a party to Gorges’s plot.  On the contrary, as his interest was wholly allied to his patent, which Gorges’s scheme would render of little value to his associate Adventurers and himself he would naturally have been, unless heavily bribed to duplicity beyond his expectations from their intended venture, the last man to whom to disclose such a conspiracy.  Neither was he necessary in any way to the success of the scheme.  He did not hire either the ship or her master; he does not appear to have had any Pilgrim relations to Captain Jones, and certainly could have had no such influence with him as Gorges could himself command, through Warwick and his own ability—­from his position at the head of the “New England Council”—­to reward the service he required.  That Gorges was able himself to exert all the influence requisite to secure Jones’s cooperation, without the aid of Pierce, who probably could have given none, is evident.  Mr. Davis’s suggestion, while pertinent and potential as to Gorges, is clearly wide of the mark as to Pierce.  He represented the Adventurers in the matter of patents only, but Weston was in authority as to the pivotal matter of shipping.  An evidently hasty footnote of Dr. Neill, appended to the “Memorial” offered by him to the Congress of the United States, in 1868, seems to have been the only authority of Mr. William T. Davis for the foregoing suggestion as to the complicity of Pierce in the treachery of Captain Jones, except the bare suspicion, already alluded to, in the records of the London Company.  Neill says:  “Captain Jones, the navigator of the may-Flower, and John Pierce, probably had arranged as to destination without the knowledge of the passengers.”  While of course this is not impossible, there is, as stated, absolutely nothing to indicate any knowledge, participation, or need of Pierce in the matter, and of course the fewer there were in the secret the better.

Unobservant that John Pierce was acting upon the old adage, “second thief best owner,” when he asked, a little later, even so extraordinary a thing as that the “Council for New England” would exchange the patent they had so promptly granted him (as representing his associates, the Adventurers and Planters) for a “deed-pole,” or title in fee, to himself alone, they instantly complied, and thus unwittingly enabled him also to steal the colony, and its demesne beside.  It is evident, from the very servile letter of Robert Cushman to John Pierce (written while the former was at New Plymouth, in November-December, 1621, on behalf of the may-Flower Adventurers), that up to that time at least, the Pilgrims had no suspicion of the trick which had been played upon them.  For, while too adroit recklessly to open a quarrel with those who could—­if they chose —­destroy them, the Pilgrims were far too high-minded to stoop to flattery and dissimulation (especially with any one known to have been guilty of treachery toward them), or to permit