THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT: CELEBRATING FOUR HUNDRED

THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT:

CELEBRATING FOUR HUNDRED YEARS OF INFLUENCE ON

U.S. DEMOCRACY

JULIA L. ERNST*

The Mayflower Compact

In the Name of God, Amen.

We whose names are underwritten, the loyal subjects of our dread Sovereign

Lord King James, by the Grace of God of Great Britain, France, and Ireland

King, Defender of the Faith, etc.

Having undertaken, for the Glory of God and advancement of the Christian

Faith and Honour of our King and Country, a Voyage to plant the First Col-

ony in Northern Parts of Virginia, do by these presents solemnly and mutu-

ally in the presence of God and one of another, Covenant and Combine our-

selves together into a Civil Body Politic, for our better ordering and

preservation and furtherance of the ends aforesaid; and by virtue hereof to

enact, constitute and frame such just and equal Laws, Ordinances, Acts, Con-

stitutions and Offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and

convenient for the general good of the Colony, unto which we promise all

due submission and obedience. In witness whereof we have hereunder sub-

scribed our names at Cape Cod, the 11

of November, in the year of the reign

of our Sovereign Lord King James, of England, France, and Ireland the

eighteenth, and of Scotland the fifty-fourth. Anno Domini 1620.

*†Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs and Associate Professor, University of North

Dakota School of Law. This article is dedicated to my mother, Janet Lee (Mohr) Ernst, a proud

descendant of Mayflower passenger John Billington and a constant source of inspiration, strength,

and love throughout my life. It is also dedicated to my father, the late Judge John Richard Ernst,

who proclaimed on countless occasions that the greatest blessing of his life was his wife, my mother.

I am very grateful for invaluable assistance from Burtness Scholar Research Assistants Lauren

Kauffman and Kari Peterson, as well as UND School of Law Thormodsgard Law Library Head of

Faculty Services Anne Mostad Jensen. I also thank Dean Michael McGinniss, Professor Emeritus

Patti Alleva, Anne, and my mother for their thoughtful comments on drafts of this article, in addition

to the NDLR editors and members for their excellent work on this piece.

1. WILLIAM BRADFORD, OF PLYMOUTH PLANTATION 1620-1647 83-84 (Random House ed.

1981) (modern English spelling).

2 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

INTRODUCTION .............................................................................. 3

II. HISTORICAL CONTEXT LEADING UP TO THE MAYFLOWER

COMPACT ......................................................................................... 4

A. DEMOCRATIC PRECURSORS TO THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT IN

AND AROUND

EUROPE ................................................................. 5

B. CONTEXT IN THE AMERICAS PRECEDING THE MAYFLOWER

COMPACT ................................................................................... 13

III. THE PILGRIMS, THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT, AND

PLYMOUTH COLONY .................................................................. 21

A. THE JOURNEY OF THE PILGRIMS ............................................... 21

B. THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT’S UNIFICATION OF THE SAINTS

AND

STRANGERS ........................................................................ 26

C. THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT: WHAT IT DID AND DID NOT DO 30

D. THE ASCENT AND ABSORPTION OF PLYMOUTH COLONY ......... 42

1. The Early Years ................................................................... 42

2. The Pilgrim Code of Law .................................................... 57

3. Plymouth Colony’s Remaining Decades ............................. 64

IV. THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT’S ENDURING LEGACY ......... 68

A. ESTABLISHMENT OF OTHER COLONIES ..................................... 69

1. Massachusetts ...................................................................... 70

2. Connecticut .......................................................................... 77

3. Rhode Island ........................................................................ 78

4. Pennsylvania ........................................................................ 80

B. CONTINUED DEVELOPMENT OF DEMOCRATIC POLITICAL

THOUGHT IN EUROPE ................................................................ 81

C. THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT’S INFLUENCE ON THE

REVOLUTIONARIES .................................................................... 88

1. Declaration of Independence ............................................... 95

2. State Constitutions ............................................................... 98

3. Articles of Confederation ................................................... 102

4. U.S. Constitution ............................................................... 106

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 3

POST-REVOLUTION SIGNIFICANCE OF THE MAYFLOWER

COMPACT ................................................................................. 121

V. THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT’S LESSONS FOR TODAY .... 131

I. INTRODUCTION

The year 2020 marks the 400

anniversary of the Mayflower Compact,

signed by the Pilgrims aboard the Mayflower anchored just offshore from the

land that would become Plymouth Colony. This manuscript would become

the historical precedent for future seminal documents in the formation of the

American governmental system, including the Fundamental Orders of Con-

necticut, the U.S. Articles of Confederation, the Virginia Declaration of

Rights, the Northwest Ordinance, and particularly the U.S. Constitution. As

the nation commemorates the quadricentennial of the landing of the Pilgrims

in 1620, this paper explores the influence the Mayflower Compact has had

on the evolution of democracy in the United States over the past four centu-

ries, tracing both the document’s precursors and its legacy.

As many leaders

in our country historically and today have endeavored to increase civic virtue

and to foster broader participation in the democratic process,

this article calls

for a greater emphasis in law schools and other educational institutions on

the Mayflower Compact and other additional formative documents that have

helped shape our constitutional establishment of government.

Part II of this article sets the stage of the historical context leading up to

the Mayflower Compact by examining the democratic precursors to this doc-

ument in and around Europe, as well as the situation in the Americas preced-

ing the Pilgrims. In the next section, Part III focuses on the Pilgrims, the

Mayflower Compact, and Plymouth Colony. This part of the paper follows

the path of the Pilgrims from England to Holland in the early 1600s and then

2. Internal citations have been omitted throughout the quotations in this article unless other-

wise indicated.

3. As suggested in the introduction, this article is not intended to offer a revolutionary new

theory about the Mayflower Compact. Instead, it provides a contextual examination of the May-

flower Compact for audiences interested in an overview of its place in the development of American

democracy. For an insightful exploration of the Mayflower Compact, see Mark L. Sargent, The

Conservative Covenant: The Rise of the Mayflower Compact in American Myth, 61 T

HE NEW

ENGLAND Q. 233, 233-51 (1988).

4. See, e.g., THE SELECTED WRITINGS OF JOHN AND JOHN QUINCY ADAMS 49 (Adrienne

Koch & William Peden eds., 1946) (John Adams wrote “It is the form of government which gives

decisive color to the manners of the people, more than any other thing. Under a well-regulated

commonwealth, the people must be wise, virtuous, and cannot be otherwise . . . . As politics there-

fore is the science of human happiness, and human happiness is clearly best promoted by virtue,

what thorough politician can hesitate who has a new government to build whether to prefer a com-

monwealth or a monarchy?”).

4 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

on to the New World in 1620. After highlighting the events leading up to the

formation of the Mayflower Compact, which the voyagers adopted to unify

the members of the religious community along with the others travelling with

them, this section then explores the text and meaning of this important agree-

ment. Next, this section investigates the rise of Plymouth Colony and its ul-

timate absorption into the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1691. Part IV of the

article discusses the Mayflower Compact’s enduring legacy, surveying the

establishment of other colonies, the continued progress of democratic politi-

cal thought in Europe, the Mayflower Compact’s impact on the Revolution-

aries, and its post-Revolution significance. The article concludes in Part V

with a brief note about the Mayflower Compact’s lessons for the present day.

II. HISTORICAL CONTEXT LEADING UP TO THE MAYFLOWER

COMPACT

In forming an agreement that provides for the consent of the governed,

lauds equality and justice, and establishes a government whose purpose is the

general good of everyone in the community no matter their station in life, the

Mayflower Compact’s uniting of the travelers aboard the eponymous ship

may appear to be somewhat of a revolutionary action when it was penned

four centuries ago. However, these ideas were not novel. Indeed, political and

theological concepts had begun to question absolute political and ecclesias-

tical authority, to promote the notion of participatory governance, and to as-

sert that the purpose of government is to advance the good of the people for

quite some time beforehand, as described below.

The concept of a society based upon a “social contract” or “covenant”

among the members of the society emerged at least three to four thousand

years ago.

Such a society is based on the deliberate choice to shape one’s

social and political relationships through purposeful agreement about the best

governance structure, usually resulting in one based on democracy, equality,

and civil rights.

This concept stands in stark contrast with either a society

based upon enforced hierarchical relationships (such as an absolute monar-

chy or a colonizer’s conquest and political dominance over conquered peo-

ples),

or a society based upon an ad hoc evolution of a societal framework

5. Daniel J. Elazar, The Political Theory of Covenant Biblical Origins and Modern Develop-

ments, 10 P

UBLIUS: THE J. OF FEDERALISM 3, 5 (1980).

6. Id. at 13 (“Covenantal foundings emphasize the deliberate coming together of humans as

equals to establish bodies politic in such a way that all reaffirm their fundamental equality and retain

their basic rights . . . . Polities whose origins are covenantal reflect the exercise of constitutional

choice and broad-based participation in constitutional design.”).

7. Id. at 12 (Conquest includes “a conqueror gaining control of a land or a people.”). The con-

cept of conquest is central to the United States story, such as the settlers in North America taking

the land of the original inhabitants, and the U.S. government ultimately claiming significant political

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 5

(such as an oligarchy based upon tradition and its corresponding governance

structure based on wealth).

These competing ideas about and models of so-

cial structures and their corresponding systems of governance have played

out in various regions of the world for the past several millennia.

This seg-

ment of the article briefly explores some of those governance and societal

structures focusing on Europe and the Americas, particularly highlighting the

budding democratic antecedents to the Mayflower Compact leading up to the

formation of this historic document.

A. D

EMOCRATIC PRECURSORS TO THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT IN

AND AROUND

EUROPE

Since early recorded history several thousand years ago,

people have

created sophisticated societies and governments throughout the globe, some

including the kernels of modern democracy. The Mesopotamian region (now

parts of Iraq, Iran, Syria, and other countries) developed the first written his-

tory approximately 5,000 years ago (c. 3200 BC).

The Mesopotamian gov-

ernments of Babylon and Sumer were well-organized with early vestiges of

control over the people who had originally occupied the North American continent. See the Marshall

Trilogy, in which Chief Justice John Marshall created the “discovery doctrine,” and the doctrine of

“domestic dependent nations” to provide legal justification for these conquests. See R

OD GRAGG,

HE PILGRIM CHRONICLES: AN EYEWITNESS HISTORY OF THE PILGRIMS AND THE FOUNDING OF

PLYMOUTH COLONY 217-18 (2014). See generally Johnson v. M’Intosh, 21 U.S. 543 (1823); Cher-

okee Nation v. Georgia, 20 U.S. 1 (1831); Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. 515 (1932); Matthew L.M.

Fletcher, The Iron Cold of the Marshall Trilogy, 82 N.D.

L. REV. 627 (2006).

8. See Elazar, supra note 5, at 12 (“Organic evolution involves the development of political

life from its beginnings in families, tribes, and villages to large polities in such a way that institu-

tions, constitutional relationships, and power alignments emerge in response to the interaction be-

tween past precedent and changing circumstances with a minimum of deliberate constitutional

choice.”); see also id. at 12-13 (“[J]ust as conquest tends to produce hierarchically organized re-

gimes ruled in an authoritarian manner, organic evolution tends to produce oligarchic regimes which

at their best, have an aristocratic flavor, and at their worst are simply the rule of the many by the

few.”).

9. The Nature of Government: Types of Government, USHISTORY.ORG, https://www.ushis-

tory.org/gov/1b.asp (last visited Feb. 21, 2020).

10. Although this article focuses on the development of societies, governments, religious the-

ory, and political theory in Europe and North America, this focus is not intended to diminish the

parallel developments occurring at the same time in civilizations throughout other regions of the

world.

11. About 300,000 years ago, Homo sapiens first appeared in Africa. Homo Sapiens,

MITHSONIAN NAT’L MUSEUM OF NAT. HIST., http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fos-

sils/species/homo-sapiens (last updated Jan. 10, 2020).

12. See History.com Editors, Mesopotamia, HISTORY.COM (Nov. 30, 2017), https://www.his-

tory.com/topics/ancient-middle-east/Mesopotamia; Richard N. Frye, Dietz O. Edzard, Wolfram Th.

von Soden, History of Mespotamia, B

RITANNICA, https://www.britannica.com/place/Mesopota-

mia-historical-region-Asia (last visited Jan. 15, 2020).

6 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

democracy, including elected assemblies to advise the king.

These civiliza-

tions also incorporated the rule of law, such as the Code of Hammurabi,

known as the first written set of laws, issued by King Hammurabi, who ruled

between 1792-1750 BC.

Ancient Greece developed a sophisticated civilization between 2000-0

BC.

The term “democracy” was coined in ancient Greece as demokratia, or

“rule by the people” in 507 BC by Cleisthenes.

This ruler in Athens insti-

tuted three separate governmental institutions: (1) a body to write the laws

and determine foreign policy, (2) a council of representatives, and (3) courts

with jurors selected by lottery before whom citizens argued their cases.

In a similar democratic development, the Roman Republic was governed

by elected senators between 509-45 BC and also established a constitution,

written laws, and a balance of powers.

The Romans defeated the Greeks

between the third and second centuries BC.

In 46 BC, Julius Caesar took

control of the government and became a supreme dictator, ending the Roman

Republic.

He was followed by Caesar Augustus in 27 BC, who became the

first Roman Emperor.

The Roman Empire dominated Europe between 0-

500 AD, and transitioned from a polytheistic religion to Christianity, begin-

ning with Emperor Constantine I’s Edict of Milan in 313 AD, proclaiming

13. Richard N. Frye, Dietz O. Edzard, Wolfram Th. von Soden, History of Mespotamia,

RITANNICA, https://www.britannica.com/place/Mesopotamia-historical-region-Asia (last visited

Jan. 15, 2020).

14. Id.

15. Until recently, it was thought that early humans arrived in Europe about 45,000-43,000

years ago, but it seems that the date range may actually be older. Josh Davis, Modern Humans May

Have Been in Europe 150,000 Years Earlier Than Thought, N

AT. HIST. MUSEUM (July 10, 2019),

https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2019/july/modern-humans-may-have-been-in-europe-150-

000-years-earlier-than.html.

16. Democracy (Ancient Greece), NAT’L GEOGRAPHIC, https://www.nationalgeo-

graphic.org/encyclopedia/democracy-ancient-greece/ (last updated Mar. 15, 2019); History.com

Editors, Ancient Greek Democracy, H

ISTORY.COM (Aug. 23, 2018), https://www.history.com/top-

ics/ancient-greece/ancient-greece-democracy.

17. Democracy (Ancient Greece), NAT’L GEOGRAPHIC, https://www.nationalgeo-

graphic.org/encyclopedia/democracy-ancient-greece/ (last updated Mar. 15, 2019); History.com

Editors, Ancient Greek Democracy, H

ISTORY.COM (Aug. 23, 2018), https://www.history.com/top-

ics/ancient-greece/ancient-greece-democracy.

18. The Roman Republic was governed by elected senators between 509-45 BC and also es-

tablished a constitution, written laws, and a balance of powers. Eric A. Posner, The Constitution of

the Roman Republic: A Political Economy Perspective 2 (John M. Olin Program in Law and Eco-

nomics, Working Paper No. 540, 2010).

19. See The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, Macedonian Wars, BRITANNICA (July 20,

1998), https://www.britannica.com/event/Macedonian-Wars.

20. See History.com Editors, Julius Caesar, HISTORY.COM (Nov. 4, 2019), https://www.his-

tory.com/topics/ancient-history/julius-caesar; Arnold Joseph Toynbee, Julius Caesar, B

RITANNICA

(Jan. 12, 2000), https://www.britannica.com/biography/Julius-Caesar-Roman-ruler.

21. See History.com Editors, Augustus, HISTORY.COM (Nov. 9, 2009), https://www.his-

tory.com/topics/ancient-history/emperor-augustus.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 7

religious toleration of Christians. Christianity became the official religion of

the Roman Empire in 391 AD.

The progression of democracy seemingly halted for a period. Raids by

Germanic tribes ultimately led to the fall of the Western Roman Empire in

476 AD and the establishment of thousands of feudal governments thereafter,

which local lords ruled.

The Middle Ages, otherwise known as the medieval

period or Dark Ages, lasted in Europe from the fall of the Roman Empire to

the fourteenth century.

During this epoch, the primary ordering of society

entailed the church hierarchy and feudalism, through which local nobility

controlled peasants and serfs, who were bound to the land and forced to cul-

tivate it on behalf of the upper-class landowners.

The feudal lords eventu-

ally banded together and pledged their loyalty to kings, such as in France and

England in Western Europe. German kings dominated the rise of the Holy

Roman Empire between 800-1806.

Throughout this timeframe the Byzan-

tine Empire controlled Eastern Europe.

Despite the widespread adherence to the absolute or divine right of

kings, slivers of democratic thought still emerged in Europe during the Mid-

dle Ages.

For example, between the eleventh and fourteenth centuries,

monarchs began granting royal charters to municipal corporations, usually

through a process of negotiation between the crown and municipal leaders.

In 1159, John of Salisbury wrote Policraticus, the first political science text

22. See The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, Edict of Milan, BRITANNICA (July 20, 1998),

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Edict-of-Milan.

23. See Evan Andrews, 8 Reasons Why Rome Fell, HISTORY.COM (Jan. 14, 2014),

https://www.history.com/news/8-reasons-why-rome-fell.

24. History.com Editors, Middle Ages, HISTORY.COM (Apr. 22, 2010) https://www.his-

tory.com/topics/middle-ages/middle-ages.

25. See Elizabeth A.R. Brown, Feudalism, BRITANNICA (July 20, 1998), https://www.britan-

nica.com/topic/feudalism.

26. Geoffrey Barraclough, Holy Roman Empire, BRITANNICA (July 20, 1998),

https://www.britannica.com/place/Holy-Roman-Empire.

27. See John L. Teall, Donald MacGillivray Nicol, Byzantine Empire, BRITANNICA (July 20,

1998), https://www.britannica.com/place/Byzantine-Empire; see also History.com Editors, Byzan-

tine Empire, H

ISTORY.COM (Aug. 24, 2010), https://www.history.com/topics/ancient-middle-

east/byzantine-empire.

28. See The Middle Ages, BRITANNICA (July 20, 1998), https://www.britan-

nica.com/topic/government/The-Middle-Ages.

29. Elazar, supra note 5, at 8 (“the political dimensions of covenanting received new impetus

in the eleventh through the fourteenth centuries . . . [including] the establishment of municipal cor-

porations throughout . . . [Europe] which were legitimized by royal charter, usually negotiated be-

tween the municipality and the throne.”); see also John Lothrop Motley, Polity of the Puritans, 69

HE N. AM. REV. 470, 478-79 (1849) (quoting GEORGE BANCROFT, I. HISTORY OF THE UNITED

STATES, 310 (1834), who expounded, “‘The middle age had been familiar with charters and consti-

tutions; but they had been merely compacts for immunities, partial enfranchisements, patents of

nobility, concessions of municipal privileges, or limitations of the sovereign power in favor of feu-

dal institutions.’ Bancroft, I. 310.”).

8 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

of the era, which—although it reaffirmed the divine right of kings—also ad-

vocated for the right of the ruled to depose and even assassinate a tyrannical

monarch.

Although this line of thought did not flourish during that era, as

scholars subsequently declared the king to be above the law, the thought was

at least introduced.

As another example, in 1215, the Magna Carta (“great charter”) encom-

passed the notion that everyone must comply with the law, even the rulers,

and expressed several progressive ideals such as the right to own property

and the right to a fair trial.

Although the upper-class nobility had created

the Magna Carta and obliged the king to assent to its provisions, this pact

afforded individuals—including those not in the upper class—certain rights

that had not previously been recognized.

The Magna Carta also supported

“the fundamental principle of no taxation without consent.”

Starting in the fourteenth century, Europe experienced the Renaissance,

an era of “rebirth” after the Dark Ages, during which Europeans revived clas-

sical culture, art, literature, and science, as well as political, economic, reli-

gious, and philosophical thought.

The invention of the printing press by

Johannes Gutenberg in the 1450s extensively facilitated the spread of

knowledge throughout the continent,

including Bibles written in the lan-

guages spoken by people throughout Europe, instead of solely in Latin, which

was incomprehensible to most people except the wealthy and few others with

access to an education.

Before the Gutenberg printing press enabled mass

30. See Bradley Aron Cooper, Defending Liberty and Defeating Tyrants: The Reemergence of

Federal Theology in the Rhetoric of the Bush Doctrine, 85 U.

DET. MERCY L. REV. 521, 526-27

(2008) (“The notoriety of Policraticus is due to its defense of the doctrine of tyrannicide, the idea

that it is legitimate to slay a ruler who has become a tyrant.” As opposed to total submission to the

monarchy, however just or tyrannical it may be, Policraticus “introduces the concept of collective

responsibility that rests upon all of society . . . Combined with this sense of ‘community justice’

was the idea that a tyrant, by definition, is a king who rules contrary to the law. Accordingly, it is

up to the community to enforce the law, even if it is the king who violates it.” Political theorists

subsequently “concluded that the king was no longer under the law, but was now to be considered

superior to it.”).

31. This concept may sound familiar: the people may rebel against a government that is no

longer serving the people—see the related provision in the Declaration of Independence. T

DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE para. 2 (U.S. 1776).

32. DONALD S. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS OF AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONALISM 59 (1998).

33. See History.com Editors, Magna Carta, HISTORY.COM (Dec. 17, 2009), https://www.his-

tory.com/topics/british-history/magna-carta.

34. Id.

35. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS supra note 32, at 59.

36. History.com Editors, Renaissance, HISTORY.COM (Apr. 4, 2018), https://www.his-

tory.com/topics/renaissance/renaissance.

37. Id.; Evan Andrews, 7 Things You May Not Know About the Gutenberg Bible,

ISTORY.COM (Feb. 23, 2015), https://www.history.com/news/7-things-you-may-not-know-about-

the-gutenberg-bible.

38. ALYSSA ADAMS ET AL., A HISTORY OF THE BOOK: DISRUPTING SOCIETY FROM TABLET

TABLET, 29-33 (2015).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 9

production and dissemination of documents, common people had to rely on

the spoken interpretation and authority of their religious leaders.

Beginning in the 1500s, the Protestant Reformation popularized the idea

that, in order to remain true to one’s personal religious convictions, an indi-

vidual may need to contravene the established authority, whether ecclesiasti-

cal or political.

The Reformation also generated widespread belief in the

power of written documents, as opposed to the prior belief in the absolute

authority and infallibility of religious or government figureheads.

In ac-

cordance with the Judeo-Christian tradition, the initial concept of covenant

as a mutual agreement between the people and God (e.g., God’s covenants

with Abraham, Moses, Noah, and so on)

eventually evolved into the con-

cept of covenant as the proper social ordering of people amongst them-

selves—both within the organized church, as well as within the context of

government.

In 1517, Martin Luther published his Ninety-Five Theses, call-

ing for reform within the Roman Catholic Church.

The Roman Catholic

Church condemned Martin Luther’s teachings through the Edict of Worms

39. Evan Andrews, 7 Things You May Not Know About the Gutenberg Bible, HISTORY.COM

(Feb. 23, 2015), https://www.history.com/news/7-things-you-may-not-know-about-the-gutenberg-

bible.

40. George Anastaplo, Constitutionalism, The Rule of Rules: Explorations, 39 BRANDEIS L.J.

17, 38 (2000) (quoting W

INSTON CHURCHILL, HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH-SPEAKING PEOPLES II,

82-83 (1963) (“With the Reformation the notion that it might be a duty to disobey the established

order on the grounds of private conviction became for the first time since the conversion to Christi-

anity of the Roman Empire the belief of great numbers. But so closely were the Church and State

involved that disobedience to the one was a challenge to the other. The idea that a man should pick

and choose for himself what doctrines he should adhere to was almost as alien to the mind of the

age as the idea that he should select what laws he should obey and what magistrates he should

respect.”).

41. Fernando Rey Martinez, The Religious Character of the American Constitution: Puritan-

ism and Constitutionalism in the United States, 12 K

AN. J.L. & PUB. POL’Y 459, 460 (2003) (“The

Protestant Reformation may be foremost among the numerous factors that caused individuals to

grant supreme authority to a written document. Edward S. Corwin wrote: ‘The Reformation super-

seded an infallible Pope with an infallible Bible; the American Revolution replaced the sway of a

king with that of a document’—the Constitution. The Puritans’ political contributions to the consti-

tutionalism in the 16

and 17

centuries dramatically changed the concept of political authority used

until then.”); see also G

LENN ALAN CHENEY, THANKSGIVING: THE PILGRIMS’ FIRST YEAR IN

AMERICA 9-10 (New London Librarium 2007) (explaining separatists neither believed in an omnip-

otent pope nor an authoritarian king).

42. See NATHANIEL PHILBRICK, MAYFLOWER: A STORY OF COURAGE, COMMUNITY, AND

WAR 9 (2006) (describing the Puritans’ concept of covenant).

43. See Cooper, supra note 30, at 5331 n. 54 (quoting Elazar, supra note 5, at 9 (“‘[F]ederal

theology . . . (federal is derived from the Latin foedus, which means covenant) stimulated the re-

newed political application of the covenant idea which was given expression first by political theo-

logians.’”). Cooper, supra note 30, at 530 (explaining the term “covenant” has been defined as “‘a

morally-informed agreement or pact between people or parties having an independent and suffi-

ciently equal status, based upon voluntary consent and established by mutual oaths or promises.’ It

was this type of pact that emerged in late thirteenth-century Switzerland that precipitated the reu-

niting of the secular and religious aspects of covenant”).

44. CHENEY, supra note 41, at 3-4; Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, Ninety-five Theses,

RITANNICA (July 20, 1998), https://www.britannica.com/event/Ninety-five-Theses.

10 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

in 1521.

Protestantism’s reliance on scripture (sola scriptura) instead of

saints or priests undermined many people’s belief in papal supremacy and in

the infallibility of the pope.

As Protestantism spread throughout Europe in the 1500s, the Reformed

Protestant notions of covenant between God and the people served as a model

for political relationships among people—and significantly, this covenant

was based upon consent.

For example, in Scotland in the 1500s, local clans

banded together through pacts to protect their lives and property, and later to

defend their liberty—particularly with respect to their religious freedom to

practice Protestantism as opposed to the Catholic monarchy.

Notably, these

clans chose to band together—they consented to be part of a group—as op-

posed to being forced to do so.

Other important thinkers during this time period contributed to the de-

velopment of theological and political thought, particularly the importance of

relationships based on covenant, or mutual promises consisting of both mu-

tual rights and mutual obligations. For example, in 1525, German Protestant

reformer Johannes Oecolampadius discussed the relationship between bibli-

cal covenants and political covenants.

John Calvin, who was born in France

and resided primarily in Geneva, published the influential Institutes of the

Christian Religion in 1536 and further developed covenant theology, noting

God’s covenants with Adam, Noah, Moses, and Abraham, and with all of

45. See Sylvia Poggioli, The Pope Commemorates The Reformation That Split Western Chris-

tianity, NPR

(Oct. 28, 2016, 4:29 AM), https://www.npr.org/sections/paral-

lels/2016/10/28/499587801/pope-francis-reaches-out-to-honor-the-man-who-splintered-christian-

ity; see also Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, Diet of Worms, B

RITANNICA (July 20, 1998),

https://www.britannica.com/event/Diet-of-Worms-Germany-1521.

46. See generally RONALD W. DUTY & MARIE A. FAILINGER, ON SECULAR GOVERNANCE:

LUTHERAN PERSPECTIVES ON CONTEMPORARY LEGAL ISSUES (2016).

47. See Elazar, supra note 5, at 14. (“[A covenant] world view was recreated by the Reformed

wing of Protestantism as the federal theology from which . . . the English and American Puritans

developed political theories and principles of constitutional design.”); see also id. at 5 (“Out of these

covenantal peoples emerged Judaism and Christianity with their biblical covenantal base, reformed

Protestantism with its federal theology, federalism as a political principle and arrangement, the

modern corporation, civil societies based upon interlocking voluntary associations, and almost

every other element that reflects social organization based upon what has loosely been called ‘con-

tract’ rather than ‘status.’ Moreover, these covenantal peoples seemed to have internalized a cove-

nantal or federalistic approach to life[.]”); see also J. Wayne Baker, Covenant and Community in

the Thought of Heinrich Bullinger, in T

HE COVENANT CONNECTION: FROM FEDERAL THEOLOGY

MODERN FEDERALISM 15-29, at 20 (Daniel J. Elazar & John Kincaid eds., Lexington Books

2000) (“[T]he modern political philosophy of federalism is directly linked to the covenantal theol-

ogy of the Reformation period.”), as quoted in Cooper, supra note 30, at 546, n. 140.

48. Cooper, supra note 30, at 540.

49. See id.

50. Elazar, supra note 5, at 20.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 11

humanity through Jesus.

As a part of the Protestant movement, people fol-

lowing Calvinist beliefs broke away from the Roman Catholic Church in Eu-

rope, and in England disavowed many of the tenets of the Church of England,

arguing “that worship should be Bible-based, emphasizing simplicity instead

of ceremony and biblical doctrine rather than Church tradition.”

Calvinist

ideas and Calvinist churches spread throughout Europe, including England,

and then through settlers to the colonies in the New World.

Moreover, from

Heinrich Bullinger’s experiences living in the Swiss confederation in the six-

teenth century, which had originally formed when three independent states

entered into a pact for mutual defense in 1291 and evolved into a loose con-

federation of states, this notable Swiss theologian in 1533 “developed a con-

cept of the covenant that not only had theological meaning but also important

social and political implications.”

In England, King Henry VIII converted from Catholicism to Protestant-

ism in 1534 when the Catholic pope refused to annul his marriage, creating

the Church of England and establishing himself as the head of the church as

well as the state.

After his death and the death of his son King Edward VI,

his daughter Queen Mary I violently attempted to restore Catholicism (earn-

ing her the nickname Bloody Mary), but upon her death five years later, her

half-sister Queen Elizabeth I restored the Church of England.

During Eliz-

abeth I’s reign from 1558-1603, the spread of printed Bibles led to a surge in

religiosity, and access to scripture also led to a proliferation of differing reli-

gious beliefs, but the queen and Church of England mandated that everyone

must follow the Book of Common Prayer and Church of England or face

severe punishment.

51. See William J. Bouwsma, John Calvin, BRITANNICA (July 20, 1998), https://www.britan-

nica.com/biography/John-Calvin.

52. GRAGG, supra note 7, at 14-15.

53. Martinez, supra note 41, at 464 (noting the “expansion of Calvinism in the 16

century

from . . . Switzerland, France, Holland, England and Scotland; and the expansion of Calvinism in

the 17

century to the English colonies of America.”); see also id. at 465 (discussing John Calvin

and Martin Luther).

54. Cooper, supra note 30, at 531 (explaining in 1533, Bullinger published a treatise in which

“he established that God’s eternal covenant with man . . . was to be the divine model for all human

affairs, be they religious or civil in nature. Bullinger’s work soon gained momentum, spreading

quickly to other reformed communities of northwestern Europe, and then later to European colonies

around the world.” “[I]t was this idea of covenant—as the guiding principle in both spiritual and

political affairs—that was later responsible for reclaiming the anti-tyrannical stance that John of

Salisbury had espoused four centuries earlier.”).

55. GRAGG, supra note 7, at 9.

56. Id. at 9-11.

57. Id. at 10-14, 25-29.

12 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

In 1574, Theodore Beza, a French Reformed Protestant theologian, ad-

vocated that people may legitimately rebel against tyranny of the state, par-

ticularly in religious matters, based on the concept that the authority of the

ruler derives from a covenant between the ruler and the ruled, requiring both

to submit to religious laws.

This reflects the Magna Carta’s exhortation that

everyone must obey the law, even the king.

In 1579, Philippe du Plessis-

Mornay, also a French Protestant writer, is presumed to be the author of Vin-

diciae Contra Tyrannos, an essay promoting civil liberties and providing le-

gal justification for popular resistance to tyranny of sovereigns, examining

both covenants in theology and contracts under political theory.

In 1603,

German jurist Johannes Althusius published Politica, in which he argued that

the purpose of government is to enable social life to flourish; the authority of

the state relies on the consent of the governed; and the ruler and ruled remain

under mutual obligation to each other.

Hugo Grotius was a Dutch jurist who

studied at Leiden University and wrote an edict establishing religious tolera-

tion in Holland around 1613, as well as numerous works advancing religious

freedoms and establishing principles of international law.

These developments in federal (i.e., covenantal) religious and political

theory helped English Puritans and Separatists, undoubtedly including the

people who would become known as the Pilgrims, develop their political and

constitutional approaches to governance.

Throughout Europe, individuals,

58. See Elazar, supra note 5, at 20.

59. Magna Carta, NAT’L CONST. CTR., https://constitutioncenter.org/learn/educational-re-

sources/historical-documents/magna-carta (last visited Feb. 1, 2020).

60. See Elazar, supra note 5, at 20 (“In has famous Vindiciae Contra Tyrannos (1579), Philippe

du Plessis-Mornay articulated a similar notion of covenants between God and the people and, then,

the people and their king, in the course of which he also expanded the scope of religious and civil

liberty.”); see also Cooper, supra note 30, at 534 (Mornay first “presents the idea of a king’s duty

and accountability to God. No longer is a king’s reign to be understood as being ‘absolute,’ as a

failure to fulfill covenantal obligations is now seen as leading to a removal of the authority to rule.

Second, by depicting the relationship as covenantal, Mornay is able to return to the Old Testament,

and build his entire argument on the main premise of Swiss covenantal theology: that covenant is

to be the guiding principle in all human affairs.”); see id. at 539 (“[T]he message contained in Vin-

diciae, Contra Tyrranos was to have an impact on the ideas of liberty and democracy around the

world,”) id. at 539 n. 96 (quoting Kathleen W. MacArthur, The Vindiciae Contra Tyrannos: A

Chapter in the Struggle for Religious Freedom in France 9 Church Hist. 285 (1940)) (concluding

the document had influence, “in the literature of freedom in seventeenth century England, and in

early American thought.”).

61. See Elazar, supra note 5, at 20 (“The idea of a civil covenant achieved its first full expres-

sion through Johannes Althusius (1603) whose work has been described as ‘a watershed of modern

political ideas.’”).

62. See Martinez, supra note 41, at 463 (discussing the Natural Right doctrine in the 17

and

centuries, along with Grotius and Newton).

63. See Elazar, supra note 5, at 14. (“was recreated by the Reformed wing of Protestantism as

the federal theology from which . . . the English and American Puritans developed political theories

and principles of constitutional design.”); id. at 5 (“Out of these covenantal peoples emerged Juda-

ism and Christianity with their biblical covenantal base, reformed Protestantism with its federal

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 13

along with political units such as cities and provinces, began to assert their

rights to autonomy and to associate freely, abandoning the strictly hierar-

chical frameworks that had been imposed upon them through medieval feu-

dalism.

Beginning in the 1500s, English Puritans and Scots designed na-

tional covenants to order civil society, which were mirrored by the covenants

settlers from Great Britain wrote to establish the colonial governments.

B. C

ONTEXT IN THE AMERICAS PRECEDING THE MAYFLOWER

COMPACT

Indigenous people arrived in North America from Asia before 15,000

BC, and possibly up to 40,000 years ago.

Various indigenous civilizations

flourished in the Americas, creating sophisticated social and political struc-

tures.

When Europeans initially made contact, about 50 million people

lived in the Americas, including about 10 million people in the land that

would eventually become the United States.

theology, federalism as a political principle and arrangement, the modern corporation, civil societies

based upon interlocking voluntary associations, and almost every other element that reflects social

organization based upon what has loosely been called ‘contract’ rather than ‘status.’ Moreover,

these covenantal peoples seemed to have internalized a covenantal or federalistic approach to

life[.]”).

64. Elazar, supra note 5, at 9 (“The reformed churches turned to the covenant concept with

relish, finding in it the most appropriate expression of their theological ideas and expectations for

church polity. The federal theology which they created (federal is derived from the Latin foedus,

which means covenant) stimulated the renewed political application of the covenant idea which was

given expression first by political theologians and then by [secular] political philosophers . . . [in-

cluding] Hobbes, Locke, and Spinoza.”); id. at 19 (“Individuals revolted in the name of conscience

and the freedom to associate or covenant on their own terms. Provinces, cities, and even villages

asserted rights to autonomy, rejecting the hierarchical relationships of feudalism and medieval po-

litical society.”).

65. Elazar, supra note 5, at 4 (“during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the Scots and

the English Puritans not only conceived of civil society in covenantal terms, but actually wrote

national covenants to which loyal members of the body politic subscribed. Similar covenants were

used in the founding of many of the original colonies in British North America.”).

66. Simon Worrall, When How Did the First Americans Arrive? It’s Complicated, NAT’L

GEOGRAPHIC (June 9, 2018), https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2018/06/when-and-how-

did-the-first-americans-arrive—its-complicated-/#close (explaining humans could have been here

40,000 years prior.).

67. See William T. Sanders et al., Pre-Columbian Civilizations, BRITANNICA (July 26, 1999),

https://www.britannica.com/topic/pre-Columbian-civilizations/.

68. History.com, Native American Cultures, HISTORY.COM (Dec. 4, 2009), https://www.his-

tory.com/topics/native-american-history/native-american-cultures; see also Alexander Koch, Chris

Brierley, Mark M. Maslin, and Simon L. Lewis, Earth System Impacts of the European Arrival and

Great Dying in the Americas after 1492, 207 QUARTERNARY SCI. REVIEWS 13, 16 (2019) (indi-

cating that the exact numbers are not known, and estimates vary widely. For example, the number

of inhabitants in North America in 1492 ranges between 900,000 and 18 million.).

14 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

The region where the Pilgrims settled had been inhabited for at least

10,000 to 12,000 years before their arrival.

These first Americans had de-

veloped thriving communities, using hunting, fishing, and farming method-

ologies similar to that of the Europeans at the time.

As opposed to absolute

authority of monarchs in Europe ruling by divine right (no matter their level

of competence), the many American communities were governed by a chief,

along with a council of advisors, who could be replaced if not capably serving

the tribe.

This is an early example on the North American continent of the

principles of the consent of the governed and that government should serve

the good of the people, even before the Mayflower Compact.

Native American societies were advanced in other ways, as well. In com-

parison with European medical practices,

the first Americans’ medical sci-

ence included some methods that were much more quick and effective than

that of the Europeans.

One historian writes, “Despite the seeming simplicity

of its technology, North American civilization was far larger and more orga-

nized than the Europeans ever knew,”

including trade that reached from the

coasts to the Dakotas.

Notably, this historian has highlighted:

[T]he quality of life in [European] cities wasn’t necessarily better

than it was in [the Native American villages]. European cities were

stinking places with garbage and sewage in the streets, where dis-

ease was widespread and often endemic, rats were rampant, public

water was dangerous to drink, foods were often rotten, almost eve-

ryone drank an unhealthy amount of alcohol, and wars were fought

with a technology-sharpened savagery beyond the imagination of

the “savages” of North America.

[By contrast, the] first European explorers who met Indians in New

England found them to be beautiful, healthy, and, until they learned

European ways, friendly and generous.

While Europeans were consuming as much as they could and now

needed a whole new continent to consume—its plants, minerals, and

animals—the natives of North America had devised a sustainable

69. CHENEY, supra note 41, at 219.

70. Id. at 219-20.

71. Id. at 227-28.

72. Id. at 44 (including “the letting of blood, the drilling of skulls, the application of mercury

and lead, and doses of anything from horse, hare and hen dung to crab juice beyond its prime.”).

73. Id. at 222-23.

74. Id. at 223.

75. Id. at 224.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 15

system that didn’t demand the conquering of new lands and peo-

ples.

Of course, Native American societies varied widely throughout the continent,

as did the societies throughout Europe.

For example, not all Native Ameri-

can tribes were peaceful, and some maintained relatively hierarchical systems

of governance.

Leif Erikson, a Norse explorer from Iceland, is the first known European

to have reached the North American mainland around 1000 AD, in the region

now known as Newfoundland province in Canada.

At that time, the Vikings

established the first European settlements in the New World in Greenland

and Newfoundland.

Some historians believe they may have first introduced

new diseases to the indigenous populations, possibly beginning the epidem-

ics that have reduced the indigenous population on the continent.

As is well-known, in 1492, Christopher Columbus, a Spanish-supported

Italian explorer, reached the Bahamas, Cuba, and Hispaniola with his crew

aboard the Niña, the Pinta, and the Santa Maria.

What may be less-well-

known is that on his first voyage, Columbus seized the land from the indige-

nous people and established a fort in present-day Haiti, which the local in-

habitants subsequently destroyed in an attempt to protect their land and way

of life from these violent invaders.

Upon his return in 1493, Columbus es-

tablished another settlement in the Dominican Republic and enslaved the in-

digenous people on the island, but starvation, disease, and unrest led to mu-

tiny and the ultimate abandonment of that settlement.

In 1496,

76. CHENEY, supra note 41, at 220-22.

77. Native American History, BRITANNICA (July 26, 1999), https://www.britan-

nica.com/topic/Native-American/Native-American-history.

78. Native American History, BRITANNICA (July 26, 1999), https://www.britan-

nica.com/topic/Native-American/Native-American-history.

79. Emma Groenveld, Leif Erickson, ANCIENT HIST. ENCYCLOPEDIA (Sept. 20, 2018),

https://www.ancient.eu/Leif_Erikson/.

80. Christopher Klein, The Viking Explorer Who Beat Columbus to America, HISTORY.COM

(Oct. 8, 2013), https://www.history.com/,news/the-viking-explorer-who-beat-columbus-to-amer-

ica; Eric Weiner, Coming to America: Who Was First?, NPR

(Oct. 8, 2007),

https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15040888.

81. Native American History, BRITANNICA (July 26, 1999), https://www.britan-

nica.com/topic/Native-American/Native-American-history.

82. Columbus Reaches the New World, HISTORY.COM, https://www.history.com/this-day-in-

history/columbus-reaches-the-new-world (last visited Feb. 1, 2020).

83. Frances Maclean, The Lost Fort of Columbus, SMITHSONIAN MAG. (Jan. 2008),

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-lost-fort-of-columbus-8026921/.

84. Hispaniola, YALE U., https://gsp.yale.edu/case-studies/colonial-genocides-project/His-

paniola (last visited Feb. 1, 2020); Charles C. Mann, The Violent Story of Columbus’ Forgotten

Colony, S

ALON (Aug. 18, 2011 5:01 AM), https://www.sa-

lon.com/2011/08/18/1493_charles_mann_excerpt/.

16 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

Bartholomew Columbus, brother of Christopher, established Santo Do-

mingo, which became the first permanent European settlement in the Amer-

icas.

As many as 3 million people who originally inhabited the Caribbean

islands were wiped out through their armed struggles against the European

aggressors, starvation due to enslavement and maltreatment by the Europe-

ans, and disease brought by the Europeans.

Through their trans-continental

voyages, the Columbus brothers brought word of the New World back to

Europe, sparking additional expeditions.

Through their voyages to the New World throughout the initial decades,

Europeans began by exploring the continent and interacting with the people

who originally inhabited the land, trading with them and bringing some of

the continent’s resources back to Europe.

For example, in 1513, Spanish

voyager Juan Ponce de Leon is the first known European explorer to reach

the Florida peninsula.

Explorers such as John Cabot, Giovanni de Verra-

zano, Jacques Cartier, Samuel Champlain, Bartholomew Gosnold, Martin

Pring, and John Smith sailed up and down the Atlantic coast.

While some

of these European missions were peaceful, many were not.

Captain George

Weymouth and Captain Thomas Hunt kidnapped Native Americans, selling

some of them into slavery in Europe.

The Aztec civilization that reigned in the region that is now Mexico was

ravaged by smallpox brought by the explorers.

It was then brutally con-

quered in 1521 by the Spanish conquistadores and native allies led by Hernán

Cortés.

The well-developed Inca Empire suffered a similar fate at the hands

85. Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, Bartholomew Columbus, BRITANNICA (July 20,

1998), https://www.britannica.com/biography/Bartholomew-Columbus.

86. Robert M Poole, What Became of the Taíno?, SMITHSONIAN MAG. (Oct. 2011),

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/travel/what-became-of-the-taino-73824867/.

87. COTTON MATHER, MAGNALIA CHRISTI AMERICANA OR THE ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY

OF NEW ENGLAND 23-24 (Raymond J. Cunningham ed. (1970) (1702).

88. Matt Blitz, The Oldest City in the United States, SMITHSONIAN MAG. (Sept. 3, 2015),

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/travel/us-oldest-city-st-augustine-florida-180956434/.

89. GRAGG, supra note 7, at 214-15.

90. Native American History, BRITANNICA (July 26, 1999), https://www.britan-

nica.com/topic/Native-American/Native-American-history; see also Native Americans and Coloni-

zation: the 16th and 17th Centuries, B

RITANNICA (July 26, 1999), https://www.britan-

nica.com/topic/Native-American/Native-Americans-and-colonization-the-16th-and-17th-centuries

(“From a Native American perspective, the initial intentions of Europeans were not always imme-

diately clear. Some Indian communities were approached with respect and in turn greeted the odd-

looking visitors as guests. For many indigenous nations, however, the first impressions of Europe-

ans were characterized by violent acts including raiding, murder, rape, and kidnapping.”).

91. GRAGG, supra note 7, at 215.

92. Richard Gunderman, How Smallpox Devastated the Aztecs – and Helped Spain Conque an

American Civilization 500 Years Ago, PBS

(Feb. 23, 2019), https://www.pbs.org/newshour/sci-

ence/how-smallpox-devastated-the-aztecs-and-helped-spain-conquer-an-american-civilization-

500-years-ago.

93. Id.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 17

of Spanish explorer Francisco Pizarro and his band of conquistadores in 1532

in the land that is now Peru.

One account described “the atrocities the Span-

iards’ hateful hunt for gold had inflicted on the Indians of America.”

As Reformed Protestantism and its corresponding political concepts

spread throughout Europe in the 1500s, people from Spain, France, and Eng-

land began attempting to break away from those monarchies and colonize

various parts of North America, but many of these initial efforts failed.

For

example, colonists from Spain unsuccessfully endeavored to settle in the re-

gions that would later become Georgia in 1526, Florida in 1528-1536 and

1559-1561, North Carolina in 1567-1568,

and Virginia in 1570-1571.

The

French tried to settle in South Carolina in 1562-1563, Florida in 1564-1565,

and Maine in 1604-1605.

100

In 1585 and 1587-1590, English colonists un-

successfully struggled to establish a settlement in North Carolina, now

known as the “Lost Colony of Roanoke.”

101

English settlers also attempted a

failed colony in Maine in 1607-1608.

102

Many of the initial colonies failed in part due to starvation, disease, ex-

posure to the elements, lack of sufficient resupplies from Europe, conflicts

with the people who already inhabited the land, and slaughter by rival Euro-

peans—reflecting the incessant violent conflicts between European nations

across the Atlantic.

103

94. Liesl Clark, The Lost Inca Empire, PBS (Oct. 31, 2000),

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/article/lost-inca-empire/.

95. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 6.

96. Nat’l Human. Ctr., Reading Guide – Failed Colonies, http://nationalhumanities-

center.org/pds/amerbegin/exploration/text6/text6read.htm (last visited Feb. 21, 2020).

97. The National Park Service and American Latino Heritage: The Spanish Claim to Florida,

Georgia, and the Carolinas, 1513-1821, NPS, https://www.nps.gov/nr/travel/american_latino_her-

itage/Spanish_Claim_to_Florida_Georgia_and_the_Carolinas.html (last visited Feb. 1, 2020).

98. Anthony Aveni, Why Virginia Was Not Spanish, HISTORY.ORG, https://www.his-

tory.org/foundation/journal/spring13/spanish.cfm (last visited Feb. 1, 2020).

99. Kenneth C. Davis, America’s First True “Pilgrims”, SMITHSONIAN MAG. (May 22,

2008), https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/americas-first-true-pilgrims-50229713/ (discuss-

ing Spanish slaughter of French soldiers).

100. Saint Croix Island, NAT. PARK SERV., https://www.nps.gov/sacr/learn/historycul-

ture/saint-croix-island-timeline.htm (last visited Feb. 1, 2020); Champlain and the Settlement of

Acadia 1604-1607, T

HE U. OF ME., https://umaine.edu/canam/publications/st-croix/champlain-and-

the-settlement-of-acadia-1604-1607/ (last visited Feb. 1, 2020).

101. CHENEY, supra note 41, at 26; Roanoke Colony Deserted, HISTORY.COM,

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/roanoke-colony-deserted (last visited Feb. 1, 2020).

102. Evan Andrews, The Lost Colony of Popham, HISTORY.COM (May 12, 2017),

https://www.history.com/news/the-lost-colony-of-popham.

103. Kenneth C. Davis, America’s First True “Pilgrims”, SMITHSONIAN MAG. (May 22,

2008), https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/americas-first-true-pilgrims-50229713/; see e.g.,

ATHER, supra note 87, at 23-24.

18 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

Despite the numerous failed attempts at settling the New World, Euro-

peans from primarily Spain, France, and England kept trying to establish col-

onies, some of which became permanent settlements. As mentioned above,

Bartholomew Columbus founded Santo Domingo in the Dominican Republic

in 1496, which became the first permanent European settlement.

104

Europe-

ans next established Veracruz, Mexico in 1519, which later relocated to its

current site.

105

In 1521, colonists founded a settlement in San Juan, Puerto

Rico,

106

and that same year other colonists established the first permanent

settlement in South America on land that is now within Venezuela.

107

1565, Spanish colonists led by Pedro Menendez de Aviles and his fleet of

galleons established the first permanent European settlement in the United

States at St. Augustine in Florida.

108

As described in greater detail below,

settlers from England established Jamestown in 1607 as the first permanent

English colony in America.

109

The settlement of Santa Fe, in what is now

New Mexico, was established in 1610.

110

Some may find it surprising that the Pilgrims in Plymouth have secured

such a prominent place in the American story, despite that fact that Jame-

stown was the first permanent English colony,

111

as mentioned above (and

also despite the fact that St. Augustine was the very first permanent European

settlement in the United States).

112

English colonists traveling aboard the Su-

san Constant, Godspeed, and Discovery established the Jamestown settle-

ment in 1607.

113

The settlers briefly abandoned the colony in 1610 after the

104. Editors of Encyclopedia Britannic, Bartholomew Columbus, BRITANNICA (July 20,

1998),

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Bartholomew-Columbus.

105. History.com Editors, Veracruz, HISTORY.COM (Dec. 8, 2009), https://www.his-

tory.com/topics/mexico/Veracruz.

106. History.com Editors, Puerto Rico, HISTORY.COM (Sept. 28, 2017), https://www.his-

tory.com/topics/us-states/puerto-rico-history.

107. Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, Cumaná, BRITANNICA (July 20, 1998),

https://www.britannica.com/place/Cumana.

108. Matt Blitz, The Oldest City in the United States, SMITHSONIAN MAG. (Sept. 3, 2015),

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/travel/us-oldest-city-st-augustine-florida-180956434/.

109. Sarah J Stebbins, A Short History of Jamestown, NAT’L. PARK SERV. (Apr. 2011),

https://www.nps.gov/jame/learn/historyculture/a-short-history-of-jamestown.htm; History.com

Editors, Jamestown Colony, H

ISTORY.COM (Mar. 8, 2010), https://www.history.com/topics/colo-

nial-america/Jamestown.

110. Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, Santa Fe, BRITANNICA (July 20, 1998),

https://www.britannica.com/place/Santa-Fe-New-Mexico.

111. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 5.

112. Peter Feuerherd, St. Augustine, the Real First European Settlement in America?, JSTOR

DAILY (Apr. 15, 2017), https://daily.jstor.org/st-augustine-the-real-first-european-settlement-in-

america/; Matt Blitz, The Oldest City in the United States, S

MITHSONIAN MAG. (Sept. 3, 2015),

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/travel/us-oldest-city-st-augustine-florida-180956434/.

113. What Happened to the Three Ships?, NAT’L PARK SERV.,

https://www.nps.gov/jame/learn/historyculture/what-happened-to-the-three-ships.htm (last updated

Feb. 26, 2015).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 19

“starving time,”

114

when some of the colonists even resorted to cannibalism

to survive the food shortage due to an extended drought and conflict with the

Powhatan Indian tribe.

115

Re-supply ships arriving from England intercepted

the fleeing colonists, who were persuaded to return to the Jamestown settle-

ment. Under the Virginia Company Charters of 1606, 1609, and 1612, the

colony was initially under control of the monarch, then under the control of

the Virginia Company under a virtually absolute governor along with a coun-

cil.

116

Considering the advancements in democratic political and theological

concepts that were sweeping through Europe throughout the 1500s and into

the 1600s, unsurprisingly, the colonists in Jamestown, Virginia, eventually

adopted some of those notions in developing the governance structure in their

new colony. After the new supplies brought in 1610 helped stabilize the col-

ony, the settlers adopted the “Articles, Laws, and Orders, Divine, Politic, and

Martial for the Colony in Virginia—1610-1611”

117

as a type of constitutional

agreement. Then in 1619, the Jamestown colonists wrote and adopted the

“Laws Enacted by the First General Assembly of Virginia—Aug. 2-4,

1619,”

118

and “a representative House of Burgesses was created, elected by

all male landowners [in the colony.]”

119

The governor of the Virginia Com-

pany could veto its laws, yet these proclamations established a more egalitar-

ian, independent, and participatory form of governance—establishing rights

and duties of members of the community and proffering its fundamental val-

ues.

120

Yet in a stark turn away from equality, liberty, and human rights, the

Jamestown settlers introduced slavery of people brought from Africa in

114. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 5.

115. GRAGG, supra note 7, at 100; Jamestown Rediscovery: History, HISTORIC JAMESTOWNE,

https://historicjamestowne.org/history/history-of-jamestown/the-starving-time/ (last visited Feb. 1,

2020).

116. Martinez, supra note 41, at 472.

117. Donald S. Lutz, From Covenant to Constitution in American Political Thought, 10

UBLIUS: THE J. OF FEDERALISM 115, 129 (1980) [hereinafter Lutz, From Covenant].

118. Id. at 129.

119. Martinez, supra note 41, at 472.

120. Lutz, From Covenant, supra note 117, at 129.

20 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

1619,

121

as memorialized in the events calling attention to the 400

anniver-

sary of the introduction of slavery into the United States throughout 2019.

122

Although the Jamestown events between 1607 and 1620 preceded the May-

flower Compact, Jamestown has largely been overshadowed by the historical

significance within the United States that has transpired around the Pilgrim

story.

123

As mentioned above, the early European explorers and settlers contrib-

uted numerous factors to the decimation of the indigenous population

throughout the Americas in the 1500s, including disease, warfare, loss of

homelands, enslavement, and societal disruption.

124

Tragically, by 1650, the

entire indigenous population throughout the Americas was reduced to less

than 6 million, in what is described as “possibly the greatest demographic

disaster in the history of the world.”

125

Therefore, when the Pilgrims and the

growing waves of European settlers began arriving in the 1600s, only a frac-

tion of the original inhabitants remained.

126

121. First Enslaved Africans Arrive in Jamestown, Setting the Stage for Slavery in North

America, H

ISTORY.COM, https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/first-african-slave-ship-ar-

rives-jamestown-colony (last visited Feb. 1, 2020); Olivia B. Waxman, The First Africans in Vir-

ginia Landed in 1619. It Was a Turning Point for Slavery in American History—But Not the Begin-

ning, TIME (Aug. 20, 2019), https://time.com/5653369/august-1619-jamestown-history/ (explaining

Jamestown colony may not have been the first instance of slavery. “Juan Garrido became the first

documented black person to arrive in what would become the U.S. when he accompanied Juan

Ponce de León in search of the Fountain of Youth in 1513.”).

122. Gregory S. Schneider, Virginia Marks the Dawn of American Slavery in 1619 with Sol-

emn Speeches and Songs, W

ASHINGTON POST (Aug. 24, 2019, 2:05 PM), https://www.washing-

tonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/virginia-marks-the-dawn-of-american-slavery-in-1619-with-

solemn-ceremonies-speeches-songs/2019/08/24/adbc84ae-c66f-11e9-9986-

1fb3e4397be4_story.html.

123. See, e.g., LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 168 (“it is . . . reasonable to see the era

of constitution writing from 1776 to 17878 as resting firmly upon developments in American that

began in 1620,” referring throughout the book to the date of the Mayflower Compact).

124. Ker Than, Massive Population Drop Found for Native Americans, DNA Shows, NAT’L.

GEOGRAPHIC (Dec. 5, 2011), https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/12/111205-native-

americans-europeans-population-dna-genetics-science/; see also M

ATHER, supra note 87, at 34 (de-

scribing the decimation of the Native American population in New England due to smallpox);

RAGG, supra note 7, at 216-17; Native American History, BRITANNICA (July 26, 1999),

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Native-American/Native-American-history.

125. The Native Population of the Americas in 1492, U. OF WIS. PRESS,

https://uwpress.wisc.edu/books/0289.htm (last updated Apr. 24, 2012) (description of the book).

126. For a disturbing justification, see MATHER, supra note 87, at 21 (“[T]he good hand of

God now brought them to a country wonderfully prepared for their entertainment, by a sweeping

mortality that had lately been among the natives.”).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 21

III. THE PILGRIMS, THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT, AND

PLYMOUTH COLONY

Although the highly celebrated Thanksgiving story is frequently retold

throughout the United States, the actual history of the Pilgrims, the May-

flower Compact, and Plymouth Colony is somewhat less well-known.

127

This

section first briefly recounts the journey of the Pilgrims from England to Hol-

land between 1607 and 1619, who then travelled back to Plymouth, England

and from there to the New World in 1620.

128

It then examines the events

giving rise to the Mayflower Compact and analyzes the text of this docu-

ment.

129

Finally, this section reviews the subsequent history of Plymouth

Colony and its ultimate merger into the much larger and better-established

Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1691.

130

A. T

HE JOURNEY OF THE PILGRIMS

As noted above, in the late 1500s and early 1600s, due to the evolution

of progressive theological and political thought throughout Europe and Eng-

land, people began questioning the absolute authority of the established

church and wanted to develop their own methods of worship in line with their

religious beliefs.

131

The Puritans wanted to “purify” the practice of religion

by eliminating anything that was not specifically mentioned in the Bible and

“believed that the Church of England must be purged of its many excesses

and abuses.”

132

Some wanted to purify the Church of England, and therefore

endeavored to remain a part of the established church but to change its char-

acter from within.

133

They would operate their congregations in accordance

with their own beliefs, yet still maintain their ties to the established church.

134

Others–more specifically known as Separatists—wanted to separate entirely

from the established church and create their own, entirely independent, con-

gregations that had nothing to do with the Church of England.

135

127. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at xi.

128. See id. at 3-34; The Pilgrims in Holland, PLIMOTH PLANTATION, https://plimoth.org/pil-

grims-holland (last visited Feb. 1, 2020).

129. See PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 35-47.

130. See id. at 48-358.

131. GRAGG, supra note 7, at 14-15; Richard Howland Maxwell, Pilgrim and Puritan: A Del-

icate Distinction 3 (Pilgrim Society Note, Ser. Two, 2003) (explaining the reason behind the title

“Separatist” and noting Separatists wanted to separate from the Church of England. “Pilgrims in

Plymouth were separatists; Puritans in Massachusetts Bay Colony were not.”).

132. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 4, 8-10; CHENEY, supra note 41, at 7-11; Maxwell, supra

note 131, at 3.

133. Maxwell, supra note 131, at 3; CHENEY, supra note 41, at 7.

134. Maxwell, supra note 131, at 3; CHENEY, supra note 41, at 7.

135. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 4, 8-10; Maxwell, supra note 131, at 3; CHENEY, supra note

41, at 7-8.

22 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

Eventually, three main strands of puritanism emerged: those who fol-

lowed the Presbyterian model of working through a national hierarchical

church structure and mandating everyone in the country must follow their

religion;

136

the Congregationalists, who believed each local church should be

made up of members who covenant with each other to form a self-governing

congregation, with no mandate that everyone in the community must be-

long;

137

and the Separatists, who wanted to withdraw entirely from the church

instead of reform it from within and believed each church congregation

should be self-governing.

138

Of course, since the Church of England was in-

extricably intertwined with the national government, as the monarch was also

the head of the church, the Separatists’ move to separate from the national

church was “an act equivalent in the legal system of the time to high trea-

son.”

139

Although each of these strands held distinct approaches, many people

today conflate them, frequently referring to all three of these groups indistin-

guishably as “Puritans.”

140

Perhaps this conflagration has come about be-

cause all groups were similar in that they adopted more democratic religious

beliefs and practices, which were founded upon mutual covenants between

each member of their congregations.

141

Therefore, the Puritans, as they are

sometimes jointly labeled, were the forerunners of democracy, including re-

publican (representative) forms of democracy.

142

Understandably, the established and hierarchical Church of England

viewed all of these new congregations and beliefs as threats to its monopoly

on religion, and therefore attempted to quash the upstart congregations.

143

136. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 36-37.

137. Maxwell, supra note 131, at 3 (Congregationalists wanted the Church of England “to give

each local congregation control over its own affairs.”).

138. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 4, 8-10; Maxwell, supra note 131, at 3; GRAGG, supra note

7, at 36.

139. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 37; GRAGG, supra note 7, at 25-29, 32-33.

140. Maxwell, supra note 131, at 3. In this article, although the text will normally refer to the

Pilgrims using the more specific term “Separatists,” the quotations in the text and footnotes may

use the more generic term “Puritan” when referring to the Pilgrims.

141. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 38 (They were “democratic in theory and organisation.”).

142. Cooper, supra note 30, at 547 (quoting ALEXIS DE TOCQUEVILLE, DEMOCRACY IN

AMERICA 43 (1862) (“‘Puritanism, was not merely a religious doctrine, but it corresponded in many

points with the most absolute democratic and republican theories.’”)..

143. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 37 (“The great body of Puritans, whether they were working

for a Presbyterian or a Congregational purification of England, were horrified by the Separatists.

These endangered the cause by seeming to prove to the government that Puritanism was really what

the government said it was—subversive, anarchical, disloyal . . . . So, the little band who eventually

landed and suffered at Plymouth in 1620 are not quite representative. The large and well-organized

body who settled Massachusetts Bay in 1630, though committed to the Congregational idea, stoutly

maintained that they were not and never had been Separatists.”); P

HILBRICK, supra note 42, at 12-

13; C

HENEY, supra note 41, at 13-14.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 23

England, since the monarch was the head of the church as well as the state,

the church could claim that anyone espousing a belief contrary to the official

religious precepts not only committed heresy against the church but also trea-

son against the monarch, and therefore committed an illegal act.

144

Therefore,

the established religious hierarchy was able to exert its authority in an attempt

to quell any dissenting religious beliefs in England.

145

Both Queen Elizabeth

I who ruled England from 1558 to 1603, as well as King James I who ruled

between 1603 and his death in 1625, supported the crackdown by the Arch-

bishop of Canterbury and other Anglican leaders against both Catholics and

Puritans, especially Separatists.

146

A small band of people in Scrooby, near Nottinghamshire, England, had

formed one of these new religious communities.

147

When harassment from

the local clergy affiliated with the established state church became intolera-

ble, members of this congregation determined to flee England in search of

autonomy, freedom of religion, and freedom of association.

148

They estab-

lished a new community first in Amsterdam, arriving between 1607 and

1608, then moved to Leiden in 1609.

149

The Dutch revolt against Spanish Catholic rule had, at least temporarily,

provided a more tolerant environment for Protestants in the northern Dutch

provinces of the Low Countries, in which the small English band could wor-

ship freely in accordance with its members’ beliefs.

150

While in Leiden, with

its university “as a center of European research and education” and “refugees

who had fled from repression in other countries,”

151

the Pilgrims had been

exposed to a flurry of ideas concerning theology, the separation of church

144. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 4, 12-13; GRAGG, supra note 7, at 25-29.

145. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 4, 12-13; see also MATHER, supra note 87, at 19-20;

HENEY, supra note 41, at 13-14.

146. GRAGG, supra note 7, at 25-47, 64-68.

147. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 10; The Pilgrims in Holland, PLIMOTH PLANTATION,

https://plimoth.org/pilgrims-holland (last visited Feb. 1, 2020); Thomas W. Perry, New Plymouth

and Old England: A Suggestion, 18 T

HE WILLIAM AND MARY QUARTERLY 251, 252 (1961);

HENEY, supra note 41, at 15-16; GRAGG, supra note 7, at 53-54.

148. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 4, 12-16; Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 43 (They “cannot rest

content with things of this world—-and so they undertake pilgrimages.”); M

ATHER, supra note 87,

at 18-19; C

HENEY, supra note 41, at 17-18.

149. MATHER, supra note 87, at 18-19; see also PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 13-16; GRAGG,

supra note 7, at 67-72, 76-82.

150. The Dutch Revolt of the primarily Reformed Protestant northern provinces of the Low

Countries against Roman Catholic Spain took place between 1568 and 1648. After years of rebel-

lion, the northern provinces enjoyed a period of relative independence and flourishing between

1609-1621. See C

HENEY, supra note 41, at 15-18, 21-22; GRAGG, supra note 7, at 84. The Low

Countries occupy the region now known as Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg (otherwise

known as “Benelux”). See Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, Low Countries (July 20, 1998),

https://www.britannica.com/place/Low-Countries.

151. GRAGG, supra note 7, at 83.

24 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

and state, and other progressive ideas, such as evolving gender roles.

152

John Quincy Adams later described: “They had resided in a city, the seat of

a university, where the polemical and political controversies of the time were

pursued with uncommon fervor.”

153

Moreover, “[a]fter twelve years of ban-

ishment from the land of their first allegiance, during which they had been

under an adoptive and temporary subjection to another sovereign, they must

naturally have been led to reflect upon the relative rights and duties of alle-

giance and subjection.”

154

However, after several years of living, working, and worshiping in Lei-

den, the members of this tiny religious enclave realized they could face sig-

nificant problems if they remained.

155

First, much like new immigrants to the

United States today, as new immigrants in a foreign country who could not

speak the local language, the members of the congregation could only find

menial work, which included difficult labor and low wages, even though

many of them had been relatively well-educated and well-established mem-

bers of the community in England.

156

Second, they found that their children

were integrating into the Dutch culture at a much faster pace than they had

expected.

157

This was troublesome for the Pilgrims, as they wanted their chil-

dren to remain truly English instead of assimilating into the Dutch culture.

158

Therefore, they wanted to remove and isolate their children within their own

community, to keep them firmly rooted within their own religious beliefs and

culture.

159

Third, they were concerned that the Catholic Spanish monarchy

152. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 40 (“[T]he Pilgrims recognized the dangers of mixing tem-

poral and spiritual authority . . . . In Holland, they had enjoyed the benefits of a society in which the

division between church and state had been, for the most part, rigorously maintained. They could

not help but absorb some decidedly Dutch ways of looking at the world.”); GRAGG, supra note 7,

at 85, 87-92.

153. John Quincy Adams, Oration Delivered at Plymouth at the Anniversary Commemoration

of the First Landing of Our Ancestors at that Place 18 (Dec. 22, 1802) (printed by Russell and

Cutler, 1802).

154. Id.

155. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 5; MATHER, supra note 87, at 19.

156. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 5, 17; MATHER, supra note 87, at 19; GRAGG, supra note

7, at 92-97. Notably, this situation reflects the circumstances of many immigrants to the United

States, today.

157. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 5, 17; MATHER, supra note 87, at 19; CHENEY, supra note

41, at 22; G

RAGG, supra note 7, at 87-97.

158. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 5, 17; MATHER, supra note 87, at 19; CHENEY, supra note

41, at 25-26; G

RAGG, supra note 7, at 87-97.

159. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 17; MATHER, supra note 87, at 19; GRAGG, supra note 7,

at 87-97.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 25

might re-take the Low Country region, thus eliminating the religious toler-

ance they had been fortunate to experience.

160

If Catholic Spain retook Lei-

den, they feared their religious and political freedoms would disappear, and

also feared for their lives.

161

For these and other reasons, a part of the religious congregation decided

to return to England and then to set out for the New World, where they could

establish a settlement free from the obstacles that faced them in both Leiden

and England.

162

They had heard of the various attempts prior settlers from

Europe had made to establish colonies in the New World, many of which

were unsuccessful.

163

Yet their firm conviction in their faith made them cer-

tain they would triumph in doing so despite others’ failures.

164

Therefore,

they briefly returned to England to prepare for their voyage, upon obtaining

backing from investors who would provide funding for the travel and provi-

sions for the colony, in exchange for a certain expectation of goods sent back

to England from the colony in the years hence.

165

They obtained a patent from

the Virginia Company to establish a colony under its charter, as well as assent

from the king that he would not harass them for their religious beliefs, as he

wanted more English subjects to establish settlements in the New World for

economic reasons.

166

Of course, they could not attempt to build a new settle-

ment from scratch without bringing other people with needed skills, so they

cobbled together a group of craftsmen, servants, and others to accompany

them to the New World.

167

The religious members on the voyage referred to

160. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 6 (discussing the religious groups’ concerns and the fact

that shortly after the Pilgrims’ departure, “what became known as the Thirty Years’ War would rage

across the Continent as Protestant and Catholic forces reduced much of Europe to a burning, corpse-

strewn battleground.”); CHENEY, supra note 41, at 22; GRAGG, supra note 7, at 98.

161. CHENEY, supra note 41, at 22, 25; GRAGG, supra note 7, at 98.

162. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 5-6, 17-18; MATHER, supra note 87, at 19-20; CHENEY,

supra note 41, at 21-23.

163. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 5-7, 19-20; MATHER, supra note 87, at 19-20; CHENEY,

supra note 41, at 35 (indicating that the Pilgrims had a book describing New England written by

John Smith, who also spent time in Jamestown, so they knew of its beginnings); G

RAGG, supra note

7, at 105, 145-150.

164. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 5-7; MATHER, supra note 87, at 19-20.

165. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 51-52 (noting commercial enterprise of Plymouth Colony in

its contracts with the Virginia Company and agreements to send goods back to England—like in-

dentured servants—exchange of goods for passage to the New World.); P

HILBRICK, supra note 42,

at 5-7, 20-21.

166. CHENEY, supra note 41, at 18-19, 27-29; GRAGG, supra note 7, at 100-01 (discussing the

Virginia Company’s “royal charter to establish colonies in America”); id. at 104-05 (discussing the

king’s acquiescence of the settlement in American and the patent they received from the Virginia

Company).

167. Lutz, From Covenant, supra note 117, at 116-17 (“Not all aboard the ship were Puritans,

a fact which did not seem crucial when setting sail from England for chartered land in Virginia.”);

HILBRICK, supra note 42, at 6-7, 20-29 (the religious members “were weavers, wool carders, tai-

lors, shoemakers, and printers, with almost no relevant experience when it came to carving a settle-

ment out of the American wilderness.”).

26 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

themselves as the “Saints,”

168

whereas all the rest were known as the

“Strangers.”

169

In fact, the people who voyaged on the Mayflower and settled

Plymouth Colony were not commonly called “Pilgrims” until Daniel Webster

used the term in a speech during the bicentennial celebration in 1820,

170

alt-

hough Cotton Mather also used the term in his history of New England,

171

and Governor William Bradford made one reference to their band as “pil-

grims.”

172

B. T

HE MAYFLOWER COMPACT’S UNIFICATION OF THE SAINTS AND

STRANGERS

The voyage onboard the Mayflower from England to the New World

was extremely difficult, right from the beginning. The Saints and Strangers

initially sailed on two ships, the Mayflower and the Speedwell, but the latter

proved not to be seaworthy, at least according to its crew.

173

Following two

false starts, whereupon both ships returned so the Speedwell could be re-

paired, upon the third failed attempt the Speedwell turned back alone, after

eleven passengers had transferred to the Mayflower to continue the jour-

ney.

174

Of the 102 passengers,

175

(only about half of whom were Saints)

176

along with about 30 crew crowded aboard the Mayflower,

177

only one pas-

senger died during the voyage along with one sailor, and one infant was born

(Oceanus Hopkins).

178

However, the passage was devastating to the travelers,

168. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 9.

169. Id. at 22.

170. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 34-35 (“These first settlers, initially referred to as the Old

Comers and later as the Forefathers, did not become known as the Pilgrim Fathers until two centu-

ries after their arrival. A responsive chord was struck with the discovery of a manuscript of Gov.

William Bradford referring to the ‘saints’ who had left Holland as ‘pilgrims.’ At a commemorative

bicentennial celebration in 1820, orator Daniel Webster used the phrase Pilgrim Fathers, and the

term became common usage thereafter.”).

171. MATHER, supra note 87, at 23.

172. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 7; CHENEY, supra note 41, at 68; GRAGG, supra note 7, at

113-115.

173. MATHER, supra note 87, at 20; PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 23-30; CHENEY, supra note

41, at 58-63

174. MATHER, supra note 87, at 20; PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 23-30; CHENEY, supra note

41, at 61-63; G

RAGG, supra note 7, at 135-39.

175. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 3.

176. Numerical accounts vary. See, e.g., PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 29 (noting “[T]here

were just 50 or so [congregation members] . . . only about half of the Mayflower’s 102 passen-

gers.”); Editors Encyclopedia Britannica, Pilgrim Gathers, B

RITANNICA (July 20, 1998),

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Pilgrim-Fathers (“Of the 102 colonists, 35 were members of the

English Separatist Church (radical faction of Puritanism).”); C

HENEY, supra note 41, at 69 (noting

“[A]t least thirty-seven of them were. As many as sixty-four others were just looking for something

that London didn’t offer. Bradford would refer to these people as ‘strangers.’”).

177. CHENEY, supra note 41, at 69 (“Twenty-five or thirty others—the number is unknown—

were sailors.”).

178. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 4, 31; CHENEY, supra note 41, at 81, 86-87.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 27

leaving many in ill health upon arrival in the New World.

179

Moreover,

storms had blown the ship off-course, so they did not land at their original

destination near the Hudson River, which at that time was part of the region

known as Virginia under the patent of the Virginia Company, as they had

permission to do under their charter from the king. Instead, on November 9,

1620, after traveling on the ocean for sixty-five days, they arrived signifi-

cantly north, off the Cape Cod in what would later become Massachusetts.

180

Although they tried to sail south along the coast, they encountered such

treacherous shoals and worsening weather that they decided to take shelter

inside the cape and establish their settlement in a region to which they did

not have a legal claim under the king’s grant of authority.

181

Aboard the Mayflower, the governor of the ship, Christopher Martin,

held authority on behalf of the “Adventurers” who had funded the voyage.

182

And although the Saints did not have a particular leader among them,

183

they

were mutually bound together through their religious convictions.

184

How-

ever, as the voyagers came closer to leaving the ship and entering into the

wilderness, some of the Strangers aboard the Mayflower—likely among them

John Billington

185

—began to speak in mutinous terms, claiming that no one

would hold authority over them once they disembarked, because the king’s

charter held no legal weight since they landed in the wrong location.

186

179. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 3.

180. Lutz, From Covenant, supra note 117, at 116-17 (They arrived “a great distance north of

Virginia . . . .”); M

ATHER, supra note 87, at 20-21; PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 35; CHENEY, supra

note 41, at 95-96; G

RAGG, supra note 7, at 181-83.

181. Lutz, From Covenant, supra note 117, at 116-17 (“[T]he colonists found themselves in a

situation where the charter was not effective.”); M

ATHER, supra note 87, at 20-21; PHILBRICK, su-

pra note 42, at 35-47; C

HENEY, supra note 41, at 95-96; GRAGG, supra note 7, at 182-87.

182. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 25; GRAGG, supra note 7, at 130-31.

183. Perry, supra note 147, at 254-55 (discussing how they had no natural leader among them,

and making matters even more difficult, among them were a majority of “strangers.”); G

RAGG,

supra note 7, at 188-89.

184. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 40-42.

185. Albert Borowitz, The Mayflower Murderer, 29 LEGAL STUD. F. 597, 597 (2005) (“John

Billington Sr. was . . . ‘unquestionably one of those mixed up in the mutiny on the Mayflower,’

which was resolved on November 11, 1620 by the adoption of the Mayflower Compact, under which

the settlers bound themselves to submit to a civil body politic to be governed by just and equal laws.

Billington was one of the signatories and thereby forswore the aim of the mutineers to break free of

the Puritan leadership.”); P

HILBRICK, supra note 42, at 39 (“Some of the Strangers . . . made ‘dis-

contented and mutinous speeches,’ insisting that ‘when they came ashore they would use their own

liberty, for none had power to command them.’ It’s likely that [these dissidents included] John Bil-

lington, who subsequently established a reputation as the colony’s leading malcontent and rabble-

rouser.”); G

RAGG, supra note 7, at 188-89.

186. Perry, supra note 147, at 255 (The Mayflower combination/compact came about because

of mutinous tendencies of many of the strangers on board the ship, who threatened to go their own

ways, because “none had power to command them,” because the patent was for Virginia and they

were going to land elsewhere.); Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 43-44 (Since the settlers had no legal

authority, and several people aboard the Mayflower threatened to go off on their own and not remain

with nor contribute to the colony nor submit to the authority of the colony, the leaders drew up the

28 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

course, the Saints and Strangers who wanted the colony to succeed knew that,

without every person’s skill and labor, the entire group was unlikely to sur-

vive the winter in what appeared to be a largely uninhabited region.

187

Ac-

cording to Mourt’s Relations:

This day before we came to harbor, observing some not well af-

fected to unity and concord, but gave some appearance of faction, it

was thought good there should be an association and agreement that

we should combine together in one body, and to submit to such gov-

ernment and governors as we should by common consent agree to

make and choose, and set our hands to this that follows word for

word.

188

Thus came the impetus for the Mayflower Compact, which the more in-

fluential members drew up in order to quell the potential rebellion.

189

There-

fore, through this agreement establishing governance for the settlers, the Pil-

grims created a more egalitarian and more broadly inclusive political

community to help support their spiritual endeavor to practice their religion

as they saw fit.

190

Because they held no valid patent, and therefore were sub-

ject to no applicable law, they needed the Mayflower Compact to create the

validity of their governance authority and to establish the rule of law reflect-

ing the diversity within their community.

191

This “Pilgrim Covenant” has

been dubbed “the first constitution in America.”

192

This historian continues,

Mayflower Compact to subdue this mutiny.); MATHER, supra note 87, at 21; PHILBRICK, supra note

42, at 39; G

RAGG, supra note 7, at 188-89.

187. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 40, 42.

188. MOURT’S RELATION: A JOURNAL OF THE PILGRIMS AT PLYMOUTH 17 (Dwight B. Heath

ed.,

Applewood Books (1963) (1622) [hereinafter MOURT’S RELATION]; CHENEY, supra note 41,

at 99-100.

189. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 44 (“[T]he misuse by others of political power had jeopard-

ized the Pilgrims’ spiritual efforts; and besides, there was an immediate need for law and order—

and so they entered into an arrangement which has its own requirements and ‘dynamic.’”);

HILBRICK, supra note 42, at 40-41; CHENEY, supra note 41, at 99-100.

190. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 40-42; Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 40 (quoting WINSTON

CHURCHILL, HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH-SPEAKING PEOPLES II, 130-32 (1963)) (“‘Before they

landed there was trouble among the group about who was to enforce discipline. Those who had

joined the ship at Plymouth were no picked band of saints, and had no intention of submitting to the

Leyden set. There was no possibility of appealing to England. Yet, if they were not all to starve,

some agreement must be reached. Forty-one of the more responsible members thereupon drew up a

solemn compact which is one of the remarkable documents in history, a spontaneous covenant for

political organization.’”). Note: The English spelling of Leiden is Leyden. Editors of Encyclopedia

Britannica, Leiden, B

RITANNICA (July 20, 1998), https://www.britannica.com/place/Leiden.

191. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 40-42; Lutz, From Covenant, supra note 117, at 116-17

(“Worse, the Puritans found themselves in the company of people not bound by the religious cove-

nant which defined them as a people, and no longer restrained by a charter. The Puritan leaders

wrote up this agreement to bind the non-Puritans to their community, and also to create the basis

for political obligation until a new charter could be had.”); B

RECKINRIDGE LONG, GENESIS OF THE

CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 6-7 (The Macmillan Company 1926).

192. LONG, supra note 191, at 4.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 29

“Their constitution was the foundation stone of democracy in America. At

once it was a declaration of independence, except as to the Crown itself, and

a constitution of democracy . . . it is from the seed as thus originally sown

that the great protecting tree of our federal constitution has grown.”

193

Therefore, as they prepared to traverse into the New World beyond the

confines of everything they had previously known, they entered into a mutual

covenant to be bound to each other through a civil government, to establish

equal and just laws, and to abide by those laws, for the general good of the

whole.

194

In doing so, they followed along the path established by the Refor-

mation and the progressive religious and political notions of people compact-

ing or covenanting among themselves to establish a new system of govern-

ance for their fledgling society.

195

This agreement, signed by the 41 adult

males

196

who were in sufficient health to do so,

197

demonstrated a quintes-

sential step toward establishing a democratic form of government.

198

The

men signed the document on behalf of all members of the community, who

were all intended to be bound by its duties and to profit from its benefits.

199

The members of the community entered into this pact based upon principles

that were understood to apply universally, such as the formation of a “just

and equal” governmental system.

200

Of course, women were not permitted to

193. Id. at 5.

194. Cooper, supra note 30, at 545-47 n. 140 (“‘The evidence is overwhelming that the cove-

nant principle translated into the larger political realm as part of the development of modern popular

government produced the idea of federalism.’”); P

HILBRICK, supra note 42, at 9 (describing the

Puritans’ concept of covenant).

195. Cooper, supra note 30, at 547 (“In the Mayflower Compact, the settlers followed the

British practice of religious banding, or covenanting together, in order to create their community.”);

Id. at 548 n. 150 (quoting Martinez, supra note 41, at 467) (“The Puritans brought to North America

their familiarity with pacts or religious alliances as instruments to build communities.”); G

RAGG,

supra note 7, at 190.

196. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 43; Edward Channing, An Historical Retrospect, 26 THE

AM. HIST. REV. 191, 191-202 (1921) (The Mayflower Compact was signed only by men.).

197. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 43 (“Only nine adult males did not sign the compact—some

had been hired as seamen for only a year, while others were probably too sick to put pen to paper.”);

Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 48 (The signatures include all “responsible” male passengers except

one Pilgrim who was dying.).

198. Elazar, supra note 5, at 13 (“Frontiersmen generally—that is to say, people who have

gone out to settle new areas where there were new established patterns of governance in which to

fit and who, therefore, have had to compact with one another to created governing institutions—are

to be found among the most active covenanters.”); G

RAGG, supra note 7, at 191 (“It was an extraor-

dinary act of democratic self-government: a tiny band of colonists in wilderness America had

drafted and enacted a governing document for their colony.”).

199. GRAGG, supra note 7, at 191.

200. Cooper, supra note 30, at 548 (quoting Vincent Ostrom, Religion and the Constitution

of the American Political System, 39 E

MORY L.J. 165, 171-172 (1990)) (“Hence, the concept of a

covenantal relationship provides a key to an understanding of democracy in America . . . . People

covenant with God and with one another to constitute civil bodies politic based upon principles that

are presumed to have universal application.”).

30 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

sign the document,

201

nor was that thought likely even entertained, except

perhaps silently by some of the more reflective and enlightened among them.

But it was a step toward democracy nonetheless, and quite radical for its time,

as it included adult males regardless of their station in life in a document

establishing an agreement to civil and political governance of their commu-

nity.

C. T

HE MAYFLOWER COMPACT: WHAT IT DID AND DID NOT DO

Although the original document has been lost, the earliest surviving text

of the Mayflower Compact was transcribed in Mourt’s Relation: A Journal

of the Pilgrims at Plymouth,

202

a pamphlet providing an account of the set-

tlers’ first thirteen months in the colony, said to have been written by Edward

Winslow and William Bradford among other settlers.

203

Bradford, the long-

standing governor of the colony, included the version quoted at the beginning

of this article in his book, Of Plymouth Plantation 1620-1647.

204

The com-

ponents of the Mayflower Compact provide a glimpse into the elements of

governance thought to be the most important in establishing the cohesion

necessary to bind diverse members of the group into a community working

together toward their survival through the first winter and ultimately the suc-

cess of the colony.

205

For the convenience of the reader, the text is reprinted

below, and then the significant clauses will be examined:

In the Name of God, Amen.

We whose names are underwritten, the loyal subjects of our dread

Sovereign Lord King James, by the Grace of God of Great Britain,

France, and Ireland King, Defender of the Faith, etc.

Having undertaken, for the Glory of God and advancement of the

Christian Faith and Honour of our King and Country, a Voyage to

plant the First Colony in Northern Parts of Virginia, do by these

presents solemnly and mutually in the presence of God and one of

201. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 43; CHENEY, supra note 41, at 100.

202. “The original document has disappeared, so this may be regarded as the most authentic

text of the Compact. It was first printed in Mourt’s Relation (1622) and that text differs from this

only by the dropping of an occasional the, and and at.” B

RADFORD, supra note 1, at 83 n. 2. In this

version of Bradford’s manuscript, “Contractions and abbreviations in the manuscript were extended,

and capitalization, punctuation, and spelling are regularized.” Id. at xxv; see also M

OURT’S

RELATION, supra note 188.

203. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 126; CHENEY, supra note 41, at 77-80; GRAGG, supra note

7, at 192.

204. BRADFORD, supra note 1, at 83; CHENEY, supra note 41, at 80.

205. Lutz, From Covenant, supra note 117, at 116-17 (“This is obviously an agreement to

create a government, but it is also, we know from history, an agreement to create a people.”);

Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 50-51 (“they had to stick together if they were to survive,” and lists

numerous other inducements for the Strangers to sign the Mayflower Compact.).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 31

another, Covenant and Combine ourselves together into a Civil

Body Politic, for our better ordering and preservation and further-

ance of the ends aforesaid; and by virtue hereof to enact, constitute

and frame such just and equal Laws, Ordinances, Acts, Constitu-

tions and Offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet

and convenient for the general good of the Colony, unto which we

promise all due submission and obedience. In witness whereof we

have hereunder subscribed our names at Cape Cod, the 11

of No-

vember, in the year of the reign of our Sovereign Lord King James,

of England, France, and Ireland the eighteenth, and of Scotland the

fifty-fourth. Anno Domini 1620.

[Signatures of 41 adult males]

206

The preamble phrase indicating that the settlers agreed to the Mayflower

Compact “In the Name of God, Amen,” and the testament that they signed it

“solemnly and mutually in the presence of God,” reflect the fact at the time

that church and state were not separate in Great Britain (which remains the

case today).

207

Therefore, documents of political significance would also in-

voke the deity, and documents of religious significance would also invoke

the monarchy. These phrases also bring a religious solemnity to the document

and grant a weighty sense of authority to the colonial leaders who would

claim to wield power under it, since the community agreed to the document

in the name of God as well as in their own names.

208

The next sentence proclaims that those signing the document remain

“loyal subjects” of King James, and the following sentence emphasizes that

the settlers were establishing the new colony in part “for the . . . Honour of

206. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 48-49 (Bradford did not name the signers in his book; the

names had been pieced together subsequently.); see also Sarah Pruitt, How the Mayflower Compact

Laid a Foundation for American Democracy, H

ISTORY.COM (Aug. 5, 2019), https://www.his-

tory.com/news/mayflower-compact-colonial-america-plymouth (among the 41 men who signed the

Mayflower Compact were two indentured servants.).

207. BRADFORD, supra note 1, at 83-84; see also The Queen, the Church and Other Faiths,

HE ROYAL FAM., https://www.royal.uk/queens-relationship-churches-england-and-scotland-and-

other-faiths (last visited Feb. 2, 2020) (“These titles date back to the reign of King Henry VIII, who

was initially granted the title ‘Defender of the Faith’ in 1521 by Pope Leo X. When Henry VIII

renounced the spiritual authority of the Papacy in 1534 he was proclaimed ‘supreme head on earth’

of the Church of England. This was repealed by Queen Mary I but reinstated during the reign of

Queen Elizabeth I, who was proclaimed ‘Supreme Governor’ of the Church of England. The [cur-

rent] Queen’s relationship with the Church of England was symbolised [sic] at the Coronation in

1953 when Her Majesty was anointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury and took an oath to ‘main-

tain and preserve inviolably the settlement of the Church of England, and the doctrine worship,

discipline, and government thereof, as by law established in England’.”).

208. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 41-42 (“The promises they have made with one another, and

in the presence of God, are thereby reinforced” by the references to God in the Mayflower Com-

pact.).

32 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

our King and Country.”

209

Here they proclaim deference to the sovereignty

of their king—not a declaration of independence from Great Britain.

210

The

Mayflower Compact did not mention any differences with King James or

with the Church of England.

211

The Saints were not entirely dismissive of

England; they remained loyal to England through Holland and in New

World,

212

“still proudly, even defiantly, English.”

213

Indeed, the colonists

were not attempting to effect a complete break from England, but still

strongly thought of themselves as English subjects with all the rights and

privileges emanating from that status.

214

The preeminence and imperial

standing of Great Britain as a predominant world power throughout the recent

Elizabethan era, sometimes referred to as England’s golden age (1558-1603,

during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I), evoked great pride in English subjects,

which likely also influenced the pride the travelers aboard the Mayflower

also had in their country of origin.

215

Although the Saints detested the estab-

lished church as operating in opposition to God’s wishes, and as the instru-

ment of their persecution, they did not openly speak against the government

or monarch.

216

The Saints had primarily suffered from persecution by their Anglican

neighbors.

217

They would also need to rely on resupply ships from England

to survive and thrive.

218

Their very lives depended upon maintaining their

ties with Great Britain by virtue of the supply ships that were expected to

continue to travel back and forth between the colony and England, bringing

209. BRADFORD, supra note 1, at 83-84; see also Perry, supra note 147, at 252 (“Though rad-

ical in religion, they remained loyal and conservative in their outlook . . . . This attitude of the Pil-

grims toward the English state, as distinguished from the English Church, is not sufficiently appre-

ciated.”).

210. Perry, supra note 147, at 255 (explaining the Mayflower Compact is neither a Declaration

of Independence (as they declared loyalty to the King), nor a Constitution (which establish the

structures of government); see also Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 42-43 (stating the Pilgrims “reaf-

firm that they are ‘loyall subjects.’ Just as they have good cause to worry about James, so James has

good cause to worry about them: the need to reassure one’s sovereign of one’s loyalty may be par-

ticularly acute if one not only holds to a different faith but also first goes East and then West to save

that faith from political interference.”).

211. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 49-50.

212. Perry, supra note 147, at 252.

213. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 5.

214. Perry, supra note 147, at 252.

215. Id. (“[T]hey were post-Elizabethan Englishmen, and it would have been entirely unlike

men of that proud age to forget their newly achieved national eminence and prestige. Perhaps the

best specific evidence for this is the inclusion of ‘the honour of our King and country’ among the

reasons for their voyage as given in the Mayflower Compact.”).

216. Id.

217. Id. at 257.

218. GRAGG, supra note 7, at 276 (The visit from the Fortune in 1621 was “the first of many

ships to follow. They would bring new colonists to Plymouth and ferry goods back and forth to

England.”).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 33

necessary goods to the settlers and returning with the cargo from the New

World that would repay the debt of their initial voyage.

219

Moreover, invok-

ing the authority of King James would help subdue the rebellious Strangers

who threatened to leave the colony and imperil its survival.

220

Finally, it

would provide the semblance of authority to the government of Plymouth

Colony, whose very existence was perpetually in doubt due to its settlement

in an area not within its original patent, the dubious validity of the patent they

were able to obtain from the Plymouth Company’s New England Council in

1630, and the fact that they were never able to obtain an official royal charter

from the royal crown.

221

The word “dread” in conjunction with “Sovereign Lord King James”

was simply a term of honor at the time; it did not signify that they feared the

king in the way the term is used today.

222

Likewise, the designation “De-

fender of the Faith” was a title given to reigning monarchs beginning in 1521

with King Henry VIII, as described previously. Therefore, the authors of the

Mayflower Compact did not intend to signify that they agreed with nor ad-

hered to the Church of England by using this phrase—indeed, the main pur-

pose of their flight from Great Britain was to separate from the Church of

England.

223

They simply intended to maintain all the headings to which King

James was entitled, to endow their invoking of his name with the full weight

of his authority, and thus reflect that authority back onto the leaders of the

new colony. Additionally, since the Strangers were not members of the Sep-

aratist congregation, bringing the clout of the Church of England into the

document made sense in order to persuade the Strangers to accept and abide

by the document under the authority of their own religion.

224

219. Paul Lermack, The Constitution is the Social Contract So It Must Be a Contract… Right?

A Critique of Originalism as Interpretive Method, 33 W

M. MITCHELL L. REV. 1403, 1414 (2007)

(although in the Mayflower Compact they say they remain loyal to the king, this was a practical

necessity because they needed continued supplies shipped from England. However, their actions

leaving England and establishing their own government demonstrate that they no longer wish to

remain subjects of the king’s authority and control).

220. Perry, supra note 147, at 255 (“What the Compact was, rather, was a temporary political

expedient, intended by the Pilgrim leaders to silence the mutinous ‘strangers’ who had so embar-

rassingly called attention to their lack of patent authority. The use of the royal style in the Compact

was a significant part of this design: the references to King James were meant, not to deceive people

in England (as is sometimes argued), but rather to heighten the solemnity of the document and the

occasion, and, more specifically, to gull the mutineers into believing that somehow the King’s maj-

esty and power stood behind the Pilgrim leaders who had just exacted this weighty pledge of obe-

dience from them.”).

221. LONG, supra note 191, at 6-7.

222. Dread, MERRIAM-WEBSTER, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dread (last

visited Feb. 21, 2020) (“archaic: to regard with awe”).

223. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 42-43 (“Certainly, the faith that James is now “defender of”

. . . is hardly that to which the Pilgrims subscribe.”).

224. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 49-51.

34 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

Indeed, the authors of the Mayflower Compact acknowledged that the

primary reason for their decision to settle in the New World was “for the

Glory of God and advancement of the Christian Faith.” Note that here they

used the more general term “Christian Faith,” and nowhere in the document

did they specifically mention the Church of England or Separatism. Their use

of the broader term was undoubtedly intentional, as it would encompass both

the Strangers who adhered to the Church of England as well as the Sepa-

ratists.

225

Also, the Strangers likely would not have signed the Mayflower

Compact with language enforcing the Saints’ version of religion. And per-

haps they all wanted King James and others in England to continue to support

them, and any reference to separatism may have jeopardized that relationship,

so best leave any specific mention of religion or religious liberty unsaid.

226

Interestingly, the word “advancement” could cleverly have signified the Sep-

aratists’ intention to change the practice of Christianity in a direction they

deemed to be superior (i.e., to “advance” the way in which Christianity was

being practiced, away from the mode of the Church of England and toward a

purer method of adhering to Christian tenets, according to their beliefs). As

might be expected, since everyone on board the Mayflower had grown up

surrounded by the Christian faith through the pervasiveness of the Church of

England, the Mayflower Compact’s stated purpose of advancing Christianity

implicitly excluded other religions, as well as other belief systems such as

humanism, deism, and atheism. Although the Pilgrims have subsequently

been lauded as champions of religious freedom, the Mayflower Compact

makes no mention of religious liberty.

227

Religious liberty and freedom of

worship would have meant that people of other faiths might claim that free-

dom as well. This the Pilgrims likely did not want to grant.

Understandably, the authors skirted around the fact that they were set-

tling in a region that was not within the patent that had been granted by the

king, acknowledging they were “to plant the First Colony in Northern Parts

of Virginia.”

228

Again, at that time, the region known as Virginia extended

all the way up into the bay where Hudson River releases into the Atlantic

225. Id. at 63 (“In their references to the Deity, it seems, the Pilgrims were obliged, in order

to bind the Strangers thereby, to ‘generalize’ Him. They could not rely simply on their interpretation,

but on a wider, yet still Christian, view.”).

226. Id. at 49-50 (“It would have done the authors of the Mayflower Compact no good to have

mentioned the differences they had with James I and with the Government of England with respect

both to the Christian Faith and to the understanding of God relied upon in the instrument.”).

227. Id. at 53 (“The Pilgrims were silent as well in the Compact about that religious liberty of

which so much is made (as a Mayflower contribution) by their successors.”).

228. Lutz, From Covenant, supra note 117, at 116-17 (“However, arriving a great distance

north of Virginia, the colonists found themselves in a situation where the charter was not effec-

tive.”); C

HENEY, supra note 41, at 95-96.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 35

Ocean, now New York City and its surroundings—where they had permis-

sion to settle under the authority of the Virginia Company, as well as beyond

up into Maine, the northern regions of which were to be controlled by the

Plymouth Company.

229

Instead of landing near the Hudson River under their

patent from the Virginia Company as planned, storms had blown their ship

farther north during the journey.

230

They clearly understood they were sign-

ing the document “at Cape Cod,” so perhaps they intended to tie their original

patent into their newfound circumstances in an attempt to bring legitimacy to

their claim over the land on which they ultimately settled near Cape Cod.

231

Another theory postulates that the Pilgrims may have intentionally decided

not to travel to Virginia and instead to settle outside of the region delineated

in their official charter, so they would be outside of the control of the Virginia

Company charter and truly be independent of all outside forces, barring the

king.

232

The crux of the Mayflower Compact was to establish a common agree-

ment among all the people in the colony, “mutually” and “in the presence of

one another,” to “Covenant and Combine ourselves together into a Civil

Body Politic.” This is the beginning of a democratic form of governance es-

tablished by the people and for the people under the principle of majority

rule.

233

It is a foundational document—not a set of specific rules, but a charter

creating the polity (the public relationships among the members of that com-

munity) and the government to institute and maintain order in that society.

They agreed to “Covenant” with each other—to enter into a formal and fun-

damentally sacred reciprocal promise with every other member of the com-

munity.

234

This form of agreement reflected the earnest solemnity of the cov-

enant theological system and the covenant political system with which most

229. CHENEY, supra note 41, at 95-97; BRECKINRIDGE LONG, GENESIS OF THE

CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2-3 (1926).

230. CHENEY, supra note 41, at 95-96.

231. BRADFORD, supra note 1, at 84; see also LONG, supra note 191, at 2-3.

232. Martinez, supra note 41, at 472 (“The Puritan Pilgrims from the Mayflower decided in

November of 1620 to establish themselves outside of the Virginia Company and build the Plymouth

Colony. As they did not have a Charter to give them any juridical-political cover, they signed the

Mayflower Compact, a genuine example of a social contract. These Pilgrims then created a legisla-

tive Assembly (General Court) and chose a Governor and a Council. When they became totally

independent from their English promoters, the political organization of the colony approximated a

democracy.”); see also C

HENEY, supra note 41, at 95-99; PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 35-36;

ONG, supra note 191, at 3.

233. Channing, supra note 196, at 191 (They “agreed for the immediate future to obey any

orders that should be adopted by the majority of those who signed this compact.”).

234. Martinez, supra note 41, at 460 n. 7 (“According to Pound, one of the Puritans’ funda-

mental propositions was that man is an active free being with the power to choose what he has to

do, and with responsibilities coming down from such a power. Individual conscience was paramount

in this belief, and no authority could constrain it. Applied to ecclesiastical politics, this leads to a

regime of ‘association but not subordination.’ . . . Such an ecclesiastical organization was based on

36 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

of them were probably accustomed. The Separatists utilized covenants in

their religious beliefs and practices, as mentioned previously. And likely

many of the Strangers were familiar with covenants through the evolving in-

tellectual debates spreading through Europe during that timeframe, due to the

Reformation and related evolution in thought about religion, government,

and society.

235

Not only did they make a formal promise to each other through

the “Covenant,” but they also pledged themselves to “Combine” with each

other—to work together as one unit for the common good of all members of

the diverse community, both Saints and Strangers.

236

In fact, the Mayflower

Compact was not so designated until 1793—it was originally called the

Plymouth Combination, reflecting the coming together of all individual

members into one cohesive, collective, egalitarian unit.

237

The Mayflower Compact does not contain all the elements of a written

constitution, such as fleshing out the form in which the new government will

take shape.

238

However, it forms the basis for such a government through

their agreement “to enact, constitute and frame such just and equal Laws,

a type of contract. If men were free to act according to their conscience, and to contract among

themselves to form congregations, it was a necessary conclusion that the state (as a political con-

gregation) would be also based on a kind of contract. The early history of New England offers

numerous applications to the idea that the covenant or compact (whose first antecedent was the

covenant between God and Abraham and his descendants) constitutes the authentic foundation of

all communities, both religious and political.”).

235. Elazar, supra note 5, at 4 (“during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the Scots and

the English Puritans not only conceived of civil society in covenantal terms, but actually wrote

national covenants to which loyal members of the body politic subscribed. Similar covenants were

used in the founding of many of the original colonies in British North America.”).

236. BRADFORD, supra note 1, at 84; see also Daniel F. Piar, Keepers of the New Covenant:

The Puritan Legacy in American Constitutional Law, 49 J.

CATH. LEGAL STUD. 143, 176-77 (2010)

(“Like the church covenant, the hallmarks of the civil covenant were consent of the members to be

bound and their mutual obligation thereafter. These elements are illustrated by perhaps the most

famous example of a Puritan civil covenant, the Mayflower Compact . . . . The notion of consent to

be bound appears in the colonists’ pledge to ‘combine ourselves,’ instead of being forced to combine

by others. The mutual obligation that flows from this consent is seen in the promise of ‘all due

submission and obedience’ to the ‘generall good’ of the new colony. These principles are repeated

elsewhere in the Puritan literature.”).

237. Lutz, From Covenant, supra note 117, at 106 (“The term [compact] is not used in any of

the titles for colonial documents. The Mayflower Compact was actually not so named until 1793,

and was known by the citizens of Plymouth as the ‘Plymouth combination,’ or the ‘agreement be-

tween the settlers at New Plymouth.’”); id. at 107 (The terms “covenant, compact, contract . . .

organic act, . . . charter, constitution, patent, agreement, frame, combination, ordinance, and funda-

mentals” had slightly different and nuanced meanings, but they had also been used inconsistently

and interchangeably, both in colonial times and subsequently.); John Witte, Jr., How To Govern a

City on a Hill: The Early Puritan Contribution to American Constitutionalism, 39 E

MORY L.J. 41,

n. 25 (1990) (discussing “The Agreement Between the Settlers of New Plymouth” (1620) (after

1793 called The Mayflower Compact)).

238. Perry, supra note 147, at 255 (The Mayflower Compact is neither a Declaration of Inde-

pendence (as they declared loyalty to the King) nor a Constitution (which establish the structures of

government)).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 37

Ordinances, Acts, Constitutions and Offices, from time to time.”

239

Thus, the

Mayflower Compact was in effect a pre-constitutional agreement, as it ex-

pressly envisions that the members of the civil society will jointly create

“Constitutions and Offices.”

240

In other words, their community will together

decide upon and implement the form of government that will govern their

society through the “Laws, Ordinances, [and] Acts” legislated by that gov-

ernment.

241

The phrase “from time to time” modifies not only the “Laws, Ordinances,

[and] Acts”—meaning the people can change them as justified by changing

circumstances over time—but also modifies the “Constitutions and Offices”

ordering the government—meaning the people can change the very structure

of government as similarly justified by changing circumstances over time.

242

This engrained flexibility is prescient of what some scholars have called the

living Constitution, noting that the framers of our nation intentionally crafted

the U.S. Constitution in a skeletal and adaptable manner, so it would naturally

modernize to reflect the advancements of the United States as its society con-

tinues to embrace broader conceptions of civil rights, as exemplified by suc-

cesses in achieving greater equality for women, people of color, members

practicing diverse religious faiths, and so on.

243

Of course, Great Britain did

not have (nor does it yet have) a written constitution, so the drafters of the

239. BRADFORD, supra note 1, at 84; see also Lutz, From Covenant, supra note 117, at 120

(“There is a very sensible reason underlying the two different linguistic patterns. If a legislature is

writing the document, then the people and government are already in existence and there is little

sense in compacting or covenanting if it has already been done. Rather, one is interested in framing

and constituting laws and ordinances. We can distinguish, then, compacts from non-compacts on

the basis of the operative words they use. This pattern of word usage remains consistent between

1620 and 1776.”).

240. BRADFORD, supra note 1, at 84; see also Lutz, From Covenant, supra note 117, at 216-

17 (“A careful examination of the Plymouth Combination (Mayflower Compact, 1620) illustrates

the early presence of . . . constitutional elements.”).

241. BRADFORD, supra note 1, at 84; see also Elazar, supra note 5, at 22 (“A classic covenant,

it explicitly created a community and the basis for its subsequent constitutional development.”).

242. BRADFORD, supra note 1, at 84; see also Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 48 (“amendments

are provided for; changes may be made ‘from time to time’”).

243. For example, see generally, Jack M. Balkin, Framework Originalism and the Living Con-

stitution, 103 NW. U. L. REV. 549 (2009). See also JOSEPH J. ELLIS, THE QUARTET:

ORCHESTRATING THE SECOND AMERICAN REVOLUTION, 1783-1789 172 (2015) (“In the long

run—and this was probably Madison’s most creative insight—the multiple ambiguities embedded

in the Constitution made it an inherently ‘living’ document. For it was designed not to offer clear

answers to the sovereignty question (or, for that matter, to the scope of executive or judicial author-

ity) but instead to provide a political arena in which arguments about those contested issues could

continue in a deliberative fashion. The Constitution was intended less to resolve arguments than to

make argument itself the solution. For judicial devotees of ‘originalism’ or ‘original intent,’ this

should be a disarming insight, since it made the Constitution the foundation for an ever-shifting

political dialogue that, like history itself, was an argument without end. Madison’s ‘original inten-

tion’ was to make all ‘original intentions’ indefinitely negotiable in the future.”).

38 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

Mayflower Compact would not necessarily have conceived of a singular writ-

ten document ordering the governmental structure—hence their reference to

“Constitutions” as a plural term.

244

However, the Pilgrims did believe in the

preeminence of the Bible as the written document providing the structure for

their Christian faith and practices, so calling for adherence to a written doc-

ument to provide structure for their civil ordering and practices would have

been a natural concept for them to adopt.

Significantly, all of the “Laws, Ordinances, Acts, Constitutions and Of-

fices” must be “just and equal” in order to be valid under the Mayflower

Compact. They were also intended “for our better ordering and preserva-

tion” of each of the signers, who represented all of the diverse members of

the community. In addition, only those edicts that “shall be thought most meet

and convenient for the general good of the Colony” were to be adopted. Each

of these phrases point to a relatively democratically minded group of people

who agreed that the government must promote justice and adhere to princi-

ples of equality.

245

They adopted a republican (i.e., representative) approach,

in the sense that the adult men who signed the document did so not only on

behalf of themselves, and on behalf the women, children, non-freemen, and

sick aboard the Mayflower, but also on behalf of all members of Plymouth

Colony who joined the settlement after the Mayflower Compact had been

originally signed.

246

Indeed, the leaders of the community continued to refer to their authority

under the Mayflower Compact for years to come, even after the original sign-

ers were far outnumbered by the “newcomers” to the settlement, as well as

the progeny born to the original settlers in the New World.

247

It is unclear

whether the signers conscientiously thought of themselves as representatives

of the interests of those who did not sign the document—but it was clear that

they thought of themselves as representatives of the others with respect to

their obligations under the compact and their duties to support the document

and ensuing government for the good of the colony as a whole.

248

244. Robert Blackburn, Britain’s Unwritten Constitution (Mar. 13, 2015),

https://www.bl.uk/magna-carta/articles/britains-unwritten-constitution.

245. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 48 (“every qualified person seems to be entitled (if not obli-

gated) to participate to some extent in the decisions made by the community”).

246. Id. at 58 (“once the community began to govern itself, subsequent settlers were not re-

quired to sign the Charter,” referring to the Mayflower Compact).

247. Id.(“once the community began to govern itself, subsequent settlers were not required to

sign the Charter,” referring to the Mayflower Compact); id. at 55 (“the Compact seems to have been

of considerable use in the early decades of Plymouth Colony, but it was superseded when that col-

ony was absorbed in 1692 by the much larger Massachusetts Bay Colony.”).

248. Id. at 47 (“the fifth part of the Compact . . . deals with the immediate consequences of

the establishment of a civil body politic: the community is empowered to legislate; and each signer,

nay each inhabitant, is obliged to obey.”).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 39

Despite these steps toward equality, in addition to gender inequality

manifest in the Plymouth Colony, other materializations of inequalities sim-

ilarly remained, as did the strictures of their religious tenets and the English

laws they brought with them.

249

However, the Compact makes no mention of

any dissention within the ranks of the settlers or signers.

250

Perhaps the ref-

erence to “just and equal” laws and to the “general good” of the whole were

concessions to induce the people who were not among the religious congre-

gation to sign the document.

251

These phrases could also have been intended

as a check on their superior authorities back in England, as a reminder to the

crown that the inhabitants of the new colony should be treated justly and

equally, and even further, may have been a refutation of the hereditary sta-

tions imposed by society in the old country.

252

Finally, the signers agreed to “promise all due submission and obedi-

ence” to the “Laws, Ordinances, Acts, Constitutions and Offices”—again, as

long as they were “just and equal” and “for the general good of the Colony.”

Notably, this provision in the Mayflower Compact entrenched the principle

of the consent of the governed. Moreover, the agreement by the governed to

obey the government was contingent upon the justice, equality, and sound-

ness of the government as a whole, the government officials, and the laws

and other acts of the government.

253

If the government ever eschewed justice,

equality, or adherence to the good of the whole, the people could presumably

249. Id. at 48 (“there is here a democracy with plenary powers—but a democracy in which

class distinctions and privileges are understood, and plenary powers which are very much restricted

by both Church law and the laws of England (as well as by considerations of ‘the generall good’

and of what is ‘due’ in the way of submission).”).

250. Id. at 50.

251. BRADFORD, supra note 1, at 84; see also Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 50 (“the reluctance

of some to sign may be seen in various of the concessions made ( . . . ‘for the generall good of the

Colonie;’ ‘all due submission and obedience’; . . . ‘shuch just and equall laws etc.’).”).

252. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 60 (“Indeed, one can now see the Plymouth community in

the Mayflower Compact, in effect, as much invoking a claim against Great Britain as placing limi-

tations upon themselves as governors. Thus the guarantee (in effect) of ‘just and equall lawes’ chal-

lenges hereditary class privileges, even while it recognizes distinctions based on (or taking account

of) property and character and education. In any event, standards are asserted which can later be

brought to bear against Great Britain as well as against American governments themselves.”).

253. Id. at 47 (“the immediate consequences of the establishment of a civil body politic: the

community is empowered to legislate; and each signer, nay each inhabitant, is obliged to obey . . .

Neither the power nor the obligation is unqualified, however: the legislation must be thought to be

(must reasonably be?) ‘most meete and convenient for the general good of the Colonie’; the inhab-

itants promise ‘all due submission and obedience’—and no doubt questions can arise whether one

is obliged to obey an enactment which is clearly not ‘for the general good of the Colonie’; certainly,

room seems to be left for the dictates of the Christian conscience. Perhaps these qualifications were

necessary to secure the unanimous acquiescence of all heads of households and otherwise respon-

sible adult males among the passengers on this ship.”).

40 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

then revoke their consent and refuse to obey an unjust and unequal govern-

ment—one that was not acting for the general good.

254

This is reflective not

only of the federal political ideas that had been percolating for several centu-

ries, but also foreshadows the provision in the Declaration of Independence

that at times “in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one

people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with an-

other.”

255

Again, perhaps this language was included to appease the Strangers

and reassure them that the government would be benevolent to them as well

as to the Saints.

256

Nonetheless, this language contains the germination of

human rights.

257

If the purpose of government is to protect rights, such as justice and

equality, and all people within that community are endowed with those inal-

ienable rights that the government must protect, then the Mayflower Compact

was a significant step in recognizing and protecting those nascent human

rights. Human rights have often been taken away by unjust rulers through

conquest, marginalization, brutalization, tyranny, and so on, and therefore

those governments are illegitimate because they are not protecting rights, but

instead are violating rights. In contrast, the Mayflower Compact supports this

concept of rights, among those including justice and equality, which the gov-

ernment must protect in order to remain a legitimate government.

258

Despite its short length, and the fact that its colony no longer exists as a

distinct political entity (unlike Massachusetts, Virginia, and the other initial

colonies that later became states), the Mayflower Compact has risen to be-

come a preeminent, pre-constitutional political document of the colonial era

in the United States.

259

In fact, the very problems that troubled the Mayflower

voyagers—the fact that they landed in an area outside of their official patent,

and the fact that a few unruly passengers threatened the survival of the colony

due to their lack of authority under a valid patent—were the root of the May-

flower Compact that blossomed into the political establishment of a written

and binding constitution-like agreement, democratic participation, just and

equal laws, and the consent of the governed.

260

The Mayflower Compact was

254. See id. at 42 (Under the Mayflower Compact, “words help to restrain the deeds of others

and to arm those to whom promises have been made.”).

255. THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE para. 1 (U.S. 1776).

256. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 50 (“the reluctance of some to sign may be seen in various

of the concessions made ( . . . ‘for the generall good of the Colonie;’ ‘all due submission and obe-

dience’; . . . ‘shuch just and equall laws etc.’).”).

257. Lermack, supra note 219, at 1414.

258. Id.

259. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 40 (calling the Mayflower Compact “the document many

consider to mark the beginning of what would one day be called the United States”).

260. Quincy Adams, supra note 153, at 18 (“The settlers of all the former European colonies

had contented themselves with the powers conferred upon them by their respective charters . . . The

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 41

perhaps initially only intended to put the authority of a government in place

until British crown sent them their hoped-for royal charter providing official

sanction to their colony (which never materialized).

261

Alternatively, as sug-

gested above, some have speculated that perhaps their landing at Plymouth

Rock (or at least not in Virginia) may have been intentional to allow them to

have as much independence from all outside authority as possible.

262

The Saints followed a tradition of separation—they separated their reli-

gious beliefs from the Church of England, they separated themselves physi-

cally from England by moving to the Netherlands, and then largely separated

themselves from all of society by fleeing to the New World, and indeed they

were even labeled “Separatists.”

263

They strongly valued their own liberty.

264

Yet, ironically, their need for everyone to stay in the original colony in order

to survive caused the Pilgrims to refuse to allow any of the Strangers to sep-

arate from the colony.

265

In order to convince the others to stay, the Pilgrims

had to concede within the Mayflower Compact to principles of justice, equal-

ity, consent of the governed, submission and obedience to the law only when

such submission and obedience was “due,” and relatively democratic and

broad-based participation in government.

266

This developed the basis for the

government to explain and justify itself to keep people within the polity,

which promotes good governance.

267

We continue to laud the Mayflower Compact and the Pilgrims to this

day for laying the foundation of these American democratic values. Although

its introduction into the colonies was based on the happenstance of a few

insubordinate rabble rousers aboard the Mayflower, it subsequently contrib-

uted to American mythology as a conceptual precursor to the Declaration of

Independence and a federal theory of government based on popularly

founded state constitutions, along with the U.S. Constitution,

268

that are now

known worldwide as beacons of human rights, equality, social justice, and

founders of Plymouth had been impelled by the peculiarities of their situation to examine the subject

with deeper and more comprehensive research.”).

261. LONG, supra note 191, at 3-4, 6 (“This charter was not confirmed by the Crown, nor did

the colony, as such, ever receive a royal grant. So the settlement of Plymouth did not have a truly

legal existence as a corporate body until its union with the Colony of Massachusetts Bay some years

later.”).

262. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 51.

263. Id. at 57-58.

264. Motley, supra note 29, at 490 (“With all their foibles, . . . the Pilgrims were lovers of

liberty as well as sticklers for authority.”).

265. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 40-42; see also Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 57-58.

266. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 40-42; see also Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 57-58.

267. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 57-58.

268. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 42 (the Mayflower Compact “ranks with the Declaration of

Independence and the United States Constitution as a seminal American text.”).

42 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

civil liberties.

269

To preserve this rich heritage, we must continue to ensure

that people throughout our country are aware of our history, including the

contributions made by the Mayflower Compact.

D. T

HE ASCENT AND ABSORPTION OF PLYMOUTH COLONY

1. The Early Years

Once they had agreed upon and signed the Mayflower Compact, the men

aboard the ship elected John Carver as the first governor of the colony for a

year as their initial action under the Compact and their first act of democ-

racy.

270

A prominent member of the religious community, John Carver had

been a successful businessman in England who helped make the financial and

logistical arrangements for the Mayflower voyage.

271

After settling the au-

thority of governance for the community, a few men went ashore in several

locations over the next several weeks to try to find a suitable site for their

colony where they would have access to fresh water and appropriate terrain

to build a settlement.

272

These explorers found a stash of corn and other sup-

plies carefully stored by the Native Americans, which the settlers raided to

replenish their own dwindling food stock, and they also looted several

gravesites and houses of the local inhabitants.

273

They initially had only rare

encounters with the Native Americans who lived in that area, as by that time

the region was sparsely populated, most likely due to disease the previous

explorers had brought to the indigenous inhabitants, significantly diminish-

ing their population.

274

The ship provided squalid accommodations to those

who remained on-board, leading to several deaths due to illness, and possibly

suicide, and desperate circumstances:

275

269. Id. at 40-42.

270. Id. at 42-43; see also Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 47 (After adoption of the Mayflower

Compact, then quoted Bradford describing the confirmation of John Carver as Governour and the

development of “lawes and orders”); M

ATHER, supra note 87, at 21.

271. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 19, 42-43; Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, John Carver,

RITANNICA (July 20, 1998), https://www.britannica.com/biography/John-Carver.

272. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 56-77; MATHER, supra note 87, at 21-22; CHENEY, supra

note 41, at 104-36.

273. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 61-69; CHENEY, supra note 41, at 115-23, 130.

274. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 47 (“nowhere had they found any people”); id. at 48

(“From 1616-1619, what may have been bubonic plague introduced by European fishermen in mod-

ern Maine spread south along the Atlantic seaboard to the Eastern shore of Narragansett Bay, killing

in some cases as many as 90 percent of the region’s inhabitants.”); id. at 48-77 (describing various

encounters between the immigrants and the Native Americans); id. at 79-80 (“nowhere could they

find evidence of any recent Native settlements” at Plymouth Harbor); see also M

ATHER, supra note

87, at 20-22; C

HENEY, supra note 41, at 104-36.

275. CHENEY, supra note 41, at 104-36.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 43

We think of the Pilgrims as resilient adventurers upheld by unwa-

vering religious faith, but they were also human beings in the midst

of what was, and continues to be, one of the most difficult emotional

challenges a person can face: immigration and exile.

276

Upon finding an acceptable location now called Plymouth Harbor,

277

the

ragged band set about building a few rudimentary structures, although most

slept aboard the ship throughout the first part of winter, before they could

move into the rough buildings.

278

Most of them were so sick from the voyage

that they could not work, as the extended time aboard the Mayflower in close

quarters lead to significant illness, scurvy among other ailments.

279

The few

healthier people not only had to construct the buildings, but also had to tend

to the ill, find and prepare the food, and shoulder all of the other necessary

chores enabling them to survive the snow and cold throughout the season.

280

Death claimed over half of their population in their first few months on the

continent.

281

Although the Mayflower was supposed to sail back to England

after the passengers disembarked, the crew was also so sick that they re-

mained languishing in the new settlement, until the crew members who were

still alive regained enough strength to sail back to England the following

spring.

282

Governor John Carver died that spring, whereupon the settlers

elected William Bradford to become the next governor

283

—a position he held

for three decades.

284

The fifty people who survived the first winter welcomed

the early coming of spring.

285

The story of the Pilgrims’ interactions with Samoset, Squanto, Chief

Massasoit, and other Native Americans in their region resonates around the

276. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 76-77.

277. MATHER, supra note 87, at 23.

278. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 78-92; MATHER, supra note 87, at 22-23; CHENEY, supra

note 41, at 146-72; G

RAGG, supra note 7, at 203, 235.

279. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 3, 78-92; see also GEORGE W. PRINCE, JOHN BILLINGTON,

THE PLYMOUTH MARTYR 6 (1902), https://archive.org/stream/johnbillingtonpl00prin#mode/2up;

RADFORD, supra note 1, at 85; CHENEY, supra note 41, at 146-72; Migration to Plymouth Colony

1620-1633, P

LYMOUTH ANCESTORS, https://www.plimoth.org/sites/default/files/media/pdf/histor-

ical_migration.pdf (last visited Feb. 2, 2020) (much of the illness was most likely due to scurvy);

HENEY, supra note 41, at 107; GRAGG, supra note 7, at 245-49.

280. See PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 3, 78-92; MATHER, supra note 87, at 23; PRINCE, supra

note 279, at 6; C

HENEY, supra note 41, at 146-72.

281. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 46, 84; PRINCE, supra note 279, at 6; CHENEY, supra note

41, at 146-72; G

RAGG, supra note 7, at 245-49.

282. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 86, 91, 100; CHENEY, supra note 41, at 168-70, 196-98.

283. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 102-103; MATHER, supra note 87, at 24-25.

284. Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, William Bradford, BRITANNICA (Jan. 28, 1999),

https://www.britannica.com/biography/William-Bradford-Plymouth-colony-governor.

285. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 91; Patricia Scott Deetz & James Deetz, Population of

Plymouth Town, Colony & County, H

ISTARCH (Dec. 14, 2007), http://www.histarch.illi-

nois.edu/plymouth/townpop.html (detailing the population of the colony).

44 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

Thanksgiving holiday throughout much of the United States today.

286

Samo-

set, a Native American who had learned some English from European ex-

plorers, befriended the settlers in the spring of 1621, proclaiming “Welcome,

Englishmen!” as he boldly strode into their village.

287

He introduced them to

Chief Massasoit, leader of the nearby Wampanoag tribe to the west of Plym-

outh Colony, and Squanto, who spoke more fluent English.

288

When he was

younger, Squanto and the other members of the Pawtuxet tribe had lived in

the region on which Plymouth Colony now stood.

289

Earlier European ex-

plorers had kidnapped Squanto and sold him into slavery in Spain.

290

He es-

caped to England, where he learned the language, and he eventually returned

to North America to find that his tribe had disappeared, likely due to dis-

ease.

291

Squanto became an invaluable member of the Plymouth Colony.

292

He taught the colonists how to plant corn and vegetables so their gardens

would flourish, and showed them other methods to help them survive and

thrive in the New World.

293

Squanto also acted as an emissary between the

286. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at xi, 117-20. As noted below, the Thanksgiving holiday and

related story of the Pilgrims and Native Americans are complicated, as evidenced by an examination

of their history. For example, some Native Americans view Thanksgiving as a day of mourning in

remembrance of the genocide of their peoples. Additionally, the Pilgrim story and Thanksgiving

traditions were used by Protestants in the early 1900s to try to exclude Catholic immigrants. See

e.g., Sean Sherman, The Thanksgiving Tale We Tell Is a Harmful Lie. As a Native American, I’ve

Found a Better Way to Celebrate the Holiday,

TIME (Nov. 19, 2018),

https://time.com/5457183/thanksgiving-native-american-holiday/; Dennis Zotigh, Do American In-

dians Celebrate Thanksgiving?, S

MITHSONIAN MAG. (Nov. 26, 2019), https://www.smithson-

ianmag.com/blogs/national-museum-american-indian/2019/11/27/do-american-indians-celebrate-

thanksgiving/; American Indian Perspectives on Thanksgiving, N

AT’L MUSEUM OF THE AM.

INDIAN, https://americanindian.si.edu/sites/1/files/pdf/education/thanksgiving_poster.pdf (last vis-

ited Feb. 21, 2020); Julie Turkewitz, Thanksgiving for Native Americans Four Voices on a Com-

plicated Holiday, N.Y.

TIMES (Nov. 23, 2017), https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/23/us/thanksgiv-

ing-for-native-americans-four-voices-on-a-complicated-holiday.html.

287. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 92-94; MATHER, supra note 87, at 23-24; CHENEY, supra

note 41, at 176-81; G

RAGG, supra note 7, at 251.

288. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 52-55, 96-97; MATHER, supra note 87, at 23-24; CHENEY,

supra note 41, at 184-95; G

RAGG, supra note 7, at 251-58.

289. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 52-55, 97; MATHER, supra note 87, at 23-24; CHENEY,

supra note 41, at 184-89; G

RAGG, supra note 7, at 251-58.

290. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 52-55, 97; Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, Squanto,

RITANNICA (July 20, 1998), https://www.britannica.com/biography/Squanto; see also MATHER,

supra note 87, at 23-24; C

HENEY, supra note 41, at 184-89; GRAGG, supra note 7, at 252-53.

291. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 52-55, 97; Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, Squanto,

RITANNICA (July 20, 1998), https://www.britannica.com/biography/Squanto; see also MATHER,

supra note 87, at 23-24; G

RAGG, supra note 7, at 252-53.

292. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 100 (“Squanto, it was agreed, would remain with the Eng-

lish.”); M

ATHER, supra note 87, at 23-24; CHENEY, supra note 41, at 195, 199-203; GRAGG, supra

note 7, at 252-53.

293. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 101-02; MATHER, supra note 87, at 23-24; CHENEY, supra

note 41, at 249-50; G

RAGG, supra note 7, at 252-53.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 45

settlers and the nearby Wampanoag tribe, led by Chief Massasoit, who en-

tered into a peace treaty with the colonists and engaged in a relatively

longstanding, mutually beneficial trade relationship.

294

Interestingly, although the Thanksgiving story has taken on great na-

tional significance throughout the United States,

295

William Bradford men-

tioned it just briefly in one of only two first-hand accounts of the event:

They began now to gather in the small harvest they had, and to fit

up their houses and dwellings against winter, being all well recov-

ered in health and strength and had all things in good plenty. For as

some were thus employed in affairs abroad, others were exercised

in fishing, about cod and bass and other fish, of which they took

good store, of which every family had their portion. All the summer

there was no want; and now began to come in store of fowl, as win-

ter approached, of which this place did abound when they came first

(but afterward decreased by degrees). And besides waterfowl there

was great store of wild turkeys, of which they took many, besides

venison, etc. Besides, they had about a peck of meal a week to a

person, or now since harvest, Indian corn to that proportion. Which

made many afterwards write so largely of their plenty here to their

friends in England, which were not feigned but true reports.

296

The other first-hand recounting of the initial Thanksgiving is contained in

Mourt’s Relations, attributed to Edward Winslow:

[O]ur harvest being gotten in, our governor sent four men on fowl-

ing, that so we might after a special manner rejoice together, after

we had gathered the fruits of our labors; they four in one day killed

as much fowl, as with a little help beside, served the Company al-

most a week, at which time amongst other Recreations, we exer-

cised our Arms, many of the Indians coming amongst us, and

amongst the rest their greatest king Massasoit, with some ninety

men, whom for three days we entertained and feasted, and they went

out and killed five Deer, which they brought to the Plantation and

bestowed on our Governor, and upon the Captain and others. And

294. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at xiv, 96-100. Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, Massasoit,

RITANNICA (July 20, 1998), https://www.britannica.com/biography/Massasoit; MATHER, supra

note 87, at 23-24.

295. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 117-20. For another description of the first Thanksgiving,

see G

RAGG, supra note 7, at 264-70.

296. BRADFORD, supra note 1, at 83; see also Primary Sources for “The First Thanksgiving”

at Plymouth, P

ILGRIM HALL MUSEUM, https://pilgrim-

hall.org/pdf/TG_What_Happened_in_1621.pdf (last visited Feb. 2, 2020) (modern English

spelling).

46 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

although it be not always so plentiful, as it was at this time with us,

yet by the goodness of God, we are so far from want, that we often

wish you partakers of our plenty.

297

In 1623, Governor Bradford declared a second celebration and day of thanks-

giving after a drought abated that had nearly devastated their crops.

298

Other

settlements in the New England colonies also adopted periodic thanksgiving

festivities.

299

While the Europeans dedicated a day periodically to give thanks, the

original Americans had developed a practice of giving thanks within their

everyday lives.

300

One historian describes: “The European settlers did not

teach the Pokonoket about thanks-giving. In fact, the giving of thanks among

Indians was as constant and ongoing as the manipulation and harvesting of

nature. The taking of life, be it that of a clam or a chestnut tree, was a moment

for a prayer of thanks. To fail to use any part of that life was something like

a sin. They used all, wasted little, lived well, and didn’t need a holiday to

give thanks.”

301

As Plymouth Colony became better established, more people continued

arriving from England.

302

The “newcomers,” as the original members of the

settlement called them, were absorbed into the colony.

303

Although they were

not required to add their signatures to the Mayflower Compact,

304

they were

expected to abide by the strictures established by the Compact as fleshed out

through the governance structure the settlers had adopted for themselves, not

infrequently leading to dissention the leaders need to quell.

305

The Mayflower

297. Primary Sources for “The First Thanksgiving” at Plymouth, PILGRIM HALL MUSEUM,

https://pilgrimhall.org/pdf/TG_What_Happened_in_1621.pdf (last visited Feb. 2, 2020) (mod-

ern English spelling); see also C

HENEY, supra note 41, at 258-68 (for a full description of what the

first Thanksgiving may have been like).

298. MATHER, supra note 87, at 25-26; History.com Editors, Thanksgiving 2020,

ISTORY.COM (Oct. 27, 2009), https://www.history.com/topics/thanksgiving/history-of-thanksgiv-

ing#section_2.

299. History.com Editors, Thanksgiving 2020, HISTORY.COM (Oct. 27, 2009),

https://www.history.com/topics/thanksgiving/history-of-thanksgiving#section_2.

300. CHENEY, supra note 41, at 228.

301. Id.

302. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 123 (arrival of the Fortune with 37 new settlers); Perry,

supra note 147, at 260 (“It is a common error to exaggerate the isolation of New Plymouth” as they

had interactions with ships and fishing vessels, letters crossed back and forth across the Atlantic to

and from England, new settlers arrived, prior settlers left, etc.).

303. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 123-29.

304. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 58 (“It should be noticed that once the community began to

govern itself, subsequent settlers were not required to sign the Charter.”) Similarly, once the U.S.

Constitution was ratified, all future inhabitants are expected to abide by it without giving it their

explicit consent.

305. Perry, supra note 147, at 256 (“The magistrates of early Plymouth were faced, then, with

the problem of ruling over a divided and often uneasy community. They had to contend not only

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 47

Compact continued to guide the leaders and members of the colony through-

out its existence, and particularly in its initial decades.

306

However, the pre-

cise language of the Mayflower Compact likely diminished in importance,

unlike the parsing of the text of the U.S. Constitution and state constitutions

that remains a staple of legal and jurisprudential thought, argument, and writ-

ing to this day.

307

And as noted above, it is important to remember that the colonizers who

settled in Plymouth, along with all of the European colonizers throughout the

Americas, were taking land that originally belonged to the indigenous civili-

zations who had lived on these continents for centuries before the Europeans

came and appropriated the land from them.

308

Although a painful and uncom-

fortable facet of history, residents of the United States must be willing to

recognize and accept this aspect of our country, which still resonates in a very

real manner throughout the current lived experiences of millions of Ameri-

cans—both Native Americans and their immigrant neighbors.

309

As a gesture of goodwill, in 1621 Chief Massasoit gave to the Pilgrims

the Patuxet lands on which they had built their small settlement as a gift from

his tribe.

310

Then over the next several decades, as more European settlers

arrived, they took over more and more of the land throughout the region, as

described in Nathaniel Philbrick’s book, Mayflower:

The Pilgrims believed that since no Indians were presently living on

the land, it was legally theirs . . . By the 1630s, however, the Pil-

grims had begun to take a different view . . . Roger Williams . . .

moved from Boston to Plymouth in 1633 . . . Williams insisted that

the Indians were the legal owners of their lands. If the English were

to take title, Williams argued, they must first purchase the land from

its previous owners . . . [H]e appears to have had a lasting influence

with the usual difficulties of maintaining public order, but also with the particular problem of en-

forcing a fairly rigorous moral code upon a body politic that included a large group which did not

subscribe to that code. This . . . created serious divisions which were usually kept quiet but which

sometimes . . . erupted into open faction.”); P

HILBRICK, supra note 42, at 123-29.

306. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 55 (“the Compact seems to have been of considerable use in

the early decades of Plymouth Colony”).

307. Id. at 56 (“Once the Plymouth community began to govern itself on land, the Compact

itself probably did not have to be consulted. In this respect it is quite different from, say, the Con-

stitution of the United States, which provides a constant guide for action.”).

308. See, e.g., PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 169-72; GRAGG, supra note 7, at 217-18.

309. Currently approximately 4.5 million Native Americans and Alaska Natives live in the

United States, comprising about 1.5 percent of the population, with the remaining 98.5 percent of

the population consisting of more recent immigrants and descendants of immigrants. History.com

Editors, Native American Cultures, HISTORY.COM (Dec. 4, 2009), https://www.history.com/top-

ics/native-american-history/native-american-cultures. Native American communities are still grap-

pling with the effects of the European infiltration of their continent.

310. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 169-70.

48 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

on the colony. Soon after his departure, the Pilgrims began record-

ing their purchases of Indian land. [However, by] monopolizing the

purchase of Indian lands, Plymouth officials kept the prices they

paid artificially low. Instead of selling to the highest bidder, Massa-

soit was forced to sell his land to the colonial government—and thus

was unable to establish what we would call today a fair market price

. . .

311

Although the Pilgrims may have treated the Native Americans’ ownership of

the land somewhat more respectfully than “many European colonists, who

had no regard for Indian lands,” they still manifested “‘the obvious expecta-

tion that in the end most of the territory would become the property of the

English,’” despite the fact that the region was still inhabited by thousands of

indigenous people.

312

With respect to religion, the leadership of the colony initially demon-

strated a certain amount of tolerance for the religious beliefs and practices of

people who were not with the Separatist congregation, perhaps giving some

credence to the modern-day narratives that the Pilgrims were champions of

religious freedom, religious liberty, and religious tolerance.

313

Perhaps their

negative experience with the divine right of kings leading to absolute author-

ity played a part in these early kernels of the separation of church and state.

314

According to their theology, God established three separate covenantal rela-

tionships among humans: one for social relationships, one for political or

governance relationships, and one for religious relationships.

315

The fact that

the colonists conceived of political or governance relationships as separate

from religious relationships formed a precursor to the separation of church

and state that later developed more concretely in the U.S. Constitution. More-

over, the Mayflower Compact has been proffered as a prime example of a

social covenant,

316

much like the social contract theory John Locke subse-

quently developed as the basis for political relationships, as described further

311. Id. at 170-71.

312. GRAGG, supra note 7, at 218.

313. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 59-60 (“And however intolerant the Puritans may have been

at times, they were exercising the right to worship God as they chose—and this no doubt influenced,

as security permitted them to relax, a development of some respect for a like right in others.”).

314. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 40.

315. Witte, supra note 237, at 44-45 (“Unlike many Protestants, the Puritans also believed that

God had created various covenants for the organization and ordering of human society, including

1) a social or communal covenant, 2) a political or governmental covenant, and 3) an ecclesiastical

or church covenant. The social covenant created the society or commonwealth as a whole; the po-

litical and ecclesiastical covenants created the two chief seats of authority within that society, the

church and the state.”). In this article, Witte does not distinguish between the Separatists in Plym-

outh and the Puritans in other parts of New England. Id. at 46 (discussing the Mayflower Compact

as an example of a social covenant formed by “Puritan colonists”).

316. Id. at 47 (citing to the Mayflower Compact as an example of the social covenant).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 49

below. The Mayflower Compact, similarly, demonstrated the Pilgrims’

recognition of the need to make a distinction between religion and politics:

“Just as a spiritual covenant had marked the beginning of their congregation

in Leiden, a civil covenant would provide the basis for a secular government

in America.”

317

As one example of early foreshadowing of separation of church and state

in Plymouth Colony, the Separatists believed that “what Scripture does not

specifically claim as a religious function remains a civil one,

”

318

which in-

cluded marriage.

319

As another example, although the Separatists believed

that people should work, even on religious holidays, they allowed some of

the newcomers who protested doing so on religious grounds to refrain from

working in the fields on Christmas day.

320

However, when the leaders found

the newcomers to be enjoying games and other frivolity, the colonial leaders

insisted that the newcomers observe the religious day solemnly, such as by

reading the Bible, instead of engaging in unseemly revelry.

321

Over time, the

leaders of the colony became increasingly suspicious of and heavy-handed

with people who held different religious beliefs or stepped outside the bounds

of what the leaders considered proper conduct.

322

Speaking of improprieties, please allow a slight diversion. The author’s

family is descended from the Billingtons, who have earned quite a negative

reputation as “one of the profanest families among them,”

323

according to

Governor William Bradford, although this characterization has been ques-

tioned.

324

As noted above, John Billington, Sr., was likely one of the

Strangers who spread rebellious grumblings to others onboard the Mayflower

317. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 41.

318. Maxwell, supra note 131, at 5 (“At Plymouth, church and state were even more markedly

separated. Like all Puritans, both groups held that the Bible—as opposed to church leaders or their

pronouncements—is the final authority. In Plymouth, they interpreted that to include the idea that

what Scripture does not specifically claim as a religious function remains a civil one. The best-

known result of this thinking was the belief that marriage was a civil rite, not a religious one.”).

319. Id.; PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 40, 104 (“marriage in Holland was a civil ceremony,

and so it would be—much to the dismay of English authorities—in Plymouth Colony.”).

320. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 128; Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 54-55 (noting Bradford’s

account of allowing the newcomers not to work on Christmas day, but also not allowing them to

revel in the streets.).

321. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 128; Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 54-55.

322. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 162-65, 177.

323. Id. at 26.

324. Family Society Friday Q&A: Seeking Justice for John Billington, GEN. SOC’Y OF

MAYFLOWER DESCENDANTS, https://www.themayflowersociety.org/blog/item/413-family-soci-

ety-friday-q-a-seeking-justice-for-john-billington (last visited Feb. 3, 2020); see also George W.

Prince, John Billington, The Plymouth Martyr (1902), A

RCHIVE.ORG, https://ar-

chive.org/stream/johnbillingtonpl00prin#mode/2up (last visited Feb. 8, 2020) (excerpted in Society

of Mayflower Descendants in Michigan, Mayflower Newsletter, Winter 2019, at 6-7; P

ILGRIM HALL

MUSEUM, JOHN ELEANOR BILLINGTON 17TH CENTURY DOCUMENTS 5 https://www.pilgrim-

hall.org/pdf/John_Eleanor_Billington_17th_Century_Documents.pdf (last visited Feb. 8, 2020).

50 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

in an attempt to question the legitimacy of the Saints as leaders of all the

passengers, and who threatened to leave the settlers once they disem-

barked.

325

Therefore, the descendants of the Billingtons could rightly claim

that the Mayflower Compact may well not have existed but for their ances-

tors.

326

The Billington family continued to have their antics documented in the

early accounts of Plymouth Colony, particularly Bradford’s Of Plymouth

Plantation, which he published years later. For example, before most of the

Mayflower passengers were allowed to go on shore, one of the Billington

brothers, Francis, was reportedly playing with firearms on the ship when he

accidentally fired off a gun, which could have caused the entire ship to ex-

plode if he had hit the stocks of gunpowder.

327

Fortunately his mishap did not

cause anyone harm, but it did cause a stir.

328

As another example of mischievous behavior, once the settlers were on-

shore beginning to build their settlement, John Jr., the older of the Billington

brothers, wandered off into the woods and was taken in by the Native Amer-

icans who lived to the east—the Nausets on Cape Cod.

329

Once his wherea-

bouts were discovered, the leaders of the colony had to negotiate with the

tribe whose goods they had previously raided for his safe return.

330

Using

diplomacy, offering gifts, and promising reimbursement for the goods the

Pilgrims had stolen, this incident resulted in actually strengthening the set-

tlers’ relationship with the Nauset tribe.

331

During another escapade, Francis

climbed a tall tree and discovered a large body of water a distance inland

325. Borowitz, supra note 185, at 597 (“John Billington Sr. was . . . ‘unquestionably one of

those mixed up in the mutiny on the Mayflower,’ which was resolved on November 11, 1620 by the

adoption of the Mayflower Compact, under which the settlers bound themselves to submit to a civil

body politic to be governed by just and equal laws. Billington was one of the signatories and thereby

forswore the aim of the mutineers to break free of the Puritan leadership.”“); see also P

ILGRIM HALL

MUSEUM, JOHN ELEANOR BILLINGTON 17TH CENTURY DOCUMENTS 5 https://www.pilgrim-

hall.org/pdf/John_Eleanor_Billington_17th_Century_Documents.pdf (last visited Feb. 8, 2020).

326. Borowitz, supra note 185, at 597.

327. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 110; PILGRIM HALL MUSEUM, JOHN ELEANOR BILLINGTON

17TH CENTURY DOCUMENTS 1 https://www.pilgrimhall.org/pdf/John_Eleanor_ Billing-

ton_17th_Century_Documents.pdf (last visited Feb. 8, 2020); P

RINCE, supra note 279, at 6 ;

HENEY, supra note 41, at 127.

328. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 110; PILGRIM HALL MUSEUM, JOHN ELEANOR BILLINGTON

17TH CENTURY DOCUMENTS 1 https://www.pilgrimhall.org/pdf/John_Eleanor_ Billing-

ton_17th_Century_Documents.pdf (last visited Feb. 8, 2020); P

RINCE, supra note 279, at 6 ;

HENEY, supra note 41, at 127.

329. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 110-13; CHENEY, supra note 41, at 229-30; PILGRIM HALL

MUSEUM, JOHN ELEANOR BILLINGTON 17TH CENTURY DOCUMENTS 2 https://www.pilgrim-

hall.org/pdf/John_Eleanor_Billington_17th_Century_Documents.pdf (last visited Feb. 8, 2020).

330. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 110-113; CHENEY, supra note 41, at 229-31; PILGRIM HALL

MUSEUM, JOHN ELEANOR BILLINGTON 17TH CENTURY DOCUMENTS 2 https://www.pilgrim-

hall.org/pdf/John_Eleanor_Billington_17th_Century_Documents.pdf (last visited Feb. 8, 2020).

331. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 110-13; CHENEY, supra note 41, at 229-31.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 51

from the settlement,

332

which to this day is named the Billington Sea.

333

addition to the Billington Sea, an area near Plymouth Harbor known as the

Billington Rocks, which is offshore the location that was once the Billington

property, can still be found on some maps and manuscripts.

334

And perhaps starting the whole Billington/Bradford rivalry, shortly after

landing in the New World, the elder John Billington witnessed an incident

likely damaging Bradford’s self-pride.

335

As described below, Billington

probably expressed great hilarity when William Bradford became entangled

in a hunting snare.

336

One source recounts:

The following incident is thought to have been its beginning. While

a party from the Mayflower at Cape Cod was exploring the coast

Nov. 1620 they came to a snare set by the Indians; young Bradford

being careless, sprang the trap, and was jerked up by his heels into

the air. Here he hung suspended, amidst the convulsive laughter of

his companions, as they witnessed the comical contortions, gyra-

tions, and gymnastic exercises of that aerial display! Is it strange

that even those staid and sober Pilgrims should choke with laughter

at the grotesque exhibit; or that the old hunter Billington, after re-

leasing him, should have rolled over and over on the ground, almost

bursting with efforts to suppress his mirth? It was then and there that

the spark of anger and hatred was kindled—and this flame, contin-

ued for ten long years—yes, until [Bradford’s] manuscript [Of

Plymouth Plantation, in which he maligned the Billington family]

was finished and perhaps until [Bradford’s] death.

337

332. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 110; CHENEY, supra note 41, at 152-53; PILGRIM HALL

MUSEUM, JOHN ELEANOR BILLINGTON 17TH CENTURY DOCUMENTS 2 https://www.pilgrim-

hall.org/pdf/John_Eleanor_Billington_17th_Century_Documents.pdf (last visited Feb. 8, 2020).

333. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 110; WILLIAM THOMAS DAVIS, ANCIENT LANDMARKS OF

PLYMOUTH 150 (1883); CHENEY, supra note 41, at 152-53.

334. DAVIS, supra note 333, at 150.

335. PRINCE, supra note 279, at 6.

336. Id.

337. Id. at 7; see also CHENEY, supra note 41, at 118-19 (“They came on a sapling bent over

a strewing of acorns. Stephen Hopkins said it looked like a deer trap. William Bradford, bringing

up the rear, didn’t hear that theory in time. As he traipsed by, the tree snapped up and a noose snared

his leg, no doubt to the joy of the men who could use a good laugh.”); see also MOURT’S RELATION,

supra note 188, at 23 (“As we wandered we came to a tree, where a young sprit was bowed down

over a bow, and some acorns strewed underneath. Stephen Hopkins said it had been to catch some

deer. So as we were looking at it, William Bradford being in the rear, when he came looked also

upon it, and as he went about, it gave a sudden jerk up, and he was immediately caught by the leg.”).

52 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

Not all of the accounts of the Billington family were negative.

338

John

Billington was apparently a highly talented marksman and provided a signif-

icant amount of game and fish to sustain the settlers during their initial diffi-

cult period in the New World.

339

As the Billington family was “left com-

pletely untouched by disease” during the first winter,

340

John and his wife

Eleanor worked assiduously throughout the first winter caring for the sick,

and are attributed with the survival of the colony.

341

Yet Billington was reportedly among several settlers who continued to

question the legitimacy of the colony’s leadership

342

(even though he had

previously signed the Mayflower Compact disavowing his prior subversive-

ness),

343

and taking other oppositional stances,

344

no doubt rankling Bradford

and others among the colonial administration.

345

Evidently the right to free-

dom of speech and to voice opposition to the government were not yet well-

established values in America at that time. And as another bone of contention,

once the parcels of farmland were distributed by lot, John Billington and his

family happened to receive a lot near the brook and ocean bay, close to that

338. Family Society Friday Q&A: Seeking Justice for John Billington, GEN. SOC’Y OF

MAYFLOWER DESCENDANTS, https://www.themayflowersociety.org/blog/item/413-family-soci-

ety-friday-q-a-seeking-justice-for-john-billington (last visited Feb. 3, 2020); P

RINCE, supra note

279, at 6-7.

339. Family Society Friday Q&A: Seeking Justice for John Billington, GEN. SOC’Y OF

MAYFLOWER DESCENDANTS, https://www.themayflowersociety.org/blog/item/413-family-soci-

ety-friday-q-a-seeking-justice-for-john-billington (last visited Feb. 3, 2020); P

RINCE, supra note

279, at 6-7.

340. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 90; CHENEY, supra note 41, at 247.

341. Family Society Friday Q&A: Seeking Justice for John Billington, GEN. SOC’Y OF

MAYFLOWER DESCENDANTS, https://www.themayflowersociety.org/blog/item/413-family-soci-

ety-friday-q-a-seeking-justice-for-john-billington (last visited Feb. 3, 2020); P

RINCE, supra note

279, at 7.

342. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 103; Perry, supra note 147, at 256 (“the Compact was not

completely successful in cowing the strangers”—almost immediately following the discussion of

the Compact, Bradford again noted “discontents and murmurings” as well as “mutinous speeches

and carriages,” which the Pilgrim leaders were able to quell, though not completely eliminate.); see

also P

ILGRIM HALL MUSEUM, JOHN ELEANOR BILLINGTON 17TH CENTURY DOCUMENTS 4

https://www.pilgrimhall.org/pdf/John_Eleanor_Billington_17th_Century_Documents.pdf (last vis-

ited Feb. 8, 2020); C

HENEY, supra note 41, at 194-95.

343. Borowitz, supra note 185, at 597 (“John Billington Sr. was . . . ‘unquestionably one of

those mixed up in the mutiny on the Mayflower,’ which was resolved on November 11, 1620 by the

adoption of the Mayflower Compact, under which the settlers bound themselves to submit to a civil

body politic to be governed by just and equal laws. Billington was one of the signatories and thereby

forswore the aim of the mutineers to break free of the Puritan leadership.”).

344. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 110 (“In late March, [John Billington, Sr.] had berated Miles

Standish and narrowly escaped public punishment”).

345. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 89; Family Society Friday Q&A: Seeking Justice for John

Billington, G

EN. SOC’Y OF MAYFLOWER DESCENDANTS, https://www.themayflowersoci-

ety.org/blog/item/413-family-society-friday-q-a-seeking-justice-for-john-billington (last visited

Feb. 3, 2020).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 53

of Governor William Bradford.

346

Apparently, a somewhat disgruntled Brad-

ford may subsequently have coveted the Billington property.

347

Ultimately, John Billington gained notoriety as the first person to be

hanged in the colony in 1630 for killing John Newcomen.

348

Stories differ,

349

but the one handed down in our family and other accounts is that the man

Billington shot had been repeatedly stealing from him.

350

Billington attested

that he had fired a warning shot, but the gun misfired, resulting in a wound

eventually leading to the thief’s demise.

351

Regardless, Governor “William

Bradford, acting as prosecutor, judge, and imposer of the death sentence,”

seized the opportunity to make an example out of Billington, who had long

been a thorn in his side, and sentenced him to be executed, despite the pleas

of other community members to have mercy on Billington.

352

The propriety

346. PILGRIM HALL MUSEUM, JOHN ELEANOR BILLINGTON 17TH CENTURY DOCUMENTS 3,

8-9 https://www.pilgrimhall.org/pdf/John_Eleanor_Billington_17th_Century_Documents.pdf (last

visited Feb. 8, 2020) (depicting the acquisition by William Bradford of a parcel of property owned

by John Billington’s widow Eleanor eight years after John Billington was executed); see also New

England Historic Genealogical Soc’y, John Billington, 2020

AMERICAN ANCESTORS, https://may-

flower.americanancestors.org/john-billington-biography#Elinor; see also D

AVIS, supra note 333, at

220 (describing the transfer of property from Eleanor Billington to Governor Thomas Prince in

1638, after John Billington had been hanged).

347. PILGRIM HALL MUSEUM, JOHN ELEANOR BILLINGTON 17TH CENTURY DOCUMENTS 8-

9 https://www.pilgrimhall.org/pdf/John_Eleanor_Billington_17th_Century_Documents.pdf (last

visited Feb. 8, 2020) (depicting the acquisition by William Bradford of a parcel of property owned

by John Billington’s widow Eleanor eight years after John Billington was executed); see also New

England Historic Genealogical Soc’y, John Billington, 2020

AMERICAN ANCESTORS, https://may-

flower.americanancestors.org/john-billington-biography#Elinor (last visited Feb. 8, 2020); D

AVIS,

supra note 333, at 220 (describing the transfer of property from Eleanor Billington to Governor

Thomas Prince in 1638, after John Billington had been hanged).

348. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 175; Perry, supra note 147, at 257 (“the Pilgrim leaders

showed by their actions that they themselves felt their authority to be insufficient. We see this in

their repeated efforts, even while other patents were in force, to obtain a more explicit grant of

governmental powers and also in their very circumspect handling of the murder trial of John Bil-

lington.”); see also D

AVIS, supra note 333, at Part II, 28; PILGRIM HALL MUSEUM, JOHN ELEANOR

BILLINGTON 17TH CENTURY DOCUMENTS 5 https://www.pilgrimhall.org/pdf/John_Eleanor_Bil-

lington_17th_Century_Documents.pdf (last visited Feb. 8, 2020); P

RINCE, supra note 279, at 7.

349. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 175.

350. In the author’s oral family history, the villain Newcomen had been trying to steal live-

stock or steal from his hunting traps. Another account indicates he was trying to steal a pig from the

Billington family farm. Rebecca Beatrice Brooks, John Billington: Mayflower Pilgrim Executed for

Murder, H

IST. OF MASS. BLOG (Jan. 8, 2013), https://historyofmassachusetts.org/john-billington-

mayflower-pilgrim-executed-for-murder/; P

RINCE, supra note 279, at 7.

351. Rebecca Beatrice Brooks, John Billington: Mayflower Pilgrim Executed for Murder,

IST. OF MASS. BLOG (Jan. 8, 2013), https://historyofmassachusetts.org/john-billington-may-

flower-pilgrim-executed-for-murder; P

RINCE, supra note 279, at 7.

352. Perry, supra note 147, at 257 (“the Pilgrim leaders showed by their actions that they

themselves felt their authority to be insufficient. We see this in their repeated efforts, even while

other patents were in force, to obtain a more explicit grant of governmental powers and also in their

very circumspect handling of the murder trial of John Billington.”); see also PILGRIM HALL

MUSEUM, JOHN ELEANOR BILLINGTON 17TH CENTURY DOCUMENTS 5 https://www.pilgrim-

hall.org/pdf/John_Eleanor_Billington_17th_Century_Documents.pdf (last visited Feb. 8, 2020).

54 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

of Bradford’s handling of this incident has been questioned.

353

Several years

later the colonial leaders consigned Eleanor Billington to a term in the stocks

for allegedly slandering one of them.

354

In sum, although the Billington fam-

ily has been much maligned down through the years, they could conversely

be seen as champions of freedom of speech, individual liberty, and the voice

of opposition to government, as well as the impetus for the Mayflower Com-

pact.

355

Aside from their dealings with the Billington family, the leaders of

Plymouth Colony also experimented with some unsuccessful ways in which

to organize the colony in their attempts to figure out how best to enable it to

flourish.

356

For example, at one point, they mandated that everyone work to-

gether in communal fields and mutually share in the harvest.

357

However,

they quickly discovered that such a collective and cooperative work environ-

ment with shared returns from their labors gave way to a free-rider prob-

lem.

358

Since community members knew they would receive provisions no

matter how much or little they worked, the incentive was to perform the least

amount of work possible.

359

The results were devastating, leading to an ex-

tremely poor harvest that year. The leaders promptly divided the lands among

the families by drawing lots, and each family had to fend for itself regarding

its labor and its bounty.

360

353. Perry, supra note 147, at 257 (“the Pilgrim leaders showed by their actions that they

themselves felt their authority to be insufficient. We see this in their repeated efforts, even while

other patents were in force, to obtain a more explicit grant of governmental powers and also in their

very circumspect handling of the murder trial of John Billington.”); Family Society Friday Q&A:

Seeking Justice for John Billington, G

EN. SOC’Y OF MAYFLOWER DESCENDANTS,

https://www.themayflowersociety.org/blog/item/413-family-society-friday-q-a-seeking-justice-

for-john-billington (last visited Feb. 3, 2020).

354. New England Historic Genealogical Soc’y, John Billington, 2020 AMERICAN

ANCESTORS, https://mayflower.americanancestors.org/john-billington-biography#Elinor (last vis-

ited Feb. 8, 2020).

355. Borowitz, supra note 185, at 599 (Billington as champion of free speech, individual in-

dependence, voice of opposition to government.); Perry, supra note 147, at 257 n. 18 (for more

sources on Billington); see also Joseph Kelly, The Thanksgiving Story You’ve Probably Never

Heard, N.Y. TIMES (Nov. 21, 2018), https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/21/opinion/thanksgiving-

pilgrims-puritans-democracy-.html.

356. Perry, supra note 147, at 256 (“other sources of discontent—most notably, in the early

years, the unpopular system of property and labor—created serious divisions which were usually

kept quiet but which sometimes . . . erupted into open faction.”).

357. Quincy Adams, supra note 153, at 20-21 (noting that the Pilgrims had attempted commu-

nity property, but their experiment did not work, so they reverted to private property).

358. Id.

359. Id.

360. Id.; see also Martinez, supra note 41, at 472 n. 87 (“The colonists at the Plymouth Colony

divided the land among them in 1627”); P

ILGRIM HALL MUSEUM, JOHN ELEANOR BILLINGTON

17TH CENTURY DOCUMENTS 3 https://www.pilgrimhall.org/pdf/John_Eleanor_Billing-

ton_17th_Century_Documents.pdf (last visited Feb. 8, 2020).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 55

Despite continued questions about the legitimacy of the colony due to its

lack of an official charter,

361

as well as and the constant flux in which the

settlement existed, including the loss of numerous original settlers who died

or returned to Great Britain,

362

the leadership of Plymouth Colony developed

a relatively sophisticated governance structure.

363

They relied on their previ-

ous experiences with local governance in England, as well as their ability to

invoke the authority of the crown through the Mayflower Compact, and the

population’s reliance on their continued loyalty to England and pride in their

English heritage.

364

Moreover, true to their covenant tradition, they created

the closest approximation of democracy and equality in the colonies, as they

believed those elected to office were obliged to uphold the covenant with

every person in the society established by the Mayflower Compact, in like

manner.

365

Thus, the Mayflower Compact has been dubbed a “proto-consti-

tution” and recognized as a precursor to the U.S. Constitution.

366

Toward the end of its first decade, the colony’s social and governance

structures were growing increasingly complex.

367

By 1627, the land was pri-

361. Perry, supra note 147, at 257 (“As a result, there persisted at Plymouth, in chronic rather

than acute form, the complementary problems—disaffection and want of authority—that had led to

the crisis on board the Mayflower. Apparently one part of the leaders’ response to this difficulty

was to adopt, as a more or less conscious policy, an expedient similar to the one they had used in

drafting the Compact, namely, the pretense, enforced by the use of English procedures and English

formulae, that the government of the plantation derived its powers from the Crown. Their hope was

that administrative and judicial proceedings carried on in the King’s name would command fear and

respect, and would serve as a psychological barrier that might help keep malcontents from realizing

just how shaky was the constitutional ground upon which the magistrates stood.”).

362. Id. at 260 (some original and prominent Pilgrims left and returned to England).

363. Martinez, supra note 41, at 472 n. 87 (“The colonists at the Plymouth Colony divided the

land among them in 1627, making up a General Court. All freemen had the right to vote and be

elected by the public posts. The General Court gave these rights to the ‘newcomer’ colonists as they

arrived. The Assembly elected the Governor and his Council, giving him no power of veto over its

laws.”).

364. Perry, supra note 147, at 254 (“The Englishness of the settlers . . . [would] help solve

Plymouth’s most serious internal political problem.”); id. at 252 (noting that the Pilgrims were not

entirely dismissive of England, they remained very loyal to England through Holland and New

World, as through their ties with England, they had imperial standing); id. at 265 (“The Pilgrims . . .

were Englishmen, and thought of themselves as such.”); id. at 259-60 (“the Pilgrim leaders, feeling

a need to bolster their authority, were attempting by suggestion to associate their regime with the

power and prestige of the English government.”).

365. Maxwell, supra note 131, at 4 (“Plymouth’s Mayflower Compact was viewed by the

members of that colony as a covenant. Those who were elected to office were bound by the terms

of the covenant just as were all members of the community, they were in that sense equals. Philo-

sophically, therefore, Plymouth’s government came close to being a true democracy; its elected

officers derived their powers by the consent of the governed within the terms of their shared cove-

nant.”).

366. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS supra note 32, at 6-7.

367. GRAGG, supra note 7, at 283-85 (describing the governance of Plymouth Colony).

56 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

vatized and divided among the families. The freemen were allowed to partic-

ipate in the governance of the colony.

368

They were allowed to run for office

and to elect, through a fairly democratic process, their governor, a council of

men to advise the governor and help him carry out his directives, and repre-

sentatives to a legislative body called the “general court.”

369

Newcomers who

were freemen were allocated land and also had the right to vote and run for

office.

370

Moreover, the governor was not allowed to veto pronouncements

of the general court.

371

By 1630, the colony had grown to over 300 resi-

dents.

372

The first records of the General Court are from the 1632-1633 ses-

sion,

373

by which time the population had expanded to around 400 people.

374

The freemen gathered in the general assemblies to decide upon executive,

legislative, and judicial matters; hence the separation of powers was still not

fully developed during that time.

375

Moreover, some accounts reflect a lack

of separation of church and state within the colony.

376

However, certain rights

were recognized, such as the right to a trial by jury, at least for some of-

fences.

377

Throughout the existence of Plymouth Colony, the leaders were con-

stantly aware that their claim to the land and to their authority to govern the

settlement was tenuous, since they were outside of their original charter.

378

368. Martinez, supra note 41, at 472 n. 87 (“The colonists at the Plymouth Colony divided the

land among them in 1627, making up a General Court. All freemen had the right to vote and be

elected by the public posts.”).

369. Id. at 472 (“These Pilgrims then created a legislative Assembly (General Court) and chose

a Governor and a Council. When they became totally independent from their English promoters, the

political organization of the colony approximated a democracy.”).

370. Id. at 472 n. 87 (“The General Court gave these rights to the ‘newcomer’ colonists as they

arrived.”).

371. Id. (“The Assembly elected the Governor and his Council, giving him no power of veto

over its laws.”).

372. Motley, supra note 29, at 480; PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 161.

373. Perry, supra note 147, at 258 (“The General Court session of January 1632/33—the first

of which we have a formal record”).

374. Migration to Plymouth Colony 1620-1633, PLYMOUTH ANCESTORS,

https://www.plimoth.org/sites/default/files/media/pdf/historical_migration.pdf (last visited

Feb. 2, 2020)

375. Motley, supra note 29, at 481-82 (“the people were convened in primary assemblies” “‘to

decide on executive, not less than on judicial, questions,’” as well as legislative issues).

376. Id. at 482 (“they considered themselves a church congregation, and governed themselves

accordingly.”).

377. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 50 (Regarding right, “the first order of record we have from

Plymouth provides for trial by jury for some offenses.”); L

UTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 41.

378. Perry, supra note 147, at 256-57 (“What is more, the magistrates’ difficulties were com-

pounded by the fact that they lacked settled constitutional authority for their actions.” So they spent

years trying to obtain an official charter from England, which never materialized “What they needed

. . . was a royal grant that would ‘inable you to make and execute lawes in shuch large and ample

maner as the Massachusett plantation hath it . . .’”); id. at 257 (“But the patent . . . finally obtained

for them fell far short . . . ; indeed, never in its entire history was the colony able to obtain a royal

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 57

Although they continually attempted to obtain an official charter from the

crown for their current location, they were not fully successful in doing so,

and therefore their status remained tenuous until they were officially ab-

sorbed into Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1691.

379

Therefore, throughout

Plymouth Colony’s duration, the colonial leaders attempted to remedy this

situation by loudly proclaiming their fealty to the crown and claiming that

their authority derived from the crown.

380

After they had developed a more refined government, the settlers

adopted the first set of written laws for the colony, known now as the Pilgrim

Code of Law.

381

Of course, this was not the first written legislation in the

New World, as Jamestown had previously developed its House of Burgesses

and legislative pronouncements even before the Mayflower had landed, as

noted above. However, the Pilgrim Code of Law is seen as one of the foun-

dational documents for the United States, both establishing constitutional-

type governmental structures, as well as elaborating the rights of the gov-

erned.

382

2. The Pilgrim Code of Law

In October of 1636, King Charles decreed that prominent members from

the town of Plymouth and nearby towns should meet to review the Mayflower

Compact and subsequent laws that had been developed thereunder.

383

The

king charged them with evaluating all of the existing “laws, orders, and con-

stitutions of the plantations within this government . . . so those that are still

fitting might be established, those that time has made unnecessary might be

charter vesting the leaders on the spot with explicit and legally indisputable power to govern and

administer justice.”); P

HILBRICK, supra note 42, at 201.

379. Perry, supra note 147, at 260 (The Pilgrims had many dealings with England, perhaps

most importantly their attempts to gain a royal charter, although it never materialized); id. at 261

(“Their solution was to refer to themselves as a ‘colony,’ as if their status were clear; to be always

on their best behavior; and to petition in a discreet manner for a charter confirming their liberties.”).

HILBRICK, supra note 42, at 201. Although they never received a royal charter granting them legal

authority, they did receive a patent from the new Council for New England permitting them to

remain in their current location. C

HENEY, supra note 41, at 271.

380. Perry, supra note 147, at 258-60 (the Pilgrims’ government did everything in the name

of the king—not separate and independent, but as loyal subjects and part of the royal government).

381. Pilgrim Code of Law | November 15, 1636, TEACHING AMERICAN HIST., https://teach-

ingamericanhistory.org/library/document/pilgrim-code-of-law (last visited Feb. 8, 2020) [hereinaf-

ter Pilgrim Code of Law].

382. Martinez, supra note 41, at 469 (“the Pilgrim Code aimed to give coherent form to the

colonists’ political practices and rules. The Code starts by referring to the Mayflower Compact and

the Charter given by the King, which established the juridical foundations of what followed. That

is, the colonists felt obligated to derive their authority from both the English law and their own law,

which came from within themselves through the Compact.”); L

UTZ, THE ORIGINS supra note 32, at

7 (calling the Pilgrim Code of Law “essentially constitutional”).

383. Pilgrim Code of Law, supra note 381; Perry, supra note 147, at 259 (first set of recorded

laws, 1636).

58 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

rejected, and others that were wanting might be prepared that . . .they might

be established.”

384

Thus, on November 15, 1636, members of Plymouth Col-

ony adopted their first Code of Law.

385

Some have viewed this enactment as

the first constitution in the Americas.

386

The Code began by referencing the

Mayflower Compact and the royal 1629 Charter of Massachusetts Bay,

387

which the Pilgrims had to refer, since they never received an official royal

charter for Plymouth Colony, as described above.

In this seminal document, the settlers began laying the explicit rules for

the governance of the region encompassing Plymouth Colony, combining the

governance of the towns and plantations into one overarching entity: “we find

a solemn and binding combination . . . for the ordering of a body politic . . .

by virtue whereof we ordain, institute, and appoint the first Tuesday in March

every year for the election of such officers as shall be thought meet for the

guiding and government of this corporation.”

388

During that yearly meeting,

which was also known as a “General Court,” those assembled would select a

governor along with seven assistants “to rule and govern the said plantations

within the said limits for one whole year and no more,”

389

whereupon another

election would determine whether they would retain their offices or be re-

placed by others.

The colonists considered the General Court equivalent to Parliament in

Great Britain.

390

The periodic elections were intended to provide a check on

governmental power, and presaged the two-year terms in the U.S. House of

Representatives, six-year terms in the U.S. Senate, and four-year presidential

384. Pilgrim Code of Law, supra note 381.

385. Id.

386. Lutz, From Covenant, supra note 117, at 115 n. 23 (Although colonists in other areas of

New England had begun to write formal documents, such as the Salem Agreement of 1634, forming

the people into a society, historians deem the Pilgrim Code of Law in 1636 “to be the first true

American constitution,” since it delineated “the specifications for a form of government.”); Mar-

tinez, supra note 41, at 468 (quoting John Witte, Jr., How to Govern a City on a Hill: The Early

Puritan Contribution to American Constitutionalism, 39 E

MORY L. J. 41, 44 (1990)) (“What distin-

guished the Puritans in New England, from other Calvinist communities in Europe and other English

colonies in America, was their ability to derive from their theological doctrines direct and dramatic

ideas and constitutional institutions. This was, in fact, the feature that made Puritans in New England

become a fertile seed for American constitutionalism.”); id. at 467 (“The idea of a written constitu-

tion is an American contribution.”); id. at 468 (quoting Donald S. Lutz, Religious Dimensions in the

Development of American Constitutionalism, 39 E

MORY L.J. 21, 22 (1990)) (“to explain the sur-

prising similarity of the state[s’] constitutions and the colonial documents”).

387. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 27, 40.

388. Pilgrim Code of Law, supra note 381. The date was subsequently changed to the first

Tuesday in June. Id.; L

UTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 40-41.

389. Pilgrim Code of Law, supra note 381; see also LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 40-

41.

390. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 39.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 59

terms in the U.S. Constitution and similar terms in state constitutions.

391

All

“freemen,” as designated “according to the former custom,” would partici-

pate in the annual meeting to elect the governor and assistants, a treasurer, a

clerk of the court, a coroner, local constables and inferior officers.

392

Hence,

the general court, along with the division of power among other governmen-

tal officials, instead of vesting all political authority into one person, augured

the separation of powers so valued by the framers of our later federal and

state constitutions.

393

The Pilgrim Code of Law vested in the governor the quintessentially ex-

ecutive power to carry out “the execution of such laws and ordinances as are

or shall be made and established.”

394

This is equivalent to the power of the

executive branch maintained by the current state governors and U.S. presi-

dent. The governor of the colonial territory also had the power “to arrest and

commit to ward any offenders,”

395

equivalent to the policing and prosecuto-

rial power currently vested in the executive branch. The assistants to the gov-

ernor were charged with helping the governor both in executing the laws and

in carrying out the policing, prosecuting, and imprisoning offenders.

396

addition, the constables were tasked with bringing “suspicious persons” and

people who disturbed the peace before the governor or his assistants for a

hearing.

397

However, to ward against autocratic tendencies of those in power, the

colonists included basic rights to safeguard against too much power being

granted to the government, which is reflected in the current federal and state

391. Witte, supra note 237, at 59 (“the Puritans insisted that both political and ecclesiastical

officials occupy their offices only for limited tenures . . . . Political officials generally served one to

two year terms, and then ran for reelection”.) Between this influence and George III, it is no wonder

the United States limited terms of members of Congress and of the President. Id. at 61 (“Sixth, the

Puritans advocated the ‘democraticall election’ of both political and ecclesiastical officials . . . the

people use elections to protect themselves against autocratic, arbitrary, and avaricious rulers.” Some

officials did not want this.).

392. Pilgrim Code of Law, supra note 381; LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 41.

393. Witte, supra note 237, at 59 (“the Puritans advocated the development of self-limiting

“republican” forms of government for both the church and the state. Rather than consolidate all

forms of authority in one person or one office, they insisted on separate forms or branches of au-

thority, each checking the sinful excesses of the other.”); id. at 60 (“Colonial government was di-

vided, at least roughly, between the executive (administrative), legislative and judicial offices. Each

office had a distinct responsibility in the commonwealth, and each wielded a measure of authority

over the others.”).

394. Pilgrim Code of Law, supra note 381.

395. Id.

396. Id.

397. Id.

60 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

constitutions.

398

Moreover, developing a written code of statutes would con-

strain the actions of governmental officials, who must then follow the written

laws, ensconcing a measure of fairness and due process.

399

For example, the

rights of defendants were already beginning to emerge, in the qualifying lan-

guage which “provided that with all convenient speed he shall bring the cause

to hearing either of the assistants or general court according to the nature of

the offense,”

400

echoing the requirements of a speedy trial guaranteed to pre-

sent-day defendants by the U.S. Constitution.

401

The fact that the accused

party could be brought before the “assistants” may be considered a precursor

of lower courts hearing minor matters, and the “general court” a precursor of

the higher courts hearing more serious matters.

However, the “general court” was not a traditional court of law over

which a judge presided, but was instead the assembly of all freemen within

the colony that met once per year to elect the officials and to take care of

other serious matters.

402

In addition to “general courts” (which were required

to meet in Plymouth) the colony also relied on “courts of assistants” (which

also met in Plymouth) and “inferior courts” (which could meet in other parts

of the colony).

403

The Code provided for a “grand inquest,” which could only

“be brought to the bench . . . [when] done upon oath.”

404

Moreover, “all trials,

whether capital or between man and man, [must] be tried by juries according

to the precedents of the law of England.”

405

Regarding minor disputes, “the

governor and two assistants, at the least, shall . . . determine in such trivial

cases, viz., under forty shillings between man and man, as shall come before

them: as also in offense of small nature.”

406

In the Pilgrim Code of Law, the colonists asserted all of the rights of

their counterparts back in England, with the principle of the consent of the

governed as a primary right:

407

398. Witte, supra note 237, at 58-59 (“This temptation toward self-indulgence and self-gain

was particularly strong and dangerous among political and ecclesiastical officials . . . . They there-

fore advocated and adopted a variety of constitutional safeguards against autocracy for the state as

well as the church. Many of these constitutional safeguards were the prototypes of those written into

state and federal constitutions in the following century.”).

399. Id. at 60 (“the Puritans advocated the development of legal codes and clear statutes so

that ‘magistrates might not proceed according to their discretions.’”).

400. Pilgrim Code of Law, supra note 381 (emphasis added).

401. U.S. CONST. amend. VI.

402. Pilgrim Code of Law, supra note 381(“the annual election of officers before expressed

be at a general court” at which the governor directed “the freemen to make their appearance,” the

failure of which would result in a three shilling fine.).

403. Id.

404. Id.

405. Id.

406. Id.; LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 41.

407. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 27.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 61

• “[A]s freeborn subjects of the state of England, we hither came

endowed with all and singular the privileges belonging to

such.”

408

• “[W]e think good that it be established for an act that, according

to the . . .due privileges of the subject aforesaid, no imposition,

law, or ordinance be made or imposed upon us by ourselves or

others at present or to come but such as shall be made or imposed

upon us by consent, according to the free liberties of the state

and kingdom of England and no otherwise.”

409

• “[T]he laws and ordinances of the colony and for the govern-

ment of the same be made only by the freemen of the corporation

and no other.”

410

• “[Taxes] shall be laid upon the whole . . .without partiality so as

the freemen be not spared for his freedom, but the levy be

equal.”

411

The Code required the governor to swear an oath “faithfully, equally,

and indifferently . . . to administer justice in all cases coming before you as

the governor.”

412

The admonition to administer justice equally foreshadows

the right to equality under the law in the U.S. Constitution. Of course, not

everyone in colonies participated in governance and enjoyed the rights and

privileges thereunder—women for example. This mandate also apparently

provided the governor with the power to adjudicate cases as would the judge

of a court in the present day, in contradistinction to the doctrine of separation

of powers regarding the judicial branch embodied in our contemporary Con-

stitution. Indeed, the assistants were also to take part in the judicial duties

within the colony, “in giving his best advice both in public court and private

council with the governor.” In fulfilling this duty, each assistant swore an

oath to “faithfully, truly, and justly . . . be assistant to the governor for his

present year for the execution of justice in all cases and towards all persons

coming before you without partiality.”

413

The governor’s ability to “examine any suspicious persons for evil

against the colony, and also to interpose or oppose such as he conceives may

tend to the overthrow of the same,”

414

echoes the charges of treason in the

U.S. Constitution. Of course, the separation of powers between the executive,

408. Pilgrim Code of Law, supra note 381.

409. Id.

410. Id.; LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 41.

411. Pilgrim Code of Law, supra note 381.

412. Id.; LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 41.

413. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 41.

414. Pilgrim Code of Law, supra note 381.

62 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

legislative, and judicial branches that are now so familiar to Americans was

not yet as well established, as is also apparent in this grant of seemingly broad

power without mentioning the mediating involvement of the court. However,

the skeletal outline of powers within the document may well have been im-

plemented somewhat differently in practice.

Interestingly, not only were the officers of the colonial territories re-

quired to take an oath of loyalty and attest that they would exercise their du-

ties in good faith, but so were all “freemen.”

415

The duties of this oath re-

quired freemen to “endeavor to advance the growth and good of the several

plantations [within the government’s territory] by all due means and

courses.”

416

Moreover, freemen were affirmatively required to oppose any

actions of others that might “tend to the destruction or overthrow” of their

respective plantations or of the colony as a whole and report such actions to

the governor.

417

The Pilgrim Code of Law required that “the annual election of officers

… be at a general court” at which the governor directed “the freemen to make

their appearance,” the failure of which would result in a three shilling fine.

Moreover, anyone elected to become governor or an assistant was required

to accept that position or pay a hefty fine.

418

This was no small sacrifice, as

the governor was required to live in Plymouth during the year in which he

served as governor.

419

Thus, the Code imposed not only rights but also duties

upon people within the colony. But since William Bradford served as gover-

nor for many years, this duty was presumably not as onerous as it might have

been.

Of course, not all people were “freemen,” as not all were recognized as

“freeborn subjects of the state of England.”

420

All people, whether “freemen”

or not, were required to take “an oath of allegiance to the King and fidelity

to the government and the several colonies therein.”

421

Additionally, similar

to the freemen, all other persons residing within the territory must oppose and

report to the governor any “intents and purposes as tend [to the destruction

or overthrow]” of the government. And as noted above, only freemen were

allowed to participate in elections. In addition to males who were not consid-

ered freemen, women were not allowed to take part in the governance of the

415. Id.; LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 41.

416. Pilgrim Code of Law, supra note 381.

417. Id.

418. Id.

419. Id.

420. Id.

421. Id.; LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 41.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 63

colony, although they were expected to abide by its laws.

422

Moreover,

women were forced to submit to male authority, though some rebelled.

423

Although all of these restrictions may make the Pilgrim Code of Law seem

archaic and discriminatory by today’s standards, it nevertheless contained

many progressive elements, considering the more stringent limitations on

participation in government the colonists had experienced in England.

424

Rather than simply a compilation of statutes, the Code was much more

along the lines of a constitution, setting forth the structure of government,

along with rights and responsibilities of individuals within the settlement,

than was the Mayflower Compact.

425

As such, it was one of the earliest writ-

ten constitutions in the New World.

426

The Code cemented the governmental

institutions established by the settlers, as well as the political practices and

laws they had adopted during the previous sixteen years, creating a coherent

set of entities and edicts, and abandoning those no longer in use.

427

In formu-

lating written statutes, the Pilgrims removed uninhibited discretion of gov-

ernmental officials and bound them to remain within the stricture of the laws

422. CHENEY, supra note 41, at 243. Note that women in the colonial period were starting to

exert themselves in the public sphere. In fact, one of the American Bar Association’s highest awards,

the Margaret Brent Award, is named for Margaret Brent, the first woman lawyer in America. Brent

arrived in the colony of Maryland in 1638 and was involved in 124 court cases in more than eight

years, winning every case. In 1648, she formally demanded a vote and voice in the Maryland As-

sembly, which the governor denied. ABA Bestows Brent Award on 5 Notable California Women

Lawyers, ABA

(Aug. 11, 2019), https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-ar-

chives/2019/08/aba-bestows-brent-award-on-5-notable-california-women-lawyers/.

423. Roger Williams: The Verin Case, NAT’L PARK SERV.,

https://www.nps.gov/rowi/learn/historyculture/verincase.htm (last updated Feb. 26, 2015) (“In Pu-

ritan New England, as well as in Tudor and Stewart England, it was the accepted belief that intelli-

gence and understanding was given to men, not women. Women were not allowed to speak in

church, and were seen as intellectually and morally inferior (starting with Eve’s failing in the Garden

of Eden). At the same time, women were a valuable part of the 17

century household, particularly

in early New England where they were expected to maintain and direct the household operation in

the absence of the husband. However, when the husband was present, they were expected to defer

judgment to him.”).

424. Witte, supra note 237, at 62 (“The franchise limitations were the same for both church

and state elections. Only males of the age of majority who were communicant members of the con-

gregational church could vote. Though by modern standards such limitations seem unduly stringent,

they were more liberal than those which the colonists had encountered in England.”).

425. Lutz, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 27 (With “the description of institutions, the Pilgrim

Code of Law becomes the first modern constitution . . . A free, self-governing people used a delib-

erative process based upon their consent to create a government . . . centered upon a representative

assembly beholden to a virtuous people as measured by God’s law.”).

426. Id. Of course, the North American Native American tribes had their own sophisticated

governance systems, but they were in disseminated in the oral tradition rather than written format.

427. Id. (explaining the Pilgrim Code of Law established “all the political practices and insti-

tutions, as well as the laws generated since 1620, into coherent form, eliminating what was redun-

dant or no longer needed.”)

64 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

instead of exercising unfettered power, ensuring some measure of due pro-

cess for the governed.

428

Moreover, it bound together in one political entity

several distinct towns, each with their own independent councils that together

comprised Plymouth Colony, and as such became a model of a federal form

of government, in which several entities covenanted to be bound together

through mutual promises.

429

The ideals brought from England and honed through the settlers’ need to

create from whole cloth their own independent forms of government helped

them plant the seeds that would grow into the constitutional democracy in

our country today.

430

One historian noted that “the Pilgrim Code of Law be-

comes the first modern constitution . . . A free, self-governing people used a

deliberative process based upon their consent to create a government. The

government was centered upon a representative assembly beholden to a vir-

tuous people . . . One hundred forty years later, Americans would use these

same symbols as the basis not only for their first state constitutions but also

for breaking with Great Britain.”

431

The same historian noted that “Further-

more, the proceedings of adoption clearly indicated that the code was an ex-

tension of the Mayflower Compact, which was a covenant.”

432

3. Plymouth Colony’s Remaining Decades

Along with the other colonies up and down the eastern seaboard, Plym-

outh Colony continued to grow as more immigrants arrived from England.

And as mentioned previously, along with an increasingly developing and

growing society, the government of the settlement correspondingly became

more complex and sophisticated.

For over a half-century, the relationship between the settlers and some

of the Native American tribes remained relatively amiable. However, at times

428. Witte, supra note 237, at 60 (“the Puritans advocated the development of legal codes and

clear statutes so that ‘magistrates might not proceed according to their discretions.’” Some officials

did not want this.).

429. Id. (“the Puritans adopted a quasi-federalist structure of government for both the church

and the state . . . . The state was divided into semi-autonomous town governments, each with their

own internal structures of executive, legislative, and judicial authority, but conjoined into a broader

colonial government.” This was based on practical necessity initially, but later on federalist princi-

ples.).

430. Id. at 44 (“What distinguished New England Puritans both from other Calvinist commu-

nities in Europe and from other English Colonies in America was their ability to derive from their

theological doctrines direct and dramatic constitutional ideas and institutions. It was this feature that

rendered Puritan New England a fertile seedbed for American constitutionalism.”).

431. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 27.

432. Id. at 41.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 65

“the Pilgrims proved unexpectedly violent and vindictive.”

433

Moreover, as

Europeans continued to immigrate to New England and confiscate more land,

some purchasing it,

434

and some taking it by fiat, the initial tolerance of the

indigenous population toward Europeans waned.

435

The growing insatiability

of the colonists for the land that had traditionally been that of the indigenous

people understandably caused the Native Americans to try to protect their

homelands.

436

The relationship between the two groups deteriorated precipitously,

leading to the Pequot War of 1637, when the settlers conducted “a terrify-

ingly brutal assault” on Pequot children, women, and elderly men, introduc-

ing the region “to the horrors of European-style genocide.”

437

The English

settlers and their allies eventually nearly obliterated the Pequot tribe, killing

hundreds of people, selling hundreds of others into slavery in the West Indies,

and forcing others to live as captives among other tribes in the region who

were on friendly terms with the settlements.

438

Not surprisingly, some tribes

found it might be advantageous to side with the Europeans— due in part to

their longstanding rivalries with the tribes who were fighting against the set-

tlers, and due in part to the growing strength of the colonies.

439

Those tribes

wanted to align with the side they predicted would eventually prevail.

440

By 1640, nearly 25,000 immigrants had left Europe to start a new life in

North America. About 1,000 people resided in the seven settlements com-

prising Plymouth Colony, approximately 1,500 people lived in the dozen set-

tlements comprising the New Haven and Connecticut colonies, about 2,000

settled around the Boston area, and nearly 7,000 were dispersed to the west

433. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 155. For a description of one instance of the Pilgrims’

slaughtering neighboring Native Americans and the ensuing devastation to the local tribes, see id.

at 151-57.

434. Id. at 170-72.

435. The Native American Response, BRITANNICA (Oct. 26, 1998), https://www.britan-

nica.com/place/United-States/The-Native-American-response.

436. Id.

437. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 178-79; see also Dennis Zotigh, Do American Indians Cel-

ebrate Thanksgiving?, S

MITHSONIAN MAG. (Nov. 26, 2019), https://www.smithson-

ianmag.com/blogs/national-museum-american-indian/2019/11/27/do-american-indians-celebrate-

thanksgiving/ (“On May 26, 1637, near the present-day Mystic River in Connecticut, while their

warriors were away, an estimated 400 to 700 Pequot women, children, and old men were massacred

and burned by combined forces of the Plymouth, Massachusetts Bay, and Saybrook (Connecticut)

colonies and Narragansett and Mohegan allies. Colonial authorities found justification to kill most

of the Pequot men and enslave the captured women and their children. Pequot slaves were sent to

Bermuda and the West Indies.”).

438. Id. at 178-79, 253.

439. Id. at 178-80.

440. Id. at 178-80.

66 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

and along the northern coast of New England.

441

In 1643, the four New Eng-

land colonies decided to band together in a loose confederation to help bolster

their mutual protection against the Native Americans: Connecticut, Massa-

chusetts Bay, New Haven, and Plymouth.

442

The Confederation of 1643 be-

came the first instance where the colonies united together in a federal associ-

ation—a precursor to the ultimate joining together of the United States.

443

The population of Plymouth Colony in 1643 had grown to about 2,000 peo-

ple.

444

A few decades later, after a series of belligerent incidents between the

Plymouth settlers and the original inhabitants of the region, another war

broke out between the tribes and the settlers in New England between 1675-

1678.

445

This conflict is known as King Phillip’s War or Metacom’s War, in

which the late Wampanoag Chief Massasoit’s son, who went by both of those

names, had united many of the region’s Native-American inhabitants in one

final attempt to reclaim their homeland against the insatiable Europeans.

446

Ultimately the settlers defeated the indigenous communities, killing thou-

sands of men, women, and children, capturing and enslaving great numbers

of people and exporting them from the region,

447

and forcing others to move

farther west. Nearly eight percent of men from Plymouth Colony died in the

war compared to the losses sustained by the Native American population of

441. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 23.

442. Fred Shelley, Ebenezer Hazard: America’s First Historical Editor, 12 WM. & MARY Q.

44, 57 (“The colonies of Plymouth, Massachusetts Bay, Connecticut, and New Haven entered into

a Confederation in 1643, for their mutual help and safety.”); M

ATHER, supra note 87, at 55;

HILBRICK, supra note 42, at 180-82.

443. Shelley, supra note 442, at 72-73 (“This federal compact, which was entered into by the

colonies of New England with the view of resisting the Indians, was the first instance of union

afforded by the Anglo-Americans. There were several other such compacts, up to the one of 1776,

which led to the independence of the colonies.”). See Alexis de Tocqueville, D

EMOCRACY IN

AMERICA 43 (1862); see also PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 180-82; LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note

32, at 32 (“It was the first of many plans for uniting all the colonies.”).

444. Patricia Scott Deetz & James Deetz, Population of Plymouth Town, Colony & County,

ISTARCH (Dec. 14, 2007), http://www.histarch.illinois.edu/plymouth/townpop.html.

445. See PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at xiii, 213-344 (describing King Phillip’s War in great

detail); Roger Williams: King Philip’s War, N

AT’L PARK SERV.,

https://www.nps.gov/rowi/learn/historyculture/philipswar.htm (last updated Feb. 26, 2015).

446. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at xiii, 213 (discussing “the English need for land” and 214-

344 describing the war in detail); Rebecca Beatrice Brooks, History of King Philip’s War, H

IST. OF

MASS. BLOG, (May 31, 2017), https://historyofmassachusetts.org/what-was-king-philips-war/.

447. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at xii (describing Plymouth Colony’s Governor Josiah Wins-

low’s involvement in shipping 180 Native American slaves to the Caribbean after the uprising

against the Europeans who had taken their land and wreaked havoc upon their society).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 67

between 60 to 80 percent.

448

Historian Nathan Philbrick describes: “one peo-

ple’s quest for freedom had resulted in the conquest and enslavement of an-

other.”

449

After a time, few Native Americans remained in New England.

450

Toward the last few decades of the 17

century, the settlement known as

Plymouth Colony was dwarfed by its much larger neighbor, the Massachu-

setts Bay Colony. Many people had left Plymouth to branch to more fertile

and productive places in the region.

451

Moreover, the European colonists in

Plymouth and Massachusetts Bay had captured large numbers of Native

Americans and shipped them away from New England as slaves in a policy

of removal.

452

In 1691, the two colonies were merged by decree of a new

royal charter from England, with the smaller being effectively absorbed into

the larger with the arrival of a new governor appointed by the crown in

1692.

453

At the time, Plymouth Colony contained about 7,000 people, the

same number as living in Boston alone, with about 60,000 living throughout

New England.

454

The Mayflower Compact was no longer necessary as a gov-

ernance document and its content disappeared for many years, until colonial

leaders prior to the Revolution revived its existence toward the latter part of

the 1700s and John Quincy Adams heralded its national significance in a pat-

riotic speech at the beginning of the 1800s.

455

However, even though people

were not frequently referring to the Mayflower Compact by name in the 18

century, its establishment of democracy on American soil at the beginning of

448. Id. at 332.

449. Id. at xiii.

450. Roger Williams: The Verin Case, NAT’L PARK SERV.,

https://www.nps.gov/rowi/learn/historyculture/verincase.htm (last updated Feb. 26, 2015) (“By

1676 the rich Indian cultures of 1620 were reeling from war and disease, and Europeans would take

virtually all of their lands.”).

451. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 185.

452. Id. at 252-53, 345 (“It has been estimated that at least a thousand Indians were sold into

slavery during King Philip’s War, with over half the slaves coming from Plymouth Colony alone

. . . . Fifty-six years after the sailing of the Mayflower, the Pilgrims’ children had not only defeated

the Pokanokets in a devastating war, they had taking conscious, methodical measures to purge the

land of its people.”).

453. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 346.

454. GRAGG, supra note 7, at 290.

455. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 55 (“the Compact seems to have been of considerable use in

the early decades of Plymouth Colony, but it was superseded when that colony was absorbed in

1692 by the much larger Massachusetts Bay colony. Not only was the Compact superseded but, it

seems, even the very text of it dropped out of sight thereafter for more than a century. Evidently, it

did not come back into public view until John Quincy Adams discovered and publicized it in the

early years of the Nineteenth Century.”). As described in greater detail below, this statement was

somewhat exaggerated, as colonists referred to the Mayflower Compact in supporting their pre-

Revolutionary activities in the 1700s, such as Thomas Jefferson’s inclusion of the Mayflower Com-

pact in his compilation of important documents in 1775. See Shelley, supra note 442, at 49-50.

68 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

the colonies’ experiences with self-governance continued to live on through-

out the colonies during the rest of the colonial period leading up to the Amer-

ican Revolution, as described below.

IV. THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT’S ENDURING LEGACY

Shortly after its founding, people soon learned about the success of

Plymouth Colony, inspiring them to undertake settlements in other parts of

the New World.

456

While one should not overstate the impact of the May-

flower Compact,

457

this formative document, along with the political com-

munity it initially created, has certainly contributed to the historical evolution

of governance and civic culture within the United States.

458

For example,

some nearby colonies established after Plymouth Colony similarly developed

around a model of relative self-governance and relatively broad participation

by the populace.

459

Over subsequent decades, through exchanges of both peo-

ple and letters between North America and Europe, political theorists

throughout the European continent carefully watched the new political ex-

periments occurring in the New World, which were following more egalitar-

ian and democratic principles than governance under royal rule across the

Atlantic.

460

The iconic place of the Pilgrims and the Mayflower Compact be-

456. MATHER, supra note 87, at 28 (“the news of the good progress made in the new plantation

of Plymouth, inspired the renowned Mr. White, minister of Dorchester, to prosecute the settlement

of such another plantation here [Cape Ann] for the propagation of religion.”).

457. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 41 (“there is a temptation to make more out of the May-

flower Compact than there actually was.”).

458. GRAGG, supra note 7, at 190 (“The Mayflower Compact would prove to be a cornerstone

for American culture, law, and government”).

459. See, e.g., MATHER, supra note 87, at 29-30; see also PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 175

(describing the close relationship between the governors of Plymouth Colony and Massachusetts

Bay Colony “Bradford had already developed a rapport with Massachusetts Bay Governor John

Winthrop”); L

UTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 23 (“The New England settlements were in some

contact with each other”).

460. The American Enlightenment: Treasures from the Stanford University Libraries,

TANFORD LIBR., https://exhibits.stanford.edu/american-enlightenment (last visited Feb. 21, 2020)

(“Like many European Enlightenment theorists, Locke had never been to the New World, but this

small detail did not stop him from grounding some of his revolutionary ideas in the vast Enlighten-

ment laboratory called America. The Enlightenment, that great age of intellectual inquiry and dis-

covery that stretched from roughly 1680-1820, drew fundamentally from the European colonization

of the Americas . . . ever-faster and more numerous ships regularly ferried books, objects, and letters

across the Atlantic Ocean, so that Europeans and Americans communicated in increasingly dense

intellectual networks over the course of the eighteenth century.”); see also Motley, supra note 29,

at 472 (“the influence of America upon Europe and upon the world has been more extensive and

more durable than it could have been under any other imaginable historical circumstances. Amid

the volcanic convulsions of the last two years, by which the political surface of Europe has been so

fearfully riven, this trans-Atlantic democracy has preserved so serene and prosperous an appearance,

that the makers of constitutions, and the political philosophers of Europe, are examining the theory

of the United States’ government and the history of the country with more attention than ever.”).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 69

gan to emerge shortly before the American Revolution, and grew exponen-

tially as civic and political leaders used their power to contribute to a new

national identity.

A. E

STABLISHMENT OF OTHER COLONIES

As one might imagine, the Mayflower Compact was not the only docu-

ment influenced by the covenantal leanings developed by the English colo-

nists and others in the 1500s and 1600s. Many of the settlements throughout

the New World had also been influenced by these progressive theological and

political evolutions of thought during this timeframe, and their colonial doc-

uments likewise reflected these tendencies, as explored in this section.

461

William Bradford, the longstanding Governor of Plymouth Colony, gave his

settlement credit for establishing a model for independent congregations

throughout the New England region.

462

Additionally, the fact that the crown

provided written documents in the form of royal charters granting the colo-

nies certain rights and responsibilities must also have influenced the colonists

to adopt written documents amongst themselves granting certain rights and

responsibilities among the members of the settlements and establishing a

governance structure to enforce those rights and responsibilities.

463

This

greater tendency in the colonies to favor written documents corresponded

with their belief in restraints on government, as well as their respect for the

Bible as the written religious laws governing their spiritual beliefs.

464

As ref-

erenced above, this reliance on the written word by individual members of

congregations was a relatively new phenomenon.

Great Britain adopted a hands-off policy toward the colonies, later

known as “salutary neglect,” under which the crown allowed the colonies to

461. Elazar, supra note 5, at 4 (“during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the Scots and

the English Puritans not only conceived of civil society in covenantal terms, but actually wrote

national covenants to which loyal members of the body politic subscribed. Similar covenants were

used in the founding of many of the original colonies in British North America. Covenantal thinking

was the common mode of political conceptualization during the American Revolution, where it was

reflected in any number of constitutional documents.”); Martinez, supra note 41, at 466 (“The in-

fluence of Calvinism in North American constitutionalism is precisely visible in the main contrib-

utes [sic] of North America to the Universal constitutionalism: the Constitution as the supreme law

and as a written rule, a limited and representative Government, and federalism and the civil rights.”).

462. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 173.

463. Martinez, supra note 41, at 474 (“charters guaranteed large amounts of local self-govern-

ment, and the colonists got used to establishing their own local governments within the framework

of a written document that was fundamental and superior to local authorities, and that simultane-

ously legitimated and limited their political activity.”); Lermack, supra note 219, at 1418 (“Colonial

charters served as grants of authority for the erection of governments and the foundation for insti-

tutions and written law.”).

464. Martinez, supra note 41, at 465 (“English colonial experience in America shows a large

amount of written legislation (contrary to customs and judicial decisions, the dominant sources in

Great Britain).”).

70 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

develop economically and politically with relatively little restriction from the

British government.

465

This approach enabled the colonies to foster their own

economic growth, entrepreneurship, and independent spirit.

466

Practical rea-

sons behind this policy included the great distance between the two conti-

nents, contributing to the difficulty and slowness of travel and communica-

tion, making governance from afar challenging.

467

Thus, for the first part of colonial history, the monarch had initiated a

relatively laissez-faire policy, allowing the settlers to create and implement

their own structures for governance, as long as they generally complied with

English law.

468

This noninterventionist approach by Great Britain, coupled

with the relationships that emerged among the colonies, led the colonies to

rely on their own resources and upon each other as templates for the contin-

ued progression toward democratic structures of government, as highlighted

by the examples below.

1. Massachusetts

After the Massachusetts Bay Company made a failed attempt in 1623 to

establish an outpost in Cape Ann, on its second endeavor it started a success-

ful settlement in 1628 in the area near Boston and Salem.

469

The Massachu-

setts Bay Colony was initially founded by a profit-seeking corporation, like

some of the other settlements in North America, such as the Virginia Com-

pany.

470

Therefore, mercantile concepts of contract indubitably influenced

the settlers’ conceptualization of political theory and governance,

471

in addi-

tion to the theological covenant influences described above. Lawyer and re-

ligious leader John Winthrop led a surge of Puritan Calvinists to the colony

starting in 1630 and served as governor for 12 of the colony’s first 20

465. James Henretta, Salutary Neglect, ENCYLOPEDIA VA. (May 27, 2011), https://www.en-

cyclopediavirginia.org/salutary_neglect#start_entry.

466. Rebecca Beatrice Brooks, 18th Century Massachusetts, HIST. OF MASS. BLOG (Aug. 12,

2016), https://historyofmassachusetts.org/18th-century-massachusetts/.

467. Martinez, supra note 41, at 471 (Factors contributing to independent governments in col-

onies included: “the directive counsel in London’s nominal control over the colonies, the huge dis-

tance between the colonies and the monarchy, the dynamics of self-government, and England’s

preoccupation with its current civil war gave the colonists substantial latitude to resolve their own

affairs.”).

468. Witte, supra note 237, at 43 (citing Charter of Massachusetts Bay (1629) reprinted in 3

Federal and State Constitutions, Colonial Charters, and Other Organic Laws of the United States

1846, 1857 (F. Thorpe ed. 1909) [hereinafter Massachusetts Charter], (“The colonists were largely

free to develop their own political and legal structures, provided that they “be not contrarie or re-

pugnant to the Lawes and Statues of . . . England.”).

469. See MATHER, supra note 87, at 27-36.

470. See id.

471. Martinez, supra note 41, at 471 (“American constitutionalism was also built upon the

addition of the mercantile concept of contract to the political arena.”).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 71

years.

472

Infused by the Great Puritan Migration,

473

the Massachusetts Bay

Colony grew quickly and soon dwarfed the previously established Plymouth

Colony, which was growing at a relatively slower pace.

474

As noted above,

by 1640, about 2,000 lived in the Boston area and only 1,000 in Plymouth

Colony.

475

As the Bible was of supreme importance in the Puritan religion, the abil-

ity to read and understand the Bible was also vital, and therefore education

and literacy were of great concern.

476

And since at least the late 1500s, polit-

ical theorists in Europe had espoused the central importance of widespread

education as a prerequisite for good governance.

477

In 1636, the same year

that the Pilgrim Code of Law was established, the Great and General Court

of the Massachusetts Bay Colony voted to establish Harvard College, which

is the oldest institution of higher education in the United States.

478

Instead of direct democracy, in which all electors vote on government

edicts and take part directly in governance, the settlers in the Massachusetts

472. See generally Maxwell, supra note 131 (In 1630, John Winship led the Puritans in estab-

lishing Massachusetts Bay Colony); M

ATHER, supra note 87, at 27-36.

473. Rebecca Beatrice Brooks, 17th Century Massachusetts, HIST. OF MASS. BLOG (Aug. 12,

2016), https://historyofmassachusetts.org/17th-century-massachusetts/ (“The Great Puritan Migra-

tion was a period between 1620 and 1642 when English Puritans migrated to the New World”).

474. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 173; MATHER, supra note 87, at 27-36.

475. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 23.

476. Martinez, supra note 41, at 462 n. 19 (Under Calvinism, “If the source of the religions

experience was mainly the Bible . . . education was an essential tool to the creation of the personal

autonomy. In this sense, it is symptomatic that the founding of Harvard College in 1636, initially

thought of as a shelter for Puritans in exile and Yale in 1701 had Congregationalist Calvinist influ-

ences. Princeton, established in 1747, had a Presbyterian Calvinist origin.”); G

RAGG, supra note 7,

at 19-20.

477. Cooper, supra note 30, between 534-39 (quoting Vindiciae, Contra Tyrannos, “A tyrant

pursues eminent and just men with hatred, and holds them in suspicion . . . a king summons and

invites good men from every quarter . . . and so that such men should not be lacking, he opens

elementary schools of reading, establishes colleges, and cultivates seminaries of virtue every-

where.’”).

478. Harvard at a Glance: History, HARVARD, https://www.harvard.edu/about-harvard/har-

vard-glance/history (last visited Feb. 8, 2020); Martinez, supra note 41, at 462 n. 18 (“‘[the Amer-

icans] were an ‘enlightened people’ who knew their rights and the limits of power and who, unlike

any people before them, aimed to think before they felt.’”); see also M

ATHER, supra note 87, at 92-

100 (“The Salt of the Nations: The History of Harvard College”). The College of William and Mary

was established in Virginia in 1693; St. John’s College was established in Maryland in 1696; Yale

College was established in Connecticut in 1701; Princeton was founded in 1746; Columbia Univer-

sity in New York was started as King’s College in 1754; and Benjamin Franklin established the

precursor to the University of Pennsylvania in 1751, which traces its roots back to 1740; the College

of Rhode Island opened in Providence in 1755; Queen’s College, which later became Rutgers Uni-

versity, opened in New Jersey in 1766; and Dartmouth College was founded in New Hampshire in

1768. See Alma Mater: The History of American Colleges & Universities, C

OLUMBIA U., https://ed-

blogs.columbia.edu/histx3570-001-2014-1/timelines/early-american-colleges-1636-1860-a-time-

line/ (last visited Feb. 21, 2020); History of St. John’s College, S

T. JOHN’S C.,

https://www.sjc.edu/about/history (last visited Feb. 21, 2020); History, C

OLUMBIA U.,

https://www.columbia.edu/content/history (last visited Feb. 21, 2020); Penn’s Heritage, P

ENN.,

https://home.www.upenn.edu/about/history (last visited Feb. 21, 2020).

72 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

Bay Colony instituted a moderately democratic republic. They elected repre-

sentatives to serve in government and act on behalf of the populace,

479

just

as the entire country would eventually do through state legislatures, the Arti-

cles of Confederation, and then the U.S. Constitution. At first, the Massachu-

setts settlers simply imposed the responsibilities of government upon the

Board of Assistants during the first General Court in 1630, but subsequently

the freemen participated in electing their government, starting with the third

General Court in 1632.

480

They remained firmly loyal to the monarch in Eng-

land and thought of themselves as British subjects.

481

Like the Separatists in Plymouth Colony, the Puritans in Massachusetts

Bay Colony believed in a covenant theology, which helped guide their reli-

gious and political actions.

482

However, in contrast with the beliefs and prac-

tices in Plymouth Colony, the Puritans in Massachusetts Bay Colony be-

lieved that once they had elected their governor, the governor ruled with

divine right, and did not thereafter need the consent of the governed.

483

Though asserting their own congregation’s right to govern its internal mat-

ters, the Massachusetts Bay Puritans were Congregationalists, claiming to re-

main firmly within the Church of England, although in reality they worshiped

as they pleased, without interference from church-appointed bishops.

484

Therefore, they were appalled by the convictions of the Separatists who had

established Plymouth Colony and had turned their backs on the Anglican

Church.

485

479. See MATHER, supra note 87, at 27-36.

480. Motley, supra note 29, at 483-84.

481. Maxwell, supra note 131, at 3 (“Both Massachusetts Bay and Plymouth perceived them-

selves as purely English colonies, subject to English law and loyal to the English monarch.”).

482. Elazar, supra note 5, at 22-23 (“John Winthrop, the foremost Puritan founder, summa-

rized this understanding in two brief sentences: ‘We are entered into a Covenant with Him for this

work. We have taken out a commission.’”).

483. Maxwell, supra note 131, at 4 (“Plymouth’s Mayflower Compact was viewed by the

members of that colony as a covenant. Those who were elected to office were bound by the terms

of the covenant just as were all members of the community, they were in that sense equals. Philo-

sophically, therefore, Plymouth’s government came close to being a true democracy; its elected

officers derived their powers by the consent of the governed within the terms of their shared cove-

nant.”); id. at 405 (This contrasted with the prevailing philosophy in other colonies such as Massa-

chusetts Bay. Once the governor and other officials were chosen by the people, they ruled with

divine authority, derived from the divine right of kings.).

484. Martinez, supra note 41, at 466 (“Congregationalism . . . the government of the church

should be completely decentralized with autonomous local congregations, and . . . a ‘democracy’

under juridical rules as the best form of ecclesiastical and civil government.”); P

HILBRICK, supra

note 42, at 174.

485. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 37 (“The great body of Puritans, whether they were working

for a Presbyterian or a Congregational purification of England, were horrified by the Separatists.

These endangered the cause by seeming to prove to the government that Puritanism was really what

the government said it was—subversive, anarchical, disloyal . . . So, the little band who eventually

landed and suffered at Plymouth in 1620 are not quite representative. The large and well-organized

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 73

Despite maintaining some trappings of a fledgling democracy, the new

settlement was far from democratic.

486

The Massachusetts Bay Colony was

largely Puritan and was governed by a few Puritan leaders elected by free-

men, who were required to be members of the local Puritan church.

487

The

leaders policing the population were strict, and punishments for violations of

the laws laid down by those leaders were severe.

488

Although people of other

Christian faiths lived in the colony, such as Anglicans, Baptists, and Quakers,

they suffered from various manifestations of intolerance at the hands of the

colonial leaders and people in the religious majority.

489

For example, in 1632

the General Court enacted an edict mandating that only members of the Pu-

ritan church were able to be citizens in the colony, in a move subsequently

described: “Thus the aristocracy became a theocracy, and the colony was less

democratic than ever.”

490

Since only one-third of the population of Massa-

chusetts Bay Colony were members of the Puritan church, two-thirds were

excluded from citizenship and the ability to participate in governance of the

colony.

491

Moreover, others, such as women, servants, bondsmen, artisans,

were also unable to be involved in the government.

492

An account looking

back from the mid-1800s described the situation as follows: “Religiously,

socially, politically, the early government of Massachusetts was a severe, in

many respects a tyrannical, system.”

493

The Puritans in Massachusetts Bay Colony had come to the New World

to distance themselves from the Church of England and King Charles in order

body who settled Massachusetts Bay in 1630, though committed to the Congregational idea, stoutly

maintained that they were not and never had been Separatists.”).

486. Motley, supra note 29, at 487 (“In civil and political matters, too, the strictness of the

government was not less apparent.” The General Court disfavored anyone who was not a member

of the church.).

487. Id. at 482-84 (The colony was initially governed by a Board of Assistants elected by the

“freemen,” Puritans who wanted to establish what they considered to be the “true church” (not reli-

gious freedom) Freemen included “men of aristocratic birth and education” from England, as well

as “old planters,” who had immigrated to the region between 1623-1630. Freemen did not include

servants, artisans, and women, among other subordinate groups).

488. Id. at 487-88 (“banishment, whipping, and cropping of ears; the tongue . . . was bored

through with a red hot iron,” slavery—all punishments meted out by the Puritans in Massachusetts.

“Nowhere in the world was a stricter police established than in Massachusetts.”).

489. See, e.g., PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 177 (discussing the treatment of the Quakers,

including executions for their religious beliefs).

490. Motley, supra note 29, at 484 (“At the General Court in May [1632] that remarkable

ordinance was passed, by which membership of a Calvinist church was established as an indispen-

sable prerequisite of citizenship. Thus the aristocracy became a theocracy, and the colony was less

democratic than ever.”).

491. Id. (stating two-thirds of the population of Massachusetts Bay Colony were not members

of the Calvinist church); see also M

ATHER, supra note 87, at 31 (noting the creation of a “church

state” earlier in Massachusetts Bay Colony).

492. Motley, supra note 29, at 483-84 (Women, servants, bondsmen, and artisans were all

excluded from governance.).

493. Id. at 486.

74 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

to practice their Congregationalist Puritan beliefs in freedom,

494

yet they de-

nied that same religious freedom to others, including their propensity to exile

people from the colony.

495

Their intolerance led the colonial leaders to vehe-

ment theological disagreements with both Roger Williams and Anne

Hutchinson, two independent-minded spiritual leaders, eventually leading to

their banishment from the colony in the mid-1630s.

496

Roger Williams and

Anne Hutchison were later founders of Rhode Island, a colony based on prin-

ciples of religious tolerance, as well as greater civil and political rights.

497

Also due to disputes with the Puritan leaders in Boston, in 1636 Reverend

Thomas Hooker led about 100 people out of Massachusetts Bay Colony to

found Hartford, and later established the colony of Connecticut.

498

The inclination of Puritans in the Massachusetts Bay Colony to separate

themselves physically, and in many respects theologically, from the Church

of England may have helped foster an environment of questioning those in

power and separating from authority with which one disagrees. This inclina-

tion could consequently prompt the freethinking among the colonies to leave

and establish their own settlements where they could practice their own be-

liefs.

499

Undoubtedly influenced by the 1636 Pilgrim Code of Law,

500

the leaders

in Massachusetts Bay Colony adopted The Book of the General Laws and

Liberties Concerning the Inhabitants of Massachusetts in 1648.

501

This set of

494. See MATHER, supra note 87, at 27-36.

495. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 170, 177.

496. Motley, supra note 29, at 486 (Note the “treatment to which Roger Williams, Anne

Hutchinson, and subsequently the Quakers, were subjected. The fact is, that toleration, religious

toleration, so far from being considered a virtue at that day, was rather accounted a crime.”). See

more on Roger Williams and Anne Hutchinson in the discussion of Rhode Island, below. See also

History.com Editors, Anne Hutchinson, H

ISTORY.COM (Nov. 9, 2009), https://www.his-

tory.com/topics/colonial-america/anne-hutchinson; P

HILBRICK, supra note 42, at 161, 170, 177.

497. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 161, 170, 177.

498. Nancy Finlay, Thomas Hooker: Connecticut’s Founding Father, CONN. HIST. (Sept. 22,

2019), https://connecticuthistory.org/thomas-hooker-connecticuts-founding-father/.

499. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 57 (“What made this problem particularly acute for the Pu-

ritans is that they were, as we have seen, themselves separatists, with a recent history of repeated

separations. The principle upon which they had acted theretofore threatened to undermine their own

stability—and, indeed, there were in the decades following the original settlements in Massachusetts

separations into not only nearby towns but also into what we now know as Connecticut and Rhode

Island. The availability of plentiful land to the West and South made such separations always at-

tractive for the more restless spirits.”).

500. Members of Plymouth Colony and Massachusetts Bay Colony interacted with each other

and consulted with each other on various occasions. See, e.g., M

ATHER, supra note 87, at 31 (“ours,

now arrived at Salem, consulted with their brethren at Plymouth”).

501. Witte, supra note 237, at n. 76 (quoting The Book of the General Laws and Liberties

Concerning the Inhabitants of Massachusetts 1 (1648) (M. Farrand ed. 1929) (page following A2)

(“The authors of the Laws and Liberties [of Massachusetts] made clear, however, that codification

should not lead to sterile conservatism, but that the law should be equitably applied. ‘[W]e have not

published [this code] as a perfect body of laws sufficient to carry on the Government established

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 75

laws was based on a document called the “Body of Liberties” originally pub-

lished in 1641.

502

The General Laws and Liberties set forth certain rights for

certain segments of the population as well as duties, and the authors intended

it to be a living document adaptable to new circumstances as they arose over

time,

503

which is an early precursor to the theories of the living Constitution

in modern constitutional interpretation.

504

Tragically, John Winthrop had written into the Body of Liberties the le-

galization of slavery in the colony, penning there “shall never be any bond

slavery unless it be lawful captives taken in just wars, and such strangers as

willingly sell themselves or are sold to us.”

505

Governor Winthrop also en-

slaved Native Americans, to which the Massachusetts General Court of As-

sistants gave legal approbation in 1639.

506

When his son Samuel became an

adult, he moved to Antigua and worked African slaves on a plantation, as the

Caribbean was the heart of the triangular trade in slaves between Africa, the

Caribbean and North America, including the New England colonies.

507

An-

other son, John, Jr., who in later years became governor of Connecticut, also

owned black slaves on numerous landholdings, as did other Winthrop family

members and their progeny.

508

Many people in the United States today do

not realize the extent of slavery that existed throughout the northern colonies

and states—including both indigenous and black slaves.

509

At the time the

U.S. Constitution was written, “[a]t least one-third of the slaveowners came

from the northern states.”

510

for future times, nor could it be expected that we should promise such a thing . . . You have called

us from amongst the rest of our Brethren and govern us power to make these lawes: we must now

call upon you to see them executed: remembering that old & true proverb, The execution of the law

is the life of the law.’”); see also Martinez, supra note 41, at 480 (listing various right included in

the Massachusetts Body of Liberties).

502. Massachusetts Body of Liberties, MASS.GOV, https://www.mass.gov/service-details/mas-

sachusetts-body-of-liberties (last visited Feb. 8, 2020); see also Martinez, supra note 41, at 480

(which lists various right included in the Massachusetts Body of Liberties).

503. Witte, supra note 237, at n. 76.

504. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 18 (“The principles vital to the Constitution of the United

States and to American constitutionalism invite, if they do not even require, continual reexamination

by citizens. Such inquiry extends to the influential documents that precede the Constitution, such as

Magna Carta, the Mayflower Compact, the Declaration of Independence, and the Articles of Con-

federation.”).

505. C.S. Mangold, New England’s Scarlet “S” for Slavery, THE BOSTON GLOBE (Jan. 18,

2010), http://archive.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/arti-

cles/2010/01/18/new_englands_scarlet_s_for_slavery/?page=full.

506. Id.

507. Id.

508. Id.

509. Id.; see also PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 253 (“Selling Indian captives served two func-

tions: it provided income to help pay for the war, and it removed a dangerous and disruptive people

from the colony—not to mention the fact that it made the rebels’ lands available for later settlement

by the English.” “[M]any Englishmen in the Narragansett Bay region, would own African slaves”).

510. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 137.

76 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

A series of squabbles with the crown in England led briefly to the revo-

cation of the colony’s charter in the later decades of the century. After King

James’ daughter Mary, along with her husband William of Orange, deposed

the king in the Glorious Revolution in 1688,

511

William and Mary issued a

new charter in 1691 establishing the Province of Massachusetts Bay, which

incorporated the former Plymouth Colony into the Massachusetts Bay Col-

ony, along with a few other holdings.

Sir William Phips returned from England with the new charter to take

charge of the expanded province in 1692.

512

Phips had been born in New

England of low socioeconomic stature, but through hard work and good for-

tune raised himself to become the first native-born New Englander to receive

a knighthood.

513

Unfortunately, he arrived in the reestablished province just

as the mass hysteria about witchcraft was cresting.

514

Around 125 people had

already been incarcerated on such charges in Salem and Boston. In Phips’

most notorious action, he launched the court that oversaw the Salem Witch

Trials in May of 1692.

515

Largely focusing on other matters, Phips travelled

north for several weeks during the height of the trials, and upon his return,

twenty people had already been executed. Although initially deferential to

the colonial church, after witnessing this religiously based persecution and

slaughter, Phips disbanded the original court as well as a subsequent iteration

and pardoned several of the accused.

516

Nearly all of those remaining in

prison were released by May of 1693, bringing the horrors perpetrated by

these infamous dogmatists to a close.

517

511. History.com Editors, Glorious Revolution, HISTORY.COM (Feb. 19, 2018),

https://www.history.com/topics/british-history/glorious-revolution.

512. See MATHER, supra note 87, at iv; see also Brendan Dignan, Governor, Sir William Phips,

ALEM WITCH TRIALS: DOCUMENTARY ARCHIVE AND TRANSCRIPTION PROJECT, http://sa-

lem.lib.virginia.edu/people/phips.html (last visited Feb. 21, 2020).

513. See MATHER, supra note 87, at 55-65; see also Brendan Dignan, Governor, Sir William

Phips, S

ALEM WITCH TRIALS: DOCUMENTARY ARCHIVE AND TRANSCRIPTION PROJECT, http://sa-

lem.lib.virginia.edu/people/phips.html (last visited Feb. 21, 2020).

514. See MATHER, supra note 87, at 59-65; see also Brendan Dignan, Governor, Sir William

Phips, S

ALEM WITCH TRIALS: DOCUMENTARY ARCHIVE AND TRANSCRIPTION PROJECT, http://sa-

lem.lib.virginia.edu/people/phips.html (last visited Feb. 21, 2020).

515. See MATHER, supra note 87, at 59-65; see also Brendan Dignan, Governor, Sir William

Phips, S

ALEM WITCH TRIALS: DOCUMENTARY ARCHIVE AND TRANSCRIPTION PROJECT, http://sa-

lem.lib.virginia.edu/people/phips.html (last visited Feb. 21, 2020).

516. The Trials, BRITANNICA (July 20, 1998), https://www.britannica.com/event/Salem-

witch-trials/The-trials#ref1229029; see also Brendan Dignan, Governor, Sir William Phips, Salem

Witch Trials: Documentary Archive and Transcription Project, http://salem.lib.virginia.edu/peo-

ple/phips.html (last visited Feb. 21, 2020).

517. The Trials, BRITANNICA (July 20, 1998), https://www.britannica.com/event/Salem-

witch-trials/The-trials#ref1229029; see also Brendan Dignan, Governor, Sir William Phips, Salem

Witch Trials: Documentary Archive and Transcription Project, http://salem.lib.virginia.edu/peo-

ple/phips.html (last visited Feb. 21, 2020).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 77

Since the early 1600s, the geographic proximity of the Plymouth and

Massachusetts Bay Colonies allowed their members to interact with each

other with relative frequency, enabling them to share experiences and in-

sights.

518

As noted above, the Massachusetts Bay Colony eventually ab-

sorbed Plymouth Colony. Massachusetts colonial historians loyal to their

Massachusetts Bay Colony heritage gave the Mayflower Compact and Plym-

outh Colony rather cursory treatment in the subsequent decades.

519

However,

the Commonwealth of Massachusetts now proudly displays its Pilgrim herit-

age, showcasing this history through the Plimouth Plantation (using the orig-

inal spelling), including a living-history 17

century village, a Wampanoag

Homesite, and the Mayflower II ship docked in Plymouth Harbor.

520

Plym-

outh, Boston, Provincetown, and the surrounding region have embraced this

legacy with their preparations for the 400

anniversary events in September

2020.

2. Connecticut

In 1635, Thomas Hooker, a Puritan minister who engaged in theological

and political disputes with the Puritan leaders in Boston, obtained permission

from the General Court of the Massachusetts Bay Colony to establish a sep-

arate settlement in the Connecticut valley.

521

In 1636 he led a group of 100

people to start a new settlement in a region they named Hartford.

522

Chafing

under the continued attempts by the Massachusetts Bay Colony to exert au-

thority over the new settlement, Reverend Hooker gave a sermon in 1638

proclaiming the right of the people within the new settlement to choose their

own leaders and establish their own government.

523

That sermon later be-

came the basis for the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut in 1639,

524

through which the settlers asserted they had the status of an independent col-

ony, distinct and separate from Massachusetts Bay Colony, and created a

518. See MATHER, supra note 87, at 27-36.

519. Sargent, supra note 3, at 237; MATHER, supra note 87, at 21.

520. Plimoth Plantation, MASS. VACATION, https://www.massvacation.com/business/3180/

(last visited Feb. 8, 2020); P

HILBRICK, supra note 42, at 356-57.

521. Martinez, supra note 41, at 473 (“In 1635 Puritan Reverend Thomas Hooker received a

permit, from the General Court to colonize the valley of Connecticut.”); M

ATHER, supra note 87,

at 36-39 and 80-87.

522. Nancy Finlay, Thomas Hooker: Connecticut’s Founding Father, CONN. HIST. (Sept. 22,

2019), https://connecticuthistory.org/thomas-hooker-connecticuts-founding-father/.

523. Id.

524. For a thorough examination of the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut, see LUTZ, THE

ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 42-46.

78 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

civil government for the cities of Hartford, Wethersfield, and Windsor and

the surrounding region.

525

The Fundamental Orders of Connecticut were forward-thinking in that

they did not include a religious test to be eligible to vote.

526

Moreover, re-

flecting the Mayflower Compact’s precedence establishing the consent of

the governed, the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut affirmed that “the

foundation of authority is in the free consent of the people.”

527

Sometimes

known as the first constitution in the colonies, the Fundamental Orders of

Connecticut guaranteed that free men had the right to elect their leaders in

government.

528

This framework adopted the basic governance structure that

had already been in place in Plymouth Colony under the Mayflower Compact

and the Pilgrim Code of Laws.

529

Referring to the colonial documents for

self-governance that the settlers had developed in New England, “In less than

two decades, these isolated communities evolved a historically important

idea—the written constitution, found in a single document and adopted by

citizens through their direct consent.”

530

3. Rhode Island

As mentioned previously, around the time of Reverend Hooker’s dis-

putes with the Puritan authorities in Boston, Roger Williams and Anne

Hutchinson were also engaging in dissent with the same religious and gov-

ernmental officials of the Massachusetts Bay Colony.

531

Much to the colonial

leaders’ consternation, Roger Williams advocated for greater religious free-

doms and asserted that the European colonists should not be able to seize

525. Nancy Finlay, Thomas Hooker: Connecticut’s Founding Father, CONN. HIST. (Sept. 22,

2019), https://connecticuthistory.org/thomas-hooker-connecticuts-founding-father/; Bruce P. Stark,

The Fundamental Orders of Connecticut, C

ONN. HIST. (Jan. 14, 2020), https://connecticuthis-

tory.org/the-fundamental-orders-of-connecticut/; see also Martinez, supra note 41, at 473 (“Three

cities were built there [in the valley of Connecticut]: Hartford, Windsor and Wethersfield. They

later became confederated [for mutual protection against the Native Americans.] . . . The Funda-

mental Orders of Connecticut was signed in June of 1639.”).

526. Bruce P. Stark, The Fundamental Orders of Connecticut, CONN. HIST. (Jan. 14, 2020),

https://connecticuthistory.org/the-fundamental-orders-of-connecticut/.

527. The First Colonial Constitution, HISTORY.COM (Feb. 9, 2010), https://www.his-

tory.com/this-day-in-history/the-first-colonial-constitution.

528. History.com Editors, Connecticut, HISTORY.COM (Nov. 9, 2009), https://www.his-

tory.com/topics/us-states/Connecticut.

529. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 27 (“Other early constitutions such as the Funda-

mental Orders of Connecticut (1639) have similar formats” to the Pilgrim Code of Law).

530. Id.

531. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 161, 170, 177.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 79

land for themselves without compensating the original inhabitants.

532

Previ-

ously, Roger Williams had moved to Plymouth Colony in 1631 to assist its

pastor,

533

but he came to believe that the church in Plymouth was not suffi-

ciently Separatist. Moreover, he disapproved of Plymouth Colony’s usurpa-

tion of the land from the Native Americans, arguing that the settlers should

have negotiated a contract with the tribal governments to purchase the land

in order to hold legitimate title.

534

After, he left Plymouth and returned to

Boston, he continued to provoke the colonial leaders, eventually resulting in

his eviction.

535

Upon his banishment from Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1635, Roger

Williams fled and subsequently founded a new community on the Narragan-

sett River named Providence, as he felt the community received divine ap-

probation.

536

Williams “declared the settlement open to all those seeking

freedom of conscience and the removal of the church from civil matters, and

many dissatisfied Puritans came,”

537

among them Anne Hutchinson, who had

been persecuted for her views on religion and for being an outspoken woman

in an era rife with gender-based discrimination.

538

The colony of Rhode Is-

land also attracted some of the first Jews to the New World, as well as Quak-

ers.

539

For people who were being persecuted because of their religious be-

liefs in other colonies and in Europe, Rhode Island became a place of

532. Id. at 170; History.com Editors, Rhode Island Founder Banished from Massachusetts,

ISTORY.COM (Feb. 9, 2010), https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/rhode-island-founder-

banished-from-massachusetts.

533. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 170.

534. Id.

535. Id. at 161, 170, 177.

536. History.com Editors, Rhode Island Founder Banished from Massachusetts,

ISTORY.COM (Feb. 9, 2010), https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/rhode-island-founder-

banished-from-massachusetts.; Martinez, supra note 41, at 473 (“In 1635, Roger Williams was ban-

ished from Massachusetts, for heterodoxy, and he left to found Providence, the nucleus of the Rhode

Island Colony.”).

537. History.com Editors, Rhode Island Founder Banished from Massachusetts,

ISTORY.COM (Feb. 9, 2010), https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/rhode-island-founder-

banished-from-massachusetts; Roger Williams: Later Years, N

AT’L PARK SERV.,

https://www.nps.gov/rowi/learn/historyculture/later-years.htm (last updated Feb. 26, 2015) (“As the

colony grew, religious dissenters flocked to Rhode Island. The religious liberty given to the small

colony in the Charter of 1663 guaranteed that no person would be punished because of their be-

liefs.”).

538. History.com Editors, Anne Hutchinson, HISTORY.COM (Nov. 9, 2009), https://www.his-

tory.com/topics/colonial-america/anne-hutchinson.

539. History.com Editors, Rhode Island Founder Banished from Massachusetts,

ISTORY.COM (Feb. 9, 2010), https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/rhode-island-founder-

banished-from-massachusetts; Roger Williams: Later Years, NAT’L PARK SERV.,

https://www.nps.gov/rowi/learn/historyculture/later-years.htm (last updated Feb. 26, 2015) (“The

oldest Synagogue and the oldest Quaker Meeting House in America are also in Rhode Island.”).

80 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

refuge.

540

In 1663, the colony had secured an official charter from King

Charles II certifying that the colony would:

“hold forth a lively experiment, that a most flourishing civil state

may stand and best be maintained, and that among our English sub-

jects, with a full liberty in religious concernments; . . .That our royal

will and pleasure is, that no person within the said colony, at any

time hereafter, shall be anyway molested, punished, disquieted, or

called in question, for any differences in opinion in matters of reli-

gion, and does not actually disturb the civil peace of our said colony;

but that all and every person and persons may, from time to time,

and at all times hereafter, freely and fully have and enjoy his and

their own judgments and consciences, in matters of religious con-

cernments[.]”

541

The government of Rhode Island derived its power from the sovereignty of

the governed instead of from the deity, creating a more complete separation

of church and state and fostering greater religious and political freedoms than

in any other colony.

542

Rhode Island, therefore, took the budding democratic

ideals surfacing through the Mayflower Compact even further.

4. Pennsylvania

King Charles II granted a charter to William Penn in 1681 allowing him

to establish the colony of Pennsylvania.

543

An intellectual powerhouse within

the Society of Friends, otherwise known as the Quakers, Penn developed the

new colony as another refuge for Quakers and other people who had been

persecuted for their religious beliefs.

544

Before sailing to the New World to

540. Roger Williams: Later Years, NAT’L PARK SERV., https://www.nps.gov/rowi/learn/his-

toryculture/later-years.htm (last updated Feb. 26, 2015).

541. Roger Williams: Return to England, NAT’L PARK SERV.,

https://www.nps.gov/rowi/learn/historyculture/england.htm (last updated Feb. 26, 2015).

542. Roger Williams: Later Years, NAT’L PARK SERV., https://www.nps.gov/rowi/learn/his-

toryculture/later-years.htm (last updated Feb. 26, 2015).; Martinez, supra note 41, at 473 (“Williams

obtain[ed] a Charter from England for the new colony, characterized by a strong spirit of religious

freedom and a more ‘democratic’ government than the rest.”); L

UTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32,

at 28, 49 (the Rhode Island charter “provided for religious freedom and permitted a religiously

acceptable alternative to swearing allegiance . . . and discussed religious freedom at length . . . . The

discussion in the 1663 charter about religious liberty used language similar to that in the early state

constitutions.”).

543. Matthew A. Zimmerman, First Purchasers of Pennsylvania, ENCYCLOPEDIA OF GR. BRIT

(2016), https://philadelphiaencyclopedia.org/archive/first-purchasers-of-pennsylvania/; William

Penn and American History, P

ENNSBURY MANOR, http://www.pennsburymanor.org/history/wil-

liam-penn-and-american-history/ (last visited Feb. 8, 2020).

544. Frame of Government, ENCYLOPEDIA.COM, https://www.encyclopedia.com/law/ency-

clopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/frame-government (last updated Jan. 21, 2020) (“In 1681

King Charles II of England granted William Penn a large tract of land on the west bank of the Del-

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 81

become the first governor of Pennsylvania, named for his father, Penn drafted

the Pennsylvania Frame of Government, ensuring freedom of religion, guar-

anteeing all traditional rights enjoyed by English citizens, and creating a bal-

ance of powers in government to prevent rulers from becoming authoritar-

ian.

545

One can surmise that, since William Penn’s founding of the colony of

Pennsylvania occurred over a half-century after the Mayflower Compact and

the establishment of Plymouth Colony, perhaps Penn may have been influ-

enced by the values of self-governance, consent of the governed, and demo-

cratic participation the Pilgrims had inaugurated through their actions in the

earlier part of the century. Indeed, the ideas and ideals launched by the May-

flower Compact and the initial settlers in the New World reverberated across

Europe throughout the 17

century, as discussed in the next section.

B. C

ONTINUED DEVELOPMENT OF DEMOCRATIC POLITICAL THOUGHT

EUROPE

Shaped by the political experiment occurring throughout the European

colonies in the New World, parallel political concepts continued to evolve on

the other side of the Atlantic throughout the 1600s and 1700s.

546

The May-

flower Compact and other documents establishing governments throughout

the colonies demonstrated a growing expectation that governments derive

their authority from the consent of the governed, that governmental power

should be limited, that governments should guarantee individual rights, and

that governments should rule for the betterment of society.

547

One scholar

has commented, “Many of the constitutional and political ideas of the eight-

eenth century liberals and republicans were essentially secularized forms of

aware River, which Penn named Pennsylvania in honor of his father. Penn, a member and intellec-

tual leader of the Quakers (Society of Friends), saw Pennsylvania as a refuge for Quakers and other

persecuted peoples. Penn believed in religious toleration on both pragmatic and moral grounds. He

thought that a harmonious society, unhampered by intolerance, would be a prosperous society as

well.”).

545. Id. (“In 1682, before he left England to become the first governor of Pennsylvania, Penn

wrote the Frame of Government, which served as the colony’s first constitution. The Frame of Gov-

ernment was an expression of Penn’s religious and political ideas. He sought to create a framework

that would frustrate political mischief and prevent a ruler from assuming absolute power to the

detriment of the community. To prevent absolutism, Penn employed the concept of balancing forces,

a concept that the Framers of the U.S. Constitution later would use liberally. Freedom of worship

was to be absolute, and all the traditional English rights were to be protected.”).

546. Sargent, supra note 3, at 239, 249.

547. Martinez, supra note 41, at 469 (“The transformation of a religious covenant into a polit-

ical compact only required the secularization of the former by the substitution of popular sover-

eignty in place of God. The Puritan theory of the church empowered only by the believers’ consent

leads directly to the democratic theory of a government by the consent of the governed.”).

82 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

Puritan antecedents and analogues.”

548

Moreover, political thinkers in the

and 18

centuries continued to develop secular political concepts based

on covenantal or federal political relationships (recall from above that the

term “federal” is based on the Latin word “foedus,” meaning covenant).

549

As noted above, these were the same covenantal concepts that spurred the

Pilgrims aboard the Mayflower to enter into a covenantal relationship with

each other through the Mayflower Compact.

550

European political philosophers picked up on these ideas in their subse-

quent writings, including Samuel Rutherford (circa 1600-1661), Thomas

Hobbes (1588–1679), John Locke (1632-1704), Baron de Montesquieu

(1689-1755), and Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778).

551

In 1784, Immanuel

Kant penned a manuscript entitled What Is Enlightenment? to encourage peo-

ple to think for themselves, coining the term for the Age of Enlightenment.

552

Also known as the Age of Reason, this epoch spanned roughly from 1665-

1815.

553

Thus, in the decades after the landing of the Mayflower at Plymouth

Rock through the establishment of the United States, the tendency to embrace

increasingly democratic ideals skyrocketed on both sides of the ocean.

554

548. Witte, supra note 237, at 64; see also id. at 62-63 (providing a good summary of influence

of Puritan institutions and concepts upon both “liberal” and “republican” thinkers).

549. Cooper, supra note 30, at n. 54 (quoting Elazar, supra note 5, at 9) (“‘[F]ederal theology

. . . (federal is derived from the Latin foedus, which means covenant) stimulated the renewed polit-

ical application of the covenant idea which was given expression first by political theologians and

then by political philosophers such as Althusius. In the next century it was given a secular term by

Hobbes, Locke, and Spinoza.’”); see also Elazar, supra note 5, at 20 (“the covenant idea was secu-

larized by Hobbes (1651), Locke (1690), Montesquieu (1748); and in somewhat altered form, Rous-

seau (1762), among others, as the civil or social compact or contract.”); Cooper, supra note 30, at

545-547 (quoting Elazar, supra note 5, at 245, 253 (“‘The evidence is overwhelming that the cove-

nant principle translated into the larger political realm as part of the development of modern popular

government produced the idea of federalism.’”).

550. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 7, 19.

551. Lermack, supra note 219, at 1415-17 (discussing Locke), Stewart Duncan, Thomas

Hobbes, S

TANFORD ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PHIL. (Mar. 11, 2009), https://plato.stanford.edu/en-

tries/hobbes/; Stewart Duncan, Baron de Montesquieu, Charles-Louis de Secondat, S

TANFORD

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PHIL. (July 18, 2003) https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/montesquieu/; Steward

Duncan, John Locke, S

TANFORD ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PHIL. (Sept. 2, 2001), https://plato.stan-

ford.edu/entries/locke/; Stewart Duncan, Jean Jacques Rousseau, S

TANFORD ENCYCLOPEDIA OF

PHIL. (Sept. 27, 2010), https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rousseau/; Stewart Duncan, Baruch Spi-

noza, S

TANFORD ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PHIL. (June 29, 2001), https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/spi-

noza/. See, e.g., T

HE SELECTED WRITINGS OF JOHN AND JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, supra note 4, at

xviii, xx, xxi, and xxiv (John Adams and John Quincy Adams referenced Hobbes, Locke, Montes-

quieu, and Rousseau numerous times in their papers).

552. Immanuel Kant, What is Enlightenment?, COLUMBIA U., http://www.colum-

bia.edu/acis/ets/CCREAD/etscc/kant.html (last visited Feb. 8, 2020).

553. History.com Editors, Enlightenment, HISTORY.COM (Dec. 16, 2009), https://www.his-

tory.com/topics/british-history/enlightenment.

554. For an example of European influence on the settlers, see CHENEY, supra note 41, at 251

(Plymouth colonist “William Brewster would eventually have a collection of four hundred books

that included the works of Aristotle, Machiavelli, and Francis Bacon[.]”).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 83

Samuel Rutherford (circa 1600-1661) became a minister in Scotland

and espoused Presbyterianism, another theological structure whereby each

congregation would be governed by its own lay members.

555

Episcopalians,

who believed in governance of the church by bishops, controlled the church

in Scotland and removed Rutherford from his ministerial position.

556

How-

ever, Presbyterianism gained traction, and Rutherford subsequently held sev-

eral important positions in the church and educational institutions.

557

Lex,

Rex (The Law and The Prince), which Rutherford issued in 1644, “used reli-

gious arguments and biblical references to call for limitations on the power

of kings and for constitutionalism.”

558

As the title denotes, the law comes

before the crown, meaning that the monarch must obey the law.

559

Drawing

from religious principles, this book asserted “that democracy might then be

the best form of government wherein liberty might be defended against tyr-

anny.”

560

Relying on prior philosophers, Rutherford argued that under natural

law, men are born free (women, of course, were still largely deemed subor-

dinate to men), and therefore men only provisionally concede power to rul-

ers.

561

His writings also justified revolt against unjust tyrants, which influ-

enced not only subsequent philosophers such as John Locke, but also greatly

influenced American colonial statesmen leading up to the American Revolu-

tion.

562

Moreover, according to his letters, Samuel Rutherford was also well-

aware of the Pilgrims and their accomplishments, referring to them as “the

Independents.”

563

555. Samuel Rutherford, UNDISCOVERED SCOT., https://www.undiscoveredscot-

land.co.uk/usbiography/r/samuelrutherford.html (last visited Feb. 8, 2020).

556. Id.

557. Id.

558. Id.; David Kopel, Origins of the Declaration of Independence: Samuel Rutherford’s ‘Lex,

Rex’, T

HE WASH. POST (July 2, 2016 4:42 PM), https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-

conspiracy/wp/2016/07/02/origins-of-the-declaration-of-independence-samuel-rutherfords-lex-

rex/.

559. David Kopel, Origins of the Declaration of Independence: Samuel Rutherford’s ‘Lex,

Rex’, T

HE WASH. POST (July 2, 2016 4:42 PM), https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-

conspiracy/wp/2016/07/02/origins-of-the-declaration-of-independence-samuel-rutherfords-lex-

rex/.

560. Cooper, supra note 30, at 545.

561. David Kopel, Origins of the Declaration of Independence: Samuel Rutherford’s ‘Lex,

Rex’, T

HE WASH. POST (July 2, 2016 4:42 PM), https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-

conspiracy/wp/2016/07/02/origins-of-the-declaration-of-independence-samuel-rutherfords-lex-

rex/.

562. Id.

563. SAMUEL RUTHERFORD, JAMES ANDERSON & A.A. BONAR, RUTHERFORD’S LETTERS:

LETTERS OF THE REV. SAMUEL RUTHERFORD, PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY AT ST. ANDREWS 630,

735-36 (William Whyte & Co. ed., 1848).

84 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

Significantly influenced by Rutherford’s Lex, Rex, Thomas Hobbes

(1588–1679) built upon and took these ideas further.

564

Thomas Hobbes pub-

lished the Leviathan in 1651, in which he asserted that, without government,

all individuals would follow their own selfish desires, which would come into

conflict with other individuals.

565

In this “state of nature,” which entails con-

stant violence and war, life would inevitably be “solitary, poore, nasty, brut-

ish and short.”

566

Therefore, as a matter of self-preservation, individuals must

enter into a social contract to permit a sovereign government to create law

and order, which will then use fear, torture, and harsh punishments to extract

obedience from its subjects.

567

When Hobbes was writing the Leviathan, he

must have known of the Pilgrims and quite possibly had heard of the May-

flower Compact being written in nearly a “state of nature,”

568

when the mu-

tinous Strangers had threatened to abandon the colonial project because the

leaders of the religious congregation had no legal authority over them.

569

Re-

coiling from that state of nature, the voyagers agreed to enter into a mutually

beneficial agreement with each other, to which all would be bound.

570

The

Plymouth colonial government had strengthened and solidified in the subse-

quent decades, justifying that political experiment.

571

As one scholar has

noted, “Hobbes expressed the new modern view [of the secular covenant]

quite simply: ‘A commonwealth is said to be instituted when a multitude of

men do agree and covenant, every one with every one . . . to the end to live

peaceably among themselves and be protected against other men.’”

572

564. Samuel Rutherford, UNDISCOVERED SCOT., https://www.undiscoveredscot-

land.co.uk/usbiography/r/samuelrutherford.html (last visited Feb. 8, 2020).

565. See Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, Political Philosophy, BRITANNICA (May 4,

1999),

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Thomas-Hobbes/Political-philosophy; Hobbes’s Le-

viathan, B

RITISH LIBR., https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/hobbess-leviathan (last visited Feb. 8,

2020).

566. Lermack, supra note 219, at 1412.

567. See id. at 1412, 1412 n. 51.

568. Id. at 1417.

569. Sarah Pruitt, How the Mayflower Compact Laid a Foundation for American Democracy,

ISTORY.COM (Aug. 5, 2019), https://www.history.com/news/mayflower-compact-colonial-amer-

ica-plymouth (“The [Mayflower Compact] agreement also drew on the secular tradition

of the social contract, the idea of covenants between men themselves, which went back

to ancient times, but would later be made more famous by philosophers like Thomas

Hobbes, John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau.”).

570. Lermack, supra note 219, at 1417 (“Finding themselves on a ship beyond the reach of

British authority, the Pilgrims looked into the face of the state of nature and recoiled. They believed

that government was necessary to keep people from yielding to the depravity in their nature, and

they knew that they would need leadership to deal with the harsh winter ahead. On November 21,

1620, the Pilgrims formed themselves into a “civill body politick” and drafted a written agree-

ment.”).

571. See Elazar, supra note 5, at 23-24.

572. Id. at 20.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 85

John Locke (1632-1704) was also influenced by Rutherford’s Lex,

Rex,

573

popularizing the secular notion that everyone, even the king, is sub-

ject to the law, that the people hold ultimate sovereignty, and that the people

are thus permitted to rebel against a tyrannical monarch.

574

Locke published

his seminal Second Treatise on Government in 1690, seventy years after the

Mayflower Compact.

575

He recognized that groups of people throughout his-

tory have separated themselves from their previous societies in order to es-

tablish new societies, undoubtedly influenced by the colonial experience in

the New World.

576

In contrast with Hobbes’ view that humans were by nature

constantly violent and self-serving, Locke “argued that people were compas-

sionate, sociable, and could see the dangers of unchecked conflict.”

577

believed that all individuals have certain natural rights, such as the right to

acquire property. And since all people have certain rights, Locke’s theory of

social contract also supports the concept of equality.

578

People also intuitively

recognize the benefits of compliance with social norms that would keep the

peace and preserve everyone’s rights. However, since individuals’ property

rights will at times conflict with each other, and since some individuals will

not comply with the peaceful social norms nor respect the rights of others, a

government is necessary to adjudicate competing claims, as well as to punish

people who threaten the peace and violate the rights of others.

579

As aptly

summarized:

the purpose of government is to protect those rights. The social con-

tract, therefore, creates only a limited obligation to obey. As long as

the sovereign governs in accordance with natural law, people must

accept governmental action. If the sovereign violates natural law,

573. Samuel Rutherford, UNDISCOVERED SCOT., https://www.undiscoveredscot-

land.co.uk/usbiography/r/samuelrutherford.html (last visited Feb. 8, 2020).

574. See Lermack, supra note 219, at 1414 (stating the theory of the social contract “evolve[d]

and [became] associated with rights, limits on government, and the sense that the government may

use brute force only in an exercise to achieve what is right and just.”).

575. See Martinez, supra note 41, at 463 (discussing John Locke and the doctrine of social

contract in Locke’s Second Treatise on Civil Government, published in 1690. The Pilgrims wrote

the Mayflower Compact 70 years before John Locke’s treatise.); id. at 469 (stating the Mayflower

Compact was signed in 1620); id. at 479 n. 112 (“Locke’s Second Treatise of Government was

published fifty years later than the American colonists passed their Bill of Rights.”).

576. Lermack, supra note 219, at n. 79 (“Locke noted that history recorded many instances of

people renouncing allegiance to an existing civil society and founding a new one from scratch.”).

577. Id. at 1413 (quoting JOHN LOCKE, SECOND TREATISE ON GOVERNMENT (Peardon ed.,

Liberal Arts Press 1952) (1690)).

578. Id. at n. 60 (“To the extent that all people have the same natural rights, social contract

theory has also been used to justify the important principle of equality.”).

579. Id. at 1410, 1413-14 (“The social contract . . . solidifies the important principle that gov-

ernmental power comes from the people and rests on the consent of the governed. It leads to the

important normative conclusion that because the people have given their consent to the existence

and powers of the government, they have also created an obligation to obey it.”).

86 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

people are relieved of the obligation of obedience. Indeed, Locke

argued that people possess a natural right to rebel against a tyranni-

cal government.

580

Thus, Locke helped to crystalize and popularize political theories in the sec-

ular realm that had been previously developed through Calvinism and other

Protestant religious theories, such as natural rights, consent of the governed,

and resistance to unjust governments.

581

At the same time that Locke’s polit-

ical thought was shaped by the colonial experiment in the New World,

Locke’s theories in turn permeated political thinking in the colonies, shaping

the colonists conceptualization of themselves and their relationships with the

monarch and parliament in Great Britain.

582

Other political theorists in Europe, though not necessarily explicitly

drawing from the Mayflower Compact, also had an immense impact upon

political concepts in the American colonies. For example, Baron de Mon-

tesquieu (1689-1755) developed the theory that political power was in con-

stant threat of becoming despotic.

583

Therefore, governments should be split

into numerous branches with different functions, each of which would form

a check on the authority of the others.

584

In this manner, none of the spheres

of political power could exercise complete power, and therefore, the govern-

ment as a whole could not fall prey to its inclinations toward tyranny.

585

Mon-

tesquieu’s political theories played a significant role in the development of

governmental structures across the Atlantic, as the colonial leaders contem-

plated the best forms of governance for the future of their political systems.

586

Scholars have referred to the Pilgrims and the Mayflower Compact as an

example of the political theory described in The Social Contract and Dis-

courses by Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778).

587

Rousseau promoted the

580. Id. at 1414.

581. Martinez, supra note 41, at n. 35 (“Foster also notes that Locke merely clarified the

known Calvinist principles of fundamental law, natural rights, contracts and consent of the people,

and resistance to tyranny.”).

582. Lermack, supra note 219, at 1414 (“Eighteenth century America was strongly influenced

by Locke.”).

583. Stewart Duncan, Baron de Montesquieu, Charles-Louis de Secondat, STANFORD

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PHIL. (July 18, 2003) https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/montesquieu/.

584. Id.

585. See id.

586. Id.; Elazar, supra note 5, at 20 (“In this form, covenant acquired a fully separate political

justification which, through Locke, Montesquieu and the covenanter settlers of America, became

the basis for the formation of the United States as reflected in the preambles of the Declaration of

Independence, the U.S. Constitution, and the American state constitutions.”).

587. Jean-Jacques Rousseau, MINN. LIBRS. PUB. PROJECT, https://mlpp.pressbooks.pub/intro-

phil/chapter/jean-jacques-rousseau/ (last visited Feb. 8, 2020).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 87

sovereignty of individual human beings as central to their freedom and per-

sonal development.

588

He advocated for a political system that would help

ensure both liberty and equality in a society where all individuals maintain

their own autonomy and freedom.

589

He argued this can only be achieved in

a governmental system that is directed by the will of the people through a

social compact,

590

echoing the importance of a democratic state and govern-

mental structures that allow for the general will to predominate.

591

Moreover,

the law must have universal application, reflecting previous political theorists

that no person is above the law, not even the rulers.

592

Moreover, the governmental structures, themselves, continued to evolve

gradually throughout Europe, mirroring this evolution in political thought

and the emerging governance structures in the New World.

593

As one exam-

ple, England experienced the Glorious Revolution in 1688,

594

which led to

the English Declaration of Rights in 1688 and the English Bill of Rights in

1689.

595

Some scholars credit the English Bill of Rights as providing impetus

for the U.S. Bill of Rights, which were adopted as the first ten amendments

to the U.S. Constitution.

596

As a summary of the English Bill of Rights:

“Some of the key liberties and concepts laid out in the articles in-

clude:

• Freedom to elect members of Parliament, without the king

or queen’s interference

588. Stewart Duncan, Jean Jacques Rousseau, STANFORD ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PHIL. (Sept. 27,

2010), https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rousseau/.

589. Id.

590. JEAN-JACQUES ROUSSEAU, THE SOCIAL CONTRACT AND DISCOURSES, Ch. VI: The So-

cial Compact (J.M Dent & Sons et al. eds., 1923)

(1761), https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/rousseau-

the-social-contract-and-discourses.

591. Stewart Duncan, Jean Jacques Rousseau, STANFORD ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PHIL. (Sept. 27,

2010), https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rousseau/.

592. Id.; Lermack, supra note 219, at 1415-16 (discussing Jean-Jacques Rousseau—1762: THE

SOCIAL CONTRACT and “noble savages”).

593. Elazar, supra note 5, at 4 (“during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the Scots and

the English Puritans not only conceived of civil society in covenantal terms, but actually wrote

national covenants to which loyal members of the body politic subscribed.”); see also Editors of

Encyclopedia Britannica, Instrument of Government, B

RITANNICA (July 20, 1998), https://www.bri-

tannica.com/event/Instrument-of-Government-England-1653 (The Instrument of Government,

adopted by Oliver Cromwell under which he governed Great Britain from 1653-1657, entailed

“[t]he first detailed written constitution adopted by a modern state.”); Martinez, supra note 41, at

462.

594. History.com Editors, Glorious Revolution, HISTORY.COM (Feb. 19, 2018),

https://www.history.com/topics/british-history/glorious-revolution.

595. Martinez, supra note 41, at 463 (noting the English Declaration and Bill of Rights in 1688

and 1689).

596. History.com Editors, English Bill of Rights, HISTORY.COM (Mar. 6, 2018),

https://www.history.com/topics/british-history/english-bill-of-rights.

88 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

• Freedom of speech in Parliament

• Freedom from royal interference with the law

• Freedom to petition the king

• Freedom to bear arms for self-defense

• Freedom from cruel and unusual punishment and excessive

bail

• Freedom from taxation by royal prerogative, without the

agreement of Parliament

• Freedom of fines and forfeitures without a trial

• Freedom from armies being raised during peacetimes.”

597

Political philosophers in Europe writing after the establishment of the

Plymouth Colony by the Pilgrims were undoubtedly influenced by the Pil-

grims’ political experiment.

598

And of course, the ideas continued to travel

back and forth across the Atlantic, leading up to the American Revolution

and the ensuing new United States, as reflected in both the federal govern-

ment and state governments.

599

The U.S. Constitution was strongly influ-

enced not only by Separatist and Puritan concepts, but also by “concepts of

French constitutionalism, European ideals, and solid roots in the Enlighten-

ment (particularly the Scottish Enlightenment) . . . [as well as by] the British

tradition of the common law . . . [and] the new concept of education intro-

duced by the Reformation.”

600

The next section will continue to explore the

development of American political institutions through the Revolutionary

War and beyond.

C. T

HE MAYFLOWER COMPACT’S INFLUENCE ON THE

REVOLUTIONARIES

As indicated above, the British monarchy maintained a relatively hands-

off approach to the colonies for much of the 1600s.

601

Therefore, the colonial

597. Id.

598. See generally SEAN DELANEY, TRANSATLANTIC PRINT CULTURE AND THE RISE OF NEW

ENGLAND LITERATURE 1620-1630 (April 2013), https://repository.library.northeast-

ern.edu/files/neu:1463/fulltext.pdf.

599. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 9 (“A host of medieval and Renaissance thinkers

contributed to the constitutional tradition upon which the Americans built, as did many writing dur-

ing the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries in England, Scotland, and France.”).

600. Martinez, supra note 41, at 462.

601. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 63 (between the 1630s and 1688, “Britain’s North

American colonies spent those years, the first half century of their existence, developing almost

complete home rule.”); Rebecca Beatrice Brooks, 18th Century Massachusetts, H

IST. OF MASS.

BLOG (Aug. 12, 2016), https://historyofmassachusetts.org/18th-century-massachusetts/.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 89

societies, economies, political systems, and assemblies of representative gov-

ernment were allowed to grow, evolve, and become more sophisticated inde-

pendently for several generations.

602

Influenced both by their own experi-

ences cultivating the seeds of democracy and that of the governments in

neighboring colonies, as well as by the development of secular political

thought by influential minds in Europe, the New World settlers were begin-

ning to establish principles of freedom and equality, along with limitations

on government to prevent tyranny and subordination.

603

Remaining true to

their heritage from New England and other areas of the New World, the col-

onists maintained an ethic of hard work, frugality, and moderation, as well as

other moral standards such as justice, honesty and personal as well as civic

virtue.

604

Their political structures included not only strong local govern-

ments, but also complicated colonial systems including elected representative

assemblies with two chambers to ensure checks and balances, governors, and

a judicial branch with trial courts and appellate courts implementing common

law.

605

Although initially judges had ruled with “absolute power” in the 17

century throughout most of the colonies, Maryland and New York had

adopted the practice of common law, which spread to other colonies in the

century.

606

Importantly, the colonists achieved many of these advances through

written documents, many of which encompassed fundamental constitutional

elements.

607

The fact that these documents were ensconced in writing was a

602. Martinez, supra note 41, at 473 (“In time, the representative assemblies of the colonies

increased in number and became more competent.”).

603. See Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 60 (In North America, “people, up and down the Atlantic

Coast (not the Puritans alone), effectively governed themselves . . . . Among the things secured by

law and which Americans now take for granted, are limitations upon government and vindications

of individual rights.”).

604. Walter Nicgorski, The Significance of the Non-Lockean Heritage of the Declaration of

Independence, 21 A

M. J. JURIS. 156, 175-175 (1976) (quoting Edmund S. Morgan, The Puritan

Ethic and the American Revolution, 24 W

M. & MARY Q. 7 (January, 1967)) (The Puritan Ethic

maintained similarities with ancient republican virtue at the time of the Revolution, which has been

described “as calling ‘for diligence in a productive calling, beneficial both to society and to the

individual. It encouraged frugality and frowned on extravagance.’”); see also LUTZ, THE ORIGINS,

supra note 32, at 87.

605. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 60 (In North America, “people, up and down the Atlantic

Coast (not the Puritans alone), effectively governed themselves . . . . Among the things secured by

law and which Americans now take for granted, are limitations upon government and vindications

of individual rights.”); Martinez, supra note 41, at 478 (“By 1776, colonial ideas of government

were well established. Colonists had polished the ideas of an elected government, limitations on the

government’s power, a governor’s office, a bi-cameral representative assembly, written constitu-

tions, a strong local government, a common law, and a system of judicial law focused on higher

courts of justice.”).

606. Martinez, supra note 41, at 462 n. 17 (citing to CLINTON ROSSITER, SEEDTIME OF THE

REPUBLIC: THE ORIGIN OF THE AMERICAN TRADITION OF POLITICAL LIBERTY 34 (1953)).

607. Lutz, From Covenant, supra note 117, at 106 (By 1722, the colonists had written some

86 “constitution-like documents”).

90 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

crucial factor, signifying that everyone—including those who held govern-

mental power—were subject to obey the strictures of those written docu-

ments—that no person is above the law, as foreshadowed centuries earlier

through the Magna Carta in England.

608

However, although limited govern-

ment was important in both England and America, they differed in that Amer-

ica embraced written constitutions.

In England the common law was the primary means of limiting gov-

ernmental power, whereas in America the means was different. The

idea of limited government does in part derive from [the common

law]. But in the American constitutional tradition, what replaced

common law was a new political technique, the written constitution.

No matter how important common law was for the operation of the

American legal system, the written constitution that framed the sys-

tem sprang from ideas, principles, and practices evolved primarily

in America.

609

As the legislative bodies in each of the thirteen colonies grew more ex-

perienced and highly developed, they each functioned along the lines of the

House of Commons in Great Britain’s Parliament, eventually claiming the

same rights and benefits.

610

As a result, the government in Great Britain be-

came wary of the colonial legislatures, as the members of the British Parlia-

ment did not want their primacy of political status to be diminished.

611

Nor

did they desire the colonies to be treated as equal states in a federal system,

which would have threatened the very structure of the British Empire, in

which Great Britain was dominant over subordinate dependencies throughout

the globe.

612

In addition to political rivalries, other points of tension arose between

Great Britain and the colonies. For example, starting with the Board of Trades

in 1696, the British government began attempting to force trade policies upon

608. See THE SELECTED WRITINGS OF JOHN AND JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, supra note 4, at 20-

21 (in which John Adams referenced the Magna Carta in an essay railing against the outrages per-

petrated by the British Government).

609. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 63.

610. Martinez, supra note 41, at 473-74 (“They began to claim for themselves all the privileges

and functions of the English House of Commons.”); see also L

UTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at

39, 63.

611. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 39, 63.

612. Martinez, supra note 41, at 473-74 (“This caused a great amount of tension. The existence

in each colony of a scale model House of Commons ‘affected the very constitution of the British

Empire itself, for it asserted that the empire was not a single state made up of a mother country and

her dependencies, but rather a group of states equal in status, with coordinate legislatures and a

common king. In this context, the American colonists supported the existence of a federal system.”);

UTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 63.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 91

the colonies that were more favorable to Great Britain, which grew increas-

ingly in the 1700s.

613

In the mid-1700s, the settlers confronted numerous

struggles with warfare, particularly the French and Indian War from 1754-

1763.

614

The war contributed to economic volatility and increased British

taxes, leading to further political conflicts with England.

615

In 1765, John

Adams published a series of articles railing against the Stamp Acts, entitled

A Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law.

616

In the third article of this

series, he describes how, in the early colonial period, people involved in the

Reformation in Europe and in England had begun to resist the tyranny of both

canon and feudal law that had long worked together to oppress them, and that

“It was this great struggle, that peopled America.”

617

Just as the oppression

by the king and Anglican Church had caused the early settlers in Plymouth

and elsewhere to “fly to the wilderness for refuge, from the temporal and

spiritual principalities and powers, and plagues, and scourges, of their na-

tive country,”

618

the contemporary king and church were attempting to exert

the same power over the colonists across the ocean.

619

Of the early colonists,

John Adams wrote that “After their arrival here, they began their settlements,

613. Martinez, supra note 41, at 471 (“The colonial period had two distinct stages. The first

began with the first settlement (Jamestown, Virginia in 1607) and continued until the restoration of

the Massachusetts Charter in 1691. This stage is marked by a solid implantation of habits of self-

government. The second stage ran from the creation of the Board of Trade in 1696 (the mission of

which was to make the colonies profitable for England, assuring a favorable balance of Trade) until

the Declaration of Independence in 1776, when the imperial administrational pressure became more

suffocating. By that time, English efforts to revoke American autonomy were too late. American

English colonists had enjoyed political autonomy for decades, and had firmly established habits of

self-government.”).

614. Rebecca Beatrice Brooks, 18th Century Massachusetts, HIST. OF MASS. BLOG (Aug. 12,

2016), https://historyofmassachusetts.org/18th-century-massachusetts/; Rebecca Beatrice Brooks,

History of the French and Indian War, H

IST. OF MASS. BLOG (May 24, 2018), https://historyofmas-

sachusetts.org/french-and-indian-war/.

615. Rebecca Beatrice Brooks, 18th Century Massachusetts, HIST. OF MASS. BLOG (Aug. 12,

2016), https://historyofmassachusetts.org/18th-century-massachusetts/.

616. John Adams, A Dissertation on the Canon and the Feudal Law, No. 1, MASS. HIST.

SOC’Y, http://www.masshist.org/publications/adams-papers/index.php/view/ADMS-06-01-02-

0052-0004 (last visited Feb. 8, 2020); see also T

HE SELECTED WRITINGS OF JOHN AND JOHN

QUINCY ADAMS, supra note 4, at 11-24.

617. John Adams, A Dissertation on the Canon and the Feudal Law, No. 1, MASS. HIST.

SOC’Y, http://www.masshist.org/publications/adams-papers/index.php/view/ADMS-06-01-02-

0052-0004 (last visited Feb. 8, 2020).

618. Id.

619. THOMAS JAMES NORTON, THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES: ITS SOURCES

AND ITS APPLICATION 197-98 (Little, Brown & Co. ed., 1922) (“In the reign of Charles II, Parlia-

ment, for the purpose of compelling all persons to attend the established Church, passed (1665) the

Conventicle Act making every one over sixteen years of age who attended a conventicle (any meet-

ing for religious worship at which five persons were present besides the household) subject to im-

prisonment, with transportation beyond the seas for the third offence. During the same reign it

passed the Test Act requiring oaths in support of the established religion . . . . Those acts hastened

emigration to America, as did intolerance in continental countries . . . . The established Church of

England had been set up in several of the Colonies and taxes were levied for its support.”).

92 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

and formed their plan both of ecclesiastical and civil government, in direct

opposition to the cannon [sic] and the feudal systems,”

620

foreshadowing the

colonies’ eventual fracture from England and establishment of their own, in-

dependent national government. Yet the British government continued to ex-

ercise more significant power over the colonies, causing the previously

largely independent colonists to bristle under the new yoke of control from

across the ocean.

621

Others in the colonies began to evoke the memory of the early settlers,

and particularly the colonists who arrived aboard the Mayflower and estab-

lished Plymouth Colony, to stir up sentiments of patriotism toward America

and indignation against the British encroachments upon their liberties.

622

For

example, the first “Forefathers’ Day” celebrating the 149

anniversary of the

landing of the Mayflower at Plymouth took place on December 22, 1769, in

preparation for the 150

anniversary celebration the following year.

623

The

colonists’ pride in their ancestors and their history began to shape into a na-

tional story replete with virtues such as adventure, independence, self-deter-

mination, liberty, equality, self-governance, hard work, perseverance, and

freedom.

624

Since then, “many generations have learned America began at that

spot”

625

known as Plymouth Colony, or more precisely as Plymouth Rock,

whom a 95 year old gentleman identified in 1741 as the rock where his father,

a settler in 1623, had told him the first Pilgrims landed in 1620.

626

On Fore-

father’s Day in 1774, the Sons of Liberty extracted the rock which broke in

half; and they left half remaining in the ground and placed the other half in

620. John Adams, A Dissertation on the Canon and the Feudal Law, No. 1, MASS. HIST.

SOC’Y, http://www.masshist.org/publications/adams-papers/index.php/view/ADMS-06-01-02-

0052-0004 (last visited Feb. 8, 2020).

621. See Witte, supra note 237, at 43 (“In the later seventeenth century, English authorities

tried repeatedly to impose their will on colonial religion and politics through new forms of legisla-

tion and review. They succeeded only at the turn of the eighteenth century with the passage of a

new provincial charter in Massachusetts and with the reinforcement of royal control in the other

New England colonies. For some four generations, therefore, the Puritans enjoyed both homogene-

ity and the hegemony to carry out their theological and political experiments.”).

622. See Sargent Bush, Jr., America’s Origin Myth: Remembering Plymouth Rock, 12 AM.

LITERARY HIST. 745, 747-48 (2000) (noting “the annual Forefathers’ Day celebration in Plymouth,

held on the anniversary of the landing, 22 December . . . .” “The first observance of Forefathers’

Day in Plymouth did not occur until 22 December 1769, no doubt anticipating the approaching

sesquicentennial of the landing while also reflecting the growing tendency in those years to think in

terms of separating America from England.”).

623. See PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 350.

624. Bush, Jr., supra note 622, at 747 (“For over a century and a half, from the late eighteenth

to the early twentieth centuries, the landing at Plymouth and the people who experienced it were the

mirror in which Americans of various stripes saw their best selves reflected.”).

625. Id. at 745 (“many generations have learned America began at that spot.”).

626. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 350-51; GRAGG, supra note 7, at 225

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 93

the town square.

627

After both halves had been diminished by souvenir-seek-

ers chipping away at them over the years, and the upper half cracked yet

again, in 1880 both halves were reunited and cemented together, and “1620”

was carved on its face.

628

The colonists perceived the charters that had originally established the

colonies and their governments to be contracts between the monarch and col-

onies.

629

When King George III began unilaterally to change the charters,

meddle with the colonial legislative assemblies, and supplant colonial laws

and governments, the colonists viewed this as a breach of contract by the

king.

630

Colonial leaders continued to develop and disseminate political doc-

trines supporting their claims to representation in government, the im-

portance of the consent of the governed, and the famous charge of no taxation

without representation.

631

They grounded these claims in the historical doc-

uments developed since the beginning of the colonial experience.

632

For ex-

ample, Thomas Jefferson noted the importance of the Mayflower Compact in

a compilation he made around 1775 listing significant historical documents

of colonial America, starting with this 1620 text and running through manu-

scripts penned in 1772.

633

Most of the colonists did not want to break with

England until after the rejection of the Olive Branch Petitions.

634

Perhaps

this reflected the political theorists who posited that the governed have an

obligation to obey government and work with government to redress any

grievances, unless those in power had committed acts so egregious that the

subjects were entitled to throw off the despotic abuse of authority.

635

Nevertheless, the delegates from the colonies to the Continental Con-

gress in Philadelphia eventually determined that the relationship with Great

Britain had deteriorated beyond repair, as exemplified by the Boston Tea

627. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 350-51.

628. CHENEY, supra note 41, at 282-83.

629. See Lermack, supra note 219, at 1418-19.

630. See id.

631. THE SELECTED WRITINGS OF JOHN AND JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, supra note 4, at 24 (“Af-

ter the Stamp Act, John Adams entered politics . . . . In these ‘Instructions’ one can see the principle

of ‘no taxation without representation.’”); L

UTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 39 (“[T]he colo-

nists would argue that Parliament had no power to tax them since they had their own legislatures

under the king.”).

632. See LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 70-71.

633. See Shelley, supra note 442, at 49-50.

634. History.com Editors, Congress Adopts Olive Branch Petition, HISTORY.COM (Nov 13,

2009), https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/congress-adopts-olive-branch-petition.

635. Elazar, supra note 5, at 18-19 (“Only after rulers had usurped power or done something

to break the normal constitutional relationship between governors and governed was it necessary to

go through some formal covenantal act in order to re-establish the principles upon which the rela-

tionship was built.”).

94 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

Party,

636

forced quartering of British soldiers,

637

and so on, leading to the

American Revolution from 1775-1783. The colonial leadership took over im-

portant communication lines, abolishing the royal postal service and employ-

ing the same riders in the service of transporting correspondence between the

colonies.

638

The Continental Congress charged the leaders of each of the colonies

with drafting and adopting new constitutions and new state governments that

would be independent from Great Britain.

639

At the same time the individual

colonies were crafting their constitutions for each new state, the members of

the Continental Congress worked on writing the Declaration of Independence

listing the king’s violations of the colonial charters and other infractions and

signifying the separation of these new states from the royal monarchy and the

United Kingdom. The Continental Congress then drafted the Articles of Con-

federation to formalize cooperation among the newly independent states in

limited spheres, such as defense from attacks by foreign nations.

640

The state

and federal documents clearly influenced each other. For example, George

Mason penned the Virginia Declaration of Rights with input from James

Madison.

641

This document, adopted on June 12, 1776, became the basis for

Thomas Jefferson’s development of the Declaration of Independence, as well

as many of the preambles setting forth individual rights in numerous state

constitutions.

642

And importantly, all of these documents drew upon the in-

struments the early settlers had created throughout the colonial period:

In American constitutionalism, there was more continuity and from

an earlier date than is generally credited. The early state constitu-

tions did not suddenly spring into being. Neither did the United

636. THE SELECTED WRITINGS OF JOHN AND JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, supra note 4, at 34-35

(John Adams referenced the Boston Tea Party in opposing taxation without representation in the

British Parliament).

637. Id. at 33 (John Adams referenced the Boston Massacre in an argument demonstrating “the

danger of standing armies.”).

638. Shelley, supra note 442, at 52.

639. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 100.

640. Articles of Confederation art. 2 (“Each State retains its sovereignty, freedom, and inde-

pendence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this confederation, expressly

delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.”); Articles of Confederation art. 3 (“The said

States hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common

defense . . . .”); see also Lermack, supra note 219, at 1421.

641. The Virginia Declaration of Rights, NAT’L ARCHIVES, https://www.archives.gov/found-

ing-docs/virginia-declaration-of-rights (last visited Feb. 8, 2020).

642. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 120-21.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 95

States Constitution. The continuity was rooted not only in docu-

ments and instruments but also in a way of viewing and approaching

politics.

643

Notably, throughout the war for independence, the Continental Congress also

designated at least one day of thanksgiving each year in a reflection of the

Thanksgiving Day tradition that had begun with the original settlers in Plym-

outh.

644

1. Declaration of Independence

After debating numerous drafts and amendments, the Second Continen-

tal Congress ratified the final iteration of the federal Declaration of Independ-

ence on July 4, 1776.

645

Although people from the different colonies varied

widely in their origins and economies, and thought of themselves as members

of distinct political entities (e.g., as a Virginian or a Rhode Islander), they

united together through their separation from Great Britain.

646

As described

more recently, “the Declaration is the document that establishes our nation

as a body politic, in much the same way as the Mayflower Compact gave

birth to that earlier community.”

647

As the opening paragraphs of the Decla-

ration indicate:

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one

people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them

with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the sep-

arate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s

God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind re-

quires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the

separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created

equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalien-

able Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of

643

LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 49.

644. History.com Editors, Thanksgiving 2020, HISTORY.COM (Oct. 27, 2009),

https://www.history.com/topics/thanksgiving/history-of-thanksgiving#section_2.

645. Declaration of Independence: Primary Documents in American History, LIBR. OF

CONGRESS, http://www.loc.gov/rr//program/bib/ourdocs/declarind.html (last visited Feb. 8, 2020).

646. Elazar, supra note 5, at 10 (“In politics, covenant connotes the voluntary creation of a

people and body-politic. The Declaration of Independence is an excellent example of this kind of

covenant. Through it, the diverse inhabitants of the thirteen colonies reaffirmed that they had con-

sented to become a people.”).

647. Cooper, supra note 30, at 549.

96 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are insti-

tuted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the

governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes de-

structive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter and abol-

ish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on

such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them

shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Pru-

dence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established

should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accord-

ingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to

suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abol-

ishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long

train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Ob-

ject evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is

their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to

provide new Guards for their future security. —Such has been the

patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity

which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.

The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of re-

peated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the es-

tablishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this,

let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

648

This venerated manuscript did not glorify self-centered individualism, but

instead reflected the selfless virtues extolled by the founders of our nation,

such as equality and justice, as well as freedom.

649

These characteristics are

reflective of those of the Pilgrims, such as moderation, self-discipline, com-

munity-oriented values, and equality.

650

As mentioned above, many people

within the colonies did not want to go to war with England before the Revo-

lution and would have preferred a peaceable severance.

651

Regarding their

“Brittish brethren,” the Declaration emphasizes that the people in the former

648. THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE para. 1-2 (U.S. 1776).

649. Nicgorski, supra note 604, at 177 (“the Declaration of Independence did not suggest to

all Americans a heady and vigorous individualism. Sacrifice, restraint, virtue, and justice were hall-

marks of other authentic American traditions that joined in the Revolution and entered the stream

of American life.” As opposed to simply laissez-faire individualism, “America has rebounded with

a greater passion for equality.”).

650. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 106 n. 230 (“The great modern statement in favor of equality

is to be found in the Declaration of Independence, anticipated in this respect somewhat by expres-

sions of various Christian sentiments.”).

651. Id. at n. 95 (“Notice that, in the opening lines of the Declaration of Independence, the

term ‘Separation’ is used to describe what the Colonies propose, as a body, to do with respect to

Great Britain”).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 97

colonies “hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in

Peace Friends.”

652

Similarly, although the Pilgrims had fled the persecution based on their

religious beliefs they had experienced in England, the Mayflower Compact

made it clear that they still wanted to maintain strong and positive relation-

ships with their king and former homeland.

653

Moreover, just as the May-

flower Compact augured not only the principle of the consent of the governed

but also participation in governance,

654

so too did the Declaration of Inde-

pendence.

655

Thomas Jefferson, who was the primary author along with Ben-

jamin Franklin, John Adams, and others, acknowledged that he was drawing

upon many political theorists from throughout the ages in authoring the Dec-

laration of Independence, including John Locke—who had asserted the right

of the people to take government power back if a ruler becomes tyrannical.

656

Jefferson incorporated many natural law principles into the document, fore-

shadowing the natural law principles incorporated into the state and federal

constitutions.

657

Other famous signers included John Hancock with his bold

signature, as well as Samuel Adams, perhaps now best known for the ale

652. THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE para. 4 (U.S. 1776).

653. See GRAGG, supra note 7, at 189 (referencing “King James, to whom the signers acknowl-

edged their submission”).

654. Id. at 190-91. The Mayflower Compact signers promised to “Covenant and Combine our-

selves together into a Civil Body Politic . . . by virtue hereof to enact, constitute and frame such just

and equal Laws, Ordinances, Acts, Constitutions and Offices, from time to time, as shall be thought

most meet and convenient for the general good of the Colony, unto which we promise all due sub-

mission and obedience.”

655. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 59 (“[T]here is recognized and exercised one critical right,

perhaps the most critical in a republic, the right not only of consent but also of consultation.”).

656. Origins of the Declaration of Independence: Samuel Rutherford’s ‘Lex, Rex’, THE WASH.

POST (July 2, 2016 4:42 PM), https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspir-

acy/wp/2016/07/02/origins-of-the-declaration-of-independence-samuel-rutherfords-lex-rex/

(“Thomas Jefferson later explained that the Declaration of Independence did not aim to express new

principles, but was based on ‘the American mind,’ including ideas expressed by ‘the elementary

books of public right, as Aristotle, Cicero, Locke, Sidney, &c.’ (Letter to Henry Lee, May 8,

1825.)”); see also Cooper, supra note 30, at

550 (“[W]hile the Declaration is much shorter in com-

parison, it contains essentially the same argument for defending liberty that Rutherford made in

opposition to the tyranny of Charles I in Lex, Rex.”); Lermack, supra note 219, at 1423 (“Govern-

ment power comes from ‘we the people’ who retain the Lockean right to take it back.”).

657. Elazar, supra note 5, at 10 (“Over the centuries, covenant, natural law and constitution-

alism became to a degree intertwined. When, for example, the Americans formally declared them-

selves as independent people in the Declaration of Independence (itself a covenant creating a new

relationship based on natural rights precepts), they then saw constitution making as a way of further

covenanting or compacting together in order to create civil instruments designed to carry out the

Declaration’s premises. The resulting state and federal constitutions were seen as compacts embod-

ying the principles of natural law, especially in their Declarations of Rights. The propriety of sub-

sequent legislation was, therefore, to be judged in light of its “constitutionality,” or in other words,

its conformity to both the natural law and the covenant, one step removed.”).

98 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

designated in his name.

658

The Declaration of Independence was subse-

quently adopted into numerous state constitutions.

659

2. State Constitutions

Following the instructions of the Continental Congress to develop con-

stitutions to establish their new political status as independent states rather

than colonies dependent on Great Britain, the leaders of each of the colonies

engaged in a groundbreaking exercise in statecraft—literally crafting new

states.

660

These exciting political episodes drew heavily upon the experiences

the colonists had encountered over the previous decades, including their char-

ters from the royal monarch.

661

For example, the constitutions of the three

states with the largest Puritan populations, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and

Rhode Island, were based upon the English charters adopted by the colonies,

with the simple change of removing references to the English monarchy.

662

In turn, some of those colonial charters had incorporated elements of even

earlier documents and agreements drawn up by the colonists, such as the

Mayflower Compact, the Pilgrim Code of Law, and the Fundamental Orders

of Connecticut.

663

In addition, like the Mayflower Compact, the new state constitutions

gave plenary powers to the state governments, as opposed to the specifically

enumerated powers that would later be delineated in the U.S. Constitution.

664

Also reflecting the Mayflower Compact, they retained many elements of cov-

enantal agreements, as did municipal governments within the colonies and

658. Christopher Klein, The Sudsy History of Samuel Adams, HISTORY.COM (Jan. 27, 2015),

https://www.history.com/news/the-sudsy-history-of-samuel-adams.

659. Martinez, supra note 41, at 475.

660. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 100.

661. Lutz, From Covenant, supra note 117, at 110 (“The early state constitutions adopted in

1776 could be viewed as ‘organic compacts’ of this type as they usually summarized what the col-

onists of each state had evolved over the previous one hundred and fifty years.”); id. at 105 (A

constitution is “the outline of a form of government, that is, the specification of political institutions

and fundamental principles of organization.” “it often was the recodification of institutions already

in use in the respective states.”); see also Martinez, supra note 41, at 475 (“The character of the

charters as written contracts between the King and the colonists would have persuaded the colonists

to giving themselves a written contract, a constitution, that would regulate the main relationships

among them and with their own governors once they decided to become independent from the Eng-

lish metropolis.).

662. See LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 100.

663. Martinez, supra note 41, at 461 (In turn, “[t]he colonial charters stemmed from the polit-

ical pacts written by the English colonists in North America (compacts) such as the Fundamental

Orders of Connecticut and the Pilgrim Code of Law, and to some extent, the pre-constitutions like

the Mayflower Compact.”).

664. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 51 (The Mayflower Compact provides for plenary powers of

government with specified limitations, instead of enumerated powers as in the U.S. Constitution; in

this respect, it is more like state constitutions than the U.S. Constitution).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 99

then states.

665

Moreover, the local town governments retained significant au-

thority, thus the state governments reflected the federal structure within the

states, themselves.

666

The state legislatures created and approved of the new

state constitutions, which retained the basic essence of compacts, although

the general population did not participate in their development or adoption.

667

Though the drafters of the new state constitutions adopted many of the

trappings of covenantal agreements, they deliberately chose to make the state

governments much more secular,

668

as opposed to the largely theocratic gov-

ernance structures that predominated in some colonies, notably the Massa-

chusetts Bay Colony in its earlier years.

669

At the time of the Revolution, the

population rejected state-imposed religion.

670

The colonial protests against

British rule were in part due to the establishmentarianism embraced by the

government of Great Britain ensconcing the Church of England throughout

the realm and its imperial holdings.

671

Religion flourished in the colonies, but

many adhered to Protestant offshoots such as Presbyterianism and Method-

ism.

672

Desiring that the state not infringe upon people’s religious beliefs and

religious freedoms, the states repealed most of the religious laws that had

previously been written into their statutes.

673

Thus, the founders rejected the

notion that the new states should represent one primary religion to which

665. Cooper, supra note 30, at 548-49 (“While the Mayflower Compact was the first political

document to employ the church covenant form, it was not the last. ‘Both town and colony govern-

ments were often derived in form and substance from covenants, which in turn were based upon

what we now know as ‘federal theology.’’ Over time, these agreements were secularized into col-

ony/state constitutions, yet they still retained the elements of covenant. Eventually, these ideas were

incorporated into the Articles of Confederation, and later the Constitution.”).

666. Lutz, From Covenant, supra note 117, at 106 (“most government is still left at the local

level . . . local government is left intact to carry on the bulk of government as it always had in

America. In this regard, the . . . state constitutions . . . are themselves federative documents, feder-

ations of towns and counties.”).

667. Id. at 122 (“Even though most of the early state constitutions were written and approved

by legislatures instead of by the people directly, there was still a strong tendency to use the compact

form.”).

668. See, e.g., LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 104-105 (noting “the right to free exercise

of religion” as an inalienable right in all of the first eighteen state constitutions).

669. Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, Massachusetts Bay Colony, BRITANNICA (July 20,

1998), https://www.britannica.com/place/Massachusetts-Bay-Colony (“The Puritans established a

theocratic government with the franchise limited to church members.”).

670. Channing, supra note 196, at 198-99 (Around the time of the Revolution was “a time of

reaction against state ecclesiasticism”).

671. Id. at 199 (“indeed, the Revolution had been partly fought as a protest against the close

connection of Church and State in England and in the empire.”).

672. Id. (“The reaction brought to the surface men and women of most radical ideas in reli-

gion,” causing the blossoming of sects such as Methodism and Presbyterianism.).

673. Id. (“The result was two-fold: great religious activity throughout the country among all

classes of people, and the repealing of nearly every one of the religious laws on the statute books of

the several states.”).

100 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

everyone is expected to adhere, but instead embraced welcoming a diversity

of religious beliefs, practices, and worldviews within the new nation.

Moreover, instead of creating social communities, as some of the prior

initial colonial covenantal documents had done, these new state constitutions

instituted explicit political relationships.

674

As noted above, the drafters of

the state constitutions were also influenced by the liberal political philosophy

European theorists had disseminated throughout both continents advocating

for liberty, equality, participation in governance, and other virtues.

675

The

new constitutions incorporated concepts of state citizenship (in contrast with

the colonists’ status as subjects of the royal crown), the location of sover-

eignty, the institutions and offices comprising the state government, the allo-

cation of authority among those institutions and offices, and specific re-

strictions curbing the authority of each arm of government.

676

Through their

state constitutions, the people within each region affirmed that they were “de-

voted to calm, deliberative processes for collective decision making, . . . ded-

icated to treating each other as fairly as possible, . . . determined to develop

themselves as completely as possible through public education and the en-

couragement of civic and moral virtues, and . . . committed to living together

as a community—which meant subordinating private interest to the good of

the community.”

677

Not surprisingly, considering that the colonists were revolting against

infringements upon their rights by the British crown, each of the state consti-

tutions gave primary emphasis to the protection of rights—both in specificity

and prominence of place at the beginning of the documents.

678

These rights

674. Lutz, From Covenant, supra note 117, at 124 (“[O]ur founding documents, now called

constitutions, no longer created communities as did our very first documents of foundation during

the seventeenth century.”); id. at 124 (“Essentially, the development of documents of foundation

from covenants to modern constitutions has been one of movement away from a communitarian

perspective toward a legalistic, contractual view of political communities.”).

675. See, e.g., LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 86-89 (“Virtue, the Deliberative Process,

and Majority Rule”).

676. Id. at 124 (“By 1776, the notion of a constitution would include along with institutional

description, a definition of citizenship, the placement of sovereignty, the establishment of a regime

for ruling, the distribution of political power among offices and institutions, and some definition of

the limits of governmental power.); id. at 106 (Other elements of constitutions include “the defini-

tion of citizenship, the placement of sovereignty, the establishment of a ruling regime, the distribu-

tion of and limits upon governmental power.”).

677. Id. at 105 (Through their state constitutions, the people within each region affirmed that

they were] “devoted to calm, deliberative processes for collective decision making, . . . dedicated to

treating each other as fairly as possible, . . . determined to develop themselves as completely as

possible through public education and the encouragement of civic and moral virtues, and . . . com-

mitted to living together as a community—which meant subordinating private interest to the good

of the community.”).

678. Lermack, supra note 219, at 1420-21 (““In addition to the listing of powers and prohibi-

tions, all the state constitutions from this period provide a bill of rights . . . . In fact, all the provisions

of the 1791 federal Bill of Rights are anticipated in one or another of the state drafts. We can infer

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 101

were subsequently mirrored in all of the Bill of Rights added to the U.S. Con-

stitution in 1791 as the first ten amendments.

679

This emphasis highlighted

that the primary purpose of government is the wellbeing of society—to serve

the good of the people—as articulated by the political theorists in both Eu-

rope and the New World.

The Constitution of Massachusetts was established in 1780, almost a

century after Plymouth Colony was merged into Massachusetts Bay Colony,

nearly one and a half centuries after the Pilgrim Code of Law, and exactly

160 years after the Mayflower Compact.

680

John Adams incorporated the

concept of “a government of laws and not of men” in the state’s new consti-

tution.

681

The members of each colony aligned themselves most strongly with their

respective colonies, not with the Continental Congress or the colonies as a

whole.

682

In fact, they used the term “state” as it was used in the international

arena to designate individual nations.

683

Each of the colonies had distinctive

origins and included people from different backgrounds, such as the Quakers

in Pennsylvania, the Dutch in New York (formerly New Amsterdam before

the British appropriated it),

684

and the Puritans in the four New England col-

onies.

685

from the length of these documents, and from the fact that they are usually placed at the beginning

of the state constitutions, that the protection of individual rights was a primary purpose of the gov-

ernment.”); L

UTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 62.

679. Lermack, supra note 219, at 1420-21 (““In addition to the listing of powers and prohibi-

tions, all the state constitutions from this period provide a bill of rights . . . . In fact, all the provisions

of the 1791 federal Bill of Rights are anticipated in one or another of the state drafts. We can infer

from the length of these documents, and from the fact that they are usually placed at the beginning

of the state constitutions, that the protection of individual rights was a primary purpose of the gov-

ernment.”).

680. See generally MASS. CONST.

681. Origins of the Declaration of Independence: Samuel Rutherford’s ‘Lex, Rex’, THE WASH.

POST (July 2, 2016 4:42 PM), https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspir-

acy/wp/2016/07/02/origins-of-the-declaration-of-independence-samuel-rutherfords-lex-rex/

(“Independence Day can be a time for reflection about whether the United States will continue to

be, in the words that John Adams put into the 1780 Massachusetts Constitution, ‘a government of

laws and not of men.’”).

682. ELLIS, supra note 243, at xi (“In 1776 thirteen American colonies declared themselves

independent states that came together temporarily to win the war, then would go their separate

ways.”).

683. Id. (“the Articles of Confederation . . . was . . . what one historian has called a ‘Peace

Pact’ among sovereign states that regarded themselves as mini-nations of their own, that came to-

gether voluntarily for mutual security in a domestic version of a League of Nations.”).

684. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 20 (mentioning the Dutch colony in Manhattan); see also

History.com Editors, New Amsterdam Becomes New York, H

ISTORY.COM (Feb. 9, 2010),

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/new-amsterdam-becomes-new-york.

685. History.com Editors, The 13 Colonies, HISTORY.COM (June 17, 2010), https://www.his-

tory.com/topics/colonial-america/thirteen-colonies (the four New England colonies that became

states are Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New Hampshire).

102 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

Each colony had its own, well-functioning executive, legislative, and ju-

dicial branches of government.

686

Each of them was developing its own, in-

dependent constitution.

687

The geographic region covered by each of the col-

onies was similar to the geographic region of the smaller European nation-

states.

688

The Continental Congress was perceived to be more akin to today’s

European Union, with each constituent member retaining nearly complete

sovereignty, and only making concessions in certain arenas to the larger po-

litical union.

689

However, after the states’ experiment with the very loose af-

filiation under the Articles of Confederation, they ultimately decided to unite

into one nation through the U.S. Constitution, which the founders based sig-

nificantly upon the structures of the various state constitutions.

690

3. Articles of Confederation

After a great degree of debate and deliberation, the Second Continental

Congress approved the Articles of Confederation in 1777, which was not rat-

ified by the states for several years, until the last state, Maryland, ratified it

in 1781.

691

Many of the representatives of the thirteen states thought of their

states as newly independent and equal nations, and their primary loyalty was

to their respective states.

692

The states were stark rivals in certain key re-

spects. For example, each state jealously guarded its own economic develop-

ment and political distinctiveness and was wary of the other states.

693

More-

over, all of the states were fearful of a new central government, in part

because they did not want a repeat of the despotism King George III had

686. See LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 96-110 (Chapter 8. The First State Constitu-

tions.).

687. See id. (Chapter 8. The First State Constitutions.); see also ELLIS, supra note 243, at 7.

688. James Martin, Driving Across the United States Versus Europe, TRIPSAVVY,

https://www.tripsavvy.com/so-just-how-big-is-europe-compared-to-the-us-anyway-3971019 (last

updated Jan. 4, 2019).

689. ELLIS, supra note 243, at 7.

690. Martinez, supra note 41, at 461 (“Searching the origins of U.S. constitutional tradition

leads us to state constitutions, the colonial documents of foundation (charters), and the previous

texts on which those are based.”).

691. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 132; see also NCC Staff, 10 Reasons Why Amer-

ica’s First Constitution Failed, C

ONST. CTR. (Nov. 17, 2019), https://constitution-

center.org/blog/10-reasons-why-americas-first-constitution-failed.

692. ELLIS, supra note 243, at xi (“the Articles of Confederation . . . was . . . what one histo-

rian has called a ‘Peace Pact’ among sovereign states that regarded themselves as mini-nations of

their own, that came together voluntarily for mutual security in a domestic version of a League of

Nations.”); id. at xvi (“the allegiances and perspectives of most Americans were confined within

local and state borders.”); id. at 12.

693. Id. at 90-91 (referring to the Confederation Congress “as a political arena in which the

states came together to display their mutual jealousies, almost a laboratory for the triumph of paro-

chialism and provincialism.”).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 103

inflicted upon the colonies, many of the details of which they had meticu-

lously recounted as grievances in the Declaration of Independence.

694

There-

fore, in the Articles of Confederation, they created a very weak central gov-

ernment consisting of a Congress, with no independent executive and

judiciary.

695

Like the Mayflower Compact, many local political agreements,

and the state constitutions, the Articles of Confederation retained many at-

tributes of a federal covenantal agreement,

696

yet it was an exceedingly loose

confederation.

697

While awaiting the ratification process to wend its way through the new

states, and at the same time waging an inter-continental war with Great Brit-

ain, the Second Continental Congress also made another significant move. It

endorsed the creation of a compilation of the most significant historical doc-

uments within the colonies leading up to their independence as new states.

698

In 1778, Ebenezer Hazard convinced the Continental Congress to enact a res-

olution supporting his transcribing and publishing a collection of historical

documents chronicling America’s colonial history from the first European

settlements through the Revolution.

699

Hazard had already begun to collect

these important documents about the history of European settlement of

America in the early 1770s, and compiling them took him twenty years.

700

Not only archivists and historians but all Americans today owe Hazard a great

debt of gratitude for preserving these vital annals of U.S. history.

694. Id. at xii (“creating a national government was the last thing on the minds of American

revolutionaries, since such a distant source of political power embodied all the tyrannical tendencies

that patriotic Americans believed they were rebelling against.”).

695. Id. at 133-34 (the court system was under the Congress and only dealt with issues between

states, and a Committee of the States took the place of an executive); see also NCC Staff, 10 Reasons

Why America’s First Constitution Failed, C

ONST. CTR. (Nov. 17, 2019), https://constitution-

center.org/blog/10-reasons-why-americas-first-constitution-failed; E

LLIS, supra note 243, at 7.

696. Cooper, supra note 30, at 548-49 (“While the Mayflower Compact was the first political

document to employ the church covenant form, it was not the last. ‘Both town and colony govern-

ments were often derived in form and substance from covenants, which in turn were based upon

what we now know as “federal theology.”‘ Over time, these agreements were secularized into col-

ony/state constitutions, yet they still retained the elements of covenant. Eventually, these ideas were

incorporated into the Articles of Confederation, and later the Constitution.”).

697. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 64; ELLIS, supra note 243, at xvii (discussing “the

inherent disarray within that flimsy framework called the Articles of Confederation”).

698. Shelley, supra note 442, at 54-55, 58 (“The value of the resolution of Congress lay, of

course, in the recognition by the national government of its responsibility and the duty in making

archives and historical manuscripts safe and available and in financing their publication.”).

699. Id. (“The value of the resolution of Congress lay, of course, in the recognition by the

national government of its responsibility and the duty in making archives and historical manuscripts

safe and available and in financing their publication.”).

700. Id. (“The value of the resolution of Congress lay, of course, in the recognition by the

national government of its responsibility and the duty in making archives and historical manuscripts

safe and available and in financing their publication.”).

104 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

The Articles of Confederation entered into force in 1781 upon ratifica-

tion by all 13 of the self-proclaimed newly independent states, despite the

fact that the Revolutionary War would continue for two more years.

701

The

powers of the central government were severely limited, including the power

to wage war with Great Britain, which was imperative to earn the freedom of

the new confederation of states.

702

The new government had no authority to

tax, and instead was reliant upon the good will of each of the states to con-

tribute to the maintenance of the army, which most were reluctant to do, and

several of which simply refused or gave a pittance.

703

Moreover, the Confed-

eration Congress had no authority over commerce, allowing each state to im-

pose its own economic policies, leading to increasingly acrimonious tariffs

and trade barriers among the states and a balkanization of the economy be-

tween the states.

704

Although the continental army led by General George

Washington ultimately defeated the British army in 1783,

705

the rivalries

among the states threatened to tear the frail confederation apart over the next

several years.

706

Most of the states refused to contribute funds to pay for the

enormous war debts of the newly independent confederation.

707

The eco-

nomic hostilities threatened to break out into actual armed conflicts, and ul-

timately did during Shay’s Rebellion between 1786 and 1787, during which

701. NCC Staff, 10 Reasons Why America’s First Constitution Failed, Const. Ctr. (Nov. 17,

2019), https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/10-reasons-why-americas-first-constitution-failed; Doc-

uments from the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention, 1774 to 1789: 1779 to

1782, L

IBR. OF CONGRESS, https://www.loc.gov/collections/continental-congress-and-constitu-

tional-convention-from-1774-to-1789/articles-and-essays/timeline/1779-to-1782/ (last visited Feb.

21, 2020); Documents from the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention, 1774 to

1789: 1783 to 1784, LIBR. OF CONGRESS, https://www.loc.gov/collections/continental-congress-

and-constitutional-convention-from-1774-to-1789/articles-and-essays/timeline/1783-to-1784/ (last

visited Feb. 21, 2020).

702. See, e.g., ELLIS, supra note 243, at 6-7 (“For three years the vast majority of states had

failed to pay their share of taxes to support the Continental Army, leaving a legacy of confusion

about where the power of the purse ultimately resided.”).

703. Id.; see also NCC Staff, 10 Reasons Why America’s First Constitution Failed, Const.

Ctr. (Nov. 17, 2019), https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/10-reasons-why-americas-first-constitu-

tion-failed.

704. Documents from the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention, 1774 to

1789: 1785 to 1786, L

IBR. OF CONGRESS, https://www.loc.gov/collections/continental-congress-

and-constitutional-convention-from-1774-to-1789/articles-and-essays/timeline/1785-to-1786/ (last

visited Feb. 21, 2020).

705. George Washington Papers: The American Revolution, LIBR. OF CONGRESS,

https://www.loc.gov/collections/george-washington-papers/articles-and-essays/timeline/the-ameri-

can-revolution/#1783 (last visited Feb. 21, 2020)

706. NCC Staff, 10 Reasons Why America’s First Constitution Failed, Const. Ctr. (Nov. 17,

2019), https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/10-reasons-why-americas-first-constitution-failed.

707. NCC Staff, 10 Reasons Why America’s First Constitution Failed, Const. Ctr. (Nov. 17,

2019), https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/10-reasons-why-americas-first-constitution-failed; see

also E

LLIS, supra note 243, at 34-35.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 105

Daniel Shays, an American veteran of the Revolutionary War, led an armed

uprising in protest of economic and civil rights injustices in Massachusetts.

708

Despite these challenges, the Confederation Congress was able to

achieve some initiatives. For example, it adopted the Northwest Ordinance

of 1787, which created the Northwest Territory out of land attained from

Great Britain, comprised of land that is now Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illi-

nois, Wisconsin, and part of Minnesota.

709

Again, the leaders of the confed-

eration apparently gave little thought to the indigenous people living on that

land, not hesitating to claim it for the government of the newly confederated

states, though professing that “[t]he utmost good faith shall always be ob-

served toward the Indians.”

710

The Northwest Ordinance established a gov-

ernment for the new territory and a mechanism for regions within the territory

to enter into the union as new states.

711

It also created a bill of rights for the

new territory and included important protections such as “freedom of reli-

gion, right to a trial by jury, public support of education, and the prohibition

of slavery.”

712

Notwithstanding this agreement, the animus between the thirteen origi-

nal states grew to such an extent that it seemed a dissolution of the union

might become inevitable.

713

In order to save the fledgling union, several lead-

ers, including Alexander Hamilton, who is now celebrated in the eponymous

Broadway musical, urged the development of a new constitution, leading to

708. NCC Staff, 10 Reasons Why America’s First Constitution Failed, Const. Ctr. (Nov. 17,

2019), https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/10-reasons-why-americas-first-constitution-failed; His-

tory.com Editors, Shays’ Rebellion, H

ISTORY.COM (Nov. 12, 2009), https://www.history.com/top-

ics/early-us/shays-rebellion; see also E

LLIS, supra note 243, at 100-02.

709. Documents from the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention, 1774 to

1789: 1787 to 1788, L

IBR. OF CONGRESS https://www.loc.gov/collections/continental-congress-

and-constitutional-convention-from-1774-to-1789/articles-and-essays/timeline/1787-to-1788/ (last

visited Feb. 21, 2020); Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, Northwest Ordinances, B

RITANNICA

(July 20, 1998), https://www.britannica.com/event/Northwest-Ordinances.

710. The Plains and Plateau Culture Areas, BRITANNICA (July 26, 1999), https://www.bri-

tannica.com/topic/Native-American/The-Plains-and-Plateau-culture-areas#ref57833.

711. Documents from the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention, 1774 to

1789: 1787 to 1788, L

IBR. OF CONGRESS https://www.loc.gov/collections/continental-congress-

and-constitutional-convention-from-1774-to-1789/articles-and-essays/timeline/1787-to-1788/ (last

visited Feb. 21, 2020); Primary Documents in American History: Northwest Ordinance, L

IBR. OF

CONGRESS, https://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/northwest.html (last visited Feb. 21,

2020).

712. Documents from the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention, 1774 to

1789: 1787 to 1788, L

IBR. OF CONGRESS https://www.loc.gov/collections/continental-congress-

and-constitutional-convention-from-1774-to-1789/articles-and-essays/timeline/1787-to-1788/ (last

visited Feb. 21, 2020).

713. NCC Staff, 10 Reasons Why America’s First Constitution Failed, Const. Ctr. (Nov. 17,

2019), https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/10-reasons-why-americas-first-constitution-failed.

106 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

the Constitutional Convention, and convinced retired general George Wash-

ington to spearhead the assembly.

714

Founder John Jay remarked that Amer-

icans were “the first people . . . [who had] the possibility of deliberating and

choosing the system of Government under which they should live,”

715

re-

flecting the situation aboard the Mayflower over a century and a half be-

fore.

716

Although the first few years of the experiment did not prove to be

very promising, the prominent statesmen gathered together once again to try

to come up with a mechanism for a national government that would work.

717

4. U.S. Constitution

On February 21, 1787, the Confederation Congress, which met in New

York City, passed a resolution to establish a Constitutional Convention

charged with developing a proposal to revise the Articles of Confederation.

718

The Constitutional Convention met in Philadelphia between May and Sep-

tember 1787. including George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, James

Madison, Gouverneur Morris, and Benjamin Franklin were among the repre-

sentatives of the thirteen states.

719

James Madison studied various forms of

government from around the world before writing the U.S. Constitution.

720

Importantly, he had been exposed to Enlightenment writers in college.

721

En-

lightenment thinkers such as Locke and Montesquieu shaped the framers’

approach to creating the new federal government.

722

Since the nation-build-

ers did not have contemporary models in Europe from which to draw in cre-

ating a new democratic government, they relied heavily on the writings of

714. NCC Staff, 10 Reasons Why America’s First Constitution Failed, Const. Ctr. (Nov. 17,

2019), https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/10-reasons-why-americas-first-constitution-failed; Edi-

tors of Encyclopedia Britannica, Constitutional Convention, B

RITANNICA (JULY 20, 1998),

https://www.britannica.com/event/Constitutional-Convention; see also E

LLIS, supra note 243, at

52-55, 104-12.

715. Martinez, supra note 41, at 462.

716. LONG, supra note 191, at 6.

717. Documents from the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention, 1774 to

1789: 1787 to 1788, L

IBR. OF CONGRESS https://www.loc.gov/collections/continental-congress-

and-constitutional-convention-from-1774-to-1789/articles-and-essays/timeline/1787-to-1788/ (last

visited Feb. 21, 2020); NCC Staff, 10 Reasons Why America’s First Constitution Failed, Const. Ctr.

(Nov. 17, 2019), https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/10-reasons-why-americas-first-constitution-

failed; E

LLIS, supra note 243, at 135-53.

718. The Confederation Congress and the Constitution, U. OF WIS.-MADISON, https://csac.his-

tory.wisc.edu/document-collections/the-constitutional-convention/confederation-congress/ (last

visited Feb. 9, 2020).

719. History.com Editors, Constitutional Convention Begins, HISTORY.COM (Feb. 9, 2010),

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/constitutional-convention-begins; E

LLIS, supra note

243, at 140, 147-48.

720. James Madison, Ancient and Modern Confederacies, LIBR. OF CONGRESS (1787),

https://cdn.loc.gov/service/mss/mjm/02/02_1036_1063.pdf (last visited Feb. 9, 2020).

721. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 55.

722. Id. at 67-68.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 107

the Enlightenment thinkers,

723

as well as the examples provided in the state

constitutions and political experiences within the colonies,

724

which in turn

had relied on their colonial charters and other historical documents,

725

lead-

ing all the way back to the Mayflower Compact,

726

and even further back to

723. Id. at 96, 139-47; see also ELLIS, supra note 243, at 25 (“European thinkers over the past

century had drafted the blueprint for a new political architecture, which was now readily available

for Americans to implement.”).

724. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 96 (“there was no European precedent or model

for it in 1787. Its form and content derived largely from the early state constitutions, as borrowings

and as reactions.”); Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 106 (“A people’s considerable experience with

self-government seems to be relied upon in the Constitution, an experience which develops (among

other things) a sense of the need for restraint with respect to those inevitable political differences

that must be examined candidly. Effective self-government also requires considerable confidence

among a people in the capacity of government to do good by serving ends for which the efforts of

government are useful if not even essential.”); see also Lutz, From Covenant, supra note 117, at

102 n. 5 (“The basic stance taken in this article, that American political documents of the late eight-

eenth century are essentially elaborations upon seventeenth century colonial documents and a dif-

ferentiation of symbols contained within these earlier documents, is an adaptation of the thesis in a

book written by W

ILLMOORE KENDALL AND GEORGE CAREY, THE BASIC SYMBOLS OF THE

AMERICAN POLITICAL TRADITION (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1970).”); Mar-

tinez, supra note 41, at 476 (“Consequently, the evolutionary process of American constitutionalism

between the first decades of the 17

century and 1787 could be summed up in the following way:

1) The religious covenants were secularized and turned into political compacts.

2) The first elements in covenants and compacts, that is the creation of a people, a frame of Gov-

ernment, and the position of fundamental values, were incorporated in the preambles and bills of

rights of numerous constitutions.

3) The second part of the compacts, which set up a framework of government, mixed with the char-

ters’ elements that had the nature of contract between the people and the government created by the

compact (once the people replaced the monarchy as sovereign.)”).

725. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 138.

726. Cooper, supra note 30, at 548-49 (“While the Mayflower Compact was the first political

document to employ the church covenant form, it was not the last. ‘Both town and colony govern-

ments were often derived in form and substance from covenants, which in turn were based upon

what we now known as “federal theology.”‘ Over time, these agreements were secularized into

colony/state constitutions, yet they still retained the elements of covenant. Eventually, these ideas

were incorporated into the Articles of Confederation, and later the Constitution.”); see also Lutz,

From Covenant, supra note 117, at 102 (“The beginning of American constitutional history, then,

must be sought in those documents establishing local self-government on American shores during

the early seventeenth century.”).

108 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

the Magna Carta.

727

They also drew upon lessons from the Iroquois Confed-

eracy, and Benjamin Franklin “invited the Great Council members of the Ir-

oquois to address the Continental Congress in 1776.”

728

Instead of generating a list of proposed amendments to the Articles of

Confederation, the statesmen meeting in Philadelphia came up with an en-

tirely new structure of government—one that would create a single, unified

nation, instead of an amalgamation of largely independent states.

729

The

meetings were held in strict secrecy, so the members of the Constitutional

Convention would not be unduly influenced by outside pressures.

730

George Washington had won tremendous popularity throughout the states by

virtue of his conduct during the Revolutionary War, some clamored for him

to become king of the new nation, a notion to which he strongly demurred.

731

Famously, when the negotiations were nearing the end, as Benjamin Franklin

left Independence Hall one evening a Mrs. Powell inquired, “Well, Doctor,

what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?” Franklin rejoined, “A republic,

if you can keep it.”

732

To alleviate concerns of many that the federal government would be-

come too strong, the drafters adopted Montesquieu’s framework of the sepa-

ration of powers,

733

which had also been incorporated into the state constitu-

tions. Therefore, as opposed to having only a legislature, as under the Articles

727. Martinez, supra note 41, at 463 n. 30 (quoting EDWARD S. CORWIN, CORWIN ON THE

CONSTITUTION 99 (Richard Loss ed., 1981)) (“‘the constitutional fathers regarded the Magna Carta

as having been from the first a monument of English liberties . . . .’”); Martinez, supra note 41, at

479 (“The Bill of Rights in the Constitution contains twenty-eight rights. Of these twenty-eight,

four come from the Magna Carta, but most of them had been already written by 1791 in the Consti-

tutions of Virginia, Maryland, Massachusetts, and others . . . they did not come so much from the

tradition of the British Common Law as from the Bills written by the English colonists in America.

Such detailed lists very often had in their margins several references to biblical passages from

which, supposedly, the rights derived. A devoted Christian . . . can translate to the languages of civil

rights the Biblical teachings about fairness and equity among men.”).

728. Terri Hansen, How the Iroquois Great Law of Peace Shaped U.S. Democracy, PBS (Dec.

17, 2018, 9:48 AM), https://www.pbs.org/native-america/blogs/native-voices/how-the-iroquois-

great-law-of-peace-shaped-us-democracy/.

729. ELLIS, supra note 243, at 135-53

730. Id. at 138.

731. Matthew Spalding, The Man Who Would Not Be King, THE HERITAGE FOUND. (Feb. 5,

2007), https://www.heritage.org/commentary/the-man-who-would-not-be-king.

732. A Republic, If We Can Keep It, THE WASH. TIMES (July 30, 2002), https://www.wash-

ingtontimes.com/news/2002/jul/30/20020730-035159-6129r/.

733. See THE SELECTED WRITINGS OF JOHN AND JOHN QUINCY ADAMS supra note 4, at xxi

(documenting references by John Adams and John Quincy Adams to Montesquieu).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 109

of Confederation,

734

the authors added an executive branch headed by a Pres-

ident, as well as a judicial branch headed by the U.S. Supreme Court.

735

Alt-

hough the Constitution does not mention the power of judicial review, mean-

ing the power of the federal courts to declare that an act of the legislative

branch or the executive branch was beyond its powers under the Constitution

and therefore was unconstitutional, this power was likely presumed, as the

state courts had already been exercising it.

736

Moreover, Alexander Hamilton

in Federalist Paper 78 asserted that the federal courts retain the power of ju-

dicial review.

737

The constitution split the new Congress into two cham-

bers—the House of Representatives and the Senate—to try to ensure that all

new legislative proposals would be subject to a slow and deliberative process

within the bicameral legislature.

738

The members of the House of Represent-

atives were to represent the interests of the general public, as they are elected

every two years by popular vote within their districts.

739

The members of the

Senate were originally designed to represent the state governments, which

initially selected the Senators, until the 17

Amendment made the Senators

also directly elected by the people.

740

The Constitution limits the powers of the federal government by enu-

merating those powers, as opposed to the general grant of plenary authority

retained by the state governments, as confirmed in the 10

Amendment.

741

734. History.com Editors, Articles of Confederation, HISTORY.COM (Oct. 27, 2009),

https://www.history.com/topics/early-us/articles-of-confederation.

735. Vincent Ostrom, Hobbes, Covenant, and Constitution, 10 PUBLIUS 83, 93-94 (1980)

(“Another method of distributing authority in a democratic constitution is to allocate the preroga-

tives of government among different types of decision structures. In the American experience this

was typically done by distinguishing legislative, executive, and judicial functions, and assigning

authority so that each decision structure is subject to limits exercised by other decision structures.

This system of reciprocal vetoes gives rise to what is characterized as a system of checks and bal-

ances . . . . “).

736. Lermack, supra note 219, at n. 144 (discussing judicial review, supreme law of the land,

“trumping federal legislation and state-made law including state constitutions”); Martinez, supra

note 41, at 463 (Judge Edward Coke “added the notion of judicial review.”); see also Editors of

Encyclopedia Britannica, Bonham’s Case, BRITANNICA (July 20, 1998), https://www.britan-

nica.com/event/Bonhams-Case.

737. NORTON, supra note 619, at 130 (quoting THE FEDERALIST NO. 78 (Alexander Hamil-

ton)).

738. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 91-92.

739. Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, House of Representatives, BRITANNICA (July 20,

1998), https://www.britannica.com/topic/House-of-Representatives-United-States-government.

740. Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, United States Senate, BRITANNICA (July 20, 1998),

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Senate-United-States-government; David N. Schleicher & Todd

J. Zywicki, The Seventeenth Amendment, C

ONST. CTR., https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-

constitution/interpretation/amendment-xvii/interps/147 (last visited Feb. 21, 2020).

741. Gary Lawson & Robert Schapiro, The Tenth Amendment, CONST. CTR., https://constitu-

tioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/amendment-x/interps/129; Reserved Powers,

ORNELL L. SCH., https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-10/reserved-pow-

ers (last visited Feb. 21, 2020).

110 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

And instead of a strict divide between the branches to employ the separation

of powers, the Constitution entails a complex system of intertwining checks

and balances.

742

By adopting a constitutional framework to constrain the

powers of government, both the federal and state constitutions created a sys-

tem whereby the people in governmental offices must abide by the constitu-

tion.

743

One such mechanism of checks and balances is periodic elections of all

members of Congress and of the President, to help ensure the will of the peo-

ple is reflected in the government,

744

and also to help bring out the best in the

people within government.

745

However, the founders did not embrace true

democracy, as they distrusted direct democracy and the potential for “mob

rule” it may engender.

746

Indeed, direct democracy, where all people would

need to develop expertise and vote on every issue, would be impossible in a

large nation, or even a small nation in today’s complex world.

747

Therefore,

the founders created a representative government, through which the people

742. Ostrom, supra note 735, at 95 (“people can participate in the organization and governance

of diverse communities of interest without having a single unit of government that exercises sover-

eign authority. Rather, people can participate in diverse units of government, each of which exer-

cises limited authority.”); LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 9, 85.

743. Ostrom, supra note 735, at 91-92 (“The American Revolution marked the beginning of

an effort to fashion a system of fundamental law that applied to the conduct of government itself.

These efforts were carried on in each of the American states and in the organization of a confeder-

ation known as the United States of America. The principles of organization were those that might

be characterized as applying to a popular government or a democracy.”); L

UTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra

note 32, at 85.

744. Again, originally the general public directly elected the members of the House of Repre-

sentatives, and indirectly influenced the selection of the Senators by electing the members of their

state governments. After ratification of the 17

Amendment, the people now directly elect their

Senators, as well. See generally U.S.

CONST. amend. XVII.

745. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 25 (“all of the arrangements that were developed for selecting

the officers of government were designed with a view to permitting the enduring interests and sen-

timents of the people to be ascertained—with a view, that is, to bringing out the best in the people.”).

746. Jeffrey Rosen, America is Living James Madison’s Nightmare, THE ATLANTIC (Oct.

2018), https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/10/james-madison-mob-rule/568351/;

See also George Friedman, The Founding Fathers Never Intended to Create a Direct Democracy,

HUFFPOST (Nov. 17, 2016, 6:09 PM), https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-founding-fathers-never-

meant-to-create_b_13051196; The Nature of Government: What Is a Democracy?,

HISTORY.ORG, https://www.ushistory.org/gov/1c.asp (last visited Feb. 21, 2020); ELLIS, supra

note 243, at xviii (“The term democracy remained an epithet until the third decade of the nineteenth

century. It meant mob rule, the manipulation of majority opinion by demagogues, and shortsighted

political initiatives on behalf of the putative ‘people’ that ran counter to the long-term interests of

the ‘public’”).

747. The Nature of Government: What Is a Democracy?, UShistory.org, https://www.ushis-

tory.org/gov/1c.asp (last visited Feb. 21, 2020). For the distinction between direct democracy and

representative democracy, see Democracy (Ancient Greece), N

AT’L GEOGRAPHIC, https://www.na-

tionalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/democracy-ancient-greece/ (last visited Feb. 21, 2020). For ex-

amples of some state systems with various forms of direct democracy, see Initiative, Referendum

and Recall, NCSL

(Sept. 20, 2012), https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/initia-

tive-referendum-and-recall-overview.aspx.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 111

elect representatives in a republican form of government, and those repre-

sentatives deliberate about and vote on the actual laws.

748

The representative

form of government allows for the general public to participate indirectly in

the government of a large nation.

749

The framers wrote the Constitution lim-

iting government and ensuring that the government will protect the right to

participation in a republican (i.e., representative) system.

750

The nascent republic was not very representative, however.

751

Article I,

Section 2, Clause 1 indicates that, “the Electors in each State shall have the

Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State

Legislature.”

752

Additionally, Article I, Section 4, of the Constitution indi-

cates that, “The times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators

and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature

thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regula-

tions.”

753

Therefore, the state governments controlled the qualifications for

which members of the population were allowed to vote, which initially only

included white male property-owners, who comprised merely about six per-

cent of the population.

754

Among those excluded from the franchise were

slaves, Native Americans, women, and people under age 21, along with other

non-white men and white males who did not own property—altogether mak-

ing up about 94 percent of the population.

755

Not very representative, indeed,

but at the time it signified a bold experiment in progressive polity.

748. Ostrom, supra note 735, at 93-94 (another “type of limit specified in the American con-

stitutions is the provision for the direct or indirect participation of citizens within the different de-

cision structures of government. The election of legislative, executive, and judicial officials allows

for the direct participation of citizens in selecting the basic personnel of government, and for the

indirect representation of citizens in the councils of government.”).

749. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 155 (A representative form of government enables

“the direct involvement of a national citizenry in the government of a large country.”).

750. Lermack, supra note 219, at 1418-19.

751. Bradley A. Smith & Daniel P. Tokaji, Article I, Section 2, CONST. CTR., https://constitu-

tioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/article-i/clauses/762 (last visited Feb. 21,

2020); Elections. . . the American Way, L

IBR. OF CONGRESS, https://www.loc.gov/teachers/class-

roommaterials/presentationsandactivities/presentations/elections/founders-and-the-vote.html (last

visited Feb. 21, 2020).

752. U.S. CONST. art. 1, § 2, cl. 1.

753. U.S. CONST. art. 1, § 4.

754. Jill Lepore, Rock, Paper, Scissors: How We Used to Vote, THE NEW YORKER (Oct. 6,

2008), https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2008/10/13/rock-paper-scissors (“In the first Presi-

dential election, only six per cent of Americans were eligible to vote.”); Bradley A. Smith & Daniel

P. Tokaji, Article I, Section 2, C

ONST. CTR., https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitu-

tion/interpretation/article-i/clauses/762 (last visited Feb. 21, 2020); Elections. . . the American Way,

IBR. OF CONGRESS, https://www.loc.gov/teachers/classroommaterials/presentationsandactivi-

ties/presentations/elections/founders-and-the-vote.html (last visited Feb. 21, 2020).

755. The Founders and the Vote, LIBR. OF CONGRESS, https://www.loc.gov/teachers/class-

roommaterials/presentationsandactivities/presentations/elections/founders-and-the-vote.html (last

visited Feb. 9, 2020); see also Bradley A. Smith & Daniel P. Tokaji, Article I, Section 2, C

ONST.

CTR., https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/article-i/clauses/762 (last

112 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

The Mayflower Compact has been recognized as a significant precursor

to the U.S. Constitution.

756

Under the Mayflower Compact 167 years earlier,

the colonists had agreed to “Covenant and Combine ourselves together into

a Civil Body Politic, for our better ordering and preservation.”

757

Similarly,

in creating the new Constitution, the framers brought together into one nation

the members of the disparate states in an attempt to create a new national

ethos.

758

Their goal was to effectuate a new patriotism and loyalty to the sin-

gular “United States” (the United States is . . .) instead of the amalgamation

of independent states that had combined for limited purposes under the plural

moniker of the United States (the United States are . . .).

759

Moreover, the

constitutional drafters were fulfilling the foresight of the Pilgrims, who had

agreed to “enact, constitute and frame such just and equal Laws, Ordinances,

Acts, Constitutions and Offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most

meet and convenient for the general good of the Colony.”

760

During the rev-

olutionary period, the colonists “thought it . . . meet and convenient” to create

a new constitution, establish new offices, and subsequently to enact new fed-

eral laws “for the general good” of the fledgling independent country. Addi-

tionally, the Saints and Strangers, in signing the Mayflower Compact,

pledged “all due submission and obedience” to the “just and [equal] [laws],

ordinances, acts, constitutions and offices,” just as the new U.S. Constitution

transplanted the principle of the consent of the governed into its frame-

work.

761

However, some clear distinctions emerge between the Mayflower Com-

pact and the new United States Constitution. For example, the Mayflower

visited Feb. 21, 2020); Grace Panetta & Olivia Reaney, Today Is National Voter Registration Day.

The Evolution Of American Voting Rights In 242 Years Shows How Far We’ve Come — And How

Far We Still Have To Go, B

US. INSIDER (Sept. 24, 2019, 8:25 AM), https://www.busi-

nessinsider.com/when-women-got-the-right-to-vote-american-voting-rights-timeline-2018-10.

756. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 68 (“the Mayflower Compact is, in more ways than one, the

‘preamble’ to American constitutional developments, especially in its invocation of the self-evident

truths that government is necessary among human beings and that it is good that all citizens should

consult or should at least appear to consult together about what is fitting and proper for the commu-

nity to do and to believe.”); Elazar, supra note 5, at 22 (“From their earliest beginnings, the people

and polities comprising the United States have bound themselves together through covenants to

erect their New World order, deliberately following biblical precedents. The covenant concluded

on the Mayflower on November 11, 1620, remains the first hallowed document of the American

constitutional tradition.”).

757. THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT (1620).

758. See generally ELLIS, supra note 243.

759. Id. at 11 (several founders advocated “a national picture of Americans as ‘a single peo-

ple,’ no longer Virginians or Rhode Islanders, and the term United States as a singular rather than

plural noun.”).

760. THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT (1620).

761. LONG, supra note 191, at 4-6.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 113

Compact was an agreement in principle, but it did not create a specified struc-

ture of government nor particular duties and rights.

762

Therefore, once it had

been signed aboard the ship, most likely the settlers did not need to consult

its text frequently, although they certainly relied upon it to provide authority

for the colony during its seven-decade existence.

763

However, the U.S. Con-

stitution directs the operations of the federal government and its relationship

with the state and tribal governments, and therefore, people rely on it fre-

quently to delineate the scope of rights, duties, and powers.

764

As another stark contrast, whereas the settlers at Plymouth proclaimed

in the Mayflower Compact that they had developed their autonomous politi-

cal community in the New World “for the Glory of God and advancement of

the Christian Faith and Honour of our King and Country,” the framers of the

U.S. Constitution deliberately and conspicuously steered away from religion

in the document,

765

and decidedly renounced any allegiance to the king and

Great Britain.

766

Unlike some of the state constitutions, the preamble to the

Constitution and the Constitution itself does not contain any mention of a

deity.

767

Also in accordance with European and American Enlightenment

theorists, many of the framers of the Constitution specifically did not want to

create a Christian theocracy in the United States.

768

Although they borrowed

many aspects of the historical documents used to govern the colonies, the

constitutional drafters followed the trend toward secularism in political gov-

ernance.

769

In fact, the drafters left out any mention of Christianity at all.

770

762. Id. at 4 (“It did not define the plan of government with any nicety”).

763. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 55 (“the Compact seems to have been of considerable use in

the early decades of Plymouth Colony, but it was superseded when that colony was absorbed in

1692 by the much larger Massachusetts Bay colony.”).

764. Id. at 56 (“Once the Plymouth community began to govern itself on land, the Compact

itself probably did not have to be consulted. In this respect it is quite different from, say, the Con-

stitution of the United States, which provides a constant guide for action.”).

765. Russell Shorto, How Christian Were the Founders?, THE N.Y. TIMES, Feb. 14, 2010, at

8, 13 (“the founders explicitly avoided religious language” in the Constitution.)

766. See generally THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE (U.S. 1776).

767. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 80 (“It is perhaps appropriate that there is no invocation of

the diving in the Preamble: the Constitution is a document for self-government; the people is on its

own.”); N

ORTON, supra note 619, at 5.

768. Shorto, supra note 765, at 11 (“In fact, the founders were rooted in Christianity—they

were inheritors of the entire European Christian tradition—and at the same time they were steeped

in an Enlightenment rationalism that was, if not opposed to religion, determined to establish separate

spheres for faith and reason”).

769. Elazar, supra note 5, at 9 (“Where settlers from those traditions were dominant, the new

peoples were established by covenant and they in turn created constitutions which concretized the

covenantal dimension through a network of political institutions. In the eighteenth century, the

American Revolution translated the concept into a powerful instrument of political reform but only

after merging it with the more secularized idea of compact. American constitutionalism is a product

of that merger.”).

770. Shorto, supra note 765, at 11 (noting that when prominent founders such as Alexander

Hamilton, George Washington, and Gouverneur Morris referred to religion, they did so in terms

114 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

The drafters made only one reference to religion in the original docu-

ment, barring any type of religious requirements for government officials,

anticipating and expecting that government officials would hold different be-

liefs about religion and would practice different religious faiths.

771

Although

many of the Americans of European heritage—both early settlers like the

Pilgrims and the colonists during the time of the Revolution—had certainly

been influenced by Christianity,

772

many had also been influenced by politi-

cal philosophy,

773

much of which advocated for the separation of church and

state.

774

The founders also maintained different beliefs about religion.

775

The

Mayflower Compact indicated that its purpose was for the glory of the king

and country, but no one is currently arguing that the United States should

revert to being a colony of England.

776

Likewise, the Mayflower Compact

should not be misused in the present day to assert that the United States

that embraced all religions, using terms such as “God,” “Grand Architect,” and “Creator,” none of

which have specifically Christian connotations.”); see also N

ORTON, supra note 619, at 5 (“Com-

ment has been made that God is not mentioned in our Constitution. In the Declaration of Independ-

ence ‘firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence’ is expressed, and in the Articles of

Confederation it is mentioned that ‘it has pleased the Great Governor of the world to incline the

hearts of the legislatures we respectively represent in Congress to approve of and to authorize us to

ratify the said Articles of Confederation and perpetual union.’”).

771. U.S. CONST. art. VI (indicating that “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Quali-

fication to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”).

772. Elazar, supra note 5, at 14 (“The American Puritans and many Americans of the Revolu-

tionary era, among others, were inspired by the biblical polity to seek federal arrangements for their

polities.”).

773. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 194 (the author considers “two principal sets of influence”

on “the American constitutional system, . . . [and] the American way of life.” “One set of influences

goes back to the Bible; the other draws upon the tradition of political philosophy. The former is very

much Christian in its inclination, with all emphasis upon equality, charity, benevolence, and even-

tually privacy; the latter is more inclined toward an opening for excellence, and excellence which

is guided by, and reflected in, the virtue of prudence and which finds productive expression in citi-

zenship and public life.”).

774. Shorto, supra note 765, at 10-11 (Although “the phrase ‘separation of church and state’

is not in the Constitution . . . Thomas Jefferson, who penned it, thought it was . . . an accurate sum-

mation of the First Amendment.” Also noting Randall Balmer, a professor of American religious

history at Barnard College).

775. Nicgorski, supra note 604, at 172 n. 56 (“Franklin’s respect for religion’s impact on mo-

rality led him to back away from that tenuous religion, mechanistic deism.”).

776. Shorto, supra note 765, at 8 (“The language in the Mayflower Compact . . . describes the

Pilgrims’ journey as being ‘for the Glory of God and advancement of the Christian Faith’ and thus

instills the idea that America was founded as a project for the spread of Christianity.”); id. at 8 (“In

a book she wrote two years ago, Cynthia Dunbar, a [Texas State Board of Education] member, could

not have been more explicit about this being the reason for the Mayflower Compact’s inclusion in

textbooks; she quoted the document and then said, ‘This is undeniably our past, and it clearly delin-

eates us as a nation intended to be emphatically Christian.’”); id. (the Enlightenment, which in-

formed the intent and purpose of the founders of the country and drafters of the Constitution and

Bill of Rights, “had in fact developed in opposition to reliance on biblical law.”).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 115

should elevate Christianity above all other religious beliefs or to attempt to

convert the United States into a Christian theocracy.

777

In line with Enlightenment scholars in Europe, such as Adam Smith in

his Wealth of Nations published in 1776,

778

the constitutional drafters be-

lieved in a free market economy and frowned upon the economic obstacles

the states had imposed, inhibiting free trade across their borders with each

other.

779

Therefore, one of the most significant powers they gave to the cen-

tral government is the authority to control commerce between the states, as

well as with foreign nations and indigenous tribal governments.

780

The fram-

ers also gave the central government the power to raise revenue through tax-

ation,

781

along with the power to spend that revenue for the “general welfare”

of the nation.

782

Initially the Constitution simply established the structure of the federal

government and delineated the powers between the federal, state, and tribal

governments.

783

The anti-Federalists were very concerned that no individual

rights had been included in the first document, so the Federalists agreed that

the first action under the new Constitution would be to adopt specific amend-

ments guaranteeing individual rights.

784

Between 1787 and 1789, Alexander

777. See, e.g., Rob Port, The Nativity Scene at North Dakota’s Capitol is Great but What Hap-

pens When the Muslims Want a Display?, S

AY ANYTHING BLOG (Dec. 4, 2019), https://www.sa-

yanythingblog.com/entry/the-nativity-scene-at-north-dakotas-capitol-is-great-but-what-happens-

when-the-muslims-want-a-display/. If the public supports voluntary prayer in public schools and

government financing for faith-based organizations, under both the First Amendment and the Equal

Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, these forms of govern-

ment-sanctioned supports for religion should also extend to Muslims, Sikhs, Hindus, Jews, Native

Americans who practice traditional religions, and people of other religious beliefs, as well as to

Christians. For example, government holidays should reflect the holidays of diverse faiths, and pub-

lic school choral pieces and dramatic performances should feature pieces from a multitude of reli-

gions and beliefs.

778. The Wealth of Nations, AMAZON, https://www.amazon.com/Wealth-Nations-Adam-

Smith/dp/1505577128 (last visited Feb. 21, 2020).

779. See generally Richard A. Posner, The Constitution as an Economic Document, 56 GEO.

WASH. L. REV. 4 (1987).

780. Art I., § 8, Cl 3 Commerce with Indian Tribes, CONST. ANNOTATED, https://constitu-

tion.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI_S8_C3_4/ (last visited Feb. 21, 2020).

781. Neil S. Siegel & Steven J. Willis, The Taxing Clause, CONST. CTR., https://constitution-

center.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/article-i/clauses/751 (last visited Feb. 21, 2020).

782. Samuel R. Bagenstos & Ilya Somin, The Spending Clause, CONST. CTR., https://consti-

tutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/article-i/clauses/755 (last visited Feb. 21,

2020).

783. Lesley Kennedy, Before Drafting the Bill of Rights, James Madison Argued the Consti-

tution Was Fine Without It, H

ISTORY.COM (Sept. 6, 2019), https://www.history.com/news/bill-of-

rights-constitution-first-10-amendments-james-madison; Separation of Powers—State-Tribal Rela-

tions and Interstate Compacts, NCSL, https://www.ncsl.org/research/about-state-legislatures/sepa-

ration-of-powers-tribal-interstate-relations.aspx (last visited Feb. 21, 2020).

784. Lesley Kennedy, Before Drafting the Bill of Rights, James Madison Argued the Consti-

tution Was Fine Without It, H

ISTORY.COM (Sept. 6, 2019), https://www.history.com/news/bill-of-

116 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay published the Federalist Papers call-

ing for ratification of the new Constitution.

785

Even the ratification process

signaled the importance of liberty,

786

equality, broad participation in govern-

ance, and the consent of the governed, as state conventions were called in

each of the states to enable the people to take part in the ratification process—

not just the state legislatures.

787

The ninth state ratified the Constitution in

1788, which was the threshold for its ratification, and it went into effect in

1789.

788

The initial Congress under the new Constitution immediately took up the

first set of amendments, which became the Bill of Rights, ratified in 1791.

789

The rights embedded in the Bill of Rights all reflected those that had been

included in the rights protected under the states’ constitutions.

790

And true to

the founders’ intent to ensure freedom of religion and the separation of

church and state, first among the amendments was a guarantee that “Congress

shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the

free exercise thereof.”

791

During his term as President, Thomas Jefferson ex-

plained this language as creating “a wall of separation between Church &

rights-constitution-first-10-amendments-james-madison; The Bill of Rights: A Brief History,

ACLU, https://www.aclu.org/other/bill-rights-brief-history (last visited Feb. 21, 2020).

785. History.com Editors, Federalist Papers, HISTORY.COM (Jan. 28, 2020), https://www.his-

tory.com/topics/early-us/federalist-papers.

786. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 79-80 (“Constitutionalism . . . depends on the good sense,

deliberation and will of the people. This giving of a rule to oneself can be seen as perhaps the most

exalted form of liberty. Thus . . . one of the ends in ordaining and establishing this Constitution is

that we should be the ones to do so.”).

787. Lermack, supra note 219, at 1424-25 (“The ratification process was deliberately designed

to encourage participation and to make the consent of the governed overt and explicit”); Lutz, From

Covenant, supra note 117, at 121 (“the national Constitution . . . was approved by specially elected

state conventions,” which formed the basis for “the concept of a constitution as a higher law limiting

government.”).

788. U.S. Constitution Ratified, HISTORY.COM, https://www.history.com/this-day-in-his-

tory/u-s-constitution-ratified (last visited Feb. 21, 2020).

789. Id.

790. Lermack, supra note 219, at 1420-21 (“In addition to the listing of powers and prohibi-

tions, all the state constitutions from this period provide a bill of rights . . . . In fact, all the provisions

of the 1791 federal Bill of Rights are anticipated in one or another of the state drafts. We can infer

from the length of these documents, and from the fact that they are usually placed at the beginning

of the state constitutions, that the protection of individual rights was a primary purpose of the gov-

ernment.”).

791. Piar, supra note 236, at 155 (“The more conventional approach to the Establishment

Clause had prevented government from favoring one religion over another or conditioning the ex-

ercise of civil rights on religious belief.” “In the mid-1980s the Court began to develop the so-called

‘endorsement test’ in Establishment Clause cases. This test . . . measures alleged establishments of

religion to see whether they send a message of endorsement or disapproval of religion . . . . ‘En-

dorsement sends a message to nonadherents that they are outsiders, not full members of the political

community, and an accompanying message to adherents that they are insiders, favored members of

the political community. Disapproval sends the opposite message.’”) (quoting Lynch v. Donnelly,

465 U.S. 668, 688 (1984)).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 117

State.”

792

Six of the twenty-seven rights embodied in the Bill of Rights de-

rived from the Magna Carta,

793

and “[t]wenty-one, or about 75 percent, were

first found in colonial documents written before the 1689 English Bill of

Rights.”

794

The U.S. Constitution was, and certainly still is, imperfect. No human

institution ever reaches perfection. The tragic arrangement the founders made

with respect to slavery—known as the “Three-Fifths Compromise”—al-

lowed slavery to continue and is one example of the abhorrent discrimination

inherent in the original document.

795

The fact that only 6% of the population

of the country could vote, as well as the fact that 20% of the country’s people

were enslaved, belied the founders’ claims of equality, liberty, and the con-

sent of the governed.

796

The colonizers’ usurpation of the land that had been

792. Shorto, supra note 765, at 6 (“I[n] 1801, [a] [group] of Baptist ministers in Danbury,

Conn., wrote a letter to the new president, Thomas Jefferson, congratulating him on his victory.

They also had a favor to ask. Baptists were a minority group, and they felt insecure . . . . In the

colonial period, there were two major Christian factions, both of which derived from England. The

Congregationalists, in New England, had evolved from the Puritan settlers, and in the South and

middle colonies, the Anglicans came from the Church of England. Nine colonies developed state

churches, which were supported financially by the colonial governments and whose power was

woven in with that of the governments. Other Christians—Lutherans, Baptists, Quakers—and, of

course, those of other faiths were made unwelcome, if not persecuted outright. There was a religious

element to the American Revolution, which was so pronounced that you could just as well view the

event in religious as in political terms. Many of the founders . . . were rebelling simultaneously

against state-church oppression and English rule. The Connecticut Baptists saw Jefferson—an anti-

Federalist who was bitterly opposed to the idea of establishment churches—as a friend. ‘Our con-

stitution of government,’ they wrote, ‘is not specific’ with regard to a guarantee of religious free-

doms that would protect them. Might the president offer some thoughts that . . . would shed light on

the intent of the framers? In his reply, Jefferson said it was not the place of the president to involve

himself in religion, and he expressed his belief that the First Amendment’s clauses—that the gov-

ernment must not establish a state religion (the so-called establishment clause) but also that it must

ensure the free exercise of religion (what became known as the free exercise clause)—meant, as far

as he was concerned, that there was ‘a wall of separation between Church & State.’”).

793. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 62.

794. Id.

795. The Bill of Rights: A Brief History, ACLU, https://www.aclu.org/other/bill-rights-brief-

history (last visited Feb. 21, 2020); The Constitution and Slavery, C

ONST. RIGHTS FOUND.,

https://www.crf-usa.org/black-history-month/the-constitution-and-slavery (last visited Feb.

21, 2020); Understanding the Three-Fifths Compromise, C

ONST. ACCOUNTABILITY CTR.,

https://www.theusconstitution.org/news/understanding-the-three-fifths-compromise/ (last visited

Feb. 21, 2020); Donald Applestein, The Three-Fifths Compromise: Rationalizing the Irrational,

CONST. CTR., https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-three-fifths-compromise-rationalizing-the-ir-

rational/ (last visited Feb. 21, 2020).

796. The Constitution and Slavery, CONST. RIGHTS FOUND., https://www.crf-usa.org/black-

history-month/the-constitution-and-slavery (last visited Feb. 21, 2020) (“When the American colo-

nies broke from England, the Continental Congress asked Thomas Jefferson to write the Declaration

of Independence. In the declaration, Jefferson expressed American grievances and explained why

the colonists were breaking away. His words proclaimed America’s ideals of freedom and equality,

which still resonate throughout the world. Yet at the time these words were written, more than

500,000 black Americans were slaves. Jefferson himself owned more than 100. Slaves accounted

for about one-fifth of the population in the American colonies. Most of them lived in the Southern

118 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

that of the Native Americans, as well as the slaughter

797

and removal of Na-

tive Americans from their homelands, which continued well after the United

States became an independent country,

798

is another example. The decision

to keep women subordinate to men under state and federal laws, and by ban-

ning women from government office and even from voting, ensuring they

could not challenge the very laws that kept them subservient, is yet another

example.

799

Yet despite its numerous flaws, the Constitution was still revolutionary

for its time.

800

The drafters incorporated a significant measure of both liberty

and equality into the national government.

801

They also recognized that the

government must promote justice and the common good,

802

or it would (and

should) fall, like the tyrannical grip on the colonies of King George III.

803

colonies, where slaves made up 40 percent of the population.”); Today Is National Voter Registra-

tion Day. The Evolution Of American Voting Rights In 242 Years Shows How Far We’ve Come —

And How Far We Still Have To Go, Bus. Insider (Sept. 24, 2019, 8:25 AM), https://www.busi-

nessinsider.com/when-women-got-the-right-to-vote-american-voting-rights-timeline-2018-10;

Map: The Growing New Nation, PBS, https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part3/map3.html (last visited

Feb. 21, 2020) (“In 1781, the estimated population of the United States was 3.5 million. About

575,000 of these were slaves. In 1801, the year Thomas Jefferson became president, the population

of the United States was 5,308,000, with 900,000 slaves. In 1830, U.S. population was 12.8 million,

with more than 2 million slaves.”).

797. As one example, in the mid-1700s, Lord Jeffrey Amherst, after which Amherst College

in Massachusetts is named, advocated for biological warfare against Native Americans by distrib-

uting blankets infected with smallpox as gifts to Native American communities, along with encour-

aging the use of “every other method that can serve to extirpate this execrable race. “ Frequently

Asked Questions, A

MHERST C., https://www.amherst.edu/library/archives/faq#lordjeff (last visited

Feb. 9, 2020).

798. One well-known example is the Trail of Tears. History.com Editors, Trail of Tears,

ISTORY.COM (Nov. 9, 2009), https://www.history.com/topics/native-american-history/trail-of-

tears.

799. The Bill of Rights: A Brief History, ACLU, https://www.aclu.org/other/bill-rights-brief-

history (last visited Feb. 21, 2020)(“Women were second-class citizens, essentially the property of

their husbands, unable even to vote until 1920, when the 19th Amendment was passed and rati-

fied.”); see also Today Is National Voter Registration Day. The Evolution Of American Voting

Rights In 242 Years Shows How Far We’ve Come — And How Far We Still Have To Go, Bus.

Insider (Sept. 24, 2019, 8:25 AM), https://www.businessinsider.com/when-women-got-the-right-

to-vote-american-voting-rights-timeline-2018-10.

800. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 27 (“The deep-rooted dedication to equality has naturally

elevated ‘the people,’ acting in its collective capacity, as the principal political authority. No one is

entitled, by birth or otherwise, to speak or to act for the community independent of the will of the

people.”).

801. Id. at 106 (“Perhaps distinctive to the Preamble is the inclusion of ‘the Blessings of Lib-

erty’ among the ends of government, anticipating thereby the modern emphasis upon equality, civil

liberties, and human rights.”).

802. THE SELECTED WRITINGS OF JOHN AND JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, supra note 4, at 30 (John

Adams wrote “The good of the governed is the end, and rewards and punishments are the means, of

all government.”).

803. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 28 (“It was also recognized in the Convention that if an

arrangement is not just, it cannot be expected to endure.”).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 119

Additionally, the Constitution contributed to the development of internation-

ally recognized human rights, both through its first ten amendments—the Bill

of Rights—as well as its recognition of international law—the law governing

relations between nations.

804

Countries around the world have replicated as-

pects of the U.S. Constitution:

805

“In 1787 the only written constitutions in

the world existed in English-speaking America; today, almost every nation

feels it necessary to have such a document.”

806

The Federalist Papers, written

by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay explaining and argu-

ing for the ratification of the Constitution, have also been scrutinized across

the globe.

807

The framers kept the document skeletal, so it could withstand the test of

time and be adapted to the needs of the changing country, because they knew

the country would inevitably change.

808

If it is reasonable to speak of a founding era that lasted from about

1765 to 1805, during which the theory and institutions informing

the state and national constitutions took definite form, it is also rea-

sonable to see the era of constitution writing from 1776 to 1787 as

resting firmly upon developments in America that began in 1620. In

sum, there is no reason to conclude that in a given year giants in

American political thought bequeathed

THE WORD, which Ameri-

cans must obey regardless of their experiences, commitments,

needs, or circumstances. Just as American constitutionalism devel-

oped continually from 1620 to 1789 on the basis of American cir-

cumstances and commitments, it has continued to do so since 1789.

The commitments remain essentially the same, though changing cir-

cumstances have required constitutional evolution. Equally im-

portant, those who wrote the United States Constitution required

that citizens complete the project.

809

Scholars have noted that the men who drafted the constitution, as well as the

men who approved of it through the ratification process in the Confederation

804. Id. at 109 (“The Constitution takes it for granted that there are offences against the law of

nations. This suggests that no people or state is a law to itself, that there are standards that transcend

national interests or the national will.”).

805. NORTON, supra note 619, at viii-ix (“There is no more interesting fact to be learned about

our Constitution than that of its influence upon the nations of the world . . . our Constitution has

been copied in whole or in part throughout the earth.”).

806. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 1.

807. NORTON, supra note 619, at 187-88.

808. Lermack, supra note 219, at 1435 (The originalist approach “makes sense only on the

assumption that the framers were wise enough to foresee and preemptively respond to problems that

would surface today.”).

809. LUTZ, THE ORIGINS, supra note 32, at 168.

120 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

Congress, the state legislatures that called the state conventions, and the state

conventions themselves, were not of one mind about the meaning of the new

Constitution,

810

and most did not believe in an interpretive strategy that

would ossify one particular set of beliefs about its meaning.

811

The drafters

intentionally created the Constitution with flexibility, so it would endure and

remain relevant despite all of the inevitable changes in society, the economy,

communication, travel, and the world.

812

Therefore, one must understand the

history of the Constitution, including its historical antecedents, in order to

understand how it has evolved and continues to do so. As one scholar high-

lighted:

The principles vital to the Constitution of the United States and to

American constitutionalism invite, if they do not even require, con-

tinual reexamination by citizens. Such inquiry extends to the influ-

ential documents that precede the Constitution, such as the Magna

Carta, the Mayflower Compact, the Declaration of Independence,

and the Articles of Confederation.

813

The founders also considered an educated citizenry to be crucial to the suc-

cess of the new democracy and its continued existence.

814

If people are to

810. Lutz, From Covenant, supra note 117, at 102 (Covenant theology should neither be down-

played nor overplayed in shaping the U.S. Constitution, “since no one idea or tradition monopolized

American thinking.”).

811. Lermack, supra note 219, at 1405-06 (The Founders “did not have a singular voice . . .

[and] said contradictory things.”); id. at 1406-07 (quoting J. Jefferson Powell, The Original Under-

standing of Original Intent, 98 H

ARV. L. REV. 885, 885 (1985) (Moreover, “The framers themselves

‘did not believe such an interpretive strategy to be appropriate.’”); Joseph J. Ellis, The Explanations,

RITANNICA, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Founding-Fathers/The-explanations#ref261052

(last updated June 20, 2007) (describing the wide range of diverse opinions about and different

interpretations of the Constitution among the framers, from before the Constitution was ratified

through the first several decades of the 1800s, confirming that they did not have a singular “original

intent” with respect to the meaning of the Constitution’s text).

812. ELLIS, supra note 243, at 219-20 (“The last word must belong to Jefferson:

‘Some men look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, and deem them like the ark of the

covenant, too sacred to be touched. They ascribe to the preceding age a wisdom more than human,

and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment. I knew that age well; I belonged to it and

labored with it. It deserved well of its country . . . . But I know also, that laws and institutions must

go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more

enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered… institutions must advance also,

and keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him

as a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regime of their barbarous ancestors.’

Jefferson spoke for all the most prominent members of the revolutionary generation in urging pos-

terity not to regard their political prescriptions as sacred script. It is richly ironic that one of the few

original intentions they all shared was opposition to any judicial doctrine of ‘original intent.’ To be

sure, they all wished to be remembered, but they did not want to be embalmed.”).

813. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 18.

814. Id. at 25 (“there were indications that if the people were to be as good as a people could

be—or if the people were to be able to use the constitution being prepared for them—they would

have to remain, or perhaps even to become, a people of a proper quality. Thus, there was an aware-

ness that properly-trained citizens would be needed.”).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 121

make wise decisions about whom to select to represent them at the national

level, as well as in state and local government, they must be able to under-

stand the important issues and the candidates’ approaches to those issues, in

order to hold the government accountable to the will of the people.

815

In ad-

dition to being knowledgeable about their representatives’ views on im-

portant issues, laws, and policies, the general population must also know

about and understand the constitutional framework under which the govern-

ment officials operate.

816

Only citizens with education about (1) the structure

of government, (2) the limitations within which the government must oper-

ate, and (3) the rights provided by the Constitution to the people, will be able

to recognize and defend against transgressions of government officials who

tread outside of their constitutional bounds.

817

In order to celebrate the ratification of the new United States Constitu-

tion and the country’s victory in its war for independence from Great Britain,

President George Washington, issued the first national proclamation of

Thanksgiving in 1789, an echo of the Pilgrims.

818

D. P

OST-REVOLUTION SIGNIFICANCE OF THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT

The charm of the Mayflower story grew in national prominence after the

Revolution, as the leaders of the newly independent country continued con-

scientiously to develop the distinctiveness of the United States’ unique na-

tional character.

819

The Mayflower Compact ascended in significance as the

815. Id. at 199 (“Self-government is no doubt critical to the American way of life. After all,

the most celebrated article of the Bill of Rights, the First Amendment, ratifies and organizes the

insistence in the Declaration of Independence that government rests upon the consent of the gov-

erned, that the people have the duty and the right to examine fully the public business, and so to

arrange the powers of government as may seem to them most likely to secure the proper ends of

civil society.”).

816. See, e.g., THE SELECTED WRITINGS OF JOHN AND JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, supra note 4,

at 75 (John Adams wrote about his desire “to see rising in America an empire of liberty . . . let us

try the experiment, and preserve our equality as long as we can. A better system of education for

the common people might preserve them from such artificial inequalities as are prejudicial to soci-

ety, by confounding the natural distinctions of right and wrong, virtue and vice.”).

817. Ostrom, supra note 735, at 92 (“If we distinguish the set of rules that apply to the organ-

ization and conduct of government in a democracy as a fundamental law that is constitutive of a

democracy as a system of government, we can then distinguish a constitution from ordinary law. A

constitution would apply to the organization and conduct of government. Ordinary law would rep-

resent subsidiary forms of legislation taken by those exercising subordinate governmental preroga-

tives under the terms of a democratic constitution.”) (“the Americans, in fulfilling the aspirations of

the American Revolution, turned to processes of constitutional decision making to fashion a system

of government where those who exercised governmental authority would themselves be subject to

law.”).

818. History.com Editors, Thanksgiving 2020, HISTORY.COM (Oct. 27, 2009),

https://www.history.com/topics/thanksgiving/history-of-thanksgiving#section_2

819. Bush, Jr., supra note 622, at 747-48 (“Following the Revolution, in the search for a dis-

tinct cultural identity, the newly independent Americans located the arrival of the Mayflower and

the signing of the Mayflower Compact as signal and prophetic events foreshadowing a noble future.

122 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

acclaimed foretelling of the new nation and the new Constitution.

820

During

the Forefathers’ Day in Plymouth, first celebrated in 1769 and later became

an annual event, prominent speakers gave rousing tributes to the Plymouth

Colony settlers and their virtues.

821

Similar speeches and celebrations oc-

curred in other regions of the country and were responsible for developing

our country’s communal notion of the Plymouth settlement and the May-

flower Compact.

822

Artists in the United States and abroad depicted the set-

tlors departing from Europe, aboard the ship, signing the Mayflower Com-

pact, landing at Plymouth Rock, interacting with the indigenous population—

particularly Samoset, Squanto, and Chief Massasoit, and celebrating the first

Thanksgiving.

823

While whitewashing the negative aspects of colonization,

the commitment to retelling and keeping alive the story mirrored the desire

to foster similar positive characteristics in the current citizenry in addition to

creating a common, national culture.

824

For example, in 1802 John Quincy Adams provided the Forefathers’ Day

speech, in which he commended the upright and honorable qualities of the

Plymouth settlers, noting that they laid the foundation for the United States

without knowing it.

825

Echoing the Enlightenment philosophers, Adams pro-

claimed that: “Man . . . was not made for himself alone . . . He was made for

his country by the obligations of the social compact.”

826

Moreover, high-

lighting the Mayflower Compact, he explained:

One of these remarkable incidents is the execution of that instru-

ment of Government by which they formed themselves into a body-

politic, the day after their arrival upon the coast, and previous to

their first landing. This is perhaps the only instance, in human his-

tory, of that positive, original social compact, which speculative

The very real hardihood of those first settlers took on heroic significance. By the beginning of the

nineteenth century, Forefathers’ Day in Plymouth had become an annual event.”).

820. Id. (“Following the Revolution, in the search for a distinct cultural identity, the newly

independent Americans located the arrival of the Mayflower and the signing of the Mayflower Com-

pact as signal and prophetic events foreshadowing a noble future. The very real hardihood of those

first settlers took on heroic significance. By the beginning of the nineteenth century, Forefathers’

Day in Plymouth had become an annual event.”).

821. Id. at 748 (Speakers such as “John Quincy Adams, Webster, Edward Everett, Lyman

Beecher, Wendell Phillips, Charles Sumner, Henry Cabot Lodge”).

822. Id. at 748-49 (“It helped keep historians’ minds focused on New England as the point of

origin for all of American culture, a primary goal of Plymouth’s Pilgrim Society and various New

England Societies that celebrated the landing.”).

823. Id. at 749 (“Painters, chiefly but not exclusively American, rendered the landing, the sign-

ing of the Mayflower Compact, and the embarkation from Holland.”).

824. Id. at 752 (“a willingness to use the watershed moment to buttress the desire for righteous

behavior in the present”).

825. Quincy Adams, supra note 153, at 11; PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 352.

826. Quincy Adams, supra note 153, at 6.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 123

philosophers have imagined as the only legitimate source of gov-

ernment.

827

Further on in his speech, John Quincy Adams remarked: “Here was a unani-

mous and personal assent by all the individuals of the community, to the as-

sociation by which they became a nation,”

828

and through the Mayflower

Compact—“[t]he instrument of voluntary association executed on board the

Mayflower, testifies that the parties to it had anticipated the improvement of

their nation.”

829

On the bicentennial of the Mayflower’s landing in 1820, Daniel Webster

delivered a powerful speech for the Forefathers’ Day celebration,

830

first pop-

ularizing the term “Pilgrims.”

831

We have come to this Rock, to record here our homage for our Pil-

grim Fathers; our sympathy in their sufferings; our gratitude for

their labors; our admiration of their virtues; our veneration for their

piety; and our attachment to those principles of civil and religious

liberty, which they encountered [numerous hardships] . . . to enjoy

and to establish. And we would leave here, also, for the generations

which are rising up rapidly to fill our places, some proof that we

have endeavored to transmit the great inheritance unimpaired; that

in our estimate of public principles and private virtue, in our vener-

ation of religion and piety, in our devotion to civil and religious lib-

erty, in our regard for whatever advances human knowledge or im-

proves human happiness, we are not altogether unworthy of our

origin.

The nature and constitution of society and government in this coun-

try are interesting topics, to which I would devote what remains of

the time allowed to this occasion. Of our system of government the

first thing to be said is, that it is really and practically a free system.

827. Id. at 17.

828. Id. at 18.

829. Id. at 20.

830. Bush, Jr., supra note 622, at 748; PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 350-52.

831. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 34-35 (“These first settlers, initially referred to as the Old

Comers and later as the Forefathers, did not become known as the Pilgrim Fathers until two centu-

ries after their arrival. A responsive chord was struck with the discovery of a manuscript of Gov.

William Bradford referring to the ‘saints’ who had left Holland as ‘pilgrims.’ At a commemorative

bicentennial celebration in 1820, orator Daniel Webster used the phrase Pilgrim Fathers, and the

term became common usage thereafter.”); id. at 35 (“The term ‘pilgrim’ . . . may be found in Gov-

ernor Bradford’s description of the departure of the Separatist band from Leyden: ‘So they lefte the

goodly and pleasante citie, which had been ther resting place near 12 years; but they knew they were

pilgrimes, and looked not much on those things, but lift up their eyes to the heavens, their dearest

cuntrie, and quieted their spirits.’”).

124 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

It originates entirely with the people and rests on no other founda-

tion than their assent . . . Our ancestors began their system of gov-

ernment here under a condition of comparative equality in regard to

wealth, and their early laws were of a nature to favor and continue

this equality.

832

The Unites States owes to this speech the fact that we now refer to the small

band of settlers at Plymouth Colony as “Pilgrims.”

833

He also used the occa-

sion to rail against the institution of slavery and call for its abolishment. A

prominent lawyer, statesman, and orator, Webster later identified the May-

flower Compact as “the first written constitution in the country.”

834

In 1834, American historian George Bancroft expounded upon the sign-

ing of the Mayflower Compact, noting,

This was the birthplace of constitutional liberty. The middle age had

been familiar with charters and constitutions; but they had been

merely compacts for immunities, partial enfranchisements, patents

of nobility, concessions of municipal privileges, or limitations of the

sovereign power in favor of feudal institutions. In the cabin of the

Mayflower humanity recovered its rights, and instituted government

on the basis of “equal laws” for the “general good.”

835

That same year, Plymouth Rock was relocated to the front of Pilgrim Hall.

836

The next year, French political researcher Alexis de Tocqueville published

Democracy in America based on his travels in 1831-1832 throughout the

United States examining its governmental system and historical develop-

ment.

837

Born into an aristocratic family, the prevalence of equality in Amer-

ican society and government greatly impressed Tocqueville.

838

Moreover, he

832. Plymouth Oration, DARTMOUTH, ww.dartmouth.edu/~dwebster/speeches/plymouth-

oration.html (last visited Feb. 9, 2020).

833. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 34-35.

834. Id. at 66-67.

835. Motley, supra note 29, at 478-79 (quoting GEORGE BANCROFT, I., HISTORY OF THE

UNITED STATES 310); see also LAURIC HENNTON, WHIG HISTORY, DEMOCRATIC HISTORY:

BANCROFT VS MOTLEY 314 (2005), https://www.persee.fr/doc/cchav_0184-

1025_2005_num_39_1_1438.

836. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 352-53.

837. See Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 34; see also Cooper, supra note 30, at 547 (quoting

LEXIS DE TOCQUEVILLE, DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA 43 (1862)) (“‘[n]o sooner had the emigrants

landed on the barren coast . . . than it was their first care to constitute a society, by subscribing the

[Mayflower Compact].’”); Bush, Jr., supra note 622, at 745-46 (“Alexis de Tocqueville, who visited

America in 1831-1832, remarked on the way a democratic society selects the objects of its venera-

tion . . . . For Tocqueville, America’s making an icon of Plymouth Rock was a triumph for demo-

cratic values.”); Cooper, supra note 30, at 548, citing Tocqueville, D

EMOCRACY IN AMERICA, at

46-47 (“showing that the commitment to public education was founded on religious principles.”).

838. Martinez, supra note 41, at 462 n. 23 (Tocqueville “nothing amazed [him] more than the

equality of conditions.”). See generally A

LEXIS DE TOCQUEVILLE, DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA Vol.

1 (1862).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 125

was taken with the Pilgrim story, noting: “Puritanism . . . was scarcely less a

political than a religious doctrine. No sooner had the emigrants landed on the

barren coast . . . than it was their first care to constitute a society, by passing

the [Mayflower Compact, which he then quoted].”

839

The following decade, German-born author Therese Albertine Luise von

Jakob Robinson published a 700-page history of New England under the

pseudonym Talvj (the acronym created by her birth name).

840

Upon quoting

the Mayflower Compact, she offered “Thus, then, did the cabin of the May-

flower become the birth-place of the first democratic constitution of the pre-

sent free states, which is yet regarded by their remote descendants with joyful

pride as the foundation of their freedom and independence.”

841

Not everyone

believed in the sentiment of predestination encouraged by these authors. For

example, an American author and diplomat John Lothrop Motley published

“Polity of the Puritans,” in which he dismissed Talvj’s interpretation and

doubted that the Mayflower Compact had much significance at all.

842

Yet the Mayflower Compact and Pilgrim story have been firmly im-

planted within American folklore and are interwoven with various narratives

and events throughout American history. For example, in 1848, Elizabeth

839. See generally ALEXIS DE TOCQUEVILLE, DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA Vol. 1 (1862); see

also Cooper, supra note 30, at 547 (quoting A

LEXIS DE TOCQUEVILLE, DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA

42-43 (1862)) (“Puritanism, was not merely a religious doctrine, but it corresponded in many points

with the most absolute democratic and republican theories.”).

840. Motley, supra note 29, at 472-73.

841. Id. at 478.

842. Id. (“The New England fathers, however, had no notion of establishing a democracy.”

“The Plymouth colony, which was the first organized band of religious emigrants who arrived in

New England, was, as is well known, but a little refugee congregation of dissenters, one hundred

and one in number, men, women, and children all told. The Plymouth rock compact was drawn up

ex necessitate, and was rather intended as a solemn agreement among a very few individuals to

stand by and support each other, under very trying circumstances, than as a formal annunciation of

political principles”); id. at 479 (“If told, that their modest little agreement would be regarded, after

two centuries and a half, by twenty millions of white men with their three millions of slaves as ‘the

foundation of their freedom and independence,’ and that this document of mutual engagement,

which was drawn up for a temporary purpose, while they were waiting for ‘a concession of munic-

ipal privileges’ from the crown, was intended ex propria vi to supersede all ‘charters, patents, and

concessions,’ we believe they would be as much puzzled to understand American liberty as Amer-

ican slavery, and would believe themselves to be about as much the founders of the one as of the

other.”); id. at 481 (“The fact is, as everybody knows, that these colonists drew up this document as

a temporary compact, because they were in a state of anarchy.” “[T]oo much political importance

has been attached to the history of the Plymouth Colony.”); id. at 485 (“It is a proof of the vigor and

truth of the democratic principle, that, although it was so far from the thoughts of the pilgrim fathers,

it nevertheless established itself at a later day; —that ‘humanity did recover its rights,’ although not

in the cabin of the Mayflower”); see also Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, John Lothrop Motley,

RITANNICA (July 20, 1998), https://www.britannica.com/biography/John-Lothrop-Motley.

126 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

Barrett Browning wrote “The Runaway Slave at Pilgrim’s Point” to draw at-

tention to and protest against the cruelty of slavery.

843

Henry Wadsworth

Longfellow, who was a descendant of Mayflower passengers John Alden and

Priscilla Mullins Alden, published The Courtship of Miles Standish in

1858.

844

Sarah Josepha Hale, a prolific author and leader of an initiative for

the United States to recognize Thanksgiving as a national holiday for over

three decades, finally prevailed as President Abraham Lincoln established

Thanksgiving as a national holiday in 1863, the same year that he issued the

Emancipation Proclamation freeing the slaves in the rebelling states during

the height of the Civil War.

845

That same year, Ralph Waldo Emerson, re-

nowned poet and abolitionist, published “Boston Hymn” in The Atlantic

magazine, both extolling the virtues of the Pilgrims and their heritage, as well

as decrying the institution of slavery.

846

Continuing the quest for “equal

laws” for the “general good” started in the Mayflower Compact, the Recon-

struction Amendments between 1865 and 1870 abolished slavery throughout

the country, established the right to equal protection of the laws, and granted

men the right to vote regardless of “race, color, or previous condition of ser-

vitude.”

847

Taken together, these amendments “are consistent with (if not

even the natural culmination of) the initial dedication of the Constitution to

liberty, equality, and republican government”

848

and the rights proclaimed in

the Declaration of Independence.

849

Shortly after the Civil War, people in France gave the United States a

Statue of Liberty to celebrate the end of slavery represented by the broken

843. ELIZABETH BARRETT BROWNING, THE COMPLETE WORKS OF ELIZABETH BARRETT

BROWNING VOL. III 160-70 (Charlotte Porter et al. eds., 1900), https://www.sas.up-

enn.edu/~cavitch/pdf-library/EBrowning_Runaway.pdf; Bahar Saber, “The Runaway Slave at Pil-

grim’s Point” in the Liberty Bell, E

COLOGY & RELIGION IN 19TH CENTURY STUDIES,

https://blogs.baylor.edu/19crs/2016/06/30/the-runaway-slave-at-pilgrims-point-in-the-liberty-bell/

(last visited Feb. 9, 2020); Runaway Slave at Pilgrim’s Point, M

ARYMOUNT U., https://com-

mons.marymount.edu/runawayslaveatpilgrimspoint/close-reading/ (last visited Feb. 9, 2020) (not-

ing “the importance of Pilgrim’s Point within the work as a symbol of the hypocrisy of the founders

who came seeking freedom from oppression but allowed for the establishment of slavery in the

United States.”).

844. Bush, Jr., supra note 622, at 748 (discussing HENRY WADSWORTH LONGFELLOW, THE

COURTSHIP OF MILES STANDISH (1858)); Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, John Alden and

Priscilla Alden, B

RITANNICA (July 20, 1998), https://www.britannica.com/biography/John-Alden-

and-Priscilla-Alden#ref127460; P

HILBRICK, supra note 42, at 354.

845. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 354.

846. Ralph Waldo Emerson, Boston Hymn, THE ATLANTIC (Feb. 1863), https://www.theatlan-

tic.com/magazine/archive/1863/02/boston-hymn/303953/.

847. The Constitution: Amendments 11-27, NAT’L ARCHIVES, https://www.ar-

chives.gov/founding-docs/amendments-11-27 (last visited Feb. 9, 2020).

848. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at n. 193.

849. Id. at 112.

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 127

chains at her feet, as a gesture of friendship between the countries, as a sym-

bol of America as a nation comprised largely of immigrants and their de-

scendants, and as a proclamation of America’s continued willingness to em-

brace of the downtrodden fleeing dire circumstances in their former countries

to the freedoms championed by the United States.

850

Dedicated in 1886, this

stirring monument is inscribed with the following stanza from the poem “The

New Colossus” by Emma Lazarus:

Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost [sic] to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!

851

The similarities between these two national icons—Plymouth Rock as the

location where the Pilgrims first disembarked from the Mayflower and en-

tered the New World, and Ellis Island near the home of the Statue of Liberty

and the first stop for immigrants to America for many decades—have been

frequently highlighted.

852

Yet the freedoms and aspirations embodied by both

the Statute of Liberty and the Mayflower Compact remained in stark contrast

with the continued discrimination in our country faced by Native Americans,

African Americans, and more recent immigrants, among others.

853

It is diffi-

cult to escape this uncomfortable juxtaposition, which itself provides the im-

petus to change our society to eliminate such discrimination.

America the Beautiful arose in 1893 from the lyrics by Katharine Lee

Bates to become a beloved national ballad, depicting the Pilgrims in the sec-

ond verse:

O beautiful for Pilgrim feet, whose stern impassioned stress

A thoroughfare for freedom beat, across the wilderness

850. Channing, supra note 196, at 198 (discussing 1900-1920 immigration from China and

Japan). Note the obstacles to immigration to the United States over the years, e.g., Catholics, Asians

in the early 1900s, current policies, and so on.

851. History.com Editors, Statue of Liberty, HISTORY.COM (Dec. 2, 2009), https://www.his-

tory.com/topics/landmarks/statue-of-liberty.

852. Bush, Jr., supra note 622, at 753 (“By now, the Rock, like New England, has lost its place

of primacy as [a] national symbol. Late in the nineteenth century, the Statue of Liberty emerged as

a new symbol of America’s welcoming acceptance of immigrants. But the Rock . . . has not disap-

peared”) (“‘Comparisons between Plymouth Rock and Ellis Island became more and more wide-

spread’”).

853. See, e.g., PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 355 (describing Native Americans referring to

Thanksgiving as a National Day of Mourning).

128 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

America, America, God mend thine every flaw

Confirm thy soul in self control, Thy liberty in law.

854

Bates, a poet and English Professor at Wellesley College who had been teach-

ing a summer class in Colorado, penned the words to describe her awe with

the beauty of the countryside after ascending the pinnacle of Pikes Peak.

855

The contradiction in this verse between the Pilgrim’s quest for freedom—

which helped beat a thoroughfare across the wilderness in America, which in

turn wrought destruction, enslavement, and other atrocities upon the first in-

habitants of America—is striking.

Henry Cabot Lodge delivered the tercentennial Forefathers’ Day speech

in 1920. Of the Mayflower Compact, he noted:

[H]ere was a constitution of government which is in its essence an

agreement among those who accepted it, made by the people them-

selves—an idea which has traveled far and wide, even to the ends

of the earth and around the habitable globe since the Mayflower lay

at anchor off Provincetown. Here, too, written in this same small

paper was the proclamation of democracy, something which had

quite faded away in Europe and had never before been declared in

the American hemisphere . . . Each and every man of them sacri-

ficed a part of his own liberty that all might be free. “Liberty . . .is

the power to discipline oneself,” and this was the spirit which in-

spired the Englishmen who signed the Mayflower compact. No

greater principle than this could have been established, for it is the

corner stone of democracy and civilization.

856

That same year, a half-century after men were given the right to vote regard-

less of race, the 19

amendment finally gave women the right to vote—dou-

bling the electorate.

857

In 2020, as the United States celebrates the 400

an-

niversary of the Mayflower Compact, our nation is also celebrating the 100

anniversary of female suffrage.

858

Four years later, in 1924 Congress passed

854. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 68 (noting “America the Beautiful’s” last verse about the

Pilgrims).

855. Eric Westervelt, Greatness is Not a Given: “America The Beautiful” Asks How We Can

Do Better, NPR

(Apr. 4, 2019, 4:26 PM), https://www.npr.org/2019/04/04/709531017/america-

the-beautiful-american-anthem.

856. HENRY CABOT LODGE ET. AL, THE PILGRIMS OF PLYMOUTH 27 (1920)

https://books.google.com/books?id=aLkTAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA11&lpg=PA11&dq=henry+cabot

+lodge+forefathers+day+speech+1920+pilgrims&source=bl&ots=Ih-

pOoGB3nS&sig=ACfU3U3Pkq0Uw7cXKW0dPml745-

wE49mPQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiR9pj-rrjmAhVOj 54KHTorCAMQ6AEwBHoE-

CAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=mayflower%20compact&f=false.

857. See generally Channing, supra note 196.

858. See, e.g., Law Day 2020, ABA, https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_educa-

tion/law-day/ (last visited Feb. 21, 2020) (“The Law Day 2020 theme is “Your Vote, Your Voice,

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 129

the Native American Citizenship Act, finally giving citizenship to all Native

Americans within the United States, many of whom had been denied citizen-

ship under a determination by the U.S. Supreme Court that the 14

Amend-

ment clause establishing citizenship rights does not apply to Native Ameri-

cans who are members of sovereign Indian tribes in the United States.

859

However, many states still prohibited Native Americans from voting through

their state laws for decades, as they had also done with African Americans

and other marginalized groups.

860

In January of 1965, Lyndon Johnson referred to the Pilgrims in his inau-

gural address:

They came here—the exile and the stranger, brave but frightened—

to find a place where a man could be his own man. They made a

covenant with this land. Conceived in justice, written in liberty,

bound in union, it was meant one day to inspire the hopes of all

mankind, and it binds us still. If we keep its terms, we shall flourish.

The American covenant called on us to help show the way for the

liberation of man. And that is today our goal. Thus, if as a nation

there is much outside our control, as a people no stranger is outside

our hope.

861

Later that same year, Congress passed the Voting Rights Act, which

strengthened the right to vote for Native Americans as well as African Amer-

icans and other disenfranchised groups.

862

References to the Pilgrim story have continued to inspire many people

in the United States through the remaining decades of the twentieth century

and into the present day. Examples include the School House Rock vignette

telling the story of the Mayflower,

863

the Peanuts video depicting the May-

flower voyage and the first Thanksgiving,

864

and continued performances of

the Anything Goes musical, which includes a song highlighting Plymouth

Our Democracy: The 19

Amendment at 100”); Ruth Bader Ginsburg to Visit Omaha Next Year To

Celebrate 19th Amendment, T

HE DAILY REC. (Aug. 27, 2019, 12:00 AM), https://www.omaha-

dailyrecord.com/content/ruth-bader-ginsburg-visit-omaha-next-year-celebrate-19th-amendment.

859. Voting Rights for Native Americans, LIBR. OF CONGRESS, https://www.loc.gov/teach-

ers/classroommaterials/presentationsandactivities/presentations/elections/voting-rights-native-

americans.html (last visited Feb. 9, 2020).

860. Id.

861. Elazar, supra note 5, at 23.

862. See Voting Rights for Native Americans, LIBR. OF CONGRESS,

https://www.loc.gov/teachers/classroommaterials/presentationsandactivities/presentations/elec-

tions/voting-rights-native-americans.html (last visited Feb. 9, 2020).

863. Schoolhouse Rock!: No More Kings (ABC television broadcast Sept, 20, 1975).

864. This is America, Charlie Brown: The Mayflower Voyagers (CBS television broadcast

October 21, 1988)

130 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

Rock and the Pilgrims.

865

And dozens of books and articles have been pub-

lished depicting the story of the Pilgrims, many especially highlighting the

first Thanksgiving.

As suggested above, as with any human institution, the American my-

thology carefully constructed around the Pilgrims and the Mayflower Com-

pact has been complicated and not always entirely benign.

866

For example,

orators such as Daniel Webster, although using the occasion of his Forefa-

thers’ Day speech to call for the abolition of slavery in the name of equality

represented in both the Mayflower Compact and the U.S. Constitution, also

regrettably vilified the indigenous population whose land was taken from

them and in doing so supposedly justified such confiscation.

867

John Quincy

Adams similarly used his speech to malign the Native American inhabitants.

In the early 1900s, the Mayflower Compact and Pilgrim story were used by

members of the Protestant majority to oppose the immigration of Catholics

from Ireland, Italy, Poland, and other countries.

868

The Mayflower Compact

has been used on opposite sides of numerous political debates throughout the

centuries.

869

And more recently, some scholars have questioned the continu-

ing relevance and resonance of the Mayflower Compact.

870

865. Anything Goes is a musical production written by Cole Porter in 1934, performed by the

Summer Performing Arts program in Grand Forks, ND, in 2018, in which the author’s daughter,

Cosette Clement, helped manage the spotlighting. Anything Goes Lyrics, A

LL MUSICALS,

https://www.allmusicals.com/lyrics/anythinggoes/anythinggoes.htm (last visited Feb. 21, 2020).

866. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at xv (describing “the nostalgic and reassuring legends that

have become the staple of annual Thanksgiving Day celebrations.”).

867. Plymouth Oration, DARTMOUTH, www.dartmouth.edu/~dwebster/speeches/plymouth-

oration.html (last visited Feb. 9, 2020).

868. All About History Team, Mayflower Pilgrims: How 1620 Came to Matter in Revolution

and Racism, H

IST. ANSWERS (Aug. 17, 2018), https://www.historyanswers.co.uk/people-poli-

tics/mayflower-pilgrims-how-1620-came-to-matter-in-revolution-and-racism; see also Sean Sher-

man, The Thanksgiving Tale We Tell Is a Harmful Lie. As a Native American, I’ve Found a Better

Way to Celebrate the Holiday,

TIME (Nov. 19, 2018), https://time.com/5457183/thanksgiving-na-

tive-american-holiday/ (the United States “saw a rise in nationalism, as European immigrants

poured into the country, and the Protestant Americans who’d massacred indigenous peo-

ple feared being displaced. Colonial ideology became the identity of what it was to be

truly ‘American,’ and they began implementing teachings to clearly define ‘American-

ism’ for the new immigrants.”).

869. See Sargent, supra note 3, at 233-51.

870. Nicgorski, supra note 604, at 156 (quoting Albert Beveridge, Sources of the Declaration

of Independence, 50 P

A. MAG. OF HIST. AND BIOGRAPHY 307 (#4, 1926)) (“We are especially fa-

vored in having marked out for us the way of happiness and safety in our domestic life and in our

foreign affairs. We have only to carry out the ideas of the Mayflower Compact, the Declaration of

Independence, the Constitution of the United States, the Farewell Address of George Washington,

and the Second Inaugural of Abraham Lincoln.”); id. at 157 (“Some measure of the Declaration’s

increasing dominance is found in the extent to which favorable or even unembarrassed reference to

the Mayflower Compact and the Farewell Address has dropped from public discourse during the

twentieth century. Those documents and their ideas, as well as the whole Puritan experience, seem

increasingly embarrassing to modern democratic America.”); id. at 159 (“Rule of the people to the

ends of ever-greater realization of individual liberty and equality seems increasingly to represent

the whole heart and substance of the American political tradition. No wonder the Declaration of

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 131

Yet as noted above, many people throughout the United States still em-

brace the Pilgrim story today, which encourages them to embrace many of

the Pilgrims’ virtuous characteristics.

871

Hopefully the nation’s continued ex-

amination of the legacy left by the Pilgrims and the Mayflower Compact—

in the broader context of both the positive and negative aspects surrounding

the founding and evolution of the United States—will help our country con-

tinue to build upon and expand the fundamental human rights of all people.

As such, these human rights must include our neighbors who are descendants

of the original inhabitants of this land, as well as our neighbors whose ances-

tors were brought here against their will through slavery, in addition to our

neighbors of European descent.

V. THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT’S LESSONS FOR TODAY

As alluded to above, a broad examination of the Mayflower Compact’s

history of influence on the development of the U.S. Constitution, our system

of governance, and the civic-mindedness of our nation’s population will ar-

guably allow us—as an increasingly multicultural populace—to embrace

their aspirational characteristics and begin to heal the longstanding rifts

among various segments of our society.

872

The events surrounding the 2020

quadricentennial celebrating the landing of the Mayflower, the signing of the

Mayflower Compact, and the establishment of Plymouth Colony provide

wonderful opportunities to continue these conversations.

873

For example, the

Independence lives in a way that neither the Mayflower Compact nor the Farewell Address does.

Its creedal section serves well to state the political ideas that really count, the primary regime char-

acteristics of modern America.”).

871. Anastaplo, supra note 40, at 67 (“preeminent place that the founding of Plymouth has

for subsequent generations”).

872. As one example, the General Society of Mayflower Descendants extended its support for

the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe Reservation Reaffirmation Act in 2019. Wampanoag Tribal Lands,

AYFLOWER NEWSL., (Society of Mayflower Descendants in Michigan) Winter 2019, at 5. The

society’s Governor General George Garmany highlighted “The General Society of Mayflower De-

scendants is made up of lineal descendants of the Mayflower Pilgrims. The Mashpee Wampanoag

Nation is made of lineal descents of the Wampanoag Tribe. In 1621, our ancestors together signed

a 54-year peace agreement that allowed both to survive and protect one another. This agreement

between Europeans and Native Americans is the only example of cooperation in what was followed

by a sad chapter in American history, and in light of the fact that our ancestors collectively chose to

live in peace for 54 years, the General Society fully supports today’s Mashpee Wampanoag tribe

and joins in support of legislation known as the Mashpee Wampanoag Reservation Reaffirmation

Act.” Id.

873. 2020 Commemoration, GEN. SOC’Y OF MAYFLOWER DESCENDANTS,

https://www.themayflowersociety.org/2020-commemoration (last visited Feb. 9, 2020).

132 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

General Society of Mayflower Descendants, founded in 1897, has been ac-

tively involved in coordinating 2020 anniversary activities,

874

as has the Bil-

lington Family Society, which was founded in 2017.

875

The estimated num-

ber of Mayflower descendants is astounding:

The Pilgrims’ descendants have proven to be, if nothing else, fruit-

ful. In 2002, it was estimated that there were approximately 35 mil-

lion descendants of the Mayflower passengers in the United States,

which represents roughly 10 percent of the total U.S. population.

876

Hopefully many of these descendants will take this opportunity to delve

deeply into the history shaped by our ancestors and learn both from our an-

cestors’ virtues as well as their shortcomings.

The expansion of citizenship rights, voting rights, and participation in

government continues the heritage of democracy, equality, and justice her-

alded in the Mayflower Compact four centuries ago. For example, the first

Native American women were elected to Congress in 2018.

877

Efforts to in-

crease awareness about our nation’s history have led to changes such as state

and local celebrations of Indigenous Peoples’ Day instead of Columbus

Day.

878

Native American voices discuss the complexities surrounding the

Thanksgiving holiday in mainstream media and other venues.

879

Many

Americans are actively engaged in political processes at the local, state, and

national level to protect human rights against governmental overreaching

880

874. GEN. SOC’Y OF MAYFLOWER DESCENDANTS, https://www.themayflowersociety.org/

(last visited Feb. 9, 2020).

875. BILLINGTON FAM. SOC’Y, https://billingtonfamilysociety.com/ (last visited Feb. 9, 2020)

(Note: The author’s mother, Janet Lee (Mohr) Ernst, serves as the Elder on the Billington Family

Society governing board.).

876. PHILBRICK, supra note 42, at 356.

877. Eli Watkins, First Native American Women Elected to Congress: Sharice Davids and

Deb Haaland, CNN (Nov. 7, 2018, 12:01 AM), https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/06/politics/sharice-

davids-and-deb-haaland-native-american-women/index.html.

878. AJ Willingham, These States And Cities Are Ditching Columbus Day To Observe Indig-

enous Peoples’ Day Instead, CNN (Oct. 14, 2019, 9:39 AM),

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/22/us/indigenous-peoples-day-columbus-day-trnd/index.html.

879. Sean Sherman, The Thanksgiving Tale We Tell Is a Harmful Lie. As a Native American,

I’ve Found a Better Way to Celebrate the Holiday, time (Nov. 19, 2018),

https://time.com/5457183/thanksgiving-native-american-holiday/; Dennis Zotigh, Do American In-

dians Celebrate Thanksgiving?, Smithsonian Mag. (Nov. 26, 2019), https://www.smithson-

ianmag.com/blogs/national-museum-american-indian/2019/11/27/do-american-indians-celebrate-

thanksgiving/; American Indian Perspectives on Thanksgiving, Nat’l Museum of the am. Indian,

https://americanindian.si.edu/sites/1/files/pdf/education/thanksgiving_poster.pdf (last visited Feb.

21, 2020); Julie Turkewitz, Thanksgiving for Native Americans: Four Voices on a Complicated

Holiday, N.Y. Times (Nov. 23, 2017), https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/23/us/thanksgiving-for-

native-americans-four-voices-on-a-complicated-holiday.html.

880. Ostrom, supra note 735, at 95 (“Ample opportunity exists in a democratic society for

some to use instruments of coercion to exploit others. The vices of injustice, ingratitude, arrogance,

pride, and contempt—to paraphrase Hobbes—can no more be the legitimate basis for governing

relationships in a democracy than in any other society.”); id. at 99 (“If citizens as subjects acquiesce

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 133

and to enhance equality and the quality of life for all people—domestically

and globally.

881

The Mayflower Compact also prefigured the spread of de-

mocracy and human rights to other countries.

882

And despite current U.S.

policies discouraging immigration, a significant segment of the U.S. popula-

tion favors welcoming people from other regions of the world to the United

States, as exemplified by non-profit organizations in North Dakota such as

the Global Friends Coalition in Grand Forks and Bismarck Global Neigh-

bors.

883

Widespread education and civic participation throughout society are vi-

tal to maintaining a flourishing democracy.

884

Residents of the United States

should participate actively in all levels of government, as it is the responsi-

bility of all inhabitants to be informed and active members of society. Citi-

zens and non-citizens may exercise some of these rights and privileges in

different ways (e.g., some jobs and voting rights are restricted to citizens),

yet all are vital to the strength and wellbeing of the United States. To foster

civic participation, patriotic philanthropy has become popular, as civic-

minded donors help entities preserve our national and cultural heritage. A

prime example is the Theodore Roosevelt Presidential Library, which will be

housed in the western part of North Dakota, where President Roosevelt spent

in the usurpation of authority by officials, unlimited prerogatives will prevail and a democracy will

cease to exist.”).

881. Id. at 95 (“Critical problems in the constitution of a viable democracy turn upon the basis

for common understanding that informs a theory of constitutional choice, and upon the capacity of

citizens in a democracy to enforce the limits of constitutional law in relation to officials.”); see also

M. BAR ASS’N, https://www.americanbar.org/ (last visited Feb. 9, 2020); AM. CONST. SOC’Y,

https://www.acslaw.org/ (last visited Feb. 9, 2020); FEDERALIST SOC’Y, https://fedsoc.org/ (last vis-

ited Feb. 9, 2020).

882. Martinez, supra note 41, at 482 (“Calvinism gave constitutionalism much of its original-

ity, making it possible to extend the solutions of American constitutionalism in other countries.

Calvinism also gave constitutionalism its strength and coherence, that astonishing and unbroken

line of continuity that has been maintained since the Mayflower Compact.”); see also Channing,

supra note 196, at 193-94 (discussing transportation and communication explosion 1815-1865, as

well as the movement of people, goods, and ideas spread democratic ideals throughout the world).

883. GLOBAL FRIENDS COALITION, http://www.gfcoalition.org/ (last visited Feb. 9, 2020);

ISMARCK GLOBAL NEIGHBORS, https://www.bismarckglobalneighbors.org/ (last visited Feb. 9,

2020).

884. Ostrom, supra note 734, at 95 (“Critical problems in the constitution of a viable democ-

racy turn upon the basis for common understanding that informs a theory of constitutional choice,

and upon the capacity of citizens in a democracy to enforce the limits of constitutional law in rela-

tion to officials.”); id. at 96 (“Common understanding, if properly grounded, gives rise to common

agreement. It is this level of common understanding and agreement that provides the metaphysical

and moral foundations that inform constitutional choice in a democracy.”); see also Anastaplo, su-

pra note 40, at 25 (noting the importance of educated citizenry: “there were indications by delegates

that if the people were to be as good as a people could be—or if the people were to be able to use

the constitution being prepared for them—they would have to remain, perhaps even to become, a

people of a proper quality. Thus, there was an awareness that properly-trained citizens would be

needed.”).

134 NORTH DAKOTA LAW REVIEW [VOL. 95:1

several formative years living in the Badlands.

885

Moreover, educational in-

stitutions provide programs focusing on enhancing knowledge of the histori-

cal and current relationships between federal, state, and tribal governments

and legal systems, such as the Northern Plains Indian Law Center, the Indian

Law Certificate Program, and the Tribal Justice Institute at the University of

North Dakota School of Law.

886

Additionally, countless organizations

throughout the United States contribute to civic education, such as the Amer-

ican Bar Association’s Law Day,

887

and the State Bar Association of North

Dakota’s mock trial program for high school students.

888

President George Washington and many of the other founders of the

United States believed deeply in the crucial role of an educated citizenry.

889

Advocating for a national university, Washington indicated that a primary

goal “should be, the education of our Youth in the science of Government. In

a republic, what species of knowledge can be equally important? And what

duty, more pressing on its Legislature, than to patronize a plan for communi-

cating it to those, who are to be the future guardians of the liberties of the

Country?”

890

And as this article highlights, one of the most important com-

ponents of education throughout our nation entails the foundational docu-

ments forming the bedrock of American democracy, including the May-

flower Compact. While writing this article, I was honored and humbled to

receive an email message from U.S. Circuit Court Judge Ralph R. Erickson

about a lecture I was giving on this topic, who gave me permission to reprint

an excerpt from his message in this article:

Just a quick note to let you know that I am very interested in your

lecture on the Mayflower Compact and the U.S. Constitution . . .

Thanks for being willing to bring this topic to the fore—I am con-

vinced that it is a significant problem that lawyers and law students

never think about the pre-constitutional documents that color con-

stitutional law (and the important post-constitutional ones as well).

885. THEODORE ROOSEVELT PRESIDENTIAL LIBR., https://www.trlibrary.com/ (last visited

Feb. 9, 2020).

886. Northern Plains Indian Law Center, U. OF N.D. SCH. OF L., https://law.und.edu/npilc/in-

dex.html (last visited Feb. 9, 2020).

887. Law Day 2020, AM. B. ASS’N, https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_educa-

tion/law-day/ (last visited Feb. 9, 2020) (“The Law Day 2020 theme is “Your Vote, Your Voice,

Our Democracy: The 19th Amendment at 100” celebrating women’s right to vote).

888. SBAND High School Mock Trial – You Be the Judge/Attorney Coach, ST. B. ASS’N OF

N.D., https://www.sband.org/events/EventDetails.aspx?id=1279745&group= (last visited Feb. 9,

2020).

889. Albert Castel, The Founding Fathers and the Vision of a National University, 4 HIST. OF

EDUC. Q. 280, 281 (1964).

890. MICHAEL S. ROTH, BEYOND THE UNIVERSITY: WHY LIBERAL EDUCATION MATTERS,

YALE UNIVERSITY PRESS 28 (2014).

2020] THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 135

I am convinced that if each of us had a better understanding of the

Magna Carta, the English Bill of Rights, the Mayflower Compact,

the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut, the Articles of Confedera-

tion, the Virginia Declaration of Rights, and the Northwest Ordi-

nance, we would much better understand the Constitution and the

liberties it guarantees to each of us.

In any event I really do appreciate your willingness to take on what

might appear to many as arcane topic. It is very important.

Ralph R. Erickson

Circuit Judge

Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals

891

Together with the other foundational documents shaping our country’s his-

tory and democratic evolution, the Mayflower Compact provides our nation

today with important lessons as the United States continues to move forward

toward even loftier heights. In bringing together the divergent groups aboard

the Mayflower, the foundation that “Combination”

892

laid provides the impe-

tus for greatness in the decades to come, as the United States continues to

incorporate and reflect a mosaic of many different peoples. And as the May-

flower Compact itself counsels, strive together we must, for out of mutual

cooperation, understanding and respect comes mutual strength.

891. Email message from the Honorable Ralph R. Erickson to the author on February 20, 2019

(on file with the author) (edited for brevity and clarity).

892. Lutz, From Covenant, supra note 117, at 106 (“The Mayflower Compact was actually

not so named until 1793, and was known by the citizens of Plymouth as the ‘Plymouth combination,’

or the ‘agreement between the settlers at New Plymouth.’”).