The Mayflower and Her Log - Chapters I-II



"Hail to thee, poor little ship MAY-FLOWER--of Delft Haven-- poor, common-
looking ship, hired by common charter-party for coined dollars,--caulked 
with mere oakum and tar, provisioned with vulgarest biscuit and bacon,--
yet what ship Argo or miraculous epic ship, built by the sea gods, was 
other than a foolish bumbarge in comparison!" 
--THOMAS CARLYLE


CHAPTER I.
THE NAME--"MAY-FLOWER" 

"Curiously enough," observes Professor Arber, "these names [MAY-FLOWER and 
"SPEEDWELL] do not occur either in the Bradford manuscript or in 'Mourt's 
Relation.'"(*)

(* A Relation, or Journal, of the Beginning and Proceedings of the English 
Plantation settled at Plymouth in New England, etc. G. Mourt, London, 
1622. Undoubtedly the joint product of Bradford and Winslow, and sent to 
George Morton at London for publication. Bradford says (op, cit. p. 120): 
"Many other smaler maters I omite, sundrie of them having been already 
published, in a Jurnall made by one of ye company," etc. From this it 
would appear that Mourt's Relation was his work, which it doubtless 
principally was, though Winslow performed an honorable part, as "Mourt's" 
introduction and other data prove.)

He might have truthfully added that they nowhere appear in any of the 
letters of the "exodus" period, whether from Carver, Robinson, Cushman, or 
Weston; or in the later publications of Window; or in fact of any 
contemporaneous writer. It is not strange, therefore, that the Rev. Mr. 
Blaxland, the able author of the "Mayflower Essays," should have asked for 
the authority for the names assigned to the two Pilgrim ships of 1620. 

It seems to be the fact, as noted by Arber, that the earliest authentic 
evidence that the bark which bore the Pilgrims across the North Atlantic 
in the late autumn of 1620 was the MAY-FLOWER, is the "heading" of the 
"Allotment of Lands"--happily an "official" document--made at New 
Plymouth, New England, in March, 1623--It is not a little remarkable that, 
with the constantly recurring references to "the ship,"--the all- 
important factor in Pilgrim history,--her name should nowhere have found 
mention in the earliest Pilgrim literature. Bradford uses the terms, the 
"biger ship," or the "larger ship," and Winslow, Cushman, Captain John 
Smith, and others mention simply the "vessel," or the "ship," when 
speaking of the MAY-FLOWER, but in no case give her a name. 

It is somewhat startling to find so thorough-paced an Englishman as Thomas 
Carlyle calling her the MAY-FLOWER "of Delft-Haven," as in the quotation 
from him on a preceding page. That he knew better cannot be doubted, and 
it must be accounted one of those 'lapsus calami' readily forgiven to 
genius,--proverbially indifferent to detail. 

Sir Ferdinando Gorges makes the curious misstatement that the Pilgrims had 
three ships, and says of them: "Of the three ships (such as their weak 
fortunes were able to provide), whereof two proved unserviceable and so 
were left behind, the third with great difficulty reached the coast of New 
England," etc.



CHAPTER II.
THE MAY-FLOWER'S CONSORT THE SPEEDWELL 

The SPEEDWELL was the first vessel procured by the Leyden Pilgrims for the 
emigration, and was bought by themselves; as she was the ship of their 
historic embarkation at Delfshaven, and that which carried the originators 
of the enterprise to Southampton, to join the MAY-FLOWER,-- whose consort 
she was to be; and as she became a determining factor in the latter's 
belated departure for New England, she may justly claim mention here as 
indeed an inseparable "part and parcel" of the MAY- FLOWER'S voyage. 

The name of this vessel of associate historic renown with the MAY-FLOWER 
was even longer in finding record in the early literature of the Pilgrim 
hegira than that of the larger It first appeared, so far as discovered, in 
1669--nearly fifty years after her memorable service to the Pilgrims on 
the fifth page of Nathaniel Morton's "New England's Memorial." 

Davis, in his "Ancient Landmarks of Plymouth," makes a singular error for 
so competent a writer, when he says: "The agents of the company in England 
had hired the SPEEDWELL, of sixty tons, and sent her to Delfthaven, to 
convey the colonists to Southampton." In this, however, he but follows 
Mather and the "Modern Universal History," though both are notably 
unreliable; but he lacks their excuse, for they were without his access to 
Bradford's "Historie." That the consort-pinnace was neither "hired" nor 
"sent to Delfthaven" duly appears. 

Bradford states the fact,--that "a smale ship (of some 60 tune), was 
bought and fitted in Holand, which was intended to serve to help to 
transport them, so to stay in ye countrie and atend ye fishing and such 
other affairs as might be for ye good and benefite of ye colonie when they 
come ther." The statements of Bradford and others indicate that she was 
bought and refitted with moneys raised in Holland, but it is not easy to 
understand the transaction, in view of the understood terms of the 
business compact between the Adventurers and the Planters, as hereinafter 
outlined. The Merchant Adventurers--who were organized (but not 
incorporated) chiefly through the activity of Thomas Weston, a merchant of 
London, to "finance" the Pilgrim undertaking--were bound, as part of their 
engagement, to provide the necessary shipping,' etc., for the voyage. The 
"joint-stock or partnership," as it was called in the agreement of the 
Adventurers and Planters, was an equal partnership between but two 
parties, the Adventurers, as a body, being one of the co-partners; the 
Planter colonists, as a body, the other. It was a partnership to run for 
seven years, to whose capital stock the first- named partner (the 
Adventurers) was bound to contribute whatever moneys, or their 
equivalents,--some subscriptions were paid in goods,--were necessary to 
transport, equip, and maintain the colony and provide it the means of 
traffic, etc., for the term named. The second-named partner (the Planter 
body) was to furnish the men, women, and children,--the colonists 
themselves, and their best endeavors, essential to the enterprise,--and 
such further contributions of money or provisions, on an agreed basis, as 
might be practicable for them. At the expiration of the seven years, all 
properties of every kind were to be divided into two equal parts, of which 
the Adventurers were to take one and the Planters the other, in full 
satisfaction of their respective investments and claims. The Adventurers' 
half would of course be divided among themselves, in such proportion as 
their individual contributions bore to the sum total invested. The 
Planters would divide their half among their number, according to their 
respective contributions of persons, money, or provisions, as per the 
agreed basis, which was:(*) that every person joining the enterprise, 
whether man, woman, youth, maid, or servant, if sixteen years old, should 
count as a share; that a share should be reckoned at L10, and hence that 
L10 worth of money or provisions should also count as a share. Every man, 
therefore, would be entitled to one share for each person (if sixteen 
years of age) he contributed, and for each L10 of money or provisions he 
added thereto, another share. Two children between ten and sixteen would 
count as one and be allowed a share in the division, but children under 
ten were to have only fifty acres of wild land. The scheme was admirable 
for its equity, simplicity, and elasticity, and was equally so for either 
capitalist or colonist. 

(* Bradford's Historie, Deane's ed.; Arber, op. cit. p. 305. The fact that 
Lyford (Bradford, Historie, Mass. ed. p. 217) recommended that every 
"particular" (i.e. non-partnership colonist) sent out by the Adventurers--
and they had come to be mostly of that class--"should come over as an 
Adventurer, even if only a ser vant," and the fact that he recognized that 
some one would have to pay in L10 to make each one an Adventurer, would 
seem to indicate that any one was eligible and that either L10 was the 
price of the Merchant Adventurer's share, or that this was the smallest 
subscription which would admit to membership. Such "particular," even 
although an Adventurer, had no partnership share in the Planters' half-
interest; had no voice in the government, and no claim for maintenance. He 
was, however, amenable to the government, subject to military duty and to 
tax. The advantage of being an Adventurer without a voice in colony 
affairs would be purely a moral one.)

Goodwin notes, that, "in an edition of Cushman's 'Discourse,' Judge Davis 
of Boston advanced the idea that at first the Pilgrims put all their 
possessions into a common stock, and until 1623 had no individual 
property. In his edition of Morton's 'Memorial' he honorably admits his 
error." The same mistake was made by Robertson and Chief Justice Marshall, 
and is occasionally repeated in this day. "There was no community of 
goods, though there was labor in common, with public supplies of food and 
clothing." Neither is there warrant for the conclusion of Goodwin, that 
because the holdings of the Planters' half interest in the undertaking 
were divided into L10 shares, those of the Adventurers were also. It is 
not impossible, but it does not necessarily follow, and certain known 
facts indicate the contrary. 

Rev. Edward Everett Hale, in "The Pilgrims' Life in Common," says: 
"Carver, Winslow, Bradford, Brewster, Standish, Fuller, and Allerton. were 
the persons of largest means in the Leyden group of the emigrants. It 
seems as if their quota of subscription to the common stock were paid in 
'provisions' for the voyage and the colony, and that by 'provisions' is 
meant such articles of food as could be best bought in Holland." The good 
Doctor is clearly in error, in the above. Allerton was probably as "well 
off" as any of the Leyden contingent, while Francis Cooke and Degory 
Priest were probably "better off" than either Brewster or Standish, who 
apparently had little of this world's goods. Neither is there any evidence 
that any considerable amount of "provision" was bought in Holland. Quite a 
large sum of money, which came, apparently, from the pockets of the Leyden 
Adventurers (Pickering, Greene, etc.), and some of the Pilgrims, was 
requisite to pay for the SPEEDWELL and her refitting, etc.; but how much 
came from either is conjectural at best. But aside from "Hollands cheese," 
"strong-waters" (schnapps), some few things that Cushman names; and 
probably a few others, obtained in Holland, most of the "provisioning," as 
repeatedly appears, was done at the English Southampton. In fact, after 
clothing and generally "outfitting" themselves, it is pretty certain that 
but few of the Leyden party had much left. There was evidently an 
understanding between the partners that there should be four principal 
agents charged with the preparations for, and carrying out of, the 
enterprise,--Thomas Weston and Christopher Martin representing the 
Adventurers and the colonists who were recruited in England (Martin being 
made treasurer), while Carver and Cushman acted for the Leyden company. 
John Pierce seems to have been the especial representative of the 
Adventurers in the matter of the obtaining of the Patent from the (London) 
Virginia Company, and later from the Council for New England. Bradford 
says: "For besides these two formerly mentioned, sent from Leyden, viz., 
Master Carver and Robert Cushman, there was one chosen in England to be 
joyned with them, to make the provisions for the Voyage. His name was 
Master Martin. He came from Billerike in Essexe; from which parts came 
sundry others to go with them; as also from London and other places, and 
therefore it was thought meet and convenient by them in Holand, that these 
strangers that were to goe with them, should appointe one thus to be 
joyned with them; not so much from any great need of their help as to 
avoid all susspition, or jealosie, of any partialitie." But neither 
Weston, Martin, Carver, nor Cushman seems to have been directly concerned 
in the purchase of the SPEEDWELL. The most probable conjecture concerning 
it is, that in furtherance of the purpose of the Leyden leaders, stated by 
Bradford, that there should be a small vessel for their service in 
fishing, traffic, etc., wherever they might plant the colony, they were 
permitted by the Adventurers to purchase the SPEEDWELL for that service, 
and as a consort, "on general account." 

It is evident, however, from John Robinson's letter of June 14, 1620, to 
John Carver, that Weston ridiculed the transaction, probably on selfish 
grounds, but, as events proved, not without some justification. 

Robinson says: "Master Weston makes himself merry with our endeavors about 
buying a ship," [the SPEEDWELL] "but we have done nothing in this but with 
good reason, as I am persuaded." Although bought with funds raised in 
Holland,(*) it was evidently upon "joint-account," and she was doubtless 
so sold, as alleged, on her arrival in September, at London, having proved 
unseaworthy. In fact, the only view of this transaction that harmonizes 
with the known facts and the respective rights and relations of the 
parties is, that permission was obtained (perhaps through Edward 
Pickering, one of the Adventurers, a merchant of Leyden, and others that 
the Leyden leaders should buy and refit the consort, and in so doing might 
expend the funds which certain of the Leyden Pilgrims were to pay into the 
enterprise, which it appears they did,--and for which they would receive, 
as shown, extra shares in the Planters' half-interest. It was very 
possibly further permitted by the Adventurers, that Mr. Pickering's and 
his partners' subscriptions to their capital stock should be applied to 
the purchase of the SPEEDWELL, as they were collected by the Leyden 
leaders, as Pastor Robinson's letter of June 14/24 to John Carver, 
previously noted, clearly shows. 

(* Arber (The Story of the Pilgrim Fathers, p. 341) arrives at the 
conclusion that "The SPEEDWELL had been bought with Leyden money. The 
proceeds of her sale, after her return to London, would, of course, go to 
the credit of the common joint-Stock there." This inference seems 
warranted by Robinson's letter of June 16/26 to Carver, in which he 
clearly indicates that the Leyden brethren collected the "Adventurers" 
subscriptions of Pickering and his partner (Greene), which were evidently 
considerable.)

She was obviously bought some little time before May 31, 1620,--probably 
in the early part of the month,--from the fact that in their letter of May 
31st to Carver and Cushman, then in London, Messrs. Fuller, Winslow, 
Bradford, and Allerton state that "we received divers letters at the 
coming of Master Nash and our Pilott," etc. From this it is clear that 
time enough had elapsed, since their purchase of the pinnace, for their 
messenger (Master Nash) to go to London,--evidently with a request to 
Carver and Cushman that they would send over a competent "pilott" to refit 
her, and for Nash to return with him, while the letter announcing their 
arrival does not seem to have been immediately written. 

The writers of the above-mentioned letter use the words "we received,"-- 
using the past tense, as if some days before, instead of "we have your 
letters," or "we have just received your letters," which would rather 
indicate present, or recent, time. Probably some days elapsed after the 
"pilott's" arrival, before this letter of acknowledgment was sent. It is 
hence fair to assume that the pinnace was bought early in May, and that no 
time was lost by the Leyden party in preparing for the exodus, after their 
negotiations with the Dutch were "broken off" and they had "struck hands" 
with Weston, sometime between February 2/12, 1619/20, and April 1/11, 
1620,--probably in March. 

The consort was a pinnace--as vessels of her class were then and for many 
years called--of sixty tons burden, as already stated, having two masts, 
which were put in--as we are informed by Bradford, and are not allowed by 
Professor Arber to forget--as apart of her refitting in Holland. That she 
was "square-rigged," and generally of the then prevalent style of vessels 
of her size and class, is altogether probable. The name pinnace was 
applied to vessels having a wide range in tonnage, etc., from a craft of 
hardly more than ten or fifteen tons to one of sixty or eighty. It was a 
term of pretty loose and indefinite adaptation and covered most of the 
smaller craft above a shallop or ketch, from such as could be propelled by 
oars, and were so fitted, to a small ship of the SPEEDWELL'S class, 
carrying an armament. 

None of the many representations of the SPEEDWELL which appear in 
historical pictures are authentic, though some doubtless give correct 
ideas of her type. Weir's painting of the "Embarkation of the Pilgrims," 
in the Capitol at Washington (and Parker's copy of the same in Pilgrim 
Hall, Plymouth); Lucy's painting of the "Departure of the Pilgrims," in 
Pilgrim Hall; Copes great painting in the corridor of the British Houses 
of Parliament, and others of lesser note, all depict the vessel on much 
the same lines, but nothing can be claimed for any of them, except 
fidelity to a type of vessel of that day and class. Perhaps the best 
illustration now known of a craft of this type is given in the painting by 
the Cuyps, father and son, of the "Departure of the Pilgrims from 
Delfshaven," as reproduced by Dr. W. E. Griffis, as the frontispiece to 
his little monograph, "The Pilgrims in their Three Homes." No reliable 
description of the pinnace herself is known to exist, and but few facts 
concerning her have been gleaned. That she was fairly "roomy" for a small 
number of passengers, and had decent accommodations, is inferable from the 
fact that so many as thirty were assigned to her at Southampton, for the 
Atlantic voyage (while the MAY-FLOWER, three times her tonnage, but of 
greater proportionate capacity, had but ninety), as also from the fact 
that "the chief [i.e. principal people] of them that came from Leyden went 
in this ship, to give Master Reynolds content." That she mounted at least 
"three pieces of ordnance" appears by the testimony of Edward Winslow, and 
they probably comprised her armament. 

We have seen that Bradford notes the purchase and refitting of this "smale 
ship of 60 tune" in Holland. The story of her several sailings, her 
"leakiness," her final return, and her abandonment as unseaworthy, is 
familiar. We find, too, that Bradford also states in his "Historie," that 
"the leakiness of this ship was partly by her being overmasted and too 
much pressed with sails." It will, however, amaze the readers of Professor 
Arber's generally excellent "Story of the Pilgrim Fathers," so often 
referred to herein, to find him sharply arraigning "those members of the 
Leyden church who were responsible for the fitting of the SPEEDWELL," 
alleging that "they were the proximate causes of most of the troubles on 
the voyage [of the MAY-FLOWER] out; and of many of the deaths at Plymouth 
in New England in the course of the following Spring; for they overmasted 
the vessel, and by so doing strained her hull while sailing." To this 
straining, Arber wholly ascribes the "leakiness" of the SPEEDWELL and the 
delay in the final departure of the MAYFLOWER, to which last he attributes 
the disastrous results he specifies. It would seem that the historian, 
unduly elated at what he thought the discovery of another "turning-point 
of modern history," endeavors to establish it by such assertions and such 
partial references to Bradford as would support the imaginary "find." 
Briefly stated, this alleged discovery, which he so zealously announces, 
is that if the SPEEDWELL had not been overmasted, both she and the MAY-
FLOWER would have arrived early in the fall at the mouth of the Hudson 
River, and the whole course of New England history would have been 
entirely different. Ergo, the "overmasting" of the SPEEDWELL was a 
"pivotal point in modern history." With the idea apparently of giving 
eclat to this announcement and of attracting attention to it, he 
surprisingly charges the responsibility for the "overmasting" and its 
alleged dire results upon the leaders of the Leyden church, "who were," he 
repeatedly asserts, "alone responsible." As a matter of fact, however, 
Bradford expressly states (in the same paragraph as that upon which 
Professor Arber must wholly base his sweeping assertions) that the 
"overmasting" was but "partly" responsible for the SPEEDWELL'S leakiness, 
and directly shows that the "stratagem" of her master and crew, 
"afterwards," he adds, "known, and by some confessed," was the chief cause 
of her leakiness. 

Cushman also shows, by his letter,--written after the ships had put back 
into Dartmouth,--a part of which Professor Arber uses, but the most 
important part suppresses, that what he evidently considers the principal 
leak was caused by a very "loose board" (plank), which was clearly not the 
result of the straining due to "crowding sail," or of "overmasting." (See 
Appendix.) 

Moreover, as the Leyden chiefs were careful to employ a presumably 
competent man ("pilott," afterwards "Master" Reynolds) to take charge of 
refitting the consort, they were hence clearly, both legally and morally, 
exempt from responsibility as to any alterations made. Even though the 
"overmasting" had been the sole cause of the SPEEDWELL'S leakiness, and 
the delays and vicissitudes which resulted to the MAY-FLOWER and her 
company, the leaders of the Leyden church--whom Professor Arber arraigns --
(themselves chiefly the sufferers) were in no wise at fault! It is clear, 
however, that the "overmasting" cut but small figure in the case; 
"confessed" rascality in making a leak otherwise, being the chief trouble, 
and this, as well as the "overmasting," lay at the door of Master 
Reynolds. 

Even if the MAY-FLOWER had not been delayed by the SPEEDWELL'S condition, 
and both had sailed for "Hudson's River" in midsummer, it is by no means 
certain that they would have reached there, as Arber so confidently 
asserts. The treachery of Captain Jones, in league with Gorges, would as 
readily have landed them, by some pretext, on Cape Cod in October, as in 
December. But even though they had landed at the mouth of the Hudson, 
there is no good reason why the Pilgrim influence should not have worked 
north and east, as well as it did west and south, and with the 
Massachusetts Bay Puritans there, Roger Williams in Rhode Island, and the 
younger Winthrop in Connecticut, would doubtless have made New England 
history very much what it has been, and not, as Professor Arber asserts, 
"entirely different." 

The cruel indictment fails, and the imaginary "turning point in modern 
history," to announce which Professor Arber seems to have sacrificed so 
much, falls with it. 

The Rev. Dr. Griffis ("The Pilgrims in their Three Homes," p. 158) seems 
to give ear to Professor Arber's untenable allegations as to the Pilgrim 
leaders' responsibility for any error made in the "overmasting" of the 
SPEEDWELL, although he destroys his case by saying of the "overmasting:" 
"Whether it was done in England or Holland is not certain." He says, 
unhappily chiming in with Arber's indictment: "In their eagerness to get 
away promptly, they [the Leyden men] made the mistake of ordering for the 
SPEEDWELL heavier and taller masts and larger spars than her hull had been 
built to receive, thus altering most unwisely and disastrously her trim." 
He adds still more unhappily: "We do not hear of these inveterate landsmen 
and townsfolk [of whom he says, 'possibly there was not one man familiar 
with ships or sea life'] who were about to venture on the Atlantic, taking 
counsel of Dutch builders or mariners as to the proportion of their 
craft." Why so discredit the capacity and intelligence of these nation-
builders? Was their sagacity ever found unequal to the problems they met? 
Were the men who commanded confidence and respect in every avenue of 
affairs they entered; who talked with kings and dealt with statesmen; 
these diplomats, merchants, students, artisans, and manufacturers; these 
men who learned law, politics, state craft, town building, navigation, 
husbandry, boat-building, and medicine, likely to deal negligently or 
presumptuously with matters upon which they were not informed? Their first 
act, after buying the SPEEDWELL, was to send to England for an "expert" to 
take charge of all technical matters of her "outfitting," which was done, 
beyond all question, in Holland. What need had they, having done this 
(very probably upon the advice of those experienced ship-merchants, their 
own "Adventurers" and townsmen, Edward Pickering and William Greene), to 
consult Dutch ship-builders or mariners? She was to be an English ship, 
under the English flag, with English owners, and an English captain; why: 
should they defer to Dutch seamen or put other than an English "expert" in 
charge of her alterations, especially when England rightfully boasted the 
best? But not only were these Leyden leaders not guilty of any laches as 
indicted by Arber and too readily convicted by Griffis, but the 
"overmasting" was of small account as compared with the deliberate 
rascality of captain and crew, in the disabling of the consort, as 
expressly certified by Bradford, who certainly, as an eye-witness, knew 
whereof he affirmed. 

Having bought a vessel, it was necessary to fit her for the severe service 
in which she was to be employed; to provision her for the voyage, etc.; 
and this could be done properly only by experienced hands. The Pilgrim 
leaders at Leyden seem, therefore, as noted, to have sent to their agents 
at London for a competent man to take charge of this work, and were sent a 
"pilott" (or "mate"), doubtless presumed to be equal to the task. Goodwin 
mistakenly says: "As Spring waned, Thomas Nash went from Leyden to confer 
with the agents at London. He soon returned with a pilot (doubtless [sic] 
Robert Coppin), who was to conduct the Continental party to England." This 
is both wild and remarkable "guessing" for the usually careful compiler of 
the "Pilgrim Republic." There is no warrant whatever for this assumption, 
and everything contra-indicates it, although two such excellent 
authorities as Dr. Dexter and Goodwin coincide--the latter undoubtedly 
copying the former--concerning Coppin; both being doubtless in error, as 
hereafter shown. Dexter says "My impression is that Coppin was originally 
hired to go in the SPEEDWELL, and that he was the 'pilott' whose coming 
was 'a great incouragement' to the Leyden expectants, in the last of May, 
or first of June, 1620 [before May 31, as shown]; that he sailed with them 
in the SPEEDWELL, but on her final putting back was transferred to the MAY-
FLOWER." All the direct light any one has upon the matter comes from the 
letter of the Leyden brethren of May 31 [O.S.], 1620, previously cited, to 
Carver and Cushman, and the reply of the latter thereto, of Sunday, June 
11, 1620. The former as noted, say: "We received diverse letters at the 
coming of Master Nash [probably Thomas] and our pilott, which is a great 
incouragement unto us . . . and indeed had you not sente him [the
'pilott,' presumably] many would have been ready to fainte and goe backe." 
Neither here nor in any other relation is there the faintest suggestion of 
Coppin, except as what he was, "the second mate," or "pilott," of the MAY-
FLOWER. It is not reasonable to suppose that, for so small a craft but 
just purchased, and with the expedition yet uncertain, the Leyden leaders 
or their London agents had by June 11, employed both a "Master" and a 
"pilott" for the SPEEDWELL, as must have been the case if this "pilott" 
was, as Goodwin so confidently assumes, "doubtless Robert Coppin." For in 
Robert Cushman's letter of Sunday, June 11, as if proposing (now that the 
larger vessel would be at once obtained, and would, as he thought, be 
"ready in fourteen days") that the "pilott" sent over to "refit" the 
SPEEDWELL should be further utilized, he says: "Let Master Reynolds tarrie 
there [inferentially, not return here when his work is done, as we 
originally arranged] and bring the ship [the SPEEDWELL], to Southampton." 
The latter service we know he performed. 

The side lights upon the matter show, beyond doubt:-- 

(a) That a "pilott" had been sent to Holland, with Master Nash, before May 
31, 1620; 

(b) That unless two had been sent (of which there is no suggestion, and 
which is entirely improbable, for obvious reasons), Master Reynolds was 
the "pilott" who was thus sent; 

(c) That it is clear, from Cushman's letter of June 11/21, that Reynolds 
was then in Holland, for Cushman directs that " Master Reynolds tarrie 
there and bring the ship to Southampton;" 

(d) That Master Reynolds was not originally intended to "tarrie there," 
and "bring the ship," etc., as, if he had been, there would have been no 
need of giving such an order; and 

(e) That he had been sent there for some other purpose than to bring the 
SPEEDWELL to Southampton. Duly considering all the facts together, there 
can be no doubt that only one "pilott" was sent from England; that he was 
expected to return when the work was done for which he went (apparently 
the refitting of the SPEEDWELL); that he was ordered to remain for a new 
duty, and that the man who performed that duty and brought the ship to 
Southampton (who, we know was Master Reynolds) must have been the 
"pilott", sent over. 

We are told too, by Bradford,(*) that the crew of the SPEEDWELL "were 
hired for a year," and we know, in a general way, that most of them went 
with her to London when she abandoned the voyage. This there is ample 
evidence Coppin did not do, going as he did to New England as "second 
mate" or "pilott" of the MAY-FLOWER, which there is no reason to doubt he 
was when she left London. Neither is there anywhere any suggestion that 
there was at Southampton any change in the second mate of the larger ship, 
as there must have been to make good the suggestion of Dr. Dexter. 

(* Bradford's Historie, as already cited; Arber, The Story of the Pilgrim 
Fathers, p. 341. John Brown, in his Pilgrim Fathers of New England, p. 
198, says: "She [the SPEEDWELL] was to remain with the colony for a year." 
Evidently a mistake, arising from the length of time for which her crew 
were shipped. The pinnace herself was intended, as we have seen, for the 
permanent use of they colonists, and was to remain indefinitely.)

Where the SPEEDWELL lay while being "refitted" has not been ascertained, 
though presumably at Delfshaven, whence she sailed, though possibly at one 
of the neighboring larger ports, where her new masts and cordage could be 
"set up" to best advantage. 

We know that Reynolds--"pilott" and "Master" went from London to 
superintend the "making-ready" for sea. Nothing is known, however, of his 
antecedents, and nothing of his history after he left the service of the 
Pilgrims in disgrace, except that he appears to have come again to New 
England some years later, in command of a vessel, in the service of the 
reckless adventurer Weston (a traitor to the Pilgrims), through whom, it 
is probable, he was originally selected for their service in Holland. 
Bradford and others entitled to judge have given their opinions of this 
cowardly scoundrel (Reynolds) in unmistakable terms. 

What other officers and crew the pinnace had does not appear, and we know 
nothing certainly of them, except the time for which they shipped; that 
some of them were fellow-conspirators with the Master (self-confessed), in 
the "strategem" to compel the SPEEDWELL'S abandonment of the voyage; and 
that a few were transferred to the MAYFLOWER. From the fact that the 
sailors Trevore and Ely returned from New Plymouth on the FORTUNE in 1621, 
"their time having expired," as Bradford notes, it may be fairly assumed 
that they were originally of the SPEEDWELL'S crew. 

That the fears of the SPEEDWELL'S men had been worked upon, and their 
cooperation thus secured by the artful Reynolds, is clearly indicated by 
the statement of Bradford: "For they apprehended that the greater ship 
being of force and in which most of the provisions were stored, she would 
retain enough for herself, whatever became of them or the passengers, and 
indeed such speeches had been cast out by some of them." 

Of the list of passengers who embarked at Delfshaven, July 22, 1620, 
"bound for Southampton on the English coast, and thence for the northern 
parts of Virginia," we fortunately have a pretty accurate knowledge. All 
of the Leyden congregation who were to emigrate, with the exception of 
Robert Cushman and family, and (probably) John Carver, were doubtless 
passengers upon the SPEEDWELL from Delfshaven to Southampton, though the 
presence of Elder Brewster has been questioned. The evidence that he was 
there is well-nigh as conclusive as that Robert Cushman sailed on the MAY-
FLOWER from London, and that Carver, who had been for some months in 
England,--chiefly at Southampton, making preparations for the voyage, was 
there to meet the ships on their arrival. It is possible, of course, that 
Cushman's wife and son came on the SPEEDWELL from Delfshaven; but is not 
probable. Among the passengers, however, were some who, like Thomas 
Blossom and his son, William Ring, and others, abandoned the voyage to 
America at Plymouth, and returned in the pinnace to London and thence went 
back to Holland. Deducting from the passenger list of the MAYFLOWER those 
known to have been of the English contingent, with Robert Cushman and 
family, and John Carver, we have a very close approximate to the 
SPEEDWELL'S company on her "departure from Delfshaven." It has not been 
found possible to determine with absolute certainty the correct relation 
of a few persons. They may have been of the Leyden contingent and so have 
come with their brethren on the SPEEDWELL, or they may have been of the 
English colonists, and first embarked either at London or at Southampton, 
or even at Plymouth,--though none are supposed to have joined the 
emigrants there or at Dartmouth. 

The list of those embarking at Delfshaven on the SPEEDWELL, and so of the 
participants in that historic event,--a list now published for the first 
time, so far as known,--is undoubtedly accurate, within the limitations 
stated, as follows, being for convenience' sake arranged by families: 

The Family of Deacon John Carver (probably in charge of John Howland), 
embracing:-- Mrs. Katherine Carver, John Howland (perhaps kinsman of 
Carver), "servant" or "employee," Desire Minter, or Minther (probably 
companion of Mrs. Carver, perhaps kinswoman), Roger Wilder, "servant," 
"Mrs. Carver's maid" (whose name has never transpired). 

Master William Bradford and Mrs. Dorothy (May) Bradford. 

Master Edward Winslow and Mrs. Elizabeth (Barker) Winslow, George Soule a 
"servant" (or employee), Elias Story, "servant." 

Elder William Brewster and Mrs. Mary Brewster, Love Brewster, a son, 
Wrestling Brewster, a son. 

Master Isaac Allerton and Mrs. Mary (Morris) Allerton, Bartholomew 
Allerton, a son, Remember Allerton, a daughter, Mary Allerton, a daughter, 
John Hooke, "servant-boy." 

Dr. Samuel Fuller and William Butten, "servant"-assistant. 

Captain Myles Standish and Mrs. Rose Standish. 

Master William White and Mrs. Susanna (Fuller) White, Resolved White, a 
son, William Holbeck, "servant," Edward Thompson, "servant." 

Deacon Thomas Blossom and ----- Blossom, a son. 

Master Edward Tilley and Mrs. Ann Tilley. 

Master John Tilley and Mrs. Bridget (Van der Velde?) Tilley (2d wife), 
Elizabeth Tilley, a daughter of Mr. Tilley by a former wife(?) 

John Crackstone and John Crackstone (Jr.), a son. 

Francis Cooke and John Cooke, a son. 

John Turner and ---- Turner, a son, ---- Turner, a son. 

Degory Priest. 

Thomas Rogers and Joseph Rogers, a son. 

Moses Fletcher. 

Thomas Williams. 

Thomas Tinker and Mrs. ---- Tinker, ---- Tinker, a son. 

Edward Fuller and Mrs. ---- Fuller, Samuel Fuller, a son. 

John Rigdale and Mrs. Alice Rigdale. 

Francis Eaton and Mrs. ---- Eaton, Samuel Eaton, an infant son. 

Peter Browne. 

William Ring. 

Richard Clarke. 

John Goodman. 

Edward Margeson. 

Richard Britteridge. 

Mrs. Katherine Carver and her family, it is altogether probable, came over 
in charge of Howland, who was probably a kinsman, both he and Deacon 
Carver coming from Essex in England,--as they could hardly have been in 
England with Carver during the time of his exacting work of preparation. 
He, it is quite certain, was not a passenger on the Speedwell, for Pastor 
Robinson would hardly have sent him such a letter as that received by him 
at Southampton, previously mentioned (Bradford's "Historie," Deane's ed. 
p. 63), if he had been with him at Delfshaven at the "departure," a few 
days before. Nor if he had handed it to him at Delfshaven, would he have 
told him in it, "I have written a large letter to the whole company." 

John Howland was clearly a "secretary" or "steward," rather than a 
"servant," and a man of standing and influence from the outset. That he 
was in Leyden and hence a SPEEDWELL passenger appears altogether probable, 
but is not absolutely certain. 

Desire Minter (or Minther) was undoubtedly the daughter of Sarah, who, the 
"Troth Book" (or "marriage-in-tention" records) for 1616, at the Stadtbuis 
of Leyden, shows, was probably wife or widow of one William Minther--
evidently of Pastor Robinson's congregation--when she appeared on May 13 
as a "voucher" for Elizabeth Claes, who then pledged herself to Heraut 
Wilson, a pump-maker, John Carver being one of Wilson's "vouchers." In 
1618 Sarah Minther (then recorded as the widow of William) reappeared, to 
plight her troth to Roger Simons, brick-maker, from Amsterdam. These two 
records and the rarity of the name warrant an inference that Desire Minter 
(or Minther) was the daughter of William and Sarah (Willet) Minter (or 
Minther), of Robinson's flock; that her father had died prior to 1618 
(perhaps before 1616); that the Carvers were near friends, perhaps 
kinsfolk; that her father being dead, her mother, a poor widow (there were 
clearly no rich ones in the Leyden congregation), placed this daughter 
with the Carvers, and, marrying herself, and removing to Amsterdam the 
year before the exodus, was glad to leave her daughter in so good a home 
and such hands as Deacon and Mistress Carver's. The record shows that the 
father and mother of Mrs. Sarah Minther, Thomas and Alice Willet, the 
probable grandparents of Desire Minter, appear as "vouchers" for their 
daughter at her Leyden betrothal. Of them we know nothing further, but it 
is a reasonable conjecture that they may have returned to England after 
the remarriage of their daughter and her removal to Amsterdam, and the 
removal of the Carvers and their granddaughter to America, and that it was 
to them that Desire went, when, as Bradford records, "she returned to her 
friends in England, and proved not very well and died there." 

"Mrs. Carver's maid" we know but little about, but the presumption is 
naturally strong that she came from; Leyden with her mistress. Her early 
marriage and; death are duly recorded. 

Roger Wilder, Carver's "servant;" was apparently in his service at Leyden 
and accompanied the family from thence. Bradford calls him "his [Carver's] 
man Roger," as if an old, familiar household servant, which (as Wilder 
died soon after the arrival at Plymouth) Bradford would not have been as 
likely to do--writing in 1650, thirty years after--if he had been only a 
short-time English addition to Carver's household, known to Bradford only 
during the voyage. The fact that he speaks of him as a "man" also 
indicates something as to his age, and renders it certain that he was not 
an "indentured" lad. It is fair to presume he was a passenger on the 
SPEEDWELL to Southampton. (It is probable that Carver's "servant-boy," 
William Latham, and Jasper More, his "bound-boy," were obtained in 
England, as more fully appears.) 

Master William Bradford and his wife were certainly of the party in the 
SPEEDWELL, as shown by his own recorded account of the embarkation. 
(Bradford's "Historie," etc.) 

Master Edward Winslow's very full (published) account of the embarkation 
("Hypocrisie Unmasked," pp. 10-13, etc.) makes it certain that himself and 
family were SPEEDWELL passengers. 

George Soule, who seems to have been a sort of "upper servant" or
"steward," it is not certain was with Winslow in Holland, though it is 
probable. 

Elias Story, his "under-servant," was probably also with him in Holland, 
though not surely so. Both servants might possibly have been procured from 
London or at Southampton, but probably sailed from Delfshaven with Winslow 
in the SPEEDWELL. 

Elder William Brewster and his family, his wife and two boys, were 
passengers on the SPEEDWELL, beyond reasonable doubt. He was, in fact, the 
ranking man of the Leyden brethren till they reached Southampton and the 
respective ships' "governors" were chosen. The Church to that point was 
dominant. (The Elder's two "bound-boys," being from London, do not appear 
as SPEEDWELL passengers.) There is, on careful study, no warrant to be 
found for the remarkable statements of Goodwin ("Pilgrim Republic," p. 
33), that, during the hunt for Brewster in Holland in 1619, by the 
emissaries of James I. of England (in the endeavor to apprehend and punish 
him for printing and publishing certain religious works alleged to be 
seditious), "William Brewster was in London . . . and there he remained 
until the sailing of the MAYFLOWER, which he helped to fit out;" and that 
during that time "he visited Scrooby." That he had no hand whatever in 
fitting out the MAYFLOWER is certain, and the Scrooby statement equally 
lacks foundation. Professor Arber, who is certainly a better authority 
upon the "hidden press" of the Separatists in Holland, and the official 
correspondence relating to its proprietors and their movements, says ("The 
Story of the Pilgrim Fathers," p.196): "The Ruling Elder of the Pilgrim 
Church was, for more than a year before he left Delfshaven on the 
SPEEDWELL, on the 22 July- 1 August, 1620, a hunted man." Again (p. 334), 
he says: "Here let us consider the excellent management and strategy of 
this Exodus. If the Pilgrims had gone to London to embark for America, 
many, if not most of them, would have been put in prison [and this is the 
opinion of a British historian, knowing the temper of those times, 
especially William Brewster.] So only those embarked in London against 
whom the Bishops could take no action." We can understand, in light, why 
Carver--a more objectionable person than Cushman to the prelates, because 
of his office in the Separatist Church--was chiefly employed out of their 
sight, at Southampton, etc., while the diplomatic and urbane Cushman did 
effective work at London, under the Bishops' eyes. It is not improbable 
that the personal friendship of Sir Robert Naunton (Principal Secretary of 
State to King James) for Sir Edward Sandys and the Leyden brethren (though 
officially seemingly active under his masters' orders in pushing Sir 
Dudley Carleton, the English ambassador at the Hague, to an unrelenting 
search for Brewster) may have been of material aid to the Pilgrims in 
gaining their departure unmolested. The only basis known for the positive 
expression of Goodwin resides in the suggestions of several letters' of 
Sir Dudley Carleton to Sir Robert Naunton, during the quest for Brewster; 
the later seeming clearly to nullify the earlier. 

Under date of July 22, 1619, Carleton says: "One William Brewster, a 
Brownist, who has been for some years an inhabitant and printer at Leyden, 
but is now within these three weeks removed from thence and gone back to 
dwell in London," etc. 

On August 16, 1619 (N.S.), he writes: "I am told William Brewster is come 
again for Leyden," but on the 30th adds: "I have made good enquiry after 
William Brewster and am well assured he is not returned thither, neither 
is it likely he will; having removed from thence both his family and
goods," etc. 

On September 7, 1619 (N.S.), he writes: "Touching Brewster, I am now 
informed that he is on this side the seas [not in London, as before 
alleged]; and that he was seen yesterday, at Leyden, but, as yet, is not 
there settled," etc. 

On September 13, 1619 (N.S.), he says: "I have used all diligence to 
enquire after Brewster; and find he keeps most at Amsterdam; but being 
'incerti laris', he is not yet to be lighted upon. I understand he 
prepares to settle himself at a village called Leerdorp, not far from 
Leyden, thinking there to be able to print prohibited books without 
discovery, but I shall lay wait for him, both there and in other places, 
so as I doubt but either he must leave this country; or I shall, sooner or 
later, find him out." 

On September 20, 1619 (N.S.), he says: "I have at length found out 
Brewster at Leyden," etc. It was a mistake, and Brewster's partner (Thomas 
Brewer), one of the Merchant Adventurers, was arrested instead. 

On September 28, 1619 (N.S.), he states, writing from Amsterdam: "If he 
lurk here for fear of apprehension, it will be hard to find him," etc. 

As late as February 8, 1619/20, there was still a desire and hope for his 
arrest, but by June the matter had become to the King--and all others--
something of an old story. While, as appears by a letter of Robert 
Cushman, written in London, in May, 1619, Brewster was then undoubtedly 
there, one cannot agree, in the light of the official correspondence just 
quoted, with the conclusion of Dr. Alexander Young ("Chronicles of the 
Pilgrim Fathers," vol. i. p. 462), that "it is probable he [Brewster] did 
not return to Leyden, but kept close till the MAYFLOWER sailed." 

Everything indicates that he was at Leyden long after this; that he did 
not again return to London, as supposed; and that he was in hiding with 
his family (after their escape from the pursuit at Leyden), somewhere 
among friends in the Low Countries. Although by July, 1620, the King had, 
as usual, considerably "cooled off," we may be sure that with full 
knowledge of the harsh treatment meted out to his partner (Brewer) when 
caught, though unusually mild (by agreement with the authorities of the 
University and Province of Holland), Brewster did not deliberately put 
himself "under the lion's paw" at London, or take any chances of arrest 
there, even in disguise. Dr. Griffis has lent his assent (" The Pilgrims 
in their Homes," p, 167), though probably without careful analysis of all 
the facts, to the untenable opinion expressed by Goodwin, that Brewster 
was "hiding in England" when the SPEEDWELL sailed from Delfshaven. There 
can be no doubt that, with his ever ready welcome of sound amendment, he 
will, on examination, revise his opinion, as would the clear-sighted 
Goodwin, if living and cognizant of the facts as marshalled against his 
evident error. As the leader and guide of the outgoing part of the Leyden 
church we may, with good warrant, believe--as all would wish--that Elder 
Brewster was the chief figure the departing Pilgrims gathered on the 
SPEEDWELL deck, as she took her departure from Delfshaven. 

Master Isaac Allerton and his family, his wife and three children, two 
sons and a daughter, were of the Leyden company and passengers in the 
SPEEDWELL. We know he was active there as a leader, and was undoubtedly 
one of those who bought the SPEEDWELL. He was one of the signers of the 
joint-letter from Leyden, to Carver and Cushman, May 31 (O.S.) 1620. 

John Hooke, Allerton's "servant-lad," may have been detained at London or 
Southampton, but it is hardly probable, as Allerton was a man of means, 
consulted his comfort, and would have hardly started so large a family on 
such a journey without a servant. 

Dr. Samuel Fuller was, as is well known, one of the Leyden chiefs, 
connected by blood and marriage with many of the leading families of 
Robinson's congregation. He was active in the preparations for the voyage 
the first signer of the joint-letter of May 31, and doubtless one of the 
negotiators for the SPEEDWELL. His wife and child were left behind, to 
follow later as they did. 

William Butten, the first of the Pilgrim party to die, was, in all 
probability, a student-"servant" of Doctor Fuller at Leyden, and doubtless 
embarked with him at Delfshaven. Bradford calls him (writing of his death) 
"Wm. Butten, a youth, servant to Samuel Fuller." Captain Myles Standish 
and his wife Rose, we know from Bradford, were with the Pilgrims in Leyden 
and doubtless shipped with them. Arber calls him ("The Story of the 
Pilgrim Fathers," p. 378) a "chief of the Pilgrim Fathers" in the sense of 
a father and leader in their Israel; but there is no warrant for this 
assumption, though he became their "sword-hand" in the New World. By some 
writers, though apparently with insufficient warrant, Standish has been 
declared a Roman Catholic. It does not appear that he was ever a 
communicant of the Pilgrim Church. His family, moreover, was not of the 
Roman Catholic faith, and all his conduct in the colony is inconsistent 
with the idea that he was of that belief. Master William White, his wife 
and son, were of the Leyden congregation, both husband and wife being 
among its principal people, and nearly related to several of the Pilgrim 
band. The marriage of Mr. and Mrs. White is duly recorded in Leyden. 
William Holbeck and Edward Thompson, Master White's two servants, he 
probably took with him from Leyden, as his was a family of means and 
position, though they might possibly have been procured at Southampton. 
They were apparently passengers in the SPEEDWELL. Deacon Thomas Blossom 
and his son were well known as of Pastor Robinson's flock at Leyden. They 
returned, moreover, to Holland from Plymouth, England (where they gave up 
the voyage), via London. The father went to New Plymouth ten years later, 
the son dying before that time. (See Blossom's letter to Governor 
Bradford. Bradford's Letter Book, "Plymouth Church Records," i. 42.) In 
his letter dated at Leyden, December 15, 1625, he says: "God hath taken 
away my son that was with me in the ship MAYFLOWER when I went back 
again." 

Edward Tilley (sometimes given the prefix of Master) his wife Ann are 
known to have been of the Leyden company. (Bradford's "Historie," p. 83.) 
It is doubtful if their "cousins," Henry Sampson and Humility Cooper, were 
of Leyden. They apparently were English kinsfolk, taken to New England 
with the Tilleys, very likely joined them at Southampton and hence were 
not of the SPEEDWELL'S passengers. Humility Cooper returned to England 
after the death of Tilley and his wife. That Mrs. Tilley's "given name" 
was Ann is not positively established, but rests on Bradford's evidence. 

John Tilley (who is also sometimes called Master) is reputed a brother of 
Edward, and is known to have been--as also his wife--of the Leyden church 
(Bradford, Deane's ed. p. 83.) His second wife Bridget Van der Velde, was 
evidently of Holland blood, and their marriage is recorded in Leyden. 
Elizabeth Tilley was clearly a daughter by an earlier wife. He is said by 
Goodwin ("Pilgrim Republic," p. 32) to have been a "silk worker" Leyden, 
but earlier authority for this occupation is not found. 

John Crackstone is of record as of the Leyden congregation. His daughter 
remained there, and came later to America. 

John Crackstone, Jr., son of above. Both were SPEEDWELL passengers. 

Francis Cooke has been supposed a very early member of Robinson's flock in 
England, who escaped with them to Holland, in 1608. He and his son perhaps 
embarked at Delfshaven, leaving his wife and three other children to 
follow later. (See Robinson's letter to Governor Bradford, "Mass. Hist. 
Coll.," vol. iii. p. 45, also Appendix for account of Cooke's marriage.) 

John Cooke, the son, was supposed to have lived to be the last male 
survivor of the MAY-FLOWER, but Richard More proves to have survived him. 
He was a prominent man in the colony, like his father, and the founder of 
Dartmouth (Mass.). 

John Turner and his sons are also known to have been of the Leyden party, 
as he was undoubtedly the messenger sent to London with the letter (of May 
31) of the leaders to Carver and Cushman, arriving there June 10, 1620. 
They were beyond doubt of the SPEEDWELL'S list. 

Degory Priest--or "Digerie," as Bradford calls him--was a prominent member 
of the Leyden body. His marriage is recorded there, and he left his family 
in the care of his pastor and friends, to follow him later. He died early. 

Thomas Rogers and his son are reputed of the Leyden company. He left 
(according to Bradford) some of his family there--as did Cooke and Priest--
to follow later. It has been suggested that Rogers might have been of the 
Essex (England) lineage, but no evidence of this appears. The Rogers 
family of Essex were distinctively Puritans, both in England and in the 
Massachusetts colony. 

Moses Fletcher was a "smith" at Leyden, and of Robinson's church. He was 
married there, in 1613, to his second wife. He was perhaps of the English 
Amsterdam family of Separatists, of that name. As the only blacksmith of 
the colonists, his early death was a great loss. 

Thomas Williams, there seems no good reason to doubt, was the Thomas 
Williams known to have been of Leyden congregation. Hon. H. C. Murphy and 
Arber include him--apparently through oversight alone-- in the list of 
those of Leyden who did not go, unless there were two of the name, one of 
whom remained in Holland. 

Thomas Tinker, wife, and son are not certainly known to have been of the 
Leyden company, or to have embarked at Delfshaven, but their constant 
association in close relation with others who were and who so embarked 
warrants the inference that they were of the SPEEDWELL'S passengers. It 
is, however, remotely possible, that they were of the English contingent. 

Edward Fuller and his wife and little son were of the Leyden company, and 
on the SPEEDWELL. He is reputed to have been a brother of Dr. Fuller, and 
is occasionally so claimed by early writers, but by what warrant is not 
clear. 

John Rigdale and his wife have always been placed by tradition and 
association with the Leyden emigrants but there is a possibility that they 
were of the English party. Probability assigns them to the SPEEDWELL, and 
they are needed to make her accredited number. 

Francis Eaton, wife, and babe were doubtless of the Leyden list. He is 
said to have been a carpenter there (Goodwin, "Pilgrim Republic," p. 32), 
and was married there, as the record attests. 

Peter Browne has always been classed with the Leyden party. There is no 
established authority for this except tradition, and he might possibly 
have been of the English emigrants, though probably a SPEEDWELL passenger; 
he is needed to make good her putative number. 

William Ring is in the same category as are Eaton and Browne. Cushman 
speaks of him, in his Dartmouth letter to Edward Southworth (of August 
17), in terms of intimacy, though this, while suggestive, of course proves 
nothing, and he gave up the voyage and returned from Plymouth to London 
with Cushman. He was certainly from Leyden. 

Richard Clarke is on the doubtful list, as are also John Goodman, Edward 
Margeson, and Richard Britteridge. They have always been traditionally 
classed with the Leyden colonists, yet some of them were possibly among 
the English emigrants. They are all needed, however, to make up the number 
usually assigned to Leyden, as are all the above "doubtfuls," which is of 
itself somewhat confirmatory of the substantial correctness of the list. 

Thomas English, Bradford records, "was hired to goe master of a [the] 
shallopp" of the colonists, in New England waters. He was probably hired 
in Holland and was almost certainly of the SPEEDWELL. 

John Alderton (sometimes written Allerton) was, Bradford states, "a hired 
man, reputed [reckoned] one of the company, but was to go back (being a 
seaman) [and so making no account of the voyages for the help of others 
behind" [probably at Leyden]. It is probable that he was hired in Holland, 
and came to Southampton on the SPEEDWELL. Both English and Alderton seem 
to have stood on a different footing from Trevore and Ely, the other two 
seamen in the employ of the colonists. 

William Trevore was, we are told by Bradford, "a seaman hired to stay a 
year in the countrie," but whether or not as part of the SPEEDWELL'S Crew 
(who, he tells us, were all hired for a year) does not appear. As the 
Master (Reynolds) and others of her crew undoubtedly returned to London in 
her from Plymouth, and her voyage was cancelled, the presumption is that 
Trevore and Ely were either hired anew or--more probably--retained under 
their former agreement, to proceed by the MAY-FLOWER to America, 
apparently (practically) as passengers. Whether of the consort's crew or 
not, there can be little doubt that he left Delfshaven on the SPEEDWELL. 

--- Ely, the other seaman in the Planters' employ, also hired to "remain a 
year in the countrie," appears to have been drafted, like Trevore, from 
the SPEEDWELL before she returned to London, having, no doubt, made 
passage from Holland in her. Both Trevore and Ely survived "the general 
sickness" at New Plimoth, and at the expiration of the time for which they 
were employed returned on the FORTUNE to England 

Of course the initial embarkation, on Friday, July 21/31 1620, was at 
Leyden, doubtless upon the Dutch canal-boats which undoubtedly brought 
them from a point closely adjacent to Pastor Robinson's house in the Klock-
Steeg (Bell, Belfry, Alley), in the garden of which were the houses of 
many, to Delfshaven. 

Rev. John Brown, D.D., says: "The barges needed for the journey were most 
likely moored near the Nuns' Bridge which spans the Rapenburg immediately 
opposite the Klok-Steeg, where Robinsons house was. This, being their 
usual meeting-place, would naturally be the place of rendezvous on the 
morning of departure. From thence it was but a stone's throw to the boats, 
and quickly after starting they would enter the Vliet, as the section of 
the canal between Leyden and Delft is named, and which for a little 
distance runs within the city bounds, its quays forming the streets. In 
those days the point where the canal leaves the city was guarded by a 
water-gate, which has long since been removed, as have also the town 
walls, the only remaining portions of which are the Morsch-gate and the 
Zylgate. So, gliding along the quiet waters of the Vliet, past the Water-
gate, and looking up at the frowning turrets of the Cow-gate, 'they left 
that goodly and pleasant city which had been their resting-place near 
twelve years.' . . . Nine miles from Leyden a branch canal connects the 
Vliet with the Hague, and immediately beyond their junction a sharp turn 
is made to the left, as the canal passes beneath the Hoom-bridge; from 
this point, for the remaining five miles, the high road from the Hague to 
Delft, lined with noble trees, runs side by side with the canal. In our 
time the canal-boats make a circuit of the town to the right, but in those 
days the traffic went by canal through the heart of the city . . . . 
Passing out of the gates of Delft and leaving the town behind, they had 
still a good ten miles of canal journey before them ere they reached their 
vessel and came to the final parting, for, as Mr. Van Pelt has clearly 
shown, it is a mistake to confound Delft with Delfshaven, as the point of 
embarkation in the SPEEDWELL. Below Delft the canal, which from Leyden 
thither is the Vliet, then becomes the Schie, and at the village of 
Overschie the travellers entered the Delfshaven Canal, which between 
perfectly straight dykes flows at a considerable height above the 
surrounding pastures. Then finally passing through one set of sluice gates 
after another, the Pilgrims were lifted from the canal into a broad 
receptacle for vessels, then into the outer haven, and so to the side of 
the SPEEDWELL as she lay at the quay awaiting their arrival." 

Dr. Holmes has prettily pictured the "Departure" in his "Robinson of 
Leyden," even if not altogether correctly, geographically. 

"He spake; with lingering, long embrace,
With tears of love and partings fond,
They floated down the creeping Maas,
Along the isle of Ysselmond.

"They passed the frowning towers of Briel,
The 'Hook of Holland's' shelf of sand,
And grated soon with lifting keel
The sullen shores of Fatherland.

"No home for these! too well they knew
The mitred king behind the throne;
The sails were set, the pennons flew,
And westward ho! for worlds unknown."

Winslow informs us that they of the Leyden congregation who volunteered 
for the American enterprise were rather the smaller fraction of the whole 
body, though he adds, as noted "that the difference was not great." A 
careful analysis of the approximate list of the Leyden colonists,-- 
including, of course, Carver, and Cushman and his family,--whose total 
number seems to have been seventy-two, indicates that of this number, 
forty-two, or considerably more than half (the rest being children, 
seamen, or servants), were probably members of the Leyden church. Of 
these, thirty, probably, were males and twelve females. The exact 
proportion this number bore to the numerical strength of Robinson's church 
at that time cannot be determined, because while something less than half 
as we know, gave their votes for the American undertaking, it cannot be 
known whether or not the women of church had a vote in the matter. 
Presumably they did not, the primitive church gave good heed to the words 
of Paul (i Corinthians xiv. 34), "Let your women keep silence in the 
churches." Neither can it be known--if they had a voice--whether the wives 
and daughters of some of the embarking Pilgrims, who did not go themselves 
at this time, voted with their husbands and fathers for the removal. The 
total number, seventy-two, coincides very nearly with the estimate made by 
Goodwin, who says: "Only eighty or ninety could go in this party from 
Leyden," and again: "Not more than eighty of the MAY- FLOWER company were 
from Leyden. Allowing for [i.e. leaving out] the younger children and 
servants, it is evident that not half the company can have been from 
Robinson's congregation." As the total number of passengers on the 
MAYFLOWER was one hundred and two when she took her final departure from 
England, it is clear that Goodwin's estimate is substantially correct, and 
that the number representing the Leyden church as given above, viz., forty-
two, is very close to the fact. 

"When they came to the place" [Delfshaven], says Bradford, "they found the 
ship and all things ready; and such of their friends as could not come 
with them [from Leyden] followed after them; and sundry also came from 
Amsterdam (about fifty miles) to see them shipped, and to take their leave 
of them." 

Saturday, July 22/Aug. 1, 1620, the Pilgrim company took their farewells, 
and Winslow records: "We only going aboard, the ship lying to the key 
[quay] and ready to sail; the wind being fair, we gave them [their 
friends] a volley of small shot [musketry] and three pieces of ordnance 
and so lifting up our hands to each other and our hearts for each other to 
the Lord our God, we departed." 

Goodwin says of the parting: "The hull was wrapped in smoke, through which 
was seen at the stern the white flag of England doubly bisected by the 
great red cross of St. George, a token that the emigrants had at last 
resumed their dearly-loved nationality. Far above them at the main was 
seen the Union Jack of new device." 

And so after more than eleven years of banishment for conscience' sake 
from their native shores, this little band of English exiles, as true to 
their mother-land--despite persecutions--as to their God, raised the flag 
of England, above their own little vessel, and under its folds set sail to 
plant themselves for a larger life in a New World. 

And thus opens the "Log" of the SPEEDWELL, and the "Westward-Ho" of the 
Pilgrim Fathers. 


THE SPEEDWELL'S LOG 

Sunday, July 23/Aug. 2. On the German Ocean. Wind fair. General course 
D.W., toward Southampton. sails set, running free. 

Monday, July 24/Aug. 3. Fair. Wind moderate. Dover Straits English 
Channel. In sight Dover Cliffs. 

Tuesday, July 25/Aug. 5 Hugging English shore. Enters Southampton Water. 

Wednesday, July 26/Aug. 5. Came to anchor in Port of Southampton near ship 
MAYFLOWER of Yarmouth, from London (to which this pinnace is consort), off 
the north of the West Quay.' 

Thursday, July 27/Aug. 6. At anchor in port of Southampton. 

Friday, July 28/Aug. 7. Lying at anchor at Southampton. 

Saturday, July 29/Aug. 8. Lying at Southampton. MAY-FLOWER ready for sea, 
but pinnace leaking and requires re- trimming. 

Sunday, July 30/Aug. 9. Lying at Southampton. 

Monday, July 31/Aug. 10. Ditto. 

Tuesday, Aug. 1/11. Ditto. 

Wednesday, Aug. 2/22. Ditto. Pinnace leaking. Re-trimmed again. 

Thursday, Aug 3/13. Ditto. Receiving passengers, etc. Some of principal 
Leyden men assigned to SPEEDWELL. 

Friday, Aug. 4/14 Southampton. Making ready to leave. 

Saturday, Aug. 5/55. Dropped down Southampton Water and beat down Channel. 
Wind dead ahead. Laid general course W.S.W. 

Sunday, Aug. 6/16. Wind baffling. Beating down Channel. 

Monday, Aug. 7/17. Ditto. 

Tuesday, Aug. 8/18. Ditto. Ship leaking. 

Wednesday, Aug. 9/19. Ship leaking badly. Wind still ahead. 

Thursday, Aug. 10/20. Ship still leaking badly. Gaining on pumps. Hove to. 
Signalled MAY-FLOWER, in company. Consultation with Captain Jones and 
principal passengers. Decided vessels shall put back, Dartmouth, being 
nearest convenient port. Wore ship and laid course for Dartmouth with good 
wind. 

Friday, Aug. 11/21. Wind fair. Ship leaking badly. 

Saturday, Aug. 12/22. Made port at Dartmouth MAY-FLOWER in company. Came 
to anchor near MAY-FLOWER. 

Sunday, Aug. 13/23. Lying at anchor, Dartmouth harbor. 

Monday, Aug. 14/24. Moving cargo and overhauling and retrimming ship. 

Tuesday, Aug. 15/25. Lying at Dartmouth. At on ship. 

Wednesday, Aug. 16/26. Ditto. Found a plank feet long loose and admitting 
water freely, as at a mole hole. Seams opened some. 

Thursday, Aug. 17/27. Lying at Dartmouth. Some dissension among chief of 
passengers. Ship's "Governor" unsatisfactory. 

Friday, Aug. 18/28. Lying at Dartmouth. Still at work on ship. 

Saturday, Aug. 19/29. Still lying at Dartmouth. 

Sunday, Aug. 20/30. Lying at Dartmouth. 

Monday, Aug. 21/31 Still at Dartmouth. Overhauling completed. Cargo 
relaced. Making ready to go to sea. 

Tuesday, Aug. 22/Sept. 1. Still at Dartmouth. Lying at anchor ready for 
sea. 

Wednesday, Aug. 23/Sept. 2. Weighed anchor,' as did also MAY-FLOWER, and 
set sail. Laid general course W.S.W. Wind fair 

Thursday, Aug. 24/Sept.3. Fair wind, but ship leaking. 

Friday, Aug. 25/Sept. 4. Wind fair. Ship leaking dangerously. MAY- FLOWER 
in company. 

Saturday, Aug. 26/Sept. 5. About 100 leagues [300 miles] from Land's End. 
Ship leaking badly. Hove to. Signalled MAY-FLOWER, in company. 
Consultation between masters, carpenters, and principal passengers. 
Decided to put back into Plymouth and determine whether pinnace is 
seaworthy. Put about and laid course for Plymouth. 

Sunday, Aug. 27/Sept. 6. Wind on starboard quarter. Made Plymouth harbor 
and came to anchor. MAY-FLOWER in company. 

Monday, Aug. 28/Sept. 7. At anchor in Plymouth harbor. Conference of chief 
of Colonists and officers of MAY- FLOWER and SPEEDWELL. No special leak 
could be found, but it was judged to be the general weakness of the ship, 
and that she would not prove sufficient for the voyage. It was resolved to 
dismiss her the SPEEDWELL, and part of the company, and proceed with the 
other ship. 

Tuesday, Aug. 29/Sept. 8 Lying at Plymouth. Transferring cargo. 

Wednesday, Aug. 30/Sept. 9 Lying at Plymouth. Transferring cargo. 

Saturday, Sept. 2/12 Ditto. Reassignment of passengers. Master Cushman and 
family, Master Blossom and son, Wm. Ring and others to return in pinnace 
to London. 

Sunday, Sept. 3/13 At anchor in Plymouth roadstead. 

Monday, Sept. 4/14 Weighed anchor and took departure for London, leaving 
MAY-FLOWER at anchor in roadstead. 

Saturday, Sept. 9/19 Off Gravesend. Came to anchor in Thames. 


THE END OF THE VOYAGE AND OF THE LOG OF THE MAY-FLOWER'S CONSORT 

From Bradford we learn that the SPEEDWELL was sold at London, and was 
"refitted", her old trip being restored, and that she afterwards made for 
her new owners many and very prosperous voyages.