because he carried dogs to the West Indies, and employed them in extirpating the natives. The truth is, that in his second expedition he was accompanied by a number of gentlemen of the best families in Spain, and many more would have gone if it had been possible to accommodate them. These gentlemen carried with them "horses, asses, and other beasts, which were of great use in a new plantation." The conflict which Columbus had with the natives was in consequence of the disorderly conduct of these Spaniards, who, in his absence, had taken their goods, abused their women, and committed other outrages, which the Indians could not endure, and therefore made war upon them. In this war he found his colony engaged when he returned from his voyage to Cuba, and there was no way to end it but by pursuing it with vigour. With two hundred Spaniards, of whom twenty were mounted on "horses, followed by as many dogs," he encountered a numerous body of Indians, estimated at one hundred thousand, on a large plain. He divided his men into two parties, and attacked them on two sides; the noise of the firearms soon dispersed them, and the horses and dogs prevented them from rallying; and thus a com

plete victory was obtained. In this instance alone were the dogs used against the natives. They naturally followed their masters into the field, and the horses to which they were accustomed; but to suppose that Columbus transported them to the West Indies with a view to destroy the Indians, appears altogether idle when it is considered that the number is reckoned only at twenty. Excepting in this instance, where he was driven by necessity, there is no evidence that he made war on the natives of the West Indies; on the contrary, he endeavoured as far as possible to treat them with justice and gentleness. The same cannot be said of those who succeeded him.

Attempts have also been made to detract from his merit as an original discoverer of the New World. The most successful candidate who has been set up as a rival to him is MARTIN BEHAIM,* of Nuremberg, in Germany. His claim to a prior discovery has been so

* [He was born about 1430, was in early life a merchant, and came to Portugal about 1481. He accompanied Cam, in the voyages mentioned below, as journalist and cosmographer. The date of his death is not certain, though it was later than 1506. He has the credit of first applying the astrolabe to the uses of navigation, an instrument from which, with some modifications, has been derived the modern quadrant.-H.]

well contested, and the vanity of it so fully exposed by the late Dr. Robertson, that I should not have thought of adding anything to what he has written, had not a memoir appeared in the second volume of the Transactions of the American Philosophical Society* at Philadelphia, in which the pretensions of Behaim are revived by M. OTTO, who has produced some authorities which he had obtained from Nuremberg, an imperial city of Germany, and which appear to him "to establish in the clearest manner a discovery of America anterior to that of Columbus."

It is conceded that Behaim was a man of learning and enterprise; that he was contemporary with Columbus, and was his friend; that he pursued the same studies and drew the same conclusions; that he was employed by King John II. in making discoveries, and that he met with deserved honour for the important services which he rendered to the crown of Portugal. But there are such difficulties attending the story of his discovering America as appear to me insuperable. These I shall state, together with some remarks on the authorities produced by M. Otto.

The first of his authorities contains several

* No. 35, p. 263.

assertions which are contradicted by other histories: 1. That Isabella, daughter of John, king of Portugal, reigned after the death of Philip, duke of Burgundy, surnamed the Good. 2. That to this lady, when regent of the duchy of Burgundy and Flanders, Behaim paid a visit in 1459. And, 3. That, having informed her of his designs, he procured a vessel, in which he made the discovery of the island of Fayal in 1460.

It is true that Philip, duke of Burgundy and Flanders, surnamed the Good, married Isabella, the daughter of John I., king of Portugal; but Philip did not die till 1467, and was immediately succeeded by his son Charles, surnamed the Bold, then thirty-four years of age. There could therefore have been no interregnum nor female regent after the death of Philip; and, if there had been, the time of Behaim's visit will not correspond with it, that being placed in 1459, eight years before the death of Philip. Such a mistake, in point of fact and of chronology, is sufficient to induce a suspicion that the "archives of Nuremberg" are too deficient in accuracy to be depended on as authorities.

* Memoirs of Philip de Comines. Mezeray's and Henault's History of France. Collier's Dictionary.

With respect to the discovery of Fayal in 1460, M. Otto acknowledges that it is "contrary to the received opinion ;" and well he might; for the first of the Azores, St. Maria, was discovered in 1431; the second, St. Michael, in 1444; the third, Terceira, in 1445; and before 1449, the islands St. George, Graciosa, Fayal, and Pico were known to the Portuguese.* However true it may be that Behaim settled in the island of Fayal, and lived there twenty years, yet his claim to the discovery of it must have a better foundation than the "archives of Nuremberg" before it can be admitted.

The genuine account of the settlement of Fayal, and the interest which Behaim had in it, is thus related by Dr. Forster, a German author of much learning and good credit.

"After the death of the infant Don Henry {which happened in 1463], the island of Fayal was made a present of by [his sister] Isabella, duchess of Burgundy, to Jobst von Hurter, a native of Nuremberg. Hurter went in 1466, with a colony of more than 2000 Flemings of both sexes, to his property, the isle of Fayal. The duchess had provided the Flemish emi

* Forster's History of Voyages and Discoveries, p. 256, 257, Dublin edition.