and does not wish to pursue his investigations below the year 1688.

The Undersigned requests that Mr. Savage may have access to the books in the State Paper office, including those lately removed from the Board of Trade, under such restrictions as Lord Aberdeen may think proper; - and the Undersigned cheerfully pledges himself, on behalf of Mr. Savage, that he will make use of the permission, if granted to him, in good faith, for the sole object for which it is sought.

46 Grosvenor Place, 29 June, 1842.

[Signed]

EDWARD EVERETT.

Lord Aberdeen presents his compliments to Mr. Everett, and in reply to his note of the 29th instant, requesting that Mr. James Savage of Boston, may be permitted to examine certain Records in the State Paper Office down to the year 1688, with a view to elucidate the early history of New England, has the honor to inform Mr. Everett, that orders have been given that Mr. Savage may have free access to the volumes of the State Papers prior to and including the year 1688, with reference to the object which Mr. Savage is stated to have in view.

Mr. Savage will however, like Mr. Brodhead, be expected to pursue his examination of the Volumes submitted to him in the presence of an Officer of the State Paper Office, to mark with slips of paper such Papers as he may wish to have Copies or Extracts of, and not to transcribe, or make Extracts of any of them, until the Papers so indicated shall have been examined and allowed on the part of Lord Aberdeen.

Foreign Office,

July 2, 1842.

Probably the visit to Boston, in Lincolnshire, and partial examination of its records may vindicate a claim to short notice here.

On 13 August the Records of the Municipal government were by the Mayor submitted to my inspection with full liberty to make extracts. Few formal statements of such

concerns as necessarily occupied the deliberations of Aldermen and Common Councilmen in a Provincial town two hundred years since may seem worth copying, and I selected but two dates out of a long lapse of time: "At an Assembly there holden upon Friday the xxth. day of October 1620, before the Maior, Aldermen and Common Council,"

(Here are names of absent Aldermen)

(Absent Councilmen)

The first article mentioned in the record of this meeting is receipt of payment of a sum of money from Sir John Read. "Item at this Assembly there is delivered out of the Treasury to Thomas Leverett the sum of £5. xviiis. 9d. expended by him in riding to London, and charges in Law, and for two messengers sent this last vacation, & for money expended by Mr. Askham for the copy of the Demurrer this last vacation about the town's land now in suit in the Chancery."

"At an Assembly holden at the Guildhall of the Borough of Boston in the County of Lincoln this xxiith day of July 1633 before the Maior, Aldermen & Common Council;

At this Assembly Mr. John Cotton late Vicar of Boston yielded up his place of being Vicar by his letter dated in July 1633, which this house have accepted.

At this Assembly Mr. Atherton Hough, an Alderman of this Borough, hath surrendered his place of Aldermanship within this Borough by his letters under his hand this day delivered & read at this Assembly, and this house hath accordingly accepted the same.

At this Assembly Mr. Thomas Leverett, an Alderman of this Borough hath surrendered his place of Aldermanship within this Borough by his letters under his hand delivered and read at this Assembly, and this house hath accepted thereof accordingly.

At this Assembly there was an intimation delivered to the Maior & Burgesses of this Borough from the right honorable John, Lord Bishop of Lincoln, by the hands of Mr. Thomas Cony of this town, intimating that the eight of July 1633 Mr. John Cotton, late Vicar of Boston, had resigned his said vicarage to the said Bishop, and that the said Lord Bishop did the same day at his house in the College of Westminster accept of the same resignation, and did then

pronounce the same vicarage to be actually void of Incumbent, and that he did then by the said Thomas Cony intimate to the Maior & Burgesses of Boston the voydance of the same to the end that the said Maior and Burgesses may when they please present some able person thereunto."

Forthwith the Corporation proceeded, as the Record shows, and made choice of Mr. Anthony Tuckney to be their Vicar. He, we know, became one of the most celebrated divines in England, was appointed one of the famous Westminster Assembly, and afterwards Master of Emanuel College, and Vice Chancellor of the University.

Of our Samuel Whiting of Lynn, Farmer has told, that he was son of John, mayor of Boston. The family was in high repute there, we may infer, for Thompson's History of the Borough shows, that John was mayor in 1600, and again in 1608, that John Whiting junr., probably son of the former, and brother of our divine, was Mayor in 1626, and John Whiting, reasonably to be regarded as the same gentleman, was in the same office in 1633 and again 1644 and 1655. Skirbeck church, where S. Whiting was minister, is less than a mile from Boston, which is in Shirbeck wapentake, the river Witham dividing the parishes.

In 1628 Atherton Hough was Mayor, this office being filled from the Board of Aldermen, and I doubt not it was the same man, and not, as Farmer supposes, his son, who resigned his place of Alderman, according to the record above, in 1633, when about to accompany his spiritual guide to our country, where they arrived 4 Septr. of the same

year.

By the same authority of Thompson we learn, that Richard Bellingham was Recorder of Boston from 1625 to 1633. He came in the following year, not, as Hutchinson implies, 1635.

Commock, known to our early historians as a nephew of the Earl of Warwick, I found a common family name at Boston in those times, when the records also mention an Edmund Jackson, a Thomas Scott, besides a John Wright, who was an Alderman in 1630. It may not be a worthless conjecture, that persons bearing those names here a few years later were all drawn by the influence of Cotton to be of his flock or neighborhood on this side of the ocean, if they had been taught by him in old England.

For giving the two following letters, of which the originals are in possession of one of our countrymen, domiciled in London, though they are not connected with our early history, yet being letters of Washington, hitherto unpublished, who kept no copies of them, in the opinion of Professor Sparks, apology must be unnecessary.

Copy of a letter from Washington, addressed "To the Hon. I. Palmer, Watertown."

(All in his handwriting, well known to me. J. S.)

"CAMBRIDGE, Augt. 7th, 1775.

Sir, - Your favour of yesterday came duely to my hands - as I did not consider local appointments, as having any operation upon the general one, I had partly engaged (at least in my own mind) the office of Quartermaster Genl. before your favour was presented to me. In truth, Sir, I think it sound policy to bestow offices indiscriminately among Gentlemen of the different Governm'ts. for as all bear a proportionable part towards the expence of this War, if no Gentleman out of these four Governments come in for any share of the appointments, it may be apt to create jealousies which will, in the end, give disgust; for this reason, I would earnestly recom❜d it to your Board to provide for some of the Volunteers who are come from Philadelphia, with very warm recommendations, tho' strangers to me.

-

In respect to the Boats &. from Salem, I doubt, in the first place, whether they could be brought over by Landin the second, I am sure nothing could ever by executed here by surprise, as I am well convinced that nothing is transacted in our Camp, or Lines, but what is known in Boston in less than 24 hours, indeed, circumstanced as we are, it is scarce possible to be otherwise, unless we were to stop the communication between the Country & our Camp & Lines, in which case, we sh'd render our supplies of milk, vegetables, &. difficult & precarious. We are now building a kind of Floating Battery; when that is done, and the utility of it discovered, I may possibly apply for Timber to build more, as circumstances shall require. I remain with great esteem, Sir,

y'r most h❜ble serv't.

Go. WASHINGTON."

Another letter, of same hand, addressed like the former, taken from another volume of MSS.

“ CAMBRIDGE, Augt. 22d, 1775. Sir, — In answer to your favour of yesterday, I must inform you, that I have often been told of the advantages of Point Alderton with respect to its command of the shipping going in and out of Boston Harbour; and that it has, before now, been the object of my particular enquiries - That I find the accounts differ exceedingly in regard to the distance of the ship channel,& that, there is a passage on the other side of the light House Island for all vessells except ships of the first Rate.

My knowledge of this matter would not have rested upon enquiries only, if I had found myself at any one time since I came to this place, in a condition to have taken such a Post. But it becomes my duty to consider, not only what place is advantageous, but what number of men are necessary to defend it-how they can be supported in case of an attack-how they may retreat, if they cannot be supported & what stock of ammunition we are provided with for the purpose of self defence, or annoyance of the Enemy. In respect to the first, I conceive our defence must be proportioned to the attack of Genl. Gage's whole force (leaving him just enough to man his Lines on Charles Town Neck & Roxbury) and with regard to the second, and most important object, we have only 184 Barrls. of powder in all, which is not sufficient to give 30 musket cartridges a man, and scarce enough to serve the artillery in any action a single day.

brisk

Would it be prudent then in me, under these circumstances, to take a Post 30 miles distant from this place when we already have a Line of Circumvallation at least Ten miles in extent, any part of which may be attacked (if the Enemy will keep their own Council) without our having one hours previous notice of it? Or is it prudent to attempt a measure which necessarily would bring on a consumption of all the ammunition we have; thereby leaving the army at the mercy of the Enemy, or to disperse, & the Country to be ravaged, and laid waste at discretion? To you, Sir, who is a well-wisher to the cause, and can reason upon the ef