Sir John Stanhope next accounts for the two years April 1, 1597, to March 31, 1599. Here we have the same entry of the payment to Brewster, of £60, 16s. 8d.

Again he accounts for the three years, from April 1, 1599, to March 31, 1602, with the same entry of the payment to Brewster of £91, 6s. 8d.

Sir John Stanhope accounts again from April 1, 1602, to March 31, 1605. Here we find that the daily wages of Brewster had been advanced from 20d. to 2s. a day, from the 1st of July, 1603, as expressed in the following entry: —

"William Brewster, post of Scrooby, for his wages as well at 20d. per diem for 456 days, begun the 1st of April, 1602, and ended the last of June, 1603, £38: as also at 2s. per diem for 640 days, begun the 1st of July, 1603, and ended the last of March, 1605, £102."

The next account is for two years, viz. from April 1, 1605, to March 31, 1607. Brewster receives £73.

The latest account in which Brewster's name occurs is that from April 1, 1607, to March 31, 1609:

—

"William Brewster, post of Scrooby, for his wages at 2s. per diem for 183 days, begun the first of April, 1607, and ended the last of September, 1607, £18, s.; and then Francis Hall succeeding him at 2s. per diem for 548 days, begun the 1st of October, 1607, and ended the last of March, 1609, £73, 2s."

It is much to be regretted that the name of each postmaster was not given for a few years earlier, as we should then have been able to arrive at the precise period when Brewster received this appointment, and this would have shown us how soon after the fall of Davison he was provided for by this government appointment. All we know on this head is, that he was in full possession on the 1st of April, 1594, and that he continued to hold the office till the 30th of September, 1607, on which day he resigned it, and a successor was appointed.

Now the holding this office explains to us in the first place how it happens that we find him inhabiting such a mansion as the Manor, which had been the residence of an archbishop, disproportionate we must believe to the circumstances of Brewster as a private man, but not so to one who had to keep relays of horses for forwarding the letters, and to find rest and refreshment for travellers on this the great highway to the north. The office of postmaster on the great roads in those days was one requiring more attention and bringing with it higher responsibilities than the same office at present, when it is little more than the receiving and transmitting letters on a system well con

sidered and already in full operation; but in those days there were no cross-posts, so that the few postmasters who were dotted about the country had to provide for very distant deliveries, which must have been done by special despatches, as well as to discharge the functions. of the innkeeper for the travellers by post.

In Brewster's days Roland Whyte, the lively correspondent of many of the nobility of the time, was the "Post of the Court;" and it may serve to show other acquaintance at least of Brewster, if we state, that Henry Foster was during the whole of his time the post of Tuxford; John Heyford, the post of Ferrybridge, and Nicholas Heyford, and after him, Ralph Aslaby, the post of Doncaster. Heyford and Aslaby were both respectable families in the south part of the West-riding of Yorkshire, corresponding in position, it may be believed, with the Brewsters. And this leads me to remark, that though I cannot but wish that Bradford had informed us that Brewster held this office, yet that his holding it is by no means inconsistent with what Bradford does relate of him. It does not, for instance, invalidate his having been at the University, or his having been in the service of a Secretary of State, and having fallen with his master. His holding this office is indeed rather favorable to these representations than the contrary, since it shows that he had among those who were the dispensers of government patronage. Nor in such an office would he be precluded from nursing a brood of discontents, and from comparing political chicanery with the simplicity of the Gospel, or from indulging in religious inquiry, religious meditation, and religious exercises. It would not prevent him from associating with the better part of the population around him, among whom there must have been many who were wrought upon by the preachers of whom we have spoken, or from being instrumental in bringing Puritan ministers to the neighboring churches as they became vacant; and we may believe also that it supplied the means, in some measure at least, by which he maintained so much hospitality and did so much good by his purse. It does not appear in any thing that is yet known of them that the Brewsters of Nottinghamshire had lands of their own, the chief source of income to gentlemen in those days who were not engaged in public employ

ments,

Brewster, we see, held the office till the last day of September, 1607. Here is another date of importance in his life; but now arises the question, under what circumstances did he retire from his employment; was it voluntary or forced resignation? Did he retire having formed the intention of following the example of Smith by removing

himself and his little church to Holland? or, was he removed by the government of the time to signify the disapprobation which they could not but feel at seeing the countenance which he gave to the Separatists, and that he himself was in a regular course of action which, as the law then stood, was in defiance of public authority, and subjecting him to large penalties? It may be in the power of some future inquirer to answer these questions; but for the present it must be acknowledged that it is only a proximate solution at which we can arrive; and that the probabilities seem rather to incline to its being a forced removal than a voluntary retirement. What we actually know is, that before the September of that year the Church was brought into some order: Robinson and Clifton were become the pastor and teacher, and he the elder; that in April, 1608, he had been fined by the Commissioners for Ecclesiastical Causes for non-appearance to their citation; and that it was in August, 1608, that Clifton arrived at Amsterdam. The date 1607, in Bradford's margin, leads us to suppose that he removed from Scrooby with the intention of proceeding to Holland before the close of that year.

The question which next arises in considering the proceedings of William Brewster is, at what precise period it was that the scattered elements of disaffection to the church as by law established, were brought to collect themselves about the centre at his house at Scrooby, and the dissidents became forward in a Separatist or Congregational or Independent Church, those terms being identical and only other names for the same things. That there was a precise period when this was done, and that it was not that the concentration was brought about by slow and almost imperceptible degrees, is evident from what was the general practice of communities such as these. They usually began with the entering into a solemn covenant to walk together in a Christian course according to the direction of the word of God, and the choice of the officers which, according to their views, were those, and those only, which were pointed out in Scripture: namely, as we have before stated, pastor, teacher, elders, and deacons. Manuscripts remain containing accounts of such beginnings of Separatist churches in other places of a later date, with lists of persons who then entered into communion; and greatly is it to be wished that among the discoveries in literary and religious history, the record of the first beginning of the Scrooby church should be discovered. It would be a treasure indeed for New England history, and for the Museum of New Plymouth.

This, however, is an event rather to be desired than expected, and we must be content to confine ourselves to making an approximation to the time, and to introducing a new name into our narrative, in the pastor or teacher (for it is uncertain which), whom these Basset-Lawe Separatists elected. And first with respect to the

time.

The year 1602 is placed in the margin of Bradford's account of Brewster against the notice, "After they were joined together into communion, he was a special stay and help to them. They ordinarily met at his house on the Lord's day." But this date, if there is not some mistake, must relate to an earlier church-union than that of which we are speaking, perhaps a union which comprehended also the people who afterwards composed Smith's church at Gainsborough; for Bradford also tells us that when the church in Brewster's house began to move towards Holland, which was certainly in the winter of 1607 and 1608, they had continued together, "about a year keeping their meetings every Sabbath in one place or another, exercising the worship of God amongst themselves." So that it would seem that the true beginning of this church as distinct from that of Smith, is to be fixed to the year 1606, about two years after the emigration of Smith and his people.

That Brewster was chosen the elder, and Clifton either the pastor or teacher (probably the latter), seems to admit of no doubt; but at this stage another person appears to have been introduced among them, whose name is the most prominent in all the subsequent history of the church, and who has left the most printed writings by which his opinions and character may be understood. He accompanied the Scrooby church when it removed to Holland, was with it while it remained at Amsterdam, transferred himself with it to Leyden, and witnessed its departure for America, intending, it is understood, to go thither himself, though he never actually took that step. This was John Robinson, who had inherited, like Smith, one of those names which are really in a large population like that of England, no notamina, affording, therefore, little assistance to the critical inquirer. But we know him to have been chosen into one of the highest offices in this church, and we know him, also, by the works which he left behind him, to have been a man of a superior cast of character. He was moreover a man whose writings may be read now for instruction. I cannot go so far as some persons do and value his essays with those of Bacon; but he must be insensible indeed, who

does not acknowledge that there is no small amount of original thinking in them, and hints which may be applied by any man with advantage in the regulation of his thoughts and conduct. He was also a further seeing man than some who were associated with him, seeing that having deserted the church and renounced its authority, it was not to be supposed that they and their posterity would remain stationary precisely where they at first rested, but that further light might be expected to be struck out by the labor of men of learning, and that it would be their duty as well as their privilege to follow the light that was vouchsafed to them. Historically, indeed, this has been eminently the case both in England and America, and has raised in both countries the question before the legal tribunals, how far men have a right to go in the pursuit of religious truth, who have renounced authority, and where the law shall step in and say, Thus far shalt thou go and no further. Such a man is deserving of honor, especially as he added to these something of the meekness of wisdom, much as compared with Smith and some other of the Separatists: "the most learned, polished, and modest spirit that ever that sect enjoyed." This is the testimony of Robert Baillie, of Glasgow, an eminent Scotch Presbyterian.

It must have been a great advantage to the Basset-Lawe Separatists to have secured the assistance of such a minister as this: and it now becomes a point which it is well worth while to consider, how it happened that such a connection should be formed, since among the few things which are known of the early history of Robinson this is one, that he was living in the earlier part of the reign of James the First, in the county of Norfolk, and particularly at Norwich. Now, we have already seen that two of the divines of whom we have spoken had been educated at Christ College, Cambridge, (Emmanuel College wherein many other Puritan ministers were educated, was then scarcely formed,) and among the persons who were admitted there in the year 1592, is a John Robinson who took the degree of M. A., and became a fellow in 1598. This we learn from Mr. Masters' printed list of the members of this college, 4to, 1749, and he further informs us that in the register of the college, this Robinson is said to have been of the county of Lincoln, and adding the conjecture that he is the John Robinson who subsequently lived in Holland. This appears to be a very probable conjecture; and I find Mr. Ashton, to whom I pointed out the passage in Masters, is inclined to adopt it.

The inference from it will be that he would easily become known