so violent that Guelfs and Ghibellines were not more animated one against
another!"

* In his work on "Joint-stock Companion", vol.II, pp. 266 ff., W.
R. Scott traces the history of these acute dissensions in the
Virginia Company and draws conclusions distinctly unfavorable to
the management of Sandys and his party.--Editor.


Believing that the Company's sessions foreshadowed a "seditious
parliament," James Stuart set himself with obstinacy and some cunning to
the Company's undoing. The court party gave the King aid, and circumstances
favored the attempt. Captain Nathaniel Butler, who had once been Governor
of the Somers Islands and had now returned to England by way of Virginia,
published in London "The Unmasked Face of Our Colony in Virginia",
containing a savage attack upon every item of Virginian administration.

The King's Privy Council summoned the Company, or rather the "country"
party, to answer these and other allegations. Southampton, Sandys, and
Ferrar answered with strength and cogency. But the tide was running against
them. James appointed commissioners to search out what was wrong with
Virginia. Certain men were shipped to Virginia to get evidence there, as
well as support from the Virginia Assembly. In this attempt they signally
failed. Then to England came a Virginia member of the Virginia Council,
with long letters to King and Privy Council: the Sandys-Southampton
administration had done more than well for Virginia. The letters were
letters of appeal. The colony hoped that "the Governors sent over might
not have absolute authority, but might be restrained to the consent of the
Council . . . . But above all they made it their most humble request that
they might still retain the liberty of their General Assemblies; than which