Part 5

Those who censure this Account of _de Fonte_ as a Cheat and a Forgery imposed by some one on the World, have produced no Evidence from Facts, or urged any Thing to shew the Improbability of this Account; as to the Argument they so strongly insist on that the Original was never produced, it is highly improbable that the Original ever should be produced in these Parts; and there is a Uniformity in the Circumstance that a Copy only came to the Hands of the Editors, which turns the Argument against the Objectors. The Suspicion of there being any Deceit or Forgery, hath arose from there having been different Systems advanced by Geographers respecting these Parts: Those in whose System this Account is not adopted have been the Occasion of such Suspicions being raised, and have given some Countenance to such their Suspicions from the imperfect Manner in which this Account hath been exhibited; though that is not to be attributed to the Account in its genuine Dress, but as broken and disfigured by the Translator and Printer. The Glosses and Comments added by the Person who took the Copy, and those added by the Translator in Explanation of the Text, are inserted in the same Character, and without any Distinction from the Text, and those by the Translator ignorantly introduced. Marginal Notes are inserted as Part of the Narration; Courses are omitted; others mistaken from the Translator's Inattention to the _Spanish_ Compass; Dates misplaced by the Printer: The Translator also deviates from the Mode of Expression, and renders, in an inaccurate, confused and obscure Manner, a very material Part in this Account. Many of these Faults we may attribute to Precipitation, from the Translator wanting due Time to study the Letter, occasioned by a Persecution of the Printer, who pressed him to finish that the Printer might compleat his monthly Number, and, from the same Necessity, the immediate Publication, it may be that the Faults of the Press are so many. Such numerous Defects make it evident that this Account could never have been originally constructed in this Manner; and it is on these Defects only that they rely, or from which their principal Arguments are drawn to invalidate the Authenticity of this Account. They might have perceived that a Relation, so mutilated and impaired, must have had a more uniform or regular Shape at one Time or other: And the Editors, in their Index, when the Year's Numbers were compleated, stile it _an original and very entertaining Letter of Admiral de Fonte_, by which they mean for the Curious; and by stiling it an Original, they are not only to be understood that it was never before published, but also that it was wrote by _de Fonte_; which implies that they had a _Spanish_ Account, and of which, as being consistent with their Purpose, they gave only a Translation: Also the Impression of the first Part, being so uncorrect and full of Faults, the second Part more correct, and the Mode of Expression resumed, shews that the first Composition is not their own, but that it is a Translation which the Editors have given us. The Defects and Imperfections of which being pointed out, we shall comprehend what little Reason there is to dispute the Authenticity of this Account, from the Disfigurements which have prevented our seeing it in its proper Shape, and for suspecting those Persons to be Authors of the Fiction who meant well; but their Fault consisted in their Inattention to the Translator, who did not therefore give a successful Conclusion to their good Design, as by rendering the Account obscure and unintelligible, he afforded Matter for Cavil and Dispute as to this Account of the Voyage, whether credible or not, and which a just Translation would have confirmed to be true.

As to the Name _Bartholomew de Fonte_, we may observe that when the Translator can render the Names in the _Spanish_ by _English_ Names which are answerable thereto, he doth not insert the _Spanish_ Names, but the _English_. Thus, as to the Ships, he calls one the King _Philip_; but when they cannot be rendered by a resembling Denomination in the _English_, and the Name hath its Original from the _Latin_, he passes by the new Name, or as it is wrote in the _Spanish_, and gives us the antient Name, or according to the Latin _St. Spiritus_, _St. Lucia_, _Rosaria_, for _de Espiritu Santo_, _Santa Lucia_, _del Rosaria_. Hath rendered _Bartholomew de Fonte_, _Philip de Ronquillo_ both in _English_ and _Latin_. From which Management of the Translator, in giving the Name according to the _Latin_ and not giving it as it hath been transformed or changed agreeable to the _Spanish_ Orthography, there is just Reason to conclude the Name which is here rendered _Fonte_, was _Fuente_ or _Fuentes_ in the Original. But if it was wrote _Fonte_, it was in the provincial Dialect, different from the Manner of writing the good Writers introduced, which did not immediately prevail in all Parts alike, but was gradually received. For Instance, they wrote _Fuenterabia_ in _Castile_, when the _Biscayners_ continued to write _Fonterabia_; and it is as often spelt the one Way as the other in our Books and Maps.

_Fuente_ and _Fuentes_ are not of one Termination. _Fonte_ or _Fuente_, in the Titles of the _Marquis Aguila de Fuente_, so in _de Fuente de Almexi_, is of the singular Number, or the Title is taken from the Water of _Almexi_. But _Fuentes_, in the Titles of the _Marquis de Fuentes_, and in _Conde Fuentes de Valde Pero_, or of _Don Pedro Enriques Conde de Fuentes_, expresses a plural Number, which the Translator, through his Indifference as to the Subject which he was employed to translate, might not observe.

_Don Pedro Enriques Conde de Fuentes_ was raised to the Honour of being a Grandee by _Philip_ the Third, in the Year 1615, in respect to his great Services in the Wars; was descended from a Branch of that illustrious Family the _Enriques_. Nine of which Family were successively Admirals of _Castile_; and the ninth, _Don Joan Alonso Enriques_, was in that high Post at the Time of this Expedition. There were Intermarriages between the Families of _Enriques_ and _Valasco_; and _Don Pedro_ was succeeded in his Estate and Title by _Don Luis de Haro_, of the principal House of _Valasco_, and Son-in-Law to _Don Olivarez_. These Circumstances considered, we have a further Reason to suspect that the Name _de Fonte_ is not duly rendered by the Translator, as there is a Consistency in a Relation of the _Conde de Fuentes_ being advanced to be Admiral of _New Spain_ and _Peru_, which coincides with what is reported from _New Spain_, of the Name being _Fuentes_ of the Person who was President of _Chili_. It was also apparent that _de Fonte_ was a Man of Family, from those who took the respective Commands under him. _Pennelossa_, of whom more particular mention is made in the Letter: _Philip de Ronquillo_, seemingly allied to _John de Ronquillo_, who did considerable Service in the Year 1617, and was Governor of the _Philippine_ Islands. There was also _Ronquillo_ a Judge, sent to reduce the Insurgents at the City of _Segovia_, in the Time of the Civil Wars in _Spain_. _Pedro de Bonardæ_, who is afterwards called Captain _Barnarda_: Of him we must have the least to say; and we could not expect to be any Way successful in our Inquiries from this Inaccuracy. He seems not to have had so distinguished an Alliance as the others, and employed on this Expedition on the Account of his Abilities, being allotted to a Service not like that of _Pennelossa_, or _Ronquillo_, disagreeable in respect to the Climate, fatiguing and hazardous. That he was a Gentleman by his Descent, is evident from his being named _de Bonardæ_.

The _Spanish_ Fleet was but in a mean Condition at the Conclusion of the Ministry of the Duke of _Lerma_; but when an Expedition was set out to recover _St. Salvador_ in the Year 1626, was much improved; the _Portuguese_ had twenty-six Sail, but the _Spanish_ Fleet were now numerous. It doth not appear that the Fleets from _Lisbon_, when _Portugal_ was under the Crown of _Spain_, were sent otherwhere than to the _East Indies_, _Brazil_, and the Perlieus; and those from _Old Spain_, that sailed from _Cadiz_, went to _New Spain_, and the Islands under that Dominion. In the Year 1596, when Sir _Francis Drake_ took _Cadiz_, he burnt the Fleet that was lying there bound for _Mexico_; and Mr. _Gage_, in the Year 1625, sailed with a Fleet of sixteen Sail, all for _Mexico_, and to the _West Indies_ seventeen Sail, besides eight Galleons for a Convoy, all under two _Spanish_ Admirals.

The Inconsistency that _de Fonte_, a _Portugueze_, should be in such a Post as _Admiral of New Spain_, a great Objection to the Authenticity of this Account, is removed by the Observations that have been made as to the Name _de Fonte_, by which it appears that he was not a _Portugueze_, and their having Sea Commanders, _Spaniards_ by Birth, with whom they could supply the principal Posts in the Marine, without being under the Necessity of applying to _Portugal_ for Persons qualified to fill those Stations.

As to _de Fonte_ being afterwards President of _Chili_, it is meant of the _Audience of Chili_, subordinate to the _Viceroy of Peru_.

REMARKS

ON

The LETTER of Admiral DE FONTE.

The Viceroys of _New Spain_ and _Peru_, having Advice from the Court of _Spain_, and not from _the Court_ and the _Council of Spain_; which latter is the common Form of Expression used in any Matter which had been under the Consideration of the _Supreme Council of the Indies_, implies that such Advice must have proceeded from the Secret Council, or from the King through his Minister, that the Design of the Equipment of the four Ships, and the Attempt of the Industrious Navigators from _Boston_ might remain a Secret.

The Appellation of Industrious Navigators was conformable to the Characters of _Gibbons_ and _Shapley_. Sir _Thomas Button_, in the Extract which there is from his Journal, gives _Gibbons_ a great Eulogium as to his being an able Navigator; and this was the Character of _Shapley_ amongst his Cotemporaries.

The Court of _Spain_ knew that this Attempt to discover a Passage between the _Atlantick_ and the _Western Ocean_, was intended by the Northward and Westward; and though they allude to all the Attempts to make such Discovery which had been at any Time made, by mentioning the several Reigns in which any such Attempts were made, yet they hint more particularly, that they expect this Attempt will be by _Hudson_'s Bay, as they mention expresly in their Advice the two Voyages of _Hudson_ and _James_. For what is here said, _That the several Attempts_, &c. is a Recital from the Advice sent by the Court to the Viceroys, or from the Orders that _de Fonte_ received.

This Expedition from _Boston_ particularly commanded the Attention of the Court of _Spain_, as Captain _James_ had not absolutely denied there was a North-west Passage; and _Fox_, though not mentioned here, had published an Account in 1635, by which he had positively declared that there was a North-west Passage; and Sir _Thomas Button_, who kept his Journal a Secret, was very confident of a Passage, and is said to have satisfied King _James_ the First. The Death of his Patron _Prince Henry_ prevented his being fitted out again. _Gibbons_, his Intimate, had made the Voyage with him: Afterwards had made a second Attempt by himself, but lost his Season by being detained in the Ice. And now, though a married Man, had a Family, a Person in Trust and Power where he resided, engages in a third Attempt from _Boston_.

_The second, third, and fourth Year of the Reign of King Charles_ refers solely to the Voyage of Captain _James_; to the Time he was engaging Friends to fit him out; and the Time when such Voyage was concluded on. As the _English_ used the _Julian_, and the _Spaniards_ the _Gregorian_ Account, these Transactions which refer to Captain _James_'s Expedition, could not be made to coalesce as to the Time, from the Difference there was between these two Computations, in any other Manner than by putting the Year of the King of _England_'s Reign. As King _Charles_ began his Reign the 27th of _March_ 1625, two Days after the Commencement of the Year, according to the _Julian_ Account, and the second Year of his Reign would not begin until the 27th of _March_ 1626, two Days also after that Year commenced, but according to the _Gregorian_ Account, the Year 1626 began in _January_; from the 1st of _January_ to the 27th of _March_, the Year 1626, according to the _Gregorian_ Account, would correspond with the first Year of the Reign of King _Charles_. As to this Expedition from _Boston_, it is mentioned to be in the Year 1639, and in the fourteenth Year of the Reign of King _Charles_; but the Year 1639, according to the _Julian_ Account, is the fifteenth Year of that King's Reign; but according to the _Gregorian_ Account, the Year 1639 corresponds from _January_ to _March_ with the fourteenth Year of that King's Reign.

The Times mentioned in this Letter do not refer to the Times when the Voyages were actually set out on, but when undertaken or resolved on, as it is expressed in the Letter, _undertaken_ by some industrious Navigators from _Boston_. Captain _James_ did not sail until the Year one Thousand six Hundred and Thirty-one, not getting the King's Protection early enough in one Thousand six Hundred and Thirty, to proceed that Year, or in the fourth Year of the King's Reign. That is, he did not get it early enough in Spring to be ready by the latter End of _March_, as he must have been to proceed that Year; so the fourth Year of the King well agrees with this Proceeding. And _de Fonte_ did not sail until one Thousand six Hundred and Forty, which was a Year after the Court of _Spain_ had received Intelligence of such Undertaking from _Boston_. Which they would use the first Opportunity to transmit to _New Spain_; _de Fonte_ therefore had at least six Months for the Equipment of the four Ships to go on this Expedition; a Time sufficient, in so fine a Climate, and every Thing that was necessary to be done was enforced by Orders of the Crown. Had this Equipment been executed in a much smaller Space of Time, there would have been nothing so admirable in it: Therefore the Objection, as to the Impossibility that Ships should be fitted between the Time the Court received this Information, and their sailing, drops to the Ground.

It is not any way strange that this Design, as it appears to have been, was made known to the Court of _Spain_ the Year before that it was set out on; as that Court entertained a continual Jealousy of these Undertakings, as is apparent from their sending Vessels to intercept _Davis_; their having Informations as to Captain _James_'s Voyage also, and the Consequences of it, as may be collected from this Letter.

Major General _Gibbons_, if he had not the King's Protection, yet he had Friends at the Court of _England_ who made Application for him to be Captain of the Fort at _Boston_, and one of the Council, the latter End of the Year one Thousand six Hundred and Thirty-eight, or in the Beginning of the Year one Thousand six Hundred and Thirty-nine. That the most secret Affairs of the Court were at that Time betrayed, I believe will be admitted, and the Secret of his designed Attempt might be known, by his applying for Leave of Absence from his Post during the Time that he should be engaged in this Undertaking. Or the Persons with whom he corresponded in _England_ might be apprized of his intended Voyage, as he could not, at that Time of Day, be supplied with every Thing that was necessary thereto in _America_; and as he intended to trade, he would be for procuring his Goods from _England_. By some of these Means probably his Design perspired, and was secretly and unexpectedly, transmitted to the Court of _Spain_.

There are several Reasons to be assigned why both Viceroys should be informed, not only the Viceroy of _Peru_, in whose District the Ships were to be fitted, but the Viceroy of _New Spain_ also. That if a Passage was made by any other Way than where the Ships were to be stationed to intercept the _Boston_ Men, or they accidentally passed such Ships, the Viceroys might order a Look-out also to be kept. And such a Provision being made, it would be scarce possible, if a Passage was obtained, that the _Boston_ People should get clear out of those Seas, and not fall into the Hands of the _Spaniards_. Another Reason is, that such Particulars as _de Fonte_ was to put in for on the Coast of _Mexico_ might be ready, that _de Fonte_ might not meet with the least Delay, as such Delay might occasion the Disappointment of his Design.

The Letter proceeds, 'Upon which, I Admiral _de Fonte_, received Orders from _Spain_ and the Viceroys to equip four Ships of Force.' These Words, _upon which_, I understand not to allude to the Advice given the Viceroys, but refer to the Attempt intended from _Boston_, and as to which he had received his Orders from _Spain_. But from the Viceroys he received Orders only as to the Equipment of the four Ships, as Orders of that Nature would regularly proceed from them. If it was otherwise, and he had also received his Orders from them, containing Instructions as to the Conduct of his Voyage, he would have made his Report to the Viceroys as to the Manner in which he had conducted his Voyage, and they would have reported it to the Court.

_De Fonte_ mentioning the Viceroys so simply and plainly, without any respectful or distinguishing Additions, is an Instance that this Letter was wrote to the Court of _Spain_, it not being proper, in a Letter so addressed, to mention the Viceroys in any other Manner; and as it is also evident from the Expression, _I Admiral de Fonte_, that he did not write this Letter in his private Capacity, but as an Admiral, therefore this Letter could not be otherwhere addressed than to such Court, to transmit an Account how he had executed these Orders, which he had received immediately from _Spain_.

_De Fonte_ mentioning that the Advice which the Viceroys received was from the Court of _Spain_, and that the Orders he received were from _Spain_, carries a Distinction with it as though the Advice and the Orders were not transmitted from the same Persons. Those who transmitted the Advice to the Viceroys were not seemingly in the Secret, as to the particular Orders or Instructions which were sent to _de Fonte_, as to the Manner in which he was to conduct his Voyage. It was the Province of the Admiral of _Castile_, who was stiled Captain General of the Sea, who was subject to no Controul but the King's, to issue all Orders relative to maritime Affairs, and therefore _de Fonte_'s Orders might come from him. Or otherwise these Orders were immediately transmitted by the _Conde de Olivarez_, who was on ill Terms with the Admiral, and regarded no Forms, under the Sanction of the Favour he had with the King, whom he influenced to authorize all his Measures. It is also consistent with the Conduct of _Don Olivarez_ that this Affair should be managed in this Manner, who was always mysterious, confided in his own Judgment, singular in his Manners, and therefore was called a Lover of Projects, and supposed a meer Visionary in some of them. He did not want for Persons of the greatest Abilities to assist him, and the Accuracy with which the Orders are composed that were sent to _de Fonte_, (as may be collected from the Manner in which the Voyage is conducted, and in which it cannot be supposed _de Fonte_ was left to his Discretion) is an Instance there had been no Want of the Assistance of able, sagacious and experienced Persons in the composing of such Orders and Instructions.

The Design of this introductory Part is to shew the Proceedings in this Affair previous to his Voyage; that the Advice was received, and the Orders subsequent were obeyed; and it is drawn with peculiar Care and a Conciseness which would be censured in a Voyage Writer, but is used with the greatest Propriety on this Occasion.

The Names of the Ships are agreeable to the Manner that the _Spaniards_ name theirs; and by Ships of Force is not meant either their Caracks or Galeons, but Country Ships, which the Equipment seems to imply, made defensible against any Attacks of the Natives, and to have nothing to fear from the _Boston_ Men, and these Ends could be obtained in Vessels which had no great Draught of Water, as the Rivers they were to pass up and the Lakes required, and of a Tonnage suitable to those Northern Seas, therefore _de Fonte_ only expresses their Names, and their Commanders, says nothing of their Rates.

_De Fonte_, in his Course from the _Callao_ of _Lima_, and in all his subsequent Courses through the Voyage, computes his Distance after the Marine Manner, from that Land from where he takes his Departure to the Land made when he enters a Harbour, or the Termination of the Land which makes such Harbour to Seaward; and here takes his Departure from the extreme Part of the _Callao_ of _Lima_, which is in the Latitude 11° 5´ S. Longitude 80° 39´ W. and from which to _St. Helena_, being North of the Bay of _Guiaguil_, in Lat. 2° 5´ S. Long. 84° 6´ W. is two hundred Leagues; and there is no Fault in the Impression, as hath been supposed. Though these Words, _on the North Side of the Bay_ of _Guiaguil_ seem to be an Interpolation.

The Distance said to be run between the _Callao_ of _Lima_ and _St. Helena_ is not reconcileable with the Accounts published by _Dampier_, _Wood Rogers_, or the Accounts in general, excepting with a Copy of a _Spanish_ Manuscript, of the Latitudes and Longitudes of the most noted Places in the _South Seas_, corrected from the latest Observations, by _Manuel Monz. Prieto_, Professor of Arts in _Peru_, whose Computation of Longitude is from the Meridian of _Paris_; but he fixes _Lima_ at full eighty Degrees. I use _Prieto_'s Tables in this, and principally in all my subsequent Computations, though _de Fonte_ no where mentions the Longitude in this Letter, as he only regards the Difference of the Meridian of _Lima_. And it by no Means invalidates but favours the Authenticity of this Account, that _de Fonte_ differs in his Computation from the _English_ and _French_ Accounts at, and after those Times, which also differ from each other, as they only ranged along the Coasts of those Seas, judged of their Distances according to their Journals, and must have made many vague Observations, as to the Latitude of Places, by Inspection of the Land from Sea, and which Land they might not certainly know. Their best Directions they got from Manuscript Journals, or Sea Waggoners, composed for their own Use by Coasters. But the navigating of the King's Ships were better provided for in this respect; and we may well suppose that _de Fonte_ was not, on this Occasion, deficient in Artists well versed in the Theory as well as the Practice of Navigation, and under this Character of an Artist we may consider _Parmentiers_. The Truth, as to the Latitude, once fixed is not variable by Time; and in this respect _de Fonte_ and _Prieto_ must agree, though a Century between the Time of their Computations.