accepted by modern publicists under which he was guilty
--he had not acted as a hostis humani generis, but as an
enemy of Spain and Portugal alone; he had not pillaged
animo furandi but under colour of right; yet at that time
international law did not distinguish so nicely between
piracy and irregular reprisal. That under the old law of
nations Drake was entitled to reprisal there is no possible
doubt. He had been wronged, he had applied to his
Government for redress, and redress had not been forth-
coming. But it must be remembered that it was now
a recognised doctrine, that before a subject of one country
could put into force his remedy of special reprisal against
the subjects of another he must obtain a commission
from his own Prince or from some authorised official of
his Government. Whether Drake or his employers had
such a commission is at least doubtful. In any case a
great part of his plunder would have to be disgorged, and
there can be little doubt that he received a hint from his
friends in authority to disappear.

In the recesses of Queenstown Harbour, a notable
haunt of pirates in Tudor times, is a land-locked creek
which still bears the name of 'Drake's Pool;' and here
a persistent tradition says he used to lie hid, and pounce
out upon Spanish ships. The details of the legend vary;
the only feature that is constant is that at one time or
other Drake was there in hiding, and so closely are we
able to follow his steps for the rest of his life, that if he
ever did make use of 'Drake's Pool,' it must certainly
have been at this time. Nor is the tradition without
documentary support. Amongst the Spanish State
Papers is a curious draft memorandum of the answers
that were to be given apparently to the Spanish 'Memoria
de los Cossarios.' ¹ Where Drake's case is dealt with

-198-