University of Virginia Library

Search this document 
10 occurrences of The records of the Virginia Company of London
[Clear Hits]
  
  
  
  
  
collapse section 
 1. 
collapse section2. 
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
collapse section3. 
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
  
  
  
  
  
  
collapse section 
  
  
  
  
  
  
BRITISH MUSEUM
collapse section4. 
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
  
  
  
  
collapse section 
  
  
  
  
  
  
 5. 
  
  
  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
collapse section 
  
collapse section 
  
  
  
  
  
  
collapse section 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
collapse section 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

10 occurrences of The records of the Virginia Company of London
[Clear Hits]

BRITISH MUSEUM

The collection of manuscripts from which the most valuable returns might be
expected is in the British Museum. The documents there deposited are small in
number but they are of great value, and none of them have heretofore been printed.
The originals of the precedents for patents of the Virginia Company, which are now
noted for the first time, evidently formed a part of the records of the company, and
it may be that they are some of the copies of the records made under the supervision
of Nicholas Ferrar, or they may be the drafts of patents which were filed by the
company according to an order of its court. Not only is the writing similar to much
of that in the contemporary transcripts of the court book, but they are unsigned
copies, and the headings of a number of them seem to be in the autograph of Edward
Collingwood. The caption of the series shows that the copies were made for the sake
of preserving the form, and reads as follows: "Presidents of Patents, Grants &
Commissioners by the Virginia Company. 1621."[150] The company thus preserved the
legal form of the various grants. Four of them are of value not only for the form
but for the knowledge they furnish of the distinction made between the four classes
of adventurers: those who paid money into the treasury and agreed to plant one
hundred persons, those who established a private plantation, those who were private
planters, and those whose "shares exceedinge 50 acr̃ are exempted from payinge
any Rent to ye Company for the persons they transporte." In addition certain
knowledge is afforded concerning the grants. Two out of the other nine documents
are commissions granted to owners and masters of ships for voyages to Virginia, by


68

which they are to transport passengers to Virginia. Another is a covenant by the
company to pay for the victualing and transporting of passengers, while still another
is for the transporting of goods only. Other forms are those used for granting
rights of fishing on the coast of America, for voyages to Virginia, and free fishing
along the shores, and others still for discovery, fishing, and trading in furs in
Virginia. The covenant signed by William Ewens in which he agreed to fit out the
ship George reveals the form of contract required of the masters of ships by the
company.

These papers form the last group in a volume which contains "A Catalogue of
the Nobility of England in the time of King James the first," 1626, and "A list
of all the Officers belonging to Courts of Justice the Kings household & Reuenue
wth their seuerall fees." There are several signs for identification, but none which
indicate the original owner of the volume. It is a small quarto in leather, bearing
the signature, "H Cowle A. 29," on the inner cover, and also the arms of James
Bindley with the motto, "unus et idem." At the bottom of the same cover is
written the following: "Purchased at the sale of W. Berwicks library at Sotheby's,
27 Apr. 1863. (Lot 427)," while on the second fly leaf in the upper right-hand
corner is the inscription: "The gift of Mr Dan1 Prince, Bookseller. Oxford—July
23d. 1776." Farther than this the history of the papers is unknown.

Another set of documents in the Museum is also unique. One of these sup-
plies all that is known outside of the court book and a single reference in Argall's
register book regarding the controversy over the grant of land to John Martin in
Virginia. The other letters from Martin to his brother-in-law, Sir Julius Cæsar,
written in December, 1622, give startling suggestions with regard to an ideal policy
for the colony. "The manner howe to bringe in the Indians into subiection wth
out makinge an utter extirpation of them ..." is the heading of the paper in
which Martin proposes to disable the main body of the enemy by cutting them
off from their sources of supply at home and by destroying their trade. He would
thus require two hundred soldiers "Contynuallie harrowinge and burneinge all their
Townes in wynter." By this means and by gaining a store of grain for two years'
supply, he plans for the recovery from the massacre. In order to secure the entire
territory from the Indians, in a second letter he propounds a scheme by which the
Crown or the company can make a "Royall plantation for gods glory his Matie:
and Royall progenyes euer happines and the Companies exceedinge good." The
responsibility and control was to be thrown upon the shires of England. The
fact that the Martin letters have not heretofore been generally known may be due
to an error in the catalogue. They appear under the name "Tho. Martin" instead
of "Jho. Martin."[151]


69

Two other projects for the advancement of the colony are in the same collection
of papers; one by Captain Bargrave, brother of the Dean of Canterbury, is dated
December 8, 1623, and the other a year later. The latter relates to the division of
income from tobacco between the King, the planter, and the grower, with a reward
to those endeavoring to preserve the plantation, but approves the Ditchfield offer.
The Ditchfield offer itself is also in this collection.[152] Captain Bargrave's proposition
for the government of the colony stands midway between absolute royal control
and full autonomy of the planters, and holds an important place in the develop-
ment of the plans from the proprietary to the royal colony. Furthermore, it is
rather significant that in the collection of Sir Julius Cæsar are to be found the propo-
sitions of Martin, of Bargrave, and the document by which the commission was
finally appointed in 1624, to establish the government in Virginia under royal control.
Sir Julius Cæsar, having been a judge of admiralty under Elizabeth and chancellor
of the exchequer in the reign of James I, became master of the rolls on January
16, 1610/11, and one of the keepers of the great seal on May 3, 1621. His position
evidently enabled him to secure a large collection of valuable drafts of documents.
This was sold at auction in 1757. One-third of the collection was purchased by the
Earl of Shelburne (Lord Lansdowne) from Webb and came to the Museum among
the Lansdowne papers.

Two collections of printed material of the company are to be found in England,
the British Museum and the Society of Antiquaries. While the British Museum has
a large number of the earlier publications, it possesses only the declaration of June
22, 1620, and also the unique note of shipping of 1620, the only other copy of which
is owned by the Society of Antiquaries. The collection of that society is rich in
royal proclamations, besides possessing a copy of the Note of Shipping, 1621, and
of the Inconveniences of 1622. The scattering documents to be found in private
collections throughout England are often valuable, but nowhere else is to be found
any considerable number of papers or any that are of great importance.[153]



 
[150]

"List of Records," pp. 149 ff., Nos. 256, 257, 267, 276–278, 298, 299, 323–325. The volume is cata-
logued as Additional MSS., 14285.

[151]

List of Records, Nos. 378, 384, 385.

[152]

List of Records, Nos. 604 and 733.

[153]

For those documents in private collections, see the List of Records. In the concluding section
of this "Introduction" will be found a discussion of the collections which have been searched in vain
for material relating to the Virginia Company. Furthermore, a statement will there be found of those
families in whose possession we should expect to find Virginia records, because of their connection with
the men prominent in the company or in the commissions which supplanted the company. A very
helpful article, entitled "The Stuart Papers," is published by Mrs. S. C. Lomas, in the Transactions of
the Royal Historical Society
, new series, XVI, 97–132.