thrown into the streets, and were in danger of being completely destroyed. Dr. [Andrew] E[liot] made every exertion to save them. Several trunks of MSS., among them the second volume of the History of Massachusetts Bay, were preserved by his care and attention, and he spent much time in assisting to arrange them." (Eliot's Biographical Dictionary.)

The dates at which the second volume of the History and the volume of State Papers appeared, both being subsequent to the dispersion of the library in seventeen hundred and sixty-five, as well as the fact that Hutchinson contemplated a second volume of State Papers, and a third of History, make it probable that such historical material of value in this connection as reached Dr. Eliot must have been by him restored to Hutchinson before the flight of the latter from the country, and have thus found its way to the State House, upon the confiscation of his literary effects.* The manuscript of his second volume of History, stated by Hutchinson to have been thrown into the street and to have been rescued by Dr. Eliot, was so restored, and is now at the State House.

That the sacking of the library was thorough, and that Hutchinson lost public papers as well as private, appears from his letter of August thirtieth, seventeen hundred and sixty-five. He writes, but four days after his loss, to Richard Jackson, Esq.: "Besides my plate and family pictures, household furniture of every kind, my own, my children's and servant's apparel, they carried off about £900 sterling in money, and emptied the house of every thing whatsoever, except a part of the kitchen furniture, not leaving a single book or paper in it, and have scattered or destroyed all the manuscripts and other papers I had been collecting for thirty years together, besides a great number of publick papers in my custody." That the quantity which found its way to the State House, whether through Dr. Eliot's care and pains or otherwise, was considerable, appears from the letter of Samuel Dexter, Esq., of Dedham, to whom had been committed the custody of Hutchinson's literary effects in the hands of the Commonwealth. He writes, October eighteenth, seventeen hundred and eighty-three, that he has them deposited in a large box, weighing, with its contents, near one hundred pounds."

66

That the several trunks full of manuscript saved by Dr. Eliot were by no means all that Hutchinson lost, but that other material, which may have come to the State House after Hutchinson's flight, eluded the care of his friend and neighbor, appears from his statement in the preface to the second volume of History, that "the loss of many papers and books, in print as well as manuscript, besides my family memorials, never can be repaired. For several days I had no hopes of recovering any considerable part of my History, but, by the great care and pains of my good friend and neighbor, the Rev. Mr. Eliot, who received into his house all my books and papers which were saved, the whole manuscript, except eight or ten sheets, were collected together, and although it had lain in the streets scattered abroad several hours in the rain, yet so much of it was legible as that I was able to supply the rest, and

• See letter of E. Eliot, Dec. 1814, in 2 Mass. Hist. Coll. III. 289.

Soon closed her hero's story:
His soul of fire and light
Passed, as the guns of Lexington
Opened the fearful fight.

The baby on her bosom

Through ninety years fought well
For a stainless flag of freedom,
As his country's records tell.

A hundred years have vanished;
We know by heart and sight
The conflicts which have followed
That wild December night.

And standing thus surrounded

By spirits of the past,

Let us wrestle for their blessing,

While we hold their mantle fast.

The Rev. GEORGE E. ELLIS, D.D., then passed around for the inspection of the members of the Society a large Silver Bowl, which was viewed with more than ordinary interest on account of the historical importance which it possesses.

Upon the front of the bowl is inscribed:

To the Memory of the glorious Ninety-Two Members of the Honorable House of Representatives of the Massachusetts Bay, who, undaunted by the insolent Menaces of Villains in Power, from a strict regard to Conscience and the Liberties of their Constituents, on the 30th of June, 1768, Voted, Not to Rescind.

This inscription is surrounded by a wreath, and surmounted by a liberty-cap. On the opposite side of the bowl is a smaller wreath encircling the words,

No. 45.
"Wilkes and Liberty."

Between, also surrounded by a liberty-cap, two small standards. Upon that at the right hand is engraved Magna Charta; and upon that at the left, Bill of Rights. Underneath is engraved a torn document, inscribed General Warrants.

Around the circumference, near the top of the bowl, are engraved the names of the Fifteen Associates, belonging to Boston, for whom the bowl was made, and to whom, as a fellowship, it belonged. The favorite method of a "Round Robbin" is adopted, to indicate equality and common responsibility. The names are as follows:

John Homer, John White, William Bowes, William Mackay, Peter Boyer, Daniel Malcom, Benjamin Cobb, Benjamin Goodwin, Caleb Hopkins, John Welsh, Nathaniel Barber, Fortesque Vernon, Daniel Parker, Jolin Marston, Ichabod Jones.

In referring to this relic, Dr. ELLIS said: The bowl, simple in form, and without chasing, is of pure standard silver, of substantial thickness, and hammered work. It was manufactured by Paul Revere, whose name is modestly stamped underneath. It weighs forty-four ounces and seven pennyweights. It is nearly six inches in depth and eleven inches in diameter, and will hold about a gallon. It rests upon a thick-rimmed base, or foot, of an inch in breadth. Mr. William Mackay bought out the shares of his associates in its proprietorship. It now belongs to his grandson, Mr. Robert Caldwell Mackay of this city.

The name "Sons of Liberty" is said to have been adopted. here from its having been used in a speech in Parliament by our friend Colonel Barré. The fellowship under the name here was formed after the passage of the Stamp Act, and was first called in a Boston paper "The Union Club." It was composed mostly of mechanics, and held secret meetings, at which the risings and other measures were planned. The principal committee met in the counting-room of Chase & Speakman's distillery, in Hanover Square. (See "Boston Gazette," Aug. 22, 1768.) The Provincial Assembly of Massachusetts had voted in 1767 to raise a Committee of Correspondence, by a circular letter, with the sister colonies, upon the common grievances. This high-handed measure, foreboding treason, congresses, and independence, when reported by Governor Sir Francis Bernard to the King and ministry, was interpreted in its full significance. A demand for the rescinding of the Act was made by the Governor, under Instructions, of the Assembly of the next year. The mischief of the circular letter had, of course, already been done. A warm debate in the Assembly resulted, June 30, 1768, in a vote "Not to rescind." Seven

teen voted for rescinding, ninety-two against rescinding. John Wilkes, in No. 45 of his "North Briton," vindicated the act of the colonies. "General warrants" were governmental warrants giving authority to search houses.

This ancient relic of our local patriotism was evidently intended for holding, that there might be dispensed from it with a ladle, a favorite compounded beverage, of which a considerable quantity must have been made and used internally or externally, in just those days, which went by the name of "Punch." It is to be supposed that if the company to partake of it was large, there was another more capacious, if less costly, vessel near at hand, from which its contents might be renewed. Possibly, too, there were certain bottles or decanters in close proximity, from which those contents might be reinforced if too weak a hand had directed the mixture in the bowl. The exact method of compounding that old-fashioned beverage as to its ingredients, their proportions, and the order of putting them in it, is said to have died out with the "good old times" that are gone. Certain approximate, but confessedly demoralized, recipes for preparing it are preserved in some of our old and marked families. Such of those as we occasionally have the opportunity to test may be pronounced as in a measure satisfactory. But the original veritable compound, I believe, is now generally regarded as one of the "lost arts"; though I am not aware that Mr. Phillips has given it a place among them. Some of the essential materials of it are said to be no longer within the reach of common people. A probable, and, on the whole, a kindly explanation of the apparently copious amount and free use of this famous beverage, in those critical times, as certified by the survival of so many of these bowls, was that it was found to be an imperfect substitute for that suspicious and treacherous herb called "Tea." True, that herb had not been actually proscribed at the time when Paul Revere hammered out this bowl. But it had the anticipatory mark of dread and apprehension upon it. When it came really to be proscribed, and our patriotic women foreswore its genial essence, we are left to suppose that they may have occasionally shared in what was dispensed from this silver vessel, though, of course, they used the smaller-sized ladles. In these days of ours the former ingredients of this bowl have taken the place of tea on the prohibited list. But one thing is certain, that, if any one will search through the news journals, the reports of harangues at popular gatherings, the resolutions of patriotic meetings, the letters and bill-posters of those days, he will find the whole vocabulary of opprobrious,

In Volume IX., second series of the Society's Collections, a list of fifteen items is acknowledged under the title of "Old letters and papers from Governour Hutchinson's MS. Collection," given by "Alden Bradford, Esq, Secretary of State."

In the next number, Volume X., of the same publication, occurs the acknowledgment already quoted, followed by the production in full of four other papers. The next, being Volume I. of the third series, opens with this announcement :—

"HUTCHINSON PAPERS."

"The publication of the series of documents begun in our last volume under this title is now continued."

And this head-note is followed by the printing in full of some sixty or more papers indexed under fifty-five titles, two of which papers had been acknowledged in the list of fifteen items above referred to.

Volume IX., second series, bears date eighteen hundred and twentytwo, and was actually in print early enough in that year to be acknowledged by a corresponding society in Philadelphia, May seventh, eighteen hundred and twenty-two.

Volume VIII., preceding it, was printed in eighteen hundred and nineteen, being acknowledged at Philadelphia, February, eighteen hundred and twenty.

Volume X., next succeeding it, bears date eighteen hundred and twenty-three.

Volume I., third series, next issued, eighteen hundred and twentyfive, and the imprint on Volume Second indicates that no other volume was issued after that until eighteen hundred and thirty.

Mr. Bradford was Secretary of the Commonwealth from eighteen hundred and twelve to eighteen hundred and twenty-four.

His first donation appears upon the Society's records October twenty-eight, eighteen hundred and nineteen.

Volume VIII., second series, was in print before the end of that year. His donations and the references of them to the Publication Committee cease with the vote of August twenty-sixth, eighteen hundred and twenty-three; and it is in Volume X., second series, dated eighteen hundred and twenty-three, but not acknowledged at Cambridge until July twelfth, eighteen hundred and twenty-four, and in Volume I., third series, dated eighteen hundred and twenty-five, that the publication in full of Hutchinson's Papers occurs.

On the morning of November tenth, eighteen hundred and twentyfive, occurred the disastrous fire in the office of the Honorable James Savage, in Court Street, which destroyed valuable manuscripts belonging to the Society.

Mr. Savage was a member of the Publication Committee for Volumes VIII. and X. of the second series, and I. of the third series, and as such had the right, denied to other members, of taking manuscripts into his private keeping.

Of the papers covered by the list of fifteen items admitted to have come from Bradford, though referred to the Publication Committee, but two were printed. One paper in the list had been already printed in