(h) The addition of several new names to the list of the Merchant Adventurers, hitherto unpublished as such, with considerable new data concerning the list in general.

(i) The demonstration of the fact that Martin and Mullens, of the may-Flower colonists, were also Merchant Adventurers, while William White was probably such.

(j) The demonstration of the fact that “Master Williamson,” the much-mooted incognito of Bradford’s “Mourt’s Relation” (whose existence even has often been denied by Pilgrim writers), was none other than the “ship’s-merchant,” or “purser” of the may-Flower,—­hitherto unknown as one of her officers, and historically wholly unidentified.

(k) The general description of; and many particulars concerning, the may-Flower herself; her accommodations (especially as to her cabins), her crew, etc., hitherto unknown.

(1) The demonstration of the fact that the witnesses to the nuncupative will of William Mullens were two of the may-FLOWER’S crew (one being possibly the ship’s surgeon), thus furnishing the names of two more of the ship’s company, and the only names—­except those of her chief officers—­ever ascertained.

(m) The indication of the strong probability that the entire company of the Merchant Adventurers signed, on the one part, the charter-party of the may-Flower.

(n) An (approximate) list of the ages of the may-FLOWER’S passengers and the respective occupations of the adults.

(o) The demonstration of the fact that no less than five of the Merchant Adventurers cast in their lots and lives with the Plymouth Pilgrims as colonists.

(p) The indication of the strong probability that Thomas Goffe, Esquire, one of the Merchant Adventurers, owned the “May-Flower” when she was chartered for the Pilgrim voyage,—­as also on her voyages to New England in 1629 and 1630.

(q) The demonstration of the fact that the Master of the may-Flower was Thomas Jones, and that there was an intrigue with Master Jones to land the Pilgrims at some point north of the 41st parallel of north latitude, the other parties to which were, not the Dutch, as heretofore claimed, but none other than Sir Ferdinando Gorges and the Earl of Warwick, chiefs of the “Council for New England,” in furtherance of a successful scheme of Gorges to steal the Pilgrim colony from the London Virginia Company, for the more “northern Plantations” of the conspirators.

(r) The demonstration of the fact that a second attempt at stealing the colony—­by which John Pierce, one of the Adventurers, endeavored to possess himself of the demesne and rights of the colonists, and to make them his tenants—­was defeated only by the intervention of the “Council” and the Crown, the matter being finally settled by compromise and the transfer of the patent by Pierce (hitherto questioned) to the colony.