As for the writer himself, William Bradford, who, on the death of John Carver, the first Governor of the colony, a few months after their arrival, succeeded him in the Governorship, and remained the guiding genius of its destinies for over thirty years—his character, despite his utter self-repression throughout his writings, can be clearly read between the lines; his marvelous breadth of charity and tolerance; his strong, simple piety; his plain, unselfconscious goodness—all the grandest characteristics of the best traditions of puritanism seem concentrated in him. But little is known of his life in England. He was born at the village of Austerfield, near Scrooby, in Nottinghamshire, and the baptismal entry in the registers of the church is dated March 19th, 1590. His family was of yeoman stock. The first Mrs. Bradford (Dorothy May) was drowned in the harbour soon after the arrival of the _Mayflower_, by falling overboard. The second wife was a Mrs. Alice Southworth, a widow, to whom, it is supposed Bradford had been attached before his and her first marriage. He wrote his proposal of marriage to her in England, and she came out to him, with two Southworth children. William Bradford died, May 9th, 1657, at 69 years of age. His dealings in the external affairs of the colony were largely with that class of hypocritical charlatan which successfully turns to perverse account the generous religious impulses of those with whom they hold intercourse. Yet his firm hold on faith, hope, and charity never failed him; he always ascribed to them, until clear proof of dishonour was revealed, the best of motives; taking account of the possibility of misunderstanding; or, in the last resort, making allowance for human weakness in the face of temptation, and forgiving unto seventy times seven. His was the spirit given to Newton, who as he watched a murderer being led to the gallows, exclaimed: “There goes John Newton, but for the Grace of God”; or to Cromwell, in his typical exhortation,—“I beseech you, in the name of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken.” The reverse side of the picture shows us, indeed, the horrible hypocrisy of the pseudo-puritans of the Weston-Sherley type, who whenever ill-fortune overtook them called upon the name of the Lord in true Pharisaic fashion,—as if to bribe by flattery a frivolous Providence,—playing upon the finest qualities of forbearance and disinterestedness of such men as Bradford and his colleagues, to get advantage of them and rob them usuriously. Such parasites on the true growth of puritanism brought it into disrepute with the undiscriminating of those times,—nor have the results of their evil work (in very truth, the Sin against the Holy Ghost!) yet disappeared; for we find it in the supercilious and suspicious attitude of the orthodox towards dissent in any form, to this day.