TRANSACTIONS OF THE COLONIAL SOCIETY OF MASSACHUSETTS

DECEMBER MEETING, 1906

A Stated Meeting of the Society was held at No. 25 Beacon Street, Boston, on Thursday, 27 December, 1906, at three o’clock in the afternoon, the President, George Lyman Kittredge, LL.D., in the chair.

The Records of the Annual Meeting in November were read and approved.

The Corresponding Secretary reported that letters had been received from the Rev. Dr. Edward Everett Hale and Mr. Arthur Lord accepting Resident Membership.

Mr. Caleb Benjamin Tillinghast of Boston, and the Rev. Thomas Franklin Waters of Ipswich, were elected Resident Members.

The Treasurer reported that he had received one hundred dollars from Mr. Robert Hallowell Gardiner, a Corresponding Member; and on the motion of the Treasurer it was voted that the thanks of the Society be sent to Mr. Gardiner for his acceptable gift.

Mr. Henry H. Edes read the following —

MEMOIR OF DR. THOMAS YOUNG, 1731–1777.

A few weeks ago the Rev. William Ladd Ropes (H. C. 1816) put into my hands a letter written by Dr. Thomas Young in September, 1769. The letter is badly mutilated, parts of it having been destroyed by mice and dampness. With great difficulty the faded portions which remain have been deciphered, and both the original and the copy are now submitted to the Society.

This interesting and valuable paper belongs to the Trustees of the Andover Theological Seminary. It was received with a large collection of manuscripts from the representatives of the estate of the late Rev. Dr. Egbert Coffin Smyth, whose wife, born Elizabeth Bradford Dwight, was a descendant of Jonathan Edwards, through the Dwight branch of the family from which she inherited these documents. One or two passages in this letter suggest the probability that it was written to a clergyman; it was certainly addressed to a liberally educated man who lived at some distance from Boston, whose name was written at the bottom of the second page; but, unfortunately, this name has been almost obliterated. Who, then, was the receiver of this letter?

Miss Mary Woolsey Dwight, a sister of Mrs. Smyth, remembers that many years ago some ancient manuscripts, somewhat damaged, were found in the old residence of the Ellsworths in East Windsor, Connecticut, and added to the Edwards-Dwight collection of family papers. As Ann Edwards, born 28 April, 1699,1 a sister of Jonathan Edwards and daughter of the Rev. Timothy Edwards (H. C. 1691), long, the minister of the church at East Windsor, married in 17342 Captain John Ellsworth (1697–1784) of that town, this clue to the name of the recipient of Dr. Young’s letter was followed up with gratifying results.

While mice have destroyed almost the whole of the name of the person to whom this letter was addressed, enough remains to show that his surname undoubtedly began with the letter P, and that the second letter was either o or e. Investigation showed that the Rev. Thomas Potwine (Yale, 1751), born in Boston 3 October, 1731,3 was ordained 1 May, 1754, first minister of the Second or North Society in the locality called Scantic, now known as the First Congregational Society in East Windsor, and continued his ministrations till his death 15 November, 1802, at the age of 71.4 His daughter Elizabeth, born 24 March, 1768, married, in 1792, Captain Job Ellsworth (1765–1849) of East Windsor,5 a kinsman of Captain John Ellsworth, above mentioned.

It was also discovered that the Rev. Joseph Perry (H. C. 1752), born in Sherborn, Massachusetts, 15 August, 1731,6 and “distinguished for talents, learning and piety,” was ordained 11 June, 1755, as colleague of the Rev. Timothy Edwards (H. C. 1691),7 who soon after died, 27 January, 1758,8 leaving Mr. Perry sole pastor of his flock till his death, 21 April, 1783.9 He was chaplain of Colonel Erastus Wolcott’s State Regiment at Boston, January–March, 1776.10 Stiles says of Perry:

When the war of the American Revolution broke out he eagerly espoused its principles, and both in public and private threw the whole weight of his influence in favor of the patriot cause. Nay, more, for when the company from East Windsor marched to Boston early in 1776, this fearless pastor accompanied them.11

It thus appears, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Dr. Young’s letter was written either to the Rev. Thomas Potwine or to the Rev. Joseph Perry. The text of the letter follows.

LETTER OF DR. THOMAS YOUNG.

[Boston, September, 1769]

Dear Sir

When an ho [cler-]12 gyman writes me that he an my family are so also, and les remains my friend and servtly considering that ultra posse nemo ob of sense and hum [or] sends me half a sheet of good fine [paper writt]en over one side only and that in characters as large as treat, quod etiam crescit eundo. Almost every s you say, then Sir it is quite lucky the Comet ha[s been good] enough to visit us in such a dry season for diversion: however if the news brot by Cap^t William Nicols13 in a short passage from Cadiz [be true] that france spain and prussia had formed a strict alliance the objects of which were to overturn hanover, to put holland under the command of an absolute sovereign and then give law to Britain: if this I say be true you will for sometime have new matter enough to engage your speculation. For my own part could I find leisure there seem subjects yet remaining whereon I think I coud spend time agreeably, such as writing a new paraphase on the canticles or conjectures on the meaning of y^e time and times and half a time in which the prophesy is to be fulfilled. However these weighty undertakings with many of equal importance may be excused till the age of beads and prayer books, I being as yet no more than a man of this world, coud have read with a good share of pleasure a little history of your undertakings successes or disappointments; future prospects, observations and reflections on all these [four words erased]

I have put M^r. Mason’s14 letter in Cap^t Freeman’s bag who sails for London first fair wind.15 M^r Otis last Tuesday evening16 in the British Coffeehouse17 was insulted and set upon by Shanap Morgan alias John Robinson, and with the assistance of six or eight such scoundrels as himself almost murdered before any but one person ss M^r John Gridley18 coud interpose in his favor. M^r Otis has a large cut on the forehead and many bruises however is not dangerous.19 One of the Ruffians is taken and bound over the reforming Justice the hon.ble James Murray and M^r. John Mein being his sureties the night of the binding Murray was hiss’d by a thousand in Fanuel Hall20 Mein had signs at his bookstore and printing office21 so besmeared with dirt that they are taken down His business is pretty well over for North America and how he will like the thin repast of his native country is not mine to determine Shan is [word erased] [word erased] absconded:22 may he never again shew his dirty face in our horizon. The officers of the customs and army having for some time in a manner exclusively held the bar room of the British Coffeehouse since this fray it is intended to keep a moderate number of the friends of Liberty there every evening to convince them that no part [of the] Province (Meins Boo^k store [and] the Dens of the importers a[nd Customs Com]missioners only excepted) has been so perfectly be privileged walks of f citizens. I Doct^r Warren to[day] met one of the assassins of M^r Otis at the Coffeehouse [and] demanded satisfaction on his behalf. The fellow plead his being under bonds.

The Doctor said he had not adverted to that and then expected a compliance he declined all further conversation on of the moves of that party they seem to nts of this town are not so hypochondriacally careful dear persons as they conceived them at first view. putations of opposition at landing in the first place de with fear. Finding no such thing and setting it all to apprehensions elated them beyond measure. When they now [be]gin to find the reach of our policy and intrepidity of the indi[vi]duals they have had to deal with, it much diminishes the conceit of their omnipotence.

M^r Winthrop23 has had his telescope put in order to view the comet and provided he finds suitable intervals of good weather we hope he will give us some curious observations on so considerable a Phenomenon. I saw it two nights successively the latter was called up half after three in the morning, and carried 5 miles out of town so that I saw it till daylight: by what I cou’d conjecture from its celerity and direction it seems to fall perpendicular into the body of the sun However unassisted by instruments or perhaps much accuracy to use them this dogma is not expected to enter the essentials of your faith on these portentous bodies. A matter more immediately interesting to me is that Doct^r Warren now first in business in this town called upon [me] last night and says Sir I now wait upon you to signify my high satisfaction that your character interest and business rises fast in this town and I now assure you Sir that whatever may heretofore have happened I have now a real esteem of you and hearty friendship for you which I desire you may henceforth credit on the honor of a Gentleman. By this accession I am now as well settled respecting medical friendship as I can wish Doct^r Church24 having since your kind mediation continued as faithful and agreeable a friend as ever man was blest with. After having such a confounded parcel of trash from me you cannot in conscience stab me off next time with a of and then ‘add no more’ but lest you should, [and I] be always cheated by you

I add no more but remain

your affec, friend

and humble serv

Considering the prominent part Dr. Young took in public affairs during the years which immediately preceded the breaking out of hostilities and the early years of the Revolutionary War, it is remarkable that his name is not found in our biographical dictionaries. It is for this reason that I have attempted to gather, from widely scattered sources, the principal facts in his career.26

In the spring of 1729 a company of immigrants left Ireland for America under the leadership of Charles Clinton. The following extracts from a contemporary record which he kept are of interest:

A journal27 of my Voyage and Travels from the County of Longford in the Kingdom of Ireland to Pennsylvania in America, Anno Dom. 1729.

I took my journey from the County of Longford on Friday the 9th day of May: came to Dublin ye 12th ditto. Entered on shipboard the ship call’d the George and Ann y^e 18th. Sett sail the 20th. . .

Discovered land on ye Continent of America ye 4th day of October 1729.

A paper28 written by Dr. Young’s younger brother, Dr. Joseph Young,29 supplies many facts which had been long sought elsewhere in vain.

James Clinton, Esquire, who lived near Belfast, in the north of Ireland, had a sister named Margaret; and one son named Charles, and two daughters, viz: Christiana and Mary. Margaret, the sister of James, was married to my great-grandfather, John Parks, and had a son named John (who was the grandfather of Arthur Parks), and two daughters, Jane and Barbara. About the year 1700, the whole connexion removed to the county of Longford, and lived nearly continguous to each other near Edgeworthstown, where Jane Parks was married to my grandfather, John Young, and had [a son named John, and] a daughter, Mary; and my grand-aunt, Barbara Parks (sister to Jane and daughter of Margaret Clinton), was married to John Crawford30 and had three sons, viz: Matthew, Alexander and Joseph, and a daughter named Mary. After my grandfather John Young died, his widow (Jane) was married to Thomas Armstrong.31 They lived in this vicinity (Edgeworthstown) until sometime in the year 1727 or 1728, when the whole connexion growing more and more dissatisfied with the government, resolved to emigrate to the then colony of New York; and as if bound together by the indissoluble ties of consanguinity and friendship, the greatest number of those who had emigrated from the north, with some additional members, engaged a ship at Dublin, commanded by a Captain Rymer, and all paid their passage money there, and had the ship bound to them for the faithful performance of their agreement. They laid in a sufficient stock of provisions for an ordinary passage, but instead of a common passage he kept them at sea twenty-one weeks and three days. During the passage they one morning came in full sight of the coast of Virginia, which the boatswain, who was an old seaman, affirmed he knew perfectly well, as he had frequently been on that coast before, but the captain called him a lying, skulking dog, and immediately ordered to put the ship about and put off to sea; in consequence of this unequivocal disclosure of the captain’s intention to famish them all to death at sea, William Armstrong (my father’s half-brother) would have put him to death, had he not been forcibly restrained. Colonel Charles Clinton, who by his age and superior abilities, appears to have been the head or chief of the connexion, who had a better knowledge of the laws than the others, told them that unless the other officers belonging to the ship would join them, their rising forcibly against the captain would, upon trial, be adjudged piracy. But the spirits of the officers were so completely subdued by the tyrannical conduct of the captain, who had killed a man on board by striking him on the head with a pipe-stave, that they dare not join the passengers against him. In this shocking dilemma, the captain extorted from them a very considerable sum of money, as a bribe for landing them on any part of the coast. Soon after this agreement he landed them at Cape Cod.

For several days previous to their landing, their allowance had been a half biscuit, and half a pint of water for twenty-four hours. In consequence of this cruel treatment many of the passengers died, and amongst this number who perished with famine, was Thomas Armstrong. He was a very valuable man. His son William and his daughter Margery, shared the same fate. They arrived at Cape Cod in the fall, and remained there until spring, and then sailed for New Windsor in Ulster county, where Colonel Charles Clinton, Alexander Denniston, and my father, John Young,32 bought three farms adjoining each other,33 and lived in the greatest friendship and harmony; and called their neighborhood Little Britain.

The Cols, two sisters, Christina and Mary, lived some years contiguous to their brother and then removed to New York. Sometime in the year 1729 or ’30 my father married his cousin, Mary Craivford, daughter of Barbara and sister to Jane Parks. By this means the descendants of John Young have derived a double portion of Clinton blood, from their grandmothers, which they prize much more than to have been related to the assuming, family of Livingston. My father had four sons, to wit: Thomas, Joseph, John and Isaac; and three daughters, viz: Jane, Mary and Barbara. Thomas was born the 19th of Feby. 1731. He exhibited very early signs of a fertile genius, and surprizing memory. Our grandmother, Jane, was a good English scholar and learned us to read, and by the time Thomas was six years old he could read any English book correctly and fluently. As there were but few children in their new settlement, they had no schoolmaster. But my father, who was a tolerable arithmetician, undertook to teach him with the assistance of Cocker’s Arithmetic. My father found little more necessary than to explain the reasons of each operation, in the first questions in each of the first rules, when he took up the business himself and went through the book without any further instruction. This uncommon rapid progress in the acquisition of useful knowledge, by a person so young, excited the admiration of many. Sometime after Mr. John Wilson, a famous mathematician, opened a school about four miles distant, to which the young self-taught student was sent. The neighbors who knew the strength of his genius, told the master that he would acquire great credit by teaching him; but it appears that the genius of our young student was not confined to one track — he was extremely sprightly and playful and his invention quite equal to his other talents, which he did not fail to exercise in a pretty full school, by diverting the attention of the scholars from their studies. The master called at the house of one who had said so much in praise of Tommy’s great genius, who asked him how Tommy improved? The master replied, “I have as yet suspended my judgment concerning him, but if his other talents are equal to his invention of means to excite laughter and merriment, he is surely a most surprising lad.”

Tommy went on in his thoughtless career, until he one day chanced to displease a pompous young man, who had made considerable progress in figures, who insultingly told him, “since Providence has denied you the capacity or talents to acquire any useful knowledge, you should not interrupt those who have both the inclination and capacity to learn; besides I shall have a great estate to manage, which will require all the knowledge I can gain to manage it, and support my rank. But if you can gain a knowledge of pounds, shillings and pence, it is all you will ever have occasion for.” Tommy, viewing him with the most sovreign contempt, replied: “Sir, you talk very exultingly of your talents and capacity; but I will convince you before the end of six weeks I will be qualified to teach you, and from that period as long as you and I shall live.” From that hour he quit his wild pranks and commenced the attentive student, and fairly verified his promise to the satisfaction and gratification of the whole school. Mr. Wilson’s fame as a Mathematical teacher soon procured him an invitation to open a school in New York, where he removed.

Thomas had from infancy an invincible propensity to the study of physic, and often declared to me, when we were very young, that if it should be proposed by those who possessed the power to confer it, to make him Emperor of the whole earth, on condition that he would relinquish the study of physic, he would spurn the proposal. But as he knew a knowledge of the Languages would be a necessary acquirement, he now turned all his attention to effect this purpose. But as there was no Latin master in the place at that time, he resolved to learn it from books. He accordingly borrowed a Vocabulary and a Concordi from Col. Clinton, who observed that he would find it much more difficult to learn Latin without the help of a Master, than to go through Cocker without assistance. He returned the books in about six weeks. The Col. naturally concluded that Thomas had been convinced of the impracticability of his design; he however examined him to find out what progress he had made, and soon discovered that every word of both books was perfectly imprinted in the memory of his student. The Col. laid by the books and told Tommy that he wished to see his father on business. Our father soon waited on the Col. who told him that it would be almost criminal to let such a promising genius sink in obscurity for want of an education, that could be so easily acquired, and added, “I am going to New York and if you wish to give him the means of improvement, in any degree adequate to the merit of his uncommon diligence and surprising talents, if you will give me the money I will bring him a set of the Classics; and after he has perused them sufficiently, I am confident that, by the assistance of a good tutor, for a few months, will give him a good knowledge of the Latin language.” The plan was executed and when the young student got his books he retired every fair day to a pleasant arbor, composed of young trees interwoven with grape vines so as to render it impervious to the rays of the sun, and was rarely seen except at meal time. But the effect of such intense application became so visible in his conduct that his parents were alarmed with apprehensions, that if he could not be immediately diverted from his studies, his mental faculties might be much injured. Matters were so arranged that one of the Col’s sons called and coaxed him to go home with him, where they would have a variety of books to read; but matters were so contrived that the key of the Col’s library was mislaid and could not be found. He remained in this friendly assylum until he resumed his cheerful sprightly humor. This happened in the golden age when friendship was a reality and not an empty name. He assumed his studies again with more prudence and much better success, for now everything which he learned was indellibly impressed in his memory, and from this period I do candidly believe that he never forgot anything, unless past the power of recollection, that was worth retaining. After he had obtained a very considerable knowledge of his Grammar and other Latin authors, there fortunately came a minister34 to the parish who was a good linguist, under whom he completed his Latin education. And I have reason to believe that although he was not a complete Grecian scholar, he knew the radical meaning of every technical term in the arts and sciences that has been borrowed from that language. He had gained a tolerable knowledge of the High Dutch language by reading their books, which he completed during his medical apprenticeship with Doctor John Kitterman. He could read and understand the French language, but never attempted converse in it, as he was unacquainted with its pronunciation. But as the study of physic was always his darling pursuit, his book on that favourite subject still made one of the selected number. He was indefatigable in the study of Botany, and at a very early period in life, he was acquainted with almost all the indigenous plants in our part of the country, and their virtues.

With these preparatory qualifications he commenced his apprenticeship, probably about the age of 17, and remained about two years, but before the expiration of that time, many of the patients reposed more confidence in the skill of the apprentice than in that of the tutor (Dr. Kitterman). During this period he gained a facility of conversing in both High and Low Dutch. He then took lodgings at the house of Captain [Garret] Winegar35 in Sharon, Conn., and soon acquired fame and a very extensive practice, being frequently called to remote parts in Connecticut, Massachusetts and New York.

It is not known whether Dr. Young’s epic poem, entitled The Conquest of Quebec, was written during his residence in Amenia or later; nor has a copy of it been found. In a memoir on the names of places in Dutch New York, read 31 December, 1816, before the New York Historical Society, the Hon. Egbert Benson says:

Vermont, Green Mountain, and the town of Amenia, in Dutchess county, Pleasant, . . . owe their names to the fancy of Young, the poet; he had a peculiar facility in making English words from Latin ones. In his Poem, the Conquest of Quebec, in describing the portents which he feigned to have preceded the battle of the Plains of Abraham, and which, according to his fiction, appalled the stout heart of Wolfe not a little, the first line of one of the couplets, [was] “vulpine ululations, ursine growls,” and the two concluding words of the next, “predicting owls,” those which preceded have escaped my memory, and it is not now in my power to recover them; sad fate for an epic! “scarce twice five lustres past and out of print.”36

It was during his residence in Amenia that Dr. Young’s friendship with Ethan Allen, then living in the adjacent town of Salisbury, Connecticut, began.37 In his Early History of Amenia, Newton Reed says:

They were often together, and they were also in sympathy in the violence of their patriotism and in their religious unbelief (p. 46).

In his Life of Ethan Allen, Henry Hall writes:

We are told that Allen in his early life was very intimate with Dr. Thomas Young. . . . One of the most noted characteristics of Ethan, his fondness for the society of able men, is illustrated in his association with Young (p. 20).

The following extracts are from “The Allen Family — an unpublished lecture, delivered at Burlington, by Rev. Zadock Thompson, March 16, 1852,” printed in the Vermont Historical Gazetteer, 1867:

I was told by the late Mr. Jehial Johns, who died in Huntington in 1840, aged 85 years, and who knew Ethan Allen in Connecticut,. . .that Allen was about that time on very intimate terms with that noted infidel and historical writer Dr. Thomas Young, and that from him he derived his own infidel notions, and the principal arguments by which he defended them (i. 563).

Mention is made in this letter, you will perceive, of his book on theology. This work was none other than that generally known as Ethan Allen’s Bible. As this was the most remarkable, and most considerable of his works, it being an octavo volume of 477 pages, I will say a few words respecting it . . . .

At the time of Ethan Allen’s youth there were in Litchfield co., Ct., and in Dutchess co., N. Y., which lies adjacent, a number of professed infidels, among whom a Dr. Thomas Young was prominent, both on account of his education and abilities, and also on account of his daring profaneness, amounting sometimes to blasphemy, for which he was once prosecuted, convicted and punished. Young was living on what was called the Oblong in Dutchess co., and very near the line of Connecticut. At the time Pres’t Edwards proposed his famous theological questions, Young engaged in their discussion, and boldly espoused the infidel side, and argued in opposition to the necessity of a Divine Revelation. Ethan Allen had previous to this time been on very intimate terms with Young, had spent much time at his house, and fully imbibed all of his infidel notions. Allen, therefore, entered at once upon this discussion, supporting the same views with Young, and spending a large share of his time in writing. Mrs. Wadhams,38 whom I have already mentioned, and in whose family he resided, informed me some years ago, that Ethan Allen spent one summer at her house employed nearly the whole time in writing. She did not know what he was writing about, but she recollected that once when she called him to dinner he said that he was very sorry she had called so soon, for “he had got clear up into the upper regions.” It seemed at this time, to be generally understood that he and Young were engaged in company, in the preparation of a work in support of infidel principles, and that there was an agreement betweeu them that the one who outlived the other should publish it. When Ethan Allen came to Vermont his MSS. were left in possession of Young. Young engaged, soon after this, very warmly in the cause of the American colonies, and became distinguished as a political writer. . . . He died in Philadelphia . . . and his family returned to their residence in Dutchess county, N. Y. On Allen’s return to Vermont, after his exile in the spring of 1778, he called upon Young’s family, procured his own and Young’s MSS. and took them with him to Vermont. These, as he had leisure he rewrote, altered and arranged them in the form of a book with this title, Reason the only Oracle of Man, or a Compendious System of Natural Religion. The preface of this work is dated July 2, 1782, and it was published at Bennington in 1784 (i. 567, 568).

The substance of Allen’s theology may be expressed in few words. It consisted in a belief in the existence of a Supreme Creator and Governor of the Universe; in a belief that man would be rewarded or punished in a future state in accordance with his doings in this life; that reason is a sufficient guide for man, and that a revelation is unnecessary; and, being unnecessary, has never been made, and is not to be expected. Whether the Oracles of Reason was the sole production of Ethan Allen, or the joint production of him and Dr. Young, may never, perhaps, be certainly known. I am very confident, however, that no person who is familiar with Allen’s other writings, can read the Oracles of Reason without suspicion that some other person beside himself was concerned in its composition (i. 569).

To anticipate a little our story of Dr. Young’s life in Boston, the following correspondence will be read with interest in this connection. The first letter, written by Aaron Davis, Jr., appeared in the Boston News-Letter of Thursday, 26 November, 1772 (p. 2/1). Dr. Young’s cause was instantly espoused by Samuel Adams39 who, over the signature of “Vindex,” published a scathing reply to Davis in the Boston Gazette of Monday, 30 November, 1772 (p. 2/1); and Dr. Young’s letter to Davis, which the Boston Gazette was unable to print for lack of space, appeared in the Boston Evening-Post of the same date (p. 2/2).

I AARON DAVIS, JR.40 TO DR. THOMAS YOUNG.

To Dr. Young

Sir,

I Perceive the manner in which I spoke of you in a late Town-Meeting has given you offence: If you are so vain as to think yourself of so much importance that a man who expresses a dislike of your character, wounds his Country through your Sides, I believe you are the only man in the world that has so high an opinion of your own importance: for my own part, I believe their is no person with whose character the Interest of the Country is less connected than with your’s.

If you think by giving us your CREED to deceive the vulgar; and palm yourself on them for a Christian, let me tell you, you are much mistaken, there are none, unless whose Eyes party zeal hath blinded, but sees there is nothing in your Creed to distinguish you from the most thorough paced infidels, and virulent opposers of our holy Religion. — Let me ask you plainly, do you believe the scriptures of the Old and New-Testament, or any part of them, to be truely a Revelation from Ood; — or that Jesus of Nazareth was the Son of God, and the appointed Saviour of the world? Do you believe that Jesus is risen from the Dead, or that he is the appointed Judge of the world? — that by him God will judge the world in righteousness, and every man will be rewarded or punished in another world according to the deeds done in the body? — let us have plain, positive, unavasive answers to the foregoing plain questions? — Do you believe it of a whit more consequence to be acquainted with the genealogy of Christ than with those of Paul, or Cephas, Luther, Calvin, or even Mahomet himself? — Have you not freely professed years ago that you tho’t it your indispensible duty to undeceive mankind, and discredit the writings of the bible? — has not your zeal in the Cause of infidelity led you to speak of Jesus Christ; and the Virgin Mary in terms of reproach and contempt too bad to be repeated after you, and too shocking to be published to the world in a common News-Paper?

You seem to complain of it, Sir, that I censured your moral character and set that in an odious light, but let me ask you, and ask the impartial world, whether, or no the man that accustoms himself to curse and swear, and take God’s name in vain and damn his fellow creatures, can be said to be a moral man? — do your acquaintance know and can they witness for you that you are free from such a use of your tongue? — perhaps I am better acquainted with your conversation than you are aware, and let me tell you, to say the least, — if you are the gentleman that keeps that unruly member, the Tongue in due subjection then I will acknowledge my ears have deceived me.

Now, Sir, I do not deny, that I did fully and openly declare in our late Town-Meeting that I did not chuse to have any thing to do with measures, wherein I must follow the lead of such men as Dr. Young, or in words of like import, — and I believe I might further say that if I had any thing of my own private affairs of importance to be transacted I should chuse to commit it to men of virtuous lives and conversations and this is still my opinion, & I hope ever will be so to my dying day: and let me tell you plainly, I do not chuse to put confidence in any man that makes it his business to disparage the religion and dishonour the person of our glorious Redeemer, or that has no more regard for the name of God, or the good of mankind, than to curse and damn his fellow creatures, and take the awful name of God in vain: — such men, I take, with all their pretences to patriotism and benevolence, to have no solid principles of goodness, and are quite unworthy of any special trust and confidence.

The Town of Boston, is not I am perswaded straitned for persons of spirit and capacity, and I may add of solidity and exemplary religion to serve them in all their important trusts: — and it has always been astonishing to the world how any important trust come to be committed to you the best account that can be given for it, I believe, is that you appeared ready to lead in such bold and exceptionable measures, as to most of the wise and discerning part of the Gentlemen of the Town appeared to be quite imprudent and dangerous, and rather savoured of faction, than boded any good to the public, — and to tell the truth it has given no small offence, to the more solid, judicious part of Town and Country, and not a little disserved the noble Cause of public liberty that you should have been held up in the light of a zealous Patriot, and been put to lead in measures of public importance: — But let your character be what it may, I don’t think, that a set of Athiests or Deists, men of profligate manners and profane tongues are fit persons to be intrusted suffered to lead in the interesting concerns of public liberty and happiness; — and don’t it look quite ridiculous for a Set of Puritans, deeply concerned for their religious as well as civil privileges, as the generality of the good people of this Country are, to set up such men, as I have just mentioned, to be the leaders, guiders and managers in public affairs: — For my part I wish our eyes may be on the faithful of the land, men of Exemplary Religion, united with us in the Faith and fellowship of the Gospel.

What end you designed to answer by the pompous accounts of your reputable Parentage and your comfortable fortune, I know not. — Your account of the early impressions you had of religion, and your concern to be saved, taken with your solemn appeal to God, seems to me to savour of prophanity: — however it agrees well enough with the other parts of your conduct. If you ever had such a serious turn of mind, I wish you had carried it through life, — that of an apostate is a dreadful character, read Heb. 6. 4 to the 8th verse, in a serious hour. — Perhaps, dear Sir, the Gospel is not a cunningly devised fable — and if there were only a perhaps such a text should make an apostate tremble.

It is not impossible that you might be helpful in encouraging Recruits for carrying on the war; but I don’t find you had courage enough to venture your head: — and since the detestable Stamp-Act you may have vapoured away in talk; — Words are but wind — whether your view was to be admired, applauded and promoted, or anything better, you know best.

I now am, and ever have been as steady a friend to the rights and privileges of my country as any man whatsoever, though perhaps not so fond of sounding my own praise as some, and in my humble station shall do all in my power to promote good Government and secure our invaluable liberties, but in this glorious Cause I shall think myself very unhappy to be obliged to consult with, or follow measures dictated by other than men of probity, piety and real Christianity.

I retract nothing that I said about you in the Meeting referred to: — I wish myself and you better men. I have neither leisure nor learning to pursue controversy — I wish my Country men of abler heads and better lives than either of us to lead in public measures.

As I ever did so I now wish you well.

Roxbury Nov. 23 1772

A. Davis, jun.

II SAMUEL ADAMS TO AARON DAVIS, JR.

Dr. Young’s Letter to Mr. Aaron Davis, Jun should have had a Place in this Day’s paper, had we not been pre-engaged with the following.

Mr. A—n D—s.

Sir,

THE weakness of an adversary, with a man of understanding, will frequently disarm him of his resentment: Who would chuse to enter the lists, when even victory is attended with disgrace? A—n D—s as a Huckster of small Wares, within the Bar-room, or laudably vending Milk and Water, might have grubbed on unnoticed, and not superlatively contemptible; but when he so far mistakes his proper department, as to blunder into the field of politicks, and assume a dictatorial and offensive part, we are compelled with reluctance to scourge the insect, tho’ convinced ’tis but an insect still. We are informed by your fellow townsman, whom we presume must know you well, that you are destitute of feeling; your unexampled effrontery in the publick transaction which has unhappily brought you into notice, added to the consummate assurance evidenced in the stupid composition to which you have tacked your name, are strong circumstances in favour of the position: But is your modesty truly impregnable? Cannot the weapon of stern rebuke arouse your sensibility? Must honest indignation mourn a defeat? I intend to try the doubtful experiment, tho’ you should analize a satyr to be a proof of your general consequence, and extract incense to your vanity from the blackest record of your shame.

In your outrageous zeal for the cause of Christianity, and the Virgin Mary, permit me to question your sincerity: It is evident from your notable performance, that you have been acquainted with the religious principles and immoral practices of the gentleman so very exceptionable to you; for some years past: That he was then as thorough-paced an infidel, as virulent an opposer of our holy religion, as he is now: That he was doing discredit to the Bible then, or to adopt your own phrase, was undeceiving mankind as actively as at any time since: That you was acquainted with the open profanity of his conversation, and if we may take your word for it, was an ear-witness to his oaths and execrations: Why did you not commence a champion in the cause of Christianity some months earlier? It would have had a better appearance, if in your ebullient zeal you had endeavoured to prevent his desseminating such mischievous principles, and seasonably entered your caveat against the pernicious effects of his example: But the cause of Christianity abstracted from political concerns, was not sufficient to awaken your resentment: Will not this my dear sir! occasion suspicions, that all your flaming professions of patriotism will neither discredit nor remove?

Doctor Young (I dare you to contradict me) has ever been an un unwearied assertor of the rights of his countrymen: has taken the post of hazard, and acted vigorously in the cause of American freedom: Such endeavours and exertions, have justly entitled him to the notice, to the confidence of the people; they, from a thorough conviction of his political integrity, have united him with several gentlemen, against whom we presume you can have no just exception, to explain their rights and state their grievances; was not your conscience so delicately offensible, I would ask such an immaculate christian, whether your ideas of reprobation extended not only to the whole committee, but to every transaction in which they could possibly be employed? If not, are you not ashamed of your capricious folly, in rejecting a cause which you profess to have at heart, for the sake of an individual, against whom, your spotless purity has matter of objection.

Shall I be arraigned of want of charity, if I here express my doubt of your veracity in this matter? The cloak of Christianity is the threadbare garb of hypocrisy; and novel cover for political apostates: I suspect ’tis the cause that renders the man obnoxious; the infidel might have perverted the world, and your zeal been smothered in its native bosom of sanctity; in short, had not the cause of liberty found a busy advocate in the man you brand with irreligion, your abhorrence would probably never have found a tongue.

You do not chuse to have any thing to do with measures wherein you must follow the lead of such men as Dr. Young: I apprehend you confine yourself here to political matters; if so, what must those rejected measures be? if just, right and reasonable, the man must be an incorrigible blockhead to reject them, let them originate where they will: if on the contrary, they are improper and exceptionable; you might have discountenanced the measure, without villifying the man.

Inconsiderable and weak as I esteem you, you have still an interest in the constitutional claims of an English subject, equal to a nobleman, equal to an intelligent being: these you have no right to sacrifice even to your own predominant folly. You assert that you are, and ever have been as steady a friend to the rights and privileges of your country, as any man whatsoever, &c. what then is that exact point of discretion, that chaste line of decorum, to which your love of your country will carry you, and no further? All those concerned in consulting and labouring for the redemption of their country, must be very examplary christians, or your patriotism hangs so loosely about you, that your country may perish rather than you will unite for it’s salvation, with a man not com-pleatly orthodox: For no political measures can possibly be reasonable or just, which are not dictated by men of piety and real Christianity: The truth of this observation will appear with peculiar lustre, when we consider what a paultry figure, those antient heathenish states of Greece and Rome made in the primitive ages. You elsewhere shrewdly remark, that it has always been astonishing in the world; how any important trusts came to be committed to Dr. Young; the best account that can be given for it, YOU BELIEVE is, that he appeared ready to lead in such bold and exceptionable measures, as rather savoured of faction than boded any good to the public: which is in plain English, that because the measures he proposed, were dangerous and exceptionable, Therefore the town approved and confided in him. To wave the illiberal slander upon the town; I question most christian sir, whether any article of Dr. Young’s CREED will shock decency and common sense more than this.

The present crisis is truly an alarming one to your country; the few friends of the people have abundant necessity to have their hands strength’ned: the man who deserts now, is the worst enemy of his country: You sir! have done this, with the aggravated guilt of endeavouring to load with obloquy the cause you abandon — I scorn to keep terms with a man I esteem so base — You have provided yourself a Retreat, being assured of the smiles of power; nay more, you are entitled to their favour, for the rank injury you meant to the oppressed people; and we shall probably see such baseness distinguished in the commissioned scroll of SCOUNDRELS and RESCINDERS.

Vindex.

III DR. THOMAS YOUNG TO AARON DAVIS, JR.

To Mr. Aaron Davis, jun.

Sir,

However distant I may be from supposing you the contriver of any one sentence of the abusive thing, ushered into the world under the auspices of your name and character, I must at least consider it as a child of your adoption, and thereupon address you as the ostensible author. And even with this provision I am really sorry to find myself necessitated to impute to you more artifice and disingenuous design than any one of your acquaintance believes you capable of; and hitherto have thought beneath your native honesty even to countenance.

The town of Boston alarmed at a recent attack upon their happy constitution and constantly observing that acquiesence under one imposition invited another, concluded to present their fellow subjects in this province especially with a state of their Rights and the infringements of those Rights which have been made in the past ten years.41 To a share of this laborious and important task I was honored with their appointment; and saving all possible deference to the superior understandings of your well known prompters, I should suppose them alone the proper judges in this particular at least, be they ever so much below yourself and associates in every other respect.

But be this matter as it may, the town of Roxbury equally uneasy at the inroads making on their birthrights called a meeting, in which mention was made of the measure planning by Boston. How did you behave on this occasion? You could not espouse a measure in the concertion of which such men as Dr. Young had been employed. Had Machiavel himself concerted the measure, were it apparently good and salutary, and as such adopted by a body of gentlemen, whose capacities you, for some cause, seem disposed to complement, I take it you would have had nothing to do with its origin. The town of Boston have long had that single point in view, to preserve inviolably the right of appointing and rewarding at their discretion their public servants. They may in some instances have appeared somewhat exceptionable to your new connections, by their tenacity of these Rights, but notwithstanding the impudent insinuation of your dictator they still conceive the odious epithet, faction, to be chargeable only to your side. Government, according to that glorious plan concerted by the wisdom, and established by the virtue of their renowned ancestors, they revere; but cannot so readily be convinced that the present system of usurpation, imposition and incessant innovation is that government which any honest man can countenance, much less wish to support. Your professions of readiness to do all in your power for the security of our invaluable Liberties are rendered quite suspicious by the conditions with which you clog them; they are no more than the hacknied rant of the most inveterate enemies of our constitution; and your cloke of Christianity is at this time prostituted with as glaring indiscretion, absurdity and impiety as it ever was done by man.

Were you on board an armed vessel and on the point of being boarded by a pirate, would you refuse acting for the common defence till you had catechized all the sailors and rendered every one of them as orthodox as yourself and as chaste in their expressions?

If we are not to resist the invasions of tyranny till we have incorporated a band of Moseses, Jobs and Samuels for the expedition, I question whether your new party would wish a more flattering condition. To be quite free with you Mr. Davis, your designs are very apparent, and your behaviour very absurd and ridiculous, as well as unjust, and most studiously calculated to take injurious advantages, but I have long since bade defiance to the united force of your cabal. They may flourish and fulminate under the signature of Aaron Davis, jun., Chromes, True Patriot, Freeholder or Landlord, or whatever other guise of patriotism, virtue, or religion they are pleased to assume. But seeing you have been pleased to revive a most detestable falshood, long since abandon’d, I now again bid defiance to you and all your associates to prove that I ever spoke one reproachful word of Jesus Christ or the Virgin Mary in this province. This I think is the third time I have published a challenge of this import; and if it be not now answered, let the public determine what manner of zeal inspires our tory advocates for Christianity.

Your interrogatories seem better calculated for the meridian of Madrid than Roxbury or Boston, and the consideration of them will therefore be suspended till we have advice of your receiving all the appendages of commission necessary to convene a free man before your awful inquisitorial tribunal.

I am Sir, with much meekness of spirit,

Your humble servant,

Tho. Young.

We resume our extracts from Dr. Joseph Young’s narrative:

As his [Dr. Thomas Young’s] practise in the country was very extensive and fatiguing, I urged him to remove to some populous city, where the toil would be less and the profits greater. He at length consented and resolved to remove to Albany, as he and a number of wealthy men were agreeing with Col. John Henry Lydius of the city of Albany for several townships of land of six miles square, which lies in the now State of Vermont. But the great land-jobbers in New York, by endeavoring to defeat Lydius’ title, that they might share in the profits, retarded the settlement of the country, and by their eagerness to grasp the shadow they lost the substance.42

We removed to Albany43 in October, 1764. Doctor Young displayed the strength and power of his mind to very great advantage in combating the great lawyers, in defence of Col. Lydius’ title, but as the history would be too lengthy I must omit it. But when the Stamp Act was passed he exerted himself strenuously to oppose it, and when the Stamps arrived, he was one of a small number who visited the Stamp Officer and caused him to resign. In the fall of 1766 he resolved to remove to Boston, where the energies of numbers of American patriots were in full operation. When he arrived, he soon became an active member of the patriotic band, and was honored by the Tories and British by being classed by them amoug the number of the arch-rebels, to wit; John Hancock, Samuel Adams, the great and truly excellent Doctor Warren, &c. &c. Doctor Young, by his great activity and strenuous exertions to counteract the nefarious design of the British, had excited their indignation to such a degree that two of their officers attacked him one night in the street. They knocked him down and probably supposing they had killed him, ran off. He was carried home to his. family all bloody. When he recovered he said he should certainly have been killed, but as he had seen the blow coming he had moved his head to one side; the weapon in consequence had brushed down his temple, and spent its chief force on his shoulder. But this atrocious attempt to assassinate him had alarmed his wife to such a degree, that when he went out at night she frequently cried until he returned. His friends in consequence advised him to remove to Newport in Rhode Island until some favorable change took place.

Let us briefly review Dr. Young’s career in Boston. As early as 6 June, 1768, with Benjamin Kent, Benjamin Church, Jr., John Adams and Joseph Warren, he signed an Address of the Sons of Liberty of Boston to John Wilkes, which is preserved in England among Wilkes’s papers and correspondence.44 Immediately thereafter, on 14 June, 1768, he was appointed by the Town of Boston on a committee to wait on Governor Bernard at Roxbury to seek a redress of grievances and to request that the Governor “issue your immediate Order to the Commander of his Majestys Ship Romney, to remove from this harbour,”45 and also on another committee “to draw a true state of some late Occurrences in this Town to be transmitted to M^r Agent Debert.”46 Warren, Samuel Adams, the Quincys and other prominent citizens were on both these committees of which James Otis was chairman. On 8 July, 1769, Dr. Young, with other physicians, attended the Selectmen and informed them that they knew of no cases of smallpox in Boston.47 In John Rowe’s Diary we find this mention of him under date of 24 July, 1770:

This afternoon “The Body” [of merchants] as they are called met & just before some of them Proceeded through the streets with Dr Young at their head with Three Flags Flying, Drums Beating & a french Horn — Tho^s Baker carried one of them for which he is much Blamed by me — The meeting today will I believe prove very Prejudicial to the Merchants & Trade of the Town of Boston (pp. 204, 205).

Writing to Governor Bernard, 28 August, 1770, Hutchinson says:

The infamous Molineux and Young with Cooper, Adams, and two or three more, still influence the mob, who threaten all who import; but it seems impossible that it should hold out much longer.48

In January, 1771, Hutchinson wrote to a correspondent in England:

We have not been so quiet these five years. Our incendiaries of the lower order have quite disappeared. A Doctor Young, whose name has often appeared in the newspapers, has taken passage for North Carolina. He may have a chance among the “Regulators” there. I hope many of the most flaming zealots, who have been at the head of affairs, see their mistake.49

Dr. Young’s stay in the South was brief, since he returned to Boston in season to deliver at the Manufactory House,50 on the fifth of March, 1771, the first anniversary Oration on the Boston Massacre. The anniversary was celebrated annually till 1783. Before the Siege of Boston a “lampooning oration” was delivered in which we find mention of Dr. Young and his associates couched in the violent language of the times of which neither the Whigs nor the Tories had a monopoly. From the virulence of the attacks on Dr. Young, it is evident that he was a thorn in the side of his political opponents.

I cannot boast the ignorance of Hancock, the insolence of Adams, the absurdity of Rowe, the arrogance of Lee, the vicious life and untimely death of Mollineaux, the turgid bombast of Warren, the treasons of Quincy, the hypocrisy of Cooper, nor the principles of Young. Nor can I with propriety pass over the characters of these modern heroes, (or, to use their own phrase, Indians,) without a few observations on their late conduct51. . ..

The eighth of these heroes is Y-g, whose character cannot be drawn by any pen with the consistency that becomes a true limner. Could we raise up the spirit of one of the murderers of St. Stephen, to tell us what a figure Paul cut, when he breathed out threatening and slaughter against his Saviour, then might we form an idea of Dr. Y-g; but since that is impossible, I can only refer you to-his own countenance, wherein you may read his true and genuine disposition. Suffice it to say, this man stands accused of rebellion, not only against his Sovereign, but against his God;— he makes a mock at the merits of his Redeemer, and uses his God only to swear by.52

On 12 March, 1771, Dr. Young was appointed by the Town on a committee to consider the following article in the warrant:

That some steps may be taken to vindicate the Character of the Inhabitants grosly injured by some partial and false publications relative to the tryals of Cap^t Preston &^c.53

This committee reported at an adjournment of the Town Meeting on 19 March, 1771, and recommended “the appointment of another committee to prepare and draw up a true and full account of those Tryals and what preceded them;” and Dr. Young was of the committee appointed for this purpose.54 On 7 May, 1771, he was chairman of a committee to consider the petition of Jacob Emmons for compensation for land taken “to make a new Street or widen the same [Paddy’s Alley] leading from Ann Street to Middle [Hanover] Street.”55 At a meeting of the Selectmen in September, 1771, —

Dr. Tho^s Young apply’d in behalf of M^rs. Wells & M^rs. Wright for liberty to exhibit the likeness of the late M^r. Whiteneld &c. in Wax Work at Concert Hall.56

On 18 August, 1772, Thomas Young, of Boston, physician, for £216.6.8 purchased of John Newell of Boston, cooper, a dwelling house and land on the southerly side of Wing’s Lane, now Elm Street, only a few rods distant from Faneuil Hall and from the house of his friend Dr. Joseph Warren in Hanover Street.57 It was a small estate, having a frontage of only sixteen and a half feet on Wing’s Lane and an extreme depth, on irregular lines, of thirty-eight feet, as shown on the accompanying plan. The rear line of the premises made a part of the northerly boundary of the King’s Arms Tavern lot, which fronted on Dock Square and the lower part of Cooper’s Alley, now Brattle Street.58 When, a century later, on 6 November, 1872, Washington Street was extended from the foot of new Cornhill to Haymarket Square, both these estates were taken and are now traversed by the roadway. Dr. Young immediately mortgaged his property for £120 to John White of Boston, gentleman; and the signature of his wife, Mary Young, in releasing dower, afforded the only evidence of her given name which had been found before the discovery of Dr. Joseph Young’s narrative.59

When, on 2 November, 1772, the Town of Boston adopted Samuel Adams’s proposal to create a Committee of Correspondence to consist of twenty-one persons, Dr. Young was appointed a member of it. The names of Otis, who was named as chairman, Adams, Warren, Quincy, Oliver Wendell, and other prominent citizens also appear in the list.60

The North End Caucus, a powerful factor in public affairs in Boston at this period, was organized as early as 1767 in the old Salutation Tavern which stood at the upper end of Salutation Alley, now Salutation Street. Later its meetings were held in the Green Dragon Tavern in Union Street.61 In 1772 the membership was increased, and at the first meeting “more than sixty were present. Their regulations were drawn up by Dr. Warren and another gentleman.”62 As Dr. Young was a man of literary ability and the first President of the Caucus,63 in which he took a leading part, it is not unreasonable to infer that he may have been Dr. Warren’s associate in draughting these regulations.

In the matter of the tea, Dr. Young had a prominent part. At a meeting of the Caucus, held at the Green Dragon, 2 November, 1773, it was —

Voted — That a committee be chosen to draw a resolution to be read to the Tea Consignees to-morrow 12 O’Clock, noon, at Liberty Tree: and that Dr. Tho^s Young and Church, and Warren be a committee for that purpose, and make a report as soon as may be.64

As the Consignees did not appear at Liberty Tree to hear the Resolution read, the Sons of Liberty appointed a committee of which William Molineux was Chairman, to “wait on them to know their determination.”

The principal People that accompanied M^r Mollineux [to the store of Richard Clark and Sons in King, now State, Street] were as Follows — M^r Sam^l Adams, M^r W^ra Dennie, M^r John Pitts, Colo. Heath of Roxbury, Dr Church, Dr Warren, Dr Young, Cap’ J^no Matchet, Cap’ Hopkins, Nat Barker, Gabriel Joh[o]nnot, Ezek^l Cheever & about five hundred more as near as I could guess.65

Of the great meeting in Faneuil Hall and the Old South on 29 November to take measures to prevent the landing of the tea, Young was one of the leaders,66 and Bancroft affirms that he held that “the only way to get rid of it [the tea] was to throw it overboard.”67 In his narrative of the proceedings of the Town of Boston at the tea meetings, laid before the Privy Council in 1773, Governor Bernard says:

The persons who principally proposed the questions on which the above resolutions and proceedings were founded were Mr. Adams, Mr. Molineux, Dr. Young and Dr. Warren; and they used many arguments to induce the people to concur in these resolutions.68

On the night of 16 December, when the tea was destroyed, Dr. Young made one of the Tea Party.69 In a communication to the Boston Evening-Post of Monday, 25 October, 1773 (p. 2/2), he wrote:

Tea is really a slow poison . . . [and is] said to be possessed of a corrosive quality, strong enough to injure the hands of the workmen almost intolerably. . . . I have my self been rheumatically affected from my infancy, and in special at the annual changes of spring and autumn had defluxions on the jaws, teeth or other parts, till the Tea became politically poisoned, and then, however much I admired it, leaving it totally off I have gained a firmness of constitution unexperienced before from my infancy. My substitute is chamomile flowers.

At the Town Meeting on 10 May, 1774, Dr. Young was named on a committee to instruct the Town’s Representatives in the General Court, which had been selected by the Caucus the night before at the Green Dragon.70 A month later, 27 June, there was sharp criticism of the conduct of the Committee of Correspondence in Town Meeting, when a “Motion for Censuring & Annihilating the Com̄ittee” was hotly debated and defeated.71 John Rowe notes in his Diary that the debate “lasted all day & adjournd until tomorrow 10 of Clock,” and that the speakers in behalf of the Committee were Samuel Adams, Dr. Warren, William Molineux, Josiah Quincy, Jr., Dr. Young, and Benjamin Kent.72 At the time that the Boston Port Bill was causing great distress, a Town Meeting was held 19 July, 1774, at which an important committee, of distinguished personnel, was appointed “to consider & Report a Declaration to be made by this Town to Great Britain & all the World;” and Dr. Young’s name appears in the list.73

Young’s friendship with Ethan Allen, already mentioned, may account for his selection at this time as the financial agent of Charles Phelps of Marlborough, Vermont, who was actively engaged (1770–1777) “in prosecuting petitions to prevent New York patenting those lands west of Connecticut River and east of New York east line:”

1774, July 27, sent £6, Lawful money, to Deacon Barrett74 of Boston, by Wilder the Postman.75 The money to be delivered to Doctor Tho’s Young of Boston, with a letter desiring him to pay said sum to said Barrett.76

In addition to his professional and public duties, Dr. Young found time to conduct a vigorous correspondence with prominent men in other places77 and to write for the public press and the Royal American Magazine on political, medical, and religious subjects. It has also been said that he was John Adams’s family physician while Mr. Adams resided in Boston, but this is apparently refuted by the statement in the Life of Mr. Adams that Dr.Warren held to him and his family that professional relation.78 The following extract from a letter dated 21 July, 1774, written by Daniel Tyler (II. C. 1771), of Brooklyn, Connecticut, to his classmate Dr. John Warren of Boston, is of present interest:

I was in Boston the other day, and flattered myself with the hope of seeing you, but Dr. Young informed me you had removed to Salem. However, the deficiency of your good company was in a great measure made up by my being honored with the company of Messrs. Cushing, Adams, and Dr. Young, patriots of renown, whose zeal in their country’s cause will hand down their names to posterity, with universal applause.79

A letter written by Dr. Young to Samuel Adams, 4 September, 1774, describes the scene in Harvard Square, Cambridge, two days before, when Judge Danforth publicly, in the presence of four thousand people, resigned his office as a Mandamus Councillor, which Dr. Young and his friend Dr. Joseph Warren witnessed.80 The letters of John Andrews, which afford much valuable information concerning persons and events in Boston at this period, contain the following paragraph under date of 13 September, 1774:

This morning Doctor Young left the town, to settle at Providence, being apprehensive from the measures that are taking that he may be taken up, and therefore thinks it his duty to defeat their purposes, in regard to himself, while it’s in his power.81

That Dr. Young’s apprehensions were not without substantial foundation is apparent from the following document which appeared in a Boston newspaper within a week of his flight:

The following is an authentic Copy of a Letter which was lately thrown into the Camps, directed,

“To the Officers and Soldiers of his Majesty’s Troops in Boston.”

IT being more than probable that the Kings standard will soon be erected, from rebellion breaking out in this province, its proper that you soldiers, should be acquainted with the authors thereof, and of all the Misfortunes brought upon the province, the following is a list of them, viz: Mess. Samuel Adams, James Bowdoin, Dr. Thomas Young, Dr. Benjamin Church, Capt. John Bradford, Josiah Quincey, Major Nathaniel Barber, William Molleneux, John Hancock, Wm. Cooper, Dr. Chancy, Dr. Cooper, Thomas Cushing, Joseph Greenleaf, and William Denning. — The friends of your King and Country, and of America hope and expect it from you soldiers, the instant rebellion happens, that you will put the above persons immediately to the sword, destroy their houses and plunder their effects; it is just that they should be the first victims to the mischeifs they have br’t upon us.

A Friend to Gr. Brit. & America.

N. B. — Don’t forget those trumpeters of sedition, the printers Edes and Gill, and Thomas.82

Dr. Franklin B. Dexter says that Dr. Young “took refuge in Newport after the battle of Lexington.”83 At Newport we catch earlier glimpses of Mm in Dr. Ezra Stiles’s Literary Diary:

Oct 1774.

3. Conversing with Dr. Young on philosophy. Dined at Mr. Channings84 with a Number of Gentlemen, Sons of Liberty from Boston and N. York (i. 461).

10. Dr. Young one of the Committee at B^o [Boston] being here, ventured to open Mr. Adams Letter and copied the Affidavit and sent it to Mr. Adams at the Congress Philad^a (i. 463).

December 13, 1774. Last Evening I read a Letter dated Boston yesterday and sent by Dr. Young to Mr. Sec’ry. Ward with this Information, viz. last Evening Dr. Warren desired me to inform you & the rest of our Friends in Newport that, 300 Soldiers more or less are embarked for Newport (i. 501).

December 23, 1774. It is certain that Application has been made to the French Canadians & to the Six Nations of Indians, to joyn the Kings Troops against the Colonies — but as to both without Success, as I see in the New York, N Haven & Boston prints. Dr. Young just from Boston brings the same Acc^o who conversed with a Gentleman just from Canada. The Tories begin to say that no such Application has been made (i. 503).

Dr. Joseph Young gives the following interesting account of his brother’s experience at Newport:

He accordingly removed there [Newport], and remained until the British concerted their design to seize those who they called the ringleaders of the rebellion and send them in irons to England. But as it would be necessary to seize them all at one time, a particular day was appointed and Wallace of the Rose man-of-war, was deputed to go to Newport and seize Doctor Young, but lest he should have a long passage, I think they allowed him three or four days. He however had a very short passage85 and had time to concert plans with the Tories and watch the Doctor until the arrival of the appointed day. Intelligence of the intent against his liberty was gained by Doctor Young by means of a sewing girl who had frequently been employed in his family, but was now employed in a Tory family. She overheard them whispering and learned that the Dr. was to be taken prisoner that night. She hid her thread to make an errand to go out to get more. She went directly to a merchant who she knew to be a great friend to the Dr. and told him what she had heard. He set off to go to the Dr. but met him by the way, and told him if he was not off the Island before midnight he would be a prisoner on board the Rose man-of-war. The Doctor replied, “What will become of my family?” The generous merchant told him not to concern himself about his family. “You must go off immediately to Philadelphia; I will take care of them and send them to you by water” — which he performed most faithfully without charging the Doctor one farthing. He told him there were spies watching his motions, but that he should come to his house after it began to grow dark; that he would equip him and have him sent off the Island. The Doctor thanked him for his kindness. When he returned home he found two young ladies from a Tory family there who had never visited him before. He was at no loss to guess the cause of such a friendly visit, but assumed a very sprightly air, took his violin and played a number of tunes; then took his oldest daughter into another room pretending to want her assistance to prepare some medicine. He then told her that he had a secret to communicate to her, if she would promise to keep it inviolate even from her mother, which she promised; he then told her the whole, and exhorted her by all means to appear cheerful. He then caused her to pack up some shirts and put the bundle out of a back window. Fortunately about dusk, a messenger called on him to visit a patient at some little distance. He told the messenger to return and that he would set off in a few minutes. The messenger returned, and when it grew dark the Doctor went to his friend, who equipped him in a complete sailor’s dress. Our new made Jack Tar took up his bundle, embarked on board of a boat, and his brother sailors soon landed him on terra firma. He pushed on and soon met his brother fugitives John Hancock and Samuel Adams in Philadelphia; and soon after had the felicity to receive his family from on board of one of his benefactor’s vessels.86

The fugitive hired a house in Philadelphia and fell into some private practice until the General Hospital was established, when he was appointed a senior physician, and with the celebrated Doctor Rush, had the chief care of the Hospital until his death.

In the Pennsylvania Gazette of Wednesday, 26 July, 1775 (p. 3/1), there appeared a paper by Dr. Young on putrid bilious fever. It is dated 17 July, is addressed to Hall and Sellers, the proprietors of the Gazette, and fills almost a column. In this connection it is interesting to quote Dr. Benjamin Rush:

I derived great pleasure from hearing, after the fever had left the city, that calomel had been given with success as a purge in bilious fevers in other parts of the Union besides Philadelphia. Dr. Lawrence87 informed me that he had cured many patients by it of the yellow fever which prevailed in New-York, in the year 1791, and the New-York papers have told us that several practitioners had been in the habit of giving it in the autumnal fevers, with great success, in the western parts of that State. They had probably learned the use of it from Dr. Young, who formerly practised in that part of the United States, and who lost no opportunity of making its praise public wherever he went.88

On 5 August, 1775, Dr. Young wrote from Philadelphia to John Adams a letter which seems to have been in reply to questions of Mr. Adams as to the proper person to be employed to search for minerals, especially lead, “much needed under present circumstances.”89 From Christopher Marshall’s Diary90 we gather several items of interest about Dr. Young after he had taken up his abode in Philadelplhia:

1775, Oct. 10. Dr. Young called at my house, requesting me to endeavor to collect a small supply for Mrs. Cleamuns,91 a woman driven from Boston with several children, whom they purposed to send and settle for the present amongst a set of his friends near Albany (pp. 46, 47).

1775 December 23. Lent Dr. Young an octavo volume (p. 54).

1776 March 13. After dinner, went to Dr. Young’s. Stayed there hearing him read a piece as answer to Common Sense, called Plain Truth, but very far from coming up to the title (p. 62).

1776 May 30. After dinner went to James Cannon’s . . . Dr. Young being returned from Yorktown, came there to see me . . . Heard of his declaration of his expedition, read his letters from the Committee92 (p. 74).

In the summer of 1776 Dr. Young was attached to the Philadelphia Rifle Battalion.93

The letter-book of Edmund Quincy (1703–1788) contains the draught of an interesting letter dated Lancaster, Massachusetts, 25 March, 1776, to his son-in-law John Hancock, then in Philadelphia in attendance on Congress, in which there are allusions to Dr. Young: “I thank you for your hint to Dr. Y. of writing to me, under cover, the political news of the day.” In a postscript he adds:

Wrote at same time, and enclosed, a letter to daughter Hancock, in which I acquainted her as follows: . . . Refer her to Dr. Y’s letter . . . To send me newspapers or other publications; and to put Dr. Y upon writing frequently of occurrences, especially what relates to French proceedings, either from F[rance] or W[est] Indies.94

Notwithstanding his residence in Philadelphia, Dr. Young appears to have been again in Albany in May, 1776, where he was a member of the Committee of Correspondence as late as the following November.95

Again we have recourse to Marshall:

1776, July 3. Near nine [P. M.] went to meet the Committee of Privates with others at Thorne’s school-room,96 where three speakers, viz., James Cannon, Timothy Matlack [and] Dr. Young flourished away on the necessity of choosing eight persons to be proposed . . . for our representatives in Convention (p. 81).

1776, July 10. To James Cannon’s; drank coffee there; stayed till past nine. There were John Adams, Paul Fooks, Dr. Young, Timothy Matlack (p. 83).

1776, Oct. 21. To the State House Yard, where it’s thought about fifteen hundred people assembled, in order to deliberate on the change of sundry matters contained in Form of Government, settled in the late Convention . . . Chief speakers, against [the] Convention, were Col. McKean and Col. Dickinson; for the Convention, James Cannon, Timothy Matlack, Dr. Young and Col. Smith of York County (p. 98).

In a letter to Samuel Perley dated. 19 June, 1809, John Adams wrote:

In 1775 and 1776 there had been great disputes, in Congress and in the several States, concerning a proper constitution for the several States to adopt for their government. A Convention in Pennsylvania had adopted a government in one representative assembly and Dr. Franklin was the President of that Convention. The Doctor, when he went to France in 1776, carried with him the printed copy of that Constitution, and it was immediately propagated through France that it was the plan of government of Mr. Franklin. In truth it was not Franklin, but Timothy Matlack, James Cannon, Thomas Young, and Thomas Paine, who were the authors of it.97

John Adams wrote to Dr. Benjamin Rush, 12 April, 1809, as follows:

I call you to witness that I was the first member of Congress who ventured to come out in public, as I did in January, 1776, in my “Thoughts on Government, in a letter from a gentleman to his friend,” that is, Mr. Wythe, in favor of a government in three branches, with an independent judiciary. This pamphlet, you know, was very unpopular. No man appeared in public to support it, but yourself. You attempted in the public papers to give it some countenance, but without much success. Franklin leaned against it. Dr. Young, Mr. Timothy Matlack, and Mr. James Cannon, and I suppose Mr. George Bryan were alarmed and displeased at it. Mr. Thomas Paine was so highly offended with it, that he came to visit me at my chamber at Mrs. Yard’s to remonstrate and even scold at me for it, which he did in very ungeuteel terms . . . Paine’s wrath was excited because my plan of government was essentially different from the silly projects that he had published in his “Common Sense.” By this means I became suspected and unpopular with the leading demagogues and the whole constitutional party in Pennsylvania.98

In a paper entitled The Council of Censors,99 Mr.. Lewis H. Meader speaks of “the radical wing of the people’s party, in which were Timothy Matlack, James Cannon, George Bryan, Dr. Thomas Young, and Thomas Paine” (p. 280), and of its great influence in framing the Constitution of Pennsylvania (p. 279). Continuing, he says:

The Constitution of Pennsylvania was launched upon a stormy sea . . . The Whigs divided: some wanted to revise the Constitution, while others wanted it kept as it was framed. The laws were disregarded. The trouble “brought the dregs to the top.”

The influence of Cannon, Matlack, and Dr. Young was still felt. In the opinion of their opponents they held “back the strength of the State by urging the execution of their rascally Government in preference to supporting measures for repelling the common enemy.”

The two chief points of attack in the constitution were the Legislature, with its single House, and the method of amending (p. 285).

Dr. Young’s active interest in public affairs, however, did not preclude the exercise of his profession. At a meeting of the Council of Safety, 14 December, 1776, it was —

Resolved, that Doct’r Thomas Young be appointed to assist Doct’r Potts in taking care of sick soldiers of the army, for which he shall have the rank and pay of Senior Surgeon in the Continental Hospital.100

In the following January he had charge of one of the wards in the “Bettering House,” as it was called, where two smallpox patients were committed to his care.101

Under date of Tuesday, 4 February, 1777, the Journal of Congress records that —

A memorial from Dr. Thomas Young was read:

Ordered, That it be referred to the medical committee.102

Unfortunately, however, neither the subject of the memorial nor the action upon it appears; and the memorial itself is not on file.

That Dr. Young and his household had not forgotten their Boston friends is shown by a letter written at Philadelphia 29 April, 1777, by Dr. J. B. Cutting103 to Dr. John Warren concerning hospital arrangements, surgeons’ appointments, and some social matters, in which he says: “Dr. Young’s family send their best regards to you.”104

Reference has already been made to Dr. Young’s friendship with Ethan Allen and to his having coined the word Vermont. His unfortunate and ill-judged attempt to secure the independence of the New Hampshire Grants and its recognition by Congress, — one of his last and most important public acts, — remains to be mentioned. The facts appear in the following Address, which, preceded by a Resolution of Congress of 15 May, 1776, was printed in the form of a handbill:

To the Inhabitants of

VERMONT

A Free and Independent State, bounding on the River Connecticut and Lake Champlain.

Philadelphia, April 11, 1777.

Gentlemen, — Numbers of you are knowing to the zeal with which I have exerted myself in your behalf from the beginning of your struggle with the New York Monopolizers. As the Supreme Arbiter of right has smiled on the just cause of North America at large, you, in a peculiar manner, have been highly favoured. God has done by you the best thing commonly done for our species. He has put it fairly in your power to help yourselves.

I have taken the minds of several leading Members in the Honourable the Continental Congress, and can assure you that you have nothing to do but send attested copies of the Recommendation to take up government to every township in your district, and invite all your freeholders and inhabitants to meet in their respective townships and choose members for a General Convention, to meet at an early day, to choose Delegates for the General Congress, a Committee of Safety, and to form a Constitution for your State.

Your friends here tell me that some are in doubt whether Delegates from your district would be admitted into Congress. I tell you to organize fairly, and make the experiment, and I will ensure your success at the risk of my reputation as a man of honour or common sense. Indeed, they can by no means refuse you! You have as good a right to choose how you will be governed, and by whom, as they had.

I have recommended to your Committee the Constitution of Pennsylvania for a model, which, with a very little alteration, will, in my opinion, come as near perfection as anything yet concerted by mankind. This Constitution has been sifted with all the criticism that a band of despots were masters of and has bid defiance to their united powers.

The alteration I would recommend is, that all the Bills intended to be passed into Laws should be laid before the Executive Board for their perusal and proposals of amendment. All the difference then between such a Constitution and those of Connecticut and Rhode-Island, in the grand outlines is, that in one case the Executive power can advise and in the other compel. For my own part, I esteem the people at large the true proprietors of governmental power. They are the supreme constituent power, and of course their immediate Representatives are the supreme Delegate power; and as soon as the delegate power gets too far out of the hands of the constituent power, a tyranny is in some degree established.

Happy are you that in laying the foundation of a new government, you have a digest drawn from the purest fountain of antiquity, and improved by the readings and observations of the great Doctor Franklin, David Rittenhouse, Esq., and others. I am certain you may build on such a basis a system which will transmit liberty and happiness to posterity.

Let the scandalous practice of bribing men by places, commissions, &c, be held in abhorrence among you. By entrusting only men of capacity and integrity in public affairs, and by obliging even the best men to fall into the common mass of the people every year, and be sensible of their need of the popular good will to sustain their political importance, are your liberties well secured. These plans effectually promise this security.

May Almighty God smile upon your arduous and important undertaking, and inspire you with that wisdom, virtue, public spirit and unanimity, which ensures success in the most hazardous enterprizes! I am, Gentlemen, Your sincere friend and humble servant,

Thomas Young.

April 12, 1777.

Your committee have obtained for you a copy of the Recommendation of Congress to all such bodies of men as looked upon themselves returned to a state of nature, to adopt such government as should, in the opinion of the Representatives of the people, best conduce to the happiness and safety of their constituents in particular and America in general.

You may perhaps think strange that nothing further is done for you at this time than to send you this extract. But if you consider that till you incorporate and actually announce to Congress your having become a body politic, they cannot treat with you as a free State. While New-York claims you as subjects of that government, my humble opinion is, your own good sense will suggest to you, that no time is to be lost in availing yourselves of the same opportunity your assuming mistress is improving to establish a dominion for herself and you too.

A WORD TO THE WISE IS SUFFICIENT.105

As might have been foreseen, the Council of Safety of New York vigorously opposed the action of Vermont in a letter to the President of Congress.106 The climax of this movement, which was reached less than a week after Dr. Young’s sudden death, is best described in the words of the official record:

MONDAY, June 23, 1777.

A delegate from the State of New-York laid before Congress a printed paper, signed “A word to the wise is sufficient,” containing an extract from the minutes of Congress, and a letter signed Thomas Young, to the inhabitants of Vermont, dated “Philadelphia, April 11, 1777,” which was read:

Ordered, That the letter from P. Van Cortlandt, and the foregoing printed paper, and the papers formerly received from the convention of New-York, respecting the difference likely to arise between that state and the inhabitants of the place called the New-Hampshire Grants, and also the papers received from the said inhabitants, be referred to a committee of the whole.107

On Wednesday, 25 June, the committee of the whole considered the various papers in the case and postponed the further consideration of it.108 The matter was finally disposed of on —

MONDAY, June 30, 1777.

Congress resolved itself into a committee of the whole, to consider farther the letters and papers from the state of New-York, the petition from Jonas Fay, &c.109 and the printed papers; and, after some time spent thereon, the president resumed the chair, and Mr. Harrison reported, that the committee have had under consideration the letters and papers referred to them, and have come to sundry resolutions thereupon, which he was ready to report.

Ordered, That the report be now received.

The report from the committee of the whole Congress being read, was agreed to, as follows:

Resolved, That Congress is composed of delegates chosen by, and representing the communities respectively inhabiting the territories of New-Hampshire, Massachusetts-Bay, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New-York, New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North-Carolina, South-Carolina, and Georgia, as they respectively stood at the time of its first institution; that it was instituted for the purposes of securing and defending the communities aforesaid against the usurpations, oppressions, and hostile invasions of Great-Britain; and that, therefore, it cannot be intended that Congress, by any of its proceedings, would do or recommend or countenance any thing injurious to the rights and jurisdictions of the several communities which it represents.

Resolved, That the independent government attempted to be established by the people styling themselves inhabitants of the New-Hampshire Grants, can derive no countenance or justification fron the act of Congress declaring the United Colonies to be independent of the crown of Great-Britain, nor from any other act or resolution of Congress.

Resolved, That the petition of Jonas Fay, Thomas Chittenden, Heman Allen and Reuben Jones, in the name and behalf of the people styling themselves as aforesaid, praying that “their declaration, that they would consider themselves as a free and independent state may be received; that the district in the said petition described may be ranked among the free and independent states, and that delegates there from may be admitted to seats in Congress,” be dismissed.

Resolved, That Congress, by raising and officering the regiment commanded by col. Warner, never meant to give any encouragement to the claim of the people aforesaid, to be considered as an independent state; but that the reason which induced Congress to form that corps was, that many officers of different states, who had served in Canada, and alleged that they could soon raise a regiment, but were then unprovided for, might be reinstated in the service of the United States.

Whereas, a printed paper, addressed to the inhabitants of the district aforesaid, dated Philadelphia, April 11, 1777, and subscribed Thomas Young, was laid before Congress by one of the delegates of New-York, to which address is prefixed the resolution of Congress of the 15th May, 1770, and in which are contained the following paragraphs: “I have taken the minds of several of the leading members of the honorable the Continental Congress, and can assure you, that you have nothing to do, but to send attested copies of the recommendation to take up government, to every township in your district, and invite all the freeholders and inhabitants to meet and choose members for a general convention, to meet at an early day to choose delegates for the general Congress and committee of safety, and to form a constitution for yourselves. Your friends here tell me that some are in doubt whether delegates from your district would be admitted into Congress. I tell you to organize fairly, and make the experiment, and I will ensure you success at the risque of my reputation, as a man of honor or common sense. Indeed, they can by no means, refuse you: you have as good a right to choose how you will be governed, and by whom, as they had.”

Resolved, That the contents of the said paragraphs are derogatory to the honor of Congress, are a gross misrepresentation of the resolutions of Congress therein referred to, and tend to deceive and mislead the people to whom they are addressed.110

The death of Dr. Young was announced in the newspapers as follows:

Philadelphia, June 28 [Saturday, 1777]. . . . Last Tuesday died of a fever in this city, Doctor Thomas Young, one of the Senior Surgeons of the Military Hospital. He has left a sickly widow and six children wholly unprovided for.111

Another announcement reads:

[Died] At Philadelphia, the 24th of June, Dr. Thomas Young, one of the senior surgeons of the military hospital; formerly of this town. He has left a sickly widow and six children wholly unprovided for.112

Dr. Young’s death and burial occurred on the same day, doubtless on account of the contagious nature of the fever of which he died. In a letter to Governor Jonathan Trumbull, dated Philadelphia, 5 July, 1777, William Williams writes:

We did not arrive here till Tuesday y^e 24^th ult^o. Dr. Young died lately of a Fever caught in attending y^e Congress Hospitals in y^e City, & was buried the day we came into town, poor man He now knows the reality of things he lately disputed & disbelieved, can find out very little of his last Ideas but believe he died just as he lived, expecting if there was a future State that a man of his Benevolence must be happy.113

Dr. Joseph Young’s account of his brother concludes in these words:

He died in June, 1777, of a most virulent putrid fever, which appeared to be almost as fatal as the plague. His very valuable library, which he had collected with great care and cost, was sold for Continental money, and was in a great measure lost to his family. These are a few of the incidents which occurred in the life of a man of superior talents, and, as far as I am capable of judging, of the most consumate physician I ever knew. He married Mary, the daughter of Captain [Garret] Winegar, of Sharon, Conn.,114 by whom he had two sons, viz: John and Rosmond, and four daughters, viz: Susannah, Catharine, Sarah, and Mary. Rosmond died young. Susan was married to a Mr. [Michael] Knies of Philadelphia, and had two sons, Thomas and John. She died about 1803 or ’4;115 her sons Thomas116 and John removed to the westward of Albany, and their grandmother, Mary Young, lives with them. John Young, the only surviving son of Doctor Thomas, studied physic under his father and was a Mate in the Hospital until his father died, and was then sent to the Hospital at Albany to be under my care. After the conclusion of the War he practiced in Fayette county, Pennsylvania, but removed to Hendersonville, Tennessee, where he was killed by a fall from his horse in November, 1805. He married Mary Hammond at Fayette by whom he had four children, viz: Mary, Thomas, William, and Sarah. Catharine, the second daughter of Doctor Thomas, was married to Mr. Daniel Castle, who removed to near Canandaigua Lake, where she died, but I do not know how many children she left. Sarah was married to Mr. Clark at Sharon or Amenia;117 and Mary was married to a Doctor Strong.118

Miss Mary Hoes Reed, formerly of Amenia and well informed as to its history and families, but now of Rutherford, New Jersey, writes:

I have here a copy of Rev. Ebenezer Knibloe’s Church Records and find the following:

Nov. 19, 1761 Joseph Young119 married Sarah Brown.
July 17, 1774 Josiah Strong and his wife admitted to the church.
June 25, 1776 Mr. Josiah Strong & wife had Lydia baptized.
Feb. 21, 1779 Josiah Strong had a child baptized by Dr. John Rodgers.
April 19, 1781 Mr. Merrit Clerk of Oyster River at West Haven [New Haven County, Connecticut] has son Nicholas (born April 17, 1781) baptized.120
Sep. 16, 1781 Daniel Castle & his wife, daughter of Doct. Thomas Young deceased, had son James baptized by Rev. David Rose.121
May 12, 1782 Susannah Nase, daughter of Doct. Thos. Young deceased, had her son John baptized by Rev. David Rose.
May 25, 1783 Daniel Castle and his wife had a child baptized by Rev. David Rose.

The Hon. Lawrence Van Alstyne, Judge of Probate of the Sharon District, Connecticut, sends me the following inscription, copied from a stone in the graveyard at Amenia Union:

Mrs. Susanna Knies, relict of Michael Knies, Esq. and daughter of the late Dr. Thomas Young, died Oct. 14, 1801, aged 44.122

The care taken in these baptismal and burial records to connect children and grandchildren with Dr.Young testifies the respect in which his memory was held, long after his decease, by clergy and kinsfolk.

In Christopher Marshall’s Diary, we get a final glimpse of Dr. Young’s family in Philadelphia, after his decease:

1777, July 14. I went this morning and visited several of our Philadelphia friends, and at the same time in company with our friend George Schlosser, reminded them, as well as some of our Lancaster friends, whom we visited, of the distress poor Dr. Young (deceased)’s family was left in, most of whom, to their honor be it remembered, gave me what they thought proper, in order for me to remit it for their relief, the which I accepted and kindly thanked them on the family’s behalf (pp. 119, 120).

1777, August 20. I gave to James Cannon, to carry to the Widow Young, the donations I collected in this place [Lancaster, Penn.], which, with my own, amounted to Seventeen Pounds, six shillings (p. 122).

Although evidently an advanced thinker in religion and politics whose views failed of the approval of conservative minds, Dr. Young appears to have been a devoted husband and father and a sincere, ardent and unselfish lover of his country, who scorned to take advantage of his position of leadership to enrich himself or his family. It is probable that the only property he left was the equity in the before-mentioned real estate in Wing’s Lane, Boston. Administration on his estate was not granted till 5 May, 1779, when letters were issued by the Probate Court for the District of Sharon, County of Litchfield, Connecticut, to Lieutenant David Doty of Amenia, New York,123 whose sister, Elizabeth Doty, had married, 28 June, 1764, at Amenia Union, John Winegar, a brother of Dr. Young’s widow.124 The only other proceeding of record concerning this estate is the order of Court, 2 September, 1783, already referred to,125 to sell the real estate and make return thereon;126 but none was made. These proceedings plainly indicate that after his decease, some members at least of Dr. Young’s family returned to Amenia to reside.

A paper hitherto unpublished testifies that Dr. Young’s ill-starred efforts in behalf of Vermont, and the straitened financial condition in which he had left his family, were not forgotten by some of the most prominent men in the State.

To the Hon^bl General Assembly of the State of Vermont convened at Rutland. The petition of the subscribers Humbly sheweth, that your petitioners with many others in this State Retain the highest feelings of gratitude to all those persons who have stood forth in early period and in time of utmost uncertainty & Distress to assist & promote the interest of this State. And we feel a more particular Gratitude to such persons who have exerted themselves & pointed out a system to be pursued to Bring this government into existence & who have acted from the most disinterested motives any farther than respected Humanity & who has in consequence thereof suffered Great Injury in personal character & private property, We beg leave to represent our former worthy friend Doc^r Thomas Young, Dec^d as coming completely under this description from the decided part which he took in our favour in the most critical Moments as Respected the existence of this State, having pointed out the system to be pursued to establish Government by a separate jurisdiction & to whom we stand indebted for the Name of (Vermont) We now beg leave to Recom[mend] his family who are left in low and indigent circumstances [to your] Notice & patronage & pray in their Behalf that [your honors] consider the merit due to our Dec^d friend & [that an] Hon^bl Compensation be made to them by a Gra[nt of] some land in such part of the State as shall be vacant which after a determination your petitioners will point out. Your petitioners pray that [a] committee may be appointed hereon that the circumstances may be more fully Represented [& a] Report made to your honors as in Duty bound your petitioners ever pray.

Tho^S Chit[tenden]

Ethan Alle[n]

Joseph Fay

Rutland 20 Oct 1786

[Filed]

Petition of Et Allen & Jos Fay

Oct 24, 1786 referred to next session. Attest Ros^l Hopkins Clk,

Filed 24 Oct 1786.127

This tribute to a forgotten patriot may be fitly closed by the following passage from Ira Allen’s History:

Dr. Thomas Young, of Philadelphia, who greatly interested himself in behalf of the settlers of Vermont; by several publications, he was highly distinguished as a philosopher, philanthropist, and patriot, and for his erudition and brilliancy of imagination. His death was universally regretted by the friends of American Independence, as one of her warm supporters, and by the republic of letters as a brilliant ornament.128

Mr. Thomas Minns presented to the Society four photographs of portraits by Copley of Thomas Hancock, the noted Boston merchant, of his wife Lydia (Henchman) Hancock, and of their nephew John Hancock. The original portraits were recently sold in Boston to settle the estate of the late Washington Hancock of London.

Mr. Minns also stated that there had recently been placed in the First Church in Boston a life-size recumbent statue by Bela L. Pratt of the Rev. John Cotton, the likeness of which had been taken from an original portrait of Cotton in the possession of his descendant Miss Adele G. Thayer of Boston.

Dr. James B. Ayer exhibited some large photographs — showing both the exterior and the interior of the Consistoire, Church of St. Pierre, Geneva — and some printed books129 which illustrate the stay of the English exiles in Geneva and Frankfort, indicating that the local historians are now greatly interested in the subject. The latter feel that a knowledge of the growth of English Puritanism, and consequently a knowledge of our early New England history, cannot be arrived at without an acquaintance with the time of the English exiles’ residence at Geneva and Frankfort and their relations there with Calvin and Knox.

Mr. Albert Matthews spoke of the destruction by fire of the second Harvard College on 24 January, 1764, and of the laying of the foundation of the present Harvard Hall on 26 June following;130 and communicated a poem commemorating the completion of the building in 1766. In a letter dated 15 July, 1765, Governor Bernard said that “a Magnificent Building has been erected and is nearly finished;”131 while Quincy stated that the building was completed in June, 1766.132 The poem in question was printed in the Boston Gazette of 7 April, 1766.133 The author was presumably a graduate of the class of 1763 or 1764 or 1765, as he had not yet taken his second degree; but his identity has eluded research. Mr. Matthews reminded the members that the present Harvard Hall was planned by Governor Bernard, who, according to Hutchinson, “was a very ingenious architect.”134 The poem follows.

The following POEM, written by a young Gentleman who lately receiv’d his first Degree at Harvard College, we doubt not will be acceptable to our Readers.

Harvardinum restauratum.

WHILE some in politics are deep immers’d,

And liberty’s just cause with patriot fire

Defend, nor fear oppressive acts t’ oppose;

Acts, only fit for those ignoble souls,

To whom the ratling of a slavish chain

Is grateful music; O! permit a muse

Unvers’d in state affairs, tho’ freedom’s friend,

To sing of diff’rent themes, soft to the ear —

Parnassian heights, the pure Castalian fount,

And seats to the muses sacred, where the foes

Of science, free from ev’ry anxious care,

With intellectual food may feast their minds.

In Cambridge’ happy plains, behold the piles

Of lofty venerable buildings rise,

The pride, the glory of New Albion’s shore!

To our fore fathers’ memories, what praise

From us their offspring, for their care, is due;

Who, when their strength was small, nor fortune smil’d,

Nor affluence crown’d their labours, strongly urg’d

By love of liberty and virtue’s cause (Sure indication of a noble mind)

Couvinc’d that where dark ignorance prevails,

There superstition reigns, and slavery

Is easily impos’d; fell En’mies both

To noble sentiments, to manly thought,

Laid firm the basis of these happy seats,

From whence the beams of science issuing forth,

Enlighten far and wide this western world!

Nor is the present generation void

Of their great grand sires’ gen’rous sentiments;

A love of lib’ral arts, not to few breasts

Appears confin’d: Our noble senators,

Whose words and actions, when in council met,

The gen’ral voice must ever be esteem’d,

Thro’ our provincial tract (not least in worth

Among her sister colonies confess’d)

Bespeak this love extensively diffus’d.

Nor needs our retrospective view extend,

For such a proof, to times long since elaps’d;

A recent instance of their ardent Zeal,

True learning’s cause, by gen’rous aid, t’ advance,

Each one must recollect, when he surveys

That lofty Edifice, which to the Pray’r135

Of those whose skilful hand our tender youth,

In their pursuit of letters wisely guides,

They bade arise, nor grudg’d to sacrifice

The golden store to such a gen’ral good.

But now, behold! a scene diversify’d

Opes to my busy thoughts. In that dread night

When Hyperborean blasts rush’d o’er the Plain,

When all within their walls, by driving snows,

Were close pent up, what pen the deep distress

And heart-felt pangs can paint, when wak’d from sleep

By cry of fire up-starting in amaze,

From venerable Harvard’s sacred roofs,

Where learning’s treasures lay, the spiral flame

Forth bursting we beheld! Our senators,

By fell contagion, from the Capital

Driv’n out, then took their lodging round these walls:

Quick they rush’d forth amid huge banks of snow,

With resolution arm’d; each active hand,

Obedient to the heart, in learning’s cause Engag’d,

was full employ’d, with force to oppose

The stanch devourer, but alas! in vain!

Down rush precipitate, with thund’ring crash,

The roofs, the walls, and in one ruinous heap,

The ancient dome, and all it’s treasures lie!

The tear forth gushing and the deep fetch’d sigh

Who cou’d restrain, when godlike science felt

A wound so near her heart? But soon our tears

Begin t’ assuage; the fathers of our laud

Command another edifice t’ ascend,

From the same spot where ancient Harvard stood;

But O! how diff’rent, from that antique pile!

In room of Gothic structure, erst the taste

Of Britain’s sons, now Grecian elegance

And Roman Grandeur rising to the view,

Here strike the modern eye. — But thou my muse

No longer hover round these new-built walls;

For what are walls unfurnish’d? empty things;

Fit treasures give them worth, be these thy theme.

In our distressful thoughts, when Harvard fell

To flames a sacrifice, the second place

The ruin’d fabric held; our anxious minds

For loss of books and philosophic aids

Felt far severer pangs: But from our breasts

The heart felt grief, which like a Vulture gnaws

The vitals, soon was banish’d. straight appears

Of Massachusetts’ sons a godlike band.

With hearts engag’d in learning’s glorious cause,

(Full well the worth they knew) nor spar’d their wealth,

When wounded science ask’d it’s pow’rful aid.

Many, with lib’ral hand, bestow’d large gifts;

But like some lofty tow’r, whose rev’rend head,

Erected high, o’ertops the neighbouring roofs;

One, whose beneficence and pious care136

Confer’d the means, by which the sacred Page,

In the original, by Harvard’s sons

Might be explor’d, rose far above the rest

In noble purposes to this fam’d seat.

Tho’ death prevented, by a sudden shaft,

His hand from off’ ring what his heart design’d,

His nephew, who inherits with his wealth,

His gen’rous spirit, gave the purpos’d sum.

Nor was this noble spirit here confin’d;

A sister colony, that oft has sent137

Her tender sons to drink at Harvard’s fount,

Mov’d by her fall, reach’d out a helping hand.

To Britain, patroness of lib’ral arts,

O’er the Atlantic flies the dismal news

Of our calamity. The many hands,

Op’d by the gen’rous heart, to send

Relief From that fam’d isle, my muse could now recount;

But chief to thee, known by a name enrlear’d138

To Harvard’s sons; to thee, whose noble breast

Blind bigotry, offspring of narrow minds,

Fell party zeal, the bane of all that’s good

Ne’er felt, belongs the tribute of her song.

But sure, a Panegyrist’s pen to raise

A monument to thy munificence

Thou need’st not; Harvard’s new built walls contain

Fairest memorials of thy lib’ral soul.

From that grand alcove, destin’d to receive

The learned treasures by thy bounteous hand

Presented, we behold, with wond’ring eyes,

The splendid tomes, throughout the spacious room,

Like orient sol diffuse their beamy glories!

The marble column, the triumphal arch,

Let haughty monarchs raise, with vast expence,

T’ immortalize their name; when these are fallen

To time’s devouring hand a sacrifice,

Treasures like thine, surviving shall record

The lib’ral donor’s worth — How chang’d the scene!

That blow which seem’d to give a deadly stab

To science, proves her friend,’tis that has serv’d

To raise her glory. As the skilful hands

Of those vers’d in the cesculapian art,

T’ a mortal frame, by bloody wounds depress’d,

More than it’s pristine vigor oft restore;

So Harvard’s gen’rous friends her wounds have heal’d;

Nor ceas’d they here, their rich restoratives

Have rais’d her to a height unknown before.

Philosophy again erects it’s head,139

And universal science now puts on

It’s wonted smiles. — O sons of Harvard! say,

Where can be found a lot so blest as your’s!

Fast by your side flows the Pierian spring

Exhaustless, in a thousand diff’rent streams

Courting your lips, ne’er let it court in vain:

Here slake your thirst, the copious draught imbibe,

Slight sips intoxicate, these shun as pests.

Fell envy, child of dæmons, from your breasts

Exterminate; but let your youthful minds

Be fir’d with emulation, diffrent guest;

That gnaws upon the vitals, this inspires

To arduous attempts, “attempts in which

Tis glorious ev’n to fall”! — O’er the fam’d page,

Wrote by the learned sages who adorn’d

Old Greece and Rome, O trim the midnight lamp!

From ev’ry fragrant flow’r in learning’s field

Extract the treasur’d sweets: Let ev’ry thought

Be elevated high: Let deathless young,140

And fam’d Longinus all be made your own;

Then take the pen and ease your teeming minds,

Success can never fail. Where am I rapt!

A Genius seems to whisper in my ear, —

Soon shall be seen fair Harvard’s rising glory;

’Tis yet in embryo; lo! her future sons,

Blest with new aids, shall mount the steeps of fame;

Remotest fields of science shall appear

Plain to their view. Some, with sagacious minds

Searching the depths of nature, various truths,

Which even to that bright genius Newton’s self

Lay hid, as if enwrap’d in sev’nfold night,

Shall quick investigate: While others, fir’d

By all the tuneful nine, shall emulate

The Greek and Roman bards; nor shall success

Be wanting: Some, inspir’d with noblest fire,

With Pindar’s impetus shall rush along,

Whose ev’ry verse, with rapid vehemence,

Like to the victors’ car (of which he sings)

By fiery steeds along the Stadium whirl’d,

Or like some torrent, from the mountain’s side

Rolling amain; flows on without control,

In freest measures, emblem of his mind,

Daring, unbounded: Some to Epic song

Shall rise, nor shall their strains discover less

Of grand description, sentiment sublime,

Imagination’s force and fancy’s flight,

Than those of Maro, the fam’d Mantuan bard,

Or Greek Mœonides, still more renown’d,

Or British Milton much surpassing both!

Others to gayer themes shall tune the lyre,

And in their song, display the elegance

And courtly wit of Horace’ polish’d strains,

Or charms of old Anacreon’s gentle lays,

Where native beauties strike th’ admiring mind

Beyond the studied ornaments of dress.

Some form’d for public speakers, here shall rise,

With eloquence array’d: Some, from the desk

(In virtue’s cause engag’d) with sacred fire

Shall melt th’ admiring audience: Some, employ’d

To plead the cause of justice at the bar,

Shall gain th’ attentive ear: While others plac’d

In that grand council, where the public weal

Is sought, with zeal inspir’d to serve the state;

Furnish’d with Ciceronian rhetoric;

The soft, the smooth persuasives, from their tongue

Mellifluent shall insinuate; or fill’d

With Grecian energy, with Attic fire,

Shall wield the thunder of Demosthenes,

Rousing such torpid souls as motionless

Could see the state enslav’d. — But cease my muse,

These strains give o’er; the heav’nly form that deign’d

These pleasing futures to disclose, is fled.

O Massachusetts! with a Parent’s care

Protect these happy seats; your genial smiles‡141

Let these enjoy, smiles that must serve to raise

Fair Harvard to that pitch the muse has sung.

Let Cam and Isis then unite and flow

In harmony; the single stream that laves

The banks where Harvard stands shall equal both!

The Rev. Henry A. Parker read the following paper on —

THE ENGLISH WENTWORTH FAMILY.

The ancient Yorkshire family of Wentworth is interesting to the student of New England history both on account of Thomas Wentworth, Earl of Strafford, and the other royalist Wentworths of the seventeenth century, and on account of the distinguished American branch of the Wentworths who early settled in New Hampshire.

The family has received rather an unusual amount of attention from a series of eminent genealogists. There is no doubt of its antiquity or of its historical importance, but, as we easily discover, there are great differences of opinion as to details of the pedigree.

Wentworth pedigrees were recorded by Tonge in 1530, the first known visitation of Yorkshire, and probably in every subsequent visitation; and besides the very elaborate study of the Wentworth family by Richard Gascoigne and by his friend Dugdale, the Rev. Joseph Hunter and Colonel Chester — two of the most eminent of the nineteenth century genealogists — devoted special attention to the study of the history of this family. Several of the Yorkshire visitations, all containing Wentworth pedigrees, have been edited by distinguished scholars — Mr. Longstaffe, Mr. Metcalfe, Mr. Foster, and Mr. Clay.142

The family was probably settled not long after the Norman conquest at Wentworth in the parish of Wath, in the wapentake of Strafford, Yorkshire. The family was not by any means of the rank of the great feudatories of those parts, Percy, Warren, and the like, nor did it rank in the same class with the great families of the second rank, subinfeudatories such as Vavasour, FitzWilliam, and Fleming. But it maintained itself, grew stronger, and spread abroad in numerous cadet branches by marriage with heiresses, until before the Civil War it had become one of the greatest of English families. In England, however, all are now gone, and the surname is borne there, so far as appears, by persons of position, only as adopted by descendants of female branches.

Writing in 1831, the Rev. Joseph Hunter, after noting the end of the regular male succession of the senior line, the Wentworths of Wentworth-Woodhouse, by the death of William the second Earl Strafford in 1695, said, “the extinction of the other principal branches of the family took place in rapid succession after that of the eldest branch.” Two had already become extinct: 1631, Wentworth of Gosfield, by the death of Sir John Wentworth; 1667, Wentworth of Nettlestead, by the death of Thomas, Earl of Cleveland; 1695, Wentworth of Wentworth-Woodhouse, by the death of the second Earl of Strafford; 1741, Wentworth of Elmsall, by the death of Sir Butler Cavendish Wentworth, Bart.; 1787, Wentworth of South Elmsall, by the death of Hugh Wentworth, Esq.; 1789, Wentworth of Wooley and Hickelton, by the death of Godfrey Wentworth, Esq.; 1792, Wentworth of Bretton, by the death of Sir Thomas Blackett, Bart.; 1799, the Earls of Strafford of the second creation, by the death of Frederick Thomas, Earl of Strafford; 1800, “a younger branch of Wentworth of Wooley, by the death of Peregrine Wentworth, Esq., the last male who can on sufficient evidence be attached to the stock of this noble family.”143 We may, however, add: 1844, the returned American Wentworths, by the death of Sir Charles Mary Wentworth, Bart.

It is likely that Hunter had him especially in mind in writing as above of Peregrine Wentworth, and with good reason; for the descent of the American family was only proved a generation later by Colonel Chester. Yet the heralds had assigned to Governor Wentworth, the first baronet of this line, arms which were but slightly differenced from the Wentworths of Wentworth-Woodhouse,144 — a proceeding by no means defensible and particularly offensive to the conscientious antiquary. Mr. John Wentworth of Chicago, who compiled the excellent Wentworth Genealogy, says, undoubtedly correctly, that neither the last baronet nor his father knew their line of descent.145 Colonel Chester’s proof, on which he justly prided himself, was not indeed sufficient, as I imagine, to be received as conclusive in the House of Lords in case of a claimant for a peerage, but is very good historical evidence. Hunter says that in the great Civil War all the branches of Wentworth took the King’s side. But we now find, oddly enough, that the history of the house in England closes with the descendant of the Colonial Puritan Elder, William Wentworth of the Hutchinson connection, of Exeter, New Hampshire.

It may be noticed that three branches of the family had attained to earldoms and that four other branches had obtained baronetcies. These honors came rather late. The first peerage in the family was obtained by Sir Thomas Wentworth of the cadet branch of Nettlestead, Suffolk, who was created a baron in 1529 by Henry VIII, who was then engaged in packing the House of Lords with a view to the suppression of the monasteries and the confiscation of their property. After passing through the hands of the Baroness Wentworth, a mistress of the Duke of Monmouth, this barony passed by her sister to Lovelace, to Noel, to Milbanke, to Gordon, to King, which last family now holds it. The fourth Lord Wentworth of this creation was created Earl of Cleveland and distinguished himself as did his son fighting for the King in the Civil War.

This Nettlestead family was founded by the marriage of a Wentworth with the heiress of the Despencers; he came from the cadet house of Elmsall, founded by the marriage of a Wentworth with the heiress of the Bissets.

The main stem, the Wentworths of Wentworth-Woodhouse, only reached the peerage nearly a century later, though William Wentworth, who inherited a Large accession of property from his mother, the heiress of the Gascoignes, was created a baronet in 1611. His second son, Thomas Wentworth, the most distinguished of all the family, may be said to have promptly made up for lost time, for, 22 July, 1628, be was created Baron Wentworth of Wentworth Woodhouse and at the same time Baron of Newmarch and Oversley, while less than five months later, 13 December, 1628, he was created Viscount Wentworth. On 12 January, 1639–40, he was created Baron of Raby, and also Earl of Strafford; so that when he was attainted early in the following year he had three baronies, a viscounty, and an earldom. And it has been said that it was the acquisition of one of these rather superfluous baronies, the Barony of Raby, that lost him his head. One branch of the great family of the Nevils had been Barons of Raby; from them he was descended; but Raby had come into the possession of Sir Harry Vane, the elder, whose intense hatred of Strafford is said to have been caused by Wentworth’s taking from his estate a title which Vane desired for himself, and in revenge pursued him to his death.146 Three months to the day after Strafford was beheaded, his son William received from the King all the peerage honors which had become extinct by his father’s attainder. This was not an act of gratuitous folly on the King’s part, but in fulfilment of a promise made to the late Earl. All, however, became extinct by the death of this William without issue, excepting only this unfortunate Barony of Raby, which, having been created with a special remainder, descended to the grandson of the first Lord Strafford’s elder brother, and is still in existence, having passed in the female line to Conolly and from that family to Byng, which family now holds it.

The famous Earl of Strafford was, however, a younger son, and the eldest line of Wentworth of Wentworth-Woodhouse only came to a peerage when Sir Thomas Wentworth, Bart., in 1695 inherited the Barony of Raby. He was in 1711 created Viscount Wentworth and Earl of Strafford.

The most elaborate pedigree of the English Wentworths is that to be found in the first volume of Mr. John Wentworth’s Wentworth Genealogy, a part of which was printed before by Colonel Chester in the Heraldic Journal (IV. 125–129) and in the New England Historical and Genealogical Register (XII. 120–139). Joseph Foster published in 1874 Pedigrees of County Families of Yorkshire, and the next year, 1875, Mr. Foster edited Glover’s Visitation of Yorkshire (1584–85). Since then Mr. Clay has been publishing in the Genealogist, with many valuable additions, Dugdale’s Visitation of Yorkshire. In various particulars these pedigrees by no means agree among themselves nor with the earlier Wentworth pedigrees.

The line of Matthew Wentworth of Bretton contains a number of the most important points of difference, and furnishes a sample of the difficulties and uncertainties not uncommonly met with in English pedigrees. Matthew Wentworth of Bretton,147 son and heir of Richard Wentworth, inherited his father’s estate in 1488, married Elizabeth Woodruffe, and died leaving two sons and four daughters. His will was dated 10 November, 1505, and proved at York 10 January following. His two sons were both named Thomas. The elder, who was knighted, died childless. This Sir Thomas entered his pedigree at Tonge’s visitation, 1530; he mentions but three of his sisters.

Richard Wentworth, the father of Matthew last mentioned, married Isabel FitzWilliam of Sprotsborough; she was his executrix. His will, made 3 October, 1488, and proved in January following, shows that he left six sons and three daughters. Tonge’s visitation omits one son and the three daughters. Flower’s visitation, 1563–64, gives to him the four daughters of his son Richard, mentioning their husbands, and omits two at least of his own daughters.

Richard Wentworth of Bretton, the father of the last named, married Cecilia, daughter and heir of John Tansley of Everton. His will was dated 20 December, 1447, named his wife executrix, and was probated 29 May, 1449. This Richard was a younger son of John Wentworth of Elmsall, who married one of the heiresses of Dronsfield from whom Richard inherited his Bretton estate. Richard is interesting genealogically because of an extraordinary mistake, or misrepresentation, concerning his marriage. Mr. Clay gives it as above and makes no mention of any other statement.148 In Flower’s visitation, however, taken in 1563–64, while both the sons of Matthew (the great grandsons of this Richard) were still living, Richard’s wife is said to have been Maud, Countess of Cambridge. In the visitation by Glover (1584–85) as edited by Foster, Richard’s wife is given as Maud, Countess of Cambridge, and second daughter to Thomas, Lord Clifford. Foster in his Pedigrees of the County Families of Yorkshire, “authenticated by the members of each family,” gives Richard two wives, first Cecilia Tansley, to whom he assigns all the children except son Richard who was, he says, son of “Maud (second wife) Countess of Cambridge, and daughter of Thomas, Lord Clifford, and relict of Richard, Earl of Cambridge (who was beheaded), son of Edmund Duke of York.” And he might have added relict of John Nevil, Lord Latimer (d. s. p. 1430). She was, indeed, a very great lady, this widow of the Plantagenet Duke of Cambridge — he who appears in Shakespeare’s Henry V; and it is perfectly clear that she never married this Squire Wentworth. The mystery is how there came to be a “family tradition” among the Wentworths that she was their great grandmother, and how they managed to get the heralds, not much more than a hundred years after her death, to record the invention. Mr. John Wentworth rejected the splendid alliance from his pedigree. He says:

In some of the accounts of the family he is said to have married Matilda, daughter of Thomas Lord Clifford, and relict of Richard Plantagenet, Earl of Cambridge; but the present writer can find no evidence of it, nor in fact that any such person ever existed. On the contrary his son William Wentworth, in his will distinctly mentions “John Tansley and Dame Alice his wife and their daughter Cecilia my mother.”149

This, however, might have been compatible with Mr. Foster’s arrangement of two wives. But that excellent and careful antiquary, Mr. Hunter, had long ago shown that Richard Wentworth married Cecilia before Lord Latimer died, and that Cecilia was his wife after the Countess’s death.150 But what did Mr. Wentworth mean by saying of the Countess that he could find no evidence that any such person ever existed? It would seem from this and other things that neither he nor Colonel Chester had consulted Mr. Hunter’s Deanery of Doncaster (otherwise called South Yorkshire), quite the best book yet published on that part of England. Mr. Wentworth in writing of his authorities, says:

The earliest portion of the Wentworth Pedigree rests upon the authority of William Flower, Norroy King of arms, one of the most careful and accurate genealogists ever connected with the College of Arms, who compiled it in the year 1588, and it has ever since remained upon the records of the college, and been accepted not only by that body but by all genealogists as authentic.151

Flower’s visitation as we have it in print certainly shows the most, extraoidinary inaccuracy so far as the Wentworths were concerned, as well in times more remote as in these which fell within a century of his own time. The earlier generations are not by any means the same as those which Mr. Wentworth gives as from Flower’s pedigree of Wentworth in the College of Arms, which would appear to be veiy much worse. And it is only right to say that while there have been many honorable, careful, and learned men in the College of Arms, there have been also heralds who, like many other needy and avaricious professional genealogists outside the College, have been more or less unscrupulous in their efforts to please the vanity of their employers.152

The father of this Richard who did not marry the Countess was John of North Elmsall, who married Agnes, one of the coheirs of the Dronsfield family, according to the two best authorities, Mr. Hunter and Mr. Clay, as also Mr. Foster and Mr. Wentworth, but the visitation pedigrees as we have them of Flower and of Glover insert another John between — namely, he who married a Beaumont and who is, according to better authorities, the brother, not the father, of Richard. We may note by the way that it was Roger, brother of Richard, who founded the family of Nettlestead by marrying the widow of Lord Ros, who became heiress of the Despencers, for which marriage he was in trouble with the Privy Council.

All the authorities agree that the John Wentworth who married the Dronsfield was son of another John and either the son or the grandson of the John who married Joan (or Jane) Tyas: Foster and the Wentworth Genealogy make him the son; the Glover and Flower visitations make him the grandson, of that John, and the son of the Bisset heiress whose name Flower gives as Elizabeth; Glover omits her name; and Hunter, who agrees to the line of descent with some hesitation, calls her Alice.153

All agree that John Wentworth and Jane Tyas are in the line and that this John’s father was William. Flower’s visitation makes John the son of William and Isabel Pollington, the Pollington heiress, and to this agree Foster, Hunter, and the Wentworth Genealogy; but Glover’s visitation inserts two Williams whom the other authorities assert to have been not the father and grandfather, but the brother and the nephew of John who married the Tyas heiress. This William Wentworth who married the Pollington heiress was Wentworth of Wentworth-Woodhouse.

The father of William who married the Pollington heiress was also William of Wentworth-Woodhouse, according to all the authorities, except the Glover visitation, which gives the father’s name as Roger, and does not mention his mother. Flower’s visitation gives Lucy Newmarch as his mother (Newmarch was a great family). Foster, Hunter and the Wentworth Genealogy agree in thinking her to have been Dionisia or Dionysia Rotherfield. Back of this, it would seem that although there is good reason to believe that the same family had owned Wentworth-Woodhouse for a considerable time, the pedigrees are clearly entirely worthless, and may be best shown by parallel columns. Hunter says the pedigree he gives is an old one, but entirely discredits it.

Of the pedigrees which follow, one can take his choice. There seems no reason to believe that either is of any value, or anything like correct.

III

VI154

1 Stiles, History and Genealogies of Ancient Windsor (1892), ii. 194.

2 Ibid. ii. 212.

3 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xxiv. 204, xxviii. 102.

4 Stiles, History and Genealogies of Ancient Windsor (1891), i. 594, 602, ii. 625; Dexter, Yale Biographies and Annals, ii. 265.

5 Stiles, History and Genealogies of Ancient Windsor, ii. 227, 625. See also ii. 210–227.

6 Ibid. ii. 561.

7 Ibid. i. 576. See also Sprague, Annals of the American Pulpit, i. 230–232.

8 Stiles, History and Genealogies of Ancient Windsor, i. 577.

9 Ibid. i. 722, ii. 561.

10 Ibid. i. 713, 714.

11 Ibid. i. 722. For further facts concerning Mr. Perry, see ibid. i. 574–577, 653, ii. 723; Sprague, Annals of the American Pulpit, i. 231 note.

12 A few of the missing words have been supplied conjecturally between brackets.

13 Capt. William Nichols was a charter member of the Marine Society at Newburyport, incorporated 13 October, 1777 (Massachusetts Province Laws, v. 737, 823–825). He attended the St. Patrick’s Day dinner in Boston, 17 March, 1767 (Letters and Diary of John Rowe, 1903, p. 125). See ibid. pp. 318, 407.

14 The allusion is probably to Jonathan Mason, a prominent Boston merchant, an Overseer of the Poor (1760–1787), Treasurer of the Board (17871795), and one of the Selectmen, chosen in the preceding March in the room of John Rowe, who declined further service (Diary, p. 183). He was also of the first Board of Directors of the Massachusetts Bank, incorporated 25 February, 1784 (Memorial Ilistory of Boston, iv. 200, 201). On 20 March, 1775, James Hooker and Oliver Mather, a committee of the town of Windsor, Connecticut, appointed “to receive donations for the poor of Boston,” addressed a letter to Mr. Mason announcing the shipment to him of the provisions they had collected (Stiles, History and Genealogies of Ancient Windsor, Connecticut, i. 310). See also Manual for the use of the Overseers of the Poor in the City of Boston (1866), pp. 160, 162.

15 Capt. Constant Freeman, a sea-captain, sailed between Boston and London and later settled at Quebec. He was the father of the Rev. Dr. James Freeman (Foote, Annals of King’s Chapel, ii. 378; Wyman, Genealogies and Estates of Charlestown, i. 375; Letters and Diary of John Rowe, pp. 88, 144, 234).

16 The assault on Mr. Otis occurred on Tuesday, 5 September, 1769, about seven o’clock in the evening. See the Boston Gazette of Monday, 11 September, 1769, p. 2/3.

17 The British Coffee House, later known as the American Coffee House, stood in State Street, on the northerly side, and had a frontage of thirty-eight or thirty-nine feet and a uniform depth of seventy feet, the westerly line of the estate being forty-four or forty-five feet east of Fitch’s, Flagg’s or Pierce’s Alley, now known as ’Change Avenue. The property was bought for £1450, 25 April, 1792, by the Massachusetts Bank (Suffolk Deeds, clxxiii. 28, 29), and, on the west, adjoined the estate on the easterly corner of ’Change Avenue long owned and occupied by the Suffolk Bank. At the time of the assault on Otis this last named lot was the site of the London Book Store, mentioned below (p. 6 note 4). These two properties are now (1906) covered by the Massachusetts Building, numbered 60 in State Street. The Massachusetts Bank erected and occupied a stone building on its purchase, and held the lot, with additions in the rear made in 1799, 1810, and 1810 at a cost of $8,138.34 (ibid, cxcii. 158, ccxxxi. 217, cccclix. 105), till 23 April, 1860, when it sold the estate, then measuring 38 feet 10 inches on State Street, 31 feet 4 inches in the rear on the Hancock Tavern lot, and having a uniform depth of 163 feet 8 inches, and containing 5732²⁶/₁₀₀ square feet, to Moses Williams, grandfather of our associate bearing the same name, for $160,000 (ibid, dcclxxviii. 225. See also ibid, clxxxvii. 184, 186, cccci. 17, cccclxx. 58, dxxvi. 165). In 1906 this land alone was taxed by the city of Boston on a valuation of eighty dollars a square foot. Corn Court, which originally ran only southerly from Faneuil Hall Square, but which has since been extended, at right angles, easterly on irregular lines to Merchants’ Row, makes a part of the northern boundary of the Coffee House lot, and was undoubtedly the “back passage” through which Robinson fled after his assault on Otis. See Tudor, Life of James Otis, p. 363.

18 The only John Gridley of whom any record is found in Boston who may have been the person mentioned in the text was John, son of Isaac and Sarah (Porter) Gridley, who was baptized 16 October, 1737. He had elder brothers, Benjamin, baptized 4 February, 1732–33, and Pollard, baptized 28 March; 1735 (Registers of the New South Church). See Frothinghatn, Life and Times of Joseph Warren, p. 167 note; Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports xxiv. 207, 221, xxviii. 143; Suffolk Probate Files, no. 14,062. A letter by John Gridley relating to Robinson’s assault on Otis is printed in the Boston Gazette of 25 September, 1769, p. 2/3.

19 For an account of this assault and the occurrences which led up to it, see Tudor, Life of James Otis, pp. 354–366; Works of John Adams (1850), ii. 219 and note; Letters of James Murray (1901), p. 159; Letters and Diary of John Rowe, p. 192.

20 Murray gives a full account of this incident in a letter to a friend in New York dated Boston, 30 September, 1769 (Letters, pp. 159–162); and it is alluded to by John Rowe in his Diary (p. 192). Murray was handled so rougldy by the people that they were rebuked by Jonathan Mason, one of the Selectmen.

21 John Mein’s shop (1765–1769) was in King, now State, Street, “at the London Book Store, Second Door above the British Coffee House” (see above, p. 5 note 3); and in 1767, in partnership with John Fleeming, he started the Boston Chronicle, which was printed in Newbury Street, almost opposite the White Horse Tavern (Publications of this Society, ix. 483). See also ibid. v. 283 and note; Letters of James Murray, pp. 168–174; Sabine, Biographical Sketches of Loyalists in the American Revolution, ii. 78; Thomas, History of Printing (1810), i. 361–365; Buckingham, Specimens of Newspaper Literature, i. 212–216; Loring, Hundred Boston Orators (1853), pp. 23, 24.

The Boston Gazette of Monday, 29 July, 1771, p. 3/2, announces: “This day is opened, a new London Bookstore, by Henry Knox, opposite Williams’s Court in Cornhill, Boston.” This Washington Street site has sometimes been confounded with that in State Street, above mentioned.

22 John Robinson, one of the Commissioners of the Customs, against whom Otis brought an action and recovered damages in £2000 sterling, was married at Trinity Church exactly a month after this affair, 5 October, 1769, to Anne Boutiueau (Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xxx. 400), the daughter of James Boutineau, who defended his son-in-law in this suit. Robinson gave bonds to answer to it and sailed for England 16 March, 1770, — “goes home to represent all these things in their proper light” (Letters and Diary of John Rowe, pp. 179, 199; Publications of this Society, vii. 4 note 2; Letters of James Murray, p. 165). He returned to sign, in August, 1772, a written apology acknowledging his fault and begging Otis’s pardon, to pay the costs of court, and to receive a discharge, drawn by Otis, from the payment of the heavy damages awarded him. See Tudor, Life of James Otis, pp. 365, 503506; Sabine, Biographical Sketches of Loyalists in the American Revolution, i. 241, 242, ii. 229, 230.

23 Professor John Winthrop (H. C. 1732). For a notice of him, see Publications of this Society, vii. 321–329. Concerning the appearance of the comet, see Letters and Diary of John Rowe, pp. 191, 192.

24 See Publications of this Society, v. 265–268.

25 This facsimile is made from the signature appended to another letter of Dr. Young. Of the signature to the letter in the text only “Young” remains, but the identity of the handwriting is apparent. An address was added to the letter in the text, but only the letters “Po” (or “Pe”) can be deciphered.

26 My thanks are due to Messrs. Frederick L. Gay, Herbert Putnam, William P. Greenlaw, Julius H. Tuttle, Edmund M. Barton, John Woolf Jordan, I. Minis Hays, Robert H. Kelby, Wilberforce Eames, Charles K. Bolton, and Albert Matthews for aid received in the preparation of this communication. I have also had the advantage of access to the Notes on early American Physicians by the late Dr. J. M. Toner, now in the Library of Congress.

27 The original of Charles Clinton’s Journal is now in the New York State Library.

28 After this Memoir had been written and was about to be put to press, Miss Charlotte van Peyma of the New York State Library at Albany, in response to inquiries, called my attention to the fact that Mr. Edward M. Ruttenber, the author of the historical sketch of New Windsor which appeared in 1881 in the History of Orange County, was still living at Newburgh, New York. From him I learned that he had in his possession a copy, made by himself about thirty years since, of a manuscript account of the Young and Clinton families written a century ago by Dr. Joseph Young, a brother of Dr. Thomas Young, who was living at that time (11 April, 1807) at No. 53 Catharine Street, New York City. This he has been so kind as to allow me to copy for use in completing this Memoir. There is an account of the Clintons, based largely on this manuscript, in Dr. David Hosack’s Memoir of De Witt Clinton (1829), pp. 22–24, 137–141.

29 Dr. Joseph Young served as surgeon prior to his appointment as Hospital Physician and Surgeon, 20 September, 1781, and until the close of the war (Heitman, Historical Register of Officers of the Continental Army, 1775–1783, Washington, 1893, p. 448). In the Knox Manuscripts (xvi. 115), in the cabinet of the New England Historic Genealogical Society, is a letter, dated at Albany, 30 December, 1783, written to Gen. Henry Knox by Dr. Joseph Young “Hospital Surgeon.” Dr. Joseph Young’s narrative, mentioned in the preceding note, bears the following title: “A Genealogical and Biographical Sketch, written by Joseph Young at the request of his niece, Barbara Amelia Hertell, who wished to gain some knowledge of her progenitors and collateral kindred, as recollected in memory. Written in June 1807.” See p. 50 and note, below.

30 John Crawford purchased lands in New Windsor in 1738. He is presumed to have been son of James Crawford, and brother of James, 2nd.

31 Jane, widow of Thomas Armstrong, died at Little Britain, 5 February, 1761, aged 84 years (gravestone in Clinton burial ground at Little Britain). Thomas Armstrong, who was her second husband, died, as already stated, on the voyage to America.

32 John Young died in 1784 aged 82 years. [Note by Dr. Joseph Young.]

33 These farms were on the Andrew Johnston Patent, the centre and seat of Little Britain and its immediate vicinity. The deeds to Clinton and Young were dated 22 August, 1730. In the log-house built on John Young’s farm, Dr. Thomas Young was born. About 1764, probably on his removal to Albany, John Young sold this estate to John Welling, who, in 1765, built on the site of the log-house, which was moved to one side but has long since disappeared, a stone house known as the Welling Homestead, which to-day shelters his descendants in the fourth and fifth generations.

All through the large district to which the name [Little Britain] was applied, the great majority of the settlers were Scotch-Irish or English-Irish and nearly all were Presbyterians. Agreeing very generally in their religious views, they were also remarkable for the uniformity of their political convictions. When it came down to the era of the Revolution, there were but few who were Tories or King’s men, and these were mainly members of the Church of England, of whom there was a sprinkling in the neighborhood. Charles Clinton, through his sons, Governor George and Gen. James, and his grandson Governor DeWitt, has, perhaps, the most extended historical reputation in the politics of the State. . . . The neighborhood was composed of men of strong natural abilities and marked character (E. M. Huttenber and L. H. Clark, History of Orange Comity, New York, pp. 211, 214, 215, 222).

34 This, probably, was the Rev. John Moffat, whose school was known as Moffat’s Academy (Ruttenber and Clark, History of Orange County, p. 212).

35 Concerning the Winegars, who were Palatines and who lived in Amenia, see James H. Smith, History of Duchess County, New York (1882), pp. 335, 336; Newton Reed, Early History of Amenia (1875), pp. 16–20; and below, p. 50 notes 1 and 4.

36 Collections of the New York Historical Society, Second Series, ii. pp. 125, 126. Benson was the first President of the Society. See also Newton Reed, Early History of Amenia, pp. 45, 46 and notes, 106 and note; New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xlvii. 215.

37 See p. 50 note 4, below.

38 Mrs. Wadhams was Ethan Allen’s sister-in-law. Abigail Beebe married, (1) Capt. Heman Allen of Salisbury, Litchfield County, Connecticut, and after his death in May, 1778, (2) Solomon Wadhams (Y. C. 1762) of Goshen, Connecticut, in 1780. She died in Goshen 3 June, 1844, in her 91st year (Dexter, Yale Biographies and Annals, ii. 773, 774). See also Stiles, History of Ancient Wethers field, Connecticut (1904), ii. 772; Cothren, History of Ancient Woodbury, Connecticut (1854), i. 414; Hemenway, Vermont Historical Gazetteer (1867), i. 561 and note, 562.

39 A note in Wells’s Life and Public Services of Samuel Adams (ii. 238) refers to Dr. Young as “among the earliest and most uncompromising of the Boston patriots . . . and a valued friend of Samuel Adams,” — a fact of present interest considering the pronounced orthodox religious views which Mr. Adams always held.

40 Captain Aaron Davis, Jr., a merchant of Boston and Roxbury, was born 18 October, 1735, married Susannah Craft 20 November, 1760, and died 12 October, 1773. In June, 1771, he was appointed Captain of the train of Artillery of the First Suffolk Regiment. His early death was attributed to exposure while drilling his troops. The announcement of his death in the Boston News-Letter of Thursday, 14 October, 1773 (p. 3/2), describes him as “a worthy, honest, useful Man, — a great Public Loss.” He was son of Colonel Aaron Davis, born 26 April, 1709, who married Mary Perrin 25 January, 1732–33, and died 11 June, 1777. The father was an active Patriot and served on many committees to protest against the policy of the British Government toward the Colonies. In November, 1774, he was chosen Captain of the Company raised from the First Parish; and he represented Roxbury in the three Provincial Congresses, 1774–1776.

I am indebted to Mr. Horatio Davis for the facts contained in this note. See Roxbury Town and Church Records; F. S. Drake, The Town of Roxbury, in Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xxxiv. 23–30, 36, 82, 89, 92, 103, 110, 142, 461.

41 The town meeting at which this action was taken was held 20 November, 1772 (Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xviii. 93–108).

42 Dr. Young was the author of an anonymous pamphlet entitled —

Some Reflections on the Disputes between New-York, New-Hampshire, and Col. John Henry Lydius of Albany. Vui ab altero fere tuleris, ne inferes ipse. To these Reflections are added, Some Rules of Law, fit to be observed in purchasing Land, &c. New-Haven: Printed and sold by Benjamin Mecom. 1764.

The copy of this rare octavo tract in the Lenox Library is more complete than any other of which I can learn. Mr. Wilberforce Eames writes concerning it:

Our copy ends on p. 21 thus:

Sic optat, Sic spirat, Philodicaios.

The reverse of this leaf is blank. Then follows one page in verse (reverse blank), headed: “From an Old Book. Rules of Law, fit to be observed in purchasing Land, &c.”

For a notice of Col. John Henry Lydius and his part in these disputes, see Hiland Hall, History of Vermont (1868), pp. 169, 495–497.

43 Dr. Young was one of the Sons of Liberty of Albany as early as 1 March, 1766, when he attended, as a delegate from New York, a conference of the Sons from several of the Colonies held at the Court House in Annapolis, Maryland (Isaac Q. Leake, Memoir of the Life and Times of General John Lamb, 1857, pp. 3, 4).

44 Fourth Report of the Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts, p. 399; Narrative and Critical History of America, viii. 160. See also 1 Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society, xi. 142.

45 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xvi. 253–255. See also Letters and Diary of John Rowe, pp. 165, 166.

46 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xvi. 255.

47 Ibid, xxiii. 23.

48 Wells, Life and Public Services of Samuel Adams, i. 366.

49 Ibid. i. 379. See Publications of this Society, vi. 390, 391 and note; 1 Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society, iv. 28.

50 This building stood where Hamilton Place now is. It was selected for this occasion, because the first opposition to the soldiers had been made here in October, 1768. Mr. John Brown, having possession of the building as a tenant under the Province, refused admission to the military. The Sheriff was sent by Gov. Bernard to take possession and was refused admittance. On a third attempt he found a window open, and entered by that; upon which, the people gathered about him, and made him prisoner (Snow, History of Boston, 1828, p. 285 and note).

“The Bells of the several Congregational Meeting-houses, were tolled from XII o’clock at Noon till 1. . . . An Oration was delivered in the Evening, by Dr. Young, at the Hall of the Manufactory, a Building originally designed for Encouraging Manufactories and Employing the Poor.— The Oration it is said, contained a brief Account of the Massacre; of the Imputations of Treason and Rebellion, with which the Tools of Power endeavoured to brand the Inhabitants, and a Discant upon the Nature of Treasons, with some Considerations on the Threats of the British Ministry to take away the Massachusets Charter, &c. &c.” (Boston Weekly News-Letter of Thursday, 7 and 14 March, 1771, pp. 3/3, 3/1.) See also J. S. Loring, Hundred Boston Orators, pp. 24, 25.

51 An Oration delivered March 15, 1775, at the Request of a Number of the Inhabitants of the Town of Boston, by Dr. Thomas Bolton (1775), p. 3.

52 Ibid. pp. 6, 7.

53 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xviii. 47.

54 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xviii. 49–51.

55 Ibid, xviii. 53, 54.

56 Ibid, xxiii. 97. Patience (Lovell) Wright (1725–1785), wife of Joseph Wright of Bordentown, New Jersey, was “a lady of uncommon talent [who] made herself famous for likenesses in wax, in the cities of her native country . . . [and] was enabled to seek more extensive fame, and more splendid fortune in the metropolis of Great Britain . . . [where] her work was considered of an extraordinary kind” (Dunlap, History of the Rise and Progress of the Arts of Design in the United States, 1834, i. 132). Her only son Joseph, a pupil of West, was a successful portrait painter, modeller in clay, and die sinker in England, France and the United States, and in 1784 he painted a portrait of Washington for the Count de Solms (ibid. i. 313). Her elder daughter, who married an American by the name of Platt, inherited something of her mother’s talent and made herself known in New York, about 1787, by her modelling in wax (ibid. i. 134). “Her younger daughter married Hopner, the rival of Stuart and Lawrence as a portrait painter” (ibid. i. 135, 312). In the summer of 1781 Abigail Adams “went to see the celebrated Mrs. Wright” at her studio in London, and in a letter to her sister Mrs. Cranch, she gives an amusing description of her visit and of the artist’s personality (Letters of Mrs. Adams, 1810, ii. 32, 33).

Mrs. Wells, mentioned in the text, was a sister of Mrs. Wright. She practised her art in Philadelphia, where John Adams visited her in the spring of 1777. “There is genius as well as taste and art discovered in this exhibition [of wax-work]. But I must confess the whole scene was disagreeable to me” (Letters of John Adams, addressed to his Wife, 1841, i. 223, 224).

57 Suffolk Deeds, cxxii. 5.

58 For an interesting account of the site of this tavern, also known as the States Armas, by the late Mr. John T. Hassam, see New England Historical and Genealogical Register for 1880, xxxiv. 41–48. Mr. Hassam also described the site of the Castle Tavern, later known as the George Tavern, which stood nearby, at the westerly corner of Dock Square and Elm Street, in ibid, xxxiii. 400–403.

59 Suffolk Deeds, cxxii. 6. In 1781 John White assigned his mortgage to David Bradlee of Boston for £140.8 (ibid, cxxxii. 169). Dr. Young died seized of this property, in 1777, after his removal from Massachusetts. In Suffolk Deeds (cxl. 87) is recorded an order of the Probate Court for the District of Sharon, County of Litchfield, Connecticut, to Lieut. David Doty of said Sharon, physician, administrator of the estate of Dr. Thomas Young, late of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, deceased, to make sale of the real estate of said Young for the benefit of creditors. In pursuance of it, on 11 November, 1783, Doty sold the property in Wing’s Lane for £230, lawful silver money, to David Bradlee before mentioned (ibid. cxl. 87). Bradlee sold to John Wyer, for £400, 7 November, 1792 (ibid, clxxiv. 106), and he in turn, for £3020, sold to Elizabeth Brewer, widow, 15 August, 1804 (ibid. ccix. 137), who, for $3,300, sold it to David Greenough of Boston, merchant, 26 January, 1818 (ibid, cclvii. 236). See below, p. 52.

60 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xviii. 93; Wells, Life and Public Services of Samuel Adams, ii. 127; Frothingham, Rise of the Republic of the United States, p. 267 and note.

61 Frothingham, History of the Siege of Boston, p. 30; E. G. Porter, Rambles in Old Boston, New England, pp. 97, 98, 272.

Police Station No. 8 stands on the easterly end of the Salutation Tavern lot, on the northeasterly corner of Salutation Street and what is now Commercial Street. As early as 27 October, 1692, the messuage then called the Salutation, later known as “the sign of the Two Palaverers,” was conveyed, for £544, by Elizabeth Green, wife of William Green of Malden, as executrix of her former husband, John Brooking, late of Boston, mariner, to Sir William Phips, the nearly rectangular lot then measuring 49 feet on the Street and 237 feet on the Alley (Suffolk Deeds, xv. 210). See also ibid. i. 57, iv. 58, xxiii. 38, xxxviii. 45, xlii. 241, xlix. 2, cix. 18, cxlv. 85, cccxxi. 267; John Brooking’s will, 1683, in Suffolk Probate Files, miscellaneous docket; Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xxv. 248.

62 Frothingham, Life and Times of Joseph Warren, pp. 169, 170.

63 J. S. Loring, Hundred Boston Orators, p. 77; E. G. Porter, Rambles in Old Boston, New England, p. 272. See also E. H. Goss, Life of Colonel Paul Revere, i. 117, 120, 133, ii. 636–638, 644.

64 E. H. Goss, Life of Colonel Paul Revere, ii. 642.

65 Letters and Diary of John Rowe, pp. 252, 253.

66 Wells, Life and Public Services of Samuel Adams, ii. Ill; Frothingham, Rise of the Republic of the United States, pp. 305, 307, 308, 334.

67 History of the United States (1854), vi. 478, 486.

68 Frothingham, Life and Times of Joseph Warren, pp. 247, 264, 265.

69 F. S. Drake, Tea Leaves (1884), pp. 93, 171, 172. See ibid. pp. 23 note, 32, 44, 50, 59, 64, 90, 91; 1 Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society, xii. 174–181, xiii. 171, xx. 15; Frothingham, Life and Times of Joseph Warren, p. 279 note.

70 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xviii. 169; E. H. Goss, Life of Colonel Paul Revere, ii. 614.

71 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xviii. 178.

72 Letters and Diary of John Rowe, p. 276.

73 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xviii. 183.

74 Deacon John Barrett, a prominent Boston merchant, was born 21 June, 1708; married Sarah Gerrish, 3 June, 1731; chosen Deacon of the New North Church, 6 December, 1742; and died 9 September, 1786 (Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xxiv. 54, xxviii. 170; Records of the New North Church, p. 242; Suffolk Probate Files, no. 18, 757; Letters and Diary of John Rowe, pp. 195, 216; New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xlii. 263).

75 Failing to identify “Wilder the Postman,” I addressed a note of inquiry to Mr. C. W. Ernst, whose knowledge of all matters concerning the postal service of this country, the legislation affecting it, and its history is recondite. An extract from his reply follows:

Your very interesting question refers, I think, to Silent Wilde, Shutesbury, who was the local express. as we now say, between Boston and Deerfield, from 1761 to 1775, that is, I have no earlier record of his service than Boston Post-Boy, 6 April, 1761, p. 3/3, nor any later than New-England Chronicle, 26 October, 1775, p. 2/ 2.

He must have been satisfactory, as he had a monopoly, and the postal legislation of Massachusetts did not interfere with him in 1775.

His chief business was to sell newspapers; in addition he carried letters, did a little money-order business, and executed all sorts of commissions. He was usually called “post-man,” but had nothing to do with the official postal service.

His route was important, being the connecting link between Boston and Canada. Infact, the route began in 1759, when Quebec fell, and Christopher Page established the service.

The United States took the postal service in 1775, but did not serve Deerfield and Brattleboro until 1792.

These early private posts, or expressmen, were responsible people. They carried money, and often traded for their customers. A young woman, going from Deerfield to Boston in 1765, would travel safely and pleasantly with Silent Wilde, who was known, respected, and familiar with the road, knowing best where to stop for meals or overnight.

The people of Massachusetts always took pleasure in defeating the postal monopoly of the King, and never recognised the right of Parliament to pass any postal acts affecting the local service of Massachusetts.

In many cases, therefore, our private posts were more important than the King’s, and Silent Wilde, of Shutesbury, was, perhaps, the most important of all. He advertised liberally. I have no evidence that he ever went as far as Brattleboro. But he took good care of matter going beyond his terminus.

76 Records of the Governor and Council of the State of Vermont iii 493

77 See three spirited letters on public affairs written in May, June and July, 1774, in I. Q. Leake’s Memoir of the Life and Times of Gen. John Lamb, pp. 84–92. There is another letter of Dr. Young, dated 25 March, 1771, written on behalf of the Boston Committee of Correspondence to their brethren in Salem, in the Pickering Papers (xxxix. 40). See 6 Massachusetts Historical Collections, viii. 577.

78 J. S Loring, Hundred Boston Orators, p. 26; Works of John Adams, i. 64. In the Letters of John Adams addressed to his Wife (1841), however, we find the following passages:

Philadelphia, 29 May, 1775. I have had miserable health and blind eyes, almost ever since I left yon; but I found Dr. Young here, who, after scolding at me quantum sufficit, for not taking his advice, has pill’d and electuary’d me into pretty good order. My eyes are better, my head is better, so are my spirits (i. 40).

Philadelphia, 7 July, 1775. I have really had a very disagreeable time of it. My health, and especially my eyes, have been so very bad, that I have not been so fit for business as I ought, and if I had been in perfect health, I should have had, in the present condition of my country and my friends, no taste for pleasure. But Dr. Young has made a kind of cure of my health, and Dr. Church of my eyes (i. 52).

79 E. Warren, Life of John Warren, M.D., p. 28.

80 Wells, Life and Public Services of Samuel Adams, ii. 237, 238. See also a letter from Adams to Young, dated 17 October, 1774, in ibid. ii. 242; Boston Gazette of Monday, 5 September, 1774, p. 2/2; Stiles, Literary Diary, i. 478; Paige, History of Cambridge, p. 154.

81 1 Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society, viii. 360. Andrews was in error in stating that Dr. Young was intending “to settle at Providence,” since he went directly to Newport, where he arrived on the following Thursday night, the fifteenth.

82 Boston Evening-Post of Monday, 19 September, 1774, p. 3/1.

83 Stiles, Literary Diary, i. 463 note.

84 The allusion is to the Hon. William Channing, father of the Rev. Dr. William Ellery Channing.

85 1774, November 5. The Rose, frigate, Capt. Wallace, was stationed at Newport for the winter, and repeated the annoyances of the Gaspee (S. G. Arnold, History of Rhode Island, 1894, ii. 342).

86 The extracts from Dr. Stiles’s Literary Diary in the text (pp. 37, 38, above), make it doubtful if Dr. Young went directly to Philadelphia, where, however, he appears to have been established in the following July (above, text, p. 39).

87 The allusion is probably to Dr. Jason Valentine O’Brien Lawrence (1791–1823). See J. Thacher, American Medical Biography (1828), i. 352–356.

88 Medical Inquiries and Observations (1818), iii. 140.

89 I am indebted to the kindness of Mr. Charles Francis Adams for this interesting item from the only letter of Dr. Young preserved in his family papers.

90 W. Duane, Extracts from the Diary of Christopher Marshall, 1774–1781 (1877).

91 Thomas Clemens and Elizabeth Andrews Mitchell, both of Boston, were married at King’s Chapel 6 May, 1764. They had several children baptized at the Chapel, 1766–1774, and others at Trinity Church, after the Evacuation of Boston, 1776–1785 (Registers of King’s Chapel and Trinity Church). This is the only family of this name in Boston at that time “with several children” which appears of record. Thomas Clemens, or Clement as the name was later spelled, was a Vestryman of King’s Chapel, 1783–1801, and died 10, buried 12, September, 1823, at the age of 88 (Foote, Annals of King’s Chapel, ii. 608; Boston Records of Deaths). He appears to have been among those members of the Chapel congregation who espoused the cause of the Colonies, hence the probability of his family having to seek refuge “for the present” in Albany during the Siege of Boston. See Foote, Annals of King’s Chapel, ii. 162, 321–323, 325, 328, 329, 331, 381, 590, 592, 596.

92 Dr. Young appears to have been one of the gentlemen sent into the different counties with the resolves of the Philadelphia town meeting of 20 May. Yorktown or York is the County town of York County, Pennsylvania.

93 Minutes of the Supreme Executive Council of Pennsylvania, x. 653. 1 Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society, iv. 33, 34.

94 1 Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society, iv. 33, 34.

95 Force, American Archives, Fourth Series, vi. 1325; Fifth Series, iii. 305, 605. See also ibid. Fourth Series, i. 764, 783, and v. 1145.

96 This was William Thorne’s School-room in Vidal’s Alley, Philadelphia, which was frequently used in the evening for political meetings. See W. Duane, Extracts from the Diary of Christopher Marshall, 1774–1781 (1877), pp. 66, 67.

97 Works of John Adams, ix. 622, 623.

98 Works of John Adams, ix. 617, 618.

99 Pennsylvania Magazine, xxii. 205–300.

100 Minutes of the Supreme Executive Council of Pennsylvania, xi. 50. See also xi. 52.

101 Ibid. xi. 151. See also xi. 155.

102 Journals of the American Congress from 1774 to 1788 (1823), ii. 31.

103 John Brown Cutting, of Delaware, was an apothecary for the Middle Medical District and for some time at the Hospital at Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.

104 E. Warren, Life of John Warren, M.D., p. 147.

105 Records of the Governor and Council of the State of Vermont, i. 394–396. This Address is also printed in Documentary History of the State of New York (1851), iv. 934, 935. It is most imperfectly printed in Vermont State Papers (1823), p. 76.

106 Vermont State Papers, pp. 77, 78; Documentary History of the State of New York (1851), iv. 832, 941.

107 Journals of the American Congress from 1774 to 1788 (1823), ii. 176.

108 Ibid. ii. 178.

109 The Declaration and Petition of the Inhabitants of the New Hampshire Grants, to Congress, announcing the District to be a Free and Independent State, and dated at Westminster, 15 January, 1777, is printed at length in Ira Allen’s Natural and Political History of the State of Vermont (London, 1798), pp. 80–85, followed by extracts from Dr. Young’s letter and from the Records of Congress.

110 Journals of the American Congress (1823), ii. 182, 183. See Hiland Hall, History of Vermont, pp. 243, 250, 251, 208, 497–500; Records of the Governor and Council of Vermont, i. 32, 42, 58, 59, 78, 83, 394–399, 403, 404; S. Williams, Natural and Civil History of Vermont (1809), ii. 167 et seq.; Vermont State Papers, pp. 65–79; Z. Thompson, History of Vermont, pp. 51–53, 106; B. H. Hall, History of Eastern Vermont, pp. 566, 567; Documentary History of the State of New York (1851), iv. 934–946; Collections of the New York Historical Society for the year 1870, pp. 30, 31; Lossing, Pictorial Field Book of the Revolution, i. 168 note.

111 Independent Chronicle (Boston) of Thursday, 17 July, 1777, p. 3/1.

112 Continental Journal (Boston) of Thursday, 24 July, 1777, p. 3/1

113 Historical Magazine, Second Series, iv. 224.

114 The Winegars were of Amenia, Dutchess County, New York. See p. 14 note 2, above; p. 52, below.

115 Probably during her widowhood, Mrs. Knies kept a private school for young women. The family of Knies was from “High Germany.” In time the name was spelled Nase (Newton Reed, Early History of Amenia, pp. 21, 22, 141). See the inscription on her gravestone, p. 51, below.

116 Mr. Ruttenber says that this son was named Thomas Y. Knies.

117 The towns of Sharon, Connecticut, and Amenia, New York, are contiguous; and there has always been a strong community of interest among the inhabitants of both towns. Salisbury adjoins Sharon on the north.

118 Dr. Strong may have been identical with Josiah Strong, who, with his wife, was admitted to the Amenia church 17 July, 1774. See text, above.

119 Dr. Joseph Young, later of Albany, Dr. Thomas Young’s younger brother. See p. 9 note 3, above.

120 Concerning this entry Miss Reed writes:

I find no Clark anywhere in the record but this. As Clerk was often pronounced Clark, and as this is the only Clerk in the whole record, I think he may have been the husband of Sarah Young.

121 The Rev. David Rose graduated at Yale College in the Class of 1760 (Dexter, Yale Biographies and Annals, ii. 676). He served the Amenia Church during the Revolutionary War when, for a time, Mr. Knibloe’s patriotism was suspected and his ministrations were not acceptable to his people, with whom, however, he finally died in peace.

122 This inscription is printed in Judge Van Alstyne’s Burying Grounds of Sharon, Connecticut, Amenia, and North East, New York (1903), 123.

123 Sharon Probate Records, v. 120.

124 E. A. Doty, The Doty-Doten Family in America (1897), nos. 9505, 9506, ii. 661. See also C. F. Sedgwick, General History of the Town of Sharon, Connecticut (1877), p. 127. In view of the family connection, through the Winegars, of Dr. Young and the Dotys, it is of interest to remark that the Suffolk Congress convened on Tuesday, 16 August, 1774, just before Dr. Young’s flight from Boston, at the Doty Tavern in Stoughton, Massachusetts, kept by Col. Thomas Doty (1703–1795); and that Dr. Joseph Warren was a leading spirit in the Congress, which at a subsequent meeting passed the Suffolk Resolves that were drafted by Warren (Frothingham, Life and Times of Joseph Warren, pp. 341, 361; Huntoon, History of Canton, Massachusetts, pp. 196, 318, 335–337, 340).

125 See p. 31 note 2, above.

126 Sharon Probate Records, vi. 5.

127 State Papers, in the office of the Secretary of State, Montpelier, Vermont, xvii. 234. For a copy of this document I am indebted to the courtesy of Mr. Edward M. Goddard, Assistant Librarian of the State Library, who writes that “the filing on the petition indicates that no action was taken on the matter; and I am unable to find any reference to the petition in 1787 Council records.”

128 Ira Allen, Natural and Political History of the State of Vermont, p. 86 note. There are many references to Dr. Young and his activity in public affairs, during his residence in Boston, in Frothinghanrs Life and Times of Joseph Warren, pp. 24, 64 note, 157 note, 201, 258, 290, 305, 313, 316, 321, 325, 326, 355, 360, 388, 525. Frothingham frequently quotes from manuscript letters of Dr. Young, the ownership of which he omits to mention.

129 The following are the titles of the books: E. Doumergue’s Jean Calvin, Les Hommes et les Choses de son Temps, Lausanne, 1905; F. C. Ebrard’s Die Französisch-reformierte Gemeinde in Frankfurt am Main, 1554–1901, Frankfort, 1906; and a reprint, published at London in 1846, of the 1575 edition of A Brief Discourse of the Troubles Begun at Frankfurt in the year 1554, about the Book of Common Prayer and Ceremonies.

130 Boston Gazette, 2 July, 1764, p. 3/2.

131 Massachusetts Province Laws, iv. 869.

132 History of Harvard University, ii. 115. Cf. ibid. ii. 112–116, 496; Peirce, History of Harvard University, pp. 281–295.

133 It fills the entire first page of that issue. The notes here printed are in the original.

134 History of Massachusetts, iii. 105 note.

135 ^a Hollis Hall built by Massachusetts Province, A. D. 1763.

136 ^b The late Honorable Thomas Hancocks Esq: who founded a Professorship of Oriental Languages, and design’d to have given £500 Sterling towards furnishing a new Library; but he dying suddenly before he had subscrib’d, his Nephew, John Hancock, Esq: gave said sum.

137 ^c New-Hampshire Province, which gave £300 Sterling towards furnishing ft Library.

138 ^d The Name of Hollis.

139 ^e There is a new, and most elegant Apparatus, vastly excelling that which was destroy’d.

140 ^f Dr. Young on Original Composition, and Longinus on the Sublime.

141 ‡Sis bonus O felixque tuis! Virgil.

142 The following Yorkshire visitations have been printed: 1530, T. Tonge, edited by W. Hylton Dyer Longstaffe (Surtees Society, xli); 1563, 1564, W. Flower, edited by C. B. Norcliffe (Harleian Society, xvi); 1584, 1585, R. Glover, 1612, R. St. George, edited by J. Foster (1875); 1665, 1666, W. Dugdale, edited by R. Davies (Surtees Society, xxxvi); 1665, 1666, W. Dugdale, edited by J. W. Clay (Genealogist, New Series, ix et seq.).

“Most of the above, however,” remarks Walter Rye, “have been printed from transcripts, and in several cases from incorrect and incomplete transcripts” (Records and Record Searching, pp. 152, 153). But how much better are the visitation copies in the College of Arms?

143 J. Hunter, South Yorkshire, ii. 243–248.

144 The arms of the Wentworth-Woodhouse family as recorded by Tonge are: Sable, a chevron between three leopards’ heads or. (No crest given.) The arms of the American Baronets were: Arms— sable, on a chevron engrailed or, between three leopards’ faces argent, two antique keys, chevronwise azure, wards upwards. Crest — on a mount vert, a griffin passant, per pale or and sable, charged with two antique keys erect in fesse, counter charged.

Motto — En Dieu est tout. (Burke’s Peerage, 1842.)

The coat of Wentworth of Elmsall, from which came the American family, is given in Dugdale’s visitation (1660–66) exactly as Tonge gives that of the elder house quoted above. Besides the “honorable augmentation” of the keys, the herald engrailed the chevron and possibly changed the leopards’ heads from gold to silver; but as they were sometimes argent as early as the time of Elizabeth, this can hardly be considered a change. Cf. Surtees Society’s Publications, vol. xli. p. xx.

145 Wentworth Genealogy, by John Wentworth, 1878.

146 “His taking the title of Raby . . . added to his many enemies the notorious Sir Harry Vane who proved one of the most bitter of them; . . . Lord Clarendon mentions it as ‘an act of the most unnecessary provocation that I have known and I believe was the chief occasion of the loss of his head’” (G. E. C., Complete Peerage, vii. 263).

147 Matthew Wentworth’s youngest child, Beatrix, was married to Arthur Kaye and was the great-grandmother of Grace Kaye, the mother of Sir Richard Saltonstall, the Massachusetts colonist. See L. Saltonstall’s Ancestry and Descendants of Sir Richard Saltonstall.

148 Genealogist, New Series xvii. 182. This is an addition to the record of Dugdale. Mr. Clay’s edition is made with the express purpose of extending the pedigrees of the Dugdale visitation. The additions are distinguished by differences of type. See Genealogist, New Series, ix. 61.

149 Wentworth Genealogy, i. 45, 46.

150 Hunter, South Yorkshire, ii. 215. See also Testamenta Eboracensia (Surtees Society, xxx), pp. 118–124, 127, 128.

151 Wentworth Genealogy, i. 5.

152 Any one who may be disposed to accept the authority of all visitation pedigrees without question or who may be overpowered by the authority of the College of Arms as upheld in The Right to Bear Arms by “X” or by other fervent advocates, may find instruction and amusement in Mr. J. H. Round’s Peerage and Family History. Mr. Walter Rye, writing in 1897 in defence of the heralds, said: “One thing I can say, of my own knowledge, that the officers are far more conscientious and careful than they used to be, and nowadays very seldom pass fudged pedigrees as was formerly the case” (Records and Record Searching, p. 148).

153 South Yorkshire, ii. 453.

154 These pedigrees are taken from the following sources: I, Wentworth Genealogy, vol. i. p. xv; II, Flower’s Visitation, Publications of the Harleian Society, xvi. 344; III, Glover’s Visitation and St. George’s Visitation, edited by J. Foster (1875), pp. 374, 375; IV, An Old Pedigree in Hunter’s South Yorkshire, ii. 81; V, Foster’s Pedigrees of the County Families of Yorkshire (1874), vol. ii; VI, Joseph Edmondson, Baronagium Genealogicum, vol. i. plate 80. In the last named work there is also a pedigree, vol. iii. plate 194, which is the same as I. Pedigrees I and V state that William, who married Dionisia de Rotherfield, also married for a second wife Lucy Newmarch.

155 The almanacs printed by the Cambridge Press in the early days of the Colony have attracted the attention of bibliographers, and their value in the eyes of collectors has been greatly enhanced by their rarity. One among them, in which the calculations were made by a future President of Harvard College, is thus alluded to by Cotton Mather, in his life of Urian Oakes in the Magnalia:

Being here a lad of small, as he never was of great stature, he published a little parcel of astronomical calculations with this apposite verse in the title page: Parvum parva decent, sed inest sua Gratia parvis.

The “parcel of astronomical calculations” was the Almanac for 1650.

156. In 1781 an annual allowance was made to each of these universities by the government, “in lieu of the Money heretofore paid to the said Universities by the Company of Stationers of the City of London, for the Privilege of printing Almanacks.” The tenth section of the Act in which this was accomplished recites that the privilege of printing and vending almanacs had been granted to the universities and by them demised to the Company of Stationers, for which they had received one thousand pounds and upwards annually. This privilege had by a late decision at law been found to be “a common right, over which the Crown had no Controul, and consequently the Universities no Power to demise the same to any Person or Body of Men” (21 George III, Ch. 56).

157 2 W. Blackstone, p. 1003 et seq.

158 Trinity Term of the Court of Common Pleas, 29 Car. II and reported 1 Mod. p. 256.

159 Dwight, Travels in New England and New York, i. 381–383. Cf. i. 376.

160 Struggle through Life, London, 1807, ii. 32–33. 6

161 This will apply equally as well to the earlier and later Connecticut legislation on the same subject which is quoted hereafter (pp. 89–91, 93).

162 Massachusetts Province Laws, 1754–55, Ch. 20, iii. 797, 798.

163 Massachusetts Province Laws, iii. 835.

164 Colonial Records of Connecticut, vii. 10.

165 State Records of Connecticut, ii. 176.

166 Rhode Island Colonial Records, vi. 509.

167 Rhode Island Colonial Records, vii. 54.

168 Rhode Island Laws, August, 1772, p. 46.

169 Johann David Schöpf, Reise durch einige der mittlern und südlichen vereinigten nordamerikanischen Staaten nach Ost-Florida und den Bahama-Inseln unternommen in den Jahren 1783 und 1784. Erlangen, 1788.

170 The possibility that Arthur Young may have seen this naturally suggests itself. In that event the presumption that it was instrumental in leading up to the series of observations chronicled by Young and quoted by Mr. Kittredge (p. 96, below) makes this reference doubly interesting.

171 See Botanical Gazette, May. 1884, ix. 83.

172 London, 1805, 1806, 1808.

173 Annals of Agriculture, xliii. 322.

174 James Payne, Annals of Agriculture, xliii. 618.

175 Benjamin Cotton, Annals of Agriculture, xliv. 132. See also xliii. 325, 327, 328, 336, 625; xliv. 86, 132, 138, 141, 146, 149, 152, 154, 155, 159, 425; xlv. Ill, 115, 117.

176 Short Account, p. 10.

177 Part i. p. 47, of the undated Philadelphia reprint by “Ed. Barrington and Geo. D. Haswell.”

178 The authority is the Parish Register of Bury, published by the Lancashire Parish Register Society. Mr. Axon states that the will of Henry Dunster, the father of President Dunster, is preserved in the Chester Probate Register, and he gives some information derived from it. In his article in the Clavian, Mr. Hewitson also states that the Rev. Richard Mather (the father of President Increase Mather), a native of Lowton, in the parish of Winwick, was married to Katherine Holt at Bury on 29 September, 1624. 7

179 Though the letter is a copy, yet it was presumably written by Cabot himself.

180 Probably the Col. Thomas Savage who was born in 1688 and died in 1720.

181 Felt, Annals of Salem (1827), p. 423; Essex Institute Historical Collections, iv. 275.

182 Owing to torn paper, bad handwriting, and Cabot’s unfamiliarity with English, the letter, which has been deciphered by Miss Mary H. Rollins, is difficult to read. The first line of each couplet in our text reproduces the text of the letter, so far as this is possible; while the second line indicates what it is supposed the writer intended.

183 Writing in 1796, Capt. J. G. Stedman said:

During the succeeding war which happened in 1712, the French Commodore Jaques Cassard, met with the same reception from Governor De Gooyer, which Ducasse had experienced from Scherpenhayzon before Zelandia; but four mouths after he returned with better success, and laid the colony nuder contribution for a sum of about 56,618 l. sterling. It was on the 10th of October that he entered the river of Surinam, The 11th Cassard threatened to bombard the town of Paramaribo (Narrative, i. 49, 52).

For notices of Cassard (1672–1740), see Michaud, Biographie Universelle, vii. 126–128; La Grande Encyclopédie, ix:. 679.

184 The Peace of Utrecht was concluded in 1713.

185 In a letter to the Lords of Trade dated October 31, 1712, Governor Hunter of New York wrote:

Captⁿ Graves in the Dullidge, brought me Her Maj^tys orders and Proclamation for a Cessation of arms by sea and land, who [is] in haste to proceed to Boston with like dispatches (New York Colonial Documents, v. 347).

Capt. Thomas Graves, who attained the rank of Rear-Admiral, died in 1755. As to the name of his vessel, there is a curious discrepancy. In the above letter Gov. Hunter calls it the “Dullidge.” In letters dated December 16, 1712, and March 14, 1712–13, he speaks of it as the “Dunwich” (ibid. v. 350, 356). Writing in 1796, Charnock said that Graves was on January 1, 1712–13, “appointed either to the Dunwich or Dunkirk, a confusion arising, most probably from some mistake in the manuscript lists which have been preserved” (Biographia Navalis, iv. 43, 44). Capt. Graves was the father of Thomas Graves, Lord Graves, who was commander-in-chief of the British naval forces in America at the time of the siege of Yorktown.

186 These Directions are printed in my Writings of Washington, xii. 230–234, and in Sparks’s Writings of Washington, xii. 336–339, but are reprinted here as an introduction to the letters to Whiting.

187 George Steptoe, Lawrence, and Harriott Washington were children of General Washington’s brother, Samuel Washington.

188 The wife of Maj. George A. Washington.

189 The letter was mailed from Philadelphia.

190 Thomas Davis, who appears as mason and painter.

191 Son of General Washington’s half-brother, Augustine Washington.

192 Maj. George A. Washington.

193 William Bartram.

194 A letter to Whiting dated Philadelphia, November 11, 1792, is printed in Sparks’s Writings of Washington, xii. 354–358.

195 Word omitted in manuscript.

196 The allusion is doubtless to A Letter on the Construction and Use of the improved Foot Plough, By an Essex Farmer. London, 1784, of which there is a copy in the Washington Collection in the Boston Athenæum.

197 The allusion is probably to John Beale Bordley’s Summary View of the Courses of Crops, in the Husbandry of England and Maryland, Philadelphia, 1784, of which there is a copy in the Washington Collection in the Boston Athenæum.

198 Pierce Butler (1744–1822), Senator from South Carolina.

199 Robert T. Hooe of Alexandria, Virginia.

200 William Garner, overseer of the River Plantation.

201 See p. 139, above.

202 Arthur Young. Cf. pp. 95, 96, above.

203 Joseph Davenport, a miller.

204 Owen Crow, an overseer.

205 See p. 139 note, above.

206 Dr. David Stuart.

207 Benjamin Hawkins (1754–1816), Senator from North Carolina.

208 Richard Bassett.

209 The word “kerf “means the “place at which a tree or branch is or has been cut across; the cut end or surface either on a felled or pruned tree” (Oxford Dictionary).

210 William Augustine Washington, General Washington’s nephew, has already been mentioned (p. 110, above).

211 “I would not have you seek (at least apparently) Major Harrison; but if you should, or could conveniently fall in with him soon, and without forcing the conversation, talk with him again on the subject of his land adjoining me, and extract anything farther from him on the subject thereof that might be useful to me, I should be glad to know it. The enclosed letter to me from Mr. Chichester, the only person (except Thomas Mason, his son in law, who also has poor tenanted land adjoining Harrisons) that can in my opinion step forward as a competitor, shows his ideas of the value of it; — but altho’ this may be the intrinsic worth, yet, circumstances considered, I would give more for it, if it is unincumbered with leases, than the sum therein ment^d, or would give by way of Exchange lands in Kentucky for it” (Washington to Robert Lewis, March 7, 1793, quoted in Conway’s George Washington and Mount Vernon, p. lx).

212 Col. Thomas Colvil. 12

213 Robert Bakewell (1725–1795).

214 Butler remained on the plantation till October, 1794.

215 Whiting died soon after

216 John Christian Ehler, who had been secured for Washington in 1790 at Bremen, by Henry Willmans, Danish consul at that place.

217 In a paper read before this Society in February, 1906 (Publications, x. 253–258), Mr. Albert Matthews, after speaking of the celebration at Milton on February 11, 1782, remarked that this was perhaps “a belated date.” Mr. Dexter’s extract proves that such was the case. On March 3, 1779, Ezra Stiles wrote: “Gen. Washington’s Birthday celebrated 11^th ult. at Milton” (Literary Diary, ii. 324).

218 See Publications of this Society, vi. 110–114.

219 Massachusetts Gazette, October 10, 1765.

220 For a note on the British Coffee House, see p. 5 note 3, above.

I am indebted to Mr. Albert Matthews for the following information. Mein and Sandeman came in the same ship with the latter’s uncle, the Rev. Robert Sandeman. The following notice appeared in the Boston Gazette of October 22, 1764 (p. 3/2):

Thursday last [October 18] . . . arrived here . . . Capt. Montgomery in seven [weeks] from Scotland; . . . In Capt. Montgomery . . . came Passenger the Rev. Mr. Sandiman who performed Service Yesterday at Mason’s Hall in this Town.

In the Boston Gazette of November 19, 1764, was printed an advertisement of which the following is a part.

Mein & Sandeman

Have imported from Great-Britain, the following Articles, which are to be Sold very cheap for CASH, at their Shop nearly opposite to Bromfield’s Lane, Marlboro’-Street, Boston.

The name of Mein & Sandeman is last found in the Boston Gazette of February 18, 1765 (p. 2/3). On June 17, 1765, Mein alone was occupying the same shop, where he remained until late in September or early in October (Boston Gazette, June 17, 1765, p. 3/2; September 23, p. 4/1). In the Boston Gazette of October 7, 1765, Mein’s goods were advertised “to be Sold at the LONDON BOOK-STORE (lately improved by Messi’rs. Rivington and Miller) the second Door above the British Coffee-House, North Side of King-street” (p. 3/1). In October, 1764, Rivington and Miller occupied the London Bookstore, then on the “North Side of the Town House” (Boston Gazette, October 8, 1764, p. 1/2). In December, 1764, they moved to the shop later occupied by Mein (ibid., December 10, 1764, p. 2/2). See also p. 6 note 4, above.

221 A copy is in the Library of the Massachusetts Historical Society. It has the following title:

A / CATALOGUE / OF / MEIN’s / CIRCULATING LIBRARY;—/CONSISTING / Of above Twelve Hundred VOLUMES, in most / Branches of polite Literature, Arts and Sciences; / . . . / Which are LENT to Read, / At One Pound Eight Shillings, lawful Money, per Year; Eighteen / Shillings per Half Year; or, Ten and Eight Pence per Quarter; / By JOHN MEIN, Bookseller, / At the LONDON BOOK-STORE, / Second Door above the BRITISH COFFEE-HOUSE, / North-side of KING-STREET, BOSTON. / . . . / BOSTON: Printed in the Year MDCCLXV. / [PRICE, One Shilling lawful Money.] Pp. 57, 2, 1.

Mr. Matthews informs me that the Catalogue was advertised as “This Day Published” in the Boston Gazette of November 4, 1765 (p. 3/3), where also will be found a notice “To the PUBLIC.” It would be interesting to know in how many other American towns circulating libraries had at that time been established. That Mein’s was not the first in this country is proved by an advertisement of Garrat Noel, to which Mr. Matthews calls my attention, inserted in John Holt’s New-York Gazette of September 5, 1765 (p. 3/2), notifying “The Subscribers to NOEL’s circulating Library . . . that there is an Addition made of several new Books.” To Dr. Austin B. Keep of the New York Society Library I am indebted for the information that Noel’s Circulating Library was first advertised in William Weyman’s New-York Gazette on August 29, 1763, as follows:

To those who delight in Reading, And would spend their Leisure Hours, and Winter Evenings, with Profit and Entertainment, This is to give Notice, that this Day is opened by GARRAT NOEL, Bookseller, next Door to the Merchants Coffee-House, A CIRCULATING LIBRARY; Consisting of several Thousand Volumes of choice Books, in History, Divinity, Travels, Voyages, Novels, &c. A Catalogue of the Books, with the Conditions of subscribing, may be seen at said Noel’s Store (p. 3/2).

222 Thomas Longman to John Hancock, January 3, 1770:

Since which date [i. e. December 4], He is arrived in London, which from the Public Papers I find was owing to a fray He had got into at Boston, which made his Sudden departure absolutely necessary. (Manuscript owned by Mr. Charles Pelham Greenough.)

As November 5 fell on a Sunday in 1769, Pope Day was celebrated on the 6th. The following is taken from Mein’s paper, the Boston Chronicle, of November 9, 1769 (ii. 361/2):

Description of the POPE, 1769.

Toasts on the Front of the large Lanthorn. Love and Unity. — The American Whig. — Confusion to the Torries, and a total Banishment to Bribery and Corruption.

On the right side of the same. — An Acrostick.

J nsulting Wretch, we’ll him expose,

O ’er the whole world his deeds disclose,

H ell now gaups wide to take him in,

N ow he is ripe, Oh lump of Sin.

M ean is the man, M—n is his Name,

E nough he’s spread his hellish Fame,

I nfernal Furies hurl his Soul,

N ine Million Times from Pole to Pole

223 Fourteenth Report of the Historical Manuscripts Commission, Appendix, part x. See also Publications of this Society, ix. 480–481 notes.

224 The seal of the city and necessary papers required an outlay of twenty guineas, and barred litigation except in important cases. For the writ, dated March 1, 1770, see Suffolk Court Files, no. 89428.

225 Longman’s letter to Hancock, January 3, 1770. I am indebted to Mr. Charles Pelham Greenough, for allowing me to examine a series of letters relating to this affair.

226 Dated “Friday, 2d March (1770) at Mrs. Gordon’s in Quaker lane” (Congress Street).

227 For an account of these financial troubles and the relations between Mein and Murray, see Letters of James Murray, pp. 168–174

228 Longman’s account showed purchases amounting to £2099 2s ½d [1 & ½]. of which Mein had paid £419 2s 10d, leaving a debt of £1679 19s 3½d (Suffolk Court Files, no. 89428).

229 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xviii. 16.

230 Records of the Superior Court of Judicature, 1771, [xxx.] 210.

231 He was in prison November 22, 1770

232 See also Thomas’s History of Printing (1874), i. 152, ii. 230; John Rowe’s Diary, October 28, 1769; Sabine, Biographical Sketches of Loyalists in the American Revolution, i. 427, ii. 78; Publications of this Society, ix. 480.

233 The name by which Summer Street was known before the Revolution

234 Newbury, later Washington, Street.

235 Independent Chronicle, May 25, 1786, p. 2/3.

236 Ibid., August 31, 1786, p. 3/4.

237 Independent Chronicle, March 15, 1787.

238 Benjamin Guild (H. C. 1769).

239 Independent Chronicle, March 10, 1785. Guild is said to have purchased the business of Ebenezer Battelle of Marlborough (now Washington) Street. Battelle gave Guild a note, dated April 21, 1780, for £204 18s 5d. In the settlement of Guild’s estate, in 1792, this is mentioned as “bad, Sundry sums endorsed” (Suffolk Probate Files, no. 20,030).

240 Ibid., May 10, 1787

241 Ibid., October 18, November 8, 1787.

242 Sabine, Biographical Sketches of Loyalists in the American Revolution, ii. 549; Massachusetts Province Laws, v. 913, 915.

243 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xxvii. 4.

244 1 Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society, iv. 360.

245 Independent Chronicle, October 25, 1792; Suffolk Probate Files, no. 20,030

246 Independent Chronicle, May 16, 1793. The Boston Public Library has a copy with the title:

A / CATALOGUE / OF / BOOKS, / For Sale or Circulation, / By WILLIAM P. BLAKE, I AT THE / BOSTON BOOK-STORE, / No. 59. CORNHILL. /. . .BOSTON: / PRINTED FOR WILLIAM P. BLAKE, / AT THE BOSTON BOOKSTORE, No. 59 CORN / HILL, MDCCXCIII. Pp. 47.

The terms of subscription to the Circulating Library are announced on reverse of title, and the catalogue itself fills p. 3–42, followed by five pages of advertisements. Dodd, Mead & Co. offered a copy for sale in 1904 for $18.00.

247 This was the William Price estate, on the southerly corner of Washington Street and Court Avenue, which was the cause of long litigation between King’s Chapel and Trinity Church. It is now occupied by Thompson’s Spa. See the William Price Fund, Trinity Church in the City of Boston (1883); Foote, Annals of King’s Chapel, ii. 417–142; New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xxvi. 400. I am indebted to Mr. Henry H. Edes for this and for part of the following note

248 William Pinson Blake, long associated with Boston as bookseller, publisher, and owner of a circulating library, was born in Boston, January 9, 1769, and baptized at the New South Church, January 23, following, the eldest child of William and Rachel (Glover) Blake (Registers of the New South Church; Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xxi. 230, xxx. 296); and died unmarried in New York City June 5, 1820 (Records of the New York Department of Health). His brother Lemuel Blake died in Boston, March 4, 1861, also unmarried, having been a bookseller, publisher, and proprietor of a paper warehouse. He was born in Dorchester August 9, and baptized at the First Church August 13, 1775 (Registers of the First Church in Dorchester; J. H. Dexter’s Manuscript Memoranda in the Cabinet of the New England Historic Genealogical Society).

In the New York City Directory for 1818, William P. Blake and Co. appear as booksellers at 249 Broadway.

249 Independent Chronicle, March 28, 1805.

250 Boston Directory for 1807.

251 Independent Chronicle, June 20, 1796.

252 The title-page of Pelham’s second catalogue reads:

CATALOGUE of / PELHAM’s / Circulating Library, 59, Cornhill, / BOSTON: / consisting of a chosen Assortment of / BOOKS / In the various Branches / of / LITERATURE / Boston: / Printed by Samuel Etheridge. [About 1798.]

Title, lp.; Conditions, pp. 3–4; Catalogue, pp. 5–22.

253 I am indebted to Mr. Charles P. Greenough for information relating to the Pelhams and Blagroves. Pelham’s cousin Helen or Helena Pelham, who married Thomas Curtis, was the ancestor of several well-known Boston families. Henry B. Blagrove, in a letter from Baltimore, dated May 4, 1848, to Charles Pelham Curtis and James Freeman Curtis, gives many details of family history. Pelham’s nephew, in a letter from Santa Fe in 1857, added some data. See Publications of this Society, v. 193–211; Heraldic Journal, iv. 175–182; New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xxvi. 399–401; Foote, Annals of King’s Chapel, ii. 420–425; S. C. Clarke, Records of Some of the Descendants of William Curtis, pp. 18, 19.

254 Independent Chronicle, October 7, 1805. Mr. Parker opened a music store in connection with his Library in 1833, and soon gave up or sold the books

255 J. H. Dexter’s Manuscript Memoranda in the Cabinet of the New England Historic Genealogical Society.

256 I am indebted to Miss Mary Honoria Wall (now Mrs. John Henry Gill) for many references to contemporary newspapers, and also for frequent and helpful suggestions during the preparation of this paper.

257 Independent Chronicle, May 17, 1802.

258 Independent Chronicle, August 19, 1784.

259 Dr. Charles E. Clark and Mr. F. J. Libbie have several bookplates and labels of interest in this connection: the Union, Franklin, Columbian, Charlestown, Washington, and Ladies Libraries, about three inches wide and two and a half inches high, and some larger labels with conditions and rules.

260 The present thoroughfare known as Cornhill, laid out March 5, 1816, is here referred to. Old Cornhill, Marlborough, Newbury, and Orange Streets, were renamed Washington Street by votes of the Selectmen, July 4, 1788, and of the Board of Aldermen, July 6, 1824.

261 A copy is in the Library of the Massachusetts Historical Society.

262 An account of Herbert Pelham and his family is given in the New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xxxiii. 285–295, and in the Heraldic Journal, ii. 84–89; and of Peter Pelham and his family in the same journal, iv. 175–182, and in the Publications of this Society, v. 193–211. There was apparently no connection between these families.

263 See Publications of this Society, vi. 122–123 note.

264 The original of this Autobiography, written in 1828, is owned by Mrs. Alexander Wadsworth, by whose courtesy it is printed in our Transactions. It is in manuscript, in a school-boy’s note-book, bearing on the inside cover the words, written in a school-boy’s hand, “Dummer R. Chapman’s Book, 2d quarter, October 18th, 1822.” Dummer R. Chapman was a son of the author. The paging of the original is indicated within square brackets.

265 Jonathan Chapman, son of Thomas and Ann (Kettell) Chapman, married Jemima Stone, widow of Jacob Stone and daughter of Richard and Mary (Kidder) Miller. Capt. Jonathan Chapman was the son of Jonathan and Jemima (Miller) Stone Chapman, and the father of Jonathan Chapman, Mayor of Boston during the years 1810–1842. Much information about the Chapman, Devens, Miller, and other families mentioned in the Autobiography will be found in Wyman’s Genealogies and Estates of Charlestown. See also Frothingham’s History of Charlestown, J. F. Hunnewell’s Centuryⁿ of Town Life (Charlestown), and T. T. Sawyer’s Old Charlestown.

266 Here Capt. Chapman’s memory played him false. In 1748 Thaddeus Mason was one of a committee to visit the school, and on August 20, 1764, the selectmen “gave Mr. William Harris the care of the writing-school.” William Harris was the father of the Rev. Thaddeus M. Harris. See Frothingham, History of Charlestown, pp. 259, 268; Wyman, Genealogies and Estates of Charlestown, i. 475.

267 Môle St. Nicolas, Haiti.

268 Maine

269 Capt. Thomas Symonds, of the British Navy, died in 1793

270 Elk River, at the head of Chesapeake Bay.

271 Bancroft, History of the United States (1890), v. 175.

272 Cooper, History of the United States Navy (1856), p. 81.

273 The marginal date is probably incorrect, as the fort was not taken until November 15. See Bancroft, History of the United States, v. 192, 198, 199

274 A bunt is “the middle part of a sail, formed designedly into a bag or cavity, that the sail may gather more wind” (Oxford Dictionary).

275 A point is “one of the short pieces of flat braided cord attached to near the lower edge of a sail for tying up a reef” (ibid.).

276 A grummet- (or grommet-) hole is “a hole bound by a ring of rope” (ibid.).

277 A snow “is generally the largest of all two-masted vessels employed by Europeans, . . . The sails and rigging on the main-mast and fore-mast of a snow, are exactly similar to those on the same masts in a ship; only that there is a small mast behind the main-mast of the former, which carries a sail nearly resembling the mizen of a ship” (W. Falconer, Universal Dictionary of the Marine, 1789).

278 William Browne (H. C. 1755), Governor of Bermuda. See Sabine, Biographical Sketches of Loyalists of the American Revolution, i. 265.

279 Charleston, South Carolina.

280 Portsmouth, Norfolk County, Virginia

281 Nansemond, Virginia.

282 Perhaps Col. Edward Hacker Moseley. See Virginia Magazine, v. 332–334.

283 See Publications of this Society, vi. 80.

284 Col. Henry Jackson. See Massachusetts Soldiers and Sailors of the Revolutionary War, viii. 667.

285 Now Castine.

286 Vice-Admiral Sir George Collier (1738–1795).

287 August 14, 1779. See Bancroft, History of the United States, v. 334, 335; Cooper, History of the United States Navy, pp. 119, 120.

288 James Henley was the son of Samuel and Elizabeth (Cheever) Henley of Charlestown. His sister Elizabeth was the first wife of Thomas Russell (died 1796)

289 George’s Island is near Chebuoto Head.

290 Dartmouth is opposite Halifax Harbor and about a mile or so from the town.

291 Sambro Head is at the entrance of Halifax Harbor

292 Liverpool, Nova Scotia, a port about seventy miles southwest of Halifax.

293 Prospect, Nova Scotia.

294 Malagash, Nova Scotia.

295 La Have is in Lunenburg County, Nova Scotia.

296 Matinicus Island, off Penobscot Bay.

297 Mr. Albert Matthews informs me that the term “shaving-Mill,” though not recognized in the Century Dictionary, was employed in the sense indicated in the text during the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812, and sends me the following extracts:

A small boat, one of the noted Shaving-Mills, which continually infest our bay, was captured by two or three whale-boats, and sent in here last Saturday (Independent Chronicle, Boston, July 19, 1781, p. 3/3).

The Shaving-Mill, commanded by Captain Plympton, has taken a sloop and schooner, laden with fish, both of which are in a safe port (Boston Gazette, August 13, 1781, p. 3/1).

Our Shaving Mills have begun to give much interruption to our Eastern Coasters (Salem Gazette, July 10, 1812, p. 2/4).

The Fairhaven shaving mill (generally called the handsaw, in honor of one of the reputed owners) has sailed from Boston on a cruise (ibid. October 12, 1813, p. 4/1).

See also the Columbian Centinel, August 18, 1813, p. 2/5; and J. L. Locke’s Sketches of the History of the Town of Camden, Maine (1859), p. 32

298 Probably Capt. Consider Rowland. See Massachusetts Soldiers and Sailors of the Revolutionary War, viii. 403; Publications of this Society, vi. 76 note.

299 Bernardo Galvez (1756–1794).

300 Near Guadaloupe, April 12, 1782. See Bancroft, History of the United States, v. 540.

301 Savanna-la-Mar.

302 A word is here struck out.

303 Abigail Devens was the daughter of Richard and Mary (Townsend) Devens of Charlestown.

304 Several words are here struck out

305 St. Paul and New Amsterdam are islands in the Indian Ocean.

306 Cape Comorin, British India.

307 Manappadu, Madras.

308 Anjengo.

309 Tellicheri, about fifty miles north of Calicut.

310 Mauritius.

311 St. Paul de Loanda

312 An error for 1791.

313 Loango is a French settlement, between St. Paul de Loanda and Cape Lopez.

314 There appears to be some error here. John Roberts was appointed Governor on March 25, 1780, and died before May 26, 1781. William Fielde was Governor from June 20, 1789, to November 15, 1791. See G. Macdonald, The Gold Coast Past and Present, pp. 346, 347.

315 Alexander Moore left a widow, Ruth, who later married John Scott and removed to London. Moore’s estate was administered in Boston, and in his inventory was scheduled “the Snow Generous Friends, with the Masts, Yards, Cables, Anchors, Sails, Stand’g and Rung Rigging, Boats, Stores &c,” valued at £400. See Suffolk Probate Files, no. 20186.

316 Elmina.

317 Anamabo.

318 St. Eustatius.

319 Sombrero.

320 This was the Asia. See p. 233 note 2, below.

321 Cape Verde Islands.

322 Tranquebar.

323 Trineomali.

324 The arrival of “Ship Asia, Chapman,” was noted in the Columbian Centinel of May 7, 1796 (p. 3/1). In the same paper of May 11 was printed an advertisement in part as follows (p. 3/3):

On Wednesday, 1st of June,

Will be exposed for sale, at RUSSELL’s Wharf, the Ship ASIA, and Cargo, as she arrived from India — Cargo consisting of—. . .

The Asia, a fine new Ship, built for the India Trade, 327 tons burthen; made one voyage only — can be put to sea at small expense, and will be sold on liberal terms.

325 See Cooper, History of the United States Navy, pp. 153, 154.

326 The Pickering was with Commodore John Barry’s squadron in the West Indies, and was lost at sea in August, 1800. See ibid. pp. 167, 176, 182.

327 The Herald also served in West Indian Waters, and was sold when the Navy was reduced in 1801. See ibid. pp. 182, 193.

328 Sir Robert Liston (1742–1836).

329 Preble was later promoted to the rank of Commodore, and was in command of the Mediterranean squadron in the war with Tripoli in 1803–1804. See Cooper, History of the United States Navy, chaps, xx–xxiv.

330 The Boston took part in several actions against the French in West Indian waters in 1800. She carried Robert R. Livingston to France in 1801. See ibid. pp. 182, 205.

331 Java.

332 Three miles S. S. E. from Marblehead.

333 Near Calcutta.

334 Now Bowdoin Street. The land was at the corner of Cambridge Street. See Suffolk Deeds, ccix. 68. It is said that the garden covered a part of the land where the Revere House now stands.

335 This land was in Main Street, Charlestown. See Suffolk Probate Files, no. 30071. The entire estate, real and personal, was appraised at $69,865.53. Sawyer writes:

Another daughter of Commissary Devens married Captain Jonathan Chapman, who was also a large real-estate owner in the old town. Chapman Street was laid out by the family, through the old distillery-lot which fronted on Main Street and ran down to the river (Old Charlestown, p. 102).

336 Sawyer writes:

To make room for the church, the old Indian Chief Tavern building was moved to the corner of Main and Miller streets, where it still stands [1898]. It was used as a public house for many years afterwards, under the name of Eagle Hotel (Old Charlestown, pp. 119, 432, 433).

337 Now known as the Harvard Church. The Rev. James Walker was later President of Harvard College.

338 David Ellis was the father of the Rev. George E. Ellis and the Rev. Rufus Ellis.

339 Publications, v. 257–297.

340 In April, 1777, officers were sent out by the Committee of Safety of New Hampshire to apprehend Dr. Hedges, then a resident of Dunbarton, New Hampshire, there being evidence against him as one concerned in counterfeiting New Hampshire bills, and he was arrested and committed to the jail in Cambridge, Massachusetts; but he was soon released and employed by the State authorities in hunting counterfeiters and Tory suspects. In September, 1777, he petitioned the New Hampshire Legislature for the fee in certain lands at Goffstown, New Hampshire. (State Papers of New Hampshire, viii. 546, 554, 694, 703, 735, 807.)

341 Capt. Ephraim Jones kept the tavern and had the care of the jail at Concord, Massachusetts, during the Revolutionary period. He was born in Concord, May 1, 1730, and died there September 21, 1787, son of Ephraim and Mary (Hayward) Jones.

342 Hon. Oliver Prescott, A.M., M.D., was born in Groton, Massachusetts, April 27, 1731, son of Hon. Benjamin and Abigail (Oliver) Prescott, and was graduated at Harvard College in 1750. He was president of the Middlesex Medical Society, served as Brigadier-General and Major-General in the Revolution, and afterwards was Judge of Probate of Middlesex County until his death, November 17, 1804. (Prescott’s Prescott Memorial, pp. 59, 60.) In April, 1777, the Committee of Safety of New Hampshire addressed a letter to him concerning Dr. Silas Hedges. (State Papers of New Hampshire, viii. 546.)

343 Hon. James Prescott was born in Groton, Massachusetts, January 13, 1720–21, son of Hon. Benjamin and Abigail (Oliver) Prescott. He was a Colonel of Militia, and at the beginning of the Revolution was a member of the Provincial Congress and of the Board of War. Afterwards, he was a judge of the Court of Common Pleas. He died in Groton, February 15, 1800. (Prescott’s Prescott Memorial, p. 56.)

344 Col. Nathaniel Peabody was born in Topsfield, Massachusetts, February 18, 1740–41, son of Dr. Jacob and Susanna (Rogers) Peabody. He studied medicine with his father, and then removed to Atkinson, New Hampshire, where he was a physician and Colonel of Militia. In the Revolutionary period he represented Atkinson in the New Hampshire Legislature and was a member of the Committee of Safety, until 1779, when he was chosen a member of the Continental Congress. He was subsequently a Major-General; and died in Atkinson, June 27, 1823. (New Hampshire Historical Collections, iii. 1; New England Historical and Genealogical Register, ii. 372.)

345 Ens. Stephen Ames was born in Boxford, Massachusetts, September 5, 1712, son of John and Priscilla (Kimball) Eames, or Ames, of Boxford and Groton, Massachusetts. In 1739 he moved from Groton to that part of West Dunstable which was incorporated as Hollis, New Hampshire; and represented Hollis in the New Hampshire Legislature, 1775–1778, and was one of the town’s Committee of Safety during the Revolution. He was an Ensign of Militia.

346 Col. Nicholas Gilman, son of Daniel and Mary (Lord) Gilman, was born in Exeter, New Hampshire, October 21, 1731, and died there April 7, 1783. He was a Colonel of Militia, Treasurer of New Hampshire, 1775–1782, and of the Committee of Safety in the period of the Revolution. (Gilman’s Gilman Family, pp. 73, 74.)

347 Hon. John Dudley, who was born in Exeter, New Hampshire, April 9, 1725, son of James and Mercy (Folsom) Dudley, was a member of the New Hampshire Legislature, 1775–1784, and served several terms as Speaker of the House. He was also a member of the Committee of Safety during that time. From 1776 to 1784 he was a Judge of the Court of Common Pleas; and from 1784 to 1797 a Judge of the Superior Court. He died at Raymond, New Hampshire, May 21, 1805. (Bell’s Bench and Bar of New Hampshire, pp. 38–41.)

348 Hon. Ebenezer Thompson, son of Robert and Abigail (Emerson) Thompson, was born in Durham, New Hampshire, March 5, 1737, and died there August 14, 1802. He studied medicine, and practised as a physician until he entered politics as a member of the New Hampshire Legislature. He was Secretary of New Hampshire, 1775–1786; a member of the Committee of Safety throughout the Revolution; Clerk of the Court of Common Pleas, 1783–1787; Judge of the Court of Common Pleas, 1787–1795; and Judge of the Superior Court, 1795 until his death. (Bell’s Bench and Bar of New Hampshire, pp. 48–50.)

The documents in the text are taken from the New Hampshire State Papers, xvii. 286–288. Cf. ibid. viii. 807.

349 5 Massachusetts Historical Collections, viii. 421.

350 6 Ibid. i. 32.

351 1 Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society, xix. 104–106.

352 Boston Common in Colonial and Provincial Days, p. 40.

353 2 Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society, i. 249.

354 See Publications of this Society, vi. 124.

355 Concerning William Pelham, see New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xxvi. 400, 401; Heraldic Journal, iv. 178–182.

356 See Foote, Annals of King’s Chapel, ii. 431–434. Cf. Allen’s Reports, ix. 422–147; Massachusetts Reports, ix. 500–507.

357 The principal authorities relied upon are Foote’s Annals of King’s Chapel; Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports; Suffolk Deeds; Suffolk Probate Files; Deblois’s The William Price Fund, Trinity Church, Boston; the works of William Loring Andrews. Thanks are due Mr. Robert H. Kelby of the New York Historical Society, Mr. Irwin C. Cromack of Boston, and Mr. Frederick L. Gay of Brookline, for their kind assistance.

358 See the December meeting, below, pp. 409–452.

359 Magnalia (1702), book iii. part i. chap, iv, § 4. Mather seems largely to have followed Fuller.

360 As Mather, following Fuller, says: “The design was generally approved, and multitudes of discreet and devout Men extreamly resented the Ruine of it.” And this resentment undoubtedly helped the Puritan interest and injured their opponents.

361 Historical Collections (1680), ii. 7 ff.

362 Just as it was here in New England.

363 Constitutional History of England (1874), i. 224–229.

364 Cutts, Dictionary of the Church of England, p. 338.

365 For example, in the fourth year of her reign she compelled the Bishop of London to give her eleven manors in exchange for a miscellaneous lot of these impropriated benefices (Kennett, Impropriations, pp. 155, 156). See also Statutes of the Realm, iv. 381, 382; Acts of the Privy Council, December 24, 1558. The Calendars of State Papers, Domestic, 1559–1560, show how these things were done.

366 The history of the Irish lay impropriations is important and throws light on the actions and motives of those engaged in the controversy over the English feoffment.

367 Kennett, Impropriations, pp. 169, 170.

368 The amiable but not very accurate Fuller says that there were at this time 3845 benefices either appropriated to bishops, cathedrals and colleges, or impropriated (as lay-fees) to private persons, but does not distinguish further. The distinction he makes between appropriation and impropriation was then in use, but the use was merely fanciful.

369 The following, under date of January 27, 1630–31, may have some direct relation to Heylyn’s sermon:

Petition of Richard Dave, son of Wm. Dave, sometime bishop of Winchester to the King. For a reference to a select number of the Council, and Council at Law, with Mr. Noy, to consider a scheme for buying up impropriations, principally by means of a collection throughout England. Underwritten, Reference to the Archbishop of York, the Lords Keeper, Treasurer, President, and Steward, the Earls of Dorset, and Holland, Sec. Dorchester, the Bishops of London and Winchester, Lord Newburgh, the Master of the Wards, the Vice Chamberlain, and Sec. Coke (Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1629–1631, p. 174).

It does not appear whether the petition was for or agains the feoffment. The fa’ her of the petitioner was accounted strongly Puritan.

370 Bishop Laud had been at least suspicious of the feoffees for more than a year, for among many things in “considerations for the better settling of church government” suggested to the King in the spring of 1629, Laud had set down “A consideration also to be had, 1. As to the general Feoffees for Benefices and Preferments.”

371 “Rent or revenue derived from house-property (which is continually undergoing deterioration or waste).” This passage from Fuller’s Church History (book xi. p. 137) is the latest noted in the Oxford Dictionary.

372 History of the Puritans (1817), ii. 247, 248.

373 A somewhat blindly calendared paper may indicate that the feoffees held impropriations in Dunstable, Hertford, and Cirencester. See Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1633–1634, p. 344.

374 “At the south west angle of St Sythe’s lane, in Budge-row is [was] situated the church of St Anthony vulgarly termed St Antholin, or Antlin” (Noorthouck, History of London, 1773, p. 600). Fuller says they were charged with misuse of funds,—

. . .when [Being by their Feoffment to erect them where preaching was wanting.] erecting a Lecture every morning at St. Antholines in London. What was this but lighting candles to the Sun, London being already the Land of Goshen, and none of those dark and distant corners, where Soules were ready to famish for lack of the food of the word? What was this but a bold breach of their trust, even in the Eye of the Kingdome?” (Church History, book xi. p. 142).

Their answer to this will be found in the same place. In Thornbury and Walford’s Old and New London (i. 553, 554) is this account of St. Antholin’s:

A new morning prayer and lecture was established here by clergymen inclined to Puritanical principles in 1599. The bells began to ring at five in the morning, and were considered Pharisaical and intolerable by all High Churchmen in the neighbourhood. The extreme Geneva party made a point of attending these early prayers . . . “and curiosity, faction, and humour brought so great a conflux and resort, that from the first appearance of day in the morning on every Sunday, to the shutting in of the light, the church was never empty.” Dugdale also mentions the church. “Now for an essay,” he says, “of those whom, under colour of preaching the Gospel, in sundry parts of the realm, they set up a morning lecture at St. Antholine’s Church in London; where (as probationers for that purpose) they first made tryal of their abilities, which place was the prand nursery whence most of the seditious preachers were after sent abroad throughout all England to poyson the people with their anti-monarchical principles.”

The funds of the Welsh parish were an additional endowment, but as I suppose for additional lecturers.

Mar. 17, 1629. Orders for disposing of certain money given towards the maintenance of six morning lectures in the church of St Antholin, London, indorsed in Bishop Lauds hand. St Antholin’s the lecture 701 per annum; and by the present instrument monies were vested in trustees to pay to each of the lecturers an additional 301 per annum (Calendar of State Papers, Domestic).

375 “The Exchequer Chamber, court of Equity in which the Lord Treasurer and the Chancellor of the Exchequer sat as judges by the side of the barons” (Gardiner, History of England, vii. 258).

376 The Rev. William Gouge, D.D. (1578–1653), a popular and fashionable preacher for many years at Blackfriars. Mr. Gardiner says that his name and that of Richard Sibbes, “the first two names on the list of feoffees . . . offered sufficient guarantees that no destructive influences were at work” (History of England, vii. 259), and that “Gouge did his best to satisfy Laud. He received his admonitions on account of some irregularities in the administration of the Communion with meekness. He detested he declared those who despised authorities.” Gardiner speaks of him as a moderate Puritan. He was at any rate a very thorough Puritan, as might be judged from his having been recommended to the noted Puritan, Stephen Edgerton, by no less a person than Arthur Hildersham. Furthermore, he was one of the leading members of the Westminster Assembly, in which he was a member of the committee for examination of ministers, on the committee for drafting a confession of faith, and assessor and finally a prolocutor. See the sketch of Gouge in the Dictionary of National Biography.

377 The Rev. Richard Sibbes (Sibs, Sibbs), D.D. (1577–1635). Of him Gardiner says:

Sibbes was a still more notable personage in the ranks of the moderate Puritans . . . Ever since the days of Cartwright there had been a strong Puritan element at Cambridge. Perkins had handed on the torch of religious oratory to Bayne, and Bayne was the spiritual father of Sibbes. [Appointed lecturer at Trinity parish, the] lecture became a great power in Cambridge. Men like Cotton, afterwards the light of New England, and Goodwin, the noted Independent divine, traced their spiritual generation to Sibbes (History of England, vii. 260 ff).

He was chosen preacher to Grays Inn in 1617, and in 1626 Master of St. Catharine’s Hall, offices which he held together. He and Gouge were reprimanded by the Star Chamber for their circular asking alms for the Palatinate exiles. After the feoffment was broken up King Charles presented him to the Vicarage of Trinity. There is no doubt, however, of his Puritanism, for which the High Commission had in 1615 deprived him of his professorship and lectureship.

378 The Rev. Charles (not Giles) Ofspring or Offspringe (it is spelled both ways in his parish register), “s. Thomas of Kent, B. A. from Trinity Coll., Cambridge, 1605–6, M. A. 1609, incorporated 14 July, 1612, rector of St. Antholin, London, 1617” (Foster, Alumni Oxonienses). At St. Antholin’s the baptisms of children Martha, Charles, Charles, Samuel, and Mary are recorded from October, 1625, to October, 1634. His wife Martha was buried August 22, 1649. He was buried March 13, 1659. None of these children survived him. The second Charles died in his twenty-fourth year, and Samuel lived to be twenty-five. St. Antholin parish was a great centre of Puritanism — there is no doubt about the thoroughness of the Rector’s Puritanism. Neal calls him “Dr.”

379 Sir Thomas Crewe (1565–1634). He entered Parliament in 1603, was chosen Speaker in 1623 and again in the first Parliament of Charles I, and in 1633 was a member of the Ecclesiastical Commission.

380 Robert Eyrs. Fuller calls him Ralph Eyre of Lincoln’s Inn.

381 John White (1590–1645), of an old Pembrokeshire family. This is the John White so well and favorably known to us for his part in the management of the Massachusetts Bay Colony Charter and settlement. No one could call him a moderate Puritan. “With reference to Episcopacy White advocated a ‘root and branch policy of extirpation.’” “His hostility to the episcopal system was extreme,” and so, we may add, was his hostility to the Episcopal clergy. See the account of him in the Dictionary of National Biography, which is much better done than some other of the lives of the Puritans in that work.

382 Samuel Browne, of Lincoln’s Inn, October, 1616, was member of Parliament for Clifton, Dartmouth and Hardness, Devonshire; was one of the committee to which the impeachment of Laud was intrusted, and followed him to the death. He seems to have been an Independent and to have fought against the Presbyterian party. He died in 1668. See the sketch of him in the Dictionary of National Biography, where nothing is said of his connection with the feoffment.

Fuller says that besides the feoffees, “there were other inferior Factors, Mr. Foxley, &c. who were employed by appointment, or of officiousness employed themselves in this designe” (Church History, book xi. p. 137).

383 The Rev. Richard Stock (1569–1626) was a Yorkshireman of St. John’s College, Cambridge, “incorporated A. M. Oxford 1595,” after holding various ecclesiastical positions, in 1611 succeeded to the parish of All Hallows, Bread Street, London, where he had been curate. “He was active in promoting the observance of the Lord’s day.” It was doubtless to him that John Davenport succeeded in the feoffment.

384 The charge that the feoffment was a scheme for private gain does not appear in the trial and was doubtless false, although it must be evident that the integrity and prudence of the feoffees alone constrained them to abstain from such gainful breach of trust to which under the temptation of increased funds less worthy successors might have yielded. Mr. Davenport said that he had made nothing, but was the poorer from his connection with the feoffment.

385 One of the advowsons was that of All Saints Church, Worcester, as appears by the following order of August 27, 1633:

The King to [Richard] Sihhes. D.D., [John] Damport [Davenport] clerk, and their Co-grantees of the advowson of All Saints, Worcester. In a suit late depending in the Court of Exchequer, prosecuted against them by the Attorney General, it was decreed that they should confer that church among others, when it should fall void, upon such person as the King should appoint. It being now void it is his Majesty’s pleasure that Valentine Southerton B. D.and Fellow of Christ’s Church, Oxford, be forthwith presented by them. [Draft by Attorney General Noy. A blank was left in the draft for the name of the person to be presented, with reference to which Archbishop Laud has written: “My Lord elect of Hereford [Dr. William Juxon] will give you the name; he is one of Worcester Church” (Calendar of State papers, Domestic, 1633–34, pp. 192, 193).

386 Historical Collections, ii. 150–152, under the year 1632. Under date of January 17, 1633–34, occurs the following:

Minute by Sec. Windebank of his Majesty’s pleasure that Archbishop Laud, Lord Keeper Coventry, Archbishop Neile, the Lord Treasurer, the Lord Privy Seal, the Earl Marshal, Lord Cottington, and Sec. Coke with Sec. Windebank, calling them Mr. Attorney General, should consider whether the feoffees of impropriations who have been questioned in the Exchequer should be proceeded against criminally, and if so, whether in the Exchequer or Star Chamber (Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1633–34, p. 418).

387 The letter to Nicholson dated 16 November, 1797, was printed in the Historical Magazine for August, 1870, Second Series, viii. 112, 118. In connection with the letters printed in the text, see W. G. Sumner’s The Financier of the American Revolution, ii. 279–292.

388 Publications, viii. 90–104.

389 Journals of the House of Lords, ix. 250. The writer of the letter was Edward Montagu, second Baron Montagu of Boughton. For much information in regard to the seizure of the King, see C. H. Firth’s Clarke Papers (Camden Society), vol. i. pp. xxvi–xxxii, 118–120.

390 A True Impartiall Narration, concerning the Armies preservation of the King; by which it doth appear, that the Army doth intend the good, life, propertie, and libertie of all the Commons of England. It is reprinted in Rushworth’s Historical Collections (1701), vi. 513–517.

391 Compleat History of the Life and Raigne of King Charles, p. 1138.

392 Memorials of the English Affairs (1682), p. 370.

393 Monarchy or no Monarchy in England, pp. 50, 51. The title and collation of this pamphlet follow:

Monarchy / or no / Monarchy in England. / Grebner his Prophecy / concerning Charles Son / Of Charles, his Greatnesse, / Victories, Conquests. / The Northern Eyon, or Lyon of the North, and / Chicken of the Eagle discovered who / they are, of what Nation. / English, Latin, Saxon, Scotish and Welch Pro-/ phecies concerning England in / particular, and all Europe in generall. / Passages upon the Life and Death of the late / King Charles. / Ænigmaticall Types of the future State and Condition / of England for many years to come. / By William Lilly, Student in Astrology. / [Eight Latin verses.] / London, Printed for Humfrey Blunden, at the Sign of the Castle / in Corn-hill 1651.

Collation: Title, 1 leaf; To the Reader, pp. (6); The Prophecie of Paulus Grebnerus, concerning these Times, pp. 1–73; Several Observations upon the Life and Death of Charles late King of England, pp. 74–119; Note, p. (120); Illustrations, pp. 2–20.

The running headline of pp. 1–73 is, “Monarchy, or, no Monarchy hereafter in England;” that of pp. 74–119 is, “Observations on the Life and Death of King Charles.” These Observations end on p. 119, and the next page (unnumbered) contains these remarks:

HAD the curtesie of the present Times deserved it at my hands, had’st seene an Explanation of the sixteen Pages following, which in Ænigmatieall Types, Formes, Figures, Shapes, doth perfectly represent the future condition of the English Nation and Common-wealth for many hundreds of yeares yet to come. I have borrowed so much Time from my Morning sleepe, as hath brought forth these Conceptions. You that reade these Lines must know that I doe no new thing, 1 doe herein but imitate the Antients, who so often as they resolved to conceale their intentions from prophane hands, used Hierogliphicks, Images, &c. The Ægyptian Priests were herein excellent, and their judgement commendable; our Saviour also himselfe commandeth; Ne detur sacrum Canibus. If Proridence shall hereafter assigne me a quiet life, and prolong my yeares, I may then perhaps leave unto the Sonnes of Art the severall Changes of every Kingdome and Common-wealth in Europe, in such like Characters as these which now follow.

Then come twenty pages (not sixteen, as Lilly says), the first page blank, each succeeding page containing one or more illustrations. It was later claimed by Lilly that two of these portrayed the plague and the fire of London. There is a copy of this pamphlet in the Boston Athenæum.

It will be observed that the passage relating to the King’s executioner is found in the “Monarchy or no Monarchy” part, and not in the “Observations.” See also p. 288 note 3, below.

394 This pamphlet bears the imprint: “London, Printed for Dan. White, at the seven Stars in St Pauls Church-yard, 1660.” There is a copy in the Harvard College Library. The collation is as follows: Title, 1 leaf; To the Reader, 1 leaf; Text, pp. 1–7.

395 John Thurloe (1616–1668).

396 Journals of the House of Commons, viii. 53.

397 William Prynne (1600–1669).

398 Journals of the House of Commons, viii. 56.

399 Arthur Annesley, first Earl of Anglesey.

400 Journals of the House of Commons, viii. 57.

401 Historical Register and Chronicle of English Affairs (1744), p. 736.

402 Sir Richard Weston (1620–1681).

403 Anthony Pearson (1628–1670).

404 Henry Ireton (1611–1651).

405 John Rushworth (1612–1690).

406 James Norfolk.

407 The regicides Thomas Harrison, Thomas Scott (or Scot), Gregory Clement, Hugh Peters, Francis Hacker, Adrian Scrope (or Scroope), John Cook.

408 Sir Orlando Bridgeman (1606–1674).

409 Mr. William Lilly’s History of His Life and Times, From the Year 1602, to 1681. Written by himself in the 66th Year of his Age, to his worthy Friend Elias Ashmole, Esq; . . . The Second Edition. London: . . . 1715, pp. 88–91. In the year 1715 was also printed a book bearing in part the following title:

Mr. William Lilly’s / True History / of / King James the First, / and / King Charles the First. / With Sundry Observations, Remarkable / Passages, and many secret Transactions / not ‘till now divulged. / Faithfully Publish’d from his own Copy. / . . . London: / . . . M DCC XV.

Collation: Title, 1 leaf; To the Reader, pp. i–vii [1]; Several Observations upon the Life and Death of Charles late King of England, pp. 1–105; What Manner of Death the Archbishop of Canterbury should die, pp. 106–108.

The running headline of pp. 1–105 is, “Observations on the Life and Death of King Charles;” that of pp. 106–108 is, “Observations on the Death of Archbishop Laud.” In his sketch of Lilly in the Dictionary of National Biography, Mr. Sidney Lee says that Lilly’s True History of King James the First and King Charles the First was printed in 1651 as an appendix to his Monarchy or no Monarcy in England. This is a slight error. As we have already seen (p. 283 note, above), the second part of Monarchy or no Monarchy in England was given a different title. Moreover, there are certain differences between the Observations of 1651 and the True History of 1715, of which it is necessary to mention only one here. The passage quoted in our text (p. 283, above) as taken from p. 51 of the Monarchy or no Monarchy in England — beginning “After the execution,” and ending “one of a competent fortune” — does not occur at all in the Observations of 1651, but is transferred to pp. 75, 76 of the True History.

410 It was also reprinted in 1822.

411 Part vi. p. 29. In the same book, January 4 is assigned to “George Joyce, a most audacious Fanatick Rebel Saint;” but in the sketch of Joyce (part i. pp. 13–17) no mention is made of the Lilly story.

412 Capt.William Hulet or Hewlet.

413 See p. 291 note 1, below.

414 Arthur Capel, first Baron Capel of Hadham, beheaded in 1649.

415 Life of Oliver Cromwell, Lord Protector of the Common-Wealth of England, Scotland, and Ireland, Third Edition with Additions, pp. Ill, 112. The first edition of Kimber’s book, published in 1724, did not contain the passage in the text; the second edition, published in 1725, I have not seen. Five or six editions appear to have been printed.

416 See Notes and Queries, May 8, 1869, Fourth Series, iii. 422.

417 Lilly and the Joyce tradition were again referred to in the Gentleman’s Magazine for July, 1784, liv. 505.

418 Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, 1650, pp. 206, 293.

419 See Mr. Charles H. Firth’s sketch of Joyce in the Dictionary of National Biography, and Temple’s Works (1740), ii. 229, 231–234.

420 The Duty and Character of a National Soldier, Represented in a Sermon Preached, January 2, 1779, At the High Church in Hull, before the Nottinghamshire Militia, pp. 28, 29. In the copy in the library of the Massachusetts Historical Society, the word “Joyce” is run through with a pen and “*Hacker or Axtel” written in the margin. The regicides Col. Francis Hacker and Col. Daniel Axtel are meant. By a curious coincidence, my attention was called to this passage by Mr. Julius H. Tuttle, to whose kindness I am indebted, only three days after I had received Mr. Lamberton’s letter.

421 In a letter dated at Venice, March 11, 1649, Joseph Kent wrote:

Gregory the ordinary hangman of London was commanded to assist to the Kings death, which he refused, but to invite him to it lie was proffered two hundred pounds, which he would not hear of; then they threatened to burn him, and at last imprisoned him, because he would not consent to so great a wickedness; but a Judas will never be wanting, a Collonel formerly a brazier (to the great dishonour of the noble military art) with his servant a minister, both masked, were those who cut the thread of His Majesty’s life, and, in it, his loyal subjects happiness. A rogue of a minister, after his head was severed from his sacred body, elevated it publicly to the people. (In Ellis’s Original Letters, Second Series, iii. 340–342.)

Sir Henry Ellis thought that Kent’s allusions were to Col. Joyce and Hugh Peters, but he overlooked the fact that Kent could not have spoken of Joyce as “Colonel” in 1649. Moreover, according to Anthony a Wood, Cornet Joyce was not a brazier but “had been a godly taylor in London” (Fasti Oxonienses, Bliss’s edition, ii. 141). Probably Kent meant Col. Francis Hacker and Peters.

Though Brandon’s name was Richard, he was commonly called “Gregory,” because he succeeded in the office his father, Gregory Brandon. For Richard Brandon, see Sidney Lee’s sketch in the Dictionary of National Biography; W. D. Fellowes, Historical Sketches of Charles the First, Cromwell, Charles the Second, and the Principal Personages of that Period, 1828, pp. 202–204; Gentleman’s Magazine, June, 1784, liv. 409, 410; H. Ellis, Original Letters, Second Series, iii. 340–343 notes; T. B. Howell, State Trials, 1816, iv. 1141, 1142, v. 1155, 1156, 1185–1194; Notes and Queries, June 8, 1861, Second Series, xi. 446.

422 Bridget Lisle, the daughter of the regicide John Lisle, married (1) the Rev. Leonard Hoar, President of Harvard College, and (2) Hezekiah Usher.

423 Publications, viii. 340 note, 341, 342.

424 Boston Gazette, January 7, 1766, p. 3/2. The allusions are of course to George Grenville and Charles Townshend. As to the alleged proclamation, I have not been able to obtain any information.

425 In April, 1769, Governor Bernard became “Sir Francis Bernard of Nettleham in the County of Lincolnshire, Baronet.”

426 Specimens of Newspaper Literature, i. 186–192.

427 See the December meeting, p. 422, below.

428 A brief passage is worth quoting:

And because the said Vaughan, whom his Maiestie graced with the title of Orpheus Junior, and one Democritus Junior, which published the Anatomie of Melancholie, and one Iohn Florio a learned Italian were the first messengers which blazed and reported their ioyfull tidings, Apollo admitted them all three into his Palace, as extraordinarie Waiters (Golden Fleece, part i. p. 23).

429 No place is given on the title-page, but the British Museum Catalogue assigns it, I think correctly, to London. The statement that the pamphlet was reprinted in Boston in 1772 is made on the authority of Sabin.

430 This long tract is not, as one might infer from the brief title given in our text, political, but is religious or theological. The title is in part as follows:

The Spirit of Liberty: or, Junius’s Loyal Address. Being a Key to the English Cabinet: or, an Humble Dissertation upon the Rights and Liberties of the ancient Britons. . . . Humbly addressed to his Majesty. . . . By Junius, Junior. To which is added, A Polemical Tale; or, The Christians Winter Piece: . . . The whole being An Enigmatical Key to the original Rise, History, Progress, Possession, and sacred Treasures of those aucient People who were first called Christians at Antioch. . . . Printed in the Year 1770.

The conclusion “To the King’s Most Excellent Majesty” is as follows:

That your Majesty may enjoy this happy Blessing, and the People their inestimable Privileges, the following Essay, upon the Rights of the People, and more particularly upon the perfect Law of Liberty of those ancient People called Christians, is laid,

With all due Reverence and Submission,

At your Majesty’s Royal Feet,

As your Majesty’s most humble Servant,

And devoted loyal Subject,

JUNIUS, Jun. a Briton born.

Private Village, Aug. 15, 1770.

The Boston Athenæum owns two copies of this tract, one bearing on the flyleaf the words “By J. Allen.” No doubt this was the Rev. John Allen who at one time was pastor of a Baptist Church in Petticoat Lane, Spitalsfields, London, who later went to New York, and of whom there is an account in the Dictionary of National Biography. His pseudonym of “Junius, Junior” was no doubt suggested by the famous Letters of Junius, the first of which was dated January 21, 1769; but possibly was derived from “Junius,” the Latinized form of the Dutch savant, Adriaen du Jon (1512–1575), or of the distinguished French Protestant theologian François du Jon (1545–1602), or of the latter’s son François du Jon (1589–1677). One of these is mentioned on p. 62 of the tract.

431 Not the least interesting feature of Mr. Lamberton’s suggestion is the fact that he himself is unable to account for it. In a second letter he writes me:

When I finished your paper on Joyce Junior, my exact thought was, “Why, Captain Joyce was an alias for Jack Ketch, and the reason was that Joyce was the executioner of Charles I.” But . . . I had no documentary evidence. So I looked up Joyce in the index to Carlyle’s “Cromwell,” and found two references. . . . I could not think of any other place to get documentary evidence of my vague recollection, and so I wrote nothing about it. But now . . . you supply what I lacked. However, my original notion did not come from Lilly’s book, for I never read it. Nor can I say how I ever got the notion. “Captain Joyce” seems to me like a once familiar nickname, which I had not heard since childhood. Yon observe I say “Captain Joyce,” which is the form lodged in my memory. But “Joyce Junior” I never heard of till I read your monograph.

It is in such unexpected and unexplainable ways that difficult problems are often solved.

432 See Frothingham, History of Charlestown, pp. 47 et seq.

433 Winthrop, History of New England (1825), i. 83.

434 Snow, History of Boston, p. 32. Felt in his Ecclesiastical History of New England agrees with Snow.

435 2 Massachusetts Historical Collections, v. 185. The congregation of Boston and Charlestown kept a fast on August 27.

436 Hutchinson’s History of Massachusetts (1764), i. 16; 2 Massachusetts Historical Collections, vii. 189.

437 1 Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society, xvii. 128.

438 For most of the above see Frothingham’s History of Charlestown, p. 47 et seq.

439 See the “Gleaner” Articles, in Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, v; Shurtleff, Topographical and Historical Description of Boston, p. 392; W. W. Wheildon, Sentry, or Beacon Hill (1877), p. 19.

440 Cotton Mather, Magnalia (1702), book iii. p. 7.

441 2 Massachusetts Historical Collections, v. 113.

442 Mr. Wheildon wrote that this was still in use in 1877 (Sentry, or Beacon Hill, pp. 19, 84).

443 See Publications of this Society, x. 257 note 2.

444 See Hill. History of the Old South Church, i. 136–138 notes.

445 See Publications of this Society, iii. 86–90.

446 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, ii. 38.

447 Suffolk Deeds, iii. 121, 128, 476.

448 See C. F. Adams’s Antinomianism in Massachusetts, p. 336; Survey of the Spiritual Antichrist opening the Secrets of Familism and Antinomianism by Samuel Rutherford, Professor of Divinity at St. Andrews, Scotland, Sold at the Green Dragon in St. Paul’s Churchyard, 1648, p. 176, chap, xxi.: Of the first sewers of Antinomianism in New England. It starts off thus, “Mrs Hutchinson, the American Jezebel.”

449 Adams’s Antinomianism in Massachusetts, p. 336; Publications of this Society, x. 26.

450 Lechford, Note-Book, p. 31; Suffolk Deeds, ii. 11, iii. 254, iv. 106, 116, vi. 340, x. 295, xi. 73. A portion was opposite the Globe Building (Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xi. 119). See also an article by M. J. Canavan in the Boston Herald, June 4, 1901.

451 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, vol. ii. part ii. p. 102.

452 Letters from New England, p. 85.

453 He settled in Dublin in 1658 (Calendar of State Papers, Colonial, pp. 367, 466).

454 See notes in Lechford’s Note-Book.

455 4 Massachusetts Historical Collections, ii. 57.

456 See Suffolk Deeds, viii. 360.

457 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, vol. ii. part ii. p. 102; 3 Massachusetts Historical Collections, vii. 48.

458 Suffolk Deeds, i. 193.

459 Drake, History of Boston, p. 229. List of those who gave up arms.

460 Winthrop, History of New England, i. 212.

461 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, vol. ii. part ii. p. 75.

462 Lechford, Note-Book, p. 102.

463 See Savage’s Genealogical Dictionary of New England.

464 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, ii. 1.

465 New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xviii. 68.

466 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, ii. 141; Suffolk Deeds, viii. 322, ix. 120.

467 Memorial History of Boston, i. 174.

468 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, ii. 38; Suffolk Deeds, i. 100.

469 Suffolk Deeds, ii. 200, 202, 315.

470 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, ii. 101.

471 See Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, vol. ii. part ii. p. 100.

472 See E. Rogers, Life and Opinions of a Fifth Monarchy Man (1867); Masson’s Milton; Thurloe’s State Papers; Pepys’s Diary.

473 Massachusetts Colony Records, vol. iv. part i. p. 33.

474 Suffolk Deeds, ii. 177, 200, 202, 315.

475 Ibid. iii. 26.

476 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xx. 106, 142.

477 Shurtleff, Topographical and Historical Description of Boston, p. 395.

478 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, vii. 20.

479 Ibid. vii. 66.

480 Francis Higginson in his New Englands Plantation.

481 Winthrop, History of New England; Memorial History of Boston, i. 741; Savage, Genealogical Dictionary.

482 Besse, Sufferings of the Quakers (1753), ii. 267.

483 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, ii. 83.

484 Suffolk Deeds, viii. 387, v. 35.

485 Suffolk Deeds, vi. 20.

486 Ibid. iv. 256.

487 Massachusetts Colony Records, vol. iv. part i. p. 99 (June 1, 1652).

488 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, ii. 108.

489 The original agreement is in the Boston Public Library.

490 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, vii. 38, 44.

491 Ibid. vii. 92.

492 Supposed to have been set by Peter Lorphelin, a Frenchman, who worked at the Castle Tavern. He was tried for arson and found guilty of having coiner’s tools in his possession.

493 New England Historical and Genealogical Register, xxx. 432.

494 4 Massachusetts Historical Collections, viii. 383.

495 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, vii. 172.

496 Suffolk Deeds, i. 165, ii. 258, v. 104, vi. 9, viii. 417, ix. 442.

497 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, vii. 172.

498 See Publications of this Society, i. 199–201.

499 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xi. 197.

500 5 Massachusetts Historical Collections, v. 358.

501 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, viii. 26.

502 Ibid. xxv. 134.

503 4 Massachusetts Historical Collections, vi. 155.

504 Suffolk Deeds, iii. 144; ibid. iii. 26, showing that in 1655 Blackleech was living in Mr. Hudson’s house south of the Town House.

505 See Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, ii. 115; Publications of this Society, viii. 118.

506 Suffolk Deeds, i. 135.

507 See plan of this estate in Mr. Edes’s Memoir of Dr. Thomas Young, pp. 2–54, above.

508 Savage, Genealogical Dictionary, ii. 554.

509 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, ii. 94.

510 Suffolk Deeds, i. 102.

511 In the Dictionary of National Biography, under Thomas Rainborow, is a reference to his brother William. Thomas (died 1648) was the more celebrated of the two brothers. See also Firth, Life of Thomas Harrison, p. 8.

512 4 Massachusetts Historical Collections, vii. 280.

513 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, vol. ii. part ii. p. 24.

514 Some say she was not a sister of Bellingham, but Winthrop, under date of 1639 (History of New England, i. 320), says that Hibbins was Bellingham’s brother-in-law. In 1641 Bellingham married for his second wife, Penelope Pelham.

515 2 Massachusetts Historical Collections, v. 610.

516 See Publications of this Society, x. 20, 21.

517 Snow’s History of Boston, pp. 140, 141.

518 2 Massachusetts Historical Collections, v. 574.

519 Suffolk Deeds, ii. 281.

520 Ibid. vii. 228.

521 See Josselyn’s Two Voyages to New England (1865), p. 25.

522 Winthrop, History of New England, ii. 263, 274; 2 Massachusetts Historical Collections, v. 527; 4 ibid. vi. 179.

523 See 4 Massachusetts Historical Collections, iii. 441, vi. 179.

524 Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series, 1574–1660, pp. 326, 327; Aspinwall’s Notarial Records, passim.

525 2 Massachusetts Historical Collections, v. 527.

526 3 Ibid. x. 19.

527 5 Ibid. viii. 214.

528 3 Ibid. x. 1.

529 Suffolk Deeds, iii. 487, xi. 226.

530 Ibid. iii. 257.

531 See Calendar of State Papers, America and West Indies, 1661–1668, p. 54; Sibley, Harvard Graduates, i. 577.

532 Dictionary of National Biography, John Crowne.

533 5 Massachusetts Historical Collections, viii. 382.

534 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, ii. 159.

535 Besse’s Sufferings of the Quakers, ii. 271. See also Mr. Noble’s paper on William Leddra, Publications of this Society, x. 335–345.

536 Besse’s Sufferings of the Quakers, ii. 218.

537 Suffolk Deeds, vi. 31, 126.

538 Besse’s Sufferings of the Quakers, ii. 271.

539 Ibid. ii. 270.

540 Suffolk Deeds, vii. 294

541 Ibid. vii. 301.

542 Ibid. viii. 288.

543 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, vii. 88.

544 Ibid. xi. 26.

545 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xi. 182.

546 Ibid. xi. 181.

547 Ibid. xi. 209.

548 Suffolk Deeds, iii. 118.

549 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xi. 181.

550 Suffolk Deeds, xxxvii. 20.

551 Ibid, xxxvii. 204.

552 Ibid, xxxix. 203.

553 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xiii. 88.

554 Ibid. xxv. 326.

555 Ibid, xxiii. 192.

556 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xxxiii. 232.

557 See Shurtleff, Topographical and Historical Description of Boston, pp. 390 et seq.

558 Wheildon, Sentry, or Beacon Hill, pp. 85, 86.

559 Memoirs of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, iii. 57–63.

560 History of Boston, p. 33.

561 When it became known that the invested funds of the Society lacked only three hundred dollars of fifty thousand dollars, three members generously gave one hundred dollars each.

562 Publications, viii. 193–198.

563 4 Massachusetts Historical Collections, i. 16.

564 Hutchinson, Collection of Original Papers, p. 435.

565 History of Harvard University (1840), i. 29, 30.

566 Collection of Original Papers, p. 429.

567 Hutchinson gives the name as “Arth. Palmer” — doubtless an error in transcription for “Anth. Palmer,” as I can find no trace of an Arthur Palmer.

568 The allusion is to the second Harvard College, erected between 1672 and 1682, and burned in 1764.

569 In his Genealogical Dictionary of New England (iv. 8), Savage stated that Richard Saltonstall, the son of Sir Richard Saltonstall, was not in this country after 1664. In his paper alluded to in the text, Mr. Noble showed that Saltonstall was here in April and June, 1672, and that he had been here in May, 1671 (Publications, viii. 193 note 3). The present document proves that he was here in August, 1671.

570 The names in the first column are those of ministers, in the second column those of magistrates. The persons are too well known to need comment.

571 Massachusetts Archives, lviii. 72, 73.

572 As stated in the text, the letter is a copy. Hence we should expect certain discrepancies in the spelling of names. In the copy the name of “m^r Loather” occurs. I cannot find any trace of a dissenting minister of that name at the time, and I suppose that it was the copyist’s error for “Loder.” It is possible, too, that my identification of certain of the names is incorrect. Notices of all the dissenting ministers will be found in S. Palmer’s edition of Calamy’s Nonconformist’s Memorial, while sketches of all except Griffith and Loder are given in the Dictionary of National Biography.

573 Jahleel Brenton (1655–1732) was a son of Governor William Brenton of Rhode Island. The manuscript is obscure and may read “Taleel” Brenton.

574 For a notice of Sir Francis Wheler, see the Dictionary of National Biography.

575 The wife and daughter of Governor Shirley are commemorated by a beautiful monument in King’s Chapel, Boston, and in Dr. Oliver Wendell Holmes’s poem, “King’s Chapel.” See Foote, Annals of King’s Chapel, ii. 131, 626. Mrs. Bollan was buried 18 February, 1744–45; and her daughter (Mrs. Western) was baptized on the ninth of March following (King’s Chapel Registers).

576 Atkinson subsequently married his cousin Frances Wentworth, who, a fortnight after his death, married her early lover, another cousin, Sir John Wentworth, afterward Governor of New Hampshire and of Nova Scotia. Her portrait by Copley is in the Lenox Library. See Wentworth Genealogy (1878), vol. i. pp. xxviii, xxix, 299, 318, 548, 549. An engraving of Copley’s canvas faces p. 548.

577 The Hon. Chambers Russell (H. C. 1731), Judge of the Admiralty and of the Superiour Court of Judicature. A son of the Hon. Daniel Russell, long a member of the Executive Council, he was born in Charlestown, 4 July, 1713, and died in Guilford, Surrey, England, 24 November, 1766. See Wyman, Genealogies and Estates of Charlestown, ii. 831, 832; Publications of this Society, viii. 159.

In this connection, it is interesting to note that Judge Russell was succeeded on the Bench of the Superiour Court by Edmund Trowbridge (Whitmore, Massachusetts Civil List, p. 70).

578 The Hon. James Russell of Charlestown, where he was born 5 August, 1715. He held many offices of trust and honor in the Province, including a seat in the Executive Council (1761–1773). He was also appointed, in 1774, one of the Mandamus Councillors, but refused to qualify. He was a Judge of the Inferiour Court of Common Pleas (1771–1774); and died in Charlestown 24 April, 1798 (Wyman, Genealogies and Estates of Charlestown, ii. 831, 832; Whitmore, Massachusetts Civil List, pp. 61–64, 88).

579 Bristol Deeds, lxvii. 312–314. The deed, dated 23 October, 1788, conveys this property to Rufus Whitmarsh, gentleman, and William Brown, merchant, both of Dighton, and Jedediah Briggs, gentleman, of Berkeley, all in the County of Bristol. With it is recorded Mrs. Western’s power of attorney to Francis Dana, dated in London, 14 March, 1787. It refers specifically to this and several other pieces of real estate belonging to her. Some of these parcels in the County of Bristol were subsequently. sold by Dana (1790–1795). See Bristol Deeds, lxix. 240, lxxiii. 377, 378. Cf. Publications of this Society, vii. 91 note, 92 note, For these facts I am indebted to the kindness of Mr. Joshua Eddy Crane.

580 This demand was for money due Mrs. Western’s father, William Bollan, for services as agent of the Province in London. It was finally paid. See Acts and Resolves of Massachusetts, 1784–85, chap. 23 of Resolves, May Session,1785, p. 637; ibid. 1790–91, chap. 142 of Resolves, January Session, 1790, p. 233.

581 In a subsequent letter, dated 22 March, 1793, Dana writes: “Judge Trowbridge, who is in the 84th year of his age, I think can now live but a few days.” He died 2 April, 1793. For a sketch of Judge Trowbridge, see Publications of this Society, v. 74–77.

582 This letter is wholly in Chief-Justice Dana’s handwriting. It is one of a series of copies of numbered letters written by him to Mrs. Western, some of which are signed and some, including this one, are not. The Chief-Justice had charge of all Mrs. Western’s property and business affairs in this country, and was her duly appointed attorney.

583 See Publications of this Society, iii. 354 and note.

584 They are owned by the Essex Institute, Mr. Zachary T. Hollingsworth, and Mr. Frederick L. Gay. The view was reproduced and described in the Harvard Graduates’ Magazine for December, 1903, xii. 338, 339.

585 At Worcester. In 1801 Coleman established the New York Evening Post.

586 New Hampshire.

587 Joseph Atherton.

588 Richard Cutts Shannon.

589 Probably Timothy Paine.

590 William Plumer (1759–1850) was the son of Samuel and Mary (Dole) Plumer. Sketches of most of the persons mentioned in these letters will be found in Bell’s Bench and Bar of New Hampshire.

591 John Prentice.

592 Probably “An Act for the recovery of small debts in an expeditious way and manner,” enacted by the House, November 9, 1785.

593 At Epping.

594 In 1691 Samuel Allen (1636–1705), a London merchant, bought of the heirs of Capt. John Mason their title to lands in New Hampshire. Thus began a controversy which, upon the death of Governor Allen, was continued by his son, Thomas Allen. The death of the latter in 1715 “put an end to the suit, which his heirs, being minors, did not renew.” See Belknap, History of New Hampshire (1784), ii. 239, 288–328. See also New Hampshire Provincial Papers, iv. 43, x. 276.

595 See New Hampshire State Papers, xx. 614.

596 Of Portsmouth.

597 James Bowdoin.

598 For a sketch of Jonathan Moulton (1726–1787), the son of Jacob and Sarah Moulton, see J. Dow, History of Hampton, i. 278, 279, ii. 866, 870.

599 Probably Capt. William Horne. See Quint, Historical Memoranda, p. 320.

600 See New Hampshire State Papers, xx. 697.

601 The vote was 44 to 34.

602 The Rev. Joseph Buckminster.

603 Daniel Runnels.

604 Archibald McMurphy.

605 Ephraim Robinson, John Waldron, John Duncan, Jeremiah Stiles, and Moses Dow.

606 Lt. Jonathan Clough.

607 See p. 242 note 2, above.

608 See p. 241 note 2, above.

609 Thomas Cotton.

610 Maj. Jonathan Cass.

611 Samuel Morse.

612 John Prentice.

613 Nathaniel Peabody.

614 Samuel Livermore.

615 State Papers, New Hampshire, xx. 627.

616 In December, 1784. See New Hampshire State Papers, xx. 255.

617 Michael M^cClary. See ibid. xx. 254, 255.

618 Joseph Badger, Jr.

619 The following extract is from the Constitution of New Hampshire, drawn up in 1783:

Government being instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the whole community, and not for the private interest or emolument of any one man, family or class of men; therefore, whenever the ends of government are prevented, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the people may, and of right ought, to reform the old, or establish a new government (part i. art. i. § 10).

620 Probably Capt. Samuel Cherry. See New Hampshire State Papers, xx. 812, 826.

621 John Prentice.

622 John Pinkerton.

623 While November 18 is the date given in the title, the heading on p. 3 reads: “A Judicious Observation of that Dreadful Comet which appeared on the 20th of November, 1680.”

624 Page 3.

625 Pages 7, 8.

626 Page 13.

627 1 Massachusetts Historical Collections, ii. 8.

628 Ministry on the Kennebec, 2 Maine Historical Collections, ix. 113–123.

629 See Morton’s New England’s Memorial (Davis’s edition, 1826), p. 475; 4 Massachusetts Historical Collections, v. 299–301. For this reference I am indebted to Mr. Frederick L. Gay.

630 Cf. Publications of this Society, viii. 200 note.

631 At the meeting in March last (p. 263, above), Mr. Matthews exhibited photographs of the Constitutional Courant and of several of the snake devices, but was unable to procure others in time to include the paper in the Transactions of that meeting.

632 Sparks says that the article quoted later in the text (pp. 415, 416, below) “was undoubtedly written by the editor” of the Pennsylvania Gazette — that is, by Franklin. McMaster asserts that “both the design and the cutting were the work of Franklin” (Benjamin Franklin, 1887, p. 162); but no proof of the statement is offered. It should not be forgotten that David Hall was Franklin’s partner in the publication of the Pennsylvania Gazette.

633 See pp. 419, 420, below.

634 See pp. 420, 421, below.

635 In a circular letter to the Governors of Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, the Lords of Trade wrote:

We desire you will lay this matter before the Council and General Assembly of the Province under your government and recommend to them forthwith to make a proper provision for appointing Commissioners, to be joined with those of the other Governments, for renewing the Covenant Chain with the Six Nations and for making such presents to them as has been usual upon the like occasions. . . . As to the time and place of meeting it is left to the Governor of New York to fix it (New York Colonial Documents, vi. 802).

The reason why no commissioners were sent from Virginia to the Albany Congress is thus stated in a letter written (presumably January 29, 1754) by Governor Dinwiddie to the Governor of New York:

Since writing the above I rec’d Y’r Letter of the 4th Dec’r covering that from the L’d’s Comiss’rs for T[rade] and P[lantations]. I observe Y’r Intent’on of an Interview with the Ind’s at Albany in June next, w’ch am very sorry interferes with the Meeting I have propos’d with the Six Nat’ns and the So’thern Ind’s on the 20th of May next, add thereto the Broils we are like to have with the French, w’ch will enhance all my Time, and I am convinc’d the Assembly of this Province will be very backward in sending Com’rs to Albany, as the Charge of the intended meeting at Winchester, and the raising of Men to defeat the Designs of the French will be very considerable (Dinwiddie Papers, i. 66).

636 The alleged reason for the delay is sufficiently curious to be given. The following paragraph, copied from a New York paper of June 24, is taken from the Pennsylvania Gazette of June 27, 1754:

The Indians of the several different Tribes design’d to form the Congress the 14th Instant, were not come down to Albany the Day appointed, owing, ’tis said, to one of their Sachems having died on or about that Day 12 Months, and their then being busy with the Ceremonies customary among them, so long a Time after the Death of such Personages: They however were to be in Albany the Monday after, being the 17th Instant (p. 2/2).

637 In the proceedings of the Congress (printed in New York Colonial Documents, vi. 853–892) there is little about the plan of union until the completion of the treaty with the Indians. In the Boston Gazette of July 18 appeared the following, dated New York, July 8:

From Albany we are told, That the Treaty ended there, in Favour of the British Interest, the latter End of the Week before last, and that several of the Gentlemen who assisted therein, designed to visit the Mohawks Country, being thereunto invited by sundry of the Mohawks Chiefs (p. 2/2).

The plan of union engrossed the attention of the Congress on July 9, 10, and 11.

The idea of a union of the colonies was “in the air” at that time, but a discussion of the subject does not come within the scope of this paper. An excellent account of the attempts at forming a union between 1690 and 1760 is given by Frothingham in his Rise of the Republic (pp. 101–157). See also Winsor’s Intercolonial Congresses and Plans of Union, in the Narrative and Critical History of America, v. 611–614. Archibald Kennedy’s Importance of Gaining and Preserving the Friendship of the Indians to the British Interest is sometimes assigned to 1752. The London edition was printed in that year, but the New York edition was published in 1751. At the end is printed a letter not signed, but dated “Philadelphia, March 20, 1750, 1.” This was first included in an edition of Franklin’s works by Bigelow in 1887, the editor’s attention having been called to the letter by Edward Eggleston. As early as 1852, however, Bancroft had stated his belief that the “voice from Philadelphia” was “in tones which I believe were Franklin’s” (History of the United States, iv. 91). This attribution was repeated in 1876 (ibid. iii. 59), but in 1883 (ibid. ii. 370) was withdrawn. In 1754 Kennedy wrote another pamphlet on the subject — Serious Considerations on the Present State of the Affairs of the Northern Colonies. The pamphlet was advertised in the Boston Evening-Post of August 19 (p. 2/1) and August 26 (p. 2/2) as “Just published at New-York, And sold by Thomas Fleet, at the Heart and Crown in Cornhill, Boston.” Yet internal evidence seems to indicate that it was written before the meeting of the Albany Congress. One sentence reads:

Will not the Commissioners from the several Colonies, and it is to be hoped a Majority will attend, in the first Place consider the Danger we are in at this Point of Time? (p. 23. Cf. pp. 6, 14, 15).

It is not uninteresting to inquire exactly when Franklin worked out his plan of union. The account given in his Autobiography, written not earlier than 1788, is as follows:

In 1754, war with France being again apprehended, a congress of commissioners from the different colonies was, by order of the Lords of Trade, to be assembled at Albany, there to confer with the chiefs of the Six Nations concerning the means of defending both their country and ours. Governor Hamilton . . . naming the speaker (Mr. Norris) and myself to join Mr. Thomas Penn and Mr. Secretary Peters as commissioners to act for Pennsylvania, . . . we met the other commissioners at Albany about the Middle of June.

In my way thither, I projected and drew a plan for the union of all the colonies under one government, so far as might be necessary for defense, and other unimportant general purposes. As we passed through York, I had there shown my project to Mr. James Alexander and Mr. Kennedy (Writings, Smyth’s edition, i. 386, 387).

Franklin left Philadelphia June 3 (Pennsylvania Gazette, June 6, p. 2/2), reached New York June 5 (New-York Gazette, June 10, p. 2/3), embarked for Albany June 9 (ibid. June 10, p. 2/3), and arrived at Albany June 15 (Pennsylvania Gazette, June 27, p. 2/2). On June 8 Franklin wrote James Alexander as follows:

Mr. Alexander is requested to peruse these Hints, and make remarks in correcting or improving the scheme, and send the paper with such remarks to Dr. Colden for his sentiments, who is desired to forward the whole to Albany, to their very humble servant (ibid. iii. 199 note).

And on June 9 Alexander wrote to Colden:

I had some conversation with Mr. Franklin and Mr. Peters as to the uniting the colonies, . . . Whereupon Mr. Franklin promised to set down some hints of a scheme that he thought might do, which accordingly he sent to me to be transmitted to you, and it is enclosed (ibid. iii. 199).

Apparently, therefore, the plan was drawn up after Franklin reached New York, and not on his way thither from Philadelphia.

638 These include the following, which I think were the only papers published north of Maryland: Pennsylvania Gazette, Pennsylvania Journal, New-York Gazette, New-York Mercury, Boston Evening-Post, Boston Gazette, Boston News-Letter, Boston Post-Boy. The files I examined of the New-York Gazette, Boston News-Letter, and Boston Post-Boy, were incomplete.

639 See pp. 415, 416, below.

640 A notice similar, but not precisely the same, appeared in the Pennsylvania Journal, June 9, p. 2/3. The Pennsylvania commissioners were John Penn, the Rev. Richard Peters, Isaac Norris, and Benjamin Franklin.

641 It should be borne in mind that my purpose in limiting the examination of the newspapers to the months of May–August was to see what they contained before and during the meeting of the Congress. Later, when the plan of union adopted at the Congress came before the different Assemblies for discussion, there was doubtless much about it in the papers.

642 That the specific plan of union unanimously adopted at the Albany Congress was rejected alike in England and in this country does not militate against the view that a union was generally desired.

643 Ensign Edward Ward. See Dinwiddie Papers, i. 147.

644 Capt. William Trent. See ibid. i. 22.

645 Col. Joshua Fry. See ibid. i. 7.

646 In a letter dated February 14, Governor Dinwiddie describes “the cruel and barbarous Murder in cool Blood of a whole Family in this Dom’n, Man, Wife, and five children, no longer ago than last Month; and very lately a poor Man on the So. Branch of Potomack [was] robbed of his son.” He then goes on to draw a lurid picture of what happened:

Think, You see the Infant torn from the unavailing Struggles of the distracted Mother, the Daughters ravish’d before the Eyes of their wretched Parents, and then, with Cruelty and Insult, butcher’d and scalp’d. Suppose the horrid Scene compleated and the whole Family, Man, Wife and Children (as they were,) murder’d and Scalp’d by these relentless Savages, and then torn in Pieces, and in Part devour’d by wild Beasts, for whom they were left a Prey by their more brutal Enemies (Dinwiddie Papers, i. 74. Cf. i. 119).

647 It is believed that every newspaper published in the colonies at the time is enumerated in the text.

648 For this information I am indebted to Mr. George W. McCreary, assistant secretary and librarian of the Maryland Historical Society.

649 Capt. James McKay. See Dinwiddie Papers, i. 146.

650 Robert Dinwiddie.

651 Washington capitulated at Fort Necessity on July 3.

652 Capt. Thomas Clarke commanded an Independent Company from New York.

653 Dinwiddle’s letters are filled with denunciations of the other colonies for their dilatoriness in responding to his appeals for aid.

654 For this extract I am indebted to Miss Mabel L. Webber, librarian of the South Carolina Historical Society.

655 History of Printing in America, ii. 329.

656 It is usually described as a wood-cut, but McMaster speaks of it as “a cut in type-metal” (Benjamin Franklin, p. 162).

657 Works of Franklin, iii. 25.

658 Stephen Hopkins, i. 172 note.

659 Larger History of the United States of America, pp. 224, 225. The statement is repeated in Higginson and MacDonald’s History of the United States from 986 to 1905 (1905), p. 217.

660 Memorial History of the City of New-York, ii. 353.

661 Benjamin Franklin, p. 79.

662 Harpers’ Cyclopædia of United States History, i. 1431.

663 The frequency with which the Bradford device of 1774–1775 is made to do duty for the Franklin device of 1754, is doubtless explained by the fact that it is easier to copy the device given by Lossing in 1851 than it is to hunt up the original.

664 In form B, “publick.” The copy of form A printed in the text has been carefully collated with the Boston Athenæum copy of form B, and all variations are noted in footnotes.

665 Marvel’s address “To the Public” was printed by Thomas in his History of Printing in America (1810), ii. 504. It is the only portion of the Constitutional Courant that, so far as I am aware, has been reprinted. Andrew Marvel is supposed to be a pseudonym for William Goddard. See p. 441, below.

666 In form B there is no comma after “charters.”

667 In form B there is a comma after “privileges.”

668 In form B there is no comma after “kings.”

669 In form B there is no comma after “father.” As late as 1768 George III was alluded to as “our best Protector and common Father.” See Publications of this Society, viii. 281.

670 The letters within brackets refer to the forms A, B, and C, of which explanations are given on pp. 433–435, below; while the figures indicate the beginning of each column.

671 In form B, “publick.”

672 In form B there is no comma after “such.”

673 In form B, “publick.”

674 In form C, the text ends here, after which comes the imprint. A long letter on the Stamp Act dated December 19, 1765, occupied more than half of John Holt’s New-York Gazette Extraordinary of December 27. It was signed “Philolutherus.”

In the Boston Post-Boy of October 7, 1765, appeared the following:

☞ The Piece signed Phileleutheros, is receiv’d, and will be inserted in our next (p. 3/3).

To our associate Dr. Franklin B. Dexter I am indebted for the information that this piece is a mere didactic disquisition on liberty.

The Boston Gazette of October 28, 1765 (p. 3/1) printed a communication signed “Phileleutherus,” taken from the Rhode Island Mercury of October 14. In the Boston Evening-Post of February 21, 1774, there is a letter signed “Phileeutheros” (p. 1/3).

675 In form B this paragraph is set in smaller type.

676 In form B, “abbettors.”

677 In form B, “publick.”

678 In form B, “abbettors.”

679 In form B there is no comma after “constitution.”

680 In form B, “i. e.”

681 In form B there is no comma after “rank.”

682 In form B, “&”.

683 In form B, this paragraph is set in smaller type.

684 In form B, this paragraph is set in smaller type.

685 In form B the entire third column of the second page is set in smaller type.

686 In form B, “birth right.”

687 In form B, apparently “Stamp-Act.”

688 In form B, “Philopatriæ.” In form A, there is apparently a slight space between “Philo” and “Patriæ.”

689 In form B, there is no comma after “Ministry.”

690 In form B, “Publick.”

691 This copy, somewhat mutilated, is bound in a file of Holt’s New-York Gazette for 1765, between the issues of September 19 and 26.

692 Underneath the imprint in this copy is written in ink, “This is the Original, Published in New York.”

693 In the Harvard College Library, bound with its two copies of the Constitutional Courant, is a letter written January 9, 1897, by William Nelson to Justin Winsor. Mr. Nelson states that his information about the copy in the Public Record Office came from Benjamin F. Stevens, who wrote him that “there are four other copies of the Courant in different Offices in London, which he [Mr. Stevens] has been unable to examine so far.” There is a copy in the British Museum, presumably of form A or form B, but of which the Catalogue does not enable me to say with certainty. The information derived from Mr. Stevens caused Mr. Nelson to write: “This convinces me that that [form A] is a copy of the first edition, and I am inclined to think that the paper was printed by Parker, at Woodbridge, and not by Goddard at Burlington.”

694 This copy is bound in a file of the Boston Evening-Post for 1765, between the issues of September 16 and 23.

695 In this copy under the name of Andrew Marvel in the imprint, is written in ink, “pseudonym. Wm. Goddard;” and under Constitution Hill in the imprint is written in ink, “Burlington, N. J.”

696 Letter of Mr. Nelson to Mr. Winsor, January 9, 1897. Dr. Dexter has been kind enough to confirm the statement.

697 Underneath the imprint in this copy is written in ink, “This was republished in Philadelphia.”

698 In 1872 Frothingham wrote:

The “Constitutional Courant” . . . appeared with this motto [Join or Die] on the 21st of September [1765]; and the figure [of a snake], with the address [of Andrew Marvel], appears in the “Boston Post Boy” of Oct. 7 (Rise of the Republic, p. 182 note).

This is a mistake, as there is no mention of the Constitutional Courant in the Boston Post-Boy; and Frothingham, no doubt through inadvertence, wrote Boston Post-Boy when he meant Boston Evening-Post.

699 Colden Papers, ii. 38, 39.

700 Ibid. ii. 45.

701 I have not myself met with documents bearing such an imprint. For a notice of Peter Hasenclever, who came to this country in 1764, see New Jersey Archives, ix. 583 note.

702 History of Printing in America, ii. 322, 323. What the English “periodical works” were, to which Thomas alludes, I do not know.

703 Mr. Edmund M. Barton kindly informs me that Thomas used for his intended second edition a copy of the first; that the changes specified in our text as made in the 1874 edition occur in the margin in Thomas’s own handwriting; and that “the only date attached to the additions and corrections in the handwriting of our Founder is March, 1815, showing that he began his intended second edition early.”

704 Specimens of Newspaper Literature, i. 236 note, 246.

705 History of the City of New York, i. 722.

706 Pictorial Field-Book of the Revolution, i. 468, 469. The reference in the text is to p. 508 of Lossing’s book.

707 Ibid. i. 507.

708 Harpers’ Cyclopædia of United States History, ii. 1431, 1432. The statement is repeated in Harper’s Encyclopædia of United States History, 1902, ix. 153, 154.

709 History of New York City, i. 27.

710 Memorial History of the City of New-York, ii. 353.

711 Specimens of Newspaper Literature, i. 246.

712 See pp. 434 note 2, 438, above.

713 In the illustrations which accompany this paper, the Harvard College Library copy of the Constitutional Courant is No. VI, while the Boston Gazette device of 1754 is No. II.

714 Pictorial Field-Book of the Revolution, i. 508.

715 See Memorial History of the City of New-York, ii. 353; Gamer and Lodge’s History of the United States, i. 381.

716 See Publications of this Society, ix. 412. W. Cushing identifies Andrew Marvel with William Goddard in his Initials and Pseudonyms (1885, pp. 184, 439), as does also Evans in his American Bibliography (i. 7).

717 One of these, a broadside, is headed, “Philadelphia, June 10th, 1773. To my Fellow Citizens, Friends to Liberty, and Enemies to Despotism.” The title of the other, a small pamphlet of sixteen pages, is in part, “Andrew Marvell’s Second Address to the Inhabitants of Ppiladelphia [sic].” Both, which were due to a proposal to build a market or range of shambles, are attributed to Goddard by Evans (American Bibliography, iv. 57); and are noted, but without attribution, by Sabin (Dictionary of Books relating to America, xi. 253) and Hildeburn (Issues of the Press in Philadelphia, ii. 168).

718 History of Printing in America, ii. 272.

719 History of Printing in America, i. 428.

720 The articles of agreement are given by Goddard in his Partnership, p. 7 note.

721 Ibid. p. 5.

722 History of Printing in America, ii. 121. Thomas underrates the number of pages, as there are really 584. The collation of the volume is as follows: Title, 1 leaf; Contents, pp. ii–vi; Preface, pp. vii–x; The History of New-Jersey, pp. 1–573; Errata, (p. 574).

723 Check-list of the Issues of the Press of New Jersey (1899), p. 9.

724 Check-list of the Issues of the Press of New Jersey (1899), pp. 41, 42.

725 As late as June 27, Parker was still at Woodbridge, as appears from the following advertisement inserted in the Pennsylvania Gazette of that date (P. 3/2):

FORASMUCH as several of the Subscribers to the New American Magazine, printed, a few Years ago at Woodbridge, in New-Jersey, have never paid off their Arrears due for the same; . . . therefore he applies in this Manner to such as are honest Men of those Subscribers, who are conscious that they are still indebted for any of those Magazines, earnestly desiring they would be so good as either to remit the Pay to the said Printer at Woodbridge, or to Franklin and Hall in Philadelphia, which would be gratefully accepted by their humble Servant,

JAMES PARKER.

726 The imprint is: “Burlington, in New-Jersey: Printed and Sold by James Parker: Sold also by David Hall, in Philadelphia. m,dcc,lxv.”

727 A letter of inquiry addressed to the University Press brought such an interesting reply that I subjoin it:

In reply to yours of 14th inst., asking our opinion as to how long it probably took to print Smith’s History of New Jersey, a book of 584 pages, would state that this book, to-day, would ordinarily take say 6 weeks; and, if special haste were arranged for, it could be done in perhaps a month if there was no delay in returning proofs. This is, however, the age of machinery, and cannot very well be contrasted, on the question at issue, with the year 1765. In these days, this whole book could, if necessary, be put in type at once, and as fast as the proofs could be read and approved the forms could be printed (or electrotyped), so that when the last forms were approved the book could speedily be finished. In 1765 the printing offices employed but few hands, and had very small fonts of type, so that (as we are told), a form of 8 pages would be set up, read, approved, printed, and the type distributed, before they could go on with the work, and this operation would then be repeated throughout the whole work. Of course it is possible that they had a font of type which would take care of more than 8 pages; but, as printing offices are reported to have run in those days, there was a constant distributing of the type to enable the work to go on, — the sheets being run off and stored until all were printed. We would not be surprised to learn that it took six months, or more, to set up and print a book of nearly 600 pages. It should be borne in mind, also, that the presswork in those days was done on hand-presses, so that the time lost in waiting for type would be considerable.

Our opinion, therefore, would be that the setting up of the book was begun before Sept. 21 (rather than after) if the book was published on Dec. 31 of the same year.

728 See p. 433 note 3, above.

729 See pp. 433 note 2, 437, above.

730 See p. 437, above.

731 See p. 435 note 1. Hildebum assigns this edition, but without giving any reason, to Andrew Steuart (Issues of the Press in Pennsylvania, ii. 34), and is followed by Evans (American Bibliography, iv. 7). Thomas says:

About the year 1764, Steuart went to Wilmington, Northcarolina, with a press, and part of his types; and he left the other part, and his book shop, in the care of Thomas Macgee and his apprentice James Crukshank. He never returned (History of Printing in America, ii. 58).

Whether this statement is correct, there is apparently no means of knowing. In the Pennsylvania Gazette of July 11 (p. 3/2), July 18 (p. 1/1), and August 29 (p. 4/2), was printed this advertisement:

Just published, and sold, Wholesale and Retail, by ANDREW STEUART, at the Bible-in-Heart, in Second-street, between Market and Chestnut-street, Philadelphia,

THE Universal American Almanack, or yearly Magazine, for the Year 1766.

This advertisement apparently did not again appear in the year 1765 after August 29.

732 History of Printing in America, ii. 307. Thomas erroneously states that the change took place in January, 1775.

733 Ibid. ii. 252.

734 * Some fifty years hence, when the body fills up, an elephant supporting Great Britain on his back, will be a more proper emblem.

735 Boston Record Commissioners’ Reports, xviii. 221.

736 James Rivington.

737 The New England pronunciation was often a subject of ridicule. For an instance, see Publications of this Society, vii. 107.

738 The issue of August 29, 1776, is numbered 1756. The next issue, numbered 1757, appeared at Kingston (Esopus) on July 7, 1777. For this information I am indebted to the officials of the Lenox Library and of the Library of Congress.