^{page 172 note 1} Clowes, W. L., Royal Navy: Hist, from Earliest Times (1898), II, 527Google Scholar. See, however, Martin-Leake, S., Life of Sir John Leake (Callender ed., 1920), II. 365 n.Google Scholar

^{page 172 note 2} See letter of William, E. S. Grew III, Bentinch and William III (1924), p. 329.Google Scholar

^{page 173 note 1} Jeremiah Dummer to Earl of Dartmouth, Colonial Office (Public Record Office, London), 5/9, No. 48 (hereafter cited as CO.). Henry St. John also realised the importance of Spanish-American trade. Cor. of Bolingbroke (Parke ed., 1798), I, 23. The French ministry also had a lively sense of the value of Canada. Archives des Affaires Étrangères (Paris), Correspondance Politique: Angleterre, 237, ff. 220–1. (Hereafter cited as C.P.A.)

^{page 174 note 1} Calendar of State Papers, Colonial (1689–92), p. 399; Colden, C., Hist, of Five Nations (1909), I, 162.Google Scholar

^{page 174 note 2} Adams, J. T., Revolutionary New Eng. (1691–1776), (1923), p. 60.Google Scholar

^{page 175 note 1} Memorial to Queen on Vetch's “ Scheme.” C.C. (1708–9), p. 165.

^{page 175 note 2} Martin-Leake, I, 91–104; Burchett, J., Complete Hist, of Most Remark. Transits, at Sea (1720), pp. 592–609Google Scholar; Lediard, T., Naval Expedns. (1735), pp. 763–766.Google Scholar

^{page 175 note 3} C.C. (1702–3), pp. viii, 571, 617, 669. Nottingham, Secretary of State, ordered the Admiralty Council to examine into the reasons for Admiral Graydon's failure to attack French ships on his way to the West Indies, and to ascertain why Walker left Guadeloupe sooner than he should. C.C. (1703–4), p. 204. See also Lediard, p. 784. Benbow was also instructed that in addition to policing the Caribbean, he should attack Newfoundland, and destroy all the fishing equipment. Ib. (1702–3), p. 545.

^{page 176 note 1} 29 Sept. 1702, CO. 5/1119. Cornbury remained very confident that the conquest of Canada would be easy. C.C. (1702–3), p. 520. Its importance is also brought out in “ Reasons for attacking Spanish America by Dutch and English at once,” which claimed that the capture of Quebec was “ of the highest importance in itself and a preservation to our northern colonies, which by that great establishment [Canada] must in time be undermined and destroyed.” C.C. (1702–3), p. 129.

^{page 176 note 2} To Board of Trade, 10 Aug., 1703. C.C. (1702–3), p. 635.

^{page 177 note 1} Burchett, p. 598; C.C. (1702–3), pp. 159, 187, 192; Soc. of Col. Wars (1897), p. 84 sq.

^{page 177 note 2} Probably the victories at Blenheim and Gibraltar.

^{page 177 note 3} 6 Mass. Histor. Soc. Collns., I, 340.

^{page 178 note 1} Hutchison, T., Hist, of Col. of Mass. Bay, II, 163–165Google Scholar. In fact, there was a general expectation, both in France and in the colonies, that the English would attack Port Royal or Quebec.

^{page 178 note 2} C.C. (1702–3), pp. 224, 568.

^{page 179 note 1} Osgood, I, 427; Adams, pp. 70, 76. A long account of the fiasco is given in Acts and Resolves (1707), VIII, 716, 722–51; 3 Mass. Histor. Soc. Collns., V, 190–5. Dudley had been very optimistic, and with good reason, for the enterprise had been well planned. It was simply another case of too many cooks. C.C. (1706–8), pp. 423, 439. See also Dummer's Letter to a Noble Lord.

^{page 179 note 2} Cal. Ty. Papers (1708–14), p. 47; Niles' “ Hist, of Indian and French Wars,” 4 Mass. Histor. Soc. Collns', V, 318.

^{page 179 note 3} C.O. 5/912. Dudley felt that unless French power in Canada were soon destroyed, “ they will be able to ravage all her Majesty's governments and put them beyond a capacity of carrying on a trade so necessary and beneficial to … Great Britain.”

^{page 180 note 1} Penn-Logan Cory., II, 281, 283, 343; R.I. Col. Records, V, 57; C.C. (1708–9), p. 256; Pa. Col. Records, II, 448.

^{page 180 note 2} This little tract, printed in C.C. (1708–9), pp. 41–51, was well received by the Commissioners of Trade, who kept Vetch at court at their expense to council with him. During the late autumn of 1709, they held at least seven meetings on his suggestion. See Jour. Bd. Tr. (1704–9), pp. 531–5, 553–9.

^{page 180 note 3} Jour. Bd. Tr. (1704–9), p. 563; C.C. (1708–9), p. 71; N.Y. Col. Docts., V, 65; CO. 5/865, No. 22. See also joint letter of Nicholson, Vetch, Dudley and Moody to Sunderland, 24 Oct., 1709. C.C. (1708–9), p. 488.

^{page 180 note 4} CO. 5/865, Nos. 16, 21; C.C. (1708–9), pp. 24, 42, 315, 328; N.Y. Col. Docts., V, 42. Although Dudley himself took such a large view of things, he found the colonists interested only in commerce.

^{page 181 note 1} Burton, J. H., Queen Anne, III, 87–88.Google Scholar

^{page 181 note 2} CO. 5/1084, No. 39.

^{page 181 note 3} Niles' “Hist.”; C.C. (1708–9), pp. 57, 61, 147–9; throughout the year there was evidence of the English fear of the French in America. House of Lords MSS. (1708–10), pp. 51–7.

^{page 181 note 4} C.C. (1708–9), p. 230; Hutchison, II, 176. Cotton Mather, in his “Diary,” 3 March, 1709, spoke of the expedition as “another matter which I laid before the lord.” 7 Mass. Histor. Soc. Collns., VIII, 8. The original plan included the capture of Acadia and Newfoundland. N.S. Histor. Soc. Collns., IV, 20.

^{page 182 note 1} CO. 5/9, No. 22; N.Y. Col. Docts., V, 70–4; Soc. of Col. Wars(1897), P- 8 l I w - T. Root, Reins, of Pa. with Brit. Govt., p. 272. New York was to raise 800 men, Connecticut 350, New Jersey 200, Pennsylvania 150—all to be at Albany by the middle of May. New England was to furnish 1,200. C.C. (1708–9), pp. 230–5. For Sunderland's instructions to Dudley and Lovelace, see N.Y. Col. Docts., V, 72; Pa. Col. Records, II, 447.

^{page 182 note 2} Kingsford, II, 428. Nicholson, however, was forced to accept partly because Peter Schuyler would serve as second in command only under him. His official uprightness and breadth of vision were unquestioned, but his immorality and earlier Jacobite associations made him suspected. Parkman, I, 142. New Jersey begged that he “ would oblige our province and nation by taking on him the supreme command of the forces employed against Canada by land.” C.C. (1708–9), p. 403. See his letter to the Secretary of State, explaining his position. Ib., p. 149. Hildreth said that he was “ bred an army officer.” Hist, of U.S. (1882), II, 261, See, however, N.Y. Col. Docts., V, 74–74.

^{page 182 note 3} I. Norris to B. Cole, Penn-Logan Corr., II, 448; Acts and Resolves, IX, 57. New Jersey finally voted £3,000. E. R. Tanner, Prov. of N.J., pp. 226, 305, 401. For Pennsylvania's attitude, consult Penn-Logan Corr., II, 346–9, 357.

^{page 183 note 1} N.Y. Col. Docts., IX, 834–6; CO. 5/913; Col. Ty. Paps. (1708–24), p. 47; Niles' “ Hist.”; Penn-Logan Corr., II, 351; Collection de MSS. de la Nouvelle France (1884), II, 502. John Winthrop felt there was some great mystery about the affair. 6 Mass. Histor. Soc. Collns., V, 186n.

^{page 183 note 2} C.C. (1706–8), p. 358. He was represented by the Secretary of State, who said that the Queen felt that being “ knocked on the head “ was no proper treatment for British subjects. Ib., p. 411.

^{page 183 note 3} C.C. (1708–9), pp. 238, 241; Sewell's “ Diary,” 7 Mass. Histor. Soc. Collns., VII, 8. Dudley suggested earlier that the destruction of the French settlements “ would make room for a colony of North Brittans if Her Majesty shall so please, which would be much more worth while than anything in Scotland.” Jour. Bd. Tr. (1704–9), p. 333; C.C, (1708–9), p. 439.

^{page 184 note 1} N.S. Histor. Soc. Collns., IV, 61; C.C. (1708–9), p. 437. Vetch was confident that if they captured Montreal and Quebec, “ all the others must of consequence fall unto Her Majesty's hands [so that] it shall not be in the power of the French to retake them.” He even suggested rounding out the British Empire by taking Pensacola from Spain, that Anne might “ be the sole empress of the vast North American continent.”

^{page 184 note 2} “ Minutes of Prov. Counc,” Pa. Col. Records, II, 449; Cockerill to Board of Trade, C.C. (1708–9), p. 409. Lt.-Gov. Ingoldesby of New York praised the activity of the assembly, saying, “ never people went more cheerfully on any designe than they have done on this, having raised £14,000 for the execution thereof, and which will not do I am told by £4,000,” C.O. 5/1049, Nos. 107, 164; N.Y. Co. Docts., V, 164.

^{page 185 note 1} N.Y. Col. Docts., IX, 837; C.C. (1708–9), p. 437; Colln, de MSS., II, 511.

^{page 185 note 2} Kingsford, II, 446; Histor. Mag. (1859), III, 123; N.S. Histor. Soc. Collns., IV, 20. Palfrey, J. G., New Engl. (1884), III, 256Google Scholar. The meeting seems to have taken place at Rehoboth. Dudley still worried about the activity of privateers.

^{page 186 note 1} C.O. 5/9, Nos. 32–45, passim; C.C. (1708–9), pp. 492–5; Dudley's letter to Boyle, C.C. (1710–11), p. 332. See also Ib. (1708–9), pp. 489–92.

^{page 186 note 2} Nothing indicates that “ the statesmen at home had the slightest realization that an opportunity had presented itself of improving the relations between the colonies and the mother-country,” Adams, p. 80.

^{page 187 note 1} See Colln, de MSS., II, 520, 522. The colonists, however, had not forgotten that the bill for abrogating their charters, introduced into Parliament late in William's reign, failed only for lack of time; and that in 1706 a second one actually passed the Lords, only to fail in the Commons. C.J., XV, 151–83, passim; L.J., XVI, 659–715, passim; C.O. 5/1291. See also C.C. (1701), p. 296.

^{page 188 note 1} N.Y. Col. Docts., IX, 931–3. Vaudreuil learned that this force was made up largely of Scots. See also Jesuit Relations (ed. Thwaites), LXVI, 195–7. Major Lloyd heard in Quebec that summer that the French there expected an attack by twelve warships and 6,000 Scots under “ Macharty ” [Macartney] who were coming over to settle. The French, it is interesting to note, knew of the diversion of the British force before New England did. C.C. (1710–11), p. 300.

^{page 188 note 2} Geheime Staats-Archiv. (Berlin), 4ep. XI, 73, Conv. 35; C.P.A. (Paris), 230, f. 152; Add. MSS. (Br. Mus.), 17677DDD, ff. 477, 484, 495; C.O. 5/1049, No. 157; Wake MSS. (Christ Church, Oxford), Lincoln, III; W. T. Morgan, “ The Five Nations and Queen Anne,” Miss. Valley Histor. Rev., Sept., 1926.

^{page 188 note 3} C.C. (1710–11), p. 10.

^{page 189 note 1} C.C. (1710–11), pp. 103, 137; CO. 5/9, No. 60. See also House of Lords MSS. (1708–10), passim, which indicate that the nerves of the ministry were somewhat jumpy.

^{page 189 note 2} CO. 5/9, No. 65; J. C. Campbell, Lives of Admirals (1817), IV, 109; C. Mather's “ Diary,” 7 Mass. Histor. Soc. Collns., VIII, 35; Lediard, p. 848; Penhallow, p. 58; Niles' “ Hist.”; N.S. Histor. Soc. Collns. (1878), I, 59.

^{page 189 note 3} N.Y. Col. Docts., IX, 845.

^{page 189 note 4} Martin-Leake, I, 365; Osgood, I, 438.

^{page 189 note 5} CO. 5/10, No. 137. Governor Cranston wrote that Rhode Island had fitted out 200 men with transports. Massachusetts informed Anne she had provided 900 men and equipment. C.C. (1710–11), p. 174.

^{page 190 note 1} Col. Records of Ct. (1706–16), pp. 234–72, passim; Arnold, II, 39. New York and New Jersey also issued paper money in the continental colonies. The Connecticut Assembly voted to accept it in payment of taxes. Hildreth, II, 260.

^{page 190 note 2} Boston News Letter, 6 Nov., 1710, reprinted in N.S. Histor. Collns. (1878), I, 64; C.C. (1710–11), p. 127; Niles' “ Hist.”; Soc. of Col. Wars (1897), p. 84.

^{page 190 note 3} Adams, p. 81. This is vigorously contradicted by Quary, who maintained that everything was in “ redyness “ at Boston, and every one nervous over the delay of the British forces. C.C. (1710–11), p. 126. Parkman (I, 145) claimed that Massachusetts worked hard to get ready, and even impressed men for the transports.

^{page 190 note 4} C.O. 5/9, No. 65. See also Doyle, Pur. Cols., II, 369.

^{page 190 note 5} Add. MSS. (Br. Mus.) 32, 694. See also C.C. (1710–11), p. 135.

^{page 190 note 6} C.C. (1710–11), p. 127.

^{page 191 note 1} C.O. 324/32, No. 21. Adams (p. 80) errs in assuming that Shannon's force left for America. Dartmouth informed Dudley and others late in August that the project had been laid aside for the present on account of contrary winds and their inability to spare a sufficient number of men. C.C. (1710–11), p. 184. In October, Shannon wrote from the Isle of Wight about his preparations, obviously for some other project. C.O. 5/9, Nos. 1–2. Parkman (I, 142) said that Massachusetts asked that the troops be in Boston by the end of March. Nicholson did not leave Plymouth until two months later, at which time there came a desire to speed things up and send Shannon against Quebec.

^{page 191 note 2} Penhallow, p. 59. Arnold gives (II, 40) the number of warships as 12 and the transports as 24, but a “ journal” in the Record Office gives 5 men-of-war and 36 transports.

^{page 191 note 3} R.I. Col. Records, IV, 93, 99; Pa. Col. Records, II, 460–75, passim.

^{page 192 note 1} CO. 5/9, No. 75; N.S. Histor. Soc. Colitis. (1878), I, 65–87; 4 Mass. Histor. Soc. Collns., V, 320, For a “ diary ” of all important happenings, 25–29 September, see Soc. of Col. Wars (1897), pp. 87–94. The fort had not been provisioned for three years. C.C. (1710–11), p. 549. Vetch was made governor, and the Council of War sent Major Livingstone to Vaudreuil to complain of Indian atrocities and threaten reprisals. Livingstone's account of his journey is filled with harrowing details of hairbreadth escapes. C.C. (1710–11), p. 371.

^{page 192 note 2} C.C. (1710–11), p. 101; Adams, p. 81.

^{page 192 note 3} C.O. 5/10, No. 138; CO. 5/9, No. 3. Later, they called attention to the value of naval stores to be secured there, and the importance Annapolis Royal as a breeding-ground for seamen; all this at a time when the English were thinking more seriously, perhaps, of the mastery of the sea than at any time since the days of Drake or Blake. See R.I, Col. Records, IV, 108; C.C. (1710–11), p. 334.

^{page 193 note 1} CO. 5/9, No. 48. Dummer felt that the fisheries were valuable and that the sale of English manufactures would increase in America. C.C. (1710–11), p. 334. ²C.O. 5/865, No. 17. See also C.C. (1708–9), p. 446.

^{page 193 note 2} C.C. (1710–11), pp. 226, 246; Lediard, II, 849; Campbell, Admirals, II, 113. Much earlier, Dudley asked for two warships to guard the provinces; also for more privateers to annoy the French and capture storeships for Canada or Acadia, where supplies were short. C.S.P.D. (1703–4), p. 44.

^{page 194 note 1} Jour. Bd. Tr. (P.R.O.), 5 January, 5 February, 1711; 4 Mass. Histor. Soc. Collns., V, 238; Soc. of Col. Wars (1897), P. 126.