The Mayflower and Her Log Part 11

It is altogether probable that it was in his capacity of "interpreter"

(as Samoset and Tisquantum knew but little English), and on account of what knowledge of the Indian tongue he very probably possessed, that Standish chose Williamson as his a.s.sociate for the formal reception of Ma.s.sasoit. It is indeed altogether probable that it was this familiarity with the "trade lingo" of the American coast tribes which influenced --perhaps determined--his employment as "s.h.i.+p's-merchant" of the MAY-FLOWER for her Pilgrim voyage, especially as she was expected to "load back" for England with the products of the country, only to be had by barter with the Indians. It is evident that there must naturally have been some provision made for communication with the natives, for the purposes of that trade, etc., which the Planters hoped to establish.

Trading along the northern coast of Virginia (as the whole coast strip was then called), princ.i.p.ally for furs, had been carried on pretty actively, since 1584, by such navigators as Raleigh's captains, Gosnold, Pring, Champlain, Smith, Dermer, Hunt, and the French and Dutch, and much of the "trade lingo" of the native tribes had doubtless been "picked up" by their different "s.h.i.+p's-merchants." It appears by Bradford' that Dermer, when coasting the sh.o.r.es of New England, in Sir Ferdinando Gorges's employ, brought the Indian Tisquantum with him, from England, as his interpreter, and doubtless from him Dermer and other s.h.i.+p's officers "picked up" more or less Indian phrases, as Tisquantum (Squanto) evidently did of English. Winslow, in his "Good Newes from New England," written in 1622, says of the Indian tongue, as spoken by the tribes about them at Plymouth, "it is very copious, large, and difficult. As yet we cannot attain to any great measure thereof, but can understand them, and explain ourselves to their understanding, by the help of those that daily converse with us." This being the case, after two years of constant communication, and noting how trivial knowledge of English speech Samoset and Tisquantum had, it is easy to understand that, if Williamson had any knowledge of the native tongue, Standish would be most anxious to have the benefit of it, in this prime and all-important effort at securing a permanent alliance with the ruling sachem of the region. Bradford, in "Mourt's Relation," speaking of the speech of Governor Carver to Ma.s.sasoit, says: "He [Ma.s.sasoit]

liked well of the speech and heard it attentively, though the interpreters did not well express it." Probably all three, Tisquantum, Samoset, and Williamson, had a voice in it.

That "Master Williamson" was a veritable person at New Plymouth, in February and March, 1620/21, is now beyond dispute; that he must have been of the s.h.i.+p's company of the MAY-FLOWER is logically certain; that he was one of her officers, and a man of character, is proven by his t.i.tle of "Master" and his choice by Standish and Mullens for exceptional and honorable service; that the position of "s.h.i.+p's-merchant" alone answers to the conditions precedent, is evident; and that such an officer was commonly carried by s.h.i.+ps of the MAY-FLOWER cla.s.s on such voyages as hers is indicated by the necessity, and proven by the facts known as to other s.h.i.+ps on similar New England voyages, both earlier and later. The fact that he was called simply "Master Williamson," in both cases where he is mentioned, with out other designation or identification, is highly significant, and clearly indicates that he was some one so familiarly known to all concerned that no occasion for any further designation apparently occurred to the minds of Mullens, Carver, or Bradford, when referring to him. In the case of Master John Hampden, the only other notable incognito of early Pilgrim literature, the description is full, and the only question concerning him has been of his ident.i.ty with John Hampden, the English patriot of the Cromwellian era. It is, therefore, not too much to a.s.sert that the MAY-FLOWER carried a "s.h.i.+p's-merchant"

(or purser), and that "Master Williamson" was that officer. If close-linked circ.u.mstantial evidence is ever to be relied upon, it clearly establishes in this case the ident.i.ty of the "Master Williamson"

who was Governor Bradford's incognito, and the person of the same name mentioned a month earlier in "Master" Mullens's will; as also the fact that in him we have a new officer of the MAY FLOWER, hitherto unknown as such to Pilgrim literature. If Mr. Bowman's belief as to Giles Heale (see note) proves correct, we have yet another, the Surgeon.

The Carpenter, Gunner, Boatswain, Quartermaster, and "Masters-mates" are the only "petty officers" of the Pilgrim s.h.i.+p of whom any record makes mention. The carpenter is named several times, and was evidently, as might be expected, one of the most useful men of the s.h.i.+p's crew. Called into requisition, doubtless, in the conferences as to the condition of the SPEEDWELL, on both of her returns to port, at the inception of the voyage, he was especially in evidence when, in mid-ocean, "the cracking and bending of a great deck-beam," and the "shaken" condition of "the upper works" of the MAY-FLOWER, gave rise to much alarm, and it was by his labors and devices, and the use of the now famous "jack-screw," that the bending beam and leaking deck were made secure. The repairs upon the shallop in Cape Cod harbor also devolved upon him, and mention is made of his illness and the dependence placed upon him. No doubt, in the construction of the first dwellings and of the ordnance platform on the hill, etc., he was the devising and princ.i.p.al workman. He undoubtedly returned to England with the s.h.i.+p, and is known in history only by his "billet," as "the carpenter" of the MAY-FLOWER.

The Master Gunner seems to have been a man with a proclivity for Indian barter, that led him to seek a place with the "third expedition" at Cape Cod, thereby nearly accomplis.h.i.+ng his death, which indeed occurred later, in Plymouth harbor, not long before the return of the s.h.i.+p.

The Boatswain is known, by Bradford's records, to have died in the general sickness which attacked the crew while lying in Plymouth harbor.

The brief narrative of his sickness and death is all that we know of his personality. The writer says: "He was a proud young man, and would often curse and scoff at the pa.s.sengers," but being nursed when dying, by those of them who remained aboard, after his s.h.i.+pmates had deserted him in their craven fear of infection, "he bewailed his former conduct," saying, "Oh! you, I now see, show your love like Christians indeed, one to another, but we let one another lie and die like dogs."

Four Quartermasters are mentioned (probably helmsmen simply), of whom three are known to have died in Plymouth harbor.

"Masters-mates" are several times mentioned, but it is pretty certain that the "pilots" (or mates) are intended. Bradford and Winslow, in "Mourt's Relation," say of the reappearance of the Indians: "So Captain Standish, with another [Hopkins], with their muskets, went over to them, with two of the masters-mates that follow them without [side?] arms, having two muskets with them: Who these "masters-mates" were does not appear." The language, "two of the masters-mates," would possibly suggest that there were more of them. It hardly seems probable that both the mates of the MAY-FLOWER would thus volunteer, or thrust themselves forward in such a matter, and it seems doubtful if they would have been permitted (even if both ash.o.r.e at one time, which, though unusual, did occur), to a.s.sume such duty. Whoever they were, they did not lack courage.

The names of the petty officers and seamen of the MAY-FLOWER do not appear as such, but the discovery of the (evidently) nuncupative will of William Mullens--herein referred to--has perhaps given us two of them.

Attached to John Carver's certificate of the particulars of this will, filed at Somerset House, London, are the names, "Giles Heale" and "Christopher Joanes." As Mr Mullens died Wednesday, February 21, 1620, on board the MAY-FLOWER in Plymouth harbor, on which day we know from Bradford' that "the Master [Jones, whose name was Thomas] came on sh.o.r.e with many of his sailors," to land and mount the cannon on the fort, and as they had a full day's work to draw up the hill and mount five guns, and moreover brought the materials for, and stayed to eat, a considerable dinner with the Pilgrims, they were doubtless ash.o.r.e all day. It is rational to interpret the known facts to indicate that in this absence of the Captain and most of his crew ash.o.r.e, Mr. Mullens, finding himself failing fast, sent for Governor Carver and--unable to do more than speak --dictated to him the disposition of his property which he desired to make. Carver, noting this down from his dictation, undoubtedly called in two of the s.h.i.+p's company (Heale very likely being the s.h.i.+p's-surgeon), who were left aboard to "keep s.h.i.+p," to hear his notes read to Mullens and a.s.sented to by him, they thus becoming the witnesses to his will, to the full copy of which, as made by Carver (April 2), they affixed their names as such. As there were then at Plymouth (besides savages) only the pa.s.sengers and crew of the MAY-FLOWER, and these men were certainly not among the pa.s.sengers, it seems inevitable that they were of the crew.

That "Christopher Joanes" was not the Master of the s.h.i.+p is clear, because Heale's is the first signature, and no man of the crew would have dared to sign before the Captain; because the Captain's name was (as demonstrated) Thomas; and because we know that he was ash.o.r.e all that day, with most of his men. It is by no means improbable that Captain Jones had s.h.i.+pped one of his kinsmen in his crew, possibly as one of the "masters mates" or quartermasters referred to (and it is by no means certain that there were not more than two), though these witnesses may have been quartermasters or other petty officers left on board as "s.h.i.+p-keepers." Certain it is that these two witnesses must have been of the crew, and that "Christopher Joanes" was not the Captain, while it is equally sure, from the collateral evidence, that Master Mullens died on s.h.i.+pboard. Had he died on sh.o.r.e it is very certain that some of the leaders, Brewster, Bradford, or others, would have been witnesses, with such of the s.h.i.+p's officers as could aid in proving the will in England.

It is equally evident that the officers of the s.h.i.+p were absent when Master Mullens dictated his will, except perhaps the surgeon.

The number of seamen belonging to the s.h.i.+p is nowhere definitely stated.

At least four in the employ of the Pilgrims were among the pa.s.sengers and not enrolled upon the s.h.i.+ps' lists. From the size of the s.h.i.+p, the amount of sail she probably carried, the weight of her anchors, and certain other data which appear,--such as the number allowed to leave the s.h.i.+p at a time, etc.,--it is probably not a wild estimate to place their number at from twenty to twenty-five. This is perhaps a somewhat larger number than would be essential to work the s.h.i.+p, and than would have been s.h.i.+pped if the voyage had been to any port of a civilized country; but on a voyage to a wild coast, the possibilities of long absence and of the weakening of the crew by death, illness, etc., demanded consideration and a larger number. The wisdom and necessity of carrying, on a voyage to an uninhabited country, some spare men, is proven by the record of Bradford, who says: "The disease begane to fall amongst them the seamen also, so as allmost halfe of their company dyed before they went away and many of their officers and l.u.s.tyest men; as ye boatson, gunner, 3 quarter maisters, the cooke, and others."

The LADY ARBELLA, the "Admiral" of Governor Winthrop's fleet, a s.h.i.+p of 350 tons, carried 52 men, and it is a fair inference that the MAY-FLOWER, of a little more than half her tonnage, would require at least half as many. It is, therefore, not unlikely that the officers and crew of the MAY-FLOWER, all told, mustered thirty men, irrespective of the sailors, four in number (Alderton, English, Trevore, and Ely), in the Pilgrims'

employ.

CHAPTER VI

THE MAY-FLOWER'S Pa.s.sENGERS

The pa.s.senger list of the SPEEDWELL has given us the names of the Leyden members of the company which, with the cooperation of the a.s.sociated Merchant Adventurers, was, in the summer of 1620, about to emigrate to America.

Though it is not possible, with present knowledge, positively to determine every one of those who were pa.s.sengers in the MAY-FLOWER from London to Southampton, most of them can be named with certainty.

Arranged for convenience, so far as possible, by families, they were:--

Master Robert Cushman, the London agent of the Leyden company, Mrs. Mary (Clarke)-Singleton Cushman, 2d wife, Thomas Cushman, son (by 1st wife).

Master Christopher Martin, treasurer-agent of the colonists, Mrs. Martin, wife, Solomon Prower, "servant,"

John Langemore, "servant."

Master Richard Warren.

Master William Mullens, Mrs. Alice Mullens, wife, Joseph Mullens, 2d son, Priscilla Mullens, 2d daughter, Robert Carter, "servant."

Master Stephen Hopkins, Mrs. Elizabeth (Fisher?) Hopkins, 2d wife, Giles Hopkins, son (by former wife), Constance Hopkins, daughter (by former wife), Damaris Hopkins, daughter, Edward Dotey, "servant,"

Edward Leister, "servant."

Gilbert Winslow.

James Chilton, Mrs. Susanna (2) Chilton, wife, Mary Chilton, daughter.

Richard Gardiner.

John Billington, Mrs. Eleanor (or Helen) Billington, wife, John Billington (Jr.), son, Francis Billington, son.

William Latham, "servant-boy" to Deacon Carver.

Jasper More, "bound-boy" to Deacon Carver.

Ellen More, "little bound girl" to Master Edward Winslow.

Richard More, "bound-boy" to Elder Brewster.

------- More, "bound-boy" to Elder Brewster.

There is a possibility that Thomas Rogers and his son, Joseph, who are usually accredited to the Leyden company, were of the London contingent, and sailed from there, though this is contra-indicated by certain collateral data.

It is possible, also, of course, that any one or more of the English colonists (with a few exceptions--such as Cushman and family, Mullens and family, the More children and others--known to have left London on the MAY-FLOWER) might have joined her (as did Carver and Alden, perhaps Martin and family) at Southampton, but the strong presumption is that most of the English pa.s.sengers joined the s.h.i.+p at London.

It is just possible, too, that the seamen, Alderton (or Allerton), English, Trevore, and Ely, were hired in London and were on board the MAY-FLOWER when she left that port, though they might have been employed and joined the s.h.i.+p at either Southampton, Dartmouth, or Plymouth.

It is strongly probable, however, that they were part, if not all, hired in Holland, and came over to Southampton in the pinnace.

Robert Cushman--the London agent (for more than three years) of the Leyden congregation, and, in spite of the wickedly unjust criticism of Robinson and others, incompetent to judge his acts, their brave, sagacious, and faithful servant--properly heads the list.

Bradford says: "Where they find the bigger s.h.i.+p come from London, Mr. Jones, Master, with the rest of the company who had been waiting there with Mr. Cushman seven days." Deacon Carver, probably from being on sh.o.r.e, was not here named. In a note appended to the memoir of Robert Cushman (prefatory to his Discourse delivered at Plymouth, New England, on "The Sin and Danger of Self-Love") it is stated in terms as follows: "The fact is, that Mr. Cushman procured the larger vessel, the MAY-FLOWER, and its pilot, at London, and left in that vessel." The statement--though published long after the events of which it treats and by other than Mr. Cushman--we know to be substantially correct, and the presumption is that the writer, whoever he may have been, knew also.

Sailing with his wife and son (it is not probable that he had any other living child at the time), in full expectation that it was for Virginia, he encountered so much of ungrateful and abusive treatment, after the brethren met at Southampton,--especially at the hands of the insufferable Martin, who, without merit and with a most reprehensible record (as it proved), was chosen over him as "governor" of the s.h.i.+p,--that he was doubtless glad to return from Plymouth when the SPEEDWELL broke down. He and his family appear, therefore, as "MAY-FLOWER pa.s.sengers," only between London and Plymouth during the vexatious attendance upon the scoundrelly Master of the SPEEDWELL, in his "doublings" in the English Channel. His Dartmouth letter to Edward Southworth, one of the most valuable contributions to the early literature of the Pilgrims extant, clearly demonstrates that he was suffering severely from dyspepsia and deeply wounded feelings. The course of events was his complete vindication, and impartial history to-day p.r.o.nounces him second to none in his service to the Pilgrims and their undertaking. His first wife is shown by Leyden records to have been Sarah Reder, and his second marriage to have occurred May 19/June 3, 1617, [sic]

about the time he first went to England in behalf of the Leyden congregation.

Mrs. Mary (Clarke)-Singleton Cushman appears only as a pa.s.senger of the MAY-FLOWER on her channel voyage, as she returned with her husband and son from Plymouth, England, in the SPEEDWELL.

Thomas Cushman, it is quite clear, must have been a son by a former wife, as he would have been but a babe, if the son of the latest wife, when he went to New England with his father, in the FORTUNE, to remain. Goodwin and others give his age as fourteen at this time, and his age at death is their warrant. Robert Cushman died in 1625, but a "Mary, wife [widow?] of Robert Cushman, and their son, Thomas," seem to have been remembered in the will of Ellen Bigge, widow, of Cranbrooke, England, proved February 12, 1638 (Archdeaconry, Canterbury, vol. lxx. leaf 482). The will intimates that the "Thomas" named was "under age" when the bequest was made.

If this is unmistakably so (though there is room for doubt), then this was not the Thomas of the Pilgrims. Otherwise the evidence is convincing.

Master Christopher Martin, who was made, Bradford informs us, the treasurer-agent of the Planter Company, Presumably about the time of the original conclusions between the Adventurers and the Planters, seems to have been appointed such, as Bradford states, not because he was needed, but to give the English contingent of the Planter body representation in the management, and to allay thereby any suspicion or jealousy. He was, if we are to judge by the evidence in hand concerning his contention and that of his family with the Archdeacon, the strong testimony that Cushman bears against him in his Dartmouth letter of August 17, and the fact that there seems to have been early dissatisfaction with him as "governor" on the s.h.i.+p, a very self-sufficient, somewhat arrogant, and decidedly contentious individual. His selection as treasurer seems to have been very unfortunate, as Bradford indicates that his accounts were in unsatisfactory shape, and that he had no means of his own, while his rather surprising selection for the office of "governor" of the larger s.h.i.+p, after the unpleasant experience with him as treasurer-agent, is difficult to account for, except that he was evidently an active opponent of Cushman, and the latter was just then in disfavor with the colonists. He was evidently a man in the prime of life, an "Independent" who had the courage of his convictions if little discretion, and much of that energy and self-reliance which, properly restrained, are excellent elements for a colonist. Very little beside the fact that he came from Ess.e.x is known of him, and nothing of his wife. He has further mention hereafter.

Solomon Prower is clearly shown by the complaint made against him by the Archdeacon of Chelmsford, the March before he sailed on the MAY-FLOWER, to have been quite a youth, a firm "Separatist," and something more than an ordinary "servant." He seems to have been summoned before the Archdeacon at the same time with young Martin (a son of Christopher), and this fact suggests some nearer relation than that of "servant." He is sometimes spoken of as Martin's "son," by what warrant does not appear, but the fact suggests that he may have been a step-son. Bradford, in recording his death, says: "Dec. 24, this day dies Solomon Martin." This could, of course, have been none other than Solomon Prower. Dr. Young, in his "Chronicles," speaking of Martin, says, "he brought his wife and two children." If this means Martin's children, it is evidently an error. It may refer to age only. His case is puzzling, for Bradford makes him both "servant" and "son." If of sufficient age and account to be cited before the Archdeacon for discipline, it seems strange that he should not have signed the "Compact." Even if a "servant" this would seem to have been no bar, as Dotey and Leister were certainly such, yet signers. The indications are that he was but a well-grown lad, and that his youth, or severe illness, and not his station, accounts for the absence of his signature. If a young foster-son or kinsman of Martin, as seems most likely, then Martin's signature was sufficient, as in the cases of fathers for their sons; if really a "ser vant" then too young (like Latham and Hooke) to be called upon, as were Dotey and Leister.

John Langemore; there is nothing (save the errors of Dr. Young) to indicate that he was other than a "servant."

Richard Warren was probably from Kent or Ess.e.x. Surprisingly little is known of his antecedents, former occupation, etc.