University of Virginia Library

ARTICLE XXXI.

Parishes in Middlesex.—No. 1.

Middlesex county was originally a part of Lancaster county,
when the latter covered both sides of the Rappahannock River for
an indefinite distance. Between the years 1650 and 1660 it is
probable that it was made a separate county. Until that time one
minister served the whole county, although it is probable there
were two parishes on either side of the river before the division of
the county. Those on the south side were called Lancaster and
Piankatank. They were originally one, and called Lancaster;
and, in 1666, became one again, under the name of Christ Church,
Lancaster county.

I have before me the vestry-book of the parish, from the year
1663 to the year 1767, commencing two years before the reunion.
There is reference to a Rev. Mr. Cole, who was minister of both
of the parishes in the year 1657; also to a Mr. Morris, as being
minister previous to the reunion. A short time afterward, some
dissensions as to the bounds of the two parishes and other matters
led to the reunion.

The first entry states the appointment of Mr. Henry Corbin to
keep the register of the parish, according to a late Act of Assembly.

The next is the vestryman's oath:—

Previous to the reunion, the vestry of Lancaster parish had determined
to build a church, after the model of that of Williamsburg,
either on the north or south side of Sunderland Creek. By
lot it fell on the north side; but it was never done.

In the reunion, in 1666, it was agreed by the vestry to build a
mother-church,—by the name of Christ Church,—at a place about
midway the parish, after the model of that at Williamsburg, the
glass and iron to be gotten from England. It was accordingly
built about midway between Brandon and Rosegill, the seats of the
Wormleys and Grymeses, not far from the Rappahannock River,
and was used until the year 1712, when a new one was built in the
same place.

On the 29th of January, 1666, it was resolved to continue Mr.
Morris as the minister, but that he be not inducted. On the following
day, at a meeting of the vestry, his salary was paid, and
he was dismissed. I suppose he would not consent to serve without
induction, or that some difficulty arose between himself and
the vestry. Major-General Robert Smith and Mr. Henry Corbin
were directed to write to Richard Perrott, then in England, for a
minister. Measures were also taken for the purchase of a glebe.
In the year 1668 it was agreed to employ the Rev. Mr. Shephard
for six months. At the end of that time he was chosen for twelve
months, and so on until the year 1671, when he was elected as
rector for the future. Mr. Shephard continued their minister until
his death, in 1683. The following extracts from the proceedings
of the vestry will show their estimate of his character, and their
desire for a worthy successor:—

In the interval between the death of Mr. Shephard and his suc
cessor, the parish was supplied by the Revs. Mr. Superiors and Mr.
Davis. In November of that year, Major-General Robert Smith
appears on the vestry-book, having returned from England and
brought with him the Rev. Duell Read, who was chosen their
minister for one year; and in proof that the earnest desire and
endeavour of the vestry were rewarded of God, by sending a
faithful minister, I adduce the following extract from the vestry-book
the year after his entrance on the ministry:—

The duty of more frequent communions in the churches of Virginia
was evident. By Act of Assembly, which was only the renewal
of one of the canons of the English Church, it was only
required that the sacrament be administered twice a year at the
parish churches, the chapels of each not being provided for. Even
in this case it is only proposed to have it at the mother-church, which
was about midway of a parish forty miles in length. There were
two chapels or churches toward either end of the county, not less,
we suppose, than twelve or fifteen miles distant from the central
one. Those communicants who lived at either end of the parish
must have had twenty miles to travel in order to partake of the
communion. At a later date the communion was administered at
all the churches. Mr. Read's services continued seven years,—at
the end of which time he returned to England; cause not known.
That he did not forget his parishioners is evident from the following
entry on the vestry-book:—

Should any smile at the value and character of the bequests, they
should remember that they were, in all probability, his whole property,
not to be despised until the widow's mite has lost its value
with heaven. Nor were they so valueless as some might suppose.
In those days a few such animals were of great use and worth.
In proof of which I adduce the following act of the vestry in this
parish, in the year 1665:—

In the year 1692 the Rev. Matthew Lidford was chosen minister
of the parish for one year, but soon died. He was succeeded by
the Rev. Mr. Gray, who agreed, in 1698, to relinquish, for a certain
amount of tobacco, all claim on the parish arising from his induction.
Mr. Gray was a most unworthy minister. The records of
the court show him to have been much engaged in lawsuits,—either
suing or being sued for property. At length he caused the death
of one of his slaves, by severe whipping, and was tried for his life.
This, it is presumed, was the occasion of his resignation.

In the year 1699 the Rev. Robert Yates is minister, and continues
so until the year 1703 or 1704, when he returned to England
in ill health. He appears to have been esteemed by his vestry,
who continued his salary for some time in the hope of his return.
The Rev. Bartholomew Yates (believed to be his son) succeeded

him. After eighteen years of faithful service, the parish of York-Hampton,
a more desirable one, endeavoured to obtain his services.
The vestry of Middlesex, however, raised his salary to twenty
thousand pounds of tobacco, and enlarged and improved his house.
The following entry shows that, in order to raise his salary, they
thought it necessary to make application to the Legislature:—

Such were the manifestations of regard for him that he continued
their minister until his death, in 1734, being more than thirty-one
years their pastor. Having sons in England at college, the vestry
waited for two years until his son Bartholomew was ordained. In
the interval the parish was served by the Revs. John Reade and
Emanuel Jones, from neighbouring parishes. He served them
until the year 1767. In 1758, we also find the Rev. William
Yates and the Rev. Robert Yates, ministers of the adjoining
parishes of Petsworth and Abington, in Gloucester county, believed
to be either sons or grandsons of the elder Bartholomew
Yates, and grandsons or great-grandsons of the Rev. Robert Yates.
All of them are believed to have been worthy ministers of the
Gospel. They have been often quoted as proof that there were
some deserving ones among the old clergy of Virginia, and that
ministers' sons are not always the worst in the parish, as some
enemies of religion say. A large tombstone was placed, by the
parishioners, over the grave of the elder Bartholomew Yates,
which is still in good order and the inscription legible. It is as
follows:—

The descendants of Mr. Yates are numerous, and scattered over
the State. One of them—the late Mr. Yates, of Jefferson county,
Virginia—charged all his children in turn to protect and preserve
this tomb.

The Rev. John Klug succeeded to Mr. Yates in 1767, and, it is
believed, continued until his death, in 1795. His name appears on
the list of delegates to the two first Conventions of the Church in
Virginia, in 1785 and 1786. He is represented to have been a
pious and efficient minister. He was followed by the Rev. Mr.
Heffernon, who was a dishonour to the Church for eighteen years.
To him I have alluded in my first article. He married into one
of the most respectable families of that part of Virginia, but,
happily, left no posterity to be ashamed of their father's name,
which was a by-word and proverb at that day, and continues so to
the present time. Hunting, gambling, drinking, were his constant
occupations. I have before me the following copy of an extract
of the will of Mr. William Churchill, in 1711:—

Mr. Heffernon, with all his vices, preached—or professed to
preach—these sermons in one of the churches, and received the
benefit of this bequest. I have often heard old Mr. Nelson, my
father-in-law, say that the last time he saw Mr. Heffernon was in

a tavern-porch in Urbanna, reeling to and fro with a bowl of toddy
in his hand, inviting the passers-by to come and drink with him.[99]
From the year 1813—the time of Mr. Heffernon's death—no
effort was made to have any services in that church. Indeed, it
is presumed that there were none for many years before his death.
The prostration of the church seemed to be complete. There was,
however, a kind of farce following that sad tragedy, to which I
must refer. In the year 1836, at the Convention in Fredericksburg,
a person calling himself Robinson, and professing to be a
minister of the Episcopal Church of England, presented himself
to Bishop Moore and myself, and produced some worn and dingy
papers, purporting to be letters of Orders. We neither of us were
pleased either with him or his papers. Bishop Moore soon turned
him over to me. He expressed a wish to unite with the Church in
Virginia; said that he did not care for salary, being in abundant
circumstances; that he wished to settle in some good society, and
not far from the ocean; that he had some of the best English
breed of sheep and Durham cattle, and wished to purchase a
farm. I told him plainly my opinion as to his course of duty;
that, if he wished to be useful in the ministry, he had better dispose
of his cattle and engage earnestly in the duties of it. He
expressed surprise that I should seem to think an attention to fine
cattle inconsistent with the duties of the ministry, and spoke of
one or more of the English Bishops who were great patrons of
cattle. We soon parted, mutually dissatisfied with each other, and
I never met him again. He took a fancy to the lower part of
Middlesex, in sight of the bay, bought or rented a farm there, and
moved some cattle to it, I believe. He had quite a library and a
great deal of English plate. He invited company, and entertained
at late fashionable hours. He also preached, either at some old
church or the court-house. His robes were those of English Fellows
or Doctors, having several pieces of different colours, besides
the gown and surplice. The same dress, I am told, he used when
performing the service at the White Sulphur Springs, in Western
Virginia, making changes in it during the service. How long he
continued in Virginia I know not; but, determining on a visit to
England, he wrote me a long letter, containing many questions
concerning the Church in America, which he said would doubtless
be proposed on his return to England, and to which he wished for
answers. My reply to him was very short, and such as he would
take care not to show. A few months after this, we received intelligence
that he was taken up as an impostor and swindler in Liverpool,
and was then on his way to Botany Bay. All that he had
brought with him to America was stolen, and he went back to replenish
his treasury, and had wellnigh, by a forged note, robbed
the bank at Liverpool of a very large sum of money. Indeed, he
had it in his possession, and was on the point of sailing to America,
when pursued and overtaken. This closes, I hope, forever,
the disgrace of the Church in Middlesex. Henceforth we look for
better times. But before we enter upon those I wish to add something
concerning the laity of the old Middlesex parish.

P.S.—A recent communication states that this impostor got
away from his place of exile and reached California, where he
died a few years since