European languages by the Moors. These authors, however, are apparently both in an error. The true origin of the term is, no doubt, given in Ferrarii origines linguæ Italicæ, as follows; " Caravela navigii minoris genus: Carabus; Græce Kapábtov." The primitive meaning of the Latin Carabus and the Greek Kapábtov is Crab, a word, in fact, derived from them. In either language, the word was used to signify a vessel or a boat. The word Kapáblov has descended to the modern Greeks, who use Kapábi for a vessel, in general; and Isidore, a late Latin writer, in his Origines, lib. xix. c. 1, defines a Carabus to be a "small skiff made of osiers, which, covered with raw leather, forms a sort of boat." There seems, therefore, much reason to respect the authority of the historian first quoted, who describes the Caravel of the Spaniards as a light open vessel. This minuteness of criticism will, I hope, be pardoned on a subject so closely connected with the discovery of America.

Having in the beginning of this note called Peter Martyr d'Anghiera the first writer, who commemorates Columbus, (and so he is generally reputed,) it should be observed, that he is entitled to this credit of precedence, by a very slight priority. The dedication of his Decades bears date Prid. Calend. October, or September 30, 1516. In November of the same year, was published a Polyglott Psalter, at Genoa, containing the Psalms in Hebrew, Greek, Arabic, and Chaldee, in which, in the form of a note on Psalm xix. 5. Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world, is given an account of Columbus and his discoveries, filling seven octavo pages, as copied in a work of de Murr. This is doubtless the first account of Columbus, for P. Martyr d'Anghiera introduces him simply as "Ligur vir." The editor of this Psalter and author of the note in question, was Guistiniani, a bishop, and as he speaks of Columbus as a native of Genoa, at a period so early, and mentions the bequest made by Columbus of the tenth part of his estates to the city of Genoa, his authority is of great weight in settling the contested points of the place of the birth of Columbus, and the authenticity of his will. Since the appearance, however, of the important and curious work entitled Codice diplomatico Colombo-Americano ossia raccolta di documenti originali e inediti, spettanti a Christofero Colombo, alla scoperta e allo governo dell' America, Genoa, 1823, these questions may be considered as put at rest.

This last very curious work, which has not yet attracted a due degree of notice from the public, though containing more official details relative to Columbus than all the other works hitherto published relative to America, was printed by order of the magistrates of Genoa. An account of the English translation of it may be found in the North American Review for April last, page 415. Two manuscripts, copies of the grants, patents, &c. of the Spanish government to Columbus (from one of which the work is now at length printed) were made by order of Columbus himself, and sent to his friend Oderigo, in Genoa. In 1670, the descendant of Oderigo presented the two manuscripts to the magistracy at Genoa. During the French Revolution one of the manuscripts was taken to Paris, and has not yet been restored to Genoa. The other was supposed to be lost, till on the death of Count Micheloni Cambiasi, a Senator of Genoa, it was advertised for sale among his books, but immediately claimed as public property. It has since been deposited in a monument erected for the purpose, and from it the work in question is printed.

Whether the two manuscripts thus mentioned be the only ones in existence may admit of doubt. When I was in Florence in 1818, a small folio manuscript was brought to me, written on parchment, apparently two or three centuries old, in binding once very rich, but now worn, containing

a series of documents in Latin and Spanish, mostly the latter, with the following title on the first blank page, "Treslado de las Builas del Papa Alexandro VI, de la Concession de las Indias y los titulos, privilegios, y cedulas reales, que se dieron a Christoval Colon."-I was led by this title to purchase the work; but, deterred by the abundant use of abbreviations and a limited acquaintance with the language, I made no attempt for several years to read it. My attention having been turned again to it, by the publication of the work at Genoa, and having had an opportunity, by the kindness of a friend, of seeing a copy of it, the only one perhaps in this part of the country, I was surprised to find my manuscript, as far as it goes, nearly identical in its contents with that of Genoa, supposed to be one of the only two in existence. My manuscript consists of about eighty closely written folio pages, which coincide precisely with the text of the first thirty seven documents, contained in two hundred and forty pages of the Genoese volume. A few more documents, wanting in my manuscript, are found in the Genoese work; and a second Bull of Alexander VI, in Latin, is contained in the former, and is wanting in the latter.

In the last of the documents, contained in the Genoese volume, and wanting in my manuscript, we read as follows;

"Los originales destos privilegios y cartas y cedulas y otras muchas cartas de sus Altezas e otras escripturas, tocantes al Señor Almirante, estan en el monasterio de Sancta Maria de las Cuevas de Sevilla.

"Otrosy esta, en el dicho Monasterio un libro traslado de los privilegios e cartas susodichos, semejante que esto.

"Otro traslado levo este año de M. D. II. y tiene Alonso Sanchez de Carvajal a las Yndias, escripto en papel e abtorizado.

“Otro traslado en pergamino tal como este.'

Mention is here accordingly made of four copies of these documents, three on parchment and one on paper. Two of them were sent by Columbus himself to Genoa. Whether that procured by me at Florence be a third; whether it be that supposed to be at Paris; or, what is more probable perhaps, another copy, there are at present no means of deciding. I hope to have in my power, on some other occasion, to describe it more accurately, particularly in those respects, in which it differs from the Genoese volume.

Note C. Page 15.

It is probable that the great extent, to which the business of fishing on the banks of Newfoundland and the New England coasts was early carried, was one chief cause of the familiarity of men with the idea of the passage across the Atlantic, and consequently of the readiness of our forefathers to undertake it. It appears, that as early as 1578, there were employed in this fishery, of Spaniards 100 sail, besides 20 or 30 in the whale fishery on the same coasts; of Portuguese 50; of French 150; of English from 30 to 50. (Hakluyt, Vol. III. p. 132, cited in the North American Review for July, 1824, p. 140.) Captain Smith remarks, that according to "Whitbourne's discovery of Newfoundland," the banks and coasts in that region were visited by 250 sail of English fishermen annually. (Vol. II. p. 246, Richmond Edition.) So important was this work of Whitbourne esteemed for the encouragement of the British fisheries that, by an order in Council, dated 12th of April, 1622, it was ordered to be distributed to every parish in the kingdom. (Ancient Right of the English Nation to the American Fisheries, &c. London, 1764.) The last cited valuable treatise contains (page 50) an important statement of the amount

of the French fishery in 1745, "made in that year, at the desire of the Governor of the Massachusetts province, by Mr Thomas Kilby." By this account, it appears that "564 ships in all, and 27,500 men were yearly employed from France on the banks of Newfoundland." The extent of the British fisheries, in this quarter, on an average of three years ending 1773, may be seen in Lord Sheffield's Observations on the Commerce of the American States, 6th Ed. p. 64. From one of the documents in the work entitled, "The Fisheries and the Mississippi," by the present Secretary of State, it appears that before 1810, there were annually employed from the United States 1232 vessels in the Bank, Bay, and Labrador fisheries, navigated by 10,459 men.-See also Seybert's Statistics, p. 333.

Note D. Page 29.

"From the commencement of the religious war in Germany to the peace of Westphalia, scarce any thing great or memorable occurred in the European political world, with which the reformation was not essentially connected. Every event in the history of the world in this interval, if not directly occasioned, was nearly influenced by this religious revolu tion, and every state, great or small, remotely or directly experienced its influence." Schiller's Geschichte des dreissigjährigen Krieges. I. 1.

Note E. Page 29.

The close connexion of the religious and political system of Rome is sufficiently shown by the authority of Cicero.- He begins the Oration pro domo sua, in these words, cum multa divinitus, Pontifices, a majoribus nostris inventa atque instituta sunt; tum nihil præclarius quam quod eosdem et religionibus deorum immortalium et summæ Reipublicæ præesse voluerunt; ut amplissimi et clarissimi cives rempublicam bene gerendo religiones sapienter interpretando conservarent. Whence is it that a principle should be commended by so wise a statesman as Cicero, and in point of experience have been found so salutary in Rome, which has been uniformly productive of evil in modern states and condemned by the soundest politicians?—The cause of the apparent anomaly is no doubt to be found in the organization of the church as a separate institution, having its own principles of growth and decline; and the organization of the clergy as a body having its own interest.-Such a body, when entrusted with power in the state, will be apt to exercise it under the influence of the esprit du corps for its own advancement. In Rome, the public religion rested upon no other sanction than any other part of the public system and the ministers of religion, not belonging to a separate consecrated body, were not liable to be influenced by any other than reasons of state in the administration of their religious functions. Although such a state of things might seem unfriendly to religious influence, it produced not that effect on the Romans, who may be characterized, during the Republic, as a religious people.

A list of the Pontifices Maximi may be found at the close of the learned treatise of Bosii de pontifice maximo Romæ veteris. It contains the most familiar names in the civil history of Rome. After the fall of the Republic, the Emperors regularly assumed the title of Pontifex Maximus, as is shown in another treatise of the same author, Bosii de Pontificatu maximo imperii Romani exercitatio. What is somewhat singular is, that this title of High Priest, originating in the ancient Roman paganism, should have been retained by the Christian emperors down to Gratian. It was afterwards adopted by the Popes, a circumstance which appears to have escaped Middleton in his letter from Rome.

The oft quoted exclamation of Dante, shows at how early a period the principle of the reformation had suggested itself to the independent thinkers.

Ahi, Costantin, di quanto mal fu madre,
Non la tua conversion, ma quella dote,
Che da te prese il primo ricco padre.

Note F. Page 30.

The treatment which Pope Boniface VIII received from Philip the fair in the fourteenth century, was as much more audacious than any thing in the recent history of the Papal see, as the power of Boniface was greater than that of Pius VII. Philip not only returned the most contemptuous answers to the Pope's letters, but sent William de Nogaret, (justly called by Mosheim, the most intrepid and inveterate enemy of the Pope before Luther) into Italy to excite a sedition, to seize the person of Boniface and bring him in chains to Lyons. This he so far effected as to get possession of the Pope, whom he loaded with indignities, and even struck on the head with an iron gauntlet. Though rescued by the citizens of Anagni, from the hands of de Nogaret, he died soon after "of the rage and anguish into which these insults threw him." It is useful to recal these traits of history, to enable us to judge more impartially of contemporary events.

Note G. Page 30.

The progress of religious reform, to which I have alluded, concerns only the connexion of church and state. As this connexion was more intimate in the Catholic church, than in any other, that church was so far the most corrupt. And as this connexion was unquestionably as prejudicial to the church, as to the state, the catholics have really as much reason to rejoice in the reformation as the protestants. There can be but little doubt, in the mind of any one who reads the history of the middle ages, that the interests of no communion of Christians have been more advanced by the reformation, than of that which regards the Pope as its head.

In like manner, in speaking of the reform carried on in England by the dissenters and puritans, no other reference is had than to the political question of the union of church and state. This union, as existing in England, I consider a great political abuse. As to the doctrinal points agitated between the catholics and protestants; the church of England and dissenters; however important they may have been at different times thought, so long as they rested within the limits of speculative theology, their settlement, one way or the other, could have had but little effect on the condition of states.

Note H. Page 31.

Bishop Burnet has discriminated the Presbyterians and Independents, in the following manner. "The main difference between these was, that the Presbyterians seemed reconcilable to the church; for they loved episcopal ordination and a liturgy, and upon some amendments seemed disposed to come into the church; and they liked the civil government and limited monarchy. But as the independents were for a commonwealth in the state, so they put all the power in the church in the people, and thought that their choice was an ordination: nor did they approve of set forms of worship." History of his own Times. II, 406.

This character, it must be remembered, was given of the Indepen dents, after the times of the commonwealth in England. At the period of the first emigrations to New England, there is no reason for accusing the independents of disaffection to the civil government.

In 1619, Mr. Robinson published, at Leyden," Apologia pro exulibus Anglis qui Brownistæ vulgo appellantur." Mosheim conjectures that the name of Independents may have grown out of a word in the following sentence, in which the leading principle of their religious peculiarities is expressed," Cœtum quemlibet particularem esse totam, integram, et perfectam ecclesiam ex suis partibus constantem, immediate et independenter (quoad alias ecclesias) sub ipso Christo." Apologia, Cap. V. p. 22. Cited in Mosheim, V. 388.

Note I. Page 34.

A considerable, and the most elaborate part of Burke's Reflections on the Revolution in France, is occupied in refuting the assertion of Dr Price, that by the Revolution in 1688, the English people acquired “the right to choose their own governors, to cashier them for misconduct, and to frame a government for themselves." It is certainly too much to say, in unlimited terms, that the English Constitution, as fixed at the Revolution, gives a right of choosing or removing the king. On the other hand, it is equally certain that both at, after, and before the Revolution, Parliament claimed and exercised the right of choosing and deposing the king and limiting the succession. Burke expresses himself thus: "So far is it from being true that we acquired a right, by the Revolution, to elect our kings, that if we had possessed it before, the English nation did, at that time, most solemnly renounce and abdicate it for themselves, and for all their posterity forever. These gentlemen [Dr Price and his party] may value themselves as much as they please on their whig principles; but I never desire to be thought a better whig than Lord Somers," &c.

Lord Somers is thus particularly appealed to by Mr Burke, in support of his construction of the Constitution, because the declaration of right was drawn by him. But it is somewhat remarkable that Burke should have insisted so much on this authority, for Lord Somers printed a work in 1710, of which the title sufficiently shows the object :-" A brief history "A of the succession of the Crown of England; wherein facts collected from the best authorities are opposed to the novel assertors of indefeasible hereditary right." After having in this work, gone through with a masterly deduction of the history of the English crown from the establishment of it, Lord Somers sums up, as follows: "I shall leave every man to make his own observations on this historical deduction. But this one observation I believe all men must make from it; that it hath been the constant opinion of all ages, that the Parliament of England had an unquestionable power to limit, restrain, and qualify the succession as they pleased, and that in all ages they have put their power in practice; and that the historian* had reason for saying, that seldom or never the third heir in a right descent enjoyed the crown of England!"

Note K. Page 38.

The settlements made by civilized Europeans on the coasts of America and of other countries occupied by savages, have evidently proceeded on the assumption of peculiar principles of national or rather social law.

* ‹ Daniel, fol. 5. in vita H. I.'