To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

William Harris (settler)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

William Harris
Bornbaptized December 9, 1610
Northbourne, Kent, England
Died1681
London, England
EducationSufficient to write books and volumes of material concerning his legal pursuits
OccupationAttorney
SpouseSusannah Hyde
ChildrenAndrew, Mary, Susannah, Howlong, Toleration
Parent(s)Andrew Harris and Jane Bagley

William Harris (1610-1681) was one of the four men with Roger Williams at Seekonk in the Plymouth Colony during the winter of 1636. He then joined Williams and several families in establishing the settlement of Providence Plantations which became a part of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. He became one of the 12 original proprietors of Providence, and one of the 12 original members of the first Baptist Church in America, and he appears prominently in the early records of the settlement.

Harris had a very keen mind for business, and he knew legal methods and principles better than any other man in Providence; he also had very liberal views concerning freedom of conscience which put him in deep conflict with Williams. Williams was President of the colony in 1657, and he issued a warrant for Harris's arrest with the charge of high treason against the Commonwealth of England. At the ensuing trial, the court decided that the matter must be sent to England for resolution, with Harris being placed under bond. Ultimately, the ruling was in his favor.

Harris was very active in town and colonial affairs from 1660 to 1676—simultaneously acting as agent or representative for interests that were inimical to the interests of the colony. He became an agent on behalf of the Pawtuxet settlers in some complex land disputes, and made several trips to England on their behalf. He was successful in winning his cases, but the results were never realized, and disputes continued following his death. On his last trip to England in 1680, he once again represented the Pawtuxet settlers, but he also became an agent for Connecticut Colony in its claims for the Narragansett lands situated within the boundaries of Rhode Island—very much at odds with Rhode Island interests. During this trip, his ship was seized by an Algerian corsair and he became a slave along the Barbary Coast, being released more than a year later after a very high ransom had been paid on his behalf. He then made his way back to London where he died three days after his arrival.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/5
    Views:
    15 241
    760
    87 809
    2 501
    338 194
  • Seizing Academic Power: Creating Deaf Counternarratives with Commentary
  • Synopsis of Liberian History.m4v
  • A Brief History of South Africa, with Dave Steward
  • A Brief History of Grant's Station
  • Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Douglas Murray - Is Islam is a Religion of Peace? [2010]

Transcription

“Seizing Academic Power: Creating Deaf Counternarratives with Commentary” [Raychelle, a white, slim woman with long, wavy light brown hair, wearing a dark taupe button-up shirt. Background screen is black.] Hello! I’m Raychelle Harris. Some of you may remember my prior video article, Seizing Academic Power: Creating Deaf Counternarratives. Some of you may have heard of the video, but haven’t seen it; some of you may not yet know of the video. Either way, I will go ahead and sum up what happened. I posted the original video this past Sunday night, and by the next morning, the video had rapidly been spread. I truly didn’t expect the video to become so popular so quickly! However, a couple of people then contacted me with some concerns. I immediately wanted to find out their thoughts, and they went on to share with me that there were some errors in the video. My producer, Summer Crider Loeffler, and I then regrouped, discussed the errors, and decided that it was best for us take down the video. We did not like the idea of the video nearly becoming viral with errors, and subsequently removed the video. Afterwards, we gathered more feedback, did some self-reflection, and then identified the problems in the footage. I admittedly did have some intuitive feelings that some of the content was rather sticky, but I still moved forward with publishing the footage. For that, I take full responsibility, as well as full responsibility for the errors in the content. In all, this was a really positive learning experience for me, and I appreciated learning from those who contacted me. I’m grateful and appreciative to those who let me know about the issues in the video, or discussed the video openly where I could witness the discussions and learn from them. Really: thank you. Now, some of you may be wondering what exactly I learned, or what was wrong with the original footage, that you did not notice anything when you watched it— but not to worry, I will go ahead and explain in-depth for those who are still asking what went wrong. I have edited out the errors in the original footage and replaced it with new, updated footage. I’ve left one original part of the erroneous footage so that it can be juxtaposed with added footage that explains why the prior information was wrong, adding in correct information with explanations. From there in out, the original footage resumes with some parts edited out as explained by the added footage. I really want to thank you all for your patience and your support. I know it was confusing and disorienting for the video to have been released and shared widely, only to be removed; and that many people started developing all kinds of worst-case scenarios about what occurred. Summer and I both voluntarily decided ourselves to remove the video. No one commanded us or threatened us to do this– really, no one. The two of us truly decided that we wanted to remove the video on our own, feeling put off that we produced something with wrong information, and wanted to remove our work. Again, we voluntarily decided to do this. [Text in video: white font against black background.] The Seizing Academic Power: Creating Deaf Counternarratives video article was previously posted online in early January with ASLized. The author, Raychelle Harris, and the producer, Summer Crider Loeffler decided to take the video down after approximately a day, due to some concerns about our video article. We wish to thank and honor those who taught us important lessons, and those who openly debated some problematic aspects of the video article so we could reexamine the video article more closely. Raychelle presents here the edited version, reflecting a more culturally respectful product. Raychelle will mention which sections ended up on the cutting room floor, and why, so others, particularly privileged people, can learn from her journey. The final, stand-alone, edited copy of the Seizing Academic Power: Creating Deaf Counternarratives will appear on ASLized! in early February, along with captions, image/text descriptions as well as a transcript. Thank you very much for your support and patience. [Background graphics of different shapes in a gradient of green colors, with white text font. Text: Seizing Academic Power: Creating Deaf Counter Narratives.] [Raychelle, a white, slim woman with shoulder-length wavy light brown hair, wearing a dark taupe button-up shirt. Background screen is black.] Hello, I'm Raychelle Harris. Today's presentation is titled, "Seizing Academic Power: Creating Deaf Counternarratives". [Image: Special effects, green stripes with "Academic Power" in blue]. Before we jump into the presentation, we need to discuss the term, 'counternarratives'. [Footage transitions into Raychelle against a black screen with longer hair, signaling the added-in footage.] One of the main mistakes I made- a very important one to point out to all of you- were racial analogies. I truly have learned from this mistake. Now, I already knew about racial analogies being wrong, but I still went ahead and made them. For that, I am very, very sorry, and take full responsibility for having done so. [On left of screen - Image description: There are four boxes. The first box depicts "Generous Offers" Through History. A person is holding up a sign, "We want land". Another person is seen storming off, saying "Ok, if you're going to get greedy about it... Forget it!" The second box: A map of the USA with very few partially shaded areas (showing the locations of Native American reservations) as opposed to "White Settlers" which has pretty much the whole map. Third box: South Africa, with Native Africans (Bantustans) and White Settlers. There's very little land for Bantusans. Fourth box: Middle East, with Native Palestinians and Israeli Settlers, with Native Palestinians having very little land.] [Text list appears at left of screen. Text reads: Indigenous Communities. Maori (Cram, Ormond, & Carter 2004]; African Botswana Community (Chilsa, 2005); Eastern Canadian Natives (Mi’kmaq College Institute, 200); Australasians (Australasian Evaluation Society, Inc., 2006); Navajo People (Brugga & Missaghian, 2003); Australian Aborigines (Gilmore & Smith, 2005); Alaskan Natives (Gilmore & Smith, 2005)] I specifically used examples from Indigenous communities and other People of Color groups, taking their resources and information about them to compare with the Deaf community. I thought it was fine for me to do this because I am a member of the Deaf community, I’m culturally Deaf, I use sign language, and so forth. But- I am not Indigenous or a Person of Color. I will never understand what it’s like to go through the violence, the systems (of oppression) they experience, and many more horrible incidents. I have never experienced those, and I never will: and for me to go ahead and discuss those experiences, to make analogies with those experiences was wrong. I have really learned to respect those experiences. While I can learn from and discuss those experiences, I cannot take those experiences and discuss them in comparative analogies. No- never. I must respect those groups and their experiences. However, I can definitely discuss the Deaf experience, of course! And what analogies can I use? Deaf and hearing people. For example: [Image: Famed cartoon by Maureen Kluzsa, The Greatest Irony. Two seated babies are wearing bonnets and diapers. The baby on the left has text and an arrow that designates the baby as “Deaf baby.” The baby is depicted as distressed and with a single tear falling down their cheek as their wrists are handcuffed. To the right is the baby designated as “Hearing baby,” who is signing the “I love you” sign, while smiling and laughing.] This image is an example of a counternarrative. Do I have to use racial analogies to expand on what I mean by “counternarrative”? No, not at all. I can easily use this image as an example of a counternarrative because of how it challenges the master narrative of researchers, doctors, teachers, school administrators who warn parents of Deaf children against signing with them, framing the choice of sign language as “ruining” Deaf children’s language development, of the choice causing cognitive delays. This narrative has been a dominant narrative for many, many years, and have ruined many Deaf children’s learning processes, with many of them struggling for access. This illustration, then, counters the imposed master narrative by pointing out the widespread trend of teaching hearing babies sign language in order to help their language and cognitive development. Yet… the master narrative said the same approach with Deaf children will cause them harm. But both the Deaf and hearing babies are just that: babies. And the hearing baby’s language development is encouraged via sign language, yet denied for the Deaf baby- and it truly does not make sense. Therefore, this illustration challenges this master narrative in a very clear way. Again, did I have to resort to racial analogies to make my point? No, not at all- I really did not have to do that. [Raychelle resumes signing, video fades to black.] [Image: Black screen with text in white. Text: "And now the rest of the video continues, with racial analogies edited out." (Last two words are in italics)] [Image: Screen is completely black.] [Raychelle, a white, slim woman with medium, wavy light brown hair, wearing a dark taupe button-up shirt. Background screen is black.] [Image: A plain tan-orange, old-looking textbook with the title "The Psychology of Deafness" visible, there are more words but the font is too small to read] This book was a bestseller at an international level. People used it for their work... those people were teachers, psychologists, administrators, supervisors, speech therapists, audiologists and more. This book was required for graduate school, universities, training, graduate and undergraduate classes ubiquitously. This book was first published in 1957. [Text: 1957 in large font with animation] The book sold out! A reprint was ordered in 1960. [Text: 1960 in large font with animation] A second edition of this book was published in 1964. This book was popular and sales were high! [Text: 1964 in large font with animation] 1964 isn't very long ago, isn't it? Classes would require this textbook way into late 1970s. The underlying message of this book is: Deaf people can't. Deaf people are limited, their brain capacity cannot function beyond a specific level, and no amount of teaching will make a difference. In other words, this book basically said it was worthless trying to teach deaf people. Their cognition is retarded. [Text: "retarded" appears in a typewriter-type of animation] That book included a summary of different tests done on deaf people saying that deaf people are… [Text: retarded, limited, inferior, deficient, problematic, immature, deficient, remedial, hypomaniac, dependent, schizoprenic, belligerent, neurotic and negative] [Image: Same old tan/orange book photo from earlier] This book was widely used, over a long span of time. The last publication was in 1964, second edition-- however, in our interviews with people, they remembered this book being required reading in their classes during the 1980s at Gallaudet College - when it was a college. The graduate program in deaf education (they had a different name back then) required this book. Imagine deaf students taking a course and having to read this required book? Thumbing through the book, deaf students would learn that they are cognitively limited and that they are retarded. There are so many diagnoses and labels thrown at deaf people in this book. That book is one example of a very powerful master narrative about the Deaf community. This book indoctrinated people in how they perceived deaf people and their beliefs about deaf people. As teachers enter classrooms to teach deaf children, they are thinking, it's worthless teaching them, but might as well try... trying is better than not trying. They are thinking - teach deaf children how to survive- by finding a menial job... because they will never become geniuses, doctors, lawyers, or pilots-- impossible. Feeling furious? Me too. When I read the book, I couldn't believe how dangerous this book was for our community. What do we do? How do we prevent this from happening? How do we stop this type of very harmful master narrative from spreading? [Image/text: "How to Seize Academic Power" in white/blue font among green shapes/animation in the background] The first category: "Recognize & Resist" [Image: Green animation and text in the background] First, we need to be able to recognize master narratives. If we aren't able to recognize master narratives, then how can we resist master narratives? By recognizing master narratives, we are able to resist the damaging discourse and replace these with counternarratives. By recognizing and resisting, we are challenging the master narrative - that's the first category. The first subcategory under "Recognize & Resist" is 1) Resist Outsider's Theories and Labels [Image: Green animation/background]. Resist outsider's attempts to label or define you. If they attempt to do so, resist by saying that is not how you would define or label yourself. A classic example is "hearing impaired". [Image: White ear symbol with a cross over it on blue background] Are you calling me hearing impaired? Well-- hey there-- time out. I'm impaired? I can't? I'm deficient? I have a problem? I have to be fixed? Whoa there-- time out. I'm proud to be deaf. I am resisting their labels by not accepting how they define me. I am educating them about how I want to be described. This resistance will multiply and help contribute to positive change. That's one example of resisting outsider's theories and labels. The second subcategory under "Recognize & Resist" is 2) Recognize Epistemologies [Image: Green animation/background]. Epistemologies refer to "knowledge". Western epistemologies do not really apply to us, hearing epistemologies makes more sense. Hearing epistemologies has been shared over many generations, and often has been forced upon us and our community. We often have to remind them that we have a different way of life and experiences. Here's one example: A Deaf charter school was housed on a hearing school campus, using same buildings, facilities such as the gym and library. There were scheduling agreements on facility usage. The hearing school had rules that the deaf school needed to follow. One rule was when students transitioned from a building to another building, they would need to walk in a straight line, typical of a K-8th school. Since the Deaf charter school was housed on the same campus, they needed to follow the same rule. The agreement was mutual. As time went on, the teachers at the hearing school started having concerns about Deaf students' inability to stay in a straight line. Seems their behavior couldn't be controlled? Were they having behavioral issues? The hearing school decided to inform the Deaf charter school about their concerns, specifically the Deaf students' inability to stay in a straight line, unlike their hearing counterparts who would stand impeccably in a straight line. The Deaf charter school employees took their concerns seriously and debated ideas on how to improve their students' ability to walk in a straight line. The discussions led to a profound paradigm shift. When standing in a line, where are the eyes? Standing in lines is a hearing construct, a part of hearing epistemology. Deaf people must have their eyes aligned with each other, where sighted space overlaps. They studied Deaf students walking in line, they were falling out of place because they had to shift their shoulders in order to communicate with the person behind or in front of them. This was a profound breakthrough! They came up with a solution rather than refuse to work with the hearing school. Double lines was agreed upon. The Deaf students were able to make eye contact and chat on way to their next location without having to shift their shoulders! The double lines for Deaf students were explained to the hearing school, along with a brief education about visual (signing) culture. They were astounded and grateful about the lesson learned regarding hearing and Deaf epistemologies. The third subcategory under "Recognize & Resist" is 3) Recognize (Academic) Gatekeeping Techniques [Image: Green background/animation] Not only academic gatekeeping-- there are gatekeeping techniques everywhere. Some gatekeeping techniques include allowing only good friends in, and not allowing strangers or people one may not be too fond of, perhaps because they look different, act differently, or talk differently. Admission is "controlled". Here's one example. A publication was originally submitted to another journal, a Deaf journal. We submitted our article, and it was immediately rejected with major revisions. We wanted to know why. This is an actual sentence from the editors of the journal: [Text: "...must the history of hearingness be repeatedly bashed over the reader's head?"] We were astounded and taken aback. We knew the importance of history in documenting pattern-based evidence and supporting the claims made in our article, justifying the reasons for a specific set of research ethics to protect the ASL/Deaf community. Authors of academic pieces know the importance of setting up a trail of historical evidence leading up to their theoretical claims and constructs. The editors who turned down our article felt that our emphasis on historical anecdotes of hearing researchers taking advantage of Deaf people were excessive and completely unnecessary. They wanted us to scale down the amount of examples and the tone of our writing. We were shocked-- however, we conceded. We toned down the tone of the article according to their feedback and resubmitted. They rejected the submission again, asking us to tone the article down even more. We toned it down so much that we felt the article was watered-down, and we were nauseated by the process. We resubmitted the article for the third time, and they rejected it again! We were fed up and decided to go with another Deaf journal, submitting the original article we wrote, with all the historical anecdotes justifying our claims. Our original article was approved on our first try! This experience hit us.... this is an example of academic gatekeeping! Recognize those types of gatekeeping techniques and resist by moving to another one, and by not supporting the gatekeepers through a subscription or purchase. [Text: The second category - Seize & Carve, in green large font and animated]. By seizing and carving, we are making a permanent mark; a metaphor for change. [Image/text: Reframing in green font, with green background and animation]. This anecdote reminds me of National Association of the Deaf's Monographs. On the side, there would be a photo of the author and their background. [Image: NAD logo with NAD in orange-red font inside a blue circle on a white background]. That section describing the author's background tends - have you noticed? - to include the author's decibel level, for example, right ear 90, left ear 110. [Image: An audiogram in white, on black background, showing a dip in decibels near right of the chart] Then the "cause" of the "deafness" would also be mentioned, for instance, meningitis, birth or gradual hearing loss. This type of writing shows there is a different way of framing one's background as deficient, problematic, broken or being proud of being deaf. What would our author's backgrounds be framed as if we were to challenge the master narrative? Certainly a shift towards a positive, cultural frame of our identity. [Text/Image: Privileging knowledge and Primacy of Experience, in green animated background]. When you see academic publications, you tend to see parentheses and a name & year inserted in middle, for example, (Jones, 2005). Authors are expected to cite publications in their writing, also called citing the "literature". Citing, or in other words, mentioning other people and what they say, and then you say something, then make a point about two other people saying something that could be synthesized into one new theory, and so on. That's pretty much how you write academically. The academic English writing culture is deeply rooted in citing other people's work. Now, let's think about the Deaf community, our culture, and ASL... are there plentiful of publications by us and with us? How do we cite our own? We're trapped in this academic expectations cycle by having to cite mainly academic publications. This is a quagmire where there aren't enough publications by our own people and we're yet still expected to cite people's work. More importantly, we know so many Deaf people in our community that are absolutely, incredibly experienced and brilliant. Our interviews with those brilliant and experienced Deaf community experts should be equivalent to, or supersede academic publications. Set aside the academic cultural rule that we are to cite publications by privileged people, and honor those with direct and authentic experiences, and many different types of experiences. All that is related to "primacy" of literature... or in this case, "primacy" of knowledge and experience, regardless of the number of publications or a terminal degree. They, to a degree, truly have a terminal degree in Deaf knowledge! Honor those individuals. [Image/text: Language of Publication & Press in green animated font/background]. The language of academic publication is generally in English. Lately, more people are publishing in English AND presenting in ASL - perhaps at conferences or at different venues. Why does the publication route have to always start with English first? Do you realize that means the first people who has access to this information are usually hearing, privileged people who are fluent and comfortable with academic English. Those people, having first access to the content, are able to participate in dialogue about the constructs presented in the paper first. Our community and cultural members are inadvertently neglected and set aside in this process. To honor our community and culture, we should strive to publish first in our language. Publishing our work in ASL first allows our community and culture to access the information first, and participate in a productive dialogue about the constructs presented in our articles. After our community has explored the article thoroughly, then submit the article in English to a journal. [Image/text: Third category - "Negotiate" in green animated font] [Image/text: First subcategory, "Ownership & Profit" in green animated font/background] Often hearing and/or incompetent signers tend to interview and collect data from Deaf people, their language, Deaf community and Deaf culture. [Image: Dollar bills are fluttering around] Then the hearing and/or incompetent signer makes some profit off their publication, increase their prominence in their academic field, and assume ownership of the data about Deaf people and their language. Who owns the knowledge about Deaf people and ASL? The Deaf community! So we, as Deaf people need to become negotiators when being asked to participate in research. Ask questions! Are Deaf people on your research team? Are you the sole hearing researcher? Or are there three hearing researchers? Where are Deaf people like me on your team? Negotiate, and refuse participation until Deaf people are on the research team. Emphasize the importance of having Deaf researchers on the team, so the Deaf participants will be more comfortable to share genuine, authentic Deaf perspective. One classic anecdote regarding research about teaching sign language to primates - hearing people would do the teaching, however, there were numerous Deaf people hired to teach too, but the recognition of the work went to hearing people. They also received honors, praise and accolades for their work. There was very high turnover for Deaf employees, due to different reasons such as low wages, lousy hours, and menial service work with very little or no compensation. This scenario is, unfortunately, not uncommon. Be sure to negotiate your terms with them from the start. [Image/text: In Front and/or Teams in green animated font/background] Research teams is an essential concept. The older, traditional model has one person on the top, with a hierarchical structure for the remaining members. [Image: A pyramid of white shaped people standing on top of each other, with one on the top] The person on top is typically hearing and male. The more culturally appropriate model would be a team concept, where everyone has equal status, with perhaps two leaders, one being Deaf and the other being hearing. Or a scenario where there is a Deaf leader, and a mix of Deaf and hearing researchers participating in and consulting on the direction of the research project. eaf-led research teams are crucial in keeping the research process genuine, honest and authentic. Finally, counter narratives are "attempts to rewrite and reright existing and often damaging academic research" (Gilmore & Smith, 2005, p. 71). Academic research has done a great deal of damage towards our culture, language and children... particularly our children who were and are being intentionally deprived of accessible language within our current educational system. Our job is to continue to challenge the master narrative and replace the narrative with OUR counter narrative. [Text: References. Full references are listed in the section below the YouTube video] [Text: Images derived from Google Images compliant with Copyright and Fair use under non-profit, educational media.]

Early life

Harris was baptized in Northbourne, Kent, England on December 9, 1610, the fourth of five children born to Andrew Harris and Jane Bagley of Northbourne. He was a young child when his father died in 1616, after which his mother married James Grigges, who also died soon, and then she married James Sayer.[1] He began a seven-year apprenticeship as a needle-maker to Thomas Wilson, a member of the Drapers' Company of Eastcheap, London on October 22, 1628, when he was almost 18.[2]

Harris was a member of Reverend John Lothrop's Church in London with his brother Thomas and sister Jane, who appears on a 1632 church roster. The three Harris siblings are listed in a church record as being among those "added to the church" at the time when John Lothrop was imprisoned, along with 42 fellow dissenters.[3] In about 1634, Harris married Susan Hyde, the daughter of John Hyde (a member of the Drapers' Company to which Harris had been apprenticed) and Mary Bonfoy. Harris probably left England in 1635, but certainly by early 1636, and he might have come first to Salem in the Massachusetts Bay Colony.[2]

Settling Providence

Harris lot in Providence overlaid on contemporary map

Roger Williams spent part of the winter of 1636 in Seekonk in the Plymouth Colony after he was forced to leave Salem in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, and four other men accompanied him, including Harris.[4] Later, the families of some of these men and others joined him in crossing the river to establish Providence Plantations.[5][4] Traveling with Harris were his wife Susannah and his infant son Andrew.[6] Williams wrote in 1677 that he "desired not to be troubled with English company, yet out of pity I gave leave to William Harris, then poor and destitute, to come along in my company."[7]

In 1638, Harris was one of the 12 original proprietors of Providence whom Williams included in a deed to the land originally obtained from Indian sachems Canonicus and Miantonomi.[5] The following year, Harris became one of the 12 founding members of the first Baptist Church in America, and he and 38 others signed an agreement in 1640 to establish a government in Providence.[5] By 1638, a group of the Providence settlers were living along the Pawtuxet River, led by William Arnold, when they began having tensions with other Providence settlers. In 1640, Harris was on a committee with three others to consider the differences between the disputing parties and to come up with an amicable solution.[5] Matters grew worse, to the point that the Pawtuxet settlers ultimately put themselves under the jurisdiction of Massachusetts Bay Colony for 16 years before re-uniting with the Providence government.[8]

Clash with Roger Williams

Over the next ten years, Harris was able to accumulate a fair amount of land, and he was assessed in a 1650 tax list more than one pound in taxes, one of the higher amounts in the colony.[5] In 1655, he appears in the Providence section of a list of freemen of the colony.[5] Sometime in the mid-1650s, "an inveterate hostility arose" between Harris and Roger Williams.[9] The source of this discord appears to have been their different views on the nature of liberty.[9] Historian Samuel G. Arnold wrote that the hostility "was carried to a degree of personal invective that mars the exalted character of Williams and detracts from the dignity and worth of his opponent. It was never forgotten by the one or forgiven by the other."[9]

Harris was almost constantly employed in undertakings that clashed with the interests of Rhode Island, and he took on a position that the Arnolds of Pawtuxet previously held, either as a factional leader within the state or the agent and representative of interests abroad.[9] Historian Samuel Arnold thought this regrettable because "he brought to whatever he undertook the resources of a great mind and, to all appearances, the honest convictions of an earnest soul."[9]

Harris had published the notion that one following his conscience should not have to yield to "any human order amongst men," a position which Williams called "unbounded license for individuals."[5][9] On March 12, 1657, Williams was President of the colony and issued a warrant for Harris' arrest on the charge of high treason against the Commonwealth of England.[5] The warrant charged Harris with having published "dangerous writings containing his notorious defiance to the authority of his highness the Lord Protector," and inciting the people into a "traitorous renouncing of their allegiance."[5] The trial of Harris took place at a special session of the General Court in Warwick, where he read a copy of his book while Williams read the original.[10] Williams also read to the court copies of his accusation against Harris and his charges.[11] A few months later, the General Court concluded that Harris' behavior was "both contemptuous and seditious," but nevertheless decided that it was best to send the case to England where judgment could be made, and in the meantime to bind Harris with a bond contingent upon his good behavior.[5][11] Harris was ultimately absolved of any wrongdoing.[12]

Colonial leader

Harris was active in the affairs of Providence over a period of 16 years—from 1660, when he became a commissioner, to 1676.[13] He served as Deputy for two terms, and as Assistant (magistrate) for seven terms.[13] He was also General Solicitor for a year, and on the Providence Town Council for seven years.[13] In 1667, he was discharged from his office as Assistant based on "many grievous complaints against him."[13] He was fined 50 pounds, but some Assistants protested the action against him, particularly William Carpenter and Benjamin Smith, and the fine was eventually remitted.[13]

Agent for Pawtuxet interests

In 1663, Harris made a trip to England on business involving the lands at Pawtuxet.[13] Land disputes had been ongoing concerning Pawtuxet settlers William Arnold, William Carpenter, and Robert Coles, and Harris became their agent. In 1675, he once again made a trip to England as agent for the Pawtuxet proprietors, with the intent of laying the case before the King, and then he made a final trip to England for the same business in 1679.[13] In addition, he was also hired by the Connecticut Colony as their agent to support their claims to the Narragansett country.[13]

Harris was apparently successful in his claims against the Town of Providence, as alluded to by Governor John Cranston in a January 1680 letter to King Charles II.[13] Nevertheless, the question of jurisdiction and title to the Pawtuxet lands was not ultimately settled until many years after Harris's death.[13]

On 25 December 1679, Harris set sail on a vessel to return to England to represent Connecticut in its claims for the Narraganset Territory.[14] On 24 January 1680, the ship was commandeered by an Algerian corsair, and Harris was taken to Algiers. He wrote in a letter while in captivity that he was sold into slavery on the Barbary Coast on 23 February and imprisoned for over a month.[15] Though kept captive, he was able to write several letters home and to Connecticut from Algiers in April and May, but it wasn't until June 1680 that Connecticut first became aware of his enslavement. He continued to write letters through July and August, requesting that about 300 pounds in ransom money be raised and sent, and Connecticut ordered that the requested sum be raised on 14 October 1680.[16] More than 18 months had transpired from his time of capture when an agent informed Mrs. Harris on 2 August 1681 that her husband had been successfully ransomed. Harris was able to cross the Mediterranean Sea and traverse Spain and France to get back to London.[13] He died three days after his arrival at the house of his London landlord John Stokes, though the exact date is unknown. It was on 3 December 1681 that an agent informed his wife of his death.[16] The inventory of his estate took place the next month, and in February 1682 his will was approved by the Providence Council.[17]

Family

William Harris had four siblings, at least three of whom emigrated to New England. His oldest sibling Jane was baptized in Northbourne, England on 23 December 1604, and she was admitted to the church at Scituate, Massachusetts on 21 June 1635 as "Jane Harrice". Nothing more has been found about her in New England.[18][19] The next oldest sibling Parnell was baptized at Northbourne on 3 August 1606, and her name appears on a March 1635 passenger list for the Hercules out of Sandwich, Kent with John Witherly as the master. Passengers were required to obtain certificates for their travel, and she had obtained hers on 19 March, signed by Jos Leech, the vicar of Bow Parish in London. The name just below hers on the ship passenger roster is that of James Sayers of Northbourne, her stepbrother. Parnell married Thomas Roberts of Providence, and both she and her husband died in 1676 after fleeing to Aquidneck Island following the devastation of Providence during King Phillips War.[20] [21] On 3 July 1676, William Harris petitioned the Newport Council for administration of Parnell's estate.[22]

The next sibling of Harris was Ann, baptized 29 May 1608. She apparently lived well into adulthood, but no record has been found for her, other than being mentioned in the estate of William Harris: a quarter of the estate of Parnell Roberts belonged to William Harris "in the right of Anne Harris."[23] William was the fourth of the Harris children, and the youngest was Thomas, baptized in Northbourne on 11 July 1613. Thomas was married to a woman named Elizabeth, likely in England about 1636, and was first of record in Providence on 20 August 1637. He held many positions in the Providence government including commissioner, lieutenant, juryman, and councilman, and died there on 7 June 1686.[24]

William Harris and his wife Susannah had five known children. Their oldest son Andrew (1635-1686) married Mary Tew, the sister of Deputy Governor Henry Tew.[5] Their daughter Mary (died 1718) married Thomas Borden, son of Richard and Joan Borden, and daughter Susannah married Ephraim Carpenter, the son of Pawtuxet settler William Carpenter. Their daughter Howlong (died 1708) married Arthur Fenner late in life as his second wife, who was ancestor of Rhode Island Governor Arthur Fenner by his first wife.[13] Their son Toleration (1645-1675) was killed during King Phillips War. William Harris is a great-grandfather of Rhode Island deputy governor Elisha Brown.[25]

Legacy

Roger Williams had an antagonistic relationship with Harris and wrote this about him:

W. Harris, who, being an impudent morris-dancer in Kent... under a cloak of separation, got in with myself, till his self-ends and restless strife, and at last his atheistical denying of heaven and hell, made honest souls to fly from him. Now he courts the Baptists: then he kicks them off and flatters the Foxians [Quakers]; then the drunkards (which he calls all that are not of the former two amongst us); then knowing the prejudices of the other Colonies against us, he dares to abuse his Majesty and Council, to bring New England upon us.[2]

Rhode Island historian Thomas W. Bicknell wrote a much more favorable commentary. "William Harris was one of the greatest of the founders of Providence, in many points superior to Roger Williams, but a very different type of man. Realism ruled his action, while Mr. Williams dreamed dreams. Harris had a legal mind and knew legal forms, methods, and principles, superior to any man in Providence."[26]

See also

References

  1. ^ Ullmann & Harris 2013, pp. 96–97.
  2. ^ a b c Ullmann & Harris 2013, p. 99.
  3. ^ Ullmann & Harris 2013, pp. 97–98.
  4. ^ a b Chapin 1916, p. 11.
  5. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k Austin 1887, p. 312.
  6. ^ Bicknell 1920, p. 158.
  7. ^ Arnold 1859, p. 97.
  8. ^ Arnold 1935, pp. 46–9.
  9. ^ a b c d e f Arnold 1859, p. 262.
  10. ^ Arnold 1859, p. 263.
  11. ^ a b Arnold 1859, p. 264.
  12. ^ Arnold 1859, pp. 432–6.
  13. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l Austin 1887, p. 314.
  14. ^ Brigham 1902, p. 40.
  15. ^ Brigham 1902, p. 41.
  16. ^ a b Brigham 1902, p. 42.
  17. ^ Brigham 1902, pp. 42–43.
  18. ^ Ullmann & Harris 2013, p. 97.
  19. ^ Anderson 2003, pp. 225–226.
  20. ^ Ullmann & Harris 2013, p. 98.
  21. ^ Anderson 2003, pp. 226–227.
  22. ^ Brigham 1902, p. 33.
  23. ^ Anderson 2003, p. 227.
  24. ^ Ullmann & Harris 2013, p. 100.
  25. ^ Austin 1887, pp. 314–315.
  26. ^ Bicknell 1920, p. 183.

Bibliography

  • Anderson, Robert Charles (2003). The Great Migration, Immigrants to New England 1634–1635. Vol. III G-H. Boston: New England Historic Genealogical Society. ISBN 0-88082-158-2.
  • Arnold, Elisha Stephen (1935). The Arnold Memorial: William Arnold of Providence and Pawtuxet, 1587–1675, and a genealogy of his descendants. Rutland, VT: Tuttle Publishing Company. OCLC 6882845.
  • Arnold, Samuel Greene (1859). History of the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. Vol. 1. New York: D. Appleton & Company. OCLC 712634101.
  • Austin, John Osborne (1887). Genealogical Dictionary of Rhode Island. Albany, New York: J. Munsell's Sons. ISBN 978-0-8063-0006-1.
  • Bicknell, Thomas Williams (1920). The History of the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. Vol. 1. New York: The American Historical Society.
  • Brigham, Clarence S. (1902), "Calendar of Events in the Life of William Harris", in Winship, George Parker (ed.), Collections of the Rhode Island Historical Society, Providence, pp. 24–45{{citation}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  • Chapin, Howard M. (1916). Documentary History of Rhode Island. Providence: Preston and Rounds Company. pp. 8–16.
  • Ullmann, Helen Schatvet; Harris, L. Randall (April 2013). "The Origins of Thomas Harris and William Harris of Providence, Rhode Island". New England Historical and Genealogical Register. 167.

External links

This page was last edited on 30 December 2023, at 22:40
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.