of course, in making the assertion, knew of the printed work of Fabyan. The Stow MS. could be instantly recognised by its allusion, under the year 1502, to the exhibition of the savages. We must strike out the reference to Fabyan in Stow, Speed, and Purchas, or deny that any part of the Continuation can be by him, for it is difficult to believe that he would prepare two works relative to the incidents of the same reign differing essentially from each other. It forms a presumption in favour of the Stow MS., and against the Continuation by Rastall, that while the worthy Alderman, noting from time to time what fell under his observation, would be likely to advert to the incident in question, it might readily escape a compiler endeavouring to recall the leading events of the era after curiosity about the Newfoundland had passed away.

It is remarkable, that the original edition of Fabyan, published by Pynson, is accompanied by a single leaf, on which are noted the death of Henry VII. and the accession of his son. As Mr Ellis republishes this (see his edition, p. 678) without any attempt to account for the disappearance of the intermediate matter, a conjecture may be hazarded. Bale, in his "Scriptorum Illustrium Magni Brytanniæ, &c." (Bas. Ed. of 1557, fol. 642), states that Cardinal Wolsey had caused some copies of Fabyan's work to be burned, because it exposed the enormous revenues of the priesthood, "Ejus Chronicorum exemplaria nonnulla Cardinalis Wolsius in suo furore comburi fecit quod cleri proventus pingues plus satis detexerit." Mr Ellis is of opinion (Preface, xviii.) that the obnoxious passage "must" have been that in which an abstract is given of the Bill projected by the House of Commons in the 11th Henry IV.; but this seems to furnish a very inadequate motive for the vehement indignation of the Cardinal. A more perilous epoch to the Chronicler was that in which he had to record the death (in 1500) of Cardinal and Chancellor Morton. Of this personage, Bacon says, in his History of Henry VII.,

"This year also died John Morton, Archbishop of Canterbury, Chancellor of England and Cardinal. He was a wise man, and an eloquent, but in his nature harsh and haughty; much accepted by the King, but envied by the nobility, and hated of the people." "He (Henry VII.) kept a strait hand on his nobility, and chose rather to advance clergymen and lawyers which were more obsequious to him, but had less interest in the people."

It is highly probable, that the popular sentiment would be reflected from the page of Fabyan, and give umbrage to Wolsey, who may he supposed anxious that Henry VIII. should pursue the very policy

attributed by Bacon to his Father. At this precise point, then, occurs a chasm in the copies extant of Pynson's edition. Was not this part sacrificed to the resentment of Wolsey, or suppressed from a dread of his displeasure, and was it not afterwards supplied by Rastall? The MS. which had, meanwhile, been lost sight of, could not elude so indefatigable a collector as Stow. The single leaf referred to, of Pynson's edition, may be either part of the original work, or a hasty substitute, got up on the withdrawal of the obnoxious matter, so as to give to the work the appearance of being brought down to the latest period.

(B.)

(See page 95.)

ENGLISH EXPEDITION SAID TO HAVE BEEN FOUND BY HOJEDA AT CAQUI

BACOA.

THE claims of Truth are so paramount to those of any Hypothesis, however convenient and apparently well sustained, that a caution must here be interposed. It might be presumed that Navarette (tom. iii. p. 41) would not lightly hazard the unqualified assertion alluded to; yet this consideration will, perhaps, occur with most force to those who have not examined his volumes. He adduces no authority in support of the position, and the Document which seems, at a hasty glance, to countenance it, will be found, on examination, to suggest an opposite conclusion.

Cabot had discovered a vast Continent along the coast of which he proceeded to the South as far as Florida without reaching its termination. Of this fact the Spanish Government was, of course, fully aware in July 1500, the date of the agreement with Hojeda in which allusion is made to the English, for we find (Navarette, tom. iii. p. 77) a Letter from the Sovereigns dated 6th May, 1500, which Navarette himself (ib. p. 42) connects with an intention to follow up the discoveries of Cabot. The conduct of England was of course regarded by the Court of Spain with indignation and alarm, as involving a violation of the Papal Bull. Cabot followed the main land no further only because his provisions were exhausted. When the Spaniards, then, subsequently discovered Terra Firma, nothing was more natural, or correct, than to suppose it connected with the Great Continent coasted by the English, and in resolving to take possess

ion, their policy, and pretended exclusive rights, would lead them to watch and repel all foreign competition. It was as if, in after times, the Spanish commander at Pensacola or St Augustine had been advised of the colonization of Virginia by the English.

On turning to the agreement with Hojeda it is found that he is enjoined to continue his examination of the region he had discovered on the former voyage, and which seemed to run East and West, as it must lead towards (hacia) the place where it was known the English were making discoveries. He is directed to set up marks as he proceeds with the Royal Arms, so that it might be known he had taken possession for Spain, and the English be thereby prevented from making discoveries in that direction (Navarette, tom. iii. p. 86).

“Item: que vaes é sigais aquella costa que descubristes que se corre leste— vuest, segun parece, per razon que va hacia la parte donde se ha sabido que descubrian los Ingleses é vais poniendo las marcas con las armas de SS. A. A. 6 con otras senales que sean conocidas, cuales vos pareciere porque se conozca como vos habes descubierto aquella tierra, para que atages el descubrir de los Ingleses por aquella via."

A Grant of Land is made to Hojeda in consideration prospectively of his active exertions to prosecute discoveries and to check those of the English (ib. p. 88).

"Para que labrees, é fagaes labrar, é vos aprovecheis é podais aprovechar de alli, para lo que habees de descubrir é en la costa de la tierra firme para el atajo de los Ingleses."

The general direction of the region visited by Hojeda is correctly described, and it is certain that had Cabot not been stopped by a failure of provisions, but turned the Cape of Florida and followed the coast, he must have reached Caquibacoa. The vast interval occasioned by the Gulf of Mexico was then unknown.

It is quite plain that the injunction contained in Hojeda's instructions, so far from assuming the identity of the spots visited by him and the English, involves a conjecture as to their relative position towards each other. It was by following up his discoveries that Hojeda was to meet and check intrusion. The phraseology, too, discountenances the idea that the person addressed had conveyed the information as to the danger; it seems rather communicated to him in the way of caution. Nor would the setting up of marks to let the English know, on reaching them, of the Spanish claim be probably so much insisted on, if, long before, Hojeda had personally given notice of it. The allusion seems to be not so much to any one expe

dition of the English as to a particular quarter from which their encroachment was to be apprehended; and Hojeda is, therefore, enjoined to spread out his party, as soon as possible, over the intermediate region, so that it might be found preoccupied. If Caquibacoa had been the scene of common discovery, and of actual encounter, it is strange that Hojeda should now be told by others of the direction which led towards the English.

Hojeda was examined on oath, at great length, in the law proceedings between Don Diego Columbus and the Crown, and the very question at issue was as to originality of discovery. He makes not the slightest allusion to such a meeting, and yet, in the course of a trial before a domestic tribunal, there would seem to have been no motive for omitting to state what, if true, must have been known to so many. Nor is this all. If Hojeda really found a party of Englishmen in that quarter he can hardly escape the charge of perjury. He swears positively (Navarette, tom. iii. p. 544) that he was the first who attempted to follow up the discovery of Columbus (" el primero hombre que vino a descubrir despues que el Almirante"). After speaking of his having found the marks of Columbus he proceeds to detail his own discoveries, mentioning particularly Caquibacoa; and he swears that no part of this had ever been discovered or visited either by Columbus or any one else (" nunca nadie lo habia descubierto ni tocado en ello asi el Almirante como otra persona"). The statement is repeated in another part of his testimony (p. 546), e que toda esta costa y la tierra-firme, y el Golfo de Uraba y el Darien el Almirante ni otra persona no lo habia descubierto."

One other forcible consideration will occur to those apprised of the character of Hojeda. That fiery and daring adventurer would have regarded the rival party as impudent trespassers on the dominions of the King of Spain, and as setting at defiance the Papal Bull. A man who gravely quotes this instrument in his manifesto to the poor Indians as sufficient authority for subjugating them, would hardly have exacted less deference to it from Christians. He was the last person in the world to come home quietly with a report of the intrusion-not knowing when he should return-and to throw on his Sovereign the necessity of giving that direct authority for expulsion which it might be more agreeable to find the officer taking for granted. Hojeda would have known his cue without a prompter.

In a recent volume (Lardner's Cyclopædia, History of Maritime and Inland discovery, vol. ii. p. 35), the assertion is made that

"Hojeda met with English navigators near the Gulf of Maracaibo,” and a sufficient authority is supposed to be found for it in the language of the Document already quoted. Without repeating what has been said on that point, it may be remarked that the writer in the Cyclopædia does not deal fairly with the original. He represents Hojeda as ordered "to follow and examine the coast which he had already discovered, and which appears to run East and West, as that is the part which the English are known to be exploring,' &c. It is obvious that the most important words are here left unnoticed. The expression "por razon que va hacia la parte donde se ha sabido que descubrian las Ingleses" will not bear the translation of the Cyclopædia without the substitution indicated by brackets, "as that is [goes towards] the part where the English are known to be exploring."

Should it appear, in the end, that the assertion has no better foundation than the document in question, what a melancholy proof have we of the perils to which Truth is subject when a writer like Navarette, who was to clear up all difficulties, is found rashly starting new errors to run their course through successive volumes!

It must be acknowledged that the remarks now submitted rather take from the force of what appears, in the text, a plausible case. But a frequent observation of the diffusive consequences of a single error suggests that there is something of moral guilt in pressing too earnestly a statement the truth of which is not sincerely confided in.

If deprived of the happy coincidence suggested by the assertion of Navarette, it must be left to conjecture to determine in what quarter the active and enterprising spirit of Cabot was employed during the long interval between his undoubted voyages from England and the time of his entering the service of Spain.

Another motive has its weight. The curious and important Documents at the Rolls Chapel will probably one day be arranged and made available to the purposes of history. Evidence may then come forth, and it is desirable that no erroneous hypothesis should be found in the way of Truth. Until that period we must be content to remain in the dark. Where the records are in such a state of confusion as to warrant the charge which has been before mentioned for finding a specific paper of which the exact date-the name of the party-the purpose and general tenor-are given, it is obvious that no private fortune would be adequate to meet the expense of a general search.