STRONG, REV. JONATHAN, Randolph. A Sermon, delivered at Plymouth, December 22, 1803, at the Anniversary Commemoration of the First Landing of our Ancestors at that Place. . . . Boston: . . . 1804. SULLIVAN, WILLIAM. A Discourse delivered before the Pilgrim Society, at Plymouth, on the Twenty Second Day of December, 1829. M DCCC XXX. ... Boston. ... SUMNER, CHARLES. A Finger-Point from Plymouth Rock. Remarks at the Plymouth Festival, on the First of August, 1853. In commemoration of the Embarkation of the Pilgrims. . . . Boston: . . . 1853. See also An Account, etc., 1853. TORREY, Rev. WILLIAM TURNER. A Sermon, delivered in Plymouth, Dec. 23, 1821, on the Lord's Day after the anniversary of the Landing of the Fathers. Boston: ... 1822. "TURNER, Rev. CHARLES, Duxbury. A Sermon, preached at Plymouth, December 22d, 1773. Being the Anniversary Thanksgiving, in Commemoration of the Landing of the Fathers there, A. D. 1620.... Boston: ... M,DCC,LXXIV. WEBSTER, DANIEL, Boston. A Discourse, delivered at Plymouth, December 22, 1820. In Commemoration of the first Settlement of New-England. . . . Boston: . . . 1821. WEST, Rev. SAMUEL, Dartmouth. An Anniversary Sermon, Preached at Plymouth, December 22d, 1777. In grateful Memory of the first Landing of our pious New-England Ancestors In that Place, A.D. 1620. ... Boston: [No date, but 1778] ... WINSLOW, EDWARD, Jr., Plymouth. 1771. Printed in 2 Proceedings Massachusetts Historical Society, iii. 416–417. WINTHROP, ROBERT CHARLES. Oration on the Two Hundred and Fiftieth Anniversary of the Landing of the Pilgrim Fathers at Plymouth. 21 December, 1870. ... Boston: . . . 1871. See also PROCEEDINGS, etc., 1871. WISNER, Rev. BENJAMIN BLYDENBURG. Influence of Religion on Liberty. A Discourse in commemoration of the Landing of the Pilgrims, delivered at Plymouth, December 22, 1830. . . . Boston: . . . 1831. WORCESTER, Rev. SAMUEL MELANCTHON. New England's Glory and Crown. A Discourse, delivered at Plymouth, Mass., December 22, 1848. . . . Salem: . . '1849.1 ... YEADON, RICHARD. Speech of Richard Yeadon, Esq., of Charleston, S. C. at the Pilgrim Celebration, at Plymouth, Mass., August 1, 1853. Extract from the Boston Courier, August 5th, 1853. “On the first page we have placed the patriotic speech of Mr. Yeadon, at the Pilgrim Dinner, at Plymouth, on the 1st instant, which speech was complimented by hisses from certain crazy and rabid abolitionists." New-York: . . . 1853. See also PROCEEDINGS, etc., 1853.2 ... 1 Another edition has this title: "New England's Glory and Crown. A Discourse, delivered at Plymouth, Mass., December 22, 1848. . . . Second Edition. Boston: . . . 1849." 2 The corner-stone of the monument erected at Provincetown was laid August 20, 1907 (see p. 293, above), and the monument was dedicated August 20, 1910. The proceedings on both occasions were printed in a book bearing the following title: "The Pilgrims and their Monument By Edmund J. Carpenter, Litt.D. . . . Illustrated. . . New York MCMXI” ... The reading of this paper was followed by a long discussion. Mr. ARTHUR LORD pointed out the similarity of creed between the Pilgrims of Plymouth and the Puritans at Salem and Boston, and the greater liberality of the Plymouth colonists in the interpretation of their beliefs and laws. The Rev. EDWARD HALE asked whether it was not a fact that the Plymouth people brought their Congregationalism with them, while the people of the Massachusetts Colony adopted it only after their settlement here, and to some extent under the influence of the Plymouth Colony. The Rev. Dr. WILLIAM W. FENN spoke as follows: With reference to Mr. Hale's question, it is to be remembered that the Dorchester church was organized, after the Congregational fashion, before that company of Puritans left England. This would seem to indicate that, at least among the more "forward" of the Puritans, there was substantial agreement with the Separatists as to polity as well as to theology. This is corroborated by Endicott's letter to Bradford in which he says of the Plymouth way, as it had been reported to him by Dr. Fuller, that it was the same which he himself had "professed and maintained ever since the Lord in mercy revealed himself unto me; being far from the common report that hath been spread of you touching that particular." That final clause reminds us that in some respects Robinson's company at Leyden differed from the Separatists at Amsterdam, and hence was sometimes called Semi-Separatist. This was owing to their more liberal attitude towards private and public communion with "the godly" of the Church of England which Robinson, after an earlier period of refusal, subsequently permitted. The fact is that Robinson's company was much less quarrelsome and intolerant than the company at Amsterdam: had it not been, had dissensions arisen at Plymouth like those of the Johnsons, White, Studley, Smith, and Ainsworth, which rent the church at Amsterdam, the Pilgrims might not have survived their first winter here. Moreover, it was because of this milder temper that they were able to enter into fellowship with the Puritans of Massachusetts Bay. Mr. GEORGE L. KITTREDGE said he wished that the term Puritan could be eliminated from scientific historical use, inasmuch as it never had a settled meaning such as attaches to "Congregationalist" or "Roman Catholic" (which are terms that everybody understands); and further reinarked that laws against witchcraft have nothing to do with the question of toleration. Mr. ANDREW MCF. DAVIS read the following paper: THE CHANGE IN THE EDITORSHIP OF THE The Charter of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay was annulled in 1684. When the records of the Colony were published the editor continued his work down to 1686, the time when the new government of a President and Council was established. Since Shurtleff's day there has been no official publication of any of the records of the government of Massachusetts Bay, whether of the President and Council, the revived Colony, or of the Province. In 1865, when those who were interested in the matter sought to secure a continuation of the publication of historical material relating to the Province of Massachusetts Bay, they selected for their purpose the laws of the Province instead of the records. A commission was appointed to prepare for publication a complete copy of the statutes and laws of the Province and State of Massachusetts Bay from the time of the Province Charter to the adoption of the Constitution, including all sessions acts, private and public, general and special, temporary and perpetual passed from time to time by the General Court, all incorporations of towns and parishes, and all other legislative acts, of legal or historical importance, appearing on the records of the General Court, with suitable marginal references to the statutes and decisions of the Province and Commonwealth, the orders of the king in council, and such other authorities as in their opinion might enhance the value and usefulness of the work, and to append to the same a complete index. Of course, there is much of economic and social interest to historians to be found in the laws, but it may be doubted whether the political importance of the records might not have made it better to have selected the records for publication rather than the laws. For instance, through the publication of the laws we gain no knowledge whatever of the fact that the elder Cooke at the very outset of legislative action in the Province protested against the assignment of a salary to the Royal Governor, thereby at once establishing a precedent which was continued during the entire days of the Province and which drew the lines in the Assembly between the Loyalists and the Colonials, thus permanently establishing two parties in that body. Another incident may be referred to which happened in the days when Joseph Dudley was Governor. Dudley prorogued the Court and in doing so said to the Representatives in substance, "You would better go home, you are not earning your money here. You are doing nothing, and you would better go back to your constituents." Thereupon the Representatives, before final adjournment, voted to publish their Journal and to distribute copies amongst their constituents in order to show that the statement of the Governor was not true. This custom was followed thereafter during the entire period of the Province, with the result that it created a body of politicians scattered throughout the entire Province, who were familiar with current political events. The way was thus prepared for the cordial reception of the inflammatory material distributed by the committees of correspondence just prior to the Revolution. But, whether or no it would have been better to select the laws or the records, the order to prepare the copy was in the form already stated, and two years afterwards, in 1867, an appropriation for the publication of one volume in the course of the following year was made by the General Court. This brought to the notice of the commission and of those interested in the publication, the fact that marginal references to documents were totally inadequate for the purposes for which the references were made, and after consultation with the Governor of the State it was concluded to go ahead and publish the volume in the form which prevailed during the time the work was carried on under the general authority to publish conferred in 1867. The work of editing the publication fell into the hands of Abner C. Goodell, who continued in office down to the year 1896. During these twenty-nine years he published five volumes, covering the public laws from 1692 to 1780, and two volumes of the resolves covering from 1692 to 1707. These volumes of Resolves were numbered 7 and 8. Volume 6 was set aside for the private laws and was only partially prepared at that time, twenty-nine chapters having been stereotyped, twenty-seven of which had been annotated and the notes thereto also stereotyped. The ninth volume at that time was also partially completed. During the latter part of this period considerable opposition to the publication of the laws manifested itself each year when the question of making an appropriation came before the Legislature. This opposition was engendered by two classes of persons: those who were absolutely opposed to the publication of the laws under any circumstances, believing it to be a waste of money; and those who were opposed to Mr. Goodell as editor, either through a belief that he was too dilatory in his work or through actual hostility to him personally. The friends of the measure contended. that the publication having once begun should be completed, inasmuch as it would throw needed light on the incorporation of many towns and on many questions of social and economic importance. They also urged that the services of Mr. Goodell were of special value in connection with the work and ought to be secured. Their work before committees of the legislature was often made more difficult by Mr. Goodell himself, whose independent personality would not permit him to modify his methods or conciliate his opponents. There were at that time three officials at the State House whose friendship would have been of the utmost value to him, but with all of whom he was constantly at odds. One was the Sergeant-atArms, who had charge of the rooms at the State House and of the assignment of rooms there and in the buildings rented for officers employed by the State. Mr. Goodell complained that during these twenty-nine years of work on the Province Laws his force had been shifted from room to room thirteen times. In all probability he might have avoided some of these changes if he had been more friendly with the Sergeant-at-Arms. Another was the State Librarian, who had charge of a set of records the volumes of which Mr. Goodell wanted to consult from time to time and frequently wanted to take to his rooms. It would have been, of course, much better |