APRIL MEETING, 1928

A Stated Meeting of the Society was held, at the invitation of Mr. Charles S. Rackemann, at No. 186 Marlborough Street, Boston, on Thursday, April 26, 1928, at half after eight o’clock in the evening, the President, Samuel Eliot Morison, in the chair.

The Records of the last Stated Meeting were read and approved.

The Corresponding Secretary reported the death, on April 19, 1928, of William Bradford Homer Dowse, a Resident Member.

The Corresponding Secretary reported that letters had been received from Mr. James Phinney Baxter, 3d, accepting Resident Membership; from Mr. Charles Austin Beard and Mr. William Lawrence Clements, accepting Corresponding Membership; and from Mr. Reginald Coupland and Mr. Verner Winslow Crane, accepting Associate Membership.

Mr. Percival Hall Lombard of Bourne was elected a Resident Member; Mr. Howard Judson Hall of Palo Alto, California, and Mr. Dwight Whitney Morrow of New York, were elected Corresponding Members; and Mr. Joseph Burr Tyrrell of Toronto, Canada, was elected an Associate Member.

The President appointed the following Committees in anticipation of the Annual Meeting:

To nominate candidates for the several offices, — Messrs. Allen French, Chester Noyes Greenough, and Frederic Winthrop.

To examine the Treasurer’s accounts, — Messrs. George Pomeroy Anderson and Nathaniel Thayer Kidder.

Dr. Frederick C. Shattuck read extracts from a Commonplace Book kept by Mrs. Benjamin Waterhouse, which gave accounts of some of her conversations with her husband, Dr. Waterhouse (1754–1846), concerning men and manners in his time.

Mr. John H. Edmonds read a paper on “Oliver Cromwell and Major Sedgwick, 1654–1656.”

Mr. Morison read the following paper:

THE GREAT REBELLION IN HARVARD COLLEGE, AND THE RESIGNATION OF PRESIDENT KIRKLAND

The resignation of President Kirkland of Harvard University, on April 2, 1828, came as a complete surprise to the community, and raised a small tempest in the Boston teapot. Not that the public was unaccustomed to college controversies. During the previous five years, there had been a spectacular rebellion by the student body, and a constitutional struggle of the faculty against the Corporation. After prolonged discussion a series of reforms in administration and instruction had been carried through. Financial difficulties had been aired, and a policy of severe retrenchment adopted. The college had also been a storm-centre of the Unitarian-Trinitarian controversy. So far as the public knew, harmony had been restored within the college by 1828, the accounts balanced, the instructors placated, and the students quieted. Yet, in the middle of the term, the President announced his resignation. The official reason given out, the President’s health, satisfied nobody; for although Dr. Kirkland had suffered a paralytic stroke the previous August, he had married a Cabot in September, and had performed his college duties during the academic year 1827–28.

On April 1, the day before his resignation went before the Corporation, President Kirkland announced his purpose to the student body, assembled for prayers in the then college chapel.60 A committee appointed by the senior class drafted and presented to him the following address, which startled the public no less than the resignation itself:

Cambridge, April 2nd, 1828

Reverend and Dear Sir:

We cannot think it presumptuous in us, to express to you our feelings upon your resignation, and the circumstances under which it has been made. We cannot believe that it will be unacceptable to you. It was kindly said by you, sir, when embarrassed with present troubles, and plans for the future, that you could not leave us without bidding us an affectionate farewell, without bestowing on us your advice and blessing. We are grateful for this last proof of your constant, parental friendship. It calls to our minds the multitude of good works and words, we have received at your hand. We thank you, sir, imperfectly, but heartily. We thank you for the honors which your award has made more sweet, and we thank you for the reproof, which has been tempered with love. We thank you for the benignity of manners which engaged our confidence, for the charities which secured our hearts. We thank you, sir, for all the little, nameless, unremembered acts of your kindness and authority. We are deeply in your debt, but the obligation is not irksome; it is a debt of gratitude we are well pleased to owe.

We should have been happy, had your connexion with the University, at least, subsisted until we had been dismissed from its walls. — We had all along hoped, that we should go out into the world under your auspices, and that the parchment, which was to entitle us to consideration, as having completed our academic course, might be signed by a name so well known to fame and to the respect of society. But it has been ordered otherwise, and we can only now assure you, sir, that though you have ceased to stand to us in the relation of President, there are other tender relations between you and us, which will terminate but with life, and it is our prayer to God, that your years may be very long protracted amid pleasant recollections and troops of friends.

We cannot forbear to say one word with regard to the untoward circumstances, in which you have been placed. It has been usual, when the activity of a great or good man has been interrupted by sickness, to deal generously by his character and claims. It has commonly been an occasion, to call forth whatever in the human heart is noble and christian; to cheer the sufferer under his affliction by an honest reference to past services, to treasure laid up. But to seize the opportunity of physical weakness, to encompass one with perplexities, and wear him down with petty calumnies; to choose this time, to sit in judgment upon inadvertent errors or improvident virtues; such malignity, we are grieved to say, has been reserved to be exhibited by individuals in our own community. This severe trial, sir, has been reserved to you. May you pass it unharmed. May your enemies have to contend, not only with your own signal merit, but also with the disapprobation of all just men.

We commend your health and fortunes into the charge of Him, whose “eye is upon them that fear him, who hath pleasure in the prosperity of his servant.”

Charles C. Emerson,		Committee of the Senior Class
Robert C. Winthrop,
George S. Hillard.

Rev. John Thornton Kirkland, D.D., LL.D.61

The press lost no time in enlarging upon the hint given in the last paragraph of the seniors’ address. “Rumours and insinuations are afloat,” said the Boston Evening Gazette of April 5, that President Kirkland had been forced to resign “by the ‘mere enforcement’ of some, who, either without classical education, or not originally belonging to the Alumni of Harvard, have been recently fomenting difficulties and encouraging opposition with regard to the President, than whom a purer writer, a more correct thinker, or a more estimable man, does not exist in the country.” Everyone knew that the person referred to was Dr. Nathaniel Bowditch, the celebrated navigator, a fellow of the Corporation. It was rumored that President Kirkland had resigned in consequence of insulting and improper language addressed to him in corporation meeting by Dr. Bowditch.62 The newspapers of Salem, Bowditch’s birthplace, evinced considerable tenderness at this charge, and countered with hints of gross financial irregularities on the part of the President. A Boston paper retorted by dubbing the Navigator a “Salem Sailor,” and calling upon him to resign from the Corporation. A complete explanation by the Corporation and Overseers was demanded, but not vouchsafed; and both principals kept silent, although Dr. Kirkland’s silence after the seniors’ address was regarded as proof of the charge. For two months the controversy raged in Boston, and to some extent, the outside press, affording more heat than light, and more speculation than fact. Various contributors, mostly anonymous, revived the charges that Harvard College was the seat of impiety and dissipation, a rich man’s college, a decaying institution, where foreign fads and foibles were encouraged rather than good solid education such as the public interest demanded.

President Quincy’s History of Harvard University, completed in 1840 shortly after Dr. Kirkland’s death, affords no clue to the reasons for his predecessor’s resignation, and no hint of the conflict that preceded it. Shortly after, the controversy was revived by the children of Dr. Bowditch (who died in 1838), taking exception to a statement in the Rev. John G. Palfrey’s published eulogy of Dr. Kirkland, to the effect that the late President had not been treated “in every quarter, by those who acted with him, with the delicacy and respect due to his greatness and his infirmity.” The Bowditch family asserted, and offered to prove, that this report was “utterly false,” and defended their notice of it on the ground that “the industrious antiquarian, a century hence, would perceive some secret meaning in this paragraph” unless it were contradicted. Dr. Palfrey took up the challenge, and declared that President Kirkland’s feelings had been “wounded by language of Dr. Bowditch, which also gave pain to the friends of both.” This was stoutly denied by the Bowditch family. In conclusion, they somewhat truculently referred to a certain manuscript memoir prepared by Dr. Bowditch as his justification, which, they declared, the “judicious friends” of Dr. Kirkland and “best friends of the college” would better not provoke them to print.63

This mémoire justificatif of Dr. Bowditch has, through the kindness of one of his great-grandchildren, come into the possession of a not too industrious antiquarian of a century thence, who has made it the basis of the present paper.64

I

John Thornton Kirkland, if not one of the greatest presidents of Harvard College, was certainly the best beloved. Three years after his graduation with the class of 1789 he became a resident tutor of the College. One of his pupils, the Rev. John Pierce, wrote: “Under the administration of the stiff and unbending, yet honest and conscientious President Willard, who feared to treat his most exemplary pupils with the least familiarity lest it should engender contempt, this young tutor was a complete gentleman in his manners; and he aimed to treat the students as gentlemen that, if possible, he might make them so.”65 As minister of the New South Church of Boston, to which he was chosen in 1793, at the early age of twenty-three, Kirkland proved himself a brilliant preacher, a favorite dinner guest of the “Essex Junto,” and became a public character. In 1798, when “French infidelity” was supposed to be making its deadly inroads upon our virtuous youth, and (to quote Dr. Pierce) “in promotion of the same unrighteous and ungodly cause Godwin’s Political Justice, a mischievous English work, had just been republished in Boston,” Mr. Kirkland particularly endeared himself to the Federalists by a Phi Beta Kappa oration, in which he flayed the enemy in such a manner as to show the potential Shelleys of Harvard College, if such there were, that wit, grace, learning, and humanity were on the conservative and not the radical side. His sermon on the death of Washington attracted wide attention, and procured for him a doctor’s degree at Princeton (1802). Such an honor from the College of New Jersey indicated that Dr. Kirkland was not yet an open and avowed heretic. Like several other Boston ministers, he was tactfully and imperceptibly leading his congregation along the road from Geneva to Divinity Avenue, and it was not until some years later that the orthodox Calvinists plastered him with the then opprobrious epithet of Unitarian.

At the close of the Revolution Harvard College became very definitely and intimately related to the Federalist party, which comprised the dominant economic group in maritime Massachusetts, the great majority of the Congregational clergy in New England, and the governing class of the Commonwealth. This relationship had been established with open eyes by the Harvard Corporation, when the embarrassments and uncertainties of the Revolutionary War showed that the college must have some definite class or group to lean upon. It was effected, as Quincy relates, by the Corporation filling each vacancy in its own body with “men of experience in business, and practically acquainted with public affairs,”66 and it followed, as a matter of course, that such men would be Federalists. Dr. Waterhouse, the only Republican who held a responsible position on the teaching or governing body, wrote President Jefferson on March 20, 1813:

Engraved for The Colonial Society of Massachusetts from the original painting owned by Harvard University

Our college at Cambridge is under the absolute direction of the Essex Junto, at the head of which stands Chief Justice Parsons, the Goliah of the Massachusetts Gentile-Army, a man as cunning as Lucifer and about half as good. This man is at the head of the Corporation of the college. He is not only the soul of that body, but he is the evil councellor, the Ahithophel of the high federal party, while H. G. Otis is the Absalom.67

By 1804, when President Willard died, the College was in good hands, and flourishing; there only wanted, to complete the laicization of the college, and to identify it more completely with the community, a liberal professor of theology, and an eminent lay President. The first was secured in 1805 with the election to the Hollis chair of a Unitarian, Henry Ware. The Presidency of the University was offered to Fisher Ames, who declined on account of his “advanced age” (of forty-seven!) and ill health. Eliphalet Pearson, Hancock Professor of Hebrew, and sole remaining representative of the teaching body on the Corporation, served as acting president for two years, when a long deadlock was broken by electing a Unitarian, the Rev. Samuel Webber, the somewhat colorless Professor of Mathematics.68 President Webber died, not greatly lamented, on July 17, 1810. Chief Justice Parsons, an enthusiastic parishioner of the New South, was then the leading member of the Corporation, and upon his nomination Dr. Kirkland was unanimously elected President of Harvard University on August 7.

Kirkland’s presidency was the first since that of the “great Leverett” (1708–24) which began a distinctly new era in the history of the College and University. The Corporation, uniting with the trustees of Bowdoin and Williams, in 1814 procured a legislative grant unprecedented in its generosity, apportioning the proceeds of a bank tax among those three colleges for a space of ten years. This grant yielded Harvard $10,000 annually. Anticipating these annual payments, University Hall, then the most magnificent college building in the United States, was built in 1815. The “Massachusetts Medical College” was erected on Grove Street in the West End of Boston, for the use of the Harvard Medical School, whose professors now for the first time received a salary, in addition to their students’ fees. The Divinity School, after successive reorganizations and a “drive” yielding $27,300,69 was firmly established in Divinity Hall in 1826. Edward Everett, elected in 1815 at the age of twenty-one to the Eliot Professorship of Greek, was allowed by vote of the Corporation — the wisdom and generosity of which was then unprecedented, and even nowadays would be unusual — to study and travel abroad for three years on full salary. He returned to take up his duties in 1819, after having taken a doctor’s degree at Gottingen, full of enthusiasm for making Harvard a genuine institution of learning, in the thorough German sense. George Ticknor, only three years older than Everett, obtained the new chair of modern languages on the Abiel Smith foundation, under the same conditions, and assumed his duties in 1819 with the same enthusiasm as Everett, a similar preparation, and far greater perseverance. A law professorship was established on the Royall foundation in 1815, and two years later the Harvard Law School was established.

It would be difficult to sum up the material results of the first ten years of Kirkland’s administration better than Josiah Quincy has done:

The early period of the administration of President Kirkland was preeminently distinguished for bold, original, and, in many respects, successful endeavours to elevate the standard of education in the University, and to extend the means of instruction and multiply accommodations in every department. Holworthy Hall, University Hall, Divinity Hall, and the Medical College, in Boston, were erected. Liberal expenditures were incurred for furnishing University Hall, and for extensive repairs and alterations in Holden Chapel and in Harvard, Stoughton, Hollis, and Massachusetts Halls. The library, the chemical, philosophical, and anatomical apparatus of the University, and the mineralogical cabinet were enlarged; and rooms for the lectures of the Medical Professors, and for the preservation of their collections and wax preparations, were fitted up in Holden Chapel. The grounds surrounding the College edifices were planted with ornamental trees and shrubberies, contributing to their beauty and usefulness. The salaries of the President and Professors were satisfactorily raised. As professorships became vacant, they were filled with young men of talent and promise. Fifteen new professorships were added to the ten which had previously existed. Three of these were titular, being conferred on Tutors after six years’ service; four were dependent on fees, or voluntary subscriptions; eight rested upon foundations more or less adequate to their support, independent of the general unappropriated funds of the College. With the exception of Divinity Hall, the additions and improvements were principally, if not all, effected within the first ten years of this administration. The external indications of prosperity and success were general, manifest, and applauded.

The extraordinary enlargement of the means, and advancement of the interests, of learning in the University during this period are to be attributed to the fortunate influx of the liberal patronage of individuals and the legislature; to the spirit of an age of improvement; but most of all to the eminent men, who then composed the Corporation and brought into it a weight of talent, personal character, and external influence, combined with an active zeal for the advancement of the institution, previously unparalleled; and who, placing an almost unlimited confidence in its President, vested him with unprecedented powers in the management of its affairs, which he exercised in a manner liberal and trustful of public support. This confidence not only was known and avowed, but is distinctly apparent on the records of the College, and had unquestionably a material influence on all the measures and results of that administration.70

In less palpable though no less important ways, the influence of the President was felt. “Dr. Kirkland was very affable, humorous and dignified. He always commanded respect, without appearing to require it by a severe effort.”71 Of fine presence, speaking faultless English and Ciceronian Latin without apparent effort, he gave Commencement such a character that even in 1817, when President Monroe received the degree of LL.D., everyone felt that President Kirkland was the more important of the two. The undergraduates, accustomed to rather dry, severe, clerical schoolmasters, were electrified by this brilliant man of the world, and at the same time impressed by his dignity, and attracted by his personality. A stanza in the class song of 1815 introduces a new note in the student attitude toward a Harvard president:

To jolly old Kirkland let’s drink the first glass

Whom a bottle did ne’er with impunity pass

Lets pray to the Gods to protect him from harm

And to send him a wife to tuck him up warm.

Health to Kirkland! Blow it out Kirkland! Stick to the bottle,

Gee up and gee ho!72

Having no children of his own, Dr. Kirkland adopted, as it were, the entire student body; and during his administration the tone of the college was patriarchal. The undergraduates both loved and respected him; and if in some of the riots that took place during his administration, an occasional brick found its way through the President’s study window, it was aimed not at Dr. Kirkland, but at the tyrannical “government,” for the President’s attitude toward his scholars was by no means transmitted to the faculty. Even twenty years later, the Kirkland tradition was so strong among the undergraduates that they welcomed President Sparks as a promise that the “Augustan Age” of Kirkland would be revived.73 The journey through the United States that Dr. Kirkland made after his resignation was a triumphal progress from the house of one affectionate pupil to another; for during his administration Harvard had become, for the first time, a national university.

The proportion of students from outside New England in the entering classes, which had risen to eleven per cent of the whole in 1810, fell off to half that during the War of 1812, then rose rapidly to thirteen per cent in 1815, eighteen per cent in 1816, and twenty-seven per cent in 1820. It was not until 1850 that so large a proportion of non-New England students was again found in an entering class, and only in 1853 was it surpassed.74 On the other hand, the absolute number of students entering Harvard College fell off from an average of 85, for the five-year period 1810–14, to 75 for the period 1820–24, and remained almost constant at that figure until 1845–49. This decline in numbers decreased the college revenues, and gave the critics of Kirkland’s administration a good target, especially as Yale and Princeton were at the same time pulling ahead.75

It was also in Kirkland’s administration that Harvard graduated some of her most distinguished sons. A glance through the classes from 1811 to 1831 reveals names such as Benjamin Apthorp Gould and William H. Prescott (1814), John Amory Lowell, John G. Palfrey, and Jared Sparks (1815), George Bancroft, Caleb Cushing and Alva Woods (1817), Robert W. Barnwell and Ralph Waldo Emerson (1821), Charles Francis Adams (1825), Richard Hildreth and Robert Rantoul (1826), Robert C. Winthrop (1828), James Freeman Clarke, Benjamin R. Curtis, Oliver Wendell Holmes, and Benjamin Pierce (1829), Charles Sumner (1830), John L. Motley and Wendell Phillips (1831).

George Ripley, the eminent critic and transcendentalist, who graduated with the class of 1823, went so far as to assign President Kirkland a leading part in producing the great revival of letters and movement of thought that swept through New England in the ’thirties and ’forties.

Without precisely defining the date, the accession of John Thornton Kirkland to the presidency of the college in 1810 may be said to mark the beginning of the era which has been so prolific in its results and so conspicuous in its influence. President Kirkland indeed made no pretensions to the character of a pioneer or a discoverer in the sphere of philosophy. His admirably balanced mind was not speculative, much less controversial. He had little genius and no taste for the discussion of purely abstract questions. Nor was he profoundly versed in the history of opinions. But the transparent clearness of his mental perceptions, the fine and subtle delicacy of his ethical instincts, his sympathy with whatever was rare and beautiful in literature, and the sagacity and firmness of his common sense created around him an atmosphere in the highest degree favorable to the cultivation of thought, freedom of research, and frankness of expression. His personal aversion to the toil of composition has prevented him from leaving any adequate memorial of his affluent mind, but the magnetic charm of his conversation, the sweet amenity of his manner, — the quaint and original suggestions of his fertile imagination must always be rated among the influences which led to the revival of a sound literature and an ideal philosophy among the descendants of the Pilgrims.76

Tested, then, by increase of buildings and facilities, magnitude of bequests, number of new foundations, geographical distribution of students, and intellectual leadership and inspiration, Kirkland’s administration must be regarded as one of the best that Harvard College has known. Yet the best-loved Harvard President was forced to resign, under circumstances that gave rise to scandal.

II

The difficulties of the latter part of Dr. Kirkland’s administration, which contributed to his downfall, may be summed up under three heads: discipline, reform, and finance.

“In the government of the College President Kirkland was lenient, in the opinion of many, to a hurtful extent,” wrote Dr. John Pierce. “Some maintain that essential injury accrued to the institution from the continuance of members there, through his reluctance to exclude them, who served greatly to corrupt all with whom they came in contact.”77 Student rebellions were nothing new at Harvard in Kirkland’s day, but were particularly prolonged and severe during his administration. There was the Rebellion of 1818, recorded by “The Rebelliad.”78 It was the class of 1823, however, which gave the Immediate Government79 of the University most trouble, and which started what is known in college history as the “Great Rebellion.”

A glance at the list of this class in the Quinquennial Catalogue of Harvard University reveals the surprising fact that most of its members received their bachelor’s degrees at an interval of eighteen to fifty-seven years after their proper commencement; and at least fifteen members of the class never obtained a degree. “John P. Robinson, he” obtained his degree in 1845 (three years before Hosea Biglow made his name immortal), in company with William Amory, Russell Sturgis, and two other classmates. James D. Halyburton had to wait until 1850, when he was judge of a federal district court. Charles Carroll of Carrollton, great-grandson of the Signer, and his neighbors George H. Calvert and Edward T. Tayloe, were thus honored in 1854 and 1855, while their friend Charles Harper, son of the great Federalist advocate, never got into the Quinquennial. Henderson Inches had to wait for his bachelor’s degree until 1880, shortly before his death; while John Adams, son and grandson of Presidents of the United States, has the rare distinction among Harvard graduates of having had a bachelor’s degree conferred upon him posthumously.

The class of 1823, however, does not illustrate the adage about the boy being father to the man. It contained two noted rebels in later life — Thomas Wilson Dorr, the leader of Dorr’s Rebellion in Rhode Island, and George Ripley, who rebelled against society in establishing a communist phalanx at Brook Farm. Yet both those men upheld Government in the Great Rebellion of 1823, and received their degrees in due course.80 Conversely, most of the rebels of 1823 in after life were respectable, respected, and conservative citizens. There seems to have been no social distinction in the division; members of the Med. Fac. and other college societies were on both sides, and Dorr was president of the Hasty Pudding.

The class of 1823 was so broken up by the events we are about to describe that it never published a report or kept a class album. Fortunately there is preserved in the College Library a manuscript account of the stormy undergraduate history of the class, compiled by Pickering Dodge (A.B. 1845 as of 1823) apparently about 1861, from the diary he kept while in College. It affords the liveliest possible account of student life in those turbulent days; and, checked by the Faculty Records and other sources, is found to be inaccurate only in minor detail. One should keep in mind that the Harvard students of that day were on an average two years younger than Harvard undergraduates today. The average age of the class of 1823 at the beginning of Freshman year was sixteen and a half.

Brief Account of the Class of 1819–23.81

August 27, 1819. Class enter Harvard university and commence a collegiate course at the end of the vacation, in number 81 on the Catalogue. Every thing proceeds peaceably and in order till the latter part of the third term, at which time it had been customary for the Freshmen to sup together on the night of the annual Examination. The Government wishing to put an end to all such convivial meetings, and having effected their purpose with the present sophomores, forbade the class from joining in the said supper82 — they however thinking it their duty and their privilege to support ancient customs, unanimously agreed to sup together at Neponset Hotel, ten miles distant from the Colleges: but hearing that the President had received some information concerning the affair, and intended to read the College laws to them the next morning at prayers, they were obliged to anticipate the evening. Consequently they all repaired to Neponset at sunsetting of the evening of August 16, 1820, and after amusing themselves with billiards, bowling, et caet. during the evening, seated themselves at table at eleven o’clock. Haskell83 presiding as President. Amory84 Vice President. Bronson85 and Bryan,86 Committee of arrangements. Everything was conducted in the finest style, and a full band of music encreased the merriment of the night. Toasts having been required from each individual, the following song composed for the occasion by a member of the Class, was sung to the chorus of Derry Down, received with great applause, and the Class rose from table at half past four o’clock the next morning—

Class Supper Song.87

In council one night, as report now will have it,

When the Government members consulting were met:

While every one “dicere sententiam amavit,”

And the scrapings of Freshmen were themes of debate —

First the Praeses rose up, and in anger began:

“These — Freshmen — twere best that we scatter them all,

“’Ere our laws they shall trample, suspend every man,

“And the breeses alone better sigh through our hall.”

But the sound of his voice had so bristled his hair,

So fell was his menace — his jesture so tragic:

“Mrs. Hedge88 and myself” thought “the nail was hit fair,”

And lik’d the proposal because he lik’d Logick.

The Praeses continued: “these upstarts we’ll tame,

“Or send them all off in a quintuple ratio;

“Et nunc quantum sufficit, your judgments I claim,

“And Pop’s89 expectatur imprimis opinio” —

The Doctor looked wild as is always his custom,

When made adhortare on matters of moment:

Where extracts of Greek non vacanter [vocantur?] in question

As those ignorare qui aliter volent.

“Μοι δοκει,” sayd he, “If ’tis actively used

“That a scrape is το ηχος a noise of the feet,

“Tis a play which δοκαζειν seems greatly abused,

“Αξιος και ζημιασ — to speak in plain Greek.

“Πολλακισ τον τροπον, according to custom,

“All the scrapes which they give me I sometimes review

“And now μετρεσαντασ by just calculation,

“I find they are πεντε και δεκα and two.

Νυν εστιν κρατιστον, I think it most proper,

That ταχιστα τι ισκμος should quickly be shewn,

“Or by Jove it will happen δικαιος και οπερ

“Του Διαβολου εκειν before we have done.

Ira Blanchard90 then spoke with unusual vim,

“I’ve dealt them dead setts,91 tho they’ve scrap’d till I’m sore,

“And I’ll stay here no longer unless you begin,

“Ad docendum profanos to scrape me no more.”

But Dr. Sykes92 rose at this perilous moment,

The whole scope of his motions he stated had fines,

“For tis mete that by letting them off so at present,

“We shall get a fresh wine butt and bag of long nines.”

The weighty proposal was sanctioned with joy,

“Συμβουλειν τοκαλεις,” says Popkin, “you call,

Παρα το βελτιον χοειςθαι — Ω ποποι — —

Διαμονιον αλιςκε, the Devil take all —”

Class return to Cambridge in a heavy shower of rain, attend prayers, regularly and not a few take cool dead setts at the morn’g exercises — The Government are in session93 all day and evening, and on the following day.

August 18, 1820. Bronson, Bryan and Haskell were suspended each for six months for taking active parts at the supper and leave Cambridge amidst the cheers of applauding classmates.94 Order was then restored to College. At commencement four have left the class and eleven joined it, encreasing the number to 88. In course of the year three were suspended, — Commence Sophomore year.

Sept. 29, 1820. Nichols of Boston dies October 15, and the class in testimony of their respect for him wear crape for thirty days on the left arm —

Oct. 29. Sunday evening, the class have a severe battle in Commons Hall with the Fresh, and having demolished doors and windows and destroyed all the crockery, china etc., peace is restored and the students are prevailed on by the Professors and Tutors to retire to their rooms.95

Oct. 31. Blunt, Gay and Lee96 are suspended each for four months for taking active [parts] in the disturbances on Sunday evening. A rebellious spirit is excited in the class and, to provoke Government, a large fire is kindled at midnight in front of University Hall, composed of Government’s newspapers nicely filed up in Harvard, after a great riot and confusion and the fire had burnt down, the students retire to their rooms, and to slumber.

Nov. 2. Dunbar97 is suspended for nine months, for dropping a large cannon ball from the fourth story of Stoughton with an insulting note attached and addressed to “Bat Fuller,” the Proctor of the entry, breaking up the stone steps, endangering the life of “Professor Downing” and insulting by opprobious language the said “Bat.”98 A Junior99 was engaged and caught in the same scrape but owing to his father’s fame his conduct was unnoticed. Another fire is kindled at midnight and a number of the class are fined by Jim Hayward100 for hideous exclamation; he also received a bucket of ink and water on his head,

Nov. 3. Class in great commotion, almost in a state of open rebellion, meet at the “Sign of the Golden Eagle” on the common at midnight, and forming themselves into separate parties, having armed themselves with Clubs and stones, break Fullers and Haywards windows. A detachment from the party afterward breaks in the windows of the President’s study.101

Nov. 4. Saturday. Government in session as usual. Afternoon, Greenough is rusticated and Marsh dismissed “for taking active parts in the late serious and aggravated disturbances.” Class combine and miss prayers. Evening, a petition to diminish the punishment is signed and sent up from all College, contrary to the wish of the majority of the Class. Our “petitions are rejected,” as a matter of course.102

Nov. 5. Sunday. Class attend meeting in the chapel regularly all day. Evening, a “round robin” is formed to which all the Class (with the exception of fifteen who were from that time denominated the “Black List”) signed an agreement that they would leave town the next morning, et caet.

Nov. 6. Monday. The Government hearing from some informer that the class were determined to leave Cambridge, gave out a general permission for all to leave town who desired it, and stay till further notice, with the exception of Harris and Tayloe who were ordered to remain, and they were both dismissed on the evening of that day. The whole class returned to Cambridge. Nov. 9, Thursday, regretting that the recess was short, and with the exception of some few misdemeanours arid cold treatment towards the Black’s, all goes on peaceably to the end of the term.103

February 9, 1821. Term commenced and with it commences the former rebellious spirit.104 The Black List are very much irritated at the neglect and coldness they receive from the class, and to avenge themselves become spies and informers, which they do not hesitate openly to avow. Satirical pieces and ridiculous caricatures are publickly posted on the advertisement boards, and considerable animosity is thereby excited.105

March 11. 1821. Sunday. President preaches two very excellent pointed sermons, addressing himself to the class, taking for his text the verse in Mathew’s Gospel: “Do unto others as you would that others should do unto you, for this is the law and the prophets.”

March 13. Tuesday. Morning. Printed copies of the Convention Song are circulated throughout College — Sturgis is seen distributing some of them, and being called before Government is ordered106 to go immediately into Boston — on the following page will be found one of the printed copies:107

Black List Convention!!!

“We have witnessed the intuitive sagacity of Davis—listened to Wright unrivalled in debate, and seen the splended conflagration of Dorr.”

YOU know, or probably heard many mention,

That lately the Black List met in Convention,

Permit me to tell you, the order and name,

Of every great man, who appeared at the same.

First Jackson108 the fair, with his trapezoid nose,

Which oft with his black greasy fingers he blows,

Who lest he call in some kind neighbour to see,

“If to grass he should go, he can’t get the idee;”

Next, Mr. Chaplin,109 whose name I’ll just mention,

And Crazy Jim Kendall,110 scarce worth your attention,

For of all the contemptible fools ever known,

These chaps bear the palm, you will readily own.

Then Prince111 the Free Agent, with his Monkey face,

And Henry A. Bruce,112 whom, no deed can disgrace;

And Woodbury,113 the same who was driven from College,

Whence he carried some kicks, if he carried no knowledge.

Then Tom Wilson Dorr, of true Gothic size,

Whose cheeks are so huge, one can scarce see his eyes;

That mighty young mammoth, so highly renown’d

For “Gift of the gab,” tho’ ’tis all empty sound.

Then Silver fac’d Denny,114 so prim and precise,

And Davis115 the Jackass, with his gravy eyes,

With Gray,116 and his oil pot, whom, as I’ve heard say,

The Blacks will appoint, for their poet straightway.

Little Emerson117 came, once, a Government tool,

A Pedagogue, now in the Classical school;

And Stearns,118 the informer, of no great affair,

Since the Devil will have them, we’ll leave as they are.

Then Ned Vernon Child,119 next to these may be seen,

Whose voice is like Mars — like a Woodchuck, his mien,

In this one fine talent for digging, unite,

With valor like Falstaff’s when no one’s in sight.

Then Ripley the pious, as fickle as wind,

For nine times an hour, he changes his mind,

And Lunt,120 with Fresh Fishes, came sneaking in here,

With Wright,121 the old hard head, to bring up the rear.

Second Edition, Aug. 27, 1823.

March 14, Wednesday. Sturgis is recalled from Boston, and entering the chapel where Rev. Mr. Channing was delivering Dudleian Lecture, the Class applaud his entrance by a stamping of feet et caet.122 Dodge is called up evening and having been cross examined is ordered to keep his room the following day. Sturgis is again examined —

March 17, Saturday. Dodge and Sturgis are suspended each for nine months “for a series of insults conducted against fellow classmates.”

March 21. Printed notifications came out for the black list as follows—

The next week, Gutterson and Stearns, (the informers against Dodge & Sturgis) suffer such violent persecution that they are oblig’d to leave College — the former took up his connexions and the latter returned at the end of the year. Affairs have assumed quite a peaceable123 aspect and it was presumed the Class would finish the term without any further molestation, however

May 16. about half past ten o’clock evening a loud report as of powder is heard in the southern entry of Stoughton Hall — Many of the Class are called up the next morning, but no evidence was found against any particular persons. Several rooms were searched, and they finally fixed their suspicions upon Coolidge and Cutts, alledging that powder was found in the room of the former & that the latter was seen a short time before the explosion happened, passing through College Yard with a bundle under his arm, etc. consequently they were call’d to Government, May 18, 1821, and Cutts dismissed and Coolidge rusticated.124 On the following day Dexter one of the Freshmen came forward and confessed that he was the sole author of the powder plot, and that the two persons who were punished were innocent. Dexter was suspended and on May 21, Coolidge and Cutts were restored to College125 — This confession tends very much to diminish the number of misdemeanours for the present —

June 1, 1821. Third term commences.

July 1. Peabody126 for three months for negligence, was suspended —

July 10. Blunt and Bruce127 were dismissed for idleness and dissipation. Some days after this Peck128 was dismissed “for disturbances at declamation and improper behaviour on the stage.”

August. Walker was dismissed “for scraping, stamping and other indecorum at Declamation.” At Commencement four have withdrawn their connexions, seven have been dismissed, one rusticated and one died, reducing the class to 77. Six were suspended —129

Sept. 28, 1821. Term commences. Entering on the Junior years Class begin to re-form. Marsh and Tayloe reenter from dismission, and various students return from suspensions. Nothing remarkable happened in the history of the Class.

Feby. 15, 1822. Second term commences.

March 5, Locke130 is suspended for three months for absenting himself from College and attending an Assembly without permission.

May 15. Langdon Elwyn131 was dismissed “for habitual negligence and dissipation,” alias “for general conduct.”

May 31^st 1822. Third term commences.

June. Roy132 is dismissed for idleness & dissipation. Times very peaceable.

July 2. Peabody, Amory, Harper, and Haskell are chosen officers to the Harvard Washington Corps.133

July 25. Nine of the Class receive public admonitions for pursuing the ancient ceremony of “christening the bower.” At Commencement five have withdrawn their connexions, two have joined the Class, and four reentered from dismission, making in toto on the Catalogue 78, with which number Class commences Senior year.

Sept. 27, 1822. Halyburton134 takes up his connexions.

Nov. 20. Class make a great disturbance at evening prayers while Folsom135 was praying on account of his detaining them too long — on the following day

Nov. 21. Government meeting is called and many of the Class are examined concerning the disturbance, but unable to designate any particular individuals. The President at evening prayers, Nov. 22, Friday, gives a public admonition to the whole class.136

February 14, 1823. Second term commences. Black List opposition still supported by the Class, who form an agreement to exclude them from the dinner when the Class graduate. The Blacks hearing this resolution are very much excited and the animosities are renewed stronger than before.

March 10. 1823. A large shower bath belonging to Dorr is taken from the fourth story of Stoughton, and having been filled with wood et caetera is burnt at midnight in the middle of College Yard, in commemoration of the Second Anniversary of the Black List. Next morning March 11, many of the class are examined by Government but they can obtain no information concerning the Fire, etc.

March 23. Four of the Class attempt to get a barrell of rosin from the Port, are detected, pursued, and reach the Colleges in safety at half past one night.

March 24, Monday. During the Government meeting evening, the straw around the pumps is set on fire about eight o’clock, which making a great conflagration, the Professors and Tutors repair to the scene of tumult, but finding themselves unable to stop the confusion by their own presence, they despatch one of their number for the President, who making his appearance, College is quickly restored to order. The next morning many students are examined by Government but the incendiary cannot be discovered.

March 27, Thursday. About nine o’clock evening a fire is kindled in front of the university, composed of newspapers from the reading room, on which occasion Tutor Folsom is severely snowballed. Next morning Dodge and Sturgis are examined by Government and ordered to keep their rooms, but getting no particular evidence against them, they vote a public admonition to the Class which the President pronounces to them, March 28, Friday, at evening prayers, adding that “if any one is hereafter found at or near one of these fires, he will be considered as an aider and abettor thereto and be punished as such.”

April 11, 1823. Robinson137 is called up morning to Government and told that information has been given them “that he is an immoral, dissipated character, and that by his conduct he had proved himself unworthy of college favours.” Appearances are very much against Woodbury, and being charged with having disparaged the character of Robinson, his reply was that “such a person ought to be exposed.”

As the remaining history of the collegiate Course must include the Rebellion, we have attempted to give a brief outline of the facts as they happened at the time — one or two circumstances must be inserted here, as they happened previous to the general rebellion.

April 22. A pitch barrell is burnt in the arbour about half past ten o’clock evening but owing to the late promulgation from the President, but very few go to the scene of action, yet there is great tumult and confusion in College yard. Some few however ventured so far as the fire where Tutor Miles,138 disguised as a labourer, seizes Farley l^st & next day, April 23, Wednesday, a Government meeting being called, Farley is dismissed “for aiding and abetting at the fire by his presence.”139

When the parts were assigned for Exhibition, Woodbury thinking that his part was not so high an one as his talents and standing in the Class entitled him to, and being already prejudiced against Robinson to whom the oration was assigned, meanly determined if it were possible to get it away from him and by these means secure to himself a higher part than he would otherwise get at Commencement.140 To effect this as privately as possible, he informed some gentleman in Boston, (at the same time intimating whether it were not better that the President should be acquainted with the circumstances) that Robinson was an immoral character, and had expended in dissipation at Boston the money which had been allowed him by Government. Accordingly the gentleman immediately informed the President of the circumstances which Woodbury had communicated to him concerning Robinson, whereupon Robinson was called up to Government (as above stated), his charges read to him and asked the usual question, “What have you to say why you should not be severely punished?” to which he replied that he was innocent of the charges brought against him, and offered to shew them an account of all his expenses since he had entered College, the bills receipted, etc. At this the President appeared satisfied of his innocence and he was acquitted. Woodbury with Stearns his chum, then gave information to the Tutors that Robinson was the principal promoter of the division which had existed in the Class for the last two years; that he had by his influences excited the Class to insult them (the Black List) and that if he had not expended his own money in dissipation, money had been given him by some of the most dissipated of the Class and that he had “been into Boston” with them etc. These charges were reported by the Tutors to the Government and not doubting their truth, Robinson is called up again to Government April 15, and “deprived of all College and pecuniary favours during the remainder of College life,” and forbidden to perform his oration at Exhibition.141 At the reception of his sentence Robinson earnestly requested the Class not to make any disturbance as it would most assuredly end in his dismission from College.

In the course of a week, April 21, a Class meeting is called for the purpose of choosing an orator and poet (as has been the custom for many years excepting with the last Senior Class, which as the Government refused to let them have a dinner, were determined that they would have no Oration, but attended prayers et caet. in the Chapel on the day they left College) when Robinson was chosen Orator, and Locke poet. The latter accepted, but Robinson rose and addressed the Class in a few words, the import of which was, that in his present circumstances and situated as he was with respect to Government, in consideration also of the punishment lately inflicted upon him, he must accept the appointment conditionally, viz. that if a Committee from the Class would acquaint the President with the vote and obtain his permission, he would then perform the oration, but until such was obtained, he must decline the honor.” A committee of three were then appointed. After this business was finished, Calvert142 requested to be heard for a few moments, when he proceeded to state that he had heard that the students generally intended to hiss Woodbury’s part on Exhibition Day, etc. He spoke of the impropriety and rashness of such a measure; that it would not only injure the feelings of the person himself, but injure the feelings of his friends who might be present, besides being an open insult against the company assembled in the Chapel & against the Government. He finished by saying, “I move therefore that we discountenance such proceedings” — when Sturgis the moderator of the meeting put it to vote and it was universally assented to “that both time and place were very improper to testify our disapprobation of Woodbury’s conduct and that we would exert ourselves to discountenance any disturbance on Exhibition Day.” Nothing more was said upon the subject and the meeting was immediately dissolved.

April 29, Tuesday, was Exhibition day, and as had been generally expected Woodbury’s performance was hissed, and for the space of nearly five minutes the Chapel was in a perfect uproar. This was the last performance, Robinson’s oration being omitted, and the Exhibition was finished with [out] any further disturbance.143

April 30, Wednesday morning, Robinson was called up to Government charged with being the cause of the disturbances made in the Chapel yesterday, and ordered to keep his room. Sturgis is then sent for and the President informs him that “from the first rate authority” he has heard that he was moderator at a meeting last week, when it was proposed that Woodbury should be hissed, that it was moved and seconded that the Class should do all in their power to countenance it, etc. Sturgis, in vindication of the Class, then gave a full account of all that was done at the meeting, mentioning the very expression Calvert used, “I move that we discountenance such proceedings.” Sturgis was then locked into an adjoining room and a number of the Class sent for, who all agreeing in the same story, even to the very words of Calvert’s expression, Sturgis was called from “the private chamber” with permission to retire, but not to leave the town of Cambridge.

May 1, 1823, Friday Morning. Robinson is again sent for, and dismissed “for being the primary cause of the disturbances on Exhibition Day.” At the same time, Sturgis is informed that the Government, believing him to be innocent of the charges brought against him, “is honourably acquitted.”144 The class are very much incensed at the unjust punishment of Robinson, and assembling together, solemnly swear “that they will not attend another College exercise with Woodbury as a Classmate” — this was at 12 o’clock noon. At 2 o’clock, p.m. the Class attend Publick Declamation in the chapel, and as soon as Woodbury entered, every one instantaneously rose from his seat, and cries of “out with him”; “out with the rascal,” were succeeded by cheers and boisterous exclamations from every quarter of the house. In a moment Woodbury refusing to withdraw, some one advanced and struck him in the face, when the whole Class pressed toward him and immediately thrust him headlong over the stairs. The Class then returned and offered to go on peaceably and in order with the Declamation, but to this Professor Channing objected saying it was impossible to proceed in the present situation of things, consequently the exercise was dispensed with, and the students retired all peaceably to their rooms.145 Twas now near three o’clock, a Government meeting is immediately called, all the students are ordered to keep to their rooms and not to leave town the next day. About a ¼ before 4 o’clock Dodge, Lee, Locke and Walker are called before Government, and charged with “taking active parts in putting Woodbury out from the Chapel,” to which they (of course) pleaded “guilty” — They were then all sent to “the private chamber,” from whence they were separately called in the course of fifteen minutes and informed that they were expelled.146

When this sentence was communicated to the Class, they were more exasperated than before that one man should be the cause of so much trouble, and resolved “to attend evening prayers, if Woodbury came in, they would put him out vi et armis, if he did not come in, they would be silent.” The President had commenced his prayer, when Woodbury made his appearance and the Class immediately rose up as before, and thrust him out from the chapel. The President refused to proceed with the Services and the students retired to Supper.147 After tea the bugle was sounded under the Rebellion Tree,148 when forty-one out of seventy bound themselves by an oath that they would not return to order till the four expelled members were recalled and Woodbury sent from College. While the Class were assembling, Loring and Weld,149 two who had been formerly numbered among the Black List, came forward and acknowledged that “they had done wrong in separating from the Class at the time of the Division and if they would once more receive them and consider them as brothers, they would join in the Rebellion hearts and hands.” They consequently met with a cordial reception, and a general shaking of hands, and exchanging of friendly sentiments ensued. The Class then endeavoured to persuade them to retire to their rooms, alleging that it was useless for them to join in the Rebellion. Weld finally consented but Loring persisted in remaining. Bronson and Tayloe then came forward and stated that they could not honourably join the Class in the Rebellion — that the only condition on which they were permitted to re-enter College from their dismission was, that they would not henceforward join in any disturbances, and by so doing they would break a promise which although extorted from them by force by the Government yet they must consider it binding. The Class unanimously assented to the justness of their remarks, and giving the “three times three” as a pledge of their perpetual friendship, proceeded with further business. Various resolutions were taken, among the rest that, “they would attend prayers the next morning for the last time, and if Woodbury again made his appearance they would put him out and thrash him severely, if he did not come in they would leave the Chapel themselves, etc.”

May 2. Saturday. Woodbury did not appear at morning prayers, and the Class leaving the chapel, the President refused to proceed with the Services, and the students once again retired to their rooms. After breakfast 37 of the Class were dismissed150 (the Government reserving enough for a Commencement) and feeling at the same time confident that those they had retained would not make any further disturbance. Eben Dorr Child and Henry A. Bruce were the only two instances of deception and desertion. The former was one of the most active ringleaders in the Rebellion but finding himself in danger of punishment made acknowledgments to Government and was permitted to remain on promise of future good behaviour. It was ascertained also that Woodbury had left Cambridge the evening before, by Government orders, and was probably by that time in N. Hampshire. The dismissed members of the Class (with Bronson, Weld and Tayloe) assembled in Concert Hall, Boston, that same eve’g, Saturday, and having transacted some necessary business, adjourn’d the meeting till Monday evening, when they again assembled in the Hall and took a last, a long affectionate Farewell —

List of the Members Dismissed & Expelled on account of Rebellion151 &c.

Names	Residence
Adams, John (1873)	Washington, D. C.
Amory, William (1845)	Boston.
Baldwin, C. C.	Templeton.
Blake, Samuel P. (1841)	Boston.
Blunt, Nath. B.152	New York, N. Y.
Borland, Francis	Somerset.
Bryan, Thomas J. (1843)	Philadelphia, Pa.
Burton, Robert.	Richmond, Va.
Calvert, Geo. H. (1855)	Pr. Geo. Co. Md.
Carrol, Charles (1855)	Baltimore, Md.
Chapin, Cha^s. O. C. (1855)	Brattleborough Vt.
Chapman, Henry G. (1841)	Boston.
Choate, Charles (1842)	Ipswich.
Clark, John J. (1841)	Norton.
Coolidge, Cornelius F.	Dorchester.
Crowninshield, Jacob.	Salem.
Cunningham, John A. (1850)	Richmond. Va.
Cutler, David F.	Lincoln.
Cutts, Hampden (1842)	Portsmouth. N. H.
Danforth, Samuel	Boston.
Dodge, Pickering (1845)	Salem.
Dunbar, Robert T.	Natches. Miss.
Farley, Joseph H. (1845)	Boston.
Gay, Martin (1841)	Hingham.
Harper, Charles C.	Baltimore, Md.
Haskell, Charles T. (1855)	Charleston. S.C.
Hearsey, Isaac P. (M.D. 1827)	Cambridge.
Hilliard, Francis (1842)	Cambridge.
Hodges, Edward153 (1855)	Salem.
Inches, Henderson (1880)	Boston.
Lee, John C. (1842)	Salem.
Locke, Andrew A.	Boston.
Loring, Ellis G.	Boston.
Newell, George154	Stow.
Peabody, George (1843)	Salem.
Pickering, Charles155 (1849)	Salem.
Stark, Caleb (1852)	Pembroke. N.H.
Sturgis, N. Russell (1845)	Boston.
Sumner, Frederick A. (1841)	Charlestown, N.H.
Thompson, Thomas H.	Charlestown.
Walker, Charles (M.D. 1826)	Charlestown.

Peace and quiet are once again restored at Cambridge, and every thing goes forward regularly and in order —

June. 1823. Langdon Elwin reenters from his dismission. The remaining part of the class, in number thirty-six, leave Cambridge.

July 15. Thursday — a week previous to Commencement, Tayloe goes up to the President, informs him “that he has accidentally lost the copy of his part, and wished to be excused from performing — that when he returned from the Springs, upon asking Bronson why he had not sent on his part as he requested, Bronson informed him that he had sent it on by mail three weeks before and that if it had not reached him it must probably have been miscarried etc.” The Government however were dissatisfied with the story and informed him “that if he did not prepare over the same part, he should forfeit his degree etc.” Bronson pleaded indisposition but the Government refused to excuse him from performing. Chaplin was called up at the same time and informed “that if he did not prepare himself by the next day in some particular studies he omitted the last winter he also should forfeit his degree, etc.” They all three

Bronson, Frederick (1824)	New York, N.Y.
Chaplin, William L.	Groton, Mass.
Tayloe, Edward T. (1854)	Washington D. C.

refusing to comply with the injunctions of the Government were consequently deprived of their degrees, but their names were not erased from the order of Exercises . . . on Commencement Day, August 27. 1823.156

The dismissal of forty-three members out of a class of seventy, on the eve of graduation, naturally gave the Boston press an opportunity to display their accustomed Schadenfreude at Harvard difficulties. The families of the expelled students were especially stirred. Among the letters of indignant parents that still repose in the college archives; the most interesting is that of the then Secretary of State, John Quincy Adams, a former professor in the University:157

Rev^d J. T. Kirkland

President of Harvard University

Cambridge

Washington, 19 May 1823.

Dear Sir,

In acknowledging the receipt of your kind favour of the 12^th. Inst^t. I will not attempt to express the painful feelings which it excited in my mind. I am fully aware of the necessity of maintaining, and of vindicating the authority of the immediate Government of the University, and am in no wise disposed to justify the disobedience, and much less the violence of the young men, who have incurred the censure of their Instructors.

I do nevertheless feel it to be my duty not only as the Parent of one of those unfortunate Youths, but as an ever affectionate and grateful pupil of the Institution myself, to request of you as its Head, to bring in deliberation of the competent authority, whether the Corporation, or Board of Overseers or both the question, if some mode of punishment or of atonement cannot be substituted instead of that which you state to be by the Law of the University applicable to the case.

Is not that Law in its Nature suited rather to the punishment of one, or a few offending individuals than to the aggregate transgressions of nearly a whole class — The punishment of postponing the honour of a degree for a year, is a punishment of disgrace. Its efficacy consists in its effect upon opinion — To an individual or two or three it is severe, without injuring the character of the Institution itself — but a degraded Class! — would it not necessarily shed some of its dishonour upon the University itself?

The second Century is drawing to a close since the foundation of Harvard College, the nursing mother of almost all that has been wise, and good, and great in the Annals of the Colony and of the Commonwealth — During that time like all similar Institutions, it has been subject to occasional collisions between the lawful authority of the Government, and the passions or indiscretions of its pupils — combinations of single Classes, and Rebellions of the whole four have more than once occurred and been subdued — But never yet has it exhibited to the contempt of the world, the example of a degraded Class.

This is now what must as it appears to me, be the inevitable result, of the Law which your Letter intimates must on this occasion be put in force. I say it would be a degraded Class; for if the remnant of it which has escaped the punishment should receive their degrees at the appointed time, I truly believe that in the opinion, which constitutes the pungency of the penalty they would be as much disgraced by their honours, as their Classmates by their exclusion from them —

The dishonour of the whole, I ask again, will it not be the dishonour of the University and of the Commonwealth? A dishonour, the more Shameful as it will befall bodies legally immortal; while that of the degraded individuals will at least be washed away by death.

I intreat you then My Dear Sir, to devise either some terms of submission upon which these young men may be restored to their standing; or some other punishment which will not exclude them from their degrees at the regular time — Save the honour of our native State, from a Catalogue of her lettered children with a year in blank, or worse than blank.

I am with the highest esteem and regard, Dear Sir,

your very obed^t Serv^t

John Quincy Adams.

President Kirkland replied in a letter which probably still reposes in the Adams family archives, but which “far from convincing me,” wrote the inflexible Secretary, “of the impropriety of my request, has confirmed me in the conviction that it was just and reasonable, and induces me to renew it.”

To this, President Kirkland replied coldly that Mr. Adams’s letters had been referred by the Corporation to the Immediate Government, which instructed him to reply that his observations upon their public statement of facts were observed with pain, and that if the offenses of the students appeared less criminal to outsiders than to the Government, it was because many of the aggravating circumstances were “out of tenderness omitted.” John Adams finally received his degree from President Eliot in the fiftieth anniversary of his class, thirty-nine years after his death.

The Immediate Government gave its own version of the rebellion in the following letter, drafted by President Kirkland and Professor Everett, which was sent out to the parents and friends of the students dismissed.158

Sir,

The Immediate Government of the University think it due to the institution and to themselves to furnish you an accurate statement of the nature of the excesses on the part of the students, which have lately led to a very painful but necessary exercise of authority of the college, in which your [blank] with others has been involved. — The government would also explain to you the effect of the censure, which has been inflicted.

On the forenoon of Friday May 2, in consequence of the resentment conceived by a part of the Senior class against one of their number, a meeting of a portion of the class took place, to concert measures to express their resentment.

The Government forbear to enter in any degree into the merits of the question between the portion of the Class above stated and that individual; inasmuch as the conduct of the former, as will immediately appear, can admit of no justification from any circumstances of provocation, real or supposed. At this meeting the Government believe, that a resolution was taken, by public insults and indignities, and if those should be ineffectual, by force, to drive the individual in question from the chapel, at the public declamation, which was to take place at two o’clock p.m. of the same day. Of this meeting however, the Government had no knowledge at the time. At this declamation, an exercise attended by the two upper, and a portion of the two lower classes, the appearance in the chapel of the obnoxious individual, was the signal for a tumult in the class. The Professor, presiding at the exercise, in vain attempted from his place to procure order. After violent hisses and outcries by a large number, an assault was made on the individual. No regard was paid to the remonstrances and commands of the professor, who had forced himself into the throng. The individual in question was struck in the presence of the professor, and thrust with violence out of the chapel. The exercise was forthwith dismissed by the professor. The Government assembled, and as their first measure, the students were enjoined to repair to their rooms and remain in them. The officers of college in giving this order to members of the Senior Class were in some cases met with direct defiance. The Government proceeded without delay to apply the laws, and four members of the Senior class, who had been forward in the disorder and assault, and two of whom had directly defied the officers, who ordered them to go to their rooms, were expelled. The Government hoped by this prompt and decisive act to suppress the disorder. At evening prayers however, which took place at six o’clock, the disorder was repeated. While the President was about to offer the introductory prayer, outcries and a knocking against the seats broke forth at the appearance in the chapel of the obnoxious individual. The attempts of the President twice made to calm the violence which prevailed, by a mild expostulation and solemn warning, were unsuccessful. The outcries, knocking, and stamping were not discontinued, and the President was constrained to dismiss the assembly soon after the service had begun. Immediately after evening commons a gathering of a considerable part of the senior class, and among them of the individuals who had been expelled, took place in the college yard. The attempts of several members of the Government to disperse the collection were met with direct disobedience, and produced no other effect, than the removal of the meeting, with tumultuous shouts, to the play ground. Under these circumstances, the government assembled in the evening, and passed a vote of expulsion on four more, hoping that by pursing this course, the disorder of the class might be reduced, without the application of a more comprehensive censure. As it was however late in the evening, the publication of these expulsions was deferred till the next morning. As the Government moreover, had twice found themselves unable to protect the individual in question from assault and menace in their presence, they thought it their duty not to permit him to expose himself, a third time, and he was accordingly directed not to appear at prayers the next morning. He therefore did not appear the next morning, May 3; but scarcely had the President engaged in prayer, when an outcry was made, and a large number of the senior class rushed from the chapel. As this act of disorder and irreverence took place without the provocation of the obnoxious individual’s presence, and in consequence, as the Government understood, of an agreement to which those concerned in it had bound themselves by an oath, the Government relinquished the hope of restoring order to college by any thing short of the removal of all who had thus pledged themselves. Instead therefore of inflicting the expulsion, which had been voted the preceding evening, the Government came to the unanimous determination of dismissing all, whom they knew to have taken a share in these disorders: which was forthwith done to the number of thirty five.

In reply to questions, which have often been asked, with respect to the nature of a dismission, the Government think it proper to explain the effect of this censure. By the laws of the University, over which the immediate Government have no control, a dismissed student is removed from College, and is not to be readmitted without a vote of the major part of the whole Government nor then within less time than twelve months. In the case of dismission of a Senior, whose class will of course have been graduated, before the expiration of a year, the Government consider the law to provide, that no senior dismissed can be permitted to take a degree till the commencement after the graduation of his class: although his degree, if conferred, may date from the year in which his class was graduated. While, however, by their provisions of the law, the Government are empowered, after the lapse of a year, entirely to restore a dismissed senior from the operation of the censure, the Government feel it their duty to add, that such restoration is in no respect, a matter of course. Dismission from College is a total dissolution of the connexions of the dismissed student; and while the laws forbid his restoration under a year, they do not provide that it shall then take place; but they leave it wholly with the discretion of the Government when, or if at all, a restoration shall be granted. The Government presume not to form any purpose with respect to distant future events, but they feel it their duty to add, that there is nothing in the nature and circumstances of the acts which led to this censure to call on the Government at any period to restore those concerned in them, and bestow the honors of the University on those engaged in acts so violent and dangerous.

The Government are aware of the apparent severity of this course, as it respects those, who were drawn, against their private feelings, into this combination. In some of them, as in some even of its more active leaders, the Government recognize young gentlemen of great worth and promise, who will ever be remembered by them with affection, and are now dismissed under censure with deepest regret. At the same time, however, when the Government consider the alarming recurrence of combinations, less violent indeed, than this, but necessarily destructive of the peace and order of college, and when they add, that this is the second occasion, on which members of this class have been thus engaged in open resistance, to the college Government, they feel the necessity of a decisive course. The well disposed members of a class, constituting in general its great majority, but who are subject in various ways to be drawn reluctantly into similar combinations, require to be convinced, that they are called on upon these occasions, to resist the few active leaders. To restore students of the description in question from the censures they incur for thus joining in Acts of resistance, is to destroy the only hold, which the Government can have upon them, on the occurrence of such disorders since, as those who are conversant with the education of youth need not be told, general principles of duty and propriety weigh but little in such moments against the contagion of example. The Government ascribed in a considerable degree the repetition of disorders of this nature to the lenient course, which has before been followed of readmitting those concerned, on expression of regret, and to the opinion, which has hence obtained currency, that no worse consequences will result, from the most violent resistance of the college authority, than a temporary absence from the University. The dangerous tendency of this opinion and the unexampled violence of the disorders in question have dictated to the college Government on the present occasion, the adoption of severer measures.

It is clear that President Kirkland must share the responsibility for the whole affair, and the recorded notes at the shilly-shallying faculty meetings of April suggest that with a little more firmness on his part justice might have been done to Robinson, and the subsequent rebellion averted.159 Whatever his private views may have been at the time, the President later endeavoured to make amends, in individual cases, but was thwarted by the Corporation. Just before the commencement of 1827 he recommended to have the master’s degree conferred on certain members of the class of 1823 who had been deprived of their bachelor’s degree. Dr. Bowditch remarked that the young men had not done works meet for repentance, and that it was contrary to college law and usage to confer a master’s degree on others than bachelors of arts. Judge Jackson remarked that several of the dismissed rebels had been admitted to the Suffolk County bar before those who had received a degree, because the Bar had misunderstood the certificates of dismissal given them by the President. That brought out the fact that the kindly Kirkland had furnished certain rebels with testimonials to the effect that they had “studied in College from August 1819 to May 1823.” Dr. Bowditch inquired, “Did not your certificate state that they were then dismissed?” Dr. Kirkland “rather tartly replied, ‘I was not obliged to criminate them.’” Dr. Bowditch: “It is your duty not to mislead, and if I had been President of the College I would not have signed that paper.” The Corporation then voted to grant no master’s degree to an ex-rebel. Notwithstanding this vote, the President had a diploma made out for a master’s degree to Joseph H. Farley; but the stern Dr. Bowditch discovered it, got his hands on the diploma on the morning of commencement, and cut out Farley’s name.160

III

The Rebellion of 1823 was the occasion for one of the most important reform movements in the history of the College. George Ticknor, since his return from Germany, had been dissatisfied with the antiquated system of discipline and instruction that he found at Harvard. The whole course of studies was rigidly prescribed; almost the only method used was the recitation;161 and the examinations were a farce. The real unit of instruction was not a subject, or even a course, but a book: the students “learnt Locke or Brown, rather than metaphysics, and Horace rather than Latin.”162 The worst feature of the system, in Mr. Ticknor’s view, was the division of the classes into alphabetical sections, so that the industrious, the idle, the good, bad and indifferent, went through exactly the same books at the same pace. There was one advantage to this system that we can appreciate better in our day than in Kirkland’s: it required so little effort that the best students, men like Emerson and Thoreau, had plenty of time for private reading. On the other hand it left too much time to the “bloods” for riot and dissipation — there being no athletics to use up their superfluous energy.163 At best, this system was antiquated, rigid, and wasteful. Ticknor had already got the ear of the Overseers and Corporation in 1821, and induced the first-named body to direct a questionnaire to the Faculty, whose replies were discouraging to reform. None of Ticknor’s colleagues but Everett and Bancroft had known anything better than Harvard; Bancroft remained at Harvard only one year (1822–23), and Everett was elected to Congress in 1824.

The Great Rebellion, however, convinced both governing boards and the public that something was radically wrong. Professors Ticknor, Ware, and Norton started things moving by private discussions with a few of their Boston friends, including four Overseers, in July, 1823. At their instance the cumbersome wheels of the college government began slowly to revolve in the reluctant motion of reform. Committee of Overseers; Committee of Corporation; Joint Committee of Overseers and Corporation, Mr. Justice Story, chairman, and long report; new Committee of Overseers, John Lowell, Esq., chairman, thirty-one questions addressed to the Immediate Government; Committee of Immediate Government instructed to prepare reply; reply reported, with proposed changes in the college laws, discussed, amended, and adopted (fifty-eight pages, giving an immense amount of information about the college and conjectures about the students); colossal report including the above, from Mr. Lowell’s committee, dated January 6, 1825, and printed; Mr. Lowell’s report found insufficient by the Overseers; Mr. Lowell’s report and Mr. Justice Story’s report discussed together by the Overseers, with the result that the latter, the more radical of the two, prevailed; Mr. Justice Story’s report sent down to the Corporation, with instructions to draft on that basis (not neglecting the promising features of Mr. Lowell’s report) a new code of college statutes; Corporation sends up new code to Overseers; Overseers accept; and in June, 1825, appear the printed “Statutes and Laws of the University in Cambridge, Massachusetts” — one hundred and fifty-three laws in thirteen chapters.

The principal reforms in this portentous code were: a rearrangement of vacation, on the theory that warm weather produced rioting;164 the requirement that the President submit an annual report to the Overseers; the abolition of fines as a method of punishment; a stricter supervision of students;165 reorganization of the teaching force — now for the first time called the Faculty — into six departments;166 a slight concession to the elective principle for upper-classmen; and in Law 61, a revolutionary division of classes:

The Students shall be formed, for the purpose of instruction, into as many divisions as shall be found practicable, and conducive to their mprovement; the divisions shall be made with reference to their proficiency and capacity, and each division shall be encouraged to proceed as rapidly as may be found consistent with a thorough knowledge of the subjects of their studies.167

Ticknor wrote:

This may be regarded as the broad corner stone for beneficial changes in all our colleges; and as a change to which all will come, as fast as their means will permit them. For it is a plain injustice, which nothing but the necessity of the case can excuse, to give a young man of high powers and active industry no more and no other means of improvement than are given to the idlest and dullest in a class of sixty or seventy.168

These reforms fell short of what the Story committee had recommended, and far short of what Professor Ticknor wanted; but they went much further than the Faculty desired. Ticknor had yet to learn, what so many academic reformers in this country and royal commissioners in England have learned to their cost, that it is one thing to get changes into college statutes, and another to get them carried out in letter and in spirit. The Code of 1825 had been inspired by a non-resident professor who was not a member of the Faculty,169 and imposed on the teaching force from above.170 President Kirkland had taken, so far as I can ascertain, a neutral and passive part in the decision. Dr. Bowditch inferred from his subsequent actions that he was not in sympathy with the reforms, and that he regarded Professor Ticknor as a troublemaker with whose services he would gladly dispense. His view is borne out by the following letter from Ticknor to the President, written on February 28, 1825, before the new laws went into operation:

In the mean time, if I am wanted at Cambridge, I pray to be informed of it. My lectures have been made so entirely a farce, that I have, of late, thought little of them, and expressed no opinion or desire, as to the times of delivering them. I hold myself at all seasons, at the command of the Corporation, within the limits of my Statutes; but, your communication now, as well as the communications I have heretofore received from you are so vague, that I know not what is wanted of me, or by what authority it is required. I will present myself at College, whenever the following terms are duly determined and made known to me: —

1. The Times and Places of Lectures.
2. The number of Lectures desired of me.
3. Whether, I am to examine and if so, how?

The last point, I wish to have definitely settled. What you say about it, is, heretofore, more dark than you intended; because one sentence in your letter is left unfinished and has no meaning at all.

Yrs. respectfully,

Geo. Ticknor.171

Ticknor did not learn until late October, 1825, whether a department of modern languages would be organized, or whether he would be the head of it; and it was not actually organized until January, 1826.

Certain laws, such as the abolition of fines and the rearrangement of the college year, were automatic in operation. But Law 61, the division of classes into sections on the basis of proficiency, required the whole-hearted coöperation of the faculty, and the President. That, it did not obtain. The experiment had already been tried, in 1822–23 by George Bancroft, without success, and abandoned.172 This whole subject of divisions is still an open pedagogical question in America, though long since closed in England. Both practices — division according to proficiency and arbitrary division by lot or alphabet or convenience of hours — are still pursued at Harvard College, according to the views of individual professors. Most American teachers still regard the Ticknor method as “undemocratic,” and unjust to the average or below-average student. Such was the opinion of the Harvard Faculty in 1825. Further, the Faculty were disgruntled by the failure of a little rebellion of their own in 1823.

Since the resignation of Professor Pearson in 1806, there had not been a single resident teacher on the Corporation. A vacancy occurred in 1823. The Faculty then claimed, as of right, the fellowship of that body — so far as its chartered number of five would admit them.173 Exactly a century before the same question had been raised, and after long discussion, decided against the teachers.174 Once more the whole constitutional history of the College was raked over. In 1825, Professors Everett and Norton appeared in public debate before the Overseers as protagonists of the theory that the Corporation should consist only of active teachers; Chief Justice Parker and Francis Calley Gray of the Overseers, and Charles Jackson, defended the practice of the Corporation in electing anyone to its fellowship, whom it thought worthy of the honor. Ticknor regarded this movement as a red herring across the trail of reform. He took a decided stand against his colleagues because he feared that to combine the teaching, financial, and administrative functions in the same body would defeat reform, and produce the same abuses that had crept into the colleges of Oxford and Cambridge. The Overseers decided against the teachers, Judge Charles Jackson was appointed to the vacant fellowship, and that question was set at rest.175

With the majority of teachers opposed to it, Law 61 functioned very badly when first applied in January, 1826, to the class of 1829. For instance, James Hayward, tutor in mathematics, divided his sections “in the most obnoxious manner,” yet “made them all get the same identical lessons, so that the duller scholar had to attempt to keep pace with the most gifted, thus rendering perfectly nugatory the wishes of the Board of Overseers. The consequence of Mr. Hayward’s measures was that the lowest sections knew nothing, and were perfectly reckless about their lessons, having been forced on beyond their powers of acquiring knowledge, and without understanding well the elementary principles of the science.”176 This sabotage by the teachers caused disorder among the students and discontent among their parents, who were naturally predisposed against it. After the same thing had happened again with the class entering in 1826, President Kirkland took the initiative in getting Law 61 modified, so that its application was left optional with the Faculty; and the Faculty allowed it to be continued by a given department only by its express permission.177 The system of division according to proficiency was abandoned by all departments in January, 1827, except that of modern languages, where it had been wholly successful and acceptable to the students.

It must be said in justice to the Faculty that they let Professor Ticknor do as he liked in his own department. He had to struggle against the President’s desire to crowd all modern language instruction into the junior year. That would have defeated Ticknor’s object of catching the student young, and getting him along far enough to read foreign literature with pleasure.178 The Faculty made a very important concession in allowing Freshmen to elect a modern language in place of half the prescribed work in Latin or Greek.179 Professor Ticknor applied Law 61 in his department with such success that modern languages became the most popular branch of study for undergraduates. A system of sections was arranged by which the best scholars were pushed forward without even reference to their year or class;180 and although all the instructors under Ticknor were foreigners,181 there was no trouble between them and the undergraduates, not one of whom, during the ten years that Ticknor administered this system, had to be reported for misdemeanor in his lecture or recitation rooms.182

IV

There remains the important subject of college finance. The act of the General Court, appropriating $10,000 a year to Harvard College for ten years, expired in 1824. By that time the Federalist party had been permanently unhorsed, public clamor against the College for student disorder, high cost of education, aristocracy, Unitarianism, etc., was loud and wide-spread, and the Republican legislature refused to renew the grant. That left the college with a total estimated income short of $45,000, of which $21,500 came from students’ fees and rents, and most of the remainder was tied up to special foundations.183 Some feeble attempts at retrenchment were made by the Corporation, but the Treasurer’s report for the year ending June 30, 1825, showed a deficit of $4,000, and a serious diminution of the unappropriated funds.

Harvard College was then the most expensive in the country. The annual tuition fee had been raised from $20 in 1807 to an average of $55, and the fashionable tone of the college under Kirkland encouraged expense and extravagance. In order to attract poor students, one quarter of the State grant had been earmarked for scholarships. This source of relief to the poor students was now cut off, and the total number of undergraduates declined from about three hundred to two hundred in four years.184

In 1825–26 the personnel of the Corporation was almost completely changed by the death or retirement of four members, and the election of Charles Jackson, Joseph Story, Francis Calley Gray, and Nathaniel Bowditch. The surviving members were the President, the Rev. Eliphalet Porter (elected 1818), an amiable retired clergyman, and the Treasurer, Judge John Davis (elected 1803). Mr. Justice Story, absent during a large part of the year at Washington, took little part in the Board’s deliberations. Judge Jackson, who had lately retired from the Supreme Bench of the Commonwealth, Mr. Gray, an accomplished and scholarly lawyer of thirty-six years,185 and Dr. Bowditch, became the active members of the Corporation.

Dr. Bowditch was of very different metal from his colleagues. A self-made man who had suffered privation in youth, deprived of a classical or a college education, but a keen scientist and acute business man, fearless, tactless, and inflexible, he had no patience with student disorder or loose administration, although his ideas on education were akin to those of George Ticknor. On the Board of Overseers since 1810, he had already considerable acquaintance with the college affairs. During the earlier part of Dr. Kirkland’s administration the college business had been administered in an easy-going fashion, and in great harmony; for, as Quincy wrote,186 the strong men on the Corporation had complete confidence in the President, and let him do practically as he liked. His statutory powers had been increased, and he had been accustomed to exercise without let or hindrance many powers beyond the college statutes. Dr. Bowditch found President Kirkland a most exasperating person to deal with. Always cool, and courteous, secure in power and popularity, he would readily consent to measures contrary to his desires, and then either blandly ignore them, or start a movement in the Faculty to procure their repeal.

Dr. Bowditch’s first tiff with the President was over chapel. Since time immemorial Harvard students had been compelled to attend chapel twice daily, and the President was supposed to preside at both services. Afternoon chapel, the hour of which varied between 4.30 and 6 according to the season,187 was generally unpopular. On the occasion of the President’s not infrequent visits to Boston, where he was a favorite guest at the lengthy three o’clock dinners, chapel was taken by one of the faculty, and was generally put upon one of the younger members. In November, 1826, there was a prolonged “scraping” at afternoon chapel as a protest against the ministrations of an unpopular tutor. The President brought the matter before the Corporation, and proposed that Chapel be postponed to nine o’clock in the evening. “I could see no reason for the change,” wrote the sententious Navigator, “except that it would enable the President to officiate after a return from a visit in Boston.”188 The President then made the sensible suggestion to abolish afternoon chapel. The Corporation non-concurred, as they were sensitive to the clamor about “Harvard impiety” and wished to give it nothing new to feed upon. The President refused to be put off. He brought in a compromise proposition from the Faculty that afternoon chapel be discontinued in winter. Dr. Bowditch then discovered that Henry Ware, the Hollis Professor of Divinity, knew nothing of this Faculty report, and was opposed to the change. “This is one of the many instances of management of the meetings of the Faculty to obtain a favorite object,” records Dr. Bowditch. Afternoon chapel continued, as before.189

As head of a committee on finance, Dr. Bowditch discovered that the accounts of the Treasurer were in hopeless confusion and arrears. Although satisfied with his integrity, “yet his habits of procrastination and indecision were so inveterate, that no hope of cure remained.” Judge Davis was persuaded to resign in January, 1827,190 and an efficient merchant, Ebenezer Francis, appointed in his place. An audit of the treasury accounts by Benjamin R. Nichols, a task which required six months, frequently at the rate of twelve hours a day, revealed a surprising state of affairs. Errors to the amount of $120,000 were found in Judge Davis’s accounts — fortunately they largely cancelled each other. The President, instead of receiving his salary ($2550) at regular intervals, had obtained it by drawing orders at pleasure on the Steward, and had overdrawn to the amount of $1700. He had abated at will the term-bills of students whom he deemed meritorious, without vote of the Corporation, or regard to the charity funds, and had thus paid out over $1000 of the college capital. Hilliard, Metcalf & Company, printers to the University, had run the Corporation heavily in debt without their knowledge, and had lost or mislaid several thousand text-books which were College property. No rent had been received from the Pennoyer estate in England since 1820. Various debtors to the College had long since died, without the Treasurer making any effort to collect the debts from their estates. Several thousand acres of land in Maine, granted to the College by the General Court, had had the timber cut off by trespassers, or got into the possession of squatters. Various deeds and bonds had been mislaid, and a lease of the Province House estate had been left at the Suffolk registry of deeds for three years. The accounts and methods of the Steward, Stephen Higginson, Jr., were found to be in bad order, and his resignation was procured, against the wishes of the President, through the persuasion of his kinsman, Judge Jackson.191

A comic relief to these laches is afforded by the question of the College wood. For many years the Corporation had owned the sloop Harvard, which made ten or twelve trips a year down-east (“being about two-thirds as much as other vessels did” says Bowditch), procuring from the College lands in Maine the wood which was the only fuel then used in the students’ rooms, or in the college buildings.192 She docked at the college wharf near the present Anderson bridge, and the wood was sold to the students at $7.50 a cord. This ancient bark was the butt of every college critic. The wood she brought was described as “rotten down-east punk,” said to be largely birch, which was kept so damp in transit and in the college woodyard that it was “doted” when delivered to the students’ rooms. They could have bought good country hardwood as cheaply, but the college article had the attraction of being charged in the term-bills. Judge Davis figured that the College made a profit of $180 a year on this wood business; Dr. Bowditch found a loss of $4,400. He records with considerable satisfaction the remarks of the Cambridge ship-carpenter when the new treasurer disputed a bill for repairs. “Judge Davis was never the man to dispute my bills. I used to call on him at his house, at 3 o’clock, just after he had eaten his dinner and was smoking his cigar, and he was always in his study. he always looked at the bottom of the account, and gave me a check without saying a word — he’s the fellow for me!” The sloop Harvard was promptly sold by the soulless Corporation, and no longer navigated the waters of the Back Bay and the Charles with her fragrant if somewhat punky cargoes.193

Having discovered the worst, restored order to the finances, obtained some sound by-laws for the conduct of the college business,194 and secured a competent steward and treasurer, Dr. Bowditch and Judge Jackson applied themselves to the ungrateful task of retrenchment.195 The President’s salary was reduced from $2550 to $2250. The Steward’s salary was reduced from $1500 to $1000, and his duties increased by becoming the President’s secretary. That office, which the kindly Kirkland had assigned to some poor but meritorious scholar, was suppressed. The teaching force, naturally, were the next to feel the axe. Resident professors’ salaries were reduced from $1700 to $1500, and the salaries of non-resident professors of law and medicine were reduced to the actual income of their foundations. Certain positions were telescoped, by which the teaching force was reduced by two professors and two tutors. Dr. Jacob Bigelow, the first Rumford Professor, and Chief Justice Isaac Parker, the first Royall Professor of Law, were forced to resign by requiring their residence at Cambridge.196

Reluctant consent of the Faculty and the President was obtained for this new schedule. The President demurred at having tutorial duties assigned to John Farrar, the Hollis Professor of Mathematics; but Dr. Bowditch put Farrar in his place by remarking that he had been teaching only an hour a day, and making $2000 a year by translating and publishing French text-books; and that if he was not willing to do his proper share of teaching he could resign. Kirkland struggled in vain to retain the services of the one suppressed professor, James Hayward. “The President urged it with great zeal, and magnified the importance of Professor Hayward’s services, remarking that he had from choice prepared himself for this occupation.” “I replied,” says Bowditch, “that he had prepared himself for the ministry, but could not obtain a call, and though his acquirements were sufficient for the present duties of mathematical tutor, he had not attended to the sciences from any particular taste for them. The President replied, ‘He is however a very good mathematician.’ I answered, ‘There is nothing very great in him, for at this moment [Benjamin] Peirce of the Sophomore Class knows more of pure mathematics than he does.’” Unpleasantly right Dr. Bowditch!197

An interesting schedule of the revised daily teaching hours of the principal members of the Faculty is recorded by the exacting Doctor:

Henry Ware, Hollis Professor of Theology	1 hour 45 minutes
Levi Hedge, Alford Professor of Philosophy	2 hours
John S. Popkin, Eliot Professor of Greek literature	3 hours
Sidney Willard, Hancock Professor of Hebrew	2 hours 48 minutes
Edward T. Channing, Boylston Professor of Rhetoric	2 hours 30 minutes
Latin Tutor	1 hour 40 minutes
Mathematics Tutor	3 hours 33 minutes
John Farrar, Hollis Professor of Mathematics	3 hours 33 minutes
Average daily time for each officer	2 hours 36 minutes

Many other petty economies were effected, such as assigning the duties of organist, chorister, monitors, and guardians of the college clock, which had formerly been remunerative, to students on scholarships, without remuneration.198 The Corporation refused to provide a dinner for the examining committee of the Overseers, with the result that “there was an examination but not a committee” in 1828. It cut off the supply of sacramental wine for the college chapel.199 The Corporation even voted to present a certain bass viol to the Pierian Sodality, in order to be saved the expense of repairing the instrument! The only saving to the students was a reduction in the price of board at commons; but, on the other hand, the President was forbidden in future to abate term bills of poor students not on scholarships, except so far as the existing charity funds allowed; and no more credit was given for term bills.

By the end of 1827, the college accounts showed for the first time in many years a favorable balance, and the Corporation and its servants were committed to business-like methods. Dr. Bowditch, however, continued to have trouble with the President. Dr. Kirkland had been in the habit of augmenting his colleagues’ meagre salaries by grants of one to three hundred dollars for “additional services,” although this practice had been forbidden by a Corporation vote on March 12, 1819. The Corporation voted unanimously on January 10, 1827, that officers of instruction should in future perform without extra pay any reasonable and necessary duties assigned to them, not inconsistent with their respective foundations.200 The President, nevertheless, continued to ask for such grants, as of right. Dr. Bowditch also discovered that the President seldom took the trouble to notify recipients of honorary degrees, which at this period were generally conferred in absentia. Horace Binney and Justice Bushrod Washington learned that they had become Harvard LL.D’s in 1827 only through the medium of the newspapers, and received no official notice until the following year.

In many petty ways, the President’s procrastination, and his habit of ignoring a vote of the Corporation which he did not like, or taking steps to thwart it, convinced Dr. Bowditch by the beginning of the year 1828 that the University would never be properly administered while Dr. Kirkland remained in office. Some of the facts of the President’s financial irresponsibility recorded by Dr. Bowditch would be hard to believe, had we not had a recent example, in a sister university, of a great teacher who was equally blind on the financial side. For instance, when the audit showed that the President had overdrawn his salary to the amount of $1700, he compiled an extraordinary expense account, including postage, stationery, and bridge-tolls on his visits to Boston for seventeen years past. Judge Jackson sadly remarked, when this “plaguy account” was presented to the Corporation in Dr. Kirkland’s absence, “The President is not the man he once was.” Dr. Kirkland had had a slight stroke in August, 1827, and was unable to preside at Commencement; and although he married the following month (at the age of fifty-seven), and presided once more at Corporation meetings in October, his shaky signatures to the letters of that period in the college archives show that his health was still far from good. Judge Jackson proposed that a Vice-President be appointed at a salary of $1000 to perform the President’s duties; or that the President be asked to resign and given a pension of $1000 per annum. Dr. Bowditch coldly objected to each alternative as too expensive, and certain to be disallowed by the Board of Overseers.

Events shortly played into Dr. Bowditch’s hands. Professor Ticknor, incommoded by having the recitation rooms for his department in four different buildings, proposed that he be assigned the four rooms on the top floor of an entry in Stoughton or Hollis.201 Dr. Bowditch was under the impression that the Corporation consented, at its meeting of February 21, 1828; but the Corporation records show that on that date Professor Ticknor’s proposal was merely committed to the President.202 At the next monthly meeting of the Board, the President reported adversely, but was overruled, and the Corporation instructed the Steward to prepare four rooms in the upper story of Hollis or Stoughton,203 and to provide the dispossessed students with as good or better. When the Steward chose the south entry of Hollis, he was obstructed by one of the occupants of the rooms, a member of the class of 1829, who had previously been detected by the Librarian stealing a book from the library, but had been shielded from punishment by the President’s withholding his name from the Faculty and Corporation. This student told the janitor that “he would be damned if he would remove.” At the next meeting of the Corporation (March 27) a letter of the Steward was read, reporting the refusal, though not the exact words of this student, and recommending that the reassignment be postponed until Commencement. The President supported the Steward, on the ground that the coming and going of students to recitations would disturb other occupants of the entry. He declared that the students affected had petitioned the Faculty against the proposed change, and that the Faculty agreed with them. Dr. Bowditch, scenting another case of tergiversation, upbraided Dr. Kirkland for bringing the Faculty into it, for proposing to let a profane and pilfering student thwart the vote of the Corporation; and even accused the President of having procured the student petition himself. He went on to declare that the President was evidently “opposed to all our measures of retrenchment,” that he “believed the Corporation and Overseers must have the same opinion,” and that everything in the way of improvement left to the President to be done, was left undone. After which tirade — which by his own showing was both offensive and unnecessary — Dr. Bowditch moved to adopt the President’s recommendation in this case, and it was adopted!204 Other business was then transacted, and the meeting adjourned, Mr. Gray remarking on leaving that Dr. Bowditch had perhaps spoken too plainly.

The following day the President sent to Mr. Gray a letter of resignation, composed by Mrs. Kirkland. The President’s friends persuaded him to take it back and alter the phraseology. A new and final letter, also dated March 28, was written and circulated among individual members of the Board on Monday, March 31.205

Considerations in my judgment, imperative, induce me to resign the office, which I now hold in the University, and I beg you to be persuaded, that I quit this high, and responsible situation, with the most sincere prayers, and wishes for its future prosperity, and advancement.

Any arrangement which the Corporation may be disposed to make as to the time in which I shall cease to perform the duties of my office, I shall cheerfully concur in, it being understood however, that the resignation is absolute, unless the Corporation shall request a postponement for the residue of the present term.206

It was generally understood that the President had made the language of Dr. Bowditch the occasion and cause of his resignation; and by the time the second letter was received, rumors were flying about — circulated by Mrs. Kirkland, according to Dr. Bowditch — that the latter had called the President an “imbecile,” to his face. The undergraduates were well acquainted with this rumor on April 1, when the President made them his farewell address in chapel.207 The following day his letter of resignation was laid before the Corporation, and accepted. Mr. Gray moved the following minute:

Voted, that, in accepting the resignation of the President, the board express their full sense of all the benefits conferred by him on the institution over which he has presided for so many years with singular dignity and mildness, highly raising its reputation and increasing its usefulness by his splendid talents and accomplishments, his paternal care, and his faithful services.208

Dr. Bowditch refused to vote for this resolve because he disapproved the adjective “faithful.” The President’s salary was paid up to Commencement, and he was given an additional grant of $2000 which served to extinguish his over-draft; but no pension. Fortunately Mrs. Kirkland had property in her own right, and the presidential family promptly vacated Wadsworth House, and moved into Franklin Place, Boston.

Unfortunately, we have no record of Dr. Kirkland’s side of the question. It seems probable that he was affronted and hurt by Dr. Bowditch’s attitude and manners; and that after consulting with his wife (who was a masterful Cabot) he determined to put up with it no more.

Unfortunate and unjust as were the circumstances of Dr. Kirkland’s resignation, there is little doubt that the best interests of the University required it; for his health and intellect had been impaired by the stroke in 1827.209 He had served the University brilliantly and faithfully; but he was out of touch with the needs of a new era. Yet a few thousand dollars would have softened the clash of temperament between Dr. Kirkland and Dr. Bowditch. An addition of $100,000 to the invested funds of the college would have enabled the one to indulge in what the Seniors called his “improvident virtues”; and the other to attain his principal objective, a reduction in the cost of college education. The next president, Josiah Quincy, effected that, and much more.

In losing Dr. Kirkland, the college lost something more than a personality. It broke definitely with a tradition that the President of Harvard College was primarily a loving father to a large if turbulent family.

Mr. Albert Matthews made the following remarks:

THE PRINTING OF THE CAPITAL LAWS IN 1642

Most of the material contained in the two volumes of Harvard College Records, issued last August, relate, as one would naturally expect, to College affairs. Occasionally, however, an entry will be found that has nothing to do with the College. Thus, there is twice entered a protest signed by nine magistrates, dated May 10, 1649, against “the wearing of long haire after the manner of Ruffians and barbarous Indians”;210 though why this should have been inserted is not easy to see.

Also, there is occasionally found an entry that has nothing to do with collegiate affairs, though it touches the College indirectly. Let me call attention to one such entry that has apparently hitherto escaped notice, since its significance is not clear and might easily elude the reader. On May 16, 1644, William Tyng, “y^e Treasurer for y^e Country” — that is, the Colony — gave in an account of the financial dealings between the Colony and the College in the years 1636–1642. Under the head “The country hath payd y^e Colledge as followeth,” one item is this:

1642

Henry Dunster received 9^ll of w^c 12^s–6^d for printing y^e laws, for y^e College received

08–07–06211

Exactly what were these “laws” for printing which at the College press Dunster was paid by the Colony twelve shillings and sixpence? It will be observed that the word “laws” is followed by a period, indicating that they were Colony laws. In view, however, of the erratic way in which punctuation marks were employed in the early days, it is conceivable that the laws were those adopted by the College in 1642; and if they were College laws it is conceivable, so close was then the relationship between the Colony and the College, that the bill for printing them should have been paid by the Colony. But so far as is known, the College laws were first printed in 1790.212 Of course, this is not absolutely conclusive, because the College laws of 1642 may have been printed and yet no copies have survived.213 But had the College laws of 1642 been printed, it is difficult to believe that Samuel Sewall, who came to this country in 1661, entered Harvard in 1667, and graduated in 1671, would have been ignorant of the fact. Yet on March 23, 1683, Sewall wrote to Increase Mather, then a Fellow of the College, as follows:

Honoured Sir, — If you think it not inconvenient, I have some thoughts what if I should print the Colledge-Laws? that so every student admitted may have a fair Admittatur to keep p^r him, in memory of his Admission. I know that to avoid writing out a copy, many borrow Laws to present at their Admission, which they are fain to return agen awhile after, which is very mischievous, for by that means, they are without both Laws & Admittatur. I supose the Colledge-Orders are not very bulkey, so I could have some stitch’t up in Marble-Paper, & (considering the fewness of what shall part with) afford them at a very easy rate.214

The notion that the laws printed in 1642 were College laws may with reasonable safety be dismissed.

Hence we are forced to the conclusion that the laws printed in 1642 were Colony laws. But here a difficulty arises. The earliest volume of Colony laws was that printed in 1648. Previous to that date, there had been printed in London in 1641 “An Abstract of the Lawes of New England, As they are novv established.” This was not, as often stated, the Body of Liberties, prepared by the Rev. Nathaniel Ward, for that was first printed in 1843. Moreover, the above title is misleading, since the Rev. John Cotton’s Abstract of the Laws of New England was never actually in force.215

The only possible explanation of the item in William Tyng’s account is furnished by the following vote of the General Court passed June 14, 1642:

It is ordered, that such lawes as make any offence to bee capitall shall fourthw^th bee imprinted & published, of w^ch lawes the Secretary is to send a coppey to the printer, when it hath bene examined by the Gov^rnor or M^r Bellingha^m w^th himselfe, & the Treasurer to pay for the printing of them.216

These Capital Laws, thus ordered to be “imprinted & published,” are found in Major John Child’s “New-Englands Jonas Cast up at London,” printed in London in 1647. But recently there has come to light a broadside in the British Museum entitled, “The Capitall Lawes of New-England, as they stand now in force in the Common-Wealth. By the Covrt, In the Years 1641. 1642.” A facsimile of this broadside was, by the courtesy of Mr. Worthington C. Ford, communicated to the Society by Mr. Frederick L. Gay in 1913.217 The colophon reads:

Printed first in New-England, and re-printed in London for Ben. Allen in Popes-head Allen.218 1643.

The item in William Tyng’s account may be regarded as confirmation, from an unexpected source, of the statement in the colophon of the London broadside that the Capital Laws were first printed at our Cambridge, presumably in 1642.

Mr. Lawrence Shaw Mayo exhibited a pre-revolutionary New Hampshire marriage license,219 which is here reproduced, and spoke briefly on

MARRIAGE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE BEFORE THE REVOLUTION

According to a statute passed in 1714220 any settled minister in New Hampshire might join parishioners in matrimony “provided they be published three publick meeting days, and have a certificate thereof” from the town clerk, or “have a sufficient license from the governor for the time being according to former custom.” Further provisions of the law established the minister’s fee at five shillings, and required that the marriage be recorded within a week. Failure to record the marriage incurred a fine of twelve pence a week after the first seven days had elapsed.

The significant part of the law as far as the present document is concerned is the clause allowing a man and woman to evade the fifteen days’ publishment by obtaining a license from the governor, “according to former custom.” What was the former custom, and how ancient was it? The earliest provincial statute regarding marriage appears to have been one of the General Laws made by the General Assembly and approved by the President and Council at the time when New Hampshire was organized as a royal province.

This law221 was passed March 16, 1679–80, and its provisions were as follows:

Any member of ye Councill shall have liberty to joyne any persons together in marriage; and for prevention of unlawfull marriages it is ordered y^t no pson shall be joyned in marriage before the intentions of the pties pceeding therein shall have been 3 times published, at some publique meeting in y^e townes, where y^e pties, or either of them doe ordinarily reside, or be sett up in writing upon some post of theire meeting house door, in publique view, there to stand soe as it may be easily read, by y^e space of 14 dayes.

The opening clause of the law suggests that the governor’s power to issue a marriage license, as it appears in the eighteenth century, might have been a relic of the power granted to any member of the Council in the early days. Such it may have been, but Belknap gives a more convincing explanation. According to him,222 “the granting of these licences was accounted part of the royal prerogative; but this practice ceased at the revolution.” As the authority is not granted explicitly in any statute or governor’s commission, there is every indication that Belknap is correct in stating that it derived from the royal prerogative.

If this was the source of the governor’s power in this particular, the limitation of the license “to either of the ordained Ministers of the Gospel in said Province, and to them only” is more understandable. The law of 1714 allowed “any settled minister residing in New Hampshire” to perform the marriage ceremony if the man and woman had “a sufficient license from the governor.” But the governor appears to have taken care that only ministers of the Church of England might function under the given condition. Of these there were only two in the province — one at Portsmouth, the other at Claremont. Possibly this denominational restriction reflects only the ecclesiastical preference of the Wentworths, for all three governors of that name were Episcopalians. More probably it was established because the governor’s power to issue the license was considered to be a part of the royal prerogative, and the king would be inclined to recognize only “ordained Ministers of the Gospel.”

engraved for the colonial society of massachusetts from the original owned by mr. lawrence shaw mayo

It would be interesting to learn how many New Hampshirites availed themselves of the governor’s license as a means to matrimony. The present document is numbered 246; but whether the numbering runs from the beginning of Governor John Wentworth’s administration or from the beginning of the “custom” is a question.

As colonial typography goes, the printing of this license is unusually handsome. The type is Caslon. In all probability the work was done by Daniel and Robert Fowle of Portsmouth. When printing a volume of the province laws in 1771 the Fowles used a font which appears to have been identical with that from which this document was printed.

1 Mr. Holmes’s paper has been printed in our Transactions, xxvi. 312–322.

2 Boston Records, ii (Second edition).

3 Boston Records, xxxii.

4 Colonial Records, i. 116.

5 Colonial Records, i. 216.

6 Boston Records, ii, Part 2, pp. iii, iv.

7 See our Publications, xxi. 251–254, xv. 43–47.

8 Boston Records, ii, Part 1, p. 71.

9 Suffolk Deeds, I. 162.

10 Superior Court Files, I. 72.

11 Boston Records, II, Part 2, p. 12.

12 J. Winsor, Memorial History of Boston, II. iv, v.

13 Boston Records, II, Part 2, p. iv.

14 Colonial Records, I. 207.

15 Boston Records, II, Part 1, p. 22.

16 Suffolk Deeds, x. 15.

17 Boston Records, xxxii.

18 Id., ii, Part 2, pp. 6, 16, 19, 28, 34.

19 Archæologia Americana, vii. 1.

20 Proper names in my list are spelled as they appear in the printed Book of Possessions.

21 Throughout this paper I have used landmarks of the present in placing the lots which are discussed.

22 The numbering follows the plan already used in the text above: the first number shows the order in which the listing was done; the second, the page in the manuscript volume; and the third, the page in the printed text of the Book of Possessions.

23 H. F. Jenks, “Historical Sketch” in Catalogue of the Boston Public Latin School, 1886, pp. 33–34.

24 The letter, as well as the account of the curriculum sent with it, is in my possession. For Williams, see H. F. Jenks, pp. 31 ff. For Hobart see J. L. Sibley, Biographical Sketches of Harvard Graduates, ii. 235–238.

25 To Professor Norton i am grateful for information as to the “new” methods and the authors who advocated them, as well as for his general comment on the document discussed in this paper.

26 This was the famous Short Introduction to the Latin Tongue: For the Use of the Lower Forms in the Latin School, Being the Accidence Abbridg’d and Compiled in that most easy and accurate Method, wherein the Famous Mr. Ezekiel Cheever taught, etc., first printed in Boston in 1709. For this book, commonly known as Cheever’s Accidence, see G. E. Littlefield, Early Schools and School-Books of New England, pp. 251–253, 255.

27 The Nomenclator, or Nomenclatura, was a small Latin-English vocabulary, long generally used.

28 A book of Latin and English sentences, translated by Charles Hoole, and printed in Boston in 1702. Id., p. 247.

29 Hoole published in 1652 Maturinus Corderius’s School Colloquies, English and Latin. Cf. id., p. 243.

30 This suggests that they were allowed English translations of the books used earlier in the course. Hoole’s Sententiae Pueriles and his Corderius contained the English as well as the Latin text. Cf. notes 4 and 5 above.

31 “The old way of Repitition,” Professor Norton tells me, probably refers to the “Memoriter Recitation,” spoken of by Locke as: “Another thing, very ordinary in the vulgar method of grammar-schools . . . of which I see no use at all . . . That which I mean, and here complain of, is their being forced to learn by heart great parcels of the authors which are taught them.” Thoughts Concerning Education, Boston, 1830, p. 215.

32 “Propr: As in pres:” refers to rules in Lily’s Latin grammar, which was long in use in New England. Cf. Littlefield, pp. 238 ff. See also a passage in John Clarke’s Essay, p. 26, in which he speaks of Lily’s grammar, saying “the common Custom is, to make the Boys construe their Propria quae maribus, Quae genus, and As in praesenti, quite thro’;” and Lily’s Brevissima Institutio, 1651, pp. 12, 47.

33 J. Garretson’s English Exercises for School-Boys to translate into Latin. Littlefield, p. 259.

34 The “x” refers to the marginal notation, indicating that there were enclosed with the account of the curriculum papers illustrating the work done by the students. These papers I have not found.

35 Lucius Florus, the historian.

36 Cf. Littlefield, p. 97.

37 That is, a dialogue making use of phrases found in Godwin.

38 Thomas Godwin’s Romanae Historiae Anthologia. An English Exposition of the Roman Antiquities, etc., the sixteenth edition of which, according to the Dictionary of National Biography, was printed in London in 1696.

39 William Walker published in 1653 his Treatise of English Particles, Shewing Much of the Variety of their Significations and Uses in English: And how to render them into Latine according to the Propriety and Elegancy of that Language. With a Praxis upon the same. See Littlefield, p. 222.

40 Cf. Mark Van Doren, The Poetry of John Dryden, pp. 6–8.

41 Catalogue of the Boston Latin School, 1886, “Catalogue,” pp. 6, 42–47.

42 Catalogue, Appendix, pp. 271–279.

43 H. F. Jenks, “Historical Sketch,” pp. 26–28.

44 In manuscript at the Massachusetts Historical Society. A photostat copy is in the Harvard College Library.

45 H. F. Jenks, “Historical Sketch,” pp. 35–37.

46 Id., pp. 42–45.

47 Id., p. 41 note.

48 B. Wendell, Cotton Mather, p. 35.

49 In March, 1710–11, Cotton Mather wrote in his Diary (ii. 49): “I am now concerned for the Welfare of the great Grammar School of the Town. I would unite Counsils with a learned, pious, honorable Visitor of the School, to introduce diverse good Intentions into it. This among the rest; that Castalio . . . be brought into the school.” “Castalio” was Sébastien Châteillon, 1515–1563, whose Dialogorum Sacrorum Libri Quatuor was for a long time a popular textbook.

50 For Eutropius and the books by John Clarke and William King, see Littlefield, pp. 259, 297, 300, 301.

51 J. F. Colby, Manual of the Constitution of New Hampshire, pp. 80–82.

52 5 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., ii. 9.

53 In the printed version this word appears as “this,” but obviously Belknap intended “his.”

54 5 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., ii. 8.

55 5 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., ii. 450–453.

56 Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., i. 29, 36.

57 The original of this letter is in the Harvard College Library. In 1814, Levi Hedge (1766–1844), who graduated from Harvard in 1792, was Professor of Logic, Ethics, and Metaphysics at the college. In 1827 he became Alford Professor of Natural Religion, Moral Philosophy, and Civil Polity. Parker Cleaveland (1780–1858) graduated from Harvard in 1799 and became in 1805 the first professor of mathematics and natural philosophy at Bowdoin.

58 Probably Stoughton Hall, completed in 1805.

59 New England Quarterly, i. 226–242.

60 The present Faculty Room of University Hall.

61 Boston Journal, April 3, and Boston Courier, April 7, 1828. Shortly after, each of the three upper classes presented Dr. Kirkland with silver plate to the value of $120.

62 Diary of Frederick W. Holland (class of 1831) for April 1 and 2, Harvard Alumni Bulletin, Oct. 13, 1927, p. 73.

63 Remarks concerning the late Dr. Bowditch by the Rev. Dr. Palfrey, with the replies of Dr. Bomditch’s children. Boston, 1840. Also in N. I. Bowditch, Memoir of Nathaniel Bowditch (Cambridge, 1884), pp. 169–172.

64 The MS. is entitled “College History, by Nathaniel Bowditch.” It has been deposited in the Harvard University Archives.

65 2 Massachusetts Historical Society Proceedings, ix. 145–146.

66 Quincy, History of Harvard University, ii. 255. Although there had been persons not active teachers on the Corporation from an early period (see our Publications, xv. pp. ixiii–lxvii), they had almost invariably been ministers. The first distinctly lay and non-resident member of the Corporation, other than the treasurers, was Paul Dudley (1697); there were only two more before the election of John Lowell in 1784, when the lay and non-resident character of the Corporation became fixed, although there were exceptions. Professor Eliphalet Pearson was a member of the Corporation 1800–06, and Rev. James Walker, when a member of the Corporation, was chosen Alford Professor in 1838, and President in 1853. Mr. Justice Story held a law professorship and a fellowship in the Corporation simultaneously, 1829–45, and E. W. Gurney was elected fellow in 1886 when professor of history.

67 2 Jefferson MSS., Library of Congress, lxxxvii. 168.

68 Eliphalet Pearson then resigned both chair and fellowship to found the Andover Theological Seminary as a Calvinist haven.

69 Quincy, ii. 311.

70 Josiah Quincy, History of Harvard University, ii. 333–335.

71 John L. Sibley, MS. Private Journal (Massachusetts Historical Society), i. 5.

72 “Government-ology,” in MS. records of the class of 1815.

73 Massachusetts Historical Society Proceedings, x. 289.

74 Statistics compiled from the Faculty Records by Mr. Clifford K. Shipton. Ninety-three students entered in the calendar year of 1820. Of the non-New England element, there were one each from New York, Pennsylvania, and Alabama, two each from Maryland, Washington, D. C., Mississippi, and Louisiana, three from Virginia, and eleven from South Carolina. The proportion of Southern students in Harvard College has never been so high as in Kirkland’s day, and the only period that approached it was 1853–55. Twenty-five per cent of those entering in 1820 were Southerners. In Kirkland’s day, however, Harvard had very few students from the Middle or Western States; not more than four from the former in any one year, and in some years none; and only one Westerner in his entire administration.

75 Statistics compiled by Mr. Shipton. The graph representing five-year average number of graduating classes at Harvard is crossed by that of Yale for the first time in 1745–19. Harvard pulled ahead in 1760–64, 1785–89, and 1815–19; then Yale gained rapidly and remained well ahead until after the Civil War. Princeton was below both Harvard and Yale until 1835–39, when it passed Harvard, but was left behind ten years later.

76 Ripley MSS. Massachusetts Historical Society.

77 2 Massachusetts Historical Society Proceedings, ix. 150–151.

78 The Rebelliad, or Terrible Transactions at the Seat of the Muses. Boston, 1842.

79 The President, resident Professors and principal Tutors — corresponding to the modern Faculty of Arts and Sciences. It is referred to as “The Government” in Dodge’s narrative, below.

80 Among those who later defended Thomas Dorr when he was generally regarded as an outlaw were his classmate John Preston, then in the New Hampshire Senate, and George Bancroft, a tutor in the college during his senior year. Bancroft’s letter on behalf of Dorr was characterized by George Ticknor Curtis as seldom surpassed in “Studied insinuation” and “degree of depravity.” The Merits of Thomas W. Dorr and George W. Bancroft, by a Citizen of Massachusetts, Boston, 1845, p. 31.

81 “By Pickering Dodge” (MS. note by John L. Sibley, the Librarian when this document was received).

82 The Faculty Records (MS.) state for August 16, 1820: “The immediate Govt, having received information, that the Freshman Class were taking measures to have a supper at the Neponsit Hotel on the evening of their public examination: Voted, That the President be requested to take such measures, as he shall judge expedient to prevent its taking place. The President accordingly informed Blake 2d, Bryan, Bronson, Loring, Robinson & Amory, — with injunction to communicate the information to others of the Class, that the proposed entertainment is forbidden by the Law iv. Ch 5. — is a violation of an express order of the Govt. that Class suppers be not allowed, — and that should it take place the government will consider it as a high misdemeanor.” Faculty Records, ix. 234. This is the prohibition referred to: “To prevent those tumults and disorders, which are frequent at entertainments, and to guard against extravagance and needless expenses, no student shall make any festive entertainments in the College, or its vicinity, except at Commencement, and at public Exhibitions, with the permission of the President.”

83 Charles T. Haskell of Charleston, S. C. He was already well known to the faculty, in July having narrowly escaped suspension for having made “a disorderly and indecent noise to the disturbance and dishonor of the College.” On Aug. 7 he was charged with being “prodigal & dissipated” and reprimanded by the President. — Faculty Records, ix. 233.

84 William Amory (1804–88). There is a memoir of him by Oliver Wendell Holmes in 2 Massachusetts Historical Society Proceedings, iv. 414–417.

85 Frederick Bronson of New York.

86 Thomas Jefferson Bryan of Philadelphia.

87 The song is printed as it is given in the manuscript, written from memory nearly forty years after the verses were composed.

88 Levi Hedge, college professor of Logic and Metaphyeics.

89 Rev. John S. Popkin, D.D., professor of Greek, a popular teacher and college character, reputed to be the last man to wear a queue.

90 Ira H. S. Blanchard, tutor in Latin.

91 Complete failure, in the college slang of the day.

92 Sibley notes that this was the nickname of Dr. Henry Ware.

93 Aug. 17. “The Govt, received information that the Freshman Class had a Supper at the Neponsit Hotel last night. — The President, Prof. Frisbie & Mr. Emerson were appointed a committee to examine into the subject.” — Faculty Records, ix. 234.

94 They were rusticated under the charge of country parsons. On Oct. 25, “A letter was read from the Father of Haskell who was suspended in August, requesting that he may be permitted to pass the winter at home with his family in South Carolina. Voted that the request be not granted.” — Faculty Records, ix. 234–5, 240–1.

95 “It appeared that the door between the dining halls of the Sophomore & Freshman Classes was burst open from the Sophomores’ Hall, — that Articles of furniture from the tables were thrown through, and great disorder produced.” Faculty Records, ix. 241. Commons were then on the ground floor of University Hall.

96 Nathaniel B. Blunt of New York, Martin Gay of Hingham, later an eminent physician, John Clarke Lee of Salem. Both Lee and Gay were later fellows of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

97 Robert T. Dunbar of Natchez, Mississippi. The split can still be seen in one of the stone steps to the north entry of Hollis, not Stoughton Hall.

98 The Faculty, after suspending Dunbar, Voted “That any student found to have a cannon-ball or bomb shell in his possession shall be fined not less than one dollar.” — Faculty Records, ix. 242. “Bat,” according to Sibley’s note, was Elisha Fuller (class of 1815), a resident graduate and proctor. I cannot identify “Professor Downing.”

99 Nathaniel Ingersoll Bowditch, son of the Navigator.

100 James Hayward, then tutor and later Hollis Professor of Mathematics.

101 “Nov. 4. It appeared that Greenough, a member of the Sophomore Class, on the evening of the 3rd Instant was guilty of an assault upon the windows of a College Officer; wherefore voted, That Greenough be rusticated. It appeared that Marsh was a principal Agent in throwing down heavy Balls from the upper story of one of the Colleges, accompanied with a deliberate insult to a College officer, wherefore voted.—That Marsh be dismissed.” — Faculty Records, ix. 242. John Greenough of Roxbury returned to the class below and took his degree in 1824. John Marsh of Danvers was readmitted and obtained his degree in course. He moved to the West, became one of the greatest physicians in the country, and took a part in the early revolutions and political intrigues in California. (Information from George D. Lyman, M.D., of San Francisco.)

102 “Nov. 5. Petitions were received from the several Classes of Students requesting that the punishments inflicted yesterday on Greenough & Marsh might be mitigated. — Voted, That the petitions be not granted. — It appeared that Adams, Bullock, Cutts, Harris, Elwyn, Locke, Roy, Taliaferro & Tayloe on the afternoon of Nov 4. assembled in the College yard, and united in a combination to absent themselves from evening prayers: — and that afternoon joined with others in a disorder in the Commons Hall to express resentment at the punishment inflicted on two of their fellow students; by which conduct they became liable to the same punishment, which had been inflicted on those students; — but whereas the Government are willing to try the experiment of a milder course for the purpose of restoring order to the College; therefore voted, that [Obadiah R.] Harris [of Sparta, Ga.] & Tayloe, appearing on evidence to have been conspicuous in the foregoing irregularities, be dismissed.” — Faculty Records, ix. 243.

103 For example, Caleb Stark (1823) gets into trouble for “poking Danforth with a cane, repeating this after Danforth had lifted the fire shovel in a menacing manner; upon which Danforth being very angry struck Stark with violence on the hand with the edge of the shovel.” — Faculty Records, ix. 244.

104 Feb. 20. “It appeared that Bronson and Bryan, who returned from suspension of Friday last, did on the Monday evening following go into the College Hall, tho’ neither of them board in commons, & that they were there & then cheered by their class, by hussas and clapping of hands; whereupon voted, that Bronson & Bryan be reprimanded by the President for the disorder of which they appeared to be the voluntary occasion. Voted, That in case of any disorder occurring on the departure of persons punished from College, or on their return, the Government, as authorized by Ch vii. Art xi of the College laws, will select for censure the persons so departing or returning, on whose account the disorder takes place.” Feb. 26, “Voted, That the communication of the above vote be suspended to some future time.” — Faculty Records, ix. 246.

105 “March 8. It appeared that several members of the sophomore class had been insulted by some of their classmates on account of the part thay had taken in favor of order, in the disorders of the last Term. Voted, That the President be requested to remonstrate with those Students, who are understood to have had a part in the insult, and to assure them, that unless they are discontinued, they will be subject to punishment.” — Faculty Records, ix. 249.

106 Mar. 13–16. “It was represented to the Government, that a considerable number of the Sophomore class had for some time been subjects of gross insult and abuse from their classmates. At the desire of some of the persons aggrieved, an inquiry was instituted by the Government, and the result was, that It appeared, that Sturgis and Dodge, members of the sophomore class had taken an active part in a series of insults directed towards a number of their fellow students on account of their having refused to join in a combination against the authority of the College — whereupon — Voted, that Sturgis be suspended to the 14th day of Dec. next, to pursue his studies under the care of Rev Dr Sanders of Medfield, Note — It was found that Sturgis had a list of the names of the students referred to, suspended in a frame in his room; and that he was one of the first to preserve and circulate a scurrilous and abusive libel of the same students, and that he joined with another in destroying the original copy. — Voted Also, That Dodge be suspended to the 14th December next, to pursue his studies under the care of Rev Mr White of Dedham. Note, it was found that Dodge was the first to procure a scurrilous & abusive libel of several of his fellow-students, which had been posted in a public place, –that he took several copies of it, and destroyed the original for the purpose of concealing the Author: that he distinguished himself afterward by his zeal & activity in communicating the same in a printed form among his classmates; and also by singing it in his room after notice has been given from the Government, that unless every species of insult should be immediately discontinued, exemplary punishment would be inflicted on the offenders.” —Faculty Records, ix. 249–250.

107 The first edition of “The Convention” poem is also interleaved with the Dodge MS.

108 Jackson Gutterson of Milford, N. H.

109 William L. Chaplin of Groton.

110 James Augustus Kendall of Plymouth.

111 William Gordon Prince of Boston.

112 Henry Augustus Bruce of Boston.

113 James Trask Woodbury of Francestown, N. H. A brother of Levi Woodbury. Afterwards minister of Acton, and a representative in the General Court.

114 Phineas S. Denny, A.M., of Leicester. Afterward changed his name to Thomas.

115 Wendell Bayard Davis of Sandwich.

116 Thomas Gray of Roxbury.

117 William Samuel Emerson of Kennebunk, Maine; M.D. Bowdoin.

118 Samuel Horatio Stearns of Bedford. “It was a principle with him, while a member of the university, that a college rebellion is never wise or right.” William Augustus Stearns, in Life and Select Discourses of Rev. Samuel H. Stearns, p. 28.

119 Ebenezer Dorr Child of Boston later changed his name to Edward Vernon Childe. Took his degree in course and did notable propaganda for the Union in Europe in 1860.

120 William Parsons Lunt of Dorchester, later S.T.D.; Instructor in Mathematics, Overseer, and member of the Massachusetts Historical Society. Chandler Robbins in a commemorative discourse for Lunt (Boston, 1857) says that he applied his full attention to study and took no part in student activity. Lunt published a tract on Moral Education (Quincy 1838), and his daughter published a volume of Gleanings from his prose and verse writings (Boston 1874).

121 John Wright of Westford.

122 Mar. 26 “Great disorder having taken place at the Declamation last week and the preceding, Voted, That information be given to the Sophomore & Freshman classes, that those, who attend the Declamation are required to sit in their proper places, and the Monitors to take notice who are present: Also, that the classes be cautioned to be orderly in their deportment, as the condition of their attending.” “Voted, That the President be requested to make an enquiry of members of the several Societies, who were out on the night of Friday last, for the purpose of ascertaining who were concerned in an outrage on the room of a College Officer, — Mr. Fuller.” — Faculty Records, ix. 250–251.

123 April 2. “It appeared that Walker, a member of the Sophomore Class was guilty of conducting himself with indecorum at the Declamation on Saturday, March 31st, and also on the same occasion of offering a gross insult to a fellow student: (It was that of hissing him when in the act of declaming,) And whereas Walker had before been generally negligent of his studies, and disorderly in his conduct, — therefore, Voted, That Walker be, and he accordingly hereby is dismissed from College.” — Faculty Records, ix. 251. May 1. From the report of the Overseers’ visiting committee: “That in regard to conduct and discipline there have been, since the last semi annual visitation, some disorders and disturbances of a serious nature, which required the infliction of several severe punishments. Order and subordination have however been restored, and the College is now in a good state of tranquillity.” — Overseers Records (MS), vi. 395. “May 5. It appeared, that the Engine Company met last evening at Tyng & Tucker’s room [Stoughton 15], and were riotous and noisy. —The officer of the Entry, Mr Blanchard, sent for the occupants of the room. Tucker came immediately, Tyng not till ten minutes afterward. —The noise, (blowing of a horn) was but partially stopped by the injunction of the officer. Other noise in the mean time increased. —The officer then went up himself to still the noise. —An attempt was made to prevent his being heard by loud noise and blowing of ye horn. Soon afterward they dispersed; but as they went down, violence wm committed on ye door of the officer by kicking or striking with a stick; and soon after, the window of the officer was broken. It was by Tyng’s invitation that the meeting was at his room. —Voted, that Tyng be fined for a riotous meeting at his room, 5.00. Voted, that the Engine Company be abolished.” — Faculty Records, ix. 253–254. Two days later Tyng was rusticated for using “highly insolent and offensive language” when ordered not to split wood in the entry.

124 Cornelius F. Coolidge of Dorchester, and Hampden Cutts of Portsmouth, N. H. “May 17. It appeared that Coolidge, a member of ye Sophomore Class, was concerned in producing a violent and dangerous explosion of Gunpowder, which took place in one of the College Entries on the evening of the 15th instant, wherefore Voted, that Coolidge be rusticated. It appeared that Cutts, a member of the Sophomore Class was guilty of knowing, aiding, and abetting the production of a violent & dangerous explosion of Gunpowder, etc. —, wherefore Voted, That Cutts be dismissed from College.” — Faculty Records, ix. 256.

125 John H. Dexter of Boston. He did not return to college. Dodge’s statement is confirmed by the Faculty Records. “Note. Dexter’s punishment was mitigated in consideration of his voluntary confession, & because ye explosion appeared to have been of a less dangerous kind, than had been supposed.” — Faculty Records, ix. 256.

126 George Peabody of Salem.

127 “July 16. Blunt was reported to have been again guilty of breaking open one of ye doors of University Hall by bursting the Bar — etc.” “Aug. 1. It appeared that Blunt, a member of the Sophomore Class, on account of a series of disorderly acts, was some time since told by the Government, that any repitition of acts of disorder would be punished by dismission from College: It further appeared, that he had since in several instances been guilty of acts of disorder, and particularly, that on July 20th without leave for the purpose, he was guilty of passing the day in shooting; — Wherefore, Voted, That Blunt be dismissed from College.” “Aug. 1. It appeared that Bruce, a member of the Sophomore Class, on the pretence of sickness, obtained leave of absence from the President; when enstead of going to his Uncle’s in Boston, who has ye care of him, he went to the house of Dr Bossuet, where he passed several days, not applying for medical advice, nor appearing to the Dr to be there on account of sickness — wherefore, Voted, That the Connections of Bruce be dissolved.” — Faculty Records, ix. 262, 267–268. He was afterwards readmitted and took his degree in course.

128 Robert J. Park (sic in Faculty Records) of Framingham. Never took a degree. Oct. 8. “It appeared that Park, a member of the Junior Class, did at the public Declamation on the 5th Instant, speak a piece which was not approved by the Professor of Rhetoric, in a manner producing, and evidently intended to produce disorder: It appeared also, yt he had in past time been irregular in his conduct, and neglectful of his studies, & had been admonished by more than one officer of the College; and the immediate Government of the College being satisfied, that his continuance at the University affords no reasonable prospect of benefit to himself, and is prejudicial to others, — therefore Voted, that Park be dismissed from College.” — Faculty Records, ix. 277–278.

129 July 18. “Great irregularity and disorder took place yesterday being the day of ye valedictory. — The Class marched in procession thro’ the several Streets of Cambridge, many in a state of intoxication, and conducting with gross indecency and insult as they passed the houses of some of the Officers; and in the College yard insulting the whole Authority by dancing around the rebellion tree with the vaunt of friendship & rebellion. Voted, That a Committee be appointed to report what measures shall be adopted for the purpose of preventing irregularities on future occasions. — To report a week from next Monday. — Prof Hedge, Prof Farrar, Mr [Caleb] Cushing.” — Faculty Records, ix. 263. This committee decided that in the future there must be no procession, no class dinner, no music, and no guests at Class Day, no holiday for the other classes, and that the Seniors must leave town directly after dinner. — Faculty Records, ix. 265–266.

130 Andrew A. Locke of Hingham.

131 Alfred Langdon-Elwyn, of Portsmouth, N. H., took his degree in course. He was the originator of the Pennsylvania Agricultural Society and farm school, president of it and of the Pennsylvania institute for the blind, the training school for feeble minded, and the society for prevention of cruelty to animals. “It appeared that Elwyn, a member of ye Junior Class, notwithstanding measures employed by the Government for his reformation, continued to be negligent of his studies, and guilty of habitual indecorum in his deportment; and that was particularly guilty of profaneness at an exercise in the presence of his Class; and he having been heretofore informed, that unless his habits of study and conduct were corrected, he would be dismissed from College: — Therefore, Voted, — that Elwyn be dismissed.” — Faculty Records, ix. 296.

132 James P. Roy of Matthews County, Virginia. Feb. 25. “It was understood by the Govt. Jan. 21. that Dunbar & Roy were contracting debts at the Marlboro’ Hotel. — Prest. & Prof. Hodge were appointed a Committee to make inquiry and to take measures to have the law complied with. Feb. 26. It appeared that Roy, a member of the Junior Class, having been directed, on the 21st of January, to leave a public house in Boston, where he had been boarding, neglected to comply with the direction, but returning immediately after the direction had been given to him, remained there till the end of the vacation, — wherefore, Voted, — That Roy be dismissed.” — Faculty Records, rx. 289.

133 May 14. “Voted, That the Officers of the military company viz Captain, Lieut: & Ensign be repremanded for entertainment at Fresh Pond Hotel contrary to law; and that they be informed; that a repetition of the offence will cause the company to be dissolved.” — Faculty Records, ix. 296. “July 13. In consequence of the circumstances which attended the visit of the military Company to Capt Shaw at Charlestown June 29th. Voted, That the liberty of going out of town on private invitation be withdrawn from the Company. — Voted, That the name of Manning, on account of his agency in the transaction above alluded to, be struck off from the Performances at Commencement. Voted, That the President and Professor Everett be requested to inform Capt Hall of the measures which the Govt. have taken on the above subject; and also of the representations under which liberty was obtained by the Company to visit Capt Sham.” — Faculty Records, ix. 305–306.

134 James Dandridge Halyburton of Richmond, judge of the U.S. District Court of Eastern Virginia, 1847–61. July 1. “Halyburton, — his case deferred, & Mr Folsom to enquire respecting his remarkable absences.” Faculty Records, ix. 300. Dec. 16. “The Father of Halyburton applying to have his son take up his connexions and join the law School, Voted, That the Government do not consent to it.” — Faculty Records, x. 12.

135 Charles Folsom (class of 1813), Tutor in Latin.

136 “Nov. 22. A disorder took place on the 21. at evening prayers, chiefly in the Senior Class by repeated noise with the feet during the reading of the Scriptures. The President, Dr Ware, Prof. Everett & Mr. [George] Otis were appointed a committee to make inquiry on the subject. Several students were sent for and examined. A report was made to the Government who resolved to apply the law of selection. Farley 1, Farley 2, Dodge and Crowninshield were selected. — Then Voted, That information be given, that certain Students are actually selected for punishment, — who will be dismissed, if the disorder shall be repeated; but that if not, the punishment will not take effect. — NB. The disorder was not repeated.” — Faculty Records, x. 10.

137 John Paul Robinson of Dover, New Hampshire. He had already (March 25) been “admonished for irregular conduct and subsequent improper language in the presence of the Government.” — Faculty Records, x. 22.

138 Solomon Pearson Miles, Tutor in Mathematics.

139 Eben Farley of Boston, April 23. “It appeared that between 10 & 11 o’clock the last evening there was a bonfire in the field back of the shrubbery behind University Hall, and that, notwithstanding the public notice given by the President a few weeks since Farley 1 was seen going toward the fire, — wherefore, Voted, That Farley 1st be dismissed.” — Faculty Records, x. 26.

140 Robinson was to speak last, giving a fifteen minute oration in English. Woodbury and Borland were allowed sixteen minutes for “a philosophical disputation. On the advantages arising from the division of mankind into independent communities.” — Faculty Records, x. 22.

141 The Robinson affair is thus related in the Faculty Records and Waste Book:

April 9. “Robinson of the Senior Class charged with having been dissolute. Voted, That Robinson be dismissed — 6 yeas, 5 nays. Voted, That the Sentence be not immediately executed — 6 nays, 5 yeas.”

April 11. “Voted, That the above sentence be executed — 6 to 4. — Reconsidered. Voted, That Robinson be dismissed — 7 to three.” — Waste Book of 1823–24. “April 11. It appeared to the satisfaction of the Govt, that Robinson, a member of the Senior Class had been guilty of such loose and immoral conduct as to render him an unfit member of the society, wherefore, Voted, — That Robinson be dismissed. Voted, That the above sentence be communicated on Monday next. Voted, That the above sentence be not carried into execution if Robinson shall choose to withdraw from College.” — Faculty Records, x. 25.

“April 14. The vote for the dismission of Robinson was reconsidered by the casting vote of the President. Yeas, Pres., Prof Hedge, Dr Popkin, Prof Willard, Prof Everett, Mr Miles. Nays, Ware, Channing, Folsom, Otis, Hayward.” — Waste Book.

“Voted, That Robinson be informed, that under present circumstances, the Govt, do not take any further notice of his character and conduct, except, that all further assistance will be withheld from him, and that the Performance assigned to him for the Exhibition is withdrawn.” — Faculty Records, x. 25.

142 George Henry Calvert of Prince George County, Maryland. The year following his expulsion Calvert traveled in Europe and studied in German universities, publishing an interesting account of his experiences, First Years in Europe, 1866. He published two other later collections of his writings, Miscellany of Verse and Prose, 1840, and Brief Essays and Brevities, 1874.

143 “Your Committee attended an Exhibition in which the performers, who were of the senior and junior classes acquitted themselves remarkably well, & gave honorable display of talents & attainments. The gratification however, which the occasion afforded, received however an interruption, in consequence of the expression of dislike, which followed the last speaker, though his oratory and what he delivered deserved high commendation. But your Committee learned afterward, that this was the ebullition of that unpleasant discordance and jealousy in the senior, to which we have already referred.” — Overseers’ Records, vi. 488.

144 “May 1. At a meeting — Voted That Sturgis & Robinson be dismissed. [May] 2. At a meeting, Voted, To reconsider the vote as respects Sturgis. Yea: Miles, Otis, Everett, Channing, Popkin, President. Nay; Hay ward, Bancroft, Folsom, Hedge, Ware. Voted, To reconsider the vote as respects Robinson Yea: Bancroft, Everett, Popkin, Hedge, Ware, President. Nay; Miles, Hayward, Otis, Folsom, Channing. Voted, That the last vote be reconsidered, and that agreebly to the vote passed yesterday, — Robinson be dismissed.” — Faculty Waste Book for 1823–24. The formal record agrees.

145 “Professor Channing ordered them to go to their rooms. I heard him.” MS. note by John L. Sibley (Class of 1825).

146 “At a meeting ½ past 2. P.M. It appeared that Locke and Walker 1. at the public declamation, were actively concerned in a riot together with a violent assault on one of the students of the college: — it appeared also, that at the same pub. declamation Dodge 1 & Lee were actively concerned in a riot together with a violent assault on one of the students of the College; and subsequently of contumacious resistance of a college officer, — wherefore, Voted, That Locke, Walker, Dodge, & Lee be expelled.” — Faculty Records, x. 27.

147 The faculty then met and voted the expulsion of four more Seniors (Faculty Records, x. 27), but before the axe could fall on these victims, the occurrences of the next morning precipitated the general debacle.

148 The Rebellion Tree was a large elm on the Yard side of Hollis. For the part played by this tree in the Rebellion of 1818, see Josiah Quincy, Figures of the Past (1883), pp. 20–21.

149 Ellis G. Loring and Daniel Weld of Boston.

150 “It appeared that the students named below, members of the Senior Class, were engaged in a combination to resist the authority of the college, — wherefore Voted that they be dismissed.” — Faculty Records, x. 28. For the names see text.

151 I have added the date when those who subsequently received a Harvard degree, obtained it. The others do not appear in the Quinquennial Catalogue.

152 June 2. “Blunt is allowed to take up his connections but cannot have a regular dismission, — having staid away from College without permission, and giving as a reason for leaving college, that he had pledged himself to the combination.” — Faculty Records, x. 32.

153 “Hodges, after receiving the Sentence of dismission, was guilty of gross profaneness, and acts of violence in the College Yard. He was sent for by the Govt, and cautioned by the President against repeating such acts, as might expose him to higher punishment, and also to a civil process for assault and battery, and trespass. He promised to behave with decorum, yet returning to the College Yard, was again guilty of gross and loud profaneness.” — Faculty Records, x. 28.

154 A mistake. Newell was not dismissed, and took his degree in course.

155 Charles Pickering of Salem; he became an eminent naturalist, a member of the American Philosophical Society, and a Fellow of the American Academy. His Chronological History of Plants, published posthumously, contains a memoir.

156 Aug. 18. “The Government were informed that Child had taken a journey for his health, hoping to be excused, on the ground of ill health, from performing his part at Commencement. — Voted, That his excuse be not allowed. Voted, That Child’s name be stricken off from the list of performances for Commencement. Voted, That Tayloe be informed, that he is required to be present, and to perform his part at Commencement. Aug. 27. Chaplin having neglected to perform studies which were required of him and giving no satisfactory reason for the neglect, is not recomended for a degree. Bronson & Tayloe having neglected to prepare for performing the parts assigned them for Commencement, the recommendation for a Degree with their class is withheld from them.” — Faculty Records, x. 50–1.

157 Harvard College Papers (MS.), x. 58.

158 Faculty Records, x. 81 (May 29, 1823). The draft from which we print the letter is in x. 34–41.

159 A distinct case of presidential vacillation occurred on August 19, 1825, when the father of Francis Hilliard petitioned that his son be admitted to a degree. The Government voted, 6 to 5, that the petition be granted. The President then withdrew his name from the vote, leaving the faculty equally divided, and Hilliard did not get his degree until 1842.—Faculty Records, x. 100.

160 Nathaniel Bowditch, College History (MS.), pp. 94–95.

161 Certain Professors gave lectures which upper classmen were compelled to attend with their bodies, but not their brains, as they were not examined in the subject of the lectures, and did no reading in connection with them. When Ticknor tried examining the students on his lectures, many refused to be examined, and the Professor was unable to do anything about it. Ticknor’s Letters, pp. 43, 44.

162 George Ticknor, Remarks on Changes Lately Proposed or Adopted in Harvard University, p. 6.

163 There is a significant reply of the Faculty to the Overseers’ question: “What are the usual bodily exercises and amusements of the students, and what time is allowed for them?”

“The military company, composed of about twelve Seniors and from thirty-five to forty Juniors, practise military drill exercises in the intervals between study hours from the first of May to the end of October. A limited number attend a dancing school in the evening during a part of the year; and another small portion of the scholars take lessons in fencing, which, however, the Government rather discourage as being expensive, and causing too much interruption of study. In the Spring and Autumn there is occasional playing at ball; but there is a want of some system for bodily exercise. Individuals make a point of brisk walking daily; but a large number, as is too common with persons of sedentary pursuits, are negligent in this respect.” — Report of a Committee of the Overseers of Harvard College, January 6, 1825 (Cambridge, 1825), part III. p. 47. In 1826 the Corporation established an open-air gymnasium on the Delta (the site of Memorial Hall) and placed Charles Follen in charge. Our late associate Edward M. Hartwell has written an account of this first college gymnasium in America, in Circulars of Information of the Bureau of Education, No. 5 (1885), p.23.

164 Hitherto, and since the earliest days of the College, the long vacation had been in winter, in order to enable poor students to teach a district school. By 1824, very few were availing themselves of the privilege. There is a delightful account of this undergraduate school teaching in Frothingham’s George Ripley.

165 The Code did not, however, adopt an interesting suggestion of the Story committee, that a board of three officers resident in each college hall should have sole jurisdiction over the discipline of that building, unless the offence were serious enough to merit expulsion.

166 The suggestion of the Story committee that each department should have the right to nominate persons for promotion to vacancies within its membership was not adopted, but each department was given limited right to regulate the studies within its sphere.

167 Statutes and Laws of University in Cambridge, 1825. Chapter vi, p. 19, no. 61.

168 Mr. Ticknor’s Remarks on Changes in Harvard College, p. 40.

169 Only resident professors and the more important tutors were included in the Immediate Government, or Faculty. Ticknor lived in Boston, as the terms of the Smith chair did not require residence at Cambridge.

170 This was one of the objections that Andrews Norton made against the Overseers’ report (Remarks on a Report of a Committee, by one lately a member of the Immediate Government, Cambridge, 1824).

171 Ticknor’s Letters (H. U. Archives, 1816–28, fol. 42.; cf. 47, 48, 56.) Kirkland is hardly mentioned in Ticknor’s Letters and Journals, but much later Ticknor wrote: “President Kirkland will always be remembered by those who knew him, not only for the richness and originality of his mind and for his great perspicacity, but for the kindliness of his nature.” Life of William Prescott, p. 14, ii.

172 Cazneau Palfrey (1826) in Harvard Register, ii. 175 (1880). On April 22, 1823, two Freshmen were rusticated for “an assault on the windows of Mr. Bancroft” — the future historian. The next day Mr. Bancroft bowed to the unanimous request of the Freshmen “to change the mode of their instruction according to their wishes,” upon which the sentence over the two window-breakers was revoked.—Faculty Records, x. 26. This was not the only time Mr. Tutor Bancroft’s windows were broken. Cf. Edward Jarvis (1826), Ms. Autobiography, p. 5; J. S. Bassett, The Middle Group of American Historians, p. 145; Harvard Graduates’ Magazine, vi. 17.

173 Henry Ware et al., To the Reverend and Honorable the Corporation of Harvard University (Cambridge, 1824, pp. 30). Professor Channing was the only member of the Faculty who did not sign.

174 Quincy, History of Harvard University, chapter xiv.

175 Quincy, History of Haward University, chapter xxxv; and pamphlets there cited. Ticknor, Remarks, pp. 11–32. The case for the teachers is best stated in Andrews Norton’s Speech delivered before the Overseers of Harvard College, February 3, 1825, in behalf of the Resident Instructers [sic], Boston, 1825.

176 Bowditch, College History, p. 71; Faculty Records, x. 117–19; Corporation Records, x. 856. “Several of the Faculty made report [that Law 61 has] occasioned disorders and dissatisfaction, without perceptibly tending to increase scholarship, and has occasioned complaint among parents as well as teachers.” — Report of Visiting Committee of Overseers, Jan. 18, 1827, Overseers’ Records, vii. 335.

177 Quincy, ii. 369–70; Faculty Records, x. 134–7; Bowditch charges (College History, p. 13) that the President tried to railroad a repeal of Law 61 through the Corporation at the close of a meeting, when most of the members were departing. The law was suspended Nov. 27, 1826, and its modification consented to by the Overseers Feb. 1, 1827.

178 Ticknor to Kirkland, Oct. 4, 1825. Ticknor Letters, fol. 48, 49, criticizing the President.

179 Vote of Jan. 4, 1826. —Faculty Records, x. 116.

180 Ticknor wanted to abolish the division into Freshman, Sophomore, etc., classes, “that the whole course be thrown open as in some foreign universities.” — Overseers’ Records, vii. 336; Ticknor’s Letters, 51. This was effected by the course system and free électives in the Eliot administration, classes being retained only as a social unit.

181 Charles Follen, the gifted German scholar and patriot; Francis Sales, for French and Spanish; and Pietro Bachi, for Italian and Spanish.

182 Life, Letters, and Journals of George Ticknor, i. 365–69; Ticknor’s MS. report of June 5, 1828, in Reports to Overseers, i. 67–69. The first presidential annual report (for 1825–6, Cambridge, 1827) contains a most interesting and detailed tabular view, showing the number of students in each section, the books studied, and comparative progress.

183 Report of a Committee of the Overseers, January 6, 1825, Part I. pp. 17–19. (Cambridge, 1825.)

184 Quincy, ii. 360.

185 See his memoir by Charles K. Bolton in Massachusetts Historical Society Proceedings, xlvii. 529–34.

186 See above, p. 61.

187 John L. Sibley, Private Journal (MS.), i. 3.

188 Bowditch, College History, p. 6; the corporation records were so badly kept at this period — as Bowditch complained — that without his remarks one could not understand the Corporation notes on this subject; e.g. College Records, x. 856, 858.

189 College Records, x. 856,; 1827–36, pp. 29–31.

190 Bowditch, p. 16, et. seq.; College Records, x. 855; 1827–36, p. 31.

191 Bowditch, pp. 22–31, 48–53; College Records, 1827–36, p. 31. Charles Sanders, the new Steward, “tells the students, when on a bill of seventy dollars they bring him 12 cents instead of 12½, that it will do this time, but that it is not what they owe him. The half cent he will sometimes give up, but he will hang on exceedingly hard for three-quarters of one.” Letter of John O. Sargent (1830), May 22, 1828, Harvard College Library.

192 “There was no coal burnt when I was in College” (John L. Sibley of the class of 1825, Private Journal, i. 7). Within five years the use of coal in grates became common.

193 Bowditch, College History, pp. 28–30; Overseers’ Records, vii. 412; Josiah Quincy, Figures of the Past (1883), p. 41; College Records, 1827–36, pp. 17, 56.

194 New by-laws for the Corporation were adopted April 12, 1827, and appear at the head of a new book of Corporation Records (College Records, 1827–36) kept by F. C. Gray, which is in marked contrast to the former haphazard records kept by Dr. Kirkland in loose sheets and small blank books. Cf. Quincy, History of Harvard University, ii. 367.

195 Their report, as adopted by the Corporation, is in Overseers’ Records, vii. 405–17.

196 Bowditch, College History, pp. 68–72; College Records, 1827–36, pp. 3–10, 35, 54–58. No new Rumford Professor was appointed until 1834, or Royall Professor until 1829. The emoluments of these chairs were so inconsiderable that they could only be held by non-residents who had other occupations; Ticknor consented to remain (much to the President’s disappointment, says Bowditch, p. 73) although his salary was reduced to $600. Dr. Bigelow retained the chair of Materia Medics in the Medical School. — George E. Ellis, Memoir of Jacob Bigelow (Cambridge, 1880, reprinted from Massachusetts Historical Society Proceedings).

197 College History, pp. 70–75, 84; College Records, 1827–36, p. 12.

198 College Records, 1827–36, pp. 37–42, 49, 51, 57.

199 Letter of John O. Sargent (class of 1830), May 22, 1828, Harvard College Library.

200 College Records, x. 461; 1827–36, p. 54.

201 Ticknor’s Letters, fol. 90

202 College Records, 1827–36, p. 60.

203 Id., p. 62.

204 The only reference to this in the Corporation Records is: “The Treasurer laid before the Board a communication from the Steward. Voted That the Steward be authorized to defer fitting up the recitation rooms for the modern languages until the vacation before Commencement.” — College Records, 182736, p. 65.

205 College Papers (MSS.), Second Series, ii. 236; Bowditch, pp. 126–27.

206 College Papers (MSS.), Second Series, ii. 236.

207 See page 56, note 2.

208 Quincy, ii. 371.

209 2 Massachusetts Historical Society Proceedings, ix. 151–52.

210 Our Publications, xv. 37, 197. Cf., xx. 113 note.

211 xv. 21.

212 xxv. 252.

213 A single copy only is extant of the 1643 broadside presently to be mentioned; of the 1648 edition of the Colony Laws; of The Present State of the New-English Affairs, 1689 (cf. our Publications, ix. 421, x. 310–320); and of Publick Occurrences Both Forreign and Domestick, 1690 (ix. 421, x. 314). Moreover, all these copies have come to light only in recent years. And of course, of many books and broadsides known to have been printed no copies are extant.

214 Mather Papers, p. 516. Cf. our Publications, xxv. 244–253.

215 Our Publications, iv. 295, 297–298.

216 Massachusetts Colony Records, ii. 22.

217 Our Publications, xvii. 116. In 1905 Robert F. Roden, under the date of “1643 (?)” gave the title. “[Capital Laws of Massachusetts Bay. Cambridge, Stephen Daye, 1643],” and said: “This is the ‘Body of Liberties,’ the first code, prepared by Nathaniel Ward. The Cambridge edition is referred to in the preface of ‘New England’s Jonas,’ London, 1647; but no copy is extant” (Carnbridge Press, 1638–1692, p. 146). Roden was in error in calling it the Body of Liberties.

218 An obvious misprint for “Alley.”

219 See the illustration facing p. 116.

220 Acts and Laws of New-Hampshire (Portsmouth, 1771), p. 51. 13 Anne, Cap. xxxviii.

221 New Hampshire State Papers, i. 396–397.

222 Belknap, History of New Hampshire, in. 280.

223 See note 67, p. 147.

224 The names of women who instructed “young ladies” and “Misses” in reading, writing, spelling, and needlework, and of men who taught only dancing, fencing, or singing (“psalmody”) are omitted.

225 Notes referring to each individual in this list are given on pages 135–156. The numbering of the notes agrees with the numbering of the names in the list.

226 The dates given are those which occur in the records. It would be impossible to verify inclusive dates for all.

227 The numbers in this list agree with those in the Chronological List above and with those used in the notes on pp. 135–156.

228 It will be observed that Judge Brooks was twelve years of age when his grandfather died and thirty-nine years old when his father died.

229 Miss Elsie Roberts, formerly of Philadelphia, who lived in Concord up to the time of her death.

230 First edition, 1831, pp. 73, 74, and 87 note. Second edition, 1856, pp. 157, 158. The first edition appeared a year before Doolittle’s death. Barber had worked with Doolittle and drew his account from him.

231 Publications of the New Haven Colony Historical Society, viii 132–150.

232 The Rev. Mr. Beardsley says: “They did not go as the Governor’s Foot Guard but as the New Haven Cadets.” Ezra Stiles in his Diary (1. 540) says under date of February 26: “The news of Lexington reached New Haven on Friday night — & on Ldsday Morn^g the Comp^a of Cadets marched from New Haven Via Hartfd for Boston.”

233 William Dunlap’s History of The Arts of Design in the United States (1918), 1. 183, 184, 263, 264, and 264 note. Earl was a portrait painter of some importance, who studied after the Revolution under Benjamin West, but is said to have “destroyed himself by habitual intemperance.”

234 This was the present Elm wood. Oliver had removed to Boston in the previous year and subsequently left there for England at the time of the Evacuation of Boston in March, 1776.

235 I am indebted to Mr. Andrew Keogh, Librarian of Yale University, for a photostat of the page of the Connecticut Journal, December 13, 1775, on which the advertisement appears.

236 Acts of 1719, Chapter 8, passed November 7, 1719.

237 The clergy had expressed the view 20 years earlier — that lotteries were “a plain cheat upon the people” yet “such is the corruption of mankind, that the mere hope of getting the riches of other men without the doing the service of anything for it, will engage men to run the hazard of being losers.” Judgment of the ministers made at Boston, in May, 1699, quoted in a lecture on lotteries by George William Gordon to the Young Men’s Society (printed by the Temperance Press, Boston, 1833), p. 10.

238 F. Parkman, Montcalm and Wolfe (1895), ii. 83–86; see also Province Laws, iv. 133–142, notes.

239 Acts of 1744–1745, Chapter 20, passed January 9, 1745, to raise £7500 for the expenses of an expedition for relief of Annapolis; Acts of 1757–1758, Chapter 35, passed April 29, 1758, to raise £30,000 for the “intended expedition against Canada.” (Under Abercrombie.)

240 Acts of 1760–1761, Chapter 26.

241 Acts of 1759–1760, Chapter 25. See also our Publications, nr. 36; iv. 59.

242 Acts of 1780, Chapter 15.

243 Act of November 9, 1786. The President and Fellows of Harvard College bought twenty tickets in this lottery by virtue of which they became the owners of ten lots covering 2720 acres of wilderness. (Corporation Records, in. 272, 320. References in these notes are to the set of records in the office of the President at University Hall, Cambridge.) The vote directs the treasurer “to purchase twenty tickets in the land lottery with Pierce’s final settlement notes now in the treasury.”

244 Acts of 1760, Chapter 35.

245 Acts of 1757–1758, Chapter 14.

246 Acts of 1779–1780, Chapter 4.

247 Independent Chronicle, Apr. 10, 1794; Nov. 23, 1795; Oct. 16, 1809.

248 Cf: W. C. Lane, “New Hampshire’s Part in Restoring the Library,” in our Publications, xxv. 24, 28.

249 Resolves of 1762–1763, Chapters 65, 71, 328; Resolves of 1763–1764, Chapters 149, 230. See also J. Quincy, History of Harvard College, ii. 100–101, 112–113, 479–481.

250 Id., i. 180.

251 The average number in the graduating class from 1755 to 1764 was 34, as against 23 in the preceding decade. Harvard Quinquennial Catalogue.

252 Chap. 21 Acts of 1765, passed June 25, 1765.

253 Thomas Hubbard graduated in the class of 1721 and was treasurer of the college from 1752 until his death in 1773. He was a member of the General Court and the Provincial Council. He contributed £100 for the building of the new Harvard Hall and left £300 to the college by his will. (Quincy, ii. 101, 158.) Thomas Flucker was secretary of the Province. (Id., ii. 153, 458.)

Edward Holyoke was president of the college. He died in 1769. John Winthrop held the Hollis professorship of mathematics, and natural and experimental philosophy. On the death of President Holyoke he was chosen president, but declined the office. (Id., ii. 25, 149.)

254 Corporation Records, ii. 320.

255 Id., ii. 352. The office of president was held by Samuel Locke, who had succeeded President Holyoke. The presidency had been offered to Andrew Eliot and Samuel Cooper, the other members of the Committee, but both had declined. (Quincy, ii. 151–154, 161.)

256 Id., ii. 365.

257 Id., ii. 369.

258 Acts of 1772, Chapter 16, passed July 2. Jonathan Mason was a merchant and deacon of the Old South Church. Thinking the atmosphere at Harvard heretical, he sent his son to Princeton, but gave a legacy of $500 to the President and Fellows of Harvard College to support a professorship of divinity.

259 “Whereas the Managers of the College Lottery have made application to this Board, representing that they cannot go on with s’d Lottery, but are determined forthwith to resign their trust, unless the College will engage to take off a number of the tickets which remain unsold; and that if sufficient encouragement may be given them this way, they hope to sell the remainder, & will proceed to fix on the first day of June next for the time of drawing; the Corporation, considering that this Lottery was designed by the General Court for a purpose of great importance to the College, & judging it their duty to do everything in their power to prevent the failure of so good a design . . .

“VOTED: That the College will take to their own account, at the risque of the proposed profits, two thousand tickets, if so many shall remain unsold at the time fixed for drawing.” (Corporation Records, ii. 415.)

260 Ibid.

261 Samuel Eliot founded the professorship of Greek Literature; Aaron Dexter was professor of Chemistry and Materia Medica for 33 years from 1783. (Quincy, ii. 267, 270, 308, 313.)

262 Acts of 1788, Chapter 24, passed November 21, 1788. A copy bearing the signature of Governor John Hancock is in the collection of Harvard College Papers, in. No. 61, in the Harvard College Library.

263 A. R. Spofford, “Lotteries in American History,” Annual Report of the American Historical Association, 1892, p. 179.

264 The following documents in the collection of Harvard College papers in Widener Library relate to this lottery:

(a) Receipt in handwriting of Joseph Willard, President (Harvard College Papers, iii. No. 29): Cambridge, March 20, 1789.

Received of Mr. Joseph Pope of Boston an Orrery purchased of him by Mr. Samuel Eliot and the Other Gentlemen, Managers of a Lottery granted by the General Court for that purpose, which Orrery is safely lodged in the Philosophy Chamber of Harvard College. (Sgd.) Joseph Willard, President.

(b) Receipt of Ebenezer Storer (Treasurer of the College) to Samuel Eliot, Henry Hill, and Aaron Dexter, Managers, Dated March 31, 1789. (Harvard College Papers, in. No. 30.)

(c) Original accounts of the Managers rendered to the Treasurer of the College. (Harvard College Papers, iii., Supp., Nos. 28, 32.)

The managers credit themselves with the following payments: Samuel Barrett, Justice of the Peace for administering three oaths,	£0	– 4	– 5
Printer’s Bill	7	– 8	– 0
Mr. Fenno for numbering tickets	2	– 8	– 0
Mr. Larkin for binding tickets	0	– 11	– 0
For wax and thread	0	– 1	– 0
Jacob Kuhn for attendance at the drawings	3	– 0	– 0
To clerks	9	– 9	– 9
To the “boys at wheels”	1	– 4	– 0
A carpenter’s bill	0	– 6	– 0

The total proceeds of the lottery were £549 – 6 – 0.

The cost of the orrery with its case was £450–3–0, and the cost of moving it to Cambridge was £2–16–0.

(d) Cancellation of Manager’s bonds, their duties having been performed. (Harvard College Papers, iii., Supp. No. 33.)

265 Corporation Records, March 31, 1789, III. 331. Copy of vote in Harvard College Papers, iii, Supp., No. 31.

266 Messrs. Walton, reporting on the work done in getting “stuff and nails out of Stoughton College” estimated the stuff saved £207 and 43,000 nails of a value of £430. (Corporation Records, iii. 365, November 23, 1779.)

267 At a meeting of the Corporation held October 2, 1781, it was voted — “To dispose of Stoughton Hall, as it now stands, to some person who will engage to remove it from the ground.” (Corporation Records in. 131.) Below this is a note — “Stoughton Hall was purchased at public auction for the College.” At a meeting of the Corporation held November 13, 1781, it was voted — “That Deacon Aaron Hill have the liberty to take down the walls of Stoughton Hall and clean the bricks, preserving for the use of the College one-half the bricks, which he is Carefully to pile up, leaving the corner stones, the stones in the celler with Governor Stoughton’s arms and the inscription under, and remove the rubbish, and for his time and trouble to have the other half of the bricks.” (Id., iii. 132.)

268 At a meeting of the Corporation held February 17, 1786, it was voted that, “Mr. Lowell, the Treasurer, and Dr. Howard be a committee to take measures to revive the Lottery granted to the University by the General Court before the commencement of the late War, for the purpose of building a college, which is now much wanted.” (Id., iii. 251.) At this time Joseph Willard held the office of president. John Lowell, one of the foremost lawyers of the time, had succeeded Dr. Cooper as a member of the Corporation. Ebenezer Storer held the office of treasurer. (Quincy, ii. 196–97, 244, 255–56.)

269 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., iii. 216–17.

270 Petition to the Honorable The Senate and Honorable House of Representatives in General Court assembled. Humbly represent the President and Fellows of Harvard College that the Buildings now erected for the Accommodation of the Students have been long insufficient for that purpose, by which means an unequal charge falls on some of them who are compelled to procure lodgings &c in private families, that the Legislature, impressed with the propriety of causing another building to be erected, in 1772, granted a Lottery for that purpose, w’ch Grant still exists in full force, but the sale of the tickets being interrupted by the late War & several of the Managers having since died, that said corporation pray Your Honors that the Vacancies may be filled up so that they may be able to proceed in so necessary a business. . . . They have hitherto avoided making an application for this purpose as many Lotteries for public objects have been lately in operation, all of which are now finished.

By order and in behalf of the Corporation.

(Sgd.) Joseph Willard, President, June 3, 1793.”

(Harvard College Papers, iii. No. 155.)

271 Acts of 1794, Chapter 1. See also Quincy, ii. 273.

272 A letter to the Salem Gazette, June 29, 1790, argues in support of lotteries:— “There exists a spirit of adventure in all societies which will lead a number to throw themselves into the hands of Chance in one way or another, and which under the direction of a wise legislature may be made to subserve their best interests. The moneys raised by lotteries cannot impoverish the community as they are not sent abroad but only taken out of one pocket and put into another.” (Reprinted in H. M. Brooks, Curiosities of the Lottery, p. 55.) Jefferson held lotteries no more immoral than any occupation depending for its success upon chance. (Works, ed. P. L. Ford, x. 362.) On the other hand lotteries were condemned as tending to ruin the prosperity and the morals of the people. See for example A. O. Stansbury’s Address to the Missionary Society of New York, 1813, in the course of a debate on the propriety of retaining a ticket in the Union College Lottery which had been deposited in the contribution box. (The Society voted to postpone its decision until after the drawing.) For a brief history of lotteries in Europe and America, and a fair presentation of the case against them, see a lecture by George William Gordon to the Boston Young Men’s Society in 1833. (Printed by the Temperance Press, Boston. A copy is in the Boston Athenaeum.)

273 “As the enemy approached our Men were not only exposed to the Attack of a very numerous Musketry, but to the heavy Fire of the Battery on Copps Hill, four or five men-of-war, several armed Boats or floating Batteries in Mistick River and a number of Field Pieces.” New England Chronicle, June 22, 1775, “printed by Samuel and Ebenezer Hall at their office in Stoughton Hall, Harvard College,” to which they had moved from the Town House in Salem. See Id., May 12, 1775.

274 Diary of William Bentley, i 157, April 1, 1790. On January 24, 1791, he writes — “The rage of lotteries increases every day.” (Id., i. 231.)

275 Id., II. 97, 83. Rev. Gideon Hawley, missionary to the Mashpee Indians at an annual salary of $175, wrote to the Treasurer of the College December 10, 1794: “My son James, the bearer, will need money to discharge his arrears and it is needed at home. My salary from the Corporation was paid up to the last of May and now two quarters is supposed to be due to me. You will therefore please pay my son $50., as Treasurer of Harvard College, and he will return you five dolls, the price of the ticket in the Lottery which I wrote you (to) buy me and deposit with Doctor Thatcher. When James knows its number he may inquire further about it . . . My son James has commenced a preacher of the Gospel to good acceptance. . . .” On Sept. 13, 1796, Mr. Hawley wrote to the Treasurer: “In case my son James will pay for half a ticket in the College Lottery . . . I will agree to adventure half a ticket in the same provided you will credit me five dolls, to be paid out of my present quarter which will terminate in November next. Nevertheless having never been successful in Lotteries I should not have made the proposal had not this been in favor of the course of literature . . .” November 3, 1796, he wrote to the Treasurer again, requesting him to buy the half ticket whether or not his son James took the other half. (Harvard College Papers, iii., Nos. 173, 202, 204.)

276 Salem Gazette, February 25, 1794. Reprinted in Brooks, p. 57.

277 Joel Barlow was born in Connecticut in 1754, but lived in France during the Revolution and was identified with the Girondist party. He was Consul at Algiers, 1795–1797, and Minister of the United States to France, 1811–1812. He wrote The Vision of Columbus, Hasty Pudding, and some other poems. But in spite of the respect which delegates to the French National Assembly had for him, it seems as if Mr. Bentley gives him more credit for their action than his letter deserved. A more persuasive argument was that lotteries violated the basic principles of the Revolution in that they tended to an unequal distribution of wealth and the creation of a new class of idle rich. Opinion de J. s. B. Delmas, Président du Conseil des Anciens, sur la Résolution du 4 Germinal, An 5, rélative à l’Etablissement d’une Lottérie Nationale. (Boston Athenaeum.)

278 In Boston the most active lottery offices were those of Gilbert & Dean at 79 State Street and W. & T. Kidder at 9 Market Square. The following advertisements in the semi-weekly newspapers are typical:

From the Independent Chronicle, March 8, 1808:

20,000 Dollars!!

The GREAT PRIZE of TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS was on Monday last drawn against

No. 21549

in HARVARD COLLEGE LOTTERY and was sold in Quarters

at GILBERT & DEAN’S REAL FORTUNATE LOTTERY OFFICE

No. 79 State Street

☞ The two largest prizes ever known in the Northern States have been sold by GILBERT & DEAN.

[Printers in the Eastern States are requested to publish the above and forward their bills for payment.]

Immediately following the above is the advertisement of W. & T. Kidder, which concludes as follows: “It is a circumstance truly worthy of remark, and which will be noticed by all those who court the smiles of Fortune, that nearly all the high prizes in this Lottery were sold at Kidder’s Lucky Lottery Office, which has now gained a high rank among those styled ‘fortunate.’”

From the Independent Chronicle, April 6, 1808:

“Lottery News!

Ye who on Fortune’s golden sea appear,

Behold the chart, — there’s no Embargo here.

It must give a confidence almost bordering on certainty to ALL who are in the habit of feeling that tickling, pleasing, painful sensation which always arises from having undrawn tickets in ones pocket; and to the “Lucky Ones,” at least, it will be a matter of particular satisfaction to learn that the following CAPITAL PRIZES have been sold at KIDDERS Established Lucky Lottery Office, No. 9 Market Square in less than one year!” [Followed by list of numbers.]

“The Embargo Act,” referred to in the advertisement, “remained in force from December 22, 1807, to March 15, 1809,” and “forbade any American vessel to clear from an American harbor for a foreign port, and placed coasting and fishing vessels under heavy bonds not to land their cargoes outside the United States. Another act, which went into effect at the same time, forbade the importation of many British goods.” (S. E. Morison, Maritime History of Massachusetts, p. 187.)

D. Beaman sold tickets at “Beaman’s Real and Truly Fortunate Lottery Office” at 1 Sumner Street, opposite the northwest corner of the new State House, and accepted prize tickets and Detroit bank bills in payment. (Independent Chronicle, July 4, 1808.) Others who sold tickets in Boston were Wright, Goodwin & Stockwell, 27 Union Street, “who have for sale best Spanish cigars by the box or less,” as well as stationery and books and periodicals. Also Eben Larkin, 50 Cornhill; Mathew Park, 2 Town Dock; William Blagrove, 5 School Street; John W. Folsom, 30 Union Street. In Cambridge tickets could be bought from William Hilliard at the “Cambridge Book Store.” In the advertisement of Gilbert & Dean in the Independent Chronicle, October 9, 1808, it is represented that “nearly one million dollars have been distributed from these offices a large proportion of which fell into the hands of poor, honest and industrious people. This shows the good effect of lotteries, and more particularly shows the remarkable good success of those who purchase their tickets at the above offices. It is presumed that after perusing the above facts any person will be convinced of the superior chance they can have by purchasing their tickets at the Real Fortunate Lottery Offices of Gilbert & Dean,” etc. A joint advertisement of Gilbert & Dean and Kidder (Independent Chronicle, July 7, 1808) appeals to the rural population. After listing in bold faced type the prize tickets sold through their offices in the preceding class of the Harvard Lottery of 1806, they say — “We often have accounts of ‘mammoth cheeses,’ ‘apples,’ ‘pears,’ ‘pompions,’ etc., but like falsehood they are hollow hearted, — none of them are so solid or contain half the ‘pith and marrow’ which may be found in the ‘mammoth prize,’ which is now for sale (it may fairly be presumed from the appearance above) either at the office of Gilbert & Dean, or W. Kidder. . . .”

The following example of current wit appears in the Independent Chronicle, June 27, 1808:

“In GENERAL COURT

(of Fortune)

IMPORTANT MOTION

The HON. MR. HARVARD offered a motion deeply interesting to every Man, Woman and Child, viz.:

That a Committee be appointed to consider the expediency of relieving by liberal and impartial appropriations of Money those of our citizens who are suffering by the present ‘hard times.’

Read and Committed to Messrs. GILBERT and DEAN and W. & T. KIDDER with leave to report by (Bank) Bill or otherwise.

The Committee this day reported an admirable system which was unanimously accepted; by which any man for a trifling fee may put himself in a way to elude the pinching of these hard times.

The same Committee being appointed to carry this scheme into execution will receive applications at No. 9. Market Square, and on the ground floor of No. 79 State Street.

The Excellent chance the Harvard College Lottery at this moment offers is worthy the attention of all who value their interest; as the wheels have gained the capital sum of 10869 dolls, and there are yet to be drawn the following large prizes, viz. —”

[The list of prizes to be drawn follows.]

An advertisement of Gilbert & Dean (Independent Chronicle, March 24, 1809) opens with a woodcut of four persons in a row boat fishing with rods in a pond swarming with fish, decorated with dollar signs and figures. This is followed by a piece of doggerel entitled:

“Fortune’s Anglers

(A new lottery song to be sung to the tune of ‘There are Sweepers in High Life as well as in Low’):

“In the fish pond of fortune men angle all ways,

Some angle for titles, some angle for praise,

Some angle for favor, some angle for wives,

And some angle for naught all the days of their lives.

Chorus:

Ye who’d angle for wealth and would Fortune obtain

Get your hooks baited by Kidder, Gilbert & Dean.

Some angle for pleasure, some angle for pain,

Some angle for trifles, some angle for gain,

Some angle for glory, some angle for strife,

Some angle to make themselves happy for Life.

Chorus: Ye who’d angle, etc.

Some angle for wit, and some angle for fame,

Some angle for nonsense and some e’en for shame,

Some angle for horses and some angle for hounds,

For angling’s infinite, it never new bounds.

Chorus: Ye who’d angle,” etc.

Some other advertisements relating to the Hanard College Lottery of 1794 are collected in a note to Albert Matthews, “Sir Matthew Holworthy and Lady Holworthy,” our Publications, xiii. 154–158.

279 In the case of lotteries that were not for State or Municipal improvements, the managers’ compensation was usually a matter for negotiation with the governing board of the institution for whose benefit the lottery was granted.

280 “The adventurers are principally confined to the laboring classes.” Thomas Man, Pictures of a Factory Village, p. 119. (Boston Athenaeum.) The following advertisement of “situations wanted” follows immediately after a list of the winning tickets, in the advertisement of the Lottery Office of W. & T. Kidder, 9 Market Square — “Persons in want of employment, such as clerks, apprentices, supercargos, coachmen, boys in families, nurses, cooks, chambermaids, kitchen maids, or servants, or who have houses or stores to sell or let, or any other kind of intelligence are requested to call. Gentlemen and ladies in want of persons in any of the above situations, or in want of houses or stores are likewise requested to call. Merchants and shopkeepers can be immediately supplied with clerks and apprentices. Wanted immediately 10 or 20 maids and cooks, also 6 or 8 boys. Silver change bought and sold.” (Independent Chronicle, June 29, 1807.)

281 At a meeting held July 3, 1794, the Corporation voted:

“Whereas by the Act passed by the General Court upon the 14th of June, 1794 granting a lottery for raising ‘the sum of eight thousand pounds for the purpose of erecting a building for the use of the University of Cambridge,’ it is required that the Corporation should allow the managers of said Lottery compensation for their services; and the Corporation having conferred with said managers:

“Voted: That five per centum be and it hereby is allowed to the Managers of the said Lottery upon the amount of the tickets which may be by them respectively sold: they the said managers to pay the charges of printing the tickets, and all other incidental expences whatever, which may accrue or arise from the managing & drawing of the several classes of the said Lottery: — The Corporation being subject to make a farther reasonable allowance to said Managers, out of the proceeds of the Lottery, upon the amount of any of the tickets which may be unsold, and returned to the Corporation on account of the Lottery, previous to the drawing of any of the classes thereof.” (Corporation Records, iii. 454.)

The managers took exception to this vote and sent the following letter to the Corporation:

“Boston, July 5, 1794

Gentlemen:

We have considered your vote of the 3^d July inst; allowing the Managers five per centum on such Lottery tickets as should be sold, and reasonable allowance upon the amount of any tickets unsold which might be returned to the Corporation. We conceive the rate of allowance on the latter tickets remaining unsettled arises rather from a desire to stimulate the Managers to exertion, than from an idea that the premium of three per centum which they demanded was exorbitnnt. But Ke do not think that this consideration is sufficient to postpone the fixing of the premium to a time when circumstances may arise to render it much more difficult to do it, than it is at present. Such of us as were concerned in the management of the State Lottery are conscious that this motive was not necessary to induce us to exertion then, although, at that time, no distinction was made between the sold and unsold tickets, and we in fact received the ahole premium upon both. We therefore request that the vote of the Corporation may be made certain, with regard to the tickets of the latter class.

We are, Gentlemen

With respect your obedient Servants

Benjamin Austin, Junior

George R’ds Minot,

Sam’l Cooper.”

(Id., iii. 455.)

The letter was discussed at a meeting of the Corporation held July 8, and the following resolution adopted: “The Corporation, by a vote of the 3d instant, having subjected themselves to make a reasonable allowance to the Managers of the College Lottery, out of the proceeds of said Lottery, upon the amount of any of the tickets which may be unsold, and returned to the Corporation previous to the Drawing of any of the Classes thereof; and the Managers not being content to enter upon the business of said Lottery a7 appears by their letter of the 5th instant, without a precise sum being allowed them for those tickets, Voted: That the premium of three percentum, which the said Managers require, be allowed upon such unsold tickets, returned as above.” (Corporation records, iii. 456.)

282 Independent Chronicle, July 14, 1794.

283 Harvard College Papers, iii., Supp., Nos. 64–67.

284 The practice of selling “halves,” “quarters” and “eighths” originated in the lottery offices and prevailed in most of the lotteries including the Harvard College Lottery of 1806. The tickets for fractions were signed by the proprietors of the lottery offices. They were sold at an advanced price. For instance — if whole tickets were quoted at $8, quarters were quoted at $2.12. This practice drew in as adventurers many people who could not afford whole tickets. These tickets had a par value of $5; the “premiums” being retained by the lottery offices. “According to the usual custom these offices will be kept open until 9 o’clock this evening to accommodate those who wish for tickets at the present prices. The price tomorrow morning will rise to 8 dolls. 50, quarters — 2 dolls. 25.” (Advertisement of Gilbert & Dean, Independent Chronicle, July 14, 1808.)

285 Independent Chronicle, June 11, 1795. “The managers understanding that adventurers in general were dissatisfied at so much money being absorbed in the high prizes, as has hitherto been the practice, have now presented a scheme which they hope will meet with general approbation.”

286 Id., November 5, 1795.

287 The following announcement appears in Id., April 7, 1796. The managers “do not consider themselves justified in proceeding with the drawing immediately,” in view of the probability that “the whole grant of the government would not be raised.”

288 In a letter addressed to the Corporation dated August 29, 1796, the managers stated their intention “still to continue to assure the public that we shall positively draw at the time aforesaid (Sept. 15th) but that if more than one-quarter of the tickets should then be on hand” and the Corporation shall still decline to take them, the managers will in that case, “think it their duty to the public and themselves to advertise that they will return the money to the Adventurers.” At the same time they were willing to assure the Corporation that there would be no more than 10,000 tickets returned. (Harvard College Papers, iii, Nos. 201–202.)

In the Independent Chronicle, September 15, 1796, the managers announced to the public — “The managers of the Harvard College Lottery are preparing with all expedition the Wheels for drawing the Fourth Class of said Lottery which is positively to commence next Thursday week. On that day the Wheels will go their rounds and throw into the lap of some fortunate ones the following noble prizes, with many others that are tolerable, . . . Who these fortunate ones will be the chance of the Wheels must determine, each one with propriety may then exclaim ‘It may be I.’”

289 At a meeting of the Corporation held Sept. 29, 1796, the following vote was passed — “The managers of the Harvard College Lottery having rendered their account of the tickets in the fourth class unsold it appeared that the number was so great as to render it inexpedient for the college to take the risque; therefore,

“VOTED, unanimously that the managers adjourn the further drawing of the lottery to the first day of December next to give opportunity to the Corporation to take such measures as will undoubtedly enable them to go on with the drawing at that time, without further delay. In the meantime it is earnestly recommended to the lovers of literature and the college to aid the cause by the purchase of tickets, that the necessary purpose for which the money is to be raised may be speedily effected.” (Corporation Records, iii, 503.) A copy of this vote, attested by Joseph Willard, President, was delivered to the managers and by them printed in connection with the following announcement bearing the signatures of the five managers, in the Independent Chronicle, September 29, 1796:

“To the Public:

“The Corporation of Harvard College having declined risqueing the unsold tickets in the fourth class of the Lottery as has been the custom in all of the preceding classes, and having recommended an adjournment of the further drawing until the first day of December next, in order that they might take measures to enable the managers then to proceed in it without delay as appears by their vote following, the subscribers after having done everything in their power to fulfill their assurances to the Public by commencing the drawing at the time assigned and by proceeding in it for several days are constrained by the measures above mentioned to adjourn the drawing agreeably to the vote of the Corporation.”

290 Independent Chronicle, January 12, 1797, and February 13, 1797.

291 Books of the Treasurer (Ebenezer Storer); Accounts of the “Managers of the Lottery” and “The New College”; Ledger “C” pp. 102–104, 157. In these accounts the proceeds of the classes are given as 1st and 2nd classes, $10,036.15; 3rd class, $5803.30 and 4th, $1927.10. Henry Warren is credited with having made good $1302 losses on tickets.

292 From a working sheet apparently made up in the treasurer’s office, and now in the Harvard College Papers, iv. No. 175, it appears that the receipts by the years were as follows:

1795	8,096.15
1796	1,191.28
1797	588.96
1800	355.44
1801	1,203.23
Total	$11,435.06

293 At a meeting held February 10, 1797, it was voted as follows: “Whereas the Corporation consider themselves, by the Act of the Legislature passed June 4, 1794, granting a Lottery for raising the sum of £8000 & C, required only to settle the compensation to be allowed the Managers for their services.

“VOTED: That the allowance be five per cent on all the monies received for tickets, they the said Managers to pay the charges for printing the tickets and all other incidental expences whatever, which may accrue or arise from the managing and drawing of the Classes of said Lottery, and that, in all other matters, the said Managers act under the provisions of said Law, and place no dependence upon the Corporation taking any unsold tickets — in future.” (Corporation Records, iv. 507, February 10, 1797.)

294 A letter from Austin in the Independent Chronicle of August 17, 1797, is typical of Austin’s communications and shows the kind of man the College had to deal with:

“The publication of ‘Philo-Observer’ in the Centinel with respect to Honestus is by information supposed to be the production of Mr. Stephen Higginson. If he means to pursue the subject he is requested to sign his name to his performances and he will be attended to by Mr. Austin. Like an assassin he at present lurks under a fictitious signatvre, but if he is an honest man, let him produce his charges in an open manner and Mr. Austin is ready to meet him in any way or manner he thinks proper.” (signed) Benj. Austin, Jr.

295 Silvanus Reed, born in 1755, was a son of James Reed who commanded the second regiment at Bunker Hill. James Reed was one of the original settlers of Fitzwilliam, New Hampshire, formerly known as “Monadnoc No. 4.” He was later appointed a Brigadier General by the Provincial Congress. Silvanus and his brother, James, served in their father’s regiment at Bunker Hill. Silvanus was “much in town business” in Boston, where he was known as “Colonel” Reed. Whatever he collected on his prize ticket could not have lasted long, for the inventory of his estate, filed in 1798, consisted of household and personal effects of $137.52, and some promissory notes on which his wife, Caroline, as administratrix collected $60. (J. W. Reed, History of the Reed Family, pp. 78–79; Suffolk Probate Records, xcvii. 143–145, 606.)

See also Independent Chronicle, August 10 and 14, 1797, and Columbian Centinel, August 16, 1797.

296 Corporation Records, iv. 533, March 13, 1798:

“VOTED: That the Treasurer, Mr. Bowdoin and Dr. Howard be a Committee in the name and behalf of the President & Fellows of Harvard College, to appear to defend, plead and pursue to final judgment and execution, an Action brought against said President and Fellows by Benjamin Austin, Jr., Esquire, to be heard and tried at the Court of Common Pleas for the County of Suffolk, on the third Tuesday of April next; and that the said Committee be authorized to defend any other action, in like manner that may be brought by said Austin or any other Managers of a Lottery granted by the General Court for erecting a building for the use of the University in Cambridge, and that the said Committee may commence and prosecute any Action or Actions in the name of said President and Fellows, against the said Austin or any other of the said Managers, for any matter touching the said Lottery; and the said Committee are authorized to substitute one or more Attorney or Attornies under them and the same at pleasure to revoke; and they are further authorized to submit to reference the action brought as aforesaid, or any that may hereafter be brought by Rule of Court, and all demands between the Corporation of Harvard College and the said Managers, or either of them.

“And that a Power or Letter of Attorney to the effect aforesaid under the Seal of the Corporation, and signed by the President, be made to said Committee.”

297 Records of the Court of Common Pleas for Suffolk County, 1798; Records of the Supreme Judicial Court for Suffolk County, 1800, No. 71.

298 Corporation Records, iv. 533, March 1, 1798.

299 On August 28, 1797, Judge Lowell, Mr. Bowdoin and the treasurer were appointed a committee to “confer with the managers of the college lottery and ripen matters for settlement.” (Corporation Records, iv, p. 528.) At the end of the record of the meeting of June 10, 1798, is entered — “At this meeting some measures were determined upon respecting settlement with the managers of the college lottery.” (Corporation Records, iv. 540.)

300 Corporation Records, iv. 95.

301 Independent Chronicle, August 11, 1806.

302 At the rate of 500 tickets per diem 14,500 would be disposed of before the drawing of the grand prize, thus raising the chance of every undrawn ticket (which started at 1 in 20,000) to 1 in 5500.

303 The plans are printed in detail in the current newspapers (Independent Chronicle and Columbian Centinel).

1st class plan published August 11, 1806, and Sept. 15, 1806; drawing commenced Jan. 22, 1807.

2nd class plan published March 2, 1807; drawing commenced May 21, 1807.

3rd class plan published July 20, 1807, and Dec. 22, 1807; drawing commenced Jan. 14, 1808.

4th class plan published April 21, 1808; drawing commenced May 30, 1808.

5th class plan published Feb. 27, 1811, and Mar. 4, 1811; drawing commenced June 19, 1811.

6th class plan published Nov. 13, 1811.

7th class plan published Feb. 1, 1812; drawing commenced Nov. 4, 1812.

304 “One of the quarters is owned by five ladies in this town (a fine sum for pin money), two quarters not yet heard from, and one on hand owned by Gilbert & Dean.” (Advertisement of Gilbert & Dean, Independent Chronicle July 21, 1808.) As proof of Fortune’s favor, the sale by Gilbert & Dean of the ticket that won the grand prize of $20,000 in the second class to Mr. Leonard Stone, carpenter of Watertown, and another that won $5000 to William W. Clap of Buxton, Me., is proclaimed in an advertisement in the Independent Chronicle, July 20, 1807.

305 Corporation Records, iv. 150, 164, 207, 212, 225, 247.

306 Id., iv. 186.

307 Id., iv. 196.

308 See case of Gilbert & Dean v. Williams, 8 Mass. Rep. 476. Several trunkfuls of tickets, some bearing endorsements of the owners, have been preserved and are in the Harvard College Library.

309 John Davis and John Lowell.

310 Corporation Records, v. 17.

311 Id., v. 39.

312 In the “Book of Donations” in the custody of the Treasurer of Harvard College appears this item: “Treasurer Davis says that $29,000 was realized.” See also Ledger “e,” p. 52.

313 Albert Matthews, “Sir Matthew Holworthy and Lady Holworthy,” our Publications, xiii. 154–158.

314 “Compiled” means, of course, “composed” — not “compiled” in the modern sense.

315 Colophon: “Impkinted [sic] at at [sic] London by Iohn Day, dwelling ouer Aldersgate, beneath Saincte Martins. Cum gratia & priuilegio Regiæ Maiestatis, per Septennium. ¶These bokes are to be sold at his shoppe vnder the gate.” Strype signalizes the publication (Annals of the Reformation, i [1725]. 256).

316 Registers of the Company of Stationers, ed. Arber, ii. 786–787.

317 Adam Winthrop was for some time Auditor of the accounts of St. John’s (Life and Letters of John Winthrop, i. 31–32).

318 He was probably the John Dawes who was B.A. of Cambridge 1536–7, M.A. 1540. See J. and J. A. Venn, Alumni Cantabrigienses, i. ii. 19.

319 Thomas, second Baron Wentmorth, was appointed Deputy of Calais on September 13, 1553, and assumed the duties in December. He surrendered the town to the Duke of Guise on January 7, 1558. He was tried for high treason on April 22, 1559, and acquitted (Dictionary of National Biography, lx. 266). Queen Mary died on November 17, 1558.

320 The Commentarii de Statu Religionis et Reipublicæ Carolo Quinto Cæsare of Johannes Sleidanus (Philippson) was published in 1555 at Strassburg. The preface is dated “X. Cal. April. M.D.LV.” Daus’s translation appeared in 1560: A Famovse Cronicle of oure time, called Sleidanes Commentaries, concerning the State of Religion and common wealth, during the raigne of the Emperour Charles the fift. . . . Translated out of Latin into Englishe by Ihon Daus. Colophon: Imprinted at London by Ihon Daye, for Abraham Veale, and Nicholas England. 1560. The 25. of September. Cum Priuilegio ad imprimendum solum. Daus’s dedication (to “Fraunces, Earle of Bedford, Lord Russel”) is dated “The Kalendes of August. Anno. 1560.”

321 The Institvtion of Christian Religion, vvrytten in Latine by maister Ihon Caluin, and translated into Englysh according to the authors last edition. . . . at London by Reinolde Wolfe & Richarde Harison. Anno. 1561. The colophon specifies “The yeare of our Lorde. 1561. The 6. day of Maye.” There is a copy in the Harvard College Library. Daus’s connection with the enterprise is considered in the following curious apology, which stands on the verso of the title-page:

The Printers to the Reders.

Wheras some men haue thought and reported it to be a fault and negligence in vs for that we haue so long kept backe from you this boke being so profitable a woorke for you, namely sithe maister Iohn Dawes had translated it and deliuered it into our handes more than a tweluemoneth past: you shall vnderstande for our excuse in that behalfe, that we could not wel emprinte it soner. For we haue ben by diuerse necessarie causes constrayned with our earnest entreatance to procure an other frende of oures to translate it whole agayn. This translation, we trust, you shal well allow. For it hath not only ben faythfully done by the translater himself, but also hath ben wholly perused by such men, whoes iugement and credit al the godly learned in Englande well knowe & esteme. But sithe it is now come foorth, we pray you accept it, and vse it. If any faultes haue passed vs by ouersight, we beseche you let vs haue your patience, as you haue had our diligence.

The friend here mentioned was Thomas Norton (1532–1584), famous as lawyer, persecutor, and poet, who shared with Sackville the authorship of Gorboduc. See his own account of his translation in the fourth edition of The Institution (1599).

322 Something followed (perhaps a signature) in the next line, but it has been trimmed off by the binder, except for two illegible fragments of letters. The volume was rebound in July, 1840.

323 Historical Manuscripts Commission, 9th Report, Appendix, Part I, p. 255.

324 Nathaniell Bacon, The Annalls of Ipsw^che, ed. by W. H. Richardson, 1884, p. 330. On December 9, 1580, the town authorities had resolved that Smith should “be presented to the B^p for his allowance [i. e., approval] of him to be m^r of the Grammer Schoole” (Bacon, p. 326).

325 J. and J. A. Venn, Alumni Cantabrigienses, i. ii. 19.

326 Bacon, p. 272.

327 Bacon, p. 316.

328 Bacon, p. 277.

329 Bacon, p. 287.

330 Suffolk in 1568, being the Returns for a Subsidy granted in 1566, [edited by S. H. A. Hervey,] 1909, p. 158.

331 Bacon, p. 297. Cf. pp. 296 (1573), 316 (1577), 323 (1580), 331 (April 6, 1582). The charter recites that the school was “founded by our most dear father Henry VIII” (John Wodderspoon, Memorials of the Ancient Town of Ipswich, 1850, p. 89). But the school, in some form, is older than that. The schoolhouse is mentioned in 1482, and the Ipswich archives preserve a document of 2 Henry VII (August 22, 1486–August 21, 1487): “The counterpart of a grant in fee-farm, at a yearly rent of three shillings and fourpence, by the Bailiffs burgesses and community of Gippewic to John Squyer clerk, and to his heirs and assigns, of a piece of the common soil of the said town, under the walls of the Freres Preachers . . . ; with further yearly rent of a red rose; the said John Sqyer being also bound to build and erect on the said land ‘unam latrinam pro pueris grammaticalibus ejusdem ville’” (9th Report, as above, pp. 246, 235; cf. p. 236).

332 W. A. Copinger, The Manors of Suffolk, vi. 99.

333 Calendars of the Proceedings in Chancery, ii. (1830), 108.

334 Proceedings Suffolk Institute of Archæology and Natural History, vi. (1888) 391; cf. Copinger, vi. 99.

335 Venns, i. ii. 19.

336 Bacon, pp. 316, 323.

337 Venns, i. ii. 19.

338 See Abiel Abbot, History of Andover, 1829, pp. 105–108.

339 She was the daughter of the Hon. Nathaniel Gorham of Charlestown. Mr. Stephen W. Phillips has helped me in genealogical matters.

340 See the facsimile of his signature in Bond’s Watertown, ii. 873. For the family see Bond, ii. 872 ff.

341 As to Robert Feake see Bond, i. 206; ii. 757.

342 For the family troubles of the Feakes see R. C. Winthrop, Jr., 2 Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., vi. 1–20.

343 John Winthrop to his wife, April 28, 1629 (Life and Letters, i. 290); Lucy Downing to John Winthrop, Jr., August 8, 1629 (5 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., i. 7).

344 Life and Letters of John Winthrop, ii. 34–35.

345 John Winthrop to John, Jr., March 28, 1631 (Life and Letters, ii. 61); Margaret Winthrop to the same (id., ii. 87–88).

346 John Winthrop, History of New England, ed. Savage, i. 82–83 (68–69).

347 Lucy Downing to John Winthrop, February 24, 1643 (5 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., i. 34).

348 John Winthrop, History, ii. 182 (151); 4 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., vi. 174; vii. 412.

349 In a document of April 9, 1642, Feake is described as “now sick” (New York Colonial Documents, ii. 144). In a letter of his son-in-law (Thomas Lyon), April 14, 1648, he is spoken of as “destracted” some time before the date of the letter (2 Mass. Hist. Proc., vi. 6). Cf. Savage’s Dictionary, n. 150; Josephine C. Frost, Ancestors of Henry Rogers Winthrop and his Wife, 1927, p. 191.

350 Theophilus Eaton to John Winthrop, Jr., 1648 (4 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., vi. 348–350, 353); Thomas Lyon’s letters (2 Mass. Hist, Soc. Proc, vi. 5–7); Connecticut Records, May 17, 1649, ed. Trumbull, i. 186; Governor John Haynes to John Winthrop, Jr., May 18, 1649 (4 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., vi. 360).

351 4 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., vi. 521–523; 2 Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc, vi. 11–12.

352 New York Colonial Documents, ii. 717. Cf. 2 Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc, vi. 13.

353 Bond’s Watertown, i. 206.

354 Mess. Archives, MS., vi. 341.

355 Boston, 1853, vi. Part i, p. 422

356 Massachusetts Bay Colony Records, ii. 209.

357 Mass. Archives, xlvii. 35.

358 5 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., ii. 212.

359 Joshua Brackett was born in Greenland, N. H., in May, 1733, and graduated from Harvard in 1752. After entering the ministry he withdrew from that profession in order to study medicine with Dr. Clement Jackson of Portsmouth. He became a skilful and successful practitioner. In 1783 he was elected an honorary member of the Massachusetts Medical Society, and ten years later he became president of the New Hampshire Medical Society. On the fortieth anniversary of his graduation Harvard conferred upon him the honorary degree of M.D. He died at Portsmouth, July 17, 1802. See N. Adams, Annals of Portsmouth, p. 321.

360 John Adams, Works, ii. 240.

361 161 J 32.

362 5 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., ii. 224.

363 Manuscript at the American Antiquarian Society, with the manuscript of Mather’s autobiography. I quote from a copy of the original made by A. P. Marvin.

364 Andros Tracts, ii. 293.

365 Probably Stephen Mason. See K. B. Murdock, Increase Mather, p. 280 note.

366 Ibid.

367 I. Mather, The Great Blessing of Primitive Counsellors, 1693, p. 8.

368 Murdock, pp. 276 ff.

369 Id., p. 312.

370 (O. Gill and others), Some Few Remarks upon a Scandalous Book, 1701, pp. 27–28.

371 Stephen Mason. For his relations with Mather, see Murdock, passim.

372 Mather, while in England, received some money on account of the gift of William Pennoyer to Harvard College. See our Publications, xvi. 411. Evidently he borrowed some of this money to meet expenses of the agency.

373 Thomas Lake (1656–1711), born in Boston, was a London barrister. His sister Anne later became the second wife of Increase Mather. See Dorchester Antiquarian and Historical Society Collections, iii. 100 ff.

374 What Mr. Bendall is referred to I do not know; Dr. Cooke was doubtless Elisha Cooke, one of Mather’s fellow-agents.

375 The manuscript is illegible here and several words are omitted.

376 Mather’s account may be compared with that rendered by Dennys De Berdt on February 1, 1771 (Massachusetts Archives, xiii, 572–579); see our Publications, xiii. 302, note 2.

377 An address delivered at the Meeting House of the First Parish of Lancaster, Massachusetts, on the occasion of the two hundred and seventy-fifth anniversary of the founding of the town.

378 C. H. Lincoln, Narratives of the Indian Wars, p. 134.

379 A transcription to the first person of the original notes in the Massachusetts Bay Colony Records, ii. 55–56.

380 Suffolk Deeds, xiii. 344.

381 See Albert Matthews’s article in our Publications, xxi. 146.

382 Professor Kittredge in our Publications, xxi. 126. To this important article on Dr. Robert Child, the Remonstrant, I am greatly indebted for the facts here mentioned about Dr. Child and John Winthrop, Jr., although I venture to disagree with the witty and learned author about the character and purpose of the Remonstrance. See also my Builders of the Bay Colony, 1930.

383 Our Publications, xxi. 128.

384 Id., xxi. 9.

385 Id., xxi. 113.

386 2 Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., viii. 14.

387 Massachusetts Bay Colony Records, ii. 75.

388 J. L. Bishop, History of Manufacturing in the United States (1866), i. 477, contains the best account of Jenks.

389 G. E. Littlefield, The Early Massachusetts Press, 1638–1711, contains the best account of Day, and particularly of his part in the Nashaway venture. There are documents concerning Day in S. A. Green, Ten Facsimile Reproductions Relating to New England. See also R. F. Roden, The Cambridge Press, 1638–1692.

390 Winthrop (ed. 1826), ii. 161.

391 Id., ii. 306.

392 H. S. Nourse, Early Records of Lancaster, 12–13.

393 The buttery hatch — still a prominent feature of the Oxford and Cambridge colleges — was a sort of Dutch door in the original Harvard College building, with a shelf on the lower part which served as bar. The college stock of beer and wine was kept in the buttery, the name of which is derived from bottles, not butter.

394 “Sir” meant a student who had already taken his bachelor’s degree, and was studying for his master’s degree.

395 Nourse, p. 17.

396 Acts, ii. 3, iv. 32. Among such literal believers in the Bible as the early New Englanders, here was good authority for communism, and I have noted several instances of these verses being quoted by the poor against the rich. In every case prompt means were taken to convince the person that his interpretation was erroneous, and his utterance dangerous.

397 J. L. Sibley, Biographical Sketches of Harvard Graduates, i. 311.

398 Nouree, p. 309.

399 Nourse, p. 311.

400 Id., p. 38.

401 Id., p. 49.

402 Nourse, p. 50.

403 Modern Philology, October, 1904, ii. 173–195.

404 W. Wirt, Life of Patrick Henry (1818), p. 372. Judge Roane was a son-in-law of Patrick Henry.

405 For full particulars in regard to James Lynch, Stephen Lynch, and Charles Lynch, see Modern Philology, ii. 183–195.

406 Notes and Queries, June 5, 1909, 10th Series, xi. 445. Cf. 10th Series, xi. 515, xii. 52, 133, 174, 495; 11th Series, i. 55, 194, 273.

407 Annual Register (1816), pp. 175–176. At the end occur the words “Dublin Correspondent.”

408 For these, see Modern Philology, ii. 186–190.

409 Southern Literary Messenger, May, 1836, ii. 389. In his book called The Southern Literary Messenger (1905), p. 45, B. B. Minor merely says: “Thereafter, he [Poe] furnishes an editorial on the origin of Lynch’s Law and fifteen pages of critical notices.”

410 Modern Philology, ii. 187.

411 Journal of the House of Delegates, October 16, 27, November 17, 24, December 3, 4, 1787, pp. 4, 19, 51, 52, 66, 80, 82. Though these references prove that William Lynch was a member, yet curiously enough it is nowhere stated what county he represented, but that it was Pittsylvania County is shown in E. G. Swem and J. W. Williams’s Register of the General Assembly of Virginia 1776–1918 and of the Constitutional Conventions (1918), p. 27, printed in Fourteenth Annual Report of the Library Board of the Virginia State Library 1916–1917 To which is appended the Fourteenth Annual Report of the State Librarian (1917).

The Journals of the House of Delegates for the years 1777–1790 were printed at Richmond in 1827–1828, but as no volume contains either an index or even a list of delegates, their examination is a heart-rending process. In 1904 I had run through the Journals for the years 1777–1783 only, but Ellicott’s statement that his Captain Lynch “commenced legislator” led me to attack the Journals for the years 1784–1790, with the result detailed above.

412 In April, 1928, Sir William A. Craigie called my attention to this passage as printed (in part, but not in full) by Mrs. Catharine Van Cortlandt Mathews in her Andrew Ellicott: His Life and Letters, pp. 220–225, published in 1908. (As that was three or four years after the publication of Professor J. E. Cutler’s Lynch Law and of my former paper, we are absolved from the charge of having overlooked an important piece of evidence.) The portions printed by Mrs. Mathews give no clue as to the exact place where Ellicott met Captain Lynch, but it was natural to assume that it was somewhere along the border between Georgia and North Carolina; yet I could find no mention of Ellicott’s expedition in the histories of those States. Luckily, however, I was so fortunate as to ascertain that the manuscript of Ellicott’s diary was owned by Mr. Ellicott Douglass Curtis of Bantam, Conn., and the passage in the text is printed from a copy kindly furnished by Mr. Curtis. The sentences omitted by Mrs. Mathews are brief, but they prove that the meeting took place not in Georgia or North Carolina but in South Carolina. In her book (p. 220) Mrs. Mathews says that “this diary, in its present form, appears to have been written up from notes, after his return home,” which was in May, 1812. Even so, the diary could not have been written later than 1820, in which year Ellicott died. Of the survey he made in 1811–1812, little seems to be known.

413 The name is found in various forms: Olenoy, Oolenoe, Oolenoi, Oolenoy, etc.

414 Variously called “Table Mountain,” “Table Rock,” “Table Rock Mountain.”

415 The political divisions of South Carolina at that time are puzzling in the extreme: cf. Proceedings Massachusetts Historical Society, li. 30–31 note.

416 Statistics of South Carolina, p. 680. A footnote says: “Near to Captain Lynch’s house runs the 35th degree of north latitude. It was here that this important point was first ascertained.” It will be noted that Mills employs the present tense, implying that John Lynch was alive in 1826.

417 Map of “Pickens & Anderson, formerly Pendleton District, South Carolina Surveyed by Scribling, Improved for Mills’ Atlas.” Mills’s Atlas of the State of South Carolina has no date on the title-page, but no doubt was published at the time his Statistics of South Carolina appeared, for in the preface to the latter work Mills wrote: “Much labour has been bestowed in preparing this work; in order that it might serve as an appendix to the author’s ‘Atlas of the State.’ A correct idea of the several sections of the state, could not be formed without it” (p. v). The maps are quite remarkable. It would seem as if Scribling, when surveying Pendleton District, must have met John Lynch.

418 Geography of South Carolina, p. 120. It will be noted that Simms uses the past tense, implying that John Lynch was then dead. The statement, however, has no corroborative value, as it is obviously based on that of Mills.

419 Nothing further is known of this person.

420 Ellicott employed the terms “Lynch laws” and “Lynch-men” in 1811, or six years before the hitherto earliest known appearance of the term under any form.

421 His tombstone in the old Lynch burying-ground has this inscription:

nathaniel lynch, born in pittsylvania co., va. nov. 28, 1790.

died in pickens county feb. 20, 1861.

a devoted member of the baptist church for 30 years.

he followed virtue as his truest Guide,

lived like a christian, as a christian died.

This information comes from Miss Esther Edens of Pickens, S. C., who kindly undertook an investigation for me. Unless otherwise stated, all my data about the Lynch family of Pendleton District have been furnished by Miss Edens, who is a descendant of Captain William Lynch.

422 For information about the grants in 1798 and 1811 to William Lynch and William Lynch, Jr., I am indebted to Mr. A. S. Salley, Jr., of Columbia, S. C.

423 Captain William Lynch’s will follows:

State of South Carolina

Pendleton District

In the name of God Amen I, William Lynch, of the state and district aforesaid being weak in body but of sound and perfect mind and memory do make and publish this my last will and testament in manner and form following: that is to say principally and first of all I give and recommend my soul into the hand of Almighty God that gives it in my body to the earth to be buried in decent christian burial at the discretion of my executors I do lend to my wife, Ann Lynch, during her life and widowhood all my household, all kitchen furniture, plantation working tools, stock of cattle, hogs, sheep, and five head of horses, one mare named Snip, another named Dove, another named Quince, another named Prince, another named Fan with all corn, fodder, wheat and all crop of tobacco which was made last year, and the wagon and gears and my plantation as tract of land which I now live on equally The whole of the above mentioned property at her decease to be sold to the greatest advantage except the land which I now live on which I then give and devise unto my youngest son, John Lynch, son of William and Ann Lynch, which are above mentioned to belong to the said John Lynch and his heirs and assigns forever, also one sorrel colt named Pete and two cows, two sows and pigs I bequeath to my son, Nathaniel Lynch and my stud colt named Liberty I bequeath to my daughter, Nancy Cochran after the death of her mother $100 which is to be equally divided among four eldest children, as to say William, Licinday, Samuel, and Polly Ann Cochran I give and bequeath to my son, William Lynch, ten shillings to be paid at the death of his mother the whole of the above mentioned property and all my effects and goods except that which is above given unto Nathaniel Lynch and John Lynch to be sold at the death of my wife, Ann Lynch, and the money which said property and effects produces is to be equally divided between my four youngest children which is Nathaniel, Levina, Hariet and John. After the amount of ten shillings is set apart for every one of my children which was born of my first wife which is Abner, Joseph, Sarah, Polly, Elizabeth and Jeter, which sum of ten shillings I bequeath to each of them to be paid when called for or demanded after the death of my present wife, Ann Lynch, and I do hereby disallow revoke and disannul all and every other former testament will legacies and executors ratifying this and no other to be my last will and testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and seal this second day of June in the year of our Lord A. D. 1820. Signed sealed and published and declared by the above named William Lynch to be his last will and testament in the presence of us who have hereunto subscribed our names as witnesses in the presence of the testator.

Peter Robinson		his
Makey A. Keith	William	X	Lynch
Milton Ladd		mark

As the probate documents (which are recorded in the court house in Anderson, Anderson County, S. C.) are written in obscure hands, perhaps a few words are incorrectly transcribed.

A document dated September 8, 1820, reads: “. . . whereas William Lynch late of Pendleton Dist. deceased did in his last will and testament leave to his surviving widow more stock of various kinds and other property than she feels desposed to keep Your petitioners therefore pray you to grant order of sale to despose of such property as shall meet with her approbation. John M. Lynch.” Another document dated September 2, 1822, reads: “One hogshead of tobacco Three feather beds and other household furniture, a quantity of farm tools and carpenter tools which is about to become expensive and bothersome to the estate of the late William Lynch deceased Therefore, I, Ann Lynch, wife of the late William Lynch deceased, having had the above list of Property to me by the said William in his will I therefore Pray your honor to order a sale for said property in order that the legacies may have their right agreeable to the will of the said William and Sir your compliance will oblige yours Ann Lynch.”

424 For this extract I am indebted to the officials of the Library of Congress. Are the words “the good will of all honest people who knew him” a covert allusion to his connection with lynch law? Captain William Lynch’s grave is about ten miles from the court house in Pickens County, about one mile west of the Lynch burying-ground, and about one hundred yards from the house where he lived at the time of his death. There is a stone wall around his grave, but no tombstone.

425 For this extract I am indebted to the officials of the State Historical Society of Wisconsin. John M. Lynch died before February 13, 1824, for on February 24 Banister Stone, of Greenville District, S. C., was appointed administrator on his estate.

John M. Lynch and Captain William Lynch’s son John Lynch may have been one and the same man, though I imagine not. In 1826 a John Lynch (as I am informed by Mr. M. H. Lesesne of Pickens, S. C.) was granted land on Cane Creek, a branch of Keowee River, in Pickens County. If that John Lynch was the son of Captain William Lynch, obviously he and John M. Lynch were two different men. The matter is of small importance, for it has been proved that Captain William Lynch had a son John, who inherited the land on which his father lived when the latter died.

426 The discrepancy in title is not, I think, important. If it be true that an Englishman “dearly loves a lord,” it is equally true that an American dearly loves a title. Ellicott in 1811, the obituary in 1820, and Mills in 1826 called him “Captain,” and the notice further stated that he was “an old revolutionary soldier.” No William Lynch, however, is found in the List of Revolutionary Soldiers of Virginia (in Eighth Annual Report of the Library Board of the Virginia State Library, 1912) or in the List of Revolutionary Soldiers of Virginia (Supplement) (in Ninth Annual Report of the Library Board of the Virginia State Library, 1913). If William Lynch really held the title of Captain in 1820, it could easily have been magnified into “Colonel” by 1836.

427 Modern Philology, ii. 187. Charles Lynch had an older brother John, the founder of Lynchburg, Va., who also has sometimes been called the author of lynch law; and there has been hopeless confusion between the two brothers. In a conversation alleged to have taken place in 1834 but not recorded until 1859, the speaker, giving no christian name, said: “I knew Mr. Lynch well, . . . He was for many years the senior and presiding justice of the County Court of Pittsylvania, . . . His advanced age prevented him from taking the field during the War of Independence, . . . Our flourishing town of Lynchburg received its name in compliment to his worth” (n. 188–189). Charles Lynch was of Bedford County, he fought in the Revolution, he was only sixty when he died in 1796, and Lynchburg was probably named not for him but for his brother John. The passage is a fair sample of the wild statements made about a century ago.

428 That he made his mark in signing his will was probably owing to physical weakness, for in 1799 he had signed his name to a deed.

429 Miss Elizabeth H. Jervey of Charleston examined for me various South Carolina newspapers for the months of June-December, 1820, but found no allusion to anyone of the name of Lynch.

430 Cf. our Publications, vii. 94–125.

431 The earliest example hitherto recorded is dated August 12, 1836 (R. H. Thornton, American Glossary, i. 95). But two or three months before that, “A Spaniard and a Frenchman . . . went out to settle an affair of honor. . . . When all the parties were ready and stripped for the occasion, with two large Bowie-knives, (an instrument about twelve inches in length, and an inch and a half wide, with two edges tapering to a sharp point), and the word ‘ready’ was given, both rushed to the contest!” (Niles’ Register, June 4, 1836, l. 234, quoting the Greene County, Ohio, Gazette). Both contestants were killed.

432 Niles Register, September 29, 1838, lv. 70.

433 Cf. Proceedings American Antiquarian Society, xix. 21–65.

434 Rutland (England) Magazine, iii. 78–80; Leicestershire and Rutland Notes and Queries, iii. 163.

435 A. Young, Chronicles of Massachusetts, pp. 309, 310; A. Holmes, American Annals (1805), i. 243 note.

436 T. Hutchinson, History of Massachusetts (1767), ii. 1; Young, p. 29.

437 T. Hutchinson, Collection of Original Papers (1769), pp. 1–23.

438 Hutchinson, Collection, pp. 27–31.

439 Young, p. 310; R. C. Winthrop, Life and Letters of John Winthrop (1869), i. 308–317.

440 4 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., vi. 52.

441 R. C. Winthrop, i. 304, 344, 345; Young, p. 282.

442 Young, pp. 87, 88.

443 4 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., vi. 31, 32.

444 Young, p. 311.

445 Id., p. 312.

446 E. Johnson, Wonder-Working Providence of Sion’s Saviour in New England (ed. Jameson, 1910), pp. 64–65.

447 T. Prince, Annals (1826), p. 311; 1 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., iii. 75.

448 Young, pp. 375, 378, 380; E. Johnson, p. 65.

449 Young, pp. 380, 381.

450 J. and J. A. Venn, Alumni Cantabrigienses.

451 Rutland Magazine, iii. 65–67.

452 New England Historical and Genealogical Register, viii. 360, 361.

453 See my “Mr. Blackstone’s ‘Excellent Spring’” in our Publications, xi. 295 f.

454 W. Coddington, Demonstration of True Love (1674), p. 4.

455 1 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., iii. 76.

456 Young, pp. 116, 319.

457 4 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., vi. 579; R. C. Winthrop, ii. 40.

458 J. Winthrop, History of New England (1853), i 40, 113 note. On August 27 the whole congregation of Charlestown and Boston kept a fast. Many had removed across the river in August. See W. Hubbard, History of New England; p. 185; W. I. Budington, History of the First Church of Charlestown, p. 16; A. B. Ellis, History of the First Church in Boston, p. 8.

459 4 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., vi. 1, 32a.

460 J. Winthrop, i. 40; Young, p. 317.

461 C. Mather, Magnalia, Book i, Chapter 5, Section 4.

462 T. Prince, Annals, p. 319.

463 Preface to Volume i.

464 T. Hutchinson, History (1769), i, 16; New England Historical and Genealogcal Register, viii. 361.

465 T. Hutchinson, History, i. 16, 17.

466 A. Holmes, Annals (1805), i. 258; C. H. Snow, History of Boston, pp. 37, 331; Budington, p. 17; Young, p. 319; S. G. Drake, History and Antiquities of Boston, pp. 91 note, 99, 100.

467 New England Historical and Genealogical Register, viii. 83.

468 J. Savage, Genealogical Dictionary, ii. 552, 553.

469 Holmes, Annals (1829), i. 206 note; Felt, ii. 447.

470 R. C. Winthrop, ii. 47 note. No one knows when John Winthrop’s tomb was built. There is no contemporary notice of where he was buried. R. C. Winthrop, in Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xvii. 128, said: “His must have been a most notable burial at the time, and the exact place of his interment could not have been mistaken or forgotten, even if it were not marked at the moment.” This might also be said of Johnson’s burial. See also R. C. Winthrop, Life and Letters, ii. 397.

471 T. Lechford, Note Book, p. 32; Boston Records, ii. 16 (March 6, 1637).

472 Boston Records, ix. 1.

473 J. Winthrop, i 113 note. See also W. Hubbard (1848), p. 185.

474 See p. 280, ante.

475 T. Prince, Annals, i. 311, 315; 1 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., iii. 76.

476 Suffolk Deeds, xxiv. 406.

477 New England Historical and Genealogical Register, vii. 46. Of Walker Sewall wrote in his diary: “a very good man, and conversant among God’s New-England People from the begifiing.” 5 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., v. 179.

478 5 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., vi. 24.

479 J. Scottow, Old Men’s Tears (1749), p. 11.

480 J. Winthrop, History, ii. 415.

481 New England Historical and Genealogical Register, viii 361, 362.

482 Young, p. 318.

483 E. Johnson, p. 65.

484 Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., xxviii. 472.

485 xii. 191–203; and there is a corrected chart of the voyage in xx. 278–9. Mr. David Cheever and myself have pricked out the course across the Gulf of Maine independently, and the tracing on the chart reproduced facing page 286 is the result of our joint efforts. Mr. Julius H. Tuttle and Mr. George W. Robinson have helped me to decipher the legends on the two maps in Winthrop’s Journal. The United States Hydrographic Office and the Harvard Astronomical Laboratory have independently estimated the times of high tide at Salem on June 12–14, 1630, and agree within half an hour. To all these, my cordial acknowledgements are extended.

486 Mount Desert was so named by Champlain, but does not appear on either of his two published maps of New France.

487 In plotting the Arbella’s course, I have used the United States Government chart No. 1106 (Bay of Fundy to Cape Cod) for the Gulf of Maine, and No. 240 (Salem and Lynn Harbors) for her movements on June 12. The compass declination on these charts is 19° 15’ W. for the Bay of Fundy, and 15° 30’ W. for Salem Harbor. According to the graph of magnetic declination prepared by Mr. Ware for our Publications, xii. 394, the declination at Eastport, Maine, was about 18° W. in 1630. The difference is so slight between 1630 and 1930 that I have not thought it worth while to allow for it.

488 Before this paper went to press, and in June, 1930, I endeavored to check up on some of Winthrop’s observations, without success. Almost every day in June was either foggy or hazy, the easterly winds bringing inexhaustible masses of fog, and I did not find a single day when the visibility was as good as when Winthrop crossed the Gulf of Maine.

489 If any other point than Cape Sable be taken as a landfall, the subsequent sailing directions of Winthrop would either have run the Arbella ashore on Seal Island, or have taken her beyond the 30 fathom sounding.

490 I have collated all extracts from Winthrop’s journal quoted in this article with the original ms., and have printed them as exactly as type will allow, excepting that Winthrop’s abbreviations for points of the compass have uniformly been printed with capital letters, as it is not often clear whether Winthrop meant to use a capital or not.

491 “full” crossed out.

492 “8” crossed out, “15” substituted (Savage reads “10” probably incorrect); compare legend H, below.

493 The italicized words were added by Winthrop after the original entry.

494 George E. Street, Mount Desert (1926 ed.), pp. 23, 59–60.

495 According to a legend on Captain Holland’s New and Correct Chart of the Coast of New England (1794), “this land may be seen 15 Leagues off in very Clear Weather.” Blunt’s American Coast Pilot (seventh edition, 1812) says 20 leagues.

496 It is, however, being reproduced concurrently by Mr. Stewart Mitchell, for Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., lxii., and the reprint, The Founding of Massachusetts (1930), as well as in The Winthrop Papers, vol. ii. The photogravure and that facing page 300 are used by permission of the Massachusetts Historical Society.

497 The legends are difficult to decipher, and as printed in this paper they follow readings made by Mr. Stewart Mitchell, except for a few minor changes. Letters indicating points of the compass are here uniformly capitalized.

498 The figure “15” is cancelled under the “12.”

499 The bracket represents a single numeral which has been blotted out, and a “2” has been altered to the “0” of the “10.”

500 Evening, in the 17th century, was commonly used to represent the time from noon to sundown, and is still so used in the southern part of the United States.

501 The only high land east of Mount Desert on that coast is the Gouldsborough or Scuttock Hills, which seem continuous with Mount Desert from the distance that the Arbella was.

502 See illustrations facing pp. 294 and 296. The Harvard College Library owns the 1729 edition of the English Pilot, and also the editions of 1706, 1765, 1773, 1789, and 1794. The first edition of the English Pilot, the Fourth Book, according to Sabin, was London, 1689; there is no copy of this in the Library of Congress, though Sabin says there is. The silhouettes appear in the 1706 edition, but are not found in the unique copy of the 1707 edition in the Boston Athenaeum. In the 1742 edition the bearing of Holt Island (Isle au Haut) is properly corrected from W. by N. to N. by W. In the 1773 edition the legends relating to Seguin are omitted. In the 1789 edition the line of cuts representing Agamenticus and the Wells Hills is interchanged with the line representing Holt Island, etc., but the legends remain fixed! The same mistake is made in the 1794 edition. In Captain Holland’s New and Correct Chart of the Coast of New England and New York (London, 1794), which appears in A New Edition, Much Enlarged, of the North American Pilot for New England . . . (London, 1800), the same old silhouettes are found, engraved on steel, with the Seguin doing duty for the Bonabeg or Wells Hills! The mistake of calling the eastern part of Mount Desert “Land to the Eastward of Mount Desert” is perpetuated in every edition from 1706 to 1800.

503 Checked up by personal observation in the summer of 1930. The mountains, from left to right, are Sargent, Pemetic, Green, Dry, and Newport. Windscal Point is Schooner Head, and the island, one of the Porcupines.

504 See illustration facing p. 298.

505 “10” altered from “12” and “8 or” inserted at the same time.

506 This is the confusion between the Camden Hills and Mount Desert which I have already mentioned.

507 Words in italics were inserted by Winthrop later than the original entry.

508 Our Publications, xii. 200.

509 The highest elevation of Agamenticus is 692 feet above sea level. It will be noted that the silhouettes in The English Pilot contain separate profiles for “Agamenticus Hills” and “Wells Hills.” The North American Pilot (London 1800) identifies the Wells Hills with Bauneg Beg (about 820 ft.), in North Berwick, a few miles inland. In view of the confusion shown by The English Pilot between its profiles and its captions, I am of the opinion that what it calls Wells Hills is really Agamenticus, and what it calls Agamenticus is the same hill more distant, with an intrusive and chopped-off hill of greater height, which may have been merely a trial sketch by the mariner who originally furnished the data for these much used profiles. The “Land to the Eastward” is probably Cape Porpoise, and the bearing under it, a mistake for N. by W.

510 See plate opposite.

511 Presumably the name had been transferred between 1616 when Smith’s Description of New England appeared, and the Arbella’s voyage, to Mt. Agamenticus, which more nearly resembled three heads than these three low islands.

512 This name, which is simply the seventeenth century spelling for Savages (the rock is still called “the Savages” by local fishermen and seamen), is probably also a transfer, from the Savage Rock, so called by Gabriel Archer in his account of Gosnold’s voyage in 1602, “because the Savages first shewed themselves there.” Purchas His Pilgrimes (MacLehose ed.) xviii. 303. Gosnold’s Savage Rock has generally been identified as the Nubble off Cape Neddick, Maine.

513 “The Misery Islands and What Happened There,” Historical Collections of the Essex Institute, xxxviii. 225–6. Great Misery Island was known as Morton’s or Moulton’s Misery as early as 1658. They are called the Great and Little Miseries in a document of 1701.

514 Historical Collections of the Essex Institute, xxxiv. 218.

515 See note, page 302.

516 The term Cape Ann, at that time, was applied to the entire shore east of Beverly Harbor.

517 The last clause added by Winthrop later, and now almost illegible.

518 Waft is an old sea term for convoy or accompany.

519 Edition by J. F. Jameson, p. 35.

520 V. F. Barnes, The Dominion of New England, p. 8, note 7.

521 The Education of Henry Adams, p. 21.

522 Our chief source of information about Temple is the Temple Papers in the Gay Transcripts, now in the possession of the Massachusetts Historical Society. The same collection contains other documents relating to Temple in the series of Sedgwick Papers, State Papers, and Miscellaneous Papers, to which reference will occasionally be made. Many of the Temple letters, which here are to be found in extenso, are calendared in the Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series, America and West Indies, in the volumes for the years 1574–1660, 1661–1668, and 1669–1674.

523 Dictionary of National Biography; W. H. Whitmore in New England Historical and Genealogical Register, x. 74; Temple Papers, i. 103.

524 Dictionary of National Biography sub Peter and James Temple

525 Hutchinson Papers, ii. 176.

526 Temple Papers, i. 103, 120; State Papers, i. 18.

527 Temple Papers, ii. 1 ff.; Sedgwick Papers, p. 16; Suffolk Deeds, iii. 22.

528 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., vii. 120.

529 Temple Papers, ii. 29, 39, 46; State Papers, i. 5.

530 Suffolk Deeds, iv. 325; Sedgwick Papers, p. 16.

531 Suffolk Deeds, iii. 26; Temple Papers, ii. 39; State Papers, i. 5. There is considerable scattered information about Breedon. Temple describes him as the chief of the New England merchants. He apparently resided in Boston, but retained his London connections. Unlike Temple he never became a good New Englander and at the time of the visit of the Royal Commissioners his hostile attitude got him into trouble with the colonial authorities. See Palfrey, History of New England, ii. 495, note 3, and the New England Historical and Genealogical Register, viii. 62; xix. 311; xlvii. 399–402; xlviii. 127. See also Massachusetts Records iv, part 2, 69, 75, 208.

532 Massachusetts Archives, n. 504; lvii. 1; New York Historical Society Collections, Clarendon Papers, (1869), p. 55.

533 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., vii. 120.

534 State Papers, i. 12; Clarendon Papers, ut supra, p. 56.

535 Temple Papers, ii. 65 ff.; Calendar of State Papers, America and West Indies, 1574–1660, pp. 484 ff.; 1661–1668, No. 111 ff., passim.

536 Temple Papers, ii. 119; i. 7 ff., 103; New England Historical and Genealogical Register, viii: 287.

537 Temple Papers, i. 103.

538 The mortgage is recorded in Suffolk Deeds, iv. 308, the purchase of a part of Noddle’s Island in Idem, p. 210, the lease of Deer Island in Boston Town Records, 1660–1701, p. 14.

539 Suffolk Deeds, v. 389; Papers of the Lloyd Family of Lloyd’s Neck (New York Historical Society Collections, 1927), ii. 526.

540 Register of the Lynn Historical Society (1910), xiv. 109.

541 Suffolk Deeds, iv. 330.

542 Temple Papers, i. 58, 103.

543 Temple Papers, i. 103, 112, 117, 120; Memorials of the English and French Commissaries concerning the Limits of Nova Scotia or Acadia (London, 1755) i. 604–613.

544 Temple Papers, ii. 94.

545 W. H. Sumner, History of East Boston, pp. 192, 212; Suffolk Deeds, viii. 62. An abstract of Temple’s will is to be found in Bowditch’s Land Titles (Ms.), xxii. 301, at the Massachusetts Historical Society.

546 3 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., vii. 120; Maine Historical Society Collections, i. 398; Cotton Mather, Parentator, p. 34.

547 Massachusetts Records, iv, part 1, pp. 342, 355.

548 J. A. Doyle, English Colonies in America, iii. 110; George Bishop, New England Judged (1703), p. 157.

549 Hutchinson Papers, ii. 95, 106.

550 Maine Historical Society Collections, i. 398.

551 1 Mass. Hist. Soc. Proc., vi. 67, note; xiii. 134; 5 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., ix. 41.

552 For an incident of this period, see S. G. Drake, History and Antiquities of Boston, p. 374.

553 Idem, p. 452; Temple Papers, i. 35, 38.

554 Quincy, History of Harvard College, i. 508.

555 In 1670 Temple, Lake, Walker, and certain others acted as trustees for the North Church in the purchase of a piece of property near the meeting house. See Suffolk Deeds, vii. 117.

556 Cotton Mather, Parentator, p. 34; C. Robbins, History of the Second Church, p. 31, note.

557 Idem, p. 281.

558 Temple Papers, i. 130; Calendar of State Papers, America and West Indies, 1669–1674, No. 1088.

559 Temple Papers, i. 120.

560 Hutchinson Papers, ii. 175–6. The letter is dated April 10, 1674.

561 Jeremiah Burroughs (Jeremy Burrows), Puritan divine. At the time Shepard mentions, he was rector of Livetshire, Norfolk. He was deprived by Bishop Wren in 1636; according to his sympathizers, for not reading the Book of Sports; according to the Bishop, for non-residence. Victoria History of the County of Korfolk, ii. 286, 288.

562 Shepard, as was not uncommon in his day, frequently uses an abbreviation for er after u (= v). In such cases, contrary to the practice followed elsewhere in editing this manuscript, the word has been spelled out, a “u” being substituted for the “v” to conform to his usage.

563 This word, obviously demanded by the context, has been inserted in the margin in another hand.

564 Thomas Shepard, Jr., was baptized February 7, 1635–6. Young, Chronicles of Massachusetts Bay, p. 545.

565 Probably the “white pasque flower,” commonly regarded as one of the anemone family. Salmon’s Herbal (1710) does not give any cure resembling this under “pasque flower.” But under the heading “ointment of anemone” (p. 20) he says that “the eye-lids being annointed therewith, it helps opthalmies or inflammations of the eyes.”

566 The following page in the original is blank except for a note written in by a modern commentator. The pagination of this edition follows at this point that in the manuscript, not in Shepard’s hand, which does not number the blank page. Beginning with page 21 of this edition, however, the editor has used his own pagination instead of that in the manuscript which repeats the number “20.”

567 This, as the context shows, is obviously a mistake for 1605.

568 This may be a slip of the pen. Otherwise it would indicate that Shepard began writing the Autobiography during his university days, as there is no indication that he lived at Towcester after taking his M. A.

569 It was an old and amiable custom for churchwardens to have a considerable quantity of ale brewed to be sold at the festivals during Whitsuntide, a practice approved by the Book of Sports. The worthy purpose to which the proceeds were devoted, the support and repairs of the church, was obscured in Puritan eyes by the resulting hilarity which inevitably attended the festivities.

570 The Towcester Grammar School dates back to 1451, when newly half the revenues of a chantry founded by William Sponne, Archdeacon of Norfolk, were devoted to educational projects. The masters in the early seventeenth century were paid £7 14s. 2d. a year. Victoria History of the County of Northampton, ii. 225–229.

571 Hiccups.

572 William Shepard’s will was proved June 6, 1617, disposing of an estate inventoried at £704 1s. 8d. Thomas was left £100, which, the will states, was then in the hands of the testator’s father-in-law, Richard Bland. According to the inst, ructions given, William Shepard’s “overseers,” among whom Thomas’ elder brother John was named, were to put the children’s portions out to interest at 18d. in the £. The house in Banbury was given to Samuel, the rent to be used for his “better education.” The widow, Amy (maiden name unknown) was granted letters of administration. Northamptonshire Notes and Queries, iv. 63.

573 There is recorded along with the will the granting of letters of guardianship, both of Thomas’ person and portion, to his brother John, a step which was taken with the “express consent” of his stepmother. Id., 63.

574 William Cluer (B.A. Emmanuel, 1610) was appointed master of the school September 23, 1617. G. Baker, History and Antiquities of the County of Northampton, ii. 336.

575 Daniel Cockerell, M.A., 1612, Fellow, 1612–1621. Venn, Al. Cantab., i. 363. For the University in Shepard’s time and the persons mentioned by him, see J. B. Mullinger, History of the University of Cambridge, ii.

576 Shepard was admitted pensioner, February 10, 1619–20. Venn, iv. 60.

577 The public rooms or other places in the university where lectures were read and disputations held.

578 This word is interlined in the hand of another person, who evidently feared lest the “great pox” (see N.E.D.) be imputed to the youth. One other episode in Shepard’s undergraduate career is described in the Notebook of Thomas Woodcock, who succeeded Shepard in the family of Richard Harlakenden, becoming tutor of the latter’s son and heir Richard: “When the same Master Shepard was at Emanuel Coledge he studyed in Bed, had a wyre Candlestick, while he slept the snuff of the Candle fell on his pillow — burned and smothred so that when the Bedmaker came in the morning shee was almost styfled, opened the Window and cryed her Mr was choaked. This awakened him: the pillow was burned, saveing in the places where his head and neck lay — not a hair of his head singed.” (This and a subsequent extract were kindly furnished by Colonel Geoffrey Probert, of Bures, Suffolk, England.)

579 Laurence Chaderton, Master of Emmanuel, 1584–1622. He was eighty four years old when Shepard entered the college, and lived to be over a hundred.

580 The correct citation is Gen. xviii. 32.

581 Dr. John Preston, a popular and talented young fellow of Queen’s Collegel who was converted to the Puritan point of view by John Cotton, was elected Master of Emmanuel in 1622.

582 Samuel Stone, of Hertford. He graduated from Emmanuel College the same year as Shepard, emigrated to New England with Thomas Hooker, and became his colleague in the ministry both at Newtown and at Hartford, Connecticut.

583 The Grinindletonians were a branch of the Familists. See Ephraim Pagitt, Heresiography (6th ed., 1661), p. 115. The Familists in general taught that “the same perfection of holinesse which Adam had before he fell, is to be obtained here in this life.” Id., 107.

584 Richard Rogers (M.A. Cambridge 1574), noted Puritan and lecturer at Wethersfield, Essex; father of Ezekiel Rogers, first minister of Rowley, Massachusetts. The book here referred to is Seaven Treatises containing such Directions as is gathered out of the Holie Scriptures (1603), of which his Practice of Christianity (1618) was an abbreviated version.

585 In the original, this numeral appears in the margin opposite the wordl “euery.”

586 Thomas Weld or Welde (M.A., Cambridge, 1618) then vicar of Terling, Essex; later pastor of the church in Roxbury. Shepard took his M.A. at Commencement, 1627.

587 Thomas Hooker, the famous Puritan, fellow of Emmanuel, 1609–18, and at this time lecturer at Chelmsford, Essex; later pastor of Newtown and of Hartford, Connecticut.

588 Young suggests that this may have been Dr. Edmund Wilson, brother of John Wilson, minister of the church in Boston. The former at another time showed his active sympathy for the Puritans by a gift of £1000 to Massachusetts Bay which was invested in military supplies. Chronicles of Massachusetts, 513n.

589 “Lecturers” were found chiefly in towns where there was a strong Puritan element. Appointed and paid through the private action of a corporation or of individuals to preach sermons, they were under no obligation to read the services in the Book of Common Prayer, and thus their conformity could not be so readily tested. Their existence “provided a certain elasticity in the ecclesiastical institutions of the country, without which the enforcement of uniformity would in the long run prove impracticable.” S.R. Gardiner, History of England (ed. 1905), vii. 130–131.

590 The following comment on the vicar of Earle’s Colne appeared in A View of the State of the Clargie within the Countie of Essex, published about 1609: “He seldome preacheth, then unprofitable and for the most parte the labors of other men, he begineth ofte tymes to saye service as he is going to his seate, he readeth the psalmes and chapters unreverendlie with his hat on his head, gaspingeand yauneinge as if he were halfe a sleepe.” Victoria History of the County of Essex, ii. 47.

591 Thomas Goodwin, a noted Puritan, was fellow of St. Catharine’s when Shepard came up to Cambridge. He succeeded Preston in the lectureship at Trinity Church, Cambridge.

592 Thomas Dove, Bishop of Peterborough from 1601 to 1630, the eloquence of whose preaching is reported to have moved Queen Elizabeth on one occasion to remark that she thought “the Holy Ghost was descended again in this Dove.” He was one of the nine bishops to represent the church party at the Hampton Court Conference, although on later occasions he was charged with remissness in allowing silenced ministers to preach.

593 The Priory, dating back as a foundation to about 1100, was dissolved in 1536, passing into the hands of the Earl of Oxford and subsequently of the Harlakenden family. Its large extent — it was partially torn down about a century ago because its owner was unwilling to keep “an acre of roof in repair” — is sufficient commentary upon the wealth and social importance of the Harlakenden family, which had been Puritan in its sympathies from the sixteenth century.

594 George Mountain or Blontaigne, successively Dean of Westminster, Bishop of Lincoln, of London, and of Durham, and Archbishop of York.

595 Thomas Prince, in his Annals of New England (ii. 46–47), quotes from a manuscript of Shepard then in his possession which gives additional information regarding this episode:

“Dec. 16. 1630. I was inhibited from Preaching in the Diocess of London by Dr. Laud Bp of that Diocess. As soon as I came in the Morning, about 8 of the Clock; falling into a Fit of Rage, he asked me, what Degree I had taken in the University? I ansaer’d him, I was a Master of Arts. He ask’d, of what College? I answer’d, of Emanuel. He ask’d how long I had liv’d in his Diocess? I answer’d three Yeurs and upwards. He ask’d, who maintain’d me all this While? Charging me to deal plainly with him; adding with all, that he had been more cheated and equivocated with by some of my malignant Faction than ever was Man by Jesuit. At the speaking of which Words he look’d as tho’ Blood would have gush’d out of his Face, and did shake as if he had been haunted with an Ague Fit, to my Apprehension by Reason of his extream Malice & secret Venom: I desired him to excuse me: He fell then to threaten me, & withal to bitter Railing, calling me $1 to naught, saying; You prating Coxcomb! Do you think all the Learning is in your Brains? He pronounc’d his Sentence thus; I charge you that you neither Preach, Read, Many, Bury, or exercise any Ministerial Function in any Part of my Diocess; for if you do, and I hear of it, I’ll be upon your back, and follow you wherever you go, in any Part of tht Kingdom, and everlastingly disenable you. I besought him not to deal so, in Regard of a poor Town, and here he stopt me in what I was going on to say; A poor Town! You have made a Company of seditious, factious Bedlams; and what do you prate to me of a poor Town? I pray’d him to suffer me to catechise in the Sabbath Days in the Afternoon: He replied, spare your Breath, I’ll have no such Fellows prate in my Diocess; get you gone, and nowmake your Complaints to whom you will? So away I went; and blessed be God that I may go to Him.”

596 Probably Peldon, a town about five miles from Colchester, Essex.

597 Son of Richard and brother of Ezekiel Rogers; for many years lecturer, as was his father, at Wethersfield, Essex.

598 Either Nathaniel Ward, “the simple cobler,” at this time at Stondon Massey, Essex, or his brother Samuel, lecturer at Ipswich, Suffok.

599 Stephen Marshall, at this time vicar of Finchingfield, Essex.

600 Samuel Wharton (M.A., Cambridge, 1612), then vicar of Felsted, Essex. Both he and Marshall were called to task by Laud for their alleged nonconformity. 3 Mass. Hist. Soc. Coll., i. 237.

601 Martin Holbeach (M.A. Cambridge, 1625); he was nominated to the headmastership of Felsted School by the Earl of Warwick in 1628. During his régime the school enjoyed a great reputation, drawing the bulk of its scholars from outside. Four of Cromwell’s sons were educated there. Victoria History of the County of Essex, ii. 534.

602 Subsequently the founder and first minister of Rowley, Massachusetts.

603 I.e., that time.

604 I.e., changed our clothes.

605 He subsequently played an important part in the early years of the New Haven Colony.

606 They both emigrated, and after their marriage settled in Cambridge.

607 John Alured and Mary Darley were, according to the parish register, married on November 17, 1631.

608 The following entry occurs in the parish register of Bossall, Yorks.: “1632. MT Thomas Shepard and m^ris margarit Tutvile were maried the .23. of July.” His wife’s name is evidently a corruption of “Estuteville,” a family of Norman origin, owners of the manor of Scrayingham in the East Riding, which in those days included Bossall and Buttercrambe on the west side of the Dement.

609 Shepard originally wrote “or 31:” after “1632.”

610 Richard Neile, Bishop of Winchester and, after 1631, Archbishop of York, was a zealous Laudian as can be seen from the ninety-seven articles of inquiry issued before he visited his province in 1633. Among other things, unlicensed lectures and exercises were to be reported. Victoria History of Yorkshire, iii. 57.

611 Thomas Morton; he has been described as belonging to the school of Richard Hooker rather than of Laud. His conciliatory attitude distinguished him in a day of violent partisanship. Victoria History of the County of Durham, ii. 4647.

612 John Bridge was in Cambridge as early as 1632, remaining there after the Hooker exodus and serving at various times as Deacon, Selectman, and Ftepresentative. Paige, History of Cambridge, p. 500.

613 John Russell was one of the Shepard group in 1635. Paige, p. 35.

614 Edward Collins settled in Cambridge in 1635 or 1636. Id., p. 35.

615 Joseph and George “Cocke” were among those crossing with Shepard on the Defense in 1635, officially listed as Roger Harlakenden’s servants. J. C. Hotten, Lists of Emigrants to America, 1600–1700, p. 100.

616 Edward Johnson furnishes additional details relating to these weeks at Ipswich (he mistakenly says Yarmouth) in his Wonder-Working Providence (ed. 1867, pp. 64–65): “. . . some persons eagerly hunting for Mr. Thomas Shepard, began to plot (for apprehending of him) with a Boy of Sixteene or seventeen yeares of Age, who lived in the House where he Lodged to open the doore for them at a certaine houre in the night; But the Lord Christ, who is the Shep heard of Israel kept a most sure watch over his indeared servants, for thus it befell, the sweet words of grace falling from the . . . lips of this Reverend and godly Mr. Thomas Shepard in the hearing of the Boy (the Lords working withall) hee was perswaded this waa an holy man of God, and therefore with many troubled thoughts, began to relate his former practice, although he had a great some of money promised him, onely to get them in at the houre and time appointed; but the Boy, the more neere the time came, grew more pensive and sad, insomuch that his Master taking notice thereof began to question him about the cause of his heavinesse, who being unwilling to reveale the matter, held of from confessing a long time, till by urgent and insinuating search of his godly Master, with teares hee tells that on such a night hee had agreed to let in Men to apprehend the godly Preacher. The good Man of the house forthwith gave notice thereof unto them, who with the helpe of some well-affected persons was convay’d away by boate through a back Lane, the men at the time appointed came to the house, where finding not the doore open (when they lifted up the Latch) as they expected, they thrust their staves under it to lift it from the hookes, but being followed by some persons, whom the good man of the house had appointed for that end; yet were they boditred out in this their wicked act by those who set them one worke. Notwithstanding they were greatly ashamed when they mist of their end!”

617 John Norton (1606–1663), then curate of Bishop’s Stortford, Northamptonshire; he too started for New England again the following yearl though not on the same ship as Shepard. After a period at Ipswich, he succeeded Cotton in the Boston church.

618 According to Johnson’s account of the storm (p. 65), “the Master, and other Sea men made a strange construction of the sore storme they met withall, saying, their Ship was bewitched, and therefore made use of the common Charme ignorant people use, nailing two red hot horse-shoos to their maine mast.”

Thomas Woodcock’s Notebook gives the following account of this episode:

“When he was going from Yarmouth to New-England a suddain storm drave the ship on the sands that the men called for all to shift for themselves for their lives, for there was no hope. Says Mr S. have you done what you can? they said, yes. Come then, saith he, let us pray, and see what God will do. Before he had done praying the wind turned, fetched the ship of the sands and flung her into the maine; so they came to shore; a little after went to sea again and finisht their voyage prosperously. Thus was this good man preserved for great purposes.”

619 Richard Champney; he came with Shepard in 1635 and served many years as Ruling Elder in the Cambridge Church. Paige, p. 506.

620 Both Edmund Frost and Edward Goffe came over the same year as Shepwd, but not in the same ship. Both settled in Cambridge where Frost acquired an estate on the westerly side of Dunster Street between Harvard Square and Mt. Auburn Street. Goffe became one of the biggest landowners. Goffe’s College, one of the early Harvard College buildings, was one of his properties.

621 William Bridge, M.A. Cambridge, 1626.

622 Shepard and his group sailed on the Defense, Thomas Bostock, master. Bostock, according to the Register of the Port of London, had brought, “testimony from the Justices of Peace & Minister in Cambridge of his conformitie to the orders & discipline of the Church of England,” and had taken “y^e oaths of Alleg: &: Suprem:” In the official list of passengers, Shepard appears as “John Shepard,” aged thirty six. Unlike Roger Harlakenden, he mas not credited with having taken the oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy. Samuel Shepard, like the Cooke brothers, was listed as Harlakenden’s servant. Hotten, pp. 98–100.

623 John Wilson, teacher of the church in Boston, now returning from his second voyage to England since crossing with Winthrop in 1630.

624 John Jones, who co-operated in the founding of Concord, subsequently moving to Fairfield, Connecticut.

625 William Coddington, later to become one of Mrs. Hutchinson’s champions and Governor of Rhode Island.

626 See Winthrop’s Journal (Rosmer ed., i. 173–174) for an account of the gathering of this church, “the first use of a method that later became orthodox and prescribed in New England.” S. E. Morison, Builders of the Bay Colony, p. 112.

627 A sect originating in the sixteenth century with a creed based on the theory that religion “consists whollyin love independently of the form of faith.” C. F. Adams, Antinomianism, 185n¹. From that it was easy to derive the idea of free love, with all its connotations of a “Communitie of Woemen; & all promiscuous & filthie coming togeather of men & Weomen. without Distinction or Relation of Marriage. . . .” Id., p. 314. See also note 23 above.

628 The following notes in Shepard’s hand appear in the manuscript of the Autobiography:

M^r Cotton: repents not: but is hid only

1: Wⁿ m^ris Hutchinsō was conuented he comme[n]ded her for all that shee did before her confinement & so gaue her a light to escape thorow the crowd w^t honour.

2: being askt whether all reu[e]lations were lost bec: all reuelations were either to compleat Scripture or for the infancy of the weake church, he answered that they were all ceased about ꝑtic. euents; rules to weake X^tians; & seemd to confirme it now; wheras in the sermō it was to the weake church vnder the old testament, he did extend it to weake xtlamals o vnder the new;

3: he doth stiffly hold the reuelatiō of o^r good estate still, without any sight of woord or woorke:

From the reference to Mrs. Hutchinson’s “confinement” it appears that these notes refer to the trial before the church in March, 1638, which resulted in her excommunication. Shepard was obviously not convinced of Cotton’s sincerity when on that occasion he aligned himself with the orthodox majority. The basis for his first charge may be found in a sentence of Cotton’s Admonition. Mrs. Hutchinson, interrupting him while he was discussing some of her “unsound Tenets” and their consequences, protested that she “did not hould any of thease Thinges” before her imprisonment. To this, Cotton replied: “I confesse I did not know that yow held any of thease Things, nor heare till hear of late: but it may be it was my sleepines & want of wachfull care over you. . . .” C. F. Adams. Antinomianism, pp. 314–315.

The question of “revelations” was one of the fundamental issues of the case against Mrs. Hutchinson. According to the sources printed by Adams, however, it was at the civil rather than at the ecclesiastical proceedings against her that Cotton, in answer to direct questions, gave his views on this moot point.

629 His Fast Day sermon, January 19, 1686–7.

630 The Synod lasted from August 30 to September 22. Winthrop (Hosmer ed.), i. 232–235.

631 Vane was defeated by Winthrop at the election held in Cambridge, May 17, 1637. At the same election, willism Coddington and Atherton Hough were dropped from the magistracy.

632 The reference is to the wife and children of Mononotto. “It was known to be by her Mediation that two English Maids (that were taken away from Wethersfield . . .) mere saved from Death, in requital of whose Pity and Humanity, the Life of her self and her Children was not only granted her, but she mas in special recommended to the Care of that honorable Gentleman Mr. John Winthrop. . . .” Hubbard’s Indian Wars (ed. 1865), ii. 37–38.

633 Nathaniel Eaton, educated at Trinity College, Cambridge, and at Franeker. He was a brother of Theophilus Eaton, of New Haven.

634 Haled into court in September, 1639, because of the Briscoe affair, Eaton was fined and assessed damages, removed from his position at Harvard, and permanently disqualified from teaching in the colony.

635 Henry Dunster; see Morison, Builders of the Bay Colony, ch. 6.

636 From Winthrop’s account of the episode (Hosmer ed., i. 310–315) it would appear that Shepard had ample reason to lament his part in the proceedings. After Eaton had given his usher an unmerciful beating, he persuaded Shepard that Briscoe’s brief zttempts at self-defense made the unfortunate man punishable by the authorities. Shepard even went so far as to accompany Eaton to the governor and some of the magistrates with the request that Briscoe be “enjoined to a public acknowledgement, etc.” The fact that Shepard had admitted Eaton among the first to full communion in his church, preserving the record of the latter’s statement of conversion in his notebook, could only have added to his chagrin.

637 Roger Harlakenden died of small pox, November 17, 1638. Winthrop (i. 281) laments the passing of “a very godly man, . . . of good use both in the commonwealth (Assistant) and in the church.” By his will, which Shepard vitnessed, Harlakenden left his friend £40, and entrusted to him the disbursement of £20 left to the “pore brethren of or Congregation.” New England Historical and Genealogical Register, ii. 182.

638 The Sincere Convert (London, 1640 and later editions). The title page of the fourth edition (1646) lists six “choyce and Divine Principles” that are “excellently and plainly opened.” According to Shepard in the introduction to The Sound Beleever (London, 1645), the former work appeared without his “privitie, knowledge, or will,” reliance presumably being had on shorthand accounts of his sermons in England. The second title is the one under which he published the remainder of his “notes,” thereby satisfying “the many desires both of friends and strangers, both by Private speecha and Letters” which he thought might be “the voyce of Christ.”

639 Joanna Hooker.

640 See Palfrey, History of New England, i. 112ff; 224–229.

641 Joseph Simonds, a contemporary of Shepard at Emmanuel. He subsequently became rector of St. Martin’s, Iremonger Lane, London, from which post he was deprived in 1639. Venn, iv. 77.

642 John Beadle, M.A. Cambridge, 1620; as rector of Little Leighs, Essex, he was one of those to sign a petition to Laud in favor of Thomas Hooker when the latter was in difficulties with the church authorities in 1629. Beadle himself was up before Laud for nonconformity in 1633 but submitted. Venn, i. 115.

643 ii Chron. xxii. 25.

644 These financial transactions involving “the house” are to be explained by the fact that Shepard’s group took over the homes of the departing Hooker group. Shepard himself took Hooker’s house, in the college yard on the north side of Massachusetts Avenue opposite Holyoke Street; Samuel Shepard acquired the property on the south side of the street, opposite his brother. Paige, pp. xv–xvi.

645 A Mr. Damport was licensed by the General Court, March 12, 1637–8, to sell “wine & strong wat^r” in Newtown. Massachusetts Colony Records, i. 221. According to Paige (p. 225) this was Nicholas Danforth, selectman and representative.

646 Long Marsh.

647 Possibly the Reverend Peter Bulkeley, who was in Cambridge for a short time before he went “up further into the woods” to establish the town of Concord.

648 The bracketed items in these accounts have been crossed out in the original.

649 Gregory Stone, probably the brother of the Samuel Stone previously mentioned.

650 Justice, wife of Guy Banbridge who was in Cambridge as early as 1634. In 1642 “our sister Banbrick being sick,” she received from the church a “brest of mutton,” and the following year her husband was given “1 bottell Sack.” Paige, p. 258.

651 Edward Winship, who settled in Cambridge in 1635.

652 Richard Girling, also an arrival in 1635; perhaps the same one as mentioned previously as master of the Hope, in which Shepard made his first start for New England.

653 There was a John Brunson among the Hartford settlers.

654 Thomas Chesholme later became steward of Harvard College.

655 John Sill, frequently helped by the church with his debts. Paige, p. 257.

656 John Trumbull, late of Newcastle-on-Tyne, master and owner of a vessel that plied between Boston, the Connecticut River, and England. He resided on the south side of South Street, at the corner of Holyoke Street. Savage, Genealogical Dictionary, iv. 336; Supplement to Paige’s Cambridge, p. 751.

657 William Goodwin, Ruling Elder of Hooker’s church in Newtown and a Hartford emigrant. Paige, p. 248.

658 Perhaps Richard Harris, brother of President Dunster’s first wife.

659 Shepard’s servant; he now removed to Bridgewater and mamed a niece of Governor Winslow.