The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1877-05-12
. x,.,.,,..,,or Of CAPTAIN John smith.

m The Editors of the Richmond Dispatch:
Tn tbe third No. OF the articles upon the
:. CoIonial Governors of Virginia by the
Rev. +, y. NELL, which appeared IN your
,,oner OF TODAY, is, a most ur,tustlhabie at
tack upon CAPTAIN John Smith, by whose
genius and courage the infant colony IN
Virginia was preserved freq, the dire de-
struction which bcfe(l tho settlers who had
preceded him. Some years ago Mr.. ChaficS
Deanc, OF Massachusetts, rGfs,hliShed con-
fessedly garbled letter written by smith In
1908 from Virginia, in wtrch no mention
was made oi his rescue by Pocahontas--a"
incident related by Smith ia severai suhs-
eucnt publications. and notably III ms le,':S
TO the Queen, when PocahoHtaS ianoeo II.
England. bv which she was accorded mus
hono,ahIe rcceptjon at thcCourt and by the
English neople. Mr.. Dcane concluded 'i,M
hacauSc the mutilated letter OF smith d'o
NOT mention his rcsrac the subsequent az
cnuntc though some were gwen IN the h'e-
time ~ PocahontaS, and Eithous con-
frad,ction from any one thc". WV. WV,
false. and ever since Mr hcaae t"
ication cer1a'a sell 'ea i'i,,'
who think /, is wise so leave tnc o'u paths
have been carping as Captain 5o',n >'n W.,
had hnped better tSfa2s "oi r'c rev. Eur
ward u. Nciii. but am SnrW 20 l,no ni!n
pronouncing the gnat nero Oh fnS' i
colonial history -.tl,e noforla!S, Seli-liil-
,,nr,ant and ,ntrutli.f John smith, Mr..
Nn,ll gives extracts tram etters from Cap
tain Archer and Captain RatclEsc. when
orc ouoted evidently foe the purpose OF ais
n,rar;ne smith. Both OF these men were
hostile TO Smith, and Suth have been de-
scribcd bv their companions rs Saa men:
or Archer. Wiugficld che first President OF
the colony. wrote: Eas 1t was Gtai ana
natural to this honest gss,t, Mr.. .Ancher, 10
be ALWAYS Matching OF satne mutlny IN my
time. lie might have appeared an author
of three several mutinieS- Ana III ;fRotn
place he speaks Of him IS "a cohhcliloA
whose Insolvency did look upon that t1tt,e'
himself. with great-SlShtea SPectacits- oc
rogatinc from others mcrifs by Sphng out
his venemouS libclS and sEfamonS chfsh'-
cles upon them. IS doth appear in his osSn
handwriting, for which, and other worse
tricks. he had not escaped the halter ESt
that Captain Newport interposod his advice
TO the contrary.
This il the same CAPTAIN Archer who. when
Smith returned from his captivity, had MN
indicted upon chapter in LesnicuS proh-
ably LeyitieuS XXiv., 1920 ana condemn.
ed to death because the Indians bad Killed
two of Smiths men when lie was captured
holding Smith responsible with his life for
the companions he had lost in his adven-
turc: and Smith would have been bung FOR
this had not Captain Newport arrived and
prevented it. When Wing1ield MAS de-
posed, Ratc!iffc, whose true name was SIC
klemore. was made President in his stead
under articles Of agreement entered into NV
the Council. one OF which was not to take
Mr.. Archer into the Council without the
consent OF every one OF them; but Wing
field goes on TO relate that " during Smiths
absence with the Indans) the President
fRatcltfcl did swear Mr.. Archer one OF the
Council. contrary to his oath taken in the
articles agreed on between themselves, aud
contrary to the Kings Instruction. Rat
cliffe and Archer were OF the same sort,
and were great nuisances in the colony.
have quoted Wlngteld because he was I'M
friendly to Smith, and his testimony cannot
be taken as given in his interest.
1t is related in the Oxford Tract OF 1872
that when Smith went home to be cured OF
his wounds charges against him were
trumped up and sent along with him. Those
frivolous charges are given, and their refu-
tation That they made no impression on
the reputation Of Smith, and were but the
emanation OF malice, is concluSlvely shown
by the fact that Smith was afterwards made
admiral, and was honored by the sovereign
and people OF England to the day OF his
death. Mr.. Neill has chosen to pronounce
him untruthiul. AS his history has long
been accepted as standard work on Viz
gina, it would be rs well for the proofs OF
this charge to be adduced. The subject is
equally if not more interesting than any yet
touched on by the reverend writer.
May 10, 1877. W. W. Ii.