ways by that in which we are placed. The illumination that is about us, often renders more opaque the darkness that is around others; to judge correctly of men of other times, we must transport ourselves to their position-must see by their light, judge by their means of ascertaining right, and comprehend exactly the prevalence of correct moral principles around them. No men, more than the Fathers, could afford to allow us to strip away from them all that belonged to the time in which they lived, and to judge them by what belonged equally to all times; but we owe it to our own times, and to a grateful sense of what Providence has allowed us to derive from the virtues of the Pilgrims, to give them the benefit of the adverse circumstances in which they were placed, and to allow their advocate to plead those circumstances in extenuation of what, in our light, is discovered to be erroneous.

In conceding what we do with regard to the intolerancy of the Fathers, we must, I repeat it, not forget the times in which they lived, nor the circumstances in which they had been trained. We cannot doubt that the great principles of the rights of man, his social, political, and religious rights, were labouring in their breasts, and operating through their lives, while a portion of their conduct was influenced by some opinions inconsistent with those lofty motives, some lingering of the old elements that remained unsanctified by the operation of the new.

But we must not plead the errors in the conduct of the Fathers against the purity of their principles; we must not allow their treatment of the natives to lead us to deny their general philanthropy, nor their severity towards other sects to doubt the general charity of their hearts.

There is in the bosom of every pioneer or reformer in morals and religion, a lingering attachment to some portion of what he has left; and the heart and the affection, even the judgment itself, sometimes pay tribute to their early object, long after the faith is pledged to another: nay, I do not know but such a lingering attachment, such a blending of the last of the old with the first of the new, may be necessary to a

proper use of the latter.

Men often err in policy, who are right in principle; and they sometimes adhere to the machinery, long after they have left the measures, of a party.

High claims are made upon the gratitude of the present generation to the Pilgrim Fathers, for the permanent blessings which have resulted to us from the establishment of the true principles of civil liberty, with the foundation of Plymouth Colony. The advent of the Pilgrims is regarded as the introduction to this continent of those principles which led to our national existence, and which, by reaction, lighted up the flame of liberty on the other side of the Atlantic.

The motives of the Pilgrims are often inferred from a remarkable document which they all signed on board the Mayflower-a species of magna charta, which seemed to ascertain and insure the right of all, while it recognised a perfect equality of those rights in every member of the community; and this document is often quoted as the germ of our Declaration of Independence, and the foundation of our national constitution. Allow me to read it.

"DOCUMENT.

"In the name of God, Amen. We, whose names are underwritten, the loyal subjects of our dread sovereign lord, King James, by the grace of God, of Great Britain, France and Ireland, king, defender of the faith, &c., having undertaken, for the glory of God and advancement of the Christian faith, and honour of our king and country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia, do, by these presents, solemnly and mutually, in the presence of God and of one another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil body politic, for our better ordering and preservation, and furtherance of the ends aforesaid; and by virtue hereof, do enact, constitute, and frame such just and equal laws and ordinances, acts, constitutions, and offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general good of the colony, unto which we promise all due subjection

and obedience. In witness whereof, we have hereunto subscribed our names, at Cape Cod, the 11th day of September, in the year of the reign of our sovereign lord, King James, of England, France, and Ireland, the eighteenth, and of Scotland the fifty-fourth, Anno Domini 1620.”

This was an instrument prepared on ship-board, and intended to give authority, while it proclaimed right. I discover in it, indeed, the sentiments of Christian men, seeking the peace and harmony of their confederacy, and exhibiting a remarkable tact in insuring from all an acknowledgment of the rights of the new magistracy to prevent the violation of any ordinance enacted or adopted.

The Pilgrim Fathers were, in theory, monarchists; they had strong faith, an inherent unexamined faith, in the divine right of kings; they fled away, indeed, from the authority of King James, because he attempted to enforce the act of conformity; but had that monarch proclaimed hostility against Episcopacy, and a preference for the Independents, his royal prerogatives would have found its stoutest supporters in the emigrants.

They left England, not because there was a king with almost unlimited power, but because that king did not exercise that power in their behalf. The compact which we have just read, was no more intended for a proclamation of democracy or republicanism, than are the articles of agreement between mercantile partners. The paper was as between so many subjects; and their allegiance to the king is as promptly acknowledged as their dependence on God; nor is there any reason to believe that these Pilgrims contemplated a transfer of their allegiance, or looked for any modification in the prerogatives of the sovereign. The theory of republicanism could have had but few charms for them; they had known nothing of it in England, and all that they had read of the republics of early times, or of those of Italy of later date, could scarcely have moved in them a desire to try the experiment which would cost so much to begin, and which, from all pre

cedents, they must have believed was destined to a turbulent life and an early death.

Yet from that race of men sprung the stern asserters of human rights. On the very territory where they colonized, grew, and still exists, the purest principles of practical republicanism. The practice commenced indeed with the Fathers, and with every enlargement of the little circle that swelled. out from the rock, was an extension of this principle. The necessities of their situation compelled the Fathers to select their rulers and officers from some special adaptation of the qualities of the person to the duties of his station. And this supposes a change whenever the duties changed their character, or the abilities lost their application. Office was not only a trust and a responsibility, but it implied augmented labour. And the true theory of republicanism then seemed to be developed in practice, which the necessity of the colony demanded.

The cold, uninviting climate, and the unproductive soil of Plymouth Colony attracted no scion of aristocracy to a lieutenancy or governorship over this people; and it is a remarkable fact, that the colony passed from infancy to youth, from the gristle to the bone, without the interference of the crown, without the vampire visitation of delegated officers, without the habits or presence of one come to rule that he might live. This circumstance, you will perceive, was most favourable to the growth of republican habits; and while the colonists were constantly admitting the rights of the king, acknowledging his authority," making mention of him in their prayers," they were silently, but steadily becoming so republican in all their manners and customs, so republican in all their political and social developments, that when at length they had acquired enough consequence to provoke the interference of the crown in their behalf, they had contracted such a habit of self-government, and such a distaste for sharing their earnings with those who only came to rule, that their nonconformity in politics, in the colony, was a worse evil than their nonconformity in religion at home.

You will perceive that though I address the Sons of New England, I speak only of the Fathers of the "Old Colony," and the time will not suffice for me to do more than even hint at these patriarchs.

And so different were the objects of many of the emigrants to other parts of New England, the founders of different portions of Massachusetts Colony for example, so different their mode of procedure, that while some general characteristics are common to all who came within the first quarter of a century after the landing in Plymouth, still there was a marked difference in the Plymouth people in the mode of government, their objects, their plans, their connexion with the natives, and their treatment of Europeans of other creeds.

The people of Plymouth were rather intolerant than persecuting, although some instances of the latter may be adduced; yet it is evident that even these cases seemed to be justified more by the circumstances and conduct of the persecuted than were those of Massachusetts Colony. My remarks, though susceptible in many cases of general application to the Fathers of New England, are, however, meant specially for those of the first immigrants to that portion of the country.

We have admitted that the Pilgrims were intolerant in religion, and that they were monarchical in their political creed.

How then came that section of the country redolent with the sweets of Christian charity, and whence sprung the republican institutions which seemed by more than a century to anticipate the best work of the American Revolution?

The Pilgrims were not, as they have been represented, men of obscure condition and uninformed minds. Many of them were of elevated position in society; some had achieved honours in the stricken field; and almost all of them were men of such attainments as would give them rank among the learned even of the present day. Miles Standish possessed the boldness of a soldier with the military skill and attainments of a commander. Carver had the dignity, the coolness, the precaution, the self-command, that made him fit to be a governor; and Bradford, the gentle and the learned, would have