[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.
[125] There is some confusion about these dates. The letter itself is dated the 1st of May, and the commission is here said on that day to have passed the great seal. The commissioners may have designated Gorges as governor-general at this time, and ordered a commission as such to be at once made out to him; but a year later the King’s intention of appointing him was formally announced. (Proc. of Amer. Antiq. Soc., 1867, p. 120.) The probability is that the business relating to the colonies was regarded as of little moment and done in the most careless and irregular way, hardly a record even of it being kept. Some proceedings were thus begun and not carried out, and other things were done twice.
[126] Morton is here quoting from the New Canaan, (p. *188) and its very last page. It would seem, therefore, now to have been written, though it was not published until three years later. (See Infra, pp. [78-9].)
[128] This letter is in Hubbard, pp. 428-30 (II. Mass. Hist. Coll., vol. vi.), and in Winthrop, vol. ii. pp. *190-1. The readings do not materially differ, but the punctuation has been corrected and the spelling is modern.
[129] Mem. Hist. of Boston, vol. i. p. 379, n.
[130] Winthrop, vol. i. p. *137.
[131] Winthrop, vol. i. p. *143.
[132] Ib., vol i. p. *102.