lady in his family for the express purpose of effecting their purposes, namely of marrying her to their son; a circumstance calculated {297} to injure the honour of himself and family in the eyes of an uncharitable world. Seeing himself, then, to have been made the innocent tool of such iniquitous measures, it no longer remained a matter of choice whether he should receive or abandon them; it was impossible for him to act otherwise than he had done, if he intended to preserve his reputation. It was certainly not his wish to quarrel with Mr. R. Flower, but as father and son were one, it was impossible to avoid it; he therefore declined purchasing the promised land or using their money in any way. He conceives that Mr. Flower should not have taken part with his son, but rather endeavoured, by all manner of means, to make reparation for the indignity attempted to be put on his (Birkbeck's) family by their illicit conduct.
Mr. Birkbeck rids himself of the charge of fraud and breach of trust, by saying, in reply to Mr. Flower's severe letter, that it was optional whether he purchased lands with the money sent; it was not binding upon him to do it. And, moreover, he thought it for the interest of both families, under such circumstances, to be more distantly situated.
Thus have I given both sides of the question, as completely as they could be gathered from verbal statements.
The two villes of Albion and Wanborough, the abodes of contention, party spirit, speculation, and feuds, arose out of this greatly to be regretted {298} quarrel. If it had produced competition and extraordinary exertions in agriculture, and a desire to conciliate, accommodate, and invite settlers, it had been well; but the reverse was the consequence. It is true that no man, since Columbus,
