Hamor also appends to his narration a short letter, of the same date with the above, from the minister Alexander Whittaker, the genuineness of which is questioned.  In speaking of the good deeds of Sir Thomas Dale it says:  “But that which is best, one Pocahuntas or Matoa, the daughter of Powhatan, is married to an honest and discreet English Gentleman—­Master Rolfe, and that after she had openly renounced her countrey Idolatry, and confessed the faith of Jesus Christ, and was baptized, which thing Sir Thomas Dale had laboured a long time to ground her in.”  If, as this proclaims, she was married after her conversion, then Rolfe’s tender conscience must have given him another twist for wedding her, when the reason for marrying her (her conversion) had ceased with her baptism.  His marriage, according to this, was a pure work of supererogation.  It took place about the 5th of April, 1614.  It is not known who performed the ceremony.

How Pocahontas passed her time in Jamestown during the period of her detention, we are not told.  Conjectures are made that she was an inmate of the house of Sir Thomas Dale, or of that of the Rev. Mr. Whittaker, both of whom labored zealously to enlighten her mind on religious subjects.  She must also have been learning English and civilized ways, for it is sure that she spoke our language very well when she went to London.  Mr. John Rolfe was also laboring for her conversion, and we may suppose that with all these ministrations, mingled with her love of Mr. Rolfe, which that ingenious widower had discovered, and her desire to convert him into a husband, she was not an unwilling captive.  Whatever may have been her barbarous instincts, we have the testimony of Governor Dale that she lived “civilly and lovingly” with her husband.

XVI

STORY OF POCAHONTAS, CONTINUED

Sir Thomas Dale was on the whole the most efficient and discreet Governor the colony had had.  One element of his success was no doubt the change in the charter of 1609.  By the first charter everything had been held in common by the company, and there had been no division of property or allotment of land among the colonists.  Under the new regime land was held in severalty, and the spur of individual interest began at once to improve the condition of the settlement.  The character of the colonists was also gradually improving.  They had not been of a sort to fulfill the earnest desire of the London promoter’s to spread vital piety in the New World.  A zealous defense of Virginia and Maryland, against “scandalous imputation,” entitled “Leah and Rachel; or, The Two Fruitful Sisters,” by Mr. John Hammond, London, 1656, considers the charges that Virginia “is an unhealthy place, a nest of rogues, abandoned women, dissolut and rookery persons; a place of intolerable labour, bad usage and hard diet”; and admits that “at the first settling, and for many years after, it deserved most of these aspersions, nor were they then aspersions but truths....  There were jails supplied, youth seduced, infamous women drilled in, the provision all brought out of England, and that embezzled by the Trustees.”