GEORGE ALSOP, the author of this curious tract, was born according to the inscription on his portrait, in 1638. He served a two years’ ap­pren­tice­ship to some trade in London, but seems to have been wild enough. His portrait and his language alike bespeak the rollicking roysterer of the days of the restoration, thoroughly familiar with all the less reputable haunts of London. He expresses a hearty contempt for Cromwell and his party, and it may be that the fate which confined him to a four years’ servitude in Maryland was an order of transportation issued in the name of the commonwealth of England. He speaks disdainfully of the “mighty low and distracted life” of such as could not pay their passage, then, according to Leah and Rachel (p. 14), generally six pounds, as though want of money was not in his case the cause of his emigrating from England. He gives the letters he wrote to his family and friends on starting, but omits the date, although from allusions to the death of Cromwell in a letter dated at Gravesend, September 7th, he evidently sailed in 1658, the protector having died on the 3d of September in that year.

In Maryland he fell to the lot of Thomas Stockett, Esq., one of three brothers who came to Maryland in 1658, {10} perhaps at the same time as Alsop, and settled originally it would seem in Baltimore county. It was on this estate that Alsop spent the four years which enabled him to write the following tract. He speaks highly of his treatment and the abundance that reigned in the Stockett mansion.

Alsop’s book appeared in 1666. One of the laudatory verses that preface it is dated January, 1665 (56), and as it would appear that he did not remain in Maryland after the expiration of his four years, except perhaps for a short time in consequence of a fit of sickness to which he alludes, he probably returned to London to resume his old career.

Of his subsequent life nothing is known, and though Allison ascribes to him a volume of Sermons, we may safely express our grave doubts whether the author of this tract can be suspected of anything of the kind.

The book, written in a most extravagant style, contains no facts as to the stirring events in Maryland history which preceded its date, and in view, doubtless, of the still exasperated state of public feeling, seems to have studiously avoided all allusion to so unattractive a subject. As an historical tract it derives its chief value from the portion which comprises its Relation of the Susquehanna Indians.

The object for which the tract was issued seems evident. It was designed to stimulate emigration to Maryland, and is written in a vulgar style to suit the class it was to reach. While from its dedication to Lord Baltimore, and the merchant adventurers, we may infer that it was paid for by them, in order to encourage emigration, especially of redemptioners. {11}

Much of the early emigration to America was effected by what was called the redemption system. Under this, one disposed to emigrate, but unable to raise the £6, entered into a contract in the following form, with a merchant adventurer, ship owner or ship master, and occasionally with a gentleman emigrant of means, under which the latter gave him his passage and supplies:

The term of service, at first limited to five years (Relation of Maryland, 1635, p. 63), was subsequently reduced to four (Act of 1638, &c.), and so remained into the next {12} century (Act of April, 1715). Thus a woman in the Sot Weed Factor, after speaking of her life in England, says:

Disputes arose as to the time when the term began, and it was finally fixed at the anchoring of the vessel in the province, but not more than fourteen days were to be allowed for anchoring after they passed the Capes (Act of 1715). When these agreements were made with the merchant adventurer, ship owner or ship captain, the servants were sold at auctions, which were conducted on the principle of our tax sales, the condition being the payment of the advances, and the bidding being for the term of service, descending from the legal limit according to his supposed value as a mechanic or hand, the best man being taken for the shortest term. Where the emigrants made their agreement with the gentleman emigrant, they proceeded at once to the land he took up, and in the name of the servant the planter took up at least one hundred acres of land, fifty of which, under the agreement, he conveyed to the servant at the expiration of his term of service.

Alsop seems to have made an agreement, perhaps on the voyage, with Thomas Stockett, Esq., as his first letter from America mentions his being in the service of that gentleman. His last letter is dated at Gravesend, the 7th of September, and his first in Maryland January 17 (1659), making a voyage of four months, which he loosely calls five, and describes as “a blowing and dangerous passage.” {13}

Through the kindness of George Lynn Lachlin Davis, Esq., I have been enabled to obtain from J. Shaaf Stockett, Esq., a descendant of Captain Stockett, some details as to his ancestor, the master of our author, during his four years’ servitude, which was not very grievous to him, for he says, “had I known my yoak would have been so easie (as I conceive it will) I would have been here long before now, rather than to have dwelt under the pressure of a Rebellious and Trayterous government so long as I did.”

A manuscript statement made some years later by one Joseph Tilly, states: “About or in y^e year of o^r Lord 1667 or 8 I became acquainted w^th 4 Gentⁿ y^t were brethren & then dwellers here in Maryland the elder of them went by y^e name of Coll^o Lewis Stockett & y^e second by y^e name of Captⁿ Thomas Stockett, y^e third was Doct^r Francis Stockett & y^e Fourth Brother was M^r Henry Stockett. These men were but yⁿ newly seated or seating in Anne Arunndell County & they had much business w^h the Lord Baltimore then pp^etor of y^e Provinces, my house standing convenient they were often entertained there: they told mee y^t they were Kentish men or Men of Kent & y^t for that they had been concerned for King Charles y^e first, were out of favour w^th y^e following Governm^t they Mortgaged a Good an estate to follow King Charles the second in his exile & at their Return they had not money to redeem their mortgage, w^ch was y^e cause of their coming hither. JOSEPH TILLY.”

Of the brothers, who are said to have arrived in the spring or summer of 1658, only Captain Thomas Stockett remained in Maryland, the others having, according to family tradition, returned to England. As stated in the {14} document just given, they settled in Anne Arundell county, and on the 19th of July, 1669, “Obligation,” a tract of 664 acres of land was patented to Captain Thomas Stockett, and a part still after the lapse of nearly two centuries remains in the family, being owned by Frank H. Stockett, Esq., of the Annapolis bar.

By his wife Mary (Wells it is supposed), Captain Thomas Stockett had one son, Thomas, born April 17, 1667, from whose marriage with Mary, daughter of Thomas Sprigg, of West River, gentleman (March 12, 1689), and subsequent marriage with Damarris Welch, the Stocketts of Maryland, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, New York and New Jersey are descended.

The arms of this branch, as given in the family archives, are “Or a Lyon rampant sable armed and Langued Gules a cheife of y^e second a castle Tripple towred argent betwixt two Beausants—to y^e crest upon a helm on a wreath of y^e colours, a Lyon Proper segeant supporte on a stock ragged and trunked argent Borne by the name of Stockett with a mantle Gules doubled Argent.” These agree with the arms given by Burke as the arms of the Stocketts of St. Stephens, county of Kent.

Thomas Stockett’s will, dated April 23, 1671, was proved on the 4th of May in the same year, so that his death must have occurred within the ten intervening days. He left his estate to his wife for life, then his lands to his son Thomas, and his posthumous child if a son, and his personal estate to be divided among his daughters. His executors were his brothers Francis and Henry and his brother (in-law) Richard Wells. His dispositions of property are brief, much of the will consisting of pious expressions and wishes. {15}

To return to the early Maryland emigration, at the time there was evident need for some popular tract to remove a prejudice that had been created against that colony, especially in regard to the redemptioners. The condition of those held for service in Maryland had been represented as pitiable indeed, the labor intolerable, the usage bad, the diet hard, and that no beds were allowed but the bare boards. Such calumnies had already been refuted in 1656 by Hammond, in his Leah and Rachel. Yet it would seem that ten years later the proprietor of Maryland found it necessary to give Alsop’s flattering picture as a new antidote.

The original tract is reproduced so nearly in fac simile here that lit­tle need be said about it. The original is a very small vol­ume, the print­ed mat­ter on the page being only 2 18 inches by 4 78. (See note No. 1).

At the end are two pages of advertisements headed “These Books, with others, are Printed for Peter Dring, and are to be sold at his Shop, at the Sun in the Poultrey, next door to the Rose Tavern.”

Among the books are Eliana, Holesworth’s Valley of Vision, Robotham’s Exposition of Solomon’s Song, N. Byfields’ Marrow of the Oracle of God, Pheteplace’s Scrutinia Sacra, Featly Tears in Time of Pestilence, Templum Musicum by Joannes Henricus Alstedius, two cook books, a jest book, Troads Englished, and ends with A Comment upon the Two Tales of our Renowned Poet Sir Jeffray Chaucer, Knight.

At the end of this is the following by way of erratum: “Courteous Reader. In the first Epistle Dedicatory, for Felton read Feltham.”