as he,—­is certainly significant.  There are still better grounds, as will appear in the closely connected relations of Jones, for holding with Goodwin rather than with Arber in the matter.  The standard authority in the case is the late Rev. E. D. Neill, D. D., for some years United States consul at Dublin, who made very considerable research into all matters pertaining to the Virginia Companies, consulting their original records and “transactions,” the Dutch related documents, the “Calendars of the East India Company,” etc.  Upon him and his exhaustive work all others have largely drawn,—­notably Professor Arber himself,—­and his conclusions seem entitled to the same weight here which Arber gives them in other relations.  Dr. Neill is clearly of opinion that the Captains of the may-Flower and the discovery were identical, and this belief is shared by such authorities in Pilgrim literature as Young, Prince, Goodwin, and Davis, and against this formidable consensus of opinion, Arber, unless better supported, can hardly hope to prevail.

The question of Jones’s duplicity and fraud, in bringing the Pilgrims to land at Cape Cod instead of the “neighbor-hood of Hudson’s River,” has been much mooted and with much diversity of opinion, but in the light of the subjoined evidence and considerations it seems well-nigh impossible to acquit him of the crime—­for such it was, in inception, nature, and results, however overruled for good.

The specific statements of Bradford and others leave no room for doubt that the may-Flower Pilgrims fully intended to make their settlement somewhere in the region of the mouth of “Hudson’s River.”  Morton states in terms that Captain Jones’s “engagement was to Hudson’s River.”  Presumably, as heretofore noted, the stipulation of his charter party required that he should complete his outward voyage in that general locality.  The northern limits of the patents granted in the Pilgrim interest, whether that of John Wincob (or Wincop) sealed June 9/ 19, 1619, but never used, or the first one to John Pierce, of February 2/12, 1620, were, of course, brought within the limits of the First (London) Virginia Company’s charter, which embraced, as is well-known, the territory between the parallels of 34 deg. and 41 deg.  N. latitude.  The most northerly of these parallels runs but about twenty miles to the north of the mouth of “Hudson’s River.”  It is certain that the Pilgrims, after the great expense, labor, and pains of three years, to secure the protection of these Patents, would not willingly or deliberately, have planted themselves outside that protection, upon territory where they had none, and where, as interlopers, they might reasonably expect trouble with the lawful proprietors.  Nor was there any reason why, if they so desired, they should not have gone to “Hudson’s River” or its vicinity, unless it was that they had once seemed to recognize the States General of