becoming eager to abandon the enterprise, and to return with all speed to Virginia, in turn urged Argall to adopt his views. But his efforts were vain. On the 1st of November (22d October, N.S.) Argall found his way, without difficulty, into the harbor, and in Port Royal abundant spoils of war. (L'Escarbot l. v. cap. 14.) He then reproved his lieutenant for the counsel he had given, as well as for believing the Jesuit; and in consequence, assigned him a smaller share of the booty. This was deeply mortifying to Turnall, who had always been esteemed for his intelligence and practical ability; and we may here add, in detail, that he spoke good French, and many other modern languages, besides Greek and Latin, which he knew very well, and having a powerful intellect, had improved it by much study. Considering himself deceived by Father Biard, he regarded him with a strong aversion, which continued unabated for a time, and was much increased, primarily, by the assertions of Biencourt, and next, by the written declaration of him and five or six others, that the reverend Father was a Spaniard by birth, and having committed crimes in France, had been compelled to become a fugitive; that he had also been guilty of scandalous misconduct at Port Royal, and only waited an opportunity to do something worse to the English. Even the master of Argall's ship, whom Father Biard calls a malicious, smooth-faced Puritan, joined in the outcry, and conjured both Argall and Turnall to turn the Jesuit ashore without food, as he had done his best to prevent the English from obtaining any.

But Argall, "who," says Father Biard, "is a man of a noble heart," was proof against all the arguments of the English, and the malicious artifices of the French. The more strongly they pressed their point, that the Father should be left ashore to his fate, the more firmly did Argall withhold his consent; for he felt that his compliance would be a dishonor and a breach of faith and justice.

The reverend Father expatiates upon his own patience and forgiving spirit, under all his wrongs; and especially, as displayed in his repeated intercessions with Argall, even on his knees, for ameliorating the condition of his persecutors. He contents himself with holding them up, as awful examples of human depravity, and self-devoted, irrecoverable slaves of Satan.

The English vessels left Port Royal for Virginia on the 9th of November. Two days after they were dispersed by a violent storm. The barque, with six Englishmen in her, was never heard of afterwards. Argall's ship arrived safe, having, probably, on his way, touched at the Dutch settlement on Manhattan Island, and received its submission. Turnall's ship, after being driven out of her course for sixteen days, regained it, and approached, as was supposed, within sixty or seventy miles of her port, when she was again blown out to sea by a furious south-west storm, and compelled to bear away for the Azores. The water falling short, the horses on board were killed, and their flesh was much liked by the Jesuits.

After three weeks' stay at Fayal, having obtained supplies, the ship was put on her course for England, arrived at Milford Haven in January, 1614; and her provisions, while there, being entirely consumed, the captain was obliged to take her to Pembroke. Having an English crew and a French ship, and no commission as captain, he was at that place arrested on suspicion of being a pirate. But, by the testimony of the Jesuits and others, showing that he was under the command of his captain, Argall, when separated from him by unavoidable accident, he was released.

Argall left Virginia again for England, in June, 1614. Sir Thomas Dale, who wrote, on the 18th of that month, to his reverend friend in Fenchurch, London, sent the letter by Argall, whom he calls "this worthy gentleman." In it he also recounts the services of Argall, in forming a league of peace and friendship with Powhatan, and another soon after with the Chickahominies, who thought that the friendship of the English allies of Powhatan would be their best protection against his hostility.

Argall carried with him Captain Flores and two others of the French prisoners. He had previously, with great difficulty, as Father Biard relates, prevailed on Sir Thomas Dale to permit the Sieur de la Motte to take passage in a Bermuda vessel for England, where he had arrived in safety. Flores arrived just in time to learn that his ship was restored, and to resume command of her.

Such was the humane and friendly conduct of Argall, on all occasions, towards his prisoners, that Father Biard says of him, "Certainly, the said Argall has shown himself such,

that we have reason to wish, for his sake, that he may henceforth serve a better cause, and where the nobleness of his heart may be displayed in befriending, and not in injuring, worthy people."

It was probably on his passage from Port Royal to Virginia, that he visited the Amsterdam Company's new settlement at Manhattan. Three years before, Sir Noel Caron, Ambassador of the States at the Court of Great Britain, had proposed that the Dutch should be joined with the English in Virginia, as a measure promising greater security from the hostile interference of Spain; and Sir Thomas Gates, in December, 1610, was appointed to confer with the States-General on the subject. But the English government, being apprehensive, if the union were on equal terms, that the art and industry of their allies would eventually supersede their own, nothing was effected by the conference beyond the implied denial of any right, on the part of the Dutch, to occupy places within the chartered limits of Virginia, North and South. Under the circumstances, it would not be unreasonable to suppose that Sir Thomas Gates ordered Argall's visit to Manhattan. (III. Winwood, p. 239.)

A year after Argall left his government in Virginia, he served in the expedition, under Sir Robert Mansel, against Algiers, as captain of the "Golden Phoenix," one of the stoutest of the twelve merchant ships in the fleet; of three hundred tons, carrying one hundred and twenty men, and forty iron guns. He was also one of the members of the council of war. The other six were the three admirals and three captains, and each of the six in command of a king's ship. The fleet sailed from Plymouth on the 12th of October, 1620, and, without having rendered any service to the nation, was recalled when on its way home, on the 9th of the following August. This fleet suffered much for want of pay, and of proper supplies. (Lord Herbert's Life, ed. 1824, p. 20; Eng. Dom. St. Pap., 1621, vol. lxxvi.; II. Purch. p. 881.)

In 1621 three Holland ships were on the point of sailing for the trading ports in the New Netherlands. To put an end to all such proceedings of the Dutch within the charter limits of the Virginias, Argall joined, with three other distinguished champions of English colonization, the Earl of Arundel, Sir Ferdinando Gorges, and Captain Mason, in a complaint and remonstrance to the king. His Majesty accordingly instructed his ambassador, Sir Dudley Carleton, to request the States-General to stop the ships, and to forbid the intrusion of their subjects into his American territory.

The States-General, in reply to the Ambassador's application, said that they knew nothing of the enterprise complained of. This was very probable, for the ambassador, upon further inquiry, ascertained and certified to the king, that it was only two companies of Amsterdam merchants, who, without the knowledge or advice of the Lords States-General, had begun to occupy, within the prohibited limits, places to which they had given the name of New Netherlands. (Brodhead, New York Document, I. p. 58.)

The stand taken by the king on this occasion, displays a determination to maintain undisturbed possession of the whole territory within the charter limits, and is in itself a complete justification and virtual approval of Argall's removal of the French, and subjugation of the Dutch, in 1613.

Five years later, in the war with Spain, Argall had the command, as Admiral for the time, of twenty-four English, and four Dutch ships, with which he left Plymouth on the 6th of September, 1625, in search of eighteen Dunkirkers, reported to be making their way to Spain, close along the French coast. One of them was hailed; but before any of them could be brought to action, they managed to take refuge in the port of Dunkirk. Argall, however, had the satisfaction of preventing their junction with the home squadrons of Spain, and, moreover, of capturing and sending in seven Spanish vessels, valued at £100,000. But in the hope that their value would be found to exceed this estimate, it being suspected that money was concealed in the sacks of wool on board, the king sent the Duke of Buckingham to search the cargoes. As the duke soon after made his ordinary payments in Spanish coin, it may be presumed that his search was successful. (II. Purch. p. 882; I. Birch, Charles I. p. 52.)

Argall's squadron, on returning to Plymouth, joined the fleet fitting out for the attack of Cadiz, making it, in all, eighty sail. Sir Edward Cecil, who was created Lord Wimbleton on the occasion, was appointed Admiral and Commander-in-Chief of the land and naval

forces. The Earl of Essex, son of the favorite and victim of Queen Elizabeth, and afterwards distinguished as General-in-Chief of the Parliamentary forces, was made Vice-Admiral of the fleet, and Colonel-General of the troops. Both of these officers had served with credit as commanders of regiments in the cause of the States-General.

Lord Essex's sense of the professional merits of Argall was manifested by selecting the "Surprize," of which Argall was captain, as his flag-ship. She had two hundred and fifty men; the complement, in those days, of a ship of six hundred tons, and forty brass guns.

The fleet went to sea on the 8th of October, four days after was dispersed by a storm; and fifty of the ships, for a week, were missing, and unable to reach Cape St. Vincents, the appointed rendezvous, before the 19th. By a council of war held there on that day, it was decided to attack Cadiz without delay. The fleet entered the bay of Cadiz on the 22d, and the next day, Argall, by order of Lord Essex, with twenty English, and five Dutch ships, bore down upon seventeen Spanish ships, and eight or ten galleys, riding under the town, with a design to fire them. The Spaniards avoided the attack, by flying, under a press of canvas, to Port Real, at the extremity of the Bay of Puntal.

Lord Essex then ordered the guns of the ships to be turned upon the Fort San Lorenzo. After expending about two thousand shot with little apparent effect, the cannonade was stopped, and Sir John Burroughs ordered to take ashore several thousand troops to attack the fort. The garrison was quickly dislodged, and the assailants took possession of the fort. Attempts, in which Argall took a part, were then made, with slight success, to enter the town. The fortifications were too strong and complete to yield to an irregular body of sailors and soldiers, without even scaling-ladders. The next day, an alarm being given of the enemy approaching, the troops were drawn out; and, being faint and without provisions, wine was supplied them, by order, it was said, from headquarters, in such abundance that they became so utterly unmanageable as to make it indispensable to re-embark them and abandon the fort.

Argall, having reconnoitred the town, reported that it was too strongly fortified to be taken, except by a regular siege; and that the Spanish fleet in the Bay of Puntal was inaccessible. Now, as no provision had been made for carrying on a siege, or even for taking and retaining the two Puntales, the Forts Matagordo and San Lorenzo, which, by their crossfire, command the entrance of the Bay of Puntal, it was agreed to cruise off Cape St. Vin cents for the Plate fleet. This was done for twenty days. In the interim, some of the crews being much weakened by a contagious disease, it was ordered that every well ship should give up two sound men, and receive on board two sick ones, by which process the infection spread through the whole fleet to such a degree, that hardly hands enough were left to manage the sails; and Lord Wimbleton was forced to set sail for home four days before the Plate fleet arrived off Cadiz. The English fleet returned to Plymouth in December, and soon after Lord Essex and nine other officers of distinction exhibited charges against Lord Wimbleton, which he answered at length, by endeavoring to throw on them the blame of his ill success. But his want of naval experience, and the disinclination of his officers to comply with his arbitrary and ill-considered orders, probably had much to do in defeating the expedition. (I. Rashworth, p. 195; Baker Chr. p. 453; Eng. Dom. St. Papers, 1625, vols. vi., vii., viii., ix., xix., xxxi.; Molineux, Conj. Exped. p. 43, 44.)

The merchant ships in the fleet having been ill supplied and badly paid, the masters, after waiting in vain for some weeks, in the hope of relief from the king, manifested great unwillingness to serve any longer. Among them the master of the "Swiftsure" was "very backward," and "very cross" to his captain, Sir Samuel Argall, "which," said Captain John Pennington, in his letter of the 28th of January, 1626, to the Duke of Buckingham, "broke his heart, and four days after he died." (Eng. Dom. St. Pap. vol. xix., Charles I.) Our notice of Argall may seem to be extended to an undue length. But all accounts of him extant are extremely meagre, and some of them unwarrantable misrepresentations of his deeds and character. We felt it, therefore, to be a duty, not only to bring into view such additional facts and incidents in his career as could be obtained from various sources, but also to enter into full and detailed explanations, in order to rescue, as far as we could, the memory of one of the most able, useful, and faithful servants of the colony of Virginia from the unmerited dishonor that had been unwittingly or malevolently cast upon it.

Those actions of Argall which have, latterly, been most acrimoniously condemned, met, originally, with almost universal praise and admiration from his countrymen. The complaints of the company, and their suit at law, may seem to weigh against him. It may be urged, that such good and wise men as Sir Edwin Sandys, the two Ferrars, and others of the council, would never have denounced him if he were not guilty. But it must be remembered that they, not having been in the colony, were constrained to rely upon statements got up for interested purposes by artful and vindictive men who had resided there for years; and were, therefore, the more able, especially in the absence of the accused, to give whatever version they chose of his conduct. But at the November meeting, six months after Argall's return to London, Sir Edwin Sandys did not venture, on the strength of Yeardley's accusations, to charge Argall with the alleged misdeeds; but only intimated, loosely, that "he doubted not but that hereafter, in due time, they would be made fully manifest; but that he forbore, at present, to touch upon them, lest he should by any glance of speech give offence to any person present," - meaning Argall. This extraordinary deference towards Argall shows that Sir Edwin did not believe him to be the malefactor which Sir Edwin's own supporters had represented him. On the other hand, Argall, with the boldness of innocence, always challenged investigation; and the suit against him, at the end of four years, came to nothing. (Stith, pp. 151, 164.)

The chief manager of the conspiracy against Argall was Captain Yeardley. His personal aim was to displace a rival, and to succeed him in office; and in the furtherance of his views he was under slight restraint from elevated or honorable sentiments. His eagerness and ardor were quickened by the news of Lord De la Warre's death, which opened to him the prospect of a higher appointment than he had previously contemplated. Within three weeks from the day when that sad event was first known in London, he prevailed on the Treasurer and Council to nominate him as Governor and Captain-General of Virginia, at the next quarterly court. The nomination, being duly approved at that court, was finally confirmed at the quarterly court (Hilary), held on the 1st of February, 1619. (I. Burke, p. 819; Eng. St. Pap. Dom. vol. ciii., James I.)

His general conduct in London in the two preceding years, and especially his machinations for the ruin of Argall, had not escaped observation; nor was it hardly possible they should do so.

London, in its greatest extent, was, at that period, comparatively a small community, (probably of about 150,000 inhabitants), where the character and conduct of each one was well known to all others of the circle in which he moved. The opinion formed of Yeardley was not more favorable to his character than the mercenary acts ascribed to him by Smith. (pp. 120, 158; Stith, pp. 204, 236, 242; Sir W. Petty's Traits, p. 107.)

John Chamberlain, who, as a professional intelligencer, was thoroughly conversant with the events, current opinions, and conspicuous persons of the day, in a letter of the 28th of November, gives Sir Dudley Carleton, ambassador at the Hague, this item of news: "Captain Yardley, a mean fellow, knighted, and is going out to Virginia, as Governor." We may here mention, that Sir Dudley had a letter of the same date from John Pory, who says in it, "I am offered the Secretaryship for Virginia, by means of Sir George Yardley, the newly elected Governor, but will not accept it without outfit, as well as allowance." (Eng. St. Pap. Dom. vol. ciii., A.D. 1618.)

This proves the truth of the opinion maintained above (p. 17), that Pory did not owe his secretaryship to the favor of the Earl of Warwick; and, likewise, that his predecessor, Rolfe, was not superseded for the reasons alleged by Stith, but because the new Governor preferred Pory.

Beyond the few incidents noticed in Smith and Strachey, little has been recorded of the personal history of either Sir Thomas Gates, or Sir Thomas Dale. A few particulars will now be mentioned, which are not contained in Belknap's "American Biography," nor, we believe, elsewhere, in a collective form.

The earliest account we have of Sir Thomas Gates is that, in the expedition of 1596 against Cadiz, he served under Lord Essex; and, in June of that year, was knighted by him for meritorious services. Like his commander, and many others of his military countrymen, he had, probably, already borne a commission in some one of the English regiments em

ployed by the States-General in the war against Spain; and, most likely, retained it after his return from Cadiz.

In July, 1604, on his way to the Netherlands, he was with Sir Henry Wotton, who was proceeding to Venice, having been, shortly before, appointed ambassador at that place. Sir Henry gave him a letter of introduction to Sir Ralph Winwood, in which he said, “I entreat you to love him" (Sir Thomas), "and to love me too, and to assure yourself that you cannot love two honester men." (II. Winwood, p. 24.)

In November, 1606, he and his fellow-Captain (afterwards Sir Thomas) Dale, were in garrison together in Oudewater, a small city in South Holland, on the little Issel, and the birthplace of the celebrated James Arminius, whose mother, brothers, and sisters were murdered there by the Spaniards, when they captured, pillaged, and burnt the city in 1575. (Brodhead, I. New York Docum. p. 2; Chalm. Biog. Dict. art. Arminius; Gazetteer of Netherlands, art. Oudewater.)

In April, 1608, he petitioned the Lords States-General for leave of absence, which was granted him for one year, on condition that he should supply his company with good officers and soldiers for the public service. From the language of the States' Resolution it appears, that the special occasion for his absence was, that he, "with three other gentlemen," had been “commissioned by the king to command, in the country of Virginia, in colonizing the said country." The next year, his voyage to Virginia, after sundry delays, finally commenced from Falmouth, on the 8th of June. His own vessel, the Admiral ship "Sea-Adventure," was driven on the rocks of Bermuda by a furious storm, which dispersed the fleet. Only seven vessels out of nine, and those in a shattered condition, arrived in Virginia. The "Sea-Adventure" sprung aleak, and was barely saved from sinking at sea, by the constant labor of the men on board at the pumps, or the bucket, for three days and four nights, in which the Governor and the Admiral took their turns with the rest. (New York Docum. ut supra; IV. Purch. p. 1733-37.)

In Smith (p. 175), Gates and Somers are represented as having been at such variance that "they lived asunder," at Bermuda, "rather as mere strangers, than as distressed friends." From which of the narrators named at the head of his account of the wreck, Smith took this account, we know not. But neither Strachey, nor the author, of "News from the Barmudas," both of whom were there at the time, gives any intimation of such misunderstanding. They lived asunder, to be sure; and we suspect, that the difference was inferred solely from that circumstance. But the narrative of Strachey shows, that they did live, although apart, as friends, and not as mere strangers. Sir George Somers employed himself and his sailors daily, for three months after landing, in fishing and hunting, to provide food, not for his own party merely, but for the whole company. For this purpose, it was more convenient, and almost unavoidable, that he should be stationed on the shore of the main island, where alone the swine were to be found, and where, with the advantage of a quiet and safe harbor, he could obtain supplies of fish and game as readily as at any other point. On all occasions referred to by either of the two authors just mentioned, there appears to be no want of concert between the chiefs. When Somers asked for ship-carpenters and men to assist them in building his boat, they were instantly furnished by Gates. The whole tenor of the letter of Gates to Somers, recited by Strachey, indicates the most amiable feeling on the part of the writer. It contains, besides, a touching appeal to the "ancient love and friendship which had been these many years settled between them; on the strength of which Gates urges Somers "to do his best to convince the conspirators, who had fled from the latter, of their errors, that they might be pardoned and not punished;" a request which Somers most nobly and heartily carried into effect. (IV. Purch. p. 1744-46; II. Hubbard's Belknap, p. 116; Stith, p. 115; Smith, Va. pp. 174, 175.)

In 1610, Sir Thomas Gates was sent from Virginia by Lord De la Warre to London, for supplies. The Treasurer and Council at that period, disheartened by the ill success which attended all attempts to make the enterprise a lucrative one, doubted whether it were not best to abandon it altogether. In this exigency, they called Sir Thomas Gates before them' and adjured him to give them, plainly, a true account of the real condition and prospects of the colony. His report, on oath, describing the nature, productions, and advantages of the territory, revived the hopes of the Council, and saved the infant colony.