"But what shall I say, my good Hakluyt," &c., conveys a similar representation.

Mark now the liberties taken by Hakluyt. Cabot, in the Extract, is made to say, that the country called "Terra primum visa" was absolutely sterile" tellus sterilis est." This Hakluyt renders "the soil is barren in some places ;" and when Cabot says, "neque ullos fructus affert," the translator has it, "and yieldeth little fruit ;" thus perverting, without hesitation, the original, which is yet audaciously placed be. neath our eyes!

While on the subject of these efforts to obscure a document so little satisfactory in itself, reference may be made to another, of a date subsequent to the time of Hakluyt, but which has had an extensive influence on modern accounts. The country discovered is designated in the Latin, as "Terra primum visa,” and distinguished from the "Insula," or Island of St John, standing opposite to it. Hakluyt preserves the distinction, but in the well known book of Captain Luke Foxe, who professes to transfer to his pages the several testimonials on the subject of Cabot's discoveries so as to present them to his readers in a cheap form, the passage is thus put (p. 15)—

"In the year of grace 1497, John Cabot, a Venetian, and Sebastian his son, with an English fleet from Bristol, discovered that Island, which before that time no man," &c. With a view to economy of space, Foxe omits to copy Hakluyt's statement, that the "Extract" spoken of was hung up "in the Queen's Privy Gallery," and from this omission a hasty reader is led to infer that he speaks of a map in his own possession. Here was a fine trap for those who came after him; and the following passage from M'Pherson's Annals of Commerce (vol. ii. p. 13, note), may show how successful it proved. "Foxe quotes the following inscription engraven near Newfoundland, in a map, published by Sebastian, the son of John Cabot-A.D. 1497, John Cabot, a Venetian, and Sebastian, his son, with an English fleet, set sail from Bristol, discovered that Island, which before that time no man had

attempted.'" Thus we have-Foxe in possession of Cabot's map on that map, "Newfoundland" marked-and, on the map, published by Sebastian Cabot, an inscription near Newfoundland, to the purport mentioned. It will be asked, with surprise, whether Foxe, culpable as he is, affords no greater countenance to M'Pherson. Positively not. So far from pretending to have any original documents, he says expressly, in his address to the reader, "It will be objected that many of these abstracts are taken out of other books, and that those are the voyages of other men. I answer, it is true that most of them are, for what are all those of Mr Hakluyt and Mr Purchas, but the collections and preservations of other mens' labours," &c. "I have abstracted those works of my predecessors, yet I have interlaced my own experience!" &c. Chalmers adopts, like M'Pherson, the perversion of Foxe.

We are bound, therefore, to look closely to the original language of this document, which is itself, unfortunately, a mere abstract; and in endeavouring to ascertain the country intended, we naturally pause on the very expressions which have been perverted, in order to accommodate them to the modern hypothesis. The unqualified language as to the sterility of the region, is certainly more applicable to Labrador than Newfoundland, and the distinction taken between the "Terra" and the "Insula," is calculated to strengthen the presumption that the former was intended.

As to the animals of this "Terra primum visa," we are told, it is "full of white bears, and deer larger than ours”— ("ursis albo colore et cervis inusitatæ apud nos magnitudinis referta"). Now the haunts of the white bear are on the coast of Labrador, and they do not come so far South as Newfoundland in numbers to warrant such a description. The account, too, given by Peter Martyr, of the manner in which these bears catch the fish, which is their favourite food, strikingly recalls the lively description of similar scenes by Mr Cartwright, in his "Journal, during a residence of nearly

sixteen years on the coast of Labrador." It is remarkable, that most English writers have been rather reluctant to copy Cabot's representation on this point, supposing it inapplicable to Newfoundland, where, though white bears may be occasionally seen, they are not "native here and to the manner born."

The introduction of an Island, "St John," into the "Extract," has contributed to mislead, the reader naturally referring it to the one of that name in the Gulf of St Lawrence. If we recollect, however, that the Terra primum visa was discovered on the 24th June, and the island on the same day (St John's day), it will seem improbable that Cabot, on the very day of discovery, could have penetrated so far. The description, also, is inapplicable, "quæ ex adverso sita est Insula"-" that island which lieth out before the land." We must remark, further, that the present St John was so named by Cartier, in 1534 (3 Hakluyt, p. 204), he having been employed from the 10th May, when he reached Newfoundland, to 24th June, in making a circuit of the Gulf which he entered through the strait of Belle Isle. But the most important, and conclusive piece of testimony, is furnished by Ortelius, who had the map of Cabot before him, and who places an island of St John in the latitude of 56° immediately on the coast of Labrador. This is, doubtless, the one so designated by Cabot.

Thus, without calling to our aid the terms of the second patent to Cabot, which recites the discovery of a land and islands on the first voyage, we reach the conclusion, that the main discovery-the "Terra," as distinguished from the “Insula❞—could not have been the present island of Newfoundland.

There is little difficulty in tracing the history of this epithet. The whole of the northern region is designated, on the old maps, as Terra Nova, or New Land, and it has the appellation of "Newland," in the statute 33 Henry VIII. cap. ii.*

Ruffhead's Statutes at large, vol. ii. p. 304.

Robert Throne of Bristol, in 1527, speaking (Hakluyt, vol. i. p. 214) of the North-West passage, says, "and if they will take this course after they be past the Pole towards the West, they should go in the back of the Newfoundland which of late was discovered by your Grace's subjects, until they come to the back side and South Seas of the Indies Occidental;" and again (p. 219), "if between our Newfoundlands, or Norway, or Island, the seas toward the North be navigable, we should go to these Islands a shorter way by more than 2000 leagues.” On the same page, he mentions the circumstance of his father having been one of the "discoverers of Newfoundland ;"--at p. 216, refers to "the land that we found, which is called here (in Spain) Terra de Labrador,"-and in another part of the same document speaks of "the Newfound island that we discovered."

The term, then, was employed, in the first instance, as a designation of all the English discoveries in the North. That it should afterwards settle down upon an inconsiderable portion, and come to be familiarly so applied, will not appear surprising if we recollect, that for almost a century the whole region was known only as a fishing station, and regarded as an appendage to the Grand Bank, and that the island was used, exclusively, in connexion with such pursuits. When long established, these designations are beyond the reach of considerations of taste or propriety. Thus, the term West Indies, once covering the whole of America, is now limited to groups of islands on its eastern side, even after a Continent and the Pacific Ocean are known to be interposed between them and that India in a supposed connexion with which the name had its origin. Parks and Squares may be laid out and named at will, but the familiar appellation of a thronged place of business will not yield even to an Act of Parliament; "expellas furca tamen usque recurret."

CHAP. VII.

CABOT DID NOT CONFER THE NAME 66 PRIMA VISTA."

THE question as to the name Prima Vista stands apart from that which has just been dismissed, and is in itself sufficiently curious.

It is to be remembered, that the description, in Latin, is not only the highest but the only authority on the subject, and that Hakluyt had no better materials for conjecture than we now possess. From this document we gather that John and Sebastian Cabot,

"Eam terram fecerunt perviam quam nullus prius adire ausus fuit die 24 Junii circiter horam quintam bene mane. Hanc autem appellavit Terram primum visam credo quod ex mari in eam partem primum oculos injecerat.”

A passage thus translated by Hakluyt

"They discovered that land which no man before that time had attempted, on the 24th June, about five of the clock, early in the morning. This land he called Prima Vista, that is to say, first seen, because as I suppose it was that part whereof they had the first sight from sea."

It is plain, that the original map could have furnished no clue to the motive for conferring the appellation, because the suggestion of the person who prepared the "Extract," is offered, confessedly, as a conjecture. We know only that there was something on the map which led him to consider the region as designated, "Terra primum visa." This bare statement will show how utterly gratuitous is Hakluyt's assumption, that the name given was Prima Vista; for it is obviously impossible to determine, whether it was in Latin, Italian, or English.

If the name Prima Vista, or Terra primum Visa, or First Sight, was conferred, why is nothing said of it in the various conversations of Sebastian Cabot? We hear continually of

H