Even though John Carroll Power cites Benedict’s book as a source, this 1876 version disagrees in many respects with Benedict. See how many you can identify.
“The Stouts very justly take pride in their family history, and being mostly Baptists, they take pride in their Baptist history also. When they meet a stranger by the name of Stout, who manifests a disposition to claim relationship, they apply one test only in their family history. They do not ask him to pronounce the word Shibboleth, but ascertain if he has any knowledge of PENELOPE, and if he knows nothing of her, they know nothing of him. In other words, they do not cultivate his acquaintance, in the direction of relationship, any further.”
The same passage (minus the long-winded paragraph about the Trojan War) also appeared in PORTRAIT & BIOGRAPHICAL ALBUM OF SANGAMON COUNTY, ILLINOIS , Chicago: Chapman Brothers, 1891 p 493 and in PAST AND PRESENT OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD AND SANGAMON COUNTY ILLINOIS by Joseph Wallace, M. A. of the Springfield Bar (The S. J. Clarke Publishing Co., Chicago, IL 1904).
The novel ideas in this passage are
Voyage about 1680 or 1690
A mention of New Jersey but not Sandy Hook
Indians lay in ambush at time of shipwreck
Tomahawked and scalped
Three Indians rescued her
However, I do like their method of distinguishing Stouts who are relatives from non-relatives.
If anyone knows of an earlier scalping reference, please let me know.