sale, after four years, when publishing Gorges's book, he took upon himself the responsibility of working in and off his dead stock. As soon as Gorges found out this trick of his publisher, he inserted in the Mercurius Publicus newspaper of the 13 Sept., 1660, the following

"ADVERTISEMENT.

"I FERDINANDO GORGES, the entituled Author of a late Book, called AMERICA PAINTED TO THE LIFE, am injured in that additional Part, called SION'S SAVIOUR IN NEW ENGLAND, (as written by SIR FERDINANDO GORGES;) that being none of his, and formerly printed in another name, the true owner.'

The book had been published some eighteen months before this disclaimer appeared; at least, the indefatigable collector, Thomason, appears to have secured a copy on the 2 March in the preceding year. In what part of England Gorges was living at this precise period I am not aware. The concluding statement in the above "Advertisement," that the book in question had been formerly printed in another name, is not strictly true, if by "another name " Gorges meant the author's name. All copies that I have seen were printed anonymously, but with a preface signed T. H. What Gorges meant was that the book had been previously issued, with no indication, either by publisher or editor, that Sir Ferdinando Gorges was the author, but under entirely different auspices. He now claims to have been fraudulently dealt with in the publishing of that book, in connection with his own tracts, as having been written by his grandfather.

In conclusion, I ought to add that our Corresponding Member, Mr. Poole, the accomplished librarian of the Chicago Public Library, edited an edition of Johnson, published in Boston in 1867. He examined at great length the question here referred to, and gave judgment against Gorges. It is a satisfaction now to be able to pronounce this controversy of so many years' standing as closed.

Mr. ELLIS AMES spoke of the death of General Poor of Exeter, New Hampshire, in 1781, while in the Revolutionary army, which was ascribed to putrid fever. He stated that he had himself, in 1823, examined critically the accounts obtained from persons cognizant of the transaction, and that in fact General Poor was killed in a duel by the Rev. Mr. Porter, then a major in command of troops from Bridgewater, and an elder brother of the Rev. Eliphalet Porter of

Roxbury. Major Porter was relieved from duty after General Poor's death, but later was appointed by the government as military aid to accompany Lafayette back to France on his return to that country. He afterward embarked for Curaçoa for merchandise, but was never heard of subsequently. His military career began on the 5th of May, 1775, as he was preaching for his father in what is now Brockton, when the report came of an alarm from the British at Weymouth, on which he at once dismissed the meeting and proceeded to the spot.

Mr. ABBOTT LAWRENCE stated that a part of the pulpit, and the deacon's seat of the old Brattle Street Church had been placed in the Cabinet on deposit; and the deposit was accepted by a vote of the Society. The pulpit was imported from England, and presented to the church by Governor Bowdoin.

Mr. C. W. TUTTLE spoke of a recent visit he had made to Bermuda, where he had examined the early records of that colony from 1616, finding, among other things, conveyances of Indian slaves, who from the dates were probably Pequots, and survivors of King Philip's War, sold into slavery by order of the General Court. The government of the island, Mr. Tuttle remarked, is still the same as was established under William III.

The stated meetings for July and August were dispensed with by vote as recommended by the Council; authority being reserved however to the President and Secretary to call a special meeting, if one should be thought advisable.

The President then read the following paper on the por trait of John Hampden, now in the White House at Washington:

I promised, Gentlemen, at our last meeting, to give some account, this afternoon, of the portrait of the celebrated John Hampden, which is now in the Executive Mansion at Washington. I first saw that portrait in January, 1861, when I accompanied Mr. Everett, Mr. Amos A. Lawrence, and others, to the capital, to bear a memorial from ten or twelve thousand of the citizens of Boston on subjects connected with the then impending Civil War. Mr. Buchanan was President at that time, and, when we were admitted to his library for a conference, I recognized the portrait hanging over one of the doors. It had no inscription of any sort on the frame or elsewhere, and Mr. Buchanan was too much engrossed with the gravest public affairs to give more than a

passing assent to my remark on the great interest of the picture. I then knew little or nothing of its history.

Nine or ten years afterward, when the Trustees of the Peabody Education Fund were dining with President Grant, I recognized the portrait again, and on making some allusion to it at the dinner-table, I found that nothing was remembered about it by others, and that there might even be danger of its being put out of sight as an unknown head, neither ornamental nor appropriate to the Executive Mansion. I took the earliest occasion, therefore, to hunt up the record, and to communicate the result to those who would be sure to take an interest in it. The name of John Hampden was thereupon affixed to the frame.

Seven or eight years later, when the Presidential Mansion had passed into other occupancy, I had reason to fear, on revisiting Washington, that the simple name― John Hampden -had not secured for the portrait the full consideration which it merited, and a somewhat more detailed inscription was substituted by the kind intervention of Mrs. Hayes. Yet even now there may be a serious doubt whether the interest and value of the portrait are appreciated by those who look at it, and I promised President Garfield last month, or the month before the last, when I was again at Washington, that I would put its history into a shape in which it could be no longer in danger of being forgotten or misunderstood.

With this view, I have turned to the Journal of the United States Senate, Aug. 14, 1856, as printed in the "Congressional Globe," where the late Hon. James A. Pearce, of Maryland, then chairman of the Congressional Library Committee on the part of the Senate, introduced the matter as follows:

MR. PEARCE. Mr. President, I have received a letter from the late Minister of the United States at the Court of London, enclosing a letter to him from Mr. John Macgregor, who is well known as a great statist, and as Secretary of the Board of Trade of England. This gentleman desires to present to Congress a portrait of John Hampden, the great champion of civil liberty. I ask that the letter may be read; after which I shall submit a resolution to the Senate. The Secretary read the letter, as follows:

ATHENEUM CLUB, 19 March, 1856.

MY DEAR SIR, - You having been so kind as to forward the portrait of the patriot Hampden, to be presented from me to the Congress of the United States, I think it proper for me to say something of the facts, as far as I have ascertained them, as to its authenticity.

It was formerly in the possession of Sir Richard Ellis, of Buckingham

shire. His family, in the male line, became extinct, and it, with several portraits, passed into the possession of collateral heirs, and one of those, almost fifteen years ago, on repairing and altering his house, gave the old portraits to a decorator and gilder, of the name of Westby, to sell. Westby was at the same time employed by me in decorating and gilding my house in which I lived, in Lowndes Square, and in which our mutual friend, Lady Talbot de Malahide, now resides. From Westby I bought Sir John * Lely's portrait of Lord William Russell, and this portrait of Hampden, attributed to Vandyck, in his earliest and more finished manner. Houbraken engraved from it his portrait of Hampden for his large historical collection. I send you this engraved portrait. Houbraken was a somewhat harsh engraver, and took liberties with the costumes, though he generally preserved the likeness. In this engraving it will be observed that every feature, the moustache, and hair are strikingly correct, the coloring making the only difference. There is an ivory bust, very like, taken from it, at the seat of the Earl of Buckinghamshire. There was a fine marble bust, from the painting, at Stowe, before the magnificent collection of the Duke was sold in lots, a few years ago. That bust had on the pedestal the following inscription:

"JOHN HAMPDEN. With great courage and consummate abilities he began a noble opposition to an arbitrary Court, in defence of the liberties of his country; supported them in Parliament, and died for them in the field."

It is known that at an early period Hampden, disgusted with the despotism of the King and the Church, contemplated settling in America. He, his cousin Cromwell, and several others, had actually embarked in the Thames, and were prevented from departing by Charles I. It would appear, by the following extract from the history of New England, by Jedediah Morse, D.D., and the Rev. Elijah Parish, that Hampden had previously been in America, when about twenty-eight years of age:

"In the spring of 1623 Massasoit fell sick, and sent intelligence of it to the Governor, who immediately sent Mr. Winslow and Mr. John Hamden (the same man who afterwards distinguished himself by his opposition to the arbitrary and unjust demands of Charles I.) to pay him a visit. They carried with them presents, and some cordials for his relief. Their visit and presents were very consolatory to the venerable chief, and were the means of his recovery. In return for their kindness he informed them of a dangerous conspiracy among the neighboring Indians, the object of which was the total extinction of the English. By means of this timely discovery, and the consequent spirited exer tions of the Governor, whose wise plans were executed by the brave Captain Standish, the colony was once more saved from destruction."

These circumstances not only associate the name of Hampden with America, but with the origin and rise of her political, civil, and religious liberties. It was these historical facts, and the honest interest which I take in your magnificent country, that suggested to me presenting the portrait of the great patriot to your national Congress.

Wishing, with all sincerity, your safe arrival and happy meeting with your friends, and assuring you that I shall, through life, retain the warmest recollection of the happy and instructive times I have had the pleasure of enjoying your society,

Believe me faithfully yours,

The Hon. JAMES BUCHANAN, &c., &c., &c.

J. MACGREGOR.

*Probably a mistake in copying for Sir Peter Lely.

MR. PEARCE. Mr. President, It will be perceived by the Senate, from Mr. Macgregor's letter, that the portrait which he now offers us is attributed to the pencil of Vandyck, the greatest portrait painter known after Titian. Vandyck died in England, in the year 1641, after having painted the portraits of many of the illustrious men of that period. It is not at all unreasonable to suppose, therefore, especially when the peculiar style of the portrait is observed, that it is really his work. If it be not, however, it can be ascribed to no source less distinguished than Sir Peter Lely, who went to England in 1641, and succeeded Vandyck in reputation and in business. Whether it be the one or the other, the portrait is of value, and special value, from the great fame and reputation of either the one or the other artist, and to no other can it be attributed. Sir Peter Lely painted in the style of Vandyck. It is possible, therefore, it may be his work, and not that of Vandyck. But, as I cannot discover the cypher which it was the custom of Sir Peter to put on all his portraits, I conclude, as Mr. Macgregor states, that this picture is by Vandyck. It has all the ease and grace of his style; the figure has his favorite attitude, and the picture is every way worthy of him. Be that as it may, it is valuable as the work of a great artist. It is still more valuable on account of the great historical interest which attaches to the name of John Hampden, the purest of all the patriots and champions of freedom in England, who offered up his life in defence of popular rights against royal and despotic prerogative. It derives a further interest from the incidents mentioned by Morse, and quoted in Mr. Macgregor's letter, which connect Hampden with an important event in the early history of one of the States of our Union. I suppose that, taking into consideration all these things, the reputation of the artist, the value of the portrait itself as a work of art, the historical interest of the personage whom it represents, and, I will add, the character of Mr. Macgregor himself as a distinguished statist, a man of high reputation generally, and, what naturally enough touches us still more, a very liberal friend of our country, there will be no hesitation in acceptting it, with a proper appreciation of the gift.

The Committee on the Library think the President's house is the most appropriate place in which to put this portrait. I ask leave to introduce a joint resolution for that purpose.

Leave was granted, by unanimous consent, to introduce the joint resolution (S. No. 40) accepting the portrait of John Hampden, presented to Congress by John Macgregor, and it was read twice by its title, and considered as in Committee of the Whole. It is:

Resolved, &c., That the portrait of John Hampden, presented to Congress by John Macgregor, be accepted, and the Joint Committee on the Library be directed to cause the same to be properly framed, and placed in the Executive Mansion.

The joint resolution was reported to the Senate without amendment, ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the third time, and passed.