Replies.

PLAIDS AND TARTANS.
(Vol. iv., p. 107.)

I am not going to enter into the controversy respecting the antiquity of the Highland kilt and tartans, nor when and where they were invented. But in reference to these questions, I beg leave to cite a passage, which may be found in the second book of the History of Tacitus, in which is designated a garb having a very distinct analogy to the trews and tartans of the Highland chiefs.

In lib. ii. sec. xx. the return of Cæcina from Germany into Italy is thus described:—

"At Cæcina, velut relictâ post Alpes sævitiâ ac licentiâ, modesto agmine per Italiam incessit. Ornatum ipsius, municipia et coloniæ in superbiam trahebant, quod versicolore sagulo, bruccas tegmen barbarum, indutus, togatos adloqueretur."

Cæcina and Valens had been the Imperial "Legati" in Upper Germany, and the former is thus described in lib. i. sec. liii.:—

"At in superiore Germaniâ, Cæcina decorâ juventâ, corpore ingens, animi immodicus, scito sermone, erecto incessu studia militum inlexerat."

So it seems that this handsome Roman, "great in stature," and "graceful in youth," thought (like many of our modern fine gentlemen when they get among the hills) the partycoloured plaid and barbarian clothing so extremely becoming, that he was determined to set the fashion of wearing it in Italy, and actually was intrepid enough to appear like a male Bloomer before the astonished eyes of the "Togati," and to answer the addresses of the "Municipia" and "Coloniæ" clad in this outlandish costume.

I leave to more learned antiquaries the task of tracing this Celtic habit, "in superiore Germaniâ," into the Scottish Highlands. For myself I have little doubt that from the earliest division of the community into septs or clans, the chiefs assumed the pattern of this "tegmen versicolor" which best pleased them, and in course of time the pattern distinguished the wearers as belonging to such and such chiefs. As to the kilt, in all probability it was the apology for nudity.

The chiefs wore the trews, the humbler vassals or serfs either wore no nether garments at all, or covered their loins with a scanty apron, which gradually comprising more ample folds, has been modernised into the kilt.

But I beg leave to put forward these speculations with all possible modesty, feeling quite inadequate to discuss such momentous matters from being only

A BORDERER.

RELIGIOUS STATISTICS.
(Vol. iv., p. 382.)

I have a memorandum (not dated) which states that M. Pradt, in his work on Ancient and Modern Jesuitism, gives curious calculations on the religious statistics of the world. The terrestrial globe, he estimates, contains 670,000,000 inhabitants, who are thus divided:—

Catholics

120,000,000

Protestants and their dependants

40,000,000

Of the Greek Church

36,000,000

Jews

4,000,000

Mahomedans

70,000,000

Idolators

400,000,000

Of these, China alone, according to the most probable accounts, contains 300,000,000.

An elaborate, valuable, and now, I believe, a scarce work, entitled The Consumption of Public Wealth by the Clergy of every Christian Nation, &c. (published by Effingham Wilson in 1822), among details, founded on authorities of repute, and which are named, gives for each nation, "France," "Scotland" (its Kirk), "Spain," "Portuguese Church," "Hungarian Churches," "Clergy in Italy," "Clergy in Austria," "Clergy in Prussia," "Clergy in Russia," "England and Wales," "Established Church Property Ireland," &c. &c., the particulars required by Q. E. D. For instance, under the heading "Hungarian Churches," we are preliminarily told that—

"Hungary contains about 8,000,000 people of various religious persuasions, who live happily together ever since the days of that excellent Emperor Joseph II. He laboured resolutely and successfully, in spite of the bigots of his own religion by whom he was surrounded, to root out the evils of religious discord from his dominions; and he left, as a glorious legacy to his people, for which his memory will be ever dear, the blessings of concord and harmony between his subjects of all denominations."

It is then narrated that there are (in Hungary):

"Catholics, Latin and Greek

4,750,000

Greek Church

1,150,000

Calvinists

1,050,000

Lutherans

650,000

Unitarian Christians

46,000

Various small Christian Sects, and persons of the Jewish faith

200,000."

But this work contains no summary of the total amounts of its own enumerations.

A HERMIT AT HAMPSTEAD.

ROYAL LIBRARY.
(Vol. iii., p. 427.; Vol. iv., pp. 69. 154.)

Your correspondent J. H. M. remarks (Vol. iv., p. 69.): "In justice to King George IV., the letter which he addressed to the late Earl of Liverpool, on presenting the books to his own subjects, should be printed in your columns." Heartily concurring in this opinion, I have much pleasure in supplying your readers with a transcript of the same. I copied it some years back from the original, then in the possession of a noble friend:

"Dear Lord Liverpool,—The king, my late revered and excellent father, having formed, during a long period of years, a most valuable and extensive library, consisting of about one hundred and twenty thousand volumes, I have resolved to present this collection to the British nation. Whilst I have the satisfaction by this means of advancing the literature of my country, I also feel that I am paying a just tribute to the memory of a parent, whose life was adorned with every public and private virtue. I desire to add, that I have great pleasure, my lord, in making this communication through you. Believe me, with great regard, your sincere friend,

"G. R.

"Pavilion, Brighton, 15th of January, 1823."

EDWARD F. RIMBAULT.

Your correspondent C. says, "the whole story of the projected sale to Russia is absolutely unfounded." He seems to consider that, because the Princess Lieven never heard a syllable about the matter, the whole story was unfounded—that is, that when a part of a story is untrue the whole must be untrue. What is really the truth I do not positively know; but I will give you the story, as I heard it at the time, from one who had good means of information. George IV. disliked the expense of keeping up the Royal Library; he was also occasionally out of temper at the claims made or insinuated by some members of the family, that as the library had not been bequeathed, they had all an equal property in it. To get rid of the expense and the claims he resolved to dispose of it, and said something about this wish at his own dinner-table. This was, perhaps, in the presence of the Russian ambassador, or some distinguished Russian, or at least came to his ears; and he spoke to Lord Liverpool upon the subject, expressing a desire to purchase. Lord L. immediately waited upon the king, and remonstrated in the strongest terms against allowing such a library collected by a king of England to be sent out of the country; and went so far as to say that he would resign his office if the measure was persisted in. The king then resolved to relieve himself from all annoyance about the matter by presenting it to the nation. Such I believe to be the outline of the truth: the minute details I did not "make a Note" of at the time, and will not trust my memory to relate them.

GRIFFIN.

DAMASKED LINEN.
(Vol. ii., p. 199.; Vol. iii., pp. 13. 229.)

In the subjoined account of some old patterns, I have, for the sake of brevity, enclosed in brackets the descriptions of the several objects represented, beginning with the highest and most distant. The words enclosed within inverted commas are the inscriptions.

No. I.

[Two horsemen, with steel-caps, riding away at speed.]

[Crown.]

“PVRSV'D BY MEN. PRESERV'D BY GOD.”

[Crown.] [Crown.]

[Oak branches surrounding a head surmounted with a low-crowned hat and flowing wig.]

I may mention that this bears the mark of an ancestor of its present possessor, who was about forty years of age at the time of the Restoration, and died in 1707.

No. II.

“SISTE SOL IN GIBEON ET LVNA IN VALLE IAALON.”

[Sun] “RIS” [Moon] “SEL.”

[Fortified town.]

[Mortars throwing shells into the town.]

[Tents and cannon.]

[Trophy] “EGENIVS.” [Trophy.]

[Equestrian figure holding a baton.]

Can any of your readers be so good as to explain the allusion of the above ungainly and somewhat profane compliment to Prince Eugene?

No. III.

“STAD ANT

WERPEN.”

[City gate.]

[Water with ships.]

“DER HERTZOG VON MARLBORVK.”

[Equestrian figure in the proper costume, holding a baton.]

The above probably commemorates the surrender of Antwerp to the allied armies soon after the battle of Ramillies, May 27, 1706.

No. IV.

“CAROLVS KÖNIG IN SPANIGEN.”

[Equestrian figure.]

[Trophy of arms and banners.]

“MADRIED.”

[City and gates.]

[Batteries with cannon planted.]

I presume this must refer to the short-lived triumph of Charles (afterwards Emperor of Germany), who was crowned King of Spain at Vienna in 1703, and entered Madrid in 1706.

No. V.

[City.]

[River with boats.]

[Cannon and mortars.]

[Tents and halberdiers, and arms strewn about on the ground.]

“KÖNIG GEORGE.”

[Crown.] [Crown.]

[Harp.] [Harp.]

[Equestrian figure holding a sceptre.]

Will some one be so kind as to explain the meaning of this design?

I may mention that there is little doubt that this cloth, as well as the others, belonged to the son of the gentleman before mentioned, and that it is very unlikely that it ever belonged to the royal household. This may perhaps affect the inference of your correspondent H. W. D. from the inscription "Der König Georg II." (Vol. iii., p. 229.).

No. VI.

[A group of figures:—On the right an eastern monarch standing, and in an attitude of command towards a female figure on the left, who is stooping down to put something into the gaping mouth of a dragon, while with her left hand she points towards the king. Behind the woman are three men turning towards the king in attitudes of entreaty.]

“BABYLON.”

[A man and woman kneeling down, with hands raised as in supplication or astonishment.]

“DANIEL, XIIII.”

[A tree with two birds in it. In front of the tree an angel flying downwards; and underneath, a man in the same attitude, holding a vessel shaped like a pitch-kettle in the left hand, and what appears to be a small loaf or cake in the right.]

All the above figures are in oriental costume. The date of this cloth cannot be later than about 1720. In each case the pattern is repeated in rows; the alternate rows being reversed so that on whichever side the cloth is turned, half of the patterns have the inscriptions legible.

W. S. T.

VERMIN, PAYMENTS FOR DESTRUCTION OF.
(Vol. iv., pp. 208. 389.)

The authority by which churchwardens paid for the destruction of vermin, is by acts of parliament (8 Eliz. cap. 15. and 14 Eliz. cap. 11.), but not AS churchwardens; and the payment for vermin out of the church-rate is illegal: but they are ex officio appointed by the statutes quoted, "with six other parishioners," as shown by FRANCISCUS, Vol. iv., p. 389.

There can be no doubt, that in course of time this assessment got into desuetude; that churchwardens, being the "distributors," they charged it on the church-rate by way of simplifying the machinery. This, and other duties of churchwardens and other parish officers, many of which have become obsolete, may be seen in Lambard's Eirenarcha, or Office of the Justice of the Peace, first published in 1581, which passed through many editions from that date to 1637. The work is commended by Blackstone as deserving the perusal of students.

With regard to the old names of vermin, Glead and Ringteal are described by Osbaldiston, in his Dictionary of Recreation, as a sort of kite; the latter with whitish feathers about the tail. Greas'-head and Baggar he does not notice. May they not be provincialisms?

H. T. ELLACOMBE

Clyst St. George.

In further illustration of this Query, and of J. EASTWOOD'S reply (p. 389.), may be quoted:—

"That the distributers of the provision for the destruction of noysome foule and vermine being chosen, and having money [as before shown by me, Vol. iv., p. 389.], shall give and pay the same money so to them delivered, to every person that shall bring to them any heades of old crowes, choughes, pies, or rookes, taken within the several parishes, for the heads of every three of them a peny; and for the heads of every sixe young crowes, choughes, pyes, or rookes, taken, as is aforesaid, a peny; and for every sixe egges of any of them unbroken, a peny; and likewise for every twelve stares heades, a peny. All which said heads and egges, the said distributers in some convenient place shall keep, and shall every moneth at the least bring foorth the same before the said churchwardens and taxors, or three of them, and then and there to them shall make a true account in writing, what money they have laid forth and paid for such heads and egges, and for the heads of such other raveinous birds and vermine, as are hereafter mentioned, that is to say:

FRANCISCUS.

WAS RALEIGH IN VIRGINIA?
(Vol. iv., pp. 190. 241.)

Raleigh never visited Virginia. The numerous expeditions thither, set on foot by him, and in which he had so large a concern as to cause them to be called his voyages, no doubt gave rise to the popular error.

We first find Raleigh's name, in connexion with discovery in North America, in 1579. In that year Sir Humphrey Gilbert, his stepbrother, prevailed upon him to join in a projected voyage. The accounts of this voyage are very scanty: all, I believe, that is known on the subject is to be found in Hakluyt, vol. iii. p. 146., in the following words:

"Others failed of their promises contracted, and the greater number were dispersed, leaving the Generall with few of his assured friends, with whom he adventured to sea; where having tasted of no lesse misfortune, he was shortly driven to retire home with the losse of a tall ship, and (more to his grief) of a valiant gentleman, Miles Morgan."

It will be observed that Raleigh's name is not mentioned, the "Generall" being Gilbert. It appears, however, to be generally assumed by his biographers that he did accompany this expedition in person. It may, at all events, be predicated with tolerable certainty, that Raleigh was not amongst those who deserted Sir Humphrey. Tytler adds the following particulars, in his Life of Raleigh (Edinburgh, 1833), p. 27., on the authority of Oldys's Life of Raleigh, pp. 28, 29.:

"On its homeward passage the small squadron of Gilbert was dispersed and disabled by a Spanish fleet, and many of the company were slain; but, perhaps owing to the disastrous issue of the fight, it has been slightly noticed by the English historians."

Schomburgk adds, in the Introduction to his reprint of Raleigh's Guiana, published for the Hakluyt Society in 1848, also on the authority of Oldys, that during the engagement "Raleigh was exposed to great danger."

We may therefore assume that he did sail with Gilbert on this occasion. There is no appearance, however, of the expedition having reached America at all; and most certainly Virginia was not then visited.

The next voyage undertaken by Gilbert was in 1583. Raleigh took a great interest in this expedition, and fitted out a barque of two hundred tons, which bore his name; and although the "most puissant" vessel in the fleet, it only ranked as "Vice-admirall." The "Delight, alias the George, of burthen 120 tunnes, was Admirall, in which went the Generall." They "began their voyage upon Tuesday, the eleventh day of June, in the yere of our Lord 1583;" but "about midnight" of the 13th June, "the Vice-admirall forsooke us, notwithstanding that we had the winde east, faire, and good. But it was after credibly reported that they were infected with a contagious sickness, and arrived greatly distressed at Plimmouth.... Sure I am no cost was spared by their owner, Master Raleigh, in setting them forth." So writes worthy Master Hayes, who commanded the Golden Hinde, the "Rear-admirall" of the expedition. It may be easily believed that Raleigh was not on board of the vessel which belonged to him. Sir H. Gilbert, who was ignorant of the cause of desertion, wrote thus to Sir George Peckham, after his arrival in Newfoundland:—"On the 13th the bark Raleigh ran from me, in fair and clear weather, having a large wind. I pray you solicit my brother Raleigh to make them an example to all knaves." The subsequent history of this disastrous expedition need not be dwelt upon. Gilbert reached Newfoundland, but was lost in returning on board the Squirrel of ten tons!

On the 25th March, 1584, Raleigh obtained letters patent from Queen Elizabeth authorising him to establish a colony in North America, south of Newfoundland. "The first voyage made" under this patent "to the coasts of America" was "with two barks, wherein were Captains M. Philip Amadas, and M. Arthur Barlowe, who discovered part of the countrey now called Virginia, anno 1584:" the account of which voyage is stated to have been "written by one of the said Captaines, and sent to Sir Walter Raleigh, knight, at whose charge and direction the said voyage was set forty"—Hak. vol. iii. p. 246.

The next voyage is called (p. 251.) "The voyage made by Sir Richard Grenvill for Sir Walter Raleigh to Virginia, in the yeere 1585." Sir Richard left a colony under the government of Master Ralph Lane. A list of all the colonists, to the number of 107, "as well gentlemen as others, that remained one whole yeere in Virginia," is given in Hakluyt, at p. 254. The first name is Master Philip Amadas, Admirall of the countrey;" the second is "Master Hariot." On the 10th June of next year the colony was visited by Sir Francis Drake, with no less than twenty-three sail of vessels, "in his prosperous returne from the sacking of Saint Domingo." Sir Francis gave the colonists, who had suffered severely from "scarsity," the means of returning to England, which they did, leaving Virginia on the 18th of June, and arriving at Portsmouth on the 28th of July, 1586. Governor Lane was greatly blamed for his precipitate desertion of the colony. Hariot wrote a description of the country, which occupies fifteen folio pages of Hakluyt. Hallam (in the passage quoted by MR. BREEN) is correct in describing Hariot as the companion of Raleigh; for that he was, and very much esteemed by him: but he is wrong in making it appear that they were together in Virginia.

In the meantime Raleigh at home was far from being forgetful of his colonists, although they seemed so little inclined to depend upon him. He got ready no less than four vessels: various delays, however, occurred to retard their sailing; and Raleigh at last getting anxious started off one of them as a "bark of aviso," or despatch boat, as it is called in one of the old accounts. It arrived at the site of the colony "immediately after the departing of our English colony out of this paradise of the world;" and "after some time spent in seeking our colony up in the countrey, and not [of course] finding them, it returned with all the aforesaid provision into England." Thus Hakluyt, page 265., who also states that it was "sent and set forth at the charges of Sir Walter Raleigh and his direction;" expressions surely inconsistent with any supposition that he was on board of this bark of aviso; and yet it would appear, from the Introduction of Sir Robert Schomburgk, already referred to, that this was the identical occasion on which Raleigh was erroneously supposed to have visited Virginia. As what Sir Robert says is very important, and bears very directly on the question, I quote his words:

"It has been asserted by Theobald and others, that Sir Walter Raleigh himself accompanied this vessel, which he sent for the relief of the young colony; such may have been his intention, as Captain Smith states in the first book of his General History of Virginia; but we have so many proofs that Sir Walter did not leave England in that year, that we are surprised that such an erroneous statement has found credence up to the present day."

This is a strong opinion of Sir Robert, and if borne out by evidence, would be conclusive; but in the first place, his reference to Smith's Virginia is incorrect; and besides, Smith, for anything he relates prior to 1606, is only secondary evidence. His book was published in 1624, and is reprinted in Pinkerton's Voyages (1812). On reference to it there I can find no such intention attributed to Raleigh; and in fact Smith's account is manifestly taken from Hakluyt (1599), who, it is well known, had his information on these voyages chiefly from Raleigh himself.[1] In the second place, it would have been well if Sir Robert had mentioned some distinct proof that Raleigh was in England on some one day that the vessel was absent, rather than generally stating that he did not leave England during 1586. Unfortunately, there is a want of precision as to the exact dates when the vessel left and returned to England; enough is said, however, to fix upon the two months at least from the 20th of May to the 20th of July as being embraced in the period during which she was on her voyage. In Hakluyt it is stated that she did not sail until "after Easter:" in 1586 Easter Sunday was, by my calculation, on the 3rd April. The 20th of May is therefore a liberal meaning to attach to the expression "after Easter." She arrived in Virginia "immediately after" Drake sailed, on the 18th of June. Say then that she even arrived on the 19th June; only spent one day in searching for the colony; and took thirty days to go home; this would bring us to the 20th July. It will be noticed that I narrow the time as much as possible, to strengthen the evidence that would be gained by proving an alibi for Sir Walter. If it can be shown that he was in England on any day between the 20th May and the 20th July, the supposition that he went on this occasion to Virginia must be given up as untenable. I have therefore directed my inquiries to this point. In the sketch of the life of George Clifford, Earl of Cumberland, given in Lodge's Portraits, a work certainly not of indisputable authority, but tolerably correct notwithstanding, I find the following statement:

"His [Cumberland's] fleet consisted of three ships, and a pinnace, the latter commanded by Sir Walter Raleigh.... It sailed from Gravesend on the 26th of June, 1586; but was repeatedly driven back by contrary winds, and could not finally leave England till the end of August."

[1] What Smith really says is, speaking generally of all the voyages, that Raleigh's occasions and employments were such that he could not go himself; but he says nothing about his intentions specially as to this particular voyage.

Now, if this were quite correct, it would be conclusive, that if Sir Walter Raleigh sailed from Gravesend on the 26th June, he could not have started from Virginia to return to England on the 20th of the same month. I thought it well, however, to verify this statement of Mr. Lodge, and had recourse to my old friend Hakluyt as usual. I there found (vol. iii. pp. 769. et seq.) that on starting from Gravesend, there were only two vessels called respectively the Red Dragon and the Clifford; these vessels arrived at Plymouth on the 24th of July, and were there detained by westerly winds until the 17th of August, when they—

"Then departed with another ship, also for our Rear-admirall, called the Roe, whereof W. Hawes was Captaine; and a fine pinnesse also, called the Dorothie, which was Sir Walter Raleigh's."

It therefore follows, that the pinnace might have joined them immediately before the 17th of August, a date too late for our purpose. Nay more, the only authority for Mr. Lodge's statement, that the vessel was commanded by Sir Walter, rests upon the words which I have put in Italics; his name is not mentioned in the subsequent account of the expedition, although, on the 7th of February, 1587, it was found necessary to hold a council of war, at which no less than eighteen officers assisted, all of whom, beginning with the admiral, are named. Raleigh's name does not occur; and is it conceivable that he, if present in the fleet, would have been absent on such an occasion? This therefore affords one additional instance in which Raleigh was presumed to be present merely because he fitted out a vessel. Being inconclusive as a positive piece of evidence on the main question, my chief reason for referring to it was to show how hastily some writers make assertions, and how probable it is that "Theobald and others" went upon similar grounds in their statement as to Raleigh's having visited Virginia. In justice to Mr. Lodge, I must mention that the error into which he fell with respect to Raleigh, in his sketch of the life of the Earl of Cumberland, is not repeated in his biography of Raleigh, in which it may be supposed he was more careful. Raleigh's having concerned himself sometime in July or August in fitting out a vessel for Cumberland's expedition, undoubtedly forms part of that chain of evidence alluded to by Schomburgk, tending to prove his continued residence in England in 1586. I feel inclined, however, to search for positive evidence on the point. In the very valuable collection of letters entitled the Leicester Correspondence, published for the Camden Society in 1844, I find his name occurring several times. On the 29th of March, 1586, Raleigh writes "from the court" to the Earl of Leicester, at that time in the Low Countries: he states that he had moved the Queen to send Leicester some pioneers, and found her very willing; but that since, the matter had been stayed, he knew not for what cause. He then goes on to protest against certain rumours which had been afloat as to his having been acting a treacherous part with the Queen against the Earl. Leicester had been in some disgrace with her Majesty, and Raleigh in a postscript says:

"The Queen is in very good tearms with yow, and, thanks be to God, well pacified, and yow are agayne her 'sweet Robyn.'"

On the 1st of April the Queen herself writes to Leicester a letter, which will repay perusal. And on the same day, Walsingham, at the express instance of the Queen, signifies to Leicester that Rawley, "upon her honor," had done Leicester good offices; and that, during the time of her displeasure, he dealt as earnestly for him as any other of his friends. All this shows Raleigh in high favour and standing at the court; and it is most improbable that he could, at such a moment, absent himself no less than three months from it. These letters appear to have been unusually long in reaching Leicester; in the early part of April he complains of not getting letters from the Queen, and on the 27th a great many reached him all at once. On the 31st of May, Leicester writes to Walsingham, and speaks of Rawley's pioneers; saying that he had written to him saying that they were ready to come. This could not refer to Raleigh's letter of 29th of March, because in it he states that the matter had been stayed; it must refer to one of a later date, which does not appear, but which was written, in all probability, some time on in May; it could not have been in Leicester's possession on the 29th of May, because on that day he writes to Walsingham, and mentions the same subject; namely, his wish for a reinforcement of 1000 men, which led him to speak of Rawley's pioneers on the 31st. With regard to the time it took to communicate with Leicester, he was at the Hague on the 30th of July, and on that day he knew of Drake's arrival at Portsmouth, stated in Hakluyt's account of Drake's voyage to have taken place on the 28th; although it is true, Governor Lane, who came home in the fleet, says the 27th of the same month. This was very speedy communication; but the arrival of Drake, and the results of his enterprise, were looked for with the utmost anxiety by the English ministry; and, no doubt, their satisfaction on the subject was communicated to Leicester by a rapid express. On the 9th of July we find Walsingham writing to Leicester:

"And lastly, that yt shall in no sorte be fyt for her Majestye to take any resolutyon in the cause until Sir Francis Drake's returne, at lest untyll the successe of his vyage be seene; wheruppon, in verry trothe, dependethe the lyfe and death of the cause according to man's judgment."

In a letter from Burleigh to Leicester, dated 20th of June, 1586, occurs the following:

"In Irland all thynges are quiet, and a nombre of gentilmen of Somersett, Devon, Dorcet, Cheshyre, and Lancashyre, are making themselves to go to Monster, to plant two or three thousand people, mere English, there this year."

In a note to this, Mr. Bruce, the editor, states, that Stow records the names of the honourable and worshipful gentlemen who made the attempt to colonise Munster, and names, amongst others, Sir Walter Raleigh. It was on this occasion that the poet Spenser got his grant of 3,028 acres in the county of Cork, which "is said to be dated June 27, 1586." So the Rev. Mr. Mitford, in his life of Spenser, prefixed to the Aldine edition of his poems (1839); and although he seems uncertain as to the date, there can be no doubt but that it is correct. Now I think that most people will agree with me in thinking that the whole of this, Raleigh's movements so far as they can be traced, his position at court, and the busy and stirring nature of the time, make it altogether improbable that Raleigh was absent in the month of June, 1586, on a voyage to Virginia. Hakluyt's not mentioning that he was in the vessel, would of itself be convincing to my mind, knowing the extent of his information on all subjects connected with Raleigh, and his minute and painstaking accuracy. Knowing, however, that this was the voyage in which Raleigh was stated to have visited Virginia, I have thought it worth while to search for more positive evidence. How far I have succeeded may be seen, but it is open to others to fix the fact of Raleigh's having been in England within the time I have limited. As a hint to go upon, I may mention that Babington's conspiracy was known to the English ministry on the 9th of July, although the conspirators were not apprehended until a month after; if Raleigh could be shown to have had any share in the discovery of the plot, his presence in England in the beginning of July, 1586, would be established beyond all doubt.

I have already been more than sufficiently tedious on the subject of the voyage of this little bark; what I have brought forward however bears more or less upon the question as to Raleigh having visited Virginia: I am clearly of opinion that on this occasion he did not. I cannot refrain, however, from adding a word or two of purely speculative conjecture. There is something rather suspicious in Drake visiting Virginia with the whole of his armament, and losing time in doing so, when the whole nation, from the queen downwards, was on the very tenter-hooks of anxiety for intelligence of him and of his success. The question arises, was it a rendezvous? and did the "bark of aviso" bear other and more important despatches than those addressed to Master Ralph Lane? Might not its arrival a day or two earlier have directed Drake to strike a blow at some defenceless but important part of the Spanish empire, deadly in proportion to its being unexpected? These are questions which I can in no wise answer, but they have arisen in my mind; and if it were so, we might be fain to believe, in spite of everything that I have been able to bring forward, that Raleigh was indeed on board his gallant little bark, but that, the mark not having been hit, the attempt was kept secret. It must not be forgotten that at that time, with the exception of this little colony, England had not a rood of land in the New World. However, I must remember that history ought not to deal in conjecture.

About fourteen or fifteen days after the departure of the bark, Grenvill made his appearance with the other three vessels. After making every search he returned home, leaving fifteen men on the Island of Roanoke. Subsequent expeditions found no traces of these men excepting the bones of one of them. No one has ever asserted that Raleigh was on board of this fleet.

Nothing daunted by these failures—

"In the yeere of our Lord 1587, Sir Walter Raleigh, intending to persevere in the planting of his countrey of Virginia, prepared a newe colonie of one hundred and fiftie men to be sent thither, under the charge of John White, whom hee appointed Governour, and also appointed unto him twelve assistants, unto whom he gave a charter, and incorporated them by the name of the Governour and Assistants of the Citie of Raleigh in Virginia."—Hak. Vol. iii. p. 280.

This colony, owing to contentions with the natives and other causes, did not thrive; and in August of the same year White was, much against his wish, induced to return to England for assistance. He failed in his first attempt to go back with aid. In 1593 he gives, at Hakluyt's request, an account of a voyage he made thither in 1590, but which quite failed in its object. The men with whom he embarked showed a greater disposition towards buccaneering, than to assist him in his search for the unfortunate colonists. He found traces of their having gone to the Island of Croatan; but his associates would not prosecute the search, and poor White, with a sad heart, was obliged to leave them, if they even then survived, to their fate. From that day to this no intelligence has ever been got as to what became of them. This voyage was made, if not under Raleigh's auspices, at all events with his assistance. It has been supposed by some that this voyage of White in 1590 was the last attempt made by Raleigh to succour his colonists—he has even been reproached with it. This, however, was not the case. At p. 1653. vol. iv. of Purchas, a very brief account is given of a ship having been purchased by Raleigh and sent out under the command of—

"Samuell Mace (a sufficient marriner who had been twice before at Virginia), to fynd out those people which he had sent last thither by Captain White in 1587."

The ill success of the previous attempts to communicate with the colony seems to have been ascribed to the practice which prevailed in that day of engaging seamen for the voyage with a share in the profits; this Raleigh attempted to remedy by hiring "all the cumpanye for wages by the month." I quote from Strachey's Virginia, printed by the Hakluyt Society from an original MS., whose statement bears undoubted marks of being the original from which Purchas took his account, and somewhat abridged it. In spite of Raleigh's precautions as to the hiring, the people behaved ill, and—

"They returned, and brought no comfort or new accesse of hope concerning the lives and safety of the unfortunate English people, for which only they were sett forth, and the charg of this employment was undertaken."

Here ends the history of Sir Walter Raleigh's connexion with Virginian discovery and colonisation. A new company was at the moment in contemplation, and it even despatched its first pioneer vessel in the same month of 1602 as Raleigh did. Raleigh may have had, to a certain extent, a selfish object in view. His patent of 1584 was conditional, as regarded its continuance, on his planting a colony within six years; and had he been able to have discovered any remains, however small, of the colony of '87, he could have prevented interlopers. The nature of his position also in England in March, 1602, may perhaps afford a clue to his designs. At that moment his royal mistress lay on the bed of sickness, dying by inches. The clouds were beginning to gather around Raleigh's head. His star, which had been in the ascendant for more than twenty years, was getting nigh its setting. Raleigh, a man of wisdom and foresight, as well as conduct and action, knew all this. He knew what he had to expect, and what he afterwards in fact experienced, from the new king, to whom all eyes were turned. Is it not most likely that he looked to Virginia as his haven of refuge, where, if he could maintain his patent rights, he might have set his enemies at defiance? Had this dream, if he entertained it, been realised, the twelve years' imprisonment and the bloody scaffold on which his head fell, might have been averted. This, however, was not to be;—the search, as already mentioned, was fruitless, and the new company went on; and, finally, under a fresh charter from James I., Virginia was again colonised in 1606, since which time its history and existence have been uninterrupted. On Raleigh's return from his last expedition to Guiana in 1618, only a few months before his murder, he touched at Newfoundland, being, as I verily believe, the only occasion on which he set his foot in North America.

It may cause your readers to smile, and perhaps be a surprise to some of them, when I conclude this long paper, written on the subject of Raleigh's connexion with Virginia, by asserting that he never had any connexion, direct or indirect, with it! All the colonies with which he had to do were planted in North Carolina and the islands thereto belonging. To have laid any stress upon this, or to have mentioned it earlier than now, would have amounted to nothing but a play upon names. The country called Virginia in Queen Elizabeth's reign, embraced not only the state now so called, but also Maryland and the Carolinas. Virginia Proper was in reality first planted by the company of 1606, who fixed their settlement on the Chesapeake.

T. N.

Demerary, Oct. 1851.