Chapter III: Part 3

Text size

The letter of Mr. Kidder relative to the "pretty pynnace of about thirty tonne," is again referred to by your correspondent. What are we to understand by the few notices of her history? Simply this, that on "August 28," "the carpenters labored about the building of a small pinnace." Their first act was to prepare the timber from the surrounding forest,--not necessarily of "green pine," where the ridge bears oak, maple and spruce now, and perhaps did then,--and put it into shape for future use. It was left to season during the autumnal months. Then, after Captain Davies returned to England, with an account of the "forwardness of their plantation," on the 15th of December, the seasoned timber was "framed," and the craft completed, as the "Brief Relation" says, "notwithstanding the coldness of the season and the small help they had." For reasons satisfactory to the leaders of the colony, after Captain Davies returned to them, Strachey says "they all ymbarqued in the new arrived shipp and in the new pynnace, the Virginia, and sett saile for England." Gorges says they "all resolved to quit the place, and with one consent to [go] away." Sir William Alexander says, "Those that went thither ... returned back with new hopes." The "Briefe Relation" says the news from home "made the whole company to resolve upon nothing but their return with their ships; ... having built a pretty bark of their own, which served them to good purpose, as easing them in their returning;" and asserts "the arrival of these people here in England,"--of course, the same "people" who embarked, and in the same "ships" in which they commenced the voyage. Any other interpretation will be a violent perversion of language. As to any persons of the colony remaining to be rovers on the coast in another supposed pinnace, it will be time enough to consider that conjecture, when proof shall be brought to change it into history. It will be "credulity" to answer such a "demand" on our faith, as long as it is unsupported by evidence; and we shall still believe that "The Virginia" was not, perhaps the first craft of the Northmen, French, Basques, Dutch, or Indians, of whom we were not thinking--but was the pioneer ship of the _English people_ in the new world, and was a striking proof of the skill and enterprise of the laboring colonists, with Digby, the London shipwright, as their head in her construction.

But, whatever may be said of the enterprise or its details, whether favorable or unfavorable, the true and single point for grave consideration is the prominent fact, that a colony was founded at the mouth of the Kennebec under the charter of James, 1606, which Popham "certainly was a chief instrument in procuring," and that this was the _first_ thus laid in New England under English sway.

No personalities, no imputation of sinister and never existing motives, no disparagement of the character of the prime movers and later advocates,--for Gorges has been blamed as well as Popham,--no reproaches thrown upon the laboring colonists, and no finger of derision pointed at the failure of their purpose, should turn the reader of history away from this path. The leading minds in England, with the King as their friend, were actuated by the desire to turn to good account the discoveries of the early navigators; the reports of fishermen returning from our coast, and the more systematic researches of Gosnold, who, Strachey says, came "for discovery;" and Weymouth, whose narrative, and Pring, whose exact description pointed out the Kennebec as the place for speedy occupation. Emphasis was given to the determination of the associates, by their bearing with them a charter and a constituent code of laws, carrying out the principles of the English Constitution. An expedition of that nature, and at that time, required relatively much more of thought, energy and means than one of ten times its numbers and power would do at the present day. The fact, that it came directly to the Kennebec, shows that its course and destination did not depend on any capricious views of its commander; but were in accordance with a previously matured plan "for the seizing such a place as they were directed unto by the council of the colony." Its approach near to the claimed territory of France implies a previous knowledge of the coast, and a purpose to take possession within the chartered limits, fully up the undisputed boundary line. This occupation, and those made in the few following years, were called in the patent of 18 James, Nov. 3, 1620, the "actual possession of the continent;" thus showing how exalted a value was placed on these incipient, though feeble measures, by the highest authority in the mother land. The commercial purposes of the undertaking at Sagadahoc were not all. A religious purpose was connected therewith, and carried on during its continuance. Its great purpose was to secure title within the territory granted to the company. Signal disasters attended the later part of its life; and, though it failed commercially, Gorges "had no reason greatly to despair of means." In its historic influence, and in its opening the way for immediate and successive efforts, it was, in the words of Maine's most worthy and distinguished living historian, "_one_ of the steps in the grand march of civilization."

As such, and as the _first_ chartered "step" on our rock-bound coast by "English hearts and hands," we have thought it proper to do it honor; and this too as persons united in no one single denomination of Christians. We have taken pleasure in aiding to bring before the appreciative mind of the community "this _initial point_ in the history of the settlement of New England," and its bearing on subsequent settlements along our shores. We have thought that the Charter of 1606 gave life to this and other enterprises. It was in harmony with its design and privileges, that "the King's Majesty and the bishops consented" to the wishes of the people at Leyden to remove to this land; and so far gave them the aid of the Church, which Mather says was not possessed with the spirit of persecution against them, though some of its members indulged that folly. The several documents following this leading instrument of title and occupation, such as the enlarged charters, "The First Plymouth Patent," and the patents issued for the benefit of Maine and Massachusetts, are traceable to this source, and to the able men concerned in its origination and provisions. So that, in a pure and great historical fact and its sequences, we have had enough to warrant our past commemorations. It is no fault of ours, that other colonies came earlier and later, and did not build a sea-going vessel in this northern latitude in the first year of their stay. We rejoice where they were successful, permanent, and a blessing to the world. But why cannot we be allowed to celebrate an event, one of the greatest of its times, without being taunted with sayings, which, while bearing bitterness, need the support of evidence; and with words which, however amiably they may have been intended, boldly represent us as culprits, "indictable at common law"?

In taking my leave of your columns, courteously allowed for this discussion, I regret that I have been compelled to occupy so much space. But much more would have been needed to rectify all the applications of the quotations from the old writers, who, so far as the colony of Sagadahoc is concerned, must be explained in harmony with the Charter of 1606, which provided only for "willing" men to join in the enterprise, and continued to them all the franchises of Englishmen at home. I wish now only to add, that I stand not alone in my opinions about the Popham Colony. Persons of the highest historical authority in the State and elsewhere support the same view. One of these, the late Bishop Burgess, had designed to write at length on this debated subject. He had been in correspondence with the present Duke of Somerset for information on one part of its history. He had already said, and patriotically too, of the chaplain of the colony, "Seymour was the first preacher of the Gospel in the English tongue, within the borders of New England, and of the free, loyal and unrevolted portion of these United States. Had he inherited all the honors of his almost royal grandsire, they would have given him a far less noble place than this, in the history of mankind." But the fatal illness of this eminent historical scholar has prevented the intended gift of his deliberate and final testimony in defence of the claims here set forth in behalf of "that northerne colony uppon the Sagadahoc."

SABINO.

[_Boston Daily Advertiser, July 28, 1866._]

A RUNNING REVIEW OF THE "POPHAM AGAIN AND FINALLY."

_To the Editors of the Boston Daily Advertiser_:--

By referring to the Supplement of the _Daily Advertiser_ of the 31st of May, I see that "pool" has again overflowed, and the result is a wishy-washy everlasting flood of nearly four columns in small type, some of which seem to be a reply to the fairly-written statements and comments of "Sabino;" but the most of it reads very much like one of Van Buren's old messages with which we were served annually, some twenty-five years ago, while in barefaced effrontery it much resembles the speeches of Jeff. Davis and Wigfall, at the commencement of the late rebellion. Let us wade through this mass of matter which reaches from the voyage of Noah to the latest raid on the Pophamites; and here let me remark, that the writer handles that ancient navigator's character very much as he does Chief Justice Popham's, looking only at its worst side. Why does he not assert that his ark was built of "green pine," and no one would embark in it, or, if they did, they went a fishing, and never arrived at Mount Ararat; for there is just as much evidence of this as there is in his assertions relative to the vessel built at Sabino. But let us follow the writer, and see how he replies to "Sabino." First, he finds great difficulty in understanding what all others clearly appreciate, and this accounts for many of his misstatements, for if a man cannot understand the truth, how can he communicate it? Secondly, he gives us a short lesson on style; but finally concludes "that, after all, it is greatly a matter of taste for which there is no accounting." I agree with him on this point; and, as evidence of what his taste is, let me make an extract from his description of the discovery of the locality of the Popham Colony. "Nothing would satisfy a few excellent people of Maine, but to dig up the sickening remains, and flaunt them under the nostrils of the community. Here was an offense against decency and sanitary regulations, indictable at common law. In cholera times the proceeding is insufferable. Their first mistake was, that when they came to the putrid mass they did not carefully replace the sod." Does this read like a review from a student of history? Does it not more likely resemble the report of a city scavenger, when the cholera is expected? Then, next, comes a quotation from Lord Bacon's essays on plantations in general, published about twenty years after the Popham expedition; and it is difficult to see what it has to do with the Popham Colony. If it could be referred to any one in particular, it must have been the then transporting of such people as he talks of to Virginia. Next, he asserts that the Colony only occupied "a few acres of ground on the promontory of Sabino." Will he tell how many more acres were really occupied at Jamestown or Plymouth the first six months of their existence?

Then comes a repetition of the old traditionary story published doubtingly by Williamson. A venerable New England writer says, "tradition is the biggest liar in the world," and, in this case, I certainly acquiesce in his assertion, and I doubt if any respectable historian would think of repeating so questionable a tale. In speaking of the end of the colony, by reason of the death of the two Pophams, he says, "did it ever occur to 'Sabino' that his colony must have had a slender foundation to have fallen into ruins at the death of two out of a hundred and twenty persons?" Will he tell us how many more than the death of the two most prominent persons at Plymouth would have caused its abandonment during their extremity in the spring of 1621? Certainly, not many. Then comes near a column of abuse on the Chief Justice, with abundant extracts from his biographers which may all be true; but, if so, his appointment and continuance on the bench was a disgrace and shame to Queen Elizabeth and the leading men of her reign. And then he comes to that cannon story again. Did it ever occur to him, that, if the statement were true, the returning colonists would have related it at home? For such things always come out; and the Pophamites had as bitter enemies there as P. is, and so it would have been a part of the authentic history of that expedition. Have there not been much worse outrages on the poor Indian all over our country since? And then he repeats his doubts about the arrival of that pretty pinnace in England, of which there can be no more question than of the return of many of the early emigrant ships which carried back passengers who were known to have reached there, while there is no mention of the ships.

But he states "Brief Relation says nothing about the arrival of _either vessel_: it records simply the arrival of _these people_ here in England." Well that out-Herods Herod: how does he expect they got there? He certainly knows they embarked in both vessels, for Strachey says, "Wherefore they all ymbarqued in this new arrived ship and in the new pynnace, the Virginia, and set saile for England." Now, I advise this learned pundit to look among his mass of newspapers; and, if he finds the London Shipping List of that time, he may be enlightened. And if he still doubts let him ask the opinion of any of our best writers on New England history, and my word for it he will not find one to indorse his views. One, certainly, whose opinion is of the greatest weight, and as anti-Popham as himself, has given a decided negative to his assertions.

And now comes a long dissertation on the blessings that have been experienced in Maine, by Massachusetts extending its government over it. Some of these moral reflections may be true, but many of the inhabitants of that territory did not then see it. I certainly agree with him in his appreciation of the energy and intelligence of the settlers of Maine and their descendants. They are equal to, and very much resemble, those of the other New England States; but what this has to do with Popham, he don't tell us. And, finally, he undertakes in a note to give the writer of that famous letter about the ship a kick, by stating that a writer in a Portland paper has had his article badly printed by having it done so far from home; and, when revised, he will give it the attention it deserves. Very kind.

Having made a somewhat rapid survey of his three or four heavy columns, "a mighty maze, and yet without a plan," I will look at his famous first attack, or, as the writer in the Portland Advertiser calls it, "the fire of his skirmish line;" and will now give his assertions there a passing notice, glancing over his attack on the Memorial Volume, the defence of Gorges, and his abuse of their authors, who are perfectly able to defend themselves, and may do so hereafter. He talks strongly about "historical verities:" let us see how fairly he treats authentic history. And first, will he tell us where he finds the colonists called "convicted felons," "cowards, Old Bailey convicts and knaves?" and that "they had saved their necks by emigrating," etc., etc.? Can he point to the book and the page for these "historical verities"? He may it is true quote a writer who says "many of them were endangered of the law." So were many of the Plymouth colonists,--to their honor, when we consider what law was, and what protection human rights had under James I.

Again, let us look at his assertions relative to that "pretty pinnace." In his "first consideration," he argues that a sea-worthy vessel was never built by the colonists; and, by inference, would make us believe that it was not built at all, saying "there was not time between the 15th of December and spring to build a sea-worthy vessel,"--when not a person but himself who ever perused "Brief Relation" or "Strachey" doubted the building and sailing for England of such a ship. Next, "that they had no need of a vessel." As if they did not know their own wants better than we do. Can there be much doubt it was the intention of the projectors to have a vessel built, and that for this purpose they sent over "Master Digby and the carpenters"? And then he coolly states she was built of "green pine," and repeatedly calls her a "fishing boat," and implies that she went a fishing. Will he also give his authority for these statements? Every reader of history knows these assertions are untrue; and till he can clear himself of this charge, let him not undertake to lecture others on "historical verities."

It will be seen that I have not noticed his argument relative to the craft built by the French at Port Royal, and which by almost a miracle carried the survivors to their homes; for the reason that we were considering English occupation of New England, and that alone. French enterprise and colonization was an entirely different affair, and had nothing to do with the subject under consideration; and the writer of "the letter" could not fairly have anticipated that it could be made to refer to any but Englishmen. It will also be noticed that I have not undertaken to advocate or indorse the Popham enterprise and its effects in general, but only to show up some of the errors of its opponents. There is and will be a wide difference of opinion on that point; but all will agree that it has been of great benefit to printers, and that they have shed a larger quantity of ink in elucidating these controversies than was lost in blood in "P.'s" imaginary fights with the Indians at Sabino.

Having made a running review of "P.'s" long columns, I would in conclusion offer him some advice, which, I trust, he will receive in the same kind way in which it is given. First, do not fear that Popham history will ever in the slightest way overshadow the lustre of Old Plymouth and Massachusetts Bay. They stand too firm to be shaken: their true glories will continue to brighten and expand through ages yet to come, till they are appreciated and acknowledged throughout the world. Don't look on the very worst side of history: much of it is bad enough at best; and we can hardly read some of the annals of our own ancestors, written by themselves, without a blush. Do not write so ferociously: people are not frightened by ink, particularly Pophamites. "A kind word turneth away wrath." Don't ruin that preface to the reprint which you have had some two years in process of incubation, by bringing Popham and Gorges into it, when there is no occasion for it. And, as a general amnesty, even for the deepest crimes, is the order of the day, you had better accept it on the following cheap terms, viz., as hot weather is approaching, and, if you have not killed out the Pophamites entirely,--and I don't really think you have even ruffled a feather,--they will in August have their picnic celebration at Sabino as usual, now let us both attend. Then, after partaking of their chowder, we will smoke the calumet of peace; drink inspiration--if we can--from that ancient well, but certainly good cool water, and something in it, if you say so; and finally bury the hatchet in the remains of that old ditch, and pledge ourselves to everlasting peace.

JUNE, 1866. SAGADAHOC.

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE POPHAM COLONY.

DOCUMENTS CIRCULATED BEFORE AND AT THE FIRST CELEBRATION, AUGUST 29, 1862.

"English Colonization in America. | Public Celebration." A brief sketch of the Colony, and of the proposed Celebration, by Mr. John A. Poor; which was sent to invited guests. July, 1862.

"Historical Celebration at Fort Popham, August 29, 1862." Programme of the Celebration.

"An Order for Morning Prayer" [read by Bishop Burgess]. 8vo, 8 pp.

[Thirty-Four] "Toasts | for the | Historical Celebration. | To be arranged hereafter in appropriate order." 8vo, 4 pp.

CARDS (4-1/2 by 7-1/2 inches):--

1. Latin Inscription for the Memorial Stone. On the reverse, an English Translation.

A printed circular headed "Public Historical Celebration," dated August 12, 1862; which was sent to invited guests, with a "Private Explanatory Note," stating that the Celebration "is held under the auspices of the Maine Historical Society, which proposes to print a full report in the form of a Memorial Volume."

NEWSPAPER ARTICLES WITH REFERENCE TO THE FIRST CELEBRATION.

_Bath Sentinel and Times_, July 10, 1862. Mr. B. C. Bailey recommends calling a public meeting, to make arrangements for a Celebration.

_The same_, July 22, 1862. The Mayor of Bath calls the meeting, for Monday, July 28.

_The same_, July 29. Report of the meeting.

_Portland Press_, July 30. Report of the meeting, List of Committees, etc.

_Daily Evening Globe_, St. John, N. B., August 23, 1862. "The First English Settlement in New England;" by John Wilkinson.

_Portland Advertiser_, August 28, 1862. The Order of the Celebration.

_The same_, August 30. 1862. An Account of the Celebration; with Mr. John A. Poor's Oration.

_The same_, September 3, 1862. Mr. Poor's Oration reprinted with corrections. Mr. T. D. McGee's Address, and Mr. R. K. Sewall's Response to a Toast.

_Bath Times_, September 1, 1862. An Account of the Celebration.

_Portland Press_, September 6. Mr. John Neal complains of the arrangements of the Celebration.

_Portland Advertiser_, September 8. Mr. Charles J. Gilman, the Chief Marshal, replies.

_Portland Transcript_, September 4. An account of the Celebration.

_Brunswick Telegraph_, September 6. An Account of the Celebration.

_Christian Mirror_, Portland, September 9. "A Sermon preached at Phipsburg, Me., on the Sabbath after the Celebration, by Rev. Francis Norwood."

_The same_, September 16. Mr. John A. Poor reviews Mr. Norwood's Sermon.

_The same_, October 7. "Popham Discussion:" Mr. Norwood replies to Mr. Poor; and "Popham Errata:" Mr. John Wingate Thornton reviews Mr. Poor's article of September 16.

_New York Journal of Commerce_, November 6. Report of the October Meeting of the New York Historical Society. Remarks concerning the Popham Celebration by Mr. George Folsom and Mr. J. R. Brodhead.

_New York Christian Times_, November 20. Fuller report of the same.

_Boston Evening Traveller_, November 21. Correspondence of Rev. William S. Bartlett, of Chelsea, and Prof. Emory Washburn, of Cambridge, concerning the Speech of the latter at the Popham Celebration.

_Congregational Quarterly_, Boston, April, 1863, Vol. v., p. 143-160. "Colonial Schemes of Popham and Gorges. By John Wingate Thornton, Esq., Boston." A Speech at the First Popham Celebration, with twelve and a half pages of "Notes and Authorities appended as proofs."

A few copies of this article were printed, with the following title page, as--

The above was noticed and discussed in--

_North American Review_, July 1863, Vol. xcvii., p. 288.

_Christian Examiner_, July 1863, Vol. lxxv., p. 143.

_Historical Collections of the Essex Institute_, August, 1863, Vol. v. pp. 175-192; by Mr. A. C. Goodell.

_Boston Review_, November, 1863, Vol. iii, p. 641.

_Historical Magazine_, New York, 1863, Vol. vii., p. 231.

_Christian Mirror_, Portland, April 28, 1863.

_Boston Journal_, August 11, 1863.

_Boston Evening Transcript_, April 24, 1863.

_Portland Transcript_, May 9, 1863.

Messrs. Bailey and Noyes, of Portland, Publishers, in April, 1863, issued a circular Prospectus for the publication of the "Memorial Volume;" soliciting Subscriptions.

Bound with the same:--

"Popham Celebration | at | Sabino, | August, 1863." Programme in broadside.

The Popham Celebration of August 29, 1863, Mr. George Folsom, Orator, was reported in--

_Portland Daily Advertiser_, August 31, 1863.

_Portland Daily Press_, August 31, and September 3, 1863.

_Brunswick Telegraph_, September 4, 1863.

_Boston Witness and Advocate_, September 11, 1863.

_Boston Courier_, September 2, 1863.

_Portland Daily Press_, September 30, 1863: "Popham--Settlement--Memorial and Celebrations." Signed "P." [Mr. George Prince.]

_Portland Daily Press_, January 29, 1864. Notice of Meeting of the Maine Historical Society, and of Judge Bourne's Reply to Mr. Thornton's Pamphlet.

The above was noticed and discussed in--

_Christian Mirror_, Portland, February 21, 1865.

_Boston Evening Transcript_, February 13, 1865; by Rev. George E. Ellis, D. D.

_Bath Daily Sentinel and Times_, August 30, 31, September 1, 1864.

_The same_, March 16, 1865. "Fort Popham Colony."

_The same_, March 16, 1865. "The Popham Settlement;" by Rev. Edward Ballard.

_The same_, March 30, 1865.

_The same_, July 7, 1865.

_The same_, September 1, 1865.

_The same_, September 2, 1865; by Mr. George Prince.

_Brunswick Telegraph_, September, 1864.

_Boston Journal_, August 2, 1865.

_Bath Daily Sentinel and Times_, May 3, 1864. "The Fort Popham Controversy," as to when and where Religious Services were first held in New England. Signed "D. Q. C." [Rev. D. Cushman.]

_The same_, May 5, 1864. "The First Worship in Popham Colony;" by Rev. Edward Ballard.

_The same_, September 2, 1864. "The First Sermon in New England." Signed "Candid" [Mr. George Prince].

_The same_, September 8, 1864. Reply by Rev. Edward Ballard.

_The same_, August 16, 17, 18, 24, 1865. "The Virginia Company's Northern Plantation;" by Mr. J. Wingate Thornton.

_The same_, August 23, 1865. Reply by Rev. Edward Ballard.

The above was noticed and discussed in--

_Boston Daily Advertiser_, April 27, 1865.

_The same_, August 2, 1865. "Popham Exhumed and Re-interred"; by Rev. Edward E. Hale.

_The same_, August 26, 1865: "The Popham Colony," by Mr. Charles F. Dunbar.

_The same_, same date: "The Popham Celebration;" by Rev. Edward Ballard.

_Portland Daily Press_, August 4, 1865.

The Celebration of August 29, 1865, was reported and discussed in--

_Portland Argus_, August 31, 1865.

_Portland Daily Press_, August 21, 30, 1865.

_Bath Daily Sentinel and Times_, August 23, 1865; by Rev. Edward Ballard.

_The same_, August 24, 1865.

_The same_, August 30, 1865.

_Boston Journal_, August 4, 1865.

_Brunswick Telegraph_, September 1, 1865.

The above was noticed and discussed in--

_Boston Daily Advertiser_, April 11, 1866: "The Last Popham Address;" by Mr. William F. Poole.

_The same_, April 21, 1866: "'The Last Popham Address,'" by Rev. Edward Ballard, D. D.

_Portland Advertiser_, April 26, 1866: "'The Last Popham Address;'" by Mr. Frederic Kidder.

_Boston Daily Advertiser_, May 31, 1866: "Popham Again and Finally;" by Mr. William F. Poole.

_The same_, July 28, 1866: "The Popham Colony, 'Finally;'" by Rev. Edward Ballard, D. D.

_The same_, July 28, 1866: "A Running Review of the 'Popham Again and Finally;'" by Mr. Frederic Kidder.

_Christian Era_, Boston, June 28, 1866; "The Popham Memorial;" by Rev. J. D. Fulton.

_The Episcopalian_, New York, May 19, 1866.

_Boston Daily Advertiser_, August 4, 1866: Report of the Meeting of the Maine Historical Society of August 2, containing a letter by Mr. John A. Poor, with regard to new evidences found in Carayon's Relations.

The Popham Celebration of August 29, 1866, was reported in--

_Boston Daily Advertiser_, September 1, 1866.

_Boston Journal_, September 1, 1866.

_New York Times_, September 4, 1866.

_New York Christian Intelligencer_, September, 1866.

_Brunswick Telegraph_, September 14, 1866.

* * * * *

Transcriber's Notes:

Obvious typographical errors were repaired, but older style spellings retained.

Hyphenation variants were resolved to most frequently used.

Comments

The Popham ColonyChapter III: Part 3

0%22 min left in chapter