The year preceding the death of the Rev. David Clarkson will ever be remembered by the nonconformists as one of the saddest in their history. Never, not even under the tyranny of Laud, had the condition of the Puritans been so deplorable. James II., thoroughly honest in his own convictions, was yet stupidly blind to the convictions of others. He was a far better man than his brother, but much inferior to him in intellectual power. A court wit has said that "Charles could see things if he would; James would see them if he could."

Matthew, a son of the Rev. David Clarkson, was the immediate ancestor of the Clarksons of New York. He was then a young man, and is said to

have been highly educated. The reasons which influenced him to leave England have never been understood, but, in the absence of any known facts, it has been thought that he may have become enlisted in the cause of the unfortunate Monmouth, and after the disastrous rout at Sedgemoor, have fled to the colonies to escape falling into the hands of Jeffreys. No less than thirty of these malcontents took passage in the vessel which brought over Dunton, the bookseller.

Clarkson was possessed of an ardent and impulsive nature, and there is at least one incident in his history which shows, that the zeal, which he at times manifested, was not always according to knowledge. We may be sure he had early learned to detest Popery, and it would be no wonder if he felt an implacable resentment against a Sovereign who hated the very name of Puritan. A cause which had for its object the removal of such a bigot from the throne, would make strong appeals to one of his disposition.

A brother of his father's colleague in the ministry, a Colonel Owen, had been accused of complicity in the late plot, and through him an acquaintance had probably been formed with Ferguson, a frequent

guest at the Colonel's house, and one of the chief conspirators. With De Foe, another partisan, Clarkson was on still more intimate terms, and it is likely that many of his associates were among the dissenters who joined the recusant army.

It is also a noteworthy coincidence that the battle of Sedgemoor, which was fought in the summer of 1685, preceded by only a few months the first known record of his being in New England. He was then engaged for awhile as a factor, or agent, in New York, but, apparently, made no arrangement to remain, and was on his way back to England in less than sixty days after the proclamation in the Province of the accession of the Prince of Orange. The proclamation was made on the 22d of June, 1689, and in August he sailed in the "Bordeaux Merchant" with Captain Studman.

Such then, in barest outline, is the view which is entertained by some on this subject. It must be remembered, however, that it is purely conjectural, and is only of value as the possible explanation of an event, of the cause of which there is no traditional

rumor.

Among the earliest authentic notices we have of Clarkson's first visit to the colonies is his meeting

with William Millborne and Charles Lodwick. The latter is called in the annals of the period his brother-in-law, and the former he had probably seen in London.

There is a letter of Millborne's still extant, dated Boston, February, 1689, and written to his brother Jacob in New York, which is, seemingly, very disparaging to our ancestor. The writer, after alluding to the "venerable respect" which his father entertained for Mr. Clarkson, adds, "a dog of whom should have respect, this I wish, being assured that he was scandalized in several particulars whilst here, but, Manum de tabula." How much of this want of respect was due to political hostility, or other causes, it is impossible to say. Millborne is represented as "a noisy anabaptist minister in Boston," and it is not likely that he had either the good opinion or good-will of the person whose character he aspersed, and it is very doubtful how far he deserved either.

On the 10th of August, 1687, the subject of our sketch, being at that time in New York, affixed his signature as a witness to a conveyance of land to his friend Charles Lodwick. This was anterior to the date of the above letter and is the