with the colonists. He was evidently a man in the prime of life, an
"Independent" who had the courage of his convictions if little
discretion, and much of that energy and self-reliance which,
properly restrained, are excellent elements for a colonist. Very
little beside the fact that he came from Essex is known of him, and
nothing of his wife. He has further mention hereafter.

Solomon Prower is clearly shown by the complaint made against him by the
Archdeacon of Chelmsford, the March before he sailed on the MAY-
FLOWER, to have been quite a youth, a firm "Separatist," and
something more than an ordinary "servant." He seems to have been
summoned before the Archdeacon at the same time with young Martin (a
son of Christopher), and this fact suggests some nearer relation
than that of "servant." He is sometimes spoken of as Martin's
"son," by what warrant does not appear, but the fact suggests that
he may have been a step-son. Bradford, in recording his death,
says: "Dec. 24, this day dies Solomon Martin." This could, of
course, have been none other than Solomon Prower. Dr. Young, in his
"Chronicles," speaking of Martin, says, "he brought his wife and two
children." If this means Martin's children, it is evidently an
error. It may refer to age only. His case is puzzling, for
Bradford makes him both "servant" and "son." If of sufficient age
and account to be cited before the Archdeacon for discipline, it
seems strange that he should not have signed the "Compact." Even if
a "servant" this would seem to have been no bar, as Dotey and
Leister were certainly such, yet signers. The indications are that
he was but a well-grown lad, and that his youth, or severe illness,
and not his station, accounts for the absence of his signature. If
a young foster-son or kinsman of Martin, as seems most likely, then
Martin's signature was sufficient, as in the cases of fathers for