29G 



DISCOVERY 



incident until the Cape Verde Islands were reached. 

 But here joy and sorrow came hand in hand. In the 

 first place Drake captured a Portuguese pilot, Nuno 

 da Silva, whose knowledge of the coasts of South 

 America, and willingness to accompany the English 

 expedition, justified something like real confidence 

 in eventual success. But in the second place, Thomas 

 Doughty, whom Drake had treated as a brother, 

 suddenly threw off disguise and revealed the cloven 

 hoof. No one has been able to discover with exactness 

 what motives were at work in Doughty 's breast. It 

 is difficult to believe that he was in Spanish pay, 

 though treachery of that kind was not unknown even 

 in the highest circles. It is more likely that the am- 

 bitious youngster had been won over by the advocates 

 of peace, who feared that the maritime schemes of 

 Drake would lead to a definite rupture with Spain. 

 Whatever his motives, there is no doubt at all that, from 

 the Cape Verdes onwards, Doughty did his utmost 

 to frustrate the ends of the voyage. Drake treated 

 him at first with the tenderness he would have shown 

 to a naughty child ; but when dehnquencies were 

 multiplied, he grew stern and severe, and on one 

 occasion had Doughty bound to the mast. It was not, 

 however, until the mischief wrought by this propa- 

 gandist had spread from one ship to another, infecting 

 with its poison the whole confraternity, that Drake 

 felt compelled to end his golden project or the life of 

 the man he had loved. 



He was not long in deciding. Anchoring his ships 

 in St. Julian's Bay on the coast of Patagonia, he brought 

 Doughty to trial before a court composed of his brother- 

 officers. The prisoner was accused of plotting to 

 frustrate the objects of the voyage ; and upon an 

 overwhelming show of evidence was found guilty. 

 Drake then assembled every man who served under 

 him ; and, after explaining the case in full assembly, 

 passed sentence of immediate death. Froude has 

 given currency to a tale that Drake himself acted as 

 executioner » ; but the story is traceable to a tainted 

 Spanish source, and there is sufficient evidence in 

 the English documents to prove the contrary. But 

 that Doughty was decapitated, and died at Drake's 

 bidding, are facts beyond all dispute. 



And the question that immediately arises is this : 

 By what authority did Drake sentence to death the 

 most influential personage of all who sailed with him ? 

 If it could be established by incontrovertible proofs 

 that Drake had been given no delegated power, then 

 we should have to admit that the charge of judicial 

 murder had not unjustly been laid at his door. But 

 what proof has ever been adduced except the wranghng 

 recriminations of e.xcited partisans ? Modern experts 

 have based their opinions on admittedly indirect 

 ' History of Evgland, vol. xi, p. 127. 



evidence ; and this should be carefully borne in mind 

 when their pronouncements are examined. 



Sir Julian Corbett, in his comprehensive work on 

 this period,* writing in 189S, says : "It is almost certain 

 that Drake had no express authority to inflict capital 

 punishment." Sir John Laugh ton goes further. In 

 his Life of Drake in the Dictionary oj National Bio- 

 graphy, after showing how the audacious raider of 

 Darien was introduced by Sir Christopher Hatton 

 into the presence of Elizabeth and was permitted to 

 recount some of his experiences, he continues : " It 

 is probable enough that she received him graciously. 

 His adventures, his daring, his success, were so many 

 passports to her favour, and there is no reason to 

 doubt that, in ambiguous and courtly phrases, she 

 encouraged him to further enterprise ; but it is in the 

 highest degree unlikely that, before a stranger to her 

 court, she laid aside her dissimulation and gave a 

 formal commission for reprisals to a man whose repute 

 was that of an unscrupulous adventurer. Such a 

 commission could not have been kept secret, and 

 would have been considered by Spain as tantamount 

 to a declaration of war. Still less can we accept the 

 story that, knowing, as she certainly did know, that 

 he was proposing a voyage which must bring him 

 into conflict with the Spaniards, she said to him, 

 ' I account that he who striketh thee, Drake, striketh 

 me.' Any such speech, if possible — and it is not Ehza- 

 bethan in its sound — could only have been uttered 

 at a much later period, and most probably in reference 

 to private rather than to public enemies." 



There are in this expression of opinion points which 

 detract from its value. We know now that sixteenth- 

 century Governments were accustomed to witness the 

 depredations of hcensed corsairs without allowing 

 themselves to be drawn into open waifare. We do 

 not know whether such a roving commission could 

 or could not have been kept secret. The reported 

 speech may or may not carry an Ehzabethan sound, 

 but it comes from the authentic narrative of Master 

 Francis Fletcher, chaplain on board the Golden Hind.' 

 Furthermore, it is logically inadmissible to refer to 

 Drake as an " unscrupulous adventurer," when he is 

 standing his trial in a land where men are held innocent 

 until they are proved guilty. Yet Sir John Laughton 

 is not the most prejudiced of Drake's prosecutors. 

 Those who desire to read a more thorough-paced in- 

 dictment should turn to Mr. David Hannay's denuncia- 

 tion in the pages of Ships and Men. 

 It must be confessed that among books published 



' Drake and the Tudor Navy, vol. i, p. 235 note. 



' " We do account that he which striketh at thee, Drake, 

 striketh at us " : The H'orld Encompassed by Sir Francis Dra)s4. 

 Tliis work, first published in 1626, is based on Fletcher's original 

 notes, which are in the British Museum, Sloane MSS., No. 61. 



