In the light of these facts, there appears to have been neither legal nor moral bar to the evident intention of the Pilgrims to settle in the vicinity of “Hudson’s River,” if they so elected.  In their light, also, despite the positive allegations of the truthful but not always reliable Morton, his charges of intrigue between the Dutch and Master Jones of the may-Flower, to prevent the settlement of his ship’s company at “Hudson’s River,” may well be doubted.  Writing in “New England’s Memorial” in 1669, Morton says:  “But some of the Dutch, having notice of their intentions, and having thoughts about the same time of erecting a plantation there likewise, they fraudulently hired the said Jones, by delays while they were in England, and now under pretence of the shoals the dangers of the Monomoy Shoals off Cape Cod to disappoint them in going thither.”  He adds:  “Of this plot between the Dutch and Mr. Jones, I have had late and certain intelligence.”  If this intelligence was more reliable than his assertion concerning the responsibility of Jones for the “delays while they were in England,” it may well be discredited, as not the faintest evidence appears to make him responsible for those delays, and they are amply accounted for without him.  Without questioning the veracity of Morton (while suggesting his many known errors, and that the lapse of time made it easy to misinterpret even apparently certain facts), it must be remembered that he is the original sponsor for the charge of Dutch intrigue with Jones, and was its sole support for many years.  All other writers who have accepted and indorsed his views are of later date, and but follow him, while Bradford and Winslow, who were victims of this Dutch conspiracy against them, if it ever existed, were entirely silent in their writings upon the matter, which we may be sure they would not have been, had they suspected the Dutch as prime movers in the treachery.  That there was a conspiracy to accomplish the landing of the may-Flower planters at a point north of “the Hudson” (in fact, north of the bounds defined by the (first) Pierce patent, upon which they relied), i.e. north of 41 deg.  N. latitude,—­is very certain; but that it was of Dutch origin, or based upon motives which are attributed to the Dutch, is clearly erroneous.  While the historical facts indicate an utter lack of motive for such an intrigue on the part of the Dutch, either as a government or as individuals, there was no lack of motive on the part of certain others, who, we can but believe, were responsible for the conspiracy.  Moreover, the chief conspirators were such, that, even if the plot was ultimately suspected by the Pilgrims, a wise policy—­indeed, self-preservation —­would have dictated their silence.  That the Dutch were without sufficient motive or interest has been declared.  That the States General could have had no wish to reject so exceptionally excellent a body of colonists as subjects,