LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 014 442 599 6 
 
 Hollio^ 
 
 pH S J 
 
 Mm Kirn F03.2193 
 
F 221 
 .V83 
 Copy 1 
 
 PROCEEDINGS 
 
 OF THE 
 
 Virginia Historical Society, 
 
 WITH THE ADDRESS OF 
 
 WILLIAM WIRT HENRY 
 
 ON THE 
 
 EARLY SETTLEMENT OF VIRGINIA, 
 
 FEBRUARY 24, 1882. 
 
ERRATUM. 
 
 In tlie first and second lines of the Address, p. lo, instead of the 
 words, "' i6ih June, /621" read '' jd February, 1620." 
 
PROCEEDINGS 
 
 Virginia Historical Society 
 
 Annual Meeting, February 24, 1882, 
 
 THE ADDRESS 
 
 WILLIAM WIRT HENRY: 
 
 THE SETTLEMENT AT JAMESTOWN, WITH PARTICULAR 
 REFERENCE TO THE LATE ATTACKS UPON CAP- 
 TAIN JOHN SMITH, POCAHONTAS, AND 
 JOHN ROLFE. 
 
 Richmond, Virginia. 
 
 PUBLISHED BY THE SOCIETY. 
 
 MDCCCLXXXII. 
 
 ^uy^ 
 
 Qb 
 
F'LX\ 
 
 WM. ELLIS JONES, 
 
 PRINTER, 
 
 RICHMOND, VA. 
 
ORGANIZATION 
 
 OF THE 
 
 Virginia Historical Society. 
 
 1882. 
 
 President. 
 ALEXANDER H. H. STUART, of Stauntoti, Virginia. 
 
 Vice-Pr'esidents. 
 
 CONWAY ROBINSON, of Washington, D. C. 
 WILLIAM W. CORCORAN, of Wasliington, D. C. 
 WILLIAM WIRT HENRY, of Riclimond, Virginia. 
 
 Corresponding Secretary and Librarian. 
 R. A. BROCK, of Ridiinond, Virginia 
 
 Recording Secretary. 
 GEORGE A. BARKSDALE, of Riclimond, Virginia. 
 
 Treasurer. 
 ROBERT T. BROOKE, of Rictwiond, Virginia. 
 
 Execzdive Committee. 
 
 BEVERLEY RANDOLPH \'^YAA.YO^Yi,]^..of Riclunond, Virginia. 
 
 ANTHONY M. KEILEY of Richmond, Virginia. 
 
 J. L. M. CURRY of RicJivi07id, Virginia. 
 
 HENRY COALTER CABELL of Riclimond, Virginia. 
 
 ARCHER ANDERSON of Rictwiond, Virginia. 
 
 WILLIAM P. PALMER of Riclimond, Virginia. 
 
 CHARLES GORHAM BARNEY of Riclimond, Virginia. 
 
 JOSEPH BRYAN of Richmond, Virginia. 
 
 EDWARD VIRGINIUS VALENTINE of Richmond, Virginia. 
 
 JOHN OTT of Richmond, Virginia. 
 
 WILLIAM A. MAURY of Washington, D. C. 
 
 JOHN B. WHITEHEAD of Norfolk, Virginia. 
 
 JMembers of the Committee ex-officio : 
 
 The President, Vice-Presidents, Secretaries and Treasurer. 
 
OFFICERS. 
 
 Committee on Fijiance. 
 
 WILLIAM p. PALMER, BEVERLEY R. WELLFORD, Jr., 
 
 WILLIAM WIRT HENRY. 
 
 Committee on Publication. 
 
 ARCHER ANDERSON, EDWARD VIRGINIUS VALENTINE,, 
 
 J. L. M. CURRY. 
 
 Committee on the Library. 
 
 ANTHONY M. KEILEY, JOSEPH BRYAN, 
 
 WILLIAM P. PALMER. 
 
 Committee on Incidental Expenses. 
 
 HENRY COALTER CABELL, EDWARD VIRGINIUS VALENTINE, 
 BEVERLEY R. WELLFORD, Jr. 
 
 Committee on Membership. 
 
 WILLIAM WIRT HENRY, CHARLES GORHAM BARNEY, 
 
 JOHN OTT. 
 
 Committee on Building. 
 
 JOHN OTT, R. A. BROCK, 
 
 HENRY COALTER CABELL. 
 
PROCEEDINGS. 
 
 The Annual Meeting of the Virginia Historical Society was 
 lield in the Hall of the House of Delegates of Virginia, in the 
 Capitol at Richmond, Friday, February 24th, 1882, at 8 o'clock 
 in the evening. 
 
 The meeting was called to order by Vice-President Henry, 
 and the Hon. Beverley Randolph Wellford, Jr., requested to 
 preside. 
 
 The Corresponding Secretary and Librarian, R. A. Brock, 
 in behalf of the Executive Committee, read the report of that 
 body. He also read the report of the Treasurer. 
 
 Mr. James Lyons, Jr., for the nominating committee, reported 
 a list of officers and committees for the year 1882. They were 
 unanimously chosen. 
 
 Vice-President Henry then addressed the Society. 
 
 At the close of the address the Hon, Anthony M. Keiley 
 offered the following resolution, which was unanimously adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That the thanks of the Society be presented to Vice President 
 Henry for his learned, able and instructive address, a copy of which is hereby 
 requested for publication with the proceedings of the Society on this occasion. 
 
PROCEEDINGS. 
 
 REPORT 
 
 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 
 
 We have just cause to congratulate the Society upon the 
 highly encouraging progress it has made during the past year, 
 both in membership and material acquisitions. 
 
 It is worthy of remark also, that the interest which has been 
 manifested in its welfare has not only pervaded our whole 
 country, but has extended across the Atlantic, and we have 
 had gratifying demonstrations that the descent of the " Ancient 
 Dominion," after a lapse of nearly three centuries, is still 
 warmly regarded in the Mother Country. 
 
 We have the great pleasure to report that the Society now 
 bears upon its rolls an aggregate membership of 592, which 
 comprises 30 honorary, 63 corresponding, 52 life, and 447 an- 
 nual members. Of the last named class, the whole number may 
 be said to have been acquired since February i, 1881, as, for 
 several years prior to that time, the Society being unable to 
 offer a publication as an equivalent, no subscription had been 
 asked of such members, and no obligation rested upon them. 
 
 The additions during the past year in the remaining classes 
 have been: 17 life, 13 corresponding, and 7 honorary members. 
 
 During the same period, the Society has added by gift to its 
 library and collections: 171 bound volumes, 304 pamphlets, a 
 number of files of newspapers, bound and unbound, many valu- 
 able MSS. and autograph letters of distinguished persons, and 
 various memorials and objects of interest. 
 
 The most important single acquisition was the generous gift 
 of the Hon. W. W. Corcoran, (a Vice-President of the Society), of 
 the Original MS. Records or Entry Books of the Colo7iy of 
 Virginia for the five years (^i^^2-i'/^7) of the administration 
 of Lietctenant- Governor Robert Dinwiddie. 
 
PROCEEDINGS. 7 
 
 Among other gifts of significance and value may be men- 
 tioned the following '• 
 
 The writing-table of George Mason of " Gunston," upon which 
 he prepared the famous Bill of Rights of Virginia — presented 
 by his great-grand-son, George Mason, Esq., Alexandria, Va. 
 
 The original commission (dated April 4, 1707,) of Robert 
 Hunter, (who being captured by the French on his voyage from 
 England, never served as designed) as Lieutenant-Governor of 
 Virginia — presented by Charles P. Greenough, Esq., Boston, 
 Mass. 
 
 Two maps of Virginia, bearing date 167 1 ; Notes on Colum- 
 bus, a privately printed and sumptuous volume; 21 bound 
 volumes of the New York World, 1861-1S67 inclusive — pre- 
 sented by S. L. M. Barlow, Esq., New York City. 
 
 The Correspondence of the Hon. Archibald Stuart, comprising 
 letters from many of the most eminent American statesmen of 
 his day ; the sword of Major Alexander Stuart, a patriot of the 
 Revolution, used by him at the battle of Guilford Court House — • 
 presented by the Hon. Alex'r H. H. Stuart (the President of 
 the Society), Staunton, Va. 
 
 The Adams and Massie family papers, a most valuable and 
 interesting collection, commencing in the year 1670; The pis- 
 tols and sash of a British officer, captured durmg the Revo- 
 lution, and afterwards used by Major Thomas Massie of the 2d 
 Va. regiment — presented by Mrs. Elizabeth, relict of the late 
 Col. Thos. J. Massie, Nelson Co., Va. 
 
 Various family papers and relics — presented by Colonel Thos. 
 Harding Ellis, late of Richmond, now of Chicago, Illinois. 
 
 An original Fry and Jefferson's Map of Virginia, of 1775 — 
 presented by the Hon. Robert W. Hughes, LL. D., Norfolk, Va. 
 
 A copy of Stuart's Indian Wars of Virginia in 1774, in the 
 autograph of Colonel Thomas Lewis — presented by Col. John 
 L. Eubank, Warm Springs, Bath Co., Va. 
 
 Various volumes from the library of Richard Henry Lee, 
 bearing his autograph — presented by Cassius F. Lee, Jr., Esq., 
 Alexandria, Va. 
 
 Six volumes of the National Intelligencer, covering the period 
 June 6, 1848 — May 28, 1857; Report of the Revisors of the 
 Civil Code of Virginia, made to the General Assembly in 1846 
 and 1847 — interleaved and annotated — presented by Col. J. 
 Marshall McCue, Afton, Va. 
 
 Four large boxes of newspapers and pamphlets — presented 
 by Mrs. W. B. Caldwell, White Sulphur Springs, West Virginia. 
 
 'Three large boxes of newspapers and pamphlets — presented 
 by Mrs. M. A. Sitlington, Millboro' Springs, Va. 
 
 The MS. Order-book of Col. Wm. Heth of the Revolution, 
 whilst encamped at Bound Brook, New Jersey, in 1777 — pre- 
 
8 PROCEEDINGS. 
 
 sented by the Rev. Philip Slaughter, D. D., Mitchell's Station, 
 Culpeper Co., Va. 
 
 Did not the limits of the present occasion forbid it, we would 
 have pleasure in rendering specific acknowledgment for many 
 additional memorials of value and interest. 
 
 The correspondence of the Society, and other duties incident 
 upon its reorganization, during the past few months, have been 
 so onerous, that the preparation of a catalogue of its library 
 has not as yet been within the accomplishment of the incum- 
 bent of the combined offices of Corresponding Secretary and 
 Librarian. 
 
 The number of bound volumes, however, may be stated as 
 exceeding ii,ooo, to which may be added several thousand 
 pamphlets. The Society's collection of portraits, twenty-eight in 
 number, comprises the following subjects: Pocahontas (two of), 
 Earl of Essex, Captain George Percy, Lord Culpeper, George 
 Washington, Martha Washington, Patrick Henry, Peyton Ran- 
 dolph, George Mason, Thomas Jefferson, Lafayette, Arthur Lee, 
 Edmund Pendleton, John Marshall, Duke de Lauzun, Gerard, 
 John Randolph of Roanoke, Hugh Nelson, Commodore Oliver 
 H. Perry, Governor Wm. B. Giles, Black Hawk, and Rev. M. D. 
 Hoge, D. D. The walls of the Westmoreland Club-House, in 
 which the Society is generously allowed its present quarters, are 
 hung with many additional objects of interest — engraved por- 
 traits, relics, historic documents, etc., the property of the Society. 
 The MSS. and autograph letters of the Society are now in course 
 of arrangement, the last in scrap-books. !Ji:til the task may be 
 completed, the definite number cannot be stated, but it is thought 
 t(; exceed 2,000. 
 
 The library is duly provided with handsome cases, and the 
 exhibit is one alike creditable to the Society and to the State. 
 So inestimably valuable indeed is it — so essential in the elucida- 
 tion of the history of Virginia, and in vindication of her fame, 
 and so irreparable would be its loss, that it is a duty from which 
 we must not shrink, to plead with this assembly its claims to a 
 durable repository, and due provision for its safety against all 
 accident. This can only be assured in the possession by the 
 Society of a fire-proof building of its own. Who, among the 
 
PROCEEDINGS. 9 
 
 pecuniarily favored of our citizens, will move in this important 
 matter ? 
 
 We beg to announce, that in pursuance of one of the offices of 
 the Society, an important contribution to history — The Letter- 
 Books of Lieutenant-Governor Alexander Spotswood, covering 
 the term of his colonial administration in Virginia (1710-1722), 
 a marked period in the development of the resources and 
 manufactures of the colony, and of its progress — is in course of 
 preparation, and that it is contemplated that the first volume of 
 the work will be ready for delivery to the members of the 
 •Society by the first of May next. 
 
 The evidences which the present recital give of the condition 
 of the Society, together with the knowledge of its recent un- 
 exampled progress (of which our citizens have been regularly 
 advised through the generous medium of the local press), are 
 assurances of fruition in its noble mission, which should claim 
 for it all needful sustenance from our own people of Virginia, 
 and this, it is to be hoped, will in the future be cheerfully 
 accorded. 
 
10 ADDRESS. 
 
 THE ADDRESS. 
 
 In a speech delivered by Lord Chancellor Bacon on the i6th 
 June, 1 62 1, in reply to the Speaker's oration, that celebrated man 
 g'ave utterance to these words: " This Kingdom, now first in his 
 Majesty's times, hath gotten a lot or portion in the New World 
 by the plantation of Virginia and the Summer Islands. And 
 certain it is with the kingdoms on earth, as it is in the Kingdom 
 of Heaven, sometimes a grain of mustard seed proves a great 
 tree. Who can tell?" What that great man hoped for and 
 hesitated to foretell has been realized in a manner far beyond the 
 most glowing conception of his wonderful genius. The little 
 English colony planted at Jamestown in 1607 proved to be the 
 germ of a great people. Less than three centuries have passed 
 by and they occupy a vast continent, and number more than fifty 
 millions. Had that feeble colony perished, as did those pre- 
 viously sent out from England, the Spaniards, who claimed by 
 right of discovery by Columbus in 1492, and by grant from Pope 
 Alexander VI, in 1493, and who were already planted in Florida 
 and Mexico, would have controlled the colonization of North 
 America, as they did that of South America, and to-day North 
 and South America would alike present the wretched appear- 
 ance of a mongrel population, the admixture of three races — 
 Spanish, Indian, and African. In a word, North America would 
 have been Mexicanized. 
 
 But an overruling Providence ordered it otherwise, and North 
 America, through the Virginia settlement, was secured to the 
 English race and to English civilization. 
 
 If the importance of an event is measured by the consequences 
 which flow from it, then the planting of the English colony at 
 Jamestown must be considered one of the most important, if not 
 the most important, of the events which have been recorded in 
 secular history. Not only followed from it the possession of this 
 vast and fertile continent by the foremost race of the earth, result- 
 ing in a people who have secured to themselves the highest. 
 
ADDRESS. 11 
 
 development and greatest political freedom, and have reacted 
 with powerful effect upon the civilization and institutions of the 
 Old World, but from this beginning there was developed a sys- 
 tem of colonization which has made the people of the little isles 
 of Great Britain the greatest power of the earth — the greatest 
 power which has ever been upon the earth, "a power [in the 
 eloquent words of Webster] which has dotted over the surface 
 of the whole globe with her possessions and military posts, 
 whose morning drum-beat, following the sun, and keeping com- 
 pany with the hours, circles the earth with one continuous and 
 unbroken strain of the martial airs of England." 
 
 Since the world has been so wonderfully affected by the plant- 
 ing of this colony, it well becomes us to preserve with religious 
 care the memory of the men to whom we are indebted for its 
 success. 
 
 The London Company which sent it out was composed of the 
 best and most honored men of the kingdom, and among the men 
 who composed the colony are names conspicuous for intellect 
 and public services; but the names oftenest mentioned in con- 
 nection with the Virginia settlement, and which have excited the 
 greatest interest, are those of Captain John Smith, the preserver 
 of the colony, and Pocahontas, the preserver of Smith, and the 
 constant friend of the English. For more than two hundred and 
 fifty years historians have delighted to relate their services, often 
 quoting the quaint, terse language of Smith's History in giving 
 his adventures, and especially his rescue from death by Pow- 
 hatan's " dearest daughter," at the risk of her own life, when as 
 her father's prisoner he was condemned to die. 
 
 In all that time no one discredited Smith's account of the colony, 
 if we except Thomas Fuller, whose groundless sneer at Smith in 
 his "Worthies of England," only demonstrated his ignorance of 
 the sources from which Smith drew the material for his history. 
 
 Thus the matter stood till the year i860, when Mr. Charles 
 Deane, cf Massachusetts, edited with notes, for the American 
 Antiquarian Society, of which he was a member, " A Discourse 
 of Virginia, by Edward Maria Wingfield, the first president of 
 the Colony," which was then first published from the original 
 manuscript in the Lambeth Library. This tract is found in vol. 
 iv of the '' Archaelogia Americana." In one of his notes to this 
 publication Mr. Deane suggested a doubt as to the truth of 
 
12 ADDRESS. 
 
 Smith's account of his rescue by Pocahontas. In 1866, Mr. 
 Deane edited with notes a reprint of "A True Relation of Vir- 
 ginia, by Captain John Smith," and renewed his attack on 
 Smith's veracity. During the next year Mr. Henry Adams fol- 
 lowed up the attack by an elaborate article, contributed to the 
 January number of the North Atnerican Review. In the year 
 1869 the Rev. Edward D. Neill published a "History of the Vir- 
 ginia Company of London," in which he not only endeavored to 
 destroy the character of Smith, but that of Pocahontas, and of 
 her husband, John Rolfe, as well. This author has been followed 
 by Wm. Cullen Bryant and Sydney Howard Gay in their His- 
 tory of America, published in 1876, and by others. 
 
 So persistent have these assaults been that it seems to be the 
 fashion now with those writers who are content to act the part of 
 copyists, to sneer at the veracity of Smith, the virtue of Poca- 
 hontas, and the honesty of Rolfe. The more generous task of 
 making their defence shall be mine. 
 
 In order that there may be a better understanding of the dis- 
 cussion proposed it may be proper to recall certain well-attested 
 facts relating to the early colonial history of Virginia. 
 
 The colony which made the first permanent settlement was 
 sent from England by " The Virginia Company of London," to 
 whom had been given the rights of colonization previously 
 granted to Sir Walter Raleigh by Queen Elizabeth. Sir Walter 
 had planted a colony at Roanoke Island, on the coast of North 
 Carolina, but it had perished, and his further efforts had been 
 thwarted. The London Company, during the year 1606, fitted 
 out their expedition in three vessels. The Sarah Constant, in 
 charge of Captain Christopher Newport, the commander of the 
 expedition, carried seventy-one men ; the Godspeed, in charge 
 of Captain Bartholomew Gosnold, carried fifty-two men; and the 
 Discovery, a pinnace, in charge of Captain John Ratcliffe, carried 
 i^^wenty men. Leaving the Thames on 19th December, ito6, 
 they were detained in the Downs by bad weather till the ist Jan- 
 uary, 1607. On the 26th of April following they were driven by 
 a storm into the Chesapeake Bay,* and on the 13th of May they 
 
 * The Indians had informed the English at Roanoke Island of this bay, and 
 it had been determined by Raleigh to attempt a settlement on it. When the 
 Virginia Company sent out this colony they were directed to search for it. It 
 
ADDRESS. 13 
 
 landed at Jamestown, where they determined to settle. Upon 
 opening- their sealed instructions they found that the London 
 Company had appointed for their government a council, com- 
 posed of Edward Maria Wingfield, Bartholomew Gosnold, John 
 Smith, Christopher Newport, John Ratclifife, John Martin, and 
 John Kendall. They chose Wingfield to be president. Captain 
 John Smith had been charged during the voyage with fostering 
 a mutiny, and was under arrest when they landed. His inno- 
 cence was made manifest, or, at any rate, his accusers failed to 
 convict him, and on the loth June he was permitted to take 
 his seat in the council. After exploring the James river to its 
 falls, Captain Newport sailed for England, on the 22d of June, to 
 bring additional colonists and supplies, and he arrived at James- 
 town on his return on the 8th January, 1608. He found that 
 matters had not gone well during his absence. Want of suit- 
 able food, and a climate to which the men were unaccustomed, 
 had caused much sickness and death. Among the council Cap- 
 tain Gosnold was dead, and Wingfield and Kendall had been 
 deposed, and were under arrest upon serious charges. The 
 difficulties through which the colony had passed had developed 
 the fact, however, that there was one man among them of genius 
 equal to the enterprise. That man was Captain John Smith. 
 He had commenced exploring the country and trading with the 
 Indians for corn, by which he supplied all the wants of the 
 colony, and three times he had prevented their abandonment of 
 the settlement in the pinnace, which Newport had left behind. 
 During one of his expeditions up the Chickahominy some of his 
 men had been killed, and he captured, but by address he had 
 procured his release, and been sent back with an escort to James- 
 town, where he arrived the day of Newport's return. Newport 
 found him, however, in great peril; for Gabriel Archer, Smith's 
 enemy, who had been improperly made a councillor during his 
 captivity, on his return had caused him to be arrested and tried 
 upon the charge of being accessory to the murder of the two 
 men he had with him when he was captured by the Indians. 
 Upon this pretext he was condemed to die, but the arrival of 
 Newport saved him. When Newport sailed again for England, 
 
 had been demonstrated that the bad harbor at Roanoke Island rendered that 
 place unfit for a settlement. 
 
14 ADDRESS. 
 
 on the loth of April following, he carried with him both Wing- 
 field and Archer. And, upon his arrival in England, Wingfield 
 wrote a defence of his administration, which is known as " Wing- 
 field's Discourse of Virginia." The Phoenix, commanded by 
 Captain Nelson, arrived after Newport's departure, having been 
 separated from him on the voyage from England. This vessel 
 returned to England on the 2d June, 1608, and carried a letter 
 written by Smith to a friend, relating what had happened in 
 the colony. This letter, as published in 1608, is known as 
 " Smith's True Relation," or, " Newes from Virginia.'' 
 
 Smith continued his explorations and trade, and with the 
 assistance of Pocahontas, who exerted a great influence over her 
 father, kept the colony well supplied with provisions. On the 
 loth of September, 1608, he accepted the presidency, which office 
 he filled with great credit. His adventures among the Indians, 
 as related by his companions, were very remarkable, and he 
 inspired the Savages with a wholesome fear of himself, which 
 proved of great advantage to the infant colony. Pocahontas was 
 his fast friend, and saved the English on more than one occasion, 
 not only by supplying their wants, but by informing Smith of the 
 plots of the Indians against them. During the fall of 1608 New- 
 port brought a second supply of colonists, and on his return to 
 England carried a map of the country and a description of the 
 inhabitants, prepared by Captain Smith, which were published 
 in 161 2 at Oxford. The returns from the colony had not been 
 profitable, and a change of charter was obtained on 23d May, 
 1609. By its provisions the government was no longer vested in 
 a president and council, but in a governor, to be appointed by 
 the London Company. Sir Thomas West, Lord Delaware, was 
 appointed governor, and he sent Sir Thomas Gates as his Lieu- 
 tenant, to reside in the colony. In October, 1609, Smith sailed 
 for England, and never returned. He left the colony at the 
 close of his presidency in a hopeful condition. It consisted of 
 upwards of four hundred and ninety persons seated at James- 
 town, and several other places. They had twenty-four pieces of 
 ordnance, and three hundred stand of small arms, with sufficient 
 ammunition, three ships and seven boats, a store of commodi- 
 ties to trade with the natives, the harvest newly gathered, ten 
 weeks provisions in store, six hundred swine, with some goats 
 and sheep, and many domestic fowls. They had become well 
 
ADDRESS. 15 
 
 acquainted with the natives, their language and habitations, and 
 could muster, if need be, one hundred well trained soldiers.* 
 Everything looked to a permanent and successful colony. But 
 the departure of Smith changed the whole aspect of affairs. The 
 Indians at once became hostile, and killed all that came in their 
 way. The ships were lost, the provision^ were wasted, and a 
 famine set in, accompanied by the diseases which invariably 
 attend it. Within six months after Captain Smith left them, 
 there were not over sixty alive, and these could hardly hope to 
 live ten days longer. Sir Thomas Gates had been shipwrecked 
 in coming over, and had remained at the Bermudas to refit. 
 When he arrived at Jamestown he beheld the ghastly spectacle 
 of a dying colony. He abandoned all hope of reviving it, and 
 taking the survivors aboard he set sail for England. Before they 
 got out of the river, however, they were met by Lord Delaware, 
 who had determined to visit the colony himself, and had brought 
 three ships well provisioned. He carried the remnant of the 
 colony back to Jamestown, and by his wise administration put 
 new hfe into the enterprise, the practicability of which had been 
 demonstrated by Captain Smith. 
 
 After Smith's departure Pocahontas refused to visit Jamestown, 
 but continued to show kindness to the English who fell into her 
 father's hands. In 1613 Captain Argall induced her to visit his 
 ship at anchor in the Potomac, made her a prisoner and carried 
 her to Jamestown. In 1614 she became a Christian, and was 
 married to John Rolfe, one of the colonists. Her marriage 
 brought peace with the Indians. Sir Thomas Dale, who was 
 
 * This statement of the condition of the colony is taken from the Oxford Tract, 
 compiled from the writings of Smith's companions; and from Piirchas' Pilgrims, 
 vol. iv, p. 1 73 1, where it is taken from the same writers. It has been disputed 
 chiefly upon the statements of the Virginia Assembly in 1624, styled "A Brief e 
 Declaration of the plantation of Virginia during the first 12 years, &c ," vol. i 
 of Colonial Records of Virginia. This paper states (p. 70) that the men landed 
 by Sir Thomas Gates fell upon the seven acres of corn planted, "and in three 
 days, at the most, wholly devoured it." Doubtless the words, "the harvest 
 newly gathered," used at a later date, referred to the harvest of the Indians, 
 for which there were ample commodities to trade. 
 
 Raleigh Crashaw was a member of the Assembly of 1624, and he endorsed 
 Smith's History of Virginia, which copies this statement from the Oxfonl Tract. 
 The account of suffering afterwards carried to England by the Swallow, referred 
 to what happened after Smith left the colony. 
 
16 ADDRESS. 
 
 acting- as governor, carried her with her husband and child to 
 England in 1616, where she was handsomely entertained by the 
 London Company and others, the queen and her court paying 
 her marked attention. As she was about to return to Virginia 
 she was taken sick, and died at Gravesend on the 21st of March, 
 1617. 
 
 The grounds of Mr. Deane's attack on Smith's veracity may- 
 be briefly stated as follows: Smith came to Virginia in 1607 and 
 returned to England in 1609. Accounts of what happened 
 during his stay in the colony were written by himself and others,, 
 and many publications concerning the early history of the 
 colony were made, but no mention was made in any publication 
 of Smith's rescue by Pocahontas, as is claimed, till 1622, when 
 Smith published a second edition of a tract entitled " New Eng- 
 land Trials," which contains an allusion to it ; and it was only in 
 Smith's "General History of Virginia," published in 1624, that 
 the full details were given. It is charged that the prominence 
 to which Pocahontas had attained in 1616 induced Smith to in- 
 vent the story, in order that he might associate her name with his 
 own. Mr. Deane also claimed that the account of Smith's treat- 
 ment at the hands of the Indians while their prisoner, given at 
 the time in his letter known as the "True Relation," differs ma- 
 terially from that given in the " General History," and that all 
 the later accounts given by Smith of his early adventures show 
 considerable embellishment, and are unworthy of belief 
 
 Those who have followed in the wake of Mr. Deane have en- 
 deavored to point out many inconsistencies between the accounts 
 given by Smith in his different publications relating to the same 
 matters, and he has been painted by one at least, (Mr. Neill) as 
 a braggart and a beggar, and unworthy of belief generally. 
 
 It is proposed to examine these several grounds of attack in 
 detail, and to show that in no instance has a falsehood been 
 fixed on Smith, but that his writings, where they have been dis- 
 puted, are so fully sustained that they constrain our belief. 
 
 The first ground of attack is the alleged omission of all allu- 
 sion to Smith's rescue in his early writings and those of his con- 
 temporaries. If this be shown, and cannot be properly explained, 
 it will beyond doubt give rise to a painful suspicion as to the 
 truth of the subsequent account, given after Pocahontas had be- 
 come an object of public interest. But it will only raise doubt 
 
ADDRESS. IT 
 
 as to Smith's veracity. A mere failure of the early writers to 
 mention the incident does not amount to proof that it never oc- 
 curred. If, however, the silence of these earlier publications can 
 be satisfactorily explained tlien the attack based upon it utterly 
 fails. 
 
 The books which relate to the early history of the colony,. 
 and which it is claimed should have noticed the rescue, are — 
 
 1. "A True Relation of Virginia," or " Newes from Vir- 
 ginia," the letter written by Captain John Smith, and pu*blished 
 in London 1608. 
 
 2. " A Discourse of Virginia," written by Edward Maria 
 Wingfield, the first president, and printed first in i860. 
 
 3. "Historic of Travaile into Virginia," by Wm. Strachey^ 
 secretary of the colony from 1610 to 1612, printed first in 1849. 
 
 4. " The proceedings of the English colonic in Virginia since 
 their first beginning from England in the yeere of our Lord 
 1606," printed at Oxford 1612, and known as the second or his- 
 torical part of the " Oxford Tract," Smith's map and description 
 of the country being the first part. 
 
 5. " Purchas' Pilgrimage," by the Rev. Samuel Purchas, 
 printed in 1613, and republished in 1614, 1617, and 1626. 
 
 6. " A True Discourse of the present estate of Virginia," &c., 
 by Ralph Hamor, late secretary in the colony, printed in 161 5. 
 
 As the first of these publications was written by Captain Smith 
 himself, and gives an account of his captivity among the In- 
 dians, its failure to record his rescue by Pocahontas is considered 
 the strongest evidence of the falsity of the account given by him 
 years afterwards. Indeed the force of the attack upon Smith, 
 inaugurated by Mr. Deane, will be found in this alleged omission. 
 But what are we to think of the argument when we learn, what 
 is undoubtedly true, that this letter has never been published as 
 Smith wrote it. Parts of it were suppressed by the person who 
 published it, who, in a preface signed with his initials "J. H.," 
 states that fact, and this preface was republished by Mr. Deane 
 in 1866, along with the garbled letter. The preface gives an ac- 
 count of how the publisher came by the manuscript, and of a 
 mistake in printing some of the copies under the name of Thomas 
 Watson instead of Captain Smith, the true writer, and then these 
 words follow : " Somwhat more was by him written, which 
 
18 ADDRESS. 
 
 being, as I thought, (fit to be private,) I would not adventure to 
 make it publicke." 
 
 What was thus omitted fi-om the letter in its publication has 
 never been known. Until the letter has been reproduced as 
 Smith wrote it, however, it is simply absurd to attempt to build 
 an argument against Smith's veracity upon its alleged omissions. 
 This answer to the main ground of attack would seem to be com- 
 plete, and yet more may be added. We are not left entirely in 
 the darS; as to what was omitted by the publisher. He continues 
 his preface as follows : " What may be expected concerning the 
 scituation of the country, the nature of the clime, number of our 
 people there resident, the manner of their government and living, 
 the commodities to be produced, and the end and effect it may 
 come too, I can say nothing more then is here written. Only 
 what I have learned and gathered from generall consent of all (that 
 I have conversed with all) as well marriners as others which have 
 had employment that way, is that the country is excellent and 
 pleasant, the clime temperate and healthfull, the ground fertill 
 and good, the commodities to be expected (if well followed) 
 many, for our people, the worst being already past, these former 
 having indured the heate of the day, whereby those that shall 
 succeede may at ease labour for their profit in the most sweete, 
 cool, and temperate shade." 
 
 Two things are evident from these sentences, one, that what was 
 omitted could only relate to the narrative of what had happened 
 to the colonists, all else had been given fully to the public; 
 another, that the desire of the publisher was to encourage further 
 emigration to Virginia, and therefore what he left out of the nar- 
 rative was in all probability matters which might tend to dis- 
 courage emigrants. 
 
 This concealment of all matters tending to discourage emigra- 
 tion was enjoined on the colonists by the London Company, in 
 the instructions given them when they sailed, A copy of these 
 instructions is in the Library of Congress in manuscript. It has 
 been printed by Mr. Neill, in his " History of the Virginia Com- 
 pany of London," pp. 8 to 14 inclusive. 
 
 In it we find the following words, " You shall do well to send a 
 perfect relation by Captain Newport of all that is done, what 
 height you are seated, how far into the land, what commodities 
 
ADDRESS. 
 
 19 
 
 you find, what soil, woods and their several kinds, and so of all 
 other things else to advertise particularly ; and to suffer no man 
 to return but by passport ft-om the President and Counsel, nor to 
 write any letters of anything that may discourage others." * * 
 " Lastly and chiefly the way to prosper and achieve good success, 
 is to make yourselves all of one mind, for the good of your 
 country and your own, and to serve and fear God, the Giver of 
 all Goodness, for every plantation which our Heavenly Father 
 hath not planted shall be rooted out." 
 
 It is very probable from his preface that the publisher of the 
 "True Relation" was a member of the London Company. He 
 says, " happening upon this relation by chance, (as I take it at 
 second or third hand) induced thereunto by divers well wishers 
 of the action, and none wishing better towards it than myself, 
 so faire footh as my poore abilitie can or may stretch too, I 
 thought good to pubhsh it." 
 
 He doubtless knew of the instructions of the Company to the 
 colonists, and whatever he found in the letter of Smith which, 
 in his judgment, was contrary to those instructions, and should 
 not have been made public, he suppressed. Certain it is we 
 find either as the work of Smith, or of the publisher, that several 
 matters well attested by writers who published later, were omitted 
 from this letter as published. 
 
 The following may be noted in this connection. During the 
 voyage out. Smith was arrested on the charge of being impli- 
 cated in an intended mutiny, and was thereby prevented from 
 taking his seat in the Council for some time after the arrival at 
 Jamestown. This is stated in the Oxford Tract, and the state- 
 ment is corroborated by Wingfield in his " Discourse of Vir- 
 ginia," in his admission that he was fined ^200 for slander in 
 making the charge. No mention is made, however, of the 
 charge, of the arrest, nor of the detention from his seat, in the 
 " True Relation." The Oxford Tract informs us of three several 
 efforts to abandon the colony, which were prevented by Smith 
 at considerable personal hazard, and Wingfield admits that he 
 offered ;^ioo towards "fetching home the collonye, if the action 
 was given over." No mention is made of these efforts to aban- 
 don the colony in Smith's letter, as published. The only pas- 
 sages which seem to make any allusion to the matter are found 
 on pages 17 and 21. The first is in the following words : "Time 
 
20 ADDRESS. 
 
 thus passing away, and having not above 14 daies vituals left,, 
 some motions were made about our presidents and Capt. Archer 
 going to England to procure a supply." The other is as fol- 
 lows : ■' Our store being now indifferently well provided with 
 corne, there was much adoe for to have the pinnace goe to Eng- 
 land, against which Capt. Martin and myselfe standing chiefly 
 against it, and in fine after much debatings pro and con, it was 
 resolved to stay a further resolution." These passages indicate 
 no effort to abandon the colony, but seem to have been worded 
 so as to avoid that construction. 
 
 We have seen that on Smith's return from captivity, Archer 
 had him tried and condemned, as accessory to the murder of 
 his men who were slain by the Indians. Wingfield mentions 
 this, and that he was saved from death by the timely arrival of 
 Captain Newport. The " General History " also confirms Wing- 
 field's account, but the published letter of Smith makes no men- 
 tion of the matter. 
 
 The same reasons which determined Smith, or his publisher,, 
 to omit these well-attested incidents, doubtless induced the omis- 
 sion of the circumstances of Smith's rescue by Pocahontas, and 
 of his deliverance by the Indian chief, Opechankanough, soon 
 after his capture, when he was tied to a tree and his captors, 
 who had promised him safety, were preparing to shoot him, 
 
 As the unjust treatment of Smith, indicating serious conten- 
 tions amongst themselves, and the efforts to abandon the set- 
 tlement, would have a tendency to " discourage others," and 
 check emigration ; so it might have been believed, and doubt- 
 less was, that a publication of the treacherous disposition of the 
 Indians, which led them to break faith with their prisoners, and 
 to put them to death contrary to their stipulations of surrender,, 
 and after their King had professed friendship, as we shall see he 
 did, would have the same tendency ; and we have seen that the 
 colonists were forbidden to write anything home which might 
 have that effect. 
 
 Another reason may be assigned also for Smith's not mention- 
 ing his rescue by Pocahontas in this letter. We are told in the 
 Oxford Tract, that when Smith was arrested on the voyage to 
 Virginia, the charge against him was that, "he intended to usurpe 
 the government, murder the councell, and make himself king " ; 
 and when he was about to return to England in 1609, to be 
 
ADDRESS. 21 
 
 treated for his wound, his enemies trumped up several frivolous 
 -charges against him, and one was, that "he would have made 
 himself a king by marrying Pocahontas, Powhatan's daughter." 
 (See Purchas' Pilgrims, vol. iv, p. 1731, where Richard Pots is 
 given as authority for the statement which is taken from the 
 Oxford Tract.) There can be no doubt of the fact that Poca- 
 hontas was greatly attached to Smith. The writer just quoted, 
 in defending Smith from the charge, says, "Very oft she came to 
 our fort with what she could get for Captain Smith, that ever 
 loved and used all the country well, but her especially he much 
 respected, and she so well requited it that when her father in- 
 tended to have surprised him, she by stealth in the dark night 
 came through the wild woods and told him of it. If he would, 
 he might have married her." The "General History" states also 
 (p. 112) that "though she had beene many times a preserver of 
 him (.Smith) and the whole colony, yet till this accident (her cap- 
 ture in 1613) she was never seene in Jamestown since his depar- 
 ture." With such charges brought against him on the voyage, 
 and the disposition of his enemies to renew them. Smith might 
 very well think it most prudent to say nothing in his letter of the 
 affectionate conduct of the Indian Emperor's daughter towards 
 him. 
 
 But whatever may have been the reason that this letter, as pub- 
 lished, did not mention Smith's rescue by Pocahontas, enough 
 has been said to show that its omission affords no ground for 
 charging that the detailed account subsequently given, when the 
 reasons for silence had ceased to exist, was false. 
 
 The silence of Wingfield as to this incident was to be expected. 
 He and Smith were bitter enemies. Smith had recovered against 
 him in a suit for slander, and had been active in having him de- 
 posed from the presidency, and keeping him a prisoner. Wing- 
 field's object in writing was to defend himself, and to throw all 
 the blame he could upon his enemies. Although his " Discourse 
 of Virginia " purports to give what happened from day to day, 
 yet it was evidently written in England after his return. He tells 
 us (p. 91) that "somewhat before this tyme, (the execution of 
 Kendall) the President and Councill had sent for the Keyes of 
 my Coffers, supposing that I had some wrightings concerning 
 the Collony. * * * Under cullor heereof they took my 
 books of accompt, and all my noates that concerned the ex- 
 
22 ADDRESS. 
 
 penses of the Collony, and instructions under the Cape-mar- 
 chant's hande of the Stoare of provisions, and divers other 
 bookes and trifles of my own proper goods, which I could never 
 recover." In the preface, addressed apparently to the council in 
 England for Virginia, he says, " My due respect to yourselves,, 
 my allegiance (if I may so term it) to the Virginean action, my 
 good heed to my poore reputation, thrust a penne into my handes, 
 so jealous am I to bee missing to any of them." We may safely 
 conclude, therefore, that if he made any notes in Virginia they 
 were taken away from him, and that he only commenced his 
 manuscript, setting forth the defence of his administration, after 
 he was freed from the imprisonment imposed upon him in the 
 colony. 
 
 It would have been very remarkable if a writer so situated, 
 and having such an object in view, had recorded in his book the 
 passionate attachment of Pocahontas for Smith. He, indeed, 
 makes no allusion to Pocahontas at all, although it is very cer- 
 tain she was frequently in Jamestown before he left on the i6th 
 April, 1608, some three months after Smith's return from cap- 
 tivity. His account of Smith's captivity is very brief, and it 
 would probably have been altogether omitted did it not enable 
 him to strike at Archer, his bitterest enemy, who was, as he 
 relates, improperly sworn as one of the Council during Smith's 
 absence, and who attempted to put Smith to death on his return. 
 He relates Smith's voyage up the Chickahominy until he could 
 go no further in his canoe. He then adds the following: "Then 
 hee went on shoare with his guide, and left Robinson and Em- 
 mery, twoe of our men, in the cannow ; which were presently 
 slayne by the Indians, Pamaonke's men, and hee himself taken 
 prysoner, and by the means of his guide his lief was saved ; and 
 Pamaonke, having him prisoner, carryed him to his neybors, 
 Wyroances [chiefs], to see if any of them knew him for one of 
 those which had bene, some twoe or three yeeres before us, in a 
 river amongst them northward, and taken awaie some Indians 
 from them by force. At last he brought him to the great Powa- 
 ton (of whome before wee had no knowledge), who sent him to 
 our towne the viij of January." 
 
 This short passage is all that Wingfield devotes to the inci- 
 dents of a captivity extending through at least a month, and 
 which cover in narration a dozen pages of Smith's printed letter. 
 
ADDRESS. 25 
 
 The disposition to say nothing to Smith's advantage is apparent. 
 It is undoubtedly true that Smith so impressed himself upon the 
 Indians while their captive, that he was sent back to Jamestown 
 unhurt, and with an escort of honor. This we learn from " Pur- 
 chas' Pilgrims," at page 1709, of volume iv, upon the authority of 
 Anas Todkill, one of the colonists. Wingfield makes not the 
 slightest allusion to this remarkable fact, but credits the saving of 
 his life to his guide, whom Smith had tied to him when attacked 
 by the Indians, and used as a protection from their arrows, as we 
 learn from the " True Relation." Wingfield alludes to the inci- 
 dent in so loose a manner as to leave the impression that the 
 Indian guide saved Smith after his capture instead of before. 
 
 That Wingfield was very careless in his statements is abun- 
 dantly shown in his book. We need cite but one instance more 
 of his want of accuracy. We have seen that he states that they 
 had no knowledge of the Emperor Powhatan, before he sent 
 Smith back to Jamestown on the 8th of January, 1608, but at 
 pages 77 and 78 of his narrative he had previously stated that on 
 the 25th of June, 1607, this same emperor had sent a messenger 
 to Jamestown and sought their friendship. 
 
 We need not be suprised therefore that this careless writer, 
 whose sole purpose was to defend himself from the charge of 
 misbehavior in office, should omit all allusion to Smith's rescue. 
 
 William Strachey came to Virginia with Sir Thomas Gates, 
 who arrived on the 23d May, 1610. 
 
 Upon his return to England in 161 2, he published at Oxford a 
 book he styled " Laws for Virginia." Prefixed to this book is 
 an " Address to His Majesties Councell for the Colonie of Vir- 
 ginia Britannia," in which he says : " When I went forth upon 
 this voyage (right worthy gentlemen), true it is, I held it a 
 service of dutie (during the time of my unprofitable service, and 
 purpose to stay in the colonie, for which way else might I adde 
 unto the least hight of so heroicke and pious a building), to pro- 
 pose unto myself to be (though an unable) remembrancer of all 
 accidents, occurrences, and undertakings thereunto adventitiall ; 
 in most of which, since the time our right famous sole governor 
 then, now Lieutenant General Sir Thomas Gates, Knight, after 
 the unsealing of his commission, hasted to our fleete in the West, 
 there staying for him, I have, both in the Bermudas, and since in 
 Virginia, beene a sufferer and an eie-witnesse, and the full storie 
 
24 ADDRESS. 
 
 of both in due time shall consecrate unto your viewes, as unto 
 whome by right it appertaineth. * * * * Howbeit, since 
 many impediments as yet must detaine such my observations in 
 the shadow of darknesses, untill I shall be able to deliver them 
 perfect unto your judgments, I do, in the meantime, present a 
 transcript of the Toparchia^ or state of those duties by which 
 their Colonic stands regulated and commaunded," &c., &c. 
 
 His determination thus expressed seems never to have been 
 carried out. The only subsequent writing of the author on Vir- 
 ginia matters, of which the world has any knowledge, is a 
 volume published in 1849 by the Hakluyt Society, entitled 
 " The Historic of Travaille into Virginia," from a manuscript 
 of the Sloane Collection in the British Museum, edited by 
 R. H. Major, Esq. This volume contains two books, each hav- 
 ing ten chapters. The first, as we are informed by the editor, 
 the author designated, " The First Book of the First Decade," 
 and the second, "The Second Book of the First Decade." It 
 appears by this that the author intended to continue the work, 
 dividing it into sections of ten books, or decades. 
 
 The first of the published books treats of Virginia, the second 
 of New England, but neither enters into the history of the colo- 
 nies. The title pages show that such was not the object of the 
 writer. The book treating of Virginia has the following, " The 
 first book of the history of travaille into Virginia Britannia, ex- 
 pressing the cosmographie and commodities of the country, to- 
 gether with the manners and customes of the people, gathered 
 and observed as well by those who went first thither, as collected 
 by William Strachey, Gent., three years thither employed secre- 
 tarie of State, and of counsaile, with the right Honorable, the 
 Lord La-warre, His Majestis Lord Governor and Captain Gene- 
 ral of the Colony." 
 
 This book mentions Pocahontas in giving the names of her 
 father's children, and gives the several names by which she was 
 called. It also illustrates the manners and customs of the Indian 
 girls by describing her playing with the boys at Jamestown when 
 under thirteen years of age. Nothing is said, however, about her 
 services to Smith or to the colony, they being reserved, doubtless, 
 for the»proposed history. Much of the book is taken from 
 Smith's description of the country and its inhabitants, annexed 
 to his map of Virginia. The author evidently had the greatest 
 
ADDRESS. 25 
 
 confidence in Smith, as is shown by his reference to him on page 
 41, in speaking of some of the Indian tribes. He says: "Their 
 severall habitations are more plainly described by the annexed 
 mappe set forth by Capt. Smith, of whose paines taken herein 
 I leave to the censure of the reader to judge. Sure I am there 
 will not returne from thence, in hast, any one who hast bene 
 more industrious, or who hath had (Capt. Geo. Percie ex- 
 cepted) greater experience amongst them, however misconstruc- 
 tion maye traduce here at home, where is not easily scene the 
 mixed sufferances, both of body and mynd, which is there daylie, 
 and with no few hazards and hearty griefes undergon." On the 
 margin of this passage the author has these words, " A dew re- 
 membrance of Capt. Smyth, vide lib. iii, cap." This third book, 
 never written, so far as we know, was designed doubtless to give 
 the " accidents, occurrences and undertakings" in the Colony 
 during the time of Captain Smith, which embraced the first three 
 years of its existence. Had the author written this third book and 
 left out the rescue of Captain Smith by Pocahontas, it would have 
 been an omission of importance in this discussion, but that he left 
 the rescue out of a book only relating to the " cosmographie and 
 and commodities of the country, together with the manners and 
 customes of the people," is not at all remarkable and of no im- 
 portance whatever. 
 
 The next work relied on to impeach Smith's veracity is the 
 historical, or second, part of the publication known as the " Ox- 
 ford Tract." It has the following as a title page : 
 
 " The Proceedings of the English Colonic in Virginia since their 
 first beginning from England, in the Yeare of our Lord, 1606, 
 till this present, 161 2, with all their accidents that befell them in 
 their Journies and Discoveries. Also the Salvages discourses, 
 orations and relations of the Bordering nighbours, and how they 
 became subject to the English. Unfolding even the fundamental 
 causes from whence have sprang so many miseries to the under- 
 takers and scandals to the businesse. Taken faithfully as they 
 were written out of the writings of Thomas Studley, the first pro- 
 vant maister, Anas Tod kill, Walter Russell, Doctor of Phisicke, 
 Nathaniel Powell, William Phettyplace, Richard Wyffin, Thomas 
 Abbay, Tho. Hope, Rich. Potts, and the labours of divers 
 other diligent observers, that were residents in Virginia. And 
 perused and confirmed by diverse now resident in England that 
 
26 ADDRESS. 
 
 were actors in this busines. By W. S. At Oxford. Printed 
 by Joseph Barnes, 1612." 
 
 It appears by an address to the reader, signed by T. Abbay, and 
 a note addressed to Captain Smith by Dr. Symonds, and printed 
 on the last page of the volume, that it was compiled by Richard 
 Pots out of the writings of a number of Smith's companions in 
 Virginia, " whose discourses are signed by their names," William 
 Simons (or Symonds), Doctor of Divinity, then gave it an edi- 
 torial supervision, and passing through the hands of many to 
 peruse, it chanced in the hands of Thomas Abbay, who knowing, 
 as he says, the writers to be honest men, and being a witness to a 
 part of the transactions, published it. The first part of the Ox- 
 ford Tract consists of a map of Virginia, with a description of the 
 country, its climate, soil and productions, and an account of the 
 natives. This was the work of Smith, as we learn in his " General 
 History," where it is reproduced. The second or historical part, 
 contains none of Smith's writings. Dr. Symonds, in his note to 
 Smith, states that it was compiled from the discourses and relations 
 " of such which have walked and observed the land of Virginia 
 with you." It is a thin volume, and only purports to be a conden- 
 sation of the writings of the colonists. The incidents of Smith's 
 captivity are related in these words : " A month those Barbarians 
 kept him prisoner, many strange triumphes and conjurations they 
 made of him, yet he so demeaned himselfe amongst them, as he 
 not only diverted them from surprising the Fort, but procured 
 his owne libertie, and got himselfe and his company such estima- 
 tion amongst them, that these Salvages admired him as a demi 
 God. So returning to the Fort, &c." 
 
 The writings from which this tract was compiled have not been 
 preserved, and we know not what they contained other than what 
 is contained in the compilation. When they were penned, the 
 instruction not to write home " anything that may discourage 
 others," was still in force, and doubtless caused the omission of 
 many incidents of personal hazard. Whether these original 
 manuscripts contained any allusion to Smith's rescue, we can 
 never know with certainty, but the fact of its omission from a 
 condensed compilation of them, can have no weight against 
 Smith's reiterated statements concerning it. 
 
 The Rev. Samuel Purchas, in his work, called " Purchas, his 
 Pilgrimage," first published in 161 3, used the Oxford tract in 
 
ADDRESS. 2T 
 
 writing of Virginia, but condensed it further. He does not enter 
 into the particulars of Smith's captivity ; all that he devotes to it 
 is in these words : " but after a month he procured himselfe not 
 only libertie, but great admiration amongst them, and returning, 
 &c." Nothing, therefore, can be concluded against Smith's ac- 
 count of his captivity by reason of this book, more than is proved 
 by the omissions from the Oxford Tract. As this writer after- 
 wards bore testimony to the truth of Smith's " General History " in 
 more ways than one, it can hardly be seriously contended that 
 the omission from the several editions of his Pilgrimage of all 
 allusion to Smith's rescue, can be relied on to prove Smith's ac- 
 count of it false, even though one edition was issued after Poca- 
 hontas visited England. 
 
 The next writer, relied on by the assailants of Smith, is Ralph 
 Hamor. His book was printed in 1615, and bears the title, "A 
 true discourse of the present estate of Virginia, and the successe 
 of the aflaires there till the 18 of June, 1614, together with a rela- 
 tion of the severall English townes and fortes, the assured hopes 
 of that countrie and the peace concluded with the Indians. The 
 christening of Powhatan's daughter and her marriage with an 
 Englishman. Written by Raphe Hamor the yonger, late Secre- 
 tarie in that Colonic." 
 
 This writer does not enter into the history of the Colony during 
 Smith's stay with it. He came with Sir Thomas Gates, along 
 with William Strachey, in 1610, and his earliest historical allu- 
 sions are of that date. He tells of the capture of Pocahontas, and 
 of her marriage to Rolfe, but he makes no allusion to her pre- 
 vious history. Had he undertaken to recount her services and 
 left out her rescue of Smith, it would have been evidence against 
 the truthfulness of Smith's account, but it cannot be thought 
 strange that he did not mention this one incident of her previous 
 life, when he mentioned no other. This writer also declared his 
 intention to write a history of the Colony from its beginning, 
 which he never carried out, so far as is now known. 
 
 The assailants of Smith admit that his statements in the "True 
 Relation " are true. Indeed, they base their arguments upon that 
 assumption. If, however, the silence of Wingfield, of Strachey, 
 of the Oxford Tract, of " Purchas' Pilgrimage," and of Hamor, is 
 to be taken as evidence of the falsity of Smith's statement con- 
 
28 ADDRESS. 
 
 cerning his rescue, it will equally disprove the many incidents of 
 his captivity given in the " True Relation " and not mentioned in 
 these works. 
 
 Let us now examine the second ground of attack, namely, the 
 alleged inconsistencies between the "True Relation" and the sub- 
 sequent publications of Smith. 
 
 At page 1 6 of the " True Relation " an account is given of an ex- 
 pedition by Smith to Kegquouhtan, or Kecoughtan (now Hamp- 
 ton) to procure corn by trade with the Indians. No mention is 
 made of an attack on the natives. In the " General History," in 
 an account of the same expedition, at page 45, it is stated that he 
 fired on the Indians, and ca'ptured their idol, called "Okee." In 
 both accounts, it is stated, that at first the Indians treated Smith 
 and his companions scornfully, thinking they were famishing 
 men, but afterwards brought them such provisions as they needed. 
 The reason why the attack was left out of the letter sent to Eng- 
 land by Smith in 1608 is evident from the narrative in the Gen- 
 eral History itself After stating the scornful reception given 
 Smith by the Indians, it continues, " But, seeing by trade and 
 courtesie there was nothing to be had, he made bold to try such 
 conclusions as necessitie inforced, though contrary to his com- 
 mission, let fly his muskets, ran his boat on shore, whereat they 
 all fled into the woods," &c., &c. We find in the instructions, 
 sent with the Colony by the London Company, this direction, 
 " In all your passages you must have great care not to offend the 
 naturals, if you can eschew it." (See Neill's " Virginia Company 
 of London," p. 11.) 
 
 This was Smith's first trading expedition, and in order to sup- 
 ply his wants, he found it necessary to disobey instructions. We 
 can well understand why he might not choose to relate his dis- 
 obedience to orders in his letter to England, and his not doing 
 so should not throw even a suspicion on his statement subse- 
 quently given in the History. There is an expression in the ac- 
 count of this expedition found in the Oxford Tract, however, 
 which is corroborative of the statement of the attack found in the 
 " General History." The Oxford Tract has the following account : 
 " Being but 6 or 7 in company, he went down the river to Ke- 
 coughton, where, at first, they scorned him as a starved man. 
 Yet he so dealt with them, that the next day they loaded his 
 
ADDRESS. 29- 
 
 boat with corne." How he dealt with them is explained in the 
 account found in the " General History," It is apparent that there 
 is no contradiction between Smith's several accounts but a mere 
 omission of the attack iii one of them, for which the publisher 
 may have been responsible. 
 
 In the " True Relation " Smith gives an account of his capture, 
 in which he states, that having carried his barge up the Chicka- 
 hominy river as far as he could, he determined to hire a canoe 
 with which to continue his explorations. He thereupon carried 
 the barge back to the Indian town, Apocant, and left it there with 
 seven men, expressly charging them not to go ashore until his 
 return. He then took two of his own men and two Indians as 
 guides, and went forward with the canoe some twelve miles higher 
 than he had been able to go in the barge, and then going ashore 
 with one of the Indians, he left the other and his two men, Rob- 
 inson and Emry, with the canoe. He had not gone far before he 
 was attacked by the Indian chief, Opechankanough, with 200 
 men, by whom he was captured, and who informed him that the 
 men at the canoe were slain. In the " New England Trials," 
 published in 1622, in referring to his capture. Smith says, " It is 
 true, in our greatest extremitie, they shot me, slew three of my 
 men, and by the folly of them that fled, took me prisoner." 
 Both, Mr. Deane and Mr. Adams, are severe in their criticisms 
 upon this last statement of Smith, treating it as a slander upon 
 the men he lost. They claim that it is inconsistent with the first 
 account, and Mr. Adams pronounces it mendacious, and "credit- 
 able neither to Smith's veracity nor to his sense of honor." It 
 would have been more creditable to these critics had they read 
 carefully the several accounts given by Smith of this matter be- 
 fore they criticised any one of them. The " True Relation" does 
 not say what became of the men left with the barge at Apocant, 
 but the " General History," at p. 46, says of them, "but he was not 
 long absent, but his men went ashore, whose want of government 
 gave both occasion and opportunity to the salvages to surprise 
 one George Cassen, whom they slew, and much failed not to 
 have cut off the boat and all the rest. * * * The salvages 
 having drawne from George Cassen, whether Captain Smith was 
 gone, prosecuting that opportunity, they followed him with 300 
 bowmen, conducted by the King of Pamaunkee, who, in divisions,. 
 
30 ADDRESS. 
 
 searching the turnings of the river, found Robinson and Emry by 
 the fire-side, those they shot full of arrowes and slew. Then 
 finding the Captaine, as is said," &c. It is plain, from this nar- 
 rative, that the " want of government" of the men left with the 
 barge resulted in the capture of George Cassen, and the informa- 
 tion obtained from him enabled the Indians to capture Smith. 
 All seven of the men left with the barge went ashore, and as they 
 were armed, it was reasonable for Smith to have believed that 
 had they stood by each other and not fled, Cassen would not have 
 been captured, and if Cassen had not been captured, he himself 
 would not have been; when he says, therefore, "by the folly of 
 them that fled," in the passage in the " New England Trials," he 
 means what he described in the "General History" by the words 
 "want of government," and this he ascribes to the men left at the 
 barge and not to the men left at the canoe. So far from charging 
 the men at the canoe with having fled, he tells us in the "General 
 History " that he supposes that they were asleep when they were 
 killed. 
 
 Strachey, at page 52 of his book, gives a corroboration of 
 Smith's statement, that Cassen was slain because of disobedience 
 to the order not to go ashore till Smith's return. In relating 
 the manner in which the Indians put to death their enemies, 
 Strachey says: "Thus themselves reported that they executed 
 an Englishman, one George Cawson, whom the women enticed 
 up from the barge unto their houses, at a place called Apocant." 
 
 The several accounts given by Smith, of his treatment while 
 a captive, have been claimed to be inconsistent, and so deter- 
 mined has been the effort to show inconsistencies, that some of 
 the passages compared have been made to suffer torture. The 
 first passages so compared are the statements of what occurred 
 immediately on the capture. In the " True Relation " Smith says : 
 " I perceived by the aboundance of fires all over the woods at 
 each place I expected when they would execute me, yet they 
 used me with what kindness they could." 
 
 In the " General History," after describing his gift to their King 
 of his "round ivory double compass Dyall" soon after his cap- 
 ture, and their admiration of it, he continues as follows : " Not- 
 withstanding, within an houre after they tyed him to a tree, and 
 as many as could stand about him prepared to shoot him, but 
 
ADDRESS. 31 
 
 the King holding up the compass in his hand, they all laid 
 downe their Bowes and Arrowes, and in a triumphant manner 
 led him to Orapaks, where he was after their manner kindly 
 feasted and well used." The real difference in these accounts 
 consists in the latter giving the preparation to kill him, and his 
 preservation by Opechankanough's holding up to view the 
 wonderful compass. The kindness of their treatment otherwise 
 is stated in both narratives. When we remember that the 
 *'True Relation," which omits this incident, has never been pub- 
 lished as Smith wrote it, we cannot conclude that Smith in that 
 letter made no allusion to it. It may be that he gave it, and 
 his editor included it in the omitted items. 
 
 The printed text of the "True Relation" indicates, in fact, that 
 something was omitted from the manuscript just where this 
 incident should have come in. The reader will have noticed 
 doubtless that the sentence quoted from the "True Relation" is 
 ungrammatical and incoherent as it stands. If, however, some- 
 thing was omitted from the manuscript between the words 
 "woods'' and "at," we can understand how the want of connec- 
 tion in the sentence was produced. 
 
 It is claimed that the accounts of the provisions given Smith, 
 and the guard put over him the first night after his capture, are 
 conflicting, as they appear in the "True Relation," and the " Gen- 
 eral History." Let us compare them. The accounts of his first 
 night's treatment are as follows : 
 
 In the True Relation, " The Captain In the General History, " Smith 
 
 conducting me to his lodging, a quar- they conducted to a long house, where 
 
 ter of Venison and some ten pound thirtie or fortie tall fellowes did guard 
 
 of bread I had for supper, what I him, and ere long more bread and 
 
 left was reserved for me, and sent Venison was brought him then would 
 
 with me to my lodging." have served twentie men." 
 
 There is not the slightest inconsistency in the accounts. A 
 quarter of venison and ten pounds of bread were more than 
 enough to serve twenty men. The careless critics, however, have 
 confounded his subsequent treatment as detailed in the " True Re- 
 lation," with what happened on the first night, and thus have 
 created the apparent inconsistency they claim to have discovered. 
 After the passage just given the narrative in the "True Relation" 
 
32 ADDRESS. 
 
 « 
 
 continues : " each morning 3 women presented me three great 
 platters of fine bread, more venison then ten men could devour I 
 had, my goune, points and garters, my compass and a tablet they 
 gave me again, though 8 ordinarily guarded me, I wanted not 
 what they could devise to content me ; and still our longer ac- 
 quaintance increased our better affection," It is apparent fi-om 
 this that as they became better acquainted the guard was reduced 
 from the thirty or forty of the first night to eight ordinarily- 
 There seems to have been but little reduction in his provisions. 
 Three great platters of bread and more venison than ten men 
 could devour might still be more bread and venison than would 
 have served twenty men, and thus, as to the provisions, there 
 would have been no real inconsistency had this referred to the 
 first night. 
 
 After his capture, Smith was carried to several places by Ope- 
 chankanough, and at each found a house of the great Emperor, 
 Powhatan, In the " True Relation" (p. 30) he says, speaking of 
 this Emperor to Opechankanough, " to him I tolde him I must 
 goe, and so return to Paspehigh," (the Indian name for James- 
 town.) This statement has been criticised by Mr. Adams. He 
 says : " Only a few days after he (Smith) was taken prisoner, he 
 represents himself as giving orders to Opechankanough to take 
 him to Powhatan, and even at this time he knew he was to be 
 allowed to return to Jamestown." This, Mr. Adams thinks, is 
 inconsistent with Smith's statement in the " General History," 
 that he expected all the time of his imprisonment to be put to 
 one death or another. 
 
 Wingfield, in his Discourse, (pp. 77-8,) states that on the 25th 
 of June preceding Smith's capture, the Emperor Powhatan sent a 
 messenger to Jamestown, offering peace and friendship. It was 
 natural for Smith, when the captive of a king who was in sub- 
 jection to the Emperor, to ask to be carried to Powhatan, with 
 whom the Colony had already entered into articles of friendship, 
 and had he demanded to be carried to him, he would have but 
 claimed a right, which, by boldness, he was endeavoring to make 
 his captor respect. The language of Smith, however, may as well 
 be considered a request as a command. 
 
 The treatment which he received when he was carried before 
 Powhatan is differently related in the " True Relation" and the 
 
ADDRESS. 33 
 
 " General History," and this difference has doubtless given rise 
 to the attacks upon Smith's veracity. Let us compare the two 
 accounts : 
 
 From the True Relation, " Hee YxomK\i& General History, ^'Y{z.\\x\g 
 kindly welcomed me with good woides, feasted him after their best barbarous 
 and great Platters of Sundrie Victuals, manner they could, a long consultation 
 assuring me his friendship, and my was held, but the conclusion was, two 
 libertie within four dayes,hee much de- great stones were brought before Pow- 
 Hghted in Opechanconough's relation halan, then as many as could layd 
 of what I had described to him and hands on him, dragged him to them, 
 oft examined me upon the same." and thereon laid his head, and being 
 
 ready with their clubs to beate out his 
 brains, Pocahontas, the King's dearest 
 daughter, when no entreaty could pre- 
 vaile, got his head in her amies, and 
 laid her owne upon his to save him 
 from death, whereat the Emperor was 
 contented he should live to make him 
 hatchets, and her bells, beads and 
 copper." 
 
 We have already seen that the omission of his rescue from 
 the " True Relation'' might well have been made by Smith, or by 
 the publisher of that partially printed letter, under the instruc- 
 tion from the London Company, the treacherous conduct of 
 Powhatan towards his prisoner and the colony being calculated 
 to discourage others from coming to Virginia. An examination,, 
 however, of the text of the " True Relation" just cited, discloses 
 the fact that the publisher must have left out a part of what Smith 
 wrote in describing his first interview with Powhatan, at which 
 interview his condemnation and rescue occurred. It is apparent 
 that all that is printed up to and including the word " dayes," 
 relates to what happened at the time Smith was brought before 
 Powhatan, while the words which immediately follow, only sepa- 
 rated by a comma, namely, " hee much delighted in Opechan- 
 conough's relation of what I had described to him, and oft 
 examined me upon the same," relate to what happened in sub- 
 sequent interviews, when some of the wonders of geometry and 
 astronomy, explained to Opechankanough by Smith, were the 
 topic of conversation. 
 
 The text, as it is, presents an abrupt transition from the inter- 
 
34 ADDRESS. 
 
 view of the first day to the interviews of subsequent days, which 
 can be satisfactorily explained only upon the theory of an omis- 
 sion by the publisher of part of the occurrences of the first day, 
 and an effort to conceal the omission by the arrangement of the 
 text presented. 
 
 The " True Relation," in describing Smith's return to James- 
 town, says: " Hee sent me home with 4 men, one that usually car- 
 ried m)'^ gowne and knapsack after me, two others loaded with 
 bread and one to accompanie me." The " General History" 
 says: "So to Jamestown with 12 guides, Powhatan sent him." 
 These statements are claimed to be contradictory. It is evident, 
 however, that in the first account Smith merely gave the number 
 of men detailed to wait upon his person, while in the second he 
 meant to enumerate the entire company sent as guides, probabjy 
 a misprint for guards. That the men sent with him numbered 
 more than four is shown by the parallel passage in Purchas' Pil- 
 grims (vol. iv, p. 1709), which is given from the writings of Anas 
 Todkill, and is also found in the " Oxford Tract." Says this writer: 
 " Powhatan having sent with this Captaine divers of his men 
 loaded with provisions, hee had conditioned, and so appointed 
 his trustie messengers to bring but two or three of our great 
 ordinances, but the messengers being satisfied with the sight of 
 one of them discharged, ran away, amazed with fear." We are 
 told in the " True Relation" that Smith had described to the 
 Indians the ordnance, in order to prevent an attack on the fort. 
 The messengers sent with his letter to the fort, while he was a 
 prisoner, had also seen these large guns. It must have been, 
 therefore, that the " divers men" sent to bring two or three of 
 them to Powhatan were more than four. 
 
 It is asserted by Mr. Adams and others, that Smith contradicts 
 himself by representing in the "True Relation" that the Indians 
 treated him with continual kindness, while, in the " General His- 
 tory," he says he was all the time of his captivity in continual 
 dread of being put to death. When we remember that he was 
 the captive of a savage people, who had killed his companions, 
 it does not seem strange that no amount of kindness could allay 
 his fears. It does seem strange that his critics should think 
 otherwise, and should read so carelessly the texts they criticise. 
 The passage they refer to in the " General History" is a part 
 
ADDRESS. 35 
 
 of the account of his return to Jamestown, and is in these words: 
 " That night they quartered in the woods, he still expecting (as 
 he had done all this long time of his imprisonment) every houre 
 to be put to one death or other for all their feasting." 
 
 We have seen that in the "True Relation," soon after his 
 capture, these words occur : " At each place I expected when 
 they would execute me, yet they used me with what kindnesse 
 they could." Afterwards it is related in this book that an Indian 
 attempted to kill him while under guard, and that one of the 
 places he was carried to was called Topahanocke, where it was 
 sought to identify him as one of a party who, some years pre- 
 viously, had slain their King, and captured some of their people. 
 Smith also tells us in this book that their excess of kindness 
 aroused his suspicions. He says: "So fat they fed mee, that 
 I much doubted they intended to have sacrificed mee to the 
 Ouiyoughquosicke, which is a superiour power they worship." 
 Smith had, before his capture, formed a very correct estimate of 
 the treacherous character of the Indians, and both accounts that 
 he gave of his captivity show that his distrust of them kept him 
 in continual fear of death at their hands. The expression in the 
 " History," " for all their feasting," indicates the kindness shown 
 him, which is detailed in the " True Relation." And if we have 
 no details of cruel dispositions recorded in the " True Relation," 
 such as are recorded in the " General History," we must remem- 
 ber that the " True Relation," as we have it, is a mutilated book, 
 and that there was a reason for leaving out of it such incidents. 
 
 It has been claimed by both Mr. Adams and Mr. Neill that the 
 accounts given by Smith, of what happened at Jamestown upon 
 his return from captivity, are inconsistent. These accounts are 
 as follows : 
 
36 ADDRESS. 
 
 True Relation. General History. 
 
 " Each man with truest signes of joy " Now, in Jamestowne they were all 
 
 they could expresse welcomed me, ex- in combustion, the strongest preparing 
 
 cept Mr. Archer, & some 2 or 3 of his, once more to run away with the Pin- 
 
 who was then in my absence, sworne nace ; which with the hazzard of his 
 
 counsellor, though not with the con- life, with sakre falcon & musket shot,, 
 
 sent of Capt. Martin : great blame & Smith forced now the third time to 
 
 imputation was laide upon mee by them stay or sinke. Some no better than 
 
 for the losse of our two men which the they should be, had plotted with the 
 
 Indians slew : insomuch that they pur- President, the next day to have put 
 
 posed to depose me, but in the midst him to death, by the Leviticall law, for 
 
 of my miseries, it pleased God to send the lives of Robinson & Emry, pre- 
 
 Captaine Newport, who arriving there tending the fault was his that had led 
 
 the same night, so tripled our joy, as them to their ends: but he quickly 
 
 for awhile these plots against me were tooke such order with such Lawyers, 
 
 deferred, though with much malice that he layd them by the heeles till he 
 
 against me, which Captain Newport sent some of them prisoners for Eng- 
 
 in short time did plainly see." land." 
 
 The statements, that upon his return Smith prevented the 
 running off with the pinnace, and caused the persons who had 
 plotted his death to be arrested, and some of them to be sent to 
 England, are those found in the " General History," which are 
 claimed to be inconsistent with the narrative in the " True Rela- 
 tion." It will be seen that while they are additional to the first 
 narrative, they are in nowise contradictory of it. That they are 
 true we have the testimony of Anas Todkill, then with the Col- 
 ony, who is cited by Purchas in his " Pilgrims," as recording that 
 Smith, on his return, "once more staled the Pinnace her flight for 
 England," and that Wingfield and Archer were carried to Eng- 
 land by Newport on his return. Wingfield states also that 
 Archer would have been hung, had not Newport advised against it. 
 
 Some of our critics have fancied that they have fixed a false- 
 hood on Smith in his account of his first landing on the island of 
 Mevis, related in the continuation of his " General History," and 
 found in the second part of the Richmond edition of 1819, chap- 
 ter 26. Smith says : " In this little (ile) of Mevis, more than 
 twenty years agoe, I have remained a good time together, to 
 wod and water and refresh my men." This was published in 
 1629, and refers to the touching at that island of the colony 
 under Captain Newport on its way to Virginia in 1607. Our 
 critics construe Smith's language to mean that he, and not New- 
 
ADDRESS. 37 
 
 port, was in command of the expedition when they touched at 
 Mevis. An examination of the context demonstrates that Smith 
 meant to convey no such idea. 
 
 In the beginning of this continuation, and afterwards in this 
 very chapter. Smith refers the reader for particulars as to the 
 planting of the colony at Jamestown to the " General History." 
 This book states the fact that Newport commanded the expe- 
 dition ; and the further fact that when they touched at the island 
 of Mevis, Smith was a prisoner under the charge of plotting a 
 mutiny. This last is referred to by Smith in this chapter in these 
 words : " Such factions here we had as commonly attend such 
 voyages, that a paire of gallowes was made, but Capt. Smith) 
 for whom they were intended, could not be perswaded to use 
 them." Had Smith intended to deceive, he would not have 
 referred the reader to another volume, of which he was then 
 writing a continuation, in which he had made a different state- 
 ment. But any one familiar with the history of the colonization 
 of Virginia will readily understand the expression, " my men," 
 as used by Smith. The orders for the expedition, as published 
 by Neill, show that soldiers under ofticers were a part of the 
 colony ; and Percy, in his narrative printed by Purchas in volume 
 iv. of his " Pilgrims," tells us that while on this island they "kept 
 centinels and Courts de gard at every captaine's quarter," fear- 
 ing an assault from the Indians. There can be no doubt that 
 Smith was one of the captains, not only from his previous mili- 
 tary training and rank, but from the fact that we find among 
 the verses addressed to him on the publication of his " General 
 History," some by soldiers, who state that he was their Captain 
 in Virginia. It should be remembered also that Smith was active 
 in getting up the colony in England, and, upon their landing in 
 Virginia, was soon looked upon as their leader. The " Oxford 
 Tract" tells us that he saved the colony from starvation by the 
 provisions he got from the Indians, and from extermination by 
 the control he acquired over the Indian princes, and that he 
 explored the country, built Jamestown, and prevented the colony 
 from abandoning it. In fact, that he was the real founder of Vir- 
 ginia.* It was not improper, therefore, that he should claim that 
 
 * It has been claimed that Lord Delaware was the real founder of Virginia, 
 because he prevented its abandonment in 1610, and by his wise administration 
 
38 ADDRESS. 
 
 honor, as he does in the conclusion of this chapter upon the isle 
 of Mevis. He says : " Now to conclude the travels and adven- 
 tures of Captaine Smith, how he planted Virginia, * * * you 
 may read at large in his generall history of Virginia, the Sum- 
 mer lies and New England." 
 
 But we need not pursue this charge of inconsistencies further, 
 as time would fail us to notice every inconsistency charged by 
 the numerous and often ill-informed assailants of Smith. Those 
 not noticed are even more easily disposed of than those we have 
 already exposed. 
 
 The bitterest of all of these assailants is the Rev. E. D. Neill, 
 who has written a history of the London Company. When King 
 James determined to take away the charter of the London 
 Company, in 1624, an attempt was made by its enemies to 
 obtain its records. Thereupon the minutes were copied for the 
 £arl of Southampton, the President, and this copy was after- 
 wards bought by Colonel William Byrd, of Virginia, and was 
 used by the historian Stith. Subsequently it came into the pos- 
 session of Thomas Jefferson, and was purchased with Mr. Jeffer- 
 son's library by Congress. These minutes only commence on 
 the 28th of April, 1619. In the Congressional Library there are 
 in addition two manuscript volumes, one containing letters of the 
 Company and the colony, with other papers, from 1621 to 1625, 
 and the other containing some copies of early colonial papers. 
 These valuable manuscripts were used by Mr. Neill in the prepa- 
 ration of his book. He says at page v. of his preface, " On the 
 15th of July (1624), the King ordered all their [the Company's] 
 papers to be given to a commission, which afterwards met 
 weekly at the house of Sir Thomas Smith [the former treas- 
 urer of the Company]. The entries in the minutes were dam- 
 aging to Smith and others of the commission, and it is presumed 
 that no great effort was made to preserve the originals. Re- 
 
 put the colony on a firm footing. 
 
 Lord Delaware should have all honor for what he did for the colony, but 
 before his arrival Smith had three times prevented its abandonment, had pre- 
 served it from starvation and destruction for nearly three years, and had left it, 
 on a change of administration, in a condition to take care of itself with proper 
 management. When a man goes out with a colony and accomplishes this much, 
 he may be well called its founder. 
 
ADDRESS. 39 
 
 peated searches have been made for them in England, but they 
 have not been discovered." 
 
 At page 211 of his book, in a note, he says: "Captain Smith's 
 ' General History ' was published after the Quo Warranto was 
 issued against the Virginia Company, and it is evident that he 
 wrote in the interest of their opponents. There is no evidence 
 beyond his statement, that the letters which he publishes as writ- 
 ten to the Company were ever received by them." 
 
 Smith's "General History" was published in 1624, the year 
 the Company's charter was taken from it, and when most of 
 the members of the Company from its foundation were alive ; and 
 yet Mr. Neill would create the impression that Smith forged the 
 letters to the Company which he published, when there were 
 hundreds alive who would have exposed the forgery. The 
 first letter given in the " General History" is found at page 200 
 (Richmond edition ), and was in reply to a letter sent to the presi- 
 dent and Council by the London Company, upon the return of 
 Captain Newport in the fall of 1608. Smith. had been made presi- 
 dent in September of that year. The "Oxford Tract" tells us, " by 
 the election of the Councell & the request of the company, Cap- 
 taine Smith received the Letters Patents, which till then by no 
 meanes he would accept, though he was often importuned there- 
 unto." It thus became his duty to answer the communication 
 from the London Company. 
 
 The second letter is found at page 79 of the second part of 
 the same edition. On the 22d March, 1622, there was a ter- 
 rible massacre of the colonists by the Indians. Smith, who 
 was then in London, relates that he " did intreat & move them to 
 put in practice his old offer, seeing now it was time to use both it 
 & him ;" and then follows the letter. The offer, which was to 
 return to Virginia, was probably made before 16 14, when he 
 commenced exploring New England. Now, until we know that 
 there is a complete collection of the company's letters preserved,, 
 nothing can be concluded against Smith, because his letters are 
 not found among the records. Of course no letters before 1621 
 could be found, as the collection commences during that year ; 
 and as we learn from Mr. Neill's book that many of the papers 
 were destroyed, and especially those which might be damaging 
 to Sir Thomas Smith and others having possession of them 
 under the King's commission, and as we find Captain Smith's 
 
40 ADDRESS. 
 
 letters reflect upon the government of the colony under Sir 
 Thomas Smith and his successor, we need not be surprised that 
 Mr. Neill has not found them in the collection now extant. 
 
 Mr. Neill attempts to produce the impression that Smith, if 
 wounded at all in 1609, did not leave the colony upon that 
 account, and because there was no surgeon there to treat him, as 
 he states in the " History," but that he left because he was 
 arrested upon charges and sent to England. It so happens 
 that the fact of his being severely wounded by an accidental 
 explosion of gunpowder, and the further fact that the lack of a 
 surgeon determined him to sail for England in a ship preparing 
 to leave Jamestown, are both related in the " Oxford Tract," and 
 that Smith copies the passages into his " General History." The 
 "Oxford Tract" relates also how charges against him, of the most 
 frivolous nature, were gotten up by his enemies after he had 
 determined to return. 
 
 It appears by the published list of original subscribers to the 
 London Company that Captain Smith only subscribed nine 
 pounds, and as in asking remuneration afterwards of the Com- 
 pany, he claimed to have spent upon Virginia " a verie great 
 matter," Mr. Neill concludes that in this he was false. In his 
 haste to condemn Smith he has not taken time to read him. At 
 page 102, of the second part of the " General History " (Rich- 
 mond edition). Smith states that he spent " more than five hun- 
 dred pounds in procuring the Letters Patents and setting for- 
 ward." His claim for special remuneration was not because of 
 his subscription to the capital stock of the Company, as every 
 member would have had the same ground of claim, but because 
 of what he had expended and accomplished in addition, as his 
 petition for reward, found in Mr. Neill's book, at page 214, plainly 
 shows. That the committee to which his petition was referred 
 allowed it, may be fairly inferred from a speech of Smith before 
 the Company, reported by Mr. Neill at page 386.* 
 
 * On the 4th of February, 1623, Captain Smith, in a discussion concerning 
 the salaries of officers, is reported to have said : " That havinge spent upon 
 Virginia a verie great matter, he did, by God's blessinge, hope to receave this 
 yeare a good quantity of Tobacco, which he would not willingly have come 
 under the hands of them that would performe the buissiness for love, and not 
 upon a good and competent salary." The same author shows that the Com- 
 pany owned much of the tobacco shipt from the colony, and Smith's expec- 
 
ADDRESS. 41 
 
 Another intimation made by this writer is, that as the records 
 •do not show that Smith's offer to the company to write a history 
 of Virginia was accepted, his statement in the book that he wrote 
 it at the instance of the Company, is false. Mr. Neill has given 
 us at page 210 the offer made April 12, 1621, which shows on its 
 face that it was made upon the request of some of the members. 
 What was the action of the committee to whom it was referred, 
 we know not, so far as Mr. Neill's extracts from the records go, 
 but as only a few of the papers of the Company have been pre- 
 served, nothing can be concluded from the absence of the com- 
 mittee's report, and it would seem unreasonable to discredit 
 Smith's published statement in regard to the matter, made when 
 so many witnesses were alive. 
 
 Without pursuing further the details of Mr. Neill's attack upon 
 Smith, it will be sufficient to expose the character of his book for 
 us to notice the authority he has followed in its preparation, and 
 the manner in which he has followed it. At page 16, in a note, 
 he says : " For the facts relative to the early days of the Colony, 
 I am indebted to Wingfield's ' Discourse of Virginia,' edited by 
 Deane, and Capt.- Newport's ' Relation,' first printed from manu- 
 scripts in vol. iv. Am. Ant. Soc. Coll." The " Relation " of Captain 
 Newport's discoveries in Virginia ended with his return to Eng- 
 land, June 22, 1607 and Wingfield's "Discourse" takes up the 
 narrative on that day. There is nothing derogatory to Smith in 
 the first. On the contrary, it shows that Newport selected him 
 as one of the persons to accompany him in exploring the James 
 river, and on his return had him sworn one of the Council. In fol- 
 lowing the narrative of Wingfield, however, Mr. Neill has shown 
 himsdf unworthy of confidence as a historian. The " Oxford 
 Tract" is entitled to the highest credit as a record of the early his- 
 tory of the Colony. The Rev. Wm. Symonds, a minister of high 
 character and considerable learning, compared it with the wri- 
 tings from which it was compiled. He then sent it to Captain 
 Smith with a note, printed at the end of the volume, in these 
 words : 
 
 tation could only have been founded on the allowance of his claim by the com- 
 mittee. The Company, however, was in difficulties, and its charter was taken 
 from it during the next year, and before Smith received any reward for his 
 expenditures and sacrifices. 
 
42 ADDRESS. 
 
 " Captaine Smith, I returne you the fruit of my labours, as 
 Mr. Crashaw requested me, which I bestowed in reading the dis- 
 courses & hearing the relations of such which have walked 
 and observed the land of Virginia with you. The paines I tooke 
 was great : yet did the nature of the argument, and hopes I con- 
 ceaved of the expedition, give me exceeding content. I cannot 
 finde there is anything but what they all affirme, or cannot contra- 
 dict : the land is good ; as there is no cities, so no sonnes of 
 Anak : al is open for labor of a good and wise inhabitant : and 
 my prayer shall ever be, that so faire a land may be inhabited by 
 those that professe and love the Gospell." 
 
 In this book we have the following account of Wingfield's 
 administration, commencing with the departure of Newport : 
 
 " Being thus left to our fortunes, it fortuned that within tenne 
 dales scarse ten amongst us coulde either goe, or well stand, 
 such weaknes and sicknes oppressed us. * * * * 
 Had we beene as free from all sinnes as gluttony and drunken- 
 nes, we might have bin canonized for saints ; But our Presi- 
 dent would never have ben admitted, for ingrossing to his private 
 (use) otemeale, sacke, oile, acquavite, beefe, egs, or what not, but 
 the kettel ; that indeede he allowed equally to be distributed, and 
 that was halfe a pinte of wheat and as much barly boyled with 
 water for a man a day, and this having fryed some 26 weeks in 
 the Ship's hold, contained as many worms as graines; so that 
 we might truly call it rather so much bran than corne: our drinke 
 was water, our lodgings castles in the aire. With this lodging 
 and diet, our extreame toile in bearing and planting pallisadoes, 
 so strained and bruised us, and our continuall labour ip the 
 extremitie of the heate had so weakened us, as were cause suffi- 
 cient to have made us miserable in our native country, or any 
 other place in the world. From May to September, those that 
 escaped lived upon sturgeon and sea-crabs, 50 in this time we 
 buried. The rest seeing the President's proiects to escape these 
 miseries in our Pinnace by flight (who all this time had neither 
 felt want nor sickness) so moved our dead spirits, as we deposed 
 him ; and established Ratcliffe in his place." 
 
 George Percy, in the fragment of his narrative preserved by 
 Purchas, relates that, "there was certaine Articles laid against 
 Master Wingfield, which was then President, thereupon he was. 
 
ADDRESS. 4S- 
 
 not only displaced out of his Presidentship, but also from being 
 of the Councell." 
 
 Wingfield, in his defence of himself, does not deny the charge 
 of attempting to make his escape in the pinnace while he was 
 president, although he denies the charge of feasting while the 
 others were starving, and attempts to justify his administration at 
 the expense of the rest of the colony. Purchas had before him, 
 and cited the " Oxford Tract" and Wingfield's " Discourse" in 
 preparing his books, and he knew personally no doubt the writers 
 of both works, as he took part in the affairs of the London Com- 
 pany. With this great advantage he follows the " Oxford Tract," 
 and condemns Wingfield's administration. Mr. Neill, however, 
 with nothing like the advantages of Purchas, follows Wingfield, 
 and discredits the other colonists. This might be attributed to 
 want of sound judgment alone had he faithfully followed him ; but 
 what condemnation is too severe for one who omits from his cita- 
 tions of the author he professes to follow, facts tending to justify 
 a good opinion of the persons that author was attacking, This 
 is what Mr. Neill has done. At page 15 he says: "Dissensions 
 arose during the voyage, and on the 12th of February John 
 Smith was suspected of mutiny." On page 21, quoting from 
 Wingfield the grounds of hostility towards him, he says: "Mr. 
 Smyth's quarrel, because his name was mentioned in the intended 
 and confessed mutiny by Galthropp." Mr. Neill makes no other 
 allusion to this charge against Smith, but leaves his readers under 
 the impression that it was true, or at least was never disproved. 
 Now Wingfield, in the very book relied on by Mr. Neill, states 
 enough to show that Smith was innocent of the charge. He 
 says : " The 17th daie of September I was sent for to the court 
 to answer a complaint exhibited against me by Jehu Robinson ; 
 for that, when I was president, I did sale, hee, with others, had 
 consented to run awaye with the Shallop to Newfoundland. At 
 another tyme I must answere Mr. Smyth, for that I had said hee 
 did conceal an intended mutany. I tould Mr. Recorder those 
 words would beare no actions ; that one of the causes was done 
 without the lymits mentioned in the Patent graunted to us. * * * 
 The jury gave one of them 100, & the other two hundred 
 pound damages for slaunder." This passage shows that the 
 charge against Smith was made by Wingfield during the voyage, 
 and was investigated in an action for slander, to which action 
 
44 ADDRESS. 
 
 Wingfield's plea was that the slanderous words were spoken 
 outside of the jurisdiction conferred by their patent, and that the 
 jury convicted him of the slander, and fined him two hundred 
 pounds. 
 
 Mr. Neill has not been content, however, to omit statements of 
 fact as to Smith alone. He has treated all of Wingfield's oppo- 
 nents in the same way. On page 19 he thus relates the deposing 
 of Wingfield: "At length a plot was formed by Ratcliffe, Smith, 
 and Martin, to depose Wingfield and form a triumvirate. On 
 the eleventh of September they brought him before them, Rat- 
 cliffe acting as president, and preferred the following frivolous 
 charges : Ratcliffe charged that he had refused him a penny 
 whitle, a chicken, a spoonful of beer, & given him bad corn ; 
 Smith alleged that he had told him he lied : Martin complained 
 that he had been called indolent. After this he was placed on 
 board of the pinnace in the river, and kept as a prisoner." The 
 charges here given by Mr. Neill, and he gives no others, seem to 
 have been verbal complaints against Wingfield, but not the 
 charges upon which he was deposed. After mentioning these 
 complaints, Wingfield says, " I asked Mr. President if I should 
 answere theis compl'ts, and whether he had ought els to charge 
 me with all, with that he pulled out a paper booke loaded full 
 with artycles against me, and give them Mr. Archer to reade." 
 None of these written charges are given by Wingfield, but he 
 relates how he cut short their reading by appealing to the King. 
 He adds : " Then Mr. Archer pulled out of his bosome another 
 paper book full of artycles against me, desiring that he might 
 reade them in the name of the Collony." He fails also to give 
 these articles, but says of them, " I have forgotten the most of the 
 artycles, they were so slight." Wingfield, while not giving the 
 charges in detail, however, is evidently endeavoring to defend 
 himself from them in his book, and we gather from the defence 
 that they were, as stated in the " Oxford Tract," and not as 
 given by Mr. Neill. 
 
 In order to strengthen his attack upon Smith, Mr. Neill brings 
 to his aid the Rev, Thomas Fuller, who, in his "Worthies of 
 England,"' gave a short sketch of Smith, in which this sentence 
 is found : " From the Turks in Europe he passed to the pagans 
 in America, where such his perils, preservations, dangers, deliv- 
 erances, they seem to most men above belief", to some beyond 
 
ADDRESS. 45' 
 
 truth. Yet we have two witnesses to attest them — the prose and 
 the pictures — both in his book, and it soundeth much to the 
 diminution of his deeds, that he alone is the herald to publish 
 and proclaim them." 
 
 This description is witty, but false, and thus very character- 
 istic of this writer. Fuller was noted for his want of accu- 
 racy, and especially was it shown in his " Worthies." The 
 material was collected during the civil war, and the book 
 published in 1662, after the author's death. One of the most 
 learned men of that century was William Nicholson, Bishop 
 of Carlisle, who published a " History of Libraries" in 1696. 
 In it he says of Fuller's "Worthies," "It was huddled up in 
 haste for the procurement of some moderate profit to the 
 author, though he did not live to see it published. It corrects 
 many mistakes in his Ecclesiastical Story, but makes more new 
 ones in their stead. * * =)^ His chief author is Bale for the 
 lives of his eminent writers, and those of his greatest heroes are 
 commonly misshapen scraps, mixed with tattle and lies." Alex- 
 ander Chalmers in his Biographical Dictionary, considers this 
 censure too great, but admits Fuller's inaccuracies, and speaks of 
 his "wit, which he could not suppress in his most serious compo- 
 sitions." 
 
 The Rev. James Granger published a Biographical History of 
 England in 1769. Chalmers testifies to its critical accuracy. 
 The author describes Fuller thus, " He was unhappy in having a 
 vein of wit, as he has taken uncommon pains to write up to the 
 bad taste of his age, which was much fonder of conceit than sen- 
 timent." 
 
 We need not be surprised, therefore, at finding that Fuller 
 sacrificed truth to wit in his sketch of Smith. That he has done 
 so is apparent to any reader of the " Oxford Tract," which was 
 compiled from the writings of eye-witnesses, and contains nearly 
 every incident of Smith's life in Virginia. 
 
 The latest attack upon Smith is contained in a volume written 
 by Charles Dudley Warner, Esq., and published during the year 
 1 881, by Henry Holt & Company, of New York. We learn 
 from the preface that the author was engaged to treat of his 
 subject " with some familiarity and disregard of historic gravity." 
 Accordingly we find the book is a labored effort to ridicule 
 
46 ADDRESS. 
 
 Smith, and the author has succeeded in making a caricature of 
 him. 
 
 But a single example need be given to show how utterly unre- 
 liable his picture of Smith is. At page ii6, in quoting from the 
 "General History" the account of the capture of Smith in the 
 Chickahominy swamp by the Indians, the following is given : 
 "Then finding the Captaine, as is said, that used the salvage that 
 was his guide as his shield (three of them being slain and divers 
 others so gauld), all the rest would not come neere him. Think- 
 ing thus to have returned to his boat, regarding them as he 
 marched, more than his way, slipped up to the middle in an 
 oosie creek, and his salvage with him, yet durst they not come 
 to him till being neere dead with cold, he threw away his arms. 
 Then according to their composition they drew him forth and 
 led him to the fire where his men were slaine. Diligently they 
 chafed his benumbed limbs. He demanding for their Captaine, 
 they shewed him Opcchankanougli, King of Pamaunkee, to 
 whom he gave a round Ivory double compass Dyall. Much 
 they marvailed at the playing of the Fly and Needle, which they 
 could see so plainly and yet not touch it because of the glass 
 that covered them. But when he demonstrated by that Globe- 
 like Jewell, the roundnesse of the earth and skies, the spheare of 
 Sunne, Moone, and Starres and how the Sunne did chase the 
 night round about the world continually : the greatnesse of the 
 Land and Sea, the diversitie of nations, varietie of complexions, 
 and how we were to them Antipodes, and many other such like 
 matters, they all stood amazed with admiration." 
 
 It will be seen from this that Smith was using an Indian as a 
 guide when he was captured. Of course he had learnt to con 
 verse with him. He had been in Virginia at that time nearly two 
 years, and had been constantly mixing with the Indians and 
 learning their language. In the " True Relation," quoted by the 
 author at page 104, Smith states explicitly that he and his guide 
 were " discoursing" when he was attacked. The reader will 
 notice that the Indians had taken him out of the swamp and car- 
 ried him to the fire he had left at his canoe, before he presented 
 the compass to their chief and entered into conversation con- 
 cerning it. Bearing this in mind, let us read Mr. Warner's com- 
 ment on this passage. At pages 122-3 he writes : "^^ should 
 like to think original in- the above the fine passage, in which 
 
ADDRESS. 47 
 
 Smith, by means of a simple compass dial, demonstrated the 
 roundness of the earth and skies, the sphere of the sun, moon 
 and stars, and how the sun did chase the night round about the 
 world continually ; the greatness of the land and sea, the diver- 
 sity of nations, variety of complexions, and how we were to them 
 antipodes, so that the Indians stood amazed with admiration. 
 Captain Smith up to his middle in a Chickahominy Swamp, dis- 
 coursing on these high themes to a Pamunky Indian, of whose 
 language Smith was wholly ignorant, and who did not under- 
 stand a word of English, is much more heroic, considering the 
 adverse circumstances, and appeals more to the imagination than 
 the long-haired lopas singing the song of Atlas at the banquet 
 given to ALneas when Trojans and Tyrians drained the flowing 
 bumpers, while Dido drank long draughts of love. Did Smith, 
 when he was in the neighborhood of Carthage, pick up some 
 such literal translations of the song of Atlas as this : 
 
 " He sang the wandering moon, and the labors of the Sun, 
 From whence the race of men and flocks, whence rain and lightning. 
 Of Arcturus, the rainy Hyades, and the twin Triones ; 
 Why the winter suns hasten so much to touch themselves in the ocean. 
 And what delay retards the slow nights." 
 
 The misrepresentation contained in the statement, that Smith 
 described himself as discoursing on these high themes while up 
 to his middle in a swamp, with an Indian who could not under- 
 stand a word of the language he used, is unpardonable. Equally 
 groundless is the insinuation that the discourse never occurred, 
 but was made up long afterwards from Smith's recollection of a 
 passage in Virgil's yEneid. The same discourse is related in the 
 "True Relation," written by Smith directly after his return from 
 captivity, and claimed by Mr. Deane and others attacking Smith, 
 to be the true account of the incidents of his captivity. If we are 
 to look for the sources from whence he got his ideas thus con- 
 veyed, or pretended to be conveyed to the Indian chief, one 
 would think that his lessons at school and his experience on land 
 and sea were sufficient, without making him use a Latin poet, 
 whom, in all probability, he never read, as he left school at an 
 early age. 
 
 Examples of such strained efforts to ridicule Smith might be 
 multiplied and taken from every part of the volume, but we need 
 
48 ADDRESS. 
 
 not stop to expose them, as every reader will readily detect them. 
 Mr. Warner has been constrained, however, to accord to Smith 
 great merit for his accurate descriptions of Virginia and its in- 
 habitants, and for his profound views and eminent services in re- 
 gard to the colonization of North America. He represents him 
 as admirable in many traits of character, yet false in what he says 
 of himself. We think as he is sustained by others in matters of 
 which they were cognisant, the conclusion is a safe one that he 
 is truthful in those matters which rest on his own testimony alone. 
 
 But we need not pursue this branch of our subject further. 
 The grounds of attack upon Smith, which have not been noticed, 
 will be found even more conspicuously false than those we have 
 been discussing. 
 
 Turning now to the direct evidence of the truthfulness of 
 Smith as a writer, we shall find it ample and conclusive. We 
 have seen that his " General History" of Virginia was first pub- 
 lished in 1624. In 1629 he published, along with another 
 edition, " The True Travels, Adventures and Observations of 
 Captaine John Smith in Europe, Asia, Africke & America," and 
 dedicated it to " William, Earle of Pembroke, Lord Steward of 
 his Majestie's most Honorable Household, Robert, Earle of 
 Lindsay, great Chamberlain of England, and Henrie, Lord 
 Hunsdon, Viscount Rochford, Earle of Dover." He commences 
 his dedication thus : " Sir Robert Cotton, that most learned 
 treasurer of antiquitie, having by the perusal of my ' Generall 
 Historic' and others, found that I had likewise undergone divers 
 other hard hazards in other parts of the world, requested me 
 to fix the whole course of my passages in a booke by itselfe, 
 whose noble desire I could not but in part satisfie ; the rather, 
 because they have acted my fatal Tragedies on the stage, & 
 racked my Relations at their pleasure." In conclusion he says 
 he dedicated his work to these noblemen and expected them to 
 patronize it, because they were " acquainted both with my [his] 
 endeavors and writings." That this work received a favorable 
 notice from them we learn from the dedication of a later work 
 by Smith, called " Advertisements for the Unexperienced." 
 
 Sir Robert Cotton was the founder of the Cottonian Library, 
 now a valuable part of the British Museum. He and the Earl of 
 Pembroke were members of the Virginia Company, and had 
 ample opportunities of knowing whether Smith's " General His- 
 
ADDRESS. 49 
 
 tory" was truthful or not. Had they not been satisfied of his 
 truthfuhiess they would hardly have allowed their names to be 
 used in his dedication of his " True Travels," and such use of 
 their names must be taken as their endorsement of the author. 
 
 The most remarkable adventures related in this last work are 
 the killing of three Turks by Smith in single combat before the 
 town of Regall, in Transilvania, and his subsequent escape from 
 captivity in Tartary. These are attested by the patent of Sigis- 
 mundus Bathor, Duke of Transilvania, given in full by Smith 
 in his book, together with the certificate of its record in the office 
 of the Herald of Arms at London. By this patent Smith was 
 authorized to add three Turk's heads to his coat of arms. Graze- 
 brook, in his "Heraldry of Smith," says he found Smith's Coat 
 of Arms with the Turk's heads, which were confirmed to him by 
 the College of Arms, in the British Museum. Harleian MS., 
 No. 578. Burke, in his " Encyclopedia of Heraldry," describes 
 it also. With such proof of the most remarkable incidents in his 
 early life we need not look beyond Smith's own statement for 
 evidence of the rest of this narrative. 
 
 As this attack has grown out of Smith's statements in the 
 " General History," however, we will look more particularly to 
 the evidence of his truthfulness in that book. 
 
 We have seen that the " General History" embodied the " Ox- 
 ford Tract," with some additions from the pen of Smith, and that 
 this tract was carefully compiled out of the writings of the colon- 
 ists, whose names are given by Dr. Symonds, and is a work of 
 the highest authority. Now a comparison of this book with the 
 " General History" shows that nearly every incident of Smith's 
 stay in Virginia, given in the " History," is found in the "Tract." 
 Certainly we find in it abundant evidence of " his perils, preser- 
 vations, dangers, deliverances," which Fuller, through ignorance, 
 or something worse, claimed were published and proclaimed 
 alone by Smith. 
 
 The " Oxford Tract" relates, among other incidents, his being 
 surprised by Opechankanough with two hundred men, while he 
 only had fifteen, and his extrication of himself and his men by 
 seizing the Indian King by his long lock and presenting a cocked 
 pistol to his breast; his encounter, while alone, with the King of 
 Paspahegh, " a most strong, stout salvage," which was only ended 
 
60 ADDRESS. 
 
 by Smith's getting him into the river, and almost drowning him ; 
 and the plot of Powhatan to surprise him and murder his party, 
 while away from Jamestown, which was prevented by Pocahontas, 
 who, " by stealth in the darke night came through the wild woods 
 and told him of it." 
 
 That the statements, added by Smith in his History, were true, 
 is conclusively shown by the fact that the book was published in 
 1624, when many persons who had been with Smith in Virginia 
 were alive, and some of them inimical to him, and we have no 
 evidence that any one of his companions ever contradicted the 
 statements in the book, while some of them directly testified to 
 their truthfulness. The first edition contained tributes in verse, 
 commending Smith and his book, written by twenty-one persons, 
 and a later edition gives in addition similar tributes by twelve 
 others. Of these thirty-three persons several were members of 
 the London Company, and five were with Smith in Virginia, 
 three arriving with the first supply, and two with the second, as 
 appears by the published lists. One of the contributors, Edward 
 Robinson, served under him in Transilvania, and was a witness 
 to his adventures there. 
 
 Michael Phettiplace, William Phettiplace and Richard Wififing, 
 who came to Virginia with the first supply, united in their tribute. 
 They recount the fact that they were with him in Virginia, and 
 witnessed his prowess among the Indians. They say of him : 
 
 " Who hast nought in thee counterfeit or slie." 
 
 and add 
 
 " Who saith of thee, this savors of vaine-glorie, 
 Mistakes both thee and us and this true storie." 
 
 Of the two who came with the second supply one, John Cod- 
 rington, writes : 
 
 " That which we call the subject of all storie, 
 Is truth : which in this worke of thine gives gloria 
 To all that thou hast done." 
 
 And the other, Raleigh Crashaw, speaking of the praise due 
 to him, says : 
 
 " For all good men's tongues shall keep the same." 
 Among the other contributors we find several of the most 
 
ADDRESS. 51 
 
 noted men of the day. George Wither, distinguished as a poet, 
 satirist and soldier, says: 
 
 " Sir your relations, I have read, which show 
 Ther's reason I should honour them and you." 
 
 R. Brathwait, an author of eminence, and John Donne, the 
 celebrated poet, each contribute handsomely to the author's 
 praise ; but the tribute deserving of the most weight, perhaps, is 
 that of the Rev. Samuel Purchas, the renowned collector of 
 travels. He commences it thus : 
 
 " Loe here Smith's Forge, where Forgery's Roague-branded,'' 
 
 and continues at some length his quaint verses. 
 
 The character of Purchas is thus drawn by Boissard, who is 
 followed by Chalmers and by the Encyclopaedia Brittanica : "A 
 man exquisitely skilled in languages, and all arts, divine and 
 human ; a very great philosopher, historian, and divine ; a faith- 
 ful presbyter of the Church of England, very famous for many 
 excellent writings, especially for his vast volumes of the East and 
 West Indies, written in his native tongue." 
 
 He resided in London, and was rector of St. Martin's, Ludgate, 
 and chaplain to Abbott, Archbishop of Canterbury. Mr. Neill 
 shows him to have enjoyed the confidence of the Virgina Com- 
 pany of London, and his works show him to have been an inde- 
 fatigable collector of travels, and colonial histories. His great 
 work, styled " Purchas, His Pilgrimes," was published in 1625, 
 the year after Smith's '' General History" appeared. In the 4th 
 volume, at page 1705, he commences a history of Virginia, with 
 this caption, "The proceedings of the English Colony in Vir- 
 ginia, taken faithfully out of the writing of Thomas Studley, cape- 
 merchant. Anas Todkill, Doctor Russell, Nathaniel Powell, Wil- 
 liam Phetiplace and Richard Pot, Richard Wififin, Tho. Abbay, 
 Tho. Hope ; and since enlarged out of the writings of Capt. 
 John Smith, principall Agent and Patient in these Virginia 
 occurrents, from the beginning of the plantation, 1606, till Ann. 
 1610, somewhat abridged." In a marginal note he says: "I 
 have many written Treatises lying by me, written by Capt. Smith 
 and others, some there, some here after their return ; but because 
 these have already scene the light, and containe a full relation of 
 Virginian Affaires, I was loth to wearie the reader with others of 
 
52 ADDRESS. 
 
 this time." At page 1773 he tells us he had the advantage of a 
 perusal of Smith's "General History" in MS. while preparing 
 his work. He also relates the visit of Rolfe and Pocahontas 
 with Temocomo, " one of Powhatan's counsellours," to England 
 in 1616, and states that he often conversed with this savage,, 
 and was favored by Rolfe with the loan of his work upon Vir- 
 ginia. He tells us of the honor and respect which were shown 
 to Pocahontas, not only by the Company, but by many per- 
 sons of honor, and particularly mentions the magnificent enter- 
 tainment given her by Dr. King, Lord Bishop of London, at 
 which he was present. With all of the advantages of living at 
 the time of the transactions recorded by Smith, of mingling 
 with the Company which colonized Virginia, of having before him 
 the published and unpublished writings of the colonists, some of 
 which are now lost, and of personally knowing so many of the 
 most conspicuous characters which figure in the history of 
 the colony, the testimony of this able and accurate writer 
 should be conclusive as to Smith's " General History." Not 
 only does he contribute verses commending Smith's work, but 
 we find that in his own book he follows him closely, and 
 gives the particulars of his rescue by Pocahontas as they are 
 related in the " General History." It must have been that the 
 acts of kindness shown by Pocahontas to the English in Vir- 
 ginia were topics of conversation while she was so conspicuous a 
 person in London, as the correspondence of the day shows 
 she was. Her rescue of Smith was either not known or was 
 the subject of conversation. Purchas, who was intimate with 
 Smith, and was in the society of Pocahontas and Rolfe, must 
 have conversed with them about the matter, if it was known. 
 If it was not then known, Purchas would have had his suspi- 
 cions aroused when Smith afterwards put the incident in his 
 "General History," and, as a careful historian, would have exam- 
 ined the evidences of the truth of the statement before he in- 
 serted it in his own book. In either event the fact that Purchas 
 records the incident is the strongest evidence of its truth. 
 
 When we look to the writings of Smith himself for evidence 
 of the truthfulness of his statement, in regard to the rescue, we 
 find it ample to confirm our reliance on his veracity. 
 
 It is true that the garbled letter from Virginia, published ia 
 1608, makes no mention of the matter, but it relates an incident 
 
ADDRESS. 53 
 
 very suggestive of the truth of his subsequent statement. Soon 
 after Smith was released from his captivity he determined to 
 arrest some Indians who had been caught thieving in James- 
 town. Powhatan was greatly concerned at the arrest, and sent 
 several messengers to obtain their release ; finally he sent Poca- 
 hontas, who is described as " a child of tenne years old," (she 
 was probably twelve) and Smith delivered to her the prisoners. 
 Why the cunning savage should have trusted his favorite child 
 at such a tender age upon such an errand would be difficult to 
 explain, unless we believe Smith's statement that she had previ- 
 ously saved his life. 
 
 In his other writings Smith frequently mentions his rescue, and 
 in such a way as would have led to detection had he made a false 
 statement about it. 
 
 In his " General History" he states, that upon the arrival of 
 Pocahontas in England, in 1616, he, " to deserve her former cour- 
 tesies, made her qualities knowne to the Queene's most excellent 
 Majestic and her court, and writ a litde booke to this effect to the 
 Queene, an abstract whereof followeth." In this abstract he 
 recounts his captivity amongst the Indians while in Virginia, and 
 says : " After some six weeks fatting amongst these salvage 
 courtiers, at the minute of my execution she hazarded the beat- 
 ing out of her owne braines to save mme, & not only that, but 
 so prevailed with her father that I was safely conducted to James- 
 towne." He then goes on to relate her coming to him afterwards 
 in the night to apprise him of her father's plot to murder him 
 and his men, her relief of the colonists from want, and her ser- 
 vices in keeping peace between them and the Indians. He then 
 adds these words : " Thus, most gracious Lady, I have related to 
 your Majestic what at your best leasure our approved Histories 
 will account you at large." 
 
 If this letter was written to the Queen under the circumstances, 
 and at the time stated, we cannot doubt with any reason the 
 truth of its statements. Every statement it contains, except that 
 concerning his rescue, is supported by the writings of others in 
 the " Oxford Tract," who were eye-witnesses. The rescue was 
 only witnessed by the Indians ; but an assertion of it in a letter to 
 the Queen on behalf of Pocahontas, when she and her husband 
 and her brother-in-law were in England, would not have been 
 attempted if it had never happened. 
 
54 ADDRESS. 
 
 Sir Thomas Dale brought them to England, and they were the 
 guests of the London Company. Dale and the members of the 
 Company were well informed of the incidents of Smith's life in 
 Virginia, as he had been the most conspicuous man in the colony. 
 Besides, some of the companions of Smith in Virginia had re- 
 turned to England, and amongst them were several of his ene- 
 mies. Had Smith for the first time related his rescue under such 
 circumstances, or repeated a story which was untrue, it is impos- 
 sible to believe that it would have passed without exposure. Nor 
 can we discover any motive prompting Smith to so hazardous 
 an undertaking as the utterance of such a falsehood. The other 
 incidents in the life of Pocahontas, related in the letter and at- 
 tested by the writings of others, were ample to commend her to 
 the favorable notice of the Queen, and to gratify any vanity 
 Smith might have had about connecting their names. No other 
 motive has been suggested by those attacking him. 
 
 But the statement made in this letter that approved histories 
 contained this with the other acts of kindness towards the Eng- 
 lish, performed by Pocahontas, proves that it was not then for 
 the first time related by Smith. Doubtless the reference is to 
 some of the writings mentioned by Purchas, which are now lost. 
 It will not do to say now that no such statement was contained 
 in histories then extant, when Smith openly stated that it was, 
 and by publishing the letter in 1624 reiterated the statement 
 without contradiction. 
 
 It is proper to note that what is given in the " General His- 
 tory," is stated to be an " abstract" of the letter, or "little book " 
 which was sent to the Queen. It cannot be properly concluded, 
 therefore, that the rescue was not more fully detailed in the letter 
 than in the abstract, and all the efifort which has been made to 
 represent the account of the rescue as growing by repetition is 
 without warrant. 
 
 The fact that Smith wrote this letter in 161 6, if conceded, is 
 conclusive of the rescue, and this was so apparent to Mr. Adams 
 that he attempted to discredit Smith's statement concerning it. 
 If the letter was written as claimed, the members of the court 
 must have known of it, and when Smith published the state- 
 ment in 1624, there were living many persons who had been 
 members of the court of 161 6. The Queen was dead, but the 
 King was alive. There were also surviving. Prince Charles, who- 
 
ADDRESS. 55 
 
 named for Smith the locaHties he had discovered in New Eng- 
 land; the celebrated Duchess of Richmond and Lenox, to whom 
 the "General History" was dedicated; the Duchess of Bedford, 
 lady to the Queen's bed chamber, an authoress and a patron- 
 ess of literary men ; the Duchess of Nottingham, lady to the 
 Queen's drawing chamber, famous for her connection with the 
 ring said to have been given by Elizabeth to the unfortunate 
 Earl of Essex, who lost his head; and the Duchess of Suffolk, 
 also of the drawing chamber, and mother of the notorious woman 
 who was divorced from that Earl of Essex, who subsequently 
 led the armies of Parliament against Charles the First. 
 
 These, and many others, would have at once detected the false- 
 hood had Smith dared to publish in 1624 a letter purporting to 
 have been written in 1616 to the Queen and her court, about so 
 interesting a person as Pocahontas, which he had in fact never 
 written. Purchas, too, who lived in London, and was intimate with 
 Smith, must have known whether the statement was true, and, so 
 far from any one denying it, he and others are found endorsing it, 
 as well as the rest of the book. 
 
 The second reference to his rescue was made by Smith in 
 1622 in his book entitled " New England Trials." -He had just 
 heard of the massacre by the Indians in Virginia, and this led 
 him to speak of his experience in the colony. Amongst other 
 things he says: "Those two honorable Gentlemen, Captaine 
 George Percie and Capt. Francis West, two of the Phitteplaces^ 
 and some other such noble Gentlemen and resolute spirits bore 
 their shares with me, and, now living in England, did see me 
 take this murdering Opechankanough, now their Great King, 
 by the long lock on his head, with my pistol to his breast I 
 led him amongst his greatest forces." Further on he adds : " It 
 is true in our greatest extremity they shot me, slue three of my 
 men, and by the folly of them that fled took me prisoner, yet 
 God made Pocahontas, the King's Daughter, the meanes to 
 deliver me." It thus appears that these companions of Smith 
 were in England in 1622, and he named them as witnesses to 
 certain actions of his in Virginia. These persons must have 
 heard the particulars of Smith's captivity when they lived in 
 Virginia, and they would have pronounced this statement in 
 reference to the rescue false, if, indeed, it was false. 
 
56 . ADDRESS. 
 
 We learn from Mr. Neill's book that Rolfe died in 1622, the 
 year this statement was published, and he may not have seen it 
 in print, but we learn from the same author that his brother, 
 Henry Rolfe, was living in England at the time, and was the 
 guardian of the son of Pocahontas. He certainly would have 
 informed himself of the matter, and denied the statement if he had 
 found it untrue. The reference of Smith in the passage seems 
 to be to a matter well known, and has every indication of truth 
 about it, and it cannot be believed, without conclusive testimony, 
 that he then for the first time, and falsely, put forth a claim that 
 Pocahontas saved his life. It may be as well to state that in the 
 verses of the Phettiplaces, printed with the " General History," 
 and endorsing it, they particularly mention Smith's adventure 
 with Opechankanough, which they witnessed. 
 
 The next reference we find is in Smith's letter to the commis- 
 sioners appointed by the King in 1623, to inquire into the affairs 
 of the Company. In this Smith says: "Six weekes I was led 
 captive by those Barbarians, though some of my men were 
 slaine, and the rest fled, yet it pleased God to make their great 
 King's daughter the meanes to returne me safe to Jamestowne." 
 Here again Smith would have been detected if he had related a 
 falsehood, as the commissioners were directed to enquire into 
 the affairs of the Company from the beginning, and they exam- 
 ined various persons who had been connected with it and knew 
 its history. 
 
 The fourth statement as to his rescue is found in the " General 
 History," where the detailed account is given heretofore quoted. 
 When we remember that this book states that it was written at 
 the instance of the Virginia Company of London, which state- 
 ment was not contradicted by any one, so far as we know, but 
 was confirmed by several members who commended the veracity 
 of the author as regards his statements in the volume, we must 
 look upon the book as published with the endorsation of the 
 Company. The men who composed the Company were among 
 the noblest and best in the kingdom, and had every opportunity 
 of knowing whether Smith wrote the truth about their history. 
 It is not credible that they would have permitted his work to go 
 through so many editions without correcting what was known to 
 be false. The fact, therefore, that Smith's book, so far from 
 
ADDRESS. 57 
 
 being disowned by the members of the Company, was accepted 
 •as the standard history of the colony from its first appearance, 
 is very strong evidence of its truthfulness. 
 
 The author was, in fact, a man of high character as well as 
 genius. He was one of the persons selected by the Company to 
 govern the infant colony of Virginia; he was entrusted with the 
 charge of two expeditions to New England, and was appointed 
 Admiral of that country. His maps of the countries he visited, 
 and descriptions of their inhabitants, are acknowledged by all 
 writers to be remarkably accurate, and the estimation in which 
 -he was held by those who knew him best, is admirably expressed 
 by one of the writers in the " Oxford Tract" upon the occasion of 
 his departure from the colony, in these words : 
 
 " What shall I saye, but thus we lost him ; that in all his pro- 
 ceedings made justice his first guide, and experience his second, 
 ever hating basenesse, sloth, pride and indignitie more than any 
 dangers ; that never allowed more for himselfe than for his sol- 
 diers with him; that upon no danger would send them where he 
 would not lead them himselfe ; that would never see us want what 
 he either had or could by any means get us ; that would rather 
 want than borrow, or starve than not pay ; that loved action more 
 than wordes, and hated falsehood and coveteousnesse worse than 
 death, whose adventures were our lives, and whose losse our 
 deathes." 
 
 The London Company were prompted in sending out the col- 
 ony by the desire of immediate gain, and when disappointed, 
 threatened to abandon the colonists to their fate; and the hard- 
 ships of colonial life made many desirous of abandoning the 
 enterprise. But the far-reaching genius of Smith saw in the 
 fertile soil and mild climate of Virginia, the provision by Provi- 
 dence for a great people, and he set himself resolutely to the 
 work of bnnging into subjection the native tribes,* and of 
 
 *The influence acquired by Smith over the Indians is thus described in 
 " Purchas' Pilgrimage," edition 1614, p. 768 : "Powhatan had above thirtie 
 Commanders, or Wirrowances, under him, all of which were not in peace only, 
 but serviceable, in Captaine Smith's presidencie, to the english, and still, as I 
 
58 ADDRESS. 
 
 making the colony self-supporting. He rebuked the London 
 Company for their threat to abandon the colony, he defeated the 
 efforts to abandon the settlement at the risk of his life, he forced 
 the men to labor, and he taught them how to hold the Indians in 
 subjection, and to get from them needed provisions. In a word, 
 he demonstrated the practicability of the enterprise. 
 
 Years afterwards, and when, through his exertions in a great 
 measure, Virginia had been successfully planted, he pictured the 
 miseries through which they had passed who planted it, and his 
 entire devotion of himself to its interests in these words: "By 
 that acquaintance I have with them, I call them my children, for 
 they have been my wife, my hawks, hounds, my cards, my dice, 
 and in totall, my best content, as indifferent to my heart as my 
 left hand to my right. And notwithstanding all those miracles 
 of disasters have crossed both them and me, yet were there not 
 an Englishman remaining, as God be thanked, notwithstanding 
 the massacre, there are some thousands, I would yet begin 
 againe with as small meanes as I did at first." 
 
 As his companions freely accorded to him the honor of being 
 the real founder of Virginia, now that his work has developed 
 into such a power for the advancement of mankind, the world 
 should freely accord him the great honor which is his due. His 
 name, belittled by Fuller in its insertion among the " Worthies 
 of England," should be enrolled among the "Worthies of Man- 
 kind," and he be forever assigned an honored place among the 
 founders of great nations. 
 
 Mr. Neill, however, has not been content to aim at the de- 
 struction of Smith's character alone; he has also attempted to 
 blacken the characters of Pocahontas and Rolfe. He has repro- 
 duced the description of the Indian princess at the age of eleven 
 or twelve, given by Strachey, in which she is represented as a 
 "well-featured but wanton young girle," playing with the boys in 
 Jamestown. It may be a matter of doubt whether Mr. Neill 
 meant by this to represent the innocent girl as unchaste, as we 
 know others have done from this passage. He may have 
 thought that his readers would know, what he did not note, that 
 
 have beene told by some that have since beene there, they doe affect him and 
 will ask of him." 
 
ADDRESS. 59- 
 
 Strachey and his contemporaries used the word " wanton" in the 
 sense of " playful."* But he has left us in no doubt that he would 
 have us believe that before the marriage of Rolfe and Pocahontas 
 they had been married to other persons, one of whom at least 
 was then alive. He also expressly charges Rolfe with dishonest 
 dealings with the estate of Lord Delaware. The testimony he 
 adduces to sustain these charges will be found singularly inade- 
 quate. 
 
 The evidence relied on to show that Pocahontas was married 
 before she married Rolfe, is a passage in Strachey's " Historic of 
 Travaile into Virginia," at page 54, in which the author says, 
 " They often reported unto us that Powhatan had then lyving 
 twenty sonnes and ten daughters, besyde a young one by Winga- 
 nuske, Machumps his sister, and a great darling of the King's * 
 and besides, younge Pocohunta, a daughter of his, using some- 
 tyme to our fort in tymes past, nowe married to a private cap- 
 taine called Kocoum, some two yeares since." 
 
 Strachey did not publish this work, but left two copies of a 
 manuscript, from one of which, found in the British Museum, 
 Mr. R. H. Major, in 1849, made the pubhcation. At page 29, 
 the author, speaking of the country north of James river, says it 
 was " the place wherein our aboad & habitation now (well neere) 
 II yeares consisted." The editor tells us in a note to this pas- 
 
 *■" All wanton as a child, skipping and vain." Love's Labor Lost, v, 2. 
 
 "Like wanton boys, that swim on bladders." Henry VIII, iii, 2. 
 
 " As flies to wanton boys are we to the Gods • 
 
 They kill us for their sport." King Lear, iv, i. 
 
 " Quips and cranks and wanton wiles." L' Allegro. 
 
 At page 14, Strachey says the word Pocahontas signifies "little Wanton,"^ 
 showing it was a pet name. 
 
 A passage in the Oxford Tract, taken from the writings of Richard Pots, has 
 been quoted by a late writer to cast a stigma upon Pocahontas. Pots is 
 denying the charge that Smith ever intended to marry her and make himself 
 King of Virginia. He says : " If he would he might have married her, or done 
 what him listed, for there was none that could have hindered his determina- 
 tion." This plainly was meant to indicate the extent of Smith's power in Vir- 
 ginia, and not to indicate any want of virtue in Pocahontas, who could not have 
 been over fourteen when he left the colony. The inscription on her portrait,. 
 in 1616, makes her then 21 years old. 
 
60 ADDRESS. 
 
 sage, that in the manuscript the word, "six," was originally 
 written, but had been crossed out and the figures 1 1 inserted in 
 a darker colored ink. This shows that Strachey was from the 
 year 1613 to the year i6i8, or thereabouts, preparing this manu- 
 script. The reference to the marriage of Pocahontas was evi- 
 dently made when she was alive, and she died in March, 1617, 
 in England. She was married to Rolfe in April, 1614, so that 
 if this passage referring to her was written in the latter part of 
 16 1 5, or 1616, it would have fitted in date that marriage. 
 
 We learn from the editor that the other copy of Strachey's 
 manuscript, which is at Oxford, was dedicated to "Sir Allen 
 Apsley, Purveyor to his Majestie's Navie Royall." Sir Allen 
 was appointed to the higher office of Lieutenant of the Tower 
 in 16 1 6, as we learn from his daughter, in her memoir of Colonel 
 Hutchinson, and afterwards it would have been proper to have 
 added this higher title to his name. This makes it certain that 
 the manuscript was completed during or before 16 16. 
 
 The reliance to show that it was not Rolfe who was referred 
 to as her husband, is in the use of the Indian name Kocoum. It 
 will be seen that the text does not say that the husband was 
 named Kocoum, but that he was a " private Captaine called 
 Kocoum." In Smith's description of the Indians, (page 143, 
 Richmond edition,) he says : " They have but few words in their 
 language, and but few occasions to use any officers more than 
 one commander, which commonly they call Werowance, or 
 Ca7icoro2ise, which is captaine." Any one reading the authors 
 we have been referring to, will be struck with the many ways 
 in which they spell the same words, and especially Indian 
 words, * not even observing the rule of idem S07ia7is. It is 
 very probable, therefore, that the word Kocoum is but a dif- 
 ferent spelling of Caucorouse, both meaning a captain, and 
 referring to the position held by Rolfe at Jamestown as a 
 captain of some section of the colonists, and therefore called a 
 private captain. We have no information that the Indians had 
 
 *A single reference to Strachey will illustrate these various spellings of the 
 same word. At page 56 he speaks "of Coiacohanauke, which we commonly 
 (though corruptly) call Tapahanock, and is the same which Capt. Smith in his 
 mappe calls Quiyoughcohanock," and "of the Weroance Pepiscummah, whome 
 by construction, as well the Indians as we, call Pipisco." 
 
ADDRESS. 61 
 
 any such officer except for war, who could not be called a private 
 captain, while we find that the colony from its beginning was 
 thrown into companies, having captains placed over them for 
 civil government, which might well be called private captains. 
 It is evident, therefore, that the word Kocoum might be the 
 Indian designation of Rolfe, either from the office of private 
 captain which he held, or otherwise ; and that being the case, 
 and it thus appearing that the author might have been, and 
 probably was, referring to the marriage with Rolfe, in the absence 
 of any other mention by him or by other writers of a marriage 
 with any one else, we must conclude that the marriage with Rolfe 
 was referred to. Had it not been so, when the author revised his 
 manuscript after the arrival of Pocahontas in England as the wife 
 of Rolfe, he would certainly have added to the passage the state- 
 ment that she had subsequently married Rolfe. That the author 
 revised this manuscript as late as 1618 is shown by the change of 
 date we have noted, and by the fact that it is dedicated to " Sir 
 Francis Bacon, Lord High Chancellor," and Bacon was not made 
 chancellor till January, 161 8. 
 
 The evidence relied on to show that Rolfe had another wife 
 living at his marriage with Pocahontas, is a passage in a letter 
 from Strachey, relating his shipwreck upon the island of Ber- 
 muda in 1610, on his way to Virginia. It is found at page 1746 
 of vol. iv. of Purchas' Pilgrims, and is as follows : " And the 
 eleventh of February wee had the childe of John Rolfe christened, 
 a daughter, to which Captaine Newport and myselfe were wit- 
 nesses, and the aforesaid Mistris Horton, and we named it Ber- 
 muda." No mention is made of the mother of this child so as 
 to show whether she was then alive, and no mention is made of 
 her afterwards by this or by any other writer. Several years 
 afterwards we find Rolfe publicly married at Jamestown to Poca- 
 hontas, with the consent of the acting Governor and of her father 
 and the service performed by a minister of high standing, and 
 we are obliged to conclude that his first wife was then dead. 
 The letter of Rolfe to Sir Thomas Dale, giving his reasons for 
 his proposed marriage with Pocahontas is preserved by Hamor, 
 and it shows Rolfe to have been an humble Christian, seeking 
 Divine guidance as to the whole matter. His allusion to his con- 
 dition in the following sentence shows plainly that he was un- 
 married : " Nor am I in so desperate an estate, that I regard not 
 
€2 ADDRESS. 
 
 what becommeth of mee ; nor am I out of hope but one day to 
 see my country, nor so void of friends nor mean of birth but 
 there to obtain a mach to my great content." 
 
 It is not to be believed that Sir Thomas Dale, the acting Gov- 
 ernor, and the Rev. Alexander Whitaker, the minister in the 
 colony, should have approved of the marriage, as their letters 
 printed by Purchas show, if either of the parties were married at 
 the time. Both Dale and Whitaker state that Pocahontas had 
 been baptized into the Christian faith before her marriage. Po- 
 cahontas and Rolfe were afterwards carried to England by Dale, 
 as the guests of the London Company, and were received with 
 favor at Court and into London society. Mr. Neill should bring 
 direct and overwhelming proof to establish now that they were 
 never lawfully married. His insinuations to the contrary will not 
 be taken as proof, and can injure no one but himself. 
 
 At page loi of his book, Mr. Neill heads a section with these 
 words : " Rolfe suspected of unfair dealings," and he adds, " The 
 minutes of the Company do not give a very high opinion of 
 Rolfe's honesty." In proof he gives an entry of April 30, 1621, 
 by which it appears that Lady Delaware requested, " that in con- 
 sideration of her goods remayning in the hands of Mr. Rolfe, in 
 Virginia, she might receive satisfaction for the same out of his 
 tobacco now sent home." Mr. Neill himself gives other entries 
 which show that the tobacco did not belong to Rolfe, and that 
 Mr. Henry Rolfe was directed to acquaint her ladyship that his 
 brother offered to make her, " good and faithfuU account of all 
 such goods as remayne in his hands, upon her ladyship's direc- 
 tion to that effect." Accordingly she desired " the court would 
 grant her a commission dyrected to Sir Frances Wyatt, Mr. 
 George Sandys and others, to examine and certifie what goods 
 and money of her late husband's deceased, came to the hands of 
 Mr. Rolfe, * * * and to require the attendinge to his promise 
 that she may be satisfied." This seems to have been the usual 
 way that estates in Virginia were appraised and settled at that 
 time, when, for the lack of probate courts in the colony, the 
 Company in London regulated such matters. 
 
 Nothing more is given by Mr. Neill from any source as to the 
 settlement of Lord Delaware's estate, and we must conclude that 
 Rolfe fully accounted for it so soon as his accounts were lawfully 
 settled and he could get a legal discharge. 
 
ADDRESS. 63 
 
 It is upon such a flimsy pretext as this that Mr. Neill attempts 
 to fix the charge of dishonesty on Rolfe, who is represented by 
 the Rev. Alex. Whitaker, and other writers of the time, as a man 
 of high character and of great usefulness in the colony. It is 
 worthy of note that he was the pioneer in the culture of Virginia's 
 great staple, tobacco, and one of the most active in developing 
 the various resources of the country. He will be ever remem- 
 bered in history, however, as the husband of Pocahontas, who, 
 born the daughter of a savage King, was endowed with all the 
 graces of character which become a Christian princess; who was 
 the first of her people to embrace Christianity, and to unite in 
 marriage with the English race; who, like a guardian angel, 
 watched over and preserved the infant colony which has devel- 
 oped into a great people, among whom her own descendants 
 have ever been conspicuous for true nobility ; and whose name 
 will be honored while this great people occupy the land upon 
 which she so signally aided in establishing them. 
 
■_j.Dl\Hr(i vr \<ui^<jrvcoo 
 
 014 442 599 6 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 n!iiii'iiri{|iifiiiiiii'<iiiii 
 
 014 442 599 6 % 
 
 Hollinger 
 
 pH 8 J 
 
 MiU Run F03-2193