Skip to main content

Full text of "A review of Winthrop's journal"

See other formats


This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 

to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 

publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 
We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 

at |http: //books .google .com/I 

I) L%o.\o, 7 








"The History of New-England from 1630 .to 1649. 

By John Winthrop, Esq." &c. &c. 






No. 37, Congress Street. 







//^ .-?i^ 2 

^ J"- - - C. ' - 

I- ' ■ ~t 

i ,'»' 


The History of New England^ from 1630 to 1649. By John Winthrof, 
Esq., First Govemour of the Colony of the Massachusetts Bay. From 
his original Manuscripts. With Notes to illusfrate the Civil and Eccle* 
siastical Concerns^ the Geography^ Settlement^ and Institutions of the 
Country y and the Lives and Manners of the Principal Planters. By 
James Savage, President of the Massachusetts Historical Society. A 
new Editioo, with Additions by the former Editor. Boston : Little, 
Brown & Ck>nipany, MDCCCLIIL 2 vols. 8vo, pp. 1018. 

When a work claiming to be a History of New England makes its ap- 
pearance, we feel bound to bestow something more than a passing notice 
upon it ; especially so if the work comes down from the days of the early 
Pilgrims. Such the work purports to be, and such the work is, the title of 
whiph stands at the head of this notice. The original work not only claims 
special attention, but it comes to us enriched by a descendant of the early 
Pilgrims to New England, who has a reputation for his knowledge of the 
times included in the work, which few possess ; a knowledge which half a 
century of application only can give. And, our work being, in its broad- 
est sense, a New England work, designed as a treasury of the History 
of New England, we shall readily be pardoned, we think, for the space 
we have devoted to an examination of one of the chief comer stones of 
its history. 

Vastly have the things of time changed, and vastly has the face of New 
England, nay, of the whole universal world change^, since the Fathers 
of New England stepped upon the barren sands of Plymouth, and since 
the rocky point of Cape Ann afforded a resting place to a few weary and 
sea-worn mariners. Those people, few indeed, if any of them, thought 
or imagined that this then ^* desolate end of the earth,'' as they used to 
say, would ever be anything but a dreary refuge for the objects of perse- 
* cution. Tet there are a few instances which seem to indicate that here 
and there a-solitary individual hoped something might grow out of their 
imdertaking. Hence such individuals took care to make records of their 
early experience in the land of their ad<^tion. Such individuals, how- 
ever, may have penned such records fiiore< with a view of returning with 
thfim to their native land, than with any espectatioa that Aey would be of 

4 Review of , Savage's Winthrop. 

use where they were made. Under these considerations was that incom- 
parable work of ^^ 6. Mourt" made at Plymouth. Many others, though 
of less value, might be mentioned. 

What confidence Governor John Winthrop had at first in the perma- 
nence of his undertaking to settle a Colony in New England, cannot be 
certainly ascertained ; while it is certain that he intended, whatever the 
result might be, that its origin and progress should be matter of record. 
Therefore, from the first, he kept a Diary of whatever oceurred which he 
thought might be of importance on a future review of what had transpired- 
Of this Diary or Journal it is proposed to speak somewhat at length in this 
notice. We have been •induced to undertake the task from several con- 
siderations. These considerations will appear as we proceed. Mean- 
while, however, we would premise, that what has mainly influenced us to 
make a somewhat formal review of the work, is our opinion that no other 
would undertake it ; or if any did undertake it, they might from some 
covert influences pass lightly over it, not bestowing that attention to it 
which its importance imperatively demands. While at the same time we 
wish it distinctly understood, that we consider ourself among the least 
able of those conversant in the subjects treated of, to do the work justice ; 
and that we have ventured upon it with the fullest conviction of our ina- 
bility to handle the matter as it deserves to be handled ; and as was said 
before, we have adventured upon the task, believing it better to be poorly 
done than not to be done at all. 

One other consideration will be mentioned, and then we shall proceed 
to the subject proposed. This arises from a fact well understood by the 
Reviewers, as well as the Reviewed; namely, that reviews, being,* for 
the most part, ^^ written to order," the works pretended to be reviewed 
are lauded or decried according to the nature of the order. And it too 
often happens, that a work is praised far above its merits, if it have any, 
and, that a very meritorious work will be written doum as one of no merit. 

It should also be borne in mind, that a review of a work, written inde- 
pendently of any trammels, either from the author of the work reviewed, 
or from the editor of a review, however just or well written his review 
may be, its writer can feel sure of but one thing, and that is the rejection 
of his article, ^^ for want of room," or its not being done in accordance 
with the ideas of the conductor of the review, 'of what such an article 
should be. — ^We therefore, independent of any trammels, and without bias 
or prejudice, for the benefit of New England history, propose to express, 
though with deference, our opinion of Winthrop's Journal, and the.manner 
in which it has been edited. 

In respect to the value of Winthrop's Journal, there never has been, 
probably, from the time of the Historian Hubbard to this day, but one 
opinion among all persons who have paid the least attention to the history ^ 

Review of Savages Winthrop. 5 

of the first settlement of New England ; and that opinion is, that there 
does not remain a document upon the beginnings in any part of the 
world, of such immense importance. It is true there are in it many, de- 
fects and seeming omissions. We should not be at all surprised at this, 
but we should rather be surprised that there are not a great many more 
of them. These defects and omissions the Author would have essentially 
lessened, in all probability, had his life been longer spared, and his situa- 
tion been favorable for a thorough revision of his work. That he intend- 
ed such a revision there cannot be much doubt ; for no man, scholar as 
John Winthrop was, would have allowed his rough notes, made in the 
woods, and under every unfavorable circumstance, to go to the press 
without being compiled anew. These reflections lead us to consider the 
title given to the rough not6s of Winthrop by his Editor, the Honorable 
James Savage. ^ 

As we have seen by the transcript of its title-page at the commence- 
ment of this article, he has entitled it ** The History of New England," 
&rC. As a reason for giving it so pretending a title, the Editor says, ^' it 
may be desirable for the reader to understand, that it is the exact lan- 
guage of the Author."* But then, in his next sentence he adds, '^ in the 
first volume of MS. indeed it is not used, nor is any other designation 
given to the book ;" but that, ^' both the other MS. volumes begin, ' A 
Continuation of the History of New England.'" Now this only shows 
that a History of New England was an afterthought of Winthrop, and 
that the idea occurred to him, that at some future period his work might 
be used in compiling a History of New England. The work has pretty 
nearly its appropriate title in the edition of it published at Hartford,, in 
1790, which is in these words : — '^ A Journal of the Transactions and 
Occurrences in the Settlement of Massachusetts and the other New Eng- 
land Colonies," &c. 

Now no book is properly entitled, unless that title exactly cQrresponds 
to its contents. An author who may leave a quantity of materials for a 
work, may leave them far short of the work he intended to make. Such 
appear to have been the memoranda left by Grovemor Winthrop ; and the 
utmost comprehensiveness that could be given to a title of them, would be 
^^ Materials towards a History of New England." And had the Publisher 
or Editor of the Hartford edition made his title read, *'A Journal of 
Transactions and Occurrences," and so on, as above extracted, there 
coald be no fault found with it, so far. Hence every one may reflect, 
that however important, and however valuable a work, or fragment of a 
work may be, that importance or value does not authorize ns to give it a 
&lse title. 

* He afterwards refers to Mass, Hist. CoUs, 2, iv, 200, but the article there, upon 
Winthrop's manuscript Journal, does not corroborate his statement. 

6 Review of Savages Winthrop. 

It id well understood that Noah Wehster, Junior, Esquire, superintended 
(be publication of the Hartford edition of Winthrop^s Journal. It is like- 
wise well understood that Mr. Webster^s labors upon that edition extended 
only to the above named supervision, and the preparation of its Preface. 
But that we may do no injustice to Doctor Webster, he shall be allowed 
to speak for himself. He says, in his Preface, ^^ The following Journal 
was written by John Winthrop, Esq., the first Governor* of Massachu- 
setts. ... He kept a Journal of everyt important occurrence, from his 
first embarking for America, in 1630, to the year 1644,^ This Manu- 
script, as appears by some passages, was originally designed for publica- 
tion ;§ and it was formerly consulted by the first compilers of New 
England history, particularly by Hubbard, Mather, and Prince. But 
it continued unpublished and uncopied, in possession of the elder branch 
of the family, till the late revolution, when Governor Trumbull of Con- 
necticut procured it, and with the assistance of his secretary, copied a 
considerable part of it. Soon after the Governor's death, a gentleman,|| 
who has a taste for examining curious original papers, which respect his 
own country, came, by accident, to a knowledge of this manuscript ; and 
with consent of the Governor's heirs, contracted for a copy, merely for 
his own improvement and amusement. On reading the work, he found it 
contained many curious and interesting facts, relating to the settlement of 
Massachusetts and the other New England Colonies, and highly descrip- 
tive of the character and views of the first inhabitants. This suggested to 
him the design of publishing the Journal complete ; as any abridgment of 
it would tend to weaken its historical evidence, and put in the power of 
captious critics to impeach its authenticity. By consent of the descend- 
ants of Gov. Winthrop, proposals were issued for publishing a small num- 
ber of copies. The copy here presented to the public, was made by 
John Porter, Esq., the Secretary of the late Grov. Trumbull, whose 
declaration, respecting its accuracy, is here annexed. It is an extract 
from his letter to the Editor.^' 

< Agreeable to your request, I send you a copy of Gov. Wmthrop's history. The 
transcribing has required more labor than I at first expected. I carefully examined 
the original, and on comparing, found many errors in the first copy ; which, upon 
further experience in reading the original, I have been able to correct ; as also to fill 
up many blanks. This has caused me much study, and retar4ed the completion of 

* We shall point ob€ tlse origin of bis mistaking Winthiop far the;&»t Govemor ia 
its proper place. 

t An unguarded expression, entirely untrue in point of fact. 

i It must be remembered that that Editor had not the whole Journal of Winthrop, 
• ^ The memoranda in the original authorizing this statement, were made probably 
to call the Author's own attention to certain passages, if he should prepare it for the 

II Doctor Webster himself, whose name does not appear in thie work. 

Review of Savage^s Winthrap. 7 

the business for some time. Yoa will observe tome blanks in the present copy — 
some of them are so in the original — ^bnt, excepting the blanks, I belieye this may be 
depended un as a genuine copy.'''^ 

^' The original is in the handwriting common to that age ;t and is not 
read without difficulty. The first copy was made during Gov. Trum- 
huWs life, and part of it by the Governor himself. The last copy, here 
given to the world, was taken from the first, and throughout the whole, 
compared with the original. The blanks are few, and, as the reader will 
observe, of no considerable consequence.":^ 

As whatever relates to the history of Grovemor Winthrop's origibal 
manuscripts, from which his ^^ History of New England" is printed, as 
we now have it, is of much interest, we next give an extract from Mr. 
Savage's Preface to his editions of them. — '' Early in the spring of 1816 
was discovered,^ in the tower of the Old South Church in Boston, the 
third volume of the History of New England, in the original MS. of the 
author, John Winthrop, first governor of the Massachusetts Bay. When 
the precious book was presented to the Massachusetts Historical S6ciety,|| 
at their next meeting, 25 April, the difficulty of transcribing it for the 
press seemed to appall several of the most competent members, whose en- 
gagement in more important duties affi)rded also a sufficient excuse for 
leaving such labor to be undertaken by any one, at any time, who could 
devote to it many weeks of leisure. The task appeared inviting to me. 
On the same evening the MS. was taken, and the study of its chirography 
was begun, the next day, by the aid of one of the former MSS., collated 
with the printed volume, usually called Winthrop's Journal." 

Such is a brief history of the bringing to light Winthrop's Journal, 
which had lain in manuscript 131 years before it was partially printed in 
1790, and 166 years before it was printed entire. 

Notwithstanding Mr. Savage went to his '^ task" with superior advan- 
tages, it is truly our opinion, that there was no other man in New England, 
between 1816 and 1825, who could, or would if he could, have rendered 
Winthrop so intelligible as Mr. Savage has done. We say he went to his 
task with superior advantages ; by which we mean, that his critical knowl- 
edge of the early men and affisdrs of New England gave him an advan- 
tage — peculiarly his own — ^that few men, if any, at that time possessed. 
Without a minute and thorough knowledge of that description, any one 

* Dated, " Lebanon, January 1st, 1788." Signed " John Porter." 

t In this the Editor vf^s mistaken. Winthrop's writing may be said to be imlike 
that of any other man's. 

:( This was merely Mr. Webster's opinion, and he ought to have stated it as an 
opinion. The fact is quite otherwise. 

^ By the late Hon. Samuel T. Armstrong, as he himself informed the writer. 

II We are not informed who presented it. 


8 Review of Savage^s Winthrop. 

undertaking to decipher Winthrop must have committed blunders at every 
step. This was a decided and indispensable requisite, and this was hap- 
pily enjoyed by Mr. Savage. Another advantage he had, which, though 
he seems inadequately to have acknowledged, is easily inferred from his 
preface. This was the labors of John Porter, Esq. This gentleman's 
efforts upon the portion of Winthrop published at Hartford must have 
been far greater than one would be likely to imagine, merely by reading 
the extract from his letter to Mr. Webster, which we have given above. 
Knowing as we do what time it costs to learn the chirography of Win- 
throp, and assuming that Mr. Porter was not a critic in our early history, 
we cannot but marvel that he made a transcript of Winthrop as good as 
he did. But poor as was Mr. Porter^s copy, it unquestionably saved Mr. 
Savage some months of labor, and it would have been no discredit to him 
to have acknowledged it. Those only who have had such aids in deci- 
phering old manuscripts, know how to estimate them. 

Notwithstanding Mr. Savage copied Mr. Webster's introductory matter 
into his first edition of Winthrop, including Mr. Porter's letter to Mr. Web- 
ster, he held the latter responsible for all the mistakes he could discover 
in the first edition ; oflen treating his labors in that edition (for so he 
would consider them) as old schoolmasters used to treat those scholars 
they were pleased to denominate dunces. But from a note to Mr. Web- 
ster's preface, as printed in Mr. Savage's new edition, it seems, that at 
some period afler he issued his Jlrst edition, he saw Dr. Webster, and 
that the Doctor told him he had never read Winthrop's original man- 
uscript. Did Mr. Savage require to be told this by Dr. Webster or any- 
body else, after reading Mr. Webster's preface ? It is true Mr. Webster 
does not say in so many words that " he never read* Winthrop's manu- 
script," but from what he does say, no one could even presume that he 
had read it. No. Mr. Webster employed the most competent man then 
probably in Connecticut to make him a copy of Winthrop, for which 
no doubt he paid liberally, and was the means of its being printed and 
published ; and it was owing to that circumstance, beyond question, that 
we of this age are favored with not only " Winthrop's Journal," but with 
" Winthrop's History of New England," also. 

In the note of Mr. Savage just referred to, instead of acknowledging 
the wrong he did Dr. Webster, by attributing to him errors which he 
never committed, he coolly states, that " caution is due to the reader, lest 
by misunderstanding the language of Mr. Webster's preface, the proper 
merit of Mr. Secretary Porter be transferred to the Editor." This is a 
poor apology, indeed, for making one responsible for the errors of another. 
Now we cannot see the least reason for cautioning the reader^ lest he 
should misunderstand Mr. Webster, whose language is perfectly clear and 
simple, and contains nothing equivocal. 

Review of Savage's Winthrop. 9 

We come now to examine, to some extent, the manner in which Mr. 
Savage has executed his task as Editor of (jrovemor Winthrop's Diaries 
or Journals, which he has dignified with the title of ** The History of 
New England.". We have not space to notice everything that is to be 
met with deserving notice in Mr. Savage's notes. That he has given us 
a better text of Winthrop, in almost every respect, probably, than any 
other could or would have given, has already been aoknowledged. That 
he could do without bias or prejudice ; for his own views and notions 
could not enter into that part of his labor ; and it is our opinion that his 
fidelity in that respect will not be questioned. There is, however, one 
serious objection to the manner in which he has printed Winthrop's 
text. We allude to the liberty he has taken with its orthography ; for 
we hold that it is a very great mistake in an editor to print a work like 
Winthrop's Journal otherwise than he wrote it ; we mean it is a great 
mistake to print such works without preserving their exact orthography. 
To undertake to reduce them to our standard in that respect, is to falsify 
them — giving us but part of an author while we are promised the whole. 
It would be more just to the author to rewrite his work. To print John 
Winthrop's Journal in the orthography of the nineteenth century is as 
unjust to him as it would be to paint a cavalier of CrorawelPs time in the 
attire of Count d'Orsay. It is rarely if ever done by thorough antiquaries ; 
— ^no matter what their orthography was. How are we to judge of the 
literature of those days without specimens of it ? 

Before proceeding to review the notes of the Editor, we have an obser- 
vation to make relative to the manner in which the text is disposed in 
connection with its legitimate marginal accompaniments. By these mar- 
ginal accompaniments we mean the chronology belonging to, and consti- 
tuting a part of the text We venture to say we were among the first 
purchasers of Mr. Savage's volumes as they appeared, one after the other, 
in 1825 and 1826. We were then young, and had had small experience 
in what constituted taste in these matters of printing a historical work, 
but we well remember turning over the leaves of that edition with some- 
thing of vexation at the manner in which the dates were printed. One 
must, in nine cases out of ten, turn backward or forward before he can 
ascertain the date of any fact; and then he must stumble over bracket 
afler bracket, placed to keep figures from running away, which figures so 
pent up are as unintelligible as the brackets without them. Now all this 
difficulty — and it is a serious one to anybody who has occasion to consult 
the work — might have been remedied without expense or trouble, merely 
by placing the month as well as the year in the top margin of the page, 
and the day of the month with it, where entries extend beyond a page, 
which is very frequently the case. 

2 • 


10 Review of Savage^s Winthrop. 

It was hoped that when a new edition was prepared this glaring defect 
would have been remedied, but whoever entertained such a hope enter- 
tained it only to be disappointed. The new edition came, and instead of 
the difficulty being lessened, it was increased — another set of figures was 
indented into the print. These are distinguished from the others, how- 
ever, by being accompanied with an asterisk. These denote the paging 
of the 182&-6 edition. Though there ought to have been no particular 
necessity for preserving the paging to that edition, yet that, in itself, is of 
not much moment ; but, that the Index of the new edition should refer to 
this old paging is intolerable, and will lead to more confusion hereaf\er, 
than the Editor could probably have dreamed of. Had there been no 
paging to the new edition, except the old, it would not have been so ob- 
jectionable. The question has been frequently asked. Why does the 
Index of the new edition refer to the paging of the old editibn ? We 
Confess we do not know, unless it was to save the very trifling expense 
which it might have required to make the Index conform to the paging of 
the new. And, we are sorry to be obliged to add to this, that the Index 
is a very imperfect and poor affair, altogether unworthy such a work — 
imperfect in every respect. 

We agree with the Editor in his estimation of the value of Chronology, 
as one of '^ the best elements of truth in history,^' and it would have been 
well for him if he had had an eye to several of his notes which he made 
in reference to 1825 ; which, being transferred to 1853 without modifica- 
tion, may cause some readers to think as poorly of his time table, as he 
does of Cotton Mather^s. Against this last named Author, we may re- 
mark in passing, he seems to have, as did Hannibal against Home, 
^^ sworn eternal war.^' He can never mention his name without a sneer 
or a jeer. This is a pity, but so it is. He seems never to have reflected 
that different trees are necessary and even useful, in the wilderness of 
mankind, as well as in the natural wilderness. But . we do not intend to 
make a special defence of Dr. Mather. 

On dismissing some eighteen pages of prefatory matter, the reader 
comes to the first page of the invaluable Journal of Governor Winthrop, 
beginning, ^^ Easter Monday, March 29, Anno Domini, 1630. Riding at 
the Cowes, near the Isle of Wight, in the A^bella, a ship of three hun- 
dred and fifty tons,'' &c. The Editor's first note is upon the name of the 
ship — ^the ^^ Arbella ;" and in our opinion, a half a pag6, or thereabouts, 
of his work, could not have been more unprofitably employed, than in an 
attempt to prove that everybody, except Winthrop, was wrong in writing 
that name Arabella, Whims are quite harmless sometimes, and this has 
already found a place among the harmless class of whimsicalities, and 
ladies who happened to be named Arabella, will write their names Ara- 
bella still, we have no manner of doubt. 


Review of Savage^ s Winthrop. 11 

The reader would wrong the Editor if he were to judge all his notes 
by this on ^^ Arbella ;^' but it is unlucky that it happened to be his first ; 
for, as'we have elsewhere said, they sometimes discover much research, 
are often appropriate, and of great service to a. student in the history of 
the times of Winthrop. But no man can be expected to know everything, 
or to know unerringly all he may think he is quite sure of. This is a 
consideration which did not probably occur to the Editor of Winthrop, 
judging from the manner he handles many whose knowledge in some 
particulars fell short of his own. He ought to have reflected, that he was 
not making notes for those who knew as much or more than he did about 
the matters treated of in Winthrop^s work, but that his business was to 
enlighten those who had not the means or ability to enlighten themselves. 
Had he kept this in view he would have done quite as good service as he 
has done without it. 

While speaking of the Editor^s marginal chronology, we omitted to re- 
mark upon an important omission in the arrangement he chose to adopt. 
We refer to the year at the top of his pages. He has followed the old 
chronology, beginning the year on the 25th of March, and ending it, of 
course, on the 24th of the following March. This is all as it should be. 
What we complain of is, that he did not, after the 1st of January of each 
year, make his figures denote, that in the text, the Author had passed the 
1st of January. He well knew how to do this, equally well preserving 
the ancient chronology. As it now stands, accompanied only by a single 
bracket in a whole folio, with a naked figure quite as mute, no reader 
can tell whether the facts recorded are in January or December, without 
the vexation of turning backward or forward indefinitely. If, when be 
came to January, 1635, for example, he had just added to that date -6, 
and continued that additional dash and figure 6, (thus 1635-6,) to the 
ensuing 25th of March, and so on in each year, that awkward defect 
would have been obviated. 

One peculiarity, glaringly obvious in the notes to Winthrop's Journal, 
more particularly so in the notes to the new edition, will be here noticed 
once for all. We refer to their invidious character, especially in the use 
of or reference to his authorities. We might give numerous instances, 
but it is not necessary. In several respects, the edition of 1825-6, has 
an advantage over this of 1853, but the emendations and additions to the 
last may more than offset the disadvantages alluded to. For ourself, we 
are free to confess, that the value and amount of the additions to the new 
edition fall a great way short of what we had anticipated. Perhaps we 
expected altogether too much ; but feeling quite sure that the Editor had, 
for the quarter of a century which had fully elapsed between his edi- 
tions, devoted himself to the study of the early afiairs of New England, 

12 Review of Savage^s Winthrop. 

and had made a voyi^ge across the Atlantic to increase his knowledge in 
the same field, we thought we had a right to expect very important addi- 
tions to his new edition of Winthrop. We do not mean to be understood 
by this, that there are not valuable and important additions, but that they 
are far less numerous and important than we expected to see. 

We make these remarks, first, because, from his title-page we have a 
right to expect, that his ^' additions and corrections^' would, at least, place 
his new edition on a sort of level with the times, in respect to the investi- 
gations and discoveries which had been published, long before he re-pub- 
lished. Of course it was not to be expected that he would dive into every 
obscure publication, that no light should escape him, however dim, but 
that he should entirely overlook the labors of such a gentleman as William 
Willis of Portland, for example, savors of something which can hardly be 
attributed to ignorance. We have not space to particularize, but he 
would, we think, have had the thanks of his readers, had he just referred 
to Mr. Willis's history of Portland, as his notes admonish him, in many 
places. This brings us to remark, secondly, upon the invidious character 
of some of the notes in respect to the mention of authorities : for instance, 
we do not think it just to single out Mr. B. as " the diligent historian of 
S.," while the " diligence" of Mr. F. in the same field is more than four 
fold that of the former. There would be no injustice done Mr. B. had 
the labors of Mr. F. been quite as honorably mentioned. So we hear of 
the " invaluable" work of Mr. O., who has labored a season or two, and 
may have produced a very tolerable work, while the labors of Mr. W., 
though brought forth without ostentation, are infinitely more laborious, 
and not less valuable than those of Mr. O. 

It is very unfortunate for the reputation of a historian, if he is so opin- 
ionated or prejudiced that he toill not be set right when he is clearly 
wrong ; that he will not patiently receive a suggestion, unless it come to 
him from those whom he happens to consider high authority, or from a 
suppliant, who feels amply paid for his service by a condescension to be 
noticed. A great deal has come to light since Mr. Savage published his 
first edition, from various quarters, to which his readers would have been 
gladly directed by him. How he has regarded these reasonable expecta- 
tions will be noticed, to some extent, as we progress. 

There is necessarily a great inequality in the modern notes to any 
ancient work. On some points the Annotator may readily find all he 
desires to illustrate them, while upon others he may feel compelled to 
say something, when in reality he has nothing to say, and hence ought to 
say nothing, The Editor of Winthrop felt all these difficulties, and per- 
haps steered as clear of them as any one would. His notes swell the 

Review of Savage's Wintkrop. 13 

bulk of Winthrop nearly one-third ; at the same time there are but few 
of them we would dispense with altogether. They might, indeed, be cut 
down considerably without cutting out much information. 

One of the most marked features of the notes of Mr. Savage, is their 
peculiar theological bias ; and yet it will probably quite^ as much puzzle 
the general reader to form an opinion as to the tenets held by their author, 
as it has puzzled the biographers of Samuel Gorton to define those of that 
singular man. One thing, however, is tolerably certain, namely, that the 
author is a real Ishmaelite among tenets, and it would have been quite as 
well for his theological reputation if he had let discussions of that nature 
entirely alone. 

On page 5,* Volume 1, Mr. Savage says of Isaac Johnson, that he was 
^' formerly regarded as the founder of Boston, where it is not probable that 
he ever passed a single night.^' In his first edition his note read, that 
*^ this gentleman, who is usually regarded as the founder of Boston,^' &c. 
The clause, ^^ where it is not probable that he ever passed a single night,'' 
is interpolated in his new edition, and for which he gives no reason what- 
ever ; nor does he refer to Prince's Annals, to which every reader should 
be referred, in which work, and in Hutchinson's Massachusetts, are to be 
found statements not to be discredited by a single dash of any modem pen. 
The matter of Johnson's burial has lately been ably presented in the Daily 
Evening Transcript of Nov. 4th, 1853. 

At page 29 we are informed, '* Here is inserted,«on a whole page of 
the original MS., a chart of the shore of Maine, Isles of Shoals, Boone 
Isle, Cape Ann, etc., with remarks on the appearance of the various land- 
marks on the several days, depth of water, bottom, bearings, distances, 
etc." — We are surprised that this should have been omitted by the Editor, 
and in all deference to his judgment in that capacity, we think we have 
lost a good deal more by that omission, than if a half dozen pages of the 
Journal containing those details about monsters^ SfC,^ had been omitted. 
We do not say that we should have omitted even these ; but to omit the 
only drawing in the whole work is exercising a liberty with the original, 
which no one could expect to be taken. 

In page 39, the Editor speaks of a work of William Aspinwall, as 
some writers of the present day speak of those who believe the end of the 
world to be near at hand. Aspinwall published a tract which he entitled 
"A brief Description of the Fiflh Monarchy, or Kingdom that shortly is to 
come," &c. Mr. Savage says, " Its title-page is garnished with several 
texts of scripture, distorted in the usual style of that day." What he 
means by " texts of scripture distorted," he may know, but we confess we 

* The paging of the 2d edition of Winthrop will be observed. 

14 Review of Savage^ s Winthrop. 

do not. Suiting his remarks to his extracts he says, '^ Proceeding through 
his inquiries of ^ the Sovereign, (Jesus Christ,) subjects, officers, and laws 
of that Kingdom,^ his fanatical vaticination favors us with ^ some hint df 
the time when the Kingdom shall begin,^ which he had wit enough to 
delay so long, that the event might not probably injure the credit of the 
living soothsayer. ^ Know, therefore, that the uttermost durance of Anti- 
christ^s dominion will be in the year 1673, as I have proved from scrip- 
ture in a brief Chronology, ready to be put forth.' Cromwell, whose 
power was just then preparing to be established, knew well the dangerous 
tendency of such jargon, unless when used by himself; but though he ap- 
plied the civil arm to many other dreamers of King Jesus, I believe he 
left the New England Seer to the safety of oblivion or contempt." Had 
the Editor been writing about Cotton Mather, whom he will not allow a 
shade of honesty or sincerity, we might have expected any kind of " jar- 
gon,'' but such raillery at the meek and sincere Aspinwall, is entirely out 
of place. He has accused him of hypocrisy, and both unnecessarily and 
absurdly coupled Cromwell with him in the offence. If Aspinwall were a 
^*- dreamer of King Jesus," so was the great Cotton, and so were all of 
Cotton's true followers. 

In a note to ^^ Capt Mason," p. 266, he goes on to make him the same 
^^ Lieut. Mason," who, in 1632, was sent to the eastern coast after a 
pirate. Now he has no evidence, or if he has he does not produce it, that 
Capt. John Mason was in the country before 1634-5. There was a 
Hugh Mason at Watertown, who may have been in the country in 1632, 
and this was the man, in all probability, who went in pursuit of the pirate. 
He was denominated ^^ Lieut. Mason," while John Mason of Pequot 
memory never was, we think, called *' Lieut. Mason" in this country. . 

Regarding the authorship of ^^A Short Story of the Eise, Reign, and 
Rum of the Antinomians, Famillsts, and Libertines that infected the 
Churches of New England," &c., in his first edition of Winthrop the 
Editor charges it upon Thomas Welde, and abuses him in unmeasured 
terms for the virulence of its contents. Long before he published his 
second edition, his error in attributing it to Welde was, we have good 
reason to believe, pointed out to him. Indeed, how one could read the 
** Short Story," in connection with Winthrop's Journal, and then charge 
the authorship of the former to Thomas Welde, is, to say the least, most 
unaccountable, when the authorship of the body of that work is as clearly 
Winthrop's as his own Journal. And, it may safely be affirmed, that, if 
Welde wrote the Short Story, he also wrote Winthrop's Journal. 

What then should have been the course of the Editor in his new edition 
of Winthrop ? Should he not, in justice to the memory of Mr. Welde, have 
made some amends for the wrong done him in his first ? He has not had the 

BevieuD of Sdvage^s Winthrop. 16 

magnanimity to do anything of the kind, but has repeated all he said before, 
and attempted to fortify it against further attacks. Thus he vaunts in his 
preface : — " Exposure of the infirmity of unhappy Thomas Welde, in his 
Short Story of the Rise, Reign and Ruin of Antinomianism, will compen? 
sate, I think, the curious hunter in bibliography/' This is one of his pe- 
culiar sentences, and by it he means, or we understand him to mean, that he 
has, in further exposing Welde, done something for the reader in bibliogra- 
phy. " Unhappy Thomas Welde." He does not mean by this that Mr. 
Welde was more unhappy than other men probably. The reader of Mr. 
Savage's notes will oflen find that " unhappy " adjective, quite as happily 
applied to other individuals. 

Beginning at page 298, we find about two pages in small type, devoted 
to " unhappy Thomas Welde." We have seen at different times, all the 
books remarked upon relative to this subject, and we must acknowledge, 
after some examination of them, and the Editor's long note upon them also, 
that we find no reason to charge anything upon Mr. Welde, beyond what 
he has himself acknowledged; and it is our firm conviction, that whatever 
Mr. Welde did, he did under the direction, or by the advice of the domi- 
nant party here. And, that the wholesale branding.of him by the Editor, 
amounts only to this, namely, — a determination on his part, to ^^ make out 
a case." He should remember, that writing history is one thing, and de- 
fending a bad cause before an intelligent jury is another. Unhappily he 
seems incapable of making the distinction. ScBpe intereunt aliis meditantes 
necem. — ^There is nothing clearer that one has a bad cause, or that he has 
undertaken on the wrong side, than the fact that he resorts to abuse to 
sustain his assertions. He charges that, what Mr. Welde wrote and put 
his name to, was ^^ altogether a pretence on the part of the virulent pamph- 
leteer ;" that he was '* over cunning " in making false title-pages, " to 
mystify a heedless observer ;" what might have been, and no doubt was, 
a printer's error, he calls "a sneaking device" at deception; and in an 
air of triumph, closes his long note, with, ^^ perhaps the reader may think 
I have derived too much gratification from disclosing the shameless in- 
firmity or petty malice of the ecclesiastical historian. Let it go for the least 
skilful of all attempts at deception." 

Afler all this, we candidly think his ''much gratification" will soon be, 
if it be not already, at an end. The jury of the public will set the matter 
right in due time, and it would have been prudent for the Advocate to 
have withheld his exultation until a verdict was rendered ; for he should 
remember, that he is not Judge and Jury too. In an earlier notice of Mr. 
Welde and his '* Short Story," (page 248), he says, " The work has not, 
I presume, been often quoted within a century ;" and yet toe know that it 
has been very oflen quoted within a quarter of a century. 

16 Remew of Savage^ s WirUhrop. 

The following reflections do not at all harmonize with the manner in 
which Mr. Welde is handled ; — 

• There is a " strange note'' of above a page, beginning on page 306, in 
which the Annotator goes into the question of the " resurrection of the 
body." We can see no other object which he could have had in view, 
except to let the reader know that he had consulted some learned authors 
upon that subject ; from which we may infer, that his own opinion agreed 
with that " profound and original philosopher," Abraham Tucker. 

In 1638, a woman was executed at Boston for infanticide, and it is 
melancholy to consider, that she must have committed the act while in a 
deranged state of mind. What the following reflection of the Editor has 
to do with the facts, we are unable to discover. He says, *' Perhaps Peter 
[who merely attended at the execution in his clerical capacity] regretted 
his treatment of Talby [that being the name of the executed woman] 
after his own wife was distracted." [Insane.] Why is Peter singled out 
in this way, as though he must have been conscious of participating in the 
murder of a craa^ woman? Why are not Wilson and Winthrop ar- 
raigned under some misfortune, and taunted in like manner.^ Was Mr. 
Peter in fault because his wife became insane ? We believe no such 
charge can be supported by evidence. Mr. Peter (or Peters as his name 
is more usually written) was an active, and energetic man. He entered 
into what he believed to be his duty and the will of God ; of all such duties 
he acquitted himself manfully. But our Editor could not divest himself 
of the rancorous feelings which he had imbibed in reading some of the 
books about him, the productions of hireling vilifiers, whose name was 
legion, immediately after the in^glorious restoration. Mr. Peters perished 
by the hand of the mercenary murderer, but his memory should be safe in 
the hands of a faithful historian of New England. The despicable 
minions of power have injured the reputation of many an honest man in 
his time. The cause of Peters was the cause of New England, and he 
perished for doing more than many others had courage to do. 

Extremes often meet in the same individual. Few men have more 
sagacity, probably, to detect minute errors and discrepancies than Mr. 
Savage, and his opinions upon questionable points of such nature are more 
worthy to be trusted than family traditions. But this peculiar talent is not 
ample security that he will never commit some signal blunders himself. 
We cite a case in point, for the double purpose of showing how easily a 
very shrewd investigator may blunder ; and when he has blundered, how 
loath he may be to acknowledge it. 

In Winthrop's Journal published at Hartford, page 114, is this passage. 
'^ Board was at 9 and 10s. the C, carpenters at 3s. the day, and other work 
accordingly." Mr. Savage had, perhaps before consulting the printed 

Review of Savage^s Winthrop. 17 

copy, transcribed from the original manuscript — ^^ Bread was at 9 and 
10s. the C; carpenters at 3s. the day," &c. In his over-anxiety continu- 
ally to find errors in the Hartford copy, he seized upon this as one, but 
notes, "The MS. looks very much like the reading of the former edition, 
which was ridiculous." That is, it " was ridiculous " that hoards should 
be sold at 9 and 10s. the hundred feet, while selling bread at those rates 
was a plain common-sense matter ! 

But the worst is to come. President Allen, in his notice of Winthrop in 
his American Biographical Dictionary, playfully pointed out the above 
blunder of Mr. Savage, and his attention was subsequently called to the 
correction. Did he make the correction in his new edition ? No. Bread 
is lefl to disfigure Winthrop's text, and will probably disfigure it until 
another edition is called for by the Public. 

Again. On page 207, under date of 28th of November, 1635, Win- 
throp records the. arrival of " a small Norsey bark, seat out by the Lordfl 
Say, &c." To the name Norsey Mr. Savage makes this note. " I never 
saw this word before ; but cannot doubt that it is the same gentilitial as 
Norwegian, or of the North Country. Norse is common with the " poets 
and others." Now the Author of this note often pries into Winthrop's 
" and so forths," and had he given but slight attention to this, he would 
have found it to contain Lord Brook, Sir Arthur Heslerigge, and Sir Mat- 
thew Boynton.* These last named gentlemen were all interested with 
Lord Say, and wero not mentioned by Winthrop by name, as being well 
enough known in the undertaking. Mr. S. would hpe found that one of 
the undertakers of the enterprise lived at Nosely, in Leicesten^ire, which 
fact would no doubt have saved him all that tedious journey among the 
Norwegians to get a " small bark of twenty-five tons " to bring half a 
dozen emigrants to New England. 

We should not omit to notice, in passing, the slur attempted to be cast 
upon Sir Henry Vane, on whose arrival in Boston, Winthrop thus respect- 
fully and sincerely remarked. "Here came also [in 1685] one Mr. 
Henry Vane, son and heir to Sir Henry Vane, comptroller of the King's 
house, who, being a young gentleman [only 23 years of age I] of excellent 
parts, and had been employed by his father, when he was ambassador, in 
foreign affairs ; yet, being called to the obedience of the gospel, forsook 
honors and preferments of the Court to enjoy the ordinances of Christ in 
their purity here." Now there never was a man in the country, probably, 
young or old, from its first settlement to the present time, who conducted 
himself with more prudence. Christian forbearance, and resignation to what 
he believed to be his duty, than this " young gentleman ' ' did. The ma* 

^ See HisT]i)Ky um AaTtQvniis or Bostoh, page 187-8. 


)B Refriew of Savftgefs Winihrcp. 

jpii^ of th^ people thought him more fit for their Governor than any other, 
and while he was Governor, no one can douht nor even presume to say that 
be did not acquit himself to the general satisfaction of the people ; and 
when he was left out of office by a manoeuvre of the minority, his conduct 
was that of a high-minded and good citizen. Winthrop was his rival, and 
did not treat him quite so well as he probably wished he had done, several 
years after. Mr. Vane bore all in silence, and left the country much to 
the regret of the people, who, on the occasion, showed him every attention 
in their power. Of this pious and conscientious pilgrim, Winthrop's Edi- 
tor remarks : — '* Few men have done less good with greater reputation 
than this statesman, whose fame rings in history too loudly to require my 
aid in its diffusion. The brief but busy exercise of his faculties here, is 
exhibited with sufficient minuteness by our author, in whose pages is found 
nb deficiency of respect towards the fanatic, who was too much honored, in 
bis early years, when exalted as the rival of the father of Massachusetts.'^ 

We will now hear what Winthrop says of Mr. Vane in the beginning 
of the Antinomian controversy. '^ The Governor, Mr. Vane, a wise and 
godly gentleman, held, with Mr. Cotton and many others, the indwelling 
of the person of the Holy Ghost in a believer ,'' &c. Several years after 
Mr. Vane had left the country, and some of the Colony's agents were in 
trouble in England, Winthrop says, '^ it pleased God to stir up such friends 
as Sir Henry Vane,who had some time lived at Boston, and though he 
might have taken occasion against us for some dishonor which he appre* 
bended to have been unjustly put upon him here, yet both now and at other 
limes he showed himself a true friend to New England, and a man of a 
noble and generous mind.'* Now we should think that this ought to have 
kept his Editor quiet, at least. — See Winthrop, ii. 304. 

Passing over numerous points open to criticism and animadversion, we 
shall in the next place dispose of a question which had its rise in a careless 
blunder. We refer to the question (if it can be called a question) whether 
or not John Endicott was the first Governor of Massachusetts. In the first 
plfu^e it is proper to state how the blunder arose, by which jir^< Governor 
was transferred to Winthrop. It will have been seen in the early part of this 
pQjtic^9 thajt Mr. Noah Webster was the Editor of the edition of Winthrop's 
Journal published at Hartford in 1790 ; and that in the title-page of that edi- 
tion, V^ First Governor of Massachusetts,'' follows the name of the Author, 
^f John Winthrop, Esq." Now that this was a mere blunder, or inadver- 
tence, will, we think, clearly appear from the following observations : — 

First, Mr. Webster was not then a critical writer of history. He had 
)cead enough of it to acquire a taste for it, especially for that of New Eng- 
land ; that when he supervised Winthrop's Journal he did not write with 
{that precision which he did afterwards. This is evident from the fact of 

Review of ISavage^a Wintkrop. 19 

his saying in bis preface to the work, tiiat it contained every important oe^ 
currencty from Winthrop^s fret embarking for America to the year 1644; 
It is only necessary to ask, who would make that assertion now ? Bfr. 
Webster says too, that the blanks and omissions in hiis edition toeTe few 
and of no considerable consequence. We know from Mr. Webster'^ own 
frank confession, that he said this not knovnng what the blanks and &mii* 
sions were, th^y having been made because the best reader of old manu- 
scripts he could find cotdd not make them out ; therefore, how should hb 
know ? Other similar inaccuracies in Mr, Webster's short introductory 
matter might be produced, but these are sufficient to show, that scrupu- 
lous exactness in his statements, of certain particulars, was not thought of. 

Second, — the superior growth and expansion of the »3ttlement in and 
about Boston, gave a kind of general impression everywhere, that, as it 
was certainly the greatest^ so it was the first settlement. This general' 
impression led Mr. Webster into his error — ^there can be no doubt of it. 
It may be jeered and denied because toe say it. That will not be of much 
advantage towards maintaining so palpable an error. The present Editor 
of Winthrop thinks, and we believe he has said, that the spot, including 
Boston and its immediate vicinity, is the paradise of the world. This is 
not mentioned with any view to dispute the point with him ; but only to 
show how much superior he views this vicinity to all other places on the 
globe ; that therefore, as it was the first place in the world (which is not 
disputed) the first Grovemor there, was the first Governor in the worloT I 
With such notions in his head, how could he think otherwise ? With these 
ideas, and happening not to question the fact in his own mind, nor to con- 
verse upon the subject with anybody, and then meeting with Mr. Webster's 
blunder, he was in the right mood to be deceived effectually, and he watf 
deceived, and he ought to have owned it long ago. 

As a proof that Mr. Savage was deceived, or rather deceived hitnself 
with regard to the first Grovemor of Massachusetts, we will state one fact, 
which we think is perfectly conclusive. Happening to be in die library 
of a certain institution in Boston, one day, he was asked by a gentleman* 
how he came to call Winthrop first Governor^ in his edition of the Jour- 
nal ? At this question he looked up, evincing a good deal of surprise. 
This was evidently the first time the question had ever entered his mind. 
As his surprise began to subside, he replied, — ^*^ Well — he toas first Grov- 
emor.'' Afler a few words of discussion, Mr. Savage appealed to Hutch- 
inson, saying, ^* Hutchinson will settle it." He theti took down from the 
shelves, and proceeded to examine that Historian. When he had satisfied 
himself that Hutchinson did not sustain him, he replaced that Author, said 
no more upon the subject, and soon afler left. 

The subject h9;rdly deserves to be treated with gravity, but as there have 

20 Review of Savage^s Winthrop, 

been some long and labored arguments upon it, pro and con, something 
more may be expected in this examination. 

Much time might have been saved, had Mr. Savage had the ingenuous- 
ness to have acknowledged that he had been mistaken, and had unwittingly- 
been led to state what he saw was an error, as sooii as bis attention was 
called to it. Unhappily this is not a characteristic of that gentleman. 
When he has said a fact is thus, thus be means it shall be, if any or every 
other fact can be bent or twisted to make it wear the shade he has 
given it. 

It is rather singular, that in his first edition of Winthrop, in which the 
name of Endicottso often occurs, in which the Editor himself has frequent 
occasion to mention '^ Governor Endicott ^' under years before Winthrop 
was thought of as Governor at all, that it did not occur to him, that when 
there was certainly but one Governor, and that one Governor was Endi- 
cott ; that he, of necessity, must be first and last, until another should be 

The '^ idle question ^' that Endicott was not chosen under precisely the 
same circumstances that Winthrop was, deserves no consideration what- 
ever. Circumstances are continually changing. Will such considerations 
make John Hancock first Governor of Massachusetts, because the Rev- 
olution had entirely changed the order of things ? Will it prove that 
Samuel Adams was first Grovemor, and that Hancock was only ^^ Captain,^' 
because a great change had taken place, and that his Grovemment was 
more permanent and important than Mr. Hancock's, which had just 
emerged out of the Eevolution > This would be nonsense indeed. But 
there is quite as much sense in it as there is in denying that Endicott was 
first Governor, because he did not come over with the second, company of 
emigrants which happened to be a little larger than the first which came 
with Endicott ! 

Everybody acquainted with the main facts in the case, thought, that 
when Mr. Savage issued a new edition of Winthrop, he would leave out 
.the '^ first'' to his Governor, and either say nothing about it in his notes, or 
if he said anything, would say he had incautiously followed the title-page 
of the Hartford edition ; but the only place where he has dropped first 
Governor to Winthrop is on the portrait. This is one step towards bringing 
the matter right. While, if his weight of argument to sustain his old error, 
were equal to the weight of type employed in his immense note, it would 
remain beyond hope oT refutation. And yet in his weighty note, the 
Editor says, ^^An idle question, as it seems to me, was raised, a short time 
since, whether Endicott should not, instead of Winthrop, be entitled first 
Governor of Massachusetts." 

To raise what mist he can, Mr. Savage cites " Mr. Pelt," as saying in 

Review of Savage^ a Wintkrop. 21 

his Annals of Salem, that ^' Roger Conant preceded both Endicott and 
Winthrop" as Grovemor. Roger Conant, Mr. Savage well knows, has noth- 
ing to do with this question, any more than John Oldham, or any others 
who were over here before the formation of the Massachusetts Company, 
and happened to remain until that Company sent over a Colony. In a few 
simple interrogatories lie the whole length and breadth of this ^^ idle ques- 
tion." They may be thus put: — 

First, — Did the Massachusetts Company send out its first Colony to 
make a settlement in what is now Massachusetts without a Governor ? 

Second, — If that Company did send out a Colony with a Governor, who 
was he ? And did he, or did he not have all the power of governing a 
Colony conferred upon him in exact accordance with the Charter of the 
Company and the laws of England ? 

Third, — Did not the first Colony sent out by the Massachusetts Com- 
pany make a permanent settlement at Salem, Charlestown, &c., in 
1628 ? 

Fourth, — Where was Mr. John Winthrop during that early period of the 
operations of the Jir«i Colony ? 

" But," says Winthrop's Editor, " Endicott never was Grovemor of the 
Company in England ; Endicott did not bring over the Charter." — With 
just as much relevancy he might say, ^^ Endicott was never Governor of 
the Plymouth Company, whose lands the Mcissachusetts Company pur- 
chased, and that he was never King of England." 

By the way, there is one thing we do believe, — namely, that if Endi- 
cott had been King of England instead of Charles Stuart, the Charter 
would not have been brought out of that country, against the laws of the 
realm, as it in fact was. And this l^ads us to the following question : — 

Did that act of the Company, in taking away the Charter out of England, 
give Winthrop any claim to being called ^r«t Governor? He certainly, 
so far as known to us, is the^r^/ Governor who took away a Charter under 
such circumstances. But that this fact entitles him to be considered first 
Governor of Massachusetts, is extremely ridiculous. He acted under 
the direction of the Company, and as affairs turned, that illegal act of the 
Massachusetts Company was a very happy circumstance for New Eng- 

Let us go to Winthrop^s own account in his Journal He never even 
dreamed that he was first Governor. He never considered himself Grovemor 
at all, saving of those who came over with him in ^^ the fleet," till he was 
elected, several months afler his arrival at Charlestown. Did he take the 
Grovernment out of Mr. Endicott's hands on his arrival ? No such thing. 
He considered himself only as an assistant to Mr. Endicott. Read his Jour- 
nal, page 30-1, Vol. I. — ^Arriving at Salem on the 12th of June, 1630, 

^ Reti^ 6f Savages Witahtofi. 

ami being visited oh boetrd his shi)) by Qov. Endicbtt, hei says, *^ We that 
were of the Assi^nt», and soine oth^ gentlemen, and some of the women^ 
and our Captain, returned with them to Nahumkedt, where We supped 
with a good venison pastry and good beer, and at night we returned to our 
ship, but some of the Women stayed behind/' 

Now will anybody pret^d that Wirithrop considered himself as super- 
seding Endicott ? It appears to us, that if the factd, the plain simple facts 
als they stand recorded, be attended to, it will inevitably supersede the 
necessity of any more long arguments to prove ^ a clear ease.'' 

The assertion that " Endicott could not be the Grovemor which the 
Charter required," is unworthy attention, when no pretence is set up that 
he was not made G^jvernor according to the Charter. We have else- 
where shown where, how and when, Winthrop came in general Governor 
of Massachusetts.* To deny that he was elected Governor at Charles- 
town, on the 23d of August, 1630, cannot be done without impeaching an 
Authority never yet impeached. Edward Johnson attended that election, 
beyond question, himself, and no particular in his book is more minutely 
and particularly recorded. 

In speaking of the Editor's defective chronology (a science which he 
seems very much to reverence) we did not refer to any particular cases 
wherein he had erred. We might refer to many, but one will serve our 
purpose, which is to put the reader of the notes to the new edition of 
Winthrop on his guard. For example : — On page 228, Volume I, it is 
said that there is no article in Dr. Allen's Biographical Dictionary upon 
General Gibbons. Now if the reader refers to that work he will find an 
article on General Gibbons. When that note was made, (and being made 
for the year 1825,) it was true, but when made for any year since 1832, 
it is false. Pew people could suppose that the Editor, in his new edition, 
was referring to an obsolete edition of a work of the kind printed half a 
century before, to the exclusion of a new and vastly improved edition. 
Therefore, taking these, and all other similar things into account, we 
much prefer Mr. Savage's first edition to his second. That can be re- 
ferred to understandingly, while references to this are open to serious 

The limits to which we are confined in this examination prevent our 
remarking upon many points deserving attention ; but having already filled 
the pages allotted for it, we are " compelled " to draw to a close. We 
cannot however dismiss the subject without adverting to one other point ; 
and that is respecting the Deed or Grant of New Hampshire by certain 
Indian Sagamores to Mr. John Wheelwright in 1629. That any such 

* HisTOBT 4ND Antiquitus OF BosToic, page 94. 

Review of Saveige^s Winihrop. 23 

conveyance was made to Mr. Wheelwright in that year, the Editor of 
Winthrop denies with a confidence almost alarming. He was sufficiently 
positive in his first edition, but in his second, 

" As if the Erakeiii momarch of the sea. 
Wallowing abroad in his immensity, 
By polar storms and lightning shafts assailed, 
Wedged with ice mountains here, had fought and failed;" 

and, in his expiring agonies, for the want of new weapons with which to 
preserve himself, he has made a very unfortunate effort to show his con- 
tempt of those who differ from his opinions. 

With regard to the instrument which Mr. Savage denounces as a forgery^ 
we will only remark, that the subject is in competent hands, and in due 
time the result will be given to the public. We never promised or pro- 
posed to give our views upon it in the Register, as Mr. Savage improperly 
insinuates in his Winthrop, Vol. I, page 504 ; and, he has purposely 
or by mistake, misquoted a deposition of Mr. Wheelwright which we pub- 
lished some three years ago ; which deposition — truly copied — happens to 
shake his theory very essentially. Notwithstanding the vast labor which 
Mr. Savage has performed to prove the deed a forgery^ he has by no 
means settled the question. It yet remains open, and even he may be 
surprised should he live to see what can be said on the other side. 

Upon the whole we regard it as very unfortunate that the second edition 
of '^ The History of New England ^^ has been published ; unfortunate 
for the Editor as well as to the cause of History. Unfortunate because 
it oflen makes the Editor appear to great disadvantage ; and because by 
its issue with its many and manifest deformities, an edition, such as is 
truly desirable, may be a good while deferred. Small indeed are the 
valuable additions to this second edition, and no one can tell tohat the 
additions are without a minute and tedious comparison of the two editions 
together. The truth seems to be, that the Editor was heartily tired of his 
subject, and let it go to a new edition without due reflection ; or, that he 
considered no improvement was necessary, or, that none could be made, 
and that perfection was already attained, both in manner and matter. We 
have been frank in rendering our judgment upon these in general. If 
editors of antiquarian works profit by it hereafter, to them we shall have 
been of some service. 

1 1 


r* '