FOOTNOTES
[1] Bradford, pp. 235-6.
[2] A Captain Wolliston is mentioned by Smith (Description of New England, III. Mass. Hist. Coll., vol. vi. p. 136) as the lieutenant of “one Captain Barra, an English pirate, in a small ship, with some twelve pieces of ordnance, about thirty men and near all starved,” whom Smith encountered in 1615, while a captive in the hands of the French freebooters. Though it has found a place in biographical dictionaries on account of two eminent men of one family from Staffordshire who bore it, the name of Wollaston is rarely met with. It is not found, for instance, in the present directories of either Boston or New York, and but twice in that of Philadelphia. It has been given to islands in both the Arctic and the Antarctic oceans, but the family to which it belonged seems to have originated in an inland English county. (Lower’s Patronymica Britannica). The Captain, or Lieutenant, Wolliston, therefore, whom Smith fell in with in 1615 may have been, and probably was, the same who ten years later gave his name to the hill on Quincy Bay. It is not likely that two Captain Wollastons were sea-adventurers at the same time. That it actually was the same man is, however, matter of pure surmise.
[3] Bradford, p. 154.
[5] Young’s Chron. of Mass., p. 321.
[6] N. E. Memorial, p. 160.
[7] III. Mass. Hist. Coll., vol. viii. p. 323.
[9] Palfrey, vol. i. p. 401, n.
[10] Bradford, p. 236.
[12] Bradford, p. 118.
[13] Bradford, p. 120.
[14] Young’s Chron. of Pl., p. 299.
[17] Palfrey, vol. i. p 397.
[18] Lowell Inst. Lectures of Mass. Hist. Soc. 1869, p. 147. Samuel Maverick, however, writing to Lord Clarendon in the year 1661, asserts that Morton had a patent. Coll. N. Y. Hist. Soc. 1869, p. 40.
[19] Palfrey (vol. i. p. 222) speaks of it as “a bluff.” This is an error. The slope from where Morton’s house stood to the water is very gradual.
[20] Young’s Chron. of Mass., p. 395.
[22] Young’s Chron. of Mass., p. 305.
[23] This View of Mount Wollaston is taken from Rev. Dr. William P. Lunt’s Two Discourses on Occasion of the Two Hundredth Anniversary of the Gathering of the First Congregational Church, Quincy, (p. 37). It represents the place very accurately as it appeared in 1840, and as it is supposed to have appeared from the time of the first settlement until recently. The single tree was a lofty red-cedar, which must have been there when Wollaston landed, as it was a large tree of a long-lived species, and died from age about 1850. The trunk is still (1882) standing; and, though all the bark has dropped off, it measures some 66 inches in circumference. The central part of the above cut, including the tree, has been adopted as a seal for the town of Quincy, with the motto “Manet.”
[27] Bradford, pp. 236-7.
[30] Morton uniformly speaks of the place as Ma-re-Mount, and John Adams on this point commented in his notes as follows:—“The Fathers of Plymouth, Dorchester, Charlestown, &c., I suppose would not allow the name to be Ma-re-Mount, but insisted upon calling it Merry-Mount, for the same reason that the common people in England will not call gentlemen’s ornamental grounds gardens, but insist upon calling them pleasure-grounds, i. e., to excite envy and make them unpopular.”
Ma-re-Mount, however, was a characteristic bit of Latin punning on Morton’s part, designed to tease his more austere neighbors. He himself says (Infra, *132): “The inhabitants of Passonagessit, having translated the name of their habitation from that ancient salvage name to Ma-re-Mount ... the precise seperatists that lived at New Plimmouth stood at defiance with the place threatening to make it a woefull mount and not a merry mount.” (Infra, *134.) In view of the situation of the place, Ma-re-Mount was a very appropriate name, but it may well be questioned whether it was ever so called by any human being besides Morton, or by him except in print. Bradford calls it Merie-mounte. (p. 237.) The expression used by Morton, that they “translated the name” from Passonagessit to Ma-re-Mount, would naturally suggest that the Indian name might find its equivalent in the Latin one, and mean simply “a hill by the sea.” On this point, however, J. Hammond Trumbull writes: “Morton’s ‘Passonagessit’ has been a puzzle to me every time it has caught my eye since I first marked it twenty years ago or more with double (??). Morton, as he shows in chap. ii. of book I., could not write the most simple Indian word without a blunder. What may have been the name he makes ‘Passonagessit’ we cannot guess, unless it survives in some early record. There is no trace of ‘sea,’ or ‘water,’ or ‘mount’ in it. If it stands for Pasco-naig-és-it, it means ‘at [a place] near the little point,’ but I know so little of the local topography that I hesitate to suggest this interpretation.” The rendering here suggested by Dr. Trumbull does apply sufficiently well to the locality. Mount Wollaston is a part of the neck which connects the peninsulas locally known in Quincy as Germantown and Hough’s Neck with the mainland.
[31] Bradford, p. 253.
[32] Whitney’s Hist. of Quincy, p. 18.
[34] Josselyn says of the “Indesses,” as he calls them, “All of them are of a modest demeanor, considering their savage breeding; and indeed do shame our English rusticks whose rudeness in many things exceedeth theirs.” (Two Voyages, pp. 12, 45.) When the Massachusets Indian women, in September, 1621, sold the furs from their backs to the first party of explorers from Plymouth, Winslow, who wrote the account of that expedition, says that they “tied boughs about them, but with great shamefacedness, for indeed they are more modest than some of our English women are.” (Mourt, p. 59.) See also, to the same effect, Wood’s Prospect, (p. 82.) It suggests, indeed, a curious inquiry as to what were the customs among the ruder classes of the British females during the Elizabethan period, when all the writers agree in speaking of the Indian women in this way. Roger Williams, for instance, referring to their clothing, says: “Both men and women within doores, leave off their beasts skin, or English cloth, and so (excepting their little apron) are wholly naked; yet but few of the women but will keepe their skin or cloth (though loose) neare to them, ready to gather it up about them. Custome hath used their minds and bodies to it, and in such a freedom from any wantonnesse that I have never seen that wantonnesse amongst them as, (with griefe) I have heard of in Europe.” (Key, pp. 110-11.) And he adds, “More particular:
In Parkman’s Jesuits in North America (ch. iv.) there is a very graphic account of the missionary Le Jeune’s experience among the Algonquins, in which he describes the interior of the wigwam on a winter’s evening. “Heated to suffocation, the sorcerer, in the closest possible approach to nudity, lay on his back, with his right knee planted upright and his left leg crossed on it, discoursing volubly to the company, who, on their part, listened in postures scarcely less remote from decency.” Le Jeune says, “Les filles et les jeunes femmes sont à l’exterieur tres honnestement couvertes, mais entre elles leurs discours sont puants, comme des cloaques;” and Parkman adds, “The social manners of remote tribes of the present time correspond perfectly with Le Jeune’s account of those of the Montagnais.” See also Voyages of Champlain, Prince Soc., vol. iii. pp. 168-70.
[35] Parkman says that “chastity in women was recognized as a virtue by many tribes.” (Jesuits in North America, p. xxxiv.) Of the New England Indians Williams remarks,—“Single fornications they count no sin, but after marriage then they count it heinous for either of them to be false.” (Key, p. 138.) Judging by an incident mentioned by Morton, however, adultery does not seem to have been looked upon as a very grave offense among the Indians of the vicinity in which he lived. (Infra, *32.) On the general subject of morality among young Indian women, especially in the vicinity of trading-posts, see Parkman’s Jesuits in North America (pp. xxxiv, xlii) and the letter from Father Carheil to the Intendant Champigny, in The Old Régime in Canada (p. 427).
[37] I. Mass. Hist. Coll., vol. iii. p. 62.
[38] IV. Mass. Hist. Coll., vol. iv. p. 478.
[39] Hazlitt’s Popular Antiquities of Great Britain, p. 121. See also on this subject, Strutt’s Sports and Pastimes, p. 352.
[41] Bradford, p. 237.
[42] Bradford, p. 238.
[43] III. Mass. Hist. Coll., vol. vi, p. 70. See also note 202 in Trumbull’s ed. of Lechford’s Plaine Dealing, p. 117.
[44] Bradford, p. 240.
[47] Bradford, p. 204.
[48] Ib. p. 233.
[50] Mem. Hist. of Boston, vol. i. p. 83.
[53] I. Mass. Hist. Coll., vol. iii, pp. 63, 64.
[54] Bradford, p. 241.
[55] XII. Coke, p. 75.
[56] Hist. of England (Edition of Harper Bros.) vol. iv. p. 280.
[57] Lives of the Chief Justices, vol. i. p. 283. See also a paper on “Royal Proclamations,” in Disraeli’s Curiosities of Literature (ed. 1863), vol. iii., p. 371.
[58] Bradford, p. 241-2.
[60] I. Mass. Hist. Coll., vol. iii. pp. 63-4.
[63] The letters in full are in Bradford’s Letter-Book, III. Mass. Hist. Coll., vol. iii. pp. 62-4.
[64] The names of neither Maverick nor Walford appear in this list, though in his history Bradford especially mentions Winnisimmet (p. 241) as one of the places the settlers at which contributed to the charge. They may, as Savage suggests, (Winthrop, vol. i. p. *43 n.) have been included with Blackstone, though, considering what Maverick’s means were, this does not seem probable. Edward Hilton lived at Dover, eight miles above Piscataqua. (Young’s Chron. of Mass., p. 315. Proc. of Mass. Hist. Soc. 1875-6, pp. 362-8.) Mr. Deane suggests that Little Harbor, the place formerly occupied by Thomson, was meant by Piscataqua. (Ib., 368.) The locality of Bursley and Jeffreys greatly confused the authorities for a time, but it no longer seems open to question. (Proc. of Mass. Hist. Soc. 1878, p. 198.)
[65] Hazard, vol. i. p. 243.
[66] Bradford, p. 238; Infra, *134. Dagon was the sea-god of the Philistines, upon the occasion of whose feast, at Gaza, Samson pulled down the pillars of the temple. Judges, xvi.
[67] Palfrey, vol. i. p. 79.
[68] Oldham’s “vast conceits of extraordinary gain of three for one” afterwards caused “no small distraction” to the sober-minded governor and assistants of the Massachusetts Company. Young’s Chron. of Mass., p. 147.
[69] III. Mass. Hist. Coll., vol. vi. p. 80.
[70] Young’s Chron. of Mass., p. 171; Hutchinson, vol. i. p. 6.
[71] Young’s Chron. of Mass., p. 147.
[72] Bradford, p. 243.
[75] XII. Coke, p. 76.
[76] Campbell’s Chief Justices, vol. ii. p. 42.
[77] Campbell’s Lord Chancellors, vol. iii. p. 256.
[78] Bradford, p. 237.
[79] Bradford, p. 250.
[81] Bradford, p. 252.
[82] I. Mass. Hist. Coll., vol. iii. p. 63.
[83] Young’s Chron. of Mass., p. 145.
[85] Hazard, vol. i. p. 252.
[86] Young’s Chron. of Mass., pp. 96, 148.
[88] Winthrop, vol. i. p. *57.
[91] Young’s Chron. of Mass., p. 311.
[92] Winthrop, vol. i. p. *30.
[93] Records, vol. i. p. 74.
[95] Records, vol i. p. 75.
[97] Coll. of N. Y. Hist. Soc. (1869), p. 42.
[99] Young’s Chron. of Mass., p. 321; Proc. Mass. Hist. Soc., 1860-2, p. 133.
[100] Bradford, p. 253.
[101] Winthrop, vol. i. p. *57.
[102] Morton says (Infra, *163) “the Snare must now be used; this instrument must not be brought by Iosua [Winthrop] in vaine.”
[103] Mass. Hist. Soc., Lowell Inst. Lectures (1869), p. 377.
[104] I. Mass. Hist. Coll., vol. i. p. 250.
[105] Bradford, p. 253.
[106] Mem. Hist. of Boston, vol. i. p. 336.
[107] Winthrop, vol. i. p. *102.
[108] Palfrey, vol. i. p. 391.
[109] Bradford, pp. 251-2.
[110] Clarendon’s Rebellion, B. III. § 27; B. VI. § 404.
[111] Winthrop. vol. i. p. *100. Downing sent a detailed account of the hearing, now lost, to Winthrop; see Hutchinson, vol. ii. p. 2.
[112] IV. Mass. Hist. Coll., vol. vi. p. 33, n.
[113] Palfrey, vol. i. p. 392.
[114] Bradford, p. 297.
[115] Winthrop, vol. ii. p. *190.
[116] Mem. Hist. of Boston, vol. i. p. 338.
[117] III. Mass. Hist. Coll., vol. vi. p. 80.
[118] Mem. Hist. of Boston, vol. i. p. 338. The reference here, as at some other places, is to Deane’s chapter on “The Charter of King Charles I.” As a rule, in works of this description, dealing with the sources of history, it is not permissible to refer to contemporaneous authorities. Mr. Deane, however, so far as New England history is concerned, may fairly be made an exception to this rule. His knowledge is so exhaustive and his accuracy so great that a reference to him I consider just as good and as permissible as a reference to the original authorities.
[119] Winthrop, vol. i. p. *56, n.
[120] Palfrey, vol. i. pp. 391-3.
[121] Briefe Narration, III. Mass. Hist. Coll., vol. vi. p. 82. Hazard, vol. i. p. 390-4.
[122] Proc. of Amer. Antiq. Soc., 1867, p. 124. Winthrop, vol. ii. p. 233. Hazard, vol. i. p. 347.
[123] Hazard, vol. i. p. 347.
[124] William Jeffreys was one of the Robert Gorges Company. He had contributed to the cost of arresting Morton in 1628 and sending him to England. Morton, in writing to him, could not but have been aware of this; but not improbably, during the time of his return to Mount Wollaston in 1630, he had seen more of Jeffreys, and found that he too, like the rest of the “old planters,” looked on the Massachusetts Company with jealousy and apprehension. At that time, indeed, Jeffreys was in active correspondence with Gorges, and outspoken in his complaints. (IV. Mass. Hist. Coll., vol. vi. p. 3.) Hence the familiarity of the address. It is apparent from the letter, however, that Morton, when he wrote it, was so sure of his position and so elated with a sense of his own importance that he could not contain himself. He could not resist the desire to let his old acquaintances in America know what an important personage he had become, and he probably hoped they would show the letter to Winthrop and every one else. It was a childish outbreak of delight and vanity.