28
CHAPTER II
PLANTING IN PROVIDENCE. 1636-1647.
IN the spring or early summer of 1636, Roger Williams with his five companions, William Harris, John Smith (miller), Joshua Verin, Thomas Angell and Francis Wickes, pushed out a canoe from the east side of the Seekonk, crossed into the cove southwestward, and landed upon “the Slate Rock.” An Indian on the hill above saluted them “What Cheer, Netop!” It was a significant and potential welcome. The peaceful and numerous Narragansetts under the judicious direction of Canonicus and Miantinomi had refused the passionate appeals of warlike Sassacus and his Pequots to join in a confederated effort to expel the English. The native on his own shore spoke in effect for the great Narragansett people; as the friend of his sachems, and these exiles from Puritan civilization, approached this new territory. Continuing around the peninsula and Fox’s Hill—which will after appear in surveyor’s lines and boundary-disputes—these six voyagers paddled up “the great salt river.” The land fall was made near the mouth of the Moshassuck, just below the site of the present St. John’s church, where a fine spring of water tempted them to found the first plantation, which the devout Williams named Providence.
Williams located his house across the way from the spring, and immigrants from Plymouth and the Massachusetts Bay soon joined the planters. In the year 1638,1 twelve proprietors received from Roger Williams, in consideration
|
1 The dates are somewhat confusing, as proceedings of the town sometimes preceded the formal conveyance. |
29
of £30. for his expenses, all the lands deeded to him by Canonicus and Miantinomi. These lands upon the Moshassuck and Seekonk, and on the Woonasquetucket southward to the Pawtuxet, had been obtained in gift from the sachems; though there had been nominal consideration, the transaction was something that “monies could not do.” Williams, when pressed by the planters to part with his title and convey to the first proprietors, consented, intending a shelter for “persons distressed for conscience.” By conveyance he made “proprietors” of the twelve associates and “such others as the major part of us shall admit into the same fellowship of vote with us.” This “initial deed” was reinforced by documents in 1661 and 1666 intended to amplify and secure the title. The thirteen proprietors, for convenience, divided their territory into the “grand purchase of Providence” and the “Pawtuxet purchase.” This division according to Judge Staples2 caused much difficulty and dissension. The vague boundaries of the deeds and the equally vague conceptions of rights of grantees and qualifications of subsequent purchasing proprietors alike confused the issues—whether fiscal or political—and agitated the town-meetings of Providence for half a century or more. Williams, pure in intention, was poorly equipped for politics. Conscience and will worked together in complex personality; until a controversy became polemic or fancied inspiraton, as the occasion prompted. Like many reformers, he conceived that the “freed” citizen and upright believer should be benefited not only in his conscience, but in his financial conditions.
The first record of a town-meeting is intensely interesting, for these steps and fossil tracks were in the noble
|
2 “Annals of Prov.,” p. 34. |
30
path of soul-liberty. “16 die. 4 month3 the year not given, after warning to attend towne-meeting,” “whoever be wanting, above one quarter of an hewer after ye time” was to pay two shillings fine, and the same for departing without leave. The other entry provides for electing a town treasurer monthly; two significant facts that, they met each month and kept a close grasp on the public purse.
This was doubtless in 1637, as will appear below from more important proceedings. In the beginning, “masters of families” had met fortnightly to consult “about our common peace, watch and planting,” choosing also an “officer” to call these meetings. But in the first year, several young men admitted “inhabitants,” yet discontented politically, sought equal representation and freedom of voting. This shows a variance between family organization and freedom for the individual to act under the state. Williams prepared a “double subscription,”4 one for masters of families, the other a sort of indenture for young men, admitted as “inhabitants.” These incidents are most interesting, as throwing light on the next procedure; a momentous step and degree in the world’s progress toward individual freedom.
Aug. 20, 1637, the “second comers,” thirteen in number, subscribed to the following “civil compact.” Thomas Harris (brother of William), Benedict Arnold, Richard Scott, Chad Brown and John Field were included among the signers. This document has been interpreted frequently as a special instrument to admit “young men.” But there was more conveyed in the procedure than such purpose would account for. Richard Scott, John Field, Chad Brown, Thomas Angell, Thomas Harris, Wm. Wickenden,
|
3 “Early Records Town of Providence,” VI., 2. 4 Cf. “Narr. Club Pub.,” V., VI., 3. |
Rhode Island’s Magna Charta.
Here occur the words, “Only in Civil Things.”
31
as well as others, were in no sense “young men.” They were among the most responsible settlers. Williams had even conceived, though it came to nought, as shown in his letter to Winthrop, a “double subscription,” one for masters of families, one for young men. These thirteen signers were “second comers,” and the adoption of our famous Magna Charta indicates that it was an evolution from the actual proceedings of the previous government. Whether these proceedings were based on a written agreement we do not know. Certainly in their actual experience they worked away from the Judaic conceptions prevailing at the Island: Witness below the “Saints of the most High” embodied in the Code of Laws. Providence developed out of this and put civic government on every-day living, squarely down on the foundation of “civil things.”
“We, whose names are hereunder, desirous to inhabit in the town of Providence, do promise to subject ourselves in active or passive obedience to all such orders or agreements as shall be made for the public good of our body in an orderly way, by the major assent of the present inhabitants, masters of families, incorporated together into a town fellowship, and others whom they shall admit unto them, only in civil things.”5 The positive matter of this compact differed not from the Mayflower compact and numerous other Anglo-Saxon conventions. The limitation “only” marks the new development outward and upward. That order in civil government could be6 organized in material form, leaving each individual free in his conscience before his own Heavenly Father, was a discovery for human intelligence, an invention in governmental procedure.
|
5 “Early Records,” Vol. I., 1. 6 Narr. Club Pub.,” Vol. VI., 3. |
32
No property qualifications were directly instituted, but divisions of land went with most early proceedings of the “proprietors.” At first, fifty-four settlers received “home lots,” a six-acre lot and additional tracts of meadow land. The home-lots of five acres ran in narrow strips from the “Towne Streete7 (now North and South Main) to the present Hope Street, and the six-acre lots were in the southerly part of “Providence Neck,” bordering on the Seekonk, or upon the Woonasquetucket River.
The government was the simplest form of democracy, and it could not last long. All functions were lodged in the town-meeting; for which a quorum was not easy and difficult to manage, when it was assembled. In 1640, the freemen tried to institute a choice of five men, arbitrators or “disposers,” to “be betrusted with disposals of land and also of the town’s stock and all general things.” A town clerk was to be chosen, who should call the disposers together every month, and call quarterly town-meetings. Former grants of land were to be valid. Mark this especial provision as “formerly hath been the liberties of the town, so still to hold forth liberty of conscience.”
This might mitigate some ills, but it created others, for the executive force of the disposers was almost fruitless. Roger Williams’ pungent pen put it “our peace was like the peace of a man who hath the tertian ague.” Disorder and in one instance bloodshed occurred. The opposition of Samuel Gorton and his fellows prompted thirteen colonists to appeal to Massachusetts Bay for intervention.
|
7 This name was not local or fortuitous—rather, it reverted to old English custom dear to the hearts of these wayfarers. Just as in Boston Sewall notes “the house that was sometimes Sr. Henry Vanes’ hounded with the Towne Street on the East.”—“Mass. H. C.,” Sewall, VI., p. 59. |
33
The reply called for absolute submission of the plantation to the Bay or to Plymouth. Though Winthrop confessed to a sneaking fondness “for an outlet into the Narragansett Bay,” and forcible intervention was afterward attempted at Warwick, no practical change was effected in the external affairs of the Plantation. But this movement of the Pawtuxet men aggravated the internal discord for many years.
While the socio-political structures were being forged out, a serious rift in the lute had been made by a certain domestic discord. Joshua Verin, an original companion, had his backyard next and adjoining Roger Williams’; whence the good Verin dame found it easy, too easy, to flit across to hear the prophet’s sermons and exhortations. Mr. Dorr suggests that the Verin stew-pot suffered in the too frequent spiritual aberrations of the housewife. However it might be, Vermin’s soul could not stomach wifely absence, and more disobedience, for he forbade her attending the meetings.8 Winthrop, our sole authority, rejoicing in these practical restraints of liberty of conscience, with “grim humor” dilates on the proceedings of the Providence council before the “disposers” attempted administration. The motion to censure Verin would virtually establish that “men’s wives, and children and servants could claim liberty to go to all religious meetings, though never so often, or though private, upon the week days.” In the debate “there stood up one Arnold, a witty man of their own Company, and withstood it, telling them that when ‘he consented to that order, he never intended it should extend to the breach of any ordinance of God, such as the subjection of wives to their husbands,’ etc., and gave divers solid reasons against it. Then one Greene replied ‘that if they should restrain their wives, etc., all the
|
8 “History of N. E.,” VI., 283. |
34
women in the country would cry out of them, etc. Arnold answered him thus: ‘Did you pretend to leave the Massachusetts because you would not offend God to please men, and would you now break an ordinance and command of God to please women?’” Arnold was a vigorous contestant and he claimed that the desire to be gadding was not prompted altogether by the woman’s conscience; that Williams and others persuaded her. Arnold was of the “Pawtuxet men,” and these bickerings indicate the early differences which were to harass the Plantation most seriously. Roger Williams’ influence appears in the final action, which condemned Verin, May 21, 1658.9 “It was agreed that Joshua Verin, upon the breach of a covenant for restraining of the libertie of conscience, shall be withheld from the libertie of voting till he shall declare the contrarie.” He soon left Providence. Much has been written, to make of this affair a state question, but to little purpose. The “woman question” inevitably leaves unsolved elements in a political situation—whether the time be of Solomon, of the seventeenth century, or of the all-confident twentieth century.
We are neglecting the local habitation, which made possible these domestic and social doings. The “Towne Streete” wavering in outline, as it went up the valley toward Constitution Hill, was in its name, according to Mr. Dorr’s sympathetic analysis, one of the earliest English
|
9 It is proper to consider Williams’ account and his view of Verin, as given in a letter to Winthrop, “Narr. Club,’ [i.e. ”] V., VI., 95, “He hath refused to hear the word with us (which we molested him, not for this twelvemonth), so because he could not draw his wife, a gracious, modest woman, to the same ungodliness with him, he bath trodden her underfoot tyrannically and brutishly; winch she and we long bearing, though with his furious blows she went in danger of her life, at the last the major vote of us discard him from our civil freedom, or disfranchise.” |
35
traditions accepted by the roving community gathering around Williams. Home-lots along this thoroughfare were laid out by John Throckmorton, of the original thirteen, Chad Brown, who came from England in 1636, and was to be a pastor of First Baptist Church and ancestor of “the Four Brothers” in the eighteenth century, with Gregory Dexter, who appears as town clerk in 1651, and became President of the Assembly in 1653. There were five-acre lots appropriated to settlers along the way; a narrow front with area stretching up the hillside and eastward. Each settler persisted until he got his quota. Thomas Olney, Jr., had his “house lot or home-share” made up in 1661. The “Spring Lot” was retained by the proprietors until July 3, 1721, when it was deeded to Gabriel Bernon.
Opposite lived Williams, and he held religious meetings in his house, as we have noted. Above were Verin and Richard Scott, below was John Throckmorton. According to Dorr, one of the strongest of this disputing neighborhood was Gregory Dexter, who dwelt up the hill at the turn of Dexter’s Lane, now Olney Street. William and Mary Dyre settled at Portsmouth, but removed to Providence. Ultimately the martyr went from Towne Streete to meet her doom on Boston Common.
On the irregular lines of this street, houses were built hastily, and generally of logs, the yards closely adjoining. A narrow strip of green separated the dwelling from passing traffic. The homesteads crept up the sloping side and unyielding grades of the ridge, which made the peninsular conformation of the early plantation. Barns sheltered the cattle for a generation and orchards soon gave plenty of fruit for the clustering families. Above and often in the orchard preserves, burial grounds soon attached the planter yet more closely to his homestead, where
36
the individual literally stood and lived, as never before in the history of the citizen. Along the middle of the hillside, the patriarchs of the plantation were laid at rest, and these particular personal burying grounds could not be disturbed by any communal or social wants for a full century. On the plateau above, home-lot pastures stretched over to a highway (the modern Hope Street) called Ferry Lane, after Red Bridge was opened across the Seekonk River.
And we perceive here the meaning of the English term plantation, as it developed under the necessities of varying colonies. The settlers did not merely drop seeds in the ground. They planted institutions in germ, which grew into communities at Plymouth, Boston, Hartford and elsewhere, as the occasion made new citizens in new homes. The close affinities cultivated in the Plantation at Providence were powerful in affording stay and support for a new religious life. Likewise, this close and intense method of living bred certain difficulties of its own, as we shall see when social and political life expanded.
After the home, a church was instituted, though the apostles of the Bay had assured themselves no Christian society could exist in a government based on “civil things.” The particular steps in organizing this church have been matter of dispute. Winthrop’s account10 that Richard Scott’s wife, a sister of Anne Hutchinson, influenced Roger Williams to become an Anabaptist, has been criticised. Williams was baptized by Holyman,11 and then baptized a dozen communicants. He remained as leader only three or four months, leaving the organization to become a “Seeker.” By some accounts he was a
|
10 Brigham, “Rhode Island,” p. 38. 11 Cf. Carpenter, “Roger Williams,” p. 164, for Holyman and Anabaptists. |
37
Seeker before he left England, though he kept membership in the Congregational church at Salem before his banishment. Whatever the detailed steps may have been, certainly the First Baptist Church was formed about the end of the year 1638, attended to worship and Christian culture, without meddling with civil government, and became a thriving influence in the community. That it survived the defection of the powerful Roger Williams proves that it met the positive wants of its members.
We should now consider a matter—the beginning of disputes—which will vex the colony for more than two-score years. Said Williams, “W. Harris and the first twelve of Providence were restless for Pawtuxet.” In 1638 all the meadow ground at Pawtuxet had been “impropriated unto thirteen persons being now incorporate into our town of Providence,” a consideration of £20 being paid to Roger Williams. Uncertain and without boundaries, this deed bred many controversies, not finally settled until 1712. The “Pawtuxet purchase” conflicted with the “grand purchase of Providence.” Notwithstanding the rebuff from the Bay cited above, William and Benedict Arnold, Carpenter and others resident at Pawtuxet submitted to the government of Massachusetts. Samuel Gorton and his companions considered that this movement affected them, and they moved to Shawomet, buying land from the Indians and settling Warwick.
The plantation as it grew consisted of proprietors, additional settlers, and those admitted to be freemen. Nineteenth of eleventh month, 1645,12 twenty-eight persons received “a free grant of twenty-five acres of land apiece, with the right of commoning according to the said proportion of lands.” They agreed in positive terms “not to claim any right to the purchase of the said plantations,
|
12 “Early Records,” Vol. II., 99. |
38
nor any privilege of vote in town affairs until we shall be received as freemen.”
Irritant and counter-irritant Samuel Gorton appeared in Providence, probably in the winter of 1640-41. We shall treat him in connection with Portsmouth and the Island. We must consider him now in the early troubles of the Plantation. Poor Williams wrote Winthrop, “Mr. Gorton, having foully abused high and low at Aquidneck, is now bewitching and madding poor Providence . . . some few and myself do withstand his inhabitation and town privileges.” Wm. Arnold was also opposed to admitting Gorton. With his followers Gorton removed to Pawtuxet, where they built houses and cultivated the land. Massachusetts, availing of every pretext to obtain a foothold in Narragansett Bay, now accepted the submission of the Pawtuxet men. Gorton made a vigorous protest, and would acknowledge only “the government of Old England.” In their favorite scriptural invective, he fully equalled the Bay parsons, but they could rejoin by calling his arguments “blasphemies.” A more effective argument was put forth through the sword of the state. Massachusetts sent an armed force and there was bloodshed. Gorton and his companions were taken to Boston and to the common jail. Carried to meeting on the Sabbath, he was indulged after service in a theological discussion with Cotton. They chopped metaphysics to their mutual delight. The tyrannical court had caught a Tartar. They thought Gorton ought to die, but did not dare to kill him. They made a curious sentence for dispersion of the culprits “into several towns” with “irons upon one leg,” etc. This wonderful product of the Bay civilization may be best comprehended in the terms of the candid Savage, a descendant of these same Puritans. “Silence might perhaps become the commentator on this lamentable delusion; for this narrative almost defies the power of
39
comment to enhance or mitigate the injustice of our government.”13 The prisoners were actually sent around into different towns, but the ingenious magistrates at last discovered that they had sapiently arranged for the prisoners to “corrupt some of our people by their heresies.” The bolts were filed off, and the authorities got rid of the offenders against the inspired government of the Bay, as they might.
The Gortonists went to Aquidneck again, and the leader went to England, where he found much favor with the powerful Earl of Warwick and his Parliamentary Commission. In 1643, as above stated, they named their settlement for their English benefactor, and in their leader’s words, lived peaceably together, “ending all our differences in a neighborly and loving way of arbitrators.”
A most romantic incident in the growth of our Plantations grew out of Gorton’s trial in Boston and his visit to England. The Narragansetts conceived in some way that a man or company who could overcome the English in Boston and gain direct authority from, the British Government—source of all power—must possess a great “medicine.” Accordingly, Gorton, with a half-dozen companions, visited Canonicus.14 April 19, 1644, they obtained from all the chief sachems a formal cession of the Narragansett lands and people to England. The instrument says directly they have “just cause and suspicion of some of his Majesty’s pretended subjects. . . . Nor can we yield ourselves unto any, that are subjects themselves.” Perhaps Gorton built better than he knew, but this movement with the Indians was an element in excluding Massachusetts and confirming the territory of
|
13 “Winthrop,” Vol. II., 177. 14 Brigham, “Rhode Island,” p. 70. |
40
Rhode Island; as it was consolidated in the Patent of 1644 and the Charter of 1663.
We must glance at “Simplicities Defence against a Seven Headed Policy,”15 published in London, 1646; wherein Gorton gives the full history of these painful proceedings, assuming the offensive-defensive in a most vigorous fashion. The title-page is an essay, and we extract briefly. “A true complaint of a peaceable people, being part of the English in New England, made unto the State of Old England, against cruel persecutors United in Church Government. Wherein is made manifest the manifold outrages, cruelties, oppressions, and taxations, by cruell and close imprisonments, fire and sword, deprivation of goods, Lands, and livelyhood, and such like barbarous inhumanities, exercised upon the people of Providence plantations in the Nanhygansett Bay by those of the Massachusetts, with the rest of the United Colonies.”
Massachusetts never caught a worse tiger in the field than this fierce contestant. In logic and metaphysical acumen, he was the equal of the Boston theologians; in matters spiritual, the illumined mystic could reach far beyond their ken. In the forum of England he appealed against them to the best men and won. Sufficient evidence that he was not the mere railing “blasphemer” described by the magistrates of the Bay.
Mr. Dorr thinks the main highways laid out at first show that the early planters conceived their work to be a new creation and must partake of “the flavour of its own soil.” English as they were, they knew that the social and political institutions inherited and transported, must be adapted to a new life, enforced by new conditions. Nowhere was this inevitable tendency more manifest than
|
15 Original in R. I. H. S. |
41
in Rhode Island. We have seen the Towne Streete and the home-lot worked out together. Dexter Lane went over to the Ferry across the Seekonk, for communication with Plymouth and Boston was by that route. Above Dexter’s corner a way ran from the main thoroughfare down to the Moshassuck, where a bridge was thrown across. Gaol Lane (now Meeting Street) had not developed, but Chad Brown lived at the corner of the present College Street and Market Square. A bridge was ultimately thrown over at ancient “Weybosset,” which means stepping stones. Here the “great salt river” disputed with the waters of the Moshassuck and Woonasquetucket, as the tides flowed in from the lower bay. Below, Wickenden and Nicholas Power lived on the main highway; between them Power Lane stretched over for another connection with Ferry Lane. Yet lower, lived Pardon Tillinghast and Christopher Unthank. Across from the latter’s homestead was a landmark which has totally disappeared. The “Streete” wound round “Mile End Cove” to reach the point below Foxes Hill. This cove was filled in long ago.
The broad religious liberty of the Plantation brought a good increase of population. Turbulent and difficult neighbors, who agreed easily with Williams in “not doing things,” but were always ready to disagree and strive against positive action. But they were generally of strong character; stiff timber for the framework of a state. In 1646 there were in Providence and its vicinity—including Warwick probably—one hundred and one men capable of bearing arms, according to the diary of President Stiles. John Smith, one of the original six, was granted land at this time for a town mill. An obsolete, upright, plunging mill, that broke the grain as rice is treated, gave the name of Stampers Street to the locality. At a small fall on
42
the Moshassuck, Smith set up his useful occupation. A volume might be written on the natural affinities of social and political influence. A miller, tavern-keeper, or socially inclined storekeeper in these primitive creative days immediately radiated influence and power. The “Town-mill” was an instituted force long before the jail or meeting-house gave opportunity for a regular town-meeting. It was like a club-center or exchange. Here was a parliament “in perpetual session,” and minute regulation of town affairs was conceived and worked up in these friendly debates.
Living was hard at first, in the homes along the Moshassuck and Great Salt River. Fish and game were plenty, but provisions for ordinary fare were scarce. Williams’ friendly connections with the Indians helped in obtaining meat and corn from them. Labor being scarce and vitally necessary in every new settlement, the producing power of the natives—brought in by exchange of wampum—was a strong economic element in starting the new life.
Moses Brown cites a sheet16 written by his grandfather James, which records traditions received from James’ grandfather Chad. This is fairly direct testimony. A cow sold at £22 in silver and gold, which corresponds with prices prevailing in Massachusetts in 1636—a little earlier—a pair of oxen at £40, and corn at 5s per bushel. At a feast in the early days the chief luxury was a boiled bass without butter. There were numerous swine and goats running on the commons, with few cattle. About 1640 there was a great decline in cattle throughout New England. In 1641-42 cattle became plenteous in Providence, Warwick, and especially in Aquidneck.17 Even then farming
|
16 MSS. materials for “History of Prov.,[”] P. R. I. H. S. 17 Dorr, “Planting and Growth of Prov.,” pp. 58, 59. |
43
proper was in a crude state, for they worked with “howes” instead of plows.
The three independent colonies of Rhode Island, feeling their lack of sovereign power and in their detached weakness, had sent Williams to obtain recognition from Old England. He found favor, and through his powerful friends secured from the Parliamentary Commission a “Free Charter of Civil Incorporation and Government for the Providence Plantations in the Narragansett Bay in New England.” This was not a “mere land patent,” nor a trading charter like that of Massachusetts. It was a real, effective government charter, bestowing upon the grantees the power “to rule . . . by whatever laws they desired.”18 Vane’s name appears among eleven signers. The exiled Williams returned through Massachusetts—his passage being exacted by the authorities of England—and bearing this precious document—a triumph for civilization. At home his arrival was occasion for the greatest communal expression the little commonwealth had put forth. Fourteen canoes met him at Seekonk and the voyagers filled the air with shouts of welcome.
The enthusiasm did not crystallize immediately and form a government. No organization was provided in the instrument and one must be made. Independent communities acting or disputing through town-meetings with jealous neighbors and some doubt as to the stability of the home government—all combined to delay union under the charter. Finally Providence, Portsmouth, Newport, and Warwick sent committees to Portsmouth, May 18, 1647, to arrange for a General Assembly and to accept the charter. Some facts should be noted, which indicate deep principles underlying the formal proceedings of the time. The Assembly finally acted on a Code of Laws,
|
18 Brigham, “Rhode Island,” p. 75. |
44
which had been formed and submitted to the towns. In adopting it, Providence happily called it the “model that hath been lately shown unto us by our worthy friends of the Island.” The code as relating to offenses ends with the following expression, which Judge Staples well calls “significant”: “These are the laws that concern all men, and these are the penalties for the transgression thereof, which, by common consent are ratified and established throughout the whole colony and otherwise than thus what is herein forbidden, all men may walk as their consciences persuade them, everyone in the fear of his God. And let the Saints of the Most High, walk in this colony, without molestation, in the name of Jehovah, their God, forever and ever.”
The Puritan walked with God literally, and his conduct purified human history. But the process, as rendered into common living, bred a more than doubtful civic efficacy. A class of worthy men like Endicott, Welde, Dudley, in a degree Winthrop—while they walked, were much more seriously concerned for the walk of other men. Each troubled his conscience for the acts of another fellow. This was not a merely personal exertion, for it was a natural result of theocratic, irresponsible power diffused among common men.19 Hooker getting partially out of this thraldom, founded a stable government in Connecticut—theocratic in origin, but democratic in practice. Massachusetts labored for a century and a half in throwing off theocratic limitations that Hooker avoided practically in his Church Discipline. He did not, like Roger Williams, free the soul absolutely, but he forged out a working form of democracy from its theocratic antecedents.
|
19 “The New England Puritan desired to force his own profession of faith on his fellowman, till it had become a morbid and overwhelming passion.”—Doyle, “Eng. Col. in Amer.,” Vol. II., 245. |