University of Virginia Library

4. The Records of the Company under the
Sandys-Southampton Administration

Organization of the Company

In order to comprehend what the records of the company were and what their
value, it is necessary to gain an understanding of the system which the corporation
worked out in order to further its purposes. The forms and usages of the company
after 1619 were determined by the charters granted by the King and by the "Orders
and Constitutions" which it adopted in 1619 and printed in June, 1620,[154] although the
latter were altered or newly interpreted from time to time by action of its courts.

The membership of the company was unlimited and was granted by the courts
to anyone who had "adventured" £12 10s. for a share of stock or to whom the com-
pany had awarded a share of stock for services.[155] The distinction between a member
who was free of the company and an owner of land in Virginia was brought out in a
controversy on February 19, 1622/3, in which a proposition to limit the adventurers
to those approved by the generality met with opposition on the ground that land in
Virginia was held in free and common socage and could not be forbidden to any man.
But Sir John Brooke, the legal authority in the company, declared that such exclusion
was agreeable to the law since it was a question of a vote in a court and not a ques-
tion of ownership of land. The argument was based on the power to withhold the
privilege of voting from Samuel Wroth, who was under censure, and similarly on
the power to exclude any man who had purchased land from a member who was
indebted to the company until the debts were paid. This discussion also revealed
that no oath of fidelity was required in the Virginia Company as in the Muscovy
and other corporations. At a later date the King proposed that no member should
be free of the courts who had not sent men to the colony as planters, claiming that
less than thirty of the adventurers could meet the requirement.[156] The power to dis-
franchise an unworthy member was reserved to the company.

The members met in four great or quarter courts, held on the last Wednesday
except one of each law term. On the Monday preceding they assembled in a prepar-
ative court and on every Wednesday fortnight thereafter in a common or ordinary
court, as required by the charter of 1612; and they might also be summoned to
an extraordinary court by the treasurer or deputy. The meetings were held in the
private houses of various members of the company[157] until the time of the tobacco
contract, when a company house was established.

In the quarter court the adventurers elected all councilors and principal officers
of the company and colony, made all laws and ordinances, confirmed all grants of
land, settled all questions of trade, and passed all measures which should bind the
company for a term of years. Their action with regard to questions of a new charter
and of investment for the colony was legal only when transacted in a quarter court,
but they might transfer to other courts actions which concerned correspondence
with the lord treasurer or similar business. Fifteen of the generality and five
of the council formed a quorum for the ordinary courts, and in those they signed
warrants, ordered the payment of bills passed by the auditors, and sealed bills of
adventure. In that meeting also were perfected commissions for transportation
of men and provisions and for trade and barter. Special officers and committees
were appointed in this court, and even actions of great importance, such as the
dissolution of the magazine or the extension of freedom of the company to hon-
orary members, were consummated.[158]

The officers chosen by the company were a council, a treasurer, a deputy,
auditors, a general committee of sixteen, a secretary, a bookkeeper, a husband, and
a beadle. The adventurers looked to the treasurer or governor not only as the
president and moderator, but as the manager of their business interests, and expected
him to be responsible for the policy of the company in its relations with the govern-
ment and to formulate and present plans for the development of the plantation and
the profit of the adventurers. To him was entrusted the supervision of the treasury
and the collection of moneys.

The care of the court books was given to the deputy. It was his duty to attend
to the engrossing of the orders and resolutions of the courts, the registration of
letters to and from the company, and the formulation of statements to be given to
the public. He also kept the court of the committees and supervised the issue of
warrants.

The council was a body, gradually increasing in size, elected for life, and was
sworn by the lord chancellor or by the lord chamberlain. In the earlier years it was
the most important committee of the generality of the company, but after 1621 its

duties seem oftentimes to have been assigned to the auditors or to special committees.
According to the "Orders and Constitutions" its chief care was the preparation of
laws for the company and for the colony, the issue of instructions to the governor
and council of the colony, and the formation of a preliminary court for the trial of
the officers of the company or of the colony. But the practice in the courts was to
refer to it those difficult duties for which its titled and distinguished personnel made
it especially fit. To it was referred, as a final resort, the examination of the claims of
John Martin, the attempts to gain a statement of accounts from the old magazine,
and the settlement or arbitration of both the Bargrave and the Argall cases.[159]

A body called the "committees" was at first composed of twelve members, six
being chosen annually, but later the number was increased to sixteen, four being
elected anew each year.[160] Its duties were chiefly to attend to the buying and
selling of the commodities of the company, and to the furnishing of ships departing
for Virginia.

The auditors formed the other important standing committee, composed of
seven members, elected annually. The chief duty assigned to them by the "Orders
and Constitutions" was that of reducing to a book the receipts and expenditures.
The court book discloses the fact that the company imposed upon them the burden
of examining all claims against the company, as well as all claims of the company, of
investigating the accounts of the lottery and of the magazine, of determining the
awards of land or of shares for service or for adventure, of perfecting all patents and
grants, and even of investigating controversies, such as the Bargrave and Martin
cases and the dispute as to the seal and coat of arms.[161]

The other officers performed such duties as usually pertain to those who hold
the corresponding titles.[162]

As the business of the company increased additional officers were chosen, as
those for the control and execution of the lotteries and of the tobacco contract; while
the custom of referring important matters to special committees grew rapidly, until
in the later years many duties were transferred to them from the council, and even
from the auditors. In this way such affairs as the securing of men to send to the

colony, the provisioning of ships, the hearing of petitions, the investigating of claims,
the sending of maids to the colony, the planning for new settlements and industries,
the representing of the interests of the company in Parliament, the defending of the
company in the suit of the quo warranto were intrusted to special committees.[163]

METHODS OF PROCEDURE

In order to secure legality of action, the "Orders and Constitutions" were
read at one quarter court each year, since in those meetings the measures of great
importance were determined.[164] That the forms and usages followed in other com-
mercial companies, in other corporate bodies, and in Parliament greatly influenced
the decisions of the company is seen in the following illustrations: The question
as to the entry in the minutes of the names of dissenters or of reasons disallowed
by the court except by special order was thus settled according to the practice
in Parliament; to prove that individual adventurers would not be liable for the
debts of the company in the management of the tobacco magazine, decisions were
cited both in a case involving the corporation of Norwich, and in the insolvency
of the Muscovy Company; when the question arose as to salaries in the tobacco
business involving £100,000, the precedent furnished by all joint stocks of no greater
capital than £7,000 was brought forward; the custom of private corporations as
well as of judicial bodies of imposing a fine upon any man who spoke against the
judge or the court was urged by Lord Brooke as a proper action to be taken
against Samuel Wroth.[165] Elections were conducted by ballot, except for the council,
in which case, as in all other matters, the will of the court was determined by an
"erection of hands."

The reward for services rendered by the officers was determined by the court
and set down in the Orders and Constitutions. The annual payment to the secre-
tary was £20, to the beadle £40, to the husband £50, and to the bookkeeper
£50. Although the chief officials and committees received no salary, at the expira-
tion of the year's term of office it was customary to award 20 acres of land in
Virginia to each individual, with the provision that such land should not be sold.
The company similarly rewarded individuals who had rendered great service, but
sometimes it granted shares of stock instead, or agreed to transport for the indi-
vidual a certain number of men free of charge. Shares thus given could not be sold
below par value of £12 10s.[166] Each share carried with it the privilege of a vote in

the courts and the receipt of 100 acres of land in Virginia on the first division, with a
similar amount on the second division providing the first section had been peopled.
In addition, the sending of a man to the plantation before midsummer of 1625
entitled the adventurer to 50 acres of land on each division. If a planter had
adventured his person only, after three years' residence in the colony the company
gave him one share of stock; or if a resident in England had sent a man to the
colony who had remained there three years, the one who bore the charge was simi-
larly rewarded. Through reward or by purchase an individual might thus own land
and not possess stock, but he might secure the latter within three years by "plant-
ing" or peopling his land. The result was that there were five classes of individuals
connected with the company.

(1)

• The old adventurer who had paid at least £12 10s. for a share of stock,
  and who thus owned, rent free, at least 100 acres of land after the first division
  which took place in 1616.

(2)

• The new adventurer who had exactly the same privileges, except that after
  seven years he must pay 12d. to the company for each 50 acres gained by trans
  portation of settlers.

(3)

• The adventurer who received a share of stock for service or for adventure
  of person and who would have the privileges of an old or of a new adventurer
  according to whether he received the award before or after 1619.

(4)

• The individual who had received a grant of land for service or who had
  purchased land and had not yet gained the grant of shares of stock by adventure
  of his person or by sending out planters.

(5)

• The individual who had purchased land of a debtor of the company and
  could not become free of the courts until the debts were paid.

It will thus be seen that ownership of land and possession of freedom of the
company were not always coexistent, but that each involved the possibility of the
other.[167] No assessments were ever levied upon the shareholders, the first sugges-
tion of such a course coming from the Privy Council in July, 1623.[168]

RECORDS PROVIDED FOR BY THE COMPANY

The company was thus a body of adventurers, who had gained the freedom
of the company by payment of money, by rendering a service, or by settlement
of land in Virginia. It was presided over by a treasurer chosen by itself at will,
and conducted all of its business through its regularly elected officers or committees,
or by special committees. According to the "Orders and Constitutions" it kept

a complete record of its actions in the courts and compelled its officers and
committees to do the same. Provision was thus made for six books which were
to contain the following records:

(1)

• Copies of the letters patents, and also of all letters, orders, and directions
  from the King and his council, as well as the replies of the company.

(2)

• The laws and standing orders passed in quarter courts for the company
  and for the colony.

(3)

• A register of all patents, charters, and indentures of validity granted by
  the company, of all instructions issued by the council, and of all public letters
  sent to or received from Virginia.

(4)

• The acts of the general courts.

(5)

• The acts of the committees; invoices of provisions sent to Virginia by
  the company; the certificates of the receipts to be returned from Virginia; invoices
  of goods sent from Virginia with the husband's certificate of receipt or defect.

(6)

• The names of adventurers, by payment of money or by rendering service,
  to whom shares of land had been given, together with the number of shares
  belonging to each person; the lawful transfers of shares from one to another;
  the names of His Majesty's council for Virginia.

(6a)

• The names of all planters in Virginia on the public and on the private
  plantations separately, based on the certificates from the governor and council in
  Virginia and from the heads of each plantation.[169]

All of these books were in the custody of the Secretary, and were to be
kept in the company's chest, together with the originals of the letters patents
and all other papers. In his custody also were the husband's books of accounts
of every voyage to Virginia, all accounts approved by the auditors, the canceled
and uncanceled charter parties, and all bonds issued to the company.

The proof of the care with which the company kept its records is found in
the contemporary copy of the court book, and in a few scattering originals and
copies of originals which are preserved among the Ferrar and Manchester papers
and in the British Museum. That all of the books required by the orders and
constitutions were really kept can not be proved, since not a page nor a copy of
a page of many of them is known to be extant; but the copy of the court book
serves as an evidence that the laws were as carefully obeyed in this respect as
in others. The references in the minutes to many of these records, the inser-
tion of many of them in the copy of the court book, and the continual provision
for supplementary records all go to show that the "Orders and Constitutions"
furnish a reliable outline of the records kept by the company.

The books which the courts added to the list of records from time to time
reveal an increasing effort to conduct the business in an orderly manner. Imme-
diately upon assuming his duties as treasurer, Sir Edwin Sandys instituted an
investigation of the accounts of Sir Thomas Smythe. In this connection four
books and four rolls were prepared containing the subscriptions, which had been
made for carrying on the business, and a list of the adventurers with the sums
invested during the previous years. The treasurer made a similar request of
the deputy, John Ferrar, on September 18, 1620, in which he asked that the
secretary and Mr. Carter should make three catalogues of the adventurers
indebted to the company in order that they might be given to a solicitor for
collection. He throws light upon the customary carelessness by urging that the
lists should be made "from the company's books and not from memory," lest
many a £12 10s should be lost.[170]

On May 17, 1620, three books of the deputy were audited. The first contained
an account of the money disbursed for provisions,[171] the second, a catalogue of the
provisions sent to the colony, and the third, a list of the names of the persons
dispatched to the plantation with the trade of each. Because of the erection of
private plantations in later years it was necessary that these records should be
supplemented. Hence an order of court provided that the names of all persons
transported to Virginia should be reported to the company and that a bookkeeper
should be appointed to be at the house of the court to register the names before
the departure of every ship. This record was to consist of the name, age, country,
profession, and kindred of each individual and was to state at whose charge the
transportation was effected. Contrary to custom each person was required to pay
a fee for registration. A duplicate of the register was to be sent to the Governor
of Virginia, but the names of those departing were not to be made public until
after the ship had sailed.[172]

Provision was made in 1620 for keeping duplicates of all patents issued.
A part of this series is now deposited in the British Museum, from which the
various kinds of patents and the terms for each may be discovered.[173] A registra-
tion of all shares passed from one member of the company to another was ordered
on November 19, 1621, and such a book was to be used as evidence of the right
to be admitted to courts. Other records added from time to time were a book
containing the rates of commodities,[174] a register of all petitions to the court,

with the action thereupon,[175] and a record of all covenants between adventurers
and indentured servants, a copy of which was to be sent to the governor of
Virginia.[176] The rolls signed by adventurers must have been numerous. Nine are
mentioned in the court book on July 24, 1621, in addition to others cited at
various times.[177]

With the increase in trade and the establishment of the company magazines
new measures were adopted for controlling the business. These often consisted
of separate documents rather than books. A statement was thus required of the
deputy certifying that the freight had been paid before any goods should be
delivered, and invoices were also demanded of the cape merchant.[178] Copies of
such certificates, as also of the accounts of the treasurer of the various joint
stock investments for the glass works and for the fur trade, were kept in the
company's chest.[179]

THE EXTANT RECORDS—THE COURT BOOK

HISTORY OF THE CONTEMPORARY COPY

The paucity of the actual extant documents of the company has made the
circumstances of the transcription of the court book the more interesting and
its authenticity the more important.

As the growing controversy between the two factions of the company resulted
in serious accusations of mismanagement by sundry adventurers and planters, the
Crown soon appointed a commission to investigate the affairs of the company, with a
consequent sequestering of all of the company's court books in May, 1623.[180] The
clear mind of Nicholas Ferrar immediately foresaw the danger of a seizure of the
documents of the company, and appreciating full well the value of the "court books,
registers and writings, instructions, letters, etc.," as political papers and also as
evidences of the possession of land and investment of capital, upon their return by
the Privy Council, he "did fairly copy out all the court books, etc. (which cost
50li) and carried them to the noble Earle of Southampton."[181]

During the following year the activities of Nicholas Ferrar, as well as the
attention of other members of the company, must have been under great strain.
The time not taken in attendance "twice or thrice a week"[182] upon the Privy
Council, and in the attempts to defend the company against the charges of "abuse
of its privileges," was evidently devoted to supervising the transcript of the com-
pany's records. The attestation at the end of each volume shows that the first
was completed January 28, 1623/4, and the second June 19, 1624.[183] This was none
too soon, for just a week later the Privy Council ordered Deputy Ferrar to bring
to the council chamber all patents, books of accounts, invoices of the company,
and lists of settlers in the colony, to be retained by the Privy Council chest
until further notice.[184] A commission had been appointed two days before to take
into their hands all "charters, letters patent, grantes and instructions, bookes,
orders, letters, advices and other writings concerning the company."[185] The com-
pany urged in these words that the council should permit the books to remain invio-
late: "So by this meanes [that is, by the transcripts] have the Original Court
bookes yet escaped purging: And wth all duety wee humbly beseech yor Lops that
they may hereafter be protected from it: And that howsover yor Lops shall please
for the future to dispose of the Companie, that the records of their past Actions
may not be corrupted & falsified." Further, when the council demanded that the
Earl of Southampton should surrender to the commissioners his copies of the
records, before he sailed for the Netherlands in August, he sent them word, "that
he would as soon part wth the evidences of his Land, as wth the said copies, being
the evidence of his honour in that Service."[186]

How these transcripts were made, and especially what became of them at that
time, and where they remained for the following half century can be a matter of

conjecture only, based on the divers statements of contemporary authorities. These
are three in number:

(1)

• The Discourse of the Old Company of Virginia addressed to the Privy
  Council, May, 1625.

(2)

• The Memoirs of the Life of Nicholas Ferrar by Dr. Peckard in 1790.

(3)

• A Short Collection of the Most Remarkable Passages from the originall
  to the dissolution of the Virginia Company, by Arthur Woodnoth, written
  between 1635 and 1645, and printed in 1651 by Richard Cotes.[187]

The Discourse of the Old Company gives much the same history of the
records as does Dr. Peckard. The facts set forth by the latter were taken from
the "Memoirs of Nicholas Ferrar" by his brother John, about 1654, and therefore
this work may be considered as based on contemporary authority. According to
Dr. Peckard, Nicholas Ferrar, knowing that malice was at work, procured a
clerk to copy out all the court books and other writings and caused them to be
carefully collated with the original. It cost him the sum of £50, which he thought
was the best service he could render the company. After the seizure of all the
muniments of the company, and after Lord Treasurer Middlesex had procured
sentence against the company, Mr. Ferrar informed Sir Edward Sandys and others
of what he had done. These men were greatly rejoiced and advised that the copies
be taken to the Earl of Southampton, who was so overcome that he is said to have
embraced Mr. Ferrar and to have declared that he valued them as an evidence of his
honor more than as evidences of his land. John Ferrar is quoted as having stated
that the Earl of Southampton was advised not to keep these records in his house
and so delivered them to Sir Robert Killigrew, who left them on his death to Sir
Edward Sackville, the Earl of Dorset. Mr. Ferrar continues that the Earl of Dor-
set died in 1652, but he hopes the records are still in the possession of the Earl's
family.[188]

Certain it is that Dr. Peckard had a large collection of manuscripts which
concerned the Virginia Company, some of which must be considered a part of the
records of the company, for such were the Ferrar papers described above which
Dr. Peckard bequeathed to Magdalene College, Cambridge. That some of them, at
least, came from the Earl of Dorset's family is to be concluded from the statement
of Dr. Peckard that the "Duke had had his library searched and found a few loose
papers, which he sent to him."[189] Some of them doubtless belonged to Dr. Peckard's

wife, Martha Ferrar. But the story of the purchase of the two volumes from the
estate of the Duke of Southampton by Colonel William Byrd in 1673 or 1688 for
60 guineas has firm credence through statements of Mr. Byrd himself; and there
is no evidence that they came from the Earl of Dorset's family. That they were
sent to Tichfield by the Earl of Southampton before he sailed for the Netherlands
and there remained until his son's library was sold after his death in 1667 seems
probable. Perhaps some of the other records went to Sir Robert Killigrew, as
stated by John Ferrar, and even some from which these copies were made.

The statement by Woodnoth, who was a nephew of Nicholas Ferrar, that Sir
John Danvers had the transcripts of the records made in order to keep out of
the way an indigent man who had been employed by the company as a copyist
and who might be persuaded to say something ill of Sandys and of Southampton,
does not bear the stamp of truth or even of probability. There may have been a
copy made by Danvers, but the internal evidence reveals that the existing volumes
in the Library of Congress were not transcribed by any one man, and that the
work was accomplished under the personal direction of Nicholas Ferrar.[190]

DESCRIPTION OF THE CONTEMPORARY COPY

The contemporary copies of the court books, which are now in the Library of
Congress and which may well be called the Ferrar copies, consist of two volumes of
large quarto size well bound in rough calf. About 1898 the books were boxed, that
is, repaired with new backs without disturbing the sewing. The old labels were
pasted on the new backs and bear the title in gold letters on red leather: Record / of
the Virgin: / Compan:/, while gold letters on black leather indicate the volume:
Vol. / I. / and Vol. / II. / . In the first volume manila strips are pasted from the
inner cover to the first and to the last fly leaf in order to strengthen the binding.
The paper is of the seventeenth century type, hand-made and uneven in texture. In
the first volume there are three hundred and fifty-four pages, with five fly leaves in
the front and seven in the back, while the second contains three hundred and
eighty-seven pages preceded by three fly leaves and followed by four, with two
extra manila pages in both the front and back. The pencil entries on the first
leaf of the first volume are as follows: "Records of the / Virginia Company / of
London./ Vol I. April 28, 1619 to May 8, 1622. / Vol 2. May 20, 1622 to June
7, 1627./ The above title in hand of / Mr. A. R. Spofford / Sig.: H. F[rieden wald][191]

Oct. 11 / 97./". On the inside of the front cover of the second volume in an unknown
modern autograph is: "p. 366 cf with p. 71 v 3,"[192] and on the first manila leaf: "May
20, 1622 / to / June 7, 1624."

The discovery of the Ferrar papers has made it possible to make a final state-
ment both as to the method of the transcription of the documents and as to its
accuracy, for the autographs there found of Nicholas Ferrar and also of his
clerk or business agent in his private accounts prove indisputably that these two
men supervised and carried on the copying of the volumes.[193] Particularly in the
second volume, where there are many entries of reports of committees, projects,
objections, letters, petitions, declarations, and relations by the company or by
individuals, the headings, the initial words, even the first line of each document, and
sometimes entire documents are in the autograph of Nicholas Ferrar. The rest
of the insertion is usually by his assistant, who was perhaps Thomas Collett, his
nephew. All of the insertions in the first volume and about twenty in the second
are entirely in the so-called Collett autograph, numbering about the same as those
superintended by the deputy himself. The way in which these insertions are often
crowded in, is evidence that they were copied from the original documents in spaces
left for the purpose by the hired copyist.[194]

As to the identity of the other three or four distinct autographs, in which
the remaining part of the volumes appear, nothing has been determined. The
first and third copyists are distinctly different in style, while what appears as
the writing of a fourth and a sixth clerk may possibly be identical with that of
the first. With the exception of the autograph of Nicholas Ferrar, the whole is
clearly, carefully, and legibly written in the characteristic running hand of the
period, resembling the chancery hand. The spelling, capitalization, and abbrevia-
tions are distinctive and characteristic of each copyist. The use of curved lines
to complete blank spaces at the end of the line, and often at the bottom and top of
the page, shows the labor expended to make the transcript accurate and complete.
The memoranda at the end of the volumes declare that the transcript had been
carefully collated with the original "courte booke" and with the authentic docu-
ments by the secretaries, Edward Waterhouse and Edward Collingwood, in the
first volume, and by Thomas Collett and Edward Collingwood in the second. That
the insertions were copied from the original documents is shown by the statement

in the memorandum of volume II that in two instances the letters had been missing
for purpose of collation. Many pages reveal the corrections of errors or omissions
of the copyist. In most instances this was done by Edward Collingwood himself,
though sometimes by Thomas Collett.[195] At the bottom of each page is the signature
"Conc Collingwood," the abbreviation standing for concordat, as is shown by the
word appearing as "Concord:" on page three hundred and fifteen of the first
volume.[196]

In addition to this internal evidence of accuracy, further proof of the care with
which the books were transcribed is found among the Ferrar papers. The records
of four courts were there discovered, which are almost identical with those of the
same date in the Library of Congress volumes.[197] The only differences, and these
are not numerous, are those which would naturally result from the fallibility of the
copyist, and the apparent custom of the time to ignore the orthography of the
original. One is led to believe that these loose pages of courts form a part of the
book from which the copy was made. This is shown by the use of larger letters to
emphasize certain words, and by Edward Collingwood's corrections of the Library
of Congress copy to make it conform to these drafts. Even the omission of one or
two lines in the Ferrar copy, later corrected, can be accounted for by reference to
these sheets, since in each case it has resulted from the same word occurring in the
same place on two successive lines. Furthermore, the directions in the margin of
these courts as to where certain documents were to be entered were followed in the
transcript and seem to point to these as a part of the original minutes. The
autograph of the court held on June 25 is identical with that of the first copyist
of the transcript, while the courts of July 4 and July 9 were apparently written by
the sixth copyist of the transcript. Among the Ferrar papers are two drafts of a
resolution concerning the "Lo Tr̃er speach touching Mr Alderm. Johnson," which
was entered in the court book. One is a rough draft written, altered, and corrected
by Edward Collingwood, and bearing the above indorsement by the writer and a
similar indorsement by John Ferrar. The other draft is in the autograph of the
sixth copyist of the court book, following the above, and is attested by Edward
Collingwood. The transcript in the court book is identical with the latter, but
the vote is omitted; the substance, however, is given after the discussion follow-

ing the presentation of the resolution. Thus they seem rather to have been drafts
of a resolution which had been presented than of one prepared to be offered.
Comparison between these records of courts and a draft of a Somers Islands court,
in the same collection, leads to the conclusion that they do not form a part of the
blotter or blurred book from which the original book was made, since the latter
are much corrected and altered and then canceled diagonally from corner to corner;[198]
but are rather a part of the original book itself. The reliability of the Library of
Congress transcripts is also confirmed by collating them with the original documents,
or with other copies of the documents, which are inserted in the court book, and these
careful comparisons have shown how accurately Edward Collingwood and his
assistants conducted the work for Nicholas Ferrar.[199]

THE SYSTEM OF KEEPING THE COURT BOOK

The system by which the minutes of the courts were kept is thus outlined in
the minutes; the court book was first drawn up by the secretary, was approved by
the deputy, and later accepted or corrected by the court.[200] That there must have
existed a "Blurr booke" in addition to the various reports or other documents
offered in any court is proved by an extract from a memorandum by Sir Nathaniel
Rich, which is a warrant requiring all records of the court to be brought to the
commissioners on Virginia, and includes the "Court Bookes wch should warrant
the s̃d Records, and the Blurr bookes wch should warrant the Court Booke and
is the first ground of the Records; that it may [be] discouered whether there be
any difference betweene them."[201] The entries in the court book are the minutes
of all the various courts, of several meetings of the Somers Islands Company,
and of one meeting of the committees.

Introducing each court is a list of the adventurers in attendance. A comparison
of the number with the number of votes cast as recorded shows that these are
quite complete for the quarter courts, but in the ordinary courts either the
attendance was very small or the entry was incomplete, since the list is often
terminated with the expression "and divers others." It was sometimes entered
later than the transcript of the body of the text, as though from a book of
attendance, but no mention of a roll book is found among the records. This part
of the book alone furnishes a valuable comment upon the social classes interested
in the undertaking and from it may be gained a knowledge of the faithfulness

of the members and especially of the factions which developed toward the close
of its history.

The order of business does not seem to have been regular. The approval of the
previous court is usually recorded first, although many times this is deferred until
the quarter court; then follows the report of the treasurer, through which the
important matters to be determined are presented to the court, and the hearing of
petitions, passing of shares, and grants of land appear at the end of the session.

In the ordinary courts were propounded all of those matters which did not
require action in the general court and often many measures for preliminary dis-
cussion which were postponed for final action to the fuller court. Thus the records
of the common courts and also of the preparative courts usually contain the full
reports and discussions of the various subjects, while the statements in the quarter
courts are brief and perfunctory, embodying the decisions reached in the lesser
courts. The reports of officers, from which so much concerning the financial status
is to be learned, are entered in the minutes of the general court. To trace the course
of any question necessitates a search through all of the courts, but in the quarter
courts will be found the elections and the final action on all laws and ordinances, on
the patents for private plantations or monopolies, or, in short, on all measures by
which the company would be bound for a term of years.

CONTENTS OF THE COURT BOOK

The business recorded during the first two years of the Sandys administration
concerned the establishment of laws and orders in the company and in the colony,
the systematizing of methods, the formation of joint stock companies for the erection
of new industries in Virginia, and the opening up of new adventures. But after the
massacre early in the year 1622, the whole tone of the book changes. Personal feuds
and quarrels, complaints, and accusations fill the pages. Whether the friction was
due to the extreme distress brought about by the attack of the Indians or whether it
was but the excuse for open opposition by the party of the Crown, which had been
rapidly developing, is difficult to determine. From the spring of 1622 until
February, 1622/3, the burden of the record concerns the tobacco contract with the
Crown. It resulted in the discussion of salaries for the officers and the quarrel
with Samuel Wroth, which occupied the attention of the company for three months.
Then followed the Butler and Johnson accusations, the investigation by the Crown,
and the dissolution of the company. It is literally true that, after June, 1622, no
new measures for trade, for industry, or for commerce are entered in the court book.
There was the usual transferring of shares and hearing of petitions and claims, but
the business activity was evidently destroyed. That the colony could survive the

massacre and continue its development with so little encouragement from the pro-
prietor is evidence of the strong foundation laid during the governorship of Sir
George Yeardley.

From the court book it would be possible to reconstruct a part or the whole
of some of the other records. A list of all of the ships departing or arriving
with the names of the masters could thus be drawn up, but the terms of the
charter party could not be determined.[202] A full statement of the shares of stock
granted or transferred, of the land assigned for adventure or for service, and of the
private plantations erected could be given. Even a partial financial account could
be rendered, though not an itemized statement. The larger sums invested or
received from the various sources are usually given in the treasurer's plans and the
officers' reports, although unfortunately only those of the treasurer and deputy are
entered in full. But from scattered statements in plans, reports, and discussions,
from grants, patents, suits, letters, petitions, and claims will come much that will
illuminate the financial situation when these are gathered together.

The full record of all documents for which record was not provided elsewhere
was made in the court book. Plans, reports of committees, and reports of chief
officers seem to have been entered in full, but letters to and from the colony, and to
and from the privy council, petitions with the action thereupon, charter parties,
grants for monopolies, lists of departing planters, expenditures and receipts of the
magazines, and rolls of adventure, were all recorded in the other books provided by
the "Orders and Constitutions" or in the books created later. A single illustration
will suffice. Of the twenty-seven letters sent to the colony and received from the
colony, copies of many of which have been found among the papers in Virginia, but
fifteen are mentioned in the court book, and only a few are spread in full upon the
minutes. A great many more documents are entered in the court book during the
later years, due evidently to the desire to keep a record of the controversy which
might serve as a defense against the accusations of the malcontents. That many of
these were not entered in the original court book is revealed by the marginal notes
in the extant court minutes of the Ferrar papers, which read as follows: "Enter the
quietus est," "Enter the resolution," and other similar directions.

The court book is not only a source of information, but it also serves as a guide
to the other records of the company. That all of the twenty-one documents men-
tioned but not entered in the court book have been found in other collections is
most important and interesting. These include some of the publications of the
company, most of the correspondence of the company with the King and with the

colony, many of the orders of the Privy Council, the Admiralty suits of the com-
pany, the laws passed in the colony, the charter granted to the colony, and the forms
for patents used by the company. There are thirteen documents entered in the
court book which are on record elsewhere, consisting of declarations or reports which
were published by the company, petitions and letters to the King, and orders of the
King's council. But thirty most valuable documents are spread upon the minutes
which have not yet been discovered among other papers. These include a few peti-
tions to the King, many petitions received by the company, a number of letters from
and to the colony, the propositions brought forward in the attempt to form a tobacco
contract with the King, the plans propounded by the treasurer for the advancement
of the enterprise, and the declarations of the state of the affairs of the company and
of the colony by the same officer.[203]

THE EXTANT SUPPLEMENTARY RECORDS

DOCUMENTS OUTLINING THE ACTIVITY OF THE COMPANY

The organization and the method of procedure of the company have been
outlined, in order to enable the reader to comprehend the nature of the records, and
through them the machinery by which it conducted its internal affairs; but there is a
wider and more important field to consider. The real interest in the company comes
from its activity in carrying on trade and in developing the resources and
government of the colony. Again, the starting point must be the court book, not
only as a guide to the records which it kept in executing its purposes, but in
discovering what activities are to be traced. Two kinds of documents afford the
clearest outline of the subject; in one are the reports which the treasurer offered to
the company and which are spread upon the minutes; in the other are the printed
declarations and broadsides which the company issued for the purpose of securing
interest, confidence, and investment in the undertaking. With the same motive it
reprinted treatises and published sermons which had been delivered before the
company.

The first report of Sir Edwin Sandys after he became treasurer was offered
on November 3, 1619, in which he thus defined his policy: The resources of the
company were to be augmented by settling and developing the company's land and
by increasing the number of industries to be established, an action which must
advance the plantation from a colony for exploitation into a colony for settlement.
The report begins with a statement of the number of men which had been transported

by the company for the college land and for the public land during the summer and
continues with propositions to the same effect, by which 300 additional persons
should be sent to the colony, 100 of whom were to be maids for wives and 100 to be
apprentices or servants from the city. The other measures discussed are indicative
of the development which rapidly took place. First of these was the effort to
establish other commodities in Virginia and restrain the excessive production of
tobacco; the second was the encouragement of a spirit of local patriotism in the
colony. The treasurer urges that men should be sent from the low countries to
raise fortifications for the colony, stating that the colonists were willing to bear the
charges of the work since they had recently been encouraged by the charters and
grants of liberties. The dependence of the company upon the lotteries for an
income and the care to arrange for an economical transportation of the men are
indications of the financial policy and status of the colony. The income of the
lottery is estimated at £3,500, and the total expense of perfecting the plan submitted
is placed at £4,000 or £5,000.

Six months later the treasurer made his annual report, which revealed to what
extent his plans had been executed. It was issued as a broadside under the date of
the court in which it was delivered and describes the state of the colony from April,
1618, to April, 1619, taken from a general letter to the company, and then proceeds to
outline the successful activity of the colony during the succeeding year. It empha-
sizes the erection of private plantations, the number of men sent to the company's
land, the commodities provided for—there being ten instead of two as in the former
year—the interest in the care of religion and education in the colony, and the stable
financial condition of the company. The general receipts amounted to £9,831 14s 11d
and the disbursements were £10,431 14s 07d, but the surplus in the college fund more
than exceeded this deficiency, the receipts from that source being £2,043 02s 11½d and
the expenditures £1,477 15s 5d. The lottery was reported to have an increase in stock
over the previous year of £1,200. Although not re-elected treasurer, the financial
management remained in the hands of Sir Edwin Sandys, as is proved by the entries
of his plans in the court book and by his private letters to John Ferrar. A scheme
outlined in the court of July 7, 1620, is practically the measure put forth in the
printed declaration of June 22, 1620, and proposes a continuation of the policy stated
above.

The printed documents of 1619 and 1620 add but little to the plans revealed in the
treasurer's reports concerning the activity of the company, although the measures
taken to advance the comfort of the planters and of the tenants upon arrival in
Virginia, the establishment of many private plantations, and the encouragement
given to the self-government of the colony are brought out more clearly. After the
note of the shipping in 1621, so far as is known, there were no propositions issued

by the company. This was due to the massacre which paralyzed the efforts of the
company for a time and forced upon it publications of defense and excuse or
directions of warning. While the company was torn by dissension, after 1622 the
colony slowly but steadily advanced. The proprietor was no longer active, and the
center of interest is therefore transferred from the courts in London in which the
plans had been conceived to the settlement in which they were maturing.

The various publications of the company afford not only an understanding of the
measures proposed, but also of their execution. They were in themselves a means of
carrying out its schemes. Before 1622 five of these advertisements were issued by
the company. The broadside bearing the date May 17, 1620, is a full statement of
the prosperous condition in the colony, setting forth the ability of the colony to
receive newcomers in its guest houses, newly built in each of the four ancient
boroughs and in the other plantations, and describing the measures provided to sus-
tain ministers in each borough. It states the number of men who had been sent to
the public land, with the provisions allowed, and describes fully the efforts which
had been made to establish six industries in the colony.[204]

A book of great importance was issued by the company in June of the same
year containing a series of declarations.[205] There were at least two editions in the
year 1620, having variations in the title page; in the first edition the pages are
numbered according to each pamphlet and the imprint is "T. S.," while in the
second the pagination is consecutive from 1 to 92 and the imprint is that of Thomas
Snodham. The latter varies also in the orthography of the word "colony" in the title.
The former was probably the first edition and was composed of pamphlets, each of
which may have been issued separately, and seems to have been reissued, with an
additional pamphlet concerning a division of land in Virginia,[206] in which the
signature is consecutive. Copies of the first issue of the first edition of the "Decla-
rations" are in the Harvard Library and in the New York Public Library ("No.
1"), but the only copy of the second issue is in the John Carter Brown Library
(copy "A"). The copies in the British Museum, the Cambridge University
Library,[207] the Library of Congress, the John Carter Brown Library (copy "B"),
and the New York Public Library (Thomas Addison Emmet Collection, "No. 2")
are identical and are evidently the first issue of the second edition. The copies in
the New York Public Library and in a private collection in New York are probably
a second issue of the second edition, having four additional pages and containing a

declaration, "By his Maiesties Councell for Virginia," dated November 15, 1620.[208]
The pagination and the signature are consecutive but the style of type is changed.

The pamphlets included in all editions are as follows:

(1)

• "By his Maiesties Counseil for Virginia." This is a declaration of the
  industries which have been established, of the good government which has been
  formed in the colony so that it "begins to have the face and fashion of an orderly
  State," and of the purpose of the company in the division of land.

(2)

• "A Note of the Shipping, Men and Prouisions sent to Virginia, by the
  Treasurer and Company in the yeere 1619."

(3)

• "A Declaration of the Supplies intended to be sent to Virginia in this
  yeare 1620. 18 Julij, 1620."

(4)

• "The Names of the Aduenturers, with their seuerall summes aduentured
  * * * paid to Sir Thos. Smith," to "Sir Baptist Hicks," and to "Sir Edwin
  Sandys."

(5)

• "Orders And Constitutions, * * * for the better gouerning * * *
  of the said Companie * * * Anno 1619, and 1620."

Some light is thrown upon these publications by the court book, in which
provision for four similar pamphlets was made between November, 1619, and June,
1620, as follows:

(1)

• An advertisement for laborers, approved to be published on November 17,
  1619.

(2)

• A publication which should confute the slander as to the barrenness of the
  soil in Virginia, ordered November 22.

(3)

• A list of the names of adventures with the sums adventured, ordered to be
  drawn up by the treasurer and Dr. Winstone, December 15.[209]

(4)

• An apology for Virginia, ordered to be printed June 23, 1620. On June 26
  and 28 it was provided that the standing orders should be printed and annexed to
  the book to be given to all members by order of the council.

The conclusion seems valid that these pamphlets are the ones included in the
book and that they first appeared at various times, but that finally in June, 1620, they
were collected, the fourth one added, and the volume published under the date of
the latter.

The publication of this declaration in four different issues during the year 1620
indicates the interest which Sir Edwin Sandys had aroused in the measure, as well as

the virility of the company, while reference to the book in much of the corre-
spondence of the day reveals the same attitude toward the venture. In order to
promote the silk industry a pamphlet entitled "Observations to be followed for
making of fit roomes for silk wormes," written by Banoeil, was translated under the
patronage of the company toward the end of the year 1620.[210] It contains a pamphlet
called "A Valuation of the Commodities growing and to be had in Virginia: rated
as they are worth," in which is presented the astonishing list of 49 articles. The
natural commodities which did not require especial cultivation, such as various kinds
of fish, furs, woods, shrubs and berries, were of course included. But this proof of
rapid development in the industrial habits and occupations of the colonists is most
important, and the note of the shipping of the same year and the one in 1621 are
confirmatory. In the former is the statement of the number of men sent for each of
four industries, and in the latter a similar declaration. The rapid transportation
of settlers and the development of private plantations in these two years is as sur-
prising. Thus in 1620 six ships with 600 persons were sent to the colony, and 400
more settlers were to be sent at once, of whom 500 were destined for the com-
pany's land. The next year the number of ships dispatched increased to twenty-one
and the number of persons to 1,300, while the number of patents for private
plantations grew from six to twenty-six.

During the year 1622 the books printed by the company were much less valuable,
although more numerous, there being seven in all. The Declaration of the state of
the Colony of Virginia with the Relation of the Massacre of the English, by the
Natiue Infidells with the names of those that were Massacred, by Edward Waterhouse,
was more concerned with the disaster than with the previous development of the
plantation.[211] A broadside is inserted in the copy of this declaration in the John
Carter Brown Library, entitled "Virginia Inconveniences,"[212] which was published
separately and was a set of directions with regard to the provisions which each person
should have before sailing for the colony. This included apparel, victuals, household
implements, arms, sugar, spice, and fruit for consumption at sea, and nets, hooks,
lines, and a tent for large numbers. The declaration was made that for its own
tenants the Virginia Company followed the proportionate provision as set forth in
this broadside. It is at once an advertisement for new tenants and a warning against
the dangers which had wrought dissatisfaction and brought complaints to the com-
pany. Two sermons and two treatises were published in the same year; one of the

latter was a reprint of Banoeil's book on silk worms, including a letter of encourage-
ment from the King and one of advice from the treasurer, which were intended to
promote the industry of silk as opposed to that of tobacco;[213] the other treatise was
by John Brinsley and was an encouragement for the advancement of learning and
the foundation of schools.[214] Of the same character was a four-page pamphlet, which
was published in the same year, declaring the sums which had been coll͠ected "towards
the building of a free schoole in Virginia."[215]

A number of general works were approved by the company in the courts or were
accepted and rewarded. Thus the proposition by Smith to write a history of Vir-
ginia on April 12, 1621, seems to have been acceptable to the adventurers, while
George Rugh, who had rendered service to the Virginia council by writing a treatise
on government, was publicly eulogized upon his bequeathing £100 to the company
for the education of infidels' children.[216] Edward Bennett was admitted to the com-
pany as a reward for a treatise against the importation of tobacco from Spain, and
the chronicler, Howes, was granted 12 pounds of tobacco as a yearly payment for his
references to Virginia.[217]

A number of works were suggested in the courts of which we have no trace or
which can not be identified as appearing under other titles. To what the company
referred when it petitioned the Archbishop of Canterbury for permission to publish
the book which he had prohibited is unknown.[218] The printed book proposed by Sir
Edwin Sandys on November 4, 1620, in which he wished to defend the lotteries and
to hasten the dispatch of persons to Virginia, may have been the declaration of the
shipping in 1620, but it is not mentioned again in the court book. In 1621 three other
proposed publications failed to be executed, so far as is known, the first of which was
a treatise on the government of Virginia by Thomas Bargrave.[219] The second was a
defense of the company, and concerned the health, trade, and manners of the colony,
and the third considered the defects and remedies of Virginia and discussed the food,

health, fortifications, wealth, and religion of the colony.[220] In the following year an
attempt was made to collect the "binding laws which had been ratified in courts"
and to add them to the printed books, but it seems to have failed, since no trace of
such a publication has been found, and no final action is recorded in the court book.[221]

DOCUMENTS REVEALING THE MOVEMENTS FOR TRADE AND INDUSTRY

The printed advertisements between 1619 and 1621 were successful in securing
the capital with which to carry on the enterprise. It now remains to discover how
the trade was conducted and controlled, how the plantation was developed and
governed, and how the business was finally destroyed.

The income which enabled the company to provide for new industries in 1619
and 1620 was derived from the £12 10s. paid by each new adventurer for each new
share of stock, and from the lotteries. Special collections and particular gifts for the
advancement of religion and of education in the colony were frequent, and thus the
account and management of the college land became important. Before the intro-
duction of freedom of trade into the colony, and the dissolution of the old magazine
on January 12, 1619/20, the company had some profit from that monopoly,[222] but the
ease with which returns came from the lotteries had doubtless led the company to
abolish the monopoly of trade which had become so difficult to maintain. That the
company depended on the lotteries is indicated by the following statements in the
court book: On December 1, 1619, the lotteries were continued until summer because
there was no other means of securing money, and the plan put forth for the devel-
opment of the colony on July 7, 1620, provided that the estimated expense of £17,800
should be met by the income from the lotteries, which would amount to £18,000.
Information concerning the organization for conducting the lottery is wanting.
Books and rolls and catalogues of prizes are referred to but have not been found.[223]
Thus the only documents which throw light on the system outside of the court book
are the records of the suit of the Virginia Company against William Leveson, an
agent for the lottery in 1613, which discloses that books and rolls had been kept, and
that a house for the lottery had been erected and furnished "at the west end of St.
Paules Church;" a proclamation by the King for the overthrow of the lottery on
March 8, 1620/21; and a few letters solicting investments.[224]

The investments by the company during the period of the lotteries followed
three lines—the old magazine, the planting of the public and the college lands in

Virginia, and the erection of industries for the production of certain commodities.
The court book is the only source of information with regard to the old magazine,
in which the company through its general stock of the company had invested more
than twice as much as any other adventurer. Hence, during the last half of the year
1619, it made every effort to gain an account and secure a settlement of that adventure.
The discussion, which resulted in the adoption of free trade to the colony, reveals the
system used for the control of the magazine, indicates to a slight degree the income
which the company had had from that joint stock, and incidentally shows that it had
some returns from the public lands in Virginia.[225] The numbers of men sent to the
company's land and their equipment are given in the printed declarations, in the
reports of the treasurer spread on the minutes, and in the discussions recorded in
the court book, and although the sums invested for the purpose are not recorded,
the statement was made by Sir Edwin Sandys that 800 men were sent through the
income from the lottery. The transportation of dissolute persons in the year 1619
to meet the command of the King, and the settlement of boys and girls on the
company's land previous to 1622, were other means used to people the public and
college lands.[226]

Five commodities enumerated in the broadside of May 17, 1620, were established
by action of the court. No record is extant of the exact nature of the investment,
but it appears from the court book to have been chiefly an investment from the general
stock. The movement for monopoly of certain industries rather than a monopoly
of all trade began during the latter part of the year 1620, and as a result the records
deal extensively with plans for the sole importation of tobacco, by which a joint
stock of £15,000 was to be raised to carry out what is known as the "Somerscales
plan."

The overthrow of the lotteries carried consternation to the company. An
income was essential with which to send out settlers to develop the soil or to create
new industries, but the general stock was so low that the company could not even
carry out its plans for glassworks. Finally, after several months of discussion,
recourse was had to special adventure or new joint stock companies for special
undertakings, controlled by a treasurer who should be elected by the adventurers in
the scheme. Thus followed the creation of a series of magazines for the erection of
a glass furnace, for the establishment of a fur trade, for sending maids for wives,
and for supplying a magazine for apparel. The records of these ventures are to be
found only in the court book, and the data there given is very insufficient. This, of
course, meant no advantage to the general stock, and the company was forced to
discover means for securing returns from the general investment and an income with

which to develop the company's land. Hence, private plantations were organized,
and private patents and monopolies for the industry of pitch and tar, for ironworks,
for new discoveries were granted, while special commissions for trade along the coast
and for fishing added to the revenue. With the exception of the movement for
private plantations and for the sole importation of tobacco, but few records exist
outside of the court book to reveal these vigorous endeavors to reap the results of
the great investments in the earlier years.[227] The grants for private plantations to
individuals or groups of individuals, called hundreds, commenced as early as 1616,
but increased rapidly during and after 1621, there being entries in the court book of
over fifty patents granted in four years, which provide for the transportation of at
least 100 men each and often for four times as many. The system by which each
hundred in Virginia and the adventurers for the hundred in England was organized
is to be found in the court book and in the extant records of the companies. The
minutes of one meeting for Martin's Hundred and one for Smythe's Hundred, and
the forms for patents deposited in the British Museum, in addition to about seventy
papers of Berkeley Hundred, afford a very satisfactory reconstruction of the terms of
agreement, the expenses, the provisioning, the form of government, the instructions
issued to the captain or governor of the hundred, and the terms of settlement with
tenants and servants. The adventures of Lord Zouch and Lord La Warr in 1617
and 1618, and of the Walloons and French in 1621, complete the series of which any
record exists.[228]

But the private grants did not promise sufficient income to meet the great
demands for supplies from the general stock which the massacre of 1622 brought
about. As a result the company turned to the income from tobacco, regardless
of its high purposes and its endeavors to enforce the production of other com-
modities. This feeling of the importance of a contract for the sole importation of
tobacco took such a strong hold upon the company that from May, 1622, until
its dissolution, just a year later, nothing else worth mentioning is recorded in the
court book, while the quarrel concerning the salaries to be paid for the manage-
ment of the £100,000 to be invested in this project monopolized the attention
of several courts. In addition to the record of an entire year in the court book,
numerous memoranda of various estimates of the value of the tobacco monopoly
to the Crown and to the company are deposited among the Manchester papers

in the Public Record Office. The communications with the Privy Council on
the subject are spread on the company's minutes, and are also to be found among
the Colonial State papers. This series includes the proclamations of the King in
1624, and the new propositions and measures for tobacco importation of the
same year. The economic condition of the planter, the necessity of a revenue to
the company, the amount of the importation and of the customs value to the
King, the relations with Spain, and the economic values in England are all brought
out in the estimates, discussions, and arguments.[229]

DOCUMENTS DISCLOSING THE RELATIONS WITH THE COLONY

The study of the relations of the company to the colony and the development
within the colony may be based on a greater variety of documents than any other
phase of the subject, especially with regard to the political conditions. The court
book furnishes an understanding of the attitude and motives of the company and
often serves to connect the data gathered from letters, instructions, commissions,
patents, and grants. Thus the emphasis on the custom of martial law in the colony
and the severity of penalty imposed is revealed both in the court book and in the
extracts from Governor Argall's register.[230] The additional forms of government
required by the development of the colony are recorded in the court book, by which
the company created the offices of deputies to the governor for the college and for
the public land, secretary, treasurer, chancellor, and surveyor, and provided for the
compensation of officers by grants of land, by transportation of tenants, by the
income of the company's land, and by allowance of fees.[231] The requests for the
appointment of a council of State and for laws and orders, urgently repeated by
Governor Yeardley, as recorded in the court book in 1619, give evidence that the
source of such development was in the colony. But the fundamental law for the
government of the colony is recorded in three documents, the instructions to Gov-
ernor Yeardley, November 8, 1618, which created the land system, the instructions
to Governor Wyatt, July 24, 1621, which emphasized the industrial development,
and "An Ordinance and Constitution * * * for a Councill of State and Generall
Assembly" in Virginia, which confirmed the political forms.

These documents provided for the creation of two councils. The council of
state, composed of the governor and council, was to form an executive and

judicial body, and the assembly, composed of the council and two burgesses from
each town or borough, was to be purely a legislative body.[232] The approval of a
quarter court of the company, which was necessary for legalizing the acts of the
assembly, is referred to in the court book in three places only.[233] The constitution
and the provisions for division of the country into cities and boroughs, recorded
both in the instructions and in the patents by which the government of the private
plantations was delegated to a private body, form the basis for a study of the
local systems. The records of Smythe's, Martin's, and Berkeley Hundred referred
to above, the correspondence of Samuel Argall with Bermuda Hundred, and the
commissions for government issued by Governor Argall and later by the council
of state complete the sources on this subject.[234] The precedents for patents are
valuable in the information which they afford with regard to the position of the
following classes of colonists: The old adventurer not subject to rent; the
adventurer paying money for his shares and agreeing to transport 100 persons;
the adventurer settling a private plantation; the individual planter.[235] These
documents also throw light on the liberty of the individual, his exemption from
taxation without his consent by the colony or by the private plantation, and his
submission to a government almost military in character.

The strict supervision which the company exercised over the economic, indus-
trial, and social conditions of the colony is to be seen in the measures enacted in
the courts and in the correspondence between the company and the colony, sup-
plemented by a large number of private letters to the officers of the company.
Four letters to the colony are mentioned in the court book, of which two have not
been found, but eight others not mentioned are extant. It is more difficult to
determine what letters came from the colony, due to the usually brief reports of
the letters in the court book, to the omission of the date from the copies of the
letters, and from the uncertainty of the date of the receipt of the letters as noted
in the court book. Seven letters seem to have been received by the company of
which no trace has been found, while only four of the ten extant are mentioned
in the court book. It is apparent therefore that only a part of the official corre-
spondence is in existence. The directions to the colony disclose the care and
earnestness of the company, and emphasize the endeavors to establish the various
commodities, while the descriptions given by the colonists are extremely valuable
in the picture they present of their efforts, ambitions, and attainments. The pri-

vate correspondence proves that the official letters were likely to give but one
phase of the conditions.

About thirty-five letters addressed to Sir Edwin Sandys during the years 1619
to 1621 have been found among the Ferrar papers, which are full of complaint
because of the scarcity of provisions. Apparently Sir Edwin's policy to develop the
plantation, and especially the company's land as a source of revenue, was overdone,
and he was not as wise in carrying out his plan as he had been in forming it, since the
colony was unable to provide for the large numbers sent out. These complaints are
casually mentioned in the court book, but the Sandys-Ferrar correspondence shows
that it was the desire of the administration to conceal the difficulties and distress
of the colony not only from the public but also from the hostile faction. The Man-
chester papers preserve letters, or copies of them, which came to the company or
to individuals in 1622 and 1623 complaining of similar deprivations in the colony.[236]

The company was not only interested in the economic and industrial develop-
ment and the necessary political forms of the colony, but, as Sir Edwin Sandys
declared, it had a higher purpose than the Muscovy or the other commercial corpo-
rations. This high ideal is proved by the attention which is devoted to plans for
the college, by the appointment of ministers, by the collections in the churches, and
by the gifts received,[237] but the theory that the chief motive of the enterprise was
religious is not supported either by the spirit or by the data of the records.

RECORDS KEPT BY THE OFFICERS IN THE COLONY

The acts of the administration in Virginia are recorded in the volume of
contemporary records of the company kept by the colony which are described
above. They consist of a series of nine orders and proclamations by the governor
and council and of twenty-one orders, proclamations, commissions, and warrants
issued by the governor as the executive officer of the council for the regulation
of affairs in the colony. They cover the years 1621, 1622, and 1623, and concern
the collection of taxes, the designation of laborers for public works, the regu-
lation of prices of commodities, the restraint of relations with the Indians, and
the control of the morals of the citizens. In addition to these documents issued
by the governor is a series of twenty-four commissions and warrants issued to
individuals to act as commanders of cities and hundreds, to carry on trade with
the Indians, to make discoveries, to wage war upon the Indians, and to collect
moneys. Another group of documents in the same collection consists of thirty-
six petitions to the governor and council between 1622 and 1624. They are

claims for wages and for moneys due, demands for fulfillment of contracts,
requests for pardon and for justification in personal quarrels, demands for lands,
and petitions to be allowed to return to deserted plantations and to England.[238]

The only extant record of the council for 1619 is an account of the "putting
out of the Tenants that came over in the B[ona] N[ova] wth other orders of the
Councell," found among the Ferrar papers.[239]

The "courte booke," or original record of the meetings of the governor and
council, in which these petitions were heard and orders issued, is extant from 1624
to 1632, with a record of one court in 1622 and of one in 1623. These are mostly
the actions of the council sitting in a judicial capacity and concern controversies
over property, probate matters, and criminal charges. The punishment seem
extreme. Two actions of the court are particularly interesting, one affecting
Edward Sharpless for sending copies of the colonial records to England, and the
other consisting of accusations against Captain John Martin of slanderous and false
utterances. A few additional orders and warrants are preserved among the Colonial
State papers,[240] together with a report of the proceedings of the assembly in 1619,
written by John Pory and sent to England, the only other account of which was
sent to Sir Edwin Sandys by John Rolfe, and is among the Ferrar papers.[241] The
acts of the assembly for March 5, 1623/24 are the only measures of that body
during the life of the company which are extant, with the exception of the letters
and petitions addressed to the company and to the King, and of a few orders.

DOCUMENTS CONCERNING THE DEVELOPMENT OF FACTIONS AND THE DISSOLUTION OF THE COMPANY

A series of documents remains which does not bear directly on the organization
of the company or the expression of its activity in trade and in colonial enterprise,
but is invaluable for a study of the history of the company, since it concerns the
relations of the individual members to one another, reveals the inner life and motive
of the company as a whole and of the various groups, and explains the conditions
which resulted from the interference of the King and the overthrow of the corpora-
tion. The entire movement centers about the growth of factions in the company.
The movement begins in the years just preceding the accession of Sir Edwin Sandys
to the position of treasurer, and seems to have had its origin in the trouble over

Sir Samuel Argall and the appointment of Sir George Yeardley as governor of the
colony. It finally involved many of the personal complaints and difficulties which
presented themselves to the company, and therefore requires a study of those
problems before it can be understood.

The measures which thus arose with regard to individuals are to be found
chiefly in the court book. They supply much information which can not be
obtained elsewhere with regard to the methods of procedure of the company,
and afford scattered data of great importance in addition to the light they throw
on the disputes of the factions. The subjects discussed include such problems
as the relations with the northern colony, the conflict with Spain concerning the
ship Treasurer, the suit against William Wye for failing to land settlers in Vir-
ginia, and various accusations against Governor Yeardley and Captain Argall for
misgovernment in the colony. The accounts of Sir Thomas Smythe, the settle-
ment of Alderman Robert Johnson's accounts for the magazine, and the illegality
of Captain John Martin's patent for a plantation, were also questions which were
of vital importance to the financial affairs of the company and took the atten-
tion of numerous courts; but neither the accounts of Sir Thomas Smythe nor of
the magazine were ever adjusted.

The claims against the company presented by William Tracey, by William
Weldon, the deputy of the college land who was superseded by George Thorpe,
and by the heirs of Sir George Somers for a compensation for the Somers
Islands are but illustrations of the many demands made upon the company.
The court sat as a judiciary body to settle numerous personal quarrels, including
the Brewster-Argall, the Argall-Smythe, the Bargrave-Smythe, and the Johnson-
Southampton cases. Disputes which arose within the courts and resulted in
slander and counter accusations took much of the time and attention of the
company, the trouble between the council and Samuel Wroth over the question
of salaries thus consuming the entire time of the courts for three months, from
December to February, 1622/3. In the various collections in London are about
a dozen papers which give additional information on the Argall-Rich troubles,
the censure of Alderman Johnson, the Martin patent, the accounts of Sir Thomas
Smythe, and the suits against William Wye.[242]

The documents which bear directly on the factional differences in the company
are among the Manchester and the Ferrar papers. From them comes the insight
into the very motives and thoughts of the opposing parties, and the proof that

the accusations of the Warwick party are well founded, in so far as they relate
to concealment of the sufferings and dissatisfactions in the colony, comes as a
surprise.[243] For a history of the factions the student must first review the
reports of the personal conflicts referred to above and then turn to the numerous
documents which include the accusations against the company, the defense of the
colony and of the company, and the memoranda and letters upon the charges.

When the quarrels had finally been carried to the Privy Council, the matter
was taken up officially by the company, and the second volume of the court book
after the spring of 1623 is composed entirely of documents spread upon the minutes
which concern the action of the company. In fact, all of the papers after that time
are of the same character except the records of the governor and council in Virginis.
Since they number upward of two hundred, it will be impossible to discuss them
separately, but it must be remembered that in them is to be found an outline of the
history of the company reaching back into the time of Sir Thomas Smythe, presented
first by one faction and then by the other. The most important of these reviews
are the charges of Captain Butler, of Alderman Johnson, and of Captain Bargrave,
with replies to each; the complaints of the adventurers and of the planters against the
Sandys administration, and a declaration by the "ancient planters" comparing the
two administrations in the colony. Finally, the "Discourse of the Old Company"
is the last review of the whole situation. Another most important group of papers
is a series of projects for readjusting the government of the colony and the adminis-
tration of the company. The projects of Martin, Bargrave, Ditchfield, and Rich
thus afford an opportunity to study the beginnings of royal control.

The relations between the Crown and the company assume three different
phases during the Sandys-Southampton administration—the first before the dis-
cussion over the tobacco contract in 1622, the second concerning that contract, and
the third relating to the abuses in the company and the dissolution of the corpora-
tion. The court book shows a readiness and a desire on the part of the company
before 1622 to refer to the Privy Council such matters as the magazine accounts
which seemed beyond their control, but it also contains declarations to the effect
that an interference with the patent rights is not to be tolerated. The questions
arising in those years concern the transportation of dissolute persons to the col-
ony, the right of the King to nominate men from whom the treasurer should be
chosen, the restriction on trade to other countries, the refusal of a new charter to
the company, and the dissolution of the lotteries. Supplementary to these records
in the court book are the orders of the Privy Council affecting all of these

problems. One of the most important documents, however, has not been found,
since the efforts for a new patent can not be traced beyond the statement in
the court book. It was first proposed November 15, 1620, and was ordered to be
continued and to be confirmed by Parliament on January 31, 1620/21. On the
22d of the following month the Lords were appointed to secure the seal, and
on April 12 the objections of the attorney-general, to whom the King had referred
the patent, were discussed. That it never went into effect is certain, since no
record is to be found among the sign manual warrants in the record office or in
the signet docquet book. Furthermore, it is not enrolled in the chancery files,
and it is not entered on the patent rolls, while in the suit of the quo warranto
the only letters patent cited are those already known of 1606, 1609, and 1612.[244]

Unless the documents have been lost or the date of the entry has been mis-
taken the conclusion must be reached that after the surrender of the draft of the
new charter to the solicitor-general it disappeared from sight. During the year 1622
the communications between the King and the company concerned the tobacco con-
tract and its final acceptance at the command of the King, and revealed the maturity
of the policy of interference which had been developing during the previous years.
The number of accusations against the company increased during the year, and the
records of the early part of 1623 abound in letters of complaint and charges of
mismanagement from the colony. The memoranda of the Warwick party, found
among the Manchester papers, are also essential to the understanding of the
movements toward the overthrow of the company. Many of the forty communi-
cations between the King and the company are spread on the court book, while
all of them are found in the Privy Council register. These include the commis-
sions to the board chosen to investigate the affairs of the company,[245] and the

directions to the commissioners sent to Virginis. The correspondence between
the King and the colony during those months of struggle concerned the latter
commission and established the royal authority, but the letters from the colony
were addressed to the company as late as the close of the year, six months after
the judgment was rendered in the quo warranto suit.

The record of this suit is found in the coram rege roll of the Kings Bench. In
the entry the usual writ served upon the company is followed by the information
read by Edward Offley, the attorney for the company, citing the letters patent of
1606 and especially of 1609. It enumerates the rights granted to the corporation,
and claims that other privileges were never used. The third document is the reply
of Attorney-General Coventry in which he prays for the conviction of the accused
on account of the usurpation of privileges, and cites those mentioned in the infor-
mation, claiming that there had not been sufficient answer in any point. The answer
of Nicholas Ferrar and others states that the company is ready to verify its rights
as quoted. The judgment was rendered on the morrow of Holy Trinity, and
declares that Nicholas Ferrar and the others are convicted of the usurpation of
privileges and that the "said privileges are taken and seized into the hand of the
King and the said Nicholas Ferrar and the others shall not intermeddle but shall be
excluded from the usurpation of liberties, privileges, and franchises of the same so
taken from the King, and that they are to satisfy to the King his fine for the usurpa-
tion of said privileges." The writ of quo warranto was issued out of the Kings
Bench on the Tuesday next after the morrow of All Souls (November 4, 1623).
The suit was opened on the Friday after the quindecim of St. Martin's (November
28), and was then postponed until the eight of Hillary (January 20). It was
postponed a second time to the quindecim of Easter (April 11), and judgment was
finally rendered on the morrow of Trinity (May 24, 1624).

VALUE OF THE VIRGINIA RECORDS

It has been the purpose of this paper to give to the reader a knowledge of
what records the Virginia Company kept and to afford a guide to the extant
records, as well as to indicate the character and importance of the various col-
lections of records and of the various classes of documents. The value of this
series of papers is threefold—it discloses the organization and activity of the
company; it aids in an understanding of the various problems, policies, and con-
ditions of the State under the early Stuarts; and it is of great importance in a
study of the entire movement of the earlier and of the later century for
exploration, for trade, and especially for colonization.

The object of the previous discussion has been to show that an intimate knowledge
of the mechanism of the company, of the methods of other corporations and business
houses, of the policies of the company toward the plantation, of the growth of the
colony, and of the change in the attitude of the Crown may be gained from the
various documents. Thus the value of the records in revealing the methods employed
by the company in conducting its courts, in keeping its books, in securing capital, and
in finding investment which would result in immediate returns and enable the com-
pany to transport men to the colony, has been pointed out. The evidence of the
change of the plantation from a colony for exploitation to a colony for settlement,
and the consequent effort of the company to stimulate exploration, settlement, and
the development of resources, as well as the proof of the liberality of the proprietors
in advancing self-government, has been outlined.

The indication in the records of the colony that the control changed from absolute
authority centralized in the governor to local management and government through
a representative legislative assembly, and that the social conditions developed from
life in a few compact settlements to plantation life has been suggested. Moreover,
the documents which show the efforts of the joint-stock companies to gain protection
and become privileged monopolies, on the one hand, and the tendency of the Crown,
on the other, to utilize the company to relieve the country of its undesirable popu-
lation, to secure a share in the revenue, and finally to assume the full proprietorship
of the colony has been cited.

The court book and other records of the company have another value in that
they incidentally aid in an understanding of many problems of the government. Thus
the attitude of the King toward the company was much influenced by his desire for
marriage relations with Spanish royalty. Various questions of policy were often
discussed in the meetings of the company, such as the freedom of trade and of
fishing, monopolies, customs, and shipping, while the financial aid given to colo-
nization by Spain is cited in contrast to the action of England, and the favor
to the Spanish colonies by the State in allowing the sole importation of certain
products was dwelt upon. The desire to cement the colony to the State and the
necessity of avoiding separation was much emphasized, but the wisdom of allowing
self-government to the colony was never once forgotten. In fact, the argument that
democracy was unavoidable, since the planter had the privilege of the adventurer,
was urged in opposition to the accusations of the King that the company favored
democratic forms. This spirit in the company is also seen in the tendency to
address Parliament whenever possible, as illustrated in the movement for a new
patent and in the settlement of the tobacco question.

The economic and industrial situation in England is perhaps better revealed than
any other phase of affairs. Thus the commodities which were in demand and not

produced in England, the rates of such commodities, the prices of necessities, and
the system of vending goods were all matters of great importance to the company,
and appear again and again in the various documents. The poverty of skilled labor
is shown in the necessity the company was under to go to the Continent for men to
superintend and carry on every industry which it attempted to establish in the col-
ony. Dutchmen, Swedes, Poles, and Frenchmen were thus imported for conducting
sawmills, cultivating silkworms, and making potash, clapboards, salt, wines, and
glass. When engineers for constructing fortifications were desired, General Cecil
declared that he had not men for the purpose, but hoped he might be able to recom-
mend some Frenchmen of ability. The papers which concern the transportation of
vagabonds and of boys and girls furnish a comment on a special phase of social
life, while the spirit of the entire records reveals the demand for an outlet for
activity and an opportunity for investment.

Throughout, the minutes of the courts and the correspondence and references
to the other trading companies emphasize the strong similarity between their
organization and that of the Virginia corporation. Illustrations of this fact are seen
in the citation of the precedent from other joint-stock companies of employing a
deputy and a director, of the salaries paid in the East India Company, and of the
liberty of trade enjoyed by the Muscovy Company; while among the Ferrar papers
are drafts of petitions from the Commons to the King in the writing of Nicholas
Ferrar on behalf of the Turkey merchants and of the "Ginny and Binny" company,
showing the intimate relations between the different movements.

Perhaps the most important result of a study of the Virginia Company comes
from the knowledge which may be gained of the whole movement which had as its
object exploration, trade, and settlement before and since the time of the company
in all of the colonies. In its records are to be found one of the earliest sources of
information concerning colonial experience from the English standpoint, and hence
through them may be gained an understanding of the way in which proprietary
colonies were established; of the development of the plantation into a colony of
settlement; and of the consequent relation between the settlers and the proprietor.
These steps as well as those by which the Crown was led to resume the authority
and to establish a royal proprietorship in place of that of a company or of an indivi-
dual, and the consequent development of the freedom of the settler were repeated
in the history of all of the proprietary colonies of America.