lodging-place in a house there, in which they continued in the most perfect seclusion for several years. In October, 1664, they removed to Hadley, in Massachusetts, where the minister of the place, Mr. Russell, had made arrangements to receive them; and under his roof they rested for the remainder of their days." (Pp. 129-133.)

APPENDIX TO SUPPLEMENT, No. 8

In a letter dated Sept. 9, 1651, he mentions the extreme sickness of his wife. In that letter was enclosed another "To Brother Humphrey Jones of my wifes' sickness."

In a letter to Thomas Scott, dated Sept. 16, 1651, he says, "This is the second tyme since I came to Ireland that my wife hath bene soe neare death, as was past hopes of Recovery."

"Letters sent by the Post, ye 9th of October 1651. To Mr. Humphrey Jones, my brother; my wifes' sickness, &c. To Bro. Jonathan Edw. to come over and bring Ann or Mary Edward' wth him."

In a letter to Mr. Scott, dated 26th of December, 1651, he says: "The Lord in much mercy to her (hath now given a period to) by taking her to himselfe, a more religious, discreet, and lovely creature, I believe never dwelt in this unhappy land."

In a letter to Mr. Morgan Lloyd, dated Aug. 23, 1652, he says: "The Lord reward your great love and kindness to my boy and give strength to (my deare friend) your wife. I thanke you for your freedome with mee as to marriage. I desire to know from whom and of whom the report you mention came; and for your satisfaction I doe really profess unto you that since the departure of my deare wife (of most pretious memory) I have not seene, nor do I know nor can thinke of that woman on whom I have pitched my thoughts to bee in that relation to mee, and if all the world were sett before mee, to make my choice off, my thoughts doe not yett lead mee to any-one numerically, my minde as yett suites not with the ofspring of this climate. If I were in my native country and could meete with one endued with soe much grace, meekness, humility, love, comeliness, and wisdome, as she had who is removed from mee, and one that in the course of nature might promise children, and would love my boy as her

owne, and be content he should be The Elder Brother, I should blesse God for such an acquaintance."

In a letter to Mr. Morgan Lloyd, dated 30th September, 1653, he speaks of my boy."

The Protector Cromwell died on the 3d of September, 1658.

In a postscript of a letter to Lord General Fleetewood, dated in October, 1659, Colonel Jones says: "My wife is through mercy in a good measure recovered of her late distempers whch was y wch she had for these 3 yeares."

In a letter to the Right Hon. the Lord Richard Cromwell, dated 12th of March, 1660, he says: "M". Waterhouse informs me y' yo' Lo have been pleased to interdict the Paym' of the annuity weh his late Highnes yo' father settled upon my wife, untill you should signifie yo' further pleasure therein, I believe it is not unknowne to yo' LoPP upon what consideration the Interest to yt Annuity came unto mee.

"I was ingaged by agreem before marriage to settle upon her 300 p-ann: Joynture wch I have done. The anuity above menconed, his late Highnes assured mee he had settled upon her dureing her life, besides some other Emoluments which I had intimation of I should have, but came short of, occasioned probably by my own indiscretion.

"Truely S' I thought there was not in ye world better security for 120 p-ann. during an ancient life than his worde and Deede under his hand and seale. I cannot believe y' his Highnes intended there should be any discontinuance of that anuity, and it were very unworthy in me to thinke soe, neither can I give way to my thoughts to apprehend otherwise of yo' Lo" but you will be pleased to make good his Highnes' acte, although by the letter of Lawe you may possibly avoyde it."

In a letter to Her Highness, Dowager, dated 4th of April, 1660, he says: "But being informed yt y' Highnes & yo' ffamily are very highly offended wth mee for reasons not yet come to my knowledge, I humbly conceived it more prudent and less offencive to forbeare yo' presence untill it please God by some meanes to give me opportunity to remove those apprehentions wch yo' LOPP is possessed wth, concerning mee, and weh I dare affirme wilbee found fictitiouse when honestly and candidly examined. I am loath to mencon what sadde impression those missunderstandings seeme to make upon my La Richard yo' Sonne by his interdicting

or withholding ye paym' of yt Anuity wch his late Highnes, now with the Lord settled upon my wife, alleddging yt his father had no Power to Graunt it.

"But I hope when he may bee pleased to seriously consider it, he willbee more tender of his fathers Hon' then to make his Act under his Hand & Seal, voyd."

APPENDIX A

ORIGIN OF THE TWEED RING.

MEMORANDUM OF CHARLES O'CONOR.

COURT OF APPEALS.

STEPHEN CLARK V. THE MAYOR, ETC., OF NEW YORK.

THE history of this case is somewhat remarkable. It covers a period of important changes. It was tried three times, and the result of each trial was reviewed in the court of last resort. It was argued there seven times. The judgments in the court of first instance were all for the plaintiffs; two of these judgments were reversed and the last was, in a very singular and as I think in a most irregular and unwarrantable way, affirmed in part, to the great injury of our city treasury.

The case was commenced in 1843 (p. 132), whilst the constitution of 1821 was in force.

Of course it was initiated under our original judicial system and according to the ancient practice.

During its pendency the new judiciary of 1846 came into being, as also did at a late period (A.D. 1848) the Code of Procedure.

Its three journeys to the court of last resort occurred whilst that tribunal was organized according to the constitution of 1846, and what may be deemed greater changes occurred during its pendency.

The political party which almost from the beginning had controlled the general policy of the federal government, passed out of power.

When it commenced, not even one life had ever been taken for