stated in terms.  As editor of Bradford’s history “Of Plimoth Plantation,” Mr. Deane (in a footnote to the letter of Cushman written Sunday, June 11), after quoting the remark, “But it is a fine ship,” mistakenly adds, “The renowned Mayflower.—­Ed.,” thus committing himself to the common error in this regard.  John Brown, in his “Pilgrim Fathers of New England,” confuses the vessels, stating that, “when all was ready for the start, a pilot came over to conduct the emigrants to England, bringing also a letter from Cushman announcing that the Mayflower, a vessel of one hundred and eighty tons, Thomas Jones, Master, would start from London to Southampton in a week or two,” etc.  As we have seen, these statements are out of their relation.  No pilot went for that purpose and none carried such a letter (certainly none from Cushman), as alleged.  Cushman’s letter, sent as we know by John Turner, announced the finding of an entirely different vessel, which was neither of 180 tons burden, nor had any relation to the may-Flower or her future historic freight.  Neither was there in his letter any time of starting mentioned, or of the port of Southampton as the destination of any vessel to go from London, or of Jones as captain.  Such loose statements are the bane of history.  Goodwin, usually so accurate, stumbles unaccountably in this matter—­which has been so strangely misleading to other competent men—­and makes the sadly perverted statement that, “In June, John Turner was sent, and he soon returned with a petulant (sic) letter from Cushman, which, however, announced that the ship Mayflower had been selected and in two weeks would probably leave London for Southampton.”  He adds, with inexcusable carelessness in the presence of the words “sixty last” (which his dictionary would have told him, at a glance, was 120 tons), that:  “This vessel (Thomas Jones, master) was rated at a hundred and eighty tons . . . .  Yet she was called a fine ship,” etc.  It is evident that, like Brown, he confused the two vessels, with Cushman’s letter before his eyes, from failure to compute the “sixty last.”  He moreover quotes Cushman incorrectly.  The great disparity in size, however, should alone render this confusion impossible, and Cushman is clear as to the tonnage ("sixty last"), regretting that the ship found is not larger, while Bradford and all other chroniclers agree that the may-Flower was of “9 score” tons burden.

It is also evident that for some reason this smaller ship (found on Saturday afternoon) was not taken, probably because the larger one, the may-Flower, was immediately offered to and secured by Masters Weston and Cushman, and very probably with general approval.  Just how the may-Flower was obtained may never be certainly known.  It was only on Saturday, June 10, as we have seen, that Master Weston had seriously set to work to look for a ship; and although the refusal