Skip to main content

Full text of "Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society"

See other formats









3 1833 01188 6071 

Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2013 




Committee of ^nblicatton. 



jHassarfmsietts fltstortcal g>octetp 

Founded 1791 


October, 1914 — June, 1915 
Volume XLVIII 

^utiltsfceb at tfje Charge of tfte $eabobp Jfunb 




Hntbersttg l^wss: 
John Wilson and Son, Cambridge. 

Ji — L/'vOo 0-l_ 


Adams, Charles Francis 

On Dr. McKenzie and Goodell 3 

Memoir of Charles Eliot Norton 57 

Again " The Tissue of History" 78 

British Proclamation of May, 1861 190 

On J. C. Gray 321 

Tributes to ^8$ 

Adams, John 

Letter to William Plumer, 1813 507 

Again "The Tissue of History" 78 

Annual Meeting 

Report of the Council 363 

Treasurer 368 

Librarian 377 

on Library and Cabinet 378 

Officers 381 

Bassett, John Spencer 

Development of the Popular Churches after the Revolu- 
tion 254 

Boyd, George 

Letters, 1774 336 

Bradford, Gamaliel 

Fiction as Historical Material 326 

British Proclamation of May, 1861 , 190 

Bryce, James, Viscount 

Tribute to Charles Francis Adams 414 

Burgoyne, John 

Letter to Lord North, 1775 119 

Burke, Edmund 

Letter to , 1793 122 

Clinton, Sir Henry 

Letter to Earl of Moira, 1775 118 

Copyright Law of 1909 184 



CsAPO, William Wallace 

Tribute to Dr. McKenzie 12 

Crawford, William Henry 

Letter to Count Hoogendorf, 1814 144 

Dan \, Richard Henry 

Tribute to Curtis Guild 427 

Davis, Andrew McFarland 

A Manuscript Massachusetts Note 168 

D] Normandie, James 

Nietzsche and the Doctrine of Force 170 

Development of the Popular Churches after the Revolution . 254 
Eliot, Charles William 

Tribute to Charles Francis Adams 387 

Endicott, William 

Tribute by Major Higginson 77 

Memoir by Mr. Rantoul 243 

Note by Mr. Thorndike 251 

Episode of the War of 181 2 496 

fiction as Historical Material 326 

Forbes, James 494 

Ford, Wortiiington Chauncey 

British Ghent Commission 138 

Tribute to Charles Francis Adams 419 

Diary of Benjamin Moran, 1860-1868 431 

Lydia Smith's Journal, 1805-1806 508 

Garibaldi and Nelaton 332 

Gay, Frederick Lewis 

Rev. Francis Marbury 280 

General Garfield at Chickamauga 268 

Germain, Lord George 

Letter, 1775 505 

Goodell, Abner Cheney 

Tribute by Mr. C. F. Adams 3 

Cray, John Chipman 

Tribute by Mr. C. F. Adams 321 

Justice Holmes 323 

Mr. Storey ? 2 $ 

Grj 1 \, Samuel Abbot 

Tribute to Charles Francis Adams 386 



Greenough, Charles Pelham 

Memoir of Henry Williamson Haynes 128 

Guild, Curtis 

Tribute by Governor Long 425 

Mr. R. H. Dana 427 

Hall, Granville Stanley 

Nietzsche 176 

Hancock, John 

Letter to Dorothy Hancock, 1778 506 

Hart, Charles Henry 

Peale's Allegory of William Pitt, Earl of Chatham ... 291 
Haynes, Henry Williamson 

Memoir by Mr. Greenough 128 

Higginson, Henry Lee 

Tribute to William Endicott 76 

Charles Francis Adams 395 

Hill, Don Gleason 

Memoir by Mr. Tuttle 163 

Holmes, Oliver Wendell 

Tribute to John C. Gray 323 

Hopkins, Edward 

Letter to Pynchon, 1639 39 

Howe, Mark Antony DeWolfe 

Memoir of Charles Eliot Norton 57 

Illustrations xi 

Indian Deed, 1641 492 

Kinnicutt, Lincoln Newton 

The Plymouth Settlement and Tisquantum 103 

Lee, Sir Sidney 

Tribute to Charles Francis Adams 415 

Livermore, Thomas Leonard 

Grant's Campaign in the Wilderness 92 

Livermore, William Roscoe 

Wilderness Campaign 101 

Long, John Davis 

Tribute to Charles Francis Adams 3 84 

Curtis Guild 425 

Lord, Arthur 

Tribute to Charles Francis Adams 403 



Losing, Charles Greely 

Memoir by Mr. Stanwood 355 

Lowell, Francis Cabot 

Memoir by Mr. Stimson 6 9 

McKenzte, Alexander 

Tribute by Mr. C. F. Adams 6 

Mr. Schouler 7 

Mr. Crapo I2 

Memoir by Mr. Schouler 3°4 

Marbury, Rev. Francis 28 ° 

Massachusetts Embassy to Washington, 1815 343 

Massachusetts Note in Manuscript I 68 

M a cher, Cotton, and Miss Maccarty 13S 

Lei 1 er to Benjamin Colman, 1703 135 

Members, List of 

Resident **v 

Corresponding XV1 

Honorary XV1 

Deceased xviii 

Mi not, George Richards 

Letter to Nathan Dane, 1787 429 

Mitchell, Matthew 

Letter to Pynchon, 1639 45 

Moran, Benjamin 

Extracts from Diary, 1860-1868 43 1 

M orison, Samuel Eliot 

The Massachusetts Embassy to Washington, 1815 ... 343 

Nietzsche and the Doctrine of Force 17° 

North, Lord .... 

Litter to Major General Riedesel 507 

Nob roN, Charles Eliot 

Memoir by Mr. Howe and Mr. C. F. Adams 57 

Peale's Allegory of William Pitt, Earl of Chatham 291 

Plymouth Settlement and Tisquan turn 103 

i'\ \i hon, Willi \m 

Letters of , 1 036-1644 35 

Rwiuri., Roijkrt Samuel 

Memoir of William Kndicott 243 

Letter to C. F. Adams 352 



Rhodes, James Ford 

Tribute to Charles Francis Adams 409 

Sanborn, Franklin Benjamin 

Tribute to Charles Francis Adams 407 

Schouler, James 

Alexander McKenzie, tribute to 7 

Memoir of 304 

Seaver, Edwin Pliny 

Tribute to Charles Francis Adams 416 

Smith, Charles Card 

Tribute to Charles Francis Adams 398 

Smith, Jonathan 

Toryism in Worcester County during the War for Inde- 
pendence 15 

Smith, Lydia 

Journal, 1805-1806 508 

Smith, Theodore Clarke 

General Garfield at Chickamauga 268 

Stanwood, Edward 

Memoir of Samuel Lothrop Thorndike 124 

Charles Greely Loring 355 

Tribute to Charles Francis Adams 406 

Stevens, Daniel 

Letter, 1782 342 

Stimson, Frederic Jesup 

Memoir of Francis Cabot Lowell 69 

Storey, Mooreield 

Tribute to John C. Gray ♦ • . 325 

Charles Francis Adams 392 

Suttle, Charles F. 

Letter, 1854 352 

Thayer, William Roscoe 

Tribute to Charles Francis Adams . 405 

Thorndike, Albert 

On William Endicott 251 

Thorndike, Samuel Lothrop 

Memoir by Mr. Stanwood 124 

Toryism in Worcester County during the War for Independence 1 5 
Treaty of Ghent, British despatches 138 





Tribute to Charles Francis Adams 4*5 

IViii.k, Julius Herbert 

Memoir of Don Gleason Hill l6 3 

On Charles Francis Adams 3 8 3 

Warren, John Collins 

Garibaldi and Nelaton 33 2 

Washburn, Charles Greneill 

The Copyright Law of 1909 l8 4 

Washington, George 

Letter to Anthony White, 1775 I21 

Waters, Thomas Franklin . 

An Episode of the War of 1812 49 6 

Wendell, Barrett 

Cotton Mather and Miss Maccarty *35 

Boyd-Stevens letters, 1774-17 82 335 


Letter to John Hancock, 1775 5°4 

Wilderness Campaign 9 2 



Charles Eliot Norton Frontispiece 

Signatures to Indian Deed, 1641 53 

Francis Cabot Lowell 68 

Samuel Lothrop Thorndike 124 

Henry Williamson Haynes 128 

Don Gleason Hill 163 

William Endicott 243 

Peale's Allegory of William Pitt 291 

Wilton's Statue of Pitt at Cork, Ireland 293 

Wilton's Pitt, at Charleston, S. C 297 

Alexander McKenzie 304 

Garibaldi and Nelaton 332 

Charles Greely Loring 355 

Lydia Smith 508 




April io, 191 5. 





2ftecoromg &ectetarg 

Cotregponoing .Secretary 

ARTHUR LORD Plymouth. 




:Pemfrerg at SLarjge of tjje Council 







Hon. Samuel Abbott Green, LL.D. 

Charles Card Smith, A.M. 


Hon. Winslow Warren, LL.B. 
Charles William Eliot, LL.D. 

Hon. Henry Cabot Lodge, LL.D. 

John Torrey Morse, Jr., A.B. 

Rev. Henry Fitch Jenks, A.M. 


Arthur Lord, A.B. 

Frederic Ward Putnam, S.D. 

Edward Channing, Ph.D. 

Edwin Pliny Seaver, A.M. 

Albert BushneU Hart, LL.D. 

Abbott Lawrence Lowell, LL.D. 


Hon. Oliver Wendell Holmes, LL.D. 
Henry Pickering Walcott, LL.D. 


Hon. Charles Russell Codman, LL.B 
Barrett Wendell, Litt.D. 
James Ford Rhodes, LL.D. 


Rt. Rev. William Lawrence, D.D. 
William Roscoe Thayer, Litt.D. 


Hon.Thomas Jefferson Coolidge,LL.D 
Hon. William Wallace Crapo, LL.D. 

Granville Stanley Hall, LL.D. 


Rev. Leverett Wilson Spring, D.D. 
Col. William Roscoe Livermore. 
Hon. Richard Olney, LL.D. 

Rev. George Angier Gordon, D.D. 
Rev. James DeNormandie, D.D. 
Andrew McFarland Davis, A.M. 


Archibald Cary Coolidge, Ph.D. 
Charles Pickering Bowditch, A.M. 



Melville Madison Bigelow, LL.D. 


Thomas Leonard Livermore, A.M. 
Nathaniel Paine, A.M. 
John Osborne Sumner, A.B. 
Arthur Theodore Lyman, A.M. 


Henry Lee Higginson, LL.D. 
Brooks Adams, A.B. 
Grenville Rowland Norcross, LL.B. 
Edward Hooker Gilbert, A.B. 


Franklin Benjamin Sanborn, A.B. 
Charles Knowles Bolton, A.B. 
Samuel Savage Shaw, LL.B. 
Ephraim Emerton, Ph.D. 
Waldo Lincoln, A.B. 
Frederic Jesup Stimson, LL.B. 
Edward Stanwood, Litt.D. 
Moorfield Storey, A.M. 


Roger Bigelow Merriman, Ph.D. 
Charles Homer Haskins, Litt.D. 


Hon. John Davis Long, LL.D. 
Theodore Clarke Smith, Ph.D. 
Henry Greenleaf Pearson, A.B. 
Bliss Perry, LL.D. 


Edwin Doak Mead, A.M. 

Edward Henry Clement, Litt.D. 

Lindsay Swift, A.B. 

Hon. George Sheldon. 

Mark Antony DeWolfe Howe, A.M. 

Arnold Augustus Rand, Esq. 


Jonathan Smith, A.B. 
Albert Matthews, A.B. 
William Vail Kellen, LL.D. 

Frederic Winthrop, A.B. 
Hon. Robert Samuel Rantoul, LL.B. 
George Lyman Kittredge, LL.D. 
Charles Pelham Greenough, LL.B. 
Henry Ernest Woods, A.M. 


Worthington Chauncey Ford, A.M. 
William Coolidge Lane, A.B. 


Hon. Samuel Walker McCall, LL.D. 
John Collins Warren, M.D., LL.D. 
Harold Murdock, Esq. 
Henry Morton Lovering, A.M. 
Edward Waldo Emerson, M.D. 
Frederick Jackson Turner, Litt.D, 
Gardner Weld Allen, M.D. 

Henry Herbert Edes, A.M. 
George Hubbard Blakeslee, Ph.D. 
Rev. George Hodges, LL.D. 
Richard Henry Dana, LL.B. 
George Foot Moore, LL.D. 
Gamaliel Bradford, A.B. 
Justin Harvey Smith, LL.D. 


John Spencer Bassett, Ph.D. 
Malcolm Storer, M.D. 
Edwin Francis Gay, Ph.D. 

Charles Grenfill Washburn, A.B. 

Frederick Lewis Gay, A.B. 
Rev. Thomas Franklin Waters, A.M. 
Zachary Taylor Hollingsworth, Esq. 
Chester Noyes Greenough, Ph.D. 
Joseph Grafton Minot, Esq. 
Samuel Eliot Morison, Ph.D. 
Ellery Sedgwick, A.B. 

William Crowninshield Endicott, A.B. 
Rev. Paul Revere Frothingham, D.D. 
Lincoln Newton Kinnicutt, Esq. 
Robert Grant, Esq. 


Rt. Hon. James Bryce, D.C.L. 


Rt. Hon. Sir George Otto Trevelyan, 
Bart., D.C.L. 


Pasquale YiLlari, D.C.L. 


Adolf Harnack, D.D. 

Rt. lion. Viscount Morley, D.C.L. 


Ernest Lavisse. 

Henry Adams, LL.D. 

Eduard Meyer, Litt.D. 

Hon. Andrew Dickson White, D.C.L. 


Hubert Howe Bancroft, A.M. 


Joseph Florimond Loubat, LL.D. 
Charles Henry Hart, LL.B. 

Franklin Bowditch Dexter, Litt.D. 

Rev. Charles Richmond Weld, LL.D. 

Hon. Janus Hurrill Angell, LL.D. 

Hon. W'oodrow Wilson, LL.D. 
Hon. Joseph Hodges Choate. D.C.L. 

John Franklin Jameson, LL.D. 

Rev. William Cunningham, LL.D. 


Hon. Simeon Eben Baldwin, LL.D. 
John Bassett Moore, LL.D. 


Frederic Harrison, Litt.D. 
Frederic Bancroft, LL.D. 
Charles Harding Firth, LL.D. 
William James Ashley, M.A. 

John Bach McMaster, LL.D. 
Albert Venn Dicey, LL.D. 
John Christopher Schwab, Ph.D. 


Rev. Arthur Blake Ellis, LL.B. 

Auguste Moireau. 

Hon. Horace Davis, LL.D. 




Sir Sidney Lee, LL.D. 


William Archibald Dunning, LL.D. 
James Schouler, LL.D. 
Gabriel Hanotaux. 
Hubert Hall. 


Andrew Cunningham McLaughlin, 

Hon. Beekman Winthrop, LL.B. 


Hon. James Phinney Baxter, Litt.D. 
Wilberforce Eames, A.M. 
George Walter Prothero, LL.D. 
Hon. Jean Jules Jusserand, LL.D. 
James Kendall Hosmer, LL.D. 


John Bagnell Bury, LL.D. 
Rafael Altamira y Crevea. 
Hon. James Wilberforce Longley, 

Henry Morse Stephens, Litt.D. 
Charles Borgeaud, LL.D. 


Lyon Gardiner Tyler, LL.D. 
Clarence Bloomfield Moore, A.B. 


Edward Doubleday Harris, Esq. 


Charles William Chadwick Oman, 

Samuel Verplanck Hoffman, Esq. 
William Milligan Sloane, LL.D. 


Rear- Admiral French Ensor Chad- 
William MacDonald, LL.D. 

John Holland Rose, Litt.D. 

Hon. George Peabody W T etmore. 


July, 1914 — June, 1915. 


1 87 1, Abner Cheney Goodell July 20, 1914 

1875, Charles Francis Adams March 20, 1915 

1 88 1, Alexander McKenzie August 6, 1914 

1897, Lucien Carr Jan. 27, 1915 

189S, John Chipman Gray Feb. 25, 1915 

1906, William Endicott Nov. 7, 1914 

1910, Curtis Guild April 6, 1915 


1907, Alfred Thayer Mahan Dec. 1, 1914, 


1905, George Parker Winship May 4, 191 5. 

1 By removal into the State of Massachusetts. 





THE stated meeting was held on Thursday, the 8th instant, 
at three o'clock, p. m.; the President, Mr. Adams, in 
the chair. 

The record of the last meeting was read and approved; and 
the Librarian reported the list of donors to the Library since 
the last meeting. 

The Cabinet-Keeper reported the purchase of twelve medals; 
and gifts of the medal of the DeMeritte School, Boston, from 
Edwin DeMeritte; of the medal of the Springfield Conven- 
tion of the American Numismatic Association, from Waldo C. 
Moore, of Lewisburg, Ohio; of a medal of Williams College, 
from John A. Lowe; of a photograph of a painting of a Mr. 
Smyth, of Philadelphia, said to be a son of George IV and 
Mrs. Fitzherbert, painted perhaps by Gilbert Stuart; also a 
lithographic reproduction of a portrait of Washington "done 
in New York, 1790," from Miss Alba Davis; of a photograph 
of a portrait of Hon. William Gray, from Edward Gray; and 
of a statuette of Daniel Webster, after Ball's statuette of 
1853, from Rev. Palfrey Perkins; also a campaign circular in 
the shape of a $1000 bill of fiat money, issued in 1880 in opposi- 
tion to the Greenback Party. 

The Corresponding Secretary reported the receipt of a letter 
from Joseph Grafton Minot accepting his election as a Resident 
Member of the Society. 

The Editor reported the publication of a new volume of 
Proceedings, 1913-1914, being the XLViith of the series, which 


had just been distributed to members; and the approaching 
issue of the first volume of Commerce of Rhode Island, 1726- 
1800 (Seventh Series, vol. ix), and The Letters and Papers of 
John Singleton Copley and Henry Pelham, 1739-17 76 (vol. 
71). 1 He also spoke of the reproduction of early Massachu- 
setts newspapers by the photostatic process now undertaken 
by the Society. Progress has already been made with the 
Boston News-Letter, and with other libraries cooperating it is 
believed that every known issue of Boston newspapers from 
1704 to 1774 will in time be accessible in this city, either in the 
original or in facsimile. 

The Editor reports the following gifts of manuscript ma- 
terial : 

From Mr. Shaw, a number of interesting printed notices 
of societies and public meetings, all of 1847. Among the 
papers is the catalogue of wines sold at auction from the estate 
of Air. Justice Story, with lots described as "' Judicial.' Im- 
ported expressly for the Judges of the Supreme Court, U. S." 

From Mrs. Bradley Gilman, of Canton, Massachusetts, a 
large number of letters of the Foster family, including letters 
from the three brothers, Dwight Foster (1 757-1823), a repre- 
sentative and Senator from Massachusetts in the United States 
Congress; Theodore Foster (175 2- 182 8), a United States Sena- 
tor from Rhode Island; and Peregrine Foster, who went with 
the Marietta colony to Ohio. These letters contain valuable 
historical material, apart from their interest as family papers, 
and extend from 1757 to 1859. 

From Mr. Edward Gray, of Groton, Massachusetts, 2 three 
deeds, 1755, on stamped paper, the stamp being an embossed 
codfish and " 11 Pence " surrounded by a circle composed of 
the words " Staple of the Massachusetts"; a contemporary 
copy (1766) of an exoneration of Rev. Penuel Bowen from a 
charge of plagiarizing from Dr. Doddridge; a contemporary 
copy in manuscript of Wilkes' " North Briton, No. 45," and 
other papers. 

From Mrs. Ellis B. Usher, granddaughter of Samuel 

1 Tn plarc of continuing series of ten volumes each, future issues of the Col- 
lections will he given volume numbers. The similar course was taken with the 


2 Author vi William Gray (1914). 


D. Partridge, a number of notes and legal papers of Cotton 
(1765- ) and Samuel (1775-1856) Partridge, of Hatfield — 
a well-known family of that town. They run from 1808 to 


From Mr. Stanley Webster Smith, of Boston, letters and 
papers, 1 695-1 833, consisting of depositions and other court 
papers, and commercial letters from Nantucket to Aaron 
Lopez and Christopher Champlin, of Newport. 

The President said: 

Seldom does the Society meet after the summer intermission 
that it does not devolve on the presiding officer to announce 
the death of either a member, or of some one otherwise asso- 
ciated with us, as having occurred during the intervening four 
months. The present constitutes no exception to the general 
rule. Two of our Resident Members have died since we last 
met — Abner Cheney Goodell, at Salem, July 20, and Alex- 
ander McKenzie, at Cambridge, August 6. 

In accordance with the custom long since adopted, it will 
devolve on others than myself to offer characterizations, and 
subsequently to prepare memoirs of those just named. I 
shall confine myself to matters bearing on their connection 
with the Society and their activities in it. I will merely say 
that Mr. Goodell and Dr. McKenzie were contemporaneous 
and both octogenarians, — the former having been born in 
Cambridgeport, October 1, 183 1, and the latter in New Bed- 
ford, December 14, 1830. Mr. Goodell was elected a Resident 
Member March 9, 1871; Dr. McKenzie, December 8, 1881. 
Mr. Goodell's membership thus covered the long period of 
forty-three years, while that of Dr. McKenzie, though ten 
years less, saw a generation born, grow up and pass off the 
stage. At the close, Mr. Goodell's name stood third on our 
roll of Resident Membership; that of Dr. McKenzie stood 

Though elected in 1871, Mr. Goodell's activities in connec- 
tion with the Society did not begin until twelve years later. 
March 8, 1883, he read his first communication — a paper I 
well remember, on the " Execution of Mark and Phillis for the 
Murder of Captain John Codman of Charlestown," a case 
of "petit treason," the murder of their owner by slaves, occur- 


ring in 1755. This paper — an extremely interesting one — 
appears in volume xx of the First Series of our Proceedings 
(pp. 122 157). During the succeeding years Mr. Goodell was 
one of our most frequent and considerable contributors, and 
nearly every tiling to which he called attention originated in 
the work on which he was engaged as Editor of the Massa- 
chusetts Province Laws. Taken altogether, those papers cover 
a large number of topics of historical interest, some of them 
of importance. To those at all acquainted with Mr. GoodelTs 
methods, it is needless to say that they all bear evidence 
of tireless investigation. In 1886 Mr. Goodell was appointed 
a member of a committee to examine and report upon the 
alleged Sharpless portraits of Washington. The same year he 
was also a member of the committee to consider the subject 
of indexing foreign Revolutionary documents relating to 
American affairs. During the next fifteen years his contribu- 
tions were constant, and he served on more committees than 
I have time to enumerate. Elected a member of the Council 
in 1885, his service was continued until April, 1887. 

Mr. Goodell 's editorial methods in connection with the 
Province Laws had long excited adverse legislative criticism, 
both because of the slowness with which the work progressed 
and the cost entailed. Into this subject it is unnecessary now 
and here to enter in detail. The criticism provoked was at- 
tributable both to the commendable qualities and to the lim- 
itations of Mr. GoodelTs mind and methods. Essentially an 
antiquarian, with him exactness was unquestionably carried to 
excess. In fact, it knew no limit. Neither was the sense of 
historical importance and proportion developed in him, if 
indeed it can be said to have existed. Time was of no moment. 
Naturally, under these conditions, all things relating to the 
past assuming in his mind importance, the work he did and the 
plan he laid out in connection with the Province Laws of 
Massachusetts may be said practically to have known no 
limit. It diverged into fields of investigation, both innumerable 
and inexhaustible. 

'Thus, though Mr. Goodell was in many respects an interest- 
ing character and his work had unquestioned value, it cannot 
be denied that to those who liked to see things accomplished 
on a reasonable basis of labor and cost, he was also an aggrava- 

1914.] ABNER C. GCODELL. 5 

tion. The combative element in his make-up was, moreover, 
pronounced. Unable to conform to the views of others, he 
aroused antagonisms which ultimately led to the discontinuance 
of his services in connection with what had become the work 
of his lifetime. As President of this Society, I found myself 
drawn into that legislative wrangle, and it entailed some exam- 
ination on my part of Mr. GoodelPs work, his methods and 
results. Deeply impressed as I was by his research and inde- 
fatigable industry, he yet continually recalled to me a pas- 
sage in Thomas Carlyle's Essay on Sir Walter Scott, pub- 
lished in 1838 in the Westminster Review. Carlyle there says: 

But indeed, in all things, writing or other, which a man engages 
in, there is the indispensablest beauty in knowing how to get done. 
A man frets himself to no purpose; he has not the sleight of the 
trade; he is not a craftsman, but an unfortunate borer and bungler, 
if he know not when to have done. Perfection is unattainable: 
no carpenter ever made a mathematically accurate right-angle 
in the world; yet all carpenters know when it is right enough, and 
do not botch it, and lose their wages, by making it too right. Too 
much pains-taking speaks disease in one's mind, as well as too 
little. The adroit sound-minded man will endeavour to spend on 
each business approximately what of pains it deserves; and with a 
conscience void of remorse will dismiss it then. 

That closing clause exactly expressed what Mr. Goodell 
was unable to do. He could not bring himself to " spend on 
each business approximately what of pains it deserved; and 
with a conscience void of remorse to dismiss it then." He was 
simply untiring — indefatigable; and, as I have said, in mat- 
ters historical, he lacked all sense of proportion. I mention 
this fact because it accounts, in my belief, for the discontin- 
uance in 1 90 1 of the contributions of Mr. Goodell, and of his 
active connection with the Society. That year the further 
work of editorship of the Province Laws was transferred to 
another, also a member of this Society; and I have reason 
to think he felt this had been in some degree due to a failure 
on our part to give him the legislative support he thought his 

In any event, our records indicate that the last appearance 
of Mr. Goodell at our meetings was in June, 1901. He then 
made some remarks on the quotations found in the writings 


of Mr. Webster. Previous to this he had attended at a few 
more than half of the meetings since his election. Especially 
was his attendance frequent between 1883 and 1901. Never- 
theless, to those of the members who remember the Society as 
it existed prior to the year 1900, Mr. Goodell was and will 
continue to be conspicuous, both personally and in his efforts. 
Naturally, however, his absence now causes in us no sense of 
immediate loss. 

At his death one of our oldest members, two years after his 
election in 1883, Dr. McKenzie became a member of the commit- 
tee to publish the Proceedings. His service on that committee 
continued until November, 1907, being the longest ever ren- 
dered by any individual in that connection. During those 
years the Society published the entire Second Series and a part 
of its Third Series — twenty-two volumes in all. A frequent 
and invariably interesting speaker at the meetings he attended, 
Dr. McKenzie had a singular and attractive facility of extem- 
poraneous utterance. His command of language was great, 
words flowing from him in well-ordered sentences which, taken 
down, at the moment of their utterance, might be put in print 
almost without revision. For a presiding officer it was, there- 
fore, a pleasure, to call on him; and I am especially mindful of 
his tributes to Professor Smyth, to Dr. Herrick, to Professor 
Allen, and especially that to William Everett, who, though 
much younger than Dr. McKenzie, had been his roommate at 
Harvard. Between his election in 1881 and the time of his 
withdrawal from activities in 1910, Dr. McKenzie appears to 
have been one of our more regular attendants. 

Altogether, he was an active and interesting, as well as fruit- 
ful member of our Society. His presence would be greatly 
missed had not four years and a half already intervened since 
he ceased coming. 

Born in New Bedford, Dr. McKenzie came of the old stock, 
his father having been a typical whaling captain. Our asso- 
ciate Mr. Crapo is its present last living representative, and 
it gives ns all satisfaction to see that his great regard for one 
he knew from boyhood has brought him here to-day. He will, 
I hope, sjxak from personal knowledge of those local but pre- 
natal educational influences which made Dr. McKenzie what 
he was. 


In the first place, however, I shall call upon Mr. Schouler, 
formerly a Resident, but now a Corresponding Member, to 
speak of his classmate and friend in life, Dr. McKenzie; 
afterwards I shall ask Mr. Waters to pay tribute to his fellow 
Salem representative, Mr. Goodell. 

Mr. Schouler read the following tribute: 

Our deceased fellow-member, Dr. McKenzie, pursued a 
long and eminent career in the Christian ministry; and the 
religious and secular presses, since his death last August, have 
paid united tribute to his memory, recalling his distinguished 
and successful service to the public and his fellow-citizens as 
a preacher, philanthropist and spiritual guide. I have no 
such intimate acquaintance with his life work as would qualify 
me to add to the characterization of others in this Boston and 
Cambridge vicinity, where his lot was mostly cast; but as a 
college classmate and one who saw something of him in his 
early manhood, besides following fairly his later career, I may 
perhaps at this time add something to the record. 

No one among you can recall those earlier years of his life 
or review his prolonged activities who is not himself one of 
your older fellow-members in point of years; and such a one 
I may now consider myself. And yet my earliest and latest 
and most constant impression of McKenzie has been that he 
was a man much older than myself both in years and feelings 
— never a youth, always a sage ; one to be looked up to for 
counsel and guidance, but not to be known familiarly. 

Alexander McKenzie was born in New Bedford in 1830. 
He died at his home in Cambridge, about two months ago, after 
a pastorate there of more than forty consecutive years, fol- 
lowed by about four years of retirement as emeritus. His 
death occurred at the advanced age of eighty-three. It is 
well known that, after a common school training, he entered 
mercantile life as a clerk and bookkeeper and served an im- 
portant business house in Boston; that, feeling a strong re- 
ligious impulse, while thus employed, to enter the sacred minis- 
try, he was aided and encouraged in his wishes by his generous 
employers; and that, in pursuance of such new plans of life, 
he entered Phillips Academy, just at the turn of majority, to 
study Latin and Greek and prepare for college. And thus did 


I first meet him, myself a youth of sixteen, coming to Cam- 
bridge from distant Cincinnati, to be, like him, a Harvard 
freshman in the Class of 1859. 

Our class numbered one hundred the first year and graduated 
only slightly smaller; and this was a good average total for 
college classes in those earlier times. McKenzie was by far 
the oldest man among us; more than eight years my own senior, 
which counted much to one in the adolescent teens. For in 
that era many of us collegians graduated at the age of twenty, 
while the greater number finished the four years' course at or 
soon after reaching majority. McKenzie was nearly thirty years 
old when he graduated, and completed afterwards his prepa- 
ration for the Congregational ministry at Andover Theological 
Seminary in 1861. Hence among us college mates, playful in 
the free effervescence of youth, McKenzie moved a full-grown 
man, sedate and lonely, mature in thought and worldly ex- 
perience and having already a fixed purpose in life while most 
of his classmates were doubtful or heedless of the future. 

McKenzie attended oral recitations with his fellows of the 
same alphabetical section. He came out of college neither 
the first nor the second scholar in the class; but he held a high 
rank in his studies and was diligent and industrious. He 
was an older man than some of those to whom he recited — 
Charles W. Eliot, for instance, later famous, who for our class 
was tutor in mathematics. 

In a simple and natural way McKenzie gained quickly 
great influence with his classmates, setting before them a high 
personal example of probity and honor. That influence was 
largely enhanced by the fact that, throughout our college 
course, the brilliant William Everett was his chum and room- 
mate. The relationship had been arranged by Everett's 
distinguished father, in order that his young and precocious 
son might have a sort of proctor rather than a comrade to 
watch over him and guard his growth. x They roomed in the 
yard and in a college building, which is the best means of assur- 
ing a large and varied class acquaintance. Everett, sociable, 
self-confident and full of animal spirits, visited much the rooms 
of other classmates, whereas McKenzie, courteous to such as 
called, went little outside, but kept somewhat secluded, as 

1 For Dr. McKcnzie's own statement on this point see Proceedings, xliii. 414. 


befitted one of his age and temperament. He sustained well 
his own unique position and, although not given to witticism 
or playful banter, he smiled indulgently and kindly on the 
frolicsomeness that went on about him, like one who could 
appreciate, but had himself put away all childish things. We 
learned to regard him as the patriarch of the class, our elder 
brother many years removed. Early in our sophomore year 
he was made President of the Institute and performed the 
duties of that post with dignity and discretion. He had al- 
ready by general consent been booked for chaplain of the class 
at our graduation. 

The college incident concerning this fellow-student which has 
left the strongest and most durable impression on my memory 
occurred towards the end of that same sophomore year and 
relates to the action taken by our Class of 1859 with reference 
to the Greek Letter societies. One of those societies, the least 
liked in college at the time, had made early canvass of our 
class and induced three or four of the most popular men to 
pledge themselves to join it when the proper time should arrive. 
Our class leaders, indignant, pressed these men to retract; 
but they felt that they could not in honor do so, though re- 
gretting the step they had hastily taken. Thereupon these 
leaders conceived the idea of persuading the whole class to 
repudiate the Greek Letter societies and refuse as a body to 
enter them. The broad ground they took, however, was that 
such societies were detrimental to class unity; a burden rather 
than a benefit so far as affiliation with like chapters in other 
colleges was concerned; and productive besides of jealous dis- 
sensions among ourselves. McKenzie was prevailed upon to 
advocate such repudiation, though he could hardly have been 
a party to the original grievance. A meeting of the class was 
called to consider and decide the question. The attendance 
was large, and in the discussion that ensued McKenzie's speech 
was the strongest, decisive of the issue. With uplifted face 
and animated voice and gesture, after the pulpit manner 
characteristic of him in later life, he besought and exhorted 
us all to cherish constantly class unity and class acquaintance. 
"I want," said he earnestly, "to see my classmates growing 
Stronger and stronger in the bonds of affection, each and all 
of them. I want to know them and I want to love them." 


That speech, and most of all that particular passage, touched 
the hearts of all assembled. It brought over the doubtful 
and wavering among his listeners and carried the meeting. 
By a large and conclusive majority the Class of 1859 voted to 
stand out from all the Greek Letter societies and have no fel- 
lowship with them. 

That speech, we may fairly suppose, was McKenzie's 
earliest effort as a preacher before a congregation worthy of 
the name. Such an occasion for exhortation he could hardly 
have found at Phillips Academy; and it was not until our 
Senior Exhibition of May, 1859, that, before the usual large 
and cultured audience of both sexes in the old chapel of Univer- 
sity Hall, he delivered his well- written dissertation on "The 
Eloquence of St. Chrysostom, " sailing in at one rear door and 
out of the other in flying silk gown, as the custom then was 
with those of us who had parts, to hold forth from an improvised 
platform in front of the pulpit, where sat President Walker 
in academic costume, to announce in Latin each orator. 

As so many of this Society are fellow-alumni of Harvard I 
may be permitted to give the sequel of this bold departure 
taken by our class. For a few months the flame of class unity 
mounted high and burned brightly. We formed a Class So- 
ciety to which all were admitted, adopting the Chinese name of 
"Wen Tchang Koun," which the knowing ones assured us had 
an appropriate meaning. We hired parlors in the old Brattle 
House for reading, general conference and conversation. On 
a few memorable occasions we held evening entertainments 
for the full class, such as a mock trial, the reading of a paper 
with special class contributions * and a mirthful charade on 
the name of one of our professors, ending with a mimic lecture 
on natural philosophy. But class affection began to flicker 
and fail in our junior year, when elections to the great Hasty 
Pudding Club came in slow and gradual order. That supreme 
of social honors at college, with its accompanying adornment 
in one's room of the symbolical black ribbon whose owner's 
name was inscribed thereon in white letters, the ambitious 
among us coveted greatly. But for these elections the balance 
of the Greek Letter societies, each with its representative men, 

1 McKenzie made a poetical contribution to my paper. The verses, full of 
class spirit, are still in my possession, in his own handwriting. 


was now wanting; and our popular leaders, as hitherto recog- 
nized, got to controlling those elections from within to please 
too much a set of favorites and parasites. Boon companionship 
prevailed against talent and quiet tastes. 

At length some of the excluded ones started an opposition 
literary society known as the "O.K," and the sixteen men 
chosen to it on behalf of '59 gave our class much distinction 
in later life. A clear schism and not mere petty dissensions 
now vexed us, and our much vaunted class unity vanished 
into the limbo of fond illusions. Class politics became bitter. 
For Class Day and the final class honors at graduation the 
"O.K." seniors set up candidates in opposition to the old class 
slate which former leaders, now in control of the "Hasty 
Pudding," still held out for acceptance. Class elections were 
held early in the second senior term and the "O.K." ticket 
was carried at the polls against the "Hasty Pudding." There 
were heartburnings among classmates in consequence at our 
graduation which only time's slow process could heal. 

Meanwhile the classes succeeding ours entered the Greek 
Letter societies and the chasm we had made was bridged over. 
The "Hasty Pudding" speedily regained its supremacy and 
composure in the social life of the college; while the "O.K," 
handed down to worthy successors, settled into a permanent 
literary society of repute, discarding all further harsh rivalry. 

As for McKenzie himself, no loss or diminution was suffered 
in his quiet popularity. He remained as before, above all 
reach of class turbulence, looked up to and respected; still 
aloof from intimacy, as nature compelled, and better appre- 
ciated rather than better known. He did not exhort us again, 
but suffered class matters to take their course, interesting 
himself specially in the college society of Christian Brethren, 
where he bore an important part. With great unanimity we 
chose him chaplain of the class, as foreordained at the begin- 
ning, and the patriarch of '59 became its priest. In this, at 
least, the class made no mistake; for McKenzie's qualities of 
mind and heart were sterling. How admirably he served, 
through a long life and career, in the Congregational ministry, 
by preaching and example, is well known in and far beyond this 
community. He was faithful, too, to the many kindred trusts, 
charitable and educational, committed to him; always judicious, 


always mature. No life could have better fulfilled the hopes 
of those who saw him turn from mercantile pursuits to the 
ministry or justified more amply the high ideals of its earliest 

Mr. Crapo spoke as follows: 

The members of this society knew Alexander McKenzie 
the man. I knew Alec McKenzie the boy. He and I were 
playmates. Our homes were directly opposite on the same 
street. We attended the same public schools and took part 
in the same sports. In his youth he was somewhat slender in 
physique. His manners were gentle. He was never rough 
or aggressive. He was not a leader in the school room or on 
the playground, for he was too modest and retiring. He was 
thoughtful and a good scholar. He was thoroughly conscien- 
tious, anxious to know what was right and determined to do 
right. His companions liked him because he was helpful and 
sympathetic. When he left school he came upon the problem 
which every boy at that period had to meet — the problem 
of employment and how to become a wage earner. Some boys 
went to a trade, others into a store or counting room, and still 
others shipped as cabin boy on a whaler. Young McKenzie 
sought employment as a clerk in a bank but was not success- 
ful. He made applications in other directions with the same 
result. At last he found a situation in a grocery store, and 
after a while by some great good fortune he had employment 
in Boston, and there he met friends who recognized his merits 
and who encouraged him to further study and to prepare for 
and enter college, which he did, graduating with the class of 
1859 fr° m Harvard. After he left New Bedford I saw little of 
him, for our steps led in different directions. 

It is difficult for me to speak of Alexander McKenzie without 
speaking of his father, Daniel McKenzie, a man whom I greatly 
admired. He was a splendid specimen of the whaling captains 
of seventy-five and eighty years ago. He was a man of daring, 
undaunted in danger, and never shirking in times of peril, 
self-poised and self-reliant. His occupation as a whaleman 
was one of great hazard. Modern devices have lessened the 
risk attending the pursuit and capture, but in those earlier 
years it was a hand to hand fight with the monsters of the deep. 


The spirit of the conflict can be inferred from the slogan used 
by the boat's crew as it pushed from the vessel to engage in 
the chase — "A dead whale or a stove boat !" Often it was a 
stoven boat, a boat crushed in the jaws of an infuriated whale, 
the crew leaping into the water, an oar their only life preserver, 
floating on the ocean until a companion boat could come to 
their rescue. Daniel McKenzie's sea-life was one of extraor- 
dinary adventure. In the War of 181 2, when nineteen years 
of age, the whaling ship in which he was serving as boatsteerer 
was captured by an English man-of-war and he was confined 
as a prisoner at Capetown. After suffering much privation 
there he was removed to the Dartmoor prison, where he re- 
mained many months enduring the brutality of that prison 
pen. If character is influenced by the strain and stress of life, 
the father of Alexander McKenzie had ample opportunity for 
character making. He was well informed. During his voyages 
he had read many books of history and travel. He visited 
seaports in distant parts of the world. He dealt with barba- 
rous and savage tribes in the South Sea Islands when in quest 
of water, wood and yams. After retiring from the seas he made 
his home at New Bedford, where he became a favorite of all 
classes. His readiness of speech, his fund of adventurous 
stories, and his gentle humor, made him an entertaining com- 
panion, while his good sense, and sound judgment, and earnest 
efforts for local improvements and the promotion of every 
worthy cause brought to him the esteem of his townsmen. In 
my boyhood I thought the great men of New Bedford were 
not its rich merchants but its retired whaling-masters. 

While the father and son were different in education, train- 
ing and vocation, they had traits in common. Both had a 
keen sense of duty and a willing purpose to meet it. Both 
were kind-hearted and broad-minded, and unselfishly sought 
to make men happier and advance the betterment of the com- 
munities in which they lived. 

I never heard Dr. McKenzie preach his sermons from the 
pulpit, but on several occasions I have listened to him when 
he spoke on topics of philanthropy, social welfare and reform 
movements. On one occasion many years ago when speaking 
in behalf of a rescue mission or some kindred charity, he men- 
tioned an event in his boyhood. It was a trifling incident, but 


as I have remembered it I venture to repeat it. In doing so I 
will preface it with a reference to a custom of that period. A 
whale ship, homeward bound, as it approached the coast dis- 
played from the mast head the private signal of its managing 
owner. As the vessel entered Buzzard's Bay, passing by Cutty- 
hunk, this signal could not be seen from the town. It was first 
discovered with the aid of a spy glass by the lighthouse keeper 
on Dumpling Rock. When he had satisfied himself of the iden- 
tity of the signal he took from the chest in the lighthouse its 
duplicate which he hoisted on the flag staff on Dumpling. 
This could not be seen from the wharves or business part of 
the town, but might be seen from elevated ground. One 
morning word came from the observatory on the hill that a 
vessel was in the bay inward bound and that it was the Falcon, 
Captain Daniel McKenzie. Young McKenzie, a mere lad, 
heard the report and rushed to the dock where the pilot boat 
was moored. He reached there just as it was about to sail to 
bring the vessel into the upper harbor. He begged the pilot 
to take him in the boat in order that he might greet his father 
on the ship. The pilot consented, and when the pilot boat 
and the ship approached each other in the bay, Capt. McKen- 
zie saw a little boy in the boat and soon recognized him as his 
son from whom he had parted two years or more before. When 
the boat came alongside the ship the Captain shouted to the 
mate, "Throw a line to my boy." The line was thrown and 
the boat's crew carefully adjusted it about the little fellow and 
he was hauled in safety on to the deck of the vessel where he 
embraced his father. The story itself was in no way remark- 
able. It was the application which Dr. McKenzie made of it 
which has remained in my memory. He said there were thou- 
sands of boys and girls floating on the sea of life, friendless and 
homeless. Who will throw a line to these boys and girls? 
Who will throw a line to save them from the wiles of the wicked 
and from destruction by devouring human sharks? This ap- 
peal made to a New Bedford audience, some of whom had 
known Dr. McKenzie in his boyhood and remembered his 
father, was impressive. 

The last time I saw Dr. McKenzie was a few years ago when 
he came to New Bedford and spoke to the Old Dartmouth 
Historical Society. His address consisted of reminiscences of 


his boyhood and school days in that town. In a charming, 
unconventional, conversational way, with touches of humor, 
he told the stories of his youth to a delighted gathering. Only 
one or two of his comrades of the old Green School house on 
Bush Street were present to welcome him; but those who lis- 
tened to him gave him a hearty greeting, for they knew him 
to be a man of sincerity and purity of character, loyal to the 
truth and a leader in good works. 

Mr. Waters spoke briefly on Mr. Goodell's career and 
character. 1 

Mr. Jonathan Smith read a paper on 

Toryism in Worcester County during the War for 

Beginning with the establishment of royal authority in 
the colonies, the people naturally divided into two parties, 
the Conservative or Tory, and the Radical party, which took 
the title of Whig, both names borrowed from the mother 
country. The former included the royal officials, whose 
salaries depended directly or indirectly upon the Crown, and 
most of their friends; the Anglican clergy almost unanimously, 
with a few ministers of other denominations; the aristocracy 
of culture, with most of the lawyers; many of the holders of 
large property; the dynastic Tories, or king worshippers; 
those who honestly believed that Parliament had the right 
to tax the colonies; and also those who were swayed by fac- 
tional feuds and interests, of which were the De Lancey and 
Livingston families of New York. 

On the other side were the Whigs, who included the farmers, 
the mechanics and laborers, nearly all the dissenting clergy 
and a good many representatives of the wealthy and educated 

From the earliest settlement the whole course of events 
had tended to emphasize this division of parties and widen 
the gap between the two. The spirit of hostility, indeed, 
showed itself in Massachusetts as early as 1638, and from 
that date down to the battle of Lexington it constantly grew, 
intensified by every new law or decree of Parliament relating 

1 He reserves his remarks for his Memoir of Mr. Goodell. 


to revenue laws, trade regulations or taxing statutes affecting 
the colonies. The Stamp Act, the Boston Massacre, the Boston 
Port Bill and the quartering of royal troops in Boston were 
but successive steps on the road, which began with the first 
settlement and ended in open war. The history of the Assem- 
blies both of Massachusetts and New Hampshire from their 
first institution down to 1775 is one long story of quarrels, 
bickerings and controversies between the representatives of 
the people and the royal governors. By the latter date all 
this had been going on for one hundred and forty years, with 
constantly growing bitterness and intensity. The people had 
taken sides, and their choice was based upon profound political 
convictions, so that when the clash of arms came they were 
ready to submit their claims to the gage of battle. 

At the outset the Tory party had one great advantage. It 
held the executive of the State and all the appointive places 
down to the least official. It also had the judiciary, the sheriffs 
and many of the leading officers of the militia. Appointees 
of royal power were found in every town. As a rule they were 
of the cultured and wealthy class and were among the leading 
citizens of their several communities, and being widely con- 
nected through their official and family kinships, they exerted 
a great influence. All the instruments of power were com- 
pletely in their hands; but they were conservative, slow to 
act and utterly failed to realize their danger or to grasp the 
opportunity which in the early stages of the controversy was 
in their control. On the other hand, the patriot party, under a 
determined and aggressive leadership, acted with the great- 
est energy and vigor. When the differences became acute 
it promptly filled every municipal office with its own friends. 
Through committees of safety and correspondence it organized 
in all the towns, and with an iron hand and by mob and vigi- 
lance committees it suppressed all symptoms of Toryism, drove 
every Tory from office or compelled him to resign, and by its 
lawless and violent acts so intimidated the citizens that they 
did not dare to express Tory opinions if they held them, and 
so compelled them to maintain silence or to espouse the popu- 
lar side. In a word, the Whigs immediately seized all the in- 
struments of power formerly held by the opposite party and 
used them remorselessly for the extermination of their enemies. 


Worcester County probably contained as few loyalists as 
any section of New England. The conduct of the patriots in 
that part of the State towards the English sympathizers may 
be taken as a fair example generally of the action and attitude 
of the two organizations towards each other, and the temper 
and feeling of each side toward that of the opposite faith. 
Where the parties were more evenly divided, the feeling was 
more bitter. 

Before 1774 there had been many acts of violence which 
intensified the hostilities of the two divisions, but after the 
several acts relating to the colonies, passed by the British 
Parliament in 1774, the colonists visited their wrath upon 
their enemies wherever found. Some details of their conduct 
will illustrate the strong tension of the time. One of the first 
objects of popular anger was the Mandamus Councillors of 
whom four — namely, Timothy Ruggles, John Murray, Tim- 
othy Paine and Colonel Abijah Willard — were from Wor- 
cester County. This Council, which previously had been 
chosen by the retiring Council and State Assembly, was, under 
the Parliamentary Act of 1774, appointed by the royal Governor 
and paid by the Crown. With the approval of the Governor, 
the Council appointed the sheriffs and the sheriffs selected the 
juries. When the appointments were known, the people of the 
county took the matter in hand. They visited Colonel Ruggles, 
in Hardwick, attacked his house in the night time and ordered 
him to depart. He promised to do so when the sun was an 
hour high in the morning, which he did, and was never seen 
again in Hardwick. Meanwhile the mob closely cropped 
the mane and tail of his horse, painted its body and maimed 
and poisoned his cattle. John Murray, of Rutland, was a 
colonel of the militia and the largest real estate owner in the 
county. The town Committee of Safety, accompanied by five 
hundred men from Worcester, who were joined by one thousand 
others, visited him to demand his abandonment of the office. 
Not finding him at home, they left word that unless his resig- 
nation appeared in the papers within so many days they 
would visit him again. Colonel Murray quailed before the 
gathering storm and fled to the British army in Boston and 
never again saw his Rutland home. A crowd of fifteen hun- 
dred people, of Worcester, met and chose a committee to wait 



upon Timothy Paine at his home in that town and demand 
his resignation. After some hesitation he wrote it out; he 
was then told to read it with his hat off, which was done, and 
he was not again molested. Colonel Abijah Willard, of Lan- 
caster, had been a distinguished officer in the war of 1745, 
commanded a regiment in the French and Indian war and was 
one of the most eminent men in that part of the province. After 
he had been sworn in as Councillor, he was arrested in Union, 
Connecticut, whither he had gone on business, taken to 
Brimfield, where a mob of four hundred people condemned him 
to imprisonment. On the way to jail they released him on his 
signing the following humiliating retraction: 

Sturbredge, August, 25, 1774. 

Whereas, I, Abijah Willard, of Lancaster, have been appointed 
by Mandamus, a Councillor for this Province, and have without 
due consideration taken the oath, do now truly and solemnly declare 
that I am heartily sorry that I have taken said oath, and do hereby 
solemnly and in good faith promise and engage that I will not sit 
or act in the said Council, nor in any other that shall be appointed 
in such manner and form, but that I will, as much as in me lies, 
maintain the Charter Rights and Liberties of this Province; and do 
hereby ask the forgiveness of all honest, worthy Gentlemen that 
I have offended by taking the above said oath; and desire this may 
be inserted in the public prints. 

Witness my hand. 

Abijah Willard. 1 

This bitterness of feeling between the contending parties was 
based on intense political convictions and the questions at 
issue, as the people understood them, went down to the founda- 
tions of government itself. A writer in the Massachusetts 
Spy 2 in 1775 thus delineates a Tory and Toryism: 

The word means, one who is a maintainer of the infernal doc- 
trine of arbitrary power, and indefeasible right on the part of the 
sovereign, and of passive obedience and non-resistance on the part 
of the subject. The Tory maintains the King holds his crown by 
none but God, while the people were made entirely for him, and 
that he had a right to dispose of their fortunes, lives and liberties 

1 Military Annals of Lancaster, 196. 

2 Massachusetts Spy, March 9, 1775. 




in defiance of his coronation oath, and the eternal laws of reason, 
without the subject having any right to demand redress of griev- 
ances or their being denied to seek it for themselves. 

It may be doubted whether the Tory himself would agree 
with this definition, but it was certainly very near King George's 
understanding of his royal prerogative. 

The action of the Worcester County blacksmiths in 1774 
showed the lengths to which the people were determined to go 
in defence of their cause. 1 

We, the subscribers, being duly impressed with the sense of our 
duty to our Country, paternal affection for our children and unborn 
millions, as also for our personal rights and liberties, solemnly 
covenant, agree and engage to and with each other, that from and 
after the first day of December 1774, we will not according to the 
best of our knowledge, any or either of us, nor any persons by our 
directions, order or procure for any or either of us, do or perform 
any blacksmith work or business for any kind whatever for any 
persons or person whom we esteem enemies of this country, com- 
monly known by the name of Tories, viz, all Councillors in this 
Province appointed by Mandamus, who have not publicly resigned 
said office; also persons who publicly addressed Gov. Hutchinson 
on his departure from this province, who have not publicly recanted; 
and also every officer exercizing authority by virtue of any com- 
mission tending to carry any of the late oppressive acts of Parlia- 
ment into execution in America; and in particular we will not do 
any work for Timothy Ruggles of Hardwick, John Murray of Rut- 
land and James Putnam of Worcester, Esquires, nor for any person 
or persons cultivating, tilling, improving, dressing, living on or oc- 
cupying any of their lands or tenements. Also we agree to refuse 
our work of every kind as aforesaid to all and every person or per- 
sons who shall not have signed the non consumption agreement, 
or have entered into a similar contract or agreement, or that shall 
not strictly conform to the Association or covenant agreed upon 
and signed by the Continental Congress lately convened at Phila- 

We further agree that we will not work for any mechanic, trades- 
man, laborer, or others that work for, or in any ways, or by any 
means whatever, aid, assist or promote the business or pecuniary 
advantage, pleasure and profits of any of the said enemies to this 

Resolved, That all lawful ways and means ought to be adopted 
1 Mass. Archives, clxxxi. 369. 


by the whole body of the people of this province, to discounte- 
nance all our inveterate political enemies in manner as aforesaid. 
Therefore, we earnestly recommend it to all denominations of artifi- 
cers that they call meetings of their respective craftsmen in their 
several counties as soon as may be, and enter into associations and 
agreements for said purposes. And that all husbandmen and 
laborers, etc., do the like; and that whosoever shall be guilty of 
any or either of the articles or agreements be held by us in con- 
tempt, as enemies to our common right. 

While many of the things were done without authority of 
law, statutes were early passed which gave full power to the 
local officials to suppress all disloyal sentiments. On October 
26, 1774, the Provincial Congress, 1 

Resolved That the committee of Safety shall watch carefully and 
diligently inspect and observe all persons as shall at any time 
attempt or enterprise the destruction, invasion, detriment or annoy- 
ance of this province and whenever they deem necessary to alarm 
and muster the militia. 

Again, by the Act of February 9, 1775, it was made the duty 
of the Committee of Safety, 2 

To most carefully and diligently inspect and observe all and 
every such person or persons as shall at any time attempt to carry 
into execution by force, an Act of the British Parliament for regu- 
lating the government of the Province of the Massachusetts Bay or 
an Act for the Impartial administration of justice or for the sup- 
pression of riots and tumults in the province of the Massachusetts 

The Second Provincial Congress, which met in May of 
the same year, after setting forth the disloyal acts of divers 
persons, 3 

Resolved That it be and hereby is recommended to the several 
committees of correspondence in the several towns and districts 
where such committees have been appointed, and to the selectmen 
of such towns and districts as have not appointed them, to inquire 
into the principles and conduct of suspected persons and that they 
cause all such to be disarmed who do not give them full and ample 
assurances, in which they can with safety confide, of their readi- 
ness to join their countrymen on all occasions in defence of the 
1 Journals Provincial Congress, 32. 2 lb., 89. 8 lb., 205. 


rights and liberties of America; and likewise that they take effec- 
tual steps to put it out of the power of such persons to obstruct, by 
any means whatever, the measures which shall be taken for the 
common defence. 

Two years later, in 1777, the State Assembly enacted a 
law * directing the selectmen forthwith to call a town meet- 
ing and elect some person firmly attached to the American 
cause to procure and lay before the Court all evidence against 
any individual showing him to be inimical to the American 
cause, and whose residence here would be dangerous to the 
State. The selectmen were required to lay before the voters 
a list of all known to be disaffected towards American liberty. 
A citizen could move to have the name of any person inserted 
in the list. This list was to be delivered to the justices of the 
peace, who were to issue their warrants of arrest against a 
suspected party and bring him before them. There was a 
jury trial, and if convicted the defendant was sent to the 
Board of War, which could transport him. 

By another act 2 passed May 9 the sheriff was directed 
to arrest any person deemed by the Council dangerous to 
the State. The sheriff was authorized to break the doors 
of the dwelling or building, in the day or night time, of the 
person named in his warrant and convey him to jail, to be 
held without bail until released by the Council or court. 
The Test Act 3 passed in 1776 required every male person 
over sixteen years to declare his allegiance to the colonial 
cause and to repudiate the sovereignty of King and 
Parliament. If he refused, he was to be disarmed and dis- 
qualified from holding office; twenty-four hours were given 
him to sign, and if he then refused, his arms were seized and 
he was arrested and brought before the Court. The militia 
could be called upon to assist in enforcing the law. If an 
official refused to act, his office was declared vacant and the 
town was forthwith to select his successor. One so refusing 
was denied the right to vote, and if a minister or teacher, he 
could not recover his salary. Still another enactment com- 
pelled every official, 4 civil and military, and attorneys to take 
the oath of allegiance. On refusal they were denied the right 

1 Province Laws, 1776-77, ch. 48, 648. 2 lb. ,1776-77, ch. 45, 641. 

3 lb., 1775-76, ch. 21, 479. *Ib., 1777-78, ch. 18, 770. 


to hold their offices longer, and if an attorney, he could prac- 
tice in the courts no more. If one furnished aid, 1 comfort or 
intelligence to the enemy, he was at once disarmed and dis- 
qualified from holding office afterwards. Where one had 
absented himself for three months or joined the enemy, on 
notice from the selectmen or Committee of Correspondence, 
the Judge of Probate could 2 order his estate seized and in- 
ventory thereof made. The agent was to pay the debts of 
the absentee and turn the balance into the State Treasury. 
The Superior Court could order the real estate sold. If the 
family of the absentee remained on the estate, the Court 
could make an allowance out of the proceeds for their support. 
Where the absentee had conveyed his estate before his depart- 
ure, such deeds were pronounced null and void. And finally 
it was enacted that, 3 when anyone had levied war on the colo- 
nies, or conspired so to do, or had fled to the British fines, or 
had abandoned his home and joined General Gage in Boston 
while he was in possession of the place, he was adjudged to 
have forfeited his allegiance, and all his goods and estate were 
declared escheated to the State. The Attorney General was 
to report the names of all such and to order their property 

These laws fairly reflect the public opinion of the period 
and were the embodiment of the people's will. They express 
better than any other words can do the intensity of the po- 
litical feeling and the grim resolution of the people to prevail 
at any cost in the battle joined. Under them free speech was 
denied, the right of suffrage taken away from everyone who 
refused to declare for the colonies. Attorneys were debarred 
from practice, ministers and teachers were driven from their 
desks and every citizen was turned into a spy and informer. 
The boycott was commended and a system of espionage, the 
most searching and humiliating, was legalized and estab- 
lished over every word said or act done by the people in every 
part of the Commonwealth. Seldom has a more drastic code 
of legislation ever been enacted in a civilized State; and it 
was faithfully enforced. The people demanded it and the 
public officials, even if otherwise inclined, did not dare to 

1 Province Laws, 1775-76, ch. 21, 483. 2 lb., 1776-77, ch. 38, 629. 

8 lb., 1778-79, ch. 49, 968. 


refuse. A few examples will show their oppressive character 
in practical operation. 

Early in the war the Committee of Correspondence for 
Northborough resolved that Thomas Billings, Silvanus Billings, 
John Taylor and John and James Eager were unfriendly to 
the colonies and had been holding private meetings. They 
were ordered to be confined to the limits of their respective 
farms and not to depart therefrom except to attend church 
or a funeral. 1 The case of Thomas Billings 2 illustrates the 
severity of the people's dealings with Tories. He was crippled 
so that he could not dress or undress himself, having a dis- 
located shoulder, and besides was affected with rheumatism 
and asthma. He was charged with being inimical to his 
country, was arrested, brought before a magistrate, tried and 
convicted by a jury and sent to the Board of War, which 
ordered him imprisoned. His physician protested that his 
physical condition was such that he ought not to be sent to 
prison, but without avail. Billings repeatedly petitioned for 
release, but the Board turned a deaf ear to his prayers. 

Jonathan Danforth, of Hardwick, had been arrested in 1775 
and thrust into jail and his estate sequestered. On December 
7, 1776, he petitioned the Council to be admitted to bail. 3 
He alleged that in the previous July he had gone to North 
Yarmouth, Maine, to work and so continued until the first 
of the following November, when he returned to Hardwick, 
bringing with him his proper credentials that during said 
time he had behaved well ; that he had been charged with being 
in the British army, which he vigorously denied, and asked 
for bail. A committee was appointed to investigate these 
claims. In their report the action of the Council in arresting 
him was fully approved, and they charged him with having 
refused to pay money to the State Treasurer as required 
by law, with lending the town's money out to other parties 
and, after being published as a public enemy with having 
broken his confinement and gone to New York to confer 
with the enemy. He was also charged with several other 
disloyal acts. His prayer to be admitted to bail was denied. 

Benjamin Hickox, of New Braintree, was indicted for en- 

1 Massachusetts Spy, July 17, 1776. 

2 Mass. Archives, cliv. 177. 3 lb., clxxxi. 362-373. 


listing into the British army in New York. 1 He pleaded guilty 
and was sentenced to sit one hour on the gallows with a rope 
around his neck and recognize in the sum of £100 for seven 

Gentlemen of the cloth received no favors. Rev. Aaron 
Whitney, of Princeton, prayed diligently for King George for 
eight years. In 1774 his flock voted neither to bargain with 
him nor hear him preach, and he was compelled to withdraw 
from the pulpit. Similar treatment was dealt out to Rev. 
Ebenezer Morse, of Boylston, then a part of Shrewsbury. 
Rev. Eli Forbes, of Brookfield, was driven from his church, 
and Rev. Thomas Goss, of Bolton, had a long quarrel with 
his people over his political views, though in his case the trouble 
was complicated with other questions. 

A poet of Petersham thus expresses his opinion of local 
Tories in the Massachusetts Spy: • 

With minds eclipsed and eke depraved, 

As meek as any lamb, 
The wretches who would be enslaved 

That live in Petersham, 
For you, ye worthless Tory band, 

Who would not lawless power withstand, 
The scum and scandal of the land, 

Be endless plagues and fetters. 
Ye want abilities and brains, 

Though headstrong as a ram, 
And seem to mourn the want of chains 

Ye tools of Petersham; 
For slaves like you the rod of power 

Is pickling for some future hour, 
The taste will prove austere and sour 

E'en to the wretch that flatters. 

Thus the patriots made Tory life miserable. Under the 
forms of law the committees exercised inquisitorial powers 
over the conduct of every citizen. If suspicions of loyalist 
sympathies were held against anyone, regardless of his char- 
acter or professional position, he was promptly brought before 
the magistrate, always a staunch patriot, and examined. 
He was generally convicted and either sent to the Board of War 
for transportation, or confined to the limits of his farm, boy- 

1 Records Supreme Judicial Court, 1783, 83. 




cotted and watched, treated as a public enemy and regarded 
with contempt. Sometimes the patriots took the case into 
their own hands and administered to the victim a coat of tar 
and feathers, as they several times did to Joseph Wilder, of 

Another method of dealing with British sympathizers was 
by prosecution in the Superior Court of Judicature. In 1780 
Ezra Houghton, of Lancaster, was indicted for using the fol- 
lowing language : 1 

"I have sworn to be faithful to King George, and there is nothing 
but I will do to serve him. It would be a capital stroke if we could 
destroy the currency. I am determined to do all in my power 
to do it!" On being asked if he justified the making and passing 
of counterfeit money, he replied, "No, where it is done on a selfish 
principle to build up, but when it is done on the more noble prin- 
ciple, with a view to bring the war to an end, and to prevent the 
effusion of human blood, I do not view it so bad; that the money 
that was passing was not made by any authority; that one person 
had as good right to make money as another. We are all as it were 
a wheel. Your spoke in the wheel is up now, but it will soon be 

He was found guilty of using the foregoing language, fined 
£50, and ordered to recognize for his good behavior in the 
sum of £6000. 

At the same term of Court, 2 Dr. Ephraim Whitney, of 
Princeton, was charged by the Grand Jury with saying, "I do 
not care anything about your law. Your law is Treason and 
your Government is Treason." He was also charged with 
refusing to pay his assessment for not serving in the army, 
and saying, "I will go to jail. I am not going to pay money 
to support a rebellion." He, too, was found guilty and was 
sentenced to pay a fine of £40 and costs. 

... To cite one more case, 3 Oliver Witt, of Paxton, was indicted 
for saying, "It is against my principles to- fight. It is very 
reasonable to accept these offers [by King and Parliament] of 
pardon. That if you would not go into the army any more, 
you might be pardoned. That he had a pardon in his desk. 
That the Congress were designing men and contrived to keep 

1 Records Superior Court Judicature, 1778-80, 225. 

2 Records Supreme Judicial Court, 1783, 85. 
■/&., 1786. 



the war along to maintain themselves. That England had 
offered as reasonable terms as we could desire and we had bet- 
ter accept them. That he always expressed pleasure when the 
enemy gained a victory, and said that England would have 
the upper hand in a year and we had better not hold our 
Independency." The indictment also charged that "he en- 
deavored to prevent the Continental Army being raised, and 
procured some persons not to enlist into the Army." He 
also was convicted, fined £40 and costs, and was ordered to 
recognize with sureties in the sum of £100. Eight others 1 were 
indicted, tried and convicted for the same offence in the Court 
of General Sessions for Worcester County and suffered heavy 

In 1 78 1 Witt was again arraigned on the charge of circulating 
counterfeit money, put on trial, but was acquitted. 

The language above quoted from these indictments is a fair 
sample of the Tory talk of the day. The colonies were contend- 
ing against desperate odds, and the action indicated shows 
how keenly they realized what would ensue to them in case of 
defeat. The aim was to suppress relentlessly all forms of 
loyalist opposition by every means possible, and to create a 
reign of terror for all those who did not support the colonial 
side. The patriots fired bullets through the Tories' windows, 
tarred and feathered the offensive friends of King George, 
burned royalist literature at the stake and either barred the 
church doors or nailed up the pulpits of the Tory preachers 
and refused to listen to them. 

The Confiscation and Banishment Act was passed April 
30, 1779. It names 309 persons who by the statute were 
banished from the State and their property declared forfeited 
to the Commonwealth. Of this 309, thirty-one were from Wor- 
cester County. Besides this number, Timothy Ruggles and 
Thomas Oliver had already been proscribed by a special 
enactment, and Joseph Moore and Solomon Houghton, of 
Lancaster, were subsequently added. Of these, six each were 
from Worcester and Hardwick, four from Rutland, five from 
Lancaster, three each from Shrewsbury and Northborough, 
two each from Princeton and Petersham, and one each from 

1 Records Court of General Sessions for Worcester County, iv. 295, 394, 403, 
4i5, 427, 465, 439, 540. 



2 7 

Leominster and Oakham. Of the number, seven are described 
as yeomen, two as blacksmiths and three as traders. The 
rest are " gentlemen" and attorneys. Thirty-five estates 
were sequestered. 1 As a class, the lawyers were the most 
loyal of all. Of the ten in practice in Worcester County at 
the beginning of the conflict, nine took the English side. 
The one exception was John Sprague, of Lancaster. Undoubt- 
edly his sympathies were with the mother country at the outset, 
and early in 1775 he went to Boston to consult with friends 
as to his future course. There he met Colonel Ward, of Lan- 
caster, an intimate friend and strong patriot, who advised him 
to go straight home and stay there. Sprague wisely did so 
and was not molested, but he was regarded with suspicion, 
and it was some years before his townsmen would trust him 
with any local office. 

The estates so confiscated netted a comparatively small 
amount to the State. The assets of the banished were largely 
in real estate; they were heavily in debt, and after the debts 
were paid and allowances made to the families who still re- 
mained in the State, not much was left. The following is the 
return of the estates seized and sold in Worcester County 
under the statute : 2 

estate netted the State £1238 25. 

15 i5 


Abel Willard's 

Thomas Mullin's 

John B owen's 

Michael Martin's 

Thomas Bennett's 

Adam Walker's 

James Putnam's 

Daniel Murray's 

James Craige's 

John and James Eager 's 

Theophilus Leslie's 

Abijah WiUard's 

Making a total of £8108, 35. 7 d. 

The favorite method of Tory attack was the manufacturing 
and circulating of counterfeit State and Continental bills. 
It was an insidious and deadly weapon to use, and the loyalists 

1 Mass. Archives, cliii. 330. 2 lb., cliv. 324. 
































employed it just as far as they dared. There had always been 
statutes against circulating counterfeit money, but in 1777 
the State strengthened the law and increased the penalties. 
The offence of counterfeiting was made punishable by death; 
and for passing the spurious paper the prisoner was to be set 
in the market place an hour, usually it was on the gallows with 
a rope around his neck, to have one of his ears cut off, the thumb 
of his right hand cut off at the root of the nail; stripes not 
exceeding forty could be inflicted ; he was liable also to a heavy 
fine; to treble the amount of the counterfeits he had circulated 
to the party defrauded, and further could be imprisoned not 
more than six months without bail. The informer was en- 
titled to a reward of £50. 

Under this statute the criminal courts of Worcester County 
did a large business for several years, and trials under it 
occupied the chief part of their criminal sessions. In some 
cases very heavy penalties were imposed. Ezra Houghton, of 
Lancaster, 1 in 1777 was indicted for passing upon William 
Whitney a false and fraudulent bill of credit, of the value of 
75. iod., and money of the United States to the value of 4s. 
He was found guilty and sentenced to pay a fine of £4000. 
Three years later he was tried and convicted of the same of- 
fence, was sentenced to pay a fine of £200 and costs, and triple 
damages to the one defrauded. 

Jotham Bush, 2 of Shrewsbury, was condemned to pay a 
fine of £20, to be set on the gallows for one hour with a rope 
around his neck, to pay treble damages and costs to the party 
he had defrauded and to suffer three months' imprisonment. 
The Spy of November 27, 1777, says that " yesterday 
Jotham Bush sat on the gallows for one hour for passing 
counterfeit money." He was not heard from in Shrewsbury 
again. He was sent to the Board of War in Boston, which con- 
fined him on a ship in the harbor. In the following January, 
1778, he petitioned the Assembly, praying that, being seized 
with smallpox, he be immediately removed on shore, and re- 
questing that his son be allowed to go on shore to attend 
him. This seems to sustain the tradition which prevails 
among his descendants that he died of smallpox in Boston 
and was buried in the old Granary Burying Ground. His sons, 

1 Records Superior Court Judicature, 1778-80, 171. 2 /j 


Jotham, Jr., and John, were subsequently convicted of passing 
counterfeit money, and his son David had his estate con- 
fiscated. Altogether the Bush family experienced the full 
weight of colonial wrath. 

The only physician, besides Dr. Ephraim Whitney before 
named, convicted under this statute was Dr. Abraham Has- 
kell, 1 of Lunenberg, who was arraigned for counterfeiting and 
also for passing counterfeit money. He was found guilty of 
the second, but acquitted on the first offence. On the charge 
of circulating the "queer" he was sentenced to pay a fine of 
£30, to sit one hour on the gallows with a rope around his neck, 
to suffer five months' imprisonment and to pay £26 to the 
one he had defrauded. 

Samuel Burnham, 2 of Bolton, was sentenced to stand one 
hour in the pillory, to pay fines to the amount of £238 and to 
be whipped forty stripes. There were two other indictments 
against him for the same offence, on one of which he was fined 
£90. In the case of many of the convicts whipping was a 
part of the penalty imposed. 

James Jewell, 3 of Sterling, was sentenced to be set in the 
pillory one hour, whipped twenty stripes on the bare back 
and to have the under part of his right ear cut off, and also 
to pay costs. These are fair illustrations of the penalties im- 
posed. Altogether, there were thirty-nine convictions of the 
crime in Worcester County. The courts were organized to 
convict and did so in nearly every case. Seven of the offenders 
were from Shrewsbury, more than three times as many as 
from any other town. This is explained by the fact that 
Jotham Bush's hotel was a station on the Tory route from 
Londonderry, New Hampshire, to New York, over which the 
loyalists travelled to British headquarters to get their supplies 
of counterfeiting tools. It was a sort of distributing centre, 
and Bush was an active agent in the business. 

It was, however, the Committee of Safety and Correspond- 
ence, organized in nearly every town, that told heaviest upon 
the Tory. Edward Clark, of Rutland, was convicted of selling 
tea and was immediately voted an enemy of American liberty. 
For a similar offence the people of Lancaster were warned to 

1 Records Superior Court Judicature, 15. 2 lb., 78. 

3 Records Superior Judicial Court, 1785. 


have nothing to do with Solomon Houghton, except in acts of 
common humanity. In Barre, John Caldwell and John Black, 
for getting a town meeting called to consider Lord Howe's 
offer of Conciliation, "to the great grief of the people," were 
held up to view as public enemies, and it was recommended 
that they be disqualified from holding office. Out of many, 
these are typical incidents which show the thoroughness with 
which the laws were enforced. 

Later in the war the Tories employed still another method 
of attack, namely, resistance to the collection of taxes. In 1780 
and 1 78 1 the currency of both State and nation had become 
practically worthless. Assessments were heavy and the people 
had become impoverished by the war. It is not surprising, 
in view of the Tory attitude, that the loyalists should bitterly 
oppose the collection of taxes, assessed illegally, as they 
claimed, to continue a struggle to which they were opposed. 
There were riotous outbreaks in several towns, in Peters- 
ham, Paxton, Sturbridge, Douglas and Dudley. The 
authorities suppressed these riots with a vigorous hand and 
brought the participants to the bar of justice. In the indict- 
ments the defendants were charged with being "seditious and 
turbulent persons, hostile to the United States of America and 
the government, opposed to the independency of the United 
States and to the measures taken by Congress for the independ- 
ency of the United States, also for preventing the collection 
of taxes, and stirring up disaffection and riotously preventing 
the execution of the law." In a single indictment found at 
the April term, 1783, and tried in the following September, 
eighty citizens of Douglas and towns in the vicinity were pre- 
sented by the Grand Jury for the above offences. At the same 
term fifteen, and at a former term twenty-three, from Dudley 
were also indicted, seven from Petersham, twelve from Stur- 
bridge and several from Paxton. 1 Those found guilty were fined 
in sums varying from thirty shillings to eight pounds each. 

The procedure of the Tories in these riots was much the 
same in all cases. Where the collector had advertised a sale, 
it was their habit to send notices to all their friends in the neigh- 
boring towns and adjoining State to assemble at the auction, 
and there, when the sale was called, create a disturbance, rescue 

1 Records Supreme Judicial Court, 1783, 212. 


the property and drive away the auctioneer and collector. 
Altogether one hundred and forty-three were indicted for these 
offences. A large majority of the defendants either pleaded 
guilty or were tried and convicted. 

No trace has been found of any secret organization of Tory 
sympathizers, and to what extent they had passwords or 
secret signs of recognition is not known; but they often held 
clandestine meetings for consultation and to plan methods of 
obstruction and hindrance to the colonial cause. The patriots 
were quick to break up these assemblies, and when any such 
were suspected, the participants were discovered and brought 
before the committee and dealt with. The penalty, in addition 
to holding them up to contempt as public enemies and com- 
manding the people to have no dealings or associations with 
them, usually was to forbid more than two of them asso- 
ciating together, and to limit their movements to the farm 
they occupied, except for the purpose of attending church or 
funerals. Some of them did adopt secret signs or marks of 
recognition, placed usually in a conspicuous place upon their 
houses; for they confidently awaited the day when their 
cause would triumph, and by these signs their persons and 
property would be spared from the violence and general 
destruction which they believed would certainly follow. 

The Toryism of Worcester County was largely in spots. 
One centre of influence was Lancaster, the oldest and then 
one of the largest and richest towns in the country. Five 
estates were confiscated. Several persons were prosecuted for 
passing counterfeit money, and others fell under the inquisition 
of the Committee of Safety. Mr. Nourse names thirteen who 
received official attention for Tory sympathies. Hard wick 
was another Tory centre. Here lived Colonel Ruggles, who 
himself and all his family clung to the English side. There 
were, besides, six others who fell victims of the people's wrath. 
In Worcester the Chandler family * and their kinsmen, the 
Paines, were Tories. In all, fifteen were publicly recognized 
and dealt with as loyalists. Rutland was the home of Colonel 
John Murray, and it was also the home of six or eight loyalists 
who received official attention. Besides these places were the 
towns of Northborough and Shrewsbury, each of which had a 

1 See Davis, The Confiscation of John Chandler's Estate. 


number of the same complexion. Some of the towns did not 
have any, at least existing records do not so show, while most 
of them had from one to thirteen each. In all, there were 
about two hundred and fifty Tories in Worcester County 
who were subjects of official action. ■ To sum up, thirty-one 
were banished by the Act of 1779, two by a previous act and 
two afterwards. Thirty-five estates were confiscated, thirty- 
nine were prosecuted for passing counterfeit money, besides 
several more who were arrested for the same offence and thrown 
into jail but not tried. Eleven were convicted for using trea- 
sonable language and heavily fined, and many more — there 
is no complete record of their names or number — were con- 
victed of disloyalty, in addition to those riotously resisting the 
execution of the laws — not a very great number out of a 
population of thirty thousand. But this does not show the 
real extent of British sympathy. Unfortunately, the records 
of the State under the Test Act were not preserved. In New 
Hampshire, however, which contained as few Tories in ratio 
to the population as any State of the thirteen, the name of 
every one who signed the Test, and of every man who refused, 
is preserved. Eight thousand five hundred and sixty-seven 
accepted the Test Act and seven hundred and eight-nine, or 
almost ten per cent, refused to sign. It is entirely safe to say 
that ten per cent of the county population openly or secretly 
hoped for the final triumph of King George III, and would have 
been found active on his side had the circumstances been 
favorable for positive action. But the patriot party had pos- 
session of every office, state and local, in the Commonwealth; 
and the timid, the indifferent, the time-server and the crowd 
which always joins the strongest side, but whose secret sym- 
pathies are with the other, did not dare to whisper their real 
preference for the English. It is well known that the British 
generals counted very largely on Tory aid to their armies in 
the different campaigns, which in the New England states 
did not materialize. General Burgoyne especially thought 
that the loyalists would flock to his camps as soon as he crossed 
the border, and he depended strongly on their assistance for 
the success of his invasion. It is needless to say that he was 
grievously disappointed. The patriots of the New England 
States had so overcome and crushed the loyalist element within 


their borders that it was unable to render him any effective 

Some of the loyalists were among the ablest and foremost 
men of the county at the outbreak of the war. Notable among 
them was Colonel John Murray. Another prominent man 
was James Putnam, of Worcester. He was born in Danvers 
in 1725, graduated at Harvard in 1746 and opened a law 
office in Worcester in 1749. He speedily made his way to the 
head of the bar, and was appointed Attorney General of 
the Province in 1773. His biographer says of him that he 
"was the best lawyer in America." John Adams studied law 
in his office. He was one of the first to cast in his lot with 
the Crown, and his estates were confiscated. Afterwards he 
was a judge of the Supreme Court of New Brunswick and 
died in 1790. He never saw Worcester after his flight in 1775. 

But the most prominent Tory of all was Colonel Timothy 
Ruggles, perhaps the ablest man in the county. He was born 
in Rochester, Massachusetts, in 171 1, and graduated at 
Harvard in 1732. He kept tavern, tended bar and was in the 
livery stable business in his earlier life. Going to Hardwick 
in 1753, he opened a law office and rapidly won high place. 
He was a keen wit, and his manners and speech were blunt and 
profane. 1 In the French and Indian war he commanded a 
regiment, and in the battle near Lake George, * in which the 
French commander, Baron Dieskau, was killed, he was second 
in command under General Johnson. When the battle was 
over he told his commander, "General, I hope the damnable 
blunders you have made this day may be sanctified to your 
spiritual and everlasting good." In days prior to the war he 
was the leader of the Tory party in the legislature, as Otis was 
of the patriots. He presided, in 1765, over a convention of 
delegates from eight States to consider the grievances imposed 
by Parliament, but refused to assent to the action of the As- 
sembly and was severely censured by it. Appointed Chief 
Justice of the Court of Common Pleas in 1773 and chosen a 
Mandamus Councillor in 1774, he adhered to the Crown and 
went to the British army, where he was active through the 
war recruiting for the army and organizing the Tories into 
regiments. The angry colonists confiscated his estates. He 

x He is satirized in Mrs. Warren's The Group as Brigadier Hateall. 




went to Nova Scotia at the end of the struggle and died in 
Halifax in 1798. 

One of the saddest tragedies in the history of Worcester 
County was connected with his family. The three sons fol- 
lowed the father on to the English side and were proscribed 
and banished. His daughter, Bathsheba, married Joshua 
Spooner, a man considerably older* than herself and not of 
attractive personality. She was of remarkable personal beauty, 
educated in the best schools of the time, but haughty in 
manner and of an imperious and demanding temper. Tiring 
of her husband, she plotted his murder and engaged three men 
to do the deed. All four of them were arrested, tried and 
convicted of the crime and sentenced to death. She was in 
a delicate condition, but said nothing about it until after she 
was sentenced, when she demanded a trial to have the fact 
determined. A jury of midwives was summoned, which decided 
against her claim. On the morning of her execution, just before 
she left her cell, she was baptized and professed belief in her 
Saviour. As she stood upon the platform awaiting her turn, she 
said to the sheriff, "My dear sir, I am ready; in a little time I 
will be in bliss, and but few years must elapse when I hope I 
shall see you and my other friends again." She was indifferent 
to her fate, made no request for life and constantly refused to 
beg for mercy; she acknowledged her sentence was just when 
standing on the gallows. After her death it was found that the 
claim as to her condition was true. It was July 2, 1778, that 
she went to her doom, amid a terrific storm of rain and light- 
ning. 1 The circumstances of her execution sent a thrill of horror 
through the community, and she was the last woman ever 
executed for murder in Worcester County. 

There is much to be said in criticism of the treatment of 
the loyalists by the colonies. To the acts of personal violence 
and the destruction of property there is no defence for the 
patriot party. But in confiscating the property of Tories who 
fled to the enemy, in the banishment of their leaders, in the 
suppression of treasonable talk, in the rigid surveillance of all 
suspected of disloyalty and in curbing their movements, the 
people were justified. It was a desperate struggle, and up to 
the capture of Burgoyne, at least, the chances of the final 
1 See Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society, v. 430. 


issue were four to one in favor of Great Britain. It is as legiti- 
mate to cripple and destroy the domestic enemy's power and 
resources as to fight the foe on the field of battle. All countries 
have done it in time of war; we did it, though less generally 
and effectively, in our Civil War. It must be remembered, 
too, that the Tories were equally vindictive and cruel, and had 
they possessed the power or had they finally prevailed, they 
would have done the same. A perusal of the literature of this 
phase of the Revolution makes that clear beyond a doubt. 
Of those who fled or were banished, very few ever returned. 
The families of some of them remained at home, and others, 
after the death of the father or husband, came back and lived 
and died in their native town. The story of their hardships 
and sufferings in exile is one of the most pathetic episodes in 
American history, but neither time nor space permits their re- 
cital here. 

Letters of William Pynchon. 1 

The first entry in the Colonial Records of Connecticut, April 
26, 1636, concerned the trading of a gun with the Indians for 
corn, a transaction against the interest of the English settlers 
on the Connecticut River, but indicating in a measure the 
importance of corn to the new communities in that region. 
Land had been set apart to the Indians, and they agreed to 
pay an annual tribute to the English in corn. That grain sup- 
plied the local currency and was sent to Boston and the Dutch 
settlement at New Amsterdam, there to be exchanged for sup- 
plies or to be sold for cash or wampum. The economic life of 
the Connecticut River settlements centred on corn, and the 
supply in the first years being insufficient, purchases were 
made of the neighboring Indians. That this trade might not 
suffer by the misdeeds of irresponsible traders, who would 
rather antagonize the interests of both settlers and natives, it 
was early regulated. At a court held at Hartford, February 9, 
1637-38, the following order was passed: 

Whereas vppon serious Consideracon wee conceiue that the plan- 
tacons in this River wilbe in some want of Indian Corne, And on 
the same Consideracon wee conceiue if every man may be at liberty 

1 A note by the Editor. See also Mason, Springfield. 



to trucke with the Indians vppon the River where the supply of 
Corne in all likeliwood is to bee had to furnish our necessities, the 
market of Corne among the Indians may be greatly advanced to 
the preiudice of these plantacons, wee therefore thinke meete and 
doe soe order that noe man in this River nor Agawam [Springfield] 
shall goe vpp River amonge the Indians or at home at theire houses 
to trade for Corne or make any Contract or bargaine amonge them 
for corne either privately or publiquely vppon the paine of 5 5. for 
every bushell that hee or they shall soe trade or contract for; this 
order to endure vntill the next Generall Courte and vntill the Courte 
take other order to the contrary, and at the saide generall Courte 
there wilbe a setled order in the thing. 1 

When this order was taken only six members of the Court 
were present; but one month later, March 8, 1637-38, at a 
better attended Court, full regulations were framed and the 
administration placed in the hands of William Pynchon, a 
member of the Court. He contracted to deliver at Hartford at 
least five hundred bushels of good merchantable corn at five 
shillings a bushel, and might charge $s. 2d. a bushel for what- 
ever additional quantity be returned. The restraint on going 
up the river to trade with the Indians was continued, but any 
corn brought down by the Indians might be sold at four shill- 
ings a bushel. In addition the Court imposed the following 
conditions : 

In case of necessity, any family or familyes doe complaine of 
present necessities they are to repaire to 3 magistrates which may 
advise them for the supply, although it be to the dispensing with 
this order; prouided alsoe that if the said Mr. Pincheon bee inforced 
to raise the price with the Indians of sixe sixes of Wampum a pecke 
then the plantacons are to increase the pay of 5 s, per bushell, if he 
can abate any thing hee will sett of soe much of 5 5 per bushell. 
The payment to be made in wampom at 3 a penny or marchant- 
able beaver at x s. pounde. 2 

That the trade required regulation and that authority was 
given at this same Court to trade in corn with the Narragansett 
Indians, 3 the profits to belong to the " public," may be inter- 
preted as good evidence that the grain raised in 1637 had not 
been sufficient for the immediate needs of the settlers. The 

1 Conn. Col. Rec, 1. 11. 2 lb., 1. 13. 3 lb., 1. 14. 


loose traders had bought corn on speculation and put up the 
price by their bargaining with the Indians, and the corn on 
the River did not meet the demand. The recent death of 
John Oldham * had removed one whose irregular dealings with 
Whites and Indians and whose greed for gain had been 
shown on every occasion ; but the lessons to be derived from the 
careers of such unscrupulous traders had thoroughly been 
learned, and the regulation was justified. In this the River 
settlements only followed the example of Plymouth and Mas- 
sachusetts Bay, where the trade both in corn and with the In- 
dians had been placed under restraint for the good of the 
commonweal, to assure a supply for the settlements and to 
protect the Indians from fraud. 

The arrangement actually made did not at first work 
smoothly. Pynchon seems to have doubts of his being able to 
carry out his part of the contract, and the Court authorized 
Roger Ludlow and Captain John Mason "taking likewise 
such with them as shalbe meete, shall trade [in corn] to supply 
theire owne necessities and the necessities of some other that 
are in want." 2 The time at which this concession was made 
is not given, and no conjecture is possible. Then, too, the In- 
dians did not trust the English so far as to trade freely with 
them. Perhaps the natives, confused by the presence of the 
newcomers and hardly knowing what was really expected of 
them, planted no more than for their own consumption. They 
had bargained away their best lands, and, practically on 
reservations set apart for their use, were expected to contribute 
to the general needs, The Warranocke Indians, for example, 
asserted that they were afraid of the English. The Court sent 
to know why they had made this assertion, and "if they will 
not come to vs willingly then to compell them to come by 
violence, and they may leaue 2 of the English as pleadges in the 
meane time and to trade with them for Corne if they can." 3 
Captain Mason headed this mission which has all the appear- 
ance of a threat, intended to dispose the Indians to yield on 
every point, and trade away their corn whether willing and 
able, or not. 

This was in April, 1638, and some time must elapse before 

1 See Bradford, History of Plymouth Plantation. 

2 Conn. Col. Rec, 1. 16. 3 lb., 1. 17. 


the new harvest. Winthrop noted a severe winter and a late 
spring, and added "the spring was so cold, that men were 
forced to plant their corn two or three times, for it rotted in 
the ground." The fishing stations on the coast sent to the Bay 
for supplies, and at Plymouth corn "wente at a round rate, 
viz. 6 s. a bushell." * It would thus be seen that Pynchon had 
made a bad bargain and the course of the market tended to 
his disadvantage. The Court offered some relief, by raising 
the price of corn to "5 s. 6 d. in money, in wampum att 3 a 
penny, 6 s. per bushell, or if in beaver according to the order 
att 9 s. per pounde, yett this is not any way to infringe the 
bargaine formerly made with Mr. Pincheon for soe much 
Corne as he bringes in." Receivers of corn were appointed in 
each town, who should hold the grain till the needy people 
would pay the official price. 2 

Events followed one another in such rapid succession that 
it is difficult to place them in their proper sequence, or to 
measure the influence of each incident. The mission was sent 
to the Warranocke Indians to "settle a Trade between vs and 
them aboute Corne," Mason, a soldier, in command. Already 
Pynchon had fallen under suspicion of undue practices; "for 
that as was conceiued and vppon proofe appeared he was not 
soe carefull to promote the publicque good in the trade of 
Corne as he was bound to doe." This agent, exercising his 
function under a monopoly created by the state, was fined 
forty bushells of corn, or nearly one twelfth of the more cer- 
tain part of his trade — the five hundred bushells, assured of 
a market. 3 Here the record ends, and the letters and papers 
now printed for the first time give Pynchon 's side of the con- 
troversy with reasonable though not satisfying fullness. They 
explain the operation of the endeavor to regulate the trade in 
corn, and supplement the colonial records of Connecticut 
where they are defective. 4 

To John Winthrop, Jr. 

June 2, 1636. 

Mr. Wintrop our deere love and affection remembred with thanks 
for the care to send away my goodes which I have Reed and also 

1 Winthrop, History, 1. 265; Bradford, n. 269. 

2 Conn. Col. Rcc, 1. 18. 3 lb., 1. 19. 
4 These letters are in 81, D; 71 E; and 1 W., 114. 


paid all the fraight: but $H doth still remaine dew to you. I am 
now preparing to goe to the Bay and have settled vppon a planta- 
tion at Agawam : and cannot [torn] Towne without both ste [ 
for the best ground at Aagawa[m is so] incombred with Indians that 
I shall loose halfe the benifit yearely: and am compelled to plant on 
the opposite side to avoid trespassing thereon: so when I see you 
I shall talke more. 

I Reed, your letter: and think it a pore shift for the Indians of 
long Hand to lay all the fault vppon a Pequot sachem: so 
blesse you, your most loving Friend 

W. Pynchon. 

I have no good pen. 

I Reed the wampum you sent. 

Addressed: To the Right Worshipfull Mr. John Winthrop at the Rivers Mouth. 

Edward Hopkins to William Pynchon. 

Hartford the 16th of Janu. 1638-39. 

Sir, — With remembrance of my best Love and respectes I 
kindly salute you, etc. I receaved yours per Goodman Lewis, 
with the 5 lb. you sent by him onely one hollands dollar which you 
Count att $s. is nott worth nor will passe in payment att above 
4s. 6d, att most. I can say little to the Reconing with Mr. Whitney, 
he onely writt me to receave soe much money of you, having taken 
soe much up of mine in the Bay. I am perswaded att his returne 
he will give you a rationall answere for what he doth. I have trans- 
scribed out the order which was made in Court for your payment of 
the 40/6. I thought to have transcribed it againe, butt tyme will 
nott permit, and I hope you will read it as it is. I was ordered by 
the Court to write to you about the five that is due from you and 
for such moneys as are coming to the Cuntrey for such Bevar as 
you have traded according to the order made with your owne con- 
sent. You may please by the next oppertunity to give me an an- 
swere, for it will be expected from me. I pray you also send me 
word how you will deliver me 100 Bushells of good Corne in Aprill 
here at Harford. If you or any of your plantacon will deale uppon 
indifferent tearmes I shall give ready mony for it. I shall want some 
for my owne occations. I doubt not but you heare of the death 
of Mr. Harlackenden * and others in the Bay. I shall not add more 
at present but the remembrance of my best regard and love to 

1 Roger Harlakenden, born in Earle's Colne, in Essex, October 1, 161 1, came 
to New England in the Defence, 1635, with wife Elizabeth, daughter of Godfrey 
Bosseville, of York. He died of the smallpox November 17, 1638. 


Mr. Moxon 1 and Mr. Smith, 2 but take leave and rest yours in what 
I may 

Edwa. Hopkins. 

Addressed : To the worshipful his very loveing friend Mr. Wm. Pincheon at his 
house att Aguam d'ld. 

William Pynchon to [John Haynes]. 

Agaam this 2d May, 1639. 

Mr. Governor my respective love remembred to you and to 
Mr. Wells and to the rest of the magistrates with you. I reed a 
letter from you by Mr. Moxon the 20 April, 1639, which is by order 
of Court: But I perceive it is not intended for an answer to my 
apologie to the Elders of Windsor. 3 But only you tak up some things 
for a case that are so darke that you can hardly make true English 
of: and you rank them into 7 or 8 particulars: But the truth is I 
did look for a convincing answer in the maine grounds of the Courtes 
proceedings wherein I have wronnged the Country so as may stand 
with the censure of a court of equity: 

But I doe ingeniously confesse I can conceive no such convince- 
ment in any of thes particulars: But if it please the Court to take 
into consideration this defense of my apologie following. 

1 . You say I have charged myself e short of that which the Court 
charged me with all. But I professe to the vttermost of my mem- 
ory and of all the helpes I could get from Mr. Moxon or my sonn: 
I have not favored myself e in the full substance of any thinge: 
but if I have I shall be glad to see any materiall adition if the court 
please to expresse it to the full. 

2. To the 2d my consultinge with Mr. Moxon and my sonn 
about the matter of Corne is not the sole reason I aledg for my- 
selfe. But you may remember to what purpose I alledged my Con- 
sulting with them: I was charged in the matter of corne with un- 
faithfulnesse, self seeking, dishonest dealing: my answer to this 
was that I did nothing therein but with advise from Mr. Moxon 
and my sonn: now bring my profe to the matter for which it was 
intended, and you see how farr it will goe thus, he that counsells 
with Mr. Moxon and my son Smyth (for want of better) cannot 
be presumed in a court of iustice to be vnfaithfull, dishonest, self- 
seeking in the matter of Corne but rather desyrous as they can 

1 Rev. George Moxon, first minister of Springfield, who followed Pynchon to 
the Connecticut, and in 1653, to England. 

- Henry Smith, who married Ann, daughter of Pynchon. His mother, Frances 
Sanford, married Pynchon. 

3 Perhaps the paper on p. 48., infra. 




give light to him to goe the best way for the publike. But Mr. 
Pynchon etc. 

3. To the 3d supposed contradiction, viz. that I tould the 
Indians the Captains 1 price was lesse than mine, and yet hold 
forth in my apologie that my price was lesse than the Captaines: 
1. I grant that there is our appeerance the Captaines price was 
somewhat lesse than mine as it was held forth among us. 2lly. 
whereas it was vrged against me by the Court and Mr. Hooker 
that the Captain traded at an vnderprice therefore I was in my 
price eather deceitefull or vnfaithfull or both: In my apologie 
I plead that the Captaines vnderprice was not so much and so 
great as to prove that which was argued against me: yea in my 
apologie I plead that it is doubtfull whether the Captaines price 
in the issue, difference of waight and measure of corne considered, 
would prove lesse than mine if not more however it appeared to 
us at first, and if it did prove lesse yet it was uncertain to him, and 
therefore that difference of price was not a sufficient proof e of my 
dishonesty and unfaithfulnesse in my price of corne: and what con- 
tradiction is in this manner of pleading? 

But you say the Captains price to the plantations was cheaper 
than mine to my owne house and this you say is a great mistery: 
but if it be a great mistery to the Contry it is none to me that know 
the course of trading with the Indians and their fearefull disposi- 
tion as well as some others in the contry, and the rather because 
mine eyes have seene their often tremblings about that corne the 
Captaine bought of them till they had paid it, and mine eares 
have heard their often relations of their feare of the Captaine, 
and of the Sachims in the river and that the Captaine would have 
them take wampum which they would not have taken: and it is 
not a vsuall way of commerce with the Indians for many more 3. 
4 or 5, to goe as it were armed and to make open Declaration of 
their wates and in the name of all the Sachims in the river and to 
put wampum vppon them vppon trust: and when much corne went 
by us they declared their feare and therefore refused to land any 
with us tho the need was great till they had satisfied the Sachims 
in the River: and this satisfies me in the vnderstanding of the mis- 
tery though I know not how it will satisfie the Country. 

The Corn Trade. 2 

G. F. a magistrate is by order of a generall court intrusted to 
trade corne with the Indians for the Countries need and all others 
prohibited: within 7 nights after or there about sundry of the 

Captain Mason. 

2 A paper in the writing of William Pynchon. 


members of the generall court together with some 3 or 4 others, 
being no members thereof, in the tyme of the adiournement of the 
generall court did meete uppon a day that was not appointed by 
the generall Court: when and where contrary to the Reasons and 
groundes of the order above mentioned, another deputy is chosen 
to trade with the Indians for corne in the Countries behalf And is 
sent out in the name power and authority of a generall court: and 
all this is don without the knowledge consent or release of the 
magistrate first ordered by the generall Court. 

This 2d deputy thus deputed in his trading of corne with the 
Indians occasionally meetes with a Sachim (with whom he is desy- 
rous to trade but answers he dares not for feare of the said magis- 
trate first deputed when the 2d deputy comes with the said Sachim 
thus pretending feare to the house of the said magistrate first de- 
puted and requesting him to take off feares from the said Sachim 
that he might trade with him whereto the said magistrate answers: 
I will neather make nor medle. 

Now for this last clause of his answer he is complained of by the 
2d deputy and is sommoned by a warrant from 2 magistrates to 
appeare at the next Sessions of the Generall Court: where he is 
taxed for the said speech as a breach of his oath of magistracy and 
is fined therefore. 

Touchinge the last wordes viz I will neather make nor meddle 
the said deputy and another with him depose that those wordes 
were in answer to his request made to the said magistrate viz that 
he would take away feares from the said Sachim: but the said magis- 
trate and his servant (who was a present witness heering all passages 
and speeches betwixt the said magistrate and the said deputy) 
are ready to depose that the said speech was in answer to another 
request which the said deputy propounded to the magistrate: 
viz that he would further him in such a particular way of trading 
corne with the said Sachim: which way of tradinge the magistrate 
disliked in his iudgment as not conducinge to the Common good. 

And further the said magistrate imediately after the deputies 
cominge to his howse sent for 2 neighbors with whom he desyred 
to consult what course to take about the said deputies request: 
which 2 neighbers doe affirme thes 2 thinges. 1. that after their 
comminge the maine thing therein the said deputy desyred the 
magistrates furtherance was his helpe to bring the said Sachim to 
trade corne with him on such and such tearmes without any request 
at all of taking away feares: 2ly. what arguments or other meanes 
was thought of by the present company and propounded, if they 
were iudged by the said company usefull and furthering to the 
deputy in his design of tradinge, the said magistrate (being best 


exercised in the Indian tounge) spake accordingly to the said 
Sachim in the Indian language: and that enough was said to the 
said Sachim to take away his f eare if any were : and the 2 neighbors 
conceive that the argument used to the Indian might have bin 
sufficient to take away his feare, if any were. 


Mr Pynchons answere to the first Article 

That he could not trade so vnlesse for some small parcell at that 
tyme when he wrote that letter. 

Which answere we take not sufficient, for that his experience 
in one day was not sufficient to bottom such a passage from him 
to the court. 

In pursuance of his answere Mr Pynchon affirmed he had power 
to raise the price of the 500 bushells directly contrary to the words 
of the order. 

Also that he sent but one letter about the price of corne before 
the captaine came up, while brother Philips undertakes to prove 2 
letters sent up. 

* l To the 2d he answeres Captaine Mason came not up accord- 
ing to the reson rated in the first order. 

to the 1. clause. Relation being had to the record its there 
apparent that Captaine Mason came up by order of Court: here 
mr Smith was produced and witnessed that he saw amongst the 
orders and rolles lying upon the table in the generall court an 
order where in power was given to C. Mason to trade for corne, 
to the which order were only three hands of Mr Hooker, Mr 
Stone and Mr Whiting together with the hands of the magistrates 
and committees of the generall Court. 

2. To the last clause, he answeres that he and his servant then 
present are ready to depose that those words were an answere to 
other words and a request that mr Pynchon would further him in 
a particular way of trade with the Sachim which way mr Pynchon 
disliked as not conducing to the publique good: but that they were 
not spoken to the former request mr Pynchon sayth he leaves. 

Here brother Haukes spake a relation of particulars as he 
thought, but missed the Circumstances and spake contradictions, 
yet nothing to the purpose. 

2d answer. Mr Pynchon sayth he sent for Mr Moxon and mr 
Smith to advise about the C. request, and they can witnesse they 
heard no speach of the indians feares but that his whole request was 
to have Mr Pynchons help in the trade to their best apprehensions. 

1 The meaning of the asterisk is not clear. See p. 45, infra. 


To this our returne was, the C speakes expressly that those 
words neither make nor meddle were spoken as soone as mett in 
mr Pynchons house before they came to the wardhouse or those 2 
men came. 

Mr Pynchon sayth when the C. was willing to trade in a way 
mr P. did approve that then he tooke away the indians feares to 
the best he could, but while the Captaine went his owne way which 
Mr. Pynchon sayth he was unwilling to meddle or make. 

Heere Mr. Moxon and mr Smith testifie the C. expressed him- 
self satisfied though after breakefast he departed in discontent. 

to the 3. Article, Mr. P. answereth The Indian from the begin- 
ning was unwilling to trade with the Captaine on the Captains 
terms : to which our returne was that here is oath that he was willing 
before he came to Mr. Pynchon and also that his comming with the 
Captaine to get leave assigned his willingnesse to trade with leave. 

2d answer to the last clause. That mr Pynchon never used 
any words to discourage the indian from trading with the Captaine 
in mr Pynchons any x way: but what discourse [or] argument he 
might take by the measuring of the basket or otherwise I cannot 
tell, but for the Captains way he answered not. 

To the 4th Article mr Pynchon answereth: for his word concern- 
ing his man he remembreth no discouragement given by him but 
he thinketh he might seeme unwilling that his servant should act 
for that there was some clause in the order respecting tribute and 
a compelling way of trade which he was ever against. 

To the 2d clause. He doth believe they had made promisses of 
corne to him and that he might speake of such promisses being 
engaged by the Country to make what provision he could and that 
his light was for a free trade with them. And others that were sent 
seemed to go another way, so that his iudgment being against their 
way he thinketh he did not do amisse. 

To the 5 Article, he answereth that it was a great grief e to him 
that he could not answere the necessitie of the river being seated 
so conveniently for it, but it was occasioned hereby that others 
having after comissions granted he was hindered in the way of 
trade and thinketh the comission so grannted were a discharg to 
him in that trust. Yet it was his desire to further the service what 
he could. 

Our retorne is that nothing was done by any by way of power or 
compulsion the C. used nothing but love nor goodman Stebbins 
and the others used any thing but love: and that mr Ludlow in his 
letter before any commissioners came up had satisfied you that no 

1 A word underlined. 


hostilitie was intended at this tyme and that the Indian was peremp- 
tory not to trade with the Captaine, what fear then of power. 
And that power seemes used by mr P. who punished him. 

* That there was more interim before the Captaine went up 
appeareth; the conclusion was upon the 4th day and they went 
forward upon the 5th day, and the provision of necessaries required 
some tyme so that they went not the next day: And when they 
went they addressed themselves to Messacho first and at Pequan- 
nock they traded their wampum away and were forced to come home 
for supply. 

Matthew Mitchell x to William Pynchon. 

Sir, — I received your letter by Judah and this yesternight by 
your men and have spoake to Goo. Hubbert at both times: but I 
know noe safe meanes of Conveyance of a letter till now, beeing 
not within when Judah came and went, and I heard of yoo. Cables 
occasion of coming downe and hoped I might as now I may, write 
and send by some of your people. Goo. Hubbert is full in his testi- 
mony] about raising the tearmes of the Contract hee well remembers 
even that of raising to $s or what it was. if the Indians did raise it 
so much to you hee saith noe body will denie it but the magies- 
trates. all grant that but saith hee they conceive he for his own 
ends would have had the price raised with the Indians whereas hee 
having such interest in them might have had so much at ould prise. 
and Capt. Mason saith hee swore hee thought hee might, and 
hearin his unfaithfullnes to the Cuntrie in their trust and neede 
appeared, and mr Hooker said hee could not believe but soe wise 
a man as mr Pinchon knewe how to procure and had such power 
with the indians that hee might have performed, els hee would 
not have promised and ingaged him selfe on this manner doth Gev. 

1 Matthew Mitchell is described by Increase Mather as "one of the old Non- 
conformist Puritans, who left England and transported himself and Family 
for New-England, purely on the account of Religion, in 1635." He was of Halifax, 
in Yorkshire, and came to New England in the James, of Bristol, with his wife 
and children, and Rev. Richard Mather, and passed through the tempest which 
nearly wrecked the vessel. He removed to the Connecticut, and in 1636, joined 
with Pynchon in the plantation "at and over agaynst Agaam," later Springfield. 
Four years later he united with others to form a new plantation at Rippowams, 
afterwards known as Stamford, the cause of his departure probably being his 
unjust removal by the General Court from the office of recorder (or town clerk) 
of Wethersfield. Conn. Col. Rec., 1. 48. In 1642 he and John Whitmore were 
admitted members of the General Court of New Haven and "accepted the 
charge of freemen." New Haven Col. Rec, 1. 69; Huntington, History of Stam- 
ford, 37. He accompanied Rev. Richard Denton to Hempstead, Long Island, 
but returned to Stamford, where he died in 1645. 


reason and so did they you know in the Court, and I believe they 
will doe soe still: but I as fully beleeve that in your owne Con- 
science you are Cleane and that your arguments to an understand- 
ing man not preiudiced will Cleare it and you, and that you will 
not neede to his testimony nor would I advise you to be at so much 
Charges, nor do I doubt but with the Church of Rocksberie you 
will easilie come of and if you do the Experience of some saith, 
your Charges will be but in vaine and long and tedious Travells in 
your honest cause but in vaine except you could suite other mens 
apprehentions all will not doe. if you could but have the proba- 
tion of Rocksberie and mr Moxon and your neighbours satisfied 
I doe beleeve it would be your best to make hast into argument 
that you may [torn] all the ordinances and so lett other mens ex- 
ample shew you what the profitt of [torn] and Chargable debates 
and delay es will bring out, they will begett [torn] and the cause 
will degenerate and new offences grow and as [torn] end as at first 
I would be glad if you were settled on the Connecticut torn] was 
out of England now is good and probable to be true for what wee 
[torn] now by mr Winthorp Confirmed and he saith he doth beleeve 
it it was [brought] by the fishing shipps as afore by the Desire 
Cutting came in haueing laded in France brought sum newes of 
it but they bring it full, the partickulers I leave to your men whom 
I tould as well as I could, if this be soe there will com but some 
passingers over, and if not, men do not incline northward winters 
are so Teedious and many places on the coast to rill up and long 
Hand and Delayware bay intice men thinke of it. I doubt I shall 
not gett soe much spare time as to see you befoore I goe. if I can 
I will, for my love would and dutie and your exceeding love to 
meward hath oblidged me. I do acknowledge my selfe much be 
houlding to you and know not how to make recompence. you 
have beene aboundant in love, my wife was now ataking those 
you sent formerly because of the could shee deffered. but now shee 
may continue a good while in her course of takeing shee rindes 
good by them they worke kindly, and I hope do her much good and 
shee is very thankfull to you desire if shee had it to show her selfe 
and my selfe thankfull god may give an opportunitie and meanes 
together, in the mean time wee are like to rest much behoulding 
to you. with our love to your selfe and mrs Pinchon kindly 
remembered and to mr Moxon, mr Smith and their wives and 
to Sam Hubbert, and so with our dayly well wishes and prayers to 
god for you wee rest your much indebted and loving servant to 

his P° wer ' Math. Mitchell. 

Addressed: To his very loving and much Respected frend Mr. Wm. Pinchon. DD. 



In the tyme of my tryall I was impleaded for unfaithfull dealing 
in the trade of come, and mr Hooker was sent for by the Court to 
give his iudgment whether I had not broken the oath of a magis- 
trate and he delivered his iudgment peremptorily that I had broken 
my oath but I being unsatisfied how he could mak his charge good 
have often caled up pon him to make it good and he hath often 
promised and yet delayed to doe it to this day: and yet the Elders 
of winsor Church have wrote to the Elders of Roxbery that mr 
Hooker hath acquainted them with it and therefore they must 
have mr Hookers challeng : and I conceive that the Elders of Rox- 
bery will expect that as you have given them intelligence that I 
am charged by mr Hooker with this foule offence that either you 
will see mr Hooker mak it good or acquit me of the guilt: for if 
mr Hooker do not mak it good many wronges will follow. 1. his 
credit is wronged by vndertaking to mak that good which yet he 
hath not don in a long distance of tyme. 2ly. I am wronged in 
my Cause and made a grieved magistrate vniustly. and 3ly the 
general Court are wronged to ground their censure vppon his iudg- 
ment. But I must expect to see this Charge demonstrated by posi- 
tive proofe such as may stand with the iust censure of a Court of 
equity, for certaine punishment must be grounded vppon certaine 
proofe, and not vppon surmises or preiudice or the like mistaken 
groundes, or els it is but a deceiving of the Court in their proceed- 
ings which is a dangerous thing to the Court as in the example of 
the ould and present misguiding the young prophet he trusted to 
his iudgment and counsell but it cost him dere. 

In another thing also I was charged with breach of oath as a 
magistrate for it was alledged against me (by mr Hooker as well as 
by others) that I should have bin so ready to further the Indians in 
transportation of their corne from woronoco that I should have but 
my Care which I manifested that I did offer to send the best I had 
and such a one as they like well of at another tyme. but because 
the Indian refused that and would only have a neighbors cano : I was 
charged that I ought to have borrowed it. which gapped I also 
stopped and manifested that I intreated mr Moxon livinge at the 
next door to borrow it. But the owner refused to lend it because 
notwithstanding his dayly need of it the Indians would not promise 
to bring it vp againe till fishing tyme, which was about 6 weekes 
after: Then I was charged with neglect of my duty and breach 
of my oath because I did not presse the cano for the Indians 
vse: A strange reason to prove the breach of my oath: If mag- 


istrates in N. E. should ex officio practise such a power our mens 
proprieties, how long would Tyrany be kept out of our habita- 
tions: Truly the king might as legaly exact a loan Ex officio of 
his subjects by a distresse on mens proprieties (because he pleades 
as greate necessity) as to presse a Cano without a legall order. The 
lawes of England count it a tender thing to touch another mans 
propriety and therefore many have rather chosen to suffer as in a 
good cause then to yeeld their goods to the king ex officio: 1 and to 
lose the liberty of an English subject in N. E. would bring woefull 
slaviry to our posterity: But while governments are ordered by 
the lawlesse law of discretion, that is transient in particular mens 
heades may be of dangerous consequence quickly if Mephibosbeth 
had but the lawes of an English subiect to defend his right Siba 
could never have enioyed Y2 his bed. as though I am necessitated 
to speek much of this for my further clering in the breach of oath 
yet [illegible] may serve for a gentill caution to those whom 

it may conscerne. 

I thinke it needful to put you in mind of one thing more: when 
I desire of you the dismission of my cause to the C[hurch] of Rox- 
bury the Elders of that Church did write to the Elders of the Church 
of Roxbury. you allege this as one R[eason] why you could not 
dismisse it as mr Hooker. 

To the Church at Windsor. 


Reverend and beloved: I rec'd your letter: but am necessita- 
ted to proceed in my journey this day: for I have appointed with 
severall Friends to meete them in the Bay this week upon weighty 
occasions and some heere have waited on me this 5 or 6 dayes to 
goe with me: and the Reasons which you aledge of the brethrens 
unwillingness to put it from them seem not to me sufficient. My 
Cause hath bin agitated in the Court and witnesses produced, and 
if there be any further testimony magistrates can take their testi- 
mony in writing and Elders also so as it will be accepted and I 
conceive it is usual in such cases I have no witnesses but in writing: 
neather seemes it faire to me that the greved brethren having 
delayed me so long should now put me of having so faier an oppor- 
tunity of issuinge the matter. I know not when nor where to have 
the like suppose I had given you a meeting now and we could not 
close to the satisfiing of each other then the greved brethren must 

1 Se Sr John Fortescue in his treatise of Rights. — Note by Pynchon. 


be necessitated to lay their hands of and to refer it to the Church 
at Roxbury therefore why not now: and what can they doe more 
eather then or now but signifie their grievances to the Church 
whereof I am a member, and seeing you cannot but conceive me 
sick in the 2 y[ears] delays and my mind stand prest to give satis- 
faction to the Church at Roxbury, and as you shall advise accord- 
ing to rule to others also: I hope vppon 2d thoughts I shall find you 
will answer my desyre to the Church of Roxbury this next week. 
So Jehovah cause his face to shine vppon your councills. Your 
ever assured in the L[ord] 

William Pynchon. 

I have sent this return by a speciall messenger for I may not 
occasion delay but would give you all tyme that may be against 
next week. 

Addressed: To the Reverend Elders of the Church of Windsor, Mr. John Ware- 
ham, pastor or Ephraim Huit Teacher, d[eliver] this. 

To the Reverend Elders of Roxbury Church. 

23 March 1640 [41.] 

Reverend and beloved my desyre and endevor with other 
godly persons among us hath bin continued longe for Church con- 
dition but hither to have bin lett, cherfuly but sinefull thinges 
have bin imputed to me, but I notwithstanding stand to defend 
my inocency in the thinges whereof I am accused therefore as 
duty bade me I mak bould to crave your advise and counsell in 
this case: the maine matter is about faling from the Gover- 
ment of the River to the Bay Jurisdiction: my son Smyth is only 
calld by the Church to answer in this point, but one of the Elders 
tould me that this matter did cheifly conserne me, and also that it 
conscerned Mr. Moxon as much as my sonn, but they would choose 
to deale with my son in this matter but he was their member and 
therefore they had more power over him then over me, and in their 
determination they have concluded against us in generall as you 
may perceive by the coppie of it: now this is the point of counsell 
that I request at your hands, whether uppon scanning of all par- 
ticulars you will iudge me guilty of those sinefull imputations I 
would walk by consell and by my selfe by your iudgment, for as 
yet the light of my conscience is much differing from the churches 
determination, they determine many grosse sinns against us for 
doing that which we conceive we have don out of consceit of our 
duty: The particulars now sent by which you may iudge in this 



case are these, i. The Churches determination: 2ly. my sons 
Replie to the Churches determination. 3ly my sonns letter to Mr 
wareham a weeke before the determination. 4ly the manner of our 
ioyning and faling from the River. 5 The coppie of the commission 
which brother Johnson sent me from mr Nowell: by all those partic- 
ulars I conceive you will have full light to iudge whether you appre- 
hended me guilty of those sinfull imputations: As for my sonns 
leaving the Church without leave: (tho it was when the Church was 
parted half in the River and half in the Bay) that is particular to 
him. But the point of Councill that I desyre is in the other things 
v/herein I am a sharer, [in that letter x we only rite such passages 
as the Church makes use of to prove our full dismission from the 
Bay, and we desyre the Court to expound their meaning in those 
passages, but you may see in my sonns answer to the Churches 
determination how we understand and expound the meaning of those 
passages: but we cannot fully conclude that the court will make the 
same interpretations till we try their exposition, neather can they 
conclud that their expositions are right till the minde of the Court 
be further tryed.] 2 

for though I am not yet caled by the Church to answer, yet I 
expect to be shortly caled and therefore I desyre your counsell 
beforehand but I would gladly attend the Church in such a way of 
satisfaction as may be according to justice and truth: and this is 
•my maine scope in desyring your faithfull concill herein and as 
speedy a return as you can. 

A second thing wherein I desyer your advise is touching a letter 
to the generall court which is sent unsealed on purpose to intreat 
your advise whether you iudge it every way convenient to be de- 
livered in case there be a generall court at present: or whether your 
advise is to suppresse it for a tyme: I am intreated by the rest to 
intreat you to weigh circumstances of and mr Moxon hath 

writ to mr. Mather to helpe with his advise: but I leve that to you 
and if your advise be to deliver it to the Court then I conceive it 
meete that after you have given your advise so to doe that some 
other should take the letter and attend the Court for their answer 
and I know noe fitter then our brother Johnson: and to him I have 
writ that in case you advise to deliver it that he should attend the 
Courtes answer: and in case there be no generall Court till the 
Election Court then we conceive if your advise be not contrary to 
acquaint some of the Councill or the magistrates as you shall think 
fitt if possible you may set (?) any further light thereby to iudge 

1 The letter to the General Court, mentioned below. 

2 The portion between brackets was struck out. 


and advise what may be meete for me to do further in our case 
and how I may be able to answer the Church when I am caled: I 
am loth to troble you further and [rest] your brother in Christ [ ] 

W. Pynchon. 

Land Purchase. 

Thes presentes witnesseth this 20 day of Aprill 1641 a bargaine 
betweene William Pynchon of Springfield on Quinettecot River 
on the one party and Nippumsuit of Naunetak in the name and 
with the consent of other Indians the owners of certaine grounde 
hereafter named viz. with name and behalf of Mishsqua and 
her sonn Saccarant and Secausk and Wenepawin all of Woronoco 
and Misquis the owner of Skep and other grounds adioyning and 
Jancompawm of Nanotak on the other party witnesseth that the 
said Nippumsuit with the consent and in the name of the rest for 
and in consideration of the sume of fifteene fathom of wampam 
by tale accounted and one yard and three quarters of double shagg 
bages one how seaven knifes seaven payer of sessars and seaven 
aules with certaine fish hooks and other smale things given at their 
request: all thes being in hand paid to the said Nippumsuit in the 
name of the rest: and for and in consideration of the said goods 
paid before the subscribing hereof hath barganed sould given and 
granted and by thes presentes hath fully and cleerely barganed and 
absolutely granted to the said William his heires and assignes for 
ever all the groundes meddowes and woodlandes lieng on the East 
side of Quettcot river from the mouth of Chickoppy River vp to 
another smale Riveret caled Wollamansak sepe which Riveret 
runs into Quinnettecot River with the meddow and planting 
groundes caled Paconemisk and all other meddowes that are wet 
and hassocky lyeing betweene the said Riveretes. Also all the 
woodlande lieng about three or fower miles vp Chickuppy River 
and the meddow there caled skep alias skipnuck, or by what other 
name or names the said groundes be caled with all the pondes 
waters swampes or other profitte adioyning to all the said premises 
with all the Ilandes in chickuppy River and the meddow and 
swampes caled Pissak on the south side of Chickuppy river near the 
mouth of the River: The said Nippumsuit with the consent of the 
Rest above named hath absolutely sould to the said William his 
heires and assignes for ever: to have and to hould the said premises 
with all and singular their appurtenances free from all incom- 
brances of other Indians: and the said William doth condition 
that the said Nippumsuit shall have liberty of fishing in Chickuppy 
at the usuall wares that now are in use: In witnesse of these pres- 


ents the said Nippumsuit with the consent of the Rest hath sub- 
scribed his marke the day and yeare first above written being the 
twenty day of the second month 1641. 1 

(Facsimile of signatures on opposite page) 

given to Wenepawin at the subscribing one yard and Y 2 for a 
coate of broad Bayes: and 1 pair of brieches to Misquis and 6 
knifes to them all : also I trusted Misquis for a coate which he never 
paid and he was trusted vppon respect of setting his hand to this 

May the 24th 1641. When Secousk sett her hand to this writ- 
ting Mr. Pynchon gave her 12 handes of wampom and a knife. 

8t mon: 9 day 1643. When Jancompowin sett his hande to this 

writtinge in the presence of us and Coe Mr. Pynchon gave him a 

coate and a knife. He came not to sett his hand to this writtinge 

till this day. Witnesses ~ ,, 

J Geo: Moxon. 

Henry Smith. 

John Pinchon. 

The woman caled Secousk above said who was the widdow of 
Kenip after she had 12 handes of wampum and a knife: came 
againe to Mr. Pynchon the 27 June 1644: desyringe a further re- 
ward in respect she said that she had not a full coate as some others 
had: thereuppon Mr. Pynchon gave her a childe coate of Redd 
Cotton which came to 8 hande of wampum and a glasse and a 
knife which came to above 2 hande of wampom more: in the pres- 
ence of Janandua her present husband: witnesse my hand per me 
William Pynchon and she was fully satisfied. 

Also Nippumsuit had another large coate for his sister that he 
said had right in the said land which came to 165. 

Also the wampom within named was current money pay at 8s 
per fathom at the tyme it was paid, per me. 

William Pynchon. 

Know all men that I William Pynchon of Springfield gent doe 
assigne sett over give and grant all my right in the land within 
named which I bought of Nippumsuit and divers other Indians 
1 641: to my son John Pynchon of Springfield gent and to Capt. 
Henry Smith and to Ensigne Holioak all of Springfield to them and 
their heires and assignes for ever to be disposed by their discretion 
for Farmes belonginge to Springfield at such rates as in their cous- 

1 The body of the document is in the writing of William Pynchon. 






tome they shall iudge to be Reasonable: witnesse my hand and 
seale this 17th day of April 1651. 

William Pynchon. [Seal] 

Sealed and delivered and possession given in presence of 
Thomas Cooper Rec'ed in Courte Septr. 

Henry Burt 30 1670. attest 

Simone Bernard. Sam'll Partrigg Clerk. 

Endorsed: The purchase of the Land of Chickuppy up to Wallamansock scape: 
and ot Skeepmuck and the land adjoyning, with Father's Deed of Gift of it. 

[To Edward Hopkins]. 

28 December, 1644. 

Mr. Governor I have Rec'd your letter and thank you for your 
loveinge discourse about your purchase of the forte with the apper- 
tenances at the Rivers mouth: and it seemes the payment is to be 
made by an impost vppon corne etc for 10 y[ears] and you think 
also that we will readily yield to beare our share therein bee it 
hath bin and may be a great Benifitt to the River and so to us as a 
part of the River for the charges past while we were of you we paid 
our part in a large Rate that way: what benifits it may be to us for 
tyme to come I do not yet see. I must leave that to be further 
manifested by the wise disposing providence of god: I suppose you 
cannot expect us to come in amonge you as ioynt purchasers, 
neither do I think that you will laie any impost vppon our goodes 
as beares with you in the charge having no considerable benefit: 
for if you should it would be the 1st president you know we are 
vnder the Bay iurisdiction, and it were a point of vnfaithfulnesse 
in vs to yeeld to such a thing without their advise and consent 
and indeed if I may speake in the plainesse of my apprehensions I 
apprehend that the purchase tendes now to expresse their lovinge 
respecte to Mr. Fenick (whome I consceyve deserves much love) 
then to their own benifitt for I conceive that the forte will be a very 
great charge and litle or no benefit to the River in regard of any 
defence against potent and malignant shipps: for I think no ship 
is so hardy as to run vppon the danger of such flattes as the Rivers 
mouth is barred vp with all : tho it may be some friend may attempt 
to doe such a thing for friends sake, and as for pinaces I thinke that 
any towne or two in the River is sufficent to resiste the force of 
two or three pinnaces by taking advantage with one or two drakes 
if once they dare be so bould as to come up the River neere the 
place. But yet I that there is good use of the forte for the 

saftie of the Inhabitantes there in case of Indian warrs or in case 
of skulkers: 


As for newes out of the Bay there is none from England: but the 
19 of this month was kept as a day of fasting for England through 
all these plantations and as soone as that was over both Mr. 
Fowles 1 ship and Mr. Pilgrim 2 were to set sayle: in both were 
many passengers also the Lady Latore had hired Capt. Richardsons 
ship 3 to carry her home and 2 shipps of the Bay went in company 
laden with a great quantity of victuall commodity and other wares, 
and yet by report of a m[aste]r of a pinace that came lately from 
thenc Latore was well victuald before and had made a forte at the 
mouth of his River and the said master reported (who traded with 
Dalny 4 ) that he thought Dalny was not able to sustain the Charge 
of those 2 shippes that did attend them for surprisall of the Lady 
Latore and Capt. Richardson said he feared them not. 

Mr. Wilson of Boston was then very sick of a feaver. But my 
son Davis 5 was well receaved and marid about 5 days before the 
messenger came. 

As for a parsell of Corse wampum which you would bye: I had a 
great parsell of Mr. Williams many years since at 3 a penny: I 
sould 200 fathom of it to Natano at 5 a penny: and still I have I 
thinke about 200 fathom left besides a quantity of coarse blue which 
was had near double the rate of the former I am loath to sell at the 
rate that wampum is ordinarily sould lest I shall lose half in half 
by it. I hoping in tyme I shall put it of by litle and litle to Indians 
at lesse losse, neither can I get any quantity of fine wampum to you. 

As for my advise about the wife 6 my iudgment in phisike is but 
smale what experience I have I brought with me out of England. 
I have had no tyme to try any conclusions since I came hither: If 
it would please god to afford you the advise of such an one better 
experienced I should be gladd the Case is so intricate. I make no 
question but Mr Moxon and Gibson mite be ready to do any office 
of love for her that they can, but if I undertake any by her I can 

1 Probably Thomas Fowle, to whom two small guns were granted by the 
General Court, November, 1644, "provided hee give security to returne them 
by midsommer next." Mass. Col. Rec, 11. 79. 

2 Master of the Gillyflower. Mass. Col. Rec, 11. 83, 84, 90. His controversy 
with Lady Latour is related in Winthrop, History, 11. 199. 

3 Some merchants of Boston, who had had a ship taken in Wales by the King's 
party, sought to get compensation by attaching a Dartmouth ship, then in 
Boston harbor. The master delivered the ship into the hands of the magistrates, 
pending a decision of the claim, and she was taken by Captain George Richard- 
son, master of a London ship and bearing a commission from the Lord Admiral. 
See Winthrop, History, 11. 194. 

4 On Aulnay see Bradford, History of Plymouth Plantation. 

5 William Davis, of Boston, who married, December 6, 1644, Margaret 

6 Ann, daughter of — Yale, was insane for a period of fifty years. 


direct as much in absence as if I were present with her, if you can 
prevaile with her to stick close to rules of direction: yet I must tell 
you that that hot subtell vapor which hath taken possession of her 
brain is hard to be removed though it may be much helped through 
gods blessing uppon the event. I wish that she may as much as 
may be observe a plaine thin and diet: that will make least 

crudities and so lesse matter for those subtle vapours: let her not 
use to eate milk except it be turned into thin posset drink and if 
she will you may soake it with sugar wherein a little saffron and 
may be mixed viz to every ounce of sugar good 3 grains 
of saffron made into fine powder and a little scraped : 

and she may use of this eather in posset drink or in warmed bere: 
by the use of this and other attenuating drink her body will be 
brought to a sweating temper which I conceive will be a good help 
to nature: and a good helpe to the opperation of other phisik. 

And for phisik I shall cheafly advise to the compleat rest of pills 
if she will be perswaded to take them often and orderly and lastly 
gentle nosing in the spring of the yeare and in short tyme will open 
the brain and give some refreshment provided it be don by gentle 
means: but nosing powder tobaco and the like are to violent: but 
if lettuce leaves could be had nothing is so good as that : 

As for pills she may begin with them at the begining of March 
next : 

Did I understand that Mris. Moxen is to lie in at the begining 
of March. 

Mr. Sanborn exhibited some interesting papers of Lord 
Sheffield and gave a description of them. 

Remarks were made during the meeting by Messrs. Green, 
Stanwood, Norcross and Davis. 





Charles Eliot Norton was elected a member of the Massa- 
chusetts Historical Society, June 14, i860. Born November 
16, 1827, he was then not quite thirty- three ; his tastes and 
accomplishments had, however, already shown him excep- 
tionally eligible for participation in the work of the Society. 
At a previous election, five months earlier, Dr. Samuel 
Abbott Green had been chosen a member. For him and for 
Mr. Norton it was in store farthest to carry the traditions of 
an earlier day through the century of their birth into the next. 
The recently published Letters of Charles Eliot Norton give 
so extensive a record of his life and spirit that it would be 
superfluous in this place to present a memoir dealing in detail 
with what he was and did. It is enough to bring forward only 
the salient facts. First among them are the fortunate cir- 
cumstances of his birth and education. His father was a 
scholar, Professor Andrews Norton of Harvard College. Soon 
after his marriage, he and his wife, Catharine Eliot, acquired 
the Cambridge estate of Shady Hill, at which their only son 
who grew to manhood was born and died. The place afforded 
a social and intellectual background of the highest moment in 
the development and exercise of Charles Norton's qualities. 
Mr. Henry James has recently referred, in his Notes of a 
Son and Brother, to Shady Hill and "the Nortons" as "that 
institution and its administrators." No phrase could more 
happily state the case. The very permanence implied in an 
"institution" relates the earliest of Mr. Norton's years to his 



latest, and gives to his life a unity seldom found in the biog- 
raphy of Americans. 

The Cambridge boyhood came to an end with young Norton's 
creditable graduation from Harvard College with the Class of 
1846. The Rev. Dr. John Pierce, who attended and made 
notes upon forty-six consecutive Commencements beginning 
with 1803, wrote in his journal for August 26, 1846: "A Dis- 
sertation, 'Santa Croce,' by Charles Eliot Norton, son of 
Professor Norton, was among the best exercises both for com- 
position and elocution." x The charm of Italy was thus early 
exerting its spell over the young student. His graduation was 
followed by a few years of service in a Boston counting-house. 
In the employ of the firm of Bullard & Lee, he sailed in May of 
1849 as supercargo of the ship Milton, bound for Madras. 
The voyage gave him an opportunity for reading, which he 
turned to remarkable advantage. The opportunities of travel, 
both in India and in a leisurely return to America by way of 
Europe, were no less steadily improved. As in all his later 
years, he gave himself everywhere to the study of the life which 
for the time surrounded him, in its political, artistic and social 
expression. In Paris, London and elsewhere he formed per- 
sonal relations with many of the most interesting men and 
women of the time — Ary Scheffer, Lamar tine, John Kenyon, 
Crabb Robinson, the Brownings — and, best of all, began a 
friendship with George William Curtis, fresh from his 
" Howadji " experiences, a friendship which in a life of many 
intimacies became one of the most vital. At the beginning of 
1 85 1, with his twenty- third birthday only two months behind 
him, he found himself at home again, with the choice between 
the careers of a merchant and a man of letters still to be made. 

For a time there was a division of allegiance to the two pur- 
suits. But the office on Central Wharf in Boston, where Mr. 
Norton undertook some ventures in East India commerce, 
was visited less and less frequently, until by 1855 his mercan- 
tile career may be said to have ended. Already, in 1852, he 
had published his first book, Five Christmas Hymns, and the 
death of his father, in 1853, nad filled his hands with the edi- 
torial work involved in the posthumous publication of the elder 
Norton's writings. In 1853, also, he brought out his own 

1 2 Mass. Hist. Soc. Proceedings, v. 249. 


Considerations of Some Recent Social Theories, a thoughtful 
study of new tendencies now grown old, in which for the 
first time he appeared as author rather than editor. During his 
foreign travels the Norton family had become summer residents 
of Newport, and there, as at Shady Hill, the only son found much 
to engage him as the head of a household naturally drawing to 
itself all that was most agreeable in the life of its time and 
place. Mr. Norton's own friendships — with Lowell, Child, 
Stillman, Clough and others — began to take an important 
place among his interests. The friendship with Clough, espe- 
cially, foreshadowed many intimacies with Englishmen of 
congenial spirit. It began with Clough's brief stay in America, 
in 1852-53, and was continued in a correspondence of nearly 
ten years, revealing Norton's keen interest in the events which 
led to the Civil War. 

For about two years of the fifties, 1855-57, Norton, under 
medical orders for the strengthening of his health, was again 
in Europe. This time he was accompanied by his mother and 
two sisters. In Italy he made the beginnings of the studies 
of Dante which occupied him to the end of his life. There and 
in England he increased the circle of his lasting friendships, 
chiefly through his meetings with Mrs. Gaskell and John 
Ruskin. To many volumes of English and American biography 
the letters written to Norton by his friends have contributed 
an important element. His own published letters to them have 
filled out the picture, showing what a wealth of appreciation, 
wise counsel and affectionate service he brought to each of 
these relationships. It was during this second visit to Europe, 
for example, that he learned from Lowell's letters that the 
Atlantic Monthly was about to be established under his friend's 
editorship. Norton at once set himself to promote its suc- 
cess by securing contributions from English writers of the 
first order to whom he could appeal on personal grounds — 
Clough, Aubrey de Vere and Mrs. Gaskell. To the early 
numbers of the new magazine, moreover, he was himself a 
frequent contributor. 

From his return to America in 1857 until 1868, when he 
went again to Europe, his own activities were largely editorial. 
His close relationship with Lowell brought the interests of the 
Atlantic constantly near to him. The approach and progress 


of the Civil War gave ample opportunity for the exercise of 
his powers as a student of public matters, a moulder of public 
opinion — for to these fields of usefulness his personal tastes 
always directed him as strongly as to the pursuit of letters. 
The chief manifestation of this interest was made through 
Norton's editorial work for the New England Loyal Publica- 
tion Society. The object of this organization was to supply 
the newspapers of the North with the best expressions of loyal 
sentiment, issued in " broadsides" conveniently printed for re- 
publication. "In this way for three years," as Norton himself 
put it, "we did a good deal of the editing of several hundred 
journals, — and some of the articles to which we gave cir- 
culation must have been read by not less than a million of 
people." To this important service he added, for about five 
years from the end of 1863, the editorship of the North Ameri- 
can Review, undertaken in collaboration with James Russell 
Lowell. Both as editor and as a frequent contributor he ren- 
dered valuable service in bringing the ancient quarterly to the 
warm support of the Union. When the war was ended he gave 
so much of his sympathy and active cooperation to the estab- 
lishment of the Nation that Godkin wrote to him, after the 
journal had continued for a year: "If the paper succeeds, I 
shall always ascribe it to you, as without your support and en- 
couragement I do not think I should have been able to endure 
to the end." 

On May 21, 1862, Norton was married to Susan Ridley 
Sedgwick of Stockbridge and New York. They established 
themselves at Shady Hill, passing the summers from 1864 
onward at Ashfield, Massachusetts, where Norton made for 
his family a second home. With all that concerned this typical 
New England hill village he identified himself from those early 
days, less in the spirit of a summer visitor than in that of a 
resident, bringing his friends, notably George William Curtis, 
to make it, with varying regularity, their own summer home, 
and, as time went on, enriching the life of the community in 
many ways. From 1865 to 1873, however, there was a long 
interruption in the American life of Norton and his family. 
These years were passed in Europe, chiefly in London and in 
Italy; and years of extraordinary fulness they were, both in 
human relationships and in the broadening of horizons for such 


a student of art and letters as Norton had now become. Their 
overshadowing calamity was the death of Mrs. Norton at 
Dresden in February, 1872. The termination of a most con- 
genial married life brought upon the survivor the care of six 
young children — a care which, in spite of all that their grand- 
mother and aunts could do to lighten it, must have been well- 
nigh overwhelming. Yet Norton took up his life with a 
fortitude which made it through all the remaining years no 
mere compromise with circumstances, but a far-reaching force. 

Nothing stands out more definitely in the record of these 
European years than the enrichment of Norton's life through 
the growth of old and new friendships. The letters to Lowell, 
Curtis, Chauncey Wright and others at home show clearly how 
little the ocean separated him from true intercourse with these 
friends. The correspondence is full of the friends he was see- 
ing abroad — Ruskin, Carlyle, Leslie Stephen and a host of 
others. Supplementing these chronicles is a journal of daily 
doings, richest of all in its reports of conversations with Car- 
lyle. They reveal the gentler aspects of Carlyle's nature, and 
contribute so much to a true understanding of him that the 
final portrait of this unique figure can hardly be painted with- 
out recourse to the colors on Norton's palette. Of Ruskin, too, 
there is so much of intimate and sympathetic characterization 
that the record is an invaluable contribution to literary biog- 
raphy. Indeed all these personal pages of Norton's writing 
bear evidence to the liveliness of his historical sense. Whether 
the possibility of the ultimate publication of his journal pre- 
sented itself to him or not, he wrote as one conscious that good 
fortune had given him facts and impressions which it was his 
duty to preserve. The spirit was that of the true collector 
who will not permit a rare or beautiful object once within his 
grasp to elude him. In all his travels Norton collected not only 
ideas, but books, pictures, memorials of every sort related to 
the persons, thoughts and things in which his interest was 

Thus it was, when he returned to America, in the spring of 
1873, n °t quite forty-seven years old, that he had prepared 
himself for the work of a teacher that lay before him. His 
cousin, Charles W. Eliot, then in the early years of his long 
administration of the college, had already made the needed 


provision for this work, partly as an essential feature in his 
plan of a comprehensive university programme and partly, it 
may be surmised, to secure for Harvard the services, in a 
wholly new field, of one who, as he had good reason to feel 
assured, was both naturally adapted and, as it chanced, ad- 
ventitiously equipped for the task proposed. This peculiar 
professorial work, with which Mr. Norton's name is most as- 
sociated, occupied him virtually the rest of his life. It con- 
stituted his mission. 

Yet it may fairly be questioned whether in 1874, when 
President Eliot invited Norton's entrance into this field, 
either of them fully appreciated the situation or realized the 
nature of the call. To have done so would have been pro- 
phetic; for, as we now see, the conditions then existing were 
without precedent and the riddle of the future was one no man 
could read aright. Only eight years before, the Civil War had 
come to a close. The waters, political and financial, so long 
and sorely troubled had not yet found their level of repose. 
With minds and memories still full of the experience through 
which their generation had passed, men, even the most far- 
seeing, could not measure the forces at work, as potent as 
they were novel, or fully take in both the ethical and material 
tendencies of the time. With ideals vague as lofty, Americans 
aspired; faith in themselves, in their country and its future, was 
practically unlimited. A general spirit of optimism prevailed. 
That the world was then passing into a new era — that of rapid 
development through applied science — was not realized; nor 
was the sobering fact appreciated that in a period of pronounced 
commercialism types of character of the higher order rarely 
manifest themselves. Thus, sympathizing in the main with a 
community just emerging from its trials into the triumph which 
marked the close of the Civil War, Norton could hardly have 
looked forward to writing of that community as follows to 
an English correspondent a quarter of a century later: "The 
rise of the democracy to power in America and in Europe is 
not, as has been hoped, to be a safeguard of peace and civiliza- 
tion. It is the rise of the uncivilized, whom no school educa- 
tion can suffice to provide with intelligence and reason. It 
looks as if the world were entering on a new stage of experience, 
unlike anything heretofore, in which there must be a new dis- 


cipline of suffering to fit men for the new conditions. I fear 
that America is beginning a long course of error and of wrong, 
and is likely to become more and more a power for disturbance 
and for barbarism. The worst sign is the lack of seriousness 
in the body of the people; its triviality, and its indifference to 
moral principle." 

So, when he entered upon his mission, Norton probably did 
not anticipate, any more than his kinsman at the head of the 
University anticipated, that the new professor's message was 
to be largely one of reaction against a present materialism and 
a species of mechanical intellectualism, to earlier and more 
mediaeval conditions. Yet a vague, instinctive perception of 
the fact clearly possessed Norton himself; for he thus wrote, 
even at the commencement (1873): "This generation is given 
over to the making and spending of money, and is losing the 
capacity of thought. It wants to be amused, and the maga- 
zines amuse it." This to Carlyle; and again, to another cor- 
respondent, Russell Lowell: "And here, in this flourishing land 
of ours, you and I and the few men like us who care for the ideal 
side of life, are left from year to year in a smaller and smaller 
minority. . . . We stop at the high-school level." Finally 
(1895), referring long after to his own field of activity, the Fine 
Arts, he retrospectively wrote: "And nowhere are such study 
and knowledge more needed than in America, for nowhere in 
the civilized world are the practical concerns of life more en- 
grossing; nowhere are the conditions of life more prosaic; no- 
where is the poetic spirit less evident, and the love of beauty 
less diffused. The concern for beauty, as the highest end of 
work, and as the noblest expression of life, hardly exists among 
us, and forms no part of our character as a nation. The fact is 
lamentable, for it is in the expression of its ideals by means of 
the arts which render those ideals in the forms of beauty, that 
the position of a people in the advance of civilization is ulti- 
mately determined." 

Thus, whether President Eliot at the outset realized it, or 
Professor Norton more than theoretically philosophized over 
it, the latter was to be, so to speak, a protestant — in a sense, a 
reactionist. It was for him to preach character and culture 
in a plutocratic world given over to eager scientific develop- 
ment. Mere money-making and vulgar ostentation were to 


become more and more the end and aim of life. Norton's mis- 
sion was thus forced upon him; but it was a very essential 
mission: and by those best acquainted with the world as it 
then was and the course of events that marked its subsequent 
progress, it will scarcely be denied that the message was de- 
livered faithfully and courageously. What the voice of Ruskin 
was in Europe, Norton's, in a way, was in America — a protest 
against tendencies to the material constantly creeping on, an 
appeal, perhaps at times unconscious, from the Street to the 
Cloister. While the message was in itself of moment, the 
method of delivery is not to be lost sight of. That Norton ful- 
filled his mission with judgment as well as persistence will 
scarcely be denied. While he occupied the chair of Fine Arts 
at Harvard, it could not be said that the appreciation and 
pursuit of art for art's sake were not constantly preached and 
in fitting terms; nor could it be asserted that the seed thrown 
by the sower in this case fell by the wayside or in barren 
places. It did bear fruit. Yet, from the beginning to the end, 
the voice, though not that of one crying in the wilderness, 
was a voice pleading for art and culture, proclaiming sweet- 
ness and light, to an undergraduate generation, insensibly, 
perhaps, but more and more tending to the banker's counter, 
with an ultimate aspiration to a seat in the Stock Exchange. 
There is, however, nothing new here. From time immemo- 
rial men of a certain stamp have deplored the "tendencies 
of the times," sternly denouncing what they are pleased to 
term the " spirit of the age," with its constantly deteriorating 
ideals. Nor in this has Harvard been in any way exceptional, 
or from it exempt. For instance, in 1696, Dr. Increase Mather, 
then President, announced in a discourse delivered to the stu- 
dents in the college hall that it was the " Judgment of very 
learned Men that in the glorious Times promised to the Church 
on Earth, America will be Hell"; while it was reserved for New 
England "to be the wofulest place in all America"; and, more- 
over, when the foregoing result in due time came about "this 
little Academy [will be] fallen to the ground." That indul- 
gence in forecasts of this uncheerful character is in no respect 
fruitful, is hardly necessary to say; and Norton's merit lay in 
the fact that, while fully alive to the existence of tendencies 
he deplored, he never had recourse, in his classroom or else- 


where, to the jeremiad. On the contrary, addressing himself 
to his audiences in a mood kindly and considerate, he sought 
to influence what he felt he could not control. Thus, though 
his personal relations with Ruskin were close, and the influ- 
ence of the Englishman on the American was apparent, he did 
not permit himself to indulge in Ruskinian denunciations. 
Norton's efforts were exerted in an altogether different direc- 
tion. He sought to educate, elevate and assimilate. And therein 
he showed insight; for in the body of American youth as repre- 
sented at Harvard, while there is indisputably held in solu- 
tion a large element drifting insensibly into " business," that 
element can yet be very perceptibly affected in the direction 
of art and public usefulness; it admits of refining. The late 
Gardiner Martin Lane constituted a striking case in point. 
Lane, after graduation, devoted himself to ''business"; but 
his success therein was always subsidiary to higher ideals and 
a realizing sense of obligation at once controlling and abid- 
ing. 1 The teaching of Norton was therein reflected. Nor, 
though illustrative, was Lane's case exceptional. Thus, ac- 
cepting unwelcome conditions, Norton's continuing effort was 
to influence them in the direction of loftier aims and purer 
ideals; and, in adopting this policy, not only did he evince 
worldly wisdom, but his efforts were in reality crowned with 
a degree of success not the less pronounced because unac- 

Mr. Norton's occupancy of the chair established for him in 
1874 continued until 1898, when he became Professor Emeritus; 
and, during the ten years that then remained to him, giving 
himself less directly to the instruction of youth, he maintained, 
none the less, his distinctive place in the American com- 
munity. A lover of his country, he was not infrequently dis- 
tressed that his countrymen were not, in his belief, drawing 
from the past all that it had to yield; but he none the less con- 
tinued constantly eager to bring them into vital relationship 
with what he regarded as the purest and loftiest ideals of char- 

1 Born at Cambridge, April 30, 1859, G. M. Lane was a son of George Martin 
Lane, Professor of Latin in Harvard College. Graduating in the class of 1881, 
Mr. Lane became a member of the banking firm of Lee, Higginson & Co. in 
1892. In 1907 he became President of the Boston Museum of Fine Arts. He 
died, aged fifty-five, October 3, 19 14. 



acter and conduct. This was the gospel he preached; and the 
descendant of many of the earlier-time preachers could best 
deliver it to the college generations of the closing quarter of the 
nineteenth century. His eldest son once defined his college 
courses as " Lectures on Modern Morals as Illustrated by the 
Art of the Ancients" — and it was precisely because the defini- 
tion had a basis in fact that what Norton preached had its 
far-reaching, vivifying effect in the field of ethics as of art. As 
Mr. Howells has recently written, "his make was essentially 
religious, Biblical, Puritanical, and, however he would have 
imagined himself Hellenic, he was in his heart Hebraic. That 
is, when he thought he was supremely loving beauty, he was 
supremely loving duty, the truth which is in beauty and is in- 
separably one with it." Nor is this otherwise than true and 
discerning of a man whose education began two centuries before 
his birth, and who later (1902) thus wrote of himself: "The 
greatest spiritual change in ourselves which the past forty 
years have wrought is, I take it, the change in our conceptions 
of the relation of man to the universe, and of the possibility of 
knowledge of anything whatsoever that lies outside the narrow 
limits set for us by our senses and by the constitution of our 
mental powers. For us at least, faith in human fancies about 
invisible things long since died away; and, for my own part, 
I have no sentimental regret at its vanishing. Without it, 
I find myself more in harmony with that exceedingly minute 
section of the universe to which I belong; not, indeed, in closer 
intellectual agreement with most of the good men and women 
my contemporaries, of whom all but an insignificant fraction 
are still living under the Ptolemaic dispensation, undisturbed 
in their practical conviction that this earth is the centre of 
the universe, and man the chief object of creation." 

Viewed as a whole and through the fast lengthening perspec- 
tive of the years, it is difficult to measure the enduring value of 
Norton's influence, ethical and artistic. It was sympatheti- 
cally viewed to a certain extent by one of his disciples in a 
recent Phi Beta Kappa poem, 1 but influence of the kind 
exercised by Norton is elusive, largely because spiritual. 
Even so far as the record is concerned, few notable facts emerge 
from the annual round of academic duty. Yet Norton, a 

1 In Memoriam: by George Edward Woodberry, June 21, 1913. 


writer before he was a teacher, never permitted his teaching to 
absorb all his interest or to become the sole fruit of his ex- 
traordinary industry. The list of his publications contains 
a large number of contributions to the periodical press and an 
enviable array of important books. In the field of pure scholar- 
ship his additions to the literature of Dante — the chief of 
which was his prose translation of the Divine Comedy (1891-92) 
— gave him a high, individual place. His more important 
other books were Historical Studies of Church Building in the 
Middle Ages (1880) and the notable succession of biographical 
volumes, in which his friendships went hand in hand with 
his labors. Chief among these were the Correspondence of 
Thomas Carlyle and Ralph Waldo Emerson (1883), Early 
Letters of Thomas Carlyle (1886), Correspondence between Car- 
lyle and Goethe (1887), Reminiscences of Thomas Carlyle (1887), 
Letters of James Russell Lowell (1894), Letters of John Ruskin 
to Charles Eliot Norton (1904). The six volumes of his Heart 
of Oak Books (1894-95), "a collection of traditional rhymes 
and stories for children," must be placed among his definite 
services in the relating of literature to the daily life of his 

The patriotic impulse was never absent. The apparent dis- 
crepancy between the motives which made Norton so strong 
a supporter of the war for the Union in 1861 and so persistent 
an opponent of the war with Spain in 1898 was apparent only. 
Behind both manifestations was a single ideal. In the first war 
he felt it realized; in the second, obscured or overthrown. The 
vitality of his ideal brought him into opposition with many of 
his countrymen, who failed at first to place a true value upon 
the need in a republic for the utterances of dissent. Especially 
was the Spanish War repugnant to him by reason of his own 
repugnance to the ideas with which the word "imperialism" 
is associated. It was often dissent from accepted public 
opinion which found vigorous expression at the series of 
"Ashfield Dinners" organized and directed by him through 
many summers. In the nature of the case, this expression 
was frequently unpopular. Hardly less inevitably, the in- 
dependence of personal opinion for which he stood, and which 
he evoked in others, seems a more precious thing, a more 
stimulating ideal, when it becomes a memory. 


Full of years and honors, Charles Eliot Norton died Oc- 
tober 21, 1908. If he had only served his country as he did; 
if he had only implanted in many minds a new apprehension 
of beauty and obligation; if he had only been the friend and 
helper he was to a multitude of men and women, he would 
have held a special place in memory and affection. Holding 
it by virtue of all these claims, and more, he stands in remem- 
brance a loved and separate figure, blending in itself the asso- 
ciations of the richest past with a personal force and benignity 
all too rare. 





Francis Cabot Lowell, the son of George Gardner and 
Mary Ellen Parker Lowell, was born in Boston on January 
7, 1855, °f ancestry well known to us and of national distinc- 
tion; a line of ministers, judges, diplomatists, poets, soldiers, 
distinguished citizens; loyal New Englanders; in politics 
consistent Whigs, Federalists and then Republicans ; of origin, 
like most such, in Essex County, one a well-known member of 
the Essex Junto; loyal to their country in war, but with feet 
as firmly planted on the soil of Massachusetts as any Ran- 
dolph of Virginia on hers. 

So many of them have been members of our Society that 
even the mention of them becomes a repetition. The first 
John Lowell graduated at Harvard in 1721 and was clergyman 
at Newbury. His son John, Harvard 1760, was Judge of the 
United States District Court when it was first formed after 
the adoption of the Constitution, and made a member of the 
Circuit Court when that was created in 1801. A great-grand- 
son of this Judge was the John Lowell, Harvard 1843, a l so a 
Judge of the United States District Court, from 1865 to 1878, 
and in the Circuit Court from 1879 to 1884. The first Judge 
Lowell was a Fellow of Harvard College. His second son was 
the Francis Cabot Lowell, Harvard 1793, who, together with 
Patrick Tracy Jackson, started the cotton manufactories at 
Waltham and gave his name to the city of Lowell. His son 
Francis Cabot Lowell, Harvard 182 1, was a merchant and 
actuary of the Massachusetts Hospital Life Insurance Com- 
pany; and his son again, George Gardner Lowell, was the father 


of Judge Francis C. Thus our recently deceased member was 
third in a line of Judges of the same Federal court, and the 
second Fellow of Harvard College in direct descent. He was 
also an Overseer of Harvard from 1886 to 1893, an d served in 
the Boston City Council for three years, and in the Massa- 
chusetts Legislature for three years, where he was the leading 
figure in the House of Representatives, Chairman of the 
Judiciary Committee, and undoubtedly would have become 
Speaker, but that he was appointed by President McKinley 
United States District Judge in 1898, so that John L. Bates, 
later Governor, was chosen Speaker instead. In the domain 
of practical politics the spoilsman has so far left the bench to 
merit alone, the one of our three branches of government 
not open primarily to political merit or as a reward of party 
service. For that very reason, perhaps, it is sometimes a 
preferment conveniently designed or indicated to the prac- 
tical politician for a competitor of higher calibre. We still 
recognize that judicial office requires a special character and 
an arduous equipment, while anyone may lift the eye of 
ambition to the legislative or even the executive chair. May 
we only hope that the spirit of direct nomination and recall — 
both ideas ardently abhorred of our Judge Lowell — may not 
make havoc of even this distinction. 

Judge Lowell had none of the tricks of the politician, unless 
party loyalty be one. I well remember how a classmate, after 
he had served three years at least in that not too formal body, 
the City Council, remarked with amusement that no one mem- 
ber had ever ventured to call Frank by his first name. It was to 
his unbending rectitude, his high standard, which in politics 
men recognize even when they do not follow, and his fair and 
judicial temperament that he owed his rapid political pre- 
ferment. Yet had he not gone upon the bench, in all proba- 
bility he would have become Governor, after the usual hieratic 
probation and promotion then in vogue in the councils of his 
party; but I doubt if he would have preferred this. A seat in a 
high court was far more congenial, and he lived to see his name 
mentioned for the highest of all such promotions. And then 
again his character was shown in that, as it was rumored, 
doubt was expressed in high places whether, in the application 
of our Constitution to the difficult problems of the insular 


policy on which we were already embarked, he might not, 
though by no means an anti-imperialist, lean back too far. 

No one doubted his qualifications for the place. Rarely has 
a judge been so seldom overruled. In the thirteen years of 
his services he rendered more than three hundred opinions, 
which were deemed worthy of printing in the Federal Reporter, 
where they may be found in volume 85 to volume 182; and of 
all those, only four times was he overruled by the Circuit 
Court of Appeals, and only once by the Supreme Court of the 
United States, which in one of its many affirmances expressly 
commended his "careful opinion." Perhaps the best known 
is the famous one in re Halladjian, 174 Federal Reporter, 834, 
decided in 1909, which broadens the definition of races capable 
of naturalization from the narrow limitation contended for 
by the government, under which negroes, Anglo-Saxons and 
western Europeans alone could become citizens, to the inter- 
pretation, both more liberal and more scientific, under which 
the definition "white" was extended to the Armenians of 
Turkey and Asia, later to the Syrians, and presumably may 
now include other races of Asiatic alien stock. For, by the 
accident of history, our Constitution as amended as a result 
of the Civil War only in terms permits and requires the 
naturalization of white and black races, not black and yellow; 
the red races, being indigenous, are born citizens, if not in 
tribal relation. Judge Lowell's line of reasoning was followed 
recently by a judge in California, in the case of a high caste 
Hindoo, yet several judges have refused to naturalize the 
Mexican, or at least the Mexican Indian. Uniformity of 
decision is to be desired; but until Congress further acts, our 
growing common law under Lowell's guidance places the possi- 
bility of naturalization on the sensible ground of race and 
civilization rather than color or religion. Lowell's opinion in 
this principal case, though only ten pages long, was a model 
of historical and ethnological learning. In other decisions he 
vindicated the right of state courts to interpret the common 
law of their own state and apply it against a contrary doctrine 
obtaining in United States courts, especially when real estate 
or matters of local application were concerned. His also was 
the decision making possible the existence of the Worcester 
Art Museum, by permitting it to take the three million dol- 


lars devised to it by the will of Stephen Salisbury, although 
only chartered to hold five hundred thousand dollars. Perhaps 
his longest decision was that in the Underwriter case, where he 
settled the relative jurisdiction of local common law courts and 
United States Courts of Admiralty — but this is not the place 
for a legal criticism of his professional service. 

He was not a frequent or facile writer. Unlike most lawyers 
or certainly judges, he contributed little to legal periodicals. 
He collaborated with his partner, now President Lowell of 
Harvard, in a textbook on the transfer of stock, which remains 
a standard work. Otherwise, besides an early anonymous 
novel, which, like many of us, he wrote for fun, when young, 
his only bound volume is a valuable and carefully written 
monograph on Joan of Arc, particularly discussing her trial 
from the lawyer's point of view, with regard to the rules on 
evidence then and now prevailing. He wrote the memoir of 
Senator George F. Hoar in the Harvard Graduates' Magazine 
in 1905, of Judge Horace Gray of the United States Supreme 
Court in the proceedings of the Academy of Arts and Sciences, 1 
an article on the Free Church of Scotland in the Columbian 
Law Review of March, 1906, and a much quoted study of 
"The Boss," with other political essays, in the Atlantic 
Monthly. He delivered an oration before the Beverly His- 
torical Society in April, 1896, and wrote the "Memoir" of 
General Francis A. Walker in December, 1897, published in 
our Proceedings. 2 In January, 1901, he paid a tribute to 
Governor Wolcott, 3 and a letter to Mr. Rantoul in March, 
191 1, concerning his friend John Noble, late Clerk of the Su- 
preme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, is appended to Mr. 
Rantoul's memoir, 4 but already too ill to write, it is signed by 
his wife, who survives him. 

He was married on November 27, 1882, to Cornelia Prime 
Baylies, of the well-known family of New York City and 
Taunton in this state; her ancestor, Judge Baylies, Judge of 
Probate, prominent, as was also a Lowell, in and about the 
Hartford Convention. One may read of both in the recent 
biography of Harrison Gray Otis by his great-grandson, 
Samuel Eliot Morison. 

1 Volume xxxix. 2 Proceedings, xm. 303. 

3 lb., xiv. 388. 4 lb., xliv. 561. 


Much has been said that may not be said again, however 
deserving of repetition, in our associate Mr. Moorfield Storey's 
tribute published in our Proceedings: 1 "A gentleman in the 
best sense of the word, brave, frank, pure and courteous; an 
able judge, a public-spirited and most useful citizen. . . . He 
drew out what is good in men and repressed what was bad." 
These words at least we may say over again. 

It is his personal character that the writer would most like 
to describe, his personality and his life. Yet it is difficult in 
that it was in a certain sense uneventful. Serene, not drama- 
tic; he had no accidents of flood or field, nor unusual travel, 
nor wide acquaintance with men and cities. In later years, 
when his health was already failing, he much enjoyed a summer 
with his wife in Greece. He was passionately fond of his 
country in a literal sense; that is to say, the hills and shores of 
Massachusetts. Sailing his boat from his home at Cotuit, 
long driving excursions to the nearer mountains, or, when time 
permitted not these, even daily bicycle trips in the environs of 
Boston made up his greater pleasures. He was not a sports- 
man and he played no games. A Unitarian in faith, somewhat 
of a Calvinist in temperament, both qualities summed up in 
the schoolboy epithet one's playfellows so readily invent and 
apply — "the blameless." But if blameless in conduct, in 
imagination, there was nothing of the mollycoddle about his 
intellectual make-up. He was a strong party man and secretly, 
I think, believed that those of the opposing party should not 
have too much recognition, certainly should lay no hand on 
the helm. He was a partisan without being narrow; strong 
in his adherence to a religious denomination without being in 
the least bigoted; strong in his adherence to a political party 
without losing his fair-mindedness. He was a Federalist of 
New England, hence he could combine the democratic belief 
of local self-government with the less democratic one that those 
who are best fitted should rule. He would, not too flippantly, 
discuss with you whether the buying of votes was not justifi- 
able. His whole mental make-up was that of the eighteenth 
century Whig, intolerant of the modern Tory democrat. 
He only once followed the will-of-the-wisp of mugwumpery, 
and then he had orthodox companions. The Republican 

1 Proceedings, xliv. 580. 


and Independent Club was composed of John F. Andrew, 
President; Roger Wolcott, Vice-President; John T. Wheel- 
wright, Secretary, and Francis C. Lowell, Assistant Secretary 
— all four later to become steady party men. But even in 
1884 Judge Lowell's character was shown in that, being dele- 
gated to write an attack on James G. Blaine justifying the 
independent revolt, he wrote so fairly that the attack became 
an exoneration and the mugwumps could not use it as cam- 
paign material (see Boston Daily Advertiser files, 1884); and 
in 1889 we rind him conducting the campaign of Edward L. 
Pierce against John F. Andrew for Congress. For this was his 
one political escapade: he believed in the necessity of a party 
machine and would have recognized the two party whips of 
Trollope's parliamentary novels as performing a necessary if 
not elevated function. Yet with all this, he was of serene good 
temper, tolerant if not intelligent of other minds; in short, a 
man whose temperament and convictions led him to act with 
a definite organization of men without impairing his judicial 

Speaking as one who has known him more than forty years, 
he well represented all that is Massachusetts at her best. 
She never bred a man in conduct and in judgment to be more 




THE stated meeting was held on Thursday, the 12 th instant, 
at three o'clock, p. m.; Vice-President John D. Long, 
in the absence of President Adams, in the chair. 

The record of the last meeting was read and approved. 

The Librarian reported a list of donors to the Library since 
the last meeting. 

The Cabinet-Keeper reported the acquisition of a number of 
medals, by purchase and by gift, from Messrs. Holker Abbott, 
H. B. Mansfield, Ernest W. Roberts, B. W. Rowell, Mrs. 
Bertrand E. Taylor, Dr. Storer, the A. D. Club, and the White- 
head and Hoag Company, also by a deposit by the Bostonian 
Society; and gifts, of fifty-six half-dollars, 1806-187 5, from 
Hon. Horace Davis, a Corresponding Member; of a piece of 
glass dug up many years ago near Shubael Gorham's house in 
Barnstable, bearing in relief: "S. Gorham 1733," from Mr. 
Francis W. Sprague, of Brookline; of a gun taken from a 
dead British soldier at Bunker Hill by a Captain Merrill, from 
Mrs. Selah Merrill; of seventy engravings of Americans, from 
Prof. Guernsey Jones, of Lincoln, Nebraska; of photographs 
of crayon portraits of Elijah Vose, of Milton and Boston, by 
Samuel W. Rowse, and of Rebecca Gorham Vose, his wife, by 
Denison Kimberly, from Mr. Francis H. Manning; of twenty- 
five photographs and engravings of former Resident Members 
of the Society, from our associate, Mr. C. P. Greenough; of 
one of the flags of the frigate Constitution used in her voyage 
around the world in the forties, from the children of the late 
William Peter Cherrington (1835-1909), of Boston, in his mem- 
ory; and the purchase of sixty-five photographs from original 
paintings of Massachusetts persons. 

The Editor reported the following gifts: 

From Mr. Frederick J. Ranlett, of Boston, the records of 
the Colonization Society of Massachusetts, 1841-1903, when 
the Society ceased to have a corporate existence. The records 


contain the minutes of meetings and the correspondence of the 
Secretary, and has much on the attempt to support a college 
in Monrovia, Liberia. 

From Mr. Stanley W. Smith, early deeds of Edgartown, 
1 75 2-1 754, containing signatures of well-known members of 
that community. Also a list of Winslow Mss. prepared by 
John Davis in 1792. 

From Dr. Loring W. Puffer, of Brockton, a letter of Fran- 
cis Baylies, January 24, 18 14, and one of William Baylies, 
February 26, 1849. 

Mr. Alexander Sedgwick deposits with the Society a letter 
of Alexander Hamilton to Theodore Sedgwick, dated New 
York, July 10, 1804 — the day before the duel with Burr. 
What gives it great interest is the opinion expressed on disunion 
projects, then beginning to be mooted in New England. He 
wrote : 

I will here express but one sentiment, which is, that Dismem- 
berment of our Empire will be a clear sacrifice of great positive ad- 
vantages, without any counterbalancing good; administering no 
relief to our real Disease; which is Democracy, the poison of which 
by a subdivision will only be the more concentred in each part; 
and consequently the more virulent. 

The letter bears an endorsement by Catherine M. Sedg- 
wick, stating that, " Mr. John Hamilton (the biographer of his 
father) told me (C. M. S.) that this was the last letter, excepting 
a short one to his mother [Elizabeth Hamilton] which his 
father wrote." 

Samuel Eliot Morison, of Boston, was elected a Resident 
Member of the Society. 

The Recording Secretary communicated two memoirs: one 
of Henry Williamson Haynes, by Mr. C. P. Greenough, 
and one of Samuel Lothrop Thorndike, by Mr. Stanwood. 

The Vice-President announced the death of Mr. William 
Endicott and spoke of him as the highest type of citizen, and 
mentioned in detail his connection with the Society and its 
meetings. Major Higginson, who was unable to be present, 
submitted the following characterization : * 

1 This had appeared in the Boston Evening Transcript, November 11, 1914. 


Coming downtown to-day, a good man spoke to me of Mr. Endi- 
cott's funeral and career, and added: "If I were younger, I might 
profit by his example." I did not reply that Mr. Endicott never 
considered such points, but always helped other people whenever 
and wherever he could. 

In 1846 Mr. Charles F. Hovey, who was already a man of busi- 
ness, set up his shop of dry goods in Winter Street and estab- 
lished the principle of "one price." Before that the customers at 
various shops of all kinds in our town regularly "dickered" for 
their purchases. Mr. Endicott went to Mr. Hovey as a boy, proved 
his value and later became a partner. If I am not misinformed, 
his especial department was the management of the finances of 
the firm, although no doubt he considered all the other affairs. 
In that way he came to understand the value of a high credit, and 
when, in the panic of 1857, his firm paid its bills promptly with 
Messrs. Baring Brothers & Co., in London, while many other 
people failed or delayed payments then due, he proved that he 
had learned his lesson. 

Mr. Hovey and his partners were from the first anti-slavery men, 
and their shop was shunned by some good people who thought 
otherwise; but they held to their faith. 

Later, when our Civil War came, Mr. Endicott was an excellent 
adviser in the financial matters of the country. He was very clear 
about the greenback question, insisted that our nation had agreed 
to pay gold for its United States paper and bonds, and that it must 
do so, and was sure that such a course was not merely honest and 
honorable but also wise, for our nation needed good credit. It was 
because he and such men as he won that fight that the nation was 
enabled to drop the rate of interest paid on United States bonds 
from 7.3 per cent to 2 per cent. 

Mr. Endicott was often called on to help in every emergency dur- 
ing the Civil War, and was an excellent adviser of Governor Andrew, 
who himself gave his time and life to the cause just as much as if he 
had been in the field. 

Mr. Endicott was one of the organizers of the New England Trust 
Company and a prominent director from the outstart. During the 
panic of 1873 he and another director, who is no longer living, gave 
much time and thought to the affairs of that company, which had 
just started and needed care. 

Of course Mr. Endicott helped to establish the Institute of Tech- 
nology and the Boston Art Museum, of which he was at one time 
the president. In short, wherever education in any form came up 
Mr. Endicott came at once to the front with his advice, his work 
and his money. Whether he was rich or poor, I do not think any 


man ever considered, but only whether he would help — and the 
answer was always prompt. 

After the great fire of Boston in 1872 he was one of the men who 
moved quickly and strongly for the necessary relief all around and 
for the help of the firemen. 

The house of Messrs. C. F. Hovey and Co. had long been known 
everywhere for its high tone, for its honesty in goods and in con- 
duct, and thereby had drawn to itself an excellent and large custom. 
Common sense ruled in that house, as was shown by its quality in 
every respect, and during the great fire it was a partner of that house 
who, by the simplest means, checked the fire from the Hovey build- 
ing and, therefore, checked the fire in that direction. The work of 
the partners all seemed of one piece, and Mr. Endicott was not the 
only man who had the spirit of the firm. 

As a wise and successful merchant, as a patriotic, able and high- 
minded citizen, as a helper in every cause large and small, Mr. 
Endicott was prompt and hearty, and he was sought as a friend by 
the best men of our community. Apparently he never considered 
himself or his own interests but only that which was good for others. 
But the one thing he did seek was the respect and affection of his 
fellows and his friends, and he certainly had it in full measure and 
running over. He is a great loss to the community in which he had 
lived, as he had been a great help during his lifetime. Such men 
make a country such as we all wish for — men who remember men 
and women as God made them. 

One of the pretty instances of his life was his constant affection 
for his old father, Mr. William Endicott, Sr., who used to await him 
in the Beverly station as the train passed by. William Endicott, Jr., 
would go out and greet William Endicott, Sr., then get into the 
train again and go home. 

He was always young, and when he died no doubt he was young 
still, and his memory will be green in the minds and hearts of all 
of us. 

Mr. Thayer read a paper by Mr. C. F. Adams on 

Again, "The Tissue of History." 

With the exception of the Editor and myself, few, I appre- 
hend, of those now present will recall a certain paper sub- 
mitted by me at the meeting three years ago corresponding to 
the present — that held on Wednesday, the nth of October, 
191 1. The paper in question was entitled "The Tissue of 


History" — a phrase drawn from Sartor Resartus, Carlyle 
likening the immediate present — the passing Now with an 
eternity on its either hand — to a "living link in that Tissue 
of History which inweaves all Being: watch well, or it will be 
past thee, and seen no more." 

I then made mention of the fact that, since my occupancy 
of this chair began, I have as October approached almost 
invariably found myself looking back over the time elapsed 
since the last meeting of the Society, and endeavoring to make 
up my mind whether, during those four intervening months 
— representing the Now — anything had anywhere occurred 
which might be termed of true historical importance; that 
is, either in this country or abroad, some event which would 
probably stand forth unmistakably in the perspective of the 
past — a milestone, possibly a landmark. I then enumerated 
four occurrences between June and October, 191 1, which not 
impossibly might, it then seemed to me, deserve the careful 
consideration of thoughtful men, as occurrences of which his- 
tory would scarcely fail to make note. 1 Three years have 
since elapsed, and already those occurrences seem somewhat 
insignificant as well as sufficiently remote. I will not enu- 
merate them ; but if doubt exists as to their abiding historical 
importance, or that of any one of them, no doubt, I think it 
may safely be affirmed, can possibly exist as respects what has 
occurred since the Society last met — the course of events 
which, with its fast following sequences, now absorbs atten- 
tion. The course of events referred to is, moreover, closely 
associated with one of the four incidents to which detailed 
reference was made in my former paper; I refer to what, three 
years ago, was known as the " Morocco Incident." Otherwise 
well-nigh passed out of general memory, the Morocco inci- 
dent has a grim present significance ; for it is as closely as it is 
obviously connected with developing events. To quote at 
length from one's own previous utterances is a practice more 
honored in the breach than in the observance. Savoring of 
senility, it is suggestive of prosing. Nevertheless the " Morocco 
Incident" of 191 1 has, to my mind, such a close bearing on 
the event of August last that I venture now to repeat what I 
said in October, 191 1. Referring to what had then happened 

1 Proceedings, xlv. 15. 


as something of which we had not yet heard the last, I ven- 
tured a belief that "a truce only had been established." The 
underlying situation had failed to develop itself, and the con- 
ditions then existing had, it seemed to me, "much future signifi- 
cance. " Finally, I thus summed up my conclusions: 

In the Morocco incident, the attitude of Germany was at the 
outset, to say the least, menacing. Under conditions formerly 
existing, the way in which this attitude was met by France could 
hardly have failed to lead to hostilities. It did fail, however, and 
the course pursued by Germany in, so to speak, modifying its 
demands, if not desisting from them, is to be accounted for. So 
far as is now apparent, this "backdown, " for it was a backdown, was 
the result solely of financial pressure brought to bear from Paris 
and London, acting in combination. Had Prussia, or Germany, 
persisted in the line of policy clearly foreshadowed, such action 
would have been met by a financial and commercial crisis, the 
point of concentration of which would have been Berlin, of a nature 
closely resembling a general bankruptcy, with the accompanying 
industrial unrest. In other words, a financial panic and labor dis- 
turbance would have been precipitated, the possibility even of 
which caused the imperial government first to hesitate and then 
stop, accepting the situation practically forced upon it. Looked at 
from our point of view, the question next suggests itself, What does 
this signify so far as the future is concerned? Has the world, by 
a closer interlacing and combination of interests — financial, com- 
mercial, industrial and economical — entered upon a new phase of 
development, in which wars of the old description must cease? 
Here, manifestly, is a problem of first-class historical importance, 
presented since our June meeting. While to-day it would seem 
not improbable that, under former conditions, a struggle of the 
old-fashioned description was contemplated, a continental power of 
the very first class, when it came face to face with what hostilities 
now necessarily would and possibly might involve, found itself under 
heavy bonds not to break the peace. To express it in a different 
way, in the forty years which have elapsed since the Franco- 
Prussian war of 1870, commercial relations have so expanded, finan- 
cial conditions have so internationalized themselves, and economi- 
cal and industrial threads have become so interwoven in the tissue, 
that it is questionable whether, in spite of manifest naval and 
military preparations, a war of the character of those so frequently 
and even lightly entered upon in the nineteenth century, yet more 
in the eighteenth, is longer probable. Its possible and remote con- 



sequences are too considerable. Local struggles and hostilities of 
a minor character must, of course, be anticipated in the future, as 
in the past; but is it not fairly open to question whether anything 
even remotely approaching the Napoleonic period is longer to be 
apprehended? It has thus become a question of the budget and of 
industrial order. 

In his poem Browning makes Paracelsus sneeringly remark 
to Festus 

Your prophecy on the whole 
Was fair enough as prophesyings go; 
At fault a little in detail, but quite 
Precise enough in the main; 

and of this, in the case of my utterance of three years ago, I 
submit the time now gives daily proof. Acting, there is 
reason to infer, on a mistaken understanding of the controlling 
facts of the situation, the governments of Germany and 
Austria-Hungary, assuming the initiative in the struggle 
which opened in the closing days of last July, ignored or set 
at defiance the conclusions above set forth. So, though 
neutral in the conflict which has ensued and is now going on, 
we are in our own daily lives and personal affairs receiving 
illustration almost unlimited of the degree to which in this 
world of steam, electricity and the applied sciences things 
have " internationalized themselves, and commercial and in- 
dustrial threads have become interwoven." 

While my premises set forth three years ago still seem 
correct, and the conclusion drawn from them plausible, yet, 
during the last ten weeks the world has undeniably found it- 
self precipitated into a war exceeding in magnitude and com- 
plexity of methods any the world ever before witnessed. At 
the same time, is there not reason to infer that this most 
portentous conflict was precipitated by those on whom the 
responsibility for it will rest as a direct outcome of the 
Morocco experience? The interval since 191 1 has been availed 
of as a time of preparation ; the issue then so threatening has 
since been carefully considered, in the nature of an object 
lesson. It is now already apparent that the German govern- 
ment proceeded with the infinite attention to detail and pre- 
caution characteristic of it. Accepting the premises in full, 
recognizing the interwoven character of relations and the 



vital importance of financial confidence, it proposed to domi- 
nate the situation, and secure results through action at once 
sudden and final. With untiring prevision it forestalled 
every foreseeable contingency, relying for its justification on 
early established supremacy. Its vanquished opponents were 
to make everything good financially and from a business 
point of view; and this as the result of a campaign limited to 
a few weeks at furthest. Thus Germany on full deliberation 
and by design challenged all the conditions and consequences 
set forth as the outcome of the " Morocco Incident." It will, 
for instance, be remembered that, some eighteen months ago, 
a special war tax was levied, of five per cent on all property, 
representing in fact a year's income of the Germanic com- 
munity. This, it was openly proclaimed, was to provide for 
armament, both defensive and offensive, of a permanent char- 
acter. The significance of the move is now apparent. 

Whether in making this challenge and incurring well-nigh 
incalculable risks in confidence on its great preparedness, 
financial as well as military, Germany was well advised, yet 
remains to be seen. That question is not now and here. to 
be considered; for our standpoint is historic. So viewed, it 
is obviously as yet altogether premature to attempt to pass 
judgment upon motives and policy, much more to venture on 
forecasts. Events can here only be considered in perspective. 
So I have no intention of now indulging in criticism, much 
less in prophecy. Quite irrespective of any opinions that may 
be held either by me individually or by those composing this 
Society, "the Tissue of History" will be woven into patterns 
not of our devising. 

Nevertheless, there is a standpoint from which I feel I may 
properly enough have something to say — something historic 
in tone; and, unless I greatly err, not wholly devoid of interest. 
Reverting to my own personal experience of half a century 
back, it throws light on passing events. In 1864, exactly fifty 
years ago, I, then being attached in a very subordinate capacity 
to the headquarters of the Army of the Potomac, took part 
in Grant's advance upon Richmond — ■ the advance through 
the Wilderness, as it was at the time designated. Now con- 
stantly recurring to it as I read of what is occurring in France, 
I have been deeply impressed by a resemblance I have thought 

it _„_ -, TC , eTT _, „_ ITT ^ rtn , T )) 


to exist between the two general situations. Almost day by 
day experience has seemed to be repeating itself, though always 
on a tenfold scale — a continuous front of battle of one hun- 
dred and fifty or even three hundred miles instead of fifteen, 
with combatants counted by the million instead of by the hun- 
dred thousand. A money outgo at least ten times as great 
has also to be provided for. As to consequent industrial and 
commercial disturbance, the difference of scale simply con- 
founds computation. Grant's entire army, for example, never 
equalled in numbers at any. one time the comparatively small 
but important contingent contributed by Great Britain to the 
allied array. On that head, it is true, we have no authentic 
information; but it is currently supposed that Field Marshal 
Sir John French entered on what he has designated as "his 
job" with some 125,000 men of all branches of the service. 
A larger force than Grant could ever muster at any one time 
during the campaign of 1864, this has been but a minor factor 
in the army of French defence, currently supposed, including 
the Belgian contingent and the French reserves, to have 
aggregated upwards of a million and a half. It is also sup- 
posed that the German force actively involved in the western 
field of operations, including garrisons and the protection of 
lines of supply, amounted more nearly to two million effectives 
than to a million and a half. Such figures are bewildering. 
The losses, too, must have far exceeded anything pertaining 
to Grant's famous campaign, though that could not be said to 
have been free from reckless blood expenditure. Nevertheless, 
allowance being made for numbers and scale of operation, the 
two situations in other essential respects seem curiously alike. 
Anyone acquainted, either by personal experience or as a 
reader, with what occurred in 1864 must realize that Grant 
then entered upon his campaign in much the spirit in which the 
Kaiser obviously entered upon the operations commenced 
two months ago. The force under Grant's command had been 
prepared for action all through the preceding winter. There 
was nothing either unexpected or theatrical in the opening of 
operations. Both his army and that of Lee simply left winter 
cantonments and entered on work in the field. Those com- 
posing Grant's army did so, however, with supreme confidence 
in themselves and in their leader, and with a firm belief gener- 


ally prevailing that at last the Union side was on the threshold 
of a movement which was to prove at once short and decisive. 
The initial blow was to suffice. 

It is manifest and, I believe, undenied that the German 
general staff had framed their program in a similar spirit. 
In the language of the ring, the first round was to be a " knock- 
out"; and all the indications at the time, as well as the sub- 
sequent disclosures, lead to one conclusion: the overrunning 
and practical conquest of France was to be effected within a 
brief period, numbered in weeks, thus releasing the German 
strength to be turned, in conjunction with that of Austria- 
Hungary, against Russia. 

In neither case did the course of events move in conformity 
with the program. In France as in Virginia, the army 
assuming the aggressive met with a resistance far more stub- 
born than had been anticipated. Military results then devel- 
oped in both cases on lines almost precisely the same. That 
is, the force on the defensive proving itself not altogether 
unequal to that attacking, on both battlefields movements 
and results similar in character developed, always propor- 
tioned to the numbers engaged. In 1864, after the battle of 
the Wilderness, Grant had recourse to a system of frontal 
assaults. They resulted only in a useless loss of life, quickly 
followed by the practical demoralization of his army. This 
manifested itself at Cold Harbor. The futility of further 
frontal assaults became manifest to the men in the ranks, and 
the attacking army went to its work as to its doom. Without 
expectation of success, they did not succeed. Recourse was 
then of necessity had to a system of flanking operations, which, 
with conspicuous poverty of result, involved a fearful expen- 
diture of life and material. In other words, the struggle de- 
generated into a series of tactical movements, from which 
nothing decisive resulted. Finally, it became a question of 
exhaustion. One of the two parties to the strife had got to 
drop from sheer inability longer to stand up. Under an 
expenditure of life and material, incessant and unavoidable, 
which could hold out longest? 

Judging by the manifestly censored reports and returns 
reaching us, this is the precise situation now reached in Europe. 
At this writing the conflict has been in active progress some 


seven weeks. During those seven weeks the expenditure of 
life and material has been something difficult to imagine and 
impossible to estimate. But that struggle has apparently 
assumed a definite shape — the shape it assumed in Virginia 
in June, 1864. Now, as then, which side can longest stand the 
strain? In our case the blockade — maritime supremacy — 
at this stage became the ultimate controlling factor. The Con- 
federacy was shut up within itself. As the field of operations 
eventually shaped itself, Grant's army depended on its base of 
supplies secure at City Point for a successful outcome of the 
prolonged grapple; it breathed and its strength was replen- 
ished from the sea. One by one through the closing months 
of 1864 and the beginning of 1865, as our blockade was per- 
fected, the inlets to the Confederacy were closed. Wilmington, 
the last of them, was captured by the Fort Fisher assault 
January 16, 1865. Thenceforth, the Confederacy, shut up 
within itself, simply gasped. The supplies absolutely neces- 
sary to a continuance of the struggle — its breath of life — 
could only be drawn over unreliable railroads, traversing re- 
gions themselves without sufficient sustenance. I have here- 
tofore had occasion to deal with this aspect of the military 
problem as it presented itself in the winter of 1864-65, and 
in so doing I have used concerning it a figure of speech to which 
I am tempted again to have recourse. It has an obvious 
bearing on what is now taking place on the other side of the 
Atlantic. History seems to be repeating itself: 

The Confederate cause sank in failure. It did so, moreover, to 
the complete surprise of a bewildered world. How was this wholly 
unexpected actual outcome brought about? The simple answer is: 
The Confederacy collapsed from inanition ! Suffering such occasional 
reverses and defeats as are incidental to all warfare, it was never 
crushed in battle or on the field at large until its strength was sapped 
away by want of food. It died of exhaustion — starved and gasp- 

Take a living organism, whatever it may be, place it in a vessel 
hermetically sealed, and attach to that vessel an air-pump. Set 
that pump in action; you know what follows. It is needless to 
describe it. No matter how strong or fierce or self-confident it may 
be, the victim dies; growing weaker by degrees, it finally collapses. 
That was the exact condition and fate of the Confederacy. What 


had been confidently pronounced impossible was done. Steam 
put in its work, and the Confederacy was sealed up within itself by 
the blockade. Operations in the field then acted as an air-pump, 
the exhausting character of which could not be exceeded. . . . 
The blockade was gradually perfected. The fateful process then 
went steadily on. Armies might be resisted in the field; the working 
of the air-pump could not be stopped. And day and night, season 
after season, the air-pump worked. So the atmosphere of the Con- 
federacy became more and more attenuated; respiration sensibly 
harder. Air-hole on air-hole was closed. . . . Lee realized it was 
only a question of time. The working of the air-pump was beyond 
his sphere either of influence or operations. Nothing could stop it. 1 

The situations are to-day undeniably analogous. The 
military deadlock is on in Europe. A question of endurance, 
consumption proceeds with a rapidity and to an extent both 
unprecedented and inconceivable. On this head I do not pro- 
pose to enter into details or make pretence of statistical in- 
formation. Under existing conditions I place small reliance 
in figures. Meanwhile, take simply two articles — both 
essential to military operations. Napoleon is said to have 
observed that an army was like a serpent — it moved on its 
belly. This in a way is true; but the feet of the units compos- 
ing the army, whether those feet be shod in leather or by iron, 
have none the less to be always borne in mind. Those better 
informed than myself in such matters tell me that when an 
army is engaged in active operations, especially in wet weather 
or in winter, a pair of shoes a month to each soldier is within 
the requirement. If such is approximately the case, allowing 
the numbers ordinarily accepted for the various armies now 
in the field, whether in Belgium or in France, in Germany or 
in Austria, what consumption of shoes must be anticipated 
and provided for? A calculation can readily be made; the re- 
sult would be expressed in millions, Whence, especially in a 
region limited to its own resources, is such an amount of foot- 
wear to come? The air-pump is here in pronounced operation. 
Will history record a repetition of Confederate experience? 

Again, the matter of transportation. The rough rule-of- 
thumb estimate accepted in my time was that an army re- 
quired a horse, on an average, for every three combatants. 

1 Trans-Atlantic Historical Solidarity, 156-160. 


In this allowance provision was made for cavalry, artillery, 
and quartermaster and commissariat trains; also for ammu- 
nition and hospital services. If, then, as asserted, there are 
some twelve million active combatants now in the field in 
Europe, it would imply for its continued movement a steadily 
maintained body of four million horses. Are there as many 
horses available? I have made no special study of this ques- 
tion, nor do I know if any reliable statistics are accessible. 
Meanwhile, during my active army life of fifty years ago, it 
was stated that in active operations the life of a horse averaged 
some six weeks. He, moreover, to sustain his strength, must 
be fed with the regularity of clock-work. In the case of men 
food admits of a certain amount of condensation. It can be 
given even in tabloid form. With the horse it is not so. He 
has to have his forage as regularly as the sun rises and sets, or 
he is unable to do his work; and upon his doing his work army 
movement depends. If, then, the average life of a horse in 
active field operations, especially field operations of the un- 
remitting and altogether pitiless character recently carried on 
in Europe, whether west or east, is to be estimated at, we will 
say, two months, it would imply a horse-flesh renewal of two 
million animals a month. We all know that during the South 
African war the horse-market of the United States was depleted. 
We also learn from the papers that the buyers of the belligerent 
governments, or such of them as have free access to the sea, are 
now everywhere in America. The shipment to Europe of 
horses, whether from Canada or our own ports, is perceptibly 
increasing. These horses, however, are utterly unfitted for 
immediate active military work, and, when thrust into it pre- 
maturely, their lives and usefulness are limited. Without 
venturing on estimates, it at once becomes apparent that the 
supply of horses to meet the requirements of modern warfare 
is somewhat confounding. Yet here, too, the operation of the 
air-pump knows no exemptions. 

The indirect effects of such consumption, also, cannot be 
lost sight of. When every active man, as has recently been 
the case in European countries, is called from the industrial 
field into military service, the loss to the laboring element does 
not need to be dwelt upon. Nevertheless, in this case, the 
immature and the old, including women, may be made to a cer- 


tain extent to supply the place of the more able bodied. The 
horse is, however, just as essential to gathering the harvest 
and doing much of the ordinary work of life as he is to military 
movement; and if an undue proportion of horses is to be com- 
mandeered, so to speak, it is difficult to see how the harvest 
and other work at home, absolutely necessary to be done, can 
be otherwise than severely crippled. Especially would this 
prove the case in countries cut off from external sources of 

In the case of horses it will, of course, at this point at once 
be objected that the introduction of the motor has here again 
materially affected conditions. The horse is to a degree a 
thing of the past. This, however, I fancy, will not prove to 
be the case in warfare any more than it has been the case in 
peace. Unless experience is wholly at fault, the motor as a 
military appliance will prove to be merely new and additional, 
not a substitute. In the first place, the motor cannot take 
the place of the horse in cavalry. Next, the increase in weight 
as well as number of the impedimenta, including artillery and 
ammunition trains, has been such as to call for additional 
motive power, not less probably in amount than the new appli- 
ance can contribute. Finally, the motor is largely dependent 
for its usefulness on road conditions; and the front of battle 
must be somehow or other supplied, quite irrespective of pave- 
ment. It has a way of being extended over fields, morasses 
and hillsides. So it remains to be seen whether, under condi- 
tions of modern warfare, the old proportion of horses to com- 
batants has been materially affected. If it shall prove to have 
been affected at all, I should apprehend it not unlikely to be 
in the direction of an increase rather than diminution. The 
introduction of the motor has not tended, on the whole, to the 
extinction or even the cheapening of the horse. 

Moreover, new complications and considerations continually 
suggest themselves. Take, for instance, again, the motor. 
As the horse is dependent on his forage, the motor is dependent 
on power. That power consists largely of petrol. Whence is 
the supply of the material drawn from which petrol is manufac- 
tured? In the case of a community artificially confined within 
its own limits, where within those limits is the necessary supply 
to be found? And if it exists, is it in regions unoccupied by 


the enemy? What is the case in this regard in Germany and 
Austria-Hungary? Whence can an adequate supply of the 
motor's power be forthcoming? This query I suggest merely. 
But here, also, the action of the air-pump has to be reckoned 

Thus, studied in the light of the experience of the Confed- 
eracy, the present European situation is at least indisputably 
interesting. Merely one of scale, the difference of scale is so 
enormous — so appalling even — that all inference becomes 
unsafe. The analogy of the air-pump is, however, again under- 
going illustration; though we are now apparently to study the 
several steps marking its process, so far as the contents of the 
receiver are concerned, under conditions rendering what took 
place fifty years ago hardly comparable. In place of a crude, 
agricultural, under-populated, self-feeding and sustaining 
community, two of the oldest and most populous nations of the 
world — both powers of the first class — are now enclosed; 
and the air-pump is in full action! A population of one hun- 
dred and twenty-five million, instead of six million as in our 
case, comprising differentiated industrial communities, are sud- 
denly cut off from outer-world commercial intercourse. Directly 
and indirectly, they are exhausting themselves at the rate of 
some twenty million dollars a day. This in material; the loss of 
life is a secondary matter. Men can assuredly be got to fill 
depleted ranks; for there are probably within the two coun- 
tries, Germany and Austria-Hungary, not less than ten million 
military effectives. But to feed, move, equip and arm those 
men, keeping them effective while dependent exclusively on 
internal sources of supply, constitutes a problem in contem- 
plation of which experience is at fault. Meanwhile, what is 
to become of the sustaining communities? Enclosed within 
the receiver, they are not, as was the case of the Confederacy, 
composed of agriculturists only. 

So, irrespective of magnitude, will the 1865 analogy of the 
air-pump hold true in 191 5? If it does, each new levy from 
this time on will only render the German and Austria-Hungary 
situations the more unendurable. The difficulty of respiration 
will be by so much enhanced. What, in that case, is to be the 
outcome? How soon is the inevitable final result — inanition 
— to be brought about? When, collapse? 


In military operations more than in most other experiences, 
both human and animal, it is the unexpected which is wont 
to occur; and it was at the close of his second Silesian experi- 
ence that Frederick the Great, then only thirty-three years of 
age, pronounced himself on what he termed "luck in warfare." 
So great a factor therein did he consider "luck," or pure 
chance, that he said that never again would he voluntarily 
expose himself and his throne to it. "I would not," he forci- 
bly declared, "henceforth attack a cat except to defend my- 
self." The unexpected, however, may enter into the solu- 
tion of the problem in favor of one side or the other engaged, 
quite as much as luck. The dealing of the cards is by no means 
all; and not unseldom the outcome sets calculation at defiance. 
Thus we in America should long hesitate before venturing 
conclusions, recalling the historical fact that in 1864 the 
European world was fully and firmly convinced that the in- 
dependence of the Confederacy was an accomplished fact. 
A restoration of our Union was pronounced the one simply 
impossible result of the struggle then in progress. Yet the 
independence of the Confederacy was not achieved; the old 
Union was restored. Remembering this, I for one certainly 
feel no disposition now to indulge in forecasts. On the sea or 
under the sea, as on the land and over the land, almost any- 
thing seems in these days possible. So I simply desire to call 
attention to the analogy existing at just this stage of opera- 
tions between what occurred in 1864 and what is now occur- 
ing. As I have already stated, at present the difference is 
one of size only. In other respects history to-day is so far 
simply repeating itself; what novel pattern the tissue now 
emerging from the loom of fate may to-morrow take on is yet 
to appear. Possibly, the receiver may be shattered. 

In our case, however, we know what happened. When the 
spring of 1865 came, the Confederacy collapsed. At the end 
of its resources, it fell from exhaustion. The demonstration 
had been brought to a successful close. Present indications 
seem to foreshadow a similar result as not now improbable. 
The question then remains, — How much longer can the exist- 
ing pressure be sustained — the demand met? In face of severe 
industrial disturbance and complete commercial paralysis 
everything is involved — men, money, material. When in 




process on such a scale, consumption cannot be figured. We 
are reduced to guessing. 

In an earlier part of this paper I spoke of the fact that in 
our daily lives and personal affairs we are now receiving 
illustration almost unlimited of the degree to which in this 
world of steam, electricity and applied science things have 
internationalized themselves, and commercial and industrial 
threads have become interwoven. Our Society has not in this 
respect been exempt from the general fate. Already its activi- 
ties have been seriously interfered with. Not only, as the Edi- 
tor to-day informs us, have investigations instituted in England, 
in the hope of recovering some at least of the lost Winthrop 
papers, come to a standstill — the thoughts of ail being other- 
wise occupied — but at home the present is no time for the 
issue of new publications. Their cost has been considerably 
enhanced, and it becomes necessary for us to modify our 
program to make it conform to conditions thus forced upon 
us. How long is this likely to continue? Often put, the 
question admits of a wide margin of response, invariably re- 
flecting the circumstances and temper of him venturing an 
opinion. I should, therefore, altogether refrain from even 
suggesting such a topic, were it not that our policy and activi- 
ties as a Society are to a degree affected. Under these cir- 
cumstances, feeling to a certain extent responsible for results, I 
have instructed our Editor and others in any way affected to 
assume that at least fifteen months will yet elapse before a 
settled order of affairs can be reasonably anticipated. If 
this forecast should prove measurably accurate, it remains 
still to consider what state of affairs will confront us in the 
year 1916. The present conflict is roughly computed to entail 
a money outgo on all concerned of not less than fifty million 
dollars a day — this apart from the inevitable destruction 
wrought in war and the indirect consequences of commercial 
and industrial disturbance. If the estimate is even approxi- 
mately correct, fifteen months of conflict yet to ensue will, in 
addition to the time already elapsed, represent a public ex- 
penditure of approximately twenty-five thousand million dol- 
lars. Such figures are astronomical. Comprehension halts. 
What industrial, financial and commercial readjustment is 
involved in a disturbance so measured others bolder than I 


can perhaps venture to estimate. All I can say on behalf of 
this Society is that, in the possible presence of such a future 
readjustment, it behooves us to proceed prudently and in the 
exercise of much caution. 

In any event, however, a spectacle of absorbing interest is 
immediately on view. Enclosed literally in an air-tight re- 
ceiver, two of the most complex and considerable organizations 
of our modern world are subjected before our eyes to the action 
of an air-pump, the movement of which never stops, while its 
energy defies estimate. 

At once a gladiatorial show and a scientific demonstration, 
what is in process affords a dramatic, if not an altogether 
fitting, close of the century just rounding out since Waterloo 
and the fall of Napoleon. We at least are fortunate in being 
spectators only of a tragedy, a repetition possibly on a large 
scale of that in which we were ourselves concerned at the 
milestone marking just half-way in the pi ogress of that cen- 
tury. What is about to occur will assuredly be memorable. 
The curtain is up; the show is on! 

Secure good places — 't will be worth your while. 

Col. Thomas L. Livermore followed: 

The resemblance between the campaign now in progress in 
France and Belgium, and the Virginia campaign of 1864, to 
which our attention has been drawn by General Adams' paper, 
which has just now been read, is most interesting. The re- 
semblance is exact between certain periods of the campaign, 
but the comparison of the Kaiser's aim at the outset of the 
present campaign with Grant's aim in May, 1864, seems less 
exact. It is said that the former's object was to capture Paris, 
but Richmond was not Grant's object. Neither does it seem 
to me that the Kaiser's confidence in completing the conquest 
of France in a term of weeks, founded in part on underrating 
his enemy, can justly be said to resemble Grant's expecta- 
tions. Grant probably did not estimate Lee's ability as great 
as it was afterwards proven to be. Immediately after Gettys- 
burg the latter's military reputation was somewhat clouded, 
and his attack, ten months later, on Grant's army as it moved 
through the Wilderness will, I think, be adjudged by history 
to have shown more courage than wisdom. 


If General Humphreys, who planned the movement into 
the Wilderness, was right, neither Grant nor his army thought 
an initial blow would be sufficient. General Humphreys wrote: 
"But move as we might, long continued hard fighting, under 
great difficulties, was before us, and whatever might be the 
line of operations adopted, the successful execution of the 
task of the Army of the Potomac could only be accomplished 
by the vigorous and untiring efforts of all belonging to that 
army, and by suffering heavy losses in killed and wounded, 
and that the whole army well understood. . . . Lee's army 
being the objective, the first question was by which flank should 
the Army of the Potomac move." * 

This seems sufficiently to establish the fact that Grant's 
campaign was not for the possession of Richmond, which in 
itself could be of little value to the Union arms, and that his 
march towards that city was intended to bring Lee to battle 
out of his intrenchments. 

In the Virginia campaign there was no strategic error like 
that which exposed the flank of the German army on the 
Marne and resulted in the battle, followed by the retreat of 
seventy miles northwards to the river Aisne. For comparison 
of the two campaigns, the latter should be taken from the 
point when the armies, at the end of the retreat, faced each 
other on that river, September 12. They then resorted to the 
practice of our Civil War, begun in 1864, of methodically 
throwing up hasty intrenchments to cover each position 
gained on the field during, as well as while preparing for, battle. 
On the Aisne, the Germans had to protect the railways com- 
ing to their rear and serving as their line of supplies. From 
June 15, 1864, the Confederates had to defend the railways 
from the south to their rear which brought their supplies. Two 
of them, the " South Side" and "Weldon," converged at 
Petersburg, and by able strategy Grant, without discovery by 
Lee, placed in front of the Petersburg fortifications a force 
ample to take the place; but although eleven redans, and the 
adjacent trenches, with fifteen cannon, were taken, the capture 
of the city failed, through faulty leadership of subordinates. 
Upon the failure of this attack Grant resorted to extending his 
line by the left flank to gain the railways, or to bring Lee 
1 Humphreys, The Virginia Campaign of '64 and '65, 9, 12. 


out of his intrenchments for their defence. The movements 
for this purpose were as follows: June 21, an unsuccessful at- 
tempt to seize the Weldon Railway, and August 13 another 
attempt, in which this was accomplished; one on September 
29-30, which extended his intrenchments to Peebles Farm; one 
on October 27, which failed in an attempt to surprise, and was 
relinquished after a Union victory at Boyd ton Plank Road; 
and one in February, in which the intrenchments were extended 
to Hatchers Run. 

By these movements, Lee was forced to extend his line to a 
total length of more than thirty-seven miles, a part of which 
was covered by rivers, but the rest of which — about twenty- 
seven miles in length — was heavily intrenched. At this 
point the resemblance to the situation on the Aisne and north 
of it, disappears. While after Grant's last extension above 
referred to, there still remained beyond the Confederates' 
right ample room for further flank movements, if it is true, 
as is reported, that the German line has been extended to the 
North Sea, no further movement by land around their right 
flank by the Allies is possible. 

Grant also sent expeditions which destroyed sections of 
railways as follows: July 7, under Sheridan, against the Vir- 
ginia Central, north of Richmond; July 22, under Wilson, 
against the Weldon, Lynchburg and Danbury railroads; 
August 22, under Hancock and Gregg, and in December under 
Warren, against the Weldon Railroad south of the Union lines. 
A movement north of the James, on August 13, was made to 
draw back the troops which had gone to oppose Sheridan in 
the Shenandoah Valley; and another, on September 29, had 
the object of preventing the despatch of further reinforce- 
ments there. An expedition, July 5, under Hancock and 
Sheridan, against the railways north of the James, had for one 
object the prevention of sending reinforcements to Johnston's 
army in Georgia, and for another, the detachment of Confeder- 
ate troops from the Petersburg front to thus lessen the force 
which might oppose the proposed assault through the breach 
to be made by the mine under Elliot salient in the Confederate 
works. This assault was made July 13 at a loss of 3,798, and 
only added to the proof given at Spottsylvania in May, that 
the old practice of carrying a breach in an enclosed fortifica- 


tion by an assault in mass cannot accomplish much against an 
open line of works defended by a force strong enough to cover 
the front with fire, and resolute enough to deploy against the 
heads and flanks of the assaulting column within the works. 
Thereafter Grant made no such assault, if we except that of 
September 9, north of the James, which, made in expectation 
of finding the works weakly held, captured Fort Harrison and 
other works but failed to penetrate to Richmond as intended. 
Lee made such an assault disastrously at Fort Stedman in 
March, 1865. The Germans seem to be trying them on the 

In June, Grant had 120,097 men "present for duty" 1 against 
Lee's 65,562. In August, the discharge of men as their terms 
expired, casualties, and the despatch in July and August of 
the Sixth corps and two cavalry divisions to Washington and the 
Shenandoah Valley, had reduced Grant's number to 69,206 
against Lee's 55,62 2. 2 It is conjectured that one motive of 
Grant's activity in August and September was to conceal from 
Lee this reduction of the Union force to an extent which was 
hazardous to the beleaguering army. 

Lee was quick in detecting or anticipating nearly all the 
attempts against his flanks or railways, and they almost always 
resulted in his giving battle to oppose them. For miles the 
opposing intrenchments were under rifle range — for long dis- 
tances within a few yards — of each other. The result of this 
was the exchange of infantry and artillery fire every day, 
between works covering the fines for about eight miles; but 
it was very rarely, if ever, that such fire was relied on to ac- 
complish the capture of works, or was wasted in sufficient vol- 
ume and duration to answer to what the reports from the lines 
in Belgium and France are entitling " battles." 

Grant's losses in all the operations above noted, beside the 
13,798 in the attack on Petersburg June 15-18, and at the mine, 
were 15,515 killed and wounded, and 12,337 captured or miss- 
ing, 3 a total of 27,852 which, as compared with the loss of 28,000 
in three days at Gettysburg does not seem extravagant. The 
published returns of the Confederate losses are incomplete. 

1 Papers of the Military Historical Society of Massachusetts, vi. 461, against 
June 30 erroneously gives the number present for duty May 31. 

2 lb., 461; War Records, 81. 542-552. 

3 War Records, 80. 218 et seq.; 85. 135 et seq.; 95. 63 et seq. 


There is ground for estimating their ratio to numbers at least 
as great as that of the Union losses. In strategic wisdom, the 
skillful use of intrenchments and resolute opposition with 
smaller numbers, Lee, in the period covered by these operations, 
gained rank among the first, and perhaps became the first, of 
generals in modern defensive war. 

In view of the obvious preponderance in Grant's numbers 
(in fact, 115,000 effectives against 54,000 Confederates) in 
March, 1865, 1 Lee foresaw the danger of an early flank march 
by Grant; and with the object of dislocating the latter's 
projects, he, on March. 25, the next day after Grant had 
issued an order for the final movement, ordered the assault 
above referred to, by half his army, under Gordon, on Fort 
Stedman, which was only one hundred and fifty yards from the 
Confederate works on the Petersburg front. The battle was a 
counterpart of that at the mine, with the contestants' parts 
reversed. The Confederates entered the fort with a rush and 
then were driven out. In this, and the counter attacks on the 
Confederate fines in other parts of the line on the same day, the 
Confederates lost about 4,000 and the Union troops 2,200. 

On the Aisne and to the north of it, like Grant at Petersburg, 
the Allies have repeatedly extended their line to the left in 
their effort to pass around the right end of the German line, 
and these attempts have always resulted in battle, at the end 
of which each side has rested in new intrenchments covering 
the extension. There also has been daily firing between in- 
trenchments. If the reports from the field of frequent assaults 
by infantry against intrenchments are true, the campaign in 
this respect differs from that at Petersburg described above, 
where during the later months of the campaign such assaults 
were avoided by Grant. 

The flank movement projected by Grant which, undelayed 
by the attack on Fort Stedman, was begun on March 29, car- 
ried his moving column so far beyond the right end of Lee's 
intrenchments that the latter was led to send 24,000 out to 
oppose them, leaving only 11,000 men to hold the Petersburg 
intrenchments over twelve miles long. 2 After three battles be- 

1 Livermore, Numbers and Losses in the Civil War, 136, 137. 

2 Papers of the Military Historical Society of Massachusetts, vi. 485, and map 
at end. 


tween the forces on the flank on the three following days, 
Grant judged that so many Confederates had left the Peters- 
burg intrenchments that an assault on them would succeed. 
This assault, made by his order on April 2, penetrated the 
line, and cut the Confederate army in two, with result that Lee 
abandoned his whole line and marched in retreat for North 
Carolina, too late. The Union army, overtaking, engaged it, 
en route, in three battles and several minor engagements, and 
compelled its surrender on April 9 at Appomattox Court House 
at the end of a retreat of one hundred miles. 

In the campaign of twelve days, the Union army captured 
40,534, and killed or wounded about 6,266, who, with about 
3,800 who deserted and 3,400 who escaped, constituted the 
whole army with which Lee started in the campaign. The 
Confederates inflicted on the Union army a loss of 9,066 
killed and wounded, and 1,714 captured or missing, 1 which 
fact, with the extraordinary endurance of the Confederate sol- 
diers on the long and rapid march in retreat, forbids the belief 
that they were the subjects of inanition — an excuse which, 
be it said, they did not make for their defeat. 

The evidence is that it was through the waste, rather than 
the enfeeblement, of the men of the Confederate army, that 
they were vanquished. The records show that they were re- 
duced to the point of surrender by the casualties which every 
army, however well fed and supplied, must suffer in a campaign 
abounding in battles, in which it marches far, and fights hard, 
against a resolute adversary — and the more so if it is largely 
outnumbered, as were the Confederates. In Numbers and 
Losses in the Civil War, published fourteen years ago, I invited 
criticism and amendment of its contents, which included an 
estimate of the United States War Department that there 
were 1,000,000 men in the Confederate army first and last, 
together with my computations, running from 1,227,890 to 
1, 406, 048 , 2 based on the census and the number and average 
strength of regiments noted to have been in the Confederate 
army. These computations involve assumptions which are not 
so well established as to admit the adoption of either of the 
results as the indisputable number of individuals in the Confed- 
erate army, but they show that the estimate of the War De- 
1 Livermore, 136, 137. 2 lb., 40-63. 



partment was within possible bounds. The Index of the War 
Records, since published, strengthens the proof. 1 It has been fre- 
quently alleged that my statement of the number in the Con- 
federate army is too large, and that in fact the number was 
only 700,000. I have not seen any criticism that the estimate 
in the book was too small. Some of these criticisms, and other 
facts and computations which further confirm the estimate of 
1,000,000, are noted in the papers printed by the Military 
Historical Society in its volume xm. 317-341. 

The records supplemented by Confederate estimates show 
the following casualties in the Confederate army: 

Killed 94,000 2 

Deserted 100,000 3 

Surrendered at close of war . . . . 173,576 4 

In Northern prisons in April, 1865 . 70,13c 5 

Total. 437,706 

There were 249,457 deaths from disease, and 285,545 dis- 
charges for disability in the Union army. 6 The total of these 
casualties is 34.318 per cent of 1,556,000, the number of men 
who, serving for three years, would be equivalent to the actual 
number for the actual terms of enlistment in the Union army. 7 
The same per cent of 1,082,000 which I have computed, on the 
same basis, as the number for three years service in the Con- 
federate army, is 372,ooo, 8 which added to the above total 
gives 809,706. Besides the 70,130 above noted in Northern 
prisons, there remained over 200,000 on the Confederate rolls 
who were not included in the surrender. 9 Many of them may 
have been men who were in no sense disabled by inanition. 
This undoubtedly was the case with more than 50,000 be- 
longing to the force west of the Mississippi — where there is no 
question of sufficient food. In addition, undoubtedly, there 

1 Papers of the Military Historical Society of Massachusetts, xiii. 332. 

2 Fox, Regimental Losses, 22, 47, 554. 

3 lb., 139, 141; War Records, 129. 11 19. 

4 War Records, 121. 772. 

5 lb., 1001. 

6 Regimental Losses, 527; Medical and Surgical History of War of the Re- 
bellion, XLII. 

7 Livermore, 50. 

8 lb., 61. 

9 Livermore, 46; War Records, 129. 1182; 94. 632. 


were more who died of wounds than were ever accounted for 
under this head. 

Upon the assumption that there were only 700,000 in the 
Confederate army enlisted for an average term of three years 
(the terms were four years for a good many), 34.318 per cent 
for deaths from disease and discharges for disability would be 
240,000, which added to the above total of 427,706 would give 
678,300 as the number accounted for out of the supposed 

There is further evidence against the theory that inanition 
subdued Lee's army, in the statement of Colonel Taylor, of 
his staff, 1 that but for the Confederate government's " inflex- 
ible purpose to hold the City of Richmond" Lee's policy would 
have been to unite with Johnston, with the purpose of falling 
on Sherman in the hope of destroying him, and then, with the 
united armies, returning to confront Grant; also in the state- 
ments of the Confederate Commissaries of Subsistence in the 
winter of 1864-65. 2 In December the Commissary General 
says that there is no deficiency in subsistence for the armies 
outside of Virginia, and he states the daily ration to the armies 
in that state (for 100 men, 100 lbs. flour or meal, 100 lbs. fresh 
meat or 33^ lbs. bacon, 10 lbs. rice, 1 gallon vinegar, 2 quarts 
salt, and for troops in the trenches 6 lbs. sugar and 3 lbs. coffee) 
which does not suggest starvation; January 23, Chief Com- 
missaries for Virginia say that plenty of meat can be had if 
the purchase money is supplied; February 9, the Commissary 
General complains that the neglect of measures to accumulate 
supplies in Richmond has made the army in Virginia "live from 
hand to mouth," that for lack of money large available sup- 
plies of meat were not secured, and that the retention of many 
thousand prisoners of war in Richmond has caused the con- 
sumption of the reserve of flour, and he mentions among 
sources of supply "various contrivances to draw supplies from 
beyond our lines" and "secret arrangements with the enemy 
turning on their anxiety to get cotton;" and March 10, affirms 
his opinion that a surplus of supplies remains in Virginia, the 
Carolinas and East Tennessee, sufficient for the Confederate 
armies there, which, with adequate military protection, could 

1 Four Years with General Lee, 146. 

2 War Records, 129. 930, 1031, 1032, 1137; 96. 1211-1216. 


be obtained by a prompt supply of funds for their purchase, but 
for the Army of Northern Virginia would have to be brought 
by " distant railroad transportation." 

Deficiencies which had existed or been feared, the Commis- 
sary General attributed to depreciating currency, destruction 
of the "fruits of the earth" by the enemy, the failure of the 
Government regulations to induce blockade runners to import 
meat, against their preference for " freight of great condensed 
value and little specific gravity," and the failure of the War 
Department to stop all private travel and freight until sup- 
plies should be forwarded; and to insure adequate supplies he 
urged impressment of them and measures for repairing, and in- 
suring efficiency of, the railroads. 

In addition to the foregoing, there is much evidence that 
there were supplies enough in the Confederacy to sustain the 
armies given in Rhodes' History, Volume v. 

There is no question that the blockade maintained by the 
navies seriously obstructed foreign importations, but the fore- 
going proves that it was not wholly — and I am persuaded that 
it was not mainly — due to the blockade that there was a 
scarcity of army supplies in Virginia, or elsewhere. In fact, 
the blockade of Wilmington was never effective, and a lively 
foreign commerce was carried on between that port and foreign 
parts until the Army and Navy together closed it in January, 
1865. 1 

It may be fairly argued that opening the Mississippi, and 
forcing the Confederate armies out of Tennessee, in 1863, by 
which about one-third of the military strength of the Confed- 
erates, and vast supplies, as well as foreign importations by 
way of Mexico, were cut off from the rest of the Confederacy, 
did more than the blockade towards diminishing the military 
power and vitality of its armies. 

It is also conceivable that the injury to the railways in the 
expeditions from the armies facing Petersburg and Richmond, 
above noted, and the destruction of the crops stored and stand- 
ing, wrought by the Army, might prove equal to all that the 
blockade did towards the success of the Union arms, if their 
effect on the efforts of the Confederate armies could be 

1 Papers of the Military Historical Society, rx. 355. 




I cannot escape the conclusion that the cause of the final 
surrender of the 173,576 brave men, who remained in the 
field, under arms in opposition to the Union army of 600,000, 
in April, 1865, 1 was the disparity of numbers, and that their 
ranks had been reduced, not by inanition from want of food, 
but by other, and ordinary, casualties, exposure, and hard- 
ships of war. 

Col. W. R. Livermore then said : 

It was kind in General Adams to send me a proof of this 
paper and to invite me to take part in this discussion. I fully 
agree with him in thinking that this war marks one of the 
great epochs of history, and that the situation now bears cer- 
tain resemblances to that in the Campaign of the Wilderness. 
The opposing forces are now intrenched behind long lines con- 
fronting each other at close range as they were around Rich- 
mond and Petersburg. How far the situations are alike in 
other respects I cannot answer without violating the Presi- 
dent's wish that no officer on the active or retired list shall 
discuss the present war from either a political or a military 
standpoint. I can only say that our first duty is to keep out 
of it, and our second duty is to be prepared for such a war when 
our turn shall come around. I shall not, then, occupy much of 
the time available for the discussion of this paper. I have 
already, at the meetings of this society for the past seven years, 
and elsewhere for at least fifty, spoken of the present war and 
expressed my opinion about its probable results with especial 
reference to its effect upon the balance of power in Europe; 
and I shall confine what I have now to say to a discussion of 
the military situation in America in 1864. 

It is very true, as General Adams says, that when Grant 
was placed in command of all the Federal forces, those com- 
posing his army "entered on their work . . . with supreme 
confidence in themselves and in their leader, and with a firm 
belief generally prevailing that at last the Union side was on 
the threshold of a movement which was to prove at once 
short and decisive." 

It is also true, as he says, that in military operations some- 
times it is the unexpected that happens. The belief was that 

1 War Records, 126. 137. 


Grant and his officers would use their troops to good advan- 
tage. This they failed to do. With an army of nearly twice 
the size of Lee's, he should have been able to outflank him, 
and either capture him or send him precipitately back to 
Richmond. If with Grant's superiority in cavalry, he had 
kept it on Lee's flank and rear, it would have been hard for 
Lee to escape. Instead of that, he resorted to the war of attri- 
tion, and settled down at Petersburg with the loss of fifty-six 
per cent of the best of his army, and tried to surround Lee at 
Richmond with the rest. There the two armies confronted 
each other for nearly a year, when the Confederacy collapsed, 
perhaps, from inanition. 

General Adams has contributed much to this phase of the 
history of the Civil War. He has called attention to the heroic 
part played by the Navy in maintaining a partial blockade 
over thousands of miles for so long a time, to the utter amaze- 
ment of the civilized world; to the effect of this blockade in 
exhausting the strength of the Confederacy; and to the wise 
and skillful conduct of our foreign relations in holding back 
the hands of our doubtful friends abroad. 

But because the Confederacy was exhausted by the air pump 
it does not follow that it could not have been suppressed if 
its armies had been defeated in the field as they should have 

If with the troops at Grant's disposal in the east he was 
unable to surround Lee and cut off his supplies, he should have 
reinforced them from other theatres of operations. 

If Lee's army at Richmond had been supplied by railroads 
from the south, Grant's could have been supplied by those 
from the north, as well as by sea from City Point. Lee would 
have been forced to yield as Pemberton did at Vicksburg; or, 
if he should escape, Grant's army, reinforced from the defences 
of Washington and Baltimore, could have swept down the 
coast and taken possession of the country without being forced 
to devastate it. In this way, at every step, it would have met 
scattered forces of the Confederacy to better and better ad- 
vantage, and ended the war more rapidly and with far less 
loss to the victors as well as to the vanquished. 

Warfare by exhaustion is admissible as an auxiliary; but 
when practicable, as it was with us, it would have been prefer- 


able to dispose of the armed forces of the enemy rather than 
make war upon old men, women, and children. 

Mr. A. C. Coolidge spoke briefly on war and the exhaus- 
tion of nations. 

Mr. Rhodes read letters he had received from two of the 
Honorary Members of this Society, one in England and one in 
Germany, expressing their views on the great war now in 
progress. Mr. Rhodes connected the two letters by giving 
some of his own experiences in France during the month of 

The Editor submitted the following paper by Mr. Lincoln N. 
Kinnicutt on 

The Plymouth Settlement and Tisquantum. 

That the landing of the Pilgrims at Plymouth was only acci- 
dental is almost an established historical fact, and the conclu- 
sions so far drawn, from the documents obtainable pertaining 
to their early history, all tend to confirm this decision. I 
think, however, there is some indirect or circumstantial evi- 
dence which possibly leads to another conclusion. In order 
fully to understand the situation we must go back to 1606 and 
bear in mind the various events which finally led to the coloni- 
zation of New England, and also try to analyze those events 
which directly or indirectly may have influenced the Pilgrims 
in their final selection. I will therefore briefly review the pre- 
vious attempts to colonize, which led to the settlement at 

The charter originally granted to Sir Humphrey Gilbert in 
1578, and on his death transferred to Sir Walter Ralegh by 
Queen Elizabeth in 1584, having lapsed to the crown, James I 
issued a charter April 10, 1606, to two companies, known as 
the London Company or first colony, and the Plymouth Com- 
pany or second colony, often designated as the south and north 
Virginia Companies. In August of that year Sir Ferdinando 
Gorges sent a ship under the command of Captain Henry Chal- 
lons to North Virginia for purposes of exploration, with the 
idea of immediate colonization. This expedition, owing to the 
disobedience of instructions, was a total failure, and the ship 
was finally captured by the Spanish. At about the same 


time Chief Justice Popham, cooperating with Sir Ferdinando 
Gorges, both being associates in the north Virginia Company, 
sent another ship under the command of Captain Martin 
Pring, with the same orders as given by Gorges to Challons. 
The two ships were to join each other on the coast of Maine. 
Captain Pring's voyage, to which I will refer later, was very 
successful and the result of his reports led to the earliest set- 
tled colony on the New England coast, in 1607, at Sagadahock, 
known as the Popham Colony and named Sabino. In the mean- 
time the south Virginia Company had sent in January, 1607, a 
ship with colonists under the command of Captain Newport, 
and before the Popham colony had started from England, had 
begun a settlement at Jamestown. It is only with the north 
Virginia Company that this narrative has to deal, and the 
above event is mentioned only to show the beginning of the 
rivalry which later led to important results. 

The Popham colony, although starting in some respects under 
much better conditions than the Plymouth settlement of 1620, 
— having erected a fort, church, storehouse, and a number of 
dwellings, three ships from England having arrived with sup- 
plies and probably with more settlers — was abandoned in 
August or September, 1608, on account of inadequate leader- 
ship, George Popham having died and Ralegh Gilbert, who 
succeeded him, having been obliged to return to England on 
account of the death of his brother. This was a severe blow to 
Sir Ferdinando Gorges and the north Virginia Company. 
The council of the south Virginia Company, hearing of this 
failure, endeavored to persuade the north Virginia Company to 
join them in their efforts of colonization, emphasizing the 
greater advantages of the southern location, and for the time 
being attempts at northern settlements were abandoned, al- 
though Gorges and Sir Francis Popham still continued to send 
ships, for fishing and trade, to the north Virginia coast. 

In 1 6 14 Captain John Smith, in the interests of certain Eng- 
lish merchants, undertook a voyage with two ships to Sagada- 
hock for whales, and to explore some mines. On this voyage 
he explored the coast of New England from Maine to Cape 
Cod. On his return Sir Ferdinando Gorges was so impressed 
by his glowing account of New England that he opened nego- 
tiations with him to attempt a colony there, although only 


the year previous he had sent a vessel with Captain Hobson to 
the New England coast, which voyage had proved a failure. 
These negotiations led to Captain John Smith being given 
command of two ships in 161 5 to undertake a settlement. This 
proved also a failure, one ship returning to Plymouth, England, 
after being captured by the French, but leaving Captain Smith 
a prisoner. In 1616 Gorges sent another ship under command 
of Richard Vines and this enterprise was still another failure. 
In 161 7 Captain John Smith succeeded in persuading certain 
members of the north Virginia Company to give him command 
of three more ships for another attempt at colonization, but the 
vessels were windbound for three months and the enterprise 
abandoned. Sir Ferdinando Gorges then ceased to have any 
further relations with Captain John Smith. About this time 
twelve hundred persons went to Virginia, as settlers under the 
south Virginia charter, to the colon}^ which had been started 
in 1607. 

Even after all these failures Sir Ferdinando Gorges was not 
discouraged, and his faith in the advisability of planting a 
colony on the shores of New England was not shaken. 

In September, 1617, the first steps were taken by the Pilgrims 
to obtain a patent of land from the south Virginia Company, 
and John Carver went to England from Holland, probably 
twice, on this mission and negotiations were continued until 
June, 1619, when a patent was finally issued. This patent, how- 
ever, was never used and the conditions or the extent of its 
grants were never known. On February 2, 1619 (o. s.), another 
patent was given by the south Virginia Company, and the 
terms and conditions of this grant also are unknown and it was 
probably surrendered; for the records of July 16, 162 1, of the 
south Virginia Company state that as a " patent had been taken 
from Sir Ferdinando Gorges of the north Virginia Company by 
the Pilgrims their patent might be called in." 

The relations between the London Company and the Plym- 
outh Company had gradually become rather strained and 
about this time (161 7 to 1620) they had actually become an- 
tagonistic. The London Company had grown very strong and, 
in fact, had received two additional charters settling their 
bounds and excluding interference from others, and were try- 
ing to encroach on some of the privileges of the Plymouth 



Company, which so far had failed to establish any colony in 
the new world. In self-defence the Plymouth Company applied 
for a new charter granting to them the same exclusive privi- 
leges which had been granted to the other company, and this 
new charter was finally given to them in 162 1. 

Sir Ferdinando Gorges must have known all about the nego- 
tiations which had been carried on for about three years between 
the south Virginia Company or London Company and the Pil- 
grims, for John Gorges, the eldest son of Sir Ferdinando, had 
married a daughter of the Countess of Lincoln who took a de- 
cided interest in American colonization; moreover the second 
patent from the south Virginia Company to the Pilgrims was 
taken out in the name of John Whincop, a member of the family 
of the Countess of Lincoln. 

It is certainly reasonable to suppose that Sir Ferdinando 
Gorges, knowing the character and standing of the body of 
men who proposed to establish a colony in the new world, 
would have wished if possible to have them settle in that por- 
tion which came under his charter. 

No documents or letters have been discovered, so far as I 
have any knowledge, showing any correspondence between 
Sir Ferdinando Gorges and the Pilgrims, but there are a few 
established facts which indicate that there may have been 
some private understanding between some of the leaders and 
Sir Ferdinando. 

Almost immediately after it was known that the landing had 
been made at Plymouth a patent was issued to them by Sir 
Ferdinando Gorges without, so far as is known, any previous 
attempt to discuss conditions or privileges, and was immediately 
accepted by the settlers. 

The Pilgrims first sighted land at Cape Cod and " the which 
being made and certainly knowne to be it, they were not a little 
joy full. After some deliberation had amongst them selves and 
with the master of the ship, they tacked aboute and resolved to 
stande for the southward (the wind and weather being faire) 
to finde some place aboute Hudsons river for their habitation." 1 
It would seem by the above quotation that from the very first 
there was some difference of opinion in regard to their place 
of settlement. After half a day they were driven by "shoulds 

1 Bradford, History of Plymouth Plantation, 1. 151. 


and roring breakers" and returned to Cape Cod. "And the 
next day [November 11] they gott into the Cape-harbour where 
they ridd in saftie." The master of the ship then insisted that 
they should look out for a place, with their shallop, as he would 
not stir from thence till a safe harbour was discovered. 

There has been much controversy over the alleged bribing 
by the Dutch to prevent a settlement of the Pilgrims in that 
part of the country they then occupied, but Winslow in his 
Brief Narration speaks of "The large offer the Dutch offered 
to us ... to go under them to Hudson River." He also says, 
referring to the first plans of the Pilgrims, "for our eye was 
upon the most northern parts of Virginia." * 

That the master of the Mayflower brought the Pilgrims to 
that part of the country about which they were probably better 
informed than of any other portion of the whole coast, is cer- 
tainly a strange coincidence considering the whole situation. 

The compact made in Cape Cod Harbor before the landing 
of the Pilgrims begins as follows: "In the name of God, Amen 
. . . Having undertaken for the glorie of God and advance- 
mente of the Christian faith and honor of our King and countrie 
a voyage to plant the first colonie in the northern parts of 
Virginia." This seems to permit a possible understanding 
with the north Virginia Company, and that New England had 
been considered before the departure from England or Holland. 

If the Popham colony in 1607 under the charter of the north 
Virginia Company, of whom Sir Ferdinando Gorges was the 
leading spirit, had made a declaration of what they intended to 
do, the first part of that compact could have been almost the 

No doubt can exist that the Pilgrims were well acquainted 
with Captain John Smith's glowing description of New Eng- 
land and of that part of the coast where they first landed, and 
also that they had his map to consult. Also without doubt they 
knew of Champlain's, Pring's and Gosnold's descriptions, and 
probably had seen the letter of Captain Thomas Dermer to 
Samuel Purchas. After discussing the advisability of remain- 
ing at Pamet or Cold Harbor they decided "for anything we 
knew there might be hard by us a far better seat" and "con- 
cluded to make some discovery within the bay but in no case so 

1 Young, Chronicles 0} the Pilgrims, 383-385. See also Bradford, 1. 158. 


far as Angoun," that is, Ipswich (Mourts' Relation). " Robert 
Coppin our pilot made relation of a great navigable river and 
good harbor in the other headlands of the bay ... in which 
he had been once not much above eight leagues distance . . . 
called it Thievish Harbor. And beyond that place they were 
enjoined not to go." 

Probably Governor Bradford had seen the letter of Captain 
Thomas Dermer "to his worshipful friend Mr. Samuel Pur- 
chas," dated December 27, 1619, from Virginia, describing 
the coast of New England and particularly the country in the 
vicinity of Plymouth; and taking into consideration what Gov- 
ernor Bradford himself says in regard to another letter, from 
Thomas Dermer written in Tune, 1620, on his second visit to 
Plymouth, it is also not at all improbable that this letter was 
seen by him before the Pilgrims left England. It is not known 
to whom this letter was written, but it or a copy was then, or 
later, in Governor Bradford's possession, and in all probability 
it was written to Sir Ferdinando Gorges in whose employ Cap- 
tain Dermer then was. The Mayflower did not leave England 
until the first part of September, 1620. Governor Bradford 
wrote in his journal in regard to this letter of June, 1620, as 
follows : 

This Mr. Dermer was hear the same year that these people came, 
as appears by a relation written by him, and given me by a freind, 
bearing date June -30- Anno: 1620. And they came in November 
following, so ther was but • 4 • months diff erance. In which relation 
to his honored freind, he hath these pasages of this very place. 

" I will first begine (saith he) with that place from whence Squanto, 
or Tisquantem, was taken away; which in Cap: Smiths mape is 
called Plimoth; and I would that Plimoth had the like comodities. 
I would that the first plantation might hear be seated, if ther come 
to the number of -50- persons, or upward. Otherwise at Charlton, 
because ther the savages are lese to be feared. The Pocanawkits, 
which live to the west of Plimoth, bear an invetrate malice to the 
English, and are of more streingth then all the savages from thence 
to Periobscote. Their desire of revenge was occasioned by an Eng- 
lish man, who having many of them on bord, made a great slaughter 
with their murderers and smale shot, when as (they say) they offered 
no injurie on their parts. Whether they were English or no, it may 
be douted; yet they beleeve they were, for the Frenche have so 
possest them; for which cause Squanto cannot deney but they would 


have kild me when I was at Namasket, had he not entreated hard 
for me. The soyle of the borders of this great bay, may be com- 
pared to most of the plantations which I have seene in Virginia. 
The land is of diverce sorts; for Patuxite is a hardy but strong soyle, 
Nawset and Saughtughtett are for the most part a blakish and deep 
mould, much like that wher groweth the best tobaco in Virginia. 
In the botume of the great bay is store of codd and basse, or mulett, 
etc. But above all he comends Pacanawkite for the richest soyle, 
and much open ground fitt for English graine, etc. Massachusets 
is about • 9 • leagues from Plimoth, and situate in the mids betweene 
both, is full of ilands and peninsules very fertill for the most part." 1 

This letter of Captain Thomas Dermer brings Squanto on to 
the scene, and while he could personally have had no influence 
on the final decision of the Pilgrims to settle at Plymouth, the 
almost indispensable aid which he afterward rendered to them 
may have been in some measure foreseen, anticipated and 
counted upon, if a settlement should be made in the vicinity 
of Cape Cod. 

The series of events from i6i8toi62iin which Sir Ferdinando 
Gorges, Captain Thomas Dermer and Tisquantum took part, 
and the schemes which they may have contemplated, offer a 
field for a little study, and the whole history of the life of 
Squanto before meeting the Pilgrims is, I think, of sufficient 
interest to repeat in this paper. 

There has been much difference of opinion in regard to the 
first knowledge we have of Tisquantum, but Sir Ferdinando 
Gorges certainly states that one of the five savages brought to 
England by Captain Waymouth in 1605 was named Tasquan- 
tum and that he had him with him in London for three years. 
Admitting that Sir Ferdinando Gorges was " singularly care- 
less in the references he makes to his Indians," 2 cannot Gov- 
ernor Bradford's statement that " Tisquantum was carried 
away with diverce others by one Hunt" 3 and Sir Ferdinando 
Gorges' statements, be more fully reconciled than has hitherto 
been done? 

Dr. Dexter's supposition 4 that in some way he got back to 

1 Bradford, 1. 207. 

2 Adams, Three Episodes of Massachusetts History, 1. 24 n. 

3 Bradford, 1. 203. 

4 Mourt, 90 n. 


the neighborhood of Cape Cod, seems to be authorized by the 
statement of Captain John Smith. "The maine assistance next 
God I had to this small number, was my acquaintance amongst 
the Saluages, especially with Dohoday, one of their greatest 
Lords, who had liued long in England (and another called Tan- 
turn, I [had] carried with mee from England, and set on shore 
at Cape Cod)." 1 

If we interpret the word "had" as meaning "would have" 
this quotation has little weight; but the word "had" was in- 
serted by Edward Arber himself. 

I think that Tisquantum could have been in the vicinity of 
Pemaquid in 1605 and taken from there by Waymouth. He 
certainly had some previous knowledge of the place before 
Captain Dermer left him at " Sawahquatooke " in 1619 among 
"friends," after bringing him back from his "native country" 
— Plymouth. It must have been his own wish, for Dermer 
then sailed south with the intention of again visiting Cape Cod. 
Captain John Smith says in 16 14: "The Massachusets they 
report some times haue warres with the Bashabes of Pennob- 
scot and are not alwaies friends with them of Chawum and 
their alliance; but now they are all friends, and haue each 
trade with other so farre as they haue society on each others 
frontiers; for they [the Bashabes] make no such voyages as 
from Pennobscot to Cape Cod, seldome to Massach^set." 2 
In this quotation Captain John Smith speaks only of voyages. 
He probably knew nothing of the Indian trails. And Mourt 
states that Monhegan Island, which is near Pemaquid, was 
"a dayes sail with a great wind, and five dayes by land." It is 
well known that the Penobscots got much corn from the tribes 
to the south on account of the northern Indians, the enemies 
of the Penobscots, and the Massachusetts who made almost 
annual expeditions into the territory of the Penobscots at har- 
vest time to rob them of their crops. Also it is well knowji that 
the supply of flint of which the Massachusetts made many 
of their arrow heads and war points came from the north. 

Only in one instance does Captain John Smith seem in any 
way to identify Tantum, whom he "set on shore at Cape Cod," 
with Tisquantum or Squanto. In speaking of Captain Dermer 

1 Works of Captain John Smith (Arber), 732. 

2 lb., 720. 


and of his first visit to Plymouth with Squanto in 1619, and 
referring to the great plague which almost annihilated the 
tribe to which Squanto belonged, he writes as follows: 

They say the plague vpon them thus sore fell 
It was because they pleased not Tantum well} 

In this verse written by Captain John Smith he mentions the 
name of Tantum, but in this case it probably referred to Tan- 
tum (or Tan to), the Indian God, whom the Indians considered 
their good God. Some curious circumstances are connected 
with this rhyme which possibly identify Tisquantum with Tan- 
tum. 2 In the paragraph preceding it Smith had just spoken 
of Captain Dermer being at Plymouth (1620) and of the 
ravages of the plague, saying, "where I had seene one hundred 
or two hundred Saluages there is scarce ten to be found, and 
yet not any one of them [Dermer's crew] touched with any 
sicknesse." (Tisquantum was with Dermer at that time.) 
Also the belief of the Indians that Squanto had some control 
over the plague is shown in Bradford's and Winslow's writ- 
ings, and Governor Bradford wrote referring to Squanto 3 that 
he (Squanto) " sought his owne ends, and plaid his owne game, 
by putting the Indians in fear, and drawing gifts from them to 
enrich him selfe; making them beleeve he could stir up warr 
against whom he would, and make peace for whom he would. 
Yea, he made them beleeve they kept the plague buried in 
the ground, and could send it amongs whom they would, 
which did much terrifie the Indeans, and made them depend 
more on him, and seeke more to him then to Massasoyte." 
Winslow in his Good News also tells the same story with some 

It is a curious fact that the names of the two Indians who 
gave so much aid to the Pilgrims, often detrimental to the In- 
dians, were Squantum, their god of evil, and Hobbanoco, their 
devil, and probably these names signified to them this mean- 
ing. The Indians possessed imagination to a very high degree, 
as is shown by their personal names, and in their words of inani- 

1 Works of Captain John Smith (Arber), 749. 

2 Captain Smith, having a certain sense of humor, may have meant to ex- 
press a double meaning intentionally. Arber, by his cross-references, seems to 
identify Tantum with the Indian. 

3 Bradford, 1. 254. 


mate objects, especially the flowers, trees, stars, etc., but they 
were always practically descriptive in their place names. 

Squantam, contracted form of Musquantum — he is angry. 

Tantum, contracted form of Keihtannittoom — my great 

Tanto, contracted form of Kehtanito — he is the greatest 
god (Trumbull). 

Tisquantum, contracted form of Atsquantam 1 

'tsquantam J 

A probable translation would be, He possesses (or owns) the 
God of evil (He has the devil in him). 

If we believe literally the written statements of SirFerdi- 
nando Gorges and Captain John Smith our knowledge of Tis- 
quantum begins in 1605. In that year he was kidnapped by 
Captain George Waymouth, in the vicinity of Pemaquid. 
Waymouth was employed by Lord Thomas Arundell, who 
conceived the idea of preparing a way for Roman Catholic 
emigration to the new world, and was sent on a voyage of 
exploration. He took five or more savages to England and 
landed at the port of Plymouth, where they were seized upon 
by Sir Ferdinando Gorges and were "in his custody for three 
years or more," * and, according to Gorges, Tisquantum was 
one of them. The next we hear of him he was set on shore at 
Cape Cod by Captain John Smith, June, 1614. 2 If so, he prob- 
ably accompanied from England John Smith, who had been 
put in charge of two ships sent out by merchants of London for 
trading purposes. Smith, when departing for England from 
Cape Cod, left one ship under the command of Captain Thomas 
Hunt to complete her cargo. On Hunt's departure he kid- 
napped from twenty to twenty-seven Indians (the number has 
been variously stated by different writers), and Tisquantum was 
certainly one of them. It has been suggested that Tisquantum, 
being without suspicion of danger, going there with Hunt's 
superior officer, doubtless frequented Hunt's ship and inno- 
cently led his companions into the trap set for them. He is 
supposed to have been sold with the others for a slave in Spain, 
but in some way got to London, where he lived two years with 
a Mr. John Slany who was Treasurer of the Newfoundland 

1 Baxter, Sir Ferdinando Gorges, 1. 104 n. 

2 Works, 732. 


Company, 1 and dwelt in Cornhill (Mourt) or Cheapside. Mr. 
John Slany sent Tisquantum to Newfoundland, probably to 
join Captain John Mason, or the Indian himself found his 
way to an English ship at Malaga and was taken to Newfound- 
land by chance. Sir Ferdinando Gorges does not mention 
the fact that the Indian was in England between 16 14 and 
1619. He was landed at Cuper's or Cupert's Cove, now Mos- 
quito Cove, where Captains John Mason and Thomas Dermer 
had settled themselves. Tisquantum is said to have been the 
only member of his own tribe who survived the great Indian 
plague which visited the Massachusetts Indians immediately 
after he was kidnapped by Hunt. 

Captain Thomas Dermer, after the unfortunate voyage of 
Captain John Smith in 161 5, with whom he was, went to 
Newfoundland to join Captain Thomas Mason and there met 
Tisquantum. Dermer must have known or have heard about 
him from Smith, or Gorges, and Tisquantum, who was one of 
the Pawtuxet tribe of Indians of Plymouth, told him much 
about his old home in the vicinity of Cape Cod. Captain 
Dermer informed Gorges of this meeting, probably in 16 18, and 
"his opinion of the good use that might be made of his employ- 
ment, with the readiness of Captain Mason to further any of 
our attempts that may either with boats or other provision be 
necessary." 2 Dermer, on the advice of Captain Mason, re- 
turned to England in 1 618 to consult Gorges, and took Tisquan- 
tum with him, with the result of being again sent (by Gorges) 
to America with Tisquantum, to join Captain Rowcroft. Row- 
croft had been sent, a short time before, to Newfoundland, by 
Sir Ferdinando Gorges. On account of some miscarriage of 
plans to which I will refer later, Dermer left "Monahiggan 
with Squanto on the 19th. of May 1619 in an open pinnace of 
five ton ... for his saluages native country" (Tisquantum's 
country). The letter to Samuel Purchas, describing this voy- 
age, has been given in full many times and therefore I will 
not again copy it, only referring to the fact that Plymouth (or 
Pawtuxet) and the country in that immediate locality was 
explored as far as Nemasket. 

Dermer returned to " Monnahiggan " June 20. Shortly after 

1 Dean, Captain John Mason, 135. 

2 2 Collections, ix. 8. 


this date Dermer sailed again, this time for Virginia, arriving 
at Jamestown about November 4, 161 9. He left Tisquantum 
at Sawahquatooke (now Saco) "to stay with some of our 
Saluage friends." This was in the summer or early autumn of 
1 61 9. Tisquantum next appears upon the scene about the 20th 
of March, 1621, "four or five days after the appearance of 

The subsequent events in the life of Squanto with the Pil- 
grims I will not repeat as they are so well known. I will only 
refer to three important facts. Either Samoset or Squanto 
must have understood English well in order to comprehend the 
terms of the peace made between Massasoit and the Pilgrims. 
Probably it was Squanto, for Caunbitant, an Indian chief, 
said of him, "if he was dead the English had lost their tongue." 
Bradford says of Squanto, "Squanto continued with them [the 
Pilgrims] and was their interpreter and was a spetiall instru- 
ment sent of God for their good beyond their expectation." 

Squanto almost miraculously escaped death in 162 1, for Mas- 
sasoit, whom he tried to supersede in the confidence of the 
Pilgrims, demanded of Governor Bradford, that he should 
fulfil the terms of their first peace treaty and deliver Tisquan- 
tum to him. Governor Bradford, after much deliberation and 
delay, had finally decided that it was the sole alternative, and 
only the appearance of a boat in Plymouth Harbor at the 
critical moment after decision had been made, prevented the 
surrender of Squanto to the messengers that Massasoit had 
sent for him. 

Squanto died at Manamoick, now Chatham, in December, 
1622. His true adventures, unlike those of Captain John Smith 
and Benvenuto Cellini, told not by himself but by others, 
would possibly have found their normal place in the pages of 
the Arabian nights. 

Taking into consideration that for fourteen years, ever since 
1606, Sir Ferdinando Gorges had attempted unsuccessfully to 
settle a colony under the north Virginia charter, would he not 
have used all the means in his power to establish this Plymouth 
colony? The project had been considered in England and Hol- 
land for three years. He knew the standing and the character 
of the men who composed it, and who proposed to make this 
settlement. He knew that their chief aim was not wealth but 




to secure a permanent home. And would he not most naturally 
have attempted to influence their leaders? He had found a 
most reliable and valuable aid, then in America, Captain 
Thomas Dermer, whose enthusiasm was almost equal to his 
own. For two years they had been planning just such an enter- 
prise. He had already been much influenced by Captain John 
Smith's glowing accounts of Massachusetts, for Smith had 
described it as the paradise of the new world. And now Dermer 
supplemented Smith's story. Pring and Gosnold had told 
their tales of the country in the vicinity of Cape Cod, and 
had brought back most substantial results. Sir Ferdinando 
Gorges had in his possession much valuable information to give 
to the Pilgrims, and he without doubt took measures to have 
them receive all the information possible. Champlain's and 
Smith's maps had both been published, and both described 
Plymouth Harbor minutely. 

Is it unreasonable to suppose that Captain Thomas Dermer 
was on the Massachusetts coast and at Plymouth, only four 
months before the Pilgrims' landing, for some definite object? 
It certainly would have been a wise move of Sir Ferdinando 
Gorges to have one of his captains ready to meet them, or 
try to intercept them, on their approach to this country. He 
certainly would have been able to give them all the advan- 
tages of his knowledge and experience. Dermer had explored 
the coast from Plymouth Harbor to Virginia the year before 
and had also re-explored it this same year, and coming back to 
Massachusetts had written the letter before mentioned which 
we know had been given to Governor Bradford, at some 
time, stating in part, speaking of Plymouth, "I would that the 
first plantation might hear be seated, if ther come to the num- 
ber of fifty persons or upward; otherwise at Charlton" (near 
the mouth of the Charles River). And Captain John Smith 
had described Plymouth as follows: "then you come to Acco- 
mack (Plymouth) an excellent good harbor, good land; and 
no want of anything but industrious people;" and also said, 
speaking of the coast of Massachusetts, "and Massachusetts the 
Paradise of all these parts . . . and of all the foure parts of 
the world I would rather live here than any wher that I have 
yet seene not inhabited could I haue but means to transfer a 


If we believe that the Pilgrims had definitely decided before 
they left England to settle somewhere on the New Jersey coast 
or near the mouth of the Hudson River, and that the Captain of 
the Mayflower had been bribed, we must consider how much 
more valuable the results of the supposed bribery would have 
been to Sir Ferdinando Gorges than to the Dutch. There has 
never been a shadow of suspicion resting on Sir Ferdinando 
for this attempt at bribery, but we must remember that his 
early training was at the court of Queen Elizabeth. And the 
investigation of Captain Jones' career, the Master of the 
Mayflower, leads to the suspicion that he was not above brib- 
ery. Even the pilot or gunner, "one Mr. Coppin," apparently 
was ready to do his part and did give the Pilgrims the direct 
position of Plymouth Harbor or Thievish Harbor, and guided 
them to it. We must also bear in mind that Captain Thomas 
Dermer in the spring or early summer of 1620 started on a 
voyage from Cape Charles, sailed up the Delaware and the 
Hudson rivers, and then to Cape Cod. The relation of this 
voyage was read at a meeting of the Virginia Company in 162 1, 
and noted in the records of the company, but the relation itself 
has never been found. We know, however, that Captain Der- 
mer was at Plymouth, Massachusetts, June 30, 1620, by his 
letter to an unknown "honorable friend" of Governor Brad- 
ford. This was the second visit of Dermer to Plymouth. From 
there he went to Monhegan, but shortly returned and was cer- 
tainly in the vicinity of Cape Cod at the expected time of the 
arrival of the Mayflower on the coast. The Mayflower, how- 
ever, was detained in England almost two months and a half 
beyond her intended departure. 

If there was any understanding with Sir Ferdinando Gorges 
the scheme was almost frustrated by an encounter with 
the Indians on the Isle of Capawack, where Dermer was so 
severely wounded that he was obliged to go immediately to 
Virginia. There he shortly after died from his wounds. There 
is another important circumstance which seems to me to add a 
link to this chain of circumstantial evidence. The meeting of 
the Pilgrims with Tisquantum and Samoset may have been 
purely accidental, but in my opinion there are too many 
"providential" meetings and crucial moments in Squanto's 
life. If the premeditated interference of man is permitted to 


be a part of a possible "preordained" event, then the meeting 
of Sir Ferdinando Gorges and Dermer's Indian with the Pil- 
grims can certainly be considered from a different point of 
view than has been generally taken. 

We know of Sir Ferdinando Gorges' strong belief in the effi- 
cacy of the aid of the kidnapped Indians in his colonization 
schemes for almost every attempt from 1606 to 1620, when he 
had sent ships for attempted colonization, he had taken pre- 
cautions to also send one or two Indians. He had no authority 
in the fitting out of the Mayflower, but if there was any plan 
to have the colony settled in any part of the new country, 
under his charter, he would certainly have believed that the 
aid of his Indians would be a great factor in its success. Der- 
mer without doubt knew where to find Tisquantum as he had 
left him only the year before at Sagadahock, and from Ply- 
mouth we know he went to the Maine coast. He may have 
gone there for that purpose, bringing back both Samoset and 
Squanto with him. After Dermer's departure for Virginia, 
after his encounter with the Indians at Capawack, if my theory 
is correct, Squanto and Samoset would have been somewhere 
in the vicinity of Cape Cod. They would have known of the 
almost daily expected arrival on the coast of some vessels from 
England, and must also have known what was expected of 
them. Even after their loss of leadership in Captain Dermer 
they naturally would have remained to use their knowledge 
for their own benefit. From the results of some study of the 
Indian character, and knowing their ability and custom of 
rapidly transmitting news, I believe the Indians of the whole 
territory, in the vicinity of Cape Cod, knew almost from the 
first day of the arrival of the Mayflower on the coast, and 
kept themselves well informed in regard to every movement 
of the Pilgrims. 1 

Indian-like, they watched and waited, and may have been 
much influenced by Squanto and Samoset. Finally in March, 
more than two months after the landing of the Pilgrims, their 
course of action had been determined and the meeting with 
Massasoit was planned and the treaty with the white man 

The circumstantial evidence I have endeavored to produce 

1 See Drake, Old Indian Chronicle (ed. 1867), 19. 


may not be conclusive, but I think it supplies some proof that 
the Pilgrims had at least a half-formed intention of settling in 
the vicinity of Cape Cod before they left England; that Sir 
Ferdinando Gorges, probably unknown to them, used indi- 
rectly every possible measure to accomplish this purpose; and 
that Captain Thomas Dermer and the Indian Tisquantum 
were to have been important factors in his scheme. 

I think Sir Ferdinando Gorges is entitled to the name some- 
times given to him — "The Father of New England Coloni- 
zation;" and although he could not claim Plymouth as his own 
child, I believe he was the family physician in attendance at 
its birth. 

Mr. Murdock supplies from his collection three letters 
written from Boston in 1775, as follows: 

Sir Henry Clinton to Earl of Moira. 

Boston, June 25th, [1775.] 

My dear Lord, — I shall not trouble your Lordship with the 
particulars of the action of the 17th those your Lordship will have 
much more circumstantially from Lord Rawdon, whose behaviour 
during the whole action cannot be too much commended; the hopes 
of being of a little service where I thought I saw an opportunity 
brought me to the assistance of my friend Gen. Howe en volontaire; 
the affair however was in great measure decided on my getting 
there, and I had little more to do, than offer my assistance and 
advice wherever that could be of use; I heard from every body my 
friend Lord Rawdon commended for his coolness, and hearty in- 
trepidity, during the action; I saw myself one instance of it. The 
Enemy occupied some houses from which they annoy'd us a good 
deal, his Lordship hearing I intended to advice Genl. Howe to occupy 
a post exposed but too much to their fire, insisted on being detatched 
for that purpose; assembled his Grenadiers and seemed in that sort 
of impatience to go which did him great honour, his request how- 
ever your Lordship may easily conceive could not be Comply'd 
with; but that spirited offer, after as sharp an action as had been 
fought a great while, and in which he had receiv'd a shot through his 
Hat, made a great impression on me, forgive me my dear Lord if I 
open my Heart on this occasion I owe it to truth, and to the respect 
I have for his Lordship, what American politicks are now I know 
not, we are too respectable an Army to be insulted, but whether 
we can undertake any thing solid in the present state of America 


must be the subject of future Consideration, give me leave my 
dear Lord to assure your Lordship that I am with great respect 
Your sincere and obt. Servt., 

H. Clinton. 

John Burgoyne to Lord North. 

Boston, October 10, 1775. 

My Lord, — I received by the Cerberus the honour of your 
Lordship's letter of July 31st, and am impressed with the fullest 
sense of gratitude to the King for the leave granted me to return 
to England, and of acknowledgement to your Lordship for the confi- 
dence you have reposed in me. 

It shall be my study not to forfeit the opinion his Majesty enter- 
tains of my zeal for his service; and it is upon conviction that I can 
be more actively and more usefully employed for that end in Eng- 
land than in America during the winter months, and upon that 
motive only, that I propose to avail myself of his grace some time in 

I will be a faithful interpreter to Parliament in such matters as may 
receive assistance from the testimony of an eye witness, a zealous 
advocate for the cause of Britain, and a steady supporter of those 
measures which your Lordship so strenuously, and in my opinion 
so judiciously adopts, in this decision of her fate. 

My secondary views of being serviceable to the King's affairs 
in London depend upon my being thought worthy to be employed in 
a confidential agency between the King's servants and the Com- 
mander in chief. From his instructions to add reasonings to plans; 
for all that an able head like his conceives upon a great subject can 
not be contained in a dispatch: and on the other hand to superin- 
tend and expedite the several articles of supply intended for the 
spring in troops, equipage, stores, etc. 

My respect for Genl. Howe as an officer, and my confidence in 
him as a friend, induced me to consult his judgement upon the meas- 
ure of my return, which I had the happiness to find consonant with 
my own. The same trust in his military talents and in his personal 
regard, creates in my mind a preference to a service hitherto I con- 
fess not the most eligible; and I pledge myself to return with alacrity 
in the Spring to the duties I owe him in both the capacities I have 

The presence of Genl. Gage in London and the dispatches of Genl. 
Howe, by which your Lordship will learn the exact state of affairs 
here, make it unnecessary that I should enlarge upon the many 
other reasons that justify my voyage; and I shall close the subject 


with an assurance, which I trust your Lordship will do me the honour 
to communicate to the King, that had any winter operations for the 
troops in which I could have borne a part been judged adviseable by 
my superiors, I should have forgot every private exigency in my 
zeal to promote the publick service. Your Lordship will find from 
Genl. Gage that I pressed for an expedition to Rhode Island as an 
object of great importance in many aspects but particularly neces- 
sary to facilitate the greater undertaking upon New York in the 
Spring. Upon scrutinising the strength of the Army it has been 
found that sufficient numbers could not prudently be spared before 
the arrival of fresh troops, and the season of the year will be then 
too far advanced. It is therefore upon the decision of the military 
counsels here to rest upon our arms 'till spring and the general sen- 
timent of my colleagues that my absence may not only be dispensed 
with but become useful that I quit for a short time my professional 
line of duty for one more immediately under your Lordship's 

Your Lordship will forgive me if in earnestness to be thoroughly 
understood I have fallen into circumlocution. Genl. Gage's de- 
parture being more sudden than I had expected does not permit 
me to arrange my thoughts or write my letter over again. As I 
hope to kiss your Lordship's hands before the end of the Xmas 
recess I shall not now enter into any of the great points of consid- 
eration, which your Lordship has with so much openness entrusted 
to me, further than to express a wish that some foreigners were 
thought of to encrease the numbers of this army. Prompted by a 
zeal to see the war brought to a speedy conclusion, I venture to 
throw out this idea. It may be subject to objections and has prob- 
ably been discussed in his Majesty's councils, but I am apprehensive 
notwithstanding the particular energy that will be found in an army 
under Genl. Howe's command, that all his spirit and abilities will 
not be able to effect the great purposes of next Campaign with a less 
force than sixteen or eighteen thousand men. 

I have frequently read over the paragraph of your Lordship's 
letter relative to secrecy in counsels, and I confess with some doubt 
lest it should have been intended as a hint to myself. I observe that 
the English newspapers have inserted several articles of intelligence 
with my name tacked to them. I therefore take this occasion to 
assure your Lordship that my correspondents are few, my confiden- 
tial ones very few, and that I never touch a publick point, that is 
not of common notoriety, without the utmost caution even where 
I think the cause of Government may be assisted by communica- 
tion. That military counsels here have transpired upon many 
occasions it is too true, but I trust that misfortune will be no more 

1914.] CLINTON-BURGOYNE LETTERS, 1 775. 12 1 

complained of. The fault has not been in Genl. Gage, nor in the 
Generals whom he has occasionally consulted, but in those who 
have been unavoidably employed to prepare for the execution. 

In this, and in many other essential points things will wear a 
new face before Spring, and I congratulate your Lordship on the 
general zeal that reigns through army and navy to carry on the 
King's measures. Among those most deeply impressed with that 
principle, and most anxious to have it directed by your counsels, I 
request your Lordship to rank Your most obliged and most obedi- 
ent Humble Servant, 

J. Burgoyne. 

Rt. Hon'ble Ld. North. 

George Washington to Anthony White. 

Camp at Cambridge 28th Oct. 1775. 

Sir, — I could not let Mr. White depart this Camp without pay- 
ing you the tribute of a Letter. When I wrote to you last, I thought 
it not at all unlikely, that he might have been one of my Family 
before this, as I was not sanguine in my expectation of the Gentle- 
man's (to whom I had written before I had spoke to yr. son on this 
Subject) coming this way. By the last Post I received a Letter from 
him (that is Mr. Harrison) informing me of his having received my 
Invitation, tho' long after date, and that he should immediately 
set out for this Camp; whereupon I advis'd Mr. White as I learnt 
by a Letter from a Member of Congress that two Battalions were 
to be raised in the Jerseys to repair there without loss of time being 
firmly perswaded that his merit would entitle him to an honour- 
able appointment in one or the other of those Corps. 

For the occurrences of this Camp I must refer you to Mr. White, 
who can relate matters more circumstantially than my time, or the 
limits of a Letter, will enable me to do. with great esteem I remain, 
Sir, Yr. most obed't H'ble Serv't, 

G° Washington. 

[Endorsed] To Anthony White Esq'r, Brunswick. Favour'd by 
Mr. W. White. 

Mr. Guild finds in the collection made by his father the 
following letter from Edmund Burke, written ten months after 
the declaration of war by France against Great Britain, and 
thus expressing his early views on the policy of the Powers in 
alliance against France. There is no indication of the person 
to whom the letter was written. 



Edmund Burke to . 

My dear Lord: 

I received, what I expected, a Letter which does infinite honour 
to your humanity and your Spirit. I did not write as supposing 
you had not interfered, but from a wish that you should in- 
terfere with that authority which belongs to your person and 
your house. Lord Grenville told me, that your Lordship had 
applied to Government; and he added, that he thought as we did; 
but I told him, that I did not apply to him, as to Lord Grenville, 
but as to one of the Ministry; amongst whom, the opinion of one 
of their Colleagues ought to be something of more weight than the 
wishes of an individual like myself. I am sure nothing has done 
the Nation more honour than the reception of the Exiles of Reli- 
gion, honour, and Virtue. This House of Winchester was the 
Manor seat of the national Reputation. 1 To take it away would be 
infinitely worse than never to have given it. In my poor opinion 
this Charity is as politick as it is noble. We have at last put the 
War on its right footing, if not in practice, at least in open and 
avowed profession. It is a war to civilize France, in order to pre- 
vent the rest of Europe from being barbarised. The French Clergy 
are the great instrument, by which this end is to be accomplished; 
and if we can make any serious impression upon France by Arms 
in the beginning, this Clergy will be of more effect in the progress 
of the Business, than an hundred thousand Soldiers. I cannot de- 
scribe my anxiety on this Subject. The force sent, I pray to God, 
may not be found too late and too small. I have made my repre- 
sentations over and over again; but I thought too indulgently to 
myself of their force. The allied powers have many Objects in com- 
mon, and many separately; and I fear they are not all of them per- 
fectly consistent with each other, nor pursued in proper subordina- 
tion to their relative importance. The diminution of the power of 
France, as a State, is pursued as an Object, as well as its reforma- 
tion, as a distemperd State; but the latter is, in my opinion, much 
the more important object of the two. However, the war for its 
reduction is pursued, as the primary object, the extirpation of 
Jacobinism in that Country only as secondary. The assistance 
given to the Royal Cause is only a diversion, when at last it is 
undertaken. From this grand mistake has arisen all the misfortunes 
which have happened to us in this Campaign, and I most ardently 
wish, that it may not be productive of further disasters. But I beg 
pardon for this digression from the subject of our correspondence. 

1 Winchester House stood between St. Saviour's Church, Southwark, and the 
river, the old palace of the Bishops of Winchester, It was built in 1107. 


Mr. Wilmot tells me, that Winchester has a respite. I believe he 
will do everything that he ought, and I am myself convinced that 
Ministers, who think themselves, mean perfectly well, were led 
in to this by some persons in subordinate office who do not very well 
consider what they do; and are perhaps not very well affected to 
the persons or Cause of the unfortunate Exiles of France. 

I have the honour to be with the most sincere respect and regard, 
my dear Lord, your Lordships most faithful and obedient humble 

Edm. Burke. 

Beconsfield, December 1, 1793. 

Remarks were made during the meeting by Messrs. Ford, 
Bradford, Sanborn, and Norcross. 






Samuel Lothrop Thorndike was born in Beverly, December 
28, 1829, and died at his home in Kendall Green (Weston), on 
June 18, 191 1. He was the son of Albert and Joanna Batch- 
elder (Lovett) Thorndike, and a descendant of an old Lincoln- 
shire family, the first ancestor of which came from England in 
1623 and settled at Beverly, then a part of Salem, in 1636. 
Of his four great grandfathers three were active and influential 
in the Revolutionary War. Nicholas Thorndike, a shipmaster 
and later a merchant in Beverly, was a member of the com- 
mittee on coast defence for Beverly and Salem. Josiah Batch- 
elder, his maternal grandfather on his mother's side, was a 
member of the first Provincial Congress, that met at Lexing- 
ton. Colonel Joseph Rea, his maternal grandfather on his 
father's side, was in command of a regiment in the New Jersey 

Mr. Thorndike was prepared for college at the Beverly Acad- 
emy and the Boston Latin School, entered Harvard in 1848, 
and was graduated in 1852. Even in college he gave evidence 
of that social disposition that, along with the lovable qualities 
which enable such a disposition to realize itself, was one of 
the most marked traits of his character. He was a member of 
A. A. 3>. and of the 3>. B. K., President of the Hasty Pudding 
Club, and of the Institute of 1770, and deputy marshal of the 
Porcellian Club. 

He left college in the middle of his senior year and made a 
journey round the world with his classmate, William Sturgis 
Hooper, in a vessel engaged in the China trade belonging to 


Mr. Hooper's father. On his return he entered the Harvard 
Law School and in 1854 received the degree of LL.B. He con- 
tinued his studies in the office of Sidney Bartlett, and in June, 
1855, was admitted to the Suffolk bar. Then he was for a 
time in the office of Rufus Choate, until he formed a partner- 
ship with his classmate, E. Ellerton Pratt, under the firm 
name of Thorndike and Pratt. In 1859 he was appointed an 
Assistant Commissioner of Insolvency; in 1867 was admitted 
to practice before the bar of the Supreme Court of the United 
States, and in the same year was appointed Register of Bank- 
ruptcy under the bankrupt law just enacted, and held the office 
until the law was repealed. Already, in 1861, he had gone 
into the office of Mr. William H. Gardiner, with whom, and 
with his son, Charles P. Gardiner, he had an office for the care 
of trust property for forty-seven years, until the death of Mr. 
C. P. Gardiner, in 1908. 

His two great professional interests, that under the bank- 
rupt law, and the function of a trustee, were quite sufficient to 
occupy the time he devoted to business, and he never engaged 
very actively in such practice as required his appearance in 
court for the trial of cases. But they did not prevent his par- 
ticipation in many enterprises of great importance. A bare list 
of the institutions with which he was connected shows how broad 
were his activities and how high was the appreciation in the 
community of his business judgment. He was a director of the 
" Blair" roads and land companies in Iowa, before their ab- 
sorption by the Chicago and Northwestern Railway; a director 
and comptroller of the Atchison system; a director of the 
Lowell and Chicopee manufacturing companies; of the Boston 
and Roxbury Mill Corporation, of which he was president at 
the time of his death; trustee and vice-president of the Suffolk 
Savings Bank; trustee and member of the finance committee 
of the Perkins Institute. He was also, for a time, president 
of the Portland, Saco and Portsmouth Railroad Company. 

Engrossing as were his professional and business interests, 
they left him time for what was the passion of his life : music. 
He was identified with the musical history of Boston in an 
astonishing variety of ways. He never had any regular musi- 
cal education or training, which makes his prominence in the 
art all the more remarkable. "He was gifted," his son has 


written of him, "with a baritone voice of not great strength or 
compass, but of very pleasing quality, which he used with 
great musical perception, especially in the singing of ballads 
and the style of song that used to be sung when he was in his 
prime." He sang in the choirs of the First Parish and St. 
Peter's churches in Beverly, in Christ Church in Cambridge, 
and for a while in Trinity Church, Boston, in the Chorus Club 
which was led by Mr. J. C. D. Parker, in the Handel and 
Haydn, and in the Cecilia, of which he was one of the founders 
and its first president. He had for some years charge of the 
Christmas music at St. Peter's, and was choirmaster at Christ 
Church. He also composed some pleasing pieces of church 
music. He was an early member of the Harvard Musical 
Association, its treasurer in 1872, and its president in 1894. 
During all the time that the Harvard Musical Association was 
giving symphony concerts in the old Music Hall (of which he 
was a director), and later in the new hall, in the concerts of the 
Boston Symphony Orchestra, he sat in the same or a corre- 
sponding seat, and hardly ever missed a concert. Moreover, 
he was treasurer and vice-president of the New England Con- 
servatory of Music, and vice-president of the Choral Art 

Early in life he became interested in freemasonry, and the 
list of his official connection with the various masonic bodies 
is almost as long as that which connects him with music. 
He became a mason in 1858, three years later was made Wor- 
shipful Master of Liberty Lodge, of Beverly, and at the time 
of his death was the senior Past Master. For twenty-five years, 
from 1884, he was one of the trustees of the Masonic Charity 
and Education Fund; in 1895 he was Deputy Grand Master 
of the Grand Lodge of Massachusetts, and in the same year 
became a member of St. Bernard Commandery of Knight 
Templars. In 1897 he received the highest masonic honor — 
the 33d degree. 

Yet the list of his social activities is not complete. He was a 
charter member of the Union, the St. Botolph, and the Tavern 
Clubs, and at the time of his death belonged not only to those 
clubs, but also to the Somerset, not to mention several lunch 

Nor were his associations simply with such clubs, organized 


solely for social purposes, for he was a member of the Exam- 
iner Club, the New England Historic Genealogical Society, the 
Colonial Society, a member of the standing committee of the 
Bunker Hill Monument Association, President of the Old 
Cambridge Shakespeare Association, and at one time of the 
Beverly Shakespeare Club. He was treasurer of the Harvard 
Alumni Association from 1876 until 1904. He was elected a 
resident member of this Society at the December meeting in 
1901, served one term as a member of the Council, was for two 
years a member of the House Committee, and acted in 1906 as 
one of the auditors of the treasurer's accounts. 

Mr. Thorndike was married, November 2, 1859, to Anna 
Lamb Wells, daughter of the Hon. Daniel Wells, Chief Justice 
of the old Court of Common Pleas from 1844 until his death 
in 1854. At Mr. Thorndike's funeral, which was held at Christ 
Church, Cambridge, delegates were present from a large number 
of the societies and clubs of which he was a member, beside 
many personal friends. 

The foregoing dry catalogue of Mr. Thorndike's many-sided 
public, semi-public, social, professional and private activities 
gives a true portraiture of him. He was a man of the hour, of 
his time. It could not be expected of one whose connection 
with the life of his time was so varied, that he would specialize 
in any one of them to such an extent as to leave any permanent 
monument to his own memory. He was one of those whose in- 
fluence is immediate upon his associates, and his influence was 
always wholesome and useful. His personality reveals itself 
in his love of human companionship, which manifested itself 
in his desire to be one in any association gathered for good 
fellowship, or for the promotion of any object for the benefit of 
society, of art, or of learning. Such a disposition is none the 
less useful and lasting because its influence can be observed and 
appreciated by the world only during the lifetime of him who 
exerts it, or even if the memory of it may fade away during that 
lifetime should he survive those upon whom its genial power 
has been directly exerted. The good that has been done re- 
mains, though men forget to whom they owe it. 






Henry Williamson Haynes, born at Bangor, Maine, Sep- 
tember 20, 1 83 1, son of Nathaniel Haynes and Caroline J. 
Williamson, was an active and efficient member of the Massa- 
chusetts Historical Society for many years. He was elected a 
Resident Member, June 12, 1879, and served as a member of 
the Council from 1881 to April, 1884. In 1896 he became 
Corresponding Secretary, which office he held until his death 
in Boston, February 16, 191 2. He was appointed a member 
of various important committees of the Society, such as the 
Committees to publish a volume of selections from the Pick- 
ering Papers in 1882; to arrange the celebration of the 400th 
anniversary of the birth of Martin Luther in 1883; to facilitate 
the English genealogical researches of Henry F. Waters in 
1884; to make suitable acknowledgment of the gift of Francis 
Parkman in 1886; to consider the alleged discovery of America 
by the Northmen in 1887; to examine the Library and Cab- 
inet in 1892 and 1894; in relation to Dr. Ellis' bequest in 1895; 
with reference to sale of Tremont Street property in 1895; 
and lastly of the Committee to publish Judge Chamberlain's 
History of Chelsea. 

He prepared and presented Memoirs of Samuel Eliot, Judge 
Chamberlain, and E. W. Donald. He was a frequent speaker 
at the meetings of the Society and he paid tributes to F. W. 
Palfrey, Wm. F. Allen, Wm. W. Greenough, Mellen Chamber- 
lain, Edmund F. Slafter and Charles E. Norton. He also read 
carefully prepared papers on a great variety of subjects ; among 
the most important were those on Apochryphal Runic In- 


scrip tions in 1888, on the Historical Character of Norse Sagas 
in 1890, on Samuel Sewall and Sir John Beaumont in 1890, 
and on the President's Ink Stand in 1909. He prepared and 
presented the Report of the Council in 1884, and the reports 
of various committees on which he served. 

He took part in the discussions at the meetings of the So- 
ciety, showing his extended studies in all branches of historical 
knowledge, speaking on the " Motto of the Commonwealth," 
on the " Sewall Diary," on the " Custom of driving a pin or nail 
in a building," on "A Neglected Fact in English History," on 
" Indian Hemp," on "Leif Ericson," and "the Norse Sagas," 
on the "death of Ernst Curtius," on "N. Hobart's Verses," 
and other subjects. 

These details are given because they tend to show the widely 
diversified studies of Mr. Haynes. In fact he was born to be a 
scholar. As Fabre says in his memoirs, "We have all of us, in 
different directions and in a greater or lesser degree, charac- 
teristics that brand us with a special mark, characteristics of 
an unfathomable origin; they exist because they exist and that 
is all that any one can say. The gift is not handed down, nor is 
it acquired, but it is improved by practice." 

In Mr. Haynes' class autobiography, written in 1853, ne 
uses these words: "To the Boston Latin School I feel greatly 
indebted for what little classical taste and knowledge I may 
possess, and shall ever be happy to acknowledge my obliga- 
tions to the teachers for confirming and directing the fondness 
for literature which my grandfather [William D. Williamson, 
the historian] implanted and to which I owe the chief happiness 
of my life." His fondness for literature was fostered and in- 
creased during his college course. After spending five years 
at the Boston Public Latin School he entered Harvard College 
and graduated in the Class of 185 1. He was chosen Class 
Secretary at graduation, and performed its duties until his 

After graduation he was, probably from lack of means, 
unable immediately to gratify his love for the life of a scholar, 
and for two years he was a teacher in Dixwell's School in 
Boston. He then began to study law, and at the same time 
acted as private tutor to the son of John E. Thayer. He was 
admitted to the Bar in Boston, September, 1856. 



He was chosen a member of the School Committee of Bos- 
ton, 1857-60, and again from 1862-65, and later in 1879-80. 
He made several visits to Europe, on two occasions with young 
Thayer. He was not especially successful at the Bar, and 
was not mentally qualified for the conflicts of the lawyer. In 
1858 he was chosen a member of the Common Council of Bos- 
ton. During his fourth visit to Europe, in 1867, he was married 
at the American Legation in Paris, to Miss Helen Blanchard, 
the daughter of John A. Blanchard of Boston, and immedi- 
ately on his return to America accepted the position of Pro- 
fessor of Latin at the University of Vermont, and in 1870 was 
appointed Professor of Greek and Librarian, which positions 
he resigned in 1873. Since that date he lived the life of a 
scholar and devoted his time to literary pursuits and especially 
to the study of American Archaeology. He did not, however, 
neglect his duties as a citizen. 

He was appointed a Trustee of the Boston Public Library in 
1858-59, and again in 1880-95, where his ripe scholarship and 
wide knowledge of books made him a most valuable member. 
His advice was largely sought by the other trustees, and his 
failure to be again reappointed was regarded by them and the 
public as a great public loss. It was his accomplishments in 
book lore, in the modern languages, and in the sciences, that 
maintained high standards in the Public Library more than 
any other single influence. 

In 1880 he was elected a Fellow of the American Academy of 
Arts and Sciences, and was afterwards, in 1890, chosen Libra- 
rian, and served until 1899. He was early attracted to the 
study of American Archaeology and in 1879-80 delivered a 
course of six lectures at the Lowell Institute on the Prehistoric 
Archaeology of Europe. In 1879 he was one of the founders of 
the Archaeological Institute of America and one of the Executive 
Committee thereof since 1879. 

He was also a member, and for a while vice-president, of the 
Boston Society of Natural History, a member of the Ameri- 
can Anthropological Society, The American Folk Lore Soci- 
ety, and the Anthropological Society of Washington. 

His classical knowledge was broad and deep and he kept him- 
self in touch with both Latin and Greek languages all his life. 
He acted on the Committee on Greek appointed by the Over- 


seers of Harvard College in 1873, an d wrote the report in 
which he highly approved the new system of instruction by 

He was an indefatigable reader and his command of many 
languages, ancient and modern, prompted him to form a large 
and learned library. 

He devoted himself for the rest of his life to the study of 
archaeology, making frequent visits to Europe, attending 
meetings of fellow archaeologists and making collections of the 
most varied character. 

Of this side of his life an archaeologist alone can do him ade- 
quate justice. Professor Peabody, in his short memoir of Mr. 
Haynes, describes his studies and life work in the following 
words : 

"In American Archaeology his interest lay largely in the 
Southwest and the Mexican fields. The most important of 
the general articles by Professor Haynes are ' Progress of 
American Archaeology during the years 1889-99,' an d the 
chapter in Winsor's Narrative and Critical History of America 
on the 'Prehistoric Archaeology of North America/ and * Early 
Explorations of New Mexico.' 

"In regard to the question of the antiquity of man in Amer- 
ica his interest never flagged; he took a middle ground be- 
tween those who acclaim each skull dug from the deeper depths 
and each culture not squaring at first sight with that of the 
red Indian as evidence of a plurality of races if not of ages of 
stone on this continent, and those on the other hand, who 
'make all things new' and will not be persuaded though one 
rose from the dead. 

"An original contribution of Professor Haynes to the mate- 
rial bearing on early man was the discovery by him in New 
England of a primitive type of stone chopper. This he brought 
out before the Boston Society of Natural History in the eight- 
ies, and he continued to hold much interest and faith in them 
until his death. The specimens are described in the catalogue 
which the present writer had the privilege of making in the 
presence of Professor Haynes as ' Specimens representing a 
culture in America possibly more primitive than the paleolithic; ' 
they were collected in the majority by him from 1880-90, and, 
often of white crystalline quartz, are of two types; they may 


show a prepared cutting edge or a prepared point; the latter 
class resemble somewhat an Acheuleen ' coup de poing ' of the 
triangular type; they are found in Northern Maine, New 
Hampshire and Vermont, as well as in Connecticut and in 
Massachusetts in the vicinity of Boston. 

" Professor Haynes was one of the very few Americans to 
take an active and scientific interest in the Congresses, dis- 
cussions, collections and researches in the field of prehistoric 
archaeology abroad. 

"He was a man whose mind and heart were everywhere at 
home and with whom every man's mind and heart might find 
a home, if so be that they were wise, sound and of good report." 

Mr. Haynes' published various articles on archaeological and 
historical subjects in Scribner's, the ' Nation, The Popular 
Science Monthly, International Review, Science, American 
Antiquarian, and other publications. His wide scholarship 
was shown by the unusual variety of subjects treated in his 
various contributions, ranging from articles on the "Fossil 
Man," " Methods of Arrow Release," " Cotton Mather and 
his Slaves," to " Driving a Pin or Nail" and "Indian Wrist 

He was a man of rare modesty, of persistent study and of a 
genial disposition. 



THE stated meeting was held on Thursday, the ioth in- 
stant, at three o'clock, p. m., Vice-President John D. 
Long, in the absence of President Adams, in the chair. 

The record of the last meeting was read and approved. 

The Librarian reported the list of donors to the Library since 
the last meeting. 

The Recording Secretary, in the absence of the Cabinet- 
Keeper, reported gifts of the following: 

A medal of the Franklin Club and a miscellaneous collection 
of 391 ancient and modern coins in copper and silver, by Wm. 
Lincoln Parker; a medal of the French Bull Dog Club of New 
England, by Walter Burgess; a medal of the Young Men's 
Christian Association, by the Association; a medal of the 
Salem Golf Club, by C. H. Willett; a medal of the Sons of 
the American Revolution, 191 2, by that Society; a medal of 
the Sons of the American Revolution, 1906, by Mr. Norcross; 
two badges of the New England Telephone and Telegraph 
Company by that Company; and the Sargent Medal, given 
by Prof. Dudley A. Sargent. A banister-back chair, once 
owned by Rev. Jonathan Edwards, was received by bequest 
of John E. L. Hazen, of Shirley. 

The Corresponding Secretary reported the receipt of a 
letter from Samuel Eliot Morison accepting his election as a 
Resident Member of the Society. 

The Corresponding Secretary also reported the receipt of an 
invitation from the Louisiana Historical Society to attend the 
celebration of the one hundredth anniversary of the Battle of 
New Orleans and of the one hundred years of peace with Great 

The Editor reported the gift from Mr. H. Hooper Lawrence, 
of Boston, of the papers of Mr. George Howe, long concerned 
in the Boston business world. The records deal with real 
estate investments near the financial centre of the city and 


contain many maps, plans, both printed and in manuscript, 
and broadsides on street widenings and extensions, and the 
construction and improvement of buildings; and also a num- 
ber of interesting railroad maps of the middle of the nineteenth 
century. A plan (Ms.) of Lechmere Point in Cambridge, made 
by Peter Tufts, Jr., in 1811, and another (also Ms.) of the 
channel and marshes at South Bay, Dorchester, 1836, have 
historical value. The collection has the books and papers of 
the Pemberton (cotton) Manufacturing Company, which in- 
clude the mill books, reports, wages-scale and correspondence, 
and a fine series of the printed prices current, 1 860-1 861, from 
leading cotton factors in New Orleans, Memphis, Charleston, 
Mobile and Savannah, as well as from English firms. For a 
study of the cotton situation at the opening of the War of 
Secession the material is at once abundant and valuable. 

Ellery Sedgwick, of Boston, was elected a Resident Member 
of the Society. 

The Recording Secretary communicated a Memoir of Don 
Gleason Hill, prepared by Mr. Tuttle. 

The Vice-President then said: 

As is usual and fitting in such cases, formal mention is now 
made by the presiding officer of the death of Rear-Admiral 
Alfred Thayer Mahan, an Honorary Member of this Society. 

It is perhaps enough at this moment to say that on the ex- 
position of the philosophy of naval power he stood at the head, 
not only in this country, but in the world. It only needs to 
refer to his Life of Lord Nelson, his Influence of Sea Power, and 
his other writings, for the truth of this statement. They are 
at once his monument and the tribute to his achievement. 
They are naval classics wherever a naval power exists, and have 
had more influence in moulding modern naval development 
and scope than any other agency. Admiral Mahan was not 
distinguished as an executive naval officer; but as a contributor 
to the literature of naval science he stands supreme. He be- 
came a Corresponding Member of this Society, May 10, 1894, 
and was transferred to the Honorary List, January 10, 1907. He 
attended several meetings of the Society, and, at the meeting 
of January, 1904, read a paper on the combat between the Con- 
stitution and the Guerriere and its effect in creating a revulsion 
of popular feeling from indifference to enthusiasm. 


Mr. Bowditch presented a sample ballot of the California 
election of November. 

Dr. Warren exhibited a volume containing letters written 
by Dr. Edward Reynolds to Dr. John C. Warren, 1816-1818, 
giving an account of surgery in London at the beginning of 
the nineteenth century. He also presented a copy of a pam- 
phlet in which the letters are printed. 

Mr. Wendell followed, saying: 

It will be remembered by whoever has read Cotton Mather's 
Diary for the year 1703, that within three months of his wife's 
death, in November, 1702, he had what he calls the "very as- 
tonishing trial" of receiving addresses from a "young gen- 
tle woman of incomparable Accomplishments," who frankly 
offered herself to him. His consequent perplexities, sketched 
in his diary, lasted until his second marriage, on August 18, 
1703. Who the gentlewoman was has never been known. 

Some months ago the following letter was found in the col- 
lection of Mr. C. P. Greenough and sent to me by Mr. Ford: 

Cotton Mather to Benjamin Colman. 

Jun. 16, [1703.] 

Very dear Sir, — The Obligations which your Letter yesterday 
laid upon me, are so great, as to swallow up all my Expressions; 
and for that only Reason, I now say no more of them. 

You will find the Defensive Armour of Righteousness, wherewith 
you have supplied me, so silently lying by me, that I do suppose, 
you will never hear mention of it; (tho' you so generously offer it:) 
if it be exposed, it will be on some very unforeseen and most allow'd 

I perfectly conform'd, (and shall do so) to your Directions, about 
the appendiced Informations. I may take a convenient Season, 
to correct the Col:s mistakes. For I still aver to you That I never 
show'd the Letter talk'd of, to any Woman under Heaven, in all my 

My Faithfulness and Innocence, in my Conduct towards the 
Gentlewoman so inexorably displeased at me, is my minutely 

I wrote yesterday to Mrs M y my Desire, 'that not only 

she, but her Child, would forbear making Mrs S n any more 

the Theme of her Invective Discourses where she comes. And, 
that I would myself take my opportunities, to say, That it was not 


so criminal and unfaithful a thing, in Mrs S n to say to me, 

what she did, as it might at first seem to be.' 

She wrote me, an Excellent Answer; (as she is indeed a Gentle- 
woman of an Excellent Spirit.) 

And among other things, she tells me, That her child will never 
any more mention the matter, which I have thus forbidden to her. 

I went yesterday, to Mrs Bants 1 (as you directed me:) and there 
used these words, (several gentlewomen, being present;) 'It would 
be a great Satisfaction to me, that there might be no clamour 

against Madm S n, on the Score of her Fidelity to me, in the late 

Instance that has been discoursed on. Her Action, which has been 
censured by some, has appeared unto me, not so criminal and un- 
friendly, as some have thought it. And much wiser persons than I, 
do think, she did as became a Good Woman to do.' 

They all (especially Mrs Lilly,) promised me, to endeav'r the 
allaying all the storms on this occasion, as they had opportunity. 

The affayr hinted, to you, by my Father last Friday, will not be 
proceeded in. 

Continue an Interest in your Loves and prayers, for, Sir, Your 
Sincere Brother and Servt. 

Co. Mather. 

A comparison of this with the notes in Mather's Diary for 
June 12, 1703, 2 will show that the letter must refer to the gen- 
tlewoman in question, and that her name must have begun 
with M and ended with y. Who she was Mr. Ford could not 
guess. He asked if I could. As I could not, I turned to the 
books of reference on my shelves; and presently found, in the 
index of SewalPs Diary, that the most probable name seemed 
to be Maccarty. Bridgman's Pilgrims of Boston 3 next gave 
me the epitaphs of Elizabeth, wife of Thaddeus Maccarty, 
and of his daughter, Katharine, who died on the same day, 
June 7, 1723 — the latter "aged about 42 years." The notes 
on Thaddeus Maccarty and his family, appended to these re- 
marks, go far to show that Katharine Maccarty, who survived 
unmarried for twenty years after the romantic episode in Cot- 
ton Mather's life, was probably the gentlewoman of his Diary. 

Who Madame S n was, seems more doubtful. She may 

probably have been Elizabeth, widow of Samuel Shrimpton, 
who later married Simon Stoddard. The Stoddards and the 

1 Sewall notes the burial of a Mrs. Bant, July 30, 171 7. Diary, in. 135. 

2 Diary, 1. 487. 3 Page 49. 


Shrimptons, as well as the Mrs. Lillie mentioned in Mather's 
letter, were connected with the Old South Church. Maccarty 
had been of King's Chapel; his wife was a member of the Old 
South. Some of the trouble may have lain in the fact that the 
family of Katharine Maccarty, and many of her friends, had 
no relations with Mather's church. One likes to fancy her 
constant to her romance, through the twenty Boston years 
she lived thereafter. 

Thaddeus Maccarty of Boston is first mentioned in the town 
records as a hog reeve in 1674. 1 He is probably the Maccarty 
mentioned in SewalPs Diary, and, with John Usher and Charles 
Lidget issued, May 12, 1686, a power of attorney to Jonathan Tyng, 
to receive lands from Robert Tufton Mason. 2 He is said to have 
occupied a house on the Sanderson property near the Town Dock, 
and in 1686 he purchased of his neighbor, William Ardell, his 
ketch, Rose, of forty-five tons, Captain Nicholas Baker, then on a 
voyage to Barbadoes; and one-half of the pink, Blossom, of seventy 
tons, Captain John Beck, then on a voyage to Holland. 3 His wife 
was admitted to the Old South Church in July, 1670. He was one 
of the founders of King's Chapel in 1686, and was one of three 
members authorized by Andros to collect contributions towards 
the "building and erecting of a house or place for the service of 
the Church of England." 4 He held the office of warden in 1694- 
95, and of vestryman in 1699. 5 By his will, dated May 24, proved 
June 14, 1705, he devised all his estate to his wife Elizabeth, and 
he owned at the time of his death a lot near the Province House 
estate, with a passage to Marlborough (now Washington) Street. 
How he became possessed of this land is not known ; but it is sup- 
posed he took it on execution from the estate of Timothy Batt, in 
1679. 6 His wife survived him and died June 7, 1723. He married, 

before 1666, Elizabeth , and a son, Francis, was born March 21, 

1666-67. 7 Other children followed: Thaddeus, born September 12, 
1670; 8 Margaret, born February 25, 1676; 9 and Catharine, born 
January 23, 1680. 10 The Roxbury records give also a son, Samuel, 
baptized November 3, 1676. 11 Savage mentions a son, Charles, who 

1 Boston Rec. Com., vn. 85. He is named in the inventory of the estate of 
Elkanah Gladman, November 23, 1664. N. E. Hist. Gen. Reg., xvi. 50. 

2 N. E. Hist. Gen. Reg., xxxi. 62. 3 lb., xvn. 242. 

4 3 Collections, 1. 84. 5 lb., 114, 118, 134. 

6 Bowditch (ms.) Titles, v. 21. See also Sewall, Diary, 1, 202 n. 

7 Boston Rec. Com., ix. 105. 8 lb., 115. 
9 lb., 138. 10 lb., 149. 

11 lb., vi. 134. 



died October 25, 1683, aged within seven days of eighteen. He was 
of the Artillery Company in 1681. 

Mr. Thayer read extracts from the unpublished diary of 
John Hay referring to the political situation in Washington in 
February, 1867, when the crisis in Reconstruction had been 
reached and the impeachment of President Johnson was already 
discussed. Hay reports intimate conversations with Secretary 
Seward, Senator Charles Sumner, Chief Justice Chase, Banks, 
Cullom and other leaders at that time. He discloses the dis- 
couragement of the moderate men and the growing vehemence 
of the radical faction. 

Mr. Ford read a paper on "Certain Phases of the negotia- 
tions at Ghent, 18 14," calling attention to the fact that 
Gallatin and Adams were generally working together, in oppo- 
sition to Clay, Russell and even Bayard, and to this union in 
sentiment of the two men the success of the negotiation was 
due. He also read extracts from the letters of John Quincy 
Adams during the negotiations, describing the manner in 
which the American commissioners lived and entertained in 
Ghent, and the various diversions of the members; the char- 
acteristics of the British commission, its aloofness and unsocial 
qualities; and change of policy in the British ministry. Adams 
gives his opinion of his colleagues, singularly generous and ap- 
preciative when measured against their criticism of him. The 
manner in which "Hail Columbia" was introduced on the 
musical programs of the day was amusingly told, and from the 
English newspapers were taken a few examples of journalistic 
enterprise and the wagers entered on the result of the treaty 
negotiation — a more delicate barometer of public feeling than 
the stock-market. 

Mr. Ford also contributed the following unpublished in- 
structions and despatches of the British Ghent Commission, 
obtained from the Public Record Office, London (F. 0. Amer- 
ica, vols. 101, 102). 

Intended Instructions. 1 

It being highly desirable that the conditions of Peace which the 
Commissioners are authorized to negotiate should not only be such 

1 "Not used" is noted in the margin. The instructions given are in Letters 
and Despatches of Lord Castlereagh, x. 67. 


as to put at rest as much as possible the many altercations and dis- 
putes which have from time to time taken place between the two 
nations respecting their respective rights and Boundaries, but that 
they should so establish the boundaries as not to have in future the 
Canadas exposed to invasion from the United States, a precaution 
become the more necessary as the subjugation of those provinces 
has been the declared object of that Government. It is necessary 
to instruct the Commissioners with respect to those points on which 
it is most essential to come to an amicable explanation and distinct 

During the course of the War with France discussions have arisen 
respecting the claims which it has been understood that the Ameri- 
can Government have brought forward with regard to the extent 
of their maritime jurisdiction from their coasts. On this point an 
explanation is desirable. The Commissioners are authorised to 
express to the American Commissioners the wish of the British 
Government to agree upon any reasonable distance within which 
the Maritime jurisdiction of the United States shall be considered 
as confined it being always understood that the maritime jurisdic- 
tion shall be reciprocal as to the respective coasts of the contract- 
ing parties. 

The doubts which have arisen respecting the river St. Croix have 
been so happily adjusted after a full discussion by the two Govern- 
ments in the year 1798 that nothing more will be necessary in that 
particular than to insert totidem verbis the declaration made by 
the joint Commissioners in that year. 

The islands in Passamaquoddie Bay have been long the subject 
of discussion. It is however clear that by the Treaty of 1783 they 
were excluded from the Territory of the United States; the second 
Article of that Treaty specially excepting from the Territory of the 
United States all such islands as " then were or as theretofore had 
been within the limits of the Province of Nova Scotia" and it having 
been proved that those islands were and always had been considered 
as forming part of that Province. 

Doubts have also arisen with respect to the boundary of the 
Province of Maine and in order to put them at rest it is proposed 
that the 47th parallel of Latitude shall be considered as that bound- 
ary from the point where the present boundary line as claimed by 
the American Government intersects that parallel. 

Fort Niagara being the point from whence an attack against Upper 
Canada can be made with the greatest facility and effect it is neces- 
sary that that Fort together with the adjoining territory should be 
retained by Great Britain. 

The British Government are willing on behalf of the Indian na- 


tions in alliance with them to consent to the adoption of the River 
Wabash and the Miami of the Lake as the boundary between the 
territory of the United States and that of the Indian nations. But 
in consideration of the extension of territory which the United States 
will thereby obtain beyond that possessed by them in the year 1783 
and in order to protect the necessary communication with the Indian 
Nations the island and Fort of Michillimackinac shall be retained 
by Great Britain. It shall be moreover agreed that the boundary 
hereby assigned to the Indian Nations shall be guaranteed to them 
and that neither of the contracting parties shall be at liberty to 
acquire either by purchase or otherwise from any Indian Nation 
any further Territory or to change existing boundaries without the 
consent of the other contracting party. 

In order to clear up the doubts to which the Treaty of 1783 has 
given rise with respect to the Western Boundary of the United 
States as laid down in that Treaty (inasmuch as a line drawn due 
West from the North Western point of the Lake of the Woods will 
not as assumed ever intersect the Mississippi) it shall be stipulated 
that that boundary of the United States shall be a straight line 
drawn from the North Western point of the Lake of the Woods to 
the Source of the Mississippi. 

Some such boundary also must be assigned to Louisiana as may 
exclude the Citizens of the United States from any interference with 
the British Settlements on the Columbia River. 

Although the British Government cannot but be sensible that 
the renewal of the Treaty of 1783 is liable to many objections on 
the part of Great Britain and that many advantages would arise 
from a refusal to renew any part of it, yet being animated with an 
anxious desire to oppose as few obstacles as possible to the restora- 
tion of Amity between the two countries they are willing to renew 
the said Treaty provided it be distinctly understood that the pro- 
visions of the third Article are in no case whatever to be considered as 

The Commissioners will either insert in the body of the Treaty 
the third Article of the Treaty of 1794 and the explanatory Article 
of 1796 or concert with the American Commissioners in drawing up 
a new Article containing the substance of those two Articles as it 
may be thought best by the American Commissioners. 

The American Commissioners must understand that if they 
are not instructed to enter into negociation on these points 
and that in consequence Peace cannot be concluded Great 
Britain is by no means pledged not to make further demands 
if the events of the War for the protraction of which the Amer- 
ican Government will be alone responsible should authorise 


demands more favorable to the security of the British possessions 
in North America. 

N : B : In order to put an end to the Jealousies which may arise 
by the Construction of Ships of War on the Lakes, it should be pro- 
posed that the two Contracting Parties should reciprocally bind 
themselves not to construct any Ships of War on any of the Lakes: 
and should entirely dismantle those which are now in Commis- 
sion, or are preparing for Service. 

Commissioners to Castlereagh. 

No. 1. 

Ghent, August 9, 1814. 

My Lord, — We have the honour to acquaint your Lordship 
that we arrived in this City on the 6th Instant. We lost no time 
in communicating our arrival to the American Commissioners, and 
in proposing a Conference with a view to that preliminary informa- 
tion which we were directed by our Instructions to obtain. 1 

The first Conference took place yesterday, when the full powers 
of each side were produced, and the Copies of them respectively 
exchanged. The Copy received from the American Commission- 
ers we beg leave to inclose. The Conference was opened by us 
with an expression of the anxiety of His Majesty's Government 
by arrangements of a permanent kind to restore the relations of 
peace between the two Nations upon terms advantageous and 
honourable to both — an anxiety unabated by any events which 
had recently happened in Europe. We stated our own desire to 
give effect to the wishes of our Government by conducting the Ne- 
gociation in the most frank and conciliatory manner. After some 
few observations of this nature we proceeded to state the points 
upon which we considered it probable that our future discussions 
might turn, viz: — 

1. The forcible seizure of mariners from on board merchant ships 
on the high Seas, and, as in necessary connection with it, the alle- 
giance due to the king of Great Britain from all his native subjects. 

In submitting this as the first topic we stated that we had no 
intention of offering any specific proposition on this subject. We 
did it because the subject had been put forward by the American 
Government in such a manner as led us to suppose that they would 
make it a principal topic of discussion. 

2. The engagements of Alliance which Great Britain had entered 
into with the Indian Nations during the war rendered it incumbent 

1 The British Commissioners proposed to meet at their lodgings, but this met 
with objections from the Americans. See Adams, Memoirs, in. 4. 


upon her to provide for their permanent tranquility and security by 
including them in any Treaty of Peace made between Great Britain 
and America, and, their permanent peace and security could not 
be provided for unless the limits of their territories were strictly 
denned. We added that Great Britain considered a satisfactory 
arrangement on this head as the sine qua non of any Treaty of 

3. A revision of the boundary between His Majesty's Territories 
in America and those of the United States, not upon any principle 
of conquest or acquisition, but upon that of mutual advantage and 

In throwing out these as the topics of discussion which had sug- 
gested themselves to us, and in requesting to be informed whether 
the American Commissioners were instructed to enter upon them, 
we expressed our willingness to receive from them any other topics 
for discussion which they might consider material, and should they 
consider as immaterial any of the topics so thrown out by us, their 
statement to that effect might possibly tend to prevent fruitless 
discussions. We then communicated to them the intention of His 
Majesty's Government not to renew the privileges derived under 
the Treaty of 1783 with respect to the North American Fisheries, 
not as necessarily forming a topic of discussion, but as a point upon 
which we in candour thought it proper to afford them information 
in this early stage of our proceedings. 

The American Commissioners having requested time for consul- 
tation together as to the answer to be returned to our enquiries, 
the Conference was accordingly adjourned to this day. It began 
by a distinct communication from them, 1 that upon two of the points 
suggested by us as topics for discussion, viz: the 1st and 3rd they 
were prepared with ample instructions from their Government, but 
that with respect to the second, viz: a defined boundary to the 
Indian Territories, they had no instructions whatever, that they 
were equally uninstructed on the subject of the fisheries, and that 

there were other points not specified by us which the of the 

United States considered it material to discuss, and upon which 
they had received authority and instructions to conclude an ar- 

These points were. 1. The Law of the Blockade, and some defi- 
nition of Blockade, and also the general subject of belligerent and 
neutral Rights. 

2. The Claims which the United States had against Great Britain 
on the ground of captures made previous to the commencement of 

1 The spokesman was John Quincy Adams. 


the War, and as to captures, or some particular captures made dur- 
ing its continuance. 

3. The regulation of the commerce of the two Countries. 

Upon this statement it appeared to us, material to ascertain how 
far the American Commissioners, although not specially instructed 
as to the question of Indian Boundary, felt themselves at liberty 
under any general discretion to conclude a provisional article on 
this important point. Our Enquiries were therefore directed to 
this subject. The American Commissioners expressed a willing- 
ness to enter into the discussion of this topic, and a particular 
anxiety to ascertain the full extent of the views with which the 
British Government had made it a sine qua non of a Treaty. Noth- 
ing fell from them which induced us to believe that they considered 
it practicable to conclude any provisional arrangement which 
would be satisfactory to their Government. One of them, Mr. 
Clay, stated his opinion that none could be framed. It appeared 
to us and we so stated it to the American Commissioners, that a 
proposal to discuss without a prospect of some arrangement at 
least of a provisional kind, would be fruitless. They appeared to 
wish to go into the discussion on the ground that they should be 
able to shew that the objects of the British Government might be 
attained without making this point a sine qua non of a Treaty. We 
gave no particular encouragement to the notion of the utility of the 
discussions in this point of view. Under these circumstances it 
would be satisfactory to us to be furnished with Instructions of the 
most specific kind how far His Majesty's Government would be 
disposed to accept of a provisional Article as to an Indian Boundary, 
subject to very dubious contingency of its ratification by the Presi- 
dent of the United States. And also whether His Majesty's 
Government would wish the negociations to proceed upon any and 
what points in the event of no provisional article of this kind being 
agreed to, which latter contingency, unless specific instructions are 
received from the United States, appears to us by no means unlikely 
to happen. 1 

On the subject of the fisheries the American Commissioners 
stated nothing of the nature of a claim to take fish within the limits 
of British Sovereignty, or to use any British Territory for purposes 
connected with the fisheries. 

As to regulations for commerce we informed them that we had 

1 This is much more fully developed in the substance of the conference sent 
by Goulburn to Earl Bathurst, in his letter of August 9, printed in Wellington, 
Supplementary Despatches, Correspondence, and Memoranda, ix. 178. The offi- 
cial protocols of conferences, August 8 and 9, are in American State Papers, 
Foreign Relations, in. 708. But see Adams, Memoirs, in. 7-10. 


no instructions on this head, but we did not mean to preclude them 
from proposing regulations of that kind, which we would transmit 
to our Government for future consideration. 

The Conference closed with mutual acknowledgements that the 
discussions had been opened with frankness and candour. The 
American Commissioners particularly requested that their sense 
of the conciliatory manner in which the conferences had been 
hitherto conducted should be made known by us to His Majesty's 
Government. 1 
We have, etc. 


Henry Goulburn. 

William Adams. 

William H. Crawford to Count Hoogendorf. 

American Legation, Paris, 22d Augt, 1814. 

During the late War between France and England the Principles 
of Maritime law were openly violated by the belligerents, and the 
interest of Neutral States sacrificed to the Cupidity of their Cruisers, 
to the views of Commercial monopoly of the one Nation, and to the 
ostensible desire of the other to prevent that Monopoly. 

This war against the rights and interests of Neutrals was prose- 
cuted by Measures of hostility, adapted to the respective situations 
of the adverse belligerents. The immense Naval preponderance of 
England enabled her to give the greatest efficacy to the Measures 
of hostility which she adopted against the commerce of the United 
States, which during several years of this hostility was the only 
Neutral State in Christendom. 

A colourable protest for these acts of violence and of injustice 
was sought in the law of Blockade. To constitute a lawful blockade 
the law of Nations requires a competent naval force to be Stationed 
before the blockaded port, so as to make the entry dangerous. A 

1 On the same date, August 9, 1814, Goulburn wrote a letter to Earl Bathurst, 
which is printed in Wellington, Supplementary Despatches, ix. 177. In it he 
wrote: "We have had two, conferences with them, and as far as I can judge from 
the mode in which they have been conducted, I believe that they are sincere in 
their wish to re-establish peace between the two countries. They have con- 
ducted themselves with more candour and openness than I had expected to find 
from them, and I might say with as much as could have been expected by any 
one. . . . We have been particularly careful to say nothing in these preliminary 
proceedings which could in any degree cause irritation on their part, and have 
therefore rather let any observation of the Americans which gave an opening for 
a sharp answer pass without observation, than get into a squabble which could 
lead to no object. To this, if we continue our negotiations, we intend to adhere." 


Neutral vessel cannot be rightfully captured for breach of block- 
ade, but upon attempting to enter the blockaded port, after hav- 
ing been warned off by the Stationary force. For this competent 
stationary force required by Writers upon public law blockades by 
proclamation have been substituted, and these proclamations have 
in the British Court of Admiralty supplied the evidence of the 
warning, what ought to be given to Neutral vessels by the 
blockading Squadron. By the aid of these infractions of public 
law the Coasts of extensive Maritime States were declared in a 
State of blockade, when few of their ports had a competent Naval 
force stationed before them, and Neutral vessels were captured 
in sight of their own Coasts, and condemned for breach of the 
blockade of a port, which they had not approached within the 
distance of more than 3,000 Miles. In the true Spirit of Com- 
mercial Monopoly the trade of the adverse belligerent, thus in- 
terdicted to Neutrals, was engrossed by England through the 
instrumentality of Licences. 

The Solemn Declaration of the Prince Regent published in the 
face of Europe in the month of April, 181 2, that these Measures of 
hostility would be rigidly executed, until the United States should 
compel France to do an act, which they had no right to demand, ac- 
companied by the unlawful and irritating practices of impressing 
American Citizens at Sea, left the American Government no other 
alternative than that of repelling force by force. 

The illegitimate principles of blockade, which have just been 
described, are now applied by England to the vessels of Neutrals 
engaged in Commerce with the United States. A coast of 2,000 
miles, intersected with almost as many bays, harbours, inlets, 
and creeks, has been declared by Proclamation to be in a State 
of Blockade, when it is matter of general Notoriety that a 
competent naval force has not been stationed before the greatest 
proportion of the ports and harbours included within this paper 
blockade. This fact is established by their own papers, which 
publish accounts of the daily entry into these ports by the 
American Armed vessels with their prizes, and of their departure 
from them. 

The United States which when Neutral adhered inviolably to 
the principles of public law recognized by Civilized Nations, are 
desirous of giving to [the] Maritime States of Europe the strongest 
evidence of their respect for those principles, when belligerent. To 
this end the President of the United States has thought fit to issue 
his * Proclamation, strictly forbidding the Commanders of the 

* The Proclamation referred to is that of the 29th of June last already pub- 
lished in the English Newspapers. — Note by Crawford. 



public and private Armed vessels of the United States to interrupt, 
detain, or molest, or vex any vessel, belonging to any Neutral or 
friendly power and to render to such vessels as are actually bound 
to American ports all the aid and kind offices which they may need 
or require. 

In transmitting a Copy of this Proclamation to Your Excellency, 
I am instructed by the President to request you to com- 
municate to H. S. H. the Sovereign Prince of the Netherlands 
the assurances of his fixed determination to favour by every 
means in his power the Commerce of Holland with the United 
States. [I am, etc.] 

Crawford. 1 

Commissioners to Castlereagh. 

No. 3. 

Ghent, August 26, 1814. 

My Lord. 

We have had the honour of receiving your Lordships Dispatch 
No. 3 of the 14th Instant. 

As the American Plenipotentiaries had in the preceding confer- 
ences declined to express themselves able within the scope of their 
general discretion to accede to a provisional Article relative to 
Indian pacification and Boundary, because the specific views and 
objects with which Great Britain brought forward that proposition 
were not made known to them, we lost no time upon the receipt of 
Your Lordship's dispatch in communicating the general principles 
offered by Great Britain as the proper basis of such a provisional 

In calling upon the American Plenipotentiaries to state how far 
their general instructions warranted them in acceding to the prin- 
ciples so laid down, we conceived that it was incumbent upon us, 
under our instructions, to state at the same time with precision the 
views with which His Majesty's Government had proposed a re- 
vision of the frontier between the North American Possessions of 
Great Britain and those of the United States. We accordingly 
made on this subject also an explicit communication to the American 
Plenipotentiaries at a Conference which took place on the 19th 
Instt. at which the American Plenipotentiaries confined themselves 
to requiring from us mere explanations upon some incidental points 
connected with the subject of our verbal communications to them. 
In conformity with a wish expressed by them to receive a written 

1 See page 147. 


statement on the subject, we addressed to them the Note of which 
a copy is inclosed. 1 To that note we beg leave to refer Your 
Lordship, as containing the substance of what fell from us at the 
different conferences to which it refers. 

We received yesterday afternoon the answer of the American 
Plenipotentiaries, which we have also the honour of enclosing for 
the information of His Majesty's Government 2 
We have, etc. 


Henry Goulburn. 

William Adams. 

Goulburn to Castlereagh. 


Ghent, Sept. 5th, 1814. 

We received on Saturday night from Lord Bathurst the draft 
of an answer to the note of the American Plenipotentiaries of 
the 26th ulto. with permission to make such alterations in the 
Style and in facts (if they were incorrectly stated) -as we might 
think proper. We send you in our public letter a duplicate copy 
of the note we send. In availing ourselves of the discretion 
intrusted to us we made no further alterations than what ap- 
peared calculated to render the note more consistent with what 
we had previously expressed. 

I send you inclosed a copy of a letter addressed by Mr. Crawford 
to Count Hoogendorf in case you should not have received it from 
another quarter. 3 It was sent to us on Sunday by Lord Clancarty. 
As you will of course watch the effect of this letter upon the Ministers 
of the several Courts to which a similar letter may have been ad- 
dressed, I think it not immaterial to call your attention to some cir- 
cumstances connected with it. It is dated you will observe on the 
22nd of August from Paris. At that time Mr. Crawford could not 
have known what our final propositions for Peace might be they hav- 
ing been communicated to the American Plenipotentiaries only on 
the 17th. Mr. C. must have been acting under instructions from his 
Government dated in June or July last, and the Government must 

1 Note of August 19. 

2 Printed in American State Papers, Foreign Relations, in. 711. Goulburn 
asked advice of Earl Bathurst, looking upon it as in effect a rupture of the nego- 
tiations. Wellington, Supplementary Despatches, ix. 190, 193. Adams thought 
it would bring the negotiations very shortly to a close. Memoirs, in. 23. 

3 Page 144, supra. 


have acquainted him that the Negotiations at Ghent would not end 
in Peace. Otherwise he could hardly have been stirring at Paris 
the Maritime questions which (I think he told Lord Buckingham 
that America did not mean to insist upon and which) the Ameri- 
can Plenipotentiaries in their Note of the 26th August stated them- 
selves instructed not to press, and thus pursuing a line of conduct 
so hostile to Great Britain before he could know from any thing 
which had passed here that there was any chance of the Negotia- 
tions failing and upon grounds unconnected with the Maritime 
question. It appears to me difficult to find a [strojnger proof of 
the insincerity of America in entering i[nto] the present Negotia- 
tions than this letter affords. 

Lord Clancarty also informed us that the Dutch Government 
merely returned an acknowledgment of the receipt of the letter 
not wishing to give any countenance to the object of it. I am, 

Henry Goulburn. 

Commissioners to Castlereagh. 
No. 8. 

Ghent, October 9, 1814. 

We have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of two dispatches 
signed by Earl Bathurst of the dates and number specified in the 
Margin. 1 

The dispatch No. 5 did not reach us until some days after we 
had transmitted for the information of His Majesty's Government 
the answer given by the American Plenipotentiaries to our proposi- 
tion on the subject of Indian pacification. Under these circum- 
stances we considered it advisable to defer acting upon the 
instruction contained in it until we should be in possession of the 
sentiments of His Majesty's Government with respect to the note 
which we had so recently transmitted. We trust that our conduct 
in this respect will meet with the approbation of His Royal High- 
ness the Prince Regent. 

Upon the receipt of No. 6 we lost no time in forwarding to the 
American Plenipotentiaries in reply to their last Note, the Note 
of which a copy is enclosed. 2 We have, etc. 


Henry Goulburn. 

William Adams. 

1 No. 5, September 27, and No. 6, October 5. 

2 The note of October 8, printed in American State Papers, Foreign Relations, 
in. 721. 






Ghent, October 10. 1814. 
Ground of alterations made in the Draft of the Article. 

No period was assigned when 
the hostilities should be put an 
end to. 

Nor any period after the 
ratification, within which the 
Indian Nations should be re- 
stored to the condition of 181 1. 

It was left indefinite how long 
the Indian Nations were to 
continue at Peace with the 
U. S. after agreeing to desist 
from hostilities. The Article, as 
drawn would seem to take from 
the Indians the privileges of 
the Treaty, even if a new war 
soon afterwards arose, upon 
other grounds between them 
and the U. S.; tho' the Interest 
which Great Britain, had in this 
matter, ought not to be affected 
by such new war. 

The United States of America 
engage to put an end [immedi- 
ately after the ratification of the 
present treaty] to hostilities with 
[all] the Tribes or Nations of 
Indians with whom they may be 
at war at the time of the [such] 
ratification of the present Treaty, 1 
& [forthwith] to restore to such 
Tribes or Nations respectfully 
all the [possessions] rights & 
privileges & possessions which 
they may have enjoyed in 181 1 
or were been entitled to [in 18 11] 
previous to the existing [such] 

Provided airways that such 
Tribes or Nations shall agree 
to desist from all hostilities 
against the United States of 
America [their Citizens and Sub- 
jects] upon the ratification of 
the present Treaty being Noti- 
fied to such Tribes or Nations 
& shall continue at peace with 
the Government & People of the 
United States [so desist accord- 

And his Britannick Majesty engages on his part to put an end 
[immediately after the ratification of the present treaty] to hostili- 
ties with [all] the Tribes or Nations of Indians with whom he may 
be at war at the time of the [such] ratification of the present Treaty, 
& [forthwith] to restore to such Tribes or Nations respectively, all 
the Possessions rights & privileges which they may have enjoyed in 
18 1 1 or were [been] entitled to [in 181 1]; previous to the existing [such] 

1 Words stricken out in italics. 


Provided allways that such Tribes or Nations shall agree to 
desist from all hostilities against his Britannick Majesty [and his 
Subjects] upon the ratification of the present Treaty being notified 
to such Tribes or Nations, or shall continue at peace with His Britan- 
nick Majesty [so desist accordingly]. 

Commissioners to Castlereagh. 
No. 9. 

Ghent, October 14. 1814. 

We have the honour to transmit for the information of His 
Majesty's Government the Copy of a Note which we have this 
day received from the American Plenipotentiaries. 1 

Your Lordship will observe that the Plenipotentiaries have con- 
sented to admit as a provisional article the modified proposition 
with respect to Indian pacification and rights which we were in- 
structed to make; and have thus removed the principal obstruction 
to the further progress of the negotiation. Under these circum- 
stances we have to request such further instructions as the state of 
the negotiation may appear to His Majesty's Government to 
require. We have, etc. 


Henry Goulburn. 

William Adams. 

Commissioners to Castlereagh. 
No. 10. 

Ghent, Oct. 24, 1814. 

We have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your Lord- 
ship's dispatches of the 18th & 20th Instt. 

In compliance with Your Lordship's instructions we lost no time 
in addressing to the American Plenipotentiaries the Note of which 
a copy is enclosed. 2 

We hope His Majesty's Government will approve of the cursory 
manner in which we have therein stated the subject of the fisheries, 
when they are informed that our communication on that topic at 
the first conference with the American Plenipotentiaries was so 
explicit as fully to apprise them of the views of His Majesty's Gov- 
ernment, with the single exception of the marine league from the 
shore being taken as the common measure of territorial Jurisdiction. 

1 Dated October 13. In American State Papers, Foreign Relations, in. 723. 

2 Note of October 21. American State Papers, Foreign Relations, 111. 724. 
Adams characterises it as of " the same dilatory and insidious character as their 
preceding notes, but is shorter." Memoirs, in. 57. 


It appeared to us better to leave this last particular till the fisheries 
were again brought into discussion, with a view to the wording of 
an Article in respect to them, as either repetition or detail at present 
might seem to imply a doubt as to the right of Great Britain to act 
upon the views of the subject. 

We received this afternoon the inclosed reply from the American 
Plenipotentiaries, 1 and transmit it for the information of His 
Majesty's Government, requesting at the same time their direc- 
tions for our future proceedings. We have, etc. 


Henry Goulburn. 

William Adams. 

Commissioners to Castlereagh. 
No. 12. 

Ghent, November 11, 18 14. 

We have the honour of transmitting to your Lordship the copy 
of a note which we have received from the American Plenipotentia- 
ries together with the Projet of a Treaty which it inclosed. 2 

As some of the Articles proposed by the American Plenipoten- 
tiaries relate to points upon which we are not in possession of the 
views and sentiments of His Majesty's Government, we are anxious, 
previously to replying to their Note, to receive such instructions as 
may enable us effectually to meet those propositions. We have, 


Henry Goulburn. 

William Adams. 

Commissioners to Castlereagh. 
No. 15. 

Ghent, December 1, 1814. 

We received yesterday from the American Plenipotentiaries the 
Note of which a copy is enclosed for the information of His Majesty's 
Government. 3 

Your Lordship will observe that the American Plenipotentiaries 

1 Note of October 24. American State Papers, Foreign Relations, in. 725. 
The British Commissioners replied October 31 (lb. 726), asking the American 
Commissioners to submit the project of a treaty covering the specific propositions 
upon which they were empowered to sign a treaty of peace between the two 
countries. This was done November 10. 

2 American State Papers, Foreign Relations, in. 733. 

3 American State Papers, Foreign Relations, in. 741. The protocol of the 
conference held on December 1 is in lb., 742. 


have therein expressed their willingness to abandon altogether with 
one modification all the Articles which had been stated on our part 
to be inadmissible. In compliance with the request contained in 
their Note we this day held a conference with them. 

We feel it unnecessary to detain Your Lordship by a specifica- 
tion of the many verbal alterations in the Pro jet which were adopted 
or rejected at the suggestion of either party, but pass at once to the 
two objections upon which alone the American Plenipotentiaries 
evinced a disposition to insist. 

The first of these objections was to the alterations made by us 
in the first Article of the Projet for the intended purpose of limiting 
the restitutions of Territory to the possessions belonging to either 
party which had been taken by the other during the war. The 
American Plenipotentiaries expressed themselves most anxious to 
retain the words originally proposed by them, which stipulate for 
the restitution of all possessions "taken by either party from the 
other" without reference to the right by which such possessions 
were held. The American Plenipotentiaries on this subject entered 
into a statement of the inconvenience of making the Act of restoring 
territory situated in many different places dependent on the opinion 
which the party in possession might hold of his right to retain it, 
and they urged the inconsistency of such a provision with the prin- 
ciple of status ante bellum upon which alone they had stated them- 
selves authorized to treat. Their real object however evidently was 
to obtain for the United States (what we in making the alteration 
had been desirous of securing to Great Britain as justly her due) the 
occupation of the Islands in Passamaquoddy Bay during the time 
which might elapse between the Ratification of the Treaty and the 
decision upon the claims of the United States, together with the fair 
advantage which might ultimately result from the fact of possession. 

Although the American Plenipotentiaries at first urged their 
objections with much earnestness yet they so generalized them 
towards the close of the discussion as to leave an impression on 
our minds that they were not prepared to insist upon them, if the 
other parts of the Treaty were arranged, more especially were some 
expressions introduced in order to limit the application of the 
Article to such possessions as were by the tenour of the Treaty itself 
admitted to be liable to some dispute. 

Their second objection was to that part of the 8th Article which 
claims for the subjects of His Britannic Majesty the free naviga- 
tion of the Mississippi and their access to that River. It was stated 
by the American Plenipotentiaries that they had always considered 
the Treaty of 1783 as differing from ordinary Treaties in so far as 
it did not confer but only recognized the advantages enjoyed under 


it both by Great Britain and the United States, and therefore they 
did not conceive any stipulation to be necessary either to secure to 
the United States the full enjoyment of the Fisheries or to Great 
Britain the free navigation of the Mississippi as stipulated in that 
Treaty. If they were correct, they stated, in their construction 
of the Treaty (which however they knew to be at variance with 
that of Great Britain) the provision introduced into the 8th Article 
was altogether unnecessary. If on the contrary their judgment 
was incorrect, and the right of the United States to the fisheries, 
and that of Great Britain to the navigation of the Mississippi had 
ceased in consequence of the war, they could not consent to give to 
Great Britain without an equivalent the advantage of that naviga- 
tion. On this ground therefore they objected altogether on the 
part of the Article in question, but they stated that if Great Britain 
was disposed to give to the United States the enjoyment of the fish- 
eries as possessed by them under the former Treaty, that they were 
willing to accept it as an equivalent or to discuss any other which 
Great Britain might be disposed to offer. Upon our stating that 
the true equivalent for the navigation of the Mississippi was to be 
found in the preceding part of the Article which not only defined a 
boundary to the dominions of both Nations in that quarter, but 
provided for a considerable accession of territory to the United 
States in a North Westerly direction, they at the same time that 
they declined to consider the definition of boundary to be an advan- 
tage, denied any accession of their territory to be the result of that 
Article. They however professed their readiness to omit that 
Article altogether. At the close of the discussion they delivered to 
us as a memorandum the enclosed amendment to the 8th Article 
founded upon the principle of their acceptance of the Fisheries as 
an equivalent for yielding the Navigation of the Mississippi to 
which memorandum, or to the substance of it they expressed them- 
selves ready to subscribe. As the American Plenipotentiaries have 
through the whole course of the Negociation taken great pains to 
describe the Treaty of 1783 as in their view of the subject only 
recognising and not conferring the privileges of using any territory 
within the British Jurisdiction for purposes connected with the 
Fisheries, we thought we saw an advantage in obtaining from them 
the offer to Great Britain of any equivalent for their enjoyment of 
this privilege in as much as it afforded a proof that they considered 
it as purely of a conventional Nature. 

The American Plenipotentiaries then in conformity with their 
Note pressed the demand for the restitution of the value of Ships 
and Cargoes seized in British Ports when the War was first known 
to, or declared by His Majesty. Their demand was founded on 


the general practice of Nations to abstain from the Capture of 
private Property at the breaking out of a War and they contended 
that this was shewn by the frequent clauses in Treaties stipulating 
for a timely notice of hostilities to private persons in affirmance of 
the general law on the subject. They further insisted on the 
American Law of July, 1812, a Section of which was enclosed in 
their note. They afterwards relied on the fact that this law had 
been acted upon by the President of the United States to an ex- 
tent that called for a proportionate liberality on the part of His 
Majesty's Government. To these suggestions we replied that it was 
the general practice of civilized Nations to capture and condemn 
all private property taken afloat or the proceeds of it whenever a 
state of War actually existed without reference to the time when 
it began. That periods fixed in order to apprize private persons of 
hostilities were matters of convention only, and by no means in 
affirmance of general law or usage. That Great Britain had been 
peculiarly considerate in not suddenly subjecting American prop- 
erty to condemnation upon capture, but such property had been 
kept in a state of suspense which the American Government might 
at once have determined in favor of their own subjects. They 
had determined otherwise. The effect of the American Law which 
they had inclosed so far was it from founding a claim upon Great 
Britain that it only put the President of the United States in the 
same condition as His Majesty stood, without a Law; that is, it 
empowered him to suffer vessels and goods to depart freely from 
his ports leaving it to his discretion whether he would do so or not. 
We denied that they had any claim on the ground of equitable 
liberality, suggesting that it was not for us to speculate upon the 
numbers of British Vessels which the President had suffered to 
depart, or the grounds upon which he might have done so. That 
we considered the principle of such a demand of much more im- 
portance than the value of the property to which it might extend. 
The Restitution of value could not take place without the implica- 
tion that such ships and goods had been improperly or irregularly 
seized. That it was wholly unprecedented for any Nation, that 
had declared War against Great Britain, even to ask and much less 
to receive indemnity for the direct and necessary consequence of 
their own act. That having listened to all their arguments we 
declined even to submit the demand to our Government, conceiv- 
ing ourselves authorized to reject it without hesitation. After this 
declaration the demand was no longer insisted on. 

Having thus stated the substance of what passed at the Con- 
ference of this morning it only remains for us to request the specific 
instructions of His Majesty's Government on the following points. 


1st: As to our adherence to the words of the first Article "be- 
longing to either party and taken by the other." 
2 : As to retaining any part of the Eighth Article. 

3. As to insisting upon the latter part of that Article relative to 
the Mississippi. 

4. As to accepting the navigation of the Mississippi with the 
very limited access offered in the American proposal as any equiva- 
lent for the privileges of the Fisheries. We have, etc. 


Henry Goulburn. 

m , -r. , William Adams. 

[Reed. Dec. 4.] 

Goulburn to Hamilton. 1 


Ghent, Deer. 2. 1814. 

Having written our dispatch of yesterday in a very great hurry 
at the close of a long tiresome conference we find upon reading it 
over to day that it abounds in inaccuracies and as in the event of its 
being published we are anxious to avoid the imputation of not writ- 
ing English we beg you to correct them. 

In the second sentence dele the words "either" and "or" so that 
the sentence may run "altogether, with one modification." 

In the latter part of the dispatch or rather near the middle 
are the words — "The American Govt, might at once have de- 
termined in favor of its own subjects. They have determined 

for its substitute their 
for have substitute had 

A little further on, instead of "or to suggest any grounds upon 
which he might have done so," substitute "or the grounds upon 
which he might have done so." 

Excuse these corrections of the Press and Believe me yours ever 
r ™ a ^ ^ i Henry Goulburn. 

[Reed. 5th Dec.] 

Commissioners to Castlereagh. 
No. 17. 

Ghent, December 10, 18 14. 

We held this morning a Conference with the American Pleni- 
potentiaries, 2 and in compliance with the Instruction conveyed to 

1 Of the Foreign Office. 

2 The protocol is in American State Papers, Foreign Relations, in. 743. See 
Adams, Memoirs, in. 93. 


us in your Lordship's dispatch of the 6th Instant, communicated to 
them the views of His Majesty's Government upon the points which 
we had been under the necessity of referring for their consideration. 

We stated that we could not consent to omit the words objected 
to by them in the first Article, viz: " belonging to either party and 
taken by the other." That Great Britain in admitting the United 
States to have any claim to the Islands in Passamaquoddy Bay 
and in consenting to submit such claim to the decision of Commis- 
sioners had made an important concession, having at all times re- 
garded those Islands as her indisputable right. We added that 
Great Britain was willing to consent to the reciprocal restitution 
of all territories held on either side by the title of Jus belli alone, 
or to admit any modification of the first Article which should con- 
fine the portions of territory excepted from such restitution to those 
which were made the subject of reference to Commissioners in the 
Treaty itself, or even to limit the exception to the Passamaquoddy 
Islands alone; but that we could not consent to yield a possession 
at the peace, the right to which we did not derive from the war. 

With respect to the 8th Article we stated that Great Britain con- 
sidered the former part of that Article to afford to the United States 
advantages fully equivalent to those which Great Britain would 
derive from the free navigation of and access to the Mississippi, and 
much more valuable than that Navigation under the restricted ac- 
cess proposed by the American Plenipotentiaries. They had in- 
deed proposed to exchange for the unlimited enjoyment of a privilege 
by American Subjects a limited enjoyment by British Subjects of a 
privilege derived from the same Treaty, an exchange which could 
not but be regarded as altogether unequal. Great Britain was how- 
ever disposed to let the former part of the Article remain in the 
Treaty; And in so doing she yielded in her estimation a consider- 
able portion of territory to the United States, without securing to 
herself what she had been willing to accept in the way of an equiva- 
lent. We further stated the readiness of Great Britain so far to 
accede to the proposition brought forward in the written proposal 
of the American Plenipotentiaries as to enter into future negotia- 
tion with respect to the equivalents which it might be just for each 
nation respectively to receive in return for the free navigation of 
the Mississippi on the one side and the enjoyment of the fisheries 
on the other. 

We delivered to the American Plenipotentiaries the Article of 
which a copy is inclosed, which with the exception of the words un- 
derlined corresponds with that transmitted in your Lordship's 

We further proposed to the American Plenipotentiaries the two 


inclosed Articles; the one intended to secure the continued exer- 
tions of both Nations for the abolition of the African Slave 
Trade; the other to provide for the right of the Subjects of each 
Nation freely to prosecute suits in the Courts of Justice of the 

Upon the point thus submitted by us the American Plenipoten- 
tiaries requested time for deliberation, after which they intimated 
their intention of proposing a further Conference. We have etc. 


Henry Goulburn. 

William Adams. 

[Reed Dec. 14.] 

Commissioners to Castlereagh. 
No. 19 

Ghent, December 13, 1814. 

At a Conference held yesterday with the American Plenipoten- 
tiaries our discussions turned entirely upon the modifications of 
the 1st and 8th Articles proposed by us at the last Conference. It 
is not necessary to trouble your Lordship with a statement of the 
Arguments urged on either side at former Conferences, many of 
which were repeated with some variations in the mode of proposing 
them. 1 

The American Plenipotentiaries in substance stated that they 
did not feel themselves authorized to accede to the words "belong- 
ing to either party and taken by the other" nor to either of the modi- 
fications under which alone we had consented to alter or omit them. 
That considering as they did the Passamaquoddy Islands to form 
part of the State of Massachusetts they could not but regard any 
agreement which should give to Great Britain the possession of them 
as equivalent to a temporary cession of territory, and this as they 
had previously intimated they had no power to make without the 
concurrence of the State of which it formed a part. That they 
had no objection to admit such a modification as should secure the 
rights of Great Britain from being affected or impaired by yielding 
possession of those Islands to the United States. That the value 
of them was too insignificant an object for either Nation to con- 
tinue the war upon that account; but the principle upon which 
Great Britain required the possession of them was what they felt 
themselves bound to resist. 

To this we replied, that the American Plenipotentiaries had as- 
sumed in argument, that a clause, whose consequential effect would 

1 Adams, Memoirs, in. 104. 


produce to Great Britain a continuance of the possession she now 
held, was a cession of territory by America, and they had assumed 
this for the sole purpose of entangling this question with the sug- 
gested difficulty of ceding without the consent of one of the United 
States any portion of its territory. But such a clause could not 
with Justice be so interpreted, for so far from requiring America to 
do any Act which could prejudice her ultimate right, it did not 
require her to do any Act whatever. On the other hand the Ameri- 
can Plenipotentiaries had not scrupled to require from Great Britain 
the act of yielding a possession, the right to which she was known 
to claim under another title than that of war. The terms cession 
of territory were really not intelligible, but in some distinct reference 
to title, and all questions of title were by a succeeding Article put 
into a train of future investigation. That we should not object to 
a clause expressly guarding their ultimate right against the preju- 
dice they apprehended from the continued possession of Great 
Britain. The particular words in question could therefore by no 
fair argument be connected with the difficulty which had been sug- 
gested. But if that difficulty did of itself exist, independently of 
what they had attempted to connect with it, it was really difficult 
to understand in what manner Great Britain could insure the ful- 
filment of any award which the Commissioners might hereafter 
make with respect to these Islands, should it be adverse to the claims 
of the United States. We further stated that we had no hesitation 
in concurring with them as to the relative value of the territory in 
question. The Act of yielding possession of the Islands by Great 
Britain involved however a point of honour, and if insisted on would, 
as we feared, prove an insuperable bar to the conclusion of peace at 
the present time. 

The American Plenipotentiaries in explanation stated that the 
difficulty of making a cession of territory, which prevented their 
assent to our propositions could not operate to defeat the award of 
the Commissioners, if made in favour of Great Britain, because as 
the award would in that case determine that those Islands had not 
been a part of the United States, no cession would be made. But 
that if the United States now consented to give possession of the 
Islands to Great Britain, and it should hereafter turn out that they 
had belonged to the State of Massachusetts, then, without its con- 
sent, a temporary cession would have been made of a possession, 
the right to hold which belonged to that State. 

In reference to the 8th Article, the American Plenipotentiaries 
stated that they were not authorized to admit the substitution pro- 
posed in the place of the latter clause of it. That they considered 
it as unnecessary, inasmuch as it did nothing but stipulate for a 


future negociation which might equally take place without it, and 
it neither bound the parties to engage in it nor precluded them from 
defeating it, if engaged in, by the Extravagance of their demands, 
but they chiefly objected to the language of the substituted Article 
as conveying that their right to the fisheries depended solely on a 
provision in the Treaty of 1783, and that this Treaty had been an- 
nulled by the War — propositions against which they had repeatedly 
contended, and in which it would be hopeless to expect their ac- 
quiescence. That they had no objection to omit the last clause 
of the 8th Article, and to substitute another, if it were possible so 
to word one, as to make the fisheries and the Mississippi the subjects 
of future negociation without prejudice to either party as to the 
manner in which his rights were derived. 

In reply we stated that should they no longer press Great Britain 
to yield possession of the Passamaquoddy Islands we should be will- 
ing to consider any determination of theirs to that effect in con- 
junction with such an Article as they might frame in relation to the 
Fisheries and Mississippi Navigation provided such an Article was 
really worded so as in our judgment simply to refer those subjects 
to future negociation without tending to preclude either party from 
acting hereafter on his own view of those subjects. That in mak- 
ing this proposition we went to the very limit of our instructions, 
if not somewhat beyond them. In justification of the manner in 
which our propositions had been brought forward we remarked that 
it was neither unusual nor improper to refer certain subjects to 
future negociation the necessary details of which might tend to 
postpone the Termination of hostilities and that we considered 
all subjects involving Equivalents as peculiarly liable to this 

The most explicit declaration as to the failure of the present War 
to put an end to the operation of the Treaty of 1783 was made by 
Mr. Gallatin, 1 but without any grounds of Argument in support of 
it. He merely stated that the United States considered that Treaty 
to be of such a nature that all its provisions were permanent and 
not liable to be, nor capable of being, annulled by a subsequent W T ar, 
and consequently that no fresh stipulations were required on either 
side to put the parties in possession of the advantages derivable 
from its provisions. This declaration has been noticed because it 
appears somewhat at variance with the Note of the American 
Plenipotentiaries of the 10th Ulto. which derives the right of the 
United States to the advantages of the Treaty as well from the 
nature of the advantages themselves as from the peculiar character 
of the Treaty by which they were recognised, a term certainly in- 
1 Adams uses the word "we," but he was usually the spokesman. 


tended to imply that the right to possess them existed before. So 
little consistency appears in the grounds upon which doctrines of 
this Nature are likely at any time to be rested that one of the Ameri- 
can Plenipotentiaries admitted that the right of the United States 
to the Fisheries so far as it depended on the Treaty of 1783 was put 
an end to by the War. Though this admission was evidently in- 
tended to convey the notion of a preexisting right to these advantages 
yet it is altogether at variance with the declaration that rests them 
on the peculiar character of that Treaty alone. 

We made no scruple on this and on other occasions of stating 
explicitly that in our view of the subject all the right which the 
United States had or could have to the fisheries was derived from 
the Treaty of 1783 alone, that we could conceive no other source 
whence they could derive it, nor on what possible grounds it could 
be contended that the provisions of that Treaty were not put an 
end to by the present War. 

The American Plenipotentiaries stated further that they should 
offer no objection to the Article we had proposed in relation to the 
Slave Trade. 

That they had objections to the Article as to the right to prose- 
cute suits by the subjects of one party in the Courts of the other, 
which objections they would take another opportunity of commu- 
nicating to us. 

The conference ended with an intimation from the American 
Plenipotentiaries that a Note should be sent to us containing their 
ultimate determination on the subjects we had recently discussed. 1 

We have, etc. 


Henry Goulburn. 
William Adams. 
[Rd. Dec. 16.] 

Goulburn to Hamilton. 


Ghent, 15 Deer., 1814. 

I take the liberty of troubling you with a few errata in our dis- 
patch No. 19 of yesterday which we should thank you to let Mr. 
Baudinel correct. 

In the following sentence viz. "In justification of the manner 
in which our propositions had been brought forward," etc., etc. 
insert former between our & propositions — and in the next line 

1 December 14. American State Papers, Foreign Relations, m. 743. Adams, 
Memoirs, in. 112. 


insert after improper the word "thus" so that it may run "nor im- 
proper thus to refer certain subjects," etc., etc. 

The other alteration is more important: it is in that part where 
we are speaking of the Fisheries we say that the term used by the 
Americans in their note of the ioth ulto. "tended to imply that the 
right to possess them existed before." This last word before 
should be independently; and a few lines afterwards instead of 
"a pre-existing right" insert "an independent right." Yours ever 

Henry Goulburn. 

Commissioners to Castlereagh. 

[No. 2 2.] 

Ghent, Deer. 24th, 1814. 

We had the honor of receiving on the 21st Instt your Lordship's 
Dispatch of the 19th, and on the following morning we addressed 
to the American Plenipotentiaries the note of which a copy is 
enclosed. 1 

A Conference was held yesterday at their request. The American 
Plenipotentiaries, having signified their willingness to accede to the 
propositions brought forward in our enclosed note, suggested many 
verbal alterations in the Treaty, the particulars of such as were 
acceded to will be found in the enclosed copy of the Protocol. 2 

The only alteration of this kind, on which it seems necessary to 
trouble your Lordship with any observations, is that, which sub- 
stitutes the date of the last Ratification of the Treaty for that of 
the exchange of the Ratifications. We were induced to accede to 
this Substitution, from a desire of obviating, as far as lay in our 
power, the apprehensions expressed by the American Plenipoten- 
tiaries of the continuance of hostilities between the two Countries 
after the actual, tho' unexchanged, Ratifications of the Treaty by 
them both, an effect which a tardy arrival in America of the British 
Ratification would otherwise produce. Their apprehensions were 
grounded on the risks attendant upon the transmission of a single 
instrument, such as the British Ratification necessarily must be, 
to America at this season of the year; more especially as a delay of 
some months had once taken place in communicating to the United 
States the Ratification of a Treaty by Great Britain. At the same 
time that we acceded to the above alteration we introduced into 
the last Article such words, as appeared to us adapted effectually 

1 Note of December 22. American State Papers, Foreign Relations, 111. 744. 
Adams, Memoirs, ill. 122. 

2 IK 745- 


to guard against any partial Ratification of the Treaty by the 
President of the United States. 

We trust we shall appear to H. M's Government to have complied 
with the tenour of our instructions on this point. 

An objection was made and dwelt upon by the American Pleni- 
potentiaries to that part of the third Article, stipulating for the 
payment in specie of the advances for the maintenance of Prisoners 
of War, on the ground of its imposing on the United States an un- 
necessary burthen, and of its requiring a mode of payment different 
from that, in which by much the larger part of the advances had 
been made. We however thought it necessary to insist on retain- 
ing the original words, and after some discussion their objections 
were withdrawn. 1 

We again endeavoured at this Conference to obtain from the 
American Plenipotentiaries an acquiescence in the Article, which 
we had before proposed, relative to Suitors in Courts of Justice. 
They persisted in considering the stipulation as useless to Great 
Britain, and added that, as it was matter of greater notoriety that 
her Courts were open to the Suitors of all nations than those of the 
United States, their acquiescence in such an Article might be con- 
strued as implying, that without it the Subjects of Great Britain 
would be unable to prosecute Suits in the Courts of the United 
States. We were at length compelled to abandon the proposed 
Article. We have etc. 


Henry Goulburn. 
William Adams. 
[Reed. Dec. 26.] 

Remarks were made during the meeting by Messrs. Rhodes, 
Stan wood, Bowditch and J. C. Warren. 

1 See Proceedings, xliv. 312. 

AW. £ Is on & Co. Boston 


1914] DON GLEASON HILL. 163 





Don Gleason Hill was elected a Resident Member of the 
Society on February 9, 1905, chiefly for his distinction in the 
field of local history. While this election came near the prime 
of his life, when there was hope that the Society might have 
the advantage of his knowledge and ripe experience, he soon 
found his usefulness greatly limited by ill health and the con- 
sequent gradual retirement from active service. He highly 
valued his membership, and deeply regretted his inability to 
be a working member; but his ambitious years of unremitting 
toil had told upon his vitality. 

Mr. Hill's boyhood home was in the quiet farming region of 
West Medway, Massachusetts, where he was born on July 12, 
1847, the second of four sons of George and Sylvia (Grout) 
Hill. He counted among his ancestors many of the early 
settlers of Massachusetts, and he inherited a good share of 
their sturdy and patriotic qualities. The devout influences of 
home, his usual round of youthful duties and his education in 
the common schools of his native town, were among his early 
advantages. Then aroused to the need of a higher education 
he assiduously applied himself in assisting his father at the 
carpenter's trade to secure the necessary means to acquire it. 
He was fitted for college at Wesleyan Academy, at Wilbraham, 
Mass., and in 1865 entered Amherst College. Two years were 
spent there; and the following year he taught school at Barre, 
Vermont, and in May, 1870, he was graduated from the Law 
School of the University of New York, with the degree of 
Bachelor of Laws. Amherst College in 1894 conferred on 
him the honorary degree of Master of Arts. 


Mr. Hill was admitted to the bar of New York State in 1870, 
and soon returned to Medway to be a student in the office of 
Charles H. Deans. Taking the advice of Mr. Deans, after a 
short time with him, he entered the law office of Waldo Col- 
burn, at Dedham, in June, 1871; and in the following Septem- 
ber he was admitted to the bar of Norfolk County. When 
Mr. Colburn was appointed a justice of the Superior Court in 
June, 1875, a large part of his practice was taken by Mr. 
Hill, who early began to give special attention to probate law 
and conveyancing. In these branches of legal practice he 
became an authority, and his advice was often sought and 
highly valued. He prized his membership in The Abstract 
Club, of Boston, of which he was one of the early members; 
and his thirty or more years with his associates resulted in 
mutual help and confidence in the examination of titles and 
the practice of real estate law. When there was a vacancy 
in the position of Judge of Probate of Norfolk County, upon 
the death of Judge White, Mr. Hill was strongly recommended 
to Governor Wolcott for appointment. 

Out of Mr. Hill's absorbing interest in his professional work 
grew his intense liking for all that pertained to the history of 
his adopted town and to its civic progress. His service as 
town clerk for more than thirty years, until his final illness, 
won for him the esteem and confidence of his townspeople. 
Many moderators were guided over difficult places by his 
tactful and wise advice. He was one of the pioneers in urging 
the preservation and printing of vital and town records; and 
through the ready appropriations made by the Town of Ded- 
ham for the purpose he printed eight volumes of such records, 
covering the years from 1635 to 1890, including the town 
records proper from 1636 to 1706 in three volumes. He found 
time to serve the town as selectman for seven years; was for 
a long time one of the Registrars of Voters; and for fifteen 
years, until his death, a member of the School Committee. 
His service to the town was remarkable, for he filled in long 
periods all the principal offices in its gift. The Dedham In- 
stitution for Savings owed much to him as its attorney for 
nearly forty years; for thirty years of which he was one of its 
trustees, and a shorter period a member of its committee of 
investment. At the time of his death he was the senior director 

1914.] DON GLEASON HILL. 1 65 

of the Dedham Mutual Fire Insurance Company, having been 
chosen a director in 1886. He was a devoted member and at- 
tendant of the Congregational Church, for many years one 
of its deacons, and worked constantly for its best welfare. 

Mr. Hill's greatest pleasure was his labor of love for the 
Dedham Historical Society. From the beginning of his mem- 
bership in September, 1880, he devoted his best efforts during 
the moments caught up out of his busy life. The Society was 
then without a building and held its meetings in the Court 
House. Six years later, at the time of the 250th anniversary 
of Dedham, he announced the handsome bequest of Miss 
Hannah Shuttleworth to the Society, the public Library, and 
to the Town, for which these institutions are greatly indebted 
for his wise suggestions and counsel. The Historical Society 
profited by its legacy of a substantial sum and a lot of land, in 
the erection of a building, which was completed in December, 
1887, and opened with a notable exhibition of historical relics 
on January 25, 1888. During the following eighteen years, 
as President of the Society, Mr. Hill gave much of his valu- 
able time toward gathering its library of several thousand vol- 
umes, and in making its monthly meetings a greater attrac- 
tion and service. He was a trustee of the Dedham Public 
Library for nineteen years, and chairman of the Trustees of 
the Shuttleworth Fund of the Town from the acceptance of 
the legacy until his death on February 20, 1914. 

His busy professional life, his active interest in local affairs 
and his natural shrinking from publicity combined to restrain 
him from taking a hand in the work of the societies that sought 
his membership. He found time, however, to work in a quiet 
way with the New England Historic Genealogical Society, to 
which he was admitted on April 5, 1881, serving on its Council 
from 1893 to 1896, for a short time on its Committee on Me- 
morials, and on its Committee of Publication from 1900 to 
1 910; though in his last years unable to give that Society more 
than the use of his name. He was also a member of the Ameri- 
can Antiquarian Society and of the American Historical 

Besides his occasional addresses before the Dedham His- 
torical Society he gave the address at the unveiling of the 
bronze tablet, on June 17, 1898, erected by the Common- 


wealth of Massachusetts to commemorate the establishment 
by the inhabitants of the town of Dedham in town meeting 
assembled on January i, 1644-45, of a free public school to be 
maintained by general taxation. Mr. Hill was always strenu- 
ous in his support of Dedham's claim that the town established 
the first free public school in the true meaning of the words. 
The National Magazine, for June, 1892, contained an illus- 
trated paper of his on "The Record of a New England Town 
from the Passage of the Stamp Act to the Declaration of In- 
dependence, 1 765-1 776." 

He was passionately fond of reading, and had gathered a 
large library relating to the Bible and religion, the drama, 
American history, travel, and art, which was also rich in 
writings of the earlier English poets, in books of reference and 
a goodly number of volumes for children's reading. 

This brief outline of sober facts shows a life of varied in- 
terests, and points to his years of intense physical and mental 
activity. Yet his kindly nature and his warm interest in 
those about him led to many lasting friendships. His untir- 
ing devotion to his church and his great love for his home 
circle were among the two controlling forces of his life. 

Mr. Hill married on December 26, 1876, Carrie Louisa, 
daughter of David Wing Luce and Caroline Elizabeth, of 
Dedham, who with four daughters and two sons survives 

JAN. 1 91 5-] GIFTS TO THE SOCIETY. 1 67 


THE stated meeting was held on Thursday, the 14th in- 
stant, at three o'clock, p. m. ; the President, Mr. Adams, 
in the chair. 

The record of the last meeting was read and approved. 

The Librarian reported the list of donors to the Library 
since the last meeting; and mentioned among the gifts a 
letter written by Ben: Perley Poore at Washington on March 
15, 1863, to Charles E. Davis, Jr., from the widow of Mr. 

The Cabinet-Keeper reported gifts of the following: 

A painting of Daniel Webster by Alvan Clark in 1846, from 
a daguerreotype, and a wooden urn made from the frigate 
Constitution by Lucius Manlius Sargent, and given by him 
on December 19, 1834, to Henry Codman, by Mr. Codman's 
granddaughter, Miss Martha C. Codman; an engraving of 
William Augustine Washington, by Mr. Ford; a bronze medal 
of the Omar Khayyam Club of America, struck in 1909 to 
commemorate the centenary of the birth of Edward Fitzgerald, 
by Walter Gilman Page; a gold medal " Presented by a num- 
ber of Citizens of Norfolk County to Simeon Miller, as a 
token of their esteem for his Firmness in the Republican 
Cause, 1804," by exchange; a photograph of the portrait of 
Otis Norcross (1 785-1827) by Chester Harding, and a photo- 
graph of the painting of George Lane (1 788-1849) by John 
Rand, by Mr. Norcross; an album containing 199 photo- 
graphs of public men and women of Great Britain, France and 
Italy (1860-1865), by Mrs. Thomas R. Watson, of Plymouth; 
six misstruck half-dollars, taken in the course of business in 
San Francisco, by Mr. Andrew McFarland Davis; and twenty- 
seven medals, by gift and exchange. 

The Corresponding Secretary reported the receipt of a let- 


ter from Ellery Sedgwick accepting his election as a Resident 
Member of the Society. 

The Editor reported the gift from Mr. Norcross, of one 
hundred and thirty-four letters and notes of Edward Everett, 
chiefly written to John T. Austin and Gales and Seaton; from 
Mr. C. P. Greenough, of a number of Massachusetts and 
French documents, the former coming from the papers of Gov- 
ernor Increase Sumner; and from Dr. Loring W. Puffer, ad- 
ditional Baylies papers and letters from Rev. Zachary Eddy. 

The memoir of William Endicott, prepared by Mr. Rantoul, 
was presented. 

William Crowninshield Endicott, of Dan vers, was elected a 
Resident Member of the Society. 

Mr. Davis made the following statement: 

At the February meeting of this Society in 1863, Robert C. 
Winthrop, the President of the Society, submitted for in- 
spection, what I conceive to be an enlarged pen-and-ink sketch 
of one of the Colony notes. 1 Mr. Winthrop, however, described 
it as being actually a note emitted by the Colony. It was 
found by him among the Winthrop papers. At that time there 
were no specimens of these notes in any of our museums, and 
it was not known that the emissions made by the Colony were 
about one quarter of the size of the pen-and-ink drawing sub- 
mitted by Mr. Winthrop, nor was it understood that the leg- 
islative committee having the emission of the Colonial notes 
in charge were instructed to have the notes printed from 
copper plates. Mr. Winthrop evidently felt that the authen- 
ticity of what he concluded to be a note might be questioned, 
and called attention to some particulars which might raise 
doubts, but on the whole concluded that it was a genuine 

Mr. Winsor, in the Narrative and Critical History of Amer- 
ica, when dealing with this Colonial paper currency, with full 
knowledge that the Colony notes were ordered to be printed 
from copper plates, gives a quasi-endorsement to the authen- 
ticity as a note of this drawing, saying that "some of the 
issues were written with a pen." 

Thus the matter remained until June, 1899, when I made a 

1 It is reproduced in 1 Proceedings, vi. 428. 


communication to this Society, refuting the proposition that 
this pen-and-ink sketch was a note, and pointing out various 
reasons why in my opinion this position could not be main- 
tained. At the same time I showed the meaning of the pres- 
ence of the name of the Province Treasurer on the back of the 
note and the reason for the presence there of a new number, 
circumstances which had puzzled Mr. Winthrop but which 
did not enter absolutely into the question of the genuineness 
of the document. 1 

Mr. Abner C. Goodell, who was present at the meeting, took 
exceptions to what I said and made an elaborate argument in 
defence of the proposition that the document was a genuine 
note, combating even my explanation of the presence of the 
name of the Province Treasurer on the back of the sketch. 

The discussion, so far as Mr. Goodell and myself were con- 
cerned, was necessarily based, as regards certain points, upon 
the lithographic facsimile of the original sketch, to be found in 
the volume of our Proceedings which contains the record of the 
meeting of June, 1899, the original document not having been 
deposited with us by Mr. Winthrop. In August of that year 
I received from Mr. Robert C. Winthrop, Jr., the accompanying 
letter. At a later date he submitted to me the original sketch, 
which was in October given to the Society. Mr. Winthrop says 
in his letter that he does not wish to have his opinion quoted, 
as he does not wish to enter into any contest with Mr. Goodell. 
Since both Mr. Winthrop and Mr. Goodell are dead, I feel that 
I have a right to file this letter, in which my conclusions are so 
fully corroborated, in the archives of the Society. My original 
opinion was never shaken by Mr. Goodell's arguments, but 
his high standing as an authority on provincial affairs justi- 
fies my seeking for support where I can find it. 

Robert C. Winthrop, Jr., to Andrew McFarland Davis. 

10 Walnut Street, Aug. 26, [i8J99. 

Dear Mr. Davis, — The missing "bill" has at last turned up 
and whenever I hear from you that you have returned to Cam- 
bridge, I will mail it to you. You can then keep it as long as you 
wish and then turn it over to the Library of the Mass. Hist. Soc. 

If I had been in this country when my father communicated it, 

1 2 Proceedings, xm. 142. 


in 1863, I should have urged him to make a much more "hesitant 
endorsement" of its genuineness. His studies had never led him in 
the direction of Provincial Currency — he relied, as you point 
out, too much upon Felt as an authority — and in all antiquarian 
matters connected with N. E., he attached great importance to the 
opinion of Charles Deane and other friends, who inclined to believe 
in this bill. None of them, however, were at all familiar with the 
habits or handwriting of my great-great-grandfather, John Win- 
throp, F.R.S., whose early letters and papers I have studied. He 
was then what would be called a Scribbler and a mouser, jotting 
down all sorts of memoranda. My belief is that, for his own 
amusement, he copied a genuine bill, on a larger scale, imitating the 
signatures, and subsequently placed it between the leaves of a Com- 
monplace book, where it seems to have remained unnoticed for a 
century and a half. The idea that, after this long interval, it would 
bamboozle a learned Society, would, I think, have greatly enter- 
tained him, for he was not averse to a joke in his youth, tho' he 
grew very peevish in his old age. 

I am wholly unable to accept Mr. GoodelPs theory that the 
signatures are genuine and that the bill is a duplicate. I see the 
handwriting of my great-great-grandfather running all through it. 
The words "Come over and help us," under the seal, are unmis- 
takably his penmanship, and so are the words "Massachusetts Bay" 
on the back. At the same time, I recognize the high authority of 
Mr. Goodell and do not wish to be publicly quoted in opposition 
to him; but my private opinion remains that this bill was a practical 
joke — not a deliberate forgery — that the signatures were suc- 
cessfully imitated for the amusement of the writer, and that you 
have successfully unearthed a mare's nest. Yours very truly, 

R. C. Winthrop, Jr. 

Dr. DeNormandle read a paper on 

Nietzsche and the Doctrine of Force. 

For the last fifty years, with an ever increasing impetus, the 
principal nations of Europe have been emphasizing the doc- 
trine of force as the only means of preserving or enlarging 
their dominion. Everything that helps the triumph of force 
is moral and to be commended, and everything that hinders 
such triumph is immoral. Out of this doctrine have come the 
vast armaments and armies, the new devices for destruction 
beneath the waves or above the earth. 

When this became the sole aim of governments, of course 


there would arise so-called philosophers and theologians and his- 
torians who would give all their thought and ability to the sup- 
port and spread of the doctrine, because as a rule these are 
generally creatures of the Zeitgeist, it is rarely one rises above 
the Zeitgeist, and creates a new and higher and nobler spirit of 
the age. 

So far as the German Empire is concerned, many writers 
claim that two philosophers may be held as almost entirely 
responsible for the Empire's belief in force, the arousing of 
the warlike spirit and the justification of every brutality war 
carries with it. This is attributing too much to these two 
writers. The imperial desire for aggrandizement, for more room 
for the rapidly increasing nation, was the controlling idea, 
to which philosophy and theology began to lend their support. 
Still more absurd is the idea that beneath all was any great 
conflict of profound philosophical or religious systems. The 
imperial spirit was born of pure covetousness, and philoso- 
phers and theologians were soon developed to bask in royal 
favor; and thereafter it was hard to distinguish between cause 
and effect. 

The two writers to whom this transcendent influence has 
generally been attributed are Treitschke and Nietzsche. 
Treitschke was a favorite in the imperial parliament, and 
in some mysterious and unaccountable way joined to his doc- 
trine of force a tinge of Christian morality. He thought it 
was entirely excusable in war to break all treaties and for 
the stronger power to take whatever it wanted, but still de- 
nounced some methods of warfare which have now been used 
and defended and praised by the Empire — but if he were 
alive would doubtless countenance them all, as a logical issue 
of his doctrine of the sovereign power of the state and the 
benefit of war; and the mission of Germany. 

I want to speak, however, of Nietzsche because I agree with 
those who think his following and influence have been greater 
and because his character is more in keeping with the tone of 
civilization in the Empire to-day. 

One need not spend much time upon his philosophy. It 
is so easy to mark the moral poison which permeates it; and 
he never hesitated to carry it all to its baneful issue. He 
wants the Superman — the man who is representative of 


power, of force, who knows no limitations of bodily weakness, 
no ailments, no disease; the fighting man, the man of superb 
physical development. There is much that is attractive in 
that. We like to see a strong, vigorous, well man, and there 
are times, emergencies in life, when we need and praise one 
who like Talus with his iron flail goes crushing over the evil- 
doers, or even the amenities, and sympathies, and false bar- 
riers, over all obstacles, and just sweeps them all away; but 
mere physical strength, or beauty, very rarely carries with it 
any of the qualities of intellect, or heart, or soul we do like 
better. Socrates was said to have been a sad spectacle, some- 
thing like a monkey, but his morals and life have been a wonder- 
ful help down to the present day. St. Paul had a contemptible 
bodily presence and a weak and feeble voice, but his words have 
had a better influence over the world than the whole German 
Empire, and his praise of love, or his oration on Mars Hill, 
will go resounding through centuries when Germany is for- 

Oh it is excellent 
To have a giant's strength; but it is tyrannous 
To use it like a giant. 

Yet that is what a giant man or giant empire is most likely 
to do. 

The Superman is to be the man who loves war and detests 
peace. "Ye shall have peace, as means to new war, and the 
short peace more than the long. I advise you not to work, but 
to fight." "You say it is the good cause which halloweth war, 
I say unto you it is the good war which halloweth every cause." 
"War and courage have done more good things than charity." 
"It is far pleasanter to injure and afterwards to beg forgive- 
ness, than to be injured and grant forgiveness." Nietzsche's 
theory is a direct inheritance of the story in ecclesiastical his- 
tory of early Germany, that they would have nothing to do 
with Christianity as the monks and missionaries portrayed 
Jesus and the Apostles, for they regarded them all as a faint- 
hearted set; but when the clergy acquired military habits, and 
circulated legends of brave and righting saints, then they began 
to accept it; or an inheritance from Attila, the scourge of the 
world, whom the Kaiser has set before his soldiers, in loud 
acclaim, as the hero they should follow. 


Yes, of course, all hail to the fine physical man or woman! 

Then look all through history, look at human life as you 
have known it, and how many, seriously weighted in the race 
of life, with every kind of physical limitations, have gained more 
glorious victories than war has ever told of ? Think how many 
of the greatest and most brilliant minds have shone beneath 
every physical disability, prisoners long of sickness and in- 
firmity, their visible world within four narrow walls, but the 
greatness of whose spirits filled the air of the whole arching 
heavens, and rayed out an influence more helpful to the world 
than if the realm of Germany were crowded with Nietzsche's 
Superman. Some Pascal, or Robert Hall, or Buckminster, or 
Channing, or Mrs. Browning, or Mozart, or RafTaelle, or 
Robertson, or Paul, with his ever-present wearying thorn, 
alas, that such should have their bonds of the flesh — "the 
sweet bells of their spirit life, jangled and out of tune," or fall- 
ing away as the world seems to miss them most! Oh! says 
Nietzsche, destroy all such as fast as you can; never help, but 
kill all who have any physical ailments; let only the great 
fighting warrior live. 

As a logical deduction from his theory of the Superman, 
Nietzsche turns to a bitter denunciation of Christianity and 
all the teachings of its founder. Everything about Christianity 
is false and worthless — the weak, the poor, taking up your 
cross; the pure in spirit, the good Samaritan — the weak and 
helpless must go to the wall, first principle of our love for 
humanity, and we must help them to go. "Pity for the weak 
and helpless, that is Christianity, and it must perish." "God 
as Father, as Judge, as Rewarder, is thoroughly refuted." "The 
ungodliest utterance came from God himself, the utterance 
there is but one God, and thou shalt have no other Gods be- 
fore me." He speaks of the parody of the opening sentence 
of John's Gospel as the best he ever heard, "In the beginning 
was the nonsense, and the nonsense was with God, and the 
nonsense was God." 

Just as we hear of deep movements throughout the world in 
favor of democracy, even if we have poorly learned yet of its 
mighty truth and meaning and promise, Nietzsche, regarding it 
as an outcome of Christianity, has words of only detestation 
for it all. "The spirit which has won its freedom, tramples 


ruthlessly upon that contemptible kind of comfort which 
tea-grocers, Christians, cows, women, English, and other demo- 
crats worship in their dreams." "Where the populace eat, 
drink, and even where they reverence, it usually stinks, one 
should not go into churches, if one wishes to breathe pure air." 
" Every elevation of the type man has been the work of Aris- 
tocracy, and so it must always be, a long scale of gradations, 
requiring slavery at the foundation." " Every one to be allowed 
to learn to read, ruineth in the long run, not only writing but 
also thinking." 

One may be excused for commending Nietzsche's philosophy 
of force, because he admires physical vigor; and of war, be- 
cause there come times when for a higher cause (although a 
nation easily convinces itself it .is righting for the higher 
when it is purely for aggrandizement, for covetousness, for 
accursed ambition) a man will take his life in his hand as of 
very little moment; and of Christianity because there are 
millions everywhere who profoundly believe that Christianity 
as Nietzsche understood it has entirely failed; and of Democ- 
racy, because in our land, where it is having its last and best 
trial, it has not realized all its promised benefits — but there is 
another subject which Nietzsche logically follows from the 
doctrine of force, and that is the weakness of woman, and upon 
this he dwells constantly and in terms which reveal his own 
utter moral degradation. 

"Surface is woman's soul, a mobile, stormy film on shallow 
water, but woman is not even shallow." "Woman is mean, 
essentially unbearable like the cat." "Her great art is false- 
hood." "Love to one woman is a barbarity; also love to one 
God." "When woman possesses masculine qualities she is 
enough to make you run away; when she possesses no mascu- 
line virtues she herself runs away." "Man shall be trained for 
the warrior, and woman for the recreation of the warrior: all 
else is folly." " Some husbands have sighed over the elopement 
of their wives; the greater number however sighed because 
nobody would elope with theirs." "Everything in woman 
hath but one solution, that is called pregnancy." "When a 
woman has any scholarly inclinations there is generally some- 
thing wrong with her sexual nature." 

And had this bastard philosopher grown so wise that he de- 


spised his mother? One day in college a pupil was speaking of 
an instance in history where a woman was leader in some 
atrocities, and another, interrupting, said, "That wasn't so." 
"Why not?" "Because a woman never does such things." 
Horace Mann paused a moment and then said with much em- 
phasis, "The remark of that student is a strong testimony that 
he has a beautiful mother, and from her life, he thinks no 
woman could do a mean thing." Had Nietzsche no mother? 
His father was a clergyman and he may have learnt from him his 
abhorrence of Christianity; and he had a divorced sister who, 
after his insanity became marked, watched over him with 
tender care — but did he never know a mother's love or devo- 
tion ? If he did and then could say woman is mean, he must 
have had a debased heart. Surely he never could have known 
or associated with any women who were not low, worldly, sen- 
sual, devilish. Any woman of a fine nature would have shrunk 
from his touch as from a leper, and from the glance of his eye as 
from the glare of a basilisk. Contrast the last words of that 
master-mind, Faust, at the age of eighty, that the elevation of 
man is dependent upon woman: "That the Ever Feminine 
draweth us on." Valor and heroism have still their work to 
perform in the world, but they will find their strongest encour- 
agement in the true womanly. 

And now it would seem as if the Empire were ashamed of the 
emphasis that has been placed upon force, and as if conscious of 
the condemnation of the world this philosopher of force, who 
has been said to have had more influence than any other man, 
in bringing the Empire to its present condition, is being repu- 
diated and denounced everywhere, and professors, historians, 
philosophers and clergymen join in one torrent of falsehood, to 
show that the whole conduct of the Empire has always been 
opposed to force and to war and of all lands has been foremost 
in obeying the precepts of Christianity, and if "thine enemy 
smite thee on thy right cheek turn to him the other also." 
"Nietzsche," says one, "was no philosopher, and had no 
system — besides he was insane." 

Rudolph Eucken, who has been loudly praised and eagerly 
taken up by many of late, says, "We have never believed in 
anything but peaceful development." "We would never think 
of forcing our civilization upon others at the point of the 


sword. " Karl Lamprecht says, " Aggressive warfare, in the 
sense of preventive war, has never been our ideal." 

Hans Delbrueck, professor of history in the University of 
Berlin, says, " Every German would reject as an insult the ques- 
tion whether cruelty and hardness against others is permissible 
in the name of progress." Another says, "Treitschke and his 
school bear very little influence. Von Bernhardi is known by 
name to but a small circle of readers" (and I suppose he would 
add that Nietzsche is too unknown to be taken into account) ; 
but, he says, "No living representative of German thought but 
would consider a war entered into for the sole purpose of con- 
quest an act of wantonness against humanity." 

Haeckel says, " German idealism of the present day excludes 
cruelty and hardness, in contrast to the English" 

Another, "The policy of the German Government has never 
been to make special preparation for this war, nor for any ag- 
gressive war." 

It looks as if there must have been some solemn conclave 
where it was agreed to see how the rest of the world could be 
made to accept statements entirely contrary to all the facts. 

Ev'n ministers, they ha'e been kenn'd, 

In holy rapture, 
A rousing whid at times to rend, 
And nail 't wi' Scripture. 

No, the true Superman is not the man merely of splendid physi- 
cal parts, but it is the whole man under the best development 
of body, mind and spirit. 

Mr. Stanley Hall followed, saying: 

Mr. DeNormandie's sketch of the teachings and influence 
of Nietzsche raises to my mind a profound and far-reaching 
historical question. There can be no doubt that in Germany a 
sense of her superiority over other nations has had a very long 
incubation and that all her leaders have long felt that she 
was Nietzsche's overman among the nations of the earth. To 
the earliest and frankest expression of this sentiment, so far as 
I know, our President has lately called attention l by quoting 
a statement from Mommsen's History of Rome (book v, chap. 
vih) which was written some sixty years ago, twelve years 

1 The Monroe Doctrine and Mommsen's Law, 28. 


before the outbreak of the Franco-Prussian War of 1870. The 
statement is as follows: 

By virtue of the law, that a people which has grown into a state 
absorbs its neighbors who are in political nonage, and a civilized 
people absorbs its neighbors who are in intellectual nonage, — by 
virtue of this law, which is as universally valid and as much a law 
of nature as the law of gravity, — the Italian nation (the only one 
in antiquity which was able to combine a superior political develop- 
ment and a superior civilization, though it presented the latter only 
in an imperfect and external manner) was entitled to reduce to sub- 
jection the Greek states of the East which were ripe for destruction, 
and to dispossess the peoples of lower grades of culture in the West 
— Libyans, Iberians, Celts, Germans — by means of its settlers; 
just as England with equal right has in Asia reduced to subjection a 
civilization of rival standing but politically impotent, and in Amer- 
ica and Australia has marked and ennobled, and still continues to 
mark and ennoble, extensive barbarian countries with the impress of 
its nationality. ... It is the imperishable glory of the Roman 
democracy or monarchy — for the two coincide — to have cor- 
rectly apprehended and vigorously realized this its highest des- 

This startling avowal of the right of might which goes 
vastly beyond all the theories that prompted the Monroe 
Doctrine, really formulated by J. Q. Adams sixty-eight years 
ago, and all "big brother" theories, antedates and perhaps 
was the very first expression of the theory of Teutonic supe- 
riority, manifest destiny, etc., which Nietzsche and others 
since in his spirit have expressed in many ways and in many 
fields of thought. It seems to me that to understand the deeper 
causes of the present stupendous war we must begin with a 
correct evaluation of the spirit and temper of Germany, and 
that at present this is inadequately appreciated, in this coun- 
try or indeed in any of the countries with which she is at war. 
Far be it from me to say that Nietzsche expresses the soul of 
the German race or even the spirit of the General Staff, but it 
is inevitable in the present crisis that judicious observers who 
are familiar with the intellectual life of Germany since the war 
of 1870, should be impressed with the enormous vogue that 
the doctrines of Nietzsche have had, and their profound and 
very widely ramifying influences upon German literature and 



humanistic culture, an influence which no other German 
writer, with one exception, ever attained. It seemed to me, 
therefore, that a very brief and impartial statement of present- 
day contemporary expressions of the spirit which prompted 
Mommsen's utterance so long ago, may have some interest and 
value to this society, inadequate though that statement be. 

Many years ago Karl Rosenkranz wrote a book to show that 
Hegel was "the" national philosopher of Germany; and so he 
was in his day, for his influence dominated not only every de- 
partment of learning but the official bureaucracy itself to a 
degree perhaps never seen elsewhere. The question Mr. De 
Normandie's paper raises is whether Nietzsche expresses the 
soul of the German people to-day. He has certainly had an 
enormous vogue since his death, especially among the intel- 
lectuals, young and old, including the officers of the General 
Staff. How much he expresses the national spirit and how much 
he has made or shaped it, can perhaps never be told. The 
dominant trait that characterizes all the so-called periods of 
his development, and even his insanity, is his worship of power. 
Personally modest as he was, his conceit was colossal. He 
said that in his Zarathustra, the overman, he had given Ger- 
many its greatest book, and he elsewhere declares himself the 
culmination of a long line of predecessors, Moses, Jesus, Ma- 
homet, Borgia, Cromwell, Napoleon and others. He holds that 
man to-day is only a link, which ought soon to be a missing one, 
between the primitive cave-dwellers and the superman which 
he created in his own image and put in the place of God, who 
he declared was dead. Indeed, God never existed, and his 
invention was a trick on the devil's part. He calls upon the 
elite to rise above the herd of common men, to assert and maxi- 
mize himself, and in Stirner's sense to do, be, get everything 
within his power. Might not only makes but is right. Good 
and bad, the traits of which are always changing, really mean 
at bottom noble and ignoble. Good is what great and strong 
men do, and bad is what the weak do. All have the right to all 
they can possibly get and hold. Pity is folly, for it adds my pain 
to that of him I pity. Regret is wastage, for there is no free- 
dom of the will, and all act only as they must. There is no 
blame or responsibility, for each does only what he has to do. 
The weak are not only miserable but contemptible, and if they 


are robbed or enslaved, their role is resignation. Our present- 
day morality is antiquated, and high-born, lordly souls have 
transcended it. The sense of sin is a poison which the strong 
insert into the minds of the weak to make them uncertain and 
submissive. War is the great awakener of all true Dionysiac 
energies and the greatest need of Europe is a colossal war. 
Human history is for the most part oppressive, for it binds 
man down to the past by its precedents, makes him timid, and 
saps the reckless abandon with which he should act. Most of 
the past is fit only to be forgotten. The greatest dread of man 
is inferiority, and the chief mainspring of action is ambition to 
excel others. If in pushing ourselves on and up towards the 
overman we completely change our opinions to the opposite, 
as we are sure to do if we grow, this is nothing but moulting a 
carapace that we may grow the faster, or in a sense it is only 
washing off accumulated uncleanness. Growth is inconsistency. 
Systems bind us down because in them one idea is limited by 
another. This is why Nietzsche hated Socrates and Plato as 
arresters of progress. All that is bad is servile and plebeian, and 
all that is good is aristocratic. The virile male is not only pro- 
gressive but aggressive, and would be a Titan. Mere knowledge 
or education is only a paltry device of the peasant classes to make 
themselves seem worthy of respect, and Jesus was a bastard 
decadent who led a revolt of the sans-culotte, of men who were 
born to be poor and mean in spirit, to overthrow the grand 
Roman Empire, and as a result the dark ages came. It is al- 
most impossible to express the philosophy of all his half-score 
volumes in a few phrases, but these ideas are stated with a style 
more brilliant and attractive than even Schopenhauer could 
command, and never, perhaps, was a fresh view of the universe 
put in such popular form, with so many fairly stinging and 
epigrammatic phrases, many of which once read can never be 
forgotten. To be sure, he vituperated Germans, but declared 
that more of that race than of any other were on the way to 
over-manhood. His views, at any rate, have profoundly per- 
meated young Germany, and he has touched nearly every as- 
pect of modern life and culture. 

Does Germany really deem itself the overman, with right 
to everything it can obtain and hold? Is this the spirit of 
Bernhardi, of the German war-lords, and diplomacy, despite 


the vigorous denials of this suggestion that have lately been 
put forth? I wonder if, after all, this will not be the main 
question in the assize of history. An eminent German has 
told us that this is the spirit of modern business and that it 
really dominates life everywhere, and that those who doubt it 
are either hypocrites or self -deceived. This colossal war, which 
it will take the world decades to understand, is particularly 
hard upon the many people in this country who have been 
more or less, like myself, "made in Germany," and owe so much 
to her and a large part of whose teaching has been the dissem- 
ination of German intellectual wares. As a student and war 
correspondent in Germany in 1870, I cannot believe that this 
spirit was dominant then, but there have been many expres- 
sions of it since which may well give us pause, with which unless 
the historian reckons he will be as densely ignorant of the soul 
of the German race as England has always been and still is. 

In Chamberlain's Foundations of the Nineteenth Century, 
which was praised by the Kaiser, we are told in substance that 
the future development of the world will be made in Germany. 
Not Jews or Greeks but the Germans, which combine the best 
traits of these races with the military genius of Rome, are the 
elect. History so far is only prolegomena. It will really begin 
when Germany seizes her inheritance, for German means Celt 
and Slav as well as Teuton, so that Chamberlain intimates that 
Dante, Paul, Assisi and Pascal were Germans. Certainly this 
book has been taken with great seriousness, as the many Ger- 
man reviews of it when it appeared have abundantly shown. 

Count Gobineau, although a Frenchman by birth, was one 
of the greatest laudators of the Aryan race, who he said were 
as superior to the whites as the whites were to the blacks, and 
so he attempts to weigh the ten types of culture that he finds, in- 
sists that the best of the white races are more or less Teutonic, 
and would reserve for them special privileges and have them 
feel that they are charged with the responsibilities for the rest 
of the world. They should rule by right of birth, and in his 
later life he retired with pride and renunciation to a sense of his 
own superiority and strove to write a culture history "in the 
largest style" and pronounced the Germans "the highest bloom 
of world-historical development." Since his works were trans- 
lated into German by Schemann they have had a great vogue. 


Woltmann in his two books proves to his satisfaction and to 
that of many Germans that most of the immortals in France, 
England and Italy, both present and past, were really Germans. 
For this anthropologist all who are dolichocephalic or have 
blonde hair or blue eyes and do not belong to the Mediterranean 
race must be German, and so he proves that Michel Angelo, Da 
Vinci, Raphael and many others are really Germans. 

J. L. Reimer says Jesus was a German, for the first syllable, 
"Jes," means "Ger," and the last, "us," means simply male, 
so we have Jesus, — Ger-man. One cannot believe that the 
Germans are megalomaniacs enough to accept such extravagant 
views, earnestly as they are put forth. At the same time, there 
is an intense personal or self-feeling which is peculiar to the 
Germans, in whom honor is as liable to become an obsession as 
duty is with a born and bred Puritan. For instance, a recent 
writer collects fifty-three German words of which Ehre (honor) 
is a component, and in a Heidelberg corps-book there were 
sixty-three points on which a student might be declared dis- 
honorable and have to face his insulter with a sword on the 
Mensur. German society is relatively almost entirely lacking 
in public opinion, and its press has little of the independence 
of ours. German society, especially in Prussianized Germany, is 
perhaps more stratified into ranks and classes than any other 
society in the world, for in Russia there are great gaps between 
the common people and the nobility, which are well rilled with 
many gradations in Germany. Rank in the army is used as the 
yardstick on which to measure ranks of office-holders, mem- 
bers of professions, including academic positions, and everything 
else is governed by precedent, the member of each grade being 
domineering over the next below and a little inclined to obse- 
quiousness to the rank above his own. This is something which 
has a deep historical and even hereditary root, but the influ- 
ence and pervasiveness of the spirit which it represents are very 
hard for us to grasp. 

Some have even questioned whether Germany ought to be 
called a Christian nation, whether the God the Kaiser worships 
is not really a tribal deity, a Thor modernized, with the mailed 
fist instead of the hammer. The Germans were converted only 
in the thirteenth century. Luther early threw off the yoke of 
Rome, and then came the rational, critical Tubingen scholars 


like Bauer and Strauss, reducing much of Christian record to 
myth; and now we have men like Arthur Drews and his 
disciples teaching with great earnestness that no such man as 
Jesus ever lived, but that he was a half -conscious, half-un- 
conscious fabrication of the middle of the first century, while 
Jensen makes him a restoration of an old Babylonian epic hero, 
Gilgamesh, and Nietzsche, with half a dozen others, insists 
that he was morbid and degenerate, a victim of delusions and 
perhaps epilepsy, and an utterly unworthy ideal. But no one 
has ever come so near exhausting the possibilities of vitupera- 
tion in a way that to all Christians must seem sacrilegious and 
blasphemous to the last degree as Nietzsche. Wagner, and 
perhaps still more, some of his followers, felt that in the interests 
of high art which ought to become religion there must be a re- 
version to the German legends of Siegfried and the rest, and his 
" Parsifal" was offered in some sense as a rival to Jesus, while 
he is credited with the slogan, "Das Deutschenthum tnusst das 
Christenthum siegen." 

Of course war at the best is a reversion to barbarism, and it 
has to be more or less pitiless, but it surely was bad inter- 
national diplomacy for Germany to reduce so many Belgians 
to a state of beggary because who, all over the world, that 
contributes to the relief of their suffering, does so with entire 
good will to the Germans? Pfister has lately given us a kind of 
psychology of war which he believes to be occasionally an 
indispensable necessity like the restoration and realization of 
childish ideals, and apparently holds with Otto Hintze that 
we stand at the beginning of an epoch of war, whether this one 
lasts a longer or shorter time. We have become over-refined 
and have to revert to savagery in the sense that Rousseau and 
Tolstoi and the " Mother Earth" movement reverted to the 
simple life again. In my student days I used to hear Treit- 
schke preach the glory of the Germans and the infamy and 
duplicity of England, and his spirit seems to me revived in a 
recent address of my old teacher, Professor Wundt, of Leipzig, 
a very eminent man, now in the eighties, who, after condemn- 
ing England for being completely given over to the utilitarian- 
ism of Bentham, who he thinks the evil genius of England, as 
others think Nietzsche is of Germany, declares that when Ger- 
many conquers England, as she surely will, she will levy no 


such paltry sum as a thousand million dollars, as she did on 
France, in 187 1, but will remember the Scriptural injunction, 
"To whom much is given, of him will much be required." Ger- 
many is unquestionably in very many respects the most re- 
markable country in the world to-day. Method and system are 
her watchwords, in science, government, education, and war. 
The barrier of language has unquestionably made her mis- 
understood, and she deeply feels, and with justice, a lack of 
due appreciation on the part of the other nations of western 
Europe and the world. She feels that her superiority justifies 
the conquest of a larger place in the sun. In the great final 
scramble for colonies that culminated in the middle or later 
nineties of the last century, when about all the available land 
in the world was appropriated, she was relatively left out, and 
now in her conquest of Belgium she probably has an eye quite 
as much or even more to the Congo Basin than to the acqui- 
sition of Belgium itself. At any rate, her present conduct of 
this war has given her friends in other lands and I think par- 
ticularly in this country, where she has so many who have lit 
their intellectual torch in the fire she kindled, a grave problem 
to solve. The souls of some of us are almost cleft in twain be- 
tween love of the peaceful Germany we have known and the 
ruthless, aggressive Germany under the dominance of the war- 

Perhaps never was history being made so fast, day by day, 
and perhaps the task of the historians of the past will appear 
puny compared to that of those who are to do justice to the 
events of these days. A new Europe may emerge, and civiliza- 
tion start off at a new angle and a new era begin. The impartial 
judgment of intelligent public opinion in this country will be 
and probably is nearest to that of the judicial historian of the 
future. Again, if the Orient is destined some day to rival the 
West, it would seem that this set-back of Europe will hasten 
for our posterity that era of competition. Perhaps England was 
lagging and needed this great but rude awakening. Once 
more, perhaps it will turn out to be at bottom a war of democ- 
racy versus autocracy, despite the accident that Russia and 
England chance now to be on the same side. We realize to-day 
as never before how full Europe is of old racial and national 
antagonisms. From the crusades and long before, Europe has 


accumulated masses of ancient enmities, jealousies, hates, preju- 
dices, and transmitted them from generation to generation, and 
this war will only add to this heritage of animosities. Here, 
however, we have no old chimneys, always liable to conflagra- 
tion. America is a tabula rasa, or to change the figure, the 
smelting-pot is doing its work, and the representatives of each 
of these warring forces can have a hearing and agree to differ. 
It is a proud thing that we can and are teaching this war in 
about three-fourths of the public schools of the land, not only 
connecting it with geography, history, economics and other 
branches, but what is far more important, bringing home to 
the minds of the rising generation a realization of the horrors 
of war and the blessings of peace, and inculcating the spirit of 
toleration. Never have we thus had such reason to be proud of 
our country. 

Mr. Washburn read a minute on 

The Copyright Law of 1909. 

It is not my purpose to consider in detail the Copyright 
Law of 1909, but rather to relate the circumstances within my 
personal knowledge under which it became a law. 

While the subject had been under consideration for many 
years and various acts had been passed, it had been found 
impossible so to harmonize conflicting interests as to get satis- 
factory legislation. 

On January 27, 1905, the Senate chairman of the Committee 
on Patents announced in Senate Report 3380 that the Com- 
mittee on Patents purposed to " attempt a codification of the 
copyright laws at the next session of the Congress;" the 
Librarian of Congress was asked to call a conference of the 
several classes interested in the codification, which he did, 
and meetings were held in New York in May, June and 
November, 1905. 

In his message of December 5, 1905, President Roosevelt 

Our copyright laws urgently need revision. They are imperfect 
in definition, confused and inconsistent in expression; they omit 
provision for many articles which, under modern reproductive 
processes, are entitled to protection; they impose hardships upon 

1915.] THE COPYRIGHT LAW OF 1909. 185 

the copyright proprietor which are not essential to the fair pro- 
tection of the public; they are difficult for the courts to interpret 
and impossible for the Copyright Office to administer with satis- 
faction to the public. Attempts to improve them by amendment 
have been frequent, no less than twelve acts for the purpose hav- 
ing been passed since the Revised Statutes. To perfect them by 
further amendment seems impracticable. A complete revision of 
them is essential. Such a revision, to meet modern conditions, has 
been found necessary in Germany, Austria, Sweden and other 
foreign countries, and bills embodying it are pending in England 
and the Australian colonies. It has been urged here, and proposals 
for a commission to undertake it have, from time to time, been 
pressed upon the Congress. The inconveniences of the present 
conditions being so great, an attempt to frame appropriate legisla- 
tion has been made by the Copyright Office, which has called con- 
ferences of the various interests especially and practically concerned 
with the operation of the copyright laws. It has secured from 
them suggestions as to the changes necessary; it has added 
from its own experience and investigations, and it has drafted 
a bill which embodies such of these changes and additions as, 
after full discussion and expert criticism, appeared to be sound 
and safe. In form this bill would replace the existing insuffi- 
cient and inconsistent laws by one general copyright statute. It 
will be presented to the Congress at the coming session. It de- 
serves prompt consideration. 

Conferences were resumed in March, 1906, successive drafts 
of bills were considered and a final draft which became the 
basis of the bill "to amend and consolidate the acts respecting 
copyright" was introduced both in the Senate and in the House 
on May 31, 1906. It was then arranged that the Senate and 
House committees should sit in joint session for public hear- 
ings which were held in the Senate Reading Room of the 
Library of Congress in June and December, 1906, and in 
March, 1908. A great many interests were heard and an 
enormous amount of testimony taken. Meantime, at the 
opening of the 60th Congress, in December, 1907, 1 had for one 
of my committees that on Patents. I found the Committee 
divided, almost evenly, and the principal difference seemed 
to be one that did not admit of compromise. It related to 
extending copyright control to music reproduced upon me- 
chanical instruments, and was known as the " canned music" 



proposition. With the development of the phonograph and 
the mechanical player, this had become a subject of importance 
and was covered by article 13 of the Convention of 1908, at 
Berlin, of the International Association, as follows: 

Authors of musical works have the exclusive right to au- 
thorize — 

1. The adaptation of these works to instruments serving 
to produce them mechanically. 

2. The public performance of the same works by means of 
these instruments. 

In the case of White-Smith Music Publishing Company v. 
Apollo Company, decided by our Supreme Court at Wash- 
ington, February 24, 1908, it was held that perforated rolls 
which, when used in connection with mechanical piano players, 
reproduce in sound copyrighted musical compositions, do not 
infringe the copyright in such compositions. 

This worked an injustice to the composer and, in the con- 
sideration of the matter to which I am now alluding, it was 
sought to remove it. The practical objection urged, and it 
had much force, was, that if a composer had the exclusive 
control over his copyright music, reproduced by mechanical 
means, it would lead to a monopoly in the manufacture and 
sale of mechanical instruments, because, as it was asserted, 
some one maker or combination of makers of mechanical in- 
struments could get control of all the popular music and in that 
way prevent its use by any other maker of mechanical in- 
struments, which would be a hardship. On the other hand, it 
was said that if the composer had a constitutional right to the 
exclusive control of the creations of his brain for a limited 
time — and that certainly was what the copyright law had in 
contemplation — then he should be allowed to exercise his ex- 
clusive right in any way that he might see fit. It became ap- 
parent that if this difficulty could be gotten over, a bill might 
be reported out of the Committee. With this end in view, a 
clause was drafted which gave the exclusive right to the com- 
poser to prevent the reproduction of his music on any mechani- 
cal instrument. On the other hand, if he should so use it or 
permit its use by others, he must permit anyone to use it on 
stated terms. This paragraph, as finally amended, brought the 
two factions together, and a bill having the unanimous support 

I9I5-] THE COPYRIGHT LAW OF 1909. 187 

of the Committee was reported into the House, February 22, 
1909. The matter then of immediate consequence was to get 
the bill through the House, and that was not a small under- 
taking, because that was the short session of Congress and the 
calendar was very much congested. As the end of the session 
approached, a great many bills are passed under "suspension 
of the rules," and if, as the rules then stood, you could get 
recognized by the Speaker, you could get consideration for 
any measure thus favored. 

I remember that the chairman of the Committee and I went 
to Speaker Cannon on one of the last three or four days of the 
session, and urged him to recognize us on the copyright bill 
so that it might be considered. He had a large number of 
requests of the same nature, and, of course, had to use a good 
deal of discretion in deciding which he would grant. He finally 
said, "Well, if you boys say that this ought to go, I will recog- 
nize you." And it so happened that at six o'clock on Tuesday 
afternoon, March 2, 1909, the chairman of the Committee was 
recognized, and moved to suspend the rules, discharge the 
Committee of the whole House on the state of the Union from 
the further consideration of the bill, agree to the amendments 
proposed by the Committee and pass the bill. Before any 
progress had been made the House took a recess until the next 
day, March 3. 

When a measure is debated under these conditions, twenty 
minutes are allowed on a side, so that there were but 
forty minutes available to consider the measure, which was 
of great importance and which involved so much controversial 

It is not necessary to follow the debate, because that can 
be found in the Congressional Record, Volume 43, Part I, page 
3761. It is enough to say here that the bill passed the House 
late on the morning of March 3. It then had to go to the 
Senate. The Senate Chairman of the Committee on Patents 
had meantime agreed to substitute the House bill in the form in 
which it had passed, for the pending Senate bill. At that stage 
of the session everything in the Senate had to be done by unani- 
mous consent: objection by any single senator was fatal. At 
the outset there was objection, but as the day wore on it was 
withdrawn, and when the House took a recess from six until nine 



o'clock everything looked favorable for the passage of the bill 
in the Senate. Another objector roused apprehensions, but he 
was quieted; and during the evening the bill passed the Senate. 
This was on the night of March 3. The next day, March 4, 
President Roosevelt signed the bill, among the last of his 
official acts. 

In my opinion, if the clause relating to mechanical repro- 
ductions had not been included in the bill, it could not have 
become a law, certainly not at that session of Congress, and 
had it not passed then, I do not think we would have had any 
codification or revision of the copyright laws for many years. 

The clause runs as follows: 

Provided, That the provisions of this Act, so far as they secure 
copyright controlling the parts of instruments serving to reproduce 
mechanically the musical work, shall include only compositions pub- 
lished and copyrighted after this Act goes into effect, and shall 
not include the works of a foreign author or composer unless the 
foreign state or nation of which such author or composer is a citi- 
zen or subject grants, either by treaty, convention, agreement, or 
law, to citizens of the United States similar rights: And provided 
further, and as a condition of extending the copyright control to such 
mechanical reproductions, That whenever the owner of a musical 
copyright has used or permitted or knowingly acquiesced in the 
use of the copyrighted work upon the parts of instruments serving 
to reproduce mechanically the musical work, any other person may 
make similar use of the copyrighted work upon the payment to the 
copyright proprietor of a royalty of two cents on each such part 
manufactured, to be paid by the manufacturer thereof; and the 
copyright proprietor may require, and if so the manufacturer shall 
furnish, a report under oath on the twentieth day of each month on 
the number of parts of instruments manufactured during the pre- 
vious month serving to reproduce mechanically said musical work, 
and royalties shall be due on the parts manufactured during any 
month upon the twentieth of the next succeeding month. The 
payment of the royalty provided for by this section shall free the 
articles or devices for which such royalty has been paid from further 
contribution to the copyright except in case of public performance 
for profit: And provided further, That it shall be the duty of the 
coypright owner, if he uses the musical composition himself for the 
manufacture of parts of instruments serving to reproduce mechani- 
cally the musical work, or licenses others to do so, to file notice 
thereof, accompanied by a recording fee, in the copyright office, 

191 5-1 THE COPYRIGHT LAW OF 1909. 189 

and any failure to file such notice shall be a complete defense to any 
suit, action, or proceeding for any infringement of such copyright. 
In case of the failure of such manufacturer to pay to the copyright 
proprietor within thirty days after demand in writing the full sum 
of royalties due at said rate at the date of such demand, the court 
may award taxable costs to the plaintiff and a reasonable counsel 
fee, and the court may, in its discretion, enter judgment therein for 
any sum in addition over the amount found to be due as royalty in 
accordance with the terms of this Act, not exceeding three times 
such amount. 

This provision is absolutely unique in our legislation and 
involves a serious constitutional question, but it was essen- 
tial to the passage of the bill. The new British Copyright Act 
of 191 1 has followed very closely this precedent. 

In closing I will quote the opening lines in the "Foreword" 
of Mr. Richard Rogers Bowker's recent book upon Copyright: 

The American copyright code of 1909, comprehensively replacing 
all previous laws, a gratifying advance in legislation despite its 
serious restrictions and minor defects, places American copyright 
practice on a new basis. The new British code, brought before 
Parliament in 19 10, to be effective July 1, 191 2, marks a like forward 
step for the British Empire, enabling the mother country and its 
colonies to participate in the Berlin convention. Among the self- 
governing Dominions made free to accept the British code or legis- 
late independently, Australia had already adopted in 1905 a com- 
plete new code, and Canada is following its example in the measure 
proposed in 191 1, which will probably be conformed to the new 
British code for passage in 191 2. Portugal has already in 191 1 
joined the family of nations by adherence to the Berlin convention, 
Russia has shaped and Holland is shaping domestic legislation to 
the same end, and even China in 19 10 decreed copyright protection 
throughout its vast empire of ancient and reviving letters. The 
Berlin convention of 1908 strengthened and broadened the bond of 
the International Copyright Union, and the Buenos Ayres conven- 
tion of 1910, which the United States has already ratified, made a 
new basis for copyright protection throughout the Pan-American 
Union, both freeing authors from formalities beyond those required 
in the country of origin. Thus the American dream of 1838 of "a 
universal republic of letters whose foundation shall be one just 
law" is well on the way toward realization. 

Mr. C. F. Adams presented a paper on 


190 massachusetts historical society. [j an. 

The British Proclamation of May, 1861. 

Nearly twenty years ago our late associate, Edward L. 
Pierce, submitted a paper, "Recollections as a Source of His- 
tory." 1 This at the time struck me as a contribution of ex- 
ceptional value, and the years since elapsed have confirmed 
that impression. It is a paper the historical investigator should 
lay at heart. Mr. Pierce's thesis was the complete fallibility 
of subsequent reminiscence in those intimately at the time 
connected with important historical incidents; and recently 
in Washington I have had renewed illustration thereof. The 
instance referred to was indeed hardly less noteworthy than 
the Abram S. Hewitt hallucination, set forth in papers I sub- 
mitted to the Society in October, 1903, January, 1904, and 
November, 1906. 2 Not impossibly I may hereafter further 
allude to it. 

To-day, however, I propose to begin with a reminiscence. It 
relates to a distinguished man and a very memorable historical 
work — Alexander William Kinglake, and his Invasion of the 
Crimea. As it rests in my recollection, the incident occurred 
some forty years ago, and at a London dinner-table. The 
late Lord Houghton was a guest, and the talk, drifting, as I 
recall it, on the Franco-German war, then, like the war now in 
progress, for the time being quite monopolizing public atten- 
tion, Lord Houghton stated that Kinglake's interest and 
imagination had been so excited by the later and far more 
considerable conflict that he had lost all interest in further 
prosecuting what had become with him the work of a lifetime. 
He went on with it, mechanically; for the war in the Crimea 
seemed not only relegated to a remote past, but reduced to 
little more than a minor military incident. Devoid of perma- 
nent interest, it had no instructive features. Consequently, 
Kinglake's work fell unfinished from his hand; and unfinished 
it was destined to remain. 

Such is my recollection, and it is distinct. Unfortunately, 
however, I find in it much suggestive of Mr. Pierce's paper. 
Closer examination fails to reconcile recollection with re- 

1 2 Proceedings, x. 473-490. 

2 The substance of these several papers was subsequently reprinted under the 
title "Queen Victoria and the Civil War," in the volume entitled Studies: Mili- 
tary and Diplomatic, 375-413. 


corded facts. I could almost make affidavit to the accuracy 
of my memory; and yet, in the first place, the after-dinner 
talk in question could not, I find, have occurred in London, 
inasmuch as I do not recall having met Lord Houghton in 
London subsequent to the year 1870 — that of the Franco- 
German War. I did afterwards meet him in Boston, and in 
his company visited Plymouth, on Thanksgiving Day, 1875. 
It may well be that he then, or at that time in Boston, men- 
tioned this incident. Even if he did, however, the statement 
as now recalled comes in somewhat hard contact with the 
publisher's records, showing that the fifth volume of Kinglake 's 
history was published in 1875, the sixth in 1880, and the 
seventh and eighth, completing the work, as it stands, not 
until 1887. Thus though he may have temporarily lost in- 
terest in his subject, Kinglake went on with it, carrying his 
narrative into minutest detail, until within four years of his 
death, which occurred in January, 1891. 

All this to the contrary notwithstanding, I here repeat this 
Houghton-Kinglake anecdote for what it is worth. It has a 
bearing on my own present condition and the paper now sub- 
mitted; for the struggle to-day on in Europe in its immensity 
as well as immediate interest has undeniably produced on me a 
deadening influence very similar to that which, according to 
Lord Houghton, the Franco- German War of 1870-71 produced 
on Kinglake. It is much as if a geologist engaged upon some 
phase of his specialty suddenly found himself face to face with 
a tremendous catastrophic convulsion, occasioning what is 
known as a " fault." The evidence as well as the import of his 
investigation, buried under a more recent deposit, once for all 
became remote and secondary. 

Thus, during recent months, not only has my own interest 
in my work been impaired, but I have in ways not to be mis- 
taken had occasion to realize that the world, even here in 
America, has for the time being at least ceased to concern itself 
over our struggle of half a century back, and what I or others 
might have to say about it. While that struggle is quite for- 
gotten in Europe, its relative importance as the " greatest war in 
history," etc., etc., has even with us been perceptibly affected. 
A twice-told tale, it has, in a word, become, so to speak, an- 
cient history; it is relegated to companionship with our war 


for independence. Undoubtledy, here in America, at least, 
interest in it will hereafter revive. Nevertheless, for the 
present I am unpleasantly but unmistakably conscious of the 
fact that not only do I approach my topics in somewhat 
languid mood, but, when the results of my labor are in print, 
they will receive attention from almost no one. Possibly, how- 
ever, some future scholar or investigator may profit thereby. 

This premised I propose to submit to-day for entry in our 
Proceedings a body of historical material relating to the memo- 
rable proclamation conceding Confederate belligerency with 
consequent British neutrality issued by Her Majesty's Govern- 
ment, early in May, 1861. This measure, fought over by his- 
torians, lawyers and publicists, was throughout the succeeding 
ten years matter of constant discussion in this country and 
in England. Indeed, the issues arising from it, which at one 
time not only seemed to, but actually did, threaten the peace 
of nations, were not finally disposed of until the summer of 
1872, when the decisions of the Geneva Tribunal of Arbitra- 
tion were rendered. The proclamation was, at the time of its 
issuance, angrily denounced in this country, and for years 
afterwards it was assumed almost unanimously by American 
authorities and journalists as an undeniable proposition that, 
without due consideration, it was prematurely issued, the 
British governmental action being inspired by an unfriendly 
feeling toward the United States. On this head every one at 
all acquainted with the literature of the period will recall the 
utterances of Mr. Seward, then Secretary of State; as also the 
famous indirect damages contention of Mr. Sumner. This last, 
enunciated in the Senate, April 13, 1869, and subsequently 
incorporated into the American case prepared for the Geneva 
Arbitration, even gravely jeopardized at one time the highly 
desirable international adjustment effected as a result of the 
Treaty of Washington. 

In the case of Secretary Seward, I am well aware that recent 
historical investigators have thrown doubt on the degree of 
faith he himself felt in his own official utterances. Made, it is 
alleged, with an eye to temporary political effect, they were 
largely what is known as a " bluff." As such, it is suggested, 
they served their purpose. On the other hand, they are part 
of the official record; and, so far as that record is concerned, 


they are explicit. About them there is nothing suggestive of 
anything less than implicit belief. 1 

It is otherwise as respects Mr. Sumner. Elsewhere 2 I have 
discussed his belligerency thesis, and international conten- 
tions thereon. Mr. Sumner, however, was afflicted with such 
a rhetorical impulse, at once morbid and irresistible, and his 
tendency to excessive exaggeration in statement so grew upon 
him that he has ceased to be regarded as an authority on any 
question involving either what he deemed "The Cause," as he 
termed it, for the time being, or principles of international 
usage. If, however, the official records and utterances of 
Secretary Seward and Mr. Sumner are left out of considera- 
tion, no similar objection can be advanced to the attitude and 
language of Reverdy Johnson. Eminent as a lawyer during 
the war, and subsequent thereto distinctly representative in 
the Senate chamber of border state sentiment, Reverdy John- 
son, though politically a loyal Unionist, was neither an anti- 
slavery extremist nor a patriot to the exclusion of both obvious 
existing conditions and accepted international usage. In the 

1 The continued iteration by Mr. Seward of his belief that the "Rebellion" 
drew its entire strength from the expectation of being recognized by foreign na- 
tions and his faith that, if the Confederacy could once be thoroughly disabused of 
that expectation, that the Civil War would collapse, is set forth, together with 
other peculiarities of Mr. Seward's rhetoric and philosophy, in extracts from his 
despatches printed in the article entitled "American State Papers" in Black- 
wood's for May, 1863, lxi., of the American edition, 628-644. 

In the extracts there quoted, Mr. Seward says in a despatch dated 6th March, 
1862: "If Great Britain should revoke her decree concerning belligerent rights 
to the insurgents to-day, this civil strife, which is the cause of all the derangement 
of those relations, and the only cause of all apprehended dangers of that kind, 
would end to-morrow. The United States have continually insisted that the dis- 
turbers of their peace are mere insurgents, not lawful belligerents." 

Four days later, 10th March, 1862, he wrote: "Let the Governments of Great 
Britain and France rescind the decrees which concede belligerent rights to a 
dwindling faction in this country, and all their troubles will come to a speedy end." 

And Mr. Seward again says: "I have not failed to see that every wrong this 
country has been called to endure at the hands of any foreign power has been a 
natural if not a logical consequence of the first grave error which that power 
committed in conceding to an insurrection, which would otherwise have been 
ephemeral, the rights of a public belligerent." 

Finally in a despatch on the 5th of May, 1862: "We shall have peace and 
union in a very few months, let France and Great Britain do what they may. We 
should have them in one month if either the Emperor or the Queen should speak 
the word, and say, — If the life of this unnatural insurrection hangs on an expec- 
tation of our favour, let it die!" 

2 Lee at Appomattox and Other Papers, 101-103, 204-205. 



closing days of 1867 — two years and a half having then passed 
since the Confederacy fell — it was gravely, to all outward 
appearances, proposed in Congress to recognize Abyssinia as a 
belligerent because of the British military operations there 
conducted, known as "King Theodore's War." A senator 
from Michigan, Mr. Chandler, introduced the usual joint 
resolution, couched in the exact terms of the British proclama- 
tion of six years previous, in fact a paraphrase of it. Indeed, but 
for the debate which ensued over the disposition to be made of 
the resolve and Mr. Johnson's participation therein, 1 the whole 
episode bore somewhat the aspect of an ill-timed and distinctly 
undignified burlesque. In urging its adoption, Mr. Chandler 
asserted in support thereof that "no man pretends that the 
rebellion would ever have taken head but for the [British] 
proclamation of neutrality," which he claimed had in its re- 
sults occasioned the Union a loss of two hundred thousand 
lives and at least $2,000,000,000 of money. Opposing this 
proposed action, Senator Reverdy Johnson in the course of 
debate assumed as of course that the proclamation referred to 
had been a "gross error," unkind to America; and that Earl 
Russell, the Foreign Secretary, was not only then especially 
unfriendly, but at the later date was well understood to be an 
obstacle in the way of settlement. He added, "England owes it 
not only to us, but to her own honor to pay every dollar of the 
losses which American citizens sustained in consequence of the 
cruise" of the Confederate commerce destroyers. The question 
of belligerency was, he admitted, not necessarily connected 
with what were known as the "Alabama Claims," but the de- 
pendency of one upon the other was apparent. 2 Through- 
out, the now forgotten debate was typical of the attitude and 
utterances of the period. In it, anything and everything were 
assumed as "indisputable." 

Of all this, acquaintance might for the purposes of this paper 

1 Congressional Globe, 40th Congress, 2 Session, December 9, 1867, 83-88. 
The British expeditionary force directed against King Theodore was then pre- 
paring to move. Magdala, his capital, was stormed by the forces under Gen. 
R. C. Napier, subsequently created Lord Napier of Magdala, April 13, 1868, and 
King Theodore killed himself as the alternative to capture. The joint resolution 
referred to was continued on the Senate calendar until June 18 ensuing, when, 
on the motion of Senator Chandler, its further consideration was indefinitely 

2 Life of Reverdy Johnson, 229. 


fairly be assumed. Not so the official and other evidence which 
at the moment influenced Lord John Russell, furnishing the 
basis on which action was taken. Of this material, some, of 
course, has appeared in the English Blue Books, in the papers 
connected with the Geneva award and in the "Memoirs" 
of British and American public men since published. Of this I 
do not propose here to make any considerable use. It will be 
remembered, however, that a year ago Mr. Ford and I passed 
several weeks in London in search of unpublished material. 
It may also be remembered by some that subsequently, at our 
December meeting a year ago, I gave, in a conversational way, 
a partial account of what then took place; which, involving, as it 
did, matters of a more or less confidential nature, and statements 
as to collections of papers not public, does not appear in detail 
in our Proceedings, 1 though I occupied the better part of an 
hour. My present purpose is to submit, in a more formal way, 
a portion of what I then communicated, and to insert in our 
record a body of original historical material bearing upon the 
issuing of the Proclamation of May 13, 1861. In the first place, 
however, I must recur to certain statements I made a year ago, 
which, though of unquestionable historical interest, I thought 
best not to print. They relate to a singular usage which has 
almost from time immemorial prevailed in Great Britain, 
affecting to an extent not fully appreciated the facts and infer- 
ences to be drawn from the historical material there accessible. 
We hear a great deal from those interested in original re- 
search of public archives and access thereto, and of dates 
arbitrarily fixed by the various Foreign Offices at which those 
archives have been, or are to be, laid open to the investigator. 
It is, however, a bit confounding in this connection to learn, 
as we now are learning, that, so far at least as the Foreign 
Office of Great Britain is concerned, the papers there to be 
found are at times of somewhat secondary importance. A 
knowledge of the true inwardness of any given situation of a 
certain sort must be looked for elsewhere. More even than 
that, the papers on file in the Foreign Office are not unseldom 
even illusory. The statement is unquestionably startling; and 
how, it will be asked, did such a condition of affairs come about? 
The explanation is curious — English ! 
1 Proceedings, xlvii. 53. 


For at least two centuries now — indeed, ever since the 
British Foreign Office took its present form — a usage as to 
correspondence has prevailed in connection with it which has 
now to be reckoned with, a usage in no wise generally under- 
stood. As Parliament, far back in the eighteenth century — 
during, in fact, the Walpole epoch — gradually assumed the 
large State functions it has since developed, it became more 
and more a practice to call on those constituting the Ministry 
for papers relating to events connected with foreign affairs, 
especially correspondence. The modern Blue Book was thus 
gradually evolved. As the practice grew, its inconveniences 
made themselves felt. Both the Secretary for Foreign Affairs 
and those with whom he was in correspondence wrote under an 
ever-increasing sense of restraint. As the British diplomatic 
service was constituted, this, not unnaturally, resulted in two 
forms of correspondence and sets of records — first, the usual 
official exchanges, including instructions and despatches sub- 
ject to parliamentary call. These were at any time subject to 
being made public through the Blue Book. Meanwhile, on the 
other hand, a private interchange of letters, frequently familiar 
in tone as between old friends and perhaps relatives, would be 
going on between the representatives at certain of the foreign 
courts and the Secretary of Foreign Affairs. And here it is 
necessary to bear in mind a wide practical distinction existing 
between the British foreign service and our American State 
Department. In Great Britain diplomacy is a career, and in 
this respect, like the army and navy, those entering into it 
have been largely of the so-called, aristocratic class, including 
members of the peerage, or those connected therewith. Rela- 
tions, therefore, of an intimate or family character almost cus- 
tomarily existed between many of the representatives abroad 
and the various Foreign Secretaries. It is safe to say that no 
similar conditions, as a rule, have ever prevailed between the 
American State Department and our own representatives in 
diplomatic position. There have been, of course, exceptions to 
this general statement. For instance, while there is no evi- 
dence of any confidential and private correspondence between 
Mr. C. F. Adams and Secretary Seward during the seven years 
of the residence of the former in London, yet there is at Auburn 
a large amount of private correspondence carried on at the 

191 5-] THE BRITISH PROCLAMATION OF MAY, 1 86 1. 1 97 

same time between Secretary Seward and other diplomatic 
representatives, including more especially H. S. Sanford, the 
United States minister at Brussels, and John Bigelow, Consul 
General at Paris. This interchange does not, however, par- 
take of the intimate personal character of the letters between 
Lord Lyons, for instance, and Lord Granville and Lord Russell, 
or between Earl Cowley and the occupants of the Foreign 
Office during his long residence at Paris. 1 In other words, in 
the American case an element of formality was always percep- 
tible, whereas in the British case the interchange was not 
infrequently as that between personal friends. Essentially 
informal, examples will frequently appear in the papers I am 
about to submit. 

It was, moreover, in times of exigency that recourse was 
naturally had to this form of communication. Its conven- 
ience as between men who thoroughly understood each other 
is under such circumstances apparent. The formal despatches, 
constituting the great mass of the Foreign Office correspondence 
— 95 per cent of it, perhaps — were regularly filed in the 
official archives; and there they now are. The private com- 
munications, however, coming from the important embassies 
and relating generally to more or less critical situations, were 
considered as belonging to the First Secretary for the time 
being. This, moreover, became a recognized system, these 
private communications being almost invariably written with 
his own hand, by either Secretary or Minister, not coming under 
the eyes or to the knowledge of subordinates. As a rule, no 
copies of them seem to have been kept; and by both writer and 
recipient they were looked upon as altogether personal and 
confidential. The minister or ambassador, therefore, had his 
own private files, separate from the official files of Embassy or 
Foreign Office. The Secretary also had his similar files; and, 
when each retired from office, he carried his private files with 

1 Much later, during the McKinley and Roosevelt administrations (1898- 
1905), I am given to understand by our associate, Mr. W. R. Thayer, it was the 
practice of Mr. John Hay, when Secretary of State, to correspond on much 
more intimate terms with certain of the representatives abroad — especially 
Mr. Henry White — as, for example, in renewing negotiations for the abrogation 
of the Clayton-Bulwer treaty. The case was, however, altogether exceptional, 
and in some respects characteristic of Secretary Hay. As a rule, the absence 
of anything suggestive of personal relations is noticeable. 


him. Not belonging to the public offices, these files were, 
nevertheless, affected, so to speak, by a public interest; and, 
while the originals could only be found either among the pri- 
vate papers of the whilom foreign secretaries or ambassadors, 
it was, and is, distinctly understood that no historical use can 
be made of this material except with the consent and approval 
both of the family of the minister or ambassador in question 
and of the Foreign Office. 

Such were the British usage and understanding. Such they 
are now. Referring to it, Mr. Julian Corbett, in recently 
editing the private papers of the second Earl Spencer, First 
Lord of the Admiralty between the years 1794 and 1801, speaks 
as follows: " Intimate as they are, going deeper into the well- 
springs of history than do the regular official documents, such 
papers seldom or never find their way into the public archives 
of the kingdom, and but for the action of the Society and the 
public spirit of their owners would remain almost inaccessible 
to students." 

I now come to my own sources of information. In the 
present case, they are threefold. First, the Public Record 
Office. Secondly, the papers of Lord Lyons, including his con- 
fidential communications to the Foreign Secretary. These 
papers are deposited in Norfolk House, London; and of them 
considerable, though still only partial, use was made by Lord 
Newton in the preparation of his recently published Life of 
Lyons. Finally, the Russell papers. This last most valuable 
body of material was then (19 13) in the hands of Mr. Rollo 
Russell, a younger son of Earl Russell. Mr. Rollo Russell has 
since died, and the papers have been removed to the Public 
Record Office, where access to them is possible only with 
permission of certain trustees in whose hands they have been 
placed. I was so fortunate as to be in England a year before 
Mr. Russell's death, and was under much obligation to him. 
Not only did Mr. Ford find the papers well arranged and 
accessible, but Mr. Russell as respects them took the large 
view. He held them as in the nature of a public trust; and, 
so far as I at least was concerned, he construed the terms of 
that trust liberally. Every facility was afforded: every request 
was immediately complied with. 

As already intimated, the material about to be submitted 


is of the period preceding the issue of the Proclamation, and 
directly or indirectly throws light thereon. 

I begin with a letter from Robert Bunch, then British Consul 
at Charleston, South Carolina, to Lord Lyons. Written Feb- 
ruary 2, i860, nine months prior to the election of Abraham 
Lincoln, it affords illustration, amusing as well as suggestive, 
of the condition of mental bewilderment under which British 
officials connected with American affairs then labored. Whether 
in London or America, they seem in fact to have been at a total 
loss as to the proper significance to be attached to any passing 
incident or unexpected demonstration; in this respect, not un- 
like the Americans themselves of the same period. Yet to those 
on the spot the Foreign Secretary necessarily as well as natu- 
rally looked for light and guidance. 

Bunch wrote describing a dinner given the evening before 
(February 1, i860) by the Jockey Club of Charleston. Being 
called upon for a speech, he had alluded to the prizes of the 
turf at home, and incidentally referred to the plates run for in 
the various British colonies. Continuing, he said: 

"I cannot help calling your attention to the great loss you your- 
selves have suffered by ceasing to be a Colonial Dependency of 
Great Britain, as I am sure that if you had continued to be so the 
Queen would have had great pleasure in 'sending' you some Plates 

Of course this was meant for the broadest sort of joke, calcu- 
lated to raise a laugh after dinner; but to my amazement, the Com- 
pany chose to take me literally, and applauded for about ten minutes 
— in fact I could not go on for some time. 

Evidently Bunch hardly knew what to make of the demon- 
stration. He could not believe that South Carolina seriously 
wished to be reannexed to Great Britain, and he comments on 
the episode in a vein somewhat humorous. Nevertheless, 
in concluding his letter, he solemnly assures Lord Lyons 
that "the Jockey Club is composed of the 'best people' of 
South Carolina — rich planters and the like. It represents, 
therefore, the 'gentlemanly interest' and not a bit of universal 

It would be idle to assume that either in South Carolina or in 
England there was, in February, i860, any serious thought of a 
resumption of colonial relations. None the less, the talk then 


currently heard in Carolina social life was suggestive, and 
throws a strangely vivid gleam ot light on what both at the time 
and subsequently occurred. For instance, when fourteen 
months later, in April, 1861, William H. Russell of the Times 
was in Charleston, immediately after the bombardment of 
Sumter, and less than a month before the British proclamation 
of neutrality, he thus wrote of what he heard at this same 
Consul Bunch's dinner- table : " Again cropping out of the 
dead level of hate to the Yankee, grows its climax in the pro- 
fession from nearly every one of the guests, that he would 
prefer a return to British rule to any reunion with New Eng- 
land." 1 

In like tenor, telling a few days later of a visit to the White 
House Plantation near Charleston, Russell describes how 
" after dinner the conversation returned to the old channel — all 
the frogs praying for a king — anyhow a prince — to rule over 
them." 2 He goes on: 

After dinner the conversation again turned on the resources and 
power of the South, and on the determination of the people never 
to go back into the Union. Then cropped out again the expression 
of regret for the rebellion of 1776, and the desire that if it came to 
the worst, England would receive back her erring children, or give 
them a prince under whom they could secure a monarchical form of 
government. There is no doubt about the earnestness with which 
these things are said. 3 

Accordingly, writing under date of April 30, Russell, in a 
letter on the state of South Carolina, which appeared in the 
issue of the Times of May 28, thus expressed himself: 

Shades of George III., of North, of Johnson, of all who contended 
against the great rebellion which tore these colonies from England, 
can you hear the chorus which rings through the State of Marion, 
Sumter, and Pinckney, and not clap your ghostly hands in triumph? 
That voice says, "If we could only get one of the Royal race of 
England to rule over us, we should be content." Let there be no 
misconception on this point. That sentiment, varied in a hundred 
ways, has been repeated to me over and over again. There is a 
general admission that the means to such an end are wanting, and 
that the desire cannot be gratified. But the admiration for mo- 
narchical institutions on the English model, for privileged classes, 

1 My Diary, I. 171. 2 lb., 188. » lb., 193. 


and for a landed aristocracy and gentry, is undisguised and appar- 
ently genuine. With the pride of having achieved their independence 
is mingled in the South Carolinians' hearts a strange regret at the 
result and consequences, and many are they who "would go back 
to-morrow if we could." l 

Recurring, however, to Consul Bunch, when in December, 
i860, secession was really determined upon, he found a very 
different sentiment to report, and himself held quite posi- 
tive opinions in regard to the arrogance and bombast of 
the citizens of Charleston. Writing to Lyons, December 14, 
i860, he told how, returning to his home one evening, he 
met a military company, which from curiosity he followed, 
and which 

drew up in front of the residence of a young Lawyer of my friends, 
after performing in whose honour, through the medium of a very 
brassy band, a Secession Schottische or Palmetto Polka, it clam- 
orously demanded his presence. After a brief interval he appeared, 
and altho' he is in private life an agreeable and moderately sensible 
young man, he succeeded, to my mind at any rate, in making most 
successfully, what Mr. Anthony Weller calls "an Egyptian Mummy 
of his self." The amount of balderdash and rubbish which he 
evacuated about mounting the deadly breach, falling back into the 
arms of his comrades and going off generally in a blaze of melo- 
dramatic fireworks, really made me so unhappy that I lost my 
night's rest. So soon as the speech was over the Company was in- 
vited into the house to "pour a libation to the holy cause" — in the 
vernacular, to take a drink and spit on the floor. 

Evidently Southern eloquence jarred on the ears of the British 
Consul. It may be, however, that another item recorded in this 
letter increased his tendency to criticism. 

The Church Bells are ringing like mad in celebration of a newly 
revived festival, called "Evacuation Day," being the nefastus ilk 
dies in which the bloody Britishers left Charleston seventy-eight 
years ago. It has fallen into utter disuse for about fifty years, but 
is now suddenly resuscitated apropos de nothing at all. 

Judging by the material now brought to light, British con- 
sular and diplomatic opinion was in a very noticeable degree 
slower in making up its mind on the issues involved in our 

1 Proceedings, xlvi. 310. 


struggle, and far more considerate to the Union side in express- 
ing itself, than was the British newspaper press. It has been 
asserted by historians that the South had so long been domi- 
nant in Washington, and that society there was so distinctly 
pro-slavery in i860, that foreign representatives naturally 
framed the accounts sent to their governments with strong 
Confederate proclivities. However this may be of other rep- 
resentatives, it does not hold good of the British Minister, Lord 
Lyons. From the first he occupied a noticeably impartial atti- 
tude, reporting with accuracy the results of elections in No- 
vember, i860, describing the consequent secession movement, 
the resignation of federal officials, and in general criticising 
the secession measures as "ill judged." He was in the begin- 
ning optimistic as to the existence of a conservative element in 
the slave states, and believed Lincoln himself to be in close 
touch with the more influential men so inclined. Throughout 
this period of obscure groping Lyons expressed his earnest hope 
that there might be no break-up of the Union. From England, 
Lord John Russell responded a similar hope. Nevertheless it is 
evident that the Foreign Secretary felt apparently certain 
that if a rupture did take place, it could only result in com- 
plete and final separation. So believing, he instructed Lyons, 
December 26, i860, not to express any opinion which "events 
may contradict" and not "to seem to favor one party rather 
than the other." Indeed, Lyons was expected to refrain from 
all advice, unless asked for it by the state Governments; in 
which case he or the British Consuls were to advise against 
violence as tending toward civil war. 

From that moment, when it was apparent that South Caro- 
lina was likely to lead the way in the secession movement, the 
problem had presented itself as to what would be the position of 
the British Consul at Charleston with regard to the collection 
of import duties at that port. On December 12, i860, Lyons 
instructed Bunch to write to him presenting the case so that it 
might be communicated to the United States government. This 
Bunch did, and December 31 the matter was presented to 
Jeremiah S. Black, then acting as Secretary of State in Buchan- 
an's Cabinet, having succeeded Lewis Cass. Black's answer 
was evasive. He replied that the United States must regard 
events in Charleston as acts of violent rebellion, and that the 

ig 1 5-] THE BRITISH PROCLAMATION OF MAY, 1 86 1. 203 

payment of duties to South Carolina officials would be unlawful ; 
but he refused to say what steps the Federal Government would 
take in regard to Bunch if he advised British merchants to pay 
these duties to South Carolina. 

From the first, also, Lyons believed that Great Britain would 
find itself in a quandary because of the opposing influence of its 
anti-slavery sentiments and its commercial interests. He 
accordingly wrote (December 12, i860) to Bunch: "The 
domestic Slavery of the South is a bitter pill which it will be 
hard enough to get the English to swallow. But if the Slave 
Trade is to be added to the dose, the least squeamish British 
stomach will reject it." 

With the formal secession of South Carolina, Lord John 
Russell felt that the end of the Union had come. In a private 
letter to Lyons, January 10, 1861, he thus summed up his 
opinion : 

I do not see how the United States can be cobbled together again 
by any compromise. South Carolina declares that by the original 
compact she has a right to secede, and she does secede. Lincoln's 
party declare that secession means rebellion, and must be put 
down by force. If force is not used no concession will satisfy S. 
Carolina. If force is used and is successful the South falls into a 
state of helpless dependence, and slavery will be abolished. 

I cannot see any mode of reconciling such parties as these. 
The best thing now would be that the right to secede should be 
acknowledged, and that there should be separation — one Repub- 
lic to be constituted on the principle of freedom and personal 
liberty, the other on the principle of Slavery and mutual surrender 
of fugitives. 

I hope sensible men will take this view, and cease to struggle for a 
compromise. But above all I hope no force will be used. 

It seems to me that the South has an enormous advantage in 
having two months more of a favourable Executive. By the 4th 
of March the position of the three States will be impregnable, ex- 
cept by mutiny and rebellion of the slaves. 

I suppose Buchanan meant by his message to dissolve the Union. 
This was a great responsibility to take upon himself. But in a legal 
sense I think the South in the right. The Personal Liberty Laws 
are contrary to the intention of the Constitution, and the Fugitive 
Slave Law. In a new Constitution the recovery of Slaves from 
another State ought not to be sanctioned. 

Preach against force and civil war. 


In this letter it will be observed slavery is depicted as a 
cause, the legal right of the South to secede is accepted, and Rus- 
sell's hope lies in a possible peaceable separation. The same 
day official instructions were sent permitting Bunch to remain 
at Charleston, and instructing him that if asked to recognize 
South Carolina he should refer the question to the Foreign 
Office. "If his consular acts are not acknowledged, he should 
suspend his functions and report to me and your Lordship such 
refusal to acknowledge his acts." Subsequently it appears that 
the practical solution of the issue presented as to the payment 
of customs dues at Charleston, as devised by Consul Bunch, 
consisted in his advising those in control of British ships to pay 
the duties to the State authorities " under protest" as done 
" under compulsion." Thus any definite and important deci- 
sion as to British attitude toward the State, claiming to be inde- 
pendent and sovereign, was avoided. The opinion of the 
Foreign Secretary that there could be no rehabilitation of the 
Union is shown also in a letter from Lord John Russell to 
Lyons, of January 22, 1861, in which the statement is made, 
"I suppose the break-up of the Union is now inevitable." 

At this stage of development there was, of course, no more 
conception of the intensity and magnitude the struggle 
was to assume in Great Britain than in the United States. 
Russell indeed still hoped that the quarrel might yet in 
some way be arranged. Nevertheless, as Foreign Secretary 
he was compelled to face an actual situation — the con- 
nection of the issue presented with British commerce. So, 
February 16, we find he wrote to Lyons as follows, reflecting 
from abroad not unfairly the condition of bewilderment then 
prevailing on this side of the Atlantic — the period of the 
Peace Congress: 

Events in the U. S. have been so astounding that I have been 
quite unable to know what to expect. At the same time the pro- 
ceedings of President, Senate and H. of Reps, have appeared to me 
so foolish and aimless that I could not expect a good result. Presi- 
dent Lincoln, looming in the distance is a still greater peril than 
President Buchanan. 

The only hope I have is in Virginia where Washington seems to 
have left his mantle. A general Convention, a universal Armistice, 
and a fair deliberation on terms of amity seem to me to afford the 
only chance of either repairing the broken chain, or taking up the 


separate links for a new combination. I fear our San Juan plan 
will break thro'. 

Above all things endeavour to prevent a blockade of the South- 
ern Coast. It would produce misery, discord, and enmity incal- 

I am sure your calmness and good sense will direct our Consuls 
to avoid provoking national quarrels. Mr. Bunch seems to me to 
have been very discreet. 

Within a week, W. E. Forster, a staunch and unquestioned 
friend of the national side throughout the war about to take 
place, was interrogating the Ministry in the House of Commons 
in regard to the situation at Charleston, and expressing the 
hope that England would not attempt in any way to interfere 
in the conflict in America. 1 Thus British commercial interests 
were forcing a keener attention to the American situation, and 
already men in governmental circles were asking themselves 
what should be the proper attitude toward the contest; how 
soon the new Southern Confederacy could claim European 
recognition; how far and how fast European governments 
ought to go in acknowledging such a claim; what indeed was to 
be the proper policy and position of a neutral power, should a 
declaration of neutrality be found necessary. 

With these questions rapidly assuming shape, it became de- 
sirable for British public characters to know something about 
the persons leading in the Southern movement, the attitude of 
the people in general and the purposes of the newly established 
Montgomery government. Here, unfortunately, Lord Lyons 
could be no guide. He was cognizant indeed of the negotiations 
subsequently conducted at Washington, but ventured no posi- 
tive opinion, even though he, like others, seems at first to have 
been convinced that there could be no reunion. The consuls 
in the South, however, were in better position to give their 

The despatches of Consul Bunch sent at this time to the 
Foreign Secretary constitute, in the light of subsequent events, 
a highly interesting series. Dated from the British Consulate at 
Charleston in February and March, 1861, and marked "Con- 
fidential," they all reached the Foreign Office before the Gov- 
ernment found itself called upon to take any decided action, 

1 Hansard, Vol. 161, 814. February 22, 1861. 


and doubtless exercised a very considerable influence on the 
minds of those responsible for such action. The first of these 
communications was dated February 28, and in its essential 
parts reads as follows: 

Since the date of my Dispatch to your Lordship of the 2 2d In- 
stant, in which I had the honour to transmit the Inaugural Address 
of Mr. Jefferson Davis, the President of the "Confederate States 
of America," the appointments of most of the Cabinet Officers have 
been made and confirmed by the Congress. So far as I am informed, 
they stand thus: 

Secretary of State, Mr. Robert Toombs, of Georgia; 

Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. C. G. Memminger, of South Carolina; 

Secretary of War, Mr. Leroy P. Walker, of Alabama; 

Secretary of the Navy, Mr. Stephen Mallory, of Florida; 

Post Master General, Mr. H. T. Ellet, of Mississippi; 

Attorney-General, Mr. Judah P. Benjamin, of Louisiana. 

Before proceeding to offer to Your Lordship a few remarks upon 
the position and character of such of the above-named Gentlemen 
as I am acquainted with, either personally or by their reputation, 
I take leave to allude briefly to the President and Vice-President of 
the new Confederacy. . . . 

. . . The views of Mr. Davis on all the questions of domestic 
policy which have agitated this Republic since his introduction into 
public life have been of the extremest Southern and Pro-Slavery 
character. He is a firm believer in the "manifest destiny" of the 
South to overrun and convert into slave-holding States of a South- 
ern Confederacy, Mexico, Central America and Cuba. He was a 
warm advocate of the expeditions of Lopez, Walker and other Fili- 
busters, and has endeared himself to the most advanced party of 
States' Rights men by his uncompromising support, in the Senate, 
of their doctrines. But I believe that his Election is attributable in a 
still greater degree to the high opinion which is entertained of his 
military capabilities. As it is confidently believed throughout the 
Southern Country that a Civil war is to result from the dissolution 
of the Union, it has been deemed prudent that the functions of 
Commander-in-Chief, which belong to the President, should be 
discharged by one who is both willing and able to take the field in 
case of necessity. His Election to the Presidency is most warmly 
welcomed by persons of all shades of political opinion. 

Mr. Stephens, the Vice President, is a lawyer by profession, and 
about fifty years of age. He has been for many years a Member 
of the House of Representatives in Washington, where his elo- 


quence has brought him some reputation. He is the Leader of the 
Moderate party in Georgia, and would, probably, not be very averse 
to the re-construction of the Union, could such be effected upon 
the basis of a proper security for the constitutional rights of the 

Mr. Toombs, the Secretary of State, has been a Senator of the 
United States, and has occupied, otherwise, positions of importance 
in the Country. So far as I can learn his talents do not lie in the 
line of Diplomacy, as he is a violent and impulsive man. His ora- 
torical powers are considered great, but they will scarcely be of 
much use in his present position. He is a man of the most advanced 
opinions; a Secessionist of the worst kind. I view his appoint- 
ment as an unfortunate one, as it gives him practically the controul 
of the foreign policy of the Confederacy. It is hoped, however, that 
he will not hold the Office long. 

Mr. Memminger, the Secretary of the Treasury, is a South Caro- 
linian by birth, the reputed son of a low German, and brought up 
in the Orphan House of this City. He is a lawyer by profession, and 
a clear headed man. But he is notoriously uncertain in his con- 
duct, a failing which has interfered with his success in his own State. 
Even now it is believed that his feelings are not enlisted in the 
present movement, the possibility of which he openly ridiculed but 
six months ago. He has been selected for the Treasury on account 
of his financial aptitude and great powers of sustained labour. 

Of the remaining Members of the Cabinet there is not much to be 
said. They are all more or less known in their own States and even 
in the general politics of the Country. Messrs. Mallory and Benja- 
min have both been in the Senate of the United States. But I am 
compelled to say that, with the single exception of the President, 
not one of the Statesmen of the new Confederacy rises above that 
dead level of mediocrity to which the popular institutions of this 
Republic seem to have condemned its political leaders. The bom- 
bastic self-glorification, so common in the United States, sees in 
every ordinary speaker a Burke, in every moderately clever lawyer 
an Eldon, in every Captain of Militia a Napoleon or a Wellington; 
but I fear that the general opinion of the world will hardly recog- 
nize such claims when preferred on behalf of the present leaders of 
public opinion in this Country, whether at the North or South. 

In the uncertainty which hangs over everything connected with 
even the immediate condition of the Southern Confederacy, it 
would be premature, and under any circumstances, perhaps, un- 
necessary, that I should trespass upon Your Lordship's leisure with 
any observations respecting its possible future. But I venture, 
upon the ground of my long residence in the United States, and 


principally of my knowledge of the Southern Country, to express 
to Your Lordship my firm conviction that the new Republic will 
never rise to eminence as a great power of the earth. It is, in the 
first place, founded upon the possession of what may be called a 
monopoly of one single production — Cotton. So soon as this 
Staple is subjected to competition, (and may that day soon arrive) 
so soon as its cultivation is impeded or destroyed by causes either 
physical or political; so soon as some cheaper or more available fibre 
shall be substituted for it, from that moment does the importance 
of these Southern States diminish and their claim to consideration 
disappear. But this new Confederacy is based, in the second place, 
upon the preservation and extension of Negro Slavery. It seems, 
to my humble judgment, quite impossible that in the present age 
of the world, a Government avowedly established for such purposes 
can meet with the sympathy and encouragement which are as neces- 
sary to Nations as to Individuals, or that a system should be suc- 
cessfully inaugurated which starts upon a principle of defiance to 
the sentiments of nature and of civilization. I do not, of course, 
mean that Foreign Nations are to interfere with the domestic insti- 
tutions or plan of labour of these new States, but I do believe that 
they will be practically ostracized by the public opinion of the 
world, and only considered, under the most favourable circum- 
stances, as growers of Cotton and of Rice. But there is still another 
ground upon which the new Confederacy is likely to rouse the sus- 
ceptibilities of Foreign Governments and to create an unfavourable 
impression abroad, that is to say, the filibustering tendencies which, 
I feel assured, will develop themselves so soon as the dread of war 
with the North shall have proved unfounded. These propensities 
may, it is true, be easily restrained by the action of the great Powers 
of Europe, but the desire to carry them into practice will exist, and 
will, doubtless, have to be repressed. 

The next despatch is dated March 21, and was received at 
the Foreign Office on the 9th of April — that is, three days prior 
to the attack on Sumter. It reads as follows: 

The Congress of the Confederate States, held at Montgomery, 
adjourned on the 16th Instant, to meet again at the same place on 
the 2nd of May. Amongst other acts of public importance ema- 
nating from it to which I shall take occasion to invite Your Lordship's 
attention by this Mail is to be found the appointment of Commis- 
sioners to the various Courts of Europe. I propose in the present 
Despatch to submit a few remarks to Your Lordship on the subject 
of these gentlemen and their Mission. 


The Commissioners are three in number; Mr. Dudley Mann, of 
Virginia, Mr. Yancey, of Alabama, and Mr. P. A. Rost, of Louisiana. 
It is stated that they have already left Montgomery for New Orleans 
where they will embark for the Havana, taking from thence the 
English Mail Steamer to Southampton, on the 27th Instant. 

Mr. Dudley Mann, the son of a bankrupt grocer in the eastern 
part of Virginia, has been called to his present post by the Southern 
Congress in consequence of his having had some experience of what 
is known here as " Court life," meaning, the management of public 
affairs in Europe. His appointment has given great dissatisfaction 
to many persons in the South, . . . partly on account of his having 
been brought from a State which is not a Member of the Southern 
Confederacy. He is, moreover, given in the Official Lists as be- 
longing to Ohio, an Abolition State, his appointment as Under 
Secretary of State under the Government of Washington having 
been made from that State. Mr. Mann has been employed on sev- 
eral occasions in Europe, having negotiated a Treaty on behalf of 
the United States with Switzerland, and having been sent by Mr. 
Webster into Hungary, in 1850, with a roving Commission, to 
encourage the Hungarians, a fact of which the Government of 
Austria was fully sensible, and of which it shewed its appreciation 
by declaring, through its Minister at Washington, that it would 
hang Mr. Mann without scruple in case of necessity. On his return 
from this Mission, he was made Under Secretary of State, after the 
termination of which employment he was interested in the attempt 
to establish direct trade by steam between the Southern States and 
Europe. He is said by those who knew him well to be a mere trad- 
ing Politician, possessing no originality of mind and no special 
merit of any description. 

Mr. Yancey is a lawyer of very considerable repute in the State 
of Alabama, and, undoubtedly, a man of ability. But the line of 
his talent is not supposed to lie in the direction of Diplomacy. He 
is a fluent speaker, admirably adapted for "stump" oratory, and 
possessing much power over the masses, but he is impulsive, erratic 
and hot-headed; a rabid Secessionist, a favourer of a revival of the 
Slave Trade and a "Filibuster" of the extremest type of "manifest 
destiny." His services to the cause of Secession have been great, 
and it is felt that he has a claim to anything which he may choose to 
demand. It is supposed that he has made a point of his nomination 
to this Mission, and that he could not be refused. 

The third Commissioner, Judge Rost, is altogether unknown to 
me, and so far as I can learn, to everyone else. He is stated to be a 
respectable sugarplanter from Opelousas, in Louisiana, and this 
seems to comprise all that can be said respecting him. 



I am not in a position to offer to Your Lordship any trustworthy 
observations upon the character of the Instructions with which the 
Commissioners have been furnished, but I feel perfectly assured 
that they are predicated upon the fact of the vital, absolute neces- 
sity to Europe, and, of course, especially to Great Britain, of Cotton, 
which is supposed here to warrant the Confederate States in taking 
high ground, and in treating their recognition by Foreign Powers 
as a matter of comparative indifference, unless it be granted on their 
own terms. Their exaggerated idea of the importance of the South- 
ern States to Great Britain is really ludicrous. It actually amounts 
to the belief, conscientiously entertained, that to withhold the 
supply of Cotton for one year, would be to plunge England into a 
Revolution which would alter the whole condition of her existence. 
Courteous of manner, as I am bound in justice to say that the better 
classes of Southerners are to Foreign Representatives, the exulta- 
tion which they feel at having placed us in the position of depend- 
ents on their pleasure, cannot be concealed in their conversations 
with me, whilst those with whom I am at all familiar openly tell me 
that we cannot live without them. Disliking us violently as the 
Southern people do, on account of our hostility to Slavery, the sup- 
posed opportunity of humiliating us is too tempting to be allowed to 
slip, and I shall be much mistaken if Your Lordship does not dis- 
cover the existence of this feeling should the Commissioners be 
honoured by personal intercourse with you. 

But the Envoys will also carry with them the means of enlisting 
the good will of the great commercial Nations of Europe towards 
their Confederacy in the liberal character of their Tariff, which will, 
at the least, offer a marked contrast to the stringent regulations 
recently adopted by the United States. The Southern Congress 
has adjourned without actually passing the new Tariff which I 
erroneously informed Your Lordship, in my Dispatch, No. 35 of the 
14th Instant, that it had adopted, but there is no doubt that its 
provisions will be carried out, with some small modifications, as 
soon as the Congress shall re-assemble. This, with the opening of 
the Coasting trade to foreigners will, I make no doubt, be urged by 
the Commissioners as a strong ground for recognition. 

The third and last despatch which is of importance in the 
present connection was dated April 19, and was received at 
the Foreign Office on the 10th of May — four days before the 
arrival of Mr. Adams. Already, a week before, on the second 
of the month, the three Commissioners — Yancey, Rost and 
Mann — had been granted an informal interview, in no way 
implying recognition, by the Foreign Secretary. The legal 


questions involved in the action of the Federal Government 
had been referred to the law advisers of the Crown. On the 6th 
of May Lord John Russell formally announced in the Commons 
the policy of neutrality and that belligerent rights would con- 
sequently be conceded to the Confederacy. On the 9th, Sir 
George Lewis, the Secretary of War, communicated to Par- 
liament the Queen's Proclamation. On the nth, President 
Lincoln's Proclamation of Blockade was officially communi- 
cated to the British Government by Mr. Dallas. On the 14th, 
the day before the arrival of Mr. Adams in London, the Queen's 
Proclamation appeared in the Gazette. The following despatch, 
therefore, arrived too late to exercise any influence on the 
action of the government, but it nevertheless was distinctly 
confirmatory of the conclusions previously arrived at and upon 
which action had been based. It reads as follows: 

Since the fall of Fort Sumter on the 13th Instant there has been 
no event of marked importance within the State of South Carolina. 
The Squadron of Men of War and Transports which was to be seen 
off the Harbour of Charleston during the attack upon the Fort has 
disappeared, and no attempt has been made either to retake the 
Fort or to retaliate upon the Confederate Forces, although this 
matter would be easy in their present exposed and disorganized con- 
dition. Thus far in the contest, the military movements of the 
United States have been characterized only by weakness and inde- 
cision. No advantage has been taken of their manifest superiority 
in numbers, and especially of the possession of the entire Navy. We 
can only hope that this vacillation proceeds from a desire on the 
part of Mr. Lincoln to avoid, if it be possible, a civil war. 

In the meantime, the Southern cause is daily gaining strength, 
and I have no doubt whatever that the whole fifteen Slave-holding 
States will soon be united under the Flag of the Confederate States. 
North Carolina, which forms a portion of this Consular District, 
is on the high road to Secession, having already taken possession 
of the Federal Forts by order of the Governor, Mr. Ellis. 

In the event of actual conflict I am inclined to think that the 
South will, at the least, hold its own with the United States. It is 
true that it is inferior in Population, Resources, and general en- 
lightenment to its gigantic neighbour, but then it is thoroughly in 
earnest, and there is no difference of opinion amongst its inhabi- 
tants. They all believe that they will have to fight for their very 
existence, and above all, to save their wives and children from the 
fury of the servile race. The North, on the contrary, is greatly 


divided in sentiment. Thousands there side with the South in this 
unhappy question, and even of those who desire to maintain the 
integrity of the Union, a large proportion are not prepared to coerce 
their brethren into a permanent connexion with a Government 
which is distasteful to them. 

Fears are entertained by many that the Union of the fifteen Slave 
states may increase the probabilities of war. I do not incline to this 
opinion, but rather believe that the very aspect of such an unan- 
imity of purpose may deter the Government of Mr. Lincoln, or, 
what is of more consequence, the conservative portion of the North, 
from commencing a conflict which can only end in the ruin of both 
sections of this distracted Country. A very few weeks must decide 
the question. The success of Fort Sumter has increased the warlike 
feeling here, but even here the difference is fully appreciated be- 
tween the defence of their own soil and a war of aggression beyond 
its limits. 

While Consul Bunch's entire characterization was condemna- 
tory, it will be noted that he never questioned the fact that the 
South had already actually established its independence. This 
he seems indeed to take for granted. The influence of such a 
conclusion reached by an intelligent official on the spot upon 
the mind of the Foreign Secretary at just this formative period 
is obvious. 

Up to the end of January, 1861, Lyons had not reported in 
any detail his views as to the administration about to be in- 
stalled at Washington. The make-up of the incoming Cabinet 
of President Lincoln was indeed yet uncertain; that Seward 
would be Secretary of State had been made known, and it 
was assumed that his would be the controlling influence in the 
Cabinet. At this time the inchoate " Premier " was deeply 
involved in those attempts at Southern conciliation which, now 
matter of familiar history, later drew upon him much criti- 
cism. Occasionally, however, the foreign representative found 
some opportunity to talk with the senator from New York, 
and on February 4, 1861, in an official letter to Russell, Lord 
Lyons says: 

Mr. Seward's real view of the state of the country appears to be, 
that if bloodshed can be avoided until the new Government is 
installed, the seceding States will in no long time return to the Con- 
federation. He has unbounded confidence in his own skill in man- 
aging the American people. He thinks that with the influence and 


the Patronage of the Federal Government at his command, he shall 
have little difficulty in turning the tide of popular feeling in the 
South. He thinks that in a few months the evils and hardships 
produced by secession will become intolerably grievous to the 
Southern States; that they will be completely reassured as to the 
intentions of the Administration; and that the conservative element 
which is now kept under the surface by the violent pressure of the 
Secessionists, will emerge with irresistible force. From all these 
causes he confidently expects that when the Elections for the State 
Legislatures are held in the Southern States in November next, the 
Union party will have a clear majority, and will bring the seced- 
ing States back into the Confederation. He then hopes to place 
himself at the head of a strong Union party, having extensive 
ramifications both in the North and in the South, and to make 
Union or Disunion, not Freedom or Slavery the watchwords of 
Political Parties. I am afraid he would not be reluctant to provide 
excitement for the public mind by raising questions with Foreign 

In all this Mr. Seward seems to take it for granted that Mr. 
Lincoln will leave the whole management of affairs to him. 

The series of despatches and even more the private letters 
now exchanged between Lord Lyons and Lord John Russell 
are of exceptional interest, throwing, as they do, much light 
upon the disposition of those then representing Great Britain 
and guiding its policy. They disclose the information upon 
which action was based. The most noticeable feature was, 
perhaps, the complete absence of guidance, so far as those 
about to be responsible for the American outcome were con- 
cerned, and the consequent utter impossibility under which 
the foreign representative labored of forming any accurate 
forecast of the policy proper, under the circumstances, to be 
pursued. The divergence of individual judgment was com- 
plete; yet everyone, groping his own way, none the less felt 
the utmost confidence in the conclusions he had reached, 
quite irrespective of the altogether different conclusions 
reached by others. Throughout the British correspondence 
this confusion of thought and council is reflected. The 
following, for instance, is from a despatch of Lord Lyons to 
Consul Bunch in Charleston, South Carolina, written De- 
cember 12, i860 — immediately after the election of Lincoln 
and before the secession of South Carolina had actually taken 
place : 


I wrote to Lord J[ohn] R[ussell] concerning some of the puzzling 
questions likely to be raised by the secession of South Carolina. 
. . . Your conversation with Mr. Pitt is very important. ... I am 
afraid the very exaggerated and very false ideas they have in the 
South about cotton will lead to very foolish conduct. It is true that 
cotton is almost a necessity to us, but it is still more necessary for 
them to sell it than it is for us to buy it. Besides there are plenty 
of places where cotton can be grown. The only difficulty is to pro- 
duce it as cheaply as in these States: the moment the price rises 
above a certain point it will be extensively cultivated in many parts 
of the world. 

Suppose the notion of the South's withholding its cotton could 
possibly be realised, it is evident from all experience that other 
cotton would be got elsewhere or a substitute be found and that the 
old state of things would never return. 

It seems to be very generally thought here, that the S. C'ians 
will be persuaded to let the U. S. Customs Authorities work on for 
a time, until the negotiations for an amicable secession either suc- 
ceed or are abandoned. If not, I suppose the Fed. Gov. must either 
send a man-of-war to collect the duties or must make some arrange- 
ment, by which foreign vessels as well as those of the non-seceding 
States must be saved from incurring loss or inconvenience from its 
neglecting to do so. Technically, I suppose it might declare Charles- 
ton to be no longer a Port of Entry, and then treat all vessels landing 
cargoes there as smugglers. But I do not suppose it would resort to a 
childish measure of this kind. 

The following letter from Lord Lyons to Lord John Russell, 
dated Washington, January 7, 1861, is marked " Private and 
Confidential." A portion of the letter has already been used 
by Lord Newton in his Life of Lord Lyons (1. 30). 

With regard to Great Britain, I cannot help fearing that he 
[Seward] will be a dangerous Foreign Minister. His view of the 
Relations between the United States and Great Britain has always 
been that they are a good material to make political Capital of. 
He thinks at all events that they may be safely played with — with- 
out any risk of bringing on a war. He has even to me avowed his 
belief that England will never go to war with the United States. 
He has generally taken up any cry against Us — but this, he says, 
he has done from friendship, to prevent the other Party's appro- 
priating it, and doing more harm with it, than he has done. The 
temptation will be great for Lincoln's Party, if they be not actually 
engaged in Civil War, to endeavour to divert the Public excitement 

191 5-] THE BRITISH PROCLAMATION OF MAY, 1 86 1. 21 5 

to a Foreign Quarrel. I do not think Mr. Seward would contem- 
plate actually going to war with us, but he would be well disposed 
to play the old game of seeking popularity hereby displaying inso- 
lence towards us. I don't think it will be so good a game for him, 
as it used to be, even supposing we give him an apparent Triumph; 
but I think he is likely to try to play it. 

This makes me more than ever impatient to settle the San Juan 
and Hudson's Bay Questions. I confess however I am almost in 
despair about them. If General Cass had staid in office, I really 
believe the thing might have been done in time. The choice of the 
Attorney General, Mr. Black, for a successor to him is most unfor- 
tunate. He is a lawyer, who can only attend to one thing at a time, 
and neglects all other business now in order, I suppose, to give the 
President legal advice on the Crisis. There are not eight weeks left 
of Mr. Buchanan's Administration. It was impossible to get the 
simplest bit of business through Mr. Black's office in that time, 
when he was Attorney General. 

In a letter, marked " Private," of January 21, 1861, Lyons 
wrote to William S. Lindsay, M.P., subsequently so pro- 
nounced a Confederate sympathizer: 

... It is really impossible to get any of the official people here to 
give a moment's attention to any matter, however important, which 
has not a direct bearing upon the question of the dissolution of the 
confederacy. Each time I have entered with them upon the subject 
of your proposals they have been less heedful of what I have said. 
Still I think I might have done something, had the men who dis- 
cussed the subject with you remained in office. But General Cass, 
Mr. Cobb and Mr. Trescott have all abandoned the Administration. 
From the President himself, harassed as he is with dissensions in his 
Cabinet, as well as with the perilous state of the country, one can 
hardly expect attention to the details of other business. The new 
Secretary of State is rarely to be found at the State Department, 
and is seldom or never prepared to speak upon any other subject 
than the crisis. The Members of Congress are as little disposed as 
the Members of the Executive Government to turn their attention 
.to matters less exciting than disunion and civil war. In fact the 
house is on fire, and neither those who are fanning the flames nor 
those who are endeavouring to extinguish them, can think of any- 
thing but the conflagration. 

In a letter to Lord John Russell, dated January 21, 1861, 
marked "Private," Lyons said: 


The absence from his Post of Mr. Tulin, the Consul at Mobile, 
in Alabama, is inconvenient. There is an idea that the Southern 
Congress will be held at Montgomery the Capital of that State — 
and it might be convenient to have some one who could be depended 
upon to watch its proceedings. To send a special Agent, whether 
avowedly as British Agent or not, would probably give rise to a 
great deal of suspicion and annoyance here and in the North. It 
would raise awkward questions, if we were to appoint a new Consul 
at this moment for an Exequatur: the seceding State would prob- 
ably not allow a Consul to act, who held an Exequatur from the 
Federal Government granted since the Secession. 

The following extract from a letter of Charles Greville to 
Lord Clarendon, written at this time, and printed in Maxwell's 
Life of Clarendon (n. 237), throws incidental light upon the 
views as respects cotton as an industrial staple, the institu- 
tion of slavery, and the possible impending outcome of the 
American situation, somewhat vaguely entertained by promi- 
nent English public men: 

. . . Any war will be almost sure to interfere with the cotton 
crops, and this is really what affects us and what we care about. 
With all our virulent abuse of slavery and slave-owners, and our 
continual self-laudation on that subject, we are just as anxious for, 
and as much interested in, the prosperity of the slavery interest in 
the Southern States as the Carolinian and Georgian planters them- 
selves, and all Lancashire would deplore a successful insurrection of 
the slaves, if such a thing were possible. 

The following from Lord Lyons to Lord John Russell, 
marked ''Private and Confidential," was written just as the 
sessions of the Peace Congress at Washington were about to 
begin. It was dated February 4, 1861: 

Mr. Everett, who is here with a monster Union Petition from 
Boston, came to me a few days ago in a state of great despondency 
about the Country. He said it had occurred to him that perhaps 
the mediation of the Great Powers of Europe between the North 
and South might be beneficial. It would not do, he said, for Eng- 
land alone to offer her mediation — but she might do so in conjunc- 
tion with France and Russia. Such a mediation he thought would 
probably take place in Europe, if any of the States on that Conti- 
nent should be in the same condition as was the Confederation. I 
reminded Mr. Everett that the States of Europe regarded them- 


selves as belonging to the same political family, while hitherto the 
United States of America had haughtily repudiated the notion that 
the Powers of Europe had any title to interfere, and this not only as 
to the affairs of the United States themselves, but as to those of any 
other part of America. Would it not cause a great deal of irritation 
in this Country, if Europe now came forward to settle the domestic 
quarrel now raging here? Mr. Everett said, perhaps it would, but 
still he thought a declaration of the Great Powers of Europe would 
have great effect on the Southern States, which looked a great deal 
to Foreign support. He said that he had hinted something of the 
kind to the Russian Minister, M. de Stoeckl — but that he had 
not mentioned the idea to anyone else here — and he begged me 
not to allow it to transpire here that he had spoken to me about it. 

I have never heard anything of the kind suggested by any one 
but Mr. Everett. I should very much hesitate to proffer mediation 
unasked. Among other difficulties, I doubt whether Public Opinion 
in England could be brought to the point of toleration of Slavery, 
at which even Northern Americans (except the most ardent abo- 
litionists) have arrived. It would I should think, be difficult for 
England to be a party to an arrangement for securing and perpetuat- 
ing Slavery anywhere — and the Northern States are quite ready 
to yield on everything except the extension of Slavery. 

I have given you an account in a Despatch to-day (No. 40) of a 
long conversation I had yesterday with Mr. Seward. Pie is ex- 
tremely friendly to me personally — but I confess my fears of him 
as Foreign Secretary are increasing. He was especially unsatisfac- 
tory on the Tariff question. He repeated (no doubt for my in- 
struction) a conversation he had had with M. Schleiden, the Bremen 
Minister, who appears to have suggested the imprudence of giving 
European Commerce and consequently European Governments 
strong reason for supporting the South. Mr. Seward said he had 
told M. Schleiden that nothing would give so much pleasure as to 
see a European Power interfere in favour of South Carolina — for 
that then he should "pitch into" the European Power and South 
Carolina and the seceding States would soon join him in doing so. 
I am afraid he takes no other view of Foreign Relations, than as 
safe levers to work with upon public opinion here. 

He says that the reason he will not commit himself to any definite 
plan for a settlement of differences at present, is that he is sure that 
at this moment no plan would be accepted by both Parties — and 
that he does not choose to weaken his position by making himself 
responsible for a rejected Plan. In this I think he is wise. Whether 
he will bring about a better state of things as soon as he expects, 
remains to be seen. 



It was in apparent reply to suggestions of this character that 
Lord John Russell at a later day wrote Lord Lyons from the 
Foreign Office, April 6, 1861, a memorandum submitted before 
transmission to Lord Palmerston, and reading as follows: 
"I have to instruct you to recommend conciliation in the 
event of your Lordship's opinion being requested, but never 
to obtrude advice unasked." 

Recurring to the earlier stage of development, the question 
of the San Juan water boundary was then under discussion. 
President Buchanan sent a message to the Senate on this sub- 
ject February 21, 1861. 1 Referring to this message, Lord 
Lyons wrote to Lord John Russell in a letter marked "Private 
and Confidential," as follows: 

I am very glad indeed to get the Draft of a Convention about 
San Juan etc., and I shall attack the President himself about it 
immediately. I am afraid he will tell me that it is impossible for 
him to attend to it, that it is too late, or (what I fear is true) that it 
would be impossible for him to carry it in the Senate, now that the 
Seceding Senators have withdrawn. Nevertheless it is our last 
chance, and I am more than ever anxious to get these questions out 
of the way before Mr. Seward comes in. For he shows more than 
ever a disposition to play his old game, of raising excitement by a 
dispute with Foreign Powers — and of course England is the power 
most useful for his purpose. He has asked one of our Colleagues to 
invite the French Minister, Mr. Mercier, and me to dinner, in order 
that he may talk politics with us. I should not be the least surprised 
if he were to tell us both not to be annoyed if he used a high tone 
with us, and appeared hostile to France and England, for that he 
would be merely conforming to a necessity of his position, and 
would be actuated by the kindest motives towards the two coun- 
tries. I had hoped that he had been convinced of the danger of this 
game by a conversation which he had with the Duke of Newcastle 
at Albany; but he has such unbounded confidence in his own sagacity 
and dexterity, that nothing which can be said to him makes much 

Such being, as I believe, the disposition of the man who will be 
at the head of the Foreign Department and Prime Minister of this 
Government in three weeks' time, it may perhaps be worth con- 
sidering whether it will not be more than usually important to act, 
if possible, in concert with France, should it become necessary to 
resist attempts to exclude our vessels from Southern Ports. As I 

1 Works, xi. 148. 


mentioned in my last letter, Mr. Seward himself told me that he 
wished some Foreign Power to resist any measure taken against 
South Carolina. He would hardly, I suppose, adopt an intolerable 
tone of bullying towards England and France united; although, in 
language at least, nothing would probably exceed his fierceness 
towards England, if he thought he had her alone to deal with. 

He is playing a difficult game in home politics. On the one hand, 
he tries to rally moderate opponents by vague conciliatory speeches; 
on the other hand, he keeps his own Party together by pointing out 
that he has never voted for any concession whatever, and declaring 
that he never will. 

Moreover he has little or no personal acquaintance with the 
President Elect, and very little knowledge of his views or intentions, 
or means of judging of the amount of influence he himself will have 
with the new Chief Magistrate. 

This latter, it will be noted, was written prior to the in- 
auguration of President Lincoln. I come now to the sub- 
sequent period, after Lincoln had been inaugurated and 
Seward, ceasing to be a member of the Senate, had been 
installed as head of the Department of State. 

In a despatch of March 18, 1861, marked ''Private," Lyons 
wrote as follows: 

Upon the troubles of the country I go in conversation little 
beyond preaching vaguely peace and conciliation, except on the 
one point of interference with Foreign Commerce. I have not 
hesitated to urge the considerations against that, pretty strongly — 
and to point out that it would in all probability be a fatal step to the 
party which first adopted it, by bringing the Powers of Europe into 
the quarrel, and throwing their weight into the other scale. 

The date of the following despatch (March 26, 1861) is of 
much interest, read in connection with the record of Secre- 
tary Welles covering the same momentous period. Concerning 
that period, Mr. Welles wrote: 

The Secretary of State spent much of each day at the Execu- 
tive Mansion and was vigilant to possess himself of every act, move 
and intention of the President and of each of his associates. Per- 
haps there was an equal desire on their part to be informed of the 
proceedings of the Administration in full, but less was known of the 
transactions of the State Department than of any other. 1 

1 Diary, 1. 14. 


Lord Lyons's despatch to Lord Russell is as follows: 

Mr. Seward came to me on the evening of the 20th instant, and 
asked me to let him speak to me very confidentially. He went on to 
express great apprehension lest any Power should recognize the 
Southern Confederacy. He seemed even to feel alarm lest Brazil or 
Peru should do so. In fact the immediate object of his visit ap- 
peared to be, to endeavour to ascertain through me, whether there 
could be any truth in private information which had reached him 
that Brazil had determined already to recognize the new Confeder- 
acy. Brazil, he said, might perhaps be led to do so, by community 
of feeling on Slavery; and Peru might hope to avoid a compliance 
with the demands made by the late Administration. He then 
told me that he was studying the Papers on the Peruvian Question, 
with an earnest desire to find that the late Administration were in 
the wrong. He said that at all events he should be disposed to 
renew Diplomatic Relations with Peru and reopen the negotiations; 
possibly he might in the end be compelled to come to the same con- 
clusion to which his Predecessor had come, but he sincerely hoped 
not. He wished to avoid giving Peru any motive for recognizing 
the Southern Confederacy; " besides," he added, "the case of the 
Peruvian Government is just our own at Charleston." 

The Peruvian Papers, to which Mr. Seward referred, were those 
submitted to Congress, of which a copy was put into my hand by 
Judge Black on the 7th January, and transmitted to you in my 
Despatch of the 10th of that month, No. 9. Speaking generally, 
the principle asserted in them by the United States Government, was 
that a Foreign vessel having complied with the regulations of a de 
facto Government which it found in power at a Port, was not after- 
wards liable to be called to account by a de jure Government. 

I told Mr. Seward that I could not offer an opinion as to the prob- 
ability of the Peruvian Government's recognizing the Southern 
Confederacy; but that I could not help thinking that the applica- 
bility of the principle maintained by the late Administration to the 
present state of affairs at Charleston, and other Southern ports, 
was a reason for wishing to find it correct and not erroneous. It 
seemed to me, I said, to afford the Government of the United States 
a good foundation for adopting the course most consonant to their 
interests; in fact to enable them to avoid interfering with Foreign 
Commerce and so getting into trouble with Foreign Powers, and at 
the same time to maintain, if they pleased, that the authority de 
jure in the Southern Ports still belonged to the United States. 

Mr. Seward observed that he considered it all important to ward 
off a crisis during the next three months — that he had good hopes, 


that if this could be effected, a counter-revolution would take place 
in the South — that he hoped and believed that it would begin in the 
most distant State, Texas; where indeed he saw symptoms of it 
already. It might be necessary towards producing this effect to 
make the Southern States feel uncomfortable in their present condi- 
tion by interrupting their commerce. It was however most im- 
portant that the new Confederacy should not in the mean time be 
recognized by any Foreign Power. 

I said that certainly the feelings as well as the interests of Great 
Britain would render Her Majesty's Government most desirous to 
avoid any step, which could prolong the quarrel between North and 
South, or be an obstacle to a cordial and speedy reunion between 
them, if that were possible. Still, I said, if the United States deter- 
mined to stop by force so important a commerce as that of Great 
Britain with the cotton growing States, I could not answer for what 
might happen. 

Mr. Seward asked whether England would not be content to get 
cotton through the Northern Ports, to which it could be sent by land. 

I answered that cotton, although by far the most important arti- 
cle of the trade, was not the only point to be considered. It was 
however a matter of the greatest consequence to England to pro- 
cure cheap cotton. If a considerable rise were to take place in the 
price of cotton, and British Ships were to be at the same time ex- 
cluded from the Southern Ports, an immense pressure would be 
put upon Her Majesty's Government to use all the means in their 
power to open those ports. If Her Majesty's Government felt it 
their duty to do so, they would naturally endeavour to effect their 
object in a manner as consistent as possible, first with their friendly 
feelings towards both sections of this Country, and secondly with 
the recognized principles of International Law. As regarded the 
latter point in particular, it certainly appeared that the most simple, 
if not the only way, would be to recognize the Southern Confederacy. 
I said a good deal about my hopes that Mr. Seward would never let 
things come to this, with which it is not necessary to trouble you. 

I thought Mr. Seward, although he did not give up the point, 
listened with complacency to my arguments against interference 
with Foreign Commerce. He said more than once that he should 
like to take me to the President to discuss the subject with him. 
The conclusion I came to was that the questions of a forcible collec- 
tion of the duties in the Southern Ports, and of a blockade of those 
Ports were under discussion in the Cabinet, but that Mr. Seward 
was himself opposed to these measures, and had good hopes that 
his opinion would prevail. 

It would appear however that a change took place in the inter- 


val between this conversation and yesterday. Mr. Seward, the 
principal Members of the Cabinet, the Russian Minister, M. de 
Stoeckl, and the French Minister, M. Mercier, with some other 
people dined with me. After dinner Mr. Seward entered into an 
animated conversation with my French and Russian Colleagues and 
signed to me to join them. When I came up I found him asking M. 
Mercier to give him a copy of his instructions to the French Consuls 
in the Southern States. M. Mercier made some excuse for refusing, 
but said that what the instructions amounted to was that the Con- 
suls were to do their best to protect French Commerce "sans sortir 
de la plus stricte neutrality " Mr. Seward then asked me to give 
him a copy of my instructions to Her Majesty's Consuls. I of 
course declined to do so, but I told him that the purport of them was, 
that the Consuls were to regard questions from a Commercial not 
from a political point of view; that they were to do all they could to 
favour the continuance of peaceful commerce, short of performing 
an act of recognition, without the orders of Her Majesty's Govern- 

Mr. Seward then alluded to the Peruvian Papers, and speaking 
as he had done all along very loud, said to my French and Russian 
Colleagues and me: "I have formed my opinion on that matter, and 
I may as well tell it to you now as at any other time. I differ with 
my Predecessor as to de facto Authorities. If one of your ships 
comes out of a Southern Port, without the Papers required by the 
laws of the United States, and is seized by one of our Cruisers and 
carried into New York and confiscated, we shall not make any 
compensation." My Russian Colleague, M. de Stoeckl, argued the 
question with Mr. Seward very good-naturedly and very ably. 
Upon his saying that a Blockade to be respected must be effective, 
Mr. Seward replied that it was not a Blockade that would be estab- 
lished — that the U. S. Cruisers would be stationed off the South 
Coast to collect duties, and enforce penalties for the infraction of the 
United States Customs Laws. Mr. Seward then appealed to me. I 
said that it was really a matter so very serious that I was unwilling 
to discuss it; that his plan seemed to me to amount in fact to a paper 
blockade of the enormous extent of coast comprised in the seceding 
States; that the calling it an enforcement of the Revenue Laws ap- 
peared to me to increase the gravity of the measure, for it placed 
Foreign Powers in the Dilemma of recognizing the Southern Con- 
federation or of submitting to the interruption of their Commerce. 

Mr. Seward then went off into a defiance of Foreign Nations, 
in a style of braggadocio which was formerly not uncommon with 
him, but which I had not heard before from him since he had 
been in office. Finding he was getting more and more violent 


and noisy, and saying things which it would be more convenient 
for me not to have heard, I took a natural opportunity of turn- 
ing, as host, to speak to some of the ladies in the room. 

The immediate question which is critical is whether we shall 
admit the Southern Privateers and their prizes into our Ports. 

M. de Stoeckl, and M. de Mercier inferred, as I do, that within 
the last two days, the opinions of the more violent Party in the Cab- 
inet had prevailed, at all events for the moment — and that there 
is a danger that an interference with Foreign Trade may take place 
at any moment. I hope it may still be prevented by the fear of its 
producing a recognition of the Southern Confederacy. But I am 
afraid we must be prepared for it. 

It may perhaps be well, with a view to the effect on this Govern- 
ment, that the Commissioners who are on their way to Europe from 
the Southern States, should not meet with too strong a rebuff in 
England or in France. Such a rebuff would be a great encouragement 
to violent measures here. In fact, notwithstanding my contradic- 
tions, the Senate, and indeed, I fear, the President, is not unin- 
fluenced by the bold assertions made by some Members of the 
violent Party, that they have positive assurances from Your Lordship 
and other Members of Her Majesty's Government that under no 
circumstances whatever will Great Britain recognize the independ- 
ence of the South. 

M. Mercier thinks it advisable that he and I should have a dis- 
cretionary power to recognize the South. This seems to me to be 
going too fast. I should feel a good deal embarrassed by having 
such a power in my pocket, unless the contingency in which it was 
to be used should be most clearly stated. What does appear to be 
of extreme importance is that England and France should act in 
concert. 1 

In this connection the dates are of extreme historical 
interest, affording, as they do, a glimpse of chaotic con- 
ditions. March 29, the British Minister is advising the 
Foreign Secretary in London that " prudent counsels appear 
to be again in the ascendant"; meanwhile, only three days 
later, on April 1, the American Secretary of State is handing 
the President a memorandum, subsequently referred to (in. 
445) by Nicolay and Hay as " an extraordinary State paper, 
unlike anything to be found in the political history of the 
United States " — a recommendation of world-warfare as a 
desirable alternative to domestic disturbance. That memo- 

1 Newton, Lyons, 1. 31. 


randum was on March 29 in the pocket of the Secretary ; 
and yet, fairly incomprehensible as such a statement now 
sounds, it is none the less true that with a vital crisis im- 
mediately as well as obviously impending, there had been as 
yet not a " single [Cabinet] sitting to deliberate on the 
general line of policy [to be adopted] towards the Southern 
Confederacy." All this we now know. Had, however, Lord 
Lyons and Lord John Russell at the time been cognizant of 
it, could the conditions have been considered by them other 
than fairly incomprehensible? Would, under such circum- 
stances, any line of action foreign nations might have decided 
upon been unwarranted? In the light of Seward's memo- 
randum, would a policy of friendliness naturally have sug- 
gested itself ? 

On the 9th of April, in a letter marked " Private," Lord 
Lyons thus expresses himself as respects the President: 

I am doing all I can to make the Government here aware of the 
disastrous effect of their blockading the Southern Ports, or attempt- 
ing to interfere with Foreign Commerce. Mr. Lincoln has not hith- 
erto given proof of his possessing any natural talents to compensate 
for his ignorance of everything but Illinois village politics. He 
seems to be well meaning and conscientious, in the measure of his 
understanding, but not much more. 

On the 12th of April, the date of the attack on Fort Sumter, 
Lord Lyons wrote as follows: 

Immense activity is shown in fitting out ships of war in several 
of the Dockyards. In fact the coercion party having at last got 
their own way in the Cabinet, are doing their best to make up for 
lost time. 

If solemn declarations are adhered to, the immediate conse- 
quence will be civil war and the secession of the Border States. 
There is still perhaps some hope, that the evident disinclination on 
both sides to shed blood, may render the coercion mild and the re- 
sistance nominal. I am afraid the probabilities are the other way. 

I do hope they will not be so ill-advised as to interfere with 
Foreign Commerce. But all these naval preparations look pain- 
fully like a blockade. 

A week later, April 23, the crisis in Charleston having in the 
meantime arrived, Lord Lyons thus wrote in a despatch 
marked "Private": 


My own opinion is that any interference in the quarrel at the 
present moment, short of a down right alliance with one side against 
the other, would probably only bring upon us the hatred of both. 
Such an alliance is of course entirely out of the question. 

The Blockade has not yet been officially announced to me. If 
it be carried on, with reasonable consideration for Foreign Flags, 
and in strict conformity with the Law of Nations, I suppose it must 
be recognized. At all events it could hardly be disputed without 
express orders from Her Majesty's Government. Before such 
orders could arrive, the season during which British vessels ordi- 
narily frequent the Southern Ports would be over. 

I understand that the Northern Ports insisted upon a Blockade, 
as a sine qua non, condition of their giving their support to the 
Government. Of course they could not endure to see Foreign 
Trade diverted to the South. 

As regards the Southern Privateers, I suppose the principle of 
Neutrality would prevent our interfering with them either — unless 
they threatened danger to our Merchant Vessels, or filibustering 
expeditions against places not in the United States. The United 
States Navy ought to be quite sufficient to keep them down, and 
there can be no doubt of its desire to do so. As a matter of technical 
law, I suppose we have the right to seize Privateers, if we please, 
which sail under a flag which we do not recognize. 

I have just seen the Consul and Vice Consul from Baltimore who 
have come over to report to me the state of affairs there. They 
describe the anti-union and anti-North excitement as tremendous. 
The town seems to be entirely in the hands of the Mob. The Vice 
Consul, who has managed to get through from New York, says 
that the excitement there against the South, and especially against 
the Baltimore people, is equally fierce. 

At Washington great alarm is felt, first, lest the town should be 
immediately attacked from the South; and secondly, lest it should 
be starved, as both Virginia and Maryland refuse to allow pro- 
visions to come to it. These alarms seem not to have much 

The following, marked "Private," was written from Wash- 
ington, April 27, 1 86 1, in the midst of the confusion which 
prevailed after the fall of Sumter: 

In common with the most influential of my Colleagues, I ex- 
hausted every possible means of opposition to the Blockade. The 
great North Eastern Cities insisted upon it, not only as a measure 
of vengeance, but as one essential to the preservation of their own 



prosperity. They could hardly be expected to make sacrifices for 
the contest, unless they were secured from seeing their Trade diverted 
to Southern Ports. I think the Blockade is less likely to be injurious 
or to raise awkward questions, than any of the irregular modes of 
closing the Southern Ports which were proposed. Until September 
it will interfere very little with any Trade which we carry on with 
the South in the ordinary course of things. But it will of course effec- 
tively prevent the new trade which might perhaps have sprung up 
under the influence of the opposing Tariffs of North and South. 
The official announcement of it, which I have only just received, 
seems extraordinarily vague. I conclude the exact date of the 
commencement of the effective Blockade at each particular Port 
will be announced in proper form hereafter. I hope that we shall 
succeed in obtaining a tolerably liberal application of its rules as 
far as Foreign vessels are concerned. 

Mr. Seward has talked (not to me) of the United States being 
now willing to adhere to the Declaration of the Congress of Paris 
abolishing Privateering. I am always rather afraid of touching 
upon the principles laid down in the Declaration. It may perhaps 
be a good thing to secure the adherence of the United States to them 
— though how long after the present crisis the adherence may be 
maintained, is, I think, not a little doubtful. The time at which the 
offer would be made renders the thing rather amusing. It would no 
doubt be very convenient if the Navies of Europe would put down 
the Privateers, and thus leave the whole Navy of the United 
States free to blockade the Ports against European Merchant 

The Consuls at New York and Boston having been withdrawn, 
by the interruption of Post and telegraphs, from the influence of the 
calming potions, which I administer to them when I have the means 
of doing so, seem to have taken the Northern War Fever. As the 
Governors have refused to send the Arms free from the British 
Public Stores without my sanction, I hope no great harm is done. 
Mr. Archibald is so valuable a public servant, that I have been 
sorry to send him even the very mild reproof, of which I sent you a 
copy officially to-day. 

I have been rather puzzled what to say to the Admiral. 1 Every 
Consul and every British Subject wishes to have a Man of War or 
a Fleet if possible at his door. I don't see that the Men of War could 
be of any practical use, except as places of refuge, in case of a bom- 
bardment or actual fighting in a town. There are naval as well as 
political objections to having our Ships here without strong neces- 

1 Milne. 


sity. The temptations to desert are very strong and very gener- 
ally yielded to by our Men of War when in American Ports. With 
the practice, which has grown up here, of putting out lights and re- 
moving Beacons and Buoys, it might be easier to get a ship into one 
of these harbours or rivers than to get her out again. I should like 
to have ships as near at hand as possible without being actually in 
American Waters. The case of a strong joint Naval demonstration 
of England and France united to enforce respect to any decision 
they might come to, about Blockades, Privateers, or other matters, 
would be a very different thing. Not that I think even a joint in- 
tervention of this kind a thing to be desired in itself. 

In their terror some of the inhabitants of this town went to my 
Prussian Colleague, Baron de Gerolt, and proposed that the Diplo- 
matic Body at Washington should propose to mediate between the 
Northern and Southern Governments, to prevent bloodshed and to 
obtain an Armistice until Congress met in July. I told Baron de 
Gerolt that the object was no doubt excellent, but that without 
discussing the plan farther, there was in my mind one objection 
which was fatal to it. I was certain that neither party would accept 
the mediation. Baron de Gerolt said he had reason to think Mr. 
Seward would not be unfavorable to the plan. I spoke in the after- 
noon to the French Minister, M. Mercier, who entirely agreed 
with me. On the following morning appeared Mr. Seward's letter 
to the Governor of Maryland (a copy of which I sent you in my 
Despatch No. 159) scornfully rejecting the "arbitrament of any 
European Monarchy." In any case I should have felt great difficulty 
in consenting to take part in a mediation without your orders — and 
I should have little or no hope of its being successful. 

On the 2d of May, Lord Lyons thus wrote, of course con- 
fidentially, to Lord John Russell: 

Mr. Seward' is so arrogant and so reckless towards Foreign 
Powers that I felt my only chance of keeping him within bounds 
was to make a firm stand in the case of the Peerless. 1 

I was afraid that other vexations would be multiplied during the 

I have, however, avoided all personal altercation with him and 
kept our personal relations on such footing that neither of us will 
feel any embarrassment in treating questions confidentially or 

As the Cabinet have gone altogether beyond their Constitutional 
powers in Warlike proceedings it is unhappily absolutely necessary 

1 See Proceedings, xlvi. 37. 


for them to keep up excitement until Congress meets in July in order 
to obtain a bill of indemnity. 

Communicated to the Premier by the Foreign Secretary, 
the despatches referred to elicited the following memorandum: 

House of Commons, 23/57-6 i. 

These Communications are very unpleasant. 

It is not at all unlikely that either from foolish and uncalcu- 
lating arrogance and self-sufficiency or from political Calculation 
Mr. Seward may bring on a Quarrel with us. He would be tempted 
to do so if our American Provinces were defenceless, and his Col- 
leagues might be deterred from doing so if they felt or knew that our 
Colonies were in a good State of Defence. 

It seems to me desirable that Three Battalions instead of one 
should be sent without Parade to Canada. The main Force for 
Defence must of Course be local but everybody knows the advan- 
tages of a regular Force as Foundation for an irregular army. 

The views at this time entertained by Lord Palmerston are 
set forth as follows in a letter addressed to Edward Ellice, M.P. : 

The day on which we could succeed in putting an end to this un- 
natural war between the two sections of our North American 
cousins would be one of the happiest of our lives, and all that is 
wanting to induce us to take steps for that purpose is a belief that 
any such steps would lead towards the accomplishment of that 
purpose, and would not do more harm than good. The danger is 
that, in the excited state of men's minds in America, the offer of 
any one to interpose to arrest their action, and disappoint them of 
their expected triumph, might be resented by both sides; and that 
jealousy of European, especially of English, interference in their 
internal affairs might make them still more prone to reject our 
offer as impertinent. 

There would, moreover, be great difficulty in suggesting any 
basis of arrangement to which both parties could agree, and which 
it would not be repugnant to English feelings and principles to 
propose. We could not well mix ourselves up with the acknowledg- 
ment of slavery and the principle that a slave escaping to a free soil 
State should be followed, claimed, and recovered, like a horse or an 
ox. We might possibly propose that the North and South should 
separate amicably; that they should make some boundary line, 
to be agreed upon, the line of separation between them; and that 
each confederation should be free to make for its own internal affairs 
and concerns such laws as it might think fit — the two confedera- 


tions entering, however, into certain mutual arrangements as to 
trade and commerce with each other. 

Do you think the time is come for any arrangement of such a kind? 
or is it not in the nature of things and in human nature that the 
wiry edge must be taken off this craving appetite for conflict in 
arms before any real and widespread desire for peace by mutual 
concession can be looked for? l 

The following, marked "Private" and dated Washington, 
May 6, 1861, naturally did not reach its destination at the 
Foreign Office before the issuance of the Proclamation of Bel- 
ligerency. Nevertheless, it throws a strong reflective light 

Mr. Seward's Despatch to Mr. Adams about your conversation 
with Mr. Dallas, and his conduct about the Peerless, are a painful 
illustration of the character of the man we have to deal with. I will 
hope that he has not a deliberate intention to quarrel with us: but 
I think he has a strong inclination to try to what extent he may 
make political capital by high-handed conduct and violent language 
towards us. My hope that he does not intend to pick a quarrel with 
us does not rest, as might be supposed, on considerations of the 
insanity which doing so at this crisis in the affairs of this country 
would seem to indicate. I can perceive little or no understanding 
in Mr. Seward, either of the comparative power of the Great Coun- 
tries of Europe and the remains of the United States, or of the im- 
portance to their Government of conciliating the European Powers 
or at all events of not forcing them into hostility. As he thought 
last autumn that all excitement would instantly subside in the 
South as soon as Mr. Lincoln's Election was decided; as he declared 
when Congress met in December that the talk of secession would all 
be over in thirty days, as he announced in January that at all events 
sixty days more was the extreme limit of the continuance of seces- 
sion agitation; as he declared in February that it was impossible 
but that in one month after he was in office, he should have brought 
all the States back to the Union; as he proclaimed six weeks ago that 
his measures had been so successful that the return of the Seceders 
in November was quite certain and that no drop of blood would 
be shed; as he maintains, I believe now, that the first appearance 
of Northern Troops in the South will be hailed by an oppressed 
Union Majority — so it is conceivable that he may hold that if a 
War arose with a Foreign Power, the South would embrace the 

1 This letter has already been printed in Ashley, Life of Palmerston, n. 


North and share its perils. Such a notion is of course simply ab- 
surd — but then so were all Mr. Seward's previous notions about 
the South. The President and the rest of the Cabinet, if not so 
ignorant of the South as Mr. Seward, are if possible, still more 
ignorant of Europe, and some of them are much more violent than 
he is. 

With such a Minister for Foreign Affairs, and such a Govern- 
ment, to keep on good terms will be no easy matter. And behind 
them is the violent party, or indeed one may say the ignorant 
mob of the North. I imagine that the immediate cause of the order 
to seize the Peerless was the desire to announce this act of vigour 
to some violent partisan in Massachusetts, who had urged it on the 
Government and reproached them with want of energy. I am in 
the greatest apprehension that similar causes may produce similar 
proceedings at any moment. The next step may be to seize a sus- 
pected Privateer in Canadian Waters, or to commit some other 
violation of Canadian Territory. My own plan with Mr. Seward 
has been to remonstrate more in sorrow than in anger, to endeavour 
to make him see the extreme folly of such conduct without wound- 
ing his vanity, and to keep on such terms with him personally as 
may at all events afford me the means of endeavouring to keep him 
straight by friendly warnings as well as by strong remonstrances. 
At the moment I am anxious too to be able to obtain, if possible, 
some relaxation of the Blockade, in favour of British subjects, in 
individual cases of hardship. I have thought moreover that you 
would not wish me to push the matter of the Peerless too far here, 
but to content myself with such a protest as would leave the means 
to be adopted to prevent a recurrence of similar acts of violence or 
threats of violence, entirely open for your consideration. I think 
our best chance of preventing future difficulties is to be firm in the 

I confess I can see no better policy for us than a strict impar- 
tiality for the present. The sympathies of an Englishman are 
naturally inclined towards the North — but I am afraid we should 
find that anything like a quasi alliance with the men in office here, 
would place us in a position which would soon become untenable. 
There would be no end to the exactions which they would make 
upon us, there would be no end to the disregard of our neutral 
rights, which they would show, if they once felt sure of us. If I 
had the least hope of their being able to reconstruct the Union, or 
even of their being able to reduce the South to the condition of a 
tolerably contented or at all events obedient dependency, my feel- 
ing against Slavery might lead me to desire to co-operate with them. 
But I conceive all chance of this to be gone for ever. The question 

191 5-] THE BRITISH PROCLAMATION OF MAY, 1 86 1. 23 1 

now is only how long and how bloody the war will be, and how 
much injury it will cause to both Divisions of the Country. The 
injury inflicted on both will be felt in England — but the conse- 
quences of the sudden failure of the supply of cotton from the 
South are appalling. 

Whether we shall think it possible to allow our supply of cotton 
to be materially interfered with by the Blockade, is a question 
which it is not for me to prejudge. I hardly see however what is to 
be gained by M. Merrier 's plan of announcing now that we will not 
recognize the Blockade in September. It would hardly produce 
less commotion here than a refusal to recognize it ah initio. An 
immediate refusal however would hardly be worth while, as we have 
very little Trade with the South in summer. My own notion would 
be that whatever we determined to do, we should announce a short 
time beforehand, be prepared on the spot with ample means of 
carrying our determination into effect, and positive orders to exe- 
cute them, coute que coute, instantly. Our best chance of avoiding 
extremities would undoubtedly be to act in entire concert with 
France. If there is any hope of dividing us, this Government will 
be encouraged to try any amount of violence against one separately, 
probably against England, as that would cause the greater excite- 
ment in this Country. But even Mr. Seward could hardly be violent 
against England and France united, especially if their decisions were 
urged firmly and judiciously. 

The next fortnight, if as is expected, it see the war actually begun, 
may decide a great deal. One cannot but hope that the North, not- 
withstanding its apparent fury and unanimity may in the end get 
tired of the War. It would seem by President Davis' Message 
that the South only asks to be let alone. I do not think the 
sensible men in the North have any expectation of conquering the 
South. The War is made from wounded pride — from a natural 
reluctance to acquiesce in the diminution of the greatness of the 

The following, marked " Private and Confidential," has al- 
ready, in part, been used by Newton in his Life of Lyons (i. 41). 
The date, May 21, is of interest. 

One of the great difficulties I have to contend with in my endeav- 
ours to keep this Government within such bounds as may render 
the maintenance of peace possible, is the persuasion, which prevails, 
even with sensible men, that no outrage will compel England to make 
war with the North. Such men, although seeing the inexpediency 
and impropriety of Mr. Seward's treatment of the European Powers, 


still do not think it worth while to risk their own mob popularity by 
declaring against it. If they thought there was really any danger, 
they would no doubt do a great deal to avert it. 

Of these men the most distinguished is Mr. Sumner. He has 
considerable influence in Foreign questions, and holds the important 
office of Chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. 
He is in correspondence with many people in England, and I believe 
with the Duke or Duchess of Argyll. I think no greater service 
could be rendered to the cause of peace, than to make Mr. Sumner 
aware of the real perils to which Mr. Seward and the Cabinet are 
exposing the Country. If some means cannot be devised of checking 
them, they will carry not only arrogance, but practical vexations to 
a pitch, which will render the maintenance of peace impossible. If 
Mr. Sumner's correspondence from England convinced him that 
there was a real danger in Mr. Seward's proceedings, he might do a 
great deal to put a stop to them. I think I have done something 
to shake his confidence, but I believe he still relies to a great degree 
upon assurances he received from England, under circumstances 
wholly different from those which now so unhappily exist. 

It will be noted that it was on May 21, the day this letter 
was written, that Secretary Seward completed his memorable 
despatch to Mr. Adams, subsequently revised by President 
Lincoln, but manifestly calculated in the Secretary's mind to 
give practical effect to his memorandum of " Thoughts for the 
President's Consideration" of April 1. The foreign-war pana- 
cea as a remedy for domestic complications had in May reached 
its climax in the mind of the Secretary of State. The original 
despatch, 1 as prepared by the Secretary for Mr. Adams, previous 
to its submission to the President, should be read in immedi- 
ate connection with the following letters. There is reason to 
believe that it was in direct consequence of the intervention of 
Mr. Sumner that the despatch in question underwent the 
changes it did at the hands of the President. 2 

Later (May 27) Lord Lyons sent to Lord Russell an ex- 
tract from a letter just received by him from William H. Rus- 
sell, the Times correspondent, then on his trip through the 
Confederacy. In his letter of transmission, Lord Lyons thus 
expresses himself: 

I have some hope that we have made an impression upon the 
President and the Cabinet, and even upon Mr. Seward, which may 

1 Nicolay-Hay, iv. 269-276. 2 Proceedings, xlvi. 41-42, 77- 


tend to keep him within reasonable bounds. Much will depend 
upon the conduct of France. The hope of the anti-English Party 
is that she will try and engage us in difficulties here, and then leave 
us in the lurch, and play her own game in Europe. 

The following is from W. H. Russell's letter to Lyons: 

New Orleans, May 21st, 1861. 

The further I travel the more satisfied I am of the terrible results 
of the struggle which seems quite beyond the reach of evasion. 
There is on the part of the South an enormously exaggerated idea 
of its own strength and of its "faut vivre" for the rest of the world, 
which nerves its sinews, and there is also the desperation of posi- 
tion which one must feel who sits on a barrel of powder and who is 
menaced with a hot poker. They are resolute and unanimous to a 
most extraordinary degree — they are stronger than I expected to 
find them — but they — I speak of the men — not of the South as 
an "it" — will, I think, discover that they are ill-fitted for a de- 
fensive and protracted contest; more especially will they lose heart, 
when or if their sheet-anchor fails them, and England and France 
permit the Blockade for a year or more. Their ideas of political 
economy are enough to drive the venerable A. Smith out of his 
quiet resting place with a fresh edition of the "Wealth of Nations" 
in his claw. 

The following from Lord Lyons to Lord John Russell 
(June 4, 186 1), already printed by Lord Newton (1. 42), is of 
value. It throws light on a possible move which, had it been 
made, would, as subsequent developments show, have resulted 
in what might well have proved irreparable injury to the Union 

The present game of the violent party appears to be to discover 
or invent some shade of difference in the conduct of England and 
France, in order to use violent language, or even to take violent 
measures against England, without necessarily involving them- 
selves in a quarrel with France also. The plan most in vogue at 
this moment seems to me to send me my Passports. After their 
experience in the case of Sir John Crampton, 1 they look upon this as 
a measure, which would gain them mob applause, by its appear- 
ance of vigour, without exposing them to any real danger. They 
have not hit upon any fault to find with me personally, except that 

1 Moore, Digest of International Law, iv. 533. 


I must have written unfriendly despatches to my Government, be- 
cause my Government has taken a course which they do not like. 
The whole is no doubt an attempt to carry a point by bluster which' 
will perhaps fail, if it be encountered with mild language and very 
firm conduct. For my own part, I conceive my best line will be to 
avoid giving any possible reason for complaint against myself per- 
sonally, and to keep things as smooth as I can. If Her Majesty's 
Government concede nothing to violent language, it will probably 
subside. But there is such a dementia in some of the people here, 
that we must not be surprised at any act of violence they may 

In studying this material, the fact always to be kept in mind 
is that the end both Lord Lyons and Lord John Russell had in 
view was to avoid an interruption of trade rather than to use 
such interruption, should it occur, as a ground for recognition 
of the Confederacy. Recognition was the essential point at 
issue — the danger-spot in the situation. It was persistently 
urged by both the French representative at Washington and 
the Paris government. But the policy gradually formulated 
in Lyons' mind and by him communicated to Russell be- 
came at last definite. When, officially, the blockade was 
declared, he thought it no cause for recognition, and was 
tolerant of its undeniable inefficiency during the earlier stages 
of the conflict. 

While the British Minister at Washington was thus keeping 
in close touch with a very confused situation, the London rela- 
tions between England and America were to the last degree 
meagre and unenlightening. All that Mr. Dallas, the American 
Minister, knew of English policy or of the Foreign Secretary's 
intentions in certain contingencies is summed up in his de- 
spatches to the Secretary of State of March 22 and April 9, 
1861. 1 In his interviews with Lord John Russell, Mr. Dallas 
drew from him merely a general expression of England's friendly 
feeling toward the United States and a hope that there might 
still be a peaceful solution of the issues presented. The Foreign 
Secretary distinctly declined to make any pledge in regard to 
English policy. Absence of any well-defined national policy at 
Washington and a deep-seated distrust of the Secretary of 
State were the most noticeable factors in the British Foreign 

1 Diplomatic Correspondence, 1861-62, 80, 81. 

ig 1 5.] THE BRITISH PROCLAMATION OF MAY, 1 86 1. 235 

Office situation — uncertainty, not unfriendliness. It was, 
however, agreed that it would be better for Great Britain to 
await Mr. Adams' arrival before taking definite action; or, at 
least, Mr. Dallas so understood Lord John, though the latter 
subsequently denied that any formal assurance to that effect 
was given. There is, however, no room for doubt that in the 
Foreign Secretary's mind, whatever he might intimate offi- 
cially, a separation of the American Union was already an ac- 
complished fact, and the hope of Great Britain centred upon 
the idea of this separation being peaceful in character. The 
Foreign Secretary was at this time continuing his instructions 
to Lyons to recommend conciliation, "but never to obtrude 
advice unasked." 

Viewed historically, it is an interesting query, whether the 
doubt and even apprehension expressed by the British Foreign 
Secretary of Seward's temper was not at the moment a distinct 
benefit to the United States. The Southern Commissioners at 
this juncture reached England. The natural inference to be 
drawn from the documents is that in spite of Lyons' advice 
to Russell to treat the Commissioners well, the effect upon 
Russell of Seward's attitude was to treat them coolly. In any 
case that Russell was distinctly worried by Seward's aggres- 
sive speech and opportunist political attitude is apparent; 
moreover, as we now know, he was right. He had ground for 

Such were the official communications on a most complex 
political situation which reached the British Foreign Office. 
Meanwhile, unofficially Lord John must have sought light in 
his namesake's letters. These were now appearing regularly in 
the Times, and on March 29 W. H. Russell thus wrote from 
Washington; his letter was printed in the issue of the Times 
for April 16: 

... It is difficult for one who has arrived so recently in this 
country and who has been subjected to such a variety of state- 
ments to come to any very definite conclusion in reference to the 
great questions which agitate it. . . . As far as I can judge — my 
conclusion, let it be understood, being drawn from the prevail- 
ing opinions of others — "the South will never go back into the 
Union." On the same day I heard a gentleman of position among 
the Southern party say, "No concession, no compromise, nothing 


that can be done or suggested shall induce us to join any Confedera- 
tion of which the New England States are members"; and by an- 
other gentleman, well known as one of the ablest Abolitionists, I 
was told, "If I could bring back the Southern States by holding up 
my little finger I should consider it criminal to do so." . . . But 
most impartial people, at least in New York, are of opinion that 
the South has shaken the dust off her feet, and will never enter 
the portals of the Union again. She is confident in her own destiny. 
She feels strong enough to stand alone. She believes her mission 
is one of extension and conquest — her leaders are men of singular 
political ability and undaunted resolution. She has but to stretch 
forth her hand, as she believes, and the Gulf becomes an American 
lake closed by Cuba. The reality of these visions the South is 
ready to test, and she would not now forego the trial, which 
may, indeed, be the work of years, but which she will certainly 

Subsequently he thus wrote under date of April 15, his 
letter appearing in the Times of May n, — three days be- 
fore the issue of the Proclamation of Neutrality and Bellig- 

The confidence of Mr. Seward in the strength of the name and 
of the resources of the United States Federal Government must 
have received a rude blow, but his confidences are by no means 
of weakly constitution, and it will be long ere he can bring him- 
self to think that all his prophecies must be given up one 
after another before the inexorable logic of facts, with which 
his vaticinations have been in "irresponsible conflict." It seems 
to me that Mr. Seward has all along undervalued the spirit 
and the resolution of the Southern Slave States, or that he has 
disguised from others the sense he entertains of their extent and 
vigour. The days assigned for the life of the secession have 
been numbered over and over again, and secession has not yet 
yielded up the ghost. The "bravado" of the South has been 
sustained by deeds which render retreat from its advanced position 
impossible. Mr. Seward will probably find himself hard pushed to 
maintain his views in the Cabinet in the face of recent events, 
which will, no doubt, be used with effect and skill by Mr. Chase, 
who is understood to be in favour of letting the South go as it lists 
without any more trouble, convinced as he is that it is an ele- 
ment of weakness in the body politic, while he would be prepared 
to treat as treason any attempts in the remaining States of the 
Union to act on the doctrine of secession. 


Lord Lyons had by this time (April 9) become satisfied 
that the so-called radical party in the Cabinet would probably 
have its way. A policy of conciliation would no longer be 
attempted, and a coercive course toward the South was to be 
adopted. In a letter of the same date he repeats his advice 
as to the treatment to be accorded the Southern Commis- 
sioners. They were to be received with deference, though 
not, of course, in any official capacity. 

. . . The only point which I venture to suggest for consideration 
with regard to the reception of these gentlemen is that their meeting 
with a very marked rebuff might be an encouragement to the violent 
party here, who maintain that any measure whatever may be taken 
by this Gov. against foreign commerce, without provoking the re- 
sistance of England, or inducing them to improve their commercial 
position by a recognition of the Southern Confederacy. 

In a despatch dated April 15, Lord Lyons described to 
Russell the fall of Sumter, advising him that war had at last 
actually begun. 

With the fall of Fort Sumter and a recognition of the fact 
of a civil war, a number of new and most perplexing questions 
naturally presented themselves; but Lord John Russell's 
treatment of them is not now to be considered. Meanwhile, 
in the period previous to May 1, 1861, the British official atti- 
tude may be summed up in the statement that Lord Lyons at 
Washington, in a state of great mental uncertainty, was con- 
sistently hoping that some solution might be found of the issue 
presented under which the Union would be continued. At the 
same time, however, he was intent on British commercial in- 
terests, and was inclined to a belief that the assertion by him of 
the extreme unwisdom of any national interference with the 
British trade to Southern ports might tend toward some more 
or less satisfactory solution of the problem. On the other side 
of the Atlantic Lord John Russell, entertaining a gradually 
diminishing hope that there might be no separation, soon be- 
came persuaded that separation was inevitable and disrup- 
tion final. It is evident that prior to the 1st of May he was 
considering the early arrival of a date when recognition must 
be granted to a new, independent and slave-holding state. 
The practical question, however, which the official at the head of 
the English Foreign Office had to confront was not sentimental. 


It related to England's attitude and her legal relation, under 
international usage, toward the American combatants. In 
solving this question, neither ideals nor humanitarianism 
played any part. England's first need and the Foreign Secre- 
tary's first duty was to determine and announce for the bene- 
fit of all concerned, and more especially for British subjects, the 
position of that country under the accepted principles of in- 
ternational usage. 

Subsequently, four years later, and after the termination of 
Civil War hostilities, the Proclamation of May 13 was 
thoroughly discussed in a lengthy diplomatic correspondence 
between Mr. Adams and Earl Russell. The contention of 
Mr. Adams was that such an act of recognition was just and 
proper only when it became necessary (1) "to provide for an 
emergency by specific measures" involving a necessity of pro- 
tecting personal interests of the neutral and should (2) extend 
only to the necessary provision for the existing emergency, 
avoiding implication in the struggle. Only, he added, (3) "if, 
after the lapse of a reasonable period, there be little prospect 
of a termination of the struggle, especially if this be carried on 
upon the ocean, a recognition of the parties as belligerents 
appears to be justifiable." 

From the American point of view, the situation as it existed 
in early May, 1861, should perhaps be judged by this test, 
obviously extreme. The facts in the case, now far better un- 
derstood than they then were, appear from the record. It was 
on the 6th of May, Mr. Adams having left America on the 1st of 
that month, and reaching Liverpool on the 13th, that Lord 
John Russell formally announced in the House of Commons that 
belligerent rights would be conceded to the Confederacy. Five 
days earlier, on May 1, he had sent for Mr. Dallas, in conse- 
quence of reports then generally current as to the intention of 
President Lincoln and the Washington administration to in- 
stitute a blockade of the Southern coast. 1 Five days later, on 

1 [From the Diary (Ms.) of Benjamin Moran, Secretary of the American Lega- 
tion in London when Dallas was Minister, are taken the following entries: 
"Wednesday, May 1, 1861. Lord John Russell yesterday requested an interview 
with Mr. Dallas this morning at one o'clock, and Mr. Dallas went. His Lord- 
ship said he had been privately informed that Mr. Lincoln meant to blockade 
the Southern ports, and this Government would object to it. Such a measure 
might prompt them to recognize tne Southern Confederacy. Mr. Dallas assured 


the nth of May, President Lincoln's Proclamation of Block- 
ade was officially communicated. This blockade was to be 
conducted in accordance with the rules of international law. 
May 14, the official copy of the consequent Proclamation of 
Neutrality appeared in the London Gazette. 

The blockade thus promulgated, it must be borne in mind, 
directly and radically involved what then constituted the 
largest branch of British foreign commerce — the trade in cotton 
as a raw material between the ports of the Confederacy and 
Liverpool. From the day the blockade took effect, a condition 
of war existed. As Earl Russell subsequently said, it became 
" necessary for England to determine at once upon facts and 
probabilities whether she should permit the right of search and 
blockade as acts of war, and whether the letters-of-marque 
or public ships of the rebels, which might appear at once in 
many parts of the world, should be treated as pirates or as law- 
ful belligerents." Fundamental, this is also historically in- 
disputable. It is next necessary to bear in mind the facts 
disclosed in the material now submitted. The official com- 
munications which reached the Foreign Secretary have been 
sufficiently referred to. Meanwhile, on the very day in May 
when Sir George Lewis, on behalf of the Ministry, formally an- 
nounced in the Commons the Queen's Proclamation, W. H. 
Russell was writing from Montgomery, announcing that the 
local papers of that morning contained "the proclamation of 

him it was in error, which seemed to give satisfaction. . . . Friday, May 3, 1861. 
Lord John Russell has found out that Mr. Dallas was wrong about the power of 
the President to blockade, and is rather grumpy. ... May 7. Lord John Rus- 
sell said last night in the House of Commons, that the Southern Confederate 
States must be recognized by Great Britain as belligerents. This is regarded by 
many as a strong indication that they mean to recognize this pretended Con- 
federacy, and the result is great anxiety among merchants. My opinion is that 
Lord John was hasty and the Government will take the back track. . . . Sat- 
urday, April 11, 1868. I received a letter from Mr. W. Hunter to-day asking me to 
let him know if Mr. Dallas ever received Mr. Seward's Circular of the 20th April, 
186 1, and the proclamation of blockade of the 19th, and if so when, and if he com- 
municated the latter to Ld. Russell. He received them on the 10th May, and 
had an interview with his Lordship at his house on the 11, but he never re- 
ported it home that I know of. He told me he would write his despatch about 
that and also about the presentation of his letter of recall when he got home and 
send me a copy to record, but he never sent such copy. I therefore don't know 
what passed at the first named interview on the nth, nor do I know if he ever 
presented a copy of the proclamation to Lord Russell. I have written home in 
full to Mr. Hunter this day and mentioned these facts." — W. C. F.] 


the President of the Confederate States of America , declaring 
a state of war between the Confederacy and the United States, 
and notifying the issue of letters-of-marque and reprisal." It 
is true this letter did not appear in the London Times until 
three weeks later — on the 30th of May. It nevertheless an- 
nounced facts connected with British commerce and interests 
which had been clearly foreshadowed in London on the first of 
that month. Under the circumstances, it was obviously neces- 
sary that the British Admiral commanding the South Atlantic 
station should have his instructions and clearly understand 
to what extent interference with British commerce and rights 
was affected. Did a state of war exist, and was he to guide 
himself accordingly? An exigency might arise any day, and, 
in fact, might well have arisen before the formal instructions, 
if sent at the earliest possible moment, could have reached 
their destination at the Bahamas. Not less than twenty 
days would then have been required to convey to the British 
Admiral these instructions. Thus, assuming that despatches 
were promptly forwarded from London on May 9, when Sir 
George Lewis announced to the Commons the Queen's Proc- 
lamation of Belligerency, they would not have reached Ad- 
miral Milne prior to the date — May 30 — when Russell's 
letter appeared in the Times. Referring to the Proclamation, 
Russell said: 

" It need hardly be observed that the protection of British interest 
demands that an efficient squadron of vessels be at once sent to 
the American waters in the face of such contingencies as will inevi- 
tably arise." He also informed the British public that the Mont- 
gomery government "had already numerous applications from the 
ship-owners of New England, from the whalers of New Bedford, and 
from others in the Northern States for these letters of marque, 
accompanied by the highest securities and guarantees." He sig- 
nificantly added, "I leave it to you to deal with the facts." Finally 
in this letter he said, "The Government at Washington seeks to 
obtain promises from Lord Lyons that our Government will not 
recognize the Southern Confederacy, but at the same time refuses 
to give any guarantees in reference to the rights of neutrals. The 
blockade of the Southern Ports would not occasion us any great in- 
convenience at present because the cotton loading season is over; 
but if it be enforced in October, there is a prospect of very serious and 
embarrassing questions arising as to the rights of neutrals under 


treaty obligations to the United States Government; the trade and 
commerce of England and the law of blockade in reference to the 
distinctions to be drawn between measures of war and means of 
annoyance." But almost at the same time he stated that of the few 
ships then at anchorage in Mobile Bay "nearly all are British." 
In like manner, on the first of May he wrote from Savannah a 
letter appearing in the issue of the Times of May 28th, in which he 
stated that while there were but few ships in the river, of those 
nearly all were "under British colors." And on returning from a 
visit to Fort Pulaski, at the entrance of Savannah Harbor, on May 
1st, he describes the party as intent on the approach of a large ship, 
"which turned out to be nothing more formidable than a Liverpool 
cotton ship." 

So far, therefore, as the conditions and circumstances which 
would justify the Proclamation of Belligerency on the part of 
the British government, it is difficult to suppose a case stronger 
than then really existed. The blockade was in effect. The 
rules of war were in operation, and might at any moment be 
rigidly applied. The British Admiral had to be instructed, 
and that at the earliest possible moment. Letters of marque 
had already been applied for and, it was fairly to be assumed, 
had been issued. Those sailing under these letters of marque 
either had or had not rights on the high seas. The British 
xAdmiral might at any moment be called upon to take action. 
He not only had a right to immediate instructions, but that he 
should have those instructions was incumbent upon the gov- 
ernment. Under such circumstances, it is not at once appar- 
ent how every caution and consideration stated or implied 
subsequently by Mr. Adams was not included in the actual 

Bearing these historical facts in mind, it seems not unfair 
now to say that a careful scrutiny of the official and private 
papers of the period nowhere indicates that "unfriendli- 
ness" toward the National Government, attributed to the 
British Foreign Secretary. On the contrary, his course through- 
out seems to have been that of one seeking light, and sincerely 
anxious to do nothing likely to wound American sensibilities. 

Dr. Storer called attention to a large number of British 
posters, exhibited on the walls of the room, encouraging and 
urging enlistment in the army. A gift by him to the Society, 



they constitute an interesting continuation of the political 
posters shown in December, 1913. 1 

Remarks were made during the meeting by Messrs. J. C. 
Warren, Thayer, Sumner, Hart, W. R. Livermore and 

1 Proceedings, xlvii. 53. 







The subject of this memoir was a unique personality. He 
was born at Beverly, January 4, 1826. His father was William 
Endicott, who succeeded Robert Rantoul, Senior, in the 
country store established by the latter at Beverly in 1796. 
William is a name of frequent recurrence with the Endicotts — 
a Dorsetshire family — and one William Endecotte was a 
"full fellow" on the rolls of Exeter College, Oxford, in 1580. 
Since 1774, the Endicotts of New England have spelled the 
name with an "i." The elder William Endicott was of the 
nearest generation of descendants living in his day, from the 
Colonial Governor, and was a son of Robert Endicott of Bev- 
erly, whose wife was a Holt of Danvers. This Beverly William 
Endicott died at Beverly in 1899, when lacking in age but a 
month of his full century. He was nine months old when 
Washington died. He married in 1824 Joanna Lovett, the 
eldest child of Robert Rantoul, Senior, and she was the mother 
of our subject, and died at St. Louis while journeying at the 
West in 1863. 

William Endicott of whom we write showed, as a child, 
marked intelligence and activity. I grew up in close touch 
with him — too close, perhaps, to view him objectively and to 
see him in his true perspective. When we went nutting or 
berrying or fishing, not only was he the life of the party, but he 
was sure to bring home more nuts or berries or fish than any 
other member of it. When told that his mother's cousin, An- 
drew Preston Peabody, had, as a child, first learned to read the 
inverted page while he stood at the knee of a teacher who was 
hearing recitations, it appeared that young Endicott had mas- 
tered the same odd accomplishment. As a schoolboy he passed 
a summer vacation on a farm at Andover. There he solved 


the mystery of cheese-making — constructed a practicable toy 
cheese-press and in it made miniature cheeses, of the size of 
a Spanish dollar, which he distributed among his playmates. 

He was destined for Harvard College, but his parents hesi- 
tated to fit him for professional life, medical advisers ques- 
tioning whether he could bear the strain. Pulmonary con- 
sumption was the universal dread in Beverly at that time, 
attributed by Agassiz, when he first visited the town in 1846, 
to the conformation of the coast. It has since lost much of its 
terror. But, on leaving the Beverly Academy, an incorporated 
school, well kept at that time by Thomas Barnard West of 
Salem, young Endicott, at the age of fourteen — he had no 
further schooling — joined his father in his local business and 
was there not long after discovered by the late Charles Fox 
Hovey, who had just left the Boston firm of J. C. Howe and 
Company and had, with partners, set up in business for him- 
self, and was building at that time his summer residence on 
the high ground west of Gloucester Harbor. The Endicotts 
were customers of the Hovey Company, and Mr. Hovey, in 
riding through Beverly to Gloucester — there was no railroad 
to Gloucester then — often stopped and did business with 
them. In this way he was aware of the rare faculty shown by 
the subject of this sketch in grasping business problems, and 
became anxious to offer him a place as treasurer in his Boston 
warehouse. He did not wait long to welcome him as a partner. 
Mr. Hovey was a Jeffersonian Democrat and a very independent 
thinker, and was in declared sympathy with the anti-slavery 
agitation then becoming rife. The Endicotts held like politi- 
cal views, William Endicott, Senior, having supported Craw- 
ford for President in 1824, and later Jackson. Young Endi- 
cott's maternal grandfather had been a rigid Federalist and a 
disciple of Timothy Pickering, imbued with all the party's 
jealousy of slave-representation and slavery extension, often 
chosen to office through that party's support, and only quit- 
ting it or what remained of it in 1828, in revolt against the 
protectionist policy of Clay, Secretary of State under John 
Quincy Adams, then a candidate for a second Presidential 
term. It was this so-called "American System" which drove 
scores of old-line Federalists, with Pickering at their head, into 
the support of Jackson. 


No sooner had young Endicott found himself in the receipt 
of an income than he began to indulge the public spirit which 
marked his career. At times he lived in Boston and at times 
spent the night in Beverly, for the railroad lately opened made 
the latter course possible. He early joined a little group of 
young townsmen in offering concerts, in stimulating the growth 
of a public library, and in sustaining the historic Lyceum. 
When he passed between Beverly and Boston day by day, the 
extent to which he made himself the medium of transmission 
for messages and errands at the service of his friends — there 
was no express conveyance then — anticipated his life-long 
practice of bearing others' burdens. Before the Civil War 
broke out he had identified himself with the new "Republican 
Party," and supported Julius Rockwell for Governor in 1855 
and Fremont for President in 1856. He was contributing to 
party funds, attending party conventions, and was so far recog- 
nized as a co-worker with Whittier, and Dr. Howe, and Amos 
A. Lawrence, and George L. Stearns, in extra-political efforts to 
save Kansas to Freedom that, when the John Brown raid 
startled us in 1859, he was among those branded as "suspect" 
by the Mason Senatorial Committee. But his sympathies 
were, in the main, with the advocates of political movements 
and constitutional measures — of such steps as Lincoln, and 
Chase, and Whittier, and Sumner, and Judge Hoar, and Gov- 
ernor Andrew advocated, rather than with the extremists who 
denounced the Constitution and distrusted and disparaged the 
Union. He disliked their methods, and while he made a con- 
tribution which secured to Garrison the statue in Common- 
wealth Avenue, because he thought the man who unselfishly 
supports his honest convictions at the risk of his life has earned 
a monument, he said from first to last that the extremists, sin- 
cere as they were in their efforts, played but a small part in the 
abolition of slavery. He thought, with the old Federalists, that 
we had been drawn, under the stress of revolt against British 
despotism, into making a necessary compact with the Southern 
colonies which they had come to feel their interests compelled 
them to annul. He thought the North should keep faith, but 
he would enforce an equal obligation on the South. 

From time to time he took active part in political conven- 
tions. He was present in 1856 at the gathering in Philadelphia 


which nominated Fremont, and again at the mortifying fiasco at 
Cincinnati in 1872 where, unable to profit by the moderation 
of such advisers as Carl Schurz, and Horace White and him- 
self, public-spirited men, called together to attempt the defeat of 
Grant for a second term in the Presidency, adopted the inconse- 
quent step of nominating Horace Greeley. During the years 
when Butler was storming the Republican citadel for that 
party's nomination as Governor of Massachusetts, Mr. Endicott 
made it a duty to be present and active during the midnight 
disturbances preceding those conventions, and did much to 
defeat the struggles of a political ambition which was at last 
rewarded only by recourse to the support of another party. 

Mr. Endicott had a disinclination for public life. Often 
urged to become a candidate for Congress, he uniformly refused. 
He distrusted his capacity for addressing people in numbers. 
He was probably right in thinking that he did better to rely on 
his facile pen and his earnest, persuasive, personal appeal for 
bringing his clean-cut convictions to the notice of the possible 
convert. But in practical politics he was no dilettante. He 
was willing to bear his share of the unpleasantness of election- 
day drudgery rather than have to reflect that unsatisfactory 
results might have been less serious but for his inaction. Three 
days before his death, though suffering much, he cast his vote 
in the State election. 

He was an indifferent speaker. His choice of phrase was 
nice and scholarly, but his voice was not effective, nor was his 
presence commanding, and he always shrunk from speaking in 
public. Twice I saw him called on without notes to address a 
gathering. In both instances he acquitted himself well. Once 
he addressed this Society in the commemorative observances on 
the death of Norton. And once he addressed the Massachu- 
setts Republican State Central Committee at a dinner ten- 
dered, in Henry Cabot Lodge's first year in the chair, to Gov- 
ernor-elect Robinson, on the defeat of Butler. But his con- 
tributions to the campaigns in which he enlisted were mainly 
literary and financial, and in the Butler campaign, and again 
in the McKinley-Bryan campaign of 1896, he produced finan- 
cial papers which were reprinted throughout the country and 
even in English journals of authority, such as John Bright's 
Daily News, as apt to afford aid to the stability of our currency 


and of the public credit. His printed reminiscences show how 
deeply he studied fiscal questions. 

Mr. Endicott's active career was co-terminous with the 
latter half of the nineteenth century. This was a period of 
rare activity in our quarter of the world. Great industrial 
and scientific changes were afoot. Facilities for the transporta- 
tion of persons and freight took the great start which made 
possible the wonderful development of our Northwest, and 
facilities for the transmission of intelligence, quite as vital to 
the rapid growth of the country, went through a radical revolu- 
tion. The relation of an active-minded, public-spirited man to 
the developments going on about him has an interest beyond 
mere personal concern. 

The first transcontinental railway enterprise was under- 
taken, at the beginning of this era, by eastern capitalists who 
proposed to unite by continuous lines the Great Lakes with 
Mobile Bay. Such needed legislation as Senator Stephen 
Arnold Douglas could not secure at Washington, from the 
general government, remained for my father, representing 
the corporators of whom he was one, to secure at Springfield 
from the State of Illinois. But the Illinois Central Railroad, 
after starting out auspiciously, was plunged into untold dis- 
aster, which was precipitated by the defalcation of its presi- 
dent, and prolonged by the panic of 1857. My father died 
suddenly in 1852, and Mr. Endicott joined Charles Greely 
Loring in an effort to extricate his estate from the disorder. 
From that time on there was no year in which Mr. Endicott 
was not actively studying the problems of railway traffic, until 
federal legislation, enacted in Roosevelt's time, made it un- 
safe, in Mr. Endicott's view, longer to hold railroad securities. 

This experience, coupled with an inborn detestation of war, 
and the natural leaning of an importer and a Democrat towards 
the greatest practicable freedom of trade, promptly brought him 
into sympathetic touch with Richard Cobden, the father of 
the anti-corn-law agitation in England, the apostle of the 
British free- trade evangel, the negotiator of the epoch-making 
commercial treaty between England and France, when, in 
1854, that statesman made his second tour of the United States 
in the interest of a group of English holders of securities in 
the Illinois Central Railroad. Mr. Cobden, with many friends 


who followed his lead, was involved in the common disaster. 
He suffered in repute and in purse, and he died at the close of 
our Civil War, after noble service rendered in behalf of the 
struggling Union. In the Cobden Club, formed the next year, 
Mr. Endicott was made an honorary member, and with John 
Bright he maintained an intimate and friendly correspond- 
ence while they both lived. 

The momentary success of the first Atlantic cable enterprise 
was announced late in 1858, but the enterprise was doomed to 
a long interval of coma before it reached its ultimate issue. 
Mr. Endicott had his own reasons for putting its claim to a 
rigid test. Doubters were many. Mr. Endicott sent a despatch 
to the bureau of Hovey and Company in Paris, conveying by 
cable an item of personal intelligence which could by no con- 
ceivable form of collusion have reached Paris at the time of its 
receipt in any other way, and that despatch hangs there framed 
to-day — silent witness to a fact having at that time very con- 
siderable import for the sender. An adventurous group of capi- 
talists had taken measures to unite New York and Chicago with 
St. Petersburg, Paris and London, by means of electric wires 
strung on poles across Alaska, Bering Strait and northern Asia. 
Funds were in hand for the preliminary steps, surveys were prac- 
tically complete, and the' enterprise only awaited the failure of 
the submarine experiment that it might feel the vital spark. 

Quern, si non tenuit, magnis tamen excidit ausis! 

Though marked throughout by close attention to the routine 
of business, Mr. Endicott's life was not without its picturesque 
features. At one time he was condemned for months to abso- 
lute vacuity of mind — the penalty of overwork — and was 
directed to seek some region which mails and telegraphs did 
not invade. Only the polar zones would answer now, but at 
that time such a resort was offered by the drowsy current of 
the Nile. Weeks of listless drifting in a sumptuously equipped 
dahabieh restored his vigor and left him more a stranger to 
what was going on in the busy world than the deaf-mute of our 
day is permitted to be. The comparison is a fair one, for he was 
a long time treasurer of the Perkins Institution for the Blind 
and greatly interested in what he found there, and especially 
in the acquirements of Helen Keller, sometimes entertaining 

191 5-] WILLIAM ENDICOTT. 249 

her at his Beverly home. Friends had died, business ventures 
had gone wrong, a portion of his life had drifted away during 
his enforced period of occultation. Before leaving Egypt he 
had been presented at the sybaritic court of the Khedive, and 
had sipped coffee from his golden cups and shared a whiff from 
his amber- tipped chibouk. Few men not wedded to sea life 
had crossed the Atlantic oftener than he. Finding himself one 
year approaching at the Christmas season the neighborhood 
of Palestine, he thought it would be a pleasant memory to pass 
the yearly festival at what is claimed to be the Holy Sepulchre 
and to take part there in the prescribed observances of the 
hour. On arriving he found a party of Greek Church pilgrims 
engaged in a wrangle for precedence with a party of pilgrims of 
the Church of Rome, and it became so violent as to call for 
the intervention of Mussulman militia to preserve the peace ! 

The number and variety of groups with which Mr. Endi- 
cott kept himself in touch bear witness to the catholicity of his 
tastes. He was constant for thirty years in his attendance at 
the monthly dinners of the Saturday Club. Certainly it was 
no small compliment for a little club, made up of the very first 
characters — a club of which Dr. Holmes could say that 
" Emerson was the nucleus around which it gathered," a club 
of which Agassiz could say that "it had enlarged his view of 
life," a club at which every foreigner worth meeting who 
Came to America was a guest, a club where Emerson " found 
his attitude mainly that of a listener" and which he looked to 
for his ideal of club life — "In our club no man shall be ad- 
mitted who is not worth in his skin five hundred thousand. 
One of them I hold worth a million, for he bows to facts, has 
no impertinent will, and nobody has come to the end of his 
resources" — for such a club, "a focus of good-sense, wisdom 
and high patriotism, whence sprung many measures important 
to the country" — for such a club as this to invite one who 
had no claim to authorship, or statesmanship, or comradeship, 
but was a simple, unassuming business man, only qualified by 
keen native wit, a close touch with such careers while in the 
making as Whittier's, and Lowell's, and Judge Rockwood 
Hoar's, and Judge John Lowell's, by a very broad intelli- 
gence of what was passing in the world at large and a friendly 
hand for everybody — for such a club to invite him was the 
compliment of a lifetime. 



He was a founder and a working member of Mr. Forbes' 
Loyal Publication Society. He was honored with an election 
as president of the New England Historic Genealogical 
Society, which he declined, and as president of the Boston 
Museum of Fine Arts, which he accepted after serving for a 
full generation as its indispensable first treasurer; and he was 
reckoned by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology as its 
wheel-horse — one of its earliest, its most active and its most 
untiring helpers. At the Massachusetts General Hospital and 
McLean Asylum he indulged himself for years in the luxurious 
munificence of a free bed or two, and for a quarter-century 
he served that charity in the onerous and exacting function of 
a State Director. When Governor Butler found himself con- 
strained by his sense of public duty to dispense with his fur- 
ther service, and named a Director to succeed him, a vacancy 
by resignation was at once created, which could be rilled by 
the Board without recourse to the executive conscience. To 
it he was elected, so that his service continued without in- 
terruption. In company with ex-Governor Long, and with an 
eminent practical builder, he was appointed by Governor 
Ames to the Commission of Three which supervised the State 
House Extension of 1889, and his exact system of accounting 
— he dispensed with all clerical aid, his own delicate handwrit- 
ing serving him to the exclusion of secretary, typewriter and 
stenographer — has left on record at the State Capitol a lasting 
memorial of what was understood in the nineteenth century by 
devotion to public duty. 

That the men who did the fighting should seek the fellowship 
of the men who stayed at home and did the financiering was an 
honor upon which both Mr. Forbes and he set a high value. 
But nobody perceives more keenly than the soldier what a 
terrible load the war-financier is bearing, nor what Sumner 
meant when he wrote to Fessenden that the next great battle 
was to be fought in Wall Street, nor what it means to the 
country if obligations are not promptly met and service- 
money promptly forthcoming, nor what a hopeless mob a 
great army becomes the moment it finds itself in need of food 
and clothing. Mr. Endicott was the last survivor of the honor- 
ary membership of the Loyal Legion of Massachusetts. 

Mr. Endicott married, in 1856, Mrs. Annie Thorndike, 



widow of John Frederick Nourse of Boston. She died in 
1876, leaving him with two children. 

It would be idle, in a paper of this kind, to attempt a cata- 
logue of the public philanthropies and private charities with 
which he filled his life, and yet without this feature the picture 
is unfinished. Unpaid service seemed to be his highest privilege. 
He was one of those helpers who make a friend's predicament 
their own. Trusts and directorates and presidencies seemed to 
reckon themselves fortunate if they could secure his name. 
Many of them he filled for a generation. Two of these, to name 
no others, were the presidencies of the Suffolk Savings Bank 
and of the New England Trust Company. And when the time 
came for him to turn them over to less enfeebled hands, he 
found himself resigning them by dozens. 

In stature Mr. Endicott was slight, his movements were 
quick and nervous — "alert in body and mind" — and his 
exceptionally little feet and hands were a constant reminder of 
the Huguenot extraction of his mother's kin. He was no in- 
different French scholar. Born at the starting point, in time 
and place, of the New England Unitarian movement, Mr. 
Endicott never had affiliations with any other sect, and his 
will made a substantial addition to the trust funds of the Bos- 
ton Young Men's Union and to the ministerial fund of the old 
First Church of Beverly in which he grew up and with which 
he was allied until, just before the war, he became a proprietor 
in King's Chapel at Boston. He was a Resident Member 
of this Society from March 8, 1906, until his death, contrib- 
uting to the Proceedings two valuable papers of personal 
reminiscence, and constant to a degree in his attendance on our 
meetings until growing infirmity made it a burden for him to 
climb the stairs. Mr. Endicott died in Boston, November 7, 
1914, and was buried at Beverly, where he retained through 
life a cherished summer home. 

And so the old Commonwealth adds one more name to her 
list of worthies. 

Albert Thorndike to Charles Francis Adams. 

_ ,_ Boston, December 7, 1914. 

Dear Mr. Adams: 

Not one of the notices about William Endicott (that I have seen) 

has laid enough stress on the "personal" side of his rWarter It 


is hoped that when the Massachusetts Historical Society memo- 
rial — which is the important record made — is written, this will 
be more strongly brought out. To those who knew him at all inti- 
mately, the delight of his personality as distinctly marked the man 
as did his public successes. 

He was fundamentally of strong will, firm opinions and earnest, 
though in manner very simple and unassuming, almost mild, not- 
withstanding his ability to enforce well his purpose. His bearing 
was unassuming and absolutely democratic; he held himself the 
same before all men. Those who met him knew this; but those 
who had seen him often also knew him as one of never failing 
kindly humor and wit, one who quickly saw and seized the humorous 
side. A joke was never forced by him nor humor overplayed; but 
the point was lightly and spontaneously brought out in a charac- 
teristic way, or if brought out by another, gratefully appreciated. 
Even in talk of serious things, the v/it and the smile were ready and 
often used. Notwithstanding all the work accomplished, this 
lighter vein was, with him, always near the top. 

In his remarkable, tenacious and accurate memory were stored 
a host of anecdotes of the people he had met in his long and active 
life. Whether it was a statesman, a man of business, or even those 
in the humblest walks of life, what he had ever known of interest 
about them, he remembered. He would tell the stories well and 
wittily, but with exactness, and often minutely dated them, though 
they might be sixty or seventy years old. It was a delight to hear 
him reminisce; and though likely that part of the pleasure was in 
the manner of the telling, still it is wished that various of these tales, 
trivial but entertaining, and touching on so many sorts and condi- 
tions of men and covering so much time, could have been preserved. 
Such things were not for a formal paper; so his Reminiscences, 
written for the Historical Society, do not have them. 

From his interest in grave subjects and the seriousness of his 
work, one might think of him as ponderous and solemn. Those 
who come after us will not know him, if they cannot see more of 
him than his achievements, his broad charity and kindnesses. 
With all this was the lighter side, the quick, quaint and gentle wit, 
the constant cheeriness (even in suffering), the love of the little 
brightnesses of life and the ability to joke (even when serious), all 
of which kept around him an atmosphere such as few are blessed 
enough to live in. Yours very truly, 

Albert Thorndike. 


2 53 


THE stated meeting was held on Thursday, the nth in- 
stant, at three o'clock, p. m.; Vice-President John D. 
Long, in the absence of President Adams, in the chair. 

The record of the last meeting was read and approved. 

The Librarian reported a list of donors to the Library since 
the last meeting; and called attention to the gift of Mrs. 
Daniel Denison Slade, which includes a number of early Ameri- 
can imprints, chiefly from the Bromfield and Tracy libraries. 

The Cabinet-Keeper reported the following gifts: a photo- 
graph of a miniature by Gilbert Stuart of John Henderson, 
the actor (i 747-1 785), from Francis Wellesley, of Westfield 
Common near Woking, England; a photograph of a miniature 
by Malbone of Edward Coverly of Boston, from Miss Alba 
Davis; Hedley Fitton's etching of Trinity Church, Sum- 
mer Street, Boston (Iconographic Society of Boston), from 
C. F. Adams; a photograph of Gutzon Borglum's head of 
Lincoln, from Grant Leet of Washington; a colored woodcut 
of a corner of Louisburg Square, Boston, from D. Berkeley 
Updike; two medals from Ezra H. Baker; and five paper 
money tokens of Rogers of North Weymouth, and a token of 
Lewis, sutler of the 23d Massachusetts Regiment, from Robert 
Bird of Canton; medal of Carnot, President of the French 
Republic, by Alphee Dubois, 1889, from Edward Gray; medal 
designed by Frances Grimes for the Women's Auxiliary of the 
Massachusetts Civil Service Reform Association, from G. H. 
Norcross; and a John C. Lane Norwood School medal, from 
Mrs. John C. Lane. A cast of Houdon's bust of John Paul 
Jones was received on deposit from Dr. Edward W. Emerson. 

The following letter was submitted, with the accompanying 
relic : 

Boston, January 20, 1915. 

My dear Dr. Storer; — In pursuance of our conversation some 
weeks ago, I send you with this a tiny fragment of wood, which came 


from the first coffin in which George Washington reposed. You will 
remember that the tomb at Mt. Vernon was reconstructed at some 
time about the middle of the last century, and his body placed in a 
new coffin, that which encloses it now. The old one, I believe, was 
cut up into relics which were distributed among Government offi- 
cials and other persons interested. This bit came to the Honorable 
William Scott, at that time a Member of Congress from western 
New York, who was a connection of my family by marriage. He 
gave it to my father, from whom I received it when I was a small 
boy; and it has been laid away with my childish treasures ever 
since, labeled as you see, by my own hand as a boy. The line of 
transmission is direct enough to insure its authenticity. If you 
think well to offer it to the Historical Society, it is quite at your 
service for that purpose. Believe me, yours very sincerely, 

W. H. van Allen. 

The Corresponding Secretary reported the receipt of a letter 
from William Crowninshield Endicott accepting his election 
as a Resident Member of the Society. 

The Editor reported that Messrs. George C. and B. Pick- 
man Mann have deposited with the Society the papers of their 
father, Horace Mann (i 796-1859), about three thousand in 
number. Of his services to education, to Massachusetts and 
the nation, it is not necessary to speak. Only a partial use has 
been made of this collection in print, and few of the letters re- 
ceived by him during his long and fruitful public life have as 
yet seen the light. The collection is an important addition to 
the Society's material on the political history of Massa- 
chusetts. It will be recalled that Mr. Mann succeeded John 
Quincy Adams in the House of Representatives in 1848. 

The Vice-President announced the death of our late asso- 
ciate Lucien Carr and summarized the facts of his life and of 
his connection with the Society. Mr. Thayer, a life-long ac- 
quaintance and friend of Mr. Carr, paid a feeling tribute to his 

Mr. Bassett read the following paper on 

Development of the Popular Churches after the 

By a popular church I mean one that by its organization and 
doctrines appeals most strongly to the middle and lower 


classes. Among such churches the most important are the 
Methodist, Baptist, and to some extent the Presbyterian 
organizations. Along with them ought to be classed several 
minor churches, which are not numerically important, but 
whose doctrines and forms of government, as well as the class 
of people to whom they appeal, make them as truly popular 
as the larger bodies just mentioned. The English Church is 
not popular in this sense, although it by no means intended to 
leave out of its scope of activity any class of people. It 
was, in its direction and in its appeal, the church of the 
colonial ruling class, and it remained during the national 
period the church which the more aristocratic portion of the 
people tended to join in a large part of the country. 

For the purposes of this paper the Congregational Church 
also is not included among the popular churches. It was the 
established church of New England, it was within the direc- 
tion of the ruling class of society, and it ought to be considered 
an aristocratic organization, although its government was 
democratic in form and it continued to have within its mem- 
bership large portions of the middle and lower classes. It had 
the fortune to experience in the seventeenth century a " Great 
Awakening," a profound revival movement, which renewed 
its evangelical spirit in many respects. In passing through 
this experience before the Revolution it underwent a stage 
of development somewhat like that which the more popular 
churches of the South and Southwest were to undergo during 
the period with which this paper deals. 

One of the recent historians of the Protestant Episcopal 
Church 1 describes the years 1784-1811 as a "Period of sus- 
pended animation and feeble growth." At that time this 
church had been well planted in America for more than a hun- 
dred years. It had enjoyed the advantage of public support 
and to it had belonged in most colonies the upper class. It 
had received much assistance from the established church in 
England through the intervention of a missionary society to 
which many charitable people had given money. During the 
period after the Revolution the general religious life of the 
country was exceedingly vigorous. Why, then, should this 

1 Tiffany, A History of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States, 
ch. xiv. 


one church, at this particular time, have come so near to ex- 
tinction? It could not have been because of the doctrines 
of the church; for they were the same as in recent years, when 
the church has most successfully appealed to many parts of 
the world. Nor could it have been on account of disestablish- 
ment; for the Congregational Church of New England, once 
an established church, passed through such a process without 
serious loss of effectiveness, and in our own time we have seen 
the Roman Catholic Church disestablished in France with a 
gain in its spiritual vigor. Nor could it have been the exist- 
ence of scepticism, at that time widely prevalent in America; 
for other churches have encountered scepticism without dis- 
aster. In fact, there is more scepticism in the United States 
today than a century ago, and yet the churches are as vigorous 
as they have ever been. 

It is also significant that in the post-revolutionary period 
the Episcopal Church reached its lowest state in the South, 
where, in colonial times it had been most favored. Statistics 
of communicants are not accessible, but we may learn the 
general condition of the church from the statistics of the 
clergymen. In 1776 there were nearly two hundred clergymen 
in the colonies south of Mason and Dixon's line. In every 
colony taxes were paid to support them, although they were 
paid very irregularly and sparsely in North Carolina and 
Georgia. In South Carolina, Virginia, and Maryland there 
were valuable glebe-lands. Some of the clergymen were 
Tories and returned to England when the war began — how 
many does not appear. Others were cast adrift when the 
church was disestablished, their parishes, it seems, making 
no effort to retain them by private subscriptions. At the end 
of the Revolution the number in parishes was a mere handful. 
Virginia offers an illustration. In 1776 there were ninety-one 
clergymen in the province: in 1783 they were only twenty- 
eight, and of these but fifteen had parishes. 1 That these re- 
mained faithful was due as much to inertia as to the state of 
vitality in the church. When the Protestant Episcopal Church 
was organized in 1785 one of the clergymen selected to be made 
a bishop was Rev. David Griffith, of Virginia. He was not 
able to go to London for consecration because the Virginia 

1 Tiffany, Protestant Episcopal Church, 47; Meade, Old Churches, 1, 17. 



church could not raise enough money to pay his travelling 
expenses. Three calls for this purpose were made on the 
parishes, but only £28 could be secured. When Bishop Mad- 
ison was consecrated in 1790, he went to London partly at his 
own expense. But in spite of the acquisition of a bishop, the 
Virginia church continued in a condition nearly comatose. Its 
life was so feeble that the bishop ceased to visit his parishes, 
and so loyal a churchman as John Marshall openly doubted 
the success of efforts to keep it alive. The convention of the 
diocese did not meet from 1805 to 18 12, and for many years 
there was only one ordination within its jurisdiction. It was 
Bishop Meade who restored life to the church in that state. 
When he was chosen to the office in 18 13 only seven clergy- 
men and eighteen laymen could be brought together in a 
diocesan convention. The Revolution left the North Caro- 
lina church in a still worse condition. In 1793, after many 
efforts, a convention of three clergymen and three laymen 
was assembled. A bishop was chosen, but he died before 
he was consecrated. It was not until 181 7 that the church 
was drawn out of this Slough of Despond and a diocese was 
regularly organized. 

While the Episcopal Church was in this prostrate condition 
in the South, it was in a healthy and progressing state in the 
North, as the minutes of the general convention show. In 
1 8 14 reports were received from the various dioceses, and in 
them we read that the state of the church in Massachusetts 
was " highly flattering," in Connecticut it was " increasing in 
numbers and in vital religion," in New York the congregations 
were increasing in numbers, loyalty, and the " spirit of evan- 
gelical piety," and in Pennsylvania there was "an increased 
attention to the concerns of the church." But the reports 
from the South were of another tenor. We read: "The 
Church in Maryland still continues in a state of depression," 
and in Virginia it was in a "deplorable condition." North 
Carolina was not reported, but there was a word of hope from 
South Carolina, where, it was declared, "the various parishes 
are making exertions to provide for their ministers and to re- 
establish divine service in the vacant churches." * 

A great deal has been said about the effects of Toryism on 

1 Journals of the General Convention, 1. 411-419. 


the Anglican Church in America at the time of the Revolution. 
Probably the effect has been overestimated. Those parts of 
the United States from which the Tory exodus was strongest 
were three: Boston, New York, and the Cape Fear region of 
North Carolina. From each were withdrawn many people, 
but those who went from the two cities named were to a large 
extent previously collected from a large surrounding area. 
Those drawn from North Carolina were mostly Presbyterians. 
It does not seem that enough Tories not Presbyterians left the 
South to have made any considerable impression on the Angli- 
can Church there ; and the withdrawals from the New England 
and Middle states could not have affected the church seriously, 
since in those states the church did not fall into the decay which 
afflicted it in the South. In the same spirit, it does not seem 
probable that the Episcopal Church was greatly discredited by 
the fact that it had been an establishment of the English gov- 
ernment, now so unpopular. Among the leading men of the 
Revolution in the South were many Episcopalians. The 
colonial gentry of the South organized and led the Revolution 
there; and the colonial gentry were formerly the support of 
the Anglican Church there. 

The best historian of the Episcopal Church in the South in 
the period under consideration is Bishop Meade. He knew 
well the Virginia church and was not disposed to shield it from 
criticism. Assigning the facts just mentioned to a subordinate 
position, he gives two chief causes of the decline of the Virginia 
church, the immoral lives of the colonial clergy and the lack of 
evangelical preaching. To be addicted to excessive dram- 
drinking, to patronize the race meets, and to promote cock- 
fighting were common with the clergy of Virginia and Maryland. 
We hear of some ministers who were atheists, or who fought 
duels. 1 In other words, the clergyman was not differentiated 
from the typical man of the world. This was largely due to the 
fact that there was no colonial bishop with authority over the 
clergy. To the colonies came incompetent ministers, who had 
no prospects in England, and there was no way of forcing 
them out of their colonial parishes or of compelling them to 
rule their wayward impulses. The fashionable and worldly 
clergymen were the most popular in a fashionable and worldly 
1 Meade, Old Churches, 1. 18. 


society, and they overshadowed and caused men to forget the 
small number of plain and sincere men who served more faith- 
fully in some of the parishes. 

As to the character of the preaching, it was affected by the 
same disease that produced at that time a cold and formal 
faith in the mother-country. Tillotson and Burnet set the 
standard, and their sermons were read or imitated in colonial 
pulpits as freely as in Great Britain. Bishop Meade com- 
plains that they were not suited to the needs of Virginia. They 
dealt with natural religion and went no further than to teach 
morality. In his researches he went through the library of 
many a deceased parson, turning his sermons over with an eye 
to discover what colonial preaching was like. "Brief and most 
unimpressive" are the words with which he dismisses these 
sermons. 1 His testimony is corroborated by that of the early 
Methodist preachers. Bishop Francis Asbury, who was a 
Wesleyan preacher in America for thirteen years before the 
Methodist Church was organized on a distinct basis, gives us 
the best view of this kind. Considering himself still a member 
of the old church, he always attended the parish church when 
possible. His diary, so faithful a witness of the events of the 
day, contains repeated reference to the cold and lifeless ser- 
mons he heard. Rev. Samuel Davies, who was a Presby- 
terian minister in Virginia before he was president of Princeton, 
said: "Had the doctrines of the gospel been solemnly and 
faithfully preached in the Established Church, I am persuaded 
there would have been few dissenters in these parts of Virginia." 
It was not, he added, the forms or the articles of the church 
that displeased the people, but the character of the preaching. 2 

Under the formal preaching of the day a great deal of scep- 
ticism grew up among the upper classes; and it must be reck- 
oned with as one of the forces which conditioned the religious 
history of the times. It was a scoffing and flamboyant kind 
of scepticism, based on Bolingbroke and Hume. We must 
remember that it was not until the progress of nineteenth- 
century science gave free thought a firm basis to stand upon 
that it ceased to be, in the mouth of the average intelligent 
defender, both superficial and abusive. It would not be 
proper to speak of the prevalence of scepticism among the 

1 Meade, Old Churches, 11. 354. 2 lb., 1. 16. 


middle and lower classes in the South. "Irreligion" would be 
a better word in connection with these people. Most of them 
believed in the existence of a hell and in the power of an angry 
God to punish sinners. Their swaggering about unbelief was 
but aping the ways of their betters. At the end of the Revo- 
lution their numbers were great, especially in the newer parts 
of the South and West. A large number of settlers had come 
into this region in quest of homes. Some of them belonged to 
one of the old churches and were devout enough to keep up 
their religious life without preacher or meeting-house. But 
far more of them drifted away from such church moorings as 
they had once had, and irreligion went hand in hand with a 
vast amount of coarse and wild living. The English established 
church of colonial times had no hold on this class. Its power 
was only slight over the corresponding class of society in the 
tide- water region. But now that it was swept away, the 
middle and lower groups of society, both in the interior and on 
the coast, were as sheep without a shepherd, and there was 
wonderful opportunity for religious reorganization. It was 
at this time and in this way that the popular churches came 
into the South and Southwest, and succeeded, after thirty years 
of missionary work, in rebuilding the religious life of these 
sections on new bases. 

When the Revolution ended, the Presbyterian and Baptist 
churches were the strongest popular churches in the South. 
They had appeared sporadically in the coast region at an early 
day; but they got their foothold in the interior during the 
middle decades of the eighteenth century. To this region 
came many Scotch-Irish and some Highlanders, all stout 
Presbyterians. They settled as the land suited them; but 
hard after came the Presbyterian missionaries sent out by the 
churches in the older North. The object was to gather up 
those who had once held the faith, lest they should forget it. 
The result of their efforts was the organization of con- 
gregations throughout the Piedmont region. In this period 
came the Great Awakening, in which the Tennents, Gilbert 
and William, created a profound impression among the Pres- 
byterians of New Jersey and Philadelphia. For a short period 
the church of Knox and Calvin cast aside its habitual conser- 
vatism and became a revival organization. From these two 


colonies went out two great streams of Presbyterian influence, 
one across the mountains into the Ohio valley and the other 
into the South. It was a cardinal doctrine of this church, 
then as now, that ministers should be educated; and to meet 
the necessity and to supply properly educated ministers for 
this field of church extension efforts were made which resulted 
in the organization of Princeton College. There was much 
division among Presbyterians. Some congregations were of 
Irish and some were of Scottish origin, and between them were 
variations of doctrine which made it difficult to establish unity 
as long as the old influences continued. But the greatest source 
of disagreement was the question of revivals. As revivalists 
the Tennents and their friends always encountered opposition, 
those who supported them being called New Side, and those 
who opposed being known as Old Side, Presbyterians. In 
1783 the Presbyterians were probably the largest religious 
group in the South. 

But the Baptists were also very strong. In Virginia they 
took the lead in the movement to disestablish the Anglican 
Church. A few congregations- appeared in the coast region of 
the South in the seventeenth century, but they were of the 
General Baptist persuasion. That is to say, they believed in 
immersion but were Arminians, preaching general salvation. 
About the middle of the next century missionaries from the 
Philadelphia Baptist Association appeared in Virginia. They 
were Regular Baptists, holding the doctrine of election. They 
.had much success in the back counties of Virginia and became 
so strong that they drew to themselves most of the General 
Baptists of the region lying to the southward. About 1756 a 
third Baptist movement appeared in the South, led by Shubael 
Stearns and Daniel Marshall. They came from New England, 
where they had come under the influence of George Whitefield. 
They were generally Arminians and emphasized the necessity 
of conversion. They were revivalists, and their preaching was 
attended with hysteria, shouting, and manifestations of nerv- 
ous excitement which the people of the day considered visita- 
tions of God. Stearns and Marshall settled in North Carolina, 
where they founded the Sandy Creek church, a centre from 
which went out many lines of influence to South Carolina, 
Georgia, and Virginia itself. Followers of this movement 


were known as Separate Baptists. Their rapid growth brought 
them into rivalry with the Regular Baptists, and efforts to 
unite the two groups were begun just before the Revolution. 
They ended with the triumph of the Regular Baptists about 
1786. The Separates made a show of retaining their tenet of 
free grace, but Calvinism was a more popular doctrine and 
most Baptists held to it. In 1784 there were 20,940 Baptists 
in the states of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, 
Georgia, Kentucky, and Tennessee. In 1792 the number had 
increased to 39,319, and in 181 2 it was 109, 33 1. 1 The Presby- 
terians seem to have given little care to the extension of the 
faith among any but the Scotch-Irish. They were not in gen- 
eral an evangelizing body. The Baptists, on the other hand, 
were earnest for conquests over the kingdom of Satan. Al- 
though the Arminianism of the Separates could not withstand 
the persistent logic of the Calvinistic Regulars, the former 
carried into the united group enough of that earnest revivalism 
which Whitefield kindled in New England and elsewhere, to 
leaven the whole lump. The Presbyterians insisted on an 
educated ministry, the Baptists, and especially the Separates, 
licensed many strong and fervent spirits to preach who had no 
more learning than the inefficient country schools afforded. 
Such persons were not skilled in theology, but they understood 
the hearts of the backwoodsmen, their brethren, and they 
gathered very many of them into the fold. 

While the Baptists were winning their way in this region, 
the Methodists were conducting a still more rapid advance. 
The first members of this church to appear in the colonies were 
persons who had migrated to the New World after coming 
under the influence of the Wesleyans in England. They were 
mostly poor people, and in 1764 to 1769 they organized con- 
gregations in Maryland, New York, and Philadelphia. At the 
same time Wesley sent over preachers who began their minis- 
trations in all parts of the seacoast. One of them was Francis 
Asbury, destined to be recognized as a bishop, and one of the 
most notable church-builders whom the country has seen. His 
diary is evidence of the religious condition of the day. It 
shows that there was not much success at first in New York 

1 Newman, History of the Baptist Churches in the United States, 303, 307, 315, 
332, 336, and 338. 


and Philadelphia. The probable reason was that Lutheran, 
Presbyterian, Dutch, Baptist, and other churches were well 
established in these places and it was hard for the newcomers 
to break into their spheres of influence. In Maryland and 
the South the case was otherwise. Wherever the preachers 
went conversions were made and churches were established. 
It must be remembered that Methodism at this time was 
technically within the Anglican Church. Wesley had organ- 
ized his societies under the protection of church communicants, 
and he did not consider them anything but societies. His 
preachers were fervid men from various walks of life and often 
without education; but he did not consider them clergymen. 
Some English clergymen gave them countenance, but mostly 
they frowned on the societies. In America the same atti- 
tude was maintained by the Anglican clergy, with a few not- 
able exceptions. One of the latter class was Rev. Devereux 
Jarratt, parish rector at Petersburg, Virginia. Born in the 
colonies, he went to London for ordination, and while there 
became acquainted with the Wesleyan work. On his return 
he organized like societies in his parish and in the surrounding 
country. When the Methodist preachers appeared he re- 
ceived them gladly and his work inured to a large extent to the 
success of the Methodist movement. In America, as in Eng- 
land, there were always some persons in the old church who 
looked on the work of the Wesleys as a much-needed effort to 
revive spiritual living. 

When the Revolution began, a few of the preachers returned 
to England. For a time Methodism was unpopular because 
it was thought to be identified with Toryism. But this was a 
transitory feeling. The best of the preachers, including Asbury, 
remained in America, and their efforts were so sincere that they 
soon regained the confidence of the people. By this time many 
native converts had begun to preach, and American Method- 
ism was able thenceforth to stand on its own feet. How fast 
the societies grew is shown by the fact that in 1775 they con- 
tained 3,348 members, seventy-seven per cent of whom lived 
south of Pennsylvania; in 1783 they contained 13,240 mem- 
bers, eighty per cent of whom were in the South. 1 The so- 
cieties were thus most prosperous in the region in which the 
1 The statistics are in the Annual Minutes for the years concerned. 


Anglican Church had suffered most through the disintegrating 
forces of the time. Should they continue to be associated 
with a church which was well-nigh moribund? It was a seri- 
ous question ; for without their connection with the old church 
they were no church at all, and could not expect to do the 
work that seemed to await them as simple societies. The 
preachers, who understood the needs of their cause, had many 
times asked that the societies be recognized as a distinct 
church; but Wesley, to his death a High Churchman, had 
steadily refused. One of the charges often made against him 
was that he was ambitious and looked to a separate organiza- 
tion, and his refusal was all the more emphatic because of this 
charge. But when the real situation in America was brought 
home to him he could no longer hold back; and in 1784, at a 
conference of the ministers in Baltimore, the garments of a 
church were definitely put on. Wesley appointed two su- 
perintendents, who afterwards were called bishops. One of 
these men was Thomas Coke, a man of good family, a gentleman 
commoner of Jesus College, Oxford, and a doctor of laws from 
that university. He was first a curate, but was dismissed 
because he preached in the Methodist fashion with great suc- 
cess. He then joined the Wesleyan movement. The other 
was Francis Asbury, son of an English gardener, and one of 
Wesley's self-educated preachers. The union of the two men, 
socially so far apart in their origins, into the joint direction of 
the Methodist Episcopal Church was characteristic of the 
early Wesleyan movement. 

From 1784 the new church grew rapidly. In 1790 it had a 
total membership of 57,631; in 1800, 64,894, of whom 42,729 
were in the states of Maryland, Virginia, North and South 
Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, and Tennessee. In 18 10 the total 
membership was 174,060, and of these 100,454 lived in the 
Southern states just named. 1 It will be interesting to note 
that in 1790 there were 11,682 colored members, in 1800 there 
were 13,452, and in 1810 there were 34,727. Most of the col- 
ored members were reported from the South. In 1796 there 
were 11,280 in that region, 11,849 *& 1800, and 22,948 in 1910. 

1 The figures for the South, 18 10, include a small number then living north 
of the Ohio, who by the method then used were included in the Western Con- 
ference. The number could hardly have been as many as 5,000. 


On consideration these statistics seem to indicate that the 
Methodists gained very rapidly in the South in the days of 
immediate disestablishment of the Anglican Church. Then 
came a period of slow growth, followed by a rapid expansion 
after 1800. On the other hand, it seems that the church grew 
very slowly in the North until it had shaken off all its con- 
nection with the English Church, and that when the people of 
the North recognized in it a distinct church with doctrines 
which recalled the days of the Great Awakening they received 
it liberally. 

The Methodists benefited through their espousal of Armin- 
ianism, which, from the standpoint of the revivalist has an 
advantage over Calvinism. It made a universal appeal and 
was more easily comprehended by the middle classes than the 
reasoning by which Calvinists must explain away some of the 
implications of the doctrine of election. The Methodists also 
benefited by their concentrated organization. The bishops, 
with their power to send ministers wherever there was need, 
were effective directors of church expansion. They were the 
generals of an army which they threw into whatever breach 
was most inviting. No other Protestant church had so strong 
and at the same time so flexible a command of its strategy. 
Methodism gained, also, through being a new organization. 
Presbyterians and Baptists lost much through having to spend 
efforts to harmonize disharmonious portions of the common 
faith, portions whose differences were partly connected with 
their geographical past and partly with doctrines. 

In the last years of the eighteenth century a great revival 
swept over the South and Southwest. Perhaps it was some- 
what related to a wave that visited the Baptists in the late 
eighties. At any rate it was in full force a decade later in 
Kentucky, Tennessee, and the whole seaboard region. Metho- 
dists, Presbyterians, Baptists, and other smaller churches 
co-operated. The statistics show how great was its influence 
on church membership. The revival was accompanied by the 
usual emotional effects, one of its achievements being to de- 
velop camp-meetings, which seem to have been used to some 
extent before the revival began. One of the inevitable phases 
of such a movement is to draw attention to the ministers who 
do not accept the revival as a means of church policy. Thus 


it happened that the fervid preachers of conversion discovered 
that there were some ministers who were not themselves con- 
verted. The natural result was opposition from the most con- 
servative of the popular churches in the South, that is, from 
the Presbyterian Church. Reliance on uneducated ministers 
served as an additional reason for the cooling of this church 
toward the revival movement. The Cumberland Presbytery, 
in the Cumberland Valley in Tennessee and Kentucky, gave 
full support to revivals and was suspended by the Synod of 
Kentucky; and the suspension was approved by the General 
Assembly. The upshot of this was the Cumberland Presby- 
terian Church, organized in 1810 on an independent basis. 
Through its attitude on this question the Presbyterian Church, 
once the strongest in the South and Southwest, was forced 
after a while into second and then third rank in regard to 
numbers. Between its two great rivals, the race was always 
close. They became the churches of the middle-class farmers 
of this large region, as well as of that portion of the West in 
which New England influence was not paramount. 

An interesting study could be made of the influence of the 
revival type of religion on the life and thought of the South. 
Many things combined to make the life of the middle classes 
there what it was. Among them were the isolation due to the 
predominance of rural life, the small amount of education ac- 
cessible to the small farmers, and the intellectual monotony 
which always closes down on an exclusively agricultural people. 
Another thing was the character of the preaching the people 
heard and accepted. It cannot be d©ubted that the rigid 
preaching of Puritanism by New England ministers left a deep 
impression on the New Englander's intellectuality. It must 
be equally true that the fervent appeals to induce men to lose 
themselves in the Spirit of God left its impress on the Southern- 
ers. It would seem that such exaltation, preached by masters 
of the art of firing the imagination, would increase the emotion- 
alism of the hearers and lessen their faculty of sober and dis- 
passionate reasoning. 

This study is not long enough to enable the writer to take 
into consideration the several minor churches that were as 
truly popular in their influence as the large organization he 
has mentioned. Among them were the Lutherans, the Mora- 


vians, the Quakers, the Christians, the Disciples, and the 
Roman Catholics. Most of them had influence within small 
localities. It is difficult to assign them proper positions in 
the religious history of the time; but taken together the minor 
churches but served to strengthen the popular movement 
about which we have been speaking. 

In the North the religious development was steady after the 
Great Awakening. Congregationalism, the one great privi- 
leged church of this section, had room for spiritual religion for 
both the aristocracy of the town and the humblest citizen ; and 
it was resourceful enough to solve the problems of disestablish- 
ment without serious loss of power. It is true that it lost 
something through the Unitarian schism, which came to a 
focus about 181 5, and from the gradual loss of its own members 
who came to desire a warmer ritual than Puritanism could 
give and who for that reason joined the Protestant Episcopal 
Church. In the West it lost something also through a ten- 
dency to combine with Presbyterianism when there were not 
enough Congregationalists in a community to make it wise to 
struggle alone. In the Middle States the churches from the 
first were founded in accordance with the needs of racial and 
social groups, and they tended to maintain themselves in their 
own fields. In the region north of the Ohio were two strata of 
population, one from New England and one from the mixed 
American, German, and Scotch-Irish population that had 
settled on the eastern side of the Appalachian system. Into 
the former were projected New England churches, the Con- 
gregational Church being the most important of them. Into 
the latter were carried the ideas and institutions of the hetero- 
geneous mass from which the people came, and among these 
institutions were the churches of the South and Southwest. 
Here we find Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians, and the 
members of the minor churches as truly as in the older region 
near the coast. 

It has often been remarked that New England is a land of 
steady habits. The Puritan code of conduct was a great 
leveler of human actions. When it had laid its hand on a 
community for some generations spontaneity and natural 
impulses were lowered. At the same time, the power of co- 
operation and the faculty of fitting into the great machinery 


of the community were exalted. In the South no such force 
came into the consciousness of the people. Religion followed 
natural impulses, and it formulated a less rigid code of morals 
than prevailed in Puritan countries. It did not weigh down 
individuality, neither did it organize the communities for 
social reforms. Being a thing of the spirit, it was rather 
ignorant of, and indifferent to, terrestrial things. It was one 
of the important factors that entered into the evolution of 
Southern society in the early nineteenth century. 

Mr. Theodore Clarke Smith then read a paper on 

General Garfield at Chickamauga. 

When Congressman Garfield, senator-elect from Ohio, was 
nominated for the Presidency in 1880, his career was ran- 
sacked for incidents suitable for creating a picturesque and 
winning impression. The campaign value of his early poverty 
and work on the Ohio canal was instantly recognized, and 
there were many quotable speeches and sayings which could 
be used to illustrate his stalwart Republicanism; but his war 
record, although covering a period of two years, revealed but 
one episode that was in the slightest degree dramatic. That 
was his ride back to the battlefield of Chickamauga after the 
commanding general had fled with the routed Union right wing, 
and his narrow escape from destruction at the hands of the 
Confederates. So General Garfield's ride became a prominent 
feature of the campaign biographies, decorated the speeches of 
stump orators, was depicted by campaign artists and caricatured 
until the tradition was established that about the only things of 
significance done by the Republican candidate of 1880 were to 
drive a canal boat in youth, volunteer for the war, ride bravely 
back to Thomas's position under a storm of shot, and then, 
after a few years in Congress, receive the nomination in recog- 
nition of his personal and military virtues. 

In the mass of biographical material at Mentor covering 
the life of the murdered President, it happens that almost 
the only important episode regarding which he has left in- 
adequate records and about which the existing information is 
least satisfactory, is precisely that of his participation in the 
battle of Chickamauga and the famous ride itself. At no time 


did he write for publication any description of his doings on 
that day, and while he undoubtedly gave information to his 
friends for their personal use, he in no case allowed the publica- 
tion of any account of the battle over his name or using his name 
as an authority. Even in his memorial oration on General 
Thomas he carefully kept to the subject in hand, eulogized 
Thomas's record in general terms, and avoided anything which 
would commit him to any view of the details of management or 
generalship. In spite of the fact that his own participation in 
the battle was such as to win him fame and promotion to a 
Major-Generalship, he resolutely refrained from any report 
of his own doings. 

All that is possible, then, for a biographer, is to discover from 
the despatches of the time, from reminiscences of other less 
reticent generals and from contemporary reports of newspaper 
correspondents, the bare outline of what General Garfield did. 
It appears that, as Rosecrans' chief of staff, he went with the 
commanding general in his various movements on September 
19 and 20, receiving reports from corps and division command- 
ers and writing Rosecrans' orders. He did not, however, write 
the "fatal order" to Wood, which caused that general to march 
his division out of line to "support" General Reynolds, thereby 
creating a gap at the precise moment that the terrific Confed- 
erate charge under Longstreet burst upon the Union right 
wing. None of Garfield's orders were phrased so barely or 
peremptorily as that which commanded Wood to " support" 
Reynolds, and it is safe to say that if he had had the drafting 
of the message it would never have forced Wood to his disas- 
trous step. In fact, according to the sworn testimony of the 
officer who carried the fatal order from Rosecrans to Wood, 
Garfield, seeing his perplexity, " called out that the object of 
the order was that General Wood should occupy the vacancy 
made by the removal of General B rannan 's division . " x This was 
repeated by the officer to Wood, but that general, seeing the 
peremptory wording of the message, did not feel warranted in 
accepting the report of Garfield's oral emendation, and moved 
his men out of their places. 

When Rosecrans was forced to fly from the field after the 

1 Testimony of Col. L. Starling, Crittenden Court of Inquiry, War Records, 
50. 983. 


rout of the Union right wing, and was cut off from going directly 
to the Union left, Garfield fled with his chief toward Chat- 
tanooga. At Rossville, about three quarters of the way there, 
the two separated, Rosecrans to continue to the city to prepare 
the place for receiving the broken army, Garfield to make his 
famous ride to the front, to discover whether General Thomas's 
corps was still unbroken and to report to Rosecrans. 

After arriving at the field, it may be gathered that Garfield 
spent the afternoon in company with Generals Thomas and 
Granger, who were at or near the Snodgrass house in the rear 
of the " Horseshoe Ridge," where the patched-up line of frag- 
ments of regiments was making its famous and magnificent de- 
fence, hour after hour, while Longstreet's troops hurled assault 
after assault on them. Very probably he remained there until 
fighting stopped, and then found his way to the other Union 
wing where Thomas had carried through a perilous but suc- 
cessful extrication of half his force from behind intrenchments 
that were in danger of being surrounded. A persistent tradition 
associates him with a discharge of artillery that closed the fight 
on the extreme Union left. In any case he saw the best of the 
fighting and accompanied Thomas to Rossville, when, after 
dark, in response to an order from Rosecrans, he withdrew his 
exhausted but unbeaten men. Since he was without any special 
duties, he had unrivalled opportunities to observe, and it is a 
matter of keen regret that he never saw fit to preserve his recol- 
lections. They would have been of unique interest. The next 
day he returned to Chattanooga and resumed his duties of 
chief of staff, relinquishing them after three weeks in order to 
take the reports of the battle to Washington and make a per- 
sonal statement to Stanton and Lincoln of the needs of the 
army. Here again it is much to be regretted that no record 
seems to have been kept of Garfield's interviews with Lincoln 
and the Cabinet, for his answers to their questions must have 
gone to the heart of the whole affair. 

Meanwhile a controversy had begun, which involved Gar- 
field indirectly, over the conduct of Rosecrans on the second 
day. Why, it was generally asked throughout the army, did 
he go to Chattanooga, instead of making his way to the front 
and sharing in the glory of the fight that Thomas made against 
odds? He had done well at Stone's River under similar circum- 


stances; he had held his troops together at Corinth — why did 
he fail now? By the time that Rosecrans was ready to write his 
report of the battle he was aware that his prestige was seriously 
damaged and that it behoved him to find a satisfactory, cogent 
reason for his retreat. He could not fail to see that Garfield by 
his ride had won credit that might well have gone to himself; 
that would, in fact, have made him a hero had he, alone of the 
routed right wing, made his way to the fight. 

Hence in his official report, undated but probably written 
two weeks at least after the battle, he says: " Hearing the 
enemy's advancing musketry and cheers I became doubtful 
whether the left had held its ground and started for Rossville. 
On consultation and further reflection, however, I determined 
to send General Garfield there, while I went to Chattanooga, 
to give orders for the security of the pontoon bridges . . . 
and to make preliminary dispositions either to forward ammu- 
nition and supplies should we hold our ground, or to withdraw 
the troops into good position. General Garfield despatched me 
from Rossville, that the left and centre still held its ground." 1 
Rosecrans' doom, however, was sealed. The general impres- 
sion created by the battle of Chickamauga was so unfavorable 
to his reputation — especially his flight to Chattanooga — that 
the administration and General Grant agreed in removing him 
from command on October 16, before Garfield with the reports 
could reach Washington. His former chief of staff, having 
been elected to Congress from the nineteenth Ohio district, re- 
signed from the army and began the career which ultimately 
brought him to the White House. But he did not forget his 
old chief, and not only did he make an eloquent speech in de- 
fence of his military services on February 17, 1864, but a year 
later he introduced and carried through a resolution giving 
Rosecrans an opportunity to appear before the Committee on 
the Conduct of the War and defend his record. On this occa- 
sion Rosecrans, again in a position to make an official state- 
ment, gave a new version of the decision to go to Chattanooga 
which added materially to that given in the official report. On 
April 22, 1865, he said: "Forgetting my past record, and in- 
fluenced by calumnies put in circulation, it has been thought 
that I needlessly or languidly forsook the field of battle on the 

1 Rosecrans' Report, October, 1863, War Records, 50. 60. 


20th." He then entered upon a justification of his course. In 
the main it followed the line sketched in his report of 1863, but 
went into great detail as to the importance of securing the 
safety of the trains, and of preparing for an eventual retreat to 
Chattanooga. The striking addition to the original statement 
is found in the following words: "When, therefore, I reached 
Rossville, and became satisfied that, though cut off from the 
main body of our army, ... we still held the field in front of 
Thomas, two things were to be done: first, to ascertain the 
condition of affairs at the front; the other to have this train 
moved to a place of safety. . . . Having explained this to 
General Garfield, my chief of staff, it was determined that the 
movement to the front, being less complicated, should be per- 
formed by him, while I made the dispositions and gave the 
orders just spoken of . . . . Out of the performance of these two 
duties, dictated by candor and a pure desire to do the best for 
the country, unjust and sycophantic men have undertaken to 
construct the means of injuring my military reputation." 1 

The growth in the defence is now evident. Rosecrans hoped 
to excuse his withdrawal by pointing out that his presence was 
unnecessary at the front, even though this involved a material 
modification of his first version. Two years later the Rosecrans 
account was reproduced in a still more emphatic form in a 
letter written by Colonel Goddard, formerly on his staff, in 
March, 1867. " General Rosecrans therefore started for Ross- 
ville, his first intention being to join, but falling in with Gen- 
eral Garfield at or near Rossville, and getting reports from 
Thomas that he continued to hold his position, and knowing that 
the fate of the army depended upon our ability to hold Chat- 
tanooga ... he decided to go himself to Chattanooga and send 
Garfield to Thomas with instructions to hold his position at all 
hazards." 2 

The official reports of the leading generals were published 
shortly after the battle, but the complete mass of evidence — ■ 
Confederate and Union — was not of course put in print until 
the Rebellion Records were established in 1880, and the volumes 
concerning the Chickamauga campaign did not appear until 

1 Rosecrans Campaigns, 32, in Senate Report, No. 142, 38th Cong. 2 Sess. 

2 Copy in Garfield Papers, referred to also in Harpers' Pictorial History, n. 


ten years later, in 1890. The Rosecrans version, then, held 
the field, and although it did not save its author from severe 
criticism, it remained uncontradicted by Garfield. In 1871 
an opportunity was offered to Garfield to give his own version 
of his ride in official form when, at the request of the War 
Department, he made a report of his military record. But in- 
stead of furnishing a narrative of his doings at Chickamauga, 
he contented himself with the bare statement, "I wrote every 
order save one from the Army headquarters during the two 
days of the Battle of Chickamauga." Clearly Garfield had 
no intention of committing himself on the events of that day, 
in print. 

The explanation for this regrettable reticence is to be found 
in the peculiar relations between Rosecrans and Garfield, which 
created for Garfield such a dilemma that silence seemed the 
only way of escape. In January, 1863, he was sent to Rose- 
crans' camp and immediately became intimate with his 
commander. The two men's friendship began in an unusual 
method by discussing religion — a subject of absorbing inter- 
est to Rosecrans who had become a Roman Catholic not long 
before. Night after night the two men, the Catholic and the 
Disciple, sat up until the small hours, debating religious 
dogma and truth, and, remarkable to relate, became firm 
friends while retaining all their original opinions wholly un- 
changed. To keep this agreeable and candid new friend with 
him was one of the main reasons why Rosecrans made Gar- 
field his chief of staff, and the home letters of the Ohio man 
show a mingled amusement and amazement at his sudden rise. 
During the long months of constant association Garfield, like 
all of Rosecrans' companions, came to have a warm affection 
for his chief; but at the same time, reluctantly grew to recog- 
nize Rosecrans' irresolution and lack of driving power. Yet 
so great was his influence that in June, 1863, Garfield's opinion 
as to the advisability of an advance against Bragg prevailed 
over the almost unanimously contrary opinions of the corps 
and division commanders, and Rosecrans, in the Tullahoma 
campaign, had the success of manoeuvring Bragg easily and 
rapidly out of Tennessee. Again during the summer, Rose- 
crans' over-caution and hesitations drove Garfield to despair. 
In July, 1863, he wrote to Secretary Chase, who had been his 


friend and correspondent since the year before: "Thus far the 
General has been singularly disinclined to grasp the situation 
with a strong hand and make the advantage his own. I write 
this with more sorrow than I can tell you, for I love every bone 
in his body, and next to my desire to see the rebellion blasted 
is my anxiety to see him blessed. But even the breadth of 
my love is not sufficient to cover this almost fatal delay." 1 
Garfield's inmost feelings regarding Rosecrans he seems to 
have confided to Chase alone, for he continued to command 
Rosecrans' regard and to exercise over his chief a considerable 
although by no means a controlling influence. The movements 
leading up to the Union occupation of Chattanooga were 
largely planned by Garfield, and his aid was repeatedly recog- 
nized publicly and privately by Rosecrans. Garfield wrote on 
August 23 to his wife: " There is so much of myself in the plan 
of this campaign that I must help realize my ideas. ... I am 
doing a work here for which I shall never get a tithe of the 
credit that others will. Let it pass. I am glad to help save the 
Republic." 2 

Just what part Garfield played in advising his chief dur- 
ing the events of September 19 and 20 does not appear. So 
far as the records go, Rosecrans made his own decisions, and 
Garfield's part was strictly that of a writer of orders, until the 
celebrated ride. After the battle we find Garfield again work- 
ing vigorously to aid in bringing order out of confusion, and 
continuing to support his late commander in public, always 
defending his ability and his military record. In Congress, 
as already stated, he took occasion to give marked evidence 
of his loyalty to Rosecrans, and he is reported to have used 
his influence as a Congressman in Rosecrans' behalf during 
his occupancy of a command in Missouri. It was this strong 
personal regard for Rosecrans and his feeling of loyalty 
toward the man whose chief of staff he had been that pre- 
vented Garfield from saying anything about the battle of 
Chickamauga. But this silence itself is significant. If Gar- 
field had not felt that the battle was a damaging affair, he 
would scarcely have found it necessary to take refuge in silence. 
For a man of his temperament to have written as a mere advo- 

1 Garfield to Chase , July 27, 1863. N. Y. Sun, March 8, 1880. 

2 Garfield to his Wife, August 23, 1863, Garfield Papers. 


cate would have been pretty nearly impossible; hence he said 
nothing. If Rosecrans' death had occurred before his own, his 
tongue might have been loosened, but Rosecrans outlived his 
ex-chief of staff and no such opportunity was ever offered. 

On the single point of the ride, however, Garfield seems to 
have felt that his pride was touched, for we find that not long 
after the war he took pains to give his friends a different ver- 
sion of the affair, and that soon found its way into print. 
Apparently the first to revive this was Henry Mills Alden, who 
was preparing for Harpers their Pictorial History of the War. 
The following extract from a letter dated March 7, 1867, 
indicates pretty clearly what Alden had already gained from 
Garfield and what use he intended to make of it : 

I am much indebted to you for going over the affair with me at 
Williamstown last summer. You gave me a picture of the battle, 
or the outlines for a picture, which I have missed elsewhere. I wish 
to be fortified in one point: Did I not understand from you that 
when you, with General R. were leaving the right, the General had 
no idea that Thomas was holding his ground or could hold it? If I 
remember rightly you said that, on your way to Rossville, the ques- 
tion arose as to whether the firing heard by both of you on Thomas's 
line was the firing of an army disorganized and in retreat, or of an 
army holding its position: and that you thought it was the latter. 
Rosecrans differed from you, having evidently reached a settled con- 
viction of the rout of the whole army. Do I remember rightly? I 
ask, because Rosecrans explicitly states in his evidence before the 
Congressional Committee that he was "satisfied that we still held the 
field in front of Thomas." The time and place are the same referred 
to by you, viz. when you both reached Rossville. He states more- 
over that it was determined between you "that the movement to 
the front being less complicated" you should go to Thomas while 
he looked after the rear. On the contrary, I believe you told me 
that you begged his permission to go to Thomas. This is important. 
I will not use your name in this connection as my authority — but I 
want to tell the exact truth, and no man knows so well as you where 
the truth here is. Therefore I wish to be assured that my memory 
of our conversation serves me right. 1 

Garfield's reply has not been preserved, but it is clear from 
the treatment of the episode in the Pictorial History that his 
version lay at the bottom. "Rosecrans," runs the narrative, 

* Alden to Garfield, March 7, 1867, Garfield Papers. 


"had already arrived at a conviction that the entire army was 
defeated. He judged that the firing was scattered and indicated 
disorganization. Garfield, who doubtless had a more correct 
ear, thought it was the firing of men who were standing their 
ground. He felt that Thomas was not beaten, and as General 
Rosecrans was determined to go to Chattanooga he asked per- 
mission to go to Thomas. This was given. Rosecrans went to 
Chattanooga and telegraphed to General Halleck that his army 
was beaten." * The identity of this information with that 
gained by Mr. Alden from Garfield at Williamstown in the 
summer of 1866 is evident. In a full footnote the author goes 
further and distinctly denies that Rosecrans knew that Thomas 
was holding his own, thereby directly contradicting Rosecrans' 
own statement of 1865. 

The next year another personal friend of Garfield, Whitelaw 
Reid, in his sketch of Garfield's military career furnished for 
Ohio in the War, observed about the ride, after quoting Rose- 
crans' statement that he sent Garfield to the front, "Such were 
the statements of the report, and in a technical sense they were 
true. It should not be forgotten, however, in Garfield's praise, 
that it was on his own earnest representation that he was sent 
— that in fact he rather procured permission to go to Thomas 
and so back to the battle than received orders to do so." 2 

By 1868, then another version of the ride was in print, not in- 
compatible with Rosecrans' original report, but entirely so with 
his later modification. Even with only part of the war material 
at his command, Alden was able to point out that Rosecrans' 
and Goddard's assertions of 1865 and 1867, that they knew that 
Thomas was holding his ground, were inaccurate and without 
support. Historians and biographers were then at liberty to use 
whichever they preferred. Some few adhered to the Rosecrans 
official statement, but more, when they mentioned the matter, 
tended to follow the Alden-Reid story, possibly because it was 
more picturesque, possibly because it seemed more reasonable. 
In 1876 General Opdycke wrote to Garfield as follows: 

I have been asked to prepare for the Times a full account of that 
battle, and I would feel pleasure in doing so if I were in possession 
of data. ... I should want what each division did, and any special 

1 Alden and Guernsey, Harpers' Pictorial History of the War, n. 548. 

2 Reid, Ohio in the War, 1. 757. 


points of interest — any special heroism and by whom. I should 
want details of the dramatic scene of the Chief of Staff urging 
Rosecrans to stop running away and return to his army, and the 
final separation, and your joining us in the battle. . . . x 

Again Garfield's L reply is not in existence, but the inference 
to be drawn from Opdycke's letter is unmistakable. In 1880, 
when the campaign biographers seized upon the ride with 
avidity, they usually followed Reid's account, but it is possi- 
ble that some of them may have drawn the narrative directly 
from Garfield himself, since they nearly all went to Mentor in 
search of material. None of them, however, use Garfield's 
name as authority any more than did Alden or Reid. He was 
determined, apparently, not to criticise in public his old chief's 

A year later, however, Garfield was dead, and almost imme- 
diately Rosecrans broke silence with a third and still more 
remarkable version of his withdrawal to Chattanooga. In 
the San Francisco Chronicle, in 1882, he described in full detail 
the scene between himself and his chief of staff, giving the 
actual dialogue that took place between them. Rosecrans 
opened by saying, "By the sound of battle we hold our ground 
under Thomas," and followed by mentioning all the orders to 
be given at Chattanooga. " General Garfield, when asked if he 
could not deliver these orders, urged that there were so many 
orders he thought the commanding General had better give 
them and send him to General Thomas." Rosecrans again 
spoke of the indispensable orders, when Garfield again urged, 
"I can go to General Thomas and report the situation to you 
much better than I can give those orders." General Rose- 
crans said, "Well, go and tell General Thomas my precautions, 
etc." "General Garfield," he continued, "had further urged 
as a reason for General Rosecrans going to Chattanooga that 
a new line should be selected . . . and this should be done 
by the commanding General himself, and that the officer in 
supreme command should be on the ground to assign the 
various commands to their positions." 2 

Here we find a new claim, that Garfield himself was to 
blame for Rosecrans not being at the front, and that while 

1 Opdycke to Garfield, February 5, 1876, Garfield Papers. 

2 Society of the Army of the Cumberland, 1903, 87-89. 




Garfield urged that he be allowed to go to Thomas, he did it 
on the ground that Rosecrans ought to go to Chattanooga and 
that his task was a comparatively simple one. Rosecrans ap- 
parently wished to make the dead chief of staff shoulder some 
of the blame which had attached to himself, but this version 
never attained much success outside of a small number of offi- 
cers of the Army of the Cumberland who were more or less 
attached to Rosecrans' fortunes. One was Major Bond, the 
staff officer who wrote the " fatal order" to Wood. He fur- 
nished a version of the affair to J. R. Gilmore, who wrote an 
article on "Garfield's Ride" for McClure's Magazine in 1895. 
Here Garfield appears as urging his own incompetence for 
assuming the responsibility of issuing orders at Chattanooga, 
and as welcoming the return to the front as a means of escaping 
a task too hard for him. 1 General H. V. Boynton, Secretary 
of the Chattanooga National Park Commission, also accepted 
the Rosecrans version in a publication of the same year, 1895, 
and repeated it later. 2 Another was Colonel Cist, who adopted 
a combination of the two stories for his Army of the Cumberland, 
1882. Here he makes the two men differ as to the status of the 
Union left wing, and has Garfield urge Rosecrans, in case he 
thinks the army routed, to continue to Chattanooga and allow 
him to return. Fiske and others have followed him. 3 

On the other hand, several writers have come out openly, 
citing Garfield as authority for the assertion that Rosecrans 
was broken in spirit after the rout and could not be persuaded 
that Thomas was holding his own. First, General Opdycke, in 
Battles and Leaders, published in 1882, observed, "Rosecrans 
says that he sent Garfield to the front, while Garfield has many 
times said that he insisted on going — that the sound of battle 
proved that Thomas was still holding the enemy in check." 4 
In Nicolay and Hay's Lincoln, a footnote cited Garfield as 
authority for the assertion that Rosecrans was broken and 
despairing, 5 and finally in 1900 General Cox, in his Reminis- 
cences, gives a long account of his interview with Garfield after 
the battle. Rosecrans, according to Garfield, was in a state of 

1 J. R. Gilmore, McClure's Magazine, v. 358. 

2 The National Military Park, Chickamauga, 1895, 2 9°- 

3 H. M. Cist, Army of the Cumberland, 1882, 225. 

4 Battles and Leaders, in. 671. 

6 Nicolay and Hay, Lincoln, 1892, vm. 102. 


collapse. When Garfield requested to be allowed to return, 
"Rosecrans assented listlessly and mechanically." Cox adds: 
"As Garfield told it to me, he leaned forward, bringing his 
excited face close to mine, and his hand came heavily down upon 
my knee as in whispered tones he described the collapse of 
nerve and will that had befallen his chief. The words burned 
themselves into my memory." 1 

After 1890 there was a touchstone for the whole matter, for 
the original reports and papers were published, and in them 
we can see whether any support is to be found for the Rose- 
crans or for the Garfield versions. It would be too long a 
process for the present occasion to run through the evidence in 
detail; nor is it, perhaps, worth while regarding a matter that 
is incapable of definite proof. It is a striking fact, however, 
that during the afternoon of September 20, from the time 
Rosecrans left Garfield until he received his first despatch from 
the front, a little before five, to the effect that Thomas was still 
holding out, he does not seem to have issued any orders that 
have been preserved, except one to Thomas to assume com- 
mand and withdraw to Rossville. Another order to Garfield, 
undated, instructs him to tell Thomas to retreat to Rossville 
"should he be retiring in order." 2 In acknowledging Garfield's 
first report, Rosecrans adds, "I trust General Thomas has been 
able to hold his position." 3 Further, after receiving Garfield's 
first despatch, Rosecrans telegraphed its substance to Halleck, 
beginning, "We have met with a serious disaster," 4 and the 
same phraseology is used to Burnside in another telegram. So 
far from sending ammunition and supplies to Rossville, he had 
apparently done nothing, for Negley telegraphed from Ross- 
ville at 7 P. m. asking for food for the exhausted troops. 5 
Even after the receipt of Garfield's report only two orders are 
preserved, neither one relating to the trains, for whose safety 
Rosecrans was supposed to be caring. He first heard regard- 
ing them from General Negley at Rossville at 8.40 R. m. 6 By 
the next day we find that some steps had been taken, as re- 

1 J. D. Cox, Reminiscences, 11. 10. 

2 McMichael to Garfield, War Records, 50. 140. 

3 Rosecrans to Garfield, ib., 50. 71. 

4 Rosecrans to Halleck, ib., 50. 142. 

5 Negley to Rosecrans, ib., 50. 143. 

6 Negley to Rosecrans, ib., 50. 144. 


ported in despatches of Bond 9.25 a. m.; 1 but the general im- 
pression produced by a reading of the despatches and of the 
wording of Rosecrans' own telegrams gives little or no support to 
his later versions of the withdrawal to Chattanooga. When to 
this negative evidence is added the overwhelming positive 
evidence found in the testimony of the McCook, Crittenden 
and Negley courts of inquiry, to the effect that nobody among 
the officers and men who had fled with the rout had any idea 
whether Thomas was holding his own until late in the after- 
noon, one is driven to the conclusion that the Garfield version 
has greater verisimilitude than that of the discredited com- 
mander who was trying to rehabilitate his reputation by a 
favorable explanation of what was at best a grave blunder. 
But what Garfield himself thought of Rosecrans' decision can 
only be surmised. Delicacy, arising from his former relations 
to the Commander of the Army of the Cumberland, compelled 
him either to justify Rosecrans' action or to take refuge in 
silence. Hence it is that the culmination and crisis of his mili- 
tary career remained forever undescribed. 

Mr. Frederick L. Gay presented a note and documents on 

Rev. Francis Marbury. 

Francis Merbury (or Marbury) was born about 1556, and 
was the son of William Merbury of Girsby, Lincolnshire. He 
was matriculated pensioner at Christ's College, Cambridge, 
in Easter term, 1571. 2 He left the university without taking a 
degree, and within a few years was ordained deacon by Edmund 
Scambler, Bishop of Peterborough. His preaching at North- 
ampton brought about his imprisonment for a time. On his 
release he returned to that place, notwithstanding he had been 
particularly forbidden to go there. He was then brought before 
the High Commission over which Bishop Aylmer presided in the 
Consistory in St. Paul's, November 5, 1578. 3 There took place 
the remarkable conference between the Bishop of London and 
Merbury which is given at length below. It is a good example 

1 Bond to Garfield, War Records, 50. 150. 

2 The Book of Matriculations and Degrees in the University of Cambridge from 
1544 to 165Q. By John Venn and J. A. Venn. 1913. 

3 Biographical Register of Christ's College, 1505-1905. By John Peile. 1910. 

191 5-] REV. FRANCIS MARBURY. 28 1 

of verbal fencing, by no means lacking in give and take or in 
deadly thrusts. To us, however, it is noteworthy in showing 
the mental effects of heredity derived from a parent of a yet 
unborn child, at least in one case under practically like condi- 
tions. Anne Hutchinson was the daughter of Francis Merbury. 
She, as well as her father, underwent an ecclesiastical trial 
under great stress of mind and under similar circumstances. 
Though their spoken words differed, their respective attitudes 
toward their judges were as like as two peas in a pod. This 
"proud puritan knave" was truly the father of this "woman 
of a ready wit and active spirit." 

Making his peace with those in authority, Francis Merbury 
was appointed a preacher at Alford in Lincolnshire by the 
bishop of that diocese. There his daughter Anne was baptized 
July 20, 1 59 1. He was inhibited for causes unknown to him, 
and in a letter, given below, to Lord Burghley, Lord High 
Treasurer, dated October 15, 1590, he lays before him a state- 
ment of his teachings and beliefs in religious and civil matters. 

Late in life Merbury was ordained priest by Richard Vaughan, 
Bishop of London, by permission of Richard Bancroft, Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury, June 24, 1605, and was presented to the 
living of St. Martin in Vintria. He was later appointed Rector 
of St. Pancras, Soper Lane, and of St. Margaret, New Fish 
Street. He died between January 25 and February 11, 1610-1 1, 
on which latter date his will was proved. The record of his 
ordination is to be found in the Bishop of London's Registry, 
Liber Ordinationum, 1 578-1628. 

The date and place of the marriage of William Hutchinson 
and Anne Merbury, or Marbury, as it is spelled in the record, 
have apparently escaped the notice of several genealogical 
writers. It is to be found in The Transcript of the Registers of 
the United Parishes of S. Mary Woolnoth and S. Mary Wool- 
church Haw. By J. M. S. Brooke and A. W. C. Hallen. 
London, 1886, as follows (p. 138): 

"St. Mary Woolnoth Marriages. 1612. Aug. 9. William 
Hutchinson, of Alford, Co. Lincoln, Mercer, and Anne, daugh- 
ter of Francis Marbury, Minister, by license." 

The text of the conference is found in a volume of some rar- 
ity, having neither name or place or date of printing, of which 
the title page is reproduced on the next page. 

<aA parte of a regiUer y contayn\nge 

fundrie memorable matters, written by. 

diuers godly and learned in our time, which ftandc 

for, and defire the reformation of our Church, in. 

Difcipline and Ceremonies, accordingc to 

the pure worde of God, and. 

the Lawe of our 


Lvke 19. 14* 
We will not hone this man to raigne oucr VS, 

Verse 27* 
Thofe myne enemies Which Would not that Ijhotildraigne 
over them, bring hither and flay e before mee* 

Verse 40. 
I telly m that ifthefejhould holde their peace ,thc 
fiones Would cry e* 

See the contentes-of this Booke on the 
next Icafc* 



A collation gives: 

Title i. L, The Table i. L, text pp. 1-548, (6) pp. additional, 
"A brief e answere to the principall pointes in the Archbishops 
Articles . . . written about an. 1583." Small quarto. 

The book is a collection of forty-two Puritan tracts relating to 
Church discipline by writers of the time. 

Dexter, jf 188. He gives 1590 as the probable year of publi- 
cation. Copies are in the Prince Library, British Museum, 
Bodleian Library, Williams's Library and Yale College 

The conference betweene mee and the Bishop of London in the 
presence of Sir Owen Hop ton, D. Lewys, M. Recorder, and Arch- 
deacon Mullins, high Commissioners, in the Consistorie in Paules, the 
5. of November last past, Anno 1578. many people standing by. 

Bish. Merburie, where were you since your last enlargement? 

M . At Northampton. 

B. That was the place whither you were speciallie forbidden to 
goe, for there you did all the harme. 

M. I neither was, nor rightly may bee inhibited the place, neither 
have I done harme there, but (I trust) good. 

B. As you say sir. 

M. Not so, but I referre mee to the judgement of Gods Church 

B. The last time you found more favour then you deserved, and 
more then (possible) you shall finde hereafter, and yet you vaunted 
that you had ratled up the Bishop of Peterborow, 1 and so you would 

M . Sir, if your eares be open to every Sycophant, you shall have 
such slanders enow, but for proofe bring forth mine accuser, for if 
bare wordes will serve, you may as well accuse me of high treason. 

B. Well sir, now you are come, what have you to say to my Lord 
of P. or to mee? 

M. Nothing but God save you both. 

B. Nothing? Why, you were woont to barke much of dumbe 
dogs, are you wearie of your part? 

M. I come not to accuse, but to defend, but because you urge 
me for advantage, I say that the B. of L. and P. and all the B. in 
England are guiltie of the death of as manie soules as have perished 
by the ignoraunce of the Ministers of their making whom they knew 
to be unable. 

B. Whom such have I made? 

1 Edmund Scambler. 


M. I accuse you not particulate, because I know not your estate, 
if you have, you shall beare this condemnation. 

B. Thy proposition is false, if it were in Cambridge, it would be 
hissed out of the schooles. 

M. Then you had need to hire hissers. 

B. If I finding one well qualified with learning admitte him, and 
hee after play the Trewant and become ignoraunt, and by his igno- 
rance slay soules, am I guiltie of their death? 

M. This is another question, I distinguish: I speake of them 
which never were able. 

B. Distinguish? Thou knowest not a distinction. What is a 

M. It is a severing of things which seeme to be the same. 

B. Nay that is differentia. 

M. Differunt quae non sunt ambigua, but wee distinguishe 
those things only which are ambigua (as) you differ not from the B. 
of L. but I may distinguish betweene you and the B. of L. because 
you remaine a man without the Bishopricke. 

B. Here is a tale of a tub, how many predicamets ar there? 

M. I answere you according to your question, if I say ther are 
enow of 7. for why doe you aske me questions so impertinent? 

B. Howe manie predicables bee there? Where didst thou learne 
thy Logike? 

M. The last time you spake much of to prepon, but this is to 
parergon, I am no Logitian. 

Record. Marburie, use my Lorde more reverently hee is a Peere 
of the Realms: I perceive your wordes are puffed upp with pride. 

M. Sir, I speake but the trueth to him, I reverence him so farre 
as he is reverend, and I pray God to teach him to die. 

B. Thou speakest of making Ministers, the B. of P. was never- 
more overseene in his life, then when hee admitted thee to bee a 
Preacher in Northampton. 

M. Like enough so (in some sense) I pray God those scales may 
fall from his eyes. 

B. Thou art a very Asse, thou art madde, thou art couragious, 
nay thou art impudent, by my troth I thinke he be mad, he careth 
for no bodie. 

M. Sir, I take exception against swearing Judges, I prayse God 
I am not mad, but sory to see you so out of temper. 

B. Did you ever heare one more impudent? 

M. It is not (I trust) impudencie to answere for my selfe. 

B. Nay I know thou art couragious, thou art fool-hardie. 

M. Though I feare not you, yet I feare the Lord. 

Rec. Is hee learned? 

191 5-] REV. FRANCIS MARBURY. 285 

B. Learned? He hath an arrogant spirit, he can scarse construe 
Cato I thinke. 

M. Sir, you doe not punish mee because I am unlearned: How 
beit I understand both the Greeke and Latine tongues, assay me to 
approve your disgrace. 

B. Thou takest uppon thee to bee a Preacher, but there is noth- 
ing in thee: Thou art a verie Asse, an idiot, and a foole. 

M. I humbly beseeche you sir have patience, give this people 
better example, I am that I am through the Lorde, I submit the 
triall of my sufficiencie to the judgement of the learned, but this 
wandering speach is not logicall. 

Sir Owen Hop. Master Merburie, how prove you all the B. in 
England to bee guiltie of the death of as many soules as have per- 
ished by the ignoraunce of the unable Ministers which they have 

M. If it please your worship, if they order unable or unmeet 
Ministers, they give imposition of hands over hastily to those men, 
which to doe the Apostle saith, Is to be partaker of other mens 
sinnes. 1 

B. The Greeke word taxeos importeth nothing but the examina- 
tion of their lives? 

M. It is general enough to include both, for it is set down before 
in the epistle as a positive law. A Bishop (which worde was then 
more generall) must be apt to teach: if he be not so approved to your 
conscience this is, Koinonia amartion after the Apostle, 2 you com- 
municate with his sinnes in those respectes. 

B. But what sinnes are those? I pray thee. 

M. Soule murdering. 

B. How provest thou that? 

M. They are in a maner the wordes of the Prophet: My people 
are destroied for lacke of knowledge, but who should teach them 
knowledge? 3 

B. Knowledge? Have they not the Homilies and the Catechisme, 
it is more then they will learne me thinks. 

M . Yea, or their Parish priest either to any purpose in manie 

B. Why then belike by thy saying, they have too much of it 

M. And too little of the other. 

B. What other? 

M. I meane preaching, what can an ignorant Minister see more 
in those things then a booke learned parishioner? 

1 1 Tim. 5. 29. 2 1 Ti. 3. 2. 3 Hose. 4. 6. 


B. O thou wouldst have all preaching, are not the Homilies 

M. God giveth his own blessing to his owne order, which is 
preaching, not reading. 1 

B. Marke you what his wordes insinuate, he condemneth read- 
ing in Churches, and hee closely seemeth to affirme that they are 
all damned, whose Minister is not a Preacher, you see what hee is. 

D. Lew. By Saint Marie, these be pernicious errors, what say 
you to them Sir? 

M. Master D. (saving your othe) I allowe reading of the scrip- 
tures in the Churches, for Christe read Esay in the temple and 
expounded that hee read in the olde. 2 I am no Judge, for God 
hath extraordinarie supplie when he taketh away the ordinarie 
meanes, but it is good for us not to tempt God, but to use thank- 
fully the ordinary meanes. 

D. L. Goe to the purpose, if I put a man to my Lorde, whom I 
take to be true, and he prove a thief e, am I guiltie of his theft? 
No, neither is the bishop guiltie of the faultes of the Ministers, 
whom when he maketh there is good hope of. 

M. Sir you argue a paribus but the reason holdeth not. 

D.L. Why? 

M. You may trie him that woulde bee a spirituall thiefe before 
you trust him: so yee cannot the other before he have stolne some- 

D. L. What triall would you have more then this, he is an 
honest man, and like to prove learned in time. 

M. But in the meane while the people perishe, you will not 
commit your sucking child to a drie milch Nurse, be she never so 

D. L. A good life is a good sermon, & such slay no soules though 
they be not so exquisite. 

M . To teach by example only, is good in a Matron whom silence 
beseemeth, this petitio principij, that they slay no soules was made 
manifest before out of Hosea. The Apostle telleth Titus they must be 
able elegxein tou antilegontas, to convince the gainsayers. 3 These 
are but evasions Veritas non quaerit angulos. 

B. This fellowe woulde have a Preacher in everie parishe Church. 

M. So would Saint Paul. 4 

B. Where wouldest thou have them? 

M. In Cambridge, in Oxford, in the Innes of Court, yea and 
some in Prison, if there wanted more, wee doing our part the Lord 
would doe his part. 

1 Reve. 10, 14, 17. 2 Luk. 4. 17. 

3 Tit. 1. 5. 4 Tit. 1. 5. 


B. I thought where thou wouldst bee, but where is the living for 

M. A man might cut a good large thong out of your hyde and 
the rest, and it would not be missed. 

B. Perge mentire: Thou shalt dispose our livings orderly. 

M. It is more then you can doe your selves, if living bee the 
default, they are too blame which have too much, whatsoever is 
the cause the Church feeleth the smart. 

Mul. Sir, in the beginning of her Majesties raigne, there was 
defect of able men, and the Church was constrained to take such as 
it could get upon commendation of noble men. 

M. I speake of a later time, as for noble men they are no sureties 
for us, as for the defect it cannot dispense with the absolute worde: 
Hee must bee able to teach, there is no such clause (except there be 
a defect). 

Mul. Why then you will have a Preacher or els none, and so the 
Church shall be unserved. 

M. It is better to have nothing then that which God would not 

B. How proveth thou that God would not have them, when wee 
can get no better. 

M. Doth he not say, Because thou hast refused knowledge, I 
will also refuse thee, that thou shalt be no Priest to me. 1 

B. Thou art an overthwart proude puritan knave, thou wilt go 
to Northampton, and thou wilt have thine owne saying to die, but 
thou shalt repent it. 

M. I am no puritan, I beseeche you bee good to mee, I have 
been twise in prison, but I know not why. 

B. Where was he before? 

Keeper of the G. house. With me my Lord. 

B. Have him to the Marshall sea, there he shall cope with the 

M. I am to goe whither it pleaseth God, but remember Gods 
judgements, you doe me open wrong, I pray God forgive you. 

Francis Merburie. 

Francis Merbury to Lord Burghley. 2 

To the R. honorable Sr. Willm Cecil Knight Lord Burghley L. High 
Treasurer of England and one of her Maties. most honorable 
privy Counsel. 

Right honorable, although I presume thus farre, yet am I not 
without an unfeyned and condigne sense of my wants and basenes, 
1 Hose. 4. 6. 2 Cecil Papers, clxvii. 109. 


humbly acknowleging my special unmeetnes thus to venture toward 
such a personage. The place therefor which your honour hath now 
so many yeares supplied (and yet to few by many, yf it please god 
to multiply them still) being managed by you wth so gret authority 
and wysdom, and moderation, and some p'ticular dignity of yours 
claiming interest in me and myne affayres of this nature, by reson of 
the place of myne abode hath moved me hereto. And so much the 
rather because I make this conscience of myne attempt, that having 
examined my thoughts asunder, I have thretned to myself a curse 
from above and evill successe from your honour, yf I seeke your 
face with a dishonest cause, or doe willingly offend in fraudulent 

I have bene according to lawe appointed a precher at Alford in 
Lincoln shiere by my L. B. of that dioces now some nomber of 
yeares, in which function (not excusing any defect) I may in the 
word of a christian man, and under ample testimony affirme your 
honour that I have bene carfull to my admesurement to sort the 
quality of my teaching to the holy nature of gods word, having both 
my conscience and that greater wittnes then conscience to record, 
that I am not advised that I have delyvered any unsounde doctrine. 
And howsoever my lacke of insight into some perplexed points in 
controversy hath kept me of conscience (as god knoweth) from 
special (I confess) and pregnant allowance, there, where many of riper 
judgment professe their resolution and that I have in a dewtifull 
maner craved pardon and desyred that my infirmity might be sup- 
ported, so yet the things that I professedly hold and am bold to im- 
part to your honour so worthy a magistrate of this realme are such (I 
hope) as may obteyne a dispensation thorough the moderate and 
loving request of those in authority. 

Concerning the Communion booke, I have subscribed to the use 
of it and non other, in our churches, and although having never 
bene benificed it lesse urgeth me as a minister, yet to the utterm[ost] 
extent of my private vocation I have long and still doe ex . . . com- 
unicate in prayer, sacraments and whatsoever rits em . . . me or 
myne by lawe with the most exact observers of it. 

The inimies of sett prayer I doe singularly mislike. A good con- 
struction of many things wristed to offence I have in desire of recon- 
ciling alienated affections sought owt. 

Concerning the state, I have allwayes resolved that th' alteration 
of things therin of right dependeth upon the magistrate: whose 
authority is to be attended as the becke of god and that in these 
matters only a dutifull and discrete intimation belon[gs] to the 
minister, holding the punishment of these troblers (which in their 
new preiudicial elections teach the neglect of civil power) for sane- 



tified from god to the magistrate in suffering wherof without re- 
pentance they cannot have a good conscience. And where under 
color of zele there appeareth by consequent heedlessnes of the sacred 
credit of princes, and the traducing of the body politique by indi- 
rect and p'ticularising courses, I am so farre from them that I have 
bene a diligent adviser of men to take wyse notice of things and not 
to be without compassion of the temptacons and perplexities of gov- 
ernours whose good endevours are often prevented by the impor- 
tunity of those which professe frendship to the truth. 

Concerning policy es in their administrations I hold them in rev- 
erent estimation, observing not only those for fooles with Solomon 
which beleeve every thyng, but those for wyse, by his counsel which 
having espied a thing, restraine theire spir[its] till after a more ma- 
turer deliberation, when every foole (as he sayeth) will be medling, 
enforcing also this poi . . that no man with a good conscience maye 
maligne a policy ... of evill semblance except he can see into it 
without error: g[iving] instance of Solomons pretense to cutt the 
child in two in the . . . blameworthy but of most unrebukeable 

Thus my L I have taught as I am perswaded to the performance 
of some small duety to her excellent ma'ty, and the peace of gods 
church, and according to this is the effect of my labors as your honour 
by further inquiry may comannd to be competently certified and 
yet have bene inhibited for causes to me utterly unknowne by in- 
formation often before attempted openly but never prevailing till 
now that both cause and accusers are conceled all suite to the con- 
trary notwithstandinge. Your L as the scriptures speake in like 
case is as an angel of god, well knowing that wee stand before a people 
partly impatient of all reprehension and partly nourishing in them 
selves idolatrous affections, making insurrection against the truth but 
coming in at the postern of supposed puritanisme. For my part I 
humbly submitt my self to the censure not misiudging the proceed- 
ings. Neverthelesse that your honours wysdom may apprehend 
much more by this litle for a comon good I have at the earnest de- 
syre of a multitude of her ma'ties most quiet and conformable sub- 
iects though utterly unknowne, made choise of your L and your 
person and that place so requiring to refer it to your honorable con- 
sideration with three peticons from the chief gentlemen, the con- 
formable preachers of those parts, and from the people my neigh- 
bors hath some change of this accident inmost humble maner bene 
assayed, but my L B of that Dioces being as he sayd otherwyse not 
unwilling yet having referred those causes to my L Archbyshop 
can not consent. Only my suit is to your honor to ponder this 
intimation and no further. Thus pardon most humbly craved I 


comitt your Ho. to gods mercifull protection. Your Honours 
most humble, 

Francis Merbury. 

[Indorsed] 15 October, 1590. 

Ordination. 1 

Ordines sacri proxime sequentes collati et celebrati fuerunt per 
Reverendum Patrem Richardum Londoniae Episcopum in magna 
capella sive Oratorio infra Manerium suum de Fulham in Comitatu 
Middlesex in festo sancti Johannis baptistae die lunae vicesimo 
quarto videlicet die Junii Anno Domini Millesimo Sexcentesimo 
Quinto iuxta licentiam prius in ea parte per Reverendissimum 
patrem dominum Richardum Cantuariae Archiepiscopum etc. viva 
voce sibi factam at consessam: Presentibus tunc et ibimet venera- 
bilibus viris Magistris Griffino Vaughan sacrae theologiae baccha- 
laureo Rectore de Asheted in Comitatu Surriae Hugone Bramham 
sacrae Theologiae etiam bacchalaureo Vicario de Dovercourt cum 
capella de Harwich eidem annexa in Comitatu Essex Ithello Griffith 
artium magistro et Owino Gwin sacrae Theologiae bacchalaureo 
presbyteris et Capellanis domesticis dicti Reverendi patris et dicto 
Reverendo patri in premissis assistentibus et in presentia Roberti 
Kemp Notarij publici in hac parte speciale assumpti, etc. 


Franciscus Merbury nuper de Alforde in Comitatu et Diocese 
Lincolnae nunc vero Civitatis London etatis XLIX annorum aut 
circiter natus in Civitate London diaconus ordinatus (ut asseruit) 
apud Burgum sancti Petri per dominum Edmundum Scambler nuper 
Petriburgensem Episcopum per plures annos elapsos, nunc Pres- 
byter ordinatus sine ullo testimoniale eo quod bene notus est tam 
Reverendissimo patri domino Archiepiscopo praedicto quam domino 
Episcopo London praedicto, et nunc legitime presentatus ad Recto- 
riam scilicet Martini in Vintria Civitatis London per mortem 
naturalem Magistri Johannis Bateman Clerici ultimi Rectoris et 
Incumbentis ibimet vacentem. 


The sacred orders next following were collated and celebrated by 
the Reverend Father Richard, 2 Bishop of London, in the great Chapel 

1 Bishop of London's Register, Liber Ordinationum, 1578-1628. The abbre- 
viations of the original record have been extended. 

2 Richard Vaughan. 



rv - •■• 

jf:\ '■-•■"" 

S / M 




^^flfifiL JPrai. 


V, Am 



I - " 





:JF a *j-- 








mm ' ; 'if -^ 





T !■. 


' ' * 


jiim naii mulp'i HiiiT ii n mil 


- M^ 



s~} ^ s, s—\ ^ H.,'/Mt,.„rl\ l /.:/i„,.r.,//^ 


or Oratory at his Manor of Fulham in the County of Middlesex, on 
the feast of St. John the Baptist, Monday, that is the twenty-fourth 
day of June, in the year of our Lord 1605, in accordance with permis- 
sion in that case first given and granted verbally by the Most Rev- 
erend Father, Richard, 1 Lord Archbishop of Canterbury. Then 
and there being present the Venerable Master Griffin Vaughan, 
Bachelor of Divinity, Rector of Asheted in the County of Surrey, 
Hugh Bramham, also Bachelor of Divinity, Vicar of Dovercourt 
with the Chapel of Harwich thereto annexed in the County of Essex, 
Ithel Griffith, Master of Arts, and Owen Gwin, Bachelor of Divin- 
ity, Priests and Domestic Chaplains of the said Reverend Father, 
and assisting the said Reverend Father in the premises, and in the 
presence of Robert Kemp, Notary Public employed in this particular 


Francis Merbury, recently of Alford in the County and Diocese 
of Lincoln, but now of the City of London, aged forty-nine years or 
thereabouts, was ordained Deacon in the City of London (as he 
asserts) many years ago in the Burough of St. Peter by the Lord 
Edmund Scambler recently Bishop of Peterborough, and was now 
ordained Priest without testimonial because he is well known both 
to the Most Reverend Father the Lord Archbishop aforesaid, and 
to the Lord Bishop of London aforesaid, and now was lawfully pre- 
sented to the Rectory, to wit, of Martin in the Vintry of the City 
of London, vacant by the natural death of Master John Bateman, 
Clerk, the last Rector and Incumbent thereof. 

Mr. Charles Henry Hart presented a paper on 

Peale's Allegory of William Pitt, Earl of Chatham. 

In the very important " Volume lxxi" of Collections of the 
Massachusetts Historical Society, recently issued, containing the 
Letters and Papers of John Singleton Copley and Henry Pelham, 
will be found, on pages ioo to 104, three documents of peculiar 
interest. One of them is the draft of a letter from John Single- 
ton Copley to Charles Willson Peale, acknowledging from 
Peale an impression of his mezzotint allegory of William Pitt, 
Earl of Chatham, and the other two are broadsides issued by 
Peale, advertising the allegory. The original letter that passed 
from Copley to Peale varies in so many particulars from the 

1 Richard Bancroft. 


original draft, as is often the way in such cases, that I have tran- 
scribed it, by permission, from the original in the Brook Club, 
New York, where it hangs pendant to Copley's portrait of 
Governor George Scott of Dominica. 

Boston, Deer. 17, 1770. 

Dear Sir, — I received your favour of the 24 of Novr. with your 
kind present which came to hand in good order; it gave me a toofold 
pleasure; first because it is the portrait of that great Man, in the 
most exalted carractor human can be dignified with, that of a true 
Patriot vindicateing the rights of Mankind; and secondly for the 
merit of the work itself, and the fair prospect it affords of Americas 
rivaling the Continant of Europe in those refined Arts that have 
been justly esteemed the Greatest glory of ancient Greece and Rome; 
go on Sir to hasten forward that happy Era. 

How little my natural abillitys or oppertunitys of improvements 
may be adiquate to the promoteing so great a work, yet I should sin- 
cerely participate with those great Souls who are happily possessd of 
boath in a soverain degree. 

The Aligory strikes me as unexceptionably in every part and 
strongly expressive of the Ideas it is design'd to convey, the Attitude 
which is simple is possessed of great dignity with a becoming energy; 
from what the print expresses I am induced to wish to see the paint- 
ing the force of Colouring gives strength and perfection to the Clear 

Permit me to conclude with my sincere thanks for the kind notice 
you have taken of me as well in the expressions accompanying the 
print as in the print itself, for the first if not for boath, I cannot 
expect to be out of your Debt. I am Dear Sir Your sincere friend 
& Humble; Sert. 

John Singleton Copley 


For/Mr Chs. Wilson Peale/ 

portrait Painter in " Annapolis "/ * 
pr favour Meriland 

The prospectus or advertisement proper, entitled "A/De- 
scription/of the/Picture and Mezzotinto/of/Mr. Pitt,/Done 
by/Charles Willson Peale,/of Maryland./" is reproduced in 
facsimile, in the volume, from an original in the Manuscript 
Department of the Library of Congress, Washington, D. C, 
where it was unearthed, some time ago, by the industry of Mr. 
Worthington C. Ford; but the supplementary broadside, en- 
1 Written by another hand. 

Statue of Chatham at Cork, Ireland 


titled " Extract of a Letter," is taken from one in the Public 
Record Office, London, where are the other papers printed. 
To collectors of Americana this print is a vara avis, much de- 
sired but seldom found, as there are but eight impressions 
known to be in existence. 1 It is a folio, height, 23 2/16; sub- 
height, 21 13/16; width, 14 14/16, signed "Chas. Willson 
Peale, pinx. et feci." and lettered " Worthy of Liberty. Mr. 
Pitt scorns to invade the Liberties of other Peoples." It is not 
necessary to describe it in detail, as the reproduction speaks for 
itself better than words can ; but the history of the picture, and 
of the figure and portrait of Pitt, is most interesting, and so 
little known as virtually to be unknown. 

Pitt's career and his relation to the colonies have been traced 
and considered by so many hands and from so many view- 
points, and are so well known if not so well understood, that it 
is not essential to rehearse or even refer to them here, more 
than to say that he was the idol of a large portion of the colo- 
nies, and it was this sentiment that was the genesis of Peak's 
pictorial work, although it was not Peale who originated memo- 
rializing it in art. Indeed the idea had its birth in Ireland, 
where too Pitt was canonized as a Great Patriot. Dublin pre- 
sented him with the freedom of the city, and Cork voted a statue 
to be erected in the municipality with the inscription "Vera 
Icon Gulielmi Pitt cujus si nomen audies, nihil hie de fama 
desideres," the order for which was given to Joseph Wilton 
(17 2 2-1803), the most eminent British statuary of the period, 
later one of the foundation members of the Royal Academy of 
Arts, and sculptor of the monument to General Wolfe, the 
hero of Quebec, erected in Westminster Abbey, as also of many 
busts and statues of distinguished persons. This statue of Pitt 
was finished in 1766, at a cost of £500, and was placed in the 
Exchange, then standing in Castle Street, in the city of Cork, 
whence it was subsequently removed to the Mansion House, 
and to-day will be found in the corridor of the Crawford Mu- 
nicipal School of Art, in Emmet Place, Cork, Ireland. 

1 Impressions located are: Public Library, Boston (Chaloner Smith); 
Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts, Philadelphia (Phillips Collection); 
Horace W. Sellers, Philadelphia (Charles Willson Peale); Mrs. Whitelaw Reid, 
Ophir Hall, N. Y. (Maggs); Francis W. Halsey, New York (Fridenberg) ; 
R. T. H. Halsey, New York (J. T. Sabin) ; Lord Rosebery, London, England 
(Parsons); Frank M. Sabin, London, England (Mitchell). 


Whether the atmosphere surrounding this Irish monument 
was wafted across the seas and stirred the colonials similarly to 
honor this friend of the colonies, or the idea they carried out 
originated with themselves, we do not know; but coincident 
with the erection of the statue in Cork, the Commons House of 
Assembly of South Carolina, on May 8, 1766, unanimously 
voted "that this house will make provision for defraying the 
expense of procuring from England a statue of the Right Honor- 
able William Pitt," and on June 23 voted £7000 currency for 
the purpose which, on November 30, the treasurer of the 
colony was directed to turn into "good bills of exchange for 
£1000 sterling" and remit them to the agent in Great Britain 
toward payment of the statue. 1 

The agent of South Carolina, who was intrusted with this 
commission, was Charles Garth, member of Parliament for 
Devizes from 1761 to 1784, who by letter of July 9, 1766, 2 ac^ 
cepted with pride the duty intrusted to him and employed Wil- 
ton, who has, he wrote, "signalized himself remarkably by a 
statue of Mr. Pitt finished this Spring, for the city of Cork and 
admired by everybody here before sent to Ireland." He men- 
tions further that Wilton has made in addition two busts of 
Pitt " which for likeness and workmanship both, are very greatly 
admired," adding, "I have given in your directions to have 
him at full length in a speaking attitude and suitable dress, with 
a roll in one hand, inscribed Magna Charta." It would seem 
that two designs were submitted by Wilton and forwarded to 
South Carolina by Garth, which as late as 1836 were in posses- 
sion of Charles Fraser, a miniature painter in Charleston. 3 

Close upon the heels of South Carolina's action, the citizens 
of New York held a meeting at Burns Coffee House, June 23, 
1766, 4 and petitioned the Assembly to erect a statue in honor 
of Pitt. The measure was carried through and Wilton was 
engaged also to make it, which he did by following, with slight 
changes, the one he was modelling for Charleston. Both 
statues were shipped about the same time — the South Caro- 
lina Gazette of May 17, 1770, announcing the arrival of the one 
destined for that colony, adds: "At the same time that the 

1 South Carolina Hist, and Gen. Magazine, xv. 22. 

2 Mag. of Am. Hist., vm. 216. 

8 lb., 217. 4 2 Proceedings, iv. 292. 


above statue was shipped in Capt White two others were 
shipped for New York, one of his present Majesty cast in Brass, 
the other of Mr. Pitt, highly finished in marble, but consider- 
ably under the size of ours." * 

The Charleston statue was placed on its pedestal July 5, 
1770, at the intersection of Broad and Meeting Streets, near 
which spot it now stands within Washington Square. The 
South Carolina Gazette of July n, 1770, describes it "of fine 
white marble, the Habit Roman, the right hand holds a Roll 
of Parchment, partly open, on which we read ' Articuli Magnae 
Cartae Libertatum.' The left hand is extended, the figure 
being in the attitude of one delivering an Oration." 2 This 
description shows that the instructions transmitted by Garth 
were carried out, and also, what is much more important, pre- 
serves a picture of what the statue was like originally, for it 
has suffered many vicissitudes. In 1780, April 16, the right 
arm was carried away by a British cannon ball, fired from 
James Island, and fourteen years later the statue was taken 
down from its pedestal in such a careless manner that the head 
was severed from the body, and when it was replaced no atten- 
tion was paid to its position relative to the action of the 
figure, with the result that it is decidedly awry. The out- 
stretched left arm has also disappeared, so that to the casual 
observer the statue has much the appearance of a mutilated 

The New York statue was erected September 7, 1770, at the 
intersection of Wall and Smith, now William Street; but during 
the occupation of the city by the British the head and right 
hand were struck off in September, 1776, by the soldiery in 
revenge for the insult previously shown by the Americans in 
pulling down the statue of the King, which had also been made 
by Wilton. The headless trunk remained standing until July, 
1788, 3 when it was removed, and after sundry migrations, what 
remains of it is in the hall of the New York Historical Society. 
Maryland also fell into line, and in November, 1766, passed 

1 As well as can be judged from what remains of the two statues they were 
virtually of the same size. 

2 John Austin Stevens, in his discourse on Progress of New York in a Century, 
describes the New York statue ad verhum "from the journals of the day." 

of Am. Hist., vii. 67. 

3 Mag. of Am. Hist., iv. 59. 


resolutions for a marble statue of Pitt in Annapolis, but it seems 
not to have materialized. 1 

The necessity for this somewhat minute account of the 
statues to Pitt, made by Wilton, will become apparent in the 
consideration of the Peale allegory; but before discussing that 
subject I must call attention to the extraordinary statements of 
Mr. Basil Williams, in his life of Pitt (19 13), where in Volume 
11, p. 121, he says, speaking of the Cork statue, which is the 
frontispiece to his book: "It was made by the sculptor Wilton 
and was thought so good by Pitt that when he was consulted in 
1766 by the agent for North [sic] Carolina about a statue of 
him for Charleston, he recommended Wilton again"; and 
further, on p. 206: "Garth their Agent in London writing on 
July 9, 1766, says he has consulted Pitt on the Sculptor . . . 
and Pitt had chosen Wilton who had recently finished the 
statue for Cork. ... It seems to have been a replica of the 
Cork Statue." This is a most unusual and remarkable use of 
authority, for Garth says not a word about consulting Pitt in 
his letter of July 9, 1766; he mentions merely having advised 
Pitt of the action of the House Commons. Garth does say 
that Pitt did choose Wilton to make the Cork statue, which 
is a valuable endorsement of Wilton's likeness of Pitt, and 
there can be no doubt that Chatham was perfectly well satisfied 
with Wilton's work or it would not have gone forth to the public 
in so many different forms — three statues and two busts — 
when a man of his power and consideration could easily have 
prevented it were it not satisfactory to him. Neither are the 
American statues in any way replicas or duplicates of the Irish 
one, or alike in any details, as can be seen by comparing the 

Charles Willson Peale, who was a much better painter than 
he is generally credited with being, owing to his best-known 
pictures being the poorest examples from his brush, was born in 
St. Paul's Parish, Queen Anne's county, Maryland, April 15, 
1 74 1, and died in Philadelphia, February 22, 1827. Having 
tried many vocations he determined in his twenty-fifth year 
that art was the one he was best qualified to follow; and after 
some instruction from John Hesselius, the native-born son of 

1 Dedham, Mass., erected a shaft with a wooden bust of Pitt on top. It is 
represented in the Dedham Historical Register, 1. 121. 

Stat ue op Chatham at Charleston, S. C. 


Gustavus Hesselius, the earliest known artist in America, 1 he 
visited Boston to get some hints from Copley, who was only a 
few years his senior, but with a reputation that extended not 
only over the colonies but to London. In December, 1767, 
Peale hied himself to London and the studio of Benjamin West, 
where he remained more than two years, returning to Mary- 
land in June, 1770. While in London, Peale was not, as 
he writes in his autobiography, 2 ''content to know how to 
paint in one way, but engaged in the whole circle of arts, ex- 
cept painting in enamel, also learned modelling and casting in 
plaster . . . and made some essays at Mezzotint scraping." 
These last words are full of import to our subject. At 
that time the atmosphere was, as we have seen, so full of 
the Pitt fever, that one of Peak's earliest pictorial endeavors 
was a large canvas, ninety-six inches high by sixty-one inches 
wide, an allegory of William Pitt, which attracted the patri- 
otic connoisseurship of another son of Maryland — Edmond 
Jenings. 3 

This gentleman was the grandson of Edmond Jenings, Lieu- 
tenant Governor of Virginia — 1 706-1 710 — and son of Edmond 
Jenings, Secretary of State of Maryland, who married Ariane 
Vanderheyden, widow of Thomas Bordley. By her he had a 
daughter who became the mother of Edmond Jenings Ran- 
dolph, better known as Edmund Randolph, a conspicuous mem- 
ber of Washington's cabinet, and one son named for his father 
and grandfather, who, born in 1731, accompanied his parents 
to England in 1737, where he was educated and bred to the 
bar. He was loyal to the colonies, acted in several quasi- 
diplomatic capacities in behalf of his native country such as 
secret agent at the court of Brussels and secretary for some 
time to John Adams. He resided in London in the vicinity of 
Kensington Square and was a daily visitor to the Westminster 
Library, dying in September, 18 19, in his eighty-eighth year. 4 
His armorial book-plate is in the Franks Collection at the 
British Museum and is one of the rarest among American ex 
libris. This cultivated American was requested by Richard 

1 Vide Harpers' Magazine for March, 1898. 

2 Penn. Mag. of Hist, and Biog., xxxviii. 264. 

8 This gentleman's name is usually wrongly given as " Edmund Jennings." 
4 The Bordley Family, 1865; Monthly Magazine, 1819, viii. 182; Annual 
Obituary, London, 182 1, 368. 


Henry Lee * to secure for Westmoreland in Virginia a portrait 
of Lord Camden, which he failed to accomplish owing to the 
multifarious public engagements of this great lawyer and 
statesman. Instead Jenings wrote to Lee, November 1, 1768, 2 
"As the honest cause of America hath been supported with true 
liberality by that great man Lord Chatham, 3 I could wish that 
his merits were not forgotten and therefore take the liberty of 
sending you by Captn. Johnson, his portrait which if you think 
it worthy of the acceptance of the gentlemen of Westmoreland, 
I beg you to offer them in my name. It was executed by Mr. 
Peele of Maryland who was recommended to me by several 
friends in that province as a young man of merit and modesty. 
I found him so, and heartily wish he may meet with every en- 
couragement on his return to America which I believe will be 
soon." Jenings adds a very important P. S. : " The head of Lord 
Chatham is done from an admirable bust by Wilton and is 
much like him tho' different from the common prints." 4 

The gentlemen of Westmoreland accepted the gift and ex- 
pressed much appreciation of the design. It was set up at 
Chantilly, 5 the seat of Lee, where it remained until 1825, when 
it was placed in the new courthouse of the county, to remain 
until 1848. It was then taken to Richmond, Va., and hung in 
the house of Delegates until 1902, 6 when, upon the erection of 
another new courthouse, in Westmoreland county, at Montross, 
the painting was returned and placed amid the environment 
originally intended for it. This was a canvas too important to 
the painter, both for size and subject, for him to allow it to 
pass out of his control without preserving a full memorandum. 
Accordingly Peale painted a duplicate nearly the same size as 
the original (ninety- three inches by fifty-six inches), which he 
brought with him back to Annapolis and subsequently presented 
to the state of Maryland, which the Assembly accepted by vote, 
April 16, 1774, offering Peale as a compliment for his "very 

1 Life and Correspondence of Richard Henry Lee, I. 49. 

2 The Virginia Historical Register, 1. 72. 
8 Elevated to the Peerage, 1766. 

4 Williams says, p. 121, of the Cork statue: "It gives a more lifelike impres- 
sion of the minister . . . than either of the two contemporary portraits by 
Hoare and by Brompton." 

6 R. H. Lee to Langdon Carter, Letters of Richard Henry Lee, I. 76. 

6 Acts of Assembly of Virginia, 1901-1902, 676. 


genteel Present," the sum of "one hundred pounds common 
money." The painting hangs in the state capitol building at 
Annapolis. It was from this replica that Peale must have 
scraped his mezzotint plate, and it would be interesting to know 
to a certainty whether the work was executed in London or in 
Maryland. The probabilities are that it was executed and 
printed in London. As far as we know it was Peale's first plate, 
and he would hardly essay it alone without having someone 
skilled in the art at his elbow to advise and guide him. Then it 
seems quite certain that he could not get the necessary copper 
plate in this country, although he could have brought one back 
with him; but where was the plate-press and the plate-printer 
to pull off the impressions, after the plate was ready for proving? 
It is true Peale was a very ingenious mechanic and might have 
printed the plate himself, for he did, according to his diary, print 
his small plate of Washington in November, 1778, and got the 
copper plate for it a month before from a " Mr. Brook." * Not- 
withstanding these possibilities the mezzotint was doubtless a 
London product. The broadside prospectus of the print, that 
has been mentioned, appears to me to be from an American 
press. The "Extract of a Letter" I have not seen in the origi- 
nal, but as its size corresponds with the prospectus, they were 
doubtless issued from the same press contemporaneously; in- 
deed, as it has no earmark, alone and unaccompanied by the 
prospectus it would have no significance or value. This 
"Extract" is a most important document in our investigation. 
Although it purports to be an excerpt from a letter, neither 
place nor date is given, and inherently it shows, I think, Peale's 
hand, merely cast in this form to make it appear adroitly as 
coming from a disinterested correspondent. It is really a plea 
for the correctness of the likeness of Pitt, which evidently had 
been attacked at the time as it has been since. Mr. Jenings, 
anticipating this result from its being an unusual and unfa- 
miliar portrait, tells Richard Henry Lee it "is much like him, 
tho y different from the common prints." Jenings' comparison is 
clearly one made with Pitt himself, while the comparisons 
made in the "Extract of a Letter" are all with engraved por- 
traits of him, which makes it plain to me this was not written 
in England, where Pitt's living face was well known, but in 

1 Penn. Mag. of Hist, and Biog., xxviii. 247. 


America, where his living face was unknown and his lineaments 
only familiar through the medium of engravings after the paint- 
ings by Brompton and by Hoare, which are in big wig and in 
the costume of the period. The Extract says: 

One of the Mezzotinto's was brought into Company, when all 
agreed it was Very clever; but some thought it " not like Pitt." . . . 
Perhaps it was hazardous to offer to the Public a Portrait so 
unlike the old Pictures, which have been long known among 
us. Very few have Seen any other Representation of the Great 
Man, and we know how Strongly First Impressions work on the 
Imagination: And, what is yet more disadvantageous to the 
Painter, not only First Impressions, but many Years intimate Ac- 
quaintance with the old Piece, has probably So fixed that Likeness 
in the Mind, that, were Mr. Pitt himself to be of a sudden present, 
and appear a Contrast to those Pieces, there would not be a total 
Want of Weak Minds, who might even struggle to conceive he 
was like himself — preferring the Likeness with which they were so 
intimate. 1 But between the old Copies and the present, I do not 
see that great Disparity that is pretended: Pray attend to them, 
and make all due Allowances — Twenty Years between the Draw- 
ing the one and the other — such Difference in his Age! In the 
one he is in modern Dress, with Neckcloth, a Wig, and full Suit: In 
the other, with his natural Hair, a loose Roman Habit, and Neck bare. 
I am assured that Gentlemen, who had seen the Proof-Copy, and 
among them Dr. Franklin, thought Mr. Peale's a very good Likeness 
of the Great Patriot, as he is at this Time, worn down with Sickness 
and Years, and with Fatigue in the Service of his Country. 

The reference to Doctor Franklin having seen a proof-copy 
of the plate, evidently meaning a proving print and not an 
early finished proof, is very strong evidence, almost conclusive, 
that the plate was well advanced, if not completely finished, in 
England; for while a proof could have been sent across the 
water to him, it is not in the least likely that one was — cer- 
tainly not in time for his remarks upon it to have come 
back and been incorporated in this printed circular, advertising 
the plate. Peale did not get back to Maryland until June, 
1770, and it was only five months later, in November, that he 
sent his present to Copley of a finished print. It is true that 

1 Is this the source of John Neal's conceit in "Charcoal Sketches," where he 
says if Washington came back to earth and did not resemble Stuart's Washington 
he would be considered an impostor? 


mezzotinting is of very rapid execution in comparison with the 
labor of a burin or line plate; yet for a novice to scrape the 
plate and send a proof across the ocean in those days, when 
Peale himself was twelve weeks making the passage, and get 
an acknowledgment from Franklin, who was proverbially delib- 
erate in his correspondence, is next to impossible. 

Not that it counts a feather's weight one way or the other in 
determining the nativity of the plate, but simply that all the 
evidence may be in, the print is recorded by Chaloner Smith 
in his British Mezzotint Portraits, 963, where the account of it 
and of its author is so amusing in its multiplicity of errors that 
it bears quoting: " Charles Wilson Peale was an American 
Painter who practised during the Revolutionary war and after- 
wards visited Europe. He studied with Copley and West. The 
following is his only mezzotint, 1 and it was almost certainly 
engraved in America about 1777. The likeness [of Chatham] 
is so indifferent that it must have been a fanciful one." The 
impression described by Smith was purchased at the sale of 
his collection of mezzotints, in 1887, by the Public Library of 
Boston, and at least three others have appeared in England, 
which is additional argument that the plate was made there. 

Although we have Peale's allegory before us in the reproduc- 
tion of the mezzotint, the artist's own description of his compo- 
sition is not without interest. In his manuscript autobiography 2 
he thus describes it: "Mr. Pitt is here represented in Roman 
dress, in the action of an orator, extending his right arm and 
points to the figure of Liberty, and holding a scroll in his left 
hand on which is written ' Magna Charta'; before him an altar 
with a civic crown on it and a flame rising, designate his zeal in 
the cause of liberty. The altar is ornamented with the bust of 
Hampden and Sidney, and wreaths of oak leaves embrace 
them. In the background is a piece of elegant architecture, 
Whitehall, in front of which King Charles I was beheaded." 

This word-picture of his painting, taken in connection with 
the newspaper description of the South Carolina statue on its 
arrival, shows that Peale reversed the position of the arms, 
making the left in the painting hold Magna Charta instead of 

* x He made three mezzotint portraits of Washington and one each of Doctor 
Franklin, La Fayette and Rev. Joseph Pilmore. 

2 In possession of Peale's great-grandson, Mr. Horace W. Sellers of Phila- 


the right, and the right extended in place of the left, greatly to 
the advantage of the figure. The costume too is quite differ- 
ent, and again the advantage is with Peale. The head of Pitt 
in the allegory is confessedly from Wilton's bust of that states- 
man and, making allowance for the hard usage the Charleston 
statue has received, besides its exposure to the elements for 
almost one hundred and fifty years, by which all its fineness 
has been destroyed, leaving a mere ghost of what it originally 
was, the head in Peale's mezzotint closely follows that of the 
statue. Taking it all in all, this was a work of no inconsiderable 
magnitude to be undertaken by a young man of twenty-seven 
who had only been an art student a shade more than two years. 
It was of magnitude not only in size but in conception and exe- 
cution, and shows a nice intimate knowledge of history almost 
unexpected in a colonist who had not had a collegiate edu- 
cation. Allowing for any hints he may have had from his 
preceptor West, who was to become the greatest history 
painter in England, he deserves high commendation for his 

From this completed survey of the entire subject it is clear 
that the statue in Charleston is not a replica or duplicate of the 
one in Cork, Ireland, or the figure in the Peale picture a servile 
copy of either; but it seems quite certain that the Cork statue 
fathered the thought that produced those for America, and that 
Peale's portrait, to say the least, was inspired by the American 
marbles which he doubtless saw in the studio of the sculptor, 
Wilton. The plate too was scraped and printed in London and 
brought overseas for sale, when Peale got out his prospectus 
and "Extract of a Letter" together, for the latter without the 
former would be unintelligible, and set to work to sell the prints 
in which he was not successful, as we learn from his autobiogra- 
phy before cited. He writes, in the third person, "When he 
was in London he painted a whole length of Mr. Pitt in the 
idea that if he made a print of it that it would be readily sold in 
America. Therefore he made a large mezzotint print from his 
picture, but let it be remembered that he never sold as many 
prints as would pay him the cost of the paper, perhaps he did 
not take the proper method for the sale of them." Poor Peale 
had not learned how short-lived was the acclaim of the public; 
that the Idol of to-day was the football of to-morrow. What 


was all aflame in 1768-69, when he began his commemorative 
work, was dead embers in 1770-71, when his allegory was ready 
for the market. This may be a sad commentary upon hero 
worship, yet it is true almost always of the living; but Peale's 
lesson accounts for the rarity of his mezzotint to-day. The 
only impression that I know to have been sold at public sale in 
this country was in the noted collection of Hon. James T. 
Mitchell, in Philadelphia, October 28, 19 13, where a slightly 
cut-down copy brought $160. It is from that copy our repro- 
duction is made, and we are indebted to Mr. Stan V. Henkels of 
Philadelphia for the use of the plate. 

Remarks were made during the meeting by Messrs. Thayer, 
Davis, T. L. Livermore, Bradford, and Wendell. 






The life of our late fellow-member affords the example of one 
who, at early manhood, obeying a spiritual call, turned from 
mercantile and secular employment to pursue classical and 
collegiate studies preparatory to entering the Christian min- 
istry. Without early advantages of his own, he used well such 
advantages as came to him through others. Achievement fol- 
lowed opportunity; and successful achievement opened up 
new and broader opportunities in the direction he had wisely 
chosen after reaching majority. 

Not unmindful of posthumous remembrance, Dr. McKenzie 
wrote out, in his seventieth year, notes for a narrative of his 
life and career, to which, about ten years later, he added at a 
final leisure many enlarged details of his personal recollections. 
These writings — which might well serve for a fuller biography 
— I am kindly permitted to use freely in preparing the present 
brief sketch of his life. From his own standpoint in the retro- 
spect, there was nothing in his record of which he felt ashamed, 
nothing that he wished suppressed. He did not think the manu- 
script of any value to the world, as he modestly expressed him- 
self, but he left it for his children and a few close friends to 
accept as a bequest. " I stand," he wrote, "not in the past 
alone, but in the future also, and I rejoice in the continuity of 

Alexander McKenzie was born in New Bedford, Mass., 
December 14, 1830, the son of Daniel and Phebe Mayhew 

Ojtau^c/Jz^ /It c Xx^J^^ 


(Smith) McKenzie. The McKenzies (or Mackenzics) are 
illustrious in Scotland; and though never tracing his lineage 
clearly to the old country — his paternal grandfather, a sea- 
faring man, having come to Nantucket in 1792 — Alexander 
felt well assured of his ancestry. "I was brought up," he 
writes, "to be proud of my Scotch blood, and I am. I am firm 
in this confidence as my father was. I remember that in his 
last illness he was bled, as the fashion then was. 'That is good 
blood,' said the doctor; and my father answered, 'It is Scotch 

Scottish- Americans are found sincere, industrious and self- 
respecting, whatever the condition of life; and Daniel Mc- 
Kenzie, a whaling captain for many years, was by all accounts 
a man of such attributes — manly, courageous and true to 
responsibilities. To his conspicuous strength of character, the 
son left an admiring tribute, and our fellow-member, Mr. 
Crapo, who knew both father and son in his boyhood, renders a 
like appreciation. 1 Captain McKenzie was a man of com- 
manding presence, tall and strong; his heart was generous. He 
had a fine mind and carried to sea good books to read while on 
his voyages. Toward the close of his life he spent much of his 
time on shore in New Bedford, where he became prominent in 
local affairs, and was much sought after as a speaker and lec- 
turer. "He was a born orator," writes Alexander; and the son 
considered his own gifts in writing and speaking as largely a 
filial heritage. As for the mother, quick, sensitive, strongly 
religious, and bearing cheerfully and patiently the watchful 
burden of a sailor's wife, while bringing up the children well 
and maintaining home and the household during her husband's 
absence, no praise, he felt, could be too great for her. The 
whaling pursuit was full of dangerous exposure and disaster, 
and letters or even tidings of the remote adventurers came in 
those days seldom and irregularly. 

That incident of boyhood to which Mr. Crapo has alluded, 2 
used sometimes by the preacher for moral illusti^tion — 
"Throw a line to my boy" — Dr. McKenzie himself has pre- 
served among his recorded recollections. It must have left a 
very strong impression on his mind through life. It had oc- 
curred when he was ardent, eager, impulsive, just upon reach- 

1 Proceedings, xlviii. 12-15. 3 lb. 


ing adolescence. And proudly did young Alexander walk 
homeward when ashore again, hand in hand with the long 
absent father, until the mother met them both at the door, and 
husband and wife were joyfully reunited. It had been a three- 
years' separation, and the father never went to sea again. "I 
bless God for my father and mother," is the son's concluding 
comment upon his parentage. 

Young McKenzie passed through the public schools of his 
native city with conspicuous credit. He did not excel in the 
sports ; strange to say, he never learned to swim ; and an inap- 
titude for athletics marked his whole course in life. But he 
could run well and showed a proficiency in games which re- 
quired mental skill. He was fond of books and study and 
stood well at school. He so enjoyed the free range of reading 
allowed him in a local bookstore that he thought seriously of 
becoming a bookseller when he grew up. A bright, good-natured, 
well-dressed youth, McKenzie's youthful days passed pleas- 
antly, in attending school regularly, and, when old enough, in 
learning to help his mother over the household chores during 
play hours. After graduating from the grammar school at 
the age of twelve, he entered the high school, keeping mostly 
at the head among larger boys, until at the age of sixteen he 
completed its course, and, like most of his companions, began 
responsible life, with his studies, which were essentially Eng- 
lish, presumably completed. 

Alexander's high-school master had a persistent "Why?" 
when conducting the recitations; and that interrogatory our 
youth carried with him into mature life, seeking sound argu- 
ments that might persuade himself whenever an existing state 
of facts presented some new problem. As to declamation, he 
records that on his first effort in school he broke down com- 
pletely, but on a second trial did better. And with him in 
later life, as with many other orators in and out of the pulpits 
who are seemingly at ease, a conscious self-distrust clung to 
him always, by his own confession. 

Seeking, then, his own fortune in life with the equipment of 
a good average education, McKenzie made his first earnings 
in his native city; but, failing to obtain a vacant clerkship 
in a New Bedford bank which he had applied for, he 
journeyed presently to Boston, a city of entire strangers, 


with all his belongings packed in a small trunk and hat box. 
This was in 1847 an< 3 when he had reached his seventeenth 

Finding a situation speedily with some lumber dealers, in 
Cambridgeport, young McKenzie made a fair start in Boston's 
vicinity upon a small salary. But he desired a better place; 
and this, by March, 1849, was procured for him in the neigh- 
boring city, with the aid of a prominent citizen of New Bedford 
whom his father knew. The firm of Lawrence, Stone & Co. 
stood high in Boston's business circles at this time and its 
members had strong social connections. The partnership dealt 
as commission merchants in the sale of woollen goods, the 
product of mills in Lowell and Lawrence. McKenzie's entrance 
into their congenial employment was a happy omen of the future. 
Beginning at the bottom he worked upward, gaining steadily 
the esteem of his fellows and the confidence of his employers. 
There must have been something peculiarly attractive in this 
young man, with his modest and methodical ways of working, 
his sobriety, his upright conduct while far from home, his 
reverent regard for the Sabbath and his wholesome week-day 
associations during the recreation intervals. The old book- 
keeper of the firm began training him for a successor, show- 
ing him special marks of confidence. All other employees were 
good-natured and kind to him; and when, after a service of 
some length, Christmas came round and the head of the firm 
invited him to take a holiday dinner with his family, so marked 
an attention was a startling surprise and he felt deeply grateful 
in accepting. 

Here began the first of those friendships with influential men 
which did so much to smooth McKenzie's pathway in later 
life and accelerate a prosperous and highly useful career. 
Samuel Lawrence had a large and attractive family of sons and 
daughters, and his wife, who came from Baltimore, was a beau- 
tiful woman in person and character. Both husband and wife 
highly appreciated the young man's good traits of character 
and became in time his warm friends. 

Alexander had been religiously brought up by his devout 
mother, and both parents were by this time church worshippers 
by profession. He had been early taught to say his prayers, 
and on the first day of the week to attend church and the Sun- 


day School. In 1847, an d about the time he prepared to take 
life's discipline into his own keeping far from home, he joined 
with others in New Bedford the Trinitarian Congregational 
Church, making open profession of the faith. No emotional 
excitement seems to have led him to that momentous decision, 
but rather the sober sense of a sacred personal duty. Procur- 
ing letters of dismissal from New Bedford, he entered in fellow- 
ship the Central Church in Boston, then on Winter Street, and 
allied himself closely with its work and interests, joining its 
Bible class and attending in week-day course the social meet- 
ings. He thus made many pleasant church acquaintances and 
came to know well one of the ministers, Mr. Richards. In 
185 1 was formed the Young Men's Christian Association of 
Boston — now circling the globe in kindred organizations, 
having been started earlier in London — and McKenzie be- 
came speedily a member. For secular companionship he en- 
joyed the Mercantile Library Association of this city, which 
held many social meetings in those days, bringing young men 
of business into pleasant intercourse. 

But our exemplary clerk was not wholly content with his 
present mode of life and occupation. He passed many weary 
days while approaching majority and yearned for some wider 
scope to the career of his full manhood. "I was not made," he 
records, "for a business career. I did not like the prospect 
before me. I saw other young men going to college while I was 
held back, and if I was not envious I greatly wished that I 
could go with them. I knew something of church life. I wanted 
to preach. . . . The life of a minister was full of attractiveness. " 

While in this frame of mind McKenzie found some trouble 
with his eyes, and consulted a Boston oculist, who advised him 
to transfer his abode to the suburbs of the city and get the 
benefit of country air and rural surroundings as a relief from 
his daily toil. Accordingly he went to Auburndale to board, 
where a pleasant home was recommended by a friend who had 
gone there already. It was with the family of Rev. Jonathan 
E. Woodb ridge, a retired clergyman of the Congregational 
Church. Auburndale was in 1852 a village in the woods, and 
its surroundings were quiet and tranquillizing. The Wood- 
bridge home was an ideal one, and McKenzie's summer 
experience brought him health and enjoyment, both hus- 

191 5-1 ALEXANDER McKENZLE. 309 

band and wife of his hosts showing strong interest in their 

One day, shortly before McKenzie purposed returning to 
Boston for the winter season, Mr. Woodbridge suggested to 
him that he should study for the ministry. "I am too old," 
was his reply — for he had now fully entered upon the period 
of manhood — "and, besides, I have not the means." These 
objections, Mr. Woodbridge thought, could be overcome; and 
his advice stirred the young man to earnest reflection. His half- 
slumbering wishes were at length fully aroused. He consulted 
Mr. Richards, his Boston pastor, on the subject, who encour- 
aged the same idea. His father, when written to, offered no 
objection, while his mother rejoiced in heart. But Samuel 
Lawrence, his kind employer, opposed at first, for he had 
plans of clerical promotion in view. Finding, however, that 
the young man's heart was set in the new direction, he gave 
way; and the firm generously offered to assume the cost 
of his education, and, in fact, did so for about five years. 
As a fellow-companion in Boston said at this time, "Alex- 
ander is a living example of what a man gets by behaving 

With the way thus happily cleared for working out his new 
and nobler purpose in life, McKenzie in 1853 entered the junior 
class of Phillips Academy, Andover, when nearly twenty-three 
years old, to fit for college. The new educational life was 
congenial to him from the first; and he took a high rank in his 
studies, having begun his drill in the Latin grammar, before 
entering, with the kindly Mr. Woodbridge. No mortifying ex- 
perience, as he found, awaited him in the academy for mingling 
with comrades much younger than himself. He took a prom- 
inent part in the various class meetings, besides conducting a 
church mission work on Sundays in a factory village nearby. 
It added much to his happiness that the Lawrences, while he 
was a student, made their summer residence at Andover, so 
that he saw the family often and gained much in their friend- 

Mr. Lawrence, though not himself a college man, had close 
interests with Harvard, and under his inducement McKenzie 
went to Cambridge in the fall of 1855, after graduating from 
the Academy, two sons of his patron entering at the same time, 


one of whom became a fellow-member and fellow-graduate of 
the class of 1859. And here at Cambridge another influential 
friendship awaited McKenzie, in an invitation, of which he 
availed himself, to become the college chum and roommate of 
William Everett, the precocious and promising son of the 
choicest among Harvard's alumni, of those years, then at the 
height of his national renown as statesman and orator. Of 
the circumstances under which that auspicious arrangement 
was made, and the advantage thence ensuing, these Pro- 
ceedings have made record; nor need I repeat here what I 
have elsewhere said as a classmate concerning McKenzie's 
college career, which was, in all respects, conspicuous and 
honorable. 1 

Harvard's class of 1859, I may remark, was one of unusual 
promise, and so McKenzie regarded it. If the fulfilment did 
not wholly correspond, this was in great measure because the 
sudden and violent tempest of Civil War swept this country 
just as each graduate was entering his chosen pathway of 
active life, too young to u lead in affairs civil or military during 
those tremendous years and yet too old to rush to the rescue 
with a fresh and unhampered enthusiasm. Some died for their 
country; others, who returned home in safety to take up 
the broken thread of individual occupation, felt in some 
way the hindrance of that interruption for the rest of their 

They of our class, however, most of all, whose bent had been 
to the ministry, pursued post-graduate studies and the initial 
work of their sacred profession comparatively unimpeded ; and 
among the foremost of these, if not the very first, was Alexander 
McKenzie. Graduating at Harvard in the summer of 1859, he 
returned to Andover to take up his theological studies at the 
Seminary. Eager to finish quickly, he was at first accepted 
as a " resident student," becoming presently the member of an 
advanced class and graduating in 1861. 

In describing my personal recollections of this college class- 
mate and friend I have elsewhere alluded to his exhortation on 
class unity, when in our sophomore year we met to discuss the 
Greek Letter societies, as probably his earliest effort in preach- 
ing before a congregation worthy of the name. 2 Finding nothing 

1 Proceedings, xliii. 414; xlviii. 8. 2 lb., xlviii. 10. 


among his posthumous notes to contradict that assertion, I am 
disposed to let it stand. It would seem, however, that Mc- 
Kenzie, from his earliest connection with the Central Church 
of Boston, whether as clerk or a college student, had been ac- 
customed to take a part in the week-day prayer meetings which 
he attended. And, viewed by his New Bedford acquaintance 
as already a collegian in training for the ministry, he found 
himself, when near graduation — probably about the close of 
his junior year — invited to preach at a Methodist Church there. 
This brought him, as he relates, to the point of applying to his 
own church for a license; and this, upon a special examination, 
was granted him in consideration of his years and advanced 
training. After this Mr. McKenzie preached at various places 
before he was ordained, and in fact previous to entering the 
seminary at Andover. 

It thus came about, that, in the fall of i860, while still a 
theological student, through the good offices of Professor Park, 
another of the influential friends who had become much inter- 
ested in him, Mr. McKenzie was invited to officiate for a Sun- 
day at the Congregational Church in Augusta, Maine, where 
a vacancy had occurred. He preached twice and the people 
were pleased with him. Officiating two Sundays more, at 
their request, he promptly received an invitation to the pas- 
torate. But as he had not yet finished his course at Andover, 
they waited until his graduation and then renewed their call, 
which he now accepted. On the 28th of August, 1861, he was 
ordained and installed pastor. 

This Congregational Church was the oldest, the largest and 
the most flourishing in the city. It was the church of the 
South Parish, established by the General Court of Massachu- 
setts in the earliest years of the nineteenth century. "It was 
a notable set of parishioners," writes Dr. McKenzie of his 
first pastorate, and it was certainly not an overstrong state- 
ment in respect of a congregation that included, almost in ad- 
joining pews, such men, together with their families, as James 
G. Blaine, ex-United States Senator James W. Bradbury, both 
of them church members, and Lot M. Morrill, afterward Sen- 
ator and Secretary of the Treasury. 

It was during his first pastorate that Dr. McKenzie began 
the practice of delivering his sermons ex tempore. At first he 


did so only occasionally, but soon he abandoned the use of 
manuscript altogether; and he was so successful that his 
discourses had, to his hearers, all the charm and finish of his 
carefully written sermons. All the people were kind to him, 
sympathizing with him in joy and sorrow. 

Dr. McKenzie's pastorate in Augusta covered most of the 
period of the Civil War. The city was the chief recruiting 
camp in the state, where many infantry and cavalry regi- 
ments and batteries of light artillery assembled for their first 
training; and the general government established there a huge 
military hospital. Dr. McKenzie preached every Sunday 
morning to hundreds of blue-coated soldiers who sat in long 
lines in the galleries of the old-fashioned meeting-house. He 
also took a large part in the ministrations to the sick and 
wounded men in the hospital. 

He had the "courage of his convictions." The political at- 
mosphere, in Maine as well as elsewhere, was highly charged 
with electricity during the war. On a Sunday morning, the 
day before the Monday on which the state election was to take 
place, the sound of a locomotive whistle broke the outer still- 
ness, during McKenzie's sermon. In those days there were 
no Sunday trains on any Maine railroad, and the members of 
the congregation pricked up their ears. What did it mean? 
The train was bringing to their homes and scattering along the 
line of the railroad, soldiers to vote for the " Union" candidate 
for governor. The Republican party had, for that occasion, 
erased its name from the ticket, although Mr. Blaine, chair- 
man of the Republican State Committee, was chairman of the 
" Union" committee. Dr. McKenzie was then undoubtedly a 
much stricter Sabbatarian than he was in later years. For on 
the Sunday following he denounced, in no measured language, 
the desecration of the Sabbath for political ends. His sermon 
was, of course, aimed directly at Mr. Blaine, who sat in his ac- 
customed place and received the reproof somewhat as delin- 
quents or offenders must have done in the early days of New 
England. But already the " Union" ticket had been suc- 

This minister's recollections of Augusta were tender and 
touching. It was here, during his pastorate, that his mother 
breathed her last while on a summer visit, his father having 

191 5-] ALEXANDER McKENZIE. 313 

died in New Bedford several years earlier. It was here, too, 
that in January, 1865, he brought from Fitchburg, Massa- 
chusetts, a wife — his " first love," as he calls her — whose 
acquaintance he had first made as Miss Ellen H. Eveleth, the 
visiting niece of one of his parishioners. Exemplary in all the 
relations of life, his constant counsellor and companion thence- 
forth, she survives Dr. McKenzie with their two children, a 
son and a daughter. 

During Mr. McKenzie's pastorate in Augusta the meeting- 
house was struck by lightning and burned; and minister and 
congregation joined zealously together in the erection of a new 
stone edifice in its place. Before this task was completed Mr. 
McKenzie received a call to the First Congregational Church 
in Cambridge, of historical renown. He at first declined, re- 
fusing to leave his present charge; but upon a second call, the 
new edifice in Augusta having at length been finished, he ac- 
cepted, and was accordingly installed in Cambridge, January 
25, 1867. And here, in the second parish of his ministerial ser- 
vice, he lived and labored for the long industrious remnant of 
his valuable life. 

This Cambridge church, contemporaneous with Harvard 
College in the seventeenth century and commemorative of its 
famous early minister, Thomas Shepard, enlarged steadily its 
domains and prestige under Dr. McKenzie's direction. The 
old wooden house of worship became inadequate, so that by 
1872 the beautiful memorial stonechurch on Garden Street, now 
in use, was built and dedicated. A handsome rectory close by 
was deeded to the minister for a residence. From the first his 
congregations were large and appreciative. Harvard professors 
and others eminent in Cambridge, in one generation or an- 
other, regarded him as their permanent pastor and spiritual 
guide. Students from Harvard and RadclifTe attended his 
Sunday services. The inner organizations of the parish were 
numerous and efficient. All things moved in smoothness and 
harmony during the forty- three years of this remarkable 
ministry. Young and old were devoted to their faithful and 
judicious presbyter; there was no discord, no schismatic out- 
growth apparent, and the church advanced steadily in the 
high ideals all cherished together. Meanwhile this pastor re- 
ceived an honorary doctorate degree from Amherst in 1879 




and from Harvard in 1901. Though from birth confined in 
residence to the eastern coast of New England, Dr. 
McKenzie's preaching and example became renowned, and 
calls were declined which came to him from other cities — 
Boston, New Haven, Chicago and New York City, besides 
the offer of a divinity professorship at one institution or 

On the twenty-sixth anniversary of his installation Dr. Mc- 
Kenzie preached in his church a commemorative sermon; on 
the fortieth anniversary, in January, 1907, a celebration was 
held there at which President Eliot of Harvard and others 
spoke in warm appreciation of his ministry; and finally, 
on the forty-third anniversary, he retired from his work at 
the age of fourscore and became pastor emeritus. After a 
brief season of rest and recreation at home or abroad, he 
passed away peacefully at his home in Cambridge, August 6, 

A chief inducement with Alexander McKenzie for accepting 
the call to Cambridge had been the desire to renew and 
strengthen those earlier ties which bound him to his alma mater. 
Soon after his installation in that city he preached in Har- 
vard College Chapel, exchanging pulpits with the venerable 
Dr. Peabody, preacher to the University and a man much be- 
loved. On the latter's retirement from his work, a board of 
preachers was instituted in. 1886 at Harvard, composed of 
eminent clergymen of different denominations, who in turn 
conducted the chapel services on Sundays and at daily prayers. 
Dr. McKenzie was one of the five clergymen originally chosen 
to this board. He was also chosen one of the overseers of 
Harvard University in 1872, soon after the Massachusetts leg- 
islature had transferred the choice from the Commonwealth to 
the alumni, and was reelected in 1878, serving for the full 
continuous space of twelve years. In 1875 he was made sec- 
retary of the board, a position which he retained until 1901. 
In these and other ways he was brought into very close contact 
with the University and with those graduates and instructors 
who led in its development during the period of its most 
famous progression and, indeed, throughout President Eliot's 
long and distinguished administration. He thus made many 
choice friendships, outside his own religious circle, among 

191 5-] ALEXANDER McKENZIE. 315 

college contemporaries, older or younger, and Harvard's 
educational work was constantly of the greatest interest to 

My space hardly permits mention of the various other works, 
philanthropic or educational, allied to his pastorate, in which 
Dr. McKenzie bore a prominent part in these years. He 
served as a trustee of Bowdoin College, of Phillips Academy, of 
Wellesley College (being once president of the board) and of 
Hampton Institute. Interested through life in the special 
welfare of the mariner, he was president of the Boston Sea- 
man's Aid and Boston Port societies. He was for several 
years on the school committee of Cambridge and served as a 
trustee of its hospital. In our Massachusetts Historical Soci- 
ety, which he joined in 1881, he bore a prominent part through 
many years of active membership, serving upon its council and 
the committee of publication. He grasped well the details of 
all such diversified pursuits; and his good judgment and habits 
of industry, combined with excellence as a preacher, and his 
liberal outlook upon the immediate problems of life while at 
the same time minister of a conservative faith, made his name 
and countenance much sought after. 

One secret of Dr. McKenzie's steady influence in these 
various directions, was the constancy with which he cultivated 
a personal interest in those younger than himself, from one gen- 
eration to another. No longer young, as it might have seemed 
while he was being educated among fellow-students, he surely 
found the true elixir of life when it came to dealing in his active 
ministry, as one confessedly mature, with those on decidedly 
the lower plane of youthful deference. "I do not write as an 
old man," he records at the age of eighty, "but as one who has 
retained the feeling and sympathy which belong to earlier 
years, and who has kept young by being so largely associated 
with young people." So, too, did the zest of living increase by 
his manifold acquaintance with helpful and congenial friends, 
during his long and favored experience. On the whole, he did 
not think that his four years of business experience in Boston 
had fitted him less for his sacred vocation than an unbroken 
training for college would have done. "They gave," he writes, 
"a practical nerve to my character. I learned to know men; 
to know young men and their feelings and tendencies. I came 


to know something of the real world. I gained a certain order- 
liness and method of later use. A ministerial life is so varied 
that nothing comes amiss." 

Among the blessings of a long life recounted by Dr. McKenzie 
was that of continuous good health. When he first preached at 
Augusta in 1861 he was far from robust, and people cautioned 
him against attempting too much. But a physician there 
whom he consulted said to him, "Go on and do your work," 
and he found that advice excellent. In his seventieth year he 
could record that from the day he first entered Phillips Acad- 
emy down to 1899 he had not missed an appointment, a lec- 
ture or a service by reason of sickness, though on one or two 
occasions kept back by some accident. His profound interest 
in affairs committed to him were a constant safeguard to his 
health, and the infirmities of old age crept over him almost 

Of Dr. McKenzie's long Cambridge pastorate, one of his most 
intimate parishioners still surviving, 1 whose church attendance 
began when a college student in 1878, writes thus: "Without 
exception, in my judgment, no one of the many conspicuous 
and able preachers of the time to whom I have listened equalled 
him in the moments of his highest inspiration and effort, as 
a pulpit orator, either in respect to the depth, incisiveness, 
accuracy and breadth of his estimation of spiritual truth, or in 
the beauty, flow, choice, force and appropriateness of the lan- 
guage in which he expressed his thought. It is noticeable that 
he almost never chose the same text the second time in his own 
pulpit. ... As a pastor he was in some respects unique, in 
my observation. He was by nature diffident and reticent in 
approaching strangers, as I found to my confusion when he 
first called upon me as a freshman. In calling upon those 
whom he knew well, or upon those from whom he expected in- 
formation or aid in the pursuit of truth, he showed more cour- 
age and warmth; while with his personal friends he was not 
only companionable, but abounding in good stories and rich 
humor, all the more effective because revealed with a sober 
and somewhat solemn countenance. He was not addicted to 
making calls, but would the more often call where he felt at 
ease. At the same time, I never have known a minister 
1 Frank Gaylord Cook, Esq. 


who, after once learning the name, address and circum- 
stances of a parishioner, more tenaciously kept him in his 
memory and thought, or watched over his welfare more 

In his philanthropic activities the welfare of the mariner was 
never forgotten by this son of a sea captain, for, as was well 
said of him, " the sea was in his blood." " It was a rare treat," 
writes one of his lay workers in the Seaman's Friend Society of 
Boston, "to hear him address an audience of sailors. His wit 
and eloquence found full expression; and the appreciation of 
the men, and their readiness to respond to an appeal from him, 
was as gratifying as it was remarkable. He never forgot, in his 
own church service, to pray for the sailor, and everywhere 
where opportunity offered he made telling appeals to men and 
women for help for the men of the sea, who are doing so much 
for us at such heavy cost." x And so, too, did this clergy- 
man's helpful labors and sympathy extend warmly to the 
uplift and educational training of our colored races. The Hamp- 
ton Institute of Virginia says of him: "He was accustomed to 
come to Hampton some days before the meetings of the trus- 
tees, and his sermons in the school church were thoroughly 
enjoyed. Certain of his sermons were long remembered by 
the graduates of the institution. One of them, on the text 
'He shall Be Like a Tree,' made a deep impression. He was an 
enthusiastic friend of the school and did much to make its 
work known throughout New England. After his health be- 
came infirm, he was unwilling to give up his yearly visit to 
Hampton. In Dr. McKenzie's death Hampton loses one of its 
most devoted friends." 2 

Not only had Dr. McKenzie a rare gift of making friends, as 
others have testified, but he himself rejoiced in the many per- 
sonal friendships of his life as a "wonderful blessing." "It 
has been a happy life," he concludes in the retrospect, "and 
though sorrows have entered it at many points, I should be 
glad to begin it again and live it over under the same condi- 
tions." Few of us, I imagine, can say this of ourselves at 
the age of threescore and ten. "If my reason and mem- 

1 Sea Breeze, October, 1914 (Mrs. Sarah C. Chapin). See also the tribute 
by Charles F. Stratton, ib. 

2 Southern Workman, September, 19 14 (editorial). 




ory remain," he reverently adds, "at the end I shall give 
God thanks for countless, ceaseless mercies; for unmeasured 
patience and forbearance; for love which passes understand- 
ing. I hope to be able to show that witness when I 
pass on." 



THE stated meeting was held on Thursday, the 12th instant, 
at three o'clock, p. m., the President, Mr. Adams, in the 
chair. 1 
The record of the last meeting was read and approved. 
The Librarian reported the list of donors to the Library 
since the last meeting. 

The Cabinet-Keeper read the following letter: 

Mrs. Lidian Emerson Bridge to the Society. 

West Medford, March 4, 1915. 

Gentlemen, — On behalf of the heirs of my father, Dr. Charles 
T. Jackson, I desire to present to the Massachusetts Historical So- 
ciety the medal and decorations, now held by you on deposit, which 
were bestowed upon Dr. Jackson for his discovery of the anaesthetic 
use of ether. 

We also take pleasure in presenting to your Society the volume 
containing the diplomas, affidavits and important letters relative 
to his discovery. 

In giving these it is on condition that they shall be kept on exhi- 
bition in a locked case, with the medals and decorations, and that 
you permit their examination on the request of any suitable person 
or persons. 

Respectfully yours, 

Lidian Emerson Bridge. 

He also reported the following accessions to the Cabinet: 
six photographs of portraits of Col. and Mrs. Jeremiah Lee, 
Capt. Patrick Tracy, and his son Hon. Nathaniel Tracy, Capt. 
Joseph Lemon Lee, son of Col. William Raymond Lee, of Revo- 
lutionary times, and of Gen. William Raymond Lee (1807- 
1891), from Mr. Thomas Amory Lee; a colored view of the old 
Mint in Philadelphia, from an original painting by Edwin 

1 Mr. Adams left before the end of the meeting, and Mr. Rhodes took the 


Lemasure, from the Frank H. Stewart Electric Co., of Phila- 
delphia; fifty mark pennies of the Royal Arch Chapter of Free- 
masons, from Mr. Charles K. Warner, of Philadelphia; a medal 
of the St. Mark's School Athletic Association of Southboro, 
Mass., from the Association; a bronze medal of the Society of 
Arts and Crafts of Boston, given to schools as an " award of 
merit," from the Society of Arts and Crafts; a medal to com- 
memorate the 150th anniversary of the town of Athol, Mass., 
19 1 2, and a store-card of William Simes and Co. and Nathaniel 
Marsh, Portsmouth, N. H., 1837, from William Simes. 

The Editor reported the following gifts and deposits: 

From Mrs. Frederick C. Shattuck bills and commercial ac- 
counts of the house of Lee and Cabot of Beverly, 1768-1827; 
correspondence on the census of 1790, and letters from Rufus 
King, William M. Gouge, C. C. Biddle, and Thomas Thornely, 
M. P., on finance and trade. Also memoranda by Henry Lee 
(178 2- 1867), on tariff and finance, and pamphlets on American 
political history. The collection is of great interest for the stu- 
dent of the commerce of Massachusetts and of the political and 
financial history of the nation. Some further records are placed 
with the Society on deposit. 

From the granddaughter and biographer of Charles Bulfinch, 
the architect, Miss Ellen Susan Bulfinch, on deposit, such pa- 
pers of the Bulfinch family as remain. Among them are the 
original letters from Moses Porter to his wife while he was on 
the Crown Point expedition of 1755 ; an autograph family record 
of John Colman, 1738; letters and journals of members of the 
Bulfinch family; a letter from George Whitefield; and letters 
from the Storers, Cranches, and Apthorp connections. The 
autobiography of Charles Bulfinch also deserves mention. 

From Loring W. Puffer, some Baylies letters. 

Paul Revere Frothingham, of Boston, was elected a Resident 
Member of the Society. 

The President announced the appointment of the following 
committees, in preparation for the Annual Meeting in April : 

To nominate Officers for the ensuing year: Messrs. William 
V. Kellen, Mark A. DeWolfe Howe, and Waldo Lincoln. 

To examine the Library and Cabinet: Messrs. Zachary T. 
Hollings worth, Chester N. Greenough, and Samuel E. 

19 1 5-1 JOHN CHIPMAN GRAY. 32 1 

To examine the Treasurer's accounts: Messrs. Harold Mur- 
dock and Henry H. Edes. 

In announcing the death of our late associate, John Chipman 
Gray, the President said: 

Through a somewhat curious coincidence, not also without 
its interest otherwise, John Chipman Gray was elected a Resi- 
dent Member of the Society at its March meeting, 1898, that 
year occurring on the 10th of the month. It now devolves on 
me to announce his death, at his dwelling in this city, on the 
25th of February. Exactly seventeen years to a day, therefore, 
elapsed between his election to membership and this announce- 
ment of his death. His name stood twenty-ninth on our present 
Roll. To some here these facts are curiously suggestive of 
changed circumstances and the passage of time. The April 
meeting of 1898 was held in the Library room of the American 
Academy of Arts and Sciences in the old Athenaeum building 
on Beacon Street. The last meeting of our Society in the orig- 
inal Dowse Room in the old Tremont Street building had taken 
place in April, 1897, eleven months before. Our associate, 
William R. Livermore, was then elected a Resident Member. 
Col. Livermore's name now stands twenty-sixth on our Resi- 
dent Membership Roll. It, therefore, appears that he whose 
death I now announce never attended a meeting of the Society 
in the Tremont Street building; but also, of those whose names 
now figure on the Resident Roll twenty-five only could have 
ever attended a meeting there. Yet to some of us, conscious of 
rapid promotion towards the head of the list, the meetings in 
the Tremont Street building seem very recent, the recollec- 
tion of them fresh. The death of Mr. Gray, twenty-ninth on the 
Roll but never present at a Tremont Street meeting, is sug- 
gestive of the fact that the time is not now remote when the 
Resident Roll of the Society will have been wholly renewed 
since the Tremont Street meetings came to an end. They will 
soon be traditions only. 1 

Though most properly, both from descent and professional 
eminence, a member of the Society, it cannot be said that Mr. 
Gray ever, in the course of a most industrious and fruitful life, 
evinced any peculiar interest in historical research as such, and 

1 The building on Tremont Street is about to be torn down, to make way for 
a city building. 


apart from the law; and certainly, so far as our Society is con- 
cerned, his contributions, either in the way of presence or other- 
wise, were not considerable. In accordance with my custom 
in making announcements like the present, I shall confine my- 
self strictly to the relations of the deceased to our Society, and 
his activities in connection therewith. 

The record in the present case is brief. Though a member for 
a score of years, I do not remember to have seen Mr. Gray at 
more than an occasional meeting. His connection was with 
the University, and his field of research was at Cambridge. It 
was in his connection with the Harvard Law School he did his 
life-work, and with it his memory will hereafter be more espe- 
cially associated. Here, he was less at home. Nevertheless, his 
name from time to time does appear in our records. 

At the November meeting, 1899, ne P a id a tribute to the 
memory of John C. Ropes, an intimate personal friend and his 
associate throughout his professional life. Mr. Gray was sub- 
sequently appointed to write a Memoir of Mr. Ropes, which he 
submitted through the Recording Secretary at the June meet- 
ing in 1900. This Memoir, however, Mr. Gray did not himself 
prepare; but, with the concurrence of the Council, the work 
had been devolved on the Rev. Joseph May of Philadelphia, a 
classmate and intimate friend of Mr. Ropes. In March, 1902, 
Mr. Gray paid a tribute to Prof. James B. Thayer, his colleague 
in the Harvard Law School, whose death was then announced. 

So far as this Society is concerned, these somewhat meagre 
details complete the record. As I have already said, Professor 
Gray's activities were professional, and connected with another 
organization in no way historical in character — the Harvard 
Law School. Nevertheless, it is desirable for obvious reasons 
that a characterization as well as Memoir of Mr. Gray should 
be matter of record in the Proceedings of our Society. There, 
and there alone, they will hereafter be matter of record and 
accessible to the investigator; and that they should somewhere 
be of record and accessible is most desirable, for Professor 
Gray was in his way a very noticeable man. In his case traits 
of character of much fineness and of a high order were fully de- 
veloped. The facts of his life will be easily gathered, and un- 
doubtedly a sufficient record will appear in a future volume of 
our Proceedings. How he appeared to his contemporaries and 

191 5-] JOHN CIIIPMAN GRAY. 323 

the few now remaining who could be classed as his intimates, 
the degree and way in which he impressed himself on them, 
is another matter. In the way of intimate characterization, 
one member only of our Society is qualified to speak of him. 
From Harvard student days, the present Oliver Wendell 
Holmes knew Professor Gray intimately. Begun before the 
Civil War, that intimacy continued down to the time of death. 
Congenial spirits, they were familiar friends. Regarding Mr. 
Gray, as did all who were ever brought in close contact with him, 
as in every way interesting, a man of choice elements as well as 
much accumulated learning, I have tried since his death to in- 
duce Mr. Justice Holmes to attend here to-day, and pay tribute 
at once intelligent and appreciative to his life-long personal and 
professional friend. Official engagements put it out of the power 
of our associate to comply with the request. Nevertheless, 
evincing keen interest in the suggestion, Judge Holmes has, 
amidst his pressing judicial duties, prepared a brief paper, which 
I now submit. With confidence I say that could Mr. Gray 
have been consulted, it would have been his old associate, Oliver 
Wendell Holmes, who, of all men, would have been selected to 
say the last word of him. 

The tribute by Mr. Holmes was read by the President, as 
follows : 

The affectionate intimacy of a lifetime may not be the best 
preparation for an attempt to characterize a friend whom one 
has known and loved so long. His qualities come to be felt too 
instinctively for articulate enumeration just as one ceases to 
be conscious of the judgments that govern one's walk in the 
streets. But with so marked a personality as that of John Gray, 
there were features that no one could forget. 

He came of a family in which scholarship was in the blood; 
and I think that perhaps the first thought that would occur to 
me would be that he was a scholar born. He was a scholar of a 
type that is growing rare. For his knowledge, his immense 
reading, his memory were not confined to the actualities of the 
day. Alongside of mathematics, and the latest German works 
on jurisprudence, alongside of his mastery of the law, equally 
profound and available for teaching in the Law School and ad- 
vising upon great affairs, he not only kept up the study of 


Greek and Roman Classics, but he was familiar with a thousand 
bypaths among books. I think he could have given a clear 
account of the Bangorian controversy, the very name of which 
has been forgotten by most of us, and he could have recited 
upon all manner of curious memoirs or upon pretty much any 
theme that falls within the domain of literature, properly so 
called. He loved books, and his beautiful collection ranged 
from the Theodosian code to curious Eighteenth Century tracts. 

He brought this scholarship to bear unobtrusively but power- 
fully when he came to write. His treatise on Perpetuities is a 
quiet masterpiece that stands on an equal footing with the most 
famous works of the great English writers upon property law. 
His last little book on The Nature and Sources of the Law 
is worthy of the German professors who might seem to have 
made that theme their private domain. But unlike much 
German work, instead of pedantry, it is written with the light 
touch and humor of a man of the world. For his knowledge not 
only was converted into the organic tissue of wisdom, but flow- 
ered with a quiet humor that sometimes emerged in his writing 
and that gave habitual delightfulness to his talk. 

He was a very wise man. So wise that those who met him 
in affairs perhaps would say that wisdom was the first thing to 
be mentioned with his name. He was able as no one else has 
been to unite practice in Boston, in which he was consulted and 
relied upon in matters of the largest import, with teaching at 
the Law School, where his subjects required study of subjects 
that seemed most remote from every day; and both with equal 

In this connection, it is worth recalling that when he was in 
the Army he was the first officer to meet Sherman at Savannah 
after the march to the sea, and that he is referred to in Sher- 
man's report of his operations as "a very intelligent officer 
whose name I have forgotten," a striking tribute to one who 
barely had reached manhood from the great commander at the 
crowning moment of his success. 

Such capacity as Gray's for voluminous occupation is apt to 
go with a loose fibre, or, one might say, a somewhat coarse 
grain, but Gray was delicate, accurate, and fine grained. Like 
all his race, he was keenly observing without showing it, seem- 
ing to see from the sides of his eyes like a woman. And none of 

igi 5-] JOHN CHIPMAN GRAY. 325 

his remarkable qualities and capacities remained isolated or 
futile, but they all united to give character to the stream of his 
thought. It will be seen that I am trying to describe a master, 
one who fairly may be called a great master, who was listened 
to with equal respect by clients, by courts, and by all students 
of the law, and at the same time an extraordinary and delightful 
man, whose conversation gave equal pleasure to specialists and 
men of the world. When I add to this that he was a most faith- 
ful and affectionate friend, I have said enough perhaps to show, 
I will not say what a loss is his death, for he had lived as long 
as a man can hope to live, but what a gain, not only to us who 
loved him, but to the world, was his life, a life rich in fruits and 
ending surrounded by honor and by love. 

The President then called upon Mr. Storey, who said: 

I am very glad to add my tribute of high respect and warm 
regard for John C. Gray, though what I say at best will be only 
a faint echo of what has been said so well by Justice Holmes. 

I have known Mr. Gray for more than forty years — at 
the monthly dinners of a small club formed when we were all 
young and where conversation was frank and intimate, in other 
social relations, and in the practice of the law to which we have 
alike been devoted during the whole period, though our asso- 
ciations were never very close. He was essentially a scholar, 
a voluminous reader, at home in his library and master of its 
contents, but, as it seemed to me, more interested in his books 
than in the active conflicts of life. The political controversies, 
for example, which have divided the nation since the Civil War 
excited in him rather the interest of a spectator than a desire to 
take part in the struggle, and for sports and outdoor life he had 
little taste. His interests were intellectual, and he was a type 
of the refined and educated men who seem unfortunately to be 
growing less common in this country. 

The great interest of his life was his profession, to which he 
gave the best that was in him. He became instructor at the 
Harvard Law School in the year when I was admitted to the 
Bar, and until his failing health compelled his retirement con- 
tinued there as lecturer and professor. As a student, as a writer 
and as a teacher his success was brilliant, and the high reputa- 
tion which he enjoyed among lawyers everywhere was well de- 


served. His position at Harvard gave him a great opportunity, 
for he who controls the fountain can color the stream. Many 
of the lawyers now eminent at the Bar of the United States owe 
to him their inspiration, and gratefully recognize their debt. 
Among the professors at the School he did his full share in 
moulding the opinions and fixing the standards of lawyers all 
over this country, and the news of his death will be received by 
them with profound sorrow. 

In active practice he was strong in counsel and in the presen- 
tation of legal questions to the court. He was familiar with 
the business of life, was a wise and safe adviser on important 
matters, and his opinions in difficult cases were sought and fol- 
lowed; but the dust of the arena had no attraction for him, 
and he was not fitted to enjoy the struggles and squabbles of 
jury practice. He was a man whom an opponent could trust 
implicitly, absolutely certain that nothing unfair or unworthy 
would ever be done in a case for which he was responsible. He 
went through life serenely, earnestly, modestly, with scrupulous 
regard for the rights and feelings of others, but without seeking 
notoriety or apparently even caring for the recognition which 
was his due. He seemed in his daily labors to recognize and act 
upon the truth stated by Justice Holmes that "the root of joy 
as of duty is to put out all one's powers for some great end . . . 
to hammer out as compact and solid a piece of work as one can, 
to try to make it first rate, and to leave it unadvertised." 

Such a man though taken in the fullness of time is a great 
loss to the community, and in his profession his death leaves a 
void which will not easily be filled. 

Mr. Bradford read a paper on 

Fiction as Historical Material. 

History and fiction are usually opposed to each other, per- 
haps more sharply than is justified by the facts. No one knows 
better than a company of historians that a large portion of 
history is fiction, more or less intentional. On the other 
hand, fiction is founded on the reality of human life which 
makes the basis of history. If it were not so, it would be 
impossible to hold the interest of the most trivial of novel 


Sober writers of history are apt to regard the historical novel 
with contempt. This feeling springs perhaps partly from jeal- 
ousy. At any rate, it is not warranted. Readers who would 
never open a solidly documented and authoritative work — 
very likely to be misleading for all its documents — will be- 
come absorbed not only in Scott and Dumas, but in such 
books as Manzoni's Promessi Sposi or the Egyptian novels of 
Ebers, and will acquire a knowledge of the general current of 
events which fills a most important place in their intellectual 
make-up. Especially significant in this regard are the histor- 
ical plays of Shakespeare. How many thousands of young 
people have gained from those plays a firm grasp upon the 
movement of history under the great English kings, which it 
would have been extremely difficult to impart to them in any 
other way. You may urge that the impressions are misleading 
and false. So, often, are those received from well-accredited 
historians. I do not know that Shakespeare's picture of the 
reign of Henry VI is any less reliable than Froude's picture of 
the reign of Henry VIII. 

But it is especially in the line of portraiture that the impor- 
tance of historical fiction can hardly be overestimated. Where 
does the average educated man get his conception of the Stuarts 
and of Cromwell? Not from Gardiner, but from Scott. James 
I and Charles I in The Fortunes of Nigel, Charles II and Crom- 
well in Woodstock, have a hold on the imagination of English- 
speaking peoples which no investigation can shake and no 
argument can alter. For myself, I confess that the Valois 
kings and Richelieu and Mazarin have a living, breathing in- 
dividuality from the pages of Dumas which never would have 
existed for me from any historical reading. It is the same with 
American history. Such figures as Cooper touched in his better 
novels have a life which does not belong to others. Mr. Win- 
ston Churchill has made Lincoln a man of flesh and blood to 
thousands who would never have got at him in Mr. Morse's 
excellent biography. You may protest against these things. 
You may scoff at them. You cannot explain away their potent 
and lasting significance. And do you not believe that the men 
who live history would rather be remembered in the pages of a 
popular novelist than of any historian? "Let me make the 
songs of a country and I care not who makes its laws," is just 


as true of the novels and plays of a country when compared to 
its history. 

But, it is urged, these fictitious portraits are not exact, they 
are not reliable, they are not final. Just here comes in the in- 
terest of the whole question. If we could exhibit on one side 
a gallery of strictly historical portraits, as to which all were 
agreed, and set against them the portraits of the novelists as 
utterly false and misleading, the problem would be simple. 
But we cannot. There are no true historical portraits, none 
reliable, none final. What we call the characters of men are 
fluid as water, unsubstantial as snow images, they change their 
aspects and their bearing even as we depict them. Character 
is but the generalization of habitual words and actions. Even 
our recorded knowledge of such words and actions is unreliable, 
confusing, and perplexed. But when we come to generalize 
them into qualities of character, the operation is as subtle and 
delicate as the attempt to weave the solid tissue of a garment 
out of moonbeams. 

This does not at all mean that the study of character is to be 
given up in despair. On the contrary, it is the study that is 
above ah most real to us, the one that enters into almost every 
little daily action of our lives. We must figure out as closely 
as possible what men will do on the basis of what they have done 
through just these frail, intangible generalizations that I speak 
of, and no effort of human intelligence is more absorbingly de- 
lightful. Only the grave historian need not flatter himself that 
he will ever arrive at finality or that he can despise the artist 
who perhaps has gifts of divination worth more than any la- 
borious faculty of dusty research. 

Take two very striking instances from the endless list of his- 
torical personalities as to whom men never have agreed and 
never will agree. For two thousand years the character, of 
Caesar has been an object of discussion and controversy. Are 
we any nearer a final conclusion that will satisfy every one than 
we were two thousand years ago? And is not the very novel and 
subtle and human portrayal by Mr. Bernard Shaw, in his 
Ccesar and Cleopatra, quite as interesting and suggestive as the 
more formal studies of Froude and Mommsen? 

Again, hundreds of attempts have been made to portray 
Napoleon, and hundreds more will be made. Do any two of 


these attempts agree with each other and can any one of them 
even pretend to be regarded as final? 

But the interest and value of fiction, in both novel and drama, 
for the historian, extends far beyond the mere casual introduc- 
tion of a few historical personages. If history is to be human, 
to be alluring, to be vital, if it is to deal rather with essential 
truth than with superficial accuracy, the writer of it must 
indeed be profoundly conversant with the special minutiae of his 
particular subject, but he must above all be a student of the 
human soul which is the primary subject of all history. It is 
for want of knowledge on this head that very learned men write 
very painstaking books and then wonder why the public does 
not read them. Long poring over curious documents is nowa- 
days — unfortunately — regarded as the first condition of his- 
torical writing. But it would be better for historians — and 
better for their publishers — if they trained themselves more 
fully in the most curious document of all. 

Hence, I think that every historian should read the great 
poets and novelists, as being more competent than any one 
else to teach him a very important part of his business. It will 
be urged, indeed, that the best way to gain a knowledge of men 
is to live among men. This is partly true, not wholly. Else 
how explain the amazing ignorance of humanity often displayed 
by those who live in daily, hourly contact with it? The study 
of men's hearts from their words and actions, is, as I have sug- 
gested above, an enormously difficult one. No man approaches 
perfection in it and few can progress far without a teacher. 
Now the best teachers in this art are beyond question the great 
writers of drama and fiction. They not only see themselves, 
but they help us to see, and if I had any hand in the training 
of future historians, I would not neglect thorough drill in the 
investigation of sources, but I would insist on its being con- 
stantly supplemented by the study of writers who are not gen- 
erally regarded as historians at all. 

It is strange, this sharp line which is constantly drawn be- 
tween fiction and history, as if one were lies, the other truth. 
The explanation is probably to be found in the fact that there 
are good and bad novels. But heaven knows there is also good 
and bad history. The foundation of all fiction is and must be 
truth. The novelist simply has the privilege of casting aside 


what is inessential, of shaking off those trammels of superficial 
circumstance by which the formal historian is ever bound so 
rigidly, and dealing only with truth as it is general, essential, 
and permanent in its bearing on the larger elements of human 
life. The great truth tellers about your soul and my soul — 
and what else really concerns us in history? — are no doubt, in 
their degree, Thucydides and Tacitus, Gibbon and Macaulay, 
Taine and Michelet; but they are far more, Dante and Cer- 
vantes and Moliere and Shakespeare; and they are also, much 
more than is usually realized, Fielding and Jane Austen and 
Thackeray and Hawthorne, George Sand and Balzac, and Zola 
and Flaubert. 

Lastly, beside these functions of fiction in the presentation of 
historical character and the profound observation of the human 
heart, there is still another of perhaps even more direct interest 
to the historian, and that is the depiction of the manners and 
fashions of thought and life characteristic of a particular 

There is, of course, a very great difference in the value of 
novels in this regard. Writers like George Sand or Dumas, 
chiefly occupied with the inner experiences of their characters 
or the movement of their story, reflect comparatively little in 
detail of the life that is going on about them. Miss Austen, 
on the other hand, though dealing with a very limited field, gives 
an immense amount of suggestion and information for the social 
historian who is working in that field. Or, as a very different 
instance, take Turgueniev. Do not his novels tell us more 
about the life, the manners, the habits of thought and action 
of the Russian people, than we should easily acquire from any 
formal history? And where is there a more magnificent and 
inexhaustible storehouse of historical material than the Come- 
die Humaine of Balzac? What would we not give for a work 
which would reveal to us so intimately the private, daily life 
of the Greeks and Romans? 

The case of Balzac will, indeed, suggest the objection, often 
raised, that fiction tends to depict not the normal conditions of 
society and ordinary life, but the rare, the exceptional, and 
even the vicious. To judge by French novels, it might be 
supposed that adultery was the main interest and occupation 
of all French persons between the ages of twenty and fifty, 


and this view would probably be somewhat exaggerated. It 
is true that literature flourishes on the exception, not on the rule. 
If we wished to make an epigram, we might say that virtuous 
people find their chief diversion in reading about vice. The 
explanation, however, does not lie wholly in mere vulgar curi- 
osity, but in the fact that we read mainly, as I have said, to 
get at the souls of men. Now men do not show their souls so 
readily when they are walking the calm path of everyday con- 
vention as when they are jolted out of that path by some 
quick blow, or sudden shock, or violent disaster. 

What is of more interest for our investigation is, that the 
same objection which is made to novels applies also to history. 
The gloomy epic of Zola does not distort ordinary life much 
more than do the Annals of Tacitus, from reading which we 
should get the idea that nearly all the Romans of the first and 
second centuries were poisoners, conspirators, adulterers, and 
debauchees; whereas probably the bulk of them were timid, 
respectable, conventional Philistines like ourselves. There are 
laws of perspective for the pen as well as for the brush, which 
the intelligent reader soon learns to appreciate. 

In this matter of reflecting the tone and manners of a period, 
the novel is probably quite as valuable in what is unconscious, 
as in the deliberate and intentional effort of the novelist. For 
instance, there is a group of novels, written in the early cen- 
turies of the Christian era, of which the Theagenes and Chariclea 
of Heliodorus is the best known example, which is of remark- 
able interest from the point of view of social history. The 
whole treatment of those stories shows that they were written, 
as most novels are, to be read mainly by women, and from them 
we can divine the woman of that day in some respects as well 
as if we knew her. We learn, to be sure, that she was very 
much like her sisters of nineteen hundred years later, that her 
dreams were the same — of an ardent lover who remains true 
in a thousand temptations and rescues her from a thousand 
perils — her sacrifices the same, her virtue the same, and her 
refinements very nearly, if not quite the same. But even this 
result has surely singular historic interest. 

A like value attaches to the novels of the time of Shakespeare. 
In themselves they are tedious enough. But when we see that 
they established a tone of social life, an atmosphere of chivalry 


and artificial love-making, a suggestion of fine-spun delicacy, 
wholly opposed to the rough, coarse vigor of the contemporary 
plays, and when we appreciate that this is because the novels 
were written for women and the plays for men, we get another 
revelation of the importance and significance of the novel for 
social history. 

Probably no other country produces or reads fiction so widely 
as the United States. Much of it is nearly worthless from every 
point of view. Very little of it deserves careful reading. Yet 
as one who attempts to keep track of this fiction in a very gen- 
eral way, so as to have at least some knowledge of the promi- 
nent landmarks in it, I have no hesitation in saying that its 
value as depicting, both consciously and unconsciously, the 
tastes, the habits, the interests, the pursuits, and the ideals of 
the American people is very great indeed. Mr. Rhodes has 
taught us all the importance of the newspaper, so that in future 
no student can neglect it. I think that the historian of a hun- 
dred years hence will find it also greatly to his profit to study 
our novels. Only, if things go on as they are going now, the 
historian of a hundred years hence will be completely smothered 
under the materials of history. 

Dean Hodges read a paper on "The New England Ancestry 
of Henry Codman Potter," which will appear in print elsewhere. 

Garibaldi and Nelaton. 

In calling attention to a photograph of Nelaton and Gari- 
baldi which formed part of a collection recently presented to 
the Society, Dr. Warren said: 

The photograph shows Nelaton at the bedside of Garibaldi 
at Spezzia on October 28, 1862, and is interesting from the 
circumstance that the visit gave rise to the invention of what 
has since been known as "Nela ton's probe," an instrument 
devised for discovering the presence of a bullet in a wound, and 
well known to surgery for the last half century. 

Garibaldi was wounded at Aspromonte on August 29, 1862. 
Beside two superficial wounds, he sustained a wound of the 
right ankle bone just in front of what is known as the internal 
malleolus. After a treatment of several weeks by the Italian 
surgeons, who had not been able to make up their minds as to 

Garibaldi and Nelaton, 



the proper course to be followed, Mr. Richard Partridge of 
London, 1 referred to by the Dublin press as the "champion 
English surgeon," at the instance of the "Garibaldi Committee" 
proceeded to Italy in order that the wounded man might have 
the judgment and skill of a British surgeon. Mr. Partridge, on 
making his report to the "Garibaldi Italian Unity Committee," 
stated that he arrived at Spezzia on the 16th of September and 
had since that time daily visited the general in company with 
Dr. Pandina and his other medical assistants. As the result of 
those visits he expressed the opinion that the bullet did not enter 
the joint nor effect a lodgment elsewhere. For this service 
Mr. Partridge received a fee of six hundred and eighty pounds 
from the Secretary of the "Garibaldi Surgical Fund." 

The wound continuing, however, to remain open, Dr. Ripari 
and his Italian colleagues still felt that the presence of the bullet 
was not disproved, and as signs of inflammation gave rise to 
the feeling that amputation might become necessary, a further 
consultation was decided upon for which, apparently, not only 
Mr. Partridge, but also the celebrated surgeons Pirogoff of St. 
Petersburg and Nelaton of Paris were sent for. It appears 
that Nelaton examined the patient on October 28, and on in- 
troducing an ordinary probe detected a resonant sound charac- 
teristic of an instrument striking a metallic surface, and not 
dull as if coming in contact with spongy bone, which left no 
doubt in his mind of the presence of the bullet in the wound. 

Messrs. Partridge and Pirogoff, according to accounts, saw 
the patient three days after this and Mr. Partridge gave out, 
as the result of their observations, that "as far as can be judged 
by external exploration the ball will be found toward the ex- 
ternal part of the articulation fixed in the bone." They advised 
waiting for the ball to become mobile and near the surface, be- 
fore attempting extraction. 

This is of special interest, as Mr. Partridge has always been 
accused of expressing the opinion that the ball was not in Gari- 
baldi's foot; although at his first visit, as we have seen, he 
felt inclined to that opinion, at his second consultation he saw 
fit to change his diagnosis. 

Attempts had been made by Professor Zannetti to detect the 
ball with an electric battery without success, but Nelaton, 
1 See Dictionary of National Biography, xliii. 432. 


on his return to Paris, after consultation with a M. Emanuel 
Rosseau, devised a probe tipped with white porcelain which, 
when pressed upon a leaden substance, would receive a mark 
of the lead upon its surface. The probe, on its arrival being 
tried by Doctor Zannetti, confirmed the diagnosis of the 
presence of the bullet, and on the 23rd of November the 
following telegram was sent to Nelaton: "Ball extracted 
from the wound of Garibaldi as assured by your diagnosis 
guaranteed by the result of your probing. Honneur a vous. 

"Nekton's probe," thus made famous, was looked upon for 
many years afterwards as the only instrument of precision by 
which the presence of a bullet in the wound could be conclu- 
sively determined. Its usefulness has probably, if not entirely, 
been set aside by modern X-ray methods. 

Nelaton's connection with this case was regarded at the time 
as a great triumph of French over English surgery and Mr. 
Partridge was by many considered as having experienced a most 
unfortunate episode in his career. A careful analysis of the facts 
seems, however, to show that Mr. Partridge, although at his 
first visit (which was about three weeks after the injury) ex- 
pressed the opinion that there might be no foreign body in the 
wound, was able to come to a different conclusion a month later, 
and had therefore agreed with the other surgeons as to the pres- 
ence of a bullet in the wound. 

It may be said here that the wound healed slowly, after the 
removal of the ball, for we find at the time of Garibaldi's visit to 
England in 1864, that although his leg still continued to trouble 
him somewhat, his wound had been healed some four or five 

Dr. Warren said he had had the pleasure of seeing both 
Mr. Partridge and Nelaton while a student abroad. They 
were both born early in the century, Partridge in 1805 and Ne- 
laton in 1807, and both died within a few weeks of one another 
in 1873. They were men of strikingly different characteristics. 
Mr. Partridge was a very old-fashioned type of an eccentric 
Englishman, and although he occupied at the time to which 
we have referred the position of seniority in English surgery, 
he was never regarded by his colleagues as an exceptionally bril- 
liant exponent of surgical art. Dr. Warren's personal ex- 


periences left a strong impression of a quaint personality and 
he can subscribe heartily to a statement made in Mr. Par- 
tridge's obituary notice that "he flavored his discourse with 
jests which were not always quite convenient." 

Nelaton, on the other hand, as Dr. Warren recalls him, was a 
refined, well-groomed, and courteous Parisian gentleman. He 
was the popular French surgical hero of his day and in later 
years filled the office of surgeon to Napoleon III. And he soon 
became in high favor at court owing to his successful treat- 
ment of the young Prince Imperial. The Prince, a child about 
ten years of age, had been suffering from a swelling on the hip 
which Nelaton had pronounced an abscess. It was commonly 
reported that when Nelaton took up his knife to operate 
Napoleon instinctively stretched out his arm. But the surgeon's 
gentle "Pardon, sire" restrained the anxious and doubting 
father with one hand while he plunged the knife in and laid the 
abscess open. 

Dr. Warren thought the facts of this episode in the lives of 
these two celebrated surgeons were worth recording in connec- 
tion with the accompanying photograph, and so far as he knew 
no such illustration as Nelaton at the bedside of Garibaldi had 
hitherto been published. 

Mr. Wendell presented copies of three letters from the cor- 
respondence of his great-grandfather, John Wendell, of Ports- 
mouth, New Hampshire. 

Of the writers not much is known. Traditions about George 
Boyd, the writer of the first two, are pleasantly set forth in 
Brewster's Rambles about Portsmouth (i. 163, 164 seq.; and cf. 
168, 173). He was probably the George Boyd baptized at 
Newington, New Hampshire, on April 23, 1732; son of Mr. 
George Boyd, of Boston, and Abigail Hoyt, of Newington, who 
were married there on August 21, 1730. In 1775 he became a 
member of His Majesty's Council in New Hampshire, the last 
man appointed to that office. The Lord Erroll x who recog- 
nized him as a kinsman was the son and heir of that Lord of 
Kilmarnock 2 who was beheaded in the Tower in 1745. The 
Scottish peerages state that the father of this nobleman was 

1 James, Lord Boyd, and thirteenth Earl of Erroll, died in 1778. 

2 William Boyd (i 704-1 746), fourth Earl of Kilmarnock. He married Lady 
Anne Livingstone, daughter of the Earl of Linlithgow. 


an only son; but George Boyd, who died in 1787, lies buried 
at Portsmouth under the arms of Boyd of Kilmarnock. 

Daniel Stevens, the writer of the third letter, is even more 
shadowy. He appears to have been engaged in business which 
concerned both South Carolina and New England. He seems 
to have been twice married at Charleston, S. C. 1 And his 
name occurs among those of American partisans imprisoned at 
Charleston by the British authorities in 1781. 

George Boyd to John Wendell. 

London June 27th 1774. 
My Dear Notra, — Agreeable to your desire and my promise I 
now set apart a few hours tho Sunday to give you a histry of what 
has transpierd since I left Portsmouth, you must not expect me 
to be regular. I shall give it from my Journal, which is not very 
corect. We saild from piscatique the 25 April with wind at North, 
before the Boats that went down with us was out of sight, the wind 
took us a back, the next day it was clouday and very rainey with 
wind prety fresh and rite Head, and continued so for eight days, 
much fogg and heavey rains. I hope the rains which we had reach'd 
Portsmouth to make a Freshett, to bring the loggs down to make 
Lumber plenty. About the 5th May we had the Glory ous Sun, 
which was well pleasing to us, it continued fair 4 Days with the 
wind before the beam, the 10th May began with thick fogg and 
heavey rains which lasted till 20th May, heavy head beat Sea fowle 
winds and fowle weather, very disagreeable at Sea such bad weather. 
I was very sick and often wished myself upon my farm planting 
potatoes, but all in vain. On the Eastermost Part of the Banks of 
Newfoundland we was in amongst 10 large Islands of Ice, we hauld 
our wind and got to winder of them and by my desire the Capt. bore 
down on one of the largest and came within Musket shott, know 
altho: Aleblastor could not look finer than the Island, we judg'd it 
to be about two miles square and between two and three hundred 
feet above water, surrounded with great numbers Birds; From the 
20th May nothing remarkeable happened till our arrival which was 
the 4th June about 4 o'clock we landed at Plymouth. I was much 
pleas'd to gett my foot on land, being so very sick on the passage, 
I could not get the Motion of the Ship out of my head for several 
days, on my landing I found a number of Letters lodged which 
introduced me to the most principle genteel People there, it being 
the Kings birth day it was kept with great Splendor in the Even'g 

1 S. C. Hist, and Gen. Mag., xi. 34, 169. 


there was Eluminations, Burnfires and very grand fire works at the 
long room where I was introduced to upwards three hundred Gentle- 
men and Laydis. I spent a few days very agreeable with some of the 
first people, and shall have orders from their to build two Ships 
when I return. My friends has lodg'd me letters at Plymouth to 
introduce me to every town of note on the Rhode to London. I left 
Plymouth the 8th June, one of the Gentlemen was very polite, came 
with me to Dartmouth which is about 40 Miles, we lodg'd at Tot- 
ness the 8th which is a very pleasant village, numbers of pritty 
women. I forgot to tell you Plymouth is well worth seeing, there 
are several magnefisant castles one of which rules the town, the 
kings Dock is much larger than Plymouth 3 or 4 miles distant, better 
laid out and much better buildings. I am told their's 15 hundred 
houses, the Dock rope houses and stores, are very curious every 
thing built with stone and iron. I dined with the Master of the 
dock and have laid in for a little Junk he is to give me an order 
to build a Ship for his Son who is abroad Perhaps I shall make 
good Commission of that, the 9th in the morn'g we took boat and 
went to Dartmouth which is 10 miles up a very narrow River 
with great plenty Salmon, we saw them hawling there netts. this 
River is very pleasant and very romantick; great numbers Noble- 
mans Seats all the way down, in short the whole 10 miles is nothing 
but Gardens both sides the River, we got to Dartmouth 9 o'clock 
morn'g after we had breakfast'd we went to see the Governor whose 
house stands very high from the Streat. I counted 68 steps to gett 
to his fore door the steps where 8 inches deep, we was soon intro- 
duc'd to the Garden which we ware oblidg'd to assend 4 pair stairs to 
gett in, its a very Beutifull Garden on a Mountain which commands 
the Sea and the whole town, the middle part of the garden was 
leval with the tops of the chimneys Notwithstanding the back of 
the House was 5 storey, the back part of the Garden over look't the 
chimney; Dartmouth has but very few good buildings, very high 
land round it and streets very bad, it's trade is large to Newfound- 
land, I'm told they have a hundred sail vessels out this season 
there is great plenty fresh fish, lobsters, crabs that will weigh 14 lb. 
plenty of oysters and pretty women. I had no inclineation to tast 
the oysters as I was told they were very dangerous, as soon as a Gen- 
tleman tastes them he '11 want to tast the prity women, and as soon 
as you had tasted the women you must be under the nessessity of 
tasting a little Mercury to work off the coppery taste of the Oysters. 
I made some very good connections at Dartmouth, for my short 
tary which was only two days, and I'm to build a small ship for a 
Gentleman their when I return to America. I promis'd to spend a 
fortnight their on my return to Plymouth, which place I intend to 


embark from. The Gentlemen there gave me letters to Pool, Liver- 
pool, and several other Sea Port towns, that I shall go to. I left 
Dartmouth 10 June and arriv'd at the City of Exeter that day, I 
had Letters to the Mare and severall other Gentlemen of Destinction 
in the City; that evening I was introduced to the Star and Garter 
Club which consists of the Mare, Alderman; and a number of the 
principle Gentlemen of the City, we was very merry. Sunday I 
spent 10 miles from the City at the Mare's Country house at Ex- 
mouth. I could have spent a month there very agreeably, but you 
know the old saying Buissness before friends. I have promised to 
tarry a week or ten days with them on my return. Monday June 
1 2th I sot out for Bristol, arriv'd there that even'g which is 84 miles. 
My friends and acquaintance was very glad to see me at Bristol. 
The second day afTter my arrival I was introduc'd to the most re- 
spectible Gentlemen of the City where I din'd with the Member of 
Parliment, Alderman and about 20 other Gentlemen of the City at 
the Alderman's; the Member of Parliment was a Minasteral man, 
they begun to be warm about chusing there Members, I understand 
their General Election is next March, Mr. Crugar stands fair to be 
chose. I need not give you the description of Bristol, as you have 
had it from abler hands, but will give you there true Charectors, 
they are very generous, for I believe if I 'd tary there three months 
it would not cost me any thing for Victual or Drink, if I'd pleas'd. 
I had a pretty good acquaintance when I was there before but now 
I have much inlarg'd it. Now there next Charector is, they are very 
keen in Buisness, a person must have his eye well open'd and look 
twice before he leaps once. I sold a Ship at Bristol and ordered a 
Brigg to be fitted out with Stores for my Ship in America. Sunday 
20th June five minutes after four in the Mor'g we sott out from Bris- 
tol and att fifty-seven min't after seven the Even'g was landed at 
the New England Coffee House in this Metropilos, which was 125 
miles we rode in less than 16 hours. As to Politekal New[s] I must 
refer you to the Prints. Since I've been in this kingdom I've had 
great Opertunitys of hearing many warm Debates about our Amer- 
ican affairs their is maney warm friends to America heare who seem 
to be desireous that all the Ports in America should be shut, nether 
Import nor Export for one year, nothing they say but such a steddy 
resolution will save the Collines and this Country from ruin. I have 
had the honour to be introduc'd to Sir Thos. Mill who is a friend to 
America, he was very polite, and gave me an invitation to call on 
him when I pleas'd, I am to dine with him Thursday with the treas- 
urey and a number of the Minesteral Party, where I presume I shall 
make such acquaintance as will be of great sirvice to me, wensday 
I 'm to be introduc'd to Lord North. I flatter myself I shall be of 


great service to Governor Wentworth. As I understand there's 
one Mr. White here that is lodging a Complaint against the Gov- 
ernor, about the out lands and that Mr. L[ivius] is his Chief advisor, 
you have heard Mr. L is apointed chief Judge, but I don't be- 
lieve he will ever come to Portsmouth, he has not got any Salery 
fixed and tis the opinion hear he wont till after Parliment if then. I 
am warm and zealous for Governor Wentworth, and shall say every 
thing in my power to lord north, to put a stop to Mr. White's Solici- 
tations. Governor Wentworth never asked me to say a word in his 
behalf, but I shall intrest myself much for his welfare, that he may 
remain with us, as I cant bare them woolves in Sheep's clothing 
that try to stab him at the same time say they have nothing against 
him, its Con'r Atkinson they aim at but it [is] coutch'd in such 
smooth terms, but they would be glad to blow Gov'r Wentworth 
up with the same shott they drew Con'o Atkinson but I believe they 
will both keep there ground, notwithstanding the maney false rep- 
resentations; I have spent part of several days with Mr. George 
Green, who appears to me a very senceable good sort of a man, he is 
not apointed Secretary as was reported, I believe he would like to 
have it with a proper Salery, but not without he and I dined to- 
gather yesterday and spent the afternoon and even'g he seems to 
have a great Friendship for Governor Wentworth. it is the opinion 
of several of the minesteral party that there will not be any places 
given or salarys fixed till after a new Parliment; enough Politicks, 
for this time, in my next I shall be particular as far as concerns our 
province. I have made some new conections since I'v been hear, 
which will be worth my tower, I believe I might do something in the 
Goverment way if I was dispos'd, but this I believe I shall think 
but little of at presant, as it is a life of more trouble hear, and them 
that are in Goverment would be willing to be out if they could live 
without it. The King going to the Parliment house to sign the Que- 
bec Bill, was much insulted and the Cry was, no Popery he was much 
hissed. I shall soon set out on my tower thro the principle see Port 
towns and manufactors of England and Scotchland. I have letters 
to the Principle People in every town that I shall visit, not only from 
my own friends, but from many Principle People besides. I imagin 
I shall spend about 500 Guines the time I am absent, but I think 
the money will be well spent as I think I shall make such Conections 
as will be worth 5000. I have tended Change very close since I 've 
been here — a deal of money to be made hear at this time with 
ready rino, I shall not do much till towards the Spring as I shall not 
be fond of sending out any Quantity Goods till I hear how affairs 
are like to turn with you. you'd be surprisd to see how solid I'm 
grown, the humours, nor Laydes does not touch my heart my whole 


heart and thoughts are at Portsmouth where I hope the body will 
be by this time twelve months. If my young friend Sam'l Shurburn 
and Mesurve was with me I might be lead astray and into tempta- 
tions I should be happy in seeing them hear if I thought they could 
keep there Resolution that I hetherto have done and resolve still 
to do, I find more satisfaction in some Gentlemens familes that I 
have spent some even'gs in than I should in a whole year of pleasure 
with the women of the town, this will serve to amuse you and my 
young friends with; a Saturday even'g, you and they promis'd to 
write me, But I find as I 'm out of sight I 'm out of mind. My 
best regards to Brother Joshua and all friends and acquaintance. 
I must stop for want of time, and begin another on my return. I 
hope this will find you and your good family in good health with 
tenders of good service this side the Water I am Dear Sir Sincerely 
Your Friend 

George Boyd. 

George Boyd to John Wendell. 

London 26th August 1774. 
My Dear Notary, — I arrived at this Metropolis last evening 
after a tour of upwards fifteen hundred miles thro' every Seaport 
Town, and manufactory Town in England, and Scotland that was 
worth my notice. I have made some of the best connections, per- 
haps that ever any person did that came to this Country, from 
America. I do assure you my interest in the mercantile way, or 
the ministerial way is equal to any thing I could wish, I have not 
time to give you a history of my whole tower at this time. My 
principle veiws when I left London was to find out my Family con- 
nection and see Lord Errald which I did and his Lordship received 
me with open arms. We soon found out the family connections. 
My Lords Grandfather and my Grandfather were own brothers. I 
tarried with him five days were I was treated with the greatest polite- 
ness and friendship, that I cou'd have expected, from a Brother or 
a father. He introduced me to some of the first Parliment men in 
Scotland, at his own table; and introduced me to Lord North, Lord 
Dartmouth and several other great people, by Letters as his Rela- 
tion, I cant say at present, what use I shall make of those introduce- 
ments; one thing I shall try to do, that is to break up the Court of 
appeals, the advantage of that Court has taken of me in my absence 
has exasperated me much. 1 I must beg youl draw a petition to his 
Majesty setting forth the injuries of that Court sit [its?] being 

1 The Court of Appeals consisted of the Governor and Council. 


wholly of one family, and get as many People of all ranks to sign as 
possible and I will deliver it to his Majesty, with my own hand, if 
possible, if not Lord Errald will do that office. I am to spend the 
winter with his Lordship, who I have told the story to of the advan- 
tage and the family compact. He will do every thing in his power to 
serve me. I believe there will be a new Councill, if there should 
shall interest myself that you shall be one of that body; if you like 
please to let me know. Pray desire brother Joshua and George 
Wentworth to forward the signing of that petition and in return I 
shall be glad to serve them, when I left N. Hampshire I thought G. 
Wentworth was my friend but I find to the contrary. I had a heart 
to serve him, but little did I think when I left America, that my 
Estate was to have been robbed, thank God I have plenty of friends 
and money here, and if I have my natural flow of spirits continue 
I shall carry the point. G W I do assure you has but very little in- 
terest here, I am sure mine at this time, is more than his is now or 
ever was this side the water. I never should have troubled mself 
about these matters, had not the last advantage of my absence been 
taken. I am so out of temper, by having so much money taken out 
of my pocket, that I cant go on only to upbraid you and my young 
friends Daniel and Sam'l for not [writing] me agreeable to promise, 
but it makes good the old saying out of sight out of mind it has 
not been so with me. I sha'nt write you or them again till I hear from 
you. I propose comming out in the spring. I believe I now shall 
turn Mr. Levius freind, I dont think he will get out this fall, adieu 
God bless you all, believe me sincerely Dear Sir Your friend 

George Boyd. 
P. S. — Capt. Flag has seen the Letter from Lord Errald to me 
and can inform you the contents. I will send you a Copy if I have 
time before I close this. 1 

1 A fragment of a third letter, written late in December, 1774, reads: "as the 
River is full of River Bult Ships for sail and are selling verey Low Every Day by 
candel. My Dear Frend my thinks I heare you say well Boyd itt is now time 
for you to be Don with out you [ ] more Regler and to the Purpose, but I 
cant stop till I tell you I have shon Lord Dartmouth your Letter his Lordship 
was well Plesed with the Contents of the Letter and much oblidged to me for 
Letting him have the Perusal of itt. I expect somthing will be done for you 
shortly more of this in my Next. I would have you wright me if you think itt 
will Reach heare in all April som tims I think I will tarey heare till all the 
Dissputs are setteld. I am much att a Loss how to act as if I com to Ameakrey 
there is now Busines to be Don and if I tarey heare now Bargens to be mad 
this is a most Extravagant Cuntrea for a man of any fashon or Spirit to Live 
in I thought I know the Value of money verey well but as well as I know itt I 
cant Live under one Pound one a Day and som Days more I hop Clap will 
make me som Good Bargens to fetch up the Lea way. Capt. Titus Salter of 
Mr. Cutts Ship Departed this Life last Evening with the Small Pox he was 


Daniel Stevens to John Wendell. 

Gen'l Greene's Head Quarters near 
Cha'ston, So. Carolina, 20th Feb., 1782. 

Dear Sir, — I beg leave to enclose you a few lines, informing you 
of my health, and high spirits, since my arrival, the great and gallant 
Gen'l Greene has had a series of success against the enemy, they are 
now effectually drove into Cha'stown, and have not a foot of ground 
out of that Garrison, we now only wait the arrival of the French 
Army, which is near at hand, when [we] shall march down, and 
open the Trenches, against the lines of Cha'stown, so that I make 
not the least doubt that by the month of April, we shall be in full 
possession of that Capital, the enemy is much alarm'd at our ap- 
proach, and of course keep very close, wou'd you believe it, the 
British tyrants lost to all sense of honour, have arm'd our Slaves, 
against us, that have tied to them into the Garrison, this step I 
trust they'll pay dear for, but Sir they are not only lost to every 
sense of honour, but they are likewise to that of shame, about three 
weeks past they had a ball in Charlestown, this they called an 
Ethiopian Ball, at which were present the Officers of the Army, (and 
our female Slaves, only) who these shameless tyrants had dress 'd 
up in taste, with the richest silks, and false rolls on their heads, 
powder' d up in the most pompous manner, these chaps who call 
themselves Gentlemen, waited on these wretches in carriages to 
convey them to the Ball, which they drove through streets in pomp 
alongside of them, many of these wretches were taken out of houses 
before their mistresses faces, and escorted to the ball, by these Brit- 
ish tyrants, enclos'd I send you a Copy of a Card wrote to one of 
these shameless brutes, by the Managers of this Ball, which were 
three Negro Wenches, this Ball was held at a very capital private 
House in Charlestown, and the Supper cost not less than £80 Ster- 
ling, and these tyrants danc'd with these Slaves until four o'clock 
in the morning, thus you see to what a state of shame and perfidy 
the Officers of that once great Nation (Britain) has arriv'd too. 
Gen'l Wayne is now within four miles of Savannah having effectu- 

taken Great Ceare of. his Brother John Salter was with him in his Illness. I 
am sorey to be the Barey of bad News and Condole with his famaly if I had a 
Clark or had time' I would Copey this. I hop youl Red this a Pissel with as 
Open a hart as itt flows from with out Critisim or Remark. My best Regards 
to your Darter Saley and Littel flock and Josha and G and all frind beleve me 
Sincerly, Dear Sir, your Frind 

George Boyd. 
"P. S. Mr. Green and I are on verey frindly terms. I have been of som 
sarvus to him heare. I feare Ships will be a bad Comodoty next Season. Dan 
and Sam must Pay the Postage of this Letter." 

1915.] THE EMBASSY TO WASHINGTON, 1815. 343 

ally drove the Enemy into that Garrison they not occupying any 
one post out of it — thus far for news. I am now employ'd in the 
important business of my Country in the House of Assembly, we 
sett on business only 30 miles from Charlestown. please present 
my respects to Mrs. Wendall and the ladies your Daughters, like- 
wise to your Son John. I am Dr. Sir your most obt. H'ble Serv't 

Dan'l Stevens. 
N. B. — my compliments to Mr. Warner and Coll. Sherburne. 
N. B. — These Managers in the Card are Negro Wenches as- 
suming their Mistress's names. 

My Lord, 

Your'e invited to a Ball on Thursday Evening at No. 99 Meeting 
Street, the Ball to be opened at Eight O'Clock. 

Hagar Roussell ) 
Izabella Pinckney > Managers 
Mary Fraser J 

Jan'y 1st, 1782, Charlestown. 
To Lord Fitzgerald, Pres't. 

Mr. Morison submitted documents and a note on 

The Massachusetts Embassy to Washington, 1815. 

The Hartford Convention adjourned on January 5, 18 15, 
and its report was published on the following day. On Janu- 
ary 27, the General Court of Massachusetts authorized Gov- 
ernor Strong to appoint three commissioners in order to lay 
before the federal government certain proposals made in the 
Hartford Convention. He appointed Harrison Gray Otis, 
Thomas Handasyd Perkins and William Sullivan on January 
31, and they left for Washington February 4. 

Much of the discussion concerning the Hartford Convention 
and the whole sectional movement in New England turns on 
the motives and objects of that "embassy," as it was jocularly 
called. One theory is best presented in John Quincy Adams's 
"Reply to the Appeal of the Massachusetts Federalists," of 
1829. 1 According to him, the Massachusetts Federalists, too 
cautious to let their real object of secession appear in the report 
of the Hartford Convention, intended, by pressing impossible 
demands on the federal government through this commission, 
to bring matters to a crisis on the popular issue of local defence. 

1 Henry Adams, Documents Relating to New-England Federalism. 


The Hartford Convention had recommended that, if these de- 
mands were not complied with, the New England States sum- 
mon another convention to meet at Boston in June, 1815. 
Here the design of a New England Confederacy would be 
carried out. John Quincy Adams believed that this plot was 
only frustrated by the news of the battle of New Orleans and the 
peace of Ghent, which arrived in Washington before the Massa- 
chusetts commissioners were able to present their demands. 

In my Life of H. G. Otis I maintained, on the contrary, that 
no secession plot was behind the embassy to Washington; that 
the leaders responsible for it simply expected to take advantage 
of the momentary weakness of Madison's administration, in 
order to procure an assignment of federal revenues into state 
hands, that would enable Massachusetts not only to manage 
its own defensive operations, but to reimburse itself for war 
claims against the federal government. The documents printed 
herewith, discovered too late to be used in preparing my work, 1 
furnish weighty evidence against the conspiracy theory of the 
embassy, and support my own conclusions. The most signifi- 
cant part is the third paragraph of Governor Strong's letter of 
January 31, 181 5, in which he notifies the commissioners that 
he has delivered to the federal arsenal, at the request of Gen- 
eral Dearborn, 2 some ordnance, stores, and ammunition then 
in the hands of the State. Obviously, governors who are con- 
templating the secession of their state do not hand over muni- 
tions of war to the federal government. 

Enclosed with the Governor's personal letter, and printed 
herewith, are three other documents: the Commission of the 
1 'three ambassadors," their secret instructions from the Gov- 
ernor's Council, and the report and resolves of the General 
Court authorizing their mission. The first and third of these 
have already been printed; 3 but the one is not easily accessible, 
and the other is here reprinted in order to make the collection 

1 They were found a few months ago in a scrap book, in which a member of 
the Otis family had pasted a number of documents abstracted from the Otis 
Mss. for their presumed autographic value. 

2 Then United States officer commanding Military District No. i, which in- 
cluded Maine and Massachusetts. 

3 The Commission is in Theodore Lyman, Jr., A Short Account of the Hartford 
Convention, Boston, 1823, 14-16; the Report and Resolves in the official series, 
are in Niks' Register, vn. 372. 

1915.] THE EMBASSY TO WASHINGTON, 1815. 345 

Governor Strong to the Massachusetts Commissioners. 

Boston, January 31st, 181 5. 

Gentlemen, — Agreably to a Resolve of the Genl. Court of the 
27th. Instant you have been appointed Commissioners to proceed 
immediately to the seat of the national Government and endeavour 
to effect an arrangement whereby this State separately or in concert 
with neighbouring States may be enabled to assume the defence of 
their territories against the enemy. By the same Resolve it was de- 
cided that the application should be made in pursuance of such in- 
structions as the Governour with the advice of Council might think 
proper to give. 

To obtain that advice I laid before the Council the above-mentioned 
Resolve, and a Committee of that body reported the inclosed instruc- 
tions which same have been accepted by the Council and in which you 
will observe a suggestion that a letter from me would be expedient. 

Genl. Dearborn requested me in a letter of the 2 2d of December to 
return into the Arsenal of the United States such ordnance, ordnance 
stores and ammunition as we had borrowed of him the last Autumn, 
and they have been returned accordingly. 1 But I presume the 
Government of the United States will be willing, if any arrangement 
is made, to place in our hands at a reasonable apprizement, such of 
their military stores in this State as shall not be necessary for their 
own immediate use. It was said that Genl. Dearborn reclaimed the 
above articles to employ them in expelling the British troops from 
the District of Maine. But no part of that District is occupied 
by the British troops except the Towns of Castine and Eastport. In 
the other Towns east of the Penobscot the people are not disturbed, 
nor the civil processes of the State obstructed; and it is the opinion 
of every one with whom I have conversed on the subject that neither 
of the above posts can be retaken without a naval force which shall 
command the Bays where they are situated — an unsuccessful attempt 
to take them would increase the calamities of that part of the State. 

1 The following letter is recorded in the Archives of the Adjutant General's 
office, of Massachusetts, Letter Book B, 1813-15, p. 239: 

Adjutant General's Office, 
Major General Henry Dearborn Boston January 2, 1815. 

The contents of your letter addressed to his Excellency Governor Strong 
dated the 2 2d of December last, having been referred to the board of War on 
the 30th of the same month, I have to acquaint you that orders were immediately 
given to Quarter Master General Davis to return to Captn Talcott, agreeably 
to your request, all the Ordnance, ordnance stores, and ammunition borrowed 
of you by the State in September and October last. I am sir, Your Obdt. Servt. 

J. Brooks. 


You must have observed the extreme reluctance of the Militia 
to be placed under the Officers of the United States, indeed the ex- 
perience we have had in this State shows the necessity of keeping 
the regular Troops and the Militia as distinct and separate as may 
be. 1 When General Dearborn requested me, in September, to call 
out 5000 of the Militia to defend the sea coast, it was found impos- 
sible to do it, unless they were placed under an Officer of the Militia, 
and we were therefore obliged either to leave the Towns on the sea- 
board defenceless, or to rely on the justice of Congress to reimburse 
the expenses. It is desirable that assurances should be obtained from 
the national Government that justice in this respect shall be done 
to us. 

In executing your Commission Gentlemen, you will act in con- 
cert with the Commissioners that have been, or may be appointed 
for the same purpose by the States of Connecticut and Rhode Island, 
and will consult with the Members of Congress from this State on 
the most proper mode to be pursued. You will of course wait on 
the President and state to him the object of your mission and will 
doubtless confer with the heads of the Treasury and War depart- 
ments. If the aid of Congress shall be necessary to effect the pro- 
posed arrangements you will make such representations to that 
Body, on behalf of this State, as you may judge expedient. 

I wish you a prosperous Journey and am, Gentlemen with great 
Esteem and Regard your obedient Servt. 

Caleb Strong. 
Hon. H. G. Otis 

Thomas H. Perkins and 
William Sullivan Esqrs. 

Letter of Commission. 

Commonwealth of Massachusetts. 

To the Honorable Harrison G. Otis, Thomas H. 

Seal Perkins, and William Sullivan, all of Boston, in the 

County of Suffolk, and Commonwealth aforesaid, 

Esqrs. Greeting: 

Caleb Strong. Whereas, by a Resolve of the Legislature of 

this Commonwealth of the twenty seventh day 

of this present month, the Governor, with the advice of Council, is 

authorized and empowered to appoint three Commissioners to pro- 

1 The Governor refers to the friction between the Massachusetts militia and 
the United States officers placed over them, and to their dislike of the United 
States regulations. Alden Bradford, Massachusetts, 1835 ed., 300; W. H. Sumner, 
East Boston, 739; W. H. Kilby, Eastport, 161; Pickering Mss., xxx. 292. These 


ceed immediately to the Seat of the National Government, and in 
pursuance of such Instructions as His Excellency the Governor and 
the Honorable Council may think proper to give them, to make 
earnest and respectful application, to the Government of the United 
States, requesting their consent to some arrangement, whereby the 
State of Massachusetts, separately, or in concert with neighbouring 
States, may be enabled to assume the defence of their territories 
against the enemy; and that to this end, a reasonable portion of the 
taxes collected within said States may be paid into the respective 
Treasuries thereof and appropriated to the payment of the balance 
due to the said States and to the future defence of the same; the 
amount so paid into the Treasuries, to be credited, and the dis- 
bursements, so made as aforesaid, to be charged to the United 
States: And whereas by said Resolve the Senators and Representa- 
tives of this Commonwealth in Congress are requested to co-operate 
with said Commissioners in effecting this object: 

Now, therefore, by virtue of the Resolve aforesaid, and the 
power and authority thereby vested in me, I, Caleb Strong, Governor 
of the said Commonwealth of Massachusetts, confiding in the abil- 
ity, integrity and patriotism of the Honorable Harrison G. Otis, 
Thomas H. Perkins and William Sullivan, Esquires, citizens of the 
said Commonwealth, have nominated, and with the advice and con- 
sent of the Council, do appoint you the aforenamed, the Honorable 
Harrison G. Otis, Thomas H. Perkins and William Sullivan, Es- 
quires, to be Commissioners for the purposes aforesaid, and with 
authority to do and perform whatever is directed and required in 
the said Resolve, a Copy of which is hereunto annexed. And you 
the said Commissioners, will proceed immediately to the Seat of the 
National Government, and, in obedience to the Requisitions of the 
Resolve aforesaid, and of Instructions given you by the Supreme 
Executive of this State, a Copy of which also accompanies this Com- 
mission, will make respectful and earnest application to the Govern- 
ment of the United States, requesting them to consent to some 
arrangement by which this Commonwealth, separately, or, in concert 
with neighbouring States, may be enabled to assume the Defence 
of their respective territories against the enemy, and a portion of 
the taxes collected within said States may be paid into the respective 
treasuries thereof, appropriated to the payment of the balance due 
to said States and to the future defence of the same; the amount, so 
paid into the said Treasuries, to be credited, and the disbursements, 
so made as aforesaid, to be charged to the United States. And in 

were always stated by Federalists as the reasons for refusing to place the entire 
militia under federal control; but the dominant motive was probably the fear 
that they would be marched off to Canada. 


your endeavors to effect this object, you will also consult with, and 
solicit the assistance and co-operation of the Senators and Represen- 
tatives of this Commonwealth in the Congress of the United States. 

In Testimony whereof, I have caused the Seal of this Common- 
wealth to be hereunto affixed, at Boston, this thirty first day of 
January Ao. Di. one thousand eight hundred and fifteen, and in 
the thirty ninth year of the Independence of the United States of 

By His Excellency the Governor. 
Alden Bradford, 

Sec'y of the Commonwealth. 


Commonwealth of Massachusetts. 

In Council, January 28th, 18 15. 

The Committee of Council appointed to prepare and report what 
instructions His Excellency the Governor and the honorable the 
Council shall give to the Commissioners to be appointed by virtue 
of a resolve of the Legislature of this Commonwealth, passed the 
27 th instant, respectfully report — 

That in their opinion the objects of the Mission being explicitly 
stated in the Resolve aforesaid, it will not be necessary to give to 
the said Commissioners very precise or particular instructions; 
inasmuch as it will probably be necessary for them to consult with 
Delegates from other of the New England States on the same sub- 
ject, and with the members of Congress, at Washington from the 
said States, prior to making any application to the General Govern- 
ment for the purposes of their mission, or of definitively deciding 
on the best mode of prosecuting the same. 

Presuming also that the persons to be appointed, will be gentle- 
men of respectability and intelligence, who are conversant with the 
present situation of the Commonwealth, the Committee believe 
that their duties may be concisely, but sufficiently explained in their 
Commission, that this, accompanied with a letter from His Excel- 
lency the Governor, requesting them to repair to the seat of the 
National Government as soon as may be, and on their arrival at 
Washington to confer with the Commissioners which may be dele- 
gated from the other States represented in the late Convention at 
Hartford, and also with the Senators and Representatives from this 
Commonwealth in the Congress of the United States, and after such 
conferences to adopt those measures which may appear to them 
best calculated to effect the objects of their mission, will be the only 
instructions needful to be given to them. 

1915.] THE EMBASSY TO WASHINGTON, 1815. 349 

At the same time the Committee think it would be adviseable, 
to suggest to the Commissioners, the propriety of proceeding with 
a due degree of caution and deliberation in their business, so that 
the interest and security of the Commonwealth may be promoted, 
and its credit and authority sustained. And as it will be undoubtedly 
necessary, that a memorial should be presented to Congress in con- 
formity with the resolve of the State aforesaid, that the said Com- 
missioners be instructed to prepare and present the same, for and in 
behalf of the Commonwealth. And that they be also requested, to 
keep a regular record of their proceedings, and in case any confer- 
ences with the President, or Heads of Departments, or other official 
Agents of the United States shall be necessary, that the same should 
be carried on, as far as may be consistent with the usual forms of 
transacting public business by written communications, and where 
this may not be customary to minute immediately after their oc- 
currence, the substance of all such conferences held as aforesaid. 1 

And as both the Congress of the United States and the Legisla- 
ture of the State, will terminate their sessions early in March, that 
the Commissioners be instructed to expedite a decision on the sub- 
jects committed to them, at as early a period as may be practicable; 
and to report to His Excellency the Governor, after they reach 
Washington, from time to time, the progress they may have made, 
in prosecuting the objects of their appointment. 

D. Cobb, per order. 

In Council, January 28th, 1815. The above Report having been 
read and considered, is accepted. 

Alden Bradford, Sec'y of Commonwealth. 
Sec'y's Office 
January 31st 1815. 

A true Copy 

Attest'r Alden Bradford, Sec'y of Commonwealth. 

Resolutions of the General Court. 
Commonwealth of Massachusetts. 

The Committee of both Houses, to whom were referred the Mes- 
sage of His Excellency the Governor, and the documents therewith 
transmitted, have had the same under consideration, and beg leave 
to Report, in part: 

That the expediency of having invited a Convention of Delegates 

1 No such minutes are to be found in the Massachusetts Archives or among 
the Otis Mss. Probably none were kept, as the authorized objects of the mission 
expired with the peace of Ghent. The commissioners transacted some informal 
business with the Secretary of the Treasury, reports of which are printed in 
Morison, H. G. Otis, 11. 195-99. 


from the New England States, is fully proved by the result of their 
labors communicated with his Excellency's Message. In times of 
unprecedented embarassment and distress, there can indeed be no 
better mode of discovering the means of relief, or of preparing for in- 
evitable consequences, than to resort to the deliberate and united 
counsels of the wisest and most faithful men of the community; — 
men, who have an interest, in common with all their fellow citizens, 
in the subjects of their deliberation, and who will act with a firm 
and enlightened regard to the good of the whole, and under the 
highest responsibility. However sensibly such men may feel the 
importance of timely resisting oppression, and averting impending 
calamities, their counsels will be tempered by an accurate under- 
standing of past political transactions, by a sound perception of the 
nature of existing sources of complaint, and by a careful enquiry as 
to events, which time may unfold. The Committee entertain a high 
sense of the wisdom and ability, with which the Convention of Dele- 
gates have discharged their arduous trust, while they maintain the 
principle of State Sovereignty, and of the duties which citizens owe 
to their respective State Governments; they give the most satisfac- 
tory proofs of attachment to the Constitution of the United States 
and to the national union; and while, with the undaunted freedom, 
which they inherit from their ancestors, they express their disap- 
probation of the measures which have produced our public calam- 
ities, and especially of the unnecessary and ruinous war, in which 
we are involved, they manifest a determination, which the people 
will support, that our Country must be defended at every hazard, 
against invasion and conquest. The people will thus find new 
reasons for approving the confidence reposed in their Delegates, in 
discerning through their Report the proper course to be pursued, in 
their relation to the Federal Constitution, in sustaining their alle- 
giance to the State Governments, and in defending themselves 
against the public enemy; but, above all, in the recognition of duties, 
which they owe to their Creator, to themselves and to posterity, 
and which are founded in higher authority than any earthly govern- 
ment can claim. 

As the exposition of the views and sentiments of that Convention 
is clear and intelligible, the Committee deem it unnecessary to en- 
large upon the considerations which entitle them to the approbation 
and support of the Legislature; or to repeat the arguments contained 
in the very able Report of their proceedings, for adopting the meas- 
ures by them recommended. 

The Committee therefore respectfully submit the following Re- 

D. A. White, per Order. 


Resolved, That the Legislature of Massachusetts do highly ap- 
prove the proceedings of the Convention of Delegates from the States 
of Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island, and the Counties 
of Cheshire and Grafton, in the State of New Hampshire, and the 
County of Windham, in the State of Vermont, convened at Hart- 
ford, on the fifteenth day of December, in the year one thousand 
eight hundred and fourteen; and that the advice and recommenda- 
tion therein given, are entitled to, and shall receive, the most re- 
spectful consideration of this Legislature. 

Resolved, That his Excellency the Governor with the advice and 
consent of Council be, and he hereby is authorised and empowered 
to appoint three Commissioners to proceed immediately to the Seat 
of the National Government, and in pursuance of such instructions 
as his Excellency and the Hon. Council may think proper to give 
them, to make an earnest and respectful application to the Gov- 
ernment of the United States, requesting their consent to some 
arrangement, whereby the State of Massachusetts, seperately, or 
in concert with neighbouring States, may be enabled to assume the 
defence of their territories against the enemy; and that to this end 
a reasonable portion of the taxes collected within said States may be 
paid into the respective Treasuries thereof, and appropriated to the 
payment of the balance due to the said States, and to the future de- 
fence of the same: the amount so paid into the said Treasuries, to 
be credited, and the disbursements so made as aforesaid, to be 
charged to the United States: and the Senators and Representatives 
of this Commonwealth in Congress are hereby requested to cooper- 
ate with said Commissioners in effecting this object. 

In Senate, January 26th, 1815. 
Read and accepted. 

Sent down for Concurrence 

John Phillips, President. 
House of Representatives, January 27th, 18 15. 
Read and Concurred 

Timothy Bigelow, Speaker. 
January 27th, 181 5. Approved 

Caleb Strong. 
Secretary's Office, January the 31st, 181 5. 
A true Copy, 
Attest'r Alden Bradford, Secretary of the Commonwealth. 

Mr. Norcross read from the original the following letter 
from Col. Charles F. Suttle, the owner of Anthony Burns, to 
Seth J, Thomas of Boston, his counsel, written after Burns's 


rendition to Virginia, and recently found among Colonel 
Thomas's papers: 

Alexandria, 24th July, 1854. 
Dear Sir, — Your letter of the 22 inst is before me, do me the 
favor to say to Mr. Grymes x that Fifteen hundred dollars is the 
lowest sum that will purchase Anthony. I gave my reasons why I 
would not take less in my letter to Mr. Willis, 2 which I presume he 
has seen. If he wishes to make the purchase at that sum, he can 
do so at any time between this and 1st day of August. After that 
time I shall consider the matter at an end between us, and act ac- 
cordingly. Yrs. truly, 

C. F. Suttle. 

Robert S. Rantoul to Charles Francis Adams. 

Salem, February 25, 1915. 

Dear Sir, — I find, on page 366 of Volume xlvii of the Pro- 
ceedings of the Society, for April, 19 14, this statement occurring in 
the memoir of our late associate, Gamaliel Bradford: "it is a fact 
contemporaries can testify to that almost singly and alone he carried 
to victory the campaign against dropping our annual State election." 

I have no inclination to disparage Mr. Bradford nor to antagonise 
his biographer, but having attempted to correct this misconception 
when it first appeared in our debates, and having then been asked 
by you, in behalf of historic accuracy, to note the facts stated at 
that time, I desire to call your attention to what follows. The 
issue is not wholly unimportant, because it relates to a matter which 
is likely to keep cropping up so long as we have two classes of reason- 
ers amongst us — one thinking, with Hamilton, that all political and 
social ills will disappear whenever we have a stronger Government, 
reposing its powers in fewer hands and choosing its agents for longer 
terms; the other class, with Jefferson, looking for the stability of 
popular government and of social order in a broader and more em- 
phatic consent of the governed, drawn from a wider expansion of the 
suffrage and a more frequent exercise of it. 

I was a member of the House of Representatives in the Legislature 
of 1884 and of the Joint Standing Committee on Election Laws. A 
proposed constitutional amendment providing for biennial elections 
and sessions had passed the preceding Legislature, and came up in 
1884 for its final passage, before being submitted to the vote of the 
people. The measure was referred, in its natural course, to the 

1 Rev. Leonard A. Grimes of Boston, who in February, 1856, succeeded in 
purchasing and freeing Burns. 

2 Hamilton Willis of Boston. 


Joint Standing Committee on Election Laws, which consisted of 
three Senators and eight Members of the House. The amendment 
required, for its passage, the vote of a majority of the Senate and 
of two-thirds of the House, present and voting thereon, at two suc- 
cessive annual sessions, before it could be submitted, in 1885, for 
ratification by a majority of the people, in accordance with the pro- 
visions of Article IX, of the Amendments to the State Constitution, 
adopted in 1820-22. 

The Committee on Election Laws divided on the measure seven 
to four, the minority including a Senator and three Representatives, 
of whom I was one, and I was asked to submit a minority report, and 
did so. The amendment, which had passed the Senate, failed of a 
two- thirds vote in the House, being lost by a vote of 139 yeas and 87 
nays. The measure had been agitated since 1870. Besides the large 
number of active Republicans who seemed to favor it, there was a con- 
siderable group of Republican leaders, of whom Henry Cabot Lodge 
and Roger Wolcott were two, who seemed to favor making a party 
issue of it. If this could be done its passage through the Legislature 
was assured, because the Republicans were largely in the ascendant. 
But this was impossible. Alanson W. Beard was the recognized 
Republican leader in the House, and he opposed it. Outside of the 
State House it was publicly opposed by such Republicans as George 
Sewall Boutwell, George Frisbie Hoar, John Davis Long, Thomas 
Wentworth Higginson, and Darwin Erastus Ware. Another amend- 
ment of narrower scope providing for biennial elections, but not 
for biennial sessions, passed the Legislature of 1885 but failed in 
that of 1886. Two several amendments, one providing for the 
biennial election of State officers and the other of members of the 
General Court, having duly passed the Legislature, came before 
the people for final action in 1896, and were rejected by a vote of 
yeas 115,505 to nays 161,263, on the question of the election of 
State officials, and on the election of members of the General Court, 
yeas, 105,589 to nays 156,211. During this campaign of 1896 vig- 
orous expressions, pro and contra, were brought out in the press. 
Reference to the journals of the day shows the statement quoted 
at the head of this communication to be totally misconceived. A 
casual examination of the files of the Evening Transcript, for in- 
stance, discloses the following facts: Ex-Senator Darwin E. Ware 
published a letter of protest, October 23rd, and this was followed, 
on the 29th, by a protest signed by twenty-five very prominent 
clergymen from different sections of the State. On the 30th, Mr. 
Bradford, as Treasurer of the Anti-Biennial League, issued a state- 
ment made up of views quoted from Speakers Blaine and Reed, 
United States Senators Edmunds, Hawley, Dawes, and Hoar, Ex- 


Governor Long and Collector Beard. On October 31st, Moorfield 
Storey, Henry W. Lamb, Charles S. Rackemann, Henry M. Williams, 
and others including the present writer, made known their opposition 
to the measure, and, on November 2nd, letters from Senator Hoar 
and from Albert S. Parsons of Lexington followed, and the labor 
organizations made themselves heard in a plea for annual elections. 
On November 4th, an editorial review of the situation appeared, 
which stated that "The idea was not a popular one from the be- 
ginning of the campaign." 

Just what part Mr. Bradford may have taken in this controversy, 
beyond giving to the public the extracts above cited, I do not know. 
Doubtless he did his best to defeat the measure. I do not wish to 
belittle his efforts in any way. The idea is a very modern one, that 
Massachusetts had better do as newer States do, and not affect a 
singularity. Our grandfathers never heard of that. Mr. Bradford, 
if living, would not have permitted the statement to be made in his 
hearing, without a protest, that he " almost singly and alone" saved 
the old system of annual elections and sessions to the State of Mas- 
sachusetts. Clearly it is not sound history to imply that any one 
man, in 1896, or in the years preceding, accomplished the defeat of 
the biennial amendment. I am, Very respectfully yours, 

Robert S. Rantoul. 

Remarks were made during the meeting by Messrs. Sanborn, 
Storey, Storer, and Bolton. 






Charles Greely Loring was born in Boston, July 22, 1828, 
of the sixth generation in descent from Thomas Loring, who 
came to Massachusetts in 1634. His father, whose name he 
bore, the son of Caleb and Ann (Greely) Loring, born May 
2, 1794, was one of the foremost lawyers of Massachusetts, 
a Fellow of Harvard College for twenty-two years, and one 
who enjoyed the distinction of having been twice offered, by 
governors of the Commonwealth, and of having twice declined, 
an appointment as United States senator, in succession to 
Webster and Everett. His mother, whose maiden name was 
Anna Pierce Brace, was a native of Litchfield, Connecticut. 

Charles G. Loring, junior, was fitted for college at the Boston 
Latin School, and was graduated from Harvard College in 
1848. In college his roommate was Mr. J. C. D. Parker, the 
pianist. They were doubtless drawn together by their artistic 
tastes, which ultimately developed in widely different fields. 
Three years after graduation Loring received, automati- 
cally, as was the custom at the time, the " second" degree, 
of A.M. 

During the summer of 1848 he was one of a party of young 
men who made a scientific exploring expedition to the shores 
of Lake Superior under the leadership of Louis Agassiz, who 
had lately been appointed professor of zoology and geology at 
Harvard. The next year he was a student at the Lawrence 


Scientific School, and took part in the survey of the line 
for the then projected Erie Railway, in central New York. 
From that work he was recalled by his father for a tour in 

While in Scotland, after his father's return to the United 
States, he became seriously ill from an affection of the lungs, 
and being ordered south spent the winter of 1853-54 at Malaga, 
Spain. Having recovered completely, he passed the following 
summer travelling on the Continent, and in the winter and 
spring of 1854-55 journeyed up the Nile, visited the Sinaitic 
peninsula and the " Arabia Petraea" of Ptolemy, and Pales- 
tine, and returned by way of Constantinople and Greece. 
That journey, particularly in Egypt, may be said to have 
been the turning point in his life, for the deep impression 
made upon him by his observations and study of Egyptian 
art so developed his natural artistic tendencies that art be- 
came the absorbing interest. Upon his return to America he 
delighted his friends with his descriptions of Egypt, about 
which little was known at the time in this country, which 
he illustrated with stereoscopic photographs. Moreover he 
devoted himself with characteristic thoroughness and enthusi- 
asm to acquiring all the information that was obtainable on 
the subject. 

During this period of his life he ministered to another form 
of his love for the beautiful and artistic by undertaking the 
laying out of his father's extensive farm lands at Beverly, 
which he carried on for some years after his father's death. 
The love of beautiful flowers and shrubs was a passion with him. 
He was accustomed to say, later in life, that if he had been 
born a quarter of a century later he should have chosen the 
career of a landscape gardener. It is related of him that he 
spent several years in perfecting a single clump of trees 
and shrubs. In laying out grounds at Beverly and Chocorua 
he displayed exquisite taste in devising schemes which by 
their very simplicity removed all suggestion that art had been 

The civil war interrupted his activities in landscape gar- 
dening and development. Late in 1861 he was disposed to 
enlist as a private in the Union army, but through the in- 
fluence of Governor Andrew he was appointed a First Lieu- 


tenant on the Staff of General Burnside; and on February 3, 
1862, was commissioned Assistant Quartermaster, with the 
rank of Captain. When the Ninth Corps was organized he 
was appointed Assistant-Inspector-General with the rank of 
Lieutenant Colonel, and held that position until the end of 
the war. Although his position did not require him to be on 
the fighting line, he did actually participate in all the cam- 
paigns in which the Ninth Corps was engaged — in Ken- 
tucky, Mississippi, Tennessee, and from April, 1864, until the 
surrender of Lee with the army of the Potomac, in Virginia. 
Mr. Benjamin Ives Gilman, in his memoir of General Loring, 
for the Art Museum, from which many of the facts in this 
sketch are taken, says: 

The accounts of the desperate assault on Cemetery Hill [in the 
Petersburg campaign] made by the Ninth Corps at great loss on 
July 30, 1864, show that Lieutenant- Colonel Loring was at the 
scene of the explosion of the mine which preceded the attack, and 
with the attacking division in the bloody "battle of the crater," 
which followed. An officer in the Confederate service after related 
that before the explosion of the mine a Federal leader, found to 
be Lieutenant-Colonel Loring, was seen from their position explor- 
ing the ground upon which the troops were to enter, and walking 
about in the rain of bullets as if totally unconscious of them, until 
the commander of the Confederates, saying it was a shame to kill 
so brave a man, gave the order to cease firing. 

Colonel Loring received three brevets, the first two, both 
dated August 1, 1864, one to the rank of Colonel "for gallant 
and meritorious services during the campaign in East Ten- 
nessee and at the siege of Knoxville," the second to the grade of 
Brigadier-General for "gallant and meritorious services at the 
battles of the Wilderness, Spottsylvania and Bethesda Church, 
and during the operations before Petersburg, Virginia." 
His third brevet raised him to the rank of Major-General. It 
was granted ten days before the great parade of the victorious 
troops in Washington, in May, 1865, in which General Loring 
took part, and was for "gallant and meritorious services 
during the war." Only one other of the many staff officers 
who served with the Ninth Corps received so high an honor. 
On August 10, 1865, General Loring was mustered out of the 


For a time, after his army service, General Loring was 
engaged in business. He became Treasurer of the Hampden 
Cotton Mills; but was not happy in the occupation and soon 
retired. In 1867 his father, to whom, in his declining years, 
he had greatly devoted himself, died, at the age of seventy- 
three years. In 1868 and the following year General Loring 
made another tour in Egypt, and continued his studies in the 
archaeology of that country. It was the knowledge he thus 
acquired that brought about his connection with the Boston 
Museum of Fine Arts, which covered a period of almost exactly 
thirty years. In 1872 the Museum, which then occupied no 
more spacious quarters than two rooms in the Athenaeum 
building, received the gift of the Way collection of Egyptian 
antiquities. General Loring, the best equipped if not the only 
expert in such matters in this community, was asked to under- 
take the installation of that collection, for purposes of exhibi- 
tion, and began the work in October, 1872. The next year 
he was elected a trustee of the Museum; in 1876, when the 
first wing of the building in Copley Square was occupied, he 
was made Curator, and from that time, until within a few 
months of his death, he was the executive head of the Museum. 
In 1887 his title was changed to that of Director. Of his emi- 
nent services to the cause of art in Boston there is no need to 
speak. His duties were multifarious, covering all the details 
of administration, the finances, the personnel of the staff, the 
oversight of the enlargements of the building, and every other 
matter that required his attention, and above all the important 
duty of acquiring, selecting and arranging the art treasures that 
grew so greatly during his administration. If the Museum 
has grown still greater since his connection with it ceased, it 
still remains true that its broad foundations were laid by him, 
and that without his tireless activity and intelligent foresight 
the institution could never have become what it is. The ex- 
tent of his service in procuring additions to the funds of the 
Museum, and in obtaining gifts and loans of works of art, will 
never be known, since no one, not even he himself, preserved 
a record of it. 

Failing health caused General Loring to resign the director- 
ship in February, 1902. He was made Director Emeritus, 
and died at Beverly, on August 18 of that year. The 


funeral services were held in King's Chapel, Boston. Dr. 
Edward Everett Hale officiating. The Museum was closed 
all the day of the funeral, and the Loyal Legion, which 
took part in the obsequies, caused taps to be sounded at the 

In 1875 General Loring married Miss Mary Hopkins of 
Catskill, New York. Mrs. Loring died in India in 19 14, but 
their two children still survive. 

He was elected a member of this Society at the January 
meeting in 1887, as a representative of a sister organization. 
It was probably not expected that he would take a prominent 
part in the proceedings of the Society, and in fact he is not 
recorded as having been other than a listener at its meet- 
ings save on one occasion. At the February meeting in 
1887 he spoke on the subject of the so-called Sharpless por- 
traits of Washington, and gave his opinion that they are 
untrustworthy. His attendance at the meetings was more 
frequent in the later years of his life, for he was present 
at ten meetings during the three years preceding his death. 
It is not generally known that he contemplated the prep- 
aration of a historical study of the civil war, and accumu- 
lated material therefor; but his absorption in the duties of 
the Museum left him no time for carrying his project into 

His was a remarkable personality. To his friends two traits 
stand out as his leading characteristics, which might at first 
sight appear to be contradictory — extreme reticence even 
among those most closely associated with him, and a gentle- 
ness and courtesy that were extended to all whom he met. 
He was a silent man, but those who knew him soon discovered 
that his reserve was but a veneer that covered a warm heart. 
His protective bearing toward all things weaker than himself 
made children and animals love him, in spite of his reserve, 
which harmonized well with his commanding figure, and the 
military bearing, slightly accentuated by his dress, which sug- 
gested the army officer. 

But that which it is well chiefly to remember regarding one 
who may be truly characterized as a great citizen is the de- 
votion and loyalty with which he gave himself to the service 
of the Museum. In the minute adopted by the Board of Trus- 


tees of that institution, called to consider General Loring's 
resignation, in March, 1902, it is said that "he was always 
ready to fill any gap, and never in any way spared himself.'' 
He always did fill the gap, and the Museum of today is a 
true monument to his life and labors. 




THE Annual Meeting was held on Thursday, the 8th in- 
stant, at three o'clock, p. m. ; the Senior Vice-President, 
Mr. Rhodes, in the chair. 

The record of the last meeting was read and approved; and 
the Librarian read the list of donors to the Library during the 
past month. 

The Cabinet-Keeper reported the gift of a medal described 
in the following letter : 

Boston, April 10, 1915. 

Dear Sir, — In transmitting to you as a gift to the Massachu- 
setts Historical Society a specimen of the bronze medal struck by 
the Handel and Haydn Society of Boston in celebration of the com- 
pletion of the first century of its existence, I am impelled to convey 
at the same time a bit of information that is possessed by scarcely 
anybody now living besides myself. 

This information relates to the oval figure on the reverse of the 
medal, flanked by laurel and scrolls. The laurel and scrolls are ad- 
ditions for the purposes of this medal. It is only of the oval figure 
that I am to speak. 

This oval figure is not the corporate seal of the Society, which is 
of wholly different design, but it is simply an ornamental device, 
with appropriate symbolism, suitable to adorn any publication of 
the Society. It has been chiefly used to adorn the front outside 
cover of the concert programs. It was so used as far back as 1874; 
how much farther back than that date, I have no material at hand 
to determine. 

The origin of this device is of interest. 

A great many years ago, Charlotte Cushman presented to the 
old Music Hall on Winter Street five or six plaster casts. One of 
them, a relief, used to be on the wall in the Hamilton Place corridor, 
on the ground floor. Several of them were large busts of eminent 
composers. On the end wall of the Music Hall opposite the stage, 
high up above the second balcony, on each side of the Apollo Belvi- 
dere which was in the centre of that wall, one or two of these busts 


were placed upon ornamental brackets. One of these busts was of 
Cherubini. Projecting from the wall, and under the shelf of the 
bracket supporting this bust, was a flight of angels. And this was 
the origin of the flight of angels that constitutes the principal fea- 
ture of the oval device upon the medal. Yours very truly, 

Eugene B. Hagar. 

The Corresponding Secretary reported the receipt of a 
letter from Paul Revere Frothingham accepting his election 
as a Resident Member. 

The Editor read the following statement: 

In recent years the Society has received two gifts of his- 
torical material, the value of which cannot be measured in 
ordinary language — the Winthrop collection of original man- 
uscripts, and the Parkman collection of original manuscripts 
and transcripts of records in foreign archives. Both relate to 
the colonial and provincial history of New England. I now 
announce a third large gift of like material, which renders 
much more complete what is in the Society, and makes its 
colonial collection the first in the land in number and in impor- 
tance. Our associate, Mr. Kellen, has presented to the 
Society 4600 photographs of historical documents in the Mas- 
sachusetts State Archives, covering some six thousand pieces, 
and including nearly all the matter of consequence from the 
earliest records to the end of the seventeenth century. This 
is the nearest equivalent to an actual transfer of the originals 
to the Society, and opens unusual opportunities for the study 
and historical use of this important material. 

The Editor also reported gifts : from Mrs. Charles H. Joy, of 
a number of manuscripts on the voyage and loss of two ves- 
sels, the ship Eliza, and the brig, Rising Sun; from Mr. Wil- 
liam K. Bixby, of letters to and from Thomas Jefferson, bearing 
upon Massachusetts history or persons; from Mr. Francis V. 
Greene, of New York, an exchange of letters between Sena- 
tor Edmunds and himself on the attitude of Empress Catherine 
of Russia toward the United States in the War of Independence. 

Lincoln Newton Kinnicutt, of Worcester, was elected a 
Resident Member of the Society. 

The death of Ex-Governor Curtis Guild, a Resident Member, 
was announced. Tributes will be given at the May meeting. 


The business of the Annual Meeting was then entered upon. 
Mr. Kellen, senior Member-at-Large of the Council, read 
the following: 

Report of the Council. 

The Council intends upon a suitable occasion to call a 
special meeting of the Society to commemorate its late 

Of the eight Presidents of the Society since its foundation, 
three have died in office — Thomas Lindall Winthrop, George 
E. Ellis and Charles Francis Adams. The combined term of 
presidencies of these three cover a period of a little over one- 
fourth the existence of the Society, and more than one-half 
of this period was occupied by Mr. Adams. It is curious to 
note that Mr. Adams when elected into the Society was the 
293d resident member to be admitted; the last act in which 
he participated was the choice of the 486th member. He had 
seen enter during his membership 193 members, and it is safe 
to say a majority owed their election to his interest. The 
quality of membership was ever in his thoughts. 

The publications of the Society in the year have been: 
1, the usual volume of Proceedings, containing a goodly num- 
ber of historical essays and documents; 2, a volume of Collec- 
tions, the Commerce of Rhode Island, Vol. I, contributed and 
printed through the generosity of our Corresponding Member, 
George Peabody Wetmore; and 3, another volume of Collections, 
being the Letters and Papers of John Singleton Copley and Henry 
Pelham, 1739-17 76. The opportunity offered for changing 
the general style of the Collections resulted in the adoption of 
a quarto form, giving a wider scope for illustration and for 
modifying the page according to subject matter. The issues 
for the coming year contemplate a volume of Proceedings, 
and the second volume of the Commerce of Rhode Island, also 
the gift of Senator Wetmore. That the reputation of the 
Society largely rests upon its publications has long been rec- 
ognized; and it is the wish of the Council to maintain and 
extend this reputation by issuing each year material valuable 
for history, and in a form more attractive than in the past, 
yet in keeping with the subject. The war in Europe put an 
end to the search in England for Winthrop material, although 


the agent of the Society reported promising leads. The ques- 
tion of resuming the search on the return of normal conditions 
in Great Britain will be decided in the future. 

The report of the Librarian gives the figures of the growth 
of the various collections. What it does not convey is the 
gradual strengthening of certain divisions of historical mate- 
rial in which the Society is and properly should be stronger. 
Files, almost complete from 1806 to i860, of the London Courier 
and the London Chronicle, the one a ministerial and the other 
an opposition newspaper, have been purchased — in all 204 
volumes. Not only do they give the Society a treasury of 
historical reference, but they are files not to be found in any 
other library in this vicinity. Thirty-six volumes of the 
earlier London Chronicle, 175 7-1 781, were also secured, in- 
teresting as covering the period of the Revolution, and in- 
teresting also as including volumes once the property of Lord 
Orrery, the friend and biographer of Swift (with his MS. 
notes) and of the Duke of Hamilton (with his book-plate). 
In original issues purchases have been made of Massachusetts 
colonial newspapers. Nearly three hundred such issues have 
been added to the already large collection of colonial news- 
papers, and many of these additions are, so far as is known, 
unique copies. The monthly reports of the Cabinet-Keeper 
and the Editor have noticed the quite steady flow of gifts to 
the Cabinet and to the coin and manuscripts collection. 

More than ever the Society has become a great depository 
of manuscripts, personal and public. The accessions in the 
last year have not only been large and important, but they 
have belonged to a great extent to the nineteenth century, 
thus marking the advance of the historical period. Hereto- 
fore the collections have been almost wholly colonial or rev- 
olutionary, and such as reached beyond 1800 have been few 
and unimportant. The period after 1800 was neglected, as of 
too recent a time to permit public use of private papers. As 
each generation comes forward, its predecessors pass into the 
realm of history, and it cannot be too strongly urged that 
every effort be made to induce holders of historical material 
to place it here, where it may be preserved, cared for and the 
use controlled by proper regulation. There exists a remark- 
able dearth of available manuscript material for the political 


history of Massachusetts in the nineteenth century. Some 
collections are known to have been destroyed in the Boston 
fire of 1872 — in itself a warning against exposing historical 
records to such risks. There is a wealth of like material now 
lying idle in private keeping, of high value, yet unavailable 
to the student, and often a burden upon the owner. It can- 
not be too generally known that the Society is the natural 
custodian of such material, and has the force needed for the 
proper arrangement and care of manuscript records — facili- 
ties greater than can be found in its sister institutions. 

Accumulation is not the only function of the Society to be 
emphasized, although of importance in viewing its past and 
future activities. Its own stores are open to all investigators, 
and in welcoming and aiding the inquirer it performs its 
public duty as trustee of what is entrusted to it. In printing, 
it gives the widest circulation to its material, and the constant 
use of both its Collections and Proceedings affords ample testi- 
mony to the utility. of its publications. The individual 
student has been at some disadvantage, for his occasional docu- 
ment may not be in print, and a copy has been liable to error, 
unless done by photography, a costly and troublesome process. 
It was to meet this need that the Society purchased, nearly a 
year ago, a photostat, and the instrument has justified the 
expense. In the ten months during which it has been in opera- 
tion more than eight thousand prints have been made, and 
of widely different subjects. Volumes or parts of volumes, 
pages to supply such as are missing, maps, portraits, broad- 
sides and manuscripts — the requests have been numerous, 
and have come from as great a distance as California. The 
instrument has thus proved its worth for meeting a demand 
for such reproductions. Nor have the needs of the Society 
been overlooked. Several years of the Journals of the Massa- 
chusetts House of Representatives have been photographed. 
A plan of completing by this process its files of the earliest 
issues of Massachusetts newspapers was not to be neglected. 
Through the courtesy of the New York Historical Society, 
the Boston Athenaeum and the American Antiquarian Society 
at Worcester, the unique early files of the Boston News-Letter 
were lent, and the entire series from 1704 to 17 16 has been 
reproduced. This has also been done for the Georgia Gazette, 


the unique file of a southern newspaper, 1 763-1 766. The ad- 
vantage is shared by other libraries, no less than eight sets of 
the reproductions being placed where they were wanted. The 
exhibit of manuscript historical documents in the State build- 
ing at San Francisco was wholly made in the Society. Several 
hundred reproductions of manuscript or rare printed material 
have been made to increase the collections of the Society. 
These are some of the uses to which this instrument can be 
applied. This diffusion of historical material, which can never 
be acquired in the original, is the highest commendation of 
this new facility. It is our intention to hold it for the use and 
encouragement of original research, and to perpetuate manu- 
script or printed matter relating to New England history, 
which is either unique or is held inaccessible to the general 
student. Some expense is involved in this undertaking; but 
the Society by this means is enabled to round out its own as 
well as other collections, and the wish may be expressed that 
a fund may be created competent to carry into effect the in- 
tention of the Society without its being obliged to consider 
the cost. Arrangements have been made by which the pho- 
tostat will be managed by a photographer of long and wide 
experience, thus ensuring the best product. 

One result has followed upon this new activity — the So- 
ciety has been brought into closer and more friendly relations 
with its sister institutions. The feeling of rivalry in a contest 
for originals has been modified, and a spirit of comity, of co- 
operation, prevails. This has led to a greater discrimination 
in purchases, a specialization of collections, and saner ideas 
on the nature and limitations of special collections. It is de- 
sirable to meet this better state of feeling cordially, and in a 
generous spirit. 

The repair and binding of manuscripts have continued and 
with good results. Such treatment, by giving the document a 
final form, brings us nearer to the time when a general cata- 
logue of the manuscripts may be prepared. The desirability 
of such a catalogue is not to be questioned; but the present 
form of catalogue, both of printed and manuscript material, 
is not one which should be continued. It is hoped that some 
progress towards this much-desired end may be made in the 
coming year. 


While recording what has been or is being accomplished in 
maintaining the repute and general worth of the Society, it 
will be well to bear in mind the many directions in which its 
influence and utility may be extended. That its collections 
are valuable and peculiar, the growing use proves; they con- 
tain what is to be found nowhere else, and this applies with 
particular force to its manuscript, printed issues and early 
newspapers of Massachusetts. Material of this nature appeals 
to the antiquary, or the local rather than to the general histo- 
rian. In such libraries as the Boston Public, Boston Athe- 
naeum and Harvard University, the general student will 
always be better supplied, and according to his wants, than in a 
specialized collection, like that of this Society. Such a con- 
sideration is conclusive against entering into the field of gen- 
eral history, except so far as may be necessary for works of 
reference. The Water ston and Ellis gifts, however, brought 
many English biographies and histories, and to such a founda- 
tion additions may judiciously be made as occasion offers. 

Then there is the ever-present question of communications 
made in the stated meetings of the Society. The membership 
is sufficiently varied in interests to assure a wide selection of 
subject, and nearly a majority of our members are actively 
engaged in historical writing. If the annual volume of 19 14 
be taken as a measure, barely one-eighth of the members are 
actual contributors to the Proceedings. It cannot too strongly 
be urged that members engaged in historical investigation 
contribute their quota; not necessarily for publication, but to 
place before the Society the results of their studies, for sug- 
gestion and comment. Even if the essay is to be printed else- 
where, it may be read at our meetings, and thus keep our 
members in touch with what is being done in history and 
awaken an interest which may prove useful to the Society as 
well as to the contributing member. The publication of docu- 
ments and papers will continue — the raw material of history, 
and of which both Collections and Proceedings are a treasury 
for reference. 

The suggestion has frequently been made that the greater 
comfort and convenience of those who use the library should 
be considered; that tables and chairs, in good light and in 
situations where the ordinary interruptions of executive 


business may not be so noticeably felt, would be an improve- 
ment; and finally that a more free access to the shelves would 
be an advantage. The force of the suggestion may be ad- 
mitted, but the suitable remedy is a more difficult matter. 
The building was never intended to serve as a public library, 
and the general use of the collections has been imposed upon, 
rather than invited by, the Society. Due provision was not 
made for readers, such as exists, for example, in our neighbor, 
the Boston Medical Library. Ellis Hall is ill adapted for such 
a use, and no other space, offering the necessary supervision, 
seems available. The Waters ton room offers a quiet retreat 
for members; but apart from that, the circular corner room 
adjoining the Librarian's room can alone be set apart for the 
visitor. Even there he will be subject to interruption. Under 
the circumstances the Council, fully recognizing the existence 
of the problem, asks further patience from those who com- 
plain of present conditions, in the hope that at no far distant 
time the necessity of an extension of the building may be met. 
Then adequate provision for readers may be provided. 

Report of the Treasurer. 

In presenting his annual report on the finances of the Society 
Mr. Lord said: 

I desire to make a brief statement of the financial condition 
of the Society, supplementing what is set forth in detail in the 
Treasurer's report submitted in print to-day. 

The property of the Society may be divided conveniently 
as follows : 

1. The Land and Buildings, which stand on the books at 
$97,990.32 and are valued by the City Assessors at $196,000. 

2. The Library and Collections, have never been appraised 
or assessed, but which have an estimated value not less than 

3. The Investments of the Society, are carried on the books, 
as appears in the Investment Account, Exhibit I of the Treas- 
urer's Report, at $480,817.22. Of this sum the two centenary 
funds amount to $66,019.22, of which amount $60,762.84 is 
the principal of the Sibley Centenary Fund and $5,256.38 of 
the Anonymous Fund. Under the terms of the bequests the 

■ ^ 


income of these funds must be added to the principal until 
the expiration of one hundred years from their receipt, or, in the 
case of the Sibley Centenary Fund, the year 2002, and in the 
case of the Anonymous Fund the year 1991. 

The gross income of the Society from all sources the past 
year was $27,483.24, of which $24,295.46 was the income of 
the invested funds. From this gross income must be deducted 
the income of the two centenary funds, which under the terms 
of the gifts are to be added annually to the principal, amount- 
ing to $3,143.76, and leaving a balance of income available for 
all purposes of $24,339.48. 

The Treasurer received the past year the sum of $111.75, 
being the balance of the legacy from Mrs. Mehitable Calef 
Coppenhagen Wilson and the sum of $1,000 from Mr. Andrew 
McFarland Davis as a gift without restrictions. 

During the year the Society received from the sale of a 
large collection of duplicate early newspapers, $10,750. A part 
of this amount was used to secure a number of rare, and some 
unique, early Boston newspapers, needed to complete our files. 
By the expenditure of $2,969.80 for these and files of English 
papers about 220 volumes of newspapers were acquired. The 
balance, $7,780.20, was added to the principal of the General 
Fund. This purchase left the amount to be charged against 
ordinary income $26,300.55. 

The amount expended for the purchase, equipment, and sup- 
plies of the new Photostat was $2,082.68. The sale of photostat 
copies of manuscripts and newspapers has already reached the 
sum of $963.78, while giving the Society for its own collections 
copies of the subjects taken. 

The balance of income over expenditures for the year ending 
March 31, 19 14, was $3,030.03. The balance of expenditures 
over income for the year ending March 31, 1915, was $1,961.07, 
which balance has been charged against accumulated income. 

The increase in invested funds the past year is $12,035.71 
as shown in detail in Exhibit III. 





In compliance with the requirements of the By-Laws, Chap- 
ter VII., Article 2, the Treasurer respectfully submits his 
Annual Report, made up to March 31, 191 5. 

The special funds now held by the Treasurer are thirty in 
number. A list of these funds, with the income and expendi- 
ture of each fund the past year, appears in Exhibit V in this 
report. An account of twenty-nine of these funds, giving a 
brief history of each fund, will be found in the Treasurer's 
Report for the year ending March 31, 1910 (Proceedings, 
xliii. 529); the thirtieth is described in the Treasurer's Re- 
port for the year ending March 31, 191 1 (Proceedings, xliv. 
568). The securities held by the Treasurer as investments 
on account of the above-mentioned funds are as follows: 

Schedule of Bonds. 

Chicago & West Michigan R. R. Co. 
Chicago & North Michigan R. R. Co. 
Rio Grande Western R. R. Co. 
Cincinnati, Dayton & Ironton R. R. 
Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe R. R. 
Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe R. R. 
Chicago Jet. & Union Stock Yards 
Oregon Short Line R. R. Co. 
Oregon Short Line R. R. Co. 
Boston & Maine R. R. Co. 
American Tel. & Tel. Co. 
Northern Pacific & Gt. Northern R. R. 
Long Island R. R. Co. 
New York Central & Hudson River R. R. 
Bangor & Aroostook R. R. Co. 
Detroit, Grand Rapids & Western R. R. 
Fitchburg R. R. Co. 
Kansas City, Clinton & Springfield R. R. 
Lowell, Lawrence & Haverhill St. R. R. 
West End Street Railway Co. 
Washington Water Power Co. 
United Electric Securities 
Blackstone Valley Gas & Elec. Co. 

Carry forward 












5, 000.00 





1995 "adjustment" 9,000.00 

















192 1 "joint 5 


































. . . $245,500.00 


Schedule of Bonds — Continued. 

Brought forward $245,500.00 

Western Tel. & Tel. Co. 5% 1932 5,000.00 

Seattle Electric Co. 5% 1929 5,000.00 

Detroit Edison Co. 5% 1933 5,000.00 

U. S. Steel Corporation 5% 1963 5,000.00 

Boston Elevated Railway 5% 1942 8,000.00 

New England Tel. & Tel. Co. 5% 1932 10,000.00 

Connecticut Power Co. 5% 1963 10,000.00 

Boston & Albany R. R. 5% 1938 10,000.00 

Cleveland Short Line R. R. 4$% 1961 10,000.00 

Arlington Gas Light Co. 5% 1927 10,000.00 

United Elec. Lt. & Power Co. 4^% 1929 10,000.00 

Wilmington City Electric Co. 5% 195 1 5,000.00 

City of New York 6% 1916-17 5,000.00 

City of Cleveland 5% 191 7 8,000.00 

Old Colony Gas Co. 5% 1931 5,000.00 

United Zinc & Chemical Co. 5% 1928 30,000.00 

(with 60 shares pfd., and 60 common) 

Par value $386,500.00 
Schedule of Stocks. 

50 Merchants National Bank, Boston $5,000.00 

50 National Union Bank, Boston 5,000.00 

50 Second National Bank, Boston 5,000.00 

50 National Shawmut Bank, Boston 5,000.00 

35 Boston & Albany R. R. Co 3,500.00 

25 Old Colony R. R. Co 2,500.00 

25 Fitchburg R. R. Co. Pfd 2,500.00 

150 Chicago Jet. Rys. & Union Stock Yards Co. Pfd 15,000.00 

75 American Smelting & Refining Co. Pfd 7,500.00 

158 Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe R. R. Co. Pfd 15,800.00 

302 Kansas City Stock Yards Co. Pfd 30,200.00 

10 Cincinnati Gas & Electric Co 1,000.00 

6 Boston Real Estate Trust 6,000.00 

5 State Street Exchange 500.00 

120 Pacific Mills 12,000.00 

52 Puget Sound Traction Light and Power Co. Pfd 5,200.00 

5 " " " " " " " Common . . 500-00 

1168 Shares Par value $122,200.00 

50 Shares National Bank of Commerce in Liquidation 
($12,750 already paid) 

Schedule of Savings Bank Books. 

M. A. Parker Fund $1,167.59 

Brattle St. Church Model Fund 203.15 




Bonds, par value $386,500.00 

Stocks, par value 122,200.00 

Savings Bank Books 1,370.74 


Represented by Balance, Investment account $480,817.22 

The balance sheet follows and shows the present condition 
of the several accounts: 

Balance Sheet, March 31, 1915. 

Investment Account, Funds, Exhibit III ... $439,889.87 

Exhibit I $480,817.22 Accumulated Income of 

Real Estate 97,990.32 Funds, Exhibit IV . . 47,428.73 

Cash on hand, Exhibit II . 6,501.38 Building Fund 72,990.32 

Ellis House 25,000.00 

$585,308.92 $585,308.92 


Investment Account. 

Balance April 1, 1914 $466,378.02 

Bought during year: 

$2,000 Arlington Gas Co., 5% $2,000.00 

10,000 United Elec. Lt. & Power Co., 4!%, 1929 . 9,400.00 
5,000 Wilmington City Electric Co., 5%, 1951 . . 4,900.00 

5,000 City of New York, 6%, 1916-17 5,000.00 

8,000 City of Cleveland, 5%,i9i7 8,000.00 

5,000 Old Colony Gas Co., 5%, 1931 4,900.00 

Accrued Interest M. A. Parker Savings Bank Book . 45-32 

" " Brattle St. Church Model Bank Book 7.88 

Total Additions, Exhibit II 34,253.20 


Securities matured, etc. : 
Liquidation Lewiston-Concord Bridge bonds . . . $5,064.00 

National Bank of Commerce 12,750.00 

Balance G. St. L. Abbott, Trustee note, paid . . 2,000.00 

Total Deduction, Exhibit II 19,814.00 

Balance, March 31, 191 5 $480,817.22 

Increase during year $14,439.20 



Cash Account. 

Balance on hand, April 1, 1914 $10,793.86 

Accrued Interest on Arlington Gas Co. Bonds 72.08 

Receipts during year to March 31, 1915: 

Sale of Publications $1,945.20 

Rebate, Telephone 2.10 

Royalties, Little, Brown & Co 10.18 

Income from Investments, net 24,242.26 

Interest on Savings Bank Books 53 .20 

" on Bank Balances 266.52 

Received from Photostat sales 963.78 

Total credited to Income of Funds, Exhibit V 27,483.24 

Balance Legacy of M. C. C. Wilson in. 75 

Gift of Andrew McFarland Davis 1,000.00 

Securities liquidated or paid, Exhibit I 19,814.00 

Received from sales of duplicate Newspapers 10,750.00 

Charges during year to March 31, 191 5: 

Investment Account, Securities bought $34,200.00 

Savings Bank Interest, not drawn 53. 20 

Total additions, Exhibit I $34,253.20 

Income Account: 

Bindery, Wages $1,100.00 

Supplies 29.28 $1,129.28 

Binding, outside 371.4$ 

Books, Pamphlets, Newspapers, and Mss. 5,082.35 

Cleaning $285.60 

Engineer 1,036.05 

Fuel 574.30 

Furniture 30.85 

Light 140.24 

Repairs 1,486.79 

Telephone 115.82 

Water 73 .00 3,742.65 

Photostat: 1 

Installation $1,274.88 

Supplies 807.80 2,082.68 

Portraits and Medals no. 10 

Postage 19552 

Carry forward .... .... $12,714.03 $34,253.20 $70,024.93 

1 For receipts, see above. 



Cash Account — Continued. 

Brought forward $12,714.03 $34,253.20 $70,024.93 


Proceedings, vol. 47 ... . $1,397.66 
" 48 . . . . 390.38 
Illustrations and Reprints 461.95 

Copley-Pelham papers . . 1,781.68 
Winthrop's History . . . 313.12 
Rhode Island Commerce . 134.61 4,479.40 

Miscellaneous 87.81 

Librarian's Assistants . . . $4,565.00 
Editor and Assistant . . . 6,080.00 10,645.00 

Stationery 204.47 

Treasurer's office: 

Bond $25.00 

Bookkeeper 600.00 

Safety Vault 50.00 

Certified Public Accountant 25.00 

Books 1.75 701.75 

Insurance, Employers Liability $56.82 

Other Expenses 381.07 437.89 


Charged Income of Funds, Exhibit V . 26,300.55 
Charged Principal of Funds 1 .... 2,969.80 


Total Payments 63,523.55 

Balance on hand, March 31, 1915 $6,501.38 

1 See Treasurer's remarks, supra, p. 369. 


Increase of Funds in Year 1914-1915. 

Amount of Funds, April 1, 1 9 14 $427,854.16 

Added during year: 

Additions to Centenary Funds: 

Anonymous Fund $250.30 

J. L. Sibley Fund 2,893.46 3,143.76 

Additions to General Funds: 

Gift of Andrew McFarland Davis $1,000.00 

Legacy of M. C. C. Wilson in. 75 

Sale of duplicate Newspapers, less purchase of news- 
papers . 7,780.20 8,891.95 

Total of Funds, March 31, 1915 $439,889.87 


Accumulated Income of Funds. 

Balance Accumulated Income, April 1, 1914 $49,389.80 

Income during year, Exhibit II 27,483.24 

Expenditures, Exhibit II 26,300.55 


Less additions to Centenary Funds 3,143.76 

Balance, March 31, 1915 $47,428.73 





Income and Expenditures of Funds for the Year Ending 
March 31, 1915. 





Brattle St 

Chamberlain .... 



Frothingham .... 





Mass. Hist. Trust . . 





C. A. L.Sibley . . . 
J. L. Sibley .... 


Waterston No. 1 . . 
Waterston No. 2 . . 
Waterston No. 3 . . 
Waterston Library . 
R. C. Winthrop . . . 
T. L. Winthrop . . . 
Wm. Winthrop . . . 
Balance, Mar. 31, 1914 
General Income . . 

Sibley Centenary . . 
Anonymous Centenary 
Total Income .... 
Expenditures .... 
Balance, Income . . 






























































































of Funds 






























Total Funds, March 31, 1915 $439,889.87 


The income for the year derived from the investments and 
credited to the several funds in proportion to the amount in 
which they stand on the Treasurer's books was nearly six per 
cent on the funds. 

The real estate, which is entirely unencumbered, stands on 
the books at $97,990.32. The aggregate amount of the per- 
manent funds including unexpended balances represented by 
securities at par and deposits is $510,070.74, as per schedules 
of investments given above. 


Boston, April 1, 1915. Treasurer. 

Report of the Auditing Committee. 

The undersigned, a Committee appointed to examine the accounts 
of the Treasurer of the Massachusetts Historical Society as made 
up to April 1, 191 5, have attended to that duty, and report that 
they find that the securities held by the Treasurer for the several 
funds correspond with the statement in his Annual Report. 

They have engaged the services of Mr. Gideon M. Mansfield, a 
Certified Public Accountant, who reports to them that he finds the 
accounts correctly kept and properly vouched, that the balance of 
cash on hand is satisfactorily accounted for, and that the trial bal- 
ance is accurately taken from the ledger. 



Boston, April 5, 1915. 

Report of the Librarian. 

The Librarian reported that during the year there have 
been added to the Library: 

Books 1,502 

Pamphlets 1,056 

Manuscripts, bound 43 

Broadsides 178 

Maps . . . . 35 


In the collection of Manuscripts there are now 1,402 volumes, 
and more than 20,000 single pieces. 


In the Rebellion Collection there are now 3,537 volumes, 
6,614 pamphlets, 510 broadsides, and in maps. 

The Library is estimated to contain 57,592 volumes, 118,005 
pamphlets, and 5,386 broadsides. 

Samuel A. Green, 


The Cabinet-Keeper presented as his report a detailed list 
of accessions to the Cabinet as given in the printed records of 
the stated meetings. 

Mr. C.N. Greenough, for the Committee, read the following: 

Report op the Committee on the Library and Cabinet 

In making our visit to the library and the cabinet, we were 
shown the usual courtesies by the Cabinet-Keeper, the Curator 
of Coins and the Assistant Librarian. We agree with last 
year's Committee that the danger from fire is now less than 
ever before; but we call attention to the slight menace which 
still remains from certain wooden furniture near the books. 
We would name the window casings, especially those near the 
manuscripts; the shelves in the basement room which con- 
tains the public documents; the catalogue case in the office; 
and the map case in the Map Room. These, in our opinion, 
might well be replaced by metal. 

We further suggest that attention be given to the room in 
the basement which contains public documents. These are 
at present in wooden cases which extend nearly to the ceiling 
and which are separated by aisles barely wide enough for the 
passage of one person. We suggest that all documents in this 
room be removed except the Massachusetts series and other 
documents bearing directly upon Massachusetts history; that 
these be placed in metal cases; and that the cases be separated 
by much wider aisles than at present. 

The Committee believes there should be some arrangement 
to enable members of the Society to make suggestions on order- 
ing current books. This might be managed either by opening 
a request book, in which any member might ask for the pur- 
chase of a given volume; or, if it were practicable, a more 
convenient arrangement might be to have prepared a list of 



current books, and to permit members to mark such volumes 
as they might personally wish to use in case they were added to 
the library. 

The Committee feels that, crowded though the office is, the 
case for the card catalogue of the library ought to be more 
adequate. It is at present a wooden case reaching to the floor, 
containing hand-written cards of an unusual size, which are 
not fastened into the trays by rods. The Committee recom- 
mends new metal cases, trays, and cards of standard size, with 
rods running through the cards. The Committee feels that 
the present arrangement of that portion of the card catalogue 
which refers to manuscripts is extremely inconvenient, and 
urges that, in the new catalogue cases, no trays be lower 
than the height of an ordinary table. The Committee questions 
the advantage of having manuscripts and books separately 
catalogued, and suggests that, whenever the catalogue is 
rearranged, cards for manuscripts and for books be combined 
in a single alphabet. It might, however, be well to have titles 
of manuscripts upon cards of a distinctive color. 

The Committee wishes to recommend that better facilities 
be created for students who wish to consult rare books and 
manuscripts. At present, the only place for such students is 
the large table in the Librarian's office. Here the student is 
disturbed by the ordinary work of the office and is obliged to 
face the light. Privileged students are permitted to study in 
the main stack room. This room, moreover, can be used only 
in warm weather, as it is not heated. The Committee suggests 
that students be allowed to use the Waterston Room, where 
they would have better light than at the desk in the Librarian's 
office, and be less subject to disturbance. Any such arrange- 
ments would of course be conditioned by the provisions of the 

The Committee commends the present policy of the Society 
in opening its resources as freely as possible to all responsible 
persons who wish to use them, and it hopes that this policy will 
become even more liberal; for example, it would suggest that 
the number of institutions with which the Society exchanges 
publications be considerably increased, even though the pub- 
lications received by the Society in return may be relatively 
unimportant. At present, the Society is exchanging with uni- 


versities and societies as follows: in New England, 59; in 
the Atlantic states, from New York to Georgia, 34; in other 
states of the Union, 40; in Canada, 5; in England, 3. The 
Committee suggests that it would be advantageous to increase 
these exchanges. It thinks that there must be libraries on the 
Continent, in Great Britain, and in South America, with which 
it would be to our advantage to exchange; and it is certain 
that it would be to our advantage to have at least one library 
in each state of the Union where our publications could be 

The Society's Cabinet contains one of the best collections 
in the state of historical relics of the Colonial and Revolu- 
tionary periods. The Committee admires the skill with which 
those in charge of the Cabinet have utilized the present room, 
but feels that no possible arrangement in that small space can 
be satisfactory. It therefore recommends that the congested 
condition of the Museum be remedied by removing part of its 
contents to Ellis Hall. That spacious room is now used only 
two or three times a year. Some of the paintings, engravings 
and other exhibits now in the Museum could be removed to 
Ellis Hall, and glass cases or frames placed near the windows 
for the display, permanent or temporary, of prints, coins, or 
relics, without interfering with the infrequent use of the hall 
for meetings. We would also suggest that a permanent dis- 
play be made in Ellis Hall of some of the rarer manuscripts, 
books, and tracts belonging to the Society. It seems a pity that 
the public should not have the opportunity of seeing some of 
these treasures — which, after all, are the main part of our 
collection — as well as the relics and portraits which are now 

For some years the Museum has been open to the public 
every Wednesday afternoon from two until four. Although 
this fact is mentioned in the Strangers' Directory in the Boston 
Transcript, it seems not to be generally known, for Mr. Tuttle 
informs the Committee that the average weekly attendance is 
about six. Not more than 350 persons, then, outside the 
membership of the Society, visit the Museum in a year. The 
Committee believes that the educational value of our collec- 
tion is such that additional steps ought to be taken to call it 
to the attention of the public. It begs to make three specific 


recommendations: first, that the Museum be opened Satur- 
day mornings from nine to twelve, and that the hour of clos- 
ing on Wednesday afternoons be extended to five o'clock, 
except in midwinter; second, that teachers of history in 
greater Boston and members of the New England Association 
of Teachers of History be invited to bring their pupils to visit 
the Museum by special appointment at their convenience; 
third, that a sign, such as shall not injure the dignity of our 
portals, be used to announce when the Museum is open. 

The Committee congratulates the Society upon the improve- 
ment which has been made in the matter of our collection of 
coins. The curator of coins, Dr. Storer, has been assiduous 
and successful in purchase, exchange, and arrangement. The 
thanks of the Society are due him for his attention to this de- 
partment of its work. Facilities for the display of coins are, of 
course, wholly unsatisfactory; but, so far as the Committee 
can see, they must remain so until additional space can be 
secured. It might, however, be possible to place some of the 
less valuable coins in racks in Ellis Hall, in case the Society 
should accept the suggestion of the Committee that this room 
be used in order to relieve the congestion in the Museum. 

In conclusion, the Committee calls the attention of the 
Society to the very important work which the purchase of the 
photostat has made possible, and to the vigor with which 
the work of photostatic reproductions of newspapers and other 
documents is being carried on. „ ^ TT 


C. N. Greenough, 
S. E. Morison. 

Mr. Kellen, chairman of the Nominating Committee, re- 
ported a list of officers for the ensuing year. In presenting the 
name of the Hon. Henry Cabot Lodge as a nominee for Presi- 
dent of the Society, he explained the circumstances in which 
the Committee was placed by the unexpected death of Mr. 
Adams and the cooperation of the Council with the Committee 
in making the selection of Mr. Lodge. He also read a letter 
from Mr. Lodge to Mr. Rhodes, expressing his sense of the high 
honor proposed for him, and his willingness to accept the 
office. The ballot being taken, fifty-two votes were cast. The 
officers are as follows: 






Recording Secretary. 

Corresponding Secretary. 





Members at Large of the Council. 



Charles Francis Adams. 

The Senior Vice-President, Mr. Rhodes, then read a state- 
ment of Mr. Adams' connection with the Society, prepared 
by Mr. Tuttle, as follows: 

Mr. Adams was born in Quincy on May 27, 1835, graduated at 
Harvard College in 1856, and was elected a Resident Member of 
the Society, April 15, 1875. He died in Washington, March 20, 


His first communication to the Society was on the settlement of 
the old planters about Boston Harbor and at Weymouth, and was 
made at the June meeting, 1878. During his membership he was 
present at most of the meetings of the Society, and the Proceed- 
ings contain many tributes and memoirs by him and a large number 
of papers covering a wide range of subjects. 

He served as a member of the executive committee of the Council 
from 1882 to 1885, as a Vice-President from 1890 to 1895, and 
as President from April, 1895, to the date of his death, completing 
nearly twenty years, the second longest term in the history of the 
Society. He entered the Presidency only a few months after the 
death of the former Presidents, Robert C. Winthrop and George E. 
Ellis, which occurred in the closing months of 1894, and he felt that 
he had entered this position at an important period of the Society's 

Through his active interest, the purchase of a site for a new build- 
ing, selected by him, was reported at the October meeting, 1895; 
and steps were soon taken, at his timely suggestion, to sell the old 
building and site to the city of Boston. As a member of the Build- 
ing Committee he closely followed the erection of the new building, 
which was completed in 1899; and at the first annual meeting, 
in April of that year, held in the new structure, he read a paper on 
"Historians and Historical Societies." The Society recorded its 
appreciation of his gift in the purchase of a part of the land needed 
for the building. 

He was urgent in his views as to the policy of the Society, especially 
as to its membership. He took a leading part in 1907 in the abolition 
of the admission and annual fees of members, and in 1908 was chair- 
man of the committee to revise the by-laws. 

In April, 1898, he suggested the publication by the Society of 
new and definitive editions of the Bradford and Winthrop His- 
tories, projects which he had long had in mind. Bradford's History 
was issued in 191 2. At the June meeting, 19 13, he expressed his 
strong desire that Winthrop's History should be published without 


any unnecessary delay while he was still connected with the 

As a member of the Finance Committee and of the various com- 
mittees of which he was an ex-omcio member, the Society greatly 
benefited by his active interest, and the library was the recipient 
of many gifts from him. 

Mr. Rhodes then called in turn upon certain members of the 
Society for tributes to Mr. Adams, beginning with the " Nestor 
of the Society," Dr. Green. 

Tribute of Governor Long. 1 

What always struck me first in Mr. Adams was his exigent 
forthputting personality. Wherever he was, he was in evi- 
dence. In the meetings of this Society — and I regard him 
as by all means the most inspiring and contributory man that 
ever sat in its presidential chair — he was its dominant ex- 
pression. At his funeral you could not think of him as lifeless 
in his coffin. He was a man of such emphatic mental activities 
that it would have seemed unfitting — I am sure that he would 
not have liked it — to say of him requiescat in pace. And it 
takes a wrench of the imagination here and now to think of 
him as separated from his wonted seat at our head. He was 
the embodiment of mental and physical vigor. 

It is guesswork to draw comparisons, but as I think of his 
splendid lineage he seems to me a more level-headed man 
than his great-grandfather John Adams; not so wise as his 
grandfather John Quincy Adams; not so well-poised and cool 
as his father Charles Francis Adams: but he ranks with them 
all and keeps the family standard full up in high character 
and intellectual strength and absolute honesty of purpose and 
conviction. Nobody could doubt that in his generation he 
was preeminently of that ilk. 

His characteristics stood out on him as emphatic and dis- 
tinct as bosses on a shield. He was dogmatic and masterful 
— a fighter, for any position he took, who asked no odds and 
gave no quarter. He was so strong in his conclusions, he 
pressed them so confidently, that, paradoxical as it may seem, 
the very intensity of his convictions often sooner or later led 

1 Governor Long was, through a conflict of engagements, unable to attend 
and his tribute was presented by Mr. Rhodes. 


him, as an overloaded gun kicks backward, to question them 
and to go to the other extreme with equal earnestness. And 
how charming were his frankness and heartiness in all this! 

It is because of this mixed quality of positiveness of being 
right and at the same time of open-mindedness that I used 
sometimes to question the soundness of his judgment. Some 
men, arguing a theme, take you unresistingly along with them. 
When he developed an argument I found myself often ques- 
tioning his postulates, or feeling that he was putting them too 
strongly, or inclining to think of something to be said on the 
other side. But all this made him all the more — the best word 
I can think of is — interesting. He gave you a feeling of elec- 
tricity in the air. You recognized his fertility and his sweep. 

Mr. Adams — perhaps another paradox — was at once a 
born aristocrat and a born democrat. He never forgot what 
was due to his illustrious ancestral and personal rank. He 
never concealed his lofty contempt for whatever derogated 
from the high standard of the gentleman. And yet, in his 
intercourse with our common citizenry, however humble, 
laborer, mechanic or what not, he was in sympathy with their 
best qualities and traditions and yearnings, and they knew it. 
Ask the people of Quincy with whom he grew up, or of Lincoln 
where he lived in later years, and they will tell you how frankly 
and unaffectedly he congregated with them. You remember 
Henry Faxon. You can hardly think of two men more unlike. 
But they had been townsmen in Quincy and had taken part 
in many a rough town meeting. I was at Faxon's funeral 
some years ago in Quincy, and when I saw there Charles Francis 
Adams, having come from his Lincoln home to pay the tribute 
of his presence to Henry Faxon — and saw no other blue blood 
there — it was evidence to me that he loved his fellow-men and 
that the democratic pulse was beating under that aristocratic 

Indeed, any estimate of the man would be lacking that did not 
include his genuine inner tenderness. Brusque and abrupt 
and outspoken, often not sparing a pungent word, yet of him 
may be said what the poet Bryant, in his oration on Fenimore 
Cooper, said of the latter, "His character was like the bark of 
the cinnamon, an astringent rind without and an intense 
sweetness within." 


A year ago in his eightieth year Mr. Adams seemed to be 
still in robust physical trim, almost every day at home on 
horseback and, while in London, rising early each morning 
to take, in the Royal Automobile Club there, a dive from a 
high platform into the swimming pool below. And his mind 
was even more vigorous than his body. It is not too much to 
say that he was a great man, especially when we think how 
mighty small some great men have been. Of unlimited in- 
dustry, with a wide range of practical talent that was equal 
to the problems of transportation, currency, diplomacy and 
material business affairs, a scholarly author of many books 
and articles, a master of a good enough literary style, a search- 
ing historian of international reputation, a fearless expresser 
of opinion on all public questions, a patriot who in his youth 
risked his life in battle for his country's flag — and how his 
honest pride in his soldier's career used to crop out now and 
then in his talks to us — a knight without fear and without 
reproach, he was, not a genius, but a mighty force. 

More copious than concise, not without a certain grim humor, 
how cordially we now recall him and his contributions to our 
meetings here, his fulness of detail, his evident relish of his 
work, his abundance of material, his exhaustive research and 
analysis. Nihil tetigit quod non exhausit. What a void without 

In his death Massachusetts loses one of her most illustrious 
sons, and this Society its leading member and a President who 
gave it his whole heart. 

Tribute of Dr. Green. 

My acquaintance with Mr. Adams began in his college days 
more than half a century ago. Since the beginning of his 
membership here in 1875 m Y relations with him have been 
fairly close and intimate, and I wish to bear witness to the 
deep interest he has always shown in the welfare of the Society. 
I wish to record, too, my deep appreciation of his kindly and 
considerate attention to me personally at all times. 

It was due to his foresight and wisdom that we have the 
present convenient and eligible site, selected by him at a time 
when there were only a few buildings in this neighborhood. 


His long-cherished purpose to secure a suitable home for the 
Society did not have at first unanimous support, but his ability 
and leadership won the day. His dominating influence in the 
life of the Society has been recognized and felt by all; and 
through him it has held a distinguished position not only in 
this country but abroad. 

Tribute of President Eliot. 

Charles Francis Adams was not naturally inclined to respect 
precedents, or to imitate in his own mental processes the 
methods of other men. He was always independent, and some- 
times recalcitrant. No wisdom of the ages, or of the multitude, 
necessarily commanded his respect. He was by nature inclined 
to believe that long-established practices of governments, 
institutions of education, and financial or industrial organiza- 
tions were likely to be wrong, or at least capable of great 
improvement. Thus, he testified in his Phi Beta Kappa ad- 
dress of 1883, twenty-seven years after his graduation at 
Harvard College, that he should never be able to overcome, 
no matter how long he might live, some serious disadvantages 
which the superstitions, wrong theories, and worse practices 
of his alma mater inflicted upon him. The educational 
wisdom of five hundred years went for nothing with him. In 
the same famous address, entitled "A College Fetich" — the 
fetich was the prescribed study of dead languages and par- 
ticularly of Greek — he described the world for which the 
College ought to have fitted its graduates of 1856, but had not, 
as an "active, bustling, hard-hitting, many-tongued world, 
caring nothing for authority and little for the past, but full of 
its living thought and living issues." It was that kind of a 
world in which Adams rejoiced to live, and did live, intellec- 
tually and morally. 

He studied law in an imperfect way after taking his bache- 
lor's degree in arts, and was admitted to the bar in 1858, 
but never practiced law, and could never have had a real liking 
for a profession which makes much account of precedent and 
public usage. 

With the exception of one brief interval, he served as a 
commissioned officer in the Union army for three years and a 


half. He had plenty of physical courage, and in age as well 
as in youth he possessed in large measure the moral courage 
which is a much rarer quality than physical, though usually 
based on the natural man's liking for running bodily risks. 
Adams exhibited pleasure in overcoming, or getting round, 
obstacles in his sports, as well as in his serious occupations. 
When riding a bicycle was a popular sport, Adams took peculiar 
pleasure in riding a bicycle on the Paris boulevards; although 
he knew that he was not an expert rider, and could not become 
one, since his time-reaction was too long. He once told me 
with glee that he took his life in his hands every time he rode 
in those thronged thoroughfares, but found it great fun. 
In many an adventure as railroad man, historical and bio- 
graphical writer, and publicist, he doubtless experienced the 
same sensation. He enjoyed risking his literary or business 
reputation, being always convinced that the work he was trying 
to accomplish was worth the risks he ran, and that the risks 
helped to make the hard work interesting. 

Before 1868, at which date he was only thirty-three years old, 
Adams had become deeply interested in railroad management 
and the condition of the American railways. Between 1868 
and 1 87 1 he published a series of remarkable papers on that 
highly controversial business subject. His Chapters on Erie 
revealed to the whole business world Adams' remarkable 
mental and moral qualities. He got at the facts of railroad 
management in those days, and stated them with absolute 
clearness and unrelenting severity. Some of his basic proposi- 
tions are extraordinarily applicable to the present condition 
of things in Europe. Thus, he maintains in his first paper on 
Erie that civilized humanity has assumed that something of 
man's animal part had been eliminated from him during the 
progress of civilization, but that, if things are called by their 
right names, it would be easy to make the civilization of the 
nineteenth century appear "but as a hypocritical mask spread 
over the brutality of the twelfth." Freebooters are not 
extinct, he said; they have only transferred their operations 
to the land, and now conduct them more or less in accordance 
with legal conventions. Gambling and cheating at cards were 
always disreputable, or even disgraceful; but " operating, 
cornering and the like are not so regarded." In 1869 it re- 


quired courage and confidence in one's own judgment to say 
of Cornelius Vanderbilt that he was unscrupulous and very 
illiterate — a strange combination of superstition and faith- 
lessness, of daring and timidity — and that "he often regarded 
his fiduciary position of director in a railroad as means of 
manipulating its stock for his own advantage." Treating 
of stock- watering, Adams said, "The great masterpieces of 
Cornelius Vanderbilt have, however, so eclipsed all other per- 
formances in this line that they may be said to constitute a 
chapter in the history of paper inflation — it might also be 
said of bubble-blowing." 

In all his writings on the mismanagement of American rail- 
roads, Adams kept clearly in view the broad political prin- 
ciples which were really the main subject of discussion. He 
saw that, when directors in great corporations came to regard 
their position as one in which to make a fortune, the possession 
of which would not be considered dishonorable, they were 
striking at the very foundation of democratic society; for that 
society rests on the sanctity of the fiduciary relations, and on 
the faithful representation of the interests of many by a few, 
in both politics and business. The corporation with limited 
liability enables combinations of small shareholders to carry 
out extensive enterprises, but individual capitalists seek to 
control those combinations. One of his striking sentences was: 
"Vanderbilt introduced Caesarism into corporate life." He 
pointed out that public corruption is the foundation on which 
corporations depend for their political power. There is a 
natural tendency to coalition between the lower grades of 
politicians and the corporations which need legislative favors. 
As Adams said: "The existing coalition between the Erie 
Railroad and the Tammany ring is a natural one; for the 
former needs votes, the latter money." In the following 
sentence Adams predicted the creation of the railroad com- 
missions and many other government commissions now in 
existence: "Finally, a responsible department of the Execu- 
tive should have charge of the subject, and should be em- 
powered to decide as to the amounts of private capital directly 
and indirectly paid into construction, and authorize the issue 
of securities accordingly." This sentence occurs in his Erie 
chapter on "Stock- Watering." 




Out of Adams' Chapters on Erie came the establishment 
of the first railroad commission in the United States, namely, 
that of Massachusetts, on which Mr. Adams served from 1869 to 
1879, and was its chairman for seven years. The success of that 
commission was so striking that it led to the appointment of 
other commissions in Massachusetts and elsewhere, whereby 
government exercised a valuable control over the conduct of 
public-utility corporations. That control has become, in 
forty-six years, an indispensable part of public administration 
under free governments. 

Adams enjoyed pioneering in promising fields, but was not 
patient of even a good routine once established. His excursion 
into actual railroad management did not give him the most 
favorable field for his real 'powers; and he did not long remain 
in it. He was the chairman of the preliminary and the first 
executive commission on metropolitan parks for Boston and 
the vicinity, and was very influential in advocating and 
securing the adoption of a wise plan for metropolitan parks; 
but, when the principal takings recommended by the com- 
mission had been made, and the work of the commission 
threatened to become a work of gradual construction and pa- 
tient management, Adams retired from the commission, being 
of opinion that it was enough for the generation in activity 
at the end of the last century to do, to acquire seven or eight 
thousand acres of wild land, and that the next generation might 
fairly do the developing and bringing into use. Nevertheless, 
he rendered a great public service as chairman of that com- 
mission, and illustrated the breadth of his views about public 
welfare and the means of promoting it. His probity and dis- 
interestedness were a great support for the commission in 
their delicate work of taking many areas of land from large 
and small owners by right of eminent domain. 

During his long service in the Board of Overseers of Harvard 
College — 1882 to 1894 and 1895 to 1907 — twenty-four years 
in all, he was always advocating the preparation of every 
youth for some specific work, the mastering of some one sub- 
ject, the concentration on some one thing, in the preparation 
for an intellectual life. In trying to spread these convictions, 
he adopted the most aggressive methods, because he believed 
them most likely to succeed. This was well illustrated in his 


College Fetich address, and in his two reports to the Board of 
Overseers as chairman of their Committee on Composition 
and Rhetoric. In both these cases Adams finally saw accom- 
plished a large part of the reforms he advocated; but the 
partial accomplishment took many years, and the method 
of teaching English in school and college is not yet fully satis- 
factory. Both these efforts, however, gave Adams much con- 
tent. He experienced in high degree the joy of combat, and 
the joy was not dependent on immediate or even ultimate 

Adams desired to employ as his subordinates or assistants 
only men who possessed unusual efficiency and self-reliance. 
He applied to me in the early eighties for competent and trust- 
worthy assistants, whom he thought I could pick out from 
among recent graduates of Harvard College; and, to aid me in 
deciding what sort of young men to recommend, he described 
his own state of mind as follows: "I find there are two kinds of 
men in the business world. If I commit a certain piece of work 
to one of the first kind, he goes off to do it, but keeps writing 
for more instructions, and after a time comes back and gives 
me excellent excuses for not having done it. A man of the 
second kind goes off on the job I have given him, and I hear 
nothing from him; but after a time he returns with the state- 
ment, ' That job you gave me is done, although there were many 
unexpected obstacles, and it has taken more time than I ex- 
pected. It is finished, however, and I am ready for another. ' 
Now," said Adams, "I have no use at all for the first kind of 
man." When Adams found assistants in whom, with good 
reason, he had confidence, he adhered to them with a perfect 
loyalty, supported them in every possible way, and took a 
persistent interest in their advancement and success. 

Of the services which Adams rendered to this Society as 
President others will speak; but I desire to testify that they 
were intelligent, unselfish, and unwearying, and that through 
these services he has contributed largely to the sound up- 
building of American biography and history. 

Adams' characteristic mental activities lasted to the end of 
his life. About a year ago I received from him a three-page 
letter chiefly devoted to a vigorous argument to the effect 
that the whole influence of the labor union is sordid, selfish, 


and narrow, subversive of individuality, and incompatible with 
the continuance of republican institutions. At the end of the 
letter, after thanking me for some efforts I had made "in this 
most unpopular and ungrateful branch of public education," 
Adams wrote, "I confess when, close upon four-score, I look 
at the problems of the present, and recall those through which 
our generation passed, a feeling of weariness predominates. 
. . . ' What pleasure can we have to war with evil?'" That 
was but a momentary lapse from joy in conflict and from hope. 
On the 23d of November last, Adams urged me to join a few 
American publicists in protesting against " mining" the 
ocean and dropping unaimed bombs into unfortified places. 
His language had all its wonted vigor. He said of these prac- 
tices that they are " exactly akin to piracy and plank-walking, 
and should be classified and stigmatized as such." On De- 
cember 1, he wrote again to the same effect, but added: "I 
am wholly dissatisfied with the attitude, or absence of atti- 
tude, of this government toward what I consider two of the 
most glaring violations of neutral rights of which record 
exists." There spoke the young Adams at thirty and three 
successive generations of his ancestors. 

Tribute of Mr. Storey. 

It is not easy in the few minutes at my command to say 
what I would of Mr. Adams, who has been my friend for a 
generation, who has filled a large place in my life, and with 
whom I have been in peculiar sympathy. I shall not try to 
speak of what he did, but only of what he was. At some other 
time and in some other place I hope to pay a more adequate 
tribute to his memory. 

He was a man of exceptional ability and of very rare quality. 
His physical vigor enabled him to take his daily ride on horse- 
back in winter and summer alike until his fatal illness, to dive 
into the icy waters of a Norwegian fiord at the age of seventy 
and the scarcely warmer waves of Massachusetts Bay till the 
last summer of his life, and to travel and work with untiring 
energy to the end. 

His mental vigor was equally remarkable, and his mind was 
incessantly active. He was a great reader and his memory 


was richly stored with the results, but his taste was exacting 
and he read only what was worth reading, always keeping him- 
self in touch with the best thought of the day and wasting no 
time on trash, though he did not neglect light literature. He 
had unusual literary power and was the master of an excellent 
style. Had he followed his natural bent and not been diverted 
by the demands of more active life, he might well have devoted 
himself to historical work, but as it was his writings were the 
diversions of a very busy man. He wrote because he enjoyed 
it, but always with a serious purpose, and whether it was a 
" Chapter on Erie," a biographical sketch, an essay on some 
historical topic, or a discussion of taxation, or our Philippine 
policy, nothing that he wrote was ever dull. He always com- 
manded public attention and set men thinking, thus exercising 
an influence which was far-reaching and which no one can 

Inheriting a great tradition of public service, he felt the obliga- 
tions which it imposed, and to that patriotism which was born 
in the descendant of men who had done so much to found and 
preserve this nation was added the consciousness of what was 
due from the members of his family. "Noblesse oblige " 
was to him an article of faith, and he held his time and his 
powers in trust for the work which his hand found to do. He 
was always ready to answer any call of public duty, and what- 
ever he did was done thoroughly and well. With his great 
abilities, his deep interest in public affairs, his marked quali- 
fications for leadership, he would naturally have been called 
to high office, but the conditions which confronted him made 
this impossible. He was incapable of serving a party, or of 
conforming his opinions and actions to the demands of a 
political committee and the assumed exigencies of a campaign. 
He was as nearly independent in thought and act as the lot 
of humanity permits, prompt to say what he thought the situa- 
tion demanded — to lead in forming public opinion, but never 
fearing or even considering the consequences to himself. He 
was content to use the best that was in him for the common 
good, but his ambition was to serve, not to win reward. He 
was not indifferent to public opinion. Every man who aims 
at a mark cares whether his arrow pierces the bull's eye, but 
when he spoke it was to secure some public end and not ap- 


plause for himself. I cannot recall in thirty years of friendship 
a single word to indicate that the thought of office or of 
popular recognition was in his mind. Certainly never by act or 
hint did he take any step toward securing either. The 
honors which he received came to him unsought. 

His moral standards were the highest, and he was true to them 
in practice, for he could not be otherwise. He was by nature 
absolutely frank, brave and sincere. Indirection and evasion 
were to him as impossible as it would be for one to speak a 
language which he had never learned. With high courage, 
with earnest purpose and with the conscience of New Eng- 
land he worked throughout his life, and there are few men 
of such varied activities of whom it can be said, as it must 
be said of him, that even an enemy can find no stain upon 
his record. 

He was fond of society and had a very wide acquaintance. 
His conversation was stimulating, and an evening with him 
sent one home with food for better thought. His opinions 
were positive and often expressed positively, but no one had 
less pride of opinion. His mind was open, and when the truth 
was made manifest, he was always willing to admit that he was 
wrong, not reluctantly but cheerfully, and often of his own 
motion without his opponent's challenge. 

His nature was affectionate and warm-hearted. He was most 
considerate of others, and his manner, which is sometimes 
mentioned, was not a weapon of offence, but, as is often the case, 
was defensive armor. He was essentially modest and some- 
what shy, which he lamented and resented. What seemed like 
brusqueness was in fact the result of an effort to overcome 
what he felt to be a weakness and to assert his control of 
himself. I knew him well enough to say that he was never 
intentionally rude or disagreeable to anyone save in those 
cases, common to the experience of us all when indignation, 
just or unjust, overcomes our self-restraint. Nothing could 
be further from his purpose than to wound or slight anyone 

He was not only a generous and loyal friend but a very 
tolerant opponent. Sharply as he might condemn the acts 
of a public man, perhaps even where he could not but distrust 
his motives, he cherished no rancor, and never allowed a dif- 


ference of opinion to affect his personal relations. His judg- 
ments of others were singularly charitable. 

Fortunate in his birth and in all the circumstances and rela- 
tions of his life, he was fortunate also in his death, for it found 
him with his natural force still unabated, and he never knew 
long suffering or slow decay. While he lived he was true to 
the high ideals which he inherited, and he leaves behind him a 
name and a record of achievement which must be an inspira- 
tion to his descendants and to all who like him would uphold 
the best traditions of New England. 

Tribute of Major Higginson. 

Dear old Charles Adams — how we miss him, for he gave 
us interest, amusement, knowledge and affection, and was one 
of the chief blessings of life — a true, warm friend whom we 
loved for his faults and for his virtues. 

I cannot tell when we first knew each other, but it was fully 
seventy years ago, and we have gone on happily from that 
day to this. In college we met familiarly but not very much, 
as my term there was short. Charles was earnest and, at the 
same time, running over with fun, searching then as afterwards 
for what he could do, what life meant, what he could get out 
of it. I fancy he was a fair scholar, and know that he learned 
much from books and from his clever companions. Presently 
he studied law at the law school, and passed some time in the 
office of Mr. Rufus Choate. While there, young Rufus Choate, 
a schoolmate of ours, asked Charles one day about another 
classmate of ours in the same office: "What sort of a chap is 
so and so?" "Well," said Charles, "I'll bet you a dollar that 
he has a key to your father's safe." 

When the Civil War came in 186 1 some of us marched in 
the Second Massachusetts Infantry, and in the fall of that 
year Charles was commissioned first lieutenant of the First 
Massachusetts Cavalry. I had been commissioned captain 
(as a six months' veteran) in that regiment, so we saw much 
of each other. We old companions were under severe West 
Pointers and were learning from them our army manners, so 
we observed with care the lines between one rank and another, 
and no longer used our first names in intercourse. Charles 


was a good officer, and presently was promoted to a captaincy. 
A little incident in our army life is worth telling. 

Late one Sunday our brigade was coming in from a recon- 
noissance, and had almost reached camp. Nearby was a 
stream where we often watered our horses. Just before 
reaching this stream we passed through the encampment of 
the United States Regulars, a division of troops under Colonel 
Buchanan. Charles's company was in my battalion, and we 
were riding together side by side, when he said to me: "I 
should much like to see Colonel Buchanan for a moment, as 
he is a relative of mine. May I go?" "Yes," said I, "but be 
sure to reach the river before your company, as you should 
see your men watering their horses." He went. The com- 
panies moved on in turn, and his company was watering as 
he rode down the hill. Colonel Sargent saw him and said to 
me: "Where has Captain Adams been?" I told him, and 
added that he had gone with my leave. Colonel Sargent said: 
"Put him under arrest. He should have been here." I re- 
plied: "Colonel, I gave him leave and am the one to blame if 
anybody," to which Colonel Sargent answered: "Never mind, 
put him under arrest. It will do him good," and he was put 
under arrest for a week — the limited time, unless an officer is 
to be court-martialed. Charles was very angry, but had to 
submit. He never forgot it. 

He did his duty well, took excellent care of his men, as an 
officer is bound to do, and had the bad luck to see them badly 
used up on several occasions. When the campaign of 1864 
began, Charles, by good luck, was ordered with his squadron 
to the headquarters of the Army of the Potomac as escort to 
General Meade, and thenceforth had pleasant service almost 
to the end of the war. In the last months of the war he was 
transferred to the Fifth Massachusetts Cavalry (colored regi- 
ment) and rode into Richmond as colonel at the head of his 

Many men enjoyed regimental service and were especially 
fitted for it. I doubt if Captain Adams did enjoy it, although 
he would have enjoyed staff duty. Just at the close of the 
war he was offered by General Humphreys an excellent posi- 
tion, but, for good reasons, declined it; so Colonel Thomas 
Livermore took it and served admirably. 


By the way, here is a little yarn : In the last days of the war 
a deserter from a Confederate regiment came in and was ques- 
tioned by Colonel Adams: " Why did you come in?" "Well, 
me and the lieutenant was all there was left of the regiment, 
and yesterday he was killed, so I thought I might as well come 

Later Colonel Adams was brevetted Brigadier-General, as 
many officers were at the end of the war. Then he came home 
looking for an occupation, took up the study of railroads, and 
was at the head of the first railroad commission of our state, 
which was, I believe, the first railroad commission in the 
United States. This led him into various investments in real 
estate in the West, and presently he, with Colonel Morse and 
others, established the Kansas City stockyards. It was an 
excellent scheme, well carried out by these men. At about 
this time he wrote the Chapters on Erie, and interested 
himself much in the astonishing tricks of Gould and Jim 
Fiske. As you remember, Charles's pen was pretty sharp. 

Later he was chosen president of the Union Pacific Rail- 
road, worked hard over the task, and after a few years left it 
to more experienced men. He was not fitted by training or 
temperament for a railroad operator, and no doubt he was 
glad to be free again and to choose his own method of life. 

As you know, Charles had always been greatly interested 
in New England history, and, having a very vigorous, excel- 
lent pen, he took up the study more carefully, and has written 
many excellent papers about it. He never minced matters, 
said what he thought at the time, reconsidered it and changed 
his words; reconsidered it again, and changed his words again. 
He was an Adams all through, but never hesitated about say- 
ing anything, and often was rough and at times emphatic in 
his expressions; but they were always strong and hearty and 
at the time meant what he said. But he was always open to 
conviction and ready to change his mind, and would freely 
say: "I was wrong. I mean something else." 

Charles was a member of an army club of men, many of 
whom were brilliant and all of whom had been good soldiers, 
and he was "hale fellow well met" with them all and with 
many other men. As a friend, nobody could be more staunch, 
true, warm-hearted. It was rarely that he said anything warm, 


but when he did speak to friends, they felt it all through. We 
were aware that he would do anything he could to help us, 
and we were very glad to do anything we could to help him. 
He was possessed of rare mental courage, keenness, power of 
expression, faithfulness to the truth, rare industry, restless 
energy. He was always searching for the meaning of things 
and the real nature of men. Last summer, meeting him just 
after the war broke out, I said: " Charles, what do you think 
of it?" Said he: "I always thought the German Emperor 
was a humbug, and now we are going to see whether it is true." 
He was always a hard hitter and hated "do-nothings" and 
" shirks." One of our men, who was a miserable soldier, had 
always taken care of his hide and stolen oats for his horse 
while in the service, and then lived in a soldiers' home, went 
to see Charles some ten years ago. He had been in to see me 
a few months before and asked for some money. I said to 
him: "Meyer, where did you come from?" He said: "Oh, I 
came up on the boat from the Soldiers' Home." "Did you 
get drunk last night? " " No, sir; no, sir, but we was convivial." 
On a very cold day he went to see Charles and asked him for 
money. Charles refused him, whereupon the man folded his 
arms and said: "Captain Adams, some cold morning I shall 
be found frozen stiff in the street." "Well," said Charles, 
with an oath, "I hope you will. That is all you are good for." 
Charles Adams was very good-tempered and very kindly, 
and often as rough as the bark of a tree, but sterling — ster- 
ling in life, in friendship, in his expressions and in his work. 
His earnestness, his indefatigable power of work, his devotion, 
his truth, his racy language by voice and pen have left us 
valuable fruits and showed him to be a true descendant of a 
very strong, honest family, to which our country owes very 
much. He always felt the impulse of blood, and he thought 
of large things. To his last days he was fully himself — and 
I may end by saying: "Dear old Charles — how we loved him 
for his faults and his virtues, and how we shall miss him!" 

Tribute of Mr. Charles C. Smith. 

As he reviewed the course of his life, Francis Bacon wrote, 
"For my name and memory, I leave it to men's charitable 


speeches, to foreign nations, and to the next ages." This 
detachment from time and place is not less necessary in look- 
ing at a complex and many-sided personality like that of our 
late President. We are much too near to see it in the white 
light in which alone it should be viewed. Our associates who 
have spoken so well and so truly this afternoon have, each and 
all of them, given expression to the picture as it impressed itself 
on their minds. What they have said or written needs to be 
correlated before we can see Mr. Adams just as he was. That 
must come later, even if the traits which seem so clear and 
sharply drawn now are a little blurred by the lapse of time. 

I shall make no attempt to combine them, but shall only 
try to give my personal recollection of some incidents in his 
connection with this Society which may add a little to what 
others have recalled. Mr. Adams was elected a member at 
the annual meeting in 1875, an d at his death his name was 
the fifth on the list of Resident Members. At first he did 
not take an active part in the work of the Society, and his 
first communication was not made until June, 1878. Early 
in the following year he prepared for the printed Proceedings 
a very just and appreciative tribute to the Hon. Richard 
Frothingham. From that time forward, for more than a gen- 
eration he was identified with this Society. Though his name 
does not appear in the Index to the printed Proceedings of 
1877, he was present and took part in the discussions at the 
special meeting in January of that year, on the question of 
enlarging the membership. There was a sharp difference of 
opinion among the members, and at the end it was agreed 
that only a slight reference to the meeting should be printed, 
and that the carefully prepared arguments which had been 
read should not be preserved. Almost twenty years afterward 
Mr. Adams gave here some reminiscences of the meeting; 
but he omitted to recall an amusing remark which he made in 
the course of his extemporaneous speech — that when he 
was elected he was a wholly unsuitable person for membership, 
and that he wished to keep out of the Society just such persons 
as he was. And he did not refer to the most dramatic incident 
of the occasion. The meeting was held in the Dowse Library in 
the old Tremont Street building, and the elder Charles Francis 
Adams sat behind the table quite near to the President. His 


son sat near the door and directly opposite to him. When 
the vote was called for, the father rose and voted in favor of 
an enlarged membership. When the nays were asked to rise 
and be counted, the son rose, and, facing his father, voted against 
it. The nays had an ovenvhelming majority, and the question 
has never been raised since that time. 

Mr. Adams was a member of the executive committee of 
the Council from 1882 to 1885. In the first year of his service 
he was appointed with Mr. Deane, then, and down to his 
deeply lamented death in 1889, our most prominent and de- 
voted member, to publish an Index to the first series of the 
Proceedings. He took a strong personal interest in the matter, 
made important suggestions, and the work was a thoroughly 
satisfactory performance, on which the Society may well con- 
gratulate itself. 

When Mr. Winthrop announced his purpose to decline a re- 
election to the Presidency after thirty years of brilliant and 
fruitful service, all the members recognized the fact that, 
whoever might be selected as his successor, the Society must 
suffer a loss of prestige by the retirement of so dignified and 
graceful a presiding officer. In this embarrassing situation 
Mr. Adams invited eight or ten of the active working members 
to dine with him at the house in which he was then living at the 
corner of Fairfield Street and Commonwealth Avenue, to con- 
sider what it was on the whole best to do. Of that company, 
I am the sole survivor. All the others — Mr. Deane, Mr. 
Winsor, Judge Chamberlain, the younger Abbott Lawrence, 
Samuel C. Cobb, William W. Greenough, Clement Hugh Hill, 
and the rest — have passed away. After Mrs. Adams had left 
the table there was a very full and frank discussion, in which 
every one present took part, and which lasted until nearly 
midnight. The result of it all was a unanimous agreement 
to recommend the nomination of Dr. Ellis to fill the vacancy. 
The subsequent history of the Society amply vindicated the 
wisdom of this decision. 

In 1889 the Society adopted the policy of employing a salaried 
editor, mainly through the efforts of Mr. Winsor, Mr. R. C. 
Winthrop, Jr., supported by his father, and Mr. Deane, then 
in failing health, as the outcome of a report made by Mr. 
William Everett to the Council some years before. As I was 


in Europe all that summer I do not know whether Mr. Adams 
was consulted in the matter, but subsequently he expressed 
his hearty approval of the policy, and firmly upheld the hands 
of the editor. And when a vacancy occurred in the office he 
gave much time and thought to filling it. 

On the death of Mr. Deane, Mr. Adams was elected his 
successor as a Vice-President. "You will be surprised/' said 
Mr. R. C. Winthrop, Jr., to one of the active members, "to 
hear who is the person I have recommended as Mr. Deane's 
successor, to become our future President — Mr. Adams." 
It was a wise recommendation, and was promptly ratified by 
the nominating committee at the next annual meeting. Five 
years later he was elected President. More than a third of the 
members on our resident list have been elected since that time, 
but all have had opportunity to witness his devotion to the 
interests of the Society and his eminent fitness for the office 
to which he had been elected. 

Almost immediately after his election to the Presidency it 
became evident that the Society would have to face a financial 
crisis as the result of the completion of the new courthouse in 
Pemberton Square and the consequent loss of income from the 
part of the Tremont Street building used by the Probate Court 
and the Registry of Deeds. It was not less evident that the 
Society must sell that building and seek a new home in some 
other locality where land was not of so great value. The 
protracted negotiations for a sale to the city of Boston were 
conducted from the first by Mr. Adams alone, and of a 
characteristic interview with one of the mayors of that time, 
he once gave a very humorous account. The interview was 
creditable to both the mayor and Mr. Adams, but cannot be 
described here. In the search for a new site he at first carried 
on the inquiry alone, and afterward called in the assistance of a 
committee to give a final judgment on the fitness of the location. 
They first visited with him the corner of Beacon Street and 
Massachusetts Avenue, where the Hotel Cambridge now stands, 
and then went to the lot at the corner of Commonwealth and 
Massachusetts Avenues, which is still vacant. Neither lot 
commended itself to the committee, who then went with him 
to the corner where this building stands. "Here, gentlemen," 
he said, "is what I think we want." In this opinion the com- 




rnittee at once fully and readily concurred. The purchase was 
accordingly made, and after some unexpected and annoying 
difficulties had been adjusted in Mr. Adams' absence, the 
various transactions were brought to a satisfactory close. 
In the Treasurer's report, dated March 31, 1907, is a brief 
account of what was a substantial money contribution on the 
part of Mr. Adams toward the completion of the new building. 

Only one other incident need be mentioned here. Mr. 
Adams had had much at heart the preparation of memorial 
editions of Bradford's History and Winthrop's Journal, based 
on the editions edited by Mr. Deane and Mr. Savage respec- 
tively. There was a wide difference in opinion among the 
members of the Society as to the expediency of undertaking 
the proposed publication, and the matter was rather warmly 
discussed in private and at meetings held in 1898 in the room 
of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in the Boston 
Athenaeum. Mr. Adams and Mr. R. C. Winthrop, Jr., took the 
leading part on opposite sides. Finally in November of that 
year the Council, in a report prepared by Mr. Adams himself, 
recommended that "the scheme so proposed be allowed to 
remain in abeyance until some future day when there is reason 
to believe it may be taken up on a basis which shall command 
practically unanimous assent and general cooperation. " 
The report was accepted by a unanimous vote, and there 
the matter rested. It was not until November, 191 2, that Mr. 
Adams saw the first part of his plan carried out by the publica- 
tion of Mr. Ford's edition of Bradford's History, and he looked 
forward to the publication of Winthrop's Journal before his 
term of office as President should expire. 

Mr. Adams' other and perhaps more conspicuous services to 
this Society are known to nearly all here, and it would be super- 
fluous to enumerate them in these recollections. It is enough 
to say that down to his last appearance in this room, a month 
ago, he carried on the golden era of Mr. Winthrop's adminis- 
tration with no diminution of its brilliancy and its fruitfulness. 
To those of us officially connected with him here he has left 
only appreciative and gracious memories. 

iqt5-} charles francis adams. 403 

Tribute of Mr. Lord. 

It is a significant and striking fact that in the twenty years 
which have passed since the election of Mr. Adams to the 
presidency of this Society in 1895, more than three-fourths of 
the members of that day have died, and of those members 
who took part in the April meeting of that year, or as candi- 
dates for office received the ballots of their associates, three 
alone survive. His election marked a new era in the progress 
and development of this Society. 

He found the Society in its somewhat narrow and contracted 
quarters in the old building on Tremont Street. Its collec- 
tions, as the council of that day reported, were kept " where 
they are not available for public exhibition and not even con- 
veniently accessible to members of the Society." It was Mr. 
Adams who carried through, to the great advantage of the 
Society, the difficult and protracted negotiations with the city 
of Boston which resulted in the sale of the Tremont Street 
building and made possible the purchase of another lot. The 
selection of the present site is mainly due to his foresight 
and determination. When this lot was purchased and it 
became evident that adjacent land upon the Fenway was 
necessary for the additional security and convenience of 
the building, Mr. Adams, unaided, acquired the title to the 
property, conveyed it to the Society, sold the parcel on the 
Boylston Street extension, and as a free gift to the Society 
assumed the difference between the purchase price of the one 
lot and the selling price of the other, and the interest on the 
original purchase for the term of six years. I refer to this 
gift because it meant something more than merely its money 

In the number, extent and variety of his communications 
I believe he has been surpassed by no other member since the 
first meeting of the Society in 1791. During his term of serv- 
ice the investments of the Society have increased in value 
from $103,000 to $510,000 and the increase in the number and 
value of its collections and in the number of the volumes in 
its library has not been equalled in any twenty years of its 

Si monumentum requiris, circumspice. 


Deeply interested in the financial affairs of the Society, he 
did not content himself with merely giving advice as to in- 
vestments, but whenever he advised an investment he did 
what no other president in my experience in other societies 
has ever done — he gave with his advice a full and complete 
guarantee in writing of the security of the investment, to 
the end that in no event the Society should suffer any loss 
through him. It is worthy of notice that no investment 
which he recommended has defaulted, either in interest or 

His views of the obligations and duties of the Society, which 
he so often expressed with vigor and originality, were broad 
and comprehensive. Familiar with its history and traditions, 
not content only to go forward along the well-defined paths of 
the past, he early began to impress upon the Society the im- 
portance of entering upon new fields of activity, and through 
his efforts primarily the Society assumed the responsibility 
of the publication of the final and definitive editions of Brad- 
ford and Winthrop, and to him, more than to any other, is 
due the fact that we see upon our shelves to-day that edition 
of Bradford whose publication he so strongly urged, and will 
see in the near future that edition of Winthrop which he would 
have so deeply rejoiced to see completed. To the work of the 
Society he brought the influence of an historic name, a ripe 
scholarship, a keen and enduring interest, an extraordinary 
virility and generous and ever increasing contributions of 
time and thought and effort. His life and labors here 
are a happy illustration of the motto on our seal — Sic vos 
non vobis. It was for the Society he ever labored and not for 

Familiar then with its traditions and history, proud of its 
past, confident of its present, hopeful of its future, the name 
of this Society he so dearly loved was written in his heart. 
And to-day, looking back over the twenty years of his presi- 
dency, it may as truly be said of him as he said of his distin- 
guished predecessor, Mr. Winthrop, that "He has ever carried 
the Society with him, at home and abroad, and it is needless 
to add that nowhere has it failed to be adequately represented." 

To enjoy his friendship was a high privilege; to cherish his 
memory is a grateful duty. 

i9 i 5 .] charles francis adams. 405 

Tribute of Mr. Thayer. 

I should like to speak of my personal relations with Mr. 
Adams, to recall how, through his unfailing interest in Harvard, 
and his readiness to serve any cause which appealed to him, 
he came to give his powerful support to the project for founding 
the Harvard Union and to the Harvard Graduates' Magazine; 
and then I should like to record my gratitude for the unal- 
tering kindness, and, if I may say so, friendship, which he 
showed me during many years. 

But in this Society, where he was just completing the for- 
tieth year of his membership, and in this building which we 
owe to his energy and foresight, and in this room where he 
has so long presided over our meetings, it seems more fitting 
to speak of his work in behalf of historical studies. 

A good while ago I ventured to call him our Charles Martel — ■ 
Charles the Hammer — and he did not object. And in truth 
it was with a hammer that he performed his most characteristic 
service to history and politics not less than to social prob- 
lems. He broke up the thick, hard crust of tradition and the 
petrifying shell of convention, not because he delighted in 
wanton destruction, but because he wished to see whether 
what was inside was really alive or not, whether it was still 
or had ever been true; and being well read in the Bible, he 
remembered that, if the rock be smitten aright, living water 
will gush from it. 

How many crusts his hammer smote! Not to mention the 
blows he gave in political campaigns, there were his assault 
on Greek, the College Fetich; his contention that it would 
have been better if the discovery of America had been post- 
poned till 1630, when the Spaniards could have had no hand in 
it; his plea for erecting a statue to Lee in the National 
Capital; his justification of States' Rights; his criticism of 
Washington's generalship; his trenchant argument against 
the account of the battles by Herodotus of Marathon and 

Whether you agreed with his opinions or not mattered as 
little as whether dispassionate historians would eventually 
ratify his verdicts on facts; but what did matter, what was of 
paramount importance, was the fact that he broke the accepted 


traditions and caused us all to think, thereby retarding that 
fossilizing process which threatens us all. Erudition is opin- 
ionated, but it is also timid: for Mr. Adams even the smiles of 
doubting pedantry had no terrors. 

Others will praise Mr. Adams' positive contributions to 
history. I speak rather of his attitude. He used his hammer 
to let in light and air and truth — to break up the quartz 
and reveal the precious ore — a most necessary work and a 
noble one! 

Tribute of Mr. Stanwood. 

My acquaintance with Mr. Adams dates back beyond the 
time when he became a member of this Society. During the 
long and fierce struggle between the advocates of "hard" 
money and "soft" money, which began in 1867, v/ith the 
declaration of General Butler in favor of paying the 5-20S 
with greenbacks, and which ended as to one branch of the 
controversy in 1879, with the resumption of specie payments, 
I was an associate editor of the Boston Daily Advertiser under 
Charles F. Dunbar and Delano A. Goddard, both former 
members of this Society. Mr. Goddard entrusted to me the 
entire conduct of the paper on the currency question. After 
the veto of the inflation bill by General Grant, in 1874, the 
hard money men took heart and began to agitate actively for 
a resumption of specie payments — the redemption of the 
greenbacks in coin. Many men of great prominence took 
part in the discussion on one side or the other. Plans in as- 
tonishing variety were proposed, ranging from Greeley's 
simple — simple in more than one sense — " the way to resume 
is to resume," to elaborate preparations and ingenious devices 
to avert possible failure. At that time Mr. Adams was asked 
by some institution — perhaps the Young Men's Christian 
Association — to present his views; and having prepared a 
paper he did me the honor to invite me to call upon him at his 
office in Pemberton Square to hear it and give him my opinion. 
I did so. It is not necessary to describe the plan for resumption 
which he proposed, even if I could remember what it was, 
nor the criticism, if any, which I made. But I tell the story 
because in the introduction of his paper he spoke slightingly, 
even contemptuously, of the plans that had been brought 


forward by other hard money men — men who had been in 
the thick of the fight long before he entered it. I did criticise 
that, and suggested that it was not good policy to attack 
generally those who were on the same side with himself and 
as earnest as he. He replied that he had done so deliberately, 
on the principle that if one wishes people to listen to him the 
surest way is to pitch into them. 

It has seemed to me that he has steadily acted on that prin- 
ciple, which involved absolutely independent judgment on 
every question to which he addressed himself, blunt frank- 
ness in expressing his opinion and indifference to adverse 
judgments. We all remember — to cite but one example — 
the almost irreverent way in which he treated Longfellow, and 
his "Ride of Paul Revere." He always did desire to be listened 
to, and if his method of securing attention differed from the 
ordinary mode, it was assuredly successful. Moreover, al- 
though it required him at times to pitch into friends, and to 
blaspheme great reputations, it probably did not earn for 
him a single enemy. 

During the last few years I have necessarily been closely 
associated with him in matters connected with the Society 
and have been impressed profoundly by his earnest and un- 
ceasing watchfulness over everything concerning it — what- 
ever would maintain its standing or contribute to its efficiency. 
In several cases where I have addressed him on subjects relat- 
ing to the general policy or the administration of the Society, 
his reception of my suggestions has been uniformly courteous 
and sympathetic; and his death leaves in my memory none 
but the sweetest associations. 

Tribute of Mr. Sanborn. 

The career of our late President was long and varied, and 
extended over a field both intellectual and practical, with 
alternating succession of serious affairs and laborious re- 
searches. But to-day I confine myself to the aspect in which 
we, his brother members of this ancient Society, viewed Mr. 
Adams as our President. On another occasion I have esti- 
mated him in his ancestral relations — a connection unavoidable 
in the Adams family. For each generation had there to be 


considered in regard to its ancestors, who had not only trans- 
mitted inherited tendencies, but a kind of family policy, in 
a manner obligatory on each descendant. Leaving that aside 
for this occasion, I wish to speak of the great effect wrought 
by this Mr. Adams on coming to this presidency, after a long 
succession of gentlemen very differently related to the noble 
art of history. Mr. Savage, Mr. Winthrop and Mr. Ellis were 
variously endowed and trained in that art; but in one point 
they were wonderfully alike: they looked on historical studies 
as a fortress, to be held with the strong hand against thinkers 
and writers whom they regarded as the children of Israel 
viewed the stiff-necked and uncircumcised Gentiles they had 
expelled from the goodly land of Canaan. Such thinkers were 
outside, and were to be kept there. Few or none of the com- 
paratively impartial historians, rising up in Massachusetts or 
New England, were members of this Society when I first heard 
of its existence and activity. Its members had taken their 
ply and understood their cue; a certain turn of thought or 
habit of judging, and a peculiar tone of expression, marked 
them as within the allowable degrees of affinity. To admit 
heretics must have appeared to them as heinous as to marry 
your grandmother, which used to be forbidden in the last 
page of every school Testament. Occasionally one slipped in 
as being, like Rev. James Freeman Clarke, the grandson of a 
Revolutionary officer. But when that calamity happened, and 
was discovered, the offender, if he had the feelings of a gentle- 
man, did his best to conform to the prevailing fashion, and 
began to do penance for his former sin — the lack of parti- 
ality. At the election of Mr. Adams to our presidency all 
this gradually changed. Wrath and partiality had not quite 
ceased to be virtues in his eyes, but he admitted there might 
be different forms of partiality, even in the same family; as 
the French say, il V await constate. Consequently, the long- 
barred doors were thrown open, and the access denied to 
Emerson for years — to Dr. Howe forever, to Theodore 
Parker, Elizur Wright, Wendell Phillips, and for almost as long 
as to Emerson, to Edmund Quincy — was freely granted to 
Colonel Higginson, to Monroe and Clement, radical journalists, 
to Mead, Rantoul, Sanborn and to others who by the old 
rule would have been excluded. This was the general result 


of the presidency of Mr. Adams; not that these new persons 
agreed with him in opinion at all points, but because he under- 
stood how to get history written. Clio, the Muse of History, 
is by definition a listener; that is her function, and she must 
not have one ear stopped up by any whim of personal dislike or 
personal favor. She must hear what all have to say; but she 
seems to have herself a preference for historians who find 
fault with their age and country. The best ones have usually 
done so, and the conspicuous single instance, up to the present 
world war, is Tacitus, as a writer in the London Nation has 
lately pointed out. At any rate, it is by the statement and 
comparison of alleged facts and motives that all good history 
is finally produced. What fear would hide, wrath cover up 
with invective, partiality screen from inquiry and superficial 
rhetoric would ignore, must all be taken into account by the 
historian. For opening this one limited arena to all persons, 
as occasion serves, we are indebted to the second Charles 
Francis Adams. And he showed us by his persistent example 
how the grain of history is threshed out by the flail of con- 
flicting opinion. 

Tribute of Mr. Rhodes. 1 

No one but a many-sided man like Mr. Adams himself 
could do justice to his many and various activities. A true 
appreciation of him must come from a consolidation of a number 
of papers, each written by a man who knew him in a particular 
phase. So it falls to me to say something of his work in history 
and literature; and I may further specialize by confining my- 
self pretty closely to his labor on the Civil War period. 

No one need hesitate to pronounce Charles Francis Adams 
a great historical writer. He had the power of investigation. 
He knew the materials of his subject and that the truth could 
not be arrived at without dry-as-dust plodding, and this he was 
willing to undergo. As he advanced in years and felt his rare 
power of generalization and presentation, he appreciated that 
he must have help in compassing the drudgery, and he had at 
hand efficient aid. Mr. Worthington C. Ford, coming to 
Boston to take the position of editor of the Massachusetts 

1 The tributes of Mr. Rhodes, Mr. Seaver and Mr. Ford were, on account 
of the lateness of the hour, not read. 


Historical Society, proved a worthy assistant, helping Adams 
personally when leisure served and developing a system of 
search and aid of great value. This systematic work may be 
perceived in Adams' later printed articles, and, had not he 
come to an untimely end, would have shown itself in the 
thorough biography of his father, on which he was engaged. 
American history has suffered a great loss in that he did not 
live to complete his father's life, in which the story of our 
diplomacy in connection with Great Britain during the Civil 
War would have been exhaustively related. No one could do 
it so well as he could have done it, and no one after him can 
live in the atmosphere of the Civil War as he did when he 
immersed himself in the subject. 

It is the essence of the profession that most writers die 
leaving unfinished important tasks. Nevertheless, Mr. Adams 
has left enough for his enduring reputation. The biography 
of his father in the American Statesmen Series, a volume of 
402 pages, is a literary and historical jewel. From May 1, 
1861 (on page 147), when Charles Francis Adams started for 
England, the book may be read at one long sitting, and I 
know no novel that is more interesting. But it is a history 
dealing with facts and a history the proportions of which are 
perfect. I do not envy the American who can read the chapter 
"A Bout with the Premier" without a feeling of satisfaction 
that our Yankee diplomat got the better of the trained and 
experienced Palmerston, and that our Yankee preserved his 
dignity and felt all through the troubled episode that he was 
guarding his country's honor as well as his own. Adams 
exhibits true historical eloquence in telling the story how more 
than once Great Britain was on the eve of acknowledging the 
Southern Confederacy and how strongly Southern was the 
sentiment of the English higher and governing classes. One 
can never weary of reading his chapter on the Emancipation 
Proclamation, "one of the great events of the century," he 
terms it; and he presents the unsympathetic comments of 
the leading London journals in a forcible manner. 

Mr. Adams possessed in an eminent degree the quality of 
historic divination. When time failed him to go through much 
of the vast material that confronts every student of modern 
American history, he had often the faculty of arriving at cor- 


rect conclusions. This was partly due to his clear appreciation, 
his brushing away extraneous considerations and with Greek 
precision going straight at his mark. Joined to these neces- 
sary qualities of a historian, he possessed a pungent, attractive 
style. He was, in short, a literary artist. This is shown in 
the biography of his father, and also in the life of Richard H. 
Dana. Dana, a master of the art of narration, left a diary and 
many private letters, and, whenever possible, Mr. Adams 
let him tell his own story, joining the parts together by neces- 
sary comment: the result is a fascinating book. 

Mr. Adams' scientific handling of materials is signally 
shown in an essay, "The Treaty of Washington," published 
in the volume entitled Lee at Appomattox. Having the 
manuscript papers of Hamilton Fish at hand (though under 
restrictions as to their complete use), and studying well the 
accessible material, he gave as an introduction a brief account 
of Great Britain's breaches of neutrality during the Civil War. 
This he followed with a full story of the negotiation of the 
treaty of Washington. It is a masterly paper, that could not 
have been written without a thorough acquaintance with the 
subject and a basic knowledge of international law. Showing 
sympathetically Hamilton Fish's great service, the conclusion 
may be easily drawn that Fish was one of our great Secre- 
taries of State. 

The Saturday Evening Transcript' gave a list of eleven pub- 
lications of Mr. Adams, some of which were in two volumes. 
This is prodigious work by a busy man of multifarious activities. 
It was a remark of Bagehot that the men who know the most 
do not have time to write books. Mr. Adams was an exception. 
On his writing he brought to bear the effect of his wide inter- 
course with men of the world and his knowledge of society at 
home and in England. It is worth noting that the author 
who seems to have influenced him most is Shakespeare. 

Few writers have criticised England's attitude to the North 
during the Civil War more sharply than he; but Adams liked 
Englishmen and Englishmen liked him. It was a graceful 
invitation that Oxford University sent to him to deliver a course 
of lectures on American History. He responded to this with 
four lectures given during the Easter and Trinity terms of 
1913. These were published by the Clarendon Press under 


the title of Trans-Atlantic Historical Solidarity, his last pub- 
lished book. The University of Oxford honored itself and him 
by conferring upon him the degree of Doctor of Letters. 

Twenty years president of the Massachusetts Historical 
Society, his devotion to that Society was sublime. He was a 
wonderful presiding officer, at times effacing self, witty as the 
occasion served, positive in urging forward the proceedings, 
and always courteous. "We shall not look upon his like 
again." His own papers that he read to the Society from time 
to time were entertaining and valuable; he was an excellent 
reader in the way of making telling points and in the indul- 
gence of his native power of criticism. Perhaps we of the 
Society may be pardoned for recalling that his great predeces- 
sors, Herodotus and Tacitus, read orally their historical 
disquisitions. So far as I know, Mr. Adams' greatest achieve- 
ment in this line was during the meeting of the American 
Historical Association in Boston in 191 2, when he read a paper 
on the fight between the Constitution and the Guerriere. Even 
the dry record of the proceedings has it, "a stirring paper." 
It took the audience off its feet and I feel sure that if a cheer 
had been called for, the " peace men" would have joined in a 
hurrah for the American Navy. 1 

Mr. Adams honored me with his friendship. From his 
devotion to this Society and my interest in it, from sympa- 
thetic aims and tastes, we became as intimate as is possible for 
acquaintances made after middle age. Naturally I got more 
from him than he did from me. His companionship was 
educational and inspiring. He had a restless mind, vast in- 
telligence and an eager mental curiosity. There were doubtless 
subjects on which he could not talk, but I never found them. 
As I think of our railway rides, of our many dinners, of hours 
spent together in the country, I feel that I have lost a worthy 
schoolmaster, a man who was willing to impart to me his 
deep knowledge of the world. What made his conversation 
and small offhand speeches fascinating was the manner in 
which he turned matters over in his mind so that these were 
really the result of profound thinking. He loved to dine out, 
and was ever a welcome guest, for he had the idea that he 

1 To this point Mr. Rhodes' tribute appeared in the Boston Evening Trans- 
cript, March 23, 1915. 


must play his part to make the dinner thoughtful, pleasant or 
merry. As host without apparent effort he made you feel at 
ease by some timely jest or by touching upon something that 
was uppermost in your mind. He was not a cosmopolitan 
in the sense of knowing all Europe; but he knew this country, 
the West as well as the East, and also England. Fully Ameri- 
can in sentiment and English in manner, he disliked the tete 
a tete conversation into which most of our dinners drift. Let 
the talk be general, he said, talk to the centre of the table as 
do the French, "fire and fall back." His manner was brusque, 
but to those who knew him well, in no way repellent. His in- 
timate friends all agree that he had a kind heart; those less 
intimate could not mistake his many considerate acts. 

It so chanced that during the past five months I saw much of 
him, and though very sad on account of the European war he 
seemed especially kind. Meeting twice in New York we went 
on one occasion to a dinner of the American Academy of 
Arts and Letters at President Butler's house, and after dinner 
during the brilliant reception that followed I could not help 
thinking that Mr. Adams was fully as much the lion as Mon- 
sieur Brieux who had brought the greeting of the French 
Academy. Everyone wanted to see Mr. Adams, and I, so to 
speak his keeper, had difficulty in persuading him to return 
to our club at the proper hour for a man of seventy-nine. 
Twice we breakfasted together, and when two men take the 
morning meal in common their minds seem to expand. At 
all events Mr. Adams talked eloquently and his subject was 
the European war. Ascertaining that I was going to look at 
the Altman paintings, he stopped over a train and went with 
me to the Metropolitan Museum of Art. The visit showed me 
a phase of his culture I had not before seen. Familiar with the 
collection, he was an admirable cicerone and gave me an en- 
joyable hour. But he wanted to linger, the color fascinated 
him. I had wondered at his excellent remarks at different 
times in this Society on sculpture and painting, but I won- 
dered no longer, as I was that morning impressed with another 
trait which made for his refinement of soul. 


Mr. Rhodes read a letter from Viscount Bryce: 

Hindleap, Forest Row, Sussex, March 26, 1915. 

My dear Rhodes, — We are deeply grieved to hear of the de- 
parture of our friend, Charles Francis Adams, and wish to tell you 
and through you any of our common friends of the Massachusetts 
Historical Society, how sincerely we join in their sorrow for the 
common loss we have sustained in the death of the President of the 
Society, who was also an ornament of American letters. I had 
seen much of him in Washington, and have been corresponding with 
him since; and had become very much attached to him, admiring 
his unquenched interest in historical study, his love of truth, and 
the width of his intellectual range of vision. At the age I have 
reached, and which you will after a time approach, one feels a sensi- 
ble void when an old friend and ardent fellow student is taken 
away. Always sincerely yours, 


From Viscount Bryce to the Society. 

Hindleap, Forest Row, Sussex, April 16th, 1915. 

My dear Slr, — May I be permitted to express to you the deep 
sorrow which I feel, as doubtless do all the members of the Historical 
Society who were privileged to enjoy his friendship, at the death of 
our late President? Mr. Charles Francis Adams was an admirable 
representative of the characteristic qualities of the men of Massa- 
chusetts in his independence and uprightness, in the vigour of his 
thought and his power of forcibly expressing it. It was my good 
fortune to see a good deal of him in Washington in the years from 
1909 to 1 9 13 and since then to receive him as my guest here, and the 
better I knew him the more was I impressed by his sterling intellec- 
tual honesty and by the largeness of his views on historical questions. 
He was engaged while in England in collecting materials for a com- 
plete life of his distinguished father, which would have become in 
substance a history of the relations between the United States and 
Great Britain during the Civil War, and would have thrown some 
fresh light on the Civil War itself. I greatly fear he may not have 
been able to complete it. If this be so, the loss will be a grievous 
one, for the thoroughness of his knowledge was equalled only by 
his penetration and his judgment. We may all be proud to have 
had such a President, whose memory we can cherish with affection 
and respect. Believe me, Faithfully yours, 

James Bryce. 


From Sir Sidney Lee. 

108A, Lexham Gardens, Kensington, W. 

London, England, 26 March, 1915. 

Dear Mr. Ford, — I have read with very deep regret the an- 
nouncement of the death of Mr. Charles Francis Adams. As a 
corresponding member of the Massachusetts Historical Society — 
a distinction of which I am proud — I involuntarily turn my 
thoughts to the Society, and desire to express to you and to the 
other members of the Society my sense of the loss which the death 
of the President entails. In the two recent years, 1913 and 1914, it 
was my good fortune to see Mr. Adams pretty frequently in Lon- 
don, where you were his companion. I was deeply impressed and 
charmed by his social vivacity, and by the energetic zeal with 
which he was pursuing historical research. He bore his years so 
lightly that I never regarded him as an old man, and his literary 
work, which I studied closely as it was published in the Proceedings 
of the Massachusetts Society and elsewhere, bore marks of fresh- 
ness which one does not associate with age. 

I trust that the researches on which he was lately engaged had 
advanced sufficiently to make their publication possible. 

The latest letter which I received from him reached me at the 
beginning of this year, and I was much cheered by the heartiness 
of his sympathy with us all in England in the struggle in which we 
are engaged. I shall always cherish his memory with affectionate 

I shall be glad if you would communicate my sincere regret to 
members of Mr. Adams's family, as well as to the officers and mem- 
bers of the Massachusetts Historical Society. 

I am, with kind regards, Yours very truly, 

Sidney Lee. 

From Sir George Otto Trevelyan. 

Welcombe, Stratford on Avon, March 29, 1915. 

Dear Sir, — I have learned, with deep feeling, of the death of Mr. 
Charles Francis Adams. It has been my singular fortune — at a 
time of life when a man's intimate circle, generally speaking, be- 
gins to narrow — to have come into close relations with Americans 
whose friendship was a source to me of rare pride and pleasure. My 
intimacy, indeed, with Mr. Henry Adams goes back to the days of 
our early youth, when he was the secretary to his father in London 
during the famous years from 1861 onward; but my intimacy with 
your lamented President was an acquisition of much later date. 


I need not dwell upon the privilege of being on familiar terms with 
the representatives of such a family, and such a name; but I cannot 
forbear referring to the special attraction exercised over me by Mr. 
Charles Adams's living and ever-present interest in history, and 
(above all,) in military history. A brave and able soldier in critical 
times and scenes, he had the passionate love for whatever was bright 
and striking in the history of the past. Those feelings gave zest and 
purpose to all his movements. The first time that he visited us at 
our Northumberland home his central object was to inspect the 
field of Otterburn — a very different battle, (it may be said in pass- 
ing,) in its issue and circumstances from that which is idealized in 
the later ballad of Chevy Chase. On his next visit he devoted a 
long day to Flodden; and two years ago, when he stayed with us 
here in Warwickshire, I think he was more struck by the beautiful 
distant view of the point of the ridge, over which the Royal army on 
the 23d of October, 1642, descended to the battle of Edgehill, even 
than by the sight of Stratford spire, or the Charlecote deer-park. 

Of the extraordinary variety, acuteness of observation, and play 
of strong human feeling, that pervade his detached writings of late 
years, it is unnecessary to speak. I owe them much, and their ap- 
pearance was an unfailing cause of constant pleasure. But I cannot 
forbear to pay a humble tribute to the peculiar excellence of the 
short biography of his father, published in 1900. The charm of 
proportion — in all forms of art perhaps the most vital element — 
is there exemplified in a remarkable manner. The rapid, lucid, and 
vivid account of the first fifty years, which covers the first hundred 
pages; the more full and detailed narrative of the busy and eventful 
period when the great American envoy did so much to preserve our 
two nations from a desolating and dividing war; and the few solemn, 
quiet pages in which the evening of a long life is sketched — are what 
biography ought to be, and what biography in most cases is not. 
That book seems to me the product of a true historical faculty, en- 
livened and inspired by a filial and family consciousness which had 
nothing about it except what was noble, and thrice, and four times, 

Renewing once more my expression of heartfelt sorrow over our 
common loss, I remain, Yours very sincerely, 

George Otto Trevelyan. 

Tribute of Mr. Seaver. 

Mr. Adams was for many years actively interested in edu- 
cation, and his services in that field merit due recognition. 
His treatment of educational questions was always vigorous, 


often drastic.