clung to them in their own day from the part they took in it, that Kidd’s reputation should be blackened, and that he should be depicted as a villain of the deepest dye, whom, on account of his unexceptionable antecedents, these great men were fully justified in employing, but whose character underwent so rapid a deterioration after he had once come into contact with them, that he betrayed them for the purpose of enriching himself with spoils, of which as a matter of fact he stood in little need and which he made no effort to secure for himself. He has been represented by Macaulay not only as a rapacious pirate, but also as a monster of cruelty, who for his own ends depraved his crew and led them into every kind of wickedness. To quote but one passage from Macaulay’s indefensible and inexcusable travesty, “With the rapacity he had the cruelty of his odious calling. He burnt houses: he massacred peasantry. His prisoners were tied up and beaten with naked cutlasses, in order to obtain information about their concealed hoards. One of his crew, whom he had called a dog, was provoked into exclaiming in an agony of remorse, ‘Yes, I am a dog: but it is you that have made me so.’ Kidd in a fury struck the man dead.” These accusations have obtained ready credence; but their absurdity will be evident to any one who will take the pains to examine the records. There is no reason whatever for believing that Kidd was cruel or rapacious. The only ground for suggesting that “he massacred peasantry” is the one case, when his cooper’s throat having been cut by the natives, he retaliated by ordering one native to be shot. This was the only time when it was ever alleged in his own day that he had burnt houses: and we have it on the authority of Palmer, the King’s evidence against him, that on this occasion Kidd had given express orders to his men to spare the houses that had white flags hoisted on them, because their inmates had helped to water his ship. The episode on the strength of which Macaulay accuses him of causing his prisoners to be beaten with cutlasses, in order to extort from them information as to their concealed hoards, has already been explained. The men in question were not his prisoners. He allowed them to proceed peacefully on their voyage, and their ship was not taken from them. Kidd never went on board of her, much less did he give directions to his crew to ill-use them. Questioned as to whether any gold had been taken from them, Palmer freely admitted that he did not see any. Asked further by Kidd, whether it was not the case that a parcel of rogues had gone on board and done the deed complained of, he virtually admitted that it was so by making no reply. In the matter of cruelty there is a marked difference between the reported doings of Kidd and of the pirates of whom the East India Company were repeatedly complaining. In these complaints mention is often made of the outrages committed: but