University of Virginia Library

Search this document 
  
  
  
  

collapse section 
Old Churches, Ministers, and Families OF VIRGINIA.
 I. 
collapse sectionII. 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 III. 
 IV. 
 V. 
collapse sectionVI. 
  
 VII. 
collapse sectionVIII. 
  
collapse sectionIX. 
  
collapse sectionX. 
  
  
 XI. 
collapse sectionXII. 
  
 XIII. 
collapse sectionXIV. 
  
  
collapse sectionXV. 
  
  
  
collapse sectionXVI. 
  
 XVII. 
collapse sectionXVIII. 
  
collapse section 
 I. 
 II. 
 III. 
 IV. 
 XIX. 
 XX. 
 XXI. 
collapse sectionXXII. 
  
  
  
 XXIII. 
 XXIV. 
collapse sectionXXV. 
  
  
  
 XXVI. 
collapse sectionXXVII. 
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse sectionXXVIII. 
  
  
collapse sectionXXIX. 
  
collapse sectionXXX. 
collapse section 
 I. 
 II. 
 III. 
 IV. 
collapse section 
 I. 
 II. 
 III. 
 IV. 
 V. 
 VI. 
 VI. 
 VIII. 
collapse section 
 I. 
 II. 
 III. 
 IV. 
 V. 
 XXXI. 
collapse sectionXXXII. 
  
  
collapse sectionXXXIII. 
  
  
  
collapse sectionXXXIV. 
  
 XXXV. 
collapse sectionXXXVI. 
  
collapse sectionXXXVII. 
  
  
 XXXVIII. 
 XXXIX. 
collapse sectionXL. 
  
  
collapse sectionXLI. 
  
  
 XLII. 
collapse sectionLXIII. 
  
collapse sectionXLIV. 
  
  
collapse sectionXLV. 
  
  


13

Page 13

Old Churches, Ministers, and Families
OF
VIRGINIA.

[From the Protestant Episcopal Quarterly Review.]

ARTICLE I.

Recollections of the Protestant Episcopal Church of Virginia,
during the Present Century. With a Brief Notice of its Earlier
History.
By Bishop Meade.[1]

It is a useful employment for societies as well as individuals to
look back through their past history and mark the dealings of a
kind Providence towards them. The History of the Episcopal
Church of Virginia has been, from the very beginning, a most interesting


14

Page 14
and eventful one—beyond that of any Diocese in the
Union. I would briefly refer to some of its particulars, in order
to raise our hearts in gratitude to God for its wonderful preservation,
and to make us more faithful and zealous in using the proper
means for its further advancement.

The Episcopal Church of Virginia commenced with the first
settlement of the first Colony. The code of laws of that Colony
was drawn up at a time when "religion (as Bishop Taylor expresses
it) was painted upon banners," for it was "divine, martial, and
moral,
" all in one, being enforced, even among Protestants, by
civil pains and penalties which we would fain now banish from our
recollections and blot from the page of history. That there was
much of sincere piety moving the hearts of those who incorporated
the forms of the Episcopal Church with the Colony of Virginia,
as well as of those who established other forms among the Pilgrim
Fathers of New England, I doubt not. Nor do I question the
piety and fidelity of some of the people and pastors during its
whole subsequent history. But that its spiritual condition was ever,
at any time, even tolerably good, bearing a comparison with that
of the Mother-Church, over whose defects also there was so much
cause to mourn, faithful history forbids us to believe. Many were
the disadvantages under which she had to labour, during nearly the
whole period of her existence in connection with the government
of England, which were well calculated to sink her character
beneath that of the Church of England, and of some other
churches in America. Immense were the difficulties of getting a
full supply of ministers of any character; and of those who came,
how few were faithful and duly qualified for the station! One who
was indeed so faithful as to be called the Apostle of Virginia at
an early period of its settlement, lamenting over the want of
ministers in the Colony, thus upbraids those who refused to come.
"Do they not either wilfully hide their talents, or keep themselves
at home, for fear of losing a few pleasures? Be not there any
among them of Moses and his mind, and of the Apostles, who
forsook all to follow Christ?" The Council of Virginia also
addressed the most solemn and pathetic appeals to the clergy of
England, beseeching them to come over to the work of the Lord in
the Colony—though, it is to be feared, with little success; for in
the year 1655 it is recorded that many places were destitute of
ministers, and likely still to continue so, the people not paying
their "accustomed dues." There were, at this time, about fifty
parishes in the Colony, most of which were destitute of clergymen,


15

Page 15
as there were only ten ministers for their supply. To
remedy this evil it was proposed to establish in the English Universities
Virginia fellowships, imposing it as a condition, that the
fellows spend seven years in Virginia; but we do not read of its
execution. That the ministers then in the Colony were men of
zeal can scarce be supposed, as a law was required enjoining it
upon them to preach constantly every Sabbath and administer the
sacrament at least twice every year. If we proceed in the history
of the Colony another fifty years, which will carry us beyond the
first century of its existence, we shall find only a few more
parishes established, and, though glebes and parishes had been
provided, not more than one-half of the congregations were supplied
with ministers, the rest being served by lay-readers. In
some places indeed lay-readers were preferred to settled ministers,
because less expensive to the parishioners. As to the unworthy
and hireling clergy of the Colony, there was no ecclesiastical
discipline to correct or punish their irregularities and
vices. The authority of a Commissary was a very insufficient substitute
for the superintendence of a faithful Bishop. The better
part of the clergy and some of the laity long and earnestly petitioned
for a faithful resident Bishop, as the Bishop of London was,
of necessity, only the nominal Bishop. For about two hundred
years did the Episcopal Church of Virginia try the experiment
of a system whose constitution required such a head but was
actually without it. No such officer was there to watch over the
conduct and punish the vices of the clergy; none to administer
the rite of Confirmation, and thus admit the faithful to the Supper
of the Lord. It must be evident that the Episcopal Church,
without such an officer, is more likely to suffer for the want of
godly discipline than any other society of Christians, because all
others have some substitute, whereas our own Church makes this
office indispensable to some important parts of ecclesiastical
government and discipline. Such being the corrupt state of the
Church in Virginia, it is not wonderful that here, as in England,
disaffection should take place, and dissent begin. The preaching
and zeal of Mr. Whitefield, who visited Virginia about this time,
contrasted with the sermons and lives of the clergy generally, contributed
no doubt to increase disaffection. The pious Mr. Davies,
afterwards President of Princeton College, made the first serious
inroad upon the unity of the Church. His candid testimony
deserves to be here introduced. "I have reason to hope," he says,
"that there are and have been a few names in various parts of the

16

Page 16
Colony who are sincerely seeking the Lord and groping after religion
in the communion of the Church of England." "Had the
doctrines of the Gospel been solemnly and faithfully preached in
the Established Church, I am persuaded there would have been
few Dissenters in these parts of Virginia, for their first objections
were not against the peculiar rites and ceremonies of that Church,
much less against her excellent Articles, but against the general
strain of the doctrines delivered from the pulpit, in which these
Articles were opposed, or (which was the more common case) not
mentioned at all, so that at first they were not properly dissenters
from the original constitution of the Church of England, but the
most strict adherents to it, and only dissented from those who had
forsaken it."

That there was at this time not only defective preaching, but,
as might be expected, most evil living among the clergy, is
evident from a petition of the clergy themselves to the legislature
asking an increase of salary, saying "that the small
encouragement given to clergymen is a reason why so few come
into this Colony from the Universities, and that so many who are
a disgrace to the ministry find opportunities to fill the parishes."
It is a well-established fact that some who were discarded from the
English Church yet obtained livings in Virginia. Such being the
case, who can question for a moment the entire accuracy of the
account both of the preaching and living of the clergy of his day,
as given by the faithful and zealous Mr. Jarrett? and who could
blame him for the encouragement afforded to the disciples of Mr.
Wesley, at a time when neither he nor they thought there could
be a separation from the Church of England? Dissent, from
various causes, was now spreading through the Commonwealth;
dissatisfaction with the mother-country and the Mother-Church was
increasing, and the Episcopal clergy losing more and more the
favour of God and man, when this devoted minister, almost alone
in preaching and living according to the doctrine, discipline, and
worship of the Protestant Episcopal Church, was glad to avail
himself of any aid in the good work he was endeavouring to perform.
For the time, however, his efforts were unavailing. The
War of the Revolution was approaching, and with it the downfall
of the Church. Many circumstances contributed to this event.
The opposition to the Dissenters in times past had embittered
their minds against the declining Establishment. The attachment
of some few of the clergy to the cause of the king subjected
the Church itself to suspicion, and gave further occasion


17

Page 17
to its enemies to seek its destruction. The dispute about
Church property now came on, and, for twenty-seven years, was
waged with bitterness and violence. At the commencement of the
War of the Revolution, Virginia had ninety-one clergymen, officiating
in one hundred and sixty-four churches and chapels; at its
close, only twenty-eight ministers were found labouring in the less
desolate parishes of the State. Whither numbers of them had fled,
and to what secular pursuits some of them had betaken themselves,
it is not in our power to state. Had they been faithful shepherds,
they would not have thus deserted their flocks.

We come now to the efforts of the more faithful to strengthen the
things that remained but were ready to die. In common with
some other dioceses, the Church in Virginia resolved on an effort to
obtain consecration from abroad for a Bishop who might complete
her imperfect organization. A very worthy man, the Rev. Dr.
Griffith, was selected for the purpose; but so depressed was her
condition, so little zeal was found in her members, that, though
for three successive years calls were made upon the parishes for
funds to defray his expenses to England, only twenty-eight
pounds were raised, a sum altogether insufficient for the purpose,
so that the effort on his part was abandoned through poverty and
domestic affliction. Even at a subsequent period, when renewed
efforts, prompted by shame at past failures and a sense of duty
to the Church, were made to secure what was necessary for
Bishop Madison's consecration, a sufficiency, even with some
foreign aid, was not obtained to pay all the necessary expenses
of the voyage. The object, however, was accomplished, and at
the end of almost two hundred years from the establishment of a
most imperfect Church in Virginia a Bishop was obtained. But
she was too far gone, and there were too many opposing difficulties,
for her revival at that time. From the addresses of Bishop
Madison to the Episcopalians of Virginia, it will be seen that he
entered on his duties with no little zeal and with very just views
of the kind of men and measures necessary for the work of revival.
He plainly admits the want of zeal and fidelity in many
of the ministers as one of the causes of the low condition of the
Church, and that the contrary qualifications were indispensable to
her resuscitation. He made an ineffectual effort at bringing back
into the bosom of the Church the followers of Mr. Wesley, for
they had now entirely separated from her. After a few partial
visitations of the Diocese, his hopes of the revival of the Church
evidently sunk; and the duties of the College of William and


18

Page 18
Mary, of which he was President, requiring his attention during
the greater part of the year, at the Convention of 1805 he called
for a Suffragan or Assistant Bishop. The subject was referred to
the next year's Convention, but no such meeting was held, nor
was there another until after his death. For seven years it
seemed as if the worst hopes of her enemies and the most painful
fears of her friends were about to be realized in her entire
destruction. In the General Convention of the Church, held in
the city of New Haven in 1811, there was no representation nor
any report whatever from Virginia. The following entry is found
on the journal:—"They fear, indeed, that the Church in Virginia
is from various causes so depressed, that there is danger of
her total ruin, unless great exertions, favoured by the blessing
of Providence, are employed to raise her." And what more
could be expected from the character of the clergy generally at
that time, or for a long time before? It is a melancholy fact,
that many of them had been addicted to the race-field, the card-table,
the ball-room, the theatre,—nay, more, to the drunken
revel. One of them, about the very period of which I am speaking,
was, and had been for years, the president of a jockey-club.
Another, after abandoning the ministry, fought a duel in sight
of the very church in which he had performed the solemn offices
of religion.[2] Nothing was more common, even with the better

19

Page 19
portion of them, than to celebrate the holy ordinance of Baptism,
not amidst the prayers of the congregation, but the festivities
of the feast and the dance, the minister sometimes taking a full
share in all that was going on. These things being so, and the
churches having been, on account of such things, almost entirely
deserted or else occupied by those who only held our Zion up to
derision, what but a firm conviction of God's watchful providence
over her could keep alive hope in the most ardent of her friends?
How often, in looking at the present comparative prosperity of
the Church, do we say, Surely God must have greatly loved this
branch of his Holy Catholic Church or he would not have
borne so long with her unfaithfulness and so readily forgiven
her sins.

Having presented this brief sketch of the past history of the
Church in Virginia, I now proceed to execute the task assigned
me by stating some things which came more or less under my own
personal observation.

My earliest recollections of the Church are derived from visits,
while yet a child, to the Old Stone Chapel in Frederick county,
(then the back-woods of Virginia,) either on horseback, behind my
father, or with my mother and the children in my grandmother's
English chariot, drawn by four work-horses in farming-gear,—
richer gear having failed with failing fortunes. Some of the
neighbours went in open four-horse plantation-wagons, very different
from the vehicles to which they had been accustomed in
Lower Virginia, whence they emigrated.[3] My father took an


20

Page 20
active part in the erection of this house, which was about seven
miles distant from his residence. It was here that I officiated
during the first twenty-five years of my ministry. The congregation,
which now worships in a larger one four miles off, makes
a kind of pilgrimage to it on one Sabbath each summer. It is
still used for service in behalf of coloured persons, and on funeral
occasions. Near it lies the parish burying-ground, where many
dear friends and relatives are interred, and where I hope to find
a grave. The Rev. Alexander Balmaine, a chaplain in the
United States Army during the War of the Revolution, and who
was married to a relative of Mr. Madison, one of the Presidents
of our country, was the minister of it for more than thirty
years, during the last ten or twelve of which I was associated
with him. He lived in Winchester, and preached alternately
there, in a stone church of about the same size, and at the
chapel.

There was a small wooden church very near the chapel, which
was built before the war, and in which the Rev. Mr. Thruston officiated.
The Baptists were, in his day, establishing themselves in
this part of the Valley of Virginia. With them, it is said, he had
much and sharp controversy. On the declaration of war he laid
aside the ministry and entered the army, attaining before the close
of it to the rank of Colonel, by which title he was known to the
end of his days. About twelve miles from my father's, in a direction
opposite to the chapel, there was another small log church, in
which the Rev. Mr. Mughlenburg, afterwards General Mughlenburg,
occasionally officiated. He was the minister of the adjoining
parish in Shenandoah county and lived at Woodstock. He also
exchanged the clerical for the military profession and rose to the
rank of General. Tradition says that his last sermon was preached
in military dress, a gown being thrown over it, and that he either
chose for his text or introduced into his sermon the words of


21

Page 21
Ecclesiastes, "To every thing there is a season, and a time to
every purpose under the heaven,"—"a time of war and a time of
peace," and that, the sermon being over, he laid aside the gown
and walked forth the soldier in dress and office. He was esteemed
a very upright and patriotic man. I have often in my younger
days, and indeed after my entrance upon the ministry, seen a poor
old lady at the chapel in Frederick, who sat under his ministry
and still lived near his log church. Being twenty miles off from
the chapel, she would come on horseback either to Winchester or
to the house of my elder sister over night. Her visits were generally
on communion-days, and she always partook of it fasting.
She spoke well of her minister as one who was faithful to his duty,
for he rode twenty miles to preach to a few poor people in one of
the poorest parts of the country. My next recollections of the
Church are in the person of my teacher, who was educated in
General Washington's Free School in Alexandria, and afterward
on account of his promising talents sent to William and Mary
College. At the end of his literary course he was admitted to
Deacons' orders by Bishop Madison. A year or two after this he
became teacher to the children of those few families who composed
almost the whole of the chapel congregation. He was faithful as
a classical teacher, heard us our catechism once a week, and for
some time opened the school with prayer. He officiated also for a
period at the chapel on those Sundays which Mr. Balmaine gave
to Winchester; but, his habits becoming bad, he ceased ever after
to exercise the ministerial office, being fully conscious that he had
mistaken his calling. He left no posterity to be wounded by this
statement, or I should have forborne to make it.[4] During this

22

Page 22
period of my life I had no other means of gaining a knowledge of
the Church and her clergy than from my parents at home. When
there was no service at the chapel or we were prevented from
going, my father read the service and a sermon; and whenever a
death occurred among the servants he performed the burial service
himself, and read Blair's Sermon on Death the following Sunday.
Of the character and conduct of the old clergy generally I have often
heard them speak in terms of strong condemnation. My father,
when a young man, was a vestryman in Prince George county,
Virginia, but resigned his place rather than consent to retain an
unworthy clergyman in the parish. Of two clergymen, however,
in King George county,—the Stewarts,—I have heard my mother,
who lived for some time under the ministry of one of them, speak
in terms of high commendation, as exceptions to the general rule.
At the age of seventeen I was sent to Princeton College, where, of
course, I had no opportunities of acquiring any knowledge of the
Church, as it had no existence there at that time, though it was
while there that I formed the determination, at the instance of my
mother and elder sister, to enter the Episcopal ministry, as they
perceived from my letters the serious turn of my mind. I ought
to have stated above that my confirmation took place at a very
early period, during the first and only visit of Bishop Madison to
this part of Virginia. I have but an indistinct recollection of his
having heard some of us the Catechism at church, and, as I suppose,
laying his hands upon us in confirmation afterward, perceiving
that we said our Catechism well. But as to both of them, especially
the latter, I have relied more on the testimony of older
persons than on my own certain remembrance. At the age of
nineteen or a few months sooner my college course was over.
Through my beloved relative and faithful friend, Mrs. Custis of
Arlington, I heard of the great worth of the Rev. Walter Addison
of Maryland and determined to prepare for the ministry at his
house and under his direction. In him I became acquainted with
one of the best of men and saw one of the purest specimens of
the ministerial character. Mr. Addison was of English parentage,
and born to large landed possessions on the Maryland side of the

23

Page 23
Potomac opposite to Alexandria. He also inherited a number of
servants, whom he emancipated. Through mismanagement his
other property wasted away. But the God whom he served never
permitted him to want, though he was allowed to end his days in
poverty. It required but little to serve him, for he was a man of
content and self-denial. At a time when wine, whiskey, rum, and
brandy were so commonly and freely drunken by all, especially by
many of the clergy of Virginia and Maryland, he made a rule
never to drink more than one small glass of very weak toddy at
dinner, but this was equal to total abstinence now. Wine he had
none. He was faithful and bold in reproving vice from the pulpit
and elsewhere, though one of the meekest of men. He told me
of some mistakes into which he ran in his earlier days. He was
probably one of the first of the Episcopal clergy in the United
States who denounced what are called fashionable amusements.
Some years before my acquaintance with him he published a small
volume against balls, theatres, gambling, and horse-racing, adducing
some high authorities from the Church of England. His
opposition to duelling and the means he adopted to prevent it made
him for a number of years very notorious among the members of our
American Congress. Being pastor of the church in Georgetown,
though still living in the country at the time, he had the opportunity
of exerting himself in the prevention of duels on several occasions.
He has often detailed to me the circumstances attending those
efforts,—namely, his clothing himself with a civil office, in order the
more effectually to arrest the duellists in their attempts to find some
favourable place for the combat, his interview with Mr. Jefferson,
when he had reason to believe that one of the parties was in the President's
house, his pursuit after them on horseback, his overtaking
them just as the seconds were measuring the ground, their threatening
to bind him to a tree in the Arlington forest if he did not desist
from the pursuit. These and such like things have I heard from
his truthful lips. At the time of the threatened encounter
between Mr. John Randolph and Mr. Eppes, he was fully prepared
to prevent it, and if necessary deposit one or both of them in a
place of confinement. Mr. Randolph was then an attendant at his
church in Georgetown. Eleven o'clock on Sunday morning was selected
for the combat, in order, as was believed, to evade Mr. Addison's
vigilance, as it was supposed he would then be at his post of
duty in the house of God. But he believed that his post of duty
on that day was elsewhere, and did not hesitate about disappointing
the congregation. For some time preceding the appointed hour he

24

Page 24
was secreted near the hotel where Mr. Randolph boarded, ready to
arrest him should he leave the house. But an adjustment of the
difference took place about that time. Mr. Stanford, a worthy
member from North Carolina, the steady and judicious friend of
Randolph, was doubtless engaged in the adjustment. At any
rate, he knew what was going on and when the pacification was
effected. He knew also where Mr. Addison was and what he was
prepared to do. He it was who informed Mr. Addison that he
might go with a quiet conscience to his Sabbath duties, as the difficulty
was settled. This I had from the lips of Mr. Stanford himself,
with whom I had the pleasure to be intimately acquainted for
many years. Mr. Addison was equally opposed to strife in the
Christian Church. Although he was a true lover of our own and
most passionately devoted to her services, yet he was no bigot, but
embraced all Christians and Churches in the arms of his wide-extended
charity. The unchurching doctrine he utterly rejected.
Just before I lived with him an Episcopal paper was commenced in
the North in which that position was taken. He either subscribed
to it, or it was sent to him; but, on finding that it declared all
other ministries invalid and all other churches out of the covenant,
he returned the paper or declined to receive it any longer. He
loved to see sinners converted, by whatsoever instruments God might
employ. There was a certain place in the corner of his large
country parish where neither he nor any other Episcopal minister
had been able to make any impression. Some Methodists being
there and desiring to build a church, he bid them God-speed and
furnished some pecuniary or other assistance, hoping that they
might do what he had not been able to do. Such was the man of
God with whom it was my privilege to spend some happy and I
hope not unprofitable months, the period of my stay being abridged
by a weakness in the eyes, which altogether prevented study. He
lived to a good old age, loving all men and beloved by all who
knew him. Many of his last years were spent in darkness, but
not of the soul. His eyes became dim, until at length all was
night to him. But while only a glimmering of light remained, he
rejoiced and thanked God for it far more than those do who enjoy
a perfect vision. And when all was gone, he was still the happiest
and most grateful of all the happy and grateful ones whom I have
ever seen or known. In my visits to the district afterward, I ever
felt it to be my sacred duty, as it was my high happiness, to enter
his humble dwelling. But this was never done without bursts of
feelings and of tears on both sides.


25

Page 25

From this digression, which I am sure the reader will pardon, I
return to the more immediate object of this article.

As I am engaged in presenting my recollections of the state of
things in the Church of Virginia, I think this a proper time for
some notice of the character of the sermons which were preached
and the books which were read among the Episcopalians of Virginia.
This was the period when the poet Cowper upbraided the
clergy of the English Church with substituting morality for religion,
saying,—

"How oft, when Paul has served us with a text,
Has Plato, Tully, Epictetus preached!"

In the Church of Virginia, with the exception of Mr. Jarrett
and perhaps a few others, I fear the preaching had for a long time
been almost entirely of the moral kind. The books most in use
were Blair's Sermons, Sterne's Works, The Spectator, The Whole
Duty of Man, sometimes Tillotson's Sermons, which last were of
the highest grade of worth then in use. But Blair's Sermons, on
account of their elegant style and great moderation in all things,
were most popular. I remember that when either of my sisters
would be at all rude or noisy, my mother would threaten them with
Blair's Sermon on gentleness. The sickly sensibility of Sterne's
Sermons (and especially of his Sentimental Journey) was the
favourite style and standard of too many of our clergy. After
entering the ministry I heard several of such most faulty exhibitions
of Christian morality. It is no wonder that the churches
were deserted and the meeting-houses filled. But the time had
come, both in the English and American Church, for a blessed
change. There is something interesting in the history of one of
the ways in which it was introduced into the Church of Virginia.
The family of Bishop Porteus was Virginian — of Gloucester
county—opposite old Yorktown, the residence of General Nelson.
It is not certain but that Bishop Porteus himself was born in Virginia
and carried over when a child to England with his emigrating
parents. Porteus became a tutor in the Eton school, and when
General Nelson was sent to England for his education his father
placed him under the care of Mr. Porteus. When Porteus was
elevated to the rank of a Bishop he did not forget his former pupil
and family, but sent them his first work, a volume of sermons,
which were a great improvement on the sermons of that day.
When Mr. Wilberforce, with whom he was intimate, published his


26

Page 26
celebrated evangelical work, "Practical View of Christianity,"
this was also sent, and afterward I believe the Bishop's Lectures
on the Gospel of St. Matthew, which were an improvement on his
sermons. A beginning of more evangelical views of Christian
doctrine was thus made in one of the best and most influential
families of Virginia. By my intimacy with one branch of this
family, which led to a matrimonial connection before my ordination,
I became acquainted with Wilberforce's "Practical View of
Christianity," and I believe Porteus's Lectures. These I read
during the time I spent with Mr. Addison, and well remember the
impression made upon me by the same. I felt that, if ever permitted
to preach, I had only to present the views set forth in these
books, and my hearers must be converted, though I was soon
brought to the experience of Melancthon, "That old Adam was
too strong for young Melancthon." These books were, I believe,
republished in America about this time, together with some of the
writings of Miss Hannah More, and all contributed to elevate and
evangelize the style of preaching in our Church. Those who
undertook the resuscitation of the Church in Virginia certainly
adopted and in their sermons exhibited these views. In this they
were greatly encouraged by the sermons of Mr. Jarrett, two editions
of which had been published.[5]


27

Page 27

I am now brought to the period of my ordination, which introduced
me to some things, in relation to the Church of Virginia,
not without a painful interest to the lovers of true religion. But,
before speaking of some circumstances attendant on my ordination,
it may be well to allude to a correspondence between Bishop Madison
and myself, some months before that event. It is the more
proper so to do as it will serve to correct some misunderstandings
which have gone abroad with respect to us both, and which have
had a bearing on the reputation of the Virginia Churchmanship of
that day. Passing through Philadelphia a year or more before my
ordination, and staying at the house of an Episcopal clergyman, I
heard some severe strictures on one or more of the ministers of our
Church, in some other diocese or dioceses, for violating the rubrics
of the Prayer Book by abridging the service. It was designated
by no slighter term than perjury, in the violation of solemn ordination
vows. I learned afterward that such charges were made
elsewhere. In examining the Canons of the Church I also found
one which seemed positively to forbid, under any circumstances, the
admission into an Episcopal pulpit of any minister not Episcopally
ordained. I was aware that it was impossible to use the whole
service in very many of the places where I might be called to officiate,
and well knew that ministers of other denominations preached
in many of our old Episcopal churches, and, indeed, that it was
questioned whether under the law our ministers had the exclusive
right to them. I also saw that there was a canon forbidding servile
labour to the clergy, while from necessity—for the support of a
young family—I was then taking part in the labours of the field,
which in Virginia was emphatically servile labour. Wishing to
enter the ministry with a good conscience and correct understanding
of my ordination vows, I wrote a letter of inquiry to Bishop
Madison on these several points. To this I received a very sensible
reply, nearly all of which, I think, the House of Bishops and the
Church generally would now indorse, though there would have
been some demurring in former times. On the occasion of my
consecration to the office of Bishop it was objected by some that
Bishop Madison had ordained me with a dispensation from canonical
obedience. Having his letter with me,—which the reader may


28

Page 28
see in the note,—the objection was not urged.[6] In the month of
February, 1811, I proceeded on horseback to Williamsburg, about
two hundred miles, and on Sunday, the 24th,—a clear, cold morning,—was
ordained. My examination took place at the Bishop's,
before breakfast,—Dr. Bracken and himself conducting it. It was
very brief. It has been asserted that Bishop Madison became an
unbeliever in the latter part of his life, and I have often been

29

Page 29
asked if it was not so. I am confident that the imputation is
unjust. His political principles, which at that day were so identified
in the minds of many with those of infidel France, may
have subjected him to such suspicion. His secular studies, and
occupations as President of the College and Professor of Natural
Philosophy, may have led him to philosophize too much on the
subject of religion, and of this I thought I saw some evidence in
the course of my examination; but that he, either secretly, or to
his most intimate friends, renounced the Christian faith, I do not
believe, but am confident of the contrary. To proceed with the
ordination. On our way to the old church the Bishop and myself
met a number of students with guns on their shoulders and dogs at
their sides, attracted by the frosty morning, which was favourable
to the chase; and at the same time one of the citizens was filling
his ice-house. On arriving at the church we found it in a wretched
condition, with broken windows and a gloomy, comfortless aspect.
The congregation which assembled consisted of two ladies and
about fifteen gentlemen, nearly all of whom were relatives or acquaintances.
The morning service being over, the ordination and
communion were administered, and then I was put into the pulpit
to preach, there being no ordination sermon. The religious condition
of the College and of the place may easily and justly be
inferred from the above. I was informed that not long before this
two questions were discussed in a literary society of the College:—
First, Whether there be a God? Secondly, Whether the Christian
religion had been injurious or beneficial to mankind? Infidelity,
indeed, was then rife in the State, and the College of William and
Mary was regarded as the hotbed of French politics and religion.
I can truly say, that then, and for some years after, in every educated
young man of Virginia whom I met, I expected to find a
skeptic, if not an avowed unbeliever. I left Williamsburg, as may
well be imagined, with sad feelings of discouragement. My next
Sabbath was spent in Richmond, where the condition of things
was little better. Although there was a church in the older part
of the town, it was never used but on communion-days. The place
of worship was an apartment in the Capitol, which held a few hundred
persons at most, and as the Presbyterians had no church at
all in Richmond at that time, the use of the room was divided
between them and the Episcopalians, each having service every
other Sabbath morning, and no oftener. Even two years after
this, being in Richmond on a communion-Sunday, I assisted the
Rector, Dr. Buchanan, in the old church, when only two gentlemen

30

Page 30
and a few ladies communed. One of these gentlemen, the
elder son of Judge Marshall, was a resident in the upper country.
One of the old clergy who was present did approach to the chancel
with a view of partaking; but his habits were so bad and so
notorious, that he was motioned by the Rector not to come. Indeed,
it was believed that he was not in a sober state at the time.

Before proceeding further in the narrative of such circumstances
as may tend to throw light on the condition of the Church in Virginia,
I will, at the risk of being charged with even more of egotism
than has already been displayed, make a few remarks, which,
I think, are necessary to a right understanding of the whole subject
I have taken in hand. So low and hopeless was the state of the
Church at this time—the time of my ordination—but a few of the
old clergy even attempting to carry on the work—only one person
for a long time having been ordained by Bishop Madison, and he
from a distance, and a most unworthy one—it created surprise, and
was a matter of much conversation, when it was understood that a
young Virginian had entered the ministry of the Episcopal Church.
Even some years after this, when I applied to Judge Marshall for
a subscription to our Theological Seminary, though he gave with
his accustomed liberality, he could not refrain from saying, that it
was a hopeless undertaking, and that it was almost unkind to induce
young Virginians to enter the Episcopal ministry, the Church being
too far gone ever to be revived. Such was the general impression
among friends and foes. I had, however, throughout the State
many most respectable and influential relatives, some still rich,
others of fallen fortunes, both on my father's and mother's side,[7]
who were still attached to the Church. My parents, too, were
very popular persons, and had many friends and acquaintances
throughout Virginia, who still lingered around the old Church.
These things caused my ordination to excite a greater interest, and
created a partiality in behalf of my future ministry. But still
there were many who thought it so strange a proceeding, that they
were ready to accept, as a probable mode of accounting for it, an


31

Page 31
opinion expressed by one or more and soon put in circulation, that
there was something unsound in mind or eccentric in character, at
any rate a want of good common sense, or I could not make such
a mistake as to attach myself to the fallen and desperate fortunes
of the old Church. Some strange speeches of this kind were made.
Nor were they or their effects confined to Virginia, or to that time.
I am not sure that their influence has ceased to the present day.
One good, however, resulted from them, namely, that certain views
of religion and certain modes of life adopted by me and contrary
to what were supposed to be the doctrines of the Episcopal Church
—certainly, contrary to the sentiments and practice of the people
—were ascribed to this natural defect and kindly dealt with, instead
of awakening hostility which, under other circumstances, might
have been exhibited. Certain it is that my ministry, from the first,
was received with a favour which neither my imperfect theological
education nor my most unfinished sermons nor any thing else
about me were entitled to. Under such favour, I commenced my
ministry in the spring of 1811, in Frederick county, as assistant
to Mr. Balmaine, in the two congregations belonging to his charge,
while living and labouring on a small farm, and having no design or
wish to go elsewhere. But in the fall of that year I consented to
the very urgent solicitations of the vestry of old Christ Church,
Alexandria, to take charge of it, with the privilege of spending a
portion of the year in Frederick and not entirely relinquishing my
engagements there. Very peculiar were the circumstances of that
congregation, and very strong the appeal, or I should not have
been moved to undertake even the partial and temporary charge of
it. Its last minister was from the West Indies, and after having
married in Alexandria was found to have left a wife behind him.
On her pursuing and reaching him he fled, and I believe was heard
of no more. His predecessor was of an unhappy temper and too
much given to the intoxicating cup. His predecessor again was
one of the old-fashioned kind in his preaching and habits, being
fond of what was called good company and the pleasures of the
table. In order to insure full and frequent meetings of the vestrymen—twelve
in number and, for the most part, good livers—he got
them to meet once per month at each others' houses to dinner.
These meetings continued until after I took charge of the congregation.
I was present at one of them. The old minister who had
established them was also there, being on a visit. He then lived
in a distant parish. It was not difficult to perceive why such
vestry-meetings were popular with certain ministers and vestrymen.

32

Page 32
I attended no more of them, and they were soon relinquished.
That a congregation having had three such ministers in
succession should be desirous to try a young Virginian was not
very wonderful. I should be guilty, however, if I did not pursue
the history of the ministers of Christ Church further back. The
next in order of time past was the good Dr. Griffith, of whom I
have already spoken, as the first Bishop-elect of Virginia, but who
was prevented by poverty from going to England for consecration.
His predecessor was Lord Bryan Fairfax, of whom I have something
to say in another place. He was a pure and conscientious
man, the friend and neighbour of General Washington, and a true
Englishman. He attempted, in a series of private letters, which
one of his children showed me and which have since been published,
to dissuade Washington from engaging in or pursuing the
war. General Washington dealt very tenderly with him in his
replies, knowing how conscientious he was, and being much attached
to him and the elder Lord Fairfax with whom he had lived.
There was associated with Mr. Fairfax the Rev. Mr. Page, who
afterward moved to Shepherdstown, and of whom I have heard
that venerable old lady, Mrs. Shepherd, speak in the highest terms
as an evangelical man of the school of Whitefield.

A few remarks on my ministry during the two years of its
exercise in Alexandria may serve to cast some light on the progress
of the Church in Virginia from that time. 1st. The old
Virginia custom of private baptisms, christening-cake, and merriment,
had prevailed in Alexandria. The ground, however, was
now taken that the rubric was entirely opposed to this and that
the whole meaning and design of the sacred rite forbade it and
that it could not be continued. There were demurrings and refusals
for a time, but a little decision with kind persuasion completely
triumphed, as they did afterward at a later period both in Norfolk
and Petersburg, where private baptisms were made to give place to
public ones, when I had the temporary charge of these two congregations,
peculiar circumstances inducing me to undertake it.
2dly. The Gospel, it is to be feared, had not been clearly preached
in times past. It was now attempted; and, though most imperfectly
done as to style and manner, God's blessing was granted.
The services were well attended. Many were added to the Church
of such as gave good proof afterward that they would be of those
who should be saved. A goodly number of the members of Congress
often came down on Sunday morning to attend the church,


33

Page 33
among whom were Mr. John Randolph[8] and Dr. Milnor, with
both of whom I became then and thus acquainted. In the mind
of the latter there was at that time going on the great change

34

Page 34
whose abundant fruits have so blessed mankind. 3d. It was during
my stay in Alexandria that I procured from the library of Mr.
Custis, of Arlington, the folio edition of Bishop Wilson's works,
which had been presented to General Washington by the son of
Bishop Wilson, and which works had been recommended to me by
Bishop Madison. By the help of Mr. Edward McGuire, who, for
more than forty-two years, has been the faithful and successful
minister of the Church in Fredericksburg, and who was then preparing
for the ministry with me, I selected from the various parts
of that large book, a small volume of private and family prayers,
which have gone through three editions, and which, being freely
circulated among the families of Virginia, contributed greatly to
introduce what was indeed a novelty in that day—the practice of
family worship.[9] It was during my short stay in Alexandria that
the Rev. William Wilmer assumed the charge of St. Paul's congregation,
and at the close of my ministry there that the Rev. Oliver
Norris took charge of Christ Church. These beloved brothers,
coming from Maryland with those views of the Gospel and the
Church which the evangelical clergy and laity of England were
then so zealously and successfully propagating there, contributed
most effectually to the promotion of the same in Virginia, and to
them is justly due much of the subsequent character and success of
the Church in Virginia, as is well known to all of their day. I
cannot take leave of Alexandria without referring to my admission
to priests' orders, which took place there a year or two after this,
and which were conferred on me by Bishop Clagget, of Maryland,
our faithful brother the Rev. Simon Wilmer preaching on the
occasion. Bishop Clagget, so far as I know and believe, entertained
sound views of the Gospel and was a truly pious man.

35

Page 35
There was much of the Englishman about him, I presume, from
his wearing the mitre, and his mode of examining me, that conforming
so much to the character of the English University examinations.[10] Beside a number of hard questions in the metaphysics
of divinity, which I was by no means well prepared to answer, but
which he kindly answered for me, he requested that I would, in
compliance with an old English canon, which had been, I think,
incorporated somewhere into our requisitions, give him an account
of my faith in the Latin tongue. Although I was pretty well
versed in the Latin language, yet, being unused to speak it, I
begged him to excuse me. He then said I could take pen and
paper and write it down in his presence; but he was kind enough
to excuse from that also, and determined to ordain me with all my
deficiencies, very much as some other bishops do in this day.

 
[1]

Having been urged to furnish some personal recollections of the Church in
Virginia for this Review, I have consented; and in this article commenced the
delicate task. The candid and the charitable will make due allowance for the
peculiar difficulties of it, especially that of avoiding the frequent mention of
myself. Had I kept a diary for the last fifty years, and taken some pains during
that period to collect information touching the old clergy, churches, glebes, and
Episcopal families, I might have laid up materials for an interesting volume; but
the time and opportunity for such a work have passed away. The old people,
from whom I could have gathered the materials, are themselves gathered to their
fathers. The vestry-books, from which I could have gotten much, and some of
which I have seen, are, for the most part, either lost, or fallen into the hands of
persons who use them for the establishment of land-claims or bounties, the register
of baptisms and marriages sometimes rendering them assistance in their work.
Small, therefore, is the contribution I can make to the ecclesiastical history of my
native State. To Dr. Hawks's elaborate and able work I must refer the reader
for the earlier history of the Episcopal Church of Virginia. A brief notice of that
period is all that is necessary to prepare him for my own reminiscences, and that
is furnished.

W. M.

[2]

Another preached (or went into an old country church, professing to do it)
four times a year against the four sins of atheism, gambling, horse-racing, and
swearing, receiving one hundred dollars—a legacy of some pious person to the
minister of the parish—for so doing, while he practised all of the vices himself.
When he died, in the midst of his ravings he was heard hallooing the hounds to
the chase. Another,—a man of great physical powers,—who ruled his vestry
with a rod of terror, wished something done, and convened them for the purpose.
It was found that they were unwilling or unable to do it. A quarrel ensued.
From words they came to blows, and the minister was victorious. Perhaps it is
fair to presume that only a part—perhaps a small part—of the vestry was
present. On the following Sabbath the minister justified what he had done in a
sermon from a passage of Nehemiah:—"And I contended with them, and cursed
them, and smote certain of them, and plucked off their hair."

This account I received from two old men of the congregation, of the most unimpeached
veracity, one or both of whom was present at the sermon.

All indeed of the cases alluded to in the note and the text came so near to my
own time and even ministry, that the truth of them was assured to me by those
whose testimony was not to be doubted. Gladly would I be spared the painful
reference to them and others, could it be done without unfaithfulness to the task
undertaken. In consenting to engage in it, which I have done with reluctance, it
became my duty to present an honest exhibition of the subject, and not misrepresent
by a suppression of the truth. God has set us the example of true fidelity
in the biographical and historical notices which pervade the sacred Scriptures.
The greatest failings of his best saints, as well as the abominations of the wicked,
are there faithfully recorded as warnings to all ages; though there are those who
think that it had been better to have passed over some unhappy passages. I have
gone as far as conscience and judgment would allow in the way of omission even
of things which have passed under my own eyes. Some of those who are hostile
to our Church have dwelt much, from the pulpit and the press, on the evil conduct
of many of our old ministers, and doubtless have oftentimes overrated this evil,
while making no acknowledgment of any good. Some of our own people, on the
other hand, have been disposed to ascribe to malice much of that which belongs to
truth. Let us seek the truth. It is not only mighty and will prevail, but will do
good in the hands of the God of truth. Often and truly has it been said of the
Church, in certain ages and countries where evil ministers have abounded, that but
for God's faithful promise, those ministers would long since have destroyed it. It
is some relief to my mind to be able to add, that in almost all the unhappy
instances to which I have made reference, it pleased Providence to ordain that
they should leave no posterity behind to mourn their fathers' shame.

[3]

My father had considerable possessions in land and servants in Lower Virginia,
but lost nearly all during the War of the Revolution, in which he served
as aid to General Washington. At the close of it, gathering up what little
remained of money, and a very few servants, he removed to the rich and
beautiful Valley of Frederick, lying between the Blue Ridge and Alleghany
Mountains. The whole country was little else than a forest at that time. For
a small sum he purchased a farm, with two unfinished log rooms, around which
the wolves nightly howled. Laying aside the weapons of war, he took himself to
hard work with the axe, the maul, and other instruments, while my mother
exchanged the luxuries and ease of Lower Virginia for the economy and diligence
of a Western housewife

[4]

Although there was no such thing as family prayers at that day, yet was the
Catechism taught in many families of the Church; pincushions to the girls and
trap-balls to the boys were sometimes given, in the parish of Frederick, by the wife
of the old parish clerk, as a reward for accuracy in saying it to the minister. My
mother also (as was the case with many others) made her children get and repeat
some of the hymns of the Prayer Book, especially Bishop Ken's, for morning and
evening, and repeat some short prayer at her bedside. In my father-in-law's family
(Mr. Philip Nelson, who has often been seen in our State and General Conventions)
the practice of reading the Psalms, as arranged in the Prayer Book, was regularly
practised each day by the females, so that my wife, at our marriage, could repeat
nearly the whole book of Psalms. Her father used to hear his children the Catechism
every Sabbath morning before breakfast; and on the one after our marriage
she took her accustomed place at the head of six or eight children and performed
her part. She was then eighteen years of age. It was doubtless the practice of
repeating the Catechism, reading the Psalms and other Scriptures daily, and using
the morning service on Sundays when there was no public worship, which kept
alive the knowledge of and attachment to the Church in many families which might
otherwise have been lost to it. Such families were found to be most effective auxiliaries
in its resuscitation.

[5]

I will be pardoned, I hope, for placing in a note some facts in relation to the
family of General Nelson, inasmuch as they are closely connected with the history
of the Church in Virginia. His parents appear to have been pious persons. It is
said that the mother was particularly attentive to the religious training of her children,
teaching them to be punctual and conscientious as to their private devotions.
If she had reason to fear that either of her sons neglected his morning prayers,
instead of tempting him to untruth by asking if he had attended to this duty, she
would say, "My son, if you have not said your prayers this morning, you had better
go and do it." The grace of God has been poured out on great numbers of her
descendants. General Nelson was blessed in a partner to whom, at his early death,
he could confide with safety his large family of children. They inherited but a
small portion of his once large estate,—that having been nearly expended in the
service of his country, and for which no remuneration was ever received. But they
were the adopted children of God, and became active and zealous members of the
Church in different parts of the State, bringing up large families in the same way
in which themselves had been trained, in the love of the Gospel and the Church.
The widow of General Nelson lived to the age of eighty-seven, being blind during
the last seventeen years. Having been twice connected in marriage with her
grandchildren, I was led, during many of her declining years, to pay an annual visit
to her humble abode. On such occasions many of her children and descendants,
who before her death had amounted to one hundred and fifty, though not all alive
at one time, assembled together at her house, where I always administered the
Holy Communion. On one of these occasions, I remember to have counted in her
room and in the passage leading to it forty-three recipients of that rite, nearly all
of whom were her descendents,—children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren.
Four of her descendants are now ministering in the Episcopal Church, and one who
did minister in it has gone to his rest.

[6]

Dear Sir:—I received your letter by Mr. Bracken, and approve of your conscientious
inquiries respecting certain obligations imposed by the Canons. You
know that every society must have general rules, as the guides of conduct for its
members; but I believe the Episcopal Church is as liberal in that respect as any
other religious society whatever. The subscription required of the candidate is,
that he will conform to the discipline and worship of the Protestant Episcopal
Church in the United States. At the time of ordination he promises to conform to
the Canons. With respect to the Book of Common Prayer, an adherence is required,
wherever the situation of the Church will permit: it happens, however, too
often that the minister must be left to his own discretion, particularly on occasions
when it may be necessary to abridge the service, or when there may be no Clerk,
&c. No oath is administered or required, and that adherence to the book only is
expected which may tend to further religion and good order in a religious society;
for there can be no doubt of the superiority of forms of prayer for public worship.
Before sermon many ministers, I believe, prefer a prayer of their own, and if it be
well conceived I suppose no objection would be made. His private prayer, may certainly
be determined by himself. With respect to the use of our Church by other
Societies, the general rule is often dispensed with, especially if the party wishing
the use will assist in the preservation of the building, or the preacher be of
known respectable character. Too often, indeed, our churches are now used entirely
by other sects. The Canon could never intend that a minister should be prevented
from following any occupation which was creditable. Hence the practice
of physic, &c. is not deemed inconsistent with the ministerial profession, nor, I
conceive, any other business which is free from a kind of public odium. It would
be unfit for a minister to keep a tavern or grogshop, &c., but certainly not to
follow any occupation where good may result both to the community and to the
individual. The honest discharge of clerical duties, with a life preaching by example,
are, in reality, the principal requisites: when these are manifested, and the
piety and good behaviour of the minister cannot be questioned, he need not apprehend
the rigour of Canons, or any other spiritual authority.

I am, sir, yours very respectfully,

October 10, 1810.

J. Madison.

Remarks.—Some years after my entrance on the ministry, I was conversing on
the subject of dispensing with the regular service in preaching to the servants in
their quarters, with one of our most eminent ministers, when he maintained, and I
doubt not most conscientiously, that I had no right to open my lips in preaching to
them, without first using the service according to the rubric. A very great change
has recently come over the minds of many of our clergy on this subject, judging
from some things seen in our religious papers, in which more latitudinarian views
are taken than I ever remember to have heard of formerly.

[7]

My great-grandfather on the paternal side was an Irish Romanist. Emigrating
to this country, he married a Quakeress, in Flushing, New York, and settled in Suffolk,
Virginia. From this alliance sprang a large family of Protestant Episcopalians.
Through my grandmother an infusion of Anglican Protestantism entered
the family, as she descended from Richard Kidder, Bishop of Bath and Wells, after
whom my father and many others of the family have been called. With scarce an
exception, their descendants have all adhered to the Episcopal Church.

[8]

It being known that there was a family connection and some intimacy and correspondence
between Mr. Randolph and myself, I have been often asked my opinion
as to his religious character. It is as difficult to answer this as to explain some
other things about this most talented, eccentric, and unhappy man. My acquaintance
and correspondence with him commenced in 1813 and terminated in 1818,
although at his death he confided a most difficult and important trust to myself, in
conjunction with our common and most valued friend, Mr. Francis S. Key. I publish
the following letter written in 1815, when his mind seemed to be in a state of
anxiety on the subject of religion, and an extract from another paper in my
possession, showing a supposed relief in the year 1818. Other letters I have,
during the period of our intimacy, of the same character. The reader must judge
for himself, taking into consideration the great inconsistencies of his subsequent
life, and making all allowances for his most peculiar and unhappy temperament, his
most diseased body, and the trying circumstances of his life and death.

"Richmond, May 19, 1815.

"It is with very great regret that I leave town about the time that you are confidently
expected to arrive. Nothing short of necessity should carry me away at
this time. I have a very great desire to see you, to converse with you on the subject
before which all others sink into insignificance. It continues daily to occupy
more and more of my attention, which it has nearly engrossed to the exclusion of
every other, and it is a source of pain as well as of occasional comfort to me. May
He who alone can do it shed light upon my mind, and conduct me, through faith,
to salvation. Give me your prayers. I have the most earnest desire for a more
perfect faith than I fear I possess. What shall I do to be saved? I know the
answer, but it is not free from difficulty. Lord, be merciful to me, a sinner. I do
submit myself most implicitly to his holy will, and great is my reliance on his
mercy. But when I reflect on the corruptions of my nature I tremble whilst I
adore. The merits of an all-atoning Saviour I hardly dare to plead when I think
of my weak faith. Help, Lord, or I perish, but thy will be done on earth as it is
in heaven. I know that I deserve to suffer for my sins; for time misspent, faculties
misemployed; but, above all, that I have not loved God and my neighbour as we
are commanded to do. But I will try to confide in the promises we have received,
or rather to comply with their conditions. Whatever be my fate, I will not harbour
a murmur in my breast against the justice of my Creator. Your afflicted
friend,

"John Randolph, of Roanoke.

"Rev. William Meade."

August, 1818. "It is now just nineteen years since sin first began to sit heavy
upon my soul. For a very great part of that time I have been as a conscious
thief; hiding or trying to hide from my fellow-sinners, from myself, from my God.
After much true repentance, followed by relapses into deadly sin, it hath pleased
Almighty God to draw me to him; reconciling me to him, and, by the love which
driveth out fear, to show me the mighty scheme of his salvation, which hath been
to me, as also to the Jews, a stumbling-block, and, as to the Greeks, foolishness.
I am now, for the first time, grateful and happy; nor would I exchange my present
feelings and assurances, although in rags, for any throne in Christendom."

[9]

Many of the sentences or petitions, making up these family devotions, are taken
from short prayers found either before or after the printed sermons of Bishop Wilson,
and no doubt were used by him in the pulpit. They were evidently adapted
to sermons. Such we know to have been the case with many if not all of the
English clergy, for a long time. Specimens of the same may be seen in connection
with a few of the homilies. Such is the practice of some of the English clergy to
this day, as I know from having heard them while on a visit to England a few years
since. It is well known that Bishop White did at one time, after the example of
English Bishops and clergy, prepare and use such prayers after his sermons. Some
of the Virginia clergy have done the same occasionally, and for it they have been
denounced as transgressors of the law, and no Churchmen. I sincerely wish that
so good a practice were generally adopted and that ministers would carefully
prepare, either in writing or otherwise, a prayer suitable to the sermon. The collects
might sometimes be found admirably adapted, but not always.

[10]

A singular circumstance occurred about this time in connection with Bishop
Clagget's consecration of old St. Paul's Church, Alexandria. Putting on his robes
and his mitre at some distance from the Church, he had to go along the street to
reach it. This attracted the attention of a number of boys and others, who ran
after and alongside of him, admiring his peculiar dress and gigantic stature. His
voice was as extraordinary for strength and ungovernableness as was his stature
for size, and as he entered the door of the church where the people were in silence
awaiting, and the first words of the service burst forth from his lips in his most
peculiar manner, a young lady, turning around suddenly and seeing his huge form
and uncommon appearance, was so convulsed that she was obliged to be taken out
of the house.


36

Page 36

ARTICLE II.

Recollections of the Protestant Episcopal Church in Virginia,
during the Present Century.

On leaving Alexandria I returned to my little farm in Frederick
and to the tending, in conjunction with Mr. Balmaine, of the two
small flocks at the chapel and in Winchester. During all the time
of that joint rectorship I bestowed a considerable portion of my
labours on five or six counties around, which were either destitute
of ministers or very partially served. The continual presence of
Mr. Balmaine in Winchester, and the lay-reading of my excellent
father-in-law, Mr. Philip Nelson, at the chapel, enabled me to do
this. In my absence from the chapel, the excellent sermons of
Gisborne and Bradley and Jarrett were delivered by one of the
best of readers, from its pulpit. I was happy to be able, during
my visit to England some years since, to communicate to the two
former the fact that they had thus, without knowing it, preached
so often and so acceptably in my pulpit in America. Such was
the scarcity of ministers and churches around, that my chapel services
were attended by families living at the distance of twelve and
fifteen miles. There are now seven churches, with regular services
by six ministers, within that district to which I was a debtor for all
pulpit and parochial ministration. My connection with Mr. Balmaine
was most pleasant and harmonious. He was one of the most
simple and single-hearted of men. Himself and his excellent partner
were the friends of the poor, and indeed of all, and were beloved
by all who knew them. They had no children, and having
some property, as well as a few hundred dollars rent for the glebe,
might have lived in a little style and self-indulgence, but they were
economical and self-denying in all things, that they might have
something for the poor and for the promotion of pious objects.
They did not even keep fire in their chamber during the coldest
weather of winter. They had one family of servants, who were
to them as children. As children they inherited, and some still
live in, the old mansion. As to some things Dr. Balmaine had
been weak, and at times led astray by those who surrounded him.
But I can truly say, that for many of the last years of his life, a


37

Page 37
more warm-hearted and exemplary man I knew not. Some of the
most eloquent extempore effusions I ever heard were from his lips,
while standing in the chancel on sacramental occasions, when he
referred with tears to past errors and sought to make amends, by
thus testifying to evangelical doctrine and holy living. In the
spring of 1812, Bishop Madison died. And as Dr. Buchannon, of
Richmond, was the Secretary to the last Convention, which was
held seven years before, Dr. Wilmer and myself united in a request
that he would call a special one in May. At that Convention
fourteen clergymen and fourteen laymen assembled. It resulted
in the election of Dr. Bracken as successor to Bishop Madison;
not, however, without opposition by some among us.[11] Another
Convention was held in the following spring, at which only seven
clergymen attended. To that Convention Dr. Bracken sent in his
resignation. Our deliberations were conducted in one of the committee-rooms
of the Capitol, sitting around a table. There was
nothing to encourage us to meet again, and but for that which I
shall soon mention, I believe such profitless and discouraging efforts
would soon have ceased. I well remember, that having just read

38

Page 38
Scott's "Lay of the Last Minstrel," as I took my solitary way
homeward on horseback, I found myself continually saying, in
relation to the Church of Virginia, in the words of the elvish
page, "Lost—lost—lost;" and never expected to cross the mountains
again on such an errand. But in the course of that year, or
in the early part of the following, it was suggested to Messrs. Wilmer
and Norris, and by none other than that unhappy man, the
Rev. Mr. Dashiel, of Baltimore, (whom they then highly esteemed,
but whom they abandoned as soon as his unworthiness was known,)
that the Rev. Dr. Moore, of New York, was the man to raise up
the Church in Virginia. Mr. D. had become acquainted with Dr.
Moore at a recent General Convention, heard him eloquently advocate
the introduction of more hymns into the Prayer Book, and
preach the Gospel with zeal and power in several large churches.
Dr. Wilmer and myself entered into a correspondence with Dr.
Moore, which led to his election at the next Convention. Some
objections, however, were privately made to Dr. Moore. It was
said that Bishop Hobart had complaints against him for some
irregularities in carrying on the work of the ministry, and that he
was somewhat Methodistical. It so happened, however, that Bishop
Hobart had written a most favourable letter concerning Dr. Moore
to some one present, which being shown, all opposition was silenced
and he was unanimously elected as Bishop of the Diocese, and immediately
after, or perhaps before, as Rector of the Monumental
Church, which had been reared on the ruins of the Richmond
Theatre. Bishop Moore was consecrated in May of 1814, and entered
on his duties in the summer of that year. Our organization
was now complete, but on a diminutive scale. Besides the few older
clergy, who had almost given up in despair, there were only the
Rev. Messrs. Wilmer and Norris, in Alexandria, the Rev. Mr.
Lemmon, who had just come to Fauquier, Mr. Edward McGuire,
acting as lay-reader in Fredericksburg, (preferred by the people in
that capacity to another importation from abroad,) and the one
who makes this record. But from this time forth a favourable
change commenced. Hope sprung up in the bosoms of many
hitherto desponding. Bishop Moore had some fine qualifications
for the work of revival. His venerable form, his melodious voice, his
popular preaching, his evangelical doctrine, his amiable disposition,
his fund of anecdote in private, and his love for the Church, all
contributed to make him popular and successful, so far as he was
able to visit and put forth effort. His parochial engagements and
bodily infirmities prevented his visiting many parts of the diocese.

39

Page 39
He never crossed the Alleghany Mountains, although he sometimes
visited North Carolina, which then had no Bishop. In the spring
of 1815, the first Convention under his Episcopate assembled in
Richmond. It must be evident to all, from the account given of
the past history of the Church in Virginia, that much prejudice
must have existed against it, and that the reputation of both clergy
and people for true piety must have been low, and that it was most
proper to take some early occasion of setting forth the principles
on which it was proposed to attempt its resuscitation. The last
Convention, which was held under Bishop Madison, and which was
followed by an intermission of seven years, had prepared the way
for this, by declaring the necessity of a reform in the manners of
both clergy and laity and by establishing rules for the trial of both.
Wherefore, among the first things which engaged the consideration
of the Convention of 1815, was the establishing a code of discipline.
The Diocese of Maryland, from which two of our brethren,
the Rev. Messrs. Wilmer and Norris, came, had already been engaged
in the same work, and we did little else than copy the regulations
there adopted. But although they were only the grosser
vices of drunkenness, gaming, extortion, &c. which it was proposed
to condemn, yet great opposition was made. The hue and cry of
priestly usurpation and oppression was raised. It was said that
the clergy only wanted the power, and fire and fagot would soon
be used again—that we were establishing a Methodist Church, and
that the new church needed reformation already. The opposition
indeed was such at this and the ensuing Convention, that we had
to content ourselves with renewing the general resolutions of the
Convention of 1805, under Bishop Madison. In two years after
this, however, in the Convention held in Winchester, when the
number of the clergy and the piety of the laymen had increased,
the subject was again brought up, and the condemnation of those
things which brought reproach on the Church was extended to
theatres, horse-racing, and public balls, by an overwhelming majority.
The same has been renewed and enforced at a more recent
one. The Church now began to move on with more rapid strides.
In looking over the list of the clergy who were added to our ranks
in the few following years we see the names of such men as Hawley,
Horrell, the two Allens, the Lowes, Ravenscroft, Smith, now
Bishop of Kentucky, Wingfield, the elder Armstrong, of Wheeling,
Charles Page, Keith, Lippitt, Alexander Jones, Cobbs, George
Smith, William Lee, John Grammer, J. P. McGuire, Brooke, the
Jacksons, and others. The itinerant labours of some of them deserve

40

Page 40
special notice. Benjamin Allen's labours in the Valley of
Virginia, Charles Page's in the counties of Amherst, Nelson, &c.,
Mr. Cobb's in Bedford and the counties round about, William Lee's
in Amelia, Goochland, Powhatan, and others, Mr. Grammer's in
Dinwiddie, Brunswick, Greenville, Surry, and Prince George, and
J. P. McGuire's between the Rappahannock and James Rivers,
were such as few professedly itinerant preachers ever surpass.
Without such self-denying labours, the Church could never have
been revived in these places. The faithful and zealous men, whom
I have enumerated above, were accompanied and have been followed
by other faithful ones, too numerous to mention

THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY.

It is time that I should now advert to the origin and progress of
one great instrument of the Church's prosperity in Virginia,—the
Theological Seminary at Alexandria. As Bishop Moore was about
leaving New York for Virginia, in the summer of 1814, Dr. Augustine
Smith, a native of Virginia, who had been for some years
Professor in a Medical School in New York and who was then
about to take charge of William and Mary College, met him in the
street and proposed that the Church in Virginia should establish a
Theological Professorship in Williamsburg, and thus make the College,
what its royal patrons designed, a School of the Prophets.
Bishop Moore encouraged the proposal, and a deputation of one of
the Professors was sent to the Convention of 1815 for the purpose
of promoting the plan. The Convention approved it, and the Rev.
Dr. Keith became the minister of the Episcopal congregation in
Williamsburg, and was prepared to instruct any candidates for the
ministry who might be sent there. During a stay of two years
only one presented himself. On various accounts Williamsburg
was found to be an unsuitable place. The Convention of Virginia
had appointed Col. Edward Colston and myself a Committee to
correspond with the Bishop of Maryland and some leading laymen
in North Carolina, proposing a union with Virginia in the establishment
and management of the Seminary at Williamsburg. From
North Carolina we received no answer. From the Bishop of Maryland[12] we received a prompt and decided refusal, accompanied with
such severe strictures on the religion and morals of Virginia that
we did not present it to the Convention, but only reported our


41

Page 41
failure. Williamsburg especially was objected to on account of its
infidelity as altogether unfit to be the seat of such an institution.
Those of us who were engaged in the resuscitation of the Church
were also said to be extravagant in some of our notions, as is apt
to be the case with those who in flying from one extreme rush into
the other. There was much in the letter but too true of the laity
and clergy, both of Maryland and Virginia, in that and past days.
Having failed in our experiment at Williamsburg, we determined to
make trial of it in Alexandria, by the help of our Education Society
—Dr. Keith, Dr. Wilmer, and Mr. Norris, being the Professors.
The General Theological Seminary was now getting under way,
and its friends were afraid of some interference with its prosperity.
The ground was taken that this was the institution of the Church,
and its claims paramount to all others. Most threatening letters
were addressed to Bishop Moore, calling upon him as a Bishop of
the General Church, bound to guard its unity, to interpose and
prevent the establishment of the Seminary at Alexandria. Happily
for us, Mr. Kohn had bequeathed a large fund for the General
Seminary in New York, where it was located when the will was
written; but, meanwhile, it had been removed to New Haven, and
it was contended that it could not inherit a legacy which was given
to an institution in New York. Bishop Hobart now took the
field in favour of Diocesan Seminaries and wrote a pamphlet on the
subject, claiming the legacy for one to be established in New York,
under Diocesan rule. A General Convention was called to settle
the question, and it was compromised by restoring the General
Seminary to New York, on certain terms, which, as it was foreseen
and predicted, made it and has continued it, virtually, a New York
Seminary. But we heard no more after that of the schismatical
character of the Virginia Seminary, nor have we since that time
heard any other objections of the kind to those established in Ohio,
Kentucky, Illinois, and Connecticut. Our Seminary continued for
several years in the town of Alexandria, until we raised sufficient
funds to purchase its present site and erect some of its buildings.
We are indebted to the zeal of Mr. John Nelson, of Mecklenburg,
for the first moneys collected for that purpose. He visited a considerable
part of the State, and raised a handsome contribution to
it. In the year 1828 I took my turn, and visited a still larger
portion of the State, realizing a greater amount. Other calls
have at successive periods been made, and always with success.
An attempt to raise an Episcopal fund for a time interfered with

42

Page 42
and postponed this, but it was soon evident that this was the
favourite with the people, and the other was relinquished.

 
[12]

Bishop Kemp.

CLERICAL ASSOCIATIONS.

Next in the order of time, and agreeably to a recommendation
in one of the Conventions in Bishop Madison's time, comes the
establishment of Clerical Associations. The first of these was in
the Valley of Virginia, consisting of the ministers of Berkeley,
Jefferson, and Frederick—Dr. Balmaine, the Rev. Benjamin Allen,
Enoch Lowe, Mr. Brian, and myself,—Benjamin Smith, now
Bishop Smith, coming among us soon after. We assembled quarterly
in each other's parishes; preaching for several days and
nights; having meetings among ourselves, and at private houses,
for special prayer; taking up collections for missionaries to the
western part of Virginia. The two first who went to Virginia
beyond the Alleghanies—the Rev. Charles Page and William Lee
—were sent out by our Society. These Associations were
attended by much good and no evil, so far as I know and believe.
I have ever encouraged them since entering the Episcopate, and
Bishop Moore did the same before and after that time, as being
most important auxiliaries to the Bishops, especially in large
dioceses. I regard it as an evil omen, when ministers, favourably
situated, are averse to such means of their own and their
people's improvement, though I do not mean to say that there
are not some good and pious men who regard them in a different
light.

OUR CONVENTIONS COME NEXT.

For the first few years after our reorganization our Conventions
were not only small as to numbers, but sad and gloomy in character,
attracting no attention. A succession of the rainy seasons in
May attended them for so many years that the two were closely
associated in the public mind. For some years they were held in
Richmond; but the proverbial and profuse hospitality of that place
was not then generally afforded them. For the most part, both
clerical and lay delegates were to be seen only at the taverns, and
but few religious services were held. The Convention at Fredericksburg—the
first after the system of rotation commenced—was
kindly and hospitably entertained, and from that time onward they
became not only delightful to the clergy and laity composing them.



No Page Number
illustration

THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, NEAR ALEXANDRIA.



No Page Number

43

Page 43
but attractive to others. To understand aright the history of such
large assemblies as our Conventions attract, and the reasons which
justify our encouragement of them by making religious exercises
so large a part of their doings, it must be stated that not only are
the Virginians a people given to visiting, but that the Episcopalians
are peculiarly so by reason of the fact that, for the most part,
they have sprung from a comparatively few families, who, by marriages
and intermarriages, though scattered all over the State,
make up one great family of tenderly-attached relatives, who are
always pleased at a good excuse, if the ability allows, to assemble
together. The bond of Christian fellowship and of Church feeling
also is very strong, even where the other is not, as well as where it
is. Hospitality also is a strong principle with them, and it is easier
here than in most places to throw open the doors and welcome all
who will come in on such occasions. A more innocent mode—nay,
a more religious mode—of gratifying the social feeling cannot be
than that of meeting together at our Conventions; and an imperative
duty rests on the ministers to afford the people the most frequent
and edifying services in their power, so that they may take
up the song of God's ancient people, when going by Divine command
to the great feasts of His own appointment:—

"Oh! 'twas a joyful sound to hear
The tribes devoutly say,
Up, Israel! to the temple haste,
And keep the festal day."

Sometimes they have been most edifying as well as joyful occasions.
The presence of God has been felt. The word preached
has been attended with great power. Many have remembered
them as the means of their awakening, and many as the channels
of more grace to their already converted souls. Long may they
continue to be thus used. Even if some dioceses are so small, or
the conveyances so convenient and rapid, that a few hours or at
most a day can bring them all to the place of meeting, and a very
short time may suffice for legislation and business, let it be remembered
how very large are the dimensions of the Diocese of Virginia,
how difficult and tedious the journey of many of its members to
the Convention, and it will be felt and acknowledged that to meet
on mere business for a few hours or a day would not be sufficient
to induce and remunerate the attendance of either clergy or laity.


44

Page 44

THE REQUIRING OF LAY DELEGATES TO BE COMMUNICANTS.

We have already spoken of the measures adopted for the purification
of the Church from evil-livers, among both clergy and laity,
by the passage of wholesome canons. At three successive periods
was this done, opposition being made each time, and six Conventions
in all being in part occupied in the discussion and contest.
We now refer to the method adopted, after a considerable time had
elapsed, for the purification of our Conventions from unworthy lay
delegates, by requiring that they be in full communion with the
Church, and not merely baptized members or professed friends,
whether baptized or not. No law, either of the General or State
Conventions, forbade an infidel or the most immoral man from being
the deputy from a parish in the Diocesan Convention, although questions
might come before them touching the Creed and Articles and
worship of the Church, or the trial of bishops, clergy, and laymen.
The strange anomaly of persons legislating for others and
not being themselves subject to such legislation was allowed in the
Church, when it would have been resisted in any and every other
society. The consequence resulted, that, although there was a
great improvement in the general character of the Church and the
respectability of the lay delegation to our Conventions, we were
still distressed and mortified at the occasional appearance of one
or more unworthy members, who were a scandal to the Church,
the scandal being the greater because of the number of attendants.
The frequenters of the race-ground and the card-table and the
lovers of the intoxicating cup sometimes found their way through
this unguarded door into the legislative hall. It was proposed to
close it; but strenuous opposition was made by some, as to a
measure assailing individual and congregational rights. It was
discussed for three successive years, and though a considerable
majority was always ready to pass the proposed canon, that majority
yielded so far to the minority as to allow of delay and
further consideration, which only resulted in the final passage of it
by increased and overwhelming numbers. An incident occurred,
during one of the discussions, showing how the consciences of even
those who are not in full communion with the Church approve of
wholesome legislation and discipline. A worthy clergyman, who
was opposing the canon, referred to his own lay delegate as a proof
of what excellent men might be sent to the Convention, who were
nevertheless not communicants. When he was seated, the lay delegate,


45

Page 45
a very humble and good man, who had never spoken before
in Convention, rose and expressed his entire dissent from his minister,
and, as it was proposed to postpone the question until the
next day, begged that there might be no delay, as he should sleep
more quietly that night after having given his vote in favour of so
necessary a regulation. He lived to appear in our body once more
in full communion with the Church. We have never, since the
adoption of this rule, had cause to repent of our legislation, or to
blush for the scandal cast upon us by unworthy members.

POLICY OF THE BISHOPS AND CLERGY OF VIRGINIA IN REGARD TO
TRACTARIANISM.

At an early period Bishop Moore called the attention of the
clergy and laity of Virginia to this heretical and Romish movement,
when it overhung our horizon only as a cloud no larger than
a man's hand. But it was a black and portentous one. The Convention
in Norfolk, with a few exceptions, agreed with him in the
propriety of warning against the giving of any encouragement to
the circulation of the insidious tracts. At the meeting in Alexandria,
the following year, when they had been circulated through
the land, having already done much evil in our Mother-Church, a
call was made upon all to expose and condemn the false doctrines
thereof. The Bishops and ministers did their duty in sounding the
alarm, and the faithful Professors of our Seminary did theirs. The
consequence is that the Church of Virginia has been preserved
from the ill effects of the erroneous and strange doctrines taught
by that school.

THE USE OF THE LITURGY AND VESTMENTS IN VIRGINIA.

From what has been said in the foregoing pages as to the
deplorable condition of the Church in Virginia, it may well be
imagined that its liturgical services were often very imperfectly
performed. In truth, the responsive parts were almost entirely
confined to the clerk, who, in a loud voice, sung or drawled them
out. As to the psalmody, it is believed that the Hundredth Psalm,
to the tune of Old Hundred, was so generally used as the signal
of the Service begun, that it was regarded as the law of the Church.
A case has been mentioned to me by good authority, where a new
minister, having varied from the established custom, gave out a
different psalm; but the clerk, disregarding it, sung as usual the
Hundredth. So unaccustomed were the people to join in the Service,


46

Page 46
that when I took charge of the congregation in Alexandria
in 1811 I tried in vain to introduce the practice, until I fell on the
expedient of making the children, who in large numbers came
weekly to my house to be catechized, go over certain parts of the
Service and the Psalms with me, and, after having thus trained
them, on a certain Sabbath directed them to respond heartily and
loudly in the midst of the grown ones. They did their part well,
and complete success soon attended the plan. Throughout the
State, when not only the friends of the Church were rapidly diminishing
and Prayer Books were very scarce, but even clerks were
hard to be gotten, I presume that the Services were very irregularly
performed. I knew of an instance where the clergyman did
not even take a Prayer Book into the pulpit, but, committing to
memory some of the principal prayers of the Morning Service, used
them in the pulpit before sermon, after the manner of other denominations.
I am unable to say whether it ever was, or had been
for a long time, the habit of any or of many of the ministers to
use what is called the full Service, combining what all acknowledge
to have been originally the three distinct parts of the old English
cathedral Service, and used separately at different portions of the
day, namely, the Morning Service proper, the Litany, the Ante-Communion
Service, and which, without law, were gradually
blended into one, for the convenience of those who preferred one
long to three short services. The probability is, that in a church
without a head and any thing like discipline, the practice may have
been very various, according to the consciences, tastes, and convenience
of those who officiated. The practice of those who engaged
in the resuscitation of the Church in Virginia, was to use the two
former portions of the Liturgy—the Morning Service and Litany
—and to omit the Ante-Communion Service, except on communion
days. This was introduced among us by the brethren who came
from Maryland, the Rev. Dr. Wilmer, Norris, and Lemmon, who
doubtless believed that it was according to the design of those who
arranged the American Prayer Book. They quoted as authority
the declaration and practice of the Rev. Dr. Smith, who, as may
be seen in the journals of our earliest General Convention, took a
leading part in the changes of the Prayer Book. Dr. Smith, after
leaving Philadelphia, settled in Chestertown, Md., where it was
declared he never used the Ante-Communion Service. Dr. Wilmer
was one of his successors, and said that it was also affirmed that
Dr. Smith avowed himself to have been the author of one or more
of the Rubrics, on the meaning and design of which rested the

47

Page 47
question of obligation to use the Ante-Communion Service every
Sabbath, and that he had in view the permission to leave it optional
with the minister. I am aware that Bishop White has expressed a
different opinion, and that his practice was otherwise, nor do I purpose
to discuss the question or take sides, but only to state the
authority on which the Virginia custom was advocated. Neither
do I mean to appropriate this custom exclusively to Virginia and a
part of Maryland. In other parts of the land there were those who
adopted it. I had it from the lips of Bishop Hobart himself, that
a portion of the clergy of New York omitted that part of the Service,
and, as I shall show hereafter, it was this fact which had
much to do with his proposition to abridge the Service in other
parts, in order the more easily to enforce the use of this favourite
portion. The Bishop acknowledged to me that the Virginia clergy
were not the only transgressors in this respect. This much I can
say, that if they did err in the understanding of the rubric, they
made amends for the abridgment of the Service by seeking to
perform what was used in a more animated manner, and to introduce
a warm and zealous response among the people, and also by more
lengthened, animated, and evangelical discourses from the pulpit.
Nor was there any attempt to enforce upon all the practice thus
commenced. From the first, every minister has been allowed the
free exercise of his conscience and judgment in regard to it. For
a time, Bishop Moore, who had been accustomed to the fuller service
in the city of New York, was disposed to urge the same upon
the clergy of Virginia, but, after some observation and experience,
became satisfied that it was best to leave it to the discretion of each
minister, and, though in his own parish he always used it, never
required the same in his visits to others.

As to the vestments, the same liberty and the same variety has
ever existed in the Church of Virginia, without interruption to its
harmony. It is well known that the controversy in our Mother-Church
concerning the use of the surplice was a long and bitter
and most injurious one; was, indeed, considered by some of her
ablest Bishops and clergy as that which was the main point which
caused the final secession; that if the obligation to use it had been
removed, the Church would, for at least a much longer period, have
been undivided. Various attempts were made to abolish the canon
or rubric enforcing it, but it was thought improper to humour the
dissenters by so doing, and alleged that if this were done other
demands would be made. At the revision of the Prayer Book by
our American fathers, this and other changes, which had long been


48

Page 48
desired by many in England, and still are, were at once made, and
the dress of the clergy left to their own good sense, it being only
required that it should be decent. I believe it has never been attempted
but once to renew the law enforcing clerical habits. Soon
after I entered the House of Bishops some one in the other House
proposed such a canon. A warm but short discussion ensued,
which ended in the withdrawal of what found but little favour.
During the discussion the subject was mentioned among the Bishops,
who seemed all opposed to it, and one of whom, more disposed,
perhaps, to such things than any other, cried out, "De minimis
non curat lex.
" That the old clergy of Virginia should have been
very uniform and particular in the use of the clerical vestments is
most improbable, from the structure of the churches and the location
of their vestry-rooms. The vestry-rooms formed no part of
the old churches, but were separate places in the yard or neighbourhood,
sometimes a mile or two off. They were designed for
civil as well as religious purposes, and were located for the convenience
of the vestrymen, who levied taxes and attended to all the
secular as well as ecclesiastical business of the parish. The setting
apart some portion of the old churches as robing or vestry-rooms
is quite a modern thing, and it is not at all probable that the ministers
would have gone backward and forward between the pulpits
and the former vestry-rooms in the churchyards, to change their
garments.[13] The clergy of Virginia, from the first efforts at resuscitating
the Church, have been charged by some with being too
indifferent to clerical garments; nor have they been very careful
to repel the charge, thinking it better to err in this way than in the
opposite. Bishop Hobart once taunted me with this, though at the
same time he acknowledged that there were times and places when
it would be folly to think of using the clerical garments, saying,
that in his visitations, especially to Western New York, he sometimes
dispensed not only with the Episcopal robes but even with
the black gown. The Bishops of Virginia have sometimes been
condemned for not requiring the candidates to be dressed in surplices
at the time of their admission to deacons' orders, although
there is no canon or rubric looking to such a thing. They are at
least as good Churchmen, in this respect, as the English Bishops.
When in England, some years since, I witnessed the ordination of
fifty deacons, by the present Archbishop of Canterbury, in Durham

49

Page 49
Cathedral, not one of whom was surpliced; some of them, as well
as I remember, having on their college gowns, answering to our
black gowns, and others only their common garments. There is, I
think, less disposition to form and parade there than is sometimes
seen in our own country. I only add that Bishop Moore, in his
visitations, always took his seat in the chancel in his ordinary dress,
except when about to perform some official act, and thus addressed
the congregation after the sermon. I have seen no cause to depart
from his example.

 
[13]

In the year 1723 the Bishop of London inquires of the clergy of Virginia concerning
this. Some reply that the surplice is provided, and others that it is not.

GLEBES AND SALARIES WITHDRAWN.

It has been made a matter of great complaint against the Legislature
of Virginia, that it should not only have withdrawn the stipend
of sixteen thousand-weight of tobacco from the clergy, but
also have seized upon the glebes. I do not mean to enter upon the
discussion of the legality of that act, or of the motives of those
who petitioned for it. Doubtless there were many who sincerely
thought that it was both legal and right, and that they were doing
God and religion a service by it. I hesitate not, however, to express
the opinion, in which I have been and am sustained by many
of the best friends of the Church then and ever since, that nothing
could have been more injurious to the cause of true religion in the
Episcopal Church, or to its growth in any way, than the continuance
of either stipend or glebes. Many clergymen of the
most unworthy character would have been continued among us, and
such a revival as we have seen have never taken place. As it was,
together with the glebes and salaries evil ministers disappeared
and made room for a new and different kind. Even in cases
where, from some peculiarity in the manner in which the glebes
were first gotten and the tenure by which they were held, the law
could not alienate them from the parish, they have been, I believe,
without an exception, a drawback to the temporal and spiritual
prosperity of the congregations, by relaxing the efforts of the
people to support the ministry and making them to rely on the
uncertain profits of their contested or pillaged lands. The prejudices
excited against the Church by the long contest for them were
almost overwhelming to her hopes, and a successful termination of
that contest might have been utterly fatal to them for a long period
of time. Not merely have the pious members of the Church
taken this view of the subject, since the revival of it under other
auspices, but many of those who preferred the Church at that day,


50

Page 50
for other reasons than her evangelical doctrine and worship, saw
that it was best that she be thrown upon her own resources. I had
a conversation many years since with Mr. Madison, soon after he
ceased to be President of the United States, in which I became
assured of this. He himself took an active part in promoting the
act for the putting down the establishment of the Episcopal Church,
while his relative was Bishop of it and all his family connection
attached to it. He mentioned an anecdote illustrative of the preference
of many for it who still advocated the repeal of all its
peculiar privileges. I give his own words. At a time when lobby
members were sent by some of the other denominations to urge
the repeal of all laws favouring the Episcopal Church, one, an
elder of a church, came from near Hampton, who pursued his
work with great fearfulness and prudence. An old-fashioned Episcopal
gentleman, of the true Federal politics, with a three-cornered
hat, powdered hair, long queue, and white top-boots, perceived him
approaching very cautiously one day, as if afraid though desirous
to speak. Whereupon he encouraged the elder to come forward,
saying that he was already with him, that he was clear for giving
all a fair chance, that there were many roads to heaven, and he
was in favour of letting every man take his own way; but he was
sure of one thing, that no gentleman would choose any but the
Episcopal. Although I am far from assenting to the conclusion
that no gentlemen are to be found in other denominations, or that
there were none in Virginia at that time who had become alienated
from the Episcopal and attached to other churches, yet it cannot
be denied that the more educated and refined were generally averse
to any but the Episcopal Church, while many, of whom the above-mentioned
was a fair representative, were in favour of equal privileges
to all.[14] It may be well here to state, what will more fully
appear when we come to speak of the old glebes and churches in
a subsequent number, that the character of the laymen of Virginia
for morals and religion was in general greatly in advance of that
of the clergy. The latter, for the most part, were the refuse or
more indifferent of the English, Irish, and Scottish Episcopal

51

Page 51
Churches, who could not find promotion and employment at home.
The former were natives of the soil and descendants of respectable
ancestors who migrated at an early period. For high and honourable
character and a due appreciation of what was required in
ministers of the Gospel there were numerous influential laymen
who would favourably compare with those of any part of the land.
Some of the vestries, as their records painfully show, did what
they could to displace unworthy ministers, though they often failed
through defect of law. In order to avoid the danger of having
evil ministers fastened upon them, as well as from the scarcity of
ministers, they made much use of lay-readers as substitutes. In
some instances, as will be seen, such readers were very successful
in strengthening the things which remained after the Church was
deprived of her possessions and privileges and the clergy had
abandoned their charges. The reading of the Service and sermons
in private families, which contributed so much to the preservation
of an attachment to the Church in the same, was doubtless promoted
by this practice of lay-reading. Those whom Providence
raised up to resuscitate the fallen Church of Virginia can testify
to the fact that the families who descended from the above-mentioned
have been their most effective supports. Existing in greater
or less numbers throughout the State, they have been the first to
originate measures for the revival of the Church, and the most
active and liberal ever since in the support of her ministers.
More intelligent and devoted Churchmen, more hospitable and
warm-hearted friends of the clergy, can nowhere be found. And
when in the providence of God they are called on to leave their
ancient homes and form new settlements in the distant South and
West, none are more active and reliable in transplanting the
Church of their Fathers.

 
[14]

Mr. Madison's mother was a pious member of the Episcopal Church. She lived
with him, but was of such feeble health that she could not attend public worship
for many of her latter years. On this account, as doubtless from a general principle
of hospitality, Mr. Madison, who was very regular in his attendance at worship,
which, during his day, was held at the court-house in Orange county, there being
no church for some time, always invited our ministers to his house, where they administered
the Lord's Supper to his venerable mother

SOME REFLECTIONS GROWING OUT OF THE FOREGOING PAGES.

The desertions from the Episcopal Church in Virginia on the
part of many who were awakened to a deeper sense of religion,
the violent opposition made to it, the persevering and successful
efforts for its downfall, the advantage taken by politicians for promoting
their objects, the abandonment of their charges by far the
greater part of the ministers so soon as their salaries were withdrawn
and when only unprofitable glebes remained to them, are
events in history which must have resulted from some powerful
cause or causes. The leading one must be found in the irreligious


52

Page 52
character and defective preaching of the clergy, operating more or
less on the laity, for it will always be, in some degree, "like priest
like people." The ignorance, superstition, and corruption of the
Romish clergy and people invited that grand assault of the great
enemy of God and man upon the Christian Church and religion in
Europe, by the agency of Voltaire and his host of followers, which
led to the French Revolution with all its horrors. It is not wonderful
that the same great foe and his active agents should have
turned their attention to the Church and people of Virginia, in
their then most irreligious state, and made an effective assault
upon them. Infidelity became rife in Virginia, perhaps beyond
any other portion of the land. The clergy, for the most part,
were a laughing-stock or objects of disgust. Some that feared
God and desired to save their souls felt bound to desert them.
Persecution followed, and that only increased defection. Infidels
rejoiced at the sight, and politicians made their use of the unhappy
state of things. The Church fell. There was no Episcopal head
to direct and govern either clergy or people. No discipline could
be exerted over either. It is not surprising that many should
think it was deserted of God as well as of man. Such a view has
been taken of it by some ever since, and most diligently and successfully
urged to our injury. Although our present condition
ought to be sufficient proof that the Episcopal Church itself is
not an offence unto God,—while at one time it came under his displeasure
by reason of the unworthiness of many of its ministers
and members,—yet it may be well to advert, not in a spirit of
retaliation but in the love of truth and justice, to some facts,
showing that the Episcopal Church is not the only one in our land
which has had its unworthy ministers and members, and been of
course so far an object of the Divine displeasure. The history of
the whole Christian Church, as one of our opponents has said, is
the "history of declensions and revivals." The Baptist Church
in Virginia, which took the lead in dissent, and was the chief
object of persecution by the magistrates and the most violent and
persevering afterward in seeking the downfall of the Establishment,
was the first to betray signs of great declension in both ministers
and people. The Rev. Robert Sample, in his History of the Baptists
of Virginia, is faithful in acknowledging this. He informs us
that at an early period Kentucky and the Western country took
off many of their ministers in pursuit of gain. Some of these
ministers had dishonoured the profession. "With some few exceptions,"
he says, "the declension (among the people) was general

53

Page 53
throughout the State. The love of many waxed cold. Some of
the watchmen fell, others stumbled, and many slumbered at their
posts. Iniquity greatly abounded." At another time he says,
"The great revival had now subsided, and the axe was laid at the
root of the tree. Many barren and fruitless trees were already
cut down. In many of the churches the number excluded surpassed
the number received." Again, he speaks of the undue
dwelling on some highly Calvinistic doctrines. "Truth is often
injured by an unsuitable application of its parts. Strong meat
should not be given but to men. To preach the deep, mysterious
doctrines of grace upon all occasions, and before all sorts of people,
is the sure way to preach them out of the parts." Again, he says,
in the same connection, "Unguardedness respecting preachers, in
various ways, but especially as to impostors, has injured the Baptists
in many parts, but in none more than on the Eastern Shore.
They have probably suffered more by impostors than any other
people in Virginia." He then mentions several sad instances of
shameful misconduct, adding others afterward. I am also compelled
in honest truth to say, that at a later period, many others
coming within my own knowledge and observation must be united
to the above; but I am also rejoiced to declare, from the same
knowledge, that the character of the ministry of that denomination
for piety and ability, and no doubt that of the people with it, has
been most manifestly improving for many years. I trust that with
the acknowledged improvement of our own, there will be an increased
disposition to forget all former animosities, to think and
speak charitably of each other, and only strive which shall most
promote the common cause of true religion.

Leaving my own State and Diocese, I proceed to speak of some
at a distance who have experienced like declension from the true
faith and practice. Col. Byrd, of Virginia, in his "Westover
Manuscripts," concerning a tour through the State in the year
1733, speaking of the Pilgrim Fathers of New England, says,
"Though these people may be ridiculed for some Pharisaical peculiarities
in their worship and behaviour, yet they were very useful
subjects, as being frugal and industrious, giving no scandal or bad
example, at least by any open and public vices. By which excellent
qualities they had much the advantage of the Southern colony,
who thought their being members of the Established Church sufficient
to sanctify very loose and profligate morals. For this reason
New England improved much faster than Virginia." Strict, however,
as were the morals, and evangelical as were the doctrines, of


54

Page 54
the Pilgrim Fathers of New England, the time of declension in
both came on. We may trace the declension in doctrine to that
which was the Mother-Church to many of them,—the Church of
Scotland. The moralizing system began there, as it had done in
the English Church. I remember to have heard Mr. Balmaine—
once a member of that Church—often compare together the moralizing
and evangelical parties of his early days,—now a hundred
years ago. Dr. Blair and Mr. Walker were the representatives of
the two parties, though associate ministers in the same church in
Edinburgh. He had heard them both. The more worldly and
fashionable delighted in the sermons of Dr. Blair, who preached in
the morning. The more zealous and evangelical attended in
greater numbers the services of Dr. Walker, who preached in the
afternoon. Dr. Witherspoon also, former President of Princeton
College, has, in his work entitled "Characteristics," exercised his
unsurpassed wit as well as pious zeal in portraying the two parties,
—the one, calling itself the "Moderate Party," which he charges
with being "fierce for moderation," and zealous in nothing else.
The same soon began to exist in New England. Low views of the
qualification for baptism, the Lord's Supper, and the ministry,
gradually crept in. The moralizing system took the place of the
evangelical. The distinctive principles of the Gospel were kept
back, and thus the way was prepared for the Unitarian heresy.
The morals also of the Church, as might be expected, began to
fail. The labours and preaching of Edwards and others and the
great revival under them did much to arrest the downward tendency;
but the evil went on. The love of pleasure in the young
and of strong drink in both young and old increased in many
places. Deacons and elders sold rum by wholesale, and other
members by retail. Nor did the clergy lift up their voices in
solemn warnings, as they should have done, but very many freely
used the intoxicating draught. That aged and venerable man, the
Rev. Leonard Woods, of Andover, states that at a particular period
previous to the temperance reformation he was able to count
nearly forty ministers of the Gospel, none of whom resided at a
very great distance, who were either drunkards or so far addicted
to intemperate drinking, that their reputation and usefulness were
very greatly injured if not utterly ruined. He mentions an ordination
at which he was present, and at which he was pained to see two
aged ministers literally drunk and a third indecently excited by
strong drink. "These disgusting and appalling facts," says this
most esteemed minister of the Gospel, "I could wish might be

55

Page 55
concealed. But they were made public by the guilty persons; and
I have thought it just and proper to mention them, in order to
show how much we owe to a compassionate God for the great deliverance
he hath wrought."[15] (The Ninth Report of the Am. Tem.
Society, as quoted in the Temperance Prize Essay, "Bacchus," pp.
79, 80; edition of 1840.) To this I add a testimony of my own.
About thirty-five or thirty-six years ago, I devoted some time to
the service of the Colonization Society, forming the first auxiliaries
and selecting the first colonists in some of the larger cities of the
Union, North and South. Of course, I mingled freely with ministers
and members of different denominations and had opportunity
of knowing what I now affirm,—namely, that many ministers of
respectable standing, and not confined to any one denomination,
were in the habit of using themselves and offering to others who
visited them, not merely at the hour of dinner, but long before,
brandy and other drinks. I have special reference to one large
city, where, in a few years, the evil effects were seen and felt, in
the reproach brought on several denominations by the partial if
not total fall of some of their chief leaders. In proof of the prevalence
of such a ruinous habit I mention the fact, that in a funeral
sermon preached about that time over a deceased minister, and

56

Page 56
published to the world, it was mentioned to his praise, that such
was his hospitality that he never permitted even a morning visit
to be paid him without offering wine and other refreshments. How
thankful we should be to God for the great change which he has
caused to take place in the hospitalities of our day! As for myself,
I can never hear without pain a slighting remark made by any one,
especially by a minister, and more especially by one of our own
Church, concerning that society which I believe God has raised up
in our land, as one instrument by which so much has been done
for the diminution of this great evil.

From this digression, if it be a digression, I return, and draw
this article to a close.

 
[15]

In the life of Mrs. Huntington, recently published, we have complaints of de
fection among the dissenters of England as far back as the beginning of the last
century. After quoting from Bishop Burnet a strong passage as to the ignorance,
want of piety and Scripture knowledge of the clergy of the Establishment, it is
added:—"No less mournful utterances came up from the bosom of dissent. Hear
its voice of lament:—`The dissenting interest is not like itself. I hardly know it. It
used to be famous for faith, holiness, and love. I knew the time when I had no
doubt, into whatsoever place of worship I went among dissenters, but that my heart
would be warmed and edified. Now I hear prayers and sermons which I neither
relish nor understand. Evangelical truth and duty are old-fashioned things. One's
ears are dinned with "reason," "the great law of reason," "the eternal law of reason."
Oh for the purity of our fountains!' " When Wesley and Whitefield and others
began to preach the Gospel in its power and purity, they found as little favour with
the dissenters as with the churchmen. Dr. Doddridge, after quoting the advice of
some one of the English Church as to the best method of resisting encroaches on
their flocks, namely, more fervent prayer, holy living, and evangelical preaching,
says, "Let us of the dissenting churches go and do likewise." Seeing, then,
that there is such a tendency to declension in all, we should learn to be charitable,
and, even if it should be only a mote in our own eye, compared with the beam in
our brother's, be very careful to eradicate that, remembering how soon it may
increase so as to obscure our vision. We speak not this to prevent the honest
declaration of truth and faithful warnings to churches, as well as individuals, but
to put all on their guard, not to assign an undue portion of error and corruption to
any one.

CONCLUDING REMARKS.

Having thus presented a brief sketch of some of the most interesting
incidents in the past history of the Church of Virginia, let
us with deep humility and lively gratitude compare together our
past and present condition, saying, "What hath God wrought!"
Toward the close of two hundred years after its first establishment
there were nearly one hundred ministers and one hundred and
sixty churches, and then in seven years after only a few fainthearted
ones serving in the few remaining and almost deserted
sanctuaries; now again, after the labours of less than half a century,
our hundred ministers are restored and more than one hundred
and seventy churches are open for the people of God. For
two hundred years not a Bishop ever visited the diocese, and even
after one was sent only a few ministrations were performed; now,
two Bishops have full employment in visiting two hundred churches
or stations. It was for years found impracticable to raise sufficient
funds for the consecration of one Bishop; now, funds are raised for
the annual support of two, independent of parochial charges. It
was once proposed, in a declining state of the Church, but in vain,
to raise funds for the education of only two candidates for the
ministry; now, numbers are annually receiving preparatory instruction
at our Seminary. Formerly we were entirely dependent
on foreign parts for our supply of clergymen, insufficient as to
numbers and worse as to character; now, by the blessing of God
on our Seminary, we are enabled to send forth to the decayed
churches of Greece, or to the heathen of Asia and Africa, a goodly
number of faithful and zealous missionaries of the cross. Formerly,


57

Page 57
and for at least a century, numbers were deserting our communion,
as that which had deserted God, and was deserted of God; now,
for the last forty years, either themselves or their children or children's
children have in considerable numbers been returning to our
fold, as to one which God himself was keeping and blessing.
Whereas once almost all men thought and spoke ill of our clergy
and communicants as devoid of piety, now, only those who are
misinformed, or most prejudiced, refuse to acknowledge that
through God's grace there is at least as large an amount of true
piety in both ministers and people as is to be found in those of any
other denomination. Whereas once we had for many years no
Conventions and then for some years a few faint-hearted ministers
and people meeting together, now, what numbers of clergy and
laity delight to assemble, not for the dry business of legislation
only, or for religious controversy, but chiefly for the blessed privilege
of joining hearts and voices in the sweet exercises of God's
word and worship, and thus becoming knit together in love! Thus
graciously hath God dealt with us. Out of gratitude to him, and
that we may continue to enjoy his smiles, it becomes us ever to
bear in mind by what means this hath been done; how our Jacob
arose, when he was not only so small, but crushed to the earth,
trodden under foot of man, after having been betrayed by friends
and dishonoured by the very ministers of God who were appointed
to defend him. In the character, habits, views, and history of the
man whom God sent to us from a distance to be our head and
leader in this work, and in the views of those, whether from our
own State or elsewhere, who entered into the service, may be seen
the religious principles and methods of action by which, under God,
the change has been effected; and it need not be said how entirely
different they were from those by which the disgrace and downfall
of the Church had been wrought. Of the efficacy of these means
we are the more convinced from the peculiar and very great difficulties
to be surmounted, which have nevertheless in a great measure
been surmounted. We are persuaded that in no part of our
own land were there such strong prejudices and such violent oppositions
to be overcome as in Virginia, in consequence of the former
character of the Episcopal clergy, and the long and bitter strife
which had existed between the Church and those who had left its
pale, which latter were never satisfied until the downfall of the
former was accomplished.

Let me briefly recapitulate the means used. Bishop Moore, in
his previous correspondence, and his first sermon and address,


58

Page 58
declared his determination to preach as he had ever done, when
God so greatly blessed his ministry, the glorious doctrines of
grace, instead of a mere morality, such as many of the English
clergy had once preached, and such as had been but too common
in Virginia. The young clergy, who engaged in the revival of
the Church of Virginia, took the same resolve and made the great
theme of their preaching "Jesus Christ and him crucified," on the
ground of a total apostasy from God on the part of man which
required such a sacrifice, as well as the renewing of the Holy
Ghost in order to meetness for the joys of Heaven. But they
did not turn this grace of God into licentiousness and think that
either priest or people might indulge in sin. Among the first
acts of the earlier Conventions, it was at once set forth before the
world that the revival of the Church was to be undertaken on
principles entirely different from those which had hitherto prevailed,
and under the influence of which religion had been so
much dishonoured. It was plainly declared that there was need
of discipline both for clergy and laity, and canons were provided
for the exercise of the same. Not merely were grosser vices stigmatized,
but what by some were considered the innocent amusements
of the world and which the clergy themselves had advocated
and practised were condemned as inconsistent with the
character of a Christian professor.

Baptism, by which we renounce the pomps and vanities of the
world as well as the sinful lusts of the flesh, and which had been
customarily celebrated in private, directly in opposition to the
rubric and often amidst ungodly festivities, was now sought to be
performed only in the house of God, and with pious sponsors
instead of thoughtless and irreligious ones. Candidates for confirmation,
instead of being presented because they had reached a
certain age and could repeat the Catechism, were told what a
solemn vow, promise, and profession they were about to make,
and that it was none other than an immediate introduction with
full qualifications to the Lord's Supper. Of course very different
views of the Lord's Supper and of the conduct of communicants
were inculcated, and the ministers bound, by express canon, to
converse with each one before admitting for the first time to the
Lord's Supper. Thus were the whole tone and standard of
religion changed, to the dissatisfaction and complaint, it is true,
of some of the old members of the Church, and not without the
condemnation of some from abroad. In due time, the important
measure, requiring that all who enter our Convention to legislate


59

Page 59
for Christians and Christian ministers should themselves be
Christian professors, was adopted, though there were those at home
who feared the attempt, and those abroad who prophesied evil in
such a manner as to encourage disaffection at home. But God
was with us and has granted most entire success.

As to the manner of exciting zeal in Christians and awakening
interest in those who were not, it was thought that no better
example could be followed than that of the apostles, who
preached not only in the temple and synagogues, but from house
to house, as occasion required and opportunity offered. As to
the manner of preaching, written sermons were generally preferred
in the pulpit, while extemporaneous exhortations were
often resorted to in smaller assemblies. Without slighting the
excellent prayers of our Liturgy, there were many occasions, both
in private families and in social meetings, when extemporaneous
petitions seemed edifying both to the pastor and his flock. As to
the great benevolent and religious institutions of the age, our
ministers felt that they were doing well to encourage their people
to a lively participation in them. The Missionary and Bible
Societies, the Colonization and Temperance Societies, received
their most cordial support, and they considered it a subject of
devout thankfulness to God if their congregations took a deep
interest in the same. To provoke each other and their congregations
to zeal in all good works, and especially to awaken the
careless to a sense of their lost condition, the ministers would
meet together occasionally, and for several successive days make
full trial of prayer and the word, expecting the blessing promised
to two or three who come together and ask somewhat of
God.

To these I will only add a few words as to the spirit cherished
and the course pursued toward our Christian brethren who walk
not with us in all things of Church order and worship. Long and
bitter was the strife that subsisted between them and our fathers,
violent the prejudices that raged against us, and it would have
been easy to enter on the work of revival in the spirit of retaliation
and fierce opposition. But would it have been right, and as
our Master would have had us do? Our forefathers had done
religion much and them some wrong. God made use of them for
good. Many of them were doubtless most sincere in their fear
of us and opposition to us. It became us rather to win them over
by love, and secure their esteem by living and preaching differently
from our predecessors. Such was the conciliatory course


60

Page 60
pursued by our deceased father in God, and followed by those
who perceived the good effects of his example, and most happy
was the effect of the same. But while we have reason, at thought
of our present by comparison with our past condition, to exclaim,
"What hath God done!" "to thank him and take courage," yet
should we beware of boasting, or of supposing that all is done, or
that what remains will certainly and easily be done. I consider it
as the great error of many in our Church, that we are too much
given to boasting, too apt to overrate our own successes, and calculate
too largely on far greater, while underrating the present or
probable future successes of others. God will, in his own way,
correct us, if we be guilty of presumption. Our Jacob is still
small, and it becomes us now, as of old, to ask, By whom shall be
arise? Much is yet to be done, and there are many difficulties in
the way. Though we have a goodly number of ministers, yet there
are by no means enough to carry on the work of enlargement as
we could wish, and as the door seems opening to us. Although
we have many churches, yet how many of the congregations are
small and not rapidly increasing, being still unable to afford even
a moderate support to the ministry! Many are the discouragements
which meet us in our efforts to sustain some of the old and
to raise up new congregations. Among the most painful is the
difficulty of attaching the poor of this world to our communion.
When our Lord was on earth he gave, as one of the signs of his
heavenly descent, the blessed fact that "to the poor the Gospel
is preached," and "the common people," it is written, "heard
him gladly,"—"the multitudes followed him." Such should be
our constant endeavour; and if, from the causes alluded to in the
past history of our Church, one description of the poor of Virginia
have been almost entirely alienated from us, let us rejoice
to know that there is another description not less acceptable
in the sight of Heaven, who, if we are kind to them and will
take due pains to win them over, may more easily be led to come
under the faithful preaching of the word. The poor servants will,
if we persevere in our labours of love toward them, and be to
them what God's faithful pastors in every age have been to the
poor, be benefited by our ministry, and may—if we will, in conjunction
with their owners, attend to them betimes, as we do to
our own children—become regular and pious members of our communion.
But whether we think of the rich or of the poor, or
of those of any and every condition and character among us,
with the hope of converting them to Christ and attaching them to

61

Page 61
the communion of our Church, we need not expect much success
without great zeal and diligence, such as was put forth in our first
efforts for its resuscitation. Our State is not one of those whose
population is rapidly increasing, in which flourishing villages are
springing up in every direction calling for neat churches to fill up
the measure of their beauty and excellency, and where the support
of the ministry is sure, so that our Zion must needs lengthen
her cords and strengthen her stakes. Very different is it with us
now, has it been for many years, and will it in all probability be
for many years to come. It is only by patient perseverance in
well-doing that we can hope to make advances in the establishment
of our Church. Much self-denial and enduring of hardship
and abounding in labours and itinerant zeal and contentedness
with a little of this world's goods, on the part of many of our
ministers, are indispensable to the growth of the Church in Virginia
much beyond her present attainment. Without these things
she may, except in the towns, continue stationary, or even retrograde
in some places, during years to come.

To the foregoing I only add that in the summer of 1829 I
was consecrated Assistant Bishop of Virginia, and continued to
perform the duties of that office until, by the death of Bishop
Moore, in 1841, I succeeded to the place which he occupied.
During all that time, I can with truth say that not the slightest
circumstance ever occurred to interrupt for a moment a most harmonious
and pleasant relation between us. Bishop Johns was
consecrated Assistant Bishop in the fall of 1842; and I can as
truly say that thus far the same harmony has existed, and I feel
confident that it will exist until death or some other circumstance
shall dissolve the connection. Such is the extent of the Diocese,
and such was the difficulty of traversing it, that, for the first
twelve or thirteen years, I was engaged in visitation during eight
months of each year, travelling over large portions of it on horseback,
or in an open one-horse carriage. During the latter period,
six months suffice for such duties as devolved upon me, and these
could not possibly be performed but for the greatly-improved
modes of conveyance. I need not add, what is so well known,
that they are most imperfectly performed.

 
[11]

A circumstance occurred at this Convention worthy of being mentioned, as
showing the effrontery of an unworthy clergyman, even at that day. One such,
from New York, came to Virginia a few years before this, and excited considerable
attention by his eloquence in Richmond, Norfolk, and elsewhere. He soon settled
himself in the vacant church at Fredericksburg, and collected crowds by his pulpit-powers.
After a while rumours came that he had left his first and true wife in New
York, and that the one with him was unlawfully married to him. This he solemnly
denied in the pulpit, and in a letter to the vestry. The thing being to a certain extent
proved upon him during the week, he was obliged to admit it as publicly the
following Sabbath and in a letter to the vestry. He shortly after left Fredericksburg,
(which was soon supplied with another from the same State, who also turned
out badly,) and went to one of the lower counties of Virginia, where he was too
well received and preferred to the incumbent who had the glebe, but was an intemperate
man. He was encouraged to go to the Convention, and see if there was no
method by which the incumbent might be ejected and himself be substituted. On
coming to Richmond, an interview took place between himself and one of the clergy,
in which he was told that if possible he himself would be brought before the Convention,
for his violation of the laws of God and man. Enraged by this, he raised
his stick, and, shaking it over the head of the clergyman, bid him beware how he
proceeded. He afterward, however, sought another interview with the same clergyman,
to whom, in the presence of a third, he acknowledged his transgression.
He was told that he ought, at any rate, to abandon the ministry. He disappeared
that night, and soon after died. He had by his first wife a son of considerable
talents who was attached to the stage. By the grace of God he was led to exchange
the stage for the pulpit, and, in the providence of God, was led to prepare for the
ministry in my house, and became an acceptable and useful minister in the large
congregation at Norfolk.


62

Page 62

ARTICLE III.

The Parish of James City.

I now enter upon the Parish of James City—the landing-place
of our first forefathers—the seat of the first civil and religious establishment
on the shores of North America. It dates its beginning
about two hundred and fifty years ago. But it found a place
in the hearts of pious and philanthropic men at a still earlier
period, and we must go back to that period with our preparatory
remarks. We are greatly mistaken, if we suppose that the missionary
spirit, after slumbering from the early ages, was aroused
to life and action only within the last hundred years. Instances
may be shown, in which Kings and Queens of our mother-country
and Church, moved to it by the pious zeal of Bishops and other
ministers, have commanded, that together with the sword and artillery
of war, and the implements of commerce and husbandry, the
sword of the Spirit and the trumpet of the Gospel should be sent,
with armies and navies and colonists, to the uncivilized nations of
the earth. I confine my references to what the religious principle
has done in behalf of the Colony of Virginia.

The domestic troubles of the English State and Church, the
controversies with Romanists, Puritans, and other disaffected bodies,
delayed and hindered any great schemes for Christian colonization
and missionary enterprise, just as civil wars prevent foreign aggressions
and conquests. To the Rev. Richard Hakluyt the chief
praise is due, for stirring up the minds of Christian statesmen and
people to the duty of finding out barbarous countries, in order to
their conversion to the Christian faith. To his friend, Sir Philip
Sydney, he dedicates his first collection of voyages and discoveries,
in 1570. In 1587, he republishes Peter Martyr's history of the
New World, with a preface, dedicating it to Sir Walter Raleigh,
together with another work on Florida, in which he urges him to
persevere in the good work he had begun in Virginia.[16] In both of
them he urges Sir Walter to prosecute the work from the only true


63

Page 63
motive and design, the extension of Christ's religion,—"The glorie
of God, and the saving of the soules of the poor and blinded
infidels." The numerous volumes collected and published by this
laborious and zealous man on this subject have come down to our
day, and are a most valuable depository of missionary information.
After holding various preferments, he settled down as Prebendary
of Westminster, and continued till his death, in 1616, to watch over
the infant Colony of Virginia. The honour of being buried in
Westminster Abbey was conferred on this man of a large soul. It
deserves to be mentioned, that he not only by his pen and the
press urged on the Christian colonization of Virginia, but sought
and obtained the honour of being one of those to whom Virginia
was consigned, by letters-patent from King James, that he might
the more effectually labour for her welfare. To his exertions the
expeditions in 1603, and again in 1605, may in a great measure be
ascribed. The language used by the King, in the terms of the
patent for Virginia, in 1606, shows also the religious character of
the movement. One design was, that "so noble a work may, by
the Providence of God, hereafter tend to the glorie of his divine
majestie, in propagating of Christian religion to such people as sit
in darkness and miserable ignorance of the true knowledge and
worship of God, and may in time bring the infidels and savages
(living in those parts) to human civility and quiet government."
Another evidence of the operation of the religious feeling in those
who first engaged in the settlement of Virginia may be seen in
what one writes, who went out with Weymouth in 1605, in regard
to a proposal of some of the natives, that "the company would
push their discoveries further." It was declined, he says, on this
ground:—"We would not hazard so hopefull a businesse as this
was, either for our private or particular ends, being more regardful
of a public goode, and promulgating God's holy Church, by planting
Christianity, which was the interest of our adventurers as well
as ours."[17]

In the following year, December, 1606, the first little colony
came to Virginia, bringing with it the first minister of James City,
the Rev. Robert Hunt. Mr. Wingfield, the first President of the
Colony, gives the following account of his appointment:—"For
my first worke, which was to make right choice of a spiritual pastor,


64

Page 64
I appeal to my Lord of Canterbury,—his grace,—who gave me
very gracious audience in my request. And the world knoweth
whom I took with me, truely a man, in my opinion, not any waie
to be touched with the rebellious humour of a papist spirit, nor
blemished with the least suspicion of a factious schismatic." In a
narrative, kept by Stukeley and others, it is written, "On the 19th
of December, 1606, we set sail from Blackwell, but by unprosperous
winds were kept six weeks in sight of England; all which
time Mr. Hunt, our preacher, was so weake and sicke that few expected
his recovery. Yet allthough we were but twenty miles from
his habitation, (the time we were in the Downes,) and notwithstanding
the stormy weather, nor the scandalous speeches of some few,
little better than atheists, of the greatest rank among us, suggested
against him, all this could never force from him so much as a
seeming desire to leave the businesse, but preferred the service of
God, in so good a voyage, before any affection to contest with his
godless foes, whose disastrous designs, could they have prevailed,
had even then overthrown the businesse, so many discontents did
there arise, had he not only with the water of patience and his
godly exhortations, but chiefly by his devoted example, quenched
those flames of envy and dissention."[18] It is very certain, that
notwithstanding the piety which prompted the expedition, and the
devotion of Mr. Hunt and some others who embarked in that
vessel, there was a considerable proportion of most unworthy
materials on board, as shown by their opposition to Hunt and Captain
Smith, two men who seemed to know no fear, but that of God.
The future conduct of the larger portion of the Colonists, after
their arrival, too well established this fact. The company in England
appears to have apprehended something of this, from their
instructions, in which they say to the Colonists at their departure,
that "the way to prosper and have success was to make themselves
all of one mind, for their own and their country's good; and to
serve and fear God, the giver of all goodness, since every plantation
which he did not plant would certainly be rooted out." Although
Captain Smith was appointed one of the Council of the

65

Page 65
Company, a violent opposition was made to his having a seat
on their arrival. "Many," it is said in the narrative already
quoted, "were the mischiefs which daily sprung from their ignorant
yet ambitious spirits; but the good doctrine and exhortation of
our preacher, Mr. Hunt, reconciled them, and caused Captain
Smith to be admitted of the Council." The next day, the Holy
Communion was, for the first time, administered in Virginia. The
number composing the first congregation at Jamestown was one
hundred and four or five. "A circumstance," says the Rev. Mr.
Anderson, author of three most laborious and interesting volumes
on the Colonial Churches, "is mentioned in President Wingfield's
manuscript, which I cannot find recorded elsewhere, which shows,
in a very remarkable manner, the careful and pious reverence manifested
by the Colonists for the due celebration of Christ's holy
ordinance, in their sad extremity." He says that when "the common
store of oil, sack, vinegar, and aqua-vitæ, were all spent,
saving two gallons of each, the sack was reserved for the communion-table."[19]


66

Page 66

In proof of the religious character of Captain Smith, as a part
of the history of James City Parish, I quote the following account
of the first place of worship in the same, in a pamphlet published
in 1631, by Mr. Smith, some years after his History of Virginia,
and entitled, "Advertisements for the unexperienced planters of
New England, or elsewhere, &c." To the Rev. Mr. Anderson's
labours we are indebted for the revival of this pamphlet.

"Now, because I have spoken so much for the body, give me leave to
say somewhat of the soul; and the rather, because I have been demanded
by so many, how we began to preach the Gospel in Virginia, and by what
authority, what churches we had, our order of service, and maintenance
for our ministers; therefore I think it not amiss to satisfie their demands,
it being the mother of all our Plantations, entreating pride to spare
laughter, to understand her simple beginnings and proceedings. When
I went first to Virginia, I well remember, we did hang an awning (which
is an old sail) to three or four trees, to shadow us from the sun; our walls
were rails of wood, our seats unhewed trees, till we cut planks, our pulpit
a bar of wood nailed to two neighbouring trees; in foul weather we shifted
into an old rotten tent, for we had few better, and this came by way of
adventure for new. This was our church, till we built a homely thing
like a barn, set upon crotchetts, covered with rafts, sedge, and earth, so
was also the walls. The best of our houses were of the like curiosity, but
the most part far much worse workmanship, that could neither well defend
wind nor rain, yet we had daily Common Prayer morning and evening,
every Sunday two sermons, and every three months the holy communion,
till our minister died, (the Rev. Mr. Hunt.) But (after that) our prayers
daily with an homily on Sundays, we continued two or three years after,
till more preachers came, and surely God did most mercifully hear us, till
the continual inundations of mistaking directions, factions, and numbers
of unprovided libertines near consumed us all, as the Israelites in the wilderness."
"Notwithstanding, (he says,) out of the relicks of our mercies,
time and experience had brought that country to a great happiness, had
they not so much doated on their Tobacco, on whose fumish foundation
there is small stability."[20]

Of the piety of Captain Smith we have further evidence, in the
account given of the survey of Virginia, when he and his valiant
comrades fell into so many perils among the Indians. "Our order
was daily to have prayer with a psalm, at which solemnity the poor
savages much wondered." On Smith's return to Jamestown, notwithstanding
all former opposition, such were his merits and such
its difficulties, that the Council elected him President of the Colony;


67

Page 67
and the first thing done was to repair the church, which,
during his absence among the Indians, had, with other houses,
been destroyed by fire. Characteristic, and evincive of piety in
him, is the statement of it:—"Now the building of the palace was
stayed as a thing needless, and the church was repaired."

In what year the first minister, Mr. Hunt, died, is not now
known, but that there was a vacancy for some years is declared in
the foregoing passage from Captain Smith's last pamphlet. The
next was the Rev. Mr. Bucke, who came over with Lord De la
War, in the year 1610. The many disasters which had befallen
the first emigrants to Virginia, so far from discouraging either the
statesmen or the Christians in England, and causing them to abandon
the enterprise, only stirred them up to more active exertion.
In the year 1609, a new company, called the London Company,
was formed, and a new charter, with a larger territory and more
privileges, was granted. Twenty-one of the peers, including a
number of the bishops, and many of the first clergy and merchants
of the kingdom, were among those who are mentioned in
the charter. Mr. Edwin Sandys, the pupil of Hooker, the two
brothers John and Nicholas Ferrar, one of them a pious divine, and
both of them most active members of the board which managed
the concerns of the company, are worthy of special mention. That
a spirit of true piety to God and love for the souls of the heathen
burned in the breasts of many of the members of the company,
cannot be questioned. It is evident from the selection of the Governor,
who was a man of sincere piety; and had his health been
continued, so as to allow of a longer residence in America, much
might have been expected from his example and zeal. The spirit
which predominated in the company may also be seen in the minister
chosen for the new expedition, the Rev. Mr. Bucke, a worthy
successor to Mr. Hunt, and from the sermons preached at their
embarkation. Two of them were published, and are still extant.
One of them, the first ever preached in England on such an occasion,
was by the Rev. Mr. Crashaw, preacher at the Temple.
"Remember," he says, "that the end of this voyage is the destruction
of the devil's kingdom, and the propagation of the Gospel."
After upbraiding those who were anxious for acquiring
wealth by voyages, but indifferent to this, he says, "But tell them
of planting a church, of saving ten thousand souls, and they are
senseless as stones; they stir no more than if men spoke to them
of toys and trifles; they laugh in their sleeves at the silliness of
such as engage themselves in such matters." To Lord De la War


68

Page 68
himself, who was present, he speaks as follows:—"And thou, most
noble Lord, whom God hath stirred up to neglect the pleasures of
England, and, with Abraham, to go from thy country and forsake
thy kindred and thy father's house, to go to a land which God will
show thee, give me leave to speak the truth. Thy ancestor many
hundred years ago gained great honour to thy house, but by this
action thou augmentest it. He took a king prisoner in the field of
his own land, but by the godly managing of this business thou
shalt take the Devil prisoner in open field and in his own kingdom;
nay, the Gospel which thou carriest with thee shall bind him in
chains, and his angels in stronger fetters than iron, and execute
upon them the judgment that is written; yea, it shall lead captivity
captive, and redeem the souls of men from bondage, and
thus thy glory and the honour of thy house is more at the last
than at the first. Go forward therefore in the strength of the
Lord, and make mention of his righteousness only. Looke principally
to religion. You go to commend it to the heathen: then
practise it yourself; make the name of Christ honourable, not
hateful unto them." Another sermon was preached at White
Chapel, London, in the presence of many honourable, worshipful
adventurers and planters for Virginia. At its close he says, "If
it be God's purpose that the Gospel shall be preached through the
world for a witness, then ought ministers to be careful and willing
to spread it abroad, in such good services as this that is intended.
Sure it is a great shame to us of the ministry, that can be better
content to set and rest us here idle, than undergoe so good a worke.
Our pretence of zeal is clear discovered to be but hypocrisy, when
we rather choose to mind unprofitable questions at home, than
gaining souls abroad." From the above we shall see that the true
missionary spirit, and missionary sermons and addresses to those
about to embark on some foreign work, are not peculiar to our day,
though, blessed be God, they are increased among us. For some
cause, which need not now be dwelt upon, Lord De la War did not
sail until the following year, though Mr. Bucke went over sooner,
in a vessel with Sir Thomas Gates and Sir George Summers. On
reaching there, after having been wrecked themselves, and long
detained at the Bermuda Islands, they found the Colony in a most
deplorable condition, the greater part having been cut off by the
Indians, and the remainder almost in a state of starvation.[21] On

69

Page 69
landing, the first place visited by Gates was the ruined and unfrequented
church. "He caused the bell to be rung, and such as
were able to crawl out of their miserable dwellings repaired thither,
that they might join in the zealous and sorrowful prayer of their
faithful minister, who pleaded in that solemn hour for his afflicted
brethren and himself, before the Lord their God." After a few
days, the provisions being nearly out, the whole Colony embarked
for Newfoundland, "none dropping a tear, because none had enjoyed
one day of happiness." "When this departure of Sir Thomas
Gates, full sore against his heart, was put in execution," says
Mr. Crashaw, "and every man aboard, their ordnance and armour
buried, and not an English soul left in Jamestown, and giving, by
their peal of shot, their last and woeful farewell to that pleasant
land, were now with sorrowful hearts going down the river,—behold
the hand of Heaven from above, at the very instant, sent in
the Right Honourable De la War to meet them at the river's
mouth, with provision and comforts of all kind, who, if he had
staid but two tydes longer, had come into Virginia and not found
one Englishman." They all now returned to Jamestown. On
landing, Lord De la War, before showing any token or performing
any act of authority, fell down upon his knees, as Paul upon the
sea-shore, and in presence of all the people made a long and silent
prayer to himself. After which he arose, and, going in procession
to the church, heard a sermon by the Rev. Mr. Bucke; at the close
of which he displayed his credentials to the congregation, and addressed
them in a few words of admonition and encouragement.
The author from whom the above statement is taken, and who was
Secretary and Recorder of the Colony, (Strachy, who wrote a
narrative of all the proceedings of the same,) gives us the following
sketch of the church, which he says the Governor had given order
at once to be repaired:—

"It is in length threescore foot, in breadth twenty-four, and shall have
chancel in it of cedar, a communion-table of black walnut, and all the


70

Page 70
pews of cedar, with fair broad windows, to shut and open, (as the weather
shall occasion,) of the same wood, a pulpit of the same, with a Font
hewn below, like a canoe, with two bells at the west end. It is so caste,
as it be very light within, and the Lord-Governor and Captain-General
doth cause it to be kept passing sweet, and trimmed up with divers flowers,
with a sexton belonging to it; and in it every Sunday we have sermons
twice a day, and every Thursday a sermon, having true preachers, which
take their weekly turns; and every morning, at the ringing of the bell
about ten o'clock, each man addresseth himself to prayers, and so at four
o'clock before supper.[22] Every Sunday, when the Lord-Governor and
Captain-General goeth to Church, he is accompanied by all the counsellors,
captains, other officers, and all the gentlemen, with a guard of Halberdiers
in his Lordship's livery, (fair red cloakes,) to the number of fifty,
on each side, and behind him. His Lordship hath his seat in the Quoir,
in a great velvet chair, with a cloth, with a velvet cushion spread before
him, on which he kneeleth, and on each side sit the council, captains, and
officers, each in their place, and when he returneth home again, he is
waited on to his house in the same manner."

In the foregoing, it is said that there were true preachers, who
took their weekly turns, which shows that there were more than
the Rev. Mr. Bucke in the Colony at this time; and we do read
of a most venerable old man, by the name of Glover, who came
over with Sir Thomas Gates, upon his second return to Virginia,
and who was doubtless one of the true preachers (perhaps it
should read two) spoken of above. In the account of the decorations
of the church under Lord De la War, and the pomp and circumstance
of his own attendance at church, the reader will not
fail to perceive some of the peculiarities of the Laudian school.
That school was not very far off, in our Mother-Church, at this
time. Some of those concerned in promoting and preparing this
expedition of Lord De la War were, I doubt not, somewhat
inclined to it. The secretary, Strachy, who has given this
account, was, it is believed, the person who had much to do in
drawing up the code of "Laws, moral, martial, and divine," which
is so much tinctured with Romish and martial discipline, and
which has ever been the reproach of the Church and State of Virginia,
though its penalties were so seldom enforced, and the worst
of them were soon abolished. One, at least, of those excellent
men, "the Ferrars," was somewhat inclined to a monkish religion.
This, however, is the only instance in which such decorations and
pomp are mentioned in the history of Virginia. Only a few years
after this, the Rev. Mr. Whittaker speaks of the simplicity of our


71

Page 71
worship and liberality of our discipline in the following words:—
"But I much more muse, that so few of our English ministers
that were so hot against the surplice and subscription come
hither, where neither of them are spoken of."

Having alluded to the Ferrars, the two brothers, as zealous and
active friends of the Colony, and especially labouring for its
religious condition, it is due not only to them, but to the whole
family, to add a few more words. The father was a wealthy
merchant in London, and a promoter of all the good works in
which the sons were engaged. The mother was also like-minded.
The two sons, John and Nicholas, were highly-educated and
talented men, labouring zealously, as members of the London
Company, until it was dissolved by the tyranny and covetousness
of King James, by a kind of Star Chamber operation, in the year
1624, the year before his death. John, the elder, then entered
into the House of Commons, and sought to promote the best
interests of the Colony in that place. Nicholas, after debating
the question whether he should remove to Virginia and seek her
welfare here on the spot, or devote himself to the ministry at
home, determined on the latter. In the words of Mr. Anderson,
who duly appreciated his worth, I make the following
statement:—

"In 1626, Ferrar was ordained by Laud, then Bishop of St. David's.
From that period, to the time of his death, which took place in 1637, he
gave himself up to those duties, with an ardour and steadfastness of devotion
which the world has never seen surpassed. It forms no part of the
present history, to relate the particulars of the economy which he then
established in his house, and in the church; still less can it be required
to enter into any explanation of the personal austerities exercised by
himself and the members of his family—austerities not exceeded, as his
biographer justly observes, by the severest orders of monastic institutions.
It is clear that such rigorous observances were not required by that
branch of the Church Catholic of which Ferrar was an ordained minister,
and the exaction of them on his part may, therefore, have justly been disapproved
of by many who loved and shared the piety which prompted
them. There is reason also to think that his own life was shortened by
the hardships of fast and vigil which he endured."

As it is well known that such a type of personal religion is
often accompanied by an excessive regard to the ceremonial, the
pomp and show of public worship, decoration of churches, &c.,
we may thus account for the fact that Lord De la War, who may
have sympathized with the rising school of Laud, in England,
introduced some parade, which had never been before, and, as we


72

Page 72
believe, never was afterward seen in the Colony. In connection
with this, we add that when George Herbert, a brother in soul to
Nicholas Ferrar, was about to die, he sent some poems to Ferrar,
which were published, and which showed how he sympathized
with him, in his hopes from America. The two following lines
are evincive of this:—

"Religion stands tiptoe in our land,
Ready to pass to the American strand."
 
[16]

In the year 1588, Sir Walter Raleigh gave £100 for the propagation of Christianity
in Virginia.

[17]

In the instructions of the King, in 1606, it was enjoined, that "all persons
should kindly treat the savages and heathen people in these parts, and use all proper
means to draw them to the true service and knowledge of God."

[18]

The log church first erected was burned down the following winter, with many
other houses. Mr. Hunt lost all his books and every thing else but the clothes on
his back. "Yet none ever saw him repine at his loss." "Upon any alarm he was
as ready at defence as any, and till he could not speak he never ceased to his utmost
to animate us constantly to persist,—whose soul, questionless, is with God."
Captain Smith's History of Virginia.

[19]

The Rev. James S. M. Anderson, of England, one of the Queen's Chaplains,
has been for some years, with great labour and research, preparing the history of
the Colonial Churches. In a letter just received, he informs me that his third and
last volume is in print. Being consulted by him, a few years since, in relation to
the Episcopal Church of Virginia, and receiving his first two volumes, a channel
has been established through which I obtain information, on some points, only to
be gotten by those who have access to old documents in England. The manuscript
of Wingfield, the first President of the Colony, from which some of the foregoing
extracts are taken, has been discovered by his careful research. I shall be indebted
to his volumes for many passages concerning the early history of the Church of
Virginia. To our worthy fellow-citizens, Mr. Conway Robinson, of Richmond, and
Mr. Charles Campbell, of Petersburg, both of whom are imbued with a large share
of antiquarian spirit, I am already indebted for some documents which will be of
much service to me in the preparation of these notices. Mr. Robinson visited England
a few years since, mainly, I believe, on this errand, and the first acquaintance
he formed was with the Rev. Mr. Anderson. Mr. Robinson not only sought out
and copied some things of interest in the civil and religious history of Virginia,
but established a channel through which much else may be procured, which would
help to accomplish a work much needed in Virginia, viz.: a full history of the Colony
and State from the beginning, consisting of the most important parts of those
numerous documents, some of which have never been published, and others lie
scattered through old volumes in England and America, but which are inaccessible
to numbers whose patriotic and Virginian feelings would delight to read them.
Such a work should be executed under the patronage of the State, as an accompaniment
to Henning's Statutes at Large, which is at present our best history, in
connection with the brief one by Mr. Campbell. If such a lover of antiquities and
so laborious a workman as Mr. Robinson were appointed to this duty, and furnished
with sufficient means, and would undertake it, a great desideratum would be
supplied to all true Virginians and the lovers of history everywhere through the
land.

[20]

Of the many evils to Church and State, resulting from the culture and use of
tobacco, we have some account to give before we close these pages.

[21]

When Captain Smith left the Colony, driven away by ill-usage, there were five
hundred persons in it. When Lord De la War reached it, six months after, there
were only sixty remaining, in a most wretched condition, famine and the natives having
destroyed the rest. It was always afterward called "the starving-time." Truly
was it said of this Colony at this and other periods, that "it grew up in misery."
One of the historians of that day, Dr. Simons, assures us, that "so great was our
famine, that a salvage (savage or Indian) we slew and buried, the poorer sort took
him up again and eat him, and so did divers one another, boiled and stewed with
roots and herbs. And one of the rest did kill his wife, powdered her, and had eaten
part of her before it was known, for which he was executed, as he well deserved."

[22]

They were then all living together, in one small place, with little work to do.


73

Page 73

ARTICLE IV.

The Parish of James City.—No. 2.

As it is an important object with the writer to furnish proofs
of the benevolent and religious spirit which actuated the friends
and patrons of the Colony, before proceeding with our narrative
we invite the attention of the reader to the two following documents.
The first was written in the year 1612, and may be found
in a pamphlet entitled "The New Life of Virginia," and shows the
spirit of the author toward the Indians.

"And for the poor Indians, what shall I say? but God, that hath many
ways showed mercy to you, make you show mercy to them and theirs, and
howsoever they may seem unto you so intolerably wicked and rooted in
mischief that they cannot be moved, yet consider rightly and be not discouraged.
They are no worse than the nature of Gentiles, and even of
those Gentiles so heinously decyphered by St. Paul, to be full of wickedness,
haters of God, doers of wrong, such as could never be appeased, and yet
himself did live to see that by the fruits of his own labours many thousands
even of them became true believing Christians, and of whose race
and offspring consisteth (well-near) the whole Church of God at this day.
This is the work that we first intended, and have published to the world,
to be chief in our thoughts, to bring those Infidel people from the worship
of Devils to the service of God. And this is the knot that you must
untie or cut asunder, before you can conquer those sundrie impediments
that will surely hinder all other proceedings, if this be not first preferred.

"Take their children and train them up with gentleness, teach them
our English tongue and the principles of religion. Win the elder sort
by wisdom and discretion; make them equal to you English in case of
protection, wealth, and habitation, doing justice on such as shall do them
wrong. Weapons of war are needful, I grant, but for defence only,
and only in this case. If you seek to gain this victory upon them by
stratagems of war, you shall utterly lose it, and never come near it, but
shall make your names odious to all their posterity. Instead of iron and
steel, you must have patience and humanity, to manage their crooked
nature to your form of civility; for as our proverb is, `Look, how you
win them so you must wear them:' if by way of peace and gentleness,
then shall you always bring them in love to youwards, and in peace with
your English people, and, by proceeding in that way, shall open the
springs of earthly benefits to them both, and of safety to yourselves."


74

Page 74

The following extracts are from "A Prayer for the Morning
and Evening Use of the Watch or Guard, to be offered up either
by the Captain himself, or some one of his principal men or
officers." It was probably prepared by Mr. Crashaw, and sent
out with Mr. Whittaker. It furnishes a just view of the religion
of that day,—at any rate, of those who were engaged in this enterprise.
It is also a fair specimen of the theology and devotion
of the English Reformers. While it is in faithful keeping with
the prayers of our Common Prayer Book, it shows that our forefathers
did not object to, but freely used, other prayers besides
those in the Prayer Book. The reader is requested not to pass
over it, but to read it in a prayerful spirit:—

"Merciful Father, and Lord of Heaven and Earth, we come before
thy presence to worship thee, in calling upon thy name, and giving
thanks unto thee. And though our duties and our very necessities call
us hereunto, yet we confess our hearts to be so dull and untoward, that
unless thou be merciful to us to teach us how to pray, we shall not please
thee, nor profit ourselves in these duties.

"We, therefore, most humbly beseech thee to raise up our hearts with
thy good Spirit, and so to dispose us to prayer, that with true fervour of
heart, feeling of our wants, humbleness of mind, and faith in thy gracious
promises, we may present our suits acceptably unto thee by our Lord and
Saviour Jesus Christ.

"And now, O blessed Lord, we are desirous to come unto thee, how
wretched soever in ourselves; yea, our very wretchedness sends us unto
thee, with whom the fatherless and he that hath no helper findeth mercy.
We come to thee in thy Son's name, not daring to come in our own.
In his name that cares for us we come to thee, in his mediation whom
thou hast sent. In him, O Father, in whom thou hast professed thyself
to be well pleased, we come unto thee, and do most humbly beseech thee
to pity us, and to save us for thy mercies' sake in him.

"O Lord, our God, our sins have not outbidden that blood of thy
Holy Son which speaks for our pardon, nor can they be so infinite as thou
art in thy mercies; and our hearts, O God! (thou seest them,) our
hearts are desirous to have peace with thee, and war with our lusts, and
wish that they could melt before thee, and be dissolved into godly
mourning, for all that filth that hath gone through them and defiled
them.

"O Lord! O Lord our God! thou hast dearly bought us for thine
own self: give us so honest hearts as may be glad to yield the possession
of thine own, and be thou so gracious, as yet to take them up, though we
have desperately held thee out of them in time past; and dwell in us and
reign in us by thy Spirit, that we may be sure to reign with thee in thy
glorious kingdom, according to thy promise, through him that hath purchased
that inheritance for all that trust in him.

"And now, O Lord of mercy! O Father of the spirits of all flesh!
look in mercy upon the Gentiles who yet know thee not! And seeing
thou hast honoured us to choose us out to bear thy name unto the Gentiles,


75

Page 75
we therefore beseech thee to bless us, and this our plantation, which
we and our nation have begun in thy fear, and for thy glory. We know,
O Lord! we have the Devil and all the gates of Hell against us; but
if thou, O Lord, be on our side, we care not who be against us! Oh,
therefore vouchsafe to be our God, and let us be a part and portion of thy
people; confirm thy covenant of grace and mercy with us, which thou
hast made to thy Church in Christ Jesus. And seeing, Lord, the highest
end of our plantation here is to set up the standard and display the banner
of Jesus Christ even here where Satan's throne is, Lord, let our labour
be blessed in labouring for the conversion of the heathen. And because
thou usest not to work such mighty works by unholy means, Lord, sanctify
our spirits, and give us holy hearts, that so we may be thy instruments
in this most glorious work.

"And whereas we have, by undertaking this plantation, undergone the
reproofs of this base world, insomuch as many of our own brethren
laugh us to scorn, O Lord, we pray thee fortify us against this temptation!

"And seeing this work must needs expose us to many miseries and dangers
of soul and body by land and sea, O Lord! we earnestly beseech thee
to receive us into thy favour and protection, defend us from the delusions
of the Devil, the malice of the heathen, the invasions of our enemies,
and mutinies and dissensions of our own people. Knit our hearts altogether
in faith and fear of thee, and love one to another; give us patience,
wisdom, and constancy to go on through all difficulties and temptations,
till this blessed work be accomplished for the honour of thy name and
glory of the gospel of Jesus Christ!

"And here, O Lord! we do upon the knees of our hearts offer thee
the sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving for that thou hast moved our hearts
to undertake the performance of this blessed work with the hazard of our
person, and hast moved the hearts of so many hundreds of our nation to
assist it with means and provision, and with their holy prayers. Lord,
look mercifully upon them all, and for that portion of their substance
which they willingly offer for thy honour and service in this action, recompense
it to them and theirs, and reward it sevenfold into their bosoms,
with better blessings. Lord, bless England, our sweet native country!
save it from Popery, this land from heathenism, and both from Atheism.
And, Lord, hear their prayers for us, and us for them, and Christ Jesus,
our glorious Mediator, for us all. Amen!"

We now proceed with the history.

The services of Lord De la War were of short duration, being
obliged to return to England early in 1611, by reason of ill
health. Before his arrival in England, the Council had sent Sir
Thomas Dale, giving him the title of High-Marshal of Virginia,
with a fresh supply of men and provisions, and with the Rev.
Alexander Whittaker, between whom and Sir Thomas there
appears to have ever been a strong attachment. They remained
together at Jamestown until the arrival of Sir Thomas Gates, in
the same year, with full powers as Governor, when Sir Thomas
Dale, the High-Marshal, by agreement with the Governor, went


76

Page 76
higher up the river, with Mr. Whittaker and three hundred and
fifty men, to establish two new positions,—one of them called
New Bermuda, in what is now Chesterfield county, in the angle
formed by James River and the Appomattox, and which afterward
assumed and still retains the name of Bermuda Hundred;
the other was five or six miles higher up, on the opposite side of
the river, on what was called Farrar's Island, though it was, as
Jamestown, only a peninsula. This was called Henrico City. In
both of them churches were built, and small villages established,
and Mr. Whittaker was the minister of both, alternately residing
at each of them. As these were the first establishments after
Jamestown, and are intimately connected in their history with
that of Jamestown, the governors sometimes residing at Bermuda,
we shall unite them together in our notices, until the destruction
of Henrico in the great massacre of 1622. The Rev. Alexander
Whittaker was the son of that eminent theologian of Cambridge
who took part in drawing up the Lambeth Articles in the year
1595, and was, as his various writings show, one of the first theologians
and controversialists of his day. He was the friend and
companion of Hooker, and sympathized with him in his doctrinal
views. The son, Alexander Whittaker, was a graduate of Cambridge,
and had been for some years a minister in the North of
England, beloved and well supported by his people, with a handsome
inheritance from his parents. Crashaw says, "that having,
after many distractions and combats with himself, (according to
his own acknowledgment,) settled his resolution that God called
him to Virginia, and therefore he would go, he accordingly made
it good, notwithstanding the earnest dissuasions of some of his
nearest friends, and the great discouragements which he daily
heard of, touching the business and country itself." Again, says
the same, "He, without any persuasion but God and his own
heart, did voluntarily leave his warm nest, and, to the wonder of
his kindred and amazement of them that knew him, undertook
this hard, but, in my judgment, heroical resolution to go to Virginia,
and help to bear the name of God to the Gentiles. Men
may muse at it, some may laugh, and others wonder at it; but
well I know the reason. God will be glorified in his own works,
and what he hath determined to do, he will find means to bring it
to pass. For the perfecting of this blessed work he hath stirred up
able and worthy men to undertake the manning and managing of
it." Mr. Whittaker had given himself to this work for three
years, but at the end of that time, instead of returning to England,

77

Page 77
as too many of the governors and other officers did, being
weary of their banishment, he preached a sermon and sent it
over to England, exhorting others to come over to his help, and
declaring his intention to live and die in the work here. His text
is, "Cast thy bread upon the waters, and thou shalt find it after
many days." Pleading for the nations, he says, "Wherefore, my
brethren, put on the bowels of compassion, and let the lamentable
estate of these miserables enter into your consideration. One God
created us. They have reasonable souls and intellectual faculties
as well as we. We all have Adam for our common parent; yea,
by nature the condition of us both is all one, the servants of sin
and slaves of the Devil. Oh, remember, I beseech you, what was
the state of England before the Gospel was preached in our
country." The whole sermon is full of such passages. In the
year 1614, after having spent three years at Bermuda Hundred
and Henrico, Sir Thomas Dale now removed to Jamestown, and,
as Mr. Anderson affirms, Whittaker returned with him to that
place. If so, he must, either before or after Sir Thomas's
return to England in 1616, have gone back again to his old congregations,
for, in the year 1617, Governor Argal, who succeeded
Sir Thomas Dale, writes to the Council, from Bermuda Hundred,
begging that a minister may be sent there, as Mr. Whittaker was
drowned, and Mr. Wickham was unable to administer the sacraments.
From this, it is probable that Mr. Wickham had been his
curate, in deacons' orders. I am aware that there is a letter
ascribed to a Rev. Mr. Stockam, and said to be dedicated to Mr.
Whittaker, at a later period. But this letter of the Governor,
declaring his death by drowning, would seem to be of higher
authority. Within the period of which we have been discoursing,
and during the ministry of Mr. Whittaker and the office of Dale
as High-Marshal, there occurred some things in the Colony
which deserve to be considered,—viz.: the conversion of Pocahontas
to the Christian faith, her baptism, and marriage to John
Rolph. The places of her residence, and of her baptism and marriage,
have been matter of discussion, and are not unworthy of notice.
As to the place of her birth and residence, there ought to be no
doubt. Her father, the great King Powhatan, lived chiefly on
York River, on the Gloucester side, some miles above York.
Here, or at a place higher up, it was that Captain Smith was
brought captive, and that Pocahontas saved his life. From one
of these places, she occasionally visited Jamestown, and there
doubtless became acquainted with Rolph, a young man of good

78

Page 78
family and education from England, between whom and herself an
attachment was formed. In the year 1612, Captain Argal, afterwards
Governor for a short time, went up the Potomac River in
quest of provisions, and finding, accidentally, that Pocahontas was
there, artfully contrived to get her on board of his vessel, and
carried her prisoner to Jamestown, in order by that means to get
back from her father some of our men and arms, and implements
of husbandry which he had, from time to time, stolen from the
Colony. But he did not succeed in the effort. At this time, Sir
Thomas Dale and Mr. Whittaker were up the river, engaged in
their duties at Henrico and Bermuda Hundred. It is most probable
that Pocahontas was carried up the river to Sir Thomas
and Mr. Whittaker, as being a more distant place, and one of
greater safety, since her father might have attempted her rescue,
or she her escape from Jamestown, the place being so much nearer
to Powhatan's residence. Certain it is that, in the following year,
Sir Thomas himself went on the same errand, up York River,—
then called Charles River,—in a vessel, and succeeded in getting
the prisoners and property from Powhatan. He took Pocahontas
with him, and got her brothers to come on board and see her.
She did not now wish to return to her father, (for she was engaged
to Mr. Rolph,) and she did not go on shore to see him, as he
might have forced her to stay. Sir Thomas, however, on leaving,
caused the fact of her engagement to be made known to her
father, who was quite pleased, and, in ten days, sent over his old
uncle, Opachisco, and two of his sons, to bear his consent, and be
present at the marriage. It is, therefore, altogether probable
that the marriage took place at Jamestown, where Sir Thomas
would stop to deliver to Governor Gates an account of the success
of his expedition. From thence, they no doubt returned to
Henrico, which was their residence until they went to England,
with Governor Dale, in 1616. This I think to be the true
account, from an examination of all the documents on the subject.
As to the question whether her baptism was before or after marriage,
there are some conflicting testimonies. Mr. Stith, in his
History of Virginia, says,—

"All this while, Sir Thomas Dale, Mr. Whittaker, minister of Bermuda
Hundred, and Mr. Rolph, her husband, were very careful and
assiduous in instructing Pocahontas in the Christian religion; and she,
on her part, expressed an eager desire and showed great capacity for
learning. After she had been tutored for some time, she openly
renounced the idolatry of her country, confessed the faith of Christ, and



No Page Number


No Page Number
illustration

BAPTISM OF POCAHONTAS.


79

Page 79
was baptized by the name of Rebecca. But her real name, it seems,
was originally Matoax, which the Indians carefully concealed from the
English, and changed it to Pocahontas, out of a superstitious fear, lest
they, by a knowledge of her true name, should be enabled to do her
some hurt. She was the first Christian Indian in these parts, and
perhaps the sincerest and most worthy that has ever been since. And
now she has no manner of desire to return to her father; neither could
she well endure the brutish manners or society of her own nation. Her
affection for her husband was extremely constant and true; and he, on
the other hand, underwent great torment and pain, out of his violent
passion and tender solicitude for her."

From the foregoing, we would infer that her marriage preceded
her baptism. On what authority Mr. Stith (who wrote his work
in 1746) relied, I know not, but the following testimony from Sir
Thomas Dale, in 1614, is certainly to be preferred. In a letter to
the Bishop of London, dated June 18, 1614, he thus writes:—

"Powhatan's daughter I caused to be carefully instructed in the Christian
religion, who, after she had made some good progress therein, renounced
publicly her country's idolatry, openly confessed her Christian faith, was,
as she desired, baptized, and is since married to an English gentleman of
good understanding, (as by his letter unto me, containing the reasons of
his marriage of her, you may perceive,) another knot to bind this peace
the stronger. Her father and friends gave approbation to it, and her
uncle gave her to him in the Church. She lives civilly and lovingly
with him, and I trust will increase in goodness, as the knowledge of God
increaseth in her. She will go into England with me; and, were it
but the gaining of this one soul, I will think my time, toil, and present
stay well spent."

According to this communication to the Bishop of London, Sir
Thomas Dale, whose return to England was delayed beyond his
wishes or expectation, did, in the year 1616, carry with him Mr.
Rolph and his wife. Her son, Thomas Rolph, was born while she
was in England. On her return, she suddenly died, at Gravesend.
The husband returned to this country, being made Recorder and
Secretary to the Colony. The son, after being educated in England
by his uncle, Henry Rolph, returned to America, and lived at Henrico,
where his parents had formerly lived, and afterward became
a person of fortune and distinction in the Colony.[23]


80

Page 80

Concerning the reception and behaviour of Pocahontas in
London, I shall only give the account which Purchas, the celebrated
compiler of the many treatises called "Purchas's Pilgrims,"
has handed down to us:—

"She did not only accustom herself to civilitie, but still carried herself
as the daughter of a King, and was accordingly respected, not only
by the company, (London Company,) which allowed provision for herself
and son; but of divers particular persons of honour, in their hopeful zeal
by her to advance Christianity. I was present when my honourable and
reverend patron, the Lord-Bishop of London, Dr. King, entertained her
with festival, and state, and pomp, beyond what I have seen in his great
hospitalitie afforded to other ladies. At her return towards Virginia, she
came to Gravesend, to her end and grave, having given great demonstration
of her Christian sincerity, as the first fruits of Virginian conversions,
leaving here a godly memory and the hopes of her resurrection,
her soul aspiring to see and enjoy presently in Heaven what here she
had joyed to hear and believe of her beloved Saviour."

 
[23]

"He left behind him an only daughter, who was married to Colonel Robert
Bolling, by whom she left an only son, Major John Bolling, who was the father
of Colonel John Bolling, and of several daughters, one of whom married Colonel
Richard Randolph, another Colonel Fleming, a third Dr. William Gay, a fourth
Mr. Thomas Eldridge, and the last Mr. James Murray." To this statement of
Stith, one of the family has furnished me with the following addition:—"The son
of Pocahontas, Thomas Rolph, married a Miss Poythress. Their grandson, John
Bolling, married a Miss Kennon, whose son John married a Miss Blair, of Williamsburg,
while Richard Randolph, of Curls, fourth in descent from Pocahontas,
married Miss Ann Meade, sister of Colonel R. K. Meade. Their daughter married
Mr. William Bolling, of Bolling Hall, Goochland county, each of them being fifth
in descent from Pocahontas."


81

Page 81

ARTICLE V.

The Parish of James City.—No. 3.

The history of Rolph and Pocahontas is so identified with that
of Virginia, and with the Church of Virginia, that it deserves more
than a passing notice. The account usually given of it is too
often considered as an interesting and highly-exaggerated romance,
though founded on the fact of the first marriage of an Englishman
with an Indian. From an accurate examination of all the early
statements concerning the two persons, and the circumstances of
their marriage, we are persuaded that there is as little of romance
or exaggeration about it as can well be. On the part of Pocahontas,
she was the daughter of the noblest and most powerful of
the native kings of North America, who by his superior wisdom
and talents had established his authority over all the tribes from
James River to the Potomac, from Kiquotan or Hampton to the
falls of James River, or what is now Richmond, with the exception
of that on the Chickohomini. We read of two of his sons, and
another of his daughters, who also rose superior to the rest of their
race. Of one of the sons, Nantaquaus, Captain Smith says that
he was "the most manliest, comeliest, boldest spirit I ever saw in
a savage," and of his sister, Pocahontas, that she had "a compassionate
pitiful heart." The other daughter Sir Thomas Dale endeavoured
without success to obtain, with a view to another alliance
with some English gentleman. But Pocahontas was acknowledged
by all to be cast in one of the first of nature's moulds, both as to
person and character. She was declared to be the "nonpareil"
of Captain Smith and his associates. Nor is it wonderful. At
the age of twelve or thirteen, after using all her powers of persuasion
to obtain the release of Captain Smith, and to save him from
the sentence of death, but in vain,—when his head was laid upon
the stone, and her father's huge club was uplifted by his arm, and
ready to fall on the head of the prisoner, she threw herself upon
him, laying her head on his, and folding her arms around him,
thus moving the heart of her father, and, as Smith himself declared
to the Queen, "hazarding the beating out of her own brains instead
of mine." After this, her interest in Smith and the Colony


82

Page 82
was displayed in frequent visits to it. "Jamestown with her wild
train (of attendants) she as frequently visited as her father's habitation,"
says Smith, in a letter to the Queen, and often, by her
timely warnings saved the Colony from destruction. On one occasion,
when Smith and a number with him were in most imminent danger,
she came along through the woods some miles, outstripping those
who were seeking their destruction: "the dark night (he says in
the same letter) could not affright her, but, coming through the irksome
woods, with watered eyes gave me intelligence." "She was,"
he adds, "the first Christian of that nation; the first who ever
spake English, or had a child in marriage." Her meeting with
Smith also, in London, was very characteristic. It was unexpected
by her, for she had been told that he was dead some years before.
She was in the circle of the great when Smith came into her presence,
and he thought it prudent and right to address her with
more ceremony and state than formerly in America, out of respect
to those around. This distressed her much, and she resented it,
and upbraided him with not calling her his child, as he did in
America, and allowing her to call him father, as she used to do;
nor could he convince her to the contrary, she declaring that she
would call him father. In relation to Mr. Rolph, there can be no
doubt that he had conceived a strong affection for her, on account
of her person, and deeply-interesting qualities, which affection was
fully returned. There is extant a long and most affecting letter
from Mr. Rolph to Sir Thomas Dale, declaring his wish and deter
mination to marry her, assigning his reasons, describing his feelings,
and asking the Governor's approbation. He seems to have
been much concerned and troubled in mind on the subject, and
calls God to witness the purity of his motives, and how deeply his
conscience had been engaged in the decision, and that not until
much suffering had been endured was the determination made.[24]

83

Page 83
The letter can only be understood by considering the character and
position of Mr. Rolph. Here was a young Englishman, of family,
education, and reputation, about to engage himself to an Indian
girl, of a different and despised colour, of different manners, uneducated,
of a hated nation, not one of whom had ever yet been
married to one of the meanest of the Colonists; his children, and
children's children, to be regarded as an inferior race, his own prospects
in life as to preferment all blasted, himself, perhaps, to be a
byword and proverb. Such, doubtless, were his feelings when
penning this letter.

"For still the world prevail'd, and its dread laugh,
Which scarce the firm philosopher can scorn."

Principle, religious principle, as well as pure love of female excellence,
prevailed and was rewarded. Not only did Sir Thomas
Dale approve and encourage the alliance, but, after writing home
most favourably of it, carried them with him to England, where
they were most honourably received. It is said that King James
was even a little jealous of them, lest, on returning to America,
they might think, by right of inheritance from Powhatan, (a far
nobler monarch than himself,) to establish themselves in rule over
his Virginia territory. This was only one of the vain thoughts
which found a seat in that weak and conceited monarch's mind.
Nothing but good resulted from the union, and much more than is
seen or acknowledged may have resulted. Instead of a race of
despised semi-savages being the issue of this union, Mr. Burk, the
historian of Virginia, after giving the names of some of his descendants,
which have been already recorded, adds:—"so that this
remnant of the imperial family of Virginia, which long ran in a
single person, is now increased and branched out into a very numerous
progeny. The virtues of mildness and humanity, so eminently
distinguished in Pocahontas, remain in the nature of an inheritance
to her posterity. There is scarcely a scion from this stock which
has not been in the highest degree amiable and respectable." He
also adds, "that he is acquainted with several members of this
family, who are intelligent and even eloquent, and, if fortune keep
pace with their merits, should not despair of attaining a conspicuous
and even exalted station in the Commonwealth." This was
written in the year 1804, when Mr. Randolph of Roanoke, one
of the descendants of Pocahontas, was just entering upon public
life.

We are now approaching a deeply-interesting, eventful, and decisive


84

Page 84
period in the history of the Colony. Until about the year
1616, when Sir Thomas Dale returned to England, Jamestown,
Henrico, and Bermuda Hundred formed nearly all of the Colony;
and at that time it is probable that Mr. Bucke, at Jamestown, and
Mr. Whittaker, with his curate, Wickham, were the only ministers
of the Colony. During the three following years, infant settlements,
planted by Sir Thomas Dale on James River, and others,
by his successors, Argal and Yeardley, began to increase, and assume
the forms of villages, called Hundreds, and several new ministers
came over. We ascertain the names of Stockam, Meare,
Hargrave, and Scale. In the year 1619, Yeardley, having visited
Europe, returned with new instructions and enlarged authority.
He was directed to convene the first legislative body ever held in
Virginia. Eleven boroughs sent delegates, called Burgesses, to it.
Mr. Bucke was still the minister at Jamestown, and opened the
meeting with solemn prayers in the choir of the church, the Governor
sitting in his accustomed place, the Councillors on each side
of him, and the Burgesses around; after which they all went
into the body of the church, and proceeded with the work of legislation.
The laws, martial, moral, and divine, were now superseded
by some of a different character. The Church of England was
more formally established than it ever had been before.[25] Now all
things began to assume a more regular and promising aspect.
More especially was the attention of the Company in London and
of pious friends in England directed to the cause of education in
the Colony. Many years before this, King James had, through
the Archbishop of Canterbury, called upon the Bishops and clergy
of England to take up collections for a University in Virginia, for
the benefit of both natives and Colonists, and the sum of £1500
had been raised for the purpose. Now an influx of charity poured
in upon Virginia, especially for this object. I have before me a
paper, copied from an English record, containing a list of the following
donations, during the years 1619-20-21:—"Mrs. Mary
Robinson, for a church in Virginia, £200. An unknown person,
£20 for communion-service, and other things for the same. A
person unknown, £30, for the College communion-service, &c. A

85

Page 85
person with the signature of Dust and Ashes sent £550, in gold,
to Sir Edward Sandys, for the instruction of the natives in religion
and civility. Nicholas Ferrar, £330 for the same, and £24 annually.
An unknown person, £10 for the Colony. For a free
school in Virginia, by persons returning from the East Indies, to
be called the East India School, £70. Ditto for the same, by an
unknown person, £30. Ditto by a person unknown, £25. Ditto
a Bible, Prayer Book, and other books worth £10." The Rev.
Mr. Hargrave also gave his library. The place selected for the
College was Henrico City, before mentioned as settled by Sir Thomas
Dale and Mr. Whittaker, on the north side of James River,
about fifteen miles below Richmond. Not less than 15,000 acres
of land were given as College lands, and for purposes connected
with the Church and College, between the settlement and Richmond,
by the Company in England. The East India School was
to be established at Charles City,—a place somewhere in what is
now the county of Charles City, and probably not far from Henrico
City. The Rev. Mr. Copland, chaplain of the East India
Company, who had proposed the East India School in Virginia
and contributed liberally to it, was appointed by the Company to
be President of the College, and general manager of all its property.
The East India School, in Charles City, was to be a preparatory
one to the College. On the 13th of April, 1622, the
Rev. Mr. Copland was requested by the Company to deliver a
thanksgiving sermon, in London, for all the late mercies of God to
the Colony, and for the bright prospects before them; but in about
one month before that time, on the 22d of March, those prospects
had been blasted by one of the most unexpected and direful calamities
which had ever befallen the Colony. Since the marriage of
Pocahontas all had been peace with the natives. The Colonists
had settled themselves in various places along James River, from
Kiquotan (Hampton) to Henrico, fearing no evil, although the
dreadful massacre which then ensued had been secretly resolved
upon for some years. On one and the same day the attack was
made on every place. Jamestown, and some few points near to it,
alone escaped, having received warning of the intended attack
just in time to prepare for defence. Besides the destruction of
houses by fire, between three and four hundred persons were put
to death in the most cruel manner. Such was the effect of this
assault, both in Virginia and in England, that a commission was
sent over to the Governor, Sir George Yeardley, to seek for a settlement
on the Eastern Shore of Virginia for those who remained.

86

Page 86
That plan, however, was never put in execution, though steps were
taken toward it. The hopes of the best friends of the Colony,
and of the natives, were now overwhelmed. This, added to all
preceding conflicts with the natives, and the continual defence required
before the marriage of Pocahontas, produced a change in
the feelings and language of many toward the natives, which we
should scarce credit if the records of the same were not too well
authenticated. In unison with the feelings of the English, Captain
Smith, who was still alive and in England, offered himself as
the commander of a company of young and valiant soldiers, to be
a standing army in Virginia, going in among the tribes, inflicting
vengeance for the past, and driving them out of their possessions
to some place so distant from our people as to render them harmless.
The Company itself, hitherto so strong in its injunction of
mild measures and the use of means for the conversion of the Indians,
now says, "We condemn their bodies, the saving of whose
souls we have so zealously affected. Root them out from being
any longer a people,—so cursed a nation, ungrateful for all benefits
and incapable of all goodness,—or remove them so far as to be
out of danger or fear. War perpetually, without peace or truce.
Yet spare the young for servants. Starve them by destroying
their corn, or reaping it for your own use. Pluck up their weirs,
(fishing-traps.) Obstruct their hunting. Employ foreign enemies
against them at so much a head. Keep a band of your own men
continually upon them, to be paid by the Colony, which is to have
half of their captives and plunder. He that takes any of their chiefs
to be doubly rewarded. He that takes Opochancono (the chief
and brother of old Powhatan, who was now dead) shall have a
great and singular reward." At a somewhat later period, either
an order in council or a law was passed, that "the Indians being
irreconcilable enemies, every commander, on the least molestation,
to fall upon them."

It may perhaps seem to some, that in giving such details of massacre
and revenge I am departing from that line of ecclesiastical
notices hitherto pursued. A few words will, I hope, suffice for my
justification, and show that I have a sufficient reason for it. In the first
fifteen years of the Colony, it must be admitted that, so far as
the few ministers who belonged to it, and a good proportion of the
laity taking part in it, are concerned, there is as large a share of
the true missionary spirit in its conduct as is anywhere to be found,
not excepting any missionary movements since apostolic days and
men. But this massacre, following others which had taken place,


87

Page 87
and the little success attending the conversion of the natives in
this country, or in England, whither some had been sent for Christian
instruction, produced a sad revolution in public feeling. The
missionary effort was considered as a failure; the conversion, or
even civilization, of the Indian, was regarded as hopeless. The
Company began, and probably continued, to appropriate £500 annually
to the support of such men as Hunt, Bucke, Clover, Whittaker,
and other religious purposes; but that Company was, in the
year 1624, dissolved by the covetous and tyrannical act of James.
Where now are to be found the considerations sufficient to move
other such devoted missionaries to fill up the ranks made vacant
by their death? The Indians were now objects of dread, of hate,
of persecution. A sentiment and declaration is ascribed to one of
the last of the ministers who came over, "that the only way to
convert the Indians was to cut the throats of their chief men and
priests." It must also be acknowledged that the experience of
two hundred and fifty years has proved that the North American
Indian is the most unlikely subject for conversion to our religion
of all the savage tribes on whom the missionary has bestowed his
labour. Cowper may have poured out his soul of piety and poetry
over some instance of conversion among them:—

"The wretch that once sang wildly, laugh'd and danced,
Has wept a silent flood; reversed his ways;
Is sober, meek, benevolent, and prays;
Feeds sparingly, communicates his store;
And he that stole has learn'd to steal no more."

But how many of such have there been? Pocahontas, at the end
of seven or eight years, was perhaps the only trophy of the missionary
labours of the Virginia Colony. In forming a judgment,
therefore, of our Mother-Church, in regard to the ministers sent
forth by, or issuing from her, from the time of this great failure, we
must inquire into the arguments by which her clergy could henceforth
be urged to come over to this Macedonia. The only persons
who could be brought under their pastoral care in Virginia were
now the same kind of rich and poor who abounded so much more
in the country they would leave, and these were placed under the
greatest imaginable difficulties of access,—scattered at great distances
from each other, and along the margins of wide rivers,
with scarce a village, or village church, to be seen. To the present
day, how great the impediment this to the full trial of the Gospel
ministry! As to the salaries and residences of ministers, we shall


88

Page 88
hereafter show that the former were most scanty and precarious,
and the latter uncomfortable. For a long time, all things were
most unfavourable for usefulness as well as comfort. Let us suppose
that the present missionaries to China and Africa were sent
merely to minister to the English and Americans scattered through
those lands, no opening whatever being had to the natives, and,
moreover, that, besides much and painful travelling through dark
forests, they were most meagrely supplied with the means of subsistence,
with clothing, and homes, so that scarce any of them
could venture to assume the relation of husbands and fathers; can
we suppose that such men as those we now send out as missionaries
would be ready to engage in the work, when there are so many
stations at home furnishing larger opportunities of usefulness? Let
us not, therefore, be surprised, if, in subsequent notices, we should
find an inferior order of men supplying the churches of Virginia,
Nor let any denomination of Christians boast itself over the
Church of Virginia, since, under similar circumstances, it might
not have done better.

 
[24]

The Rev. Peter Fontaine, in a letter to his brother in England, in which he
advocates intermarriage with the Indians as a means of their civilization and Christianization,
says, "But this, our wise politicians at home put an effectual stop to at
the beginning of our settlement here, for when they heard that Rolph had married
Pocahontas, it was deliberated in Council whether he had not committed high treason
by so doing, that is, marrying an Indian princess; and had not some troubles
intervened, which put a stop to the enquiry, the poor man might have been hanged
up for doing the most just, the most natural, the most generous and politic action,
that ever was done on this side of the water. This put an effectual stop to all
intermarriages afterwards." From whence Mr. Fontaine got this tradition I know
not. Col. Byrd, in his Westover Manuscripts, advocates the same mode of converting
and civilizing the natives as did his minister, Mr. Fontaine.

[25]

Mr. Henning, in his Statutes at Large, and all other writers on the early history
of Virginia, have declared that no account of the acts of this first Assembly has
been preserved; but Mr. Conway Robinson, in his researches among the public
offices in England, during his late visit to that country, has discovered an old manuscript,
of thirty or forty pages, being a journal or report of its proceedings.


89

Page 89

ARTICLE VI.

The Parish of James City.—No. 4.

Having brought the history of James City parish, in its connection
with the few others then in existence, to the time of the
great massacre, with some thoughts on its effects, I briefly allude
to two events, occurring soon after, and calculated to concur with
it in having an injurious influence over the future welfare of the
Colony. While the Company and the Governors were endeavouring
to improve the condition of the Colony, by selecting a hundred
young females, of good character, to be wives to the labourers on
the farms in Virginia, King James had determined to make of the
Colony a Botany Bay for the wretched convicts in England, and
ordered one hundred to be sent over. The Company remonstrated,
but in vain. A large portion, if not all of them, were actually
sent. The influence of this must have been pernicious. Whether
it was continued by his successors, and how long, and to what extent,
I know not. Shortly after this, a Dutch vessel brought into
Jamestown the first cargo of negro slaves which was ever cast on
the shores of America. While we must acknowledge that "the
earth is the Lord's, and all that therein is;" that he has a right,
and will exercise it, to pull down one kingdom and raise up another,
to dispossess the Indians of their territories and give them to
the white men and the negroes for their possession; while we must
acknowledge that the advantage of the African trade, notwithstanding
the cruelties accompanying it, has been on the side of
that people, both temporally and spiritually; yet can we never be
brought to believe that the introduction into and the multiplication
of slaves in Virginia have advanced either her religious, political,
or agricultural interests. On the contrary, we are confident that
it has injured all. But if our loss has redounded to the benefit of
Africa, by affording religious advantages to numbers of her benighted
sons, who, in the providence of God, have come hither,
and especially if it should be the means, by colonization and missionary
enterprise, of establishing Christianity in that dark habitation
of cruelty, we must bow submissively to the will of Heaven,
and allow many of our sister States, with far less advantages of


90

Page 90
soil, climate, and navigation, to outstrip us in numbers, wealth, and
political power.[26]


91

Page 91

That an unfavourable turn had taken place in the affairs of the
Church of Virginia, by reason of the massacre and other circumstances,


92

Page 92
although the temporal condition of the Colony and the
numbers of Colonists soon began greatly to increase, is evident
from various acts of the Assembly, and from letters to and from
England, which show the difficulty of procuring such ministers as
those who first came into the Colony. Laws now seem to be required
to keep the ministers from cards, dice, drinking, and such
like things; and even to constrain them to preach and administer
the communion as often as was proper,—yea, even to visit the sick
and dying. It is true, the inducements as to earthly comforts,
which might help to bring over respectable ministers, were very
small. The Assembly, by various preambles and acts, declares
that without better provision for them it was not to be expected
that sufficient, learned, pious, and diligent ministers could be obtained,
and admits that some of a contrary character did come
over, while there were not enough of any kind to do the work
required. From that time, until the close of the Colonial establishment,
Governors, Commissaries, and private individuals, in
their communications with the Bishops of London and the Archbishops
of Canterbury, all declare that such was the scanty and
uncertain support of the clergy, the precarious tenure by which
livings were held, that but few of the clergy could support families,
and therefore respectable ladies would not marry them. Hence
the immense number of unmarried, ever-shifting clergymen in the
Colony.

With these general remarks, we proceed with the special history
of James City parish. It was not until the year 1634 that it could
fairly be considered a parish. The settlements were for some time
called Plantations, Hundreds, Congregations, &c.; but in 1634,
part of the State was divided into eight shires, as in England.
They were James City, Henrico, Charles City, Elizabeth City,
Warwick River, Warrosquijoake, Charles River, and Accawmac.
Of these, all lay between York and James Rivers, and east of
James City, except Henrico, Charles City, Accawmac, the latter
being then all of what is now the Eastern Shore of Virginia. But
in James City shire or county, a number of small parishes were at
an early period established, for the convenience of the people, as
Martin's Hundred, Chiskiake, Chippoax, Lane's Creek, and Harrop
parish, which in time were lost in James City parish, York
Hampton, and Bruton parishes. The first minister of James
City parish of whom we read, after Mr. Bucke, was the Rev.
Thomas Hampton, in 1644, of whom we know nothing but the
name, as no vestry-book or other document remains to tell who, if


93

Page 93
any, intervened between him and Mr. Bucke. Nor have we, for a
long time after, any name of a minister of that parish; but an
event occurred in the year 1675 or '76, by which the church and
city, and probably all the church-records, were destroyed, which
deserves to be mentioned.[27]

BACON'S REBELLION.

Jamestown having been the most prominent theatre of Bacon's
rebellion, and the greatest sufferer thereby,—the place being destroyed
by fire,—it becomes us to take some brief notice of it.
Writers on the subject trace the beginnings of this movement to
an enterprise against the Indians by Colonel Mason and Captain
Brent, of Stafford county, in 1675, who, on some cruel murder
committed by the former, collected troops and followed them
over into Maryland, putting great numbers to death, bringing
a young son of one of their kings or chiefs back a prisoner.[28]
These wars with the Indians continuing to harass those who lived
on the frontiers and in the interior, while the Governor and those
living at or around Jamestown were quite secure, the former began
to complain that they were not protected, and that they must follow
the example of Mason and Brent, and take care of themselves.
Among the dissatisfied was Bacon, a man of family, talents, courage,
and ambition. After applying in vain to Sir William Berkeley
for a commission to raise men for the purpose of assailing the
Indians, he, urged by his own genius and the wishes of others,
collected a considerable troop and spread terror around him,
destroying a number of the hostile natives. The Governor proclaimed
him a rebel, but the people sent him back to the House of
Burgesses, and the Governor thought it expedient even to admit
him into the Council, where he had been before. But it did not end
here. Bacon again raised a troop and sallied forth against the


94

Page 94
Indians. Again the Governor pronounced him a rebel, and raised
an army to subdue him and his followers. But Bacon, with an
inferior force, besieged Jamestown, drove out the Governor and his
men, and, lest he should regain this stronghold, burnt city, church,
and all to the ground. The Governor had twice to seek refuge on
the Eastern Shore. Whether Bacon's rebellion was a lawful one
or not, I leave civilians to decide. Sir William Berkeley certainly
gained no credit to himself, either for his military talents, or his
truth, or humanity, for, in spite of all his assurances to the contrary,
and the express orders of the King, he did, after the sudden
decease of Bacon, put to death a number of his followers. For
this, and other high-handed acts, his memory is not dear to the
lovers of freedom.

Although a new and better church, whose tower still remains,
was built at Jamestown, yet the city never recovered from this
blow. The middle Plantation, or Williamsburg, was already beginning
to rival it, and by the beginning of the next century the
seat of government was removed to Williamsburg, where the College,
State-House, and Governor's palace quite eclipsed any thing
which had ever been seen at Jamestown. The Governor's house,
at Green Spring, which Sir William Berkeley built, a few miles off,
answered for a time in place of the State-House at Jamestown;
the Council and Burgh holding their meetings there.

Proceeding now with the succession of ministers in Jamestown,
we have been unable to ascertain any other until the Rev. James
Blair, the Commissary, who came to this country in 1685, and settled
in Henrico, whence, after remaining until 1694, he removed
to Jamestown, and remained until 1710, preaching there, and at a
church eight miles off, in the adjacent parish, and then moved to
Williamsburg. Who succeeded him, and who ministered there
until the year 1722, I know not. In that year the Rev. William
Le Neve took charge of it. He reports to the Bishop of London,
in the year 1724, that the parish is twenty miles long, twelve wide,
has seventy-eight families in it, and usually twenty or thirty communicants.
He also preached every third Sunday at Mulberry
Island parish church, lower down the river, where he had double
the number of communicants, and a larger congregation. The
congregation at Jamestown must have been small. There never
was but one church in it; and that was not a large one. The seventy-eight
families must have been the whole flock of James City parish
at this time. The salary of James City parish was only £60.


95

Page 95
The minister received £30 for preaching at Mulberry Island, and
£20 for lecturing in Williamsburg on Sunday afternoons. In the
year 1758, we find the Rev. Mr. Berkeley the minister. In the
year 1772, the Rev. John Hyde Saunders was ordained for this
parish by the Bishop of London. In the year 1785, the Rev.
James Madison, afterward Bishop of Virginia, became its minister,
and continued so until his death in 1812, long before which the
congregation had dwindled into almost nothing,—the church on the
Island having sunk into ruins, and the little remnant of Episcopalians
meeting at a brick church a few miles from the island, on the
road from it to Williamsburg. That has also entirely disappeared.
A young friend of mine, who was in Williamsburg about the year
1810, informed me that, being desirous of hearing the oratory of
Bishop Madison, he had once or twice gone out on a Sabbath
morning to this church, but that the required number for a sermon
was not there, though it was a very small one, and so he was disappointed.
It might be expected that I should in this place say
something about Bishop Madison, in addition to what may be found
in my first article of Reminiscences of Virginia; but, though I
have endeavoured to procure some of his papers for this purpose,
I have thus far been disappointed. I can only say that in the
year 1775 he was ordained deacon and priest by the Bishop of
London. In the year 1774 he became Professor in the College of
William and Mary, in the year 1777, President of the College,
and in the year 1790 was consecrated Bishop of Virginia. His
addresses to the Convention breathe a spirit of zealous piety, and
his recommendations are sensible and practical. Although agreeing
in political principles with those who were foremost in the
State for the sale of Church property and the withholding from
her and other Societies any corporate privileges, he steadily and
perseveringly, though ineffectually, resisted their efforts. I again
repeat my conviction that the reports as to his abandonment of
the Christian faith in his latter years are groundless; although it
is to be feared that the failure of the Church in his hands, and
which at that time might have failed in any hands, his secular and
philosophical pursuits, had much abated the spirit with which he
entered upon the ministry.

The old church at Jamestown is no longer to be seen, except
the base of its ruined tower. A few tombstones, with the names
of the Amblers and Jaquelines, the chief owners of the island for
a long time, and the Lees, of Green Spring, (the residence and property,
at one time, of Sir William Berkeley,) a few miles from


96

Page 96
Jamestown, still mark the spot where so many were interred
during the earlier years of the Colony. Some of the sacred vessels
are yet to be seen, either in private hands or public temples
of religion. The first I would mention are a large silver chalice
and paten, with the inscription on each,—

"Ex Dono Jacobi Morrison Armigeri, A.D. 1661."

Also a silver alms-basin, with the inscription, "For the use of
James City Parish Church." When the church at Jamestown
had fallen into ruin and the parish ceased to exist, probably at
the death of Bishop Madison, these vessels were taken under the
charge of the vestry in Williamsburg. During the presidency of
Dr. Wilmer over the College, and his pastorship of the church in
Williamsburg, in the year 1827, they were placed in the hands of
the Rev. John Grammer, to be used in the church or churches
under his care, on condition of their being restored to the parish
of James City, should it ever be revived. In the year 1854, Mr.
Grammer thought it best to surrender it into the hands of the
Episcopal Convention, with the request that it be deposited for
safe-keeping in the Library of the Theological Seminary of Virginia,
where it now is. The second is a silver plate, being part
of a communion-service presented to the church at Jamestown,
by Edmund Andros, in the year 1694, he being then Governor.
The history of this is singular. In one of our Southern towns,
about twelve years since, a gentleman, wishing something from a
jeweller's shop, was directed by the owners of it to look into a
drawer for the thing wanted, in which drawer was kept old silver
purchased for the purpose of being worked up again. This piece
of plate was noticed, being much bent and battered. It was purchased,
and, being restored to its original shape, was discovered to
be what we have stated; this appearing from the Latin inscription
upon it. This also has been presented to the Church of Virginia.
The third and last of the pieces of church furniture—which is
now in use in one of our congregations—is a silver vase, a font for
baptism, which was presented to the Jamestown Church, in 1733,
by Martha Jaqueline, widow of Edward Jaqueline, and their son
Edward. In the year 1785, when the act of Assembly ordered
the sale of Church property, it reserved that which was possessed
by right of private donation. Under this clause, it was given
into the hands of the late Mr. John Ambler, his grandson. The
following lines in relation to it are from the pen of Mr. Edward
Jaqueline's grand-daughter, the late Mrs. Edward Carrington, of


97

Page 97
Richmond. They have been furnished by one of her descendants,
and I take pleasure in placing them on record:—

"Dear sacred vase! do I indeed behold
This holy relic of my church and sire,
Not basely barter'd, or profanely sold,
But pure and perfect, still preserved entire?
"No sordid act could change thy sacred use,
No impious tongue condemn a gift so rare,
While plate and chalice felt the dire abuse,
That echoes loud in heaven's offended ear.
"But thou, most precious vase, remain'st the same,
Still waiting to perform the donor's will;
And, when to men thou giv'st the Christian's name,
Come thou, O God, and grace divine instil!"

I have also been permitted to make use of the papers of this
excellent lady in presenting some sketches of the members of her
family who were in connection with the old church at Jamestown.
Nor can I do this without first making a brief reference
to herself. Mrs. Carrington was a sincere and pious member of
our Church in Richmond, from the beginning of its resuscitation
in 1812,—how much longer I know not. Being infirm, from the
time of our first Conventions, she was unable to attend public
worship, but was not ashamed to convert her house into a place
of prayer and exhortation, inviting her neighbours and friends to
assemble there. Some pleasant and edifying meetings have I
been privileged to attend and participate in, under her roof,
during the last years of her pilgrimage on earth. The paper from
which I extract the following was drawn up in the year 1785, on a
visit to one of the Amblers, at a residence called the "Cottage,"
in Hanover county, Virginia, and where were the portraits of the
older members of the family:—

"The first was Edward Jaqueline, who was descended in a right line
from one of those unfortunate banished Huguenots whose zeal in the
good Protestant cause has made their history so remarkable. He was of
French extraction, and, from his buckram suit and antique periwig,
(alluding to his portrait on the wall,) must have arrived in this country
in its early settlement. The costume of the young ladies and gentlemen
bespoke more modern fashion; amongst whom (and she was the youngest)
stood my highly-respected aunt Martha, who, I well remember, told me
she was born in the year 1711. She died at the age of ninety-three.
From her I learned that the old gentleman, Edward Jaqueline, her father,
settled in Jamestown, on his first arrival in this country, where his tombstone
still remains; that he married in the Carey family, in Warrick
county; that he had three sons and three daughters; that the daughters


98

Page 98
only survived him; that the eldest of these, Elizabeth, married our
grandfather, Richard Ambler, a respectable merchant in Yorktown; that
the second, Mary, married John Smith, of Westmoreland, from whom
have descended our kinsfolks John and Edward Smith, of Frederick
county. The third was our dear aunt, Martha Jaqueline, who choose to
take upon herself the title of Mrs. at the age of fifty, this being the custom
with spinsters in England at that day. Richard Ambler was an honest
Yorkshireman, who settled, as we have said, as a merchant in Yorktown,
and married Elizabeth Jaqueline, and thus inherited the ancient seat in
Jamestown, which was thus transmitted through several generations,
being enlarged in size until the whole island came into the possession of
the late John Ambler, of Richmond. Mr. Richard Ambler had a number
of children, only four of whom reached maturity,—Edward, John, Mary,
and Jaqueline, the latter of whom, after being educated in Philadelphia,
entered into business with his father in Yorktown, and married
Rebecca Burwell, daughter of Lewis Burwell, and niece of President
Nelson, who, having no daughter, took charge of her, she being
left an orphan at ten years of age. Jaqueline Ambler and Rebecca his
wife were the parents of Eliza, who married Mr. William Brent, of
Stafford, and, at his death, Colonel Edward Carrington, of Cumberland.[29]

99

Page 99
Mary married John Marshall;[30] Anne, George Fisher; and Lucy, Daniel
Call.

From the papers of Mrs. Carrington I take the following concerning
the religious character of her mother:—

"Often, when a child, have I listened to my mother's account of her
early devotion to her Maker: heard her describe how, at the age of
thirteen, deprived of earthly parents, she, with pious resignation, turned
her heart to God, and, in the midst of a large family, sought a retired
spot in the garret, where she erected a little altar at which to worship.
There, with her collection of sacred books, she gave her earliest and latest
hours to God. Her character, in the opinion of her giddy companions,
was stamped with enthusiasm. But who would not wish to be such an
enthusiast? In after-years she made it her meat and drink to do the
will of God, and never, in one instance, do I recollect her to have shrunk
from it. Her whole life was a continued series of practical Christian


100

Page 100
duty, and her example can never be effaced from the hearts of those who
knew her."

Mrs. Carrington also speaks, in like manner, of her father, Mr.
Jaqueline Ambler:—

"His saintlike image is too deeply impressed to need any picture of
mine to recall him to our remembrance. I find a complete portrait of
him drawn by the inimitable Cowper:—

" `He is the happy man whose life e'en now
Shows somewhat of that happier life to come.' "

Speaking of the piety of both of her parents, she says,—

"We boast not that we deduce our birth
From loins enthroned, or rulers of the earth;
But higher far our high pretensions rise,—
Children of parents pass'd into the skies."

Her aged aunt Jaqueline had assured her that piety distinguished
her father from early youth. She herself had experienced the
fruits of it in his assiduous care of herself and sisters. Her mother
being in very bad health, her father, though much engaged in
the duties of his office, (collector of the King's customs at York,)
devoted all his spare hours to the education of herself and her
sister, (afterward Mrs. Marshall,) then only five or six years of age.
The copies for writing were always written by himself, in a fair
hand, containing some moral or religious sentiment, but defective
in grammar, that they might correct them; and so of other branches.
The advantages they possessed were superior to any enjoyed in
those days, when there were no boarding-schools and all that was
taught "was reading and writing, at twenty shillings a year and
a load of wood." Mrs. Carrington informs us that "the government
exercised by her father was by some thought to be too severe,
for the rod, at that time, was an instrument never to be dispensed
with, and our dear father used it most conscientiously. I have
since discovered that his superior knowledge of human nature led
him to pursue the right course, (as to discipline,) and in my own
subsequent experience, in the education of children, I have found
that the present prevailing opinion, that youth may be reared and
matured by indulgence, is erroneous. I will venture to say that,
with a very few exceptions, it will be always proper to observe a
well-regulated discipline. We often hear the observation that a
rigid parent never has an obedient child. Our experience certainly
contradicts it. Where the parent is found to unite the virtuous


101

Page 101
Christian with the conscientious disciplinarian, he will never cease
to be loved and respected. Such a father was ours, and the love
and respect we bore him has seldom been equalled." His example,
also, added weight to his precept and government. "Never did
man live in the more constant practice of religious duties. Early
and late we knew him to be in the performance of them. It was
his daily habit to spend his first and latest hours in prayer and
meditation. Every Sunday that his church was open, he was the
first to enter it, and often would he be almost a solitary male at
the table of the Lord." This, she adds, was during the war, when
the men were engaged in it, and when infidelity was spreading
through the land. The last end of this good man was, as might
be expected, one of peace. On his death-bed, when speaking of
one of his neighbours, who had gone to some distant place in
search of a home, he said, with his eyes uplifted to heaven, "I am
going to a nearer, happier home" To a female friend, who was at
his bedside when he died, he exclaimed,—

"See the New Jerusalem!
See it open'd to my eyes!"

From such ancestors, as might well be expected according to the
covenant of grace, many pious children have descended, who have
faithfully adhered to the Church of their fathers.

P.S.—Since preparing the above, I have received a fuller account
of the descendants of the first of the Jaquelines. He came
to this country from Kent, in England, in the year 1697, and, marrying
Miss Carey, of Warwick, settled at Jamestown. His daughter
Mary married one of those Smiths in Middlesex of whom we
shall make mention in our article on that parish, and two of which
family were ministers of the Church in Gloucester and Matthews.
Colonel Edward and General John Smith, of Frederick, and many
others, were the children of Mary Jaqueline and John Smith. We
have seen, in the account taken from the papers of Mrs. Carrington,
the sketch of one branch of the Amblers, that descended from Jaqueline
Ambler, who married Miss Burwell. We have only to refer
to that descended from Edward Ambler, who inherited Jamestown,
or a large portion of it. Mr. Edward Ambler married Miss Mary
Carey, daughter of Wilson Carey, the lady of whom Washington
Irving, in his life of Washington, speaks, as the one to whom General
Washington was somewhat attached. One of his sons was Mr.
John Ambler, first of Jamestown, then of Hanover, and afterward of


102

Page 102
Richmond. His first wife was a Miss Armistead, by whom he had Edward, who settled in Rappahannock, and Mary, who married
Mr. Smith. His second wife was the sister of Judge Marshall, by
whom he had one child, Major Thomas Ambler, of Fauquier. His
third wife was the widow of Mr. Hatley Norton, of England, and
daughter of Philip Bush, of Winchester, by whom he had many
sons and daughters, who are married and settled in various parts
of the State,—warm friends or members of the Church. Two of
the descendants of this branch of the family are worthy ministers
of the Church,—the Revs. Charles and Thomas Ambler.

 
[28]

Of him a circumstance is related, showing that there was not only religion in
those days, but superstition also. The boy lying for ten days in bed, as one dead,
his eyes and mouth shut but his body warm, Captain Brent, who was a Papist,
said that he was bewitched, and that he had heard baptism was a remedy for it, and
proposed the trial. Colonel Mason answered that there was no minister in many
miles. Captain Brent replied, "Your clerk, Mr. Dobson, may do that office;"
which was accordingly done by the Church of England Liturgy. Colonel Mason and
Captain Brent stood godfathers, and Mrs. Mason godmother. The end of the
story is, that the child, being eight years old, soon recovered.

[29]

Colonel Carrington, the husband of her from whose papers I make these
extracts, entered early into the army of the Revolution, and afterwards served his
country in the American Congress. He was a great favourite of Washington, and
endeared himself to Generals Green, Marion, and Sumpter, while rendering important
services in the Southern campaign, as their letters amply show.

It will not be inopportune here to introduce a passage from one of Mrs. Carrington's
letters to her sister, Mrs. Fisher, written from Mount Vernon, where she
and Colonel Carrington were on a visit, not long before General Washington's
death. I have always determined to give, in some part of these sketches, a view
of the chamber of a Virginia lady, to show that, though abounding with servants,
she is not idle; nay, that the very number of her servants creates employment.
After speaking of the hearty welcome given them by the general and his lady, and
the extension of the retiring-hour of the former from nine to twelve on one night,
when he and Colonel Carrington were lost in former days and scenes and in the
company of Pulaski and Kosciusko, she comes to Mrs. Washington, who spoke
of her days of public life, and levees, and company, as "her lost days." "Let
us repair to the old lady's room, which is precisely in the style of our good old
aunt's,—that is to say, nicely fixed for all sorts of work. On one side sits the
chambermaid, with her knitting; on the other, a little coloured pet, learning
to sew. An old, decent woman is there, with her table and shears, cutting out
the negroes' winter-clothes, while the good old lady directs them all, incessantly
knitting herself. She points out to me several pair of nice coloured stockings
and gloves she had just finished, and presents me with a pair half done, which she
begs I will finish and wear for her sake." "It is wonderful, after a life spent as
these good people have necessarily spent theirs, to see them, in retirement, assume
those domestic habits that prevail in our country." If the wife of General
Washington, having her own and his wealth at command, should thus choose to
live, how much more the wives and mothers of Virginia with moderate fortunes
and numerous children! How often have I seen, added to the above-mentioned
scenes of the chamber, the instruction of several sons and daughters going on, the
churn, the reel, and other domestic operations, all in progress at the same time,
and the mistress, too, lying on a sick-bed. There are still such to be found,
though I fear the march of refinement is carrying many beyond such good old
ways.

[30]

The papers from which I quote state that the first meeting of Captain
Marshall and his future wife was at York, where the Amblers at that time lived;
that the father of Captain Marshall—Colonel Thomas Marshall, from Fauquier—
was the commanding officer at York, and that his son, who was in the army,
came to visit him and the family there, during some months when his services
were not required in the army; that an attachment was formed, at first sight,
between him and the youngest daughter of Colonel Ambler, she being only fourteen
years of age; that Mr. Marshall endeared himself to them all, notwithstanding
his slouched hat and negligent and awkward dress, by his amiable manners,
fine talents, and especially his love for poetry, which he read to them with
deep pathos; that, during his absence from the army of a few months, he studied
law in Williamsburg, obtained a license, and returned to the army as captain; that
immediately after the war he and Miss Ambler were married, at the Cottage, in
Hanover, a seat of one of the Amblers; that after having paid the minister his fee
his fortune was only one guinea in pocket. In proof of the ardour of his character
and the tenderness of his attachment to his intended wife, Mrs. Carrington
remarks that he had often said to her "that he looked with astonishment on the
present race of lovers," so totally unlike what he had been himself. The proof
of this was seen in his persevering devotion to Mrs. Marshall during life.

That Judge Marshall should be a reader and lover of poetry may be somewhat
unexpected to many who have been accustomed to regard him only as the
able lawyer, the grave and dignified chief-justice, or the laborious historian; yet
it was nevertheless so, to a justifiable extent. His education was, from the first,
classical, under the Rev. Mr. Thompson, and was so continued, at William and
Mary College, when the first scholars presided over it. I remember once to have
heard him quote, with a playful aptitude, concerning some leading persons who
had changed their political relations, these words of old Homer,—

"Ye gods, what havoc does ambition make
'Mong all your works!"
 
[26]

I have been for the last fifty years, and more especially for the last thirty, travelling
much through the length and breadth of Virginia, making observations for
myself, conversing with intelligent farmers, politicians, ministers of the Gospel, and
other Christians, on the subject referred to above. I have been not a little over
other parts of our land, observing and conversing on the same, and I have read
much of what has been written about it. Since the publication, in another form, of the
few brief sentences referred to in this note, I have not only reconsidered them myself,
but freely conversed with many sound-minded persons concerning the views
there presented; and the result has been an increased conviction that they are correct,
and have been in times past, and still are, held by the great body of our citizens,
Christians, and statesmen. There are some who seem to advocate slavery as
though it were the only institution which is exempt from any of the evils incident
to our fallen humanity, while others can see nothing but evil about it, ignoring the
hand of a permissive Providence for good. We cannot agree with either of these
classes, and are happy to think that but few belong to them. That the agriculture
of Virginia has suffered in times past from the use of slaves we think most evident
from our deserted fields, impoverished estates, and emigrating population, by comparison
with the condition of other parts of our land less highly favoured in natural
advantages. That a great improvement has already taken place, and is still
going on, in many parts of the State, notwithstanding this system, we rejoice to
know and declare; and, even if the future should show that agriculture may be as
well conducted by slave-labour as by free, our remark is true as to the past. That
we have fallen behind in our white population, and of course in the number of our
delegates to Congress, and thus in our political power, will not be questioned. That
Virginia has been the fruitful nursery of patriots and orators and statesmen,
whether representing their own State or those to which they have emigrated, I rejoice
to believe, and I acknowledge that the institution of slavery, by affording
more leisure and opportunity to some for the attainment of the most thorough education,
has contributed to this; but that our political power as a State has been
reduced is a fact not to be denied; and that this has resulted from the preceding facts
—viz. . the wasteful agriculture and consequent emigration—must be admitted. The
effect of slavery upon our religious institutions has been a matter of remark and
lamentation by some of the earliest writers on Virginia, beginning with the first
century of her existence. They speak of the large estates cultivated by slaves,
especially along the rivers, as preventing the establishment of villages, churches,
and schools. To this day the ministers of religion deeply feel this in the distant
abodes of their members. That slavery and its attendant—a supposed disgrace
belonging to labour—has produced in many of the sons of Virginia gentlemen idleness
and dissipation, who will deny? On account of all the foregoing accompaniments
of slavery, how long did our statesmen protest against the continuance of the slave-trade,
making the "inhuman use of the royal veto" on an act prohibiting it one of
the justifying causes of the Revolution! And we all know that one of the first exercises
of our independence was the entire abolition of it. But while thus satisfied,
so far as Virginia is concerned, that slavery was attended by the above-mentioned
evils, it is our privilege, as Christians, to view the whole subject in a higher and
holier light and on a larger scale, and to be willing to suffer some loss for the sake
of the greater good which Providence, through that loss, may bestow on a benighted
portion of mankind. "The whole earth is the Lord's," and not ours. He who
drove out the Canaanites and gave their land to Israel for a possession has been
pleased to drive out the Indians from Virginia and give it to white men and to the
most amiable race of savages which I believe exists upon earth, and which is far
more ready to receive the Gospel than the ferocious Indian. Though Virginia suffered
some loss by the introduction of the Negro race, yet her advantages were, and
still are, so great that she could and can afford to lose what God chooses to take
in his own way. I trust that God will still be gracious to this race, and, when it
shall overflow the first bounds which were set for it, will provide, in sufficient abundance,
other and goodlier portions for her in our widely-extended territory. I
trust that he will give wisdom and largeness of heart, even as the sea-shore, to our
people and rulers in providing for this race, whether in bondage or in freedom. I
am no politician to discuss the question of metes and boundaries in relation to their
settlement. I do not plead for the extension of territory with any regard to the
increase of wealth or political power to their owners; but I do trust that the Lord
has a goodly and large heritage for them, in such parts of this continent as shall be
most suitable, and that our Senators and delegates may ever deliberate on this subject
in a spirit of enlarged Christian philanthropy. If there was any plan by which
their own character and condition could, by emancipation, be improved without
greater injury to their owners than good to themselves, I am sure that God in his own
time will reveal it unto us; but, all such attempts having hitherto failed, we should
legislate for their good, as people in bondage and who may long continue so. Many of
them will, I trust, go back, with something better than civil liberty, to the land of
their fathers; but many must long remain in America,—probably to the end of
time; and cruel would be the policy which should seek to restrict them to limits too
narrow for their comfort or that of their owners. Already the abundance of the
South and West is attracting them, as it does their owners, and they leave many
parts of Virginia with joy, in the hope of a milder climate, a richer soil, and ampler
provision for their bodily sustenance. While we admit and maintain that
slavery has its evils, we must also affirm that some of the finest traits in the character
of man are to be found in active exercise in connection with it. The very
dependence of the slave upon his master is a continual and effective appeal to his
justice and humanity, and the relation between them is generally a very different
thing from what it is believed to be by many who have no opportunity of forming a
correct estimate of the same. If the evil passions are sometimes called into exercise,
the milder virtues are much more frequently drawn forth. If there be less of
bodily labour, there is more of mental culture, among those who are not obliged to
"hold the plough;" and thus it is that among the upper classes there is far more
of academical and collegiate education in Virginia than in any other State of the
Union, and the whole South and West have felt and do feel the effect of it. Nor
as to religion are we, as some have supposed, so destitute, though we might have
abounded more under different circumstances. Irreligion, false doctrines, Unitarianism,
belong neither to slavery nor freedom. At a time when all Christendom
was covered with slavery of every degree, the Unitarian heresy prevailed for a period
in its greatest extension, and so did a swarm of other false doctrines. That
the slave-holding States are now most happily free from this and other pestilential
errors, and have much of true piety in them, must be acknowledged; and it were
to be wished that, for the sake of peace and union, criminations and recriminations
would cease.

[27]

The Rev. William Gough was also its minister, and died in 1683-4. He was
buried in the old graveyard, near the church, at Jamestown.


103

Page 103

ARTICLE VII.

Being an appendix to the articles on James City parish, and containing
a further account of the Jaquelines, Amblers, and James
town.
—No. 5.

Since the foregoing notice of these families was written I
have had access to some most reliable documents, from which have
been obtained the following additional information:—

Within the last thirty years visits have been made to England
by a number of their descendants, and an intercourse, personal
and epistolary, been established between those in England and
those in America. I am the more pleased at being allowed access
to these documents, because I am enabled thereby to gratify a
favourite wish and design of these articles in the establishment
of a connection between the old families and the old Church of
England and America.

The tradition prevalent in Virginia as to the descent of the
Ambler family is entirely confirmed by a letter of the Rev.
George Ambler, of Wakefield, in Yorkshire, to one of his relatives
in Virginia. Wakefield and Leeds are near to each other in
Yorkshire, as they are in Westmoreland, Virginia,—the latter
deriving their names from the former through the instrumentality
of the Washington and Fairfax families, whose residence was in
that part of England. The Amblers were also from the same
place, and Leeds Manor, in Fauquier, may have received its name
through them. The following is an extract from a letter of the
Rev. Mr. Ambler, of England, to Mr. Philip St. George Ambler,
of Virginia:—

"I am seventy-four years of age,—a graduate of the University of Cambridge,—a
clergyman,—living in my native town (Wakefield, in Yorkshire)
upon my private means; am descended from John Ambler, of the
city of York, who was sheriff of the county in 1721. My great-grandfather,
the aforesaid John Ambler, had a son, Richard, who followed the
fortunes of a relative in Virginia. That son had nine children, of
which I happen to possess a list."

This number exactly agrees with that of the children of Richard
Ambler, of York, who married Miss Jaqueline, of Jamestown. A


104

Page 104
sister of this Richard Ambler (Mary Ambler) married the Rev.
George Shaw, a minister of the Established Church, and was
grandmother of Charles Shaw Lefevre, late Speaker of the House
of Commons. For many years this Richard Ambler was collector
of the port at Yorktown, an office both honourable and lucrative,
and which he discharged with great integrity. Of his
nine children by Elizabeth Jaqueline, all died at an early age,
except Edward, John, and Jaqueline, as we have said in our last
article.

I find some interesting notices in the document before me concerning
these three,—which I shall introduce, but not without a
previous notice, from the same source, of the family of their
mother, Elizabeth Jaqueline:—

"Her father, Edward Jaqueline, of Jamestown, was the son of John
Jaqueline and Elizabeth Craddock, of the county of Kent, in England.
He was descended from the same stock which gave rise to the noble family
of La Roche Jaqueline in France. They were Protestants, and fled from
La Vendée, in France, to England, during the reign of that bloodthirsty
tyrant, Charles IX. of France, and a short time previous to the Massacre
of St. Bartholomew. They were eminently wealthy, and were fortunate
enough to convert a large portion of their wealth into gold and silver,
which they transported in safety to England."

"Whilst I was in Paris," (says one of the travellers from America,) "in
1826, the Duke de Sylverack, who was the intimate friend of Madame
De la Roche Jaqueline, (the celebrated authoress of the `Wars of La
Vendée,') informed me that the above account—which is the tradition
among the descendants of the family in America—corresponds exactly
with what the family in France believe to have been the fate of those
Jaquelines who fled to England in the reign of Charles IX. I found the
family to be still numerous in France. It has produced many distinguished
individuals; but none more so than the celebrated Vendéan
chief, Henri De la Roche Jaqueline, who, during the Revolution of 1790,
was called to command the troops of La Vendée after his father had been
killed, and when he was only nineteen years of age. Thinking that he
was inadequate to the task, on account of his extreme youth and total
want of experience in military affairs, he sought seriously to decline the
dangerous honour; but the troops, who had been devotedly attached to
the father and family, would not allow him to do so, and absolutely forced
him to place himself at their head in spite of himself. As soon as he
found that resistance was useless, he assumed the bearing of a hero and
gave orders for a general review of his army: to which, (being formed in
a hollow square,) in an animated and enthusiastic manner, he delivered
this ever-memorable speech:—

" `My friends, if my father was here you would have confidence in
him; but as for me, I am nothing more than a child. But, as to my
courage, I shall now show myself worthy to command you.'

"This young man started forth a military Roscius, and maintained to
the end of his career the high ground he first seized. After displaying


105

Page 105
all the skill of a veteran commander, and all the courage of a most dauntless
hero, he nobly died upon the field of battle, at the early age of twenty-one,
thus closing his short but brilliant career."

The document thus concludes on the subject of the Jaquelines:—

"By a mourning-ring now in possession of Mary Marshall, the wife of the
Chief-Justice of the United States, it appears that Edward Jaqueline
died in the year 1730. He died, as he had lived, one of the most
wealthy men in the Colony."

We now proceed to speak of the three grandsons of Edward
Jaqueline. The sons of Richard Ambler and Elizabeth Jaqueline
were John, Edward, and Jaqueline. John was born in Yorktown.
At the age of ten he was sent, with his elder brother, Edward, to
Leeds Academy, near Wakefield, in Yorkshire, England, for his
education. He afterward graduated with great credit at Cambridge,
and then repaired to London, to begin the study of law.
There he became a very learned and accomplished barrister-at-law.
After travelling over Europe, he returned to Virginia and took
possession of Jamestown, which estate had been given him by his
grandfather Jaqueline. He represented the borough of Jamestown
for many years, and was considered one of the most accomplished
scholars in the Colony. He was perfect master of seven
languages. Many of his books in those different languages have
come down to his relatives. His health sunk under his literary
habits, and he died of consumption, at the age of thirty-one, in the
island of Barbadoes. His body was brought to Jamestown, and
deposited in the old graveyard around the church. The following
inscription, taken in 1820 from a tombstone of which no vestige
now remains, shows in what esteem he was held by his brother Edward,
who died on the day it was placed over his remains:—

"John Ambler, Esquire, Barrister-at-Law, Representative in the Assembly
for Jamestown, and Collector of the District of York River, in
this Province.

"He was born the 31st of December, 1735, and died at Barbadoes,
27th of May, 1766. In the relative and social duties—as a son, and a
brother, and a friend—few equalled him, and none excelled him. He
was early distinguished by his love of letters, which he improved at Cambridge
and the Temple, and well knew how to adorn a manly sense with
all the elegance of language. To an extensive knowledge of men and
things he joined the noblest sentiments of liberty, and in his own example
held up to the world the most striking picture of the amiableness of religion."


106

Page 106

To this brief testimony to the worth of one whose days were
soon numbered, we add a more enlarged one to the virtues of his
brother, Mr. Jaqueline Ambler:—

"Jaqueline Ambler, the seventh child of Richard and Elizabeth Ambler,
was born in the town of Little York, on the 9th of August, 1742.
At an early age he married Rebecca, daughter of Lewis Burwell, of White
Marsh, in Gloucester county, Virginia. He was Councillor of State
during the Revolutionary War, at the time that Thomas Jefferson was
Governor of Virginia. He was afterward appointed Treasurer of State,
which office he held until his death. He stood as high, as a man of
honour, as any who had ever lived, either in ancient or modern times. He
was indeed so remarkable for his scrupulous integrity that he was called,
throughout the land, `The Aristides of Virginia.' Whilst Treasurer, one
of his clerks robbed the Treasury of £5000. The officers whose duty it
was to examine the Treasurer's books for that year failed to detect the
defalcation, and reported to the Legislature that the Treasurer's books
balanced as they should do. Mr. Ambler was the first to find out the villany
and immediately reported it to the Legislature, who caused a re-examination
of the books to take place, re-elected him to the office, and
passed an act in which they declared that their confidence in his character,
so far from being impaired by the event, had been greatly increased:
whereupon he immediately paid the £5000 into the treasury, out of his
own funds, and determined to continue in office. He was as charitable
as his means would allow him to be; no meritorious person in distress
ever applied to him in vain. There was living in Richmond a poor
Scotch clergyman, named John Buchanon, whom he invited to make his
house his home until he should be able to support himself. The invitation
was accepted.

"The excellent parson Buchanon lived with him till he died, officiated
when he was consigned to the grave, and preached his funeral
sermon, from which the following extract is made:—

" `And when can we more seasonably apply to these duties than when
we are warned by the loss of our friends to remember our latter end and
apply our hearts unto wisdom? We have, my brethren, been lately paying
the last sad tribute to a departed brother. He whose loss we now
lament has passed the fifty-fifth year of his age without a blemish to
his reputation; without an enemy; with numerous friends. Adored
by his family, he has almost consoled them for his loss by the conviction
that he has not gone too early for himself, and that he was mature in
character.

" `Notwithstanding the constant exposure of an official man to the displeasure
of others, by the impartiality of his conduct, even those who went
away from him unindulged in their applications were satisfied by a confidence
in the purity of his motives. His public career for nearly twenty
years was a series of testimony to this truth. Drawn from the peaceful
walks of private life into public action, without a solicitation or a wish
previously expressed, he was chosen by the Legislature to three important
offices during the Revolution and since the peace. His last, that of Treasurer,
presented for thirteen years to malice, envy, or enmity, had they
existed against him, an annual opportunity of gratification. And yet was
he annually re-elected, because he had unremittingly shown his fitness


107

Page 107
for the office. His fatal disorder put human nature to the rack; but he
bore his agonies with every firmness of which human nature was capable,
cherished, strengthened, and animated by the divine glow of Christianity,
and foreseeing with a smile the prospect opening to his view. The poor
scarcely knew the hand from whence they so often received relief; and
those who were his dependants could not but own how much their condition
was softened by the kindness of their master.' "

"To this fair transcript of his character," says Dr. Buchannon,
the author of the sermon, "I might, from a fourteen
years' knowledge of him, (ten whereof I spent in his family,)
add many private traits which characterize him as the good man
and sincere and pious Christian. I could set before you innumerable
instances of kind attention and anxious solicitude to alleviate
the distresses, bear the infirmities, provide for the wants, nay, even
anticipate the wishes, of her to whom he was united; of the constant
care and unremitted assiduity of the fond but judicious parent
training up his own children, as also the fatherless and those
who had none to guide and direct them in the paths of religion and
virtue, not merely by daily precepts, but by what is infinitely more
efficacious, by daily example; and thus conscientiously discharging
that most important of all trusts, and securing their eternal as well as
temporal interests. I might bear honourable testimony to his being
as tender of the reputation of another; repelling every report circulated
by envy or malice against his neighbour's fame, and, like
Christian charity, thinking no evil. I might adduce repeated
proofs of his delicacy and purity of manners and conversation,
and of his temperance and self-government. He may, however,
have been thought by some too reserved and too much of a recluse;
and that he separated himself more than was necessary from
scenes of cheerful and innocent sociability. But, it may be truly said,
none had greater enjoyment in his family and the private circle
of his friends whenever the state of his health would permit; and
that he was sufficiently conversant in the world to present a fair
model of integrity, and a constant attention to his duties as an
officer, though not enough to be seduced or contaminated by its
follies and vices. To sum up all, I might lead to his private retirement,
and there present to you the devout Christian, prostrate in
humble supplication before his almighty Creator, which they only
who follow his example can justly estimate, and which they know
proves their greatest consolation in the various trials and calamities
of life. In fine, I might conduct you to the altar of God, where
you would hear him making a public profession of his faith, and,


108

Page 108
regardless of the scoffs of the infidel and the ridicule of a vain
and inconsiderate world, giving an open and solemn testimony that
he was not ashamed of the cross of Christ, which was to him both
the wisdom and power of God to his salvation.

"These and many more features of his character I might exhibit
to your view. But though a minute and particular detail would
still appear to myself as falling short of his merit, yet, to those
less acquainted with him than I was, it might seem to be drawn by
the flattering pencil of a friend. I therefore forbear a further
recital, and make one reflection naturally arising from the subject:
—that whenever the eye of man is disgusted and shocked by scenes
of impiety, rapine, cruelty, and bloodshed, let him cast it on such
a fair and pleasing picture as the present, which does so much
honour to human nature, and he will not fail to conclude that man,
the prey of furious and malignant passions, resembles an infernal
spirit; but when actuated by the sacred dictates of religion and
devoted virtue he claims kindred with the angels in heaven.
`Mark, therefore, the perfect man, and behold the upright, for
the end of that man is peace.' "

The following account of Mr. Edward Ambler is from the same
source,—the family document:—

"When he attained the age of twelve years he was sent to England to
finish his education, accompanied by his younger brother, John. They
were entered at Leeds Academy, near Wakefield, in the county of York,
at which place they continued for several years; after which they were
sent to Cambridge, where they went through a regular course of study
and terminated their university career with the highest credit. The
liberality of Mr. Richard Ambler allowed his son Edward to make
the grand tour of Europe after he quitted the university, so that he had
passed his twenty-first year before he returned to Virginia. After
which event it was not very long before he led to the altar Miss Mary
Cary, the daughter of Wilson Cary, Esquire, of Celeys, Elizabeth City
county, Virginia, who was descended from one of the most noble families
in all England.

"The elder sister of Miss Mary Cary had married George William
Fairfax, at whose house she was on a visit, when she captivated a young
man, who paid her his addresses. His affection, however, was not returned,
and the offer of his hand was rejected by Miss Cary. This young
man was afterward known to the world as General George Washington,
the first President of the United States of America. Young Washington
asked permission of old Mr. Cary to address his daughter before he
ventured to speak to herself. The reply of the old gentleman was, `If
that is your business here, sir, I wish you to leave the house, for my
daughter has been accustomed to ride in her own coach.' It has subsequently
been said that this answer of Mr. Cary to the stripling Washington


109

Page 109
produced the independence of the United States, and laid the foundation
of the future fame of the first of heroes and the best of men,—our
immortal Washington; as it was more than probable that, had he obtained
possession of the large fortune which it was known Miss Cary would carry
to the altar with her, he would have passed the remainder of his life in
inglorious ease. It was an anecdote of the day, that this lady, many
years after she had become the wife of Edward Ambler, happened to be
in Williamsburg when General Washington passed through that city at
the head of the American army, crowned with never-fading laurels and
adored by his countrymen. Having distinguished her among the crowd,
his sword waved toward her a military salute, whereupon she is said to
have fainted. But this wants confirmation, for her whole life tended to
show that she never for a moment regretted the choice she had made. It
may be added, as a curious fact, that the lady General Washington afterward
married resembled Miss Cary as much as one twin-sister ever did
another.

"Edward Ambler, after the death of his father, Richard Ambler, was
appointed Collector of the port of York, which station he was induced
to occupy, rather on account of the honour it conferred in those days,
than for the sake of the emolument. He was a man of such consideration
in the Colony, that when Lord Baron Botetourt came over to this
country as Colonial Governor of Virginia he brought a letter of introduction
to him, which is now in possession of the writer. Upon the death
of his younger brother, John, who gave him Jamestown, he removed
there to live, and represented the old borough for many years afterward in
the House of Burgesses. Edward Ambler died and was buried at Jamestown,
in the thirty-fifth year of his age, Anno Domini 1767. His
widow survived him fourteen years. When the Revolutionary War broke
out she removed, with her children, from Jamestown to the Cottage, in
Hanover county, which was a much less exposed situation. Several of
her acquaintances and connections removed from the lower country and
bought estates near the Cottage, merely for the sake of society. Among
others were Robert Carter Nicholas, Esquire, who bought and lived at a
place called `The Retreat.' Wilson Miles Cary, Esquire, her brother,
bought an estate near, as did the family of General Nelson; so that this
neighbourhood, as deserted and uninhabited as it now is, afforded at that
time as polished society as any in Virginia. Mrs. Ambler was a woman
of uncommon strength of mind and firmness of purpose. After the tea
had been thrown overboard at Boston, she would not allow a particle of it
to be used in her family, though fully able to have indulged in every
luxury which the country afforded. And, as another proof of her patriotism,
I will mention, what I have often heard my father say, that, at the
time that the young Marquis De la Fayette was retreating before Lord
Cornwallis, he passed with his army near the Cottage, taking the right-hand
road to Negrofoot, about half a mile above Ground-Squirrel Bridge
and two from the Cottage. As soon as she heard of it she procured uniform
and arms for my father, then a boy only sixteen years of age, buckled
them on him with her own hands, and then bade him `to go out and join
the American troops; and though you are my last and only child,
' said
she, `return to me with honour or return no more!' This most excellent
and amiable lady did not live to see her country independent and the war
terminate, as she fondly wished she might do, that she might once more
return to light her hospitable fires in the hearths of her noble old family


110

Page 110
mansion at Jamestown; to which every member of the family had been
exceedingly attached for several generations past; for at that spot almost
all of the blood and the name had been born, had lived, had died, and
been buried. Independent of its antiquity,—being so celebrated as the
spot where the first successful Colony from England located themselves in
America, and where the first town and the first church had been built in
America, with bricks brought from England,—it is a noble estate of about
thirteen hundred acres of land, situated on the banks of James River,
where this noble stream is near four miles wide, and originally had one of
the largest old mansions on it that was built in times when a Virginia
gentleman vied in wealth with an English nobleman. Though half of
this structure was destroyed by fire during the lifetime of the first John
Ambler, yet the remainder presents as commodious and commanding an
appearance as any dwelling-house in Virginia. The estate is now an
island; though it was formerly a peninsula, connected with the mainland
by a narrow isthmus, which has in the last century been entirely washed
away by the resistless action of the waves upon it. At Jamestown there
abound, in the very greatest perfection in which they can be eaten, all
sorts of fish, deer, wild ducks, sora, and ortolans. Figs, grapes, and pomegranates
here attain perfection. It is situated within eight miles of the
ancient city of Williamsburg, which, during the lifetime of my grandmother,
contained as polished society as could have been found at the
court of St. James itself. In the year 1781, Mrs. Mary Ambler, the
widow of him whom we shall call the first Edward Ambler, whilst staying
at the Cottage, in Hanover county, was attacked by that illness which
ended in her death. Whilst on her death-bed she directed that her remains
should be taken to Jamestown. But, as the war still raged with
England, it was thought best to have them interred where she died. And
even this precaution did not have the effect of securing them from the
profanation of the British troops, a detachment of which overran this part
of the country and came to the Cottage to ransack and to plunder. In
looking for the family plate they took it into their heads that it was
buried in the graveyard; though they were assured to the contrary by the
servants. They proceeded to the grave of my grandmother, dug up the
coffin, and actually opened it before they would be satisfied that the object
of their search was not there. When the war was ended, Mrs. Ambler's
remains were taken to Jamestown, according to her request, and placed by
the side of those of her husband."

The following account of a recent visit to Jamestown will conclude
our notices of this parish:—

On the 27th of October, 1856, I went to this place of ruins in
company with the Rev. Dr. Totten, the Rev. George Wilmer, Mr.
Richard Randolph, and Colonel Durfey. The latter had been
owner of the place some years since, and was well acquainted with
its past and present history. Mr. Randolph, our Virginia antiquary,
was also quite at home as to all that belonged to the
scene. We entered the island in a boat, at the upper or western
end of it, near to that which was once the neck constituting it a
peninsula and uniting it to the mainland. This has long since


111

Page 111
been overflowed and the peninsula has become an island. About
ninety years ago the late Mr. John Ambler, then owning the
greater part of the island and residing on it, made a causeway on
that which had been the neck of land, but which was now covered
with water some feet deep. This, after some time, having been
overwhelmed with the waves of James River, Colonel Durfey, on
becoming the proprietor of the whole island, made a bridge to it at
some distance from the causeway, over which the stage passed, carrying
passengers to the Old Wharf at Jamestown, where the
steamboats received them. Only the piles on which the bridge
rested now remain, and the steamboats receive passengers from
Williamsburg and the country around at some other place. The
only access at this time to the island from the mainland is by boat
across Back River, which surrounds the island on the west and in
part on the north and east, uniting with James River at the upper
and lower ends of the island; also stretching up some miles into
the mainland, by a creek called Portan. While the neck of land
stood firm, Back River terminated in this creek. Since the irruption
of the waters of James River over this neck, the upper part
of the island has lost much of its ancient territory. The neck
itself is in some places a third of a mile in the river. A large
portion of the town also lies buried in the waves. At low-water
some signs of it may yet be seen. As this was the highest part
of the peninsula, and the most fertile and beautiful, the town was
chiefly built on it. The work of destruction has now passed along
nearly a mile, from the original connection with the mainland to
the lower part of the town, where the public buildings and the old
church stood. The bank is giving way within one hundred and
fifty yards of the old tower and graveyard; and, if some remedy
be not applied in time, they also must be immersed in the waters
of old Powhatan; for that was the Indian name of James River.
As the church was built on the fifty acres of land which is deeded
to the authorities of James City for public houses, it is hoped that
in due time either those authorities or that of the State will guard
the same against destruction. The old tower and the ruins of the
church are about fifty yards from the river, which in that place
has not yet encroached on the bank; although, as we have said, a
hundred and fifty yards above it is rapidly advancing on the
island.

Something special deserves to be said of the ruins of the old
church. The graveyard, in the midst of which it stood, contained
about half an acre of land, which is covered with old sycamores,


112

Page 112
and mulberries, and smaller trees, and shrubberies, which form a
dense shade. The old brick enclosure, which was mouldering into
ruins, and some of the walls of the church, were used about sixty
years ago by Mr. William Lee, of Green Spring, and the late Mr.
John Ambler, of Jamestown, in making a small enclosure around
the tombstones which were still remaining. This enclosure covers
about one-third of the original one, and takes in a part of the spot
on which the church stood. The foundation of the old church is
still marked by the bricks which remain. On accurate measurement,
we found it to be an oblong square of just twenty-eight feet
by fifty-six. The ruined tower was judged to be about thirty feet
high, and, by measurement, proved to be eighteen feet square. As
there are conflicting opinions concerning the date of the erection
of this old church,—some affirming that what we see are the ruins
of that which was destroyed in Bacon's rebellion, while others
affirm the building of a new one after that event,—we will briefly
state the facts bearing on the case. The history of the succession
of the Jamestown churches is as follows:—The first place of worship,
as described by Captain Smith, was made of the awning, or
old sails, taken from vessels, and fastened to trees. The second
was a very plain log building, which was burned down in the second
or third year of the Colony, during the ministry of the Rev. Mr.
Hunt. The third was a larger and better one, probably of wood,
built during the presidency of Captain Smith, and in a ruinous
or neglected condition when Lord De la War arrived, in 1611.
By him it was repaired and adorned as I have stated. Its dimensions
were twenty-four feet by sixty. The chancel, called quoir,
was large enough to hold the Governor, the Council, and other
officers of state. This was doubtless the same in which Governor
Yeardley, with the Councillors and Burgesses, held their legislative
session in 1619; and, as we read of no other being built between
that time and 1676, when the town and church were burned down
by Bacon, it is most probable that this was the building. In opposition
to the theory that the present are the ruins of the old church
which was burned in the rebellion, is the fact that the dimensions
of the church which Smith built and Lord De la War repaired
were different from the one whose ruins are now seen. The dimensions
of the former were twenty-four by sixty; those of the latter
twenty-eight by fifty-six. Other circumstances there are, which
render it almost certain that another church had been built since
the destruction of the one by Bacon. Not only was there a goodly
number of families residing in the place for some time after this,


No Page Number
illustration

RUINS OF THE CHURCHYARD, JAMESTOWN.



No Page Number

113

Page 113
but the court-house and House of Burgesses were there until the
removal of the seat of government to Williamsburg, after the year
1705. Although the Governors may have lived at Green Spring,
yet some of the officers of government, belonging to the port, and
Legislature, were there; and it is not to be supposed that they
would live for thirty years without a church. This improbability
is strengthened by the fact that Governor Andros presented some
communion-plate to the church at Jamestown in 1694; and yet
more by another fact, that in 1733 a silver font, still in existence,
was presented to it by two of the Ambler family. Surely these
would not have been presented to the ruins of a deserted church.
We must, therefore, suppose that the ruins which we now behold
are those of a church put up since the rebellion. That they are
not the ruins produced by fire I ascertain, not merely by the fact
that there are no marks of destruction by fire, but by the testimony
of an elderly gentleman, who assured me he was present when the
wooden part of the tower was burned by accident. It is proper to
state, in connection with this, that at a later period, the date not
known, a brick church was built on the road from Jamestown to
Williamsburg, called the "Main Church," in which Bishop Madison
preached in the concluding years of his ministry. He doubtless
preached at Jamestown in the earlier part of it. The Main
Church has recently disappeared. Underneath it was found a brick
vault, containing the remains of some unknown ones who were
buried there.[31] Having thus disposed of the church, we add something
concerning the graveyard. Deep-pressed into the earth and
almost covered up by it we found the following inscription:—
"Here lyeth the body of the Rev. John Gough, late minister of
this place, who departed this life January 15th, 1683-4, and waits
in hopes of a joyful reunion." This supplies one blank in our list
of its ministers. Besides this, we found the tombstones, or fragments
thereof, of Philip Ludwell and Sarah his wife, of Ursula
Beverly, wife of Robert Beverly and daughter of William Byrd,
(the first of that name, we presume, and who lived in Williamsburg

114

Page 114
during the building of the College.) The tombs of Edward
Jaqueline and Jaqueline Ambler, also those of B. Harrison and
Mrs. Edwards, may yet be seen.

Something special in the way of notice is due to the condition
of the tombs of Commissary Blair and Mrs. Blair; the latter being
the daughter of Philip Ludwell, of Green Spring, who married
Miss Sarah Grymes, of Middlesex. The tombs were placed side
by side, and were very heavy and strong. The platform, sides,
and ends were of white freestone, and the interior filled with
bricks, well cemented. The top slab, on which the inscriptions
were made, are of thick dark iron-stone, or black marble. A
sycamore-shoot sprung up between the graves and is now a large
tree. In its growth it embraced, on one end and on the top, the
tomb of Mrs. Blair, one-third of which lies embedded in the body
of the tree and is held immovable. All the interior, consisting of
brick, and two of the side-stones, have been entirely forced out of
their places by the tree and lie scattered around, while the dark
iron-stone slab is held in the air three feet above the surface of the
earth, fast bound by the embrace of the body of the tree, into
which it is sunk between one and two feet, the inscription being
only partially legible. On the other side, the whole tomb of Commissary
Blair has been forced away from its place by the roots
and body of the tree, and is broken to pieces in all its parts.
We found about two-thirds of the slab (on which was the inscription)
scattered in three or four fragments at some distance from
each other, and having put them together made out an imperfect
Latin memorial,—so imperfect that we shall not insert it.

Leaving the ruins of the church and graveyard, we add a few
concluding words as to the island. About two hundred yards below
the church and a hundred from the river, is the old brick house
of the Amblers, or a large part thereof, built, it is supposed, more
than a hundred years since. It is still in good repair and is the
residence of the manager of the present owner, Mr. William Allen.
It is the only house on the island except the old brick magazine
and a small frame room near it, both of which, unless preventive
measures are adopted, must soon tumble into James River. At the
lower end of the island there are still the remains of a graveyard
belonging to the Travis family, which owned that part of the island
for some generations. The house is gone. This part of the island
became separated from the other by some low and swampy ground.
Mr. Allen now owns the whole of the island, which consists of
about seventeen hundred acres and is between two and three miles


115

Page 115
in length and three-quarters of a mile in width. Twelve hundred
acres of it are now and always have been a marsh and incapable
of use. There are one hundred acres of woodland and four hundred
of arable land, very fertile and valuable. Within the last
thirty years it has changed owners several times, being sold at
various prices, from ten to thirty thousand dollars.

 
[31]

Since the above was written I have received the following information:—"The
last minister of the `Main Church' before Bishop Madison was the Rev. Mr. Bland,
afterward of Norfolk. His wife was a daughter of the Rev. William Yates, who
was for a short time President of William and Mary College. When the church
was taken down, a piece of timber broke the arch of a vault containing a coffin,
with a plate on which was inscribed `Elizabeth Bland,' with a vacant space sufficient
for another coffin."


116

Page 116

ARTICLE VIII.

The Parish of James City.—No. 6.[32]

SOME NOTES ON JAMESTOWN; SUPPLEMENTARY TO BISHOP MEADE'S
ARTICLES.

Your readers must have been deeply interested, Mr. Editor, by
Bishop Meade's articles in your paper upon the "Old Churches,
Ministers, and Families of Virginia." For a very long and important
portion of the history of the Episcopal Church in Virginia,
his own experience and observation have put him in possession
of the best materials; and for the rest, his position and efforts
have enabled him to avail himself of most of what others had to
contribute. For a vast deal of information, therefore, must we
acknowledge ourselves dependent upon and indebted to him.

When he reached the parish of James City, however, he entered
a field which has been long comparatively open to the researches
of other inquirers. Dr. Hawks explored it some years ago with
such industry and success, that we regret that he could not have
had the rare opportunities for obtaining materials which have been
enjoyed by the Rev. Mr. Anderson. No one can properly study,
write, or appreciate Virginia history who does not largely and
heartily enter into those parts relating and devoted to religion and
the Church. So that, if confined to any two works for the history
of Virginia down to the Revolutionary period, one could hardly
do better than take Henning's Statutes at Large and Hawks's
Contributions to the Ecclesiastical History of Virginia.

It is hoped that a few supplementary notes will not be deemed
by Bishop Meade or any one else as an intrusion, but as a co-operation
in the good work in which he is engaged. Should any new
facts be brought out, or any inadvertences corrected, it may be of
some little service when he comes to rewrite his articles for a more
permanent form of publication.

Bishop Meade gives deserved prominence and praise to the missionary


117

Page 117
element that entered into the colonization of Virginia.
Those adventurers who looked chiefly to the glory of God and the
conversion of the Infidels were as sincerely convinced as any
others of the bright prospects of gold and other temporal benefits;
but they used these mainly for the purpose of stimulating "the
action," that the religious and spiritual blessings to which they
looked might be realized. The constancy and continuousness with
which these last are held up in all that was said, done, and written
in behalf of this Colony until that awful check in the massacre by
Opechancanough, in 1622, are remarkable. Even the business-entries
in the records of the Company in London make express
reference to the blessing of God and the favouring care of his
providence. Whilst the motto of every patriot and Christian
should be, "A religious nation, and not a national religion," yet a
connection between Church and State is apt to confer upon the
State the benefit of an express recognition, in all enterprises of
public pith and moment, of God's supremacy and superintending
providence. This is a good habit in itself; but, of course, its
chief value consists in the sincerity of those who practise it, whether
rulers or ruled. In the case before us, numbers of Christian
men and women were equally as fervent and sincere as Richard
Hakluyt and Robert Hunt.

Bishop Meade refers to the first charters and to the instructions
issued by King James in 1606. But the passage in those instructions
which enjoins kind treatment of the savages, &c. has this
singular addendum:—"And that all just, kind, and charitable
courses shall be holden with such of them as shall conform themselves
to any good and sociable trafic and dealing with the subjects
of us, our heirs and successors, which shall be planted there,
whereby they may be the sooner drawn to the true knowledge of
God and the obedience of us, our heirs and successors, under such
severe pains and punishments
as shall be inflicted by the same
several presidents and councells of the said several Colonies, or
the most part of them, within their several limits and precincts, on
such as shall offend therein or doe the contrary." We must not
lose sight of the spirit of the age, especially when we come to
judge of that after-policy which is said to have been ever the
reproach of Virginia.

In the third charter, 1611-12, March 12, which still recites
that the plantation was undertaken "for the propagation of Christian
religion and reclaiming of people barbarous to civility and
humanity," is a fact worth mentioning,—viz.: The fifth section


118

Page 118
expressly admits and confirms among the adventurers, George,
Lord-Archbishop of Canterbury,
Henry, Earl of Huntingdon,
Edward, Earl of Bedford, and Richard, of Clanrickard, who were
named in this formal manner at the request of the Company, "for
the good and welfare of the plantation, and that posterity may
hereafter know who have adventured and not been sparing of their
purses in such a noble and generous action for the general good of
their country." These are the only four named in this charter,
and, as they had all become members of the Company already, this
was doubtless done to get the influence of their names. There are
still extant alphabetical lists of the adventurers down to the year
1620.

It was under this charter that that code of "Laws, Divine,
Moral, and Martial," was introduced by Gates and Dale, about the
period when the Company were seriously debating whether they
should not recall Lord De la War home and abandon the action.
They called Gates from Virginia to England to advise them on
that subject. He and Lord De la War induced them to persevere:
but the state of affairs, especially in the Colony, required new and
vigorous remedies. The colonists were heterogeneous, disorderly,
wasteful, and mutinous; they had to obtain something to return
home by the ships; they had to produce a part of their own subsistence,
almost sword in hand; for the Indians, spoiled by Newport
and others, and no longer fooled with articles of mere trifling
value, would not trade freely, and were not only not yet conciliated
by the marriage of Pocahontas, but were really exasperated by the
new intruders. The Colony had to be reduced into somewhat of
a camp both for purposes of labour and of defence. Compulsion
in religious matters was a long-practised thing in the mother-country
and in those countries with whom she had intercourse. Indeed,
are not some compulsory features inseparable from any system that
tolerates a union between Church and State? Can there long be
entire religious freedom and tolerance, save where religion is sustained
and enforced solely on the voluntary principle? as in this
most glorious land of free freedom,—the wonder, thus far, of human
history.

Neither Gates nor Dale was a despot or tyrant. They had no
Brewster cases and appeals during their administration. Argall
was a tyrant, and a government of greater mildness theoretically
would have been arbitrarily administered by him.

In judging, then, of the code of laws referred to above, whilst
we, with the road-to-Damascus light about us, cannot but condemn


119

Page 119
them, yet they should be viewed through the media of those days
in which they were adopted.

Bishop Meade says that Strachy probably had a hand in concocting
them. This is doubtful; but he certainly edited and vindicated
them in 1612.

Promising a narrative of what he had seen and suffered in Bermuda
and Virginia, he says, "I do, in the mean time, present a
transcript of the Toparchia, or state of those duties by which
their Colonie stands regulated and commanded, that such may
receive due checke, who malitiously and desperately heretofore
have censured it; and by examining of which they may be right
sorrie so to have defaulked from us as if we lived there lawlesse,
without obedience to our countrey or observance of religion to
God." He declares, moreover, that the laws are not new, but
"the same constant asterismes and starres which must guide all
that travel in these perplexed ways and paths of public affairs,"
&c. By this code, which deals so lavishly in capital punishment,
many and the chief offences were cognizable both by martial law
and by the civil magistrate;
but there was a goodly catalogue appertaining
only to martial discipline, which were to be diligently
observed and severely executed. Along with the laws, Strachy
publishes instructions from the marshal to each officer, and even to
the private soldier, for the better enabling each in executing his
duty. These are in the nature of a long and wholesome lecture,
or charge, and wind up with the lengthy but excellent prayer
quoted from by Bishop Meade, and which was to be said twice
daily, upon the court of guard, by the captain or one of his principal
officers.

The religious services enjoined were as follows: — On weekdays,
early in the morning, the captain sent for tools, for which a
receipt was given; the companies assembled, with the tools, in the
place of arms, where "the serjeant-major, or captain of the watch,
upon their knees, made public and faithful prayers to Almighty
God for his blessing and protection to attend them in this their
business the whole day after-succeeding." The men were divided
into gangs, who worked on alternate days. The gang for the day
was then delivered to the maisters and overseers of the work appointed,
who kept them at labour until nine or ten o'clock, according
to the season of the year; then, at the beat of the drum, they
were marched to the church to hear divine service. After dinner,
and rest till two or three o'clock, at beat of drum, the captain
drew them forth to the place of arms, to be thence taken to their


120

Page 120
work till five or six o'clock, when, at beat of drum, they were
again marched to church to evening prayer: they were then dismissed,—those
that were to set the watch with charge to prepare
their arms, the others unto their rest and lodgings. After order
given out for the watch, the captain had to assemble his company,
except his sentinels, upon his court of guard, and there "humbly
present themselves on their knees, and, by faithful and zealous
prayer to Almighty God, commend themselves and their endeavours
to his merciful protection." Again, in the morning, an
hour after the discharge of the watch, were they to repair to the
court of guard, and there, "with public prayer, to give unto Almighty
God humble thanks and praises for his merciful and safe
protection through the night, and commend themselves to his no
less merciful protection and safeguard for the day following."

It was also the special duty of the captain to have religious and
manly care over the poor sick soldiers or labourers under his command;
to keep their lodgings sweet and their beds standing three
feet from the ground, as provided in the public injunctions.

A singular duty was laid upon him who was for the time the
captain of the watch. Half an hour before divine service, morning
and evening, he had to shut the ports and place sentinels, and,
the bell having tolled the last time, to search all the houses of the
town, to command every one of what quality soever (the sick and
hurt excepted) to repair to church; after which he was to follow
all the guards with their arms into the church and lay the keys
before the governor. On Sunday, he was to see that the Sabbath
was noways profaned by any disorders, gaming, drunkenness, intemperate
meeting, or such like, in public or private, in the streets
or within the houses. On the Sabbath, all were required, under
severe penalties, to attend divine service, sermons, and catechizing,
morning and evening. Any disrespect to a minister or preacher
was also punished, and every person then in or who might arrive
in the Colony was required to give an account of his or her religious
faith to the minister and to seek instruction from him.

In the midst of all this blended system—martial, civil, and
religious—that same missionary spirit was maintained. Even in
the charge from the marshal to his colonel in this passage:—

"If the wisest man that ever spake or writ (except him that was both
God and man) summed up all the reckonings of worldly felicities in
these two words,—lœtari et benefacere, imploying a cheerful mirth with
well-doing, (from which it cannot be severed,)—who hath more cause to be
cheerful and inly glad than you, that have the comfort of so great well-doing,


121

Page 121
to which no other may be compared? For what well-doing can be
greater than to be stocks and authors of a people that shall serve and glorify
God, which is the end of all our creation, and to redeem them from
ignorance and infidelity to the true knowledge and worship of God,
whereby you are made partakers of this promise, that they which lead
others into righteousness shall shine like the stars in the firmament?
wherein be right well assured that your happiness is envied by many a
right-knowing and excellent virtuous man in England," &c.

Bishop Meade has alluded to the fact that for several years
after the death of Mr. Hunt the Colony was without a minister.
This is referred to in "A True Declaration of the Estate of the
Colony in Virginia," &c., published by the council in England, in
1610, as one of the causes which had provoked God to visit the
plantation with those dire calamities which beset it at the time that
Lord De la War was first sent out as Governor for life.

"Cast up," says the publication just referred to, "this reckoning together,—want
of government, store of idleness, their expectations frustrated
by the traitors, their market spoiled by the mariners, our nets broken, the
deere chased away, our boats lost, our hogs killed, our trade with the
Indians forbidden, some of our men fled, some murthered, and most, by
drinking of the brackish water of James Fort, weakened and endaungered,
famyne and sickness by all these means increased, here at home
the monies came in so slowly that the Lord Laware could not be dispatched
till the Colony was worne and spent with difficulties. Above all,
having neither ruler nor preacher, they neither feared God nor man,
which provoked the wrath of the Lord of hosts and pulled down his
judgments upon them."

Bishop Meade quotes from Crashaw how providential and opportune
was the arrival of Lord De la War. Indeed, there did
seem then to be a most remarkable divine interposition in behalf
of the Colony, the striking circumstances of which are exultingly
set forth in the "True Declaration" already mentioned:—

"He that shall further observe how God inclineth all casual events to
work the necessary help of his saints must needs adore the Lord's infinite
goodness. Never had any people more just cause to cast themselves
at the footstool of God and to reverence his mercy than our distressed
Colony; for if God had not sent Sir Thomas Gates from the Bermudas
within four days, they had all been famished; if God had not directed
the heart of that worthy knight to save the fort from fire[33] at their shipping,
they had been destitute of a present harbour and succour; if they
had abandoned the fort any longer time and had not so soon returned, questionless


122

Page 122
the Indians would have destroyed the fort which had been the
means of our safety among them and a terror to them. If they had set
sail sooner and had launched into the vast ocean, who could have promised
that they should have encountered the fleet of the Lord De la
War? especially when they made for Newfoundland,—a course contrary to
our navies approaching. If the Lord De la War had not brought with
him a year's provision, what comfort could those souls have received, to
have been relanded to a second destruction? Brachium Domini, this was
the arm of the Lord of hosts, who would have his people pass the Red
Sea and wilderness and then to possess the land of Canaan. If God for
man be careful, why should man be over-distrustful?"

The following letter, from an unknown person, relates to the
proposition at a later period to establish a College at Henrico:—

"To Sir Edwin Sandis, Treasurer of Virginia.

IHS

"Good luck in the name of the Lord, who is daily magnified by the
experiment of your zeal and piety in giving beginning to the foundation
of the College in Virginia, the sacred work so due to heaven and so
longed-for on earth. Now know we assuredly that the Lord will do you
good, and bless you in all your proceedings, even as he blessed the house
of Obed-edom and all that pertained unto him, because of the ark of God.
Now that ye seek the kingdom of God all things shall be ministered unto
you. This I well see already, and perceive that by your godly determination
the Lord hath given you favour in the sight of the people; and I
know some whose hearts are much enlarged because of the house of the
Lord our God, to procure your wealth, whose greater designs I have presumed
to outrun with this oblation, which I humbly beseech you may be
accepted as the pledge of my devotion and as the earnest of the vows I
have vowed unto the Almighty God of Jacob concerning this thing;
which, till I may in part perform, I desire to remain unknown and unsought
after."

This oblation consisted of a communion-cup with the cover and
case, a trencher-plate for the bread, a carpet of crimson velvet
and a linen damask tablecloth.

B. B. Minor, Richmond, Va.
 
[33]

When they abandoned the town to return to England, the people were eager
to burn up the place; and, to prevent them, Sir Thomas Gates, with a select party,
stayed on shore till they had all embarked.

 
[32]

This article did not appear, as was designed, in the "Southern Churchman;"
but it is here inserted as a valuable addition to the preceding ones.


123

Page 123

ARTICLE IX.

Henrico Parish.—No. 1.

About twelve or fifteen miles below Richmond, on the north
side of James River, lies a tract of land, than which none, except
the island on which Jamestown stood, has more interest to a Virginian.
It was the second settlement in the Colony, with the
exception of the feeble attempts at the Falls of James River, at
Nansemond, and Hampton. In the year 1611,—four years after
the first settlement at Jamestown, and while that was just struggling
into existence,—Sir Thomas Dale, High-Marshal of Virginia,
divided the colonists with Governor Gates, and brought with him
three hundred and fifty men, (chiefly German labourers,) and built
three rows of houses for them, a church, a house for himself, and
others for "the honester sort of people,"—that is, the farmers.
Palisadoes,—that is, fences,—to be some guard against the
Indians and to keep in the cattle, and small watch-towers and
other works, were put up. The place on which these things were
erected was afterward called Farrar's Island, from the name
of the man who bought it after the great massacre, but misnamed,
just as Jamestown was; for a narrow neck of land united
them both to the main, though, in the case of Jamestown, that
neck has been overflowed, and it is now—not only in name, but in
reality—an island. The other, Farrar's Island, is sometimes
called the Great Bend, because, while the neck is only one hundred
and twenty yards across, you must go seven miles around by
water to reach the opposite point. It has also been called Dutch
Gap, because there are indubitable marks of the commencement
of a channel by the first Dutch settlers across its narrow neck,
by which the water might be let through and thus the seven miles
of travel be saved. The channel was opened about half-way
across,—that is, about sixty yards,—and then abandoned. A
proposition to do this was also made during the last war, but
never executed. The same reason probably prevented in both
instances,—viz.: the fear of injuring the bed of the river, or of
inundating some of the adjoining lands. Another name was also
given to the settlement in earlier times,—viz.: Dale's Gift,


124

Page 124
because Sir Thomas here first divided lands to the colonists, who
hitherto (while at Jamestown) lived in common, cultivating the
fields on the island, but living together in the city. Fifty
acres of fine river-bottom were allotted to each family. The
city was called Henricopolis, or the City of Henry, after
Prince Henry. It was afterward in common use contracted to
Henrico. There were probably about five thousand acres of
land in the settlement as bounded by the circuit of the river
and the long palisadoes which separated it from the main-land
on the north. If its figure be compared to the human body, the
head of a man would represent the island, or rather peninsula;
the neck represents the narrow part where the river, after its
circuit, almost touches; and then, if the arms be a little raised
from the body on each side, you would have the remaining part
of the settlement extending about two miles between the two
rivers, as they seem to be. Indeed, the visitor to this spot, standing
on the elevation where Henrico City once stood, may see,
almost at one view, what appear to be four beautiful rivers, though
only one in reality. The effect upon both mind and eye is truly
romantic and worth a visit from places far more distant than
Richmond, though it is believed but few of the inhabitants of that
city have ever enjoyed the sight. Let those who have any thing
of the feeling of an antiquarian, or even of a Virginian, only visit
that spot, taking with them the account given of its first settlement
by Captain Smith, Sir Thomas Dale, or any other of our
early writers, with the guidance of our fellow-citizen, Mr. Richard
Randolph, who was born near it and lived on it forty years ago,
and they may verify the accounts on the ground, may gather up
some broken bricks, which have been worn by the ploughshare for
one or two centuries on the well-known spots where the houses of
Sir Thomas Dale, Rolph, and Pocahontas once stood. The correspondence
between the ancient account and the present appearances
and relics is too strong to admit of a lingering doubt.
Near the Dutch Gap, or narrow neck separating what appears to
be two beautiful rivers only by a few paces, stood the second
church in Virginia and America, built immediately on the landing
of these Virginia Pilgrims, and before Sir Thomas Dale laid the
foundation of his own residence. And this was only preparatory
to a much better one of brick, whose foundation, Captain Smith
informs us, was soon laid. Such was the piety of our first
ancestors. It was soon discovered that another settlement on the
other side of the river—between James River and the Appomattox—was

125

Page 125
necessary to the security of the little colony at
Henrico, for a troublesome tribe of Indians occupied that narrow
corner between the two rivers, and annoyed the colonists.
Accordingly, Sir Thomas, in a few months, divided his forces
again, drove away the Indians from thence, and made a settlement,
opposite to what is now called City Point, naming it
Bermuda Hundred, and dividing lands here also to the settlers,
and running a palisado from river to river across another neck.
The Rev. Mr. Whittaker—of whom we have before spoken—was
the minister to each of these settlements; for they were both
in one parish (Henrico parish) from the first, and for a long
time, extending (as did the county) on both sides of James River,
included what is now Chesterfield county and Dale parish.
Wherefore Mr. Whittaker, in order to be convenient to his whole
parish, chose for his residence what is well known at this day as
Rock Hall, on the southern bank of James River, in what is now
Chesterfield, and opposite to the lowest part of the Great Bend.
At this point Sir Thomas Dale built him a parsonage and set
apart his glebe.[34] It was probably in crossing the river near his
house, in order to visit his parishioners on the island, that he was
drowned, as we have before stated. Having referred to the
residence of Rolph and Pocahontas, it will be interesting to point
the reader and the visitor to the very spot, since it is clearly
ascertained. Mr. Rolph's house and residence were about two
miles from the city of Henrico, down the river, where the courthouse
afterward stood, and where a parsonage and glebe also were
located. All these sites are well known, and constitute what was
called Varina.

Before proceeding further in our history of Henrico parish, we
must make a digression, for which we are sure our readers will
more than pardon us. It will be remembered that, in our
sketch of the early history of Jamestown parish, we introduced
some things concerning Henrico and Bermuda, alleging, as a
sufficient reason, that the history of these three places were intimately
connected and identified for some years, and, indeed, was
the whole history of the colony at that time. For the same
reason we now introduce into the early history of Henrico some
things which might have formed a part of our notices of Jamestown,


126

Page 126
but which were not at that time in our possession. It will
be remembered that, in speaking of the marriage of Rolph and
Pocahontas in the church at Jamestown, we alluded to a letter of
the former to Sir Thomas Dale, in which he sets forth all the perplexities
of his soul on that subject and submitted the final decision
to that pious and noble-spirited man. Through the kindness of our
worthy citizen, Mr. Conway Robinson, of Richmond, I have possession
of that letter, which he obtained during a recent visit to
England, and here submit it to the reader. None can fail to perceive
what a genuine spirit of piety and philanthropy breathes
throughout it.

ROLPH'S LETTER TO SIR THOMAS DALE.

"The coppie of this Gentleman's Letter to Sir Thomas Dale, that after
married Powhatan's daughter, containing the reasons that moved him
thereunto.
[35]

"Honourable Sir, and most worthy Governor:

When your leasure
shall best serve you to peruse these lines, I trust in God the beginning
will not strike you into greater admiration than the end will give you good
content. It is a matter of no small moment, concerning my own particular,
which here I impart unto you, and which toucheth me so nearly
as the tenderness of my salvation. Howbeit, I freely subject myself to
your great and mature judgment, deliberation, approbation, and determination;
assuring myself of your zealous admonition and godly comforts,
either persuading me to desist, or encouraging me to persist therein, with
a religious fear and godly care, for which (from the very instant that this
began to roote itself within the secrete bosome of my breast) my daily
and earnest praiers have bin, still are, and ever shall bee poored forthwith,
in as sincere a goodly zeal as I possibly may, to be directed, aided, and
governed in all my thoughts, words, and deedes, to the glory of God and
for my eternal consolation; to persevere wherein I had never had more
neede, nor (till now) could ever imagine to have bin moved with the like
occasion. But (my case standing as it doth) what better worldly refuge
can I here seeke, than to shelter myself under the safety of your favourable
protection? And did not my case proceede from an unspotted conscience,
I should not dare to offer to your view and approved judgment
these passions of my troubled soule; so full of feare and trembling is
hypocrisie and dissimulation. But, knowing my own innocency and godly
fervour in the whole prosecution hereof, I doubt not of your benigne
acceptance and clement construction. As for malicious depravers and
turbulent spirits, to whom nothing is tasteful but what pleaseth their unsavoury
pallate, I passe not for them, being well assured in my persuasion
by the often trial and proving of myselfe in my holiest meditations and
praises, that I am called hereunto by the Spirit of God; and it shall be
sufficient for me to be protected by yourselfe in all virtuous and pious
endeavours. And for my more happy proceedings herein, my daily oblations


127

Page 127
shall ever be addressed to bring to passe to goode effects, that yourselfe
and all the world may truly say, `This is the worke of God, and it
is marvellous in our eies.'

"But to avoide tedious preambles, and to come nearer the matter: first,
suffer with your patience to sweepe and make cleane the way wherein I
walke from all suspicions and doubts, which may be covered therein, and
faithfully to reveale unto you what should move me hereunto.

"Let, therefore, this my well-advised protestations, which here I make
before God and my own conscience, be a sufficient witnesse at the dreadful
day of judgment, when the secret of all living harts shall be opened, to
condemn me herein, if my deepest intent and purpose be not to strive
with all my power of body and minde, in the undertaking of so mighty a
matter, for the good of this plantation, for the honour of our countrie, for
the glory of God, for my own salvation, and for the converting to the true
knowledge of God and Jesus Christ an unbelieving creature,—viz.: Pokahontas.
To whom my hartie and best thoughts are and have a long
time bin so intangled and inthralled in so intricate a labyrinth, that I was
even awearied to unwinde myself thereout. But Almighty God, who
never faileth his that truly invocate his holy name, hath opened the gate
and led me by the hand, that I might plainly see and discerne the safe
pathes wherein to treade.

"To you, therefore, (most noble sir,) the patron and father of us in this
countrie, doe I utter the effects of this my settled and long-continued
affection, (which hath made a mightie warre in my meditations;) and
here I do truly relate, to what issue this dangerous combat is come unto,
wherein I have not only examined, but thoroughly tried and pared my
thoughts, even to the quicke, before I could finde any fit, wholesome, and
apt applications to cure so dangerous an ulcer. I never failed to offer my
daily and faithful praiers to God for his sacred and holy assistance. I forgot
not to set before mine eies the frailtie of mankind, his proneness to
evill, his indulgence of wicked thoughts, with many other imperfections,
wherein man is daily insnared and oftentimes overthrown, and them compared
to my present estate. Nor was I ignorant of the heavie displeasure
which Almightie God conceived against the sonnes of Levie and Israel
for marrying strange wives, nor of the inconveniences which may thereby
arise, with other the like good notions, which made me look about warily
and with good circumspection into the grounds and principall agitations,
which thus provoke me to be in love with one whose education hath been
rude, her manners barbarous, her generation accursed, and so discrepant
in all nurtreture from myself, that oftentimes with fear and trembling I
have ended my private controversie with this:—`Surely these are wicked
instigations, hatched by him who seeketh and delighteth in man's destruction;'
and so with fervent praiers to be ever preserved from such
diabolical assaults (as I tooke those to be) I have taken some rest.

"Thus when I thought I had obtained some peace and quietness,
behold, another but more gracious tentation hath made breaches into my
holiest and strongest meditations, with which I have been put to a new
triall, in a straighter manner than the former; for besides the many passions
and sufferings which I have daily, hourly, yea, and in my sleepe
indured, even awaking me to astonishment, taxing me with remisness and
carelessness, refusing and neglecting to performe the duties of a good
Christian, pulling me by the eare, and crying, `Why dost not thou indeavour
to make her a Christian?' And these have happened to my greater


128

Page 128
wonder even when she hath bin furthest separated from me, which in
common reason (were it not an undoubted work of God) might breede
forgetfulness of a fare more worthy creature. Besides, I say, the Holy
Spirit hath often demanded of me, why I was created, if not for transitory
pleasures and worldly vanities, but to labour in the Lord's vineyard,
there to sow and plant, to nourish and increase the fruits thereof, daily
adding, with the good husband in the gospel, somewhat to the talent, that
in the end the fruits may be reaped, to the comfort of the labourer in
this life and his salvation in the world to come? And if this be, as undoubtedly
this is, the service Jesus Christ requireth of his best servant,
wo unto him that hath these instruments of pietie put into his hands, and
wilfully despiseth to worke with them! Likewise adding hereunto her
great appearance of love to me, her desire to be taught and instructed in
the knowledge of God, her capablenesse of understanding, her aptness
and willingnesse to receive anie good impression, and also the spirituall,
beside her own incitements hereunto stirring me up. What should I doe?
Shall I be of so untoward a disposition as to refuse to leade the blind into
the right way? Shall I be so unnaturall as not to give bread to the hungrie,
or uncharitable as not to cover the naked? Shall I despise to actuate
these pious duties of a Christian? Shall the base feare of displeasing
the world overpower and withhold me from revealing unto man these
spirituall works of the Lord, which in my meditations and praiers I have
daily made known unto him? God forbid! I assuredly trust he hath
thus delt with mee for my eternal felicitie and for his glorie; and I hope
so to be guarded by his heavenly grace, that in the end, by my faithfull
praiers and christianlike labour, I shall attaine to that blessed promise
pronounced by that holy prophet Daniell unto the righteous that bring
many unto the knowledge of God,—namely: that `they shall shine like
the stars forever and ever.' A sweeter comfort cannot be to a true Christian,
nor a greater incouragement to him to labour all the daies of his life
in the performance thereof, to be desired at the hour of death and in the
day of judgment. Again, by my reading and conference with honest and
religious persons, have I received no small encouragement; besides mea
serena conscientia,
the cleannesse of my conscience, clean from the filth
of impurity, quœ est instar muri ahenei, which is to me a brazen wall. If
I should set down at large the perturbations and godly motions which
have striven within mee, I should make but a tedious and unnecessary
volume. But I doubt not these shall be sufficient, both to certify you of
my true intent, in discharging of my duties to God and to yourselfe, to
whose gracious Providence I humbly submit myself, for his glory, your
honour, my countrie's good, the benefit of this Plantation, and for the
converting of one unregenerate to regeneration, which I beseech God to
grant for his dear Sonne Christ Jesus his sake. Nor am I in so desperate
an estate that I regard not what becometh of mee; nor am I out of hope
but one day to see my countrie, nor so void of friends, nor mean in birth,
but there to obtain a match to my great content; nor have I ignorantly
passed over my hopes there, nor regardlessly seek to lose the love of my
friends by taking this course: I know them all, and have not rashly overslipped
any.

"But shall it please God thus to dispose of me (which I earnestly
desire to fulfill my end before set down) I will heartily accept of it, as a
godly taxe appointed me, and I will never cease (God assisting me) until
I have accomplished and brought to perfection so holy a worke, in which


129

Page 129
I will daily pray God to bless mee, to mine and her eternal happiness.
And thus desiring no longer to live, to enjoy the blessing of God, than
this my resolution doth tend to such godly ends, as are by me before declared,
not doubting your favourable acceptance, I take my leave, beseeching
Almighty God to rain down upon you such plenitude of his heavenly
graces as your heart can wish and desire; and so I rest,

"At your command, most willingly to be disposed off,
"John Rolph"
 
[35]

This letter is referred to in Sir Thomas Dale's, and went with it to England

FIRST JOURNAL OF THE HOUSE OF DELEGATES.

For the following deeply-interesting document I am also indebted
to the same hand. Mr. Robinson, in his careful examination
of papers in the State Office, in London, discovered a manuscript
journal covering thirty pages, in which are the proceedings
of a House of Burgesses held at Jamestown in 1619. It has
been generally received and admitted, since the first volume of Mr.
Henning's Statutes at Large were published, that no account of
any such meeting was to be found for some years after this.

My object in publishing it is not merely to gratify the curiosity
and promote the objects of the historian and politician, but far
more,—to give additional weight to what I have already adduced in
proof of the spirit of piety which animated the bosoms of the first
founders of the Church and State of Virginia.

None can read the following document without admitting this:—

"A report of the manner of proceeding in the General Assembly convented
at James City, in Virginia, July 30, 1619, consisting of the Governor,
the Council of Estate, and two Burgesses elected out of each
incorporation and plantation, and being dissolved the first of August next
ensuing."

This is a document of the greatest interest to every Virginian.
It is very satisfactory to find that it is quite a full report, embracing
thirty pages. After the caption it proceeds as follows:—

"First, Sir George Yeardley, Knight, Governor and Captain-General
of Virginia, having sent his summons all over the country, as well as to
invite those of the Council of Estate that were absent, as also for the
election of Burgesses, they were chosen and appeared.

"1st. For James City—Capt. Wm. Powell, Ensign Wm. Spense.

"2nd. For Charles City—Samuel Sharpe, James Jordan.

"3rd. For the City of Henricus—Thomas Dowce, John Potintine.

"4th. For Kicciotan—Captain Wm. Tucker, Wm. Capp.

"5th. For Martin Brandon, Captain John Martin's Plantation—Mr.
Thomas Davis, Robert Stacy.


130

Page 130

"6th. For Smyth's Hundred—Captain Thos. Graves, Mr. Walter
Shelley.

"7th. For Martin's Hundred—Mr. John Boys, John Jackson.

"8th. For Argall's Plantation—Mr. Powlett, Mr. Gourgemy.

"9th. For Flour De Hundred—Ensign Poppingham, Mr. Jefferson.

"10th. For Captain Lannis' Plantation—Captain Christopher Lanne,
Ensign Wisher.

"11th. Captain Wirt's Plantation—Captain Wirt, Lieutenant Gibbs.

"The most convenient place we could find to sit in was the quire of
the church where Sir George Yeardley, the Governor, being set down in
his accustomed place, those of the Council of the Estate sat next him on
both hands, except only the Secretary, then appointed Speaker, who sat
before him. John Frome, Clerk of the General Assembly, being placed
next the Speaker, and Thomas Pierce, the Sergeant, standing at the bar,
to be ready for any service the Assembly should command him.

"But for as much as men's affairs do little prosper when God's service
is neglected, all the Burgesses took their places in the quire till a prayer
was said by Mr. Bucke, the minister, that it would please God to guide
and sanctify all our proceedings to his own glory and the good of this
plantation. Prayer being ended to the intent that, as we had begun at
God Almighty, so we might proceed with careful and due respect towards
his Lieutenant, our most gracious and dread sovereign, all the Burgesses
were instructed to retire themselves into the body of the church,
which, being done, before they were fully admitted, they were called in
order and by name, and so every man (none staggering at it) took the
oath of supremacy, and then entered the assembly."

To the foregoing documents in proof of the spirit which animated
the most devoted friends of the Colony, I add a third,
furnished me by another true son of Virginia,—Mr. Charles Campbell,
of Petersburg.

In the records of the London Company we meet with the name
of the Earl of Southampton as the treasurer and most active
friend of the same at the time of its greatest trials, when King
James and his ministers were seeking its destruction. In the year
1724, their object was effected and the Company summarily disbanded,
all their papers were seized upon, and the Colony taken
under the sole charge of Government. The pious, zealous, and
brave Earl of Southampton, however, never deserted the cause,
but, in Parliament, boldly advocated such measures as he believed
would most promote the true welfare of the Colony, in opposition
to a corrupt king and cabinet. This was the more honourable to
him from the relation he bore to the king. The Earl of Southampton
was the bosom-friend of the celebrated Earl of Essex,
Prime Minister to Elizabeth, and was somewhat implicated with
him in that conduct toward the queen which brought Essex to
the scaffold. Southampton was imprisoned by the queen, though


131

Page 131
spared the fate of Essex. At the death of Elizabeth and the
coronation of James, he was released from prison and placed in
some offices of honour and trust, being a member of the Privy
Council also. While thus honoured, in opposition to the wishes
and remonstrances of the king, the earl, true to the best interests
of the Company and the Colony, accepted the office of treasurer,
attended all its meetings, often had them at his own house, and, as
we have said, was the zealous advocate of all measures in Parliament
calculated to promote the truest good of the Colony, after
the company was dismissed by the king. The true secret of this
moral courage was his fidelity to the King of kings. How much
the following letter from his friend, the Earl of Essex, may have
contributed to this, we know not, but that it was eminently calculated
to direct his mind to the only true source of moral greatness
none can question. It has been a long time since its publication
in a London chronicle, and it is well worthy of republication in connection
with the name of Southampton and the early history of
Virginia. Let me add that so high was the character of Southampton
held in Virginia, that one of her rivers for some time bore
his name, and one of her largest counties still retains it.

Letter from the Earl of Essex to his friend the Earl of Southampton.

"My Lord:

As neither nature nor custom ever made me a man of
compliment, so now I shall have less will than ever for to use such ceremonies,
when I have left with Martha to be solicitus circa multa, and
believe with Mary unum sufficit. But it is no compliment or ceremony,
but a real and necessary duty that one friend oweth to another in absence,
and especially at their leave-taking, when, in man's reason, many accidents
may keep them long divided, or perhaps bar them ever meeting till
they meet in another world; for then shall I think that my friend, whose
honour, whose person, and whose fortune is dear unto me, shall prosper
and be happy wherever he goes, and whatever he takes in hand, when he
is in the favour of that God under whose protection there is only safety,
and in whose service there is only true happiness to be found. What I
think of your natural gifts or ability, in this age or in this State, to give
glory to God and to win honour to yourself, if you employ the talents you
have received to their best use, I will not now tell you; it sufficeth that
when I was farthest of all times from dissembling I spake truly and
have witness enough. But these things only I will put your lordship in
mind of.

"1. That you have nothing that you have not received.

"2. That you possess them not as lord over them, but as an accountant
for them

"3. If you employ them to serve this world, or your own worldly delights,
which the prince of this world will seek to entertain you with, it
is ingratitude, it is injustice, yea, it is perfidious treachery.


132

Page 132

"For what would you think of such a servant of yours that should
convert your goods, committed to his charge, to the advantage or service of
your greatest enemy; and what do you less than this with God, since you
have all from him, and know that the world and prince thereof are at continual
enmity with him? And therefore, if ever the admonition of your
truest friend shall be heard by you, or if your country which you may
serve in so great and many things be dear unto you; if God, whom you
must (if you deal truly with yourself) acknowledge to be powerful over
all, and just in all, be feared by you; yea, if you be dear unto yourself
and prefer an everlasting happiness before a pleasant dream, which you
must shortly awake out of and then repent in the bitterness of your soul;
if any of these things be regarded by you, then, I say, call yourself to
account for what is past, cancel all the leagues you have made without the
warrant of a religious conscience, make a resolute covenant with your God
to serve him with all your natural and spiritual, inward and outward gifts
and abilities, and then He that is faithful and cannot lie hath promised to
honour them that honour him; He will give you that inward peace of soul
and true joy of heart which, till you have, you shall never rest, and that,
when you have, you shall never be shaken, and which you can never attain
to any other way than this that I have showed you.

"I know your lordship may say to yourself and object to me, This is
but a vapour of melancholy and the style of a prisoner; and that I was
far enough from it when I lived in the world as you do now, and may be
so again when my fetters be taken from me. I answer, though your
lordship should think so, yet cannot I distrust the goodness of my God,
that his mercy will fail me or his grace forsake me. I have so deeply
engaged myself, that I should be one of the most miserable apostates
that ever was; I have so avowed my profession and called so many from
time to time to witness it and to be watchmen over me, that I should be
the hollowest hypocrite that ever was born. But though I should perish
in my own sin, and draw upon myself my own damnation, should not you
take hold of the grace and mercy, in God, which is offered unto you, and
make your profit of my fearful and wretched example? I was longer a
slave and servant to the world and the corruptions of it than you have
been, and therefore could hardly be drawn from it. I had many calls,
and answered some of them,—slowly thinking a soft pace fast enough
to come to Christ, and myself forward enough when I saw the end of my
journey, though I arrived not at it; and therefore I have been, by God's
providence, violently pulled, hauled, and dragged to the marriage-feast,
as the world hath seen. It was just with God to afflict me in this world,
that he might give me joy in another. I had too much knowledge when
I performed too little obedience, and I was, therefore, to be beaten with
double stripes. God grant your lordship may feel the comfort I now
enjoy in my unfeigned conversion, but that you may never feel the
torments I have suffered for my too long delaying it! I had none but
divines to call upon; to whom I said, if my ambition could have entered
into their narrow hearts, they would not have been so humble; or, if my
delights had been tasted by them, they could not have been so precise.
But your lordship hath one to call on you, that knows what it is you now
enjoy, and what the greatest fruit and end is of all the contentments that
this world can afford. Think, therefore, dear earl, that I have staked
and buoyed all the ways of pleasure to you, and left them as sea-marks,
for you to keep the channel of religious virtue: for, shut your eyes never


133

Page 133
so long, they must be open at last; and then you must say with me, There
is no peace to the wicked.

"I will make a covenant with my soul, not to suffer my eyes to sleep in
the night, nor my thoughts to attend the first business of the day, till I
have prayed to my God, that your lordship may believe and make profit
of this plain but faithful admonition; and then I know your country and
friends shall be happy in you, and yourself successful in all you take in
hand, which shall be an unspeakable comfort to

"Your lordship's cousin and true friend,
"whom no worldly cause can divide from you,
"Essex.'
 
[34]

At a later period a church—called Jefferson's Church—was built near Rock
Hall, and supplied by the minister from Varina. This church, or a part of it, may
be still standing.


134

Page 134

ARTICLE X.

Henrico Parish.—No. 2.

We introduce this second article by the following extract from a
pamphlet of Alexander Whittaker, the first minister of Henrico
parish. It was written in the year 1613. The account he gives
of the Indian character has a bearing on that sad catastrophe
which at an early period marred the fair prospects of Henrico
College, and which, but for it, might have been the William and
Mary of Virginia.

"TRACTATE BY MASTER ALEXANDER WHITTAKER, WRITTEN AT
HENRICO, 1613.

"They (the Indians) acknowledge that there is a great good God, but
know him not, having the eyes of their understanding as yet blinded;
wherefore they serve the Divell for feare, after a most base manner, sacrificing
sometimes (as I have hearde) their own children to him. I have
sent one image of their god to the Council in England, which is painted
on one side of a toadestoole, much like unto a deformed monster. Their
priests (whom they call Quickosoughs) are no other but such as our English
witches are. They live naked in body, as if their shame of their
sinne deserved no covering. Their names are as naked as their body:
they esteem it a vertue to lye, deceive, and steale, as their master the Divell
teacheth them.

"Their men are not so simple as some have supposed them, for they are
of body lusty, strong, and very nimble; they are a very understanding
generation,—quicke of apprehension, sudden in their despatches, subtile in
their dealings, exquisite in their intentions, and industrious in their labour.
I suppose the world hath no better marksmen than they be: they will kill
birds flying, fishes swimming, and beasts running. They shoote also with
marvailous strength: they shot one of our men, being unarmed, quite
through the body and nailed both his arms to his body with one arrow;
one of their children also, about the age of twelve or thirteen years, killed
a bird with his arrow, in my sight. The service of their god is answerable
to their life, being performed with great feare and attention, and many
strange dumb shewes used in the same, stretching forth their limbs and
straining their body, much like to the counterfeit women in England, who
fancie themselves bewitched or possessed of some evil spirit. They stand
in great awe of the Quickosoughs or priests, which are a generation of
vipers, even Satan's own brood. The manner of their life is much like
to the Popish hermits of our age; for they live alone in the woods, in
houses sequestered from the common course of men; neither may any


135

Page 135
man be suffered to come into their house, or speake to them, but when the
priest doth call him.

"He taketh no care for his victuals; for all such kind of things, both
bread and water, &c., are brought into a place neare his cottage and there
left, which he fetcheth for his proper needs. If they would have raine,
or have lost any thing, they have recourse to him, who conjureth for them
and many times prevaileth. If they be sick, he is their physician; if
they be wounded, he sucketh them. At his command they make warre
and peace; neither doe they any thing of moment without him. Finally,
there is a civil government among them which they strictly observe, and
show thereby that the law of nature dwelleth in them; for they have a
rude kinde of commonwealth and rough government, wherein they both
honour and obey their king, parents, and governors, both greater and
lesser. They observe the limits of their own possessions. Murther is
scarcely heard of; adultery and other offences severely punished."

We follow this sketch of the Indian character by stating that
the efforts of Mr. Whittaker and others, and all the acts of the
Company and Colony, seemed to have produced some effect on the
natives, and to promise friendly relations with them. This prospect
was brightened by the marriage of Rolph and Pocahontas.
Even after her death, in 1617, a letter is written to the Company,
saying, "Powhatan goes about visiting his country, taking his
pleasure, in good friendship with us; sorry for the death of his
daughter, but glad her son is living. So does Opechancanough.
They both wish to see the boy, but do not wish him to come to
Virginia until he is a man."[36] But, even at this time, it is to be
feared that the perfidious Indians were meditating war.

We now proceed with the history of the College and parish.

We have already stated, in one of our articles on Jamestown,


136

Page 136
that about the year 1619 it was determined to establish a College
at Henrico, and that liberal contributions were made in England
for that purpose. A pious and philanthropic man, a good scholar,
a warm and confiding friend of the Indians, Mr. George Thorpe,
was actually engaged in superintending all the preparatory operations.
How far they had advanced when the great massacre in
1622 occurred, and in which Mr. Thorpe and so many others were
killed and the city either destroyed or greatly injured, we have no
means of ascertaining. We have reason to believe that some unsuccessful
attempts were afterward made; but neither the city nor
the College ever recovered from this disastrous blow.

Large tracts of land, called the College lands and the Company's
lands, to the amount of fifteen thousand acres, had been
set apart on both sides of the river for the purpose of promoting
the College and settlement. Between one and two hundred labourers
were imported to cultivate them. One hundred young
women, of good character, were ordered over to be wives to the
workmen here and elsewhere. Eighty of them actually came.
The massacre fell heavily on them upon both sides of the river.
Despairing of success, at length the lands were otherwise disposed
of.

We are informed, by one of the descendants, that Mr. William
Randolph bought at one time the whole of Sir Thomas Dale's settlement,
amounting to five thousand acres of land, and as much
more of other persons, reaching down to Four-Mile Creek, on
James River. The two settlements of Varina and Curls, so long
the property and abodes of the Randolphs, were on this estate.
The estate of Bacon, the rebel, once formed a part of this tract,
and there are still some remains of the fort which he erected when
contending with the Indians. The estate called Varina, which
continued longest in possession of the Randolphs, was so called
from a place of that name in Spain, because the tobacco raised at
both places so resembled each other in flavour.

As to the ministers and churches, we have seen that Mr. Whittaker,
who died in 1619, ministered to the people at Henricopolis
and at Bermuda Hundred. He was succeeded by the Rev. Mr.
Wickam, and he by the Rev. Mr. Stockam. After these we have
no authentic account of any minister until the time of the Rev.
James Blair, who settled here in 1685, and was the rector until
the year 1694, when he went to Jamestown and became Commissary
and President of the College of William and Mary. The
next account we have of the parish is in the year 1724, in an


137

Page 137
answer to the circular of the Bishop of London; but unfortunately
the name of the minister is cut off from the manuscript which is
before us, and we can only give the report itself. The minister
(whose name is lost) had been in the parish fourteen years; that
is, since 1710. There were two churches and one chapel. The
parish was eighteen miles by twenty-five. There were eleven hundred
tithables and four hundred families in it. The masters do
nothing for their servants, but let some of them now and then go
to church. One or two hundred persons are sometimes at church.
The families are so distant that it is difficult to have the children
brought to catechism, and when they grow to any bigness they do
not like to be publicly catechized. The teachers and parents do
whatever is done in that way. There was no public school for
youth. There were only about twenty communicants at a time,
when the sacrament was administered.

The same evil is complained of here as is often elsewhere. The
large estates on the river separate the families, so that it is difficult
to get to church. It is so to this day along our rivers. Where
the two churches and the chapel were at that time, we are at a loss
to tell. Perhaps one may still have been at Henricopolis, the first
settlement by Sir Thomas Dale. After a time, one was built by
the first of the Richard Randolphs, which was called sometimes
Four-Mile Creek Church, sometimes Curls Church, as it lay between
these places. Whether there was a chapel at that time at the
Falls—that is, Richmond—is not certainly known, but is probable.
At a later period, the minister officiated alternately at the Four-Mile
Creek Church, or Curls Church, on the north side of James
River, and at a church on the south side, near Rock Hall, called
Jefferson's Church.

This was the case in the time of Mr. Stith, who wrote his History
about the year 1740, at Varina, when he was minister of
Henrico parish. He removed to Williamsburg to preside over the
College in the year 1752.[37] The building of the church at Four-Mile


138

Page 138
Creek, or Curls, is clearly ascertained, as to the time and the
erection of it, by an extract from a letter of the eldest Richard
Randolph, of Curls, to his son Richard, in 1748, in which he says,
"Pray assist Wilkinson all you can in getting the church finished,
and get the shells that will be wanted carted before the roads get
bad. The joiner can inform you what shells I have at the Falls.
If more are wanted you must get them." Some thirty or forty
years ago, when this church was without Episcopal services, a man
claimed it, and declared his intention to take it, when a great-grandson
of old Mr. Randolph, of the same name, repaired to the
place, and informed him that as soon as he touched it he would
have him arrested. The desired effect was produced. It has,
however, now disappeared; and none, I believe, bearing the name
of Randolph, owns a rood of that immense tract of land on which
their fathers once lived.[38]


139

Page 139

To proceed with the history of the ministers of Henrico parish:
we find, on the lists of the clergy in Virginia, that the Rev. Miles


140

Page 140
Selden was minister in 1758 and also in 1776, from which we
infer that he was the minister from 1758 to 1776; how long before
1758 or after 1776, does not appear. Nor have I been able to
ascertain any thing particular concerning him.[39]

 
[36]

Even as late as 1641 the boy Thomas Rolph asks and obtains leave of the
Assembly to visit his uncle, Opechancanough. There is a document in the records
of the Virginia Company of the 7th of October, 1622, which is worthy of insertion
here. It appears that Mr. John Rolph, after returning to Virginia in 1617, married
again and had other children, and that he died in or before 1622, leaving a
widow and children. Mr. Henry Rolph, brother of John Rolph, addresses a petition
to the House of Burgesses, "desiring the estate his brother John Rolph, deceased,
left in Virginia, might be enquired out and converted to the best use for
the maintenance of his relict wife and children, and for his indemnity, (having
brought up the child his said brother had by the daughter of Powhatan, which is
yet living and in his custody.) It was therefore ordered that the Governor and
Council in Virginia should cause inquiry to be made what lands and goods the said
Rolph died seized of, and in case it should be found that the said Rolph made no
will, then to take such order for the petitioner's indemnity, and for the maintenance
of the said children and his relict wife, as they shall find his estate will beare, (his
debts unto the Company and others being satisfied,) and return unto the Company
an account of their proceedings."

[37]

William Stith was the only son of Captain John Stith, of the county of Charles
City, and of Mary, a daughter of "William Randolph, gentleman," of Turkey
Island, in the adjoining county, Henrico, in the Colony of Virginia: their son William
was born in the year 1689. On the death of her husband, Mrs. Stith. at the
instance of her brother, Sir John Randolph, removed to Williamsburg and placed
her son in the grammar-school attached to the College of William and Mary, where
he pursued his academic studies and graduated. His theological studies were completed
in England, where he was ordained a minister in the Episcopal Church. On
his return to Virginia, in the year 1731, he was elected master of the grammar-school
in the College and chaplain to the House of Burgesses. In June, 1738, he
was called as rector to Henrico parish, in the county of Henrico. He married his
cousin Judith, a daughter of Thomas Randolph, of Tuckahoe, the second son of
William Randolph, of Turkey Island, and resided in the parsonage on the glebe
near Varina, the seat of justice for the county of Henrico. There he wrote his
History of Virginia, which was printed and bound in the city of Williamsburg, at
the only printing-press then in the Colony. In August, 1752, he was elected President
of William and Mary College, to which he removed and over which he
presided until his death, in 1755.

[38]

The connection of so many of the Randolphs, not only with the Episcopal
Church, but ministry, both in England and America, merits some special notice of
the family. It shall be very brief by comparison with the numbers and respectability
of it. I leave it to some one of the name to trace back its history through
the Church and State in England, and through the numerous branches which have
spread themselves over Virginia and other parts of our land. I only abridge some
of the genealogies placed in my hands, by giving a list of some of the earliest of
the family, from whom all others have proceeded. The first of the name who
settled in Virginia, Mr. William Randolph, became possessed of the large estate on
James River called Turkey Island, bordering on Charles City, to which he added
numerous other estates, on which he settled his sons, building excellent houses for
all of them. He married Miss Mary Isham, daughter of Henry and Catherine
Isham, of Bermuda Hundred, on the opposite side of the river.

They had seven sons and two daughters. 1st. William, of Turkey Island, who
married Miss Beverly, of Gloucester. 2d. Thomas, of Tuckahoe, who married
Miss Flemming. 3d. Isham, of Dungeness, who married a Miss Rojers, of England.
4th. Richard, of Curls, who married a Miss Bolling, descendant of Pocahontas.
5th. Henry, who died without issue. 6th. Sir John Randolph, of Williamsburg,
who married Miss Beverly, sister of his brother William's wife. 7th.
Edward, who married an heiress in England,—a Miss Groves. He was a captain
of a ship. Some of his children settled in England and some in Virginia. Two of
his daughters married the Revs. William and Robert Yates, of Gloucester county.
A third married William Stith, and was the mother of the Rev. Mr. Stith, the historian
of Virginia, minister of Henrico, and afterward President of William and
Mary College. His sister married Commissary Dawson, and he himself married
Miss Judith Randolph, of Tuckahoe. Another of the family married the Rev. Mr.
Keith, who settled in Fauquier, and was the ancestor of Judge Marshall. Another
married Mr. Anthony Walke, of Norfolk county, and was the mother of the Rev.
Anthony Walke, of that county. To their connection with the sanctuary in Virginia
may be added one in our Mother-Church of which the family may well be
proud. Bishop Randolph, of the latter part of the last century, was first Archdeacon
of Jersey, then Bishop of Oxford, and then of London, in all which stations
he was most highly esteemed. His collection of tracts for the benefit of young students
for the ministry show him to have been a Bishop of sound doctrines and of a
truly catholic spirit. As to piety and active zeal, he is thought to have been considerably
in advance of the generality of the Bishops of his day. It may not be
amiss to state that Thomas Randolph, the poet, of England, was uncle to William
Randolph, of Turkey Island, and that the nephew is said to have possessed something
of his poetic genius. We must here stop, and only say that the family of Randolphs
is henceforth to be found mixed up with the Beverlys, Harrisons, Jennings,
Lees, Grymes, Wormleys, Nelsons, Burwells, Lightfoots, Bollings, Spotwoods,
Pages, Singletons, Flemings, Berkeleys, Stiths, Carys, Jeffersons, Carrs, Pleasants,
Meades, Hackleys, Woods, Mumfords, Armsteads, and others, known and unknown
and too numerous to mention.

I add the following brief account from Campbell's History of Virginia:—"Several
of the sons of the first William Randolph, of Turkey Island, father of the family in
Virginia, were men of distinction. William was a member of the Council and Treasurer
of the Colony. Isham was member of the House of Burgesses, in 1740, from
Goochland, and Adjutant-General of the Colony. Richard was a member of the House
of Burgesses in 1740, from Henrico, and succeeded his brother as Treasurer Sir
John was Speaker of the House of Burgesses, and Attorney-General. Peter, son
of the second William Randolph, was Clerk of the House of Burgesses, and Attorney-General.
Peyton, son of Sir John, was Speaker of the House of Burgesses
and President of the first Congress held at Philadelphia. Thomas Mann Randolph,
great-grandson of William, of Turkey Island, was a member of the Virginia Convention
in 1775, from Goochland. Beverly Randolph was member of the Assembly
from Cumberland, during the Revolution, and Governor of Virginia. Robert Randolph,
son of Peter, Richard Randolph, grandson of Peter, and David Meade Randolph,
grandson of the second Richard, of Curls, were cavalry-officers in the Revolution.
David Meade Randolph was Marshal of Virginia. John Randolph, of
Roanoke, member of Congress and minister to Russia, was grandson of the first
Richard. Thomas Mann Randolph, Jr., was member of Congress, of the Legislature
of Virginia, and Governor of Virginia." To this we add, that Edmund Randolph
was Secretary of State of the United States and Governor of Virginia, beside
holding other offices.

Mr. Campbell remarks that the members of the numerous families of the
Randolphs, in several instances, adopted the names of their seats, for purposes of
distinction, as, Thomas of Tuckahoe, Isham of Dungeness, Richard of Curls, John
of Roanoke. The following were the seats of the Randolphs on James River,
Tuckahoe, Dungeness, Chattsworth, Wilton, Varina, Curls, Bremo, Turkey Island.
In a work on the old families, &c. of the Church in Virginia, the above is not too
much for one, whose branches have, with few exceptions, been so steadfast to her
and some of whom have contributed so liberally to her support, as old Mr. Richard
Randolph, of Curls, Mr. Thomas Mann Randolph, of Tuckahoe, and Colonel
Robert Randolph, of Fauquier.

[39]

I have obtained the following notice of the Rev. Wm. Selden, a relative of Mr.
Miles Selden:—"The Rev. Wm. Selden was son of John Selden and Grace Rosewell,
and grandson of the first of the name who came to Virginia, about 1690, and
settled in the Northern Neck. Wm. Selden was born in 1741, was educated at William
and Mary College, studied law and practised it some years. Disliking the
profession, he studied for the ministry, and went to London, where he was ordained
in 1771. Returning to Virginia, he became the minister of Elizabeth parish. He
continued in charge of this parish until a short time before his death. He married
Mary Ann Hancock, of Princess Ann county, by whom he had many children, two
only of whom grew up and had issue,—viz.: Dr. W. B. Selden, of Norfolk, only
two of whose sons survive, viz., Dr. Wm. Selden, of Norfolk, and Robert Selden,
of Gloucester, two others, Dr. Henry Selden and Miss Susan Selden, having fallen
victims to the late epidemic in Norfolk. Mrs. Bagnal, the other child of the Rev.
W. Selden who left issue, has now living two children,—Mrs. Mary Grace, of Gloucester,
and W. D. Bagnal, of Norfolk. The Rev. Miles Selden, of Henrico, was
the son of Joseph, the youngest son of the first settler, and, consequently, the first-cousin
of the Rev. Wm. Selden." From their continuance during their ministry in
the parishes which called them, and other considerations, we have reason to believe
that they were both exemplary men.

HENRICO PARISH AFTER THE REVOLUTION.

Previous to the Revolution, it is probable that the families of the
Randolphs at Turkey Island, Curls, Varina, Wilton, and Chattsworth,
with a few others in the neighbourhood of the old settlement
of Sir Thomas Dale, formed the main strength of the Episcopal
Church in Henrico, and that the ministers resided at the
parsonage and on the glebe at Varina. But the scene will now
be changed to Richmond, which, though still a very small place,
became the seat of government during the war.[40]



No Page Number


No Page Number
illustration

ST. JOHN'S CHURCH, RICHMOND, VA.


141

Page 141

St. John's Church, on Richmond Hill, whose age we are unable
to ascertain, had been the sanctuary of patriotism, as well as of
religion, more than once before and during the war, in which the
voices of our Randolphs, Lees, Henrys, and Masons roused the
citizens to arms. Beneath it, on the river Powhatan, (the ancient
name of James River, and which ought never to have been
changed,) lay the spot where the old King Powhatan sometimes
held his court when warring with the fierce Monacans or Manakins,
who never allowed him to extend his conquests above the
Falls. Although it is clearly shown that Pocahontas was born and
trained at a place far distant from this, and baptized and married
at Jamestown, and though it is all a fable that it was here she
rescued the gallant Smith, yet, during her residence with Rolph
at Henricopolis, she may have visited the spot before any Christian
church was reared on its brows.

From this time forward we have the sure guide of a vestry-book
in tracing the history of this parish. The one before us opens
with the first meeting of the parishioners, in March, 1785, to elect
a vestry under the act of incorporation by the Legislature, which
had before put down the Episcopal Church as an Establishment.
The first vestrymen were Edmund Randolph, Turner Southall,
Jaqueline Ambler, Nathaniel Wilkinson, Hobson Owen, William
Fouchee, William Burton, Daniel L. Hylton, Miles Selden, Thomas
Prosser, John Ellis, Bowler Cocke, of whom Edmund Randolph
and Bowler Cocke were chosen churchwardens, and the former
elected to the Convention about to meet in the May following.
Previous to that meeting, the Rev. John Buchanon was elected
minister of the parish. He had been the minister of Amherst
parish some years before this. The following resolution of the
vestry in the year 1789 will show their sense of the importance of
religion, and their testimony to its low condition at that time:—

"We, the undersigned, (it was intended for vestrymen and others,)
considering that the principles of true religion have a powerful tendency
to promote as well the order and good government of the society at large,
as the peace and happiness of those individuals who are influenced by
them, and that there has been found no surer mode of establishing and
rivetting such principles on the mind, and the uniform exercise of and
attendance on public worship, and deeply deploring the almost total decline
of divine worship for some years past, and the consequent depravation


142

Page 142
of morals of every denomination among us, and earnestly wishing for
a reformation on that head, more particularly on account of the rising
generation, that the seeds of piety and virtue may be sown in their tender
minds, and preserve them from the contagion and irreligion and the practices
of an evil world. To effectuate these important purposes, as far as
our influence and circumstances admit, we have entered into the present
association for the support of religion and the maintenance of regular
divine worship, and do therefore hereby oblige ourselves, our heirs, &c. to
pay or cause to be paid unto Jaqueline Ambler, Treasurer of the Protestant
Episcopal Church in the parish of Henrico," &c.

So low, however, was the condition of the church, that a very
small sum was raised in this way for the support of the ministry,
and Mr. Buchannon received but little beside the rent of the glebe
and perquisites during the whole of his ministry; and that little
was always given to others. Having some property of his own,
through the death of his brother, Mr. James Buchanon, and
living with simplicity and economy, he did not need a salary for
himself.[41]

In the year 1790, the vestry passed a resolution permitting the
churchwardens to allow ministers of other denominations to preach
in our country churches in the daytime, when not occupied by Dr.
Buchanon, provided they did not leave them open or injure them.
At a later period, Mr. Blair is allowed to preach every other Sunday
in St. John's Church. This not only shows their kind feelings
toward the other denominations, but that they considered the
churches as not made common property by the law, as some have
contended. In the year 1791, a committee appointed to inquire
into the property of the parish report that the glebe consists of
one hundred and ninety-six acres of land by an old patent, that
the houses are out of repair, that the glebe rents for forty pounds,


143

Page 143
and is supposed to be worth one thousand pounds, that there is
one silver cup and salver. In the year 1714, the vestry elected
the Rev. David Moore, son of Bishop Moore, to act as assistant
to Dr. Buchanon; but the offer was declined. In the year 1715,
the Rev. William Hart was chosen and accepted. In the year
1722, Dr. Buchanon died, and Mr. Hart succeeded to the entire
rectorship of the church.

On the 13th of May, 1826, Dr. John Adams presented to the
vestry a marble font, which was obtained from Curls Church. In
July of the year 1828, the Rev. Mr. Hart resigned and the Rev.
William F. Lee was elected. Soon after Mr. Lee's entrance on
the duties of rector, a proposition was made to remove the old
church below the hill, or build or purchase a new one. This resulted
in the resignation of Mr. Lee and of a number of the vestrymen,
and the formation of a new congregation and purchase of
a Presbyterian church, since called Christ Church, in whose service
Mr. Lee ended his days.

In the year 1830, the Rev. Mr. Peet was chosen the minister of
St. John's. In the year 1833, the Rev. Mr. Peet resigned and the
Rev. Robert Croes was elected. Mr. Croes resigned in 1836, and
the Rev. Mr. Hart was re-elected to his old parish, and continued
its minister until the year 1842. In the following year, the Rev.
Mr. Morrison was elected, and continued the minister until 1848.
In the following year, the Rev. Mr. Kepler was called to be the
minister of this parish, and continues such to this time.

I close my notice of St. John's Church by referring to a subject
on which I find that the vestry took action in the years 1826 and
1828. At an early period, two hundred acres of land were laid
off from the College or Company lands near Henricopolis or Dale's
settlement, for a glebe, court-house, prison, &c., one hundred and
ninety-six being for the former. It continued to be the residence
and property of the successive ministers until the death of Dr.
Buchanon, in 1822. A short time subsequent to this, the overseers
of the poor laid claim to it and offered it for sale. The Rev.
Mr. Hart, assistant and successor to Dr. Buchanon, enjoined the
proceedings, and filed a bill in Chancery to obtain ownership;
whereupon the Chancellor, at the January term of his court in
1826, decided in favour of the church and against all claims of
the overseers of the poor. It was then resolved by the vestry to
sell their right and interest in the glebe to Mr. Pleasant Aiken, of
Petersburg, in such manner as shall appear for the best interests
of the parish. An appeal from the decision of the Chancellor was


144

Page 144
taken by the overseers of the poor, and Mr. Aiken declined closing
the bargain until the decision of the Court of Appeals. In the
month of March, 1828, the vestry direct the rector to lease the
glebe-lands adjoining the Varina estate, and belonging to the
parish, to such person and upon such terms as he may think will
best secure their preservation. This is the last entry upon the vestry-book
concerning it. I am privately informed that the vestry
withdrew their claim, or did not prosecute it, rather than involve
the church in what might prove a long and bitter controversy with
the overseers of the poor representing the citizens of Henrico,
although well persuaded that the Chancellor was right in his decision.
I presume that the claim of the vestry rested on the fact
that this glebe was not purchased for the parish by a levy of the
vestry on the people, as was the case of the glebes generally, and
on which account the law for selling them was passed, but was a
gift to the parish by the London Company out of the lands set
apart for the College and the general uses of Henrico. In ceasing
to contend for their rights, the vestrymen of Henrico only did
what other vestrymen have done, preferring rather to suffer loss
than promote strife and thereby injure the cause of religion. It
has been the general sentiment of the clergy and laity of our
Church in Virginia, with whom I have been acquainted, that,
though the glebes may have been wrongfully taken away, (about
which there has been diversity of opinion,) yet even if they could
be recovered by law, the effort should not be made, because of the
discord and unhappiness which would certainly attend it.

As I am writing of the old churches and ministers of Virginia,
leaving it to some one else, at a future day, with ampler materials
than I possess for my work, to speak of more modern ones, a few
words will suffice for the new parishes and churches in Richmond.
Of the sad calamity which led to the erection of the Monumental
Church, every modern history of Virginia and sketch of Richmond
is full, and I shall not dwell upon it. Bishop Moore was
called to be its first minister, and still lives in the hearts of all
who knew him. The Revs. Mr. Croes, Nichols, Thomas Jackson,
and Norwood, were successively his assistants. The latter succeeded
to the rectorship at the Bishop's death. A larger church
being needed, St. Paul's was built under the auspices of Mr. Norwood
and some active laymen. The Rev. Mr. Woodbridge, who
had long laboured in the church vacated by the death of the Rev.
Mr. Lee, took possession of the Monumental, when St. Paul's was
completed and entered by Mr. Norwood and his congregation.


145

Page 145

Years before this, St. James's Church had been built and Dr.
Empie called to be its pastor. After faithfully labouring many
years, and being unable to labour more, he resigned the charge of
it to the Rev. Mr. Cummings, at whose resignation the Rev. Mr.
Peterkin succeeded. At the resignation of St. Paul's by Mr. Norwood,
on account of ill health, the Rev. Alexander Jones was
chosen, and continued some years. The Rev. Mr. Minegerode is
the present pastor. Since Mr. Woodbridge's removal to the Monumental
Church, Trinity Church has been mostly supplied by missionary
services. During the last spring, while under the charge
of the Rev. Mr. Webb, the building was consumed with fire. It
deserves to be mentioned that a missionary chapel was erected in
the western part of the city, some years since, through the zealous
labours of the Rev. Dr. Bolton, though, from various unfavourable
circumstances, it failed of its object and has been disposed of.
Should I have failed to make mention of the missionary labours of
the Rev. Mr. Duval, in Richmond, the memories and the hearts of
all its citizens would have supplied the deficiency, even if the excellent
memoir of him by the Rev. Mr. Walker had not perpetuated
the remembrance of one of the most devoted Christians and philanthropists
of Virginia.

 
[40]

The following account of Richmond at this time is from the papers of Mrs.
Colonel Carrington, from which I have already borrowed so largely, and, I am sure,
so acceptably to my readers:—

"Richmond at the time of the Removal of the Seat of Government thither.—It
is indeed a lovely situation, and may at some future period be a great
city, but at present it will afford scarce one comfort of life. With the exception
two or three families, this little town is made up of Scotch factors, who inhabit
small tenements here and there from the river to the hill, some of which looking—
as Colonel Marshal (afterward Judge Marshal) observes—as if the poor Caledonians
had brought them over on their backs, the weaker of whom were glad to stop
at the bottom of the hill; others a little stronger proceeded higher; while a few of
the stoutest and boldest reached the summit, which, once accomplished, affords a
situation beautiful and picturesque. One of these hardy Scots has thought proper
to vacate his little dwelling on the hill; and, though our whole family can scarcely
stand up all together in it, my father has determined to rent it as the only decent
tenement on the hill."

[41]

The following letter from Mrs. Colonel Edward Carrington, of Richmond, to
her friend Miss Caines, of London, (who had lived in Virginia,) will show what was
the state of things at this time, in the year 1792, the date of the letter:—

"This evil" (the want of public worship) "increases daily; nor have we left in
our extensive State three churches that are decently supported. Our metropolis
even would be left destitute of this blessing but for the kind offices of our friend
Buchanon, whom you remember well, an inmate of our family. He, from sheer
benevolence, continues to preach in our capital, to what we now call the New
School,—that is to say, to a set of modern philosophers who merely attend because
they know not what else to do with themselves. But, blessed be God, in spite of
the enlightened, as they call themselves, and in spite of Godwin, Paine, &c., we
still, at times, particularly on our great Church-days, repair with a choice few to
our old church on the hill, (St. John's,) and, by contributing our mite, endeavour
to preserve the religion of our fathers. Delightful hours we sometimes pass
there," &c.


146

Page 146

ARTICLE XI.

Williamsburg, Bruton Parish.—No. 1.

This parish was carved out of the counties of James City and
Charles River. The latter county was, in 1642, changed into
York county. The parish of Bruton, in the year 1723, was
reported to the Bishop of London as ten miles square. At one
time a parish called Marston was within these bounds, being the
upper part, toward New Kent; but that was soon dissolved and
added to Bruton. Of the early history of Williamsburg, or the
Middle Plantation, we know but little. That there was a church
there in 1665 is certain from an entry in the vestry-book of Middlesex
parish, in that year, which directs a church to be built in
that parish, after the model of that at Williamsburg,—probably a
wooden one. How long that at Williamsburg had been in existence
before this time is not known. The vestry-book of Bruton parish
commenced in 1674, and continues until 1769,—a few years before
the Revolution. The first minister was the Rev. Rowland Jones,
who continued from 1674 to his death, in 1688. Besides vestrymen
and churchwardens, there were, after the English custom and
canons, two officers, called sidesmen or questmen, who were especially
appointed to present unworthy persons to those in authority,
for civil and ecclesiastical discipline. I have not met with these in
any other parish. It appears that there were at this time, and
had been, no doubt, for a considerable period, two other churches
in this parish, an upper and lower, both of which needed repair;
and the vestry resolved, in the year 1678, not to repair either of
them, but to build a new brick church at Williamsburg, to answer
for all. Free donations were solicited before a levy was resorted
to. A list of some of the donors is recorded. At the head is
John Page (first of the name) for £20, and the ground for the
church and graveyard; Thomas Ludwell, £20; Philip Ludwell,
£10; Colonel Thorp, £10; and many others, £5,—among them
the minister, Mr. Jones. A pew was put in the chancel for the
minister, and Mr. John Page and Edward Jennings were allowed



No Page Number
illustration

WILLIAMSBURG CHURCH, BRUTON PARISH.



No Page Number

147

Page 147
to put up pews for their families within the same.[42] The church
being finished, the Rev. Mr. Jones was requested to dedicate it.

148

Page 148
The vestry now caused it to be proclaimed throughout the parish,
that the law against those who absented themselves from church
would be enforced. It seems that, though much violated, it had
not been enforced, and perhaps never was. The penalty was so
many pounds of tobacco, after the laws "martial, moral, and divine"
had been repealed. It was during Mr. Jones's ministry that the
salary of £100, which had been paid him, was commuted for sixteen
thousand-weight of tobacco, the minister consenting, as the people
complained that they were not able to pay the £100. At the death
of Mr. Jones, the Rev. Mr. Sclater was employed for six months,
to preach every other Sabbath afternoon, and then the Rev. Mr.
Eburne for the same time every other Sunday morning. It is
probable that these were ministers of neighbouring parishes. At
the close of Mr. Eburne's engagement they elected him for seven
years, instead of inducting him for life. Lord Effingham, Lieutenant-Governor,
then addressed them the following letter:—

"Gentlemen:

I understand that upon my former recommendation
to you of Mr. Samuel Eburne, you have received him, and he hath continued
to exercise his ministerial functions in preaching and performing
divine service. I have now to recommend him a second time to you,
with the addition of my own experience of his ability and true qualification
in all points, together with his exemplary life and conversation.
And therefore, holding of him in esteem, as a person who, to God's
honour and your good instruction, is fit to be received, I do desire he may
be by you entertained and continued, and that you will give him such
encouragement as you have formerly done to persons so qualified.

Effingham."

149

Page 149

The meaning of the foregoing is plain,—viz.: that the vestrymen
apply to the Governor to induct Mr. Eburne for life, and so
have him fixed upon them, unless by process of law he could be
discarded for some great crime or crimes. The vestry, however,
at the end of the seven years, passed a resolve never to elect a
minister for more than one year at a time, and invited him to
remain on these terms; but he, getting old and infirm, preferred
going to some milder climate. Here is the first recorded conflict
of a vestry with the Governor on the subject of inductions. We
shall very soon have occasion to consider the subject at some
length. In the year 1697, the Rev. Cope Doyley was chosen
minister. In the year 1700, Governor Nicholson appears on the
vestry-book, in a manner characteristic of himself. He demands
of the vestry, under their own hands, whether the Rev. Mr.
Doyley reads the service of the Book of Common Prayer in the
church. It is answered in the affirmative. In the year 1702, Mr.
Doyley dies, and Mr. Solomon Whately is chosen from some other
parish,—not, however, without the Governor's leave being asked
for his removal. After having preached his trial sermon, and
being called, some objection was raised, and he is requested to
preach again, for the satisfaction of those who were not present at
his first sermon. His election for one year was confirmed, at
the end of which time his call was not renewed; but he was invited
to continue for a few months while looking out for another
parish. One of the vestry was directed to see the Rev. Isaac
Grace, who had just arrived in the colony, and get him to preach.
Mr. Grace expressed a willingness to come, but said that his case
was in the hands of the Governor, who had forbid him to come into
the parish. It seems that Mr. Whately was a favourite of the
Governor, and that he was offended with the vestry for not
choosing him as their permanent minister. Mr. Whately was the
most active minister in sustaining Governor Nicholson when, on
various accounts, he had become so unpopular that, at the petition
of the Council and some of the clergy, he was withdrawn
from Virginia. This case of the vestry and Mr. Whately led Mr.
Nicholson to get the opinion of Mr. Edward Northy, one of the
King's high legal advisers, as to the relative powers and privileges
of the Governors and vestries in presenting and inducting ministers,
and to order it to be entered upon all the vestry-books. I
have seen it on a number of them, and find it on that of Bruton
parish, from which I am drawing these statements. On receiving
it, the vestry passed some resolutions, and directed Mr. John


150

Page 150
Page, (grandson of the old vestryman of that name, who was now
dead,) an eminent lawyer and member of the Council, to draw up
something on the subject, with the view of presenting it to the
House of Burgesses, requesting them to take action on the question.
We hear nothing more of the dispute, and the Governor was recalled
in 1705; but this is evident:—that the vestry never yielded the
point; for although they thought it expedient to retain Mr. Whately
until his death, yet it was under a solemn declaration of their determination
to elect their minister every year, which was done in the case
of Mr. Whately and his successors, during the Colonial Government,
so far as the vestry-book shows. The history of the case is
this:—In theory, the Governor claimed to be the representative of
the King, in Church and State, and patron of all the parishes; also
to be the representative of the Bishop of London, having the disposal
of the ministers and the exercise of discipline over the clergy,
thus making the office of the Commissary a nullity. Nor did the
Commissaries object; for they were, with one exception, Presidents
of William and Mary College, and fully employed. Dr. Blair did
sometimes act. It was evident that if such was to be the construction
put upon the power of the Governor, as claimed by Effingham,
Nicholson, and Spottswood, the vestries would have little
power to prevent the settlement for life (with legal power to enforce
their salaries) of many most unworthy ministers; for although the
law allowed them the right of choosing a minister within six
months after a vacancy occurred, yet if they did not so do the
Governor might send one and induct him for life. Now, such was
the scarcity of ministers that they must wait the arrival of some
new and untried one from England, or else take some indifferent
one who was without a parish in this country. To save the
congregations from imposition under such a system, the vestries
adopted the method of electing from year to year, not presenting
to the Governors for induction, by which induction so many unworthy
ministers might be settled upon them. Induction did take
place in some cases where, after years of good conduct, it was
safe to conform to the law; and in some few others. Who could
blame them for this act of self-defence against such mighty power
in the hands of one man, when the consequences of induction were
so evil, and when the circumstances of the parishes, the small
salaries and extensive districts to be served, and the state of the
Mother-Church, made it so difficult to get worthy ministers? This
was the practice of the vestries almost from the first and to the
very last of the Colonial establishment. In vain did the clergy

151

Page 151
complain to the Bishop of London, and even to the Crown, of the
uncertain and precarious tenure by which they held their livings
from year to year. In vain did the Governors and Commissaries
speak of this custom of the vestries, as preventing more and
better ministers from coming over. In vain were the sympathetic
responses from England. The vestries were unmoved. The
Governors and Commissaries were wise enough to attempt nothing
more than complaints; for they must have seen that the vestries
had much reason for their conduct, and that any rigid interpretation
of the law and effort to enforce it would meet with effectual
resistance from the vestries. The Crown and the Bishop of
London dared not issue any injunction of the kind. On the
contrary, whatever was done in England from time to time was
in modification of any supposed high rights of Governors and in
favour of vestries, and the nearer the Revolution approached the
more fearful were the authorities in England of doing any thing
against the vestries. The vestries were the depositaries of power
in Virginia. They not only governed the Church by the election
of ministers, the levying of taxes, the enforcing of laws, but
they made laws in the House of Burgesses; for the burgesses
were the most intelligent and influential men of the parish, and
were mostly vestrymen. It is easy to perceive why the vestry of
Williamsburg wished the question between them and Nicholson
referred to the Assembly; for it was only referring it to the other
vestries, who were pursuing the same course with themselves.
Nor were the vestries represented in the popular branch of the
Government only. We will venture to affirm, and that not
without examination, that there was scarce an instance of any but
a vestryman being in the Council, although, as the Council was
chosen by the Governor and the King, there was more likelihood
of some being found in them who might favour high views of
prerogative.

In the history of the vestries we may fairly trace the origin, not
only of that religious liberty which afterward developed itself in
Virginia, but also of the early and determined stand taken by the
Episcopalians of Virginia in behalf of civil liberty. The vestries,
who were the intelligence and moral strength of the land, had been
trained up in the defence of their rights against Governors and
Bishops, Kings, Queens, and Cabinets. They had been slowly
fighting the battles of the Revolution for a hundred and fifty
years. Taxation and representation were only other words for
support and election of ministers. The principle was the same.


152

Page 152
It is not wonderful, therefore, that we find the same men who took
the lead in the councils and armies of the Revolution most active
in the recorded proceedings of the vestries. Examine the vestry-books,
and you will find prominent there the names of Washington,
Peyton Randolph, Edmund Pendleton, General Nelson, Governor
Page, Colonel Bland, Richard Henry Lee, General Wood,
Colonel Harrison, George Mason, and hundreds of others who might
be named as patriots of the Revolution. The principle for which
vestries contended was correct,—viz.: the choice of their ministers.
I do not say that it must necessarily be by annual election; but
there must be a power of changing ministers, for sufficient reasons.
The Governors and the clergy, who came from England, did not
understand how this could be, so used had they been to a method
widely different. It was reserved for the Church in America to
show its practicability, and also to establish something yet more
important, and what is by most Englishmen still thought a doubtful
problem,—the voluntary principle, by which congregations not
only choose their ministers but support them without taxation by
law. It may be wise to provide some check to the sudden removal
of ministers by the caprice of vestries and congregations, as is the
case in the Presbyterian and Episcopal Churches, where some
leave of separation is required from Presbyteries and Bishops; but
neither of them are ever so unwise as to interpose a veto where it
is evident that there is sufficient reason for separation, whether
from dissatisfaction on either side, or from both, or any strong consideration.
The people have it in their power, either by withholding
support or attendance, and in other ways, to secure their removal,
and the ministers cannot be forced to preach. Either party
have an inalienable right to separate, unless there be some specific
bargain to the contrary. In one denomination in our land, it is
true that ministers are appointed to their stations and congregations
are supplied by its chief officers; but it must be remembered
that this is only a temporary appointment,—for a year or two at
most. Let it ever be attempted to make it an appointment for life,
or even a long term of years, and the dissolution of that Society
would soon take place. In the first organization of our general
Church in this country, after the separation from our mother-country,
an office of induction was adopted, with the view of rendering
the situation of the clergy more permanent; but such was the opposition
to it from Virginia and some other States, that it was determined
it should only be obligatory on those States which chose to

153

Page 153
make it so. Very few instances of its use have ever occurred in
the Diocese of Virginia.[43]


154

Page 154

From this digression, should it seem so to any, I resume the history
of Bruton parish. At the death of Mr. Whately, the Rev.
James Blair, Commissary to the Bishop of London, and President
of William and Mary College, was chosen minister, with the understanding
that there was to be an annual election. He continued
the minister for thirty-three years, until his death, in 1743.
Mr. Blair came over to Virginia in 1685, and was the minister of
Henrico parish for nine years, and then moved to Jamestown, in
order to be more convenient to the College which he was raising
up. In the year 1710, he became the minister of Bruton parish.
The history of Mr. Blair during the last forty-three out of the
fifty-three years of his ministry is so connected with the history
not only of Williamsburg and the College, but of the Governors,
the Council, the Assembly and Church of Virginia, that it will
require some time and labour to do it any thing like justice. Indeed,
with all the documents I possess, consisting of numerous and
most particular communications made by him and others to the
Privy Council, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and Bishop of
London, as to the personal difficulties between himself and the
Governors and the clergy,—communications never published, and
which would form a large volume,—I find it very difficult to form
a positive opinion as to some points in his character. I begin with
that which is most easy and satisfactory,—his ministerial life. It
commenced under the administration of Governor Spottswood, and
with a tender from the Governor to the vestry of aid in building a
new church; the plan of which was sent by him, and is, I presume,
the same with that now standing. Its dimensions were to
be seventy-five by twenty-two feet, with two wings, making it a
cross as to form. The governor offered to build twenty-two feet
of the length himself. Mr. Blair, so far as the vestry-book shows,
lived in uninterrupted harmony with his vestry during the thirty-three


155

Page 155
years of his ministry. As to his preaching, we have a
full opportunity of deciding upon the style and doctrine, in four
printed volumes upon the Saviour's Sermon on the Mount, containing
one hundred and seventeen sermons. These sermons
went through at least two editions in England. Dr. Waterbury
published a preface to the second, in high praise of them. Dr.
Doddridge also has spoken well of them. I have gone over
these discourses with sufficient care to form a just judgment
of the same. As an accurate commentary on that most blessed
portion of Scripture, I should think it can never have been
surpassed. Since it was reserved for the apostles, under the dictates
of the Spirit, to dwell on the power of the resurrection, on
justification by faith, on the cleansing by the blood of Jesus
Christ, so Christ, in this discourse, was not setting forth the faith
and doctrines of the gospel, but expounding the law, in opposition
to the false glosses of the Jews, and showing the superior spirit of
the gospel. Mr. Blair does not, therefore, enter fully into some
of the doctrines of the gospel, though he recognises them sufficiently
to show that he held them according to what may be
termed the moderate Arminian scheme. A faithful exposition of
the Sermon on the Mount must necessarily condemn all evil dispositions
and practices, and Mr. Blair does not soften any thing
His congregation was often composed of the authority and intelligence,
fashion and wealth of the State, besides the youth of the
College; nor does he spare any. I do not wonder that some of the
Governors and great ones complained of his being personal. From
many sources of information, I fear that swearing was most common
among the gentlemen of that day, those high in office setting
a bad example. In concluding his sermon on the third commandment,
as explained by our Lord in his Sermon on the Mount, he
thus speaks:—

"Thus, now I have done with my text; but I am afraid I have done no
good all this while, and that the evil one, from whom the spirit of lying
and swearing comes, will be abundantly too hard for all that I can say or
do to fortify you against his devices. Learn, I beseech you, this easy
part of Christianity, to be men of your word, and to refrain from the evil
custom of swearing; and to refrain from it from a right principle,—the
fear of God. I know no vice that brings more scandal to our Church of
England. The Church may be in danger from many enemies; but perhaps
she is not so much in danger from any as from the great number of
profane persons that pretend to be of her; enough to make all serious
people afraid of our society, and to bring down the judgments of God upon
us, for `by reason of swearing the land mourneth.' But be not deceived:
our Church has no principles that lead to swearing more than the Dissenters;


156

Page 156
but, whatever Church is uppermost, there are always a great
many who, having no religion at all, crowd into it and bring it into disgrace
and disreputation; but the time is coming that the tares must be
separated from the wheat; and they shall be cast with the evil one—the
devil that loved them—into hell; but the angels shall carefully gather
the wheat into God's barn. If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye
do them."

In speaking of the lusts of the flesh, he hesitates not to call
things by their right names and to threaten the Scriptural penalties.
In warning against the temptations and provocations to the
same, he speaks in different terms from many of that day of
theatres, balls, frolics, rendezvous, promiscuous dances, interludes,
and clatter of company, the intoxication of drink, the lulling the
thoughts asleep by music, gaming, &c. In warning against the
love of dress, from our Saviour's allusion to the flowers of the field
being clothed with more glory than even Solomon, he says:—

"I doubt not but it was designed to cast a slur upon the vanity of apparel,
since it is a thing of so little estimation in the sight of God that
he bestows it in the highest degree on the meanest of his creatures. For
it is to be presumed, had it been a thing of any great worth in itself,
instead of bestowing these admirable varieties of colours, gildings, and
embroideries upon tulips, he would have bestowed them upon creatures
of higher dignity. Whereas, on mankind he has bestowed but very
sparingly of these gaudy colours and features; a great part of them being
black, a great part of them being tauny, and a great part being of other
wan and dusky complexions, show that it is not the outward gaudy beauty
that he values, but the ornaments of the mind—Christian graces and virtues—which,
in his sight, are of great price."

He is throughout a faithful reprover of sin. He admits that
there is little or no infidelity known in the Colony, as in England,
but a great deal of wickedness. As to Church principles, as some
call them, he was no Sacramentarian, and denounces Romanism in
no measured terms, but is still conservative. He admitted Mr.
Whitefield into his pulpit, but, on hearing that the Bishop of London
had proscribed him, made a kind of apology for it, and asked
the Bishop's opinion about him.



No Page Number


No Page Number
illustration

WILLIAM AND MARY COLLEGE, WILLIAMSBURG, VA.

 
[42]

The Autobiography of Governor Page, from which the following extract is
taken, was written at the request of Mr. Skelton Jones, when he undertook the
completion of Burk's History of Virginia:—

"I discover from the tombstones in Williamsburg churchyard," says Governor
Page, "and from others in my grandfather's burying-ground at his family-seat
called Rosewell:—1st, that one of my ancestors, named John Page, was an highly-respectable
character, and had long been one of the King's Council in this Colony,
when he died, viz.: on the 23d January, 1691-2, aged sixty. His manuscripts,
which I have seen, prove that he was learned and pious. 2d, that his son, Matthew
Page, was one of the Council, and his son Mann also, whose letters to his friends,
and theirs to him, exhibit him as patriotic, well educated, and truly amiable. He
had his classical education at Eton School, in England. He was my father's
father, who might also have been appointed to the office of Councillor; but he
declined it in favour of his younger brother, John Page, who, my father said,
having been brought up in the study of the law regularly, was a much more proper
person for that office than he was. The John Page first above mentioned was, as
we find by an old picture, a Sir John Page, a merchant of London, supposed to
have been knighted, as Sir John Randolph long after was, for proposing a regulation
of the tobacco-trade and a duty thereon, which if it was the case, I think his
patriotism was premature, and perhaps misplaced: his dear, pure-minded, and
American patriotic grandson, my grandfather, Mann Page, in his days checked
the British merchants from claiming even freight on their goods from England,
declaring that their freight on our tobacco and homeward-bound articles, added to
their monopoly of our trade, ought to satisfy avarice itself. This he expressed
repeatedly to his mercantile friends, and some near relations who were tobacco-merchants
in London: however, he lived not long after. The fashion or practice
then was for men of landed property here to dispose of their children in the following
manner:—They entailed all their lands on the eldest son, brought up the
others according to their genius or disposition,—physicians, or lawyers, or merchants,
or ministers of the Church of England,—which handsomely maintained such
as were frugal and industrious. My father was frequently urged by friends, but
not relations, to pay court to Sir Gregory Page, whose heir, from his coat-of-arms
and many circumstances, he was supposed to be. But he despised titles sixty years
ago as much as you and I do now, and would have nothing to say to the rich silly
knight, who died, leaving his estate and title to a sillier man than himself, his sister's
son, a Mr. Turner, on condition that he would take the name and title of Sir Gregory
Page, which he did by act of Parliament, as I have been told or read."

It would appear from the above that Mr. Page, of Rosewell, had but little of the
pride of family about him, and that his grandfather despised titles. From the
vestry-book it seems that the second John Page defended the rights of vestries
against the claims of King and Governor. From the autobiography it appears
that Governor Page, of Rosewell, opposed Lord Dunmore in his attempt to place
John Randolph, who went to England when the war commenced, among the Visitors
of the College, and succeeded in getting Mr. Nathaniel Burwell (afterward of
Frederick county) chosen, Lord Dunmore's vote alone being cast for Mr. Randolph.
Governor Page was an officer for Gloucester in the Revolutionary War, and was
with Washington in one of his Western expeditions against the French and Indians.
He was the associate and intimate friend of Mr. Jefferson at college, and his
follower in politics afterward, though always differing from him on religious subjects,
endeavouring to his latest years, by correspondence, to convince him of his
errors. He was a zealous friend of the Episcopal Church, and defended in the
Legislature what he conceived to be her rights, against those political friends with
whom he agreed on all other points. So zealous was he in her cause that some
wished him to take Orders, with a view to being the Bishop of Virginia. His name
may be seen on the journals of the earliest Conventions of the general Church, as
well as of those of Virginia. I have a pamphlet in my possession, in which his name
is in connection with those of Robert C. Nicholas and Colonel Bland, as charging
one of the clergy in or about Williamsburg with false views on the subject of the
Trinity and the eternity of the punishment of the damned. His theological library
was well stored for that day. The early fathers in Greek and Latin, with some
other valuable books, were presented to myself by one of his sons, and form a part
of my library. It may not be amiss to repeat what I have said in a preface to the
little volume written as a legacy by the first of this name to his posterity,—that
seven of them are now ministers of the Episcopal Church, and two who were such
are deceased.

[43]

In proof of what is said as to vestrymen, we publish the following list of the
Convention of 1776. From our examination of the old vestry-books, we are confident
that there are not three on this list who were not vestrymen of the Episcopal
Church.

A list of the members of the Convention of Virginia which began its sessions in the
City of Williamsburg on Monday the sixth of May,
1776, as copied from the
Journal:

Accomac—Southey Simpson and Isaac Smith, Esquires; Albemarle—Charles
Lewis, Esquire, and George Gilmer for Thomas Jefferson, Esquire; Amelia—John
Tabb and John Winn, Esquires; Augusta—Thomas Lewis and Samuel McDowell,
Esquires; West Augusta—John Harvie and Charles Simms, Esquires; Amherst—
William Cabell and Gabriel Penn, Esquires; Bedford—John Talbot and Charles
Lynch, Esquires; Botetourt—John Bowyer and Patrick Lockhart, Esquires; Brunswick—Frederic
Maclin and Henry Tazewell, Esquires; Buckingham—Charles Patteson
and John Cabell, Esquires; Berkeley—Robert Rutherford and William Drew,
Esquires; Caroline—the Hon. Edmund Pendleton and James Taylor, Esquires;
Charles City—William Acrill, Esquire, and Samuel Harwood, Esquire, for B. Harrison,
Esquire; Charlotte—Paul Carrington and Thomas Read, Esquires; Chesterfield—Archibald
Cary and Benjamin Watkins, Esquires; Culpeper—Henry Field
and French Strother, Esquires; Cumberland—John Mayo and William Fleming,
Esquires; Dinwiddie—John Banister and Bolling Starke, Esquires; Dunmore—
Abraham Bird and John Tipton, Esquires; Elizabeth City—Wilson Miles Cary and
Henry King, Esquires; Essex—Meriwether Smith and James Edmundson, Esquires;
Fairfax—John West, Jr., and George Mason, Esquires; Fauquier—Martin Pickett
and James Scott, Esquires; Frederick—James Wood and Isaac Zane, Esquires;
Fincastle—Arthur Campbell and William Russell, Esquires; Gloucester—Thomas
Whiting and Lewis Burwell, Esquires; Goochland—John Woodson and Thomas M.
Randolph, Esquires; Halifax—Nathaniel Terry and Micajah Watkins, Esquires;
Hampshire—James Mercer and Abraham Hite, Esquires; Hanover—Patrick Henry
and John Syme, Esquires; Henrico—Nathaniel Wilkinson and Richard Adams,
Esquires; James City—Robert C. Nicholas and William Norvell, Esquires; Isle of
Wight—John S. Wills and Charles Fulgham, Esquires; King George—Joseph Jones
and William Fitzhugh, Esquires; King and Queen—George Brooke and William
Lyne, Esquires; King William—William Aylett and Richard Squire Taylor, Esquires;
Lancaster—James Seldon and James Gordon, Esquires; Loudoun—Francis Peyton
and Josias Clapham, Esquires; Louisa—George Meriwether and Thomas Johnson,
Esquires; Lunenburg—David Garland and Lodowick Farmer, Esquires; Middlesex
—Edmund Berkeley and James Montague, Esquires; Mecklenburg—Joseph Speed
and Bennett Goode, Esquires; Nansemond—Willis Riddick and William Cowper,
Esquires; New Kent—William Clayton and Bartholomew Dandridge, Esquires;
Norfolk—James Holt and Thomas Newton, Esquires; Northumberland—Rodham
Kenner and John Cralle, Esquires; Northampton—Nathaniel L. Savage and George
Savage, Esquires; Orange—James Madison and William Moore, Esquires; Pittsylvania—Benjamin
Lankford and Robert Williams, Esquires; Prince Edward—William
Watts and William Booker, Esquires; Prince George—Richard Bland and
Peter Poythress, Esquires; Princess Anne—William Robinson and John Thoroughgood,
Esquires; Prince William—Cuthbert Bullitt and Henry Lee, Esquires;
Richmond—Hudson Muse and Charles McCarty, Esquires; Southampton—Edwin
Gray and Henry Taylor, Esquires; Spottsylvania—Mann Page and George Thornton,
Esquires; Stafford—Thomas Ludwell Lee and William Brent, Esquires; Surry
—Allen Cocke and Nicholas Fulton, Esquires; Sussex—David Mason and Henry
Gee, Esquires; Warwick—William Harwood and Richard Cary, Esquires; Westmoreland
— Richard Lee, Esquire, Richard Henry Lee, Esquire, and John A.
Washington, Esquires;[44] York — Dudley Digges, Esquire, Thomas Nelson, Jr.,
Esquire, and William Digges, Esquire; Jamestown—Champion Travis, Esquire;
Williamsburg—Edmund Randolph, Esquire, for George Wythe, Esquire; Norfolk
Borough—William Roscow Wilson Curle, Esquire; College of William and Mary—
John Blair, Esquire.

[44]

John A. Washington was probably the alternate of R. H. Lee.


157

Page 157

ARTICLE XII.

Williamsburg, Bruton Parish.—No. 2.

We have now to consider Mr. Blair as Commissary, and
having, with the Governors, the superintendence of the clergy
and the affairs of the Church; as representative of the Bishop
of London, with no defined limits of authority; as the founder
and President of William and Mary College, having joint action,
with visitors, professors, and others, in all things belonging to
the College, and of course often coming in collision with them;
as member of the Council, consulting and deciding with the
Governor and others — the first men of Virginia — on all the
concerns of the State, civil and religious, and forming the
great judicial body to whom all important causes were referred
for final decision. That a man of his active character and superior
mind should, for more than half a century, have been thus
associated in matters of such importance, without frequent collision
and without having many enemies, is not to be supposed.
That he should be charged with worldliness and management, with
being an informer to the Bishop of London and the Archbishop
of Canterbury, with whom he must have had intimate correspondence,
was to be expected; that he should be misunderstood by
many, and be very unpopular with some good men, through that
misunderstanding, and perhaps through want of conciliatory manners,
and a tact in the management of men:—all these things
might be expected. He was involved in difficulties with Governors
and clergymen, more or less, during almost the whole period
of his Commissaryship and Presidency of the College. I have the
whole of these controversies spread before me in long and tedious
letters, from himself and his opponents, to the authorities in England,
which have never been published. His first controversy was
with Governor Andros, who came to Virginia, under no good
character, from New York. By royal instructions Andros was not
only Governor of Virginia, but the ordinary, the representative
of the King and Bishop of London in Church matters, the Commissary


158

Page 158
being comparatively a very negative character. When
these complaints were made, which ended in his disgrace, Dr.
Blair, then in England, about his College, preferred the charges
against him as an enemy to religion, to the Church, the clergy,
and the College, bringing proofs of the same. The charges cover
thirty-two folio pages of manuscript, and are well written. But
Blair had formidable foes to meet in London. Governor Andros
sends over in his defence Colonel Byrd, of Westover, Mr. Harrison,
of Surry, Mr. Povey, a man high in office in the Colony, and
a Mr. Marshall, to arraign Dr. Blair himself before the Bishop of
London and the Archbishop of Canterbury. Two days were spent
in Lambeth Palace in the examination. The charges and the
answers are set down, and fill up fifty-seven folio pages of manuscript.
Never were four men more completely foiled by one.
The accusers seem to feel and acknowledge it, and doubtless
wished themselves out of Lambeth Palace long before the trial
was over. One of the chief charges was Mr. Blair's partiality to
Scotchmen, whom they said he brought over to fill the churches,
contrary to the wishes of the people. But, being called on to
specify names, it was found that they had made egregious blunders
as to facts; that some whom they supposed to be Scots were
Englishmen. Great was the prejudice against Mr. Blair, as being
a Scot. This was the time when that unhappy feeling was at
its height in England, when a "beggarly Scot" was the common
phrase. A number of the private letters which I have show the
prejudice to have been very strong. The result of it all was, that
Mr. Blair came home with a good sum of money for his College,
and Andros was sent back to England to stand his trial, from
which he came out but badly. Governor Nicholson succeeded him.
He had been Deputy-Governor before Andros came over, and
there was then a good understanding and friendship between him
and Mr. Blair. During the government of Andros he was Governor
of Maryland, and disagreed with the good Commissary Bray
not a little. On returning to Virginia he seemed to be a changed
man. A disappointment in love was thought to have much to do
with it. He was vain, conceited, fickle, passionate, and acted
sometimes like a madman, though still professing great zeal for
the Church. After a year or two Dr. Blair and himself were open
foes. Letters on both sides were written to England. Blair wrote
four, covering in all forty-four pages folio, charging him with
interfering with his province and with private and public misconduct;
dwelling on his furiousness in relation to the affair of Miss

159

Page 159
Burwell, and the Rev. Mr. Fouace.[45] The Council and some of
the clergy joined with him in petitioning the recall of Nicholson,
which petition was successful. The Church and State were in an
uproar. A number of the clergy, with whom Mr. Blair was unpopular,
and whom Mr. Nicholson had ingratiated by taking part
with them against the vestries and representing Mr. Blair as less
favourable to their cause, took part with Mr. Nicholson. Mr.
Nicholson ordered a Convocation to be assembled for general
purposes, and during its sitting had private meetings of those
friendly to him, at his house or lodging, who signed a paper
denying the charges of Mr. Blair and the Council. A great
dinner or supper was given them at the hotel in Williamsburg,
which was satirized in a ballad, in which their hilarity was set
forth, and some of them depicted in rather unfavourable colours.
It soon appeared in London. Mr. Blair, with his few friends,

160

Page 160
however, (for a large majority of the clergy present were against
him,—17 to 6,) triumphed again, and Mr. Nicholson was recalled.
In his place Mr. Nott, an amiable man, came out, and the Bishop
of London sent with him a severe letter to the clergy, begging
them not "to play the fool any more." Mr. Nott died in a short
time, much esteemed and regretted.

In 1710, Colonel Spottswood was appointed Governor,—an old
soldier, a man of resolute character, of liberal views on many
points, but a most ultra man for the royal prerogative, and for the
transfer of it to the Governor of Virginia. For some years he and
Mr. Blair agreed well. They both were in favour of efforts for the
Indians. Mr. Blair advocated the Governor's favourite enterprise,
—the ascending the Blue Ridge and looking upon the valley beyond.
At length the Governor became unpopular with the House
of Burgesses for some measures supposed to be high-handed, and
again Colonel Byrd is sent over, with others, to bring charges
against him, and was more successful than in the case of Mr.
Blair. About this time Governor Spottswood got into a difficulty
with the vestry of St. Anne's parish, Essex, on the subject of the
rights of the vestries and Governors in the matter of induction, in
which he claims higher powers than had ever been claimed before.
The Rev. Hugh Jones had been in England and reported some
things to the Bishop of London unfavourable to the rubrical exactness
of Mr. Blair and others; and evil reports also as to the
moral character of some of the clergy were rife in the mother-country.
In 1719 the Bishop of London addressed a letter to the
Governor and Commissary, directing a convocation of the clergy
to receive a communication from him. At their meeting the letter
is read. It referred to some reports as to the evil conduct of the
clergy and the violation of the rubrics. Commissary Blair opens
the meeting with a sermon and address. The Governor calls upon
him for his sermon, which he immediately sent. The Governor
was offended at something in it touching Government. Perhaps
the Commissary, even at that day, had a little of the spirit of
American independence in him. The Governor also sends in an
address to the clergy in reference to the Bishop of London's letter,
which he had previously read. He opens with a direct assault on
Commissary Blair, saying that he knew of no clergyman who
transgressed the rubrics except the Commissary, who sometimes
let a layman read the service for him in church, and even the
burial-service in his presence, and wished to establish lay-readers
in the parishes. He also charged him with injuring the clergy by


161

Page 161
opposing their induction, &c. To all this the Commissary had an
easy answer. Once or twice, when unable to go through the service
through sickness, he had gotten a lay-reader to assist him.
On some occasion he may have passed the churchyard when a clerk
or lay-reader was burying some one,—a thing very common in
Virginia at that time by reason of the scarcity of clergymen, and
when lay-readers were common and commanded by law. As to
the discouraging of induction, he shows that he had always advised
it; but that the vestries would not present ministers for
this purpose to the Governor, and that the Governors would not
use the privilege granted and perform the duty enjoined upon them
by the royal institution,—viz.: after six months' vacancy to present
and induct if the vestry did not supply the place. As to his own
example, he said that he could not help it, for the vestry in Williamsburg
would not present him to the Governor for induction;
and that he, (the Governor,) though on the spot, had never remonstrated
against it, but, on the contrary, when he communicated the
fact of his election to the Governor he only received the assurance
of the pleasure it gave him; not one word being said about induction.[46] The manuscript of the journal of this convocation is before
me, covering some forty or fifty pages. Neither this nor any other
journal of the Colonial convocation has ever been in print. It
is one of the most interesting documents of the kind I ever read,
and exhibits in a clearer light the true condition of the Church,
and character of the clergy, and peculiarities of the two great
combatants, Spottswood and Blair, than can be seen anywhere

162

Page 162
else. The whole history of the dispute about induction is also
there seen. The persevering determination of the vestries as to
their defensive measures, and the fearfulness of the Governor, the
Council, the Bishop of London, and the Crown, to come into collision
with the vestries, is there plainly seen. Though the vestries
doubtless often made the position of the ministers a painfully-precarious
one, and that doubtless prevented some good men from
coming over, yet these were lesser evils than would result from
allowing the Governor to be the patron of all the livings, with
authority to send to and keep in parishes any and all whom he
should choose. So interesting and instructive is this journal beyond
that of any meeting ever held by the clergy of Virginia, that
I shall subjoin the document in an appendix. There is one question,
proposed by the Bishop of London, which was very difficult
to be managed,—viz.: whether any of them knew of the existence
of evil livers among the clergy. It was first proposed in the
meeting from the chair. The answer was, that none of them were
personally acquainted with any notorious evil livers, and the same
was introduced into an answer to the Bishop of London, drawn up
by the committee. It was a trying question, and was doubtless
evaded by denying that they were personally acquainted with such.
It is probable that the notorious evil livers did not attend convocations,
especially this, as they might have heard the special object
of it. As this seems to be a proper place for considering this
painful question, I will adduce from letters addressed to the Bishop
of London, from Governor Drysdale, Dr. Blair, and others, some
passages which may give us a correct view of it. In 1723, Mr.
Blair, in writing to the Bishop of London, says:—

"Bishop Compton directed me to make no further use of my commission
than to keep the clergy in order; so that I have never pretended to
set up any spiritual court for the laity, though there are enormities among
them which want to be redressed; and, as to the clergy, unless they are
notoriously scandalous, I have found it necessary to content myself with
admonitions; for, if I lay them aside by suspension, we have no unprovided
clergymen to put in their place. At present we have about ten
vacancies and no minister to supply them.

He complains of the precariousness of the ministers, by reason
of their dependence from year to year on new elections by the
vestries. "This (he says) has gone on so long, by the connivance
of Governors, that though our present Governor (Drysdale) is very
willing of himself to redress it, yet thinks it not prudent to do it
without an instruction from his Majesty." Dr. Blair wished the


163

Page 163
Governor, when a vacancy of more than six months occurred, to
send and induct a minister, as by law directed. But neither the
Governors—not even the brave Spottswood—dared to do it, nor
did his Majesty dare order it to be done. In another letter from
Mr. Blair to a worthy clergyman, Mr. Forbs, he says:—

"I met with the Rev. Mr. Baylye (the one referred to by Governor
Spottswood) and admonished him pretty sharply, but I do not hear that
it has had the desired effect. I doubt I must proceed to greater severity
with him, and some others. But the difficulty is to find proof; there
being many who will cry out against scandalous ministers, who will not
appear as evidences against them. I hear a very bad character of Mr.
Worthen, and I understand that you have mentioned him in a letter to
the Governor. I shall take it kind if you will help me to any clear
proofs of those scandals; for, although for want of clergymen to fill the
vacancies I prefer to lean to the gentle than to the severe side, yet certainly
the behaviour of some men is so flagrant, that we had better be
without ministers than to be served with such as are scandals to the
Gospel. I wish you your health and success in the ministry, in which
you set so good an example."

In a letter to the Bishop of London, in 1724, on the same
subject, he says, "I have never made but two examples (that is,
of withdrawing their licenses during the Bishop's pleasure) in all
the time I have been Commissary, now thirty-four years; and,
indeed, for want of clergymen, we must bear with those we have
much more than we should do." In the same year a joint letter
from Governor Drysdale and Mr. Blair, and others from worthy
clergymen, confirm the above. About the same time, several
lengthy communications are sent over to England, containing
schemes for a supply of more and better ministers for Virginia,
and offering some suggestions as to their government and discipline.
The reigning vice among the clergy at that time was
intemperance; as it probably has been ever since both among the
clergy and laity of all denominations, having given great trouble to
the Church of every age. The difficulty of proof is stated in one
of these schemes for reformation; and the following mortifying
tests of intoxication are proposed to the Bishop of London, for the
trial of the clergy in Virginia. They were these:—

"Sitting an hour or longer in the company where they are drinking
strong drink, and in the mean time drinking of healths, or otherwise
taking the cups as they come round, like the rest of the company; striking,
and challenging, or threatening to fight, or laying aside any of his
garments for that purpose; staggering, reeling, vomiting; incoherent, impertinent,
obscene, or rude talking. Let the proof of these signs proceed


164

Page 164
so far, till the judges conclude that the minister's behaviour at such a
time was scandalous, indecent, unbecoming the gravity of a minister."

It was found then, as it ever has been, that one great source of
the scandal brought upon the Church of God by the intemperance of
clergy and laity, is to be found in the difficulty not only of witnesses
and prosecutors, but of deciding when excitement from intoxicating
liquors has reached that point which must be regarded as the sin
of drunkenness. And what an argument this should be with both
clergy and laity, but especially the former, to abstain altogether,
lest they should appear to be, or be charged with, or suspected of
this sin!

I have thus brought to a close my remarks on the chief incidents
in the life of Dr. Blair, and the peculiar points of his character.
Our impression of him is, that, though he could not be otherwise
than busy, considering all the offices he held and the relation he
bore to others, yet that the charge brought against him by some,
that he was too busy, had truth in it. His most minute details of
things said and done, in his long and tedious though well-written
letters to England furnish proof of this. Still, we must esteem
him a sincere Christian and a most laborious man in the performance
of duty in all his official relations. The College owed its
existence to him, and was probably as well managed by him as
times and circumstances allowed; and it is probable that his faithful
preaching and correct moral deportment did much to stem that
torrent of wickedness which, in his day, flowed over England and
America. Few men ever contended with more difficulties or surmounted
them better than Dr. Blair. Few clergymen ever were
engaged with such fierce opponents in high stations, and who not
only bore up manfully against them, but actually overcame them.
Governors of distant provinces have ever been proverbially corrupt
and tyrannical men. Such were Andros and Nicholson. Spottswood
was a nobler spirit, but he was brought up a soldier, and rose
to high command in the English army, and had there learned both
to obey and command. As Governor of Virginia, he thought it
was his province to command, and that of all others to obey; but
Dr. Blair thought there were limits to submission. They were
both of them benefactors to Virginia. Had there been many such
before and after, it would have been well for the State. Of Dr.
Blair I have nothing more to say, but that, in a letter from Governor
Gooch to the Bishop of London, at his death, he informs
him that the Commissary left his library and five hundred pounds
to the College, and ten thousand pounds to his nephew and the


165

Page 165
children of his nephew, besides some smaller legacies. His nephew
was Mr. John Blair, who was so long President of the Council,
and whose character was of the highest order. The son of this
John Blair (whose name was also John) was distinguished as a
patriot, statesman, and jurist. He represented the College of
William and Mary in the House of Burgesses for a long time,
took an active part in all the Revolutionary movements, was a
member of the great Convention which met to revise the Articles
of Confederation, and, finally, was one of the Supreme Federal
Court.

GOVERNOR SPOTTSWOOD AND HIS FAMILY.

The following sketch has been furnished me, at my request, by
one of the descendants in Virginia, and I take pleasure in adding
it to this article.

"Sir Walter Scott, in his History of Scotland, says:—

" `The Parliament, consisting entirely of Covenanters, instigated by the
importunity of the clergy, condemned eight of the most distinguished
Cavaliers to execution. Four were appointed to suffer at St. Andrew's,
that their blood might atone for the number of men (said to exceed five
thousand) which the county of Fife had lost during the Montrose wars.
Lord Ogilvey was the first of these, but that young nobleman escaped
from prison and death in his sister's clothes. Colonel Nathaniel Gordon,
one of the best soldiers and bravest men in Europe, and six other Cavaliers
of the first distinction, were actually executed. We may particularly
distinguish the fate of Sir Robert Spottswood, who, when the wars broke
out, was Lord-President of the Court of Sessions, and accounted a judge
of talent and learning. He had never borne arms; but the circumstance
of having brought Montrose his commission of Captain-General of Scotland
was thought quite worthy of death, without any further act of treason
against the estates. When, on the scaffold, he vindicated his conduct
with the dignity of a judge and the talent of a lawyer, he was silenced
by the Provost of St. Andrew's, who was formerly a servant of his father's
when Prelate of that city. The victim submitted to that indignity with
calmness, and betook himself to his private devotions: he was soon in
this last act interrupted by the Presbyterian minister in attendance, who
demanded of him if he desired the benefit of his prayers and those of the
assembled people. Sir Robert replied, that he earnestly desired the
prayers of the people, but rejected those of the speaker; for that, in his
opinion, God had expressed his displeasure against Scotland by sending a
lying spirit into the mouth of the prophets, a far greater curse than those
of fire, sword, and pestilence. An old servant of his family took care of
his body and buried him privately; and it is said of the faithful domestic,
that, passing through the market-place a day or two afterwards, and, seeing
the scaffold still standing and stained with his master's blood, he was
so much affected that he sunk down in a swoon and died as they were
lifting him over his own threshold'


166

Page 166

"His son, Alexander Spottswood, was aide-de-camp to the Duke of Marlborough.
Afterward, he was Governor of Virginia. He married Jane
Butler, sister of the Duke of Ormond, by whom he had two sons—John
and Robert; and two daughters—Catherine and Dorethea: Catherine married
Bernard Moore, and Dorethea, Nathaniel Dandridge. Robert was
killed by the Indians on an expedition with his father beyond the Alleghanies.
Whom John, my grandfather, married, I am not certain; but I
think she was Mary Dandridge, the sister of Nathaniel Dandridge. He
had two sons—Alexander and John; and two daughters—Mary and Ann.
Mary married Mr. Peter Randolph. John married Mary Rouzey, of Essex
county, by whom he had numerous children. Alexander (my father) married
Elizabeth Washington, daughter of Augustine Washington, and niece
of General George Washington, by whom he had seven children, myself
the youngest. My father was a Brigadier-General in the Revolution: his
brother John was a captain. I think I have given you a correct account
of the genealogy of the Spottswood family. There is a difference in spelling
the name in this and the Old World, the original name being spelt
Spottiswood.[47] "

 
[47]

A worthy antiquary of Virginia thinks that Governor Spottiswood was not
the son of Sir Robert Spottiswood, who was executed in Scotland, but the grandson;
that his father was named Robert, but was a physician who died at Tangier,
in Africa, in 1680, his son Alexander being born there in 1676. He also thinks
that the name of Governor Spottiswood's wife was Anne Butler Bryan, the latter
part being usually pronounced Brain, the middle name being taken from her godfather,
James Butler, Duke of Ormond. He also states that Robert Spottiswood
died near Fort Cumberland, in 1757, when serving under Washington, being killed,
as was supposed, by the Indians

 
[45]

The second Lewis Burwell had nine daughters, one of whom completely upset
what little reason there was in Governor Nicholson of famous memory. He became
most passionately attached to her, and demanded her in royal style of her parents.
Neither she, her parents, or other members of the family, were disposed to compliance.
He became furious, and for years persisted in his design and claim. All
around felt the effects of it. The father and sons, Commissary Blair, and the
Rev. Mr. Fouace, minister of an adjoining parish, were the especial objects of
his threatened vengeance.

To the young lady he threatened the life of her father and brothers if she did
not yield to his suit, which caused a friend in England to write a letter of remonstrance,
in which he says, "It is not here as in some barbarous countries, where
the tender lady is dragged into the Sultan's arms just reeking in the blood of her
nearest relatives, and yet must strangely dissemble her aversion." To Commissary
Blair he declared that "he would cut the throats of three men, (if the lady should
marry any other man than himself,) viz.: the bridegroom, the minister, and the
justice who issued the license. The minister of the parish, the Rev. Mr. Fouace, in
a letter to the Lord-Commissioners in England, complains of being assaulted one
evening, on his return from a visit to the family, (the major being sick,) by
Governor Nicholson, and commanded never again to go to this house without leave
from himself. It seemed that the Governor was jealous of him. Besides abusive
language and other indignities, he pulled off the minister's hat, as being disrespectful
to him, the Governor, for one to keep on his hat, even on horseback.
Such was the misconduct of the Governor, in this and other respects, that the
Council and some of the clergy united in a petition to the Crown for his removal,
and the petition was granted. All this, and much more, is on record in the
archives of Lambeth Palace. Copies of the records are now before me. What
was the subsequent history of the young lady—the innocent cause of so much
strife—is not told. Even her Christian name is not given. Perhaps some of the
descendants of the family may find it out. I need not say, that if a Governor
of Virginia, under our free system, should assume such royal airs, the case
would be much more speedily and easily disposed of by the lady, the parents,
and the minister.

[46]

Another insinuation against Dr. Blair by the Governor, and open charge by
some of the clergy, was that he had never been Episcopally ordained. The Bishop
of London, in his letter, inquired whether any of those officiating in Virginia were
without Episcopal orders. In reply to this, some of them expressed their doubts
in open Assembly, whether Dr. Blair's papers were genuine. This was also satisfactorily
answered. The triumph of Dr. Blair was again complete. Governor
Spottswood was superseded in 1722 by Governor Drysdale; and it is more than
probable that his unfortunate assault upon Dr. Blair, and the high position he
assumed in regard to the vestries, who were the Burgesses of the country, and
opposed to Spottswood, contributed to this. Governor Spottswood evidently felt
his defeat, and was not disposed to engage in another contest with Dr. Blair; for,
in a letter to the Bishop of London, speaking of some steps which ought to be
taken in relation to a clergyman supposed to be an evil one, and who had been
entertained in a parish in preference to one whom he had appointed, he says,
"That I must remain passive, or else I shall raise the old combustion in this
government, and be in danger of drawing your Lordship's Commissary on my back
again."


167

Page 167

ARTICLE XIII.

Williamsburg, Bruton Parish.—No. 3.

With the death of Mr. Blair closed all conflicts, so far as
is shown, between Commissaries and Governors. The Rev. William
Dawson was chosen Commissary and President of the College,
while his brother, the Rev. Thomas Dawson, was called to the
rectorship of the church, Mr. Gooch being Governor. All the letters
of Governor Gooch and Commissary Dawson to the Bishop of
London show them to be truly anxious to promote the best interests
of the colony, though many difficulties seem to have impeded
its prosperity and prevented a supply of worthy ministers. One
thing is set forth in praise of William and Mary College, which we
delight to record,—viz.: that the hopes and designs of its founders
and early benefactors, in relation to its being a nursery of pious
ministers, were not entirely disappointed. It is positively affirmed
by those most competent to speak, that the best ministers in Virginia
were those educated at the College and sent over to England
for ordination. The foreigners were the great scandal of the
Church. No vigilance on the part of the Bishop of London, the
Governor or Commissaries, could altogether prevent this. Nor
was the discipline exerted over the clergy, whether foreign or domestic,
calculated to be a terror to evil-doers. We have seen
what Dr. Blair acknowledged as to his forbearance; and yet there
was more of clerical discipline under his supervision than at any
subsequent period. We read of none under the first of the Dawsons.
When Mr. Thomas Dawson, who succeeded his brother as
Commissary, (Mr. Stith being called to the Presidency of the College,)
was in office, a most flagrant case called so loudly for notice
that Governor Dinwiddie summoned the offender (the Rev. Mr.
Brunskill, of Prince William) to Williamsburg, and on trial dismissed
him from his parish. Mr. Dawson, however, shrunk from
the proceeding, expressing a doubt whether they were authorized
to exercise discipline. If what his successor, Mr. Robinson, stated
to the Bishop of London be true, there must have been a secret consciousness
of unworthiness which operated upon the mind of Mr.


168

Page 168
Dawson,—viz.: that he himself in his latter years became addicted
to drink, to such an extent that the Visitors of the College arraigned
him for it, but let it pass on the plea that his troubles in office, as
President and Commissary, so pressed upon him as to make him
resort to this wretched refuge for consolation. It was in the time
of the first of these brothers that the troubles about the Rev. Mr.
Davis, the Presbyterian minister, took place; and in the time of
the second, that the great tobacco-question agitated the Church
and State, and about each of which I shall have something to say
in the proper place. The huge folio volume of manuscripts from
Lambeth and Fulham Palaces which lie before me contains a number
of letters and memorials on these subjects from which to draw
materials. At the death of the second Mr. Dawson, the Rev.
William Yates, of Gloucester, one of that family which so abounded
in ministers, succeeded to the rectorship of the church and
Presidency of the College, while the Rev. William Robinson, of
King and Queen, was made Commissary. Mr. Yates, dying in
1764, was succeeded by the Rev. Mr. Horrocks, in the College
and the church, and about the same time, at the death of Commissary
Robinson, he was appointed to that office also.

In the year 1771, a meeting of the clergy was called by Mr.
Horrocks, at the request of some of the Northern clergy, to consider
the subject of applying for an American Episcopate. The
desirableness of this, in order to complete the organization of our
Church for the benefit of Episcopalians, without requiring others
to be subjected to it, had been felt by its friends on both sides of
the water for a long time. Various plans had been proposed for
its accomplishment; but difficulties, civil and religious, (of whose
force it is impossible that we, at this distance of time, should be
proper judges,) interposed and prevented. Enemies to the scheme,
both in England and America, were always ready to rise up against
it with political and religious objections. At length, when Episcopalians
began to increase in the Middle and Northern States,
(though still a small band,) the press was resorted to in advocacy
of the measure. Dr. Chandler, an eminent divine of our Church
in New Jersey, took the lead in defence of the measure. An effort
was made to combine the Episcopalians of Virginia with those of
the North, in a petition to the throne for an American Episcopate.
Mr. Horrocks, the Commissary of Virginia, induced by various
pressing letters from the North, called a convocation of the clergy,
to be held in Williamsburg on the 4th of May, 1771, without mentioning
the object of it. But few attended, and they, on being


169

Page 169
informed of the object, determined that it was too grave a matter
to be decided on by so small a number, and that another call should
be made, specifying the object of the meeting. Another call was
accordingly made for the 4th of June, when only twelve appeared,
a smaller number than before, although many more than these lived
very near the place of assemblage, and about one hundred were in
the diocese. There must, of course, have been some serious objection,
in the minds of the great body of the clergy, to taking any
part in it, for the subject was not new, having been under discussion
for some time in the Northern papers. After some deliberation,
it was determined not to address the crown, but to ask advice
of the Bishop of London,—the good Bishop Porteus,—who, in a
sermon, recommended the measure, but only in the event of the
Government, in its wisdom, favouring the plan. It was thought
proper, therefore, first to apply to him as the Diocesan and the
warm friend of Virginia, where his parents had resided and he
was perhaps born. This was passed by a unanimous vote. And
yet, by one of those unaccountable revolutions which sometimes
takes place in public bodies, before the final adjournment, the question
was reconsidered, the vote reversed, and a direct petition to the
King determined upon, two only dissenting, who were afterward
joined by two others in a protest, with the reasons thereof. It was
resolved that the votes of a majority must be obtained in some
other way. But we hear nothing more of it. This protest of the
Rev. Messrs. Gwatkin and Henly, Professors in the College, and
Bland and Hewitt, ministers of parishes, called forth a pamphlet
from the united Conventions of the clergy of New York and New
Jersey in condemnation, and a reply of the protesters in defence.
These were followed by various others, of the most severe and
bitter character, by different persons in the Northern and Middle
States. I have seen them all bound up in a number of volumes,
and read some of them. Many of those, in small pamphlets or in
newspapers, were written by those of other denominations, who
were entirely opposed to the introduction of Episcopacy; and I
feel confident that the Stamp Act, and the tax on tea and other
articles, did not draw forth more violent denunciations and threatenings
than were spread throughout the Northern States against
this proposal. All New England was in a flame. It may well
appear strange that so many Episcopal clergyman as were in Virginia
should appear indifferent to a measure so suitable and necessary
to the perfect organization and effectual working of our system,
and it is right that their reasons, not only for indifference,

170

Page 170
but even opposition, should be stated. It appears, from what was
written in their defence, that there was but one opinion as to the
propriety and desirableness of the object, but only diversity as to
the time and manner of effecting it. It was declared that all things
were unfavourable to it at that time. The difficulties about the Stamp
Act were not over. There was a root of bitterness still remaining
in consequence of some deceptive measures charged on the British
ministry in connection with its repeal. Other causes of dissatisfaction
were arising. There was a filial feeling in Virginians toward
the mother-country and Church, which made them averse to war
and separation, and they wished to avoid every thing which would
hasten it; and yet there was a strong and firm determination not to
continue the union except upon honourable terms. Their just
rights they would maintain at all hazards. They believed that the
proposition for an American Episcopate, no matter how modified
the plan, was so offensive to all other Protestant bodies, both in
this country and England, that, united with other causes which
were increasing every day, it must decide the question of war if
agreed to. The violent tones of the press on this subject were
enough to justify the apprehension. But there was another very
general source of fear throughout the land. It was believed that
if Bishops should be sent they would be men, like the Governors,
favouring the royal pretensions instead of American rights, and
thus weakening the cause of proper independence. On this
account, Bishop White, in his Memoirs, expresses the belief "that
it would have been impossible to have obtained the concurrence of
a respectable number of laymen in any measure for obtaining an
American Bishop." He appeals to the conduct of Virginia, where,
if anywhere in the land, such concurrence might be expected.
And yet, nowhere was opposition greater than in Virginia, and
among Episcopalians, under existing circumstances. We have
seen the jealousies of the vestries as to the attempt of Governors
and wishes of Commissaries and clergy to deprive them of the
right to choose and displace their own ministers. The Governors
claimed to be Bishops, or in the place of Bishops, and to have the
right of inducting ministers for life, and, in many instances, of
choosing them and presenting them. If Bishops should be sent,
they would assuredly claim as much, if not more, and be more
likely to obtain it, and also to have greater power of discipline.
The laity, therefore, were on this account fearful of the experiment,
and preferred losing the benefit of the rite of confirmation
for a time, than be saddled with a power greater than Governors

171

Page 171
and Commissaries had been able to erect. In proof of this general
aversion of the laity in Virginia to the proposal of a Bishop or
Bishops, we find that soon after the small meeting of the clergy at
Williamsburg which voted a petition to the Crown, the House of
Burgesses met and unanimously passed a vote of thanks to the few
who protested for the course they pursued. The thanks were carried
them by two gentlemen whose attachment to the Church cannot
be questioned,—Colonel Bland and Richard Henry Lee, the latter
of whom was our most active agent with the Court of St. James
in obtaining our Episcopacy immediately after the Revolution. In
proof that it was not a want of due regard to the Episcopal office,
but a conviction that it could not be obtained in such a manner
at that time as to comport with our civil and religious liberties,
which made the Virginia laity and very many of the clergy to
object, we would mention the fact that, so soon as we were free to
establish it on right principles, the very men who, in the House of
Burgesses and elsewhere, were most opposed to it, now came forward
to our Episcopal Convention and zealously advocated the
establishment of Episcopacy. There can be no doubt that the
general feeling of the nation, and of no part of it more than of
Virginia, was that America was destined to independence, though it
was not wished to hasten it by a bloody war. Can any one doubt
that the thought was often in the minds of our truest men, that the
time for establishing our Episcopacy would not be until we could
do it untrammelled by our connection with and subjection to England?
She, said some, is illy able to establish her own Episcopacy
aright, much less one for us. Trammelled as the Church of England
is by the State, her Bishops are almost powerless for discipline,
so complicated and expensive the machinery by which they
must exercise it. Few as were the instances of clerical discipline
under our Commissaries and Governors, it was believed that they
were far more numerous than during the same period under the
Bishops of England; and if we had Bishops, they of course must
be governed by the same laws as in England, whereas the Governor,
acting under some general instruction from the crown, has
more liberty, especially when such a spirit as that of Spottswood
ruled the Colony. A candid investigation of the whole subject
will therefore lead to the same conclusion to which Dr. Hawks, an
able jurist as well as eloquent divine and faithful historian, did,
when he says, in his work on Virginia, "At this distance of time,
it will probably be acknowledged that, on the question of expediency,
the Virginia clergy judged wisely. In the temper of the

172

Page 172
times, the application could not but have proved unsuccessful: to
make it, therefore, could only serve to exasperate a large portion
of the Colonists, without the prospect of obtaining the end desired."

That the laity of Virginia, as represented by the Burgesses, had
reason to complain of the attempt of the clergy to manage this
delicate and important matter without any conference with them,
seeing that they were so deeply interested in the matter, cannot be
denied. In their meeting was no lay element whatever. One of
the protesters stated this, and proposed consulting with the Governor,
Council, and Burgesses; but one of the leaders of the
measure acknowledged that they would certainly be opposed to it,
and therefore objected to the reference. The protesters, in their
defence, make use of this argument, and say that, to establish a
measure of this kind, without the co-operation of the laity, would
be to adopt the Popish system of a spiritual dominion within the
State, entirely independent of it and dangerous to the liberties of
the people. The lay element in England was the King, Parliament,
and mixed courts; the lay element here had been the Governor
and Council, House of Burgesses, and vestries; but now all
those were dispensed with, and the clergy proposed to act without
advice and independent of these,—that is, the few who adopted and
signed the petition; for the greater part stayed at home, well knowing
the opposition of the laity. The protesters, in their reply, charge
their opponents at the North with a leaning to the Non-juring
Bishops of Scotland, whom they call schismatics, and bid them, if
they wished Bishops, apply to them, and thus set up a separate
Church without the support of the State; but not to disturb the
peace of the land by endeavouring to involve the Government of
England in the measure. They also intimate that some private
objects—perhaps ecclesiastical aspirations—influenced the great
and sudden change in the meeting at Williamsburg. Mr. Camm
had recently been disappointed in succeeding to the Commissary's
place, at the death of Mr. Robinson, in consequence of some difficulties
with Governor Dinwiddie; and Mr. Horrocks was suspected
of some desires for the mitre. These were the leaders among the
clergy. President Nelson, of York, writing to a friend in London
at this time, says:—

"We do not want Bishops; and yet, from our principles, I hardly think
we should oppose such an establishment. Nor will the laity apply for
them,—Colonel Corbin having assured me that he has received no petition
to be signed, nor any thing else about it from Dr. Porteus; but Mr. Horrocks,


173

Page 173
the Bishop of London's Commissary here, hath invited all the
clergy of the Colony to meet him soon, in order to consider of an application
for this purpose; which he tells me he has done in compliance with
the pressing instances of some of the Episcopal clergy northward. This
gentleman goes to England for his health this summer: possibly a mitre
may be his polar star, for we know that there is much magnetic virtue in
such dignities, and I tell him he will be too late if he does not embark
soon.[48] To which he, with the usual modesty on such occasions, replies,
`Nolo Episcopari."'

As the clergy met in secret, the President could not then tell
what they were about, but promises to write his friend hereafter.

The vestry-book ceases in the year 1769, while Mr. Horrocks
was minister, all the leaves being filled up. Doubtless a new one
was gotten and records made in it; but it is nowhere to be found.
Mr. Horrocks was rector of the parish, President of the College,
and Commissary as late as 1771. He was succeeded in all these
by the Rev. John Camm, who continued until 1777, when Mr.
Madison became President of the College.

We must here cease from the private history of the parish for a
brief space, in order to introduce a memorable passage from the
history of the State, which occurred within the bounds of this
parish. The decisive step was now about to be taken by the Colonies
in relation to the mother-country. They had denounced and
renounced her as a cruel step-mother; they were about to take up
arms and appeal to the God of battles to aid them in the defence
of their just rights. The patriots of Virginia determined to do
this with the most solemn forms of religion. On the 24th of May,
1774, the members of the Assembly, at their meeting in Williamsburg,
after setting forth in a well-written preamble the condition
of the country, the evils already oppressing us, the dangers to be
feared, and their determination to assert our just rights, "resolved
to set apart a day for fasting, humiliation, and prayer; and
ordered that the members of the House do attend in their places,
at the hour of ten in the morning, on the first day of June next,
in order to proceed, with the Speaker and the mace, to the church
in this city for the purpose aforesaid; and that the Rev. Mr. Price
be requested to read prayers, and the Rev. Mr. Gwatkin to preach


174

Page 174
a sermon suitable to the occasion." The following extract of a
letter from George Mason, of Fairfax, a neighbour and friend of
Washington, who was in Williamsburg at the time, though not a
member of the House, (Washington being the delegate,) will show
the religious feeling of the members. It is addressed to Martin
Cockburn, one of his pious neighbours.

"Enclosed you have the Boston Trade Act and a resolve of our House
of Burgesses. You will observe that it is confined to the members of
their own House; but they would wish to see the example followed
through the country; for which purpose the members, at their own private
expense, are sending expresses with the resolve to their respective
counties. Mr. Massie (the minister of Fairfax) will receive a copy of the
resolve from Colonel Washington; and, should a day of prayer and fasting
be appointed in our county, please to tell my dear little family that I
charge them to pay a strict attention to it, and that I desire my three
eldest sons and my two oldest daughters may attend church in mourning,
if they have it, as I believe they have."

This speaks well for the faith, and humble dependence on God,
which dwelt in the breasts of our Virginia patriots. There were
those, even then, among them, who had unhappily imbibed the
infidel principles of France; but they were too few to raise their
voices against those of Washington, Nicholas, Pendleton, Randolph,
Mason, Lee, Nelson, and such like. And in proof that
they were disposed to go further than mere prayer and fasting, a
few years after, in the year 1778, when the American Congress
added to their appointment of a day of prayer and humiliation, a
condemnation of certain evil customs and practices as offensive to
the God whose favour they sought to propitiate, we find our delegates,
Richard Henry Lee and Marsden Smith, uniting with others
in voting for and carrying the measure. The resolution is as
follows:—

"Whereas, true religion and good morals are the only solid foundation of
public liberty and happiness, Resolved, that it be, and is, hereby earnestly
recommended to the several States, to take the most effectual measures
for the encouragement thereof, and for the suppressing of theatrical entertainments,
horse-racing, and gaming, and such other diversions as are
productive of idleness, dissipation, and a general depravity of manners."

Had there not been in all parts of our land a goodly number of
our citizens of such a spirit and views, God might not have intrusted
such a gift as national independence to our keeping. It is,
however, deeply to be lamented that the successful termination of
the war, and all the rich blessings attending it, did not produce the


175

Page 175
gratitude to the Giver which was promised by the hearts of our
people in the day of danger and supplication. The intimacy produced
between infidel France and our own country, by the union
of our arms against the common foe, was most baneful in its
influence with our citizens generally, and on none more than those
of Virginia. The grain of mustard-seed which was planted at
Williamsburg, about the middle of the century, had taken root
there and sprung up and spread its branches over the whole State,
—the stock still enlarging and strengthening itself there, and the
roots shooting deeper into the soil. At the end of the century the
College of William and Mary was regarded as the hotbed of infidelity
and of the wild politics of France. Strong as the Virginia
feeling was in favour of the Alma Mater of their parents, the
Northern Colleges were filled with the sons of Virginia's best men.
No wonder that God for so long a time withdrew the light of his
countenance from it.[49]


176

Page 176

Brief must be our remaining notice of the ministry, the Church,
and the Presidents of the College. Dr. Bracken became the minister
in the year 1773, and continued so to be, in connection with
the Professorship of Humanity in the College, until his death in
1818. Bishop Madison became President in 1777, and continued
such until his death in 1812. After a temporary Presidency of
one year by Dr. Bracken, Dr. Augustine Smith, a Virginian, and
son of one of our most respectable clergymen, then the Professor
in a Medical College in New York, was called to preside over the
College. On entering upon its duties, he was conscious that the
aid of heaven, through his Church and ministry, ought to be had
in order to success, and therefore petitioned the now reviving Episcopal
Church of Virginia to establish a Professorship of Divinity
in the College. The result was, the sending the Rev. Dr. Keith
for that purpose, who succeeded Dr. Bracken as minister of the
parish, and made the experiment. After the trial of a few years,
being satisfied that success could not attend the effort at that time,
he resigned, and became the head of the Seminary at Alexandria.
Dr. Smith met with a good degree of success in increasing the
number of the students, but not enough to encourage his continuance


177

Page 177
beyond the year 1826. At his resignation, the Rev. Dr. William
H. Wilmer, of Alexandria, was called to the rectorship of the
church and Presidency of the College, both of which he discharged
with zeal and ability, and with considerable success, during one
year, at the end of which he died of fever, deeply lamented by all
the friends of the church and College. The means of awakening
pious fervour in the friends of the Church and of converting the
irreligious youth had never been so earnestly employed before his
time. Besides the regular services of the Sabbath and temple,
lectures, exhortations, and prayers were most earnestly used in
private houses twice in the week, and well attended. It was hoped
that a genuine revival of true religion was about to take place in
the College and town. The first-fruits of it had already appeared.
Nor did he rely on moral suasion alone to govern the youth, but,
when occasion called, resorted to proper discipline. One instance
is worthy of being recorded. At Williamsburg, as at some other
places, it was thought to be an exploit, becoming students, to annoy
all around by ringing the College bell or some other to which access
could be had. The large bell of the old church, in the midst of
the town, was resorted to for this purpose by some troublesome
youths. After due warning and admonition, Dr. Wilmer determined
to detect and punish the offenders. On the sound of the
bell one night, he promptly reached the place, taking with him one
of the chief citizens of the town, rather against his will. While
the bell was still ringing, followed by his companion, he ascended
in the dark the steps of the belfry leading up to the bell, not
knowing who or how many he had to encounter, and, seizing on
one of them, effectually secured him. Such resolution is not often
to be found. At the death of Dr. Wilmer, the Rev. Dr. Empie
was chosen his successor in both stations. He continued in them
for eight or nine years, when he accepted a call to St. James
Church, Richmond. As pastor and preacher he was admired, esteemed,
and beloved, as he had been elsewhere before, and was in
Richmond afterward. He still lives. His many and increasing
infirmities of body amply justify his retirement from public service,
and his many excellencies secure him the affection and esteem of
all who know him. His place in the College was supplied by Mr.
Dew, a Virginia gentleman, a graduate of the College, and a
scholar. His amiable disposition, fine talents, tact at management,
great zeal, and unwearied assiduity, were the means of raising the
College to as great prosperity as perhaps had ever been its lot at
any time since its first establishment, notwithstanding many opposing

178

Page 178
difficulties. To this we must make one exception,—viz.: as
to the classical and mathematical departments, under some of the
old and ripe scholars from England, before the Revolution. Mr.
Dew being arrested by the hand of death in a foreign land, in the
year 1846, the College was left in the temporary charge of Professor
Saunders and Mr. Benjamin Ewell during the years 1847
and 1848, when, by an arrangement with the Episcopal Church of
Virginia, the Visitors secured the services of Bishop Johns for a
few years. During the five years of his continuance, notwithstanding
the arduous labours of his Episcopal office, he so diligently
and wisely conducted the management of the College as to produce
a regular increase of the number of students until they had nearly
reached the maximum of former times, established a better discipline
than perhaps ever before had prevailed in the institution,
and attracted more students of divinity to its lectures than had
ever been seen there in the memory of any now living. At his
resignation in 1854, Mr. Ewell resumed the government, and is now
the President.

Renewing and concluding the list of the ministers of Williams
burg,—the Rev. Mr. Hodges succeeded Dr. Empie, and continued
for many years to fill the pulpit and perform all the duties of the
pastoral office most acceptably to the congregation. He was a
great favourite with a congregation of coloured persons, who,
though belonging to another denomination, preferred him as their
minister; and to the uttermost of his physical abilities he did for
many years act as such. At the resignation of Mr. Hodges, the
Rev. Mr. Denison became their pastor, and continued such for a
number of years. The Rev. George Wilmer, son of the former
rector and President, is their present pastor.

List of vestrymen in the church at Williamsburg from the year
1674 to 1769:—

Hon. Daniel Parke, Colonel John Page, James Besouth, Robert Cobb,
Mr. Bray, Captain Chesley, Mr. Aylott, Hon. Thomas Ludwell, Hon.
Thomas Ballard, James Vaux, William Korker, George Poindexter,
Thomas Whaley, Captain Otho Thorpe, Captain Thomas Williams, Martin
Gardiner, Daniel Wyld, Thomas Taylor, Christopher Pierson, Gideon
Macon, Robert Spring, George Martin, Abraham Vinckler, Samuel Timson,
John Ownes, Captain Francis Page, Thomas Pettus, Colonel Thomas
Ballard, Ralph Graves, Captain James Archer, George Norvell, John
Dormar, Edward Jones, Thomas Thorp, Daniel Parke, Jr., Hon. Edmund
Jennings, Hugh Norvell, William Pinkethman, Henry Tyler, John Kendall,
Baldwin Mathews, Philip Ludwell, Jr., Robert Crawley, Timothy
Pinkethman, Joseph White, James Whaley, Hon. John Page, Jr., William
Hansford, William Timson, Frederick Jones, David Bray, James Bray,


179

Page 179
Ambrose Cobb, James Hubard, Nathaniel Crowley, Matthew Pierce, John
Custis, Henry Carey, John Holloway, Archibald Blair, Michael Archer,
Baldwin Mathews, John Clayton, Lewis Burwell, David Bray, Jr., Thomas
Jones, Samuel Timson, Sir John Randolph, George Nicholas, William
Robertson, Hon. John Blair, Sen., Thomas Cobbs, Ralph Graves, Edward
Barradale, James Barber, Daniel Needler, James Bray, Jr., Henry Tyler,
Jr., John Harmer, James Wray, Matthew Pierce, Edward Barradale, Jr.,
Benjamin Waller, William Parks, Peyton Randolph, William Prentiss,
William Timson, Jr., John Holt, William Graves, Armstead Burwell,
John Palmer, Pinkethman Eaton, Robert Carter Nicholas, Thomas Everard,
Nathaniel Shields, Frederick Bryan, George Wythe, John Prentiss,
John Power, William Eaton.

 
[48]

I suppose he meant that the Government, if favourable to the measure, would
give it to some one in England. It is a fact clearly proved by his own letters to
Governor Hunter, of New York, that when at some previous period it was thought
probable that a Bishop would be sent to America, Dean Swift wished and expected
to be the Bishop

[49]

Many years before the war the College was in a most unhappy condition. The
Visitors and the Faculty were at variance, as the following correspondence will
show:—

Substance of a letter written by the Visitors to the Bishop of London, dated
July 15, 1767.

They informed the Bishop that Dr. Halyburton, whom he had recommended to
the Professorship of Moral Philosophy in the College, had arrived a few weeks
before, when they had reason to expect him more than ten months ago. They fear
that his Lordship had been imposed upon in regard to the qualifications of this
person, whom, by his own confessions, they find was totally unqualified to discharge
the duties of the Professorship. They say that Dr. H.'s letter "breathes
so great levity, not to say profaneness, of sentiment," that they would think themselves
unpardonable should they admit him to the College. They complain, also,
that those have been frequently sent to them "who were extremely unfit for the
employments assigned them;" and, on that account, the education of the youth
has been very defective; "a natural consequence of which have been riots, contentions,
and a dissipation of manners as unbecoming their characters as vitally
destructive of the ends of their appointment." They quote the following from the
letter of the Bishop, dated July 4, 1766:—"From the discouragements which
have been in the College, and the power which the Visitors seem desirous of exerting,
in displacing at their pleasure the Professors and Masters, it was no easy matter
to prevail upon any person to enter upon so precarious a situation." In reply to
this, they said that they had censured some former Professors for immoralities
and remissness in their duty; and, a few years since, some were deprived for their
contumacious behaviour. They then go on to give an account of the contests
between the Visitors and the Professors, arising out of the conflicting authority
of the two bodies in the appointment of Ushers for the Grammar-School; and
also on account of a statute enacted by the Visitors, prohibiting the Masters and
Professors from engaging in any employment out of College without special
permission. In justification of this statute, they say that one Professor had
engaged in the practice of medicine; that others had held parochial cures in
the vicinity and at greater distances, causing them to neglect their duties in
College, and more particularly on Saturdays and Sundays, when the students,
being left without any supervision, engaged in riotous conduct. According to that
account of the matter, there had been a contest between the Visitors and Professors
during the past twelve years, to the great detriment of the interests of the College.
That now these differences are happily settled, and harmony in a degree restored;
and they ask his Lordship to recommend to them suitable persons to fill the Professorships
of Moral Philosophy and Mathematics; the salary to be £100 per
annum, with board and lodgings, in the College building.

In reply to this letter, the Bishop exhorts them to bury all former animosities, and
speaks of the difficulty of finding men qualified for Professorships, who would be
willing to go to a distant and unhealthy country for an advance of thirty or forty
pounds per annum beyond what they might receive at home.

By a statute of the Visitors, passed in 1770, provision is made for the salaries
of eight undergraduates, of £30 per annum each; to be chosen, two each year,
from the body of students, for their proficiency in learning and their exemplary
conduct. They were to complete a full course of studies, probably including divinity,
as the statute closes with these words:—"Let those who shall have completed
this course of education and propose to go home for orders be entitled to a bounty
of £50 sterling, for their encouragement and to defray the expenses of their
voyage." In 1775, James Madison was allowed £50 by the Visitors, to defray his
expenses in going to England for holy orders. In the year 1775, Messrs. Gwatkin
and Henly returned to England. In the year 1777, Messrs. Camm, Jones, and
Dixon have difficulties with the Visitors. The two latter resign, and Mr. Camm,
denying the authority of the board, is displaced. Mr. Madison is made President.


180

Page 180

ARTICLE XIV.

Williamsburg, Bruton Parish.—No. 4.

According to promise, I proceed to some notices of a few of
the vestrymen of Bruton parish. There are doubtless others
equally worthy of praise, but I have no information from which
to speak. Mr. Daniel Parke, whose name stands first on the list
of the first vestry in 1676, was from Surrey, England, and
married a Miss Evelyn.[50] A tablet of him was placed in the
first church at Williamsburg, and afterwards was transferred to
the second. He appears to have been a man of worth and distinction.
Mr. John Custis, of Arlington, Northampton county,
Eastern Shore of Virginia, married his daughter, and was also a
vestryman. George Washington Parke Custis, of Arlington, Fairfax
county, grandson of Mrs. General Washington, was descended
from the above-mentioned Daniel Parke and John Custis. It
could be wished that the record of Daniel Parke his son, whose
name is also on the vestry-book, were as worthy of notice. He
was indeed more notorious than his father, but for other reasons.
He conceived a great dislike to Mr. Blair, the minister of Jamestown,
the President of the College, and who was living near
Williamsburg. Having no pew in the church at Williamsburg, his
wife was indebted to the kindness of Mr. Ludlow, of Green Spring,
whose daughter Mr. Parke married, for a seat. On a certain Sunday,
Mr. Parke, determined to mortify Mr. Blair by insulting his
wife, in his absence (and doubtless in the absence of Mr. Ludlow,
who afterward complained of it) came into the church, and, rudely
seizing Mrs. Blair by the arm, drew her out of the pew, saying


181

Page 181
she should not sit there. He was a man of great violence of
character, as otherwise appears. This is recorded in the archives
of Lambeth, and speaks ill for the decorum and chivalry of the
times. In the Rev. Mr. Anderson's Colonial History of this period,
we have the following account of a Mr. Daniel Parke, which
answers but too well to the foregoing:—

"The offences of Parke's early life had compelled him to flee from Virginia,
the land of his birth, to England, where he purchased an estate in
Hampshire and obtained a seat in Parliament. Not long afterward, he
was expelled the House for bribery; and the provocation of fresh crimes
drove him again a fugitive to Holland, where he entered as a volunteer
in the army of the Duke of Marlborough, and was made his aid-de-camp.
He carried home, in a brief note written upon the field by Marlborough to
his Duchess, the first tidings of the victory of Blenheim, and, through the
interest which then prevailed at the Court of Anne, obtained the Government
of Antigua. His arbitary and oppressive conduct in public matters
and the gross licentiousness of his private life soon stirred up against him
the hatred of all classes of its inhabitants. The home Government ordered
his recall; but he, refusing to obey it, persisted with arrogant insolence
in his course of tyranny. At length it could be endured no longer, and
on the morning of the 7th of December, 1710, a body of five hundred men
with numbers of the Assembly at their head, marched to the Government-House,
determined to drive him from it by force. The orders of Parke
that they should disperse, and the attempts of his enemies to negotiate,
were alike fruitless. The attack was made, and resisted with equal violence
by the soldiers and others whom Parke had summoned to his aid;
but the assailants in a few hours conquered, and Parke fell a victim to
their fury. It was a lawless punishment of a lawless act, and excited great
indignation in England. But the catalogue of Parke's offences had been
so enormous, and the effusion of blood would have been so great had the
sentence of capital punishment gone forth against all, or even the leaders
of those who had been concerned in his violent death, that it was judged
expedient to issue a general pardon."

Of old Mr. Page, who stands next to Colonel Daniel Parke the
elder, I have already spoken. Early on the list of vestrymen was
Mr. John Randolph, alias Sir John Randolph, who was the father
of Mr. John Randolph and Mr. Peyton Randolph, all of whom
were in succession Attorney-Generals of Virginia. The father is
spoken of as a most eminent man in his profession, and of high
character. His son Peyton Randolph was also a vestryman of
the church, and gave early signs of a too independent spirit to be
very acceptable to the English Government. Being sent over to
England on account of some of our complaints, and speaking his
mind too freely for the Court and Cabinet, he was displaced from
his office, and his brother John, who had been acting in his absence,
was installed. At the breaking out of the war, John went to England


182

Page 182
and was succeeded by his son Edmond. The former, bitterly
repenting of his choice, died of a broken heart, and directed his
remains to be brought back to Virginia. They are interred in the
College Chapel. Mr. Peyton Randolph ever showed himself the
warm and steady friend of the Church as well as of his country.
He went by the name of Speaker Randolph, being for a long time
the presiding officer in the House of Burgesses. He was also
chosen Speaker of the first, second, and third Congress, but suddenly
died of apoplexy, during the last. He was buried for a time
in Philadelphia, but afterward removed to Williamsburg. In connection
with the foregoing notice of Mr. Peyton Randolph, I add
something concerning his nephew and adopted son, Edmund Randolph,
of whose religious sentiments I have spoken in a former
number.

Extract from a paper written by Edmund Randolph, soon after the
death of his wife, and addressed to his children.

"Up to the commencement of the Revolution, the Church of England
was the established religion, in which your mother had been educated
with strictness, if not with bigotry. From the strength of parental example,
her attendance on public worship was unremitted, except when
insuporable obstacles occurred; the administration of the sacrament was
never without a cause passed by; in her closet, prayer was uniformly addressed
to the throne of mercy, and the questioning of the sacred truths
she never permitted to herself or heard from others without abhorrence.
When we were united, I was a deist, made so by my confidence in some
whom I revered, and by the labours of two of my preceptors, who, though
of the ministry, poisoned me with books of infidelity. I cannot answer
for myself that I should ever have been brought to examine the genuineness
of Holy Writ, if I had not observed the consoling influence which
it wrought upon the life of my dearest Betsey. I recollect well that it
was not long before I adopted a principle which I have never relinquished:
—that woman, in the present state of society, is, without religion, a
monster. While my opinions were unsettled, Mr. — and Mr. — came
to my house on Sunday evening to play with me at chess. She did
not appear in the room; and her reproof, which from its mildness was
like the manna of heaven, has operated perpetually as an injunction from
above; for several years since I detected the vanity of sublunary things,
and knew that the good of man consisted in Christianity alone. I have
often hinted a wish that we had instituted a course of family prayer for
the benefit of our children, on whose minds, when most pliant, the habit
might be fixed. But I know not how the plan was not enforced, until
during her last illness she and I frequently joined in prayer. She always
thanked me after it was finished; and it grieves me to think that she
should suppose that this enlivening inducement was necessary in order
to excite me to this duty."

It is sad to think that ministers of the Gospel should contribute
to infidelity by recommending the examination of infidel works.


183

Page 183
Who they were I am unable to ascertain. I have other reasons
for knowing that infidelity, under the specious garb of Universalism,
was then finding its way into the pulpit. Governor Page,
Colonel Nicholas, and Colonel Bland made complaints against
some one preaching in or near Williamsburg about this time, for
advocating the doctrine with its usual associates, and prevented
his preferment. The Rev. Mr. Yancey, of Louisa, also published
a sermon on universal salvation, which has been recently
republished by some of that school. A Rev. Mr. Tally, of Gloucester,
taught the same, and afterward gave a fit comment on his
doctrine by dying the death of the drunkard, as one informed
me who closed his eyes. At such a time, when the writings of
French philosophers — falsely so called — were corrupting the
minds of the Virginia youth, the testimony of such men as Peyton
Randolph, Mr. R. C. Nicholas, Colonel Bland, President Nelson,
Governor Page, and the recovery of Edmund Randolph from the
snare, has peculiar weight. In the worst of times, God never
leaves himself without a witness.

There appears on the vestry-list the two names of George
Nicholas and his son, Robert Carter Nicholas. The former came
to this country a physician,—doubtless duly qualified. He married
the widow of Mr. Burwell, of Gloucester, a descendant of the Carters.
His son, Robert C. Nicholas, was distinguished at the bar in Williamsburg,
in the House of Burgesses, in the Council, as Treasurer
of the State, and as a patriot in the Revolutionary War. But he
had a higher praise than all these offices could give him; for he
was a sincere Christian, and a zealous defender of the Church of
his fathers when he believed her rights were assailed. Mr. Hugh
Blair Grigsby, in his eloquent description of the Burgesses of
1776, thus describes him:—

"He loved, indeed, a particular form of religion, but he loved more
dearly religion itself. In peace or war, at the fireside, or on the floor
of the House of Burgesses, a strong sense of moral responsibility was
seen through all his actions. If a resolution appointing a day of fasting
and prayer or acknowledging the providence of God in crowning our arms
with victory, though drawn by worldly men with worldly views, was to
be, it was from his hands it was to be presented to the House, and from
his lips came the persuasive words which fell not in vain on the coldest
ears. Indeed, such was the impression which his sincere piety—embellishing
as it did the sterling virtues of his character—made upon his
own generation, that its influence was felt upon that which succeeded it;
and when his youngest son, near a quarter of a century after his death,
became a candidate for the office of Attorney-General of the Commonwealth,
a political opponent, who knew neither father nor son, gave him


184

Page 184
his support, declaring that no son of the old Treasurer could be unfaithful
to his country. Nor was his piety less conspicuous in a private
sphere. Visiting, on one occasion, Lord Botetourt, with whom he lived
in the strictest friendship, he observed to that nobleman, `My lord, I
think you will be very unwilling to die;' and when asked what gave rise
to that remark, `Because,' said he, `you are so social in your nature, and
so much beloved, and have so many good things around you, that you must
be loath to leave them." His lordship made no reply; but a short time
after, being on his death-bed, he sent in haste for Colonel Nicholas, who
lived near the palace, and who instantly repaired thither to receive the
last sighs of his dying friend. On entering his chamber, he asked his
commands. `Nothing,' replied his lordship, `but to let you see that I
resign those good things, of which you formerly spoke, with as much
composure as I enjoyed them.' After which he grasped his hand with
warmth, and instantly expired."[51]

The children of R. C. Nicholas were blessed with a mother who
was equally worthy. Let the following letter to her son, Wilson
Cary Nicholas, on his entering public life, bear witness:—

"Dear Wilson:

I congratulate you on the honour your county has
done you in choosing you their representative with so large a vote. I
hope you are come into the Assembly without those trammels which some
people submit to wear for a seat in the House,—I mean, unbound by
promises to perform this or that job which the many-headed monster may
think proper to chalk out for you; especially that you have not engaged
to lend a last hand to pulling down the church, which, by some impertinent
questions in the last paper, I suspect will be attempted. Never, my
dear Wilson, let me hear that by that sacrilegious act you have furnished
yourself with materials to erect a scaffold by which you may climb to the
summit of popularity; rather remain in the lowest obscurity: though, I
think, from long observation, I can venture to assert that the man of
integrity, who observes one equal tenor in his conduct,—who deviates
neither to the one side or the other from the proper line,—has more of the
confidence of the people than the very compliant time-server, who calls
himself the servant—and, indeed, is the slave—of the people. I flatter
myself, too, you will act on a more liberal plan than some members have
done in matters in which the honour and interest of this State are concerned;


185

Page 185
that you will not, to save a few pence to your constituents, discourage
the progress of arts and sciences, nor pay with so scanty a hand
persons who are eminent in either. This parsimonious plan, of late
adopted, will throw us behind the other States in all valuable improvements,
and chill, like a frost, the spring of learning and spirit of enterprise.
I have insensibly extended what I had to say beyond my first
design, but will not quit the subject without giving you a hint, from a
very good friend of yours, that your weight in the House will be much
greater if you do not take up the attention of the Assembly on trifling
matters nor too often demand a hearing. To this I must add a hint of
my own, that temper and decorum is of infinite advantage to a public
speaker, and a modest diffidence to a young man just entering the stage
of life: the neglect of the former throws him off his guard, breaks his
chain of reasoning, and has often produced in England duels that have
terminated fatally. The natural effect of the latter will ever be procuring
a favourable and patient hearing, and all those advantages that a
prepossession in favour of the speaker produces.

"You see, my son, that I take the privilege of a mother in advising
you, and, be assured, you have no friend so solicitous for your welfare,
temporal and eternal, as your ever-affectionate mother,

"Anne Nicholas."

The author of the above letter was the daughter of Colonel
Wilson Cary, of Hampton, a descendant of one of the first
families who settled in the lower part of Virginia. Tradition says
that Mrs. Nicholas, after the death of her husband, R. C. Nicholas,
at his seat in Hanover, was visited by some British officers,
and received them with great dignity. Her daughter-in-law, wife
of her son George, and sister of Governor Samuel Smith, of Baltimore,
being recognised by one of the officers as an old acquaintance
in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, secured polite treatment for the
family; but the officers, on discovering that there were some jewels
and other valuables in the house, seized upon them and carried
them off.

Although I have not continued the list of vestrymen beyond
the period of the Revolution, there are two who must have been
added to it soon after that event, of whom I wish to take a passing
notice. The first of these is Mr. Burwell Bassett. His name
may be seen on one or more of the earlier journals of the Church
of Virginia, when it was first organized on the American platform.
He is also to be seen, for a long time, as the representative of the
Williamsburg district in the American Congress, and very often as
filling the Speaker's chair in the absence of that officer. I knew
him from my very boyhood as my father's friend and visitor. The
name of Bassett is an ancient and honourable one on the page
of Virginia history, and Mr. Burwell Bassett did not dishonour it.


186

Page 186
He was loved and esteemed for his integrity and friendly qualities.
An anecdote was related to me, more than forty years ago, by
that worthy man, Mr. Stanford, member of Congress from North
Carolina, which showed his generosity of character. On a certain
occasion, a poor old soldier of the Revolution presented himself in
Washington and asked an alms of the members of Congress.
Mr. Stanford, seeing something really touching and worthy in the
case, undertook a collection for him in the hall of Congress. He
was mortified at the refusal of some, and at the small and reluctant
contribution of others, but when he came to Mr. Bassett
the scene was changed. He was just receiving of some one a
number of bank-notes, and, on the mention of the subject, immediately
opened both his hands, in which he held the bank-notes,
and said, "Certainly," bidding him take whatever he wanted. His
hospitality was proverbial. You could do him no greater favour
than to go to his house and take as many others with you as you
pleased. He was, however, though a very ultra republican in
theory, pertinacious in having his own way in some things. An
instance of this was once displayed in the Board of Visitors of
William and Mary College, with which he had been connected for
a long time, and where his will had generally governed. On a certain
occasion, when, after much debate, he failed to carry his point
against the younger members, he left the room, shaking his coattail,
instead of the dust of his feet, against them. The Board
could not think of thus parting with their old friend, and, at the
suggestion of one of their number, contrived that evening to let
him know that they wished to dine with him next day. This was
enough. A hospitable feast was given, and nothing more heard
of the difference. The democratic principle of Mr. Bassett,
united with this pertinacity of character, was also evident in his
opposition to the canon of the Virginia Convention excluding from
that body all non-communicants. He held that the vestries had a
right to send whom they pleased, and that it was interfering with
their rights to impose any conditions. He came to the Convention
in Fredericksburg, at which the question was finally settled,
and spoke nearly one whole day against it. Being old and
infirm, when he was tired of standing he asked leave to sit, which
was freely granted. From a seat in the middle aisle, near the
chancel where the bishops sat, he still talked until toward the
close of the day. As I had read a written (and afterward published)
argument in its favour in the morning, his address was
chiefly to myself, and in a very plain style; but we allowed him

187

Page 187
all liberties, and, at the close, passed the canon by a majority of
two-thirds or more. His vestry, sympathizing with him or unwilling
to differ, resolved to send no more delegates or contributions
while this canon continued, and were encouraged in their course
by the strictures upon our canon in two of our Northern Episcopal
papers. Bishop Moore and myself did not change our relation
to the parish, but continued to visit the congregation as
usual, and said not a word to persuade the vestry to change their
course. At the death of Mr. Bassett, not many years after, of its
own accord a delegate was sent to the Convention, and all the back
dues honourably sent with him. The kindness of Mr. Bassett to
myself was increased during this period. He not only was most
attentive to me when in Williamsburg, but, as I always came to it
through New Kent, he would meet me in his carriage, more than
twenty miles off, at old Colonel Macon's, and carry me thence to
his hospitable home in Williamsburg, and, when my services
there were ended, insist on sending me to the next point. From
him I learned much of the character of the old church and its
ministers.

MR. ROBERT SAUNDERS.

The other person to whom I alluded was the elder Mr. Robert
Saunders, and father to the one of the same name now living in
Williamsburg. Whether he was descended from either of the two
ministers of that name on the list of the Virginia clergy, (one of
early date,) or related to them, I know not. Mr. Saunders was a
lawyer of distinction in Williamsburg, and highly esteemed by Dr.
Wilmer and Dr. Empie for his religious character. He furnished
Dr. Hawks a lengthy statement about the Church in Virginia, and
especially about the parish of Bruton. The following is his opinion
of the conduct of the Virginia Legislature in relation to the sale
of the glebes:—

"It was not, I am persuaded, the result either of covetousness, infidelity,
or sectarianism, but proceeded from the same spirit which gave
rise to the bill of rights and the Constitution bottomed upon them. I
remark, further, that it is manifest, from the history of the day and the
journal of the Legislative proceedings, that a great majority of both
Houses were, at the time of passing these statutes, Episcopalians, and
they clung to the Episcopal clergy as long as they could properly do so
under the pressure of public opinion. As an individual I was opposed
to the sale of the glebes, because I wished the Episcopal Church to be
predominant; and, as no direct injury was done to the Dissenters by keeping


188

Page 188
the glebes as appendages to the Church, I thought it was prudent to
preserve this property in the channel in which it had passed for so many
years, as an encouragement to the clergy of the Episcopal Church, to
whom the people had been mainly attached by habit and education. But
I cannot admit that the Legislature illegally seized and violated the
rights of the Episcopal Church. The property belonged to the parish,
and not to the clergy; and it is certainly now known that in very many,
if not the larger number, of parishes in Virginia, the Episcopalians were
not the majority, but a small minority at the time when this law was
enacted."—Letter to Dr. Hawks.

I entirely concur with Mr. Saunders, that covetousness did not
promote this law; for, as I shall show hereafter, the glebes were
not worth contending for. Infidelity and sectarianism, I think,
must have had their share in the work. I shall have occasion to
consider this question at a future time.

CONCLUSION.

Some thoughts on the formation of the Virginia character, as
displayed in the American Revolution and previously, may with
propriety follow after the history of the Church and College at
Williamsburg, and the foregoing list of vestrymen. As London
and the Universities were in one sense England, Paris and its University
France, so Williamsburg, while it was the seat of Government,
and the College of William and Mary, were, to a great extent,
Virginia. Here her Governor and chief officers resided; here her
Council often repaired and her Burgesses annually met. What
was their character? Whence did their ancestors come, and who
were they? Happily for the Colony, they were not Lords, or their
eldest sons, and therefore heirs of lordship. With one or two exceptions,
none such ever settled in Virginia. Neither were they in
any great numbers the ultra devotees of kings,—the rich, gay, military,
Cavalier adherents of Charles I.,—or the non-juring believers in
the divine right of kings, in the days of Charles II. and of James II.
Some of all these there were in the Colony, doubtless. Some dainty
idlers, with a little high blood, came over with Captain Smith at
first, and more of the rich and high-minded Cavaliers after the
execution of Charles I.; but Virginia did not suit them well
enough to attract and retain great numbers. There was too much
hard work to be done, and too much independence, even from the
first, for those who held the doctrine of non-resistance and passive
obedience to kings and others in authority, to make Virginia a


189

Page 189
comfortable place for them and their posterity.[52] And yet we must
not suppose that the opposite class—the paupers, the ignorant, the
servile—formed the basis of the larger and better class of the Virginia
population, when it began to develop its character at the Revolution,
and, indeed, long before. These did not spring up into
great men in a day or a night, on touching the Virginia soil. Some
of the best families of England, Ireland, Scotland, and France,
formed at an early period a large part of that basis. Noblemen
and their elder sons did not come over; but we must remember
how many of the younger sons of noblemen were educated for the
bar, for the medical profession, and the pulpit, and turned adrift
on the world to seek their own living, without any patrimony.
Some of those, and many more of their enterprising descendants,
came to the New World, especially to Virginia, in search of fortune
and honour, and found them here. Numbers of Virginia families,
who are almost ashamed or afraid in this republican age to own it,
have their genealogical trees, or traditionary records, by which
they can trace their line to some of the most ancient families in
England, Scotland, Ireland, and to the Huguenots of France.
Where this is not the case, still they can derive their origin from

190

Page 190
men of education, either in law, physic, or divinity, which things
were too costly in the old countries to be gotten by the poorer
classes, except in some few instances where charity was afforded.
Ministers could not generally be ordained without degrees from
Cambridge, Oxford, Dublin, or Edinburgh. Lawyers studied at
the Temple Bar in London; physicians at Edinburgh. For a long
time Virginia was dependent for all these professional characters
on English education. Those who came over to this country poor,
and ignorant, and dependent, had few opportunities of elevating
themselves; as has been happily the case since our independence,
by reason of the multiplication of schools and colleges, and of all
the means of wealth which are now open to us. Sir William
Berkeley in his day rejoiced that there was not a free school or
printing-press in Virginia, and hoped it might be so for a hundred
years to come; and perhaps it was not much otherwise as to
schools. In the year 1723, the Bishop of London addressed a
circular to the clergy of Virginia, then somewhat over forty in
number, making various inquiries as to the condition of things in
the parishes. One of the questions was, "Are there any schools
in your parish?" The answer, with two or three exceptions, (and
those in favour of charity-schools,) was, none. Private schools at
rich gentlemen's houses, kept perhaps by an unmarried clergyman
or candidate for Orders, were all the means of education in the
Colony, and to such the poor had no access. Another question
was, "Is there any parish library?" The answer invariably was,
none; except in one case, where the minister replied, "We have
the Book of Homilies, the Whole Duty of Man, and the Singing
Psalms." Such were the answers from thirty clergymen, whose
responses I have before me.[53] If "knowledge be power," Virginia
was, up to that time, so far as the poor were concerned, but a barren
nursery of mighty men. Would that it had been otherwise,
both for Church and State! Education was confined to the sons
of those who, being educated themselves, and appreciating the
value of it, and having the means, employed private teachers in
their families, or sent their sons to the schools in England and paid

191

Page 191
for them with their tobacco. Even up to the time of the Revolution
was this the case with some. General Nelson, several of the
Lees and Randolphs, George Gilmer, my own father and two of
his brothers, and many besides who might be mentioned, just got
back in time to prepare for the Revolutionary struggle. The College
of William and Mary, from the year 1700 and onward, did
something toward educating a small portion of the youth of Virginia,
and that was all until Hampden Sydney, at a much later
period, was established. But let any one look at the published
catalogue of William and Mary, and see how few were educated
there from 1720 to the Revolution, and let him notice who they
were. Let him also examine whatever lists of Burgesses, Henning's
volumes and the old Virginia almanacs furnish, and he will
see who they were that may be considered the chief men of Virginia.
I have been recently examining another set of records
which show who were considered her first men. I allude to the
vestry elections; and nine times in ten we are confident one of
their body was the delegate. They were the ruling men of the
parishes,—the men of property and education. As we have said
before, from an early period they were in training for the Revolution,
by the steady and ever-successful struggle with Commissaries,
Governors, Bishops of London, and the Crown, on the subject of
the calling and induction of ministers. They also spoke through
the House of Burgesses, which was made up of themselves. We
will venture to affirm that very few of the statesmen of the Revolution
went into it without this training. Even Mr. Jefferson, and
Wythe, who did not conceal their disbelief of Christianity, took their
parts in the duties of vestrymen, the one in Williamsburg, the other
in Albemarle; for they wished to be men of influence. In some
of the communications to England, the vestries are complained of
by the clergy as the aristocratic bodies,—the twelve lords or masters
of the parishes; and they did sometimes, I doubt not, rule
the poor clergy with a rod of iron; but they were not the men to
truckle to George III., Lord North, or the Parliament. Well did
Mr. Burke, in his celebrated speech on American affairs, reply to
some who said that the rich slaveholders of the South would not
stand a war, "that they were entirely mistaken; for that those
who had been long accustomed to command were the last who
would consent to obey."[54] In proof of my position that men of

192

Page 192
education, and that gotten chiefly in Europe, were the ancestors of
large numbers of those who formed at a later period the most
influential class, I would here insert a list of the earlier clergy of
Virginia which I got from some ancient documents, (most of them
unpublished,) and this is but a small part of those whose names
are lost to us forever. Let the reader compare these with names
on the civil and military list of Virginia's history, and he must
acknowledge the probability at least of consanguinity between
many of them. I begin with the names of Bucke, Whittaker, the
two Williamses, (names still common in Virginia,) Young, Key,
Berkeley, Hampton, Richardson, Teackle, Cotton, Palmer, Gordon,
the Smiths, Ware, Doyley, the Bowkers, Saunders, Holt,
Collier, Wallace, Walker, the Monroes, Slaughter, Blair, Ander
son, Ball, the Yateses, Hall, Latane, the Roses, the Joneses, Sharp,
Waggener, the Taylors, Stith, Cox, the Brookes, the Robertsons,
the Robinsons, Collings, Baylie, Bell, Warden, Debutts, Forbes,
Marshall, Preston, Goodwin, Cargill, Hughes, the Scotts, the
Fontains and Maurys, the Dawsons, Reid, White, Campbell, Graham,
the Thompsons, Fraser, Thacker, Wilkinson, the Navisons,
the Stewarts, the Dixons, Webb, Innis, Warrington, Cole, Purdie,
Marye, Mackay, Jackson, Green, McDonald, Moncure, Keith, Leland,
Craig, Grayson, Bland, Manning, Hamilton, Dick, Clay,
Lyons. Many of the foregoing belong to the first century of our
existence and to the early part of the second. Many of the families
of Virginia may have descended from some of the foregoing
without knowing it. I leave it to others to search out the civil
list of Virginia names, in order to ascertain as far as practicable
how many of their ancestors may have been well-educated doctors
and lawyers, or respectable merchants and farmers, when first
coming to this country. I hope I shall not be misunderstood. It
is no dishonour to be born of the poorest parents in the land. It
is a much greater honour to be descended from a poor and ignorant

193

Page 193
good man, than from a rich or learned bad man. I am only
speaking of a historical fact. It was the shame of our forefathers,
both here and in England, that they did not, by promoting education,
furnish more opportunities to the poor to become in a greater
degree the very bone and sinew of the State. It is our sin now
that more and better attention is not paid to the common schools
of Virginia, in order to make them nurseries of good and great
men.

 
[52]

It may very properly be called a mixed basis of Cavaliers, of the followers of
Cromwell and of the Pretender, and of the Huguenots, when persecuted and forced
to fly for refuge to other lands; and also of many respectable persons at other
times. The Test-Act, or subscriptions required of the vestrymen and other officers,
shows that no encouragement was held out, either to the followers of Cromwell or
of the Pretender, to expect honours and offices in Virginia. They always required
allegiance to the established Government, except during the temporary usurpation
of Cromwell. After the establishment of the House of Hanover, the Stuart Pretenders
and their followers were denounced in these test-oaths. Some specimens
of these subscriptions, or oaths, are presented in our sketches. So that, probably,
not many of either extreme came to Virginia, where they were thus stigmatized and
excluded from office unless on condition of abjuring their principles Dr. Hawks,
in his History of the Church in Virginia, says that its population before the protectorate
of Cromwell was twenty thousand; after the restoration of monarchy,
thirty thousand. There were only ten thousand added in ten or twelve years. If
we consider how many of this number were from natural increase in a new country,
how many not of the Cavalier class had come over, and how many of that class
returned on the accession of Charles II., it will not leave a large number to make
an impression on the Virginia character. Most of those Cavaliers who, by their birth
and talents, were most likely to make that impression, had gone to Surinam,
Barbadoes, Antigua, and the Leeward Islands. These "were to be men of the first
rate, who wanted not money or credit." (See Dr. Hawks's History, page 284.)
After the restoration of monarchy, some of the followers of Cromwell came over to
Virginia, but most probably in much smaller numbers than the Cavaliers had done,
as they would not find so welcome a home, for the loyalty of Virginia at that time
cannot be questioned.

[53]

Even the little establishment of Huguenots at Manakintown, whose compact
settlement so favoured education, and whose parentage made its members to desire
it, was so destitute, that about this time one of their leading men, a Mr. Sallie, on
hearing that the King was about to establish a colony in Ireland for the Huguenots,
addressed him a letter begging permission to be united to it, saying that there was
no school among them where their children could be educated.

[54]

In all that we say on this subject, concerning the patriots of the Revolution
and their connection with the Episcopal Church, and especially the vestries, it must
not be understood as excluding from their fair share in the assertion of the liberties
of the country those of other denominations. The Baptists as a body soon tendered
their services, and were accepted. They, however, were mostly descended
from Episcopalians, having for conscience' sake separated themselves from the
Established Church not long before the war. The same may be said of the Presbyterians
in Eastern Virginia; they were not numerous, being chiefly in Hanover,
Charlotte, and Prince Edward, but still they furnished most valuable men to the
cause. Those of Western Virginia, as well as the Germans, were descended from
European ancestors who were not of the Episcopal Church. They also were forward
and most effective in the Revolution.

 
[50]

If this Miss Evelyn whom Mr. Parke married was daughter or relative of the
Mr. Evelyn whose name appears among the pious benefactors of that day in England,
then was she connected with one of the truest friends of the Church of
America. In all that was done by the two great societies for the promotion of Christianity
in foreign lands,—the Propagation and Christian Knowledge Societies,—Mr.
Evelyn was among the foremost. Of him, at his death in 1705, it is said, "Evelyn,
full of years and honour, and breathing to the last the spirit of prayer and thankfulness,
entered into his rest."

[51]

Colonel Nicholas died at his seat in Hanover, leaving five sons,—George, who
moved to Kentucky; Lewis, who lived in Albemarle; John, who moved to New
York; Wilson Cary, who was member of the Senate and House of Representatives
of the United States and Governor of Virginia; Philip Norborne, called
after Norborne, Lord Botetourt, his father's friend, and who, besides other offices,
held that of Judge of the General Court. One of the daughters of Colonel Nicholas
married Mr. Edmund Randolph; another Mr. John H. Norton, of Winchester.
She was the mother of the Rev. Mr. Norton, a venerable minister of the Episcopal
Church of New York, who has two sons in our ministry,—one in Virginia, the other
in Kentucky.


194

Page 194

ARTICLE XV.

Williamsburg, Bruton Parish.—No. 5.

Since the preceding articles on this parish were written, and
published in another form, we have obtained some further information
which may not be uninteresting to our readers. We have
searched among the old tombstones in the graveyard surrounding
the church, and deciphered some of the scarce-legible inscriptions
on the time-worn or broken slabs, which are either still resting on
their original foundations, or else prostrated upon the earth or
leaning against the church-wall or on other tombs. Some, no
doubt, were deposited beneath the church itself, as was the custom
more in ancient than in present times. Some of our great men, as
the Randolphs, Bishop Madison, and others, are in a vault beneath
the College chapel, while others are in adjoining farms, where once
stately mansions stood, and of which the tombstones are now the
only witnesses that they once existed. Williamsburg was once the
miniature copy of the Court of St. James, somewhat aping the
manners of that royal place, while the old church and its graveyard
and the College chapel were—si licet cum magnis componere
parva
—the Westminster Abbey and St. Paul's of London, where
the great ones were interred.

We begin our transcript of inscriptions with that of the first
minister of the parish,—the Rev. Roland Jones, son of a minister
of the same name,—probably in England,—and of which name,
and doubtless family, several others ministered in Virginia:—

"Hic jacet Rolandus Jones, Clericus, filius Rolandi Jones, Clerici.
Natus Swimbrook, juxta Burford in comitatu Oxon. Collegii Merton,
Universitate Oxon., Alumnus. Parochiæ Bruton, Virginia, Pastor Primus
Delectissimus. Functione pastorali annis 14 Fideliter defunctus Parochiæ
quam maximo de . . . . . obiit April 23, die ætatis suæ, 45
An. . . . D. 1688."

The blanks in the foregoing and others cannot be supplied, being
illegible.

Our next describes one of the best of our early Governors:—

"Under this marble rest ye ashes of his excellency Edward Nott, late


195

Page 195
Governor of this Colony, who, in his private character, was a good Christian,
and in his public, a good Governor. He was a lover of mankind,
and bountiful to his friends. By the prudence and justice of his administration,
he was deservedly esteemed a public blessing while he lived;
and when he died, it was a public calamity. He departed this life the
23d day of August, 1706, aged 49 years. In grateful remembrance of
whose many virtues, the General Assembly of this Colony have erected
this monument."

The next is taken from a slab lying in the graveyard against the
wall of the church, in order to preserve it. Philip Ludwell lived
within a mile or two of Williamsburg, and his uncle Thomas may
have been buried there and removed by the nephew. Commissary
Blair married the daughter of Philip Ludwell and lived on a farm
adjoining, which was given to him by his father-in-law.

"Under this marble lyeth the body of Thomas Ludwell, Esquire
Secretary of Va., who was born at Bruton, in the county of Somerset
in the kingdom of England, and departed this life in the year 1678. And
near this lye the bodies of Richard Kemp, Esquire, his predecessor in the
Secretary's office, and Sir Thomas Lunsford, Knight. In memory of
whom this marble is placed, by order of Philip Ludwell, Esq., nephew of
said Thomas Ludwell, in the year 1727."

There can be no doubt but that the name Bruton was given to
the parish in honour of Thomas Ludwell, who came from a place
of that name in England. Originally the parish was called Middletowne,
when, in 1658, the inhabitants of Middle Plantation
(Williamsburg) and of Harop parish (between it and Warwick)
were united into one.

From the fragments of a large slab which, for some time, has
been lying at one of the gates of the churchyard, we take the following
imperfect inscription relating to the father of the Pages of
Virginia:—

"Here lyeth, in hope of a joyful resurrexion, the body of Col. John
Page, Esquire, of Bruton parish, one of their Majesties' Council . . . .
dominion, Virginia. . . . . departed this life, 23d of —nuary, in the
year of our Lord, —69½, aged 65."

From this and another inscription in Gloucester, it appears that
Governor Page was wrong when, in his autobiography, he calls
him Sir John Page. He is called Colonel John Page on this and
the tombstone in Gloucester, where he is mentioned as the father
of Matthew Page, who married Miss Mary Mann, of Timberneck.
Colonel Page died in 1690—½.


196

Page 196

The following is the inscription over his wife:—

"Here lyeth the body of Alice Page, wife to John Page, of the county
of York, in Va., aged 73 years, who departed this life the 22d day of
June, anno domini 169-," [the other figure being illegible.]

As York county took in a part of Williamsburg, Mr. Page may
have lived in or near it.

Mr. Page's eldest son was named Francis, who died at the early
age of thirty-five, but not without being much distinguished as a
lawyer. To him, according to Henning, were committed several
trusts; among them, the revision of the laws of the Colony. He
was also a vestryman of the parish of Bruton, and contracted for
the building of the present church; that is, for the part of it built
before the time of General Spottswood. He died only a year or
two after his father. The following is his epitaph:—

"Here lyeth, in hope of a joyful resurrexion, the body of Captain
Francis Page, of Bruton parish, in the dominion of Virginia, son of
Colonel John Page, of the same parish, who departed this life the 10th
day of May, in the year of our Lord 1692, aged 35."

The following is a fragment of the poetic eulogy on the broken
tombstone:—

"Thou wast, while living, of unspotted fame:
Now, being dead, no man dares soil thy name;
For thou wast one whom nothing here could stain,
Neither force of honour nor love of gain.
spheres, thou hast well discharged thy trust,
most truly pious, loyal, just.
and goodness, my pen cannot expresse,
virtues my tongue cannot rehearse,
teemed by all the wise and sage
thy country in thy age.
we cannot now speak of thee
to all posterity
life did yourself create
everlasting date
your most happy wife
and this life."

Near to this is the tomb of his wife, with the following inscription:—

"Here lyeth, in hope of a joyful resurrexion, Mary, the wife of Captain
Francis Page, of Bruton parish, in the dominion of Va., daughter of
Edward Digges, Esquire, of Hampton parish, in the same dominion, who
departed this life the eighteenth day of March, in the year of our Lord
1690/1, aged 3-," the second figure illegible.


197

Page 197

Then comes the following eulogy:—

"Thy modest, meek, and pious soul did shine
With well-temper'd nature, and grace divine:
One to excell in beauty, few could finde;
Yet thy rarest features were of the minde.
Thou wast a faithful and virtuous wife;
Thou greatly loved peace and hated strife;
Thou wast a prudent and tender mother,
A true-loving sister to each brother,
A choice friend, a kind neighbour . . .
A good Christian, ready at God's call . . . .
Thou lived and died, upon Christ relying;
Thou died to rise, and now livest by dying.
Thy faith doth yield, thy piety doth give,
Restoratives to make thee ever live.
Thrice blessed friend, this epitaph is thy due;
When saints arise, thy Lord will say, 'tis true."

The difficulty of deciphering an old and long-exposed inscription
may cause injustice to the poetry, though we cannot expect
much in that line at that day.

It seems that Mrs. Page was the daughter of Edward Digges, a
man so well known and so justly esteemed. He is said to be of
the parish of Hampton. The reader must be guarded against the
mistake of supposing him to have been of Hampton parish, in Elizabeth
City county. There was, at an early period, a small parish
between Williamsburg and York, called Kiskiacke, or Chiskiake,
after a tribe of Indians which lived on York River. The church,
which still stands a few miles from Williamsburg, on the road to
York, vulgarly called Cheesecake, belonged to that parish. After
a time, about the year 1742, its name was changed to Hampton
parish, and was so called when the Digges lived in it. After some
time, the parish of Hampton was united to that of York, and
the name York-Hampton was given to the united parish. The
family-seat of the Digges was Bellfield, about eight miles from
Williamsburg, and is the same now owned by Colonel Robert
McCandlish. On a recent visit to it, I saw the large tombs of Mr.
Edward Digges and others of the family, whose epitaphs I shall
present to the reader in another article, in connection with some
account of the Church in Warwick and of the family of Digges.

There is also, in the Williamsburg churchyard, a tomb of a Mrs.
Page, wife of John Page and daughter of Francis Page. This
John Page was doubtless Colonel John Page, the lawyer, to whom
the vestry intrusted the defence of their rights when Nicholson
and others sought to invade them.


198

Page 198

Following, as near as may be, the order of time, we give the inscription
on two of the Archer family:—

"Here lies ye body of Michael Archer, Gentleman, who was born the
29th of September, 1681, near Rippon in Yorkshire, and died ye 10th of
February, 1726, in the 46th year of his age. Also, Joanna Archer, wife
of Michael Archer, who departed this life Octo. 1st, 1732.

One of the earliest settlements was Archer's Hope; and the parish
was called Archer's Hope Parish, coming up within a few miles
of Williamsburg, to what is called the College Landing. It was
in time merged in Bruton parish. Some of the Archer family
continued to live in or about York until the Revolution. The
name is often to be seen in Henning's Statutes, connected with the
History of Virginia.

THE FAMILY OF THORP.

The name of Thorp must be dear to every Christian philanthropist.
Perhaps, of all the devoted friends to the first Colonists
and the Indians, he who was martyred, in the Great Massacre,
stands first among the laymen. The name did not die with him.
Whether they were his descendants or the descendants of his relatives,
we know not; but we meet with many of the name in Virginia.
They abounded in Bruton parish, as the following epitaphs
show:—

"Catherine Thorp, relict of Captain Thomas Thorp, nephew to Major
Thomas Thorp, formerly inhabitant of this parish, after a pilgrimage of
forty-three years in this troublesome world, lies down here to rest in hope
of a joyful resurrexion. Obiit June 6th, 1695.

"Here lyeth, in hope of a joyful resurrexion, the body of Captain
Thomas Thorp, of Bruton parish, in the dominion of Virginia, nephew of
Major Otho Thorp, of the same parish, who departed this life the 7th day
of October, Anno . . . . aged 48."

THE BARRADALLS.

This name is also an ancient and most respectable one. It is
another name for one learned in the law,—a name which for a long
time was a terror to the young applicant for a license to practise
law, and before which even a Pendleton trembled at his examination.
Two of these were buried in this churchyard. One or both of
them had been vestrymen of the parish. Edward Barradall married
Sarah, youngest daughter of the first William Fitzhugh, who
settled in Virginia, and who was also an eminent lawyer in the
Northern Neck, and belonged to the Council.


199

Page 199

EPITAPH.

"Edwardus Barradall, armiger, qui in legum studiis feliciter versatus
Attornati-Generalis et admiralitatis judicis amplissimas partes merito
obtinuit fideliter. Collegium Gulielmi et Mariæ cum Gubernator tum in
Conventu Generali, Senator, propugnavit. Saram Viri Honorabilis Gulielmi
Fitzhugh serenissimæ Reginæ anna, in Virginiæ Conciliis, filiam
natu minimam, tam mortis, quam vitæ sociam, uxorem habuit. Obierant
—ille 13th Cal. Julii; illa the 3d of the Non. Oct., Anno Domini 1743."

On the same stone is the name of Blumfield Barradall, brother
of Edward, and that of their sisters Elizabeth and Frances, who
had placed the tomb over their brothers.

We have also the monuments of the ancient and excellent family
of Brays:—

"Here lyeth the body of Col. David Bray, of this parish, who died 21st
of Octo., 1717, in the 52d year of his age, and left his wife Judith and son
David Bray, by whom this monument was erected, in memory of him."

On the same is the following:—

"Under this tomb, with her husband, lyeth Mrs. Judith Bray, who
departed this life the 26th day of October, 1720, in the 45th year of
her age."

There is also a large marble monument, on one side of which is
the following:—

"Hic depositum quicquid habuit mortale Elizabetha Bray, una cum
marito desideratissimo, quæ languenti morbo consumpta animam resignavit
22 die Aprilis, anno 1734, ætatis 32. Æquanimiter, Fortiter, Pie."

On the other side as follows:—

"David Bray, armiger, vir, forma, ingenio, morum suavitate . . . . . .
serenissimo reji Georgio Secundo, Concilii in Virginia constitutus, tamen
ante munus susceptum, florente ætate morteabreptus, Elizabetham Johannis
Page armigeri filiam natu primam, et sine prole mærentem reliquit,
Octo. 1731, ætate 32."

The last I shall record is the following:—

"Here lies, in hope of a joyful resurrexion, all that was mortal of John
Greenhow, late of this city, merchant. He was born in Staunton, near
Kindall in Westmoreland, Great Britain, November 12th, 1724, and
died the 29th of August, 1787. On his left side lies Elizabeth, the
daughter of John Tyler, his second wife, who was born in James City,
the 30th of January, 1744, and died of the small-pox on July the 23d,
1781, which she endured with the greatest Christian fortitude and resignation."


200

Page 200

I might add to these some monuments which lie all exposed in
the neighbourhood of Williamsburg. Nathaniel Bacon, uncle or
near kinsman of him who is called the rebel, and who was high in
office during the period of the rebellion, as he was before and
after, married Elizabeth, the daughter and heiress of Richard
Kingswell, of James City county. His residence was on King's
Creek, near York River, and not far from Williamsburg. There
are tombstones now near the bank of the river. The following
inscriptions have been furnished me:—"Here lyeth the body of
Elizabeth, wife of the Honourable Nathaniel Bacon, who departed
this life the second day of November, one thousand six hundred
and ninety-one, in the sixty-seventh year of her age." Also, on
a mutilated tombstone, may be deciphered these words:—"The
Rev. Thomas Hampton, rector of this parish in 1647." It is
probable that he ministered in one of those churches which were
closed when the first church at Williamsburg was built. Another residence
of Nathaniel Bacon must have been near Williamsburg; for
his tombstone now lies in a field on Dr. Tinsley's farm, while the
tombstones of the Palmer family are in the garden of that place.
The tombstone of Daniel Parke, whose name stands first on the
old vestry-book of Bruton parish as vestryman and churchwarden,
lies on the farm called Beal's, near Williamsburg.

In connection with the above, I mention that, in the Virginia
Gazette for March, 1746, it is stated that the plate given by
Colonel Nathaniel Bacon to York-Hampton parish was stolen.
There are also, I am told, some graves and tombstones around a
church about ten miles from Williamsburg, called Chickahominy
Church, and lying near that river. It may be that it was in one
of those numerous parishes which abounded in early times in and
around James City. One there was, called Wilmington parish,
which was taken partly from James City, and may have been
united to Bruton parish. If so, all that I can find of it is that it
was dissolved in 1723 and added to other parishes. At that time
it lay most probably on both sides of the Chickahominy, was thirty
miles long and eight wide, had one hundred communicants and one
hundred and eighty families. The Rev. Mr. Brunskill was the
minister, and reports that his parsonage had one room below and
a garret above, and, together with his glebe, rented for forty shillings
per annum.

At a recent visit to Williamsburg, my steps were directed to the
College and the old court-house, in order to see if I could find
something additional from the records thereof. In the old books


201

Page 201
of the clerk's office, I was shown a deed of one acre of land from
some one for a new church in Wilmington parish,—probably the
very church just spoken of.

There is mention also of a letter of the Bishop of London
against swearing, and frequent notices of thanksgiving-days. The
Rev. James Horrocks, afterward President of the College, was
prevented by the court for not reading the act for suppressing
vice, as the law directs. Fifty acres of land at Jamestown, and
a house lately occupied by the Burgesses, were given to the justices
of James City for a free school. Susannah Riddle petitions that
her servant, John Hope, (alias Cæsar Barber, by which name he
was afterward, and for a long time, well known,) might be allowed
to be set free, as he had served her faithfully for thirty years.
Mrs. Riddle was the friend of Mrs. Carrington, of Richmond, and
aunt of Miss Caines, and great-aunt or relative of Lewis Warrington,
who bequeathed to him one thousand pounds, as mentioned in
a previous article. The Rev. Robert Andrews was the guardian
of young Warrington.

From the records of the College I obtained, besides those previously
gotten and used, one document worthy of insertion. In
the will of Hilarity Giles, of Newport parish, Isle of Wight, giving
a tract of land on Blackwater to the College of William and
Mary, he thus begins:—

"First and principally, above all things, I give and commit my soul
into the hands of Almighty God, my Saviour and Redeemer, by whom,
through the merits of Jesus Christ, I believe assuredly to be saved, and
to have full, full, full remission and forgiveness of all my sins."


202

Page 202

ARTICLE XVI.

York-Hampton Parish.—No. 1.

This was originally called Charles River parish, as the county
of York was at first called Charles River county or shire, from
the river whose early name was Charles, afterward York River.
The name of Charles River county was changed to that of York
in 1642. Of the earliest history of this parish but little is known,
as there is no vestry-book to be found. In the first part of the
last century it was considered one of the most desirable in the
State, as Mr. Bartholomew Yates, of Middlesex, would have exchanged
his position for it, if his salary had not been raised to
twenty thousand-weight of tobacco and his glebe-house repaired
and enlarged.[55] In the year 1724, we find, from a letter to the
Bishop of London, that the Rev. Francis Fontaine — one of the
Huguenot family which first settled in King William parish, at
Manakintown on James River—had been the rector of this parish
for two years, on a salary of £150, arising from the sale of twenty
thousand-weight of sweet-scented tobacco, with a glebe and parsonage.
The parish was four miles wide and twenty miles long,
having two churches and two hundred families in it. Mr. Fontaine
seems to have been a faithful minister, attending to the
instruction of children and servants. He was unfortunate in his
second marriage, and not a little injured by it, as may be seen in
the History of the Fontaine Family, by Miss Anne Maury and
Dr. Hawks. How long Mr. Fontaine continued to be the minister
of York-Hampton we are unable to ascertain; but, as he was a
good man and it was a good parish, it is probable that he ended
his days there. The Rev. John Camm was the minister there in
1758, and, we have reason to believe, was there many years
before. Although President of the College, and Commissary from


203

Page 203
the year 1771 or 1772, he still continued to be the minister of the
parish until he left the College in 1777: how much longer I know
not. Mr. Camm was succeeded by the Rev. Mr. Shield, who was
the minister to some now living.[56] He was, it is believed, an
intelligent and pious man. Some thought him rather too much of
a Methodist. I have it from relatives of one of the party, that a
lady of the old school, at a time when stiff broacades were the
church dress of those who could afford it, would come home, after
some of Mr. Shield's more animated discourses, and call upon her
maid to take off her clothes, for she had heard so much of hell,
damnation, and death, that it would take her all the evening to
get cool. I have one of his sermons, which does credit to his
head and heart, without being at all violent or extravagant. Mr.
Shield had a correspondent in London,—a merchant, of good
sense and apparent piety, to whom he shipped his tobacco,—a
number of whose letters have been furnished me. In one of
them there is allusion to the fact of Mr. Shield's retiring from
the ministry, and engaging in political life by entering the Virginia
Assembly. Mr. Shield replies at length, and solemnly declares
that preaching the gospel was the occupation of all others
in which he delighted, but that loss of his voice had incapacitated
him from either reading the service or preaching, and that he
acted under the advice of Bishop Madison in discontinuing all
efforts. The disease seems to have been what is now well known
as bronchitis, though he is at a loss even to describe it, so rare
was the complaint at that time. His correspondent—Mr. Graham
Frank, a gentleman well known to the merchants of York—mentions
having seen Bishop Madison when he came to London for
consecration, and that he was much pleased with the spirit and
plans with which he was about to engage in his work. Mr. Frank
had seen him some years before, on a visit to Virginia, and was
not pleased with him on account of his political principles. As
Mr. Frank was a man of zeal for the great doctrines of the
Church, there can be no doubt but that the Bishop was in a good
frame of mind, as may be seen in his address on entering upon
the duties of the Episcopate soon after. Mr. Shield, in his letter
to his friend, mentions that he had continued to perform his duties
with great pain, and in part only, until he could get his place

204

Page 204
supplied, which was now about to be done by the ordination of a
son of a former rector of the parish and President of the College.
If the son did enter upon this charge, I do not think he continued
it long, but removed to a parish in York county, called Charles
parish, and which had formerly been served by the Rev. Thomas
Warrington, grandfather of Commodore Warrington, and by a
Mr. Joseph Davenport afterward. York had not recovered from
the ruins of the siege, and was now no longer the desirable parish
it had been. The old families were deserting it, and the inhabitants
around connecting themselves with other denominations.
Nevertheless, we hear of three ministers occupying it,—a Rev. Mr.
Scott, Mr. Henderson, and Brockenbrough, neither of whom were
calculated to arrest its downfall. At length, in the year 1815,
the old church was burned down. The material of the church was
remarkable. The walls were made of blocks of marl, taken out
of the bank of the river on which it stood, and which hardened by
exposure. It was cemented yet the more by the fire, which
caused it to melt somewhat and thus form one solid wall, which
continued to stand until the roof and other parts were renewed
a few years since, of which we shall speak more particularly hereafter.

We sometimes turn aside from the succession and character
of ministers and churches, to cast a glance over the scenery, or to
call up recollections of departed friends. We have recently done
this in the case of Jamestown and some of its inhabitants, the
Jaquelines and Amblers. Surely, if there be any spot in Virginia
where we may be allowed to pause and look around us, remembering
the past and dwelling with tender emotions on the
present, that spot is old York. To use the language of one who
has furnished materials for much of what follows:—

"The river is full a mile wide at York, which is eleven miles from its
mouth, and is seen stretching itself away until it merges itself into the
Chesapeake Bay. The sun rises immediately over the mouth of the
river, and the water is tinged with the rainbow-hues of heaven. We
have watched with much interest the decline of day from the New York
Battery, but we doubt if New York Harbour—compared, as it is, with
the Bay of Naples—ever presented to the eye a more enchanting spectacle
than York River in its morning glory. Beautiful for situation is
Old York, stretching east and west on as noble a sheet of water as rolls
beneath the sun. But painful is the contrast of what it now is with
what it once was. It is only when we turn to the river, `the work of
an Almighty hand,' that the force of that Scripture is felt,—`I change
not.'



No Page Number
illustration

BACK VIEW OF GEN. NELSON'S HOUSE, YORK.



No Page Number

205

Page 205
" `Here's nothing left of ancient pride,
Of what was grand, of what was gay;
But all is changed, is lost, is sold:
All, all that's left is chilling cold.' "

A few venerable relics of the past are all that may now be
seen. The old York House is the most memorable. The cornerstone
of it was laid by old President Nelson, when an infant, as it
was designed for him. He was held by his nurse, and the brick
laid in his apron and passed through his little hands. The bricks
were all from England,—the corners of hewn stone. It was long
the abode of love, friendship, and hospitality.

"Farewell: a prouder mansion I may see,
But much must meet in that which equals thee."

As one said of modern Italy, "Our memory sees more than our
eyes in this place." What Paulding says of Virginia may emphatically
be said of York,—

"All hail, thou birthplace of the glowing West!
Thou seem'st the towering eagle's ruin'd nest."

Let us, by the aid of well-attested tradition and history, speak
a few words concerning it and some of its old inhabitants. It was
established as a town and laid out in the year 1705. The founder
of it was a Mr. Thomas Nelson, the first of the name in Virginia.
He came from Penriff, near the border of Scotland, and was called
Scotch Tom on that account. He set up a mercantile establishment
in this place, as the first of the Amblers did soon after. He
married a Miss Reid of the neighbouring country, and had two
sons and one daughter. At her death he married a widow Tucker,
whose husband was from Barbadoes, where, and in Bermuda, that
name abounded. His two sons settled in York. His daughter
married Colonel Berkeley, of Middlesex. His eldest son, Thomas,
is the same who was called Secretary Nelson, because a long time
Secretary of the Council. He had three sons in the American
Revolution, whose descendants are all over Virginia. The other
son of old Thomas Nelson was named William, and has always
been called President Nelson, because so often President of the
Council, and at one time President of the Colony. He married a
Miss Burwell, grand-daughter of Mr. Robin Carter, called King
Carter. He had many daughters, but none lived beyond the
twelfth year. He had many sons also, the eldest of whom was
General Thomas Nelson of the Revolution. One of his sons was
burned to death, and another became an idiot by a fall from an


206

Page 206
upper story. These afflictions contributed to make Mrs. Nelson a
"woman of a sorrowful spirit." She had been also educated
religiously by her aunt, Mrs. Page, of Rosewell. She was a truly
pious and conscientious woman. Her private and public exercises
of religion, her well-known frequent prayers for her children and
pious instruction of them, and exemplary conduct in all things,
established this beyond all contradiction.[57] Mrs. Nelson was not
alone in her personal piety, nor in her wishes and endeavours for
the religious welfare of her children. President Nelson performed
his part most faithfully. His eldest son, afterward General
Nelson, was placed under the care of the Rev. Mr. Yates, of
Gloucester, afterward President of William and Mary College, in
order to prepare him for an English University. At the age of
fourteen—sooner than was intended—he was sent thither. The
circumstance which hastened his going was the following. On one
Sunday afternoon, as his father was walking on the outskirts of
the village of York, (for it was then but a village, and never much
more,) he found him at play with some of the little negroes of the
place. Feeling the evil of such associations, and the difficulty of
preventing them, he determined to send him at once to England,
and, a vessel being ready to sail, he was despatched the next day
to the care of his friends,—Mr. Hunt, of London, and Beilby
Porteus, then Fellow of Cambridge University. He went for some

207

Page 207
time to a preparatory school of Dr. Newcome, at Hackney, and
then to the especial care and tutorship of Dr. Porteus. The letters
of Mr. Nelson to Mr. Hunt and Dr. Porteus, copies of which I have,
and the answers to which are acknowledged, evince deep anxiety
for the improvement of his son in all things, but especially in
morals and religion. He is evidently uneasy about the spirited
character of his son, fearing lest it might lead him astray, and
begs his friends to inform him if his son shows a disposition to
idleness and pleasure. In order to avoid the temptations incident
to young men during the vacation, especially such as are far away
from friends, he requests Dr. Porteus to place him, during those
seasons, with some eminent scientific agriculturist, and thus prepare
him for dealing with the soils of America. After seven years,
he returns home, being delayed several months beyond the time he
intended, by a circumstance which showed the religious character
of his father. In a letter to his friend Mr. Hunt, he alludes to the
fact that two young Virginians, whose habits he feared were not good,
were coming over in the ship in which he expected his son, and he
must request that he be not sent with them; that he would rather
his coming be postponed six months than have them as his companions,
though they were sons of some of the first families of
Virginia, and of those who were on terms of intimacy with his.
His return was accordingly delayed for some months. On his arrival,
Mr. Nelson writes to his friends in England that he is much
pleased with the general improvement of his son, but regrets to find
that he has fallen into that bad practice, which most of the young
Virginians going to England adopt, of smoking tobacco,—adding,
emphatically, "filthy tobacco;" also that "of eating and drinking,
though not to inebriety, more than was conducive to health and
long life." Still, he was rejoiced to see him, such as he was, with
good principles. In proof of the respect in which President Nelson
was held, and the hopes entertained of his son, we state that,
though having been absent seven years, and being just twenty-one
years of age, he was elected to the House of Burgesses while on
his voyage home. If it be said that even immoral and irreligious
parents sometimes wish to see their sons moral and religious, we
further add, that President Nelson gave most varied proof of great
uprightness of character. One such is furnished in a letter to
some relatives in the North of England. He had redeemed an
estate in that region by paying off its debts, by which it became
his own. It proved to be much more valuable than was expected,
and, discovering that some other relative had a better right to redeem

208

Page 208
it, voluntarily offered to surrender the estate or all the profits.
His commercial character was of the highest order. He imported
goods for merchants of Philadelphia and Baltimore, which places
were then in an incipient stage. By this means he acquired a
large fortune, leaving landed estates and servants to each of his
five sons,—Thomas, Hugh, William, Nat, and Robert,—and all of
his other property, amounting, according to the statement of the
elder St. George Tucker, to forty thousand pounds, to his oldest
son, General Nelson, who had been engaged in business with him.[58]
His interest in the affairs of religion and the Church was manifested
by his taking the lead in the parish. The parish, though
narrow, was long, and many, especially of the poor, must come
some distance to church. On Church-Sundays he always had a
large dinner prepared, to which rich and poor were indiscriminately
invited. After having been President of the Council for a long
term of years, on the decease of Lord Botetourt there was an
interregnum, during which he, as President of the Council, was
Acting Governor of the State, the civil and ecclesiastical representative
of the King. By two letters to Lord Hillsborough now
before me, in the years 1770 and 1771, he displays his determination
to do his duty in relation to unworthy clergymen, of whom
there were some needing discipline, and asks full and undoubted
authority for so doing, as such authority required to be renewed
from the throne. I conclude what yet remains to be said of President
William Nelson by a few extracts from a printed sermon
on his death, by Mr. Camm, the minister of York and President
of William and Mary College. He ascribes to him "a rational
and firm piety, an active and constant affection for the well-being
and best interests of mankind;" speaks of him as "constant in
his attendance at the ordinary service of God and the celebration
of the Lord's Supper, and exhibiting unaffected and fervent devotion."
He was—

"The kind and indulgent father, without suffering the excess of fondness
to take off his eye from the true and best interests of his children;
the tender husband, the affectionate brother, the useful and entertaining


209

Page 209
friend, the kind and generous master. His hospitality was extensive and
liberal, yet judicious, and not set free from the restraints of reason and
religion. It was not a blind propensity to profuseness, or a passion for a
name, by which he corrupted the morals of his friends and neighbours.
He was no encourager of intemperance or riot, or any practice tending to
injure the health, the reputation, the fortunes, or the religious attainments
of his company.
His charities were many, and dispensed with choice
and discretion, and so as to be most serviceable to the receivers and the
least oppressive to their modesty. As one of the first and most respectable
merchants in this dominion, he had great opportunity of being acquainted
with the circumstances of many people whose cases otherwise
would have escaped his knowledge. This knowledge was often turned to
their advantage whose affairs fell under his consideration. I think I shall
have the concurring voice of the public with me, when I say that his own
gain by trade was not more sweet to him than the help which he hereby
received toward becoming a general benefactor. He was an instance of
what abundance of good may be done by a prudent and conscientious
man without impoverishing himself or his connections,—nay, while his
fortunes are improving. An estate raised with an unblemished reputation,
and diffused from humane and devout motives in the service of multitudes
as well as the owner's, it may reasonably be expected will wear
well, and have the blessing of Providence to attend and protect it from
generation to generation."

This last remark has certainly been in a good degree fulfilled in
the descendants of President Nelson. Though they have not been
rich in this world's goods, yet they have not suffered through want.
Many of them have held respectable offices in the State and General
Government. Almost all of them have been enabled to obtain a
good education,—the best fortune in a country like ours,—so as to
associate with the most respectable portion of the community.
Many of them have obtained the highest of all honours,—the
honour which cometh from God only. It is true that the first son,
to whom the birthright of those days—the amplest fortune—was
given, spent it in his country's service, leaving his widow and
children in comparative poverty. But he spent it nobly, as his
father would have done had he lived to see the mighty struggle for
our liberties. Although that father was the first in the Government
only a few years before, and was the right hand of George
III. in this Colony, addressed in his commission as "My well-beloved
and worshipful, greeting," yet at that very time the letters
to his merchants and friends in London show that he had the soul
of a patriot as well as a Christian within him,—that he was indignant
at the imposition of the British Parliament,—and leave none
to doubt where he would have been found when the trumpet
sounded to arms. The thousands which General Nelson cast upon
the waters were not lost, but soon sprung up in a plentiful harvest


210

Page 210
of rich blessings to his country, on which let his latest posterity
reflect with delight, and enjoy as a richer inheritance than thousands
of silver and gold.[59]

This leads me to add a few words concerning that patriot himself,
confining my remarks as nearly as possible to the special
character of the work I have in hand. I mean the moral and
religious character of the persons treated of. Whether General
Nelson was ever in full communion with the Church, I am not able
to say.[60] That he was a believer in the Gospel in that age of blasphemy
with so many, and that he was the friend of religion, cannot
be doubted. In writing to his own and his father's friend in London,
Mr. Samuel Martin, the 27th of January, 1773, he says:—

"It falls to my lot to acquaint you with the death of my father, who
departed this life the 19th of last November. His life was exemplary,
being blessed with both public and private virtues. His death was such
as became a true Christian, hoping through the mediation of our blessed
Saviour
to meet with the reward promised to the righteous. But I must
stop here, lest prejudice should lead me too far."

His friendship to God's ministers may be seen, about that time,
by the introduction of Mr. Samuel Shield to his friend in London,
with a request that he would pay him £50 on his account. Hitherto
there was a king's bounty of £50 to all who came over for Orders.
But this was in the year 1774, and probably Mr. Nelson apprehended
some difficulty, for, only two years after, Orders were
refused, such was the state of things between the Colony and
Great Britain.[61] We have seen that in the year 1775 the College


211

Page 211
voted £50 to Mr. Madison when he went over for Orders. In the
following year I see an instance of liberality in General Nelson's
provision for a number of families in York, who had been driven
from their homes by Lord Dunmore's troops. Again I see his high
and honourable character, in imitation of that integrity which his
father displayed in all his dealings, when it was proposed in the
House of Burgesses to adopt some method of discharging British
debts which he considered improper. He indignantly opposed it, declaring,
some say, with an oath; others, far more probably, "So help
me God, others may do as they please, but I will pay all my debts
like an honest man." I might add numerous testimonies to his
unbounded liberality toward his comrades in the war when far from
home. It becomes not me to speak of the hundreds of thousands
procured on his own credit for the use of the State, when not a
dollar could be gotten on its own, nor how the account stood between
them at the close of that war. He certainly entered upon
it very rich, and came out of it so poor that when a few years had
passed away, and he was laid in the old graveyard at York, without
a headstone or slab to mark the spot, his property, save the old
house in deserted York and some poor broom-straw fields in Hanover,
was put up at public sale to pay the debts contracted in his
country's cause.[62] Even the old family Bible, with the births and
baptisms of the family, with the little table on which it stood, was
(though, I doubt not, by mistake) sold on that occasion. Within
the last year, in one of my visitations among the mountains, I
heard of this Bible. So was it valued by the family now having
it, whose baptisms and births had also there been registered, that
they could not be induced to relinquish it to one of the descendants
of its original owner.

The following account of General Nelson's family at Offley, a
small wooden house in Hanover county, Virginia, by the French
traveller, Chattellux, soon after the war, will not be uninteresting
to the reader:—

"Send comfort down from thy right hand,
To cheer us in this barren land."

But still, as some one said of the people of Iceland, that "poverty was the bulwark
of their happiness," so it is, and has been, with many of the descendants of
General Nelson, in one respect: they have not been tempted by riches to "be full
and deny God."


212

Page 212

"In the absence of the General, (who had gone to Williamsburg,) his
mother and wife received us with all the politeness, ease, and cordiality
natural to his family. But, as in America the ladies are never thought
sufficient to do the honours of the house, five or six Nelsons were assembled
to receive us,—among others, Secretary Nelson, uncle to the General,
his two sons, and two of the General's brothers. These young men were
married, and several of them were accompanied with their wives and children,
all called Nelsons, and distinguished only by their Christian names;
so that, during the two days which I spent in this truly patriarchal house,
it was impossible for me to find out their degrees of relationship. The
company assembled either in the parlour or saloon, especially the men,
from the hour of breakfast to that of bedtime; but the conversation was
always agreeable and well supported. If you were desirous of diversifying
the scene, there were some good French and English authors at hand. An
excellent breakfast at nine o'clock, a sumptuous dinner at two, tea and
punch in the afternoon, and an elegant little supper, divided the day most
happily for those whose stomachs were never unprepared. It is worth
observing, that on this occasion, where fifteen or twenty people (four of
whom were strangers to the family and country) were assembled together,
and by bad weather forced to stay within doors, not a syllable was said
about play. How many parties of tric-trac, whist, and lotto would with
us have been the consequence of such obstinate bad weather!"

We shall probably find an explanation of this absence of all
games, not only by the presence of such pious ladies as General
Nelson's mother and wife, but in the fact that old President Nelson
had trained up his family otherwise, and at a time when card-playing
and other games were but too common. We infer this from a letter
of his to a friend in England, concerning some young man in
whom they were both interested, and of whom Mr. Nelson entertains
painful apprehension because he had gone to a part of the State
where cards, racing, and suchlike things were freely practised.
We cannot forbear mentioning one circumstance that comes to us on
undoubted authority, concerning the second son of President Nelson,
—Colonel Hugh Nelson, of York. He followed the example of his
father's piety, and was a kind of lay preacher to the families in York,
especially to those of his own name. Besides reading the service
and sermon in the church every other Sunday in the absence of the
minister, and every Sunday when there was no minister, as was
often the case after the war, he acted as minister in preparing the
candidates for the first confirmation ever held in York, soon after
Bishop Madison's return from England with Episcopal consecration.
On the morning of the confirmation he assembled them all
in the large parlour or hall at the old house in York, and addressed
them on the nature of that rite. That, and the scene in church
which soon followed, has been often described as most deeply
affecting by one of his own children, the youngest recipient of the


213

Page 213
rite, the late Mrs. Edmund Pendleton, mother of the Rev. William
N. Pendleton. We close with the expression of deep regret that
many documents, from which we might have drawn other passages
of interest touching President and General Nelson, are not to be
found. Of the numerous letters to correspondents in England,
written during a long series of years, only those of the last six of
President Nelson's life—from 1766 to 1772—are to be had. The
same loss is felt as to the letters of General Nelson. Not long
before his death he caused them all to be collected and filed by
his son, Mr. Philip Nelson, who had been trained to the mercantile
life; and among them that son always remembered and often
spoke of some most interesting ones from Washington, Lafayette,
and others during and after the war. These also have disappeared.
His papers and those of his father descended, together with the
old York house, to one of his sons and the descendants of the
same. They were doubtless objects of curiosity and desire to its
numerous visitors from all parts of the State and land, especially
after it became, as it was for many years, one of public entertainment.
Too freely may the desire and curiosity of travellers and
visitors have been yielded to, and too little, as in many other cases
in Virginia, have such relics of our ancestors been prized.

Although no apology is needed for the more full and particular
notice of the family of Nelsons which has been given, it may be
well to state that my more intimate connection with it for nearly
fifty years has furnished me with the means of such fulness and
particularity. As to others less known to me, and worthy of special
notice for their religious character and attachment to the Episcopal
Church, I invite communications. Some have been sent and
gladly used.

TOMBSTONES AND INSCRIPTIONS IN THE OLD CHURCHYARD AT
YORK.

But few of these remain, and some of them are broken and illegible.
That of the first Nelson and the founder of the town is as
follows:—

"Hic jacet, spe certa resurgendi in Christo, Thomas Nelson, Generosus;
Filius Hugonis et Sariæ Nelson, de Penrith, in comitate Cumbriæ. Natus
20mo die Februarii, Anno Domini 1677. Vitæ bene gestæ finem implevit
7mo die Octobris, 1745, ætatis suæ 68."

Which is thus rendered into English:—


214

Page 214

"Here lies, in the certain hope of being raised up in Christ, Thomas
Nelson, Gentleman; the son of Hugh and Sarah Nelson, of Penrith, in
the county of Cumberland. Born the 20th of February, 1677. He
completed a well-spent life on the 7th of October, 1745, in his sixty-eighth
year."

Adjoining this is the tomb of his son, President Nelson, whose
character has been portrayed in the first article on this parish
The inscription is as follows:—

"Here lies the body of the Honourable William Nelson, Esquire, late
President of his Majesty's Council in this Dominion; in whom the love
of man and the love of God so restrained and enforced each other, and
so invigorated the mental powers in general, as not only to defend him
from the vices and follies of his age and country, but also to render it a
matter of difficult decision in what part of laudable conduct he most excelled,—whether
in the tender and endearing accomplishments of domestic
life, or in the more arduous duties of a wider circuit,—whether as a
neighbour, a gentleman, or a magistrate,—whether in the graces of hospitality
or piety. Reader, if you feel the spirit of that exalted ardour
which aspires to the felicity of conscious virtue, animated by those consolations
and divine admonitions, perform the task and expect the distinction
of the righteous man. He died the 19th of November, Anno
Domini 1772, aged 61."

The latter part of this epitaph savours much of the language of
the pulpit in that day. The epitaph was probably written by
President Camm.

Very near to these tombstones General Thomas Nelson was
buried; but to this day not even a rough headstone marks the
spot, and no hillock is to be seen; and when one or two aged members
of the family are gone, there will be none left to point out the
place, when the gratitude of his country, or the filial piety of his
descendants, which has been too long waiting the action of the
former, desires to raise some humble monument to the most generous
and self-sacrificing of American patriots.[63]

The only other inscriptions which could be deciphered were
those of Abraham Archer, who died in 1752, aged sixty-two; of


215

Page 215
Susannah Reignolds, daughter of William Rojers, who died in
1768, aged sixty; and of Jane Frank, the daughter of Mr. William
Routh, of Kisklington, in Yorkshire. She died on her passage
at sea, April 26, and was interred May 28, 1753, aged twenty-eight
years. She was doubtless the wife of that pious man, Mr.
Frank, of whom we have written as the friend and correspondent
of the Rev. Mr. Shield and others in York and Williamsburg.

 
[63]

An American writer, after describing the tombs of old Thomas Nelson and
his son, President William Nelson, says that General Thomas Nelson was buried in
a vault at the end of a fragment of the brick wall which surrounds the church,
with nothing but a rough stone lying among the grass to mark the spot, than
which nothing can be more fabulous. He was buried near to his father and grandfather.
The spot has been pointed out to me by one of the family, who is well
acquainted with it. Not more than two or three others survive who could now,
with certainty, from personal knowledge designate the exact place.

 
[55]

Governor Spottswood had his country-house near York, early in the last
century, at Temple Farm, and, as will be seen, a Major Gooch, of York-Hampton
parish, was buried at that place in 1665. It had probably been an old establishment,
which the Governor selected for its beauty, and where he built a new and
larger house, and where he was buried.

[56]

Mr. Shield was a friend of General Nelson, who recommended him to Bishop
Porteus for orders, in 1774, and wrote to the merchant to advance him £50.

[57]

The two following hymns have come down in the family as her morning exercises:—

Hymn I.

"Preserved by thee another day,
Another song I'll raise;
Accept, I pray, for Jesus sake,
My gratitude and praise.
"Then take me underneath thy wing,
My God, my guardian be;
That in the morning I may sing
Another song to thee."

Hymn II.

"Thanks to my Saviour for a bed
On which to lay my drowsy head;
Oh, may my weary spirit rest
As sweetly on my Saviour's breast.
"Jesus, the sinner's precious friend,
On Thee alone will I depend:
Thou art my refuge, and to Thee
My spirit shall in safety flee."
[58]

Judge Tucker, on reaching this country from Bermuda or the West Indies,
landed at Yorktown, and being invited to General Nelson's house, where he spent
some days, a warm friendship commenced between them, which continued during
the life of General Nelson, and was, at his death, transferred to the surviving
family by Judge Tucker. The latter wrote a brief biography of General Nelson,
of which I have a manuscript copy. Whether it was ever published or not, I am
not able to say

[59]

Although it does not come strictly under the character of this work, I cannot
help referring to a circumstance which occurred just at the opening of the war,
which shows that the citizens of little York were a valiant race. On a certain
occasion, a Captain Montague drew up a ship-of-war before it, and threatened that,
in a certain event, he would fire upon the town. Though full of helpless women
and children, the committee of the place, on meeting to receive his message, "Resolved,
unanimously, that Mr. Montague had manifested a spirit of cruelty unprecedented
in the annals of civilized times, and that it be recommended to the inhabitants
of the town and of the country in general, that they do not entertain, or
show any other mark of civility to Captain Montague, besides what common decency
and absolute necessity requires."

[60]

I have since heard that General Nelson was certainly a communicant of the
Church,—at any rate, during the latter part of his life.

[61]

In a letter to one of his friends a year or two afterward, he says, "What
think you of the Right Reverend Fathers in God, the Bishops? One of them
refused to ordain a young gentleman who went from America, because he was a
rebellious American; so that, unless we will submit to Parliamentary oppression,
we shall not have the Gospel of Christ preached to us."

[62]

Chancellor Nelson, the General's youngest son, used to amuse himself with his
relatives in Hanover, by telling them that their favourite hymn seemed to be that
one in which were the two lines,—


216

Page 216

ARTICLE XVII.

York-Hampton Parish.—No. 2.

In connection with York-Hampton parish and its minister, the
Rev. John Camm, there is a subject which I shall now consider,
deeming this the most suitable occasion, as the vestry was equally
concerned in it with any other in the diocese, and the minister
took a more active part than any other of the clergy. I allude to
the celebrated contest between the clergy on the one hand, and
the Council, Burgesses, and some of the vestries on the other, concerning
the salaries of the former, in the year 1758. The act of
Assembly which produced the contest, and convulsed both Church
and State, was called the Option Law or Two-penny Act, because
the people were allowed the option of paying as usual so much
tobacco, or about twopence per pound instead of it. It was occasioned
by the apprehension of a very short crop of tobacco, by
the failure of plants in the spring in some parts of the State.
The failure was very great, though not to the extent apprehended.
It was, however, so great as, with other circumstances, to raise
the price from sixteen shillings and fourpence—the supposed
average price of the clergy's tobacco—to fifty and sixty shillings.
In anticipation of the difficulty which many might find in discharging
their debts to the clergy and others in tobacco, according
to law or contract, the Assembly ordained that the debts due in
tobacco to the clergy and to certain officers of Government,—who
were but few at that time,—and from tenants to their landlords,
or planters to merchants, &c., might be discharged by the payment
of twopence a pound in paper currency, which was only
good in the Colony. In order to understand the subject aright, it
is necessary to recur to some previous acts of the Assembly on
the subject of salaries.

For a long time the salary of a minister had been settled at
sixteen thousand-weight of tobacco per annum; and in the year
1748 the Assembly passed a new act, confirming this, and giving
to the vestries certain privileges hitherto claimed by the Crown,
the Governors, and clergy, but in fact exercised by the vestries,
as has before been stated. Though the clergy did not like some


217

Page 217
things in it, yet, unable to help themselves, they submitted, and
the royal assent was given. According to a standing law of England,
no act of the Colonial Legislature could contradict a previous
act which had received the royal sanction, without suspending its
execution until the King's pleasure could be known. The Assembly,
finding it desirable to have the privilege of passing some acts
and carrying them into execution sooner than the distance from
England and the time then required for communication with the
Government would allow, petitioned the King in the year 1751 or
1752 for leave to make some exceptions; but the petition was positively
refused. Nevertheless, it began to act in a small way at
first, on the principle thus refused. In the year 1753 it passed an
act allowing the vestries of Frederick and Augusta to pay the
salaries of their ministers in money instead of tobacco, as but little
of the latter was raised in the valley,—taking care, however, to
allow them handsome salaries, so that no complaint was made. In
the year 1754 the same was done in Norfolk and Princess Anne
parishes without much notice or complaint. But in the year 1755,
when there was the threatening of a very small crop of tobacco
throughout the country, the Assembly proceeded to a bolder step,
and passed a law allowing all who pleased to pay either in tobacco
or money as suited best. The law was carried by only one vote.
A general feeling of uneasiness now seized upon the clergy, and
they were preparing to make opposition. Letters and memorials
were sent to England, and meetings of the clergy held; but as the
season became more propitious and the crop turned out nearly as
good as usual, and the tobacco would generally be paid, no active
measures were taken, though some even then threatened to resort
to law. In the year 1758 a great failure was apprehended, and
the Assembly now passed the obnoxious law of which we are speaking.
Though opposed by some of the Burgesses and the Council
as illegal and unjust, it was carried. The clergy who were nearest
to Williamsburg assembled and asked to be admitted to the bar of
the House, to be heard in opposition to the measure before it
passed, but were refused. Governor Dinwiddie had been urged to
veto the act of 1755, but declined, though saying it was unjust and
illegal, asking, "What can I do? If I refuse, I shall have the people
on my back." Lieutenant-Governor Fauquier, now in office,
when applied to for the same purpose, also refused, saying, "Whether
it be just or unjust, contradictory to the King's instructions or not,
is not the question. The question is, What will please the people?"
He took part with the Assembly; and the Assembly, which had

218

Page 218
voted Dinwiddie only £500, (it was the custom to make a present
to every new Governor,) voted him, though a more obnoxious man
than even Dinwiddie, £1000. The clergy were now convened,
and made an address to the Crown, through the Lord-Commissioner
of Trade for the Plantation, pleading their grievances. The Bishop
of London, being called upon for his opinion by the Commissioners,
was decided and strong in favour of the clergy. The Rev. Mr.
Camm was sent over by the clergy to plead their cause, and per
sons were employed by the Assembly on their part. The Rev.
Mr. Camm remained eighteen months in England in the prosecution
of the case. To oppose the Colonies in any thing where taxation or
prerogative was concerned was now becoming a critical matter.
The Stamp Act had just been repealed. Notwithstanding this, the
Commissioners of Trade unanimously declared the law to be not
only unjust, but null and void, and recommended the King to disallow
it and require its repeal, which he accordingly did. As to
the requiring the tobacco to be paid, they told Mr. Camm that the
courts in America must do this, and certainly would do it, the case
being so plain; that if it should be otherwise, and an appeal was
taken to the Privy Council in England, they would certainly be
righted. On this, Mr. Camm immediately wrote to his agent in
America to institute a suit against his vestry for the tobacco, and
carry it before the Governor and Council, which was the Supreme
Court in Virginia. The vestry declined standing the suit until
the Assembly passed an act to support all vestries in their defence.
The trial being had, it appears that Messrs. Randolph, Corbin,
Carter, and Lee were in favour of Mr. Camm's claim, and Messrs.
Byrd, Taylor, Thornton, Burwell, and Blair against it. The two
Mr. Nelsons, of York, the President and Secretary, declined sitting,
as they were a party concerned, being vestrymen of Mr.
Camm's parish. It was understood that they were in favour of the
claim of the clergy, one of them having told the Rev. Mr. Warrington
that he regarded the law as most unjust, and had Mr.
Warrington's case been permitted, as was attempted afterward,
to come up for trial, they would have been on the court, and have
made a majority of one in favour of the clergy, whereas, in the case
of Mr. Camm, a majority of one was in favour of the law. There
was now no other resort for Mr. Camm but to the English Court
of Appeals; and he was not the man to give up a contest until he
could contend no more, especially as he was fighting not only his
own battle, but that of all the clergy of Virginia. He accordingly
sent his case to the Privy Council, expecting that the promises

219

Page 219
made to him while in England would be fulfilled, but was disappointed.
After various delays, the case was dismissed, on the
pretence of some informality, the blame being chiefly laid at the
door of Lord Northington. Inasmuch as the Lord-Commissioners
of Trade, Privy Council, and King had all so positively and unanimously
declared the law null and void, and the Governor of Virginia
had proclaimed its repeal by the order of the King, we must
seek the cause of this dismissal in some other difficulty than an informality.
It was doubtless to be found in the desire to avoid at
this time a collision with the Virginia Assembly; and the clergy
were deserted. The Rev. Mr. Warrington, of Hampton, who was
as brave and determined in the Church as his grandson Commodore
Warrington afterward in the navy, had his case before the Council
of Virginia, and, if unsuccessful, was prepared to try whether the
Privy Council would, when the alleged informality was avoided,
enter upon the cause; but his suit was never permitted to be tried
here, the court in Virginia professing to await the decision of the
court in England, and thus ended the matter. Mr. Warrington
brought suit for his full salary in the Court of Elizabeth City, and
the jury brought in a special verdict for some damages, but still
declared the law valid in opposition to the King. The Rev. Alexander
White, of King William, also brought suit. The court declined
instructing the jurors as to the law, and left it entirely with
them, who brought in some trivial damages. But the instance of
suit which caused most interest at the time, and has continued most
to sparkle on the page of history, was that of the Rev. James
Maury. It was tried in Hanover county, though he was in an
adjoining parish. The high character of Mr. Maury entitles any
account he may have given of the transaction to great confidence.
We have it in a printed letter to Mr. Camm in the year 1763. In
the November Court of that year, he says, the court decided in his
favour that it was no law, and at the next court a select jury was
to decide upon the damages. It was indeed, he says, a select jury,
three or four being what were called New Lights, who were dissenters
from and enemies to the Church, and the others picked up
on the occasion, and most unfit to decide such a cause.

It was on this occasion that Patrick Henry, then young in the
practice, made his first successful effort. It was truly an ad captandum
speech, being suited to the times and addressed to the
passions and interests of the people. He praised the law as salutary,—said
that a king, by disallowing such a law, became a tyrant
instead of the father of the people. He spoke in such a manner


220

Page 220
that several persons in the crowd cried out, "Treason!" The cause
being pleaded on both sides, by Mr. Lyons for Mr. Maury, by Mr.
Henry for the vestry or collector, and it being intimated to the
jury that, though they must find for the plaintiffs, yet one penny
damages would suffice, in five minutes the jury brought in that
verdict. Mr. Lyons moved that the jury should be sent back
again, as having found against the evidence; but this was refused:
then that certain evidence should be recorded, which also was refused:
and, lastly, that an appeal should be allowed, which shared
the same fate.[64] It is due to Mr. Henry to state that he apologized
to Mr. Maury for some improper reflection made as to himself,
and pleaded, as an excuse for his course, that he was a young
lawyer, a candidate for practice and reputation, and therefore must
make the best of his cause. It is probable, also, that at this time
Mr. Henry may have been a little alienated from the Church of
his father and relatives.[65] The Revs. Mr. Davies and Mr. Waddell
(the old blind preacher of whom Mr. Wirt speaks) were then in
their height of zeal and eminence, and Mr. Henry often attended
their services and admired them much. Disaffection to the Church
was also getting quite strong in that region. Mr. Henry may for
a time have sympathized in their religious views, though I have no
testimony to this effect. The following extract of a letter of Mr.
Roger Atkinson, of Mannsfield, near Petersburg, an old vestryman
and staunch friend of the Church in that place, to his brother-in-law,
Mr. Samuel Pleasants, may throw some light on this
point. He is drawing the portraits of the members sent to the
first Congress from Virginia. Of Mr. Henry he says, "He is a
real half-Quaker,—your brother's man,—moderate and mild, and
in religious matters a saint; but the very d—l in politics,—a son
of thunder. He will shake the Senate. Some years ago he had

221

Page 221
liked to have talked treason into the House."[66] Whatever may
have been the feelings of Mr. Henry as to the Episcopal Church
at that time, it is very certain that in after-life he gave full proof
that he was no enemy to it, and had no desire to deprive it of any
just rights. At a time when such numbers were deserting it,
when politicians were raising themselves on its ruins, when the
worn-out glebes, and decayed parsonages, and sacred vessels were
thought to be too much to be left in the hands of the few Episcopal
families which were remaining, Mr. Henry stood up in opposition
to every attempt at their alienation, with the same boldness
and the same success as when he denounced British oppression;
nor did the advocates of the last act by which she was prostrated
in the dust succeed in their endeavour until he had left the hall of
legislation.[67] There may be some difficulty in reconciling his opposition
to this measure with his advocacy of that concerning which
we have been writing, but there may have seemed to be one to him,
and may have been a real one. At any rate, his attachment to the
Church of his fathers is clearly established. There are abundant
proofs that it continued through life, and that his descendants have

222

Page 222
inherited it. And now, should it be asked why the clergy alone
of all who were affected by this law should have made such opposition,
when it was professedly designed to relieve the poor, in a
year of unparalleled scarcity, I will endeavour to answer the
question out of the mouths of the clergy themselves at the time.
Their reasons and complaints were sent in lengthy letters—memorials
from themselves and the Commissaries Dawson and Robinson
—to the Archbishop of Canterbury, and Bishop of London, and
the Privy Council; also in a letter from the Bishop of London to
the Lord-Commissioners of Trade, and in an opinion of some of
the first jurists in England, among them Lord Cambden. These
have been preserved in the archives of Lambeth and Fulham. I
have a copy of them before me, covering more than one hundred
and fifty folio pages of manuscript. I have carefully examined
the same, as well as whatever on the other side I could obtain, and
will briefly state the substance of the clergy's plea. In the first
place, it is declared to be untrue that no complaints came from
other sources. In the year 1755, the same measure was carried
by only one vote, such was the opposition to it. In the year 1758,
some of the ablest and best men of the Assembly and the State
were opposed to it. Those who were to be sufferers by it among
the officers of Government were afraid to complain, as they might
lose office. But the chief reason why many others did not complain
more and longer was, that most of them were actually paid
their full dues in tobacco. When the King disallowed the law at
the petition of the clergy, and the Legislature was obliged to
encourage the vestries to resent by promising to bear the expenses
of the suit, but said nothing about any other suits, nearly all the
other debtors, believing their cause to be a hopeless one, would not
incur the expenses of a suit, but paid their dues as they stood
before the law was passed. Thus the clergy alone were the sufferers,
while the instruments of doing justice to others. Secondly,
they maintained that theirs was a peculiar case, and might have
been exempted from the operation of law, even if some such
method could have been legally adopted with others. They, by
their profession, were precluded from those various modes of
acquiring property by which others might more easily bear a loss.
Their salaries too were generally small,—so small that a great
number of them could not marry,—that respectable families would
not admit them into that relationship. In ordinary years most of
them, it was declared, did not receive more than eighty pounds,—
sometimes much less; and, when tobacco was indifferent, not more

223

Page 223
than forty or fifty pounds, while cases occurred of still less. One
great grievance was, that their salaries were not paid until eighteen
months after their year's labour begun, the levy being never ordered
until twelve months had elapsed, and that not demandable
for six months after; and, if shipped to England, a still longer
delay; and, if they did not send it to England and get their goods
there, must sell it here and buy indifferent articles at an advance
of from twenty-five to fifty per cent. The consequence of this
was, that the clergy were often deeply in debt long before their
salaries were paid. They thought it hard, therefore, that when,
in the course of Providence, an increase of funds occurred for one
year, by which they might be set free from debt or be enabled to
buy a few books, this should be prevented by such an act. They
had often before, by bad seasons injuring the tobacco, or by an
abundant crop reducing the price, suffered a great diminution of
salary, but the Assembly had never regarded this their loss and
sought to supply it in any other way, and it was not fair now to
reduce it by an arbitrary, unjust, and unconstitutional act. Moreover,
they said it was an ex post facto or retrospective law, passed
after they had earned their salary by a year's labour. It was thus
their own property, though not in their hands, as it ought to have
been. They also declared that, considering the high price at which
tobacco sold that year, it was a prosperous one. The quantity of
tobacco shipped was estimated at thirty-five thousand hogsheads,
instead of fifty thousand, the average crop; that, selling at fifty
shillings a hundred instead of sixteen and eightpence, every man
got two-thirds more than usual for his tobacco, and therefore could
better afford to pay than in other years, except in such places as
failed very greatly. The clergy thus lost two-thirds of their just
expectations and lawful rights. They said the history of Virginia
proved that a small crop of tobacco was best for the Colony, that
the Legislature was often endeavouring to stint the crop of tobacco
by preventing the culture of so much, and in former days had
even destroyed some which was already made, and that now, when
Providence had stinted the crop, it was hard that the clergy should
be the chief, indeed only, sufferers. They most positively denied
that the welfare of the poor was the object or the effect of the law,
and said that the rich planters were the chief gainers by it,—that
they had few tenants to pay them in money instead of tobacco,
but cultivated their lands with their own servants, and now paid
the clergy and others to whom they were indebted at one-third of
the price at which they sold their tobacco. They charged the

224

Page 224
Legislature with taking from them one penny for the poor and a
shilling for the rich, and maintained that some other method might
have been adopted for the relief of real sufferers far more just and
equal. Comparing their tithes with those of Israel of old, they
computed their portion of the tobacco on an average to be less
than one-fiftieth, and even in that year less than a twentieth, and
said that nothing whatever of any other crops was taxed, and
that all other crops that year were uncommonly abundant. If,
therefore, the Church was worth supporting, they maintained that
it ought to be honourably done. They affirmed that the effect of
this unjust proceeding must be to deter respectable clergymen
from coming into the Colony, or young men of education and
respectability here from entering the ministry. They declared
that such an effect had already been produced; that some of the
best men had already left the Colony, and others were preparing
to follow. There was, with one exception, (and he a young, conceited,
and unworthy man,) entire unanimity among the clergy,
while there was great diversity of sentiment among the laity, and
certainly among the opponents of the measure there were many of
the ablest and best men of Virginia. The clergy, indeed, boasted
that what their advocates wanted in numbers was amply made up
in quality. As the question came to be weighed in the balances
of law and equity, it was more and more admitted to be
unconstitutional and unfair. Many confessed their error; but it
was too late to retract. The clergy had committed the unpardonable
sin of appealing to the Crown; and, though many of them
became staunch Revolutionists, preaching and writing in behalf of
the war, and some girding on their swords, the evil could not be
repaired. Dissenters were rapidly gaining ground. They took
possession of the vacant pulpits and drew off numbers from the
Church, and no future Assembly could have been gotten to repair
the wrong. Such was the permissive providence of God, and
doubtless for wisest reasons. Had the one hundred clergy of Virginia,
or a large portion of them, been true men of God, not only
leading holy lives, laboriously discharging all their duties, understanding
by their own heartfelt experience, and zealously preaching
the doctrines of the Gospel as set forth by the Reformers in
our standards, God would not have permitted that unjust act on
the part of the Legislature of Virginia. There were doubtless
many worthy men among them, and some few who understood,
felt, and preached the Gospel; but, if Mr. Jarratt's testimony is
to be received, God could not have been among them to bless

225

Page 225
them. After his ordination in England and settlement in Virginia,
he attended one of the later convocations at Williamsburg, but
was so disgusted at the manner in which he heard some of the doctrines
of the Gospel and the Church spoken of, that he resolved to
attend no more of them. I doubt not there were many sober,
good-natured men among the clergy, but they wanted weight of
character, and were unfit for the ministry. There were many who
preached a dry orthodoxy and frigid morality; but that was not
enough. The Dissenters came and gave hungry souls something
else, though often mixed with what was not the Gospel.

Still, all this did not justify the act of which we have been speaking,
which must ever be regarded as a deep stain on the Legislature
of that day. Necessity, indeed, has no law, and there are times
when laws must be violated in order to prevent a greater evil.
Government has a right to interfere with the property of individuals,
when they greatly abuse it to the injury of the public. But no
such necessity existed. If tobacco was scarce, the price was very
high, and all the necessaries of life abounded. The clergy, whether
deficient in right views of religion or not, performed a large amount
of bodily exercise and went through their required duties, and
therefore had a right to what was secured to them by law. There
was the same scarcity in Maryland, where the salaries were larger;
and yet there was no such commutation enjoined there. We again
therefore come to the conclusion that the clergy were sinking in
public estimation, the dissenters from and enemies to the Church
were increasing, the Revolutionary spirit, the unwillingness to be
interfered with by the authorities of England, was daily strengthening,
and all these combined to permit the passage of the law
and to forbid the reparation of the wrong that was done. I add
that in the College of William and Mary the same contest was
going on. The Visitors and the Faculty were at variance,—the
former claiming the right to dismiss the professors at pleasure, the
latter affirming that, according to the charter of the College, a
controlling power was in the authorities abroad; but the former, as
might be expected, prevailed. The time for revolution and independence
was fully come, and there was no resisting it. President
Camm, at the beginning of the war, being summoned before the
Visitors to answer some complaints, denied their authority, and,
refusing to attend, was displaced, and Mr. Madison, of more republican
spirit, was chosen in his room.

Having closed the consideration of a question which for some
years violently agitated the Church and Colony of Virginia, and


226

Page 226
which on one side was mainly defended by the minister of York
Hampton parish, we take our leave of poor old York, but not without
a word or two as to its past, its present, and its future, so
far as man may look into the future of a dilapidated town or
village. Little York was never much more than a village; although
merchants from Baltimore and Philadelphia—at that time little
more than villages—once got goods from its warehouses. How
many inhabitants it had, when at its height, cannot be said. Besides
tradesmen and artificers and shopkeepers, of whom we are
unable to get any information, we learn that before and for some
time after the Revolution there was one of the most delightful societies
anywhere to be found, consisting of Amblers, Archers, Gibbons,
Jamiesons, Macawleys, Nicolsons, Griffins, Nelsons, Diggeses,
Smiths, Popes, Shields, Fouchees, &c. All these, with the other families
of the place, and from the country around, filled the Episcopal
Church in York, and formed a happy, undivided society. During
the war, all fled who could: some did not return, or only returned
to bid adieu to its ruins. From time to time, others removed,
until it was left almost desolate, and the country around seemed
likely to share the same fate. Agriculture grew worse and worse.
Lands were almost given away. But within the last few years a
favourable change has seemed likely to take place, in sympathy
with the improvement of all Lower Virginia. A few zealous
females, in the hope and anticipation of it, by the most indefatigable
diligence, rebuilt the old church, which had been destroyed by fire,
and the Rev. Mr. Withers, while Chaplain to the Lunatic Asylum
in Williamsburg, rendered acceptable services to the few remaining
inhabitants of York. It has been hoped that the railroad, intended
to connect Richmond with Baltimore by York River, would have
found a terminus here, and thus insured a revival of the town. In
this its friends have been also disappointed, that terminus being
established higher up. Still, hopes are entertained of its more
gradual improvement by the increased commerce floating on the
bosom of York River, and from the rise in lands all around. The
demand for houses is increasing, and, if the present owner of nearly
all York and its vicinity was disposed to sell, lots and small farms
would be purchased and settled. There is one interesting and
venerable establishment in the vicinity of York which deserves
a notice. It is called Temple Farm. It was the country-residence
of Governor Spottswood in the beginning of the last century.
It was called Temple Farm because of a house in its garden,
built by the Governor as a cemetery. It was in the mansion-house

227

Page 227
on this farm that Lord Cornwallis met Washington and
signed the articles of capitulation. One of our Virginia antiquaries,
(Mr. Caruthers,) in a semi-fictitious historical novel, after
the manner of Walter Scott, has made this place a chief scene and
Governor Spottswood the chief hero. But, it being so long since
the date of the events described, many of its readers perhaps
doubt whether the house was built by Governor Spottswood, or
whether he ever lived there. Having myself had an interest, by
marriage, in the house and farm, and knowing that there was much
of the real in the traditionary accounts of it, but wishing to obtain
the most reliable information, I addressed a letter to Doctor William
Shield, of York, who once possessed it, and received from him
the following communication:—

"Rev. and Dear Sir:

Yours dated the 30th of January, asking for
some information relative to Temple Farm, near Yorktown, which, according
to history, was once the residence of Governor Spottswood, and
the house in which Lord Cornwallis signed the capitulation, was received
a few days ago.

"I purchased the farm and moved there in 1834, at which time the
walls of the Temple, from which the place takes its name, were several
feet high: within them (after removing the ruins) I found heaps of broken
tombstones, and on putting the fragments together, to ascertain, if possible,
the names of some of the persons who had been buried there, I
succeeded in finding the name of Governor Spottswood, showing that he
was buried at Temple Farm,—a fact, perhaps, not generally known. There
was one tombstone, however, entire and unbroken, with the following singular
inscription on it, and which, as it may be interesting to you, I send
verbatim et literatim:—

`Major William Gooch, of this parish.
Died October 29, 1655.'

`Within this tomb there doth interred lie,
No shape, but substance, true nobility.
Itself, though young in years, just twenty-nine,
Yet graced with virtues moral and divine;
The Church from him did good participate,
In counsel rare, fit to adorn a State.'

"The house at Temple Farm is built of wood, and is in rather a dilapidated
condition at present. The original building was very large, and
consisted of a centre building with two large wings, either one of which
was as large as the present house, which in fact was originally the centre
building.

"I gave for Temple Farm, in 1834, three thousand dollars, and sold it to
Mr. Pettit, in 1839, for seven thousand dollars. Mr. P. sold it in 1853
for eleven thousand dollars, and the present owner informs me that he
has been offered fifteen thousand dollars. The increase in the price of our
lands here is not, perhaps, to be attributed so much to the effect of marl,
as to the great benefits anticipated to all this country on York River from
the completion of the contemplated railroad from Richmond to York


228

Page 228
River, and to the fact that the steamboats are now regularly plying from
Baltimore and Norfolk, up York River, to the Mattaponi and Pamunkey
Rivers. There are in Old York between twenty-five and thirty houses,
all of which are generally inhabited; and there is a demand for more.

"With my best wishes for your health and happiness, I am, with the
highest respect, your friend and servant,

William H. Shield."

It is well known that Governor Spottswood died at Annapolis, in
the year 1737, on his way to join the army which he was appointed
to command, and which was about to engage in a Western expedition.
His remains were doubtless carried by water to York,
and deposited at this, his favourite residence, and in the tomb or
temple which he had built, and in which other worthies were buried.
It may be said, without fear of contradiction, that there is not on
all York River a more picturesque spot than Temple Farm. Its
capacity for improvement is also very great.

 
[64]

Mr. Wirt, in his Life of Patrick Henry, while under the strongest temptation to
place any thing he did or said in the most favourable light, yet hesitates not to
acknowledge that the case was a bad one, and the law indefensible. Mr. Wirt, after
reading all that was written on both sides of the case, says, "It seems impossible
to deny at this day that the clergy had much the best of the argument." And
again, that the court which had decided the principle of law in favour of the
clergy. "very much to their credit, breasted the popular current." He also informs
us that Mr. John Lewis, counsel for the people, was so satisfied that the case was a
desperate one after the decision of the court, that he gave up the cause, saying to
his clients that he could do them no service. Then it was that Mr. Henry was called
in, who took care to say nothing about the law of the case.

[65]

He had an uncle in the Episcopal ministry, Patrick Henry, who lived near the
place of trial, and would have been present, but at the request of his nephew stayed
away.

[66]

Mr. Atkinson was the grandfather of Bishop Atkinson. The remainder of this
letter is so faithfully and happily descriptive of the other members of the delegation,
that I make no apology for introducing it. Of Peyton Randolph he says,
"A venerable man, whom I well know and love; an honest man; has knowledge,
temper, experience, judgment,—above all, integrity; a true Roman spirit. He, I
find, is chairman. The choice will do honour to the judges, and the chairman will
do honour to the choice." Of Richard Henry Lee he says, "I think I know the
man, and I like him: need I say more? He was the second choice, and he was my
second choice." Of George Washington he says, "He is a soldier,—a warrior; he
is a modest man; sensible; speaks little; in action cool, like a Bishop at his
prayers." Of Colonel Bland he says, "A wary, old, experienced veteran at the bar
and in the Senate; has something of the look of old musty parchments, which he
handleth and studieth much. He formerly wrote a treatise against the Quakers on
water-baptism." Of Benjamin Harrison he says, "He is your neighbour, and
brother-in-law to the speaker, (Peyton Randolph:) I need not describe him." Of
Mr. Pendleton he says, "The last and best, though all good. The last shall be
first, says the Scripture. He is an humble and religious man, and must be exalted.
He is a smooth-tongued speaker, and, though not so old, may be compared to old
Nestor,—

" `Experienced Nestor, in persuasion skill'd,
Words sweet as honey from his lips distill'd.' "
[67]

I have often in my early days heard the delegate from Frederick county (Mr.
Matthew Page) speak of the eloquence of Mr. Henry while defending the Church
against this assault, and refer to the fact that his opponents could never succeed
until he was out of the way. This circumstance seemed to have been well known,
for Bishop White has introduced it into his Memoirs of the Protestant Episcopal
Church of the United States.


229

Page 229

ARTICLE XVIII.

Hampton Parish, Elizabeth City County, and Parishes in Warwick.

Until the year 1751 it was called Hampton parish, and on one
of my lists after this; but on the vestry-book beginning in 1751
it is changed to Elizabeth City. Elizabeth City county is one of
the eight original shires of Virginia in the year 1634. It is situated,
as may be seen by looking at the map, just between the
mouths of James and York Rivers. Its compass is so small
and so compact that it does not appear that there was ever an attempt
at building more than one church in it,—that at Hampton,
—unless there may have been one on the Back River portion of it,
of which, however, we have no account. Although the parish and
county of Elizabeth City be comparatively so small,—only eighteen
miles square,—yet are they on many accounts deeply interesting.
Old Point Comfort, which is a part of this county, was, with
the exception of Cape Henry, most probably the first place in
Virginia which was touched by Captain Smith in 1607. In exploring
the county for a suitable settlement, they met (says the
historian Burk) with five of the natives, who invited them to their
town, Kecoughtan or Kichotan, where Hampton now stands. It
was doubtless one of the earliest Indian towns, as it became in
1610 one of the earliest settlements of the Colony. Even before
that, it became a kind of Cape of Good Hope to the Colonists, who
called here on their expeditions up York, Rappahannock, Potomac,
and Nansemond Rivers. It was also the first harbour which Europeans
reached after their long voyages over the Atlantic. Here
they usually stopped, and often proceeded to Jamestown and Williamsburg
by land. It is not, therefore, to be wondered at that we
find a church and ministry here at an early period; especially as
this place does not appear to have suffered in the Indian massacre
of 1622, the natives having probably at this time been driven from
this corner of the Colony. We have no vestry-book of more ancient
date than 1751 from whence to draw our facts concerning
the early history of this parish; but the records of the court,
which are equally trustworthy, as far back as the year 1635, have
been preserved in the old clerk's office, and furnish us with some


230

Page 230
interesting documents touching the ministers and church at Hampton.
I am indebted to the researches of the Rev. John McCabe,
late minister of Hampton, for the following facts out of the records
of the court, and which he has embodied in his full and interesting
account of this parish in the Church Review.

In the year 1644 we find the churchwardens presenting to the
court an unworthy female. In the year 1646 we find Nicholas
Brown and William Armistead presenting one of their own body.
In the year 1644 we read of a Rev. Mr. Mallory as performing
service and being remunerated for it. In the next year we read
of a Rev. Justinian Aylmer, who continued to officiate until 1667,
—twenty-three years. In the year 1667 we read of a Rev. Jeremiah
Taylor, who buried a Mr. Nicholas Baker in the new church
of Kichotan,
according to a request in the will.

In the same year Mr. Robert Brough, by will, requests that he
may be buried in the old church of Kichotan. In one and the
same year there were an old and a new church standing at Kichotan.
The old one had probably been built many years, and was
going to decay. As there was a law passed in 1621, under the
administration of Sir Thomas Yeardley, that a house of worship
should be erected and a burial-ground set apart on every plantation,
(that is, settlement,) there is reason to believe that there was
one then built at Kichotan, if not before; and that the new one
was built between 1660 and 1667, and that new one is the present
church of St. John's, at Hampton. As to the location of the old
one, Mr. McCabe and some friends settled that point beyond all
dispute. There is an old burial-ground, about a mile from Hampton,
on the Pembroke farm, now the property of John Jones, Esquire,
on which are a number of old gravestones, and where tradition
had located an ancient church. To this Mr. McCabe and his
friends repaired with proper instruments, and, clearing away the
rubbish and digging into the earth, soon found the brick foundation
of the former church; the superstructure having probably been, as
with most other first churches, of wood. Among other interments
in that graveyard are those of John Neville, Vice-Admiral of his
Majesty's fleet in the West Indies, who died in 1697; of Thomas
Curle, born in the year 1640, in Sussex, England, and dying in
1700; also of the Rev. Andrew Thompson, minister of the parish,
who died in 1719, "leaving the character of a sober and religious
man." It seems that the old church had been repaired after the
new one was built, and that it and the burial-ground were preserved
for funeral purposes, (as the old church and graveyard at


231

Page 231
Blandford and the old chapel and burying-ground in Clarke
county;) but now they are ruins in the midst of a field. From
the examination of records Mr. McCabe concludes that the Rev.
Mr. Mallory was the minister in 1664; how long before is not known.
He was succeeded in 1665 by the Rev. Mr. Aylmer, who in 1667
was followed by the Rev. Jeremiah Taylor. He was a disgrace to
his name and the ministry. For his insolency and misbehaviour
in open court, he was committed to confinement during the court's
pleasure. Again he was presented by the grand jury for drunkenness,
and again for slander. It speaks well for the grand juries
of that day, that they would take cognizance of and punish offences
which are sometimes permitted to pass unnoticed or unpunished
by some church judicatories of our day, of various denominations.
He was succeeded in 1677 by the Rev. John Page, who
left the Colony in 1687. He was no doubt the same of whom we
read as minister of St. Peter's, New Kent, for one year about this
time. He was succeeded by the Rev. Cope Doyley in 1687. In
1712 the Rev. Andrew Thompson became the rector, and died in
1719.[68] In 1731 the Rev. Mr. Fife becomes the minister, and continues
until his death in 1756. He was succeeded by the Rev.
Thomas Warrington, who died in 1770. The Rev. William Selden
followed and continued until 1783, and was succeeded by the Rev.
William Nixon. It does not appear how long he continued, as
there is no meeting of the vestry from 1786 until 1806,—twenty
years. At that meeting the Rev. George Halson was chosen minister.
About this time also the Rev. Mr. Syme served for a short
period. Twenty years longer elapsed before another meeting of
the vestry occurred, when the Rev. Mark L. Chevers was chosen,
who continued to serve the parish, in connection with the chaplaincy
at Old Point, until 1842 or 1843. In the year 1845 the
Rev. Mr. Bausman became its minister, and in 1850 the Rev. Mr.
McCabe, who continued until the present year, 1856.


232

Page 232

Concerning two of the preceding ministers, the Rev. Thomas
Warrington and the Rev. William Selden, there is a transaction
recorded on the vestry-book worthy of special notice, as serving to
illustrate still more the contest between vestries and Governors,
Commissaries, and the Crown. It seems that at the death of the
Rev. Mr. Fife two candidates presented themselves,—the Rev. Mr.
Warrington, who was recommended to the parish by Governor
Gooch, and Mr. William Selden, then a young lawyer, probably of
Hampton, who, disliking his profession, wished to enter the ministry,
and applied for a title to this parish with which to proceed to
the Bishop of London for Orders. The vote in the vestry being
taken, there was a tie between the candidates. At this the Governor
and Commissary were much displeased, and wrote a sharp
letter upbraiding the vestry with despising the authority of the
Crown and the Bishop of London by thus refusing to comply with
the recommendation of their commissioned agents in Virginia,—
that is, themselves,—and again call upon them to receive Mr.
Warrington. The vestry have no meeting for four months, and
then the vote was the same as before. They, however, choose Mr.
Warrington temporarily, and at the end of five months more unanimously
choose him as their minister; and he continued to serve
them faithfully and acceptably until his death, thirteen years after,
in 1770. At his death Mr. Selden is again an applicant for the
parish, is elected, and goes to London for Orders, which he obtains
that same year, and continues to be an acceptable minister until
1783, when he resigned on account of ill-health, and soon after
died. For an account of him and his descendants, I refer to a
note in my second article on Henrico; though I am unable to reconcile
the date of his birth, as there given, with the date of his
application to the vestry, and think there must be a mistake on
the part of my informant.

Of the Rev. Mr. Warrington I have information in other documents,
showing him to have been a fearless, upright man, and
while reading of him have been reminded of his brave and patriotic
grandson, Commodore Louis Warrington.[69]


233

Page 233

To the above I add a passage from the article of Mr. McCabe,
which had escaped my notice while preparing the above:—

"The vestry-book here is defaced for some years, owing, we presume, to
the fact that in the change of the Church from that of England to the


234

Page 234
Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States, begun in 1783, consummated
in 1787, and the first Convention in Philadelphia, July 28,
1789, with Bishops of our own presiding, this parish did not procure a
minister during that period. A tomb has recently been erected, from
which we infer that the Rev. Mr. Skyren was probably the first minister
after the Revolution. The inscription on the tomb reads as follows:—
`Sacred to the memory of the Rev. Henry Skyren, rector of Elizabeth
City parish. Born in Whitehaven, England, anno domini 1729. Died
in Hampton, Virginia, A.D. 1795. This monument is erected by his
surviving children, Elizabeth Temple and John Spottswood Skyren.' "

The following inscription, on a stone near the east entrance to
the church, will show that very soon after the change spoken of
above, the parish was supplied with regular services:—"Sacred to
the memory of the Rev. John Jones Spooner, rector of the church
in Elizabeth City county, who departed this life September 15th,
1799, aged forty-two years." And then, to the right of the door
entering from the east, another, bearing the following:—"Departed
this life January 17th, 1806, the Rev. Benjamin Brown, rector of
Elizabeth City parish, aged thirty-nine years."

Another extract also I take the liberty of making:—


235

Page 235

"During the last war with Great Britain, Hampton was sacked, its
inhabitants pillaged, one of its aged citizens, sick and infirm, wantonly
murdered in the arms of his wife, and other crimes committed by hireling
soldiers and by brutalized officers, over which the chaste historian must
draw a veil. The Church of God itself was not spared during the saturnalia
of lust and violence. His temple was profaned and his altars
desecrated. What British ruthlessness had left scattered and prostrate
was soon looked upon with neglect. The moles and bats held their revels
undisturbed within its once hallowed courts, and the obscene owl nestled
and brought forth in the ark of the covenant. The church in which our
fathers worshipped stabled the horse and stalled the ox. The very tomb
of the dead, sacred in all lands, became a slaughter-ground of the butcher,
and an arena for pugilistic contests. A few faithful ones wept when they
remembered Zion in her day of prosperity and beheld her in her hour of
homeless travail, and uttered their cry, `How long, oh Lord, how long?' "

The following preamble, accompanying a subscription, tells the
story of her woes, and breathes the language of returning hope:—

"Whereas, from a variety of circumstances, the Episcopal Church in the
town of Hampton is in a state of dilapidation, and will ere long moulder
into ruins unless some friendly hand be extended to its relief, and, in the
opinion of the vestry, the only method that can be pursued to accomplish
the laudable design of restoring it to the order in which our forefathers
bequeathed it to their children, is to resort to subscription, they do
earnestly solicit pecuniary aid from all its friends, in a full belief that our
appeal will not be made in vain. And, hoping that God will put it into
the hearts of the people to be benevolently disposed toward our long-neglected
Zion," &c.

A committee was appointed to take counsel with Bishop Moore
as to the best method of raising funds for the purpose. The subscription-paper
was circulated, not merely in Hampton, but sent
to some whose fathers had once worshipped in the old house, and
the desired object was attained. Among the subscribers we notice
Commodore Warrington for fifty dollars; Commodore James Barron,
one hundred; the latter, as well as his brother, who was also a
commodore in the American navy, having been born in the parish.

Funds being raised, the church was thoroughly repaired. It
was consecrated by Bishop Moore on Friday, the 8th of January,
1830, and is now one of the most interesting and comfortable
places of worship in Virginia.

A list of the vestrymen from 1751 to 1826 will close our notice
of this parish:—

Mr. Booth Armistead, George Wray, William Armistead, Henry King,
Wilson Miles Cary, William Mallory, William Wager, Jas. Wallace, John
Tabb, Joseph Selden, Miles King, Cary Selden, Warlock Westwood,
Merit Sweny, Robert Armistead, John Allen, Anthony Tucker, Baldwin


236

Page 236
Shephard, William Westwood, Charles King, Charles Jennings, Westwood
Armistead, William Parsons, John Moore, Jacob Walker, Thomas
Latimer, James Wallace, William Latimer, William Armistead, Booth
Armistead, Wilson Miles Cary, William Mallory, Joseph Selden, Miles
King, Robert Bright, William Brough, Thomas Allen, Robert Armistead,
John Cowper, James Latimer, Thomas Watts, Samuel Watts, Miles Cary,
William Loury, Benjamin Philips, William Armistead, Thomas Latimer,
Robert Lively, John Cary, Dr. Wm Hope, J. W. Jones, Westwood T.
Armistead, Col. G. A. Cary, Capt. T. Hope, Capt. J. Herbert, Dr. R. G.
Banks, Capt. John F. Wray, Richard C. Servant, Samuel Dewbre.

The last-named vestryman but one—Mr. Richard B. Servant—
was for many years, and to the close of the vestry-book, the secretary
of the vestry. It has now been many years since he left
Virginia and moved to Illinois, which was once a county of Virginia,
made so for special purposes, at a time when Virginia's
western boundary was the Eastern Ocean, and embraced even
modern California, at least in theory or by royal grant. Mr. Servant,
as may be seen by the following letter, has not forgotten the
old State and Church of Virginia:—

"Rt. Rev. and very Dear Sir:

I have read with deep and filial
interest your reminiscenses published in the Southern Churchman, and I
send you a memorandum, hastily made from recollection. I have no
disposition to have my name appear in print, but if you have not already
all the information that you may desire in regard to Elizabeth City parish
and the old church at Hampton, you may use such parts of the following
memorandum as may suit you:—

" `I think that the record will show that Parson Brown was the last
settled minister, and I think his immediate predecessor was Parson Simms,
said to be the best reader in the diocese, but a great "fox-hunter;" and, to
the best of my recollection, Parson George Halson, who was also principal
of the Hampton Academy, was the incumbent,—whether regular or not I
am not sure, but the record will explain. He officiated until the war of
1812. During the interval between Parson Brown and the war, the
framework of the tower, which stood on the west end of the church, became
so decayed that the "Old Queen Anne Bell" had to be taken down
and was placed in the angle made by the church and the tower. From
that position it was removed, by the order of Major Crutchfield, who commanded
the troops encamped on Little England Farm, to the "guardhouse"
of that encampment, and a short time after the tongue became
loose, an axe was used to strike the hour, and the bell cracked. We had
it recast about the year 1825. It was probably the best bell in the Colony.

" `After the British troops evacuated Hampton, on, I think, the 27th of
June, 1813, I, then a boy twelve years old, went into town; and the first
thing that attracted my attention was, that the enemy had used the
churchyard, where the last mortal remains of my ancestors for one hundred
and fifty years or more had been deposited, for slaughtering cattle,
and the walls were smoked in numerous paces where they had made fires
with which to cook their provisions. The venerable old church was also



No Page Number


No Page Number
illustration

ST. JOHN'S CHURCH, HAMPTON, VA.


237

Page 237
much misused in the interior, as that seemed to have been used as a common
barrack.

" `From this time until about the year 1824, the church and the walls
surrounding it were rapidly going to decay,—the church a common shelter
for horses, cattle, and hogs, and was profaned by men and boys also. I
had often said to my dear sainted mother, that if I lived to be a man I
would stir up the people to repair the old church and walls. In the year
1822 or 1823, just as I was arriving to manhood, an incident occurred
which I shall never forget. Mrs. Jane Hope, eldest daughter of the late
Commodore James Barron, was spending the evening with my mother,
(who resided on the lot adjoining, west of the church,) and she proposed
a visit to the graves of our ancestors; and, while standing at the front
door of the church, within a foot of the graves of my ancestors, she remarked
to me, "Cousin, if I were a man I would have these walls built
up." Her words were like electricity, and from that moment my determination
was fixed. The very next day I called on the late Westwood Armistead,
Dr. William Hope, Captain Robert Lively, and Colonel Wilson W.
Jones; and the result of our interview was, that we should prepare a subscription-paper
to have the wall around the old graveyard repaired, little
thinking then that the repairs of the "old church" would follow. I commenced
on the same day, and, after raising all that I could in the parish,
proceeded to Norfolk, and with the assistance of Commodores Barron
and Warrington, (the grandfather of the latter having been one of the
ministers of the church,) Miles King, late Navy Agent, and Dr. William
Selden, whose ancestors were buried in the old churchyard, Judge Strange,
of North Carolina, who also had a relative buried there, and subscribed
liberally, raised a sufficient sum to repair the walls around the graveyard,
which in a short time were completed, and a substantial wrought-iron
gate placed at the entrance.

" `About the year 1824 or 1825, (the record will show,) a meeting of
the friends of the church was called, a vestry elected, and an effort made
to repair the church, which, with the assistance of our friends at Norfolk,
was successful beyond our most sanguine anticipations. A short time
after, the Rev. Mark L. Chevers was elected rector: of this, however,
and what has followed, the record will show.

" `When we undertook to repair the church there was nothing standing
but the bare walls and a leaky roof,—not a vestige of doors, windows, or
floors. In order to give an impetus to our proceedings, we prevailed upon
good old Bishop Moore to pay us a visit, and, to make his visit the more
effective, we had the accumulated filth cleansed out, and the old walls,
after a lapse of many years, resounded with prayer and praise. I sat on
the bare tiles; but what a seat, and what a day! It was manifest to all
that "the glory of the Lord filled the house." Dr. Ducachet occasionally
came over to preach for us, and at every visit the remark was that "some
more nails were driven into the church."

" `Upon the election of the vestry there was not a vestige of the church-furniture
to be found. We, however, succeeded in finding the old vestry-book,
which had been carefully preserved by the late Samuel Watts, or,
as he was more familiarly called, "Uncle Sammy."

" `I doubt very much whether, upon the reorganization and resuscitation
of the parish, there were a half-dozen Prayer Books in the parish.'

"You will see that I have written the foregoing just as circumstances


238

Page 238
occurred to me: if you can cull any thing out of it and put it in shape
you can use it.

"I am, with great esteem,
"Your brother in Christ,
"R. B. Servant.
"P.S.—My great-grandfather was commandant of the garrison at Old
Point Comfort, more than one hundred and eighty years ago, and since
that time there has not been a Dissenter in the family. Do you ask how
this happened, when the church had sunk so low that there was scarcely
any to do it reverence? I answer, the habitual use of the Prayer Book
and FAMILY PRAYERS. My father died when I was sixteen years old,
and my mother had an aversion to leading in prayer, but she insisted
that I should do so, and our family were kept together in the `one fold'
by means of FAMILY PRAYER."

PARISH OF WARWICK.

Of this we can say but little. The county was one of the eight
original shires in 1634. It is a small county on the lower part of
James River, lying alongside of Elizabeth City and York counties.
Of course it became a parish and county at the same time, and
they have always been known by the same names. The first
information we have of its ministers is in 1754, when the Rev.
Roscoe Cole had charge of the parish. In the year 1758 the Rev.
Thomas Davis was minister. In the years 1773, 1774, and 1776,
the Rev. William Hubard was there. In the year 1785 the Rev.
William Bland, of whom we have already written, was in the Convention
which organized the diocese, with Mr. Richard Cary as
his lay delegate. The Carys were a very ancient and most respectable
family in that part of Virginia. It is our purpose to
visit their ancient seat and the Clerk's Office of the county, in the
hope of finding something worth adding to this meagre account;
and, in the mean while, would be thankful to any member of the
family for some account of it.[70]

 
[70]

We enlarge our notices of Warwick a little by the following account of the
Digges, some of whom lived in it. The family of Digges is most ancient and
honourable. Virginians and Episcopalians need not wish to go further back than
to the Hon. Dudley Digges, one of the most active members of that most noble and
Christian association, the London Company,—far more of a missionary institution
than any of that day. The minutes of the London Company show him to have
ever been at his post in the meetings of the committee, with such men as the Earl
of Southampton, the Ferrars, and others. Mr. Burk, after speaking the praises
of this Company for purity of morals, for noble motives, and even a tolerant spirit
of religion, which was high commendation from an infidel as he was, then extols
its literary character,—representing Southampton as the friend of Shakspeare, and
George Sandys, the Company's Treasurer in Virginia, as translating Ovid in the
wilds of Virginia,—concluding thus:—"Sir Edwin Sandys, Sir Dudley Digges, Sir
John Saville, with several other members of the London Company, were considered
the most elegant scholars and the most eloquent speakers in the nation." The name
of Digges was soon transferred to Virginia. We read of Digges's Hundred among
the early settlements on James River. We read in 1654 of Edward Digges made
one of the Council, and so approving himself in that office as to be called to preside
over the Colony; and then, at the expiration of his term, to be requested to continue
in it as long as he continued in the country, with other marks of distinction.
Thence onward we meet with the name in the lists of vestrymen and Burgesses,
until the period came in our country's history which tried the souls even of the
bravest, when, in 1773, we find the name of Dudley Digges on the first committee
for correspondence with the other Colonies about our grievances; and in 1776 the
names of Dudley Digges and William Digges as members from York with General
Nelson in the great Convention. And ever since that time it has been our happiness
to find that name often enrolled on the lists of vestrymen and communicants of our
Church. One of the descendants of the Digges, who died in 1700, was named
Cole Digges, a man of large property, owning Chilham Castle near York, Bellfield
on York River, between York and Williamsburg, and Denbigh in Warwick. His
sons were Edward, William, and Dudley. Among his grandchildren were William,
who married his cousin Elizabeth, of Denbigh; Dudley, who married his cousin
Louisa: Thomas and Edward moved to Fauquier and had families. One granddaughter
married a Mr. Powell, of Petersburg. Two married Fitzhughs, of Fauquier.
The first wife of the first Dudley was a Miss Armistead; the second, Miss
Wormley, of Rosegill. He had two sons, Cole and Dudley, and several daughters,
one of whom married a Burwell, another a Stratton, of the Eastern Shore, a third
a Digges, and two of them married Nicolsons. The wife of the Rev. Mr. Woodbridge
is daughter of one of the last. One daughter of the first Cole Digges married
Nathaniel Harrison, of Brandon; another, Nathaniel Harrison, of Wakefield.


239

Page 239

CHARLES, OR CHARLES RIVER PARISH, YORK COUNTY.

This was separated from York-Hampton parish before the year
1754, but how long we have been unable as yet to ascertain. The
Rev. Thomas Warrington was ordained in 1747 and was its minister
in 1754, and until he went to Hampton in 1756. As I do not
see his name as belonging to any other parish, it is probable that
he entered at once on the ministry in this parish.

The Rev. Joseph Davenport was the minister in 1773, 1774, and
also in 1785. In the last year he appears in the Convention with
Mr. Robert Shield as lay delegate. This is all we can learn as to
the parish of Charles,—so called because on York River, which
was once called Charles River, and because York county was once
called Charles River county.

Before crossing York River to treat of the parishes of Gloucester
and Mathews, it may be well to observe that at an early period
there may be found the names of a number of parishes which once


240

Page 240
existed in that part of Virginia lying between Warwick and
Charles City, below and above Jamestown and round about Williamsburg;
as, for instance, Southwark, Chiskiack, Middletown,
Harop, Nutmeg and Denbigh, Wilmington, Marston, which were
soon merged into James City, York-Hampton, Bruton, and Westover
parish. Soon after the settlement of the country, when the
Indians abounded and it was dangerous to go far to worship, every
little plantation or settlement in that region was made a parish.
There is one parish, by the name of Westminster, which as yet I
have been unable to locate, and which made a report to the Bishop
of London in 1724. Its communicants only numbered sixteen. I
incline to think it was somewhere on the Chickahominy. Its minister
was the Rev. Mr. Cox.

In accordance with the determination expressed above, I have
visited old Warwick, which, though the least of all shires of Virginia,
was one of the most fruitful nurseries of the families of
Virginia. Its contiguity to James River and Jamestown rendered
it a safe place for early Colonists to settle in. It was probably at
one time, according to its dimensions, the most populous of all the
counties. In evidence of which, I find from an examination of the
records of the Clerk's Office, which extend back to about 1642,
that there were, at one time, not less than eight parishes in Warwick.
Two of these were on Mulberry Island,—one called Stanley
Hundred, and the other Nutmeg Quarter. It is really not an
island, as Jamestown was not an island, though both of them so called.
Mulberry Island joined the mainland in its upper part, and one of
its parishes at least—Stanley Hundred—was at one time connected
with the church at Jamestown, and had much the largest congregation.
The result of my hasty examination of the old and decayed
records at Warwick Court-house, some of which are like the
exhumed volumes from the long-buried towns of the East, and will
scarce bear handling, was the discovery that the following were the
most prominent names in this county in times long since gone
by: — Fauntleroy, Hill, Bushrodd, Ryland, Ballard, Purnell,
Ashton, Clayborne, Cary, Dade, Griffith, Whittaker, Pritchard,
Hurd, Harwood, Bassett, Watkins, Smith, Digges, Dudley, Petit,
Radford, Stephens, Wood, Bradford, Stratton, Glascock, Pattison,
Barber, Allsop, Browninge, Killpatricke, Nowell, Lewellin,
Goodale, Dawson, Cosby, Wythe, Reade, Bolton, Dixon, Langhorne,
Morgan, Fenton, Chisman, Watkins, John, Lang, Parker,
West. No one can look over this list without exclaiming, "What


241

Page 241
a prolific nursery of Virginia families was old Warwick!" In what
part of Virginia are not some of the descendants of these first
settlers to be found?[71]

Besides visiting the old court-house and Clerk's Office and jail
(the latter without an inmate) of Warwick county, I went to the
ancient seat of the Coles and Digges, at Denbigh, on James
River, just opposite to Nutmeg Quarter, on Mulberry Island, the
island reaching down to this place and only separated from it by
Warwick River. The ancient house at Denbigh is no more, except
one wing of it, which forms a part of the habitation of the
present owner, Mr. Young, a descendant of one of the old Episcopal
families of Denbigh parish. The settlement at Denbigh was
formerly the seat of the Coles and Digges, who intermarried.
The Hon. Edward Digges, no doubt, at one time lived at this place
and owned part of Mulberry Island, which may have received its
name from the trees which furnished food for the worms which
were used in the raising of silk, of which operation Mr. Digges was
the great patron, as appears from history and his tombstone. There
is still handed down, in the family residing there, a ball of the raw
material, made at an early period, a portion of which was presented
to me. Within a few miles of Denbigh farm is one of the
ancient seats of the Cary family, and, at the same distance, old
Denbigh Church. I paid a visit to the latter, and found it in a
much better condition than I could have expected. It is in the
parish called Upper Denbigh, there being formerly one called
Lower Denbigh. The present building was erected one hundred
and ten years since; and the weatherboarding was so well done,
and was of such excellent material, that it is still good. The
foundation of an older one is plainly to be traced a short distance
behind it, in the woods which come up to the present church, which
is only a few yards from the main Warwick road leading up and
down the country. There is only one large tombstone there, on
which is the following inscription:—

"Mary Harrison, daughter of the Honble Cole Digges, of his Majesty's


242

Page 242
Council, wife of Nathaniel Harrison, of Prince George county, died November
12th, 1744, in her 27th year. She so discharged the several
duties of a wife, mother, daughter, and neighbour, that her relations and
acquaintances might justly esteem their loss insupportable, was it not
chastened with the remembrance that every virtue which adds weight to
their loss augments her reward."

Mrs. Harrison was grandmother of the late George Harrison,
of Lower Brandon, and of Mr. William Harrison, of Upper Brandon,
on James River.[72] I also visited the site of another old
church in Warwick, in the parish of Martin's Hundred a few
miles from the Grove, the former seat of the Burwells. After
much exploring of the place, now covered with trees and bushes
and leaves, my companion, Mr. Richard Randolph, and myself felt
beneath our feet a tombstone covered with moss and leaves, and,
on clearing them away, deciphered the name of "Samuel Pond,
of Martin's Hundred parish, in the Colony of Va., who departed
this life in the year of our Lord 1694, aged 48." By this discovery
alone have I been able to locate the parish of Martin's Hundred,
so often mentioned in the early history and statutes of Virginia.
A part of this parish may have been in James City county.

The family of Cary owned large tracts of land in this county,
and had two family-seats, well known and much visited in former
days. One of them is near Denbigh. The tombs of a number of
the family are still to be seen there. The other, called Richneck,
is about eight miles off, and higher up the county. The last occupant
bearing the name was Mr. Cary, who moved to Carysbrook,
in Fluvanna county. On visiting this place, and going to
the graveyard where some of the ancestors had been buried, I
found that the brick enclosure had been removed, and even the
bricks underneath the only large tombstone which was there had
been taken away, and used in constructing a steam mill for sawing
up the timber of the plantation. The whole estate, consisting chiefly


243

Page 243
of forest, either of ancient or modern growth, and amounting to
fifteen hundred acres, had been sold to persons from a distance,
who were converting it into lumber and wood. What is true of
this is true of many other old settlements in Warwick. Impoverished
by improper culture, and deserted of its former owners, what
was once covered with habitations and people has now returned to
its primeval state, and is dense forest. It is now feeding the steamboats
and furnishing building-materials for our towns. A few
more generations may see it once more in a different condition.

Before leaving this county, it will be interesting to our readers
to have an extract from the Acts of Assembly, in the year 1654,
touching one whose family name is on the list of the early inhabitants
of Warwick, and who may himself have belonged to it at
the time:—

"PUBLIQUE ORDERS OF ASSEMBLY

"Whereas, Col. Edward Hill, unanimously chosen Speaker of this House,
was afterward maliciously reported by William Hatcher to be an atheist
and blasphemer, according to an information exhibited against him the
last Quarter-court, from which the Honourable Governor and Council then
cleared the said Edward Hill, and now certified the same unto the House;
and forasmuch as the said William Hatcher, notwithstanding he had notice
given him of the Governor and Council's pleasure therein, and of the said
Col. Hill being cleared as aforesaid, hath also reported that `the mouth of
this House was a devil,' nominating and meaning thereby the said Right
Worshipfull Col. Edward Hill, it is therefore ordered by this House,
that the said William Hatcher, upon his knees, make an humble acknowledgment
of his offence unto the said Col. Edward Hill and Burgesses of
this Assembly; which accordingly was performed, and then he, the said
Hatcher, was dismissed, paying his fees."

The above shows in what horror an atheist was then held, and
what a reproach it was to have such a one in a public office.

I also promised to examine further into the history of the Digges,
supposing them to belong much more to the county of Warwick than
I find them to have been. Although they intermarried with the
family of Cole, and some of them were Warwick men, yet, for the
most part, they lived in York county. Their two seats, Chilham,
near Yorktown, and Bellfield, some miles higher up the river and
about eight miles from Williamsburg, were both on the river. The
latter is just opposite to Shelly, on the Gloucester side, and was in
the parish first called Chiskiack, and afterward Hampton, until it was
merged into York-Hampton. Captain Smith, in his history of the
Colony at its first establishment, speaks of King Powhatan as being
sometimes with this tribe of Chiskiack Indians. He had only to
cross the river from his residence at or near Shelly to Bellfield,


244

Page 244
now owned by Colonel McCandish, of Williamsburg, and he would
be in the midst of this tribe. Being informed that Bellfield was
the burial-place of the Digges, I recently spent a night there with
Colonel McCandlish and a part of his family, who met me at this—
which is only their occasional—residence. I found the tombs in
much better order than at most of the old family graveyards.
They are very massive. The top-stones, on which the inscriptions
are put, are of what is called ironstone, or black marble, being the
hardest and heaviest stone in England, scarcely less heavy than
iron itself. Nearly all of the old imported tombs are of this kind.
It preserves the inscriptions also much better than any other kind
of stone or marble. The following are the inscriptions:—

I.

"To the memory of Edward Digges, Esquire, sonne of Sir Dudley
Digges, of Chilham, in Kent, Knight and Baronett, Master of the Rolls
in the reign of King Charles the 1st. He departed this life the 15th of
March, 1675, in the 55th year of his age, one of his Majesty's Councill
for this his Colony of Va. A gentleman of most commendable parts and
ingenuity, and the only introducer and promoter of the silk-manufacture
in this Colonie, and in every thing else a pattern worthy of all pious
imitation. He had issue six sonnes and seven daughters by the body of
Elizabeth his wife, who of her conjugal affection hath dedicated to him
this memorial."

II.

This is to the memory of his son Dudley, who married Miss
Cole, of Denbigh:—

"Sub hoc marmore requiescit in pace Dudleus Digges, armiger, Susannæ
Digges juxta depositæ maritus amantissimus. Vir et virtute, et pro sapientia,
vere inclytus, qui hujusce Coloniæ primo Consilioris, dein ad Auditoris
dignitatem, erectus est. Obiit, omnibus desideratus, 27 Januarii,
1710, ætatis suæ 47. Justorum animæ in manu Dei sunt."

Which is thus rendered:—

"Under this marble rests in peace Dudley Digges, gentleman, the most
loving husband of Susannah Digges, buried near him. He was a man
very eminent for virtue and wisdom, who was first raised to the dignity
of Councillor and then Auditor of this Colony. He died, lamented by
all, the 27th of January, 1710, in his forty-seventh year. `The souls of
the righteous are in the hand of God.' "

III. THE TOMB OF HIS WIFE.

"Hic subtus inhumatum corpus Susannæ Digges, filiæ Gulielmi Cole,
armigeri, nec non Dudlei Digges, armigeri, conjugis fidelissimæ, quæ en
hac vita decessit 9th Kal. Decembris, anno salutis 1708. Ætatis suæ 34.

IV.

"This monument was erected by Col. Edward Digges to the memory


245

Page 245
of a most indulgent father, the Honble Col. Digges, Esquire, who being
many years one of his Majesty's Honble Council for this Colony, and
some time President of the same, died in the 53d year of his age, and in
the year of our Lord 1744.

"Digges, ever to extremes untaught to bend;
Enjoying life, yet mindful of his end.
In thee the world an happy meeting saw
Of sprightly humour and religious awe.
Cheerful, not wild; facetious, yet not mad;
Though grave, not sour; though serious, never sad.
Mirth came not, call'd to banish from within
Intruding pangs of unrepented sin;
And thy religion was no studied art
To varnish guilt, but purified the heart.
What less than a felicity most rare
Could spring from such a temper and such care?
Now in the city, taking great delight,
To vote new laws, or old interpret right;
Now crowds and business quitting, to receive
The joys content in solitude can give.
With equal praise thou shone among the great,
And graced the humble pleasures of retreat;
Display'd thy dignity on every scene,
And tempted or betray'd to nothing mean.
Whate'er of mean beneath it lies,
The rest unstain'd is claimed by the skies."
 
[71]

The following extract, from an old will among the records, is worthy of insertion:—

"In
the name of God, Amen: I, Garnett Corbett, of the county of Warwick,
being now sick and weake, but of sound and perfect memory, and knowing not how
soone it may be the pleasure of Almighty God to release mee out of this transitory
world, doe hereby make my last will and testament, in form following,—viz.:—

"First, and principally, I most humbly recommend my soule into the protection
and conservation of my blessed and precious Redeemer, Jesus Christ, with full and
whole trust in him, by his bitter death and passion, to receive salvation."

[72]

I ascertained, also, that the last ministers who officiated at Denbigh Church
were the Rev. Mr. Camm, son of the Rev. Commissary Camm, and a Mr. Wood,—
both of them respectable men. They officiated at some other place or places in
Warwick at the same time. The old high-backed pews are still retained. I was
told that after the Episcopal Church had ceased to have services in this church, and
other denominations had taken possession, on the occasion of some protracted and
very exciting meeting, when the old pews seemed to be in the way of promoting a
revival, it was proposed from the pulpit that they be taken away and benches put
in place of them. The measure was about to be carried, when a young man, whose
ancestors had worshipped in the old church as it was, rose up and protested against
it, saying that he would appeal to the law and prevent it."

 
[68]

I am enabled to supply a deficiency in this catalogue, from a letter of the Rev.
James Falconer, who was minister in this parish between the Rev. Mr. Thompson
and the Rev. Mr. Fife. His report to the Bishop of London is, that his parish is
fifty miles in circumference, with three hundred and fifty families; that the owners
were careful to instruct the young negro children and bring them to baptism; that
service is performed every Sunday, and that most of the parishioners attend; that
there were about one hundred communicants; that his salary was about sixty-five
pounds; that there were two public schools in the parish, and one good private one
kept by a Mr. William Fife, a man of good life and conversation. He was doubtless
the person that succeeded him in 1731.

[69]

The Rev. Mr. Warrington was the grandfather of Commodore Warrington.
From his birth the latter became an object of peculiar interest to a lady in Williamsburg,
whom I am unable to name or identify except that she was the aunt of
a Miss Frances Caines, the intimate friend of Miss Ambler, afterward Mrs. Edward
Carrington, of Richmond, from whose papers I have often quoted. Both the young
ladies had been companions of the mother of young Louis Warrington, and took a
lively interest in him on that account. Miss Caines and Miss Ambler (afterward
Mrs. Carrington) corresponded for a long time after the former returned to England,
as she was only a temporary sojourner in Virginia. The following extracts from
one of Mrs. Carrington's letters to her old friend, Miss C., in 1820, will, I am sure,
be gratifying to my readers, not only on account of what refers to young Warrington,
but what relates to other subjects:—

"At our advanced age, my respected friend, it would seem incredible that a
renewal of intercourse should take place between us. Years have passed since I
have had the pleasure of hearing from you, and but for the visit of my cousin (John
Jaqueline Ambler) to England, I might probably have gone to my grave without
knowing what had become of you. Who can tell but it may be a foretaste of a
reunion in a better world that a merciful God has in store for us? The little book
you presented to my cousin brought to my recollection the one you presented to me
some forty years ago, entitled `Sacred Dramas.' It was a precious gift to me, and
led me to peruse every succeeding work of that excellent author (Miss Hannah
More) with delight, and, I hope, with advantage. What a woman is she! And what
a gift have her writings been even to our remote corner of the world! Whenever
England is brought to my mind, I somehow or other so connect the names of Frances
Caines, Hannah More, and the hallowed spot of Barley Wood, that altogether it
seems a paradise. In one of your last letters you say, `Can it be possible that the
Captain Warrington I have seen announced in the Liverpool papers, as lately arrived
in England with despatches from America, is our dear little Louis?' It was the
same little Louis that we so fondly doted on. His conduct through life has been
distinguished,—has raised him to high standing in our navy,—and no doubt some
future historian will do him ample justice in his naval character. In private life
he has been alike deserving."

Mrs. Carrington then mentions, in proof of his generosity, his dividing a thousand
pounds, which had been left him by the aunt of Miss Caines, with two half-sisters
who were in need. She speaks also of his having married a Miss Cary King,
"a sprightly and amiable girl, an old schoolmate of hers." "They are now living
in great comfort near Norfolk; he holding some office in the navy-yard, and standing
high in the confidence of his country. It has been some years since I saw him,
and on his last visit to Richmond my health was too bad to admit of my inviting
him. It was a visit, however, of great interest to many, and produced an excitement
that is rarely experienced. How would you have felt, my dear friend, had
you seen him hailed as one of the choicest guardians of his country, called by the
united voice of Virginia to receive a splendid sword as a token of her love and
gratitude to him? It is impossible for me to describe the emotions produced in my
mind when I heard every voice united in commendation, and in rapture describe his
modest manliness as he entered the Senate-Hall to receive his merited reward. In
an instant my thoughts flew back to your aunt's room, where you first saw the
lovely boy; and busy recollection carried me still further back,—two years previous,
—when on a visit to Williamsburg I was ushered in to see your aunt, who laid him
on my lap, and in agony left the room."

Mrs. Carrington adds a passage from a projected novel of her aunt Jaqueline, in
which Louis Warrington was to be the hero:—"This must ever be the lot of our
poor clergy,—a scanty subsistence while living, and at their death poverty and
misery is their children's only inheritance." In which, however, we must beg leave
widely to differ from this excellent lady; and must class this sentiment and assertion
among many others in novels, projected or executed, as we believe the descendants
of pious clergymen have many special blessings entailed upon them.
The prayers and example of Commodore Warrington's pious grandfather may have
been among the means appointed of Providence for promoting the future greatness,
and, what is infinitely better, the future piety, of Commodore Warrington. My residence
in Norfolk, as minister of Christ Church, for two years, enabled me to form a
just estimate of his character. Though his station was at the navy-yard in Gosport,
and his residence there, he was a most punctual attendant on the Sabbath in
Christ Church, Norfolk. Mrs. Carrington speaks of the modest manliness, admired
of all, with which he entered the Senate-Chamber to receive the sword which was
voted him by the Legislature of Virginia. I have seen him n every succeeding
Sabbath for the greater part of two years in a much more desirable and honourable
place, when walking up the middle aisle of Christ Church with the same "modest
manliness." There was in him the dignity of the soldier and the modesty of the
Christian blended together. He was not then in full membership with the Church,
though all thought he might with propriety have been. But, even then, his devout
behaviour and respectful use of the Prayer Book was an example to all others. As
through life he had always, so far as I know and believe, been the friend of religion,
and manifested it in those public ways required of naval officers, so, in his latter
days, he sealed that testimony by entering into full communion with the Church of
his choice and of his ancestors.

P.S.—I have since discovered that the lady who patronized Louis Warrington was
Mrs. Riddle, sister of the Rev. Thomas Warrington and great-aunt of Commodore
Warrington.


246

Page 246

ARTICLE XIX.

Lynnhaven Parish, Princess Anne County.

Cape Henry, in this county and parish, was probably the first
point at which our Virginia Colonists touched on reaching America.
Here a fort was established, either then or soon after. At what
time other settlements were made on the coast and bay surrounding
this part of Virginia on three sides cannot certainly be determined,
though there is every reason to believe it must have been at a very
early period. In the year 1642 we find Lynnhaven parish recognised
as existing, and its boundaries were then fixed. How long
before this it had been a plantation, or congregation, or hundred,
or parish,—for by all these names were the first settlements called,
sometimes long before parish-boundaries were fixed,—we cannot
ascertain. The following is the Act of Assembly which establishes
the existence of this and other parishes in the year 1642-3:—"Be
it further enacted and confirmed, upon the petition of the inhabitants
of Lynnhaven parish, by the Governor, Council, and Burgesses
of this Grand Assembly, that the parish of Lynnhaven be
bounded as follows." The bounds are then stated. After which
it is added:—"Provided it be not prejudicial to the parishes of
Elizabeth River and Southern Shoare by taking away any partes
of the said parishes." Then follow certain immunities granted to
the people of this parish.

The following interesting account of the first church and graveyard
in this parish will very properly introduce our notices of it:—

"There is much that is curious, at least, connected with the Lynnhaven
country, besides what immediately pertains to the old church, of which
nothing now remains but the mound which hardly marks the spot. I
need not enter into the details, however.

"The church itself was probably built by the earliest settlers in this
region, upon a flat surface about half a mile from Little Creek, which
then ran east and west in a narrow channel, separated from the Chesapeake
or Lynnhaven Bay by a sand-beach about a quarter of a mile wide.
The creek communicated with the bay through an inlet about thirty yards
wide, and distant from the church some three or four miles. The people
living on Little Creek were profitably engaged in the business of seinehauling;
but the profits were much reduced by the distance they had to
go by water through the inlet to the bay shore, where the seines were


247

Page 247
hauled. To go and return by water required six miles, whilst to reach
the fishery across the sandy beach was hardly half a mile; and the people,
to remedy this objection, gathered their hands together, and, with their
field-hoes, opened a trench across the beach wide enough to admit the
passage of a canoe, not dreaming of any consequences beyond their immediate
object. The moment, however, the trench was opened, the
waters of the bay, probably piled up by an easterly wind from the Atlantic,
rushed through the sandy beach, opening what is now the mouth of
Lynnhaven, and passed through the lower lands of the neighbourhood,
not stopping until they had run beyond what is now known as London
Bridge, about five or six miles, and forming in their mad career the present
beautiful Lynnhaven River, which varies from a quarter to three-quarters
of a mile in width. This invasion of the waters carried away
nearly the whole of the burying-ground attached to the church, which it
left standing on the bank of the new-formed river, and divided the church
from the glebe-land, which now lies on the eastern side of the river, and
is still claimed and owned by the vestry of Lynnhaven parish; although
the overseers of the poor, it is said, are seeking to possess themselves of it.

"It was many years after this event that the old Donation Church, in
its neighbourhood, was built. This, in its turn, has been abandoned to
the beasts and bats; though still a strong, commodious house, built of
English brick. As to the remains of the Lynnhaven Church, they are
covered with large trees and are scarcely discernible; but the writer of this
note has, within the last forty years, seen the bones of the buried parishioners
protruding from the sides of the bank of the river, and the tombstones
strewed along its shores. In 1819, Commodore Decatur and another
eminent person still living were bathing there, and in the middle of the
river were enabled, by feeling with their toes, to decipher the names of
those whose graves they had covered before the waters of the bay had
carried away the churchyard. These stones are now many of them at the
bottom of the stream; but, although the water is not more than five or six
feet deep, they are so covered with sand and marine shells that it would
be difficult to recover them. The stones which fell and were left on the
shore have long since been taken away by the fishermen and broken up
for killicks, or anchors for their small boats, and for other purposes."

The following synopsis of the contents of the vestry-book of
Lynnhaven parish have been furnished me by a friend, as I could
not have access to the record:—

"The only parish-record known in this county commences the 20th of
November, 1723, on which occasion were present the Rev. James Tenant,
minister; Major Max'n Boush, churchwarden; and the following-named
gentlemen, who composed the vestry:—Colonel Edward Moseley, Captain
Henry Chapman, Mr. Wm. Elligood, Captain John Moseley, Mr. Charles
Sayer, and Captain Francis Lund. It appears that Mr. Tenant had been
the minister for some time before; but when he entered upon his duties,
or when he ceased to perform them, does not appear upon the record. Nor
is it known whether he died in the service of the Church or not. Nothing
is said of him after the 3d of November, 1726, on which day his
last account with the parish was settled, showing that his regular salary
had been sixteen thousand pounds of tobacco.


248

Page 248

"Mr. Jas. Nimmo is mentioned as being the clerk of the Brick Church
and lower chapel, Mr. Andrew Peacock being the clerk of the upper one.

"At the first meeting, say November 20, 1723, the parish is made debtor
to Captain Hillary Moseley, for quitrents of glebe-land, which shows that
the church was then in possession of the glebe, which is frequently mentioned
throughout the record. On the 15th September, 1724, Major Maximilian
Boush and Mr. John Cormick are mentioned as churchwardens,
and the names of Solomon White, John Bolithor, Captain Anthony Walke,
Captain Robert Vaughan, and John Bonney, are mentioned as constituting
a part of the vestry. At this meeting, a resolution was passed for building
a new wooden chapel on the eastern shore of the county; and, on the
7th July, 1725, an order was passed that Captain Robert Vaughan, one
of the vestry, should employ persons to repair the chapel at Machipungo,
showing that a brick church and two chapels (one on the Eastern Shore,
and one in Pungo, or Machipungo) were then in possession of the Episcopalians
of Lynnhaven parish, which seemed to embrace the whole county
of Princess Anne.

"On the 2d February, 1726, about nine months previous to the settlement
of Mr. Tenant's account, already referred to, Mr. Nicholas Jones,
minister, was engaged to preach in the Brick Church and Eastern Shore
Chapel once every month, and he was allowed four hundred pounds of tobacco
for each sermon; and with this engagement he appears to have complied
until the 18th October, 1728.

"The Brick Church, already mentioned, was very old at that time, and
in a dilapidated state, as appears from the frequent orders passed by the
vestry for repairing it, and from the fact that it was given up to be used
as a school-house on the 2d March, 1736, as appears by the record. It
was the same church, no doubt, which stood on the western bank of Lynnhaven
River, on what was then called Church Point, which point has been
washed away by the encroaching tides, leaving nothing scarcely to designate
the spot where the church stood, the graveyard which was annexed
to it being now entirely under water at high tide.

"On the 3d June, 1728, Mr. James Nimmo was employed, on a message
to the Governor, for removing Mr. Thomas Bayly, who (contrary to
the desire of the vestry) insisted on being the minister of the parish; and
it is supposed that Mr. Nimmo succeeded, after a second application to the
Governor, as no further notice is taken of it. At this time, the names
of Christopher Bourroughs, Major Anthony Walke, Major Henry Spratt,
and Mr. George Kempe, are mentioned as forming a part of the vestry.

"On the 7th January, 1729, the Rev. Richard Marsden was engaged
to preach once every month, at the church and chapels, and he continued
to do so until the 14th November, 1729, the same year when the Rev.
Henry Barlow was engaged as the regular minister; and he continued to
perform the duties until the 14th October, 1747, (about eighteen years,)
after which he is not mentioned.

"On the 29th November, 1732, Mr. James Nimmo and Mr. William
Keeling were engaged as clerks to the church and chapel for one year,
and to receive one thousand pounds of tobacco each. On the 3d November,
1733, an order was made that Colonel Anthony Walke, Captain
Francis Lund, and Captain Jacob Elligood, or any two, agree with Peter
Malbone on terms to build and finish the new church near the ferry.

"On the 25th of June, 1736, the vestry (having given up the Old Brick
Church, on the 2d March of the same year, to be used as a school-house,


249

Page 249
which has been already stated) received from the contractor and builder,
Mr. Peter Malbone, the `New Church,' near the ferry, as it was then
called, but which has been better known since as the `Donation Church,'
probably from the circumstance of its being very near the farm donated
to Lynnhaven parish by Parson Dickson. From the above date, say 25th
June, 1736, the services were regularly performed by Mr. Barlow in the
new church, until the close of his ministry in 1747.

"On the 13th July, 1748, the Rev. Robert Dickson being minister, the
following new names appear among the vestry:—Major Nathaniel Newton,
Mr. Joseph Gaskin, James Nimmo, Major Thomas Walke, and John
Whitehead.

"The Rev. Robert Dickson continued to discharge the duties of minister
until the 23d February, 1776,—nearly twenty-eight years,—at a salary of
sixteen thousand pounds of tobacco, which had been paid to the regular
ministers who preceded him.

"When Parson Dickson died is not known exactly, but his will was
admitted to record on the 14th February, 1777, in which he gives to the
parish a farm, on certain conditions, which farm, within a few years, has
passed into the hands of the overseers of the poor, the glebe referred to
having been sold within the last three or four months.

"There appears to have been no regular minister after Mr. Dickson
until 1785, and the church and chapels were much neglected.

"At a meeting of the vestry on the 22d November, 1779, the sum of
twenty pounds was allowed Anthony Fentress for taking care of Pungo
Chapel. This chapel has not been used by the Episcopalians for a great
many years, and is now entirely out of repair.

"On the 28th March, 1785, a new vestry was elected, (under an Act
of Assembly, passed the previous session, dissolving the former vestries
throughout the State,) when the following names appear as composing the
new vestry,—viz.: Anthony Walke, Edward H. Moseley, John Ackiss,
James Henley, William White, John Cornick, Joel Cornick, and Francis
Lund; and, on the 6th May, 1785, the Rev. James Simpson was inducted
minister of the parish, and continued to officiate until May, 1788, when
he formally resigned, having given notice of his intention to do so about
four months previously.

"On the 3d July, 1788, the Rev. Anthony Walke was inducted minister,
and continued to discharge the duties until the 10th of October, 1800,
when he formally resigned. Some new names appear here among the
vestry,—viz.: John Hancock, Peter Singleton, Cason Moore, and Dennis
Dawley.

"On the 1st November, 1800, the Rev. Cornelius Calvert, Jr., was inducted
minister, but served a short time only, as an entry on the book
shows that there was no minister in the parish on the 18th July, 1801.

"On the 11th August, 1803, the Rev. George Halson was inducted
minister, and discharged his duties as such until the close of the year
1805.

"At this time, the names of John Smith, Erasmus Haynes, James Robinson,
Thomas Lawson, George D. Corprew, John James, and William
Boush, appear as composing the vestry.

"The parish was then without a regular minister for some years, being
served occasionally and irregularly by ministers from Norfolk.

"On the 28th November, 1821, the Rev. Robert Prout was elected
minister, and served until about the year 1824. Thomas Hoggard, John


250

Page 250
Thorougood, Henry Keeling, and William Shepherd, having been elected
to fill vacancies in the vestry.

"On the 7th May, 1838, the Rev. D. M. Fackler was elected, and
served as minister until the 8th November, 1841.

"On the 11th May, 1842, the Rev. John G. Hull was elected, but,
being in very delicate health, only continued to discharge the duties of
minister until the 11th March, 1843, when he resigned. By his influence,
however, a neat little brick church was built in Kempsville, called
`Emanuel Church,' which was consecrated by Bishop Meade, on the 27th
November, 1843. Since its erection, no services have been performed in
the `Donation Church,' which would now require $1200 or $1400 to put
it in order.

"On the 1st November, 1846, the Rev. Henry C. Lay was elected
minister, who served but a few months.

"In July, 1848, the Rev. Lewis Walke was elected minister, and continued
to discharge the duties about four years.

"Nothing of consequence appears upon the record since that time. It
closes with a notice of a meeting held in March, 1856, when William P.
Morgan, John S. Woodhouse, Solomon S. Keeling, A. G. Tebault, and
William C. Scott, qualified as vestrymen by subscribing their names in due
form."

To the foregoing it may be added that the Rev. Robert Gatewood,
a Deacon, spent a part of the last year in this parish. I must
not omit to take special notice of one of the last of the ministers
who officiated in this parish,—the Rev. Mr. Hull,—an alumnus of our
Seminary. So entirely devoted was he to his work in public and
in private,—so beloved as a man and as a minister,—that when,
through failing health being unable to preach, he resigned his
charge, the people refused to accept it, and insisted upon his continuing
their minister; only asking such private intercourse as he
could carry on while going from house to house. Such was his last
year's ministry among them. Our prospects in this parish are now
and have been for a long time discouraging. Formerly this was
one of the most flourishing parishes in Virginia. Many circumstances
have concurred to promote its declension. In my early
youth I remember to have heard my parents speak of it as having
what is called the best society in Virginia. The families were interesting,
hospitable, given to visiting and social pleasures. They
whose words I quote had some experience of it. Both of them
were by marriage connected with the Rev. Anthony Walke, whose
mother was a Randolph. At his glebe they were sometimes
inmates. The social glass, the rich feast, the card-table, the
dance, and the horse-race, were all freely indulged in through the
county. And what has been the result? I passed through the
length and breadth of this parish more than twenty years ago, in
company with my friend, David Meade Walke, son of the old


251

Page 251
minister of the parish, who was well acquainted with its past history
and present condition, and able to inform me whose were once
the estates through which we passed, and into whose hands they
had gone; who could point me to the ruins of family seats
which had been consumed by fire; could tell me what were the
causes of the bankruptcy and ruin and untimely death of those
who once formed the gay society of this county. Cards, the bottle,
the horse-race, the continual feasts,—these were the destroyers.
In no part of Virginia has the destruction of all that was old been
greater. But let us hope for better things, and strive for them by
the substitution of honest industry for spendthrift idleness, of temperance
for dissipation, of true piety for the mere form of it.
Some excellent people, doubtless, there always were. Their number
has increased of late years. Some have I known most worthy
of esteem. May God strengthen the things that remain, though
they seem ready to perish!


252

Page 252

ARTICLE XX.

Hungar's Parish, Northampton County.

Northampton was originally called by the old Indian name of
Ackowmake or Accowmake. In the year 1642 the name was
changed from Accowmake to Northton or Northampton, the name
of a county in England from whence the family of Robins came,
and on account of which it probably received this name. In that
same year—1642—the parish was divided, all below King's Creek to
Smith's Island being one parish, afterward called Hungar's parish,
and all from King's Creek to Nuswattock Creek being the other,
and called Nuswattocks or Nassawattocks Church or parish. Accowmake
was one of the original shires established in 1634. Being
cut off from the mainland by the Chesapeake Bay, and the passage
being difficult and dangerous, it was permitted for a considerable
time to be somewhat independent in the execution of the laws, no
appeal from the decision of its authorities to the higher court on
the other side of the bay being allowed, except for great causes.
On account of its detached position, the title of the Colony in early
writers is that of Virginia and Accomac. This independent
condition probably contributed to something like a rebellion in
the time of Governor Yeardley, which required a visit from him
and the Council, and suitable attendants, in order to its suppression.
In this suppression Colonel Scarborough took an active part.

It was always an interesting part of Virginia. In the year
1622, when the great massacre of the Indians took place in all
other parts of the State, it was in serious contemplation to remove
the whole colony to the Eastern Shore; and when, in Bacon's
Rebellion, Mr. William Berkeley was obliged to fly, he twice found
an asylum there. Could an accurate history of its early settlement
and of the chief families which have ever since been living
there, and of the old churches and ministers, have been preserved,
perhaps no portion of the State would have furnished a more interesting
one; and had that justice been done to the culture and
improvement of its soil, and the use of its many advantages, which
now has begun to be done, few parts of Virginia would have been
more valuable. In one remarkable particular it has retained a


253

Page 253
more accurate record of its early history than any other part of
the State. While the oldest vestry-books and county-records have
been burned by fire or lost through negligence, the proceedings
of the court of Accomac, from 1632, ten years before it changed
its name, and yet more, before it was divided into two counties,
have been preserved, and now furnish documents from which to
estimate the discipline of the court and the manners of the people.
A friend,[73] at great pains, has furnished me with copious extracts
from the records of the court from the year 1632 to 1690, and
some of a later date, out of which I shall select as many, and
of such kind, as shall best suit the size and character of this
work.

Those who examine these records are struck with nothing so
much as the penitentiary discipline which they exhibit, more like
that of the early ages than is to be found in Protestant times and
countries. As we have, in connection with certain parishes, taken
up some special topic for consideration, as those of induction of
ministers and the Option or Two-penny Act, we will, before entering
on the statistics of this parish, very briefly consider the subject of
discipline as exhibited in the early history of the Church and State
of Virginia. We have already alluded more than once to the
"laws moral, martial, and divine," which were introduced under
Governors De La War, Dale, and others from the Low Countries of
Europe, where they were in use among the armies of that time,
and which were better suited for a rude soldiery, in a barbarous
age, than for the Christian Church in any age. We have said
that the most severe of those enacted against heresy and blasphemy
and non-attendance at church were never executed. Mr. Burke,
whose skeptical principles and ill opinion of Christians cannot be
concealed, is forced to acknowledge this.

I have met with but one instance of the infliction of that most
painful punishment, "the running of an awl or bodkin through
the tongue;" and that was not for any violation of the laws concerning
religion, but for a sin of the tongue, in uttering a base
and detracting speech against Mr. Hamar, a worthy gentleman of
the Council at an early period of the Colony. The guilty person
was a Mr. Barnes, of Bermuda Hundred, who was sent to Jamestown
for trial, and condemned "to have his tongue run through
with an awl, to pass through a guard of forty men, and to be
butted by every one of them, and at the head of the troop


254

Page 254
knocked down, and footed out of the fort." I find that, for the
violation of the seventh and ninth commandments, which God
himself delivered amidst lightnings and thunders from Sinai, the
most frequent and disgraceful punishments were inflicted. As
to slander, the bearing false witness against fellow-beings,—at
the early period of the Colony, if a woman was convicted of it,
her husband was made to pay five hundredweight of tobacco;
but, this law proving insufficient, the penalty was changed into
ducking, and inflicted on the woman herself. Places for ducking
were prepared at the doors of court-houses. An instance is mentioned
of a woman who was ordered to be ducked three times from
a vessel lying in James River, near Bermuda Hundred, for scolding.
No doubt she was notorious for it. If a man was guilty
of slandering a minister, he was required to pay a fine of five
hundred pounds of tobacco and ask the pardon of the minister
before the congregation. Now, however we may lament and
condemn the modes which were sometimes adopted by our
ancestors for declaring their abhorrence of these crimes and
seeking to banish them from society, we must do them the justice
to acknowledge that it was evidence in them of a hatred of sin
and irreligion, and of a desire and determination to punish what
was offensive to God. We must also ever make due allowance for
the times and circumstances in which laws are made and enforced.
In examining the early history of Hungar's parish, we find that
in the year 1633, the offence of slandering the first minister, the
Rev. Mr. Cotton, was punished in the following manner:—"Ordered
by the court that Mr. Henry Charlton make a pair of stocks and
set in them several Sabbath-days, during divine service, and then
ask Mr. Cotton's forgiveness, for using offensive and slanderous
words concerning him." In the year 1643 the court inflicted
punishment on one Richard Buckland for writing a slanderous song
on one Ann Smith, ordering that "at the next sermon preached at
Nassawattocks, he shall stand, during the Lessons, at the church-door,
with a paper on his hat, on which shall be written `Inimicus
libellus,' and that he shall ask forgiveness of God, and also in
particular of the said defamed Ann Smith." In the year 1647,
Mr. Palmer being minister at Nassawattocks, the churchwardens
presented two persons to the court, which ordered them to stand
in the church during the service, with white sheets over their
shoulders and white wands in their hands. In the year 1652 the
Rev. Mr. Higby is brought before the court for scandalous speeches
against Major Robins,—the issue of it not being mentioned. In

255

Page 255
the year 1664 Major Robins brought suit against Mary Powell for
scandalous speeches against the Rev. Mr. Teackle, and she was
ordered to receive twenty lashes on her bare shoulders, and to be
banished the county. In the year 1664, Captain John Custis
being High-Sheriff, there were eight presentments for violating the
seventh commandment, one for swearing, one for not attending
church, two for playing cards on Sunday. We have already mentioned
that a few Quakers had before this time been brought before
the court for blasphemy and ordered out of the county. It is
due to the people of the county to say that they did tolerate
respectable persons of that sect at a later period. Between the
years 1680 and 1690 there were such living quietly and unmolested
in that region. It is on record that "Thomas Brown and his wife,
though Quakers, were yet of such known integrity that their affirmation
was received instead of an oath." That the citizens of
the Eastern Shore were not cruel and bloodthirsty may be inferred
from the fact that the first capital punishment was inflicted in the
year 1693. The above-mentioned Mr. and Mrs. Brown were the
ancestors of that large and respectable family of Upshurs which
have since been spread over the Eastern Shore of Virginia. The
old family seat, called Brownsville, on the sea-shore of Northampton,
still in possession of an Upshur, was the ancient residence of the
Browns, who were there visited by some of the more eminent
Friends from Philadelphia, who came to have fellowship with them
in their peculiar mode of worship.

Before attempting a list of the names of the ministers and a
notice of the churches, I will mention a few things reflecting credit
on a few individuals. The first notice is due to Mr. Stephen
Charlton, who, in the year 1653, bequeathed the glebe which has
so long been the subject of dispute between the Episcopalians of
Northampton and the overseers of the poor. I find honourable
mention of Mr. Charlton in the account given by Colonel Norwood
in his visit to the Eastern Shore in the year 1649. Being on a
voyage from England to Virginia, he and his company were cast
away on one of the islands in the ocean. After remaining there
more than a week, they were conducted by some friendly Indians to
the main land, and found their way to Captain Charlton's hospitable
abode. "When I came to the house of one Stephen Charlton, he
not only did outdo all that I had visited before him, in variety of
dishes at his table, which was very well ordered in the kitchen, but
would also oblige me to put on a good farmer-like suit of his wearing-clothes
for exchange of my dirty habit; and this gave me


256

Page 256
opportunity to deliver my camlet coat to Jake, for the use of my
brother of Kickotanke, [the Indian chief who had been kind to
them,] with other things to make it worth his acceptance." Mr.
Charlton was not only a hospitable but a pious man, if we may
judge from the language and bequests of his will. After some
expressions showing that he had just views of a Saviour, he divides
his property equally between his wife and two daughters, Elizabeth
and Bridget, whom he directs to be educated in a godly manner,
and to be under guardians until the age of fourteen. Should
Bridget, the eldest, die without children, her share was to be given
to the church in Northampton, for the support of the minister.
She married a Mr. Foxcroft, a worthy man, and until his death a
vestryman of the church. They both lived to a good old age, and,
dying childless, the father's will was readily complied with. The
glebe, consisting of fifteen or sixteen hundred acres of the best
land in the county, has been in possession of the vestry ever since
her death, though the overseers of the poor have for some time
been endeavouring to take it from them. The other daughter,
Elizabeth, while at school, and only twelve years of age, was persuaded
to elope with a Mr. Getterrings, and, being unable to get a
license on that side of the bay, they came over to the western, and
contriving, by some artifice, to evade the laws, were married. She
soon died, and the husband sought to recover the estate to himself.
It was carried into court. A Colonel Scarborough, ancestor of
those bearing that name, prepared an address to the court in
writing, setting forth the iniquity of the conduct of Mr. Getterrings,
especially and emphatically dwelling on the right of every
man to dispose of his property according to his own will,—an argument
which may, with mighty power, be used in the case of the
other child's property also, since nothing can be clearer than that
Mr. Charlton's desire and intention was to leave her property, if
dying without issue, to the Episcopal Church of Northampton, or
in a certain event to one of his relatives.

In the year 1689, I read of the death of Colonel John Stringer.
His will indicates just views and feelings on the great subject of
man's redemption. In the preamble he says, "I bequeath my
soul to God, who first gave it me, Father, Son, and Spirit, Unity
in Trinity, Trinity in Unity, who hath redeemed and preserved
me, in and through Jesus Christ, who died for my sins and the sins
of all people that truly and unfeignedly believe in him, for whose
sake and loving-kindness I hope to obtain everlasting life; wherefore,
dear Father, have mercy on my soul." Among other legacies,


257

Page 257
he leaves one thousand pounds of tobacco to have the Lord's Prayer
and Commandments put up in the new church about to be built in
the lower part of Northampton. He also forbids all drinking and
shooting at his funeral, as things altogether unbecoming the
occasion.

I may also mention the fact of Major Custis, who lived some
time in Williamsburg and married a daughter of Colonel Daniel
Parke, presenting sets of heavy silver Communion-service to both
the churches, upper and lower, of Northampton; and when the
lower church was built, in 1680, near which was his residence, he
promised to give the builder one hogshead of tobacco, or its equivalent,
and thirty gallons of cider, to put up for him the first pew
(the best, I suppose) in the church. Several other donations might
be mentioned. Let these suffice.

We now proceed to speak of the ministers and churches of
Northampton. It is somewhat difficult to determine their order
with accuracy, from the fact that there were from the year 1642
two parishes,—the upper and lower,—divided as we have already
said, and the ministers and people responsible to the one civil court,
from whose records we get our information. We shall not be very
anxious to decide this point, it being of little consequence.

Mr. Cotton is the first minister of whom we find notices on the
records of the court. He is often named therein from 1633 onward,
as bringing suits for his tithes. We read of a Mr. Cams,
or Carns, who received one hundred pounds of tobacco for preaching
a funeral sermon in the parish of Mr. Cotton. We read also
of John Rodgers, Thomas Higby, Francis Loughty, Thomas
Palmer, John Almoner, Thomas Teackle. Thomas Teackle was
the first minister of the upper church. Mr. Higby was then
minister of the lower. All of them, with the exception of Mr.
Teackle, served but a short time, and the records show many suits
for their salaries. Mr. Teackle had his difficulties also, and to the
end of his life sought his dues in a legal way. He seems to have
acquired much property in land. Though fiercely assailed as to
his moral character, in one instance by Colonel Scarborough, he
seems to have retained the confidence of the people.

About the year 1660, settlements had spread themselves up the
neck, toward Pungoteage, so as to call for a church and other
public buildings. In the year 1662, the county of Accomac was
formed. Of these things we shall treat in our next article.

In the year 1676, we find a Rev. Mr. Key the minister of the
lower parish. The Rev. Mr. Teackle, we presume, was still the


258

Page 258
minister of the upper; for we find, in 1689, he recovered twenty
thousand-weight of tobacco from the vestry. A Rev. Mr. Richardson
preceded Mr. Key, but it seems he was not an orthodox
minister; that is, one regularly ordained by an English Bishop;
for such was the use of the word orthodox at that time. From
necessity,—the great difficulty of getting such,—the vestries sometimes
employed those who were not Episcopally ordained. An
opportunity offering to get an Episcopal minister of good character,
they dismissed Mr. Richardson, and wrote to the Governor,
Sir William Berkeley, to induct Mr. Key. The Governor readily
complied, and, being well acquainted with Mr. Key, recommended
him highly.

In the year 1691, a petition was made to the Assembly to unite
the two parishes of Northampton, on the ground that they were
unable, each of them, to give such a support as would secure an
able minister and build a good church. The petition was granted,
and the two merged in one, and called Hungar's parish. It was
after this, I presume, that the large church at Hungar's was built.[74]
In the following year, Mr. John Monroe was the minister of the
united parishes. Of him we read in some of the convocations of
the ministers in Williamsburg.

In the year 1703, the Rev. Mr. Collier was minister. He married
a widow Kendal, who had previously made an assault on some
one in church, and was afterward presented in court for cursing
and swearing.

Mr. Foxcroft died in 1702, leaving all his property to his wife,
Bridget, who died two years after, and fifty years after her father's
death. Being childless, the glebe-land, by his will, was the property
of the church.

In the year 1712, the Rev. Patrick Falconer is minister, and continues
so until 1718, when, after having given much to the poor,
he left his property to his brother James, in London, and desired
that his body be buried before the pulpit in Old Hungar's Church.
The Rev. Thomas Dell was then minister until the year 1729.
Then John Holbroke to 1747. The Rev. Edward Barlow probably
succeeded him, and died in 1761. Then the Rev. Richard Hewett,
who died in 1774; and in that year the Rev. Mr. McCoskry was
chosen, who died its minister in the year 1803. He married a


259

Page 259
daughter of John Bowdoin, of Virginia. They died childless.[75]

Mr. McCoskry was succeeded by the Rev. Mr. Gardiner. The
Rev. Thomas Davis followed him, and was followed by the
Rev. Mr. Symes. In the year 1820, the Rev. Simon Wilmer
appears on the vestry-book as minister, and so continued until
1823. Stephen S. Gunter was elected in 1824, and continued
until his death, in 1835. W. G. Jackson was elected in 1836, and
resigned in 1841. J. P. Wilmer was elected in 1841, and resigned
in 1843. John Ufford was elected in 1843, and resigned in 1850.
James Rawson was elected in 1850, and died in 1854. John M.
Chevers was chosen in 1855, and is the present rector.

The following is the list of vestrymen since 1712:—Peter Bowdoin,
John Eyre, Nathaniel Holland, John Addison, John Goffigan,
John Upshur, John Winder, Littleton Upshur, George Parker,
William Satchell, Thomas Satchell, S. Pitts, Jacob Nottingham,
Isaac Smith, John T. Elliott, J. H. Harmonson, James Upshur, Abel
P. Upshur, W. Danton, Charles West, W. G. Smith, John Leatherbury,
Severn E. Parker, John Ker, T. N. Robins, N. J. Winder,
Major Pitts, G. F. Wilkins, Simkins, Fisher, Evans, Bell, Adams,
Nicholson.[76] One generous act of him who stands second on the


260

Page 260
foregoing list deserves a mention. Besides being always most
liberal to the minister and to all the wants of the church, and
most punctual at the meetings of the vestry and at church, for a
long series of years, toward the close of his life Mr. John Eyre
gave the sum of three thousand dollars for the erection of that
model parsonage which may be seen a mile from Eastville, and
from which the great Atlantic may be surveyed. To Dr. W. G.
Smith, the faithful lay-reader and vestryman of so many years,
and the active friend of the church in so many ways, the church

261

Page 261
is indebted, not only for the judicious planning of it, but for one
year's devotion of almost all his time and attention to the erection
of it, and of all the surrounding improvements.

The Episcopal congregation of Northampton is now, and has
been for a long time, a deeply-interesting one. Its peace and
happiness, however, has been much marred for many years by a
painful and protracted controversy with the overseers of the poor
concerning the glebe. More than two hundred years ago the
worthy and pious Charlton, in view of his approaching dissolution,
and in the event of one of his two daughters dying childless, left
a portion of that earth, which is all the Lord's, for the perpetual
support of the Church of his fathers, and of that religion which
had been his happiness in life, and was now to be his consolation
in death.

He did this in the exercise of a right recognised by God himself
in the law of his word, and secured to men by the laws of every
government on earth,—the right of disposing of our property by
will. It pleased that God, who put it into the heart of his servant
thus to will a portion of his property, to cause that contingency to
happen on which the bequest to the Church depended. He withheld
the blessing of children from the daughter, and so ordained
that the church of Northampton should be her heir. At her death
that church took quiet possession of it, and long enjoyed it. The
Legislature of Virginia, both under the Colonial Government and
since our independence, has by several acts ratified her claim. But,
after a long period of acquiescence in the church's right, the overseers
of the poor, under that act of the Legislature which had
never before been suspected of embracing this case, determined to
claim it, and actually did sell it, conditionally, at public auction.[77]
The question was brought before the Legislature, and a sanction
for the sale sought for; but it was dismissed as unreasonable. The
question was taken before a court of law, and twice decided in
behalf of the church. An appeal, however, has been taken from
the last decision to a higher court, and when the vexatious suit
will be decided, no one can tell. Years have already been passed
in painful controversy. Great have been the expenses to the
church, and much the loss in various ways which has been sustained.
The peace of the county has been much impaired by


262

Page 262
it. Political questions, and election to civil offices, have been
mixed up with it, and Christians of different denominations
estranged from and embittered toward each other. Surely, when
our Legislators reserved all private donations from the operation
of the law which ordered the sale of glebes, if this case could have
been presented to them, and they been asked whether it could come
under the sentence of it, the bitterest enemies of the Episcopal
Church, and the most unbelieving foes of our religion, would have
shrunk with horror from the mere suggestion. May God overrule
it all for good!

A friend on the Eastern Shore, whose delight is in searching its
ancient records, has sent me a full account of the Custis family,
which so abounds in that part of the State. Its name and blood
are intermingled with those of most of the families of Northampton
and Accomac, whether rich or poor. I give a brief statement
of it. The name of John Custis first appears on the record in
1640. It is probable that he was the person of whom Colonel
Norwood speaks, in his account of his voyage to America and
shipwreck on the Eastern Shore in 1649, as having been a hotel-keeper
in Rotterdam and a great favourite with English travellers.
He had six sons and one daughter. The daughter married Colonel
Argal Yeardley, son of Governor Yeardley, of Virginia. His
sons were John, William, Joseph, who were in Virginia, Thomas,
who was in Baltimore, (Ireland,) Robert, who resided in Rotterdam,
and Edmund, who lived in London. The family is of Irish descent.
John appears to have taken the lead. He was an active, enterprising
man, engaged in making salt on one of the islands; foremost
in all civil and ecclesiastical matters; was, in 1676, during
Bacon's Rebellion, appointed Major-General; a true royalist; a
law-and-order man; a favourite of Lord Arlington in the time of
Charles II., after whom he called his estate Arlington, on the
Eastern Shore, which he received by his first wife. His second
wife was daughter of Colonel Edmund Scarborough. He died at
an advanced age, after having been full of labours through life.
He had only one son, whom he named John. This John Custis
had numerous children, whose descendants, together with those of
his uncle, William Custis, have filled the Eastern Shore with the
name. His son John, being the fourth of that name, after being
educated in England, received from his grandfather the Arlington
estate. He was the John Custis who moved to Williamsburg and
married the daughter of Colonel Daniel Parke, and was the father
of him whose widow married General Washington. His tomb is


263

Page 263
at the Arlington House, in Northampton, and its inscription one
of the curiosities of the Eastern Shore. It is plainly to be inferred
from it that he was not very happy in his matrimonial relations;
for it says that he only lived seven years,—those seven
which he spent as a bachelor at Arlington. His wife, it is to be
feared, was too much like her brother, and unlike her father, both
of whom were spoken of in one of our articles on Williamsburg.

 
[73]

Mr. Anderson, of Franktown.

[74]

I am informed by one now living that there were, as late as 1809, the remains
of a fine organ in Hungar's Church. "It was entirely broken up by ruthless hands,
and the lead and other parts used for sacrilegious purposes."

[75]

A Rev. Mr. Seward, who went afterward to the Northern Neck, was his assistant.

[76]

By going back a century and a half, and then coming down the records, we
meet with, as acting in the vestries and courts, the names of Scarborough, Robins,
Littleton, Charlton, Severn, Custis, Yeardley, (son of Governor Yeardley,) Kendal,
Purnell, Waltham, Claybourn, Andrews, Wise, Foxcroft, Parker, Eyre, Upshur,
Hack, West, Vaughan, Preston, Marshall, Burton, Stith, John Bowdoin. Concerning
the ancestors of the latter, something more particular will be interesting to the
reader. I take it from an address of the Hon. Robert Winthrop, of Boston, delivered
before the Maine Historical Society at Bowdoin College, at the annual commencement
of 1849. The first of the family who came to America was Pierre
Boudouin, a French Huguenot, who, driven from France, first settled in Ireland,
then, with a wife and four children, came to Casco, in Maine. Of him Mr. Winthrop
says, "He was one of that noble sect of Huguenots of whom John Calvin
may be regarded as the great founder and exemplar; of which Gaspard De Coligny,
the generous and gallant admiral who filled the kingdom of France with the glory
and terror of his name for the space of twelve years, was one of the most devoted
disciples and one of the most lamented martyrs, and which has furnished to our
land blood everyway worthy of being mingled with the best that has ever flowed
in the veins of either Southern Cavaliers or Northern Puritans. He was of that
noble stock which gave three presidents out of five to the old Congress of the Confederation,
which gave her her Lawrences and Marions, her Hugers and Manigalts,
her Prioleaus, and Galliards, and Legares to South Carolina; which gave her Jays to
New York, her Boudinots to New Jersey, her Brimmers, her Dexters, and her Peter
Faneuil, with the cradle of liberty, to Massachusetts." Pierre Boudouin escaped
from the place of his first settlement, the fort at Casco, in 1690, only a few hours
before it was sacked and its inhabitants generally massacred by the Indians, and
removed to Boston. Dying shortly after, he left his family to the care of his eldest
son James, then seventeen years of age, who, besides providing for it, amassed the
largest fortune then possessed by any one person in Massachusetts. He left two
sons; the youngest, James Bowdoin, (the name being now changed from Boudouin,)
was the friend and compatriot of Washington and Franklin, delighting in the same
philosophical pursuits with the latter, and agreeing and acting with both in the
great political movements of the day. He was a man of high moral and religious
character, which, together with his patriotism and statesmanship, made him for a
long time the first man in the commonwealth of Massachusetts. But for his own
and Mrs. Bowdoin's ill-health, he would have been in that Congress which signed
the Declaration of Independence.

A daughter of Mr. Bowdoin married a Mr. Temple, who, though born in Boston,
was of an old English family and inherited a title. Into this family of Temples,
a Mr. Robert Nelson, of England, married, previous to their emigration to America.
Hence the names and families of Temples and Nelsons in Massachusetts. It may
be that those in Virginia and Massachusetts are derived from the same English
stock. The ancestor of the Bowdoins—Pierre Boudouin—was godfather to Peter
Faneuil, the donor of Faneuil Hall, Boston. His great-grandson, James Bowdoin,
son of the Revolutionary patriot, was also a distinguished man, not only holding a
seat in both branches of the Legislature, but being sent as minister to the Courts
of France and Spain. He died without children, and was the founder of Bowdoin
College, Massachusetts. One of the grandsons of Pierre Boudouin—John—removed
to the Eastern Shore of Virginia, at the beginning of the last century. It is said that
his relative, the founder of Bowdoin College, offered to adopt his son Peter if he
would change his name, but that the offer was declined. His grandson, Peter
Bowdoin, has succeeded to his father's and grandfather's place as vestryman in
Northampton. One sister married Professor George Tucker, of the University of
Virginia; another, Dr. Smith, of Eastville, Northampton. Two brothers are
living in Baltimore. All of the Bowdoins—now pronounced Bodens—of Virginia
are of this family, and, so far as I know and believe, have belonged to the Episcopal
Church. Their first ancestor, Pierre Boudouin, it is presumed, was of that
Church, as he was godfather to Mr. Faneuil's child. The Winthrops and Lloyds of
Boston were also connected with the Temples and Bowdoins.

[Since the above was written and published in its first form, a letter from a friend
says that I am mistaken in supposing that the John Boudouin who came to Virginia
was the grandson of Pierre Boudouin, of Boston, and is confident that he was his
son. Not having in possession Mr. Winthrop's pamphlet, I cannot re-examine it.
That document will correct my error if I have made one.]

[77]

Soon after the passage of the Act the servants belonging to the farm and the
other glebe in the county, which properly came under the Act, were disposed of by
the proper authorities; but this was not touched.


264

Page 264

ARTICLE XXI.

Parishes in Accomac.

At the first, as we have seen in the article on Northampton, the
whole of the Eastern Shore of Virginia was called Accowmake;
then changed to Northampton; then divided into Northampton
and Accomac. Soon after this, in the year 1762, the county of
Accomac was divided into two parishes, by a line running from the
bay to the sea, the upper being called Accomac parish, and the
other St. George's. The dividing-line runs about three miles north
of Drummondtown.

From a record in the Clerk's Office in Northampton there is
reason to believe that the church at Pongoteague was built before
the division of the Eastern Shore into two counties, and was the
first erected in Accomac. The next was that which stood a few
miles from Drummondtown, and was, until the year 1819, called
the New Church. At that time the name of St. James's was given
to it. It was subsequently removed to Drummondtown, and now
forms the church in that place. In the year 1724, there were
three churches in the upper parish, (Accomac,) about ten miles
distant from each other. The first minister of whom we read in
this parish was the Rev. William Black, who, in the year 1709-10,
wrote to the Bishop of London that he had taken charge of it,—
that there had been no minister there before for fifteen years. In
the year 1724 he is still the minister; and, in answer to certain
questions by the Bishop of London, writes, that he preaches at
these churches, has two hundred communicants, four or five hundred
families under his charge, instructs the negroes at their masters'
houses, has baptized two hundred of them, catechizes the
children on Sunday from March to September, has no Communion-service
or any thing decent in his church, receives a salary of forty
pounds per annum, (that being the value of his tobacco,) rents his
glebe for twenty shillings per annum, has a school in his parish,
endowed by one Mr. Sanford, of London, and which is still in
existence.[78]


265

Page 265

How long the pious labours of Mr. Black continued after the
year 1724 is not known. In the year 1755, we find, from an old
list of the clergy of Virginia, that the Rev. Arthur Emmerson,
afterward well known in other parishes, was the minister. In the
year 1774, the Rev. William Vere is set down in the Virginia Almanac
as the minister of Accomac parish. He was doubtless the
last minister of this parish. In the year 1785, when the first Con
vention after the Revolution met in Richmond, there was no clerical
delegate from either of the parishes of Accomac. Mr. Jabez Pittis
was the lay delegate from Accomac parish, and Mr. Levin Joynes
and Tully Wise from St. George's.

I conclude this brief notice of the old and decayed parish of
Accomac, in Accomac county, with the following paper, furnished
by my friend, T. R. Joynes, Sr., of that county, touching the
school. The document consists of an extract from the will of Mr.
Sandford, with some remarks by Mr. Joynes:—

"In the will of Samuel Sandford—`sometime of Accomack county, Virginia,
and now being in the city of London, dated the 27th day of March,
1710, in the ninth year of the reign of our sovereign Lady Queen Anne,
over England, alias Great Britain'—there is a very long preamble in the
usual pious style of that age; and, after a number of other devises, he
says, `For the benefit, better learning, and education of poor children,
whose parents are esteemed unable to give them learning, living in the
upper part of Accomack county, in Virginia; that is to say, from Guildford
Creek directly to the seaside, and likewise from Guildford Creek to
the dividing-line parting Virginia from Maryland, the rents and profits,


266

Page 266
(of the three tracts of land therein described, containing together three
thousand four hundred and twenty acres,) authorizing and empowering such
person or persons who are justices of the peace, churchwardens, or of the
vestry for the time being, or the major part of them, being inhabitants of
those aforesaid parts of ye county of Accomack aforesaid, to sett and lett the
aforesaid premises for the better improvement thereof, and for the support
of better learning and better education of poor children; for which uses
the rents and profits thereof is bequeathed and given forever,—hereby
humbly praying the Honourable the Governor of Virginia for the time-being,
with the Honourable Council of State, their care that the lands
by this will given may be appropriated for the uses intended and prescribed.'

"In the will, the testator speaks of his `living' in the county of Gloucester,
from which I infer that he was probably a minister of the Gospel,
who was, at one time, a minister in Accomac, and, at the time of the date
of his will, was a minister in the county of Gloucester, in England.

"T. R. Joynes, Secretary."

From the same source I learn that the churches in Accomac
were—a brick one, at Assawaman, on the seaside; a wooden one,
on the Middle or Wallop's Road, about five miles from the southern
line of the parish; and another of wood, at Pocomoke, near the
Maryland line, called the New Church. None of them now remain,
and very few of the inhabitants of the parish retain any attachment
to the Church of their fathers. About thirty years past, the
overseers of the poor took possession of the Communion-plate, and
sold the same to a silversmith, who intended to melt it up; but,
being advised that it was doubtful whether they had any authority
to sell the plate under the law directing the sale of the glebe-lands,
and there being a tradition that the plate was a private donation,
the sale was rescinded.

As to the ministers of St. George's parish, in Accomac, our
records before the Revolution fail us altogether. It is probable
that some of the ministers of Hungar's parish rendered service
here for some time after the division of the Eastern Shore into the
counties of Northampton and Accomac, especially Mr. Teackle.
The first minister on any of our lists was the Rev. John Lyon,
from Rhode Island, who was in the parish in the year 1774, and
continued there during and some time after the war. Being more
of the Englishman than the American in his feelings, his time was
very uncomfortable during the Revolutionary struggle; but, being
married into a respectable family, his principles were tolerated and
his person protected. While as a faithful historian we shall truthfully
admit whatever of Toryism there was among the clergy of
Virginia, we shall as faithfully maintain that there was a large
share of noble patriotism in the clergy of Virginia. Mr. Jefferson


267

Page 267
declares this most emphatically. In a late number of the Lynchburg
Republican the editor refers to it, as may be seen in the note
below.[79]

In the year 1786 the Rev. Theopolus Nugent was present in the
Convention as the rector of St. George's parish, Accomac. But
nothing more is known of him. The following is the list of the
clergymen from the time of Mr. Nugent to the present day:—The
Revs. Cave Jones, Ayrs, Reese, Gardiner, Eastburn, Smith, Chase,
Goldsmith, Carpenter, Adams, Bartlett, Winchester, Jonathan
Smith, Wm. G. Jones, and Zimmer. I am not able, at present,
to get the surnames of some of the foregoing. A few remarks
concerning two of the above-mentioned ministers will be acceptable
to the reader. The Rev. Cave Jones was a native of Virginia,
—probably a descendant of one of the three of that name who
ministered in the early Church of Virginia. He was a man of
talents and eloquence, which, after some years, attracted attention
beyond the bounds of our State, and led to a call to Trinity Church,


268

Page 268
New York. He was so popular in that situation as to become a
formidable rival to Dr. Hobart, afterward Bishop of New York.

The Rev. Mr. Eastburn was from New York, and brother to
Bishop Eastburn of Massachusetts. From every account we have
received of him, whether from New York or Accomac, he must have
been one of the most interesting and talented young men of our
land. He came to Virginia at a time when ample material still
remained in Accomac for the exercise of his pious zeal, and it was
exercised most diligently in all the departments of ministerial duty,
but especially in the instruction of the young by the means of
Sunday-schools. He is still spoken of in the families of Accomac
as that extraordinary young man. The following letter from his
brother, Bishop Manton Eastburn, in answer to one from myself,
furnishes some particulars worthy of being recorded:—

"My dear Bishop:

Having been at this place during the present
month, your letter of the 16th has only just reached me. Nothing was
published after my dear and distinguished brother's death, except the
poem of `Yamoyden, a Tale of the Wars of King Philip,' which he composed
in company with his friend, Robert C. Sands, and which the latter
edited. I can only say, in a few words, that he was ordained by Bishop
Hobart at the Diocesan Convention of New York, in October, 1818;
commenced his ministry in Accomac county almost immediately; and,
after a short but truly glorious ministry of about eight months, (during
which, as I heard him say, he thought he had been the instrument of the
conversion of seventeen persons,) returned, broken in health, to New
York, and expired in December, 1819, on his passage to St. Croix, W. I.,
to which island, in company with his mother and myself, he was proceeding
for the benefit of his health. He had just reached the age of
twenty-two years; but he was mature in mind, accomplished in attainments
both of ancient and modern learning, and one of the most "burning
lights" in the Church of God I ever knew. I think he left an impression
in Accomac which is not yet effaced.

"Excuse me for this unavoidable delay, and believe me to be

"Faithfully yours,
"In one dear Lord and Saviour,
"Manton Eastburn.
"Rt. Rev. Bishop Meade.
"P.S.—My brother's name was James Wallis Eastburn, M. A., of
Columbia College, New York. He composed, at eighteen years of age,
the beautiful Trinity-Sunday Hymn in our collection, No. 77; beginning,
`Oh, holy, holy, holy Lord,' &c. The `Summer Midnight'—being five
or six stanzas composed at Accomac in June, 1819—is, for beauty and
elevation of thought, and heavenly aspirations after immortality, one of
the most exquisite things in our language. It was published in the New
York Commercial Advertiser soon after its composition.
"His studies for the ministry were pursued for two years with Bishop

269

Page 269
Griswold, at Bristol, R. I. There is a letter of my father's, in relation to
him, in Stone's life of the Bishop."

The Episcopalian cannot but think with melancholy feelings of
the gradual decline, as to numbers, of the Church in Accomac, from
the time of Mr. Black, in 1710, to the present day. Then, in one
parish only—the upper—there were four or five hundred families,
three overflowing churches, and two hundred communicants, with
scarce a Dissenter in it. Now, in both parishes, covering the whole
county, there are only three churches and about fifty communicants.
Other denominations, chiefly the Methodists, have drawn away the
great body of the people from our communion. There are still a
number of very interesting and intelligent families remaining to us,
in which are not only some attached Churchmen, but truly pious
Christians. May God strengthen the things that remain, and grant
us there, as he has done in so many other parts of the State, a
great increase!

It deserves to be mentioned that, some years since, the Rev.
Ambler Weed, of Richmond, undertook the revival of the Church
in the lower part of St. George's parish, and by great diligence
caused a new church, by the name of St. Michael's, to be erected
near Bell Haven. In this and in old Pongoteague Church he
officiated for some years with great diligence and self-denial, and
with some success.

Old Pongoteague—the first house of prayer erected in Accomac,
and probably not much less than two hundred years old—still stands,
a remarkable monument of former days, among some old trees,
perhaps as ancient as itself. It is a brick building in the form of a
cross. Though well-built, and in some parts still firm and unyielding,
yet in others it gives signs of decay and ruin. Breaches in the
walls are apparent, and the rains from above find their way through
its mouldering roof.

I am sorry to be unable to give a list of the ancient vestrymen of
Accomac. The only documents of which I have heard, from which
to derive such list, and other particulars, perished during the last
year. Would that all the friends, members, and ministers of the
Church of Virginia, and any others who have any care for her
past history, would but inquire for such documents, and search for
them among the neglected papers of old family mansions and
clerk's offices! How much might still be rescued from destruction and
oblivion, which is worthy of preservation in some permanent form!

In place of a list of the vestrymen of the parish, I subjoin the
following, of the families which from the earliest period to the


270

Page 270
present time have belonged to the Episcopal Church in Accomac.
It has been furnished me by a friend, with the qualification that it
is imperfect, and that there were others who might be added:—
"Bowman, Cropper, Joynes, West, Satchell, Smith, Wise, Finney,
Bayley, Snead, Parker, Stratton, Bagwell, Andrews, Arbunkle,
Scarbrough, Robinson, Custis, Stokely, Poulson, Downing, Bell,
Upshur, Pasamour, Teagle, Hack, Seymour, Kellam, etc."

 
[78]

The attention paid to the servants by Mr. Black is deserving of special notice,
as showing the feeling of the pious ministers on the subject at that day. It was
always recognised as a duty by the civil and ecclesiastical rulers in England, and
more or less practised by the better sort of our ministers in Virginia. About
this time I find the following proposition, which is preserved among the archives
of Lambeth:—

"A Proposition for Encouraging the Christian Education of Indian, Negro, and
Mulatto Children.

"It being a duty of Christianity very much neglected by masters and mistresses
of this country (America) to endeavour the good instruction and education of their
heathen slaves in the Christian faith,—the said duty being likewise earnestly recommended
by his Majesty's instructions,—for the facilitating thereof among the young
slaves that are born among us; it is, therefore, humbly proposed that every Indian,
negro, or mulatto child that shall be baptized and afterward brought to church
and publicly catechized by the minister in church, and shall, before the fourteenth
year of his or her age, give a distinct account of the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and
Ten Commandments, and whose master or mistress shall receive a certificate from
the minister that he or she hath so done, such Indian, negro, or mulatto child shall
be exempted from paying all levies till the age of eighteen years."

[79]

We affirm that no element was more often invoked in the earlier history of
Virginia than the influence of ministers of the Gospel, in producing a feeling of
resistance to the oppressions of England; and no class from whom the Henrys,
Jeffersons, and patriot politicians of that day received greater aid in opening the
eyes of the people and preparing them for a severance from Great Britain. Mr.
Jefferson himself acknowledges this in his works, vol. i. pp. 5, 6.

"Describing the influence of the news of the Boston Port Bill upon himself, Mr.
Henry, R. H. Lee, Francis Lightfoot Lee, and some others, in June, 1774, he says,
`We were under conviction of the necessity of arousing our people from the lethargy
into which they had fallen as to passing events, and thought that the appointment
of a day of general fasting and prayer would be most likely to call up and alarm
their attention. No examples of such a solemnity had existed since the days of our
distresses in the war of '55, since which a new generation had grown up. With the
help, therefore, of Rushworth, whom we rummaged over for the precedents and
forms of the Puritans of that day, preserved by him, we cooked up a resolution,
somewhat modernizing their phrases, for appointing the 1st day of June, on which
the Port Bill was to commence, for a day of fasting, humiliation, and prayer, to
implore Heaven to avert from us the evils of civil war, to inspire us with firmness in
support of our rights, and to turn the hearts of the King and Parliament to
moderation and justice. To give greater emphasis to our proposition, we agreed
to wait the next morning on Mr. Nicholas—whose grave and religious character was
more in unison with the tone of our resolutions—and solicit him to move it. We
accordingly went to him in the morning. He moved it the same day: the 1st
of June was proposed, and it was passed without opposition. The Governor
dissolved us. We returned home, and in our several counties invited the clergy to
meet the assemblies of the people on the 1st of June, to perform the ceremonies of
the day, and to address to them discourses suited to the occasion. The people
met, generally, with anxiety and alarm in their countenances, and the effect of the
day,
through the whole Colony, was like a shock of electricity, arousing every man
and placing him erect and solidly on his centre.' "


271

Page 271

ARTICLE XXII.

Parishes in Norfolk County.

Until the year 1691, that which is now Princess Anne and Norfolk
was called Lower Norfolk, in contradistinction to Upper Norfolk,
now Nansemond. In that year Lower Norfolk was divided into
Norfolk and Princess Anne, the parishes being still called Elizabeth
River and Lynnhaven parishes.

The town of Norfolk was established in 1705. Colonel Byrd, in
his Westover Manuscripts, in the year 1728, after speaking of its
prosperous condition, says, "The worst of it is, they contribute
much toward debauching the country, by importing an abundance
of rum, which, like gin in Great Britain, breaks the constitution,
vitiates the morals, and ruins the industry of most of the poor people
of the country." Of the people of Norfolk he says, "The two
cardinal virtues which make a place thrive—industry and frugality—
are seen here in perfection; and, so long as they can banish luxury
and idleness, the town will remain in a happy and flourishing condition."
Although it has not increased in numbers and wealth as
some other places, if religion and morality constitute the real prosperity
of a place, then Norfolk has to this day flourished much
beyond most other towns in our land, and her industry and frugality
have ministered not a little to these.

Of the churches and ministers in Lower Norfolk before the year
1691, when the division above mentioned took place, we have but
scanty accounts. I state it on the authority of one who would not
speak unadvisedly, that, in the year 1637, one John Wilson was
minister of Elizabeth River parish, in Norfolk county. From this
until the year 1749 there is no information to be obtained as to
this parish or its ministers, except that in the year 1724, when
answers were sent to the Bishop of London's circulars, there were
no ministers of the parish to furnish one.

On a loose piece of paper which has come into my hands, I find
that, in the year 1728, a Mr. Thomas Nash—who was, I believe,
both clerk of the vestry and lay-reader of the South Branch Chapel—
gave in a list of births occurring in that part of the parish during
the year 1727. The number of these shows that there was a


272

Page 272
considerable population at that time in the county, and that their
reliance here, as in some other places, was on the cheaper supply
of readers.

From the vestry-book, which begins in 1749 and ends in 1761,—
twelve years,—I learn that the Rev. Charles Smith was the minister
during all that period: how long before is not known, but it is
probable from the year 1743, from the following inscription on his
tombstone at the glebe, near Portsmouth, as he was the minister
of Portsmouth parish at his death in 1773:—

"Here lies interred the Rev. Charles Smith, rector of Portsmouth
parish, who died the 11th of January, 1773, in the 61st year of his age.
He officiated as minister upwards of thirty years, and his conduct through
life was unexceptionable. He was a sincere friend, a most tender husband,
an affectionate father, and a humane, good man. He was esteemed
and beloved when alive, and died universally lamented. In testimony of
their tender regard, his son-in-law, James Taylor, and daughter, Alice
Taylor, have erected this monument."

It appears, by what we learn from the vestry-book and tombstone,
that he was probably the minister of Elizabeth River parish
and of a division of the same during the whole period of a more
than thirty years' ministry.

In the year 1761 the parish of Elizabeth River, covering all
Norfolk county, was divided into three,—Portsmouth, St. Bride's,
and Elizabeth River. We cannot say whether Mr. Smith continued
to minister in Norfolk and Elizabeth River after this, or at once
chose Portsmouth town and parish as his place of residence and
field of labour. In the years 1773-4-6 we find, on our old lists,
the Rev. Thomas Davis the minister in Norfolk. He was one of
the ministers who zealously advocated the Revolution, and preached
on some public occasion by request of the Assembly. In the year
1785 he was the minister in Northumberland county,—afterwards
in Alexandria, and lastly in Northampton, where he died. In the
year 1785, when the first Convention was held in Richmond, no
clerical delegate appeared from Norfolk, and it is probable there
was no minister there, as two lay delegates were present, Dr.
James Taylor (son-in-law to the Rev. Mr. Smith, we presume) and
Mr. George Kelly. Although no clerical or lay delegation appears
from Norfolk in the years 1786-88, yet it is believed that the Rev.
Walker Maury was minister during a part of that time. The following
inscription on his tombstone in the graveyard at Norfolk,
put there, it is believed, by the congregation, would indicate that
he was the minister:—


273

Page 273

"Sacred to the memory of the Rev. Walker Maury, who departed this
life in the city of Norfolk, October 11th, 1788, in the 36th year of his
age."

He died of the yellow fever of that year. Mr. Walker Maury
was the son of the Rev. James Maury and brother of the Rev.
Matthew Maury of Frederickville parish, Albemarle, of whom we
have written. He married a Miss Grimes, of the Lower Country.
They were the parents of the ladies who married Mr. Isaac Hite
and John Hay, of Frederick county, and Mr. Polk, of Washington.
More pious and estimable ladies than the mother and daughters are
not easily found. There were also several sons.

In 1789-91, the Rev. James Whitehead appears in the several
Conventions as minister of Elizabeth River parish, Norfolk; and
again in 1805. During the interval no delegation appears. Soon
after this, it is believed, Mr. Whitehead accepted a charge in Baltimore.
From all the accounts I have received, Mr. Whitehead was
a worthy minister of the Gospel. He was also a good scholar, and
presided over the academy in Norfolk. He was the father of Mrs.
Commodore Skinner, and other children, who inherit the father's
attachment to the Episcopal Church.

It was during the ministry of Mr. Whitehead that a most unhappy
and bitter controversy occurred in the congregation, concerning
himself and the Rev. William Bland, who was the favourite of a
portion of the congregation, and was claimed, by some, to be the
minister, although he never had a seat in the Conventions. Mr.
Bland was ordained by the Bishop of London in 1767, and had
been floating about various parishes until he came to Norfolk. His
only virtue was an attachment to the Revolutionary cause while he
was minister in James City, and which brought him into some notice
by our patriots in Williamsburg. He was a man of intemperate
habits—at any rate while in Norfolk—but still had something about
him which created a party in his favour. The controversy was carried
on in the newspapers in Norfolk during the week, and also in
the pulpit on the Sabbath,—the same pulpit serving both ministers,
the one in the morning, the other in the afternoon. The following
extract of a letter from my friend, Mr. John Southgate, of Norfolk,
contains the most accurate account of the transaction which is to
be had:—

"I think it was in the year 1790 or 1791 that I arrived in Norfolk,
at which time, or very soon thereafter, the controversy that you
speak of commenced between the partisans of Bland and Whitehead, who


274

Page 274
were both elected by their separate vestries (for both parties had their
separate vestries and wardens) to the rectorship of old St. Paul's. Of
course a good deal of ill blood was engendered between the reverend gentlemen.
This state of things lasted for some years, until Mr. Whitehead
and his friends, who amounted to a large majority, perhaps nine-tenths
of the church, and who were most moderate in their pretensions, for the
sake of peace gave way, and occupied the court-house as a place of worship,
and where the ordinances of the Church were for some time administered.
In the year 1800, April 16th, the friends of Mr. Whitehead met for the purpose
of making arrangements for building a place of worship, which they
called Christ Church, at which time sixteen thousand dollars were promptly
subscribed, and on the 24th of June of the same year the corner-stone
was laid; and, for the purpose of avoiding difficulties heretofore existing,
it was determined that the appointment of the rector should be made by
the pew-holders, and that annually.[80] Mr. Whitehead continued to be the
pastor of the same until the early part of the year 1806, when he received a
call to a church in Baltimore; and, what may surprise us at this day, his only
compensation during sixteen years, for his services, was one hundred pounds
or three hundred and thirty-three and one-third dollars per annum."

Mr. Whitehead was succeeded by the Rev. Thomas Davis, from
Alexandria, (the same who had formerly been minister in Norfolk,)
who continued with us until October, 1808, having received a call
from Hungar's parish, on the Eastern Shore. Mr. Davis was succeeded
by the Rev. Mr. Syme, who continued until February, 1815,
when he was not re-elected. He, however, occasionally did the
duties of the clerk and pulpit, in connection with the Rev. Mr.
Brown, until July, 1816. At this time Mr. Brown either died or
removed, and Mr. Syme was called to Hungar's parish. In August,
1816, the Rev. Samuel Low became rector of the parish, and continued
until his death in 1820. Mr. Low was the son of the unhappy
man who was minister in Lancaster and Fredericksburg and
gave much trouble to the Church, and of whom we shall have something
to say hereafter. His son was as a brand plucked from the
burning in more ways than one. Being of a literary and poetic turn,
and having some talent for the stage and passionately fond of it, he
for a time addicted himself to its performances; but the Spirit of God
followed him even into that synagogue of Satan, and brought him
forth and placed him on a higher and holier stage in the Church


275

Page 275
of Christ. What little preparation he was able to make for the
pulpit was chiefly made under my own roof. His father's sin and
disgrace produced an abiding impression of pensiveness, if not of
melancholy, on a naturally sensitive mind, and this was deepened
still more by the early death of a lovely young woman (Miss Brown,
of Norfolk) whom he married soon after taking charge of Christ's
Church. His pious conversation and evangelical preaching began
that work which to this day has gone on. His successor, Mr.
Enoch Lowe, who had been a soldier in the late war and brought a
soldier's spirit with him into the ministry, by a bold and fearless
declaration of evangelical truth and a very impressive delivery,
advanced the work with rapid strides. He was succeeded by the
Rev. Mr. Wickes, originally a Methodist minister. His preaching
also was bold, impressive, sound, and experimental, and he was
effecting much good when the destroyer came in the form of strong
drink. He fell a victim to it, as many of God's ministers have
done, who, listening to the voice of the tempter, "Ye shall not
surely die," have fallen into the snare. Acknowledging his great
guilt, and not denying it, as too many do, he submitted to the
discipline of the Church, and afterward returned to the communion
he had left.

In the year 1825, the Rev. George A. Smith became the minister
of Christ Church, but was only able to continue one year, on account
of feeble health. He was succeeded by the Rev. Dr. Ducachet.
On his being called to St. Stephen's Church, in Philadelphia,
in 1834, I was induced, under peculiar circumstances, to leave
my old charge in Frederick to the care of another, and take the
temporary charge of this congregation, not knowing how long it
might seem to be my duty to continue. At the end of two
years, among the happiest and perhaps most useful years of my
ministerial life, I resigned the charge of it into the hands of the
Rev. Mr. Parks, whose ministry was highly acceptable. During
these two years I had also the care of the congregation at old
St. Paul's, which was without a minister, and in almost a despairing
condition. I was successful in keeping alive its hopes, and
preventing a dissolution of the congregation, and placing over it
the Rev. Thomas Atkinson, who was ordained a deacon by me
while in Norfolk. On the resignation of Mr. Parks, the Rev.
Upton Beale became its minister. His faithfulness in all the departments
of the ministry, private and public, his sound judgment
and prudence, and his unceasing labours and sound evangelical
and experimental preaching, secured for him the increasing affection


276

Page 276
and esteem of the congregation until his death. To the Rev.
Mr. Beale succeeded the Rev. George Cummings, who, after a
ministry of a few years, was succeeded by the Rev. Mr. Minnegerode,
who has just resigned the charge.

THE CHURCHES OF NORFOLK COUNTY AND ELIZABETH RIVER PARISH.

As we hear of a minister in 1637, we must suppose that some
kind of a church was erected in Norfolk at that early period. The
first churches were always rude and indifferent, destined soon to
pass away. There were, indeed, very many such even to the time
of the Revolution.

I have no information concerning the old churches except that
contained in a vestry-book commencing in 1749 and ending in
1761. At the close of it a new vestry-book is spoken of as about
to be. Doubtless there was one, but it is nowhere to be found.

In the year 1750, there is, in the old one, a record evidently
alluding to St. Paul's Church that now is, and to one that had been
there some time before, but how long cannot be ascertained. It is
ordered in that year that Mr. James Pasteur be allowed to have
the bricks and timber of the old church to build a house on the
school-land,—a school-house, we suppose. This proves that the
present St. Paul's was built before 1750, and that there was a brick
church some time before this on or near the same place. It is
otherwise known that St. Paul's was built in 1739. There is an
entry showing that Mr. Smith, the minister, received sixteen thousand-weight
of tobacco for preaching at the mother-church, (St.
Paul's, in Norfolk) and four thousand for each of the three chapels,—that
at the Great Bridge, where the first battle of the Revolution
was fought, that at Tanner's Creek, and the Southern Branch
Chapel. In the year 1753, a Western Branch Chapel is also spoken
of. There are, I believe, some remains of one or more of these
chapels to this day. In regard to St. Paul's; in the year 1750,
we have an account of some of the interior of the same. It is
ordered "that Captain John Cook, Captain John Shriff, Captain
John Calvert, and Mr. Charles Sweny be allowed to build a gallery
in the church in Norfolk, reaching from the gallery of Mr.
John Taylor to the school-boys' gallery, to be theirs and their heirs'
forever." Also, "that Mr. Mathew Godfrey, Mr. William Nash,
Captain Trimagan Tatum, and Mr. William Ashley have leave to
build a gallery from the pulpit to the school-boys' gallery, to be
theirs and their heirs' forever." The whole church in each member



No Page Number
illustration

ST. PAUL'S CHURCH, NORFOLK, VA.



No Page Number

277

Page 277
of the cross was, therefore, galleried by private individuals, except
that set apart for the school-boys. It appears from the foregoing
extracts that there was one church (St. Paul's) and four chapels,
with one minister and three readers. The readers were Chamberlaine,
Granbury, and Nash.

One-half of the glebe rented for thirty-six shillings; but there
were parish servants, and a parsonage which cost £131 10s. After
the building of the new church (Christ Church) in 1800, St. Paul's
was for a time loaned to the Baptist denomination, and was used
first by the white and afterward by the coloured portion of that
denomination. But in the year 1832 it was resumed and repaired
by the Episcopalians and solemnly consecrated by Bishop Moore.
It must not be omitted on our record that, during the war, all the
combustible materials of St. Paul's were consumed by the fire which
laid the town in ashes. The well-built walls, however, not only
resisted the fire, but the cannon-balls of our foe. There is still to
be seen a considerable indentation in the corner of one of them
made by a ball from the frigate Liverpool, and the ball itself may
also be seen in the vestry-room, although a Governor of Virginia
has petitioned that it might be placed in the public library at Richmond.
The communion-plate was taken by the enemy and carried
to Scotland. Some tidings of it have recently been received,
and hopes are entertained of its recovery.[81]

In relation to the other church in Norfolk, which was built in
1800, that was also destroyed by fire in the year 1827. A new
one, the present Christ Church, was immediately erected, which,
being planned before the new style of architecture was introduced,
(one so unfavourable to both speaker and hearer, in winter and in
summer,) is one of the most capacious and comfortable churches in
the land, and when well lighted up at night, and filled with worshippers,
as it almost always is, presents to the eye one of the most
delightful spectacles on earth.[82]

On it, Time his mark has hung;
On it, hostile balls have rung;
On it, green old moss has clung;
On it, winds their dirge have sung:
Let us still adore thy walls,
Sacred temple, old St. Paul's."

278

Page 278

I would that it were in my power to furnish a larger list of the
vestry of the old church in Norfolk, but the brief term of twelve
years, to which the vestry-book is limited, forbids. Among the first
was Colonel Samuel Boush, who gave the land on which St. Paul's
and its graveyard stands, and whose tombstone, at the door of the
church, tells where his body lies. Himself, Colonel George Newton,
Colonel William Crawford, Captain William Hodges, Captain
Willis Wilson, Mr. Charles Sweny, Captain James Joy, Captain
John Shriff, and Mr. Samuel Boush were the first vestrymen on
the book. The two last were in place of Mr. John Scott and Captain
Samuel Langley, former vestrymen. To the above, at different
times, were added, Colonel Robert Tucker, Mr. Mathew Godfrey,
Mr. James Webb, Thomas Newton, Major John Willowby, Captain
George Yeale, Mr. Robert Tucker. This list comes down to 1761.
Should the new vestry-book which then commenced be discovered,
the list can be greatly enlarged.[83]

 
[81]

The following lines, taken from the Rev. John McCabe's fuller account of St.
Paul's, in the Church Review, will interest the reader:—

[82]

Mr. Swain, the architect of this church, deserves to be mentioned for the extraordinary
fidelity displayed in its erection.

[83]

I must not omit to mention, among the families of Norfolk county, that of Dale—
an ancient and respectable one of this and surrounding counties, nor can I otherwise
than specially refer to one member of it, Commodore Richard Dale, who was
born in this county in the year 1756. At an early period—twelve years of age—
he chose the sea for his habitation. Five times was he taken prisoner by the
British during the war of the Revolution. He was in the Mill prison, at Liverpool,
but escaped, and was seized by a press-gang, carried back, and thrown into a noisome
dungeon for forty days. Being released, he was again thrown into the Black
Hole for singing rebellious songs. Again escaping, he fled to France, and was
appointed first lieutenant in the Bon Homme Richard, in the fleet of Paul Jones,
which spread such terror along the western coast of Scotland. In the desperate
action with the Serapis he distinguished himself, and was wounded in the head.
Being appointed captain of an armed merchantman in the American service, he continued
to command her to the end of the war. In 1794 he was made captain in
the United States navy; and in 1801 he commanded the Mediterranean squadron.
In 1802 he retired to private life, and spent the remainder of his days in Philadelphia,
where he died in 1826, aged seventy years, loved and honoured by all who
knew him. But I should not have introduced his name into this work except for
the fact that his religious character, for many years before his death, was as
marked as his military one had been before. My acquaintance with him commenced
about six or eight years before his death, and was most intimate to the last.
His house was my happy home during our General Conventions.

He was one of those open, honest men who could and did speak freely on all
subjects to all men and yet not give offence. It was expected of him to reprove
sin and irreligion, no matter in whom it was seen. He took an active part with
the philanthropic of Philadelphia in all their great plans of benevolence. Especially
did he patronize all religious efforts for the seafaring race. He had a large
sailors' loft for a chapel, which was always considered as Dale's Chapel, and which
he often attended, even though he must leave his own church to do it. A pious
old Presbyterian minister was the officiating clergyman in it, and was most devoted
to his work. I have attended with the old commodore in that loft, and preached to
his congregation with great satisfaction. Although full of charity to all others,
and holding no exclusive views, yet was Commodore Dale warmly attached to the
Episcopal Church, and may be regarded as the father of St. Stephen's, which was
built for his nephew, Dr. Montgomery. It was good to see his large manly form
go through all the postures, and hear his bold seaman's voice in all the responses
of the Liturgy.

Commodore Dale was in his religious as in his military character no halfway
man: he did not attempt to serve God and Mammon,—to carry religion in one hand
and the world in the other. He was among the first in Philadelphia to break
away from an old system of Churchmanship which allowed such a compromise with
the world. May his spirit descend to his latest posterity, and his example be faithfully
copied!


279

Page 279

ST. BRIDE'S PARISH, NORFOLK COUNTY.

Of the position, lines, and boundaries of this we have no accurate
idea, but must refer our readers to the delineation of it in the
Act of Assembly, in 1761, which carved it out of Elizabeth River
parish. (See Henning's Statutes, 1761.) Having no lists of clergy
from 1758 until the year 1773, we must begin with 1773, when, as
well as in 1774, we find the Rev. James Pasteur its minister. In
the year 1776, the Rev. Emanuel Jones, Jr. becomes the minister.
How long he may have continued is not known. We know nothing
more of the parish until the year 1787, after the Revolution, when
the Rev. Needler Robinson appears on the list for one year, and
one only, as minister of St. Bride's parish. We presume he was
the last of her ministers.

Which of the old churches were embraced within her bounds I
know not, nor whether she erected any new ones.

PORTSMOUTH PARISH, NORFOLK COUNTY.

Of this I have rather more information, though no vestry-book
after 1761 affords it.

We have seen that the Rev. Charles Smith was its minister when
he died in 1773. He was succeeded in 1774 by the Rev. William
Braidfoot. He was a native of Scotland, and had not been long
in the ministry when it became evident that war between England
and the Colonies was inevitable; and, as he believed the Colonies
were contending for their just rights, he warmly espoused their
cause, and entered the army as chaplain, continuing to fill that
station until the close of the war, when he returned to Portsmouth
parish, and died at the glebe about the year 1784 or 1785.


280

Page 280
Mr. Braidfoot married a Miss Mosely, of Princess Anne, and left
one son, whose descendants are now living in Portsmouth. Mr.
Braidfoot was succeeded by the Rev. Arthur Emmerson, son of
one of the same name who was minister on the Eastern Shore.
The son was minister in Meherrin parish, Greensville, and in
Nansemond, before coming to Portsmouth parish in 1785. He
ministered there from that time until 1801, much esteemed as a
man and minister, though from feeble health unable to lead an
active life. His wife was the widow of the Rev. John Nivison.
He was followed by the Rev. George Young, who continued until
the year 1808 or 1809. After his death or resignation there was
a vacancy until the year 1821, when the present rector, the Rev.
Mr. Wingfield, began his labours in that parish. In the absence
of any vestry-book to supply the names of vestrymen before the
time of Mr. Wingfield, I mention the following names of old
friends of the Church:—Sproull, Chisholm, Agnew, Herbert,
Hansford, Joins, Dyson, Porter, Godfrey, Wilson, Wallington,
Tankard, Parker, Veal, Roberts, Nivison, Marsh, North, Edwards,
Davis, Luke, Cowper, Blow, Braidfoot, Dickson, Thompson, Young,
Kearns, Grew, Garrow, Kidd, Mathews, Brown, Etheridge, Mushrow,
Shelton, Pearce, Satchwell, Milhado, Cox, Butt, Maupin,
Swift.

As to churches, there were three built in Portsmouth parish,—
one in the town of Portsmouth, in 1762, on a lot in the centre of
the town, given by William Crawford, Esq., the original proprietor
of the land on which the town is built; one on the north bank of
the Western Branch, and one near a village called Deep Creek.
The church in Portsmouth was rebuilt and enlarged in 1829, under
the rectorship of Mr. Wingfield. The country churches have long
since fallen into ruins. When the present rector took charge of
the parish, in 1821, the vestry had long since been dissolved, and
the members of the three congregations had united themselves—
as in many other places—with the various surrounding denominations.

A few years since, another congregation was formed in Portsmouth,
a church built, and the Rev. James Chisholm called to be
its rector. After labouring zealously and preaching faithfully and
affectionately for some years, he fell a victim, during the summer
of 1855, to the yellow fever, when, with the spirit of a martyr, he
was nursing the sick and dying of his congregation and of the
town. For the particulars of the life and death and character of
this most talented and interesting young minister of the Gospel, I


281

Page 281
refer my readers to the Memoirs of the Rev. James Chisholm, by
his particular friend and former parishioner, Mr. Conrad, of Martinsburg,—a
biography which for thrilling interest is not easily
surpassed. For the biography of his brother and companion in
toils and sufferings and death, the Rev. William Jackson, the
minister of St. Paul's, Norfolk, I refer in like manner for a faithful
sketch of him to the work of the Rev. Mr. Cummings.

I now add, what was omitted in the proper place, that it was to
the labours of the Rev. Mr. Boyden, during the rectorship of Dr.
Ducachet in Christ Church, that the congregation of St. Paul's
owed its revival after a long, deathlike slumber. Its life was continued
and its energies increased under his successor, the Rev. Mr.
Atkinson. The Rev. B. M. Miller, who followed him, increased it
still more, especially by his attention to the poor. The Rev. Mr.
Caldwell was doing a good work, when failing health required his
withdrawal. The Rev. Joseph Wilmer and Leonidas Smith had
each rendered temporary services, not to be regarded as those of
regular pastors, as had also the Rev. R. K. Meade; but it was
reserved for the Rev. William Jackson and his faithful and
acceptable services to fill the church to such overflowing that it
was evident, if his life had been spared, a new and larger church
would have been built for him. His successor is the Rev. Mr.
Okeson.

 
[80]

Although we can never be brought to approve of annual elections, and that by
the pew-holders instead of vestrymen, yet it must be confessed that thus far it has
happily succeeded in this congregation. But we are persuaded this has resulted
from the peculiarly excellent materials of which it has been composed, and not
from the mode of election. Painful fears have often been felt of evil in its operation.
May it long be averted by the good providence of God!


282

Page 282

ARTICLE XXIII.

Parishes in Nansemond.—No. 1.

There were settlements in Nansemond at a very early period.
The Acts of Assembly in dividing counties and parishes are nearly
all of its early history that can be gotten. A vestry-book of the
upper parish, commencing in 1743 and continuing to 1787,
contains all the statistics I can get. These are painfully interesting.
But as I propose to follow the course of the North Carolina
and Virginia line in some of the following articles,—if materials
can be obtained in time,—I think it best to begin with some notice
of the borders on that line. The running of it, in the year 1728,
by Colonel Byrd, Fitz William, and Dandridge, commissioners on
the part of Virginia, and others on the part of Carolina, led
to some information which must be interesting to all who take
pleasure in such things, and especially to the citizens and Churchmen
of the two States. This has recently been given to the
public in a small volume entitled "Westover Manuscripts,"—
taken from a large folio volume of Colonel Byrd's manuscripts on
various subjects, which is in the hands of one of his descendants,
or deposited for safe-keeping in the rooms of the Historical Society
of Virginia, in Richmond. Colonel Byrd was a man of
great enterprise, a classical scholar and very sprightly writer.
The fault of his works is an exuberance of humour and of jesting
with serious things, which sometimes degenerates into that kind
of wit which so disfigures and injures the writings of Shakspeare.
Although he never loses an opportunity of a playful remark about
Christians, and especially the clergy, it is proof of an admission
on his part that Christianity is divine and excellent, that he took
with him, on this difficult and somewhat hazardous expedition, the
Rev. Peter Fontaine, his parish minister, to be chaplain to the
joint company, with a salary of twenty pounds for the expedition.
Of Mr. Fontaine, the Huguenot minister, we have something to
say in the proper place. His conduct in this journey, and all the
witticisms of Colonel Byrd, testify to his piety. What I have to
say will be chiefly in the language of Mr. Byrd's journal, which is
to be taken with the qualifications above stated. After the commissioners


283

Page 283
had wandered for some time about the Dismal Swamp,
they reach "Colonel Andrew Meade's, who lives upon Nansemond
River. They were no sooner under the shelter of that hospitable
roof but it began to rain hard, and continued so to do during the
night." On leaving that, with a cart-load of provisions to eat
and drink, which Colonel Meade insisted on sending with them,
he says,—

"We passed by no less than two Quaker meeting-houses. That persuasion
prevails much in the lower end of Nansemond county, for want
of ministers to pilot the people a decenter way to heaven. The ill reputation
of the tobacco in these lower parishes makes the clergy unwilling
to accept of them, except such whose abilities are as mean as their pay.
People uninstructed in any religion are apt to embrace the first that offers.
It is natural for helpless man to adore his Maker in some form or other;
and, were there any exception to this rule, I should expect it to be
among the Hottentots of the Cape of Good Hope and of North Carolina.
. . . . For want of men in Holy Orders, both the members of the Council
and magistrates are empowered to marry all those who will not take each
other's word. But for the ceremony of christening their children they
leave that to chance. If a parson comes in their way, they will crave a
cast of their office, as they call it; else they are content that their children
should remain as arrant pagans as themselves. They do not know Sunday
from any other day any more than Robinson Crusoe, which would give
them a great advantage were they given to be industrious."

During a few days' delay at a certain point, the chaplain was allowed
"to take a turn to Edenton, to preach the Gospel to the infidels
and to christen the children there." Of Edenton at that time
he says, "I believe this is the only metropolis in the Christian or
Mohammedan world where there is neither church, chapel, mosque,
synagogue, or any other place of public worship of any sect or religion
whatever. Justice herself is but indifferently lodged, the
court-house having much the air of a common tobacco-house."
"Our chaplain," the journal proceeds, "returned to us, having
preached in the court-house and made no less than nineteen Christians,—that
is, baptized so many."

On their route the company stop and tarry for a time at Nottoway
Town, which must be near the dividing line and either in Nansemond
or Southampton, and which we suppose to be Christina, where
the Indian school was, and of which we shall soon speak. Of the
people of Nottoway Town, Colonel Byrd thus writes:—

"The whole number of people belonging to the Nottoway Town, if you
include women and children, amounts to about two hundred. These are
the only Indians of any consequence now remaining within the limits of
Virginia. The rest are either removed or dwindled to a very inconsiderable


284

Page 284
number, either by destroying one another, or else by smallpox
or other diseases; though nothing has been so fatal to them as their
ungovernable passion for rum, with which, I am sorry to say it, they have
been but too liberally supplied by the English that live near them. And
here I must lament the bad success Mr. Boyle's charity has hitherto had
toward converting any of these poor heathen to Christianity. Many
children of our neighbouring Indians have been brought up in the College
of William and Mary. They have been taught to read and write, and
have been carefully instructed in the Christian religion till they came to
be men; yet after they returned home, instead of civilizing and converting
the rest, they have immediately relapsed into infidelity and barbarism
themselves.

"And some of them, too, have made the worst use of the knowledge
they acquired among the English, by employing it against their benefactors.
Besides, as they unhappily forget all the good they learn and
remember the ill, they are apt to be more vicious and disorderly than the
rest of their countrymen. I ought not to quit this subject without doing
justice to the great prudence of Colonel Spottswood in this affair. This
gentleman was Lieutenant-Governor of Virginia when Carolina was engaged
in a bloody war with the Indians. At that critical time it was
thought expedient to keep a watchful eye upon our tributary savages,
whom we knew had nothing to keep them to their duty but their fears.
Then it was that he demanded of each nation a competent number of their
great men's children to be sent to the College, where they served as so
many hostages for the good behaviour of the rest, and, at the same time,
were themselves principled in the Christian religion. He also placed a
schoolmaster among the Saponi Indians, at a salary of fifty pounds per
annum, to instruct their children. The person that undertook that charitable
work was Mr. Charles Griffin, a man of good family, who, by the
innocence of his life and the sweetness of his temper, was perfectly well
qualified for that pious undertaking. Besides, he had so much the secret
of mixing pleasure with instruction, that he had not a scholar who did
not love him affectionately. Such talents must needs have been blessed
with a proportionate success, had he not been unluckily removed to the
College, by which he left the good work he had begun unfinished. In
short, all the pains he had taken among the infidels had no other effect
than to make them cleanlier than other Indians are. The care Colonel
Spottswood took to tincture the Indian children with Christianity produced
the following epigram, which was not published during his administration,
for fear it might then have looked like flattery:—

" `Long has the furious priest assay'd in vain
With sword and fagot infidels to gain;
But now the milder soldier wisely tries,
By gentler methods, to unveil their eyes.
Wonders apart, he knew 'twere vain t'engage
The fixed perversions of misguided age:
With fairer hopes, he forms the Indian youth
To early manners, probity, and truth.
The lion's whelp, thus, on the Libyan shore,
Is tamed and gentled by the artful Moor,
Not the grim sire inured to blood before.'

"I am sorry I cannot give a better account of the state of the po
Indians with respect to Christianity, although a great deal of pains ho


285

Page 285
been taken and still continues to be taken with them. For my part, I
must be of opinion, as I hinted before, that there is but one way of converting
these poor infidels and reclaiming them from barbarity, and that
is, charitably to intermarry with them, according to the modern policy of
the most Christian King in Canada and Louisiana. Had the English done
this at the first settlement of the Colony, the infidelity of the Indians had
been worn out at this day, with their dark complexions, and the country
had swarmed with people more than it does with insects. It was certainly
an unreasonable nicety that prevented their entering into so good-natured
an alliance. All nations of men have the same natural dignity, and we
all know that very bright talents may be lodged under a very dark skin.
The principal difference between one people and another proceeds only
from the different opportunities of improvement. The Indians by no
means want understanding, and are in figure tall and well proportioned.
Even their copper-coloured complexions would admit of blanching, if not
in the first, at the furthest in the second generation. I may safely venture
to say, the Indian women would have made altogether as honest
wives for the first planters as the damsels they used to purchase from
aboard the ships. It is strange, therefore, that any good Christian should
have refused a wholesome straight bedfellow when he might have had so
fair a portion with her as the merit of saving her soul."

Colonel Byrd often speaks of Mr. Fontaine as preaching to the
heathen of North Carolina, and baptizing their children to the
number of one hundred during the route, and in his way taunts
the Carolinians for not caring for the souls of their children enough
to take the trouble of bringing them over into Virginia to have
them made Christians, and thinks that if the clergy of Virginia
were as zealous as they ought to be, they would make more frequent
excursions into Carolina for the same purpose. He was
under the impression that there was not a single minister in North
Carolina. In this he was, we think, mistaken, although correct in
the statement that the moral and religious condition of the people
was most deplorable, and that the clergy, when any were there,
were not allowed to marry, the perquisite for this being claimed by
the magistrates. The following statement, in the third volume of
the Rev. Mr. Anderson's History of the Colonial Churches, is
doubtless the true one. Speaking of the missionaries sent out by
the Propagation Society in the beginning of the last century, he
says:—

"Foremost among these were the services of John Blair, who first came
out in 1704 as an itinerant missionary through the courtesy of Lord Weymouth,
and, after suffering many hardships, returned to encounter them a
second time as one of the permanent missionaries of the Society and Commissary
of the Bishop of London. At the time of Blair's first visit, he
found three small churches already built in the Colony, with glebes belonging
to them. His fellow-labourers sent out by the Society in 1707 and
the few next years were Adams, Gordon, Urmston, Rainsford, Newman,


286

Page 286
Garzia, and Moir, some of whom, worn out by the difficulties and distresses
which poverty and fatigue and the indifference or hostility of the
people brought upon them, returned not long afterward to England.
Compelled to lodge, when at home, in some old tobacco-house, and, when
they travelled, to lie oftentimes whole nights in the woods, and to live for
days together upon no other food but bread moistened in brackish water,
journeying amid deep swamps and along broken roads through a wild and
desert country, and finding themselves at the distance of every twenty
miles upon the banks of some broad river, which they could only cross by
good boats and experienced watermen, neither of which aids were at their
command; encountering upon some of the plantations the violent opposition
of various non-conformists, already settled there in preponderating
numbers; receiving in others the promise of some small stipend from the
vestry, which was called a `living,' and, if paid at all, was paid in bills
which could only be disposed of at an excessive discount; forced, therefore,
to work hard with axe and hoe and spade to keep themselves and
their families from starving, and discerning not in any quarter a single ray
of earthly hope or comfort,—it cannot be a matter of surprise that some of
them should have sought once more the shelter and rest of their native
land. Governor Eden, and, after him, Sir Richard Everett, both appear
to have done what they could to bring about a better state of things; and,
at a later period, (1762,) Arthur Dobbs, who filled the same high office,
made earnest but vain appeals to the authorities at home, that a Bishop
might be sent out to the Province. The Assembly, also, had passed an
act as early as the year 1715, by which the whole Province was divided
into nine parishes, and a stipend, not exceeding fifty pounds, was fixed
for their respective ministers by the vestries. But, regard being had to
the peculiar condition of the Colony at that time, the letter of such an
enactment served only to provoke and aggravate dissensions. There was
no spirit of hearty co-operation in the great body of the people; and the
unwillingness of the magistrates of the several districts to set an example
of earnest and true devotion may be learned from a strange fact recorded
by Blair upon his first visit to the Province,—that, while he administered
every other ordinance required of him by the Church, he abstained from
celebrating any marriage, because the fee given upon such occasions was a
perquisite belonging to the magistrates, which he was not desirous to
deprive them of.

"Of the zeal and diligence of the clergy of North Carolina, whose
names I have given above, the reports which reached the Society in England
were uniformly satisfactory; and a deeper feeling, therefore, of regret
arises, that one of them should afterward have forfeited his good name
at Philadelphia.

"Two more of the North Carolina clergy at this time deserve to be
named with especial honour, because they had both resided as laymen for
some years in the Province, and therefore been eye-witnesses of the hardships
to which the Church there was exposed. Nevertheless, they came
forward with resolute and hopeful spirit to encounter them, and were admitted
into the ranks of her ordained missionaries. The first of these—
John Boyd—received from the Bishop of London authority to enter upon
his arduous work in 1732; and the manner in which he discharged his
duties in Albemarle county, North Carolina, until his death, six years
afterward, proved how fitly it had been conferred upon him.

"The other—Clement Hall—pursued a yet more distinguished course,


287

Page 287
and for a longer period. He had formerly been in the commission of the
peace for the Colony, and had officiated for several years as lay-reader in
congregations which could not obtain the services of an ordained minister.
The testimony borne to him in the letters which he took with him to
England, in 1743, from the Attorney-General, sheriffs, and clergy of the
Province, was amply verified by the zeal and piety with which he afterward
fulfilled the labours of his mission. Although chiefly confined to
Chowan county, it was extended at stated periods to three others; and the
number and variety of his services may be learned in some degree from
one of his earliest reports, from which it appears that he had preached
sixteen times and baptized above four hundred children and twenty adults
in three weeks. But the mere recital of numbers would describe very
imperfectly the amount of labour involved in such visitations. The distance
and difficulties of the journeys they required must also be taken
into account; and, in the case of Hall, the difficulties became greater
through his own weakness of health. But no sooner did he end one visitation
than he made preparation for another; and, except when sickness
laid him prostrate, his work ceased not for a single day. In the face of
much opposition and discouragement, he still pressed onward, and in
many places was cheered by the eager sympathy of the people. The
chapels and court-houses of the different settlements which he visited
were seldom large enough to contain half the numbers who flocked together
to hear him. Sometimes the place of their solemn meeting was
beneath the shades of the forest; at other times, by the river-side or upon
the sea-shore, the same work of truth and holiness was permitted to `have
free course and be glorified.' A summary of the labours of Clement
Hall, made about eight years after he had entered upon them, shows that
at that time (1752) he had journeyed about fourteen thousand miles,
preached nearly seven hundred sermons, baptized more than six thousand
children and grown-up persons, (among whom were several hundred
negroes and Indians,) administered the Lord's Supper frequently to as
many as two or three hundred in a single journey, besides performing the
countless other offices of visiting the sick, of churching of women, and
of catechizing the young, which he was everywhere careful to do."

The reader will more than excuse us for the foregoing notices
of the early condition of our sister State and diocese of North
Carolina.

According to promise, I now present a view of the Indian school
at Christina, in a report to the Bishop of London by its teacher,
the Rev. Mr. Griffin:—

"My Lord:

Being employed by Colonel Spottswood, our Governor,
to instruct the Indian children at this settlement, I thought it my duty to
address your lordship with this, in which I humbly beg leave to inform
you what progress I have made in carrying on this charitable design of
our excellent Governor. Should I presume to give an account of the kind
reception I met with at my arrival here from the Indian Queen, the great
men, and, indeed, from all the Indians, with a constant continuance of
their kindness and respect, and of the great sense they have of the good
that is designed them by the Governor in sending me to live with them


288

Page 288
to teach their children, as also at the great expense he has been at, and
the many fatigues he has undergone by travelling hither in the heat of
summer, as well as in the midst of winter, to the great hazard of his
health, to encourage and promote this most pious undertaking, I should
far exceed the bounds of a letter, and intrude too much on your lordship's
time. I shall, therefore, decline this, and humbly represent to your lordship
what improvements the pagan children have made in the knowledge
of the Christian religion, which I promise myself can't but be very acceptable
to you, a pious Christian Bishop. We have here a very handsome
school-house, built at the charge of the Indian Company, in which
are at present taught seventy Indian children; and many others from the
Western Indians, who live more than four hundred miles from hence, will
be brought hither in the spring to be put under my care, in order to be
instructed in the religion of the Holy Jesus. The greatest number of my
scholars can say the Belief, the Lord's Prayer, and Ten Commandments,
perfectly well; they know that there is but one God, and they are able to
tell me how many persons there are in the Godhead, and what each of
those blessed Persons have done for them. They know how many sacraments
Christ hath ordained in his Church, and for what end he instituted
them; they behave themselves reverently at our daily prayers, and can
make their responses, which was no little pleasure to their great and good
benefactor, the Governor, as also to the Rev. Mr. John Cargill, Mr. Attorney-General,
and many other gentlemen who attended him in his progress
hither. Thus, my lord, hath the Governor (notwithstanding the many
difficulties he laboured under) happily laid the foundation of this great
and good work of civilizing and converting these poor Indians, who,
although they have lived many years among the professors of the best
and most holy religion in the world, yet so little care has been taken to
instruct them therein, that they still remain strangers to the covenant of
grace, and have not improved in any thing by their conversing with Christians,
excepting in vices to which before they were strangers, which is a
very sad and melancholy reflection. But that God may crown with success
this present undertaking, that thereby his Kingdom may be enlarged
by the sincere conversion of these poor heathen, I humbly recommend
both it and myself to your lordship's prayers, and beg leave to subscribe
myself, with great duty, my lord, your lordship's

"Most dutiful and most obedient, humble servant,
"Charles Griffin."

I am sorry to add that, Mr. Griffin's labours proving much less
successful at Christina than he fondly anticipated in his letter, he
was some years after this removed to the Brafferton Professorship
at William and Mary College, and the institution at Christina
abandoned. He, however, still continued to pay attention to such
Indian youth as came to the College.


289

Page 289

ARTICLE XXIV.

Parishes in Nansemond.—No. 2.

Having thus availed myself of the journal of Colonel Byrd, and
the report of Mr. Griffin concerning the Indian School, and Mr.
Anderson's account of the Church in North Carolina, I return to
the brief sketch of the Church in Nansemond. It was divided into
two parishes,—the upper and lower. The lower was sometimes
called Suffolk parish, although the town of Suffolk was in the
upper parish. All that I have yet learned of the Suffolk or lower
parish is, that there are two old brick churches in it, one on the
left and the other on the right bank of the Nansemond River, each
about ten miles from Suffolk. There is a valuable glebe attached
to them, which, being a private donation, has not been touched.
There is no minister in the parish.

The vestry-book of the upper parish dates back as far as
November 30th, 1743. At the first vestry-meeting there were
present Colonel Andrew Meade, Edward Norfleet, Lemuel Reddick,
John Gregorie, John Norfleet, Daniel Pugh, Jethro Sumner. In
the year 1744 Captain William Wright and Captain Williams
appear on the list, and the Rev. Mr. Balfour is minister. In the
year 1745 Mr. David Meade and Mr. Daniel Pugh take the places
of Colonel Andrew Meade and Colonel Daniel Pugh, the sons succeeding
the fathers. In this year the Rev. Mr. Balfour is arraigned
by the vestry for drunkenness, swearing, and other vices, and nothing
more is heard of him. In the year 1746 Henry Temple, Christopher
Norfleet, Miles Reddick, and Mr. Wimburn are vestrymen.
In this year a new brick church is ordered in Suffolk in the place
of the old one. In the year 1747 the Rev. Willis Webb is elected
minister, Richard Baker chosen vestryman, and a chapel at Holy
Neck ordered,—the minister to preach at Middle Chapel and
Somerton Chapel until the new chapel is built. In the year 1748
the order for a new church at Suffolk is renewed. It is to be a
handsome brick church, and David Meade and Lemuel Reddick
allowed to put up, at their own expense, galleries for their families.
Wm. Moore, Thomas Sumner, Messrs. Hunter and Rawles, Henry
Holland, and John Ashburn, vestrymen. In the year 1758 a
chapel is ordered at Mr. Norfleet's, like that at Nottoway. Richard


290

Page 290
Webb, James Gibson, Josiah Reddick, are elected vestrymen. In
the year 1760 the Rev. Mr. Webb either died or removed, having
been minister without reproof for thirteen years. In the same
year the Rev. Patrick Lunan is chosen to preach at Nottoway
Chapel, Cypress Chapel, Holy Neck, and Suffolk Church, and the
Rev. Mr. Burgess assisted. In the year 1766 Jeremiah Godwin
was chosen vestryman, and the Rev. Mr. Lunan was presented by
the vestry to Commissary Robinson; and in the following year Mr.
David Meade and Thomas Gilgrist were ordered to prosecute the
case, and to apply to the Attorney-General and Mr. Wm. Waller.
This, and several other cases in different parishes, led Commissary
Robinson to write to the Bishop of London, stating the uncertainty
of the authority given to the Commissaries for the purpose of
discipline over the clergy. I presume that no change was made,
and this and other cases were left to be settled by the vestry as
they could; for we find that, though this Mr. Lunan did not preach
for the parish, he held the glebe until the year 1775, when he
relinquished all claim on glebe and parish for three hundred pounds,
paid in three annual instalments. In the year 1774 the Rev. Mr.
Agnew preached at Cypress Church and Suffolk, and the Rev. Mr.
Burgess at Holy Neck Chapel once a month. In the year 1775 the
Rev. Mr. Andrews is elected. Going back two years, we find that in
the year 1773 Mr. Lemuel Reddick resigned on account of age and
infirmities, having served forty years, and Mr. David Meade being
about to move from the county, having served twenty-seven years,
John Reddick and Andrew Meade were chosen in their room.
Walls Cooper, Willis Streaton, and William Pugh and Samuel
Cohoon appear on the vestry. In the year 1777 Mr. Andrew
Meade removed; and Jacob Sumner resigned. John Driver and
Christopher Roberts were elected. In the year 1781 John Brinkle
and John Coles were vestrymen. In the year 1785, according
to Act of Assembly, a new vestry was elected. There were six of
the Reddicks placed on it, and Richard Baker, Dimsey Sumner,
and John Giles, William King and Abraham Parker. Richard
Baker and Willis Reddick were appointed to attend the Episcopal
Convention to be held at Richmond, that year. The churchwardens
were directed to advertise for a minister. Meetings of the
vestry were also held in the years 1790 and 1791, when Henry
Harrison and Hardy Parker were chosen vestrymen. Thus
closes the journal. The misconduct of several of the ministers,
and several other circumstances, had combined for a long time to
bring the Church and religion to a sad condition.


291

Page 291

On the journal of the Convention of 1785, the Rev. Arthur
Emmerson appears as the clerical delegate, and Willis Reddick,
Richard Baker, and Solomon Shepherd as lay delegates. In the
years 1790 and 1791 a Rev. Mr. Taylor appears on the journals
from Suffolk. In the year 1812 the Rev. Jacob Keeling's name
appears on the journal, he having been ordained by Bishop Madison,
but how long before is not known. The excellencies of this
simple-hearted and single-minded man are known to some now
living. During the latter years of his ministry he had much aid
from the Rev. Mr. Jones, of the adjoining parish in the Isle of
Wight, and the Rev. Mr. Wingfield, of Portsmouth. In process
of time the Rev. Mr. Disbrough became the minister of the parish,
and during the period of his ministry the present brick church was
erected. After his departure, the Rev. Aristides and the Rev.
Leonidas Smith rendered much service to the congregation while
engaged as instructors of youth in Norfolk. The Rev. Chauncey
Colton is its present minister.

Having thus presented the fullest sketch of the parish history I
have been able to get, I close, as in some others, with a notice of
some families which once belonged to it. Though there may be
others more deserving of notice, yet, as that of my own ancestors
is the only one known to me, I will be excused for saying something
of that. It is chiefly taken, even to the letter, from papers found
among the relics of the late David Meade, of Kentucky, eldest
brother of my father, who lived to be more than ninety years of
age, and was much addicted to the study of genealogy.

The family is traced by him to Thomas Cromwell, a blacksmith
of Putney, in Ireland, who was the father of Thomas Cromwell,
servant of Cardinal Wolsey, and his successor in the favour of Henry
the Eighth, but who, forfeiting that, was beheaded by his orders.
Oliver Cromwell was his nephew. One branch of this family was
the Everards, of Essex, from whom Richard Kidder, Bishop of
Bath and Wells, was derived, who, together with his wife, was
killed by the falling upon them of a stack of chimneys in a thunderstorm.
From him came the name of Richard Kidder, so frequent
in the family, and from the Everards the name of Everard, also
common in the family. The name of Oliver is also to be found in
it. The paternal ancestor of the family in this country, Andrew
Meade, was born in the county of Kerry and kingdom of Ireland
about the latter part of the seventeenth century. Tradition says,
that on leaving his native country he went first to London, and from
thence came to New York, where he, though a Romanist, married


292

Page 292
Miss Mary Latham, a Quakeress, of Flushing, (a family still residing
there,)—a heterogeneous kind of union, less obnoxious to nature than
to bigotry, says Mr. Meade. Some five years after, he removed to
Virginia and settled in Nansemond county. It has never been
certainly ascertained whether he formally renounced the Catholic
faith, though he was for many years a representative of his county
in the House of Burgesses, judge of the county, and colonel of the
militia.[84]

He is said to have been a large, muscular man, of great corporal
strength, and rather hard-featured in the face, but of fine form.
He died in the year 1745, leaving a character without a stain,
having had the glorious epithet connected with it, The Honest.
One son and daughter were all the children which he left. His
son David Meade, and wife Susannah, afforded their posterity an
example of conjugal felicity which has been rarely equalled. The
God of Love was present at their first interview, and made them
feel the effects of his disposition at the same moment. But there
was a considerable lapse of time between their first meeting and
marriage. Her father was Governor Everard, of North Carolina,
then living with his family in Edenton, and was unwilling to leave
his daughter in the wilds of America when he should return home.
When about to sail,—the ship in which they were to embark lying
in Hampton Roads, then called Nansemond River,—there was no
other house at that time, convenient to the place of embarkation, at
which they could be well accommodated but Andrew Meade's.
To this they went; and, being detained some time by adverse winds,
or other causes, the earnest entreaties of a most affectionate father,
almost distracted at the thought of parting with his only son, (who
was determined to follow her,) at length prevailed, and they were
immediately married;[85] and the daughter of Andrew Meade was
named Priscilla, and married a Mr. Wilson Curle, of Hampton, by
whom she had two daughters and not less than six sons.


293

Page 293

David Meade had two daughters and five sons. His daughters
were Anne, who married Richard Randolph, of Curls, and Mary,
who married Colonel Walker, each of them leaving many children,
who are scattered over the land. The sons were David Meade, who
inherited the estate in Nansemond, married a Miss Waters, of
Williamsburg, then settled at Macox, in Prince George, then removed
to Kentucky, devoting his time and fortune to the improvement
of the seats on which he lived, and which were celebrated all
over Virginia and Kentucky. The others were R. K. Meade, aid
to General Washington, Everard Meade, aid to General Lincoln
and afterward raised to the rank of General, Andrew Meade, who
settled in Brunswick, and John, who died in his youth. The three
elder children were sent to England for their education, and placed
under the care of Dr. Thackery, the Principal of Harrow School,
and Archdeacon of Surrey. The celebrated Sir William Jones, Sir
Joseph Banks, and Dr. Parr were at that time among its scholars.[86]

As it is good sometimes to wander amidst ruins and graveyards,
I will take my readers for a few moments to the spot where my
ancestors lived and some of them died and were buried, and from
whence they will rise up on the great day. It stands on an eminence
about a mile back of the town of Suffolk. An avenue of trees led
from it to the church in Suffolk, through which the family, at the
sound of the bell, repaired to church. Andrew Meade, having made
a handsome fortune, first by the fur-trade with Indians up the
Roanoke in Virginia and North Carolina, and then by the lumber-trade,
built a large house on this spot for his residence, and storehouses
also, as he still carried on trade by a creek which came up
almost to his door. The mansion has long since been consumed by
fire, and the other houses mouldered into ruin. The estate has
passed into many hands since the last of the family parted with it.
But there was one spot which it was hoped would be spared until
the dissolution of the earth,—the graveyard,—so well was it guarded.
It was a small square lot, around which cedar-trees were planted so
thick that their bodies reached within one or two feet of each
other. A better enclosure, and one more likely to endure, cannot
well be imagined. I visited the place some years since for the first


294

Page 294
time, and was sorry to find that the last owner of it had cut down
every tree and converted them into stakes and firewood. The
stumps, however, were perfectly apparent. The graveyard was
thickly covered with grass, leaves, briers, and shrubs,—so much so,
that a friend and connection of the family who was with me could
with difficulty get a few yards into it, to search for some memorial
of the dead, for nothing of the kind appeared on the surface. The
corner of one slab, thickly covered with grass and mould, was all
that he could see or feel. We left the spot, convinced that a better
protection for the place and its monuments, whatever they were,
could not be provided, than that which they then had. But we
were mistaken. A few months since, I wrote to that same friend
and companion, saying that in view of this work which I am now
engaged in, I wished him to get some suitable hands with proper
implements, and remove all the trees, shrubs, briers, and rubbish,
so as to find out what was concealed by them. According to my
request, he went to the spot prepared to make the examination, when
to his surprise he found not a stump or shrub remaining, but only
a number of small fragments of tombstone about the spot, which
was now in the midst of a cultivated field, itself ploughed up and
cultivated. The names of Caruthers and Vail were all that could
be distinguished. That of Meade could not be made out on any
of the fragments. Perhaps no tombstone with that name was
ever there, although some of the family must have been buried
there.

I shall be excused for adding in this place some other particulars
concerning my father. He married, at the age of nineteen, Miss
Jane Randolph, of Curls, sister of Richard Randolph, who married
his sister, and aunt of John Randolph, of Roanoke, who
always called him Uncle Kidder. His wife was some years older
than himself, which called from the elder Judge Tucker some
humorous poetry, entitled Happy Dick, in which he condoles with
the younger ladies on James River upon their disappointment.
This wife lived but a few years, having several children during the
time, and leaving none behind. During his first marriage he lived
at Coggin's Point, in Prince George, the present possession and
residence of Edmund Ruffin, and which he sold during the war,
though, by means of the depreciation of money, he realized but
little from it. In Prince George he was a vestryman, but resigned
because the vestry would not discharge an unworthy clergyman.
He entered early into the Revolutionary War, being one of twenty-four
persons—among whom were James Monroe, George Wythe,


295

Page 295
Benjamin Harrison, Colonel Bland, &c.—who, in June, 1775, seized
upon the arms and ammunition in Dunmore's house, in Williamsburg,
carrying the powder to the magazine, and dividing the arms
among themselves for safe-keeping and the service of the country.
In December of that year he was found at the battle of Great
Bridge, near Norfolk,—the first battle fought in Virginia. He had
raised a company, and was then serving as captain under General
Woodford. [See the account which he gives in the Bland Papers.]
He was soon taken into the family of General Washington as his aid,
and was the most active in reconnoitring, being a good rider and
having a fine animal,—the black mare so well known to the British
as well as American armies. [See Campbell's History of Virginia.]
He used to say that Hamilton did all the head-work for the General,
and he the riding, reconnoitring, and carrying orders on the field.
He was with Washington in all the great battles of the Revolution.
To him was committed the superintendence of the execution of
Major André, of which he always spoke with much feeling, saying
that he could not forbear tears at seeing the execution of so uncommon
and interesting a man, though he entirely approved the
order. At the close of the war he married the widow of Mr. William
Randolph, of Chattsworth, near Richmond, the brother of
Governor Beverly Randolph, of Cumberland, and Colonel Robert
Randolph, of Fauquier. She is mentioned in Campbell's History
as among the female contributors to the expenses of the war in a
time of great need. Her contribution was eight hundred dollars.
Perhaps this circumstance may have first attracted my father's
attention to her. When Washington was taking leave of some of
his aids, a circumstance occurred which showed his estimate of
their different characters. To Hamilton he said, "You must go to
the bar, which you can reach in six months;" to Laurens, something
as appropriate; to Colonel Meade, whom he then called by
his familiar name, "Friend Dick, you must go to a plantation in
Virginia; you will make a good farmer and an honest foreman of
the grand jury of the county where you live." And so it proved;
for he became a most attentive, successful, and, at first, hardworking
farmer, and was, while health permitted, always the foreman
of the grand jury of the old District Court of Frederick
county. He rejoiced as a citizen in those blessings which his military
services had helped to obtain, and often said that there was
no debt he so gladly discharged as the taxes levied for the maintenance
of our free and happy government. He never allowed a
tax-gatherer to come to his house in search of what was due, but

296

Page 296
always anticipated this by paying it beforehand at some appointed
place. The same was true of all his debts. As infirmities of body
increased, the foundation of which were laid in his exposure during
the war, and he could no longer fell trees and maul rails with the
very few servants saved from the wreck of his estate, he still
laboured in other ways. A box of tools, imported from England,
stood in the corner of the old log dining-room, and a saddler's
bench during the winter season was on one side. All the helves,
rakes, cradles, gates, and plantation-gear were made by his own
hands; and so expert was he in the latter manufacture as to produce
a compliment from an old friend, that "a good saddler was
spoiled in the attempt to make a gentleman of him." Nevertheless,
he did not entirely discard books and politics, but sometimes
wrote an article for the press on some subject which deeply involved
our country's interests. Nor did Washington disdain to
consult with him as to the choice of officers when, in the near prospect
of war with France, he was called on once more to head the
armies of our country. The year before the death of Washington,
my father paid him a visit at Mount Vernon. They had not met
since the close of the war. The general was on his farm. They
met in one of the fields, near a pair of draw-bars. Each, recognising
the other, dismounted and shook hands over them, the General
insisting that he would pull down his own bars, and my father
that he would be his aid still.

My father survived but a few years. Several interesting obituaries,
in prose and verse, appeared at his death. From them I take
the following extracts. The first is from the pen of Mr. Robert
Page, of Janeville, Frederick county:—

"His virtues, though of that dignified kind which enforce respect, were
yet so tempered by gentleness and condescension that they never failed
to conciliate affection. In public life his conduct was such as to secure
the esteem and friendship of those accurate discerners of merit, Washington
and Hamilton. This speaks sufficiently his eulogium. His benevolence
was ardent, active, and disinterested; and one of his greatest pleasures
consisted in promoting the happiness and welfare of all around him.
The death of his friend, General Hamilton, made an impression of melancholy
on his mind, which, it is believed, was not obliterated until the
hour of his death."

The following is from the Rev. Mr. Wiley:—

"The heart that beat for public weal,
Where justice held her steady way,
Where glow'd the flame of patriot zeal.
Is now a lump of inert clay

297

Page 297
But memory often shall rejoice,
With pensive pleasure, to retrace
His form, the accents of his voice,
And every valued mental grace.
His social gayety, whose flow
Could pleasure ever new impart;
His candour, which could never bow
To veil in dark disguise the heart;
His goodness, active, ardent, great,
And prompt the sufferer's wants to aid;
These, whilst the pulse of life shall beat,
Will never from remembrance fade."

The last is from Mrs. Mary Page, of Pagebrook, Frederick
county:—

"Though wars have ceased, the hero claims renown;
With choicest myrtle let his tomb be crown'd;
And ye, sweet nine, your plaintive tribute pay,
And o'er his virtues shed a milder ray.
In scenes domestic man is truly known;
In scenes domestic Meade forever shone.
His soul, unconscious of one narrow thought,
Of self regardless, did the thing he ought.
Where'er his form benignant bent its way,
Grim care soon vanish'd and each heart was gay.
At mercy's call he ever foremost press'd;
For meek-eyed pity sway'd his manly breast.
Hasten, fair nymphs of Frederick's peaceful plains;
Attend, fond youths, to breathe your mournful strains;
Votaries of Hymen, follow to deplore
That Meade, your pride and father, is no more.
But why, blest shade, should friends lament thy doom?
Joys celestial hover o'er thy tomb;
Thy Mary, purer than the snowdrop white,
Shall guide thine offspring to the realms of light."

I conclude this article by a brief reference to one individual
belonging to Suffolk parish, whom not to mention in its history
were an unpardonable neglect. In the history of Bruton parish,
Williamsburg, we have on the list of vestrymen and active members
of the Church the name of Prentiss more than once. Mr.
Prentiss, of Suffolk, was a worthy successor to the virtues of his
ancestors. To his persevering attachment to the Church of his
fathers during a long and dark period of almost despair, may be
mainly ascribed, under God, its continuance in Suffolk. A more
humble and conscientious Christian and more true-hearted Episcopalian,
a more honourable and courteous gentleman, a more
affectionate husband and tender father, was, and is, nowhere


298

Page 298
to be found. His descendants still cherish the Church in which
they were trained, and will so do, we trust, to the latest generations.

Other members might, doubtless, be found among the Reddicks,
the Joneses, the Bakers, the Hallidays, and other families of the
parish of Suffolk, most worthy of special notice; but the writer has
not the necessary information for the purpose.

 
[84]

From his holding these offices, we may certainly conclude that he had renounced
it, since test-oaths were required of such officers, and he was reputed to be an
honest man. In this I am further confirmed by the fact, that the name of Colonel
Andrew Meade stands first on the list of vestrymen in the year 1743, when the list
I have commences. He was at Suffolk, and a hospitable entertainer, in 1728, as
Colonel Byrd testifies.

[85]

The case of David Meade and Susannah Everard had something so touching
in it as to give rise to some little novel or poem, but of which nothing remains but
uncertain tradition. David Meade is represented as rigid in his morals, and one
who could not tolerate vice. He was active in enforcing discipline against evil
ministers.

[86]

The talented and unhappy Dr. Dodd, of London, used to preach at Harrow to
the boys of that school. I have seen his sermons to them, and heard my father
speak of his eloquence. When he was executed, the boys of the school were either
sent or permitted to go. My father witnessed the scene. I may be permitted to
add concerning my father, that while at the school his teacher said of him that he
would never make a great scholar, but he will be what is much better,—vir probus.


299

Page 299

ARTICLE XXV.

Parishes in Isle of Wight and Southampton.

The Isle of Wight was one of the eight original shires in the
year 1634, and embraced what is now Southampton, extending
from James River to the North Carolina line,—a distance of ninety
miles. The first name it bore was Warrosquoyacke, which, in the
course of three years, was changed to its present. In all the early
notices of the Colony we have frequent mention of this settlement,
for it was among the earliest, being not far from Jamestown, on
the other side of the river. We find in Henning's Statutes, that
in 1642 it was divided into two parishes, the upper and lower, or
Newport and Warwicksqueake, each extending the full length of
the county, or ninety miles. The condition of the division, however,
was that the Rev. Mr. Falkner, the minister, should not lose
any thing of his salary by the change. In the year 1734, those
parts of the two parishes which lay south of Blackwater were
united in one, under the name of Nottoway parish, while those on
the north of it were to be united under the name of Newport parish.
In the year 1748, fourteen years later, Southampton was cut off
from Isle of Wight, the parish still retaining the name of Nottoway.
In the year 1762 this was again divided by the Nottoway River
running through Southampton, into two parishes, and St. Luke's
established. There are no Church records of this parish to which
I can resort for information about it. At the time of Tarleton's
invasion of Virginia, he sent a detachment to Macclesfield, the
residence of Colonel Josiah Parker, of Revolutionary memory, in
hopes to take him and destroy his papers, &c. In the former he
failed, but in the latter succeeded. Among the effects destroyed
were the vestry-book and some Church-papers, which he, as a warm
friend of the Church, had in keeping. It appears, however, that,
notwithstanding the vigilance of Arnold's men, some papers relating
to the Church were preserved and remained in possession of his
daughter, Mrs. Cowper, until the war of 1812, when a militia force
which was stationed near Macclesfield, being in want of cartridge-paper,
obtained from the servants what they supposed was waste
paper; and thus what remained of Church records was used in the
service of the country. Such being the case, I must rely on tradition


300

Page 300
for any statements not provable by later records. There
have been some very old persons in the county, who have transmitted
to the present generation some testimonies which have probable
accuracy in them. There is a tradition that the old and venerable
brick church a few miles from Smithfield was built in 1632 and
was the second church erected in the Colony. Dr. Hawks mentioned
this as probable. It is quite likely that the date of its erection
was as early as 1632, but that it was the second church in the
Colony is disproved by all the early writers, who tell us of one at
Henrico in 1611. Others, no doubt, though of a rude character,
were raised in earlier settlements long before this time, and perhaps
some cheap and plain one at Warrosquoyacke itself. The building
of which we are speaking is a remarkable one. All of its materials
must have been of the best kind, and its workmanship superior,—
whether those materials were from England and the workmanship
as to the interior done in England, as tradition says, or not. Its
present condition fully proves this. Its thick walls and high tower,
like that of some English castle, are still firm, and promise so to
be for a long time to come. The windows, doors, and all the interior,
are gone. It is said that the eastern window—twenty-five
feet high—was of stained glass. This venerable building stands
not far from the main road leading from Smithfield to Suffolk, in
an open tract of woodland. The trees for some distance around
it are large and tall and the foliage dense, so that but little of the
light of the sun is thrown upon it. The pillars which strengthen
the walls, and which are wide at the base, tapering toward the
eaves of the house by stair-steps, have somewhat mouldered, so as
to allow various shrubs and small trees to root themselves therein.
Some few, indeed, though quite small, have issued from between
the bricks beneath the eaves, on other parts of the walls. This,
arising from the dense shade around, gives the building and the
picture of it (which I have) a deeply-interesting appearance.[87]
Some twenty or thirty years ago a new roof was put upon it
and worship occasionally held there, in which I have partaken on


No Page Number
illustration

OLD SMITHFIELD CHURCH.



No Page Number

301

Page 301
several occasions; but, the neighbourhood being deserted of
Episcopal families and a new church built in Smithfield, it is now,
like the tomb or body of Sir John Moore, "left alone in its glory."

There were two other old churches in this county. The Bay
Church was a brick building about five miles northwest of Smithfield,
near a bend in James River called Burwell's Bay, (some of
that name having settled there at an early period,) originally
Warrosquoyacke Bay. It was erected about the middle of the last
century on the lands of Colonel Burwell, who was a Colonial clerk
of the county. About the year 1810, the estate came into other
hands; the church was pulled down and a kitchen built of the
bricks; the sides and backs of the pews were used to make stalls for
a stable and divisions in a barn, which was last struck with lightning
and burned down. The bell of the church was exchanged in
Richmond for a brandy-still. The other church, called the Isle of
Wight Chapel, was a framed wooden building about fifteen miles
southwest of Smithfield, and was erected about the year 1750. It
was destroyed by fire some thirty or forty years since. The new
church at Smithfield was built in 1832, and has been under the
charge of the Rev. C. J. Hedges, Thomas Smith, Jonathan Smith,
John Downing, John C. McCabe, H. T. Wilcoxon, and Chauncey
Colton.

Of the ministers in the county of Isle of Wight, previous to the
year 1724, we have not yet been able to learn any thing except
what has been already stated,—that, in the year 1642, the Rev. Mr.
Falkner was rector of the whole county. It was then divided into
two parishes. In the year 1724 the same division continued. The
Rev. Alexander Forbes was minister of the upper parish, called
Warwicksqueake, and Thomas Bayley of the lower or Newport
parish. I have before me a letter from each of them, in that year,
to the Bishop of London, giving an account of their parishes. Mr.
Forbes enlarges in a second letter on all the points contained in
his first, and gives a most particular, faithful, and painful history
of all the difficulties and trials of his ministry, and of the
unhappy condition of things in his parish and in the Colony. His
parish is eleven miles wide along the river, and more than sixty
miles long, extending to the North Carolina line. He has three
churches, one of which was doubtless the old one near Smithfield.
He speaks of the impossibility of any successful efforts at doing
much good either by preaching or catechizing, whether in churches
or private houses,—both of which he had diligently tried,—by reason
of the extent of his parish and the scattered position of the families


302

Page 302
of his charge. He complains much of the Quakers, who annoyed
him not a little; somewhat of the Anabaptists, who were then finding
their way into Virginia; but most of all of some of our own
clergy, whose evil lives hindered the religion of the laity. His
nearest neighbour, as we shall see, was an instance of this. He
speaks of the Indian settlement on the Nottoway River,—Christina,
—where Mr. Griffin's school was, and which was in his parish, though
afterward in Southampton,—which was cut off from the Isle of
Wight,—and deplores the ill example of the Colonists and its influence
on the natives. There were no schools in his parish. His
number of communicants not more than thirty or forty. His glebe
was indifferent and had no house on it. The tobacco raised there,
being of bad quality, sold at a very reduced price, so that his salary
was small. From the testimony of Commissary Blair and others, he
was, however, not a mere complainant, but a very faithful and laborious
man, who continued at his post for a long time,—perhaps until
his death.

As to his neighbour,—the Rev. Mr. Bayley, in the lower parish,
—he was, from all the accounts we have of him, the very reverse.
Commissary Blair and Governor Spottswood speak of him, in their
letters to the Bishop of London and others, as a most notoriously
wicked man. Mr. Blair says that he has tried sharp reproof
without effect, and thinks that he shall be obliged to adopt something
more severe. Whether he ever did does not appear. He
acknowledges that the difficulties in the way of discipline were so
great, and ministers so scarce, that he was obliged to pass by many
offences.

From his answers to the Bishop of London, it appears that Mr.
Bayley had been ten years in the States,—during a part of which he
was minister of St. John's Church, Baltimore,—that there were four
hundred families in his parish, and about forty communicants. He
also had the small parish of Chuckatuck, in Nansemond, under his
care, at which he preached during the week. In answer to the question
whether there were any infidels in his parish, he says, "Yes,
both bond and free;" and the method of their conversion was "by
baptism and instruction." He speaks also of there being some
unendowed schools in his parish, but in such way that we conclude
they are none other than private schools.

After these we learn, by oral tradition, that there was a Mr.
Pedier, who probably was minister of the parish in which the old
church was situated, as he was buried in the aisle of it. Then the
Rev. J. H. Burgess, afterward of Southampton, was minister of


303

Page 303
the parish for the years 1773, 1774, 1775, and 1776; how much
longer we know not. He went from thence to Northampton.
The last of whom we hear was the Rev. Mr. Hubard, who was
ordained by the Bishop of London in 1766. When he entered on
his charge we know not, as he was minister in Warwick in the
year 1776. He died in the parsonage on the glebe of Newport
parish, after the year 1802. He manifested his attachment to the
Church by preaching to the last, though there were only two or
three persons present.

No vestry-book furnishing us with a list of the vestrymen, we
insert the names of some of the families in this parish:—Bridger,
Smith, Pierce, Parker, Young, Cary, Pedier, Wills, Godwin, Burwell,
Cocke, Holliday, Todd, Purdy, Tucker, Butler, &c. The
tombstone of an ancestor of the Bridgers still stands on a farm a
few miles from the Old Brick Church, with an inscription which
declares him to have been a Councillor of State for Virginia
under Charles II., and that he died in 1682.

Since writing the foregoing, I have received further information
concerning this parish from a friend, who has come into possession
of the fragments of an old vestry-book, which partially cover
the period lying between 1724 and 1771. As we have stated
above, the worthy Alexander Forbes was the minister in 1724,
as appears by his letter to the Bishop of London in that year;
but, according to the vestry-record, in two years after the Rev.
Mr. Barlow is the minister officiating occasionally, being the
minister of some neighbouring parish. In the year 1727, we find
the Rev. Mr. Bayley—the minister of the lower parish, of whom
we spoke as being so unworthy a man—applying for this parish.
The vestry dispose of his application by electing him on the condition
that "he make it appear that he is not in any ways debarred
or silenced by any order of Government." It appears,
from other documents in my possession, that he had been thus
"debarred and silenced." He was a notorious character, and,
either before or after this, was in North Carolina and other parts
of Virginia, seeking employment.

In the year 1729, the Rev. John Gammill was chosen minister,
and continued so until his death in 1744. The following letter
from Governor Gooch to the vestry speaks well of him:—

"Gentlemen:

"It is a great satisfaction to me that I can now recommend to your
parish, which has been so long without a minister so good a man as the


304

Page 304
bearer hereof, the Rev. Mr. Gammill, whose good life and conversation
will be very agreeable to you, as it is to, gentlemen,

"Your affectionate friend and humble servant,
"William Gooch.

Commissary Blair also recommends him highly.

After Mr. Gammill's ministry the Rev. Mr. Camm occasionally
officiated in this parish. Then the Rev. Mr. McKensie preached
nine sermons. In the year 1746, we find the Rev. John Reid
present with the vestry; and he seems to have been the minister
until 1755, when the record becomes defective. In 1766, the
Rev. Mr. Milner is the minister, and resigns in 1770. Tradition
says, as we have stated, that a Rev. Mr. Pedier was once minister,
and was buried in Old Smithfield Church. It is probable he succeeded
Mr. Milner. Then came Mr. Burgess and Hubard, as
before stated. The old vestry-book confirms what has been stated
as to the position of the three churches of this parish.

The following is the list of vestrymen during the period of which
it is a record:—

"Laurence Baker, Samuel Davis, Matthew Jones, Thomas Walton,
William Kinchin, William Crumples, William Bridger, James Day,
George Reddick, Matthew Wills, Reuben Proctor, Nathaniel Ridley,
Thomas Woodly, John Goodrich, George Williamson, James Ingles, John
Porson, John Davis, John Simmons, William Wilkinson, Joseph Godwin,
Henry Lightfoot, James Bridger, John Monro, Thomas Parker, Hardy
Council, Henry Pitt, Arthur Smith, Richard Wilkinson, Henry Applewhaite,
Thomas Day, John Laurence, Hugh Giles, Thomas and John
Applewhaite, Thomas Tynes, John Eley, Thomas Smith, Jordan Thomas
John Darden, Dolphin Drew, John Wills, William Hodsden, William
Salter, Robert Barry, Charles Tilghman, Robert Burwell, Miles Wills,
Edmund Godwin."

In the foregoing list, my friend remarks, are forty different
surnames, almost all of which are now to be found in Isle of Wight
and Southampton counties; that is, within the original bounds of old
Warwicksqueake shire and parish. It appears from the vestry-book
that, in the year 1737,—that is, one hundred and five years
after it was first built,—the Old Smithfield Church had a new
covering of shingles put upon it. This was doubtless the first
repair of the kind since its erection, for it was no uncommon thing
for a well-built roof to last thus long. Old Yeocomico Church, in
Westmoreland, has one on it at this time of greater age.

I have alluded to the families of Bridger and Parker, and their
mansion at Macclesfield,—a few miles from Old Smithfield Church,


305

Page 305
—in the first part of this article, and to a tombstone thereat; and
a friend has furnished me with the following inscription, with the
explanatory remarks:—

"Inscription on the tomb of the Honble Joseph Bridger, Paymaster-General
to the British troops in America during Bacon's Rebellion, in the reign
of Charles the Second of England.

"Sacred to the memory of the Honble Joseph Bridger, Councillor of
State to Charles the 2d. He dyed Aprill 15, Anno Domini 1688, aged
58 years, mournfully leaving his wife, three sons, and four daughters."

Some eulogistic verses are added, from which we select the following:—

"Can nature silent mourn, and can dumb stone
Make his true worth to future ages known?
Here lies the late great minister of state,
That royall virtues had, and royall fate."

Perhaps it was as great an honour to him to be the son of the
man who built Old Smithfield Church as to have been one of the
Councillors of the corrupt Charles II., and to have acted with
Sir William Berkeley against him who is called the rebel Bacon.
That he was the son of the man who contracted for the church is
stated in the following words accompaning the inscription:—

"General Bridger was the son and heir of the Joseph Bridger who
superintended the building of St. Luke's, (the Brick Church,) in Newport
parish, Isle of Wight county."

My friend adds these words:—

"The above is taken from a copy made by the late Mrs. Anne P. P.
Cowper, of Macclesfield, from the tombstone, which is erected on a
farm about three miles below the Old Brick Church, and is still in a
perfect state. This farm was a part of an immense landed estate which
descended to Mrs. Cowper from her mother, who was a widow Bridger,
and married Colonel Josiah Parker, of Revolutionary celebrity."

I have also referred to a small parish, called Chuckatuck, in
Nansemond county, of which I could say nothing for want of any
documents. A friend has sent me the copy of a portion of an old
vestry-book of this parish, which contains the proceedings of the
vestry from December of the year 1702 to 1709. I will first
give the names of the gentlemen composing the vestry during that
period:—

"Captain Edmund Godwin, Major Thomas Swann, Captain L. Havield,
Mr. James Davis, Mr. Oliver Slaughter, Mr. James Cewling, Mr. Thomas


306

Page 306
Drury, Colonel Thomas Godwin, Captain John Pitt, Mr. Thomas Corbell,
Colonel George Norsworthy, Captain Charles Drury, Mr. John Brasseur,
Major Thomas Jordan, Captain B. Kearne, Mr. John Lear, Peter Best,
Thomas Cutchins, John Isles."

The vestry seems to have been an energetic and decided one.
In April, 1703, is their first action:—

"The vestry, being willing to embrace the first opportunity for the
service of God, have therefore entertained and agreed with Mr. William
Rudd, minister, to preach a sermon every intervening Thursday until the
1st of October next, at the rate of three hundred and eight pounds of
tobacco per sermon, and also to pay twelve shillings for his ferrying over
the river: which Mr. William Rudd accepts, and promises, with God's
assistance, to perform his duty. During the summer they invite him to
become their minister and preach every other Sunday, for eight thousand
pounds of tobacco."

Mr. Rudd was then the minister of Norfolk, in Elizabeth River
parish, and it was customary to ask the consent of the Governor
to a separation; wherefore the vestry addressed a letter to Governor
Nicholson. Mr. Rudd became their minister, and remained such
for some years. After this they had the services of the Rev.
Thomas Hassell, but how long is not known. It was during the
infancy of this vestry that Governor Nicholson was endeavouring
to establish his authority over the vestries in relation to induction
of ministers and the supply of vacancies. The opinion of Sir
Edward Northy, the King's Attorney, was sent to all the vestries
and ordered to be recorded on the vestry-books. The vestry of
the little Chuckatuck parish obeyed the Governor's order and
placed the document on record, but added this spirited resolution
to it:—

"But as to presenting our present or any other minister for induction,
are not of opinion, [here is something not very intelligible by itself,
but rendered perfectly so by what follows,] but are willing to entertain
our present minister upon the usual terms, as formerly hath been used in
this Colony."

I do not know that there was ever more than one church in this
parish. That is still standing, and has been occasionally supplied
by ministers from Suffolk and Smithfield. I have often been in
it, and enjoyed the services held therein.

On the few pages of this vestry-book which are before me, I
find all the oaths which at that time were required of vestrymen
and churchwardens. As they varied according to times and circumstances,
and some are to be seen in one vestry-book and some


307

Page 307
in another, I will present them all to the reader as they here
appear:—

"The oaths appointed to be taken, as by an Act of Parliament, in the
reign of William the Third, instead of allegiance and supremacy.

"I, A. B., do sincerely promise and swear, that I will be true and faithful,
and bar [bear] true allegiance to his Majesty King George the Third.
So help me God.

"I, A. B., do from my heart abhor, detest, and abjure, as impious and
hereticall, that damnable doctrine and position, that Princes excommunicated
or deprived by the Pope, or any authority of the See of Rome, may
be deposed or murthered by any of their subjects whatsoever; and I do
declare, that no foreign Prince, Person or Prelate, State or Potentate,
hath, or ought to have, any jurisdiction, power, superiority, predominance,
or authority, ecclesiasticall or spiritual, within this Realm. So help me
God.

"I, A. B., do sincerely believe that there is not any transubstantiation
in the Sacraments of the Lord's Supper, or in the elements of bread and
wine, at or after the consecration thereof by any person whatsoever."

"The oath of a vestryman, being the oath of obedience canonical.

"I, A. B., do swear, that I approve of the doctrine and discipline, or
government, in the Church of England as concerning all things necessary
to Salvation; and that I will not endeavour, by myself or any other,
directly or indirectly, to bring in any Popish Doctrine contrary to that
which is so established; nor will I ever give my consent to alter the government
of this church by Archbishops, Bishops, Deans, and Archdeacons,
&c., as it stands now established, and as by right it ought to stand, nor yet
ever to subject it to the usurpations and superstitions of the See of Rome.
And all these things I do plainly and sincerely acknowledge and swear,
according to the plain and common sense and understanding of the same
words, without any equivocation, mental evasion, or secret reservation
whatsoever; and this I do heartily, willingly, and truly, upon the faith of
a Christian. So help me God."

`The oath of a churchwarden.

"You shall execute the office of churchwarden in the parish where you
are chosen, according to your discretion and skill, in his Majesties' ecclesiastical
laws of this Realm now in force. So help me God."

PARISHES IN SOUTHAMPTON.

Having exhausted our little stock of information concerning the
Isle of Wight parishes, we proceed to Southampton, which was cut
off from it in the year 1748, and the parish called Nottoway, which
was in a few years divided and St. Luke's parish established. In
the year 1758 we find a Rev. Thomas Burgess minister of the undivided
Nottoway parish; and in the year 1773, the Rev. William
Agur minister of Nottoway parish, and the Rev. George Gurley
of St. Luke's, and the same in 1774. But in the year 1776, the


308

Page 308
Rev. William Andrews takes the place of Mr. Agur in Nottoway
parish. In the year 1785, Mr. George Gurley appears in the Convention
at Richmond as rector of St. Luke's still, and in 1786 the
Rev. Benjamin Blunt has taken his place. This is the last representation
from Southampton until after the revival of the Church
in Virginia. I have, however, some private information concerning
a portion of its intermediate history. During the war the Rev.
John Henry Burgess, who had been before ministering in Newport
parish, Isle of Wight, moved into Southampton, and there both
preached the Gospel and instructed the youth. He probably
preached at all the churches in the two parishes, and supported
himself by teaching, as the salaries of the ministers were very
badly paid during the war, if at all, and many of them ceased to
preach. There were not less than seven churches in the two
parishes, including one built under his auspices. The names of five
of them were Lecock, Oberry's, Simmons's, Jones's, and Millfield.
The latter, Millfield, was near his residence, and is now in possession
of the Baptists. All the rest have passed away. Mr. Burgess's
school was held in high esteem. Among those which were
educated in it we may mention one of the late Presidents, William
Henry Harrison. To the number of patriotic ministers we may
surely add the Rev. Mr. Burgess; for so zealously did he advocate
the cause of America, both privately and publicly, that the British
got possession of him during the war, and kept him a prisoner
until the close of it. So entire was the prostration of the Episcopal
Church in this county, that it was some time after our efforts
at resuscitation commenced before attention was turned toward it.
The Revs. Edmund Withers and Edward B. McGuire gave a portion
of their time and labours to it a few years since, and not without
effect. The Rev. Mr. Gibson, of Petersburg, and Robert, of
Greensville, have added their occasional services since then, and we
hope the time is not far distant when we shall have a regular
ministry and temples of our own.

PARISHES IN SURREY COUNTY.

This county originally contained all that is now Surrey and
Sussex. There were two parishes in it in 1738, called Lawn's
Creek and Southwark, running the whole length of the county
toward the Carolina line, being one hundred and twenty miles.
At that time each of them were curtailed; and, as in the case of
the Isle of Wight parishes, Black River divided them. Those
parts of the parishes which lie south of Blackwater River formed


309

Page 309
a parish by the name of Albemarle, in what is now Sussex county,
and the parts north of Black River formed another parish, retaining
the name of Southwark,—that of Lawn's Creek being henceforth
dropped. Although there were many ministers in the parishes
of Surrey before the year 1724, and between that and 1754 and
1758, and though I have their names on different documents in
possession, I am not able to identify or locate them, because these
documents do not appropriate them to their parishes. I am able to
say who were the ministers in 1724, because their answers to the
Bishop of London show it. I can say who were the ministers in
1754 and 1758, because I have a list both of the ministers and
parishes of those years. Had I the old vestry-books, they would
supply the deficiency; but I have none of either of these parishes;
and yet they may be in existence, though in some tattered form.

I give, first, some of the answers of the Rev. John Worden,
who says,—

"I arrived in Virginia in 1712, when Governor Spottswood sent me for
six months to Jamestown. Thence I went to the parishes of Weynoake
and Martins Brandon, both of which parishes were hardly sufficient to
support a minister; therefore I removed to this parish, where I have been
since January 30th, 1717." His parish, he says, "is ten miles wide
along the river, and one hundred and twenty long, with seven hundred
tithables in it. There are some Indians, bond and free, and negroes, bond
and free. Some masters will have their negroes baptized; and some will
not, because they will not be sureties for them. I cannot persuade parents
and masters to send their children and servants to be catechized. I sometimes
get eight shillings and fourpence for my tobacco, per hundred, and
sometimes not so much; and if I send it to Europe, perhaps it brings me
in debt, as of late years it hath happened. The vestry will not keep my
glebe-house in order; but if I choose to do it myself, I may and welcome.
I have a church and chapel thirty miles apart,—twelve communicants at
the former, and thirty or forty at the latter."

The following are the answers of the Rev. John Cargill, minister
of Southwark parish:—

"I have been here sixteen years. My parish is twenty miles in width,
and one hundred inhabited in length, being a frontier-parish. It has
three hundred and ninety-four families. The school of Mr. Griffin, called
Christina, for Indians, is on the borders of my parish. There is one
church and two chapels, and seventy or eighty communicants. My tobacco
now sells at five shillings per hundred; my salary from thirty to
forty pounds. My glebe-house is in a very bad condition, and the parish
will not repair it, so I must look out for a house elsewhere. No school,
no library, in the parish."

Such is the sad account in 1724 of the two parishes in Surrey
county.


310

Page 310

In the year 1758, after the arrangement by which all on the north
side of Blackwater is united in Southwark parish, we find the Rev.
Peter Davis its minister; in the years 1774 and 1776, the Rev.
Benjamin Blagrove. In the year 1785, the Rev. John Henry
Burgess, of whom we recently spoke as minister in Southampton,
appears in the Convention as minister of Southwark; and, in the
years 1790 and 1792, the Rev. Samuel Butler. After this we hear
of it no more. Its last minister was a man of pleasure, so devoted
to the turf that he was made President of the Jockey Club of
Surrey and Charles City, as I was informed by the clerk of the
same. Nothing else was to be expected but that the Church should
perish in such hands.

Since the revival of our Church in Virginia, efforts have been
made in behalf of the parishes in Surrey, and not without some
effect. Between twenty-five and thirty years ago the Rev. John
Cole, encouraged by the zeal of good Mrs. Falcon and others of
Southwark parish, preached for one year at Old Surrey and Cabin
Point Churches, reviving not a little the hopes of our few remaining
friends. At a later period the Rev. Edmund Christian spent some
time in the same; and for the last few years the Rev. John
McCabe recently of Hampton, has devoted one Sunday in four to
Old Surrey Church. Under his ministry the congregation increased,
and a new church has been recently erected near the old one.[88]
I know of no other churches in Surrey but those of Old Surrey and
Cabin Point, unless there be one standing about eight or ten miles
from the court-house. I made one visit to it about twenty years
ago. In company with a zealous female member of the Church,
some notice having been previously given, I approached the old
and desolate-looking place. No horses or carriages were around
it; but on the sill of an open door was sitting an old negro man,
who I was told had in former times been the sexton. We three
were the congregation. My visit has not been repeated.

To the foregoing I add the following communication from my
esteemed friend, William Harrison, of Brandon:—

"In the will of Benjamin Harrison, of Surrey, who was buried at the
chapel near Cabin Point, and who, according to the epitaph on his tombstone,
was born in Southwark parish in 1645, and which will was admitted
to probate in 1712, I find the following passage:—`Item, I give
twenty pounds sterling to buy ornaments for the chapel, and that my executor


311

Page 311
take care to provide them, so soon as may be, after the new chapel is
built; and my will is that five acres of my land be laid out, where the old
chapel now stands, and that it be held for that use forever.' "

The plate of this church, I have reason to believe, was sold by
a person having charge of it, and the proceeds applied to private
use. The Harrisons, Shorts, Allens, Cockes, and Peters, in olden
time, were leading families around this church.[89]

 
[88]

The old one was built in the year 1754; the age of the one at Cabin Point
unknown.

[89]

To this I add the following from the History of Virginia, by Mr. Charles Campbell.
The following is the epitaph:—"Here lyeth the body of the Honourable
Benjamin Harrison, Esquire, who `did justice, loved mercy, and walked humbly
with his God,' was always loyal to his Prince, and a great benefactor to his country."
He had three sons, of whom Benjamin, the eldest, settled at Berkeley. He
married Elizabeth, daughter of Lewis Burwell, of Gloucester, and was an eminent
lawyer, and sometime Speaker of the House of Burgesses. He died in April, 1710,
aged thirty-seven, leaving an only son, Benjamin, and an only daughter, Elizabeth.
A monument was erected at the public expense to his memory in the old Westover
churchyard. The son Benjamin married a daughter of Robert Carter, of Corotoman,
(called King Carter,) in Lancaster county. Himself and two daughters of
this union were killed by the same flash of lightning at Berkeley. Another daughter
married Mr. Randolph, of Wilton. The sons were Benjamin, the signer of the Declaration
of Independence, Charles, a general in the Revolution, Nathaniel, Henry,
Colin, and Carter H. From the last-mentioned descended the Harrison, of Cumberland.
Benjamin Harrison, Jr., the signer of the Declaration, and otherwise
celebrated, married a Miss Bassett. Their children were Benjamin, father of the
late Benjamin Harrison, of Berkeley, Carter B., sometime member of Congress, and
William Henry, President of the United States; one daughter who married a Mr.
Randolph, and another who married a Mr. Copeland. The second son of Benjamin
Harrison, of Surrey, (the first of the family in Virginia,) was Nathaniel. His eldest
son was also named Nathaniel, and his only son again was Benjamin Harrison, of
Brandon, member of the Council of Virginia at the same time with Benjamin
Harrison, of Berkeley, about the commencement of the Revolution. This Benjamin
Harrison, of Brandon, who married a daughter of the last Colonel Byrd, of Westover,
was father of the present William Harrison, of Upper Brandon, and of the
late George Harrison, of Lower Brandon, on James River, besides four daughters.
If the first of the name was a zealous friend of the Church and liberal contributor,
his posterity have ever continued true to it; and the two last named, with their
families, have done much to its partial revival within the last thirty years. The
ministers have ever found their seats to be hospitable homes when in that part of
the parish. They have set good examples in encouraging the religious teaching
of their servants, and, in order to promote this, have built a chapel between them
for the especial benefit of the same.

For a full description of Mr. Benjamin Harrison, signer of the Declaration of
Independence, Governor of Virginia, and holder of so many offices during and after
the war, I refer the reader to Mr. Griggsby's book on the Convention of 1776.
Of the family of Harrison he says, "Of all the ancient families in the Colony, that
of Harrison, if not the oldest, is one of the oldest. The original ancestor some
time before the year 1645 had come over to the Colony; but, as his name does not
appear in the list of early patentees recorded by Burk, it is probable that he purchased
land already patented, or may have engaged in mercantile pursuits. The
first born of the name in the Colony of whom we have any distinct record was Benjamin
Harrison, who became a member of the Council, and was Speaker of the House
of Burgesses, and died in Southwark parish, in the county of Surrey, in the year
1712, in his sixty-second year." Mr. Griggsby thinks it probable that his father
was the Herman Harrison who came over in what is called the "second supply" in
Smith's History, or of Master John Harrison, who was Governor in 1623, and
adds:—"That from the year 1645 to this date—a period of more than two centuries—the
name has been distinguished for the patriotism, the intelligence, and the
moral worth of those who have borne it."


312

Page 312

SUSSEX COUNTY.

A few words suffice for Sussex county, and Albemarle parish in
Sussex county. The parish, as has been stated above, was divided
from Lawn's Creek and Southwark parishes in 1738. We have an
old tattered register, which seems to have begun in 1738, and at
the bottom of each page is the name of William Willie, minister.
It continues until 1776 with the same name. I find the name of
William Willie, as its minister, on a list in 1754,—the earliest list to
be found on record. I find it also in a list for 1776 in an old Virginia
almanac. In both instances he is the minister of Albemarle
parish, Sussex. The parish, I doubt not, began and ended with
him, as does the old register, for we hear no more of him or the
parish after the year 1776. It is by far the most particular
register I have ever met with. It states the days on which he
preaches at each of his four churches,—St. Mark's, St. Andrew's,
St. Paul's, and Nottoway, and the number of persons present, and
occasionally other circumstances. It states the births, baptisms,
deaths, marriages, sponsors, names of masters, of bond and free,
black and white. So methodical and pains-taking a man, living for
thirty-eight years among a people (judging from the names in the
register) as respectable as any in Virginia, was, it is to be hoped,
a worthy minister in other respects.

In speaking of the church in Sussex as being born and dying
with Mr. Willie, we do not mean to say that there were no churches
and ministers in that region before,—the contrary being evident,—
but that its separate parochial existence commenced with him and
died with him so far as regular ministerial services were concerned.
Nor do we mean to say that no efforts have been made of late to
resuscitate it. Some years since a new church was erected by the


313

Page 313
zeal of a few surviving friends and members of the church, and
the Rev. Mr. Withers, McGuire, and others, have performed
services in it. We hope the ground will never be abandoned, but
that in this and the neighbouring county of Southampton the
twelve churches which once were, but now are not, may in time
have their places supplied by the blessing of God on the labours
of faithful men.

 
[87]

Some years since, in the month of November, toward the close of day, I passed
by this church in company with an active young man; and, as usual, turning aside
to survey it, I saw among the shrubs a delicate young cedar, about a foot long,
issuing out of the wall just under the cornicing of the roof. On expressing a wish
that I had it, without dreaming that it could be gotten, my companion immediately
began to clamber up the pillar nearest to it, and, ascending twelve feet, got in a
position which enabled him to remove several of the loosened bricks and get the
young plant, with good roots, from its nest. It is now a flourishing tree, eight feet
high, near my study-window.


314

Page 314

ARTICLE XXVI.

Parishes in Charles City, Surrey, and Sussex

Although Charles City was one of the eight original shires or
counties into which the Colony was partitioned in 1634, and holds
so central a position among the old counties, and lies on one of our
noblest rivers, yet have we little knowledge of either its civil or
ecclesiastical history during the first century of our Colonial existence.
We read indeed of Westover Hundred, and Weynoake
Hundred, and Charles City Hundred, as early settlements on
James River, within its bounds, and of the destruction or great
injury of them by the Indians in the great massacre of 1622. We
read of a school being established, or about to be established, at
Charles City Hundred, in aid of the proposed College at Henrico,
without being able to ascertain the location of it,—though we presume
it was somewhere on the river. The dimensions of the parish
we are able accurately to define. As was the case with some other
counties on this and other rivers, it extended some distance on
both sides of James River. Inconvenient as this must have been
to the inhabitants in many respects, yet such was the unwillingness
to divide what God had divided, that two court-houses were used
in the one county, one on each side of the river, for a long period
of time. Still more inconvenient must this have been to the
ministers of religion and the people of their charges, whose
parishes were thus divided. There were two parishes in Charles
City,—Westover or the upper, and Weynoake or the lower,—each
divided by the river into two parts, until the year 1720, when the
two parts of Westover and Weynoake on the north of James River,
together with a part of another parish called Wallingford, extending
to the Chickahominy, were all united into one, and took the
name of Westover parish; while the two parts of Weynoake and
Westover on the south of the river were united to one called
Martins Brandon in Prince George, which latter county had been
taken from Charles City, being that part of it lying south of James
River. It is not until after this arrangement that we have any
account of the ministers of Charles City county and Westover
parish as they now are. We have no means of ascertaining the


315

Page 315
name of a single minister of this ancient shire for nearly a century
after its establishment. In the year 1724, the Rev. Peter Fontaine
gives an account of himself and his parish. He came into
it nine years before that time,—had officiated in Wallingford,
Weynoake, Martins Brandon, and Jamestown, before the new arrangement.
He had now three churches in Westover parish, the
upper or Westover Church, and the lower church near the Chickahominy,
formerly in Wallingford parish. The length of this parish
was thirty miles; the number of families two hundred and thirty-three,
of communicants seventy-five. He was as attentive to the
instruction of children and servants as circumstances would allow.
There were two glebes in his parish, neither of which had houses
on them, and the best of them rented for thirty shillings. He
lived in his own house and on his own farm. His salary, besides perquisites,
was from fifty to sixty pounds. Mr. Fontaine is the same
minister of whom we have spoken as accompanying Colonel Byrd
on that most laborious and dangerous expedition for running the
dividing-line between Virginia and North Carolina. Colonel Byrd
evidently held him in the highest esteem, as doubtless did all his
parishioners. We find him still living in their affections and labouring
among them in the year 1757. He died in the month of July
of that year. After expressing a firm trust in a joyful resurrection
through the blood of a merciful Redeemer, he concludes his
will by saying, "My will and desire is, that I may have no public
funeral, but that my corpse may be accompanied by a few of my
nearest neighbours; that no liquors be given to make any of the
company drunk,—many instances of which I have seen, to the
great scandal of the Christian religion and abuse of so solemn an
ordinance. I desire none of my family to go in mourning for
me."

Concerning this good man and his family, something more must
be said. I have already, in my article on one of the parishes in
Albemarle, referred to the interesting history of the Fontaine
family as set forth by Miss Ann Maury and Dr. Hawks. I refer
to it again, and commend it to all as having all the interest of the
best novels, without their imperfections and evils. Mr. Peter Fontaine
was one of six children (five sons and one daughter) of two
pious and valiant Huguenots, who fled from France to England.
Giving their children a good education, especially as to religion,
they committed "them to the providence of a covenant God to seek
their fortune in the wide world." All of them came to America,
though two of them—Moses and John—returned to England. The


316

Page 316
daughter, Mary Ann, married Matthew Maury, from Gascony, and,
coming to America, became the mother of a numerous posterity.
James Fontaine settled in King William as a farmer, and is also
the ancestor of many most respectable families in Virginia and
elsewhere. Francis was the minister of whom we have already
spoken in our article on York-Hampton. Peter is the worthy
person of whom we are now speaking, and who also has his descendants
spread over our own and other States. Nor are the names of
Fontaine and Maury absent from the lists of our present American
Episcopal clergy. Of Mr. Peter Fontaine, who spent his whole
ministry of about forty years in the county of Charles City, with
the exception of a short time at Jamestown and Wallingford parish,
it becomes us to add something more. His letters to various relatives,
and one of his sermons, furnish us with the means. It was
the pious custom of the Fontaines to assemble annually, and hold a
solemn religious thanksgiving in commemoration of their deliverance
from persecution in France, and remarkable preservation when
attacked by French privateers in the North of Ireland. I have
before me a sermon on one of those occasions, preached by Peter
Fontaine. After a suitable prayer, which is prefaced to it, he takes
for his text that passage from Romans,—"That ye may with one
mind and with one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord
Jesus Christ." After a general consideration of the duty enjoined
by the text, he applies it to their particular case. Alluding to the
former, he says,—

"Several months was our parent obliged to shift among forests and
deserts for his safety, because he had preached the word of God to a congregation
of innocent and sincere persons, who desired to be instructed in
their duty and confirmed in their faith. The woods afforded him a shelter
and the rocks a resting-place; but his enemies gave him no quiet, until,
of his own accord, he delivered himself up to their custody. They loaded
his hands with chains, his feet stuck fast in the mire, a dungeon was his
abode, and murderers and thieves were his companions, until God by
means of a pious gentlewoman, whose kindness ought to be remembered
by us even to latest posterity, withdrew him from thence, and was the
occasion that his confinement was more tolerable."

He exhorts them in the close of the sermon never to forsake
their annual meetings, which were so calculated to keep up the
remembrance of their parent's virtues and sufferings, and the wonderful
deliverance of God. "Would to God," he says, "that you
would make it your business to teach them to your children, that
they may be qualified to perpetuate them to infinite generations to


317

Page 317
come, and thereby engage the protection and draw the blessing of
the Almighty upon them; for God is not like Jacob, who hath only
one blessing in store. He hath millions of millions to bestow on
those who love and fear him." We believe that the recollection of
these things has had a happy religious effect on very many of this
wide-spread family. A passage from one of the letters of Mrs.
Maury, the sister of Peter Fontaine, concerning his family, is
worthy of insertion:—

"My brother Peter's first wife, Lizzy, was one of the loveliest creatures
I ever saw. God had endowed her with all the virtues of a good Christian
wife and a watchful mother. She never let the least thing pass in her
children that had any apperance of evil in it, and was very tender of them.

His present wife is a lovely, sweet-tempered woman, and she, Mary Ann,
and Peter, have an unusual tenderness for each other; and I believe if
they were her own children she could not show more tenderness to them.
My brother has two children by her,—a boy and a girl. The boy is named
Thomas. I hope God will spare my brother's life to raise them as he hath
the other two, who are examples of piety and wisdom, and a great comfort
to their parents and us."

There is one passage from a letter of Mr. Fontaine to one of his
brothers in England, on the subject of preserving health, which is
worthy of him as a man and as a minister. Besides commending
active exercise in the open air on foot and horseback, and a careful
consideration of one's own constitution so as to be our own physician,
he adds this valuable hint:—"I drink no spirituous liquors at
all; no small beer; but when I am obliged to take more than ordinary
fatigue, either in serving my churches or other branches of
duty, I take one glass of good old Madeira wine, which revives me
and contributes to my going through without much fatigue."

Happy would it have been for the Church of Virginia had all
her members prescribed such bounds to themselves. Mr. Fontaine,
though living in the midst of the opulent and voluptuous gentlemen
on James River, was no wine-bibber sitting at their tables and
quaffing glass after glass of their rich wines after having imbibed
something stronger, perhaps, before and at dinner, but confined himself
to one glass of pure wine when weariness called for it, eschewing
all other liquors. Though we think expediency and a due
regard to personal security now call for even more abstinence, on
the part of the clergy especially, yet we are free to say that if all
had restricted themselves as did Mr. Fontaine, there would have
been no need, so far as the clergy are concerned, of a temperance-society.
No one can doubt on which side of the question Mr.


318

Page 318
Fontaine would be were he living in our day. And had the rich
gentlemen of Virginia but followed his example, how many estates
would have been saved from ruin, how many families from dispersion,
how many young men from the grave of the drunkard!

Our remaining work as to the ministers of Westover parish will
be brief. In the year 1758—three years after the death of Mr.
Fontaine—we find on an English list the name of William Davis as
minister of this parish; and the same is found on a list in the Virginia
Almanac for 1773. In the year 1776 we find the name of
James Ogilvie. No accounts have reached us of the character of
either of them. In the year 1786 we meet with the name of the
Rev. John Dunbar,—a name to be met with previously as ministering
in other parishes. For the honour of the Church it were to be
wished that it had never been on any list of the clergy. He married
a daughter of Colonel Byrd, of Westover, of whom we have
already spoken.[90] By none was he better known and more despised
than by the members of that family. Often has one of its most
pious members, who in infancy was baptized by him, spoken to me
with concern about her baptism, asking whether it could not be
repeated, saying that she found it hard to regard herself as baptized.
Nor is it wonderful, when it is considered that, besides other
vices, he openly renounced the ministry and with it the Christian
faith, and, if I have been rightly informed, fought a duel in sight
of Old Westover Church, in which he had once officiated. Happily,
he left no descendants to blush at the above recital.

In the year 1793 we find the Rev. Sewal Chapin in the Episcopal
Convention at Richmond, with Mr. Charles Carter, of Shirley, as
lay delegate. Mr. Chapin continued on the list of clergy as long
as the Conventions continued; that is, until the year 1805, when
they ceased until 1812. How long Mr. Chapin was minister after
1805 we are unable to state, nor can we speak with any certainty
as to his religious views and character. Thus ends the history of


319

Page 319
Westover parish previous to the revival of the Church, which commenced
in 1812. So low was the condition of the parish that it
was some time before even an effort was made in its behalf. In the
year 1833 the Rev. Farley Berkeley, now of Amelia, acted as missionary
in Charles City, Chesterfield, and King William, and somewhat
revived the hopes of these old parishes. He was followed in
Westover parish in the year 1835 by the Rev. Alexander Norris,
who continued its minister until 1838. The Rev. Mr. Leavell succeeded
Mr. Norris, and continued in the parish until 1853. The
Rev. Mr. Okeson took his place. Mr. Okeson resigned his charge
the past year, (1856,) and the Rev. Dr. Wade has accepted a call
from the parish.

As to the churches in Westover parish, we know nothing of the
history of that at Weynoake, or of that near the Chickahominy,
except that they are now nowhere to be seen. The Old Westover
still stands, a relic and monument of ancient times. A new
church in the neighbourhood of Weynoake was put up some years
ago, but has recently been destroyed by fire. Another is now
rising up upon the same site.

I wish it were in my power to furnish a list of the vestrymen of
Westover parish from an early period, as in so doing I should give
the names of the principal Episcopal families of Charles City; but,
no remnant of a parish-record being preserved, I am unable to do
any thing more than mention a few names familiar to my ears.
The Lightfoots, Minges, Byrds, Carters, Harrisons, Tylers, Christians,
Seldens, Nelsons, Lewises, Douthats, and Wilcoxes, are
those best known to me.

The following extract from the letter of a friend is an interesting
addition to this article:—

"The old church and churchyard were near the present Westover
House,—about one-quarter mile up the river-bank,—where are some very
old tombstones, besides that of Benjamin Harrison. The present Westover
Church was built by Mrs. Byrd on her land, called Evelington. The
minister once resided on the adjacent tract, called Westing, which also
belonged to the Westover estate, across the creek from the Westover
House. Perhaps it was only Mr. Dunbar who occupied that farm; for the
glebe proper was between the two churches, and below the present courthouse
about two miles.

"The clerk of the county has told me that the county was divided into
two parishes,—Westover and Mapsco. The part above the court-house was
called Westover, and the part below called Mapsco, from an Indian tribe
who gave name to the creek near where the Old Brick Church, called
Mapsco, stood, about seven miles below the court-house and immediately
on the road to Sandy Point,—the old seat of the Lightfoot family. That


320

Page 320
church was convenient to the Chickahominy neighbourhood, being only
seven or eight miles from the mouth of that river, where the most of the
earlier friends of the Church in that part of the county must have
resided; and it was behind the Old Mapsco Church that it is said that
one of its ministers—either Davis or Dunbar—fought a duel. The quarrel
originated about a horse-race. An additional fact was related to me by
the late Benjamin Harrison, of Berkeley,—viz.: That this Mr. Dunbar
offered to be the bearer of a challenge from Benjamin Harrison, of
Berkeley, to Benjamin Harrison, of Brandon, assuring the former, as his
friend, that the conduct of the latter justified such notice. But Mr.
Harrison, of Berkeley, was not persuaded by him. The note was at
Berkeley, and Mr. Harrison promised to show it to me when he had more
leisure; but he died suddenly soon after.

"In addition to the names of the old ministers you have mentioned in
your article, I have been told by some very old servants, and some of the
oldest citizens too, that there were two others remembered besides Chapin,
who was the last occupant of the glebe, whilst the churches mouldered
away or were used as barns. That of Westover was so used at the time
the friends of the Church got possession of it, when the family at Berkeley
and Shirley undertook its repairs. The other two ministers were
Black and Blagrove. Several servants told me they were christened by
Parson Black. Old Mr. Chapin occupied the glebe until persuaded by
Mr. F. Lewis, of Weynoake, and Mr. Colier Harrison, of Kettiuvan, to rent
out the place and come and live with them. He died at Weynoake, the
residence of Mr. F. Lewis, and was buried in the aisle and under the
present chancel of the Westover Church. I have made frequent inquiry
for his sermons, &c., but have never been able to find any: all that could
be remembered of them was that they served the young ladies for paper
in which to roll up their hair at night."

 
[90]

There were three of the name of Byrd in Virginia, of whom we read in various
Virginia documents. The first, who was the father of the family and early owner
of lands about richmond and of the place called Belvidera, is spoken of in my
Lambeth Documents as being engaged with Commissary Blair in the incipient steps
about the College of William and Mary. The part of it called the Chapel was
contracted for and the erecting of it superintended by him in the time of Governor
Andros, between the years 1690 and 1700. The second was Colonel Byrd, the
author of the Westover Papers and owner of Westover. The third was the last
of the name who owned Westover, and was with General Washington when encamped
at Winchester and defending the frontiers against the Indians.


321

Page 321

ARTICLE XXVII.

Parishes in Gloucester.—No. 1. Petsworth and Kingston.

Gloucester is recognised as a county in 1652, when it was represented
in the House of Burgesses by Colonel Hugh Gwinne and
Francis Willis. No change took place in it until 1790, when
Mathews county was cut off. The parishes in Gloucester in 1754
were Petsworth, Abingdon, Ware, and Kingston, the last being cut
off with Mathews in 1790. The Rev. Mr. Carraway, having hunted
up some mutilated copies of the vestry-books of Petsworth and
Kingston, has furnished the following summary of the contents of
the former:—"Petsworth exists only on paper: its church and
worshippers have alike ceased to be." The writer, feeling a common
interest with those who wish to gather up the history of the
Colonial times, proceeds to note some facts drawn from the old vestry-book.
This book contains, with a slight exception, the records
of the vestry-meetings from the year 1677 to 1793. When commenced
and closed, its torn condition permits us not to discover.
In 1677 there is an order for the completion and furnishing of a
church at Poplar Spring. At this date there is mention of a lower
church within the parish, which in the year 1695 is spoken of as the
"Old Church." It being then a ruin, it was determined not to rebuild
on its site, but to have only one place of worship, and that to
be kept in "thorough order and repair."

In 1684 we find the following entries:—"His Excellency the
Governor, having given to this Church one large Bible, one Book
of Common Prayer, one Book of Homilies, the Thirty-nine Articles,
and Book of Canons of the Church of England: it is ordered that
the clerk of the vestry enter the same in the register, to the end
His Lordship's so pious a gift may be gratefully remembered."
"Ordered, that the clerk enter into the register of this parish the
generous and pious gift of the Hon. Augustine Warner, deceased,
to this church,—viz.: one silver flagon, two silver bowls, and two
silver plates, which, though long since given, hath not yet been entered."
In 1723 an order was made for the building of a new
church at Poplar Spring,—the cost of said building, exclusive of
painting, &c., to be eleven hundred and ninety pounds Virginia


322

Page 322
currency. This church was standing a few years since, and but for
the ruthless hand of cupidity it might have stood for centuries. The
writer will never forget his feelings as he looked upon it when the
work of destruction and desecration was going on. There remained
enough then of its former condition and elegance to assure the beholder
that they who erected this temple entered into the meaning
of God's ancient prophet, who taught that sacred edifices should
exceed, in comfort and stability and magnificence, private abodes.
We gather from the records in the large expenditure for painting,
and in the way of furnishing and ornamenting, that no means were
spared to present a church of the finest taste and finish. Such it
doubtless was,—perhaps too gorgeous for our republican simplicity.
The writer has talked with persons who remembered this church.
One of them—the late Mrs. Page, of Shelly—had much to say of the
former glory of old Petsworth. She, in childhood, had been a worshipper
within its hallowed courts, and had united her voice in songs
of praise with the swelling notes of the organ. In confirmation of
the liberality of this congregation and the elegance of the church,
we make the following copies from the record:—At a vestry-meeting
in 1735, it is noted that "there were great subscriptions made by the
present vestry for an organ, to be purchased for the use of the church
at Petsworth; also, it was directed that seven hundred gold leaves
be ordered for the use of the painter. In 1751 the vestry ordered
Mr. Augustine Smith to send to England for `pulpit, and table-cloth,
and cushion;' the cloth to be of crimson velvet, with a gold fringe
and lace." A subsequent entry shows that the cost of the same was
one hundred and fifty-four pounds, sixteen shillings, sixpence, current
money. Much refinement and wealth were found in the numerous
families who worshipped within the venerable church. Among those
who were active in the duties of the parish may be mentioned the
name of Porteus. It appears on the record from the earliest date.
This is the family of Beilby Porteus, Bishop of London, who, it is
supposed, was a native of Gloucester. Also, Colonel John Washington,
and son Warner, and their ancestor, Augustine Warner.[91]


323

Page 323

A LIST OF THE MINISTERS OF THE PARISH.

In 1677, Rev. Thomas Vicaris, who continued until his death in
1697, when the Rev. Joseph Holt was employed as a temporary
supply. In 1700, Rev. George Young was elected upon the nomination
of Governor Nicholson; he remained only a few months, when
the Rev. Emanuel Jones was chosen, who served until his death, in
the year 1739. Rev. John Read supplied the pulpit until the return
of Mr. Ford. In 1741, Robert Yates, a member of the congregation,
was sent to England for Orders. He continued the minister until his
death, in 1761. In 1762, Rev. James Horrox served in the place
of Mr. James Maury Fontaine, who had been sent to England for
Orders. In 1764, the Rev. James M. Fontaine was the minister
for a few months, and removed to Ware parish. The vestry then
elected one of their own body, Captain Charles Minn Thruston,
who went to England for Orders. In 1767, Rev. Charles M. Thruston;
he served until the year 1768, when he resigned. In 1768,
Rev. Arthur Hamilton: no mention of him after this year. 1776,
1777, 1778, 1779, 1780, 1781, supposed to be vacant. In 1782,


324

Page 324
Rev. Thomas Price: not known how long he served. In 1790,
Rev. James Elliott. In 1791, Rev. James Fontaine was elected as
weekly lecturer; in 1792, Rev. Thomas Hughes. Mr. Hughes
was a member of the congregation, and ordained by Bishop
Madison.

We make the following significant extract from the vestry-book.
It has reference to one who had been the minister of the parish for
many years:—"Ordered, that Mr. Vicaris, the present minister,
continue in his charge and exercise his ministerial functions until
the next shipping, in hopes of his future amendment, he declaring
his willingness then to leave the place if not approved by the precinct
and vestry." He became a reformed man, and was minister
for some years. (By the next shipping was meant the next importation
of ministers from England.) On agreeing with a clergyman it
was ordered, "That he, the said clergyman, will behave himself in
his ministerial function upon all occasions."

The site of this church, now only marked by a few ancient tombs,
is claimed as private property. The glebe was sold under the law
of 1802. No information is possessed by the author concerning the
plate. The sermons of the Rev. Robert Yates were found in the
library of Mr. John Randolph, and were sold and purchased with
other books and manuscripts.[92]

Vestry of Petsworth Parish.

John Buckner, Robt. Lee, Thomas Royston, Philip Lightfoot, William
Thornton, Thomas Pate, William Pritchet, John Ascough, William Throckmorton,
William Hansford, Thomas Ramsey, Thomas Miller, Richard
Barnett, Ralph Greene, Robert Carter, Charles Roan, William Thornton,
Jr., Robert Cobb, Edward Porteus, William Grymes, Thomas
Buckner, James Dudley, John Evans, Colquit Wyatt, Robert Yeardley,
Captain John Smith, Richard Stignor, William Barnard, William Brooking,
Thomas Cook, Nicholas Smith, David Alexander, William Dodsley,
William Upshaw, John Pate, Robert Porteus, John Pratt, John Coleman,
Albion Throckmorton, Augustine Smith, Philip Smith, Richard Seaton,
Henry Willis, Francis Wyatt, Thomas Green, Thos. Booth, Sr., Bayley
Seaton, Thomas Stubbs, Francis Thornton, John Read, John Washington,
William Miller, Thomas Green, Captain John Alexander, Seth Thornton,


325

Page 325
Samuel Buckner, Mr. John Throckmorton, Thomas Booth, John Royston,
David Alexander, George Reade, Gwynne Read, Bayley Seaton, Warner
Washington, John Stubbs, James Carter, James Hubard, Edward Wyatt,
John Shirmon, William Thornton, Richard Jones, Peter Kemp, Francis
Stubbs, Ludwell Grymes, John Wyatt, John Scott, Geo. Booth, John
Buckner, Chas. Minn Thruston, John Roots, Alexander Dalgleish, James
Hubard, Jr., Henry Whiting, Richard Taliafero, Lewis Booker, William
Duval, John Fox, Captain John Hubard, Jonathan Watson, Sterling
Thornton, Peter Wyatt, Wm. Sears, Robert Yates, Charles Tompkins, M.
Anderson, Benjamin Dabney, James Baytop, Lewis Booker, Jr., Christopher
Garland, Meaux Thornton, Major John Hughes, William Booth,
Francis Duval, Lewis Wood. [The remainder torn out.]

 
[92]

The following account of the bricks has been given me:—

"Several efforts were made to remove the bricks from Petsoe, and were prevented
by presentments before the Grand Jury; but some years since, Mr. —, whilst
building a hotel at Old Point, purchased from Mr. —, who owned the land,
any right he might have in the remains of the old church, and under that deed
Mr. — removed the bricks. The hotel was struck by lightning and injured
before its completion."

KINGSTON PARISH, MATHEWS COUNTY.

This was originally one of the parishes in Gloucester. There
are loose leaves of an old vestry-book, going back to the year 1677,
the first of which leaves do not indicate how much older the book
was. It was called the parish in North River precinct. It has a
peculiarity distinguishing it from all other parishes. With the
vestrymen, who were generally very few, there met a larger number
of the inhabitants, who seem to have managed the affairs of the
parish in conjunction.

From 1677 to 1691 the Rev. Michael Typerios and James Bowker
were ministers; but when their ministries began or ended cannot
be made out. In the year 1740 the Rev. John Blacknal appears
on the first page of another imperfect vestry-book. It cannot be
ascertained how much of the vestry-book was lost, and how long
Mr. Blacknal may have been the minister before 1740. He died
in 1747, and was succeeded by the Rev. John Dixon in 1750, the
Rev. John Locke having served meanwhile for three months. In
the year 1770 Mr. Dixon resigned, and died in 1777. Four applicants
appeared for the parish,—the Revs. Thomas Baker, Thomas
Field, Arthur Hamilton, and Archibald Avens, of whom Mr. Field
was chosen,—Mr. Baker having previously served three months.
In the year 1778, Mr. Field either dying or resigning, Revs. Robert
Read and William Dunlop were candidates, when the former was
chosen. In the year 1784 the Rev. Thomas Hopkinson became its
minister, and in the year 1789 the Rev. James McBride. In 1794
the Rev. Armistead Smith, of the old family of Smiths in that part
of Virginia, became the minister, being ordained by Bishop Madison.
He served the parish until his death in 1817. "His descendants
and relatives," says the Rev. Mr. Carraway, the present
minister of the parish, "are amongst the foremost friends of the


326

Page 326
Church, and most of them communicants." One of the family, the
late Miss Elizabeth Tompkins, was the instrument under God for
the revival of the church. Under circumstances the most discouraging,
she determined to build a house of prayer, in which the few
scattered ones "who loved the old paths" might worship the God
of their fathers. Her efforts were crowned with success. She
lived to witness the completion of her dear little church, and her
highest earthly joy was experienced when she first heard within its
walls these solemn words:—"The Lord is in his holy temple,"
"declared by the minister of salvation." Mr. Carraway adds that
there were once four places of worship in the parish, over two of
which the plough and the harrow have passed. On the sites of the
others two churches have recently been erected,—the one just mentioned,
and another under his special care. Tradition says that
one of the old churches was a private chapel of the "family of
Hesse," the residence of the Armisteads.

By giving a list of the old vestrymen we shall see who were the
most prominent persons in Church matters. Mr. Carraway mentions
them as the "Dudleys, Armisteads, Carys, Tabbs, Gwynns, Billops,
Throckmortons, and Sir John Peyton,"—the latter being the patriot
of the Revolution as well as the Churchman.

Names of the Vestrymen, beginning in 1677.

Richard Dudley, James Ransom, James Hill, Sands Knowles, George
Burge, Thos. Bayley, Robert Elliot, Ambrose Dudley, Peter Ransom,
John Billop, William Tompkins, Charles Jones, John Coot, Humphrey
Tompkins, Edmund Roberts, George Dudley, John Hayes, Hugh Gwinne,
Robert Barnard, Charles Debrum, William Marlow, Humphrey Joye
Tabb, Wm. Armistead, Kemp Plumer, Gwinne Reade, Thomas Hayes,
Wm. Tabb, Chas. Blacknal, John Peyton, Captain Thomas Smith, Kemp
Whiting, George Dudley, John Armistead, James Ransom, Robt. Tabb,
Wm. Plummer, Wm. Armistead, of Hesse, Edward Hughes, Francis
Armistead, John Willis, Gabriel Hughes, John Billop, Walter Keeble,
Edmund Custis, Edward Tabb, John Dixon, Thomas Peyton, Robert
Mathews, Dudley Cary, Mordecai Throckmorton, James Booker, Josiah
Dean, Thos. Smith, Jr., Samuel Williams, Joel Foster, Armistead Smith,
Robert Cary, Thomas Tabb, Richard Gregory, James Bibber, Sands Smith,
John Cary, Wilton Glasscock.

In the above list hundreds scattered through Virginia and various
parts of the land will see the names of their forefathers.

The remaining history of Kingston parish is very brief. The
erection of a church, chiefly through the zeal of Miss Elizabeth
Tompkins, near her father's house, led to the employment of a


327

Page 327
missionary about the year 1841 or 1842. The Rev. Mr. Rooker
spent some time between the two counties of Mathews and Middlesex
in this capacity. He was followed by the Rev. Mr. Carraway, who
to this day continues to perform the arduous labours required by so
large a field. Under his ministry a new church on the opposite
side of the county has been built on the ruins of one of the old
ones.

 
[91]

The following letter is from a lady who in her youth saw this church at Poplar
Spring:—

"Dear Bishop:—I have been thinking you might perhaps like to hear a little of
Old Poplar Spring Church, in Gloucester, which was a few miles above Rosewell, on
the road that passed up to King and Queen. My first recollections of it were very
pleasing, as I was going with my mother in the old Rosewell coach. It was in warm
weather, and mamma desired the driver to stop under the shade near the spring,
while we all got out; and, after drinking some of the cool water, she took us into the
church, and showed us the remains of the fine painting, over what had been the
chancel, and told us how it had been when she first remembered it. I think I then
first received a correct idea of the solemn use and importance of a church, as I must
have been very young. I remember a broad cornice, painted with the resemblance
of a bright blue sky, and clouds rolling off on either hand; below this were fragments
of the plaster, extending farther down at the corners, and representing an
immense crimson curtain drawn back. I remember seeing part of what seemed a
very large cord and tassel. Mamma said there used to be an angel just where the
curtain was drawn on one side, with a trumpet in his hand, and rolling on toward
him were vast bodies of clouds with angels in them, and that she used to fancy one
of the faces was like her dear little brother John, who was drowned when only ten
years old, and who had been her playfellow, she being next to him in age. I feel
sure that then I first understood about the last Judgment; for I seldom think of that
great day, but what my dear mother and the painting at Poplar Spring Church
are not united in my memory as a kind of picture, the groundwork being the ruined
church, the bright green grass, the shade, and the cool spring. Our dear mother's
teachings, on that and other occasions, were so mixed with a sorrow for the state
of the Episcopal churches, and the want of ministers `since Mr. Fontaine's death,'
that, childlike, I thought Mr. Fontaine must have been the best and greatest man
in the world, except my grandpapa. Most of the flagstones in the middle aisle were
there on my first visit. On passing it in later years, all trace of the bright colours
had departed, and the stones which had so often echoed the steps of those who
came to worship God had been removed for more unhallowed purposes. And the
last time I saw it some cows were reposing on the bare ground within, and swallows,
bats, and other birds occupied the large roof. As regards the painting, I have so
often heard my mother speak of it, that I am sure I cannot do it full justice by my
description, but can only say what I remember."


328

Page 328

ARTICLE XXVIII.

Gloucester County, Abington, and Ware.—No. 2.

I take these together, since they have so long been identified
in the public mind, so long under one minister, and so little to be
said of them, though so much might be said, had we any ancient
records. The following letter from the Rev. Mr. Mann, the present
rector, forbids the hope of ever recovering what is lost in regard
to these parishes:—

"My dear Bishop:—Nothing has astonished me more in this county
than the utter ignorance of the people as to the early history of the
Church. All our records of former times are lost,—the church registers,
with the county records, by the burning of the court-house many years
since. The late Dr. Taliafero told me that the first church in Ware parish
stood on Mr. William P. Smith's land, where there is an old graveyard,
and near to which was the glebe. The parish church of Ware is built on
land granted to the parish by the Throckmorton family,—the female ancestors
of the Taliaferos: when erected, no one knows. On the outside
of the church is the tombstone of the Rev. James Black, a native
of England, and many years minister of Ware parish. He died in 1723.
On the inside, near the chancel, are the tombstones of the Rev. John
Richards and his wife, and their beloved servant Amy. Mr. Richards was
once rector of Nettlehead, and vicar of Leston, England, and died rector
of Ware in 1735. Adjoining these is a stone erected by the Rev. John
Fox over his wife, who died in 1742, and two of his children, who died
in 1742 and 1743. The Rev. James Maury Fontaine was once minister
of this parish and kept a school near it.[93] The Rev. Mr. Smith, father of
Mr. W. P. Smith and Colonel Thomas Smith, and of the first Mrs. Colonel
Tompkins and the first Mrs. Tom Tabb, held the church, I believe, until
his death, preaching in all the churches of this county and Mathews.
Then came a long vacancy, and with it the desolation and destruction of
the building, which continued until the Rev. Mr. Carnes took charge of
it, when it was repaired by the exertions of Colonel Thomas Smith, Mr.
Tom Tabb, Dr. Taliafero, and others, and remained as they left it until
last year, (1854,) when a new roof was put upon it, and the inside altered
and improved. A few hundred dollars will render it a handsome as it is
now a convenient place of worship. Dr. Taliafero, Jr., has lately placed
the old subscription in my hands which was made for Mr. Carnes, and I


329

Page 329
find very much the same names of families now attending the church.
The Corbins and some others have removed from the county. The first
subscription to Mr. Carnes was four hundred and ten dollars.

"Of Abington as little is known as of Ware. The first church stood
near the present building, and its foundations are easily traced. It seems
originally to have been a very small building to which a section was subsequently
added. Then the present noble building was erected. On the
arch of the door, 1765 has been cut, but whether at the time of building
no one can say. This church was repaired by the exertions of Colonel
Lewis, of Eagle Point, the present residence of J. R. Bryan."

To the foregoing information as to the earlier ministers of
Abington I am able to add something from documents in possession.
In the year 1724 the Rev. Thomas Hughes writes to the
Bishop of London "that he has been living in this parish for four
or five years, after having lived in the upper parish of Nansemond
for three years; that he was not inducted,—only four ministers in
the Colony being inducted; that he has three hundred families
under his charge, about two hundred attendants at church, sixty
or seventy communicants, no surplice used in the parish, as is the
statement in many other reports, a free-school endowed with five
hundred acres of land and servants; no parochial library here or
in any other parish in the colony." There being no minister in
Ware parish, he gives a portion of his time to it.

In the years 1754 and 1758 the Rev. William Gates was minister
of Abington, and the Rev. John Fox of Ware parish. In the years
1773-4 and 1776 the Rev. Thomas Price was minister of Abington,
and the Rev. James M. Fontaine of Ware. In the year 1785
neither Abington nor Ware was represented in the Convention by
the clergy, Mr. John Page (Governor) being the lay delegate from
Abington, Mr. Thomas Smith from Kingston, and Matthew Anderson
from Petsworth. Mr. Page attended the next two Conventions,
and Mr. Anderson one. Mr. Thomas Lewis also attended
from Abington in 1787. After this we find no more delegates,
either clerical or lay, from Abington until long after the revival
of the Church commenced. The Rev. Mr. Carnes was the first
minister after that work commenced. He continued for some
years in zealous prosecution of it, and was succeeded by the Rev.
John Cole, now in Culpepper, who was followed by the Rev. Mr.
Mann, the present rector of the parishes of Abington and Ware.

In the absence of all records from which to draw the names of
vestrymen, and thus ascertain who have been the leading families,
from the earliest to the present times, in the parishes of Abington
and Ware, we furnish the following imperfect list of families


330

Page 330
known to us, or mentioned to us by one who is better acquainted
with the history of the old settlers.

Of the Burwells, who at an early period settled at Carter's
Creek, we have already said something when speaking of the
family at King's Mill and the Grove, in York and James City.
To this we add the Manns, who settled at Timberneck Bay, on
York River, not far from Shelly and Rosewell, the Montagues, the
Kempes, the Carys, the Tabbs, the Taliaferos, the Dabneys,
Thrustons, Catletts, Throckmortons, Roots, Lewises, Nicholsons,
Nelsons, Vanbibbers, Pages, of Shelly and Rosewell, Byrds, Corbins,
Joneses, Ennises, Curtises, Robinses, Harewoods, Dicksons,
Roys, and Smarts.

Of old Mrs. Vanbibber and Dr. Taliafero—two of the props
of the Church in the day of her adversity—I need not speak to
the present generation in Gloucester, as there are still some living
who knew their religious worth and continue to dwell upon the
same before the younger ones. Of Mrs. Vanbibber some interesting
notices appeared many years since in one of our religious
papers. Of Dr. Taliafero I may say from personal knowledge
that it is not often we meet with a more pious and benevolent man
or more eminent physician. There is one name on the foregoing
list to which I must allude as having, at an early period in the
history of Virginia, been characterized by a devotion to the welfare
of the Church and religion,—that of Kempe. The name often
occurs on the vestry-book of Middlesex county in such a way as
to show this. The high esteem in which one of the family was
held, is seen from the fact that he was the Governor of the Colony
in 1644, and the following extract from the first volume of Henning's
Statutes will show not only the religious character of those
in authority at that day, but the probability that Governor Kempe
sympathized in the movement, for the Governors had great power
either to promote or prevent such a measure. In 1644 it was

"Enacted by the Governor, Council, and Burgesses of this Grand Assembly,
for God's glory and the public benefit of the Colony, to the end
that God might avert his heavy judgments that are upon us, that the last
Wednesday in every month be set apart for fast and humiliation, and that
it be wholly dedicated to prayers and preaching, &c.

"Richard Kempe, Esq., Governor."

I do not remember ever to have seen such an indefinite and prolonged
period appropriated by a public body to public humiliation.
It speaks well for the religion of our public functionaries of that
day. What would be thought of such a measure at this?


331

Page 331

Of Governor Page and his family I have already spoken somewhat
in treating of the Church in Williamsburg, where the first
of his name were buried; but, as the celebrated Rosewell and its
graveyard full of tombs with that name are in Abington parish, I
shall add something. And first I must take occasion to speak of
the great folly of erecting such immense and costly houses as that
of Rosewell, even in monarchical and aristocratic days. Richly-carved
mahogany wainscotings and capitals and stairways abound,
and every brick was English. The house was built, or rather
begun to be built, by Mr. Mann Page, grandson of old Sir John
Page, who wrote the good book to his son Matthew, father of
Mann. I am sure the grandfather would not have approved the
act of his grandson. It may be said that, as his mother was the
rich heiress of Timberneck Bay, he had a right to do it, and could
afford it, as he was the first-born son and chief heir. We do not
admit that any one has a right thus to misspend the talent given
to him by God to be used for his glory, and God often punishes
such misconduct by sending poverty on the persons thus acting,
and on their posterity. A most remarkable exemplification of this
appears in the case of Mr. Page, who began to build Rosewell,
and which was finished by his widow and son.

Whoever will look into the fifth volume and at the 277th page
of Henning's Statutes will see an Act of Assembly covering more
than seven octavo pages, and describing all the property in lands
and servants belonging to Mr. Page, and the former of which his
embarrassed son, Mann Page, Jr., petitioned to be allowed to sell,
in order to pay off his father's debts in Virginia and England, and
which all his real estate, though he had many servants on various
estates, was incompetent to discharge. His landed estates were in
Prince William, Frederick, Spottsylvania, Essex, James City,
Hanover, Gloucester, and King William. He had eight thousand
acres in Frederick called Pageland, more than ten thousand in
Prince William called Pageland also, four thousand five hundred
in Spottsylvania, one thousand called Pampatike in King William,
two thousand in Hanover, near two thousand in James City, &c.,
besides other lands not mentioned. Leave is asked and granted
that his son Mann might sell them, in order to pay off the debts
which had been for many years accumulating by interest, and
which the real estate was unable to discharge, and in order to pay
the portions of his brothers and sisters. For a long time had he
been labouring from the proceeds of the estates to do this, but in
vain. Now, it cannot be doubted that the tradition is correct that


332

Page 332
much if not all of the original debt was contracted for the erection
of this immense pile of building, every brick of which, and doubtless
much other material, together with the workmen, were imported
from England and not paid for, except by his agents and friends
there, until the sale of these lands in Virginia enabled his son, long
after, to do it. The whole of the roof of this ancient building was
covered with heavy lead over the shingles. The result of this immense
expenditure was not only the entailing a heavy debt upon
his estate, and the causing a sale of lands which might have furnished
his posterity for some generations with farms, but the keeping
up such an establishment has been a burden on all who have
possessed it to the present day, as must be the case with all such
establishments. For a long time old Rosewell has been standing
on Carter's Creek, in sight of York River, like an old deserted English
castle, in solitary grandeur, scarce a tree or shrub around it
to vary and beautify the scene. No one of the name of him who built
it has owned it or could afford to own it for generations. "Some
stranger fills the Stuarts' throne." "Sic transit gloria mundi!"

Would that this were the only folly of the kind in ancient or
modern Virginia! The Acts of Assembly give us other instances
in old Virginia. Mr. Lewis Burwell, of King's Mill, near Williamsburg,
built a large house worthy of his first-born son to live
in; and that first-born son, after his father's death, was obliged to
petition the Legislature for leave to break the entail and sell a
large tract of land in King William to pay for it. The folly is still
going on in many parts of our land; the greater folly now, because
the law of primogeniture being happily abolished, and different and
better views prevailing as to the division of estates among children,
the proud homestead must be sold or be an expense and burden to the
child who inherits it. Even in England—the land of entails and
primogeniture—the philanthropic Howard, a man of birth and
inherited wealth, instead of listening to the plea that our houses
must be proportioned to our wealth, to the extent even of palaces,
and that it was a charity to the poor to employ numbers of them
in the erection of stupendous and costly mansions, built one of
more moderate size and expense for himself, and employed greater
numbers of workmen in rearing neat and comfortable cottages for
the poor on his large and numerous estates. How much of that
now needlessly expended in building and furnishing large houses
might be more rationally and charitably devoted to the improvement
of the dwellings of the labourers, whether on the plantations
of the South or the neighbourhoods of the North!



No Page Number
illustration

ROSEWELL HOUSE.



No Page Number

333

Page 333

How much wiser was it in the first William Randolph, of Turkey
Island, to live in a house of moderate dimensions himself, though
with every comfort, and to build during his lifetime good houses
for his numerous children in various parts of the State! How
much more becoming Christians, instead of building extravagant
mansions for themselves, to see that the houses of worship are
comely and comfortable, and that all God's ministers are well provided
with houses becoming their station and the means of living
in them!

To return from this digression, let me say that Governor Page,
though living in this proud mansion of his forefathers, was not himself
a proud man. He was not only a true republican in politics, but
an humble man in his religion, and doubtless often wished himself,
on more accounts than one, well rid of his large abode. The poor,
I doubt not, were often kindly treated at Rosewell, and the servants
justly dealt with. There was once a picture—among many
others of higher degree—on the walls of Rosewell parlour, which
shows that he was not too proud to allow the head of a poor
African to be there. It was the head of Selim, an Algerine negro,
well known at Rosewell, York, and Williamsburg, which Mr. Page
had taken while he was a member of Congress in Philadelphia, and
hung up among his portraits. There was something so touching and
very remarkable in the captivity, conversion, and latter end of
Selim, that the Rev. John H. Rice, a Presbyterian minister of high
standing, wrote an account of him, which was published in a Presbyterian
magazine, I think. It is so interesting and so edifying in
a religious point of view that I shall insert it in these sketches;
and I am the more induced so to do because I am able to add some
particulars not contained in Mr. Rice's notice.

Before I introduce this, however, (reserving it for another
article,) I will add that Mr. Page was not only the patriot, soldier
and politician, the well-read theologian and zealous Churchman,—
so that, as I have said before, some wished him to take Orders with
a view to being the first Bishop of Virginia,—but he was a most
affectionate domestic character. His tenderness as a father and
attention to his children is seen in the fact that, when attending a
Congress held in New York, he was continually writing very short
letters to his little ones, even before they could read them. I have
a bundle of them, from which I extract the following:—

"My dear Bobby:

My letters to your brother Mann and your sisters
will inform you how and when I arrived here. I will tell you then what


334

Page 334
I have not told them, and what you, a young traveller, ought to know.
This town is not half so large as Philadelphia, nor in any manner to be
compared to it for beauty and elegance. Philadelphia, I am well assured,
has more inhabitants than Boston and New York together. The streets
here are badly paved, very dirty, and narrow as well as crooked, and filled
up with a strange variety of wooden, stone, and brick buildings, and full
of hogs and mud. The College, St. Paul's Church, and the Hospital are
elegant buildings. The Federal Hall also, in which Congress is to sit, is
elegant. What is very remarkable here is, that there is but one well of
water which furnishes the inhabitants with drink, so that water is bought
here by every one that drinks it, except the owner of this well. Four
carts are continually going about selling it at three gallons for a copper;
that is, a penny for every three gallons of water. The other wells and
pumps serve for washing, and nothing else.[94] I have not time to say more
about this place and the other towns through which I passed, but will by
some other opportunity write you whatever may be worth your knowing.
You must show this to Frank. Give my love to him, and tell him I will
write to him and Judy next. Kiss her for me, and be a good boy, my
dear. Give my love to your brothers and sisters and to your cousin Mat
and Nat. Tell Beck [a maid-servant] that Sharp [the servant that went
with him] is well, and sends his love to her, [his wife, I suppose.] That
God Almighty may bless you all, my dear, is the fervent prayer of your
affectionate father,

John Page."
 
[94]

In another letter he says that he was mistaken—that there were several good
wells.

These letters were written on very coarse, stiff, dingy paper,
such as no country-merchant would use in wrapping any but his
heaviest and roughest goods in at this day. Some of them were
sent by the two Randolphs,—John and Theodoric,—who were going
to school in New York at that time.[95]


335

Page 335

GLOUCESTER, THE RESIDENCE OF POWHATAN AND POCAHONTAS.

We are now in the region where by general consent the chief
residence of King Powhatan has been placed, after discussion and
accurate investigation. Mr. Howe, in his laborious though sometimes
inaccurate History of Virginia, quotes from Captain John
Smith as saying that "twenty-five miles lower (than what is now West
Point, the junction of the Pamunkey and Mattapony) on the north
side of this river (York River) is Werowocomico, where their great
king inhabited when I was delivered to him a prisoner," and where
Smith in another place says "for the most part he was resident."
Mr. Howe says, "Upon a short visit made to that part of Gloucester
county a year or two ago, I was satisfied that Shelly, the


336

Page 336
seat of Mrs. Mann Page, is the famous Werowocomico. Shelly
adjoins Rosewell, formerly the seat of John Page, (sometime Governor
of Virginia), and was originally part of the Rosewell plantation;
and I learned from Mrs. Page, of Shelly, that Governor
Page always held Shelly to be the ancient Werowocomico, and accordingly
he at first gave it that name, but afterward, on account
of the inconvenient length of the word, dropped it and adopted
the title of Shelly, on account of the extraordinary accumulation
of shells found there. The enormous beds of oyster-shells deposited
there, especially in front of the Shelly House, indicate it
to have been a place of great resort among the natives. The
situation is highly picturesque and beautiful; and, looking as it
does on the lovely and majestic York, it would seem of all others
to have been the befitting residence of the lordly Powhatan."

Our worthy fellow-citizen, Mr. Charles Campbell, of Petersburg,
after having adopted the above opinion, has renounced it in favour
of another place only two or three miles, I believe, lower down
York River. On paying a visit a few years since to Shelly and
the neighbourhood, for the purpose of examining the question, he
became satisfied that Timberneck Bay, in Gloucester, the ancient
seat of the Manns, only a mile from Shelly, is the famous spot.
Smith, he says, in his work "Newes from Virginia," says "the bay
where Powhatan dwelleth hath three creeks in it." "I have
visited," says Mr. Campbell, "that part of Gloucester county,
and am satisfied that Timberneck Bay is the one referred to by
Mr. Smith. On the east bank of this bay stands an old chimney
known as `Powhatan's chimney,' and its site corresponds with Werowocomico
as laid down in Smith's map." Mr. Campbell supposes
this to be the chimney of the house built by the Colonists to
propitiate the favour of Powhatan, and says he is supported by
tradition. May not the two opinions be reconciled in the following
manner? Shelly may have been the original place of his residence
or of his frequent residence; but when it was offered to build
him a house after the English fashion, he may have preferred a
situation a few miles off, for reasons best known to his royal
majesty. And now, although I have already introduced some
documents touching Powhatan and Pocahontas into my article on
Jamestown and Henrico, yet, as there is another most worthy of
preservation and use, I will do my part toward its perpetuity by
inserting it in this place. It is the famous letter of Captain Smith
to Queen Anne, soliciting her attention to Pocahontas when in
England,—a letter not easily surpassed by any one in any age.


337

Page 337

"To the Most High and Virtuous Princess, Queen Anne,
of Great Britain:
[96]

"Most admired Madam:

The love I bear my God, my King, and
my Church, hath so often emboldened me in the worst of extreme dangers,
that now honesty doth constrain me to presume thus far beyond myself,
to present to your Majesty this short discourse. If ingratitude be a
deadly poison to all honest virtues, I must be guilty of that crime if I
should omit any means to be thankful. So it was, that about ten years ago,
being in Virginia, and being taken prisoner by the power of Powhatan,
their chief king, I received from this great savage exceeding great courtesy,—especially
from his son, Nantiquaus, the manliest, comeliest, boldest
spirit I ever saw in a savage, and his sister Pocahontas, the king's most
dear and beloved daughter, being but a child of twelve or thirteen years
of age, whose compassionate, pitiful heart of my desperate estate gave me
much cause to respect her. I being the first Christian this proud king
and his grim attendants ever saw, and thus enthralled in their power, I
cannot say I felt the least occasion of want that was in the power of those,
my mortal foes, to prevent, notwithstanding all their threats. After some
six weeks' fattening among these savage courtiers, at the minute of my
execution she hazarded the beating out of her own brains to save mine;
and not only that, but so prevailed with her father that I was safely conducted
to Jamestown, where I found about eight-and-thirty miserable,
poor, and sick creatures to keep possession of all those large territories in
Virginia. Such was the weakness of this poor Commonwealth, as had not
the savages fed us, we directly had starved. And this relief, most gracious
Queen, was commonly brought us by the Lady Pocahontas.

"Notwithstanding all those passages, when inconstant fortune turned
our peace to war, this tender virgin would still not spare to dare to visit
us; and by her our fears have been often appeased and our wants still
supplied. Were it the policy of her father thus to employ her, or the
ordinance of God thus to make her his instrument, or her extraordinary
affection to our nation, I know not. But of this I am sure; when her
father, with the utmost of his policy and power, sought to surprise me,
having but eighteen with me, the dark night could not affright her from
coming through the irksome woods, and, with watered eyes, gave me intelligence
with her best advice to escape his fury, which had he seen, he
had surely slain her.

"Jamestown, with her wild train, she as freely visited as her father's
habitation; and during the time of two or three years, she, next under
God, was still the instrument to preserve this Colony from death, famine,
and utter confusion, which in those times had once been dissolved, Virginia
might have lain as it was at our first arrival till this day. Since
then this business, having been turned and varied by many accidents from
what I left it, is most certain; after a long and troublesome war, since my
departure, betwixt her father and our Colony, all which time she was not
heard of. About two years after, she herself was taken prisoner, being so
detained near two years longer; the Colony by that means was relieved,
peace concluded, and at last, rejecting her barbarous condition, she was
married to an English gentleman, the first Virginian who ever spake English,


338

Page 338
or had a child in marriage by an Englishman,—a matter surely, if
my meaning be truly considered and well understood, well worthy a
prince's information. Thus, most gracious lady, I have related to your
Majesty what, at your best leisure, our approved histories will recount to
you at large, as done in your Majesty's life. And, however this might be
presented you from a more worthy pen, it cannot from a more honest
heart.

"As yet, I never begged any thing of the State; and it is my want of
ability and her exceeding deserts, your birth, means, and authority, her
birth, virtue, want, and simplicity, doth make me thus bold humbly to beseech
your Majesty to take this knowledge of her, though it be from one so
unworthy to be the reporter as myself, her husband's estate not being able
to make her fit to attend your Majesty. The most and least I can do is to
tell you this, and the rather of her being of so great a spirit, however her
stature. If she should not be well received, seeing this kingdom may rightly
have a kingdom by her means, her present love to us and Christianity might
turn to such scorn and fury as to divert all this good to the worst of evil;
when, finding that so great a Queen should do her more honour than she
imagines, for having been kind to her subjects and servants, would so
ravish her with content as to endear her dearest blood to effect that your
Majesty and all the King's most honest subjects most earnestly desire.
And so I humbly kiss your gracious hands, &c.

"Signed, John Smith."
 
[96]

King James's wife was named Anne.

Since the above was in print, we have received the following
extract from one of our public papers:—

"Pocahontas.—An interesting link in the chain of American Documentary
History has just been given by the rector of Gravesend, in Kent,
to the Rev. R. Anderson, for his `Colonial Church History.' It is the
fac-simile copy of the entry of the death of Pocahontas, in the register
of that parish, where she died three years after her marriage, when on
the point of embarking to return to her native land with her husband,
who was appointed Secretary and Recorder-General for Virginia. It runs
thus:—`1616, March 21. Rebecca Rolfe, wyffe of Thomas Rolfe, gent.,
a Virginia lady borne, was buried in ye Chauncell.' The present church
at Gravesend is an erection later than the date of this entry; so that, in
all probability, it is the only tangible relic of the last resting-place of
one called by our forefathers `the first-fruit of the Gospel in America,' of
whom Sir Thomas Dale (Marshal of Virginia) wrote, `were it but the
gaining of this one soule, I think my time, toile, and present stay well
spent.' Poor Pocahontas! who shall say what emotions passed through
her mind, when, strong in affectionate confidence, she accompanied her
husband from the pleasant savannas of Virginia, which she was never to
see again, to the Court of England, and still (in the words of Purchas)
`did not onely accustom herselfe to civilitie, but carried herselfe as the
daughter of a king.' Every trait preserved of her in the records of the
time testifies to her `increasing in goodness as the knowledge of God increased
in her.' Her true story is one that can never become hackneyed
even with familiarity, and should be religiously kept free from burlesque
association."


339

Page 339

GRAVEYARDS IN GLOUCESTER COUNTY.

There are three graveyards of some note near to each other:—
that at Rosewell, where the Pages are buried; at Timberneck Bay,
where the Manns are buried; and at Carter's Creek, where the
Burwells alone are buried. Many inscriptions upon the old tombstones
have been furnished me.

The first of the Pages was John Page, usually called Sir John,
of Williamsburg, who wrote the good book to his son Matthew.
His son Matthew married Mary Mann, of Timberneck Bay, a rich
heiress, and bequeathed an immense estate to his son Mann, who
built Rosewell. His son Mann, Jr. married, first, Judith Wormley,
who had only one child who lived; and she married Thomas Mann
Randolph, of Tuckahoe. Mr. Page's second wife was Judith Carter,
daughter of Robert Carter, of Corotoman, commonly called King
Carter. By this marriage he had Mann Page, of Rosewell, John
Page, of North End, Gloucester, and Robert Page, of Broadneck,
Hanover. The first of these three married Alice Grymes, of Middlesex,
by whom he had two children,—John Page, of Rosewell,
alias Governor Page, and Judith, who married Lewis Burwell, of
Carter's Creek. At the death of his first wife, Alice Grymes,
Mann Page married Miss Ann Corbin Tayloe, sister of the first
Colonel Tayloe, of Mount Airy, by whom he had Mann Page, of
Mansfield, near Fredericksburg, who married his cousin, sister of
the late Colonel Tayloe, of Mount Airy; Robert Page, of Hanover
Town, who married a daughter of Charles Carter, of Fredericksburg;
Gwinn Page, who married first in Prince William and
then in Kentucky; Matthew Page, of Hanover Town, who died
unmarried; Betsey Page, who married Mr. Benjamin Harrison, of
Brandon; Lucy Page, who married first Colonel George Baylor,
and then Colonel Nathaniel Burwell.

The second son of Mann Page and Judith Carter—John Page,
of North End—married Jane Byrd, of Westover, whose son Mann
married Miss Selden, and was the father of William Byrd Page, of
Frederick, who married Miss Lee, and was the father of the Rev.
Charles Page, and many others.

John Page, second son of John, of North End, married Miss
Betty Burwell, and had several children. Their daughter Jane
married Mr. Edmund Pendleton. William, third son of John, of
North End, married Miss Jones, and had three children,—Jane,
Byrd, and Carter. Carter Page, of Cumberland, fourth son of


340

Page 340
John, of North End, married, first, Polly, daughter of Archibald
Cary, then Lucy, daughter of General Nelson, of York. Robert
Page, of Janeville, Frederick county, married his cousin Sarah,
of Broadneck. The sixth son was Matthew, who died unmarried.
The seventh, Tom, who married Mildred, daughter of Edmund
Pendleton, of White Plains. The eighth, Judith, who married
Colonel Hugh Nelson, of York. The ninth, Molly, who married
Mr. John Byrd, and had no children. The tenth, Jane, who married
Nathaniel Nelson, and was the mother of Mrs. Nathaniel Burwell,
of Saratoga. The eleventh, Lucy, who married Mr. Frank
Nelson, of Hanover. The above eleven were all the children of
Mr. John Page, of North End, second son of Mann and Judith
Page, of Rosewell. Their third son was Robert, of Broadneck,
Hanover county, who married Miss Sarah Walker. Their children
were, first, Robert, who married a Miss Braxton, and was the
father of Carter B. Page, John White Page, Walker Page, and
three sisters. Second, John, of Page Brook, who married Miss
Byrd, of Westover, and left many children. Third, Matthew
Page, of Annfield, who married Miss Ann R. Meade, and left two
daughters. Fourth, Catharine, who married Benjamin Waller, of
Williamsburg. Fifth, Judith, who married Mr. John Waller.
Sixth, Sarah, who married Mr. Robert Page, of Janeville.



No Page Number


No Page Number
illustration

OLD SELIM.

 
[93]

There is no mention of this minister in the history of the Maury and Fontaine
families by Dr. Hawks and Miss Ann Maury; but we doubt not he was one
of them,—probably the son of Mr. James Fontaine, one of the five brothers, and
who settled in King William.

[95]

Mr. Page, of Rosewell, was twice married. First to Miss Frances Burwell, of
the Isle of Wight, and next to Miss Louther, of New York, whom he met with
while in Congress, which sat in that place. I have before me the funeral sermon
preached on the occasion of the death of the former by the Rev. James Maury
Fontaine, minister of Petsoe parish, and for some time of Ware parish, Gloucester.
I quote a few passages from it, not only to show the character of Mrs. Page, but
also the theology of Mr. Fontaine:—

"The voice of all proclaim aloud her praise. It was Mrs. Page's peculiar felicity
to have no enemies. This is only to be accounted for by her having no competitions
with the world but that laudable one, who should outdo in kindness and good offices.
A contest of this kind always leaves the victor as amiable as triumphant. To be
more particular: she was a faithful member of our Church. Her piety was exemplary.
Her charity was universal. Her patience and fortitude in travelling the
painful and gloomy road to dissolution were uncommonly great. She was a fair
pattern of conjugal perfection. A better wife never died. She was a complete
example to mothers. Sensible of the great blessing of early instruction, she
laboured gradually and pleasingly to infuse into the tender minds of her offspring
suitable portions of knowledge and virtue, and, knowing the force of good example,
she did what she would have her children practise, and was what she wished them
to be. She was an amiable pattern for mistresses; a fast, valuable friend, and
emphatically a good neighbour; in fine, a pattern to her sex and an ornament to
human nature."

Although we could wish to have seen more of the Gospel throughout the sermon,
yet at the close there is a recognition of it which shows that he understood and, we
hope, practised it. In exhorting the bereaved members of the family to a proper
resignation, he says, "Others have been as deeply afflicted as you. Jesus, the
Captain of our salvation, was made perfect through sufferings. He knows how to
pity you. And his sorrows have sufficient efficacy in them to convert yours into
real blessings. Let patience have her perfect work. Still confide in the power,
goodness, and faithfulness of God. Still rely on the mediation, advocacy, and grace
of the Lord Jesus Christ. And still expect those aids and support from the blessed
Spirit which you may yet need."

The effects of paternal as well as maternal examples have been seen in the numerous
descendants of Mr. Page who have embraced the religion and loved the
Church of their fathers, instead of adjuring the former and deserting the latter, as
too many of that day did. Of one of them I may be permitted to speak a special
word. She inherited her mother's name as well as her virtues. I mean the late
Mrs. Frances Berkeley, of Hanover. Her first husband was Mr. Thomas Nelson,
of York, son of General Nelson, by whom she had a daughter who was dearer to
me than life itself. They owned and for a time lived at Old Temple Farm, the ancient
seat of General Spottswood, the head-quarters of Washington during the siege
of York, and the place where Cornwallis signed his capitulation. After the death
of Mr. Nelson his widow married Dr. Carter Berkeley, of Hanover. Each of them
contributed a number of children by their first marriage to the joint family at
Edgewood, and others were born to them afterward. Instead of discord and
strife, a threefold cord of love was formed, seldom to be seen. Mrs. Berkeley was
added to the number of those excellent ones belonging to the much-abused family
of step-mothers, who knew no difference between her own and adopted children,
while all regarded her equally as their own mother and each other as children of
the same parents. She was in mind and person and character one of "nature's
nobles," sanctified by divine grace to be among the finest specimens of renewed
humanity. Less than this I could not say of one who was to me as a mother.


341

Page 341

ARTICLE XXIX.

Gloucester.—No. 3. History of Selim, the Algerine Convert.

The following article was written by the Rev. Benjamin H. Rice.
The addition is from a descendant of Mr. Page, of Rosewell:—

THE CONVERTED ALGERINE.

The following narrative was committed to writing by an aged
clergyman in Virginia, and is communicated for publication by a
missionary of known character. Its authenticity may be relied on.
It is introduced by the writer with the following paragraphs:—

I have long been of opinion that even the short account I am able
to give of Selim, the Algerine, is worth preserving, and suppose that
no person now living is able to give so full an account of him as
myself, not having the same means of information.

Had Selim ever recovered his reason so far as to be able to
write his own history and give an account of all the tender and
interesting circumstances of his story, it would undoubtedly have
been one of the most moving narratives to be met with. All I
can write is the substance of the story as related to me, most of
it many years ago. I have been careful to relate every particular
circumstance I could recollect worthy of notice, and make
no additions and very few reflections of my own. I publish
these narratives at this time for the sake of a few observations
which they naturally suggest, and which I think seasonable at the
present day.

About the close of the war between France and England in
Virginia, commonly called Braddock's War, a certain man, whose
name, as I have been informed, was Samuel Givins, then an inhabitant
of Augusta county, in Virginia, went into the woods back of
the settlements to hunt wild meat for the support of his family,—
a practice which necessity renders customary for the settlers of a
new country. He took more than one horse with him, that it
might be in his power to bring home his meat and skins. As he
was one day ranging the woods in quest of game, he cast his eyes
into the top of a large fallen tree, where he saw a living creature


342

Page 342
move. Supposing it to be some kind of a wild beast, he made
ready to shoot it, but had no sooner obtained a distinct view than
he discovered a human shape, which prevented the fatal discharge.
Going to the place, he found a man in a most wretched and pitiable
condition,—his person entirely naked (except a few rags tied about
his feet) and almost covered over with scabs, quite emaciated and
nearly famished to death. The man was unacquainted with the English
language, and Givins knew no other. No information, therefore,
could be obtained who he was, whence he came, or how he was
brought into a state so truly distressing. Givins, however, with
the kindness of the good Samaritan, took a tender care of him,
and supplied his emaciated body with the best nourishment his
present circumstances would afford. He prudently gave him but
little at a time, and increased the quantity as his strength and the
power of digestion increased. In a few days the man recovered
such a degree of strength as to be able to ride on horseback.
Givins furnished him with one of those he had taken with him to
carry home his meat, and conducted him to Captain (afterward
Colonel) Dickerson's, who then lived near the Windy Cave. Dickerson
supplied his wants, and entertained him for some months with a
generosity that is more common with rough backwoodsmen, who
are acquainted with the hardships of life, than among the opulent
sons of luxury and ease.

The poor man considered that he had no way to make himself
and his complicated distresses known, without the help of language:
he therefore resolved to make himself acquainted with the
English tongue as soon as possible. In this his progress was surprising:
he procured pen, ink, and paper, and spent much of his
time in writing down remarkable and important words, pronouncing
them, and getting whoever was present to correct his pronunciation.
By his indefatigable application, and the kind assistance of Colonel
Dickerson's family, he in a few months was so far master of English
as to speak it with considerable propriety. When he found
himself sufficiently qualified for communicating his ideas, he gave
the colonel and others a most moving narrative of his various
unparalleled misfortunes. He said his name was Selim; that he
was born of wealthy and respectable parents in Algiers; that when
a small boy his parents sent him to Constantinople, with a view to
have him liberally educated there; and that after he had spent
several years in that city, in pursuit of learning, he returned to
Africa to see his parents, with a view to return to Constantinople
to finish his education. The ship in which he embarked was taken


343

Page 343
by a Spanish man-of-war or privateer, and Selim thus became a
prisoner of war. The Spaniards were at this time in alliance with
France against England. Falling in with a French ship bound to
New Orleans, they put him on board this vessel, which carried him
to the place of its destination. After living some time among the
French at New Orleans, they sent him up the rivers Mississippi
and Ohio to the Shawnee towns, and left him a prisoner of war
with the Indians, who at that time lived near the Ohio. There
was at the same time a white woman, who had been taken from the
frontiers of Virginia, a prisoner with the same tribe of Indians.
Selim inquired of her, by signs, whence she came. The woman
answered by pointing directly toward the sunrising. He was so
far acquainted with the geography of America as to know that
there were English settlements on the eastern shore of this continent;
and he rightly supposed the woman had been taken prisoner
from some of them. Having received this imperfect information,
he resolved to attempt an escape from the Indians to some of these
settlements. This was a daring attempt, for he was an entire
stranger to the distance he would have to travel and the dangers
which lay in his way; he had no pilot but the sun, nor any provisions
for his journey,—nor gun, ammunition, or other means of
obtaining them. Being thus badly provided for, and under all
these discouraging circumstances, he set out on his arduous journey
through an unknown mountainous wilderness of several hundred
miles. Not knowing the extent of the settlements he aimed at, he
apprehended danger of missing them should he turn much to the
north or south, and therefore resolved to keep as directly to the
sunrising as he possibly could, whatever rivers or mountains might
obstruct his path. Through all these difficulties Selim travelled
on until the few clothes he had were torn to pieces by bushes,
thorns, and briers. These, when thus torn and fit for no other
service, he wrapped and tied about his feet to defend them from
injuries. Thus he travelled naked, until his skin was torn to
pieces with briers and thorns, his body emaciated, his strength exhausted
with hunger and fatigue, and his spirits sunk under discouragements.
All he had to strengthen and cheer him was a few
nuts and berries he gathered by the way, and the distant prospect
of once more seeing his native land. But this pleasing prospect
could animate him no longer, nor could these scanty provisions
support him. His strength failed, and he sank into despair of
every thing but ending a miserable life in a howling wilderness, surrounded
by wild beasts! Finding he could travel no farther, he

344

Page 344
fixed upon the top of the tree where Givins found him, as the spot
where his sorrows and his life must end together. But God, whose
providence is over all his creatures, had other views. While Selim
was dying this lingering, painful death, and was scarce able to move
his feeble limbs, relief was sent him by the beneficent hand of
Givins: he is again restored to life, and hope once more revives
and animates his sinking heart. No doubt Colonel Dickerson was
sensibly touched with this moving tale of woe, and the generous
feelings of his humanity greatly increased. I infer it from his
conduct; for he furnished Selim with a horse to ride, treated him
as a companion, and took him to visit the neighbours and see the
country. He accompanied the colonel to Staunton, where the
court of Augusta county sat, and where the inhabitants of the
county were assembled, it being court-day. Among the rest was
the Rev. John Craig, a Presbyterian minister of the Gospel, who
resided a few miles from town. When Selim saw Mr. Craig he
was struck with his appearance, turned his particular attention to
him, and after some time came and spoke to him, and intimated a
desire to go home with him. Mr. Craig welcomed him to his
house, and then, or afterward, asked him why he desired to go
home with him in particular, being an entire stranger, whom he had
never seen before. Selim replied:—

"When I was in my distress, I once in my sleep dreamed that I
was in my own country, and saw in my dream the largest assembly of
men my eyes had ever beheld, collected in a wide plain, all dressed
in uniform and drawn up in military order. At the farther side
of the plain, and almost at an immense distance, I saw a person
whom I understood to be one of great distinction; but, by reason
of the vast distance he was from me, I could not discern what sort
of a person he was. I only knew him to be a person of great eminence.
I saw every now and then one or two of this large assembly
attempting to go across the plain to this distinguished
personage; but when they had got about half-way over, they
suddenly dropped into a hole in the earth, and I saw them no
more. I also imagined that I saw an old man standing by himself,
at a distance from this large assembly, and one or two of the multitude
applied to him for direction how to cross the plain in safety;
and all who received and followed it got safe across. As soon as
I saw you," added Selim, "I knew you to be the man who gave
these directions; and this has convinced me that it is the mind of
God that I should apply to you for instructions in religion. It is
for this reason I desire to go home with you. When I was among


345

Page 345
the French, they endeavoured to prevail on me to embrace the
Christian religion. But, as I observed they made use of images in
their religious worship, I looked on Christianity with abhorrence;
such worship being, in my opinion, idolatrous."

Mr. Craig cheerfully undertook the agreeable work he seemed
called to by an extraordinary Providence. He soon found that
Selim understood the Greek language, which greatly facilitated the
business. He furnished a Greek Testament; Selim spent his time
cheerfully in reading it, and Mr. Craig his leisure hours in explaining
to him the Gospel of Jesus Christ. In the space of about two
weeks he obtained what Mr. Craig esteemed a competent knowledge
of the Christian religion. He went to Mr. Craig's house of worship,
made a public profession of Christianity, and was baptized
in the name of the adorable Trinity. Some time after this, Selim
informed Mr. Craig that he was desirous to return to his native
country and once more see his parents and friends. Mr. Craig
reminded him that his friends and countrymen, being Mohammedans,
entertained strong prejudices against the Christian religion, and
that, as he now professed to be a Christian, he would probably be
used ill on that account, and that here in America he might enjoy
his religion without disturbance. To which Selim replied, that his
father was a man of good estate, and he was his heir; that he had
never been brought up to labour, and knew no possible way in
which he could obtain a subsistence; that he could not bear the
thought of living a life of dependence upon strangers and being a
burden to them; that he was sensible of the strong prejudices of
his friends against Christianity, yet could not think that, after all
the calamities he had undergone, his father's religious prejudices
would so far get the better of his humanity as to cause him to use
his son ill on that account; and that, at all events, he desired to
make the experiment. Mr. Craig urged that the favourable
regards of his friends and a good estate on the one hand, and a
life of poverty and distress on the other, might prove a too powerful
temptation to renounce that religion he now professed to believe
true, and to return again to Mohammedanism. Selim said, whatever
the event might be, he was resolved never to deny Jesus.

When Mr. Craig found that he was fully resolved, he applied to
some of his neighbours, and, with their assistance, furnished Selim
with as much money as they supposed sufficient to defray his expenses
to England, from whence he said he could easily get a
passage to Africa. He furnished him, also, with a letter to the
Hon. Robert Carter, who then lived in Williamsburg and was


346

Page 346
noted for his beneficence to the poor and afflicted, requesting him
to procure for the bearer an agreeable passage in some ship bound
to England. Mr. Carter did more than was requested of him: he
furnished Selim plentifully with sea-stores. Being thus provided
for, he set sail for England, with the flattering prospect before him
of being once more happy in his own country and in the arms of
his affectionate parents. For many months no more is heard of
him by his American acquaintance.

How long after this I do not recollect,—perhaps some years,—
the poor unfortunate Selim returned again to Virginia in a state
of insanity. He came to Williamsburg, and to the house of his
old benefactor, Mr. Carter. His constant complaint was, that he
had no friend, and where should he find a friend? From which
complaint the cause of his present very pitiable situation was
easily conjectured: his father was not his friend. Notwithstanding
the derangement of his mental powers, he had certain lucid intervals,
in which he so far enjoyed his reason as to be able to give
a pretty distinct account of his adventures after he left Virginia.
He said he had a speedy and safe passage to England, and from
thence to Africa; and that, on his arrival, he found his parents
still alive, but that it was not in his power long to conceal it from
them that he had renounced Mohammedanism and embraced the
Christian religion, and that his father no sooner found this to be
the case than he disowned him as a child and turned him out
of his house. Affection for his parents, grief for their religious
prejudices and his own temporal ruin, tormented his tender
heart. He was now turned out into the world, without money,
without a friend, without any art by which he could obtain a subsistence.
He left his own country, the estate on which he expected
to spend his life, and all his natural connections, without
the most distant prospect of ever seeing or enjoying them more.
He went to England, in hopes of there finding some way to live,
where he could enjoy his religion when every other source of comfort
was dried up. But, having no friend to introduce him to the
pious and benevolent, he found no way to subsist in that country;
on which he resolved to return to America, it being a new country,
where the poor could more easily find the means of support. In
his passage to Virginia—while he had probably no pious friend to
console him in his distresses nor to encourage and support him
under them, and while he had little to do but pore over his wretched
situation—he sunk, under the weight of his complicated calamities,
into a state of insanity.


347

Page 347

Though Selim's great distress was that he had no friend and
he was constantly roving about in quest of one, yet of friendship
he was incapable of enjoying the advantages. In pursuit of his
object he went up to Colonel Dickerson's, but to no purpose.
From thence he wandered away to the Warm Springs, where was
at that time a young clergyman of the name of Templeton, who,
having understood something of his history, entered into conversation
with him. He asked him, among other things, whether he
was acquainted with the Greek language; to which he modestly
replied that he understood a little of it. Mr. Templeton put a
Greek Testament into his hand, and asked him to read and construe
some of it. He took the book and opened it, and, when he
saw what it was, in a transport of joy he pressed it to his heart,
and then complied with Mr. Templeton's request. By these
actions he showed his great veneration for the Sacred Scriptures,
and how long he had retained the knowledge of the Greek in circumstances
the most unfavourable. From the Warm Springs he
went down to Mr. Carter's, (who, by this time, had removed from
Williamsburg to his seat in Westmoreland county,) in hopes that
gentleman would act the part of a friend, as he had formerly
done; but still, poor man, he was incapable of enjoying what he
greatly needed and most desired. He soon wandered away from
Mr. Carter's, was taken, and carried to the madhouse in Williamsburg.

The above account I received from Mr. Craig, Mr. Carter, and
Mr. Templeton; and it is the substance of all I knew of Selim
before I came to reside in this State. Since my arrival here I
have seen several men who were personally acquainted with him
while in a state of derangement. They say he was commonly inoffensive
in his behaviour, grateful for favours received, manifested
a veneration for religion, was frequently engaged in prayer,—that
his prayers were commonly, though not always, pretty sensible
and tolerably well connected,—and that he appeared to have the
temper and behaviour of a gentleman, though he was in ruins;
that he went roving from place to place, sometimes almost naked
for want of sense to keep on the clothes that he had received
from the hand of charity, until he was taken with the sickness
which put an end to his sorrows; that when he was taken sick his
reason was restored and continued to his last moments; that the
family where he lay sick and died treated him with great tenderness,
for which he expressed the utmost gratitude, and that, at his
request and importunity, no persons sat up with him on the night


348

Page 348
in which he died. It appears, however, that he died with great
composure; for he placed himself, his hands, his feet, and his
whole body, in a proper posture to be laid in his coffin, and so
expired.

The following is added by a descendant of Mr. Page:—

"Among the pictures that made the deepest impression on me at Rosewell,
and which decorated the old hall, was that of Selim. He was painted
Indian fashion, with a blanket round his shoulders, a straw hat on his
head, tied on with a check handkerchief. This portrait Governor Page
had taken in Philadelphia, by Peale; and, when the box arrived at Rosewell,
the family and servants were all assembled in the hall to see it opened.
Great was their astonishment and disappointment to find, instead of a portrait
of their father and master, Selim's picture, which was greeted instantly
with his usual salutation, `God save ye.' He was a constant visitor at
Rosewell, and was always kindly received by servants and children, who
respected him for his gentleness, piety, and learning. One of his fancies
was never to sleep in a house, and, unless he could be furnished with regimentals,
disdained all other clothing. One of his greatest pleasures, when
in Williamsburg, was to read Greek with Professor Small and President
Horrocks, of William and Mary, and at Rosewell, with Mr. Page, and his
youngest son, who read Greek and Hebrew at a very early period; but it
was always out of doors.

"When in Yorktown, the old windmill (which was blown down by a
late tornado, and was long a relic of olden times, and which ground nearly
all the bread used in York) was his resting-place. The only time he was
ever in the York House he was coaxed by General Nelson's oldest daughter
and niece to take his seat in Lady Nelson's sedan-chair. As they bore
him in and rested in the passage, he rose up, and sang melodiously one
of Dr. Watts's hymns for children,—

`How glorious is our heavenly King!'

The first time it was ever heard in Yorktown. Where he learned it was
never known, but we suppose it must have been from his Presbyterian
friends in Prince Edward. He had a trick of constantly passing his
hands over his face, and, when questioned about it, would say, `It is the
blow—that disgrace to a gentleman—given me by that Louisiana planter;
but—thank God! thank God! but for the Saviour I could not bear it.'

"I have always understood he went to South Carolina from Phila
delphia with a gentleman who took a fancy to him and got him off with
the promise of a full suit of regimentals, and there we lose sight of him."

The picture of Selim may still be seen in the library of Mr.
Robert Saunders, of Williamsburg. Mr. Saunders married a
daughter of Governor Page, and thus inherited it. Selim, out of
his attachment to Mr. Page, either followed or went with him to
Philadelphia, where the American Congress was sitting, of which
Mr. Page was a member. Mr. Peale was then a most eminent
painter.


349

Page 349

ARTICLE XXX.

Gloucester.—No. 4. Supplement to the Articles on Gloucester.

According to a purpose expressed in one of my previous numbers,
I have visited some places in Gloucester, with a view of obtaining
the most accurate information concerning some antiquated places
which have interest in them for more than mere antiquaries. My
first visit was to the old stone chimney which tradition says belonged
to the house built by Captain Smith for King Powhatan at
or near his residence on York River, in Gloucester. I acknowledge
that I had never placed much confidence in this tradition; for, though
I did not doubt but that Captain Smith had built a log room with
a stone chimney for the King, yet I did doubt whether any remains
of the room or chimney could now be seen. I am sure that there
is now no other remnant of such architecture, either in stone or
wood, to be found in Virginia. I went therefore to the spot with
no little of skepticism on the subject. On a high point of land,
divided by Timberneck Creek from Mr. Catlett's farm, the former
seat of the Manns, there is a wooden frame room, of more recent
construction, attached to a low, Dutch-built chimney intended only
for a single-story house. The chimney has recently been covered
on the outside with a coat of plastering. The fireplace within was
eight feet four inches wide—that is, the opening to receive the
wood—and four feet deep, and more than six feet high, so that the
tallest man might walk into it and a number of men sit within it
around the fire. All this was royal enough; but as many of the old
chimneys in Virginia, especially of the negro quarters, were as
large in former days, when wood abounded, my skepticism was not
entirely removed until I perceived, in the only crack which was to
be seen outside of the wall, something which showed that the material
was of no ordinary kind of stone, but like that of which the
old church at York was built,—viz.: marl out of the bank, which
only hardens by fire and by exposure. To render this more certain,
I asked the owner of the house if he could not get me a small block
of the material from the bottom of the chimney, near the ground,
so as not to injure it. He obligingly consented, and, bringing an
old axe, by repeated and heavy blows disengaged from the chimney a


350

Page 350
fragment of it, which I found to be what I conjectured,—a particular
kind of marl, composed of shells, and which abounds on some of
the high banks of York River, on both sides. I am now satisfied
that this is really the stone chimney built by Captain Smith.
There is no other kind of stone—if this may be called stone—in
this region; and it was much easier for Captain Smith to use this
than to make and burn brick. It is, moreover, more durable than
brick or stone. It is impossible to say how many generations of log
or frame rooms have been built to this celebrated chimney. There
is a contest between this spot and Shelly for the honour of being
Powhatan's residence; and it is thought by some that the old chimney
decides it in behalf of this. Shelly, in a straight line, is little more
than a mile from this, and may have been the residence of the
King and his tribe (and there are some strong marks of this) at the
time, though he may have preferred to have this house built on the
high and commanding bluff on which it stands. Moreover, Smith
and his men may have preferred, while at their work, to be at a
little distance from his royal majesty and his treacherous people.

Bearing away with me the piece of marl-stone from Powhatan's
chimney, to be kept in proof of what I now believe to be fact, I
crossed the creek, and sought at the old homestead of the Manns
for some sepulchral monument showing that tradition was true in
relation to the residence of a family whose name is only to be
found incorporated with other names, inheriting an estate which
not only once covered the half of Gloucester, if report be true, but
was scattered in large parcels over numerous other counties. In
or near the stable-yard, in an open place, there is to be seen a pile
of tombstones lying upon and beside each other in promiscuous
confusion, on which may be read the following inscriptions:—

"Here lyeth the body of John Mann, of Gloucester county, in Virginia,
gentleman, aged sixty-three years, who departed this life the 7th day of
January, 1694."

Also,—

"Here lyeth the body of Mrs. Mary Mann, of the county of Gloucester,
in the Colony of Virginia, gentlewoman, who departed this life the 18th
day of March, 1703-4, aged fifty-six years."

Their daughter and only child married Matthew Page, son of
John Page, the first of the family. They buried a child at this
place, whose tombstone is a part of this pile, and reads as follows:—

"Here lyeth the body of Elizabeth Page, daughter of Matthew Page,


351

Page 351
of the Colony of Virginia, gentleman, aged three years, who departed this
life the 15th of March, Anno Domini 1693."

THE TOMBS AT ROSEWELL.

My next visit was to Rosewell,—the mansion of which I have
spoken in one of the preceding articles.

Mr. Matthew Page moved to this place from Timberneck. Three
of his young children—Matthew, Mary, and Ann—are buried here
before the month of August, 1704. This appears, or did appear,
from their tombs. The following is the inscription on the heavy
ironstone tomb of Matthew Page:—

I.

"Here lyeth interred the body of the Honble Col. Matthew Page, one of.
Her Majesty's most Honble Council, of the parish of Abington, in the
county of Gloucester, Colony of Virginia, son of the Honble John Page, of
the parish of Bruton, in the county of York, in the aforesaid Colony, who
departed this life the 9th day of January, Anno Domini 1703, in the
45th year of his age."

II.

"Here lyeth interred the body of Mary Page, wife of the Honble Matthew
Page, Esquire, one of Her Majesty's Council of this Colony of Virginia, a
daughter of John and Mary Mann, who departed this life the 24th day of
March, in the year of our Lord 1707, in the 36th year of her age."

III.

"Here lie the remains of the Honble Mann Page, Esquire, one of His
Majesty's Council, of the Colony of Virginia, who departed this life the
24th day of January, 1730, in the 40th year of his age. He was the only
son of the Honble Matthew Page, Esquire, who was likewise member of His
Majesty's Council. His first wife was Judith, daughter of Ralf Wormley,
Esquire, Secretary of Virginia, by whom he had two sons and a daughter.
He afterward married Judith, daughter of the Honble Robert Carter, Esquire,
President of Virginia, with whom he lived in the most tender reciprocal
affection for twelve years, leaving by her five sons and a daughter.
His public trust he faithfully discharged, with candour and discretion,
truth and justice. Nor was he less eminent in his private behaviour; for
he was a tender husband and indulgent father, a gentle master and faithful
friend, being to all courteous and beneficent, kind and affable. This
monument was piously erected to his memory by his mournfully surviving
lady."

There were tombstones with inscriptions over each of the wives
of this, the first Mann Page,—one in Latin and the other in
English. The latter was first broken and then crumbled away.

One of the sons of the above-mentioned Mann Page was named
Mann, and inherited Rosewell. The following is the inscription
over his first wife:—


352

Page 352

IV.

"Here lyeth the body of Alice Page, wife of Mann Page, who departed
this life the 11th day of January, 1746, in childbed of her second son, in
the 23d year of her age, leaving two sons and one daughter. She was
the third daughter of the Honble John Grymes, Esquire, of Middlesex
county, one of His Majesty's Council in this Colony. Her personal beauty
and the uncommon sweetness of her temper, her affable deportment and
exemplary behaviour, made her respected by all who knew her. The
spotless innocency of her life and her singular piety, her constancy and
resignation at the hour of death, sufficiently testified her firm and certain
hope of a joyful resurrexion. To her sacred memory this monument is
piously erected."

His second wife was Miss Ann Corbin Tayloe. Two of their
sons, who died young, are buried at Rosewell, having tombs and
inscriptions. Governor Page, of Virginia, was a son by his first
wife, Alice Grymes. There is no tombstone over the second Mann
Page. Governor Page died in Richmond, and was buried in the
old churchyard around St. John's.

My next visit was to the old seat of the Burwells, about two
miles from Rosewell, on Carter's Creek, and in full view of York
River. It was formerly called Fairfield, and is so marked on
Bishop Madison's map of Virginia. It has for some time past been
called Carter's Creek only. The house, as appears by figures on
one of the walls, was built either in 1684 or 1694. A portion of
it has been taken down: the rest is still strong and likely to endure
for no little time to come. The graveyard is in a pasture-lot not
far from the house. Being unenclosed, it is free to all the various
animals which belong to a Virginia farm. Hogs, sheep, cows, and
horses, have free access to it; and, as there is a grove of a few old
trees overshadowing it, the place is a favourite resort in summer.
The tombs are very massive. The slabs on which the inscriptions
are engraved are of the same heavy ironstone or black marble with
those at Rosewell, Timberneck, and Bellfield, of which we have
spoken. The framework underneath them has generally given way,
and they lie in various positions about the ground. A large honeylocust,
around which several of them were placed, having attained
its maturity, was either blown down by the wind or struck by lightning,
and fell across them, breaking one of the largest into pieces.
The young shoots of the tree, springing up, have now themselves
become trees of considerable size, and afford shade for inanimate
tombs and living beasts. None of the family have for a long time
owned this ancient seat.


353

Page 353

TOMBS AT CARTER'S CREEK, OR FAIRFIELD.

I.

"To the lasting memory of Major Lewis Burwell, of the county of Gloucester,
in Virginia, gentleman, who descended from the ancient family of the
Burwells, of the counties of Bedford and Northampton, in England, who,
nothing more worthy in his birth than virtuous in his life, exchanged this
life for a better, on the 19th day of November, in the 33d year of his age,
A.D. 1658."

II.

"The daughter of Robert Higginson. She died November 26th, 1675.
. . . . . She was the wife of Major Lewis Burwell."

III.

"Here lyeth the body of Lewis, son of Lewis Burwell and Abigail his
wife, on the left hand of his brother Bacon and sister Jane. He departed
this life ye sixteenth day of September, 1676, in the 15th year of his
age."

IV.

"Here lyeth the body of Mary, the daughter of Lewis and Martha his
wife. She departed this life in the first year of her age, on the 20th of
July."

V.

"To the sacred memory of Abigail, the loving and beloved wife of
Major Lewis Burwell, of the county of Gloucester, gent., who was descended
of the illustrious family of the Bacons, and heiress of the Hon.
Nathaniel Bacon, Esq., President of Virginia, who, not being more
honourable in her birth than virtuous in her life, departed this world the
12th day of November, 1672, aged 36 years, having blessed her husband
with four sons and six daughters."

VI.

"Beneath this tomb lyeth the body of Major Nathaniel Burwell, eldest
son of Major Lewis Burwell, who, by well-regulated conduct and firm integrity,
justly established a good reputation. He died in the 41st year
of his age, leaving behind him three sons and one daughter,[97] by Elizabeth,
eldest daughter of Robert Carter, Esq., in the year of our Lord Christ
1721."

 
[97]

Of these, the daughter, Elizabeth Burwell, married President William Nelson,
and was the mother of General Thomas Nelson, &c. One son, Lewis, was the grandfather
of the late Lewis Burwell, of Richmond, &c., and father of Mrs. P. B. Whiting;
and the other was Carter Burwell, of The Grove, who married Lucy Grymes,
the sister of Alice, wife of Mann Page, and daughter of the Hon. John Grymes;
and he was the father of Col. Nathaniel Burwell, of Carter Hall, in Frederick
county, Virginia; and the third son was Robert Carter Burwell, of the Isle of
Wight, the father of Nathaniel Burwell of the same county, (whose children were
Robert C. Burwell, of Long Branch, Frederick, and his four sisters,) and Fanny,
the first wife of Col. John Page, of Rosewell, since Governor of Virginia.

VII.

"Here lyeth the body of the Hon. Lewis Burwell, son of Major Lewis
Burwell and Lucy his wife, of the county of Gloucester, who first married


354

Page 354
Abigail Smith, of the family of the Bacons, by whom he had four sons
and six daughters; and, after her death, Martha, widow of the Hon. William
Cole, by whom he had two sons and eight daughters, and departed
this life 19th day of Dec., 1710, leaving behind him three sons and six
daughters."

VIII.

"Sacred to the memory of the dearly-beloved . . . Martha, daughter
of . . . . of Nansemond county, in Virginia, married to Col. William
Cole, by whom she had no sons and no daughters. Afterward married
to Major Lewis Burwell, by whom she had six sons and three daughters;
resigned this mortal life the 4th day of Aug. 1704."

Copies of inscriptions on the tombstones of Ware Church, which sto
were covered by the erection of a new chancel-floor in said church in
June,
1854.

I.

"Underneath this stone lyeth interred the body of Amy Richards, the
most dearly-beloved wife of John Richards, minister of this parish, who
departed this life 21st of November, 1725, aged 40 years.

"Near her dear mistress lies the body of Mary Ades, her faithful and
beloved servant, who departed this life the 23d of November, 1725, aged
28 years."

II.

"Here lyeth the body of Mrs. Ann Willis, the wife of Col. Francis
Willis, who departed this life the 10th of June, 1727, in the 32d year
of her age. Also the body of A., daughter of the abovesaid, aged 7 days."

III.

"Underneath this stone lyeth the body of Mr. John Richards, late rector
of Nettlestead, and vicar of Teston, in the county of Kent, in the kingdom
of England, and minister of Ware, in the county of Gloucester and Colony
of Virginia, who, after a troublesome passage through the various changes
and chances of this mortal life, at last reposed in this silent grave in expectation
of a joyful resurrexion to eternal life. He died the 12th day
of November, in the year of our Lord MDCC . . . V., aged 46."

IV.

"Here lyeth the body of Isabel, daughter of Mr. Thomas Booth, wite
of Rev. John Fox, minister of this parish; who with exemplary patience
having borne various afflictions, and with equal piety discharged her several
duties on earth, cheerfully yielded to mortality, exchanging the miseries
of this life for the joys of a glorious eternity, on the 13th day of June, in
the year of our Lord MDCCXLII., of her age 38."

V.

`Here also lie the bodies of Mary and Susannah, daughters of the
above-mentioned John and Isabel. The one departed this life on the 5th
day of September, 1742, in the 4th year of her age; the other on the
8th of October, in the 3d year of her age, MDCCXLIII."

Doubtless there are other tombstones in the county bearing the
names of the old worthies of former days; but no information concerning


355

Page 355
them has been furnished me. There is, I am told, an old
graveyard, with tombstones, at the old seat of the Washingtons,
in Gloucester, on the Piankatank, from which I have been desirous
to hear, but have failed. One of the sons of the first John Washington
married a Miss Warner, of Gloucester, and settled at the
above-mentioned place. Hence sprung the combination of the
names Warner and Washington, so common in these families.


356

Page 356

ARTICLE XXXI.

Parishes in Middlesex.—No. 1.

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

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

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

The next is the vestryman's oath:—

"I, A. B., as I do acknowledge myself a true son of the Church of
England, so I do believe the articles of faith therein professed, and do
oblige myself to be conformable to the doctrine and discipline therein
taught and established; and that, as a vestryman of Christ Church, I will
well and truly perform my duty therein, being directed by the laws and
customs of this country and the canons of the Church of England, so far
as they will suit our present capacity; and this I shall sincerely do, according
to the best of my knowledge, skill, and cunning, without fear,
favour, or partiality; and so help me God."

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


357

Page 357

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

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

"It is ordered by this present vestry, that, whereas it hath pleased
Almighty God to take out of this life Mr. John Shephard, our late worthy
minister, and this vestry and the whole parish desiring to have his place
supplied with a gentleman of good life and doctrine, and a true son of the
Church of England,—and they knowing of none such at present in this
country but have benefices,—it is, therefore, unanimously agreed by the
vestry, that the Hon. Ralph Wormley, Esq., and Mr. Robert Smith, be
desired and empowered to write in the name of this vestry to the Hon. the
Lady Agatha Chichely and Major-General Robert Smith,—who, it is hoped,
are now safe in London,—to request them, or either of them, that they will
please to take the trouble to procure a fit minister in England to come over
and supply the place of Mr. Shephard; and for whose better encouragement
this vestry do promise, and accordingly resolve, that they will entertain
no minister in the said parish, except for the present time only, until
they have an answer from those honourable persons; and that they will
willingly accept and receive into this parish such minister as they shall
persuade to come and recommend to this vestry; and that such minister
shall have, beside the glebe-land and plantation, (which contains four hundred
acres of land,) the sum of sixteen thousand pounds of tobacco and
caske, yearly paid him by this parish, besides all perquisites and other
profits which have been enjoyed by our said worthy minister, Mr. John
Shephard."


358

Page 358

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

"Memorandum:—That the Rev. Duell Read, our present minister, out
of his pious intentions to the good of the souls of his flock, mentioned
that the blessed sacrament of the Lord's Supper (too much neglected)
might for the future be more frequently administered and attended. To
this intent, he, the aforesaid Mr. Read, propounded the monthly observation
thereof; that is to say, on the first Sunday in every month according to
course, that the congregation should assemble to divine service at the
mother-church, then and there the sacrament of the Lord's Supper
should be celebrated. And, moreover, that this great solemn mystery
might as well worthily as frequently be observed, he, the said Mr. Read,
did then frankly and freely promise a sermon at the said church monthly;
that is to say, on the Saturday, in the afternoon, for the guiding the communion,—not
doubting that all parents and masters of families, who ponder
the everlasting welfare of the souls committed to their charge, would readily
comply, and allow convenient liberty to their children and servants to repair
to church at such times, there to be instructed and prepared for this religious
duty. This motion was then thankfully and cheerfully entertained
by the present vestry, and they did unanimously concur with the said
Mr. Read therein."

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


359

Page 359

"I, Duell Read, late of Middlesex, in Virginia, having lived in the
said county for at least seven years past, and received divers kindnesses
from the parishioners thereof, and Almighty God in his great goodness
having preserved me through many dangers in my return to England, and
being most kindly received by my Right Honourable and Right Rev.
Henry Lord Bishop of London, do, in point of gratitude to Almighty
God and in honour for the Church of England, freely give and bestow, for
the use of my successors in the said parish, four milch-cows and calves,
four breeding sows, a mare and colt, to be delivered on the glebe of said
parish to the next incumbent, he to enjoy them and their increase for his
own use, and leaving the like number and quality on his death to his successors;
humbly requesting my aforesaid Right Rev. Diocesan to give
charge to his Commissary there to take due care herein, and to settle it in
such manner as to him shall seem fit, according to the true intent hereof.

"Witness my hand, in London, this 12th day of November, in the
second year of the reign of our Sovereign Lord and Lady, King William
and Queen Mary, &c.

"Duell Read."

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

"The following gentlemen, vestrymen of the parish,—viz.: Henry
Corbin, Richard Perrott, Abraham Weeks, John Hastewood, Richard
Cock, Robert Chewning, agree, each of them, to mark one cow-calf with
a crop in the right ear, to be kept as well as their own cattle until they be
two years old, then given to the vestry as stock for the parish."

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

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


360

Page 360
him. After eighteen years of faithful service, the parish of York-Hampton,
a more desirable one, endeavoured to obtain his services.
The vestry of Middlesex, however, raised his salary to twenty
thousand pounds of tobacco, and enlarged and improved his house.
The following entry shows that, in order to raise his salary, they
thought it necessary to make application to the Legislature:—

"To the Honourable the General Assembly:

"The humble petition of the vestry held for Christ Church parish the
7th day of May, 1722, showeth that this vestry, taking into consideration
the great satisfaction given to this parish for about eighteen years, and the
general good character of our minister, Mr. Bartholomew Yates, which we
are apprehensive has induced some other parishes to entertain thoughts
of endeavouring to prevail with him to quit this parish for some of those
more convenient, humbly pray they may be enabled to make use of such
measures as may be proper and reasonable to secure so great a good to
the parish.

"And they shall pray, &c.
"John Robinson."

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

"Here lie the remains of the Rev. Bartholomew Yates, who departed this
life the 26th day of July, 1734, in the fifty-seventh year of his age. He
was one of the visitors of William and Mary College, as also Professor of
Divinity in that Royal Foundation. In the conscientious discharge of his
duty few ever equalled him, none ever surpassed him. He explained the
doctrine by his practice, and taught and led the way to heaven. Cheerfulness—the


361

Page 361
result of innocence—always sparkled in his face, and, by the
sweetness of his temper, he gained universal good-will. His consort
enjoyed in him a tender husband, his children an indulgent father, his
servants a gentle master, his acquaintance a faithful friend. He was
minister of this parish upward of thirty years; and, to perpetuate his
memory, this monument is erected at the charge of his friends and
parishioners."

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

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

"I give £100 sterling to the vestry of Christ Church parish in Middle
sex, which said £100 I would have put to interest, and the interest-money
to be given to the minister for preaching four quarterly sermons
yearly, against the four reigning vices,—viz.: atheism and irreligion,
swearing and cursing, fornication and adultery, and drunkenness; and
this I would have done forever. I give to the said parish and vestry
aforesaid £25 sterling, to be put to interest, and the interest-money to be
given yearly to the clerk and sexton attending said sermon."[98]

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


362

Page 362
a tavern-porch in Urbanna, reeling to and fro with a bowl of toddy
in his hand, inviting the passers-by to come and drink with him.[99]
From the year 1813—the time of Mr. Heffernon's death—no
effort was made to have any services in that church. Indeed, it
is presumed that there were none for many years before his death.
The prostration of the church seemed to be complete. There was,
however, a kind of farce following that sad tragedy, to which I
must refer. In the year 1836, at the Convention in Fredericksburg,
a person calling himself Robinson, and professing to be a
minister of the Episcopal Church of England, presented himself
to Bishop Moore and myself, and produced some worn and dingy
papers, purporting to be letters of Orders. We neither of us were
pleased either with him or his papers. Bishop Moore soon turned
him over to me. He expressed a wish to unite with the Church in
Virginia; said that he did not care for salary, being in abundant
circumstances; that he wished to settle in some good society, and
not far from the ocean; that he had some of the best English
breed of sheep and Durham cattle, and wished to purchase a
farm. I told him plainly my opinion as to his course of duty;
that, if he wished to be useful in the ministry, he had better dispose
of his cattle and engage earnestly in the duties of it. He
expressed surprise that I should seem to think an attention to fine
cattle inconsistent with the duties of the ministry, and spoke of
one or more of the English Bishops who were great patrons of
cattle. We soon parted, mutually dissatisfied with each other, and
I never met him again. He took a fancy to the lower part of
Middlesex, in sight of the bay, bought or rented a farm there, and
moved some cattle to it, I believe. He had quite a library and a
great deal of English plate. He invited company, and entertained
at late fashionable hours. He also preached, either at some old
church or the court-house. His robes were those of English Fellows
or Doctors, having several pieces of different colours, besides
the gown and surplice. The same dress, I am told, he used when
performing the service at the White Sulphur Springs, in Western
Virginia, making changes in it during the service. How long he
continued in Virginia I know not; but, determining on a visit to
England, he wrote me a long letter, containing many questions
concerning the Church in America, which he said would doubtless

363

Page 363
be proposed on his return to England, and to which he wished for
answers. My reply to him was very short, and such as he would
take care not to show. A few months after this, we received intelligence
that he was taken up as an impostor and swindler in Liverpool,
and was then on his way to Botany Bay. All that he had
brought with him to America was stolen, and he went back to replenish
his treasury, and had wellnigh, by a forged note, robbed
the bank at Liverpool of a very large sum of money. Indeed, he
had it in his possession, and was on the point of sailing to America,
when pursued and overtaken. This closes, I hope, forever,
the disgrace of the Church in Middlesex. Henceforth we look for
better times. But before we enter upon those I wish to add something
concerning the laity of the old Middlesex parish.

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

 
[98]

By atheism we must not understand a denial of the existence of a God, but rather
irreligion,—a living without God in the world; for, at this time, infidelity was unknown
in the Colony. In the year 1724—thirteen years later—the clergy informed
the Bishop of London that there were no infidels in Virginia but Indians and negroes.
When the first infidel book was imported into Virginia, after the year 1730,
it produced such an excitement that the Governor and Commissary communicated
on the subject with the authorities in England.

[99]

What became of that fund I have not yet been able to ascertain. It ought to
be carefully inquired for, and sacredly applied according to the will of the testator.
Surely the overseers of the poor could not have claimed this?



No Page Number

ARTICLE XXXII.

Parishes in Middlesex.—No. 2.

Hitherto we have been entirely occupied with the history of
the clergy of this county. This being an early settlement,
lying on one of the finest rivers in Virginia, and near the
bay, we might expect to find here many of the ancestors of
some of the most respectable families of Virginia. As the vestrymen
were chosen from the leading citizens of each parish, we
shall give, in the order in which they appear on the vestry-book
for more than one hundred years, a full list of all who served the
parish in that capacity. Those who have any acquaintance with
the Virginia families, and with many who have dispersed themselves
throughout the West and South, will readily trace great
numbers to the parish of which we are treating. For the sake of
brevity we shall only mention the surnames, and afterward be more
specific as to a few of them. Corbin, Perrott, Chewning, Potter,
Vause, Weeks, Willis, Cock, Curtis, Smith, Dudley, Thacher, Skipwith,
Beverley, Wormley, Jones, Miller, Scarborough, Woodley,
Whitaker, Robinson, Warwick, Gordon, Chichester, Midge, Churchill,
Burnham, Wormley 2d, Kemp, Smith 2d, Cary, Dudley 2d,
Smith 3d, Daniel, Price, Mann, Seager, Vause 2d, Cock 2d, Cant,
Skipwith 2d, Wormley 3d, Thacher 2d, Grimes, Beverley 2d, Kilbee,
Kemp 2d, Corbin 2d, Robinson 2d, Walker, Jones 2d, Wormley
4th, Standard, Churchill 2d, Robinson 3d, Walker 2d, Robinson 4th,
Hardin, Wormley 5th, Corbin 3d, Smith 4th, Grymes 2d, Stanard
2d, Reid, Carter 2d, Elliot, Miles, Montague, Grymes 3d, Nelson,
Smith 5th. (The figures 2, 3, 4, 5 signify how many of the same
name and family held the office of vestrymen at different times.
They were probably sons, grandsons, &c.) The old English aristocracy
is apparent on the vestry-books. Sir Henry Chichely, Baronet
and Knight, (he was once Deputy-Governor of Virginia,) Sir William
Skipwith, Baronet and Knight, appear always at the head of the
vestrymen as written in the vestry-books, these titles giving them
the precedence. They appear to have been active and liberal, giving


365

Page 365
land and plate to the churches. John Grymes and Edmund Berkeley
appear to have been churchwardens for a longer period than any
others. The Thackers and Robinsons were also constant attendants
and active churchwardens for a long time. So also the Smiths,
Churchills, Curtises, Corbins, and Beverleys. Many of the above-mentioned
vestrymen were members of the Council, and held other
offices in the Colonial Government. The first Beverley on the list
was the celebrated Robert Beverley, so noted in the early history of
Virginia as a martyr in the cause of liberty. He was Clerk to the
House of Burgesses, and father of Robert Beverley, the historian of
Virginia, and ancestor of the other Beverleys. There were always
three lay readers, one to each of the churches,—the middle or mother,
or Great Church, and the upper and lower. We read the names of
Chewning, Baldwin, and Stevens, among the lay readers. They
were required not only to read Homilies, but to catechize the children
and see that every thing about the churches was kept clean
and in order, that the leaves around the churches (which were built
in the woods) should be burnt, in order to preserve the churches
from being destroyed by some of the great fires which were common
in the woods. It was not always easy to get suitable persons as
lay readers. We find at one meeting an express act of the vestry,
requiring that they be sober and reputable men; and this was only
an echo of the Act of Assembly. Complaints appear on the vestry-books
of the irregular attendance of the members, and a fine was
imposed of so much tobacco for each failure. The vestry appear
on several occasions to have taxed themselves with something extra
for the clergyman, though for every thing done and furnished for
the church, even the wealthiest made charges, as for communionwine,
putting up a horse-block, &c. The duties of the vestrymen
were to see that the salaries of the ministers be collected, which
was no easy matter, seeing that it must be gotten from the whole
country. They also took care of the poor, of orphan and illegitimate
children, imposed fines, and appointed persons to procession
the lands,—that is, renew the landmarks from time to time. Certain
offences against good morals were sometimes punished by them. In
one instance a lady of respectable family was fined five hundredweight
of tobacco for breaking the seventh commandment.[100] The

366

Page 366
greatest difficulty which they appear to have had was with the hired
servants, of whom, at an early period, great numbers came over to
this country, binding themselves to the richer families. The number
of illegitimate children born of them and thrown upon the
parish led to much action on the part of the vestries and the legislature.
The lower order of persons in Virginia, in a great measure,
sprang from those apprenticed servants and from poor exiled culprits.
It is not wonderful that there should have been much debasement
of character among the poorest population, and that the negroes
of the first families should always have considered themselves a
more respectable class. To this day there are many who look upon
poor white folks (for so they call them) as much beneath themselves;
and, in truth, they are so in many respects. The churchwardens
in this parish, among other things, were directed to assign seats in
the churches to the different families, which they no doubt did with
some reference to family and wealth, as in England. Mr. Matthew
Kemp, as churchwarden, received the commendation of the vestry
for displacing an unworthy woman, who insisted on taking a pew
above her degree. Four of the families of Wormley, Grymes,
Churchill, and Berkeley, obtained leave of the vestry to put an
addition of twenty feet square to one of the churches (the lower
one) for their special use. It was very common, as we shall see
hereafter, for certain families to build galleries for themselves after
the manner of their forefathers in England, and it was hard sometimes
to dislodge their descendants, even when their position was
uncomfortable and not very safe. There was one very important
duty which the vestries had to perform, and which was sometimes
a subject of dispute between them and the Governor of Virginia,—
viz.: to maintain their rights, as representing the people, in the
choice and settlement of ministers. In the English Church the
congregation have no part in the choice of their ministers. Patrons
appoint them, and livings support them. In Virginia, as the salary
was drawn directly from the people by the vestries, the vestries
sometimes claimed not only the right to choose the ministers, but
to turn them away at pleasure. In the absence of Bishops and

367

Page 367
canons to try the ministers, it is evident that there would be a strong
temptation on the part of the vestries to act arbitrarily if the power
was entirely vested in them. To prevent this, the Governor claimed
to be the ordinary, and to act as Bishop in relation to this point.
He, appealing to an English canon, allowed the vestries the right
of choosing their minister and presenting to him for induction.
Being inducted, the minister could not be displaced by the vestry:
he had a right to the salary, and might enforce it by an appeal to
law, unless, indeed, for misconduct, he could be deprived by some
difficult and tedious process under the direction of the Governor.
Should the vestry not appoint a minister within six months after
a vacancy, then the Governor might send one, and induct him as
the permanent minister, not to be removed by the vestry. The
Governor of Virginia in 1703, Mr. Nicholson, at the time about
which I am writing, maintained also that he had a right to send a
temporary supply to any parish immediately on the occurrence of
a vacancy, which supply might be superseded by one of their own
choice within the six months. It is the same power which some
have proposed to vest in our Bishops in relation to a temporary
supply of vacant parishes. It is evident that such a power would
very much interfere with the free choice of ministers by the vestries,
since the minister thus sent as the supply would have a great advantage
over others who might be obtained. To refuse him after
trial would be to condemn the choice of the Bishop, and be an offence
to himself. The above is the view taken of the relative
power of the vestry and Governor, in an opinion of the Queen's
Attorney-General, Mr. Edward Northy, which was sent by the
Governor to all the vestries of the Church, and directed to be put
on record.[101] The action of the vestries uniformly show their determination
to defend themselves as well as they could against the
evils consequent upon such a construction of the law. As to the
immediate temporary supply of the vacancies, that does not appear
to have been attempted by the Governor, although the right was
claimed. In order to prevent the minister being suddenly inducted
and put upon them for life, (whether one of their own choice or
of the Governor,) who might soon prove unworthy, while in reality
there was no method of getting rid of him, since no civil Governor

368

Page 368
could depose a minister, the vestries fell upon the expedient of employing
ministers for a limited time, generally twelve months,
sometimes less, repeating the same again and again until they were
sufficiently satisfied of their worthiness and suitableness, and then
of presenting him to the Governor for induction and permanent
settlement. Against this there was no law, and the Governor
acquiesced in it. And who can blame them for adopting such a
course? Bad as the state of things was even under that wise precaution,
how much worse would it have been, if the choice of the
vestry or the appointment of the Governor, after such a slight
acquaintance as either of them were likely to have with foreigners,
must be perpetuated for better for worse, even as the marriages of
some in that day, who imported their wives from England without
knowing them! It is but justice to the vestries to say, that as a
general thing, when they secured the services of a respectable
minister, they retained him during life. Although I shall shortly
show one instance to the contrary, I shall also show a number in
confirmation of it. It is also due to the vestries to say, that, in
compliance with the decision of the Governor, they always allowed
to the ministers who were not inducted the same rights, perquisites,
and privileges with those who were inducted. This principle is, I
believe, confirmed by one of the canons of our General Convention.

If now it be asked what was the state of morals and religion in
the parish where the leading men, the nobility and the gentry, took
such an active part in support of the public service of God, and
when the moral character of the ministers appears to have been
good, whatever may have been the substance and style of their
preaching, I must point to the fact that a pious man, Mr. William
Churchill, being a churchwarden, by his last will, in the year 1711,
left a sum of money, whose interest was to be used for the encouragement
of the minister to preach "against the four reigning vices
of atheism and irreligion, of swearing and cursing, fornication and
adultery, and drunkenness." They must have been prevalent in
that day to have prompted such a bequest. That they increased
more and more, even to the time of the French Revolution, is but
too probable. It was so with all ranks of the community. The
seats of the rich and the educated were the scenes of a more refined
voluptuousness, while many of the abodes of the poor were filled
with the lowest vices. And what has been the end of these things?
But for the uneducated and sometimes fanatical ministers, who, in
the providence of God, were after a time permitted to preach the
Gospel to the poor in Middlesex, where would have been the Church


369

Page 369
of God in that region, during a long, dark period? What has
become of the old Episcopal families, the Skipwiths, Wormleys,
Grymeses, Churchills, Robinsons, Berkeleys, and others? What
has become of, or who owns, those mansions where were the voluptuous
feasts, the sparkling wine, the flowing bowl, the viol and the
dance and the card-table, and the dogs for the chase, and the
horses for the turf? I am told, and I believe it, that the whole of
that county was at one time in possession of some few of these old
families, and that now not a rood of it is owned by one of their
name, and scarcely by one in whom is a remnant of their blood.
Old Brandon, the seat of my maternal ancestors, the Grymeses, is
gone, except a small part of it. Rosegill, where the Wormleys
lived in English state, has passed from hand to hand, and is reduced
to less than half its size. Even the places of many others
cannot now be found. The ploughshare has been over them, as it
has been over the ruins of many an old church in Virginia. But
still there were good and holy men and women there, in whom the
spirit of the Gospel and of the Prayer Book reigned, and that spirit
has possessed many of their exiled posterity. While some of the
descendants of those whose names I have recorded have been but
too well known in Virginia as unworthy, there have been a good
number of both sexes who have proved themselves to be an honour
to the State, and active agents in rebuilding the Church of their
fathers. Old Middlesex, too, once about to be deserted of its inhabitants
by reason of disease, exhaustion, and barrenness, has of
late years entered upon a new and unexpected career. Resting as
it were on a bed of richest marl, her agriculture has been revolutionized,
and she bids fair one day, and that not a distant one, to
compare with some of the fairest portions of our land. And what
has become of the old Mother-Church—the Great Church, as she is
styled in her journal—standing in view of the wide Rappahannock,
midway between Rosegill and Brandon? More perhaps than fifty
years ago it was deserted. Its roof decayed and fell in. Every
thing within it returned to its native dust. But nature abhors a
vacuum.
A sycamore-tree sprung up within its walls. All know
the rapidity of that tree's growth. It filled the void. Its boughs
soon rose above and overspread the walls. In the year 1840, when
it pleased God to put it into the hearts of some, in whom the spirit
of old Virginia Episcopalians still remained, to seek the revival of
the Church's dry bones in Middlesex, that huge, overspreading tree
must first be removed piecemeal from the house, and the rich mould
of fifty years' accumulation, to the depth of two feet, must be dug

370

Page 370
up, before the chancel-floor and the stone aisles could be reached.
The walls—faithful workmanship of other days—were uninjured, and
may still remain while generations of frail modern structures pass
away. The house is now one of our best country-churches. The
graves of our ancestors are all around it. In scattered fragments
some of the tombstones lie; others, too substantial to be broken, too
heavy to be borne away, now plainly tell whose remains are protected
by them. To the attention and kindness of a young female near
the spot, I am indebted for the following inscription, selected from
many others, and which will not be without interest to some Virginians,
and to others who have long since left the old homes of
their fathers for the Far South or West:

EPITAPH OF MR. JOHN GRYMES.[102]

"Here lies interred the body of the Honourable John Grymes, Esq.,
who for many years acted in the public affairs of this Dominion, with
honour, fortitude, fidelity to their Majesties King George I. and II. Of
the Council of State, of the Royal Prerogative, of the liberty and property
of the subject, a zealous asserter. On the seat of judgment, clear, sound,
unbiassed. In the office of Receiver-General, punctual, approved. Of the
College of William and Mary an ornament, visitor, patron. Beneficent to
all, a pattern of true piety. Respected, loved, revered. Lamented by his
family, acquaintance, country. He departed this life the 2d day of November,
1748, in the 57th year of his age."[103]

 
[102]

Mr. John Grymes was the grandfather of Mrs. General Nelson, of York, and
of Mrs. Susan Burwell, first wife of Colonel Nathaniel Burwell, of Carter Hall,
Clarke county, Virginia, all now deceased.

[103]

In connection with this epitaph on Major John Grymes, who appears to have
been highly esteemed in Church and State, we give the following account of the
family, which is taken from tradition, the vestry-records, and some registries of
baptisms and marriages. It is believed that Thomas Grymes, who was a lieutenant-general
in the army of Cromwell, was the father of the first Grymes who came to
Virginia; that his son was well pleased to come to Virginia after the fall of Cromwell
and the restoration of monarchy, and there is a tradition that he even made
some change in his name when coming to this loyal Colony. The son's name was
John, who appears on the vestry-book as one of the vestry in 1694. He and Anne
his wife were sponsors to a child of the Rev. Mr. Gray, the minister in 1695 and
1696. They lived in Middlesex, near to Piankatank, at a place called Grymesby
to this day. Their tombstones still lie in an open field, upon the ground, and the
plougshare sometimes passes over them. Although the family has long since parted
with the place, I am happy to say that it is in contemplation to remove the monuments
to the old churchyard, where so many of their descendants are buried.
This John Grymes continued to act as vestryman until 1708, when he withdrew,—no
doubt from old age or infirmity, as he died not long after. His son John, whose
epitaph we have given, was born in 1693, and became a vestryman in 1711, when
only eighteen years of age, and continued to be such until his death in 1748,—thirtyseven
years. Whether the first John Grymes had other children besides the second
John does not certainly appear; but from a baptismal registry we think it probable
he had a son named Charles, as one of that name had a child baptized in 1734.

The second John and Lucy his wife had the following children between 1720 and
1733:—Lucy, Philip, Charles, (who died early,) Benjamin, Sarah, Charles, Ludwell.
Of these, Lucy married Carter Burwell, of The Grove, near Williamsburg; Philip
married Mary Randolph, daughter of Mr. John Randolph, of Williamsburg, in 1742;
and Benjamin married Miss Fitzhugh, sister of William Fitzhugh, of Chatham, near
Fredericksburg. Lucy was the mother of Mr. Nathaniel Burwell, of The Grove,
who afterward moved to Frederick.

Philip was the father of Lucy, John, (who died early,) Philip Ludwell, John
Randolph, Charles, Benjamin, Susannah, Mary, Peyton, and Betty. Lucy married
General Thomas Nelson; Philip Ludwell married, first, a Miss Randolph, daughter
of John Randolph who went to England, but had no children, then Miss Wormley,
by whom he had Mrs. Sayres and others. John Randolph Grymes followed Mr.
John Randolph to England and there married his daughter. Of Charles we know
nothing certain. Benjamin married Miss Robinson, of King William, and had numerous
children, (names of all not known,) of whom only Peyton Grymes, of Orange,
and one sister, survive. Betty married Dr. Pope. Susannah, Mr. Nathaniel
Burwell, of The Grove, and afterward of Frederick. Mary married Mr. Robert
Nelson, of Malvern Hill, brother of General Nelson. Benjamin, the son of the
second John Grymes, and who married Miss Fitzhugh, settled near Fredericksburg
and had large iron-works. He was the father of Mrs. Colonel Meade, of Frederick,
and of Captain Benjamin Grymes, of King George, by his first wife; and, by a second,
of Ludwell Grymes, Charles Grymes, Randolph Grymes, Mrs. Wedderburne, and
Mrs. Dudley.

The following is also worthy of insertion:—

"Here lyeth the body of Lucy Berkliey, who departed this life ye 16th day of December,
1716, in ye 33d year of her Age, after she had been married 12 years and
15 days. She left behind her 5 children, viz.: 2 Boys and 3 Girls. I shall not
pretend to give her full character: it would take too much room for a Gravestone:
shall only say she never neglected her duty to her Creator in Publick or Private,
she was Charitable to the Poor, a Kind Mistress, an Indulgent Mother, and Obedient
Wife. She never in all the time she lived with her husband gave him so much as
once cause to be displeased with her."—Copied from a tombstone at Barn Elm,
Middlesex.


371

Page 371

The following have also been sent me:—

"This monument is erected to the memory of Ralph Wormley, Esq.,
of Rosegill, who died on the 19th day of January, 1806, in the 62d year
of his age. The rules of honour guided the actions of this great man. He
was the perfect gentleman and finished scholar, with many virtues founded
on Christianity."[104]

"Beneath this marble lies interred the remains of Mrs. Eleanor Wormley,
widow of Ralph Wormley, Esq., of Rosegill, and sister of Col. John
Tayloe, of Mount Airey, who died the 23d day of February, 1815, in the
60th year of her age. Few women were more eminently distinguished for


372

Page 372
correctness of deportment and for the practice of all the Christian virtues:
as a wife she was conjugal, as a widow exemplary, as a mother fond and
affectionate, as a neighbour charitable and kind, as a friend steady and
sincere."

There were also buried within the church Sir Henry Chichely,
Knight, Deputy-Governor of Virginia in 1682. The Rev. John
Shephard in the same, and the Honourable Lady Madam Catharine
Wormley, wife of the Honourable Ralph Wormley, (the first Ralph
Wormley,) in the year 1685. The following is a communication
from the present minister of our partly-resuscitated Church in
Middlesex, (the Rev. Mr. Carraway.)

"The upper and lower churches or chapels are still standing. One of
them is about to be repaired by the Baptists, who will claim the chief
though not exclusive use of it. The lower chapel retains some appearance
of antiquity, in spite of the efforts to destroy every vestige of Episcopal
taste and usage. The high pulpit and sounding-board have been removed,
and the reading-desk placed within the chancel, before which is the
roughly-carved chest that formerly held the plate and other articles for
the decent celebration of the Holy Communion. There were three sets of
plate in the parish. A descendant of one of the earliest families, now the
wife of one of our Virginia clergy, on removing from this county, took
with her, in order to keep from desecration, the service belonging to the
lower chapel. She lent it to a rector of one of the churches in Richmond,
with the understanding that upon the revival of the parish it must be
restored. Application was accordingly made in the year 1840, and the
vestry received the value of the plate in money, which was given at their
suggestion, they having a full service in their possession. The plate owned
by Christ Church was presented by the Hon. Ralph Wormley. It numbered
five pieces. But for the inscription bearing the name of the donor,
it would have shared the fate of much that was irreligiously and sacrilegiously
disposed of. The administrator of Mr. Wormley deposited it in
the bank at Fredericksburg, where it remained for more than thirty years.
It has been in use up to a few months since, when, we regret to say, it
met with almost entire destruction by fire. Enough has been gathered up
to make a service more than sufficient for the present little company of
communicants. It will perpetuate the name of the donor and indicate his
pious intention. The third set, belonging to the upper chapel, was sold
by the overseers of the poor. We omitted to mention in the proper place
that there are some slight traces of the foundation of a building, now
overgrown with pine-trees, which tradition says was the chapel of the
Buckingham farm, the residence of Mr. Henry Corbin."

A few words will suffice for the history of efforts for the revival
of the Church in Middlesex. The Rev. Mr. Rooker was employed
as missionary, in this and the adjoining county of Mathews, for a
few years after 1840. His preaching and labours excited a considerable
zeal in the few remaining members of the Church in those
counties. He was succeeded by its present minister, the Rev. Mr.


373

Page 373
Carraway, who has devoted himself now for about ten years most
faithfully and laboriously to those two counties. Though the fields
be large and comparatively unproductive, requiring great toil and a
large amount of itinerancy, and the salary small, still, no invitations
to more promising and less laborious positions have tempted him to
leave them. Himself and companion are now, and have been for
some years, the welcome inmates of the family of Captain Bailey,
who, with his excellent wife, (a pious member of the Church,) is
living at old Rosegill, the ancient seat of the Wormleys, on the
high banks of the Rappahannock, a few miles from Christ Church.
Captain Bailey, (the relative of our old friend Colonel Chewning,
of Lancaster, one of whose descendants was vestryman and another
lay reader in Middlesex, whose dwelling is on the opposite shore,)
when an orphan boy, in a spirit of independence, left Lancaster to
seek his fortune in the wide world. He launched forth for Baltimore
in a merchant-vessel, traversed many seas, visited many lands
and experienced many dangers and hardships, was shipwrecked
often, (Mrs. B. being with him in one shipwreck,) but still preserved
by a kind Providence. Occasionally, in the midst of his various
efforts to realize a fortune, in which he was at length most successful,
he would return to his native place, and, as Colonel Chewning
has often told me, cast a wishful eye on old Rosegill, towering on the
high banks of the Rappahannock, and declaring his determination,
if Providence spared his life and prospered his efforts, that he
would spend the evening of his days as the owner of that mansion.
Providence has spared his life and prospered his efforts in laying
up a fortune gathered from various seas and countries, and he and
his wife are now the hospitable owners of Rosegill. More than
half of the huge pile has been removed by him, and the remainder
exalted, beautified, and improved. Hospitality, though modified
and improved from former times, still distinguishes the place.
Captain B. and his excellent wife are glad to have the society of
Mr. and Mrs. Carraway as permanent guests, free of all charge.
Besides patronizing old Christ Church on the one side of him, he
has recently purchased the old court-house in Urbanna on the other,
and converted it into a neat and comfortable house of worship.
Mr. Carraway's services are very acceptable, and the Episcopal
Church is gradually rising in the estimation of the inhabitants of
Middlesex.

 
[104]

Mr. Wormley attended a number of the Episcopal Conventions after the Revolution.
After his death, the descendants of Colonel Edmund Berkeley appear to be
almost all that remained of the church. That family preserved the vestry-book,
from which I have obtained the foregoing information.

 
[100]

It is due to these times to say that the courts and juries were not entirely
negligent of their duties, but sometimes set examples which those of our day
would do well to follow. The following extracts from the presentments of a Grand
Jury of Middlesex in 1704 are proofs of this:—

"1st. We present Thomas Sims for travelling on the road on the Sabbath-day
with a loaded beast.

"2d. We present William Montague and Garrett Minor for bringing oysters
ashore on the Sabbath-day.

"3d. We present James Lewis for swearing and cursing on the Sabbath-day.

"Ordered, That John Hutney be fined according to law for being drunk on the
Sabbath-day."

[101]

Beverley, in his History, expresses the following opinion of Governor Nicholson:—

"And lastly, Governor Nicholson, a man the least acquainted with the law of
any of them, endeavoured to introduce all the quirks of the English proceedings,
by the help of some wretched pettifoggers, who had the direction both of his conscience
and his understanding."


374

Page 374

ARTICLE XXXIII.

Parishes in King and Queen and King William.—Stratton Major.

This is one of our oldest parishes, being established in 1664-65.
Of the ministers previous to the year 1724 we know nothing. In
that year the Rev. Mr. Skaife, who had been its minister for thirteen
years, and continued to be so for twelve years longer, informs
the Bishop of London that his parish was eighteen miles in length
and thirteen in breadth; that there was only one church, and that
open every Sunday; that there were three hundred attendants, two
hundred and twenty communicants; that his salary was eighty
pounds. In answer to the question, Are there any infidels in your
parish? the reply is, Generally negroes are unbaptized; they
that desire it have it; the church is open to all. In 1736 the Rev.
John Reade becomes minister, and either dies or resigns in 1743.
The following year the Rev. Mr. Robinson becomes the minister,
and so continues until his death in 1767 or 1768. Of him we shall
speak more in a little while. On the 4th of April, 1768, the Rev.
William Dunlap is received as their minister. In the year 1773 a
letter is received from Mr. Dunlap,—in the West Indies,—asking
leave of six months' absence longer, which is granted, and the Rev.
Mr. Dixon, from a neighbouring parish, is employed every other
Sabbath. In the year 1778 the vestry and their minister, Mr.
Dunlap, seem to be involved in a difficulty. The Rev. Mr. Dunlap
writes them a letter, which they wish to consider as a resignation,
and so record it, directing the churchwardens to advertise his resignation
three times in the Virginia Gazette. This is in April;
but in September of the same year we find the following record:—
"Ordered that churchwardens make application to the Rev.
William Dunlap and the Rev. Arthur Hamilton about moving from
the glebe; and, provided they refuse to move, the churchwardens
are hereby authorized to commence suit against them." In the
following year I find the following order:—"That the churchwardens
wait on the Rev. Mr. Hamilton, offering him the use of the
glebe, house, garden, &c., on condition that he preach once a month
and be ready to remove whenever required, and that the churchwardens
rent out the glebe." These unhappy notices are the last


375

Page 375
on the record about the ministers of this once flourishing parish.
There are subsequent records of vestry-meetings and proceedings,
but not a word is written about even an effort to secure the services
of a minister. The last entry was in 1783. In vain do we turn
over the pages of our journals of Convention from the year 1785
and onward in search of some clerical or lay delegate from this
parish. The name of Stratton Major is nowhere to be found upon
them.

About twenty-five years ago, for the first and last time, I passed
through that part of the county where I think it probable that this
old church, of which I shall soon speak, stood. At a little distance
from the road I saw (for I had not time to stop, having to travel
thirty-five miles that day across three counties to my appointment)
a large and venerable old church, which had long been in possession
of others. One of the noble trees which almost touched its walls,
and gave shade to the house and those around and within, had a
short time before been cut down, by some idle and wanton ones,
merely to obtain a small quantity of wild honey which was supposed
to be in some hollow part of it. Whether its walls are still standing,
or what is its condition, I know not.

There never were, so far as the vestry-book shows, but two
churches in this parish, called in the entries of the book the Upper
and the Lower. In the year 1768, as soon as the new church of
which we are about to speak was finished, the vestry order that
the Upper Church should have the doors and windows studded and
boarded if necessary. It is probable that, after this, the new church,
which may have been in some central position, was the only one used.

This new church was probably the largest and best church built
in Virginia before that time, and for years after. That in Petsworth
parish, built a few years before, cost eleven hundred pounds,
and far exceeded any thing before seen; but this was contracted for
with Mr. Henry Gaines, for thirteen hundred pounds. Its dimensions
were fifty by eighty feet, and of corresponding height, with
galleries. When finished, the pews were not rented or sold as now,
but were assigned by the vestry to the individuals and families of
the parish. On two pages of the large folio vestry-book are the
names of two hundred and seventy-five individuals or heads of
families to whom these pews, or seats in them, are assigned. The
Hon. Richard Corbin's and John Robinson's (Speaker Robinson,
though he was just dead) families seem to be assigned the highest
seats. Commissary Robinson and family had one near the pulpit.
Then come the Merediths, Roots, Shacklefords, Gaines, Whitings,


376

Page 376
Taliaferos, Metcalfs, Andersons, Hunts, Dudleys, Wares, Wedderburnes,
&c., though it does not appear whether the aristocratic
principle was adopted in the general distribution. Whoever would
see the names of half the families in King and Queen one century
ago would probably find them on this vestry-book.

The following list of vestrymen, commencing in 1739, will show
who were the leading men in all the civil and ecclesiastical matters
of the parish and county:—Richard Roy, Richard Johnson, Henry
Hickman, Edward Ware, Thomas Foster, Thomas Dudley, John
Collier, Gawin Corbin, Valentine Ware, Roger Gregory, Richard
Anderson, John Robinson, Benjamin Needler, Robert Dudley, John
Livingston, Robert Gaines, Philip Roots, John Ware, Richard
Shackleford, William Taliafero, John Strakey, William Lyne,
Charles Collier, Thomas Thorpe, Thomas Langford, John Shackleford,
John Foster, Philip Roots, Francis Gaines, John Whiting,
Thomas Reade Roots, John Whiting, James Prior, Thomas Dillard,
Lyne Shackleford, Hon. Richard Corbin, William Hall, John Taylor
Corbin, Benjamin Robinson, Humphrey Garrett, Richard Bray,
James Didlake, Philip Taliafero, Lyne Shackleford, Jr., Thomas
Dillard, John Kidd.

It is painful to see in this and other vestry-books, how, as the
Church began to decline and dissent to increase, and some of the
old friends disappeared from the vestries, it was difficult to supply
their places. Some who were elected refused to serve, and even
some who had served resigned their places. It must be said, however,
of the vestry of Stratton Major, from its first beginning to
its close, that it seems to have been attentive to all its duties, especially
in providing for the comfort of its ministers. While most
of the vestries purchased miserable glebes for eighty or a hundred
pounds, and were content with glebe-houses in proportion, this vestry
gave seven hundred pounds for one glebe, and when it was expedient
to dispose of that bought another for six hundred pounds,
and provided all necessary houses upon them of a comfortable kind,
even to a hen-house twenty feet long, and a dairy suitable for the
purpose. Mr. Richard Corbin is the first instance I have met
with who furnished the bread and wine for sacrament gratuitously.
He also presented a marble font to one of the churches, and the
land on which the new church was built was his gift. It was built
on a place not far from his residence, called "Goliath's Field." Its
size and walls were answerable to that name. The walls began
with five bricks at the foundation, and ended with four at the top,
and were twenty-seven feet high.


377

Page 377

The Rev. William Robinson, as appears by the following extract
of a letter to the Bishop of London, and the records of the vestry-book,
was ordained in 1743, and became minister of Stratton Major
in 1744, continuing to be so until his death in 1767 or 1768. He
became Commissary in the year 1761. Governor Fauquier was
much dissatisfied with his appointment, and so expressed himself
in a letter to England. The opposition of the Governor was no
sure proof of the unworthiness of Mr. Robinson. He was an arbitrary
and high-tempered man, who could not brook opposition, and
Mr. Robinson was no negative submissive character to crouch before
authority. They had had one or two serious rencounters. During
the six or seven years of his Commissaryship, his correspondence
with the Bishop of London on the affairs of the Church was lengthy
and able. He espoused the cause of the clergy on the occasion
of the Two-Penny Act, or Option Law, with zeal and fearlessness,
though without success. He had an independent fortune of his
own, and was therefore the less liable to be charged with mercenary
motives. The following extract from a letter to the Bishop of London
in 1765 shows that he had reason to believe that he still had
enemies whose communications to the ears of the Bishop were unfavourable.
The continuance of his labour during the whole of his
ministry, for twenty-four years in the same parish, and where there
was much of character and wealth and talent, and such zeal and
liberality in regard to all Church matters, speaks well in his behalf.

Extract of a letter from Mr. Robinson to the Bishop of London, dated
May
23, 1765.

"My Lord:—I have some reasons to apprehend that endeavours have
been made to prejudice your Lordship against me, but in what particular
I know not. I must therefore beg your Lordship's patience while I give
some account of myself. I was born in Virginia. At ten years old I was
sent to England for my education, which was in the year 1729. I continued
at school in the country until the year 1737, at which time I was
admitted a member of Oriel College, in Oxford. After I had taken
my B.A. degree, I was chosen by the Provost and Fellows to one of Dr.
Robinson's Bishop of London's exhibitions, (who was my great-uncle,)
which I enjoyed for three years, the term limited by his Lordship. In
June, 1743, I was ordained Priest by Dr. Gibson, Bishop of London. I
returned to my native country in the year 1744, (October;) the November
following I was received into Stratton Major parish in King and Queen
county, where I have continued rector ever since.

"I can with truth assure your Lordship, I have always lived in the greatest
harmony with my parishioners, and I believe no minister can be more
respected by them than I am. I have always studiously avoided giving
any just cause of offence to any one, especially those in authority. Your
Lordship, I hope, will excuse my saying so much in my own behalf; but


378

Page 378
there is a time when it is requisite for a man to praise himself; and as to
the truth of what I have said, I can appeal to my whole parish."[105]


379

Page 379

ST. STEPHEN'S PARISH, KING AND QUEEN.

This parish was probably established in 1691, there being no
certain account of it.[106] In the years 1754 and 1758, and again in
the years 1773-74 and 1776, the Rev. Mr. Dunbar was minister of
this parish. No minister appears on our journals to represent this
parish until the year 1793, when the Rev. Thomas Andrews appears
from St. Stephen's parish, but whether St. Stephen's of King
and Queen, or of Northumberland, does not appear; but there
were some faithful laymen in that parish, who steadily adhered
to its falling fortunes. Anderson Scott and Henry Young appear
as lay delegates in 1785 and 1786. Mr. Thomas Hill and William
Fleet are lay delegates in 1796. Mr. Thomas Hill had attended
alone, without minister or associate layman, during several of the
preceding Conventions; but, after 1796, St. Stephen's parish appears
to be deserted.

Of the churches in this parish I know nothing, unless the following
is a description of one of them:—"In the northwest of the
county, in an old and venerable grove, stands St. Stephen's Church,
I think in the form of a cross. There is no wall around it, but it
is in good repair. It is principally used by the Baptists, but Episcopal
services have sometimes been held in it of late years, and
one of the Bishops has visited it, I believe."

From this whole county Episcopalians have nearly disappeared,
either by death, removal, or union with other denominations.

 
[106]

In 1724 the Rev. John Goodwin was minister. The parish was thirty miles
long, had three hundred families, sixty communicants, a very poor house and glebe,
two or three little schools, unendowed. The parish-library consisted of three
books,—the Book of Homilies, the Whole Duty of Man, and the Singing Psalms.

KING WILLIAM COUNTY AND THE PARISHES IN IT.

King William was taken out of King and Queen in 1701. At
that time St. John's parish was the only one in the county. In
1721, St. Margarett's parish was established. A part of this
being in Caroline, when that county was established in the year
1744, St. Margarett's was divided, and that part in Caroline was
called St. Margarett's still, and that in King William called St.
David's, so that the two parishes in King William were henceforth
St. John's and St. David's. In the year 1754, the Rev. Alexander
White, afterward minister in Hanover county, and one of those


380

Page 380
who opposed the Two-Penny Act by a lawsuit, was the minister of
St. David's, and Mr. John Robertson of St. John's parish. The
same continued in these parishes in 1758. In the years 1773-7476,
the Rev. Alexander White is still the minister of St. David's,
and the Rev. William Skyren of St. John's. At the first Convention
in 1785, the Rev. William Skyren is still the minister of
St. John's, attended by Mr. Carter Braxton as lay delegate, Mr.
William Temple being the lay delegate from St. David's. In 1786,
the Rev. Mr. Skyren is still in St. John's; Mr. Carter Braxton
the lay delegate from the same, and Mr. Benjamin Temple and
William Spiller from St. David's. In 1787, Mr. Skyren still from
St. John's, and his lay delegates, William D. Claiborne, William
Spiller, and Benjamin Temple, from St. David's. In the year
1790, Rev. Reuben Clopton appears in Convention from St. David's,
with Nathaniel Burwell as lay delegate. There was no
representative from St. John's, the Rev. Mr. Skyren having removed
to Hampton. In 1791, Mr. Clopton is still the minister of
St. David's; also in 1792, with Mr. Nathaniel Burwell as lay delegate.
St. John's is once more represented by Carter Braxton, Jr.
as lay delegate, in 1792. In 1794, St. David's is represented by
Mr. Joseph Guathney as lay delegate, and in the following year
by Mr. Thomas Fox and Mr. William Dabney. In the year 1797,
the Rev. Thomas Hughes and Mr. Benjamin Temple represent St.
David's, and the Rev. John Dunn and Mr. James Ruffin represent
St. John's. In the year 1799, the Rev. Thomas Hughes and Mr.
Thomas Fox represent St. David's, and Mr. Edward Chamberlayne
and John Lord represent St. John's. In the year 1805, the Rev.
Duncan McNaughton and Mr. John Hull represent St. Stephen's
parish, but whether the parish of that name in Northumberland or
King William is not known. This concludes the list of ministers
of King William county, until the Rev. Farley Berkeley was sent
there as missionary, who remained one year.

The Rev. John McGuire, while minister in Essex, often visited
one or more of the old churches in King William, and since his
removal the Rev. Mr. Temple has done the same; but the revival
of the Church in that county is at this time very unpromising, the
old Episcopal families having long since either removed or united
with other denominations.

Of the old churches in King William I have received the following
account:—

"King William has still not less than four old Episcopal churches


381

Page 381
First, West Point Church, or St. John's, in the central part of the lower
section. There is neither grove or graveyard now around it. The pulpit
was of the ancient and customary shape,—that of a bottle turned upside
down, the neck of the bottle representing the stem on which the body
was sustained. The stem is said to be still preserved somewhere in the
church. A new and ruder pulpit has been substituted. The second is
called Acquinton Church. It is a large old church, in the form of a cross,
having the aisles paved with flagstones. The third is St. David's, about
ten miles higher up, which is a regular quadrangular building, and is
sometimes called Cattail. Fourth, Mangochick Church, in the upper part
of the county,—which is also quadrangular. All of the churches are said
to be in pretty good preservation. The old high-back pews have in some,
perhaps in all of them, given place to benches, and the Commandments
disappeared, except in two of them, from the walls. They have been regarded
and used as common property for a long time. I have officiated
in two of them. In one of them I found the old pulpit still standing,
though a new one or a kind of stage has been erected in another part
of it, and used, I was informed, by one of two contending parties, who
officiated in the church,—the others still preferring the old pulpit.

POSTSCRIPTS TO THE ARTICLES ON THE PARISHES OF KING AND
QUEEN, AND KING WILLIAM.

Two letters from brethren who are well acquainted with these
counties enable me to correct some errors in the preceding account.
As to King and Queen, I was mistaken in supposing that I may
have once passed by the large church in Stratton Major parish,
which was built on Mr. Corbin's land, called Goliath's Field. The
one I saw was in St. Stephen's parish, and is still standing, being in
possession of the Baptists. The Stratton Major Church has been
sold, some years since, and the bricks entirely removed. There is
still one church standing in Stratton Major parish. A third was
destroyed by fire. There was also another church in St. Stephen's
parish, called the Apple-Tree Church. Among the families belonging
to St. Stephen's parish may be mentioned the Temples,
Hoskins, Scotts, Youngs, Hills, and Fleets.

The following account of the Rev. Henry Skyren, the last of the
ministers who regularly officiated in the churches of King William
and King and Queen, will be read with deep interest:—

"The Rev. Henry Skyren was born at White Haven, England. The
date of his birth I am unable to give, as the family Bible was lost, though
it may be seen on his tombstone at Hampton. The exact time of his
arrival in this country is not known; but the first field of his ministry
was in King and Queen and King William counties, preaching alternately
in two or three of the old Colonial churches, and residing in the family
of Colonel Corbin, of Laneville. In 1774, he married Miss Lucy Moore,
the youngest of the three daughters of General Bernard Moore and Kate


382

Page 382
Spottswood, whose education he had completed, having resided in her
father's family for several years previous to his marriage. He continued
in the same parish for four or five years; afterward removed to Hampton,
where, after officiating for six years, he died universally beloved and lamented.
It is much to be regretted that his widow, who was too amiable
to refuse a favour, no matter how unreasonable, allowed the ministers of
the neighbouring parishes to pick over and take away the best of his sermons,
which were never returned; so that when her brothers-in-law, Mr.
Walker, of Albemarle, and Mr. Charles Carter, of Shirley, sent to her for
them for publication, only a few fragments could be collected.

"He was said to be an elegant scholar and accomplished gentleman,
who was alike remarkable for his eloquence and piety, never participating
in any of the worldly amusements so common in that day with the clergy.

"These last facts we have learned from the elder residents in Norfolk
and Hampton, many of whom a few years back were living, who retained
a perfect recollection of him; and there is a lady living in this place,
(Fredericksburg,) Mrs. John Scott, Sr., who recollects to have heard him
spoken of in her early youth as the most eminent divine of the age in this
diocese. He left three sons and three daughters. None of his sons ever
married, and the name became extinct in this country with the death of
Colonel John Spottswood Skyren. His eldest daughter first married
Mr. Frazier, of Washington, and afterward Dr. Lewis, of King William.
The youngest married Mr. Tebbs, of Culpepper. The second, the only one
of his children now living, married the late Robert Temple, of Ampthill,
eldest son of Colonel Benjamin Temple, of King William, and is now
residing in Fredericksburg. Her children and grandchildren number
upward of fifty, many of whom still cling to the Church of their fathers
with a strong affection, mingled with veneration and love for the memory
of their ancestors; and it may be well to add that Colonel Benjamin
Temple and Parson Skyren were both members of the first Episcopal Convention
ever held in Virginia. A reliable witness says that, when Mr.
Skyren preached in King William, `the Acquinton Church was always so
crowded that the people used to bring their seats and fill up the aisle after
the pews were full. The other churches in which he preached were Cattail,
and what was called the Lower Church. The church at Hampton
was in a very flourishing condition, and it was with difficulty Mr. Skyren
could get the consent of his congregation to preach in Norfolk, where he
was frequently invited.' "

During the ministry of the Rev. Mr. Dalrymple in New Kent,
in the years 1843 and 1844, he made an effort to revive the old
churches in King William, by preaching there, and the parishes
were received into the Convention. The Rev. Edward McGuire,
who succeeded him, also officiated occasionally, I believe; but sufficient
encouragement was not afforded for the settlement of a
minister among them. We will not, however, despair.

 
[105]

The first of the Robinson family of whom we have any account was John Robinson,
of Cleasby, Yorkshire, (England,) who married Elizabeth Potter, of Cleasby,
daughter of Christopher Potter, from whom no doubt the name of Christopher, so
common in the family, was derived. The fourth son of John Robinson was Dr. John
Robinson, Bishop of Bristol, and, while Bishop, was British Envoy for some years at
the court of Sweden, writing, while there, a history of Sweden. He was also British
Plenipotentiary at the Treaty of Utrecht, being, it is supposed, the last Bishop or
clergyman employed in a public service of that kind. He afterward became Bishop
of London, in which office he continued until his death, in 1723. He was twice married,
but left no issue. He devised his real estate to the eldest son of his brother
Christopher, who had migrated to what was Rappahannock, on the Rappahannock
River. He was one of the first vestrymen mentioned on the vestry-book in Middlesex
county, in 1664, and married Miss Bertram. His oldest son, who inherited
the Bishop of London's estate, was John Robinson, who was born in 1683, who
was also a vestryman of Middlesex, and became President of the Council of Vir
ginia. He married Catharine Beverley, daughter of Robert Beverley, author of
the "History of Virginia" published in 1708. He had seven children; one of
them, named John Robinson, was Treasurer and Speaker of the Colony. Another
—Henry—married a Miss Waring. Another married in New York. Christopher
Robinson, who first came over to Virginia, had six children. Of John, the eldest,
we have already spoken. Christopher married a daughter of Christopher
Wormley, of Essex. Benjamin, Clerk of Caroline county, married a Miss King,
and was the father of the Rev. William Robinson, minister of Stratton Major,
in King and Queen. His daughter Clara married Mr. James Walker, of Urbanna,
in Middlesex. His daughter Anne married Dr. John Hay. Of his daughter Agatha
nothing is known. One of the descendants of the family married Mr. Carter Braxton,
and others intermarried with the Wormleys, Berkeleys, Smiths, &c. The
worthy family of Robinsons, in Norfolk and Richmond,—also those in Hanover,—
were derived from the same stock. A branch of this family moved to Canada; and
some of them have held high civil and military station under the English Government
there, and in the mother-country. The reputation of Mr. Speaker Robinson
suffered from the fact that as Treasurer he loaned to some of his friends large
sums of the public money. The Government, however, sustained no loss, as it
was all made good out of his private estate at his death. In all other respects he
stood high in the public confidence. He was never suspected of using the public
money for his own private advantage. He was held in high esteem by General
Washington, as their correspondence shows.

The following epitaph has been furnished me:—

EPITAPH.

"Beneath this place lieth all that could die of the late worthy John Robinsion,
Esq., who was a Representative of the county of King and Queen, and Speaker to
the House of Burgesses above twenty-eight years. How eminently he supplied that
dignified office, and with what fidelity he acted as Treasurer to the country beside,
is well known to us, and it is not unlikely future ages will relate, He was a tender
husband, a loving father, a kind master, a sincere friend, a generous benefactor,
and a solid Christian. Go, reader, and to the utmost of your power imitate his
virtues."


383

Page 383

ARTICLE XXXIV.

Parishes in New Kent.—St. Peter's and Blissland Parishes.

New Kent was cut off from the upper part of York county in
1654. It commenced on Scimon's Creek, on the north of York
River, some distance above Williamsburg, and extended to the
heads of Pamunkey and Mattapony Rivers, and returned again on
the north of Mattapony to the Prepotanke Creek, north of York
River, including what are now King William and King and Queen
counties, as well as Hanover county to the west. On the north
of the York and Pamunkey Rivers there was a parish called St.
John's; on the south, one called St. Peter's. About the year 1684
or 1685, a parish, east of St. Peter's, on Pamunkey and York Rivers,
toward Williamsburg, was formed, by the name of Blissland, which
continued to have a minister until after the Revolutionary War.
We shall begin with such notices as we have been able to obtain of
St. Peter's parish. We have an old vestry-book, which probably
commenced in 1682, though we can only use it from 1685, the previous
pages having been torn out. A friend, however, has supplied
the deficiency in some measure. Our materials from English
archives enable us to go back yet further, and furnish us also with
some information of a later date, not to be found in the vestry-book.
We begin with these. In the year 1699, Governor Nicholson addressed
the following letter to the High-Sheriff of New Kent
county, ordering a meeting of the clergy in Jamestown. It will
not only show the spirit of the age and of those in authority, but
the peculiarly dogmatic spirit of the man:—

"Sir:

I do hereby, in his Majesty's name, will and require you to
acquaint the minister or ministers within your county, that (God willing)
they do not fail of meeting me here on Wednesday, being the 10th of April
next, and that they bring with them their Priests' and Deacons' Orders, as
likewise the Rt. Rev. the Father in God, the Lord-Bishop of London his
license for their preaching, or whatever license they have, and withall a copy
out of the vestry-books of the agreement they have made with the parish or
parishes where they officiate. If there be any parish or parishes within
your county who have no minister, I do hereby, in his Majesty's name,
command that the vestry of said parish or parishes do, by the said 10th
of April, return me an account how long they have been without a minister,


384

Page 384
and the reason thereof, as also if they have any person that reads the
Common Prayer on Sundays and at their church. This account must be
signed by them, and they may send it by the minister who lives next to
them. So, not doubting of your compliances therein, I remain your
loving friend,

Francis Nicholson.

"You are not to fail of making a return to these my orders, as you will
answer the contrary to me.

Francis Nicholson."

The first notice I find of the religious condition of the parish
and of the neighbouring parishes is from a letter in the year 1696,
from the Rev. Nicholas Moreau, who was the minister of St. Peter's
for two years. He appears to have been a pious man, and was probably
one of the French Huguenots who were driven to America
about this time by the persecution growing out of the revocation
of the Edict of Nantes.

The following extract is from a letter to the Bishop of London:—

"Your clergy in these parts are of a very ill example. No discipline
nor canons of the Church are observed. Several ministers have caused
such high scandal of late, and have raised such prejudices amongst the
people against the clergy, that hardly can they be persuaded to take a
clergyman into their parish. As to me, my lord, I have got into the very
worst parish of Virginia, and most troublesome nevertheless. But I must
tell you I find abundance of good people who are willing to serve God,
but they want good ministers,—ministers that be very pious, and not
wedded to this world as the best of them are. God has blessed my endeavours
so far already, that with his assistance I have brought again to church
two families who had gone to the Quakers' meeting for three years
past. If ministers were as they ought to be, I dare say there would be no
Quakers or Dissenters among them. A learned sermon signifies nothing
without good example. I wish God would put it into your mind, my lord,
to send here an eminent Bishop, who, by his piety, charity, and severity in
keeping the canons of the Church, might quicken these base ministers,
and force them to mind the whole duty of their charge." Again: "An
eminent Bishop being sent over here will make hell tremble, and settle the
Church of England here forever. This work, my lord, is God's work; and
if it doth happen that I see a Bishop come over here, I will say, as St.
Bernard saith in his Epistle to Eugenius, `Tertius hic digitus Dei est.' "

The next information is from the report of the condition of this
parish to the Bishop of London in 1724, by the Rev. Henry Collings.
His parish had two hundred and four families in it, forty
or fifty communicants, only one church, (St. Peter's,) about one
hundred and seventy or one hundred and eighty attendants. His
salary eighty pounds, more or less. Glebe and parsonage rented
out for six pounds five shillings per annum. Catechizing had been
much neglected: he intended to introduce it.


385

Page 385

The next is from the Rev. Mr. Lang, who succeeded Mr. Collings
in 1725 and continued two years.

The Rev. Mr. Lang came highly recommended from England to
Governor Drysdale and Commissary Blair, and by them as highly
to the parish of St. Peter's, in New Kent. On the 7th of February,
1725-26, he writes thus to the Bishop of London:—"I observe
the people here are very zealous for our Holy Church, as it is established
in England, so that (except some few inconsiderable
Quakers) there are scarce any Dissenters from our communion,
and yet at the same time supinely ignorant in the very principles
of religion, and very debauched in morals. This, I apprehend, is
chiefly owing to the general neglect of the clergy in not taking
pains to instruct youth in the fundamentals of religion, or to examine
people come to years of discretion before they are permitted to
come to Church privileges." He speaks of the gross ignorance of
many, who on their death-beds, or on Christmas-day, desire to receive
the sacraments; of the great ignorance of those who offer
themselves as sponsors; of the evil lives of the servants who have
been presented by their owners to baptism. "The great cause of
all which" (he says) "I humbly conceive to be in the clergy, the sober
part being slothful and negligent, and others so debauched that
they are the foremost and most bent on all manner of vices.
Drunkenness is the common vice." He goes on to specify instances
among clergy and laity of great unworthiness, concluding
as to the former by saying:—"How dreadful it is to think that
men authorized by the Church to preach repentance and forgiveness
through Christ should be first in the very sins which they reprove!"
It is not wonderful that this should be among the first parts of our
State in which dissent began, as we are informed was the case under
Samuel Davies, some twenty or thirty years after the date of Mr.
Lang's letter.

I now proceed with a list of the ministers of St. Peter's Church
from the year 1682. The Rev. William Sellake was minister in
1682. Rev. John Carr from 1684 to 1686. Rev. John Hall from
1686 to 1687. The Rev. John Page from 1687 to 1688. The
Rev. Mr. Williams officiated for a short time in 1689. Rev. Jacob
Ward from 1690 to 1696. Rev. Nicholas Moreau from 1696 to
1698. Rev. James Bowker from 1698 to 1703. Rev. Richard
Squire from 1703 to 1707. Rev. Daniel Taylor from 1707 to 1708.
Rev. Daniel Gray from 1708 to 1709. Rev. Benjamin Goodwin
from 1709 to 1710. From the year 1710 to 1720 the Rev. William
Brodie. During the two following years the Revs. Thomas Sharp,


386

Page 386
Broomscale, Brooke, Forbess, and Francis Fontaine, officiated there.
From 1722 to 1725 the Rev. Henry Collings. From 1725 to 1727
the Rev. Mr. Lang. He was succeeded by the Rev. David Mossom,
who continued the minister for forty years. He was the person
who officiated at the nuptials of General Washington, at the White
House, a few miles from St. Peter's Church. It was in that parish,
and under the ministry of Mr. Mossom, that the Rev. Devereux
Jarratt was born and trained. In his Autobiography he gives a
poor account of the state of morals and religion in New Kent. He
considers himself as a brand plucked from the burning by the grace
of God. Illustrative of the condition of things, he mentions a
quarrel between Mr. Mossom and his clerk, in which the former
assailed the latter from the pulpit in his sermon, and the latter, to
avenge himself, gave out from the desk the psalm in which were
these lines:—

"With restless and ungovern'd rage,
Why do the heathen storm?
Why in such rash attempts engage
As they can ne'er perform?"

Nevertheless, from the long continuance of Mossom in this parish,
we doubt not that he was a more respectable man than many of his
day. He was married four times, and much harassed by his last
wife, as Colonel Bassett has often told me, which may account for
and somewhat excuse a little peevishness. He came from Newburyport,
Massachusetts, and was, according to his epitaph in St. Peter's
Church, the first native American admitted to the office of Presbyter
in the Church of England.

Mr. Mossom was followed by the Rev. James Semple, who continued
the minister of the parish for twenty-two years. The Rev.
Benjamin Blagrove was the minister in the year 1789. The Rev.
Benjamin Brown was the minister in the year 1797.

After a long and dreary interval of nearly fifty years, we find
the Rev. E. A. Dalrymple the minister from 1843 to 1845.[107] Then
the Rev. E. B. Maguire from 1845 to 1851. Then the Rev. William
Norwood from 1852 to 1854. Then the Rev. David Caldwell
from 1854 to 1856.

Having disposed of the ministers, we now give a list of the vestry
so far as furnished by the vestry-book from the year 1685 to the
year 1758. They are as follows—George Jones, William Bassett,


387

Page 387
Stephen Carlton, Henry Wyatt, Thomas Mitchell, John Park,
William Paisley, J. Renor, Cornelius Dabnee, (Dabney,) Gideon
Macon, Matthew Page, George Smith, George Joands, John
Rojor, (Roger,) David Craford, James Moss, John Lydall, Mr.
Forster, W. Clopton, John Lewis, Nicholas Merriwether, John Park,
Jr., Richard Littlepage, Thomas Butts, Thomas Massie, William
Waddell, Henry Childs, Robert Anderson, Richard Allen, Samuel
Gray, Ebenezer Adams, Charles Lewis, Charles Massie, Walton
Clopton, William Macon, W. Brown, W. Marston, John Netherland,
William Chamberlayne, David Patterson, Michael Sherman,
John Dandridge, Daniel Parke Custis, Matthew Anderson, George
Webb, W. Hopkins, Jesse Scott, Edmund Bacon, William Vaughan,
William Clayton, John Roper.

It deserves to be mentioned to the credit of the vestry, that it
does not appear to have been unmindful of its duty as guardian
of the public morals. On more than one occasion, at an early
period, it enjoins on the churchwardens to see that the laws are
enforced against such as violated the seventh commandment; and in
the year 1736, when some unworthy persons disturbed the congregation
during service, an order was passed that a pair of stocks
should be put up in the yard, in order to confine any who should
thus offend.

It appears also from the vestry-book that the parish was divided
in 1704, and St. Paul's, in Hanover, taken off.

St. Peter's Church was built in 1703, at a cost of one hundred
and forty-six thousand-weight of tobacco. The steeple was not
built until twelve years after. If the early history of this parish
be not creditable to its piety, let not those unto whom in the wonderful
providence of God it has been transmitted, and who are permitted
to worship in the venerable church of St. Peter's, be discouraged.
The first sometimes become last and the last first. So
may it be with this parish! May its latter end greatly increase in
all that is good! That it yet survives is proof that God has a
favour toward it, and will strengthen the things which seemed ready
to perish.[108]


388

Page 388

OF BLISSLAND PARISH.

A few words will suffice for the little we have to say of this. No
vestry-book remains to tell its history.

Though a small parish, yet being near to Williamsburg it was
doubtless continually supplied, from its establishment in 1684 or
1685, until the year 1785, when we lose sight of it from the list of
clergy and parishes and the journals of Conventions.

In the year 1724 the Rev. Daniel Clayton was the minister, and
had been for twenty years, as he writes to the Bishop of London.
There were two churches in it. The parish had one hundred
and thirty-six families. His salary was eighty pounds per annum.
The glebe was worth nothing. No school or library was in the
parish.

In the year 1758 the Rev. Chichely Thacker was the minister.
In the years 1773, 1774, 1776, and 1785, the Rev. Price Davies
was the rector. In the latter year he appears in the Convention
at Richmond, attended by Mr. Burwell Bassett as lay delegate,
while the Rev. James Semple and Mr. William Hartwell Macon
represented St. Peter's parish. What has become of the churches
of Blissland parish I am unable to say. Perhaps I may yet learn.
I think one of them was an old brick church, on the roadside from
New Kent to Williamsburg, about twelve miles from the latter, and
which I have seen in former days,—the walls still good, and nothing
else remaining.

 
[107]

The Rev. Farley Berkeley officiated some time before this as missionary at St.
Peter's Church.

[108]

Mr. Jarratt, as will appear hereafter in his memoirs, speaks of cards, racing,
dancing, and cockfighting, as most prevalent in this parish, and of himself as being
trained to them. At that time the Church had nearly come to an end. In the
course of my travels through the State, and my recent researches into its past history,
I find that in those parts of it where such things most prevailed, there religion
and morality sank to the lowest ebb. Where gambling, racing, and even the low
practice of cockfighting, were encouraged, there were the lost estates, the ruined,
scattered families; there were the blasted hopes of parents, the idle, intemperate
sons, and the sacrificed daughters. Now that horse-racing has become so discreditable
that it has gone into the hands of a lower order of characters, and cockfighting
is deemed too mean even to be encouraged by those, we can scarcely realize that
such idle and destructive diversions as the former, and such a cruel and degrading
one as the latter, should ever have found the favour which was once shown them.
That they should ever regain that favour, we delight to think of as a moral impossibility;
but, in order to this, Christian parents should train their children to an
utter abhorrence of them, and Christian gentlemen frown upon them and avoid
them, as unworthy of genteel society, remembering the past and consulting for the
future


389

Page 389

ARTICLE XXXV.

Parishes in Essex County.—No. 1. South Farnham.

This parish was erected in 1692. It was called South Farnham
to distinguish it from one in Richmond county, on the north
side of the Rappahannock, called North Farnham.

There were two churches in this parish, called Upper and Lower
Piscataway. The first minister of the parish of whom we have
any account was the Rev. Lewis Latane, a Huguenot, who came
to this country and settled in this parish in the year 1700. He
must have taken charge of the parish very soon after his arrival,
as a letter from Governor Spottswood to the vestry of South
Farnham — found among his papers, and bearing date 17th December,
1716—speaks of Mr. Latane as having been the minister
of the parish for nearly sixteen years. This letter is in relation
to an attempt on the part of the vestry to displace Mr. Latane,
and severely reprehends their conduct, and threatens to interpose
the authority of the Governor if persisted in. It must have been
abandoned, as appears from the journal of a Mr. John Fontaine,
who, travelling from Williamsburg through this region of country,
heard Mr. Latane preach at the parish church, as he called it, in
1717, and speaks of his sermon and himself in high terms of commendation.
This was the year after the date of the letter referred
to. Mr. Latane seems to have been a quiet man, moving
on in the even tenor of his way, but feeling keenly the injustice
done him by his vestry. The opposition to him was not on the
ground of immorality or ministerial unfaithfulness or inefficiency,
but on account of his dialect, to which Mr. Latane thought they
ought now to have become accustomed. He felt aggrieved that,
after preaching for them so many years, the objection should be
made at so late a day. An anecdote connected with this matter
is related of him, which seems to be characteristic of the man.
He was riding with one of his parishioners, when the subject of his
removal was talked over by them. The other expressed his sorrow,
but thought it better on the ground that Mr. Latane's sermons
were rendered unintelligible by his foreign brogue. Before
separating they came to the minister's gate. "Go by," he said,


390

Page 390
"and get something to drink;" which was readily agreed to.
This he said to prove him. "Now," said the minister, "you can
readily understand me when I tempt you to do wrong, but you
can't understand me when I counsel you to do right."

How long he continued to officiate in the parish church cannot
be ascertained. No records of the parish pertaining to the church
are to be found, even after diligent inquisition made. The proceedings
of the vestry of South Farnham, in relation to the work
of processioners who were appointed by the vestry under authority
and by direction of the court of Essex, have been found; but they
only show who were the ministers and who the vestrymen of the
parish at each meeting for that business. The first meeting was
held in 1739, when the Rev. William Philips was present. Nothing
but the name of this person can be gathered from this or any other
source. He is mentioned as being present at subsequent meetings
up to 1744.

An interval of eight years occurs, and the Rev. Alexander Cruden
appears in 1752 and continues until 1773. There is no one living
in the parish who can remember any thing of Mr. Cruden. Vague
tradition represents him as having been a fine preacher in his day.
Nothing is known as to his piety. He was a native of Aberdeen,
Scotland, as is believed, and returned to that country during the
Revolutionary War. He must have relinquished his charge two
years before the war commenced. There was no minister in the
parish from that time till 1792, when the Rev. Andrew Syme,
of Glasgow, Scotland, came to the village of Tappahannock as
tutor in the family of Dr. John Brockenbrough, and preached in
the churches of South Farnham. He received a small salary
raised by voluntary contribution. What were the fruits of his
ministerial work: whether the scattered sheep were collected
and their drooping spirits revived, or the tide of infidelity which
was then rising and afterward spread over this region was
stayed by his labours, does not appear. Being the first minister
after the Revolution, he doubtless had many difficulties to
contend with, and his usefulness must have been lessened by
his school. He removed from Essex to Petersburg in 1794.
More than twenty years elapsed before there were again any regular
services in the parish. The Rev. Mr. Mathews, of St. Anne's
parish, Essex, the Rev. Mr. Carter, of Drysdale parish, King and
Queen county, and the Rev. Mr. Krew, of Middlesex county, officiated
in South Farnham for the rites of baptism, marriage, and
burial, when sent for by the few remaining followers of the Episcopal


391

Page 391
Church. When regular services were again resumed, it was
under the ministry of the Rev. John Reynolds, in 1822, who came
to this country from England a Wesleyan Methodist and afterward
entered the ministry of the Episcopal Church. He was
called by the two parishes of Essex united. The parishes continued
so under the ministry of the Rev. J. P. McGuire, who was
called to the rectorship of St. Anne's and South Farnham parishes
in 1825. When he resigned, in 1852, the parishes were each able
to support its own minister. During the dreary interval in the
history of the Church in South Farnham parish referred to, the
influence of the Church had waned until it seemed almost lost.
That it should be revived, humanly viewed, seemed more improbable
than that it should become extinct. It was "the Lord's
doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes." The few remaining
friends were now without minister or temple. Both churches in
the parish had been destroyed,—one being pulled down, the other
burned. The feeling of hostility to the Church engendered by
the establishment under the Colonial Government, and transmitted
from generation to generation, was greatly increased in this
vicinity by the imprisonment of some of the Dissenting ministers,
—a proceeding which was unjustly identified with the Episcopal
Church. This feeling, at its height when the influence of the
Church was at the lowest, joined with the stronger feeling of
rapacity, led, as may be supposed, to wholesale plunder of the
churches and church-property. The destruction in this parish
has been complete. Nothing is to be found but the durable materials
of which the buildings were made. The bricks may be recognised
where seen; but they are nowhere found except in other
buildings. The flagstones, too, from the aisles, may be seen in
walks and in hearths; but not a whole brick, much less one upon
another, nor a piece of timber, is to be seen where the temples of
the living God stood. The monuments of the dead were not even
spared in the general depredation. These were dragged from their
resting-places and made into grindstones, and may still be identified
by parts of the original inscriptions.

As mentioned, no vestry-book is to be found belonging to the
parish, no Bible, Prayer Book, font, nor Communion-table; and
the strange fact can only be accounted for by supposing that they
shared one common ruin with the churches.

One of these buildings was preserved from destruction by a
worthy old gentleman who is said to have watched, with his
servants, night after night, to protect the house of God. When


392

Page 392
he died, the work of destruction went on, nor ceased till nothing
was left to tempt the cupidity of the plunderers. The other was
spared, to meet, if possible, a worse fate. The bricks and nails
were the most tempting materials in this house; and, as the
readiest way to obtain these was to fire the building, this was
done accordingly. But the first attempt to burn it was unsuccessful;
the fire, after burning for a time, went out of itself. No
one of sensibility could see this house of God as it then stood—
charred and blackened by fire, hacked by axes, and otherwise
injured by Vandal hands—and not have his feelings deeply
moved. But this condition did not suffice the spirit that was bent
on its destruction. It stood a short time longer, was again fired,
and burned to the ground. It had been a noble structure of the
kind, must have been one of the oldest Colonial churches, and, until
within a few years of its destruction, had much of venerable grandeur
in its appearance. Having, up to the time of its destruction,
so far withstood the influence of three natural elements, and a
still worse and more cruel in the bosom of man, with no guardians
left but the venerable oaks which had watched over it in better
days, and were still stretching out their arms toward it as if to
afford help in its fallen state, it was an object of peculiar
interest. Few indeed must have been the friends then to ask,
"Who saw this house in its first glory, and how do ye see it now?"
or they had not had so soon to take up the lamentation, "Our holy
and our beautiful house, where our fathers praised thee, is burned
up with fire, and all our pleasant things are laid waste." But
there was "a remnant, according to the election of grace," who
"sighed for the abominations" they could not prevent, mourned
over the desolations of Zion, "who took pleasure in her stones,
and favoured the dust thereof." They were as the "two or three
berries on the top of the uppermost bough" left after the vintage.
But they were "mothers in Israel," and nourished a seed for the
future Church. The glebe belonging to the parish, together with
the plate belonging to both churches, was sold, and the fund accruing
invested for the support of the parish poor. The fund
yields about one thousand dollars per annum. The plate was
massive, and sold, at a sacrifice, for some three hundred or four
hundred dollars.

The glebe was a donation from Rev. Lewis Latane, the first
minister of the parish. Had this plea been urged, after proper
steps to establish it,—as might have been done in the bar of the
sale,—it had no doubt been prevented. The following are the


393

Page 393
names of persons who constituted the vestry of South Farnham
parish from 1739 to 1779:—

"Hon. John Robinson, Captain Nicholas Smith, William Roane, Mr.
William Covington, Isaac Scandrith, John Vass, Captain William Dangerfield,
Alexander Parker, Abraham Montague, James Reynolds, Captain
Francis Smith, Mr. Henry Young, James Webb, John Clements, John
Upshaw, Henry Vass, James Mills, William Montague, William Young,
Thomas Roane, Samuel Peachy, Merriwether Smith, Archibald Ritchie,
John Richards, James Campbell, William Smith, James Edmonson, Newman
Brockenbrough, John Beal, John Edmonson.

"The Rev. Lewis Latane fled from France to England after the revocation
of the Edict of Nantes, in October, 1685, and remained there until
the year 1700. He was ordained Deacon, September 22, and Priest, October
18, of that year; reached Virginia, March 5, 1701, and took
charge of the parish of South Farnham, April 5 of that year. He was
married once before he came to this country, and twice afterward. His
third wife, of whom alone any thing is known, was Miss Mary Dean, a
relative and protégé of Mr. William Beverley, of Blandfield, in Essex
county, and of the adjoining parish of St. Anne's. Mr. Latane died in
1732, leaving a widow, and one son named John, and five daughters. In
his will we have the following characteristic trait of him:—`My will is,
that whatsoever I am justly indebted to any person be duly paid by my
executor; and whereas Mrs. Phœbe Kater, in her last will and testament,
disposed of such things to my daughters C., P., and S., as were not
in her power to give, my will is that none of my said daughters shall have
any of the said legacies paid them. But, if any of them shall be so refractory
as to insist on having any of the said legacies paid them, then I
give to each of my said daughters twelvepence, in full of all the legacies
hereafter in this my will to them given and bequeathed.' "

Faithfully have the descendants of this upright and conscientious
man followed the example of his integrity. Perhaps there is no
instance to be found in Virginia, where a whole family have been
more remarkable for truth and fidelity in all their dealings and
character. John, his only surviving son, married a Miss Mary
Allen. William, his only surviving son, married a Miss Ann
Waring, leaving a large number of sons and daughters. His
daughter Lucy, third in descent from Mr. Latane, married Mr.
Payne Waring, of Essex, so well known as the zealous and liberal
friend of the Church in that county and in the diocese, and father
of the present Mrs. Richard Baylor. His son Henry, now seventy-three
years of age, has several children who are members of the
Church, one of whom is preparing for the ministry. His daughter
Mary married Mr. John Temple, one of whose sons is the minister
of Old South Farnham parish at this time, and one of whom died at
the University in the year 1829, a model of piety and all excellence.
A brief tribute is due to his memory. In the year 1829,


394

Page 394
a most pestilential and fatal disease broke out in the village of
Charlottesville and at the University. Nine of the students in the
latter fell victims to it, and among them young Temple. Being
invited by the authorities of the University to improve that most
afflictive dispensation, I prepared and delivered a discourse, which
was published. From it I extract the concluding sentences, which
will show in what high esteem young Temple was held:—

"Is there upon earth a sight so interesting as that of a young man, at
a seat of learning, in the midst of temptation, surrounded by other youths
of widely-differing sentiments, yet steadily holding on `the even tenor of
his way,' resisting pleasure, avoiding evil communication, acting from religious
principle, and not ashamed to call himself by the name and seal
himself with the seal of Christ? Have you seen none such, my young
hearers? Amidst all your young associates, was there not one who loved
his Saviour, one whom you all loved, all esteemed, whom you could not but
love and esteem, and who was a witness to the truth of that which I have
spoken to-day?

"Was young Temple less beloved by you all because young Temple was
a Christian, because a portion of his Sabbaths was spent in teaching the
young and ignorant, because the Bible was his daily study? And, when
death was sent to summon him away, was he less happy? Which one of
you present, now in your own mind hostile to religion and in your conduct
furthest removed from it, but would, if called to die, rather be as
young Temple was, than as you now are?"

The following documents explain themselves:—

"At a Council held at the Capitol, the 23d day of January, 1716, present
the Governor and Council.

"On reading at this Board a representation from Mr. Commissary Blair,
setting forth that the vestry of South Farnham parish, in Essex county,
have taken upon them to suspend Mr. Lewis Latane, their minister, from
the exercise of his ministerial office, without any previous accusation or
conviction of any crime; and that the said vestry have also prohibited
the performance of divine service in the said parish, by causing the church-doors
to be shut, and praying the consideration of this therein, and the
order of the vestry for suspending Mr. Latane being also read, it is the unanimous
opinion of this Board that the said vestry have no power to turn out
their minister in the manner they have done; and, therefore, it is ordered
that the churchwardens cause the doors of the church to be opened, and
that the said Mr. Latane be permitted to exercise his ministerial functions
therein, until he be legally tried and convicted of such crime as renders
him unworthy to be continued, for which there are proper judicatures to
which the said vestry may apply, if they have any thing to charge him
with. And it is further resolved, that in case the said vestry shall refuse
to pay their minister, in the mean time, his salary due by law, that proper
measures be taken for obliging them to do him justice.

"(Copied.) Wm. Robertson, Clerk of Council"


395

Page 395

Letter of Governor Spottswood to the Churchwardens and Vestry of
South Farnham Parish in Essex.

"Gentlemen:—I'm not a little surprised at the sight of an order of
yours, wherein you take upon you to suspend from his office a clergyman
who, for near sixteen years, has served as your minister, and that without
assigning any manner of reason for your so doing. I look upon it that
the British subjects in these Plantations ought to conform to the Constitution
of their mother-country in all cases wherein the laws of the several
Colonies have not otherwise decided; and, as no vestry in England ever
pretended to set themselves up as judges over their ministers, so I know
no law of this country that has given such authority to the vestry here.
If a clergyman transgresses against the canons of the Church, he is to
be tried before a proper judicature; and though in this country there be
no Bishops to apply to, yet there is the substitute of the Bishop, who is
your diocesan, and who can take cognizance of the offences of the clergy;
and I cannot believe there is any vestry here so ignorant but to know that
the Governor, for the time-being, has the honour to be intrusted with the
power of collating to all benefits, and ought, in reason, to be made acquainted
with the crime which unqualifies a clergyman from holding a
benefice of which he is once legally possessed. In case of the misbehaviour
of your minister, you may be his accusers, but in no case his
judges; but much less are you empowered to turn him out without showing
any cause. But your churchwardens, ordering the church to be shut
up, and thereby taking upon them to lay the parish under an interdict, is
such an exorbitant act of power, that even the Pope of Rome never pretended
to a greater; and if your churchwardens persist in it, they will
find themselves involved in greater troubles than they are aware of.

"By the small number of vestrymen present at the making the late
order, and the dissent of several that were, I apprehend the turning out
of Mr. Latane, and what has followed on it since, to be the effect of some
sudden heat, and therefore I am willing to believe that, upon cooler deliberation
in a full vestry, you will think fit to reverse that order, and give
your minister the opportunity of a fair trial, if you have any thing to
accuse him of, which is what every subject ought to have before he is
condemned. But if, contrary to my expectations, you persist in that unwarrantable
way you have begun, I recommend to your inquiry what success
a vestry who took upon them the like power met with at Kichotan,
(Hampton) But I hope, without obliging me to exert that authority his
Majesty has intrusted me with, in this case you will rather choose to be
reconciled to your minister, which will be more for the quiet of your parish,
and much more obliging to,

"Gentlemen, your most humble servant,
A. Spottswood."

396

Page 396

ARTICLE XXXVI.

Parishes in Essex.—No. 2. St. Anne's Parish.

This parish was established in 1692, the same year with the
neighbouring parish of South Farnham, of which we have just given
some account. We are unable to ascertain[109] who were its ministers
previous to 1725. We learn from his own journal that the Rev.
Robert Rose became its minister in February, 1725. Nor do we
learn any thing of his ministry until the year 1746, as his journal
does not commence until that year, which he says was the twenty-first
of his incumbency in the parish of St. Anne. This journal has
been an object of great interest and desire to the antiquaries of
Virginia. Mr. Charles Campbell, of Petersburg, in his valuable
History of Virginia, laments its supposed loss in the Western wilds,
whither it had been carried by some of his descendants. I am so
fortunate as to have it in temporary possession, through the kindness
of Mr. Henry Carter, of Caroline county, Virginia, who has
recently gotten it from the West,—Mr. Carter being one of the posterity
of Mr. Rose. It will, in one important respect, disappoint


397

Page 397
the expectations of those who have longed for it. It only covers
the last five or six years of his life,—from January 21, 1746, to
June 13, 1751, soon after which he died. It is, however, in some
respects an interesting narrative, exhibiting the character of its
author to the life, and casting light on men and things of that early
period. Mr. Rose came from Scotland early in the last century.
It is confidently believed that he came under the auspices of Governor
Spottswood. There was certainly a great intimacy between
them to the day of General Spottswood's death. Mr. Rose was, I
presume, from a large account-book bound up with his journal, or
to which his journal is appended, going back to the year 1727, his
executor. He certainly had much to do with the settlement of the
estate, and with his widow and children after the death of General
Spottswood in 1737. Mr. Rose partook very much of the character
of General Spottswood, being a man of great labour, decision, benevolence,
and of extraordinary business-talents. If the previous years
of his life partook in any good degree of the character of the last
five or six, he must have done an amount of labour such as few men
ever accomplish,—too much indeed of a secular kind to consist with
that spirituality which ought ever to characterize a minister of the
Gospel. He was the executor of various persons besides General
Spottswood. It is due to him to say that a benevolent feeling
seems to have prompted to this, for the widow and the orphan were
the objects of his care. At an early period after his settlement in
Essex, we find him taking charge of the estate and family of the
Rev. Mr. Bagge. It is also due to him to say that he never seems
to have neglected the duty of preaching. Wherever he was on the
Sabbath, whether in his own parish or on his journeys, he records
his preaching. Very often also he speaks of preaching during the
week at private houses, and baptizing children. About the time
his journal commences, he was preparing to move into Nelson
county, where he had purchased lands at a cheap rate, and where
he settled his four sons, Hugh, Patrick, Henry, and Charles. His
journal mentions all his visits to and fro between Nelson and Essex;
in making which he passes through Stafford, Spottsylvania, Louisa,
Orange, Albemarle, Culpepper, and calls on all the first families in
these counties, sometimes preaching, sometimes marrying, at other
times baptizing. Wherever he went, accounts are brought out to
him for examination and settlement, as though there was none other
capable of it. His judgment as to farms is often consulted. He
would not only visit them, but sometimes help to survey them. He
was equally good at settling family disputes, and was often engaged

398

Page 398
in it. He was also a man of much public spirit. He once visited
Western Virginia with some friends, going as far as the Cow Pasture,
sleeping out at nights in cold weather, and drinking, as he
records, wretched whiskey for want of something better,—though
he was still a sober man. He was the first to descend James River,
with one or two others, in an open canoe, as far as Richmond, and
thus establish its navigability. At that and at other times, when
travelling by land, we find him passing through all the counties
lying between Nelson and York, stopping at all the chief places on
James River,—at Colonel Jefferson's, in Goochland, (father of the
President,) at Tuckahoe, Curls, Westover, &c. We find him repeatedly
at Williamsburg,—having business with the court and
Legislature,—dining or supping with the Governor and Council,
with Commissary Blair, President Burwell, Speaker Beverley, with
the Nelsons and others at York,—then passing through Gloucester
to Middlesex,—visiting at Brandon and Rosegill,—thence to his
parish in Essex. About twice a year for five years he seems to
have made excursions of this kind, more or less extensive. He
was doubtless a very popular man in Virginia, and enjoyed the
affection and confidence of the first men and families in the State.
The manner and place in which he terminated his life is one proof
of this. When the city of Richmond was about to be laid out, he
was invited, by those to whom the duty was intrusted, to meet with
them and aid by his counsel. It was while thus engaged that he
sickened and died. He lies buried in the graveyard of the old
church on Richmond Hill, with the following inscription:—

"Here lyeth the body of Robert Rose, Rector of Albemarle parish.
His extraordinary genius and capacity in all the polite and useful arts of
life, though equalled by few, were yet exceeded by the great goodness of
his heart. Humanity, benevolence, and charity ran through the whole
course of his life, and were exerted with uncommon penetration. In his
friendship he was warm and steady; in his manners gentle and easy; in
his conversation entertaining and instructive. With the most tender piety
he discharged all the domestic duties of husband, father, son, and brother.[110]
In short, he was a friend of the whole human race, and upon that principle
a strenuous asserter and defender of liberty. He died the 30th day of
June, 1751, in the 47th year of his age."


399

Page 399

He must have entered on his charge in Essex when he was but
twenty-one years of age, for in his journal of February 1, 1746,
he says that that was the twenty-first year of his incumbency in
St. Anne's parish. If ordained Deacon during the year preceding
his entrance into the parish, he must have been in his forty-third
year at the time of this entry on the journal; and he lived five years
and five months after this. It is difficult to reconcile these dates,
and there may be a mistake either in the entry or the inscription.

I doubt not but that the inscription is far more just to his character
than most of the records of that period. I have not been
able to meet with any of the sermons of Mr. Rose, and therefore
cannot speak of his theology or style of preaching; and there is
nothing in his entries which give us any light into his religious character
and sentiments, or the state of religion at that time. He only
records his sermons, their texts, and the times and places of their
delivery, and some baptisms and communions. Once only does he
mention meeting with a Baptist,—an ignorant ploughman,—who
tried to get him into a controversy about election and reprobation,
and to whom the only advice he gave was, as he says, that of John
the Baptist, that every man attend to his own business. The Baptists
were then making considerable progress in Virginia, and I have
no idea that Mr. Rose or any of the clergy of the Episcopal Church
of that day were calculated to oppose them successfully. The style
of the sermons and the delivery of the same were altogether too
tame for that purpose. They were written, in almost every instance
that I have seen, in a very small hand, and with very close lines,
as if paper was too scarce and dear to admit of any thing else.
They must have read very closely in order to get through with such
manuscripts. The location and form of their pulpits were also such
as to show that they kept their eyes very near to the manuscript,
and did not care to look at the congregation. The pulpits in the
old churches were always either on the side of the church, if oblong,
or on one of the angles, if cruciform. The aisles were wide, and a
cross aisle and door nearly opposite the pulpit, so that only a small
portion of the congregation could be seen by the minister. It was
also so deep, that unless he were a very tall man his head only
could be seen. In the earlier part of my ministry I have often
been much at a loss how to elevate myself in many of these old
churches which I visited, and have sometimes hurried to church before
the congregation assembled, in order to gather up stones, bricks,
and pieces of plank to raise a little platform under me, and which
was not always very steady. I have preached repeatedly in two of


400

Page 400
the old churches, built under the auspices of Mr. Rose, whose pulpits
were remarkably deep. In one of them, a large round block
sawed from the body of a tree, more than a foot high, had been
provided by some one of his successors, and stood in the centre of
the pulpit; and even on this I found it uncomfortable to stand and
preach. All of these old pulpits have been lowered and their location
changed.

But I have something more to say of Mr. Rose from his journal.
He was a kind of universal genius. Now he is in the house reading
Cicero's Orations, now on the farm engaged in all kinds of employment,
now at his neighbours', instructing and helping them in various
operations. Now he writes in his journal a recipe for the best mode
of curing tobacco.[111] His visits to friends in neighbouring parishes
are recorded. We find him in the Northern Neck, at the Fitzhughs'
and Stewarts'; then going over to Maryland, visiting at Dr. Gustavus
Brown's, five of whose daughters married clergymen, as we
shall see hereafter; at Dr. John Key's, who married another; associating
with some of the Romish clergy, who treated him very
kindly. His association with numbers of the clergy of Virginia
is mentioned. He speaks of Mr. Stewart, of King George,—then
Stafford,—as an eloquent preacher, as being an exception to the
scriptural rule, for he was a prophet who had honour in his own
country. He mentions in an account-book Mr. Alexander Scott,
of Stafford, as being minister in 1727, and Mr. Moncure, his successor,
at a later period. He visits Mr. Mayre, of Fredericksburg,


401

Page 401
—Mr. Dixon, one of the successors of Mr. Latane in South Farnham
parish,—mentions Mr. Thompson, of Culpepper, who married
the widow of General Spottswood, and between whom and the
family, who opposed the marriage, he effected a reconciliation. He
speaks particularly of the Rev. Mr. Smelt, who, through his influence,
succeeded him in Essex. In his journal, after hearing him
preach, he thus writes:—"Rev. Mr. Smelt preached on John,
4th chap. 8-36 verses, (Tillotson's,) delivered modestly and distinctly."[112] Borrowing sermons was very common in those days.
Other ministers also are mentioned, as Mr. Maury, of Albemarle,
Mr. Douglass, of Goochland, Mr. Barrett, of Louisa, Mr. Yates, of
Middlesex, Mr. Camm, of Williamsburg, Mr. Stith, of Curls Neck,
and Mr. Cruden. With the leading families of his parish he appears
to have lived on the most intimate terms. He is continually
breakfasting, dining, or staying all night, at Colonel Brooke's, at
Mr. Beverley's of Blanfield, at Mr. Tarent's, Mr. Fitzhugh's, at Mr.
Garnett's, Mr. Rowzie's, Fairfax's, Parker's, Mercer's, and Lomax's.
He appears to have been a man of energy and business in Church
matters also. When elected minister in Nelson, then part of Albemarle,
and in what was called St. Anne's parish, at one meeting of
the vestry in 1749 he had an order passed for four new churches,—
the Forge, Balinger's, Rooker's, and at New Glasgow, the two former
on the Green Mountain, and the latter in what is now Amherst,
though he did not live to see them all finished. The habits of Mr.
Rose were doubtless temperate. He speaks of turning away an
overseer for getting drunk on a certain occasion; and yet, in evidence
of the habits of the times, he speaks of bringing home with him
one day from Leighton's, on the Rappahannock, "rum and wine
and other necessaries,
" and at another time of carrying a quarter-cask
of wine into Nelson, the first that ever crossed Tye River,
although the Cabels, Higgenbottoms, and Frys then lived there.[113]
In further proof of the manner and habits of the age, I mention
the entry of a visit to one of the leading families of his parish, when
he found that the head of it had gone to Newcastle (which was in

402

Page 402
another county, and a considerable distance off) to a cockfight. I
read of him also as being at a horse-race at Tye River, (probably
at New Market, where were races afterward,) but then he adds:—
"Memorandum: suffer it no more," as though he had power to prevent
it and would do so. I bring this notice to a close by stating
that Mr. Rose was twice married. Who his first wife was, or
whence she came, I know not. At the death of a daughter in 1748,
there is the following entry:—"Buried my daughter's body by the
side of her mother and brother Robert, at Mr. Brooke's plantation."
His second wife was Miss Ann Fitzhugh, of Stafford, not far from
Fredericksburg. With all the families of Fitzhughs in Stafford,
King George, and Essex, he seems to have lived on the most affectionate
terms. His last wife survived him, but how many years I
am unable to say. His four sons, Hugh, Patrick, Henry, and
Charles, settled on the farms in Nelson and Amherst left them by
their father. His son Colonel Hugh Rose was a man of great decision
of character, and for many years acted as lay reader in two
of the churches of Amherst,—viz.: Rooker's, and that at New
Glasgow. After the war of the Revolution, and when the church
was without a minister, a young preacher of another denomination,
coming from a distance, and understanding that there was no minister
in the parish, gave notice that on the following Sunday he
would officiate in the church at New Glasgow. On the Sabbath
morning he took possession of the pulpit. Soon after, Colonel
Hugh came in, prepared to execute his office. Seeing the pulpit
occupied, and learning by whom, he ascended and politely informed
him that it was his church, and that he could not give place to
another. Whereupon the occupant came down, and the lay reader
performed his part. Being an accomplished gentleman, however,
as well as staunch Churchman, he insisted on his going home with
him, where he treated him with so much kindness and hospitality
as to make a deep impression on the young preacher, who took
pleasure ever after in speaking of the whole affair.

As to the successors of Mr. Rose in Essex, we are unable to
speak fully, for want of documents. Mr. Smelt succeeded him in
1749, and was there in 1758, according to a list which I have from an
English paper. I have no other lists of ministers until the year
1774 and 1776. In two Virginia almanacs of those dates, the Rev.
John Matthews is set down as the minister of St. Anne's parish.
From 1776 to 1814 there is no account of it. No delegation, either
clerical or lay, appear in any of the Conventions from 1784 to 1805.
After the renewal of our Convention, in 1812, two years elapsed


403

Page 403
before there was any representative. In 1814 the Rev. Mr. Norris
and myself passed through the Northern Neck and Essex, on our
way to Richmond, when the Hon. James Hunter and Thomas
Mathews were appointed delegates. In the year 1817 the Hon.
James Garnett was sent, and, in the year 1820, Mr. Robert Beverley.
In the year 1822 the Rev. John Reynolds took his seat as
minister of both of the parishes of Essex. In the year 1826 the
Rev. John P. McGuire appears as minister of the same. He continued
faithfully serving them for twenty-four years, and performing
a large amount of missionary labour in the adjoining counties.
During his ministry the old and venerable brick church called
Vauter's (built most probably about the year 1731) was repaired,
and two others built in St. Anne's parish,—one a very handsome
frame building in Tappahannock, the other about ten miles off.
The Rev. Mr. Temple, fourth in descent from Mr. Latane, is the
minister of the latter, and the Rev. E. C. McGuire, son of the Rev.
Dr. McGuire, of Fredericksburg, and nephew of the former minister,
the Rev. J. P. McGuire, is the rector of the former,—viz.: Vauter's
Church, St. Anne's parish. Some of the descendants of the
old families mentioned in Mr. Rose's journal still help to sustain
the Church in this region. Many of them are scattered far and
wide through the land.

The following communication concerning Old Vauter's Church,
from Mr. Richard Baylor, of Essex, is worthy of a place in an
article on St. Anne's parish:—

"Upon a branch of Blackburn's Creek, called Church Swamp, stands
Vauter's Church, built, as indicated by a date inscribed upon its walls, in
1731. This church, as you know, is in a good state of preservation,—
though it has been twice thoroughly shingled and otherwise repaired and
modernized within my recollection. The walls over the doors and windows
have cracked somewhat, but with proper attention Old Vauter's will
yet serve many generations. The first thing that I recollect, as connected
with the old sanctuary, is, that my father used to keep the old
English Bible at Marl Bank, and when the casual services of a passing
Episcopal minister were to be held there, a servant took the old Bible on
his head, and accompanied the family, a near walking-way, across this
same Blackburn's Creek, and after service brought it back. I still have
the old Bible at Kinlock, [the name of Mr. B.'s place,] valued for its antiquity,
and on its blank leaves are numerous references in my father's
handwriting. I remember when the church-doors always stood wide open,
if, indeed, they could be closed, and have taken refuge myself from a
storm in the body of the church, leading my horse in with me. Before
the old Bible was kept by my father or others, it laid upon the desk; and
I have heard that a man told upon himself that he once took the Bible,
intending, no doubt, to appropriate it to his own or worse uses, carried it


404

Page 404
some miles or more homeward from the church, when he became so
conscience-smitten that he returned and restored it to its own place. I
was told by the late Robert B. Starke, of Norfolk, that many years ago
he attended, as surgeon, one of a party who fought a duel in Vauter's
Churchyard, before the door facing toward Loretto. The parties were
the late General Bankhead and a Mr. Buckner, who, after an exchange
of one or two shots without physical effect, retired satisfied. We are
now indebted to the firm friendship of a lady that Vauter's Church did
not share the same fate of other such sanctuaries,—as, for instance, the
church at Leedstown, just across the river. So soon as Mrs. Muscoe
Garnett heard that persons had commenced carrying away the paving-stones
of the aisles, and perhaps some of the bricks, she claimed the
church as her own, and threatened prosecution to the next offender. The
ground on which she placed her claim was that the church stood on her
land, or that of her family. Around the church are numerous graves, all
now levelled down; and no one knows, or seems to care to know, who
tenants them. The only tombstones to be seen are those over Mr. Anderson
and Mr. Miller, who both lived and died at Brooke's Bank. Messrs.
Anderson and Miller were merchants, and Brooke's Bank an old trading-place
on the Rappahannock."

A friend has furnished me with the following information and statistics,
which are well worthy of insertion as a supplement to the two
articles on the parishes in Essex county. It will be remembered that,
from 1652 to the year 1695, what is now Essex was a part of Rappahannock
county, and what are now South Farnham and St. Anne
parishes were part of Littenburne parish. The only list of vestrymen
in Rappahannock parish is that of the first vestry after its
establishment, under a minister by the name of Francis Doughty.
In place of the names of vestrymen, the old records of the court
furnish us with a list of the magistrates and clerks; and a friend
has transcribed the following, who acted from 1680 to 1800:—

Names of Justices of Rappahannock County from 1680 to 1695, when
Essex County was established.

Henry Aubrey, Major Henry Smith, Captain George Taylor, Mr. Thos.
Harrison, Colonel Jno. Stone, Colonel Leroy Griffin, Major Robinson, Colonel
Wm. Loyd, Captain Samuel Bloomfield, Wm. Fauntleroy, Samuel Peachy,
William Soughter, Cadwallader Jones, Henry Williamson. Clerks of the
Court, Robert Davis, Edward Crosk.

Essex County, 1695. Names of Justices from 1695 to 1700.

Captain John Caslett, Captain William Moseley, Robert Brocky, John
Taliafero, Thomas Edmunson, Francis Taliafero, Captain John Battaile,
Bernard Gaines, James Baughan, Francis Gaulman, Richard Covington.
Clerk of Court, William Colson.

From 1700 to 1720: William Tomlin, Samuel Thrasher, Dobyns,
Robert Coleman, Thomas Meriwether, Colonel John Lomax, Colonel


405

Page 405
William Dangerfield, Paul Micou, Major Benjamin Robinson, Captain
Thomas Waring, Francis Thornton, Joshua Fry. Clerk of Court, Francis
Meriwether.

From 1720 to 1740: William, son of Colonel William Dangerfield,
Captain Salvator Muscoe, Robert Brooky, Captain Nicholas Smith,
Alexander Parker, Thomas Sthreshley, Major Thomas Waring, James
Garnett, Richard Tyler, Jr., Mungo Roy, Benjamin Winslow, Thomas
Jones, Francis Smith, William Roane. Clerk of Court, William Beverley.

From 1740 to 1760: Colonel William Dangerfield, John Corbin, Samuel
Hipkins, Rice Jones, Henry Young, John Clements, William Covington,
Francis Waring, Archibald Ritchie, Paul Micou, John Upshaw, William
Montague, Charles Mortimer.

From 1760 to 1780: Meriwether Smith, Samuel Peachy, John Lee,
Leroy Dangerfield, Thomas Roane, Robert Beverley, John Beale, Robert
Payne Waring, William Latane, John Brockenbrough, Humphrey B.
Brooke.

From 1780 to 1800: Sthreshley Rennolds, Paul Micou, Jr., John
Dangerfield, Maco Clements, Robert Beverley, Jr., James Upshaw, Tunstall
Banks, Reuben Garnett, James Sale, Thomas Roane, Jr., Joseph
Bahannon, Andrew Monro, Thomas Pitts, John Mathews, James M.
Garnett. Clerks of Court, from 1740 to 1800, were Wm. Beverley, John
Lee, Hancock Lee, John P. Lee.

"This Joshua Fry mentioned above (continues my friend) married
Mrs. Mary Hill, who was a daughter of Paul Micou the first. I have
heard from my father that this Joshua Fry was connected with William
and Mary College. He has numerous descendants in Virginia.
One of this family accompanied General Washington in the Indian
wars. John Lomax was the ancestor of Judge John T. Lomax; Paul
Micou and Mungo Roy, the ancestors of the Roys and Micous in this
State. The Dangerfields mentioned above were lineal descendants of
John Dangerfield, the first settler in the county of Rappahannock,
who resided at Greenfield, and to whom it was granted in 1660.
The last proprietor was Colonel John Dangerfield. Most of the
other justices have descendants in this section at this time. Archibald
Richie, the ancestor of this family in Virginia, was a Scotchman,
and a merchant in Tappahannock."

THE DANGERFIELD FAMILY.

The history of the Dangerfield family in this country, so far as
I have been able to ascertain, is contained in the following statement.
"The first of the name who emigrated to America were two
brothers, John and William, who came to this country early and
settled on the James River: one or both of them intermarried with
the Blands and Robinsons, and held a high social position in that


406

Page 406
section. The residence of John Dangerfield, in New Kent, retained
the family name within the memory of one living at this time. It
is not known whether they held any office or not. In 1660, John
Dangerfield, a descendant of John, located a patent in the county
of Rappahannock, and at Greenfield, which remained in the family
till 1821. He married in Rappahannock, and left a son, William.
He became a justice and colonel, and married a member of the
Batherst family of England,—a Miss Meriwether, of Batherst, Essex
county. He left a son William, who married a Miss Fauntleroy,
of Nailor's Hold. He was also a justice, and left three sons,—John,
William, and Leroy. William inherited the greater portion of his
estate, including the family residence, and was one of the seven
colonels appointed at the commencement of the Revolution. He
married a Miss Willis, of Fredericksburg, and died during the
Revolution, at his seat,—Coventry, Spottsylvania,—and left a large
family. John, the eldest, inherited the estate in Essex, and succeeded
to the offices, civil and military, held by his ancestors. He
married, first, Miss Southall, of Williamsburg, and secondly, Miss
Armstead, of Hess. Leroy, the brother of the last William, filled
the office of justice for several years, and married a Miss Parker,
daughter of the first Judge Parker, of Westmoreland county, and
descendant of Alexander Parker, a justice of Rappahannock. He
removed to Frederick county, Virginia.

To the above contributions from Mr. Micou, the worthy Clerk of
Essex, and another friend, I have something more to add. The father
of the first Lomax who came to this country was one of the silenced
and ejected ministers in the time of Charles I. of England,—a pious,
conscientious, and superior man. His son John, who came to this
country, intermarried with the Wormlys of Middlesex. Lunsford
Lomax, son of John, married Judith Micou, daughter of the first
Paul Micou, who settled in Virginia, and who was a French surgeon
and Huguenot. Major Thomas Lomax, father of the present Judge
Lomax, was his son. The family seat is that beautiful estate
situated on Portobago Bay, a few miles below Port Royal, on the
Rappahannock. The eldest sister of Judith Micou, who married
Lunsford Lomax, married Moore Fauntleroy. One of her daughters
married the Rev. Mr. Giberne, of Richmond county. Another
of this connection, who was the grandmother of Mr. Micou, the
present Clerk of Essex, married the Rev. Mr. Mathews, one of
the ministers of St. Anne's parish, Essex.

I have been furnished by a worthy friend with some notices of


407

Page 407
the connection and relatives of the Rev. Mr. Mathews, the substance
of which I take pleasure in adding to what has been written
concerning St. Anne's parish, Essex. The families of Mathews
and Smith and Bushrod intermarried at an early period. The Rev.
John Mathews also married a Miss Smith. His son Thomas was a
member of one of our earlier Conventions; his daughter Mary
married Dr. Alexander Somervail, of Scotland; his daughter
Fanny married James Roy Micou, father of the present Clerk of
Essex; his daughter Virginia married Dr. William Baynham, of
Essex. There were also two other daughters.

The two physicians who married daughters of the Rev. Mr.
Mathews were most eminent men in their profession, and of very
high moral character.

Dr. Somervail, though brought up in the Kirk of Scotland, was
for some time an avowed infidel. It is said that some remarks
dropped by Mrs. Hunter, mother of the present Senator in Congress,
during a religious discussion she had with the celebrated Dr.
Ogilvie and one of his Virginia followers, in the presence of Dr.
S., made an impression on his mind, and led him to a serious examination
of Christianity, which resulted in his conversion. He
was most eminent in his profession, contributing largely to Dr.
Chapman's Medical Journal, and being the author of an important
discovery, by which one of the most painful diseases of the human
frame is relieved. He was the physician of the poor as well as
the rich. On leaving Scotland his father said to him, "If you
ever oppress the poor my curse is upon you." Neither the curse
of his earthly or heavenly Father came down upon him for neglecting
the poor. On the very day of his death, in his seventy-sixth
year, he paid friendly visits to some of his poor patients. Dr.
Somervail, after his conversion, connected himself with the Baptist
Church, but was beloved and esteemed by all. The Hon. James
M. Garnett sent an extended obituary of him to the National
Intelligencer at the time of his death.

Not less eminent was the other son-in-law of the Rev. Mr.
Mathews,—Dr. William Baynham. He was the son of an old
vestryman of the Episcopal Church in Caroline county, who was
also an eminent physician. The son, after studying seven years
under his father, completed his preparations for the practice of
medicine under the celebrated Dr. William Hunter, of London.
Young Baynham distinguished himself while in England, and had
he remained there would certainly have attained to the highest


408

Page 408
station in his profession. He also was the discoverer of something
very important in the medical department. The eulogies bestowed
upon him, both at home and abroad, for moral character and great
medical attainments, of which I have specimens before me, prove
that he was a man of great celebrity. The Hon. Robert Garnett,
of Essex, furnished the press with a high encomium on his
character.

 
[109]

On examination of the Lambeth Records, I find that the Rev. John Bagge was
the predecessor of the Rev. Robert Rose; that he came into the Colony in 1709, in
Deacons' Orders, but was allowed to take charge of St. Anne's parish. He soon
after settled in another, but says he was driven out by an influential layman. In
1717 he returned to England for Priests' Orders, then had a difficulty with a Rev.
Mr. Ransford about St. Anne's parish, in which Governor Spottswood took his part
but could not support him. We find him, however, the minister of St. Anne's in
1724, but, dying soon after, he is succeeded by the Rev. Robert Rose. He speaks
of Governor Spottswood as a valiant defender of the rights of the clergy and the Governor
against the usurpations of the vestries, but acknowledges the failure of his
efforts. He admits that there were not more than four inducted ministers in the
Colony. There were two churches in the parish of St. Anne. His salary was from
sixty to eighty pounds, according to the quality and price of tobacco,—his perquisites
about twelve hundred-weight of tobacco. On the counties bordering on
North Carolina, he says that the tobacco is so mean, and of so little value, that but
little is made, and the ministers are obliged to receive their salaries in tar, pitch,
pork, and other commodities, and that it is difficult to get ministers to settle there.
This agrees with Colonel Byrd's account of the border-parishes a few years after
this. Mr. Bagge mentions seven or eight parishes, in different parts of the State,
then vacant. He says that they have no parish library or public school.

[110]

Mr. Rose had four brothers, who, from his journal, must have settled somewhere
in Virginia not very far from him. His brother Charles was the minister of
Cople parish, in Westmoreland county. In his journal he speaks of visiting him
there. Visits are also exchanged with his other brothers, though their residences
are not so exactly defined. He speaks affectionately of his brothers, wife, and
children.

[111]

The following information is from a reliable source:—

"During the early part of my life,—say some fifty years ago or more,—I heard my
grandfather, or my great-uncle, I do not recollect exactly which of them, relate an
anecdote of Parson Robert Rose. There had been a year of great drought, producing,
if not a famine the succeeding year, great scarcity and tribulation among
the settlers of the upper part of Amherst and Nelson counties.

"Parson Rose, hearing of the distress of the people, gave information, by advertising,
that he had a quantity of corn which he could spare, and all those wishing
to get a share should come to his house on a certain day. Many of the good
people attended promptly to his summons, and when he thought they had all arrived
he requested all those who wanted corn that they should form a line. They did so.
When the line was formed, he asked the applicants whether they had the money to
pay for the corn: many of them, rejoicing, cried out, `We have the money;' whilst the
greater portion, with looks and eyes cast down, said, `We have no money.' The parson,
with good-humour, commanded all those that had money to step one pace in front.
After they had done so he said to them, `You all have money?' The cry was, `Yes,
yes;' when he again, in great good-nature, said to them, `As you have money, you
are able to get corn anywhere; but as to these poor fellows who have no money, they
are to get my corn.' And it was so done."

[112]

The Rev. Mr. Smelt was the grandfather of Miss Caroline Smelt, whose memoirs
were written in the year 1818 by the Rev. Moses Waddell, of South Carolina.
Mr. Smelt was an Englishman, and a graduate of Oxford. His son Dennis Smelt,
after receiving his literary education at William and Mary College, went to England
and obtained a medical one. On returning to America he settled in Augusta, Georgia,
where he married a Miss Cooper. The religious exercises and character of their
daughter Caroline were such as to justify the publication of her memoirs.

[113]

This is questioned.


409

Page 409

ARTICLE XXXVII.

Parishes in Caroline County.—St. Mary's, St. Margarett's, St.
Asaph, Drysdale

In the year 1827 Caroline county was formed out of the heads
or upper parts of Essex, King and Queen, and King William, and,
soon after, the parishes of Drysdale and St. Margarett's were
formed, it is believed, for I can find no certain account of the
time. The parish of St. Mary's had previously, I think, been
established in Essex county, most probably soon after the county
was established in 1701. Wherefore we find that, in 1724, when
the Bishop of London sent his circular to the clergy, an answer
was returned from the Rev. Owen Jones, minister of St. Mary's
parish, Essex. He had then been twenty years in the parish.
The parish was about twenty miles long, extending from below
Port Royal up toward Fredericksburg, I suppose, as it now does.
There were one hundred and fifty families, one hundred and fifty
attendants at church, one hundred communicants; servants neglected,
and particular means for their instruction discouraged; no
public school, no parish library.

In the year 1754 one of the three John Brunskills was the
minister. In 1758 the Rev. Musgrave Dawson was there. In
the years 1773-74 and 1776 the Rev. Abner Waugh was minister.
In the years 1785 and 1786, after our Conventions commenced,
we find Mr. Robert Gilchrist the lay member, but no clergyman,
although Mr. Waugh was still the minister of the parish. Nor
does he appear until the year 1792, and never again after that.
It will be seen that, in the close of life, he was for a short time
minister of the church in Fredericksburg.

A friend has furnished me the following tradition concerning
some of the old churches in Caroline county: whether all of them
were in St. Mary's parish is doubtful:—

"There was one which stood on the south side of Maricopie or Massacopie
Creek, in the eastern part of the county, and was, I think, called
Joy Creek Church, from a small rivulet close by. Every vestige of it had
disappeared before my father's recollection, so that it must have been one
of the most ancient of our churches. Another stood near the southwestern


410

Page 410
border of the county, near Reedy Creek, and was called Reedy
Creek Church. Within my recollection the walls and roof were entire.
About thirty years ago the roof fell in, and immediately the bricks were
carried away by the neighbours. A third was near the Bowling Green,
about a mile northeast of it. This was in good condition about forty or
fifty years ago, and services held in it. The Hoomes, Pendletons, Taylors,
Battailes, Baylors, and other old families, attended it. Another is the Old
Bull Church, or St. Margarett's, with which you are familiar. The last is
the present Rappahannock Academy, about two miles from the river and
four miles above Port Royal. In my boyhood," says my informant, "an
amusing story was told of two men returning one night from muster with
too much of what is called Dutch courage in them,—that is, intoxicated.
The old church was said to be haunted of the devil, and they determined
to drive him out. It was very dark, and one of them planted himself at
one door, or where a door had been, while the other entered at the other
end with a pole, with which he began to beat about, when something
started up and ran to the door where the other man stood with his legs
stretched out. It proved to be an ox, which was in the habit of sheltering
there, and which, lowering his head as he approached the man, took him
on his neck and bore him some distance away."

I have also received a letter from a clerical brother who has
long ministered in this region, and from which I make a few
extracts:—

"The Mount Church, before it was converted into an academy, was one
of the first country-churches in the State. It was in the form of a cross,
with galleries on three of the wings, in one of which was the largest and
finest-toned organ in Virginia. This organ was sold, under an Act of the
Legislature, and the proceeds applied to the purchase of a library for the
use of the Rappahannock Academy. It is now in a Roman Catholic
church in Georgetown. The aisles were paved with square slabs of sandstone.
The enclosure around the church was used as a burial-ground, and,
though now a play-ground for the boys, the forms of the graves are apparent.
The glebe was first sold, and the proceeds applied to an academy,
and, the following year, the house itself was appropriated to the same purpose.
John Taylor, of Caroline, John T. Woodward, Lawrence Battaile,
Hay Battaile, and Reuben Turner, were the trustees. I have been
unable," says my correspondent, "to ascertain the age of Mount Church.
It must have been built at a period long anterior to the Revolution. The
first minister of the parish was the Rev. Mr. Boucher. All that I can
gather concerning him is, that he lived and taught school in Port Royal.
The only reminiscence of his acts is a red sandstone monument, which he
had erected near the village to the memory of one of his pupils, who died
in 1763, aged nine years, on which there is this epitaph:—

`Beneath this humble stone a youth doth lie
Almost too good to live, too young to die:
Count his few years, how short the scanty span!
But count his virtues, and he died a man.' "

This may be good poetry, but in the second line there is un
sound theology. I suppose we must make a liberal allowance for


411

Page 411
the poetica licentia. Mr. Boucher was also, at one time, the
minister of Hanover parish, in King George, on the other side of
the river. I have often heard my old friend, Mr. Addison, of
Maryland, speak of him. He was connected with the Addisons
and the Carrs, of Maryland, but in what way I know not. The
name of Boucher is still in use among the Carrs of Virginia.
The following account of him I take from the third volume of
that interesting, laborious, and impartial work of the Rev. Mr.
Anderson on the Colonial Churches:—

"I allude to Jonathan Boucher, who was born in Cumberland, in 1738,
and brought up at Wigton Grammar-School. He went to Virginia, at
the age of sixteen, and was nominated by the vestry of Hanover parish,
in the county of King George, to its rectory before he was in Orders. He
returned to England for ordination, and, after he had crossed the Atlantic
a second time, entered upon the duties of that parish upon the banks of the
Rappahannock. He removed, soon afterward, to St. Mary's parish, in
Caroline county, upon the same river, where he enjoyed the fullest confidence
and love of his people. In the second of two sermons preached by
him, upon the question of the American Episcopate, in that parish, and in
the year 1771, in which it had been so strongly advocated, he expresses
his assurance that he would be listened to with candour by his parishioners,
seeing that he had lived among them more than seven years, as their minister,
in such harmony as to have had no disagreement with any man, even
for a day. The terms of this testimony, and the circumstances under
which it was delivered, leave no room to doubt its truthfulness. He was
accounted one of the best preachers of his time, and the vigorous and lucid
reasoning of his published discourses fully sustains the justice of that reputation.
From St. Mary's parish Mr. Boucher went to Maryland, where he
was appointed by Sir Robert Eden, its Governor, to the rectory of St.
Anne's, in Annapolis, the capital of that Province, and afterward of Queen
Anne's, in Prince George county. From the latter parish he was ejected
at the Revolution.

"His `Discourses'—thirteen in number, preached between the years
1763 and 1775—were published by him when he was vicar of Epsom,
in Surrey, in 1795, fifteen years after the formal recognition by England
of the Independence of the United States. They contain, with an historical
preface, his views of the causes and consequences of the American
Revolution, and are dedicated to General Washington, not because of any
concord of political sentiment between him and the writer, for in this
respect they had been and still were wide as the poles asunder, but to
express the hope of Mr. Boucher that the offering which he thus made of
renewed respect and affection for that great man might be received and
regarded as giving some promise of that perfect reconciliation between
these two countries which it was the sincere aim of his publication to
promote. While the language of this `Dedication' attests the candour
and generosity of Boucher's character, still, his courage and hatred of every
thing that savoured of republicanism are displayed not less clearly throughout
the whole body of his work. The only faults which, in the course of
his `Historical Preface,' he can detect on the part of England, before and
during the war which had deprived her of thirteen Colonies, was the


412

Page 412
feebleness of her ministers at home and of her generals abroad. The
positive injustice of many of her acts seems never present to his mind.
The arguments of Burke and Chatham, exposing that injustice, weigh
with him as nothing."

The foregoing extract from Mr. Anderson's work shows the
author to be a man of candour and a lover of America, though a
good English Churchman too. I hope his work will be patronized
in this country.

To these notices of the Rev. Mr. Boucher I add something more
from my clerical correspondent in Caroline:—

"The successor of Mr. Boucher was the Rev. Abner Waugh. He was
the last minister of Mount Church. He was not engaged in the active
duties of the ministry for many of the latter years of his life. Mr. Waugh
was chaplain to the Convention which ratified the Federal Constitution.

"The chief families in this parish," he adds, (there being no list
of vestrymen,) "were the Millers, Foxes, Grays, Beverleys, Taliaferos,
Woodfords, Battailes, Fitzhughs, Corbins, &c. A member of one of the
families was buried, according to her own directions, beneath the pavement
of the aisle of that wing of the church which was occupied by the
poor. She directed this to be done as an act of self-abasement for the
pride she had manifested and the contempt she had exhibited toward the
common people during her life, alleging that she wished them to trample
upon her when she was dead."

In relation to Old Mount Church, where this lady was interred,
we conclude with an extract from our report to the Convention
of 1838:—

"The services of this place [Grace Church, Caroline] being over, we
proceeded to Port Royal. On our way to that place, and only a few miles
above it, we passed by a large brick building, once a temple of the living
God, where our forefathers used to worship, now, by an act of the Legislature,
converted into a seminary of learning. This house, like some others
of those built in ancient times, seems destined to outlive generations of
those more modern ones, which, hastily and slightly constructed, soon sink
upon their own knees and fall into ruins. It stands on an elevated and
beautiful hill, overlooking the river and country around, and is rendered
very interesting by a number of large and venerable trees not far distant.
It was deserted as a place of worship, some time before its conversion into
a seminary. The melodious organ that once filled the house with its enrapturing
notes (said to have been the first ever imported into Virginia,
and of great price) has long since been sold, and is now in a Roman
Catholic chapel in the District of Columbia, (either in Washington or
Georgetown.) During the interval of its use as a church, and its application
to other objects, if common fame is to be credited, (and we fear it deserves
it but too well,) this sacred house was desecrated to most unhallowed
purposes. The drunken feast has been spread where the holy Supper of our


413

Page 413
Lord was wont to be received, and the footsteps of the dance have sported
over that floor where the knees of humble worshippers once bent before
the Lord."

ST. MARGARETT'S, CAROLINE COUNTY.

This parish, as we have seen, was established soon after the
year 1727.

In the years 1754 and 1758, the Rev. John Brunskill—one of
three ministers of the same name—was in charge of St. Margarett's.
By another document in my possession, I find that he was
in this county before the year 1750. From 1758 to 1773 we
have no means of ascertaining who ministered in this parish.
From 1773 to 1787, the Rev. Archibald Dick, who was ordained
in 1762, was the minister of St. Margarett's. After the disappearance
of Mr. Dick from the journals in 1787, we know of no other
regular minister in St. Margarett's until the year 1829, when the
Rev. Caleb Good represents this parish,—as also in 1830. His
zealous labours contributed not a little to revive the hopes of the
Episcopalians in that parish. Services were from time to time
afforded to Bull Church, or St. Margarett's, by neighbouring
ministers; and after some time a church was built at the Bowling
Green, which, whether in St. Margarett's or St. Mary's parish, was
connected with the congregation in St. Margarett's. In 1833, the
Rev. Mr. Friend became the minister of St. Margarett's, and continued
so for some years, until his removal to St. Mary's of the
same county. Since the removal of Mr. Friend, St. Margarett's
has been connected with Berkeley parish in Spottsylvania county,
first and for some years under the charge of the Rev. Mr. Ward,
until his removal to Westmoreland, and then of the Rev. Dabney
Wharton, its present minister. We have no old vestry-books from
which to learn who were the early friends of the Church in this
region. We can only mention the names of a few families known
to ourself,—the Temples, Tompkinses, Swans, Hallidays, Rawlings,
Minors, Hills, Harts, Keans, Leavills, Phillipses, Dickensons, Harrises,
Nelsons, Fontanes,—as now belonging to this part of Caroline
and Spottsylvania.

PARISHES OF DRYSDALE AND ST. ASAPH, IN CAROLINE COUNTY.

These parishes have long since been deserted of Episcopalians,
and can soon be disposed of. That of Drysdale was, it is supposed,
cut off from St. Mary's in 1713. St. Asaph was taken
from Drysdale, which lay partly in Caroline and partly in King


414

Page 414
William, in the year 1779. Drysdale parish, thus reduced, lay
alongside of Essex and St. Asaph, toward Hanover county.

In the years 1754 and 1758, we find the Rev. Robert Innes
minister of Drysdale parish. In the year 1774, the Rev. Andrew
Moreton. In the year 1776, the Rev. Samuel Shield. In the
years 1785 and 1787 and 1789, the Rev. Jesse Carter represents
the parish in the Convention, since which time we hear nothing of
the parish. Mr. William Lyne appears during this time to have
been a faithful lay delegate.

St. Asaph parish, as we have seen, was established in 1779,
during the war of the Revolution. We can only look for any account
of this parish, in the absence of a vestry-book, to the journals
of our Conventions, which began in 1785, after the close of
the war. In the year 1785, we find it represented by the Rev.
Samuel Shield and Mr. John Page, Jr. In the year 1786, by the
Rev. James Taylor and Mr. John Page. In the year 1787, by the
Rev. James Taylor and Mr. John Baylor. In the year 1796, by
the Rev. George Spirrin and Mr. John Woolfolk. St. Asaph only
appears these four times on our journals.

Within the bounds of this parish after the separation, and in
Drysdale before that time, lived Mr. Edmund Pendleton, President
of the Court of Appeals, of whom we have previously spoken as a sincere
Christian and steady friend of the Church. Were any vestry-books
of Caroline county to be found, there can be no doubt his name
would be there. He was the clerk of the vestry, he himself informs
us, when a mere boy. Should it be asked why his name never appears
on our journals of Convention with those of Governors Wood
and Page, and the Nelsons and Carys, and other patriots of the
Revolution, it would be sufficient to conjecture that his heavy duties
as judge prevented; but it is made certain by the following letter
to Richard Henry Lee, which has been sent me by a friend:—

Extract of a Letter from Edmund Pendleton to Richard Henry Lee,
June
13, 1785.

"You have heard of a Convention of the clergy and laity of our Episcopal
Church last month. I was not able to attend it, but was pleased to
learn that the members were truly respectable, and their proceedings wise
and temperate. Their journal is not yet printed, but I am told it contains
rules for the government of the clergy, and the appointment of
deputies to represent us in a Federal Convention to be held in Philadelphia
in September next, to whom it is referred to revise and reform our
Liturgy. Mr. Page, of Rosewell, and your brother, of Greenspring, [Mr.


415

Page 415
William Lee,] are the lay deputies, and the Revs. Mr. Griffith and
McCrosky the clerical. What is become of Bishop Seabury, and how is
he received in Connecticut? One would not have expected that the first
American Bishop had come to New England."

I am happy also to be able to furnish another document from the
pen of Judge Pendleton, toward the close of his life, on a subject
of as deep interest at the present as at that time. It is a petition, in
his own well-known handwriting, and with his own name at the head
of it, from the inhabitants of Caroline, addressed to the Legislature,
praying it to take into consideration the evils of treating the voters
at annual elections with intoxicating drink. The names of the
signers are those of the most respectable citizens of Caroline
county. The committee to whom it was referred in the House
were also the most eminent men of Virginia, viz.:—Messrs. Venable,
Mathews, Ellzey, Jennings, Hill, Shield, and John Taylor.

The petition is as follows:—

"To the Honourable the Legislature of the State of Virginia, the
subscribers, inhabitants of the county of Caroline, beg leave to represent,
that, beholding with concern the growth of a species of corruption at elections,
commonly called treating, as having a tendency to destroy national
principles and individual morals, they presume to submit the following
considerations to legislative deliberation:—1st. Whether the best mode of
enabling electors to judge of a candidate's qualifications is to deprive them
of their senses. 2d. Whether corrupting and being corrupted is calculated
to produce sentiments of confidence between the people and their
representatives. 3d. Whether true patriotism can exist on any other foundation
than such confidence and esteem. 4th. Whether, in order to bring
merit into preference, success should depend on expense. 5th. Whether,
if a political body should appear, where wealth grew out of public spoils,
until it was beyond competition, a check upon its pernicious influence will
be erected by a consignment of legislation to riches. 6th. Whether
liberty will be considered inestimable by those who are in the habit of
selling it for a bottle of rum. 7th. Whether the dispensation of corruption
is likely to steel the mind of the elected against its introduction, in
the exercise of several elective functions confided to the representatives
of the people. 8th. Whether the consequences experienced from a septennial
repetition (as in England) of the practice we deprecate are sufficient
to justify it as an annual custom, and whether virtue or vice is the
safest basis for a republican government.

"If the Legislature shall view this mischief in the light we see it,
we refer it to their wisdom as calling loudly for an effectual legislative
remedy; and we pledge ourselves to support an energetic law by withholding
our suffrages from all who shall infringe it. Edmund Pendleton,
James Taylor, William Jones, Edmund Pendleton, Jr., Anthony
Thornton, Charles Todd, Anthony New, Daniel Coleman, Henry Chiles,
John Baylor, Mungo Roy, P. Woolfolk, John Minor, Jr., John Pendleton,
Jr., George Gray, Norborne Taliafero, William Stewart, Thomas Kidd,


416

Page 416
David Dickerson, Philip Slaughter, John Walden, Robert Tompkins,
Edmund Chapman, George Terrill, R. R. Tyler, J. Woolfolk, Thomas
Harris."

Let us consider the above petition, and think upon its signers for
a moment. If such a paper were now drawn up and signed by a
number of persons, no matter how conscientiously, there are those
who would regard it either as fanatical or as an assault on individual
rights and liberty, and say, We will sign no such paper and come
under no such pledge, but will vote for whomsoever we please, even
though they or their friends liberally treat with the intoxicating
draught. But how encouraging and strengthening it is to know
that old Edmund Pendleton and many of the best men of Caroline
county and Virginia, who had just come out of the war of the
Revolution, and certainly had some just views of true liberty, did
thus denounce an approaching evil, and call upon the Legislature
to enact rigid laws against it, promising to sustain the same by
their voices on the day of election! There is something of a moral
grandeur about this movement of the venerable Pendleton and of
his most respectable countymen which is worthy of admiration
and imitation. Were he now living, we might surely calculate on
his support of any wise and practical measure for the prevention
not only of the one mentioned in the memorial, but of the numerous
and most destructive evils of intoxicating drinks.

The following extract from the letter of a friend furnishes some
additional information concerning St. Margarett's parish:—

"The Rev. Mr. Dick left one son bearing his name, who lived and died
in this county; also two daughters,—one who married Mr. Vivian Minor,
and who lived to a good old age, and retained to the time of her death a
warm attachment to the Episcopal Church, travelling the distance of twelve
miles to St. Margarett's, whenever its pulpit was filled, generally reaching
it before those in the immediate neighbourhood,—and this after she was
seventy years old. The other daughter married Mr. Robert Hart, of
Spottsylvania, and also with her descendants continued true to the Church
of her fathers. Mr. Boggs preached in this church for thirty years. In
the year 1825, the Female Missionary Society of Fredericksburg sent Mr.
John McGuire to preach for us, hoping to build up our waste places. By
the blessing of God on this effort, a considerable interest was manifested
by the few remaining members and others, and his preaching was attended
by crowds, generally. The church was then in a very dilapidated condition,
but was soon after repaired. After Mr. McGuire located himself in
Essex, the vestry called the Rev. Leonard H. Johns, who ministered to
them for two years. It was during this time that more members were
added to the Church than at any other; but most of them were, I believe,


417

Page 417
the seals of Mr. McGuire's ministry, though Mr. Johns's was very
acceptable, and much beloved by all. Mr. Good succeeded Mr. Johns
early in the year 1829, and remained until 1831, when he was compelled
by ill health to leave the parish, much to the regret of all who knew him.
The Rev. Mr. Cooke officiated frequently for us while we were without a
minister. In July, 1832, Mr. Friend became our pastor: he continued
to preach till June, 1835, in which time the St. Margarett's Church underwent
considerable repairs and the church at the Bowling Green was
built. Mr. Ward followed Mr. Friend and remained till 1840, when the
Rev. St. M. Fackler took his place, continuing with us two years. The
Rev. D. M. Wharton took charge of this and the churches in Spottsylvania
in the fall of 1843."

The following letter from the Rev. H. M. Denison, formerly of
Virginia, deserves a place in the article on Drysdale parish:—

"My Dear Bishop:

I have read with deep interest your account of
many of the old churches and families of Virginia. Having just risen
from the perusal of that on York-Hampton parish, it seems to me that you
have not given all the credit it deserves to the character of the Rev.
Samuel Shield.

"He was a clergyman of high character, and was a competitor with
Bishop Madison for the Episcopate. He had at one time charge of Drysdale
parish, (now unrepresented in Convention,) lying in Caroline and the
adjoining counties. He was great-uncle, I think, to the Rev. Charles
Shield, grandfather of Dr. Samuel Shield, of Hampton, a worthy son of
our Church, grandfather to Mrs. Colonel McCandlish, of W—, and
grandfather to the wife of the Rev. Edmund Murdaugh; so that the
succession, both Christian and ministerial, is kept up in his family. But
I take up my pen to mention to you the following incident, which will
not be uninteresting to you even if it be without the scope of your published
reminiscences.

"After the massacre by the British and Indians of a large portion of
the inhabitants of the lovely Valley of Wyoming in Pennsylvania, the parishioners
of Drysdale, through their rector, Mr. Shield, as almoner, sent
to the destitute and helpless women and children of the Valley the handsome
sum (for those days) of one hundred and eighty dollars to relieve
their necessities. The transaction is thus recorded in the History of
Wyoming, by the Hon. Charles Miner:—

"At a town-meeting held in Wyoming on the 20th of April, 1780, it
was—

" `Voted, That whereas the parish of Dresden, [for Drysdale,] in the State
of Virginia, have contributed and sent one hundred and eighty dollars for
the support of the distressed inhabitants of this town, [Wilkesbarre,] that
the Selectmen be directed to distribute said money to those they shall judge
the most necessitated, and report to the town at some future meeting.

" `Voted, That Colonel Nathan Denison return the thanks of this town
to the parish of Dresden in the State of Virginia, for their charitable disposition
in presenting the distressed inhabitants of this town with one
hundred and eighty dollars.'


418

Page 418

"Some five or six years ago I was at Dr. Samuel Shield's, in Hampton,
and the doctor told me he had discovered my name among his grand
father's papers; and upon examination I found the original letter of
thanks written by my grandfather, Colonel Denison, to his grandfather, the
Rev. Mr. Shield. It was threescore and ten years of age, but had evidently
been preserved with much care; and I sent it at once to Mr. Miner,
the historian. Very sincerely, but unworthily, your son in the Gospel.

"H. M. Denison."

419

Page 419

ARTICLE XXXVIII.

Parishes in Hanover County.—No. 1. St. Paul's and St. Martin's.

This was separated from New Kent county in the year 1720, and
the parish called St. Paul's. Its first minister was the Rev. Zachariah
Brooke, who was still vicar of Hawkston and Newton in England,
leaving a curate there. In 1724 he informs the Bishop of
London that his parish is sixty miles in length and twelve in width,
(before Louisa county was cut off;) that there were twelve hundred
families in it; two churches and two chapels, at the former of which
he preached on the Sabbaths, and at the latter during the days of
the week; that there were about one hundred communicants at the
churches,—at each church, I suppose, though it is not clear; that
the glebe and glebe-house were only worth the casks,—that is, the
hogsheads in which the tobacco was put up, and which he received
in lieu of them. Of the previous ministers we shall speak when
treating of the parish of New Kent, from which it was divided in
1720. How long Mr. Brooke continued, I cannot ascertain. In
the year 1738, fourteen years later, I find the following letter from
the Rev. Charles Bridges, whose spirit breathes something of that
which animates the present minister of our Mother-Church bearing
the same name. It is addressed to the Bishop of London:—

"My good Bishop:—The little good I find I am capable of doing,
without your particular countenance, in first subscribing and getting subscriptions
to that your excellent design of instructing the negroes here,
according to the method proposed, and pressing the Commissary to follow
you, and solicit the Governor and his interest,—I say, all that can be done
in this affair without your charitable efforts will, I fear, to my great concern,
come to nothing. The Commissary [Mr. Blair] and I grow in years,
and the world hangs heavy upon us. I am roused sometimes and then
call upon him, and then he is asleep, perhaps, and answers nothing, and I
am ready to sleep too. Would to God your powerful voice would sound
in our ears, to get up and be doing a little more good while there is time
and opportunity, which would make us thankful to your goodness for so
great a blessing, and especially to me, your obedient and most dutiful
servant,

Charles Bridges."

From this it would seem that he was much interested in the welfare
of the servants, and doubtless made efforts in their behalf, as


420

Page 420
others of the clergy (from the reports to the Bishop of London
in 1724) appear to have done, though, it is to be feared, feebly
and with but little success. Many of the coloured children were
baptized, and some of them taught the catechism. How long
Mr. Bridges continued the minister in St. Paul's parish, Hanover,
I cannot say, or who was the minister in the other parish,—St.
Martin's,—for another had, in the year 1726, been cut off from
it by that name; but in the year 1754 we find that the Rev.
Patrick Henry was the minister of St. Paul's, and the Rev. Robert
Barrett of St. Martin's. They continued such until the year 1776.
Indeed, the name of Robert Barrett appears as the minister of St.
Martin's in the year 1785. How long Mr. Henry continued after
1776 does not appear. In the year 1789 the Rev. Peter Nelson,
of the same name, though of a different family, from those who
formed a part of his congregation, was the minister of St. Martin's,
and the Rev. Mr. Talley was minister of St. Paul's. Mr. Nelson,
according to the journal, was minister in 1799, and some time
after that united himself to the Baptist Church. The Rev. Mr.
Talley became a Universalist, and died the death of the drunkard.
The Rev. Mr. Boggs, of Spottsylvania, occasionally officiated in
St. Martin's parish and at the Fork Church after this for some
years; but so low was the condition of the Church, and so few disposed
to respond, that he used to read only such parts as needed
no response, and not all of them. Such was the case in other
parishes also. The Rev. Mr. Hopkins, of Goochland, during a part
of the same destitute period preached in Hollowing Creek Church,
and perhaps Allen's Creek Church. With the commencement of
the resuscitation of the Church in 1812, the hopes of the Episcopalians
in Hanover began to revive. In 1815 the Rev. John
Philips became their pastor. He was an Englishman of the Wesleyan
school, and was ordained for our Church by Bishop Moore.
There were some things so peculiar in the person and character of
Mr. Philips, that they deserve notice. His person was the most
diminutive I ever saw or heard of in the pulpit, but it was remarkable
for its quickness and energy of action. He required to be
elevated on a high block or platform to be seen at all in the pulpit.
When praying in private houses he always knelt in the chair, not
by it. He was very animated in preaching, putting his soul and
voice into his extempore sermons. He was ultra Arminian in doctrine,
and could not tolerate Calvinists. Had he lived in the days
of Calvin, or even later, and possessed the power, he would have
served him as he (Calvin) did Servetus. As it was, he could not

421

Page 421
refrain from denouncing such in the most violent and offensive terms,
in private and public, much to the injury of his usefulness and to the
grief of his friends. But he was a faithful and conscientious man,
and urged to repentance and faith and the new spiritual birth in
the most earnest and effectual manner, on the Sabbath and from
house to house. Religion was with him the fixed idea,—the one
thing needful. He could talk of nothing else, for he knew nothing
else, being a child in all other things. Wherever he was, this was
the only theme. Nobody expected any thing else. He never left
a house, though only calling for a few moments, without what he
called a word of prayer. On his visits to Richmond, no matter
into what house he entered, (and he entered many of the gay and
fashionable, as well as of the serious,) he would say at parting, "Let
us have a word of prayer;" and then, kneeling in a chair, would offer
up a most fervent and special prayer for the members of the same.
Of course, there were those who amused themselves at this novel
mode of proceeding, but there were those who felt it in their hearts,
and if the old man caused smiles in some, he drew tears and sighs
from others. The old and the young in Hanover felt the power
of his ministry. They who embraced religion as presented by him
embraced it as the power of God to the salvation of the soul. His
converts were genuine, faithful, true-hearted ones. They saw his
defects, but felt and imitated his virtues. They saw that there was
such a thing as being entirely taken up with the service of God.
During the few years he spent in the parish an entire change took
place there, the effects of which are felt to this day. The manner
of his death, which took place after his removal to Lunenburg, was
as remarkable as that of his life. While riding in a plain conveyance
with Mrs. Philips, who always drove him about, as she did
many other things for him, he expired without her knowledge,
until, stopping at a tavern to water the horse which carried them,
it was discovered that he was sitting by her side a lifeless corpse.
Although it would be great folly for all ministers to copy after
the example of Mr. Philips in all things, yet it would be well for
us all to be ever seeking after his entire devotedness of spirit to
the work of our calling. It is this spirit which insures the favour
both of God and man, and makes those of humblest talents able
ministers of the New Testament, not of the letter, but of the spirit.
Mr. Philips was succeeded by the Rev. Mr. Wydown, who continued
two or three years, and was followed by the Rev. Mr. Barns,
who, after labouring two years, was obliged to desist from ill health.
To him succeeded the Rev. Mr. Cook, who was the minister from

422

Page 422
1825 to 1834. The next was the Rev. Mr. Bowers, whose ministry,
commencing soon after the resignation of Mr. Cook, continued
until a few years since. The present minister is the Rev. Horace
Stringfellow. There being no remnant left of the old vestry-book
of this parish, I am unable to furnish a list of those who in its
earlier days took the most active part in its concerns, and whose
families composed its congregations. I can only speak of some few
from my own recollection and knowledge. In my first visits to the
parish, the aged forms of old Captains Shephard and Price presented
themselves as the last of a race of old lovers of our communion.
Their memory is held in high esteem, and many of their
descendants honour them by adhering to the Church of their ancestors.
Dr. Carter Berkeley, whose name may be so often seen on
the Convention journals of the last and present century, and also
on those of our General Convention, is too well remembered to be
more than mentioned. Of his mother, of Airwell, a descendant of
the Carters, inheriting all their devotion to the Church, one circumstance
is too interesting to be omitted. Airwell, the family
seat of the Berkeleys, was the place where the communion-plate
was kept. After the death of Mr. Berkeley, and death or resignation
of the minister, by which, under the law, the glebes were
forfeited, the overseers of the poor wished to do what was done in
some other parishes,—viz.: bring the sacred vessels under the operation
of that act, but which in other parishes was scorned to be
done. Those in Hanover, however, well knowing not only the
pious attachment of Mrs. Berkeley to every thing belonging to the
Church, but that she was a lady of dignity, firmness, and authority,
instead of appearing in person to demand the plate, sent an embassy
to her for the purpose, through whom she returned this answer:—"Tell
the gentlemen to come and take them." They never
came, and the vessels are now in use on every communion-day, in
St. Martin's parish, Hanover. I cannot forbear remarking that
there is no part of the conduct of the opponents of the Episcopal
Church which appears so unamiable and unjustifiable as that in
regard to the Church plate. It was almost always a private donation,
as the vestry-books and the inscriptions show, and even if it
had not been, the framers and supporters of the law would have
felt themselves insulted, if the insinuation had been made at the
time of its passage that such an application of it would be made.
But numerous instances have occurred in which such application
has been made, while too many have been the cases where individuals
have seized upon them and made way with them for their

423

Page 423
private benefit. Returning from this digression, I would add to
the list of true friends of religion and our Church the families of
the Fontaines, descendants of the good old Huguenot of whom I
have yet to speak; of the Nelsons, connected with the minister of
whom I have already spoken, but who did not follow his example;
of the Morrises, the Wickams, Taylors, Winstons, Pollards, Robinsons,
Pages, Prices, Shepherds, and others.

I must also add a few words concerning the widow of General
Nelson. The old lady (who was blind for the last seventeen years
of her life, and who lived a much longer period than that in Hanover)
was an example of the sweetest piety. We have said on a
former occasion that we often administered the Holy Communion to
her and numbers of her descendants in her room, and on one occasion
to more than forty, in that and the passage adjoining, nearly
all of whom were her children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren.
I omitted to mention one constant recipient of the sacrament,—her
old and venerable servant, the only property she had
in the world, for the house in which she lived, humble as it was,
was not her own, and the small funds she annually received were
the interest of a few thousand dollars which at her death belonged
to some kind creditors of General Nelson, who allowed her the use
of it during life. This servant was a member of the Baptist Church,
who thought the rule which forbade intercommunion with others
was more honoured in the breach than in the observance. Having
been taught to read, and reading well, she was a great comfort to
her mistress, and read to her all the best books on religious subjects
as they appeared, during many of the last years of her life. At
her death, she bequeathed to this servant all she had to bequeath,—
her freedom,—well knowing that the whole family would see that
freedom should not become poverty and want to her. There was,
indeed, one small legacy she had been saving; it was twenty dollars,
which was found carefully enfolded, with a direction that it be
given to her minister. In proof of the rigid economy she had
practised, and the strict principle on which she had practised it, it
is not unworthy of being told, that only a few nights before her
death, and when a number of her children and descendants were
sitting around the fire, and supposing she was asleep, the silence
was broken by her saying, "Don't bury me in my new gown,"
to which one of them playfully replied, "Oh, no; don't be troubled:
we will put all the old rags around you that we can find." Her
remains lie buried at the east end of the Old Fork Church in the


424

Page 424
midst of a number of the family.[114] As my object is to seek to do
good, by referring to excellent traits in the character of some of
the best members of our Church, I must add a few words concerning
one of the sons of this venerable lady. There are still some

425

Page 425
of us remaining who remember old Mr. Francis Nelson as the frequent
delegate from this parish. He married one of the descendants
of the old Mr. Page of whom we have spoken. They had fourteen
children, to whom by good management they contrived to give
respectable educations, though living on a poor Hanover farm.
Unable to afford other conveyance than a farm-wagon with four
mules, his family was punctually at church in that, when the
weather would allow, himself being on horseback. The great secret
of his bringing up such a family on such a farm was, a conscientious
determination to live on its proceeds and never run in
debt. He was himself an example of that self-denial which he required
of his children. If the allowance of tobacco raised on his
own farm and set apart for his own use failed before another crop,
and he had not the money to pay for more, he did without it. If
tea or coffee could not be had for the elder members of the family,
as was often the case, milk served in their stead; if there was not
milk enough for the children, water supplied its place. Thus did
he live and die without debt. And, what is more worthy of notice
than any thing else, all of his fourteen children entered into full
communion with the Church of their parents. I conclude this part
of the article on Hanover by stating that this parish, though small,
has furnished four ministers to the Church,—the Revs. W. N. Pendleton,
Washington Nelson, Robert Nelson, and Farley Berkeley.
It ought to have furnished many more, but I could wish they had
all done as well. In my next, I shall consider what occurred in
this county in relation to the Rev. Samuel Davies, and the establishment
of the Presbyterian Church in the same, with a review
of what is ascribed to the Episcopal Church in the way of intolerance.

 
[114]

In connection with old Mrs. Nelson, the following circumstance deserves to be
mentioned, not more to show the patriotic spirit which animated the breasts of
young and old at the breaking out of the war, but chiefly to illustrate the parental
authority and filial submission which characterized the days of our forefathers.
When the British were about landing on James River, and Yorktown was peculiarly
exposed, General Nelson, then in arms against them, was obliged to send Mrs. Nelson,
with an infant three weeks old, to the upper country. When near Williamsburg
she met a company of youths, some of them mere boys, armed with their guns,
and marching down to fire at the enemy. On meeting the well-known old English
coach, they halted and presented arms to Mrs. Nelson, wishing to show her all
honour. She received their salutation very courteously, but, perceiving among them
two of her own sons, mere boys at the preparatory school, she directed the coachman
to stop, and, opening the door, requested them to enter the carriage. Mortifying
as it must have been to them, they were too much accustomed to obey to think
of refusing. Taking them with her, she sent them to Philadelphia to complete their
education, placing them under the care of Mr. Rittenhouse. One of these youths,
Mr. Thomas Nelson, was afterward private secretary to General Washington while
President, and a great favourite with him and Mrs. Washington. This is only one
of a thousand instances which might be adduced to prove that, however we may in
in some respects have improved on the manners and habits of our ancestors, we
certainly have not in the prompt submission to the will of parents and authority of
teachers. The Revolution, with all its blessings, has nevertheless been attended
with one evil,—that of insubordination to those in authority, whether parents or
others. I shall have occasion to speak of one of the old clergy, who, though importuned
to resume the office of teacher after the establishment of our independence,
could not be prevailed on to undertake it, saying that it was hard enough to govern
boys before, but as for these little democrats he would have nothing to do with
them. So important do I deem this subject, that, at the risk of seeming to be very
egotistical, as I must have often done already, I add the following. Soon after my
father's death my mother sent me to Princeton College. While there, the great rebellion
took place, in which one hundred and fifty out of two hundred took part,
and for which they were all sent home. Being among the dismissed, and returning
home and unable to justify the act, my mother, who was of the old Virginia school,
hesitated not to send me back again, with acknowledgment of error and promise of
future good behaviour. Nor did I hesitate to obey, for the habit of submission to
her authority had been established from my earliest years. There were fifty other
sons at that time whose parents or guardians adopted the same course. I fear that
it would be difficult now to find many who would follow their example, even in relation
to the misconduct of boys at a high-school, so independent have our sons
become. I am not given to croaking, or to complaining that "the former days were
better than these," as I believe the contrary to be true; but in this respect I believe
there is a deterioration. It is due to those who were concerned in the above-mentioned
rebellion, to say that, with a few exceptions, there probably never was a collegiate
outbreak in which there was less guilt than in this, by reason of misunderstanding
and the artful imposition of some ringleaders. Still, it was hard to retract
and ask pardon.


426

Page 426

ARTICLE XXXIX.

Parishes in Hanover.—No. 2.

The history of the treatment of other denominations of Christians
by the Government and Church of Virginia deserves a
special consideration; and I know not where, in the progress of
my sketches, it can be more properly examined than in connection
with the history of this parish. That the Episcopalians of Virginia
should, from the first, have shared in the spirit of the age,
and been sometimes guilty of such an exclusive course as marked
the Church of England, of Scotland, and of New England, and
which all in this age of toleration unite in condemning, was to be
expected; but it is not fair that she should be loaded with a
heavier reproach than was merited. From a pretty extensive—
and, we think, impartial—examination of the subject, we are
firmly persuaded that her misconduct in this respect has been
greatly exaggerated, and is much misunderstood to this day, even
by some of her most attached friends. The press, the pulpit, and
the fireside have been, for more than a century, accustomed to
retail instances of imprisonment, and fines, and restraints, colouring
and magnifying them according to the temperament of the
speaker, until many have been impressed with the belief that the
bloody persecutions of Nero, in the first ages, were not more
wicked. I remember from early boyhood to have heard, from the
pulpit and elsewhere, of the dreadful persecution of a worthy old
Dissenting minister, and for a long time his name was always
associated in my mind with stripes, imprisonment, and the shutting
up his lips from preaching the Gospel of Christ. During the last
summer I happened at the court-house, where whatever proceedings
took place must have been recorded; and I asked to see the records
of the same, when one of the clerks, being a descendant of the old
martyr, with a smile told me that the persecution was not so cruel
as some had supposed. On examination of the record, it appeared
that, having violated the Act of Toleration and preached in various
places of the parish without taking out a license for the same, he
had been presented for it, summoned before the court, and made
to give a small security for the observance of the law in the


427

Page 427
future. All that the law required was, to ask for a license to
preach in such and such places, and it was freely given. I have,
during my life, been accustomed to hear of the persecutions of the
harmless Quakers in Virginia and elsewhere, and have ever thought
that it must have been proof of a most uncharitable spirit, not to
make the largest allowance for their scruples, and not only permit
them without molestation to worship God according to their own
consciences, but even to have some immunities as citizens on the
same account. But recent investigations have convinced me that
great injustice has been done to our forefathers in the imputation
cast upon them for their treatment of the first of this sect who came
into America. I have been, by the kindness of a friend, furnished
with extracts from the records of the Court of Accomac,—going
back to the year 1632, the oldest documents of the kind in Virginia,—from
which I find that, between 1650 and 1660, some
persons (called Quakers) appeared in that part of Virginia, and,
after a time, having made a few converts, built a log-church,—only
ten feet square, so small was their number. They were charged
not only with vilifying the ministers and disobeying the laws, but
with blaspheming God. Witnesses, in open court, proved their
denial that Christ was ever seen in the flesh, that he had any
humanity about him, that several of them called God "a foolish
old man," and other names. On account of these things they
were ordered to be sent over the bay to the Governor and Council.
What was done to them does not appear. How entirely does this
change the aspect of the case! It seems they were sent over for
trial, not for dissenting from the Church of England, but because
they were disobedient to law, wicked men, and blasphemers.
Were this the only testimony against them, we might hope some
mistake had occurred; but, both before and after this, we find the
Acts of Assembly and other documents speaking of some belonging
to this sect as lawless persons, disturbers of the peace, atheists,
and blasphemers. Even at a time when other denominations—as
the Huguenots and German Lutherans—were not only tolerated but
patronized, these men were put upon the same footing with Papists.
In the year 1711, Governor Spottswood, in a letter to the Lord-Commissioner,
speaks of them as much embarrassing the Government,
and "broaching doctrines so monstrous as their brethren in
England never owned, and which cannot be suffered in any government.
They have not only," he says, "refused to work themselves,
or suffer any of their servants to be employed in the fortifications,
but affirm that their consciences will not permit them to contribute

428

Page 428
in any manner or way to the defence of the country, even so much
as trusting the Government for provision to support them that do
work, though at the same time they say that, being obliged by
their religion to feed their enemies, if the French should come
here and want provisions, they must, in conscience, supply them."
Governor Spottswood was not the man to be thus dealt with.
Accordingly he says, "I have, therefore, thought it necessary to
put the laws in force against them, since any one that is lazy or
cowardly would make use of the pretence of conscience to excuse
himself from working or fighting when there is greatest need of his
service." As the Quakers became a more respectable body in
Virginia, the treatment of them was changed.

I must make the same remark as to another denomination of
Christians in Virginia, who were generally called—as on their first
appearance in Europe—Anabaptists, and were a very different
people from what they are at this time. In the year 1761, the
Rev. James Maury addressed a printed letter of some length to
the Christians of all denominations in Virginia, calling upon them
to unite in opposing that new sect. There was at that time a
considerable number of Presbyterians in the Valley, and some in
different counties in Eastern Virginia. The Methodists, also, had
their preachers and congregations. The ground on which he calls
upon them to unite against the Anabaptists was, that they denied
all ordination, and claimed that every one had a right to preach,
by virtue of the inspiration of the Spirit, and that they were
going about, without any licence, disturbing the order of neighbourhoods
and churches with wild doctrines. Although Mr.
Maury held in high esteem and preference the Episcopal ordination,
yet he considered that regularly-appointed preachers of the
other Churches, according to some rule, were lawful ministers, of
which the Baptists at that time had none. This fact I mention
to show that the first opposition made to the Baptists was in a
measure caused and strengthened by doctrines and practices
which they themselves would now hold in condemnation, and upon
which they would exercise discipline. That their preachers
were dealt severely with in some instances then, and perhaps at
a later date, is certainly true; but let the truth also be admitted,
that it was the State, not the Church, which did it; that the
civil magistrates, not the clergy, were guilty; that the offences
which were the cause of their being arraigned were offences
against laws made by the civil legislature, though those laws had
reference to religious matters. Let it also be remembered how


429

Page 429
often the clergy themselves condemned and opposed all such interference,
and how, when an appeal was made to the Governor and
Council, the mildest and most tolerant construction was put upon
the law, and the magistrates rebuked. Mr. Sample, in his "History
of the Baptists of Virginia," gives some instances of this.
We shall also see, hereafter, how the Bishop of London, in his
own behalf and that of the whole Church of England, disavows
having any thing to do with the making or executing laws against
Dissenters. The following extract from the address of Mr. Maury
will show of what spirit he was:—

"'Tis true, the author acknowledges himself peculiarly bound by ties
of duty, as he is prompted by inclination, to wish—and, if he can, to
promote—the prosperity of that peculiar Church in which he deems it
his honour and happiness to minister. Yet be just enough to believe
him, when he declares that he would deem it no small addition to
that honour and happiness, could he be an instrument of furthering in
any degree the spiritual comfort and edification of any one honest and
well-disposed person, of whatever persuasion, within the extensive pale
of the Catholic Church at large; that he hath much at heart the eternal
welfare of Dissenters and Conformists; and that, as he thinks he sees
errors in both, and sincerely laments them, so he is disposed cheerfully to
exert his endeavours, weak as they be at best, to rectify whatever may
be blameworthy in either."

Having made these preliminary remarks, I proceed to consider
the case of the Rev. Samuel Davies and the Presbyterians of
Hanover county, Virginia, which has been the subject of much
discussion. I introduce it by the following address of five Episcopal
clergymen, in Hanover and the counties around, to the
House of Burgesses, in the year —:

"ADDRESS TO THE BURGESSES.

"To the Worshipful the Speaker and Gentlemen of the House of
Burgesses.

"The humble petition of some of the Clergy of this Dominion
showeth:—

"That there have been frequently held in the counties of Hanover,
Henrico, Goochland, and some others, for several years past, numerous
Assemblies, especially of the common people, upon a pretended religious
account,—convened sometimes by merely lay enthusiasts, who, in these
meetings, read sundry fanatical books and used long extempore prayers and
discourses,—sometimes by strolling, pretended ministers,—and at present
by one Mr. Samuel Davies, who has fixed himself in Hanover; and, in the
counties of Amelia and Albemarle, by a person who calls himself Mr. Cennick,
well known in England by his intimacy with Mr. Whitefield.

"That though these teachers and their adherents (except the above-mentioned
Cennick) assume the denomination of Presbyterians, yet we


430

Page 430
think they have no just claim to that character, as the ringleaders of the
party were, for their erroneous doctrines and practices, excluded the
Presbyterian Synod of Philadelphia in May, 1741, (as appears by an address
of said Synod to our Governor;) nor have they, since that time,
made any recantation of their errors, nor been readmitted as members of
that Synod,—which Synod, though of many years' standing, never was
reprehended for errors in doctrine, discipline, or government, either by
the established Kirk of Scotland, the Presbyterian Dissenters in England,
or any other body of Presbyterians whatsoever. Whence we beg leave
to conclude, that the distinguishing tenets of these teachers before mentioned
are of dangerous consequence to religion in general, and that the
authors and propagators thereof are deservedly stigmatized with a name
(New-Lights) unknown till of late in this part of the world.

"That your petitioners further humbly conceive that, though these
excluded members of the Synod of Philadelphia were really Presbyterians,
or of any of the other sects tolerated in England, yet there is no law in this
Colony by virtue whereof they can be entitled to a license to preach, far
less to send forth their emissaries, or to travel themselves over several
counties, (to many places without invitation,) to gain proselytes to their
way; `to inveigle ignorant and unwary people with their sophistry;'
and, under pretence of greater degrees of piety among them than can be
found among the members of the Established Church, to seduce them from
their lawful teachers and the religion hitherto professed in this Dominion.

"Your petitioners therefore, confiding in the wisdom and piety of this
worshipful House, the guardians of their religious as well as civil privileges,
and being deeply sensible of the inestimable value of the souls committed to
their charge, of the infectious and pernicious tendency, nature, and consequences
of heresy and schism, and of the sacred and solemn obligations they
are under `To be ready with all faithful diligence to banish and drive away
all erroneous and strange doctrines contrary to God's word, and to use
their utmost care that the flock of Christ may be fed with the sincere milk
of the word only,' humbly pray that the good laws, formerly in that
case made and provided, may be strictly put in execution; particularly
that entitled `ministers to be inducted.' And, as we humbly think this
law still retains its primitive force and vigour, so we pray that it may on
this occasion effectually exert the same, to the end that all novel notions
and perplexing, uncertain doctrines and speculations, which tend to the
subversion of true religion, designed by its admirable Author to direct the
faith and practice of reasonable creatures, may be suitably checked and
discouraged. And that this Church, of which we are members, and which
our forefathers justly esteemed a most invaluable blessing, worthy by all
prudent and honourable means to be defended and supported, being by us
in the same manner regarded, may remain `the pillar and ground of
truth,' and glory of this Colony, which hitherto hath been remarkably
happy for uniformity of religion.

"And your petitioners, as in duty bound, shall ever pray, &c.

"D. Mossom,

"John Brunskill,[115]

Pat. Henry,

John Robertson,

Robert Barrett."


431

Page 431

That these memorialists were perfectly sincere and conscientious
in their protest, I doubt not; nor have I any reason to suspect the
respectability of their character. The following statement, which
I take substantially from the history of the Presbyterian Church
in Virginia, by the Rev. Mr. Foote, will show the grounds on which
the charges in the foregoing letter were made. It must have been
somewhere about the year 1740, when the reports of some great
awakenings and revivals at the North, and some books differing
from those in common use, found their way first into Virginia, and
especially excited the minds of some persons in Hanover, Louisa,
and other counties around. Finding nothing in the sermons of the
Episcopal ministers corresponding with these, some of the laity
separated themselves from the usual services, which by law they
were bound to attend, and read sermons in private houses. After
a time certain ministers came among them from the North, but who
were not recognised by the Philadelphia Presbytery. It seems
that they, and some of the laymen who set up reading-houses, held
some extravagant doctrines, probably Antinomian, which made a
great noise. These, and the irregular meetings of the itinerant
preachers, and lay readers and exhorters, came to Governor Gooch's
ears. They were charged with assailing the Church and its ministers,
in private and public, with the most abusive language, and of
disturbing the peace and order of society. Governor Gooch, who
had always treated the Dissenters with great kindness, and had, in
reply to a letter from the Philadelphia Synod a few years before,
assured them that their members and people should be allowed the
free exercise of conscience in the worship of God, if complying with
the Act of Toleration, became much offended, and, summoning a
general court, delivered a charge complaining of the conduct of
those laymen and preachers who, professing to be Presbyterians, yet
utterly disregarded the conditions of the Act of Toleration, and produced
much discord in the Colony. This charge was laid before the
Synod of Philadelphia by a gentleman from Virginia. The Synod,
having considered it, sent the following address to the Governor:—

"May it please your Honour, the favourable acceptance which your
Honour was pleased to give our former address, and the countenance and
protection which those of our persuasion have met with in Virginia, fills
us with gratitude, and we beg leave on this occasion with all sincerity to
express the same. It very deeply affects us to find that any who go from
these parts, and perhaps assume the name of Presbyterians, should be guilty
of such practices, such uncharitable and unchristian expressions, as are
taken notice of in your Honour's charge to the Grand Jury. And, in the
mean time, it gives us the greatest pleasure that we can assure your Honour


432

Page 432
these persons never belonged to our body, but are missionaries, sent out
by some, who, by reason of their divisions and uncharitable doctrines and
practices, were, in May, 1741, excluded from our Synod, upon which they
erected themselves into a separate society, and have industriously sent
abroad persons whom we judge ill qualified for the character they assume,
to divide and trouble the churches. And, therefore, we humbly pray,
that while those who belong to us, and produce proper testimonials, behave
themselves suitably, they may still enjoy the favour of your Honour's
countenance and protection. And praying for the divine blessing on your
Honour's person and government, we beg leave to subscribe ourselves
your Honour's, &c. &c.

"Robert Cathcart, Moderator."

The following is an extract from the Governor's reply:—

"Gentlemen:—The address you were pleased to send me, as a grateful
acknowledgment for the favour which teachers of your persuasion met with
in Virginia, was very acceptable to me, but altogether needless to a person
in my station, because it is what by law they are entitled to."

The Synod soon after this, in reply to a petition from the people
in Hanover, sent them, as a temporary supply, two most venerable
men, Messrs. Tennent and Finley, who were kindly received by the
Governor and permitted to preach in Hanover. Then followed the
Rev. Mr. Blair, and soon after Mr. Whitefield, who, in passing
through Virginia, preached for them five days. During the intervals
of their visits, it is said that the Non-conformists and itinerant
preachers and lay readers were harassed by the pains and penalties
of the law, by which I presume is meant the fines for not attending
the Established Church. The meetings for reading were, however,
kept up, although forbidden. Those ministers and readers who
had been summoned to Williamsburg for violation of law, and for
the use of most abusive language, seemed all to have been dismissed,
and there was no terror in the law for any who chose to worship
God in their own way and place, except a trivial fine for being
absent from church, which, I will venture to say, was seldom enforced,
as few could be found who would undertake to present them.
Those who are persecuted are very apt to magnify their sufferings,
and those who come after them to magnify them much more.

We now come to the time when the Rev. Samuel Davies, afterward
President of Princeton College, settled in Hanover, as the
regular pastor of the Presbyterians there and in some other places
around. Calling at Williamsburg, and showing his credentials as
a minister of that denomination, the Governor and Council licensed
four places at which he was allowed to officiate. His zeal and
eloquence soon attracted crowds, and drew many from the Episcopal


433

Page 433
churches. His fame spread through the counties around, and in a
short time three other places were licensed, and then three more
were called for. Meanwhile, complaints were made to the Governor
that he also was nothing more than an itinerant proselyter, as those
who had gone before him, and who had been condemned by the
Philadelphia Synod itself. About this time the letter from the
five clergymen, which goes before, was addressed to the Burgesses.
The Governor was much excited, and, with the Council, questioned
whether it was according to the true intent of the Act of Toleration to
allow one man to have any number of houses licensed, in any number
of counties, at which to preach and draw away the people from their
regular places of worship, to which they were attached, and which
they were bound to attend by law. Mr. Davies appeared before
them and plead his own cause,—no doubt with great ability. The
result, however, was a refusal to license any more without consultation
with the authorities of England, and Mr. Davies was required
to content himself with his seven congregations in five or more
counties. The Governor himself, in his letter to the Synod of
Philadelphia, had said, after condemning itinerant preachers, who
disturbed the order and peace of the community, "Your missionaries
producing proper testimonials, complying with the laws, and
performing divine service in some certain place appropriated for
that purpose, without disturbing the quiet and unity of our sacred
and civil establishments, may be sure of my protection." On such
terms Mr. Davies was supposed to have come to Virginia, and for
the alleged violation of such was opposition made to the licensing
f so many places of service. We have the whole subject discussed
in a kind of triangular correspondence between the Bishop of London,
Mr. Davies, and the excellent Dr. Doddridge of England. I
shall briefly state the main points of these letters,—enough to exhibit
the subject in its proper light. The Bishop of London says, that,
as to any methods of oppression with the Dissenters, neither he nor
his Commissaries have any power, nor desire it; that if any is exerted,
the civil Government alone is concerned; that if the Church
of Virginia is in such a state of corruption as the Church of Rome
was at the Reformation, then, without any law authorizing it, such
methods as Mr. Davies pursues are justifiable; but, that though
Mr. Davies gives a much worse account of the clergy than he
receives, yet he does not justify himself on that ground; that he
places it on the right given by the Toleration Act, in which he (the
Bishop) differs from him, thinking that it never was designed to
give such unlimited license. The Bishop evidently considers that

434

Page 434
Mr. Davies had come from a great distance (three hundred miles)
to disturb the minds of a people, where he admits that only a few
years before there were not more than five or six Dissenters. The
Bishop alludes to the opposition made at the North to the plan he
had submitted to Government of sending some Bishops, though only
to the Southern part of the country, where the Episcopal Church
prevailed, and asks what would be thought if the people of New
England were not allowed to settle ministers for themselves, but
must send them over for Orders to Geneva. He also alludes to the
fact of their persecuting and imprisoning members of the Episcopal
Church for not contributing to the support of their preachers. In
view of all these things, he asks, is it consistent to be sending a
minister to Virginia to disturb the minds of a people acknowledged
to be Episcopal, and to be a true Church?[116] Dr. Doddridge, in his
letter, differs from the Bishop as to the construction to be put on the
Act of Toleration, and shows clearly that the practice in England is
altogether different, and in favour of what Mr. Davies pleads for;
that it is only required that three men apply to have a place licensed,
and that every licensed minister may officiate. He agrees with the
Bishop, that it is a great hardship that the Episcopalians of America
should be obliged to send their candidates to England for ordination,
and says that he has always condemned his brethren for
their opposition. As to requiring Episcopalians in certain parts
of New England to pay for some other ministry, which may be the
established one, he is not sufficiently acquainted with the nature of
the Establishment to speak, but says that he has always maintained
that, in England, it was reasonable that Dissenters should pay
something to the Church which the majority had established. Of
the Church of England he speaks in kind terms, "as a most respectable
body, and heartily prays that it may in every regard be
more and more the glory of the Reformation." "As for myself,"
he concludes, "having now lived for almost a century, I consider
myself (if all my best hopes do not deceive me) as quickly to join
that general assembly and Church of the first-born, where our views
and hearts will be forever one; and, as that prospect approaches, I
really find every thing that would feed the spirit of a party daily
losing its influence on me. These sentiments I daily cultivate in

435

Page 435
my own heart, and in the young people whom I am endeavouring to
form for the service of the sanctuary." Mr. Davies's letter to the
Bishop of London is like his sermons,—very long and very good.
He declares that, so far from coming to stir up the beginnings of
strife in Virginia, the work of separation had been going on
among the laity for at least six years; that a number of congregations
had been actually organized; that he was called to supply
them;[117] that he had carefully forborne to assail any peculiarities
of the Church, but contented himself with preaching the great doctrines
of the Gospel; that in so doing he had been the honoured
instrument of converting a number of souls; that it must, of course,
happen that some of those were brought up in the Episcopal Church;
that although he esteemed that Church as sound and evangelical
in its doctrines, and believed that some of its ministers were so also,
while others were only learned and moral men, yet he was obliged
to say that many of them were immoral and irreligious, and that
the laity also were in a most deplorable state of ignorance as to
true religion, and many of them of intemperate and vicious lives.
He also, I think, clearly shows that he had not violated the law
as understood and acted upon in England.[118] It certainly came to
be more and more thus understood and acted upon in Virginia,
until the necessity for a license was done away by the destruction
of the Establishment and the placing of all denominations upon an
equal footing. While we rejoice that such is the case, we cannot
join with those who condemn, as bigoted and intolerant, all who at
different periods approved and promoted measures for preventing
the introduction of different denominations. A sincere love of order,
peace, and unity, may have influenced their policy and conduct.
Experience shows that they were mistaken, and that all the interests
of Virginia would have been the better, and the condition of
the Episcopal Church certainly not the worse, had a more liberal
course been pursued from the first, and free permission granted to
all denominations from the mother-country to settle here. But let
none imagine that the desire to prevent inroads upon Church unity

436

Page 436
was peculiar to the Episcopalians of Virginia. It belongs equally
to all denominations, and all congregations, with their ministers.
What Church previously established in any land or portions of a
land, what congregation being first established in any village or
neighbourhood, and having filled up the same, does not desire to
retain possession, and think it hard that efforts should be made to
divide, and sow discord and unhappiness therein? We say not
this to excuse our Church for wrong she hath done, or to cast undue
blame on others. If we know our own heart, it is our desire to
seek the truth and do justice to all. When we consider how much
and what has been said, written, and preached against the Episcopal
Church for more than a century,—what efforts have been made to
excite political and religious prejudices against her,—and more
especially what pains have been taken to bias the minds of the poor,
to warn them against her assemblies, even since her ministers have
been acknowledged to be evangelical, experimental, and faithful
preachers, and holy men in their lives,—we cannot but ask the question,
Which of all the Churches in Virginia has, in the sight of God,
been most persecuted during the last hundred years? We would
beseech our Christian brethren, of other denominations especially,
to consider whether, when seeking to array the rich and the poor,
the learned and unlearned, against each other, they are not committing
a great sin against society and government, and against
that God who has joined all together in his Church, and forbids us
to separate whom he hath united. While so many have for so long
a time been exposing the faults of our communion, and questioning
whether there has been or is true piety in the same, it may
be permitted to one in these latter days, in imitation of those of
other communions, to speak the praises of some who have been the
subjects of God's grace among us, without denying the melancholy
fact, that too many have in times past brought reproach upon our
Zion and its sanctuary. He who undertakes the task has not only
been for a long time going in and out among this people, becoming
acquainted with several generations, but has inquired of our fathers
who are no more, and searched much in ancient and veritable documents,
and in his own old age asks the privilege of gratifying his
own heart, and the hearts of others, in bearing testimony to the
piety of a goodly number, as pure perhaps as is anywhere to be
found in this evil world, and especially in whose hearts was and is
to be found a large share of the true spirit, not only of toleration,
but of Christian kindness to all who love the Lord Jesus Christ in
sincerity, by whatever name they be called.

 
[115]

There were three ministers named John Brunskill at this time in Virginia, two
of whom lived in Caroline county, and one in Fauquier. The one in Fauquier was
an unworthy person.

[116]

Dr. Doddridge's letter to the Bishop of London, and the memorial of the five
clergymen, I have in manuscript, taken from the archives of Lambeth; the others
may be seen in Mr. Foote's first volume of Sketches of the Presbyterian Church
of Virginia.

[117]

One of these was called the Fork Church, and some of his printed sermons are
dated there. It was not, as some have supposed, that now called the Fork Church,
and which was always an Episcopal Church.

[118]

Mr. Davies also unites with Dr. Doddridge in approving the plan of sending
Bishops to Virginia, and declares that such was the case with his Presbyterian
brethren of the North. This, however, he was obliged to retract, on discovering
that he was mistaken. Their opposition was general and violent. This cannot be
denied. The milder spirit of Davies revolted at it.


437

Page 437

ARTICLE XL.

Parishes in Prince George, Martins Brandon, and Bristol.

Martins Brandon was a very early parish in Charles City
when that county extended across the river. How long before we
know not. Prince George county was taken out of Charles City
in 1702. Bristol parish was cut off from Martins Brandon in
1642. We have already seen that the parish of Martins Brandon
had been enlarged, in 1720, by the addition of those parts of
Westover and Weynoake parishes which lay on the south side of
James River. We have neither an old vestry-book nor register of
this parish, nor even a report to the Bishop of London, in 1724,
from which to gather any materials for a notice of it in early
times. The first minister of whom we have any record is the Rev.
Alexander Finnie, whose name is on the list of clergy on the
Lambeth Record, for 1754, as rector of Martins Brandon. From
our worthy citizen, the elder Mr. Edmund Ruffin—who, from his
age and extensive acquaintance with many much older than himself,
and laudable curiosity about former days and men, is well
qualified to speak on the subject of tradition—I have received
some interesting accounts of Mr. Finnie. Although perhaps not
so strict in some things as becomes one in so serious a profession,
yet he was a conscientious and upright man, doing and saying
whatever he considered his duty. Being also independent in his
circumstances, and somewhat eccentric in character, he was the
more fearless in preaching what he thought to be his duty. This
eccentricity and independence were remarkably displayed in one
department of the pastoral office,—the preaching of funeral sermons.
He considered this to be an occasion in which he must make
full trial of his ministry, by declaring the whole truth about the
deceased for the benefit of the living. The old Roman maxim,
"De mortuis nil nisi bonum," he eschewed in theory and practice.
Whether they were rich or poor, high or low, he recommended
their good qualities and warned his hearers against their evil ones.
Some memorable instances are handed down. One wealthy lady
left in her will a positive prohibition of a funeral sermon; but
without avail, for he never departed from this practice. He regarded


438

Page 438
it as his great instrument for doing good. Even this custom,
which we do not mean to defend, is better than those unfaithful,
flattering, and fulsome eulogies which are so often uttered on
such occasions. Better far have none at all, in most cases, and
let "expressive silence" speak both the praises and censures of
the dead. How long Mr. Finnie had been in the parish before
1754, and continued afterward, is not known. He was in other
parishes besides this, and has left a respectable posterity in Virginia.
In the years 1773, 1774, and 1776, I find the Rev. William
Coutts on the list as minister of Martins Brandon. In the years
1785 and 1786, the Rev. Benjamin Blagrove. In the years 1790
and 1794, the Rev. John Spooner. After this, the parish seems to
have been deserted, as no delegation—either clerical or lay—appears
on the journal until the year 1829, when the Rev. Mr. Cole
is a delegate from Surrey and Prince George.[119] Since that time,
the parish has enjoyed the services of the Rev. Mr. Denison, Mr.
Minnegerode, Mr. Murdaugh, and, being recently divided, has the
benefit of the labours of the Rev. Mr. Johnson in the upper parish,
in addition to those of Mr. Murdaugh in the lower.

I have no means of ascertaining what — if any—were the
churches in Martins Brandon besides the Old Brandon Church,
near the estates of the Harrisons at the two Brandons, and Old
Merchant's Hope. A new church has recently been erected in
place of the Old Brandon Church, and very near to it. At City
Point also, some years since, the Rev. Malcoim McFarland, now
of Baltimore, in some measure at his own expense, erected a neat
brick church, and, for some years, served the people of that place
and vicinity gratuitously. He was succeeded by the Rev. Mr.
Okeson. The Rev. Mr. Murray now occupies it. A parish by
the name of St. John's has been organized at City Point.

BRISTOL PARISH.

I am now brought, in the order of time and geography, to
Bristol parish. This parish was formed in 1662, on either side
of the Appomattox River, beginning at its junction with James
River, at City Point, and extending to the Falls. By the Falls


439

Page 439
we presume must be meant those at or a little above Petersburg,
though, as we shall see hereafter, the vestry, in the course of time,
seem to have acted for a much larger territory.

It was called Bristol parish, because the river was then called
Bristol as well as Appomattox. Within the bounds of this parish
was the old settlement of Sir Thomas Dale, in 1611, called Bermuda
Hundred, at the junction of James River and Appomattox.
Settlements were, from time to time, formed along the river up to
the Falls, where is now the town of Petersburg. The mother or
parish church was at Bermuda Hundred, opposite to City Point,
and it was desirable to organize a parish and provide for those who
were settling higher up the Appomattox or Bristol River. That
the mother-church was at this place is evident from an early entry
in the vestry-book, where, for the first and only time, the mother-church
is mentioned,—and then in connection with the ferry at the
Point, (City Point,) which is directed to be kept in good order for
persons, on Sunday, going over to the "mother-church," called,
in the Act of Assembly, the "Parish Church." The next place
of worship in the parish was probably the "Ferry Chapel," near
the Falls, and not far from the Old Blandford Church, which took
its place in the year 1737 or 1738. From the year 1720, when
the vestry-book begins, to the year 1737, the vestry-meetings are
invariably held at the Ferry Chapel, and afterward at the Brick
Church, on Wills's Hill, or Blandford Church. There was a church
built, it is believed, in 1707, according to some marks on it, and
called Wood's Church, about five miles from Petersburg, on the
north side of the Appomattox. Of this we shall speak when
treating of Dale parish, in Chesterfield, in which it now stands.
The first and most accurate account we have of Bristol parish is
from a letter to the Bishop of London, by its incumbent, the Rev.
George Robertson, in the year 1724. He had been, at that time,
its minister for nearly thirty-one years, and so continued for sixteen
more, making in all forty-six years. The extent of the parish
was twenty-five miles wide and forty miles long. It, of course,
must then have extended up the Appomattox into Brunswick and
Amelia. He complains that but a few of the masters send their
servants to be catechized, as he exhorts them to do, though some
do it at home and then bring them to baptism. He had one church
and one chapel, at which he alternately preached, and had full
congregations in good weather,—sometimes more than the pews
would hold. His tobacco being of inferior quality, his salary was
not more than forty-five or forty-six pounds sterling. His glebe


440

Page 440
had forty acres of barren land, with no house on it, and not cultivated.[120] No public school nor library. His services were confined
to the Ferry Chapel, at Petersburg, and to the mother-church, at
Bermuda Hundred. Although Mr. Robertson had only these two
places at which he officiated in 1724, we find the vestry determined
to build chapels in the year 1721, three years before, at Saponey
Creek and Nansomond Creek, a considerable distance up the river.
These, however, were not built until the year 1727. Meanwhile, a
chapel was built elsewhere—and, as we believe, lower down the
parish—in the year 1723. The person contracting for it was a
Mr. Thomas Jefferson; and we suppose it to be the same building
spoken of by Mr. Stith, in his "History of Virginia," in 1740, as
being in Chesterfield, and which was so near to James River that a
minister of Henrico parish connected it at a later period with his.
It was called Jefferson's Church,—probably after the builder: I
am not sure but that there are remains of it to this day.

In the year 1727, it appears that four surplices were ordered,
which shows that there must have been at least four churches then
in the parish. In the year 1729, additions are made to each of the
churches recently built at Saponey and Namoisen Creeks. In the
year 1730, another church—between Smacks and Krebbs—is determined
upon, for "the remote inhabitants" of the parish, on Flat
Creek, near Samuel Cobb's, to be built by Richard Booker, with
the privilege of putting up a pew for his family by the side of the
communion-table. In 1733, a committee is appointed to examine
the Ferry Chapel and see whether it is worthy of being repaired.
The report being unfavourable, in 1734 it was determined to build
a new one, on Will's Hill, of the best materials and workmanship,
—sixty feet by twenty-five,—the aisle to be laid of white Bristol
stone. Thomas Ravenscroft contracted to build it for four hundred
and eighty-five pounds sterling. The building of this church
involved the vestry in great pecuniary difficulty, so that the minister,
Mr. George Robertson, agreed to serve them gratuitously until
they were relieved. The vestry seems also to have been tempted
to resort to very doubtful means of discharging their engagements.
The Assembly had established two new parishes in the year 1735,
—viz.: Dale parish, in Chesterfield, taking in that part of Bristol
parish lying north of the Appomattox, and Raleigh parish, now in
Amelia, but then parts of Bristol and St. Andrew's parishes. After


441

Page 441
the passage, but before the execution, of the law, a levy was made
on these new parishes for the means of paying for Blandford Church.
Complaint being made, the next Assembly declared the levy improper,
and ordered it to be refunded.

In proof of an increasing population and desire for places of
worship, we state that petitions for two new chapels were addressed
to the vestry in the year 1737. In the year 1738 one was ordered
to be built on the north side of Hatcher's Run, which was undertaken
by Isham Eppes for one hundred and nineteen pounds and fifteen
shillings; and in the year 1739 one was ordered to be built for the
convenience of the lower parts of the parish, and Mr. John Ravenscroft
undertook to build it for one hundred and thirty-four pounds
and ten shillings, on Titmassie's land. That on Hatcher's Run
being burned down, another is ordered in 1740. Another at Jones's
Hole was also completed that year. An addition being found necessary
to Blandford Church, in the year 1752 it was ordered that one,
thirty by twenty-five feet, be put to it, and that a brick wall be
placed around it. Since the completion of Blandford Church in
1738, the vestry appears to have been duly attentive to the wants
of the minister as to a glebe and glebe-houses. In the year 1761
we find another entry of an order for building a small church in
the outward part of the parish. Again, in 1769, we find an order
for one sixty feet by twenty-eight, in the upper part of the parish
that lies in Dinwiddie county. On the approach of the war the
vestry resolved to pay a salary of one hundred and forty-four
pounds, instead of tobacco, and Mr. Harrison, their minister, agrees
to wait three years for a balance due him, on account of the distress
of the country.

In the year 1789 we find Jones's Hole Church forcibly entered,
through the windows and doors, for the purpose of worship,—the
vestry giving notice that if this be again done, or the church entered
without leave, the offending persons shall be dealt with according
to law, which proves that the Episcopalians were the subjects
of some persecution at that time. This forcible entry of some of
our churches has continued ever since. Surely, in view of such
forcible entries, when the Legislature confiscated the glebes, it
would have declared the churches common, in the plainest manner,
had such been the design of the law. Mr. Chapman Johnson once
told me that, after the fullest investigation of the subject, he was
well convinced that the law never contemplated any interference
with the entire right of Episcopalians with the Church buildings.
Nevertheless, we have not, like the dog in the manger, refused to


442

Page 442
use them ourselves or let others do it, but when reduced in numbers
so as to have only irregular or infrequent services, or having
utterly failed in the neighbourhood of many of the old churches,
have either allowed the partial use of them, or quietly surrendered
them to others. With the above act in 1789 the records of the
old vestry-book of Bristol parish terminate. To other sources we
must be indebted for any information touching the churches in this
parish after this. As to the numbers which, as we have stated,
were built in different parts of the parish, without the towns of
Petersburg and Blandford, we are unable to give any account of
them, save that, with the exception of Old Saponey Church,—Mr.
Jarratt's Church, as it has been often called,—they are gone, and
the places thereof know them no more. Being of framework, they
were not destined to much duration, and, being occupied and abused
by all, soon came to desolation. Old Blandford Church also began
to experience the effects of age, and the increasing prosperity and
numbers of Petersburg, standing on the adjoining hill, made it expedient
to begin to think of deserting her, and preparing a place
of worship more convenient to the majority of the worshippers.
Accordingly, in the year 1802, measures were taken for building a
church in Petersburg near the court-house. This answered the
purposes of the congregation until the year 1839, when another
and larger one was built in a more convenient place. That having
been consumed by fire a few years since, another larger and more
expensive one has recently been erected. Two other churches have
also been built in Petersburg under the auspices of the Rev. Mr.
Gibson within a few years past, the first of them being disposed of
when the second was erected. A small missionary chapel was also
erected in another part of the town, but has failed of its object.

We have thus, contrary to our usual order, given in the first
place an account of the churches of Bristol parish, and now proceed
to state what we have been able to collect of the history of
its ministers. After the early mention of Alexander Whittaker,
Mr. Wickham, and Stockam, who, from the year 1611 and onward,
officiated at Bermuda Hundred, in connection with the church at
Henrico City, about five or six miles off, on the north side of James
River, we have no record of even the name of a minister until the
year 1693, when Mr. Robertson came to it, and continued to be the
minister till 1740.

At the death of Mr. Robertson in 1740, an agreement was made
with a Rev. Mr. Hartwell to become the minister; but, misunderstandings
taking place as to the terms, it was never carried


443

Page 443
into execution. Mr. Robert Ferguson was then chosen, and continued
to be the minister for ten years,—until 1750. He was succeeded
by the Rev. Eleazer Robertson, who continued two years,
and was succeeded by the Rev. Thomas Wilkinson, who resigned
in 1762, and was succeeded by the Rev. William Harrison, who
resigned in 1780, though continuing to reside in Petersburg until
his death in 1814, being eighty-four years of age. The parish
being advertised as vacant, the Rev. Mr. Kennedy and the Rev.
Dr. Cameron were candidates in 1784. The latter was chosen, and
ministered in the parish until 1793, when he resigned. Of him I
shall speak in another place. In the following year the Rev. Andrew
Syme was elected, and continued until his resignation in 1839,
—a period of forty-five years. He continued to reside in Petersburg
until his death, esteemed and beloved, by all who knew him, as "an
Israelite in whom there was no guile." For further particulars of
him the reader is referred to my article on South Farnham parish,
Essex county, from which he removed to Bristol parish, and to the
Rev. Mr. Slaughter's full and very interesting pamphlet on Bristol
parish. For some years previous to his resignation of the parish,
Mr. Syme, on account of increasing infirmities, had called for an
assistant, and obtained the services of the Rev. Hobart Bartlett,
from New York, whose fine talents, popular preaching, and agreeable
manners contributed much to the increase of the congregation.
In the year 1839 I was induced, under peculiar circumstances, to
take the temporary charge of the congregation, but soon accomplished
the object had in view, and procured for the congregation
the services of the Rev. Mr. Cobbs, now Bishop of Alabama. His
ministry, during the few years of its continuance, was very prosperous
in all respects. During that period a general awakening of
the souls of the people of Petersburg took place, and the ministers
of all denominations laboured faithfully in prayer, and sermons,
and exhortations, private and public. Instead of discouraging such
extraordinary efforts for so extraordinary an outpouring of the
Spirit of God as was granted, Mr. Cobbs came behind none, and
went beyond some, in the frequency and continuance of his religious
exercises. The result was, that no congregation was more highly
blest in the results thereof. I laid my hands on the heads of ninety-three
at that time, who, for the last three months, had been receiving
the daily instructions of their minister, either public or private,
and of such other ministers as he was able to bring to his help.
During Mr. Cobbs's ministry the ladies of the Wilmer Association—
who had for so many years been the most active of all in supporting

444

Page 444
beneficiaries at our Seminary, sending at times to the amou
of five and six hundred dollars to the treasury—began to divert their
funds from this to the promotion of missionary labours in the town
of Petersburg. The result has been the establishment of the prosperous
church under the care of the Rev. Mr. Gibson. In the year
1843 the Rev. Mr. Slaughter accepted a call to this parish, after
the resignation of the Rev. Mr. Cobbs. His services were so acceptable
to the people, that at the end of the six months which he
had proposed to himself as a trial, he agreed to continue, nor did
he cease to labour there until his health so failed as to make it
improper to add further efforts. He was succeeded by the Rev.
Horace Stringfellow, who continued until the year 1854. His place
has been supplied during the present year (1856) by the Rev. Mr.
Platt, from Alabama.

A few words concerning Petersburg and Blandford will close my
remarks. We naturally like to know the origin of the names of
places in which we take interest. In looking over documents which
have been furnished me, I find the name of Petersburg ascribed to
the fact that a great number of persons by the name of Peter,
especially of the family of Jones, were among the first settlers.[121]
As to Blandford, which was, as to the time of its settlement, considerably
in the advance of Petersburg, the name is supposed to
have been given it because so much of the property around was
once in the possession of the family of Blands. Concerning the
venerable old church at Blandford, now and for a long time past
only used for funeral services of those who are buried around it,
and which reminds the traveller of the "moss-grown battlements
and ivy-mantled towers" of our fatherland, I need only present
to the reader the following lines of some unknown one, which are



No Page Number


No Page Number
illustration

OLD BLANDFORD CHURCH, PETERSBURG, VA.

"Lone relic of the past! old mouldering pile,

Where twines the ivy round its ruins gray."


445

Page 445
engraven on its walls, and refer them to the not less exquisite ones
to be found in Mr. Slaughter's pamphlet,

"Thou art crumbling to the dust, old pile,
Thou art hastening to thy fall,
And around thee in thy loneliness
Clings the ivy to thy wall.
The worshippers are scatter'd now
Who met before thy shrine,
And silence reigns where anthems rose
In days of old lang syne.
"And rudely sighs the wandering wind,
Where oft, in years gone by,
Prayer rose from many hearts to Him,
The highest of the high.
The tramp of many a busy foot
Which sought thy aisles is o'er,
And many a weary heart around
Is still'd for evermore.
"How oft ambition's hope takes wing!
How droop the spirits now!
We hear the distant city's din:
The dead are mute below.
The sun which shone upon their paths
Now gilds their lonely graves;
The zephyrs which once fann'd their brows
The grass above them waves.
"Oh, could we call the many back
Who've gather'd here in vain,
Who careless roved where we do now.
Who'll never meet again,—
How would our souls be stirr'd
To meet the earnest gaze
Of the lovely and the beautiful,
The light of other days!"

The following is a list of the vestrymen whose names are in the
record from the year 1720 to 1788. For the continuation of the
list, reference is made to the fuller sketch of this parish by the Rev.
Mr. Slaughter:—Robert Bolling, Robert Munford, A. Hall, L.
Green, Henry Randolph, Thomas Bott, William Kennon, G. Wilson,
Peter Jones, George Archer, Robert Kennon, I. Herbert, Drury
Bolling, William Poythress, Theophilus Field, A. Bevell, Charles
Fisher, William Starke, D. Walker, F. Poythress, J. Bannister,
William Hamlin, Theodoric Bland, T. Short, W. Eppes, G. Smith,
L. Dewey, J. Gordon, J. Boisseau, J. Murray, A. Walker, T. Williams,


446

Page 446
Alexander Bolling, William Eaton, Roger Atkinson, G.
Nicholas, Sir William Skipwith, N. Raines, John Ruffin, R. Bolling,
William Kall, Dr. Theodoric Bland, (afterward Colonel Bland of
the Revolution,) Richard Taylor, Thomas Jones, Peter Jones, J. P.
Wheat, Robert Skipwith, W. Brown, William Robertson, John
Kirby, R. Bolling, James Field, William Diggs, B. Kirby, R. Turnbull,
John Shore, T. G. Peachy, A. G. Strachan, J. Hull, J. Geddy,
R. Gregory, J. Bonner, E. Harrison, A. Gracie, T. Bolling, J.
Campbell, R. Williams, D. Hardaway, John Grammar, Sr., George
Keith Taylor, Thomas Withers, A. Macrae, W. Prentiss, E. Stott,
J. Osburne, R. Moore, D. Maitland.

To this we add, that, on examining the list of baptisms from 1720
and onward, we find the following names, among many others:—
Birchett, Bolling, Hardaway, Jones, Poythress, Buchan, Peebles,
Hinton, Vaughan, Pegram, Peterson, Walthall, Sturdivant, Stith,
Rowlett, Bragg, Batte, Bannister, Guilliam, Hammond, Bland,
Chambliss, &c.

 
[120]

In reply to the question, Is your glebe-house kept in good repair? he says,
"Nonentibus nulla sunt accidentia;" (To nonentities no accidents happen.)

[121]

Colonel Byrd, in his visit to Eden (as he calls his land on the Roanoke) in the
year 1733, took with him a Mr. Peter Jones. In his journal he says, "When we
got home, we laid the foundation of two cities,—one at Shocco's, to be called Richmond,
and the other at the point of Appomattox River, to be called Petersburg.
Thus we did not only build castles in the air, but cities also." We learn that the
locality was first called Peter's Point, subsequently changed to Petersburg.

In the year 1762 the town of Petersburg was enlarged by taking in twenty-eight
acres of land belonging to one Peter Jones, and the following gentlemen, with very
large powers, made trustees of the town,—viz.: Robert Bolling, Roger Atkinson,
William Eaton, John Bannister, Robert Ruffin, Thomas Jones, Henry Walker, George
Turnbull, and James Field. It appears that until the year 1784 there were four
towns clustered together in that place,—viz.: Blandford, Petersburg, Pocahontas,
and Ravenscroft, all of which, by an act of the Legislature of that year, were
united under the one name of Petersburg.

THE GENEALOGY OF THE BLANDS.

From the genealogy of the Blands preserved at Jordans, we take
a few extracts, sufficient to comply with the character of these
sketches,—their religious character. It is an old and highly-respectable
English family. I leave it to others to speak of the gallant
conduct and fatal end of Giles Bland in Bacon's Rebellion, and begin
with Theodoric Bland, who settled at Westover, in Charles City,
in 1654, and died in 1671. He was buried in the chancel of the
church, which church he built and gave it, with ten acres of land, a
court-house and prison, for the county and parish. His tomb is
now to be seen in old Westover graveyard, lying between those of
two of his friends, William Perry and Walter Aston. The church is
fallen down. He was one of the King's Council for Virginia, and
was both in fortune and understanding inferior to none in the Colony.
He left three sons,—Theodoric, Richard, and John. We confine
ourselves to his son Richard and his posterity. He was born at
Berkeley, the neighbouring estate, in 1665, and married first a Miss
Swan, and secondly Elizabeth, daughter of William Randolph, of
Turkey Island. His daughters, three in number, married Henry
Lee, William Beverley, and Robert Monford. His sons were Richard
and Theodoric, who moved to Prince George and lived at Jordans
and Causons, near City Point. Richard was the one who took so
active a part in the affairs of both Church and State before and
during the war of the Revolution. He wrote a treatise on Baptism


447

Page 447
against the Quakers, of which sect some of his ancestors or relatives
in England had been. He died in 1776, and was buried at Jordans.
He married a Miss Poythress and had twelve children. The other
son of Richard Bland, Sr., was Theodoric, who lived at Causons.
He married a Miss Bolling, descendant of Pocahontas, and had
one son Theodoric, and five daughters, who married Messrs. Bannister,
Ruffin, Eaton, Haynes, and Randolph of Roanoke, father
of John Randolph, member of Congress. At Mr. Randolph's death
she married St. George Tucker, who was afterward Judge of the
Court of Appeals. His son Theodoric was Lieutenant of the county,
Clerk, Burgess, and vestryman. He was active to the close of the
war, as his letter to Colonel Theodoric Bland, his son, shows. His
son received a complete English education, being in England eleven
years, and returning a thorough-bred physician. But, not liking
that profession, and engaging warmly in the dispute with England,
he entered the army and signalized himself. He attained to the
rank of colonel, and stood high in the esteem of Washington. His
letters to Lord Dunmore, at the opening of the war, have not a
little of the spirit and genius of Junius in them. In the year
1769, while living at Blandford, or Petersburg, and practicing medicine,
we find his name on the list of vestrymen, thus following his
father's footsteps.

Of old Mr. and Mrs. Grammar, on whom for a considerable time,
by general consent, the very existence of the Episcopal Church in
Petersburg seemed to hang, I need not speak, or seek for any
epitaph. They live in the hearts of children and children's children
yet alive, and in the memories of many others who revere
their characters and endeavour to follow their example. The social
prayer-meetings held at their house, when the old lady was unable
any longer to go to the house of God, were refreshing seasons to
ministers and people.

 
[119]

One of these was called the Fork Church, and some of his printed sermons are
dated there. It was not, as some have supposed, that now called the Fork Church,
and which was always an Episcopal Church.


448

Page 448

ARTICLE XLI.

Parishes in Chesterfield, Dale, and Manchester.

Chesterfield was originally part of Henrico shire and parish,
as established in 1632. In —, that part of the parish lying
some miles north of the Appomattox was taken into Bristol parish,
but at the establishment of Dale parish was incorporated into it.
Dale parish, therefore, included the whole of Chesterfield until
Manchester parish was separated from it. In this region were
some of the earliest settlements. Bermuda Hundred was established
in 1611, by Sir Thomas Dale. A large portion of the
College Lands were laid along James River, on its northern bank,
toward Manchester. Here the Indian massacre in 1622 was great.
On Colonel Berkeley's plantation alone—at Falling Creek—himself
and twenty others were destroyed. At an early period settlements
were made on James River and the Appomattox, from City
Point to what are now Manchester and Petersburg.

The first ministers were in one corner of the county, at Bermuda
Hundred, Whittaker, Wickham, and Stockham, of whom we have
already spoken. In the sketch of Bristol parish we have given
the names of those who have ministered in this part of the State
from 1693 to the time of the establishment of Dale parish.

The first of whom we read after this is the Rev. George Frazer,
in 1754, who was also minister in 1758. How long he continued
afterward cannot be ascertained. In the years 1773-74-76, the
Rev. Archibald McRoberts is on the list of clergy as minister of
this parish. Having been ordained in 1763, he may have been
there some years before. He was the bosom-friend of Mr. Jarratt
for a number of years, but left the Church about the year 1779,
during the war, and after the Church had become very unpopular.
His defence of this act will, I think, be considered by nearly all as
a very weak one. He was not the minister of Dale parish at the
time, but of one in Prince Edward. His letter in reply to two
written to him by Mr. Jarratt, inquiring into the truth of his reported
change, and as to his reasons for it, is dated Providence,


449

Page 449
July 13, 1780. This was the name of the glebe near Prince
Edward Court-house. In it he says,—

"Upon the strictest inquiry it appears to me that the Church of Christ
is truly and properly independent; and I am a Dissenter under that denomination.
Ecclesiastical matters among the Presbyterians I find every
day verging toward my sentiments, and will, I believe, terminate there.
There is very little that divides us even now. They constantly attend my
poor ministry. Several of Mr. Sanky's people have joined my congregation,
and I have lately had a most delightful communion-season at Cumberland,
where I assisted Mr. Smith, at the urgent request of himself and
the elders. Soon after my dissent, as my concern for the people had suffered
no change, I drew up a set of articles including the essential parts
of natural and revealed religion, together with the Constitution and Discipline
of the Christian Church, and proposed them to their consideration;
since which they have formed a congregation at the chapel, and a few
have acceded at French's and Sandy River.[122] I preach at the churches
by permission, and intend to continue, God willing, until the first of
January, at which time, if congregations should not be formed at the
lower churches, my time will be confined to the chapel, and such other
place or places as Providence may point out and the good spirit of God
unite his people at."

It appears that, failing to attach his old Episcopal congregations
to the Independent Church, which he was endeavouring to establish,
he afterward connected himself with the Presbyterian, which was
then gaining ground in that region, as we find him spoken of as a
minister of that communion. Of his subsequent history we know
little. That he was a pious and conscientious man we are well convinced.[123]


450

Page 450

After Mr. McRoberts, in 1776, we have no records to inform us
who was the minister of Dale parish until the Convention of 1785,
the first after the Establishment was put down, when the Rev. William
Leigh, who was ordained by the Bishop of London in 1772,
was the clerical delegate. His name does not appear after this, and
I am informed that he died in the year 1786 or '87, aged thirty-nine
years. In the year 1776, I find he was the minister of Manchester
parish in the same county. He was the only son of Ferdinand
Leigh, of West Point, in King and Queen county, Virginia.
His father early dedicated him to the ministry. He was educated
at William and Mary College. He married the daughter of Benjamin
Watkins, Clerk of Chesterfield county. He lived at Dale
glebe, near Petersburg, and preached at Wood's Church and Ware
Bottom, or Osburne's, alternately, and sometimes at Saponey Church,
of Chesterfield. Mr. Leigh was the father of Judge William Leigh,
of Halifax county, and Benjamin Watkins Leigh, of Richmond,
both of them so well known in Virginia,—the one as lawyer and
judge, the other as lawyer and statesman; also of two sisters,
Mrs. Finnie and Mrs. Harris, zealous members of our Church.[124]


451

Page 451

Of the Rev. Mr. Leigh, the testimony of children and of many
others speaks nothing but what is good. He was succeeded by the
Rev. Needler Robinson, whose name first appears on our journal
as its minister in 1790. He continued to be its minister—nominally
at least—until his death, in 1823. The Episcopal Church
in Chesterfield nearly disappeared during the period of his ministry.
Indeed, his time and labours were chiefly devoted to a school from
the first. Although he lived so many years after our Conventions
in Richmond were renewed, and was so near the place, he never
attended them.

I have been furnished with a few leaves from the vestry-book of
Dale parish, from the years 1790 to 1799, from which I am able
to give a list of the vestrymen during that period. They are as
follows:—Jerman Baker, John Botts, George Robertson, Richard
Bosker, Blackman Morly, Thomas Bolling, King Graves, Arch.
Walthall, Arch. Bass, Jesse Coghill, Daniel McCallum, Charles


452

Page 452
Graves, George Woodson, Henry Winfree, Roger Atkinson, Thomas
Friend, Charles Duncan, Daniel Dyson, John Hill, Henry
Archer.

On the same loose leaves we have a number of subscription-lists,
on which are names well known to us at this day. The object, we
presume, was for repairing the churches about the year 1790.
Among them, besides the above-named vestrymen, were the following,—a
few among many:—Osborne, Rowlett, Burton, Roisseau,
Taylor, Gibbs, Royall, Shore, Worsham, Branch, Tanner, Randolph,
Burwell, Goode, Ward, Clarke, Hardaway, Walke, Barber,
Donald, Bragg, Epps, Belcher, Hodges, Marshall, &c.

Nothing is heard of this parish for a long and dark period.

In the year 1835, the Rev. Farley Berkeley takes charge of
Raleigh parish, Amelia, and extends his labours to Old Saponey
Church, in the neighbourhood of a few zealous friends of it,—the
Thweats, Johnsons, and others. He has been succeeded for some
years by the Rev. Mr. Tizzard, who devotes his whole time and
labours to the county of Chesterfield.

The Old Saponey is deserted: a new church has been erected
some miles off, in a more convenient location. Wood's Church is
still standing. The following communication in relation to it comes
from such a source that I feel sure I shall not do injustice to any
one in publishing it:—

"About 1831 or 1832, the old deserted church was repaired by the
united efforts of two bodies of Christians, and occupied by them until it
was abandoned by both in 1848. Another repairing being found necessary,
it was undertaken by a gentleman attached to the Episcopal Church.
By him it was restored to the Episcopalians, and at his invitation the first
sermon preached by a minister of that body. Before the next Sunday,
however, the house had been entered, the main door fastened up, a lock put
upon a side-door, and the building taken possession of by one of those
bodies which had deserted it. Anxious to recover their lawful right to
this venerable building, the Episcopalians of the neighbourhood made application
to the judge to appoint two of their number to hold it as Episcopal
property. The application was rejected, on the ground that it was
public property, and belonged no more to Episcopalians than to any other
body of Christians. During the last repair the workmen discovered on one
of the upright beams the figures 1707, showing that it was built thirty
years before the Old Blandford Church."

In regard to the right of property I have before said, that that
most eminent jurist, Mr. Chapman Johnson, after the most thorough
examination of the question, gave it as his opinion that the
right of the Church to the old houses of worship was not impaired


453

Page 453
by any Act of the Virginia Assembly. It would appear very unlikely
that such a body would pass an act so well calculated to
engage all bodies of Christians in such disgraceful broils as must
ensue from declaring them common property, to be used as art or
violence might determine. It would have been far better to offer
them to the highest bidder,—as was done in regard to the glebes
and parsonages, which were, as the churches, built by levies on
all the tithables. As when Episcopalians have abandoned their
churches and others take possession, so, when these in turn have
abandoned them, and we, under altered circumstances, repair and
re-enter them, it would seem just and reasonable that we be allowed
so to do.

MANCHESTER PARISH, CHESTERFIELD COUNTY.

This parish was taken from Dale parish in 1772. The dividingline
commenced at the mouth of Falling Creek, on James River,
and ended at the mouth of Winterbock Creek, on the Appomattox.
In the following year the line was altered; the upper part, including
Manchester, was Manchester parish. At Falling Creek there
are, I believe, still the remains of an old and venerable church,—
whether built before or after the division I am unable to say, but
most probably before. I presume there must also have been one in
or near Manchester. The troublous times of the Revolution being
at hand when it became a parish, it is probable that nothing was
done toward building churches in it after the division.

As to ministers, we read of the Rev. William Leigh, who took
charge of it in 1773 and kept it until 1777; how much longer we
cannot say, as we have no lists of the clergy after that until 1785,
and in 1786 he was minister of Dale parish. In 1785, the Rev.
Paul Clay is minister for one year. In the year 1790, the Rev.
William Cameron, brother of Dr. John Cameron, was minister, and
continued so for four years. In the year 1799, the Rev. John
Dunn is the minister. After this there is no delegation from this
parish, except when the names of Mr. David Patterson and James
Patterson appear as laymen in 1805. I remember the former well,
as a constant attendant at our Conventions in Richmond after their
revival in 1812. He took a deep interest in all the movements of
the Church until his death. If not a reader at Falling Creek
Church before, he was appointed such by Bishop Moore, and continued
to the last to officiate to the few who remained in our communion
around the old temple.


454

Page 454

I conclude the little I have to say of the parish of Manchester
and Falling Creek Church with the following notice of it by a
young brother in the ministry, who visited them both a few years
since:—

FALLING CREEK CHURCH.

"I visited Falling Creek Church in 1849, and note the following particulars
concerning it:—

"This church is in Chesterfield county, about thirteen miles southwest
of Richmond. It is situated in what is now a very secluded spot. I instinctively
raised my hat as I crossed the old decaying threshold and stood
under the roof of this ancient edifice. It is a wooden building, the timbers
of the very best quality, and even at the time [1849] in a state of
almost perfect preservation. After the old style, we find the clerk's desk
at the foot of the reading-desk, and, rising above both, the pulpit,—the
latter of octagonal form, with a sounding-board. These were at the side
of the church. At the end of the aisle, and opposite the main entrance,
were the chancel and communion-table. A side-door faces the pulpit. The
window-shutters were, with one or two exceptions, all missing. The sashes
had been taken from the windows and scattered about the church and
yard, and none of them appeared to have ever had a single pane of
glass, so carefully had the work of appropriation been carried on. The
pews are square, with seats on all four sides, and capable of accommodating
about fifteen or twenty persons each. About two hundred persons
could have been comfortably seated on the floor of the church, while many
additional sittings might have been found in a gallery which ran across
the end of the house opposite the chancel.

"A gray-haired old negro—not very talkative, but a coloured gentleman
of the old school, for his manners were almost courtly—informed me that
he could `just remember when the church was built, being then a mere boy.'
He said that it was always crowded `when the clergyman with the black
gown preached.' He remembered, too, `when the British soldiers camped
in the churchyard,'—at whose appearance his master and mistress, and all
their family, hurriedly fled. The name of his master I have forgotten. He
pointed out one of the largest trees in the churchyard, and told me he had
seen that tree planted as a scion at the head of an infant's grave. He
had forgotten whose child it was. The Baptists had used the church
for some time, until of late years, when they abandoned it, owing to its
retired position. It was taken possession of by those who did not feel it
was holy ground, for its walls were desecrated with scribbling unsuited to
the sacredness of the place; and about a month before my visit the dead
body of a poor creature, noted in the neighbourhood for his drunken
habits, was discovered lying at the foot of the clerk's desk, much defaced
by the rats. Better that the owls and the bats should have undisturbed
possession, than that God's image should thus be defiled in the house of
prayer."

There was a warm friend of the Church living near this place,
of whom it becomes us to make some mention. Mr. Archibald


455

Page 455
Cary, of Amphill, in Chesterfield, appears in the Episcopal Conventions
in the years 1785 and 1786, as delegate from Dale parish.
In the last of these years he died. I refer my readers to Mr.
Grigsby's work on the Convention of 1776, for a sketch of the political
character and patriotic services of Mr. Cary. He was among
the very foremost of the patriots of Virginia. "It was from his
lips, as Chairman of the Committee of the Whole, that the words
of the resolution of Independence, of the Declaration of Rights,
and a plan of government, first fell upon the public ear." The
following is a brief sketch of one branch of the Carys, from Mr.
Grigsby's book:—

"Miles Cary, the son of John Cary, of Bristol, England, came to Virginia
in 1640, and settled in the county of Warwick, which, in 1659, he represented
in the House of Burgesses. In 1667 he died, leaving four sons.
His son Henry, father of Archibald, was appointed to superintend the
building of the capitol at Williamsburg, (when the seat of government
was removed from Jamestown;) also at a later period to superintend the
rebuilding of the college, which had been burnt. He married a daughter of
Richard Randolph, of Curles, and left five daughters, who married Thos.
Mann Randolph, of Tuckahoe, Thos. Isham Randolph, of Dungeness,
Archibald Bolling, Carter Page, of Cumberland, and Joseph Kincade."

This branch has been denominated the Iron Carys, from the fact
that Archibald Cary was called "Old Iron," either, says Mr.
Grigsby, because of his "capacity of physical endurance" or
"his indomitable courage," or because he had an iron furnace
and mills at Falling Creek, on the site of one established by
Colonel Berkeley, who, with a number of his men, was murdered
by the Indians in 1622. Mr. Cary's mills were burned by Colonel
Tarleton in the American war.

 
[122]

These are the distinguishing-names of the three churches in the parish in which
he had been minister.

[123]

A correspondent, (not of the Episcopal communion,) who seems well acquainted
with the history of this period and region, writes thus concerning Mr. McRoberts:—
"He was, like many other of the old Episcopal clergy, a Scotchman by birth.
The opinion you express concerning him was, I dare say, the general one, and is
certainly the judgment of charity. There were persons, however, who thought that
he showed something of the wariness of his countrymen in abandoning a sinking
ship. He married a daughter of Robert Munford, of Mechlenburg, (whose wife was
Maria Bland.) Mrs. McRoberts was amiable indeed, but more remarkable for
genius than for those domestic virtues which best befit a minister's wife." My correspondent
also mentions an anecdote of Mr. McRoberts which will not be without
interest to our readers:—"Most of the able-bodied men of Prince Edward were off
with the army, on duty elsewhere, when Tarleton with his troop of cavalry made his
foray through that and the neighbouring counties. He visited sundry houses in
Prince Edward, attempted to frighten women and children, destroyed much furniture,
and otherwise did wanton mischief. A detachment was also sent to the glebe,
and Mr. McRoberts had hardly time to escape. They ripped open feather-beds,
broke mirrors, &c., and went off, having set fire to the house. It burned slowly
at first, but the building would have been consumed had not a shower of rain come
up suddenly and extinguished the flames. Mr. McRoberts, who regarded this as a
special interposition of Providence, called the place Providence,—a name it has
borne to this day. When the glebe was sold he became the purchaser. It afterward
became the property of Colonel Venable, one of whose children still owns
it."

[124]

The name of Watkins is often to be found on our vestry-books as members of the
vestries in different parishes. Many of the name have for a century past been found
in different connections. In the year 1745, a Mr. Thomas Watkins, of Henrico, son
of Edward Watkins, is presented for reflecting upon the Established Church, and
saying, "Your churches and chapels are no better than synagogues of Satan."
He was, however, dismissed without fine or injury. This was probably the commencement
of defection in that family from the Established Church. I have before
me a pamphlet by Mr. Francis Watkins, of Prince Edward, in which is
contained a full genealogy of all the branches of this wide-spread and respectable
family, so far as it can be ascertained, to the present time. It is supposed to be of
Welsh descent. The name of James Watkins appears among the early emigrants
to Virginia in 1607 or 1608. He was a companion of Smith in his perilous voyages
of discovery in Virginia, and may, it is supposed, have been the first ancestor of
the family; but nothing was certainly known except of the descendants of Thomas
Watkins, of Swift Creek, Cumberland county,—now Powhatan,—whose will bears date
1760. He had eight children. His eldest son, Thomas, of Chickahominy, is spoken
of thus by the late Benjamin Watkins Leigh, his great-nephew:—"Of Thomas
Watkins, of Chickahominy, I have heard very full accounts from my mother (wife
of the Rev. William Leigh, of Chesterfield) and from my uncle Thomas, both of
whom knew him well. He was a man of the highest respectability in every point
of view, and in particular a man of indefatigable industry." He reared a large
family of children, four sons and seven daughters, from whom have proceeded numerous
families of numerous names, in and out of Virginia. Of his son Joel Watkins,
of Charlotte, Mr. John Randolph of Roanoke, in a manuscript left behind
him, says,—"On Sunday, the second of January, departed this life Colonel Joel
Watkins, beloved, honoured, and lamented by all who knew him. Without shining
abilities or the advantages of an education, by plain, straightforward industry,
under the guidance of old-fashioned honesty and practical good sense, he accumulated
an ample fortune, in which it is firmly believed there was not one dirty shilling."
Much is said of the worth and piety of other children of Thomas Watkins,
in the pamphlet referred to, and of the descendants of the same, which is worthy of
perusal. In the appendix of the same there is a special notice of his brother Benjamin
Watkins, youngest son of the first Thomas, of Powhatan, who married Miss
Cary, of Warwick. He was the first clerk of Chesterfield county, which office he
held until his death. He was a man of genius, a scholar and patriot, took an
active part in the affairs of the Revolution, and was a member of the Convention
of 1776. The Rev. Mr. Leigh, of Chesterfield, married his daughter, and was the
father of the late Benjamin Watkins Leigh, of Richmond, and the present Judge
William Leigh, of Halifax; also of Mrs. Finnie, of Powhatan, and Mrs. Harris, of
Petersburg. One of the sons (Thomas) of Benjamin Watkins, the clerk of Chesterfield,
married Rebecca Selden, daughter of Miles Selden, of Henrico parish.
Their daughter Mary was the first wife of Benjamin Watkins Leigh. Their daughter
Rebecca married Judge William Leigh, of Halifax, and their daughter Hannah
Dr. John Barksdale, of Halifax. The eldest daughter (Hannah) of Benjamin Watkins
married a Mr. William Finnie, of Amelia, from whom have descended numerous
families of Finnies, Royalls, Woreshams, Sydnors, and others in Virginia, South
Carolina, and the West. It will be remembered that we have spoken of a Rev.
Alexander Finnie, as a minister in Prince George in the year 1774, and probably
before and after that. On inquiry we find that he was connected with this family,
but how nearly cannot be ascertained. He may have been closely allied to the
first-named William Finnie, of Amelia.


456

Page 456

ARTICLE XLII.

St. James Northam, Goochland County.

Goochland county was cut off from Henrico in 1727. In the
year 1744 the parish of St. James Northam, was restricted to the
north side of the river, and that on the south side was called St.
James Southam, both of them being in Goochland, which still lay
on both sides of the river, and extended from the Louisa line to
Appomattox River. Albemarle county and parish were also in this
year taken from Goochland, by a line from Louisa to the Appomattox.
We shall now speak of the parish of St. James Northam,
in Goochland, on the north of James River. The vestry-book
which we have commences at its division in 1744. How long it
had been supplied with services before this we are unable to ascertain.
The vestry-book begins with stating that, the parish being
divided into three parts, each parish was at liberty to choose its
own minister, and since the Rev. Mr. Gavin, who had been the
minister of the undivided parish, was disliked by many, the vestry
would procure another. To this Mr. Gavin did not agree, but insisted
on choosing this part, and did continue the minister until his
death in 1749. There is no charge brought against the character
of Mr. Gavin, but only that he was not acceptable to many of the
people. The following letter of Mr. Gavin to the Bishop of London
may perhaps throw some light upon the subject:—

Mr. Gavin to the Bishop of London.

"Right Rev. Father in God:—I received your Lordship's blessing in
May, 1735, and by bad weather we were obliged to go up to Maryland,
and from thence five weeks after I came to Williamsburg, and was kindly
received by our Governor and Mr. Commissary Blair. I got immediately
a parish, which I served nine months; but hearing that a frontier-parish
was vacant, and that the people of the mountains had never seen a clergyman
since they were settled there, I desired the Governor's consent to
leave an easy parish for this I do now serve. I have three churches,
twenty-three and twenty-four miles from the glebe, in which I officiate
every third Sunday; and, besides these three, I have seven places of service
up in the mountains, where the clerks read prayers,—four clerks in the
seven places. I go twice a year to preach in twelve places, which I reckon
better than four hundred miles backward and forward, and ford nineteen


457

Page 457
times the North and South Rivers. I have taken four trips already, and
the 20th instant I go up again. In my first journey I baptized white
people, 209; blacks, 172; Quakers, 15; Anabaptists, 2; and of the white
people there were baptized from twenty to twenty-five years of age, 4;
from twelve to twenty, 35; and from eight to twelve, 189. I found, on
my first coming into the parish, but six persons that received the Sacrament,
which my predecessors never administered but in the lower church;
and, blessed be God, I have now one hundred and thirty-six that receive
twice a year, and in the lower part three times a year, which fills my heart
with joy, and makes all my pains and fatigues very agreeable to me. I
struggle with many difficulties with Quakers, who are countenanced by
high-minded men, but I wrestle with wickedness in high places, and the
Lord gives me utterance to speak boldly as I ought to speak. I find that
my strength faileth me; but I hope the Lord will be my strength and
helper, that I may fight the good fight and finish my course in the ministry
which is given me to fulfil the word of God.

"There is one thing which grieves my heart,—viz.: to see Episcopacy so
little regarded in this Colony, and the cognizance of spiritual affairs left to
Governors and Council by the laws of this Colony. And next to this, it
gives me a great deal of uneasiness to see the greatest part of our brethren
taken up in farming and buying slaves, which in my humble opinion is
unlawful for any Christian and particularly for clergymen. By this the
souls committed to their care must suffer; and this evil cannot be redressed,
for want of a yearly convocation, which has not been called these ten
years.

"The Rev. Mr. Blair I really believe is a good man, and has been a
good minister, but he cannot act in his commission as it is required, and I
have always wished that your Lordship would send as a Deputy-Commissary
a clergyman of known zeal, courage, and resolution, and such as
could redress some great neglects of duty in our brethren, and bring Episcopacy
to be regarded; for even some of the clergymen born and educated
in this Colony are guilty in this point.

"Pardon, my Lord, these my open expressions. I think myself obliged
in conscience to acquaint your Lordship with these evils, in hopes that
God will direct you to prevent them in some measure; for, though I know
how things go with us in this world, we do not know what shall become
of us in the next.

"And that God may bless and preserve your Lordship, and grant plenteousness
to your family, is, has been, and shall be, the daily prayer of,

"My Lord, your Lordship's most obedient and submissive son and
servant in Jesus,

Anthony Gavin."

From the foregoing it may be inferred that he was a zealous and
laborious man, and very plain in his speech. His views of slavery
were sufficient, if expressed, to make him very unacceptable to many
of his parishioners. It would seem, also, that there had been
ministers in the parish before him, but they confined their labours
to the lower church,—probably that at Dover, nearest to Richmond,
—whereas he extended his to the mountains, at least fifty or sixty
miles farther up.

Immediately after his death the Rev. Mr. Douglass was chosen.


458

Page 458
He entered on his duties in 1750. His history and character de
serve some notice, and must be acceptable to his numerous and respectable
descendants. They are gathered chiefly from a large register
of baptisms, funerals, marriages, sermons, &c., interspersed with
other notices, throwing some light upon the peculiarities which distinguished
him. The Rev. William Douglass was from Scotland.
In the year 1735 he married Miss Nicholas Hunter, by whom he
had only one child,—a daughter named Margaret. In the year
1748 or 1749, leaving them behind, he came over as teacher in the
family of Colonel Monroe, of Westmoreland, father of President
Monroe, who was one of his pupils, as was also Mr. Jefferson afterward,
in Goochland. After some time, returning to England, he
was ordained, and brought back his wife and daughter in the year
1750, and in the same year settled himself in Goochland. His
daughter Margaret, whom he always called Peggy, married Mr.
Nicholas Meriwether, of Albemarle, and they were the ancestors
of many of that name in Virginia. He brought with him, or had
sent to him, two nephews from Scotland, whom he adopted, educated,
and called his children. He had a brother named James,
who settled in New York and left a numerous posterity there.
Perhaps some of that name who have ministered in our Church
may be his descendants. A few years since a Mr. George Douglass
and two daughters from this family in New York paid a visit to
Albemarle to see their relatives in that county, when a happy
family meeting occurred. One of the adopted sons of Mr. Douglass
(William) returned to Scotland and inherited a title. The other
(James) went to New York and became a successful merchant.
One of his daughters married James Monroe, (the nephew and
adopted son of President Monroe,) who some years since represented
the city of New York in Congress. After this biographical notice
of himself and family, I return to his register, from which we learn
some things concerning the early history of this parish nowhere
else to be found. He states, as coming to him from good authority,
that the church at Dover was undertaken by Mr. Thomas Mann
Randolph in 1720; that it was finished in 1724 at a cost of fifty-four
thousand nine hundred and ninety pounds of tobacco; that it
was fifty by twenty-four feet in size; that the Rev. Mr. Finnie
was employed during those four years to preach once a month; that
the Rev. Mr. Murdaugh was then received as a minister; that he
was to preach the last Sunday in every month alternately at the
plantation of Mr. Robert Carter, on the south side of James River,
and of Major Bolling, on the north side of James River. We learn,

459

Page 459
also, that in the year 1727 the Rev. Mr. Brooke preached once per
month for them; and that in the same year the Rev. Mr. Beckett
was received into the parish as a minister. We learn also, from his
diary kept in this register, that ministers were very scarce in the
surrounding counties, so that Mr. Douglass had much duty to perform
in the way of funerals, marriages, &c. He records one thousand
three hundred and eighty-eight marriages and four thousand
and sixty-nine baptisms. His views of doctrine and ministerial
character may be seen from the favourable notice taken of Turretine,
Doddridge, Walker, Hill, and Whitefield,—also, of Shower's
Sacramental Discourses. In one of Doddridge's works—his Sermons
to Young Men—he has written on a blank leaf these lines to
his children:—

"This, with all Doddridge's other writings, I leave as my best legacy
to my dear children, to supply my deficiencies in your education, which I
now sadly remember has been shamefully neglected. Part with none of
his works for gold or silver, but let your children enjoy them, if you
will not.

"I am your loving father,
"William Douglass."

To this I add an extract from a letter to one of his nephews, just
married, not long before his death:—

"Industry, frugality, good contrivance, with the divine blessing, are
the only schemes to make us happy for this world and another. That was
your father's and grandfather's scheme; and oh, Billy and Martha, make
it yours! Set up, by all means, the worship of God in your family; and
let others about you do what they will, and heap up riches by every
method, but as for you and your family, do you serve God. As for me,
I am quite unfit for this world, and am daily waiting till my change
come."

As to the time in which the churches were completed, with
the exception of that at Dover, it is not easy to determine. The
three churches at which Mr. Douglass officiated were Dover,
Beaver Dam, and Licking Hole. In the year 1777, after a ministry
of twenty-seven years, he resigned his charge, and settled on
a farm in Louisa, where he spent the remainder of his years,
which were not many. In that year the Rev. Mr. Hall was appointed
for twelve months, to be continued or rejected at pleasure
when the time expired. In the year 1781 the Rev. Mr. Hill was
minister. In that year the glebe rented for only five hundredweight
of tobacco. In the year 1787, a tax of three pounds and
ten shillings was levied, or called for, in order to defray the expenses


460

Page 460
of the Rev. Mr. Griffith's consecration as Bishop, of which
Mr. Thomas Mann Randolph paid three pounds. So many of the
parishes failed of their contributions that the consecration did not
take place. In the year 1789, the Rev. Mr. Hopkins was chosen
minister, and continued such until his death, in 1807, when the
old vestry-book ceased. All the accounts received of the Rev.
Mr. Hopkins are of the most favourable kind. His first ministerial
years were spent among the Methodists; but in consequence
of some dissensions among them, or their separation from
the Episcopal Church, he entered into the ministry of the latter.
Tradition says that he was ordained by Bishop White, at a time
when the Congress of the United States and the General Convention
of the Episcopal Church were both sitting in Philadelphia:
that, being called on to preach before civil and ecclesiastical dignitaries,
and especially with General Washington full in view, he
was for a time overwhelmed, but roused himself up to boldness
by remembering "that a mightier than Washington was there."
Soon after his ordination he became the minister of Hollowing
Creek and Allen's Creek Churches, in Hanover county, supplying
also the Manakin and Peterville Churches, in Powhatan. In
1787, he became minister of Beaver Dam and Licking Hole
Churches, Dover Church being left out. He died in the seventieth
year of his age, universally esteemed and beloved. He was married
twice, and had eleven children by each wife. His first wife
was a Miss Pollard, the second a Miss Anderson.[125]

After a long and dreary interval of utter destitution, the hopes
and efforts of the few remaining friends and members of the
Church in Goochland and the neighbouring counties were aroused,
in the year 1726, by the missionary labours of the Rev. William
Lee. As to body, Mr. Lee being little more than thin air, or a


461

Page 461
light feather, as he galloped over these counties, his horse felt not
the rider on his back; but the people felt the weight and power
of a strong mind and will, and the pressure of a heart and soul
devoted to the love of God and man. He laid the foundation
anew of the churches in Goochland, Powhatan, Amelia, and
Chesterfield, and, like another Allen, lived to see them all supplied
by ministers. His physical power being incompetent to
these itinerant labours, he took charge of the Church of St. John's,
in Richmond, and afterward of that in the Valley, now a missionary
church. His health failing even for this, he devoted himself
to the press, and was the first editor of the Southern Churchman,
establishing it in Richmond. He continued to edit the same until
his part of the work was performed, when lying on a sick-bed, his
proof-sheets corrected, his selections made and editorials written,
while propped up with bolsters and pillows, thus, to the last, spending
and being spent in his Master's service. During his stay in
Richmond, he was as a right hand to Bishop Moore, who not only
loved him for his amiable qualities and zealous piety, but respected
him for his good judgment, which he often consulted.

In April, 1839, the Rev. Mr. Doughen took charge of the
parish, but only continued a short time. He was succeeded, in
the same year, by the Rev. Richard Wilmer, who continued, with
a short interval, until the summer or fall of 1843. In the year
1844, the Rev. Joseph Wilmer took charge of it, and continued
until the year 1849; and he was succeeded by the Rev. Francis
Whittle, who resigned in 1852. The Rev. Mr. Rodman has recently
become its pastor.

The following list of vestrymen is copied from the vestry-book,
beginning in the year 1744. The Christian names are omitted, for
the sake of brevity, except where necessary to distinguish from
those of the same surname:—

Cocke, Hopkins, Smith, Martin, Burton, Miller, William Randolph,
Woods, Tarlton Fleming, Holman, Bates, Lewis, Peter Jefferson, (father
of the President,) Jordan, Pollard, Cole, Pryor, Stamps, Thomas Mann
Randolph, Woodson, Thomas and John Bolling, Underwood, Sampson,
Vaughan, Morris, Curd, Bryce, Perkins, Massie, Pemberton, Leake,
Harris, William Bolling, Carter, Eldridge. After 1826: Ferguson,
Pleasants, T. K. Harrison, Garland, Vashon, Edward Cunningham,
Carter Harrison, J. A. Cunningham, Randolph Harrison, James and
William Galt, Weisiger, Stillman, Jackson, Thomas Bolling, Nelson,
Watkins, Stanard, Julian Harrison, Logan, Turner, Skipwith, Morson,
Taylor, Selden, Anderson.


462

Page 462

To this it is proper to add, that Mr. William Bolling, in the year
1840, presented a house and fifty acres of land to the church for
a parsonage. St. Paul's, a brick church, was built in the same
year, and, being burned down some years since, was rebuilt in
1855.

 
[125]

I have obtained the following information concerning the ancestors of Mr.
Hopkins. Toward the close of the seventeenth century, three brothers emigrated
to this country from Wales,—one of whom settled in Massachusetts, one in Pennsylvania,
and one in Virginia,—from whom it is probable that great numbers of
the name of Hopkins in this country have sprung. Of the twenty-two children of
the Rev. Mr. Hopkins, I believe only three are now alive. The oldest of these, a
most worthy man, lives on James River, in Goochland. The two youngest—Mr.
George W. Hopkins, of Washington county, and Henry L. Hopkins, of Powhatan—
have been honoured with various offices,—both of these having been, repeatedly,
members of the Virginia Assembly, and each of them of the State Convention;
both of them having been Speakers of the House of Delegates; one of them sent
on a mission to Portugal, and now Judge of the Circuit Court, and the other a
member of the Council and Commonwealth's Attorney.


463

Page 463

ARTICLE LXIII.

King William Parish, or Manakintown, the Huguenot Settlement
on James River.

This parish was originally in Henrico county, which extended
thus far and far beyond it on either side of James River. It is now in
Powhatan county, whose name is taken from the ancient name of
the river and the old King Powhatan. By Act of Assembly in 1790,
it was assigned to the French refugees who were driven from their
country by the persecutions of Louis XIV., and sought an asylum in
Virginia, as hundreds of thousands did in all the various countries
of Protestant Christendom. Before giving that brief detail of the
parish which its tattered records afford, it will be proper to allude
to the history of that most cruel persecution. Though the Reformation
had so far succeeded in France as to number one million
of its most resolute converts, yet there were twenty millions of
bigoted adherents to the Papacy. By uniting their influence and
arms with other Protestants around, the Huguenots, however, had
for a century been a terror to the monarchs of France and the
Papal throne. The bloody massacre of St. Bartholomew's eve, in
1572, only served to increase their resolution. By their aid was
Henry IV. placed upon the throne of France. Out of policy he declared
himself a Romanist, though it was believed he was more of
a Protestant at heart. He soon determined to put a stop to the
persecution and wars which had been carried on, and while declaring
the Papal the true and established Church, and the Protestant the
"Pretended Reformed Religion," secured them both in their religious
privileges, by the Edict of Nantes, in the year 1685.[126] This
continued in force during the reign of Louis XIII. and the minority
of his son, Louis XIV. On his accession to the throne, he determined
on a different course. The dupe of Jesuits, confessors,


464

Page 464
Madame Maintenon, and Cardinal Mazarin, he set about converting
the Huguenots to the Catholic Church. He did not for some time
repeal the Edict of Nantes by a formal decree, but set it aside by
various acts which rendered it of no avail. He declared his determination
to convert all his subjects to the true faith of Rome.
This he attempted by bribery, using large sums for the purpose;
by persecution of various kinds; by destroying their churches and
requiring them to attend the Romish worship. Immense numbers
stole away from the country, though death and confiscation were
the penalties. At length the formal decree was passed. The Edict
of Nantes was revoked. The Protestant clergy must be converted,
or leave the kingdom in fifteen days, or be sent to work in the
galleys. Great numbers of false-hearted ones, chiefly of the laity,
were converted, either by gold or the sword,—for dragoons were the
chief ministers of the King, therefore converting was called dragooning.
It is computed that by emigration alone not less than
three hundred thousand were lost to the country. All the nations
of Protestant Christendom, and even Russia, were shocked at the
scene, and, deeply sympathizing with the sufferers, threw open their
doors to receive them, and vied with each other who should afford
most succour and most immunities and privileges. They thus found
their way into every Protestant country of Europe, and into many
parts of the United States, especially into New York, Virginia,
and South Carolina, where their names are to this day the names
of some of the most respectable families of the land. Dearly has
France and the Romish Church paid for the inhuman treatment of
these brave soldiers of the cross. Ardent lovers of religious liberty,
they have been in every land the most strenuous asserters of it;
and, sound in the faith, they have boldly contended against the false
docrines of Rome. Trained from generation to generation to contend
for their rights on the battle-field, in gratitude to those who
have afforded them an asylum, they have on many a field of Europe
revenged their own and their fathers' wrongs. Nor did Louis succeed
in his design to banish them from the land. The blood of the
martyrs was again the seed of the Church. Some faithful ones
were kept there by the arm of the Lord, as in the hollow of his
hand, who have increased and multiplied to this day; and it is believed
that at this time the proportion of Protestants in France to
the Catholics is as great as in the days of Louis the persecutor.
Then there was one million to twenty, now one million eight hundred
thousand to thirty-four millions; and the same policy by the
Bonapartes has been found necessary as that adopted by Henry

465

Page 465
IV. In the providence of God, who can bring good out of evil, it
has also come to pass that the banished Huguenots have been benefactors
to all countries where they have gone, by contributing to
the improvement of the same, not only in religion, but in all the
arts and sciences,—being remarkable for their industry, skill, and
integrity. The very best of the old ministers of Virginia were
from this stock. Moncure, Latane, the two Fontaines, the two
Maurys, and others who might be mentioned, were among them.
To these, I am told, may be added one of recent date,—the pious
William Duvall, of Richmond. If we extend our view, and look
to the patriots and statesmen of the Revolution, where shall we find
better men than Chief-Justice Jay, of New York, Elias Boudinot,
of New Jersey, the Bayards, Legare, the Laurenses, the Grimkys,
Marion, Neuvilles, Gervais, Rutledge?

THE FONTAINE AND MAURY FAMILIES.

In connection with these notices of the Manakin settlement,
some account of the Fontaines and Maurys may very properly
come in, not merely because they were descendants of the Huguenots,
but because one of them—the Rev. Francis Fontaine—was at
one time its minister. Whoever would see a full and most interesting
account of the ancestors of these families must examine
that deeply-touching history of them, entitled "The Huguenot
Family," prepared by the Rev. Dr. Hawks and Miss Ann Maury,
of New York. I can only briefly refer to some of the children
and grandchildren of those remarkable persons, James Fontaine
and his wife, who were so signally rescued from destruction on the
coast of Ireland. Their five sons and two daughters were well
educated. John entered the army, and came over to this country
to explore it for his brother. He returned, and with Morris remained
in England. Peter, Francis, and James settled in Virginia.
Peter became minister first, for one year, at Weynoake, Martins
Brandon, and Jamestown, then settled in Westover parish. Francis
lived for one year at Manakintown, then settled in York-Hampton.
Their sister, Anne Fontaine, married Strother Maury,
from Gascony, in England. They came to Virginia, and settled in
King William. Their son, James Maury, was ordained in 1742,
and was for one year minister in King William county, then went
to Louisa to Fredericksville parish, which was afterward added in
part to Albemarle. He married a daughter of Mr. Walker, of
Albemarle. He had numerous sons and daughters, of whom more
hereafter. His son Matthew succeeded his father as minister.


466

Page 466

I will now speak more particularly of those Huguenots who settled
in Virginia. As early as the year 1660 some few came over,
fleeing from the earlier persecutions. They were sufficient in
number to induce an Act of the Assembly granting them the privilege
of citizens. Toward the close of the century we read of some
settling themselves on the Rappahannock. In the year 1790, so
many had settled on the south side of James River, in Henrico
county, (which was then on both sides of the river,) that the Assembly
passed an act giving them a large tract of land along the
river as their possession, exempting them from all county and
State taxes for seven years, and then extending the privilege indefinitely.
They were required to support their own minister in
their own way. Accordingly, in dividing the grant into farms, all
running down to the river in narrow slips, a portion of the most
valuable was set apart for the minister, and continued for a long
time to be in possession and use of the minister, while one was
resident in the parish, and after that to be rented out, and the
proceeds paid for such occasional services as were rendered by
neighbouring ministers. At length, as it could not be seized and
alienated by the act for selling the glebes, it got into private hands,
and has been thus held for many years. As service is now regularly
held in the old church in Manakintown settlement, it is believed
that the glebe originally consecrated to the support of a
minister will be restored to its first design and long use. The
service of the Episcopal Church was used, and sermons preached
for some time in both French and English, as some of both nations
attended the church at Manakin.[127] In the year 1714 a list of the
little Colony was sent to England of men, women, and children,
amounting to nearly three hundred. The list is before me. The
minister was the Rev. Jean Caison. In the year 1728 the Rev.
Mr. Niern, who had been their minister for a year or two, left them
and took with him to London a letter showing that there had never
been more than thirty tithables in the parish, and that they could
not support a minister by themselves. Dr. Hawks speaks of a body
of six hundred coming over with their minister, Philippe de Richebourg,
and settling there. It may be that these are the same of
whom we read as first settling at Manakin and then moving to
South Carolina. I have the old register of baptisms, &c. of this


467

Page 467
parish, written in French, and beginning in the year 1721 and
continuing to 1753, from which it would appear that a Rev. Mr.
Fontaine was minister in 1720 and 1721, baptizing a child by the
name of Morris, establishing that to be a Huguenot name. In
the year 1726 a Mr. Murdock, minister of St. James Northam,
Goochland, officiated by baptizing at Manakin. In the year 1727
the Rev. Mr. Brooke, of Hanover, did the same. In that same
year and the next Mr. Niern was the minister. In the year during
which Mr. Niern went to England Mr. Massamm was minister. In
the years 1728 and 1729 the Revs. Mr. Swift and Deter baptized.
In the years 1731 and 1732 the Rev. Mr. Marye was minister. In
the year 1739 the Rev. Mr. Gavin baptized in the parish. From
the year 1750 to 1780 the Rev. Mr. Douglass, of Goochland, and
other ministers around, occasionally served it. After this the Rev.
Mr. Hopkins, of Goochland, was their minister. Since the revival
of the Church in Virginia, it has been partially supplied by various
other ministers to the present time, when the Rev. Mr. Tizzard, of
Chesterfield, is the pastor, in connection with the Church in Chesterfield.
One thing is worthy of remark in relation to the baptisms
in this parish,—that those of the negro children are far more in
number than those of the whites. Their names are regularly registered.
This shows their sense of duty as to the religious dedication
of the children of Africa. To the foregoing brief statistics I cannot
forbear adding the following extract from a letter received
from one of the descendants of the family of Dupuys. She writes:—

"From notes written at the base of our ancestral tree I copy the following:—`Bartholomew
Dupuy (my paternal Huguenot ancestor) in 1650
or 1653. At eighteen years of age he entered the army, where his intelligence
and fidelity soon won him the confidence of the King, Louis
XIV., who promoted him at an early age to be an officer in his household
guard. He so far trusted and honoured him as often to select him to
perform duties so important as to require his own signature to some of the
orders. One of these papers was the means under God of saving this
officer and his wife from arrest and most probably from death. But a
short time before the revocation of the Edict of Nantes, he married a
Countess (Susannah Lavillon) and retired to his villa for a short respite
from his military duties. Very soon after his retirement, they were called
on by one of the King's messengers, who communicated the startling intelligence
that the revocation of the Edict of Nantes was to take immediate
effect, and that he had been sent by the King from motives of esteem to
save him and his wife from the impending fate of all heretics. He urged
their submission (that is, their renunciation of the Protestant faith) with
all his eloquence, and with all his promises of great benefits from the King
if they would show them fidelity by obeying their orders. Dupuy replied
that the demand was so sudden and important that he would beg a few


468

Page 468
hours for consideration. The priest said that this request was reasonable,
and he would grant it cheerfully. As soon as he had retired, Dupuy sent
for the village tailor, and asked whether he could have a suit of livery
made for his page in six hours. He replied in the affirmative, and at
midnight they were completed and delivered. In this suit he immediately
disguised his wife as his page, and putting on his best uniform, and girding
on his sword, took what money and jewels they had, together with a
few clothes and their Bibles and Psalm-Books, and, mounting two good
horses, set out for the frontier of the kingdom. They travelled either fourteen
or eighteen days, and, though stopped almost daily, always escaped
by saying that he was the King's officer, until near the line, when he was
arrested. He showed the officer the paper with the King's signature; and,
immediately snatching it back, he drew his sword and fiercely asked by
what authority he was thus insulted, and demanding an escort for his protection
to the line, which was immediately granted. On their safe arrival
the guard was dismissed, and, crossing over into Germany, they there
sang the praises of God in the fortieth Psalm, and offered up prayers and
thanksgivings to their great Deliverer for their escape from a cruel death.
They remained in Germany fourteen years, then stayed two years in England,
from whence they came to America in the year 1700, and settled at
Manakintown, on James River, in King William parish. The sword
used by Bartholomew Dupuy while in France is now in possession of Dr.
John James Dupuy, of Prince George, and was used by his grandfather,
James Dupuy, Sr., of Nottoway, at the battle of Guilford, where he signalized
himself.' "

From the family of Dupuys I have gotten the old church register,
which, though rotten and torn and in fragments, has been kept
so as to enable me to obtain the statistics given in this article.
The foregoing account of the escape of Bartholomew Dupuy and
his wife is a true picture of the methods resorted to by the persecuted
Huguenots to fly from the kingdom. Nothing now remains
but that I mention the names of those families still remaining in
Virginia who derive their descent from the Huguenots. From
information coming through books and individuals they are as
follows:—Marye, Fontaine, Dupuy, Harris, Sublett, Watkins,
Markam, Sully, Chasteen, Duvall, Bondurant, Flournoy, Potter,
Michaux, Pemberton, Munford, Hatcher, Jaqueline, Bernard,
Barraud, Latane, Moncure, Agie, Amouet, Chadouin, Dibrell,
Farrar, Fuqua, Jeter, Jordan, Jouette, Le Grand, Ligon, Maupin,
Maxey, Pasteur, Perrou, Thweatt, Maury, Boisseau, Fouche, Lanier,
Le Neve. Concerning a few of these it may be questioned whether
they be not of Welsh descent, while there are doubtless others who
might be added.

 
[127]

The name Manakin is derived from the Indian word Monacan,—the name of a
warlike tribe of Indians whom the great King Powhatan in vain attempted to subdue.
They resided on James River from the Falls (Richmond) to Manakin.

 
[126]

The clergy and Parliament opposed the edict violently, but Henry said, "I
have enacted the edict. I wish it to be observed. My will must be observed as the
reason why. In an obedient State, reasons are never demanded of the prince. I am
King. I speak to you as a King. I will be obeyed." The Protestants, also, who
were dissatisfied at his declaring himself for the Romish Church, complained and
threatened; but he spoke as decisively to them.


469

Page 469

ARTICLE XLIV.

Parishes in Dinwiddie and Brunswick Counties.—Bath Parish.

This parish was established in 1742, being cut off from Bristol
parish. Its dividing-line, however, was changed in 1744, so as to
enlarge Bristol parish. Dinwiddie county was taken from Prince
George in 1752. A part of Bristol parish—that in which Petersburg
lies—is still in Dinwiddie. The first minister of whom we
have any account was a Mr. Pow, once a chaplain of his Majesty's
ship Triton, who was succeeded in 1755 by the Rev. James Pasteur,
who was also the minister in 1756; whether after this, and how
long, is unknown. In 1763 the Rev. Devereux Jarratt, who had
been ordained in London on Christmas-day the preceding year,
became minister of the parish. In his autobiography he says,—

"Several ministers have been my predecessors in the parish. From
them," he says, "I suppose they had heard little else but morality and
smooth harangues, in no wise calculated to disturb their carnal repose, or
to awaken any one to a sense of guilt and danger. . . . My doctrine was
strange and wonderful to them, and their language one to another was to
this effect:—`We have had many ministers, and have heard many before
this man, but we never heard any thing till now of conversion, the new
birth, &c. We never heard any of our ministers say any thing against
civil mirth, such as dancing, &c.; nay, they rather encouraged the people
in them,—for we have seen Parson such an one, and Parson such another,
at these mirthful places, as merry as any of the company. This new man
of ours brings strange things to our ears.' . . . At this time," he says
"I stood alone, not knowing of one clergyman in Virginia like-minded
with myself."

It is to be feared that about this time, and some years before, a
number of the clergy of Virginia were not only wanting in seriousness,
but were immoral and ignorant. A pious member of the
Church, from somewhere in this region, I believe, writes to the
Bishop of London of the gross ignorance of four clergymen, mentioning
them by name, and the immorality of one of them, comparing
them with the learning and piety of two Presbyterian
ministers who had just come into the State, and prophesying the
result of these things unless arrested. He, however, adds that
there were some of a different character. With one of these Mr.
Jarratt himself soon became acquainted.


470

Page 470

As Mr. Jarratt was the minister of this parish from this time
(1763) to the time of his death in the year 1801,—thirty-eight years,
—and was a man of no ordinary character, it is proper that we give
some sketch of him. The only difficulty in doing this will be the
selecting, from the materials furnished by himself and the Rev. Mr.
Coleman, to whom he addressed his autobiographical letters, the
most important, so as not to exceed the bounds prescribed by the
character of this work. Devereux Jarratt—so called, as to his Christian
name, from Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex, in whose army
his grandfather served—was born in New Kent county, Virginia,
January 6, 1732-3. His father, like the reputed father of our
Emmanuel, was a carpenter. "We were accustomed," he says,
"to look upon what were called gentlefolks as being of a superior
order. My parents neither sought nor expected any titles or great
things either for themselves or their children. Their highest ambition
was to teach their children to read and write and to understand
the fundamental rules of arithmetic. They also taught us short
prayers, and made us very perfect in repeating the Church catechism."
When he was seven years of age his father died, and he
was left to the care of his elder brother Robert, who inherited all
the landed estate, as there was no will. The share of the other
children was twenty-five pounds current Virginia money. At an
early age Devereux discovered a turn for books, and was sent to a
plain school. But, when not at school, his time was spent in
keeping race-horses, taking care of game-cocks, and working on
the farm. He seldom went to church, where he says old Mr. Mossom
preached "wholly from a written sermon, keeping his eyes
continually fixed on the paper, and so near that what he said
seemed rather addressed to the cushion than to the congregation."
At the age of nineteen, after spending some time in learning the
trade of a carpenter, and disliking it, he determined to become a
teacher of what he did know. Hearing of a place in Albemarle—
now Fluvanna—at a Mr. Moon's, he set out,—his all, excepting only
one shirt, being on his back, and that which was in his hand was
lost soon after. In Albemarle there was no minister of any persuasion,—the
Sabbath being spent in sporting. His salary was nine
pound and seven shillings. Being sickly on that part of James River
where he lived,—near Bremo Creek,—he changed his place of
labour, and got still less the second year. The third year he lived
with a Mr. Kennon, whose wife was a pious woman and greatly
promoted his spiritual welfare. His reading and intercourse with
Mrs. Kennon strongly inclined him to the Presbyterian Church,


471

Page 471
which was then gaining ground in those parts. After some backslidings,
and many doubts and misgivings, and some severe contests
with the evil one, he determined on the ministry. Having meanwhile
examined some excellent Episcopal writers, and considered
well the question of Churches, he resolved to take Orders in the
Established Church. Having improved himself much in literature,
especially in the languages, during his engagements as a teacher,
and having obtained commendatory papers, and a title to some
parish, in October, 1762, he sailed for England to obtain Orders.
There he was detained until the spring,—not being able to obtain
Orders at once,—and being attacked by the smallpox. During
this time he placed all his money in the hands of the friend with
whom he stayed, who spent it. Other and better friends being
raised up by Providence, he was supplied with the means of returning
to Virginia. In that year he entered upon the duties of
the ministry in Bath parish. There were three churches in it,—
Saponey, Hatcher's Run, and Butterwood,—to whose congregations
he devoted himself. Of his preaching he speaks thus:—

"Instead of moral harangues, and advising my hearers, in a cool, dispassionate
manner, to walk in the primrose paths of a decided, sublime,
and elevated virtue, and not to tread the foul track of disgraceful vice,

[the language of the pulpit in that day,] I endeavoured to enforce, in the
most alarming colours, the guilt of sin, the entire depravity of human
nature, the awful danger mankind are in by nature and practice, the tremendous
curse to which they are obnoxious, and their utter inability to
evade the sentence of the law and the strokes of divine justice by their
own power, merit, or good works. A religious concern took place, and
that great question, `What must I do to be saved?' was more and more
common, especially among the middle ranks. Not that I supposed none
of the poorer sort were convinced of sin and truly concerned for their
souls, but they did not make me acquainted with it, because, at that time,
people in the lower walks of life had not been accustomed to converse with
clergymen, whom they supposed to stand in the rank of gentlemen and
above the company and conversation of plebeians. . . . As soon as I
discovered a religious concern in my parish, I no longer confined my labours
to the pulpit on Sundays, but went out by night and by day, and at
any time in the week, to private houses, and convened as many as I could
for the purpose of prayer, singing, preaching, and conversation. The
religious concern among the people of Bath soon enlarged the bounds of
my preaching. The sound of it quickly reached to the neighbouring
parishes, and thence to the counties and parishes at a greater distance.
This moved many scores from other parishes to come and see for themselves.
Butterwood Church soon became too small to hold one-half the
congregation. One large wing, and then another, were added to it, but
yet room was wanting. I was now earnestly solicited by one and another
from a distance to come over and help them. Thus commenced the enlargement


472

Page 472
of my bounds of preaching, which, in process of time, extended
to a circle of five or six hundred miles, east, west, north, south."

During his years of travelling, when he visited twenty-nine
counties in North Carolina and Virginia, he regularly attended the
three churches in his own parish on Sundays, devoting the days
of the week to itinerant labours, except on occasions when his
visits were very distant. The journal of his labours shows that for
some years he averaged five sermons a week. He was, of course,
very obnoxious to many of the clergy. One of them charged him
with violating an old English canon by preaching in private houses.
To this he replied that no clergyman refused to preach a funeral
sermon in a private house for forty shillings, and he preached for
nothing. Moreover, that many of the brethren transgressed the
75th canon, which forbids cards, dice, tables, &c. to the clergy,
and yet were not punished. Some complained of his encouraging
pious laymen to pray in his presence, which he answered by reminding
them how often they permitted ungodly laymen to swear
in their presence, without even a rebuke. Mr. Jarratt adduces in
proof of the low state of religion the small number of communicants,—none
but a few of the more aged—perhaps seven or eight
at a church—attending. The rest thought nothing about it, or else
considered it a dangerous thing to meddle with. The first time he
administered it there was only that number. About ten years after
he entered the ministry, there were, at his three churches, including
a number who came from other parishes, about nine hundred or
one thousand, although he endeavoured faithfully to guard the table
against unworthy receivers. For many years this happy state of
things continued; but, after a time, a melancholy change appeared.
During the war, the clergy, deprived of their salaries, had in great
numbers deserted their parishes. Dissenters were multiplying
through the State. An irresistible tide was sweeping away the
Episcopal Church. What could the single arm of Mr. Jarratt do
to avert its ruin? The Baptists made the first inroads on his flock.
The Methodists came on soon after, and Mr. Jarratt availed himself
of their aid to oppose the former. They professed to be, and
doubtless at the first in sincerity, the true friends of the Episcopal
Church, who only desired its reformation; but, when increased in
numbers, they established a separate and rival communion. Mr.
Jarratt encouraged their private meetings, and, not deeming it
right or canonical to throw open his churches to their lay preachers,
tendered his own barn to their use, and was present at some of


473

Page 473
their meetings. The issue of this is well known. His own services
were after a time deserted for the more popular modes of the Methodists.
But the same result occurred throughout the State, only
that those who adopted a different mode, and made violent opposition
to them, were the sooner deserted. The fact is, that a
thousand circumstances contributed to render the downfall of the
Church at that time inevitable. Had there been such men as Jarratt
from the first, it would not have been. Had there been a
hundred such men as Jarratt in the Church of Virginia at that
time, numbers would have remained in it, who would have made
the Episcopal Church at this day the largest, instead of the smallest,
of the Churches of Virginia. Mr. Jarratt, though thus deserted
and discouraged, continued steadfast, predicting, even to the last,
the resuscitation of the Episcopal Church, believing that it had the
Divine favour, and the redeeming principle in it. In his letter to
his old friend Mr. McRoberts, who was like-minded with himself
for many years, and with whom he had taken sweet counsel, but
who at length abandoned our ministry and sought to establish a
Church in Virginia on the Independent plan, he writes like a true
descendant of the English Reformers as to the doctrines and policy
of the Church, assuming, as to the latter, the ground taken in our
Articles and Ordination Services, affirming its apostolic origin,
though not denouncing others as destitute of authority. Mr. Jarratt,
though looked upon with an evil eye, as he says, by the old clergy,
and having little intercourse with them, still attended some of their
Conventions. At one, in 1774, held in Williamsburg, he says that
he was treated so unkindly, and heard the true doctrines of Christianity
so ridiculed, that he determined to attend no more of them.
In the year 1785, however, he attended one in Richmond, which
was called for the purpose of organizing a Diocesan Church and
adopting canons; but he was again so coldly treated, that, after
remaining a few hours, he returned home. In the year 1790, the
Convention which elected Bishop Madison was called, and he, being
present, was better received. On the following year he was appointed
to preach the opening sermon at the Convention of 1792.
That noble sermon stands first in his volume of sermons. On his
return home he stopped in Petersburg, where Bishop Madison had
appointed an ordination. Mr. Jarratt, being requested to take
part in the examination, refused two of them as unfit for the office.
"But what did that avail?" he says: "another clergyman was called
in, and I had the mortification to hear both of them ordained the
same day. I say hear, for it was a sight I did not wish to see."

474

Page 474
The explanation of this was as follows:—Mr. Jarratt took his place
in a pew on one side of the pulpit, in a corner, where he sat with
a handkerchief over his head. The excuse which Bishop Madison
offers for ordaining one or more of them, whom he admitted to be
unworthy, was the same which Governors and Commissaries formerly
did for not disgracing such,—viz.: that "ministers were so scarce,
we must not be too strict." The Convention of 1792 was the last
Mr. Jarratt attended. In the year 1795, he says, "I have now
lived in the world just sixty-two years." Infirmities of body were
now coming over him. The use of one eye had long been lost to him.
A tumour on his face, which ultimately proved to be a cancer, began
to make its appearance. Notwithstanding this, he says, "old and
afflicted as I am, I travelled more than one hundred miles last
week, was at three funerals, and married two couples. Within less
than three months, I think, I wrote about nine hundred pages in
quarto. Part of them I copied for the press; part I extracted and
abridged; part I composed in prose and poetry. But now it is
probable I have wellnigh finished my work." Still, he went on
with his public duties. "I wish," he says, "to go to church every
Sunday at least, and join in her most excellent system of public
worship,—a system to which I am particularly attached, because it
is noble, beautiful, and complete in all its parts, and, in my judgment,
well calculated to answer the end designed. And will such a
system ever be permitted to fall to the ground? I fondly hope it will
not; though, alas! the prospect here in Virginia is gloomy enough.
Churches are little attended,—in most places (I judge from report)
not more than a dozen, one Sunday with another; and sometimes
half that number. By a letter from a Presbyterian minister, I learn
that religion is at a low ebb among them. The Baptists, I suppose,
are equally declining. I seldom hear any thing about them. The
Methodists are splitting and falling to pieces." As to himself, he
says, "I have yet tolerable congregations, but the people have sat
under the sound of it so long, that they appear gospel-hardened."
He speaks of the condition of a minister in Virginia as most discouraging.
He was labouring without any compensation; and yet, he
says, "it is pretended that I have an itching palm." This he
disproves by declaring that from 1776 to 1785 he received not one
farthing, and that after the Church was organized in Virginia, and
a subscription was set on foot in his parish, he only received about
thirty or forty shillings the first year, and nothing since.

To this brief sketch, taken from his own letters to Mr. Coleman,
I only add the following remarks by the editor:—


475

Page 475

"Mr. Jarratt meddled very little with politics. He had enough to do
to attend to the duties of his profession. He considered himself an ambassador
of Christ. His business was to call sinners to repentance, and to
teach mankind the way of salvation without regard to parties or opinions.
Had he been asked what countryman he was, in the spirit of universal
philanthropy he might have answered, like Socrates, `I am a citizen of
the world;' but when the rights of his country were invaded, or her
interests endangered, the amor patriæ which dwelt in his bosom would
not permit him to be an unconcerned looker-on. Many circumstances
took place during the Revolution, and all well known in Virginia, which
unite to evince his attachment to the interests of America. When the
Governor of Virginia (Lord Dunmore) left the seat of Government, and
issued a proclamation for all the loyalists to join him, it was necessary to
guard the seaport-towns from depredations. Many of his parishioners
and even his pupils turned out as volunteers in defence of their country,
and with his approbation. I remember the circumstances well, being out
myself in 1776; and a fellow-student of mine (Mr. Daniel Eppes) read
the Declaration of Independence to the army. During the contest between
England and America, his dress was generally homespun. By precept
and example he encouraged economy, frugality, and industry. I have
often heard him recommend these virtues to his fellow-citizens, and even
to go patch upon patch rather than suffer their just rights to be infringed."

Mr. Jarratt died on the 29th of January, 1801, in the sixty-ninth
year of his age and the thirty-eighth of his ministry. His excellent
widow survived him a number of years. She was the daughter
of a Mr. Clayborne, of Dinwiddie or Brunswick. They had no
children. Mrs. Jarratt was one of the first and most liberal contributors
to our Theological Seminary.

Though fifty-five years have elapsed since the death of Mr.
Jarratt, the history of his successors is brief. With one exception
all are now living, and therefore my pen is hindered. The Rev.
Wright Tucker, like-minded with Mr. Jarratt, succeeded him.
In the year 1805, he is in the Convention at Richmond. There
had been no Conventions, or else no journals of them, since 1795.
Another interval of seven years elapsed without Conventions. Mr.
Tucker was not at the Convention of 1812, but appeared in 1813.
How long he lived and ministered after this is not known to the
writer. His name is not on the journals afterward. Nor is it
known that there were any regular ministrations there, until the
year 1827, when the Rev. John Grammar—a son of the two props
to the church in Petersburg, already mentioned, one of whom was
an old parishioner of Mr. Jarratt—took charge of the parish, in
connection with that of St. Andrew's in Brunswick. From the
time of his settlement to the present, there have been six ministers
besides himself,—the Rev. Thos. Castleman, the Rev. Mr. Massie,
the Rev. Mr. Banister, the Rev. Mr. Webb, and the Rev. Thomas


476

Page 476
Ambler. A new brick church has been built at the court-house
Old Saponey still stands, and is the only one of the three in which
Mr. Jarratt officiated that has any existence so far as we know
and believe. No bishop or other minister can enter that plain but
venerable building without associations of the most sacred character.
Although only a very few now live who remember to have seen old
Father Jarratt, even in their early years, yet his name and memory
have been handed down from generation to generation with the
highest respect, and not only the Old Saponey, but the Episcopal
Church itself in that region, used to be known and called by some
of the inhabitants "Old Father Jarratt's Church."

As to the families which once dwelt around that spot and worshipped
in that house, where are they? One at least remains to
remind us of former days. Hard by the old church still lives the
aged widow of Mr. Thomas Withers, the friend of Mr. Jarratt, the
prop of Old Saponey in many ways. To the old mansion, as by
instinct, the clergy always repair, when the service is over, and
love to ask and hear of former days and of Father Jarratt. The
descendants and relatives of old Mr. Withers and his still surviving
widow are numerous, and many of them active members of the
Church, and one of them in the ministry: but where are they?
Old Saponey knows them no more.

BRUNSWICK COUNTY AND ST. ANDREW'S PARISH.

The county of Brunswick and parish of St. Andrew's were established
in 1720, being cut off from the counties of Isle of Wight and
Surrey and the parishes of the same, by Act of Assembly. Being a
frontier-county, arms and ammunition were assigned to the settlers,
taxes remitted for ten years, and five hundred pounds given to Nathaniel
Harrison, Jonathan Allen, Henry Harrison, and William
Edwards, to be by them laid out in building a church, court-house,
prison, pillory and stocks, where they shall think fit. Twelve years
after this, in the year 1732, other portions of the Isle of Wight and
Surrey were added to Brunswick. Having had access to the vestry-book
of this parish, which commences in the year 1732, when the
county and parish were then completed, we are able to give a
more accurate account of the church and its ministers than of some
others. It is evident that there had been previous vestries, and
that the church ordered by the Assembly had been built, (where
is not known,) and there may have been a minister or ministers
before the commencement of this vestry-book. But in 1733 the
vestry met and chose the Rev. Mr. Beatty, at the recommendation


477

Page 477
of the Governor. He was to preach at the church already built,
and some place on Meherrin, where a chapel was to be built. At
a meeting in 1734, two chapels, instead of one, were ordered, and
the places selected, but objection, it is supposed, being made, and
complaints sent to the Governor and Council, that body gave directions
where they were to be placed. The one was to be on Meherrin,
and called Meherrin Church, and the other on or near
Roanoke, to be called Roanoke Church, the old church to be called
the Mother-Church. In the year 1739, another church is determined
on, and in 1742, mention is made of the new church. In
1744, it is resolved to build a church on the south side of Roanoke.
In 1746, it is resolved to build a church on the south side of
Meherrin. In the year 1750, mention is made of Duke's Chapel,
and Rattlesnake Chapel. These, we presume, were additional to
the two on either side of Meherrin, and the two on either side of
Roanoke, and the Mother-Church,—being seven in all. As to their
location I can form no conjecture. The problem must be solved
by the citizens of Brunswick and Greensville, the latter county,
with one or more of the churches, having been cut off from the
former at a later period. In the year 1750, the Rev. Mr. Beatty
disappears from the record, having served the parish seventeen
years. In the same year the Rev. George Purdie is elected
minister for six months. At the end of the year the Rev. William
Pow,—the same no doubt who was soon after the minister in Bath
parish,—being recommended by the Hon. Lewis Burwell, President,
and the Commissary, is chosen. In six months after, the Rev.
Mr. Purdie is again the minister, though with the remonstrance
of four of the vestry. In November, 1752, the name of another
chapel—Reedy Creek—appears, and in the year 1754 another by
the name of Kittle Stick. At the same date the Rev. Mr. Purdie is
allowed to preach once in three months at Red Oak School-House,—
probably the place where Red Oak Church afterward stood.

At a vestry-meeting in 1755 the following entry is found:—

"The vestry, being of opinion that the Rev. George Purdie has for some
time past neglected his duty, and behaved himself in a manner which is
a scandal to a person of his function, do order and direct Drury Stith,
Edward Goodrich, and Littleton Tazwell, or any two of them, to wait on
the Commissary and acquaint him as soon as possible with the behaviour
and conduct of said Purdie for some time past, and request him to make
use of his authority in silencing him, (if any such he hath,) and if not,
that he will join with us in a remonstrance to the Bishop of London, or
such other person or persons as he shall advise, to have the said Purdie
removed from the parish."


478

Page 478

Under the same date we find mention of the Old Court-House
Church, and an order that the Surveyor of the county make a
plan of it, as it will be necessary to build three other chapels.

In the year 1757, we find the case of Mr. Purdie before the
vestry, the Commissary having ordered a trial. The witnesses
appear, when Mr. Purdie acknowledges guilt and resigns his
charge, but the vestry agree to try him for one year more. At
the end of that time, one month's trial was allowed him. They
are not relieved from him until April, 1760. His case is mentioned
in other documents which I have. The Rev. Patrick Lunan and
the Rev. Gronon Owen next present themselves as candidates, and
are both admitted on trial for one year, the salary to be equally
divided between them. The Rev. Mr. Lunan was doubtless the
one who gave such trouble to the parish in Suffolk soon after this.
The Rev. Mr. Owen had been recommended by the Governor, but
the recommendation did not come until the application of Mr.
Lunan had been made. Therefore they were both put on trial,
but at the end of the year neither was chosen. Governor Fauquier
then presented Mr. Owen, who was accepted. There was probably
some understanding between the vestry and Governor to this effect,
or else the Governor, being an authoritative man, insisted upon his
right of presentation and induction,—a thing seldom done by any
of his predecessors. Mr. Owen continued to be the minister until
1769, and died there. We should have had no knowledge whatever
of Mr. Owen but for a recent communication from a literary
society in London, from which it appears that he was a man of
talents and worth. The communication referred to makes inquiry
concerning him and his posterity, and their history in this country.
It seems that he was a Welshman, a man of great genius and a fine
scholar, who wrote one of the best poems in the Welsh language,
concerning Wales; and a Welsh society in England is desirous to
erect some monument to his memory in that country. All the
information which could be returned was, that some worthy grandchildren—two
females—were living in Brunswick in reduced circumstances.
No tombstone, no inscription, exists. Perhaps the
place of his interment is unknown. In the year 1769, the Rev.
Mr. Lundie produces a certificate from the Bishop of London of
his ordination, and is received as the minister.

The entries in the vestry-book now become irregular and brief.
The war of the Revolution was at hand. The best men were on
the field or in the councils of the country. Henry Tazwell, an
active member of the vestry, was taking an active part in the


479

Page 479
affairs of the country. The ministers lost their salaries; the glebes
were for the most part scarcely worth having, and the glebe-houses
tumbling over their heads. The Rev. Mr. Lundie was among the few
who continued at his post during the war. His name is seen on
the Journal of the Convention in 1785, which met in Richmond to
organize the diocese and unite in the general confederation of the
Church in America. He was then the minister of the churches in
Greensville as well as Brunswick. After this he became a minister
of the Methodist communion. The names of Drury Stith,
John Jones, Thomas Claiborne, appear among the lay delegates.
They were probably among the last who despaired of the Church
in this region. It is believed that the Rev. Mr. Grammar in 1827
was, longo intervallo, the regular successor to Mr. Lundie. The
Rev. Messrs. Jarratt, Tucker, and Cameron, from the adjoining
counties of Dinwiddie and Lunenburg, doubtless performed many
ministerial offices there during their ministries.

In giving a list of the clergy in Bath parish, from Mr. Grammar's
time to the present, we have given the list of the ministers of St.
Andrew's parish, as they were under the same ministry, with the
exception of the three last,—the Revs. Messrs. Berger, Johnson, and
Mower, whose services have been confined to Brunswick, while Bath
parish had its own. Under the auspices of these ministers of our
resuscitated Church in Brunswick, three new churches have been
built, one at Lawrenceville, another about twelve miles off, called
Wilkin's Chapel, from the name of him who built it at his own expense,
and the third about eighteen miles from Lawrenceville.

The following is the list of vestrymen from the year 1732 to
1786:—Henry Embra, John Wall, Richard Burch, Wm. Machen,
Wm. Wynne, Charles King, Wm. Smith, Thomas Wilson, Robert
Dyer, Nicholas Lanier, Wm. Hagwood, Batt Peterson, Nathaniel
Edwards, James Mitchell, Clement Read, George Walter, John
Ligleport, Littleton Tazwell, Nicholas Edmonds, John Clack,
Thomas Switty, Henry Edmonds, Robert Briggs, Edward Goodrich,
Heagle Williams, John Petway, Samson Lanier, William
Thornton, W. Edwards, Henry Cocke, Alexander Watson, Thomas
Stith, Frederick Machen, Francis Willis, Henry Tazwell, Joseph
Poeples, Richard Elliott, William Batte, Thomas Edmonds, Wm.
Machen, Buckner Stith, Benjamin Blick, Birrus Jones, Andrew
Meade, John Stith, John B. Goldsberry. Among the above-mentioned
vestrymen we read the names of Clement Read, Littleton
and Henry Tazwell. Of the first we shall speak when we find
his name on the vestry-book of Cumberland parish, Lunenburg, when


480

Page 480
separated from Brunswick. For notices of the two Tazwells, we
refer to Mr. Grigsby's book on the Convention of 1776. The
first was descended from William Tazwell, who came from Somersetshire
in 1715, and married a daughter of Colonel Southey
Littleton. His son Littleton resided in Brunswick and was an
active vestryman and churchwarden. His grandson Henry was
born there, and became a lawyer of eminence. He married a Miss
Waller. He was the father of the present Littleton Waller Tazwell.
After distinguishing himself as a statesman and patriot in
the House of Burgesses, and in other causes during and after the
war, he was raised to the bench of the Court of Appeals, and then
appointed Senator of the United States in the place of Mr. John
Taylor, of Caroline, and in opposition to Mr. Madison.

MEHERRIN PARISH IN THE COUNTY OF GREENSVILLE.

This parish was separated from St. Andrew's parish, Brunswick,
in 1753. No vestry-book being extant or in our possession if
extant, we can only ascertain, from such lists of the ministers as
we have, who belonged to this parish. In the year 1754 we find
the name of John Navison, and also in 1758, as the pastor of this
parish. In the years 1773-74-76, the Rev. Arthur Emmerson
was the minister. In the year 1791 the Rev. Stephen Johnson
was the minister for that year, and that only. From that time
it is supposed a deathlike silence pervaded the churches, so far as
Episcopal services were concerned, until of late years. The Rev.
Edward E. McGuire was sent as missionary to Greensville, Sussex,
and Southampton, in 1842. The Rev. Mr. Withers succeeded him
in Sussex and Southampton, and was succeeded in Greensville by
the Rev. Mr. Sprigg in 1846. The Rev. W. D. Hanson also spent
one year in Greensville. In the time of Mr. Sprigg, in the year
1848, a neat and comfortable house of worship was formed out of
a large barn or stable, and, under the ministry of the Rev. Mr.
Robert and of his predecessors, a tolerable congregation has been
raised up in this waste place of our Zion. I am further informed,
by a letter which had escaped my notice when writing the foregoing,
that before the division of Meherrin from St. Andrew's there
were two churches in it, to which two more were added, one near the
Carolina line, and one on the Meherrin River, three or four miles
west of Hicksford. A third was Grassy Pond Church, the traces
of whose foundation may yet be seen; the fourth was near Poplar
Mount. All of them being cheap churches, of wood, as nine-tenths
of the Colonial churches were, soon perished. There is a


481

Page 481
tradition, that, besides the above, a Mr. Fanning was the minister
of this parish, and was too favourable to the British; but I cannot
find his name on any of my lists, before, during, and after the war,
and do not believe that there was one of his name in Virginia.
That the British under Arnold did not receive favour in the whole
of the parish is proved by the fact that there is a place near one
of the churches to this day called Dry Bread, because they would
let them have nothing else to eat there. There are two churches
now in the county, of recent erection,—Christ Church, Hicksford,
and Grace Church, twelve miles off.


482

Page 482

ARTICLE XLV.

Parishes in Lunenburg, Mecklenburg, and Charlotte Counties.
Cumberland Parish.

In the year 1745, Lunenburg county and Cumberland parish
were cut off from Brunswick. In the year 1764, Lunenburg county
embraced all that is now Lunenburg, Mecklenburg, and Charlotte.
There had been, previous to this, three parishes in it,—viz.: Cumberland,
St. James's, and Cornwall. In that year it was divided
into three counties also, commensurate with the above-mentioned
parishes,—Cumberland parish being in Lunenburg, St. James's in
Mecklenburg, and Cornwall in Charlotte. We shall now present
what information we have about the parish of Cumberland, in Lunenburg.
The vestry-book which we have commences in 1746,
just after the parish and county were cut off from Brunswick, and
when they embraced all of Mecklenburg and Charlotte, and that
which was afterward, in 1752, cut off and made Halifax county
and Antrim parish, which, as we shall see, was again divided into
Pittsylvania and Halifax. At the time we commence with Cumberland
parish, it therefore comprehended all the territory which
is now Lunenburg, Mecklenburg, Charlotte, Halifax, and Pittsylvania,
to which we may add Henry, Franklin, and Patrick.

In the first year after the establishment of the parish,—viz.:
1746,—the vestry ordered a chapel forty-eight feet by twenty-four
to be built near Reedy Creek. This was near Lunenburg
Court-House. It was consumed by fire between thirty and forty
years since, during the ministry of Rev. Mr. Philips. Committees
also were appointed to select places for a chapel and reading-house,
near Otter River and the Fork of Roanoke; and another
committee the following year for purchasing a site for a chapel on
Little Roanoke. In the year 1748, the following communication
between the vestry and the Governor confirms what I have previously
said as to the relation between vestries and Governors:—

"Letters commendatory from Sir William Gooch, Baronett and
Lieutenant-Governor, and Mr. Commissary Dawson, in favour of the


483

Page 483
Rev. John Brunskill being presented to the vestry: they are willing to
pay all due respect and deference to the Governor's and Mr. Commissary's
recommendation, and are willing to receive the said Mr. Brunskill
into this parish as a minister of the Gospel for one year, and at the
expiration thereof to cause to be paid him the salary by law appointed.
But, forasmuch as they are not willing to be compelled to entertain and
receive any minister other than such as may answer the end of his
ministerial function, they only intend to entertain and receive him as a
probationer for one year, being fully minded and desirous that, if they
should in that time disapprove his conduct or behaviour, they may have
it in their power to choose another."

This was signed by Lewis Deloney, Clement Read,[128] William
Howard, Lyddall Bacon, David Stokes, Thomas Bouldin, Abraham
Martin, John Twitty, Matthew Talbot, vestrymen.

It would appear that the vestrymen had not been inactive in the
erection of churches during the two years since entering on their
office, for the contract with Mr. Brunskill, to preach at the four
churches already built, and at another place on South River, and
two others, are determined on this year. Mr. Brunskill remained
but one year; and, if he was the man who so disgraced himself and
the Church in Fauquier soon after this, the vestry did wisely in
their mode of engaging with him. There were three John Brunskills
in the Church of Virginia at this time,—one of whom died in
Amelia. The Rev. George Purdie is the next minister. They
are yet more careful in their contract with him; for, although recommended
by the President of the Council, Mr. Burwell, and Commissary
Dawson, they will only receive him on trial for six months,
and agree with him that either party may dissolve the connection
by giving six months' notice. He remained about eighteen months,
and, having occasion to visit England, resigned his charge. The
vestry, however, speak well of his conduct while he was their minister.
On his return from England, (if he went,) he became in the
following year minister of St. Andrew's in Brunswick, as we have
seen. In the year 1751, the Rev. William Kay, of whom we shall
have more to say in another place, became the minister on a probation


484

Page 484
of two years, with the understanding that either party might
be released at the end of one year. Mr. Kay, being a worthy
minister, remained with them until his death in 1755. In 1756, the
Rev. Mr. Barclay became the minister, on the condition that he
or the vestry might dissolve the relation at a moment's warning
After continuing one year and some months, Mr. Barclay resigns,
and recommends to the vestry to give a title to the parish to
Mr. James Craig, student of divinity, in order that he might obtain
Orders,—that being necessary according to the English canons.
They agree to this, as they did a few years after to Mr. Jarratt,
but only on condition of his entering into bond, with proper security,
that he shall not by virtue of this title insist upon being the
minister of this parish if he shall not be found agreeable to the
gentlemen of the vestry and the parishioners, after trial. This
was the common custom of the vestries in Virginia in regard to
those who were only candidates for the ministry and wished to be
able to comply with the canon and obtain Orders. In the year
1759, the Rev. James Craig becomes their minister. About this
time several other chapels are ordered.

After a few years Mr. Craig thinks of leaving the parish; and
the Rev. Mr. Jarratt, who was about to go to England for Orders,
receives a title on the same condition which had been agreed on
with Mr. Craig. Mr. Craig, however, still continues in the parish
until his death in 1795. He appears to have had the esteem of
the people. A good glebe and glebe-house are prepared for him,
and he was allowed to practise medicine in connection with his
ministry. At one time—about 1790—he appears to have left the
parish, or to have been officiating in some parish or parishes around,
as the vestry pass an order that if he will return to the parish and
preach every Sabbath they will raise sixty pounds for him. Whether
the sixty pounds was raised or not, he appears to have laboured
in his old parish until his death. His ministry was of thirty-five
or thirty-six years' duration in this one parish.

Mr. Craig united the practice of medicine with the duties of
the ministry. Whether it was from the necessity of obtaining a
support for his family, or from charity to the poor, I cannot say.
He prospered in his worldly matters. His glebe was larger and
better than most of those in the State, and he was a better
manager. He had a mill of his own, and during the war it was a
kind of storehouse for public provisions. Tarleton, knowing this,
and that Mr. Craig was a true American and zealous in the cause
of the Revolution, took the mill in his route, and, after he and


485

Page 485
his men had feasted on Mr. Craig's good mutton and fed their
horses on his corn, caused all the barrels of flour to be rolled into
the mill-pond and the whole establishment to be burned down.

To Mr. Craig the Rev. John Cameron succeeded. He was one
of four brothers who came from Scotland,—one of them, besides
himself, being in the ministry. The family was ancient and highly
respectable. He was educated in King's College, Aberdeen, was
ordained by the Bishop of Chester in 1770, and came over that year
to Virginia. His first charge was St. James's Church, Mecklenburg.
From thence, in 1784, he went to Petersburg, and, after
spending some years there, removed to Nottoway parish. Mr.
Jarratt, in speaking of the migratory course of the clergy for want
of support after the Revolution, says,—

"Among others, we have a recent instance of this in the case of Dr.
Cameron, whom you saw at my house as a visitor. He then lived at
Petersburg. But, induced by necessity, having a large and increasing
family, he removed into a parish above me, called Nottoway, where the
vestry obligated themselves to pay him a hundred pounds annually for
three years successively. But, meeting with no assistance from any one
of the people, the whole fell upon themselves alone. This burden they
found too weighty, and it caused them to wish to get rid of the incumbent,
which I am told they have effected, and Dr. Cameron is now the
minister of a parish in Lunenberg county. Few or none of the people
would go to hear him, (at least very seldom,) and very few of the vestry
made a constant practice of going to church, as I have been informed, so
that frequently his congregation would not exceed five or six hearers.
Surely this was enough to weary him out and make him think of new
quarters."

His new quarters not being in this respect sufficient for his
support, he was obliged to resort to school-keeping, and had a
select classical school, for which, by his scholarship, he was eminently
fitted. He was made Doctor of Divinity by William and
Mary College. If for his strictness he was even then complained
of, how would such a school as his be now endured, by either
parents or children? By nature stern and authoritative, he was
born and educated where the discipline of schools and families
was more than Anglican. It was Caledonian. But he made fine
scholars. There is one at least now alive, who is an instance of
this, and bears testimony to it. His sincere piety and great
uprightness commanded the respect of all, if his stern appearance
and uncompromising strictness prevented a kindlier feeling. I
never saw him but once, and then only for a few hours around a
committee-table at our second Convention in Richmond, and then
received a rebuke from him; and, though it was not for an unpardonable


486

Page 486
sin, yet I sincerely thanked him, and have esteemed him
the more for it ever since. The father's piety and integrity have
descended to more than one of his posterity. Judge Duncan
Cameron, of North Carolina, was his son, and educated by him.
Of him it might be said in some good degree, as of Sir Matthew
Hale, "A light saith the Pulpit, a light saith the Bar." Judge
Walker Anderson, of Florida, is his grandson, and was his scholar,
and but for ill health would have been in the ministry. I might
speak of others, but it enters not into my place to enlarge more.

Dr. Cameron continued the minister of Cumberland parish until
his death in 1815. He was buried beside his daughter, Anna M.
Cameron. A tombstone has been erected to their memory by his
son, of whom we have just spoken,—the late Hon. Duncan Cameron,
of North Carolina.

About three or four years after the death of Mr. Cameron, the
Rev. Mr. Philips, of whom I wrote in the article on Hanover, took
charge of this parish and continued in it until his death. During
the interval between the death of Mr. Cameron and the coming of
Mr. Philips, Mr. Ravenscroft, of Mecklenburg, then a candidate
for Orders in Virginia, was recommended by Bishop Moore and
accepted by the vestry as lay reader in the parish.

The Rev. Charles Taliafero, after an interval of some years,
succeeded Mr. Philips in 1831, and for six years laboured most
diligently and successfully, being the means under God of rousing
up the slumbering energies of the old parish. St. John's Church
was the only one standing in the parish at that time. Reedy Creek
Church had been consumed by fire. Being deserted of worshippers,
it was filled with fodder, and said to have taken fire while some
negroes were playing cards in it by night. Old Flatrock Church
had been disposed of and the proceeds applied to the building of
St. John's. St. Paul's was built during the ministry of the honest
and zealous Mr. Taliafero. At his entrance upon duty there were
only seven regular attending communicants in the parish. During
his brief ministry forty-six were added to the communion. Mr.
Taliafero was succeeded by the Rev. Thomas Locke, who has continued
to be the minister until within the last two years. The Rev.
Mr. Henderson is its present rector.

I take from the old vestry-book the following list of vestrymen:—

Lewis Deloney, Clement Read, Matthew Talbot, Abraham Martin,
Lyddall Bacon, David Stokes, Daniel Ferth, Thomas Bouldin, John Twitty,
Field Jefferson, John Edloe, John Cox, Francis Ellidge, Luke Smith,


487

Page 487
William Embry or Embra, Peter Fontaine, Robert Wade, George Walton,
Joseph Morton, Thomas Hawkins, William Watkins, Thomas Nash, John
Speed, Henry Blagrove, John Jennings, Matthew Marraball, John Parrish,
John Ragsdale, Daniel Claiborne, Edmund Taylor, Thomas Pettis, Thomas
Lanier, Thomas Tabb, William Gee, David Garland, John Hobson, George
Philips, Thomas Wynne, William Taylor, Thomas Chambers, Christopher
Philips, Benjamin Tomlinson, Charles Warden, Elisha Betts, Thomas
Buford, William Harding, David Stokes, John Ballard, Robert Dixon,
Anthony Street, Edward Jordan, Nicholas Hobson, Sterling Niblett, John
Cureton, Christopher Robertson, James Buford, Covington Hardy, Ellison
Ellis, J. E. Broadman, William Buford, James Smith, Thomas Stephenson,
Bryan Lester, William Glenn, Obadiah Clay, William Tucker, Edmund
P. Bacon, Thomas Garland, John Street, Henry Stokes, Peter
Lamkin, Philip Jackson, Thomas Garland, John Billups, David Street,
Peter Eppes, W. Farmer, James McFarland, Thomas M. Cameron, William
Buford, Jr.

It will be seen that the name of Buford often occurs on this list.
At one time four of the name were in the same vestry. To Mr.
Thomas Buford, a pious member of the Church, the parish is now,
and has been for a long time, indebted for its ability to support a
minister. About sixty years ago he left an estate to the parish,
which, though badly managed, has rendered effectual aid to the
vestry in the support of a minister.

To the above list I add the first election after the effort at reviving
the Church began:—David Street, Colonel John Street,
William Overton, Roger Atkinson, Thomas Atkinson, James McFarland,
Charles Smith.

ST. JAMES'S PARISH, MECKLENBURG COUNTY.

This parish was separated from Cumberland parish, Lunenburg,
in the year 1761. The county of Mecklenburg was cut off from
Lunenburg in 1764. The City Church, as it is called, is still standing,
being an old frame building with a number of old Episcopal
families around it, who, I trust, will ever be as willing as they are
able to sustain a minister. Where the chapels stood I am unable
to say. There was an old house of worship, in the time of Bishop
Ravenscroft's ministry, called Speed's Church, which I believe was
one of former days. In later days one was built in a more central
place and called St. James's, and then removed to another position,
and then abandoned and sold for the purpose of building one at
Boydton. Another has been built about twelve miles from Boydton
by the name of St. Andrew's, another near the Carolina line
called St. Luke's, and, lastly, one at Clarksville, on the Roanoke.

The first minister of this parish was Mr. John Cameron, of whom


488

Page 488
we have recently spoken. He is on our list of clergy from this
parish in 1774-76, the only one we have between 1754 and 1758
and 1785. It is probable that he was minister in Mecklenburg
from his first coming into this country, in the year 1770, until
1784, when he moved to Petersburg; though one of his descendants
informs me that he was living in Charlotte in 1771, where he
married a Miss Nash. He may have settled there first and after
a year or two removed to Mecklenburg. It has generally been
supposed that the Rev. George Micklejohn succeeded to Mr. Cameron,
but I can find no evidence that he ever was the regular
minister of the parish. Although there were Conventions from the
year 1785 to the year 1805, and then from 1812 to the present
time, his name never appears as the minister. He was ordained
for North Carolina by the Bishop of London in 1766, and removed,
no doubt, from thence to Virginia and settled in Mecklenburg. He
had either taught school in Carolina or Virginia before the Revolution,
if that anecdote be true which is related of him,—viz.: that
on being solicited by some of the gentlemen, after the war, to resume
his occupation and take some of their sons, he replied that
"he would have nothing to do with their little American democrats,
for that it was hard enough to manage them before the Revolution,
and now it would be impossible." He lived to a great age, was a
man of peculiar character, and never calculated to be useful in the
ministry. He preached very often in Mecklenburg, but to very
small congregations, not always to two or three, himself and an old
brother Scotchman being on one occasion the whole assembly:
nevertheless, the sermon was preached. He lived some years after
Mr. Ravenscroft's ministry commenced. The latter tells the following
anecdote of him:—On a certain occasion, when he (Mr. R.)
was preaching on the various testimonies to the truth and excellency
of religion, he alluded to the comfort of it to the aged and to their
dying witness to it, and, pointing to old Mr. Micklejohn, who was
present and before him, told the congregation that there was the
testimony of a century to our holy religion, supposing him to have
lived his century; but Mr. M. immediately corrected him, crying
aloud, in broad Scotch, "Naw, naw, mon,—ninety-aught, ninety-aught."
But he outlived a century. Mr. Ravenscroft was the first
minister of the parish after the relinquishment of it by Mr. Cameron
in 1784. He was of an ancient Virginia family, to be found about
Williamsburg and Petersburg, according to the records of the House
of Burgesses and the vestry-books. He himself was related to old
Lady Skipwith, of Mecklenburg. He was educated at Williamsburg.

489

Page 489
John Randolph, who was there at the same time, used to
say that his nickname was Mad Jack while there, and that he deserved
it long after by reason of the vehemence of his temper,
speech, and manners. The religion of Christ took strong hold of
him, and made a great change in his views and character, so that
he felt necessity laid upon him to preach the Gospel. He at first
united himself to the Methodists, but, on examination, gave the
preference to the Church of his fathers, and became a lay reader
in Mecklenburg and Lunenburg, producing no little effect by his
most impressive and emphatic manner. In the year 1817 he was
minister of St. James's parish, in which he continued until his
election to the Bishopric of North Carolina. He was succeeded
by the Rev. William Steele, who was followed by the Rev. Francis
McGuire. He continued its minister until obliged to retire from
full duty by reason of ill health, though he still lives in it and
performs some services. The Rev. Mr. Chesley took the place of
Mr. McGuire, and was succeeded by the Rev. Mr. Rodman. It is
now vacant.

Although there is no vestry-book of the church in Mecklenburg
from which to give a list of the early vestrymen from the year
1761, we cannot forbear the mention of a few names of persons well
known to us, who contributed much to its revival after the year
1812. Major John Nelson, son or grandson of old Secretary
Thomas Nelson, of York, settled toward the close of the last
century in Mecklenburg, on the Roanoke. The Rev. Alexander
Hay, of whom we shall read when we come to Halifax county, resided
as teacher in his family. The old man and his numerous
sons entered zealously into measures for the revival of the Church.
Mr. John Nelson, Mr. Robert Nelson, and Major Thomas Nelson,
especially, were the active coadjutors of Mr. Ravenscroft and his
successors in raising up the prostrate Church in Mecklenburg.
The names of all of them are to be seen on the journals of our
State Conventions, and those of two of them on the list of delegates
to the General Convention. Major Thomas Nelson signalized
himself in the last war with England, and was for some time a
member of Congress from his district. He recently died at Columbus,
in Georgia, to which State he removed some years since,
beloved and esteemed by all who knew him. To these I might add
the venerable name of Goode and his descendants, and the Lewises,
Cunninghams, Baskervilles, Alexanders, Colemans, Sturdivants,
Tarrys, Daily, and others.


490

Page 490

CORNWALL PARISH, IN THE COUNTY OF CHARLOTTE.

The county of Charlotte was taken from Lunenburg in the year
1764. The parish was separated from Cumberland parish, Lunenburg,
in the year 1755, nine years before. On the list of clergy
for the years 1773, 1774, and 1776, we find the Rev. Thomas
Johnson assigned to this parish. We cannot ascertain that any
other ever was the regular pastor of this parish; but from the
family Bible of old Colonel Carrington, of Charlotte, we ascertain
that the following ministers officiated in baptizing between the
years 1755 and 1762:—The Revs. William Key, John Berkeley,
James Garden, William Craig, and Alexander Hay. Some of them
were certainly ministers of surrounding parishes; some of them may
have been ministers of this.

END OF VOL. I.

 
[128]

The clergy and Parliament opposed the edict violently, but Henry said, "I
have enacted the edict. I wish it to be observed. My will must be observed as the
reason why. In an obedient State, reasons are never demanded of the prince. I am
King. I speak to you as a King. I will be obeyed." The Protestants, also, who
were dissatisfied at his declaring himself for the Romish Church, complained and
threatened; but he spoke as decisively to them.