'*' 7 - THE GIFT OF ?.njhj^^...(^MA\osk A z.b F.R.S. in London (Boston, 1722). The second is that published under the title, The Abuses and Scandals of some late Pamphlets . . . Modestly Obviated (Boston, 1722); but one of Wagstaffe's ex- cerpts (p. 13) is taken from the postscript, which was issued separately {Post- script to Abuses, &c. Obviated, [1722]). The third letter has never been printed, so far as I know, except for the substantial portion which Wagstaffe gives. 6 Pp. 13-14 (cf. pp. 17-18). 58 458 MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL SOCIETY. [Feb. "Men of the greatest Judgment, Learning and Character there," 1 and he had read Mather's Account and Dummer's dedication with interest and approval. 2 One detail, however, in Mather's pamphlet was not to Brady's liking. It was the speculative, etiological paragraph which I have already quoted, — that in which Mather personifies the smallpox as an enemy assailing and storming the citadel of the human body. 3 It is, in truth, grotesque enough, if considered from a scientific point of view, and of this Mather himself was fully aware, for he dismisses the subject without ceremony: "But to what purpose is all this Jargon? And of what Sig- nificancy are most of our Speculations?" 4 Here is Brady's comment on the paragraph: I come now, according to your Desire, to give you something of a rational Account of the Safety of this Method. You know what wretched Work the Gentleman makes of it, who writes the Letter from New-England, published by Mr. Drummer; 6 tho' otherwise a Man of Learning, and Sense, and aware of the Folly of attempting it: However, let us try. 6 These animadversions are quoted by Mather's inveterate opponent, Douglass, with scandalous inaccuracy, in his Dis- sertation concerning Inoculation (1730): What wretched work (says Dr. Brady) the Gentleman (Dr. C. M.) who writes the Letter to Mr. Dummer from New-England makes of his accounts.' Here Douglass, we observe, not only omits Brady's compliment to Mather as a "man of learning and sense," but he also garbles and misapplies the quotation in such fashion that it seems to be an adverse criticism on Mather's whole tract, not (as Brady meant it) on a single unimportant paragraph. Douglass was too opinionated to be fair, and he was a good hater. However, we are not so much concerned with Douglass's perversity as with his parenthesis. Brady was, of course, quite ignorant of the name of "the Gentleman who writes the Letter to Mr. Drummer." But Douglass knew it, 8 and there- 1 P. is- 2 See pp. 18, 26. » P. 454, supra. 4 Account, 8. 6 So printed. * P. 37. 'P. 7. 8 The New-England Courant for May 14-21, 1722 (No. 42), contains an in- teresting mention of our tract, in the course of an unsigned article manifestly 191 2.] LOST WORKS OF COTTON MATHER. 459 fore he inserts the initials, — "Dr. C. M." With this final confirmation of Mather's authorship we may drop the subject. » The relations between the Account and the Little Treatise 1 are very curious, — though perfectly natural when one con- siders their respective dates. The Little Treatise was finished before June 26, 172 1. Its composition (that is to say) preceded Mather's first acquaintance with inoculation as an operation in progress. By September 7, however, — the date of the Account, — Zabdiel Boylston had inoculated more than thirty persons in Boston and vicinity, 2 not a single one of whom had died. 3 Mather had good reason, therefore, to regard the results as amply justifying the experiment, and he thought it his duty to further the practice not only in America but in the mother country. With this in view, he drew up the Account and sent it to Dummer for publication. Of course, he was at liberty to utilize such portions of the Little Treatise as seemed pertinent. Accordingly, as anybody may see for himself by comparing the two documents, he embodied in the Account a considerable amount of material that already stood in the Little Treatise, often copying' word for word. Nearly the whole of the first eight pages of the Account consists of such repeated material, — including an abstract of Timonius and Pylarinus. 4 from Douglass's pen: — "A Letter from Boston, bearing date the 7th Sept. last, was published in London last February; it was advertis'd in the News Papers thus, 'An Account of the Method and Success of Inoculating the Small Pox upon great Numbers" of People (who all recovered) in New-England.' This Pamphlet, and its Dedication by Mr. Jer. Dummer, shall be considered at large in some subsequent Paper." I find nothing further on this matter in the file of the Courant. 1 See pp. 440 ff., supra. 2 Including September 7, the exact number was 35, as may be made out from Boylston's Historical Account. 8 The first inoculated person to die was Mrs. Dixwell. She was inoculated on August 30, 1721, and on September 12 Boylston was still "in good Hopes of her doing well." Her death did not occur until the 24th. (Boylston, Historical Account, 2d ed., 1730, 9-10). 4 Either Mather had sent the Little Treatise to London (see p. 441, above), or he had not. If he had not, it lay in his desk as MS., and he could properly make extracts from it in composing the Account. If he had sent it to London, he did not know whether or not it had been published. The chances were in the nega- tive. But, even if it had been published, the scope of the two documents was so different that a certain amount of repetition would make neither of them superfluous. The Account did not cancel the Treatise. 460 MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL SOCIETY. [Feb. IV. A Faithful Account. 1721. On October 30, 1721, ther,e was printed in the Boston Gazette (No. 101) an anonymous article entitled: "A Faithful Account of what has occur'd under the late Experiments of the Small- Pox managed and governed in the way of Inoculation. Pub- lished, partly to put a stop unto that unaccountable way of Lying, which fills the Town & Country on this occasion; and partly for the Information & Satisfaction of our Friends in other places." The article is well characterized by Dr. Fitz as "a report of progress." It may also be regarded as a kind of supplement to the Boylston tract, which had come out be- tween August 25 and September 24. 1 Dr. Fitz ascribes the Faithful Account to Zabdiel Boylston. 2 No doubt Boylston furnished the author with material, but the man who actually wrote the article was beyond question Cotton Mather. The style is unmistakably his, not Boylston's. Here is a decisive specimen: Some, of whom the People have confidently affirmed, That they died under the Inoculation, have sent their dying Charges unto their Friends, To hasten into it. These Friends have done it; and so found their Account in it, and seen such Easy Circumstances, that the surviving Relatives of the Deceased are drowned in Tears, to think, how the Lives of Theirs 3 have been thrown away. Mather's authorship of the Faithful Account was apparently an open secret in his own day. In the New-England Courant of December 4, 1721, 4 a correspondent, signing himself "Peter Hakins," describes it as "a Piece concerning Inoculation, wherein the Reverend Author publishes to the World what an abundance of Lying and false Reports have been spread." V. The Way of Proceeding and A Further Account. The sixth paper in the Philosophical Transactions for Janu- ary-March, 1722 (No. 370) is entitled, "The Way of Proceeding 1 See p. 429, note i, supra. i Fitz, 321. » A Latinism (suorum). 4 No. 18. James Franklin, in this number, defends himself for having pub- lished "an Answer to a Piece in the Gazette of October 30," and, as a part of his case, reprints that " Answer," namely, the Hakins letter, which had already- appeared in the Courant. It is not in No. 17 (November 20-27). Nos. 1-16 are not known to exist; but the first publication of the Hakins letter must have taken place not later than November 20. 1912.] LOST WORKS OF COTTON MATHER. 461 in the Small Pox inoculated in New England. Communicated by Henry Newman, Esq; of the Middle Temple." 1 This was the Henry Newman (born in 1670) who graduated at Harvard College in 1687 and was librarian there from 1690 to 1693, but who afterwards removed to London, where he became agent for the College and for the Province of New Hampshire. He was also Secretary of the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge and of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel. 2 Mr. Sibley supposed Newman to be the author of the article just mentioned, 3 and it is ascribed to him in Maty's Index. 4, The ascription is certainly erroneous. In the first place, the paper is designated in the Transactions, not as written by New- man, but as communicated by him, a formula especially used when a letter or essay was handed in or read by some person other than the author. Thus the epistle of Timonius was "communicated to the Royal Society by John Woodward"; 5 and Paul Dudley's observations on Maple Sugar, the Moose, and the "Poyson Wood Tree" are labelled as "by the Hon- ourable Paul Dudley, Esq; F.R.S. Communicated by John Chamberlayne, Esq." 6 Again, the very language of The Way of Proceeding shows that the writer lived in New England, and that he was personally acquainted with every detail of the practice of inoculation there. Further, we have the direct testimony of Dr. William Douglass (in his Dissertation, 1730) that the author was Cotton Mather. Douglass writes: The best of Men have some Foible: that of Dr. Mathers was Credulity; it was upon his Authority that our New-England Inocu- lation was carried on. I shall mention a few Instances of this weakness from his own Letters concerning Inoculation published in London: in one Letter Dated March 1722 He tells the world, That A. 172 1. in Boston, some Cats had a regular Small-Pox and died of it; that during the Small Pox, the Pigeons and Dunghill Fowls 1 xxxn. 33-35. No. 370 was "printed . . . 1722" according to the colophon. 2 Harvard Graduates, in. 389-394 ; Andrews and Davenport, Guide to the Manuscript Materials, 1908, 67, 404. 3 m. 394. 4 P. H. Maty, A General Index to the Philosophical Transactions, from the First to the end of the Seventieth Volume, 1787, 721. 6 Philosophical Transactions, No. 339 (xxix. 72). 6 Nos. 364, 367, 368 (xxxi. 27, 14s, 165). The word "communicated" is, however, not decisive (see, for example, xxrx. 52, 314, 326, 329). 462 MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL SOCIETY. [FEB. did not lay nor hatch, that he never knew Blistering miss of saving life in the Small-Pox, &c. In his Letter communicated to the R. S. by Mr. Newman in favour of Inoculation he says, the Patient is more healthy after Inoculation, it is usefull to Women in Child-bed, it dries up tedious running Ulcers, makes the crazy consumptive people hearty, and rids people of their former maladies. Thus he makes a Panacea of it. 1 To Mather's letter of March, 1722, which Douglass mentions first, we shall return in due season. 2 What concerns us now is, of course, the latter part of Douglass's paragraph, containing quotations from "his [Mather's] Letter communicated to the R. S. by Mr. Newman." Douglass, as Dr. Green reminds me, had the reputation of being "always positive and sometimes accurate." This time he was accurate enough for all practical purposes. The sentences that he quotes occur, almost word for word, in the article communicated by Newman. 3 Let us now turn to Mather's Diary. On November 24, 1721, he notes: I draw up the Method of Proceeding in the Inoculation of the Small-Pox, and communicate Copies of it, that so Physicians about the Countrey may know how to manage it. 4 And on December 1, he remarks: 1 A Dissertation concerning Inoculation of the Small-Pox (Boston, 1730), 8. The author's name does not occur on the title-page, but the dedication (to John Jekyll) is signed " W. D.," and there has never been any doubt that Douglass wrote the pamphlet. He repeated considerable passages from it in his Summary (an acknowledged work), where the passage just quoted appears in the following shape: — "Dr. C. Mather, who first set up Inoculation in Boston, in his pub- lished Accounts of it, shows what small Dependance there is upon weak Authori- ties, 'some Cats 1721m Boston had a regular Small-Pox and died of it.' — During the Small-Pox, the Pigeons and Dunghill Fowls did not lay nor hatch. — He never knew Blistering miss of saving Life in the Small-Pox. — The Patient is more healthy after Inoculation, it is useful to Women in Child-bed, — it dries up tedious running Ulcers, — makes the Crazy Consumptive People hearty, — and rids People of their former Maladies" (n. 411, 1751). 2 See pp. 47s ff., infra. 3 "The Patient gets abroad quickly, and is most sensibly Stronger, and in better Health than he was before. The Transplantation has been given to Women in Child-bed, Eight or Nine Days after their Delivery; and they have got earlier out of their Child-bed, and in better Circumstances, than ever in their Lives. Those that have had ugly Ulcers long running upon them, have had them healed on, and by this Transplantation. Some very feeble, crazy, Consumptive People, have upon this Transplantation, grown hearty and got rid of their former Mala- dies " (Philosophical Transactions, No. 370, xxxn. 35). 4 Diary, n. 660. 191 2-] LOST WORKS OF COTTON MATHER. 463 Having drawn up, the Way of Proceeding, in the Inoculation of the Small-pox, I communicate Copies of it unto the Physicians and others, in several Parts of the Countrey; that so they may be directed in the Practice of it, as there may be Occasion for it. 1 Both entries manifestly concern one and the same document, and its title {The Way of Proceeding in the Inoculation of the Small-Pox) agrees almost exactly with that of the Newman paper {The Way of Proceeding in the Small Pox Inoculated). Further, the Newman paper consists of brief and precise direc- tions and practical remarks. In other words, it corresponds to a hair with the paper described in the Diary. We may now take it as proved that the Newman paper is Mather's," and that it is identical, to all intents and purposes, with the document which Mather mentions in his Diary for November 24 and December 1, 1721. Besides furnishing copies to the New England physicians, Mather had, it seems, sent a transcript to Henry Newman, who straightway communi- cated it, at Mather's request, to the Royal Society. 2 But we are not yet at the end of our case. Between the en- tries of November 24 and December 1 (just quoted from Math- er's Diary) stands another, of much interest, under date of November 30: Writing Letters for Europe, I send over many Things, that I hope, will serve the Kingdome of GOD. And particularly, among the rest, I write a further and a more distinct Account of the Small-Pox Inoculated, the Method and Success of it among us, and the Opposition to it; By which Means, I hope, some hun- dreds of thousands of Lives, may in a little while come to be preserved. 3 There can be little doubt that the "many things" here re- corded as sent over to Europe, included letters to the Royal 1 n. 662. 2 An unpublished letter from Mather to Newman, September 7, 1710 (Raw- linson MS. C. 743, fol. S3), indicates that their "Old Acquaintance" had at that time been recently "renewed." On February 17, 1720, Mather wrote to New- man (the original draught is in the possession of the American Antiquarian Society), enclosing a series of Curiosa for the Royal Society, which he asked Newman to transmit to John Chamberlayne. The series consisted of twelve letters, all of which appear to be lost, though their receipt was acknowledged by Chamberlayne in a letter of August 31, 1720 (see Publications of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, xrv. 94, 105, note 8). 3 Diary, n. 661-662. 464 MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL SOCIETY. [Feb. Society, to whom Mather had been despatching Curiosa Amer- icana, at intervals, ever since 1712. 1 It is, therefore, with some satisfaction that we discover — both in Mather's Catalogue of contributions drawn up in 1723 and in the Loose Leaf List of "Curiosa Continued" — the title, "A Further Account, of the Small-Pox Inoculated," or (as the Loose Leaf has it) "A further Account, of, the Method & Success of the Small-Pox inoculated." Here then is close agreement with the Diary for November 30 (just quoted), so that we may safely infer that the passage in the Diary refers to the letter to the Royal Society entered in Mather's two lists. But what has all this to do with The Way of Proceeding sent to the country physicians in Massachusetts and also (as we have discovered) communicated by Newman to the Philosophical Transactions ? That there is some connection between this document and A Further Account is at once suggested by the fact that Mather was at work on both papers at the same time. 2 What is the connection? The question is answered by a glance at the chapter on Smallpox in The Angel of Bethesda. This chapter (xx) we have already studied. 3 It falls, as we have observed, into two parts (pp. 112-141 and pp. 142-147), and Part One has been shown to coincide with the Little Treatise described in the Diary for June 22, 172 1. Part One comes to an end not far from the middle of MS. p. 141, and contains the sum and substance of what Mather knew about smallpox and inoculation up to June 22, 1721, — four days before the experi- ment was actually tried in Boston. Let us now scrutinize Part Two (pp. 142-147). Part Two begins thus : I am now able as an Eywilness, (& more than so) to give a more full Account of the Practice, which until Now I could only propose as a Matter at a greater Distance. There follows a brief but lively narrative of the outbreak of the disease in 1721, of Mather's urging the physicians to con- 1 See Publications of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, xrv. 101-102. 2 As is shown by the dates in the Diary, — November 24 and December 1, 1721, for The Way of Proceeding, and November 30 for A Further Account (n. 660, 661-662). 8 See p. 442, supra. 1912.] LOST WORKS OF COTTON MATHER. 465 sider inoculation, of their distrust of the strange practice, of Boylston's courage in undertaking it, of the frantic opposition of the townspeople, and of the throwing of a "fir'd Granado" through Mather's window. The narrative fills p. 142 of the manuscript and most of p. 143. Next comes (near the bottom of p. 143) the sentence: "I shall now communicate o r Way of Proceeding, in the Practice." And then we encounter (on pp. 143-145) the full text of The Way of Proceeding, word for word (but for a few slight variations) as it stands in the paper communi- cated by Henry Newman to the Royal Society. After this a few sentences bring Chapter XX to a close. 1 This state of things establishes beyond cavil what, indeed, has already been sufficiently demonstrated, — namely, that Mather, not Newman, was the author of The Way of Proceeding. But it also shows something else. It shows that, just as Part One of Chapter XX (pp. 112-141) consists of Mather's Little Treatise (described in the Diary for June 22, 1721), so Part Two consists of the essay that he describes in the Diary for November 30, — "a further and a more distinct Account of the Small-Pox Inoculated, the Method and Success of it among us, and the Opposition to it." And this paper, as we know, is included in Mather's own Catalogue of his Communications to the Royal Society and in the Loose Leaf List. We observe also that this Further Account included The Way of Proceeding, — the document which Mather distributed among the New Eng- land physicians. What Newman received from Mather, then, was, in all prob- ability, the Further Account, consisting of (1) the narrative and (2) the practical observations (The Way of Proceeding). In communicating the material to the Society, however, he omitted the narrative portion (which was of less immediate interest to the English savants), and confined himself to the practical observations. 2 Thus it happens that the paper, as printed in the Transactions, opens with marked abruptness. Mather himself refers to this paper in an unpublished letter to Jurin, May 4, 1723: 1 The Newman paper consists of thirteen numbered sections. These few additional sentences make a fourteenth in The Angel of Bethesda. 2 Or, as is perhaps equally probable, Newman communicated the whole of the Further Account, and the editor of the Transactions deleted the introductory (narrative) portion. 59 466 MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL SOCIETY. [FEB. We had but One Physician in the City, who ventured on y° Practice; whose Courage, with y e Blessing of God upon his En- deavours, triumphed over the Attempts of his Adversaries to mine him. His Method, you have already received and imparted. 1 Here, as always, he is frank and generous in his praise of Zabdiel B oylston. The method (or ' ' way of proceeding ' ') which Mather had described in his Further Account, and which had been printed in the Philosophical Transactions, was, of course, that followed by Boylston, who had improved upon the Oriental practice in several respects. 2 Why Mather called his essay A Further Account of the Method and Success of the Small-Pox Inoculated must now be perfectly clear. It was with reference to the title of his previous tract (the Letter to Dummer), — An Account of the Method and Suc- cess of Inoculating the Small-Pox in New-England. We can also understand why the introductory narrative in the Further Account is so short. It was intended to supplement what had already been told in the Dummer tract. This function it does in fact fulfil. The most exciting occurrence between September 7 (the date of the letter to Dummer) and November 30 was the incident of the hand-grenade, — an outrage which, as we have seen, is duly emphasized in the Further Account. For convenience, and in lieu of other summary, I subjoin an analysis of Chapter XX of The Angel of Bethesda. Part One (ms., pp. 112-141). Practically identical with the Little Treatise described in Mather's Diary, June 22, 1721 (11. 627-628). The three sections of this Treatise appear in The Angel of Bethesda as follows: (1) "Sentiments of piety" (pp. 112-119). (2) "Best medicines and methods" (pp. 120-132). (a) Sydenham (pp. 120-126). (6) Woodman (pp. 127-128). (c) Pitcairn (pp. 128-129). (d) "Mantissa": Woodward's method (pp. 130-132). On an inserted sheet of smaller size. Perhaps not a part of the Little Treatise. P. 133 contains transitional sentences leading up to (3). 1 From the original draught, p. 16 (A. A. S.). 2 See Boylston, Historical Account, 2d ed., 1730, 6, 42 ff.; [Mather,] An Ac- count of the Method and Success (the Dummer tract), 1722, 19-20. 191 2.] LOST WORKS OF COTTON MATHER. 467 (3) Inoculation (headed "Appendix") (pp. 134-141). This section is an adaptation of the Address to the Physicians (July 6, 1721). It consists of — (a) Introduction (p. 134), containing (1) the story of Onesimus (as in the letter of July 12, 17 16, and in the Dummer tract, 1) ; (2) other African testimony (practically identical with a passage in the Boylston tract, 1721, p. 9, and agreeing closely with Dummer tract, 1-2). (b) Abstract of Timonius and Pylarinus (pp. 135-140), cor- responding almost word for word with that given (from the Address to the Physicians) in Boylston tract, 1-8), and with that in the Dummer tract, 2-7. (c) ^Etiological speculation (pp. 140-141), corresponding closely with Dummer tract, 7-8. (d) Peroration (p. 141), ending "I have done." Adapted from the peroration of the Address to the Physicians (as quoted in A Vindication of the Ministers, 1722, 7-8, and in [Greenwood's] Friendly Debate, 1722, 5-6). In the ms. the peroration is cancelled, and a couple of sentences are substituted in the margin. Part Two (ms., pp. 142-147). Practically identical with "a further and a more distinct Account of the Small-Pox Inoculated, the Method and Success of it among us, and the Opposition to it," mentioned in the Diary, November 30, 1721 (11. 661-662), as sent to Europe. This is the same thing entered in Mather's Catalogue of 1723 as "A Further Account of the Small-pox Inoculated," and in the Loose Leaf List as "A further Account, of, the Method & Success of the Small-Pox Inoculated." (1) Brief sketch of inoculation in Boston to November 30, 1721, including the incident of the granado (pp. 142-143). (2) "The way of proceeding" (pp. 143-147), almost exactly coincident with "The way of proceeding" communicated by Henry Newman to the Royal Society {Philosophical Trans- actions, xxxii. 33-35). This section is doubtless practically identical with the document mentioned in the Diary, No- vember 24 and December 1, 1721 (n. 660, 662). VI. Miscellaneous Curiosa of 1721. The Further Account, as we have seen, was sent to London, in all likelihood, about November 30, 1721, as one of a considerable number of Curiosa Americana addressed to Dr. Woodward. 468 MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL SOCIETY. [Feb. The titles of the other papers in the packet are recoverable from Mather's two lists. 1 They were as follows: NishmathrChajim. The probable seat & general cure of all Diseases. The Seventh Son Examined. With a Touch upon the Kings Evil. Lacus Mirabilis. An Horrible Tempest. Ostreophagi or a Matchless Oister-Hill. Absinthium sempervivum. Ambergrise discovered & determined. Neevi Materni. Melissologia; with a new Method of Bee-hunting. These, with the Further Account, make a series of ten letters, — a very probable number, since Mather was fond of decades. Most of the letters in this particular Decade of Curiosa seem to have perished. Ostreophagi doubtless described some great Indian shell-heap, possibly the famous deposits at Damaris- cotta, Maine. Melissologia unquestionably treated of the subject that Paul Dudley handles in a brief paper (entitled An Account of a Method lately found out in New-England for Discovering where the Bees Hive in the Woods, in order to get their Honey) printed in the Philosophical Transactions for January-April, 172 1. 2 Dudley's article, however, contains none of that out- of-the-way lore in which Mather's presumably abounded. Ambergrise discovered &° determined, another lost paper of the Decade, I should like to retrieve, if only for the pleasure of comparing it with one of the most ambitious of Dudley's com- munications to the Royal Society: An Essay upon the Natural History of Whales, with a particular Account of the Ambergris found in the Sperma Ceti Whale. This appeared in the Philo- sophical Transactions for March-April, 1725. 3 Cotton Mather was not the only New Englander who sent odd stories to Eng- land. Dudley spins a yarn about a finback that "came into an Harbour near Cape-Cod, and tow'd away a Sloop of near forty Tun, out of the Harbour into the Sea." I believe the yarn, for it is credible enough, and besides, who could resist the authorities who helped Dudley to collect his material, — 1 The Catalogue of 1723 and the Loose Leaf List. "■ No. 367 (xxxi. 148-150). a No. 387 (xxxm. 256-269). 1012.] LOST WORKS OF COTTON MATHER. 469 "the Reverend Mr. Greenleaf e 1 of Yarmouth, near Cape-Cod, and Mr. J. Coffin, sometime of the Island of Nantucket, both of them Places famous for the Whale-Fishery." It was Nathaniel Coffin who supplied Cotton Mather with his first knowledge of the famous Amphisba?na of Newbury, 2 — but the Coffins were a large family. . Two papers mentioned in the list, however, besides the Further Account are preserved. One, Nishmath-Chajim, 3 is well known. It was composed for The Angel of Bethesda, and stands as Chapter v. in the manuscript; but it was also pub- lished as a tract in 1722 or 1723. 4 The other is The Seventh 1 The Rev. Daniel Greenleaf (H. C. 1699) was minister of the First Church at Yarmouth, Massachusetts, from 1708 to 1727 (see Freeman, History of Cape Cod, 11. 208-10, 212, 214, 594, 697-8; J. W. Dodge, History of the First Congrega- tional Church, Yarmouth, 1873, 2I_2 5j C./F. Swift, Old Yarmouth, 121-123, 139). I have a receipt, in Mr. Greenleaf 's handwriting, which runs as follows: "Rec d of M r John Miller Const ble the full of my Sallery for my 14 th years service in the work of y 6 Ministry being y° year of our Lord 1721 1 say rec d Dan 11 Greenleaf." 2 Coffin's letter, June 14, 1723, concerning this two-headed monster, published in the New-England Courant, No. 100 (for June 24- July 1), is reprinted by J. T. Buckingham, Specimens of Newspaper Literature, 1850, 1. 85. See Mather's letter to Jurin, September 21, 1724 (Royal Society Letter-Book, M. 2. 47; Gay MS., fols. 219-222). 8 I. e., Breath of Life (Genesis, ii. 7). 4 Sibley, No. 371 (m. 138). "New-London. Printed and Sold by Timothy Green, 1722." The title-page reads, The Angel of Bethesda, but the running title is Nishmath-Chajim [etc.]. Mather sketched the plan of The Angel of Bethesda in a letter to John Winthrop (H. C. 1700), December 26, 1720. He refrained from enclosing "a sheet or two of my MSS" because of the risks of conveyance (4 Collections, vm. 445-446). On April 17, 1721, he reports slow progress, and adds: "I here single out one chapter of it, for your present Entertainment; Because I thought the Curiosity with the Novelty of it, would be really Entertaining to a Gentleman of your Sagacity " (lb. 448).. That this chapter was the Nishmath-Chajim may be in- ferred, partly from the quality of that tract (which suits the description), and partly from another letter to Winthrop, April 23, 1722: "I was looking out something to treat you withal; and, Lo, as a Fore-runner to some other Things, I single out a Chapter, in The Angel op Bethesda; which, I pray, lett Return by a safe Conveyance within a Month; with your sentiments upon my Nishmath Chajim, which you always know my value for" (lb. 452). The new chapter, sent with this letter, was probably the Seventh Son, to which Mather refers (as perhaps in Winthrop's hands) in a letter of January 10, 1723: "Did I ever send you a Little Dissertation of mine, upon, A Seventh Son ? A passage in one of your Letters, Looks as if I did; tho' I don't remember, that ever I did it" (76. 454). And finally, still in 1723 (apparently in May or early June), Mather writes to Win- throp: " I must importunately Request, That my Two Manuscripts; The Nish- math-Chajim, and The Seventh Son, may ... be return'd unto me. I have no copy of them, and I have more than ordinary occasion for them" (lb. 454). The urgent occasion was, no doubt, Mather's wish to insert these chapters in their 470 MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL SOCIETY. [FEB. Son. This, too, is preserved (as I believe) in The Angel of Bethesda. It has a curious history, which seems hitherto to have escaped the antiquarian investigator. On November 23, 1721, there appeared at Boston a single folio sheet * consisting of two parts: (1) Several Reasons proving that Inoculating or Transplanting the Small Pox, is a Lawful proper places in the work, which was approaching completion. The whole manu- script was ready for the printer on February 20, T724 (Diary, n. 6g8). From all this it appears that the Nishmath-Chajim was finished before April 17, i72r, — in ample time, therefore, to be sent to England with other Curiosa on or about November 30, i72r (cf. Diary, n. 661-662). Further, since Mather asked for the return of the manuscript in the spring of 1723, and said nothing about its having been printed at New London, I suspect that the 1722 on the title-page stands for 1722-3, and that the tract appeared between January 1 and March 25 of that year. Samuel Mather's list (p. 175) puts it third from the end under 1722. The letter asking the return of the Nishmath-Chajim and the Seventh Son is undated, but was obviously written later than that of January 10, 1722-3. A hither limit may be determined from the contents. (1) Mather asks for an ac- count of a certain " New Snake, who commands & governs the Rattle-Snakes." Now on June 4, 1723, he wrote to the Royal Society'on that subject (to Jurin, Royal Society Letter-Book, M. 2. 38; Gay MS., fol. 187; draught in A. A. S.). (2) Mather remarks. that "the New Uproar, which keeps the King at home, & keeps the Camp at Hide Park still going on, is variously talk'd about." This reference to Atterbury's Plot and its consequences can hardly have been written after July 8, 1723, when the New-England Courant printed news from London (dated May 7) to the effect that "his Majesty designs to go to Hanover about the Beginning of next Month." His visit for 1722 had been omitted on account of the plot. (See Robert Walpole's letter of May 29, 1722 O. S., to Horace Wal- pole in Coxe, Walpole, n. 220; Boyer, Political State for May, 1722, xxm. 53T, 549; New England Courant, August 6, 1722, No. 53; July 8, 1723, No. 101; July 22, 29, Nos. 103-104; Swift to Robert Cope, June 1, 1723, Scott's Swift, 2d ed., xvi. 414). (3) Mather says, "Our New Scene of Troubles here, God knows when & how it will terminate." This manifestly alludes to the incendiary fires and the fear of a servile insurrection in Boston in the spring of 1723 (Courant, April 22, 29, May 13, July 8, 1723, Nos. 90, 91, 93, 101; Mather to Prince, Diary, n. 686- 688.) — We may feel quite safe, then, in dating this letter sometime between May 1 and June 4, 1723. As printed in 4 Collections, vm. 454-455, the letter is unfor- tunately run together with the last page (all that is preserved) of a letter dated "i2 d r m . 1722, with which (as a glance at the original manuscripts among the Winthrop Papers reveals) it has nothing to do. The dividing line should come on printed page 455 between the words "into the common" and "And what?" The letter of "i2 d i m 1722" enclosed a copy of [Greenwood's] Friendly Debate — a circumstance which makes it clear that " 1722" is N. S., not, as tie editors as- sume, 1722-3 (see p. 472, note 5, infra). 1 So described by Dr. Haven in his edition of Thomas, n. 391. I know of nobody who has seen the original. It is reprinted in 1 Collections, rx. 275-280 (as Mr. Ford notes in the Diary, 11. 660), but nothing is there said of the form or whereabouts of the thing itself. It was, I suppose, not a broadside, but a leaf printed on both sides. 1912.] LOST WORKS OF COTTON MATHER. 471 Practice, by Increase Mather; 1 and (2) Sentiments on the Small Pox Inoculated. The second piece is unsigned, 2 but it is at once recognizable as Cotton Mather's, was probably never disowned by him, and is proved to be his work by an entry in the Diary? A reply to both parts was speedily prepared by John Williams. 4 It came out, in all probability, on December 4, 1721. 5 Wil- liams kept a "tobacco cellar" in Boston 6 and very likely dis- pensed drugs as well. Indeed, he seems to have given medical advice to his customers gratis. 7 He was an unlettered man, 1 The Several Reasons is expressly designated as "by Increase Mather," and is dated November 20, 1721. 2 Increase Mather introduces it as "the sentiments of another, well known in our churches, of which I declare my hearty approbation." 3 November 23, 1721: "I join with my aged Father, in publishing some, Sentiments on the Small-Pox Inoculated" (n. 660). The exact date of issue may be inferred from this entry. Its limits are fixed (1) by the date ap- pended to Increase Mather's contribution, November 20, 1721, and (2) by a reply to the Sentiments, in the Courant for November 20-27 (No. 17). 4 Several Arguments, proving, That Inoculating the Small Pox is not contained in the Law of Physick, either Natural or Divine, and therefore Unlawful. Together with A Reply to two short Pieces, one by the Rev. Dr. Increase Mather, and another by an Anonymous Author, Intituled, Sentiments on the Small Pox Inoculated. And also, A Short Answer to a late Letter in the New-England Courant. By John Wil- liams. Boston: Printed and sold by J . Franklin . . . 1721. 6 There is contradiction in the announcement of this tract in Franklin's own newspaper, the Courant. In No. 18 (for November 27-December 4, 1721) "the Second Edition" is advertised as "Just Publish'd," but in No. 19 (for December 4-11) the same thing (without the words "Second Edition") is advertised as "This Day publish'd." I have compared a copy of the tract which professes to be of "The Second Edition" (Harvard College Library) with two copies which do not so designate themselves (M. H. S., A. A. S.), and the contents are identical. So (with a few slight variations) are the typography and make- up. It is manifest that the type was not reset, except perhaps for the last page. A few trifling corrections are made in the " Second Edition." It is pos- sible that the first edition came out between November 23 (when the two "pieces" by the Mathers appeared) and December 4, and the second edition on December n. A scurrilous reply to Williams, in prose and verse (dated "Cambridge. Dec. 19. 1721") was sent to the Courant, and was printed at the end of A Friendly Debate; or, A Dialogue between Rusticus and Academicus (Boston. Printed and Sold by J. Franklin, 1722), 8-11, where it is ascribed to "an Academical Brother (Son to a Fellow of the Royal Society)," i. e., of course, to Samuel Mather. He expressly declared, however, in the Courant, No. 33 (for March 12-19, 1722), that he "was not concern'd in writing or composing" it. 6 See [Isaac Greenwood,] A Friendly Debate; or, A Dialogue between Aca- demicus; and Sawny 6" Mundungus (Boston, 1722), 20-21, 22-24; A Friendly Debate; or, A Dialogue between Rusticus and Academicus (Boston, 1722), 7-12; A Vindication of the Ministers of Boston (Boston, 1722), 3; John Williams, An Answer to a Late Pamphlet (Boston, 1722), 14-15. 7 In his Answer to a Late Pamphlet, p. 15, Williams says: "Unless I could install 472 MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL SOCIETY. [Feb. whose eccentric spelling made him the butt of numerous witti- cisms. He was dubbed Mundungus, from his trade, 1 and it was pretended that he had invented a new variety of human speech, Mundungian, which was well-fitted to be "the Universal Lan- guage." It was facetiously proposed that he be appointed Professor of Mundungian at Harvard College. A Mundungian Vocabulary was printed, enshrining such gems as cidnys for "kidneys," deses for " disease, " fecicions for "physicians," and yers for "ears." 2 Even Williams's publisher, James Franklin, lent himself to the jest, 3 and inserted in the Courant, without correcting the blunders in orthography, two letters from him (one of them signed " J. W.") as specimens of the Mundungian Language. 4 If they are authentic (as they doubtless are), John Williams was a spelling reformer of the heroic school afterwards made illustrious by Lord Timothy Dexter. Mather describes him as follows, in an unpublished letter to Dr. James Jurin, May 4, 1723: A sorry Tobacconist; who could hardly spell a Word of English, (even the Word English, from his acute Pen was Engleche) and could not read his own Manuscript, but pray'd the Printer to find out y e Meaning, & make English of it. This hideous Fellow, who is more known by the Name of Mundungus than that of John Williams, directed his Readers, to studde sempeti and Anthepeti; B and to forbid this Prates, because, to specke for Eoomain Invenecions in Fisecke, is not al'owebel. 6 you with the Title of Doctor of Physick, you must expect to follow my Steps, and give Advice gratis." 1 The nickname antedates the publication of [Greenwood's] Friendly Debate. A writer in the Gazette, January 8-15, 1722 (No. 112), who dates his letter "Cam- bridge, January 11. 1721" (i. e. 1722), calls him "that Crackbrain'd Mundungus Williams." 2 See [Greenwood's] Friendly Debate, 20-23. 8 So did the anonymous author of the Dialogue between Rusticus and Academi- cus (p. 12), though he, like Williams, was opposed to inoculation. 4 New-England Courant, No. 32 (for March 5-12, 1722). Williams's two tracts {Several Arguments, 1721; and An Answer to a Late Pamphlet, 1722) are not spelled in Mundungian fashion. 6 In his Several Arguments, p. 1, Williams declares that "the Rules of Natural Physick are Two, and no more; which are Sympathy and Antipathy." Mather mentions Mundungus in a letter of "i2 d i. m 1722" to John Winthrop (4 Collec- tions, vni. 455). This, I suspect, is 1722 n. s. (not 1722 [-23] as dated by the editors). For it obviously accompanied a copy of [Greenwood's] Friendly De- bate, which came out on March 7, 1721-22 (see Courant, No. 32, for March 5-12). Cf. p. 469, note 4, supra. 6 From the original draught (dated May 4, 1723) in the possession of the igi2.] LOST WORKS OF COTTON MATHER. 473 Williams's reply to the Mathers' folio sheet is rather dull reading, except for a couple of paragraphs that illustrate the popular superstitions of the time. Cotton Mather, in the Sentiments, had appealed to "experience" to show "that there never was a more unfailing remedy [than inoculation] employed among the children of men." x Williams saw an opening for a reductio ad absurdum. Here is his triumphant rejoinder: Hold Sir, suppose I tell you of two as successful, to wit, to cure Agues. The first is to wear a Spell about the Neck, next to the Skin; I can tell you too how to make it, and what Words are used in it. 2dly, The writing the Persons Name that hath the Ague, by the hand of a Seventh Son, and he slitting the Rine of an Elder- Tree, and opening it, and putting the Piece of Paper in, will cure the Ague: And they tell you of much Virtue in the Seventh Son, and also of the Elder Tree; and they, do not say ask them not, but tell us the Reason why they say so, to wit, because Judas hanged himself on it. I could tell you of many more such Things, with respect to the Event, which are good to a Person or People; but that does not prove it to be lawful, which you should have done, if you under- stand your Argument. 2 , A few pages later Williams reverts to the Seventh Son, asso- ciating him with the famous cure by the Royal Touch. Cotton Mather had contended that "the parents, and masters, and husbands and wives, whose relatives have beg'd as for their lives, that they might have leave to save their lives, by this method, should not by their obstinate violence hinder them from it, least on the loss of their lives they have sad matter of reflection left unto them." 3 Williams retorts: Sir, I shall answer you by a Similitude, and you may judge. I have known Children that have had the King's Evil, and have desired their Governours let them go and be touched by the King, who lays his Hand upon them, and says, I touch, and God heals: Whether or no if Parents or Governours are satisfy'd that it is not lawful, or .that there is no Physical Means in it, they ought not to deter them from it, lest the Disease may not go off, and they have sad Cause of Reflection. The like Cure the Seventh Son performs, which you may consider. 4 American Antiquarian Society, pp. 14-15- In the same letter Mather calls Williams "this Poor smoaky Conjurer" (p. 15). 1 1 Collections, rx. 278. 2 Several Arguments, 11. 3 Sentiments, etc. (1 Collections, rx. 279). 4 Several Arguments, 16-17. 60 474 MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL SOCIETY. [Feb. One may venture to assert, with little fear of contradiction, that in these two inimitable arguments of Mundungus Williams we have latent the impulse that moved Cotton Mather to compose The Seventh Son Examined; with a Touch upon the Kings Evil. This title directly follows Nishmath Chajim in both lists of Curiosa, and there is no difficulty about dates. 1 The Seventh Son, at all events, was written and sent to Dr. Woodward with other Curiosa Americana. It is preserved, I believe, in Chapter lxii of The Angel of Bethesda. The title of this Chapter is "Fuga Daemonum. or, Cures by CHARMS considered. And, a SEVENTH SON examined." The first three pages (pp. 374-377) inveigh against the use of charms. Then follows (on pp. 378-380) a section headed "Mantissa," which begins: "We have a Fancy among o r Com- mon People, That a SEVENTH SON, among Brethren that have not had a Sister born between them, is endued with I know not what, Power of Healing Various Distempers, with a Touch of his Hand upon y* Part affected." P. 381 is blank. P. 382 begins a new section — headed "An Appendix. POPERY ridiculed " — which continues through p. 384 and closes the chapter. It discusses the custom of appealing to special saints for the relief of special diseases, and condemns, as a folly akin to idolatry, the practice (once common in medicine) of "assign- ing . . . Particular Plants to particular Planets." The whole ^chapter is instructive reading for such of us moderns as have been brought up to think that Cotton Mather was a type- specimen of the homo super stitiosus. How much of Chapter lxii was contained in the Seventh Son that Mather sent to Woodward, we cannot tell; possibly the whole of it, but certainly the "Mantissa" (pp. 378-380), at the very least, and probably the "Appendix" (pp. 382-384) 1 Williams's Several Arguments came out between November 23 and December 4 (or perhaps on the latter date), 1721. Mather was "writing letters for Europe" and " sending over many Things" on November 30th (Diary, n. 661-662). These may have gone by David Cutler, who is recorded as " entered out " for London in the News-Letter for November 27-December 4, 1721 (No. 931). The Courant of the same dates (No. 18) says that David Cutler was "outward bound" for London in the ship Abraham. Or they may have gone by John Westcot, of the Friend- ship, who "cleared out" in the next week (News-Letter, No. 932, for December 4- 11, 1721; Courant, No. 19, same dates), or by Jonathan Clark, who "cleared out" in the week after (News-Letter, No. 933, for December n-18; Courant, No. 20, same dates). 1012.] LOST WORKS OF COTTON MATHER. 475 as well. That the "Appendix" was originally addressed to a British audience is proved by a minute detail: Mather speaks of a famous English physician 1 as "your Culpepper." 2 So much for the Seventh Son. VII. Curiosa Variolarum. 1722. Dr. James Jurin, Secretary of the Royal Society, was one of the leading English advocates of inoculation. In a tract on the subject, published in 1723, 3 he remarks: The Reverend Mr. Mather, in a Letter dated March 10, 1721. from Boston in New England, gives an Account, That of near 300 inoculated there, 5 or 6 died upon it or after it, but from other Diseases and Accidents, chiefly from having taken the Infection in the com- mon way by Inspiration, before it could be given them in this way of Transplantation. 2 And again, on the same page: Mr. Mather tells us, that the Persons inoculated were young and old, from 1 Year to 70, weak and strong; and by other relations we are inform'd, that Women with Child, and others even in Childbed, underwent the Operation. Apparently the Greatness of the Danger they were in, from the Infection in the Natural Way, which then raged among them with the utmost Fury, made them the more adventurous. Once more: Mr. Mather observes, in his Letter mention'd above, that out of more than 5000 Persons that had the Small Pox at Bos- 1 Nicholas Culpeper (1616-1654). See Dictionary of National Biography, xm. 286-287. 2 ms., p. 384. 3 A Letter to the Learned Caleb Cotesworth, M.D. . . . Containing a Com- parison between the Mortality of the Natural Small Pox, and that Given by Inocula- tion, London, 1723. The letter is dated "Feb. 20th, 172!." There is a postscript beginning: "Since this Paper was drawn up and communicated to the Royal Society, the following Account of the Success of Inoculation in and about Boston, in New England, was procured at my Desire, by my Ingenious Friend Dr. Nes- bitt, from Capt. John Osborne, who resided in that Town and Neighbourhood during the whole time of that Practice. I think proper to insert it here, as it confirms Mr. Mather'?, Relation, and is a more particular Account of the Matter of Fact, than any that I have yet seen" (p. 19). Jurin's Letter to Cotesworth, with the Postscript, was also published in No. 374 of the Philosophical Transactions (for November-December, 1722, xxxn. 213 ff.). 2 P. 6 {Philosophical Transactions, xxxn. 215). 476 MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL SOCIETY. [FEB. ton in New England, within little more than half a Year, near 900 died. 1 Mather's letter is extant, in a contemporary copy, in Sloane MS. 3324, fol. 260. It is dated "March 10. 17!^," and was addressed to Dr. John Woodward. 2 The passages quoted by Jurin occur in it. The same letter is also quoted by Dr. William Douglass, in his Dissertation, 1730, for the sake of illustrating what he styles Mather's "foible" of "credulity." The best of Men have some Foible: that of Dr. Mathers was Credulity ... I shall mention a few Instances of this weakness from his own Letters concerning Inoculation published in London: in one Letter Dated March 1722 He tells the world, That A. 1721. in Boston, some Cats had a regular Small-Pox and died of it; that during the Small Pox, the Pigeons and Dunghill Fowls did not lay nor hatch, that he never knew Blistering miss of saving life in the Small- Pox, &°c. 3 Mather's words in the letter of March 10, 172 1-2, are as follows: Your D r Leigh, in his naturall History of Lancashire, counts it an occurrence worth relating, that there where some Catts known to catch the Small Pox, & pass regularly thro' the state of it, & then to Dy, Wee have had among us the very same Occurrence. It was generaly observ'd, & Complain' d, that the Pidgeon Houses of the City continued unfruitfull, & the Pidgeons did not Hatch or lay as they used to do, all the while that the Small Pox was in its 1 P. 17 (Philosophical Transactions, xxxn. 223). 2 The letter begins: "So Considerable a part of Mankind fearfully perishing by the small Pox and many more of us grievously Suffering, by that miserable Distemper, You will Allow me to Entertain you, with a few more Communications, and write You (I think its) a fourth Letter upon it" (Sloane ms. 3324, fol. 260 a). The previous letters were clearly enough, (i) that of July 12, 1716, (discussed on pp. 420 ff. supra); (2) that of September 7, 1721, printed as An Account, etc., in 1722 (see pp. 444 ft., supra); and (3) the Further Account (see pp. 460, 463 ff., supra). Of these the first and third were certainly addressed to Woodward, and the second is so designated in the Loose Leaf List (though labelled "To M r Dum- mer" in the Catalogue of 1723; see p. 455, supra). We may feel sure, therefore, that this letter of March 10, 1721-2, was also addressed to Woodward (though no address appears in the Sloane MS.), and that it is identical with Curiosa Variolarum, mentioned as addressed to him in both the Catalogue of 1723 and the Loose Leaf List. 8 P. 8. Douglass repeats this passage with slight variations, in his Summary, n. (1751) 411. In the latter place he omits the date (March, 1722), but still refers to the matter as "published." X 9I2-] LOST WORKS OF COTTON MATHER. 477 Epidemical Progress. And it is very strongly affirm'd, that our Dunghill Fowl, felt much of the like effect upon them. I will add but one thing more. For succour under the Small Pox, where Life is in Danger, after all the Methods & Medicines, y* our Sydenham and others rely upon, I can assure you, wee have yet found nothing so sure as this. Procure for the Patient as early as may be, by Epispasticks a plentifull Discharge at the Handwrists or Ankles, or both; (I say, as early as may be/) & keep them running till the danger is over. When the Venom of the Small Pox makes an Evident & violent Invasion on the noble parts, this Discharge does wonderfully. I am sorry it was so late before wee fell into this way; but it has constantly prospered; I know not, that it has once Miscarried, since wee came into it. 1 The passages derided by Douglass, we note, form no part of Jurin's quotations. Hence it is clear that Douglass, when he says that Mather's letter was "published in London," cannot be referring to the extracts made by Jurin. 2 Nobody has yet found Mather's letter in print. Doubtless, however, it saw the light in some London newspaper of the time. We know that the London papers paid more or less attention to the epidemic in Boston and to the experiments there tried in the way of inoculation. For instance, they reproduced Dr. Lawrence Dalhonde's sensational report made to the selectmen on July 21, 1721. 3 A search in the files in the British Museum might add several items to our knowledge of the disturbances in Boston. The title Curiosa Variolarum occurs in both the Catalogue of 1723 and the Loose Leaf List, and may unhesitatingly be attached to the letter of March 10, 172 1-2. 1 This passage about epispastics (or blisters) is repeated, almost word for word, in the margin of p. 126 of The Angel of Bethesda (Chapter xx), as a later addition to the text. 2 In another place in his Dissertation (22-23) Douglass remarks: "Dr. Mather in his Letters published in London, gives the reason why they used no precaution: because in the natural way it raged with the utmost fury, and to make his assertion good, says that of something more than 5000, decumbents near 900 died." These figures are in Mather's letter of March 10, 1721-2; but the expression "raged with the utmost fury," as well as the inference about lack of precaution, is not found there. Douglass seems to have taken these from Jurin (see the passages quoted above). ' See pp. 4S7-4S8, supra. 478 MASSACHUSETTS HISTORICAL SOCIETY. [FEB. VIII. The Case op the Small-Pox Inoculated. 1723. The American Antiquarian Society possesses Mather's own draught of a rather long communication to the Royal Society dated May 4, 1723, and entitled The Case of the Small-Pox Inoculated; further Cleared. To U James Jurin. The essay was sent to Jurin by Mather along with the well-known letter 01 May 21, 1723, in which he requested an official judgment on the disputed question of his right to style himself an F. R. S. 1 The essay is sufficiently familiar to students of Mather MSS. My sole excuse, then, for mentioning it here is the fact that I have ascertained, since the present paper was submitted to the Society, the existence of another copy of the document. Some weeks ago Mr. Tuttle called to my notice the occur- rence of an article on inoculation by Cotton Mather in Sir Arthur H. Church's list of papers in the Archives of the Royal Society. 2 Suspecting that this might be The Case of the Small-Pox Inoculated further Cleared, I addressed a letter of inquiry to Mr. Robert Harrison, the Assistant Secretary and Librarian, asking him to send me the opening and the closing words of the Royal Society MS. and to indicate its form and extent. Mr. Harrison replied with a promptness and courtesy which lay me under great obligations to him. The document, he informs me, 3 " is written on small 4to paper and extends to 17 pages. It is entitled 'The Case of the Small-pox Inoculated, further cleared,' and is dated May 21st, 1723." This date, we note at once, corresponds with that of the letter in which the manuscript was enclosed, — not with the date (May 4) of the draught. The change was a natu- ral one on Mather's part. The Royal Society MS. begins: It is a thing well known to all who know anything, that the Small-pox has from the days that the Saracens brought it into Europe with them, still proved a Great Plague unto the Inhabitants of the Earth, and bin enough, if there were nothing else, to pro- 1 See Publications of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, xrv. 107-109; cf. p. 418, note 1, supra. 2 The Royal Society Archives, ' Classified -Papers ' of the Period 1606-1741 (Oxford, privately printed, 1907), 28 (noted as preserved in " Guard Books, xxiii. (2)31")- 8 In a letter of March 22, 1912. 1912.] SOME LOST WORKS OF COTTON MATHER. 479 cure the Denomination of a Wo, for those woful Harpy es. The Numbers of the Slain by this tremendous Malady, have been far more than of those, who have perished by the Pestilence; and the Distemper which has been, by way of Eminency called, The Destroyer, has not been such a Besome of Destruction as this Com- petitor to it, among them, who have had ye Graves waiting for them. It ends as follows: I write unto a person of so much Goodness, that I am sure he will pardon the Fatigue, which the perusal of this Long Epistle may give him; upon an Affair the Importance whereof will make its Apology; and he will with his usual Candour, accept the In- tention of, Syr, Your most hearty Friend & Servant, Cotton Mather. Boston, New England. "The paper," adds Mr. Harrison, "is not in Mather's own autograph, though signed and dated by him." This account of the article establishes its complete identity with the communication of which the American Antiquarian Society possesses the holograph draught. DATE DUE -#bT"" r&ms- i GAYLORD PRINTED IN U.S.A.