SOME RECENT REVISIONS OF PLYMOUTH HISTORY. 375 
Town Mills, built by Drake himself. These mills the Corporation 
assert to have been " built by themselves, and not to be prejudicial, 
like Crymes' New Mills, to the interests of their poor neighbours 
and her majesty's subjects." And then we have the assertion made 
that the deed of compensation of 1592 to the landowners and 
tenants of the land lying along the watercourse only awarded some 
£60 in assessment of the value of these lands, and that this repre- 
sented their "very value at 16 years' purchase," some instances 
being cited so late as the reigns of the Charleses of some land chang- 
ing hands at almost a similar figure. But opportunely, as a test for 
this style of argument, we have the details at last made known of 
the reasons assigned by some of the landowners for their wish to 
pass the second Haven or Mills Removal Bill of 1592. To our in- 
finite surprise we find that the promoters of the bill lay the damages 
sustained by them along a watercourse supposed to have only cost 
about £60 for acquisition of the necessary land — the landowners 
that is to say, lay the damages sustained at no less a figure than 
£6,000 ! If we wanted further proof, can we desire better than 
this, that the sums assigned in the Assessment Indenture of 1592 
are of the nature of peppercorn rents % We must remember, more- 
over, that though the transaction is admitted to have been carried 
through by Drake, the deed puts it as if everything had been done 
by the Corporation — qui facit per alium, facit per se — and this is 
clearly the case here, whether the expenses were met by Drake, 
or the Corporation, or by both together. 
4th. We have the implied contrast between Hawkins and Drake. 
On this point it may suffice to say this much in the present abstract. 
It has been asserted that Drake only took care of No. 1, however 
much he might appear to act for queen and country, and yet this 
is called " no aspersion on Drake." Reference was made in the 
lecture to the charges of malversation against Hawkins as regards 
the shipping, only to show that these charges were " delivered " to 
her majesty, and so far received that directions were given for the 
drawing up of instructions as to the way in which the expenses 
of H.M. Navy were to be administered. Assertions have been 
made, on the one hand, that these charges were disproved, an asser- 
tion which seems only to rest on Froude's reading of some docu- 
ments which have been otherwise interpreted ; and on the other 
hand it has been maintained that the charges were never absolutely 
disproved. It is, I believe, established that the Commissioners 
