Browsing named entities in George Bancroft, History of the Colonization of the United States, Vol. 1, 17th edition.. You can also browse the collection for Robertson or search for Robertson in all documents.

Your search returned 6 results in 4 document sections:

George Bancroft, History of the Colonization of the United States, Vol. 1, 17th edition., Chapter 4: (search)
gland zealous and able defenders, who, independent of any party in religion or politics, believed that a prosperous state could be established by Englishmen in the temperate regions of North America. The king of England, too timid to be active, yet too Chap. IV.} 1606. vain to be indifferent, favored the design of enlarging his dominions. He had attempted in Scotland the introduction of the arts of life among the Highlanders and the Western Isles, by the establishment of colonies; Robertson's Scotland, b. VIII. and the English plantations which he formed in the northern counties of Ireland, are said to have contributed to the affluence and the security of that island. Leland's History of Ireland, II. 204—213. Lord Bacon's speech as Chancellor to the Speaker, Works, III. 405. When, therefore, a company of men of business and men of rank, formed by the experience of Gosnold, the enthusiasm of Smith, the perseverance of Hakluyt, the hopes of profit and the extensive influence
George Bancroft, History of the Colonization of the United States, Vol. 1, 17th edition., Chapter 5: (search)
iving in robust Ibid. III. 370, 371. health under the sun of Hispaniola, returning from America to plead 1517. the cause of the feeble Indians, in the same year which saw the dawn of the Reformation in Germany, suggested the expedient, The merits of Las Casas have been largely discussed. The controversy seems now concluded. Irving's Columbus, III. 367—378. Navarette, Introduccion, s. LVIII. LIX, The Memoir of Las Casas still exists in manuscript. Herrera, d. II. l. II. c. XX. Robertson's America, b. III. It may yet gratify curiosity to compare Gregoire, Apologie de B. Las Casas, in Mem. de l'inst. Nat. An VIII.; and Verplanck, in N. Y. Hist. Coll. III. 49—53, and 103—105 that negroes might still further be employed to perform the severe toils which they alone could endure. The avarice of the Flemings greedily seized on the expedient; the board of trade at Seville was consulted, to learn how many slaves Chap. V.} would be required. It had been proposed to allow fou<
George Bancroft, History of the Colonization of the United States, Vol. 1, 17th edition., Chapter VI (search)
the whole period, enjoyed the benefit of independent colonial legislation; As an opposite statement has received the sanction, not of Oldmixon, Chalmers, and Robertson only, but of Marshall and of Story (see Story's Commentaries, i. 28, without the slightest effort to convene a colonial assembly), I deem it necessary to state, e. Campbell's Virginia, 60—a modest little book. Chalmers, 118, 119, is betrayed into error by following Oldmixon. Burk, II. 41, 42. Bullock's Virginia, 10. Robertson, in his History of Virginia, after the dissolution of the company, furnishes a tissue of inventions. Keith, 143, 144, places in 1639 the occurrences of 1635. H gloomy pictures of the discontent which pervaded the colony, and have represented that discontent as heightened by commercial oppression. Beverley, Chalmers, Robertson, Marshall. Even the accurate and learned Holmes has transmitted the error. Compare Jared Sparks, in North American Review, XX. New series, 433—436. The statem
George Bancroft, History of the Colonization of the United States, Vol. 1, 17th edition., Chapter 10: (search)
y side, and at that time having no prospect of ultimate success, desired at any rate to escape from their native country. The privy council interfered to stay a squadron of eight ships, which were in the Thames, preparing to embark for 1638 May 1. New England. Rushworth, II. 409. Hazard, i. 122 It has been said that Hampden and Cromwell were on board this fleet. Bates and Dugdale, in Neal's Puritans, II. 349. C. Mather, b. i. c. v. s. 7. Neal's N. E. i. 168. Chalmers, 160, 161. Robertson, b. x. Hume, c. LIII Belknap, II. 229. Grahame's U. S. i. 299. Lord Nugent, in his Hampden, i. 254, should not have repeated the error. Edinburgh Review, No. 108. Russel's Cromwell, i. 51. Godwin, in his History of the Commonwealth, i. 11, 12, reproves the conduct which he unjustly imputes to Hampden. The pretended design was indeed unlike Hampden. The English ministry of that day might willingly have exiled Hampden; no original authors, except royalists writing on hearsay, allude to