1 March, 1920
- FRED NORRIS ROBINSON, Ph.D. Cambridge
- ANDREW McFARLAND DAVIS, A.M. Cambridge
- Hon. ARTHUR PRENTICE RUGG, LL.D. Worcester
- HENRY WINCHESTER CUNNINGHAM, A.B. Milton
- Rev. CHARLES EDWARDS PARK, D.D. Boston
- HENRY HERBERT EDES, A.M. Cambridge
- ALFRED JOHNSON, Litt.D. Brookline
- CHARLES LEMUEL NICHOLS, M.D., Litt.D. Worcester
- MARK ANTONY DeWOLFE HOWE, Litt.D. Boston
- SAMUEL WILLISTON, LL.D. Belmont
Editor of Publications
- ALBERT MATTHEWS, A.B. Boston
1 The date of Child’s birth is inferred from his age (22) when he entered the University of Leyden on May 23, 1635 (see note 5, below). His county (Kent) is mentioned in the record of his admission to Corpus Christi (List appended to Part i of Robert Masters’s History of the College of Corpus Christi, 1753, p. 12), and he describes himself in an agreement of August 23, 1650, as “Robert Child of Northfleet in the County of Kent Doctor in Physicke” (Suffolk Deeds, i. 216). His (presumably elder) brother, Major John Child, was also of Northfleet (see p. 94, below). His father’s name is given in the Padua record (see p. 5 note 4, below).
2 The name of Child (Peter de la Child) occurs in Kent as early as 1262 (Archæologia Cantiana, iii. 252; cf. x. 40; xiii. 209, 305, 308, 426; xviii. 355, 364; xxvii. 45–47, 221). I suspect that Robert Child belonged to that branch of the family that in the sixteenth century held the manor of Parrocks (Porrocks, Paddocks) in the parish of Milton-juxta-Gravesend (John Harris, History of Kent, 1719, pp. 136–137; Hasted’s Kent, 2d ed., iii. 339–341 ; Cruden, History of the Town of Gravesend, 1843, pp. 284, 387). The John Child who, on April 27, 1637, was appointed administrator of the estate of Thomas Child, his brother, of “Milton next Gravesend” (Archæologia Cantiana, xx. 26) may have been Robert Child’s brother the Major. The John Childe of Kent who, about 1626, was reported by the Commissioners for the Loan as conformable and as having given assurance to pay (Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1625–1626, p. 521), may have been the father. The persons mentioned by Waters, Gleanings, i. 762, seem to belong to quite a different family, but, as Kentishmen, may have been related.
3 Winthrop, ii. 358 (294).
4 Savage, 3 Massachusetts Historical Collections, viii. 247; Venn, Book of Matriculations and Degrees, i. 147 (in the record of matriculation the name is spelled Chiles). The county (Kent), which identifies this student as our man, is given in the List printed by Masters (see note 1, above).
5 Album Studiosorum Academiae Lugduno Batavae, Hague, 1875, col. 271 (“Robertus Child Anglus”).
6 Cf. note 1, above. Major John Child calls him “my Brother Robert Child Doctor of Physick” (New-Englands Jonas, p. 1).
7 Hutchinson Papers (Prince Society), i. 239.
8 History of Massachusetts, 2d ed., 1765, i. 145.
9 New-Englands Salamander, p. 7.
10 University Archives, vol. cclxxv, p. 179. Some years ago, I asked Mr. William C. Lane, who was writing to Padua, to ask the University Librarian if he could find any entries relating to Robert Child, George Stirk, or Nathaniel Eaton. In his reply (January 12, 1914), the Head of the University Library, Dr. Gaetano Buryada, wrote: “Ho fatto le ricerche da Lei desiderate, ma posso dir Le che solo di Robertus Child, anglus filius Johannis, qui si trova notizia. Nel nostro archivio universitario, nel volume 275 che si riferisce ai Dottori e licenziati in chirurgia dal 1629 al 1640, a p. 179 e proprio nell’ anno 1638, mese di agosto, giomo di Venerdl, 13, dava gli esami il Child per addottorarsi in medicina. Di Nat. Eaton e dello Stirk non trovo ricosdo alcuno, ma debbo pure aggiungere che i nostri atti di archivio hanno molte lacune.”
11 “There are two wayes of making Cider and Perry: one, by bruising and beating them, and then presently to put them into a vessel to ferment or work (as it is usually called) of themselves: The other way is to boil the juice with some good spices, by which the rawnesse is taken away, and then to ferment it with some yest, if it work not of it self, this is the best way: and I have tasted Cider thus made of an excellent delicate taste. Neither let any complaine of the windinesse; for it is onely want of use: When I had for 2 or 3 years continually drunk wine beyond Sea, the strongest beer for 2 or 3 weeks was as windy to me, as Cider will be to any; and afterwards when I went to Paris, the wine of that place was as troublesome as English beer for a little time” (2d ed., 1652, p. 20; 3d ed., 1655, p. 20). As to Child’s authorship of this Large Letter, see p. 107, below.
12 See the passage quoted in p. 5 note 5, and cf. p. 9, below.
13 Legacie, 2d ed., 1652, p. 23; 3d ed., 1655, p. 23.
14 Legacie, 2d ed., pp. 1–3, 5, 14, 26, 28, 47; 3d ed., pp. 1–3, 5, 14, 26, 28, 48.
15 Legacie, 2d ed., p. 44; 3d ed., p. 45.
16 Legacie, 2d ed., p. 45, 47; 3d ed., p. 46, 48.
17 Legacie, 2d ed., pp. 29, 51; 3d ed., pp. 29, 52. Cf. p. 102 note 1, below.
18 Legacie, 2d ed., pp. 5, 27, 28, 51, 52; 3d ed., pp. 5, 27, 28, 52, 53.
19 New-Englands Salamander, p. 7. Cf. p. 102 note 1, below.
20 An Answer to the Animadversor on the Letter to Mr. Samuel Hartlib of Husbandry (in Samuel Hartlib his Legacy of Husbandry, 3d ed., 1655, p. 168).
21 See p. 61, below.
22 Cf. p. 30, below.
23 It is noted by Felt (Ecclesiastical History of New England, i. 583) and by W. T. R. Marvin, New-England’s Jonas, 1869 (Introduction, p. xxiv note 41).
24 A list of the books given to Harvard College by Digby is on record in College Book i. 259, but this remark appears to be the only allusion to Child’s benefaction.
25 New-Englands Salamander, pp. 7–8.
26 Winthrop Papers, iii. 148–151. This letter must have been written between May 8 and 12, for, in a brief budget of “good newes,” Child informs Winthrop that “ye deputy [Strafford] in cōdem̄ed by both houses,” but does not mention his execution. What he says of a fine of £100,000 on canons to help toward the payment to the Scots sounds like an incorrect rumor based on the debate of May 11 in the House of Commons (W. A. Shaw, History of the English Church during the Civil Wars and under the Commonwealth, i. 59).
27 “I intend when I returne to you (god willing) to prosecute ye planting of vines throwly” (Winthrop Papers, iii. 150).
28 March 1, 1644[–5] (iii. 155). In quoting the Winthrop Papers, I have in almost every instance gone back to the manuscripts. This will explain a number of divergences from the printed text.
29 Drake, History and Antiquities of Boston, 1856, pp. 292, 299; Marvin, with a “probably,” in his edition of New-Englands Jonas, 1869, p. xxii note 40; Whittier, 1 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, xviii. 390, 392; C. E. Banks in his edition of Henry Gardener’s New-Englands Vindication, p. 32 note 34 (Gorges Society, No. 1, 1884); Augustine Jones, Life and Work of Thomas Dudley, 1899, p. 337.
30 Winthrop Papers, iii. 150, 151.
31 Pierre Jean Fabre, the celebrated French physician and chemist, who died in 1650 (see Ferguson, Bibliotheca Chemica, i. 259–260). He was a correspondent of the younger Winthrop (Cromwell Mortimer, dedication of vol. xl of the Philosophical Transactions, 1741).
32 Cf. Child’s essay on the Defects of English Husbandry: “Yet I counsell to get a Vigneron from France, where there are plenty, and at cheaper rates than ordinary servants here, and who will be serviceable also for Gardening” (Samuel Hartlib his Legacie, 2d ed., 1652, p. 28; 3d ed., 1655, p. 28).
33 Winthrop Papers, iii. 150.
34 See p. 109, below.
35 Samuel Hartlib his Legacy, 3d ed., 1655, p. 148.
36 Winthrop, ii. 38 (31).
37 John Winthrop, Jr., to his wife, October 8, 1641 (Winthrop Papers, iv. 35).
38 Sir William Boswell to De Vic, November 1, 1642 (Winthrop Papers, iii. 323). We learn from this letter that Winthrop was travelling under the style of “Student in Physic.”
39 Under 1645 Winthrop notes that “Mr. John Winthrop, the younger, coming from England two years since, brought with him 1000 pounds stock and divers workmen to begin an iron work” (ii. 261 ). One concrete trace of the collection of English capital for this project remains in the form of a receipt given by Winthrop, Emanuel Downing, and Hugh Peter to Nicholas Bond for £100 “for the Iron worke,” March 23, 1642[–3] (Winthrop Papers, i. 516).
40 See pp. 11, 60–61, 65, below.
41 See pp. 11, 14–15, 92, 99, 112–115, below.
42 Child to Winthrop, March 1, 1644[–5] (Winthrop Papers, iii. 153–155).
43 Winthrop’s draught of a petition to Parliament, perhaps never presented (Winthrop Papers, iv. 36–37; cf. 2 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, viii. 13, 14 note). He alleged that he was damnified above £1000 for delay and for wear and tear of workmen. Emanuel Downing, who was also interested in the iron works, seems to have been on the same ship (iii. 152).
44 Winthrop Papers, iii. 151–152.
45 Winthrop Papers, i. 60. Downing had left Massachusetts again late in 1644 or early in 1645 (id., i. 89), bringing a letter from Winthrop to Child, to which Child’s letter of March 1, 1644[–5], is a reply.
46 Winthrop Papers, iii. 153.
47 Emanuel Downing (from London) to John Winthrop, Jr., February 25, 1644– (Winthrop Papers, i. 61; cf. i. 62–64, and 2 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, iii. 190–197).
48 2 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, viii. 13–14
49 Town Records (Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, ii. 77; cf. pp. 91–92, 127); Suffolk Deeds, i. 73.
50 Lewis and Newhall, History of Lynn, index, s. v. iron works; Pattee, History of Old Braintree and Quincy, pp. 450–472; E. P. Robinson, Essex Institute Historical Collections, xviii. 241–254; N. M. Hawkes, Register of the Lynn Historical Society for 1902, pp. 46–60.
51 Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 61–62; Winthrop, ii. 261 (212–213). The Company’s privileges were afterwards extended or otherwise modified in their favor (Records, ii. 81–82, 125–128, 185–186).
52 Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 81–82.
53 On June 4, 1645, nine persons (including Robert Child), adventurers for the iron works, wrote to Winthrop introducing “our agent,” Mr. Richard Leader, now sent over (2 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, viii. 15–16). Emanuel Downing, writing to Winthrop from England on February 25, March 3, and May 5, 1645, has many suggestions as to what compensation Winthrop should receive for his past services (Winthrop Papers, i. 61–64).
54 Records and Files of the Quarterly Courts of Essex County, Essex Institute, i. 294. Emanuel Downing wrote from Salem to John Winthrop, Jr., February 24, 1650[–1]: “I suppose you haue heard how Mr. Leddar hath left the Iron works . . . Here is one Jeffries come in Mr. Leddars place” (Winthrop Papers, i. 76). In 1651 Leader was in trouble for “threatening and slandering the courts, magistrates, and government” of Massachusetts, and for “affronting” the constable in the execution of his duty. He made his peace by means of an apology in writing (Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 227–228). There is a good brief sketch of him by Dr. Charles E. Banks in Tuttle and Dean, Captain John Mason (Prince Society, 1887), p. 92 note 180; but it is comical to read that his severing his connection with the iron works before the expiration of his contract was “a change which had its beginning, doubtless, in a lack of sympathy with the religious views of his employers.” William Awbrey of London, merchant, was engaged by the adventurers as their agent on August 23, 1650, and soon came to Massachusetts (Suffolk Deeds, i. 216–218). He was acting in this capacity in January, 1651[–2], and for some time thereafter (Suffolk Deeds, i. 178–180, 227, 232). Apparently he coöperated with Gifford. One Mr. Dawes, “a grave man of good fashion,” had come over in 1648 “to oversee Mr. Leader,” but “they could not agree” and he returned before September 30 (John Winthrop to his son John, August 14 and September 30, 1648, in Savage’s Winthrop, 1853, ii. 434–435).
55 Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 103–104; cf. iii. 31.
56 See Beex’s letter to the committee, September 28, 1652, and Webb’s letters to Beex, November 6 and December 14, 1653; letter from John Beex and Thomas Foley to Josias Winslow and Captain Keayne, December 26, 1654 (Records and Files of the Quarterly Courts of Essex County, i. 400–401, ii. 75–91).
57 Suffolk Deeds, i. 306.
58 Records and Files, i. 284, 286, 289–295, 300, 309–310, 319, 332, 335, 336, 347–348, 372–374, 378, 385–386, 393–394, 398–402, 417, 425–426; ii. 130, 193; Suffolk Deeds, ii. 266, 271–272; iii. 3, 30, 137; Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 351, 369–372, 379, 381, 406; iv. i. 155–156, 188, 194–195, 216–220, 237, 241–244, 251–254, 268, 330–331.
59 Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 406, iv. i. 268.
60 Suffolk Deeds, iii. 155–161.
61 Massachusetts Colony Records, iv. i. 311.
62 Records and Files, ii. 71–72, 74–97, 116. Cf. Lords’ Journals, xi. 38, 41; Historical Manuscripts Commission, Seventh Report, Appendix, p. 87.
63 Records and Files, ii. 389.
64 Calendar of State Papers, America and West Indies, 1661–1668, p. 17.
65 Wonder-working Providence, 1654, bk. iii. chap. 6, p. 207.
66 Winthrop Papers, iii. 153–155.
67 Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 75 (after May 29). Child mentions the Nashaway mine in his Answer to Boot (see p. 112, below).
68 Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 71; Winthrop Papers, i. 517–518. Cf. Winthrop’s 1661 will (Waters, Sketch of the Life of John Winthrop the Younger, p. 70).
69 Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 60; Winthrop, ii. 193–194 (160–161), 218 219 (178–179), 229 (187). The adventurers were Valentine Hill, Robert Sedgwick, William Tinge, Francis Norton, Thomas Clarke, Joshua Hewes, and William Aspinwall.
70 Winthrop, ii. 82 (68).
71 See his letter of November 23, 1632 (Winthrop Papers, i. 480–481), and a note in Howes’s hand in a copy of Sir Dudley Digges’s essay Of the Circumference of the Earth, or A Treatise of the North-east-passage (1612) which Howes sent to Winthrop in 1632 and which is in the library of the Massachusetts Historical Society (Winthrop Papers, i. 480 note): see Ford, Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, lii. 278. In a letter of September 3, 1636, Howes asks “What newes of the Lake?” (Winthrop Papers, i. 503).
72 Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 53–54. The original petition of the adventurers (Richard Saltonstall, Simon Bradstreet, Samuel Symonds, Richard Dummer, William Hubbard, William Hathorne, and William Payne) is in the Massachusetts Archives, cxix. 5.
73 I. e., utilize.
74 Winthrop Papers, i. 108.
75 James Graham in his report of title, 1688, declares: “I do Also find that . . . Richard, Vines by his Certaine Writing under his hand and Seale Bearing Date ye Last Day of September one thousand Six hundred fourty five did convey and Selljunto Robert Child Phisicion his heires and Assignes all that Parcell of Land on ye South Side of ye River Swackadock Alias Saco in the Province of Maine as is Said in the Above Graunt but find No Conveyance from said Child or from any Vnder him” (Documentary History of the State of Maine, iv. 443). For the Vines patent see Documentary History of the State of Maine, vii. 121–125. “I Richard Vines of Saco gen haue barganed and Sould the patent aboue Specified vnto Robert Childe Esqr Doct°: of phisick and given him livery and seasin. Vpon the [ ] day of 8ber 1645 in the presence of Mr Addam Winthorpeand Mr Beniamin Gillam” (York Deeds, i. ii. 9; Folsom, History of Saco and Biddeford, 1830, pp. 74, 319). On October 22, 1645, William Aspinwall “attested a Copie” of Vines’s deed to Child (Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xxxii. 10).
76 The fullest account of the whole affair is that by W. T. R. Marvin in his reprint of New-Englands Jonas (Boston, 1869). This is so detailed, and — in the main — so clear and accurate, that my review of the facts may seem a work of supererogation. Still, there are a good many points in which Marvin’s narrative needs correction or supplement, and some of them are of much significance. It was impossible to indicate these points and to enforce their bearing on the subject without telling the whole story. Palfrey’s treatment of the episode (History of New England, book ii, chapter 4) is admirable, especially for the lucidity with which the relations of the Remonstrance to English politics are brought out; but it is not quite full enough for my purpose. Besides, his arguments have been treated so cavalierly by some recent writers that a reopening of the case is at least excusable. Bancroft (History of the United States, 19th ed., 1862, chap. x., i. 437–444) is also excellent, but his plan does not call for details. Most or all of the other important accounts are cited in the course of this paper. Winthrop is naturally our chief authority; he is supplemented by John Child’s New-Englands Jonas, Winslow’s New-Englands Salamander, and Johnson’s Wonder-working Providence. Hubbard depends entirely upon Winthrop, but does not always follow him with due care (chap. 55, ed. 1848, pp. 500, 512–518). Hutchinson is of some use, since he apparently had access to documents now lost (see p. 41 note 1, below), but he unfortunately confused the Remonstrants with the Hingham petitioners (see p. 25, below) — an error found also in Old-mixon’s British Empire in America (2d ed., 1741, i. 88–90), in Neal’s History of New-England, 1720, i. 213–218, and in Chalmers’s Political Annals of the Present United Colonies, 1780, i. 179–181. From one of these sources it has made its way into Grahame’s History of the Rise and Progress of the United States, 1827, i. 320–325.
77 New-Englands Jonas, p. 13.
78 Winthrop, ii. 320–321 (261–262). The Court convened on May 6 (Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 61; Winthrop, ii. 316 ) and “lasted near three weeks” (Winthrop, ibid.).
79 New-Englands Jonas, p. 14.
80 The text of the Remonstrance may be found in New-Englands Jonas, pp. 6–13, and in the Hutchinson Papers, i. 214–223. There is a very brief abstract, summing up the main complaints and demands, in the Massachusetts Archives, cvi. 6 (printed by Sumner, History of East Boston, pp. 101–102).
81 See Winthrop, ii. 319, 340, 391 (260–261, 278, 321); Winslow, New-Englands Salamander, pp. i. 16–18, 23. The history of Vassall’s activity is obscure. It is certain, however, that he carried to England certain petitions against the colonial government (one apparently from the Bay and another from Plymouth) by the Supply, which sailed from Boston November 9, 1646 (see p. 33, below), and that he had been occupied with these before Child’s Remonstrance was presented. On Yassall’s character, see the defence of him in 1 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, vi. 471–479.
82 See p. 44, below.
83 Winslow, New-Englands Salamander, p. 6.
84 Winthrop Papers, i. 182.
85 I. e., “are well advanced.”
86 See Winthrop, ii. 332 (272).
87 Winthrop, ii. 342–344 (280–282).
88 Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 154–156; iii. 70–73; Winthrop, ii. 323–324 (264–265).
89 Palfrey, History of New England, 1860, ii. 170; Marvin, New-Englands Jonas, pp. xxvii–xxviii.
90 John Child, New-Englands Jonas, p. 13.
91 Winthrop, ii. 323 (264).
92 Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 109, 128, 157, 196; iii. 26–27, 46–47, 74–75, 84–85, 87–88.
93 Winthrop, ii. 321 (262).
94 Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 197; iii. 109–110.
95 Bk. iii. chap. 3, p. 202.
96 Perhaps the Governor (Winthrop) or the Deputy Governor (Thomas Dudley).
97 This was the famous preacher whose book justifying the trial of Charles I (Ὑβριστοδίκαι. The Obstructours of Justice. Or A Defence of the Honourable Sentence passed upon the late King, by the High Court of Justice. London, 1649) had the honor to be burned by the common hangman in 1660 along with Milton’s Defensio pro Populo Anglicano and Εἰκονοκλάστης (Chalmers, Supplemental Apology, 1799, pp. 7–9; Masson, Life of Milton, vi. 181–182, 193). He became Vicar of St. Stephen’s, Coleman Street, London, December 18, 1633, succeeding John Davenport, who had resigned (Newcourt, Repertorium, i. 537; Hennessy, Novum Repertorium, p.385), and he was sequestered May 22, 1645 (Hennessy, p. cliv note u 1; cf. p. 470), by the Committee for Plundered Ministers (Freshfield, Some Remarks upon the Book of Records, etc., from Archæologia, vol. 1. p. 8) but was reinstated by Parliament in 1649 (Freshfield, pp. 10–11). Meantime he had been minister of a private congregation, which was now received very hospitably by the vestry: the details of the arrangement are extremely curious (Freshfield, pp. 11–12; W. A. Shaw, History of the English Church during the Civil Wars and under the Commonwealth, 1900, ii. 134–136). Neal describes him succinctly as “a learned Divine, and a quick Disputant, but of a peculiar Mould, being a Republican, an Independant, and a thorough Arminian” (History of the Puritans, iii. 391, ed. 1736); cf. Burnet, Own Time, ed. Airy, 1897, i. 283–284. See also Baylie, Dissuasive, 1645, p. 56; Cotton, The Way of Congregational Churches Cleared, 1648, pt. i. pp. 23–28.
98 New-Englands Salamander, p. 3.
99 Declaration, November, 1646 (Hutchinson Papers, i. 240).
100 Neal, History of the Puritans, iii. 391–392 (1736). The New England Independents, the Remonstrants complained, would not admit sober and godly members of the [Presbyterated] Church of England to the Lord’s table (or their children to baptism) without their previous assent to the covenant of some local church (Hutchinson Papers, pp. 193–194, Prince Society, i. 220–221). As to baptizing the children of non-church-members (in the New England sense), there was, as a matter of fact, great diversity of practice. This is clearly set forth in the resolutions of the General Court in May, 1646, recommending the Cambridge assembly or synod of 1646 (Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 70–73; cf. Winthrop, ii. 323–324 [264–265], 329–332 [269–271]). As to communion, it seems clear (from a kind of agreement discernible in the gingerly-conducted debate on this point in Hypocrisie Unmasked, New-Englands Jonas, and New-Englands Salamander) that Presbyterians were sometimes allowed to communicate without actually joining a New England church. We should note, further, that to extend the right of communion to all parishioners indiscriminately was no more a principle of Presbyterian than of Congregational discipline. On the contrary, the Presbyterian system required that only such parishioners should communicate as had passed a catechetical test and were also certified by the elders as of moral and godly conduct. This principle, indeed, was regarded as so vital by the Presbyterian clergy in England that, when a parish declined to assent to it, they in many instances refused to administer the sacrament at all. On the whole subject see the excellent discussion in Dr. William A. Shaw’s History of the English Church during the Civil Wars and under the Commonwealth, London, 1900, ii. 142–164.
101 “A freeman, but no member of any church, and the reason hath beene his professed affection to the hierarchie” (Declaration of the General Court, November, 1646, Hutchinson Papers, i. 239).
102 Declaration of November, 1646 (Hutchinson Papers, i. 239). It is he, undoubtedly to whom the same document refers in the following sentence: “These remonstrants are now come to the church doore, when one of theire companie gives them the slipp, not dareing (it seemes) to enter for feare of an admonition” (i. 241). This accords with what Winslow says of his approving the New England church system.
103 Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 51; cf. iii. 64. Emanuel Downing wasone of the petitioners. Cf. p. 29 note 1, below. The counter-petition of 1646 — “that such Lawes or orders as are in force amongst vs against Anabaptists orother erronious persones . . . may not be abrogated . . . nor any waies weakned” — is in the Massachusetts Archives, x. 210–211.
104 Hutchinson Papers, i. 239–240.
105 Samuel, xv. 11.
106 Declaration of the General Court, November session, 1646, Hutchinson Papers, i. 239.
107 History of Hingham, ii. 112, iii. 101–102.
108 ii. 112.
109 “Hee refuseth to baptize no children that are tendred to him (although this liberty stands not upon a Presbyterian bottom)” writes Winslow, Hypocrisie Unmasked, p. 100. Major Child thus challenges Winslow: “Dares Mr. Winslow say that Mr. Hubard was not punished neither directly nor indirectly, for baptizing some children whose parents were not members of their Churches, and that his sharp fines & disgracefull being bound to the good behaviour, had no influence from the baptism of those children?” (New-Englands Jonas, p. ). Winslow replies: “For answer, I doe and dare affirme in my conscience, that I am firmly perswaded hee was not” (New-Englands Salamander, p. 28). If, as it would seem, Burton’s children were among those for whose baptism Hobart was blamed, Burton’s impulse to join the Remonstrants would have been especially powerful.
110 Winthrop, ii. 288 (235); Hypocrisie Unmasked, p. 99.
111 Winthrop, ii. 367 (302), justifies such an inference.
112 From the official Relation (New-Englands Jonas, p. 4); Winthrop, ii. 271–288, 312–313 (221–236, 255–256). Cf. New-Englands Salamander, pp. 4–6, 28.
113 Cf. New-Englands Salamander, p. 5.
114 Winthrop, ii. 340 (278–279).
115 New-Englands Jonas, pp. 3–5.
116 Winthrop, ii. 367–368 (302).
117 History of Hingham, ii. 112.
118 Winthrop, ii. 367 (302). John Otis, Burton’s father-in-law, died on May 31, 1657, and in his will, dated May 30, left “to my daughter Margaret Burtonand her three children twenty shillings amongst them, a small brasse pot, and a canvass skillet” (History of Hingham, iii. 102).
119 New Haven Colony Records, i. 27, 50, 91; F. B. Dexter, Papers of the New Haven Colony Historical Society, iii. 227; Lechford’s Note Book, p. 224 (cf. p. 232), in American Antiquarian Society Transactions and Collections, vii. 414 (cf. p. 426); Winthrop, i. 272 (228).
120 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, ix. 17, 20, 33; Du Gard’s MS., excerpted in 2 Notes and Queries, ix. 101, and New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xiv. 201; Dexter, as above, iii. 228–232. Cf. Waters, Gleanings, i. 65. On July 17, 1644, Israel Stoughton in his will, drawn up in England, made David Yale one of his overseers (New England Historical and Genealogical Register, iv. 52).
121 Suffolk Deeds, ii. 47. Cf. our Publications, xx. 264.
122 Suffolk Deeds, i. 192.
123 Winthrop Papers, ii. 501.
124 Suffolk Deeds, ii. 48.
125 Dexter, as above, iii. 231–232.
126 Her daughter, the wife of Governor Edward Hopkins, was insane for many years (Waters, Gleanings, p. 64; Winthrop, ii. 265–266 [216–217]).
127 The report of the trial, from the Church Records, is in the Papers of the New Haven Colony Historical Society, v. 133–148; cf. Leonard Bacon, Thirteen Historical Discourses, 1839, pp. 296–306; F. B. Dexter, Historical Catalogue of the Members of the First Church in New Haven, 1914, pp. 2–3.
128 Maverick, whatever his wrongs and his virtues, was not always law-abiding. Witness his punishment for “confederacy” with Thomas Owen in the latter’s escape from prison in 1641 (Massachusetts Colony Records, i. 335; Winthrop, ii. 61–62 [51–52]). In that same year he was also thought to be “privey to the flight of one Bell,” who had jumped his bail (Maverick to Winthrop, March 1, 1640[–1], Winthrop Papers, ii. 308–309); nor was this the first time that he had been suspected of harboring shady characters (Massachusetts Colony Records, i 140, cf. i. 159). The administration had another ground of offence against him of very recent date. In 1644 Madame la Tour had got judgment in £2000 damages in a Massachusetts court against Alderman Barclay of London; and in the next year Barclay had attached Thomas Fowle’s ship and had brought suit against Stephen Winthrop, Recorder of the court that found for Madame la Tour, and Captain John Weld, one of the jurymen (Winthrop, ii. 244–248 [198–202]; letters of Stephen Winthrop, March 1, 1644[–5], and March 27, 1646, Winthrop Papers, iv. 200, 205). A mainstay of his case was “a certificate of the proceedings of the [Massachusetts] court under the hands of divers persons of good credit here, who although they reported truth for the most part, yet not the whole truth, being somewhat prejudiced in the case.” “These persons,” adds Winthrop, “were called in question about it after, for the offence was great, and they had been censured for it, if proof could have been had for a legal conviction.” Who they were, he does not inform us, but we learn from another source that one of them was Maverick, for Stephen Winthrop writes to his brother John from London, March 1, 1644[–5]: “Major Sedgwick, Mr Rusell, Mr Maverick & Trerise were they yt did informe agt ye country vnder theire hands” (Winthrop Papers, iv. 200). Barclay’s efforts were in vain, but he put Fowle, Weld, and Stephen Winthrop to considerable expense, and their petitions to the General Court in 1645 for reimbursement were unavailing (Massachusetts Colony Records, ii 135, iii. 49–50). The original petitions are in the Massachusetts Archives, ii. 489 (Winthrop and Weld), lx. 142 (Fowle). See also Lords’ Journals, vii. 352, 366, 400; Historical Manuscripts Commission, Sixth Report, Appendix, pp. 58, 59, 61, 63; 3 Massachusetts Historical Collections, vii. 98–99, 105–106.
129 Fowle and Yale (and apparently Dand) were merchants and as such were doubtless influenced by the feeling that the severity of the colonial government discouraged immigration and was damaging to trade. Thus their wish for greater freedom in religious matters may have rested in part (by no means discreditably) on a sound commercial basis. If so, they were under a singular misapprehension in supposing that the establishment of a Presbyterian régime would foster liberty. There is plenty of evidence that friends of New England felt that the harshness toward the Anabaptists and other sectaries was bad for the Colony. On March 1, 1644[–5], Stephen Winthrop wrote from London to his brother John: “Heere is great complaint agt vs for or severetye agt Anabaptist. It doth diseourag any people from coming to vs for fear they should be banished if they disent from vs in opinion” (Winthrop Papers, iv. 200). On September 4, [1646,] Hugh Peter wrote to the younger Winthrop: “None will come to you because you persecute” (Winthrop Papers, i. 109), and Coddingtonrefers to this remark in a letter of November 11, 1646, to the elder Winthrop: “Mr Petters writes in yt yow sent to yor sonn, yt yow ꝑsecute” (Charles Deane, Some Notices of Samuel Gorton, Boston, 1850, p. 41). Again, on May 5, 1647, Peter writes to John Winthrop, Senior: “Ah sweet New England! & yet sweeter if diuisions bee not among you, if you will giue any incouragement to those that are godly and shall differ etc. I pray doe what you can herin, & know that your example swayse here” (Winthrop Papers, i. 111; cf. 1 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, x. 19). Giles Firmin writes to the elder Winthrop on July 1, 1646, with regard to Hugh Peter: “I could wish hee did not too much countenance the Opinionists, which wee did so cast out in N. England. I know he abhorrs them in his heart, but hee hath many hang vpon him, being a man of such vse. I hope God will preserue him spottlesse, notwithstanding vile aspersions cast vpon him, but I perceiue it is by the Presbyterians, against whom sometime hee lets dropp a sharp word” (Winthrop Papers, ii. 277). Cotton, in The Way of Congregational Churches Cleared (London, 1648), pt. i. p. 22, remarks: “Surely the way which is practised in New-England cannot justly be taxed for too much connivence to all kinde of Sects: wee here doe rather heare ill for too much rigour.”
130 Dr. H. M. Dexter describes the Remonstrants accurately enough as “a little cabal of Presbyterians and others in Massachusetts — undertaking to work with the aid of the very large number who by this time were in the country resident, who were not members of the churches, and so were debarred from the privileges of freemen” (Congregationalism, New York, 1880, p. 435).
131 Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 162; Winthrop, ii. 346 (283).
132 See p. 8, above.
133 Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 79.
134 Winthrop, ii. 347 (284).
135 Winthrop, ii. 346 (284).
136 Hutchinson Papers, i. 223–247. The manuscript is in the Massachusetts Archives, x. 321–337.
137 Winthrop, ii. 346 (284).
138 New-Englands Jonas, p. 2; Winslow, New-Englands Salamander, p. 3.
139 Cf. the language of Henry Gardener, New-Englands Vindication, 1660: “What Law can we have or expect that be of the Church of England, they Independents, so our Antagonists, incompetent Judges, being parties in action, and opposite in Religion [?]” (pp. 6–7; p. 36, ed. Banks, Gorges Society).
140 Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 88–89 (session of November 4, 1646).
The exact date cannot be determined, but it was between November 4, when the Court came in, and November 9, when the Supply sailed.
141 See p. 38, below.
142 Winthrop, ii. 347–348 (284–285); cf. New-Englands Salamander, p. 12.
143 It will be noted that the Record testifies that there was an intermission in the hearing or examination of Smith and Fowle. Doubtless it was caused by the time it took to summon Child and the others.
144 The allusion is to the Declaration of the General Court, session of November 4, 1646 (see p. 31, above).
145 John Winthrop to John Winthrop, Jr., November 16, 1646, printed in the Appendix to Savage’s Winthrop, ii. 430.
146 John Winthrop to John Winthrop, Jr., May 14, 1647: “Captain Harding arrived at Bristol 19 (10). They went from here 9 (9), and had a very tempestuous voyage, and were carried among the rocks at Scilly, where never ship came” (Savage’s Winthrop, ii. 432). Cf. Winslow, New-Englands Salamander, pp. 4, 19.
147 Winslow is our authority for the names that follow (New-Englands Salamander, pp. 17, 18, 20).
148 Winthrop Papers, ii. 138–139. The petition of Herbert Pelham and Richard Saltonstall (who also wished to be relieved of this duty) is dated November 17, 1646, and must have been presented to the court by the latter, since Pelham sailed on the 9th. Yet it is all in Pelham’s hand (date included) except Saltonstall’s signature. For Saltonstall’s appointment (1645), see Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 48.
149 See the Rev. Patrick Copland’s letter to John Winthrop, September 30, 1647 (Winthrop Papers, iii. 351).
150 Winthrop’s letter (p. 33 note 3 above); New Englands Salamander, pp. 4, 18–20 (cf. New-Englands Jonas, pp. [18–19]). Cf. Copland to Winthrop, September 30, 1647: “Our friends [Sayles and Golding] write they had a miserable voyage from you to old England, but at last they safely arrived at their native Country;” he is giving news contained in their letters of March 15, 1647 (Winthrop Papers, iii. 351–352).
151 New-Englands Salamander, pp. 14–17. The petition was Vassall’s.
152 So he told Winslow in London, with permission to print the fact in his New-Englands Salamander (p. 18), John Winthrop, in a letter to John Winthrop, Jr., November 16, 1646, says that “Mr Peters is resolued to goe by Malago, wth Capt Hawkins” (Savage’s Winthrop, 2d ed., Appendix, ii. 430). This ship “loosed fro Nantasket” on December 19, 1646, and arrived at Malaga on January 19, 1647 (Thomas Peters to Governor Winthrop, from Malaga Road, February 17, 1646[–7], Winthrop Papers, ii. 428). Peters was in London as early as April 27, 1647 (ii. 431).
153 I have followed Winslow’s account of this Jonah incident, which is based on inquiries made among the passengers — particularly on information furnished by Captains Sayles, Leverett, and Harding, and Mr. Richard Sadler. The account in New-Englands Jonas does not differ in any essential respect, but is less careful and less circumstantial.
154 See Winthrop, ii. 340, 391 (279, 321).
155 New-Englands Jonas, p. .
156 See Lefroy, Bermudas, i. 569–587, 594–595, 600–633, 711–713; Winthrop, ii 408–409 (334–336); Sibley, Harvard Graduates, i. 137–140; Winthrop Papers, iii. 340–342, 350–354; unpublished letter of the Rev. Patrick Copland to Winthrop, August 25, 1646, Davis Papers, fol. 7 (Massachusetts Historical Society, O. 12, 3); Colonial Society Publications, xiii. 53–55; A declaration of the Right Honourable Robert, Earle of Warwick, . . . Governour of the Company of London for the Plantation of the Summer Islands; And of the said Company: To the Colony and Plantation there. October 23, 1644 (Harvard College Library). What might have happened in Massachusetts, had Child’s conspiracy not been frustrated, Winthrop was able to read in the Bermuda case in a letter from William Rener (March 31, 1647) which he may have received before Child was sentenced: “The Honrll Companye in London for or Ilands, hathe sent a newe Gouernor. At his Arriuall called an Assemblye, and by multiplicitye of vote chose suche Burgesses as serued for the ende pr tended, the greatest p̃te of the Counscell were independants (as they call them) but by this Assemblye to be caste of, ipso facto; haueinge not else against them; Our Elders not suffered to teache the worde, nor anye of that (soe called) independant waye to beare anye office in Com̄onwealthe” (Winthrop Papers, iii. 340).
157 Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 86.
158 Winthrop, ii. 372 (305).
159 Winthrop, ii. 288 (235). Cf. Hypocrisie Unmasked, p. 99.
160 The Record says expressly that Fowle was “at sea” when judgment was passed (iii. 94).
161 Winthrop, ii. 348–350 (285–287); Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 90–91.
162 Winthrop, ii. 350–355 (287–291).
163 Winthrop’s words (ii. 354 ), “they make an apology for their appeal,” must not be misconstrued: apology is used in its original meaning, “defence.”
164 Winthrop, ii. 354 (290).
165 Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 94; Winthrop, ii. 355–356 (291–292).
166 Winthrop, ii. 356 (292).
167 Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 94 (Richard Russell, Henry Bartholmew, Bozon Allen, Joshua Hubbard, Edward Carleton). Allen and Hubbard (Hobart) were the Hingham men, and the latter was the minister’s brother.
168 Ibid.; Winthrop, ii. 355 (291).
169 Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 94.
170 Winthrop, ii. 356 (292).
171 This may be inferred not only from its place in the record, but also from the words of Winthrop, ii. 356 (292): “So the court was dissolved.”
172 On November 16, 1646, John Winthrop wrote to his son John, respecting the Remonstrants: “We are like to proceed to some Censure [i. e., judgment] for their appeal, if not for the Petition” (letter in Savage’s Winthrop, ii. 430).
173 Contrast the language of the sentence imposed in May, 1647, when it was expressly provided that the defendants should be imprisoned until their fines were paid or security given (Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 113).
174 Winslow says: “Though they were fined, yet the fines were not levied” (New-Englands Salamander, p. 2). Child’s letter to John Winthrop, Jr., May 14, 1647, shows that none of the fines had been paid at that date: “I am in some measure streightned for things necessary, esp. if or fines be demaunded” (Winthrop Papers, iii. 158).
175 He writes to John Winthrop, Jr., May 14, 1647: “I neglected to write to my freinds for a supply [of money] this yeare, because my Intentions were for England” (Winthrop Papers, iii. 157–158).
176 Winthrop, ii. 356 (292). I suppose this was Major Nehemiah Bourne’s ship, which, on November 16, 1646, was expected to be ready to sail within “this 14 dayes” (John Winthrop to John Winthrop, Jr., in the Appendix to Savage’s Winthrop, 2d ed., ii. 430). Marvin says inadvertently that Child “was hastily preparing to return to England with Vassal and Fowle” (New-Englands Jonas, Introduction, p. xxxix).
177 Winthrop, ii. 356–357 (292–293). Winthrop, ii. 358 (294), says that “the writings” were in Child’s hand. Winslow says that one of the “Coppies” was in Child’s hand, another in Dand’s (New-Englands Salamander, p. 13). A document in the Massachusetts Archives, cvi. 6 a (printed below, p. 55), says that “the foule draughts both of Petition & Queris are like his [Child’s] hand.”
178 Emancipation of Massachusetts, Boston, 1887 [really 1886], p. 92.
179 Winthrop, ii. 357–358 (293). Hutchinson (2d ed., 1765, i. 147–149), gives the fullest account of the contents of the seized documents, but he speaks of only one petition, a portion of which was the request for the answers to certain queries. Winthrop, ii. 359 (295), says that the “petitions and queries intended for England” are in the records of “that court,” but they are not now to be found there nor have the originals been discovered.
180 Winthrop Papers, i. 381. Pynchon goes on to suggest certain measures which the Colony may well take to obviate criticisms made by the Remonstrants.
181 Winthrop, ii. 358 (294).
182 So I understand the combined testimony of Child’s letter to the younger Winthrop, March 15, 1646[–7] (Winthrop Papers, iii. 156), and of New-Englands Jonas, p. , Winthrop, ii. 358 (294), says merely: “Yet, upon tender of sufficient bail, he was set at liberty, but confined to his house, and to appear at the next court of assistants.”
183 Winthrop, ii. 358–359 (294–295); cf. New Englands Salamander, p. 13.
184 Winthrop, ii. 367 (301).
185 I. e., three months more (in reality, about two months).
186 Winthrop Papers, iii. 156. I infer from this letter that Child had for three months been under bonds not to leave the town limits, and that he refused to renew his bond and went to prison.
187 See Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 148.
188 Our associate Mr. Samuel C. Clough states that this house was on the westerly side of the prison land, fronting Court Street, now covered in part by the annex to the City Hall.
189 Winthrop, ii. 374–375 (307).
190 Winthrop Papers, iii. 157.
191 Gorton and his comrades left Rhode Island for “the Dutch plantation” about the middle of August, 1645; there they “lay long,” waiting for a ship, then sailed to Holland, where they “lay long” again before they could get passage for England. These details (but not the date) come from the letter of August 22, 1661, from the inhabitants of Warwick to the General Court of Massachusetts (Rhode Island Historical Society Collections, ii. 228). The best criterion for the date of Gorton’s departure from Rhode Island is the letter of J[ohn]. W[arner]., November 20, 1645, printed in Simplicities Defence, pp. 93–94. In telling Gorton the news from America, Warner begins by informing him that the Bay authorities had provided an army against the Narragansetts, but that, upon Captain Harding’s warning them of the difficulty of the enterprise, they had sent Harding and Wylbour to deal with the savages, associating with them Benedict Arnold as interpreter. Now these events took place in August, 1645 (Plymouth Colony Records, ix. 32 ff, ii. 90), and the commission of Harding, “Welborne,” and Arnold is dated August 18 (ix. 41–42).
192 Winthrop gives both orders in full, ii. 333, 342–344 (272–273, 280–282); see also Rhode Island Colonial Records, i. 367–369.
193 Winthrop, ii. 333–334, 342 (273, 280).
194 “Imprimatur August 3, 1646.” Thomason bought his copy on November 7 (Thomason Catalogue, i. 473).
195 New-Englands Salamander, p. 20; Winthrop, ii. 387 (317). Seccombe (Dictionary of National Biography, lxii. 202) says that “Winslow sailed from Boston in October 1646,” apparently following Jacob B. Moore’s statement (“about the middle of October”) in his Memoirs of American Governors, i. 123. Moore was no doubt misled by Winthrop’s “10ber”, thinking that he should count January as the first month instead of March. The error would not deserve a word if it had not passed from Seccombe into a note in the fine edition of Bradford published by the Massachusetts Historical Society, ii. 394 note 1.
196 On May 5, 1647, Herbert Pelham wrote from London to Winthrop: “For the Busines of the Countrie yow will be more fully informed by my Cosen Winslow, who takes great payns, but as yet can not come to a hearing” (Winthrop Papers, ii. 140). On the same day Hugh Peter wrote to Winthrop: “Appeales will hardly bee ouerthrowne nor doe I mynd it much as a thing you should bee troubled about” (Winthrop Papers, i. 111). Cf. p. 64, below.
197 The date in the title-page, 1646, proves that the book was printed before March 25, 1647, and it was certainly written after Winslow’s arrival, which must have taken place in January. It was entered in the Stationers’ Register on February 22, 1646[–7] (Stationers’ Register, 1640–1708, Roxburghe Club, i. 263). Winslow himself dates it (p. 77) “not much above two moneths” after his departure from New England. Thomason dated it October 2 (Thomason Catalogue, i. 467), which is manifestly wrong, for Winslow did not leave New England until about the middle of December, and he states expressly that he first saw Gorton’s book in England: “When I came over, I found that Gorton had enlarged his complaint by publishing a booke called Simplicities defence against Seven-headed Policy” (New-Englands Salamander, p. 22; cf. Hypocrisie Unmasked, p. 63).
198 Major Child speaks of 1646 as “this year” (p. ). This is in the body of his tract. His reply to Hypocrisie Unmasked is in the form of a “Post-Script,” which may have been written after the rest of the book was in type. New-Englands Jonas is reprinted in part in 2 Massachusetts Historical Collections, iv. 107–120, and in its entirety by W. T. R. Marvin (Boston, 1869) with a good introduction. It may also be found in Force’s Tracts, iv, no. 3. I have used a copy of the original in the Boston Athenæum.
199 Thomason Catalogue, i. 504.
200 This is Thomason’s date (Catalogue, i. 513) and must be close to the day of publication. When Winslow wrote, he had not yet been heard by the Commissioners, for he says that he has been sent over by “the government of the Massachusets” to “render a reason” to the Commissioners with reference to the Gorton business, “which I still attend till their more weighty occasions will permit them to heare” (Salamander, p. 22). This passage, then, was certainly written before May 25, the date of their preliminary answer, which was so favorable that Winslow could hardly have refrained from alluding to it if it had already been given when he wrote. The tract is reprinted in 3 Massachusetts Historical Collections, ii. 110–145. I have used the copy of the original in the Harvard College Library.
201 See p. 87, below.
202 New-Englands Jonas, p. 13 [i. e., 21].
203 See Winslow’s Epistle Dedicatory to Hypocrisie Unmasked.
204 Hypocrisie Unmasked, pp. 99–100.
205 In the title-page of New-Englands Salamander, Winslow describes New-Englands Jonas as “an irreligious and scornefull Pamphlet, . . . Owned by Major Iohn Childe, but not probable to be written by him.” He ascribes the book to “New-Englands Salamander,” that is, as we learn from Winthrop (ii. 391 ), to William Vassall. At all events, he is convinced that Vassall was Major Child’s “chief animator to this undertaking” (p. 1), and the Post-Script he “verily beleeves” the Salamander “penned every word” (p. 13). In fact, Child’s tract (except for this Post-Script) is mostly occupied by copies of documents (the Hingham Petition, with the record of subsequent proceedings in that affair; the Remonstrance; the Capital Laws of Massachusetts; the Oath of a Freeman) and by the story of throwing the petition overboard, which he says (p. 2) is given “verbatim, as it was delivered to me in writing by a Gentleman that was then a passenger in the Ship.” Vassall was a passenger.
206 See pp. 42–44, above.
207 See Winslow’s letter to Winthrop, November 24, 1645 (Hutchinson Papers, i. 172–175). This letter is generally, and doubtless rightly, thought to refer to Vassall (Palfrey, History of New England, ii. 167 note 4). The proposition which Winslow says was brought before the Plymouth Court was “to allow and maintaine full and free tollerance of religion to all men that would preserve the civill peace and submit unto government; and there was no limitation or exception against Turke, Jew, Papist, Arian, Socinian, Nicholaytan, Familist, or any other.” Cf. 1 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, vi. 476–479.
208 No copy of Vassall’s petition or petitions is known. See Winthrop, ii. 319–320, 340, 391 (260–261, 278–279, 321); New-Englands Jonas, p. 12 [error for 18]; New-Englands Salamander, pp. 16, 18, 23.
209 New-Englands Jonas, p. 13 [error for 19].
210 Winthrop, ii. 360–364 (295–298).
211 As Winthrop, ii. 391 (321), puts it, “Mr. Vassall, finding no entertainment for his petitions, went to Barbados.” This news seems to have reached Boston in May, 1648.
212 See p. 44, above.
213 I. e., the Commissioners’ order of May 15, 1646, printed in Winthrop, ii. 342–344 (280–282).
214 Winthrop, ii. 389–390 (319–320).
215 Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 97 (session of November 4, 1646); Winthrop, ii. 362–363 (297).
216 Winthrop, ii. 357 (293).
217 See pp. 53–55, 56, below.
218 Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 113.
219 Winthrop, ii. 367 (301).
220 Felt, Annals of Salem, 1827, p. 166. The General Court of November, 1646, granted him a license at the rate of £15 a year (Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 173).
221 Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 133 (cf. ii. 110).
222 Records and Files of the Quarterly Courts of Essex County, i. 91. He was not, as Felt (p. 172) asserts, fined, for the law against playing “shovelboard” in public houses was not passed until the May 26 session of the General Court, 1647 (Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 195).
223 He had other troubles, for on August 4, 1646, he was “discharged of his presentment for affronting the constable, having confessed publicly.” It appears that he had twice affronted this officer, once when the latter had visited his house on an errand about a “hew and crye,” and again when he demanded Clark’s “measure” to compare it with the town standard, thinking the landlord’s measure too small (Records and Files of the Quarterly Courts of Essex County, i. 101). He had lawsuits in 1640, 1642, and 1643 (i. 20, 22, 49, 55), but anyhow our forefathers were a litigious lot.
224 Felt, Annals of Salem, p. 175; Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 193. The inventory of his estate (sworn to by his widow, Katherine Clark) is dated June 25, 1647 (Records and Files, as above, i. 119).
225 Winthrop, ii. 359 (295) says that the trial was in June — “(4) 47.” See p. 58, below.
226 On June 9, 1647, Mr. Ezekiel Rogers of Rowley preached at the Cambridge Synod, the Magistrates and Deputies being present, and he “took occasion to speak of the petitioners, (then in question before the court,) and exhorted the court to do justice upon them, yet with desire of favor to such as had been drawn in, etc., and should submit” (Winthrop, ii. 376 ).
227 Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 195–196.
228 The second word is very indistinct, but seems to be meant for “motions” or “Notions.”
229 Massachusetts Archives, cvi. 6 a.
230 Error for Petitions.
231 Foy and Barlow were apparently sea-captains engaged in the carrying trade between England and the Colony, who testified that Dand had given them copies of both of the seized petitions to take to England. When this delivery was made — whether before or after the raid on Dand’s study — does not appear, nor is it clear whether the petitions were actually taken to England by Foy and Barlow. The Foy mentioned can hardly have been the Captain John Foy (e) so well-known in Boston from 1672 (Suffolk Deeds, vii. 317) till his death in 1715 (Sewall’s Diary, iii. 68), but may have been an older relative. Captain John Foy bought a house here in 1673 (Suffolk Deeds, viii. 133), took the oath of allegiance in 1678 (Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xxix. 165), and had by his wife Dorothy (died 1724: Sewall’s Diary, iii. 328) nine children born in Boston 1672–1689 (Record Commissioners’ Reports, ix. 123, 132, 145, 151, 157, 165, 174, 184). He is often mentioned in Sewall’s Diary and Letter-Book and elsewhere (Massachusetts Colony Records, v. 267, 382, 391, 497; Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1693, p. 428; Hinckley Papers, p. 206; Lawrence Hammond’s Diary, 2 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, vii. 157, 159, 168; our Publications, x. 112, xiv. 143; indexes to Toppan’s Edward Randolph, iii, iv, vi; Suffolk Deeds, x–xiv; Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, i; Mather Papers; Winthrop Papers, iv, vi); but is easily confused with his son, the younger Captain John Foy (1674–1730), who was of Charlestown (Wyman, Genealogies and Estates of Charlestown, i. 372–373; Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, iii. 210, 211, ix. 250; Sewall’s Diary, i. 480, 493, ii. 279, 327; Sewall’s Letter-Book, i. 193, 203; Winthrop Papers, iv. 527, 545, v. 515; New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xxiv. 7, 131, 132).
232 This was the petition “from some non-freeman,” in getting signatures to which Maverick had been! “very active.” See Winthrop, ii. 358, 367 (293–294, 301). This memorandum is the only evidence we have that it was actually “sent for England.” One copy was seized in Dand’s study — perhaps the “foule draught” mentioned below. It appears, however, that the authorities had a copy with twenty-five signatures that was seized in the raid on Dand (Winthrop, as above), and this can hardly have been the foul draught. What “owninge of it from Bushnel” means is a puzzle. The word owninge is very clear in the MS. It was first written owinge and the n is above the line with a caret. Perhaps “from Bushnel” belongs in sense with “appears,” — i. e. that Maverick countenanced the petition appears from Bushnel’s testimony that he acknowledged it (as a document that he approved).
233 I. e., contrary to his oath as a freeman.
234 This outburst on Smith’s part gave particular offence in those days as being gross disrespect to authority. Times have changed. See Winthrop, ii. 357 (293): “But at Dand’s study they [the officers] found Mr. Smith, who catched up some papers, and when the officer took them from him, he brake out into these speeches, viz. we hope shortly we shall have commission to search the governour’s closet.”
235 Hole in the paper.
236 This seems to mean the Remonstrance. It cannot refer to Vassall’s petition, for Vassall took that over with him on the Supply (see p. 34, above), nor does Burton seem to have had anything to do with it. As to the Remonstrance, it is clear that two copies were on board the Supply. One of them was thrown overboard, the other was used for the text printed in New-Englands Jonas (see pp. 35, 45, above).
237 I. e., apparently “would quiet it.” The passage seems to mean that Child, in conversation, had been heard to say that certain queries that were to be sent to England would put an end to his grievances. This remark was thought to refer to the queries afterwards seized in Dand’s study.
238 If the text is right, the phrase must mean “exerting all our abilities.” In that case, we have an example of the verb to through (to “carry through,” “carry out”), hitherto known only as a Scottish word. Perhaps, however, throughing is a scribe’s error for through and the phrase means “to the best of our ability.”
239 Dummer was deputy from Salisbury; Gibbons from Boston; Pendleton from Watertown; Payne from Ipswich; Carlton from Rowley; Clements from Haverhill; Bartholomew from Ipswich; Barney from Salem; Kinsley from Braintree; Bruen (or Brewen) from Gloucester; Pelham from Sudbury; Lothrop from Salem; English from Hampton; Fiske from Wenham (see Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 42, 62, 121–122, 147, 202, 297). Their names all appear in the list of Deputies for 1647 (Records, ii. 186, iii. 105). Four of the persons who were contradicentes in the previous sentence, 1646 — Richard Russell, now Treasurer, Bozon Allen, Joshua Hobart (Hubbard), and Edward Carlton (see p. 38, above) — were members of the 1647 Court, but only one of them (Carlton) now appeared as an objector.
240 Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 114. Lothrop, however, agreed with the Court as to Child and Dand.
241 The formula, in each case, is: “Doctor Child he could not ꝑceed to sentence besids his imprisonment.”
242 See pp. 67, 81–82, below.
243 That is, earlier in this same session. The judgment is not recorded.
244 Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 113.
245 Winthrop, ii. 359 (295).
246 Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 205.
247 Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 241, iii. 125–126; cf. Winthrop, ii. 359 (295).
248 Samuel Maverick’s petition, May 8, 1649 (Massachusetts Archives, B xxxviii. 228, printed by Sumner, History of East Boston, p. 110).
249 Petition of Mary, the wife of Francis Hooke, of Kittery, Maine, “Daughter and Heiresse of Samuel Mavericke, deceased” (Massachusetts Archives, cxxviii. 45; New England Historical and Genealogical Register, viii. 334; Sumner, History of East Boston, p. 107). Mary Maverick married (1) John Palsgrave, February 8, 1655–6, and (2) Francis Hooke, September 20, 1660 (Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, ix. 53, 76). There are several errors in the petition, but there seems to be no reason to doubt the execution of the deed of gift, which is consistent with the fact that, in 1650, Samuel Maverick and his wife, conjointly with their son Nathaniel, conveyed the island to Captain George Briggs of Barbados for 40,000 lbs. of good white sugar (Suffolk Deeds, i. 122–123; Sumner, History of East Boston, p. 178).
250 Samuel Maverick’s petition, May 8, 1649 (Massachusetts Archives, B xxxviii. 228, printed by Sumner, History of East Boston, p. 110).
251 The plural is used because two fines were imposed in June, 1647, £100 for conspiracy and £50 for perjury (see p. 56, above).
252 So Maverick recites in a petition submitted in October, 1648 (Massachusetts Archives, B xxxviii. 227). No copy of the 1647 petition has been found, nor is it mentioned in the Court records.
253 The original of this 1648 petition is in the Massachusetts Archives, B xxxviii. 227; and the approval of a rehearing (signed by William Torrey) and the consent of the Magistrates (in Governor Winthrop’s hand, signed) are appended on the same sheet. The only date given is that noted by Winthrop after his signature: “25 (8) 48”.
254 This note of the Deputies (in William Torrey’s hand, signed) is preserved on a scrap of paper in the Archives (B xxxviii. 227 a) which is docketed “Mr S: Mavericks Petition 1648.” The same scrap shows a memorandum in Winthrop’s hand: “An Answr to this Petn will appear in the Record of the Court holden Nov: 19;” but nothing is to be found in the Court Records.
255 Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 153.
256 Massachusetts Archives, B xxxviii. 228 (Sumner, History of East Boston, p. 110).
257 Massachusetts Archives, B xxxviii. 228 a. I append this memorial (hitherto unprinted) since it furnishes some curious details of the prosecution:
Errors (as I conceiue, in the Coppie of those records I receiued from mr Secretarie)
First yor whole ꝑceeding ag͞s͞t vs seemes to depend on or refusall to answer Intergatories vpon oath, whereas the Comittie of magrts and deputies, had sate diȗse dayes & made returne to the Corte before eu wee were called as appeares by the records.
Further whereas it is declared in the reccor ds that at or appearance when wee were sentenced wee had nothinge further to aleage to hinder the Corts ꝑceedings against vs vnder fauor wee all then desired to see those testimonies vpon wch or sentence was grounded And I in my ꝑticuler answer to the charge against mee desired to haue libertie to make additionall answers for the further Clearing vp of my inocencie wch I could not obtaine
Further where as it is affirm̄ed in the reccords that wee brought in to the Corte or seȗall answers to or seuerall Charges (vnder fauor) It was not soe neither was it in the publique meeting howse, but or answrs were sent for to vs by the marshall, by whom after oure deniall the second time wee sent them
Further the last clawse now on reccord of or sentence Concerning the keepeing of one or twoe in Irons was noe ꝑte of or publique sentence as will appeare by a Coppie of the sentence vnder the Secretaries hand wch I had six dayes after the Corte was ended and affirmed vnder his hand to bee a true Coppie fiue weekes after
Diȗse other both materiall & Circumstantiall errors I conceuie there are Wch for want of time I omitt
The 8. of the 3d m° 1649
The “last clawse” to which Maverick refers seems to have embodied the substance of the order printed on p. 52, above.
258 Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 166–167.
259 iii. 200; iv. i. 18.
260 Egerton MS. 2395, fols. 397–411 (British Museum).
261 2 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, i. 240; New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xxxix. 41.
262 Child to John Winthrop, Jr., from Gravesend, May 13, 1648 (Winthrop Papers, iii. 159).
263 See pp. 10–14, above.
264 See p. 92 note 2, below.
265 Winthrop Papers, iii. 162.
266 iii. 156, 157, 159.
267 Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 199.
268 Leader’s receipt is preserved among the Winthrop MSS., xiv. 104:
Rec of John Winthrop Jnr Esqr the sume of forty pounds by the order & for the vse of doc Robt Childs witnes my hand the 12th day of September 1647
Ꝑ Richard Leader.
An order to Winthrop from Leader in favor of Goodman Arnold for any sum not exceeding £6, dated Boston, July 16, 1646, is also preserved among these manuscripts (xiv. 124). On the back Winthrop has written: “Mr leaders note for G Arnold 6li — wch accordingly Mr Leader paid Dr Child in full of all ye mony I re[c]ived of him in England &c.”
269 Petition printed by Waters, A Sketch of the Life of John Winthrop the Younger, pp. 31–32.
270 Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 219.
271 iii. 256, iv. i. 65.
272 Emancipation of Massachusetts, p. 95.
273 “I freely imparted to you the Countries colorable grounds of suspecting his agency for the great Incendiaries of Europe, . . . yea that the very yeare hee came over, a gentleman in the country (Mr. Peters by name) was advised by letters from a forraign part that the Jesuits had an agent that Sommer in New-England. And that the Countrey comparing his practise with the intelligence were more jealous of him then any; (though to mee he was a meere stranger)” (New-Englands Salamander, p. 2). Cf. p. 7: “Hee is a Gentleman that hath travelled other parts before hee came to us, namely Italy; confesseth hee was twice at Rome, speaketh sometimes highly as I have heard reported in favour of the Jesuites.” In his first extant letter to the younger Winthrop, 1641, Child reveals his reading of the Jesuit Relations, but he certainly does not express approval: “From myne owne library I likewise send you to ꝑvse till I come to New England, Dr Dauisons workes; ye French Jesuits voyages in Canada in 3 Volūes, that you may see how they proceede in the c̃version of those Heathen, and how little the Lord hath blessed them in there proceeding” (Winthrop Papers, iii. 150). Cf. p. 103 note 1, below.
274 New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xxxiii. 65.
275 Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 193, iii. 112. Felt thinks that “one inducement for the passage of such an act was probably the strong suspicion that Dr. Child . . . was on his second tour in this country as a spy from the Jesuits of Europe” (Ecclesiastical History of New England, i. 597).
276 The Way of Congregational Churches Cleared, London, 1648 (imprimatur, January 1, 1647–), part i. pp. 21–22.
277 Winthrop, ii. 111 (92).
278 See, for example, Gardiner, History of the Great Civil War, ed. 1893, ii. 170–176, 258–260, 285–286; ii. 1–57, 62–63, 70–76.
279 York Deeds, i. i. 40; Folsom, History of Saco and Biddeford, p. 74. Folsom quotes an undated letter from Vines to Child concerning a hundred-acre lot purchased by Joseph Bowles.
280 P. 60, above. William White, an expert miner, seems to have been left stranded by Child’s withdrawal: see White’s confused letter to Governor Winthrop, July 24, 1648 (2 Massachusetts Historical Collections, iv. 199): “I was promised 5s a day by Doctor Child for myselfe and my sonn.”
281 See Leader’s receipt of that date (p. 61 note 1, above). John Winthrop, Jr., wrote to Child, apparently to England, on October 25, 1647 (Winthrop Papers, iii. 158).
282 Samuel Hartlib his Legacie of Husbandry, 2d ed., 1652, p. 62 (3d ed., 1655, p. 71). On Child’s authorship of a large portion of this volume, see p. 107, below.
283 Legacie, p. 112 (3d ed., 1655, p. 127). See p. 108, below.
284 Legacie, 3d ed., 1655, p. 168. See p. 109, below.
285 Winthrop, ii. 387–390 (318–320).
286 Winthrop, ii. 391–392 (321–322).
287 In 1659 the lands included in this patent were conveyed to Lt. William Phillips of Boston, vintner, by William Hathorne of Salem as attorney for John Jeffard (Gifford) in behalf of Mr. Beex and Company (York Deeds, i. i. 82; Folsom, History of Saco and Biddeford, p. 103). Child had purchased the patent in 1645 (see p. 16, above). James Graham, who reported on the title in 1688, could find no record of any conveyance from Child or “from any under him” (p. 16 note 4, above).
288 Child as one of the proprietors of the iron works joins with Becx and others in an agreement with John Gifford, August 23, 1650 (Suffolk Deeds, i. 216).
289 New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xxxiii. 238.
290 History of Plimmoth Plantation, 1912, ii. 391–393.
291 Winthrop Papers, ii. 144–145.
292 The proverb was familiar to our forefathers. It is used with dignified indulgence in the Court’s letter to the adventurers for the iron works, 1646: “Wee find yor stile more sharpe & your concluco͠ns more peremptory then rationall, (as wee conceave,) but wee consider yow have binn hitherto loosers, & therefore may take leave to speake” (Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 91).
293 This indicates that there was an appeal after the second trial.
294 Egerton MS. 2395, British Museum (2 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, i. 240; New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xxxix. 41).
295 Gifford at this same time was full of projects. He was trying to convince the English authorities that copper and precious stones might be found in New England (Calendar of State Papers, America and West Indies, 1661–1668, pp. 25–26).
296 Pp. 16–17.
297 P. 15.
298 P. 16. On the 14th this order is repeated for the 18th as to Godfrey, Gifford, Maverick, Breedon, and Leverett, and Leverett is to bring a copy of the “patent for New England” (p. 16).
299 Calendar, as above, p. 151.
300 P. 157.
301 P. 204.
302 P. 67, above.
303 New York Colonial Documents, iii. 92.
304 Calendar, as above, p. 302.
305 The Remonstrance practically accuses the colonial authorities of having violated the Charter (whence it was an unavoidable inference that they had forfeited it), and with having broken their oath of allegiance (Hutchinson Papers, 217, lines 27–28). The signers express in set terms their objection to that measure of independence which the Colony arrogates, maintaining that it should reduce itself to its proper position, which is not that of a “free state,” but that of “a colonie or corporation of England” (i. 219, lines 13–14). They hope for such changes as may bring the Colony under the immediate and minutely exercised control of the Parliament (i. 222, lines 19–20). And, if the colonial authorities do not voluntarily undertake such measures as shall bring about these ends, they threaten to endeavor to force the changes by an appeal to Parliament itself (i. 221, lines 28–30).
It may be held, perhaps, that the danger from Child was not so great as the colonists imagined, but that consideration, even if it is sound — as by no means appears — neither alters the fact of his revolutionary purposes nor renders the magistrates blameworthy for resisting them with all their strength. If they were nervous, they had every reason to be nervous. The autonomy of the Colony had been continually attacked, and they knew that their enemies were numerous in England and elsewhere. When we read Maverick’s Briefe Description, drawn up ca. 1661, and note his bitter assault upon the Bay (2 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, i. 239–242), we are apt to think that his enmity resulted from the treatment he had experienced in the matter of the Remonstrance. This may be true in part, but what seems to have eluded the observation of some scholars is the fact that what Maverick was alleging and what he was attempting in 1661–1665 accord perfectly with what we know of the allegations and attempts of the Remonstrants in 1646 and 1647.
306 That is, to “be suffered to exercise their Presbyteriall government amongst us.”
307 Hypocrisie Unmasked, p. 100.
308 New-Englands Jonas, p. .
309 New-Englands Salamander, p. 3.
310 New-Englands Salamander, pp. 12–13.
311 I. e., “their liberty in the exercise of the Presbyterian government.”
312 New-Englands Salamander, p. 28.
313 See p. 87, below.
314 Commons’ Journals, iv. 463–465.
315 Lords’ Journals, viii. 209. As Gardiner points out (Great Civil War, ed. 1893, iii. 77), the Lords had amended the ordinance, and it therefore had to go back to the Commons; but that was a mere detail: nobody doubted any longer that the Church of England was to be Presbyterian.
316 Hypocrisie Unmasked, p. 100.
317 Winthrop, ii. 91–92 (76), 304 (248). Cf. Cotton, The Way of Congregational Churches Cleared, 1648, pt. i. p. 68: “If none of us have been willing to reply to the Books written against us, how come it to passe that Mr. Hooker hath written a large answer to Mr. Rutherford, Mr. Davenport to Mr. Paget, Mr. Mader to Mr. Rathbone, Mr. Shepard and Mr. Allen to Mr. Ball, Mr. Norton in Latine to Mr. Appollonii; my self to Mr. Williams, both to his examination of my Letter, and to his bloody Tenent?”
318 In 1645 Stephen Winthrop wrote to his brother John: “Only the presbeterian Govermt is resolved on & ye other are at a Losse: & cannot tell where they shall find rest” (Winthrop Papers, iv. 202).
319 Dr. C. E. Banks, in his edition of Henry Gardener’s New Englands Vindication, avers that the Remonstrants, whom he calls Episcopalians, “were heavily fined for presuming to petition for freedom of worship” (Gorges Society, 1884, p. 32, n. 34). Whittier remarks that the colonial authorities “imprisoned Dr. Child, an Episcopalian, for petitioning the General Court for toleration” (1 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, xviii. 390).
320 Winthrop, ii. 347 (284).
321 New-Englands Salamander, p. 9.
322 Chief Justice Marshall, in his brief account of the affair, brings out this point, as might be expected, with proper emphasis: “Their plea that the right to petition government was sacred, was answered by saying that they were not accused for petitioning, but for using contemptuous and seditious expressions” (History of the Colonies, Philadelphia, 1824, pp. 119–120).
323 The Charge, in Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 91; Winthrop, ii. 350 (287).
324 In Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 97; Winthrop, ii. 362 (297).
325 There was, of course, some difference of opinion, and therefore a certain sentiment favoring a petition to Parliament for a new charter with enlarged powers; but wiser counsels prevailed, for it was feared that Parliament might reduce rather than increase the local authority (Winthrop, ii. 341–342 ). The elders gave their opinion that there was no appeal (ii. 345 [282–283]).
326 Winthrop, i. 119, 122 (100, 102–103).
327 One notes that Winthrop, while recording with obvious relief the action of the House of Lords in 1641 in reviving the Charter, takes care to add that the petition which resulted in this action, though presented by “some of our people being then in London,” was “preferred without warrant from our court” (ii. 50 ).
328 Winthrop, ii. 29–30 (25).
329 Savage’s note, ibid. The passage is in Trumbull’s letter to Van der Capellan, August 31, 1779 (1 Massachusetts Historical Collections, vi. 156).
330 Winthrop, i. 119, 122–123 (100, 102–103); Hutchinson Papers, i. 57–59; Bradford, ii. 141–145; Acts of the Privy Council, Colonial Series, i. 183; C. F. Adams, 1 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, xx. 81–85.
331 Winthrop, i. 161, 163 (135, 137); ii. 233–234 (180–191).
332 Brought in Trinity Term, 11 Charles I (Hutchinson Papers, i. 114–116); decree, Michaelmas Term (i. 116–118).
333 Winthrop, i. 163 (137).
334 Hutchinson Papers, i. 118–119; Winthrop, i. 323–324 (269), 329–330 (274); Hubbard, ch. 36, ed. 1848, pp. 268–271.
335 Winthrop, i. 359–360 (298–299), 367 (305).
336 Winthrop, i. 50 (42).
337 Winthrop, i. 171, 183, 280–281 (143–144, 154, 234–235). As to the first of these occasions, see Laud’s commission of 1634 in American Antiquarian Society Proceedings, xiii. 213–220. These signs of promptitude in resistance were, soon after the Restoration, made a ground of attack on the Colony by Samuel Maverick in his Briefe Description of New England preserved in Egerton MS. 2395 (2 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, i. 240–241; New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xxxix. 41–42).
338 Winthrop, i. 205 (172).
339 Winthrop, ii. 222–225 (180–183).
340 Winthrop, ii. 332–334, 340–340, 359–367 (272–273, 278–284, 295–301).
341 Hypocrisie Unmasked, pp. 28–36. Two specimens of the diction of this document will suffice: “Out of the abovesaid principles, which is the kingdome of darknesse and of the devill; you have writ another Note unto us, to adde to your former pride and folly.” “But we know our course, professing the kingdome of God and his righteousnesse, renouncing that of darknesse and the devill, wherein you delight to trust . . . O yee generation of vipers, who hath fore-warned you, or fore-stalled your mindes with this, but Satan himselfe.”
342 Three Episodes of Massachusetts History, pp. 349–350
343 In Verrem, Actio ii. lib. v, 61–66.
344 There was probably an appeal after the second trial also (see pp. 67, 81, 84). If so, Maverick’s sentence (p. 54, above) may apply to this occasion; but, in any event, Child was punished for no appeal except that at the November hearing in 1646.
345 It is printed in New-Englands Jonas, p. , to show that the Colony was setting up a commonwealth independent of the mother country.
346 It passes my comprehension how anybody who had read this passage could straightway characterize Child as a champion of religious liberty or freedom of conscience. Perhaps nobody who has read the passage has ever so characterized him.
347 This particular passage was read to the Remonstrants by the Court at the first hearing as a specimen of the offensiveness of the document (Winthrop, ii. 347 ).
348 Hutchinson Papers, i. 214–223.
349 See pp. 7–8, above.
350 Captain Edward Johnson, who is a good witness as to contemporary opinion in the Bay, was in no doubt on this point (Wonder-working Providence, 1654, bk. iii. chap. 3, p. 202). Bancroft states the facts in brief and trenchant terms: “An entire revolution was demanded.” “The document was written in a spirit of wanton insult” and “was evidently designed for English ears.” Child “desired only an excuse for appealing to England” (History of the United States, chap, x, 19th ed., 1862, i. 438, 439). Chalmers writes amusingly: “A petition, which would now appear so humble and so reasonable, we ought naturally to infer, met with the most gracious attention. But no conclusion however would be more erroneous” (Political Annals, 1780, i. 179).
351 Grahame makes a pretty keen observation: “The discovery of the intolerance meditated by these persons served to exasperate the intolerance which they themselves were experiencing from the society of which they formed but an insignificant fraction” (History of the Rise and Progress of the United States, London, 1827, i. 324).
352 Winthrop, ii. 357 (293).
353 Whether one petitioned the Parliament or the Commissioners was a mere detail of procedure, for any petition to the Parliament from the colonies was sure to be referred to the Commissioners for advice, if not for final action.
354 Cf. the Remonstrance: “Whence issue forth . . . also jealousies of too much unwarranted power and dominion on the one side, and of perpetual slavery and bondage on the other” (Hutchinson Papers, i. 218).
355 Winthrop, ii. 347 (285).
356 New-Englands Jonas, p. .
357 P. 12 [error for 20].
358 Robert Baylie, A Dissuasive from the Errours of the Time, London, 1645, pp. 60–61.
359 I. e., the establishment of the complete Presbyterian system, including the inquisitorial power over manners and morals in private life.
360 P. 90.
361 Chap. x. pp. 196–223.
362 Epistle Dedicatory, p. [iv].
363 Among writers who think or seem to think that Robert Child was an advocate of toleration or of liberty of conscience may be mentioned Whittier (Preface to Snow-Bound; 1 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, xviii. 390); C. F. Adams, Massachusetts its Historians and its History, p. 60, and Three Episodes of Massachusetts History, i. 333; Brooks Adams, Emancipation of Massachusetts, p. 95; W. T. R. Marvin, New-Englands Jonas, p. 1; Peter Oliver, Puritan Commonwealth, p. 420; C. E. Banks, reprint of Henry Gardener’s New-Englands Vindication, p. 32, n. 34; Sumner, History of East Boston, p. 99; Barry, History of Massachusetts, 1855, i. 339.
It must be admitted that one of the petitions to the Commissioners seized in Dand’s study (signed by a number of non-freemen) did ask for “liberty of conscience” as well as for a General Governor (p. 40, above). How Child meant to utilize such a paper, which was glaringly inconsistent with his own request for the imposition of the Covenant and the establishment of Presbyterianism, does not appear: probably, however, merely as evidence of general discontent, for only so could it serve his turn and back up the requests that he had draughted to submit to the Commissioners. Such discontent, if proved, might encourage the Presbyterian party in England to attempt the overthrow of the Massachusetts regime, and, if that were once abolished, the Presbyterian régime would of course be decreed as its successor, no matter what wishes these non-freemen might cherish for universal toleration.
364 Errours and Induration, are the Great Sins and the Great Judgements of the Time. Preached in a Sermon Before the . . . House of Peers, . . . July 30. 1645 (London, 1645).
366 P. 26.
367 Pp. 22–23.
368 P. 26.
369 P. 17.
370 The Way of Congregational Churches Cleared. London, 1648 (Imprimatur, January 1, 1647[–8]).
371 Winthrop, ii. 304–305 (248–249); Palfrey, History of New England, 1860, ii. 84–92, 173, n. 1.
372 New-Englands Jonas, p. 1.
373 The Remonstrance itself ascribes to New England Congregationalism “an ocean of inconveniences, dishonor to God and to his ordinances, little profit by the ministry, encrease of anabaptisme, and of those that totally contemn all ordinances as vaine, fading of Christian graces, decrease of brotherly love, heresies, schismes, &c.” (Hutchinson Papers, i. 221).
374 Winthrop is mentioned in the list of those present at the opening of the spring session of the General Court on May 6, 1646 (Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 146). It was at this session (on May 19) that the Remonstrance was presented, but it was not taken up until November (see p. 30, above), when he was in Connecticut (John Winthrop to John Winthrop, Jr., October 26, November 16 and 19, 1646, in Savage’s Winthrop, 2d ed., Appendix, ii. 429–431). He was also in Connecticut in May, 1647 (Winthrop Papers, iii. 157–158, iv. 222–223), and probably also in June, when the second trial of the Remonstrants took place. However, he attended meetings of the Commissioners of the United Colonies, at Boston, perhaps in July and certainly in August, 1647 (Acts of the Commissioners, i. 96–97, 101), and may therefore have seen Child before the latter sailed for England (see p. 63, above). Winthrop was an uncommonly charming person and never quarrelled with anybody, even with Samuel Gorton (Winthrop Papers, ii. 627); his success in dealing with the English government after the Restoration has astonished all students of our early history.
375 I. e., [black] lead.
376 Winthrop Papers, iii. 158–161. On August 21, 1648, Richard Leader writes to Winthrop on the same subject: “I have lately received from the Doc, whoe remembers his love to you and hath ordered me to see if his fine can be remitted; which he will venture in your black lead myne, in case you approve of it” (2 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, iii. 192).
377 This may be a kind of excuse for having nothing to say about the fines.
378 Winthrop Papers, iv. 41. The sheet is endorsed “Letter intended to Dr Child.” We cannot be sure, therefore, whether this letter was ever sent, but Child’s letter of August 26, 1650, shows that Winthrop had written.
379 “He remembers his love to you, he hath not bin Idle, these many yeares, yet I can̄ot see he had done much in this great busines” (Winthrop Papers, iii. 160).
380 On the whole matter see A Perfect Diurnall, no. 253 (May 29–June 5, 1648), pp. 2034–2040; Rushworth, Historical Collections, vii. 1133–1137, 1130 bis–1131 bis; Clarendon, bk. xi (ed. 1826, vi. 25–31, 38–41, 56–62); Heath, Brief Chronicle, 2d impression, 1663, pp. 314–317; C. R. Markham, Life of Fairfax, pp. 305–309; Archæologia Cantiana, ix. 31–49; Gardiner, History of the Great Civil War, chap, lxii (ed. 1893, iv. 132–142). The Rev. Thomas Peters (Hugh’s younger brother), writing from Falmouth, England, on June 26, 1648, gives his friend John Winthrop, Jr., a brief account of the revolt (Winthrop Papers, ii. 432). Nehemiah Bourne mentions “the rebellion of Kent, Essex, and other parts” in a letter to Governor Winthrop, August 12, 1648 (Winthrop Papers, ii. 303). Winthrop mentions the affair in a letter to his son John, September 30, 1648 (Savage’s Winthrop, 2d ed., Appendix, ii. 434).
382 Azariah Husbands, a well-known officer in the Parliamentary army (see Clarke Papers, ed. by C. H. Firth, Camden Society, i. 57, ii. 274).
383 The Lord Generals Letter In Answer to the Message of the Kentish-men, May 31, 1648. Imprimatur June 1, 1648. London, Printed June 2, 1648 (Harvard College Library), pp. 6–7. The extract is not from Fairfax’s letter, but from another letter dated Mapham, 1 June, 1648, and printed in the tract. The same letter, with slight variations, is included in A Perfect Diurnall for May 29–June 5, 1648, no. 253, pp. 2037–2038 (Harvard College Library).
384 Letter dated Maidstone, June 2, 1648, in A Perfect Diurnall, as above, p. 2039; also in Rushworth, vii. 1137.
385 A Narrative of the Great Victory obtained by the Lord Generali in Kent (London, 1648), p. 6 (Harvard College Library).
386 The Christian name of Major Child is not mentioned in any of the contemporary accounts of the skirmish, but it is given, with his place of residence, in the “information” brought by John Bulfinch against “Major John Childe, or Chiles, Northfleet, Kent,” on November 2, 1650, which declares that “he was a commissioned officer in arms against Parliament in the Kentish insurrection of 1648” (Calendar of the Proceedings of the Committee for Advance of Money, iii. 1274). The Doctor’s brother, the Major John Child of New-Englands Jonas, was (as Winthrop tells us) “a Major of a regiment in Kent” (ii. 391 ), and Northfleet was undoubtedly his home.
387 Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1644–1645, p. 407 (cf. p. 406).
388 London, 1648 (Harvard College Library).
389 According to this writer the county was loyal to Parliament but had been driven to revolt by the oppressive acts of the Committee for Kent. It was, he alleges, “a plaine Committee-war, without the least premeditate designe or plot against the Parliament, or their present peace and security” (p. 8). “On the one side you have a whole County, represented by all the Knights, Gentlemen, and Yeomen thereof, by many of the Deputy Lieutenants themselves, the Captaines and other Officers of Horse and Foot ever wel-affected to the Parliament. . .On the other side, you have about six or seven, or few more busie pragmaticall Committee-men, having neither honour nor honesty, patronizing the Separatists and Sectaries of the Country, by them alone had in veneration, as favourers of conscientious Professours; and elsewhere by persons of greater power and place held to be zealous members of the Independant Churches. . .six or seven Committee-men with so many hundred perhaps of their schismaticall Adherents” (pp. 12–13).
390 Calendar of the Proceedings of the Committee for Advance of Money, iii. 1274.
391 Calendar of the Proceedings of the Committee for Advance of Money, iii. 1274. Perhaps these charges were part of the same Bulfinch case
392 Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1651, p. 211 (cf. p. 208).
393 Calendar, Committee for Advance of Money, iii. 1274.
394 Id., ii. 870.
395 Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1655–1656, p. 94.
396 Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1659–1660, pp. 67, 580
397 Id., 1659–1660, p. 75.
398 Winthrop Papers, iii. 159.
399 The Epistle Dedicatory, signed “W. P.,” is dated “London the 8. January. 164⅞.” The title-page bears the date 1647, obviously Old Style. There is a copy in the library of the Massachusetts Historical Society which may have been a present from Hartlib to the younger Winthrop. Some copies appeal’ to be dated 1648 (see Dircks, Biographical Memoir of Samuel Hartlib, p. 60). The tract is reprinted in Oldys, Harleian Miscellany, vi. 1–13 (1745), ed. Park, 4to, vi. 1–14 (1810), with the later date. On the pentograph, which proved a disappointment, see Hartlib to Boyle, May 8, 1654 (Boyle’s Works, v. 264); Fitzmaurice, Life of Sir William Petty, 1895, pp. 10–11, 13. Hartlib, writing to Boyle, November 16, 1647, speaks of “one Petty, of twenty four years of age, not altogether a very dear Worsley, but a perfect Frenchman,” etc. (Boyle’s Works, ed. Birch, 1744, v. 256). Benjamin Worsley and Robert Boyle were doubtless friends of Child’s at this time, as we know they were a little later.
400 P. 129, below.
401 Winthrop Papers, ii. 161–164.
402 Coddington went to England in January, 1648–9 (Roger Williams to John Winthrop, Jr., January 29, 1648[–9], in 3 Massachusetts Historical Collections, ix. 280, and Letters of Roger Williams, ed. by J. R. Bartlett, p. 169, 1 Narragansett Club Publications, vi). His commission was on the stocks from March 6, 1650, — when the Council of State referred his petition to the Committee of the Admiralty for report, — until April 3, 1651, when it was granted (Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series, 1574–1660, pp. 335–338, 354; Edward Winslow’s letter of April 17, 1651, in Plymouth Colony Records, ix. 197, and Hutchinson Papers, i. 258). Coddington seems to have reached his home at Newport in August, 1651 (see William Arnold’s letter of September 1, 1651, in Hutchinson Papers, i. 267; cf. Roger Williams to John Winthrop, Jr., October 6, 1651, in 3 Massachusetts Historical Collections, ix. 294, and Letters of Roger Williams, p. 228).
403 Winthrop Papers, ii. 282.
404 Cf. p. 166 note 5, below
405 Lives of Ashmole and Lilly, ed. by Charles Burman, 1774, p. 313.
406 See our Publications, xiii. 16–59.
407 Copland to Winthrop, December 4, 1639 (Winthrop Papers, iii. 279).
408 “In the Year of Our Lord 1644. I first began the studie of Chemical Philosophic” (Stirk, Pyrotechny Asserted, London, 1658, p. 76).
409 Stirk to John Winthrop, Jr., [from Boston], August 2, 1648 (Winthrop Papers, iii. 359–360).
410 Copland to Winthrop, September 30, 1647 (Winthrop Papers, iii. 353).
411 These dates appear from an entry in William Aspinwall’s Notarial Records (Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xxxii. 304).
412 The exact dates are not determinable, but we know that Stirk was in this country as late as May 31, 1650 (Massachusetts Colony Records, iv. i. 15), and there is every reason to believe that he went to England with his maternal grandfather, Stephen Painter, who arrived in Boston, en route for London, on August 6, 1650 (Increase Mather, in the Dunster MS., M. H. S.; our Publications, xiii. 53–55). Painter was in London before July 19, 1651 (Lefroy, Bermudas, ii. 24), and that Stirk was there in 1652 is proved by an entry in his own hand in Sloane MS. 3708, fob 78 a. Boyle went to Ireland in 1652 (Life, by Birch, in Boyle’s Works, i. 30), and in January, 1653, his letter to John Mallet shows that he had already been there for some time (Works, i. 31). In either 1651 or 1652 Stirk collaborated with Boyle in an experiment in medical chemistry: by a misprint the date is given both ways in his tract entitled George Starkey’s Pill Vindicated, and Boyle does not give it at all (Works, i. 510–511, 563–565). Child may have gone to Ireland in the latter part of 1651, and he certainly was there in 1652 (see p. 119 note 5, below). On the whole, it is safe to infer that Stirk went to England in the latter part of 1650, and that in 1651 he was introduced to Boyle.
413 Three Books of Occult Philosophy, written by Henry Cornelius Agrippa . . . Translated out of the Latin into the English Tongue, By J. F. London, 1651. As to the identity of the translator, see Ferguson (Bibliotheca Chemica i. 293); the question is settled definitely by two entries (unknown to Ferguson) in the Stationers’ Register (Roxburghe Club, i. 341, 342). The same J. F. translated Sendivogius (London, 1650). Child speaks of both translations in a letter to Winthrop (p. 125, below), but says nothing about J. F. and does not mention the dedication. Some account of Dr. French (1616?–1657) may be found in the Dictionary of National Biography, xx. 251–252.
Dr. French’s dedication of his translation of Agrippa’s Occult Philosophy has just been transcribed for me from a copy in the British Museum. It is so interesting that I append it entire. The volume is dated 1651 in the imprint, but Thomason bought it on November 24, 1650 (Thomason’s Catalogue, i. 818). The book was entered in the Stationers’ Register on April 23, 1650 (Roxburghe Club, i. 342), and Child mentions it in a letter of August 26, 1650, as “coming out” (Winthrop Papers, iii. 162).
To my most honorable, and no less learned Friend, Robert Childe, Doctor of Physick.
Sir! Great men decline, mighty men may fall, but an honest Philosopher keeps his Station for ever. To your self therefore I crave leave to present, what I know you are able to protect; not with sword, but by reason; & not that only, but what by your acceptance you are able to give a lustre to. I see it is not in vain that you have compassed Sea and Land, for thereby you have made a Proselyte, not of another, but of your self, by being converted from vulgar, and irrational incredulities to the rational embracing of the Sublime, Hermeticall, and Theomagicall truths. You are skilled in the one as if Hermes had been your Tutor; have insight in the other, as if Agrippa your Master. Many transmarine Philosophers, which we only read, you have conversed with: many Countries, rarities, and antiquities, which we have only heard of, and admire, you have seen. Nay you have not only heard of, but seen, not in Maps, but in Rome it self the manners of Rome. There you have seen much Ceremony, and little Religion; and in the wilderness of New England, you have seen amongst some, much Religion, and little Ceremony; and amongst others, I mean the Natives thereof, neither Ceremony, nor Religion, but what nature dictates to them. In this there is no small variety, and your observation not little. In your passage thither by Sea, you have seen the wonders of God in the Deep; and by Land, you have seen the astonishing works of God in the unaccessible Mountains. You have left no stone unturned, that the turning thereof might conduce to the discovery of what was Occult, and worthy to be known. It is part of my ambition to let the world know that I honor such as your self, & my learned friend, & your experienced fellow-traveller, Doctor Charlet, who have, like true Philosophers neglected your worldly advantages to become masters of that which hath now rendered you both truly honorable. If I had as many languages as your selves, the rhetoricall and patheticall expressions thereof would fail to signifie my estimation of, and affections towards you both. Now Sir! as in reference to this my translation, if your judgement shall finde a deficiency therein, let your candor make a supply thereof. Let this Treatise of Occult Philosophy, coming as a stranger amongst the English, be patronized by you, remembering that your self was once a stranger in the Country of its Nativity. This stranger I have dressed in an English garb; but if it be not according to the fashion, and therefore ungrateful to any, let your approbation make it the mode; you know strangers most commonly induce a fashion, especially if any once begin to approve of their habit. Your approbation is that which it will stand in need of, and which will render me,
Most obligedly yours,
414 Samuel Hartlib his Legacie: or An Enlargement of the Discourse of Husbandry used in Brabant & Flaunders, London, 1651. In my references I have used the second and third editions, 1652, 1655 (which are in the Harvard College Library), but I have examined the New York Public Library’s copy of the first edition (1651). Except for the Appendix (added in the second edition), the contents of the first and the second edition are identical, and there is only one trifling difference in arrangement: the errata and the brief advertisement about clover, which in the first edition come at the end of the front matter, are in the second edition transferred to the penultimate page of the volume. As to the Appendix in the second edition, see p. 108, below. The Large Letter is on pp. 1–108 in the first edition, pp. 1–81 in the second, pp. 1–96 in the third. The subtitle (An Enlargement, etc.), dropped in the third edition, is a little misleading. It means that this book was issued as an addition to the material on this practical art contained in a tract already published by Hartlib in 1650 — A Discours of Husbandrie used in Brabant and Flanders (of which a second edition appeared in 1652 and a third in 1654). Of this earlier tract the author was Sir Richard Weston, as Hartlib informs us in the preface to the Legacie, as well as in the second and third editions of the Discours itself. When he first published the Discours, he was ignorant of the author’s name.
The Large Letter in the third edition of the Legacy shows a few additions. I have noted the following: P. 38 of ed. 3 (a philosophical discussion of “the true causes of Fertility”) is not in ed. 2; “Instructions for the increase and planting of Mulberry-trees,” pp. 63–68, ed. 3, is not in ed. 2 (this is reprinted from a tract “printed by Eliaz. Edgar, in the year 1609:” see p. 55); there is a slight addition in ed. 3, p. 82, as against ed. 2, p. 72; most of pp. 91–92 in ed. 3 is new; the passage beginning “Lastly, for a Corollary,” on p. 93 of ed. 3, and ending “I leave to them at the Helme of the State,” p. 95, is not in ed. 2. The total increase amounts to about eleven pages, six of which (63–68) are reprinted from the Edgar tract.
415 Samuel Hartlib his Legacie, 2d ed., 1652, p. 54. The 3d ed. (1655) adds (after “Ratcliffe-Crosse”) “yea, even in Cheshire at Duckenfield, they thrive & prosper” (p. 55).
416 A Rare and New Discovery of A speedy way, and easie means, found, out by a young Lady in England, she having made full proof thereof in May, Anno 1652. For the feeding of Silk-Worms in the woods, on the Mulberry-Treeleaves in Virginia (London, 1652: Boston Public Library). Child refers to this tract in his answer to Boot (Samuel Hartlib his Legacy, 3d ed., 1655, pp. 151–152): “Moreover, a Lady (Virginia F.) as I have lately seen in print, hath hatched worms in England, and then turned them forth to the Mulberry-trees, exposed to the cold and moysture of the Air, and yet they have done well, yea better then those within doors.”
417 Essay i, p. 129 (also in the ed. of 1770).
418 In the copy of the 1764 edition which he gave to the library of Harvard College.
419 P. 5, above.
420 2d ed., p. 49; 3d ed., p. 50.
421 2d ed., pp. 68–69; 3d ed., p. 78
422 2d ed., p. 68; 3d ed., pp. 77–78.
423 2d ed., p. 10; 3d ed., p. 10. The parenthetical clause about New England is added in the third edition
424 Winthrop, ii. 327 (267–268); William Pynchon to Winthrop, July 7, 1646 (Winthrop Papers, i. 378); John Eliot, Records of First Church in Roxbury (New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xxxiii. 65).
425 2d ed., p. 67; 3d ed., p. 76.
426 Freeman, History of Cape Cod, ii. 545.
427 2d ed., p. 72; 3d ed., p. 82.
428 American Antiquarian Society Proceedings, xxvi. 37.
429 2d ed., pp. 35–36; 3d ed., pp. 35–36.
430 Misprinted “sail” in ed. 2.
431 In distinction from “the Southern Plantations, as Barbadoes, Antego, Saint Croix[,] Christopher, Mevis, Monferate” (ed. 2, p. 60; ed. 3, p. 69).
432 See our Publications, xiv. 151, 183–184; American Antiquarian Society Proceedings, xxv. 359, xxvi. 23–24, 42.
433 The 3d ed. reads (correctly) March.
434 2d ed., pp. 60–61; 3d ed., pp. 69–70.
435 P. 108.
436 P. 81
437 P. 96.
438 Boyle’s Works, v. 262. Harte, Essays on Husbandry, 1764 (also in the edition of 1770), speaks of “Robert Child, the true author of the famous Treatise on Husbandry, commonly called Hartlib’s Legacy” (Essay, i. p. 129; cf. Essay i., p. 23; Essay ii., p. 54), and Sir Egerton Brydges (Censura Literaria, 2d ed., v. 117) quotes Harte. Dircks (Biographical Memoir of Samuel Hartlib, p. 69) is disposed to credit the Large Letter to Cressy Dymock, though he was aware of its ascription to Child by Harte and in the Gentleman’s Magazine, lxxii. 12; but Dircks had overlooked both Hartlib’s letter to Boyle and the plain signature in the third edition of the Legacy. The paper in the Gentleman’s Magazine (signed “Ferd. Stanley”) is by Brydges (see Censura Literaria, ed. 2, vii. 201).
439 This is proved by what Hartlib says in a letter “To his worthy and very much Honoured Friend, the Author of the large Letter of Husbandry,” prefixed to the Appendix that appears in the second edition of the Legacie, 1652.
440 Besides the general title-page (Samuel Hartlib his Legacie . . . The second Edition augmented with an Appendix) there is a title-page for the Appendix (An Appendix To The Legacie of Husbandry: or, A Seed-plot of Annotations upon the Legacie aforesaid. With an Interrogatorie, Relating more particularly to the Husbandry, and Naturall History of Ireland) and another for the Interrogatory. Each of the three title-pages bears the date 1652.
441 P. .
442 Legacy, 3d ed., pp. 132–172. This Answer is neither signed nor dated, but no signature is needed to assure us that it is the work of the writer of the Large Letter. The author uses the first personal pronoun continually in referring to statements made in that essay.
443 They are on pp. 118–132. In the second edition (1652), when Boot’s annotations first saw the light (pp. 103–118), their author’s name is not given.
444 Both Dr. Arnold Boot and his brother Dr. Gerard (see p. 116, below) used this spelling of their name (Boate) when writing English, to preclude the otherwise inevitable mispronunciation. See, for example, Arnold Boot’s letters to Ussher in Ussher’s Whole Works, ed. Elrington and Todd, vol. xvi
445 These two kinds of forage, then much in favor in France, were just beginning to interest agriculturalists in England and Ireland. See Samuel Hartlib his Legacie, 2d ed., 1652, pp. 1–4, 84–89; 3d ed., 1655, pp. 1–4, 98–104, 250–255.
446 Boyle’s Works, v. 262.
447 See also Legacy, 3d ed. (1655), pp. 140, 154, 157, 163, 168. Child also mentions things he has seen in Ireland (pp. 163, 164, 166, 169; cf. p. 152). In the Large Letter in this 3d ed. are two mentions of Ireland (pp. 82, 91) not found in the 2d ed.
448 I have not found this in Bacon.
449 Cf. our Publications, xiv. 151, 185–186; American Antiquarian Society Proceedings, xxvi, 42.
450 P. 138
451 Winthrop, ii. 315–316 (258).
452 Hutchinson Papers, i. 215.
453 P. 142.
454 The Lord Bacons Relation of the Sweating-Sickness Examined, in a Reply to George Thomson, Pretender to Physicke and Chymistry (London, 1671), p. 117 (Harvard College Library).
455 P. 16, above.
456 Legacy, 3d ed., 1655, p. 153
458 Pp. 153–154.
459 P. 156.
460 See p. 106, above.
461 P. 155.
462 Namely, “Master Bolton and Master Bret, who live in Cornhil nigh the Exchange, and sell Colours” (p. 132).
463 Child is referring to the treatise De Metallicis by Andreas Cæsalpinus (Cesalpino). Plumbago is treated in book iii, chap. 22 (Nürnberg edition, 1602 pp. 211–212), where much is said about silver, though I do not find the phrase “mater argenti.” In his letter of March 1, 1644[–5], in a little excursus on this same subject (see p. 14, above), Child also refers to Cæsalpinus, having his eye apparently on book i, chap. 9, pp. 28–29, and book iii, chap. 8, pp. 186–187, as well as on the passage just cited.
464 Samuel Hartlib his Legacy, 3d ed., 1655, pp. 133–134.
465 See pp. 10, 11, 14–15, 92, 99, above.
466 See Child’s letter of June 27, 1643 (Winthrop Papers, iii. 152).
467 Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 82. This action was in general though not exact accord with a policy adopted at the session of June 2, 1641: “For incuragment of such as will adventure for the discovery of mines, it is ordered, that whosoever shalbee at the charge for discovery of any mine wthin this iurisdiction shall enioy the same, wth a fit portion of land to the same, for 21 years to their ꝑꝑ. use” (i. 327).
468 Winthrop Papers, iii. 153–155.
469 Stephen Winthrop writes to his brother John from London on March 1, 1644[–5]: “We are inquiring a chapm̄ for yor black lead. There is some of it sent into France for triall. We hope we shall setle al yor busines & or returne in ye Cambridg shipp a month after this” (Winthrop Papers, iv. 200–201).
470 Winthrop Papers, iii. 336.
471 Winthrop Papers, iii. 162 (cf. pp. 156–157, 159).
472 See p. 92, above.
473 William Paine’s letters to John Winthrop, Jr. (Winthrop Papers, ii. 404–410). In 1662 at a meeting of the Royal Society (December 31) “Mr. Winthrop remarked that there was no right black-lead any where except in England and New England” (Birch, History of the Royal Society, i. 167).
474 “The Tale of Tantiusques,” American Antiquarian Society Proceedings xiv. 471–497.
475 Samuel Hartlib his Legacy, 3d ed., 1655, p. 154.
476 Memoirs of Ann Lady Fanshawe, London, 1907, p. 50.
477 Southwell to Boyle, Rome, March 30, 1661 (Boyle’s Works, v. 405). In the same year (April 3) Dr. William Petty was desired by the Royal Society “to inquire in Ireland concerning the petrification of wood, the bernacles,” etc. (Birch, History of the Royal Society, i. 20).
478 Worthington to Hartlib, October 7, 1661 (Diary and Correspondence of Dr. John Worthington, ed. Crossley, Chetham Society, ii. 51).
479 Pp. 98–122, International Fisheries Exhibition, London, 1883, Literature, vol. iii.
480. Rev. Daniel O’Connor, St. Patrick’s Purgatory, Lough Derg (Dublin, 1895), pp. 132–140. Cf. the Earl of Cork’s Diary, September 8, 1632 (Lismore Papers, ed. by A. B. Grosart, 1st Series, iii. 159); Dorothea Townshend, Life and Letters of the Great Earl of Cork, 1904, pp. 192–193.
481 Van der Aa, Biographisch Woordenboek der Nederlanden, ii. (iii.) 892.
482 The Leyden Album Studiosorum registers his admission as a student of medicine (aged 25) on June 21, 1628 (col. 211), describing him as “Gorckomiensis.” See also note 6, below.
483 Van der Aa, ii. (iii.) 892.
484 Letter from Arnold Boot (Boate) to Ussher, March 5, 1648 (Ussher’s Whole Works, ed. by Elrington and Todd, xvi. 554).
485 November 6, 1646 (Munk, Roll of the Royal College of Physicians of London, i. 243–244). Munk says he was “entered in the physic line at Leyden, 21st June, 1628, being then twenty-five years of age, and graduated a doctor of medicine there, the 3rd July, 1628.”
486 Arnold Boot’s prefatory letter. Cf. Calendar of State Papers, Ireland, Adventurers for Land, 1642–1659, p. 129; Calendar of State Papers, Ireland, 1647–1660, pp. 410, 416, 535.
487 “And the Adventurers after 10 years being out of their Principal Mony, which now ought to be double by its Interest, they sold their Adventures for under 10 s. per l. anno 1652, in open and free Market” (Sir William Petty, Political Survey of Ireland, 2d ed., 1719, p. 23).
488 Gerard was born in 1604, Arnold in 1606 (van der Aa, ii. [iii.] 892, 893). The Leyden Album Studiosorum registers the admission of “Arnoldus Boot Gorichomiensis,” aged 22, as a student of medicine on April 23, 1620 (col. 217).
489 Gerard Boot, Irelands Naturall History, chap, xxiii, section 4 (Collection of Tracts and Treatises, i. 143); Arnold Boot’s prefatory letter. His earliest extant letter to Ussher is dated Dublin, October 30, 1638 (Ussher’s Whole Works, xvi. 39–40).
490 The Rev. Alexander Clogie, writing of Ussher, says: “The speech of his own physitian, D. Bootius, a learned Dutchman (who was also physitian to the e. of Strafford), is very remarkable; Si Armachanus noster esset,” etc. (Speculum Episcoporum, § 49, printed in Two Biographies of William Bedell, Bishop of Kilmore, ed. by E. E. Shuckburgh, 1902, p. 118).
491 Van der Aa, ii. (iii.) 893. We can locate him in Paris, on the evidence of his correspondence with Ussher and Hartlib, from April 15/25, 1648, to October 18, 1653 (Uasher’s Whole Works, xvi. 126–130, 581–582, and passim; Samuel Hartlib his Legacie, 2d ed., 1652, pp. 103–118, 3d ed., 1655, pp. 118–132; Boyle’s Works, v. 258). On December 22, 1650, Evelyn, then in Paris, notes in his Diary: “Came the learned Dr. Boet to visite me” (ed. Wheatley, 1906, ii. 20).
492 In the House of Commons, April 25, 1644, “the humble Petition of Dr. Arnold Boole and Mr. Ben. Worseley, in the Behalf of themselves, and other poor Protestant Passengers, taken by some Ships in the Parliament’s Service, in their Passage upon a Vessel of Dover, was this Day read; and referred, and in an especial Manner recommended unto the Consideration of the Adventurers, that set forth the Ships that took the said Passengers; to inquire into the Condition and Affection of the said Passengers; and to do therein as they shall think fit; and to report their Doings therein to the House” (Commons’ Journals, iii. 469).
493 Arnold Boot’s prefatory letter in Irelands Naturall History.
494 Arnold Boot’s prefatory letter.
495 Commons’ Journals, v. 247. Benjamin Worsley was named as General Surgeon to the Army in Ireland in the same order.
496 Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1649–1650, pp. 66, 588; Arnold. Boot’s prefatory letter.
497 Arnold Boot’s prefatory letter in Irelands Naturall History.
498 His last letter to Hartlib from Paris (October 18, 1653) expressed his intention of bringing a book to Boyle, who was then in Ireland (Hartlib to Boyle, February 28, 1653–4, Boyle’s Works, v. 258).
499 Hartlib to Boyle, February 28, 1653–4 (Boyle’s Works, v. 258).
500 His son-in-law Clod (Clodius, Claudius) was a fashionable London practitioner of the chemical persuasion (see Hartlib to John Pell, April 1, 1658, in Robert Vaughan, Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell, ii. 454).
501 Van der Aa says 1653 (p. 893). The author of Boot’s life in the Dictionary of National Biography (J. T. Gilbert) says the date of his death has not been ascertained (v. 284), but gives it as 1653 with a query. Neither of them knows of the passage in Hartlib’s letter.
502 Boyle’s Works, v. 259.
503 We know that he was still in England during a good part of 1651 (see pp. 100–103, 107–108, above), and that he was in Ireland when, in 1652, the second edition of Samuel Hartlib his Legacie was published (see p. 108, above).
504 Birch’s Life of Boyle in Boyle’s Works, i. 30; cf. Boyle’s letter to John Mallet, January, 1652–3 (Works, i. 31).
505 Child was certainly acquainted with Petty (p. 98, above), and it may be assumed that he also knew Worsley, who was an intimate friend of both Boyle and Hartlib. Petty and Worsley went over on the same ship, arriving at Waterford on September 10, 1652 (Petty, History of the Down Survey, ed. Larcom, Dublin, 1851, p. 2; Petty’s will, Transactions of the Royal Irish Academy, vol. xxiv, Antiquities, p. 110). Worsley was Secretary to the Commissioners for the Affairs of Ireland as early as February 4, 1653 (Calendar of State Papers, Ireland, 1647–1660, p. 391), and I assume that he had this appointment before he left England.
506 Worsley was “Chirurgeon-General of the whole Army” in Ireland from 1641 to 1645 (Calendar of State Papers, Ireland, 1633–1647, pp. 776, 780, 787; Manuscripts of the Marquess of Ormonde, Historical Manuscripts Commission, New Series, ii. 256–257, 284; Lords’ Journals, vii. 401, 424; Historical Manuscripts Commission, 6th Report, Appendix, pp. 61, 63).
507 See pp. 41, 71, above. On August 26, 1650, Child wrote to the younger Winthrop: “Mr Leader hath more curious booke[s] than I; especially about Divinity businesses; where you may see them” (Winthrop Papers, iii. 162). I am indebted to Mr. Clough for the following note:
Although Richard Leader’s place of residence was chiefly at Lynn, he was the owner of at least two parcels of real estate in Boston. One of these, the one referred, to in the text, he sold, October 10, 1655, for £200, to Mr. William Paine: “all that my Mansion house (now in possession of Mr. Robert Patershall, merchant) at Boston, togither with ye Orchard, gardens, tymber yeards, wharfes wayes, water courses, Grounds,” etc. (Suffolk Deeds, ii. 210.) The site of this property is in part now numbered 350–360 on the west side of North Street, between Harris Street and Hanover Avenue. In Leader’s time, this estate included also the corresponding frontage on the easterly side of North Street to the water’s edge. Cf. Savage, Genealogical Dictionary, iii. 67, 68; Aspinwall, Notarial Records, p. 367.
508 Leader to John Winthrop, Jr., January 16, 1659–60 (2 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, iii. 196).
509 Hartlib to Boyle, May 8, 1654 (Boyle’s Works, v. 262).
510 See p. 123, below.
511 Letter from Major George Rawdon to Lord Conway, November 20, 1651 (Calendar of State Papers, Ireland, 1647–1660, p. 383); R. Dunlop, Ireland under the Commonwealth, vol. i. pp. cxxvii. 40 note (cf. i. 71–73, 127, 131; ii. 329. 339, 655, 658, 670).
512 Burke’s Peerage, under Downshire. The head of the family was created Viscount Hillsborough in 1717, Earl of Hillsborough in 1751, and Marquess of Downshire in 1789.
513 Complete Peerage, by G. E. C., iv. 461 (1916).
514 Sir William Brereton’s Travels, Chetham Society, 1844, pp. 128–129.
515 There is a possible trace of Child in this part of Ireland in a passage in his Answer to Boot (Samuel Hartlib his Legacy, 3d ed., 1655, p. 164): “I have seen long pices of yellow transparent Stone, or Amber found in a Fountain nigh Lake Neagh, about six miles from Antrims which the Irish say (though vainly) that it is found only there on May-day, and doe use it superstitiously about divers things.” Cf. Birch, History of the Royal Society, ii. 60.
516 Calendar of State Papers, Ireland, Adventurers for Land, 1642–1659, p. 92; cf. pp. 91, 352.
517 Calendar of State Papers, Ireland, 1647–1660, p. 405
518 Boyle’s Works, v. 259. In the same letter Hartlib remarks: “Sir, you complain of that barbarous (for the present) country, wherein you live; but if you would but make a right use of yourself, from the place where you live, towards Dr. Child, Mr. Worsley, Dr. Petty, major Morgan (not to mention others) they would abundantly cherish in you many philosophical thoughts, and encourage you, perhaps more vigorously than I can do at this distance and uncertainties, to venture even upon divers choice chemical experiments, for the advancement both of health and wealth.” The letter was written in reply to a letter from Boyle dated Youghal, January 10, 1653–4.
519 Boyle’s Works, v. 262. In this same letter (v. 264) Hartlib writes: “I am intending . . . to write to the possessors of the late Dr. Boate’s papers, to publish those in print beyond the seas, which contain the Natural History of Ireland, written in Low-Dutch originally, as he told me in his life-time.” This must refer to Dr. Arnold Boot, but no such publication is known.
520 Hartlib to Winthrop, September 3, 1661 (1 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, xvi. 213). It will be noted that Hartlib underestimates the lapse of time.
521 Declaration of the General Court, November, 1646 (Hutchinson Papers, i. 239).
522 Lowell devotes a few pages to the subject in his essay on New England Two Centuries Ago, 1865 (Works, Standard Library edition, ii. 46–56).
523 For Munson (1734–1826) see Stiles, Literary Diary, ed. F. B. Dexter, iii. 345, 471, 472; Henry Bronson, Papers of the New Haven Colony Historical Society, ii. 263–274.
524 Brewster was at a trading post at Manheken (Monhegen), afterwards a part of Norwich, Connecticut. See his letters to the younger Winthrop, January, 1656[–7] (Winthrop Papers, ii. 72–75, 77–81). He writes: “It is 5 yeares wanting two monthes befor the red Elixer be ꝑfected, and 4. yeares before the white, soe that my worke will be yet till December next, befor the coullers bee & 5 monthes after before the white apeare, and after the white standee a working till ꝑfected by the hott fyerey imbibitiones, one whole year after till September. I ffeare I shall not live to see it finished, in regard ꝑtly of the Indianes who I feare will raise warres: as also I haue a conceite yt God sees me not worthy of such a blessing, by reason of my manifold miscariadges” (ii. 79).
525 See William Avery’s two letters to Boyle (November 9, 1682, and May 1, 1684), printed in Boyle’s Works, v. 614–617; cf. our Publications, xiv. 147, 162–165.
526 Winthrop Papers, iii. 148–151.
527 iii. 161–164.
528 See p. 102, above.
529 A New Light of Alchymie . . . Written by Micheel Sendivogius . . . Translated . . . by J. F. M.D. London, 1650. On Sendivogius see Ferguson, Bibliotheca Chemica, ii. 364–370. As to the translator, see p. 102, above.
530 Exercitationes de Generatione Animalium, London, 1651
531 Francis Glisson, George Bate, and Ahasuerus Regemorter, De Rachitide . . . Tractatus, London, 1651.
532 Anthroposophia Theomagica: Or A Discourse of the Nature of Man and his state after death; Grounded on his Creator’s Proto-Chimistry, and verifi’d by a practicall Examination of Principles in the Great World. By Eugenius Philalethes. London, 1650. Magia Adamica: or The Antiquitie of Magic, and The Descent thereof from Adam downwards, proved. Whereunto is added a perfect, and full Discoverie of the true Cœlum Terræ, or the Magician’s Heavenly Chaos, and first Matter of all Things. By Eugenius Philalethes. London, 1650.
533 See p. 142, below.
534 “Although our self is not of the Theomagical Order of the Holy Rosie Cross; yet we have been very studious and curious in searching out their secret Mysterious Learning near twenty years: besides, we have served as a Clerk five years in Cliffords-Inne, and now in Terme-time we follow the practice of an Atturney in the Kings-bench at Westminster. But this is our Vacation-Recreation, and it is profitable to our Practice in the Law; and by these Arts we gain credit: for we will undertake no cause that shall go against us; let the Plaintiff or Defendant pretend what they will, we know before-hand what good or evil will end the business; and so we (contrary to others) endeavour peace, save money and trouble; yet we do not profess our self a Scholar, but a Gentleman, and that very few Artists can do” (John Heydon, Theomagia: or, The Temple of Wisdome, Spiritual, Ccelestial, and Elemental, bk. iii. chap. 19, p. 125, London, 1663, 1664).
535 “Interspersed among my miscellaneous Writings may perhaps be found Things respecting the Rosacrucian Philosophy, which may induce some to imagine that I have more Knowledge of that matter than I really have. I have no Knowledge of it at all; I never saw Transmutation, the aurific Powder, nor the Philosophers Stone; nor did I ever converse with an Adept knowing him to be such. The only Man that I ever suspected as a real & true Adept was Rabbi Tobias of Poland, but he evaded my Interrogatories & communicated to me nothing — I believe he was only a conjectural speculative Philosopher. I have known 2 or 3 Persons (as Judge Danforth & Rev. Mr. West) who believed the reality of the Philosophers Stone, but neither of them ever obtained it. They are only conjectural & speculative Philosophers — and of such, Dr Franklin told me there were several at Philada &c. who were loosing their Time in chemical Experiments to no Effect. I never had, or made an Expt with, a Furnace or Alembic in all my Life. I am not versed in the Books of the Adepts; I have seen but few of those authors, & read less — perhaps all the little I have read collectively would not equal a common Octavo Volume. I am infinitely less acquainted with that than any other of the Sciences in the whole Encyclopaedia of Literature. I never absorbed the extracted Sulpher of Gold in Terra: I have no practical Knowl. of the Matter: the few Ideas I have about it are only imaginary, conjectural & speculative. Coram Deo Veritas” (Stiles, Literary Diary, July 1, 1777, ii. 173–174; cf. ii. 183, 216; iii. 345, 348, 471–472)
536 3 Massachusetta Historical Collections, ix. 240–245, 252–258; Winthrop Papers, i. 467–513.
537 So runs the inscription on his tombstone in Roxbury (Hazard, 5 Massachusetts Historical Collections, ii. 19).
538 A black-letter broadside, reprinted by Waters, Sketch of the Life of John Winthrop the Younger, p. 75; cf. S. A. Green, John Foster, p. 127; 2 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, x. 270–271.
539 Magnalia, 1702, bk. ii. chap. 11, p. 33.
540 P. 43.
541 Literary Diary, iii. 266.
542 Winthrop, ii. 24 (20).
543 There is an imperfect fist of that portion of them that went to this corporation in the Alphabetical and Analytical Catalogue of the New York Society Library, 1850, pp. 491–505.
544 Antimonii Mysteria Gemina. Alexandra von Suchten. Das ist: Von den grossen Geheimnussen des Antimonij . . . Durch Johann Thölden, Leipzig, 1604 (Society Library, No. 240). On von Suchten, see Ferguson, Bibliotheca Chemica, ii. 415–417. Antimony in Winthrop’s time was an equally enthralling subject to the would-be adept and to the physician. Dr. William Douglass, in recording the death of the younger Winthrop, April 5, 1676, remarks: “He was much given to experimental Philosophy and Medicine; several of his Recipe’s are still used by that Family in Charity to the Poor; some of his Pieces are to be found amongst the first Philosophical Transactions of the London Royal Society; he was a great Admirer of Van Helmont, and dealt much in Antimonials” (Summary, Boston, 1751, ii. 159 note †).
545 I. e., “silver into gold.”
546 Winthrop Papers, iii. 159–160.
547 Howes to Winthrop, November 24, 1632 (Winthrop Papers, i. 483–485; cf. i. 496, 497, and 3 Massachusetts Historical Collections, ix. 255).
548 Howes to Winthrop, August 21, 1635 (Winthrop Papers, i. 499). See also Howes’s letters of August 4, 1636, and March 21, 1637[–8] (i. 501–502, 504–505), which are in a strain of exalted mysticism. The earliest of all Howes’s letters to Winthrop (January 22, 1628) has a distinctly mystical tinge (Winthrop Papers 467–468).
549 Cf. Winthrop Papers, i. 500, 502, 507.
550 The medal is figured in J. J. Becher, Oedipus Chemicus, Frankfurt, 1664, ad p. 168; J. F. Helvetius, Vitulus Aureus, Amsterdam, 1667 (2d ed., Hague, 1702), frontispiece; Johann Zwelfer, Mantissa Spagyrica, pt. i. cap. 1 (Pharmacopeia Augustana Reformata cum eius Mantissa & Appendice, Dordrecht, 1672, p. 796; cf. Gabriel Clauder, Dissertatio de Tinctura Universali, Altenburg, 1678, pp. 84–88); W[illiam]. C[ooper]., A Philosophicall Epitaph, London, 1673, opposite pp. 34, 41; Musaeum Hermeticum, Frankfort, 1677, p. 830 (The Hermetic Museum, London, 1893, ii. 281); J. J. Manget, Bibliotheca Chemica Curiosa, Geneva, 1702, i. 200; J. F. Buddeus, Exercitatio Politica An Alchemistae sint in Republica Tolerandi (in his Commentatio Aeademica de Concordia Religionis Christianae Statusque Civilis, etc., Halle, 1712), fig. iv. ad p. 549 (German translation, Historischund Politische Untersuchung von der Alchemie, in Friedrich Roth-Scholtz, Deutsches Theatrum Chemicum, Nürnberg, 1727, i. 78, fig. iv); Lenglet-Dufresnoy, Histoire de la Philosophie Hermetique, Paris, 1742, 36–37; Kiesewetter, Geschichte des Occultismus, Leipzig, 1895, ii. 135. See also Ioumal des Voyages de Monsieur de Monconys, 2e Partie, Lyons, 1666, pp. 378–380 (Voyage d’Allemagne); D. G. Morhof, De Metallorum Transmutatione, Hamburg, 1673, p. 164; Wilhelm Freiherr von Schröder, Nothwendiger Unterrichtvom Goldmachen, 1684 (Roth-Scholtz, Deutsches Theatrum Chemicum, 1727, i. 232–233); G. W. Wedel, Introductio in Alchimiam, Jena, 1705, p. 14; K. C. Schmieder, Geachichte der Alchemie, Halle, 1832, pp. 397–401; Louis Figuier, L’Alchemie et les Alchemistes, 3d ed., Paris, 1860, pp. 247–248; A. Bauer, Chemieund Alchymie in Oesterreich, Vienna, 1883, pp. 35–36; H. Kopp, Die Alchemie in älterer und neuerer Zeit, Heidelberg, 1886, i. 89–90, 195 n.; A. E. Wnite, Lives of Alcheinystical Philosophers, London, 1888, pp. 182–183; H. C. Bolt, on, Contributions of Alchemy to Numismatics, New York, 1890, pp. 19–20 (also in American Journal of Numismatics, xxiv. 82); Ferguson, Bibliotheca Chemica, ii. 572; J. C. Creiling, Die Edelgeborne Jungfer Alchyrnia, Tübingen, 1730, pp. 84–92 (with figure).
551 Among the letters addressed to John Winthrop, Jr., still remaining in the hands of his grandson, John Winthrop, F. R. S. (H. C. 1700) in 1741, there was at least one from “Fred. Princeps Holsatiæ & D. Slesvic” (Cromwell Mortimer’s dedication to vol. xl of the Philosophical Transactions). The Harvard College copy of the volume was given to the library by this John Winthrop and contains an inscription in his beautiful handwriting:
To the publick Library of Harvard College, at Cambridge in New-England; by their very Affectionate and most Obedient, humble Servant
Like his grandfather, many of whose alchemical books he inherited, this John Winthrop was a spagyric philosopher. “The extraordinary Knowledge,” writes Mortimer in the dedication, “you have in the deep Mysteries of the most secret Hermetic Science, will always make you esteemed and courted by learned and good Men.”
552 See Malachi, iv. 5–6; Matthew, xi. 14, xvii. 10–12; Mark, ix. 11–13; John, i. 21, 25.
553 Divine Dialogues, 1668, ii. 361 (2d ed., 1713, p. 473).
554 See the references in Hermann Kopp, Die Alchemie in älterer und neuerer Zeit, Heidelberg, 1886, i. 250–251
555 P. 5
556 See Ferguson, Bibliotheca Chemica, i. 236–237.
557 Vitulus Aureus, Quem Mundus adorat & orat. Amsterdam, 1667 (2d ed., the Hague, 1702).
558 Circulus Pisanus Claudii Berigardi (Utini, 1643), chap. xxv. p. 154.
559 Morgenbesser’s letter dated Wahlau, October 14, 1672, as quoted from the original by Samuel Reyher, Dissertatio de Nummis quibusdam ex Chymico Metallo factis (Kiel, 1692), pp. 138–140.
560 Gross’s own account, as communicated by him to J. J. Manget and reported by the latter in his Bibliotheca Chemica Curiosa, Geneva, 1702, Preface, pp. [iv–v].
561 The Marrow of Alchemy, Being an Experimental Treatise, Discovering the secret and most hidden Mystery of the Philosophers Elixer. . . . By Eiræneus Philoponos Philalethes. London, Printed by A. M. for Edw. Brewster . . . 1654. The Second Part appeared in 1655.
562 The complete evidence for this acknowledgment is too long and complicated to be given here. One decisive fact, however, may be cited. Stirk prefixed a Latin poem, with an English translation, to John Heydon’s Idea of the Law, 1660, and another Latin poem (dated May 4, 1663) to the same author’s Theomagia, 1664, and on both occasions he added his pseudonym “Eirenæus Philoponus Philalethes” to his own signature — George (in the second case Georgius) Starkey.
563. See p. 101, above.
564 Miscellanea Curiosa, sive Ephemerides Medico-Physicæ Germanicæ Academia Naturæ Curiosorum, for 1677, Breslau, 1678, viii. 384–386. This was the official journal of the Breslau Academia Naturæ Curiosorum (later the Leopoldina), of which Hertodt was a Fellow.
565 Miscellanea Curiosa, as above, viii. 389.
566 Fols. 2–6, 11b–13b, 23–24.
567 Johann Jakob Manget, Bibliotheca Chemica Curiosa, Geneva, 1702, ii. 697–700.
568 Dni. de Helbig judicium de Philalethæ introitu ad apertum Regis palatium, & Pantaleone (appendix to Johann. Ottonis de Helbig, Magnæ Britanniæ: Equitis, . . . Judicium de Duumviris Hermeticis Fœderatis, Jena, 1683, pp. 42–45): — “Licet amicus qvidam Londini, cum nuper in Anglia essem, suam de Philalethâ suspicionem, & qvod sub Imperio Britannico, in Insula quadam Anglicana adhuc viveret, mihi dixerit” (p. 42). There is an English translation (in the hand of Samuel Bellingham, M.D.) of the passage about Philalethes in Sloane MS. 633 (fol. 234a). It begins: “As Concerning Philalethes Introitus I know not the Author Although a friend at London wn I was Lately in England told mee hee beleeued hee yet Lived in Some of ye English Islands or Plantations.”
569 Nothwendiger Unterricht vom Goldmachen, 1684 (in Friedrich Roth-Scholtz, Deutsches Theatrum Chemicum, Theil i., Nürnberg, 1727, p. 273).
570 Not Sloane’s.
571 Both these notes are in the same hand as the text. The discrepancy is accounted for if we conjecture that the copyist transcribed scribbles (in different hands) found in the printed volume from which he copied.
572 Georg F. C. Fuchs, Repertorium der chemischen Litteratur, p. 199 (Ferguson, Bibliotheca Chemica, ii. 194).
573 liv. 108
574 Paige, History of Cambridge, pp. 461, 465; Whitmore, Civil List, pp. 56–63, 73, 79, 88, 90; Emory Washburn, Sketches of the Judicial History of Massachusetts, 1840, p. 342; W. T. Davis, History of the Judiciary of Massachusetts, 1900, pp. 137, 140; New England Historical and Genealogical Register, vii. 319.
575 Our Publications, iv (index).
576 Id., xiv. 13, 16, 17
577 Wells, Life and Public Services of Samuel Adams, ii. 237–238; our Publications, xi. 36 and n. 3. Cf. Thomas Newell’s Diary, September 2, 1774 (1 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, iv. 222, xv. 357); New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xxviii. 61–62, xxix. 63–64, xliii. 146–147. In 1775 Danforth’s house in Cambridge was protected by a guard: see Col. William Henshaw’s Orderly Book, April 22, 1775 (1 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, xv. 90).
578 Biographical Dictionary, 1809, p. 148 note.
579 Literary Diary, ii. 216.
580 Ba‘al Shem, “Master of the Name:” a term applied to an adept in secret learning; properly, one who can work wonders by virtue of knowing the true name of God (see Ginsberg, Jewish Encyclopædia, ii. 382–383). Our associate Professor George F. Moore has helped me here.
581 These books came to the Athenæum by gift of Judge Danforth’s son Dr. Samuel Danforth (H. C. 1758) and grandson Dr. Thomas Danforth (H. C. 1792).
582 Pyrotechny Asserted and Illustrated. By George Starkey. London, 1658.
583 Opus Tripartitum de Philosophorum Arcanis, London, 1678.
584 Our Publications, v. 260.
585 Thacher, American Medical Biography, ii. 233–238; New England Historical and Genealogical Register, yii. 319–320.
586 Judge Danforth’s library was valued in the inventory of his estate at £300; he bequeathed one half of it to his son Samuel (Suffolk County Probate Files).
587 See his manuscript note in the Judge’s copy of Urim and Thummim, p. 71: “The Author of the above written Urim and Thummim was an adept.”
588 P. 181.
589 P. .
590 P. 222.
591 Musæum Hermeticum Reformatum et Amplificatum (Frankfort, 1677), p. 647. This copy has no indication of having been Judge Danforth’s, but it certainly belonged to his son the Doctor, who gave it to the Athenaeum in 1812.
592 Secrets Reveal’d: or, An Open Entrance to the Shut-Palace of the King . . . Composed by a most famous English-map, Styling himself Anonymus, or Eyræneus Philaletha Cosmopolita: Who, by Inspiration and Reading, attained to the Philosophers Stone at his Age of Twenty three years, Anno Domini, 1645 (London, 1669). This volume has the Doctor’s autograph on the title-page: “Samuel Danforth’s.”
593 Introitus Apertus ad Occlusum Regis Palatium, authore Anonymo Philaletha Philosopho, . . . denuo publieatus, cum Indice & noua præfatione Georgii Wolffgangi Wedelii, Jena, 1699. Ad Lectorem, p. 15. This preface is dated September 21, 1698. Wedel does not repeat the statement, however, in his Introductio in Alchimiam (Jena, 1705), though he often refers to Philaletha, whom he reckons among authorities who are “classici, veri, principes” (p. 19).
594 See p. 125, above.
595 Abyssus Alchymiæ; Exploratus . . . von Thoma de Vagan, Einem Englischen Adepto . . . gezeiget und beschrieben, Hamburg, 1705.
596 Histoire de la Philosophie Hermetique, i. 403. Lenglet-Dufresnoy adds (i.480): “Eyrenée Philalethe se nommoit à ce qu’on croit, Thomas de Vagan.”
597 Anthony à Wood in his Athenæ Oxonienses, first published in 1691 and 1692, distinguishes Eirenæus from Eugenius (Vaughan) and both from the author of The Marrow of Alchemy. See Bliss’s edition, iii. 725 (370).
598 Dictionnaire Universel, xii. 801.
599 Alchemie in älterer und neuerer Zeit (Heidelberg, 1886), i. 200.
600 Poems of Henry Vaughan, ed. by E. K. Chambers, vol. ii. pp. xxxiii–lvi.
601 Taxil’s real name was Gabriel Jogand-Pagès.
602 Memoirés d’une ex-Palladiste, pp. 110, 130–133, 172, 176–178, 240.
603 There is a full report of his address (based chiefly on that in Le Frondeur of April 25, 1917) in H. Gruber, Betrug als Ende eines Betruges, Berlin, 1897, pp. 9–28, and a briefer report in Braeunlich, Der neueste Teufelsschwindel, Leipzig, 1897, pp. 96–101. Cf. Journal des Débats, April 24, 1897, cix. 782–784; L’Univers (Paris) for April 23, 25, and 27, 1897. Taxil had previously been exposed by A. E. Waite, Devil-Worship in France (London, 1896); by F. Legge in The Contemporary Review for October, 1896, lxx. 466–483 (cf. lxi. 694–710); by Pourtalès in Études publiées par des Pères de la Compagnie de Jésus, 34e année, January-March, 1897, lxx. 162–174 (cf. L’Univers for March 12, 1897); and by Gruber, Leo Taxil’s Palladismus-Roman (Berlin, 1897), but many believed in him until the very moment of his impenitent confession. For copies of several journals containing important material on Taxil’s imposture I am indebted to the staff of St. John’s Ecclesiastical Seminary at Brighton and to the Maurist Fathers in Boston.
604 See Ferguson, Bibliotheca Chemica, ii. 487–488.
605 “Der Irenæus 1. Anonym. Philaletha aber soll Projection ver König Carls II. gethan haben, wie dann der sel. B. Urbiger aus dieses grossen Königs Munde solches selber gehöret zu haben sehr versichert hat” (Fr. Basilii Valentini . . . Chymische Schriften: Samt einer neuen Vorrede . . . begleitet von Bened. Nic. Petraeo, Med. D., 6th ed., Leipzig, 1760, sig. f v°). The first edition of Petraeus’s book appeared at Hamburg in 1717 (Roth-Scholtz, Deutsches Theatrum Chemicum, Nürnberg, 1727, i. 656). The Urbiger yarn owes what plausibility it has to King Charles’s well-known interest in alchemy (Burnet, Own Time, ed. 1833, i. 169).
606 Histoire de la Philosophic Hermetique, i. 405. See p. 132, above.
607 Mémoires d’une ex-Palladiste, pp. 215–217.
608 On the authorship, see Ferguson, Bibliotheca Chemica, i. 182–183.
609 Chap. ii. § xxxi, pp. 195–197.
610 Schmieder, Geschichte der Alchemie, Halle, 1832, pp. 389–392.
611 2d ed., Paris, 1856, chap, vi, pp. 276–286. He gives liberal, but not too liberal, acknowledgment to Schmieder in his preface.
612 ii. 130–132.
613 G. W. Gessmann, Die Geheimsymbole der Chemie und Medicin des Mittelalters, Munich, 1900, p. 11.
614 P. 309. In his Lives of Alchemystical Philosophers, 1888, pp. 187–189, Waite gives up the identification of Eirenæus with Vaughan, but in his edition of The-Magical Writings of Thomas Vaughan, 1888, he still contemplates the mysterious adept as wandering “over a large portion of the habitable globe, performing astounding transmutations under various names and disguises” (p. vii).
615 Ferguson saw the identity of the names (Bibliotheca Chemica, ii. 194).
616 Albert L. Caillet, Manuel Bibliographique des Sciences Psychiques ou Occultes, Paris, 1912, iii. 669.
617 Ferguson, Bibliotheca Chemica, ii. 194.
618 He may have been that Johann Friedrich Bachstrom, German physician and preacher, of whom Adelung gives an account in his continuation of Jöcher (Fortsetzung und Ergänzungen zu Jöchers Allgemeinem Gelehrten Lexico, i . 1323–1325). This Bachstrom lived in the first half of the eighteenth century and visited England, where he is said to have become an F. R. S., though this claim is not substantiated by the list in Records of the Royal Society, 2d ed., 1901.
619 Magnalia, 1702, bk. iv. pt. ii. § 5, p. 128; 1820, ii. 10; 1853, ii. 14. The punctuation of this passage is obviously at fault, the comma after Dunster’s name being unnecessary and misleading.
620 American Journal of Education, September, 1860, ix. 135. The article, called “Harvard College. 1636–1654,” fills pp. 129–166. A note on p. 129 says: “This sketch will follow substantially Eliot’s ‘History of Harvard College’” — that is, Samuel A. Eliot’s Sketch of the History of Harvard College, published in 1848. I have been unable to ascertain whether this article was prepared by Eliot himself, or, as perhaps is more probable, by or under the direction of Henry Barnard, the editor of the American Journal of Education. As stated in our text, Eliot’s Sketch does not mention Mather’s story. A footnote on p. 135 of the article refers to “John Amos Comenius,” translated from the German of Karl von Raumer, in the American Journal of Education for June, 1858, v. 257–298; but that memoir contains no allusion to Mather’s story.
Dr. Charles W. Eliot kindly writes me as follows: “It is highly improbable that my father had anything to do with the article published in Henry Barnard’s American Journal of Education for September, 1860, for his health was at that time already impaired; but I am by no means able to assert that he did not write that article. I am sure, however, that my father never alluded in conversation with me to the supposed invitation to Comenius to become President of Harvard. He would have been likely to do so if he had accepted that statement; because I entered the service of Harvard College in 1854, and my father knew that I had a strong interest in the history of the College.”
621 History of the Church known as the Unitas Fratrum, p. 580. A footnote says: “Our authority for the interesting fact that Comenius received an offer of the presidency of Harvard University, as it is now called, is Cotton Mather in his Magnalia, . . . At that time Mr. Henry Dunster was President, who ‘fill’d the Overseers with uneasie Fears,’ on account of ‘his unhappy entanglement in the snares of Anabaptism.’”
622 Gabriel Compayré’s History of Pedagogy, 2d ed., 1890, p. 125 note.
623 The Permanent Influence of Comenius, in Educational Review for March, 1892, iii. 234–236. See p. 151, below.
624 History of Modern Education, 2d ed., 1896, pp. 164–165.
625 The Educational Ideal, pp. 76–77.
“I have,” says Mr. Monroe, “examined with some care the numerous lives of Comenius printed in the German language, and a Bohemian friend has examined those printed in Czech; and although we find less noteworthy distinctions recorded, there is no mention of a call to Harvard College or America” (Educational Review, 1896, xii. 379). In a book published in German since this passage was written, Dr. Jan Jakubec, “Professor an der k. k. Böhm. Karl-Ferdinand-Universität in Prag,” has said: “Aus Amerika wurde ihm die Leitung des Harvarder Kollegiums angeboten” (Geschichte der čechischen Litteratur, Leipzig, 1909, p. 98; 1913, p. 114). Mr. Monroe owns the Korrespondence Jana Amose Komenského, published in three volumes by the Čech Academy of Arts and Science in Prague, and writes me that his “good friend Professor František Čada of the University of Prague had collated them with some care without finding any justification for Mather’s statement.”
I have myself examined most of the books and articles relating to Comenius printed in the English language listed in the bibliographies in Mr. Monroe’s Comenius’s School of Infancy (1896, pp. 91–95), in Mr. Monroe’s Comenius and the Beginnings of Educational Reform (1900, pp. 175–180), and in Mr. Čapek’s Bohemian (Čech) Bibliography (1918). So far as I have noted, Count Lützow and Dr. Jakubec are the only writers not Americans who have alluded to America or to Harvard College. But see p. 150 note 3, below.
626 Bohemia, an Historical Sketch, p. 408. Count Lützow gives no authority for his statement. The Moravians did not come to America until about 1735.
627 History of Bohemian Literature, pp. 268–269. Again no authority is given. Count Lützow must have relied on some writer who confused Governor John Winthrop of Massachusetts with the late Robert Charles Winthrop, who edited the letters by and to Governor John Winthrop, Jr., of Connecticut, printed in 1 Proceedings Massachusetts Historical Society, xvi. 206–251.
628 In their Bohemian (Čech) Bibliography, 1918, Thomas Čapek and Anna Vostrovský Čapek say: “From Cotton Mather we learn (a fact which is confirmed by other sources) that Governor Winthrop offered to Komenský the Presidency of Harvard College” (p. 43). In reply to a query as to the “other sources,” Mr. Čapek kindly writes me as follows:
“In the Ottův Naučný Slovník (Čech Encyclopedia), xiv. 627, Dr. J. Novák says: ‘Having been provided with funds by Lawrence de Geer, he [Komenský] returned from England to the Continent. He stopped at Leyden and he received at that time an offer from America to take charge of a college there; thereafter in August, 1642, he proceeded to Norrköping,’ etc.
“On p. 437 of Písemnictví České (Čech Literature), by Dr. Václav Flajšhans, published at Prague, 1901, the statement is repeated; but it adds, that it was the Swedish Ambassador who prevented Komenský from accepting.”
A tradition in regard to the alleged offer of the presidency might have come down from three wholly independent sources: (1) in America from Winthrop; (2) in England from Hartlib; and (3) in Bohemia from Comenius. The sole person to record the first source is Cotton Mather, and no one records either the second source or the third source. Nor, apparently, did any European writer allude to the offer previous to 1896. Hence it seems pretty clear that the “other sources” referred to by Mr. Čapek are in reality derived from American sources.
629 Comenius, the Evangelist of Modem Pedagogy, in Education for December, 1892, xiii. 212–219. Mr. Monroe cites Mr. Hanus’s article quoted in our text.
630 Journal of Education, November 15, 1892, xl. 324. These Words are repeated in Monroe’s Comenius’ School of Infancy, 1896, p. xiii.
631 Was Comenius Called to the Presidency of Harvard? in Educational Review for November, 1896, xii. 378–382.
632 Comenius and the Beginnings of Educational Reform, 1900, pp. 78–81.
633 Was Comenius Called to the Presidency of Harvard? in Educational Review for November, 1898, xvi. 391–393.
634 The Permanent Influence of Comenius, reprinted in Educational Aims and Educational Values, 1899, pp. 195–211.
635 Peirce, History of Harvard University, Appendix, pp. 79–80.
636 College Book iii. 17–18. The second paragraph in this entry was doubtless copied from Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 352, or vol. iv. pt. i. pp. 196–197.
637 College Book iii. 18
638 iii. 39.
639 iii. 39.
640 College Book iii. 39.
641 Is this interpretation a necessary one? As printed, the passage (p. 146, above) appears to have that meaning. It is to be remembered, however, that Mather did not see his work through the press, as it was printed in London, and that many errors in the Magnalia are doubtless due to that fact. The single sentence about Comenius is preceded by a sentence about Dunster’s resignation and is followed by a sentence about Chauncy’s election. Hence the sentence about Comenius is really parenthetical, and, had Mather been able to see proof sheets, might have been placed within parentheses. Both in the Magnalia and in the Ratio Discipline (quoted on p. 165, below), Mather mentions Sweden, showing that he had in mind Comenius’s “diversion” to that country in 1642.
642 The work of Comenius published under this title, imitated by Cotton Mather was between 1664 and 1738 mentioned by four generations of Mathers: see pp. 189–190, below.
643 “Ratio Disciplinæ Fratrum Nov-Anglorum. A Faithful Account of the Discipline Professed and Practised; in the Churches of New-England,” Boston, 1726, Introduction, pp. 5–6.
644 See p. 148, above.
645 See p. 147, above.
646 This suggestion, rightly rejected by Mr. Monroe, was made to him by the late Rev. Dr. Edward Everett Hale (Educational Review, xii. 379–380).
647 Hereafter in this paper called either John Winthrop, Jr., or the younger Winthrop, when it is necessary to distinguish him from his father
648 Magnalia, 1702, bk. ii. chap. xi. p. 30.
649 It was Governor John Winthrop of Massachusetts who studied at Cambridge University, though he did not take a degree: see R. C. Winthrop, Life and Letters of John Winthrop, i. 58–59. The Adam Winthrop who matriculated at Magdalene College, Cambridge, at Michaelmas, 1567 (Venn, Matriculations and Degrees, 1913, p. 740), was no doubt the father of Governor John Winthrop; Governor John Winthrop matriculated at Trinity at Easter, 1603 (ibid.); and Forth Winthrop, a younger brother of John Winthrop, Jr., matriculated at Emmanuel at Easter, 1626 (ibid.). All three left without taking degrees. John Winthrop, Jr., and Forth Winthrop were fitted for college at the Free Grammar School at Bury St. Edmund’s, the former going to Dublin in 1622 and the latter to Cambridge in 1626 Adam Winthrop was auditor of Trinity College for sixteen or seventeen years, resigning in 1610 (R. C. Winthrop, Life and Letters of John Winthrop, i. 32–33).
650 See p. 164, below
651 Winthrop Papers, iv. 9–20. In a letter dated July 28, 1629, he wrote:
“I am yesterday safely arrived in this citty of Amsterdam. . . . I am heere without acquaintance & our long passage hath eaten out all the money that I receyved at Venice, . . . therefore I pray you to send me a letter of credit from some merchant to some man in Flushing, or Middleborough, . . . because the longer I stay heere the more I shall runn in debt. Therefore I would, as soone as I can receive answeare from you . . . returne with all speede home. . . . If you write to me, I pray conscribe it to be delivered in Flushing at the house of Mr. Henry Kerker, for I purpose, God willing, to goe shortly thither, where I shalbe neere to take my passage upon all occasions” (iv. 18–19).
On August 8, 1629, his aunt Lucy Downing (the wife of Emanuel Downing) addressed a letter as directed (iii. 7). In a letter dated “Aug: Friday, 1629,” he said: “I am (God be thanked) yesterday safely arrived in London” (iv. 19); and in his next letter, dated “Lond., Aug. 21, 1629” (iv. 21), he acknowledged having received letters on the previous Wednesday (August 19). Hence he must have reached London on Thursday, August 13 or 20, and obviously could not have gone to Germany.
652 My information about Comenius is derived from the following sources: R. H. Quick, Essays on Educational Reformers, 1868, pp. 43–67; M. W. Keatinge, The Great Didactic of John Amos Comenius, 1896, pp. 1–101; W. S. Monroe, Comenius and the Beginnings of Educational Reform, 1900, pp. 38–82; Count Lützow, Comenius’s Labyrinth of the World and the Paradise of the Heart, 1901, pp. 11–52; Lützow, Bohemia, an Historical Sketch, 1896, pp. 392–416; Lützow, History of Bohemian Literature, 1899, pp. 249–253. It is of course possible that Comenius, though living at Lissa from 1628 to 1640, took an unrecorded flying trip to Holland in 1629 or in 1634–1635.
653 J. Winthrop, Journal, 1908, i. 70. He came in the Lyon, which reached Nantasket November 2.
654 Winthrop Papers, iv. 3 note.
655 In a letter to Winthrop dated Salem, February 24, 1651, Emanuel Downing wrote: “Wee heare that Mr. Damport and Mr. Eaton are goeing for England. I cannot give much creditt thereto, I hope you will not resolve to goe before you give your freinds a visit here” (Winthrop Papers, i. 76).
A document dated October 22, 1670, says: “About ye peace between ye Maquaes and Mahicanders, To leave this in suspense, Untill ye Certainty of Governr Winthrops Voyage to England bee knowne & the Returne of Mr. Mayor from Albany” (New York Colonial Documents, xiii. 458). I have found no other allusion to this trip, which certainly was not undertaken. But in 1675 Winthrop did intend to go to England, though the intention was not carried out: see Winthrop Papers, iv. 166–169; Connecticut Colonial Records, ii. 263, 344.
In a letter to Winthrop undated but assigned to “May, 1647,” his brother Adam Winthrop said: “Youer letter off the 2 of Desember I receaued, but it had a very longe passage. We were glad to heer of youer safe arivall, and that you have bene in health since” (Winthrop Papers, iv. 222). The “very longe passage” might imply that John Winthrop had lately been in England, but actually it means only that he was at Pequot, where he had been granted a plantation and where he was living late in 1646: see Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 71, 160, 241; Winthrop Papers, iv. 38; R. C. Winthrop, Life and Letters of John Winthrop, ii. 356–361. Writing to Winthrop from Ipswich on February 26, 1636, his sister Mary Dudley said: “I am sorry that I shall not se you before you take your journey to Coneticott, but I wish you a prosperous viage” (Winthrop Papers, iii. 65). In those days any trip by sea, however short, was called a “voyage.”
656 He was present at a court held October 6, 1634 (Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 132), but on November 8 his father wrote: “I hope the Lord hath carried you safe to England” (R. C. Winthrop, Life and Letters of John Winthrop, ii. 123).
657 Rev. John Wilson (1588–1667) of Boston.
658 In a letter to John Winthrop, Jr., dated (as printed) “Antrim, 5th Ju: 1634,” Sir John Clotworthy says that “I shall request yu, when yu are freede from ye distractions wch a werisom jorney may ꝑhapps afford, to consider of these p̄ticulars” (Winthrop Papers, iii. 203–204), the particulars relating to those mentioned by Governor John Winthrop, and the letter clearly indicates that John Winthrop, Jr., was then in Europe. As he was in New England in June and July, 1634, it is obvious that the printed date is wrong; and an examination of the original letter shows that it is dated “Antrim, 5th Jn: 1634” — that is, January 5, 1634–5. Clotworthy, afterwards first Viscount Massereene, either knew or was interested in Hartlib, for on April 2, 1647, “Sir John Clotworthy carried to the Lords the vote for Three hundred pounds, out of Haberdasher’s Hall, for Mr. Hartlib” (H. Dirck, Biographical Memoir of Samuel Hartlib, p. 12).
659 J. Winthrop, Journal, i. 164.
660 Winthrop Papers, iii. 482.
661 Hotten, Original Lists, p. 100
662 J. Winthrop, Journal, i. 161.
663 Not a single letter written by Winthrop during this journey has been preserved. But his movements can be followed fairly well by letters written to him, and from these it would appear that he visited Ireland, Scotland, and England only. In a letter to Winthrop dated Rotterdam, March 7, 1635, his brother-in-law Col. Thomas Reade said: “I cane not chooes but trobell you withe thes feaue leynes, to let you for to vnder stand that I should a bean very glad for to a spoke withe you at London, but the shipes coming a way so sone that I could not inquier you ought (thoe I was at deyveres places to heare of you)” (Winthrop Papers, ii. 113).
664 Mr. Monroe says: “Winthrop visited briefly in England during the early months of 1661, and the only reference to Comenius in connection with the names of any of the Winthrops occurs in a letter from Samuel Hartlib written at ‘Axe-Yard in Westm. Sept. 3, 1661,’ to Governor Winthrop at Hartford, shortly after the latter’s return from London” (Educational Review, xii. 380–381). Hartlib’s letter of September 3 was written not after Winthrop’s return from London, but before he had reached London, which, as stated in our text, was in September. Hartlib’s letter of September 3 addressed to New England, and another letter of October 9 addressed to Winthrop “Next to the Church in Colman Street,” London, are printed in 1 Proceedings Massachusetts Historical Society, xvi. 212–216. And Winthrop’s visit was not “during the early months of 1661,” but lasted from September, 1661, to April, 1663.
665 In a letter to Winthrop dated “Brereton, Cheshire, October the Second, 1661,” William Brereton said: “I was very glad to find in our good friend Mr. Hartlibs letter that you were come to London and that you intend to make some stay in England” (1 Proceedings Massachusetts Historical Society, xvi. 215). Evidently, therefore, Winthrop must have reached London in September.
666 Winthrop Papers, iv. 83.
667 In a letter to Winthrop dated February 15, 1664, his aunt Lucy Downing said: “Yrs of April 9th 1663 I had, but perceiuing therein yt you was that day to set out of London to meet yr ship at ye Downs, I had noe hopes to recouer any to you” (Winthrop Papers, iii. 58).
668 Winthrop Papers, i. 526, 535; 1 Proceedings Massachusetts Historical Society, xvi. 216.
669 Keatinge, The Great Didactic of Comenius, pp. 62, 70, 83, 84, 85, 87, 89. In a letter to an unknown person dated July 17–27, 1656, John Pell said:
“Five days ago, I received from you a letter dated Dantzic, Junii 17th, containing a letter from Mr. Comenius, dated the 22nd of May, wherein he describes the sad estate of those Protestants that escaped from Lesna, where he, for his own part, besides his writings, lost in money, books, and household stuff, above three thousand reich-dalers, (near seven hundred pounds sterling.) . . . I hear he is sixty-five years old; and, it seems, hath nothing left but the clothes on his back” (in R. Vaughan’s Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell, 1838, ii. 430).
A letter from Comenius dated Stettin, June 14–24, 1656, is printed in Thurloe’s State Papers (1742), v. 118. (Cf. C. H. Firth, Last Years of the Protectorate, 1909, ii. 244.) Another, dated Amsterdam, September 1, 1656, is printed in Monumenta Germaniae Paedagogica, 1903, xxvi. 322–323.
In a letter to John Pell dated August 7, 1656, Samuel Hartlib wrote: “I have also received from Mr. Comenius fresh letters dated at Hamburg, . . . Mr Dury has returned to Amsterdam, and promises with all possible expedition to hasten unto us, and it is very like Mr. Comenius will come along with him” (Vaughan, ii. 432, 433). Comenius, however, did not go to England after 1642.
The Rev. Dr. John Pell, whose correspondence is printed in Vaughan’s volumes, was unquestionably known to Winthrop, quite possibly as early as 1642. His brother Thomas Pell came to this country about 1635, served as a surgeon in the Pequot war of 1637 and 1638 (Elizabeth H. Schenck, History of Fairfield, 1889, i. 68), is mentioned in a letter written to Winthrop by Theophilus Eaton on January 4, 1656 (Winthrop Papers, ii. 476), and on July 2, 1666, himself wrote a letter to Winthrop (Winthrop Papers, iii. 410). He left his estate to his nephew John Pell, son of Dr. John Pell. In a letter to Lord Brereton, in whose family Dr. Pell was then living, dated October 10, 1670, Winthrop said: “I was at Boston in the Massachusets colony when Mr John Pell arrived, by whom I had the great favour of your Lordships letter of the 23 of June last. He came into that harboure very opportunely for his advantage in the expedition of his businesse; for Mr Banckes, a neighboare of Mr Pell deceased, & one of those whom he had intrusted wth the estate, was in a vessell of Fairfeild (the place where Mr Pell lived) returning thither & mett the ship, coming in & came back wth Mr John Pell to Boston, where I spake wth them both” (Winthrop Papers, iv. 138; a letter to the same purport from Winthrop to Boyle, dated October 27, ‘1670, is printed in Boyle’s Works, 1772, vi. 581–582). Dr. John Pell was a Fellow of the Royal Society; in 1643 he was at Amsterdam through the influence of Sir William Boswell; and his Idea of Mathematics, written about 1639, was sent by Hartlib to Mersennes and Descartes and published in 1650 in John Durie’s Reformed Library Keeper: see the notice of Pell in the Dictionary of National Biography. Pell and Sir William Boswell were in correspondence as early as 1640 (Vaughan, Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell, ii. 379, 380). For John Durie, see p. 172 note 5, below.
670 Winthrop Papers, iv. 73.
671 It should be borne in mind that Stuyvesant’s dates are no doubt New Style, while Winthrop’s are Old Style, and that hence an allowance of ten days must be made. Thus June 21 Old Style, was July 1 New Style; while July 5 and July 23 New Style, were June 25 and July 13 Old Style.
672 Winthrop Papers, iii. 391.
673 Winthrop Papers, iii. 396.
674 New York Colonial Documents, ii. 460. On January 27, 1662, the Directors of the Dutch West India Company wrote a letter to Stuyvesant describing an “interview between gov. Winthrop of Connecticut and the directors at Amsterdam” (Calendar of New York Historical Manuscripts, Dutch, 1865, i. 297). Winthrop’s expected arrival at Amsterdam was thus announced in the Haerlemse Saterdaeghse Courant of September 17, 1661: “Amsterdam, September 16. On Monday last arrived in the Texel the ship Arent, from New-Netherlands, laden with tobacco and some peltry. The ship Trou and the ship Klock lay ready to sail, [intending] daily to depart, and may now be daily expected, having been seen, as is supposed, near Fairhill. In the Trou comes passenger Mr. Winthrop, Governor of Connecticut, together with the Rev. Mr. Stone, as agents to his Majesty of England” (2 New York Historical Society Collections, i. 456). Thus Winthrop reached Amsterdam soon after Monday, September 2–12, 1661.
675 The Dutch name for the Connecticut River.
676 Comenius was born March 28, 1592.
677 J. Winthrop, Journal, ii. 32.
678 Winthrop Papers, iv. 35.
679 See Winthrop’s petition, undated, in which he says that he sailed in May, 1643, but was “kept above six weekes vpon the coast of England, and by reason thereof was above 14 weekes before he could attaine the port in New England” (Winthrop Papers, iv. 36–37). At the session beginning September 7, 1643, the General Court voted to pay his bill of £50, “except what is already paid” (Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 47).
680 This is the letter, dated Bristol, October 8, 1641, cited above, p. 10 note 2.
681 He was elected a magistrate in 1632, and for the years 1634–1649, both included: see Massachusetts Colony Records, i. 95, 118, 145, 174, 195, 228, 256, 288, 319, ii. 33, 66, 97, 146, 187, 238, 265, iii. 2, 9, 61, 104, 121, 146. His friends in England did not fail to note this honor. “I understand,” wrote Francis Kirby on March 26, 1633, “that you are an Assistant and so have a voice in the weighty affaires of that Commonwealth” (3 Massachusetts Historical Collections, ix. 260).
682 Winthrop Papers, iii. 323
683 This had been published by Hartlib at London in 1639.
684 R. H. Quick, Essays on Educational Reformers, 1868, pp. 47–49.
685 Keatinge, The Great Didactic of Comenius, pp. 47–48.
686 Mersenne is mentioned in letters of Sir Charles Cavendish to Dr. Pell, February 5, 1642 (Vaughan, Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell, ii. 346); of Sir William Petty to Dr. Pell, November 8, 1645 (id. ii. 367–368); and of Boyle to Hartlib, March 19, May 8, 1647 (Boyle’s Works, 1772, vol. i. pp. xxxviii, xli).
687 According to Keatinge (The Great Didactic of Comenius, pp. 49, 50–51, 53), Comenius apparently returned from Stockholm to Norrköping, then made a preliminary visit to Elbing, then went to Lissa “to take final leave of his scholastic and clerical duties,” etc., and finally settled at Elbing in November.
688 See pp. 171–174, below.
689 John Humfrey left Boston in the autumn of 1641 and in a letter to Winthrop dated Weymouth, England, July 21, 1642, said: “You are a thousand times wellcome home, . . . I beseech you if you see the wind chops about contrarie, & hold there, come downe, I will beare your charges of the Post, & you shall doe no worse (but as much better as you will & I can helpe it) then I. Indeede I thinke you should have beene with us before. . . . Good deare loving Sagamore, let us have your companie if possible” (Winthrop Papers, i. 18–19). This would seem to indicate that Winthrop was in London in July, 1642. On the other hand, Winthrop’s letter to Humfrey announcing his own arrival in England may have been written weeks before its receipt by Humfrey. All we know for certain of Winthrop’s movements in the summer and autumn of 1642 is that he was in Germany and the Low Countries in October and November.
690 Educational Review, xii. 380.
691 See p. 164 note 2, above.
692 On October 18, 1654, the General Court (Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 204) appointed as Overseers John Allin of Dedham, John Norton of Boston, Samuel Whiting of Lynn, and Thomas Cobbet of Lynn, though none of them were eligible under the act of 1642.
693 See p. 367, below.
694 In a letter to John Winthrop, F.R.S., dated December 10, 1707, Cotton Mather said: “If there be a Family in the World, which I have endeavoured alwayes to treat with all possible service and Honour, tis the Winthropian. If there be a person in that Family, for whose welfare, I have even travailed with Agony tis You; whereof the walls of a certain Bibliothecula in the World, are but some of the many witnesses” (Mather Papers, p. 405).
695 These sermons, after the fashion of their kind, contain no biographical data of value.
696 Life and Letters of John Winthrop, i. 12. With regard to one story, told by Mather about the younger Winthrop, Mr. Winthrop, though pointing out errors in detail, concludes that “doubtless it must have had some foundation in fact” (i. 27). And of the same story the late Frederick J. Kingsbury said: “Of late years, however, it has become the fashion to throw doubt on anything related by Cotton Mather. But it should be remembered that Mather did not write as a historian but as a collector of interesting events which in any way had come to his knowledge illustrating the life of his times. Doubtless Mather had heard this story and there is no reason why it should not be true” (Proceedings American Antiquarian Society, April, 1898, xii. 306).
697 See New Haven Colonial Records, i. 376, ii. 141, 141 note, 370; B. Trumbull, History of Connecticut, 1797, i. 305–306, 566–571; Palfrey, History of New England, i. 237, 373; Hollister, History of Connecticut, ii. 567–568, 577; E. E. Atwater, History of the Colony of New Haven, pp. 271–285; B. C. Steiner, History of Guilford and Madison, pp. 394–395.
698 Yale College was incorporated October 19, 1701, but was not established in New Haven until October, 1716 (F. B. Dexter, Historical Papers, 1918, pp. 366–381). For the controversy that occurred over the will of Governor Hopkins, see Charles P. Bowditch’s “Account of the Trust administered by the Trustees of the Charity of Edward Hopkins” (1889).
699 The title-page of Book IV reads in part as follows: “The Fourth Book of the New-English History. Containing An Account of the University, From whence the Churches of New-England, (and many other Churches) have been Illuminated.” And the heading on p. 125 reads, “The History of Harvard-Colledge.” In 1726 Mather specifically stated “Harvard College:” see p. 155, above.
700 William and Mary College was founded in 1693.
701 Though not published until 1702, the Magnalia was finished on August 20, 1697, and sent to London on June 8, 1700 (C. Mather, Diary, i. 226, 229, 255, 352–353).
702 Even had Mather spoken merely of “the College,” there could be no possible doubt of his meaning Harvard. In his Life of Theophilus Eaton, Mather says: “His Eldest Son he maintained at the Colledge until he proceeded Master of Arts” (Magnalia, bk. ii. chap, ix, § 9, p. 28), the allusion being to Samuel Eaton, who graduated at Harvard in 1649. In 1690 was published Mather’s “The Wonderful Works of God Commemorated. . . . In a Thanksgiving Sermon: Delivered on Decemb. 19, 1689.” The epistle dedicatory to Sir Henry Ashurst contains the words: “And Sir, . . . you will pardon it if One born in that Countrey, and a Son of the Colledge there, take the Liberty to acquaint you, That we are not insensible” etc.
In September, 1644, the Rev. Thomas Shepard presented to the Commissioners of the United Colonies a proposition “for the mayntenance of poore Schollers at the Colledg at Cambridge,” whereby “euery famyly (wch is able and willing to giue) throughout the plantacōns to giue yearely but the fourth part of a bushell of Come, or somethinge equivolent therevnto” (Plymouth Colony Records, ix. 20–21). This proposition was recommended by the Commissioners and was favorably acted on by various of the “plantations.” On November 11, 1644, the New Haven Colony “fully approved off” “the propositiō for the releife of poore schollars att the colledge att Cambridg;” on March 16, 1646, “It was propownded that the free gift of corne to the colledge might be continued as it was the last year;” and thereafter are various allusions to “corne to the colledge” or to “the colledge corne,” where “the college” meant not the proposed college at New Haven but Harvard College (New Haven Colonial Records, i. 149, 210, 225, 311, 318, 354, 357, 382). See also Connecticut Colonial Records, i. 112, 139, 250.
703 Winthrop was elected Governor of Connecticut in 1657 and in 1659–1675, both included. He resigned in 1667, 1670, and 1675 (Winthrop Papers, iv. 121, 137, 168–169), but his resignation was not accepted in the two former years (Connecticut Colonial Records, ii. 62, 64, 145).
704 In a matter of this sort, negative evidence must be received with caution. It has already been pointed out that very few letters written by the younger Winthrop during his three trips to Europe have been preserved, and in those extant there is not the slightest allusion to his having been in Holland: yet we know with certainty that he was there in 1642 and 1661.
705 It need scarcely be pointed out that in those days, as in these, New England scholars had an extensive correspondence with foreign scholars whom they never met, a notable instance being Cotton Mather himself, who never left America.
706 Winthrop Papers, iv. 73–74.
707 iv. 86.
708 See p. 160, above.
709 1 Proceedings Massachusetts Historical Society, xvi. 212.
710 Rev. William Hook (1600–1677).
711 Hezekiah Usher.
712 This name is printed “Drury,” but an examination of the original letter shows that Davenport plainly wrote “Dury.” See the next note but one.
713 3 Massachusetts Historical Collections, x. 38.
714 The Rev. John Durie (or Dury), though he never came to this country, was well known to the New England clergy, and may well have been known personally to Winthrop, — if so, he would be another link connecting Winthrop and Hartlib. (“This day Mrs. Dury with her husband went from hence to . . . Chester; from whence they intend to give a visit to Sir Richard Saltonstall at Wrexham:” Hartlib to Dr. Keffler, August 10, 1668, in Boyle’s Works, 1772, vi. 113.) The Rev. John Norton of Boston died in 1663, and the next year was published at our Cambridge “Three Choice and Profitable Sermons,” to which was appended “A Copy of the Letter Returned by the Ministers of New-England to Mr. John Dury about his Pacification. Faithfully Translated out of the Original Manuscript written in Latine, By the Reverend Author of the Three former Sermons.” The preface, which mentions “the late Synod 1662,” is signed by forty-four persons — President Chauncy, four Fellows of Harvard College, and thirty-nine ministers. Mather says: “The Three Sermons thus Published . . . are accompanied with the Translation of a Letter, which was composed in Latin by Mr. Norton, and subscribed by more than Forty of the Ministers, on this Occasion. The famous John Dury having from the Year 1636. been most indifatigably labouring for a Pacification, between the Reformed Churches in Europe, communicated his Design to the Ministers of New-England, requesting their Concurrence and Countenance unto his Generous Undertaking. In answer to Him, this Letter was written” (Magnalia, bk. iii. pt. i. chap. ii. § 25, p. 39). Norton’s original letter was written before 1661 (in which year the Rev. Ezekiel Rogers, one of the signers, died), and in 1738 was in the possession of Samuel Mather. Extracts from it were quoted by Cotton Mather in the Magnalia (see the reference above), and it was reprinted in full by Samuel Mather in his Apology for the Liberties of the Churches in New England (1738), pp. 151–166.
Davenport called Durie his “ancient and honored friend.” They had doubtless met in Holland in 1633–1636. Durie was the son of Robert Durie, who in 1609 became the first pastor of the English Presbyterian Church at Leyden; on August 3, 1611, at the age of twelve, he was admitted a student at Leyden University (3 Massachusetts Historical Collections, x. 58); after the death of his father in 1616 he returned to England; from 1628 to 1633 he was in Germany and Holland; on December 17, 1633, he was in London (Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1633–1634, p. 329); in 1634 he was in Germany, then again in England, and in July, 1635, he started for the Continent and “laboured for a year in the Netherlands:” see the notice of him in the Dictionary of National Biography. Durie’s daughter married Henry Oldenburg, a friend of the younger Winthrop’s. Davenport took refuge in November, 1633, in Holland, where he remained until late in 1636 or early in 1637, and reached Boston in June of the latter year: see the notices of him in the Dictionary of National Biography, and in F. B. Dexter’s Historical Papers (1918), pp. 31–58. In 1738 Samuel Mather wrote: “I might fitly subjoin to the Letter foregoing [Norton’s letter to Durie] another Letter of the famous Mr. John Davenport Batchelor of Divinity, who was Minister of New Haven and afterwards Pastor of the first Church in Boston New-England, to the pious Dury upon the same Occasion that the foregoing Letter was written; which Letter was signed by the Ministers of Connecticut Colony. . . . But, lest the Appendix should swell too much upon us, I consent to the dropping it. N. B. As I signified concerning the former Letter; so I would advertize concerning this, that if any Gentleman or others desire to see the Original Copy of it, I have it at their Service” (Apology, etc., p. 166). Portions of Davenport’s letter were quoted by Cotton Mather in the Magnalia, bk. iii. pt. i. chap. iv. § 9, pp. 54–55.
It may be added that Davenport, while in Holland, corresponded with Sir William Boswell: see Proceedings Massachusetts Historical Society, xlii. 228, 234; and cf. p. 164, above.
715 Winthrop Papers, ii. 504, 505.
716 That is, John Palmer was the bearer of the books.
717 Winthrop Papers, ii. 509.
718 See H. Dirck, Biographical Memoir of Samuel Hartlib (1865), pp. 58, 59, 60, 65, 77, 82, 83.
719 See p. 164, above.
720 Winthrop Papers, iv. 7.
721 Winthrop Papers, i. 468–472.
722 Henry Jacie to Winthrop, January 9, 1632 (3 Massachusetts Historical Collections, i. 235).
723 Winthrop Papers, ii. 17, 18. A letter from Abraham Keffler (written in 1639) is printed in Winthrop Papers, iii. 270–271; and one from Dr. John Sibert Keffler (written in 1659) in iii. 382–383. Both men are referred to in Digby’s letter of January 26, 1656 (3 Massachusetts Historical Collections, x. 16), and the latter in Winthrop’s letter of November 12, 1668 (Winthrop Papers, iv. 136). Mr. Kittredge, to whom I am indebted for information about the Kefflers, thinks that Winthrop must have met Abraham Keffler in the Rochelle expedition, in which both men were engaged — Keffler as an expert in explosives (Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1628–1629, pp. 148, 161; 1629–1631, pp. 212, 215). In 1638 the latter received a grant of denization in England (id. 1638–1639, p. 176).
724 In a letter undated but written on or shortly after May 2, 1641, Child acknowledged letters from Winthrop, and wished to be remembered to “yor father, Mr Dudley, Mr Bellingham, Mr Humphreys, Mr Cotton, Mr Wilson, Mr Peters, unto whome I am much beholdē” (Winthrop Papers, iii. 149, 151), showing that he was well acquainted with many of the chief men in New England before Winthrop’s visit to Europe in 1641. He had first come to this country between 1638 and 1641 (seep. 7, above). If, as Savage thinks (3 Massachusetts Historical Collections, viii. 247; Genealogical Dictionary, i. 379), the Robert Child who matriculated at Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, at Easter, 1628, and proceeded A. B. in 1631–2 and A. M. in 1635 (Venn, Matriculations and Degrees, p. 147), was our Dr. Robert Child, then the latter and Forth Winthrop (the brother of John Winthrop, Jr.) may well have met at Cambridge; for Forth Winthrop entered Emmanuel College in 1626 (see p. 156 note 5, above) and remained there during 1627 and a part of 1628. From a letter to his brother undated but written in the spring of 1628 (Winthrop Papers, iv. 192–195), it appears that Forth Winthrop was still at Emmanuel.
725 In a passage published in 1655 but written as early as 1653 or 1654, Child calls Winthrop “our” — that is, his and Hartlib’s — friend: see p. 112, above.
726 Digby had returned to England for a time in January, 1654: see T. Longueville, Life of Sir Kenelm Digby (1896), p. 278. He was at Hartlib’s house on May 14, 1654 (Boyle’s Works, 1772, vi. 89).
727 3 Massachusetts Historical Collections, x. 5–6. In a letter to Winthrop dated March 3, 1655, Hugh Peters said that “Sir Kenelme Digby . . . longs for you here” (Winthrop Papers, i. 116). It is worth noting that in a letter dated Leghorn, July 14, 1628, Winthrop wrote: “there is newes . . . from Marseiles that the Duke de Guise is come to sea with 4 gallioones & 12 sailes of gallies, it is supposed to meete with Sir Chillam Digby, who hath taken 3 or 4 Frenchmen, hath beene at Algiers, & redeemed some 20 or 30 Christian slaves, hath mand his prizes, & is gone againe towards the bottom” (Winthrop Papers, iv. 10).
728 Winthrop Papers, iii. 279.
729 iii. 353, 359.
730 George Starkey’s Pill Vindicated.
731 Stirk’s dedication, to Boyle, of Pyrotechny Asserted, published in 1658.
732 Cardilucius calls Hartlib his “good friend:” “Und hat ihn [a certain Latin tract] Herr G.S. [i.e. George Stirk] vom Authore mit aus West-Indien bracht, und solchen alsofort meinem guten Freunde Herrn S. H. übergeben, von dannen ich ihn etliche Jahr hernach bekommen” (Magnalia Medico-Chymica Continuata, 1680, Vorbericht, p. 4).
733 Hartlib to Boyle, February 28, 1654, December 8, 1657, in Boyle’s Works, vi. 78–83, 97.
734 For this information about Stirk I am again indebted to Mr. Kittredge.
735 1 Proceedings Massachusetts Historical Society, xvi. 213. This is the only reference to Comenius in either the Proceedings or the Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society. His name does not occur in A. P. C. Griffin’s Bibliography of American Historical Societies (1907). Mr. Monroe says (Educational Review, xii. 381) that “the only reference to Comenius in connection with the names of any of the Winthrops occurs” in the letter quoted in our text, but there is one other important reference: see p. 178, below.
736 These were John Winthrop, Jr.; John Winthrop, who graduated at Harvard in 1700; and John Winthrop, who graduated at Harvard in 1732. The last is usually called Professor John Winthrop, but sometimes John Winthrop, LL.D., because he was the first person to receive (in 1773) that degree from Harvard College: see our Publications, vii. 321–329.
737 The following table shows the relationships at a glance:
738 My attention was called to this dedication by Mr. Kittredge.
739 See p. 175 note 1, above.
740 See p. 161, above.
741 It is only fair to add that Tycho Brahe, whose name occurs in the list, died in 1601, and hence that letters from him which were in the possession of John Winthrop, F.R.S., could not have been addressed to John Winthrop, Jr.
742 See p. 148, above.
743 Educational Aims and Educational values, p. 209.
744 College Book i. 264.
745 See p. 195, below
746 Catalogus Librorum Bibliothecæ Collegij Harvardini (1723), p. 67
747 Janua Linguarum Reserata, 2d edition, Lissa, 1632; Janua Linguarum Gr. & Lat., Amsterdam, 1642; Janua Linguarum Trilinguis, London, 1662 (Catalogus, p. 74).
748 New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xxx. 432. This reference came to me from Mr. Thomas G. Wright.
749 The Library of the Late Reverend and Learned Mr. Samuel Lee (1693), pp. 11, 13. The History of the Bohemian Persecution, London, 1650, was a translation of Comenius’s Historia Persecutionum Ecclesiæ Bohemicæ, published in 1648.
750 See p. 176, above.
751 See p. 172 note 5, above.
752 1 Proceedings Massachusetts Historical Society, xvi. 212, 213
753 In Proceedings American Antiquarian Society, xx. 322, the title-page is said to be wanting and the title is wrongly given — a mistake due to the fact that the book is in two parts, separately paged, and the title-page is bound in in the wrong place. There being some doubt as to the identity of the book, Mr. Brigham kindly sent it to me for my inspection.
A translation of Comenius’s De Bono Unitatis et Ordinis, etc., was published in London in 1661 under the title of An Exhortation of the Churches of Bohemia to the Church of England, etc. There is a copy in the Yale University Library, but with no clues to ownership.
754 To those who have struggled with Increase Mather’s small and difficult handwriting, the inscription will seem surprisingly large and legible. The Massachusetts Historical Society owns a copy of the Bible printed at London in 1599, one of the fly-leaves of which is nearly filled with memoranda in the hand of Increase Mather. First comes the signature “Crescentius Mather;” then the words “I was marryed ye 6 day of ye 1 moneth being ye fifth day of ye week 1661½;” then other entries coming down as late as 1710. The signature at the top is nearly as large as that of the facsimile, after which the hand dwindles in size.
With regard to the words “cœlū non solū,” found in the inscription, Mr. Kittredge writes me: “Horace says, ‘Caelum non animum mutant qui trans mare currunt,’ and this became so proverbial that ‘caelum non animum’ by itself was an intelligible motto. I take it that ‘caelum non solum’ imitates this. ‘I have changed climate (or clime), but am still an Englishman, not having changed my natale solum, since New England is really England.’”
755 I have examined those owned by the Boston Athenaeum, the Boston Public Library, the Congregational Library, the Harvard College Library, and the Massachusetts Historical Society. Our associate Mr. Brigham has sent information about those owned by the American Antiquarian Society. The late Mr. Thomas G. Wright of New Haven, at my request, kindly examined those in the Yale University Library. Some of the copies contain notes or signatures not without interest — showing, for instance, that the books were apparently used at the English universities — but which have no bearing on the question under discussion.
Professor Hanus describes (Educational Review, iii. 235 note; Educational Aims and Educational Values, p. 209 note) several, but by no means all, of the copies in the Harvard College Library. In an article, quoted by Mr. Hanus, on “Boston as an Educational Centre,” the late Arthur Gilman, speaking of Comenius, said:
“The connection of the great pioneer among pedagogical reformers with Boston is not fanciful, though it may at first sight appear so. The writer has before him a copy of the ‘Gate of Languages,’ printed in London in 1670. Fifty years after its publication it was the property of the writer’s great-grandfather, a graduate of Harvard College in the Class of 1724. Following the family line, it belonged in 1813 to one of the writer’s uncles, who graduated from Phillips Academy, at Exeter, in that year, and went out of Harvard a member of the Class of 1818. It seems to have been a text-book in the college, and there are other worn and stained copies in the library” (Christian Union, July 4, 1891, xliv. 53 note).
Mr. Gilman’s relatives were the Rev. Nicholas Gilman (1708–1748, H. C. 1724), who “went to the Latin School at Newburyport, at eight years of age,” and Joseph Gilman (1792–1823, H. C. 1818): see A. Gilman, Gilman Family (1869), pp. 55–64, 166.
756 Two of these, besides the De Bono Unitatis et Ordinis, etc., are now in the American Antiquarian Society (Proceedings, xx. 322). The Massachusetts Historical Society owns a volume once the property of Cotton Mather containing Physicæ ad Lumen divinum Reformatæ Synopsis (1643), Pansophiæ Prodromus (1644), and De Sermonis Latini Studio (1644); and also a copy of De Zelo Sine scientia & charitate, Admonitio Fraterna J. A. Comenii ad D. Samuelem Maresiurn (1659), which once belonged to Cotton Mather or to his son Samuel Mather or to both
757 This is not the autograph either of the Rev. John Norton of Boston or of his nephew the Rev. John Norton (H. C. 1671) of Hingham, and I have been unable to identify the writer.
758 Sibley, Harvard Graduates, iii. 334–335. After the death of the elder Thomas Berry in 1695, his widow Margaret married in 1697 John Leverett (H. C. 1680).
759 Or, of course, the book may originally have belonged to John Rogers of the Class of 1684, and then have come into the possession of the elder Thomas Berry.
760 Catalogue of the Boston Public Latin School (1886), p. 41.
761 Rev. Samuel Willard (H. C. 1659), then Vice-President of the College.
762 Diary, ii. 87.
763 Sibley, Harvard Graduates, iii. 386–388.
764 Sibley, Harvard Graduates, ii. 457–462.
765 F. B. Dexter, Yale Annals and Biographies, i. 101–102.
766 i. 621.
767 Besides the books mentioned in the text, the fly-leaf at the end of a copy of Janua Linguarum Reserata (London, 1673) contains the entry: “This belonged to Middlecott Cooke the G. Son of the immortal Elisha Cooke & son of Elisha Cooke, a family that guided Mass. for 80 years by their virtue and patriotism. One of the best of Books in itself considered.” This book was “The Gift of Edward Soley, of Charlestown, Senior Sophister. 1827,” who graduated in 1828.
768 The name of Elkanah Cooke is not found in the Catalogue (1886) of the School, but the early records are very defective. The two Elisha Cookes and Middlecott Cooke are entered under the years 1646, 1686, and 1712, as probable scholars (pp. 40, 41, 43).
769 New England Historical and Genealogical Register, ii. 78; Savage, Genealogical Dictionary, i. 445, 449; Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, ix. 10.
770 New England Historical and Genealogical Register, viii. 277, 353, xxxi. 105; Suffolk Deeds, iii. 413.
771 Suffolk Probate Files, no. 670.
772 Catalogue (1886), p. 41.
773 The names of “Joel Jacoomis” and “Caleb Chesecheamuck” are attached as witnesses to a deposition dated January 20, 1664, in Massachusetts Archives, lix. 186; but that document is a copy, and hence the names are not autographs.
774 Corporation for Propagating the Gospel in New England, now known as the New England Company, of which Boyle was then Governor. For the many names by which this society has been called, see our Publications, vi. 180 note 2.
775 1 Proceedings Massachusetts Historical Society, xvi. 218–219. It is also printed, with slight differences, in Winthrop Papers, iv. 84–85.
776 Cotton Mather speaks of this Indian, calling him “I-a-coomes” (Magnalia, bk. vi. chap. vi. sect, ii, p. 53). Elsewhere he is called “Hiacombs,” “Hiacoms,” “Iacomoes,” “Jacomes,” “Jacoms,” and “Sacomas” (Plymouth Colony Records, x. 167, 210, 245, 262, 277, 405, 405 note). Cf. p. 260, below.
It will be observed that Joel spells his name “J:acoomis,” and “Jacomis.” In the list of temporary students at Harvard College printed in our Publications (xvii. 285 note), the name appears as “Jacoms,” that being the form found in a monitor’s bill of the period: see 1 Proceedings Massachusetts Historical Society, x. 403–408; P. B. Dexter, Historical Papers, pp. 1–5
777 In a document dated May 11, 1665, Edward Rawson said: “there are eight Indian youths, one whereof is in the colledg, & ready to com̄ence batchiler of art, besides another, in the like capacity, a few months since, wth seuerall English, was murdered by the Indians at Nantucket” (Massachusetts Colony Records, vol. ii. pt. ii. p. 198).
779 Historical Collections of the Indians in New England, in 1 Massachusetts Historical Collections, i. 154–155, 172, 173. For Caleb, see also Sibley, Harvard Graduates, ii. 201–204.
780 Alphabetical and Analytical Catalogue of the New York Society Library (1850), p. 494, to which my attention was called by Mr. Wright. The so-called Winthrop Library is catalogued on pp. 491–505, there being 269 titles. “This Ancient and Curious Collection of Books was presented by the late Francis B. Winthrop, Esq; they were the property of his distinguished ancestor, John Winthrop, the Founder of Connecticut” (p. 491). This statement is not strictly accurate, for I have noted at least fifteen books which were not published until after the death of John Winthrop, Jr. Nevertheless, it is reasonable to suppose that the two books in question did belong to the younger Winthrop, though Mr. F. B. Bigelow (the librarian) kindly informs me that “The two volumes of Comenius contain no mss. notes.”
781 Pp. 20, 28.
782 P. 29. In some preliminary words “To the Reader,” Mather said: “The Judicious Reader will remember that this was written . . . in America; where I could not by any means come by the sight of some Books more fully discovering the practice of Antiquity respecting the controverted Question. Yet such as I had, I have spared no pains in revolving.”
783 See p. 155, above.
784 Apology for the Liberties of the Churches in New England, p. 174,
785 See our Publications, xv. 158–166.
786 A few Notes concerning the Records of Harvard College. Library of Harvard University, Bibliographical Contributions, No. 27, 1888, pp. 7–13.
787 Catalogus Librorum Bibliothecæ Collegij Harvardini quod est Cantabrigiæ in Nova Anglia. Bostoni Nov-Anglorum: MDCCXXIII.
788 History of Harvard University (1840), i. 10.
789 A few Notes, etc., p. 6.
790 John Harvard’s Life in America, in our Publications, xii. 33 n.
791 The following catalogue is arranged in the order of the original List, and the first fine of each entry reproduces the original verbatim. Then follow the fuller titles as far as found, with any necessary notes.
Where a title has been found in the printed Catalogue of 1723, it is indicated by the words “Cat. 1723” after the entry.
When the same edition of any work is now in the Harvard Library, an asterisk precedes the title. If the book is now in the Library, but in a different edition, the facts are given in a note.
792 Altered from “Consiones.”
793 This number has been altered.
794 Publications, xiv. 213–257.
795 William H. Whitmore, Introduction to Dunton’s Letters from New England, p. xxiv.
796 “To my only Brother Mr. Lake Dunton. Lately Return’d from Surat in the East Indies.” The letter occupies pp. 20–55 of the Prince Society edition.
797 P. 43.
798 See Andrew D. White, History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom, i, chap. 1, for a popular account, with many references, of the Physiologus and similar books. See also the article “Physiologus” in the Encyclopædia Britannica.
799 The / Travels / Of / Sig. Pietro della Valle, / A Noble Roman, / Into / East-India / And / Arabia Deserts. / In which, the several Countries, together with the / Customs, Manners, Traffique, and Rites both / Religioun and Civil, of those Oriental Princes / and Nations, are faithfully Described: / In Familiar Letters to his Friend / Signior Mario Schipano. / Whereunto is Added /.4 Relation of Sir Thomas Roe’s Voyage / into the East-Indies. / London, / Printed by J. Macock, for John Martin, and James Allesty; and / are to be sold at their Shop, at the Bell in St Paul’s / Church-yard. 1665.
The Epistle Dedicatory to the Earl of Orrery, concludes thus concerning the relation of Sir Thomas Roe’s voyage:
“The other Piece hath been judg’d fit to be adjoyned, as one of the Exactest Relations of the Eastern parts of the World that hitherto hath been publish’d by any Writer, either Domestick or Forreign; having been penn’d by one that attended Sir Thomas Roe in his Embassy to the Great Mogol; Than whom, ’tis acknowledg’d by one of that Country that trades most into those parts, none ever gave a more faithful Account thereof.”
This dedication is signed by G. Havers.
For a life of Pietro della Valle (1586–1652) and a bibliographical account of his Viaggi, see Edward Grey’s edition of The Travels of Pietro della Valle in India, 2 vols., London, 1892 (Hakluyt Society Publications, Nos. 84 and 85).
800 There is an account of Sir Thomas Roe (1580 or 1581–1644) in the Dictionary of National Biography by Stanley Lane-Poole, who does not mention this relation. S. R. Gardiner mentions Roe frequently and with much respect: see the general index in the tenth volume of his History of England, 1603–1642.
801 Speculum / Mundi. / Or / A Glasse Re/ presenting The Face / Of The World; / Shevving both that it did begin, and must also end: /The manner How, and time When, being / largely examined. / Whereunto Is / Joyned / an Hexameron, or a serious discourse of the causes, / continuance, and qualities of things in Nature; / occasioned as matter pertinent to the / work done in the six dayes of the / Worlds creation. / The second Edition enlarged. / Aug. in Ser. de Ascen. / Qui se dicit scire quod nescit, temerarius est. / Qui se negat scire quod scit, ingratus est. / Printed by Roger Daniel Printer to the / Universitie of Cambridge, 1643. / For Troylus Adkinson, Stationer in Cambridge.
Swan’s Speculum Mundi was rather popular: the British Museum catalogue has editions as follows, — Cambridge 1635, Cambridge 1643, London 1665, and London 1670. A recent bookseller’s catalogue advertises a copy of the Cambridge edition of 1643 with a “fine frontispiece by W. Marshall.” This is, of course, the well known William Marshall, on whom see the Dictionary of National Biography. Possibly this frontispiece is the “second title-page, engraved” referred to by the British Museum cataloguer in describing their copy of the second edition.
The author of the Speculum Mundi may be the John Swan who entered Emmanuel College, Cambridge, as a sizar in the Lenten term of 1626–7 and proceeded A.B. in 1630–1 and A.M. in 1634. Another John Swan entered Queens College, Cambridge, as a pensioner in 1627 and was A.B. in 1630–1 and A.M. in 1634. Still another entered Trinity in 1622 and was A.B. in 1625–6 and A.M. in 1629. (Venn, Book of Matriculations and Degrees, 1913, p. 651.)
802 The copy of Pell in the Harvard College Library is imperfect, the first six words of the title having been supplied in manuscript. The words so supplied are indicated below within square brackets. It appears, however, from the British Museum catalogue, Watt, the Thomason Catalogue, and other sources, that the first word of the title should be Πέλαγος, in part chosen, no doubt, for the sake of the pun upon the author’s name. The full title of Pell’s book should be, then, as follows:
[Πέλαγος Nec inter Vivos, nec inter Mortuos] Neither Amongst the living, nor / amongst the Dead. / Or, An / Improvement / of the Sea, / Upon the Nine Nautical Verses in the / 107. Psalm; / Wherein is handled / I. The several, great, and many hazzards, that Ma / riners do meet withall, in Stormy and Tempestuous / Seas. II. Their many, several, miraculous, and stupen / dious deliverances out of all their helpless, and / shiftless distresses. / III. A very full, and delightful description of all those / many various, and multitudinous objects, which / they behold in their travels (through the Lords / Creation) both on Sea, in Sea, and on Land. viz. / All sorts and kinds of Fish, Foul, and Beasts, / Whether wilde, or tame; all sorts of Trees, and / Fruits; all sorts of People, Cities, Towns, and / Countries; / With many profitable, and useful rules, and / Instructions for them that use the Seas. / By Daniel Pell, Preacher of the Word. /London, Printed for Livewell Chapman, and are to be / sold at the Crown in Popes-head Alley. 1659.
Pell dates his preface from his Study “at my Lady Hungerfords in Hungerford house upon the Strand, May 4, 1659.” This was Lady Margaret Hungerford, wife of Sir Edward Hungerford. He died before 1659, as appears from Pell’s separate dedicatory epistle to Lady Hungerford.
The publication of the book presumably occurred in November of 1659, according to the Thomason Catalogue, ii. 268.
A Daniel Pell, who may be our author, entered St. John’s College, Cambridge, as a sizar, in Easter term 1651. (Venn, Book of Matriculations and Degrees, p. 520.)
803 The contrary opinion is expressed in Dunton’s Athenian Mercury, ii, No. 5, Question 5, where the question “Why a Dolphin follows a Ship until he is frightened away” is thus answered: “’Tis not from the same reason as Sharks, and other ravenous Fishes do, who expect a dead Body, or a Prey, but from the great love and kindness which these sort of Fishes bear unto Man.”
804 This passage may indicate that Dunton had looked into Sir Thomas Browne’s Pseudodoxia Epidemica, bk. v. chap. 2 (“Of the Picture of Dolphins”), wherein we read: “That dolphins are crooked, is not only affirmed by the hand of the painter, but commonly conceived their natural and proper figure, which is not only the opinion of our times, but seems the belief of elder times before us. . . . Notwithstanding, to speak strictly, in their natural figure they are straight, nor have their spine convexed, or more considerably embowed, than sharks, porpoises, whales, and other cetaceous animals” (Works of Sir Thomas Browne, ed. Simon Wilkin, London, 1852, ii. 4–5).
805 Our Publications, xiv. 253.
806 I have not taken into account the single sentence borrowed from Purchas.
807 Here I received the most generous assistance from our associate Mr. Samuel Henshaw.
808 See an article on the Fearing Collection, by our associate Mr. George P. Winship, in the Harvard Alumni Bulletin of November 3, 1915, xviii. 92–94; and an article by Mr. Fearing in the Harvard Graduates’ Magazine for December, 1915, xxiv. 263–274.
809 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xxii.
810 Born in or about 1632, Munnings was brought to this country in 1635; married Hannah Wiswall in 1656; and was drowned in Boston on February 27, 1660. See Records and Files of the Quarterly Courts, Essex County, ii. 203–204; Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, iii. 21, iv. 3, 15, 26, 29, 38, 80, 105, xxi. 5; New England Historical and Genealogical Register, i. 132, vi. 73, vii. 273–274, x. 176–177, xiv. 316, xviii. 270, xxxvii. 378; Suffolk Deeds, iii. 298–299; Robbins, History of the Second Church, p. 265; History of Dorchester (1859), pp. 137–138; Orcutt, Good Old Dorchester, p. 60.
811 Miss Judkins was of Cambridge, and was a great-granddaughter of Jonathan Hastings (H. C. 1730; College Steward, 1755–1779).
812 Samuel Webber was President from May 6, 1806, to July 17, 1810. He succeeded Joseph Willard (1781–1804), and was succeeded by John Thornton Kirkland (1810–1828).
813 In documents dated 1665, Henry Chickering’s name appears as “Chickerol,” “Chickrol,” and “Chickerin:” see our Publications, xx. 260, 262, 263.
814 Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 6–7.
815 Plymouth Colony Records, x. 245. Hiacoms (Hiacombs, I-a-coomes, Jacomes, Jacoms, Sacomas) was a man of note. His son Joel was in the Harvard Class of 1665, but was murdered shortly before Commencement Day in that year: see pp. 187–189, above. Of Hiacoms Cotton Mather wrote:
The first Indian embracing the Motion of forsaking their gods, and praying to the true God, was called I-a-coomes; Esteemed by the Indians as a contemptible Person among themselves: Unto this Man, God who ordereth all things for his own Glory, gave so great a Measure of Faith and Confidence in his Power, that he is soon beyond the fear of concealing his Contempt of their Gods: The Sachems and Powaws being much inraged, threaten his Life; the Powaws or Wizzards told him (a thing publickly known) that he could not be ignorant, that they could kill such as displeas’d them, viz. by Witchcraft.
He answers for himself before the Sachems, Witches, and a great Assembly; acknowledges the god they worshipp’d had great Power, but limited, and was subservient to the God he now had chosen: Therefore although by their means many had suffer’d much, and some were killed, he despis’d their Power, as being himself a servant of Him, whose power over-ruled all Powers, and ordered all things: The Expecting Multitude wait the Event, which while they concluded to be Sickness or Death; the good Man remains wholly sound to their Astonishment (Magnalia, bk. vi. chap. vi. sect. ii. p. 53).
816 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, vi. 191.
817 The Second Church in Boston: Commemorative Services held on the completion of Two Hundred and Fifty Years since its Foundation (1900), p. 73.
818 “The Covenant Which was Solemnly Renewed by the Church in Norwich in Connecticut Colony in New-England, March 22. 1675,” in the Rev. James Fitch’s An Explanation of the Solemn Advice, Recommended by the Council in Connecticut Colony, to the Inhabitants in that Jurisdiction, Respecting the Reformation of those Evils, which have been the Procuring Cause of the late Judgments upon New-England (1683), p. 69.
819 Mayflower Descendant, xiv. 191. The extracts dated 1644, 1660, and 1694 have not hitherto, so far as I am aware, been cited. There are to be found, however, in several works on Sunday schools, two or three extracts which are either misleading or actually erroneous. In an address delivered before the Society of Alumni of Williams College, August 16, 1843, the Rev. Dr. Thomas Robbins remarked: “A distinguished gentleman in New York, not long since, said, without qualification, . . . that the first Sabbath school in the United States was established at Hanover, in Virginia, by Bishop Asbury, in the year 1785. There were Sabbath schools in New England before that Bishop or John Wesley were born.” And in a footnote he added: “The earliest Sabbath school of which I have seen an authentic account, was at Plymouth, commenced in November, 1669” (pp. 39–40). Dr. Robbins gave no authority for that statement, but no doubt it was derived from John Cotton’s “Account of the Church of Christ In Plymouth, The first Church in New England, From it’s Establishment to the present Day,” appended to the Rev. Philemon Robbins’s Sermon Preached at the Ordination Of the Reverend Mr. Chandler Robbins, To the Pastoral Office over the First Church and Congregation In Plymouth, January 30th 1760, Appendix, p. 17. Instead of quoting Cotton’s words (which are substantially correct), I give the passage as it appears in the church records themselves, written by the then pastor, the Rev. John Cotton (H. C. 1657): “Also in November , began the Catechizing of the children by the Pastor, (the Elder also accompanying him therein constantly) once a fortnight, the Males at one time & the females at the other: the catechisme then used was Mr: Perkins” (Mayflower Descendant, iv. 214). Mr. Cotton is silent as to the day of the week on which this catechizing took place, and Dr. Robbins was unwarranted in assuming that it was Sunday.
In his Dictionary of Congregational Usages and Principles, published in 1852, under the heading “INTERMISSIONS, Sabbath, how spent in New England,” Preston Cummings quoted a passage from Cotton Mather and remarked: “Thus they were in advance of Raikes in devising virtual Sabbath-schools” (p. 45). Mather’s statement is as follows:
“The Hours taken from the two Meetings on the Lord’s Day, are such as they Judge may most suit their Edification. Where any number of the People have their living very remote from the Meeting-House, the Time of Intermission between the two Meetings is usually shortened for their sake; and they stay in or near it. But how do they spend this Time? The more faithful and watchful Pastors, are put upon using their best Contrivances, that their Employments may be most agreeable, and most serviceable to the Interests of Hol[i]ness. It has been proposed That Repitilions of, or Conferences on, the Word of Christ may be some of the Employments” (Ratio Disciplinæ Fratrum Nov-Anglorum, 1726, p. 45).
This passage does not warrant Cummings’s deduction about “virtual Sabbath-schools.”
In his Rise and Progress of Sunday Schools, published in 1863, John C. Power said:
“Many places in America claim the honor of having Sabbath schools prior to 1781. In fact, as early as 1680, (a century before their general introduction,) the records of the Pilgrim’s Church, at Plymouth, Massachusetts, then under the care of the Rev. John Robinson, show that a Sabbath School was organized at that time in connexion with the church.
“A vote of the church in the form of a request is as follows — ‘That the Deacons of the church be requested to assist the minister in teaching the children during the intermission on the Sabbath’” (p. 22).
It is obvious at a glance that there is something wrong about this passage. First, the Plymouth Church was “under the care” not of a “minister” but of a “pastor.” Secondly, the only John Robinson who was ever connected with the Pilgrims was the famous English divine who died in 1625 and who, it is needless to add, never came to this country. Thirdly, the pastor of the Plymouth Church in 1680 was the Rev. John Cotton. And finally, the church records themselves for 1680 yield no such passage nor anything resembling it: see the Mayflower Descendant, xii. 28. Apparently the only Rev. John Robinson who flourished in New England in the early days was the one who graduated at Harvard College in 1695 and became pastor of the Duxbury Church in 1702.
The Rev. John Cotton was ordained pastor of the Plymouth Church on June 30, 1669, and during the nearly thirty years of his pastorate there are in the church records several allusions to the catechizing of children. The first of these is the one under date of 1669, already quoted in this note, though, as above stated, there is no evidence that this then took place on Sunday. A second is under the year 1678: “Catechizing was againe begun, December 4: in the Assemblies Catechisme” (Mayflower Descendant, xii. 27). Now December 4, 1678, was a Friday. A third is under the year 1693 (or possibly 1694): “At a chh-meeting Feb: 4: the chh voted to sing the spirituall songs in scripture as translated into meeter in our new Psalm-booke the chh was then desired to warne their children & servants not to depart the Assembly before the Blessing, as also to acquaint them, that the ordinance of c[atech]izing them should shortly be revived, the chh unanimously agreed hereunto” (xiv. 189). A fourth is the one under date of May 13, 1694, quoted in our text. A fifth is under the year 1696: “July, 26: at the conclusion of the sacrament, the Pastor called upon the chh, desiring them after the example of Abraham, Gen: 18: 19: to command their children etc to attend more upon & not neglect the ordinance of publick catechizing, wherein of late there had bin some remisness, upon which followed a Reformation in that respect” (xv. 22).
For the references to the Plymouth Church Records taken from the Mayflower Descendant, I am indebted to Mr. George E. Bowman.
820 Raikes’s first school was opened in 1780 or 1781. Others had certainly been opened earlier. See the notices of Joseph Alleine (1634–1668), Hannah Ball (1734–1792), Theophilus Lindsey (1723–1808), and Robert Raikes (1735–1811) in the Dictionary of National Biography.
821 “Consequently,” writes Marianna C. Brown, “the few Sunday-schools dating back to the seventeenth century whose names have come down to us belong to an entirely different movement from the Sunday-schools started at the close of the eighteenth century” (Sunday-School Movements in America, 1901, p. 19. Though Miss Brown accepts without examination two or three doubtful statements, her account of early Sunday schools in this country is much more accurate than that found in the Rev. Dr. Edwin W. Rice’s “The Sunday-School Movement, 1780–1917, and the American Sunday-School Union, 1817–1917,” 1917, pp. 42–44, 153). Between 1791 and about 1819 a still further change took place in this country: instruction, at first secular, became religious; and the children of the wealthy as well as poor children attended. Finally, so far as Boston is concerned, between 1815 and about 1830 a Sunday school became attached to a particular parish and was attended by the children of that parish only.
822 “On recurring to the records it appears, that from the third month March, 1791, to the first month January 1800, there had been expended on the education of children 3968 dollars and 56 cents” (Constitution of the Society for the Institution and Support of First-Day or Sunday Schools in the City of Philadelphia, and the Districts of Southwark and the Northern Liberties, 1810, p. 18). Preliminary meetings having been held on December 19 and 26, 1790, that society was organized on January 11, 1791 (Marianna C. Brown, Sunday-School Movements in America, pp. 26–27).
823 For other earlier or early schools in this country see, under the titles “First Sunday Schools” and “Sunday-School History, Middle Period of,” the Encyclopedia of Sunday Schools and Religious Education (1915), ii. 411–416, iii. 1025–1033.
824 Rev. Edward H. Randall, A Discourse commemorative of the Fiftieth Anniversary of the Consecration of St. Paul’s Church, Pawtucket, R. I., delivered on Sunday, October 20th, A.D. 1867 (1868), pp. 18–27; Rev. Massena Goodrich, Historical Sketch of the Town of Pawtucket (1876), pp. 128–129.
825 “The sabbath-school system originated by Robert Raikes in England, for the benefit of the neglected children of his neighborhood, now began to attract public notice, and one of the earliest trials of it in New England was made in this town. In 1810, two ladies of the first church (Miss Joanna Prince, now Mrs. Ebenezer Everett, of Brunswick, Me., and Miss Hannah Hill,) collected a number of children and commenced a Sunday-school. Their efforts were crowned with entire success, and they before long enjoyed the pleasure of witnessing the establishment of similar institutions in each of the religious societies in town” (E. M. Stone, History of Beverly, 1843, pp. 299–300). In some reminiscences written between 1848 and 1858, Robert Rantoul (1778–1858) spoke of this school: see Essex Institute Historical Collections, vi. 89–90.
But three years before the Beverly school is supposed to have started, a Sunday school was certainly projected at Salem, though whether it actually came into existence I have been unable to ascertain. The following advertisement is copied from the Salem Gazette of September 4, 1807 (p. 3/4):
THE subscriber respectfully advertises the public, that he proposes to open a SUNDAY SCHOOL for the benefit of any children who may wish to profit by such an establishment.
It is essential to the success of this plan to state, that the pupils will be exposed to no expence, except for bibles, blank-books, &c.
The exercises will commence at the subscriber’s school-room, on Sabbath day next, the 6th inst.
Hours of instruction from half past 6 to 8, A.M. and from half past 4 to 6 P.M.
Salem, sept. 4.
S. Cleveland Blydon.
Stephen Cleveland Blyth was born at Salem on January 29, 1771;. entered Harvard College in the class of 1790, but did not graduate; had a varied and interesting career in the West Indies and in Europe; in 1807 changed his name to Blydon; in 1809 became a Roman Catholic; later, but exactly when is not known, changed his name back to Blyth; and practised medicine at Boucherville, Canada, where he died in 1844.
826 Boston Transcript, March 23, 1915, p. 12.
827 “The first mention of Sabbath schools in this country, in the ‘Boston Recorder,’” wrote the Rev. Asa Bullard in 1876, “so far as we can find, was in vol. xi., for 1817, in an article by Thomas Vose, Secretary of the Boston Society for the Moral and Religious Instruction of the Poor” (Fifty Years with the Sabbath Schools, p. 46). That article was printed in the issue of October 7, 1817, ii. 173 (not xi). This religious paper, first published under the name of The Recorder on January 3, 1816, contains many references to Sunday schools in this country before the article in question appeared. The paper was at first opposed to their establishment in New England, an editorial in the issue of September 4, 1816, reading in part as follows:
“It has been suggested, that the notices which we have occasionally published of the establishment and success of Sunday Schools in the southern and western States might induce the idea that similar institutions would be equally advantageous in this part of the country. This is far from our intention. The design of Sunday Schools is, and ought to be, the gratuitous instruction of poor children whose parents are unable to spare them from labor or pay for their instruction during the week. In the populous manufacturing districts of Great? Britain, where large numbers of poor children are confined to manual labor for six days in the week, such schools are an invaluable blessing. . . . But in New-England, where Schools are brought to every man’s door, and where the chidren of the poor may be educated without expence during the week, there are few cases where Sunday Schools would be attended with any solid advantage. They might even prove injurious, by inducing a neglect of common schools” (i. 143).
But in an editorial in the issue of October 14, 1817, Sunday schools were “vindicated” (ii. 177). In the Columbian Centinel of August 21, 1816, appeared the following:
Sunday Schools — are found, on experiment, to succeed in N. York, . . . We wish them success. In Massachusetts, we desire to be thankful, these institutions are not needed, and our youths can attend the public worship of God without any impediment to their education. Our laws — cheerfully obeyed — make ample provision for the education of all classes of the community, the children of the poor particularly. The teachers are liberally endowed — at least this is the case in Boston, and other places within the circuit of our knowledge; and the schools are kept constantly filled with pupils of both sexes, at separate times; and exhibitions are given in those schools of reading, writing, arithmetic, grammar, composition, and eloquence, which are not excelled at the best academies (p. 1/4–5).
The complacent view that the Boston schools furnished “ample provision for the education of all classes of the community” was not shared by others, and at a town meeting held May 25, 1818, “The application of a number of the Inhabitants for the establishment of Schools for the instruction of children under seven years of age” was read and the matter was placed in the hands of a committee. The report of this committee, dated June 3, was read at a town meeting held June 11, its recommendations were adopted, money was appropriated, and thus the primary schools were established: “Most of the Schools were opened in August, and all by the first week in September,” 1818 (Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xxxvii. 100, 105–106, 124–126).
828 Semi-Centennial Celebration of the Park Street Church and Society; held on the Lord’s Day, February 27, 1859 (1861), pp. 162–164.
829 The Seventeenth Annual Report (1834) was the last published by the Boston Society for the Moral and Religious Instruction of the Poor under that name. The operations of the society were suspended from January, 1838, to January, 1841, when it began a new career under the name of the City Missionary Society.
830 History of the Old South Church, ii. 406.
831 June 4, 1817: “An application was made for the use of the school houses for the accommodation of Sunday schools. — referred to the School Committee” (Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xxxviii. 234).
March 18, 1818: “On the application of the Rev. Mr. Huntington & Mr. Thurston leave was granted to occupy the North School house and the school house in Mason street for Sunday schools” (id. p. 279).
832 An account of this was printed in the Boston Recorder of April 24, 1818, beginning as follows: “During the latter part of last summer, a Sabbath School was established in the Congregational Society at South Boston, under the superintendence of the Instructor of the public school there, assisted by the Sabbath School Society in Boston; into which about 60 children were received and instructed in the elements of Reading, and the Holy Scriptures, about three months” (iii. 67).
833 Report of the Boston Society for the Moral and Religious Instruction of the Poor, October 8, 1817, pp. 2–3, 4. This Report was also printed in the Boston Recorder of October 28, 1817, ii. 183.
834 “The School in North-Bennet street was opened about seven months since” (Second Annual Report of the Boston Society, etc., October 22, 1818, p. 8).
835 “The School in Hawkins-street was commenced on Sunday, April 5th” (Second Annual Report, etc., p. 9).
836 Twelfth Annual Report, etc., December 4, 1828, p. 21.
837 Thirteenth Annual Report, December 30, 1829, p. 4. In a footnote the name of the “appropriate institution” is given as “The Massachusetts Branch of the American Sabbath School Union.” In the Fifth Annual Report of the Massachusetts Sabbath School Union, May 27, 1830, it is said: “These difficulties were foreseen by the Board and other friends of the Union, before the experiment was tried; but it was not then known, that each denomination was willing to be organized into Unions by themselves. As soon as this fact was ascertained, the Board were unanimous in the wish that all their schools might be formed into Auxiliary Unions, in connection with each Association of Ministers, or Conference of Churches, in the whole State” (p. 3). A long notice in the Boston Recorder of April 16, 1829, reads in part as follows: “It is well known that the Congregational Evangelical Sabbath Schools in this city have hitherto been under the care of the Society for the Religious and Moral Instruction of the Poor. . . . Recently . . . it was determined that the management of these schools should be entrusted to those who were engaged as instructors in them. . . . The design of relinquishing the schools having been communicated to the Superintendents and teachers; they held a meeting, accepted the trust, formed themselves into a union under the style of the Boston Sabbath School Union, auxiliary to the Massachusetts Sabbath School Union, adopted a constitution, and chose the following persons as officers” (xiv. 62). The first article of the new society’s constitution, adopted March 10, 1829, reads: “This Society shall be known by the name of the Boston Sabbath School Union, and shall be auxiliary to the Massachusetts Sabbath School Union” (First Annual Report of the Board of Managers of the Boston Sabbath School Union, February 20, 1830, p. 28: cf. p. 5).
838 Letter of Harry J. Jaquith dated December 30, 1918, in Boston Transcript of December 31, 1918. Mr. Jaquith says in part:
“The records of Park Street Church were in my possession in the early ’70s and while in my possession I had frequent talks with original members of the church, one of them, my venerable friend Peter Hobart, in telling of the gathering of the church narrated that when the split came between the Trinitarian and Unitarian wings of the Congregational Church, many families withdrew from the Unitarian churches and for years maintained a Sunday school for their children and youth in Deacon Bumstead’s house on Beacon Hill. Finally, out of the Sunday school grew the organization of Park Street Church and the erection of the present (altered) structure. Mr. Hobart was an original member of the Sunday school and later of the church. He told me of the boys of the Sunday school organizing a drum and fife corps and parading the streets upon the outbreak of the War of 1812; so it is easy to fix the date as five or six years earlier than the Christ Church School, and add to that the fact that its services were not discontinued but removed into the church edifice as soon as the building was ready for occupancy.
“There are no ‘ifs, ands or buts’ about these facts. I do not state them to claim ‘first’ for any Sunday school, indeed, Mr. Hobart did not speak of the school as anything new or novel and it is my impression that we would have to go back many years to correctly apply the label, ‘first.’”
Mr. Peter Hobart was born on November 19, 1806, and, consequently, lacked five months of being six years old at the outbreak of the War of 1812 (June 18): see New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xxxiv. 107–108. Obviously, what he told Mr. Jaquith cannot be accepted as anything more than the hazy recollections one would naturally expect sixty years or more after the event. Moreover, the historic sketch printed in 1861 was “chiefly from copious statements prepared” by three persons, one of whom was Mr. Hobart (p. 131). “Of my first three or four years,” a distinguished psychologist has recently written, “. . .I have managed to preserve only one dim fragmentary impression, that of mounted horsemen splashing through our street, on the occasion, without doubt, of an exceptionally high tide. But who can say what those first so-called impressions really mean: whether they are in part at least true memories of things seen by us refreshed from time to time, or merely reverberations of tales repeatedly told us by our elders?” (James Sully, My Life and Friends, 1918, p. 10).
839 See p. 265 note 3, above.
840 “An attempt was made to establish a Sunday School for children of color in the African Meeting-house in Belknap-street in the month of November, 1816” (Boston Recorder, November 25, 1817, ii. 200, from an account; “furnished by the Rev. Thomas Paul, Pastor of the African Church, Belknap-street”).
841 History of the First Baptist Church of Boston, pp. 306–307, 353. “Extracts from the Report of the Union Committee of the Sabbath Schools in the three Baptist Societies in Boston” were printed in the Boston Recorder of November 25, 1817, ii. 200, where it is stated that “It was in June, 1816, that the females of the Third Baptist Church and Congregation, formed the first Sunday School in this town.”
842 Semi-Centennial Celebration of the First Sabbath-School Society in Massachusetts, and the First Parish Sabbath School, Charlestown, held on the Lord’s Day, October 14, 1866, at the First Church, Charlestown (1867), pp. 47, 48.
843 Rev. Dr. Asa Eaton.
844 Evidently news about Sunday schools travelled with extreme slowness, but it is certainly surprising that an Episcopal parish in Boston in 1815 should have known nothing of the society that had been organized in Philadelphia twenty-four years before and of which William White, Episcopal Bishop of Pennsylvania, was the first president. Cf. p. 264 note 3, above.
845 The Boston Athenæum owns a copy, the title reading in part: “The Youth’s Manual. Containing the Catechism, of the Protestant Episcopal Church. . . . To which is prefixed A Form of Prayer, for the Use of Sunday Schools. Boston: . . . 1816.” It is a pamphlet of 54 pages, but “The Form of Prayer” is lacking.
846 “Salem Street Sunday School. List of the Officers of the Society, and of the Scholars belonging to the School, Dec. 14, 1817,” copied from a manuscript (now framed and hanging in the vestry of Christ Church), will be found in Bostonian Society Publications (1913), x. 119–125.
847 Report of the Superintendent of the Christ Church Sunday School, [Late Salem Street Sunday School,] presented . . . April 6, 1826, pp. 10–12.
“In June, 1815, Dr. Eaton, with the concurrence and help of his Wardens Shubael Bell and Thomas Clark, established the first Sunday School in this region. . . . It was at first called the Salem street Sunday School. Its sessions . . . were held in the Academy that stood next to the Church on the north side” (Rev. Henry Burroughs, Historical Account of Christ Church, 1874, pp. 33–34).
“On June 14, 1815, the church organized the first Sunday-school known in this part of the world” (Charles Downer, A Visit to the ‘Old North Church,’ Boston, 1893, p. 18).
In a sermon preached on December 29, 1898, the Rev. Charles W. Duane stated that “In June, 1815, Dr. Eaton . . . established, as claimed by some, the first Sunday school in New England” (Historical Sermon, 1901, p. 12).
“The church was part owner of the [Salem Street] Academy, and on June 14, 1815, organized the first Sunday-school known in this part of the world, if we except Samuel Slater’s private Sunday-school at Pawtucket, established in 1793” (Charles K. Bolton, Christ Church, Salem Street, Boston, 1912, p. 15). For the Pawtucket school, see p. 265 note 2, above.
The date June 14 is an error for June 4, since Mr. Ingraham states that Mr. Cotting became preceptor of the Salem Street Academy in May, 1815, and that the Sunday school was “opened on the first Sunday after he commenced his duties as preceptor, being the first Sunday in June, 1815” — that is, June 4th.
848 Boston Transcript, April 23, 1915, p. 12. In 1915, in 1917, and in 1918 discussions took place in the Boston Transcript as to the earliest Sunday school in Boston. See the editorial pages of the following issues: March 22, April 10, 16, 23, 26, 1915, and December 28, 31, 1918; and the Notes and Queriea department, no. 3504, July 21, 28, August 4, September 8, 1917.
849 See pp. 272–273, above.
850 See p. 265 note 3, above.
851 Sermon on the Seventy-fifth Anniversary of the First Baptist Sunday-School, Charlestown, . . . preached . . . April 15, 1888, pp. 8–9. Mr. Collier, a graduate of Brown University in 1797, had taught at the Pawtucket school: cf. p. 265 note 2, above. Mr. Hanson kindly sends me a pamphlet entitled, “Centennial of the First Baptist Sunday School of Charlestown, Mass. Historical address by Rev. Arthur Warren Smith, Librarian, New England Baptist Library. Sunday, April 27, 1913.” Mr. Smith says:
“Like many important beginnings the exact date when there began to be a Baptist Sunday school in Charlestown can not be determined. The probable reason for this is that the pastor and deacons of that early day followed a natural impulse in gathering together a company of twenty persons for religious instruction. But their plan which proved so efficient probably had little organisation for some years, though, doubtless, carried on with consecrated energy. Then in 1813 other local occurrences in the interest of great moral influences gave larger significance to the school more or less informal hitherto. This probably explains how it was that leaders in the church years ago always spoke of this school as in operation as early as 1813. Consequently the long series of school anniversaries, which are known to have been a regular feature ever since as early as 1849, has fixed the above date as the latest which can be assigned for the founding of this school. But there is full reason to recognise the actual origin to have taken place years earlier. It is a question if there was ever a time after 1804, when Pastor Collier, with his definite Sunday school experience in Pawtucket and New York, had not a practical interest in the religious instruction of the youth of his parish. Therefore, in this observance you have a reasonable right to think of this school as more than a hundred full years old” (pp. 3–4).
852 See p. 265 note 3, above.
853 E. S. Gannett, Address delivered before the Boston Sunday School Society, on the celebration of the Fiftieth Anniversary of the Sunday School Institution, at the Federal Street Church, September 14, 1831, p. 40. Dr. Lowell says that the “ladies of the West Church . . . continued the instruction of the Sunday school, till it was transferred to the church,” but does not state when that transference took place. It must have been between May 26 and November 6, 1822. The Boston Society for the Religious and Moral Instruction of the Poor contemplated “the establishment of another [Sunday school] at West Boston” in 1820, but had been obliged to defer it “from want of . . . a sufficient number of suitable Teachers” (Fourth Annual Report, October 11, 1820, p. 6). The Fifth Annual Report, October 17, 1821, stated that “No new School has been founded the past year, although two more might be established with every prospect of doing good — the one to accommodate adults at the Seamens’ meeting, and the children, who attend there — and the other at West Boston, where it has been so long needed. Hitherto, however, the want of suitable Teachers in sufficient numbers has prevented these labours of love” (p. 14). But in the Sixth Annual Report, November 6, 1822, we read: “The subject of a new Sabbath School at West Boston, in connection with the Society’s place of worship there, has been repeatedly mentioned in preceding Reports. The Directors have now the pleasure to state, that one is at length established, and is . . . conducted under the superintendence of Mr. William G. Lambert, . . . who observes in his Report: ‘The Sabbath School in the Mission-house was organized the 26th of May last. . . . Soon after we commenced, a school was opened in a neighboring congregation, and as a number of our scholars belonged to that society, they have generally gone from this to that school’” (p. 14). And a footnote states that the “neighboring congregation” was “The Rev. Mr. Lowell’s,” which was also alluded to on pp. 5–6 of the same Report.
854 Rev. Abiel Abbot (H. C. 1792).
855 Rev. Christopher Toppan Thayer (H. C. 1824).
856 The West Church and its Ministers, pp. 214–219, 221.
857 1 Massachusetts Historical Collections, iii. 266–267.
858 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xxvii. 147.
859 His middle name sometimes occurs as “Willington.”
860 O. W. Lane’s mother was presumably that Mary Wellington who was born at Lexington on October 20, 1732 (Lexington Vital Records, p. 84; C. Hudson, History of the Town of Lexington, ii. 728).
861 Bedford Vital Records, p. 36. The Faculty Records (iii. 119) give his name as “Oliver Lane,” the date of his birth as November 7, 1752, and his age as “16–8” — that is, sixteen years and eight months — on June 7, 1769, “about” which time the Freshman class was placed.
862 Massachusetts Soldiers and Sailors of the Revolutionary War, ix. 482.
863 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xxx. 90.
864 x. 190.
865 New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xiv. 261, 262.
866 John H. Sheppard, Reminiscences of Lucius Manlius Sargent, id. xxv. 211.
867 See the Columbian Centinel of October 23, p. 2/3, and October 26, p. 3/1.
868 Mercury, Tuesday, November 5, 1793, p. 3/3. The inscription on his tombstone in the Granary Burying Ground is given in T. Bridgman’s Pilgrims of Boston (1856), p. 118.
869 John Hancock (1737–1793) was the nephew of Thomas Hancock (1704–1764), who married Lydia Henchman, a daughter of Daniel Henchman (1689–1761), the Boston bookseller. Cf. our Publications, vi. 321.
870 History of Printing in America, 1810, i. 305; 1874, i. 107–108.
871 History of the United States, 1852, v. 266.
872 History of the United States, 1855, v. 266.
873 On January 13, 1853, Livermore “read a series of remarks pointing out sundry errors in the fifth volume of Mr. Bancroft’s ‘History of the United States,’ in relation to the printing of the Bible in this country before the Revolution” (1 Proceedings Massachusetts Historical Society, ii. 510–511: cf. x. 450–451). Presumably the remarks were identical with those printed, under the heading “The Bible before the Revolution. Mr. Bancroft and his Authorities,” in the Boston Daily Advertiser of January 18, 1853, p. 1/8. Livermore pointed out that the Bible had been printed here in the German language before 1776, and in later editions of his History of the United States Bancroft’s sentence reads: “And yet to print that Bible in British America would have been a piracy; and the Bible, though printed in German and in a native savage dialect, was never printed there in English till the land became free” (Centenary Ed., 1876, iii. 464). With regard to the alleged Bible printed by Kneeland & Green, Livermore could only quote Thomas at length — a clear begging of the question.
874 Catalogue of the Library of the late Thomas Jefferson Mc Kee, pt. vi, May 12–13, 1902, no. 4714, pp. 881–882. Cf. E. B. O’Callaghan, List of Editions of the Holy Scriptures and Parts thereof, printed in America previous to 1860 (1861), pp. xiii–xvi; J. Wright, Early Bibles of America (1892), pp. 55–58 (1894), pp. 60–63; J. Wright, Historical Bibles in America (1905), pp. 69–72.
875 The New York Public Library owns a copy in which this error has been rectified.
876 The partnership between Samuel Kneeland (d. 1769) and Timothy Green (d. 1763) was dissolved on or a few days after December 26, 1752: cf. our Publications, ix. 443.
877 “He [John Baskett] received afterwards a new grant from George II. for sixty years, with the additional privilege of serving Parliament with stationary. In this manner Baskett’s right would have endured from 1709 to 1799; but the last thirty years of this patent were conveyed to Charles Eyre and his heirs for £10,000. Eyre took possession of his reversion in 1769, and assumed William Strahan as his partner. When the term of this patent expired, a new one was granted to the same family” (John Lee, Memorial for the Bible Societies in Scotland, 1824, p. 180 note).
878 History of Printing in America, 1810, ii. 280; 1874, ii. 93.
879 Apparently the only Bible published by Thomas Baskett in 1752 was printed not at London but at Oxford (T. D. Darlow and H. F. Moule, Historical Catalogue of the Printed Editions of Holy Scripture in the Library of the British and Foreign Bible Society, 1903, i. 280, 285–286). The title-page of that edition, taken from a copy in the Boston Public Library, is as follows, the capital, small capital, and italic letters being as here given:
Containing the OLD and NEW
Newly Translated out of the
And with the former
Diligently Compared and Revised.
By his Majesty’s Special Command.
Appointed to be read in CHURCHES.
Printed by THOMAS BASKETT, Printer to the
UNIVERSITY. M DCC LII.
880 The volume is labelled on the back of the cover (which is not old): “Sir Ed Andros Land Warrants. 1687 and 1688.” The pages containing the warrants are numbered from 2 to 137, and at the beginning there is an alphabetical list of names. Many documents relating to the warrants are in vols, cxxvi–cxxix of the Massachusetts Archives, and other information will be found in vol. ii of the Council Records, in the Dudley Records (2 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, xiii. 226–286), in the Andros Records (Proceedings American Antiquarian Society, xiii. 239–268), and in Toppan’s Edward Randolph (Prince Society). The handwriting, which appears to be that of two clerks, is singularly legible for that period, though occasionally a proper name is obscure.
881 Facing p. 94 is a map of “Ancient Falmouth, from 1630 to 1690,” which shows the locations of most of the grants mentioned in the warrants.
882 Collections Maine Historical Society (1847), ii. 165–188.
883 Collections Maine Historical Society (1853), iii. 1–237. At the beginning of the volume are maps of Black Point and of Blue Point.
884 Massachusetts Colony Records, iv. i. 359.
885 Massachusetts Colony Records, iv. i. 359.
886 Though nominated a Councillor on November 4, 1687, Simon Lynde did not serve, as he died on the 22d of the same month.
887 Pawcatuck River separates Westerly, R. I., from Stonington, Ct. Pawcatuck Neck is the neck of land at Watch Hill, Westerly. “Squamacack” occurs in various forms: Ascomicutt, Misquamicoke, Misquamicuck, Misquamicuk, Misquamicut, Squamicut, Squamocuck, etc.
888 Philip Wells had been Andros’s steward, and may have come with him to New York in 1674 or in 1678. At all events, he was there on October 16, 1680, and on December 2 following a lot was surveyed for him in New York City. On August 30, 1683, he was appointed deputy-surveyor in New Jersey, and in June, 1686, he was one of the surveyors who ran the line between New Jersey and New York. On June 17, 1687, then described as of Boston, he was appointed by Andros to the “Office of Surveyor within ye Territory and Dominion” of New England. In March, 1700, he was one of the commissioners to run the line between New York and Connecticut. (New York Colonial Documents, ii. 302, 312 note, iv. 630; Calendar of Council Minutes, 1668–1783 , pp. 40, 45, 49 50, 61, 86, 122; Minutes of the Common Council of the City of New York, i. 87; New Jersey Archives, i. 517, 518, 521, ii. 22, 23, 24, iv. 412, 413, 414, vi. 148, 149, viii. 205, 227, 247, 249, xiii. 105, 111; Massachusetts Archives, cxxvi. 341.)
889 On June 22, 1687, John Smith, described as of “New Bristoll in ye County of Bristoll,” was appointed by Andros “Deputy Surveyor of Land within this his Maties Territory and Dominion” of New England (Massachusetts Archives, cxxvi. 341).
890 At that time there were three townships in the Narragansett Country — Kingston, Westerly, and Greenwich. On May 25, 1686, Joseph Dudley was inaugurated President of the Council for New England, and on June 23 following a court was held at Kingston by “his Majesty’s Commissioners and Justices . . . in the King’s Province,” Dudley himself and three other members of the Council being present. The names of Kingston, Westerly, and Greenwich were changed respectively to Rochester, Feversham, and Deptford — doubtless after the three places so called in Kent, England. A curious error is sometimes made in regard to the name of Feversham. In the document printed in our text; in documents dated July 18, 1687, and July 15, 1688 (Massachusetts Archives, cxxvi. 392, cxxix. 51–52); and in a letter dated September 13, 1687, from John Rodman to John Usher (in the Jeffries Family Papers, Massachusetts Historical Society), the name is clearly “Feversham.” But the old spelling “ff,” merely of course a capital F, has misled some copyists, and in 1 Massachusetts Historical Collections, v. 247; in the Rhode Island Colonial Records, iii. 201, 202; in Arnold’s History of the State of Rhode Island (1878), 1–485; and in the New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xxxv. 182, the name is wrongly given as “Haversham.” Similarly the name Deptford, sometimes in the old documents written “Dedford,” has in the Calendar of State Papers, America and West Indies, 1685–1688, no. 925, p. 261, been misread as “Bedford.”
891 The Rev. John Maxson died December 17, 1720.
892 William Champlin died December 1, 1713.
893 The petition, dated July 18, 1687, of “the subscribers for our seluels and in behalfe of the Towne westerle allias ffeversham in Kings Province,” is in Massachusetts Archives, cxxvi. 392–393. It is signed by five persons, among them John Maxson and William Champlin.
894 John Swarton’s name is wrongly printed “Swanton” in Toppan’s Edward Randolph (Prince Society), ii. 33 note 70. In his own petition, dated June 16, 1687 (Massachusetts Archives, cxxvi. 358), in other documents (id. cxxvi. 375, cxxvii. 132), and in the present warrant, the name is clearly “Swarton,” though the “r” is of the old fashioned kind that might easily be mistaken by a careless copyist for “n.”
895 Charles Lidgett died in 1698.
896 John Cutler, Jr., died August 12, 1708.
897 Probably Jonathan Wade, who died November 24, 1689.
898 Samuel Ballatt died November 12, 1708.
899 Nathaniel Gary was one of the Roxbury men to whom New Roxbury in the Nipmug Country was granted.
900 Giles Payson died January 28, 1689.
901 Now Brookline.
902 In 1680 the “lands att Pocassett and places adjacent,” in the Plymouth Colony, were bought by eight persons, among them Benjamin Church “of Puncatest,” Daniel Wilcox of “Portsmouth, in the Colony of Rhode Island,” and Thomas Waite “of Puncatest” (O. Fowler, History of Fall River, 1862, p. 61: cf. Plymouth Colony Records, vi. 29–30).
903 On June 6, 1682, Sakonnet (Seaconet, Seconet, etc.) was incorporated as Little Compton (Plymouth Colony Records, vi. 88).
904 The clerk’s error for “Seconet:” see the next note.
905 Perhaps “Natinnah” It should be “Natimnah” In a petition undated but referred to John Walley and Nathaniel Byfield on June 6, 1687 (Massachusetts Archives, cxxvi 339–340), Daniel Wilcox said: “That in Julij 1679; There was granted by the seūall Courts holclen att Plymouth vnto Samuell Leonard and John Lennard in right of their father Solomon Lennard the Quantity of One Hundred and fifty Acres of Land And that the second day of July 1686 Yor Petr for a Valuable Considerac̄on purchased of the said Samuell and John all their right and title in and to the said grant and Whereas yor Petr the Three & Twentyeth of June 1683 [altered from 1686, or 1686 altered from 1683] Did for a valuable Considerac̄on Likewise purchase of Mamanewatt Cheife Sachem of Seconett and the Lands Adjacent; One Hundred acres of Land being part of a Large Neck of Land called Seconett butted and bounded asin the Deed thereof is Expressed And Likewise the 21th of June 1686 Hath also purchased of another Indian called Kewegue aƚs Chacliamuck brother to the said Mamanewatt for a Like Valuable Conrac̄on ffifty acres of Land Lying on a Small neck within the sd Large Neck called Natimnah butted and bounded as in the deed thereof is sett forth.” Cf. Plymouth Colony Records, vi. 18, 202, 245.
906 Boston Neck is still so called, lying between Wickford and Narragansett Pier, R. I.
907 Francis Brinley (1632–1719).
908 In June, 1694, Pocasset was incorporated as Tiverton (Massachusetts Province Laws, i. 174), but in January, 1747, was reincorporated by Rhode Island (Rhode Island Colonial Records, v. 204).
909 Cf. p. 299 note 1, above.
910 Puncatest Neck was in Sakonnet now Little Compton, R. I. See p. 299 note 1, above.
911 Now Somerset.
912 Benjamin Davis died November 26, 1704.
913 Roger Clap died February 2, 1691.
914 Edward Shippen moved to Philadelphia about 1693 and died October 2, 1712. Cf. our Publications, xx. 266.
915 On October 15, 1684, it was ordered that the “plantation at Quansigamond be called Worcester” (Massachusetts Colony Records, v. 460).
916 The willof George Danson was dated December 10, 1689, and proved July 29, 1696. (Suffolk Probate Files, no. 1956). The name sometimes wrongly appears as Dawson.
917 John Gore of Roxbury died June 26, 1705. Cf. p. 306 note 1, below.
918 Major Robert Thompson was of London.
919 For Dr. Daniel Coxe (1640–1730) of London, see Pennsylvania Magazine, vii. 317–337.
920 On May 16, 1683, the General Court, “hauing information that some gentlemen in England are desirous to remoove themselues into this colony, & (if it may be) to setle themselues vnder the Massachusetts; for the incouragement of such persons, . . . this Court doth grant to Major Robert Thompson, Willjam Stoughton, & Joseph Dudley, Esq, and such others as they shall associate to them,” the tract mentioned in the warrant (Massachusetts Colony Records, v. 408).
921 Nonsuch farm was in Scarborough.
922 Sarah Jordan was the daughter of John Winter and the widow of the Rev. Robert Jordan, who had died in 1679.
923 John Hinckes was a member of the Council: cf. our Publications, xvii.39.
924 Richard Clement (Clemente, Clements) was appointed deputy surveyor September 16–19, 1687 (Massachusetts Archives, cxxvii. 106). On the order is written “The like warrt for Jno Gore to be Deputy Surveyor.”
925 Silvanus Davis died in 1703.
926 Fort Loyal, Falmouth.
927 Little Chebeag.
928 Capisick, a small stream flowing into Casco River.
929 Walter Barefoot, Deputy-Governor of New Hampshire, died late in 1688 or early in 1689.
930 Robert Lawrence was killed by Indians in May, 1690.
932 Ammoncongin (variously spelled), “now universally called Congin, was applied to a portion of Presumpscot river around the falls next below Saccarappa” (Willis, History of Portland, p. 242 note).
933 Edward Tyng, a member of the Council, died about 1701.
934 Peter Bowdoin: see no. 29.
935 Richard Seacomb (Seccomb, etc.) died in 1694.
936 John Smith: see no. 41.
937 See no. 39.
938 David Phippen was killed by Indians in August, 1703.
939 Joseph Phippen made his will July 21, 1687, and died soon after.
940 George Cleeves died between 1666 and 1671.
941 Joshua Scottow died January 20, 1698.
942 Abraham Jocelyn was a brother of Henry Jocelyn and of John Josselyn.
943 Peter Bowdoin died in September, 1716.
944 Error for “Tyng.”
945 Walter Gendall was killed by Indians in September, 1688.
946 The Rev. John Sherman, who died July 8, 1685, married for his second wife Mary Launce.
947 The source of Mayanexit River is now in Leicester.
948 Probably in Sutton.
949 Dominicus Jordan, a son of the Rev. Robert Jordan, was killed by Indians in 1703.
950 John Ross was a son of James Ross.
951 This name appears variously as Samford, Stamford, Standford, Stanfort, and Staniford. The last form is the one usually employed by Willis.
952 Samuel Ingersoll was a son of George Ingersoll, Sr.
953 Richard Hunnewell was killed by Indians in 1703 or 1713.
954 Nicholas Paige died in 1717.
955 Rumley or Rumney Marsh, now Chelsea.
956 Anna (Keayne) Paige was a daughter of Benjamin Keayne, a son of Robert Keayne.
958 Richard Powsland.
959 George Ingersoll, Jr., was a son of George Ingersoll, Sr., and died about 1730.
960 Thomas Cloice (Clayce, Cloyse, Cloyes) was killed by Indians in 1690
961 Purpooduck Point is at the mouth of Casco River.
962 Portland Head is south of Purpooduck Point, and Pond Cove is between Portland Head and Cape Elizabeth.
963 Joseph Webber was probably the son of Mary Webber: see no. 56.
964 Richard Vines died in 1651.
965 Daniel, David, Henry, John, and Matthew Libbey were brothers.
966 Bartholomew Gedney, a member of the Council, died March 1, 1698.
967 Robert Elliot died in 1720.
968 John Wallis died in 1690.
969 See no. 96.
970 The Rev. Shubael Dummer (H. C. 1656), a son of Richard Dummer (d. December 14, 1678), was killed by Indians on January 25, 1692.
971 James Andrews died in 1714.
972 Perhaps “Monticke.”
973 Nathaniel Clark died January 31, 1717.
974 Clark’s Island was the summer home of our late associate, Professor William W. Goodwin: see our Publications, xiv. 299.
975 Margaret Corwin, a daughter of the younger John Winthrop and the widow of John Corwin (d. July 12, 1683), died November 30, 1711.
976 Ann Winthrop, a daughter of the younger John Winthrop, married John Richards in 1692, and died June 27, 1704.
977 According to a deposition dated May 14, 1684, the land was given to Gov. John Winthrop by Tacomus; and on May 2, 1685, was deeded by John and Wait Winthrop to their sisters Margaret Corwin and Ann Winthrop: see Suffolk Deeds, xiii. 344, 429–430.
978 Perhaps “Sicketts.”
979 In his petition (Massachusetts Archives, cxxvi. 421) the name is “Niles,” and is so entered in the index to that volume; but the petition is not in the hand of Niell, and his autograph signature reads “Samuell Nielld.” In documents dated April 11, 1689, he is called “Niel” (id. cxxix. 364).
980 The elder Peter Housing died about 1673.
981 Russell says that “in 1652, John Maine lived on the Foreside; and a point which yet retains his name, directs us to the place of his settlement” (History of North Yarmouth, p. 171). In a petition not dated but referred to Walter Gendall on June 10, 1687, John Maine said that “about thirty yeares since [he] purchased an house in Casco Bay, with sixty Acres of Land adjoyneing Scittuate neare the Middle of Casco Bay; on the Westerly side of Westgostuggo River; at a Certaine place there, Com̄only Called and knowne by the name of Maines Point” (Massachusetts Archives, cxxvi. 347–348).
982 Russell gives Harriseket as the Indian name of the present Freeport (History of North Yarmouth, p. 167). What is called Arriscicott River in no. 90 and Arrisicket River in no. 92, elsewhere appears as Harriseeket River (Collections Maine Historical Society, iv. 105) and even as “Henery Sickett his River” (York Deeds, iii. 53).
983 Eleuthera, one of the Bahama Islands, was laid waste by the Spaniards, and in 1686 some of the inhabitants came to Boston and were settled at North Yarmouth, which, however, they “were forced to desert” because they “had not food to subsist there to or great dam̄age & vndoing:” see 2 Proceedings Massachusetts Historical Society, xiii. 15–16, 265. Cf. our Publications, iii. 421 note 2.
984 Nathaniel Wallis died October 18, 1709.
985 Matthew Paulling married a daughter of John Wallis.
986 George Bramhall was killed by Indians in September, 1690.
987 George Ingersoll, Sr., who was living at Salem in 1694, was the father of Joseph, Samuel, and George Ingersoll, Jr.
988 John Ingersoll, a brother of George Ingersoll, Sr., died about 1716.
989 John and Isaac Jones were probably brothers. They were of Charlestown, and both died about 1690.
990 Doubtless Enoch Wiswall (Massachusetts Archives, cxxviii. 284, cxxix. 95).
991 Doubtless J. Atwater (Massachusetts Archives, cxxviii. 214).
992 John and James Mosier, sons of Hugh Mosier (d. about 1666), “occupied two islands, now in Freeport, called great and little Mosier’s, but since, by corruption, the Moges” (Willis, History of Portland, p. 60).
993 Joseph Ingersoll (1646–1700) was a son of George Ingersoll, Sr.
994 Joseph Ingersoll married a daughter of Matthew Coe, whose wife was Elizabeth Wakely, daughter of Thomas Wakely.
995 John and Robert Nicholson were brothers.
996 Robert Greason was captured by Indians in 1690.
997 Joel Madiver was killed by Indians in August, 1703.
998 George, Jonathan, and Samuel Felt were the sons of George Felt, who was killed by Indians on September 23, 1676.
999 The elder George Felt married a sister of James Andrews.
1000 John Eyre died June 17, 1700.
1001 Jonathan Tyng, a member of the Council, died January 19, 1724.
1002 Now Chelmsford.
1003 Samuel Shrimpton, a member of the Council, died February 8, 1698.
1004 Benjamin Munford (Mountfort, Mumford) died in 1714.
1005 Savill Simpson died in 1725.
1006 Now called Magunco Hill, in Ashland. Cf. Hurd, History of Middlesex County (1890), iii. 535; Handbook of American Indians (1907), i. 786.
1007 Joseph Lynde died January 29, 1727.
1008 Andrew Belcher (1647–1717).
1009 Edward Collins died in April, 1689.
1010 Stoughton’s sister Rebecca married William Taylor (d. 1682), and was the mother of Lt.-Gov. William Tailer.
1011 James Russell died April 28, 1709.
1012 The “s” was perhaps inserted later.
1013 Apparently altered from “Rauenscrof.”
1014 George Turfrey died in 1714.
1015 John Chandler died April 15, 1703.
1016 Now Woodstock, which became a part of Connecticut about 1750. Under date of March 18, 1690, Sewall wrote: “I gave New-Roxbury the name of Woodstock because of its nearness to Oxford, for the sake of Queen Elizabeth” (Diary, i. 315).
1017 This was the second Nathaniel Newgate, a London merchant: see Chamberlain, History of Chelsea, i. 166–168.
1018 Not all place-names mentioned in the warrants are given in this list, but only those which in a general way indicate the location of the grants.
1019 For Hoar, see Sibley’s Harvard Graduates, i. 228–252, 587–590.
1020 Hoar’s patron was Sir Henry Mildmay (died about 1664) of Wanstead, the father of William Mildmay (H. C. 1647): cf. our Publications, xviii. 309 note 2.
1021 Hoar received the degree of M.D. from Cambridge University in 1671.
1022 Under date of July 8, 1672, William Adams (H. C. 1671) wrote: “Dr. Hoare came in from England” (4 Massachusetts Historical Collections, i. 17).
1023 This is of course a misprint for 1671. As March was then the first month, Chauncy’s death was “at the latter End of the Year 1671,” Old Style. As Mather did not see proofs of his magnum opus, there can be no doubt that various errors in the Magnalia, like the date 1701, are due not to the author but to the printer. Cf. p. 154 note 2, above.
1024 Magnalia, bk. iv. pt. i, § 5, pp. 128–129.
1025 From an unexpected source it is learned that this “motion” originated with the Overseers — a fact which appears to have escaped the attention of the historians of the College. In the Index to College Books i–vi, compiled by President Wadsworth, are these entries: “When ye President’s place was offer’d to mr Chauncey. A.D. 1654. an. 100ll salary was offer’d at ye same time. B. 2. p. 15. . . . President’s Salary (An. 1654. B. 2. p. 3) p. 7, Judg’d by ye overseers. 1672. shd be. 150ƚƚ at least ye General Court to be address’d about it. B. 2. p. 47. 49.” Evidently the order of October 8, 1672, was in response to an address from the Overseers. College Book ii was destroyed in the fire of 1764, and those particular entries were not (like many others) copied into College Book iii.
1026 Massachusetts Colony Records, iv. ii. 535.
1027 American Antiquarian Society Transactions and Collections, iii. 233. Cf. Hill’s History of the Old South Church, i. 182–190.
1028 American Antiquarian Society Transactions and Collections, iii. 235. The preceding entry is dated “Dec. 7,” and the entry after is dated “1673, 21st of 1st.”
1029 4 Massachusetts Historical Collections, i. 18.
1030 Henry Ashurst (d. 1680).
1031 Boyle’s Works (1772), vi. 653. In reprinting this interesting letter, Sibley says that it was written “a few weeks after Hoar’s inauguration as President” (Harvard Graduates, i. 588), forgetting that he had previously (p. 235) given the date as December 10, and overlooking his own pencilled note in College Book i. 75 (though that note may have been made after the publication of his Harvard Graduates).
1032 So far as I have noted, this is the only entry in the Index to which no reference is attached. The omission is unfortunate; but since neither College Book iii nor College Book iv contains such an entry, it is a fair assumption that the entry in question was taken from College Book ii (not now extant). Though Wadsworth noted Hoar’s inauguration and resignation, he did not note Hoar’s election.
1033 Down to and including 1827, the Triennial Catalogues gave only the years in which a President was inaugurated or died or left office. In the 1830 Triennial full dates were given for the first time, and from 1830 to 1885, both included, the Triennial and Quinquennial Catalogues gave September 10 as the date of Hoar’s accession to office. In the 1890 Quinquennial, the correct date of December 10, 1672, appeared for the first time.
1034 Danforth, it will be observed, gives the date of the inauguration as September 10. Perhaps this was Mather’s authority for the same date.
1035 1 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, xiii. 235.
1036 History of Massachusetts (London, 1765), i. 174 note.
1037 See p. 396, below.
1038 College Book iii. 3.
1039 See pp. 152–154, above.
1040 In his Index to College Books i–vi, President Wadsworth made the entry, “Dr Hoar resign’d his Presidentship. 15–1. 1675. B. 2. p. 63;” but made no entry in regard to Hoar’s election.
1041 Thomas Shepard was elected a Fellow on November 27, 1654 (College Book iii. 39), and the Quinquennial Catalogue states that he held the position until 1673. I cannot help thinking that this is a mistake, and that he was not a Fellow early in 1672: see p. 396 note 4, below.
1042 College Book iii. 43.
1043 Joseph Browne was probably a Fellow before 1671, for in a letter dated February 14 or 15, 1672, Sewall, who entered College in 1667, said: “Prethee present my service to Mr. Nowell, Mr. Richardson; and in special, to Mr. Brown my Tutor” (Letter-Book, i. 19). The editors say in a footnote that this letter “was written March 16, 1672;” but the letter is dated “Newbury; 16. Calend. Martij, 1671,” which was not March 16 but February 14 or 15, 1672
1044 2 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, iv. 266.
1045 On May 1, 1671, the Rev. John Knowles, then in England, wrote to the Overseers in regard to the condition of the College. That letter has not been preserved, but the letter of the Overseers in reply, dated August 21, 1671, is printed in our Publications, xi. 336–341. This last letter, in its turn, drew from thirteen ministers in and about London a letter dated February 5, 1672, which is printed in Hutchinson’s Collection of Original Papers (1769), pp. 429–431. This letter contains a recommendation of Dr. Hoar, as does also a letter written by the Rev. John Collins (H. C. 1649) to Governor Leverett (printed in id. pp. 435–436). In March, 1672, Richard Saltonstall wrote a letter recommending the Rev. John Knowles for the presidency (printed in our Publications, viii. 193–198).
1046 W. Ames, 4 Massachusetts Historical Collections, i. 15–16.
1047 During the time when there were three resident Fellows or Tutors, they were called respectively “Senior” Fellow, “Second” or “Middle” Fellow, and “Third” Fellow. By the charter of 1672, the number of resident Fellows or Tutors was reduced from three to two: see p. 396, below.
1048 W. Ames, 4 Massachusetts Historical Collections, i. 17.
1049 I should also be inclined to think that Samuel Danforth could not have been a Fellow early in 1672, were it not for the peculiar way in which he is spoken of in the charter of 1672: see p. 396, below.
1050 See p. 368, above.
1051 See pp. 382, 379, below.
1052 See p. 381, below
1053 College Records, x. 67
1054 x 68.
1055 x. 70.
1056 John Davis (H. C. 1781).
1057 John Lowell (H. C. 1786).
1058 College Records, x. 80.
1059 x. 80.
1060 College Records, x. 83.
1061 x. 101.
1062 The genesis of this pamphlet is as follows. On January 9, 1811, the Corporation voted “That the President & Chief Justice be a Committee to prepare & cause to be printed five hundred copies of the documents, which relate to the foundation & existing powers of the Corporation & Overseers of Harvard College” (College Records, x. 12–13). On April 15, 1812, the Corporation voted “That the Committee (The President and Chief Justice Parsons) appointed to prepare and print the Constitution of the College with the history of the Proceedings under it, be requested to cause to be printed One thousand Copies” (x. 101). Chief Justice Theophilus Parsons (H. C. 1769) was a Fellow from 1806 to 1812. At the bottom of p. 33 of the pamphlet are the words:
The foregoing charters and acts relating to the constitution of Harvard College with the appendix are printed by vote of the corporation.
JOHN T. KIRKLAND, President.
Cambridge, April 18, 1812.
1063 Constitution of the University at Cambridge, pp. 19, 21.
The first edition of the Harvard University Catalogue to contain a section on “The Government of the University” was that for the year 1872–73, where appears (p. 15) a paragraph of twelve lines about the charter of 1672, practically taken from Quincy’s History. This paragraph appeared in every succeeding edition of the Catalogue down to and including that for 1882–83; but no edition of the Catalogue issued since that for 1882–83 has contained any allusion to the charter of 1672
1064 History of Harvard University (1833), p. 43. In a footnote Peirce refers to “Constitution of the Univ., App. p. 27.” In that pamphlet the memorial presented to the Legislature by the Corporation on February 24, 1812, is printed on pp. 25–32.
1065 History of Harvard University, i. 32–33.
1066 History of New England, iii. 94.
1067 Harvard Graduates, i. 234, 235.
1068 Our Publications, i. 201–202, 204–205.
1069 See p. 400, below.
1070 Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 30.
1071 By “correction,” Sibley (Harvard Graduates, i. 12, 15 note) appears to understand whipping; but that does not seem to be a necessary interpretation of the word.
1072 College Book i. 43.
1073 College Book i. 50.
1074 Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 417; iv. i. 278–279. In 1644 two students were whipped by President Dunster himself: see Winthrop, Journal (1908), ii. 170.
1075 Massachusetts Colony Records, iv. i. 315.
1076 For this draught, see pp. 395–402, below.
1077 For this copy, see pp. 395–401, below.
1078 See p. 381, below
1079 See p. 386, below.
1080 See p. 375, above.
1081 So far as I have noted, only two meetings before 1672 had any heading at all: “At the meeting of the Corporation, June 10, 1659” (College Book iii. 36); and “At a Corporation meeting held June 17, 1667” (iii. 28). When, on becoming President, Hoar made the entry “Acts of ye Corporation since ye 10th Decembr 1672,” and continued to use the word Corporation, he was following what little precedent there was.
1082 Though the words “President and Fellows of Harvard College” are not found in the heading of any meeting before 1708, yet on November 25, 1685, “It was then agreed by the President & ffellows,” etc. (College Book i. 95), and on April 25, 1686, it was “Ordered by ye president & Fellows,” etc. (iii. 96).
1083 It need scarcely be pointed out that very often the words “President and Fellows of Harvard College” meant not the corporate name but the particular persons who were holding the positions of President and Fellows at the time.
1084 See pp. 386–387, below.
1085 History of Massachusetts, i. 171. Hutchinson’s dates are a trifle inaccurate. The Colony charter was vacated in 1684, but the College continued to be governed under the College charter of 1650 until July 23, 1686. The date 1673 should of course be 1672.
1086 See p. 386 note 2, below. On November 15, 1856, a committee consisting of President Walker, Chief Justice Lemuel Shaw, and Charles G. Loring made a report to the Corporation in which, referring to the appendix passed in 1657, they said: “it is never mentioned, as they believe, in any subsequent record [i. e., record subsequent to 1657] of the doings of either Board, nor in any of the legislative enactments concerning the College, excepting in one instance of a reference to it by the Corporation, in a vote of July 20, 1722, relating to an order or by-law, and in one by the Overseers in December, 1778, relating to appointments” (Report on the Rights and Duties of the President and Fellows of Harvard College in relation to the Board of Overseers, 1856, pp. 29–30). The appendix is twice mentioned in the Corporation Records: once on July 30 (not 20, as misprinted in the Report), 1722; and again on August 23, 1723: see College Book iv. 79, 89.
1087 See pp. 388–389, below.
1088 Henry Flynt (H. C. 1693).
1089 Edward Hutchinson (d. 1752).
1090 Leverett’s Diary, p. 262. Leverett’s omission to give the number of the folio was supplied by Quincy, who has here written in ink “v. iv. P. 86” — that is, College Book iv. 86.
1091 College Book iv. 89–90. This representation is printed in full by Quincy in his History, i. 546–556, the extract quoted in the text appearing on p. 551. Thus when Quincy stated that “nor is any notice taken of it in those records,” he overlooked a document printed by himself.
1092 1 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, xvi. 54, 61.
1093 There are many documents (most of which appear to be in the hand of Sever) in the College archives (Harvard College Papers, i; Supplement, i) relating to this controversy, in several of which there are allusions to the charter of 1672 (Harvard College Papers, i. 88, 117, 119, 125). A careful examination of these documents would doubtless yield many other references to that charter.
1094 Quincy devotes nearly a page to the pamphlet (History, ii. 34–35), but makes no mention of Prince’s discussion of the charter of 1672.
1095 College Book iv. 84.
1096 iv. 135.
1097 iv. 238.
1098 College Book iv. 237, 238–239, 239, 241, 242, 243. The following document is in Harvard College Papers, i. 171:
This may Certify whom it may concern, That I the Subscriber have, (upon the Account of Harvard College) hired a Chamber of Henry Prentice of Cambridge in the County of Middlesex in New-England Cooper, at the rate of three pounds five shillings ⅌ the Quarter of a Year, in Order to put therein the Goods, of Mr Nathan Prince, late a Fellow of Harvard College afforsd, & hereby I promise, that I will indemnify, the sd Henry Prentice, from any Loss or Damage to Him on Account of the Premises, as Witness my hand
Sign’d in Presence of Us
This document is in the hand of President Holyoke, who has written on the back: “Copy of my Note to Henry Prentice to pay for his Chamber.” It is endorsed in a different hand: “Holyokes indemnification against Nathan Prince about 1740.” The note was of course written in 1742.
1099 Prince had evidently begun writing his pamphlet long before his chamber was broken into. As the pamphlet presents some curiosities, bibliographical and otherwise, and has apparently never been described, an account of it will be pertinent. Neither date, nor place of publication, nor author’s name, nor publisher’s name appears on the title-page. It is assigned to 1743 by Sabin, but to 1742 by Evans. The following advertisement was printed in the Boston News Letter of January 13, 1743:
JUST published, a Piece entitled “The Constitution and Government of Harvard College.” Wherein its Charter and all the Laws that constitute the Government of that College are laid together and compared; and the several Powers belonging to the Corporation and Overseers of said College are considered; and what Powers over it still remain in the General Court. And from the whole ’tis argued that the Court alone are the Visitors of that College. A work useful to all Persons related to that Society, and in particular to those whose Children are Educated in it. To be sold by Rogers and Fowle at their Printing House, and by J. Blanchard Bookseller at the Head of the Town-Dock Boston; & by Deacon Samuel Whittemore Shopkeeper in Cambridge (p. 2/2).
Two editions were published, one containing 28 pages and a later edition containing 44 pages. The title-page and the first twenty-four pages are identical in both editions, even to misprints. The title-page, which has an ornamental line above it and below it, the whole being in the middle of the page (thus more like a half-title than an ordinary title-page), reads as follows:
Constitution and Government
As already stated the first twenty-four pages are identical in both editions. All of the text on p. 25 of the first edition also appears on p. 25 of the second edition. But two footnotes on p. 25 of the first edition are omitted in the second edition; and their place is taken by four lines of text which are not in the first edition. Prince had evidently written to the end of p. 25 when his chamber was broken into. The two footnotes on that page are somewhat wild in tone, and the text on p. 26 is still wilder. It reads as follows:
The Writer of this Paper was going on to exhibit to View the Management of the College-Stock from Age to Age- - -And how it was scarce looked into [here the word but is interlined in Prince’s hand] once or twice in an Age! . . . And thereon the Writer of this Paper proposed to give Instances of some general and perpetual Grievances, and particularly the enormous Grievance of abusing Gentlemen’s Sons in the Arbitrary fixing them below their Just Place in College-Classes,- - - -There to stand degraded (for ever!) in the publick Catalogues. . . . But while the Writer of this Paper (who is absolutely resolved to set his Name to it, and at the End to stile himself Nathan Prince) was Demonstrating how the College Constitution provided Such Remedy- - -He received a College-Vote, as he Thinks, (though by the very Words of the Vote it self it can be no College Vote at all!) whereby “The President, Tutors and Professors [Poor Professors † ! settled by Vote below Tutors!] were empowered and directed to break open or cause to be broken open the Doors of his Chamber and Studies, and to remove out of them the said Prince’s Goods.” And so to Seize all his Books and Plate and Papers to their own Use and Behoof (for ought any Thing he knew by This Vote!)- - - - -He Flung his Pen aside- - - -and cared not what besame of such an ingrateful Society- - -Till it was restored to a Better Government - - - -Nor of all the &c. &c. **** Tr- - - ! D- - - ! H- - -! G- - - ! A- - - ! C- - - ! F- - - ! D- - - ! G- - - ! B- - -C- - -I- - - Se!- - - - -AMEN. But KAI and again and again. - - - - -all in DUE Time.
† Dr. W. is degraded below 2 Ms. and an H. “What are Things coming to!
This extraordinary outburst, coming at the end of twenty-five pages of perfectly rational argument, would be inexplicable but for some words written at the bottom of p. 25 in a copy of the pamphlet in the Boston Public Library. There the Rev. Thomas Prince has written: “My Dear Brother’s Hardships growing upon Him; He begins to grow Disordered in his Brain, & continues so for a week or two.” The initials at the end of the outburst stand, I suppose, for various Overseers or members of the Corporation or Tutors.
“Dr. W.” is Edward Wigglesworth; “2 Ms. and an H.” are Joseph Mayhew, Thomas Marsh, and Belcher Hancock.
The text of the first edition ends on p. 26 with the passage quoted above. There is, however, a second footnote on that page, which ends about the middle of p. 27. The signatures of this first edition are B, C, D, E, F, G.
Upon his recovery, Nathan Prince completed his pamphlet in a second edition of 44 pages. The above passage is omitted and the text ends on p. 43 as follows:
As to any indecent Reflections in this Piece, which might be occasioned by the Unexampled Treatment he has lately met with, he would only say, that “He has not the Inhumanity to wish the most malicious of his unreasonable Enemies to change Circumstances with him, and then be put upon the Trial to write a Piece on this Subject with fewer Reflections in it. But with These and all Other Defects in the Piece itself, it may still be of publick Service to Harvard College, whose Treasury! Whose Constitution! Whose very Being! it so nearly concerns. He therefore offers it to the serious Perusal of ALL the true Friends to that Society; and subscribes himself
Then follows a list of Errata, also on p. 43. The signatures of the second edition are B, C, D, E, F, F, H, I, K, L. On p. 26 is an allusion to “this present Day July 7. 1742.”
An advertisement inserted by Prince in the Boston papers in March and April, 1743, is here given because it shows that, many months after his ejection from his chamber, he still called himself a Fellow:
THESE may inform the Public, that Nathan Prince, Fellow of Harvard College proposes, on suitable Encouragement, to open a School in this Town for the instructing young Gentlemen in the most useful Parts of the Mathemalicks, Natural Philosophy and History. Particularly in the Elements of Geometry and Algebra; in Trigonometry and Navigation; in Geography and Astronomy; with the Use of the Globes and the several Kinds of Projecting the Sphere: In the Arts of Surveying, Gauging and Dialing; and in the General Rules of Fortification and Gunnery. To these will be added, Lectures on History and natural Philosophy.
The Terms, on which the said Nathan Prince would engage to instruct young Gentlemen in the above-mentioned Arts and Sciences, may be seen at his Lodgings at the House of Seth Cushing in Exchange Lane, Boston (Boston News Letter, March 3, p. 2/2, March 10, p. 2/2: Boston Evening Post, March 14, Supplement, p. 1/1, March 21, p. 2/2, March 28, p. 2/2, April 4, Supplement, p. 2/2).
It is well known that soon after this Nathan Prince went to England to receive Anglican orders, became an Episcopal missionary, and died July 25, 1748: cf. our Publications, xviii. 335 note 1, xix. 332 note 3.
1100 Constitution and Government of Harvard College, p. 3.
1101 The College charter of 1650 was twice entered “in due Form” — once in College Book i. 59–60, and again in College Book iii. 12–14, both of which are noted in Wadsworth’s Index. The appendix to the charter of 1650 passed in 1657 was not entered in College Books i, iii, or iv, and is not noted in Wadsworth’s index. If Prince’s statement is correct, and there is no reason for thinking that he was mistaken, the appendix was probably entered in College Book ii, which was destroyed by fire in 1764.
1102 Most of the copies of Prince’s pamphlet I have seen have corrections in ink in his own hand. In several such copies, after the word “no” is a caret and in the margin are the words “Independent or.”
1103 Constitution and Government, pp. 8, 9, 13, 15. In Harvard College Papers i. 88, is a document thus described by Mr. Brown in his Calendar (see p. 392 note 1, below) of those Papers:
“A series of statements, extracts, &c., from various proposed charters, & concerning the government of the college, apparently set down with a view to a forensic use of them. The purpose of the whole is not clear.
“Note. — My conjecture is that the paper was used by one of the controversialists about 1721, on the question of admitting Tutors to the corporation.”
This document is in the hand of Nathan Prince, a fact which escaped Mr. Brown, and without doubt it was compiled while Prince was preparing his pamphlet in 1742.
1104 Harvard College Papers, Supplement, i. 16.
1105 Leverett’s Diary, pp. 265–262.
1106 In 1912 I wrote: “In addition to this ‘College Book V in Folio’ [Treasurer Brattle’s Account Book, 1693–1713], there was also at one time a volume known as ‘College Book V in Quarto,’ as appears from various references to it by Wadsworth in the marginal entries in the Corporation Records. This volume was either burned in the fire of 1764, or has disappeared, or cannot now be identified” (our Publications, xiv. 314 note 1). I have since identified the volume as President Leverett’s Diary (cf. id. xiv. 316).
1107 Quincy prints extracts from it in his History, i. 291, 292, 295, 520, 522, 546. Cf. p. 388 note 3, above.
1108 Harvard College Papers, Supplement, i. 17.
1109 Harvard College Papers, Supplement, i. 18.
1110 Harvard College Papers, i. 20. Possibly this copy is in the hand of Sever.
1111 This is of course the copy printed in Massachusetts Colony Records, iv. ii. 535–537.
1112 It may have been one of those destroyed when the Town House was burned in 1747: cf. our Publications, vol. ii. pp. xviii–xix. On the other hand, the hypothetical copy (G) may never have existed, and Prince may have used for collation the Rawson copy (A) now in the College archives. But if that was the case, it is impossible to explain the reference to “p. 550.” Besides, copy (A) contains the word “sconsing,” while Rawson’s copy (G) evidently had “scourging:” see p. 398 note 3, below.
1113 Prince’s copy (I) is endorsed, apparently in a different hand, “Votes about College Octr 1672.”
1114 Apparently not many specimens of Hoar’s handwriting have been preserved. A letter of his (printed in 1 Massachusetts Historical Collections, vi. 100–108) dated March 27, 1661, is in the Massachusetts Historical Society. Another, dated January 7, 1675, is reproduced in facsimile in Hill’s History of the Old South Church, i. 184. Entries from 1672 to 1674 on pp. 75–78 of College Book i are in his hand. The most characteristic feature of his writing is the letter “l,” which is made with an odd twist in the downward stroke.
1115 Copy (E) is in Harvard College Papers, i. 20. How the volumes so called came to be collected is explained at the beginning of the first volume:
At a Special Meeting of the President and Fellows of Harvard College, February 6th 1850.
“Voted, That the President cause to be examined and arranged all the manuscript papers relating to the College, . . . and procure such as are worthy of preservation to be substantially bound.”
Harvard College, October, 1852.
In compliance with the above order, a thorough inquiry and examination have been made. All the papers that could be found relating to the history and general affairs of the College have been collected, arranged, & bound in the following volumes.
The papers then arranged were bound in eleven volumes. Over forty years later other documents were arranged, called Supplements to vols, i–vii, and bound in four volumes. (The book-plate pasted into vol. i says that that volume was received March 4, 1893.) The late William G. Brown compiled in one volume, presumably while he was Deputy Keeper of the University Archives from 1896 to 1901, a Calendar to both series, adding notes. These notes are valuable, but Mr. Brown occasionally went astray in assigning dates to undated documents.
1116 Copies (A), (C), and (D) are in Harvard College Papers, Supplement, i. 16, 17, 18.
It is of course well known that certain important books of College records (among them Treasurer Richards’s Account Book, 1669–1693; Treasurer Brattle’s Account Book, 1693–1713; and Treasurer Hutchinson’s Account Book, 1721–1752) were carried off by John Hancock while he was Treasurer (1773–1777) and were not restored to the College until about 1862: cf. 1 Massachusetts Historical Proceedings, vi. 337, 342–343. And documents that once actually or properly belonged to the College but had fallen into private hands, are constantly being returned to the College.
1117 Massachusetts Colony Records, iv. i. 12–14.
1118 Altered from “errected.”
1119 Apparently altered from “the.”
1120 Perhaps “Indians.”
1121 Altered from “ꝑpetration.”
1122 Altered from “by.”
1123 Altered from “inferiall.”
1124 Altered from some other word, perhaps “service.”
1125 This sentence is probably in the hand of Hoar.
1126 This sentence is probably in the hand of Hoar.
1127 This sentence is probably in the hand of Hoar.
1128 As here printed, the words “newly inserted” are in italics.
1129 This sentence is probably in the hand of Hoar.
1130 The entry on the slip numbered 84a is in the hand of Rawson.
1131 The words “be the prsent” have been inserted in the margin in a different hand — perhaps that of Rawson,
1132 Originally written “—— Richardson,” the name “John” having been inserted later.
1133 Massachusetts Archives, lviii. 82–85.
1134 This sentence is in the hand of Rawson.
1135 The words “and for all the accommodations of the Schollars thereof” are interlined in the hand of Rawson.
1136 It will be observed that Danforth is called “Fellow of the said College,” a term not applied to Oakes, Shepard, Browne, or Richardson. For this reason, I think that Danforth must have been a Fellow early in 1672.
1137 Altered from “Shepheard.” As Shepard, unlike Danforth, is not called “Fellow of the said College,” I think that he could not have been a Fellow early in 1672.
1138 A curious error occurs in the Massachusetts Colony Records, iv. ii. 536, where this word is printed “intermediate.” In the Court Records, iv. 708, the word is very plainly “Imediate.”
1139 The words “made by the Majorr ꝑt prsent” are underlined.
1140 The words “the President being one” are underlined.
1141 The reading is “sconcing” in (A), (D), (F), and (J). The reading is “scourging” in (B), (C), (E), and (I). In (B), Leverett has written in the margin: “shall haue the full power of scourging &c Attests Edward Rawson Secretary.” Leverett’s copy (B) was made from Willard’s copy (H) not extant, but Leverett’s marginal note seems to show that Leverett had seen a copy attested by Rawson — presumably copy (G).
1142 Harvard College Papers, Supplement, i. 16. The last sentence is in the hand of Rawson.
1143 This paper is a brief survey of material collected by the writer several years ago when a member of the seminar in American History of Professor Frederick Jackson Turner in Harvard University.
1144 Johnson’s Wonder-Working Providence (ed. J. F. Jameson), p. 76.
1145 Massachusetts Colony Records, i. 93; Winthrop, Journal (ed. J. K. Hosmer), i. 74, 122. The standard treatise upon the beginnings of the representative system of Massachusetts is Professor George H. Haynes’s Representation and Suffrage in Massachusetts, in Johns Hopkins University Studies, Twelfth Series, viii.
1146 Massachusetts Colony Records, i. 117; Winthrop, i. 125. The law of 1634 did not give the deputies power to cast the vote of their townsmen in the election of the magistrates of the Company. The freemen were still required to bring in their votes personally. In 1636 the freemen of the outlying towns were permitted by law to send their votes by proxy. (Massachusetts Colony Records, i. 166.) Thus arose the system of proxy voting.
1147 Rhode Island Colonial Records, i. 147, 149; Early Records of the Town of Providence, xv. 9; Staples, Annals of the Town of Providence, p. 64; Connecticut Colonial Records, i. 24.
1148 Cf. Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports (hereafter cited as Boston Records), ii. 103, 114, 150, 154; Records of Town of Cambridge, 1630–1703, pp. 11, 13, 99; Watertown Records, i. 1–5; Braintree Records, pp. 5, 11, 22.
1149 Plymouth Colony Records, xi. 36.
1150 Massachusetts Colony Records, i. 333, 340, 346; Winthrop, i. 223, ii. 48.
1151 Winthrop, ii. 118.
1152 Boston Records, ii. 114, 118, 132, 159, vii. 6, 15, 20, 26, 48, 103, 110, 128,. 133, 142, 160, 169, 177.
1153 J. Dow, History of Hampton, p. 50.
1154 A. H. Quint, Historical Memoranda concerning Persons and Places in Old Dover, pp. 50, 66, 70, 94.
1155 Salem Town Records, 1659–1680, in Essex Institute Historical Collections, xl. 277; Deane, History of Scituate, p. 100; S. Lincoln, History of Hingham, p. 81; Burt, First Century of History of Springfield, ii. 131; Records of Town of Plymouth, i. 170; Felt, History of Ipswich, 123; Winsor, History of Duxbury, 109.
1156 Massachusetts Archives, cvii. 8, 44, 52; Boston Records, vii. 160, 177; T. F. Waters, Ipswich in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, p. 234; Felt, History of Ipswich, p. 123; Felt, Annals of Salem, pp. 280, 282; Winsor, History of Duxbury, p. 109; Deane, History of Scituate, p. 101.
1157 S. F. Smith, History of Newton, p. 51.
1158 Boston Records, ii. 114.
1159 History of the Rise, Progress, and Establishment of the Independence of the United States (London: 1788), i. 382.
1160 Diary, i. 125, 424, 473, 478, ii. 8, 74, 275, iii. 257; W. Pyncheon, Diary, pp. 24, 75, 122.
1161 Boston Records.
1162 Diary, i. 424.
1163 ii. 74.
1164 Boston Records, xiv. 45, 255.
1165 Works, ii. 144.
1166 Mr. Samuel C. Clough states that this locus, now numbered 214 to 228 Purchase Street, is on the southerly side of that street, between Summer and Congress Streets. When owned by Dawes, the estate ran to the water’s edge, which was then north of the present Atlantic Avenue. It is owned to-day by Mr. William A. Gaston.
1167 Cf. H. W. Holland, William Dawes and his Ride with Paul Revere (1878), pp. 23, 60–66; H. A. Hill, History of the Old South Church, i. 347, ii. 135 note, 336–338; J. G. Palfrey, Sermon Preached to the Church in Brattle Square, July 18, 1824 (1825), p. 64. The “architect of the State House” was Charles Bulfinch, and not Dawes (as stated by Holland, p. 60). Dawes’s plans of the Old South property are reproduced by Hill (i. 347, ii. 134–135). In 1765 Dawes received from the Province the sum of £2439.12.6 for “the Mason’s work and sundrys which he paid by order of the Committee” in the erection of the present Harvard Hall (Publications of this Society, xiv. 17).
1168 Bridgman, Memorials of the Dead, p. 125.
1169 For the Merchants’ Club, see Publications of this Society, xix. 159–259.
1170 Cf. a communication in the Boston Evening Post, October 28, 1765.
1171 Boston Records, xvii. 77, xiv. 57.
1172 Acts and Resolves of His Majesty’s Province of the Massachusetts-Bay, (Boston, 1759), p. 18.
1173 In Massachusetts, by the law of 1634, the towns were to send two or three deputies to the Great and General Court. Ten years later the General Court referred to the towns a proposal for a law to abolish the representation by towns and to substitute in its place representation by shires or counties. (Massachusetts Colony Records, i. 118, ii. 88; Winthrop, i. 125, ii. 170.) The proposal, however, did not pass into law. Under the State Constitution of 1780 the townships were retained as the election districts of the lower house of the legislature. Finally, by the constitutional amendment of 1857 the districts were re-arranged without preserving the old townships as units.
1174 The English statute of 1696 (7 and 8 William III, c. 25) was widely copied in the colonies. The preamble of the Maryland election law of 1716 contained the following: “And foreasmuch as the safest and best Rule for this Province in electing . . . Delegates and Representatives is the Precedents of the Proceedings in Parliament in Great Britain, as near as the Constitution of this Province will admit . . . ” (Compleat Collection of the Laws of Maryland, Annapolis, 1727, p. 174.) Cf. Hening, Virginia Statutes at Large, iii. 172, 236; Colonial Laws of New York, i. 405; Allinson, Acts of the General Assembly of the Province of New Jersey (Burlington, 1776), p. 69; Statutes at Large of Pennsylvania from 1682 to 1801, ii. 212; Laws of the Government of New-Castle, Kent and Sussex Upon Delaware (Philadelphia, 1741), p. 76.
1175 There were a few exceptions. In 1652 a meeting in Northampton County, Virginia, voted a paper of instructions. (William and Mary College Quarterly, i. 191.) Professor Charles W. Spencer has called my attention to a pamphlet in the British Public Record Office entitled “To the Inhabitants and Freeholders of Westchester County (New York)” issued by Lewis Morris, the leader of the Governor’s party, who proposed that the towns of the county should appoint delegates “to joyn with me in drawing up necessary Instructions to our Representative.”
1176 W. Maitland, History and Survey of London (London, 1760), i. 469, 500, 502, 518, 600. The Common Council of London very frequently voted instructions. (Id. i. 548, 623, 624, 628; H. Chamberlain, History and Survey of the Cities of London and Westminster, London, 1769, i. 378; Addresses Presented from the Court of Common Council to the King . . . [and] Instructions at Different Times to the Representatives of the City in Parliament, London, 1778, pp. 20, 30.)
1177 These documents were reprinted in the Boston Evening Post, March 7, 1743.
1178 Rhode Island Colonial Records, i. 148, 229, 401, 429.
1179 Massachusetts Colony Records, i. 334.
1180 Winthrop, ii. 223.
1181 Massachusetts Colony Records, i. 340
1182 Massachusetts House Journal, pp. 266, 276.
1183 Massachusetts Archives, clvi. 98–120.
1184 Cf. E. M. Hartwell, Referenda in Massachusetts and Boston, in the City of Boston, Monthly Bulletin of the Statistics Department (1909), xi. 151–160; H. A. Cushing, History of the Transition from Provincial to Commonwealth Government in Massachusetts, in Columbia University Studies, vol. vii. chaps, vii, viii.
1185 Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 3.
1186 Felt, Annals of Salem, p. 282.
1187 Schenck, History of Fairfield, i. 237–239.
1188 Bliss, History of Rehoboth, pp. 145, 146.
1189 Continental Journal (Boston), February 4, 1779. The town voted the resolution on June 1, 1778.
1190 J Adams, Works, iv. 197; 5 Massachusetts Historical Collections, iv. 377.
1191 Paige, History of Cambridge, p. 166.
1192 Deane, History of Scituate, p. 100.
1193 Boston Records, vii. 134, viii. 135, xii. 122, 146, 198, 226, xiv. 12, 277, xxxv. 117.
1194 Felt, Annals of Salem, p. 410.
1195 Among other examples, the town of Sutton on January 24, 1787, voted “that our Representative be instructed to use his influence in the General Court that any man may be permitted to keep a half score of sheep that they may not be liable to be taken from him by Warrant or Execution” (Benedict and Tracy, History of Sutton, p. 127). Concord instructed its deputy in May, 1787, “to provide some way for raising some supplies for the public expense, which shall be less burdensome on the landed interest” (Shattuck, History of Concord, p. 142). Worcester demanded in October 1786, “the annihilation of the courts of common pleas and general sessions” (Worcester Town Records, 1784–1800, pp. 24, 89). Among other radical instructions, see Smith, History of Pittsfield, p. 412; Freeman, History of Cape Cod, ii. 135; Hudson, History of Marlborough, p. 195; Weston, History of Middleboro, p. 577; Braintree Records, p. 567. For the action taken by the “instructed” members in the House of Representatives, see House Journal (Massachusetts Archives), v. 90, vi. 471, vii. 297, 317, 459, viii. 66, 70, 110, 111, 266, 289, 496, 505; Massachusetts Centinel, March 29, 1788.
1196 Cotton Mather gives an account of this affair in his Parentator (1724), p. 91.
1197 The above quotation is from “Extract of a Letter from New England to Mr. Randolph. Reed. 30 May 84” in Edward Randolph (Prince Society), in. 283,
1198 Boston Records, vii. 164.
1199 Waters, Ipswich in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, 234; Felt, History of Ipswich, 123.
1200 Connecticut Colonial Records, iii. 427.
1201 Massachusetts House Journal, 1728, pp. 61, 64, 67; Hutchinson, History of Massachusetts (London, 1767), ii. 345.
1202 Boston Records, viii. 226, xiii. 178.
1203 House Journal, 1728, pp. 103, 105.
1204 Id., 1731, p. 119.
1205 Boston Records, xii. 26; Bi-Centennial Book of Malden, p. 206; Felt, History of Ipswich, Essex and Hamilton, p. 127; Watertown Records, iii. 62; Hazen, History of Billerica, p. 226; Weston, History of Middleboro, p. 572; Benedict and Tracy, History of Sutton, p. 44; Braintree Town Records, p. 166; Brooks, History of Medford, p. 105.
1206 Winthrop, i. 94.
1207 American Antiquarian Society Transactions and Collections, iii. 121; Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 147, 297, iv. ii, 362, 485, 507, 551, v. 2, 98, 260. Springfield, Andover, and Oxford for a few years elected non-resident deputies. (Burt, First Century of the History of Springfield, i. 34; Bailey, Historical Sketches of Andover, p. 136; Daniels, History of Oxford, p. 12; Freeland, Records of Oxford, p. 147.)
1208 Massachusetts Colony Records, iii. 204, iv. i. 22, 182, v. 4, 562; Quint, Historical Memoranda concerning Old Dover, p. 144; Green, Historical Sketch of Groton, p. 198; Shattuck, History of Concord, p. 142.
1209 Worcester Town Records from 1753 to 1783, p. 244; Essex Gazette (Salem), June 7, 1774; Shattuck, History of Concord, p. 142.
1210 See the introduction to W. C. Ford’s edition of Journals of the House of Representatives, 1715 (Boston, 1902).
1211 Concerning the censorship of the press in Massachusetts, see C. A. Duniway, Freedom of the Press in Massachusetts, ch. v.
1212 Cf. Publications of this Society, ix. 422, 441.
1213 For an account of this remarkable increase in publishing, see Thomas, History of Printing in America, ii. 309; Narrative and Critical History of America, v. 120; Memorial History of Boston, ii. 387; S. N. D. North, History and Present Condition of the Newspaper and Periodical Press of the United States, Tenth Census of the United States, viii. passim; J. L. Bishop, History of American Manufactures from 1608 to 1860, vol. ii. ch. vii; Tyler, History of American Literature, 1607–1765, ii. 93.
1214 Appendix to Massachusetts in Agony (Boston, 1751), in A. Mc F. Davis, Colonial Currency Reprints (Prince Society), iv. 464.
1215 House Journal, 1754, p. 45.
1216 Id. p. 60.
1217 House Journal, 1754, pp. 61, 62, 101. I have not examined the unpublished town records for action taken upon the Excise Bill. Among the published records, and in the Massachusetts Archives, I have found only five town votes in favor of the bill. Cf. Barry, History of Framingham, p. 48; Paige, History of Hardwick, p. 47; Marvin, History of Lancaster, p. 266; Bi-Centennial Book of Malden, p. 207; Pierce, Town of Weston, p. 38. A copy of the vote of the town of Weston is in the Massachusetts Archives, cxix. 475a. Twenty-one town votes against the Excise Bill have been found. Cf. Boston Records, xiv. 260; Felt, Annals of Salem, p. 444; Worcester Town Records for 1753–1783, p. 19; Babson, History of Gloucester, p. 344; Felt, History of Ipswich, p. 128; Brooks, History of Medford, p. 109; Hadley Town Records (MS. in Town Clerk’s house), August 5, 1754; Records of the Town of Plymouth, iii. p. 63; Early Records of Lunenburg, p. 166; Braintree Records, p. 337; Coffin, Sketch of Newbury, p. 221; Frothingham, History of Charlestown, p. 263; Barry, Historical Sketch of Hanover, p. 170; Washburn, Historical Sketches of Leicester, p. 65; Merrill, History of Amesbury, p. 220; Roads, History of Marblehead, p. 63. The Boston Gazette, August 20, 1754, stated that Dorchester and Weymouth had voted instructions against the Excise Bill. The Boston Post-Boy, September 23, 1754, reported similar action taken by the town of Kittery. The instructions of Eastham and Stoughton are in the Massachusetts Archives, cxix. 474, 475.
1218 The Relapse (Boston, 1754). Copies of this pamphlet are in the library of the Massachusetts Historical Society and in the Boston Athenæum. The author is unknown. Other pamphlets on the subject are The Eclipse, The Review, and The Crisis, the last by the Rev. Samuel Cooper.
1219 House Journal, 1754, pp. 63, 67, 72.
1220 On November 5, 1765, the House ordered: “That the Instructions of the several towns to their Representatives, relative to the Stamp Act, be printed in the Journal of the House; and that the Boston Members place them in proper Order for that end” (House Journal, p. 167. Cf. Boston Evening Post, November 11, 1765). These instructions were not the returns of a referendum. The order of the House was never carried out.
1221 R. H. Lee, Life of Arthur Lee, ii. 204; Cushing, Writings of Samuel Adams, iii. 37.
1222 Works, ii. x, 152, ix. 610, 616; Cushing, Writings of Samuel Adams, i. 7; Braintree Records, p. 404; Boston Records, xvi. 155.
1223 The instructions of the Boston town-meeting of September 18, 1765, were published in the Boston Gazette on September 23. The Braintree instructions were adopted on September 24, but not published until October 14. I find a record of mandates voted by the following towns: Andover, Beverly, Boston, Boxford, Braintree, Bridgewater, Byfield, Cambridge, Charlestown, Danvers, Dedham, Duxbury, Framingham, Gloucester, Groton, Haverhill, Ipswich, Leicester, Lexington, Malden, Marblehead, Marshfield, Medfield, Medford, Medway, Mendon, Middleboro, Milton, Newburyport, Newton, Norton, Oakham, Pembroke, Plymouth, Quincy, Reading, Rowley, Roxbury, Salem, Sandwich, Shirley, Southampton, Stoughton, Westborough, Westford, Weston, Weymouth, Worcester and Yarmouth
1224 Boston Records, xviii. 192. Cf. the instructions of Barnstable, Billerica, Brookline, Cambridge, Danvers, Framingham, Gorham (Maine), Hardwick, Middleboro, Portland (Maine), Weymouth.
1225 Metcalf, Annals of the Town of Mendon, p. 417.
1226 Jameson, History of Medway, p. 58.
1227 Huntoon, History of the Town of Canton, 423. Sutton passed a similar vote: Benedict and Tracy, History of Sutton, p. 93.
1228 House Journal, 1777, pp. 143, 206, 208; Massachusetts Archives, clvi. 294–303.
1229 Boston Records, xxvi. 211–219.
1230 Records of Town of Plymouth, iii. 439. Cf. Chamberlain, History of Chelsea, ii. 549; Hanson, History of Danvers, p. 100; Felt, Annals of Ipswich, p. 123; Smith, History of Newburyport, 120; Willis, History of Portland, Maine, ii. 174; Felt, Annals of Salem, p. 513; W. Pyncheon, Diary, p. 114.
1231 Boston Records, xxvi. 310. Mention should also be made of a communication by “An American” published in Thomas’s Massachusetts Spy for May 1, 1783, which advised the towns in the county of Worcester to “bind by instructions” their deputies elected to the next General Court to the end that they vote for no law permitting the return of the Loyalists or for rendering them compensation or restitution for confiscated property.
1232 Defence of the American Constitutions (1787), i. 384; Works, v. 495.
1233 Works, vii. 182–183.
1234 Burnet to the Board of Trade, March 24, 1729, in the Sparks Manuscripts (Harvard College Library), Series X, i. 56.
1235 Returns of the tax assessments for the Massachusetts towns are preserved in the Archives in the State House in Boston. I have made an examination of these returns for a number of typical towns in 1738 and 1755, and I have found that more than one half of the persons whose names appear on the list of the poll tax payers were possessed of, or heirs to, personal or landed property of a value sufficient to entitle them to vote.
1236 G. H. Haynes, Representation and Suffrage in Massachusetts, 1620–1691, in Johns Hopkins University Studies, Twelfth Series, viii. 418–429; C. P. Bishop, History of Elections in the American Colonies, in Columbia University Studies, iii. 219–223.
1237 Constitution of the Common-Wealth of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, 1776), p. 9; Proceedings Relative to the Calling of the Conventions of 1776 and 1790 (Harrisburg, 1825), p. 57.
1238 Colonial Records of North Carolina, x. 974, 1004.
1239 Gordon, American Revolution, ii. 369; Wells, Life and Public Services of Samuel Adams, ii. 438.
1240 Ashe, History of North Carolina, vol. i. chap, xxxii; Works of John Adams, i. 208; iv. 185, 203; Warren-Adams Letters, i. 230.
1241 F. N. Thorpe, Federal and State Constitutions, pp. 270, 392, 705, 919, 983, 1059, 1125, 1179, 1648, 1892, 1932, 2403, 2457, 2600, 2788, 2911, 3000, 3084, 3423, 3754, 4037.
1242 Votes and Proceedings of the Senate of Maryland, November, 1786, pp. 18, 38, 111; Maryland Journal and Baltimore Public Advertiser, November 14, December 19, 1786; January 16, February 2, 9, 13, March 2, April 27, 1787.
1243 Maryland Journal and Baltimore Advertiser, February 9, 13, 20, March 2, 16, April 13, May 18, June 22, July 13, August 3, 14, 31, 1787; Maryland Gazette (Annapolis), February 22, 1787.
1244 Register of Debates, 1833–1834, p. 636; Congressional Globe, 1833–1834, p. 193; Richmond Enquirer, February 25, 1834.
1245 Register of Debates, 1835–1836, p. 636; Niles’ Register, 1. 25; Journal of the House of Delegates of the Commonwealth of Virginia, December, 1835 (Richmond, 1835), p. 171; Richmond Enquirer, March 2, 1836; Richmond Whig, March 4, 1836; L. G. Tyler, Letters and Times of the Tylers, i. 537.
1246 Boston Records, xxxi. 347, 348; Boston Gazette, February 10, 24, 1794; Columbian Centinel, February 12, 15, 26, March 8, 1794; Independent Chronicle, February 13, 17, 27, March 3, 6, 13, 1794.
1247 Houghton, History of Berlin, p. 49; Williamson, History of Belfast, p. 696.
1248 Bourne, History of Wells and Kennebunk, p. 592.
1249 Notably in the town records of Andover, Cambridge, Duxbury, Gardner, Haverhill, Ipswich, Lynn, Newburyport, and Rowley.
1250 Boston Records, xxxiii. 380, xxxv. 237, 239, 316. Among other towns, Long-meadow on August 9, 1808, “Voted to send a Petition to the President of the United States for the Removing of the Embargo Law, and Voted that this Petition be in form and words conformable to a like Petition from the Town of Boston” (Centennial Celebration of the Town of Longmeadow, p. 174).
1251 Smith, History of Pittsfield, 1800–1876, p. 231.
1252 Barrus, History of Goshen, p. 27.
1253 Parmenter, History of Pelham, p. 186.
1254 Cf. Publications of this Society, x. 345–356.
1255 Municipal History of the Town and City of Boston, p. 28. Cf. Report of the Committee appointed at a Town Meeting on the 22d day of October (Boston, 1821), p. 5; Journal of the Convention to Revise the Constitution of Massachusetts, 1820, p. 193.
1256 Boston Patriot, December 12, 1821.
1257 New-England Galaxy, January 4, 1822.
1258 December 15, 17, 19, 21, 22, 25, 27, 29, 1821.
1259 Cf. the articles signed “Franklin” and “Amicus Civitatis” in the Boston Patriot, December 19, 1821, and the New-England Palladium, December 21, 1821.
1260 One instance of the use of instructions as late as the year 1851 should be cited. In the spring of this year a deadlock in the General Court prevented the election of a United States Senator. Twenty-three Democrats and all the Anti-slavery Whigs were opposed to Charles Sumner. In a town-meeting on April 12, 1851, the town of Fall River instructed its representative, Nathaniel Borden, to vote for Sumner. Mr. Borden changed his vote as instructed; and the shifting of a few other votes broke the deadlock on April 24, 1851. This secured the election of Sumner. Cf. Pierce, Memoirs and Letters of Charles Sumner, iii. 242; Wilson, History of the Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America, ii. 349. Mr. George W. Rankin has kindly verified for me the vote of instructions in the town records of Fall River.
1261 For two remarkable cases of the verification of family traditions, see Proceedings Massachusetts Historical Society, xlii. 193–195.
1262 For a facsimile of this entry, see p. 453, below.
1263 See pp. 259–264 and notes, above. Mr. Matthews tells me that since writing his paper he has found a pamphlet to which it is worth calling attention: “Report of the Union Committee of the Sunday Schools of the three Baptist Societies in Boston. Together with an Address, delivered at the General Meeting of the Schools, October 29th, 1817. By Rev. Daniel Sharp, A. M. Boston . . . 1817.” In the Report, written by the Rev. James M. Winchell, we read: “It was in June, 1816, that the females of the Third Baptist Church and Congregation, formed the first Sunday School in this town” (p. 5). In his Address, Mr. Sharp said: “The attention of some pious females in this town, was called to the subject, by accounts which they received in private letters of the first meetings in New-York. . . . It became the topic of conversation; and on June 1, 1816, the first female Sabbath School was organized in Boston. Others followed in succession, till seven schools were formed among the Baptist churches in this town. We are happy to say that since these were organized, similar societies have been formed by the members of the church in Park Street, and of the Old South” (p. 12).
1264 The Rev. Thomas Vincent’s Explanatory Catechism: or, an Explanation of the Assemblies Shorter Catechism, was republished at Boston in 1729.