Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1893-02-05


thinking OF giving it up they imme-
diately sent out vessel with ga years
competent provision for the whole colo
n.y." So far from being discouraged,
| they became more determined than ever
to carry the undertaking forward to sue
cess. The magnitude Of the obstacles
| which had 10 be met and
overcome, in England, in Spain en- route,
and in Virginia, before the colony was
regarded as settled plantation cannot
be overestimated, and yet they have
scarcely been considered at all. The
men on whom the existence and contln-
uance of the enterprise was depending
for many years have been described as
marplots, while we have been taught
TO believe that Virginia was founded by
| a vain adventurer, dressed in little brief
authority, "laying Englishmen by the
heals" and pow-wowing with the INDIANS
! And this has been done largely on
blind faith in evidence collected, com
piled, written, edited. or published by
the adventurer himself.
THE REPLY TO THE OXFORD TRACT.
/ do not remember stating "that the
company never undertook to deny the
statements OF The Oxford Tract" or
"to have admitted that they stood mute
at the bar of public opinion" but for
cogent reasons DO not believe that they
ever took any notice of it in print The
only complete reply that | know OF IS
still in manuscript. ] have said, how
ever, that it could not be relied on.
And a reliance thereon has led Mr..
Henry, and will lead any one else who
attempts to follow It, into erroneous
| ideas. At the same time ! believe that
| il Smith had rested his case Oh his own
True Relation" or even on this
tract, although it wonld not have been
q strong case, it would have been much
stronger than it is but he continued to
write until he proved his own written
words TO be Enthusiastically, and thus de-
stroyed his own case.
Mr.. Henry insists upon my injustice
| to Smith, but he has never a word
about Smiths injustice to others. tie
Gays that 1 have perslstently attempted
to discredit everything written to the
advantage of Smith, etc. and as an
act of justice to me he should have SAID
that my reason for doing this was be-
cause the acceptation thereof would he
| to the disadvantage OF others
| Ex-PARTE EVIDENCE.
am not a member of "the school OF
so-called higher criticism who fancy
that they can overturn established
authorities by fanciful theories but J
| do not believe that the historian can
safely follow cr-pGTte evidence even
when it does not evidently reflect on
characters or motives, and that 1t is I'M
possible for him to do so when 1t does.
And all the evidence as it accumulatcs
before me goes to prove that great
mistake has been made by accepting
"as correct" such evidence as that OF
Smith and his authors-a mistake
which wac only justified by necessity,
which knows no law" SO late rs l1Sl
Jefferson wrote that Smiths history was
"almost the only source from which we
derived any knowledge of the infancy
of our State.
| NEWPORT AND SPAIN.
The Spaniards were never able to cap
ture Newport. the admiral OF Virginia,
but the first ship sent ont by the North
Virginia Company was taken by them
and carried to Spain. Captain Daniel
Tucker, one Of the officers, soon made
his escape to England, and on February
4. 1907, wrote relation OF the capture,
which Sir Ferdinando Gorges immedi-
ately sent to Cecil, the Secretary of
State. and the matter began to be looked
after at once. On February 26th this
matter, with others, was brought before
the House of Commons, where las we'll
as before the House of Lords it was a
subject of consideration for months.
Spain would not give up the prisoners
save under conditions which England
was not willing to agree to. Letters OF
maraue against Spain were asked for,
but it was found to be inadylsable to
grant them.
While thus matter was still being con-
sidered Captain Newport returned from
South Virginia, and as soon as possible
thereafter the Spanish Ambassador II
England had an audience with James l.,
and in the name of Philip Ill,
Of Spain protested against the English
occupancy of Spanish territory. Tc
make a long story short, the English
government could accomplish nothing
openly without breaking the treaty and
going to war with Spain, and 1t was
deemed best to manage the affair or
the Diplomatic plan il possible. At the
same time the issue between the govern
ments of England and Spain was dis
tinctly made, and what in the beginning
although national. was comparatively
a small affair became large and de
termined undertaking. i'll which the
claims, the rights, and the honor OF The
English crown and people were at stake
SMITHS MOTIF.
The motif of Smiths history is t.
magnify events in Virginia under The
charter of 1906, and to give Smith the
credit therefor but as q matter OF fac
the colony never prospered under thu
first form of government. No colony
was established under the first charter
and it was because the colony wen
rather backwards than forwards y undel
this government and charter that it wa
"resolved to alter them and to tail mor'
, lively and substantially to the bussinesse.
The Virginia Company of London, on
OF the most powerful companies eve
organized, was incorporated with erea
privileges aud powers. The Secretar,
Of State, the diplomatic head Of tn
English government, was at the hea'
of the company, and the govern
ment itself, was Immediately be
hind it. This company undertook
to settle that part of Virginia whicl
adjoined the acknowledged territory o
Spain and which was claimed by Spain
| on the strong grounds of actual pr'o
, discovery, surrey, and settlement
, And one Of the reasons for this under
taking was "the inestimable adyantag
, that would be gained to this State o
/ England in time of war by establishing
4 the colony in Virginia. both for the cas-
assaulting of the Spaniard's West Indie
from those parts, and for the relieving
of all ships and men of-war tina
/ should 60 there on reprlsals. The
, virtually threw down the gauntle
| l.,