The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1893-01-20
CAPTAIN JOHN SMITH.
AN INTERESTING LECTURE Ar
RICHMOND COLLEGE LAST NIGHT.
1Ir. Charles Poipdcxter Regards tho Ac-
count of John Smiths Experience at
Jamestown ~ Authentic.


delivered an address before the Society 70
Geographical and Historical Study In tina
institution.
In the absence Of Professor +. w. Boat
wright, the president of the society. Pro
fessor ii. ii. Harris introduced the speak
er. Professor Harris said that the sub
5oct OF the address. Captain John Smith
and his Critics." was one which was OF
peculiar interest to Virginians. and espe
ciaily TO the people of Richmond, since
the scene of the account of John Smith
and Pocahontas was in close proximity
70 this city
There we're various theories advanced
in regard to the life and rescue OF captain
Smith.
Some regard II as fiction. and do not
believe that there ever was such man
as Smith.
Others look upon the account as history,
and are averse TO the idea that smith
,never lived. Professor Harris advanced
no theory himself, but introduced MI
poindexter, whom he said had given the
subject a great deal OF careful study ana
was prepared to discuss the subject from
every point OF view.
The speaker stated that his address was
statements which are attributed TO CaS'
tain Smith himself in reference 10 ms
soiourn and experiences among the IN
dams In the vicinity Of Jamestown
He took the ground that the account
"a history. and brought some very strong
arguments to the support Of his position.
Mr.. Poindexter spoke in part as follows'
The charge is founded on statements IN
n book attributed 10 John Smith, ana
x{11, N l.
most say, discovered not many years ago.
brought TO light by the zeal that or late
years has so diligently ransacked ancient
records and books for everything bearing
on early American history. This little
book. the so-called Relation OF virginia
Is the earliest known published work re-
lating TO the settlement at jamestown
having been printed in London In looo'
Among other things, It contains YER
sion OF John Smiths captivity. so difrer-
ent on the account as published some
years later in John Smiths history as TO
cast the gravest suspicion on one OF the
two narratives, which are utterly incon-
sistent-in effect, contradictory. IL one
IS true. the other is false.
The critics insist that the account in the
earlier Relation" must be accepted as
the TRUE and credible story because
written just after the captivity, when the
events were recent anu fresh III JOHl
Smiths mind: and charge that the story
of rescue by Pocahontas. as told in the
history-as familiar to us and generally
received-is an invention" embellish-
ment," they call it-prompted by vanity,
and by John Smiths fondness for making
n hero of himself
Let us look into the credibility Of the
matter. and see what is John Smith re-
sponsible therefor.
There are three books on Virginia bear
ing John Smiths name-the Relation"
published in 1905: the Map, with Descrip-
lions. &c." published in 1912, and the
History Of Virginia" published in 1924.
With only the first and last-named RE
lation" and History" we have now to
do, as relating to John Smiths captivity
and bearing on the question Of his credi-
bility and Veracity.
The so-called Relation Is small
pamphlet of less than forty pages, so
rare and obscure. so lost in oblivion, that
1t may be said to have been practically
unknown till some fifty years ago. when
IL was unearthed and brought TO light.
A copy of it turned up in New York, and
was reprinted as a historical curiosity in
our South. Literary Messenger 1S45)
Afterwards, in 1866. il was reprinted in
Boston, with an elaborate introduction
and notes by Mr.. Charles Deane, in which
he. for the first time, discovers the varia-
lions between narratives of the "Rela-
ton" and History" and formulates the
charges against John Smiths veraclty.
This "Relation" was originally. in 1908.
edited and published in London, by one
~. H." whoever he was, for nobody
knows. 1t purported to be. and is a YER
sion OF a letter from Virginia by John
Smith TO a friend In England, unknown,
though the question OF authorship might
be contested. The unknown editor -.
H." fortunately wrote a preface TO his
publication, from which we know that
as printed by him it is certainly not the
letter originally written by Smith.
In this preface ii is announced that,
Somewhat more was by him, the au-
thor, written, which. being as l thought,
fit to be private l would not adventure
TO make II public" The cases, as against
Smith, might be rested just here. on the
reasonable ground that the omitted or
suppressed parts of the letter, II really
his. may have been statements that would
make the narrative entirely or substan-
TALLY consistent with the account pub
lished by him in later years, for which he
is responsible.
For. YOU cannot hold man responsible
for statements attributed TO him in a
publication acknowledged to be garbled,
as against his own genuine and authentic
but different statement about the same
transaction; and more than that. when
the first statement or publication was
utterly Unauthorized and Lever acknowl-
edged by him, as we shall see is the case
here. unless. indeed, he Is proven to be
SO unreliable that his authentic state
ments cannot be accepted. or that they
are inconsistent with we'll known facts;
but we do not now insist on this view of
the case. especially as the first edition
OF the letter was printed without the
preface referred to- published without
any explanation and without any name
OF the author on the title page. 1t must
be borne I'm mind that the letter was
printed without Smiths knowledge or
consent he being at the time in Virginia.
5000 miles away, and that the editor and
publisher of II acknowledges an unauthor-
lied. and even surreptitious possession
and handling Of a private letter, when he
says In his preface: Happening upon this
Relation" by chance as take 1t at sec
ond or third hand, | thought good TO
publish IT," The preface, as a whole, is
a curious example of the worst style Of
its day--a mixture Of the then fashionable
conceits prevalent among Euphuistic
wits and witlings From its opening SEN
fences Of poor stage player illustrious TO
its closing pages Of affected piety and
zeal for religion, IL is pointed with affec-
tations that arouse suspicion of the gen
uineness of the work il heralds 10 the
world Of courtiy sinners and Puritan
saints, who might be interested or induced
10 become interested in the novel enter
prise. whose hopes and merits it pro-
claims.
SO much, in brief for the character Of
the preface TO the Relation" As TO the