THE MAY-FLOWER AND HER LOG
July 15, 1620—May 6,
1621 Chiefly from Original Sources
By AZEL
Member of Pilgrim
Society, etc.
|
"Next to the fugitives whom Moses led out
of |
CONTENTS
ILLUSTRATIONS
INTRODUCTORY
O
civilized humanity, world-wide, and especially to the descendants of the
Pilgrims who, in 1620, laid on New England shores the foundations of that civil
and religious freedom upon which has been built a refuge for the oppressed of
every land, the story of the Pilgrim "Exodus" has an ever-increasing
value and zest. The little we know of the inception, development, and
vicissitudes of their bold scheme of colonization in the American wilderness
only serves to sharpen the appetite for more.
Every
detail and circumstance which relates to their preparations; to the ships which
carried them; to the personnel of the Merchant Adventurers associated with
them, and to that of the colonists themselves; to what befell them; to their
final embarkation on their lone ship,—the immortal MAY-FLOWER; and to the
voyage itself and to its issues, is vested to-day with, a supreme interest, and
over them all rests a glamour peculiarly their own.
For
every grain of added knowledge that can be gleaned concerning the Pilgrim sires
from any field, their children are ever grateful, and whoever can add a
well-attested line to their all-too-meagre annals is regarded by them, indeed
by all, a benefactor.
Of
those all-important factors in the chronicles of the "Exodus,"—the
Pilgrim ships, of which the MAY-FLOWER alone crossed the seas,—and of the
voyage itself, there is still but far too little known. Of even this little,
the larger part has not hitherto been readily accessible, or in form available
for ready reference to the many who eagerly seize upon every crumb of new-found
data concerning these pious and intrepid Argonauts.
To
such there can be no need to recite here the principal and familiar facts of
the organization of the English "Separatist" congregation under John
Robinson; of its emigration to Holland under persecution of the Bishops; of its
residence and unique history at Leyden; of the broad outlook of its members
upon the future, and their resultant determination to cross the sea to secure
larger life and liberty; and of their initial labors to that end. We find these
Leyden Pilgrims in the early summer of 1620, their plans fairly matured and
their agreements between themselves and with their merchant associates
practically concluded, urging forward their preparations for departure;
impatient of the delays and disappointments which befell, and anxiously seeking
shipping for their long and hazardous voyage.
It
is to what concerns their ships, and especially that one which has passed into
history as "the Pilgrim bark," the MAY-FLOWER, and to her pregnant
voyage, that the succeeding chapters chiefly relate. In them the effort has
been made to bring together in sequential relation, from many and widely
scattered sources, everything germane that diligent and faithful research could
discover, or the careful study and re-analysis of known data determine. No new
and relevant item of fact discovered, however trivial in itself, has failed of
mention, if it might serve to correct, to better interpret, or to amplify the
scanty though priceless records left us, of conditions, circumstances, and
events which have meant so much to the world.
As
properly antecedent to the story of the voyage of the MAY-FLOWER as told by her
putative "Log," albeit written up long after her boned lay bleaching
on some unknown shore, some pertinent account has been given of the ship
herself and of her "consort," the SPEEDWELL; of the difficulties
attendant on securing them; of the preparations for the voyage; of the Merchant
Adventurers who had large share in sending them to sea; of their officers and
crews; of their passengers and lading; of the troubles that assailed before
they had "shaken off the land," and of the final consolidation of the
passengers and lading of both ships upon the MAY-FLOWER, for the belated ocean
passage. The wholly negative results of careful search render it altogether
probable that the original journal or "Log" of the MAY-FLOWER (a
misnomer lately applied by the British press, and unhappily continued in that
of the United States, to the recovered original manuscript of Bradford's
"History of Plimoth Plantation "), if such journal ever existed, is
now hopelessly lost.
So
far as known, no previous effort has been made to bring together in the
consecutive relation of such a journal, duly attested and in their entirety,
the ascertained daily happenings of that destiny-freighted voyage. Hence, this
later volume may perhaps rightly claim to present —and in part to be, though
necessarily imperfect—the sole and a true "Log of the MAY-FLOWER." No
effort has been made, however, to reduce the collated data to the shape and
style of the ship's "Log" of recent times, whose matter and form are
largely prescribed by maritime law. While it is not possible to give, as the
original—if it existed—would have done, the results of the navigators'
observations day by day; the "Lat." and "Long."; the
variations of the wind and of the magnetic needle; the tallies of the
"lead" and "log" lines; "the daily run," etc.—in
all else the record may confidently be assumed to vary little from that
presumably kept, in some form, by Captain Jones, the competent Master of the
Pilgrim bark, and his mates, Masters Clarke and Coppin.
As
the charter was for the "round voyage," all the features and
incidents of that voyage until complete, whether at sea or in port, properly
find entry in its journal, and are therefore included in this compilation,
which it is hoped may hence prove of reference value to such as take interest
in Pilgrim studies. Although the least pleasant to the author, not the least
valuable feature of the work to the reader—especially if student or writer of
Pilgrim history—will be found, it is believed, in the numerous corrections of
previously published errors which it contains, some of which are radical and of
much historical importance. It is true that new facts and items of information
which have been coming to light, in long neglected or newly discovered
documents, etc., are correctives of earlier and natural misconceptions, and a
certain percentage of error is inevitable, but many radical and reckless errors
have been made in Pilgrim history which due study and care must have prevented.
Such errors have so great and rapidly extending power for harm, and, when built
upon, so certainly bring the superstructure tumbling to the ground, that the
competent and careful workman can render no better service than to point out
and correct them wherever found, undeterred by the association of great names,
or the consciousness of his own liability to blunder. A sound and conscientious
writer will welcome the courteous correction of his error, in the interest of
historical accuracy; the opinion of any other need not be regarded.
Some
of the new contributions (or original demonstrations), of more or less
historical importance, made to the history of the Pilgrims, as the author
believes, by this volume, are as follows:—
(a)
A closely approximate list of the passengers who left Delfshaven on the
SPEEDWELL for Southampton; in other words, the names—those of Carver and Cushman
and of the latter's family being added—of the
(b)
A closely approximate list of the passengers who left
(c)
The establishment as correct, beyond reasonable doubt, of the date, Sunday,
June 11/21, 1620, affixed by Robert Cushman to his letter to the Leyden leaders
(announcing the "turning of the tide" in Pilgrim affairs, the hiring
of the "pilott" Clarke, etc.), contrary to the conclusions of Prince,
Arber, and others, that the letter could not have been written on Sunday.
(d)
The demonstration of the fact that on Saturday, June 10/20, 1620, Cushman's
efforts alone apparently turned the tide in Pilgrim affairs; brought Weston to
renewed and decisive cooperation; secured the employment of a
"pilot," and definite action toward hiring a ship, marking it as one
of the most notable and important of Pilgrim "red-letter days."
(e)
The demonstration of the fact that the ship of which Weston and Cushman took
"the refusal," on Saturday, June 10/20, 1620, was not the MAY-FLOWER,
as Young, Deane, Goodwin, and other historians allege.
(f)
The demonstration of the fact (overthrowing the author's own earlier views)
that the estimates and criticisms of Robinson, Carver, Brown, Goodwin, and
others upon Robert Cushman were unwarranted, unjust, and cruel, and that he
was, in fact, second to none in efficient service to the Pilgrims; and hence so
ranks in title to grateful appreciation and memory.
(g)
The demonstration of the fact that the MAY-FLOWER was not chartered later than
June 19/29, 1620, and was probably chartered in the week of June 12/22—June
19/29 of that year.
(h)
The addition of several new names to the list of the Merchant Adventurers,
hitherto unpublished as such, with considerable new data concerning the list in
general.
(i)
The demonstration of the fact that Martin and Mullens, of the MAY-FLOWER
colonists, were also Merchant Adventurers, while William White was probably
such.
(j)
The demonstration of the fact that "Master Williamson," the
much-mooted incognito of
(k)
The general description of; and many particulars concerning, the MAY-FLOWER
herself; her accommodations (especially as to her cabins), her crew, etc.,
hitherto unknown.
(1)
The demonstration of the fact that the witnesses to the nuncupative will of William
Mullens were two of the MAY-FLOWER'S crew (one being possibly the ship's
surgeon), thus furnishing the names of two more of the ship's company, and the
only names—except those of her chief officers—ever ascertained.
(m)
The indication of the strong probability that the entire company of the
Merchant Adventurers signed, on the one part, the charter-party of the
MAY-FLOWER.
(n)
An (approximate) list of the ages of the MAY-FLOWER'S passengers and the
respective occupations of the adults.
(o)
The demonstration of the fact that no less than five of the Merchant
Adventurers cast in their lots and lives with the Plymouth Pilgrims as
colonists.
(p)
The indication of the strong probability that Thomas Goffe, Esquire, one of the
Merchant Adventurers, owned the "MAY-FLOWER" when she was chartered
for the Pilgrim voyage,—as also on her voyages to
(q)
The demonstration of the fact that the Master of the MAY-FLOWER was Thomas
Jones, and that there was an intrigue with Master Jones to land the Pilgrims at
some point north of the 41st parallel of north latitude, the other parties to
which were, not the Dutch, as heretofore claimed, but none other than Sir
Ferdinando Gorges and the Earl of Warwick, chiefs of the "Council for New
England," in furtherance of a successful scheme of Gorges to steal the
Pilgrim colony from the London Virginia Company, for the more "northern
Plantations" of the conspirators.
(r)
The demonstration of the fact that a second attempt at stealing the colony—by
which John Pierce, one of the Adventurers, endeavored to possess himself of the
demesne and rights of the colonists, and to make them his tenants—was defeated
only by the intervention of the "Council" and the Crown, the matter
being finally settled by compromise and the transfer of the patent by Pierce
(hitherto questioned) to the colony.
(s)
The demonstration of the actual relations of the Merchant Adventurers and the
Pilgrim colonists—their respective bodies being associated as but two partners
in an equal copartnership, the interests of the respective partners being
(probably) held upon differing bases—contrary to the commonly published and
accepted view.
(t)
The demonstration of the fact that the MAY-FLOWER—contrary to the popular
impression—did not enter Plymouth harbor, as a "lone vessel," slowly
"feeling her way" by chart and lead-line, but was undoubtedly piloted
to her anchorage—previously "sounded" for her—by the Pilgrim shallop,
which doubtless accompanied her from Cape Cod harbor, on both her efforts to
make this haven, under her own sails.
(u)
The indication of the strong probability that Thomas English was helmsman of
the MAY-FLOWER'S shallop (and so savior of her sovereign company, at the
entrance of
(v)
Many facts not hitherto published, or generally known, as to the antecedents,
relationships, etc., of individual Pilgrims of both the
For
convenience' sake, both the Old Style and the New Style dates of many events
are annexed to their mention, and double-dating is followed throughout the
narrative journal or "Log" of the Pilgrim ship.
As
the Gregorian and other corrections of the calendar are now generally well
understood, and have been so often stated in detail in print, it is thought
sufficient to note here their concrete results as affecting dates occurring in
Pilgrim and later literature.
From
1582 to 1700 the difference between O.S. and N.S. was ten (10) days (the
leap-year being passed in 1600). From 1700 to 1800 it was eleven (11) days,
because 1700 in O.S. was leap-year. From 1800 to 1900 the difference is twelve
(12) days, and from 1900 to 2000 it will be thirteen (13) days. All the Dutch
dates were New Style, while English dates were yet of the Old Style.
There
are three editions of
(a)
The original manuscript itself, now in possession of the State of
Massachusetts, having been returned from England in 1897, called herein
"orig. MS."
(b)
The Deane Edition (so-called) of 1856, being that edited by the late Charles
Deane for the Massachusetts Historical Society and published in
"Massachusetts Historical Collections," vol. iii.; called herein
"Deane's ed."
(c)
The Edition recently published by the
Of
"Mourt's Relation" there are several editions, but the one usually
referred to herein is that edited by Rev. Henry M. Dexter,
AZEL
THE MAYFLOWER AND
HER LOG
|
"Hail to thee, poor little ship
MAY-FLOWER—of Delft Haven |
CHAPTER I
THE
NAME—"MAY-FLOWER"
"Curiously
enough," observes Professor Arber, "these names [MAY-FLOWER and
SPEEDWELL] do not occur either in the
[A Relation,
or Journal, of the Beginning and Proceedings of the
English
Plantation settled at
Mourt,
Winslow, and
sent to George Morton at
sundrie of
them having been already published, in a Jurnall made by
one of ye
company," etc. From this it would
appear that Mourt's
Relation was
his work, which it doubtless principally was, though
Winslow
performed an honorable part, as "Mourt's" introduction and
other data
prove.]
He
might have truthfully added that they nowhere appear in any of the letters of
the "exodus" period, whether from Carver, Robinson, Cushman, or
Weston; or in the later publications of Window; or in fact of any
contemporaneous writer. It is not strange, therefore, that the Rev. Mr.
Blaxland, the able author of the "Mayflower Essays," should have
asked for the authority for the names assigned to the two Pilgrim ships of
1620.
It
seems to be the fact, as noted by Arber, that the earliest authentic evidence
that the bark which bore the Pilgrims across the North Atlantic in the late
autumn of 1620 was the MAY-FLOWER, is the "heading" of the
"Allotment of Lands"—happily an "official" document—made at
New Plymouth, New England, in March, 1623—It is not a little remarkable that,
with the constantly recurring references to "the ship,"—the
all-important factor in Pilgrim history,—her name should nowhere have found
mention in the earliest Pilgrim literature. Bradford uses the terms, the
"biger ship," or the "larger ship," and Winslow, Cushman,
Captain John Smith, and others mention simply the "vessel," or the
"ship," when speaking of the MAY-FLOWER, but in no case give her a
name.
It
is somewhat startling to find so thorough-paced an Englishman as Thomas Carlyle
calling her the MAY-FLOWER "of Delft-Haven," as in the quotation from
him on a preceding page. That he knew better cannot be doubted, and it must be
accounted one of those 'lapsus calami' readily forgiven to genius,—proverbially
indifferent to detail.
Sir
Ferdinando Gorges makes the curious misstatement that the Pilgrims had three
ships, and says of them: "Of the three ships (such as their weak fortunes
were able to provide), whereof two proved unserviceable and so were left
behind, the third with great difficulty reached the coast of New England,"
etc.
CHAPTER II
THE MAY-FLOWER'S
CONSORT THE SPEEDWELL
The
SPEEDWELL was the first vessel procured by the Leyden Pilgrims for the
emigration, and was bought by themselves; as she was the ship of their historic
embarkation at Delfshaven, and that which carried the originators of the
enterprise to Southampton, to join the MAY-FLOWER, —whose consort she was to
be; and as she became a determining factor in the latter's belated departure
for New England, she may justly claim mention here as indeed an inseparable
"part and parcel" of the MAY-FLOWER'S voyage.
The
name of this vessel of associate historic renown with the MAY-FLOWER was even
longer in finding record in the early literature of the Pilgrim hegira than
that of the larger It first appeared, so far as discovered, in 1669—nearly
fifty years after her memorable service to the Pilgrims on the fifth page of
Nathaniel Morton's "New England's Memorial."
Bradford
states the fact,—that "a smale ship (of some 60 tune), was bought and
fitted in Holand, which was intended to serve to help to transport them, so to
stay in ye countrie and atend ye fishing and such other affairs as might be for
ye good and benefite of ye colonie when they come ther." The statements of
Bradford and others indicate that she was bought and refitted with moneys
raised in
[
The fact that
Lyford (Bradford, Historie, Mass. ed. p. 217)
recommended
that every "particular" (i.e.
non-partnership colonist)
sent out by
the Adventurers—and they had come to be mostly of that
class—"should come over as an Adventurer, even if only a
servant,"
and the fact
that he recognized that some one would have to pay in
L10 to make
each one an Adventurer, would seem to indicate that any
one was
eligible and that either L10 was the price of the Merchant
Adventurer's
share, or that this was the smallest subscription which
would admit to
membership. Such "particular,"
even although an
Adventurer,
had no partnership share in the Planters' half-interest;
had no voice
in the government, and no claim for maintenance. He
was, however,
amenable to the government, subject to military duty
and to
tax. The advantage of being an
Adventurer without a voice in
colony affairs
would be purely a moral one.]
that every person joining the enterprise, whether man, woman, youth, maid, or
servant, if sixteen years old, should count as a share; that a share should be
reckoned at L10, and hence that L10 worth of money or provisions should also
count as a share. Every man, therefore, would be entitled to one share for each
person (if sixteen years of age) he contributed, and for each L10 of money or
provisions he added thereto, another share. Two children between ten and
sixteen would count as one and be allowed a share in the division, but children
under ten were to have only fifty acres of wild land. The scheme was admirable
for its equity, simplicity, and elasticity, and was equally so for either
capitalist or colonist.
Goodwin
notes, that, "in an edition of Cushman's 'Discourse,' Judge Davis of
Boston advanced the idea that at first the Pilgrims put all their possessions
into a common stock, and until 1623 had no individual property. In his edition
of Morton's 'Memorial' he honorably admits his error." The same mistake
was made by Robertson and Chief Justice Marshall, and is occasionally repeated
in this day. "There was no community of goods, though there was labor in
common, with public supplies of food and clothing." Neither is there
warrant for the conclusion of Goodwin, that because the holdings of the
Planters' half interest in the undertaking were divided into L10 shares, those
of the Adventurers were also. It is not impossible, but it does not necessarily
follow, and certain known facts indicate the contrary.
Rev.
Edward Everett Hale, in "The Pilgrims' Life in Common," says:
"Carver, Winslow, Bradford, Brewster, Standish, Fuller, and Allerton. were
the persons of largest means in the
It
is evident, however, from John Robinson's letter of June 14, 1620, to John
Carver, that Weston ridiculed the transaction, probably on selfish grounds,
but, as events proved, not without some justification.
Robinson
says: "Master Weston makes himself merry with our endeavors about buying a
ship," [the SPEEDWELL] "but we have done nothing in this but with
good reason, as I am persuaded." Although bought with funds raised in
[Arber (The
Story of the Pilgrim Fathers, p. 341) arrives at the
conclusion that "The SPEEDWELL had been
bought with
The proceeds
of her sale, after her return to
course, go to
the credit of the common joint-Stock there." This
inference
seems warranted by Robinson's letter of June 16/26 to
Carver, in
which he clearly indicates that the
collected the
"Adventurers" subscriptions of Pickering and his
partner
(Greene), which were evidently considerable.]
it was evidently upon "joint-account," and she was doubtless so sold,
as alleged, on her arrival in September, at
She
was obviously bought some little time before May 31, 1620,—probably in the
early part of the month,—from the fact that in their letter of May 31st to
Carver and Cushman, then in London, Messrs. Fuller, Winslow, Bradford, and
Allerton state that "we received divers letters at the coming of Master Nash
and our Pilott," etc. From this it is clear that time enough had elapsed,
since their purchase of the pinnace, for their messenger (Master Nash) to go to
London,—evidently with a request to Carver and Cushman that they would send
over a competent "pilott" to refit her, and for Nash to return with
him, while the letter announcing their arrival does not seem to have been
immediately written.
The
writers of the above-mentioned letter use the words "we received,"
—using the past tense, as if some days before, instead of "we have your
letters," or "we have just received your letters," which would
rather indicate present, or recent, time. Probably some days elapsed after the
"pilott's" arrival, before this letter of acknowledgment was sent. It
is hence fair to assume that the pinnace was bought early in May, and that no
time was lost by the Leyden party in preparing for the exodus, after their
negotiations with the Dutch were "broken off" and they had
"struck hands" with Weston, sometime between February 2/12, 1619/20,
and April 1/11, 1620,—probably in March.
The
consort was a pinnace—as vessels of her class were then and for many years
called—of sixty tons burden, as already stated, having two masts, which were
put in—as we are informed by Bradford, and are not allowed by Professor Arber
to forget—as apart of her refitting in Holland. That she was
"square-rigged," and generally of the then prevalent style of vessels
of her size and class, is altogether probable. The name pinnace was applied to
vessels having a wide range in tonnage, etc., from a craft of hardly more than
ten or fifteen tons to one of sixty or eighty. It was a term of pretty loose
and indefinite adaptation and covered most of the smaller craft above a shallop
or ketch, from such as could be propelled by oars, and were so fitted, to a
small ship of the SPEEDWELL'S class, carrying an armament.
None
of the many representations of the SPEEDWELL which appear in historical
pictures are authentic, though some doubtless give correct ideas of her type. Weir's
painting of the "Embarkation of the Pilgrims," in the Capitol at
Washington (and Parker's copy of the same in Pilgrim Hall, Plymouth); Lucy's
painting of the "Departure of the Pilgrims," in Pilgrim Hall; Copes
great painting in the corridor of the British Houses of Parliament, and others
of lesser note, all depict the vessel on much the same lines, but nothing can
be claimed for any of them, except fidelity to a type of vessel of that day and
class. Perhaps the best illustration now known of a craft of this type is given
in the painting by the Cuyps, father and son, of the "Departure of the
Pilgrims from Delfshaven," as reproduced by Dr. W. E. Griffis, as the
frontispiece to his little monograph, "The Pilgrims in their Three Homes."
No reliable description of the pinnace herself is known to exist, and but few
facts concerning her have been gleaned. That she was fairly "roomy"
for a small number of passengers, and had decent accommodations, is inferable
from the fact that so many as thirty were assigned to her at Southampton, for
the Atlantic voyage (while the MAY-FLOWER, three times her tonnage, but of
greater proportionate capacity, had but ninety), as also from the fact that
"the chief [i.e. principal people] of them that came from Leyden went in
this ship, to give Master Reynolds content." That she mounted at least
"three pieces of ordnance" appears by the testimony of Edward
Winslow, and they probably comprised her armament.
We
have seen that Bradford notes the purchase and refitting of this "smale ship
of 60 tune" in
Cushman
also shows, by his letter,—written after the ships had put back into
Dartmouth,—a part of which Professor Arber uses, but the most important part
suppresses, that what he evidently considers the principal leak was caused by a
very "loose board" (plank), which was clearly not the result of the
straining due to "crowding sail," or of "overmasting." (See
Appendix.)
Moreover,
as the
Even
if the MAY-FLOWER had not been delayed by the SPEEDWELL'S condition, and both
had sailed for "
The
cruel indictment fails, and the imaginary "turning point in modern
history," to announce which Professor Arber seems to have sacrificed so
much, falls with it.
The
Rev. Dr. Griffis ("The Pilgrims in their Three Homes," p. 158) seems
to give ear to Professor Arber's untenable allegations as to the Pilgrim
leaders' responsibility for any error made in the "overmasting" of
the SPEEDWELL, although he destroys his case by saying of the
"overmasting:" "Whether it was done in England or Holland is not
certain." He says, unhappily chiming in with Arber's indictment: "In
their eagerness to get away promptly, they [the Leyden men] made the mistake of
ordering for the SPEEDWELL heavier and taller masts and larger spars than her
hull had been built to receive, thus altering most unwisely and disastrously
her trim." He adds still more unhappily: "We do not hear of these
inveterate landsmen and townsfolk [of whom he says, 'possibly there was not one
man familiar with ships or sea life'] who were about to venture on the Atlantic,
taking counsel of Dutch builders or mariners as to the proportion of their
craft." Why so discredit the capacity and intelligence of these
nation-builders? Was their sagacity ever found unequal to the problems they
met? Were the men who commanded confidence and respect in every avenue of
affairs they entered; who talked with kings and dealt with statesmen; these
diplomats, merchants, students, artisans, and manufacturers; these men who
learned law, politics, state craft, town building, navigation, husbandry, boat-building,
and medicine, likely to deal negligently or presumptuously with matters upon
which they were not informed? Their first act, after buying the SPEEDWELL, was
to send to
Having
bought a vessel, it was necessary to fit her for the severe service in which
she was to be employed; to provision her for the voyage, etc.; and this could
be done properly only by experienced hands. The Pilgrim leaders at Leyden seem,
therefore, as noted, to have sent to their agents at
The
side lights upon the matter show, beyond doubt:—
(a)
That a "pilott" had been sent to
(b)
That unless two had been sent (of which there is no suggestion, and which is
entirely improbable, for obvious reasons), Master Reynolds was the
"pilott" who was thus sent;
(c)
That it is clear, from Cushman's letter of June 11/21, that Reynolds was then
in
(d)
That Master Reynolds was not originally intended to "tarrie there,"
and "bring the ship," etc., as, if he had been, there would have been
no need of giving such an order; and
(e)
That he had been sent there for some other purpose than to bring the SPEEDWELL
to
We
are told too, by
[
Pilgrim
Fathers, p. 341. John Brown, in his
Pilgrim Fathers of New
colony for a
year." Evidently a mistake, arising
from the length of
time for which
her crew were shipped. The pinnace
herself was
intended, as
we have seen, for the permanent use of they colonists,
and was to
remain indefinitely.]
that the crew of the SPEEDWELL "were hired for a year," and we know,
in a general way, that most of them went with her to
Where
the SPEEDWELL lay while being "refitted" has not been ascertained,
though presumably at Delfshaven, whence she sailed, though possibly at one of
the neighboring larger ports, where her new masts and cordage could be
"set up" to best advantage.
We
know that Reynolds—"pilott" and "Master" went from
What
other officers and crew the pinnace had does not appear, and we know nothing
certainly of them, except the time for which they shipped; that some of them
were fellow-conspirators with the Master (self-confessed), in the
"strategem" to compel the SPEEDWELL'S abandonment of the voyage; and
that a few were transferred to the MAYFLOWER. From the fact that the sailors
Trevore and Ely returned from New Plymouth on the FORTUNE in 1621, "their
time having expired," as Bradford notes, it may be fairly assumed that
they were originally of the SPEEDWELL'S crew.
That
the fears of the SPEEDWELL'S men had been worked upon, and their cooperation
thus secured by the artful Reynolds, is clearly indicated by the statement of
Bradford: "For they apprehended that the greater ship being of force and
in which most of the provisions were stored, she would retain enough for
herself, whatever became of them or the passengers, and indeed such speeches
had been cast out by some of them."
Of
the list of passengers who embarked at Delfshaven, July 22, 1620, "bound
for Southampton on the English coast, and thence for the northern parts of
The
list of those embarking at Delfshaven on the SPEEDWELL, and so of the
participants in that historic event,—a list now published for the first time,
so far as known,—is undoubtedly accurate, within the limitations stated, as
follows, being for convenience' sake arranged by families:
The Family of Deacon John Carver (probably in charge of
John Howland),
embracing:—
Mrs. Katherine
Carver,
John Howland
(perhaps kinsman of Carver), "servant" or "employee,"
Desire Minter,
or Minther (probably companion of Mrs. Carver,
perhaps
kinswoman),
Roger Wilder,
"servant,"
"Mrs. Carver's
maid" (whose name has never transpired).
Master William Bradford and
Mrs. Dorothy
(May)
Master Edward Winslow and
Mrs. Elizabeth
(Barker) Winslow,
George Soule a
"servant" (or employee),
Elias Story,
"servant."
Elder William Brewster and
Mrs. Mary
Brewster,
Love Brewster,
a son,
Wrestling
Brewster, a son.
Master Isaac Allerton and
Mrs. Mary
(Morris) Allerton,
Bartholomew
Allerton, a son,
Remember
Allerton, a daughter,
Mary Allerton,
a daughter,
John Hooke,
"servant-boy."
Dr. Samuel Fuller and
William
Butten, "servant"-assistant.
Captain Myles Standish and
Mrs. Rose
Standish.
Master William White and
Mrs. Susanna
(Fuller) White,
Resolved
White, a son,
William Holbeck, "servant,"
Edward
Thompson, "servant."
Deacon Thomas Blossom and
——- Blossom, a
son.
Master Edward Tilley and
Mrs. Ann
Tilley.
Master John Tilley and
Mrs. Bridget
(Van der Velde?) Tilley (2d wife),
Elizabeth
Tilley, a daughter of Mr. Tilley by a former wife(?)
John Crackstone and
John
Crackstone (Jr.), a son.
Francis Cooke and
John Cooke, a
son.
John Turner and
—— Turner, a
son,
—— Turner, a
son.
Degory Priest.
Thomas Rogers and
Joseph Rogers,
a son.
Moses Fletcher.
Thomas
Williams.
Thomas Tinker and
Mrs. ——
Tinker,
—— Tinker, a
son.
Edward Fuller and
Mrs. ——
Fuller,
Samuel Fuller,
a son.
John Rigdale and
Mrs. Alice
Rigdale.
Francis Eaton and
Mrs. —— Eaton,
Samuel Eaton,
an infant son.
Peter Browne.
William Ring.
Richard Clarke.
John Goodman.
Edward
Margeson.
Richard
Britteridge.
Mrs. Katherine Carver and her family, it is altogether
probable, came
over in charge
of Howland, who was probably a kinsman, both he and
Deacon Carver
coming from Essex in
have been in
work of
preparation. He, it is quite certain,
was not a passenger
on the
Speedwell, for Pastor Robinson would hardly have sent him
such a letter
as that received by him at
mentioned
(Bradford's "Historie," Deane's ed. p. 63), if he had been
with him at Delfshaven
at the "departure," a few days before. Nor
if he had
handed it to him at Delfshaven, would he have told him in
it, "I
have written a large letter to the whole company."
John Howland was clearly a "secretary" or
"steward," rather than a
"servant," and a man of standing and influence from the
outset.
That he was in
altogether
probable, but is not absolutely certain.
Desire Minter (or Minther) was undoubtedly the daughter
of Sarah, who,
the
"Troth Book" (or "marriage-in-tention" records) for 1616,
at the
Stadtbuis of
Leyden, shows, was probably wife or widow of one
William
Minther—evidently of Pastor Robinson's congregation—when
she appeared
on May 13 as a "voucher" for Elizabeth Claes, who then
pledged
herself to Heraut Wilson, a pump-maker, John Carver being
one of
the widow of
William) reappeared, to plight her troth to Roger
Simons,
brick-maker, from
rarity of the
name warrant an inference that Desire Minter (or
Minther) was
the daughter of William and Sarah (Willet) Minter (or
Minther), of
Robinson's flock; that her father had died prior to
1618 (perhaps
before 1616); that the Carvers were near friends,
perhaps
kinsfolk; that her father being dead, her mother, a poor
widow (there
were clearly no rich ones in the
placed this
daughter with the Carvers, and, marrying herself, and
removing to
her daughter
in so good a home and such hands as Deacon and Mistress
Carver's. The record shows that the father and mother
of Mrs. Sarah
Minther,
Thomas and Alice Willet, the probable grandparents of
Desire Minter,
appear as "vouchers" for their daughter at her
betrothal. Of them we know
nothing further, but it is a reasonable
conjecture
that they may have returned to
remarriage of
their daughter and her removal to
removal of the
Carvers and their granddaughter to
it was to them
that Desire went, when, as
returned to
her friends in
died
there."
"Mrs. Carver's maid" we know but little about,
but the presumption is
naturally
strong that she came from;
early marriage
and; death are duly recorded.
Roger Wilder, Carver's "servant;" was
apparently in his service at
and
accompanied the family from thence.
[Carver's] man
Roger," as if an old, familiar household servant,
which (as Wilder died soon after the arrival
at
would not have
been as likely to do—writing in 1650, thirty years
after—if he
had been only a short-time English addition to Carver's
household,
known to
he speaks of
him as a "man" also indicates something as to his age,
and renders it
certain that he was not an "indentured" lad. It is
fair to
presume he was a passenger on the SPEEDWELL to
(It is
probable that Carver's "servant-boy," William Latham, and
Jasper More,
his "bound-boy," were obtained in
fully
appears.)
Master William Bradford and his wife were certainly of
the party in the
SPEEDWELL, as
shown by his own recorded account of the embarkation.
(
Master Edward Winslow's very full (published) account of
the embarkation
("Hypocrisie Unmasked," pp. 10-13, etc.) makes it certain that
himself and
family were SPEEDWELL passengers.
George Soule, who seems to have been a sort of
"upper servant" or
"steward," it is not certain was with Winslow in
is probable.
Elias Story, his "under-servant," was probably
also with him in
though not
surely so. Both servants might possibly
have been
procured from
Delfshaven
with Winslow in the SPEEDWELL.
Elder William Brewster and his family, his wife and two
boys, were
passengers on
the SPEEDWELL, beyond reasonable doubt.
He was, in
fact, the
ranking man of the
Southampton
and the respective ships' "governors" were chosen. The
Church to that
point was dominant. (The Elder's two
"bound-boys,"
being from
on careful
study, no warrant to be found for the remarkable
statements of
Goodwin ("
hunt for
Brewster in
of
and publishing
certain religious works alleged to be seditious),
"William
Brewster was in
the sailing of
the MAYFLOWER, which he helped to fit out;" and that
during that
time "he visited Scrooby."
That he had no hand whatever
in fitting out
the MAYFLOWER is certain, and the Scrooby statement
equally lacks
foundation. Professor Arber, who is
certainly a
better
authority upon the "hidden press" of the Separatists in
and their
movements, says ("The Story of the Pilgrim Fathers,"
p.196):
"The Ruling Elder of the
year before he
left Delfshaven on the SPEEDWELL, on the 22 July-
1 August,
1620, a hunted man." Again (p.
334), he says: "Here let
us consider
the excellent management and strategy of this Exodus.
If the
Pilgrims had gone to
not most of
them, would have been put in prison [and this is the
opinion of a
British historian, knowing the temper of those times,
especially
William Brewster.] So only those
embarked in
against whom
the Bishops could take no action."
We can understand,
in light, why
Carver—a more objectionable person than Cushman to
the prelates,
because of his office in the
chiefly
employed out of their sight, at
diplomatic and
urbane Cushman did effective work at
the Bishops'
eyes. It is not improbable that the
personal
friendship of
Sir Robert Naunton (Principal Secretary of State to
King James)
for Sir Edward Sandys and the
officially
seemingly active under his masters' orders in pushing Sir
Dudley
Carleton, the English ambassador at
unrelenting search
for Brewster) may have been of material aid to
the Pilgrims
in gaining their departure unmolested.
The only basis
known for the
positive expression of Goodwin resides in the
suggestions of
several letters' of Sir Dudley Carleton to Sir Robert
Naunton,
during the quest for Brewster; the later seeming clearly to
nullify the
earlier.
Under date of
July 22, 1619, Carleton says: "One William Brewster,
a Brownist,
who has been for some years an inhabitant and printer at
gone back to
dwell in
On August 16,
1619 (N.S.), he writes: "I am told William Brewster is
come again for
enquiry after
William Brewster and am well assured he is not
returned
thither, neither is it likely he will; having removed from
thence both
his family and goods," etc.
On September
7, 1619 (N.S.), he writes: "Touching Brewster, I am now
informed that
he is on this side the seas [not in
alleged]; and
that he was seen yesterday, at
not there
settled," etc.
On September
13, 1619 (N.S.), he says: "I have used all diligence to
enquire after
Brewster; and find he keeps most at
being 'incerti
laris', he is not yet to be lighted upon.
I
understand he
prepares to settle himself at a village called
Leerdorp, not
far from
prohibited
books without discovery, but I shall lay wait for him,
both there and
in other places, so as I doubt but either he must
leave this
country; or I shall, sooner or later, find him out."
On September
20, 1619 (N.S.), he says: "I have at length found out
Brewster at
(Thomas
Brewer), one of the Merchant Adventurers, was arrested
instead.
On September
28, 1619 (N.S.), he states, writing from
"If he
lurk here for fear of apprehension, it will be hard to find
him,"
etc.
As late as
February 8, 1619/20, there was still a desire and hope
for his
arrest, but by June the matter had become to the King—and
all
others—something of an old story. While,
as appears by a
letter of
Robert Cushman, written in
was then
undoubtedly there, one cannot agree, in the light of the
official
correspondence just quoted, with the conclusion of Dr.
Alexander
Young ("Chronicles of the Pilgrim Fathers," vol. i.
p. 462), that
"it is probable he [Brewster] did not return to
Everything indicates that he was at
did not again
return to
hiding with
his family (after their escape from the pursuit at
Leyden),
somewhere among friends in the
July, 1620,
the King had, as usual, considerably "cooled off," we
may be sure
that with full knowledge of the harsh treatment meted
out to his
partner (Brewer) when caught, though unusually mild (by
agreement with
the authorities of the University and Province of
lion's
paw" at
disguise. Dr. Griffis has lent his assent ("The
Pilgrims in their
Homes,"
p, 167), though probably without careful analysis of all the
facts, to the
untenable opinion expressed by Goodwin, that Brewster
was
"hiding in
There can be
no doubt that, with his ever ready welcome of sound
amendment, he
will, on examination, revise his opinion, as would the
clear-sighted
Goodwin, if living and cognizant of the facts as
marshalled
against his evident error. As the leader
and guide of
the outgoing
part of the
believe—as all
would wish—that Elder Brewster was the chief figure
the departing
Pilgrims gathered on the SPEEDWELL deck, as she took
her departure from
Delfshaven.
Master Isaac Allerton and his family, his wife and three
children, two
sons and a
daughter, were of the
the
SPEEDWELL. We know he was active there
as a leader, and was
undoubtedly
one of those who bought the SPEEDWELL.
He was one of
the signers of
the joint-letter from
May 31 (O.S.)
1620.
John Hooke, Allerton's "servant-lad," may have
been detained at
means,
consulted his comfort, and would have hardly started so large
a family on
such a journey without a servant.
Dr. Samuel Fuller was, as is well known, one of the
connected by
blood and marriage with many of the leading families of
Robinson's
congregation. He was active in the
preparations for the
voyage the
first signer of the joint-letter of May 31, and doubtless
one of the
negotiators for the SPEEDWELL. His wife
and child were
left behind,
to follow later as they did.
William Butten, the first of the Pilgrim party to die,
was, in all
probability, a
student-"servant" of Doctor Fuller at
doubtless
embarked with him at Delfshaven.
(writing of his death) "Wm. Butten, a
youth, servant to Samuel
Fuller." Captain Myles
Standish and his wife Rose, we know from
Bradford, were
with the Pilgrims in
with
them. Arber calls him ("The Story
of the Pilgrim Fathers,"
p. 378) a
"chief of the Pilgrim Fathers" in the sense of a father
and leader in
their
assumption,
though he became their "sword-hand" in the New World.
By some
writers, though apparently with insufficient warrant,
Standish has
been declared a Roman Catholic. It does
not appear
that he was
ever a communicant of the Pilgrim Church. His family,
moreover, was
not of the Roman Catholic faith, and all his conduct
in the colony is inconsistent with the idea
that he was of that
belief. Master William White, his wife and son, were
of the Leyden
congregation,
both husband and wife being among its principal
people, and
nearly related to several of the Pilgrim band.
The
marriage of
Mr. and Mrs. White is duly recorded in Leyden. William
Holbeck and
Edward Thompson, Master White's two servants, he
probably took
with him from Leyden, as his was a family of means and
position,
though they might possibly have been procured at
Southampton. They were apparently
passengers in the SPEEDWELL.
Deacon Thomas
Blossom and his son were well known as of Pastor
Robinson's
flock at Leyden. They returned,
moreover, to Holland
from Plymouth,
England (where they gave up the voyage), via London.
The father
went to New Plymouth ten years later, the son dying
before that
time. (See Blossom's letter to Governor
Bradford.
Bradford's
Letter Book, "Plymouth Church Records," i. 42.) In his
letter dated
at Leyden, December 15, 1625, he says: "God hath taken
away my son
that was with me in the ship MAYFLOWER when I went back
again."
Edward Tilley (sometimes given the prefix of Master) his
wife Ann are
known to have
been of the Leyden company. (Bradford's
"Historie,"
p. 83.) It is
doubtful if their "cousins," Henry Sampson and
Humility
Cooper, were of Leyden. They apparently
were English
kinsfolk,
taken to New England with the Tilleys, very likely joined
them at
Southampton and hence were not of the SPEEDWELL'S
passengers. Humility Cooper
returned to England after the death of
Tilley and his
wife. That Mrs. Tilley's "given
name" was Ann is not
positively
established, but rests on Bradford's evidence.
John Tilley (who is also sometimes called Master) is
reputed a brother of
Edward, and is
known to have been—as also his wife—of the Leyden
church
(Bradford, Deane's ed. p. 83.) His
second wife Bridget Van
der Velde, was
evidently of Holland blood, and their marriage is
recorded in
Leyden. Elizabeth Tilley was clearly a
daughter by an
earlier
wife. He is said by Goodwin
("Pilgrim Republic," p. 32) to
have been a
"silk worker" Leyden, but earlier authority for this
occupation is
not found.
John Crackstone is of record as of the Leyden
congregation. His daughter
remained
there, and came later to America.
John
Crackstone, Jr., son of above. Both were
SPEEDWELL passengers.
Francis Cooke has been supposed a very early member of
Robinson's flock
in England,
who escaped with them to Holland, in 1608.
He and his
son perhaps
embarked at Delfshaven, leaving his wife and three other
children to
follow later. (See Robinson's letter to
Governor
Bradford,
"Mass. Hist. Coll.," vol. iii.
p. 45, also Appendix for
account of
Cooke's marriage.)
John Cooke, the son, was supposed to have lived to be the
last male
survivor of
the MAY-FLOWER, but Richard More proves to have survived
him. He was a
prominent man in the colony, like his father, and the
founder of
Dartmouth (Mass.).
John Turner and his sons are also known to have been of
the Leyden party,
as he was
undoubtedly the messenger sent to London with the letter
(of May 31) of
the leaders to Carver and Cushman, arriving there
June 10,
1620. They were beyond doubt of the
SPEEDWELL'S list.
Degory Priest—or "Digerie," as Bradford calls
him—was a prominent
member of the
Leyden body. His marriage is recorded
there, and he
left his
family in the care of his pastor and friends, to follow him
later. He died early.
Thomas Rogers and his son are reputed of the Leyden
company. He left
(according to
Bradford) some of his family there—as did Cooke and
Priest—to
follow later. It has been suggested that
Rogers might
have been of
the Essex (England) lineage, but no evidence of this
appears. The Rogers family of Essex were distinctively
Puritans,
both in
England and in the Massachusetts colony.
Moses Fletcher was a "smith" at Leyden, and of
Robinson's church. He was
married there,
in 1613, to his second wife. He was
perhaps of the
English
Amsterdam family of Separatists, of that name.
As the only
blacksmith of
the colonists, his early death was a great loss.
Thomas Williams, there seems no good reason to doubt, was
the Thomas
Williams known
to have been of Leyden congregation.
Hon. H. C.
Murphy and Arber include him—apparently
through oversight alone
—in the list
of those of Leyden who did not go, unless there were
two of the
name, one of whom remained in Holland.
Thomas Tinker, wife, and son are not certainly known to
have been of the
Leyden
company, or to have embarked at Delfshaven, but their
constant
association in close relation with others who were and who
so embarked
warrants the inference that they were of the SPEEDWELL'S
passengers. It is, however,
remotely possible, that they were of
the English
contingent.
Edward Fuller and his wife and little son were of the
Leyden company, and
on the
SPEEDWELL. He is reputed to have been a
brother of Dr.
Fuller, and is
occasionally so claimed by early writers, but by what
warrant is not
clear.
John Rigdale and his wife have always been placed by
tradition and
association
with the Leyden emigrants but there is a possibility
that they were
of the English party. Probability
assigns them to
the SPEEDWELL,
and they are needed to make her accredited number.
Francis Eaton, wife, and babe were doubtless of the
Leyden list. He is
said to have
been a carpenter there (Goodwin, "Pilgrim Republic," p.
32), and was
married there, as the record attests.
Peter Browne has always been classed with the Leyden
party. There is no
established
authority for this except tradition, and he might
possibly have
been of the English emigrants, though probably a
SPEEDWELL
passenger; he is needed to make good her putative number.
William Ring is in the same category as are Eaton and
Browne. Cushman
speaks of him,
in his Dartmouth letter to Edward Southworth (of
August 17), in
terms of intimacy, though this, while suggestive, of
course proves
nothing, and he gave up the voyage and returned from
Plymouth to
London with Cushman. He was certainly
from Leyden.
Richard Clarke is on the doubtful list, as are also John
Goodman, Edward
Margeson, and
Richard Britteridge. They have always
been
traditionally
classed with the Leyden colonists, yet some of them
were possibly
among the English emigrants. They are
all needed,
however, to
make up the number usually assigned to Leyden, as are
all the above
"doubtfuls," which is of itself somewhat confirmatory
of the
substantial correctness of the list.
Thomas English, Bradford records, "was hired to goe
master of a [the]
shallopp"
of the colonists, in New England waters.
He was probably
hired in
Holland and was almost certainly of the SPEEDWELL.
John Alderton (sometimes written Allerton) was, Bradford
states, "a hired
man, reputed
[reckoned] one of the company, but was to go back
(being a
seaman) and so making no account of the voyages for the
help of others
behind" [probably at Leyden]. It is
probable that he
was hired in
Holland, and came to Southampton on the SPEEDWELL.
Both English
and Alderton seem to have stood on a different footing
from Trevore
and Ely, the other two seamen in the employ of the
colonists.
William Trevore was, we are told by Bradford, "a
seaman hired to stay a
year in the
countrie," but whether or not as part of the SPEEDWELL'S
Crew (who, he
tells us, were all hired for a year) does not appear.
As the Master
(Reynolds) and others of her crew undoubtedly returned
to London in
her from Plymouth, and her voyage was cancelled, the
presumption is
that Trevore and Ely were either hired anew or—more
probably—retained under their former agreement, to proceed by the
MAY-FLOWER to
America, apparently (practically) as passengers.
Whether of the
consort's crew or not, there can be little doubt that
he left
Delfshaven on the SPEEDWELL.
—- Ely, the other seaman in the Planters' employ, also
hired to "remain
a year in the
countrie," appears to have been drafted, like Trevore,
from the
SPEEDWELL before she returned to London, having, no doubt,
made passage
from Holland in her. Both Trevore and
Ely survived
"the
general sickness" at New Plimoth, and at the expiration of the
time for which
they were employed returned on the FORTUNE to England
Of
course the initial embarkation, on Friday, July 21/31 1620, was at Leyden,
doubtless upon the Dutch canal-boats which undoubtedly brought them from a
point closely adjacent to Pastor Robinson's house in the Klock-Steeg (Bell,
Belfry, Alley), in the garden of which were the houses of many, to Delfshaven.
Rev.
John Brown, D.D., says: "The barges needed for the journey were most
likely moored near the Nuns' Bridge which spans the Rapenburg immediately
opposite the Klok-Steeg, where Robinsons house was. This, being their usual
meeting-place, would naturally be the place of rendezvous on the morning of
departure. From thence it was but a stone's throw to the boats, and quickly
after starting they would enter the Vliet, as the section of the canal between
Leyden and Delft is named, and which for a little distance runs within the city
bounds, its quays forming the streets. In those days the point where the canal
leaves the city was guarded by a water-gate, which has long since been removed,
as have also the town walls, the only remaining portions of which are the
Morsch-gate and the Zylgate. So, gliding along the quiet waters of the Vliet,
past the Water-gate, and looking up at the frowning turrets of the Cow-gate,
'they left that goodly and pleasant city which had been their resting-place
near twelve years.' . . . Nine miles from Leyden a branch canal connects the
Vliet with the Hague, and immediately beyond their junction a sharp turn is
made to the left, as the canal passes beneath the Hoom-bridge; from this point,
for the remaining five miles, the high road from the Hague to Delft, lined with
noble trees, runs side by side with the canal. In our time the canal-boats make
a circuit of the town to the right, but in those days the traffic went by canal
through the heart of the city . . . . Passing out of the gates of Delft and
leaving the town behind, they had still a good ten miles of canal journey
before them ere they reached their vessel and came to the final parting, for,
as Mr. Van Pelt has clearly shown, it is a mistake to confound Delft with
Delfshaven, as the point of embarkation in the SPEEDWELL. Below Delft the
canal, which from Leyden thither is the Vliet, then becomes the Schie, and at
the village of Overschie the travellers entered the Delfshaven Canal, which
between perfectly straight dykes flows at a considerable height above the
surrounding pastures. Then finally passing through one set of sluice gates
after another, the Pilgrims were lifted from the canal into a broad receptacle
for vessels, then into the outer haven, and so to the side of the SPEEDWELL as
she lay at the quay awaiting their arrival."
Dr.
Holmes has prettily pictured the "Departure" in his "Robinson of
Leyden," even if not altogether correctly, geographically.
"He spake; with lingering, long embrace,
With
tears of love and partings fond,
They
floated down the creeping Maas,
Along the isle of Ysselmond.
"They passed the frowning towers of Briel,
The
'Hook of Holland's' shelf of sand,
And
grated soon with lifting keel
The
sullen shores of Fatherland.
"No home for these! too well
they knew
The
mitred king behind the throne;
The
sails were set, the pennons flew,
And
westward ho! for worlds unknown."
Winslow
informs us that they of the Leyden congregation who volunteered for the
American enterprise were rather the smaller fraction of the whole body, though
he adds, as noted "that the difference was not great." A careful
analysis of the approximate list of the Leyden colonists, —including, of
course, Carver, and Cushman and his family,—whose total number seems to have
been seventy-two, indicates that of this number, forty-two, or considerably
more than half (the rest being children, seamen, or servants), were probably
members of the Leyden church. Of these, thirty, probably, were males and twelve
females. The exact proportion this number bore to the numerical strength of
Robinson's church at that time cannot be determined, because while something
less than half as we know, gave their votes for the American undertaking, it
cannot be known whether or not the women of church had a vote in the matter.
Presumably they did not, the primitive church gave good heed to the words of
Paul (i Corinthians xiv. 34), "Let your women keep silence in the
churches." Neither can it be known—if they had a voice—whether the wives
and daughters of some of the embarking Pilgrims, who did not go themselves at
this time, voted with their husbands and fathers for the removal. The total
number, seventy-two, coincides very nearly with the estimate made by Goodwin,
who says: "Only eighty or ninety could go in this party from Leyden,"
and again: "Not more than eighty of the MAY-FLOWER company were from
Leyden. Allowing for [i.e. leaving out] the younger children and servants, it
is evident that not half the company can have been from Robinson's
congregation." As the total number of passengers on the MAYFLOWER was one
hundred and two when she took her final departure from England, it is clear
that Goodwin's estimate is substantially correct, and that the number
representing the Leyden church as given above, viz., forty-two, is very close
to the fact.
"When
they came to the place" [Delfshaven], says Bradford, "they found the
ship and all things ready; and such of their friends as could not come with
them [from Leyden] followed after them; and sundry also came from Amsterdam
(about fifty miles) to see them shipped, and to take their leave of them."
Saturday,
July 22/Aug. 1, 1620, the Pilgrim company took their farewells, and Winslow
records: "We only going aboard, the ship lying to the key [quay] and ready
to sail; the wind being fair, we gave them [their friends] a volley of small
shot [musketry] and three pieces of ordnance and so lifting up our hands to
each other and our hearts for each other to the Lord our God, we
departed."
Goodwin
says of the parting: "The hull was wrapped in smoke, through which was
seen at the stern the white flag of England doubly bisected by the great red
cross of St. George, a token that the emigrants had at last resumed their dearly-loved
nationality. Far above them at the main was seen the Union Jack of new
device."
And
so after more than eleven years of banishment for conscience' sake from their
native shores, this little band of English exiles, as true to their
mother-land—despite persecutions—as to their God, raised the flag of England,
above their own little vessel, and under its folds set sail to plant themselves
for a larger life in a New World.
And
thus opens the "Log" of the SPEEDWELL, and the
"Westward-Ho" of the Pilgrim Fathers.
THE SPEEDWELL'S LOG
Sunday, July 23/Aug. 2.
On the German
Ocean. Wind fair. General
course D.W.,
toward Southampton. sails
set, running
free.
Monday, July 24/Aug. 3.
Fair. Wind moderate. Dover Straits
English
Channel. In sight Dover Cliffs.
Tuesday, July 25/Aug. 5
Hugging English
shore. Enters Southampton
Water.
Wednesday, July 26/Aug. 5.
Came to anchor in
Port of Southampton near
ship MAYFLOWER of
Yarmouth, from London (to
which this pinnace
is consort), off the
north of the West
Quay.'
Thursday, July 27/Aug. 6.
At anchor in port
of Southampton.
Friday, July 28/Aug. 7.
Lying at anchor
at Southampton.
Saturday, July 29/Aug. 8.
Lying at
Southampton. MAY-FLOWER ready for
sea, but
pinnace leaking and requires
re-trimming.
Sunday, July 30/Aug. 9.
Lying at Southampton.
Monday, July 31/Aug. 10.
Ditto.
Tuesday, Aug. 1/11.
Ditto.
Wednesday, Aug. 2/22.
Ditto. Pinnace leaking. Re-trimmed again.
Thursday, Aug 3/13.
Ditto. Receiving passengers, etc. Some of
principal Leyden
men assigned to SPEEDWELL.
Friday, Aug. 4/14
Southampton. Making ready to leave.
Saturday, Aug. 5/55.
Dropped down
Southampton Water and beat
down Channel.
Wind dead ahead. Laid general
course W.S.W.
Sunday, Aug. 6/16.
Wind
baffling. Beating down Channel.
Monday, Aug. 7/17.
Ditto.
Tuesday, Aug. 8/18.
Ditto. Ship leaking.
Wednesday, Aug. 9/19.
Ship leaking
badly. Wind still ahead.
Thursday, Aug. 10/20.
Ship still
leaking badly. Gaining on
pumps. Hove to.
Signalled MAY-FLOWER, in
company. Consultation with Captain Jones
and principal
passengers. Decided vessels
shall put back,
Dartmouth, being nearest
convenient
port. Wore ship and laid course
for Dartmouth
with good wind.
Friday, Aug.
11/21.
Wind fair. Ship leaking badly.
Saturday, Aug.
12/22.
Made port at
Dartmouth MAY-FLOWER in
company. Came to anchor near MAY-FLOWER.
Sunday, Aug.
13/23.
Lying at anchor,
Dartmouth harbor.
Monday, Aug. 14/24.
Moving cargo and
overhauling and retrimming
ship.
Tuesday, Aug. 15/25.
Lying at Dartmouth. At on ship.
Wednesday, Aug. 16/26.
Ditto. Found a plank feet long loose and
admitting water
freely, as at a mole hole.
Seams opened
some.
Thursday, Aug. 17/27.
Lying at
Dartmouth. Some dissension among
chief of
passengers. Ship's "Governor"
unsatisfactory.
Friday, Aug.
18/28.
Lying at Dartmouth. Still at work on ship.
Saturday, Aug. 19/29.
Still lying at
Dartmouth.
Sunday, Aug.
20/30.
Lying at
Dartmouth.
Monday, Aug. 21/31
Still at Dartmouth.
Overhauling completed.
Cargo
relaced. Making ready to go to sea.
Tuesday, Aug. 22/Sept. 1.
Still at
Dartmouth. Lying at anchor ready
for sea.
Wednesday, Aug. 23/Sept. 2.
Weighed anchor,'
as did also MAY-FLOWER,
and set
sail. Laid general course W.S.W.
Wind fair
Thursday, Aug. 24/Sept.3.
Fair wind, but ship leaking.
Friday, Aug. 25/Sept. 4.
Wind fair. Ship leaking dangerously.
MAY-FLOWER in
company.
Saturday, Aug. 26/Sept. 5.
About 100 leagues
[300 miles] from Land's
End. Ship leaking badly. Hove to.
Signalled
MAY-FLOWER, in company.
Consultation
between masters, carpenters,
and principal
passengers. Decided to put
back into
Plymouth and determine whether
pinnace is
seaworthy. Put about and laid
course for
Plymouth.
Sunday, Aug. 27/Sept. 6.
Wind on starboard
quarter. Made Plymouth
harbor and came
to anchor. MAY-FLOWER in
company.
Monday, Aug. 28/Sept. 7.
At anchor in
Plymouth harbor. Conference
of chief of
Colonists and officers of
MAY-FLOWER and
SPEEDWELL. No special leak
could be found,
but it was judged to be the
general weakness of the
ship, and that she
would not prove
sufficient for the voyage.
It was resolved
to dismiss her the
SPEEDWELL, and
part of the company, and
proceed with the
other ship.
Tuesday, Aug. 29/Sept. 8
Lying at
Plymouth. Transferring cargo.
Wednesday, Aug. 30/Sept. 9
Lying at
Plymouth. Transferring cargo.
Saturday, Sept.
2/12
Ditto. Reassignment of passengers. Master
Cushman and
family, Master Blossom and son,
Wm. Ring and
others to return in pinnace to
London.
Sunday, Sept. 3/13
At anchor in
Plymouth roadstead.
Monday, Sept. 4/14
Weighed anchor
and took departure for
London, leaving
MAY-FLOWER at anchor in
roadstead.
Saturday, Sept. 9/19
Off Gravesend.
Came to anchor in Thames.
THE END OF THE VOYAGE AND
OF THE LOG OF THE
MAY-FLOWER'S
CONSORT
From
Bradford we learn that the SPEEDWELL was sold at London, and was
"refitted", her old trip being restored, and that she afterwards made
for her new owners many and very prosperous voyages.
CHAPTER III
THE MAY-FLOWER'S
CHARTER AND THE ADVENTURERS
The
ship MAY-FLOWER was evidently chartered about the middle of June, 1620 at London,
by Masters Thomas West Robert Cushman acting together in behalf of the Merchant
Adventurers (chiefly of London) and the English congregation of
"Separatists" (the "Pilgrims"), at Leyden in Holland who,
with certain of England associated, proposed to colony in America.
Professor
Arber, when he says, in speaking of Cushman and Weston, "the hiring of the
MAY-FLOWER, when they did do it, was their act alone, and the Leyden church
nothing to do with it," seems to forget that Cushman and his associate Carver
had no other function or authority in their conjunction with Weston and Martin,
except to represent the Leyden congregation. Furthermore, it was the avowed
wish of Robinson (see his letter dated June 14, 1620, to John Carver), that
Weston "may [should] presently succeed in hiring" [a ship], which was
equivalent to hoping that Carver and Cushman—Weston's associates representing
Leyden—would aid in so doing. Moreover, Bradford expressly states that:
"Articles of Agreement, drawn by themselves were, by their [the Leyden
congregation's] said messenger [Carver] sent into England, who together with
Robert Cushman were to receive moneys and make provisions, both for shipping,
and other things for the voyage."
Up
to Saturday, June 10, nothing had been effected in the way of providing
shipping for the migrating planters though the undertaking had been four months
afoot—beyond the purchase and refitting, in Holland, by the Leyden people
themselves, of a pinnace of sixty tons (the SPEEDWELL) intended as consort to a
larger ship—and the hiring of a "pilott" to refit her, as we have
seen.
The
Leyden leaders had apparently favored purchasing also the larger vessel still
needed for the voyage, hoping, perhaps, to interest therein at least one of
their friends, Master Edward Pickering, a merchant of Holland, himself one of
the Adventurers, while Master Weston had, as appears, inclined to hire. From
this disagreement and other causes, perhaps certain sinister reasons, Weston
had become disaffected, the enterprise drooped, the outlook was dubious, and
several formerly interested drew back, until shipping should be provided and
the good faith of the enterprise be thus assured.
It
transpires from Robinson's letter dated June 14., before quoted (in which he
says: "For shipping, Master Weston, it should seem is set upon
hiring"), that Robinson's own idea was to purchase, and he seems to have
dominated the rest. There is perhaps a hint of his reason for this in the
following clause of the same letter, where he writes: "I do not think
Master Pickering [the friend previously named] will ingage, except in the
course of buying ['ships?'—Arber interpolates] as in former letters
specified." If he had not then "ingaged" (as Robinson
intimates), as an Adventurer, he surely did later, contrary to the pastor's
prediction, and the above may have been a bit of special pleading. Robinson
naturally wished to keep their, affairs, so far as possible, in known and
supposedly friendly hands, and had possibly some assurances that, as a
merchant, Pickering would be willing to invest in a ship for which he could get
a good charter for an American voyage. He proved rather an unstable friend.
Robinson
is emphatic, in the letter cited, as to the imperative necessity that shipping
should be immediately provided if the enterprise was to be held together and
the funds subscribed were to be secured. He evidently considered this the only
guaranty of good faith and of an honest intention to immediately transport the
colony over sea, that would be accepted. After saying, as already noted, that
those behind-hand with their payments refuse to pay in "till they see
shipping provided or a course taken for it," he adds, referring to Master
Weston: "That he should not have had either shipping ready before this
time, or at least certain [i.e. definite] means and course, and the same known
to us, for it; or have taken other order otherwise; cannot in [according to] my
conscience be excused."
Bradford
also states that one Master Thomas Weston a merchant of London, came to Leyden
about the same time [apparently while negotiations for emigration under their
auspices were pending with the Dutch, in February or March, 1620], who was
"well acquainted with some of them and a furtherer of them in their former
proceedings.... and persuaded them.... not to meddle with the Dutch," etc.
This Robinson confirms in his letter to Carver before referred to, saying:
"You know right well we depend on Master Weston alone,.... and when we had
in hand another course with the Dutchman, broke it off at his motion."
On
the morning of the 10th of June, 1620, Robert Cushman, one of the Leyden agents
at London, after writing to his associate, Master John Carver, then at
Southampton; and to the Leyden leaders—in reply to certain censorious letters
received by him from both these sources —although disheartened by the
difficulties and prospects before him, sought Master Weston, and by an urgent
appeal so effectively wrought upon him, that, two hours later, coming to
Cushman, he promised "he would not yet give it [the undertaking] up."
Cushman's patience and endurance were evidently nearly "at the breaking
point," for he says in his letter of Sunday, June 11, when success had
begun to crown his last grand effort: "And, indeed, the many
discouragements I find here [in London] together with the demurs and retirings
there [at Leyden] had made me to say, 'I would give up my accounts to John
Carver and at his coming from Southampton acquaint him fully with all courses
[proceedings] and so leave it quite, with only the poor clothes on my back: But
gathering up myself by further consideration, I resolved yet to make one trial
more," etc. It was this "one trial more" which meant so much to
the Pilgrims; to the cause of Religion; to America; and to Humanity. It will
rank with the last heroic and successful efforts of Robert the Bruce and
others, which have become historic. The effect of Cushman's appeal upon Weston
cannot be doubted. It not only apparently influenced him at the time, but,
after reflection and the lapse of hours, it brought him to his associate to
promise further loyalty, and, what was much better, to act. The real animus of
Weston's backwardness, it is quite probable, lay in the designs of Gorges,
which were probably not yet fully matured, or, if so, involved delay as an
essential part. "And so," Cushman states, "advising together, we
resolved to hire a ship." They evidently found one that afternoon,
"of sixty last" (120 tons) which was called "a fine ship,"
and which they "took liking of [Old English for trial (Dryden), equivalent
to refusal] till Monday." The same afternoon they "hired another
pilot . . . one Master Clarke."—of whom further.
It
seems certain that by the expression, "we have hired another pilot here,
one Master Clarke," etc.; that Cushman was reckoning the
"pilott" Reynolds whom he had hired and sent over to them in Holland,
as shown—as at the first, and now Clarke as "another." It nowhere
appears that up to this date, any other than these two had been hired, nor had
there been until then, any occasion for more than one.
If
Cushman had been engaged in such important negotiations as these before he
wrote his letters to Carver and the Leyden friends, on Saturday morning, he
would certainly have mentioned them. As he named neither, it is clear that they
had not then occurred. It is equally certain that Cushman's appeal to Weston
was not made, and his renewed activity aroused, until after these letters had
been dispatched and nothing of the kind could have been done without Weston.
His
letter-writing of June 10 was obviously in the morning, as proven by the great
day's work Cushman performed subsequently. He must have written his letters
early and have taken them to such place as his messenger had suggested (Who his
messenger was does not appear, but it was not John Turner, as suggested by
Arber, for he did not arrive till that night.) Cushman must then have looked up
Weston and had an hour or more of earnest argument with him, for he says:
"at the last [as if some time was occupied] he gathered himself up a
little more" [i.e. yielded somewhat.] Then came an interval of "two
hours," at the end of which Weston came to him,
[It would be
highly interesting to know whether, in the two hours
which
intervened between Cushman's call on Weston and the latter's
return call,
Weston consulted Gorges and got his instructions. It
is certain
that he came prepared to act, and that vigorously, which
he had not
previously been.]
and they "advised together,"—which took time. It was by this
evidently somewhat past noon, a four or five hours having been consumed. They
then went to look for a ship and found one, which, from Cushman's remark,
"but a fine ship it is," they must (at least superficially) have
examined. While hunting for the ship they seem to have come across, and to have
hired, John Clarke the "pilot," with whom they necessarily, as with
the ship's people, spent some time. It is not improbable that the approach of
dusk cut short their examination of the ship, which they hence "took
liking of [refusal of] till Monday." It is therefore evident that the
"refusal" of the "sixty last" ship was taken, and the
"pilot" Clarke was "hired," on Saturday afternoon, June 10,
as on Sunday, June 11, Cushman informed the Leyden leaders of these facts by
letter, as above indicated, and gave instructions as to the SPEEDWELL'S
"pilott," Master Reynolds.
We
are therefore able to fix, nearly to an hour, the "turning of the
tide" in the affairs of the Pilgrim movement to America.
It
is also altogether probable that the Pilgrims and humanity at large are still
further (indirectly) indebted to Cushman's "one more trial" and
resultant Saturday afternoon's work, for the MAY-FLOWER (though not found that
day), and her able commander Jones, who, whatever his faults, safely brought
the Pilgrims through stormy seas to their "promised land."
Obligations
of considerable and rapidly cumulative cost had now been incurred, making it
imperative to go forward to embarkation with all speed, and primarily, to secure
the requisite larger ship. Evidently Weston and Cushman believed they had found
one that would serve, when on Saturday, they "took liking," as we
have seen, of the "fine ship" of 120 tons, "till Monday."
No less able authorities than Charles Deane, Goodwin, and Brown, with others,
have mistakenly concluded that this ship was the MAY-FLOWER, and have so stated
in terms. As editor of Bradford's history "Of Plimoth Plantation,"
Mr. Deane (in a footnote to the letter of Cushman written Sunday, June 11),
after quoting the remark, "But it is a fine ship," mistakenly adds,
"The renowned MAYFLOWER.—Ed.," thus committing himself to the common
error in this regard. John Brown, in his "Pilgrim Fathers of New
England," confuses the vessels, stating that, "when all was ready for
the start, a pilot came over to conduct the emigrants to England, bringing also
a letter from Cushman announcing that the MAYFLOWER, a vessel of one hundred
and eighty tons, Thomas Jones, Master, would start from London to Southampton
in a week or two," etc. As we have seen, these statements are out of their
relation. No pilot went for that purpose and none carried such a letter
(certainly none from Cushman), as alleged. Cushman's letter, sent as we know by
John Turner, announced the finding of an entirely different vessel, which was
neither of 180 tons burden, nor had any relation to the MAY-FLOWER or her
future historic freight. Neither was there in his letter any time of starting
mentioned, or of the port of Southampton as the destination of any vessel to go
from London, or of Jones as captain. Such loose statements are the bane of
history. Goodwin, usually so accurate, stumbles unaccountably in this
matter—which has been so strangely misleading to other competent men—and makes
the sadly perverted statement that, "In June, John Turner was sent, and he
soon returned with a petulant (sic) letter from Cushman, which, however,
announced that the ship MAYFLOWER had been selected and in two weeks would
probably leave London for Southampton." He adds, with inexcusable
carelessness in the presence of the words "sixty last" (which his
dictionary would have told him, at a glance, was 120 tons), that: "This
vessel (Thomas Jones, master) was rated at a hundred and eighty tons . . . .
Yet she was called a fine ship," etc. It is evident that, like Brown, he
confused the two vessels, with Cushman's letter before his eyes, from failure
to compute the "sixty last." He moreover quotes Cushman incorrectly.
The great disparity in size, however, should alone render this confusion
impossible, and Cushman is clear as to the tonnage ("sixty last"),
regretting that the ship found is not larger, while Bradford and all other
chroniclers agree that the MAY-FLOWER was of "9 score" tons burden.
It
is also evident that for some reason this smaller ship (found on Saturday
afternoon) was not taken, probably because the larger one, the MAY-FLOWER, was
immediately offered to and secured by Masters Weston and Cushman, and very
probably with general approval. Just how the MAY-FLOWER was obtained may never
be certainly known. It was only on Saturday, June 10, as we have seen, that
Master Weston had seriously set to work to look for a ship; and although the
refusal of one—not wholly satisfactory—had been prudently taken that day, it
was both natural and politic that as early as possible in the following week he
should make first inquiry of his fellow-merchants among the Adventurers,
whether any of them had available such a ship as was requisite, seeking to
find, if possible, one more nearly of the desired capacity than that of which
he had "taken the refusal" on Saturday. It appears altogether
probable that, in reply to this inquiry, Thomas Goffe, Esq., a fellow
Adventurer and shipping-merchant of London, offered the MAY-FLOWER, which, there
is ample reason to believe, then and for ten years thereafter, belonged to him.
It
is quite likely that Clarke, the newly engaged "pilot," learning that
his employers required a competent commander for their ship, brought to their
notice the master of the ship (the FALCON) in which he had made his recent
voyage to Virginia, Captain Jones, who, having powerful friends at his back in
both Virginia Companies (as later appears), and large experience, was able to
approve himself to the Adventurers. It is also probable that Thomas Weston
engaged him himself, on the recommendation of the Earl of Warwick, at the
instance of Sir Ferdinando Gorges.
As
several weeks would be required to fit the ship for her long voyage on such
service, and as she sailed from London July 15, her charter-party must
certainly have been signed by June 20, 1620. The SPEEDWELL, as appears from
various sources (Bradford, Winslow et al.), sailed from Delfshaven, Saturday,
July 22. She is said to have been four days on the passage to Southampton,
reaching there Wednesday, July 26. Cushman, in his letter of Thursday, August
17, from Dartmouth to Edward Southworth, says, "We lay at Southampton
seven days waiting for her" (the SPEEDWELL), from which it is evident,
both that Cushman came on the MAY-FLOWER from London, and that the MAY-FLOWER
must have left London at least ten days before the 26th of July, the date of
the SPEEDWELL'S arrival. As given traditionally, it was on the 15th, or eleven
days before the SPEEDWELL'S arrival at Southampton.
By
whom the charter-party of the MAY-FLOWER was signed will probably remain matter
of conjecture, though we are not without intimations of some value regarding
it. Captain John Smith tells us that the Merchant Adventurers (presumably one
of the contracting parties) "were about seventy, . . . not a Corporation,
but knit together by a voluntary combination in a Society without constraint or
penalty. They have a President and Treasurer every year newly chosen by the
most voices, who ordereth the affairs of their Courts and meetings; and with
the assent of most of them, undertaketh all the ordinary business, but in more
weighty affairs, the assent of the whole Company is required." It would
seem from the foregoing—which, from so intelligent a source at a date so
contemporaneous, ought to be reliable—that, not being an incorporated body, it
would be essential that all the Adventurers (which Smith expressly states was
their rule) should "assent" by their signatures, which alone could
bind them to so important a business document as this charter-party. It was
certainly one of their "more weighty affairs," and it may well be
doubted, also, if the owner of the vessel (even though one of their number)
would accept less than the signatures of all, when there was no legal status by
incorporation or co-partnership to hold them collectively.
If
the facts were indeed as stated by Smith,—whose knowledge of what he affirmed
there is no reason to doubt,—there can be little question that the contract for
the service of the MAY-FLOWER was signed by the entire number of the
Adventurers on the one part. If so, its covenants would be equally binding upon
each of them except as otherwise therein stipulated, or provided by the law of
the realm. In such case, the charter-party of the MAY-FLOWER, with the
autograph of each Merchant Adventurer appended, would constitute, if it could
be found, one of the most interesting and valuable of historical documents.
That it was not signed by any of the Leyden congregation—in any representative
capacity—is well-nigh certain. Their contracts were with the Adventurers alone,
and hence they were not directly concerned in the contracts of the latter,
their "agents" being but co-workers with the Adventurers (under their
partnership agreements), in finding shipping, collecting moneys, purchasing
supplies, and in generally promoting the enterprise. That they were not
signing-parties to this contract, in particular, is made very certain by the
suggestion of Cushman's letter of Sunday, June 11, to the effect that he hoped
that "our friends there [at Leyden] if they be quitted of the ship-hire
[as then seemed certain, as the Adventurers would hire on general account] will
be induced to venture [invest] the more." There had evidently been a grave
fear on the part of the Leyden people that if they were ever to get away, they
would have to hire the necessary ship themselves.
There
is just the shadow of a doubt thrown upon the accuracy of Smith's statement as
to the non-corporate status of the Adventurers, by the loose and unwieldy
features which must thereby attach to their business transactions, to which it
seems probable that merchants like Weston, Andrews, Beauchamp, Shirley,
Pickering, Goffe, and others would object, unless the law at that time expressly
limited and defined the rights and liabilities of members in such voluntary
associations. Neither evidences of (primary) incorporation, or of such legal
limitation, have, however, rewarded diligent search. There was evidently some
more definite and corporate form of ownership in the properties and values of
the Adventurers, arrived at later. A considerable reduction in the number of
proprietors was effected before 1624—in most cases by the purchase of the
interests of certain ones by their associates—for we find their holdings spoken
of in that year as "sixteenths," and these shares to have sometimes
been attached for their owners' debts. A letter of Shirley, Brewer et als., to
Bradford, Allerton et als., dated London, April 7, 1624, says: "If it had
not been apparently sold, Mr. Beauchamp, who is of the company also, unto whom
he [Weston] oweth a great deal more, had long ago attached it (as he did
other's 16ths)," etc. It is exceedingly difficult to reconcile these
unquestionable facts with the equal certainty that, at the
"Composition" of the Adventurers with the Planters in 1626, there
were forty-two who signed as of the Adventurers. The weight, however, of
evidence and of probability must be held to support the conclusion that in
June, 1620, the organization was voluntary, and that the charter-party of the
MAY-FLOWER was signed—" on the one part "—by each of the enrolled
Adventurers engaged in the Leyden congregation's colonization scheme. Goodwin'
alone pretends to any certain knowledge of the matter, but although a veracious
usually reliable writer, he is not infallible, as already shown, and could
hardly have had access to the original documents,—which alone, in this case,
could be relied on to prove his assertion that "Shortly articles were signed
by both parties, Weston acting for the Adventurers." Not a particle of
confirmatory evidence has anywhere been found in Pilgrim or contemporaneous
literature to warrant this statement, after exhaustive search, and it must
hence, until sustained by proof, be regarded as a personal inference rather
than a verity. If the facts were as appears, they permit the hope that a
document of so much prima facie importance may have escaped destruction, and
will yet be found among the private papers of some of the last survivors of the
Adventurers, though with the acquisition of all their interests by the Pilgrim
leaders such documents would seem, of right, to have become the property of the
purchasers, and to have been transferred to the Plymouth planters.
This
all-important and historic body—the company of Merchant Adventurers—is entitled
to more than passing notice. Associated to "finance" the projected
transplantation of the Leyden congregation of "Independents" to the
"northern parts of Virginia," under such patronage and protection of
the English government and its chartered Companies as they might be able to
secure, they were no doubt primarily brought together by the efforts of one of
their number, Thomas Weston, Esq., the London merchant previously named, though
for some obscure reason Master John Pierce (also one of them) was their
"recognized" representative in dealing with the (London) Virginia
Company and the Council for the Affairs of New England, in regard to their
Patents.
Bradford
states that Weston "was well acquainted with some of them the Leyden
leaders and a furtherer of them in their former proceedings," and this
fact is more than once referred to as ground for their gratitude and generosity
toward him, though where, or in what way, his friendship had been exercised,
cannot be learned,—perhaps in the difficulties attending their escape from
"the north country" to Holland. It was doubtless largely on this
account, that his confident assurances of all needed aid in their plans for
America were so relied upon; that he was so long and so fully trusted; and that
his abominable treachery and later abuse were so patiently borne.
We
are indebted to the celebrated navigator, Captain John Smith, of Virginia fame,
always the friend of the New England colonists, for most of what we know of the
organization and purposes of this Company. His ample statement, worthy of
repetition here, recites, that "the Adventurers which raised the stock to
begin and supply this Plantation, were about seventy: some, Gentlemen; some,
Merchants; some, handicraftsmen; some adventuring great sums, some, small; as
their estates and affections served . . . . These dwell most about London. They
are not a corporation but knit together, by a voluntary combination, in a
Society, with out constraint or penalty; aiming to do good and to plant
Religion." Their organization, officers, and rules of conduct, as given by
Smith, have already been quoted. It is to be feared from the conduct of such
men as Weston, Pierce, Andrews, Shirley, Thornell, Greene, Pickering, Alden,
and others, that profitable investment, rather than desire "to do good and
to plant Religion," was their chief interest. That the higher motives
mentioned by Smith governed such tried and steadfast souls as Bass, Brewer, Collier,
Fletcher, Goffe, Hatherly, Ling, Mullens, Pocock, Thomas, and a few others,
there can be no doubt.
[Weston wrote
Bradford, April 10, 1622, "I perceive and know as well
as another ye
disposition of your adventurers, whom ye hope of gaine
hath drawne on
to this they have done; and yet I fear ye hope will
not draw them
much further." While Weston's
character was utterly
bad, and he
had then alienated his interest in both Pilgrims and
Adventurers,
his judgment of men was evidently good.]
No
complete list of the original "seventy" has ever been found, and we
are indebted for the names of forty-two, of the fifty who are now known, to the
final "Composition" made with the Pilgrim colonists, through the
latter's representatives, November 15/25, 1626, as given by Bradford, and to
private research for the rest. The list of original members of the company of
Merchant Adventurers, as ascertained to date, is as follows. More extended
mention of them appears in the notes appended to this list.
Robert
Allden, Thomas Fletcher, Emanuel Altham, Thomas Goffe, Richard Andrews, Peter
Gudburn, Thomas Andrews, William Greene, Lawrence Anthony, Timothy Hatherly,
Edward Bass, Thomas Heath, John Beauchamp, William Hobson, Thomas Brewer,
Robert Holland, Henry Browning, Thomas Hudson, William Collier, Robert Keayne,
Thomas Coventry, Eliza Knight, John Knight, John Revell, Miles Knowles, Newman
Rookes, John Ling, Samuel Sharpe, Christopher Martin(Treasurer pro tem.), James
Shirley (Treasurer), Thomas Millsop, William Thomas, Thomas Mott, John Thornell
William Mullens, Fria Newbald, Matthew Thornell William Pennington, William
Penrin. Joseph Tilden, Edward Pickering, Thomas Ward, John Pierce, John White,
John Pocock, John Wincob, Daniel Poynton, Thomas Weston, William Quarles,
Richard Wright.
Shirley,
in a letter to Governor Bradford, mentions a Mr. Fogge and a Mr. Coalson, in a
way to indicate that they might have been, like himself, Collier, Thomas,
Hatherly, Beauchamp, and Andrews, also of the original Merchant Adventurers,
but no proof that they were such has yet been discovered. It has been suggested
that Sir Edwin Sandys was one of the number, at the inception of the
enterprise, but—though there is evidence to indicate that he stood the friend
of the Pilgrims in many ways, possibly lending them money, etc.—there is no
proof that he was ever one of the Adventurers. It is more probable that certain
promoters of Higginson's and Winthrop's companies, some ten years later, were
early financial sponsers of the MAY-FLOWER Pilgrims. Some of them were
certainly so, and it is likely that others not known as such, in reality, were.
Bradford suggests, in a connection to indicate the possibility of his having
been an "Adventurer," the name of a "Mr. Denison," of whom
nothing more is known. George Morton of London, merchant, and friend of the
leaders from the inception, and later a colonist, is sometimes mentioned as
probably of the list, but no evidence of the fact as yet appears. Sir George
Farrer and his brother were among the first of the Adventurers, but withdrew
themselves and their subscriptions very early, on account of some
dissatisfaction.
It
is impossible, in the space at command, to give more than briefest mention of
each of these individual Adventurers.
Allden. Was at one
time unfriendly to the Pilgrims,—Bradford calls him
"one of
our powerfullest opposers,"—but later their ally. Little
is known of
him. He appears to have been of London.
Altham. Was Master
of the pinnace LITTLE JAMES, belonging chiefly to
Fletcher, and
apparently expected to command her on her voyage to
New Plymouth
in 1623, as consort of the ANNE, but for some reason
did not go,
and William Bridge went as her Master, in his stead.
Andrews (Richard).
Was one of the wealthiest and most liberal of the
Adventurers. He was a haberdasher
of Cheapside, London, and an
Alderman of
the city. He became an early proprietor and liberal
benefactor of
the Massachusetts Bay Company, but most illogically
gave the debt
due him from Plymouth Colony (L540) to the stronger
and richer Bay
Colony. He had been, however, unjustly
prejudiced
against the
Pilgrims, probably through the deceit of Pierce, Weston,
Shirley, and
Allerton.
Andrews (Thomas).
A Lord Mayor of London, reputed a brother of the
last-named. Never very active in
the Adventurers' affairs, but
friendly, so
far as appears.
Anthony. Little or nothing is known concerning him.
Bass. Was one of
the enduring friends of the struggling Colony and
loaned them
money when they were in dire straits and the prospect of
recovery was
not good. He was of London, and
considerable is known
concerning
him.
Beauchamp. Was one
of the most active of the Company for many years.
Generally to
be relied upon as the Colony's friend, but not without
some sordid
self seeking. Apparently a wealthy
citizen and "salter"
of London.
Brewer. Is too
well-known as long the partner of Brewster in the conduct
of the "hidden
press" at Leyden, and as a sufferer for conscience'
sake, to
require identification. He was a wealthy
man, a scholar,
writer,
printer, and publisher. Was of the
University of Leyden,
but removed to
London after the departure of the chief of the
Pilgrims. Was their stanch friend, a loyal defender of
the faith,
and spent most
of his later life in prison, under persecution of the
Bishops.
Browning. Does not
appear to have been active, and little is known of
him.
Collier. Was a
stanch and steadfast friend. Finally
cast in his lot
with the
Pilgrims at New Plymouth and became a leading man in the
government
there. His life is well known. He was a "brewer."
Coventry. Appears only as a signer, and nothing is
known of him.
Fletcher. Was a
well-to-do merchant of London, a warm friend and a
reliance of
the Pilgrims. The loss of the LITTLE
JAMES was a severe
blow to him
financially.
Greene. Appears to
have been a merchant and a partner in Holland (and
perhaps at
London) of Edward Pickering. They were
well acquainted
personally
with the Pilgrims, and should have been among their most
liberal and
surest friends. Facts indicate, however,
that they were
sordid in
their interest and not entirely just.
Goffe. Was a
London merchant and ship-owner, as else where appears.
He was not
only a Merchant Adventurer, but a patentee and
deputy-governor of the Massachusetts Company, and an intimate
friend of
Winthrop. He lost heavily by his New
England ventures.
There is, as
shown elsewhere, good reason to believe that he was
the owner of
the MAY-FLOWER on her historic voyage, as also when
she came over
in Higginson's and Winthrop's fleets, ten years
later.
Gudburn. Appears only as a signer, so far as known.
Hatherly. Was a
well-to-do friend of the Pilgrims, and after many
complaints had
been made against them among the "Purchasers"
—arising out
of the rascality of Shirley and Allerton—went to New
England on a
mission of inquiry. He was perfectly
convinced of the
Pilgrims'
integrity and charmed with the country.
He made another
visit, and
removed thither in 1633, to remain. He
became at once
prominent in
the government of New Plimoth Colony.
Heath. Does not appear to have been active, and
naught is known of him.
Hobson. Is known only as a signer of the
"Composition."
Holland. Was a
friend and ally of the Pilgrims, and one of their
correspondents. He is supposed to
have been of the ancient house of
that name and
to have lived in London.
Hudson. Was not active, and appears as a signer only.
Keayne. Was a
well-to-do citizen of the vicinity of London, a friend, in
a general way, of the Pilgrims. He came to Boston with Winthrop.
Was prominent
in the Massachusetts Colony. Was the
founder and
first
commander of the early Artillery Company of Boston, the oldest
military
organization of the United States, and died at Boston,
leaving a
large estate and a very remarkable will, of which he made
Governor
Winslow an "overseer." He was
an erratic,—but valuable,
citizen.
Knight (Eliza).
Seems to have been the only woman of the Adventurers, so
far as they
are known, but no thing is known of her.
It has been
suggested that
the given name has been wrongly spelled and should be
"Eleazar,"—a man's name,—but the "Composition" gives
the signature
as Eliza,
clearly, as published.
Knight (John).
Finds no especial mention. He was
probably a relative of
Eliza.
Knowles. Appears only as a signer of the
"Composition."
Ling. Was a
wealthy friend of the colonists and always true to them. He
lost his
property and was in poverty when the Pilgrims (though not
yet well on
their feet), in grateful remembrance of his fidelity,
sent him a
generous gift.
Martin. Was the
first treasurer of the colonists and also a MAY-FLOWER
Pilgrim. Mention of him appears later. He was no
credit to the
Company, and
his early death probably prevented much vexation.
Millsop. Appears only as a signer of the
"Composition."
Mott. Has no
especial mention, but is believed to have sent some of his
people to
Plymouth Colony at an early day.
Mullens. Was, as
appears elsewhere, a well-conditioned tradesman of
Surrey,
England, who was both an Adventurer and a MAY-FLOWER
Pilgrim, and
Martin and himself appear to have been the only ones
who enjoyed
that distinction. He died, however, soon
after the
arrival at
Plymouth. That he was an Adventurer is
but recently
discovered by
the author, but there appears no room for doubt as to
the fact. His
record was brief, but satisfactory, in its relation to
the Pilgrims.
Newbald. Finds no especial mention.
Pennington. Appears only as a
signer. It is a London name.
Penrin. Appears only as a signer of the
"Composition."
Pickering. Is
introduced to us first as a Leyden merchant, through John
Robinson's
letters. He appears to have been a
shrewd, cold-blooded
calculator,
like his partner-Adventurer, Greene, not interested
especially in
the Pilgrims, except for gain, and soon deserting the
Adventurers. His family seem to have been in favor with
Charles II.
(See Pepys'
"Diary.")
Pierce (John).
Although recognized by the Virginia Companies and Council
for New
England, as the representative of the Adventurers, he has
only been
recently generally reckoned a chief man of the
Adventurers. A
Protean friend of the Pilgrims, never reliable, ever
pretentious,
always self-seeking, and of no help. He was finally
ruined by the
disasters to his ship, the PARAGON, which cost him all
his interests. Having attempted treacherously to secure to
himself
the Patent
granted in the Colony's interest, he was compelled by the
Council to
surrender its advantages to the Adventurers and
colonists.
Pocock. Was a
stanch and firm supporter of the Pilgrims and their
interests, at
all times, and to the end. He was also a
financial
supporter and
deputy-governor the Massachusetts
Company, under
Winthrop. A correspondent of Bradford. A good man.
Poyton. Finds no especial mention. He appears as a signer only.
Quarles. Appears only as a signer of the
"Composition."
Revell. Was a very
wealthy citizen, merchant, and ship owner of London,
and a good
man. He became also ardently interested
in Winthrop's
Company. Was an "assistant" and one of the
five "undertakers"
chosen to go
to New England to reside. He went to New
England on
the JEWELL of
Winthrop's fleet, and was part owner of the LADY
ARBELLA. He evidently, however, did not like the life,
and returned
after a few
weeks' stay.
Rookes. Appears only as a signer.
Sharpe. Was also a
friend of both Pilgrim and Puritan. He came to New
England in
1629, and settled first at Salem, in the Massachusetts
Company. He died in 1658, having long been a ruling
elder of the
church
there. He met with many enemies, but was
a valuable man and
an able
one. He was Governor Cradock's New
England agent.
Shirley. Requires
little mention here. The perfidious
friend of the
Pilgrims,—perhaps originally true to them,—he sunk everything for
hope of
gain. He was treasurer of the
Adventurers, one of their
most active
and intelligent men, but proved a rascal and a canting
hypocrite. He was a "citizen
and gold-smith" of London.
Thomas. Has
nowhere been enumerated in any list of the Adventurers
(though
occasionally mentioned as such by recent writers), which is
strange, as
repeated letters of his to Bradford, and other data,
show him to have
been one of the best and truest of them all.
He
sold his
interests before the "Composition" and became a colonist
after
1630. He was the fifth of the
Adventurers to come to New
England to
remain, and cast in his lot with the Pilgrims at New
Plimoth—Martin, Mullens, Collier, and Hatherly preceding him. A
wealthy and
well-informed man, he became a power in the government.
Probably Welsh
by birth, he was a London merchant when the
Adventurers
were organized. His home at Marshfield,
Massachusetts,
has since
become additionally famous as the home of Daniel Webster.
Thornell (John).
Is sometimes confounded with another Adventurer,
Matthew
Thornhill, as his name is some times so spelled. There is
reason to
believe they were related. He was not a
friend to the
Pilgrims.
Thornhill (or
Thornell), (Matthew). Little is known
concerning him.
Tilden. Was of an
old family in Kent, "a citizen and girdler of London,"
as his will
declares, his brother (Nathaniel) later coming to New
England and
settling near Hatherly at Scituate.
Nathaniel's son
Joseph—named
for his uncle—was made his executor and heir.
The
uncle was
always a firm friend of the Pilgrims.
Mr. Tilden's will
is given by Waters ("Genealogical
Gleanings," vol. i. p. 71), and
is of much
interest.
Ward. Appears only as a signer.
White. Probably
the Rev. John White, a stanch friend of the Pilgrims,
although not a
"Separatist," and intimately connected with the
upbuilding of
New England. His record was a broad and
noble one.
Goodwin says:
"Haven thinks White was that Dorchester clergyman
reputed to be
the author of the Planters' Plea."
Probably, but
not certainly,
William White of the Pilgrims was also an Adventurer.
Wincob (?). Was a
gentleman of the family of the Countess of Lincoln,
and the one in
whose name the first patent in behalf of the
Adventurers
and Pilgrims (which, however, was never used) was taken.
It is only recently that evidences which,
though not conclusive, are
yet quite
indicative, have caused his name to be added to the list,
though there
is still a measure of doubt whether it belongs there.
Weston. Requires
little mention here. Once a friend of
the Pilgrims and
unmistakably
the organizer of the Adventurers, he became a graceless
ingrate and
rascal. An instrument of good at first,
he became a
heartless and
designing enemy of the Planters. He was
a "citizen
and merchant
[ironmonger] of London." It is
altogether probable
that he was
originally a tool of Sir Ferdinando Gorges and was led
by him to
influence the Leyden brethren to break off negotiations
with the
Dutch. He died poor, at Bristol, England.
Wright. Perhaps
came to New Plimoth and married a daughter of the
MAY-FLOWER
Pilgrim, Francis Cooke. If so, he settled at Rehoboth and
became its
leading citizen. He may possibly have
been the settler
of that name
in the Bay-Colony, and the weight of evidence rather
favors the
latter supposition.
Of
the Adventurers, Collier, Hatherly, Keayne, Mullens, Revell, Pierce, Sharpe,
Thomas, and Weston, probably Wright and White, possibly others, came to America
for longer or shorter periods. Several of them were back and forth more than
once. The records show that Andrews, Goffe, Pocock, Revell, Sharpe, and White
were subsequently members of the Massachusetts (Winthrop's) Company.
Professor
Arberl finds but six of the Pilgrim Merchant Adventurers who later were among
the Adventurers with Winthrop's Company of Massachusetts Bay, viz.:—Thomas
Andrews, John Pocock, Samuel Sharpe, Thomas Goffe, John Revell, John White.
He
should have added at least, the names of Richard Andrews and Robert Keayne, and
probably that of Richard Wright.
Of
their number, Collier, Hatherly, Martin, Mullens, Thomas, and (possibly) Wright
were Plymouth colonists Martin and Mullens, as noted, being MAY-FLOWER
Pilgrims. Nathaniel Tilden, a brother of Joseph Tilden of the Adventurers,
came, as previously mentioned, to the Colony from Kent, settling at Scituate.
Joseph, being apparently unmarried, made his nephew, Joseph of Scituate, his
residuary legatee, and his property mostly came over to the Colony.
Collier,
Hatherly, and Thomas all located within a few miles of one another, were all
wealthy and prominent men in the government of the Colony, were intimate
friends,—the first and last especially,—and lent not a little dignity and
character to this new dependency of King James the First. The remaining twenty
or thereabouts whose names are not surely known—though a few of them are pretty
safely conjectured, some being presumably of the Holland Pilgrims and their
friends—were probably chiefly small contributors, whose rights were acquired
from time to time by others of larger faith in the enterprise, or greater
sympathy or means. Not all, however, who had ceased to hold their interests
when the "Composition" was made with Allerton in behalf of the
colonists, in 1626, were of these small holders. Weston was forced out by
stress of circumstances; Thomas moved to New England; Pierce was ruined by his
ventures by sea; Martin and Mullens died in 1621; Pickering and Greene got out
early, from distrust as to profits; Wincob alone, of this class, was a small
investor, if he was one at all.
By
far the greater portion of the sums invested by the Adventurers in behalf of
the Colony is represented by those whose names are known, those still unknown
representing, doubtless, numbers rather than amounts. It is, however,
interesting to note, that more than four sevenths of the original number, as
given by Captain John Smith, continued to retain their interests till the
"Composition" of 1626. It is to be hoped that it may yet be possible
to increase considerably, if not to perfect, the list of these coadjutors of
the Pilgrims—the Merchant Adventurers—the contracting "party of the second
part," to the charter-party of the MAY-FLOWER.
Who
the Owner of the MAY-FLOWER was, or who his representative, the "party of
the first part," to the charter party of the Pilgrim ship, cannot be
declared with absolute certainty, though naturally a matter of absorbing
interest. There is, however, the strongest probability, as before intimated, that
Thomas Goffe, Esq., one of the Merchant Adventurers, and always a stanch friend
of the Pilgrims, was the owner of the historic vessel,—and as such has
interwoven his name and hers with the histories of both the Pilgrim and Puritan
hegiras from Old to New England. He was, as previously stated, a wealthy
"merchant and ship owner of London," and not only an Adventurer with
the Leyden Pilgrims, but—nearly ten years later—a patentee of the Massachusetts
Company and one of its charter officers.
We
are told in the journal of Governor Winthrop of that Company—then on board the
LADY ARBELLA, the, "Admiral" or flagship of his fleet, riding at
Cowes, ready to set sail for New England—that on "Easter Monday (March
29), 1630, the CHARLES, the MAY-FLOWER, the WILLIAM AND FRANCIS, the HOPEWELL,
the WHALE, the SUCCESS, and the TRIAL," of his fleet, were "still at
Hampton [Southampton] and are not ready." Of these seven ships it is
certain that Mr. Goffe owned at least two, as Governor Winthrop—in writing,
some days later, of the detention of his son Henry and his friend Mr. Pelham,
who, going ashore, failed to return to the governor's ship before she sailed
from Cowes, and so went to the fleet at Southampton for passage—says: "So
we have left them behind and suppose they will come after in one of Mr. Goffe's
ships." It is clear, therefore, that Mr. Goffe, who was an intimate friend
and business associate of Governor Winthrop, as the latter's correspondence
amply attests, and was a charter deputy-governor of the Massachusetts Company, and
at this time "an assistant," was the owner of at least two (probably
not more) of these seven belated ships of the governor's fleet, riding at
Southampton. Bearing in mind that the MAY-FLOWER and the WHALE were two of
those ships, it becomes of much importance to find that these two ships,
evidently sailing in company (as if of one owner), arrived together in the
harbor of Charlestown, New England, on Thursday, July 1, having on board one of
them the governor's missing son, Henry Winthrop. If he came—as his father
expected and as appears certain—"in one of Mr. Goffe's ships," then
evidently, either the MAY-FLOWER or the WHALE, or both, belonged to Mr. Goffe.
That both were Goffe's is rendered probable by the fact that Governor
Winthrop—writing of the vessels as if associated and a single interest—states
that "most of their cattle [on these ships] were dead, whereof a mare and
horse of mine." This probability is increased, too, by the facts that the
ships evidently kept close company across the Atlantic (as if under orders of a
common owner, and as was the custom, for mutual defence and assistance, if
occasion required), and that Winthrop who, as we above noted, had large
dealings with Goffe, seems to have practically freighted both these ships for
himself and friends, as his freight bills attest. They would hence, so far as
possible, naturally keep together and would discharge their cargoes and have
their accountings to a single consignee, taken as nearly together as
practicable. Both these ships came to Charlestown,—as only one other did,—and
both were freighted, as noted, by one party.
Sadly
enough, the young man, Henry Winthrop, was drowned at Salem the very day after
his arrival, and before that of either of the other vessels: the HOPEWELL, or
WILLIAM AND FRANCIS (which arrived at Salem the 3d); or the TRIAL or CHARLES
(which arrived—the first at Charlestown, of the last at Salem—the 5th); or the
SUCCESS (which arrived the 6th); making it certain that he must have come in
either the MAY-FLOWER or the WHALE. If, as appears, Goffe owned them both, then
his ownership of the MAY-FLOWER in 1630 is assured, while all authorities agree
without cavil that the MAY-FLOWER of Winthrop's fleet in that year (1630) and
the MAY-FLOWER of the Pilgrims were the same. In the second "General
Letter of Instructions" from the Massachusetts Company in England—dated
London, May 28, 1629—to Governor Endicott and his Council, a duplicate of which
is preserved in the First Book of the Suffolk Registry of Deeds at Boston, the
historic vessel is described as "The MAY-FLOWER, of Yarmouth —William
Pierse, Master," and Higginson, in his "Journal of a Voyage to New
England," says, "The fifth ship is called the MAY-FLOWER carrying
passengers and provisions." Yarmouth was hence undoubtedly the place of
register, and the hailing port of the MAY-FLOWER,—she was very likely built
there,—and this would remain the same, except by legal change of register,
wherever she was owned, or from what ever port she might sail. Weston and
Cushman, according to Bradford, found and hired her at London, and her probable
owner, Thomas Goffe, Esq., was a merchant of that city. Dr. Young remarks:
"The MAYFLOWER Of Higginson's fleet is the renowned vessel that brought
the Pilgrim Fathers to Plymouth in 1620." Hon. James Savage says "The
MAYFLOWER had been a name of renown without forming part of this fleet
[Winthrop's, 1630], because in her came the devoted planters of Plimouth 1620 and she had
also brought in the year preceding 1629 some of
Higginson's company to Salem." Goodwin' says: "In 1629 she [the
Pilgrim MAY-FLOWER] came to Salem with a company of the Leyden people for
Plymouth, and in 1630 was one of the large fleet that attended John Winthrop,
discharging her passengers at Charlestown." Dr. Young remarks in a
footnote: "Thirty-five of the Leyden congregation with their families came
over to Plymouth via Salem, in the MAY-FLOWER and TALBOT."
In
view of such positive statements as these, from such eminent authorities and
others, and of the collateral facts as to the probable ownership of the
MAY-FLOWER in 1630, and on her earlier voyages herein presented, the doubt
expressed by the Rev. Mr. Blaxland in his "Mayflower Essays," whether
the ship bearing her name was the same, on these three several voyages,
certainly does not seem justified.
Captain
William Pierce, who commanded the MAY-FLOWER in 1629, when she brought over
part of the Leyden company, was the very early and intimate friend of the
Pilgrims—having brought over the ANNE with Leyden passengers in 1623—and sailed
exclusively in the employ of the Merchant Adventurers, or some of their number,
for many years, which is of itself suggestive.
To
accept, as beyond serious doubt, Mr. Goffe's ownership of the MAY-FLOWER, when
she made her memorable voyage to New Plimoth, one need only to compare, and to
interpret logically, the significant facts; —that he was a ship-owner of London
and one of the body of Merchant Adventurers who set her forth on her Pilgrim
voyage in 1620; and that he stood, as her evident owner, in similar relation to
the Puritan company which chartered her for New England, similarly carrying
colonists, self-exiled for religion's sake, in 1629 and again in 1630. This
conviction is greatly strengthened by the fact that Mr. Goffe continued one of
the Pilgrim Merchant Adventurers, until their interests were transferred to the
colonists by the "Composition" of 1626, and three years later (1629)
sent by the MAY-FLOWER, on her second New England voyage, although under a
Puritan charter, another company from the Leyden congregation. The (cipher)
letter of the "Governor and deputies of the New-England Company for a
plantation in Massachusetts Bay" to Captain John Endicott, written at
Gravesend, England, the 17th of April, 1629, says: "If you want any Swyne
wee have agreed with those of Ne[w] Plimouth that they deliver you six Sowes
with pigg for which they a[re] to bee allowed 9 lb. in accompt of what they the
Plymouth people owe unto Mr. Goffe [our] deputie [Governor]." It appears
from the foregoing that the Pilgrims at New Plymouth were in debt to Mr. Goffe
in 1629, presumably for advances and passage money on account of the contingent
of the Leyden congregation, brought over with Higginson's company to Salem, on
the second trip of the MAY-FLOWER. Mr. Goffe's intimate connection with the
Pilgrims was certainly unbroken from the organization of their Merchant
Adventurers in 1619/20, through the entire period of ten years, to 1630. There
is every reason to believe, and none to doubt, that his ownership of the
MAY-FLOWER of imperishable renown remained equally unbroken throughout these
years, and that his signature as her owner was appended to her Pilgrim
charter-party in 1620. Whoever the signatories of her charter-party may have
been, there can be no doubt that the good ship MAY-FLOWER, in charge of her
competent, if treacherous, Master, Captain Thomas Jones, and her first
"pilot," John Clarke, lay in the Thames near London through the
latter part of June and the early part of July, in the summer of 1620,
undergoing a thorough overhauling, under contract as a colonist-transport, for
a voyage to the far-off shores of "the northern parts of Virginia."
In
whatever of old English verbiage, with quaint terms and cumbersome repetition,
the stipulations of this contract of were concealed, there can be no doubt that
they purported and designed to "ingage" that "the Good ship
MAY-FLOWER of Yarmouth, of 9 score tuns burthen, whereof for the present viage
Thomas Joanes is Master," should make the "viage" as a
colonist-transport, "from the city of London in His Majesty's Kingdom of
Great Britain," etc., "to the neighborhood of the mouth of Hudson's
River, in the northern parts of Virginia and return, calling at the Port of
Southampton, outward bound, to complete her lading, the same of all kinds, to convey
to, and well and safely deliver at, such port or place, at or about the mouth
of Hudson's River, so-called, in Virginia aforesaid, as those in authority of
her passengers shall direct," etc., with provision as to her return
lading, through her supercargo, etc.
It
is probable that the exact stipulations of the contract will never transpire,
and we can only roughly guess at them, by somewhat difficult comparison with
the terms on which the LADY ARBELLA, the "Admiral," or flagship, of
Winthrop's fleet, was chartered in 1630, for substantially the like voyage (of
course, without expectation or probability, of so long a stay on the New
England coast), though the latter was much the larger ship. The contract
probably named an "upset" or total sum for the "round voyage,"
as was the of the case with the LADY ARBELLA, though it is to be hoped there
was no "demurrage" clause, exacting damage, as is usual, for each day
of detention beyond the "lay days" allowed, for the long and
unexpected tarries in Cape Cod and Plymouth harbors must have rolled up an
appalling "demurrage" claim. Winthrop enters among his memoranda,
"The agreement for the ARBELLA L750, whereof is to be paid in hand [i e.
cash down] the rest upon certificate of our safe arrival." The sum was
doubtless considerably in excess of that paid for the MAY-FLOWER, both because
she was a much larger, heavier-armed, and better-manned ship, of finer
accommodations, and because ships were, in 1630, in far greater demand for the
New England trade than in 1620, Winthrop's own fleet including no less than
ten. The adjustments of freight and passage moneys between the Adventurers and
colonists are matter of much doubt and perplexity, and are not likely to be
fully ascertained. The only light thrown upon them is by the tariffs for such
service on Winthrop's fleet, and for passage, etc., on different ships, at a
little later day. It is altogether probable that transportation of all those
accepted as colonists, by the agents of the Adventurers and
"Planters," was without direct charge to any individual, but was
debited against the whole. But as some had better quarters than others, some
much more and heavier furniture, etc., while some had bulky and heavy goods for
their personal benefit (such as William Mullen's cases of "boots and
shoes," etc.), it is fair to assume that some schedule of rates for
"tonnage," if not for individuals, became necessary, to prevent
complaints and to facilitate accounts. Winthrop credits Mr. Goffe—owner of two
of the ships in 1630—as follows:—
"For ninety-six passengers at L4, L384.
For
thirty-two tons of goods at L3 (per ton).
For
passage for a man, his wife and servant, (3 persons)
L16/10,
L5/10 each."
Goodwin
shows the cost of transportation at different times and under varying
conditions. "The expense of securing and shipping Thos. Morton of 'Merry
Mount' to England, was L12 7 0," but just what proportion the passage
money bore to the rest of the account, cannot now be told. The expense of Mr.
Rogers, the young insane clergyman brought over by Isaac Allerton, without
authority, was, for the voyage out: "For passage L1. For diet for eleven
weeks at 4s. 8d. per week, total L3 11 4" [A rather longer passage than
usual.] Constant Southworth came in the same ship and paid the same, L3 11 4,
which may hence be assumed as the average charge, at that date, for a
first-class passage. This does not vary greatly from the tariff of to-day,
(1900) as, reduced to United States currency, it would be about $18; and
allowing the value of sterling to be about four times this, in purchase ratio,
it would mean about $73. The expenses of the thirty-five of the Leyden
congregation who came over in the MAY-FLOWER in 1620, and of the others brought
in the LION in 1630, were slightly higher than these figures, but the cost of
the trip from Leyden to England was included, with that of some clothing. In
1650, Judge Sewall, who as a wealthy man would be likely to indulge in some
luxury, gives his outlay one way, as, "Fare, L2 3 0; cabin expenses, L4 11
4; total, L6 14 4."
CHAPTER IV
THE MAY-FLOWER—THE
SHIP HERSELF
Unhappily
the early chroniclers familiar with the MAY-FLOWER have left us neither
representation nor general description of her, and but few data from which we
may reconstruct her outlines and details for ourselves. Tradition chiefly
determines her place in one of the few classes into which the merchant craft of
her day were divided, her tonnage and service being almost the only other
authentic indices to this class.
Bradford
helps us to little more than the statement, that a vessel, which could have
been no other, "was hired at London, being of burden about 9 score"
[tons], while the same extraordinary silence, which we have noticed as to her
name, exists as to her description, with Smith, Bradford, Winslow, Morton, and
the other contemporaneous or early writers of Pilgrim history. Her hundred and
eighty tons register indicates in general her size, and to some extent her
probable model and rig.
Long
search for a reliable, coetaneous picture of one of the larger ships of the
merchant service of England, in the Pilgrim period, has been rewarded by the
discovery of the excellent "cut" of such a craft, taken from M.
Blundeville's "New and Necessarie Treatise of Navigation," published
early in the seventeenth century. Appearing in a work of so high character,
published by so competent a navigator and critic, and (approximately) in the
very time of the Pilgrim "exodus," there can be no doubt that it
quite correctly, if roughly and insufficiently, depicts the outlines, rig, and
general cast of a vessel of the MAY-FLOWER type and time, as she appeared to
those of that day, familiar therewith.
It
gives us a ship corresponding, in the chief essentials, to that which careful
study of the detail and minutiae of the meagre MAY-FLOWER history and its
collaterals had already permitted the author and others to construct mentally,
and one which confirms in general the conceptions wrought out by the best
artists and students who have attempted to portray the historic ship herself.
Captain
J. W. Collins, whose experience and labors in this relation are further alluded
to, and whose opinion is entitled to respect, writes the author in this
connection, as follows "The cut from Blundeville's treatise, which was
published more or less contemporaneously with the MAYFLOWER, is, in my
judgment, misleading, since it doubtless represents a ship of an earlier date,
and is evidently [sic] reproduced from a representation on tapestry, of which
examples are still to be seen (with similar ships) in England. The actual
builder's plans, reproduced by Admiral Paris, from drawings still preserved, of
ships of the MAYFLOWER'S time, seem to me to offer more correct and conclusive
data for accurately determining what the famous ship of the Pilgrim Fathers was
like."
Decidedly
one of the larger and better vessels of the merchant class of her day, she
presumably followed the prevalent lines of that class, no doubt correctly
represented, in the main, by the few coeval pictures of such craft which have
come down to us. No one can state with absolute authority, her exact rig,
model, or dimensions; but there can be no question that all these are very
closely determined from even the meagre data and the prints we possess, so
nearly did the ships of each class correspond in their respective features in
those days. There is a notable similarity in certain points of the MAY-FLOWER,
as she has been represented by these different artists, which is evidence upon
two points: first, that all delineators have been obliged to study the type of
vessel to which she belonged from such representations of it as each could
find, as neither picture nor description of the vessel herself was to be had;
and second, that as the result of such independent study nearly all are
substantially agreed as to what the salient features of her type and class
were. A model of a ship [3 masts] of the MAY-FLOWER type, and called in the
Society's catalogue "A Model of the MAY FLOWER, after De Bry," but
itself labelled "Model of one of Sir Walter Raleigh's Ships," is
(mistakenly) exhibited by the Pilgrim Society at Plymouth. It is by no means to
be taken as a correct representation of the Pilgrim bark. Few of the putative
pictures of the MAY-FLOWER herself are at all satisfactory,—apart from the
environment or relation in which she is usually depicted,—whether considered
from an historical, a nautical, or an artistic point of view. The only one of
these found by the author which has commanded (general, if qualified) approval
is that entitled "The MAY-FLOWER at Sea," a reproduction of which, by
permission, is the frontispiece of this volume. It is from an engraving by the
master hand of W. J. Linton, from a drawing by Granville Perkins, and appeared
in the "New England Magazine" for April, 1898, as it has elsewhere.
Its comparative fidelity to fact, and its spirited treatment, alike commend it
to those familiar with the subject, as par excellence the modern artistic
picture of the MAY-FLOWER, although somewhat fanciful, and its rig, as Captain
Collies observes, "is that of a ship a century later than the MAY-FLOWER;
a square topsail on the mizzen," he notes, "being unknown in the
early part of the seventeenth century, and a jib on a ship equally rare."
Halsall's picture of "The Arrival of the MAY-FLOWER in Plymouth
Harbor," owned by the Pilgrim Society, of Plymouth, and hung in the
Society's Hall, while presenting several historical inaccuracies, undoubtedly
more correctly portrays the ship herself, in model, rig, etc., than do most of
the well-known paintings which represent her. It is much to be regretted that
the artist, in woeful ignorance, or disregard, of the recorded fact that the
ship was not troubled with either ice or snow on her entrance (at her
successful second attempt) to Plymouth harbor, should have covered and
environed her with both.
Answering,
as the MAY-FLOWER doubtless did, to her type, she was certainly of rather
"blocky," though not unshapely, build, with high poop and forecastle,
broad of beam, short in the waist, low "between decks," and modelled
far more upon the lines of the great nautical prototype, the water-fowl, than
the requirements of speed have permitted in the carrying trade of more recent
years. That she was of the "square rig" of her time—when apparently
no use was made of the "fore-and-aft" sails which have so wholly
banished the former from all vessels of her size—goes without saying. She was
too large for the lateen rig, so prevalent in the Mediterranean, except upon
her mizzenmast, where it was no doubt employed.
The
chief differences which appear in the several "counterfeit
presentments" of the historic ship are in the number of her masts and the
height of her poop and her forecastle. A few make her a brig or
"snow" of the oldest pattern, while others depict her as a
full-rigged ship, sometimes having the auxiliary rig of a small
"jigger" or "dandy-mast," with square or lateen sail, on peak
of stern, or on the bow sprit, or both, though usually her mizzenmast is set
well aft upon the poop. There is no reason for thinking that the former of
these auxiliaries existed upon the MAY-FLOWER, though quite possible. Her 180
tons measurement indicates, by the general rule of the nautical construction of
that period, a length of from 90 to 100 feet, "from taffrail to
knighthead," with about 24 feet beam, and with such a hull as this, three
masts would be far more likely than two. The fact that she is always called a
"ship"—to which name, as indicating a class, three masts technically
attach—is also somewhat significant, though the term is often generically used.
Mrs. Jane G. Austin calls the MAY-FLOWER a "brig," but there does not
appear anywhere any warrant for so doing.
At
the Smithsonian Institution (National Museum) at Washington, D. C., there is
exhibited a model of the MAY-FLOWER, constructed from the ratio of measurements
given in connection with the sketch and working plans of a British ship of the
merchant MAY-FLOWER class of the seventeenth century, as laid down by Admiral
Francois Edmond Paris, of France, in his "Souvenirs de Marine." The
hull and rigging of this model were carefully worked out by, and under the
supervision of Captain Joseph W. Collins (long in the service of the
Smithsonian Institution, in nautical and kindred matters, and now a member of
the Massachusetts Commission of Inland Fisheries and Game), but were calculated
on the erroneous basis of a ship of 120 instead of 180 tons measurement. This
model, which is upon a scale of 1/2 inch to 1 foot, bears a label designating
it as "The 'MAYFLOWER' of the Puritans" [sic], and giving the
following description (written by Captain Collins) of such a vessel as the
Pilgrim ship, if of 120 tons burthen, as figured from such data as that given
by Admiral Paris, must, approximately, have been. (See photographs of the model
presented herewith.) "A wooden, carvel-built, keel vessel, with full bluff
bow, strongly raking below water line; raking curved stem; large open head;
long round (nearly log-shaped) bottom; tumble in top side; short run; very
large and high square stern; quarter galleries; high forecastle, square on
forward end, with open rails on each side; open bulwarks to main [spar] and
quarter-decks; a succession of three quarter-decks or poops, the after one
being nearly 9 feet above main [spar] deck; two boats stowed on deck;
ship-rigged, with pole masts [i.e. masts in one piece]; without jibs; square
sprit sail (or water sail under bowsprit); two square sails on fore and main
masts, and lateen sail on mizzenmast."
Dimensions
of Vessel. Length, over all, knightheads to taffrail, 82 feet; beam, 22 feet;
depth, 14 feet; tonnage, 120; bowsprit, outboard, 40 feet 6 inches; spritsail
yard, 34 feet 6 inches; foremast, main deck to top, 39 feet; total length, main
[spar] deck to truck, 67 feet 6 inches; fore-yard, 47 feet 6 inches; foretopsail
yard, 34 feet 1 2 inches; mainmast, deck to top, 46 feet; total, deck to truck,
81 feet; main yard, 53 feet; maintopsail yard, 38 feet 6 inches; mizzen mast,
deck to top, 34 feet; total, deck to truck, 60 feet 6 inches; spanker yard, 54
feet 6 inches; boats, one on port side of deck, 17 feet long by 5 feet 2 inches
wide; one on starboard side, 13 feet 6 inches long by 4 feet 9 inches wide. The
above description "worked out" by Captain Collins, and in conformity
to which his putative model of the "MAY FLOWER" was constructed,
rests, of course, for its correctness, primarily, upon the assumptions (which
there is no reason to question) that the "plates" of Admiral Paris,
his sketches, working plans, dimensions, etc., are reliable, and that Captain
Collins's mathematics are correct, in reducing and applying the Admiral's data
to a ship of 120 tons. That there would be some considerable variance from the
description given, in applying these data to a ship of 60 tons greater
measurement (i.e. of 180 tons), goes without saying, though the changes would
appear more largely in the hull dimensions than in the rigging. That the
description given, and its expression in the model depicted, present, with
considerable fidelity, a ship of the MAY-FLOWER'S class and type, in her
day,—though of sixty tons less register, and amenable to changes otherwise,—is
altogether probable, and taken together, they afford a fairly accurate idea of
the general appearance of such a craft.
In
addition to mention of the enlargements which the increased tonnage certainly
entails, the following features of the description seem to call for remark.
It
is doubtful whether the vessels of this class had "open bulwarks to the
main [spar] deck," or "a succession of three quarter-decks or
poops." Many models and prints of ships of that period and class show but
two. It is probable that if the jib was absent, as Captain Collins believes
(though it was evidently in use upon some of the pinnaces and shallops of the
time, and its utility therefore appreciated), there was a small squaresail on a
"dandy" mast on the bowsprit, and very possibly the "sprit"
or "water-sail" he describes. The length of the vessel as given by
Captain Collins, as well as her beam, being based on a measurement of but 120
tons, are both doubtless less than they should be, the depth probably also
varying slightly, though there would very likely be but few and slight
departures otherwise from his proximate figures. The long-boat would be more
likely to be lashed across the hatch amidships than stowed on the port side of
the deck, unless in use for stowage purposes, as previously suggested. Captain
Collins very interestingly notes in a letter to the author, concerning the
measurements indicated by his model: "Here we meet with a difficulty, even
if it is not insurmountable. This is found in the discrepancy which exists
between the dimensions—length, breadth, and depth—requisite to produce a
certain tonnage, as given by Admiral Paris and the British Admiralty. Whether
this is due to a difference in estimating tonnage between France (or other
countries) and Great Britain, I am unable to say, but it is a somewhat
remarkable fact that the National Museum model, which was made for a vessel of
120 tons, as given by Admiral Paris who was a Frenchman, has almost exactly the
proportions of length, depth, and breadth that an English ship of 180 tons
would have, if we can accept as correct the lists of measurements from the
Admiralty records published by Charnock . . . In the third volume of Charnock's
'History of Marine Architecture,' p. 274., I find that a supply transport of
175 tons, built in 1759, and evidently a merchant ship originally, or at least
a vessel of that class, was 79.4 feet long (tonnage measure), 22.6 feet beam,
and 11.61 feet deep." The correspondence is noticeable and of much
interest, but as the writer comments, all depends upon whether or not "the
measurement of the middle of the eighteenth century materially differed in
Great Britain from what it was in the early part of the previous century."
Like
all vessels having high stems and sterns, she was unquestionably "a wet
ship,"—upon this voyage especially so, as Bradford shows, from being
overloaded, and hence lower than usual in the water. Captain John Smith says:
"But being pestered [vexed] nine weeks in this leaking, unwholesome ship,
lying wet in their cabins; most of them grew very weak and weary of the
sea." Bradford says, quoting the master of the MAY-FLOWER and others:
"As for the decks and upper works they would caulk them as well as they
could, . . . though with the working of the ship, they would not long keep
staunch." She was probably not an old craft, as her captain and others
declared they "knew her to be strong and firm under water;" and the
weakness of her upper works was doubtless due to the strain of her overload, in
the heavy weather of the autumnal gales. Bradford says: "They met with
many contrary winds and fierce storms with which their ship was shrewdly shaken
and her upper works made very leaky." That the confidence of her master in
her soundness below the water-line was well placed, is additionally proven by
her excellent voyages to America, already noted, in 1629, and 1630, when she
was ten years older.
That
she was somewhat "blocky" above water was doubtless true of her, as
of most of her class; but that she was not unshapely below the water-line is
quite certain, for the re markable return passage she made to England (in
ballast) shows that her lower lines must have been good. She made the run from
Plymouth to London on her return voyage in just thirty-one days, a passage that
even with the "clipper ships" of later days would have been
respectable, and for a vessel of her model and rig was exceptionally good. She
was "light" (in ballast), as we know from the correspondence of
Weston and Bradford, the letter of the former to Governor Carver—who died
before it was received—upbraiding him for sending her home "empty."
The terrible sickness and mortality of the whole company, afloat and ashore,
had, of course, made it impossible to freight her as intended with
"clapboards" [stave-stock], sassafras roots, peltry, etc. No vessels
of her class of that day were without the high poop and its cabin possibilities,—admirably
adapting them to passenger service,—and the larger had the high and roomy
topgallant forecastles so necessary for their larger crews. The breadth of beam
was always considerably greater in that day than earlier, or until much later,
necessitated by the proportionately greater height ("topsides"),
above water, at stem and stern. The encroachments of her high poop and
forecastle left but short waist-room; her waist-ribs limited the height of her
"between decks;" while the "perked up" lines of her bow and
stern produced the resemblance noted, to the croup and neck of the wild duck.
That she was low "between decks" is demonstrated by the fact that it
was necessary to "cut down" the Pilgrims' shallop—an open sloop, of
certainly not over 30 feet in length, some 10 tons burden, and not very high
"freeboard"—"to stow" her under the MAY-FLOWER'S spar deck.
That she was "square-rigged" follows, as noted, from the fact that it
was the only rig in use for ships of her class and size, and that she had
"topsails" is shown by the fact that the "top-saile
halliards" were pitched over board with John Howland, and saved his life.
Bradford says: "A lustie yonge man (called John Howland) coming upon some
occasion above ye grattings, was with a seele of ye shipe throwne into ye sea:
but it pleased God yt he caught hould of ye top-saile halliards which hunge
over board & rane out at length yet he held his hould . . . till he was
haled up," etc. Howland had evidently just come from below upon the
poop-deck (as there would be no "grattings" open in the waist to
receive the heavy seas shipped). The ship was clearly experiencing "heavy
weather" and a great lurch ("seele") which at the stern, and on
the high, swinging, tilting poop-deck would be most severely felt, undoubtedly
tossed him over the rail. The topsail halliards were probably trailing
alongside and saved him, as they have others under like circumstances.
Whether
or not the MAY-FLOWER had the "round house" under her poop-deck, —-a
sort of circular-end deck-house, more especially the quarters, by day, of the
officers and favored passengers; common, but apparently not universal, in
vessels of her class,—we have no positive knowledge, but the presumption is
that she had, as passenger ships like the PARAGON (of only 140 tons), and
others of less tonnage, seem to have been so fitted!
It
is plain that, in addition to the larger cabin space and the smaller
cabins,—"staterooms," nowadays,—common to ships of the MAY-FLOWER'S
size and class, the large number of her passengers, and especially of women and
children, made it necessary to construct other cabins between decks. Whether
these were put up at London, or Southampton, or after the SPEEDWELL'S
additional passengers were taken aboard at Plymouth, does not appear. The great
majority of the men and boys were doubtless provided with bunks only,
"between decks," but it seems that John Billington had a cabin there.
Bradford narrates of the gunpowder escapade of young Francis Billington, that,
"there being a fowling-piece, charged in his father's cabin [though why so
inferior a person as Billington should have a cabin when there could not have
been enough for better men, is a query], shot her off in the cabin, there being
a little barrel of powder half-full scattered in and about the cabin, the fire
being within four feet of the bed, between the decks, . . . and many people
gathered about the fire," etc.
Whatever
other deductions may be drawn from this very badly constructed and ambiguous
paragraph of Bradford, two things appear certain,—one, that Billington had a
"cabin" of his own "between decks;" and the other, that
there was a "fire between decks," which "many people" were
gathered "about." We can quite forgive the young scamp for the
jeopardy in which he placed the ship and her company, since it resulted in
giving us so much data concerning the MAY-FLOWER'S "interior."
Captain John Smith's remark, already quoted, as to the MAY-FLOWER'S people
"lying wet in their cabins," is a hint of much value from an experienced
navigator of that time, as to the "interior" construction of ships
and the bestowal of passengers in them, in that day, doubtless applicable to
the MAY-FLOWER.
While
it was feasible, when lying quietly at anchor in a land-locked harbor, with
abundance of fire-wood at hand, to have a fire, about which they could gather,
even if only upon the "sand-hearth" of the early navigators, when
upon boisterous seas, in mid-ocean, "lying . . . in their cabins" was
the only means of keeping warm possible to voyagers. In "Good Newes from
New England," we find the lines:—
"Close cabins being now prepared,
With bred, bief, beire, and fish,
The passengers prepare themselves,
That they might have their wish."
Her
magazine, carpenter's and sailmaker's lockers, etc., were doubtless well
forward under her forecastle, easily accessible from the spar-deck, as was
common to merchant vessels of her class and size. Dr. Young, in his
"Chronicles of the Pilgrim Fathers" (p. 86, note), says: "This
vessel was less than the average size of the fishing-smacks that go to the
Grand Banks. This seems a frail bark in which to cross a stormy ocean of three
thousand miles in extent. Yet it should be remembered that two of the ships of Columbus
on his first daring and perilous voyage of discovery, were light vessels,
without decks, little superior to the small craft that ply on our rivers and
along our coasts . . . . Frobisher's fleet consisted of two barks of
twenty-five tons each and a pinnace of ten tons, when he sailed in 1576 to
discover a north-west passage to the Indies. Sir Francis Drake, too, embarked
on his voyage for circumnavigating the globe, in 1577, with five vessels, of
which the largest was of one hundred, and the smallest fifteen tons. The bark
in which Sir Humphrey Gilbert perished was of ten tons only." The LITTLE
JAMES, which the Company sent to Plymouth in July, 1623, was "a pinnace of
only forty-four tons," and in a vessel of fifty tons (the SPEEDWELL),
Martin Pring, in 1603, coasted along the shores of New England. Goodwin says:
"In 1587 there were not in all England's fleet more than five merchant
vessels exceeding two hundred tons." The SPARROW-HAWK wrecked on Cape Cod
in 1626 was only 40 feet "over all." The Dutch seem to have built
larger vessels. Winthrop records that as they came down the Channel, on their
way to New England (1630), they passed the wreck of "a great Dutch
merchantman of a thousand tons."
The
MAY-FLOWER'S galley, with its primitive conditions for cooking, existed rather
as a place for the preparation of food and the keeping of utensils, than for
the use of fire. The arrangements for the latter were exceedingly crude, and
were limited to the open "hearth-box" filled with sand, the chief
cooking appliance being the tripod-kettle of the early navigators: This might
indeed be set up in any part of the ship where the "sand-hearth"
could also go, and the smoke be cared for. It not infrequently found space in
the fore castle, between decks, and, when fine weather prevailed, upon the open
deck, as in the open caravels of Columbus, a hundred years before. The
bake-kettle and the frying-pan held only less important places than the kettle
for boiling. It must have been rather a burst of the imagination that led Mrs.
Austin, in "Standish of Standish," to make Peter Browne remind poor
half-frozen Goodman—whom he is urging to make an effort to reach home, when
they had been lost, but had got in sight of the MAY-FLOWER In the harbor—of
"the good fires aboard of her." Moreover, on January 22, when Goodman
was lost, the company had occupied their "common-house" on shore. Her
ordnance doubtless comprised several heavy guns (as such were then reckoned),
mounted on the spar-deck amid ships, with lighter guns astern and on. the rail,
and a piece of longer range and larger calibre upon the forecastle. Such was
the general disposal of ordnance upon merchant vessels of her size in that day,
when an armament was a 'sine qua non'. Governor Winslow in his "Hypocrisie
Unmasked," 1646 (p. 91), says, in writing of the departure of the Pilgrims
from Delfshaven, upon the SPEEDWELL: "The wind being fair we gave them a
volley of small shot and three pieces of ordnance," by which it seems that
the SPEEDWELL, of only sixty tons, mounted at least "three pieces of
ordnance" as, from the form of expression, there seem to have been
"three pieces," rather than three discharges of the same piece.
The
inference is warranted that the MAY-FLOWER, being three times as large, would
carry a considerably heavier and proportionate armament. The LADY ARBELLA,
Winthrop's ship, a vessel of 350 tons, carried "twenty-eight pieces of
ordnance;" but as "Admiral" of the fleet, at a time when there
was a state of war with others, and much piracy, she would presumably mount
more than a proportionate weight of metal, especially as she convoyed smaller
and lightly armed vessels, and carried much value. There is no reason to
suppose that the MAY-FLOWER, in her excessively crowded condition, mounted more
than eight or ten guns, and these chiefly of small calibre. Her boats included
her "long-boat," with which the experience of her company in
"Cape Cod harbor" have made us familiar, and perhaps other smaller
boats,—besides the Master's "skiff" or "gig," of whose
existence and necessity there are numerous proofs. "Monday the 27,"
Bradford and Winslow state, "it proved rough weather and cross winds, so
as we were constrained, some in the shallop and others in the long-boat,"
etc. Bradford states, in regard to the repeated springings-a-leak of the
SPEEDWELL: "So the Master of the bigger ship, called Master Jones, being
consulted with;" and again, "The Master of the small ship complained
his ship was so leaky . . . so they [Masters Jones and Reynolds] came to
consultation, again," etc. It is evident that Jones was obliged to visit
the SPEEDWELL to inspect her and to consult with the leaders, who were aboard
her. For this purpose, as for others, a smaller boat than the
"long-boat" would often serve, while the number of passengers and
crew aboard would seem to demand still other boats. Winthrop notices that their
Captain (Melborne) frequently "had his skiff heaved out," in the
course of their voyage. The Master's small boat, called the "skiff"
or "gig," was, no doubt, stowed (lashed) in the waist of the ship,
while the "long-boat" was probably lashed on deck forward, being
hoisted out and in, as the practice of those days was, by "whips,"
from the yardarms. It was early the habit to keep certain of the live-stock,
poultry, rabbits, etc., in the unused boats upon deck, and it is possible that
in the crowded state of the MAY-FLOWER this custom was followed. Bradford
remarks that their "goods or common store . . . were long in unlading [at
New Plimoth] for want of boats." It seems hardly possible that the
Admiralty authorities,—though navigation laws were then few, crude, and poorly
enforced,—or that the Adventurers and Pilgrim chiefs themselves, would permit a
ship carrying some 130 souls to cross the Atlantic in the stormy season, without
a reasonable boat provision. The capacity of the "long-boat" we know
to have been about twenty persons, as nearly that number is shown by Bradford
and Winslow to have gone in her on the early expeditions from the ship, at Cape
Cod. She would therefore accommodate only about one sixth of the ship's
company. As the "gig" would carry only five or six persons,—while the
shallop was stowed between decks and could be of no service in case of need
upon the voyage,—the inference is warranted that other boats were carried,
which fail of specific mention, or that she was wofully lacking. The want of
boats for unlading, mentioned by Bradford, suggests the possibility that some
of the ship's quota may have been lost or destroyed on her boisterous voyage,
though no such event appears of record, or is suggested by any one. In the
event of wreck, the Pilgrims must have trusted, like the Apostle Paul and his
associates when cast away on the island of Melita, to get to shore, "some
on boards and some on broken pieces of the ship." Her steering-gear,
rigging, and the mechanism for "getting her anchors,"
"slinging," "squaring," and "cockbilling" her
yards; for "making" and "shortening" sail; "heaving out"
her boats and "handling" her cargo, were of course all of the crude
and simple patterns and construction of the time, usually so well illustrating
the ancient axiom in physics, that "what is lost [spent] in power is
gained in time."
The
compass-box and hanging-compass, invented by the English cleric, William
Barlow, but twelve years before the Pilgrim voyage, was almost the only
nautical appliance possessed by Captain Jones, of the MAY-FLOWER, in which no
radical improvement has since been made. Few charts of much value—especially of
western waters—had yet been drafted, but the rough maps and diagrams of Cabot,
Smith, Gosnold, Pring, Champlain and Dermer, Jones was too good a navigator not
to have had. In speaking of the landing at Cape Cod, the expression is used by
Bradford in "Mourt's Relation," "We went round all points of the
compass," proving that already the mariner's compass had become familiar
to the speech even of those not using it professionally.
That
the ship was "well-found" in anchors (with solid stocks), hemp
cables, "spare" spars, "boat-tackling" and the heavy
"hoisting-gear" of those days, we have the evidence of recorded use.
"The MAY-FLOWER," writes Captain Collins, would have had a hemp cable
about 9 inches in circumference. Her anchors would probably weigh as follows:
sheet anchor (or best bower) 500 to 600 lbs.; stream anchor 350 to 400 lbs.;
the spare anchors same as the stream anchor.
"Charnock's
Illustrations" show that the anchors used in the MAY-FLOWER period were
shaped very much like the so called Cape Ann anchor now made for our deep-sea
fishing vessels. They had the conventional shaped flukes, with broad pointed
palms, and a long shank, the upper end passing through a wooden stock. [Tory
shows in his diagrams some of the anchors of that period with the space between
the shank and flukes nearly filled up in the lower part with metal.] Such an
anchor has the maximum of holding powers, and bearing in mind the elasticity of
the hemp cables then used, would enable a vessel to ride safely even when
exposed to heavy winds and a racing sea: There is no doubt, according to the
British Admiralty Office,—which should be authority upon the matter, —that the
flag under which the MAY-FLOWER, and all other vessels of the merchant marine
of Great Britain, sailed, at the time she left England (as noted concerning the
SPEEDWELL), was what became known as the "Union Jack," as decreed by
James the First, in 1606, supplanting the English ensign, which had been the
red cross of St. George upon a white field. The new flag resulted from the
"union" of the crowns and kingdoms of England and Scotland, upon the
accession of James VI. of Scotland to the English throne, as James I. of
England, upon the death of queen Elizabeth. Its design was formed by
superimposing the red cross of St. George upon the white cross of St. Andrew,
on a dark blue field; in other words, by imposing the cross of St. George,
taken from the English ensign, upon the Scotch flag, and creating there by the
new flag of Great Britain.
In
a little monograph on "The British Flag—Its Origin and History," a paper
read by its author, Jona. F. Morris, Esq., before the Connecticut Historical
Society, June 7, 1881, and reprinted at Hartford (1889), Mr. Morris, who has
made much study of the matter, states (p. 4): "In 1603, James VI. of
Scotland was crowned James I. of England. The Scots, in their pride that they
had given a king to England, soon began to contend that the cross of St. Andrew
should take precedence of the cross of St. George, that ships bearing the flag
of the latter should salute that of St. Andrew. To allay the contention, the
King, on the 12th of April, 1606, ordered that all subjects of Great Britain
travelling by sea shall bear at the maintop the red cross of St. George and the
white cross, commonly called the cross of St. Andrew, joined together according
to a form made by his heralds besides this all vessels belonging to South
Britain or England might wear the cross of St. George at the peak or fore, as
they were wont, and all vessels belonging to North Britain or Scotland might
wear the cross of St. Andrew at the fore top, as they had been accustomed; and
all vessels were for bidden to wear any other flag at their peril. The new flag
thus designed by the heralds and proclaimed by this order was called the
'King's Colors.' For a long period the red cross had been the colors of English
navigators, as well as the badge of English soldiery . . . . No permanent
English settlement in America was made until after the adoption of the 'King's
Colors.' Jamestown, Plymouth, Salem, and Boston were settled under the new
flag, though the ships bringing over settlers, being English vessels, also
carried the red cross as permitted." Mr. Barlow Cumberland, of Toronto,
Canada, has also given, in a little monograph entitled "The Union
Jack" (published by William Briggs of that city, 1898), an admirable
account of the history of the British jack, which confirms the foregoing
conclusions. The early English jack was later restored. Such, roughly sketched,
was the Pilgrim ship, the renowned MAY-FLOWER, as, drafted from the meagre but
fairly trustworthy and suggestive data available, she appears to us of to-day.
HER HISTORY:
In
even the little we know of the later history of the ship, one cannot always be
quite sure of her identity in the records of vessels of her name, of which
there have been many. Dr. Nathaniel B. Shurtleff, of Boston, says that "a
vessel bearing this name was owned in England about fifteen years or more
before the voyage of our forefathers, but it would be impossible to prove or
disprove its identity with the renowned MAY-FLOWER, however great such a
probability might be. It is known, nevertheless, that—the identical famous
vessel afterwards hailed from various English ports, such as London, Yarmouth,
and Southampton, and that it was much used in transporting immigrants to this
country. What eventually became of it and what was the end of its career, are
equally unknown to history." Goodwin says: "It does not appear that
the MAY-FLOWER ever revisited Plymouth, but in 1629 she came to Salem,"
with a company of the Leyden people for Plymouth, under command of Captain
William Peirce, the warm friend of the Pilgrims, and in 1630 was one of the
large fleet that attended John Winthrop, under a different master, discharging
her passengers at Charlestown. Nothing is certainly known of her after that
time. In 1648 a ship [hereinafter mentioned by Hunter] named the MAY-FLOWER was
engaged in the slave trade, and the ill-informed as well as the ill-disposed
have sometimes sneeringly alleged that this was our historic ship; but it is
ascertained that the slaver was a vessel of three hundred and fifty
tons,—nearly twice the size of our ship of happy memory. In 1588 the officials
of Lynn (England) offered the "MAY-FLOWER" (150 tons) to join the
fleet against the dreaded Spanish Armada. In 1657, Samuel Vassall, of London,
complained that the government had twice impressed his ship, MAY-FLOWER, which
he had "fitted out with sixty men, for the Straits." Rev. Joseph
Hunter, author of "The Founders of New Plymouth," one of the most
eminent antiquarians in England, and an indefatigable student of Pilgrim
history among British archives, says: "I have not observed the name of MAY
FLOWER [in which style he always writes it] before the year 1583 . . . But the
name soon became exceedingly popular among those to whom belonged the giving of
the names to vessels in the merchant-service. Before the close of that century
[the sixteenth] we have a MAY-FLOWER of Hastings; a MAY-FLOWER of Rie; a
MAY-FLOWER of Newcastle: a MAY FLOWER of Lynn; and a MAY-FLOWER Of Yarmouth:
both in 1589. Also a MAY-FLOWER of Hull, 1599; a MAY FLOWER of London of eighty
tons burden, 1587, and 1594, Of which Richard Ireland was the master, and
another MAY-FLOWER of the same port, of ninety tons burthen, of which Robert
White was the master in 1594, and a third MAY-FLOWER of London, unless it is
the same vessel with one of the two just spoken of, only with a different
master, William Morecock. In 1587 there was a MAY-FLOWER Of Dover, of which
John Tooke was the master. In 1593 there was a MAY-FLOWER of Yarmouth of 120
tons, of which William Musgrove was the master. In 1608 there was a MAY-FLOWER
of Dartmouth, of which Nicholas Waterdonne was the master; and in 1609 a
MAY-FLOWER of Middleburgh entered an English port."
Later
in the century we find a MAY-FLOWER of Ipswich, and another of Newcastle in
1618; a MAY-FLOWER of York in 1621; a MAY-FLOWER of Scarborough in 1630, Robert
Hadock the master; a MAY-FLOWER of Sandwich the same year, John Oliver the
master; a MAY-FLOWER of Dover, 1633, Walter Finnis, master, in which two sons
of the Earl of Berkshire crossed to Calais. "Which of these was the
vessell which carried over the precious [Pilgrim] freight cannot perhaps be
told [apparently neither, unless perhaps the MAY-FLOWER of Yarmouth of 1593, in
which case her tonnage is incorrectly given], but we learn from Mr. Sherley's
letter to Governor Bradford' that the same vessel was employed in 1629 in
passing between the two countries, a company of the church at Leyden, who had
joined in the first emigration, intending to pass in it to America; and in the
same author we find that the vessel arrived in the harbour of Charlestown [N.
E.] on July 1, 1630. There was a MAY-FLOWER which, in 1648, gained an
unenviable notoriety as a slaver. But this was not the MAY-FLOWER which had
carried over the first settlers, it being a vessel Of 350 tons, while the
genuine MAY-FLOWER was of only 180 tons." Of the first of her two known
visits, after her voyage with the Pilgrim company from Leyden, Goodwin says:
"In August, 1629, the renowned MAY-FLOWER came from England to Salem under
Plymouth's old friend [William] Peirce, and in her came thirty-five Leyden
people, on their way to Plymouth." The number has been in dispute, but the
large cost of bringing them, over L500, would suggest that their families must
have also come, as has been alleged, but for the following from Governor
Bradford's Letter Book: "These persons," he says, "were in all
thirty-five, which came at this time unto us from Leyden, whose charge out of
Holland into England, and in England till the ship was ready, and then their
transportation hither, came to a great deal of money, for besides victuals and
other expenses, they were all newly apparelled." Shirley, one of the Adventurers,
writing to Governor Bradford in 1629, says: "Here are now many of your
friends from Leyden coming over. With them also we have sent some servants, or
in the ship that went lately (I think called the TALBOT), and this that these
come in is the MAY-FLOWER." All that Higginson's journal tells of her, as
noted, is, that "she was of Yarmouth;" was commanded by William
Peirce, and carried provisions and passengers, but the fact that she was under
command of Captain Peirce of itself tells much. On her next trip the MAY-FLOWER
sailed from Southampton, in May, 1630, as part of Winthrop's fleet, and arrived
at Charlestown July 1. She was, on this voyage, under command of a new master
(perhaps a Captain Weatherby), Captain Peirce having, at this time, command of
the ship LYON, apparently in the service of Plymouth Colony. A vessel of this
name [MAY-FLOWER] was sailing between England and Boston in 1656. Young says:
"The MAY-FLOWER is a ship of renown in the history of the colonization of
New England. She was one of the five vessels which, in 1629, conveyed
Higginson's company to Salem, and also one of the fleet which, in 1630, brought
over his colony to Massachusetts Bay."
October
6, 1652, "Thomas Webber, Mr. of the good shipp called the MAYFLOWER of the
burden of Two hundred Tuns or there abouts . . . . Rideing at Ancor in the
Harber of Boston," sold one-sixteenth of the ship "for good &
valluable Consideracons to Mr. John Pinchon of Springfield Mrchant." The
next day, October 7, 1652, the same "Thomas Webber, Mr, of the good Shipp
called the MAY FLOWER of Boston in New England now bound for the barbadoes and
thence to London," acknowledges an indebtedness to Theodore Atkinson, a
wealthy "hatter, felt-maker," and merchant of Boston, and the same
day (October 7, 1652), the said "Thomas Webber, Mr. of the good shipp
called the MAY FLOWER of the burthen of Two hundred tuns or thereabouts,"
sold "unto Theodore Atkinson felt-maker one-sixteenth part as well of said
Shipp as of all & singular her masts Sails Sail-yards Ancors Cables Ropes
Cords Gunns Gunpowder Shott Artillery Tackle Munition apparrell boate skiffe
and furniture to the same belonging." It is of course possible that this
was the historic ship, though, if so, reappearing twenty two years after her
last known voyage to New England. If the same, she was apparently under both
new master and owner. From the facts that she is called "of Boston in New
England" and was trading between that port, "the Barbadoes" and
London, it is not impossible that she may have been built at Boston—a sort of
namesake descendant of the historic ship—and was that MAY-FLOWER mentioned as
belonging, in 1657, to Mr. Samuel Vassall; as he had large interests alike in
Boston, Barbadoes, and London. Masters of vessels were often empowered to sell
their ships or shares in them. Although we know not where her keel was laid, by
what master she was built, or where she laid her timbers when her work was
done, by virtue of her grand service to humanity, her fame is secure, and her
name written among the few, the immortal names that were not born to die.
CHAPTER V
THE OFFICERS AND
CREW OF THE MAYFLOWER
The
officers and crew of the MAY-FLOWER were obviously important factors in the
success of the Pilgrim undertaking, and it is of interest to know what we may
concerning them. We have seen that the "pilot," John Clarke, was
employed by Weston and Cushman, even before the vessel upon which he was to
serve had been found, and he had hence the distinction of being the first man "shipped"
of the MAY-FLOWER'S complement. It is evident that he was promptly hired on its
being known that he had recently returned from a voyage to Virginia in the
cattle-ship FALCON, as certain to be of value in the colonists' undertakings.
Knowing
that the Adventurers' agents were seeking both a ship and a master for her, it
was the natural thing for the latter, that he should propose the Captain under
whom he had last sailed, on much the same voyage as that now contemplated. It
is an interesting fact that something of the uncertainty which for a time
existed as to the names and features of the Pilgrim barks attaches the names
and identity of their respective commanders. The "given" name of
"Master" Reynolds, "pilott" and "Master" of the
SPEED WELL, does not appear, but the assertion of Professor Arber, though
positive enough, that "the Christian name of the Captain of the MAY-FLOWER
is not known," is not accepted by other authorities in Pilgrim history,
though it is true that it does not find mention in the contemporaneous accounts
of the Pilgrim ship and her voyage.
There
is no room for doubt that the Captain of the FALCON—whose release from arrest
while under charge of piracy the Earl of Warwick procured, that he might take
command of the above-named cattle-ship on her voyage to Virginia, as
hereinafter shown—was Thomas Jones. The identity of this man and "Master
Jones" who assumed command of the MAY-FLOWER—with the former mate of the
FALCON, John Clarke, as his first officer—is abundantly certified by
circumstantial evidence of the strongest kind, as is also the fact that he
commanded the ship DISCOVERY a little later.
With
the powerful backing of such interested friends as the Earl of Warwick and Sir
Ferdinando Gorges, undoubtedly already in league with Thomas Weston, who
probably made the contract with Jones, as he had with Clarke, the suggestion of
the latter as to the competency and availability of his late commander would be
sure of prompt approval, and thus, in all probability, Captain Thomas Jones,
who finds his chief place in history—and a most important one—as Master of the
MAY-FLOWER, came to that service.
In
1619, as appears by Neill, the Virginia Company had one John Clarke in Ireland,
"buying cattle for Virginia." We know that Captain Jones soon sailed
for Virginia with cattle, in the FALCON, of 150 tons, and as this was the only
cattle ship in a long period, we can very certainly identify Clarke as the
newly-hired mate of the MAY-FLOWER, who, Cush man says (letter of June 11/21,
1620), "went last year to Virginia with a ship of kine." As 1620 did
not begin until March 25, a ship sailing in February would have gone out in
1619, and Jones and Clarke could easily have made the voyage in time to engage
for the MAY-FLOWER in the following June. "Six months after Jones's trip
in the latter" (i.e. after his return from the Pilgrim voyage), Neill
says, "he took the DISCOVERY (60 tons) to Virginia, and then northward,
trading along the coast. The Council for New England complained of him to the
Virginia Company for robbing the natives on this voyage. He stopped at Plymouth
(1622), and, taking advantage of the distress for food he found there, was
extortionate in his prices. In July, 1625, he appeared at Jamestown, Virginia,
in possession of a Spanish frigate, which he said had been captured by one
Powell, under a Dutch commission, but it was thought a resumption of his old
buccaneering practices. Before investigation he sickened and died."
That
Jones was a man of large experience, and fully competent in his profession, is
beyond dispute. His disposition, character, and deeds have been the subject of
much discussion. By most writers he is held to have been a man of coarse,
"unsympathetic" nature, "a rough sea-dog," capable of good
feeling and kindly impulses at times, but neither governed by them nor by
principle. That he was a "highwayman of the seas," a buccaneer and
pirate, guilty of blood for gold, there can be no doubt. Certainly nothing
could justify the estimate of him given by Professor Arber, that "he was
both fair-minded and friendly toward the Pilgrim Fathers," and he
certainly stands alone among writers of reputation in that opinion. Jones's
selfishness,
[Bradford
himself—whose authority in the matter will not be
doubted—says
(Historie, Mass. ed. p. 112): "As
this calamitie,
the general
sickness, fell among ye passengers that were to be left
here to plant,
and were basted ashore and made to drinke water, that
the sea-men
might have ye more bear [beer] and one in his sickness
desiring but a
small can of beare it was answered that if he were
their own
father he should have none."
Bradford also shows (op.
cit. p. 153) the rapacity of Jones, when in
command of the
DISCOVERY, in
his extortionate demands upon the Plymouth planters,
notwithstanding their necessities.]
threats, boorishness, and extortion, to say nothing of his exceedingly bad
record as a pirate, both in East and West Indian waters, compel a far different
estimate of him as a man, from that of Arber, however excellent he was as a
mariner. Professor Arber dissents from Goodwin's conclusion that Captain Jones
of the DISCOVERY was the former Master of the MAY-FLOWER, but the reasons of
his dissent are by no means convincing. He argues that Jones would not have
accepted the command of a vessel so much smaller than his last, the DISCOVERY
being only one third the size of the MAY-FLOWER. Master-mariners, particularly
when just returned from long and unsuccessful voyages, especially if in bad
repute,—as was Jones, —are obliged to take such employment as offers, and are
often glad to get a ship much smaller than their last, rather than remain idle.
Moreover, in Jones's case, if, as appears, he was inclined to buccaneering, the
smaller ship would serve his purpose—as it seems it did satisfactorily. Nor is
the fact that Bradford speaks of him—although previously so well acquainted—as
"one Captain Jones," to be taken as evidence, as Arber thinks, that
the Master of the DISCOVERY was some other of the name. Bradford was writing
history, and his thought just then was the especial Providence of God in the
timely relief afforded their necessities by the arrival of the ships with food,
without regard to the individuals who brought it, or the fact that one was an
acquaintance of former years. On the other hand, Winslow—in his "Good
Newes from New England" —records the arrival of the two ships in August,
1622, and says, "the one as I take [recollect] it, was called the
DISCOVERY, Captain Jones having command thereof," which on the same line
of argument as Arber's might be read, "our old acquaintance Captain Jones,
you know"! If the expression of Bradford makes against its being Captain
Jones, formerly of the MAY-FLOWER, Winslow's certainly makes quite as much for
it, while the fact which Winslow recites, viz. that the DISCOVERY, under Jones,
was sailing as consort to the SPARROW, a ship of Thomas Weston,—who employed
him for the MAY-FLOWER, was linked with him in the Gorges conspiracy, and had
become nearly as degenerate as he,—is certainly significant. There are still
better grounds, as will appear in the closely connected relations of Jones, for
holding with Goodwin rather than with Arber in the matter. The standard
authority in the case is the late Rev. E. D. Neill, D. D., for some years
United States consul at Dublin, who made very considerable research into all
matters pertaining to the Virginia Companies, consulting their original records
and "transactions," the Dutch related documents, the "Calendars
of the East India Company," etc. Upon him and his exhaustive work all
others have largely drawn,—notably Professor Arber himself,—and his conclusions
seem entitled to the same weight here which Arber gives them in other
relations. Dr. Neill is clearly of opinion that the Captains of the MAY-FLOWER
and the DISCOVERY were identical, and this belief is shared by such authorities
in Pilgrim literature as Young, Prince, Goodwin, and Davis, and against this
formidable consensus of opinion, Arber, unless better supported, can hardly
hope to prevail.
The
question of Jones's duplicity and fraud, in bringing the Pilgrims to land at
Cape Cod instead of the "neighbor-hood of Hudson's River," has been
much mooted and with much diversity of opinion, but in the light of the
subjoined evidence and considerations it seems well-nigh impossible to acquit
him of the crime—for such it was, in inception, nature, and results, however
overruled for good.
The
specific statements of Bradford and others leave no room for doubt that the
MAY-FLOWER Pilgrims fully intended to make their settlement somewhere in the
region of the mouth of "Hudson's River." Morton states in terms that
Captain Jones's "engagement was to Hudson's River." Presumably, as
heretofore noted, the stipulation of his charter party required that he should
complete his outward voyage in that general locality. The northern limits of
the patents granted in the Pilgrim interest, whether that of John Wincob (or
Wincop) sealed June 9/ 19, 1619, but never used, or the first one to John
Pierce, of February 2/12, 1620, were, of course, brought within the limits of
the First (London) Virginia Company's charter, which embraced, as is
well-known, the territory between the parallels of 34 deg. and 41 deg. N.
latitude. The most northerly of these parallels runs but about twenty miles to
the north of the mouth of "Hudson's River." It is certain that the
Pilgrims, after the great expense, labor, and pains of three years, to secure
the protection of these Patents, would not willingly or deliberately, have
planted themselves outside that protection, upon territory where they had none,
and where, as interlopers, they might reasonably expect trouble with the lawful
proprietors. Nor was there any reason why, if they so desired, they should not
have gone to "Hudson's River" or its vicinity, unless it was that
they had once seemed to recognize the States General of Holland as the rightful
owners of that territory, by making petition to them, through the New
Netherland Company, for their authority and protection in settling there. But
even this fact constituted no moral or legal bar to such action, if desirable
First, because it appears certain that, whatever the cause, they "broke
off" themselves their negotiations with the Dutch,—whether on account of
the inducements offered by Thomas Weston, or a doubt of the ability of the
Dutch to maintain their claim to that region, and to protect there, or both,
neither appears nor matters. Second, because the States General—whether with
knowledge that they of Leyden had so "broken off" or from their own
doubts of their ability to maintain their claim on the Hudson region, does not
appear—rejected the petition made to them in the Pilgrims' behalf. It is
probable that the latter was the real reason, from the fact that the petition
was twice rejected.
In
view of the high opinion of the Leyden brethren, entertained, as we know, by
the Dutch, it is clear that the latter would have been pleased to secure them
as colonists; while if at all confident of their rights to the territory, they
must have been anxious to colonize it and thus confirm their hold, increase
their revenues as speedily as possible, and
Third,
because it appears upon the showing of the petition itself, made by the New
Netherland Company (to which the Leyden leaders had looked, doubtless on
account of its pretensions, for the authority and protection of the States
General, as they afterward did to the English Virginia Company for British
protection), that this Company had lost its own charter by expiration, and
hence had absolutely nothing to offer the Leyden people beyond the personal and
associate influence of its members, and the prestige of a name that had once
been potential. In fact, the New Netherland Company was using the Leyden congregation
as a leverage to pry for itself from the States General new advantages, larger
than it had previously enjoyed.
Moreover
it appears by the evidence of both the petition of the Directors of the New
Netherland Company to the Prince of Orange (February 2/12, 1619/20), and the
letters of Sir Dudley Carleton, the British ambassador at the Hague, to the
English Privy Council, dated February 5/15, 1621/22, that, up to this latter
date the Dutch had established no colony
[British State
Papers, Holland, Bundle 165. Sir Dudley
Carleton's
Letters.
"They have certain Factors there, continually resident,
trading with
savages . . . but
I cannot learn of any colony,
either I
already planted there by these people, or so much as
intended."
Sir Dudley Carleton's Letters.]
on the territory claimed by them at the Hudson, and had no other representation
there than the trading-post of a commercial company whose charter had expired.
There can be no doubt that the Leyden leaders knew, from their dealings with
the New Netherland Company, and the study of the whole problem which they
evidently made, that this region was open to them or any other parties for
habitation and trade, so far as any prior grants or charters under the Dutch
were concerned, but they required more than this.
To
Englishmen, the English claim to the territory at "Hudson's River"
was valid, by virtue of the discovery of the Cabots, under the law of nations
as then recognized, not withstanding Hudson's more particular explorations of
those parts in 1609, in the service of Holland, especially as no colony or
permanent occupancy of the region by the Dutch had been made.
Professor
John Fiske shows that "it was not until the Protestant England of Elizabeth
had come to a life-and-death grapple with Spain, and not until the discovery of
America had advanced much nearer completion, so that its value began to be more
correctly understood, that political and commercial motives combined in
determining England to attack Spain through America, and to deprive her of
supremacy in the colonial and maritime world. Then the voyages of the Cabots
assumed an importance entirely new, and could be quoted as the basis of a prior
claim on the part of the English Crown, to lands which it [through the Cabots]
had discovered."
Having
in mind the terrible history of slaughter and reprisal between the Spanish and
French (Huguenot) settlers in Florida in 1565-67,
[Bancroft,
History of the United States, vol. i. p.
68; Fiske,
Discovery of
America, vol. ii. p. 511 et seq. With the terrible
experience of
the Florida plantations in memory, the far-sighted
leaders of the
Leyden church proposed to plant under the shelter of
an arm strong
enough to protect them, and we find the Directors of
the New
Netherland Company stating that the Leyden party (the
Pilgrims) can
be induced to settle under Dutch auspices, "provided,
they would be
guarded and preserved from all violence on the part of
other potentates, by the authority, and under
the protection of your
Princely
Excellency and the High and Mighty States General."
Petition of
the Directors of the New Netherland Company to the
Prince of
Orange.]
the Pilgrims recognized the need of a strong power behind them, under whose
aegis they might safely plant, and by virtue of whose might and right they
could hope to keep their lives and possessions. The King of England had, in
1606, granted charters to the two Virginia Companies, covering all the
territory in dispute, and, there could be no doubt, would protect these grants
and British proprietorship therein, against all comers. Indeed, the King (James
I.) by letter to Sir Dudley Carleton, his ambassador at the Hague, under date of
December 15, 1621, expressly claimed his rights in the New Netherland territory
and instructed him to impress upon the government of the States General his
Majesty's claim,—"who, 'jure prime occupation' hath good and sufficient
title to these parts." There can be no question that the overtures of
Sandys, Weston, and others to make interest for them with one of these English
Companies, agreed as well with both the preferences and convictions of the
Leyden Pilgrims, as they did with the hopes and designs of Sir Ferdinando
Gorges. In the light of these facts, there appears to have been neither legal
nor moral bar to the evident intention of the Pilgrims to settle in the
vicinity of "Hudson's River," if they so elected. In their light,
also, despite the positive allegations of the truthful but not always reliable
Morton, his charges of intrigue between the Dutch and Master Jones of the
MAY-FLOWER, to prevent the settlement of his ship's company at "Hudson's
River," may well be doubted. Writing in "New England's Memorial"
in 1669, Morton says: "But some of the Dutch, having notice of their
intentions, and having thoughts about the same time of erecting a plantation
there likewise, they fraudulently hired the said Jones, by delays while they
were in England, and now under pretence of the shoals the dangers of the
Monomoy Shoals off Cape Cod to disappoint them in going thither." He adds:
"Of this plot between the Dutch and Mr. Jones, I have had late and certain
intelligence." If this intelligence was more reliable than his assertion
concerning the responsibility of Jones for the "delays while they were in
England," it may well be discredited, as not the faintest evidence appears
to make him responsible for those delays, and they are amply accounted for without
him. Without questioning the veracity of Morton (while suggesting his many
known errors, and that the lapse of time made it easy to misinterpret even
apparently certain facts), it must be remembered that he is the original
sponsor for the charge of Dutch intrigue with Jones, and was its sole support
for many years. All other writers who have accepted and indorsed his views are
of later date, and but follow him, while Bradford and Winslow, who were victims
of this Dutch conspiracy against them, if it ever existed, were entirely silent
in their writings upon the matter, which we may be sure they would not have
been, had they suspected the Dutch as prime movers in the treachery. That there
was a conspiracy to accomplish the landing of the MAY-FLOWER planters at a point
north of "the Hudson" (in fact, north of the bounds defined by the
(first) Pierce patent, upon which they relied), i.e. north of 41 deg. N.
latitude,—is very certain; but that it was of Dutch origin, or based upon
motives which are attributed to the Dutch, is clearly erroneous. While the
historical facts indicate an utter lack of motive for such an intrigue on the
part of the Dutch, either as a government or as individuals, there was no lack
of motive on the part of certain others, who, we can but believe, were
responsible for the conspiracy. Moreover, the chief conspirators were such,
that, even if the plot was ultimately suspected by the Pilgrims, a wise
policy—indeed, self-preservation —would have dictated their silence. That the
Dutch were without sufficient motive or interest has been declared. That the
States General could have had no wish to reject so exceptionally excellent a
body of colonists as subjects, and as tenants to hold and develop their
disputed territory—if in position to receive them and guarantee them protection
—is clear. The sole objection that could be urged against them was their
English birth, and with English regiments garrisoning the Dutch home cities,
and foreigners of every nation in the States General's employ, by land and by sea,
such an objection could have had no weight. Indeed, the Leyden party proposed,
if they effected satisfactory arrangements with the States General (as stated
by the Directors of the New Netherland Company), "to plant there [at
"Hudson's River"] a new commonwealth, all under the order and command
of your Princely Excellency and their High Mightinesses the States
General:" The Leyden Pilgrims were men who kept their agreements.
The
Dutch trading-companies, who were the only parties in the Low Countries who
could possibly have had any motive for such a conspiracy, were at this time
themselves without charters, and the overtures of the principal company, made
to the government in behalf of themselves and the Leyden brethren, had
recently, as we have seen, been twice rejected. They had apparently, therefore,
little to hope for in the near future; certainly not enough to warrant
expenditure and the risk of disgraceful exposure, in negotiations with a
stranger—an obscure ship-master—to change his course and land his passengers in
violation of the terms of his charter-party;—negotiations, moreover, in which
neither of the parties could well have had any guaranty of the other's good
faith.
But,
as previously asserted, there was a party—to whom such knavery was an ordinary
affair—who had ample motive, and of whom Master Thomas Jones was already the
very willing and subservient ally and tool, and had been such for years.
Singularly enough, the motive governing this party was exactly the reverse of
that attributed—though illogically and without reason—to the Dutch. In the case
of the latter, the alleged animus was a desire to keep the Pilgrim planters
away from their "Hudson's River" domain. In the case of the real
conspirators, the purpose was to secure these planters as colonists for, and
bring them to, the more northern territory owned by them. It is well known that
Sir Ferdinando Gorges was the leading spirit of the "Second Virginia
Company," as he also became (with the Earl of Warwick a close second) of "The
Council for the Affairs of New England," of which both men were made
"Governors," in November of 1620, when the Council practically
superseded the "Second Virginia Company." The Great Charter for
"The Council of Affairs of New England," commonly known as "The
Council for New England," issued Tuesday, November 3/13, 1620, and it held
in force till Sunday, June 7/17, 1635.
Although
not its official head, and ranked at its board by dukes and earls, Sir
Ferdinando Gorges was—as he had been in the old Plymouth (or Second) Virginia
Company—the leading man. This was largely from his superior acquaintance with,
and long and varied experience in, New England affairs. The "Council"
was composed of forty patentees, and Baxter truly states, that "Sir
Ferdinando Gorges, at this time 1621 stood at the
head of the Council for New England, so far as influence went; in fact, his
hand shaped its affairs." This company, holding—by the division of
territory made under the original charter-grants—a strip of territory one
hundred miles wide, on the North American coast, between the parallels of 41
deg. and 45 deg. N. latitude, had not prospered, and its efforts at
colonization (on what is now the Maine coast), in 1607 and later, had proved
abortive, largely through the character of its "settlers," who had
been, in good degree, a somewhat notable mixture of two of the worst elements
of society,—convicts and broken-down "gentlemen."
"In
1607," says Goodwin, "Gorges and the cruel Judge Popham planted a
colony at Phillipsburg (or Sagadahoc, as is supposed), by the mouth of the
Kennebec. Two ships came, 'THE GIFT OF GOD' and the 'MARY AND JOHN,' bringing a
hundred persons. Through August they found all delightful, but when the ships
went back in December, fifty five of the number returned to England, weary of
their experience and fearful of the cold .... With spring the ships returned
from England; "but by this time the remainder were ready to leave,"
so every soul returned with Gilbert [the Admiral] . . . . For thirty years
Gorges continued to push exploration and emigration to that region, but his
ambition and liberality ever resulted in disappointment and loss." The
annals of the time show that not a few of the Sagadahoc colonists were
convicts, released from the English jails to people this colony.
Hakluyt
says: "In 1607 [this should read 1608], disheartened by the death of
Popham, they all embarked in a ship from Exeter and in the new pynnace, the
'VIRGINIA,' built in the colony, and sett sail for England, and this was the
end of that northern colony upon the river Sachadehoc [Kennebec]."
No
one knew better than the shrewd Gorges the value of such a colony as that of
the Leyden brethren would be, to plant, populate, and develop his Company's
great demesne. None were more facile than himself and the buccaneering Earl of
Warwick, to plan and execute the bold, but—as it proved—easy coup, by which the
Pilgrim colony was to be stolen bodily; for the benefit of the "Second
Virginia Company" and its successor, "the Council for New
England," from the "First (or London) Company," under whose
patent (to John Pierce) and patronage they sailed. They apparently did not take
their patent with them,—it would have been worthless if they had,—and they were
destined to have no small trouble with Pierce, before they were established in
their rights under the new patent granted him (in the interest of the
Adventurers and themselves), by the "Council for New England." Master
John Wincob's early and silent withdrawal from his apparently active connection
with the Pilgrim movement, and the evident cancellation of the first patent
issued to him in its interest, by the (London) Virginia Company, have never
been satisfactorily explained. Wincob (or Wincop), we are told, "was a
religious Gentleman, then belonging to the household of the Countess of
Lincoln, who intended to go with them [the Pilgrims] but God so disposed as he
never went, nor they ever made use of this Patent, which had cost them so much
labor and charge." Wincob, it appears by the minutes of the (London)
Virginia Company of Wednesday, May 26/June 5, 1619, was commended to the
Company, for the patent he sought, by the fourth Earl of Lincoln, and it was
doubtless through his influence that it was granted and sealed, June 9/19,
1619. But while Wincob was a member of the household of the Dowager Countess of
Lincoln, mother of the fourth Earl of Lincoln; John, the eldest son of Sir
Ferdinando Gorges, had married the Earl's daughter (sister ?), and hence Gorges
stood in a much nearer relation to the Earl than did his mother's friend and
dependant (as Wincob evidently was), as well as on a much more equal social
footing. By the minutes of the (London) Virginia Company of Wednesday, February
2/ 12, 1619/20, it appears that a patent was "allowed and sealed to John
Pierce and his associates, heirs and assigns," for practically the same
territory for which the patent to Wincob had been given but eight months before.
No explanation was offered, and none appears of record, but the logical
conclusion is, that the first patent had been cancelled, that Master Wincob's
personal interest in the Pilgrim exodus had ceased, and that the Lincoln
patronage had been withdrawn. It is a rational conjecture that Sir Ferdinando
Gorges, through the relationship he sustained to the Earl, procured the
withdrawal of Wincob and his patent, knowing that the success of his (Gorges's)
plot would render the Wincob patent worthless, and that the theft of the
colony, in his own interest, would be likely to breed
"unpleasantness" between himself and Wincob's sponsors and friends
among the Adventurers, many of whom were friends of the Earl of Lincoln.
The
Earl of Warwick, the man of highest social and political rank in the First (or
London) Virginia Company, was, at about the same time, induced by Gorges to
abandon his (the London) Company and unite with himself in securing from the
Crown the charter of the "Council of Affairs for New England." The
only inducements he could offer for the change must apparently have resided in
the promised large results of plottings disclosed by him (Gorges), but he
needed the influential and unscrupulous Earl for the promotion of his schemes,
and won him, by some means, to an active partnership, which was doubtless
congenial to both. The "fine Italian hand" of Sir Ferdinando hence
appears at every stage, and in every phase, of the Leyden movement, from the
mission of Weston to Holland, to the landing at Cape Cod, and every movement
clearly indicates the crafty cunning, the skilful and brilliant manipulation,
and the dogged determination of the man.
That
Weston was a most pliant and efficient tool in the hands of Gorges, "from
start to finish" of this undertaking, is certainly apparent. Whether he
was, from the outset, made fully aware of the sinister designs of the chief
conspirator, and a party to them, admits of some doubt, though the conviction
strengthens with study, that he was, from the beginning, 'particeps criminis'.
If he was ever single-minded for the welfare of the Leyden brethren and the
Adventurers, it must have been for a very brief time at the inception of the
enterprise; and circumstances seem to forbid crediting him with honesty of
purpose, even then. The weight of evidence indicates that he both knew, and was
fully enlisted in, the entire plot of Gorges from the outset. In all its early
stages he was its most efficient promoter, and seems to have given ample proof
of his compliant zeal in its execution. His visit to the Leyden brethren in
Holland was, apparently, wholly instigated by Gorges, as the latter
complacently claims and collateral evidence proves. In his endeavor to induce
the leaders to "break off with the Dutch," their pending negotiations
for settlement at "Hudson's River," he evidently made capital of, and
traded upon, his former kindness to some of them when they were in straits,—a
most contemptible thing in itself, yet characteristic of the man. He led the
Pilgrims to "break off" their dealings with the Dutch by the largest
and most positive promises of greater advantages through him, few of which he
ever voluntarily kept (as we see by John Robinson's sharp arraignment of him),
his whole object being apparently to get the Leyden party into his control and
that of his friends,—the most subtle and able of whom was Gorges. Bradford
recites that Weston not only urged the Leyden leaders "not to meddle with
ye Dutch," but also,—"not too much to depend on ye Virginia [London]
Company," but to rely on himself and his friends. This strongly suggests
active cooperation with Gorges, on Weston's part, at the outset, with the
intent (if he could win them by any means, from allegiance to the First
(London) Virginia Company), to lead the Leyden party, if possible, into
Gorges's hands and under the control and patronage of the Second (or Plymouth)
Virginia Company. Whatever the date may have been, at which (as Bradford
states) the Leyden people "heard, both by Mr. Weston and others, yt
sundrie Honble: Lords had obtained a large grante from ye king for ye more
northerly parts of that countrie, derived out of ye Virginia patents, and
wholly secluded from theire Governmente, and to be called by another name, viz.
New England, unto which Mr. Weston and the chiefe of them begane to
incline;" Bradford leaves us in no doubt as to Weston's attitude toward
the matter itself. It is certain that the governor, writing from memory, long
afterward, fixed the time at which the Honble: Lords had obtained "their
large grante" much earlier than it could possibly have occurred, as we
know the exact date of the patent for the, "Council for New England,"
and that the order for its issue was not given till just as the Pilgrims left
Leyden; so that they could not have known of the actual "grante" till
they reached Southampton. The essential fact, stated on this best of authority,
is, that "Mr. Weston and the chiefe of them [their sponsors, i.e. Weston
and Lord Warwick, both in league with Gorges] begane to incline to Gorges's new
Council for New England." Such an attitude (evidently taken insidiously)
meant, on Weston's part, of necessity, no less than treachery to his associates
of the Adventurers; to the (London) Virginia Company, and to the Leyden company
and their allied English colonists, in the interest of Sir Ferdinando Gorges
and his schemes and of the new "Council" that Gorges was organizing.
Weston's refusal to advance "a penny" to clear the departing Pilgrims
from their port charges at Southampton; his almost immediate severance of connection
with both the colonists and the Adventurers; and his early association with
Gorges,—in open and disgraceful violation of all the formers' rights in New
England,—to say nothing of his exhibition of a malevolence rarely exercised
except toward those one has deeply wronged, all point to a complete and
positive surrender of himself and his energies to the plot of Gorges, as a full
participant, from its inception. In his review of the Anniversary Address of
Hon. Charles Francis Adams (of July 4, 1892, at Quincy), Daniel W. Baker, Esq.,
of Boston, says: "The Pilgrim Fathers were influenced in their decision to
come to New England by Weston, who, if not the agent of Gorges in this
particular matter, was such in other matters and held intimate relations with him."
The
known facts favor the belief that Gorges's cogitations on colonial
matters—especially as stimulated by his plottings in relation to the Leyden
people—led to his project of the grant—and charter for the new "Council
for New England," designed and constituted to supplant, or override, all
others. It is highly probable that this grand scheme —duly embellished by the
crafty Gorges,—being unfolded to Weston, with suggestions of great
opportunities for Weston himself therein, warmed and drew him, and brought him
to full and zealous cooperation in all Gorges's plans, and that from this time,
as Bradford states, he "begane to incline" toward, and to suggest to
the Pilgrims, association with Gorges and the new "Council." Not
daring openly to declare his change of allegiance and his perfidy, he
undertook, apparently, at first, by suggestions, e.g. "not to place too
much dependence on the London Company, but to rely on himself and
friends;" that "the fishing of New England was good," etc.; and
making thus no headway, then, by a policy of delay, fault finding, etc., to
breed dissatisfaction, on the Pilgrims' part, with the Adventurers, the patent
of Wincob, etc., with the hope of bringing about "a new deal" in the
Gorges interest. The same "delays" in sailing, that have been adduced
as proof of Jones's complicity with the Dutch, would have been of equal
advantage to these noble schemers, and if he had any hand in them-which does
not appear—it would have been far more likely in the interest of his long-time
patron, the Earl of Warwick, and of his friends, than of any Dutch
conspirators.
Once
the colonists were landed upon the American soil, especially if late in the
season, they would not be likely, it doubtless was argued, to remove; while by
a liberal policy on the part of the "Council for New England" toward
them—when they discovered that they were upon its territory—they could probably
be retained. That just such a policy was, at once and eagerly, adopted toward
them, as soon as occasion permitted, is good proof that the scheme was
thoroughly matured from the start. The record of the action of the
"Council for New England"—which had become the successor of the
Second Virginia Company before intelligence was received that the Pilgrims had
landed on its domain—is not at hand, but it appears by the record of the London
Company, under date of Monday, July 16/26, 1621, that the "Council for New
England" had promptly made itself agreeable to the colonists. The record
reads: "It was moved, seeing that Master John Pierce had taken a Patent of
Sir Ferdinando Gorges, and thereupon seated his Company [the Pilgrims] within
the limits of the Northern Plantations, as by some was supposed,"' etc.
From this it is plain that, on receipt by Pierce of the news that the colony
was landed within the limits of the "Council for New England," he
had, as instructed, applied for, and been given (June 1, 1621), the (first)
"Council" patent for the colony. For confirmation hereof one should
see also the minutes of the "Council for New England" of March
25/April 4., 1623, and the fulsome letter of Robert Cushman returning thanks in
behalf of the Planters (through John Pierce), to Gorges, for his prompt
response to their request for a patent and for his general complacency toward
them Hon. James Phinney Baxter, Gorges's able and faithful biographer, says:
"We can imagine with what alacrity he [Sir Ferdinando] hastened to give to
Pierce a patent in their behalf." The same biographer, clearly unconscious
of the well-laid plot of Gorges and Warwick (as all other writers but Neill and
Davis have been), bears testimony (all the stronger because the witness is
unwitting of the intrigue), to the ardent interest Gorges had in its success.
He says: "The warm desire of Sir Ferdinando Gorges to see a permanent
colony founded within the domain of the Plymouth [or Second] Virginia Company
was to be realized in a manner of which he had never dreamed [sic!] and by a
people with whom he had but little sympathized, although we know that he
favored their settlement within the territorial limits of the Plymouth [Second]
Company." He had indeed "favored their settlement," by all the
craft of which he was master, and greeted their expected and duly arranged
advent with all the jubilant open-handedness with which the hunter treats the
wild horse he has entrapped, and hopes to domesticate and turn to account.
Everything favored the conspirators. The deflection north-ward from the normal
course of the ship as she approached the coast, bound for the latitude of the
Hudson, required only to be so trifling that the best sailor of the Pilgrim
leaders would not be likely to note or criticise it, and it was by no means
uncommon to make Cape Cod as the first landfall on Virginia voyages. The
lateness of the arrival on the coast, and the difficulties ever attendant on
doubling Cape Cod, properly turned to account, would increase the anxiety for
almost any landing-place, and render it easy to retain the sea-worn colonists
when once on shore. The grand advantage, however, over and above all else, was
the entire ease and certainty with which the cooperation of the one man
essential to the success of the undertaking could be secured, without need of
the privity of any other, viz. the Master of the MAY-FLOWER, Captain Thomas
Jones.
Let
us see upon what the assumption of this ready and certain accord on the part of
Captain Jones rests. Rev. Dr. Neill, whose thorough study of the records of the
Virginia Companies, and of the East India Company Calendars and collateral
data, entitles him to speak with authority, recites that, "In 1617, Capt.
Thomas Jones (sometimes spelled Joanes) had been sent to the East Indies in
command of the ship LION by the Earl of Warwick (then Sir Robt. Rich), under a
letter of protection from the Duke of Savoy, a foreign prince, ostensibly 'to
take pirates,' which [pretext] had grown, as Sir Thomas Roe (the English
ambassador with the Great Mogul) states, 'to be a common pretence for becoming
pirate.'" Caught by the famous Captain Martin Pring, in full pursuit of
the junk of the Queen Mother of the Great Mogul, Jones was attacked, his ship
fired in the fight, and burned,—with some of his crew,—and he was sent a
prisoner to England in the ship BULL, arriving in the Thames, January 1,
1618/19. No action seems to have been taken against him for his offences, and
presumably his employer, Sir Robert, the coming Earl, obtained his liberty on
one pretext or another. On January 19, however, complaint was made against
Captain Jones, "late of the LION," by the East India Company,
"for hiring divers men to serve the King of Denmark in the East
Indies." A few days after his arrest for "hiring away the Company's
men, Lord Warwick got him off" on the claim that he had employed him
"to go to Virginia with cattle." From the "Transactions" of
the Second Virginia Company, of which—as we have seen—Sir Ferdinando Gorges was
the leading spirit, it appears that on "February 2, 1619/20, a commission
was allowed Captain Thomas Jones of the FALCON, a ship of 150 tons" [he
having been lately released from arrest by the Earl of Warwick's intercession],
and that "before the close of the month, he sailed with cattle for
Virginia," as previously noted. Dr. Neill, than whom there can be no
better authority, was himself satisfied, and unequivocally states, that
"Thomas Jones, Captain of the MAY-FLOWER, was without doubt the old
servant of Lord Warwick in the East Indies." Having done Sir Robert Rich's
(the Earl of Warwick's) "dirty work" for years, and having on all
occasions been saved from harm by his noble patron (even when piracy and
similar practices had involved him in the meshes of the law), it would be but a
trifling matter, at the request of such powerful friends as the Earl and Sir
Ferdinando Gorges, to steal the Pilgrim Colony from the London Virginia
Company, and hand it over bodily to the "Council for New
England,"—the successor of the Second (Plymouth) Virginia Company,—in
which their interests were vested, Warwick having, significantly, transferred
his membership from the London Company to the new "Council for New
England," as it was commonly called. Neill states, and there is abundant
proof, that "the Earl of Warwick and Gorges were in sympathy," and
were active coadjutors, while it is self-evident that both would be anxious to
accomplish the permanent settlement of the "Northern Plantations"
held by their Company. That they would hesitate to utilize so excellent an
opportunity to secure so very desirable a colony, by any means available, our
knowledge of the men and their records makes it impossible to believe,—while
nothing could apparently have been easier of accomplishment. It will readily be
understood that if the conspirators were these men,—upon whose grace the
Pilgrims must depend for permission to remain upon the territory to which they
had been inveigled, or even for permission to depart from it, without
spoliation, —men whose influence with the King (no friend to the Pilgrims) was
sufficient to make both of them, in the very month of the Pilgrims' landing,
"governors" of "The Council for New England," under whose
authority the Planters must remain,—the latter were not likely to voice their
suspicions of the trick played upon them, if they discovered it, or openly to
resent it, when known. Dr. Dexter, in commenting on the remark of Bradford,
"We made Master Jones our leader, for we thought it best herein to
gratifie his kindness & forwardness," sensibly says, "This proves
nothing either way, in regard to the charge which Secretary Morton makes of
treachery against Jones, in landing the company so far north, because, if that
were true, it was not known to any of the company for years afterward, and of
course could not now [at that time] impair their feelings of confidence in, or
kindness towards, him. Moreover, the phraseology, "we thought it best to
gratifie," suggests rather considerations of policy than cordial desire,
and their acquaintance, too, with the man was still young. There is, however,
no evidence that Jones's duplicity was suspected till long afterward, though
his character was fully recognized. Gorges himself furnishes, in his writings,
the strongest confirmation we have of the already apparent fact, that he was
himself the prime conspirator. He says, in his own "Narration,"
"It was referred [evidently by himself] to their [the London Virginia
Company's] consideration, how necessary it was that means might be used to draw
unto those their enterprises, some of those families that had retired
themselves into Holland for scruple of conscience, giving them such freedom and
liberty as might stand with their liking." When have we ever found Sir
Ferdinando Gorges thus solicitous for the success of the rival Virginia
Company? Why, if he so esteemed the Leyden people as excellent colonists, did
he not endeavor to secure them himself directly, for his own languishing
company? Certainly the "scruple of conscience" of the Leyden brethren
did not hinder him, for he found it no bar, though of the Established Church
himself, to giving them instantly all and more than was asked in their behalf, as
soon as he had them upon his territory and they had applied for a patent. He
well knew that it would be matter of some expense and difficulty to bring the
Leyden congregation into agreement to go to either of the Virginia grants, and
he doubtless, and with good reason, feared that his repute and the character
and reputation of his own Company, with its past history of failure, convict
settlers, and loose living, would be repellent to these people of
"conscience." If they could be brought to the "going-point,"
by men more of their ilk, like Sir Edwin Sandys, Weston, and others, it would
then be time to see if he could not pluck the ripe fruit for himself,—as he
seems to have done.
"This
advice," he says, "being hearkened unto, there were [those] that undertook
the putting it in practice [Weston and others] and it was accordingly brought
to effect," etc. Then, reciting (erroneously) the difficulties with the
SPEEDWELL, etc., he records the MAY-FLOWER'S arrival at Cape Cod, saying,
"The . . . ship with great difficulty reached the coast of New
England." He then gives a glowing, though absurd, account of the
attractions the planters found—in midwinter —especially naming the hospitable
reception of the Indians, despite the fact of the savage attack made upon them
by the Nausets at Cape Cod, and adds: "After they had well considered the
state of their affairs and found that the authority they had from the London
Company of Virginia, could not warrant their abode in that place," which
"they found so prosperous and pleasing [sic] they hastened away their
ship, with orders to their Solicitor to deal with me to be a means they might
have a grant from the Council of New England Affairs, to settle in the place,
which was accordingly performed to their particular satisfaction and good
content of them all." One can readily imagine the crafty smile with which
Sir Ferdinando thus guilelessly recorded the complete success of his plot. It
is of interest to note how like a needle to the pole the grand conspirator's
mind flies to the fact which most appeals to him —that they find "that the
authority they had . . . could not warrant their abode in that place." It
is of like interest to observe that in that place which he called
"pleasant and prosperous" one half their own and of the ship's
company had died before they hastened the ship away, and they had endured
trial, hardships, and sorrows untellable,—although from pluck and principle
they would not abandon it. He tells us "they hastened away their
ship," and implies that it was for the chief purpose of obtaining through
him a grant of the land they occupied. While we know that the ship did not
return till the following April,—and then at her Captain's rather than the
Pilgrims' pleasure,—it is evident that Gorges could think of events only as
incident to his designs and from his point of view. His plot had succeeded. He
had the "Holland families" upon his soil, and his willing imagination
converted their sober and deliberate action into the eager haste with which he
had planned that they should fly to him for the patent, which his cunning
had—as he purposed—rendered necessary. Of course their request "was
performed," and so readily and delightedly that, recognizing John Pierce
as their mouthpiece and the plantation as "Mr. Pierces Plantation,"
Sir Ferdinando and his associates—the "Council for New England,"
including his joint-conspirator, the Earl of Warwick—gave Pierce unhesitatingly
whatever he asked. The Hon. William T. Davis, who alone among Pilgrim
historians (except Dr. Neill, whom he follows) seems to have suspected the hand
of Gorges in the treachery of Captain Jones, here demonstrated, has suggested
that: "Whether Gorges might not have influenced Pierce, in whose name the
patent of the Pilgrims had been issued—and whether both together might not have
seduced Capt. Jones, are further considerations to be weighed, in solving the
problem of a deviation from the intended voyage of the MAYFLOWER."
Although not aware of these suggestions, either of Mr. Davis or of Dr. Neill,
till his own labors had satisfied him of Gorges's guilt, and his conclusions
were formed, the author cheerfully recognizes the priority to his own
demonstration, of the suggestions of both these gentlemen. No thing appears of
record, however, to indicate that John Pierce was in any way a party to
Gorges's plot. On the contrary, as his interest was wholly allied to his
patent, which Gorges's scheme would render of little value to his associate
Adventurers and himself he would naturally have been, unless heavily bribed to
duplicity beyond his expectations from their intended venture, the last man to
whom to disclose such a conspiracy. Neither was he necessary in any way to the
success of the scheme. He did not hire either the ship or her master; he does
not appear to have had any Pilgrim relations to Captain Jones, and certainly
could have had no such influence with him as Gorges could himself command,
through Warwick and his own ability—from his position at the head of the
"New England Council"—to reward the service he required. That Gorges
was able himself to exert all the influence requisite to secure Jones's
cooperation, without the aid of Pierce, who probably could have given none, is
evident. Mr. Davis's suggestion, while pertinent and potential as to Gorges, is
clearly wide of the mark as to Pierce. He represented the Adventurers in the
matter of patents only, but Weston was in authority as to the pivotal matter of
shipping. An evidently hasty footnote of Dr. Neill, appended to the
"Memorial" offered by him to the Congress of the United States, in
1868, seems to have been the only authority of Mr. William T. Davis for the
foregoing suggestion as to the complicity of Pierce in the treachery of Captain
Jones, except the bare suspicion, already alluded to, in the records of the
London Company. Neill says: "Captain Jones, the navigator of the
MAY-FLOWER, and John Pierce, probably had arranged as to destination without
the knowledge of the passengers." While of course this is not impossible,
there is, as stated, absolutely nothing to indicate any knowledge,
participation, or need of Pierce in the matter, and of course the fewer there
were in the secret the better.
Unobservant
that John Pierce was acting upon the old adage, "second thief best
owner," when he asked, a little later, even so extraordinary a thing as
that the "Council for New England" would exchange the patent they had
so promptly granted him (as representing his associates, the Adventurers and
Planters) for a "deed-pole," or title in fee, to himself alone, they
instantly complied, and thus unwittingly enabled him also to steal the colony,
and its demesne beside. It is evident, from the very servile letter of Robert
Cushman to John Pierce (written while the former was at New Plymouth, in
November-December, 1621, on behalf of the MAY-FLOWER Adventurers), that up to
that time at least, the Pilgrims had no suspicion of the trick which had been
played upon them. For, while too adroit recklessly to open a quarrel with those
who could—if they chose —destroy them, the Pilgrims were far too high-minded to
stoop to flattery and dissimulation (especially with any one known to have been
guilty of treachery toward them), or to permit any one to do so in their stead.
In the letter referred to, Cush man acknowledges in the name of the colonists
the "bounty and grace of the President and Council of the Affairs of New
England [Gorges, Warwick, et als.] for their allowance and approbation" of
the "free possession and enjoyment" of the territory and rights so
promptly granted Pierce by the Council, in the colonists' interest, upon
application. If the degree of promptness with which the wily Gorges and his
associates granted the petition of Pierce, in the colony's behalf for authority
to occupy the domain to which Gorges's henchman Jones had so treacherously
conveyed them, was at all proportionate to the fulsome and lavish
acknowledgments of Cushman, there must have been such eagerness of compliance
as to provoke general suspicion at the Council table. Gorges and Warwick must
have "grinned horribly behind their hands" upon receipt of the honest
thanks of these honest planters and the pious benedictions of their scribe,
knowing themselves guilty of detestable conspiracy and fraud, which had
frustrated an honest purpose, filched the results of others' labors, and had
"done to death" good men and women not a few. Winslow, in
"Hypocrisie Unmasked," says: "We met with many dangers and the
mariners' put back into the harbor of the Cape." The original intent of
the Pilgrims to go to the neighborhood of the Hudson is unmistakable; that this
intention was still clear on the morning of November 10 (not 9th) —after they
had "made the land"—has been plainly shown; that there was no need of
so "standing in with the land" as to become entangled in the
"rips" and "shoals" off what is now known as Monomoy (in an
effort to pass around the Cape to the southward, when there was plenty of open
water to port), is clear and certain; that the dangers and difficulties were
magnified by Jones, and the abandonment of the effort was urged and practically
made by him, is also evident from Winslow's language above noted,—"and the
mariners put back," etc. No indication of the old-time consultations with
the chief men appears here as to the matter of the return. Their advice was not
desired. "The mariners put back" on their own responsibility.
Goodwin
forcibly remarks, "These waters had been navigated by Gosnold, Smith, and
various English and French explorers, whose descriptions and charts must have
been familiar to a veteran master like Jones. He doubtless magnified the danger
of the passage [of the shoals], and managed to have only such efforts made as
were sure to fail. Of course he knew that by standing well out, and then
southward in the clear sea, he would be able to bear up for the Hudson. His
professed inability to devise any way for getting south of the Cape is strong
proof of guilt."
The
sequential acts of the Gorges conspiracy were doubtless practically as
follows:—
(a)
The Leyden leaders applied to the States General of Holland, through the New
Netherland Company, for their aid and protection in locating at the mouth of
"Hudson's" River;
(b)
Sir Dudley Carleton, the English ambassador at the Hague, doubtless promptly
reported these negotiations to the King, through Sir Robert Naunton;
(c)
The King, naturally enough, probably mentioned the matter to his intimate and
favorite, Sir Ferdinando Gorges, the leading man in American colonization
matters in the kingdom;
(d)
Sir Ferdinando Gorges, recognizing the value of such colonists as the Leyden
congregation would make, anxious to secure them, instead of permitting the
Dutch to do so, and knowing that he and his Company would be obnoxious to the
Leyden leaders, suggested, as he admits, to Weston, perhaps to Sandys, as the
Leyden brethren's friends, that they ought to secure them as colonists for
their (London) Company;
(e)
Weston was dispatched to Holland to urge the Leyden leaders to drop the Dutch
negotiations, come under English auspices, which he guaranteed, and they,
placing faith in him, and possibly in Sandys's assurances of his (London)
Virginia Company's favor, were led to put themselves completely into the hands
of Weston and the Merchant Adventurers; the Wincob patent was cancelled and
Pierces substituted;
(f)
Weston, failing to lead them to Gorges's company, was next deputed, perhaps by
Gorges's secret aid, to act with full powers for the Adventurers, in securing
shipping, etc.;
(g)
Having made sure of the Leyden party, and being in charge of the shipping,
Weston was practically master of the situation. He and Cushman, who was clearly
entirely innocent of the conspiracy, had the hiring of the ship and of her
officers, and at this point he and his acts were of vital importance to
Gorges's plans. To bring the plot to a successful issue it remained only to
effect the landing of the colony upon territory north of the 41st parallel of
north latitude, to take it out of the London Company's jurisdiction, and to do
this it was only necessary to make Jones Master of the ship and to instruct him
accordingly. This, with so willing a servant of his masters, was a matter of
minutes only, the instructions were evidently given, and the success of the
plot—the theft of the MAY-FLOWER colony—was assured.
To
a careful and candid student of all the facts, the proofs are seemingly
unmistakable, and the conclusion is unavoidable, that the MAY-FLOWER Pilgrims
were designedly brought to Cape Cod by Captain Jones, and their landing in that
latitude was effected, in pursuance of a conspiracy entered into by him, not
with the Dutch, but with certain of the nobility of England; not with the
purpose of keeping the planters out of Dutch territory, but with the deliberate
intent of stealing the colony from the London Virginia Company, under whose
auspices it had organized and set sail, in the interest, and to the advantage,
of its rival Company of the "Northern Plantations."
It
is noteworthy that Jones did not command the MAY-FLOWER for another voyage, and
never sailed afterward in the employ of Thomas Goffe, Esq., or (so far as
appears) of any reputable shipowner. Weston was not such, nor were the chiefs
of the "Council for New England," in whose employ he remained till
his death.
The
records of the Court of the "Council" show, that "as soon as it
would do," and when his absence would tend to lull suspicion as to the
parts played, Captain Jones's noble patrons took steps to secure for him due
recognition and compensation for his services, from the parties who were to
benefit directly, with themselves, by his knavery. The records read:
"July
17, 1622. A motion was made in the behaffe of Captaine Thomas Jones, Captaine
of the DISCOVERY, nowe employed in Virginia for trade and fishinge [it proved,
apparently, rather to be piracy], that he may be admitted a freeman in this
Companie in reward of the good service he hath there [Virginia in general]
performed. The Court liked well of the motion and condiscended thereunto."
The DISCOVERY left London at the close of November, 1621. She arrived at
Jamestown, Virginia, in April, 1622. She reached Plymouth, New England, in
August, 1622. Her outward voyage was not, so far as can be learned, eventful,
or entitled to especial consideration or recognition, and the good store of
English trading-goods she still had on hand—as Governor Bradford notices—on her
arrival at Plymouth indicates no notable success up to that time, in the way of
a trading-voyage, while "fishing" is not mentioned. For piracy, in
which she was later more successful, she had then had neither time nor
opportunity. The conclusion is irresistible, that "the good service"
recognized by the vote recorded was of the past (he had sailed only the
MAY-FLOWER voyage for the "Council" before), and that this
recognition was a part of the compensation previously agreed upon, if, in the
matter of the MAY-FLOWER voyage, Captain Jones did as he was bidden. Thus much
of the crafty Master of the MAY-FLOWER, Captain Thomas Jones,—his Christian
name and identity both apparently beyond dispute, —whom we first know in the
full tide of his piratical career, in the corsair LION in Eastern seas; whom we
next find as a prisoner in London for his misconduct in the East, but soon
Master of the cattle-ship FALCON on her Virginia voyage; whom we greet next—and
best—as Admiral of the Pilgrim fleet, commander of the destiny freighted
MAY-FLOWER, and though a conspirator with nobles against the devoted band he
steered, under the overruling hand of their Lord God, their unwitting pilot to "imperial
labors" and mighty honors, to the founding of empire, and to eternal
Peace; whom we next meet—fallen, "like Lucifer, never to hope again"
—as Captain of the little buccaneer,—the DISCOVERY, disguised as a
trading-ship, on the Virginian and New England coasts; and lastly, in charge of
his leaking prize, a Spanish frigate in West Indian waters, making his
way—death-stricken—into the Virginia port of Jamestown, where (July, 1625), he
"cast anchor" for the last time, dying, as we first found him, a
pirate, to whom it had meantime been given to "minister unto saints."
Of
JOHN CLARKE, the first mate of the MAY-FLOWER, we have already learned that he
had been in the employ of the First (or London) Virginia Company, and had but
just returned (in June, 1620) from a voyage to Virginia with Captain Jones in
the FALCON, when found and employed by Weston and Cushman for the Pilgrim ship.
Dr. Neill quotes from the "Minutes of the London Virginia Company,"
of Wednesday, February 13/23, 1621/2, the following; which embodies
considerable information concerning him:—
"February
13th, 1621. Master Deputy acquainted the Court, that one Master John Clarke
being taken from Virginia long since [Arber interpolates, "in 1612"]
by a Spanish ship that came to discover the Plantation, that forasmuch as he
hath since that time done the Company presumably the First (or London) Virginia
Company good service in many voyages to Virginia; and, of late 1619 went into
Ireland, for the transportation of cattle to Virginia; he was a humble suitor
to this Court that he might be a Free brother of the Company, and have some
shares of land bestowed upon him."
From
the foregoing he seems to have begun his American experiences as early as 1612,
and to have frequently repeated them. That he was at once hired by Weston and
Cushman as a valuable man, as soon as found, was not strange.
He
seems to have had the ability to impress men favorably and secure their confidence,
and to have been a modest and reliable man. Although of both experience and
capacity, he continued an under-officer for some years after the Pilgrim
voyage, when, it is fair to suppose, he might have had command of a ship. He
seems to have lacked confidence in himself, or else the breadth of education
necessary to make him trust his ability as a navigator.
He
is not mentioned, in connection with the affairs of the Pilgrims, after he was
hired as "pilot,"—on Saturday afternoon the 10th of June, 1620, at
London,—until after the arrival at Cape Cod, and evidently was steadily
occupied during all the experience of "getting away" and of the
voyage, in the faithful performance of his duty as first mate (or
"pilot") of the MAY-FLOWER. It was not until the "third
party" of exploration from Cape Cod harbor was organized and set out, on
Wednesday, December 6, that he appeared as one of the company who put out in
the shallop, to seek the harbor which had been commended by Coppin, "the
second mate." On this eventful voyage—when the party narrowly escaped
shipwreck at the mouth of Plymouth harbor—they found shelter under the lee of
an island, which (it being claimed traditionally that he was first to land
there on) was called, in his honor, "Clarke's Island," which name it
retains to this day. No other mention of him is made by name, in the affairs of
ship or shore, though it is known inferentially that he survived the general
illness which attacked and carried off half of the ship's company. In November,
1621,—the autumn following his return from the Pilgrim voyage,—he seems to have
gone to Virginia as "pilot" (or "mate") of the FLYING HART,
with cattle of Daniel Gookin, and in 1623 to have attained command of a ship,
the PROVIDENCE, belonging to Mr. Gookin, on a voyage to Virginia where he
arrived April 10, 1623, but died in that colony soon after his arrival. He
seems to have been a competent and faithful man, who filled well his part in
life. He will always have honorable mention as the first officer of the historic
MAY-FLOWER, and as sponsor at the English christening of the smiling islet in
Plymouth harbor which bears his name.
Of
ROBERT COPPIN, the "second mate" (or "pilot") of the
MAY-FLOWER, nothing is known before his voyage in the Pilgrim ship, except that
he seems to have made a former to the coast of New England and the vicinity of
Cape Cod, though under what auspices, or in what ship, does not transpire.
Bradford says: "Their Pilotte, one Mr. Coppin, who had been in the
countrie before." Dr. Young a suggests that Coppin was perhaps on the
coast with Smith or Hunt. Mrs. Austin imaginatively makes him, of "the
whaling bark SCOTSMAN of Glasgow," but no warrant whatever for such a
conception appears.
Dr.
Dexter, as elsewhere noted, has said: "My impression is that Coppin was
originally hired to go in the SPEEDWELL, . . that he sailed with them [the
Pilgrims] in the SPEED WELL, but on her final putting back was transferred to
the MAY-FLOWER." As we have seen in another relation, Dr. Dexter also
believed Coppin to have been the "pilot" sent over by Cushman to
Leyden, in May, 1620, and we have found both views to be untenable. It was
doubtless because of this mistaken view that Dr. Dexter believed that Coppin
was "hired to go in the SPEEDWELL," and, the premise being wrong, the
conclusion is sequentially incorrect. But there are abundant reasons for
thinking that Dexter's "impression" is wholly mistaken. It would be
unreasonable to suppose (as both vessels were expected to cross the ocean),
that each had not—certainly on leaving Southampton her full complement of
officers. If so, each undoubtedly had her second mate. The MAY-FLOWER'S
officers and crew were, as we know, hired for the voyage, and there is no good
reason to suppose that the second mate of the MAY-FLOWER was dismissed at
Plymouth and Coppin put in his place which would not be equally potent for such
an exchange between the first mate of the SPEEDWELL and Clarke of the
MAY-FLOWER. The assumption presumes too much. In fact, there can be no doubt
that Dexter's misconception was enbased upon, and arose from, the unwarranted
impression that Coppin was the "pilot" sent over to Leyden. It is not
likely that, when the SPEEDWELL'S officers were so evidently anxious to escape
the voyage, they would seek transfer to the MAY-FLOWER.
Charles
Deane, the editor of Bradford's "Historie" (ed.1865), makes, in
indexing, the clerical error of referring to Coppin as the
"master-gunner," an error doubtless occasioned by the fact that in
the text referred to, the words, "two of the masters-mates, Master Clarke
and Master Coppin, the master-gunner," etc., were run so near together
that the mistake was readily made.
In
"Mourt's Relation" it appears that in the conferences that were held
aboard the ship in Cape Cod harbor, as to the most desirable place for the
colonists to locate, "Robert Coppin our pilot, made relation of a great
navigable river and great harbor in the headland of the Bay, almost right over
against Cape Cod, being a right line not much above eight leagues distant,"
etc. Mrs. Jane G. Austin asserts, though absolutely without warrant of any
reliable authority, known tradition, or probability, that "Coppin's harbor
. . . afterward proved to be Cut River and the site of Marshfield," but in
another place she contradicts this by stating that it was "Jones River,
Duxbury." As Coppin described his putative harbor, called "Thievish
Harbor," a "great navigable river and good harbor" were in close
relation, which was never true of either the Jones River or "Cut
River" localities, while any one familiar with the region knows that what
Mrs. Austin knew as "Cut River" had no existence in the Pilgrims'
early days, but was the work of man, superseding a small river-mouth (Green
Harbor River), which was so shallow as to have its exit closed by the
sand-shift of a single storm.
Young,
with almost equal recklessness, says: "The other headland of the
bay," alluded to by Coppin, was Manomet Point, and the river was probably
the North River in Scituate; but there are no "great navigable river and
good harbor" in conjunction in the neighborhood of Manomet, or of the
North River,—the former having no river and the latter no harbor. If Coppin had
not declared that he had never seen the mouth of Plymouth harbor before
("mine eyes never saw this place before"), it might readily have been
believed that Plymouth harbor was the "Thievish Harbor" of his
description, so well do they correspond.
Goodwin,
the brother of Mrs. Austin, quite at variance with his sister's conclusions,
states, with every probability confirming him, that the harbor Coppin sought
"may have been Boston, Ipswich, Newburyport, or Portsmouth."
As
a result of his "relation" as to a desirable harbor, Coppin was made
the "pilot" of the "third expedition," which left the ship
in the shallop, Wednesday, December 6, and, after varying disasters and a
narrow escape from shipwreck—through Coppin's mistake—landed Friday night after
dark, in the storm, on the island previously mentioned, ever since called
"Clarke's Island," at the mouth of Plymouth harbor.
Nothing
further is known of Coppin except that he returned to England with the ship. He
has passed into history only as Robert Coppin, "the second mate" (or
"pilot") of the MAY-FLOWER.
But
one other officer in merchant ships of the MAY-FLOWER class in her day was
dignified by the address of "Master" (or Mister), or had rank with
the Captain and Mates as a quarter-deck officer,—except in those instances
where a surgeon or a chaplain was carried. That the MAY-FLOWER carried no
special ship's-surgeon has been supposed from the fact of Dr. Fuller's
attendance alike on her passengers and crew, and the increased mortality of the
seamen—after his removal on shore.
[The author is
greatly indebted to his esteemed friend, Mr. George
Ernest Bowman, Secretary-General of the
Society of MAY-FLOWER
Descendants,
for information of much value upon this point. He
believes that
he has discovered trustworthy evidence of the
existence of a
small volume bearing upon its title-page an
inscription
that would certainly indicate that the MAY-FLOWER had
her own
surgeon. A copy of the inscription, which Mr. Bowman
declares well
attested (the book not being within reach), reads as
follows:—
"To Giles Heale Chirurgeon,
from Isaac Allerton
in Virginia.
Feb. 10,
1620."
Giles Heale's
name will be recognized as that of one of the
witnesses to
John Carver's copy of William Mullens's nuncupative
will, and, if
he was the ship's-surgeon, might very naturally appear
in that
relation. If book and inscription exist
and the latter is
genuine, it
would be indubitable proof that Heale (who was surely
not a
MAY-FLOWER passenger) was one of the ship's company, and if a
"chirurgeon," the surgeon of the ship, for no other
Englishmen,
except those
of the colonists and the ship's company, could have
been at New
Plymouth, at the date given, and New England was then
included in
the term "Virginia." It is
much to be hoped that Mr.
Bowman's
belief may be established, and that in Giles Heale we shall
have another
known officer, the surgeon, of the MAY-FLOWER.]
That
she had no chaplain goes without saying. The Pilgrims had their spiritual
adviser with them in the person of Elder Brewster, and were not likely to
tolerate a priest of either the English or the Romish church on a vessel
carrying them. The officer referred to was the representative of the business
interests of the owner or chartering-party, on whose account the ship made the
voyage; and in that day was known as the "ship's-merchant," later as
the "purser," and in some relations as the "supercargo." No
mention of an officer thus designated, belonging to the MAY-FLOWER, has ever
been made by any writer, so far as known, and it devolves upon the author to
indicate his existence and to establish, so far as possible, both this and his
identity.
A
certain "Master Williamson," whose name and presence, though but once
mentioned by Governor Bradford, have greatly puzzled Pilgrim historians, seems
to have filled this berth on board the MAY-FLOWER. Bradford tells us that on
Thursday, March 22, 1620/21, "Master Williamson" was designated to
accompany Captain Standish—practically as an officer of the guard—to receive
and escort the Pokanoket chief, Massasoit, to Governor Carver, on the occasion
of the former's first visit of state. Prior to the recent discovery in London,
by an American genealogist, of a copy of the nuncupative will of Master William
Mullens, one of the MAY-FLOWER Pilgrims, clearly dictated to Governor John
Carver on board the ship, in the harbor of New Plymouth (probably) Wednesday,
February 21, 1620 (though not written out by Carver till April 2, 1620), on
which day (as we learn from Bradford), Master Mullens died, no other mention of
"Master Williamson" than that above quoted was known, and his very
existence was seriously questioned. In this will, as elsewhere noted,
"Master Williamson" is named as one of the "Overseers." By
most early writers it was held that Bradford had unwittingly substituted the
name "Williamson" for that of Allerton, and this view—apparently for
no better reasons than that both names had two terminal letters in common, and
that Allerton was associated next day with Standish on some military duty—came
to be generally accepted, and Allerton's name to be even frequently substituted
without question.—-Miss Marcia A. Thomas, in her "Memorials of
Marshfield" (p. 75), says: "In 1621, Master Williamson, Captain
Standish, and Edward Winslow made a journey to make a treaty with Massasoit. He
is called 'Master George,' meaning probably Master George Williamson,"
etc.
This
is certainly most absurd, and by one not familiar with the exceptional fidelity
and the conscientious work of Miss Thomas would rightly be denounced as
reckless and reprehensible fabrication. Of course Williamson, Standish, and
Winslow made no such journey, and made no treaty with Massasoit, but aided
simply in conducting, with due ceremonial, the first meeting between Governor
John Carver and the Indian sachem at Plymouth, at which a treaty was concluded.
There is no historical warrant whatever for the name of "George," as
appertaining to "Master William son." The fact, however,—made known
by the fortunate discovery mentioned,—that "Master Williamson" was
named in his will by Master Mullens as one of its "Overseers," and
undoubtedly probated the will in England, puts the existence of such a person
beyond reasonable doubt. That he was a person of some dignity, and of very
respectable position, is shown by the facts that he was chosen as Standish's
associate, as lieutenant of the guard, on an occasion of so much importance, and
was thought fit by Master Mullens, a careful and clear-headed man as his will
proves,—to be named an "Overseer" of that will, charged with
responsible duties to Mullens's children and property. It is practically
certain that on either of the above-mentioned dates (February 21, or March 22)
there were no human beings in the Colony of New Plymouth beside the passengers
of the MAY-FLOWER, her officers and crew, and the native savages. Visitors, by
way of the fishing vessels on the Maine coast, had not yet begun to come, as
they did a little later. It is certain that no one of the name of
"Williamson" was among the colonist passengers, or indeed for several
years in the colony, and we may at once dismiss both the passengers and the
savages from our consideration. This elimination renders it inevitable that
"Master Williamson" must have been of the ship's company. It remains
to determine, if possible, what position upon the MAY-FLOWER'S roster he
presumably held. His selection by "Master" Mullens as one of the "Over
seers" of his will suggests the probability that, having named Governor
Carver as the one upon whom he would rely for the care of his family and
affairs in New England, Mr. Mullens sought as the other a proper person, soon
to return to England, and hence able to exercise like personal interest in his
two children and his considerable property left there? Such a suggestion points
to a returning and competent officer of the ship. That "Master
Williamson" was above the grade of "petty officer," and ranked
at least with the mates or "pilots," is clear from the fact that he
is invariably styled "Master" (equivalent to Mister), and we know
with certainty that he was neither captain nor mate. That he was a man of
address and courage follows the fact that he was chosen by Standish as his
lieutenant, while the choice in and of itself is a strong bit of presumptive
proof that he held the position on the MAY-FLOWER to which he is here assigned.
The
only officer commonly carried by a ship of the MAY-FLOWER class, whose rank,
capacities, and functions would comport with every fact and feature of the
case, was "the ship's-merchant," her accountant, factor, and
usually—when such was requisite—her "interpreter," on every
considerable (trading) voyage.
It
is altogether probable that it was in his capacity of "interpreter"
(as Samoset and Tisquantum knew but little English), and on account of what
knowledge of the Indian tongue he very probably possessed, that Standish chose
Williamson as his associate for the formal reception of Massasoit. It is indeed
altogether probable that it was this familiarity with the "trade
lingo" of the American coast tribes which influenced —perhaps
determined—his employment as "ship's-merchant" of the MAY-FLOWER for
her Pilgrim voyage, especially as she was expected to "load back" for
England with the products of the country, only to be had by barter with the
Indians. It is evident that there must naturally have been some provision made
for communication with the natives, for the purposes of that trade, etc., which
the Planters hoped to establish. Trading along the northern coast of Virginia
(as the whole coast strip was then called), principally for furs, had been
carried on pretty actively, since 1584, by such navigators as Raleigh's captains,
Gosnold, Pring, Champlain, Smith, Dermer, Hunt, and the French and Dutch, and
much of the "trade lingo" of the native tribes had doubtless been
"picked up" by their different "ship's-merchants." It
appears by Bradford' that Dermer, when coasting the shores of New England, in
Sir Ferdinando Gorges's employ, brought the Indian Tisquantum with him, from
England, as his interpreter, and doubtless from him Dermer and other ship's
officers "picked up" more or less Indian phrases, as Tisquantum (Squanto)
evidently did of English. Winslow, in his "Good Newes from New
England," written in 1622, says of the Indian tongue, as spoken by the
tribes about them at Plymouth, "it is very copious, large, and difficult.
As yet we cannot attain to any great measure thereof, but can understand them,
and explain ourselves to their understanding, by the help of those that daily
converse with us." This being the case, after two years of constant
communication, and noting how trivial knowledge of English speech Samoset and Tisquantum
had, it is easy to understand that, if Williamson had any knowledge of the
native tongue, Standish would be most anxious to have the benefit of it, in
this prime and all-important effort at securing a permanent alliance with the
ruling sachem of the region. Bradford, in "Mourt's Relation,"
speaking of the speech of Governor Carver to Massasoit, says: "He
[Massasoit] liked well of the speech and heard it attentively, though the
interpreters did not well express it." Probably all three, Tisquantum,
Samoset, and Williamson, had a voice in it.
That
"Master Williamson" was a veritable person at New Plymouth, in
February and March, 1620/21, is now beyond dispute; that he must have been of
the ship's company of the MAY-FLOWER is logically certain; that he was one of
her officers, and a man of character, is proven by his title of
"Master" and his choice by Standish and Mullens for exceptional and
honorable service; that the position of "ship's-merchant" alone
answers to the conditions precedent, is evident; and that such an officer was
commonly carried by ships of the MAY-FLOWER class on such voyages as hers is
indicated by the necessity, and proven by the facts known as to other ships on
similar New England voyages, both earlier and later. The fact that he was called
simply "Master Williamson," in both cases where he is mentioned, with
out other designation or identification, is highly significant, and clearly
indicates that he was some one so familiarly known to all concerned that no
occasion for any further designation apparently occurred to the minds of
Mullens, Carver, or Bradford, when referring to him. In the case of Master John
Hampden, the only other notable incognito of early Pilgrim literature, the
description is full, and the only question concerning him has been of his
identity with John Hampden, the English patriot of the Cromwellian era. It is,
therefore, not too much to assert that the MAY-FLOWER carried a
"ship's-merchant" (or purser), and that "Master Williamson"
was that officer. If close-linked circumstantial evidence is ever to be relied
upon, it clearly establishes in this case the identity of the "Master
Williamson" who was Governor Bradford's incognito, and the person of the
same name mentioned a month earlier in "Master" Mullens's will; as
also the fact that in him we have a new officer of the MAY FLOWER, hitherto
unknown as such to Pilgrim literature. If Mr. Bowman's belief as to Giles Heale
(see note) proves correct, we have yet another, the Surgeon.
The
Carpenter, Gunner, Boatswain, Quartermaster, and "Masters-mates" are
the only "petty officers" of the Pilgrim ship of whom any record
makes mention. The carpenter is named several times, and was evidently, as
might be expected, one of the most useful men of the ship's crew. Called into
requisition, doubtless, in the conferences as to the condition of the
SPEEDWELL, on both of her returns to port, at the inception of the voyage, he
was especially in evidence when, in mid-ocean, "the cracking and bending
of a great deck-beam," and the "shaken" condition of "the
upper works" of the MAY-FLOWER, gave rise to much alarm, and it was by his
labors and devices, and the use of the now famous "jack-screw," that
the bending beam and leaking deck were made secure. The repairs upon the shallop
in Cape Cod harbor also devolved upon him, and mention is made of his illness
and the dependence placed upon him. No doubt, in the construction of the first
dwellings and of the ordnance platform on the hill, etc., he was the devising
and principal workman. He undoubtedly returned to England with the ship, and is
known in history only by his "billet," as "the carpenter"
of the MAY-FLOWER.
The
Master Gunner seems to have been a man with a proclivity for Indian barter,
that led him to seek a place with the "third expedition" at Cape Cod,
thereby nearly accomplishing his death, which indeed occurred later, in
Plymouth harbor, not long before the return of the ship.
The
Boatswain is known, by Bradford's records, to have died in the general sickness
which attacked the crew while lying in Plymouth harbor. The brief narrative of
his sickness and death is all that we know of his personality. The writer says:
"He was a proud young man, and would often curse and scoff at the
passengers," but being nursed when dying, by those of them who remained
aboard, after his shipmates had deserted him in their craven fear of infection,
"he bewailed his former conduct," saying, "Oh! you, I now see,
show your love like Christians indeed, one to another, but we let one another
lie and die like dogs."
Four
Quartermasters are mentioned (probably helmsmen simply), of whom three are
known to have died in Plymouth harbor.
"Masters-mates"
are several times mentioned, but it is pretty certain that the
"pilots" (or mates) are intended. Bradford and Winslow, in
"Mourt's Relation," say of the reappearance of the Indians: "So
Captain Standish, with another [Hopkins], with their muskets, went over to
them, with two of the masters-mates that follow them without [side?] arms,
having two muskets with them: Who these "masters-mates" were does not
appear." The language, "two of the masters-mates," would
possibly suggest that there were more of them. It hardly seems probable that
both the mates of the MAY-FLOWER would thus volunteer, or thrust themselves
forward in such a matter, and it seems doubtful if they would have been
permitted (even if both ashore at one time, which, though unusual, did occur),
to assume such duty. Whoever they were, they did not lack courage.
The
names of the petty officers and seamen of the MAY-FLOWER do not appear as such,
but the discovery of the (evidently) nuncupative will of William Mullens—herein
referred to—has perhaps given us two of them. Attached to John Carver's
certificate of the particulars of this will, filed at Somerset House, London,
are the names, "Giles Heale" and "Christopher Joanes." As
Mr Mullens died Wednesday, February 21, 1620, on board the MAY-FLOWER in
Plymouth harbor, on which day we know from Bradford' that "the Master
[Jones, whose name was Thomas] came on shore with many of his sailors," to
land and mount the cannon on the fort, and as they had a full day's work to
draw up the hill and mount five guns, and moreover brought the materials for,
and stayed to eat, a considerable dinner with the Pilgrims, they were doubtless
ashore all day. It is rational to interpret the known facts to indicate that in
this absence of the Captain and most of his crew ashore, Mr. Mullens, finding
himself failing fast, sent for Governor Carver and—unable to do more than speak
—dictated to him the disposition of his property which he desired to make.
Carver, noting this down from his dictation, undoubtedly called in two of the
ship's company (Heale very likely being the ship's-surgeon), who were left
aboard to "keep ship," to hear his notes read to Mullens and assented
to by him, they thus becoming the witnesses to his will, to the full copy of
which, as made by Carver (April 2), they affixed their names as such. As there
were then at Plymouth (besides savages) only the passengers and crew of the
MAY-FLOWER, and these men were certainly not among the passengers, it seems
inevitable that they were of the crew. That "Christopher Joanes" was
not the Master of the ship is clear, because Heale's is the first signature,
and no man of the crew would have dared to sign before the Captain; because the
Captain's name was (as demonstrated) Thomas; and because we know that he was
ashore all that day, with most of his men. It is by no means improbable that
Captain Jones had shipped one of his kinsmen in his crew, possibly as one of
the "masters mates" or quartermasters referred to (and it is by no
means certain that there were not more than two), though these witnesses may
have been quartermasters or other petty officers left on board as "ship-keepers."
Certain it is that these two witnesses must have been of the crew, and that
"Christopher Joanes" was not the Captain, while it is equally sure,
from the collateral evidence, that Master Mullens died on shipboard. Had he
died on shore it is very certain that some of the leaders, Brewster, Bradford,
or others, would have been witnesses, with such of the ship's officers as could
aid in proving the will in England. It is equally evident that the officers of
the ship were absent when Master Mullens dictated his will, except perhaps the
surgeon.
The
number of seamen belonging to the ship is nowhere definitely stated. At least
four in the employ of the Pilgrims were among the passengers and not enrolled
upon the ships' lists. From the size of the ship, the amount of sail she
probably carried, the weight of her anchors, and certain other data which
appear,—such as the number allowed to leave the ship at a time, etc.,—it is
probably not a wild estimate to place their number at from twenty to
twenty-five. This is perhaps a somewhat larger number than would be essential
to work the ship, and than would have been shipped if the voyage had been to
any port of a civilized country; but on a voyage to a wild coast, the
possibilities of long absence and of the weakening of the crew by death,
illness, etc., demanded consideration and a larger number. The wisdom and
necessity of carrying, on a voyage to an uninhabited country, some spare men,
is proven by the record of Bradford, who says: "The disease begane to fall
amongst them the seamen also, so as allmost halfe of their company dyed before
they went away and many of their officers and lustyest men; as ye boatson,
gunner, 3 quarter maisters, the cooke, and others."
The
LADY ARBELLA, the "Admiral" of Governor Winthrop's fleet, a ship of
350 tons, carried 52 men, and it is a fair inference that the MAY-FLOWER, of a
little more than half her tonnage, would require at least half as many. It is,
therefore, not unlikely that the officers and crew of the MAY-FLOWER, all told,
mustered thirty men, irrespective of the sailors, four in number (Alderton,
English, Trevore, and Ely), in the Pilgrims' employ.
CHAPTER VI
THE MAY-FLOWER'S
PASSENGERS
The
passenger list of the SPEEDWELL has given us the names of the Leyden members of
the company which, with the cooperation of the associated Merchant Adventurers,
was, in the summer of 1620, about to emigrate to America.
Though
it is not possible, with present knowledge, positively to determine every one
of those who were passengers in the MAY-FLOWER from London to Southampton, most
of them can be named with certainty.
Arranged
for convenience, so far as possible, by families, they were:—
Master Robert Cushman, the London agent of the Leyden
company,
Mrs. Mary
(Clarke)-Singleton Cushman, 2d wife,
Thomas
Cushman, son (by 1st wife).
Master Christopher Martin, treasurer-agent of the
colonists,
Mrs. Martin,
wife,
Solomon
Prower, "servant,"
John
Langemore, "servant."
Master Richard
Warren.
Master William Mullens,
Mrs. Alice Mullens, wife,
Joseph
Mullens, 2d son,
Priscilla
Mullens, 2d daughter,
Robert Carter,
"servant."
Master Stephen Hopkins,
Mrs. Elizabeth
(Fisher?) Hopkins, 2d wife,
Giles Hopkins,
son (by former wife),
Constance Hopkins,
daughter (by former wife),
Damaris
Hopkins, daughter,
Edward Dotey,
"servant,"
Edward
Leister, "servant."
Gilbert
Winslow.
James Chilton,
Mrs. Susanna
(2) Chilton, wife,
Mary Chilton,
daughter.
Richard
Gardiner.
John Billington,
Mrs. Eleanor
(or Helen) Billington, wife,
John
Billington (Jr.), son,
Francis
Billington, son.
William Latham,
"servant-boy" to Deacon Carver.
Jasper More,
"bound-boy" to Deacon Carver.
Ellen More,
"little bound girl" to Master Edward Winslow.
Richard More,
"bound-boy" to Elder Brewster.
———- More,
"bound-boy" to Elder Brewster.
There
is a possibility that Thomas Rogers and his son, Joseph, who are usually
accredited to the Leyden company, were of the London contingent, and sailed
from there, though this is contra-indicated by certain collateral data.
It
is possible, also, of course, that any one or more of the English colonists
(with a few exceptions—such as Cushman and family, Mullens and family, the More
children and others—known to have left London on the MAY-FLOWER) might have
joined her (as did Carver and Alden, perhaps Martin and family) at Southampton,
but the strong presumption is that most of the English passengers joined the
ship at London.
It
is just possible, too, that the seamen, Alderton (or Allerton), English,
Trevore, and Ely, were hired in London and were on board the MAY-FLOWER when
she left that port, though they might have been employed and joined the ship at
either Southampton, Dartmouth, or Plymouth. It is strongly probable, however,
that they were part, if not all, hired in Holland, and came over to Southampton
in the pinnace.
Robert Cushman—the London agent (for more than three
years) of the
Leyden
congregation, and, in spite of the wickedly unjust criticism
of Robinson
and others, incompetent to judge his acts, their brave,
sagacious, and
faithful servant—properly heads the list.
Bradford says:
"Where they find the bigger ship come from London,
Mr. Jones,
Master, with the rest of the company who had been waiting
there with Mr.
Cushman seven days." Deacon Carver,
probably from
being on
shore, was not here named. In a note
appended to the
memoir of Robert Cushman (prefatory to his
Discourse delivered at
Plymouth, New
England, on "The Sin and Danger of Self-Love") it is
stated in
terms as follows: "The fact is, that Mr. Cushman procured
the larger
vessel, the MAY-FLOWER, and its pilot, at London, and
left in that
vessel." The statement—though published long after the
events of
which it treats and by other than Mr. Cushman—we know to
be
substantially correct, and the presumption is that the writer,
whoever he may
have been, knew also.
Sailing with
his wife and son (it is not probable that he had any
other living
child at the time), in full expectation that it was for
Virginia, he
encountered so much of ungrateful and abusive
treatment, after
the brethren met at Southampton,—especially at the
hands of the
insufferable Martin, who, without merit and with a most
reprehensible
record (as it proved), was chosen over him as
"governor" of the ship,—that he was doubtless glad to return
from
Plymouth when
the SPEEDWELL broke down. He and his
family appear,
therefore, as
"MAY-FLOWER passengers," only between London and
Plymouth
during the vexatious attendance upon the scoundrelly Master
of the
SPEEDWELL, in his "doublings" in the English Channel. His
Dartmouth
letter to Edward Southworth, one of the most valuable
contributions
to the early literature of the Pilgrims extant,
clearly
demonstrates that he was suffering severely from dyspepsia
and deeply
wounded feelings. The course of events
was his complete
vindication,
and impartial history to-day pronounces him second to
none in his
service to the Pilgrims and their undertaking.
His
first wife is
shown by Leyden records to have been Sarah Reder, and
his second
marriage to have occurred May 19/June 3, 1617, [sic]
about the time
he first went to England in behalf of the Leyden
congregation.
Mrs. Mary (Clarke)-Singleton Cushman appears only as a
passenger of the
MAY-FLOWER on
her channel voyage, as she returned with her husband
and son from
Plymouth, England, in the SPEEDWELL.
Thomas Cushman, it is quite clear, must have been a son
by a former wife,
as he would
have been but a babe, if the son of the latest wife,
when he went
to New England with his father, in the FORTUNE, to
remain.
Goodwin and others give his age as fourteen at this time,
and his age at
death is their warrant. Robert Cushman
died in 1625,
but a
"Mary, wife [widow?] of Robert Cushman, and their son,
Thomas,"
seem to have been remembered in the will of Ellen Bigge,
widow, of
Cranbrooke, England, proved February 12, 1638
(Archdeaconry,
Canterbury, vol. lxx. leaf 482). The will intimates
that the
"Thomas" named was "under age" when the bequest was made.
If this is
unmistakably so (though there is room for doubt), then
this was not
the Thomas of the Pilgrims. Otherwise
the evidence is
convincing.
Master Christopher Martin, who was made, Bradford informs
us, the
treasurer-agent of the Planter Company, Presumably about the time of
the original
conclusions between the Adventurers and the Planters,
seems to have
been appointed such, as Bradford states, not because
he was needed,
but to give the English contingent of the Planter
body
representation in the management, and to allay thereby any
suspicion or
jealousy. He was, if we are to judge by
the evidence
in hand concerning
his contention and that of his family with the
Archdeacon,
the strong testimony that Cushman bears against him in
his Dartmouth
letter of August 17, and the fact that there seems to
have been
early dissatisfaction with him as "governor" on the ship,
a very
self-sufficient, somewhat arrogant, and decidedly contentious
individual. His selection as
treasurer seems to have been very
unfortunate,
as Bradford indicates that his accounts were in
unsatisfactory
shape, and that he had no means of his own, while his
rather
surprising selection for the office of "governor" of the
larger ship,
after the unpleasant experience with him as
treasurer-agent, is difficult to account for, except that he was
evidently an
active opponent of Cushman, and the latter was just
then in
disfavor with the colonists. He was evidently a man in the
prime of life,
an "Independent" who had the courage of his
convictions if
little discretion, and much of that energy and
self-reliance
which, properly restrained, are excellent elements
for a
colonist. Very little beside the fact
that he came from
Essex is known
of him, and nothing of his wife. He has
further
mention
hereafter.
Solomon Prower is clearly shown by the complaint made
against him by the
Archdeacon of
Chelmsford, the March before he sailed on the
MAY-FLOWER,
to have been quite a youth, a firm
"Separatist," and
something more
than an ordinary "servant." He
seems to have been
summoned
before the Archdeacon at the same time with young Martin
(a son of
Christopher), and this fact suggests some nearer relation
than that of
"servant." He is sometimes
spoken of as Martin's
"son," by what warrant does not appear, but the fact suggests
that
he may have
been a step-son. Bradford, in recording
his death,
says:
"Dec. 24, this day dies Solomon Martin." This could, of
course, have
been none other than Solomon Prower. Dr.
Young, in his
"Chronicles," speaking of Martin, says, "he brought his
wife and two
children." If this means
Martin's children, it is evidently an
error. It may refer to age only. His case is puzzling, for
Bradford makes
him both "servant" and "son." If of sufficient age
and account to
be cited before the Archdeacon for discipline, it
seems strange
that he should not have signed the "Compact." Even if
a
"servant" this would seem to have been no bar, as Dotey and
Leister were
certainly such, yet signers. The indications are that
he was but a
well-grown lad, and that his youth, or severe illness,
and not his
station, accounts for the absence of his signature. If
a young
foster-son or kinsman of Martin, as seems most likely, then
Martin's
signature was sufficient, as in the cases of fathers for
their sons; if
really a "ser vant" then too young (like Latham and
Hooke) to be
called upon, as were Dotey and Leister.
John Langemore; there is nothing (save the errors of Dr.
Young) to
indicate that
he was other than a "servant."
Richard Warren was probably from Kent or Essex. Surprisingly little is
known of his
antecedents, former occupation, etc.
William Mullens and his family were, as shown, from
Dorking in Surrey,
and their home
was therefore close to London, whence they sailed,
beyond doubt,
in the MAY-FLOWER. The discovery at
Somerset House,
London, by Mr.
Henry F. Waters, of Salem, Massachusetts; of what is
evidently the
nuncupative will of William Mullens, proves an
important one
in many particulars, only one of which need be
referred to in
this connection, but all of which will receive due
consideration. It conclusively
shows Mr. Mullens not to have been
of the Leyden
congregation, as has sometimes been claimed, but that
he was a
well-to-do tradesman of Dorking in Surrey, adjacent to
London. It renders it certain, too, that he had been
some time
resident
there, and had both a married daughter and a son (William),
doubtless
living there, which effectually overthrows the "imaginary
history"
of Baird, and of that pretty story, "Standish of Standish,"
whereby the
Mullens (or Molines) family are given French (Huguenot)
antecedents
and the daughter is endowed with numerous airs, graces,
and
accomplishments, professedly French.
Dr. Griffis,
in his delightful little narrative, "The Pilgrims in
their Three
Homes, England, Holland, America," cites the name
"Mullins" as a Dutch distortion of Molines or Molineaux. Without
questioning
that such it might be,—for the Dutch scribes were
gifted in
remarkable distortions of simple names, even of their own
people,—they
evidently had no hand in thus maltreating the patronym
of William
Mullens (or Mullins) of the Pilgrims, for not only is
evidence
entirely wanting to show that he was ever a Leyden citizen,
though made
such by the fertile fiction of Mrs. Austin, but Governor
Carver, who knew him well, wrote it in his
will "Mullens," while two
English
probate functionaries of his own home-counties wrote it
respectively
"Mullens" and "Mullins."
Dr. Grifs
speaks of "the Mullens family" as evidently [sic] of
Huguenot or Walloon birth or descent, but in
doing so probably knew
no other
authority than Mrs. Austin's little novel, or (possibly)
Dr. Baird's
misstatements.
A writer in
the "New England Historic-Genealogical Register," vol.
xlvii, p. 90,
states, that "Mrs. Jane G. Austin found her authority
for saying
that Priscilla Mullens was of a Huguenot family, in Dr.
Baird's
'History of Huguenot Emigration to America,' vol. i.
p. 158,"
etc., referring to Rev. Charles W. Baird, D. D., New York.
The reference
given is a notable specimen of very bad historical
work. Of Dr. Baird, one has a right to expect
better things, and
the
positiveness of his reckless assertion might well mislead those
not wholly
familiar with the facts involved, as it evidently has
more than
one. He states, without qualification or
reservation,
that
"among the passengers in the SPEEDWELL were several of the
French who had
decided to cast in their lot with these English
brethren.
William Molines and his daughter Priscilla, afterwards
the wife of
John Alden and Philip Delanoy, born in Leyden of French
parents, were
of the number." One stands
confounded by such a
combination of
unwarranted errors. Not only is it not
true that
there
"were several of the French among the passengers in the
SPEEDWELL," but there is no evidence whatever that there was even
one. Those specifically named as there, certainly
were not, and
there is not
the remotest proof or reason to believe, that William
Mullens (or
Molines) and his daughter Priscilla (to say nothing of
the wife and
son who accompanied him to America, whom Baird forgets)
ever even saw
Leyden or Delfshaven. Their home had
been at Dorking
in Surrey,
just across the river from London, whence the MAY-FLOWER
sailed for New
England, and nothing could be more absurd than to
assume that
they were passengers on the SPEEDWELL from Delfshaven to
Southampton.
So far from
Philip Delanoy (De La Noye or Delano) being a passenger
on the
SPEEDWELL, he was not even one of the Pilgrim company, did
not go to New
England till the following year (in the FORTUNE), and
of course had
no relation to the SPEEDWELL. Neither
does Edward
Winslow—the
only authority for the parentage of "Delanoy"—state
that "he
was born in Leyden," as Baird alleges, but only that "he
was born of
French parents . . . and
came to us from Leyden to
New
Plymouth,"—an essential variance in several important
particulars.
Scores and perhaps hundreds of people have been led to
believe
Priscilla Mullens a French Protestant of the Leyden
congregation,
and themselves—as her descendants—"of Huguenot
stock,"
because of these absolutely groundless assertions of Dr.
Baird. They
lent themselves readily to Mrs. Austin's fertile
imagination
and facile pen, and as "welcome lies" acquired a hold on
the public
mind, from which even the demonstrated truth will never
wholly
dislodge them. The comment of the
intelligent writer in the
"Historic-Genealogical Register" referred to is proof of
this. So
fast-rooted
had these assertions become in her thought as the truth,
that, confronted
with the evidence that Master Mullens and his
family were
from Dorking in England, it does not occur to her to
doubt the
correctness of the impression which the recklessness of
Baird had
created,—that they were of Leyden,—and she hence
amusingly suggests that "they must have
moved from Leyden to
Dorking." These careless
utterances of one who is especially bound
by his
position, both as a writer and as a teacher of morals, to be
jealous for
the truth, might be partly condoned as attributable to
mistake or
haste, except for the facts that they seem to have been
the
fountain-head of an ever-widening stream of serious error, and
that they are
preceded on the very page that bears them by others as
to the Pilgrim
exodus equally unhappy. It seems proper
to suggest
that it is
high time that all lovers of reliable history should
stand firmly
together against the flood of loose statement which is
deluging the
public; brand the false wherever found; and call for
proof from of
all new and important historical propositions put
forth.
Stephen Hopkins may possibly have had more than one wife
before
Elizabeth, who
accompanied him to New England and was mother of the
sea-born son
Oceanus. Hopkins's will indicates his
affection for
this latest
wife, in unusual degree for wills of that day.
With
singular
carelessness, both of the writer and his proof-reader, Hon.
William T.
Davis states that Damaris Hopkins was born "after the
arrival"
in New England. The contrary is, of
course, a well
established
fact. Mr. Davis was probably led into
this error by
following
Bradford's "summary" as affecting the Hopkins family. He
states therein
that Hopkins "had one son, who became a seaman and
died at
Barbadoes probably Caleb, and four daugh ters born here."
To make up
these "four" daughters "born here" Davis found it
necessary to
include Damaris, unmindful that Bradford names her in
his list of
MAY-FLOWER passengers. It is evident,
either that
Bradford made
a mistake in the number, or that there was some
daughter who
died in infancy. It is evident that
Dotey and Leister,
the
"servants" of Hopkins, were of English origin and accompanied
their master
from London.
Gilbert Winslow was a brother of Edward Winslow, a young
man, said to
have been a
carpenter, who returned to England after "divers years"
in New
England. There is a possibility that he
was at Leyden and
was a
passenger on the SPEEDWELL. It has been
suggested that he
spent the
greater part of the time he was in New England, outside of
the Pilgrim
Colony. He took no part in its affairs.
James Chilton and his family are but little known to
Pilgrim writers,
except the
daughter Mary, who came into notice principally through
her marriage
with John Winslow, another brother of Governor Edward,
who came over
later. Their name has assumed a singular
prominence
in popular
regard, altogether disproportionate to either their
personal
characteristics, station, or the importance of their early
descendants. Some unaccountable
glamour of romance, without any
substantial foundation,
is probably responsible for it. They
left a
married
daughter behind them in England, which is the only hint we
have as to
their home just prior to the embarkation.
There has been
a disposition,
not well grounded, to regard them as of Leyden.
Richard Gardiner, Goodwin unequivocally places with the
English colonists
(but on what
authority does not fully appear), and he has been
claimed, but
without any better warrant, for the Leyden list.
John Billington and his family were unmistakably of the
English
colonists. Mrs. Billington's name
has been variously given,
e.g. Helen, Ellen, and Eleanor, and the same
writer has used them
interchangeably. One writer has
made the inexcusable error of
stating that
"the younger son, Francis, was born after the arrival
at New
Plymouth," but his own affidavit shows him to have been born
in 1606.
William Latham, a "servant-boy" of Deacon
Carver, has always been of
doubtful
relation, some circumstances indicating that he was of
Leyden and
hence was a SPEEDWELL passenger, but others—and these
the more
significant—rendering it probable that he was an English
boy, who was
obtained in London (like the More children) and
apprenticed to
Carver, in which case he probably came in the
MAY-FLOWER
from London, though he may have awaited her coming with
his master at
Southampton, in which case he probably originally
embarked
there, with him, on the SPEEDWELL, and was transferred
with him, at
Plymouth, to the MAY-FLOWER. There is,
of course,
also still the
possibility that he came with Carver's family from
Leyden. Governor Carver's early death necessarily
changed his
status
somewhat, and Plymouth early records do not give much beyond
suggestion as
to what the change was; but all indications confirm
the opinion
that he was a poor boy—very likely of London or
vicinity—taken
by Carver as his "servant."
The More children, Jasper, Richard, their brother (whose
given name has
never
transpired), and Ellen, their sister, invite more than passing
mention. The belief has always been current and
confident among
students of
Pilgrim history that these More children, four in
number,
"put" or "indentured" to three of the Leyden leaders, were
probably
orphaned children of some family of the Leyden
congregation,
and were so "bound" to give them a chance in the new
colony, in
return for such services as they could render to those
they
accompanied. If thus of the Leyden
contingent they would,
of course, be
enumerated as passengers in the SPEEDWELL from
Delfshaven,
but if of the English contingent they should probably be
borne on the
list of passengers sailing from London in the
MAY-FLOWER,
certainly should be reckoned as part of the English
contingent on
the MAY-FLOWER at Southampton. An
affidavit of
Richard More,
perhaps the eldest of these children, indentured to
Elder Brewster,
dated in 1684., found in "Proceedings of the
Provincial
Court, Maryland Archives, vol. xiv. ('New England
Historic-Genealogical Register,' vol
1. p. 203 )," affirms the
deponent to be
then "seaventy years or thereabouts" of age, which
would have
made him some six years of age, "or thereabouts," in
1620. He deposes "that being in London at the
house of Mr. Thomas
Weston, Iron
monger, in the year 1620, he was from there transported
to New
Plymouth in New England," etc. This clearly identifies
Richard More
of the MAY FLOWER, and renders it well-nigh certain
that he and
his brothers and sister, "bound out" like himself to
Pilgrim
leaders, were of the English company, were probably never in
Leyden or on
the SPEEDWELL, and were very surely passengers on the
MAY-FLOWER
from London, in charge of Mr. Cushman or others. The
fact that the
lad was in London, and went from thence direct to New
England, is
good evidence that he was not of the Leyden party. The
fair presump
tion is that his brothers and sister were, like
himself, of
English birth, and humble—perhaps deceased—parents,
taken because
of their orphaned condition. It is highly improbable
that they
would be taken from London to Southampton by land, at the
large expense
of land travel in those days, when the MAY-FLOWER was
to sail from
London. That they would accompany their
respective
masters to
their respectively assigned ships at Southampton is
altogether
likely. The phraseology of his affidavit suggests the
probability
that Richard More, his brothers, and sister were brought
to Mr.
Weston's house, to be by him sent aboard the MAY-FLOWER,
about to
sail. The affidavit is almost conclusive
evidence as to
the fact that
the More children were all of the English colonists'
party, though
apprenticed to Leyden families, and belonged to the
London
passenger list of the Pilgrim ship. The
researches of Dr.
Neill among
the MS. "minutes" and "transactions" of the (London)
Virginia
Company show germanely that, on November 17, 1619, "the
treasurer,
council, and company" of this Virginia Company addressed
Sir William
Cockaine, Knight, Lord Mayor of the city of London, and
the right
worthys the aldermen, his brethren, and the worthys the
"common
council of the city," and returning
thanks for the benefits
conferred, in
furnishing out one hundred children this last year
for "the
plantation in Virginia" (from what Neill calls the
"homeless
boys and girls of London"), states, that, "forasmuch as we
have now resolved
to send this next spring 1620 very large
supplies," etc., "we pray your Lordship and the rest . .
. to
renew the like
favors, and furnish us again with one hundred more
for the next
spring. Our desire is that we may have
them of twelve
years old and
upward, with allowance of L3 apiece for their
transportation, and 40s. apiece for their apparel, as was formerly
granted. They shall be apprenticed; the boys till they
come to 21
years of age,
the girls till like age or till they be married," etc.
A letter of
Sir Edwin Sandys (dated January 28, 1620) to Sir Robert
Naunton shows
that "The city of London have appointed one hundred
children from
the superfluous multitude to be transported to
Virginia,
there to be bound apprentices upon very beneficial
conditions." In view of the
facts that these More children—and
perhaps
others—were "apprenticed" or "bound" to the Pilgrims
(Carver,
Winslow, Brewster, etc.), and that there must have been
some one to
make the indentures, it seems strongly probable that
these four
children of one family,—as Bradford shows,—very likely
orphaned, were
among those designated by the city of London for the
benefit of the
(London) Virginia Company in the spring of 1620.
They seem to
have been waifs caught up in the westward-setting
current, but
only Richard survived the first winter.
Bradford,
writing in
1650, states of Richard More that his brothers and sister
died,
"but he is married 1636and hath 4 or 5 children." William
T. Davis, in
his "Ancient Landmarks of Plymouth" (p. 24), states,
and Arber
copies him, that "he was afterwards called Mann; and died
at Scituate,
New England, in 1656." The researches
of Mr. George E.
Bowman, the
able Secretary of the Massachusetts Society of
MAY-FLOWER
Descendants, some time since disproved this error,
but Mores
affidavit quoted conclusively determines the matter.
The
possible accessions to the company, at London or Southampton, of Henry Sampson
and Humility Cooper, cousins of Edward Tilley and wife, would be added to the
passengers of the pinnace rather than to the MAY-FLOWER'S, if, as seems
probable, their relatives were of the SPEEDWELL. If Edward Tilley and his wife
were assigned to the MAY FLOWER, room would doubtless also be found for these
cousins on the ship. John Alden, the only positively known addition (except
Carver) made to the list at Southampton, was, from the nature of his engagement
as "cooper," quite likely assigned to the larger ship. There are no
known hints as to the assignments of passengers to the respective vessels at
Southampton—then supposed to be final—beyond the remarks of Bradford that
"the chief [principal ones] of them that came from Leyden went on this
ship [the SPEEDWELL] to give the Master content," and his further minute,
that "Master Martin was governour in the biger ship and Master Cushman
assistante." It is very certain that Deacon Carver, one of the four agents
of the colonists, who had "fitted out" the voyage in England, was a
passenger in the SPEEDWELL from Southampton,—as the above mentioned remark of
Bradford would suggest,—and was made "governour" of her passengers,
as he later was of the whole company, on the MAY-FLOWER. It has sometimes been
queried whether, in the interim between the arrival of the SPEEDWELL at
Southampton and the assignment of the colonists to their respective ships
(especially as both vessels were taking in and transferring cargo), the
passengers remained on board or were quartered on shore. The same query has
arisen, with even better reason, as to the passengers of the SPEEDWELL during
the stay at Dartmouth, when the consort was being carefully overhauled to find
her leaks, the suggestion being made that in this case some of them might have
found accommodation on board the larger ship. The question may be fairly
considered as settled negatively, from the facts that the colonists, with few
exceptions, were unable to bear such extra expense themselves; the funds of the
Adventurers—if any were on hand, which appears doubtful—were not available for
the purpose; while the evidence of some of the early writers renders it very
certain that the Leyden party were not released from residence on shipboard
from the time they embarked on the SPEEDWELL at Delfshaven till the final
landing in the harbor of New Plimoth. Just who of the Leyden chiefs caused
themselves to be assigned to the smaller vessel, to encourage its cowardly
Master, cannot be definitely known. It may be confidently assumed, however,
that Dr. Samuel Fuller, the physician of the colonists, was transferred to the
MAY-FLOWER, upon which were embarked three fourths of the entire company,
including most of the women and children, with some of whom, it was evident,
his services would be certainly in demand. There is little doubt that the good
Elder (William Brewster) was also transferred to the larger ship at
Southampton, while it would not be a very wild guess—in the light of Bradford's
statement—to place Carver, Winslow, Bradford, Standish, Cooke, Howland, and
Edward Tilley, and their families, among the passengers on the consort. Just
how many passengers each vessel carried when they sailed from Southampton will
probably never be positively known. Approximately, it may be said, on the
authority of such contemporaneous evidence as is available, and such
calculations as are possible from the data we have, that the SPEEDWELL had
thirty (30), and the MAY-FLOWER her proportionate number, ninety (90)—a total
of one hundred and twenty (120).
Captain
John Smith says,
[Smith, New
England's Trials, ed. 1622, London, p. 259.
It is a
singular error
of the celebrated navigator that he makes the ships
to have, in
less than a day's sail, got outside of Plymouth, as he
indicates by
his words, "the next day," and "forced their return to
Plymouth." He evidently
intends to speak only in general terms, as
he entirely
omits the (first) return to Dartmouth, and numbers the
passengers on
the MAY-FLOWER, on her final departure, at but "one
hundred." He also says they
"discharged twenty passengers."]
apparently without pretending to be exact, "They left the coast of England
the 23 of August, with about 120 persons, but the next day [sic] the lesser
ship sprung a leak that forced their return to Plymouth; where discharging her
[the ship] and twenty passengers, with the great ship and a hundred persons,
besides sailors, they set sail again on the 6th of September."
[PG Etext
Editor's Note:
Dr. Ames, so
stringent in his requirements of other authors, for
example Jane
Austin, has to this point been perhaps naive as to
the veracity
of Captain John Smith. Captain Smith's
self-serving
and subjective
narratives of his own voyages obtained for him
the very
derogatory judgement by his contemporaries.
One of the
best studies
of John Smith's life may be found in a small book on
this
adventurer by Charles Dudley Warner.
D.W.]
If
the number one hundred and twenty (120) is correct, and the distribution
suggested is also exact, viz. thirty (30) to the SPEEDWELL and ninety (90) to
the MAY-FLOWER, it is clear that there must have been more than twelve (the
number usually named) who went from the consort to the larger ship, when the
pinnace was abandoned. We know that at least Robert Cushman and his family
(wife and son), who were on the MAY-FLOWER, were among the number who returned
to London upon the SPEEDWELL (and the language of Thomas Blossom in his letter
to Governor Bradford, else where quoted, indicates that he and his son were
also there), so that if the ship's number was ninety (90), and three or more
were withdrawn, it would require fifteen (15) or more to make the number up to
one hundred and two (102), the number of passengers we know the MAY-FLOWER had
when she took her final departure. It is not likely we shall ever be able to
determine exactly the names or number of those transferred to the MAY-FLOWER
from the consort, or the number or names of all those who went back to London
from either vessel. Several of the former and a few of the latter are known,
but we must (except for some fortunate discovery) rest content with a very
accurate knowledge of the passenger list of the MAY-FLOWER when she left
Plymouth (England), and of the changes which occurred in it afterward; and a
partial knowledge of the ship's own complement of officers and men.
Goodwin
says: "The returning ones were probably of those who joined in England,
and had not yet acquired the Pilgrim spirit." Unhappily this view is not
sustained by the relations of those of the number who are known. Robert Cushman
and his family (3 persons), Thomas Blossom and his son (2 persons), and William
Ring (1 person), a total of six, or just one third of the putative eighteen who
went back, all belonged to the Leyden congregation, and were far from lacking
"the Pilgrim spirit." Cushman was both ill and heart-sore from
fatigue, disappointment, and bad treatment; Ring was very ill, according to
Cushman's Dartmouth letter; but the motives governing Blossom and his son do
not appear, unless the comparatively early death of the son—after which his
father went to New England—furnishes a clue thereto. Bradford says: "Those
that went back were, for the most part, such as were willing to do so, either
out of some discontent, or fear they conceived of the ill success of the
Voyage, seeing so many crosses befallen and the year time so far spent. But
others, in regard of their own weakness and the charge of many young children,
were thought [by the Managers] least useful and most unfit to bear the brunt of
this hard adventure." It is evident from the above that, while the return
of most was from choice, some were sent back by those in authority, as unfit
for the undertaking, and that of these some had "many young chil
dren." There are said to have been eighteen who returned on the SPEEDWELL
to London. We know who six of them were, leaving twelve, or two thirds,
unknown. Whether these twelve were in part from Leyden, and were part English,
we shall probably never know. If any of them were from Holland, then the number
of those who left Delfshaven on the SPEEDWELL is increased by so many. If any
were of the English contingent, and probably the most were,—then the passenger
list of the MAY-FLOWER from London to Southampton was probably, by so many, the
larger. It is evident, from Bradford's remark, that, among the twelve unknown,
were some who, from "their own weakness and charge of many young children,
were thought least useful and most unfit," etc. From this it is clear that
at least one family was included which had a number of young children, the
parents' "own weakness" being recognized. A father, mother, and four
children (in view of the term "many") would seem a reasonable
surmise, and would make six, or another third of the whole number. The
probability that the unknown two thirds were chiefly from England, rather than
Holland, is increased by observation of the evident care with which, as a rule,
those from the Leyden congregation were picked, as to strength and fitness, and
also by the fact that their Leyden homes were broken up. Winslow remarks,
"the youngest and strongest part were to go," and an analysis of the
list shows that those selected were mostly such. Bradford, in stating that
Martin was "from Billericay in Essex," says, "from which part
came sundry others." It is quite possible that some of the unknown twelve
who returned were from this locality, as none of those who went on the
MAY-FLOWER are understood to have hailed from there, beside the Martins.
All
the colonists still intending to go to America were now gathered in one vessel.
Whatever previous disposition of them had been made, or whatever relations they
might have had in the disjointed record of the exodus, were ephemeral, and are
now lost sight of in the enduring interest which attaches to their final and
successful "going forth" as MAY-FLOWER Pilgrims.
Bradford
informs us—as already noted—that, just before the departure from Southampton,
having "ordered and distributed their company for either ship, as they
conceived for the best," they "chose a Governor and two or three
assistants for each ship, to order the people by the way, and see to the disposing
of the provisions, and such like affairs. All which was not only with the
liking of the Masters of the ships, but according to their desires." We
have seen that under this arrangement —the wisdom and necessity of which are
obvious—Martin was made "Governor" on the "biger ship" and
Cushman his "assistante." Although we find no mention of the fact, it
is rendered certain by the record which Bradford makes of the action of the
Pilgrim company on December 11, 1620, at Cape Cod,—when they "confirmed"
Deacon John Carver as "Governor,"—that he was and had been such, over
the colonist passengers for the voyage (the ecclesiastical authority only
remaining to Elder Brewster), Martin holding certainly no higher than the
second place, made vacant by Cushman's departure.
Thus,
hardly had the Pilgrims shaken the dust of their persecuting mother-country
from their feet before they set up, by popular voice (above religious
authority, and even that vested by maritime law in their ships' officers), a
government of themselves, by themselves, and for themselves. It was a
significant step, and the early revision they made of their choice of
"governors" certifies their purpose to have only rulers who could
command their confidence and respect. Dr. Young says: "We know the age of
but few of the Pilgrims," which has hitherto been true; yet by careful
examination of reliable data, now available, we are able to deter mine very
closely the ages of a considerable number, and approximately the years of most
of the others, at the time of the exodus. No analysis, so far as known, has
hitherto been made of the vocations (trades, etc.) represented by the
MAY-FLOWER company. They were, as befitted those bent on founding a colony, of
considerable variety, though it should be understood that the vocations given
were, so far as ascertained, the callings the individuals who represented them
had followed before taking ship. Several are known to have been engaged in
other pursuits at some time, either before their residence in Holland, or
during their earlier years there. Bradford tells us that most of the Leyden
congregation (or that portion of it which came from England, in or about 1608)
were agricultural people. These were chiefly obliged to acquire handicrafts or
other occupations. A few, e.g. Allerton, Brewster, Bradford, Carver, Cooke, and
Winslow, had possessed some means, while others had been bred to pursuits for
which there was no demand in the Low Countries. Standish, bred to arms,
apparently followed his profession nearly to the time of departure, and resumed
it in the colony, adding thereto the calling which, in all times and all lands,
had been held compatible in dignity with that of arms,—the pursuit of
agriculture. While always the "Sword of the White Men," he was the
pioneer "planter" in the first settlement begun (at Duxbury) beyond
Plymouth limits. Of the "arts, crafts or trades" of the colonists
from London and neighboring English localities, but little has been gleaned.
They were mostly people of some means, tradesmen rather than artisans, and at
least two (Martin and Mullens) were evidently also of the Merchant Adventurers.
Their
social (conjugal) conditions—not previously analyzed, it is thought—have been
determined, it is believed, with approximate accuracy; though it is of course
possible that some were married, of whom that fact does not appear, especially
among the seamen.
The
passengers of the MAY-FLOWER on her departure from Plymouth (England), as
arranged for convenience by families, were as appears by the following lists.
While
the ages given in these lists are the result of much careful study of all the
latest available data, and are believed, when not exact, to be very close
approximates; as it has been possible to arrive at results, in several cases,
only by considerable calculation, the bases of which may not always have been
entirely reliable, errors may have crept in. Though the author is aware that,
in a few instances, the age stated does not agree with that assigned by other
recognized authority, critical re-analysis seems to warrant and confirm the
figures given.
The
actual and comparative youth of the majority of the colonist leaders —the
Pilgrim Fathers—is matter of comment, even of surprise, to most students of
Pilgrim history, especially in view of what the Leyden congregation had
experienced before embarking for America. Only two of the leaders exceeded
fifty years of age, and of these Governor Carver died early. Of the principal
men only nine could have been over forty, and of these Carver, Chilton, Martin,
Mullins, and Priest (more than half died within a few months after landing),
leaving Brewster, Warren (who died early), Cooke, and Hopkins—neither of the
latter hardly forty—the seniors. One does not readily think of Alden as but
twenty-one, Winslow as only twenty-five, Dr. Fuller as about thirty, Bradford
as only thirty-one when chosen Governor, Allerton as thirty-two, and Captain
Standish as thirty-six. Verily they were "old heads on young
shoulders." It is interesting to note that the dominant influence at all
times was that of the Leyden contingent.
Of
these, all except William Butten, who died upon the voyage, reached Cape Cod in
safety, though some of them had become seriously ill from the hardships
encountered, and Howland had narrowly escaped drowning. Two were added to the
number en voyage,—Oceanus Hopkins, born upon the sea, and Peregrine White, born
soon after the arrival in Cape Cod harbor. This made the total of the passenger
list 103, before further depletion by death occurred, though several deaths
again reduced it before the MAY-FLOWER cast anchor in Plymouth harbor, her
final haven on the outward voyage.
Deacon John Carver's place of birth or early life is not
known, but he
was an Essex
County man, and was probably not, until in middle life,
a member of
Robinson's congregation of "Independents." His age is
determined by
collateral evidence.
Mrs. Katherine Carver, it has been supposed by some, was
a sister of
Pastor
Robinson. This supposition rests,
apparently, upon the
expression of
Robinson in his parting letter to Carver, where he
says:
"What shall I say or write unto you and your good wife, my
loving
sister?" Neither the place of Mrs.
Carver's nativity nor her
age is known.
Desire Minter was evidently a young girl of the Leyden
congregation,
between the
ages of fourteen and seventeen, who in some way (perhaps
through
kinship) had been taken into Carver's family.
She returned
to England
early. See ante, for account of her
(probable)
parentage.
John Howland was possibly of kin to Carver and had been
apparently some
years in his
family. Bradford calls him a
"man-servant," but it is
evident that
"employee" would be the more correct term, and that he
was much more
than a "servant." It is
observable that Howland
signed the
Compact (by Morton's List) before such men as Hopkins,
the Tilleys,
Cooke, Rogers, and Priest, which does not indicate much
of the
"servant" relation. His
antecedents are not certainly known,
but that he was of the Essex family of the
name seems probable.
Much effort
has been made in recent years to trace his ancestry,
but without
any considerable result. His age at
death (1673)
determines his
age in 1620. He was older than generally
supposed,
being born
about 1593.
Roger Wilder is also called a "man-servant" by
Bradford, and hardly more
than this is
known of him, his death occurring early.
There is no
clue to his
age except that his being called a "man-servant" would
seem to
suggest that he was of age; but the fact that he did not
sign the
Compact would indicate that he was younger, or he may have
been extremely
ill, as he died very soon after arrival.
William Latham is called a "boy" by Bradford,
though a lad of 18. It is
quite possible
he was one of those "indentured" by the corporation
of London, but
there is no direct intimation of this.
"Mrs. Carver's maid," it is fair to presume,
from her position as
lady's-maid
and its requirements in those days, was a young woman of
eighteen or
twenty years, and this is confirmed by her early
marriage. Nothing is known of her before the
embarkation. She died
early.
Jasper More, Bradford says, "was a child yt was put
to him." Further
information
concerning him is given in connection with his brother
Richard,
"indentured" to Elder Brewster.
He is erroneously called
by Justin
Winsor in his "History of Duxbury" (Massachusetts) a child
of Carver's,
as Elizabeth Tilley is "his daughter." Others have
similarly
erred.
Elder William Brewster's known age at his death
determines his age in
1620. He was born in 1566-67. His early life was full of interest
and activity,
and his life in Holland and America no less so.
In
early life he
filled important stations. Steele's
"Chief of the
Pilgrims"
is a most engaging biography of him, and there are others
hardly less
so, Bradford's sketch being one of the best.
Mrs. Mary Brewster's age at her death determines it at
the embarkation,
and is matter
of computation.
Love Brewster
was the second son of his parents, his elder brother
Jonathan coming
over afterwards.
Wrestling
Brewster was but a "lad," and his father's third son.
Richard More and his brother, Bradford states, "were
put to him" (Elder
Brewster) as
bound-boys. For a full account of their
English
origin,
Richard's affidavit, etc., see ante.
This makes him but
about six, but
he was perhaps older.
Governor Edward Winslow's known age at his death fixes
his age at the
time of the
exodus, and his birth is duly recorded at Droitwich, in
Worcester,
England. (See "Winslow Memorial," David Parsons Holton,
vol. i.
p. 16.)
Mrs. Elizabeth (Barker) Winslow, the first wife of the
Governor, appears
by the data
supplied by the record of her marriage in Holland, May
27, 1618, to
have been a maiden of comporting years to her
husband's, he
being then twenty-three. Tradition makes
her slightly
younger than
her husband.
George Soule, it is evident,—like Howland,—though
denominated a
"servant" by Bradford, was more than this, and should rather
have
been styled,
as Goodwin points out, "an employee" of Edward Winslow.
His age is
approximated by collateral evidence, his marriage, etc.
Elias Story is called "man-servant" by
Bradford, and his age is unknown.
The fact that
he did not sign the Compact indicates that he was
under age, but
extreme illness may have prevented, as he died early.
Ellen More, "a little girl that was put to him"
(Winslow), died early.
She was sister
of the other More children, "bound out" to Carver and
Brewster, of
whom extended mention has been made.
Governor William Bradford's date of birth fixes his age
in 1620. His
early home was
at Austerfield, in Yorkshire. Belknap
("American
Biography," vol. ii. p. 218)
says: "He learned the art of
silk-dyeing."
Mrs. Dorothy (May) Bradford's age (the first wife of the
Governor) is
fixed at
twenty-three by collateral data, but she may have been
older. She was probably from Wisbeach, England. The manner of her
tragic death
(by drowning, having fallen overboard from the ship in
Cape Cod
harbor), the first violent death in the colony, was
especially
sad, her husband being absent for a week afterward. It
is not known
that her body was recovered.
Dr. Samuel Fuller, from his marriage record at Leyden,
made in 1613, when
he was a
widower, it is fair to assume was about thirty, perhaps
older, in
1620, as he could, when married, have hardly been under
twenty-one. His (third) wife and
child were left in Holland.
William Butten (who died at sea, November 6/16), Bradford
calls
"a youth." He was undoubtedly a
"servant"-assistant to the doctor.
Isaac Allerton, it is a fair assumption, was about
thirty-four in 1620,
from the fact
that he married his first wife October 4, 1611, as he
was called
"a young man" in the Leyden marriage record. He is
called
"of London, England," by Bradford and on the Leyden records.
He was made a
"freeman" of Leyden, February 7, 1614. Arber and
others state
that his early occupation was that of "tailor," but he
was later a
tradesman and merchant.
Mary (Norris) Allerton is called a "maid of Newbury
in England," in the
Leyden record
of her marriage, in October, 1611, and it is the only
hint as to her
age we have. She was presumably a young
woman. Her
death followed (a month later) the birth of
her still-born son, on
board the
MAY-FLOWER in Plymouth harbor, February 25/March 7, 1621.
Bartholomew Allerton, born probably in 1612/13 (his
parents married
October,
1611), was hence, as stated, about seven or eight years old
at the
embarkation. He has been represented as
older, but this was
clearly
impossible. He was doubtless born in
Holland.
Remember Allerton, apparently Allerton's second child,
has (with a
novelist's
license) been represented by Mrs. Austin as considerably
older than
six, in fact nearer sixteen (Goodwin, p. 183, says,
"over
13"), but the known years of her mother's marriage and her
brother's
birth make this improbable. She was, no
doubt, born in
Holland about 1614—She married Moses
Maverick by 1635, and Thomas
Weston's only
child, Elizabeth, was married from her house at
Marblehead to
Roger Conant, son of the first "governor" of a
Massachusetts
Bay "plantation."
Mary Allerton, apparently the third child, could hardly
have been much
more than four
years old in 1620, though Goodwin ("Pilgrim
Republic," p. 184) calls her
eleven, which is an error. She was
probably born
in Holland about 1616. She was the last
survivor of
the passengers
of the MAY-FLOWER, dying at Plymouth, New England,
1699.
John Hooke, described by Bradford as a
"servant-boy," was probably but a
youth. He did not sign the Compact. Nothing further
is known of him
except that he
died early. It is quite possible that he
may have
been of London
and have been "indentured" by the municipality to
Allerton, but
the presumption has been that he came, as body-servant
of Allerton,
with him from Leyden.
Captain Standish's years in 1620 are conjectural (from
fixed data), as is
his age at
death. His early home was at Duxborough
Hall, in
Lancashire. His commission as
Captain, from Queen Elizabeth, would
make his birth
about 1584. Rose Standish, his wife, is
said by
tradition to
have been from the Isle of Man, but nothing is known of
her age or
antecedents, except that she was younger than the
Captain. She died during the "general
sickness," early in 1621.
Master Christopher Martin, as previously noted, was from
Billerica, in
Essex. From collateral data it appears that he must
have been
"about
forty" years old when he joined the Pilgrims. He appears to
have been a
staunch "Independent" and to have drawn upon himself the
ire of the
Archdeacon of Chelmsford, (probably) by his loud-mouthed
expression of
his views, as only "a month before the MAY-FLOWER
sailed"
he, with his son and Solomon Prower of his household
(probably a
relative), were cited before the archdeacon to answer
for their
shortcomings, especially in reverence for this church
dignitary. He seems to have been
at all times a self-conceited,
arrogant, and
unsatisfactory man. That he was elected
treasurer
and ship's
"governor" and permitted so much unbridled liberty as
appears, is
incomprehensible. It was probably
fortunate that he
died early, as
he did, evidently in utter poverty. He
had a son,
in 1620,
apparently quite a grown youth, from which it is fair to
infer that the
father was at that time "about forty." Of his wife
nothing is
known. She also died early.
Solomon Prower, who is called by Bradford both
"son" and "servant" of
Martin, seems
from the fact of his "citation" before the Archdeacon
of Chelmsford,
etc., to have been something more than a "servant,"
possibly a
kinsman, or foster-son, and probably would more properly
have been
termed an "employee." He was
from Billerica, in Essex,
and was, from
the fact that he did not sign the Compact, probably
under
twenty-one or very ill at the time. He
died early. Of John
Langemore, his
fellow "servant," nothing is known, except that he is
spoken of by
Young as one of two "children" brought over by Martin
(but on no
apparent authority), and he did not sign the Compact,
though this
might have been from extreme illness, as he too died
early.
William White was of the Leyden congregation. He is wrongly called by
Davis a son of
Bishop John White, as the only English Bishop of that
name and time
died a bachelor. At White's marriage,
recorded at the
Stadthaus at
Leyden, January 27/February 1, 1612, to Anna [Susanna]
Fuller, he is
called "a young man of England."
As he presumably was
of age at that
time, he must have been at least some twenty-nine or
thirty years
old at the embarkation, eight years later.
His son
Peregrine was
born in Cape Cod harbor. Mr. White died
very early.
Susanna (Fuller) White, wife of William, and sister of
Dr. Fuller (?),
was apparently
somewhat younger than her first husband and perhaps
older than her
second. She must, in all probability
(having been
married in
Leyden in 1612), have been at least twenty-five at the
embarkation
eight years later. Her second husband,
Governor
Winslow, was
but twenty-five in 1620, and the presumption is that
she was
slightly his senior. There appears no
good reason for
ascribing to
her the austere and rather unlovable characteristics
which the pen
of Mrs. Austin has given her.
Resolved White, the son of William and Susanna White,
could not have been
more than six
or seven years old, and is set down by Goodwin and
others—on what
seems inconclusive evidence—at five. He
was
doubtless born
at Leyden.
William Holbeck is simply named as "a servant"
of White, by Bradford.
His age does
not appear, but as he did not sign the Compact he was
probably
"under age." From the fact
that he died early, it is
possible that
he was too ill to sign.
Edward Thompson is named by Bradford as a second
"servant" of Master
White, but
nothing more is known of him, except that he did not sign
the Compact,
and was therefore probably in his nonage, unless
prevented by
severe sickness. He died very early.
Master William Mullens (or Molines, as Bradford some
times calls him) is
elsewhere
shown to have been a tradesman of some means, of Dorking,
in Surrey, one
of the Merchant Adventurers, and a man of ability.
From the fact
that he left a married daughter (Mrs. Sarah Blunden)
and a son
(William) a young man grown, in England, it is evident
that he must
have been forty years old or more when he sailed for
New England,
only to die aboard the ship in New Plymouth harbor.
That he was
not a French Huguenot of the Leyden contingent, as
pictured by
Rev. Dr. Baird and Mrs. Austin, is certain.
Mrs. Alice Mullens, whose given name we know only from
her husband's
will, filed in
London, we know little about. Her age
was (if she
was his first
wife) presumably about that of her husband, whom she
survived but a
short time.
Joseph Mullens was perhaps older than his sister Priscilla,
and the third
child of his
parents; but the impression prevails that he was
slightly her
junior,—on what evidence it is hard to say.
That he
was sixteen is
rendered certain by the fact that he is reckoned by
his father, in
his will, as representing a share in the planter's
half-interest
in the colony, and to do so must have been of that
age.
Priscilla Mullens, whom the glamour of unfounded romance
and the pen of
the poet
Longfellow have made one of the best known and best beloved
of the Pilgrim
band, was either a little older, or younger, than her
brother
Joseph, it is not certain which. But
that she was over
sixteen is
made certain by the same evidence as that named
concerning her brother.
Robert Carter is named by Bradford as a
"man-servant," and Mrs. Austin,
in her
imaginative "Standish of Standish," which is never to be
taken too
literally, has made him (see p. 181 of that book) "a dear
old
servant," whom Priscilla Mullens credits with carrying her in
his arms when
a small child, etc. Both Bradford's
mention and Mr.
Mullens's will
indicate that he was yet a young man and "needed
looking
after." He did not sign the
Compact, which of itself
indicates
nonage, unless illness was the cause, of which, in his
case, there is
no evidence, until later.
Richard Warren, as he had a wife and five pretty well
grown daughters,
must have been
forty-five or more when he came over. He
is
suggested to
have been from Essex.
Stephen Hopkins is believed to have been a
"lay-reader" with Mr. Buck,
chaplain to
Governor Gates, of the Bermuda expedition of 1609 (see
Purchas, vol.
iv. p. 174). As he could hardly have had this
appointment,
or have taken the political stand he did, until
of
age, he must
have been at least twenty-one at that time.
If so, he
would have
been not less than thirty two years old in 1620, and was
probably considerably
older, as his son Giles is represented by
Goodwin
("Pilgrim Republic," p. 184) as being "about 15." If the
father was but
twenty-one when the son was born, he must have been
at least
thirty-seven when he became a MAY-FLOWER Pilgrim. The
probabilities
are that he was considerably older. His
English home
is not
known. Professor Arber makes an error
(The Story of the
Pilgrim
Fathers," p. 261) in regard to Hopkins which, unless noted,
might lead to
other and more serious mistakes. Noting
the
differences
between John Pierce and a Master Hopkins, heard before
the Council
for New England, May 5/15, 1623, Arber designates Master
Hopkins as
"Stephen" (on what authority does not appear), and leaves
us to infer
that it was the Pilgrim Hopkins. On further inquiry it
transpires
that the person who was at variance with Master John
Pierce over
the matter of passage and freight money, on account of
the
unfortunate PARAGON, was a Rev. Master Hopkins (not Stephen of
the
MAY-FLOWER), who, we learn from Neill's "History of the Virginia
Company,"
was "recommended July 3, 1622, by the Court of the Company
to the
Governor of Virginia, . . . being desirous to go over at
his own
charge. He was evidently a passenger on
both of the
disastrous
attempts of the PARAGON under Captain William Pierce, and
being forced
back the second time, apparently gave up the intention
of going.
Mrs. Elizabeth Hopkins, nothing is known concerning,
except that she was
not her
husband's first wife. Sometime
apparently elapsed between
her husband's
marriages.
Giles Hopkins we only know was the son of his father's
first wife, and
"about
15." An error (of the types
presumably) makes Griffis ("The
Pilgrims in
their Three Homes," p. 176) give the name of Oceanus
Hopkins's
father as Giles, instead of Stephen.
Constance (or
Constantia)
Hopkins was apparently about eleven years old in 1620,
as she married
in 1627, and probably was then not far from eighteen
years old.
Damaris Hopkins, the younger daughter of Master Hopkins,
was probably a
very young child when she came in the MAY-FLOWER, but
her exact age
has not been as certained. Davis, as
elsewhere noted,
makes the
singular mistake of saying she was born after her parents
arrived in New
England. She married Jacob Cooke, and
the
ante-nuptial
agreement of his parents is believed to be the
earliest of
record in America, except that between Gregory
Armstrong and
the widow Billington.
Edward Dotey is called by Bradford "a servant,"
but nothing is known of
his age or
antecedents. It is very certain from the
fact that he
signed the
Compact that he was twenty-one. He was a
very energetic
man. He seems
to have been married before coming to New England, or
soon after.
Edward Leister (the name is variously spelled) was a
"servant," by
Bradford's
record. He was doubtless of age, as he
signed the
Compact.
Master John Crackstone, being (apparently) a widower with
a son, a child
well grown,
was evidently about thirty five years old when he
embarked for
New England. He left a daughter behind.
He died early.
John
Crackstone, Jr., was but a lad, and died early.
Master Edward Tilley (sometimes spelled Tillie) and his
wife Ann seem to
have been
without children of their own, and as they took with them
to New England
two children who were their kindred, it may be
inferred that
they had been married some little time. It is hence
probable that
Mr. Tilley was in the neighborhood of thirty.
His
wife's age is
purely conjectural. They were, Bradford
states, "of
the Leyden
congregation."
Henry Sampson was apparently but a young English lad when
he came over in
the MAY-FLOWER
with his cousins the Tilleys. As he
married in 1636,
he was
probably then about twenty-one, which would make him five or
six when he
came over. Goodwin ("Pilgrim
Republic," p. 184) says he
was
"six."
Humility Cooper is said by Bradford to have been a
"cosen" of the
Tilleys, but
no light is given as to her age or antecedents.
She
was but a
child, apparently. She returned to
England very soon
after the
death of Mr. and Mrs. Tilley, and "died young."
Master John Tilley, having twice married, and having a
daughter some
fourteen years
old, must have been over thirty-five years old when
he sailed on the
Pilgrim ship. His birthplace and
antecedents are
not known, but
he was "of the Leyden congregation."
Mrs. Bridget (Van der Velde) Tilley was just possibly a
second wife.
Nothing is
known concerning her except that she was of Holland, and
that she had, apparently, no child.
Elizabeth Tilley is said by Goodwin (op. cit. p. 298) and others to have
been fourteen
years old at her parents' death in 1621, soon after
the arrival in
New England. She was the child of her
father's first
wife. She married John Howland before 1624. Historians for many
years called
her the "daughter of Governor Carver," but the recovery
of Bradford's
MS. "historie" corrected this, with many other
misconceptions, though to some the error had become apparent before.
Her will also
suggests her age.
Francis Cooke's age in 1620 is fixed by his known age at
his death
("about
81") in 1663. He was from the north
of England, and long a
member of
Robinson's congregation, both in England and in
Holland(?).
John Cooke, son of Francis, is known to have been about
ten years old
when he sailed
with his father for America, as his parents did not
marry before
1609. He was undoubtedly born at
Leyden. He was long
supposed to
have been the last male survivor of the original
passengers
(dying at Dartmouth in 1695.)
James Chilton's antecedents and his age are quite
unknown. He must have
been at least
fifty, as he had a married daughter in Leyden,
according to
Bradford. He died among the first, and
there is
nothing of
record to inform us concerning him, except Bradford's
meagre
mention. He may have lived at Leyden.
Mrs. Chilton's given name is declared by one writer to
have been Susanna,
but it is not
clearly proven. Whence she came, her
ancestry, and
her age, are
alike unknown.
Mary Chilton was but a young girl in 1620. She married, before 1627,
John Winslow,
and was probably not then over twenty, nor over
fourteen when
she came with her parents in the MAY-FLOWER.
Thomas Rogers appears, from the fact that he had a son, a
lad well-grown,
to have been
thirty or more in 1620. His birthplace,
antecedents,
and history
are unknown, but he appears to have been "of the Leyden
congregation." His wife and
children came later.
Joseph Rogers was only a "lad" aboard the
MAY-FLOWER, but he left a
considerable
posterity. Nothing is surely known of
him, except that
he was
Thomas's son.
Degory Priest had the distinction of being
"freeman" of Leyden, having
been admitted
such, November 16, 1615. He was by
occupation a
"hatter," a man of some means, who left a wife and at least
two
children in
Holland when he embarked for America.
His known age at
death gives
his age at sailing but a few months previous.
At his
marriage in
Leyden, October 4, 1611, he was called "of London." He
was about
thirty-two when he married. His wife (a
widow Vincent)
was a sister
of Isaac Allerton, who also was married at the same
time that he
was. Goodwin ("Pilgrim Republic," p. 183) also gives
his age as
"forty-one." His widow
remarried and came over later.
Dexter
("Mourt's Relation," p. 69, note) states, quoting from Leyden
MS. records,
that "Degory Priest in April, 1619, calling himself a
'hatter,'
deposes that he 'is forty years of age.'"
He must,
therefore,
have been about forty-one when he sailed on the
MAY-FLOWER,
and forty-two years old at his death.
John Rigdale and his wife Alice afford no data. They both died early,
and there is
no record concerning either of them beyond the fact
that they were
passengers.
Edward Fuller and his wife have left us little record of
themselves save
that they were
of Leyden, that he is reputed a brother of Dr. Samuel
Fuller (for
whom they seem to have named the boy they brought over
with
them,—leaving apparently another son, Matthew, behind), and
that both died
the first winter. He must have been at
least
twenty-five,
judging from the fact that he was married and had two
children, and
was perhaps somewhat older (though traditionally
represented as
younger) than his brother. Neither his
occupation
nor
antecedents are surely known.
Samuel Fuller—the son of Edward Fuller and his wife—is
called by
Bradford
"a young child." He must have
been some five or six years
of age, as he
married in 1635, fifteen years later, and would
presumably
have been of age, or nearly so.
Thomas Tinker's name, the mention of his "wife"
and "son," the tradition
that they were
"of the Leyden congregation" (which is not sure), the
certainty that
they were MAY-FLOWER passengers,—on Brad ford's
list,—and that
all died early, are all we know of the Tinker
family.
John Turner and his two sons we know little about. He seems to have been
a widower, as
no mention is found of his wife, though this is not
certain. He was of the Leyden congregation, and
evidently a man of
some standing
with the leaders, as he was made their messenger to
Carver and
Cushman in London, in June, 1620, and was apparently
accustomed to
travel. He appears to have had business of his own in
England at the
time, and was apparently a man of sober age.
As he
had three
children,—a daughter who came later to New England, and
two sons, as
stated by Bradford,—it is probable that he was thirty
or over. He and both his sons died in the spring of
1621.
Francis Eaton was of Leyden, a carpenter, and, having a
wife and child,
was probably a
young man about twenty five, perhaps a little
younger. He married three times.
Mrs. Sarah Eaton, wife of Francis, was evidently a young
woman, with an
infant, at the
date of embarkation. Nothing more is
known of her,
except that
she died the spring following the arrival at Plymouth.
Samuel Eaton, the son of Francis and his wife, Sarah,
Bradford calls "a
sucking
child:" He lived to marry.
Gilbert Window was the third younger brother of Governor
Edward Winslow,
and is reputed
to have been a carpenter. He was born on
Wednesday,
October 26,
1600, at Droitwitch, in Worcester, England.
("Winslow
Memorial," vol. i. p.
23.) He apparently did not remain long
in
the colony, as
he does not appear in either the "land division" of
1623 or the
"cattle division" of 1627; and hence was probably not
then in the
"settlement," though land was later allowed his heirs,
he having been
an "original" voyager of the Plymouth colony. He was
but twenty
years and fifteen days old when he signed the Compact,
but probably
was—from his brother's prominence and his nearness to
his
majority—counted as eligible. Bradford states that he returned
to England
after "divers years" in New England, and died there. It
has been
suggested that he went very early to some of the other
"plantations."
John Alden was of Southampton, England, was hired as
"a cooper," was
twenty-one
years old in 1620, as determined by the year of his
birth, 1599
("Alden Memorial," p. 1), and became the most prominent
and useful of
any of the English contingent of the MAY FLOWER
company. Longfellow's delightful poem, "The
Courtship of Miles
Standish," has given him and his bride, Priscilla Mullens,
world-wide
celebrity, though it is to be feared that its historical
accuracy would
hardly stand criticism. Why young Alden
should have
been
"hired for a cooper at Southampton," with liberty to "go or
stay" in
the colony, as Bradford says he was (clearly indicating
that he went
to perform some specific work and return, if he liked,
with the
ship), has mystified many. The matter is
clear, however,
when it is
known, as Griffis shows, that part of a Parliamentary Act
of 1543 reads:
"Whosoever shall carry Beer beyond Sea, shall find
Sureties to
the Customers (?) of that Port, to bring in Clapboard
[staves] meet [sufficient] to make so much
Vessel [barrel or
"kilderkin"] as he shall carry forth." As a considerable quantity of
beer was part
of the MAY-FLOWER'S lading, and her consignors stood
bound to make
good in quantity the stave-stock she carried away,
it was
essential, in going to a wild country where it could not be
bought, but
must be "got out" from the growing timber, to take along
a "cooper
and cleaver" for that purpose.
Moreover, the great demand
for beer-barrel
stock made "clapboard" good and profitable return
lading. It constituted a large part of the FORTUNE'S
return freight
(doubtless
"gotten out" by Alden), as it would have undoubtedly of
the
MAY-FLOWER'S, had the hardship of the colony's condition
permitted.
Peter Browne we know little concerning. That he was a man of early
middle age is
inferable from the fact that he married the widow
Martha Ford,
who came in the FORTUNE in 1621. As she
then was the
mother of
three children, it is improbable that she would have
married a very
young man. He appears, from certain
collateral
evidence, to
have been a mechanic of some kind, but it is not clear
what his
handicraft was or whence he came.
John Billington (Bradford sometimes spells it Billinton)
and his family,
Bradford tells
us, "were from London." They
were evidently an
ill-conditioned lot, and unfit for the company of the planters, and
Bradford says,
"I know not by what friend shuffled into their
Company." As he had a wife
and two children, the elder of whom must
have been
about sixteen years old, he was apparently over
thirty-five
years of age. There is a tradition that
he was a
countryman
bred, which certain facts seem to confirm.
(See land
allotments for
data as to age of boys, 1632.) He was
the only one
of the
original colonists to suffer the "death penalty" for crime.
Mrs. Ellen (or "Elen") Billington, as Bradford
spells the name, was
evidently of
comporting age to her husband's, perhaps a little
younger. Their two sons, John and Francis, were lively
urchins who
frequently
made matters interesting for the colonists, afloat and
ashore. The family was radically bad throughout, but
they have had
not a few
worthy descendants. Mrs. Billington married Gregory
Armstrong, and
their antenuptial agreement is the first of record
known in
America.
John Billington, Jr., is always first named of his
father's two sons, and
hence the
impression prevails that he was the elder, and Bradford so
designates
him. The affidavit of Francis Billington
(Plymouth
County, Mass.,
Deeds, vol. i. p. 81), dated 1674, in
which he
declares
himself sixty-eight years old, would indicate that he was
born in 1606,
and hence must have been about fourteen years of age
when he came
on the MAY-FLOWER to New Plymouth. If
John, his
brother, was
older than he, he must have been born about 1604, and
so was about
sixteen when, he came to New England.
The indications
are that it
was Francis, the younger son, who got hold of the
gunpowder in
his father's cabin in Cape Cod harbor, and narrowly
missed blowing
up the ship. John died before 1630. Francis lived,
as appears, to
good age, and had a family.
Moses Fletcher was of the Leyden company, a
"smith," and at the time of
his second
marriage at Leyden, November 30/December 21, 1613, was
called a
"widower" and "of England."
As he was probably of age at
the time of
his first marriage,—presumably two years or more before
his last,—he
must have been over thirty in 1620. He
was perhaps
again a
widower when he came over, as no mention is made of his
having wife or
family. He was possibly of the Amsterdam
family of
that
name. His early death was a great loss
to the colony.
A Thomas Williams is mentioned by Hon. Henry C Murphy ("Historical
Magazine," vol. iii. pp.
358, 359), in a list of some of Robinson's
congregation
who did not go to New England in either the MAY-FLOWER,
FORTUNE, ANNE,
Or LITTLE JAMES. He either overlooked
the fact that
Williams was
one of the MAY-FLOWER passengers, or else there were
two of the
name, one of whom did not go. Nothing is
known of the
age or former
history of the Pilgrim of that name. He
died in the
spring of 1621
(before the end of March). As he signed the Compact,
he must have
been over twenty-one. He may have left a
wife, Sarah.
John Goodman we know little more about than that he and
Peter Browne seem
to have been
"lost" together, on one occasion (when he was badly
frozen), and
to have had, with his little spaniel dog, a rencontre
with "two
great wolves," on another. He was
twice married, the last
time at Leyden
in 1619. He died before the end of
March, 1621.
As he signed
the Compact, he must have been over twenty-one.
Edward Margeson we know nothing about. As he signed the Compact, he was
presumably of
age.
Richard Britteridge affords little data. His age, birthplace, or
occupation do
not transpire, but he was, it seems, according to
Bradford, the
first of the company to die on board the ship after
she had cast
anchor in the harbor of New Plymouth.
This fact
negatives the
pleasant fiction of Mrs. Austin's "Standish of
Standish"
(p. 104), that Britteridge was one of those employed in
cutting sedge
on shore on Friday, January 12. Poor
Britteridge died
December 21,
three weeks earlier. He signed the
Compact, and hence
may be
accounted of age at the landing at Cape Cod.
Richard Clarke appears only as one of the passengers and
as dying before
the end of
March. He signed the Compact, and hence
was doubtless
twenty-one or
over.
Richard Gardiner, we know from Bradford, "became a
seaman and died in
England or at
sea." He was evidently a young man,
but of his age or
antecedents
nothing appears. He signed the Compact,
and hence was
at least
twenty-one years old.
John Alderton (sometimes spelled Allerton), we are told
by Bradford,—as
elsewhere
noted,—"was hired, but was reputed one of the company,
but was to go
back, being a seaman and so, presumably, unmindful of
the voyages,
for the help of others." Whether
Bradford intended by
the latter
clause to indicate that he had left his family behind,
and came
"to spy out the land," and, if satisfied, to return for
them, or was
to return for the counsel and assistance of Robinson
and the rest,
who were to follow, is not clear, but the latter view
has most to
support it. We learn his occupation, but
can only infer
that he was a
young man over twenty-one from the above and the fact
that he signed
the Compact. It has been suggested that
he was a
relative of
Isaac Allerton, but this is nowhere shown and is
improbable. He died before the
MAY-FLOWER returned to England.
Thomas English (or Enlish), Bradford tells us
("Historie," Mass. ed.
p. 533),
"was hired to goe Master of a [the] shallop here." He,
however,
"died here before the ship returned."
It is altogether
probable that
he was the savior of the colony on that stormy night
when the
shallop made Plymouth harbor the first time, and, narrowly
escaping
destruction, took shelter under Clarke's Island. The first
three
governors of the colony, its chief founders,—Carver,
Bradford, and
Winslow,—with Standish, Warren, Hopkins, Howland,
Dotey, and
others, were on board, and but for the heroism and prompt
action of
"the lusty sea man which steered," who was—beyond
reasonable
doubt—English, as Bradford's narrative ("Morton's
Memorial") shows, the lives of the entire party must, apparently,
have been
lost. That English was, if on
board—Bradford shows in
the
"Memorial" that he was—as Master of the shallop, properly her
helmsman in so
critical a time, goes without saying, especially as
the
"rudder was broken" and an oar substituted; that the ship's
"mates," Clarke and Coppin, were not in charge (although on
board)
fully appears
by Bradford's account; and as it must have taken all
of the other
(four) seamen on board to pull the shallop, bereft of
her sail, in
the heavy breakers into which she had been run by
Coppin's
blunder, there would be no seaman but English for the
steering-oar,
which was his by right. Had these
leaders been lost
at this
critical time,—before a settlement had been made,—it is
certain that
the colony must have been abandoned, and the Pilgrim
impress upon
America must have been lost. English's
name should, by
virtue of his
great service, be ever held in high honor by all of
Pilgrim
stock. His early death was a grave loss.
Bradford spells
the name once
Enlish, but presumably by error. He
signed the
Compact as
Thomas English.
William Trevore was, according to Bradford, one of
"two seamen hired to
stay a year in
the countrie." He went back when
his time expired,
but later
returned to New England. Cushman
(Bradford, "Historie,"
p. 122)
suggests that he was telling "sailors' yarns." He says:
"For
William Trevore hath lavishly told but what he knew or imagined
of Capewock Martha's Vineyard, Monhiggon, and
ye Narragansetts." In
1629 he was at
Massachusetts Bay in command of the HANDMAID
(Goodwin, p.
320), and in February, 1633 (Winthrop, vol. i. p. 100),
he seems to
have been in command of the ship WILLIAM at Plymouth,
with
passengers for Massachusetts Bay.
Captain Standish testified
in regard to
Thompson's Island in Boston harbor, that about 1620 he
"was on
that Island with Trevore," and called it "Island Trevore."
(Bradford,
"Historie," Deane's ed. p.
209.) He did not sign the
Compact,
perhaps because of the limitations of his contract (one
year).
—- Ely (not Ellis, as Arber miscalls him, "The Story
of the Pilgrim
Fathers,"
p. 377) was the other of the "two seamen hired to stay a
year,"
etc. He also returned when his time
expired. (Bradford,
Hist. Mass.
ed. p. 534.) He did not sign the
Compact, probably for
the reason
operative in .Trevore's case. A digest
of the foregoing
data gives the
following interesting, if incomplete, data (errors
excepted):—
|
Adult males (hired seamen and servants of age
included) |
44 |
|
Adult females (including Mrs Carver's maid) |
19 |
|
Youths, male children, and male servants,
minors |
29 |
|
Maidens, female children |
10 |
|
|
— |
|
|
102 |
|
Married males |
26 |
|
Married females |
18 |
|
Single (adult) males (and young
men) |
25 |
|
Single (adult) females (Mrs Carver's
maid) |
1 |
Vocations
of adults so far as known (except wives, who are presumed housekeepers for
their husbands):—
|
Carpenters |
2 |
|
Cooper |
1 |
|
Fustian-worker and silk-dyer |
1 |
|
Hatter |
1 |
|
Lay-reader |
1 |
|
Lady's-maid |
1 |
|
Merchants |
3 |
|
Physician |
1 |
|
Printers and publishers |
2 |
|
Seamen |
4 |
|
Servants (adult) |
10 |
|
Smith |
1 |
|
Soldier |
1 |
|
Tailor |
1 |
|
Tradesmen |
2 |
|
Wool-carders |
2 |
Allowing
for the addition of Wilder and the two sailors, Trevore and Ely, who did not
sign it, the number of those who signed the Compact tallies exactly with the
adult males. Besides these occupations, it is known that several of the
individuals representing them were skilled in other callings, and were at some
time teachers, accountants, linguists, writers, etc., while some had formerly
practised certain handicrafts; Dr. Fuller, e.g. having formerly been a
"silk-worker," Brad ford (on the authority of Belknap), a
"silk-dyer," and others "fustian-workers." Hopkins had
apparently sometime before dropped his character of "lay-reader," and
was a pretty efficient man of affairs, but his vocation at the time of the
exodus is not known.
The
former occupations of fourteen of the adult colonists, Browne, Billington,
Britteridge, Cooke, Chilton, Clarke, Crackstone, Goodman, Gardiner, Rogers,
Rigdale, Turner, Warren, and Williams are not certainly known. There is
evidence suggesting that Browne was a mechanic; Billington and Cooke had been
trained to husbandry; that Chilton had been a small tradesman; that Edward
Tilley had been, like his brother, a silk-worker; that Turner was a tradesman,
and Warren a farmer; while it is certain that Cooke, Rogers, and Warren had been
men of some means.
Of
the above list of fourteen men whose last occupations before joining the
colonists are unknown, only five, viz. Browne, Billington, Cooke, Gardiner, and
Warren lived beyond the spring of 1621. Of these, Warren died early, Gardiner
left the colony and "became a seaman;" the other three, Billington,
Browne, and Cooke, became "planters." Thomas Morton, of "Merry
Mount," in his "New Eng land's Canaan" (p. 217), gives
Billington the sobriquet "Ould Woodman."
The
early deaths of the others make their former handicrafts—except as so much data
pertaining to the composi tion and history of the colony— matters of only
ephemeral interest.
CHAPTER VII
QUARTERS, COOKING,
PROVISIONS
Probably
no more vexatious problem presented itself for the time being to the
"governors" of the two vessels and their "assistants," upon
their selection, than the assignment of quarters to the passengers allotted to
their respective ships. That these allotments were in a large measure determined
by the requirements of the women and children may be considered certain. The
difficulties attendant on due recognition of social and official station (far
more imperative in that day than this) were in no small degree lessened by the
voluntary assignment of themselves, already mentioned, of some of the Leyden
chief people to the smaller ship; but in the interests of the general welfare
and of harmony, certain of the leaders, both of the Leyden and London
contingents, were of necessity provided for in the larger vessel. The
allotments to the respective ships made at Southampton, the designation of
quarters in the ships themselves, and the final readjustments upon the
MAY-FLOWER at Plymouth (England), when the remaining passengers of both ships
had been united, were all necessarily determined chiefly with regard to the
needs of the women, girls, and babes. Careful analysis of the list shows that
there were, requiring this especial consideration, nineteen women, ten young
girls, and one infant. Of the other children, none were so young that they
might not readily bunk with or near their fathers in any part of the ship in
which the latter might be located.
We
know enough of the absolute unselfishness and devotion of all the Leyden
leaders, whatever their birth or station,—so grandly proven in those terrible
days of general sickness and death at New Plymouth,—to be certain that with
them, under all circumstances, it was noblesse oblige, and that no self-seeking
would actuate them here. It should be remembered that the MAY-FLOWER was
primarily a passenger transport, her passengers being her principal freight and
occupying the most of the ship, the heavier cargo being chiefly confined to the
"hold." As in that day the passenger traffic was, of course, wholly
by sailing vessels, they were built with cabin accommodations for it, as to
numbers, etc., proportionately much beyond those of the sailing craft of
to-day. The testimony of Captain John Smith, "the navigator," as to
the passengers of the MAY-FLOWER "lying wet in their cabins," and
that of Bradford as to Billington's "cabin between decks," already
quoted, is conclusive as to the fact that she had small cabins (the
"staterooms" of to-day), intended chiefly, no doubt, for women and
children. The advice of Edward Winslow to his friend George Morton, when the
latter was about to come to New England in the ANNE, "build your cabins as
open as possible," is suggestive of close cabins and their discomforts
endured upon the MAY-FLOWER. It also suggests that the chartering-party was
expected in those days to control, if not to do, the "fitting up" of
the ship for her voyage. In view of the usual "breadth of beam" of
ships of her class and tonnage, aft, and the fore and aft length of the poop,
it is not unreasonable to suppose that there were not less than four small
cabins on either side of the common (open) cabin or saloon (often depicted as
the signing-place of the Compact), under the high poop deck. Constructed on the
general plan of such rooms or cabins to-day (with four single berths, in tiers
of two on either hand), there would be—if the women and girls were conveniently
distributed among them—space for all except the Billingtons, who we know had a
cabin (as had also doubtless several of the principal men) built between decks.
This would also leave an after cabin for the Master, who not infrequently made
his quarters, and those of his chief officer, in the "round house,"
when one existed, especially in a crowded ship.
Cabins
and bunks "between decks" would provide for all of the males of the
company, while the seamen, both of the crew and (some of) those in the employ
of the Pilgrims—like Trevore and Ely—were no doubt housed in the fore castle.
Alderton and English seem to have been counted "of the company." The
few data we have permit us to confidently assume that some such disposition of
the passengers was (necessarily) made, and that but for the leaky decks, the
inseparable discomforts of the sea, and those of over crowding, the wives of
the Pilgrims (three of whom gave birth to children aboard the ship), and their
daughters, were fairly "berthed."
Bradford
is authority for the statement that with the "governor" of the ship's
company were chosen "two or three assistants . . . to order [regulate] the
people by the way [on the passage] and see to the disposition of the
provisions," etc. The last-named duty must have been a most difficult and
wearisome one. From what has been shown of the poverty of the ship's cooking
facilities (especially for so large a company), one must infer that it would be
hopeless to expect to cook food in any quantity, except when all conditions
favored, and then but slowly and with much difficulty. From the fact that so
many would require food at practically the same hours of the day, it is clear
that there must have been distribution of food (principally uncooked) to groups
or families, who, with the aid of servants (when available), must each have
prepared their own meals, cooking as occasion and opportunity indicated; much
after the manner of the steerage passengers in later days, but before those of
the great ocean liners. There appears to have been but one cook for the
officers and crew of the ship, and his hands were doubtless full with their
demands. It is certain that his service to the passengers must have been very
slight. That "the cook" is named as one of the ship's crew who died
in Plymouth harbor (New England) is all the knowledge we have concerning him.
The
use of and dependence upon tea and coffee, now so universal, and at sea so
seemingly indispensable, was then unknown, beer supplying their places, and
this happily did not have to be prepared with fire. "Strong
waters"—Holland gin and to some extent "aqua vitae"
(brandy)—were relied upon for the (supposed) maintenance of warmth. Our Pilgrim
Fathers were by no means "total abstainers," and sadly bewailed being
deprived of their beer when the supply failed. They also made general and
habitual (moderate) use of wine and spirits, though they sharply interdicted
and promptly punished their abuse.
In
the absence of cooking facilities, it became necessary in that day to rely
chiefly upon such articles of food as did not require to be prepared by heat,
such as biscuit (hard bread), butter, cheese ("Holland cheese" was a
chief staple with the Pilgrims), "haberdyne" (or dried salt codfish),
smoked herring, smoked ("cured ") ham and bacon, "dried neat's
tongues," preserved and "potted" meats (a very limited list in
that day), fruits, etc. Mush, oatmeal, pease-puddings, pickled eggs, sausage
meats, salt beef and pork, bacon, "spiced beef," such few vegetables
as they had (chiefly cabbages, turnips, and onions,—there were no potatoes in
that day), etc., could be cooked in quantity, when the weather permitted, and
would then be eaten cold.
Except
as dried or preserved fruits, vegetables (notably onions), limes, lemon juice,
and the free use of vinegar feebly counteracted, their food was distinctively
stimulant of scorbutic and tuberculosis disease, which constant exposure to
cold and wet and the overcrowded state of the ship could but increase and
aggravate. Bradford narrates of one of the crew of the MAY-FLOWER when in
Plymouth harbor, as suggestive of the wretched conditions prevalent in the
ship, that one of his shipmates, under an agreement to care for him, "got
him a little spice and made him a mess of beef, once or twice," and then
deserted him.
Josselyn,
in his "Two Voyages to New England," gives as the result of the
experience and observations had in his voyages, but a few years later, much
that is interesting and of exceptional value as to the food and equipment of
passengers to, and colonists in, this part of America. It has especial
interest, perhaps, for the author and his readers, in the fact that Josselyn's
statements were not known until after the data given in these pages had been
independently worked out from various sources, and came therefore as a
gratifying confirmation of the conclusions already reached.
Josselyn
says as to food, as follows:—"The common proportion of victuals for the
sea to a mess (being 4 men) is as followeth:—
"2
pieces of Beef of 3 lb. 1/4 apiece. Pork seems to have been inadvertently
omitted.
"Four
pounds of Bread [ship-bread].
"One
pint & 1/2 of Pease.
"Four
Gallons of Bear [Beer], with mustard and vinegar for 3 flesh days in the
week."
"For
four fish days to each mess per day:—
"Two
pieces of Codd or Haberdine, making 3 pieces of a fish, i.e. a dried salt cod
being divided into three pieces, 2 of those pieces were to be a day's ration
for 4 men.
"Four
pounds of Bread.
"Three-quarters
of a pound of cheese.
"Bear
as before."
"Oatmeal
per day for 50 men 1 Gallon [dry], and so proportionable for more or
fewer."
"Thus
you see the ship's provision is Beefe and Porke, Fish, Butter, Cheese, Pease,
Pottage, Water-Gruel, Bisket, and six shilling Bear."
"For
private fresh provision you may carry with you (in case you or any of yours
should be sick at sea):—
"Conserves
of Roses, Clove-Gilliflowers, Wormwood, Green-Ginger, Burnt-Wine, English
Spirits, Prunes to stew, Raisons of the Sun, Currence [currants], Sugar,
Nutmeg, Mace, Cinnamon, Pepper and Ginger, White Bisket, Butter, or 'Captains
biscuit,' made with wheat flour or Spanish Rusk, Eggs, Rice, Juice of Lemons,
well put up to cure or prevent the Scurvy, Small Skillets, Pipkins, Porringers
and small Frying Pans."
Josselyn
further gives us an estimate for:—
"Victuals
for a whole year to be carried out of England for one man and so for more after
this rate." He annexed also their current prices:—
"Eight
bushels of Meal [Rye meal probably intended]
Two bushels of
Pease at 3/s
Two bushels of
Oatmeal at 4s/6d
One Gallon of
Aqua Vitae
One Gallon of
Oyl
Two Gallons of
Vinegar
[No estimate of
Beef or Pork, or of vegetables, is included.]
A Hogshead of
English Bear
A Hogshead of
Irish Bear
A Hogshead of
Vinegar
A bushel of
Mustard seed
A Kental
[Quintal] of fish, Cod or Haberdine, 112 lb."
Edward
Window, in his letter to George Morton before mentioned, advising him as to his
voyage, says: "Bring juice of lemons and take it fasting. It is of good
use."
It
is indeed remarkable that, totally unused to any such conditions, wet, cold,
poorly fed, overcrowded, storm-tossed, bruised and beaten, anxious, and with no
homes to welcome them, exposed to new hardships and dangers on landing, worn
and exhausted, any of the MAY-FLOWER'S company survived. It certainly cannot be
accounted strange that infectious diseases, once started among them, should
have run through their ranks like fire, taking both old and young. Nor is it
strange that—though more inured to hardship and the conditions of sea life—with
the extreme and unusual exposure of boat service on the New England coast in
mid winter, often wading in the icy water and living aboard ship in a highly
infected atmosphere, the seamen should have succumbed to disease in almost
equal ratio with the colonists. The author is prepared, after careful consideration,
to accept and professionally indorse, with few exceptions, the conclusions as
to the probable character of the decimating diseases of the passengers and crew
of the MAY-FLOWER, so ably and interestingly presented by Dr. Edward E.
Cornwall in the "New England Magazine" for February, 1897—From the
fact that Edward Thompson, Jasper More, and Master James Chilton died within a
month of the arrival at Cape Cod (and while the ship lay in that harbor), and
following the axiom of vital statistics that "for each death two are
constantly sick," there must have been some little (though not to say
general) sickness on the MAY-FLOWER when she arrived at Cape Cod. It would, in
view of the hardship of the voyage, have been very remarkable if this had not
been the case. It would have been still more remarkable if the ill-conditioned,
thin-blooded, town-bred "servants" and apprentices had not suffered
first and most. It is significant that eight out of nine of the male
"servants" should have died in the first four months. It was
impossible that scurvy should not have been prevalent with both passengers and
crew.
CHAPTER VIII
THE MAY-FLOWER'S
LADING
Beside
her human freight of one hundred and thirty or more passengers and crew, the
lading of the MAY-FLOWER when she sailed from Plymouth (England), September
6/16, 1620, was considerable and various. If clearing at a custom-house of
to-day her manifest would excite no little interest and surprise. Taking no
account of the ship's stores and supplies (necessarily large, like her crew,
when bound upon such a voyage, when every possible need till her return to her
home port must be provided for before sailing), the colonists' goods and
chattels were many, their provisions bulky, their ordnance, arms, and stores
(in the hold) heavy, and their trading-stock fairly ample. Much of the cargo
originally stowed in the SPEEDWELL, a part, as we know, of her company, and a
few of her crew were transferred to the MAY-FLOWER at Plymouth, and there can
be no doubt that the ship was both crowded and overladen.
It
is altogether probable that the crowded condition of her spar and main decks
caused the supply of live-stock taken—whether for consumption upon the voyage
or for the planters' needs on shore—to be very limited as to both number and
variety. It has been matter of surprise to many that no cattle (not even
milch-cows) were taken, but if—as is not unlikely—it was at first proposed to
take a cow or two (when both ships were to go and larger space was available),
this intent was undoubtedly abandoned at Plymouth, England, when it became
evident that there would be dearth of room even for passengers, none whatever
for cattle or their fodder (a large and prohibitive quantity of the latter
being required for so long a voyage), and that the lateness of the season and
its probable hardships would endanger the lives of the animals if taken. So far
as appears the only domestic live-stock aboard the MAY-FLOWER consisted of
goats, swine, poultry, and dogs. It is quite possible that some few sheep,
rabbits, and poultry for immediate consumption (these requiring but little
forage) may have been shipped, this being customary then as now. It is also
probable that some household pets—cats and caged singing-birds, the latter
always numerous in both England and Holland—were carried on board by their
owners, though no direct evidence of the fact is found. There is ample proof
that goats, swine, poultry, and dogs were landed with the colonists at New
Plymouth, and it is equally certain that they had at first neither cattle,
horses, nor sheep. Of course the she-goats were their sole reliance for milk
for some time, whether afloat or ashore, and goat's flesh and pork their only
possibilities in the way of fresh meat for many months, save poultry (and game
after landing), though we may be sure, in view of the breeding value of their
goats, poultry, and swine, few were consumed for food. The "fresh
meat" mentioned as placed before Massasoit' on his first visit was
probably venison, though possibly kid's meat, pork, or poultry. Of swine and
poultry they must have had a pretty fair supply, judging from their rapid
increase, though their goats must have been few. They were wholly without
beasts of draft or burden (though it seems strange that a few Spanish donkeys or
English "jacks" had not been taken along, as being easily kept,
hardy, and strong, and quite equal to light ploughing, hauling, carrying,
etc.), and their lack was sorely felt. The space they and their forage demanded
it was doubtless considered impracticable to spare. The only dogs that appear
in evidence are a large mastiff bitch (the only dog of that breed probably seen
on these shores since Pring's "bigge dogges" so frightened the
Indians' in this region seventeen years before)
[Captain
Martin Pring had at Plymouth, in 1603, two great "mastive
dogges"
named "Fool" and "Gallant," the former being trained to
carry
a half-pike in
his mouth. "The Indians were more
afraid of these
dogs than of
twenty men." American Magazine of
History; Goodwin,
Pilgrim
Republic, p. 3.]
and a small spaniel, both the property of passengers, though there may have
been others not mentioned. Speaking of the venison found in a tree by one of
the exploring parties, Winslow says: "We thought it fitter for the dogs
than for us," perhaps suggesting by his word "the" their own
dogs aboard ship and provision for them. There is an intimation as to the
ownership of these two dogs in the facts that on certainly two occasions John
Goodman was accompanied by the little spaniel (once when alone), from which it
may perhaps be inferred that he was the dog's master; while the big mastiffs
presence when only Peter Browne and Goodman were together suggests that Browne
was her owner. The goats, swine, rabbits, and poultry were doubtless penned on
the spar-deck forward, while possibly some poultry, and any sheep brought for
food, may have been temporarily housed—as was a practice with early voyagers—in
the (unused) ship's boats, though these appear to have been so few in number
and so much in demand that it is doubtful if they were here available as pens.
The heavy cargo and most of the lighter was of course stowed in the hold, as
the main deck (or "'tween decks") was mostly occupied as quarters for
the male passengers, old and young, though the colonists' shallop, a
sloop-rigged boat some thirty feet in length, had been "cut down" and
stowed "between the decks" for the voyage. A glimpse of the weary
life at sea on that long and dreary passage is given in Bradford's remark that
"she was much opened with the people's lying in her during the
voyage:" This shallop with her equipment, a possible spare skiff or two,
the chests, "boxes," and other personal belongings of the passengers,
some few cases of goods, some furniture, etc., constituted the only freight for
which there could have been room "between decks," most of the space
(aft) being occupied by cabins and bunks.
The
provisions in use, both by passengers and crew, were probably kept in the
lazarette or "runs," in the stern of the ship, which would be
unusually capacious in vessels of this model; some—the bulkiest—in the hold
under the forward hatch, as the custom was, and to some extent still is. The
food supply of the Pilgrims, constituting part of the MAY-FLOWER'S Cargo, included,
as appears from authentic sources:—
Breadstuff's, including,—
Biscuits or
ship-bread (in barrels).
Oatmeal (in
barrels or hogsheads).
Rye meal (in
hogsheads).
Butter (in firkins).
Cheese, "Hollands" and English (in boxes).
Eggs, pickled (in tubs).
Fish, "haberdyne" [or salt dried cod] (in
boxes).
Smoked herring (in boxes).
Meats, including,—
Beef, salt, or
"corned" (in barrels).
Dry-salted (in barrels).
Smoked
(in sacks).
Dried
neats'-tongues (in boxes).
Pork, bacon,
smoked (in sacks or boxes).
Salt
["corned"] (in barrels).
Hams and
shoulders, smoked (in canvas sacks or hogsheads).
Salt (in bags and barrels).
Vegetables, including,—
Beans (in bags
and barrels).
Cabbages (in
sacks and barrels).
Onions (in
sacks).
Turnips (in
sacks).
Parsnips (in
sacks).
Pease (in
barrels), and
Vinegar (in hogsheads), while,—
Beer (in casks), brandy, "aqua vitae" (in
pipes), and gin ["Hollands,"
"strong
waters," or "schnapps"] (in pipes) were no small or
unimportant
part, from any point of view, of the provision supply.
Winslow,
in his letter to George Morton advising him as to his preparations for the
voyage over, says: "Be careful to have a very good bread-room to keep your
biscuit in." This was to keep them from dampness. Winthrop gives us the
memorandum of his order for the ship-bread for his voyage in 1630. He says:
"Agreed with Keene of Southwark, baker, for 20,000 of Biscuit, 15,000 of
brown, and 5,000 of white." Captain Beecher minutes: "10 M. of bread
for the ship ARBELLA." Beecher's memorandum of "oatmeal" is
"30 bushels." Winslow mentions "oatmeal," and Winthrop
notes among the provisions bought by Captain William Pierce, "4 hhds. of
oatmeal." Rye meal was usually meant by the term "meal," and
Window in his letter to George Morton advises him: "Let your meal be so
hard-trod in your casks that you shall need an adz or hatchet to work it out
with;" and also to "be careful to come by [be able to get at] some of
your meal to spend [use] by the way." Notwithstanding that Bradford'
speaks of their "selling away" some "60 firkins of butter,"
to clear port charges at Southampton, and the leaders, in their letter to the
Adventurers from that port (August 3), speak of themselves, when leaving
Southampton in August, 1620, as "scarce having any butter," there
seems to have been some left to give as a present to Quadrequina, Massasoit's
brother, the last of March following, which would indicate its good
"keeping" qualities. Wood, in his "New England's Prospect"
(ch. 2), says: "Their butter and cheese were corrupted." Bradford
mentions that their lunch on the exploration expedition of November 15, on Cape
Cod, included "Hollands cheese," which receives also other mention.
There is a single mention, in the literature of the day, of eggs preserved in
salt, for use on shipboard. "Haberdyne" (or dried salt cod) seems to
have been a favorite and staple article of diet aboard ship. Captain Beecher
minutes "600 haberdyne for the ship ARBELLA." Wood says: "Their
fish was rotten." Smoked "red-herring" were familiar food to all
the MAY-FLOWER company. No house or ship of England or Holland in that day but
made great dependence upon them. Bacon was, of course, a main staple at sea. In
its half-cooked state as it came from the smoke-house it was much relished with
their biscuit by seamen and others wishing strong food, and when fried it
became a desirable article of food to all except the sick. Mention is made of
it by several of the early Pilgrim writers. Carlyle, as quoted, speaks of it as
a diet-staple on the MAY-FLOWER. Salt ("corned") beef has always been
a main article of food with seamen everywhere. Wood' states that the "beef"
of the Pilgrims was "tainted." In some way it was made the basis of a
reputedly palatable preparation called "spiced beef," mentioned as
prepared by one of the sailors for a shipmate dying on the MAY-FLOWER in
Plymouth harbor. It must have been a very different article from that we now
find so acceptable under that name in England. Winthrop' gives the price of his
beef at "19 shillings per cwt." Winslow advises his friend Morton, in
the letter so often quoted, not to have his beef "dry-salted,"
saying, "none can do it better than the sailors," which is a
suggestion not readily understood. "Smoked" beef was practically the
same as that known as "jerked," "smoked," or
"dried" beef in America. A "dried neat's-tongue" is named
as a contribution of the Pilgrims to the dinner for Captain Jones and his men
on February 21, 1621, when they had helped to draw up and mount the cannon upon
the platform on the hill at Plymouth. Winthrop paid "14d. a piece"
for his "neats' tongues." The pork of the Pilgrims is also said by
Wood' to have been "tainted." Winthrop states that his pork cost
"20 pence the stone" (14 lbs.).
Hams
seem to have been then, as now, a highly-prized article of diet. Goodwin
mentions that the salt used by the Pilgrims was (evaporated)
"sea-salt" and very "impure." Winthrop mentions among his
supplies, "White, Spanish, and Bay salt."
The
beans of the Pilgrims were probably of the variety then known as "Spanish
beans." The cabbages were apparently boiled with meat, as nowadays, and
also used considerably for "sour-krout" and for pickling, with which
the Leyden people had doubtless become familiar during their residence among
the Dutch. As anti-scorbutics they were of much value. The same was true of
onions, whether pickled, salted, raw, or boiled. Turnips and parsnips find frequent
mention in the early literature of the first settlers, and were among their
stock vegetables. Pease were evidently staple articles of food with the
Plymouth people, and are frequently named. They probably were chiefly used for
porridge and puddings, and were used in large quantities, both afloat and
ashore.
Vinegar
in hogsheads was named on the food-list of every ship of the Pilgrim era. It
was one of their best antiscorbutics, and was of course a prime factor in their
use of "sour krout," pickling, etc. The fruits, natural, dried, and
preserved, were probably, in that day, in rather small supply. Apples, limes,
lemons, prunes, olives, rice, etc., were among the luxuries of a voyage, while
dried or preserved fruits and small fruits were not yet in common use. Winslow,
in the letter cited, urges that "your casks for beer . . . be iron bound,
at least for the first [end] tyre" [hoop]. Cushman states that they had
ample supplies of beer offered them both in Kent and Amsterdam. The planters' supply
seems to have failed, however, soon after the company landed, and they were
obliged to rely upon the whim of the Captain of the MAY-FLOWER for their needs,
the ship's supply being apparently separate from that of the planters, and
lasting longer. Winthrop's supply seems to have been large ("42
tons"—probably tuns intended). It was evidently a stipulation of the
charter-party that the ship should, in part at least, provision her crew for
the voyage,—certainly furnish their beer. This is rendered certain by Bradford's
difficulty (as stated by himself) with Captain Jones, previously referred to,
showing that the ship had her own supply of beer, separate from that of the
colonists, and that it was intended for the seamen as well as the officers.
Bradford
mentions "aqua vitae" as a constituent of their lunch on the
exploring party of November 15. "Strong waters" (or Holland gin) are
mentioned as a part of the entertainment given Massasoit on his first visit,
and they find frequent mention otherwise. Wine finds no mention. Bradford
states in terms: "Neither ever had they any supply of foode from them [the
Adventurers] but what they first brought with them;" and again, "They
never had any supply of vitales more afterwards (but what the Lord gave them
otherwise), for all ye company [the Adventurers] sent at any time was allways
too short for those people yt came with it."
The clothing supplies of the Pilgrims included hats,
caps, shirts,
neck-cloths, jerkins, doublets, waistcoats, breeches
(stuff and leather),
"hosen," stockings, shoes, boots, belts
(girdles), cloth, piece-goods
(dress-stuff's), "haberdasherie," etc., etc.,
all of which, with minor
items for men's and women's use, find mention in their
early narratives,
accounts, and correspondence. By the will of Mr. Mullens it appears that
he had twenty-one dozen of shoes and thirteen pairs of
boots on board,
doubtless intended as medium of exchange or barter. By the terms of the.
contract with the colonists, the Merchant Adventurers
were to supply all
their actual necessities of Clothing food, clothing,
etc., for the full
term of seven years, during which the labors of the
"planters" were to be
for the joint account.
Whether under this agreement they were bound to
fully "outfit" the colonists before they embarked
(and did so), as was
done by Higginson's company coming to Salem in 1628-29 at
considerable
cost per capita, and as was done for those of the Leyden
people who came
over in 1629 with Pierce in the MAY-FLOWER and the TALBOT
to Salem, and
again in 1630 with the same Master (Pierce) in the LION
by the Plymouth
successors to the Adventurers (without recompense), does
not clearly
appear. No mention
is found of any "outfitting" of the MAY-FLOWER
passengers except the London apprentices. There is no doubt that a
considerable supply of all the above-named articles was
necessarily sent
by the Adventurers on the MAY-FLOWER, both for the
Pilgrims' needs on the
voyage and in the new colony, as also for trading
purposes. There seems
to have been at all times a supreme anxiety, on the part
of both Pilgrim
and Puritan settlers, to get English clothes upon their
red brethren of
the forest, whether as a means of exchange for peltry, or
for decency's
sake, is not quite clear. There was apparently a greater
disparity in
character, intelligence, and station between the leaders
of Higginson's
and Winthrop's companies and their followers than between
the chief men
of the Pilgrims and their associates. With the former were titles and
considerable representation of wealth and position. With the passengers
of the MAY-FLOWER a far greater equality in rank, means,
intelligence,
capacity, and character was noticeable. This was due in part, doubtless,
to the religious beliefs and training of the Leyden
contingent, and had
prompt illustration in their Compact, in which all stood
at once on an
equal footing.
There was but little of the "paternal" nature in the form
of their government (though something at times in their
punishments), and
there was much personal dignity and independence of the
individual.
An equipment having so much of the character of a
uniform—not to say
"livery"—as that furnished by Higginson's
company to its people
suggests the "hedger and ditcher" type of
colonists (of whom there were
very few among the Plymouth settlers), rather than the
scholar,
publisher, tradesman, physician, hatter, smith,
carpenter, "lay reader,"
and soldier of the Pilgrims, and would certainly have
been obnoxious to
their finer sense of personal dignity and
proportion. Doubtless an
equivalent provision existed—though in less
"all-of-a-pattern"
character—in the bales and boxes of the MAY-FLOWER'S
cargo for every
need suggested by the list of the Higginson
"outfit," which is given
herewith, both as matter of interest and as affording an
excellent idea
of the accepted style and needs in dress of a New England
settler (at
least of the men) of 1620-30. One cannot fail to wonder at the
noticeably infrequent mention of provision in apparel,
etc., for the
women and children. The inventory of the "Apparell
for 100 men" furnished
by Higginson's company in 1628-29 gives us, among others,
the following
items of clothing for each emigrant:—
4 "peares of shoes."
4 "peares of stockings."
1 "peare Norwich gaiters."
4 "shirts."
2 "suits dublet and hose of leather lyn'd with oyld
skyn leather, ye hose
& dublett
with hooks & eyes."
1 "sute of Norden dussens or hampshire kersies lynd
the hose with skins,
dublets with lynen of gilford or gedlyman kerseys."
4 bands.
2 handkerchiefs.
1 "wastecoat of greene cotton bound about with red
tape."
1 leather girdle.
1 "Monmouth cap."
1 "black hatt lyned in the brows with lether."
5 "Red knitt capps milf'd about 5d apiece."
2 "peares of gloves."
1 "Mandiliion lynd with cotton" [mantle or
greatcoat].
1 "peare of breeches and waistcoat."
1 "leather sute of Dublett & breeches of oyled
leather."
1 "peare of leather breeches and drawers to weare
with both there other
sutes."
In 1628 Josselyn put the average cost of clothing to
emigrants to New
England at L4 each.
In 1629 good shoes cost the "Bay" colonists 2s/7d
per pair. In his
"Two Voyages to New England" previously referred to,
Josselyn gives an estimate (made about 1628) of the
"outfit" in clothing
needed by a New England settler of his time. He names as "Apparel for
one man—and after this rate for more:—"
One Hatt
One
Monmouth Cap
Three
falling bands
Three
Shirts
One
Wastcoat
One Suite
of Frize (Frieze)
One Suite
of Cloth
One Suite of Canvas
Three
Pairs of Irish Stockings
Four
Pairs of Shoes
One Pair
of Canvas Sheets
Seven
ells of coarse canvas, to make a bed at sea for two men,
to
be filled with straw
One
Coarse Rug at Sea
The
Furniture of the Pilgrims has naturally been matter of much interest to their
descendants and others for many years. While it is doubtful if a single article
now in existence can be positively identified and truthfully certified as
having made the memorable voyage in the MAY-FLOWER (nearly everything having,
of course, gone to decay with the wear and tear of more than two hundred and
fifty years), this honorable origin is still assigned to many heirlooms, to
some probably correctly. Dr. Oliver Wendell Holmes in his delightful lines,
"On Lending a Punch Bowl," humorously claims for his convivial silver
vessel a place with the Pilgrims:—
"Along with all the furniture, to fill their new abodes,
To judge
by what is still on hand, at least a hundred loads."
To
a very few time-worn and venerated relics—such as Brewster's chair and one or
more books, Myles Standish's Plymouth sword, the Peregrine White cradle,
Winslow's pewter, and one or two of Bradford's books—a strong probability
attaches that they were in veritate, as traditionally avowed, part of the
MAY-FLOWER'S freight, but of even these the fact cannot be proven beyond the
possibility of a doubt.
From
its pattern and workmanship, which are of a period antedating the
"departure from Delfshaven," and the ancient tradition which is
traceable to Brewster's time, it appears altogether probable that what is known
as "Elder Brewster's chair" came with him on the ship. There is even
greater probability as to one of his books bearing his autograph.
The
sword of Myles Standish, in possession of the Pilgrim Society, may claim, with
equal probability, MAY-FLOWER relation, from its evident antiquity and the
facts that, as a soldier, his trusty blade doubtless stayed with him, and that
it is directly traceable in his descendants' hands, back to his time; but an
equally positive claim is made for similar honors for another sword said to
have also belonged to the Captain, now in the keeping of the Massachusetts
Historical Society.
The
Peregrine White cradle "is strongly indorsed as of the MAY-FLOWER, from
the facts that it is, indubitably, of a very early Dutch pattern and
manufacture; that Mrs. White was anticipating the early need of a cradle when
leaving Holland; and that the descent of this one as an heirloom in her
(second) family is so fairly traced."
The
pewter and the silver flask of Winslow not only bear very early
"Hallmarks," but also the arms of his family, which it is not likely
he would have had engraved on what he may have bought after notably becoming
the defender of the simplicity and democracy of the "Pilgrim
Republic." Long traceable use in his family strengthens belief in the
supposition that these articles came with the Pilgrims, and were then very probably
heirlooms. One of Governor Bradford's books (Pastor John Robinson's
"Justification of Separation"), published in 1610, and containing the
Governor's autograph, bears almost 'prima facie' evidence of having come with
him in the MAY-FLOWER, but of course might, like the above-named relics, have
come in some later ship.
In
this connection it is of interest to note what freight the MAY-FLOWER carried
for the intellectual needs of the Pilgrims. Of Bibles, as the "book of
books," we may be sure—even without the evidence of the inventories of the
early dead—there was no lack, and there is reason to believe that they existed
in several tongues, viz. in English, Dutch, and possibly French (the Walloon
contribution from the Huguenots), while there is little doubt that, alike as
publishers and as "students of the Word," Brewster, Bradford, and
Winslow, at least, were possessed of, and more or less familiar with, both the
Latin and Greek Testaments. It is altogether probable, however, that Governor
Bradford's well attested study of "the oracles of God in the
original" Hebrew, and his possession of the essential Hebrew Bible,
grammar, and lexicon, were of a later day. Some few copies of the earliest
hymnals ("psalme-bookes")—then very limited in number—there is
evidence that the Holland voyagers had with them in the singing of their
parting hymns at Leyden and Delfshaven, as mentioned by Winslow and in the
earlier inventories: These metrical versions of the Psalms constituted at the
time, practically, the only hymnology permitted in the worship of the
"Separatists," though the grand hymn of Luther, "Ein feste Burg
ist unser Gott," doubtless familiar to them, must have commended itself as
especially comforting and apposite.
Of
the doctrinal tracts of their beloved Pastor, John Robinson, there is every
probability, as well as some proof, that there was good supply, as well as
those of Ainsworth and Clyfton and of the works of William Ames, the renowned
Franeker Professor, the controversial opponent but sincere friend of Robinson:
the founder of evangelical "systematic theology," [method—Methodist?
D.W.] whom death alone prevented from becoming the President of Harvard
College. We may be equally sure that the few cases of books in the freight of
the Pilgrim ship included copies of the publications of the "hidden and
hunted press" of Brewster and Brewer, and some at least of the issues of
their fellows in tribulation at Amsterdam and in Scotland and England. Some few
heavy tomes and early classics in English, Dutch, Latin, and Greek were also
presumably among the goodly number of books brought in the MAY FLOWER by
Brewster, Bradford, Winslow, Fuller, Hopkins, Allerton, Standish, and others,
though it is probable that the larger part of the very considerable library of
four hundred volumes, left at his death by Brewster (including sixty-two in
Latin), and of the respectable libraries of Fuller, Standish, and others, named
in their respective inventories, either were brought over in the later ships,
or were the products of the earliest printers of New England. One is surprised
and amused that the library of the good Dr. Fuller should contain so relatively
small a proportion of medical works (although the number in print prior to his
death in 1633 was not great), while rich in religious works pertinent to his
functions as deacon. It is equally interesting to note that the inventory of
the soldier Standish should name only one book on military science,
"Bariffe's Artillery," though it includes abundant evidence to
controvert, beyond reasonable doubt, the suggestion which has been made, that
he was of the Romanist faith. Just which of the books left by the worthies
named, and others whose inventories we possess, came with them in the Pilgrim
ship, cannot be certainly determined, though, as before noted, some still in
existence bear intrinsic testimony that they were of the number. There is
evidence that Allerton made gift of a book to Giles Heale of the MAY-FLOWER
(perhaps the ship's surgeon), while the ship lay at Plymouth, and Francis Cooke's
inventory includes "1 great Bible and 4 olde bookes," which as they
were "olde," and he was clearly not a book-buyer, very probably came
with him in the ship. In fact, hardly an adult of the Leyden colonists, the
inventory of whose estate at death we possess, but left one or more books which
may have been his companions on the voyage.
Some
of the early forms of British and Dutch calendars, "annuals," and
agricultural "hand-books," it is certain were brought over by several
families, and were doubtless much consulted and well-thumbed "guides,
counsellors, and friends" in the households of their possessors. The great
preponderance of reading matter brought by the little colony was, however,
unquestionably of the religious controversial order, which had been so much a
part of their lives, and its sum total was considerable. There are intimations,
in the inventories of the Fathers, of a few works of historical cast, but of
these not many had yet been printed. "Caesar's Commentaries," a
"History of the World," and a "History of Turkey" on
Standish's shelves, with the two Dictionaries and "Peter Martyr on
Rome" on Dr. Fuller's, were as likely to have come in the first ship, and
to have afforded as much satisfaction to the hungry readers of the little
community as any of the books we find named in the lists of their little stock.
It is pathetic to note, in these days of utmost prodigality in juvenile
literature, that for the Pilgrim children, aside from the "Bible
stories," some of the wonderful and mirth-provoking metrical renderings of
the "Psalme booke," and the "horne booke," or primer (the
alphabet and certain elementary contributions in verse or prose, placed between
thin covers of transparent horn for protection), there was almost absolutely
nothing in the meagre book-freight of the Pilgrim ark. "Milk for
Babes," whether as physical or mental pabulum, was in poor supply aboard
the MAY-FLOWER.
The
most that can be claimed with confidence, for particular objects of alleged
MAY-FLOWER relation, is that there is logical and moral certainty that there
was a supply of just such things on board, because they were indispensable, and
because every known circumstance and condition indicates their presence in the
hands to which they are assigned, while tradition and collateral evidence
confirm the inference and sometimes go very far to establish their alleged
identity, and their presence with their respective owners upon the ship. A few
other articles besides those enumerated in possession of the Pilgrim Society,
and of other societies and individuals, present almost equally strong claims
with those named, to be counted as "of MAY-FLOWER belonging," but in
no case is the connection entirely beyond question. Where so competent,
interested, and conscientious students of Pilgrim history as Hon. William T.
Davis, of Plymouth, and the late Dr. Thomas B. Drew, so long the curator of the
Pilgrim Society, cannot find warrant for a positive claim in behalf of any
article as having come, beyond a doubt, "in the MAY FLOWER," others
may well hesitate to insist upon that which, however probable and desirable, is
not susceptible of conclusive proof.
That
certain articles of household furniture, whether now existent or not, were
included in the ship's cargo, is attested by the inventories of the small
estates of those first deceased, and, by mention or implication, in the
narratives of Bradford, Winslow, Morton, and other contemporaries, as were also
many utensils and articles of domestic use. There were also beyond question
many not so mentioned, which may be safely named as having very certainly been
comprised in the ship's lading, either because in themselves indispensable to
the colonists, or because from the evidence in hand we know them to have been
inseparable from the character, social status, daily habits, home life, or
ascertained deeds of the Pilgrims. When it is remembered that furnishings,
however simple, were speedily required for no less than nineteen
"cottages" and their households, the sum total called for was not
inconsiderable.
[Bradford, in
Mourt's Relation (p. 68), shows that the colonists
were divided
up into "nineteen families," that "so we might build
fewer
houses." Winslow, writing to George
Morton, December 11/21,
1621, says:
"We have built seven dwelling-houses and four for the
use of the
plantation." Bradford (Historie,
Mass. ed. p. 110)
calls the
houses "small cottages."]
Among
the furniture for these "cottages" brought on the Pilgrim ship may be
enumerated: chairs, table-chairs, stools and forms (benches), tables of several
sizes and shapes (mostly small), table-boards and "cloathes,"
trestles, beds; bedding and bed-clothing, cradles, "buffets,"
cupboards and "cabinets," chests and chests of drawers, boxes of
several kinds and "trunks," andirons, "iron dogs,"
"cob-irons," fire-tongs and "slices" (shovels), cushions,
rugs, and "blanckets," spinning wheels, hand-looms, etc., etc. Among
household utensils were "spits," "bake-kettles," pots and
kettles (iron, brass, and copper), frying-pans, "mortars" and pestles
(iron, brass, and "belle-mettle"), sconces, lamps (oil
"bettys"), candlesticks, snuffers, buckets, tubs,
"runlets," pails and baskets, "steel yards," measures,
hour-glasses and sun-dials, pewter-ware (platters, plates, mugs, porringers,
etc.), wooden trenchers, trays, "noggins," "bottles," cups,
and "lossets." Earthen ware, "fatten" ware (mugs,
"jugs," and "crocks "), leather ware (bottles,
"noggins," and cups), table-ware (salt "sellars," spoons,
knives, etc), etc. All of the foregoing, with numerous lesser articles, have
received mention in the early literature of the Pilgrim exodus, and were
undeniably part of the MAY-FLOWER'S lading.
The
MAY-FLOWER origin claimed for the "Governor Carver chair" and the
"Elder Brewster chair" rests wholly upon tradition, and upon the
venerable pattern and aspect of the chairs themselves. The "Winslow
chair," in possession of the Pilgrim Society at Plymouth (Mass.), though
bearing evidence of having been "made in Cheapside, London, in 1614,"
is not positively known to have been brought on the MAY-FLOWER. Thacher's
"History of Plymouth" (p. 144.) states that "a sitting-chair,
said to have been screwed to the floor of the MAY-FLOWER'S cabin for the
convenience of a lady, is known to have been in the possession of Penelope
Winslow (who married James Warren), and is now in possession of Hannah
White." There are certain venerable chairs alleged, with some show of
probability, to have been the property of Captain Standish, now owned in
Bridgewater, but there is no record attached to them, and they are not surely
assignable to either ship or owner. That some few tables —mostly small—were
brought in the MAY-FLOWER, there is some evidence, but the indications are that
what were known as "table-boards"—long and narrow boards covered with
what were called "board-cloths"—very largely took the place of
tables. The walnut-top table, said to have once been Governor Winslow's and now
in possession of the Pilgrim Society, is not known to have come over with him,
and probably did not. It was very likely bought for the use of the Council when
he was governor. The "table-boards" mentioned were laid on
"trestles" (cross-legged and folding supports of proper height),
which had the great merit that they could be placed in any convenient spot and
as easily folded up, and with the board put away, leaving the space which a
table would have permanently occupied free for other use.
Bradford
mentions that when the fire of Sunday, January 14., 1621, occurred in the
"common house," the "house was as full of beds as they could lie
one by another." There is a doubt, however, whether this indicates
bedsteads or (probably) "pallets" only. Beds, bedding of all sorts,
pillow-"beers," pillow-cases and even "mattrises," are of
most frequent mention in the earliest wills and inventories. (See Appendix.)
"Buffets," "cupboards," and "cabinets," all find
mention in the earliest writers and inventories, and one or two specimens, for
which a MAY-FLOWER history is claimed, are in possession of the Pilgrim Society
and others. The "White" cabinet, of putative MAY-FLOWER connection,
owned by the Pilgrim Society, is a fine example of its class, and both its
"ear marks" and its known history support the probable truth of the
claim made for it. Of "chests" and "chests-of-drawers"
there were doubtless goodly numbers in the ship, but with the exception of a
few chests (or the fragments of them), for which a MAY-FLOWER passage is
vaunted, little is known of them. The chest claimed to be that of Elder
Brewster, owned by the Connecticut Historical Society, was not improb ably his,
but that it had any MAY-FLOWER relation is not shown. A fragment of a chest
claimed to have been "brought by Edward Winslow in the MAY-FLOWER" is
owned by the Pilgrim Society, and bears considerable evidence of the probable
validity of such claim, but proof positive is lacking. Boxes of several kinds
and sizes were part of the Pilgrims' chattels on their ship, some of them
taking the place of the travellers' "trunks" of to-day, though
"trunks" were then known by that name and find early mention in
Pilgrim inventories, and there were no doubt some upon the Pilgrim ship. A few
claiming such distinction are exhibited, but without attested records of their
origin.
"Andirons,
fire-dogs, and cob-irons" (the latter to rest roasting spits upon) were
enumerated among the effects of those early deceased among the Pilgrims,
rendering it well-certain that they must have been part of their belongings on
the MAY-FLOWER. Fire-tongs and "slices" [shovels] are also frequently
mentioned in early Pilgrim inventories, placing them in the same category with
the "andirons and fire-dogs."
In
"Mourt's Relation," in the accounts given of the state reception of
Massasoit, "a green rug and three or four cushions" are shown to have
performed their parts in the official ceremonies, and were, of course,
necessarily brought in the MAY-FLOWER.
Spinning-wheels
and hand-looms were such absolute necessities, and were so familiar and
omnipresent features of the lives and labors of the Pilgrim housewives and
their Dutch neighbors of Leyden, that we should be certain that they came with
the Pilgrims, even if they did not find mention in the earliest Pilgrim
inventories. Many ancient ones are exhibited in the "Old Colony," but
it is not known that it is claimed for any of them that they came in the first
ship. It is probable that some of the "cheese fatts" and churns so
often named in early inventories came in the ship, though at first there was,
in the absence of milch kine, no such use for them as there had been in both
England and Holland, and soon was in New England.
Among
cooking utensils the roasting "spit" was, in one form or another,
among the earliest devices for cooking flesh, and as such was an essential of
every household. Those brought by the Plymouth settlers were probably, as
indicated by the oldest specimens that remain to us, of a pretty primitive
type. The ancient "bake-kettle" (sometimes called "pan"),
made to bury in the ashes and thus to heat above and below, has never been
superseded where resort must be had to the open fire for cooking, and
(practically unchanged) is in use to-day at many a sheep-herder's and cowboy's
camp fire of the Far West. We may be sure that it was in every MAY-FLOWER
family, and occasional ancient specimens are yet to be found in "Old
Colony" garrets. Pots and kettles of all sorts find more frequent mention
in the early inventories than anything else, except muskets and swords, and
were probably more numerous upon the ship than any other cooking utensil. A few
claimed to be from the Pilgrim ship are exhibited, chief of which is a large
iron pot, said to have been "brought by Myles Standish in the
MAY-FLOWER," now owned by the Pilgrim Society.
Hardly
an early Pilgrim inventory but includes "a mortar and pestle,"
sometimes of iron, sometimes of "brass" or "belle-mettle"
(bell metal). They were of course, in the absence of mills, and for some
purposes for which small hand mills were not adapted, prime necessities, and
every house hold had one. A very fine one of brass (with an iron pestle), nine
and a half inches across its bell-shaped top,—exhibited by the Pilgrim Society,
and said to have been "brought in the MAY-FLOWER by Edward
Winslow,"—seems to the author as likely to have been so as almost any
article for which that distinction is claimed.
The
lighting facilities of the Pilgrims were fewer and cruder than those for
cooking. They possessed the lamp of the ancient Romans, Greeks, and Hebrews,
with but few improvements,—a more or less fanciful vessel for oil, with a
protuberant nose for a wick, and a loose-twisted cotton wick. Hand-lamps of
this general form and of various devices, called "betty-lamps," were
commonly used, with candlesticks of various metals, —iron, brass, silver, and
copper,—though but few of any other ware. For wall-lighting two or more candle
sockets were brought together in "sconces," which were more or less
elaborate in design and finish. One of the early writers (Higginson) mentions
the abundance of oil (from fish) available for lamps, but all tallow and suet
used by the early colonists was, for some years (till cattle became plentiful),
necessarily imported. Some of the "candle-snuffers" of the
"first comers" doubtless still remain. We may be sure every family
had its candles, "betty-lamps," candlesticks, and
"snuffers." "Lanthorns" were of the primitive, perforated
tin variety—only "serving to make darkness visible" now found in a
few old attics in Pilgrim towns, and on the "bull-carts" of the peons
of Porto Rico, by night. Fire, for any purpose, was chiefly procured by the use
of flint, steel, and tinder, of which many very early specimens exist. Buckets,
tubs, and pails were, beyond question, numerous aboard the ship, and were among
the most essential and highly valued of Pilgrim utensils. Most, if not all of
them, we may confidently assert, were brought into requisition on that Monday
"wash-day" at Cape Cod, the first week-day after their arrival, when
the women went ashore to do their long-neglected laundrying, in the
comparatively fresh water of the beach pond at Cape Cod harbor. They are
frequently named in the earliest inventories. Bradford also mentions the
filling of a "runlet" with water at the Cape. The "steel-yards"
and "measures" were the only determiners of weight and quantity—as
the hour-glass and sun dial were of time—possessed at first (so far as appears)
by the passengers of the Pilgrim ship, though it is barely possible that a
Dutch clock or two may have been among the possessions of the wealthiest.
Clocks and watches were not yet in common use (though the former were known in
England from 1540), and except that in "Mourt's Relation" and
Bradford's "Historie" mention is made of the time of day as such
"o'clock" (indicating some degree of familiarity with clocks), no
mention is made of their possession at the first. Certain of the leaders were
apparently acquainted at Leyden with the astronomer Galileo, co-resident with
them there, and through this acquaintance some of the wealthier and more
scholarly may have come to know, and even to own, one of the earliest Dutch
clocks made with the pendulum invented by Galileo, though hardly probable as
early as 1620. Pocket watches were yet practically unknown.
Except
for a few pieces of silver owned by the wealthiest of their number, pewter was
the most elegant and expensive of the Pilgrims' table-ware. A pewter platter
said to have been "brought over in the MAY-FLOWER" is now owned by
the Pilgrim Society, which also exhibits smaller pewter formerly Edward
Winslow's, and bearing his "arms," for which, as previously noted, a
like claim is made. Platters, dishes, "potts," ladles, bottles,
"flaggons," "skelletts," cups, porringers,
"basons," spoons, candlesticks, and salt "sellars," were
among the many pewter utensils unmistakably brought on the good ship.
The
wooden-ware of the colonists, brought with them, was considerable and various.
The Dutch were long famous for its fabrication. There was but very little
china, glass, or pottery of any kind in common use in western Europe in 1620;
some kinds were not yet made, and pewter, wood, and leather largely filled
their places. Wooden trenchers (taking the place of plates), trays,
"noggins" (jug or pitcher-like cups), cups, and "lossets"
(flat dishes like the bread-plates of to day), were of course part of every
housewife's providings. Some few of Pilgrim origin possibly still exist. As
neither coffee, tea, nor china had come into use, the cups and saucers which
another century brought in—to delight their owners in that day and the ceramic
hunter in this—were not among the "breakables" of the
"good-wife" of the MAY-FLOWER. The "table-plenishings" had
not much variety, but in the aggregate the (first) "nineteen families"
must have required quite a quantity of spoons, knives, salt
"sellars," etc. Forks there were none, and of the accessories of
to-day (except napkins), very few. Meat was held by the napkin while being cut
with the knife. Josselyn' gives a list of "Implements for a family of six
persons" going to New England.
Kitchen utensils:—
"1 Iron Pot.
1
Great Copper Kettle.
1
Small Kettle.
1
Lesser Kettle.
1
Large Frying pan.
1
Brass Mortar.
1
Spit.
1
Gridiron.
2
Skillets.
Platters, dishes, and spoons of wood.
A
pair of Bellows.
A
Skoope, etc."
Among
the implements of husbandry, etc., and mechanics' tools we find evidence of hoes,
spades, shovels, scythes, "sikles," mattocks, bill-hooks,
garden-rakes, hay-forks ("pitch-forks"), besides seed-grain and
garden seeds. Axes, saws, hammers, "adzs," augers, chisels, gouges,
squares, hatchets, an "iron jack-scrue," "holdfasts"
(vises), blacksmiths' tools, coopers' tools, iron and steel in bar, anvils,
chains, etc., "staples and locks," rope, lime (for mortar), nails,
etc., are also known to have been in the ship. Francis Eaton, the carpenter,
seems to have had a very respectable "kit," and Fletcher, the smith,
was evidently fairly "outfitted."
The
implements of husbandry were of the lighter (?) sort; no ploughs, harrows,
carts, harness, stone-drags, or other farming tools requiring the strength of
beasts for their use, were included. In nothing could they have experienced so
sharp a contrast as in the absence of horses, cattle, and sheep in their
husbandry, and especially of milch kine. Bradford and Window both mention hoes,
spades, mattocks, and sickles, while shovels, scythes, bill-hooks
(brush-scythes, the terrible weapons of the English peasantry in their great
"Mon mouth" and earlier uprisings), pitchforks, etc., find very early
mention in inventories and colonial records. Josselyn, in his "Two Voyages
to New England," gives, in 1628, the following very pertinent list of
"Tools for a Family of six persons, and so after this rate for
more,—intending for New England." This may be taken as fairly
approximating the possessions of the average MAY-FLOWER planter, though
probably somewhat exceeding individual supplies. Eight years of the Pilgrims'
experience had taught those who came after them very much that was of service.
5 Broad Howes
[hoes].
6 Chisels.
5 Narrow Howes
[hoes].
3 Gimblets.
5 Felling Axes.
2 hatchets.
2 steel hand
saws.
2 frones (?) to
cleave pail! (Probably knives for cleaving pail stock.)
2 hand saws.
2 hand-bills.
1 whip saw, set
and files with box.
Nails of all
sorts.
2 Pick-axes.
A file and
rest.
3 Locks and 3
paire fetters.
2 Hammers.
2 Currie Combs.
3 Shovels.
Brands for
beasts.
2 Spades.
A hand vice.
2 Augers.
A pitchfork,
etc.
2 Broad Axes.
Unhappily
we know little from contemporaneous authority as to what grain and other seeds
the Pilgrims brought with them for planting. We may be sure, however, that rye,
barley, oats, wheat, pease, and beans were the bulkiest of this part of their
freight, though Bradford mentions the planting of "garden seeds"
their first spring.
While
we know from the earliest Pilgrim chronicles that their mechanics' implements
embraced axes, saws, hammers, "adzs," augers, hatchets, an "iron
jack-scrue," "staples and locks," etc., we know there must have
been many other tools not mentioned by them, brought over with the settlers.
The "great iron-scrue," as Bradford calls it in his original MS.,
played, as all know, a most important part on the voyage, in forcing the
"cracked and bowed" deck-beam of the ship into place. Governor
Bradford tells us that "it was brought on board by one of the Leyden
passengers," and one may hazard the guess that it was by either Moses
Fletcher, the smith, or Francis Eaton, the "carpenter."
"Staples" and "locks" found their place and mention, as
well as the "chains," "manacles," and "leg-irons"
named in the list of accoutrements for offence or defence, when it became
necessary to chain up the Indian spy of the Neponsets (as narrated by Winslow
in his "Good Newes from New England") and other evil-doers. The
planters seem to have made stiff "mortar," which premises the use of
lime and indicates a supply.
Among
the fishing and fowling implements of the MAY FLOWER colonists are recorded,
nets, "seynes," twine, fish hooks, muskets (for large game),
"fowling pieces," powder, "goose-shot,"
"hail-shot," etc.
Such
early mention is found of the nets, "seynes," etc., of their fishing
equipment, as to leave no room for doubt that store of them was brought in the
ship. They seem to have been unfortunate in the size of their fish-hooks, which
are spoken of as "too large" even for cod. They must, as Goodwin
remarks, "have been very large." Window also says, "We wanted
fit and strong seines and other netting."
They
seem to have relied upon their muskets to some extent for wild fowl (as witness
Winslow's long and successful shot at a duck, on his visit to Massasoit), as
they undoubtedly did for deer, etc. They were apparently fairly well supplied
with them, of either the "matchlock" or "snaphance"
(flintlock) pattern, though the planters complained to the Merchant Adventurers
(in their letter of August 3, from Southampton), that they were "wanting
many muskets," etc. That they had some "fowling-pieces" is shown
by the fact that young Billington seems (according to Bradford) to have
"shot one off in his father's cabin" aboard ship in Cape Cod harbor,
and there are several other coeval mentions of them.
The
arms and accoutrements (besides ordnance) of the MAY-FLOWER Pilgrims, known on
the authority of Bradford and Winslow to have been brought by them, included
muskets ("matchlocks"), "snaphances" (flintlocks), armor
("corslets," "cuirasses," "helmets,"
"bandoliers," etc.), swords, "curtlaxes" (cutlasses),
"daggers," powder, "mould-shot," "match"
(slow-match for guns), "flints," belts, "knapsacks,"
"drum," "trumpet," "manacles,"
"leg-irons," etc., etc. "Pistols" (brass) appear in early
inventories, but their absence in the early hand-to-hand encounter at
Wessagussett indicates that none were then available, or that they were not
trusted. It is evident from the statement of Bradford that every one of the
sixteen men who went out (under command of Standish) on the "first
exploration" at Cape Cod had his "musket, sword, and corslet;"
that they relied much on their armor, and hence, doubtless, took all possible
with them on the ship. They probably did not long retain its use. In the letter
written to the Adventurers from Southampton, the leaders complain of
"wanting many muskets, much armour, &c."
Josselyn
gives' the equipment he considers necessary for each man going to New England
to settle:—
"Armor compleat:—
One long piece
[musket] five feet or five and a half long.
One Sword.
One bandoleer.
One belt.
Twenty pounds
of powder.
Sixty pounds
of shot or lead, pistol and Goose-shot."
"Another list gives an idea of 'complete
armor.'"
Corselet
Breast [plate
or piece].
Back [ditto].
Culet (?).
Gorget
[throat-piece].
Tussis
[thigh-pieces].
Head-piece
"[morion skull-cap]."
Bradford
states that they used their "curtlaxes" (cutlasses) to dig the frozen
ground to get at the Indians' corn, "having forgotten to bring spade or
mattock." "Daggers" are mentioned as used in their celebrated
duel by Dotey and Leister, servants of Stephen Hopkins. Bradford narrates that
on one of their exploring tours on the Cape the length of guard duty performed
at night by each "relief" was determined by the inches of slow-match
burned ("every one standing when his turn came while five or six inches of
match was burning"), clearly indicating that they had no watches with
them. The "drum" and "trumpet" are both mentioned in
"Mourt's Relation" in the account given of Massasoit's reception, the
latter as eliciting the especial attention of his men, and their efforts at
blowing it.
The
Ordnance (cannon) brought in the ship consisted (probably) of ten guns,
certainly of six. Of these, two (2) were "sakers,"—guns ten feet long
of 3 to 4 inches bore, weighing from fifteen to eighteen hundred pounds each;
two (2) were "minions" (or "falcons"),—guns of 3 1/2 inch
bore, weighing twelve hundred pounds (1200 lbs.) each; and two (2) were
"bases,"—small guns of 1 1/4 inch bore, weighing some three hundred
pounds (300 1bs.) each. These were mounted on "the Hill" fort or
platform. It is probable that besides these were the four smallest cannon,
called "patereros" (or "murderers"), which, at the time of
De Rasiere's visit to Plymouth in 1627, were mounted on a platform (in front of
the Governor's house), at the intersection of the two streets of the town, and
commanded its several approaches. It is not likely that they were sent for
after 1621, because the Adventurers were never in mood to send if asked, while
Bradford, in speaking of the first alarm by the Indians, says, "This
caused us to plant our great ordnance in places most convenient," leaving
a possible inference that they had smaller ordnance in reserve. With this
ordnance was of course a proper supply of ammunition adapted to its use. The
"sakers" are said to have carried a four-pound ball, the
"minions" a three-pound ball, and the "bases" a ball of a
pound weight. There is not entire agreement between authorities, in regard to
the size, weight, and calibre of these different classes of early ordnance, or
the weight of metal thrown by them, but the above are approximate data,
gathered from careful comparison of the figures given by several. There is no
doubt that with this heavy ordnance and ammunition they stowed among their
ballast and dunnage (as was the case in Higginson's ships), their "spare
chains and anchors, chalk, bricks, sea-coal (for blacksmithing), iron, steel,
lead, copper, red-lead, salt," etc.; all of which they also necessarily
had, and from their bulk, character, and weight, would stow as low in the ship
as might be.
That
a considerable "stock of trading goods" was included in the
MAY-FLOWER'S lading is mentioned by at least one writer, and that this was a
fact is confirmed by the records of the colonists' dealings with the Indians,
and the enumeration of not a few of the goods which could have had, for the
most part, no other use or value. They consisted largely of knives, bracelets
(bead and metal), rings, scissors, copper-chains, beads, "blue and red
trading cloth," cheap (glass) jewels ("for the ears," etc.),
small mirrors, clothing (e. g. "red-cotton horseman's coats—laced,"
jerkins, blankets, etc.), shoes, "strong waters," pipes, tobacco,
tools and hard ware (hatchets, nails, hoes, fish-hooks, etc.), rugs, twine,
nets, etc., etc. A fragment of one of the heavy hoes of the ancient
pattern—"found on the site of the Pilgrim trading house at
Manomet"—is owned by the Pilgrim Society, and speaks volumes of the labor
performed by the Pilgrims, before they had ploughs and draught-cattle, in the
raising of their wonderful crops of corn. Such was the MAY-FLOWER'S burden,
animate and inanimate, whe —the last passenger and the last piece of freight
transferred from the SPEEDWELL—her anchor "hove short," she swung
with the tide in Plymouth roadstead, ready to depart at last for "the
Virginia plantations."
CHAPTER IX
THE JOURNAL OF THE
SHIP MAY-FLOWER
Thomas
Jones, Master, from London, England, towards "Hudson's River" in
Virginia
[The voyage of
the MAY-FLOWER began at London, as her consort's did
at Delfshaven,
and though, as incident to the tatter's brief career,
we have been
obliged to take note of some of the happenings to the
larger ship
and her company (at Southampton, etc.), out of due
course and time,
they have been recited only because of their
insuperable
relation to the consort and her company, and not as part
of the
MAY-FLOWER'S own proper record]
SATURDAY, July 15/25, 1620
Gravesend. Finished lading. Got
passengers
aboard and got under way for
Southampton. Dropped down the Thames to
Gravesend with
the tide.
[Vessels
leaving the port of London always, in that day, "dropped
down with the
tide," tug-boats being unknown, and sail-headway
against the
tide being difficult in the narrow river.]
Masters Cushman
and Martin, agents of the
chartering—party,
came aboard at London.
SUNDAY, July 16/26
Gravesend. Channel pilot aboard. Favoring
wind.
MONDAY, July 17/27
In Channel. Course D.W. by W. Favoring
wind.
TUESDAY, July 18/28
In Channel. Southampton Water.
WEDNESDAY, July 19/29
Southampton
Water. Arrived at Southampton
and came to
anchor.
[Both ships
undoubtedly lay at anchor a day or two, before hauling
in to the
quay. The MAY-FLOWER undoubtedly lay at
anchor until
after the
SPEEDWELL arrived, to save expense]
THURSDAY, July 20/30
Lying at
Southampton off north end of "West
Quay."
FRIDAY, July 21/31
Lying at
Southampton. Masters Carver,
Cushman, and
Martin, three of the agents
here. Outfitting ship, taking in lading,
and getting ready
for sea.
SATURDAY, July 22/Aug 1
Lying off Quay,
Southampton.
SUNDAY, July 23/Aug 2
Lying off Quay,
Southampton.
MONDAY, July 24/Aug 3
Lying off Quay,
Southampton.
TUESDAY, July 25/Aug 4
Lying off Quay,
Southampton. Waiting for
consort to arrive
from Holland.
WEDNESDAY, July 26/Aug 5
Lying off Quay,
Southampton. Pinnace
SPEEDWELL, 60
tons, Reynolds, Master, from
Delfshaven, July
22, consort to this ship,
arrived in harbor, having on
board some 70
passengers and
lading for Virginia. She
came to anchor
off north end "West Quay."
THURSDAY, July 27/Aug. 6
Lying at Quay, Southampton, SPEEDWELL
warped to berth
at Quay near the ship, to
transfer lading.
[Some of the
cargo of the SPEEDWELL is understood to have been here
transferred to
the larger ship; doubtless the cheese, "Hollands,"
and other
provisions, ordered, as noted, by Cushman]
FRIDAY, July 28/Aug. 7
Lying at Quay,
Southampton, Much parleying
and discontent
among the passengers.
[Bradford
gives an account of the bickering and recrimination at
Southampton,
when all parties had arrived. Pastor
Robinson had
rather too
strenuously given instructions, which it now began to be
seen were not
altogether wise. Cushman was very much
censured, and
there was
evidently some acrimony. See Cushman's
Dartmouth letter
of August 17
to Edward Southworth, Bradford's Historie, Mass. ed.
p. 86.]
SATURDAY, July 29/Aug. 8
Lying at Quay, Southampton.
Some of the
passengers
transferred from SPEEDWELL and
some to her. Master Christopher Martin
chosen by
passengers their "Governour" for
the voyage to
order them by the way, see to
the disposing of
their pro visions, etc.
Master Robert
Cushman chosen "Assistant."
The ship ready for sea this
day, but
obliged to lie
here on account of leakiness
of consort, which
is forced to retrim. Ship
has now 90
passengers and consort 30.
SUNDAY, July 30/Aug. 9
Lying at
Southampton.
MONDAY, July 31/Aug. 10
Lying at
Southampton. Letters received for
passengers from
Holland. One from the
Leyden Pastor [Robinson]
read out to the
company that came
from that place.
TUESDAY, Aug. 1/Aug. 11
Lying at anchor
at Southampton. SPEEDWELL
retrimmed a
second time to overcome
leakiness.
WEDNESDAY, Aug. 2/Aug. 12
Lying at anchor
at Southampton. Master
Weston, principal
agent of the Merchants
setting out the voyage, came up
from Lon
don to see the
ships dispatched, but, on
the refusal of
the Planters to sign certain
papers, took
offence and returned to London
in displeasure,
bidding them "stand on
their own
legs," etc.
[The two
"conditions" which Weston had changed in the proposed
agreement
between the Adventurers and Planters, the Leyden leaders
refused to
agree to. Bradford, op cit.
p. 61. He says: "But they
refused to
sign, and answered him that he knew right well that these
were not
according to the first Agreement."
Dr. Griffis has made
one of those
little slips common to all writers—though perfectly
conversant
with the facts—in stating as he does (The Pilgrims in
their Three
Homes, etc. p. 158), with reference to the new
"conditions" which some blamed Cushman for assenting to, as
"more
fit for
thieves and slaves than for honest men," that, "nevertheless
they consented
to them;" while on p. 169 he says "The SPEEDWELL
people
[i.e. the Leyden leaders would not agree
with the new
conditions,
without the consent of those left behind in Leyden."
The fact is
that the Pilgrims did not assent to the new conditions,
unwarrantably
imposed by Weston, though of small consequence in any
view of the
case, until Cushman came over to New Plymouth in the
FORTUNE, in
1621, and by dint of his sermon on the "Sin and Danger
of
Self-Love," and his persuasion, induced them (they being also
advised
thereto by Robinson) to sign them. All
business up to this
time had been
done between the Adventurers and the Pilgrims,
apparently,
without any agreement in writing. It was
probably felt,
both by
Robinson and the Plymouth leaders, that it was the least
reparation
they could make Cushman for their cruel and unjust
treatment of
him, realizing at length that, through all
vicissitudes,
he had proven their just, sagacious, faithful, and
efficient
friend. There does not appear to be any
conclusive
evidence that
any articles of agreement between the Adventurers and
colonists were
signed before the MAY-FLOWER Sailed.]
THURSDAY, Aug. 3/Aug. 13
Lying at anchor
at Southampton. After
Master Weston's
departure, the Planters had
a meeting and resolved to
sell some of such
stores as they
could best spare, to clear
port charges,
etc., and to write a general
letter to the Adventurers
explaining the
case, which they
did. Landed some three
score firkins of
butter, sold as
determined.
FRIDAY, Aug. 4/Aug. 14
Lying at anchor
at Southampton. Consort
nearly ready for
sea. Heard that the
King's warrant
had issued to Sir James
Coventry, under
date of July 23, to prepare
a Patent for the
Council for the Affairs of
New England to
supersede the Plymouth
Virginia Company,
Sir Ferdinando Gorges and
Sir Robert Rich
the Earl of Warwick among
the Patentees.
SATURDAY, Aug. 5/Aug. 15
Weighed anchor,
as did consort, and in
company dropped
down Southampton Water.
Took departure from Cowes, Isle of
Wight,
and laid course
down the Solent to Channel.
Winds baffling.
General course S.W. by S.
SUNDAY, Aug. 6/Aug. 16
Head winds. Beating out Channel.
SPEEDWELL In
Company. Passed Bill of
Portland.
MONDAY, Aug. 7/Aug. 17
Wind
contrary. Beating out Channel.
SPEEDWELL In company.
TUESDAY, Aug. 8/Aug. 18
Wind still
contrary. Beating out Channel.
SPEEDWELL in
company.
WEDNESDAY, Aug. 9/Aug. 19
Wind ahead. Beating down Channel. Consort
in company.
THURSDAY, Aug. 10/20
Wind fair. All sail set.
SPEEDWELL in
company. Signalled by consort, which hove
to. Found to be leaking badly. On
consultation of
Masters and chief of
passengers of
both ships, it was concluded
that both should
put into Dartmouth, being
nearest port. Laid course for Dartmouth
with wind ahead.
THURSDAY, Aug. 11/21
Wind ahead. Bearing up to Dartmouth.
SATURDAY, Aug. 12/22
Made port at
Dartmouth. SPEEDWELL in
company, and came
to anchor in harbor.
[Bradford, op.
cit. Deane's ed. p. 68, note. Russell (Pilgrim
Memorials, p.
15) says: "The ships put back into Dartmouth, August
13/23." Goodwin (op.
cit. p. 55) says: "The port was
reached
about August
23." Captain John Smith strangely
omits the return of
the ships to
Dartmouth, and confuses dates, as he says "But the next
day after
leaving Southampton the lesser ship sprung a leak that
forced their
return to Plymouth," etc. Smith,
New England's Trials,
2d ed. 1622.
Cushman's letter, written the 17th, says they had
then lain
there "four days," which would mean, if four full days,
the 13th,
14th, 15th, and 16th.]
SUNDAY, Aug. 13/23
Lying at anchor
with SPEEDWELL leaking
badly in
Dartmouth harbor. No passengers,
except leaders,
allowed ashore.
[Cushman in
his letter to Edward Southworth, written at Dartmouth,
August 17,
says that Martin, the "governour" of the passengers in
the
MAY-FLOWER, "will not suffer them the passengers to go, ashore
lest they
should run away." This probably
applied especially to
such as had
become disaffected by the delays and disasters, the
apprenticed
("bound") servants, etc. Of
course no responsible
colonist would
be thus restrained for the reason alleged.]
MONDAY, Aug. 14/24
Lying at anchor, Dartmouth
harbor.
SPEEDWELL at Quay
taking out lading for
thorough
overhauling.
TUESDAY, Aug. 15/25
Lying at anchor,
Dartmouth harbor.
WEDNESDAY, Aug. 16/26
Lying at anchor,
Dartmouth harbor.
SPEEDWELL being
thoroughly overhauled for
leaks. Pronounced "as open and leaky as a
sieve." Much dissatisfaction between the
passengers, and
discontent with the ship's
"governour" Master Martin, between whom
and Mr. Cushman,
the "assistant," there is
constant
disagreement.
[Cushman
portrays the contemptible character and manner of Martin
very sharply,
and could not have wished to punish him worse for his
meannesses
than he has, by thus holding him up to the scorn of the
world, for all
time. He says, 'inter alia': "If I
speak to him, he
flies in my
face and saith no complaints shall be heard or received
but by
himself, and saith: 'They are froward, and waspish,
discontented
people, and I do ill to hear them.'"]
THURSDAY, Aug. 17/27
Lying at anchor,
Dartmouth harbor. Consort
being searched
and mended. Sailors offended
at Master Martin
because of meddling.
[Cushman's
letter, Dartmouth, August 17. He says:
"The sailors also
are so
offended at his ignorant boldness in meddling and controling
in things he
knows not what belongs to, as that some threaten to
mischief him
. .
. . But at best this cometh of it, that he
makes himself
a scorn and laughing stock unto them."]
FRIDAY, Aug. 18/28
Lying at anchor,
Dartmouth harbor. Consort
still repairing. Judged by workmen that
mended her
sufficient for the voyage.
SATURDAY, Aug. 19/29
Lying at anchor,
Dartmouth harbor.
SPEEDWELL
relading.
SUNDAY, Aug. 20/30
Lying at anchor,
Dartmouth harbor.
MONDAY, Aug. 21/31
Lying at anchor,
Dartmouth harbor. Consort
relading.
TUESDAY, Aug. 22/Sept. 1
Lying at anchor,
Dartmouth harbor. Both
ships ready for
sea.
[Bradford,
Historie, Deane's ed. p. 68. He says: "Some leaks were
found and
mended and now it was conceived by the workmen and all,
that she was
sufficient, and they might proceed without either fear
or
danger." Bradford shows (op.
cit. p. 69) note that they must
have left
Dartmouth "about the 21st" of August.
Captain John Smith
gives that
date, though somewhat confusedly. Arber
(the Story of
the Pilgrim
Fathers, p. 343 says: "They actually left on 23 August."
Goodwin
(Pilgrim Republic, p. 55) says : "Ten days were spent in
discharging
and re-stowing the SPEEDWELL and repairing her from stem
to stern,"
etc.)]
WEDNESDAY, Aug. 23/Sept. 2
Weighed anchor,
as did consort. Laid
course
W.S.W. Ships in company. Wind
fair.
THURSDAY, Aug. 24/Sept. 3
Comes in with wind fair. General course
W.S.W. Consort in company.
FRIDAY, Aug. 25/Sept. 4
Comes in with
wind fair. Course W.S.W.
SPEEDWELL in
company.
SATURDAY, Aug. 26/Sept. 5
Observations
showed ship above 100 leagues
W.S.W. of Land's End. SPEEDWELL signalled
and hove to. Reported leaking dangerously.
On consultation between
Masters and
carpenters of
both ships, it was concluded
to put back into
Plymouth—Bore up for
Plymouth. Consort in company.
SUNDAY, Aug. 27/Sept. 6
Ship on course
for Plymouth. SPEEDWELL in
company.
MONDAY, Aug. 28/Sept. 7
Made Plymouth
harbor, and came to anchor in
the Catwater, followed by consort.
TUESDAY, Aug. 29/Sept. 8
At anchor in
roadstead. At conference of
officers of ship
and consort and the chief
of the Planters,
it was decided to send the
SPEEDWELL back to
London with some 18 or 20
of her
passengers, transferring a dozen or
more, with part
of her lading, to the
MAY-FLOWER.
WEDNESDAY, Aug. 30/Sept. 9
At anchor in
Plymouth roadstead off the
Barbican. Transferring passengers and
lading from
consort, lying near by.
Weather fine.
[Goodwin notes
(Pilgrim Republic, p. 57) that "it was fortunate for
the overloaded
MAY-FLOWER that she had fine weather while lying at
anchor there,
. .
. for the port of Plymouth was
then only a
shallow, open
bay, with no protection. In
southwesterly gales its
waters rose
into enormous waves, with such depressions between that
ships while
anchored sometimes struck the bottom of the harbor and
were dashed in
pieces."]
THURSDAY, Aug. 31/Sept. 10
At anchor in
Plymouth roadstead.
Transferring
cargo from SPEEDWELL.
FRIDAY, Sept. 1/Sept. 11
At anchor in
Plymouth roadstead.
Transferring passengers
and freight to and
from
consort. Master Cushman and family,
Master Blossom
and son, William Ring, and
others with children,
going back to London
in
SPEEDWELL. All Of SPEEDWELL'S
passengers who
are to make the voyage now
aboard. New "governour" of ship and
assistants chosen. Master
Carver
"governour."
[We have seen
that Christopher Martin was made "governour" of the
passengers on
the MAY-FLOWER for the voyage, and Cushman
"assistant." It is
evident from Cushman's oft-quoted letter (see
ante) that
Martin became obnoxious, before the ship reached
Dartmouth, to
both passengers and crew. It is also
evident that
when the
emigrants were all gathered in the MAY-FLOWER there was a
new choice of
officers (though no record is found of it), as Cushman
vacated his
place and went back to London, and we find that, as
noted before,
on November 11 the colonists "confirmed" John Carver
as their
"governour," showing that he had been such hitherto.
Doubtless
Martin was deposed at Southampton (perhaps put into
Cushman's
vacant place, and Carver made "governour" in his stead.)]
SATURDAY, Sept. 2/Sept. 12
At anchor,
Plymouth roadstead. Some of
principal passengers
entertained ashore by
friends of their
faith. SPEEDWELL sailed
for London. Quarters assigned, etc.
SUNDAY, Sept. 3/Sept. 13
At anchor in
Plymouth roadstead.
MONDAY, Sept. 4/Sept. 14
At anchor in
Plymouth roadstead. Some Of
company ashore.
TUESDAY, Sept. 5/Sept. 15
At anchor in
Plymouth roadstead. Ready for
sea.
WEDNESDAY, Sept. 6/Sept. 16
Weighed
anchor. Wind E.N.E., a fine gale.
Laid course
W.S.W. for northern coasts of
Virginia.
THURSDAY, Sept. 7/Sept. 17
Comes in with
wind E.N.E. Light gale
continues. Made all sail on ship.
FRIDAY, Sept. 8/Sept. 18
Comes in with
wind E.N.E. Gale continues.
All sails full.
SATURDAY, Sept. 9/Sept. 19
Comes in with
wind E.N E. Gale holds.
Ship well off the
land.
SUNDAY, Sept. 10/Sept. 20
Comes in with
wind E.N.E. Gale holds.
Distance lost,
when ship bore up for
Plymouth, more
than regained.
MONDAY, Sept. 11/Sept. 21
Same; and so without material change, the
daily record of
wind, weather, and the
ship's general
course—the repetition of
which would be
both useless and wearisome
—continued through
the month and until the
vessel was near
half the seas over. Fine
warm weather and
the "harvest-moon." The
usual equinoctial
weather deferred.
SATURDAY, Sept. 23/Oct. 3
One of the
seamen, some time sick with a
grievous disease,
died in a desperate manner.
The first death and
burial at sea of the
voyage.
[We can
readily imagine this first burial at sea on the MAY FLOWER,
and its
impressiveness. Doubtless the good Elder
"committed the
body to the
deep" with fitting ceremonial, for though the young man
was of the
crew, and not of the Pilgrim company, his reverence for
death and the
last rites of Christian burial would as surely impel
him to offer
such services, as the rough, buccaneering Master (Jones
would surely
be glad to evade them).
Dr. Griffis
(The Pilgrims in their Three Homes, p. 176) says "The
Puritans [does
this mean Pilgrims ?] cared next to nothing about
ceremonies
over a corpse, whether at wave or grave."
This will
hardly bear examination,
though Bradford's phraseology in this case
would seem to
support it, as he speaks of the body as "thrown
overboard;" yet it is not to be supposed that it was treated quite
so
indecorously as the words would imply.
It was but a few years
after,
certainly, that we find both Pilgrim and Puritan making much
ceremony at
burials. We find considerable ceremony
at Carver's
burial only a
few months later. Choate, in his
masterly oration at
New York,
December 22, 1863, pictures Brewster's service at the open
grave of one
of the Pilgrims in March, 1621.]
A sharp
change. Equinoctial weather,
followed by
stormy westerly gales;
encountered cross winds and continued
fierce
storms. Ship shrewdly shaken and
her upper works
made very leaky. One of
the main beams in
the midships was bowed
and cracked. Some fear that the ship could
not be able to
perform the voyage. The
chief of the
company perceiving the
mariners to fear
the sufficiency of the
ship (as appeared
by their mutterings) they
entered into
serious consultation with the
Master and other
officers of the ship, to
consider, in time, of the danger,
and
rather to return
than to cast themselves
into a desperate
and inevitable peril.
There was great
distraction and difference
of opinion
amongst the mariners themselves.
Fain would they
do what would be done for
their wages'
sake, being now near half the
seas over; on the other hand, they were
loath to hazard
their lives too
desperately. In
examining of all opinions,
the Master and
others affirmed they knew
the ship to be strong and
firm under water,
and for the
buckling bending or bowing of
the main beam,
there was a great iron scrue
the passengers
brought out of Holland which
would raise the
beam into its place. The
which being done,
the carpenter and Master
affirmed that a
post put under it, set firm
in the lower
deck, and otherwise bound,
would make it
sufficient. As for the decks
and upper works,
they would caulk them as
well as they
could; and though with the
working of the
ship they would not long
keep staunch, yet
there would otherwise be
no great danger
if they did not overpress
her with sails. So they resolved to
proceed.
In sundry of
these stormes, the winds were
so fierce and the
seas so high, as the ship
could not bear a knot
of sail, but was
forced to hull
drift under bare poles for
divers days
together. A succession of
strong westerly
gales. In one of the
heaviest storms,
while lying at hull, [hove
to D.W.] a lusty young man, one of the
passengers, John
Howland by name, coming
upon some occasion above the
gratings
latticed covers
to the hatches, was with
the seel [roll]
of the ship thrown into the
sea, but caught
hold of the topsail
halliards, which
hung overboard and ran out
at length; yet he
held his hold, though he
was sundry
fathoms under water, till he was
hauled up by the
same rope to the brim of
the water, and
then with a boathook and
other means got
into the ship again and his
life saved. He was something ill with it.
The equinoctial
disturbances over and the
strong October
gales, the milder, warmer
weather of late
October followed.
Mistress Elizabeth
Hopkins, wife of Master
Stephen Hopkins,
of Billericay, in Essex,
was delivered of
a son, who, on account of
the circumstances
of his birth, was named
Oceanus, the first birth
aboard the ship
during the
voyage.
A succession of
fine days, with favoring
winds.
MONDAY Nov. 6/16
William Butten; a youth,
servant to Doctor
Samuel Fuller,
died. The first of the
passengers to die
on this voyage.
MONDAY Nov. 7/17
The body of
William Butten committed to the
deep. The first burial at sea of a
passenger, on
this voyage.
MONDAY Nov. 8/18
Signs of land.
MONDAY Nov. 9/19
Closing in with
the land at nightfall.
Sighted land at
daybreak. The landfall
made out to be
Cape Cod the bluffs [in what
is now the town
of Truro, Mass.]. After a
conference
between the Master of the ship
and the chief
colonists, tacked about and
stood for the
southward. Wind and weather
fair. Made our course S.S.W., continued
proposing to go
to a river ten leagues
south of the Cape
Hudson's River. After
had sailed that
course about half the day
fell amongst dangerous shoals
and foaming
breakers [the
shoals off Monomoy] got out of
them before night
and the wind being
contrary put round again for the Bay of
Cape Cod. Abandoned efforts to go further
south and so
announced to passengers.
[Bradford
(Historie, Mass. ed. p. 93) says:
"They resolved to bear
up again for
the Cape." No one will question
that Jones's assertion
of inability
to proceed, and his announced determination to return
to Cape Cod
harbor, fell upon many acquiescent ears, for, as Winslow
says:
"Winter was come; the seas were dangerous; the season was
cold; the
winds were high, and the region being well furnished for a
plantation, we
entered upon discovery." Tossed for
sixty-seven days
on the north
Atlantic at that season of the year, their food and
firing well
spent, cold, homesick, and ill, the bare thought of once
again setting
foot on any land, wherever it might be, must have been
an allurement
that lent Jones potential aid in his high-handed
course.]
SATURDAY Nov. 11/21
Comes in with
light, fair wind. On course
for Cape Cod
harbor, along the coast. Some
hints of
disaffection among colonists, on
account of
abandonment of location
[Bradford (in Mourt's Relation) says:
"This day before we come to
harbor Italics
the author's, observing some not well affected to
unity and
concord, but gave some appearance of faction, it was
thought good
there should be an Association and Agreement that we
should combine
together in one body; and to submit to such
Government and
Governors as we should, by common consent, agree to
make and
choose, and set our hands to this that follows word for
word." Then follows the
Compact. Bradford is even more explicit in
his Historie
(Mass. ed. p. 109), where he says:
"I shall a little
returne backe
and begin with a combination made by them before they
came ashore,
being ye first foundation of their governments in this
place;
occasioned partly by ye discontent & mutinous speeches that
some of the
strangers amongst them [i.e. not any of
the Leyden
contingent had
let fall from them in ye ship—That when they came
ashore they
would use their owne libertie: for none had power to
command them,
the patents they had being for Virginia, and not for
New-England
which belonged to another Government, with which ye
London [or
First Virginia Company had nothing to doe, and partly
that such an
acte by them done . . .
might be as firm as any
patent, and in
some respects more sure." Dr.
Griffis is hardly
warranted in
making Bradford to say, as he does (The Pilgrims in
their Three
Homes, p. 182), that "there were a few people I
'shuffled' in
upon them the company who were probably unmitigated
scoundrels." Bradford speaks
only of Billington and his family as
those
"shuffled into their company," and while he was not improbably
one of the
agitators (with Hopkins) who were the proximate causes of
the drawing up
of the Compact, he was not, in this case, the
responsible
leader. It is evident from the foregoing that the
"appearance of faction" did not show itself until the vessel's
prow
was turned
back toward Cape Cod Harbor, and it became apparent that
the effort to
locate "near Hudson's River" was to be abandoned, and
a location
found north of 41 degrees north latitude, which would
leave them
without charter rights or authority of any kind. It is
undoubtedly
history that Master Stephen Hopkins,—then "a
lay-reader" for Chaplain Buck,—on Sir Thomas Gates's expedition to
Virginia, had,
when some of them were cast away on the Bermudas,
advocated just
such sentiments—on the same basis—as were now
bruited upon
the MAY-FLOWER, and it could hardly have been
coincidence
only that the same were repeated here.
That Hopkins
fomented the
discord is well-nigh certain. It caused
him, as
elsewhere
noted, to receive sentence of death for insubordination,
at the hands
of Sir Thomas Gates, in the first instance, from which
his pardon was
with much difficulty procured by his friends.
In the
present case, it led to the drafting and
execution of the Pilgrim
Compact, a
framework of civil self-government whose fame will never
die; though
the author is in full accord with Dr. Young (Chronicles,
p. 120) in
thinking that "a great deal more has been discovered in
this document
than the signers contemplated,"—wonderfully
comprehensive
as it is. Professor Herbert B. Adams, of
Johns
Hopkins
University, says in his admirable article in the Magazine of
American
History, November, 1882 (pp—798 799): "The fundamental
idea of this
famous document was that of a contract based upon the
common law of
England,"—certainly a stable and ancient basis of
procedure. Their Dutch training
(as Griffis points out) had also
led naturally
to such ideas of government as the Pilgrims adopted.
It is to be
feared that Griffis's inference (The Pilgrims in their
Three Homes,
p. 184), that all who signed the Compact could write,
is
unwarranted. It is more than probable
that if the venerated
paper should
ever be found, it would show that several of those
whose names
are believed to have been affixed to it "made their
'mark.'" There is good
reason, also, to believe that neither
"sickness" (except unto death) nor
"indifference" would have
prevented the
ultimate obtaining of the signatures (by "mark," if
need be) of
every one of the nine male servants who did not
subscribe, if
they were considered eligible. Severe
illness was, we
know,
answerable for the absence of a few, some of whom died a few
days later.
The fact seems
rather to be, as noted, that age—not social status
was the
determining factor as to all otherwise eligible. It is
evident too,
that the fact was recognized by all parties (by none so
clearly as by
Master Jones) that they were about to plant themselves
on territory
not within the jurisdiction of their steadfast friends,
the London
Virginia Company, but under control of those formerly of
the Second
(Plymouth) Virginia Company, who (by the intelligence
they received
while at Southampton) they knew would be erected into
the
"Council for the Affairs of New England." Goodwin is in error
in saying
(Pilgrim Republic, p. 62), "Neither did any other body
exercise
authority there;" for the Second Virginia Company under Sir
Ferdinando
Gorges, as noted, had been since 1606 in control of this
region, and
only a week before the Pilgrims landed at Cape Cod (i.e.
on November 3)
King James had signed the patent of the Council for
New England,
giving them full authority over all territory north of
the
forty-first parallel of north latitude, as successors to the
Second
Virginia Company. If the intention to land south of the
forty-first
parallel had been persisted in, there would, of course,
have been no
occasion for the Compact, as the patent to John Pierce
(in their
interest) from the London Virginia Company would have been
in force. The Compact became a necessity, therefore,
only when they
turned
northward to make settlement above 41 deg. north latitude.
Hence it is
plain that as no opportunity for "faction"—and so no
occasion for
any "Association and Agreement"—existed till the
MAY-FLOWER
turned northward, late in the afternoon of Friday,
November to,
the Compact was not drawn and presented for signature
until the
morning of Saturday, November 11.
Bradford's language,
"This
day, before we came into harbour," leaves no room for doubt
that it was
rather hurriedly drafted—and also signed—before noon
of the 11th.
That they had time on this winter Saturday—hardly
three weeks
from the shortest day in the year—to reach and
encircle the
harbor; secure anchorage; get out boats; arm, equip,
and land two
companies of men; make a considerable march into the
land; cut
firewood; and get all aboard again before dark, indicates
that they must
have made the harbor not far from noon.
These facts
serve also to
correct another error of traditional Pilgrim history,
which has been
commonly current, and into which Davis falls
(Ancient
Landmarks of Plymouth, p. 60), viz. that
the Compact was
signed
"in the harbor of Cape Cod."
It is noticeable that the
instrument
itself simply says, "Cape Cod," not "Cape Cod harbour,"
as later they
were wont to say. The leaders clearly
did not mean
to get to port till there was a form of law
and authority.]
for settlement on
territory under the
protection of the
patent granted in their
interest to John
Pierce, by the London
Virginia Company.
[The patent
granted John Pierce, one of the Merchant Adventurers,
by the London
Virginia Company in the interest of the Pilgrims,
was signed
February 2/12, 1619, and of course could convey no rights
to, or upon,
territory not conveyed to the Company by its charter
from the King
issued in 1606, and the division of territory made
thereunder to
the Second Virginia Company. By this
division the
London Company
was restricted northward by the 41st parallel, as
noted, while
the Second Company could not claim the 38th as its
southern
bound, as the charter stipulated that the nearest
settlements
under the respective companies should not be within one
hundred miles of each other.]
Meeting in main
cabin of all adult male
passengers except
their two hired seamen,
Trevore and Ely,
and those too ill—to make
and sign a mutual
'Compact"
[The Compact
is too well known to require reprinting here (see
Appendix); but
a single clause of it calls for comment in this
connection. In it the framers
recite that, "Having undertaken to
plant the
first colony in the northern parts of Virginia," etc.
From this
phraseology it would appear that they here used the words
"northern
parts of Virginia" understandingly, and with a new
relation and
significance, from their connection with the words "the
first colony
in," for such declaration could have no force or truth
except as to
the region north of 41 deg. north latitude.
They knew,
of course, of
the colonies in Virginia under Gates, Wingfield,
Smith,
Raleigh, and others (Hopkins having been with Gates), and
that, though
there had been brief attempts at settlements in the
"northern
plantations," there were none there then, and that hence
theirs would
be in a sense "the first," especially if considered
with reference
to the new Council for New England. The
region of
the Hudson had
heretofore been included in the term "northern parts
of
Virginia," although in the southern Company's limit; but a new
meaning was
now designedly given to the words as used in the
Compact, and
New England was contemplated. ]
to regulate their
civil government. This
done, they
confirmed Master Carver their
"governour" in the ship on the voyage,
their
"governour" for the year. Bore
up
for the Cape, and
by short tacks made the
Cape [Paomet, now Provincetown]
Harbor,
coming to an
anchorage a furlong within the
point. The bay so circular that before
coming to anchor
the ship boxed the compass
[i.e. went clear around all points of it].
Let go anchors
three quarters of an English
mile off shore,
because of shallow water,
sixty-seven days
from Plymouth (Eng.),
eighty-one days
from Dartmouth, ninety-nine
days from
Southampton, and one hundred and
twenty from
London. Got out the long-boat
and set ashore an
armed party of fifteen or
sixteen in armor,
and some to fetch wood,
having none left,
landing them on the long
point or neck,
toward the sea.
[The strip of
land now known as Long Point, Provincetown (Mass.)
harbor.]
Those going ashore
were forced to wade a
bow-shot or two
in going aland. The party
sent ashore
returned at night having seen
no person or
habitation, having laded the
boat with juniper wood.
SUNDAY, Nov. 12/22
At anchor in Cape
Cod harbor. All hands
piped to
service. Weather mild.
MONDAY, Nov. 13/23
At anchor in Cape
Cod harbor, unshipped the
shallop and drew
her on land to mend and
repair her.
[Bradford
(Historie, Mass. ed. p. 97) says: "Having brought a large
shallop with
them out of England, stowed in quarters in ye ship they
now gott her
out and sett their carpenters to worke to trime her up:
but being much
brused and shatered in ye ship with foule weather,
they saw she
sould be longe in mending." In
'Mourt's Relation' he
says: "Monday, the 13th of November, we
unshipped our shallop and
drew her on
land to mend and repair her, having been forced to cut
her down, in
bestowing her betwixt the decks, and she was much
opened, with
the peoples lying in her, which kept us long there: for
it was sixteen
or seventeen days before the Carpenter had finished
her." Goodwin says she was
"a sloop-rigged craft of twelve or
fifteen
tons." There is an intimation of
Bradford that she was
"about
thirty feet long." It is evident
from Bradford's account
(Historie,
Mass. ed. p. 105) of her stormy entrance to Plymouth
harbor that
the shallop had but one mast, as he says "But herewith
they broake
their mast in 3 pieces and their saill fell overboard in
a very grown
sea."]
Many went ashore
to refresh themselves, and
the women to
wash.
TUESDAY, Nov. 14/24
Lying at
anchor. Carpenter at work on
shallop. Arms and accoutrements being got
ready for an
exploring party inland.
WEDNESDAY, Nov. 15/25
Lying at anchor
in harbor. Master and
boat's crew went
ashore, followed in the
afternoon by an
armed party of sixteen men
under command of
Captain Myles Standish.
Masters William
Bradford, Stephen Hopkins,
and Edward Tilley
being joined to him for
council. The party to be gone from the
ship a day or
two. Weather mild and ground
not frozen.
THURSDAY, Nov. 16/26
Lying at anchor
in harbor. Exploring party
still absent from
ship. Weather continues
open.
FRIDAY, Nov. 17/27
At anchor, Cape
Cod harbor. Weather open.
Saw signal-fire
on the other side of bay
this morning,
built by exploring party as
arranged. The Master, Governor Carver, and
many of the
company ashore in afternoon,
and met exploring
party there on their
return to
ship. Hearing their signal-guns
before they arrived
at the shore, sent
long-boat to
fetch them aboard. They
reported seeing
Indians and following them
ten miles without
coming up to them the
first afternoon out, and the next
day found
store of corn
buried, and a big ship's
kettle, which
they brought to the ship with
much corn. Also saw deer and found
excellent water.
SATURDAY, Nov. 18/28
At anchor, Cape
Cod harbor. Planters
helving tools,
etc. Carpenter at work on
shallop, which
takes more labor than at
first
supposed. Weather still moderate.
Fetched wood and
water.
SUNDAY, Nov. 19/29
At anchor, Gape
Cod harbor. Second Sunday
in harbor. Services aboard ship. Seamen
ashore. Change in weather. Colder.
MONDAY, Nov. 20/30
At anchor, Cape
Cod harbor. Carpenter and
others at work on
shallop, getting out
stock for a new
shallop, helving tools,
making articles
needed, etc.
TUESDAY, Nov. 21/Dec. 1
At anchor in
harbor. Much inconvenienced
in going
ashore. Can only go and come at
high water except
by wading, from which
many have taken
coughs and colds.
WEDNESDAY, Nov. 22/Dec. 2
At anchor in
harbor. Weather cold and
stormy, having
changed suddenly.
THURSDAY, Nov. 23/Dec. 3
At anchor in
harbor. Cold and stormy.
Work progressing
on shallop.
FRIDAY, Nov. 24/Dec. 4
At anchor in
harbor. Continues cold and
stormy.
SATURDAY, Nov. 25/Dec. 5
At anchor in
harbor. Weather same. Work
on shallop pretty well finished and
she can
be used, though
more remains to be done.
Another
exploration getting ready for
Monday. Master and crew anxious to unlade
and return for
England. Fetched wood and
water.
SUNDAY, Nov. 26/Dec. 6
At anchor, Cape
Cod harbor. Third Sunday
here. Master notified Planters that they
must find
permanent location and that he
must and would
keep sufficient supplies for
ship's company
and their return.
[Bradford,
Historie, Mass. ed. p. 96. The doubt as to how the
ship's and the
colonists' provisions were divided and held is again
suggested
here. It is difficult, however, to
understand how the
Master
"must and would" retain provisions with his small force
against the
larger, if it came to an issue of strength between Jones
and Standish.]
MONDAY, Nov. 27/Dec. 7
At anchor, Cape
Cod harbor. Rough weather
and cross
winds. The Planters determined
to send out a
strong exploring party, and
invited the
Master of the ship to join them
and go as leader,
which he agreed continued
to, and offered nine of the crew
and the
long-boat, which
were accepted. Of the
colonists there
were four-and-twenty,
making the party
in all four-and-thirty.
Wind so strong
that setting out from the
ship the shallop
and long-boat were obliged
to row to the
nearest shore and the men to
wade above the
knees to land. The wind
proved so strong
that the shallop was
obliged to harbor
where she landed. Mate
in charge of
ship. Blowed and snowed all
day and at night, and
froze withal.
Mistress White
delivered of a son which is
called
"Peregrine." The second child
born
on the voyage,
the first in this harbor.
TUESDAY, Nov. 28/Dec. 8
At anchor, Cape
Cod harbor. Cold. Master
Jones and
exploring party absent on shore
with long-boat
and colonists' shallop. The
latter, which
beached near ship yesterday
in a strong wind
and harbored there last
night, got under
way this morning and
sailed up the
harbor, following the course
taken by the
long-boat yesterday, the wind
favoring. Six inches of snow fell
yesterday and
last night. Crew at work
clearing snow from ship.
WEDNESDAY, Nov. 29/Dec. 9
At anchor, Cape
Cod harbor. Cold. Foul
weather
threatening. Master Jones with
sixteen men in the
long-boat and shallop
came aboard
towards night (eighteen men
remaining
ashore), bringing also about ten
bushels of Indian
corn which had been found
buried. The Master reports a long march,
the exploration
of two creeks, great
numbers of wild
fowl, the finding of much
corn and beans,'
etc.
[This seems to
be the first mention of beans (in early Pilgrim
literature) as
indigenous (presumably) to New England.
They have
held an
important place in her dietary ever since.]
THURSDAY, Nov. 30/Dec. 10
At anchor in
harbor. Sent shallop to head
of harbor with
mattocks and spades, as
desired by those
ashore, the seamen taking
their muskets
also. The shallop came
alongside at nightfall with
the rest of the
explorers—the
tide being out—bringing a
lot of Indian
things, baskets, pottery,
wicker-ware,
etc., discovered in two graves
and sundry Indian
houses they found after
the Master left
them. They report ground
frozen a foot
deep.
FRIDAY, Dec. 1/11
At anchor, Cape Cod
harbor. Carpenter
finishing work on
shallop. Colonists
discussing
locations visited, as places for
settlement.
SATURDAY, Dec. 2/12
At anchor in harbor. Much discussion among
colonists as to
settlement, the Master
insisting on a
speedy determination.
Whales playing
about the ship in
considerable
numbers. One lying within
half a
musket-shot of the ship, two of the
Planters shot at
her, but the musket of the
one who gave fire
first blew in pieces both
stock and barrel,
yet no one was hurt.
Fetched wood and
water.
SUNDAY, Dec. 3/13
At anchor in Cape
Cod harbor. The fourth
Sunday here. Scarce any of those aboard
free from
vehement coughs, some very ill.
Weather very
variable.
MONDAY, Dec. 4/14
At anchor in Cape
Cod harbor. Carpenter
completing
repairs on shallop. Much
discussion of
plans for settlement. The
Master urging
that the Planters should
explore with their
shallop at some
distance,
declining in such season to stir
from the present
anchorage till a safe
harbor is
discovered by them where they
would be and he
might go without danger.
This day died
Edward Thompson, a servant of
Master William
White, the first to die
aboard the ship
since she anchored in the
harbor. Burying-party sent ashore after
services to bury
him.
TUESDAY, Dec. 5/15
At anchor in
harbor. Francis Billington, a
young son of one of the
passengers, put the
ship and all in
great jeopardy, by shooting
off a
fowling-piece in his father's cabin
between decks where
there was a small
barrel of powder
open, and many people
about the fire
close by. None hurt.
Weather cold and
foul.
WEDNESDAY, Dec. 6/16
At anchor in harbor. Very cold, bad
weather. This day died Jasper More, a lad
bound to Governor
Carver. The second death
in the
harbor. The third exploring party
got away from the
ship in the afternoon in
the shallop,
intent on finding a harbor
recommended by
the second mate, Robert
Coppin, who had
visited it. Captain
Standish in
command, with whom were
Governor Carver,
Masters Bradford, Winslow,
John Tilley and
Edward Tilley, Warren and
Hopkins, John Howland, Edward
Dotey, and
two of the
colonists' seamen, Alderton and
English, and of
the ship's company, the
mates Clarke and
Coppin, the master-gunner
and three
sailors, eighteen in all. The
shallop was a
long time getting clear of
the point, having
to row, but at last got
up her sails and out of the
harbor. Sent
burying-party
ashore with body of little
More boy, after
services aboard.
THURSDAY, Dec. 7/17
At anchor in Cape
Cod harbor. This day
Mistress Dorothy
Bradford, wife of Master
Bradford, who is
away with the exploring
party to the
westward, fell over board and
was drowned.
FRIDAY, Dec. 8/18
At anchor in
harbor. A strong south-east
gale with heavy
rain, turning to snow and
growing cold
toward night, as it cleared.
This day Master James
Chilton died aboard
the ship. The third passenger, and first
head of a family;
to die in this harbor.
SATURDAY, Dec. 9/19
At anchor in harbor. Burying-party sent
ashore after
services aboard, to bury
Chilton. Fetched wood and water.
[The death of
Chilton was the first of the head of a family, and it
may readily be
imagined that the burial was an especially affecting
scene,
especially as following so closely upon the tragic death of
Mrs. Bradford
(for whom no funeral or burial arrangements are
mentioned?? D.W.)]
SUNDAY, Dec. 10/20
At anchor in Cape Cod
harbor. The fifth
Sunday in this
harbor. The exploring party
still
absent. Four deaths one by drowning;
very severe weather;
the ship's narrow
escape from being
blown up; and the absence
of so many of the
principal men, have made
it a hard, gloomy
week.
MONDAY, Dec. 11/21
At anchor in harbor. Clear weather.
TUESDAY, Dec. 12/22
At anchor in
harbor. Exploration party
still absent.
WEDNESDAY, Dec. 13/23
At anchor in
harbor. Exploration party
returned to ship,
where much sad
intelligence met
them (especially Master
Bradford), as to
his wife's drowning. The
exploring party
report finding a
considerable
Indian burying-place; several
Indian houses; a
fierce attack on them by
Indians on Friday
morning, but without
harm; a severe
gale on the same afternoon,
in which their rudder-hinges
broke, their
mast was split in
three pieces, their sail
fell over board
in a heavy sea, and they
were like to have
been cast away in making
a harbor which
Master Coppin thought he
knew, but was
deceived about. They landed
on an island at
the mouth of the harbor,
which they named for Master
Clarke, the
first mate, and
spent Saturday and Sunday
there, and on
Monday examined the harbor
they found, and
are agreed that it is the
place for
settlement. Much satisfaction
with the report
among the colonists.
THURSDAY, Dec. 14/24
At anchor, Cape
Cod harbor. The colonists
have determined to make
settlement at the
harbor they
visited, and which is
apparently, by
Captain John Smith's chart
of 1616, no other
than the place he calls
"Plimoth" thereon.
Fetched wood and water.
FRIDAY, Dec. 15/25
Weighed anchor to
go to the place the
exploring party
discovered. Course west,
after leaving
harbor. Shallop in company.
Coming within two
leagues, the wind coming
northwest, could
not fetch the harbor, and
was faine to put
round again towards Cape
Cod. Made old anchorage at night. The
thirty-fifth
night have lain at anchor
here. Shallop returned with ship.
SATURDAY, Dec. 16/26
Comes in with fair wind for
Plymouth.
Weighed anchor
and put to sea again and made
harbor
safely. Shallop in company. Within
half an hour of
anchoring the wind changed,
so if letted
[hindered] but a little had
gone back to Cape
Cod. A fine harbor.
Let go anchors
just within a long spur of
beach a mile or more from
shore. The end of
the outward
voyage; one hundred and two days
from Plymouth
(England to Plymouth New
England). One
hundred and fifty-five days
from London.
THE SHIPS JOURNAL WHILE SHE LAY IN
PLYMOUTH HARBOR
SUNDAY, Dec. 17/27
At anchor in
Plymouth harbor. Services on
ship. This harbor is a bay greater than
Cape Cod,
compassed with goodly land. It is
in fashion like a
sickle or fish-hook.
MONDAY, Dec. 18/28
At anchor,
Plymouth harbor: The Master of
the ship, with
three or four of the sailors
and several of
the Planters, went aland and
marched along the coast several
miles.
Made careful
examination of locality. Found
many brooks of
fine water, abundant wood,
etc. The party came aboard at night weary
with marching.
TUESDAY, Dec. 19/29
At anchor,
Plymouth harbor. A party from
the ship went
ashore to discover, some
going by land and
some keeping to the
shallop. A creek was found leading up
within the land
and followed up three
English miles, a
very pleasant river at
full sea. It was given the name of "Jones
River" in
compliment to the Master of the
ship. A bark of thirty tons may go up at
high tide, but
the shallop could scarcely
pass at low
water. All came aboard at
night with
resolution to fix, to-morrow,
which of the
several places examined they
would settle upon.
WEDNESDAY, Dec. 20/30
At anchor,
Plymouth harbor, many ill. Dec.
After service the
colonists decided to go
ashore this
morning and determine upon one
of two places
which were thought most
fitting for their
habitation. So a
considerable
party went ashore and left
twenty of their
number there to make a
rendezvous, the
rest coming on board at
night. They reported that they had chosen
by the most
voices the site first looked at
by the largest brook, near
where they
landed on the
11th on a large rock
[Plymouth Rock].
[The
"Rock" seems to have become the established landing place of
the Pilgrims,
from the time of the first visit of the third
exploring
party on December 11/21. The absurdity
of the claims of
the partisans
of Mary Chilton, in the foolish contention which
existed for
many years as to whether she or John Alden was the first
person to set
foot upon the "Rock," is shown by the fact that, of
course, no
women were with the third exploring party which first
landed there,
while it is also certain that Alden was not of that
exploring
party. That Mary Chilton may have been
the first woman to
land at Cape
Cod harbor is entirely possible, as it is that she or
John Alden may
have been the first person to land on the "Rock"
after the ship
arrived in Plymouth harbor. It was a
vexatious
travesty upon
history (though perpetuated by parties who ought to
have been
correct) that the Association for building the Pilgrim
Monument at
Plymouth should issue a pamphlet giving a picture of the
"Landing
of the Pilgrims, December 21, 1620," in which women are
pictured, and
in which the shallop is shown with a large
fore-and-aft
mainsail, while on the same page is another picture
entitled,
"The Shallop of the MAY-FLOWER," having a large yard and
square-sail,
and a "Cuddy" (which last the MAY-FLOWER'S shallop we
know did not
have). The printed description of the
picture,
however, says:
"The cut is copied from a picture by Van der Veldt,
a Dutch
painter of the seventeenth century, representing a
shallop," etc. It is matter of regret to find that a book
like
Colonel T. W.
Higginson's 'Book of American Explorers', intended
for a
text-book, and bearing the imprint of a house like Longmans,
Green &
Co. should actually print a "cut" showing Mary Chilton
landing from a
boat full of men (in which she is the only woman)
upon a rock,
presumably Plymouth Rock.]
THURSDAY, Dec. 21/31
At anchor,
Plymouth harbor. Wet and
stormy, so the
Planters could not go ashore
as planned,
having blown hard and rained
extremely all
night. Very uncomfortable
for the party on
shore. So tempestuous
that the shallop
could not go to land as
soon as was meet,
for they had no victuals
on land. About eleven o'clock the shallop
went off with
much ado with provision, but
could not return,
it blew so strong. Such
foul weather
forced to ride with three
anchors
ahead. This day Richard
Britteridge, one of the colonists,
died
aboard the ship,
the first to die in this
harbor.
FRIDAY, Dec. 22/Jan. 1
At anchor,
Plymouth harbor. The storm
continues, so that
no one could go ashore,
or those on land
come aboard. This morning
goodwife Allerton
was delivered of a son,
but dead-born.
The third child born on
board the ship
since leaving England,—the
first in this
harbor.
SATURDAY, Dec. 23/Jan. 2
At anchor in
Plymouth harbor. Sent body of
Britteridge ashore
for burial, the storm
having prevented
going before, and also a
large party of
colonists to fell timber,
etc. Left a large number on shore at the
rendezvous. Fetched wood and water.
SUNDAY, Dec. 24/Jan. 3
At anchor,
Plymouth harbor. Second Sunday
here. This day died Solomon Prower, one of
the family of
Master Martin, the treasurer
of the colonists,
being the sixth death
this month, and
the second in this harbor.
A burying-party went
ashore with Prower's
body, after
services aboard.
MONDAY, Dec. 25/Jan. 4
At anchor in
Plymouth harbor. Christmas
Day, but not
observed by these colonists,
they being
opposed to all saints' days,
etc. The men on shore Sunday reported that
they "heard
a cry of some savages," as they
thought, that
day. A large party went
ashore this
morning to fell timber and
begin
building. They began to erect the
first house about
twenty feet square for
their common use,
to receive them and their
goods. Another alarm as of Indians this
day. All but twenty of the Planters came
aboard at night, leaving the
rest to keep
court of
guard. The colonists began to
drink water, but
at night the Master caused
them to have some
beer.
TUESDAY, Dec. 26/Jan. 5
At anchor in
Plymouth harbor. A violent
storm of wind and
rain. The weather so
foul this morning
that none could go
ashore.
WEDNESDAY, Dec. 27/Jan. 6
At anchor in
harbor. Sent working party
ashore. All but the guard came aboard at
night.
THURSDAY, Dec. 28/Jan. 7
At anchor. All able went ashore this
morning to work
on a platform for ordnance
on the hill back
of the settlement,
commanding the
harbor. The Planters this
day laid out
their town-site and allotted
ground to the
several families. Many of
the colonists ill
from exposure. All but
the guard came
off to the ship at night.
FRIDAY, Dec. 29/Jan. 8
At anchor in
harbor. No working-party went
aland. The Planters fitting tools, etc.,
for their work. The weather wet and cold.
SATURDAY, Dec. 30/Jan. 9
At anchor in
harbor. Very stormy and cold.
No working-party
sent aland. The Planters
fitting tools,
etc. Great smokes of fires
visible from the
ship, six or seven miles
away, probably
made by Indians.
SUNDAY, Dec. 31/Jan. 10
At anchor in
harbor. The third Sunday in
this harbor. Sailors given leave to go
ashore. Many colonists ill.
MONDAY, Jan. 1/Jan. 11
At anchor in
Plymouth harbor. This day
Degory Priest,
one of the colonists, died
aboard the ship.
A large party went ashore
early to
work. Much time lost between ship
and shore, the
ship drawing so much water
as obliged to
anchor a mile and a half off.
The working-party
came aboard at nightfall.
Fetched wood and
water.
TUESDAY, Jan. 2/Jan. 12
At anchor in harbor. Sent burying-party
ashore with
Priest's body. Weather good.
Working-party
aland and returned to ship at
night.
WEDNESDAY, Jan. 3/Jan. 13
At anchor in
harbor. Working-party aland,
returned at
night. They report seeing
great fires of
the Indians. Smoke seen
from the ship. Have seen no savages since
arrival.
THURSDAY, Jan. 4/Jan. 14
At anchor in
Plymouth harbor. Captain
Standish, with
four or five men, went to
look for savages, and though
they found
some of their old
houses "wigwams" could
not meet with any
of them.
FRIDAY, Jan. 5/Jan. 15
At anchor in
Plymouth harbor. Working-
party went aland
early. One of the sailors
found a live
herring upon the shore, which
the Master had to
his supper. As yet have
caught but one cod.
SATURDAY, Jan. 6/Jan. 16
At anchor in
harbor. In judgment of
Masters Brewster,
Bradford, and others,
Master Martin,
the colonists' treasurer,
was so hopelessly
ill that Governor Carver,
who had taken up
his quarters on land, was
sent for to come
aboard to speak with him
about his
accounts. Fetched wood and water.
SUNDAY, Jan. 7/Jan. 17
At anchor in
harbor. Fourth Sunday here.
Governor Carver
came aboard to talk with
Master Martin,
who was sinking fast.
MONDAY, Jan. 8/Jan. 18
At anchor in
Plymouth harbor. A very fan
fair day. The working-party went aland
early. The Master sent, the shallop for
fish. They had a great tempest at sea and
were in some
danger. They returned to the
ship at night,
with three great seals they
had shot, and an
excellent great cod.
Master Martin
died this day. He had been a
"governour" of the passengers on the ship,
and an
"assistant," and was an Adventurer.
One of the Master-mates
took a musket, and
went with young
Francis Billington to find
the great inland
sea the latter had seen
from the top of a
tree, and found a great
water, in two
great lakes [Billington Sea,]
also Indian
houses.
TUESDAY, Jan. 9/Jan. 19
At anchor in
harbor. Fair day. Sent
burying-party
ashore after services aboard,
with the body of
Master Martin, and he was
buried with some
ceremony on the hill near
the landing-place. The settlers drew lots
for their
meersteads and garden-plots. The
common-house
nearly finished, wanting only
covering.
WEDNESDAY, Jan. 10/Jan. 20
At anchor in
harbor. Party went aland from
ship. Frosty.
THURSDAY, Jan. 11/Jan. 21
At anchor in
harbor. A fair day. Party
ashore from ship
and coming off at night,
reported Master
William Bradford very ill:
Many ill aboard.
FRIDAY, Jan. 12/Jan. 22
At anchor in
harbor. Began to rain at noon
and stopped all work. Those coming aboard
ship at night
reported John Goodman and
Peter Browne, two
of the colonists,
missing, and
fears entertained that they
may have been
taken by Indians. Froze and
snowed at
night. The first snow for a
month. An
extremely cold night.
SATURDAY, Jan. 13/Jan. 23
At anchor in harbor. The Governor sent out
an armed party of
ten or twelve to look for
the missing men,
but they returned without
seeing or hearing
anything at all of them.
Those on
shipboard much grieved, as deeming
them lost. Fetched wood and water.
SUNDAY, Jan. 14/Jan. 24
At anchor in
harbor. About six o'clock in
the morning, the
wind being very great, the
watch on deck
spied the great new
rendezvous on
shore on fire and feared it
fired by Indians,
but the tide being out,
men could not get
ashore for three quarters
of an hour, when
they went armed. At the
landing they
heard that the lost men were
returned, some
frost-bitten, and that the
thatch of the
common-house only was burnt
by a spark, but
no other harm done the
roof. The most loss was Governor Carver's
and Master
Bradford's, both of whom lay
sick in bed, and
narrowly missed being
blown up with
powder. The meeting was to
have been kept ashore to-day, the
greater
number of the
people now being there, but
the fire, etc.,
prevented. Some of those
sick in the
common-house were fain to
return aboard for
shelter. Fifth Sunday in
this harbor.
MONDAY, Jan. 15/Jan. 25
At anchor in
Plymouth harbor. Rained much
all day. They on shipboard could not go
ashore nor they
on shore do any labor, but
were all wet.
TUESDAY, Jan. 16/Jan. 26
At
anchorage. A fine, sunshining day like
April. Party went aland betimes. Many ill
both on ship and
on shore.
WEDNESDAY, Jan. 17/Jan. 27
At
anchorage. Another fine, sunshining
day.
Working-party went aland early. Set
on shore some of
the Planters' goods.
[Mourt's
Relation, Dexter's ed. p. 77. Bradford
states (op. cit.
Mass. ed. p.
110) that they were hindered in getting goods ashore
by "want
of boats," as well as sickness.
Mention is made only of
the
"long-boat" and shallop. It is
possible there were no others,
except the
Master's skiff]
THURSDAY, Jan. 18/Jan. 28
At
anchorage. Another fine, bright day.
Some of the
common goods [i.e. belonging
to all] set on
shore.
FRIDAY, Jan. 19/Jan. 29
At
anchorage. A shed was begun on shore to
receive the goods from the ship.
Rained at
noon but cleared
toward night.
[Cleared
toward evening (though wet at noon), and John Goodman went
out to try his
frozen feet, as is recorded, and had his encounter
with wolves.]
SATURDAY, Jan. 20/Jan. 30
At
anchorage. Shed made ready for goods
from ship. Fetched wood and water.
SUNDAY, Jan. 21/Jan. 31
At anchor in
Plymouth harbor. Sixth Sunday
in this
harbor. Many ill. The Planters
kept their
meeting on land to-day for the
first time, in the
common-house.
MONDAY, Jan. 22/Feb. 1
At
anchorage. Fair day. Hogsheads of meal
sent on shore
from ship and put in
storehouse.
TUESDAY, Jan. 23/Feb. 2
At
anchorage. The general sickness
increases, both
on shipboard and on land.
WEDNESDAY, Jan. 24/Feb. 3
At anchor in
harbor. Fair weather. Party
on shore from ship and
returned at night.
THURSDAY, Jan. 25/Feb. 4
At
anchorage. Weather good. Party set
ashore and came
aboard at night.
FRIDAY, Jan. 26/Feb. 5
At anchorage. Weather good.
Party set
ashore. The sickness increases.
SATURDAY, Jan. 27/Feb. 6
At
anchorage. Weather fair. Good working
weather all the
week, but many sick.
Fetched wood and
water.
SUNDAY, Jan. 28/Feb. 7
At anchorage,
Plymouth harbor. Seventh
Sunday in this
harbor. Meeting kept on
shore. Those of Planters on board who were
able, and some of
the ship's company, went
ashore, and came
off after service.
MONDAY, Jan. 29/Feb. 8
At anchor, Plymouth
harbor. Morning cold,
with frost and
sleet, but after reason ably
fair. Both long-boat and shallop carrying
Planters' goods
on shore. Those returning
reported that
Mistress Rose Standish, wife
of Captain
Standish, died to-day.
TUESDAY, Jan. 30/Feb. 9
At
anchorage. Cold, frosty weather, so no
working-party went on shore
from ship. The
Master and others
of the ship's company saw
two savages that
had been on the island
near the ship
[Clarke's Island]. They were
gone so far back
again before they were
discovered that
could not speak with them.
The first natives
actually seen since the
encounter on the Cape.
WEDNESDAY, Jan. 31/Feb. 10
At anchor in
harbor. Still cold and
frosty, with
sleet. No party went on
shore. Eight of
the colonists have died
this month on the
ship and on shore.
THURSDAY, Feb. 1/Feb. 11
At anchor in
harbor. Weather better, and
some of those on
board the ship went on
shore to work, but many ill.
FRIDAY, Feb. 2/Feb. 12
At
anchorage. The same.
SATURDAY, Feb. 3/13
At
anchorage. Weather threatening. Fetched
wood and water.
SUNDAY, Feb. 4/14
At anchor,
Plymouth harbor. The eighth
Sunday in this
harbor, and now inexpedient
to think of
getting away, till both Planters
and crew in better
condition as to health.
[Bradford,
Historie, p. 92; Young, Chronicler, p. 198.
Bradford
says (op.
cit. Mass. ed, pp. 120, 121): "The
reason on their parts
why she stayed
so long was ye necessitie and danger that lay upon
them, for it
was well toward ye ende of December before she could
land anything
here, or they able to receive anything ashore.
After
wards, ye 14
of January the house which they had made for a general
randevoze by
casulty fell afire, and some were faine to retire
aboard for
shelter. Then the sickness begane to
fall sore amongst
them, and ye
weather so bad as they could not make much sooner
dispatch. Againe, the Governor & chiefe of them
seeing so many dye,
and fall down
sick dayly, thought it no wisdom to send away the
ship, their
condition considered, and the danger they stood in from
ye Indians,
till they could procure some shelter; and therefore
thought it
better to draw some more charge upon themselves & friends
["demurrage?"] than hazard all. The Mr. and sea-men likewise;
though before
they hasted ye passengers a shore to be goone [gone],
now many of
their men being dead, and of ye ablest of them [as is
before noted,
and of ye rest many lay sick & weake, ye Mr, durst not
put to sea
till he saw his men begine to recover, and ye hart of
winter
over."]]
A very rainy day
with the heaviest gusts of
wind yet
experienced. The ship in some
danger of
oversetting, being light and
unballasted.
MONDAY, Feb. 5/15
At anchor in
harbor. Clearing weather.
TUESDAY, Feb. 6/16
At anchor in
harbor. Cold and clear.
WEDNESDAY, Feb. 7/17
At anchor in
harbor. Much colder.
THURSDAY, Feb. 8/18
At
anchorage. Hard, cold weather.
FRIDAY, Feb. 9/19
At
anchorage. Cold weather continues.
Little work
possible. The little house for
the sick people
on shore took fire this
afternoon, by a
spark that kindled in the
roof. No great harm done. The Master
going ashore,
killed five geese, which he
distributed among
the sick people. He also
found a good deer
the savages had killed,
having also cut
off his horns. A wolf was
eating him. Cannot conceive how he came
there.
SATURDAY, Feb. 10/20
At anchor in
harbor. Getting goods on
shore, but
sickness makes both Planters and
crew
shorthanded. Fetched wood and water.
SUNDAY, Feb. 11/21
At anchor in
Plymouth harbor. Ninth Sunday
in this harbor.
MONDAY, Feb. 12/22
At
anchorage. Getting goods on shore.
TUESDAY, Feb. 13/23
At anchorage.
Rainy.
WEDNESDAY, Feb. 14/24
At
anchorage. More sickness on ship and on
shore than at any
time, and more deaths.
Rainy, clearing.
[The sickness
and mortality had rapidly increased and was now at its
height]
THURSDAY, Feb. 15/25
At
anchorage. Northerly wind and frost.
FRIDAY, Feb. 16/26
At
anchorage. Northerly wind continues,
which continues the
frost. Those from
shore reported
that one of the Planters,
being out fowling
and hidden in the reeds,
about a mile and a
half from the
settlement, saw
twelve Indians marching
toward the
plantation and heard many more.
He hurried home
with all speed and gave the
alarm, so all the people in
the woods at
work returned and
armed themselves, but saw
nothing of the
Indians. Captain Standish's
and Francis
Cooke's tools also stolen by
Indians in
woods. A great fire toward
night seen from
the ship, about where the
Indians were
discovered.
SATURDAY, Feb. 17/27
At anchorage.
All the colonists on the
ship able to go
on shore went this morning
to attend the
meeting for the establishment
of military
orders among them. They chose
Captain Standish
their captain, and gave
him authority of
command in affairs. Two
savages appeared
on the hill, a quarter of
a mile from the
plantation, while the
Planters were
consulting, and made signs
for Planters to
come to them. All armed
and stood ready,
and sent two towards them,
Captain Standish and
Master Hopkins, but
the natives would
not tarry. It was
determined to
plant the great ordnance in
convenient places
at once. Fetched wood
and water.
SUNDAY, Feb. 18/28
At anchor in
Plymouth harbor. The Feb.
tenth Sunday in
this harbor. Many sick,
both on board the
ship and on shore.
MONDAY, Feb. 19/Mar. 1
At
anchorage. Got one of the great guns on
shore with the
help of some of the
Planters.
TUESDAY, Feb. 20/Mar. 2
At
anchorage. Getting cannon ashore and
mounted.
WEDNESDAY, Feb. 21/Mar. 3
At
anchorage. The Master, with many of the
sailors, went on
shore, taking one of the
great pieces
called a minion, and with the
Planters drew it
up the hill, with another
piece that lay on
the shore, and mounted
them and a saller and
two bases—five guns
—on the platform
made for them. A hard
day's work. The Master took on shore with
him a very fat goose
he had shot, to which
the Planters
added a fat crane, a mallard,
and a dried
neat's tongue (ox tongue), and
Planters and crew
feasted together. When
the Master went on shore, he
sent off the
Governor to take
the directions of Master
Mullens as to his
property, as he was lying
near to death,—as
also Master White.
Master Mullens
dictated his will to the
Governor,
which he noted down, and Giles
Heale, the
chirurgeon, and Christopher
Joanes, of the crew, witnessed,
they being
left aboard to
care for the sick, keep the
ship, etc. Master Mullens and Master White
both died this
day. Two others also died.
Got the men
aboard about nightfall.
THURSDAY, Feb. 22/Mar. 4
At
anchorage. Large burial-party went
ashore with
bodies of Masters Mullens and
White, and joined
with those on shore made
the chief burial
thus far had. The service
on shore, the
most of the people being
there, Master
Mullens being one of the
chief subscribing
Adventurers, as well as
one of the chief
men of the Planters, as
was Master
White. Their deaths much
deplored.
FRIDAY, Feb. 23/Mar. 5
At
anchorage. Party from the ship went on
shore to help
finish work on the ordnance.
SATURDAY, Feb. 24/Mar. 6
At anchorage. Same.
Fetched wood and
water.
SUNDAY, Feb. 25/Mar. 7
At anchorage in
Plymouth harbor. Eleventh
Sunday in this
harbor. Mistress Mary
Allerton, wife of Master Isaac
Allerton,
one of the chief
men of the colonists, died
on board this
day, not having mended well
since the birth
of her child, dead-born
about two months
agone.
MONDAY, Feb. 26/Mar. 8
At anchor in
harbor. Burying-party went
ashore to bury
Mistress Allerton, services
being held there.
TUESDAY, Feb. 27/Mar. 9
At
anchorage. The sickness and deaths of
the colonists on
shore have steadily
increased, and
have extended to the ship,
which has lost
several of its petty
officers,
including the master gunner,
three
quarter-masters, and cook, and a
third of the
crew, many from scurvy.
[There can be
no doubt that both planters and ship's crew suffered
severely from
scurvy. The conditions all favored it,
the sailors
were familiar
with it, and would not be likely to be mistaken in
their
recognition of it, and Dr. Fuller, their competent physician,
would not be
likely to err in his diagnosis of it.
Tuberculosis was
its very
natural associate.]
WEDNESDAY, Feb. 28/Mar. 10
At
anchorage. The last day of the month.
The fifty-third day the
ship has lain in
this harbor, and
from the present rate of
sickness and
death aboard, no present
capacity or
prospect of getting away, those
better being yet
weak. The Planters have
lost seventeen
this month, their largest
mortality.
THURSDAY, Mar. 1/11
At anchorage.
Blustering but milder
weather.
FRIDAY,
Mar. 2/12
At
anchorage. Same.
SATURDAY, Mar. 3/13
At
anchorage. Wind south. Morning misty
[foggy]. Towards noon warm and fine
weather. At one o'clock it thundered. The
first heard. It rained sadly from two
o'clock till
midnight. Fetched wood and
water.
SUNDAY, Mar. 4/14
At anchor in
Plymouth harbor. The twelfth
Sunday in this
harbor. Cooler. Clear
weather.
MONDAY, Mar. 5/15
At
anchorage. Rough weather.
TUESDAY, Mar. 6/16
At
anchorage. Same.
WEDNESDAY, Mar. 7/17
At anchor in
harbor. Wind full east, cold
but fair. The Governor went this day with
a party of five,
to the great ponds,
discovered by one
of the ship's mates and
Francis
Billington. Some planting done in
the settlement.
THURSDAY, Mar. 8/18
At anchor in
harbor. Rough easterly
weather.
FRIDAY, Mar. 9/19
At
anchorage. Same. Many sick aboard.
SATURDAY, Mar. 10/20
At
anchorage. Same. Fetched wood and
water.
SUNDAY, Mar. 11/21
At anchorage,
Plymouth harbor. The
thirteenth Sunday the ship has
lain in this
harbor. Many of crew yet ill, including
boatswain.
MONDAY, Mar. 12/22
At
anchorage. Easterly weather.
TUESDAY, Mar. 13/23
At
anchorage. The sickness and mortality
on ship and on
shore continue.
WEDNESDAY, Mar. 14/24
At
anchorage. Same.
THURSDAY, Mar. 15/25
At anchorage. Same.
FRIDAY, Mar. 16/26
At
anchorage. A fair, warm day, towards
noon. The Master and others went ashore to
the general
meeting. The plantation was
startled this
morning by a visit from an
Indian who spoke
some English and bade
"Welcome." He is from
Monhiggon, an island
to the eastward
some days' sail, near where
Sir Ferdinando
Gorges had a settlement. He
was friendly, and
having had much
intercourse with
Englishmen who came to
fish in those parts, very
comfortable with
them. He saw the ship in the harbor from a
distance and
supposed her to be a fishing
vessel. He told the Governor that the
plantation was
formerly called "Patuxet"
[or Apaum], and
that all its inhabitants
had been carried
off by a plague about four
years ago. All the afternoon was spent in
communication
with him. The Governor
purposed sending
him aboard the ship at
night, and he was
well content to go and
went aboard the
shallop to come to the
ship, but the
wind was high and water scant
[low], so that
the shallop could not go to
the ship. The Governor sent him to Master
Hopkins's house
and set a watch over him.
SATURDAY, Mar. 17/27
At anchor in
harbor. The Master and others
came off to the ship. Samoset the Indian
went away back to
the Massasoits whence he
came. A reasonably fair day. Fetched wood
and water.
SUNDAY, Mar. 18/28
At anchor in Plymouth
harbor. The
fourteenth Sunday
the ship has lain at this
anchorage. A fair day.
The sickness
stayed a
little. Many went on shore to the
meeting in the
common-house. Samoset the
savage came
again, and brought five others
with him.
[This Sunday
visit was doubtless very much to the dislike of the
good brethren,
or at least of the leaders, but policy dictated every
possible
forbearance. Their consciences drew the
line at trade,
however, and
they got rid of their untimely visitors as soon as
possible
without giving offense. Massasoit's men
seem to have
shown, by
leaving their peltry with them, a confidence in their new
white
neighbors that is remarkable in view of the brevity of their
friendship.]
They left their
bows and arrows a quarter
of a mile from
the town, as instructed.
The Planters gave
them entertainment, but
would not truck
with them.
["Truck—to trade." All
early and modern lexicographers give the
word, which,
though now obsolete, was in common use in parts of New
England fifty
years ago.]
They sang and
danced after their manner,
and made
semblance of amity and friendship.
They drank
tobacco and carried pounded corn
to eat. Their faces were painted. They
brought a few
skins which they left with
the Planters, and returned the
tools which
Captain Standish
and Francis Cooke left in
the woods. The Planters dismissed them
with a few
trifles as soon as they could,
it being Sunday,
and they promised soon to
return and
trade. Samoset would not go
with them,
feigning sick, and stayed.
Those on shore from
the ship came off to
her at night.
MONDAY, Mar. 19/29
At
anchorage. A fair day. The Planters
digging and
sowing seeds.
TUESDAY, Mar. 20/30
At
anchorage. A fine day. Digging and
planting of
gardens on shore. Those sick
of the crew
mending.
WEDNESDAY, Mar. 21/31
At anchorage. A fine warm day. Beginning
to put ship in
trim for return voyage.
Bringing ballast,
etc. Some, including
the
Masters-mates, went on shore, who on
return reported
that the Planters sent the
Indian Samoset
away. A general meeting of
the Planters was
held at the common-house,
to conclude laws and orders, and to confirm
the military
orders formerly proposed, and
twice broken off
by the savages coming, as
happened
again. After the meeting had held
an hour or so,
two or three savages
appeared on the
hill over against the town,
and made
semblance of daring the Planters.
Captain Standish
and another, with their
muskets, went
over to them, with the two
Masters-mates of
the ship, who were ashore,
also armed with
muskets. The savages made
show of defiance,
but as our men drew near
they ran
away. This day the carpenter, who
has long been ill
of scurvy, fitted the
shallop to carry
all the goods and
furniture aboard
the ship, on shore.
THURSDAY, Mar. 22/Apr. 1
At
anchorage. A very fair, warm day.
At work on ship
getting ready for sea,
bringing ballast
aboard, etc. Another
general meeting
of the Planters which all
able
attended. They had scarce been an
hour together
when Samoset the Indian came
again with one
Squanto, the only native of
Patuxet (where
the Planters now inhabit)
surviving, who
was one of the twenty captives
carried away from this
place by Captain Hunt,
to England. He could speak a little English.
They brought
three other Indians with them.
They signified
that their great Sagamore,
Masasoyt, was
hard by, with Quadequina his
brother, and all
their men. They could not
well express what
they would in English,
but after an hour
the king came to the top
of the hill, over
against the plantation,
with his train of
about sixty men. Squanto
went to him and
brought a message that one
should be sent to
parley with him, and Master
Edward Winslow
went, to know hisnmind, and
signify the wish
of the Governor to have
trading and peace
with him, the Governor
sending presents
to the king and his brother,
with something to
eat and drink.
[Edward
Winslow gives us here another proof of that rare
self-sacrifice, that entire devotion to his work, and that splendid
intrepidity
which so signally characterized his whole career. At
this most
critical moment, the fate of the little colony trembling
in the balance,
when there was evident fear of treachery and
surprise on
the part of both the English and the savages; though the
wife of his
youth lay at the point of death (which came but two days
later), and
his heart was heavy with grief; forgetting all but the
welfare of his
little band of brethren, he goes forward alone, his
life in his
hand, to meet the great sachem surrounded by his whole
tribe, as the
calm, adroit diplomatist, upon whom all must depend;
and as the
fearless hostage, to put himself in pawn for the savage
chief.]
The king, leaving
Master Winslow with
brother, came
over the brook, with some
twenty of his
men, leaving their bows and
arrows behind
them, and giving some six or
seven of their
men as hostages for Master
Winslow. Captain Standish, with Master
Williamson, the
ship's-merchant, as
interpreter,
[It would seem
from the frequent mention of the presence of some of
the ship's
company, Master Jones, the "Masters-mates," and now the
"ship's-merchant,"
that the ship was daily well represented in the
little
settlement on shore. The presence of
Master Williamson on
this occasion
is perhaps readily accounted for. Every
other meeting
with the
Indians had been unexpected, the present one was
anticipated,
and somewhat eagerly, for upon its successful issue
almost
everything depended. By this time
Standish had probably
become aware
that Tisquantum's command of English was very limited,
and he desired
all the aid the ship's interpreter could give.
By
some means,
the sachem and the colonists succeeded in establishing
on this day a
very good and lasting understanding.]
and a guard of
half a dozen musketeers, met
the king at the brook,
[The guard was
probably made thus small to leave the body of the
colonists as
strong a reserve force as possible to meet any surprise
attack on the
part of the Indians. Colonel Higginson,
in his Book
of American
Explorers, gives a cut of this meeting of Massasoit and
his pineses
with Standish and his guard of honor, but it is
defective in
that the guard seems to have advanced to the hill
("Strawberry," or later "Watson's") to meet the
sachem, instead of
only to
"the brook;" and more especially in that there are but two
officers with
the "six musketeers," where there ought to be three,
viz. Standish, in command, Edward Window, as the
envoy and hostage
(in full
armor), and "Mr. Williamson," the ship's-merchant or
purser, as
interpreter, perhaps acting as lieutenant of the guard.
It is always
matter of regret when books, especially text-books,
written by
authors of some repute, and published by reputable
houses, fail,
for want of only a little care in the study of the
available
history of events they pictorially represent, to make
their pictures
and the known facts correspond.]
and they saluted
each other, and the guard
conducted the
Sagamore to one of the new
houses then
building, where were placed a
green rug and
three or four cushions. Then
came the Governor
with drum and trumpet,
and a guard of
musketeers, and they drank
to each other in
some strong waters, and
the Governor gave the king
and his
followers meat,
and they made a treaty in
King James's
name, and drank tobacco
together. His
face was painted a sad red,
and his head and
face were oiled, which
made him look
greasy. All his followers
were more or less
painted. So after all
was done, the
Governor conducted him to the
brook, and his
brother came, and was also
feasted, and then
conveyed him to the
brook, and Master
Winslow returned.
Samoset and Squanto stayed
in the town and
the Indians
stayed all night in the woods
half a mile
away. The last of the
colonists on
board the ship went ashore to
remain to-day.
FRIDAY, Mar. 23/Apr. 2
At anchor. A fair day.
Some of the ship's
company went on
shore. Some of the Indians
came again, and Captain
Standish and Master
Allerton went to
see the king, and were
welcomed by
him. This morning the Indians
stayed till ten
or eleven of the clock, and
the Governor,
sending for the king's
kettle, filled it
with pease, and they went
their way? Making ready for sea, getting
ballast, wood,
and water from the shore,
etc. The Planters held a meeting and
concluded both of
military orders and some
laws, and chose
as Governor, for the coming
year, Master John
Carver, who was
"governor" on the ship.
SATURDAY, Mar. 24/April 3
At
anchorage. The ship's company busy with
preparations for
the return voyage,
bringing ballast,
wood, and water from the
shore, etc., the
ship having no lading for
the return. This day died, on shore,
Mistress Elizabeth Winslow,
wife of Master
Winslow. Many still sick. More on the
ship than on
shore.
SUNDAY, Mar. 25/April 4
At anchor in
Plymouth harbor. The
fifteenth Sunday
in this port. Many of the
crew dead and
some still sick, but the
sickness and
mortality lessening.
MONDAY, Mar. 26/April 5
At anchor. Bringing ballast from shore and
getting ship in
trim.
TUESDAY, Mar. 27/April 6
At
anchorage. Getting ballast, overhauling
rigging, getting
wood, water, etc., from
shore.
WEDNESDAY, Mar. 28/April 7
At
anchorage. Same.
THURSDAY, Mar. 29/April 8
At
anchorage. The Master offered to take
back any of the colonists who
wished to
return to
England, but none desired to go.
Getting in stores
and ballast.
FRIDAY, Mar. 30/April 9
At anchorage. Hastening all preparations
for sailing. Getting ballast, etc. Water
butts filled.
SATURDAY, Mar. 31/April 10
At
anchorage. Setting up rigging, bending
light sails, etc. Getting ballast and wood
from the beach
and island. The colonists
have lost
thirteen by death the past month,
making in all half
of their number.
SUNDAY, April 1/11
At anchor in
Plymouth harbor. The
sixteenth Sunday
the ship has lain at
anchor here, and
to be the last, being
nearly ready to sail. Most of the crew
ashore on
liberty. In the sixteen weeks the
ship has lain
here, half of her crew (but
none of her
officers) have died, and a few
are still
weak. Among the petty officers
who have died
have been the master gunner,
boatswain, and
three quartermasters, beside
the cook, and more than
a third of the
sailors. A bad voyage for the owner,
Adventurers,
ship, and crew.
MONDAY, April 2/12
Still at anchor,
but making last
preparations for
voyage. Ship's officers
made farewells on
shore. Governor Carver
copied out, and
Giles Heale and Chris.
Jones witnessed,
Master Mullens's will, to
go to England.
TUESDAY, April 3/13
Still at
anchorage, but (near) ready to
sail with a fair
wind. Master Williamson,
the ship's-merchant [purser],
appointed by
Master Mullens an
overseer of his will,
takes copy of
same to England for probate,
with many
letters, keepsakes, etc., etc.,
to Adventurers
and friends. Very little
lading, chiefly
skins and roots. Make
adieus to
Governor Carver and company.
WEDNESDAY, April 4/14
Still at anchor in
Plymouth harbor. Sails
loosened and all
ready for departure except
Governor's
letters. Last visits of shore
people to ship. Sail with morning tide, if
wind serves. One hundred and ten days in
this harbor.
THURSDAY, April 5/15
Got anchors, and
with fair wind got
underway at full tide. Many to bid adieu.
Set colors and
gave Planters a parting
salute with the
ensign and ordnance.
Cleared the
harbor without hindrance, and
laid general
course E.S.E. for England
with a fine
wind. Took departure from Cape
Cod early in the
day, shook off the land
and got ship to
rights before night. All
sails set and the
ship logging her best.
And
so the MAY-FLOWER began her speedy, uneventful, homeward run, of but thirty-one
days, arriving in England May 6, 1621, having been absent, on her "round
voyage," from her sailing port, two hundred and ninety-six days.
THE END OF THE
VOYAGE
AND OF THIS
JOURNAL
AUTHOR'S
NOTE. Of the "Log" Of the MAY-FLOWER, the author is able to repeat
the assurance given as to the brief Journal of the SPEEDWELL, and is able to
say, in the happy phrase of Griffis, "I have tried to state only recorded
facts, or to give expression to well grounded inferences."
APPENDIX
In
view of the natural wish of many of "restricted facilities," to
consult for themselves the full text of certain of the principal letters and
documents which have imparted much of the most definite and valuable
information concerning the Pilgrim movement, it has been thought well to
include certain of them here verbatim, that they may be of ready availability
to the reader. The list comprises copies of—
I.
The Agreement of the Merchant Adventurers and Planters;
II.
The Letter of the Leyden Leaders to John Carver and Robert Cushman (at London),
May 31/June 10, 1620;
III.
The Letter of Robert Cushman to John Carver (then at Southampton), Saturday,
June 10/20, 1620;
IV.
The Letter of Robert Cushman to the Leyden Leaders, June 10/20, 1620;
V.
The Letter of Robert Cushman to the Leyden Leaders, Sunday, June 11/21, 1620;
VI.
The Letter of Rev. John Robinson to John Carver at London, June 14/24, 1620;
VII.
The Letter of the Planters to the Merchant Adventurers from Southamp ton,
August 3, 1620;
VIII.
The Letter of Robert Cushman (from Dartmouth) to Edward Southworth, Thursday,
August 17,1620;
IX.
The MAY-FLOWER Compact;
X.
The Nuncupative Will of Master William Mullens; and
XI.
The Letter of "One of the Chiefe of ye Companie" (The Merchant
Adventurers), dated at London, April 9, 1623—
Many
other early original documents frequently referred to in this volume are of no
less interest than those here given, but most of them have either had such
publication as to be more generally known or accessible, or involve space and
cost disproportionate to their value in this connection.
I
THE AGREEMENT OF THE MERCHANT ADVENTURERS AND PLANTERS
Anno:
1620, July 1.
1.
The adventurers & planters doe agree, that every person that goeth being
aged 16. years & upward, be rated at 10li., and ten pounds to be accounted
a single share.
2.
That he goeth in person, and furnisheth him selfe out with 10li. either in
money or other provisions, be accounted as haveing 20li. in stock, and in ye
devission shall receive a double share.
3.
The persons transported & ye adventurers shall continue their joynt stock
& partnership togeather, ye space of 7 years, (excepte some unexpected
impedimente doe cause ye whole company to agree otherwise,) during which time,
all profits & benifits that are gott by trade, traffick, trucking, working,
fishing, or any other means of any person or persons, remaine still in ye
comone stock untill ye division.
4.
That at their coming ther, they chose out such a number of fitt persons, as may
furnish their ships and boats for fishing upon ye sea; imploying the rest of
their severall faculties upon ye land; as building houses, tilling, and
planting ye ground, & makeing shuch comodities as shall be most usefull for
ye collonie.
5.
That at ye end of ye 7 years, ye capitall & profits, viz. the houses,
lands, goods and chatels, be equally devided betwixte ye adventurers, and
planters; wch done, every man shall be free from other of them of any debt or
detrimente concerning this adventure.
6.
Whosoever cometh to ye colonie hereafter, or putteth any into ye stock, shall
at the ende of ye 7. years be alowed proportionably to ye time of his so doing.
7.
He that shall carie his wife & children, or servants, shall be alowed for
everie person now aged 16. years & upward, a single share in ye devision,
or if he provid them necessaries, a duble share, or if they be between 10. year
old and 16., then 2. of them to be reconed for a person, both in trasportation
and devision.
8.
That such children as now goe, & are under ye age of ten years, have noe
other shar in ye devision, but 50. acers of unmanured land.
9.
That such persons as die before ye 7. years be expired, their executors to have
their parte or sharr at ye devision, proportionably to ye time of their life in
ye collonie.
10.
That all such persons as are of this collonie, are to have their meate, drink,
apparell, and all provissions out of ye comon stock & goods of ye said
collonie.
Governor
Bradford adds:—
"The
chief and principal differences betwene these & the former [original]
conditions, stood in those 2. points; that ye houses, & lands improved,
espetialy gardens & home lotts should remaine undevided wholy to ye
planters at ye 7. years end. 2ly, yt they should have had 2. days in a weeke
for their owne private imploymente, for ye more comforte of themselves and their
families, espetialy such as had families."
[Apparently,
as has been noted, neither these articles of agreement, nor their predecessors
which received the approval of the Leyden leaders, were ever signed by the
contracting parties, until Robert Cushman brought the later draft over in the
FORTUNE, in 1621, and the planter body (advised thereto by Pastor Robinson, who
had previously bitterly opposed) signed them. Much might be truly said on
either side of this controversy—indeed was said at the time; but if the Pilgrims
were to abandon their contention, whatever its merits, in a year's time, as
they did, it would seemingly have been much better not to have begun it, for it
undoubtedly cost them dear.]
II
LETTER OF THE LEYDEN LEADERS TO JOHN CARVER AND ROBERT CUSHMAN, AT LONDON
May 31/June 10, 1620.
To their loving
freinds John Carver and Robart Cushman, these, &c.
Good bretheren, after salutations, &c. We received diverse letters at ye
coming of Mr. [Thomas] Nash & our pilott, which is a
great incouragmente
unto us, and for whom we hop after times will minister
occasion of
praising God; and indeed had you not sente him, many
would have been
ready to fainte and goe backe. Partly in respecte of ye new conditions
which have bene taken up by you, which all men are
against, and partly in
regard of our owne inabillitie to doe any one of those
many waightie
bussineses you referr to us here. For ye former wherof, wheras Robart
Cushman desirs reasons for our dislike, promising
therupon to alter ye
same, or els saing we should thinke he hath no brains, we
desire him to
exercise them therin, refering him to our pastors former
reasons, and
them to ye censure of ye godly wise. But our desires are that you will
not entangle your selvs and us in any such unreasonable
courses as those
are, viz. yt the marchants should have ye halfe of mens
houses and lands
at ye dividente; and that persons should be deprived of
ye 2. days in a
weeke agreed upon, yea every momente of time for their
owne perticuler;
by reason wherof we cannot conceive why any should carie
servants for
their own help and comfort; for that we can require no
more of them than
all men one of another.
This we have only by relation from Mr. Nash, &
not from any writing of your owne, & therfore hope
you have not proceeded
farr in so great a thing without us. But requiring you not to exseed the
bounds of your comission, which was to proceed upon ye
things or
conditions agred upon and expressed in writing (at your
going over it),
we leave it, not without marveling, that your selfe, as
you write,
knowing how smale a thing troubleth our consultations,
and how few,
as you fear, understands the busnes aright, should
trouble us with such
matters as these are, &c. Salute Mr. Weston from us,
in whom we hope we
are not deceived; we pray you make known our estate unto
him, and if you
thinke good shew him our letters, at least tell him (yt
under God) we
much relie upon him & put our confidence in him; and,
as your selves well
know, that if he had not been an adventurer with us, we
had not taken it
in hand; presuming that if he had not seene means to
accomplish it, he
would not have begune it; so we hope in our extremitie he
will so farr
help us as our expectation be no way made frustrate
concerning him.
Since therfor, good brethren, we have plainly opened ye
state of things
with us in this matter, you will, &c. Thus beseeching ye Allmightie, who
is allsufficiente to raise us out of this depth of
difficulties, to
assiste us herin; raising such means by his providence
and fatherly care
for us, his pore children & servants, as we may with
comforte behould ye
hand of our God for good towards us in this our bussines,
which we
undertake in his name & fear, we take leave &
remaine
Your perplexed, yet
hopful
bretheren,
June 10, New Stille
Ano: 1620. SAMUEL
FULLER, EDWARD WINSLOW,
WILLIAM
BRADFORD, ISAAC ALLERTON.
III
THE LETTER OF ROBERT CUSHMAN (AT LONDON), TO JOHN CARVER (AT SOUTHAMPTON)
Saturday, June 10/20, 1620.
To his loving
freind Mr. John Carver, these, &c.
Loving freind,
I have received from you some letters, full of affection &
complaints,
& what it is you would have of me I know not; for your
crieing out,
Negligence, negligence, negligence, I marvell why so
negligente a
man was used in ye bussines: Yet know you yt all that I have
power to doe
hear, shall not be one hower behind, I warent you. You have
reference to
Mr. Weston to help us with money, more then his adventure;
wher he
protesteth but for his promise, he would not have done any thing.
He saith we
take a heady course, and is offended yt our provissions are
made so farr
of; as also that he was not made aquainted with our
quantitie of
things; and saith yt in now being in 3. places, so farr
remote,
(i.e. Leyden, London, and Southampton)
we will, with going up &
downe, and
wrangling & expostulating, pass over ye sourer before we will
goe. And to speake ye trueth, they is fallen
already amongst us a flatt
schisme; and we
are redier to goe to dispute, then to sett forwarde a
vaiage. I have received from Leyden since you wente
(to Southampton) 3.
or 4. letters directed
to you, though they only conscerne me. I
will not
trouble you
with them. I always feared ye event of
ye Amsterdamers
(members of
Rev. Henry Ainsworth's church there) striking in with us.
I trow you must
excomunicate me, or els you must goe without their
companie, or we
shall wante no quareling; but let them pass.
We have reckoned, it should seeme, without our host; and,
count upon a
150. persons, ther cannot be founde above 1200li. &
odd moneys of all ye
venturs you can reckone, besids some cloath, stockings,
& shoes, which
are not counted; so we shall come shorte at least 3. or
400li. I would
have had some thing shortened at first of beare (beer)
& other
provissions in hope of other adventurs, & now we
could have, both in
Amsterd & Kente, beere inough to serve our turne, but
now we cannot
accept it without prejudice. You fear we have begune to build & and
shall not be able to make an end; indeed, our courses
were never
established by counsell, we may therfore justly fear
their standing.
Yea, then was a schisme amongst us 3. at ye first. You wrote to Mr.
Martin, to prevente ye making of ye provissions in Kente,
which he did,
and sett downe his resolution how much he would have of
every thing,
without respecte to any counsell or exception. Surely he yt is in a
societie & yet regards not counsell, may better be a
king then a
consorte. To be
short, if then be not some other dispossition setled
unto then yet is, we yt should be partners of humilitie
and peace, shall
be examples of jangling & insulting. Yet your money which you ther
[Southampton] must have, we will get provided for you
instantly. 500li.
you say will serve; for ye rest which hear & in
Holand is to be used, we
may goe scratch for it.
For Mr. Crabe, of whom you write,
he hath
promised to goe with us, yet I tell you I shall not be
without feare till
I see him shipped, for he [i.e. his going] is much opposed, yet I hope
he will not faile. Thinke ye best of all, and bear with
patience what is
wanting, and ye Lord guid us all.
Your loving freind,
ROBART
CUSHMAN.
London June 10.
Ano: 1620.
IV THE LETTER OF
ROBERT CUSHMAN TO THE LEYDEN LEADERS
(Probably
written at London, Saturday, June 10/20, 1620.)
Brethern,
I understand by letters & passagess yt have come to me, that ther are great
discontents, & dislike of my proceedings amongst you. Sorie I am to hear
it, yet contente to beare it, as not doubting but yt partly by writing, and
more principally by word when we shall come togeather, I shall satisfie any
reasonable man. I have been perswaded by some, espetialy this bearer, to come
and clear things unto you; but as things now stand I cannot be absente one day,
excepte I should hazard all ye viage. Neither conceive I any great good would
come of it. Take then, brethern, this as a step to give you contente. First,
for your dislike of ye alteration of one clause in ye conditions, if you
conceive it right, ther can be no blame lye on me at all. For ye articles first
brought over by John Carver were never seene of any of ye adventurers hear,
excepte Mr. Weston, neither did any of them like them because of that clause;
nor Mr. Weston him selfe, after he had well considered it. But as at ye first
ther was 500li. withdrawne by Sr. Georg Farrer and his brother upon that
dislike, so all ye rest would have withdrawne (Mr. Weston excepted) if we had
not altered yt clause. Now whilst we at Leyden conclude upon points, as we did,
we reckoned without our host, which was not my faulte. Besids, I shewed you by
a letter ye equitie of yt condition, & our inconveniences, which might be
sett against all Mr. Rob: [Robinson's] inconveniences, that without ye
alteration of yt clause, we could neither have means to gett thither, nor
supplie wherby to subsiste when we were ther. Yet notwithstanding all those
reasons, which were not mine, but other mens wiser than my selfe, without
answer to any one of them, here cometh over many quirimonies, and complaints against
me, of lording it over my brethern, and making conditions fitter for theeves
& bondslaves then honest men, and that of my owne head I did what I list.
And at last a paper of reasons, framed against yt clause in ye conditions,
which as yey were delivered me open, so my answer is open to you all. And
first, as they are no other but inconveniences, such as a man might frame 20.
as great on ye other side, and yet prove nor disprove nothing by them, so they
misse & mistake both ye very ground of ye article and nature of ye project.
For,
first, it is said, that if ther had been no divission of houses & lands, it
had been better for ye poore. True, and yt showeth ye inequalitie of ye
condition; we should more respect him yt ventureth both his money and his person,
then him yt ventureth but his person only.
2.
Consider whereaboute we are, not giveing almes, but furnishing a store house;
no one shall be porer then another for 7. years, and if any be rich, none can
be pore. At ye least, we must not in such bussines crie, Pore, pore, mercie,
mercie. Charitie hath it[s] life in wraks, not in venturs; you are by this most
in a hopefull pitie of makeing, therefore complaine not before you have need.
3.
This will hinder ye building of good and faire houses, contrarie to ye advise
of pollitiks. A. So we would have it; our purpose is to build for ye presente
such houses as, if need be, we may with litle greefe set a fire, and rune away
by the lighte; our riches shall not be in pompe, but in strength; if God send
us riches, we will imploye them to provid more men, ships, munition, &c.
You may see it amongst the best pollitiks, that a comonwele is readier to ebe
then to flow, when once fine houses and gay cloaths come up.
4.
The Govet may prevente excess in building. A. But if it be on all men
beforehand resolved on, to build mean houses, ye Govet laboure is spared.
5.
All men are not of one condition. A. If by condition you mean wealth, you are
mistaken; if you mean by condition, qualities, then I say he that is not contente
his neighbour shall have as good a house, fare, means, &c. as him selfe, is
not of a good qualitie. 2ly. Such retired persons, as have an eie only to them
selves, are fitter to come wher catching is, then closing; and are fitter to
live alone, then in any societie, either civil or religious.
6.
It will be of litle value, scarce worth 5li. A. True, it may not be worth halfe
5li. If then so smale a thing will content them, (the Adventurers) why strive
we thus aboute it, and give them occasion to suspecte us to be worldly &
covetous? I will not say what I have heard since these complaints came first
over [from Leyden].
7.
Our freinds with us yt adventure mind not their owne profite, as did ye old
adventurers. A. Then they are better than we, who for a little matter of
profite are readie to draw back, and it is more apparente, brethern looke too
it, that make profit your maine end; repente of this, els goe not least you be
like Jonas to Tarshis. Though some of them mind not their profite, yet others
doe mind it; and why not as well as we? venturs are made by all sorts of men,
and we must labour to give them all contente, if we can.
8.
It will break ye course of comunitie, as may be showed by many reasons. A. That
is but said, and I say againe, it will best foster comunion, as may be showed
by many reasons.
9.
Great profite is like to be made by trucking, fishing, &c. A. As it is
better for them, so for us; for halfe is ours, besids our living still upon it,
and if such profite in yt way come, our labour shall be ye less on ye land, and
our houses & lands will be of less value.
10.
Our hazard is greater than theirs. A. True, but doe they put us upon it? doe
they urge or egg us? hath not ye motion & resolution been always in our selves?
doe they any more then in seeing us resolute if we had means, help us to means
upon equall termes & conditions! If we will not goe, they are content to
keep their moneys.
Thus
I have pointed at a way to loose those knots, which I hope you will consider
seriously, and let me have no more stirr about them.
Now
furder, I hear a noise of slavish conditions by me made; but surly this is all
I have altered, and reasons I have sent you. If you mean it of ye 2. days in a
week for perticuler, as some insinuate, you are deceived; you may have 3. days
in a week for me if you will. And when I have spoken to ye adventurers of times
of working, they have said they hope we are men of discretion & conscience,
and so fitt to be trusted our selves with that. But indeed ye ground of our
proceedings at Leyden was mistaken, and so here is nothing but tottering every
day, &c.
As
for them of Amsterdam, [i.e. the members of Rev. Henry Ainsworth's church
there] I had thought they would as soon gone to Rome as with us; for our
libertie is to them as ratts bane, and their riggour as bad to us as ye Spanish
Inquisition. If any practise of mine discourage them, let them yet draw back; I
will undertake they shall have their money againe presently paid hear. Or if
the Company think me to be ye Jonas, let them cast me of before we goe; I shall
be content to stay with good will, having but ye cloaths on my back; only let
us have quietnes, and no more of these clamors; full little did I expect these
things which are now come to pass, &c.
Yours,
R. CUSHMAN.
V
THE LETTER OF ROBERT CUSHMAN TO THE LEYDEN LEADERS, LONDON
(Sunday, June 11/21, 1620.)
Salutations,
&c. I received your letter [of May
31/June 10] yesterday,
by John Turner,
with another ye same day from Amsterdam by Mr. W.
savouring of ye
place whenc it came. And indeed the many
discouragements
I find
her,[London] togeather with ye demurrs and retirings ther,[Leyden]
had made me to
say, I would give up my accounts to John Carver, & at his
comeing aquainte
him fully with all courses, and so leave it quite, with
only ye pore
cloaths on my back. But gathering up my selfe by further
consideration,
I resolved yet to make one triall more, and to acquainte
Mr. Weston with
ye fainted state of our bussines; and though he hath been
much
discontented at some thing amongst us of late, which hath made him
often say, that
save for his promise, he would not meadle at all with ye
bussines any
more, yet considering how farr we were plunged into maters,
& how it
stood both on our credits & undoing, at ye last he gathered up
him selfe a
litle more, & coming to me 2. hours after, he tould me he
would not yet
leave it. And so advising togeather we
resolved to hire a
ship, and have
tooke liking of one till Monday, about 60. laste, for a
greater we
cannot gett, excepte it be tow great; but a fine ship it is.
And seeing our
neer freinds ther are so streite lased, we hope to assure
her without
troubling them any further; and if ye ship fale too small, it
fitteth well yt
such as stumble at strawes already, may rest them ther a
while, least
worse blocks come in ye way ere 7. years be ended. If you
had beaten this
bussines so throuly a month agoe, and write to us as now
you doe, we
could thus have done much more conveniently.
But it is as it
is; I hope our
freinds they, if they be quitted of ye ship hire, will be
indusced to
venture ye more. All yt I now require is
yt salt and netts
may ther be
boughte, and for all ye rest we will here provid it; yet if
that will not
be, let them but stand for it a month or tow, and we will
take order to
pay it all. Let Mr. Reinholds tarie
ther, and bring ye
ship to
Southampton. We have hired another
pilote here, one Mr. Clarke,
who went last
year to Virginia with a ship of kine.
You shall here distinctly by John Turner, who I thinke
shall come hence
on tewsday night.
I had thought to have come with him, to have answered
to my complaints; but I shal lerne to pass litle for
their censurs; and
if I had more minde to goe & dispute &
expostulate with them, then I have
care of this waightie bussines, I were like them who live
by clamours &
jangling. But
neither my mind nor my body is at libertie to doe much,
for I am fettered with bussines, and had rather study to
be quiet, then
to make answer to their exceptions. If men be set on it, let them beat
ye eair; I hope such as are my sinceire freinds will not
thinke but I can
give some reason of my actions. But of your mistaking aboute ye mater,
& other
things tending to this bussines, I shall nexte informe you
more distinctly.
Mean space entreate our freinds not to be too bussie in
answering matters, before they know them. If I doe such things as I
canot give reasons for, it is like you have sett a foole
aboute your
bussines, and so turne ye reproofe to your selves, &
send an other, and
let me come againe to my Combes. But setting aside my naturall
infirmities, I refuse not to have my cause judged, both of
God, & all
indifferent men; and when we come togeather I shall give
accounte of my
actions hear. The
Lord, who judgeth justly without respect of persons,
see into ye equitie of my cause, and give us quiet,
peacable, and patient
minds, in all these turmoils, and sanctifie unto us all
crosses
whatsoever. And so
I take my leave of you all, in all love & affection.
I hope we
shall gett all hear ready in 14. days.
Your pore brother,
ROBART CUSHMAN.
[London]
June 11. 1620 [O.S.].
VI
A LETTER OF MR. JOHN ROBINSON TO JOHN CARVER,/h3
JUNE 14. (N.S.), 1620
[Professor
Arber ("The Story of the Pilgrim Fathers," p. 317) has
apparently
failed to notice that in the original MS. of Bradford,
this letter is
dated "June 14, 1620, N. Stile," which would make it
June 4., O.S.,
while Arber dates it "14/24 June," which is
manifestly
incorrect. A typographical error in
Arber (p. 317)
directs the
letter to "Leyden" instead of to London. ]
June
14. 1620. N. Stile.
My dear freind & brother, whom with yours I alwaise
remember in my best
affection, and whose wellfare I shall never cease to
comend to God by my
best & most earnest praires. You doe throwly understand by our generall
letters ye estate of things hear, which indeed is very
pitifull;
espetialy by wante of shiping, and not seeing means
lickly, much less
certaine, of having it provided; though withall ther be
great want of
money & means to doe needfull things. Mr. [Edward] Pickering, you know
before this, will not defray a peny hear; though Robert
Cushman presumed
of I know not how many 100li. from him, & I know not
whom. Yet it seems
strange yt we should be put to him to receive both his
& his partners
[William Greene's] adventer, and yet Mr. Weston write
unto him, yt in
regard of it, he hath drawne upon him a 100li. more. But they is in this
some misterie, as indeed it seems ther is in ye whole
course. Besids,
wheras diverse are to pay in some parts of their moneys
yet behinde, they
refuse to doe it, till they see shiping provided, or a
course taken for
it. Neither doe I
thinke is ther a man hear would pay anything, if he
had againe his money in his purse. You know right well we depended on
Mr. Weston alone, and upon such means as he would procure
for this
commone bussines; and when we had in hand an other course
with ye
Dutchmen, broke it of at his motion, and upon ye
conditions by him
shortly after propounded. He did this in his love I know,
but things
appeare not answerable from him hitherto. That he should have first have
put in his moneys, is thought by many to have been but
fitt, but yt I can
well excuse, he being a marchante and haveing use of it
to his benefite;
whereas others, if it had been in their hands, would have
consumed it.
But yt he should not but have had either shipping ready
before this time,
or at least certaine means, and course, and ye same
knowne to us for it,
or have taken other order otherwise, cannot in my
conscience be excused.
I have heard yt wen he hath been moved in the bussines,
he hath put it of
from him selfe, and referred it to ye others; and would
come to Georg
Morton [in London] & enquire news of him aboute
things, as if he had
scarce been some accessarie unto it. Wlether he hath
failed of some helps
from others which he expected, and so be not well able to
goe through
with things, or whether he hath feared least you should
be ready too
soone & so encrease ye charge of shiping above yt is
meete, or whether he
hath thought by withhoulding to put us upon straits,
thinking yt therby
Mr. Brewer and Mr. Pickering would be drawne by
importunitie to doe more,
or what other misterie is in it, we know not; but sure we
are yt things
are not answerable to such an occasion. Mr. Weston maks himselfe mery
with our endeavors aboute buying a ship, [the SPEEDWELL],
but we have
done nothing in this but with good reason, as I am
perswaded, nor yet
that I know in any thing els, save in those tow: ye one,
that we imployed
Robart Cushman, who is known (though a good man & of
spetiall abilities
in his kind, yet) most unfitt to deale for other by
reason of his
singularitie, and too great indifferancie for any
conditions, and for (to
speak truly) that we have had nothing from him but termes
& presumptions.
The other, yt we have so much relyed, by implicite faith
as it were, upon
generalities, without seeing ye perticuler course &
means for so waghtie
an affaire set down unto us. For shiping, Mr. Weston, it should seeme,
is set upon hireing, which yet I wish he may presently
effecte; but I see
litle hope of help from hence if so it be. Of Mr. [Thomas] Brewer, you
know what to expecte.
I doe not thinke Mr. Pickering will ingage,
excepte in ye course of buying [ships?] in former letters
specified.
Aboute ye conditions, you have our reason for our
judgments of what is
agreed. And let
this spetially be borne in minde, yt the greatest pane
of ye Collonie is like to be imployed constantly, not
upon dressing they
perticuler land & building houses, but upon fishing,
trading, &c. So as
ye land & house will be but a trifell for advantage
to ye adventurers,
and yet the devission of it a great discouragmente to ye
planters, who
would with singuler care make it comfortable with borowed
houres from
their sleep. The
same consideration of comone imploymente constantly by
the most is a good reason not to have ye 2, daies in a
week denyed ye few
planters for private use, which yet is subordinate to
comone good.
Consider also how much unfite that you & your liks
must serve a new
prentishipe of 7. years, and not a daies freedome from
taske. Send me
word what persons are to goe, who of usefull faculties,
& how many, &
perticulerly of every thing. I know you wante not a minde. I am sorie
you have not been at London all this while, but ye
provissions could not
want you. Time
will suffer me to write no more; fare, you & yours well
allways in ye Lord, in whom I rest.
Yours to use,
JOHN' ROBINSON.
VII
THE LETTER OF THE PLANTERS TO THE
MERCHANT ADVENTURERS (FROM SOUTHAMPTON)
Aug. 3. Ano.
1620.
Beloved
freinds, sory we are that ther should be occasion of writing at
all unto you,
partly because we ever expected to see ye most of you hear,
but espetially
because ther should any difference at all be conceived
betweene
us. But seing it faleth out that we
cannot conferr togeather,
we thinke it
meete (though brefly) to show you ye just cause & reason of
our differing
from those articles last made by Robert Cushman, without
our comission
or knowledg.
And though he might propound good ends to himselfe, yet
it no way
justifies his doing it.
Our maine diference is in ye 5.& 9. article,
concerning ye deviding or holding of house and lands; the
injoying
whereof some of your selves well know, was one spetiall
motive, amongst
many other, to provoke us to goe. This was thought so reasonable, yt
when ye greatest of you in adventure (whom we have much
cause to
respecte), when he propounded conditions to us freely of
his owne
accorde, he set this downe for one; a coppy wherof we
have sent unto you,
with some additions then added by us; which being liked
on both sids, and
a day set for ye paimente of moneys, those in Holland
paid in theirs.
After yt, Robert Cushman, Mr. [John] Pierce, & Mr.
[Christopher] Martine,
brought them into a better forme, & write them in a
booke now extante;
and upon Robarts [Cushmans] shewing them and delivering
Mr. [William]
Mullins a coppy thereof under his hand (which we have),
he payed in his
money. And we of
Holland had never seen other before our coming to
Hamton, but only as one got for him selfe a private coppy
of them; upon
sight wherof we manyfested uter dislike, but had put of
our estats & were
ready to come, and therfore was too late to rejecte ye
vioage. Judge
therefore we beseech you indifferently of things, and if
a faulte have
bene comited, lay it where it is, & not upon us, who
have more cause to
stand for ye one, then you have for ye other. We never gave Robart
Cushman comission to make any one article for us, but
only sent him to
receive moneys upon articles before agreed on, and to
further ye
provissions till John Carver came, and to assiste him in
it. Yet since
you conceive your selves wronged as well as we, we
thought meete to add a
branch to ye end of our 9. article, as will allmost heale
that wound of
it selfe, which you conceive to be in it. But that it may appeare to all
men yt we are not lovers of our selves only, but desire
also ye good &
inriching of our freinds who have adventured your moneys
with our
persons, we have added our last article to ye rest,
promising you againe
by leters in ye behalfe of the whole company, that if
large profits
should not arise within ye 7. years, yt we will continue
togeather longer
with you, if ye Lord give a blessing.—[Bradford adds in a
note, "It is
well for them yt this was not accepted."]—This we
hope is sufficente to
satisfie any in this case, espetialy freinds, since we
are asured yt if
the whole charge was devided into 4. parts, 3. of them
will not stand
upon it, nether doe regarde it, &c. We are in shuch a streate at
presente, as we are forced to sell away 60li. worth of
our provissions to
cleare ye Haven [Southampton] & withall put our
selves upon great
extremities, scarce haveing any butter, no oyle, not a
sole to mend a
shoe, nor every man a sword to his side, wanting many
muskets, much
armoure, etc. And yet we are willing to expose our selves
to shuch
eminente dangers as are like to insue, & trust to ye
good providence of
God, rather then his name & truth should be evill
spoken of for us. Thus
saluting all of you in love, and beseeching ye Lord to
give a blesing to
our endeavore, and keepe all our harts in ye bonds of
peace & love, we
take leave & rest,
Yours, &c
Aug. 3. 1620.
["It was
subscribed with many names of ye cheefest of ye company."
—Bradford,
"Historie," Mass. ed. p. 77.]
VIII THE LETTER OF
ROBERT CUSHMAN (FROM SOUTHAMPTON) TO EDWARD SOUTHWORTH
To his loving
friend Ed[ward] S[outhworth] at Henige House, in ye Duks
Place [London],
these, &c.
Dartmouth [Thursday] Aug. 17, [Anno 1620.]
Loving friend,
my most kind remembrance to you & your wife, with loving
E. M.
&c. whom in this world I never looke
to see againe. For besids ye
eminente
dangers of this viage, which are no less then deadly, an
infirmitie of
body Hath seased me, which will not in all licelyhoode
leave me till
death. What to call it I know not, but
it it is a bundle
of lead, as it
were, crushing my harte more & more these 14. days, as
that allthough
I doe ye acctions of a liveing man, yet I am but as dead;
but ye will of
God be done. Our pinass [the SPEEDWELL]
will not cease
leaking, els I
thinke we had been halfe way at Virginia, our viage hither
hath been as
full of crosses, as our, selves have been of crokednes. We
put in hear to
trime her, & I thinke, as others also, if we had stayed at
sea but 3. or
4. howers more, shee would have sunke right downe. And
though she was
twice trimed at Hamton, yet now shee is open and lekie as
a seine; and
ther was a borde, a man might have puld of with his fingers,
2 foote longe,
wher ye water came in as at a mole hole.
We lay at Hamton
7. days, in
fair weather, waiting for her, and now we lye hear waiting
for her in as
faire a wind as can blowe, and so have done these 4. days,
and are like to
lye 4. more, and by yt time ye wind will happily turne as
it did at
Hamton. Our victualls will be halfe
eaten up, I thinke, before
we goe from the
coaste of England, and if our viage last longe, we shall
not have a
months victialls when we come in ye countrie.
Near 700li.
hath bene
bestowed at Hamton upon what I know not.
Mr. Martin saith he
neither can nor
will give any accounte of it, and if he be called upon
for accounts he
crieth out of unthankfulness for his paines & care, that
we are
susspitious of him, and flings away, and will end nothing. Also
he so insulteh
over our poore people with shuch scorne and contempte, as
if they were
not good enough to wipe his shoes. It
would break your hart
to see his
dealing, and ye mourning of our people.
They complaine to me,
&
alass! I can doe nothing for them; if I
speake to him, he flies in my
face, as
mutinous, and saith no complaints shall be heard or received but
by him selfe,
and saith they are forwarde, & waspish, discontented
people, & I
doe ill to hear them. Ther are others yt
would lose all they
have put in, or
make satisfaction for what they have had, that they might
departe; but he
will not hear them, nor suffer them to goe ashore, least
they should
rune away. The sailors also are so offended at his ignorante
bouldnes, in
medling & controuling in things he knows not what belongs
too, as yt some
threaten to misscheefe him, others say they will leave ye
shipe & goe
their way. But at ye best this cometh of
it, yt he maks him
selfe a scorne
& laughing stock unto them. As for
Mr. Weston, excepte
grace doe
greatly swaye with him, he will hate us ten times more then
ever he loved
us, for not confirming ye conditions.
But now, since some
pinches have
taken them, they begine to reveile ye trueth, and say Mr.
Robinson was in
ye falte who charged them never to consente to those
conditions, nor
chuse me into office, but indeede apointed them to chose
them they did
chose. But he and they will rue too
late, they may now
see, & all
be ashamed when it is too late, that they were so ignorante,
yea, & so
inordinate in their courses. I am sure
as they were resolved
not to seale
those conditions, I was not so resolute at Hamton to have
left ye whole
bussines, excepte they would seale them, and better ye
vioage to have
bene broken of then, then to have brought such miserie to
our selves,
dishonour to God, & detrimente to our loving freinds, as now
it is like to
doe. 4. or 5. of ye cheefe of them which
came from Leyden,
came resolved
never to goe on those conditions. And
Mr. Martine, he said
he never
received no money on those conditions, he was not beholden to ye
marchants, for
a pine [pennie], they were bloudsuckers, & I know not
what. Simple man, he indeed never made any
conditions wth the marchants,
nor ever spake
with them.
But did all that money flie to Hamton, or was it his
owne? Who will goe
lay out money so rashly & lavishly as he did, and
never know how he comes
by it, or on what conditions? I tould him of ye alteration longe
agoe, & he was contente; but now he dominires, &
said I had betrayed them
into ye hands of slaves; he is not beholden to them, he
can set out 2
ships him selfe to a viage. When, good man? He hath but 50li. in, & if
he should give up his accounts he would not have a penie
left him,
—["This
was found true
afterwards.] W[illiam] B"[radford]]—as I
am persuaded, &c.
Freind, if ever we make a plantation, God works a
mirakle; especially considering how scante we shall be of
victualls, and
most of all ununited amongst our selves, & devoyd of
good tutors and
regimente.
Violence will break all. Wher is
ye meek & humble spirite of
Moyses? & of Nehemiah who reedified ye wals of
Jerusalem, and ye state of
Israell? Is not ye
sound of Rehoboams braggs daly hear amongst us?
Have
not ye philosophers and all wise men observed yt, even in
setled comone
welths, violente governours bring either them selves, or
people, or
boath, to ruine; how much more in ye raising of comone
wealths, when ye
mortar is yet scarce tempered yt should bind ye wales
[walls]. If I
should write to you of all things which promiscuously
forerune our ruine,
I should over charge my weake head and greeve your tender
hart; only
this, I pray you prepare for evill tidings of us every
day. But pray for
us instantly, it may be ye Lord will be yet entreated one
way or other to
make for us. I see
not in reason how we shall escape even ye gasping of
hunger starved persons; but God can doe much, & his
will be done. It is
better for me to dye, then now for me to bear it, which I
doe daly, &
expect it howerly; haveing received ye sentance of death,
both within me
& with out me.
Poore William Ring & my selfe doe strive who shall be
meate first for ye fishes; but we looke for a glorious
resurrection,
knowing Christ Jesus after ye flesh no more, but looking
unto ye joye yt
is before us, we will endure all these things and
accounte them light in
comparison of ye joye we hope for. Remember me in all love to our
freinds as if I named them, whose praiers I desire
earnestly, & wish
againe to see, but not till I can with more comforte
looke them in ye
face. The Lord
give us that true comforte which none can take from us.
I had a desire to make a breefe relation of our estate to
some freind.
I doubte not but your wisdome will teach you seasonably
to utter things
as here after you shall be called to it. That which I have writen is
treue, & many things more which I have for
borne. I write it as upon my
life, and last confession in England. What is of use to be spoken of
presently, you may speake of it, and what is fitt to
conceile, conceall.
Pass by my weake maner, for my head is weake, and my body
feeble, ye Lord
make me strong in him, and keepe both you & yours.
Your loving
freind,
ROBART
CUSHMAN.
Dartmouth, Aug. 17, 1620.
IX
THE MAY-FLOWER COMPACT
In
ye name of God, Amen. We whose names are underwriten, the loyall subjects of
our dread soveraigne Lord, King James, by ye grace of God, of Great Britaine,
Franc, & Ireland king, defender of ye faith, &c., haveing under taken,
for ye glorie of God, and advancemente of ye Christian faith, and honour of our
king & countrie, a voyage to plant ye first colonie in ye Northerne parts
of Virginia, doe by these presents solemnly & mutualy in ye presence of
God, and one of another, covenant & combine our selves together into a
civill body politick, for our better ordering & preservation &
furtherance of ye ends aforesaid: and by vertue hearof to enacte, constitute,
and frame such just & equall lawes, ordinances, actes, constitutions, &
offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meete & convenient for
ye generall good of ye Colonie, unto which we promise all due submission and obedience.
In witnes wherof we have here under subscribed our names at Cape-Codd ye 11. of
November, in ye year of ye raigne of our soveraigne lord, King James, of
England, France, & Ireland ye eighteenth, and of Scotland ye fiftie fourth.
Ano. Dom. 1620
X
A COPY OF THE NUNCUPATIVE WILL OF MASTER WILLIAM MULLENS
[Undoubtedly
taken by Governor Carver on board the MAY-FLOWER.]
[Although the
dictation must, apparently, have been taken on the day
of Master
Mullens's death, February 21/March 3, 1620, Governor
Carver
evidently did not write out his notes, and have them
witnessed,
till April 2, 1621, some weeks later.]
"April, 1621.
In the name of
God, Amen: I comfit my Soule to God that gave it and my
bodie to the
earth from whence it came. Alsoe I give my goodes as
followeth: That
fforty poundes wch is in the hand of good-man Woodes I
give my wife
tenn poundes, my sonne Joseph tenn poundes, my daughter
Priscilla tenn
poundes, and my eldest sonne tenn poundes. Alsoe I give to
my eldest sonne
all my debtes, bonds, bills (onelye yt forty poundes
excepted in the
handes of goodman Wood) given as aforesaid wth all the
stock in his
owne handes. To my eldest daughter I
give ten shillinges to
be paied out of
my sonnes stock Furthermore that goodes I have in
Virginia as
followeth To my wife Alice halfe my goodes.
2. to Joseph and
Priscilla the
other halfe equallie to be devided betweene them. Alsoe I
have xxi dozen
of shoes, and thirteene paire of bootes wch I give into
the Companies
handes for forty poundes at seaven years end if they like
them at that
rate. If it be thought to deare as my
Overseers shall
thinck
good. And if they like them at that rate
at the devident I shall
have nyne
shares whereof I give as followeth twoe to my wife, twoe to my
sonne William,
twoe to my sonne Joseph, towe to my daughter Priscilla,
and one to the
Companie. Allsoe if my sonne William
will come to
Virginia I give
him my share of land furdermore I give to my two
Overseers Mr.
John Carver and Mr. Williamson, twentye shillinges apeece
to see this my
will performed desiringe them that he would have an eye
over my wife and
children to be as fathers and freindes to them, Allsoe
to have a
speciall eye to my man Robert wch hathe not so approved
himselfe as I
would he should have done.
This is a
Coppye of Mr. Mullens his Will of all particulars he hathe
given. In witnes whereof I have sette my hande John
Carver, Giles Heale,
Christopher
Joanes."
XI
THE LETTER OF "ONE OF THE CHIEFE OF YE COMPANIE"
[THE MERCHANT ADVENTURERS]
DATED AT
Loving friend,
when I write my last leter, I hope to have received one
from you
well-nigh by this time. But when I write
in Des: I little
thought to have
seen Mr. John Pierce till he had brought some good
tidings from
you. But it pleased God, he brought us
ye wofull tidings of
his returne
when he was half-way over, by extraime tempest, werin ye
goodnes &
mercie of God appeared in sparing their lives, being 109.
souls. The loss is so great to Mr. Pierce &c.,
and ye companie put upon
so great
charge, as veryly, &c. Now with great trouble & loss, we have
got Mr. John
Pierce to assigne over ye grand patente to ye companie,
which he had
taken in his owne name, and made quite voyd our former
grante. I am sorie to writ how many hear thinke yt
the hand of God was
justly against
him, both ye first and 2. time of his returne; in regard
he, whom you
and we so confidently trusted, but only to use his name for
ye company,
should aspire to be lord over us all, and so make you & us
tenants at his
will and pleasure, our assurance or patente being quite
voyd &
disanuled by his means. I desire to judg
charitably of him. But
his
unwillingness to part with his royall lordship, and ye high rate he
set it at,
which was 500li. which cost him but
50li., maks many speake
and judg hardly
of him. The company are out for goods in
his ship, with
charge aboute
ye passengers, 640li., &c.
We have agreed
with 2 merchants for a ship of 140 tunes, caled ye Anne,
which is to be
ready ye last of this month, to bring 60 passengers &
60 tune of
goods, &c—[Bradford, Historie, Mass.
ed. p. 167.]
ADDENDA
Governor
Winslow, in his "Hypocrisie Unmasked" (pp. 89,90), indicates that the
representatives of the Leyden congregation (Cushman and Carver) sought the
First (or
ETEXT EDITOR'S
BOOKMARKS:
All business
without any agreement in writing
Anxiety to get
English clothes upon their red brethren
As 1620 did not
begin until March 25
Borowed houres
from their sleep
Crime—for such
it was, in inception, nature, and results
Forks there
were none
Genius,—proverbially indifferent to detail
Lanterns—only
"serving to make darkness visible"
Malevolence
rarely exercised except toward those one has wronged
Meat was held
by the napkin while being cut with the knife
Not to be too
bussie in answering matters, before they know them
Old Style and
the New Style dates
Personal
inference rather than a verity
Redier to goe
to dispute, then to sett forwarde
Sorie I am to
hear it, yet contente to beare it
The old adage,
"second thief best owner"
Theft of the
MAY-FLOWER colony
Thinke ye best
of all, and bear with patience what is wanting
Transplantation
to the "northern parts of
Welcome lies
acquired a hold on the public mind