PARISHES OF DRYSDALE AND ST. ASAPH, IN CAROLINE COUNTY.
These parishes have long since been deserted of Episcopalians,
and can soon be disposed of. That of Drysdale was, it is supposed,
cut off from St. Mary's in 1713. St. Asaph was taken
from Drysdale, which lay partly in Caroline and partly in King
William, in the year 1779. Drysdale parish, thus reduced, lay
alongside of Essex and St. Asaph, toward Hanover county.
In the years 1754 and 1758, we find the Rev. Robert Innes
minister of Drysdale parish. In the year 1774, the Rev. Andrew
Moreton. In the year 1776, the Rev. Samuel Shield. In the
years 1785 and 1787 and 1789, the Rev. Jesse Carter represents
the parish in the Convention, since which time we hear nothing of
the parish. Mr. William Lyne appears during this time to have
been a faithful lay delegate.
St. Asaph parish, as we have seen, was established in 1779,
during the war of the Revolution. We can only look for any account
of this parish, in the absence of a vestry-book, to the journals
of our Conventions, which began in 1785, after the close of
the war. In the year 1785, we find it represented by the Rev.
Samuel Shield and Mr. John Page, Jr. In the year 1786, by the
Rev. James Taylor and Mr. John Page. In the year 1787, by the
Rev. James Taylor and Mr. John Baylor. In the year 1796, by
the Rev. George Spirrin and Mr. John Woolfolk. St. Asaph only
appears these four times on our journals.
Within the bounds of this parish after the separation, and in
Drysdale before that time, lived Mr. Edmund Pendleton, President
of the Court of Appeals, of whom we have previously spoken as a sincere
Christian and steady friend of the Church. Were any vestry-books
of Caroline county to be found, there can be no doubt his name
would be there. He was the clerk of the vestry, he himself informs
us, when a mere boy. Should it be asked why his name never appears
on our journals of Convention with those of Governors Wood
and Page, and the Nelsons and Carys, and other patriots of the
Revolution, it would be sufficient to conjecture that his heavy duties
as judge prevented; but it is made certain by the following letter
to Richard Henry Lee, which has been sent me by a friend:—
Extract of a Letter from Edmund Pendleton to Richard Henry Lee,
June 13, 1785.
"You have heard of a Convention of the clergy and laity of our Episcopal
Church last month. I was not able to attend it, but was pleased to
learn that the members were truly respectable, and their proceedings wise
and temperate. Their journal is not yet printed, but I am told it contains
rules for the government of the clergy, and the appointment of
deputies to represent us in a Federal Convention to be held in Philadelphia
in September next, to whom it is referred to revise and reform our
Liturgy. Mr. Page, of Rosewell, and your brother, of Greenspring, [Mr.
William Lee,] are the lay deputies, and the Revs. Mr. Griffith and
McCrosky the clerical. What is become of Bishop Seabury, and how is
he received in Connecticut? One would not have expected that the first
American Bishop had come to New England."
I am happy also to be able to furnish another document from the
pen of Judge Pendleton, toward the close of his life, on a subject
of as deep interest at the present as at that time. It is a petition, in
his own well-known handwriting, and with his own name at the head
of it, from the inhabitants of Caroline, addressed to the Legislature,
praying it to take into consideration the evils of treating the voters
at annual elections with intoxicating drink. The names of the
signers are those of the most respectable citizens of Caroline
county. The committee to whom it was referred in the House
were also the most eminent men of Virginia, viz.:—Messrs. Venable,
Mathews, Ellzey, Jennings, Hill, Shield, and John Taylor.
The petition is as follows:—
"To the Honourable the Legislature of the State of Virginia, the
subscribers, inhabitants of the county of Caroline, beg leave to represent,
that, beholding with concern the growth of a species of corruption at elections,
commonly called treating, as having a tendency to destroy national
principles and individual morals, they presume to submit the following
considerations to legislative deliberation:—1st. Whether the best mode of
enabling electors to judge of a candidate's qualifications is to deprive them
of their senses. 2d. Whether corrupting and being corrupted is calculated
to produce sentiments of confidence between the people and their
representatives. 3d. Whether true patriotism can exist on any other foundation
than such confidence and esteem. 4th. Whether, in order to bring
merit into preference, success should depend on expense. 5th. Whether,
if a political body should appear, where wealth grew out of public spoils,
until it was beyond competition, a check upon its pernicious influence will
be erected by a consignment of legislation to riches. 6th. Whether
liberty will be considered inestimable by those who are in the habit of
selling it for a bottle of rum. 7th. Whether the dispensation of corruption
is likely to steel the mind of the elected against its introduction, in
the exercise of several elective functions confided to the representatives
of the people. 8th. Whether the consequences experienced from a septennial
repetition (as in England) of the practice we deprecate are sufficient
to justify it as an annual custom, and whether virtue or vice is the
safest basis for a republican government.
"If the Legislature shall view this mischief in the light we see it,
we refer it to their wisdom as calling loudly for an effectual legislative
remedy; and we pledge ourselves to support an energetic law by withholding
our suffrages from all who shall infringe it. Edmund Pendleton,
James Taylor, William Jones, Edmund Pendleton, Jr., Anthony
Thornton, Charles Todd, Anthony New, Daniel Coleman, Henry Chiles,
John Baylor, Mungo Roy, P. Woolfolk, John Minor, Jr., John Pendleton,
Jr., George Gray, Norborne Taliafero, William Stewart, Thomas Kidd,
David Dickerson, Philip Slaughter, John Walden, Robert Tompkins,
Edmund Chapman, George Terrill, R. R. Tyler, J. Woolfolk, Thomas
Harris."
Let us consider the above petition, and think upon its signers for
a moment. If such a paper were now drawn up and signed by a
number of persons, no matter how conscientiously, there are those
who would regard it either as fanatical or as an assault on individual
rights and liberty, and say, We will sign no such paper and come
under no such pledge, but will vote for whomsoever we please, even
though they or their friends liberally treat with the intoxicating
draught. But how encouraging and strengthening it is to know
that old Edmund Pendleton and many of the best men of Caroline
county and Virginia, who had just come out of the war of the
Revolution, and certainly had some just views of true liberty, did
thus denounce an approaching evil, and call upon the Legislature
to enact rigid laws against it, promising to sustain the same by
their voices on the day of election! There is something of a moral
grandeur about this movement of the venerable Pendleton and of
his most respectable countymen which is worthy of admiration
and imitation. Were he now living, we might surely calculate on
his support of any wise and practical measure for the prevention
not only of the one mentioned in the memorial, but of the numerous
and most destructive evils of intoxicating drinks.
The following extract from the letter of a friend furnishes some
additional information concerning St. Margarett's parish:—
"The Rev. Mr. Dick left one son bearing his name, who lived and died
in this county; also two daughters,—one who married Mr. Vivian Minor,
and who lived to a good old age, and retained to the time of her death a
warm attachment to the Episcopal Church, travelling the distance of twelve
miles to St. Margarett's, whenever its pulpit was filled, generally reaching
it before those in the immediate neighbourhood,—and this after she was
seventy years old. The other daughter married Mr. Robert Hart, of
Spottsylvania, and also with her descendants continued true to the Church
of her fathers. Mr. Boggs preached in this church for thirty years. In
the year 1825, the Female Missionary Society of Fredericksburg sent Mr.
John McGuire to preach for us, hoping to build up our waste places. By
the blessing of God on this effort, a considerable interest was manifested
by the few remaining members and others, and his preaching was attended
by crowds, generally. The church was then in a very dilapidated condition,
but was soon after repaired. After Mr. McGuire located himself in
Essex, the vestry called the Rev. Leonard H. Johns, who ministered to
them for two years. It was during this time that more members were
added to the Church than at any other; but most of them were, I believe,
the seals of Mr. McGuire's ministry, though Mr. Johns's was very
acceptable, and much beloved by all. Mr. Good succeeded Mr. Johns
early in the year 1829, and remained until 1831, when he was compelled
by ill health to leave the parish, much to the regret of all who knew him.
The Rev. Mr. Cooke officiated frequently for us while we were without a
minister. In July, 1832, Mr. Friend became our pastor: he continued
to preach till June, 1835, in which time the St. Margarett's Church underwent
considerable repairs and the church at the Bowling Green was
built. Mr. Ward followed Mr. Friend and remained till 1840, when the
Rev. St. M. Fackler took his place, continuing with us two years. The
Rev. D. M. Wharton took charge of this and the churches in Spottsylvania
in the fall of 1843."
The following letter from the Rev. H. M. Denison, formerly of
Virginia, deserves a place in the article on Drysdale parish:—
"Louisville, April 29, 1856.
"My Dear Bishop:—
I have read with deep interest your account of
many of the old churches and families of Virginia. Having just risen
from the perusal of that on York-Hampton parish, it seems to me that you
have not given all the credit it deserves to the character of the Rev.
Samuel Shield.
"He was a clergyman of high character, and was a competitor with
Bishop Madison for the Episcopate. He had at one time charge of Drysdale
parish, (now unrepresented in Convention,) lying in Caroline and the
adjoining counties. He was great-uncle, I think, to the Rev. Charles
Shield, grandfather of Dr. Samuel Shield, of Hampton, a worthy son of
our Church, grandfather to Mrs. Colonel McCandlish, of W—, and
grandfather to the wife of the Rev. Edmund Murdaugh; so that the
succession, both Christian and ministerial, is kept up in his family. But
I take up my pen to mention to you the following incident, which will
not be uninteresting to you even if it be without the scope of your published
reminiscences.
"After the massacre by the British and Indians of a large portion of
the inhabitants of the lovely Valley of Wyoming in Pennsylvania, the parishioners
of Drysdale, through their rector, Mr. Shield, as almoner, sent
to the destitute and helpless women and children of the Valley the handsome
sum (for those days) of one hundred and eighty dollars to relieve
their necessities. The transaction is thus recorded in the History of
Wyoming, by the Hon. Charles Miner:—
"At a town-meeting held in Wyoming on the 20th of April, 1780, it
was—
" `Voted, That whereas the parish of Dresden, [for Drysdale,] in the State
of Virginia, have contributed and sent one hundred and eighty dollars for
the support of the distressed inhabitants of this town, [Wilkesbarre,] that
the Selectmen be directed to distribute said money to those they shall judge
the most necessitated, and report to the town at some future meeting.
" `Voted, That Colonel Nathan Denison return the thanks of this town
to the parish of Dresden in the State of Virginia, for their charitable disposition
in presenting the distressed inhabitants of this town with one
hundred and eighty dollars.'
"Some five or six years ago I was at Dr. Samuel Shield's, in Hampton,
and the doctor told me he had discovered my name among his grand
father's papers; and upon examination I found the original letter of
thanks written by my grandfather, Colonel Denison, to his grandfather, the
Rev. Mr. Shield. It was threescore and ten years of age, but had evidently
been preserved with much care; and I sent it at once to Mr. Miner,
the historian. Very sincerely, but unworthily, your son in the Gospel.
