[XXIX‑39] As 'a Man who was as Valiant and Couragious as any could be, and likewise next to Capt. Sharp, the best beloved of all our Company, or the most Part thereof.' Bucaniers of Amer., ii. 33-4. Sharp was not a general favorite among the buccaneers. Burney says that 'Ringrose was not in England when his narrative was published; and advantage was taken of his absence to interpolate in it some impudent passages in commendation of Sharp's valor.' He goes on to say that in the MS. of Ringrose's Journal, preserved in the Sloane Collection, British Museum, the passage quoted concerning Sawkins' character runs: 'Captain Sawkins was a valiant and generous spirited man, and beloved above any other we ever had among us, which he well deserved.' Burney's Discov. South Sea, iv. 104-5. The inference suggested by Burney, therefore, is that Sharp, or somebody in his interest, foisted in the passages characterized as 'impudent.'
[XXIX‑40] According to Ringrose, page 35, who would have joined them but for the dangers of the journey, 63 men left. loc. cit. Those who departed numbered about 70, while 146 remained with Capt. Sharp. Hacke's Col. Voy., ii. 35. 'In this mutiny 75 more of our Men left us, and returned over Land as they came, delivering up their commissions to our Emperour.' Sharp's Voy., 17.
[XXIX‑41] One John Cox took command of Cook's ship, the Mayflower, with a company of 40 men. Sharp's Voy., 17-18. Sharp does not mention Cox at this time.
[XXIX‑42] Ringrose's ship had been burned for her iron.
[XXIX‑43] The reason of the mutiny was that Captain Sharp had now some 3,000 pesos, and wished to return home immediately. Two-thirds of the crew, however, had no money left, having gambled it all away, and they were in no mind to return; so they supported the claims of Watling against Sharp. Sharp's Voy., 49. 'While we lay at the isle of John Fernando, Captain Sharp was by general consent, displaced from being Commander; the Company being not satisfied either with his Courage or Behavior.' Dampier's Voyage, introd., p.v. The story of the mutiny, without any detail, is found in Drake's Univ. Col. Voy., 56. Sharp says the conspiracy against him was mainly the doing of John Cox, whom he had appointed to a separate command under him for old acquaintance's sake. Hacke's Col. Voy., ii. 45-46.
[XXIX‑44] After Watling's death, 'a great number of the meaner sort' wished Sharp once more elected commander, but the more experienced and able men were not satisfied and would not consent. The difference of opinion became so great that it was determined to put the matter to the vote; the majority keeping the ship, and the minority taking the long-boat and canoes, and going where they wished. Captain Sharp's party being in the majority, Dampier joined the smaller body, and taking their share of provisions, etc., they sailed for the Isthmus. Dampier's Voyage, introd., pp. v.-vi.
[XXIX‑45] Sharp asserts that he was unanimously restored to his command after the death of Watling, and does not mention the mutiny. Hacke's Col. Voy., 48.
[XXIX‑46] He carried off also several persons of both sexes, who were afterward ransomed for 1,000 pesos. Haya, Inform. al Rey, MS., 12; Nueva Esp., Breve Resum., MS., ii. 385. Juarros, Guat., i. 58, mentions that Esparza had been previously sacked by a French corsair in 1670. It was again attacked by pirates in 1686 or 1688, when it was abandoned by its inhabitants, who retired to the valleys of Bagaces and Landecho. Haya and Nueva Esp., ut supra.
[XXIX‑47] Their name inspired such dread that the new viceroy of Peru dared not sail from Panamá to his government in a ship of 25 guns, but waited for the arrival of the armada from the south. Bucaniers of Amer., ii. 136.
[XXIX‑48] Las Casas, in his Relation of the Spanish Voyages and Cruelties in the West Indies, 217, distinctly lays down the principle that 'the Spaniards had no Title to the Americans, as their Subjects, by right of Inheritance, Purchase, or Conquest.' Darien, Defence of the Scots Settlement, 5.