solely to John Cabot, authorising a second expedition on a more extended scale and with fuller royal authority, which letters-patent were dated February 3rd, 1498. That this expedition sailed in the spring of 1498, and had not returned in October

[are] points [which] are now fully supported by satisfactory evidence, mostly documentary and contemporary. As for John Cabot, Sebastian said he died, which is one of the few undisputed facts in the discussion; but if Sebastian is correctly reported in Ramusio1 to have said that he died at the time when the news of Columbus's discoveries reached England, then Sebastian Cabot told an untruth, because the letters - patent of 1498 were addressed to John Cabot alone. The son had a gift of reticence concerning others, including his father and brothers, which in these latter days has been the cause of much wearisome research to scholars." Dr. Dawson also says: "During the whole of the first voyage John Cabot was the commander; on the second voyage he sailed in command, but who brought the expedition home, and when it returned, are not recorded. It is not known how or when John Cabot died, and although the letters-patent for the second voyage were addressed to him alone, his son Sebastian, during forty-five years, took the whole credit in every subsequent mention of the discovery of America. This antithesis may throw light upon the suppression of his father's name in all the statements attributed to or made by Sebastian Cabot. He was marvellously reticent about his father. The only mention which

1 "Discourse of the Anonymous Guest at the House of Frascator Ramusio," Navigazioni et Viaggi, vol. i. fol. 374D, 3rd ed., Venice.

occurs is on the map, seen by Hakluyt, and on the map of 1544, supposed, somewhat rashly, to be a transcript of it. There1 the discovery is attributed to John Cabot and to Sebastian his son, and that has reference to the first voyage. Sebastian manifested no concern for any person's reputation but his own. He never once alluded to his two brothers who were associated in the first patent, and the preceding slight notice of his father is all that can be traced to him,2 although contemporary records of unquestionable authority indicate John Cabot as the moving spirit, and do not mention the son. . . . .. What we are concerned to solve is the historical problem : Who first discovered the mainland of America? For that reason John Cabot and his little vessel, the Matthew of Bristol have to us a paramount interest. In this portion of my paper, then, Peter Martyr, Gomara, Ramusio, and Hakluyt are of minor importance. I am to concern myself first with those Spanish and Italian envoys, whose letters and despatches from England in the same year are almost the only contemporary evidence we possess of John Cabot's achievement. As these were all written before the return of the second expedition, in studying them we are sure of having the only extant information concerning the first voyage absolutely free from any inter

1 It may or may not be Sebastian Cabot's map. The evidence as to the authorship is merely conjectural. There exists no authentic proof that the inscriptions on the map were placed thereon by Sebastian Cabot.

2 This certainly depends upon whether the authorship of the legends on the so-called Cabot map can be traced to Sebastian. In fairness, however, the inscription on the portrait of Sebastian should also be mentioned.

mixture with the details of the second." Dr. Dawson has shown, in his discussion of the various important points at issue in the Cabot history, that he possesses a singularly apt method of leading up to and offering a solution of the complicated questions, which, in consequence of what Sebastian Cabot said, or it may be what he left unsaid, have caused so much difficulty to those who are desirous to get at the truth. Dr. Dawson's monograph, which was published in 1894, together with an article written by him which is included in a recently published pamphlet,' entitled "The Discovery of America by John Cabot in 1497," etc., deserves the best attention of every student of American history.

In concluding the notice of the accounts related by Peter Martyr, Galvao, Gomara, and Ramusio, the following questions are presented before us for our serious consideration. First, was Sebastian Cabot with his father, either in the voyage of 1497 or in that of 1498? Secondly, did he wilfully suppress the fact that it was his father who was the real discoverer? Thirdly, did he trade upon the imperfect knowledge he had gleaned as to the voyages of 1497 and 1498, or either of them, from his father?

These questions are put as the result of a very careful study by the questioner of all the documentary evidence it is possible to obtain. The answers must be left to the readers of this volume, who are advised to keep their minds open until after they have read its last page. The final decision should not be arrived at until the whole

1 Ottawa, for sale by James Hope & Sons, 1896.

of the difficulties and entanglements of the Cabot history have been carefully examined. "Great surprise," says Biddle, "has been expressed that [Sebastian] Cabot should have left no account of his voyages, and this circumstance has ever been urged against him as a matter of reproach." Perhaps it is better to say that it is a great pity, both for the sake of Sebastian and the public, that, so far as the allegations as to the agency of Sebastian Cabot in the voyages of 1497 and 1498 are concerned, we are left to judge as to the truth or otherwise from statements made at secondhand.

CHAPTER VI

In the year 1521 we find that Sebastian Cabot had made terms with King Henry VIII. for taking command of an expedition. As a matter of fact, we cannot tell for certain whether the expedition ever sailed; it is certain, however, that if it actually sailed, Sebastian Cabot took no part whatever in it. But the records of the proceedings connected with the negotiations tend to throw some very important side-lights on the history of Sebastian Cabot.

Sir Robert Wynkfeld and Sir Wolston Brown, two members of the council of Henry VIII., called upon the wardens of the various livery companies of London to furnish five vessels "for a viage to be made into the newe found Iland," which was to be placed under the command of "one man callyd as understoud Sebastyan." It is certain that this means that arrangements of some kind—whether of a complete nature or subject to some condition, must be left to conjecture-had been made with Sebastyan Cabot, whose surname was suppressed. At that time he was in the employ of Spain. The wardens of the drapers and of the mercers took exception to the proposed expedition on the ground, as they alleged, that the king and his council "were not duely and substancially enformed in such manner as perfite knowledge myght be had by credible reporte