could, of
     course, have been none other than Solomon Prower.  Dr. Young, in his
     “Chronicles,” speaking of Martin, says, “he brought his wife and two
     children.”  If this means Martin’s children, it is evidently an
     error.  It may refer to age only.  His case is puzzling, for
     Bradford makes him both “servant” and “son.”  If of sufficient age
     and account to be cited before the Archdeacon for discipline, it
     seems strange that he should not have signed the “Compact.”  Even if
     a “servant” this would seem to have been no bar, as Dotey and
     Leister were certainly such, yet signers.  The indications are that
     he was but a well-grown lad, and that his youth, or severe illness,
     and not his station, accounts for the absence of his signature.  If
     a young foster-son or kinsman of Martin, as seems most likely, then
     Martin’s signature was sufficient, as in the cases of fathers for
     their sons; if really a “ser vant” then too young (like Latham and
     Hooke) to be called upon, as were Dotey and Leister.

John Langemore; there is nothing (save the errors of Dr. Young) to
     indicate that he was other than a “servant.”

Richard Warren was probably from Kent or Essex.  Surprisingly little is
     known of his antecedents, former occupation, etc.

William Mullens and his family were, as shown, from Dorking in Surrey,
     and their home was therefore close to London, whence they sailed,
     beyond doubt, in the may-Flower.  The discovery at Somerset House,
     London, by Mr. Henry F. Waters, of Salem, Massachusetts; of what is
     evidently the nuncupative will of William Mullens, proves an
     important one in many particulars, only one of which need be
     referred to in this connection, but all of which will receive due
     consideration.  It conclusively shows Mr. Mullens not to have been
     of the Leyden congregation, as has sometimes been claimed, but that
     he was a well-to-do tradesman of Dorking in Surrey, adjacent to
     London.  It renders it certain, too, that he had been some time
     resident there, and had both a married daughter and a son (William),
     doubtless living there, which effectually overthrows the “imaginary
     history” of Baird, and of that pretty story, “Standish of Standish,”
     whereby the Mullens (or Molines) family are given French (Huguenot)
     antecedents and the daughter is endowed with numerous airs, graces,
     and accomplishments, professedly French.