{"1": {"fulltext": "", "height": "2916", "width": "1960", "jp2-path": "replytocriticism00mease_0001.jp2"}, "2": {"fulltext": "LIBRARY OF CONGRESS\\n,...rllllll!IMItllimimiliill!lld]\\n014 311 803 4(", "height": "2969", "width": "2006", "jp2-path": "replytocriticism00mease_0002.jp2"}, "3": {"fulltext": ".44\\n.M6\\nCopy 1\\n^]i!^m^\\nCRITICISMS BY J. N. BARKER,\\nKXSTOHXCAI. FACTS\\n^I\\nm ^mi^AwmmwmiA,\\n^5 \u00c2\u00a9M\\nBY JAMES MEASE, M. D.\\n\u00c2\u00bbI\u00c2\u00a3MBER OF THE PENN SOCIETV Or PHILADELPHIA\\nFtlTLADEXPHIA\\nClark (y RascT) Printers, 33 Carter s .lllty.\\n1828,", "height": "2916", "width": "1960", "jp2-path": "replytocriticism00mease_0003.jp2"}, "4": {"fulltext": "Mi*", "height": "3026", "width": "1882", "jp2-path": "replytocriticism00mease_0004.jp2"}, "5": {"fulltext": "REPLY, c.\\nTo the Penn Society.\\nIn the notes which Mr, Barker has added to his Address\\ndelivered before the Penn Society, on our anniversary,\\nOctober 24, 1827, he has criticised several passages in my\\nPicture of Philadelphia, impugned my accuracy, and denied\\nsome of my historical facts respecting the early events on the\\nDelaware. As I took great pains to collect the materials for\\nthe compilation of the few pages of notices I have given re-\\nspecting those events, and the early history of Pennsylvania,\\nI was much concerned at his remarks; and have therefore\\nagain consulted the various works from which I obtained the\\nmaterials for the statements I have given, in order to ascertain\\nwhether I had committed any error. The result has been,\\na full confirmation of all my positions, (with one trifling ex-\\nception,) and this I shall now prove, to the entire satisfac-\\ntion, as I hope, of our Society.\\nI. The first criticism to which I shall reply, is as follows,\\np. 14.\\nDr. Mease, in Picture of Philadelphia, p. 2, says that Lord\\nDelaware discovered and named the bay after himself, in\\n1610. I can find no authority for this.\\nMy authorities were, 1. Dr. Douglass, who says Sir\\nWalter Raleigh having forfeited his patent by his attainder,\\nanno 1606, several adventurers petitioned the king for grants.\\nThe company did not thrive; and, anno 1609, they surren-\\ndered their charter, and a new patent was issued in the name\\nof the Treasurer and Council. This new company appointed\\nLord Delaware general, or governor, by approbation of the\\ncrown. By mistake of the mariners, he fell in with Penn-", "height": "3092", "width": "1878", "jp2-path": "replytocriticism00mease_0005.jp2"}, "6": {"fulltext": "4\\nsylvania Bay, instead of Cliesapeake, or Virginia Bay? and\\ngave name to it, which it retains to this day.\\n2. Acrelius also says that Lord D. gave his name to the bay\\nand river. t The authority of this writer is deemed high by\\nMr. B.\\n3. Campanius Holm also mentions that Lord D. discovered\\nthe bay 4\\nThese were my authorities for the account I have given of\\nthe discovery and naming of the bay and river Delaware.\\nThe respectability of the two last will not be doubted by\\nMr. B., because he frequently refers to them in his Address;\\nand I am not in the least uneasy as to the degree of reliance\\nwhich he may attach to the first, although he is quite as much,\\nnay, more entitled to credit, than Ogilby, who is quoted by\\nMr. B. as worthy of attention. My object is to show,\\nthat I did not invent the story of the discovery of the bay,\\nby Lord D., and his naming it after himself; and that if Mr.\\nB. could find no authority for these facts, I can.\\nSubsequent researches have confirmed what 1 had stated.\\nEbeling says, Lord D. discovered the bay on his voyage to\\nVirginia, and gave it name and De Vries, when he went\\nto Virginia for provisions in 1633, after the massacre of the\\nDutch settlers on the Delaware, by the Indians, was told by\\nthe governor, that the south bay was by them [the Eng-\\nlish] named my Lord Delaware s Bay, who some years ago,\\nwas forced in there by bad weather, but that having found\\nthat place full of banks, they had never looked after it again,\\nbut that nevertheless it was their king s land, and not New\\nNetherlands. This shows at least, that the belief of the\\nDouglass Summary Hist, anil Pol. of the British Settlements in N. A.\\nVol. 2cl, p. 390. Boston, 1751.\\nf Acount of the Swedish Congregation, in the so called Ne*r Sweden,\\np. 3. Stockholm, 1759.\\nNya Swerige, p. 28.\\nHistory of Pennsylvania, p. 127.\\nII De Vries Journal, in 4to. Alkmaar, 1665, in Du Simitiere s MSS. Col-\\nlection of the Library Company of Philadelphia.", "height": "3082", "width": "1810", "jp2-path": "replytocriticism00mease_0006.jp2"}, "7": {"fulltext": "visit of Lord D. to the river was general among the En-\\nglish.\\nI shall make no comment upon the circumstance of the\\nJournal of De Vries, and of the works by Holm and Acre-\\nlius, having been quoted, and I presume, therefore, examined,\\nby Mr. B., nor upon his saying he could find no authority\\nfor what I had stated, after giving us reason to believe that\\nhe had consulted one of the works I mention, and another,\\nin which the testimony of this last is confirmed. The fact\\nof Lord D. having entered the bay, is as well establislied as\\nany other respecting the history of the United States. He\\narrived in Virginia, June 9, 1610, the year after Hudson, in\\nIhc Half Moon, had been there,* and may probably have en-\\ntered the bay in the month of May, of the same year. Now,\\nas it was impossible for him to obtain the knowledge of Hud-\\nson s visit to the same water. Lord D. s visit was substantially\\na discovery, and he may therefore have deemed himself jus-\\ntified in giving his name to the bay, in conformity to the prac-\\ntice of voyagers, who call countries, bays, straits, sounds, and\\nrivers, which they first discover, or think they first disco-\\nvered, after themselves. Hudson, Bheering, Frobisher, Lan-\\ncaster, Davis, and Baffin, are cases in point, and a hundred\\nothers might be mentioned. Some have immortalized them-\\nselves in this way, for supposed discoveries, to which they\\nhad no just title; of this Amerigo Vespucci is a striking\\nexample.\\nn. The second criticism respects the etymology of the\\nword Schuylkill. Mr. B. says\u00e2\u0080\u0094 The idea of Dr. M.,\\nthat in all probability its low Dutch appellation was derived\\nfrom the circumstance of the secret settlements of the peo-\\nple of Maryland on its shores, is not happy.\\nIf not happy, it would have been but fair to give the\\nwhole paragraph, instead of a part only, because it would\\nthen be seen, that if one explanation of the name could not\\nHudson s visit to the b.iy is noticed in tlie Picture of Philadelphia, p. 2.", "height": "3092", "width": "1878", "jp2-path": "replytocriticism00mease_0007.jp2"}, "8": {"fulltext": "6\\nbe sustained, I was right in another; and that the etymology\\nat least, of the word, was perfectly happy; so happy, that\\nMr. B. himself has adopted it in p. 16.\\nIn page 19, of the Picture of Philadelphia, I say Most\\nof our rivers retain their Indian names; but Schuylkill signi-\\nfies, in Low Dutch, hidden river,^ or hiding river, an\\nappellation derived, in all probability, from the circumstance\\nof the secret settlements of the people of Maryland upon its\\nshores, or from its running into the interior, beyond the\\nresearches of the settlers.\\nI obtained the knowledge of the etymology of the word\\nSchuylkill in the following way Upon mentioning to my\\namanuensis, who understood Low Dutch, that I had heard\\nthe late Dr. Barton say, the word Schuylkill was the only\\nname of all our rivers, the derivation of which puzzled him,\\nas it was certainly not Indian; he said, it was comj)osed of\\ntwo words, schuyl, hidden, and kill, creek. I then\\nrecollected, that in New York, there were many streams to\\nwhich the word kill* is attached to some preceding word, to\\ndenote their size, locality, or some other circumstance, and\\nrelying upon the knowledge of the Dutch language by my\\nclerk, for the meaning of the word schuyl, I ventured to\\ngive the English of the compound, iiidden, or hiding\\nriver. I was giatificd afterwards to find liiat Chalmerst and\\nProudt gave the same etymology of the word Schuylkill. It\\ncertainly was no unreasonable supposition, that the Dutcii called\\nthe river hiding, from the circumstance of the secret settle-\\nments of the Marylanders upon its shores, fiom which, it is\\nwell known, they weredriven, in 1042, by a force in two sloops,\\nsent b} Keift, the governor of New Netherlands but as this is\\nnot deemed a happy idea, by Mr. B., he must be content-\\ned with the other, and probably the just, explanation, but\\nwhich he has thought jjroper to omit. Had Mr. B. not been\\nKline-kill, Kaader s-kill, Kaats-kiil, c. c.\\nt Political Annals, p. 632, Vol. 2, p. 251.\\nf) Picture of Philadelphia, p. 4 and Proud, vol. i. p. 110.", "height": "3082", "width": "1810", "jp2-path": "replytocriticism00mease_0008.jp2"}, "9": {"fulltext": "disposed to find fault, he would have given both, and quoted\\nme fully. As he is in the daily practice of dispensing\\njustice between man and man, it is to be regretted, that he\\nshould have evinced a disposition to withhold it on the pre-\\nsent occasion.\\nIII. I state that Sven Scutz, the commander of Fort Casi-\\nmir, on the present site of New Castle, when taken by the\\nDutch, in 1654 or 1655, had lost a leg in the Dutch service.\\nMr. B. says that it was Stuyvesant, his conqueror, who had\\nlost a leg in the Dutch service: insinuc^^ing, in course, that\\nSven had fortunately saved his limb. I distinctly remem-\\nber to have met with the fact of a similar misfortune having\\noccurred to Sven, in two of the numerous works which I\\nconsulted, when compiling the historical notices of the early\\nsettlements on the Delaware, and I considered it as well es-\\ntablished as any other I have recorded; but the most diligent\\nresearches have not enabled me to find the fact again. The\\ncircumstance was coupled with an apology for his tame sub-\\nmission to the Dutch, and mentioned to show that he had\\nbeen a soldier, and therefore did not yield from cowardice,\\nbut from a conviction of the inutility of resistance to an\\noverwhelming force and this apology which I made for him,\\nwas suggested by one of the authors, to whom I was indebted\\nfor the fact. I now think he was not entitled to it.\\nIV. Mr. B. says\u00e2\u0080\u0094 It was on the 2Sth August, 1609,\\nwhile coasting northwardly, not southwardly, (see Picture of\\nPhiladelphia, p. 2,) that Hudson discovered our bay.\\nThe expression southwardl}^, was used by me, in refer-\\nence to the course of Hudson from Newfoundland to our\\ncontinent and not to his voyage along our coast. The ex-\\npression, therefore, southwardly, in the sense I used it, is\\ncorrect. Hudson entered our bay when coming from Vir-\\nginia, and it is true was then pi oceeding northwardly, as\\nstated by Mr. B.\\nV. Mr. B. says I am mistaken in saying, that on the ar-\\nrival of De Vries, the bay was called Nieiiwport-Mey, after\\nan early Dutch navigator j and adds De Vries called it", "height": "3092", "width": "1878", "jp2-path": "replytocriticism00mease_0009.jp2"}, "10": {"fulltext": "Q\\nJ0 014 311 803 4\\nGodyn s Bay, after his employer, Godyn. It had been Nieiiw-\\nport-Mey seven years previously. This is too bad. To\\nmisquote an author, and then assert that he is mistaken as to\\nfact, and make the false quotation the ground of a critique\\nMy words are In 1630, under the direction of P. De\\nVries, the Dutch extended their settlements up the Delaware,\\non the western side, as far as Bompt Hook, which they call-\\ned Swaandale. The eastern cape of the bay they called Cape\\nMey, after Cornelius Jacobs Mey, an early Dutch American\\nnavigator. The bjur was named Nieiiwport-Mey, and Go-\\ndyn s Bay, from Samuel Godyn, an eminent merchant of\\nAmsterdam, who was greatly interested in the first settle-\\nment of the New Netherlands, and is frequently mentioned\\nby P. De Vries in his account of the country.\\nAll this is given on the best authority. The brevity\\nwhich I thought proper to observe in my narrative of the\\nearly settlements of the river, induced me to omit the parti-\\nculars respecting the engagement of De Vries with some of the\\nDutch West India Company, who employed him* to make a\\nsettlement on the south bay; but Mr. Moulton, in his interest-\\ning History of New York, has given it at length (p. 405} j\\nand Mr. Barker has abridged it, p. 16, omitting, however, to\\ngive credit to Mr. M. I did not specify the precise time,\\nwhether before or after the arrival of De Vries, that the dif-\\nferent names were given to the capes and the bay, because I\\ncould not ascertain it.\\nMey was certainly an early American navigator, for he\\ncame to Manhattan with timely supplies, in the year 1623,\\nand in that year, or the next, settled on South Bay; but\\nthere is no proof that Godyn s name was given to the bay\\nby De Vries. On this subject I shall treat presently.\\nMr. B. calls Godyn the employer of De Vries, as if there were no\\nother persons concerned with him; whereas, Godyn was only one of four of\\nthe nineteen directors of tlic West India Company, who determined to form\\nthe; colony on South llivor, and l)c Vrirs accepted of the command of the\\nvessel, from tliem, on condition of his being coequal in every thing with the\\nothers. The partners were, Godyn, Van Kensselaer, Bloemart, De Laet,\\nand De Vries.", "height": "3082", "width": "1810", "jp2-path": "replytocriticism00mease_0010.jp2"}, "11": {"fulltext": "", "height": "3092", "width": "1878", "jp2-path": "replytocriticism00mease_0011.jp2"}, "12": {"fulltext": "LIBRARY OF CONGRESS\\n014 311 803 4^", "height": "3082", "width": "1810", "jp2-path": "replytocriticism00mease_0012.jp2"}}