F 22 .P83 Copy 1 -t AN ADDRESS TWO-HUNDRED AND FIFTY-EIGHTH ANNIVERSARY planting of t\jt ||0pljam Cokixg. HON. JAMES W. PATTERSON. THE POPHAM COLONY i^< A DISCUSSION OF ITS HISTORICAL CLAIMS BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE SUBJECI BOS T O N WIGGIN AND LUNT, 13 SCHOOL STREET 1866 IStiition, Kf^vH J^unticetr Qto^ieu. y/^ft <;*T^ That, when tJun xretv : be K-K^l-ei^d, the w«K>s ivf >d»k-h tlK y ^^^^^ e«.xietc^ ^^ d«eflr poBtk^ The rv ^.X = , r. n^ sconi of the klwu^ popttl*- ^^'^^ ~ ^ .iitschai^cter;'^ IfthoTvkul t^ aBT ecmrkts in tiie Keiii^^ Colony, It J ^frc«ailiisaec — - :-^-^^^^„ . av* Aew «s BO transportsnion of any olas^ of the ,.^™ .!«« 1»* *<»^- .J _ . , , ; bivn shoini ivquiring t»n#twm- ^r^ a - n« for m««l a«ilt Aims the time of tho ^ oo«ld not be a««.po"od without . fe- A»> *'^-^ Wore. =.^ alHwt 4e felons of ,he «W. i. in.nmon.h- bn..,H,t asainst the memory of U.e helpless dead. The «««J eharae eomes from the cannon slory: that ilK „en at the fort todueed tl.e Indians to ...an the d™^■v,«,H>^ and to stand in the li..e of dirxvtion of the pi.ve a.nuxl or ex. ention; and then fltx^ oft the pi«e upon the xvhole IhhIv of 15 tlic imfortuiiatcs, when thus "in lino, and l»lc\v thcni (o atoms." This is a tak^ of Avoe rather tougher than the (juoted AVillianisoti gives it. — who is inelined to discredit it. But is even William- son's reluctant aeeount true? The best reply to this allegation of horror is to be found in the narrative of the Jesuits, in 1611, who went to the Kennebec by the inland passage, in quest of corn. The Indians met Ihem. They gave them an account of their Ireatuieut of the colonists, whom they represented as having been defeated by them. They '•llattered" the French, saying that "they loved them well;'" and, to gain tlieir favor, told them hoAV the English drove them from their doors and tables with clubs, and made their dogs bite tliem. All this might have been done for jU'otcH'tion. und(M' a renewal of the hostile attitude assumed by the natives on Gilbert's trip up the Androscoggin. The French were good listeners to any charge against English Protestants. Now, if this story about the cannon had been as true as its reality would have been cruel, why should not these Indians have told its barbarities to such good auditors ? A cannon ball, with the explosion from the muzzle, Avonld have nuide a more damaging narrative than a club or a dou'-bite. Yet no svllable of the great event is recorded while the little ones are faithfully chronicled to the disparagement of the Protestants. It is doubtful whether any cruelties did occur so utterly at variance with the known kind treatment of them by the '• worthy '' President. For the Jesuits say of these Indians, that they were " flatterers," and " the greatest speech-makers (/larangi/ci/rs) in the world." When they had encouraged their visitors {/loiilcd them, cmmieloijent) with promises of grain, they put them oil" by trucking in beaver.^ Such witnesses do not auunmt to much; and. if ^Ir. Parkman uses the language of your correspondent in calling these uncertain incidents " the most 1 Fuller information, g.iined from the military letters of Biard and Masse, shows that the troatmont referred to was connected with an occupation of tlic same location, by the Knglish, in the year ii/ter t!ie Popluun Colony had departed. — Reports, edited by Carayon. 16 shocking baAavities," it nnght be well wished that ^o able a,,d interest^, a historian as he, had given the bnet narra . e itself, .,.„,.„ ,i,„„ry " from ts statements, rather than to have derived such a theoiy Were there no "shocking barbarities" elsewhere against the natives ? „/i_ •„ The first known utterance of this cannon story was made m Massachusetts, about seventy years after its asserted occnn-ence. A few words may be allowed as to the letter in the Appen- dix, which comes in for a large share of notice. It is intimated tha; other letters were not worthy of preservation. Ihe reason why they were not printed was because they wore notes of c^ui- tesy to the Committee, not needing public expression. Mr. Kid- lei's letter was thought to have a historical value, as illustrating the skillful and industrious abilities of the colonists; and is e e- tainly proved to be of some importauce, or it would not have le- ceived so much attention. i;,,;„Minn The first criticism is verbal, on the non-apparent distinction between "works" and "formal acts recorded." To us who have drank water, if not inspiration, from the sm...s^ni?ov. ham well, beneath tlie shadow of gabino Head, it appears th .. formal acts recorded," were the acts of taking possession with chartered rights, placed on the minutes by « John fecamnion, Sec ret V" The "works" were the daily toils of the laborers in tr-enching, fortifying, building the storehouse and church and the " nrcttv pvnnacc." „ , tiie piciij i.> „resentinf the fact of a We thank your correspondent lor presenilis French vessel built at Port Royal forty years before any naval architecture was attempted at Sabino. AVe h.ave been so much e habit of thinki„g of English colonization, «-» P-'-P^\- Ive had too narrow a horizon. But, better taugh hereafter ;, „il, be careful to put the patrial adjective as the proper ;:recessor, and say "the EngUsk ' pioneer ship,' and so again "Ttolllr " pynnace," built before this one claimed as the 17 firstj wc arc also glad to be assured of the fact for the first time. We had supposed that the two mentions, made in the Popham journal as given by Strachey, related to the one vessel, — in another writer called a " pretty bark." ^ But, if there were two, so much the better for Mr, Kidder's illusti-ation touching the skill and energy of the colonists. Strachey says, they all em- barked in the ship that arrived with supplies from England, " and in the new pynnace, the ' Virginia,' and set sail for England." This word all, used also by Gorges and Ogilb}', and its equivalent by a contemporaneous writer, forbids utterly the statement of your correspondent, that a considerable portion of the colonists took the other ''pynnace" — which we cannot yet see was built — to fish, and '' lead generally a wild and free life." It is also intimated that the "Virginia" did not reach England. But the " Briefc Relation," 1622, gives as much information about its arrival in England as about the arrival of the ship. A fair hearing of the old writer is enough to show that both reached the expected haven ; and, doubtless, the tirst English vessel built in these wild regions did awaken curiosity in the beholders at home. But this may be '' theory." As to the improbability of the building of this vessel in the time allowed, and in the unusually cold winter, with the few men, it is enough to reply, that the " Briefc Relation " says this : " Having in the time of their abode there (notwithstanding the coldness of the season, and the small help they had,) built a pretty bark of their own, which served them to good purpose, as easing them [i. e. in the other vessel] in their returning." The application of the term "hangman " is made to the Chief Justice Popham. But it is not easy to see what connection it has with the purpose of the colony. If the laws of the land required criminals to be hung, he cannot be blamed for their adminis- tration. Sad indeed will it be for magistrates, if they are lo be thus designated because they execute the laws. It would not be 1 Briefe Relation. 18 among the earliest, if not the very fi.»t, of ^^^^^^^ dead.'" [rorllosil Adeirllter, Jprit 26, iscaj.] uTHE LAST I'OPHAM ADDEESS." Under the above caption there was printed in the Bo.<» rrrtf t.r tlXdred and .t.ei.hth Anniversary of the Planting of the Popham Colony, at Sagadahoc. .V!i „ first readin- of this somewhat enrious review, I sup- posed twt-Untended to throw ridicule on the Popha. Srlns, and all concerned in ^, hnt, on a c.ser pe^sal, ti::rt:t:::h::^-^--;-^::r^^^^^^^^^^ and all that has been written about them, bj the "Hrcolences his theme by ridiculing the ^^ Popham Memo riaf he "vindication of Gorges," and some other pubhc.- 's • but without attempting to reply to any part of t em. H Z'L on to tell us that Mr. Patterson is a scho ar, ha» Z : Professor at Dartmouth College, and is -^^ a >Iem er r ron^ress • and then commences his onslaught by statmg, that on S a so '(S bino) a colony of convicted criminals landed .n 160 more than half of whom deserted the next December, and ,e reminder left the next spring, after comm.ttmg the mo t ^Xrlarities on the Indians; and refers to Wilhamson s 19 History of Maine, and Parkman's Pioneers, — neither of which authorities justify any such statement ; and, although trying to ridicule some of Professor Patterson's sentiments, charges him with branching off into a subject that has no relation to the question at all. Leaving the thirty odd pages of the Address without any remarks, he attacks a letter, written as a reply to an invitation to be present on that occasion, in which the writer notices the building of a ship by the colonists, as a fact of some importance, which, all the writers on that expedition say, took part of the colonists to England. But let us follow him through his many wild and unsupported assertions relating to that vessel. And here it may be proper to say, that the letter does not endorse the authors of the Popham Memorial, or any part of their theory, but at the outset expresses a dissent to many of the claims made by those writers, and refers almost entirely to the ship and its history. This reviewer, after some grand denunciations, finally concentrates his arguments into three stately propositions. First, that the vessel never was built, because there was not time, and also that there was not over ten carpenters, or forty personS; in all the colony to do it, — while we know that since that day vessels of five times her size have been built with half that force, and in much less time, in that immediate vicinity. Second, that there was no need of a vessel ; and third, that she was built of green pine, and no one would wish himself in her; and so the idea that she made the voyage is absurd. Now this is exactly the famous kettle argument over again, with results just as conclusive. In reply to these three formal propositions, it is only necessary to say, that the fact of the building of the vessel rests on as good authority as any historical statement relating to that colony; that there were sufficient men and full time to do it in ; and that there can be no doubt it was intended to build a ship when the expedition left England, from the fact that they brought out a 20 master ship-builder and workmen. That she was built of " green pine " is an assumption very improbable, when we know that the growth along that shore was mainly hard wood, while pine pre- dominates in the interior. But his most severe tirades are poured out upon the poor colonists, calling them felons, knaves, cowards, and almost exhausting the vocabulary of Billingsgate. To this I will not attempt to reply, but merely remark, that his language, style and logic, is as far removed from the " pure well of English undofiled " as a pool of stagnant water is from a perennial fountain. A passing reader of his famous review would be at a loss to understand why this ten-ible onset is made on this small pam- phlet, — nine-tenths of which he says does not refer to the Popham subject at all, — as though he expected to conquer them. Chinese- like, by only making a great noise. But a friend at my elbow savs that this is a broadside in advance, or, rather, the fire of his skirmish line, and only preparatory to the advance of liis big guns, which are to come in the shape of a preface to a reprint, in which he intended to entirely annihilate the Pophams, the Gorges, all their followers and biographers, great and small, rich and poor, so completely that our histories will have to be re- written, and these old names that have been so prominent in our early annals obliterated entirely ; and finally to destroy the gran- ite walls of Fort Popham, memorial stone and all, and by further displays of his cut-and-thrust logic prove conclusively that it is all a myth, and nothing of the kind ever existed. Nous verrons. Orient. I Boston Daili/ Advei'tiser, May 31, 1866.] POPHAM AGAIN AND FINALLY. Our notice of Professor Patterson's Address, in the Advertiser of the 11th of April, has drawn from "Sabino" an extended 21 reply, which appeared ten days later. As our object in noticing the Address was not controversy ; and as " Sabino," skirmishing here and there, has made no effective attack on any historical position taken in the criticism, we have doubted the propriety of making a rejoinder. The world is not in haste to become Pophamized. The memories and associations of more than two centuries, grounded on historic truth, are not to be pushed aside by the most absurd and baseless theory ever addressed to the human understanding. " Sabino " has done us the honor of acknowledging, that we have contributed to this discussion some historical facts that had not before fallen under his notice, and he thanks us for the same. The most courteous acknowledgment we can make is, confessedly, a rejoinder. We shall therefore examine somewhat minutely several of the positions taken by our Eastern friend, hoping still to deserve his kind eulogium, by contributing other facts that may not have come within his observation. We feel especially favored in having, as a disputant in this dis- cussion, no amateur nor journeyman Pophamite ; but the mas- ter-workman, the original inventor and patentee, tlie Magnus Apollo of the theory ; he who compiled the " Memorial Volume ; " who arranges annually those agreeable junketings, in midsum- mer, at Sabino Head ; who is perpetual manager of the controversy and overseer of the press for all Popham publications. He kindly informs us (for no one knows so well as himself) why Mr. Kid- der's letter was printed, confirming the impression expressed in our notice. Every fact and inference, favoring liis side of the question that " Sabino " is not master of, is not worth knowing. It is unfortunate that one so profound in Pophamistic lore should not express his ideas in clear and idiomatic English. Some of his sentences, after careful study, we confess our inabil- ity to understand ; and he often makes use of words out of their ordinary meaning. For instance, he says, " We who live in the valley of the Kennebec have always supposed, that faith is 22 belief founded in evidence ; and that all other demands on faith, if answered, are credulity." How demaiids on faith can in any event be credulity, is to us as obscure as the metaphysical nomenclature in vogue in the valley of the Kennebec. Faith is defined by the best lexicographer of the language as '•' the assent of the mind to the truth of what is declared by another, resting on his authority or veracity, without other evidence." We, at the Bay, accept an older definition, running after this fashion : " Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, and the evi- dence of things not seen." We apprehend that if there is, in the valley of the Kennebec, any faith in the Popham theory, other than that held by our clerical friend and his copartners, it is grounded solely on the assertion of " Sabino & Co.," (the corporate style of the firm is the Maine Historical Society,) as something to be hoped for, but the evidence for which is not seen. " Sabino," on the other hand, objects to our style, as not appropriate for a grave historical discussion. He is shocked that we should speak of his theorizing as " historical waggery, which we read, as we do other fiction, to be amused." Style, after all, is greatly a matter of taste, for which there is no ac- counting. We arc now, however, to deal with History ; and we promise our friend that our style shall be as rigid and matter-of- fact as he can desire. "Sabino" complained that we commented on the Popham theory without " stating the theory itself." Our notice was written to be read only by those who are conversant with the historical discussions of the day, not one of whom, probably, is ignorant of what he and his Society have been doing and printing for the past four years. He supplied what he deemed an omis- sion in our notice. We copy his carefully-prepared statement in full, and insert numerals, for convenience in its examination : — "That in 1607 an English colon}-, under President Geoi-ge Popham, was founded (1) at the mouth of the Kennebec; — was inaugurated and continued with the sacred service of the Christian 23 religion (2) ; — was in actnal possession of the region after- wards known as New England (3), under a royal charter never denied nor abrogated (4) ; — and, though intended, as the docu- ments show, to be perpetual, it came to an end within a year, by reason of the death of its two chief supporters (5) ; — and was followed by a succession of occupancies, that proved title, as against the former and never-renewed claims of France " (6). " These facts," " Sabino " says, " we are ready to take in all their dimensions." " These facts," we, on the other hand, propose to submit to a critical examination. 1. Was an English colony founded at the mouth of the Ken- nebec in 1607 ? An attempt was made then and there to found such a colony ; but the speedy result of the experiment was a disgraceful failure, and proved a warning to all future underta- kers. This M^arning comes to us in the inimitable wi'itings of Lord Bacon. His lordship was personally conversant with the circumstances ; and to him Strachey dedicates his " Historic of Travaile," which contains the best contemporaneous account we have of the aflfair. We quote from the first complete edition of Lord Bacon's Essays, 1625, p. 199 : — " It is a Shamefull and Vnbleffed Thing, to take the Scumme of People, and Wicked, Condemned Men, to be the People with whom you Plant : And not only fo, but it fpoileth the Plantation ; For they will euer Hue like Rogues, and not fall to worke, but be Lazie, and doe Mifchief, and fpend Victuals, and quickly weaiy, and then Certifie ouer to their Country to the Difcredit of the Plantation." " Sabino " shuns the usual expression " planted " for the more pretentious " founded," as if the afl'air was a reality, and had a foundation. A thing may be planted, and that be the end of it. If the seed be bad, it rots in the hill. Such was the fact, and fate of the Popham Colony. 2. The religious history of the Popham Colony is the briefest narrative of the kind on record. All that is known of it may 24 be comprised in one sentence. A sermon was preached on two occasions ; and some Indians were taken on a Sunday to the " place of public prayer," when they listened " with great rever- ence and silence." This conduct was highly commendable in the Indians ; and, if the colonists, " the wicked, condemned men," had behaved as well, something, after all, might have come of the enterprise. 3. How much of '• the region afterwards known as New England" was this Colony " in actual possession of"? A few acres of ground on the Promontory of Sabino, where they in- trenched themselves, and nothing more ! Fi'oni this narrow foothold they were driven, on one occasion, by the Indians, who took possession of their Fort, their stock of provisions and mili- tary stores. Not understanding the nature of gunpowder, tlie Indians blew themselves up ; and the survivors — regarding the explosion as an expression of disapproval on the part of the Great Spirit for their rudeness in driving, with arrows and clubs, forty-five Englishmen out of a Fort that was trenched, and mounted twelve pieces of ordnance — restored the premises to its gallant defenders, and proposed henceforth to live on terms of friendship. (See Williamson's History of Maine, i. p. 200.) Why does " Sabino " limit their possessions to New England ? Why not give them North America, and the whole Western Continent ? 4. The Popham theorists maintain, that King James's North Virginia Charter of 160G had some special virtue as a barrier to French supremacy in New England. Both nations claimed the whole territory ; — the English on the ground of Cabot's discov- ery, and of Gilbert's taking formal possession in 1583; and the French on the ground of prior settlement. The question of su- premacy was to be determined by permanent occupancy, by enterprise, and by valor in arms ; not by royal proclamations and charters. No royal charter to a trading company could strengthen the title England already possessed by right of 25 discovery and former occupation. The Plymouth Colony landed in New England without a charter, and the event will never be the less significant on that account. 5. The Popham Colony "came to an end within a year, by reason of the death of its two chief supporters." Did it ever occur to " Sabino," that his Colony must have had a very slender foundation to have fallen in ruins at the death of two, out of a hundred and twenty, persons engaged in it? The Plymouth Colony lost by death, in four months after the landing, fifty-one out of one hundred and two, and still the Colony lived. We neither accept nor deny "Sabino's" statement as to the cause by which his Colony came to its end. Mourners, in doubtful cases, should be allowed to settle these questions for themselves. It was a case of complicated diseases, any one of which would have resulted in dissolution. Sworn testimony and a coroner's jury would be necessary to determine the approximate cause. The first question before such a tribunal would be whether the patient could be said to have ever lived. Waiving this point, we should, if pressed for a verdict, give — "Died by visitation of the Almighty." Who were the two persons whose lives were so intimately en- twined with that of the Colony ? They were George Popham, who came over as president, and his brother. Sir John Popham, who never came over — both very aged persons. Sir Ferdinando Gorges, who was " interested in all these misfortunes," and knew more of the end of the Colony than any other person whose writ- ings have come down to us, did not regard the president's death as a matter of importance. He says, his death " was not so strange, in that he was well stricken in years hefore he went, and had long been an infirme man" (Briefe Narration, p. 10). Raleigh Gilbert, a younger and more energetic man, " a man," says Gorges, " worthy to be beloved of them all for his industry," was forthwith appointed president ) and the change was rather a 4 26 benefit, than otherwise, to the Colony, if anything could benefit what was in artiado mortis. The death of Sir John Popham was a more serious matter. He was the head and front of the enterprise ; the brother was only his agent. It was Sir John's Colony. He furnished the bulk of the capital, provided the colonists, gave liis name and his own personal infamy to ihe undertaking. Who, then, was Sir John Popham? He was Lord Chief Justice of England, and was seventy-six years of age. In his youth he had been a highwayman, and probably a garroter. "He frequently sallied forth at night from a hostel in Southwark, with a band of despe- rate characters, and, planting tbemselves in ambush on Shooter's Hill, or taking other positions favorable for attack and escape, they stopped travelers and took from them not only their money, but any valuable commodities which they carried with them. The extraordinary and almost incredible circumstance is, that Popham is supposed to have continued in these courses after he had been called to the bar, and when, being of mature age, he was married to a respectable woman." (Lord Campbell's Lives of the Chief Justices, 1849-57, i. p. 210.) Lord Campbell was not the man to speak unadvisedly of one who had occupied the highest judicial office, save one, in England. " Popham's portrait," he says, " represented him as ' a huge, heavy, ugly man,' and I am afraid he would not appear to great advantage in a sketch of his moral qualities, which, lest I should do him injus- tice I will not attempt." — Idem, p. 229. With regard to his law reports. Lord Campbell says " they are wretchedly ill done, and they are not considered of authority. We should have been better pleased if he had given us an account of his exploits when he was chief of a band of freebooters." (p. 229.) "The reproach urged against him was extreme se- verity to prisoners. He was notorious as a ' hanging judge.' Not only was he keen to convict in cases prosecuted by the government ; but in ordinary larcenies, and above all in highway 27 robberies, there was little chance of an acquittal before liim." — Idem, p. 219. " lie left behind him the greatest estate that had ever been amassed hj any lawyer. Some said as much as £10,000 a year; but it is not supposed to be all honestly come by; and he is reported even to have begun to save money when ' the road did him justice.'" — Idem, p. 229. His other biographers, Fuller, Aubrey, Lloyd, Wood and Foss, paint his character in similar colors. They allude to, and several of them state at large, the shocking details of the manner in which he came into possession of Littlecote Hall, his estate in Wiltshire, It}' compounding with felony. Foss, tlie latest biographer of the Judges of England, who is disposed to soften the hard places in Popham's record, mentions this dark story, and says, (vi. pp. 188-84,) "It is extraordinary that no refu- tation should have been attempted ; for, if any existed, it is to be presumed tliat such a writer as Sir Walter Scott, while de- tailing tlie charge [in Rokel\v] would have noticed the answer." The " horrible and mysterious crime " alluded to by Macaulay (Hist, of Eng., ii. p. 542) refers to tliis affair. Here is the man, who — the Maine Historical Society would have us believe — planted civilization on this continent. Let us see how he did it. His position as Chief Justice gave him a controlling influence in all the jails and penitentiaries in the realm. Aubrey (Letters, iii. p. 495) says "he stockt or planted [Northern] Virginia out of all the gaoles of England " Wood's Athena? Oxonienses (Bliss's ed. ii. p. 22) says, "he was the first person who invented the plan of sending convicts to the plantations." The statement should have been limited to Englishmen; for the French had practised this mode of colonization many years before. Cartier in 1547, La Roche in 1598, and De Monies in 1604, all used this material for colonists. The permission which the King of France gave Cartier to ransack the jails of Paris may be found in Hazard, i. p. 21. Any sort of criminals he could take, 28 except those convicted of treason, or counterfeiting the King's currency. Thomas Fuller (Worthies of England, ii. p. 284) says "his [Popham's] justice was exemplary on Theeves and Robbers." Wood quotes this passage, adding, " whose wayes and courses he well understood when he was a young man," and counects it with the fact of his sending convicts to the plantations. Fuller, in his essay on Plantations, in "Holy and Profane States," 1642, says : " If the planters be such as leap thither from the gallows, can any hope for cream out of scum, when men send, as I may say. Christian savages to heathen savages ? It is rather bitterly than falsely spokeu concerning one of our Western plantations, consisting of most dissolute people, that it was very like unto England, as being spit out of the very mouth of it." David Lloyd (State Worthies, 1766, ii. p. 46) gives a sketch of Chief Justice Popham, in which, quoting the words of Fuller, already cited, he goes on to say : " neither did he only punish malefac- tors, but provide for them. He first set up the discovery of New England to maintain and employ those tliat could not live honestly in the Old." Lloyd also, in this connection, quotes the passage we have cited from Lord Bacon (p. 23), showing that it was understood by the old English historians as applying to the Popham Colony. The authorities seem to be conclusive as to the character of the colonists sent to Sagadahoc, the person by whom, and the manner in which, they were " prepared ;" — for that is the ex- pression Strachey uses (p. 163) with regard to these very colon- ists. Popham had sent out the year before (1606) a colony of one hundred persons destined to the same place. The ship was captured by the Spaniards, and the persons taken to Spain, and " made slaves in their gallions." The loss of the ship and outfit was suitably lamented; but not one word of sympathy was ex- pressed by the old writers for the persons enslaved by the Span- iards ; nor did Popham, so far as we know, make any attempt to 29 rescue them from their hard fate ; but he forthwith '•' prepared a greater number of planters," — that is, the one hundred and twenty persons who afterwards landed at Sabino. If it is pre- tended that the first company were honest, worthy men, the as- sumption carries with it the necessary inference that Popham was a heartless wretch ; but, assuming that they also were crimi- nals, it was natural that he should leave them to their fate. The death of Popham, on the 10th of June, 1607, — only eleven days after the Popham colonists sailed ^ — was of course fatal to the original plan of the undertaking. There was no authority left to " prepare " convicts, — colonists, we mean. A criminal colony needs constant recuperation. Seventy-five of the hun- dred and twenty abandoned the colony before the end of four months. Why they returned to England on the first opportunity that oifered, is not recorded. As they were the majority, they probably entered into a conspiracy, and deserted ; or they be- haved so badly, tliat the managers were glad to be rid of them, expecting that the Chief Justice would " prepare " others. But his Lordship was dead, though they knew it not ; and with him died all hopes of continuing the enterprise. The good ship " Mary and John " returned in the spring with provisions, but with no recruits ; and wound up the concern, by taking back to England the managers, and such of the wretched culprits as wished to return. Perhaps we may as well notice here, as in another place, the only evidence " Sabino " brings forward to show that the Saga- dahoc colonists were not convicted criminals, only convicted vagabonds and political offenders. It is this : " Chalmers says there was no transportation of any class of the guilty till 1619. Therefore there was none to Sagadahoc." Chalmers, we beg to submit, is not an original authority. He died only about 1 For the date of Popham's death, we have followed Foss rather than CampbeU. The latter fixes the date as June 1, 1607, only one day after the colonists sailed. Campbell has fallen into a mistake in making Fopham's age seventy-two ; for Campbell himself, and the other authorities, give the date of his birth as 1531. 50 ;ao ia iint " Sabino " should quote fnrtv vears aso ; and our surpnss is that . aoiuu l^ifL f;=J of t„e oW wHte. C^a.^e.-s l.d^o .^a„ !::rMr: :; t^c:: « as ... . .„ow .. na„e rrrt;;:\r":\,ol.*staUe„ta. -.SaMno- a«H.„tes rHosapsinn..yt.,att,,opo,ioyofse„aio.co„™^^^^^^^^ ,„„,tion, ori.'inatcd with King James; ami, tliat m t lie j ear ^: ;,„.; Colony." Will "Sabino" please pou. o« t llaw " under wl.iel. James seat o£f one ''"-"«\-""= ^^ " ^\^ that did not exist in 1G06 ? It seems never to have oeeuued to .Wo hat, under the in.pulse of avariee, or baser uu^t.ves ,.ptnrn to the examination of "Sabino's " theory. W eonfess our inability to understand the eoneludmg e,le f " Sabino's " statement. The Popham CCony '■ was fol- wcd by a sueeession of oeeupaneies that proved t.tle fc ^ . ,-? There was no later occupancy of New What occupane.es, prav? The.e was no F Fn..land till the Pilgrims arr.ved ... 1G20. JNo „en f ^ni: would, for an instant, adn.it that .1.0 P .y™;""' ^o o..y Tad any relation to E..«iish supren.acy in New t..gla,.d. Re- 31 garded as a political event the Pilgrim settlement was not of the slightest consequence or importance." (Mr. John A. Poor's Vin- dication of Gorges, p. 72). Tlie next event in New England history was the occupancy of Massachusetts Bay. He cannot allude to this. " Puritan " is a more distasteful word to the Maine theorists than "Pilgrim." Besides, Puritan and Pilgrim have no relation to, or connection with, Popham. We are evidently drift- ing away from the true interpretation, and for the present must remain in blissful ignorance of the full meaning of this Delphic utterance. The general intent of "Sabino" is not obscure. He would have his readers understand that the Popham affair led to some- thing that was favorable to English supremacy. This we denv, and for proof, again appeal to the record. Can "Sabino" name one of the Popham men that ever took part in, or encouraged, any subsequent settlement ? Does he not know that they circu- lated the most unfavorable reports of the country, and prevented for many years any attempt to occupy New England ? Judge Sullivan (History of District of Maine, p. 53) says, "The suffer- ings of this [Popham] party, and the disagreeable account which they were obliged to give to excuse their own conduct, discour- aged any further attempts by the English." Brief Relation, 1G22, (in Purchas, iv. p. 1826,) says, "The arrival of these [Popham] people in England was a wonderful discouragement to all the first undertakers, insomuch as there was no more speech of set- ting any more Plantations in those parts for a long time after." Gorges, (Briefe Narration, p. 10) speaking of the return of the Popham colonists, says, " by which means all our former hopes were frozen to death." Among his misfortunes, which he goes on to enumerate, — for he was a large holder of Popham stock, — was that the country was " wholly given over by the body of the adventurers, as also that it self was branded by the returne of the Plantation as being over cold, and in respect to that, not habitable by our Nation." This statement he must have had 32 from the principal men of ilie Colony, and shows that thcv were as destitute of veracity, as the main body of the colonists were wanting in the cardinal virtues enjoined in the Decalogue. As- suming Strachey's account to be correct, we know that the winter of 1607-8, on the coast of Maine, could not have been severe for that locality, whatever the season was in Europe. After the loth of December, they finished trenching the fort, which shows that there was little or no frost in the ground. The amount of work also performed in the winter would have been absolutely impos- sible in a severe season. Gorges thus expressed his disbelief in the reports he received, as to the severity of the weather : " I have had too much experience in the World to be fi-ighted with such a blast." Sir William Alexander, Earl of Stirling, the patentee of Nova Scotia, (Description of New England, 1630, p. 30) thus describes what the Popham Colony did for English supremacy in New England : — " Thofe that went thither, being preffed to that enterprize, as en- dangered by the Law, or their own neceffities, (no enforced thing prouing pleafant, difcontented perfons fuffering while they act can feldom haue good fucceffe, and neuer fatiffaction) they after a ^Vinter ftay dreaming of new hopes at home returned backe with the firft occafion, and to iuftify the fuddenneffe of their returne, they did coyne many excufes, burdening the bounds where they had beene with all the afperfions that poffibly they could deuife, feeking by that meanes to difcourage all others." " Our people abandoning the plantation," says "Brief Relation," (Purchas, iv. p. 1828) "in this sort as you have heard, the Frenchmen immediately took the opportunity to settle themselves within our limits." So far, then, from keeping the Frenchmen out, the Colony invited them in. In the face of such evidence "Sabino" asserts, that the Popham affair " proved title as against the former and never-renewed claims of France." Does he mean that the French claims were never renewed after 1608? 33 Would he wipe out from history the French and Indian wars, and the bloody strife for supremacy between the French and English, that went on for a century and a half, and culminated in the overthrow of French power in 1760 ? We have thus with patience, and we trust with candor, exam- ined in detail " Sabino's " statement of the Fopham theory ; and, if in our former article we slighted its historic claims, they have now, we hope, received due attention. '' Sabino " omitted from his formal statement — but inserted it in another part of his paper — the claim which Fopham writers usually bring into the foreground, namely, that the Fopham Colony was "the Jirst colonial occupation of the soil of New England under English enterprise." What rank will he assign to Bartholomew Gosnold's occupation of Cuttyhunk, on the south shore of Massachusetts, in 1602 ? Gosnold there and then made a settlement, which he intended to be permanent. He and his men built a fort and a storehouse, and collected a valuable freight to send home to England. The cellar walls of the house they occupied can be identified at the present day. They planted wheat, barley and oats. " Here," says Bancroft, (i. p. 112,) "the foundations of tlie first New England colony were to be laid." We do not claim that Gosnold founded a colony. He attempted it, and failed ; but he did all that the Fopham people did, and even more. He made American colo- nization an honorable enterprise, and showed that it could be made profitable. Gosnold's men were not convicts. They each had a share in the undertaking ; and jealousy as to the distribution of their gains led to the return of the whole company to England. The sale of their freight made it a profitable adventure. They spread the most favorable reports of the regions they had visited, and brought the best evidence that it was a country worth possessing. The Fopham men, on the other hand, returned to England in penury and disgrace, " bur- dening the bounds where they had beene with all the aspersions 5 34 that possibly they could deiiise, seeking by that meanes to dis- courage all others." The death of Queen Elizabeth prevented Gosnold's return to the Elizabeth Islands ; Init his representa- tions and cheerful energy awakened an interest in America that resulted in the Charter of 1606,, under which the Northern and Southern Virginia settlements were projected. When wo com- pare what Gosnold and his men did in 1602, with what Popham and his felons did in 1607, it requires a degree of audacity rising to sublimity to assert, that " the Popham Colony was the Jirst colonial occupation of the soil of New England under English enterprise." Ex-Governor Washburn, of Cambridge, in a speech he made at the tirst Popham Celebration in 1862, suggested that if they would set up the claim that Noah's Ark landed on one of the adjacent hills, and arrange a Celebration in honor of the event, he would volunteer to come and take part in it, without doubting it was true (Pop. Mem., p. 157). The suggestion is worthy of the serious consideration of the Pophamites. The historical diffi- culties in the way are but mole-hills compared with the Alpine absurdities of their present theory. Noah's Ark was an impoi-tant fact in the history of the human race. Noah and his family were respectable persons. The only circumstance we know, to the discredit of the old patriarch, is excusable on the ground that there was then no "Maine Law," or even a "judicious license system." The prejudice attached to the descendants of one of his sons, has been neutralized by the Emancipation Proc- lamation, and the passage of the Civil Rights Bill over the head of President Johnson. The coast is now clear for Noah's Ark. Let the Celebration come off" by all means. Why is it more un- reasonable to suppose that the Eastern Continent was settled from the Western, than vice versa ? Much as we hate celebra- tions of all kinds, we also volunteer ; and, if we cannot attend, we promise to write a letter, developing still further the theory ; and " Sabino " shall have full permission to print it as an Appen- dix to the public address. " Sabino" is evidently in trouble about the " cannon story," and well be may be. He says " Williamson is inclined to discredit it." Williamson has this inclination, not on the ground of lack of evidence that it occurred; but on the ground of its shocking inhumanity, and the discredit it throws upon the colonists. We are inclined to discredit it, because of the disgrace it casts upon the human race. But the ugly fact still remains (to use William- son's words) that it was "believed to be true by the ancient and well-informed inhabitants on the Sagadahoc." Again " Sabino " would have us believe, that, whereas the Indians, several years later, told the Jesuit missionaries some of the outrages they had sufiered from the Popham colonists, and did not tell them this, therefore the story was invented in Massachusetts, seventy years after it was alleged to have happened. The Jesuits, in their Relations, were describing the friendly feelings of the Indians towards themselves. They doubtless heard, with the other cru- elties mentioned, the cannon story ; but they rightly judged, that, while it would not contribute to the point they were illustrating, it would appear to readers so inhuman, and hence so improbable, as to weaken the credibility of their other statements. Besides, " Sabino's " argument founded on an omission, if it proves any- thing, proves too much for him. It proves that not one of the many propositions set up by the Pophamites are true, for not one of them is mentioned in the Jesuit Relations. The insinuation that the cannon story originated in Massachusetts, is a curious and comical blunder. The District of Maine, Fort Popham in- cluded, was at the date specified a part of Massachusetts. ''Sabino" sees this foot-note in Williamson: "Supplement to King Philip's Wars, A. D., 1675, p. 75," and he supposes that 1675 was the date the statement was published, whereas it was the date when King Philip's War commenced. The book was not printed till 1716. He does not inform us how "the ancient and well-informed inhabitants on the Sagadahoc " could have been misled bv a statement invented in Massachusetts in 1716. " Sabino " firmly lioklS; with Mr. Kidder; that the vessel of thirty tons, built at Sagadahoc, made a voyage across the ocean. " Brief Relation, 1G22," he says, "gives ns much information about its arrival in England as about the arrival of the ship." But " Brief Relation " says nothing about the arrival of either ves- sel. It records simply, "the arrival of these people\\&vQ in England was a wonderful discouragement," etc. The leaders, and the main body of these people, we believe, i-eturned safely to England in the " Mary and John ;" and this is sufficient to fulfil all the con- ditions of the narrative in " Briefe Narration," Strachey and the other old chroniclers. " Sabino," however, is ambitious that all (including those who left in the "'pretty pynnace ") should arrive in England, and show up the new craft. He says, " This word all used by Gorges and Ogilby utterly forbids the statement of your correspondent." Gorges's all has no reference to the arrival in England. His words are, " all resolved to quit the place (Sagadahoc) and with one consent to away." That <' Sabino " should quote Ogilby as an authority, indicates an un- familiarity in the authentic sources of New England history which Ave regret to see. Mr. John A. Poor (Popham Memorial, p. 73) says : " It is well known that the Popham Colony, or a portion oj them, returned to England in 1608." It strengthens Mr. Poor's argument on the importance of the Colony in maintaining English supremacy, to claim that a portion of the colonists remained in the country. We have quoted the opinion of our esteemed Port- land friend for "Sabino's" benefit; and not because it carries additional conviction to our mind. One who writes after this fashion : "They finished their vessel of fifty ( ?) tons in the winter and spring, called the Virginia, of Sagadahoc, in which tliey re- turned to England," — thus adding twenty tons to the size of the vessel, and crowding all into the "pretty pynnace," leaving the "Mary and John" to return in ballast, — is not amenable to the common code of literarv and historical criticism. The Popliam Colony, in fine, was a scandalous and complete failure. The thing, as an historical event, was dead and buried. The grass, for more than two centuries and a half, had kindly grown over it, obliterating even from the memory of man the spot where those disgraceful scenes were enacted. In the year 1849, the Hakluyt Society of London printed Strachey's nar- ration, and furnished a clew to the burial place. Nothing would satisfy a few excellent people in Maine but to dig up the sicken- ing remains, and flaunt them under the nostrils of the community. Here was an offense against decency and sanitary regulations, indictable at common law. In choh;ra times the proceeding is insufferable. No one imagines that the Popham investigators commenced operations with any other than the amiable motive of contribut- ing to the historic glories of their native State. But they knew not for what they were digging. Their first mistake was, that, when they came to the putrid mass, they did not carefully replace the sod, and say nothing about it. Instead of this, every man shouted "Eureka!" They arranged a monster gathering, and invited all creation to celebrate with them the Two-hundred and Fiftieth Popham Anniversary. People came from the ends of the earth ; enjoyed a generous Eastern hospitality ; " drank water, if not inspiration, out of the existent Popham well'' (Query — Is "Sabino" quite sure that the inspiration came from the li-e/Z?), believed as much as they could, and had a good time generally. Perhaps history manufactured in this way will stand ; but we think not. Because historical writers have presumed to examine and question their theory, they have grown sullen and morose. They abuse Massachusetts ; they spit at Plymouth Rock ; they berate the Puritans ; they eulogize Sir John Popham ; and they sigh for a system of medieval barbarism which Popham and Gorges could not plant on New England soil, because God, in his mercy to the human race, had decreed otherwise. 38 The true historic glor}^ of the noble State of Maine seems to have been lost sight of, in the antiquarian researches of her zealous sons, — which is, that the State sprang from the loins of Massachusetts. To this fact, the State to-day is indebted for every one of those distinctive elements of general intelligence, enterprise and thrift that make her what she is, — a New Eng- land State, instead of a feudal Virginia or a South Carolina. The Massachusetts Puritans came in early, and took possession of the land, under a technical construction they gave to their own charter, organized municipalities, set up their churches and schools, and put down with a strong hand all opposition to their authority. The historian of New IJampshire has given a faithful picture of the social condition of the Gorges plantation on the Agamenticus (York) River, when the Puritans commenced their missionary operations. " The people were without order or morals, and it is said of some of them, that they had as many shares in a woman, as they had in a fishing-boat No provision was made for public institutions, schools were unknown, and the^^ had no ministers, till, in pity of their deplora1)le state, two went thither from Boston on a voluntary mission." Belknap's American Biography, i. p. 387-8. See also Hutchinson's Collections, p. 424. The appearance of the Puritans among them did not to the Gorges men seem joyous, but grievous ; nevertheless afterward it yielded the peaceable fruit of civilization and godliness unto them who were exercised thereby. The territory was thus saved from the ethics of Popham, the prelacy of Laud and the Stuarts, and the barbarism of a colony of outlaws. The civilization ot the District of Maine, during the colonial period, was as essen- tially Puritan, as that of Massachusetts Bay; and the District was represented in the General Court at Boston, from the year 1G53. This close political and social union continued till the admission of the State into the Union in 1820. 39 It is the privilege, therefoi^c, of the historical writers of Maine, to turn from the unpleasant topic that of late has engaged their attention, to the more congenial theme we have suggested. Let them, with filial aflfection, recount the virtues and deeds of their Puritan ancestors ; and, if they must have an event to celebrate, let it be the landing on Plymouth Rock in 1620, or the arrival of Winthrop and the Charter in 1630, — events which are theirs to celebrate, as well as ours. P. P.S. — We ought perhaps to acknowledge Mr. Kidder's kind- ness in sending to us a corrected cop}^ of his article in the Portland Advertiser, in reply to our notice of Prof. Patterson's Address. The article still has so many literary and historical errors, that it would be unkindness to its author to review it in its present con- dition. We can imagine the inconvenience of having one's writings printed so far from home. If IMr. Kidder will fiu'uish us with another copy, still fnrther revised, we promise to give it all the attention it deserves. P. [Boston Daihj Advertiser, Juhj 28, 1866. J THE POPHAM COLONY, " FINALLY." To the Editors of the Boston Daily Advertiser : — Absences have prevented my notice of the article of your correspondent " P.," as early as I could have wished. I now take it up for some remarks on its most prominent positions. To his ciiticisms, both merited and unmerited, I desire to bow in meek thankfulness. They are merited only as the imperfections were the result of haste in writing on the eve of a journey. Though they may injure the advocate, the cause stands as impregnable as ever. The unmerited are to be at- tributed to the indistinctness of my rapid penmanship. If our articles shall have the fortune to come to a second edition, he will not be sorry to see that his sagacity has been made useful in aid of my argument. 40 As to the pervading personalities in the communication, I have but little to say. Of my position and acts in connection with the commemorations of the colony, it asserts matters which never existed, and attributes to me motives which I liave never entertained. These allegations do not change the facts of history. It is because of this iwrsoiud phase of the discussion, that I propose to make no farther reply to your correspondent, even if he should attempt a sur-rejoinder. I do not know him. But he seems to know me, in this connection, more than well, — more than I know of myself, or any one knows or can know of me. In ascribing to me the origination of the celebrations of the Popham Colony, the communication ignores the fact, that the " founding " thereof (and I use the word in its dictionary sense) was commemorated, in " a bi-centenary celebration," by the Rev. Dr. Jenks, "with a party of gentlemen, in 1807." So that, if there could be claimed any virtue for an Episcopal origination of the commemorative visit to Sabino, — which has never been claimed by any one acquainted with the facts, — this early act by this lover of the olden days would take it all away. Indeed, I have had nothing to do with the later celebrations, as their " original inventor and patentee," in any sense whatever. Its suggestion even was not Episcopal, but simply historical. I have been only auxiliary. The communication has not a little to say about the bad traits of character in Chief Justice Popham, as displayed in a portion of his early manhood. But it wholly neglects testimony — elsewhere cited — to traits of an opposite kind, appearing in his more matured years. This evidence appears in the writings of his cotemporaries, who speak of him in terms of high commenda- tion. Whatever might have been his earlier life, the path of repentance and amendment was open for his entrance. After his marriage, he changed his early courses ; and by his diligence in his legal studies qualified himself for his later eminent posi- 41 tion. When Stracliev, Smith, Croke and ]\Iather, writing after his death, and of . course after his character was completed, call him " the upright and noble gentleman," " that honorable pattern of virtue," " a person of great learning and integrity," " the noble lord," with other words of approval, and none of censure, a reader of the paper cannot but wonder that the better part of his later life was not noticed as well as the worse parts of his earlier. Fuller has placed him among the " Worthies," and says : " If Qituksiher could really be Jixed, to what a treasure would it amount ! Such is icild youth seriously reduced to gravity, as by tins young man did appear." The opinion of Lord Campbell in his favor should not be neglected by an impartial seeker for truth. He is severe on most of the Chief Justices, not sparing even the good Sir Matthew Hale. His commendations are therefore the more valuable. In his '• Life " of this Chief Justice, he describes the particular traits to his discredit, when, with other young men, he entered on his illegal acts on the highway; and then says, "We must remember that this calling was not then so discreditable as it became after- wards." He speaks of the change in his purposes ; his diligence as a student ; and, after some quotations-, presented in this dis- cussion, he says, "He held the office (of Chief Justice) fifteen years, and was supposed to conduct himself in it very credit- ably." " Many of his judgments in civil cases are preserved, showing that he well deserved the reputation which he enjoyed." " On the trial of actions between party and party, he is allowed to be strictly impartial, and to have expounded the law clearly and soundly." " I believe that no charge could justly be made against his purity as a judge." And then, as to the reasons why censures were brought against him, this biographer says, " Yet, from the recollection of his early history, some suspicion always hung about him, and stories, probably quite groundless, were circulated to his disad- vantage." " Of these we have a specimen " about " Littlecote 6 42 Hull." It is " unfair to load the memory of a judge with the obloquy of so g'l-eat a crime, upon such unsatisfactory testimony." A distinguished ruler — more exalted than Popham, whom Pal- frey calls " that eminent person " — once wrote, " Remember not the sins of my youth." If lie was called "tiie hanging judge," it was because criminals were to be punished. Lloyd says, to his credit, that " the de- served death of some scores preserved the lives and livelihood of some thousands ; travellers owing their safety to this judge's severity many years after his death." Aubrey says the same. But, if all were true, as alleged to the disparagement of the Chief Justice, is there so necessary a connection between him and the colonists at Sabino as that they, except the ten men in office, must therefore have been ''villains and convicts " ? He certainly has on all sides the praise of having been the earliest and the most active promoter of colonization on our wild New England shores. In this relation he gained the distinct commendation of Hubbard, as '• the first that ever procured men or means to possess New England," — •'the main pillar" of the enterprise, with not the remotest allusion to any such acts in its accomplish- ment as are mentioned by your correspondent. His statement leads one to think, that he regarded these early movements as preparatory to the settlements in Massachusetts. He certainly has said nothing that can lead us to suppose he connected "convicts" with Popham's efforts. There is a statement made, derived from Strachcy's use of the word " prepared," in two instances, as though this iircparatian consisted chiefly in furnishing convicts for transportation to Saga- dahoc. Where is the proof? There is not a word in the con- text to warrant any such application, and indeed no where else. One of the " prepared " expeditions was captured by a Spanish fleet, and the men held in a kind of piratical duress. The com- munication proceeds to say, in condemnation of the old historians and Popham, that "no word of sympathy was expressed by the 43 old wi'iters for the persons enslaved by the Spaniards ; nor did Popliam, so far as we know, make any attempts to rescue them from their hard fate." Alas ! where is the proof of this sweep- ing assertion ? Exactly opposite was the fact. His humane regard for the captives was forthwith put into action. It would have been well for the furtherance of history, if one well versed in "the old writers" against Popham had also seen and produced a single testimony in his favor. Take one sentence from Gorges, relating to this Spanish capture : " The affliction of the captain and his company put the Lord Chief Justice to charge and myself to trouble in procuring their liberties, which was not soon ob- tained." This citation is enough to show his efforts for their release, and proves great humanity on the part of this " noble patron of justice and virtue," as he has been well described ; and that he was not herein " a heartless wretch," as your corre- spondent writes, and furnishes no proof of his allegation. The quotations from Lloyd — himself mostly valuable for his quotations — are pi'ominently presented, as bearing on the char- acter of the colonists, lie says that Popham "' provided for malefactors." But that is no certain proof that he sent them to Sagadahoc. The plan and its completion are different things, and its completion was not necessarily here. " He first set up the discovery of New England to maintain and employ those that could not honestly live in the Old." But this proposal, this " setting up," if made in regard to Sagadahoc, does not jyrove that the suggestion was ever carried out. With the singu- larly imperfect knowledge of foreign geography, that has always characterized English education, all A'irginia seems to have been New England, and vice versa. New England was North and South Virginia. We admit the plan. We demand the j^roof that convicts were banished to this region. Besides, where is the inhumanity of the proposal, or its fulfilment ? It was in- tended to save the lives of criminals, who otherwise would have been hung, according to evidence and the laws of their time ; 44 and doubtless the culprits coudemned would have deemed the provision n)erciful, that by banishment allowed them to live. The quotation from Sir William Alexander has been often made ; and it is valuable, as coinciding accurately with the views expressed in my communications. His book is rare ; and I take his words from your columns : — "Thofe that went thither being preffed to that enterprize, as endangered by the Law, or their own neceffities, (no enforced thing prouing pleafant, difcontented perfons futfering while they act can feldom have good fuccefs and neuer fatiffaction) they after a Winter ftay dreaming of new hopes at home returned back with the iirft occafion." Here we arc accurately taught that the people — that is, the laborers in the colony — went '• as endangered l)y the law, or their own necessities." How were they " endangered " ? By what '' law " ? By what " necessity " ? A writer of that time furnishes the reply, — in the crowded population, the poverty of the working class, and the encroachments of their rich neigh- bors ; and urges emigration as the relief. He writes the follow- ing : — " Look seriously into the land, and see whether there bee not just cause, if not a necessity to seek abroad. The people do swarme in the land as }■ oung bees in a hive in June : insomuch that there is hardly room for one man to live by another. The mightier, like old strong bees, thrust the weaker, as 3'ounger out of their hives. Lords of manors convert townships, in which were a hundredth or two hundredth communicants, to a shepheard and his dog. The true laboring husbandman, that sustaineth the prince by the plow, Avho was wont to feed many poore, to set man}- people on work, and pay tAvice as much subsidie and fifteenes to the king for his j^ropor- tion of earth, as his landlord did for ten times as much ; that was wont to furnish the church with saints, the musters with able per- sons to fight for their soveraigne, is now turned laborer, and can hardly scape the statutes of rogues and vagrants. . . . The poore 45 metall man worketli his bones ont and sweltetli himself in the fire ; 3'et for all his labor, having charge of wife and children, he can hardly keep himselfe from the almes box. . . . The poor man receiveth very neere four pence for every sixepeny worth of work. The thonghtfull poore woman that hath her small children standing at her side and hanging on her breast, she worketh with her needle and laboureth with her fingers, her candle goeth not out by night, she is often deluding the bitterness of her life with sweete songs, that she singeth to a heavy heart. ... I warrant you her songs want no passion ; she never saith, O Lord, but a salt teare droppeth from her sorrowfull heart, that weepeth with the head for company with teares of sweetest bloud. And Avhen all the week is ended, she can hardly earn salt enough for her water gruel to feede on upon the Sunday." Surely here is a picture of extreme poverty, — fully corrobo- rated by a document in Mather, — showing how " the land grew weary of her inhabitants ; " and how " children, neighbors and fi'iends, especially tlie poor, were counted the greatest bur- dens." It tells us how the honest yeomanry and worthy labor- ers of that day were harassed by the encroachments of their " mightier " neighbors, and the rigid oppression of the civil law. They were " endangered " through no fault of their own. One cannot but recall a part of the petition of Agur, — " lest I be poor, and steal " to support life. But are we to consider such men as "rascals and villains"? And were any such men, sen- tenced, as men of guilt, to go forth as a part of the colony ? Symonds here gives a full and sufficient interpretation to the meaning of Lloyd and Alexander. Let us now see who had the power to sentence and tix the place of exile. The Statute of 39 Elizabeth c. iv, 1597-8, to which your correspondent refers as being ample enough to cover " the plan of colonizing by banishment of convicts," au- thorizes this penalty for " dangerous rogues," wlio " shall and may lawfully be banished out of this Realme and all other the Domynions thereof." This was to be done " by the Justices of 46 the Peace " at the " Quarter Sessions." Not a word is said about the Chief Justice. The place to which they were to be sent was to be decided " by the Privie Council ; " and thus, cer- tainly, not by Popham alone. So that, if there were shame in the transaction, the most honored men of the nation were equally involved in the disgrace. It is unfair and ungenerous to single him out to meet a purpose, as the sole object of obloquy and rebuke. And now, as to the return of these persons to England. Your correspondent, assuming that a part of them were convicts, truly says, in agreement with his assumption, that they would not be " over-anxious to revisit their native land. They had saved their necks once l)y emigrating, and were not in haste to put them again into the halter." And so he invents the story about a second pinnace, with which they could " lead generally a wild and free life, such as was congenial to their character and dis- positions." This is a precious statement ; but it happens to be directly opposite to the citation fearlessly made from Sir William Alexander, which declares that " Those that went thither, — as endangered by the laws, — dreaming of new hopes of home, re- turned thither with the first occasion." None were left behind. If they had been convicts, they would have pursued some such plan as is intimated by your coi'respondent, and not have gone back to the hazard of certain death. For the statute last quoted enacts, " if any such Rogues, so banished as aforesaid, shall i-eturne againe into any part of this Rcalme or Dominion of Wales without lawiul Lycence or Warrant so to do, that in every such case such ofience shall be Fellony, and the Party offending therein shall suffer Death as in case of Fellony." This was but poor encouragement for convicts to seek their native shores. The winter had been hard. But Captain Davies, who had borne news of the " success " of the enterprise to England, had come back to Sagadahoc in the spring, " with a shipp laden full of vitualls " and other useful things, so that starvation had 47 no horrors ; and the summer was at hand. Sir William testifies that they had " new hopes " inviting them to go home. But, if they were conderfined criminals, what " new hopes " could have been cherished by men who had nothing to expect but certain detection, l)y the letter R '' branded in the left shoulder," for identification, as soon as they stepped on their native shores; and penal death as its sequel ? These " hopes " must have been " new " indeed, if they rested only on a halter, a hangman, and a gallows 1 Here your correspondent and one of his chief wit- nesses entirely disagree. The former says, they " were not over- anxious to revisit their native land," fearing the halter. The witness says, that "they returned back with the first occasion" — hasting, and hopeful of a better condition than the one they had left. The one says, that, as liberated jail-birds, they led a roving life here, fearing death at home. The other, in effect, says they had a happy voyage to England, with bright anticipations of a more prosperous life ! We may now look at the kind of men who were to go as set- tlers to the early colonies on our coast. The Charter of James, April 10, 1606, under which this colony was formed, gives the information. It proves that the specially enumerated patentees, " they and every one of them, shall and may, at all and every time and times hereafter, have, take, and lead in the said voyage, and for and towards the said Plantations, and Colonies, and to travel thitherward, and to abide and inhabit there, in every the said Colonies and plantations, such and so many of our subjects as shall willingly accompany them or any of them, in the said voyages and Plantations." The reader will note the sole condition annexed, as to the persons selected to go : " such and so many of our subjects, as shall WILLINGLY accompany " any or all of the patentees. Can any language be plainer ? Force by the sentence of the civil law is not here thought of. The " willingness " of the " honest," liard pressed yeomanry, seeking to better their livelihood, is here pro- 48 vidcd for. The " willinj:; " ones are allowed to go, except such as, by the royal power might " be specially restrained." So that tlie real rogues, however " willing " to go, might thus be forbid- den, lest they should contaminate the honest men, described by Gorges, who, " not liking to be hired out as servants to foreign states, tiiouglit it better became them to put in practice the re- viving resolution of those free spirits, that rather chose to spend themselves in seeking a new world, than servilely to be hired out but as slaughterers in the quarrels of strangers." The same provision existed in the patents to Gilbert and Raleigh. Yet no one has supposed that these leaders took convicts. Yet this is not all. The same Charter of 1G06 expressly provides : " that all and every the Persons being our subjects, which shall dwell and inliabit within every or any of the said several Colonies or Plantations, and every of their Children, which shall happen to be born within any of the Limils and Pre- cincts of the said several Colonies and Plantations, shall have and enjoy all Libei'ties, Franchises and Immunities, within any of our other Dominions, to all Intents and Purposes, as if they had been abiding and born, within this our Realm of England, or any other of our said Dominions." Xow, if the Popham Colony Avas composed of convicts, how enviable their condition! The sentence of the law did not touch them, except in words ! They still had all the " Liberties " of the most innocent English- man on his native soil ! They were " subjects," — " loving sub- jects," as the same class of " willing " emigrants were called in the Charter of 1609. What "convicts " ever had such "Fran- chises and Immunities " since the world began ? Their state was nothing less than perfect freedom ! They were, therefore, no convkts at all ; and so could return home safely, and with " new hopes," just as soon as they deemed the change desirable. In double confirmation of this fact, we may go to the Charter of 18 James, Nov. 3, 1620, which speaks of the efforts made in divers years past, in the Northern Colony, by former grantees, 49 who had " taken actual possession of the Continent," and had " settled already some of our People in Places agreeable to their Desires in those parts." This, certainly, is very far from sus- taining the opinion, that the occupants of Sagadahoc were con- victs. For they were settled in a place " agreeable to their Desires," until calamities darkened all their prospects. It is worth noting here, that Lord Campbell says nothing about Pop- ham in connection with convicts and the colony. This omission is significant. A question is proposed, with an air of confidence, as if its answer must demolish the positions of mj' former article. It is this : " Will ' Sabino ' please point out the ' law ' under which James sent off a hundred convicts in 1619, that did not exist in 1606?" The demand is adroitly made, but not pertinentl3\ To make it touch the point, it should have been 16U7. My reply is readily given. The statute for the punishment of rogues by banishment, al- ready noted, (39 Eliz. ch. iv.,) expired by its own limitation, in 1601 ; when it was renewed, to continue till the end of the first ses- sion of the next Parliament, which was held in 1603-4. It was then re-enacted, (1 James, ch. iv. and xxv.,) when the additional provision was made, that persons condemned under its sanctions should be branded on the left shoulder with "' a greate Romane R," for their detection in case of their unlicensed return, so as to secure the death of the offeuder, "as in case of Felonie." This statute was to continue *•' until the end of the first session of the next Parliament" (ch. xxv.). I have no means at hand of know- ing the precise date when this session closed; but the Parlia- ment itself ended on May 27, 1606, and the statute was not revived. The temper of the king and that body was sho^vn in the statute (3 James ch. xxvii.) entitled, "An acte for the King's most gracious generall and free Pardon." The next Parliament began Nov. 18, 1606, and ended July 4, 1607. Such was the forbearance of the supreme legislature in relation to the 7 50 transportation of condemned criminals, that the session passed away, and the law, that had expired by its own limitation, was allowed to remain in this state of its natural death. Transpor- tation seems not to have been in favor. Therefore, from " the end of the firste session " of the Parlia- ment whose final session was terminated May 27, 1606, till after the Popham Colony sailed, May 31, 1607, there was no statute of transportation in existence. A re-enactment of the law, or rather a law for punishing rogues by the workhouse, and not by transportation, was not made until the Parliament beginning Feb. 9, 1609. This was four days more than a year after George Popham's death, and a year and a half after the death of the Chief Justice. So that here was at least an interval of more than two years and three-fourths, when there was no law for the exile of convicts from the royal dominions. In this space of time, the Popham Colony had its beginning, its continuance and its end, — beginning more than a year after the law had died ; continuing through the larger part of the year ; and ending nearly another year before it was revived, in a very difierent form, and with a milder penalty. During this period, no law appears in the " Statutes of the Realm " for the transportation of convicts ; and it is perfectly incredible that any persons were so sentenced by the justices of the peace, and sent to Sagadahoc under any sanction of the highest judicial authority in the realm, with the specific designa- tion of the place by the Privy Council. The preamble of the statute of 1609 for "punishing rogues" makes known the inactivity of the magistrates in the enforcement of former provisions, and the desuetude into which this law had fallen. It declares that the earlier " Statutes had not been duly and severely putt in execution." Therefore the requisitions are made stronger, to bind the proper officers to their more stringent execution, in regard to "Houses of Correction." Transporta- tion is not even hinted at. This previous easy state of affairs 51 on this topic shows that the rigor of expulsion, ascribed to Pop- ham, is a thought of kter times. It is also to be noted, that the Cliartcr of 1608 is in strict har- mony with the fact that the expired law had not been revived. Among the twenty-seven Acts of 3, 4 James, 1G05-6, and the thirteen of 4, 5 James, 1606-7, no one appears on the pages to authorize tlie exportation of criminals. Those who went to either of the Virginias were to go " willingly," and enjoy their " liber- ties." If, in any other book of laws besides the " Statutes of the Realm," if there be such, or by any new and singular interpreta- tion of any provision there can be found a rule requiring the transportation of convicts, it will not thence follow that any were sent to Sagadahoc. For the Charter will still say that only volunteers were to go, who should be free men as long as they remained in connection with the company. I did not refer to Ogilby and Chalmers as original authorities, but as good investigators. The former has been long known. My favorable opinion of the latter is drawn from the Preface to his " Introduction to the History' of the Revolt in the Ameri- can Colonies." Your correspondent seems to undervalue him. But to sustain my estimate, I may quote the expressions of the American editor of the above-named volumes. " His works are deemed to possess much merit as the result of profound research and a discriminating judgment." — " His official station gave him access to all state papers." — "He took advantage of this oppor- tunity, to investigate in its original sources the history of the colonies." — " His work ( Political Annals ) has ever been quoted with entire confidence and respect; and this circumstance speaks clearly in favor of the author's candor and honesty." When he speaks of no earlier transportation than 1619, I have been ready to give him credit. Your correspondent refers to him as Avriting, " that the policy of sending convicts to the planta- tions originated with King James, and that in the year 1619 he issued an order to send a hundred dissolute persons to Virginia." I am content with this statement. Bancroft tliinks " some of them were convicts : but it must be remembered that the crimes of which they were convicted were chiefly political ; " and political felons, as well as those whom in the same volume he calls " the Puritan felons that freighted the fleet of Winthrop," were " endangered by the law ; " and yet not for this reason to be regarded as tainted in the least with moral guilt. His opin- ion, too, is that there was never sent to South Virginia — for he seems not to have heard of the accusations brought against the northern colony — any '• considerable number '" of persons convicted of " social crimes ; " " certainly not enough to aflect its character." This statement may be taken as a sufficient reply to the charge that Popham " stockt " the plantations out of ''all the gaoles of England." Indeed, all that Bacon, nearly twenty years after his colony had ceased, and other far later writers have said, on the topic contained in the quotation from him, relates to the later affairs in the southern colony : and can be connected with Popham only as he was a prime mover in the enterprise of colonization, carried on after his death. It cannot be shown that they had Sagadahoc in mind. Weber, as •• re- vised and cori-ected " by Professor Bowen, adheres to 1619. Against a remark of mine, the communication states, th?it there was " no later occupancy of Xew England till the Pilgrims ar- rived in 1620." I said '^ the Popham Colony was followed by a succession of occupancies, that proved title." I say so still. I did not mean that all these occupancies were colonies. They were at ^klonhegan. by Sir Francis Popham and Captain John Smith : at Pemaquid, by the annual visits of the English from Virginia ; at Mount Desert, by Argall ; at Saco, by Vines ; at Plymouth, by the Pilgrims and by numerous others, after that great and memorable event in our national history. They were made under the protection of the Charter of James in 1606; energetically promoted in the outset by Popham, " the first to procure men and means to possess Xew England ; " and sustained 53 for years at great expense by Sir Ferdinando Gorges. In tliis connection I wish to supply an omission noticed by your corre- spondent, where I said, that the colony " proved title as against the former and never-revived claims of France." " West of the Kennebec " was in my mind, but not written. I thank him for the correction, as it strengthens my position. It would have been better to have said, " the French never had any possession on the coast, west of the Kennebec." As to the settlement of Gosnold, I have before shown that it was not a " chartered colony." It was deserted on the day when its small house was scarcely fitted for a permanent dwelling. It was " undertaken on private account ; " asserted no general claim ; proved no title ; and was not renewed. The powder and cannon stories appear to be singularly con- fused by Williamson. His misplaced footnote referring to the History of King Philip's War has misled us both. It is made as authority for the latter, when it should be for the former, and the tradition (I quote from memory) is from " an ancient mar- iner." As it is unsupported, it can hardly be claimed as history. As to the cannon story, one of our best antiquarians thinks that it has had no earlier mention than is found in Morse and Parish, about two centuries after its alleged occurrence, as derived from the Norridgewock Indians. Such a tradition is of very little account. If these stories had been true, it is marvellous that the " speechifying " Indians round about Arrowsic should not have told their prowess and their sufferings to the listening- Jesuits in 1611. It may be well to know that a valued New Hampshire historian locates the narrative about the cannon at Dover, N. H., in the time of Waldron, when a large number of Indians were captured by stratagem. If the servants of the colony set dogs on the meddlesome Indians, the wise men in council in a later colony in New England, as Hazard gives it, de- cided to employ " mastiffe-dogs " to hunt down Indians in 1656. Whv not blame both ? 54 That portions of the population in Maine ^vere corrupt, after settlements were dotted along the coast, is true. Deterioration often follows colonization. For all the influence for good that Massachusetts has spread, here and elsewhere, all ought to be glad, though here it was somewhat irregularly introduced. The celebrations at Sabino Head are not intended to detract from the merits of Plymouth Rock. Tliey were many. It is no harm to wish that they had been more. The letter of Mr. Kidder relative to the *• pretty pynnace of about thirty tonne," is again referred to by your correspondent. What are we to understand by the few notices of her history ? Simply this, that on " August 28," " the carpenters labored about the building of a small pinnace." Their first act was to pre- pare the timber from the surrounding forest, — not necessarily of " green pine," where the ridge bears oak, maple and spruce now, and perhaps did then, — and put it into shape for future use. It was left to season during the autumnal months. Then, after Captain Davies returned to England, with an account of the "for- wardness of their plantation," on the 15th of December, the seasoned timber was " framed," and the craft completed, as the " Brief Relation " says, " notwitlistanding the coldness of the season and the small help they had." For reasons satisfactory to the leaders of the colony, after Captain Davies returned to them, Strachey says "they all ymbarqued in the new arrived shipp and in the new pynnace, the Virginia, and sett saile for England." Gorges says they " all resolved to quit the place, and with one consent to [go] away." Sir William Alexander says, " Those that went thither . . . returned back with new hopes." The " Briefe Relation " says the news from home " made the whole company to resolve upon notliing but their return with their ships ; • . . having built a pretty bark of their own, which served them to good purpose, as easing them in their returning;" and asserts "the arrival of these people here in England," — of course, the same "people" who enibarked, and in the same "ships" in wliicli they commenced the voyage. Any other interpretation will be a violent perversion of language. As to any persons of the colony remaining to be rovers on the coast in another sup- posed pinnace, it will be time enough to consider that conjecture, when proof shall be brought to change it into history. It will be " credulity " to answer such a '' demand " on our faith, as long as it is unsupported by evidence ; and we shall still believe that " The Virginia " was not, perhaps the first craft of the Northmen, French, Basques, Dutch, or Indians, of Avhom we were not think- ing — but was the pioneer ship of the English jfcojylc in the new world, and was a striking proof of the skill and enterprise of the laboring colonists, with Digby, the London shipwright, as their head in her construction. But, whatever may be said of the enterprise or its details, whether favorable or unfavorable, the true and single point for grave consideration is the prominent fact, that a colony was founded at the mouth of the Kennebec under the charter of James, 1606, which Popham "certainly was a chief instrument in pro- curing," and that this was the Jirst thus laid in New England under English sway. No personalities, no imputation of sinister and never existing motives, no disparagement of the character of the prime movers and later advocates, — for Gorges has been blamed as well as Popham, — no reproaches thrown upon the laboring colonists, and no finger of derision pointed at the failure of their purpose, should turn the reader of history away from this path. The leading minds in England, with the King as tiieir friend, were actuated by the desire to turn to good account the discoveries of the early navigators ; the reports of fishermen returning from our coast, and the more systematic researches of Gosnold, who, Strachey says, came " for discovery ; " and Weymouth, whose narrative, and Pring, whose exact description pointed out the Kennebec as the place for speedy occupation. Emphasis was given to the determination of the associates, by their bearing with 56 them a charter and a constituent code of laws, carrying out the principles of the English Constitution. An expedition of that nature, and at that time, required relatively much more of thought, energy and means than one of ten times its numlaers and power would do at the present day. The fact, that it came directly to tlie Kennebec, shows that its course and destination did not de- pend on any capricious views of its commander ; but were in accordance with a previously matured plan " for the seizing such a place as they were directed unto by the council of the colony." Its approach near to the claimed territory of France implies a previous knowdedge of the coast, and a purpose to take pos- session within the chartered limits, fully up the undisputed boundary line. This occupation, and those made in the few fol- lowing years, were called in the patent of 18 James, Nov. 3, 1620, the "actual possession of the continent;" thus showing how exalted a value was placed on these incipient, though feeble measures, by the highest authority in the mother land. The commercial purposes of the undertaking at Sagadahoc were not all. A religious purpose was connected therewith, and carried on during its continuance. Its great purpose was to secure title within the tei'ritory granted to the company. Signal disasters attended the later part of its life ; and, though it failed commer- cially, Gorges " had no reason greatly to despair of means." In its historic influence, and in its opening the way for immediate and successive efforts, it was, in the words of Maine's most worthy and distinguisluid living historian, '*' one of the steps in the grand march of civilization." As such, and as the first chartered " step " on our rock-bound coast by •' English hearts and hands," we have thought it proper to do it honor ; and this too as persons united in no one single denomination of Christians. Wc have taken pleasure in aiding to bring before the appreciative mind of the community " this initial 1)01111 in the history of the settlement of New England," and its bearing on subsequent settlements along our shores. We 57 have thought that the Charter of 1G06 gave life to this and other enterprises. It was in liarmony with its design and privileges, that " the King's Majesty and the bishops consented '' to the wishes of the people at Leyden to remove to this land ; and so far gave them the aid of the Church, which Mather sa}s was not possessed with the spirit of persecution against them, though some of its members indulged that folly. The several documents following this leading instrument of title and occupation, such as the enlarged charters, " The First Plymouth Patent," and the patents issued for the benefit of Maine and Massachusetts, are traceable to this source, and to the able men concerned in its origination and provisions. So that, in a pure and great histori- cal fact and its sequences, we have had enough to warrant our past commemorations. It is no fault of ours, that other colonies came earlier and later, and did not build a sea-going vessel in this northern latitude in the first year of their stay. We rejoice where they were successful, permanent, and a blessing to the world. But why cannot we be allowed to celebrate an event, one of the greatest of its times, without being taunted with say- ings, which, while bearing bitterness, need the support of evi- dence ; and with words which, however amiably they may have been intended, boldly represent us as culprits, " indictable at common law " ? In taking my leave of your columns, courteously allowed for this discussion, I regret that I have been compelled to occupy so much space. But much more would have been needed to rectify- all the applications of the quotations from the old writers, who, so far as the colony of Sagadahoc is concerned, must be explained in harmony with the Charter of 1606, which provided only for " willing " men to join in the enterprise, and continued to them all the franchises of Englishmen at home. I wish now only to add, that I stand not alone in my opinions about the Popham Colony. Persons of the highest historical authority in the State and elsewhere support the same view. One of these, the late 8 58 Bishop Burgess, had designed to write at length on this debated subject. He had been in correspondence with the present Duke of Somerset for information on one part of its history. He had already said, and patriotically too, of the chaplain of the colony, " Seymour was the first preacher of the Gospel in the English tongue, within the borders of New England, and of the free, loyal and unrcvolted portion of these United States. Had he inherited all the honors of his almost royal grandsire, they would have given him a far less noble place than this, in the history of man- kind." But the fatal illness of this eminent historical scholar has prevented the intended gift of his deliberate and final testi- mony in defence of the claims here set forth in behalf of '' that northerue colony uppon the Sagadahoc." Sabino. [Boston Daily Advertiser, July 28, 1866.] A RUNNING REVIEW OF THE " POPHAM AGAIN AND FINALLY." To the Editors of the Boston Daily Advertiser : — By referring to the Supplement of the Daily Advertiser of the 31st of May, I see that "pool" has again overflowed, and the result is a wishy-washy everlasting flood of nearly four columns in small type, some of which seem to be a reply to the fairly- written statements and comments of " Sabino ; " but the most of it reads very much like one of Van Bureu's old messages with which we were served annually, some twenty-five years ago, while in barefaced effrontery it much resembles the speeches of Jeff. Davis and Wigfall, at the commencement of the late re- bellion. Let us wade through this mass of matter which reaches from the voyage of Noah to the latest raid on the Pophamites ; and here let me remark, that the writer handles that ancient 59 navigator's character very much as he does Chief Justice Pop- ham's, looking only at its worst side. Why does he not assert tliat his ark was built of " green pine," and no one would embark in it, or, if they did, they went a fishing, and never arrived at Mount Ararat; for there is just as much evidence of this as there is in his assertions relative to the vessel built at Sabino. But let us follow the writer, and see how he replies to " Sabino." First, he finds great difficulty in understanding what all others clearly appreciate, and this accounts for many of his misstatements, for if a man cannot understand the trutli, how can he communicate it? Secondly, he gives us a short lesson on style ; but finally concludes " that, after all, it is greatly a matter of taste for which there is no accounting." I agree with him on this point ; and, as evidence of what his taste is, let me make an extract from his description of the discovery of the locality of the Popham Colony. " Nothing would satisfy a few excellent people of Maine, but to dig up the sickening remains, and flaunt them under the nostrils of the community. Here was an offense against decency and sanitary regulations, indictable at common law. In cholera times the proceeding is insuflera- ble. Their first mistake was, that when they came to the putrid mass they did not carefully replace the sod." Does this read like a review from a student of history? Does it not more likely resemble the report of a city scavenger, when the cholera is expected ? Then, next, comes a quotation from Lord Bacon's essays on plantations in general, published about twenty years after the Popham expedition ; and it is difficult to see what it has to do with the Popham Colony. If it could be referred to any one in particular, it must have been the then transporting of such people as he talks of to Virginia. Next, lie asserts that the Colony only occupied " a few acres of ground on the promontory of Sabino." Will he tell how many more acres were really occupied at Jamestown or Plymouth the first six months of their existence ? 60 Then comes a lepetition of the old traditionary story published doiibting-ly by Williamson. A venerable New England writer says, " tradition is the biggest liar in the world," and, in this case, I certainly acquiesce in his assertion, and I doubt if any respecta- ble historian would think of repeating so questionable a tale. In speaking of the end of the colony, by reason of the death of the two Pophams, he says, '^ did it ever occur to ' Sabino ' that his colony must liave had a slender foundation to have fallen into ruins at the death of two out of a hundred and twenty per- sons ? " Will he tell us how many more than the death of the two most prominent persons at Plymouth would have . caused its abandonment during their extremity in the spring of 1621 ? Certainly, not many. Then comes near a column of abuse on the Chief Justice, with abundant extracts from his biographers which may all be true ; but, if so, his appointment and continuance on the bench was a disgrace and shame to Queen Elizabeth and the leading men of her reign. And then he comes to that cannon story again. Did it ever occur to him, that, if the statement were true, the returning colonists would have related it at home ? For such things always come out; and the Pophamites had as bitter enemies there as P. is, and so it would have been a part of the authentic history of that expedition. Have there not been much worse outrages on the poor Indian all over our country since ? And then he repeats his doubts about the arrival of that pretty pinnace in England, of which there can be no more question than of the return of many of the early emigrant ships which carried back passengers who were known to have reached there, while there is no mention of the ships. But he states " Brief Relation says nothing about the arrival of either vessel : it records simply the arrival of these people here in England." Well that out-Herods Herod : how does he expect they got there ? He certainly knows they embarked in both ves- sels, for Strachey says, " Wherefore they all ymbarqued in this new arrived ship and in the new pynnace, the Virginia, and set 61 saile for England." Now, I advise this learned pundit to look among his mass of newspapers ; and, if he finds the London Ship- ping List of that time, he may be enlightened. And if he still doubts let him ask the opinion of any of our best writers on New England history, and my word for it he will not find one to in- dorse his views. One, certainly, whose opinion is of the greatest weight, and as anti-Popham as himself, has given a decided nega- tive to his assertions. And now comes a long dissertation on the blessings that have been experienced in Maine, by Massachusetts extending its gov- ernment over it. Some of these moral reflections may be true, but many of the inhabitants of that territory did not then see it, I certainly agree with him in his appreciation of the energy and intelligence of the settlers of Maine and their descendants. They are equal to, and very much resemble, those of the other New England States ; but what this has to do with Popham, he don't tell us. And, finally, he undertakes in a note to give the writer of that famous letter about the ship a kick, by stating that a writer in a Portland paper has had his article badly printed by having it done so far from home ; and, when revised, he will give it the attention it deserves. Very kind. Having made a somewhat rapid survey of his three or four heavy columns, " a mighty maze, and yet without a plan," I will look at his famous first attack, or, as the writer in the Portland Advertiser calls it, " the fire of his skirmish line;" and will now give his assertions there a passing notice, glancing over his attack on the Memorial Volume, the defence of Gorges, and his abuse of their authors, who are perfectly able to defend themselves, and may do so hereafter. He talks strongly about " historical verities : " let us see how fairly he treats authentic history. And first, will he tell us where he finds the colonists called " convicted felons," " cowards. Old Bailey convicts and knaves ? " and that " they had saved their necks by emigrating," etc., etc. ? Can he point to the book and the page for these " his- 62 toiical verities " ? He ma}- it is true quote a writer who says " many of them were endangered of the law." So were many of the Plymouth colonists, — to their honor, when we consider what law was, and what protection human rights had under James I. Again, let us look at his assertions relative to that " pretty pinnace." In his " first consideration," he argues that a sea-worthy vessel was never built by the colonists ; and, by inference, would make us believe that it was not built at all, saying " there was not time between the 15th of December and spring to build a sea-worthy vessel," — when not a person but himself who ever pe- rused " Brief Relation " or " Strachey " doubted the building and sailing for England of such a ship. Next, '^ that they had no need of a vessel." As if they did not know their own wants better than we do. Can there be much doubt it was the inten- tion of the projectors to have a vessel built, and that for this pur- pose they sent over " Master Digby and the carpenters " ? And then he coolly states she was built of " green pine," and repeat- edly calls her a " fishing boat," and implies that she went a fish- ing. Will he also give his authority for these statements ? Every reader of history knows these assertions are untrue ; and till he can clear himself of this charge, let him not undertake to lecture others on " historical verities." It will be seen that I have not noticed his argument relative to the craft built by the French at Port Royal, and which by almost a miracle carried the survivors to their homes ; for the reason that we were considering English occupation of New England, and that alone. French enterprise and colonization was an entirely different affair, and had nothing to do with the subject under consideration ; and the writer of '^ the letter" could not fairly have anticipated that it could be made to refer to any but Englishmen. It will also be noticed that I have not under- taken to advocate or indorse the Popham enterprise and its effects in general, but only to show up some of the errors of its 63 opponents. There is and will be a wide difference of opinion on that point ; but all will agree that it has been of great benefit to printers, and that they have shed a larger quantity of ink in elucidating these controversies than was lost in blood in " P.'s " imaginary fights with the Indians at Sabino. Having made a running review of "P.'s" long columns, I would in conclusion offer him some advice, which, I trust, he will receive in the same kind way in which it is given. First, do not fear that Popham history will ever in the slightest way overshadow the lustre of Old Plymouth and Massachusetts Bay. They stand too firm to be shaken : their true glories will con- tinue to brighten and expand through ages yet to come, till they are appreciated and acknowledged throughout the world. Don't look on the very worst side of history : much of it is bad enough at best ; and we can hardly read some of the annals of our own ancestors, written by themselves, without a blush. Do not write so ferociously : people are not frightened by ink, particularly Pophamites. " A kind word turneth away wrath." Don't ruin that preface to the reprint which you have had some two years in process of incubation, by bringing Popham and Gorges into it, Avhen there is no occasion for it. And, as a general amnesty, even for the deepest crimes, is the order of the day, you had better accept it on the following cheap terms, viz., as hot weather is approaching, and, if you have not killed out the Pophamites entirely, — and I don't really think you have even rufiied a feather, — they will in August have their picnic cele- bration at Sabino as usual, now let us both attend. Then, after partaking of their chowder, we will smoke the calumet of peace ; drink inspiration — if we can — from that ancient well, but certainly good cool water, and something in it, if you say so ; and finally bury the hatchet in the remains of that old ditch; and pledge ourselves to everlasting peace. June, 1866. Sagadahoc. // BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE POPHAM COLONY. DOCUMENTS CIRCULATED BEFORE AND AT THE FIRST CELEBRATION, AUGUST 29, 18G2. " English Colonization in America. | Public Celebration." A brief sketch of the Colony, and of the proposed Celebration, by Mr. John A. Poor; which was sent to invited guests. July, 1862. "Historical Celebration at Fort Popham, August 29, 1862." Programme of the Celebration. ''An Order for Morning Prayer" [read by Bishop Burgess]. 8vo, 8 pp. [Thirty-Four] " Toasts | for the | Historical Celebration. | To be arranged hereafter in appropriate order." 8vo. 4 pp. Cards (4^ by 7^ inches) : — 1. Latin Inscription for the Memorial Stone. On the re- verse, an English Translation. 2. Latin Inscription as before. On the reverse, " The First Colony I on the Shores of New England | was Founded here, | August 19th, 0. S., 1607 | under | George Popham. | A printed circular headed " Public Historical Celebration," dated August 12, 1862 ; which was sent to invited guests, with a "Private Explanatory Note," stating that the Celebration "is held under the auspices of the Maine Historical Society, which pro- poses to, print a full report in the form of a Memorial Volume." m NEWSPAPER ARTICLES WITH REFERENCE TO THE FIRST CELE- BRATION. Bath Sentinel and Times, July 10, 1862. Mr. I>. C. Bailey recommends calling a public meeting, to make arrangements for a Celebration. T/ie same, July 22, 1862. The Mayor of Bath calls the meet- ing, for Monday, July 28, T/w same, July 29. Report of the meeting. Portland Press, July 30. Report of the meeting. List of Com- mittees, etc. Daily Evening Globe, St. John, N.B., August 23, 1862. " The First English Settlement in New England ; " by John Wilkinson. Portland Advertiser, August 28, 1862, The Order of the Celebration. The same, August 30, 1862, An Account of the Celebration; with Mr, John A. Poor's Oration, The same, September 3, 1862. Mr. Poor's Oration reprinted with corrections. Mr, T, D, McGee's Address, and Mr, R, K, Sewall's Response to a Toast. Bath Times, September 1, 1862. An Account of the Celebration. Portland Press, September 6. Mr. John Neal complains of the arrangements of the Celebration. Portland Advertiser, September 8. Mr, Charles J, Gihnan, the Chief Marshal, replies, Portland Transcript, September 4, An account of tiie Cele- bration, Bruvsiviclc Telegraph, September 6, An Account of the Celebration. Christian Mirror, Portland, September 9. "A Sermon preached at Phipsburg, Me., on the Sabbath after the Celebration, by Rev, Francis Norwood." The some, September 16, Mr. John A. Poor i-eviews Mr, Norwood's Sermon. 67 The same, October 7. " Popham Discussion : " Mr. Nor- wood replies to Mr. Poor ; and " Popham Errata : " Mr. John Wingate Thornton reviews Mr. Poor's article of September 16. ISew JorJc Journal of Commerce, November 6. Report of the October Meeting of the New York Historical Society. Remarks concerning the Popham Celebration by Mr. George Folsom and Mr. J. R. Brodhead. New York CJiristian Times, November 20. Fuller report of the same. Boston Evening Traveller, November 21. Correspondence of Rev. William S. Bartlett, of Chelsea, and Prof. Emory Wash- burn, of Cambridge, concerning the Speech of the latter at the Popham Celebration. Cuvgrcgational Quartcrhj, Boston, April, 1863, Vol. v., p. 143— 160. "Colonial Schemes of Popham and Gorges. By John Wingate Thornton, Esq., Boston." A Speech at the First Popham Celebration, with twelve and a half pages of " Notes and Authorities appended as proofs." A few copies of this article were printed, with the following title page, as A Pamphlet. " Colonial Schemes of Poplium and Gorges, j Speech | of | John Wingate Thornton, P]sq., j at the | Fort Popham Celebration, | August 29, 1862, | under ihe auspices of the I Maine Historical Society. | Boston, 1863." 8vo, 20 pp. [This Speech is not contained in the Popham " Memorial Volume."] The above was noticed and discussed in — North American Review, July 1863, Vol. xcvii., p. 288. Christian Examiner, July 1863, Vol. Ixxv., p. 143. Historical Collections of tlie Essex Institute, August, 1863, Vol. V. pp. 175-192; by Mr. A. C. Goodell. Boston Review, November, 1863, Vol. iii., p. 641. Historical Magazine, New York, 1863, Vol. vii., p. 231. 68 Christian Mirror, Portland, April 28, 1863. Boston Journal, August 11, 1863. Boston Evening Transcript, April 24, 1863. Portland Transcript, May 9, 1863. A Pamphlet. " The Connection | of the | Church of England I with Early | American Discovery \ and | Colonization. | By the Rev. William Stevens Perry, M. A. ] Portland, Maine. | 1863." 8vo, 7 pp. Messrs. Bailey and Noyes, of Portland, Publishers, in April, 1863, issued a circular Prospectus for the publication of the " Memorial Volume ; " soliciting Subscriptions. " Memorial Volume | of the | Popham Celebration, | August 29, 1862: | commemorative of the Planting of the | Popham Colony on the Peninsula of Sabino, j August 19, 0. S., 1607, | establishing the Title of England to the Continent. | Published under the direction of the | Rev. Edward Ballard, | Secretary of the Executive Committee of the Celebration. | Portland : | Bailey and Noyes. | 1863." 8vo. 368 pp. Bound with the same : — "English Colonization in America. [ A | Vindication of the Claims | of | Sir Ferdiuando Gorges, | as the ] Father of Eng- lish Colonization in America. | By John A. Poor. | (Delivered before the Historical Societies of Maine, and New York.) | New York: D. Appleton and Company. | 1862." 8vo. [Ad- dress, 92 pp. Appendix, 52 pp.,] 144 pp. "Popham Celebration | at | Sabino, | August, 1863." Pro- gramme in broadside. The Popham Celebration of August 29, 1863, Mr. George Folsom, Orator, was reported in — Portland Daihj Advertiser, August 31, 1863. Portland Daily Press, August 31, and September 3, 1863. 69 Bnmsioich Telegraph, September 4, 1863. Boston Witness and Advocate, September 11, 1863. Boston Courier, September 2, 1863. Portland Dalhj Press, September 30, 1863: "Popham — Set- tlement — Memorial and Celebrations." Signed ''P." [Mr. Greorge Prince.] A Pamphlet. " The Beginning of America | A | Discourse I delivered before the | New York Historical Society | on its Fifty-ninth Anniversary | Tuesday November 17 1863 | By | Erastus C. Benedict | New York | 1864." 8vo, 64 pp. Portland Daily Press, January 29, 1864. Notice of Meeting of the Maine Historical Society, and of Judge Bourne's Reply to Mr. Thornton's Pamphlet. A Pamphlet. "An | Address | on the | Character of the Colony I founded by | George Popham, | at the | Mouth of the Kennebec River August 19th [0. S.] 1607. | Delivered in Bath, I on the Two hundred and fifty-seventh Anniversary | of that Event. I By Hon. Edward E. Bourne, | ofKennebunk. | Delivered and Published at the request of the Committee on the Com- memoration. I Portland: | 1864." 8vo, 60 pp. The above was noticed and discussed in — Christian Mirror, Portland, February 21, 1865. Boston Evening Transcript, February 13, 1865 ; by Rev. George E. Ellis, D.D. Bath Daily Sentinel and Times, August 30, 31, September 1, 1864. The same, March 16, 1865. "Fort Popham Colony." The same, March 16, 1865. "The Popham Settlement;" by Rev. Edward Ballard. The same, March 30, 1865. The same, July 7, 1865. 72 Boston Daily Advertiser, August 4, 1866: Report of the Meeting of the Maine Historical Society of August 2, containing a letter by Mr. John A. Poor, with regard to new evidences found in Carayon's Relations. The Popham Celebration of August 29, 1866, was reported iu Boston Daily Advertiser, September 1, 1866. Boston Joiirntil, September 1, 1866. New York Times, September 4, 1866. Neiv York Christian Intelligencer, September, 1866. Brunswick Telegraph, September 14, 1866. A Pajiphlet. " The Popham Colony | A Discussion of its Historical Claims | With a | Bibliography of the Subject | Bos- ton I Wiggin and Lunt 13 School Street 1866 " 8vo, 72 pp. LIBRftRY OF CONGRESS 013 983 519 1