for an island, which he said he knew well was rich, and replenished with great commodities: which shippe thus manned and victualled at the King's costs, divers marchants of London ventured in her small stocks, being in her, as chief patron, the said Venetian. And in the company of the said ship sailed, also, out of Bristow, three or foure small ships, fraught with sleight and grosse marchandizes, as course cloth, caps, laces, points, and other trifles, and so departed from Bristow in the beginning of May, of whom in this Maior's time returned no tidings."

There is added, by Hakluyt, a note of three savages brought from the newly-discovered region, " mentioned by the foresaid, Robert Fabian."

It may be remarked, in the first place, that the history of this "latter part of Robert Fabyan's Chronicle," well deserves the attention of antiquaries. Both Stow, in his Annals, subsequently published, and after him, Speed (p. 744), and Purchas (vol. iii. p. 808), speak of the exhibition, in 1502, of savages brought from the Newfoundland, and cite Fabyan, as authority for what is not to be found in his work as we now have it.* Assuming, however, as we may safely do, that Stow was possessed of a manuscript which he had reason to believe the work of a contemporary, the question remains as to its precise language. The passage in Hakluyt would evidently appear to be not an exact transcript from such a work. The expression, "of whom in this Mayor's time returned no tidings," is not in the manner of a Chronicler making a note of incidents as they occurred, but is very natural in a person looking over the materials in his possession for information on a particular point, and reporting to another the result of that examination. It is probable, therefore, that Hakluyt had asked Stow what light he could throw on the expeditions in the time of Henry VII., and that we have here the answer given to the inquiry. From what has already been seen, it may be conceived that Hakluyt would not hesitate to run his pen through whatever struck him as irreconcilable with the leading facts in his possession. The wealthy Prebendary would approach with no great reverence the labours of poor Stow, who having abandoned his business as a tailor, for the

* See Appendix (A).

unrequited labours of an antiquary, was reduced to such distress, that, through the royal munificence, a special license was granted to him to beg at the church doors. If, therefore, Hakluyt found the son's name introduced, he would not hesitate to make it give way to what he deemed the better evidence supplied by the record. Fortunately, however, we are not left to mere conjecture. In 1605 appeared Stow's own "Annals.” The simplicity and good faith of this writer are so well known, as well as his intense reverence for whatever bore the stamp of antiquity, that we have no fear of his having committed what in his eyes would have been sacrilege, by changing one syllable of the original. Let it be remembered, then, that Hakluyt relies exclusively on what he obtained from Stow; and in reading the following passage from the Annals, we find what, doubtless, passed into Hakluyt's hands before it was subjected to his perilous correction. It occurs at p. 804 of the edition of 1605, and at p. 483 of that of 1631. "This year one Sebastian Gaboto, a Genoa's sonne borne in Bristol, professing himself to be expert in the knowledge of the circuit of the world and islands of the same, as by his charts and other reasonable demonstrations he shewed, caused the king to man and victual a ship," &c. The rest corresponds with the passage in Hakluyt, but there is not added, "of whom in this Mayor's time," &c.; thus confirming the conjecture as to the meaning of those words in the memorandum given to Hakluyt. Under the year 1502 we find the passage as to the exhibition of the savages, beginning, "This year were brought unto the king three men taken in the Newfoundland by Sebastian Gaboto, before named, in anno 1498." As authority for this last fact, he cites Robert Fabyan. Thus we have the best evidence that the contemporary writer, whoever he may have been, made not the slightest allusion to the father. Bacon, Speed, Thuanus, &c., all furnish the same statement.

The very phrase, "a Genoa's son," employed to designate Sebastian Cabot, may be considered as the not unnatural mis

take of a contemporary, referring as it does to the country of Columbus, with whose fame all Europe was ringing from side to side.

It happens that we can trace the progress of Hakluyt's perversion. The communication from Stow first appears in the "Divers Voyages to America," &c. published in 1582. When given at that early period, as derived from "Mr John Stow, citizen," Hakluyt merely changes the words "a Genoa's son," into "a Venetian," without giving any name. He had not then heard of the patent of February 3, 1498, naming John Cabot exclusively, for the only document he quotes is the original patent of March 1496, in which both father and son are mentioned, and which describes the father as a Venetian. He struck out, therefore, only what he then knew to be incorrect. Subsequently, he received information of the second patent in favour of John Cabot, and in his enlarged work he not only furnishes a reference to that patent, but makes a further alteration of what he had received from Stow. Instead of "a Venetian," as in 1582, when he had the memorandum first before him, it becomes "one John Cabot, a Venetian," thus effecting, at the two stages of alteration, a complete change of what he had received, and yet for the statement as thus finally made, Fabian and Stow continue to be cited!

Hakluyt has, incautiously, suffered to lie about the evidence of his guilty deed, which should have been carefully buried. Thus there is retained the original title of the passage" A note of Sebastian Cabot's first discovery of part of the Indies, taken out of the latter part of Robert Fabyan's Chronicle, not hitherto printed, which is in the custody of Mr John Stow, a diligent preserver of Antiquities." Now it is highly probable that all this, with the exception of the compliment, was the explanatory memorandum at the head of Stow's communication. It is incredible that Hakluyt himself should prefix it to a passage which does not contain the slightest allusion to Sebastian Cabot. Thus we see that in indicating to the

printer the alterations in the new edition, the pen of Hakluyt, busied with amendment at the critical point, has spared, inad vertently, what betrays him by its incongruity with that which remains, and, like the titles of many acts of parliament, serves to show the successful struggle for amendment after the original draught.

As to the second paragraph, about the exhibition of the three savages, Hakluyt's conduct has been equally unjustifiable, but an exposure of it belongs to a different part of the subject.

Thus it is established by the testimony of the contemporary Annalist, that it was on a young man-the son of the rich merchant from Italy-that the public eye was turned in reference to the projected schemes of discovery.

The explanation that has been given furnishes at the same time an answer to the second ground adverted to in support of the father's pretensions-the encomiums bestowed on him by respectable writers. Singular as it may appear, they have all arisen out of the misconception as to Fabyan's meaning. Beyond this supposed allusion, there is not the slightent evidence that the father was a seaman, or had the least claim to nautical skill or the kindred sciences. We hear only of his going "to dwell in England to follow the trade of merchandise." Yet out of Hakluyt's perversion, mark how each successive writer has delighted to draw the materials for eulogy on this old gentleman.

"Thus it appears, from the best authority that can be desired, that of a contemporary writer, this discovery was made by Sir John Cabot, the father of Sebastian." (Campbell's Lives of The Admirals.) "Sir John Cabot was the original discoverer, of which honour he ought not to be despoiled, even by his son." (Ib.) The same language is found in M'Pherson's Annals of Commerce (vol. ii. p. 13. note), and in Chalmer's Political Annals of The Colonies (p. 8, 9), though it happens, singularly enough, that in correcting the supposed error, this last writer not only mistakes the name of

the annalist (making him to be John Fabyan), but cites a work which does not contain the slightest allusion to these enterprises.

"He was, it seems, a man perfectly skilled in all the sciences requisite to form an accomplished seaman or a general trader!" (Campbell's Lives of the Admirals.)

"The father was a man of science, and had paid particular attention to the doctrine of the spheres. His studies, &c. He seems to have applied to Henry VII., who accordingly empowered him to sail," &c. (vol. xviii. Kerr's Voyages, p. 353. Essay by W. Stevenson, Esq.).

"John Caboto, a citizen of Venice, a skilful Pilot and intrepid Navigator." (Barrow, p. 32.)

"Henry VII., disappointed in his hopes of forming an engagement with Columbus, gladly extended his protection to the Venetian, John Gavotta or Cabot, whose reputation as a skilful pilot was little inferior to that of the celebrated Genoese." (Dr Lardner's Cabinet Cyclopædia, Maritime and Inland Discovery, vol. ii. p. 136.)

We come now to the assertion, that on the map "hung up in the Queen's Privy Gallery," the discoveries indicated, are referred to the joint agency of the father and son. And here, the first consideration is, of course, as to the evidence that such a representation was made.

The map itself has disappeared, and we approach the statement of Hakluyt with a conviction that he would not hesitate, for a moment, to interpolate the name of John Cabot, if he thought that, thereby, was secured a better correspondence with the language of the original patent. No additional confidence is derived from Purchas, who copies all Hakluyt's perversions, and even repeats the citation of Fabyan, as found in Hakluyt's last work, though Stow's Annals had intermediately appeared, and the discrepance between Hakluyt's first and last work ought to have put him on his guard.

Sir Humphrey Gilbert makes not the slightest allusion to the father.