University of Virginia Library

Old Churches, Ministers, and Families
OF
VIRGINIA.

ARTICLE XLVI.

Antrim Parish, Halifax County.

When Halifax county was divided from Lunenburg, in 1752, it
comprehended all that is now Pittsylvania, Henry, Franklin, and
Patrick. Antrim parish was coextensive with the county. At
the time of its establishment it is probable, from certain entries in
the vestry-book, that there were no churches or chapels in its wide
extent, for the readers who had been appointed before the separation—four
in number—were reappointed, and several gentlemen
were allowed to have services in their own houses, doubtless for the
benefit of their neighbours as well as their own families. Besides
this, when the first minister was settled among them he was required
to officiate at six different places, at no one of which was there a
church or chapel, though at some of them buildings were about to
be erected. Four were ordered at some of the earliest meetings
of the vestry, and others afterward. One of the places of reading
is recognised as being on Pigg River, in Franklin county that now
is. The buildings were small, either log or frame, and not very
durable, generally. The first movement toward getting a minister
was in the year 1752, when a title to the parish was given to a Mr.
William Chisholm, a candidate for Orders, who wished to be prepared
with that indispensable qualification when he should present
himself to the Bishop of London; but, as usual, there was this
condition:—"Provided, on his return, the vestry approved of him
for their minister, or should not have accepted any other in his

absence." Nothing more is heard of Mr. Chisholm; nor can I find
his name on any of the lists of clergy ordained by the Bishop of
London for any part of America.

What follows in regard to the parish of Antrim I take from a
letter of the Rev. Mr. Dresser, in the year 1830, addressed to the
Rev. Drs. Hawks and Rutledge, who were then engaged in writing
a history of the different dioceses of the Church in this country.

Mr. Dresser became the minister of this parish in 1828, and
continued in it until 1838, when he was succeeded by its present
rector, the Rev. John Grammar. Under his ministry the congregation
has become one of the largest in the diocese. A church at

Meadville was built many years since, but has failed to effect what
was hoped from it. A large and costly church has been built at
the court-house, in place of the one mentioned by Mr. Dresser, in
which one of our largest country-congregations assemble every
Sabbath.

To them we may add other names, though not vestrymen, yet
from the time of efforts for reviving the Church, taking an interest
in it and contributing to it,—such as the Bruces, Ligons, Greens,
Wimbishses, Leighs, Banks, Logans, Borums, Edmundsons, Fontaines,
Carringtons, Baileys, &c.

In another part of the county of Halifax the Rev. Mr. Clark
has been for many years doing a good work, chiefly among the
poor and servants, to whom he has devoted time and labour without
compensation, being enabled by Providence so to do. Under his
auspices, and not without considerable pecuniary aid on his part,
three new churches have been erected in that part of the county.

ARTICLE XLVII.

Parishes in Pittsylvania, Henry, Campbell, and Bedford.—
Camden Parish, Pittsylvania.

The names of this county and parish tell their own origin. Pitt
and Camden are names familiar to the English and American ear.
They were divided from Halifax and Antrim in the year 1767. At
different times, subsequent to this, Henry, Patrick, and Franklin
were taken from Pittsylvania, but no new parishes established,
except in Henry, the Church and State having been separated,
so that the two last of them were, according to Colonial law, in
the parish of Camden, until the Episcopal Convention made other
arrangements. There are no records of the vestry-meetings in this
parish; yet the records of the court show that vestrymen were
regularly elected, and had the same duties assigned them as in
other places. To them were assigned the processioning of lands,
the binding out poor and unfortunate children, and the punishment
of offences against the moral law. Rude as was the state of society,
it is a fact that these officers did sometimes punish certain
violations of the law of God, as Sabbath-breaking, profane swearing,
and incontinence, which now are never noticed. It is also a fact
that the sins of the fathers being visited upon children to the third
and fourth generation, and children's teeth being set on edge by
the eating of sour grapes on the part of their parents, is remarkably
exemplified in the case of the descendants of those who nearly
a century ago were bound out on account of the immorality of
the parents. These descendants, bearing the same name, are
objects of the same action by the overseers of the poor as their
ancestors were by the churchwardens.

As to the ministers of Camden parish before the revival of the
Church in Virginia, we find but one on all our lists. In the year
1774,—seven years after the establishment of the parish,—we find
the name of the Rev. Lewis Guilliam. Would that we could find
it nowhere else! but, alas, on examining the records of the court,
we there find his name, not connected with the registry of baptisms
and marriages, as perhaps none would call on him for these offices,
but with continual petty law-suits, in which he was almost always
the loser. Shame and contempt covered his whole life. He was

a Scotchman, and never married. As to churches, I have heard
of one about twenty miles from the court-house. In the year 1773,
Mr. Richard Chamberlaine, of St. Peter's Church, New Kent, conveyed
to the vestry, for one hundred and sixty pounds, five hundred
and eighty-eight acres of land. On this land the Rev. Mr.
Guilliam lived. One of the vestrymen, to whom the land was
conveyed,—John Donelson,—emigrated to Tennessee, and was
the father of Mrs. General Jackson. The glebe lay on the road
to Henry Court-House, a few miles from "Callands." It doubtless
shared the fate of other glebes. The other vestrymen were John
Pigg, Crispin Shelton, John Wilson, Peter Perkins, Thomas Dillard,
Hugh Innes, Theodoric Lacy, Abram Shelton, George Rowland,
Robert Chandler, and William Witcher.

The descendants of the above, by the same and other names,
are scattered over this and the surrounding counties. There is
one family in the county which has contributed so much to keep
alive the hope of the Church in this parish, in her darkest days,
that I must give it a passing notice. Colonel Isaac Coles, ancestor
of a number of that name in this region, and uncle of those in
Albemarle, married first a Miss Lightfoot, of York, (a maid-servant
of whom, one hundred and ten years old, is still alive and in the
family,) and had one son by her,—Mr. Isaac Coles, of Halifax. His
second wife was a Miss Thompson, from New York, with whom he
became acquainted while member of Congress, and whose sister married
Elbridge Gerry.[1] By this marriage he had a numerous offspring,
who are dispersed through this county and other places. At
a time when the venerable widow, and her daughter Mary, who
married James M. Whittle, were almost the whole Church in that
region, I always made the old mansion in which they lived a
stopping-place and a house of prayer, for the mother had long
been confined to it. The Lord's Supper was always administered
to her. Many baptisms and confirmations of children, and children's
children, have I performed, and happy religious seasons enjoyed
in that "Church in the House."

The mother and the daughter above mentioned were, in person
and character, striking and impressive. Great was the parental
anxiety of the widow and the mother for all her children's welfare,
and tender and faithful was the filial piety of the daughter, who
devoted herself to the comfort of the aged mother. May the
descendants of both of them follow their holy example, and not

only, like them, love and nourish the Church of their ancestors,
but the holy standard of religion which it lifts up on high.

By the exertions of this family, and a few others,—the Smiths
and Slaughters, Millers and Sheltons,—and under the auspices of
the Rev. Mr. Dresser, then minister in Halifax, now at Jubilee
College, in Illinois, a church (St. Andrew's) was built in this part
of the county, and, for a time, hopes were entertained that a permanent
congregation might be established there; but deaths and
removals have disappointed these hopes. In relation to Danville
and the court-house, after a visit from the Rev. Mr. Towles, and
numerous visits from the Rev. Mr. Clark, the services of the Rev.
Mr. Dame were secured in 1840, for the joint purpose of teaching
young females and building up the Church. At his first coming
there were only eight communicants, and they all females, in the
three counties of Pittsylvania, Franklin, and Henry. Since his
ministry, one hundred and twenty have been added, exclusive of
those coming from other parishes. A new church has been built
in Danville, and another at the court-house, since Dr. Dame's
coming, in 1840. He is still the minister of the parish, and will,
I hope, long continue to be so.

HENRY COUNTY, PATRICK PARISH.

The county of Henry was separated from Pittsylvania in the
year 1776, and the parish of Patrick from Camden in 1778; but no
steps, we believe, were ever taken to build churches and procure
ministers. Our fathers were then in the midst of the war, and
every thing was unfavourable for such an enterprise. Patrick Henry,
after whom both the county and parish were probably called, was
then, I believe, a delegate from this part of the State, having his
abode and much land here. Some of his descendants are here to
this day. Some readers were probably exercising their functions
in private houses in this county, but we hear of no settled pastor.
The first efforts at the establishment of the Church, in later days,
were made by the Rev. Mr. Webb, while a teacher of youth, candidate
for the ministry, and lay reader at Henry Court-House.

He was succeeded by the Rev. Mr. Wade, a native of the
county, and descendant of some whose names have hitherto
appeared among the vestrymen of adjoining parishes. During
his ministry a church has been erected at the court-house, and
the foundation of a promising congregation laid. He occasionally
officiated in Franklin county. No parish was ever established by

law, or otherwise, in either Franklin or Patrick, until of late years,
when one was erected in the former, where there is a prospect of our
having a respectable settlement, as we trust, before many years.

CAMPBELL COUNTY.

Campbell was separated in 1781, just at the close of the war,
when the civil Legislature was ceasing to act for the affairs of the
Church. Nothing is said of a parish. That was reserved for our
Convention at a later period. The first minister in Lynchburg—
the Rev. Amos Tredway—is said to represent Lynchburg parish,
and by that name does it still go. Subsequently, Moore parish is
established in the county. In Lynchburg, the Rev. Franklin G.
Smith succeeded Mr. Tredway, in 1825, and continued for about
fourteen years. The Rev. Thomas Atkinson (now Bishop) succeeded
Mr. Smith, and the Rev. William H. Kinckle, the present
rector, succeeded him in 1844. An excellent brick church was
erected in the time of Mr. Smith, and a larger and much costlier
one in the time of Mr. Kinckle.

In Moore parish, the Rev. Mr. Osgood was the first who taught
school and ministered. Under his care, St. John's Church was
erected. In its loft was his vestry-room and chamber, and, near
at hand, his school-house. The present location of St. John's is
not the same with its original one, it having been found that a
more convenient one might be had a mile off, to which it was moved
on rollers. After the removal of Mr. Osgood to the West,—
where he died,—the Rev. Mr. Tompkins took his place in both
departments for many years, preaching at St. John's, and at
another position some twelve miles off. Since his removal to
Western Virginia, the Rev. Mr. Kinckle, of Lynchburg, has, by
occasional services, kept alive the hopes of our few but zealous
members in that part of the county, sometimes aided by the visits
of the Rev. Mr. Clark, of Halifax, until, during the last year, the
Rev. Mr. Locke, having settled himself at Campbell Court-House,
took charge of both of the congregations, and added to it a new
one at the place of his residence. A church has recently been purchased
and consecrated at that place, and the friends of the Church
in that part of the county are encouraged to hope for better times.

RUSSELL PARISH, BEDFORD COUNTY.

The county of Bedford was separated from Lunenburg in
1753. The parish of Russell was established in it at the same

time. Both were enlarged in the year 1754 by the addition of a
part of Albemarle, then of large extent. The present county of
Campbell was included in the original bounds of the parish of
Russell and county of Bedford.

On our list of clergy for 1754 and 1758, we find no minister
from Bedford. In the years 1773-74-76, we find the Rev. John
Brandon. Doubtless there were ministers there during the twenty
years of which there are no records. Our Conventions under the
independent system, after the Revolution, commenced in 1785
and continued until 1805; but there is no representation, either
clerical or lay, during that period. The first representation from
that region was in the year 1823, when the Rev. Amos Tredway
appears as a delegate from Lynchburg, then in Campbell county.
But Mr. Tredway officiated also at New London, in Bedford, as
had also the Rev. Mr. Dashiel, who had the academy at New
London, though he was never in regular connection with the
diocese.

In the year 1825 the Rev. Nicholas H. Cobbs appears as the
first regular representative from Russell parish. Its revival is to
be ascribed under God to his zealous, and for a long time almost
gratuitous, services, since his support was mainly derived from a
school. Under his ministry St. Stephen's and Trinity Churches
were built, and other positions, as Liberty, and Mr. Wharton's,
occupied, where churches are now to be seen. Mr. Cobbs continued
his indefatigable labours until the year 1835, when he
removed to the University of Virginia, and, after two years'
service as chaplain, returned to Bedford, and continued until 1839,
when he removed to Petersburg. Mr. Cobbs was succeeded, for a
short time, by the Rev. Mr. Doughen, after which the Rev. Mr.
Marbury took charge of the parish, and was succeeded by the
Rev. Mr. Cofer. The Rev. Mr. Kinsolving followed, and, after
some years, was succeeded by the Rev. R. H. Wilmer, the present
minister.

The Rev. Mr. Sale has been for many years occupying other
parts of the county of Bedford, as at St. Thomas's Church, built
under his auspices, at Liberty, at Trinity Church, when separated
from St. Stephen's, and at Pedlar's Church, in Amherst county.
While labouring on a farm and raising a large family, he has
performed the duties of minister for a very small pecuniary compensation.

A new church was built at Liberty, in this county, during
the ministry of the Rev. Mr. Caldwell, who spent some time at

that place after the removal of Mr. Cobbs. After the removal of
Mr. Caldwell the Rev. Mr. Sale took charge of it, and still is its
canonical rector, although the duty of preaching is performed by
the Rev. John Wharton, who has for some years been acting as
sub-deacon. There are now no less than four parishes in that part
of old Russell parish which lay in Bedford county, as now reduced
in its dimensions. No parish register is found to supply a list of
the old vestrymen of this parish.[2]

ARTICLE XLVIII.

Parishes in Amelia, Nottoway, and Prince Edward.

Amelia county was cut off from Prince George in the year
1734. Raleigh parish was established in the following year. In
the year 1754 the Rev. Musgrave Dawson was minister of Raleigh
parish,—how long, if before, not known. He was not the minister
in 1758. The Rev. John Brunskill was minister in 1773-74-76.[3]

It does not appear to have been represented in any of the Conventions
subsequent to the Revolution, until some years after the
revival of the Church, except in the years 1790 and 1791, by a
lay delegate,—Mr. John Royall. It is believed that Mr. Brunskill
lived for many years to be a dead weight upon the Church. He
never married, and lived a solitary, uncomfortable life. It is
stated of him, and on authority entirely to be relied on, that, upon
the declaration of war, he proclaimed from the pulpit that to take
part in it was rebellion; upon which the gentlemen arose and
carried their families out of the church, and, on consultation,
determined to inflict punishment upon him, which was only prevented
by the interference of two of the elder and most influential
gentlemen present. But he was never permitted to officiate again,
a lay reader being appointed to take his place. He continued
until his death to hold the glebe and to live upon it.

Of the churches in Amelia I have received accounts from two
of the oldest persons now living in it. There was one called Huntington,
(long since in ruins,) about five miles northwest of the
court-house. There was another called Chinquapin Church, in
the upper part of the county, built about the year 1749 or 1750,
at a place since called Paineville. There were three other churches,
called Rocky Run, Avery's, and Pride's, in different parts of the
county, two of which have been claimed as private property, taken
down, and used for farming-purposes. Of old Grubhill Church
we have more particular accounts. A venerable lady, now living,
and in her ninetieth year, remembers, when a child, to have
accompanied her parents to this church, and knows that the
timber for it was furnished from her father's and uncle's lands,
(Messrs. William and Joseph Eggleston.) Another old lady, now
deceased, is known to have said that in the year 1768 she saw
the workmen laying the floor of the wing of the church, the main
body having probably been built some years before. I have
been visiting that old building since the year 1827 or 1828.
It was even then in a somewhat tottering condition as to the
galleries, which had been put up, with the permission of the

vestries, by some of the old families of Egglestons, Banisters,
Tabbs, Archers, &c., for their own use. Although cold in winter,
hot in summer, at all times dark and uncomfortable, (being high
up, and near the roof,) yet such was the old family feeling of attachment
to them on the part of the descendants of those who
built and first occupied them, that even after it became somewhat
unsafe to sit in them, being propped up with large poles and in
other ways, they could not be induced to abandon them. This
presented an obstacle for some time to remodelling and improving
other parts of the church; and the attachment to the whole
building, such as it was, though decaying and very uncomely and
uncomfortable, for a long time stood in the way of a new and
better one.

At length old feelings were so much subdued as to permit a new
one to be erected and the old one to be removed. The attachment
to the old name, Grubhill, though neither classical nor scriptural,
was so great, that not even a compromise, by which it should be
called St. Paul's, Grubhill, would be accepted by those whose
antiquarian feelings were distressed by the change of the name
given it by their ancestors and so long in use. The history of the
transaction is on the pages of the vestry-book.

As names are not always things, we trust that the divine
blessing will be as abundantly poured out on the religious services
performed in it under the old and homely name of Grubhill, as of
any other. Of the two extremes, an undue attachment to old
things, or an undue fondness for new, we prefer the former, as most
conservative; but "medio tutissimus ibis."

Having had access to the vestry-book of Raleigh parish, commencing
in 1790, we are enabled to furnish a list of the vestrymen
from that date. At an election at that time we find the
name of William Giles, John Pride, Richard Eggleston, John Wiley,
John Archer, Joseph Eggleston, Rowland Ward, John Towns, Jr.,
Daniel Hardaway,—John Archer and Richard Eggleston being
made churchwardens. From that time until the year 1827 there
does not appear to have been any election of vestrymen, or any
thing done in the parish. In that year the Rev. William F. Lee
was elected minister, and the following gentlemen vestrymen:—
Hodijah Meade, John R. Robertson, Charles Eggleston, T. R.
Banister, W. A. Mileston, Benjamin L. Meade, W. J. Barksdale,
William Murray; to whom were added, at different times, John
Booker, James Allen, Jaqueline Berkeley, Dr. Thomas Meaux,
Dr. Skelton, Daniel Worsham, William Barksdale, Jr., Dr. Skelton,

Jr., B. M. Jones, Thomas G. Tabb, Egbert Leigh, J. W. Lane,
Thomson Walthall. Here my list ends.

I have already said that the Rev. Mr. Lee, of whom I have
spoken more fully in another place, became the minister in 1827.
In the year 1835 the Rev. Farley Berkeley, the present minister,
took charge of it, connecting with it the pastorship of either the
church in Chesterfield, or that at Genito Bridge, in Powhatan, or
sometimes of both. I see from the vestry-book, that he has ever
insisted on an annual election, though the vestry protest against it
as unnecessary, and record the same. How different from former
days, when, though Governors, Commissaries, and clergy ever
protested against annual elections, the vestries insisted on them.
The difference arises from the great difference in the character of
the clergy generally. I know of but one parish in the diocese
which follows this ancient custom, and peculiar circumstances in
its past history led to this. The clergy of our day are ready to
relinquish their charges the moment they believe their services
are unacceptable and unprofitable, while the people are anxious to
retain as long as possible the labours of a worthy, pious, and
zealous minister.

I have only to add, in relation to Raleigh parish, that the Rev.
Mr. Chevers, a few years since, devoted himself very diligently to
the effort at establishing the congregation at Chinquapin Church,
but, after two years' faithful services, relinquished it as a hopeless
task at the present time. "Non si male nunc et olim sic erit."

NOTTOWAY PARISH, NOTTOWAY COUNTY.

Nottoway county was separated from Amelia in the year 1788.
Nottoway parish was established in the county of Amelia, being
separated from Raleigh parish before the year 1752 and after the
year 1748. There being no account of the Acts of Assembly for
1749-51, in Henning, I am unable to decide the precise year.
In the year 1754, and again in 1758, the Rev. Wm. Proctor was
the minister,—the same, no doubt, of whom mention is made in
the vestry-book of Halifax. In the years 1773-74-76, the Rev.
Thomas Wilkinson is the minister. Of him I have found a good
account. The Rev. Mr. Jarratt informs us that Dr. Cameron was
its minister for about two years after leaving Petersburg in 1793,
but was obliged to resign for want of support. This was, no
doubt, the last of Episcopal services in this parish, except some
occasional ones of late years. As to the churches in this parish,

all that I have been able to learn is from the Act of Assembly in
1755, by which the parish of St. Patrick is established in the county
of Prince Edward. It seems that the county of Prince Edward had
been separated from Amelia the previous year, and from that part
of it in which the parish of Nottoway lay, but no new parish was
then cut off from it and established in Prince Edward. But now,
in 1775, the parish of St. Patrick is taken from Nottoway and
made to correspond with the bounds of Prince Edward. At a later
period (1788) Nottoway county is established, corresponding, I presume,
with the bounds of old Nottoway parish in Amelia. The Act
speaks of two new churches being recently built in the lower part
of Nottoway parish, and requires the parish to refund a portion of
the money which had been raised from the whole parish for their
erection, to be refunded to the new parish in Prince Edward. Where
these churches are situated, and what were their names, and what
others had been there before, I am unable to say.[4]

ST. PATRICK'S PARISH, PRINCE EDWARD COUNTY.

We have seen that the county was established in 1754 and the
parish in 1755. In the year 1758 the Rev. James Garden is its
minister. We find him there also in 1773,—fifteen years after. In
the years 1774 and 1776 the parish has no minister. In the years
1777 and 1778 the Rev. Archibald McRoberts was the minister.
We have already spoken of his relinquishment of our ministry in
the year 1779. With his ministry Episcopal services no doubt

ceased in Prince Edward, as we see no representative, either clerical
or lay, in any Convention.

There were in Mr. McRoberts's time three churches in Prince
Edward, one of which, or the congregation thereof, separated with
him. Their names were—1st. The Chapel or Watkins's Church,
about eighteen miles from Prince Edward Court-House, on the
Lynchburg Road, which was the one whose congregation followed
Mr. McRoberts in his movement toward an Independent Church.
It is now occupied by different denominations. 2d. French's
Church, which was about a mile from the court-house and is now
gone down. 3d. Sandy River Church, on Sandy River, about
eight miles from the court-house on the Petersburg Road. This
last church is now, I am told, occupied by the Baptist denomination.
I have in my possession a pamphlet of some twenty-two pages,
containing an account of a controversy concerning it between the
Methodists and Baptists in the years 1832-34. When deserted
by the Episcopalians it had been repaired by general subscription,
and at several different times occupied as a free church. In the year
1832 the Baptists obtained a title to it and claimed sole right to it,
though not refusing to allow the Methodists the use of it at such
times as the owners might choose. The Methodists were unwilling
to accept these terms, and much unhappy disputation ensued. At one
time two ministers of each denomination met on the same day and
were in the pulpit together, and the vote of the congregation as to
who should preach was taken. The matter was referred to two
men eminent in the law,—Judge Thomas Bouldin and Mr. Charles
Smith. They determined that the deed recently given to the
Baptists was not good, that the one given to the churchwardens at the
first creation of the church was the legal title, and that it belonged
now to the Commonwealth of Virginia, unless there was an older
and better title than that of those who made one to the churchwardens,
and to this they were inclined, and therefore advised that
the line be run in order to decide the point. A line was run, and
it passed through the church; and so a part of it only was legally
the property of the churchwardens and afterward of the Commonwealth.
The result was that the Baptists retained possession,
though the Methodists maintained that a wall might be raised
through the church according to the line run; but it was not done.
If either Mr. Chapman Johnson's opinion—that the churches were
the property of Episcopalians—was true, or that of Judge Bouldin
and Mr. Smith, then, in the first case, the Episcopalians in the
county ought to have been applied to to decide the question, or

else the public authorities, either of which would, I think, have
settled it more amicably and more to the honour of religion. Other
unhappy disputes have occurred concerning our old churches in
other places. I knew of one where, after much strife between two
denominations, the church was set up by them to the highest bidder.
Who gave the title, or what was it worth? About another, two
parties preached in different pulpits,—one in the old Episcopal
pulpit and the other in a new one in a different part of the church.
So far from their being always respected as equally common
property, I have myself been refused admission into one, while on
an Episcopal visitation, by those who claimed it by the right of
use. In relation to the suggestion that the Episcopalians in Prince
Edward were the most proper persons to decide the question as to
the occupancy of Old Sandy River Church, if it be said that there
were scarcely any left unto whom application might have been made,
I reply that, from all the information I have been able to get, there
have always been some few of high respectability there. One at
least there was, whose firm attachment to the Church, yet catholic
spirit to all others, and great weight of character, were felt and
acknowledged by all. I allude to Mr. William Berkeley, son of
the old lady of Hanover who bade the overseers of the poor who
sent a deputation to her for the Communion-plate to come themselves
and take it. He inherited all his mother's devotion to the
Church, and when at our Conventions, and on other occasions,
opportunity was presented for displaying it, never failed to do so.
He was not, however, a bigot to a particular Church, but loved the
whole Catholic Church. In evidence of which, being in the providence
of God placed beyond the reach of an Episcopal place of
worship, and near the Presbyterian College in Prince Edward, he
not only attended the religious services held there, but was an
active member of the board of trustees thereof. For a long period
of time he presided over that board, fulfilling the duties of his
station faithfully, and yet always having it distinctly understood
that he was a true son of the Episcopal Church. So amiable,
pious, and dignified a Christian gentleman as he was is not easily
found.

In the list of vestrymen in Brunswick, Lunenburg, Halifax, and
elsewhere, we meet with certain persons some of whose descendants
are enrolled on other registers than those of the Episcopal Church,
such as Read, Venable, Watkins, Carrington, Cabell, Morton, &c.,
and we know not where in the progress of our work we can more
properly introduce some notice of them than in connection with

Prince Edward county and the College of Hampden-Sydney. We
have seen how the Presbyterians from Ireland and Scotland, settling
first in Pennsylvania, began to emigrate to the Valley of Virginia
about the year 1738,—how, under Mr. Samuel Davies, they were
established in Hanover and some parts around between 1740 and
1750. From thence, in a short time, they found their way into
what is now Charlotte and Prince Edward, and made strong and
permanent settlements there. This was in a great measure effected
by the establishment of Hampden-Sydney College, a brief history
of which, taken from the Sketches of the Presbyterian Church of
Virginia, by the Rev. Mr. Foote, will best enable us to understand
the subject. In the year 1774 the ministers and members of the
Presbytery of Hanover determine to establish a public school in
that part of the State,—Prince Edward,—understanding that they
can procure the services of Mr. Samuel Stanhope Smith, then a
candidate for the ministry in the New Castle Presbytery, and
teacher of languages in Princeton College, afterward the distinguished
President of the same. Sufficient funds being raised
and a place selected, in November, 1774, Mr. Smith, with his
brother, J. B. Smith, a candidate for the ministry, and a third
person, are regularly chosen to commence the work. The first,
being now ordained, was called also to the congregation in that
place. Under this most eminent scholar and eloquent preacher
and his yet more zealous and laborious brother, Mr. J. B. Smith,
the institution flourished, notwithstanding all the obstacles of the
war. In the year 1779 the elder brother resigned and accepted a
call to a professorship in Princeton College. The Presidency of
Hampden-Sydney devolved upon his most excellent and devoted
brother, J. B. Smith, who continued to promote its welfare and the
religious interests of the country around until the year 1788, when
he accepted a call to a church in Philadelphia. During the Presidency
of the younger Mr. Smith a charter was obtained for the
College.

On the list of trustees we find names to which our eyes have
become familiar on the pages of the old vestry-books, as those of
Carrington, Nash, Watkins, Morton, Read, Booker, Scott, Meade,
Allen, Parker, Foster, Johnson. Now, though some of them were
doubtless still attached to the Episcopal Church, since it was declared
at the outset that the institution should be conducted "on
the most catholic plan," and it was the best policy to enlist general
favour by appointing some of the Episcopal Church, yet a considerable
number of them had doubtless given in their adhesion to

the Presbyterian Church. Whereupon, ever since that time, we have
found most of the above-mentioned names in each denomination.

Let these remarks introduce the following genealogy of the
Reads and Carringtons, who may be regarded as common to the
Episcopal and Presbyterian Churches of Virginia, though more of
the former belonged to the Presbyterian and more of the latter to
the Episcopal. I take them chiefly from the Rev. Mr. Foote's
Sketches of the Presbyterian Church.

Colonel Clement Read (so often mentioned as the active vestryman
in Brunswick and Lunenburg) was born in the year 1707. He
was a trustee of William and Mary College in 1729. Being President
of the Council at the departure of Governor Gooch for England,
in 1749, he became Governor of the Colony, but died a few
days after. He had been educated at William and Mary under
Commissary Blair. He married the daughter of William Hill, an
officer in the British navy and second son of the Marquis of Lansdowne.
Mr. Read, having, with Colonel Richard Randolph, of
Curls, purchased large tracts of land in what was then Lunenburg,
moved to that county and was clerk of the same for many years.
He frequently served in the House of Burgesses with the great
leaders of the Revolution. He died in the year 1763 and was
buried at Bushy Forest. His wife was laid by his side in 1780.
She was (says Mr. Foote) a pious woman and an exemplary member
of the Episcopal Church. Their eldest son, Colonel Isaac Read,
married a daughter of Henry Embra, (another vestryman of the
Lunenburg Church,) who represented the county with his father,
Clement Read. He himself represented the county with Paul
Carrington, who married one of his sisters. They were both associated
with Washington, Jefferson, and Henry in their patriotic
movements. Paul Carrington was a zealous friend of the Episcopal
Church. What were the partialities of Mr. Isaac Read, whether
he followed in the footsteps of his father or not, we are unable to
say. He was made colonel in a Virginia regiment, and soon after
died, being laid with military honours in a vault in Philadelphia.
He left a son by the name of Clement, who became a distinguished
minister of the Presbyterian Church, after having for a time officiated
among the Methodists. He married a descendant of Pocahontas,—a
Miss Edmonds, of Brunswick,—by whom he had thirteen
children.

I take from the same source (Foote's Sketches) the following notice
of the Carrington family, whose members abound in this part
of Virginia. Mr. Paul Carrington and his wife (who was of the

Henningham family) emigrated from Ireland to Barbadoes, where
he died early in the eighteenth century, leaving a widow and a
numerous family of children. The youngest child, George, came to
Virginia about the year 1727 with the family of Joseph Mayo, a
Barbadoes merchant. Mr. Mayo purchased and occupied the ancient
seat of Powhatan, near the Falls of Jamestown. Young Carrington
lived for some years with Mr. Mayo as his storekeeper.
About 1732, when in his twenty-first year, he married Anne, the
eldest daughter of William Mayo, brother of Joseph, who had
settled in Goochland. They went to reside on Willis's Creek, now
in Cumberland county. They had eleven children,—viz.: Paul,
William, (who died in infancy,) George, William again, Joseph,
Nathaniel, Henningham, Edward, Hannah, (who married a Cabell
and was mother of Judge Cabell,) Mayo, Mary, (who married a
Watkins.) The parents, George Carrington and his wife, both died
in 1785. From them sprung the numerous families of Carringtons
in Virginia; and in the female line the descendants have been
numerous. Their eldest child, Paul Carrington, married, as we
have already said, the daughter of Colonel Clement Read, of Lunenburg,—now
Charlotte,—who left a memory of great virtues.
Their children were Paul, Clement, George, Mary, and Anne. Her
youngest child, Paul, became Judge of the General Court of Virginia,
and died in 1816. The elder Paul Carrington was married
a second time, to Miss Priscilla Sims. Two of their children died
in infancy. The rest were Henry, Robert, Letitia, and Martha. A
very interesting account is given of this, the elder Carrington, in
Mr. Grigsby's book,—the Convention of 1776. He was a member
of that body, and filled various departments of duty during the
Revolutionary struggle, while furnishing three sons to the army,
two of whom were eminently distinguished. He was an able lawyer
in his day, and after the close of the war was promoted to the
General Court, and then to the Court of Appeals, where he was
associated with his old friend, Edmund Pendleton, from whom he
seldom if ever differed on all the great questions which came before
them during the scenes of the Revolution. Agreeing with Pendleton
on the subject of religion and in attachment to the Episcopal
Church, when the question of the constitutionality of the law for
selling the glebes came before the Court of Appeals, we find them
united in giving their voice against the law. Mr. Grigsby informs
us that "in middle life, and until the war of the Revolution was
past, he was of a grave turn. Before the troubles began he had
lost the bride of his youth. During the war, and when the Southern
States were almost the reconquered Colonies of Britain, he was
never seen to smile. Day succeeded day in his domestic life, and
not only was no smile seen to play upon his face, but hardly a
word fell from his lips. He was almost overwhelmed with the
calamities which assailed his country. But his latter years were
cheered by its prosperity and glory. He died in the eighty-sixth
year of his age."

That some of the descendants of such men as Paul Carrington
and Clement Read, born and living in Prince Edward and the
counties around, should have forsaken a Church many of whose
ministers had forsaken them in times of trial, or else proved most
unworthy, is not to be wondered at, when we remember the ministers
of the Presbyterian Church who were sent into Virginia, and were
reared in it just before, during, and after the Revolution. Samuel
Davies led the way. The two Smiths were men of superior abilities.
Old David Rice was himself a host. Dr. Graham, Dr. Alexander,
and Dr. Hodge, following soon after, and having the powerful influence
of a college in their hands, could not but make a deep impression
on the public mind in all that region. It is not to be
wondered at that Episcopalians should wish well to the institution,
and that we should find among the trustees the names of Paul Carrington,
William Cabell, Sr., James Madison, General Everard
Meade, and others, who with their families were attached to the
Episcopal Church, and so many of whose descendants have continued
so to be. It was, in opposition to some fears expressed at
the time, most solemnly pledged that it should not be a sectarian
proselyting institution, though the forms of the Presbyterian Church
would be observed in it; and the fact that Episcopalians have
often been in some measure concerned, as trustees or professors, in
its management, proves that the pledge has been redeemed as far
as perhaps is practicable in such institutions. The long and prosperous
Presidency over it by the late Mr. Cushing, whose memory
is held in respect by all who knew him, and who, although a member
of the Episcopal Church, enjoyed the confidence of the trustees of
the College, and the fact that the Rev. Mr. Dame, of Danville, and
Colonel Smith, of Lexington, with their well-known Episcopal
attachments, were professors in the institution, are proofs that it
was conducted in as catholic a spirit as circumstances would admit
of. Whether in the lapse of time any change has taken place in its
constitution or administration, I am unable to say.

The articles in which the Presbyterian Church has been spoken

of having been read by a gentleman well versed in its history, he
has kindly sent me the following letter:—

ARTICLE XLIX.

Parishes in Cumberland, Buckingham, and Fluvanna.—St.
James Southam, Cumberland.

In 1745, Southam parish was cut off from St. James Northam,
in Goochland county, which county then extended over James
River and to the Appomattox. That on the south side of James
River was called Southam parish. Southam parish is now in Powhatan
county, which was separated at a later date from Cumberland.

A vestry-book of this parish, whose record began in 1745 and
continued until 1791, furnishes the following particulars. On June
30, 1746, the Rev. John Robertson enters upon his duties in this
parish, being recommended by Governor Gooch and Commissary
Dawson, having been ordained the previous year by the Bishop of
London. He ceased to be minister in 1751. Mr. McClaurine is
then received on probation for twelve months, and continues until
his death in 1772. Mr. Jarratt, in his autobiography, speaks of
him as a pious man.[5] The Rev. Jesse Carter, James Oglesby, and
Hyde Saunders, at the death of Mr. McClaurine, became applicants
for the parish, each preaching some time. Mr. Saunders is chosen
in November, 1773, and continues so to be until the year 1791,
when the record ends. In the year 1793 he also appears on the
journal of the Convention for the first and only time. Nothing
more is heard of the parish until the Rev. Mr. Lee took it under
his care in connection with Goochland and Amelia, in the year
1827. The Rev. Farley Berkeley, who succeeded Mr. Lee, has
also connected a new church at Genito, in Powhatan, with the
church in Amelia. For the last eleven years the Rev. Mr. Fisher
has been the minister of Southam parish, preaching at Emanuel
and St. Luke's Churches, each of which have been built since the

commencement of his ministry. He has recently relinquished the
care of one of them, which has connected itself with a congregation
in Littleton parish, Cumberland, St. Luke's being in Powhatan.

THE CHURCHES IN SOUTHAM PARISH.

The first church determined on was on Tear or Tar Wallett Hill.
The church has long been called Tar Wallett. It was built on the
land of Daniel Coleman, in what is now Littleton parish, Cumberland.
The next was ordered to be on James River, on Thomas
Carter's land. The next to be at or near the reading-place called
Worley's. At the same time Peterville Church is spoken of as
having a reader, and another chapel, called Ham, is ordered to be
examined. These last were doubtless built before the division of
the parish. Additions are made at different times to some of these
churches, as to those of Tear Wallett and South Chapel. Mr.
Alexander Trent is allowed to build a gallery for his family. Nicholas
Davies and Carter Henry Harrison are allowed to put additions
to Ham Chapel for their families. John Mayo and Benjamin
Moseby are allowed to build galleries in Peterville Church for their
families.

The vestry appears to have performed their duty in regard to a
glebe and glebe-houses for the ministers, and to have complied with
a law forbidding a vestryman to be a lay reader, by displacing two
who were lay readers, or rather by accepting their resignation.
A lay reader of disorderly behaviour is also summoned to answer
to the vestry.

The following is a list of the vestrymen:—William Randolph,
probably the second of that name; George Carrington, probably
the first of that name who settled on Willis Creek; (these were
the first churchwardens;) Alexander Trent, James Barnes, James
Terry, Benjamin Harrison, Charles Anderson, Samuel Scott, Stephen
Bedford, Thomas Turpin, John Baskerville, (in 1748, in room
of William Randolph, removed,) Benjamin Harris, (in place of
Benjamin Harrison, resigned,) Archibald Cary, Thomas Davenport,
(in place of Archibald Cary, removed in 1750,) Abraham Sally,
William Barnit, Creed Haskins, Wade Netherland, Alexander
Trent, Jr., John Fleming, Thompson Swann, Littlebury Moseby,
Henry Macon, Roderick Easly, John Netherland, Maurice Lang
horne, John Railey, George Carrington, Jr., Edward Haskins,
John Mosely, John Hughes, Edmund Logwood, William Mayo,
Richard Crump, George Williamson, William Ronald, Edmund

Vaughan, Peter F. Archer, William Bentley, Edward Carrington,
Brett Randolph. The clerks or lay readers were Messrs. Hubbard,
Anderson, Terry, Turpin, &c.

LITTLETON PARISH, CUMBERLAND COUNTY.

This was separated from Southam parish in the year 1771. Its
early history is very brief,—at least such of it as has come down to
us. The Rev. Christopher Macrae appears on our lists of clergy as
minister of Littleton parish, Cumberland, in the years 1773-74-76,
and 1785; after which he appears no more. In the next year Mr.
Mayo Carrington appears as the lay delegate, without any clerical
representation. In the year 1790 he appears again with the Rev.
Elkanah Talley as the minister. He continues the minister for
three years, and then removes to Ware parish, Gloucester. In
1797 the parish is represented by two laymen,—Alexander Brand
and James Deane. In the year 1799 the Rev. James Dickenson
and Mr. Alexander Trent are in the Convention. There being no
journal, and perhaps no Convention, between 1799 and 1805, and
none between 1805 and 1812, and having no other means of information,
we are unable to say how long Mr. Dickenson continued
in the parish, or whether he had any successor until some time after
the revival of the Church commenced. Still, there were laymen
there who, at the first signs of reviving life, came forward to declare
their readiness to help on the good cause. In the first of
our renewed Conventions—that of 1812—Mr. Codrington Carrington
is the delegate, and, in 1813, Mr. Samuel Wilson.

A long interval again appears where all seemed hopeless. At
length, in 1843, the Rev. Mr. Kinckle takes charge of it in connection
with some other of the waste places around. He is succeeded
in 1844 by the Rev. Mr. Bulkley, who, after some years,
was succeeded in part by the present minister, the Rev. Mr. Meredith,
who, in connection with the church in Buckingham, serves
the congregation at Ca-Ira. Of the ministers yet alive it is not
my purpose in these sketches to speak. Of those whom we have
named as the ministers of this parish before 1800 we know nothing,
either by report or otherwise, with the exception of Mr. Elkanah
Talley and Mr. Macrae. Of the former we have spoken elsewhere
in terms which it was our regret to use. Of the latter the testimony
of those who ought to have known him best is most satisfactory. He
was by birth and education a Scotchman,—probably ordained about
1765 by the Bishop of London. He was a man of prayer, retiring
from his family three times a day for purposes of private devotion

and study. He was a Scotchman, and not a modern Virginian,
in his notions and habits of governing his children and the boys
committed to his care, and was therefore complained of as too
strict. He did not enter with spirit into the American Revolution,
and was suspected of favouring the other side, though he said and
did nothing, so far as we can learn, to give just offence. He had
a right to a conscientious opinion on the subject; but the temper
of the times did not allow this, and some violent young men either
waylaid him at night or took him out of his bed, and severely
chastised him, leaving him naked in the woods. Tradition says
that he was prudent in the affair, and never opened his lips in the
way of complaint or sought to find out his nocturnal and cowardly
assailants, well knowing that it was too good a story to be kept
secret, and that if he did not they would reveal it. Accordingly,
in due time, they boasted of the deed and were witnesses against
themselves. They were summoned before a tribunal of justice,
which did not allow any patriotic feeling to prevent the punishment
of such an outrage. A heavy fine was accordingly inflicted upon
them. Patrick Henry, who was then in the Legislature, being
well acquainted with Mr. Macrae, took some public occasion to
animadvert upon the conduct of these young men, and spoke in
the highest terms of Mr. Macrae. The sons of Mr. Macrae, I believe,
are all dead, but three daughters and grandchildren are yet
alive, and love the Church and the religion of their fathers.[6]

I have no record from which to derive the names of vestrymen
or their doings in this parish. I know nothing of its former

churches, except that old Tar Wallett has long been in the service
of other denominations. Two new ones, one at Ca-Ira and another
near Cartersville, have been erected of late years, and are in constant
use.

TILLOTSON PARISH, BUCKINGHAM COUNTY.

These come next in geographical order, although not taken from
Cumberland county and Littleton parish.

At the time that Albemarle county and St. Anne's parish, in
the same, were separated from Goochland, they comprehended all
that is now Buckingham, Fluvanna, Nelson, and Amherst, as well
as Albemarle. In the year 1757, Tillotson parish was separated
from St. Anne's parish, and, in the year 1761, the county of Buckingham
was taken from Albemarle.

We have a list of ministers for 1758,—the year after the parish
was formed,—but there is none belonging to it. Our next list is
for 1773, when the Rev. Mr. Peasly is minister, and continues to
be in the years 1774 and 1776. How much longer, if at all, or
who, if any, succeeded, is not known, as there are no records until

1785,—nine years after. No delegation then appears, and the
name of Tillotson disappears from the journal until the year 1830,
when the Rev. Mr. Osgood, minister of Moore parish, Campbell
county, reports some services in it. In the year 1833, the Rev.
Mr. Swift was there. In the year 1838, the Rev. Mr. Cofer,—how
long before or after we have not the present means of ascertaining.
In the year 1845, the Rev. Mr. Meredith appears as its minister,
and has continued so to the present time. A new church has been
erected in this parish, which now stands at Curdsville, having been
originally placed a few miles from its present site, but recently
removed to its present more convenient position.

No vestry-book remains to furnish the names of the old vestrymen
and families of this parish.

There were two old churches in Buckingham. At one of them,
called Goodwin, near the court-house, we have officiated. The
locality of the other we cannot specify, but think that it was
somewhere near the Methodist Female College.

PARISH OF FLUVANNA, IN FLUVANNA COUNTY.

These were separated at the same time by an Act of Assembly,
in 1777, from Albemarle county and St. Anne's parish. Just
entering on the war, during which little or nothing was done, even
in the old parishes, it is doubtful whether a vestry was elected or
any steps taken toward building a church. At any rate, there is
no record of it. The following extract, from the letter of a friend
to whom I applied for information, tells nearly all that is known
of this parish:—

Since that time the two Mr. Galts, Mr. Archy Harrison's, Mr.
Bryant's, Mr. Brent's, and a goodly number of other families,
have been added.

ARTICLE L.

Fredericksville and Trinity Parishes, in Louisa and Albemarle
Counties.

After the separation of Louisa county from Hanover, in the
year 1742, and of Fredericksville parish, Louisa, from St. Martin's,
Hanover, the parish of Fredericksville was enlarged by taking in
a part of Albemarle lying north and west of the Rivanna. After
some years Fredericksville parish was divided into Fredericksville
and Trinity, the former being in Albemarle and the latter in Louisa.
We first treat of it in its enlarged and undivided state. It was then
without a place of worship, except an old mountain-chapel (age not
known) where Walker's Church afterward stood. The first meeting
of the vestry was in 1742. The vestry-book has some documents
worthy of introduction as historical antiquities. They were the
tests required of vestrymen at that period of England's history:—

From the foregoing it is evident that the apprehension of Popery
and the success of the Pretender was quite strong, and that the
English Church and Government endeavoured, not only at home,
but in the Colonies, through her officers, to guard most effectually
against both.

Those who signed the above tests were the first vestrymen after
the organization of the parish in 1742. The following were added
at different times until the division of the parish in 1762:—Thomas
Walker, John Meriwether, Nicholas Meriwether, David Mills,
Robert Harris, Robert Anderson, Tyree or Tyrce Harris, William
Johnson, John Harvie, Thomas Johnson.

After the division, a new vestry was elected from Fredericksville
parish. Some of the old ones continued, and others were added, as
Morias Jones, Isaac Davis, Thomas Caw, William Barksdale, John
Foster, Hezekiah Rice, Robert Clark, Nicholas Lewis, and at different

times afterward John Walker, Henry Fry, Thomas Jefferson,[8]
William Tims, John Rodes, John Harvie, Mordecai Ford, Isaac
Davis, James Quarles, William Dalton, Dr. George Gilmer, David
Hooks, James Marks, Thomas Walker, Jr., Robert Michie, James
Minor, Peter Clarkson, William Michie, Reuben Tinsley, Francis
Walker, George Nicholas, Joseph Tunstall, William D. Meriwether.
The last election of vestrymen was in 1787; and the last act recorded
in the vestry-books was the election of Mr. John Walker as
lay delegate to the Convention of that year.

Having thus drawn from our record all that relates to the vestrymen,
we will return and gather up whatever else is worthy of notice.

There being no churches in the parish, the services were held at
Louisa Court-House and at various private houses at different points
in the county. These were performed by lay readers on Sundays,
and for some years by the Rev. Mr. Barrett, from Hanover, twenty-four
times in the year during the days of labour, three hundred and
twenty pounds of tobacco being paid for each sermon. In the year
1745 it was determined to build three frame churches, one in some
central place in Louisa county, called the Lower Church, and sometimes
Trinity Church; another in Albemarle, called Middle Church,
and which was doubtless the same with Walker's Church; and the
third between the mountains on the Buckmountain Road, which is
doubtless the same with that now called Buckmountain Church.
Each of these was built at different times during the few following
years. In the year 1763 another church was resolved on nearer
to Orange,—whether built or not I cannot say. In the year 1747
the Rev. Mr. Arnold was chosen for one year, and continued until
his death, in 1754, when his funeral was preached by Mr. Barrett.

A Rev. Mr. Beckett then performed some services in the parish, as
also the Rev. James Maury, who became the minister in the same
year, and who married a Miss Walker. Soon after he settled in
the parish a good glebe of four hundred acres was purchased for
him, near Captain Linsey's, and a parsonage built, which, with the
outhouses and other improvements, seem during his life to have
been well attended to by the vestry. In the year 1763 the parish
was divided into Trinity, in Louisa, and Fredericksville, in Albemarle.
Of Trinity we now lose sight altogether, I fear, as I know
of no source from which to obtain information. By an Act of the
Legislature the vestry of Fredericksville was ordered to pay two
hundred pounds—half the price of their glebe—to the new vestry
of Trinity for the purchase of a glebe.

The Rev. James Maury continued until his death, in 1770, to
officiate in this parish. Of him and his Huguenot ancestors I have
written in my article on Manakintown,—of him particularly in my
notices of the Option Law, or Two-Penny Act, and in my remarks
on toleration. He was a very deserving man. He was succeeded
by his son, Matthew Maury, who was ordained the preceding year.
Mr. Matthew Maury continued to be the minister of the parish
until his death, in 1808, though his name does not appear on the
vestry-book as receiving a salary after the year 1777. From that
time forward he received little or nothing for his services as a
minister. He retained the glebe for the benefit of his mother and
family, who lived on it, while he taught school on an adjoining farm,
and educated a large number of the citizens of Virginia. He lived
very near to, and on the most intimate terms with, the old blind
preacher, Mr. Waddell, who officiated at the death of his wife, there
being no Episcopal minister at that time in any of the surrounding
counties, and but few in the State.[9]

Before we make our brief mention of the ministers of this parish,
since the revival of the Church during the present century, a few
words are due to the two old churches at Walker's and Buckmountain,
which we have said were determined upon in the year 1745,
and built within a year or two afterward. Old Walker's Church,
built upon the site of a still older and ruder house, stood on the
side of the road from Orange Court-House to Charlottesville, at the
end of a noble avenue of oaks—now no more—leading down to Mr.
Walker's old seat, Belvoir,—itself no more, having been consumed
by fire, but for a long time the seat of hospitality, especially
to ministers and persons coming to church from a distance. The
church being of wood—a framed one—of course must decay much
sooner than one of more solid material.

In the year 1827, when Judge Hugh Nelson, Mr. William C.
Rives, and Dr. Page, occupied their old seats, (having married into
the families of the Walkers,) and the descendants of other old
families were still around, the duty of repairing it was felt. But
the vestry not being able, as of old, to order a levy of tobacco for
building and repairing churches, it was not so easy to accomplish
the work. One of the females of the parish on that occasion made
the following very interesting appeal. It is believed to be from the
pen of one who has since taken so active a part in procuring the
new one which has recently been erected.[10]

The result of this poetic appeal, in co-operation with other means,
was the raising a sufficient sum for the repairs of the church. But,
time still going on with its ravages, it was felt that a new and more
durable one should be had. A gentleman, some years since, then
in prosperous circumstances, promised several thousand dollars
toward the erection of a new one, though by adversity he was disabled
from the full performance of his promise. This stimulated
the desire for a more expensive building than would otherwise have
been attempted. It was commenced under the auspices of one
family,[11] although the people around, during its progress, contributed
about five thousand dollars to it. False calculations were made
as to the expense of the style and manner of its execution, which
caused great delay in the work, and led to various efforts and solicitations
in Virginia and elsewhere in order to raise the needful
amount. Could all the disappointments and miscalculations and
costs have been foreseen, it would have been improper to have
attempted such a building, as a much cheaper one would have
answered all the needs of the neighbourhood. But it was at length
completed, and is in its exterior appearance a most beautiful building,
without any thing gaudy about it, while the materials and
manner of its execution give the promise of its long continuance.

As to Old Buckmountain Church, at the time that measures were

commenced for the resuscitation of our Zion in Virginia, it had
been so long in the use of some other denomination that it was
claimed, not merely by right of possession, but on the ground of
having been repaired. It will amuse the reader to learn the kind
and the amount of repairs on which this claim was grounded. When
I first saw it, more than thirty years ago, it was—though said to
be repaired—a mere shell, with many an opening in the clapboard
walls, through which the wind might freely pass. The inward repairs
consisted in removing the old pews into the gallery, where
they were piled up, and in their room putting benches made of the
outside slabs from the sawmill, with legs as rude thrust through
them, and of course no backs. The old pulpit was left standing,
but by its side was a platform made by laying a few planks across
the backs of two pews, which the preacher preferred to the old-fashioned
pulpit. A few years after the revival of our Church
began, the Episcopalians around, not thinking that either these
repairs or the occasional occupancy of the building had deprived
them of their right, put in their claim, which, though stoutly resisted
by some, being as stoutly insisted on by others, was finally
admitted, and the old church, being much better repaired than
before, has ever since been in our possession and use.

As to the ministers who have officiated in Fredericksville parish
since the revival of the Church, we have but little to say. The
Rev. Mr. Bausman took charge of it in 1818, and remained less
than one year. The Rev. Mr. Hatch succeeded him in 1820 and
continued until 1830. He was succeeded by the Rev. Zachariah
Mead, who continued three or four years, and, as did Mr. Hatch,
served the whole county. From 1833 to the fall of 1838, the Rev.
W. G. Jones, from Orange, officiated at Walker's Church. In the
year 1839 the present minister, the Rev. Mr. Boyden, took charge
of the parish, and for some years ministered also to the congregation
on the Green Mountain. The church on Buckmountain has
for many years been served in conjunction with other congregations,
which will be mentioned when we speak in our next article of St.
Anne's parish.

ARTICLE LI.

St. Anne's Parish, Albemarle County.

In the year 1761, Albemarle, besides its present territory, embraced
all of Fluvanna, Buckingham, Nelson, and Amherst. By
various Acts between that time and 1777, it was reduced to its present
dimensions. St. Anne's parish covered the whole of this region
at its first organization in 1742, and by successive Acts was reduced
to the same dimensions with the present county of Albemarle, with
the exception of that part which forms Fredericksville parish. The
dividing-line, after running some distance along the Rivanna, crosses
the same and passes through Charlottesville. Of late years some
other parishes have been formed within St. Anne's parish, as that on
Green Mountain, &c. Our first knowledge of any churches in
that part of St. Anne's parish now in Albemarle, as at present
bounded, is of two which began about the year 1746 or 1747, under
the direction of the Rev. Robert Rose, who moved from Essex to
what is now Amherst, and extended his labours, during a short period,
to that part of Albemarle called the Green Mountain, where were
built Ballenger's Church, not very far from Warren, and the Forge
Church, not far from Mr. John Cole's, the ancestor of those now
bearing that name, and who appears from the vestry-book in my
possession to have been the most active member of the vestry, until
the year 1785, when the record closes. After Mr. Rose's death, in
1751, the Rev. Mr. Camp probably succeeded to all his churches.
He lived in the neighbourhood of New Glasgow. The old glebe-house
is still to be seen on the land of Dr. Hite, near the roadside.
He moved with his family to the West just before the Revolution,
and it is said was murdered by the Indians near the
fort of Vincennes on the Wabash. Previously to this the Rev.
Mr. Ramsay had settled in Albemarle and become the minister of
St. Anne's parish with its reduced dimensions. He is represented
as a very unacceptable minister. The Rev. Charles Clay followed
him. He was near relative of our statesman, Mr. Henry
Clay,—probably first-cousin,—and inherited no little of his talents
and decision of character. He was ordained by the Bishop of London
in 1769, and on 22d October of the same year was received as

minister of St. Anne's parish. The vestry-book opens in 1772 and
closes in 1785, during all of which time, as well as the three preceding
years, Mr. Clay was the minister, living at the glebe, somewhere
in the Green Mountain neighbourhood, and preaching at the two
churches,—Ballenger and The Forge,—and sometimes at the courthouse,
and at various private houses in Albemarle; also, at the
Barracks during the war, which was probably the place where the
British prisoners under General Philips were kept, first by Colonel
Bland, and afterward by General Wood. He also preached in
Amherst and Chesterfield occasionally. The places of his preaching
I ascertain from the notes on a number of his sermons, which
have been submitted to my perusal. The sermons are sound, energetic,
and evangelical beyond the character of the times. One of
them, on the new birth, is most impressive and experimental. Another
on the atonement, for Christmas day, is very excellent as to doctrine,
and concludes with a faithful warning against the profanation
of that day by "fiddling, dancing, drinking, and such like
things," which he said were so common among them.

In the year 1777, on the public fast-day, he preached a sermon
to the minute-company at Charlottesville, in which his patriotic
spirit was displayed. "Cursed be he (in the course of his sermon
he said) who keepeth back his sword from blood in this war." He
declared that the "cause of liberty was the cause of God,"—calls
upon them to "plead the cause of their country before the Lord
with their blood." And yet he said, "There might be some present
who would rather bow their necks to the most abject slavery, than
face a man in arms." It was at this time and under these circumstances
that he became acquainted with Mr. Jefferson, who, having
removed into this parish from Fredericksville, was now elected to
the vestry of St. Anne's, though it does not appear that he ever
acted. This intimacy was kept up until his death in Bedford county,
in the year 1824, where he and Mr. Jefferson each had farms, and
where, during the visits of the latter, there was much friendly intercourse.
During the latter years of his ministry in St. Anne's
parish, the connection of Mr. Clay with his vestry was very unhappy.
The salary of one year was the occasion of it. There appears
to have been some division in the vestry about it. The majority,
however, was against Mr. Clay, and a law-suit was the result.
The decision was not satisfactory to Mr. Clay, and he refused taking
the amount offered, and told the vestry if they would not pay
him what he considered right, he would receive none. The vestry
ordered Mr. Fry, the collector, to lay it out in a land-warrant,

thinking that he might change his mind. Nothing more appeared
on the vestry-book about it, and how it was ended I know not.
Mr. Clay must have left St. Anne's in 1784, for we find him representing
the Church in Chesterfield in the Episcopal Convention at
Richmond, in the year 1785, but never afterward. The Church
was daily sinking, and, his mind being soured perhaps by his controversy
with the vestry, and discouraged by the prospects before
him as a minister, he moved to Bedford, and betook himself to a
farmer's life, only officiating occasionally at marriages, funerals,
&c. to the few Episcopalians of that region. He married a most
estimable and pious lady of that neighbourhood, who survived him
many years and contributed greatly to the revival of the Church
under the Rev. Mr. Cobbs of that county. He left a numerous
and most respectable family of sons and daughters, who have adhered
to the Church of their parents. At his death the Rev. Mr.
Ravenscroft performed the funeral services. There was something
peculiar in the structure of Mr. Clay's mind, in proof of which it
is mentioned that by his will he enjoined, what has been strictly
observed, that on the spot where he was buried, and which he had
marked out, there should be raised a huge pile of stones for his
sepulchre. It is about twenty feet in diameter and twelve feet high,
and being first covered with earth, and then with turf, presents the
appearance of one of those Indian mounds to be seen in our Western
States.

In looking over the vestry-book, which extends from 1772 to
1785, we find nothing requiring notice except the list of vestrymen
and what is said of churches.

The list of vestrymen is as follows:—John Coles, Jacob Moore,
John Ware, Patrick Napier, James Hopkins, James Garland, Michael
Thomas, William Coxe, John Fry, Roger and George Thompson,
William Burton, John Harris, John Scott, Thomas Jefferson, Orlando
Jones, William Oglesby, Richard Farrar, Philip Mazzei,
William Hughes, Samuel Shelton, Wm. Ball, Charles Lewis, Nathaniel
Garland, Nicholas Hamner, Richard Davenport, John Old,
Joshua Fry, Charles Irving, John Jordan. The vestry appears
throughout to have been attentive to the glebe-house and its appurtenances.
As to churches, in 1774 it was ordered that a church
be built at a place to be chosen by Henry Martin and Patrick
Napier, and that Messrs. Roger and George Thompson might each
build a pew, adjoining, at their own expense. In 1777 a church
was contracted for with Mr. Edward Cobbs, at whose house services
had been held. It was not finished for some years. It is also

stated that in 1777 Mr. James Minor, Dabney Minor, and John
Napier were appointed to examine a church built by a Mr. Anderson.
During the ministry of Mr. Clay there was also a Mr. Holmes
acting as a teacher and preacher in Albemarle. He was also American
in his feelings, and rejoiced in the capture of Cornwallis.

After the resignation of Mr. Clay the Rev. Mr. Darneile performed
some services here and in Nelson. We learn that he became
involved in debt, and studied law; but, not extricating himself, he
left his family, and, going to the South, spent some years there.
From the year 1795 to 1812 the Rev. William Crawford occasionally
officiated at the churches in St. Anne's parish.

After that period there were no services until the year 1818,
when the Rev. Mr. Bausman divided his labours between the few
remaining Episcopalians about Charlottesville in St. Anne's parish,
and Walker's Church, in Fredericksville. The Episcopal Church,
under new auspices, now began to revive a little. The Gospel was
preached in a clearer and more forcible manner than had been common
in Virginia, and the ministers exhibited more zeal. In the year
1820, the Rev. Frederick Hatch succeeded to Mr. Bausman, and
extended his efforts to the Green Mountain, finding a considerable
number of the old families still attached to the Church. Old Ballenger
Church was in ruins, and that called The Forge was in little
better condition. Still, service was held in it for some years. The
first time I ever saw it was in company with Bishop Moore, not long
after his coming to Virginia. It was a cold, cloudy, stormy day,
and the wind whistled not only around but within its tattered walls.
The Holy Communion was administered to a few of the old adherents
of the church. General Cocke, from Fluvanna, had come
that morning from his home, between twenty and thirty miles, to
partake of his first Communion, as he has continued to do ever since
on Episcopal visitations. The resolve was taken that day, that a
new and better house must be provided for the worship of God,
which has been faithfully fulfilled. Some miles off, in a more central
position and on a beautiful site, a neat and excellent brick
church has been erected, and near it, more recently, a parsonage
and small glebe have been added. A parish has been established in
that part of the county. A succession of ministers either in whole
or in part have ministered unto it. The Rev. Mr. Hatch stands
first. Then follow the Rev. Zachariah Mead, the Rev. Joseph
Wilmer, the Rev. Mr. Boyden, the Rev. Charles Ambler, and their
present rector, the Rev. W. M. Nelson. But few of the old families

are represented now. The Fryes, Cobbs, Nicholases, Harrises,
Lewises, Garlands, Thomases, Thompsons, Joneses, Napiers, are
gone, but the descendants of John Cole, in considerable number,
the Tompkinses, Riveses, Carters, Gants, Randolphs, and others, have
taken their places, and will, I trust, fulfil them well. In that part
of the parish called North Garden, and near which an old church
stood, a new brick church was also erected by the zeal and liberality
of a few devoted friends, and the same was done also on the road
leading from Charlottesville to Staunton, and the two, being brought
into one parish, have generally been supplied with a minister.
The Rev. Mr. Christian acted for some time as missionary in that
part of the county. Then the Rev. William Jackson, who recently
fell victim to the fever in Norfolk, was the settled pastor for some
years. After him came the Rev. Mr. Slack, and at present the
Rev. Mr. Davis, who, as well as most of his predecessors, connect
with them the church on Buckmountain, in Fredericksville parish,
and sometimes the church at Rockfish, in Nelson county.

To the zeal and enterprise of the Rev. Mr. Hatch, is, under God,
to be ascribed the building of the church in Charlottesville, which
stands just within the bounds of Fredericksville parish. For a long
time the court-house was the only place in Charlottesville or round
about for public worship. The four leading denominations in the
State equally divided the Sabbaths, and some thought that this
was sufficient, and calculated to promote peace and love among them
all. Mr. Jefferson used to bring his seat with him on horseback
from Monticello, it being some light machinery which, folded up,
was carried under his arm, and unfolded served for a chair on the
floor of the court-house. But the great body of the people felt
the need of a more convenient place of worship, where more persons
could be accommodated and in a better manner. It was proposed
that all denominations should unite in one; but that was
found full of difficulties, and was soon abandoned. It was then
proposed that two should unite,—the Episcopalians and Presbyterians;
which also came to nothing. Mr. Hatch, who was opposed
to either scheme, then circulated a subscription for an Episcopal
church, which immediately succeeded, and was soon followed with
the same success by all the others; and the village is now filled
with well-built churches. The plan of the Episcopal church was
furnished by Mr. Jefferson, and, though far from being the best, is
much better for the purposes of worship and preaching than most
of those which now come from the hands of ecclesiological architects,
who, if hired to injure the voices and energies of ministers, and

to frustrate the main purposes for which temples of religion are
built, could not have succeeded much better than they have done by
their lofty ceilings, their pillars, recesses, and angles, besides the
heavy debts into which they have led their employers. The church
in Charlottesville has been recently enlarged and much improved.

The Rev. Mr. Hatch was succeeded in this parish by the Rev.
Zachariah Mead, an alumnus of our Seminary. For the encouragement
of young men of weak constitutions to choose a country
parish, let me give the experience of Mr. Mead. When he left the
Seminary he was thought to be far gone in that disease of which
he eventually died,—consumption,—so that he required assistance
to get into the stage which was to convey him to the place where
it was soon to be determined whether a speedy death or a prolonged
life was to be his portion. The latter was his portion. By little
and little he enlarged his sphere of labour, until on horseback he
rode over the whole hilly and mountainous country of Albemarle,
taking charge of all the congregations in both parishes, which now
employ, and fully employ, the labours of four ministers, and in
less than a year swam the Rivanna River, on horseback, on a
bleak day, without taking cold. He became a hearty man, and
continued so until he returned to the North, took charge of a congregation
in Boston, lost his health, and was obliged to seek its
restoration in the milder climate of Richmond and in the editorial
chair. Had he returned again to the labours of a country ministry,
his days and services might have been prolonged. Mr. Z. Mead
was succeeded for two years in the church at Charlottesville by the
Rev. Mr. Cobbs, (now Bishop,) while performing the duties of
Chaplain to the University. He was followed by the present
minister, the Rev. R. K. Meade, who has been in this position ever
since his ordination,—more than twenty years. Every fourth year
at first, and, of late, every two years in eight, the Chaplaincy of
the University is filled by an Episcopal minister, which deserves to
be mentioned in the history of the Church in this parish. It was
just before the Chaplaincy of Mr. Cobbs, that a circumstance
occurred deserving some notice, as it occasioned much excitement
at the time, and not a little misapprehension. A pestilential
disease had visited the students of the Institution for two successive
years, or twice in the same year, sweeping a number of them
into untimely graves. There was something most unaccountable,
mysterious, and awful in all the circumstances of it. Though
there was confessedly much of irreligion and even infidelity in the
faculty of that day, yet such an awe rested upon them, that at the

instance of a pious member of it, Judge Lomax, the Law Professor,
it was determined to celebrate the event in the most solemn manner.
The Episcopal Convention was to meet in Charlottesville the
ensuing spring, and that was selected as the proper time for it.
The author of these pages was requested to prepare and deliver a
discourse at that time and on the occasion referred to. It was a
most trying and responsible undertaking, but he dared not refuse.
At the time appointed there was present, on Sabbath morning, in
the great rotunda of the University, a large number of the clergy
and laity then in attendance on the Convention, with the Professors,
students, and people around.

The sermon was preached from those words of the Prophet Amos,
(3d chap. 6th verse,) "Shall a trumpet be blown in the city and
the people not be afraid? Shall there be evil in the city and the
Lord hath not done it?" I need not say that the doctrine of an
overruling special providence was drawn from these words, in opposition
to atheism, chance, or some general divine providence
which attends only to great things, which governs and directs the
spheres, but lets the atoms fly at random,—that a warning was
given to take heed to this judgment, and carefully inquire what
was the righteousness that God called on us to learn. The importance
of literary institutions was dwelt upon, and especially the
great duty of calling in the aid of Heaven in the conduct of them.

I hope the reader will excuse the insertion of the following
passages:—

At this discourse much offence was taken by some, and many
misrepresentations went forth through the State. It was charged
against it that, besides undertaking to interpret and apply the
judgments of God in a way which had been most carefully avoided,
a personal attack had been made on the Professors and Visitors of
the University, and especially on its chief founder, whose opinions,
having been published to the world, were known to be contrary to
those expressed in the sermon. So extensively were these charges,
with many colourings and exaggerations, spread abroad, that after
due consideration the sermon was published, and the author had
the happiness of learning that the effect of its publication was
such as he desired. Many were astonished to find that any in a
Christian land could object to its doctrine, or expect any other
improvement of the occasion from a Christian minister. But it
was long before the preacher could be forgiven by some within the
walls of the University. Previous to that he had been freely invited
to preach there, but for some years even some of his friends
were afraid to propose it. We must, however, in justice say, that
the opposition was not from Virginians, nor from Americans, but
from foreigners, who were allowed to forbid a minister of Virginia
to be heard in the University of Virginia. It was, however, the
happiness of that minister to see, only a few years after, all the
offensive features of his sermon adopted into the administration
of the College, as far perhaps as is practicable under the circumstances
of its existence as the common property of all denominations
of Christians and all citizens of the State.

ARTICLE LII.

Parishes in Amherst, Nelson, Botetourt, Rockbridge, Greenbrier,
and Montgomery.

In 1761, Amherst county and Amherst parish were separated
from Albemarle county and St. Anne's parish. In the year 1778,
Amherst parish was divided and Lexington parish established. In
the year 1780, the boundary-line was changed so as somewhat to
reduce Lexington parish. The line, as settled in 1780, we presume
is the same, or nearly the same, which now separates Nelson and
Amherst. Amherst parish was left in that part which is now Nelson
county. We have seen in our notice of the Rev. Mr. Rose,
that he became minister of this region about 1745 or 1746, by being
minister of all St. Anne's parish and Albemarle county, then
extending over Amherst and Nelson; that he had four churches
ordered by the vestry at one time,—two in what is now Albemarle,
and two in what is now Amherst and Nelson. He was
followed by the Rev. John Ramsey, who was minister in 1754 and
also in 1758,—how much longer not known. In 1773-74-76 we find
the Rev. Ichabod Camp minister of Lexington parish,—how long
before 1773 not known. He lived at the glebe near New Glasgow,
now in possession of Dr. Hite. The shell of the parsonage is still
to be seen.

About the commencement of the war, Mr. Camp moved to Illinois,
to a fort on the Wabash, and tradition says that he and his family
were destroyed by the Indians. The first minister of Lexington
parish, after its division from Amherst, was the Rev. John Buchanon,
in the year 1780. The following is the entry in the vestrybook:—"The
vestry, taking into consideration the distressed condition
of the parish for want of an orthodox minister, elect Mr. J.
Buchanon, a gentleman of fair character, &c." This is the same
person who afterward ministered in Richmond. He was ordained
in 1775, and had officiated acceptably elsewhere in Virginia. In
the year 1788, the Rev. John W. Hole was elected. In the year
1789, the Rev. Charles Crawford, a native of Amherst, was ordained
by Bishop Madison, and received as minister of this parish, and
continued its minister until 1815, when, from great corpulency,

age, and infirmities, he resigned. Those who have retained the
recollection of Mr. Crawford, and have knowledge of him otherwise,
bear testimony to his excellency as a preacher and a Christian.
The Rev. Silas Freeman succeeded him in 1823, and continued a
few years. The Rev. Charles Page followed him and laboured for
many years in that and the adjoining parish of Amherst, in Nelson
county. The Revs. Nelson Sale, Stewart, Black, Caldwell, Walker,
Caldwell again, and Martin, have followed in too rapid succession.
The Rev. Mr. Nowlin is the present minister.

The churches in Lexington parish were—Pedlar's, near the mountains,
where a new one was built some years since; Rucker's or
St. Matthew's, some miles from the court-house; Maple Run
Church, afterward moved to New Glasgow; and another called
Bent Chapel, which was near James River. This being burned
down was never rebuilt. The brick church now at New Glasgow
was built by a general subscription, but chiefly of Episcopalians,
and regularly assigned to them, but afterward claimed by others
and forcibly entered by the Campbellites. It was then bought, by
the Episcopalians, of the executors of David Garland, to whom it
legally belonged, being on his land, and was regularly consecrated
as an Episcopal Church. Another church of brick has within the
last few years been built at the court-house of Amherst county.
The following is the list of vestrymen of this parish from 1779:—

AMHERST PARISH, NELSON COUNTY.

We have seen that this was separated from Lexington in 1778.
It is not known how many churches there were in it at that time,
but certainly one at Rockfish Gap, near the mountain, and one
near James River, in the neighbourhood of the Cabells. The Rev.
Robert Rose, in his journal ending in the year 1751, often speaks
of being at the houses of the Cabells and preaching in that neighbourhood,
and doubtless a church must have been built there soon
after, called Key's Church. About the year 1780, it is believed
a Mr. Buchan was minister of that parish,—probably the same who
was afterward in Stafford. In the year 1790 the Rev. Isaac
Darneile appears on the journal of the Convention as minister of
this parish. Of him I have spoken on a former occasion, as one
who was always in pecuniary difficulties, who exchanged the pulpit
for the bar, and, failing in that also, left his family behind, and,
going to the South, spent some years there. In 1795 the Rev.
William Crawford, brother or near relative of Mr. Charles Crawford,
succeeded Mr. Darneile, preaching at Rockfish Key's, the old
court-house, and Hat Creek. Mr. Crawford was, I believe, the
last regular minister of this parish, until the Rev. Charles Page
undertook the charge of it, in connection with that of Lexington,
some years after the revival of the Church commenced. The Rev.
Mr. King and Dr. Stephens, of Staunton, had performed some
duties at Rockfish Gap Church before Mr. Page's more regular
assumption of the charge of the parish. The Rev. Frederick
Goodwin succeeded Mr. Page in this parish, and has continued to
be its minister until the last year. The Rev. Mr. Martin is its
present minister.[12]

As to the churches in the parish of Amherst and county of Nelson
of more recent erection, there was, until a few years since, one
called Calloway's Church, of whose date, however, I am unable to
speak positively, but think it must have been at a much later date
than the old ones which have long since passed away. This has
been deserted of late years for two new brick houses,—the one
called Trinity, near the residence (Oak Ridge) of old Mr. Rives,
and built chiefly, if not entirely, by him, and the other at New
Market, on the James River Canal, at the mouth of Tye River.
The old church at Rockfish has also been removed to a more convenient
place, not far off, and entirely renovated.

Amidst no little opposition, Captain John B. Coles and Mr.
Martin, two fast friends of the Church, determined upon the effort
for its removal and renewal, and invited all the neighbours—even
the poorest—to meet at certain appointed days for its prostration,
its removal and re-erection, and completely triumphed over all
opposition and falsified all unfavourable prophecies. In another
place I have stated that it has been for many years supplied with
occasional services by ministers from Albemarle county.

THE FAMILY OF CABELLS.

Among the numerous families of Amherst and Nelson who were
the active supporters of the Episcopal Church, the Roses and Cabells
were most conspicuous. Of the Roses, the descendants of
the Rev. Robert Rose, who died in 1751, leaving large estates to
his four sons, we have already written in our sketches of the father
in a previous article. Of the Cabells we will now make some
mention, abridging our notice from the various accounts we have
of them.

Dr. William Cabell, a surgeon of the British navy, emigrated
to Virginia about the year 1720 or 1725, according to different accounts.
It is said he owned twenty-five thousand acres of land on
either side of Upper James River, in the counties of Nelson, Amherst,
and Buckingham. He was one of the earliest vestrymen and
wardens in the Church, as established in that part of Virginia, and
was the intimate friend of the Rev. Robert Rose. Between the
years 1740 and 1750 he appears as chiefly concerned in the contracts
for the building of churches, &c. He had four sons,—William,
Joseph, John, and Nicholas. William, the eldest, was the owner of
the estate called Union Hill, in Nelson county, on James River.
Mr. Grigsby has given a very glowing account of this mansion and
the hospitality of its owner, and his great business-talents as a
farmer, and in other respects comparing his house to Mount Vernon,
except that it was larger, and himself to Washington, as to the
management of his estate, and methodical accounts kept by him.
He speaks of his association with Washington in all the great political
bodies in Virginia previous to 1776, as well as in that year, and
of his political career afterward, terminating in the adjournment of
the Federal Convention. It remains for me to add, that before and
after the death of his father, Dr. Cabell, he was also the active
vestryman and churchwarden in the parish, the intimate friend of
the Rev. Mr. Rose, who was often at his house. I have before me
subscription-papers and contracts in which he is leader in all Church

matters in the parish, especially after the Establishment was put
down and it became necessary to raise a salary for the minister by
private contributions. His son also, Mr. William Cabell, who was
a representative in Congress from this district before his father's
death, and in connection with his father, took part in the vestry-proceedings.
Of his other sons I have no account. Of his daughters,
one married Mr. Rives, the father of W. C. Rives and of a
number of other sons and daughters; another married Judge Cabell;
another the Rev. Mr. Legrand. The present Mayo Cabell,
of Nelson, and Mrs. Bruce, of Richmond, are also descendants of
Colonel Wm. Cabell. The second son of Dr. Cabell, father of the
family, was Joseph, of whom all the information I have is, that he
was also at various times in the House of Burgesses, and took
part in the Revolution, and was the ancestor of General Cabell, of
Danville, and of the Breckenridges of Virginia and Kentucky. Of
the third son, John, I learn that he was in the Convention of 1775
and 1776, and was the father of the late Dr. George Cabell, of
Lynchburg. Of the fourth son, Nicholas Cabell, of Liberty Hall,
I find that he was both in the field and the Legislature, and was
the father of the late Judge W. H. Cabell and Joseph C. Cabell.
I have also papers showing that he was a vestryman of the church
in this parish, and took a lively interest in its affairs. He was the
collector of the subscriptions made to the ministers after the Revolution:
to him Mr. Darneile applied in his difficulties, for relief,
and both himself and his brother, Colonel Wm. Cabell, acted as
friends to Mr. Darneile by advancing moneys for him. On a slip
of paper before me I find that he also collected what was given to
the Rev. Mr. Clay, while minister in Albemarle, for services
rendered at Key's Church, in Nelson, but which Mr. Clay requested
him to give to the poor of the parish.[13]

I have also a manuscript sermon preached by the Rev. Charles
O'Neale, then probably a minister of some neighbouring parish,

afterward in Prince William, in the year 1794, on the occasion of
the death of two of Mr. Nicholas Cabell's daughters, Hannah and
Henningham, who died on the 7th and 8th of September of that
year, aged the one eight and the other six years. In this sermon
also we see the deficiency of the pulpit in that day. Once only is
there allusion to Christ, when he says that "to those who lead a
virtuous life, and die in the faith of Christ, the whole aspect of
death is changed," while in the sermon, which is on resignation and
preparation for death, he speaks of certain duties "to be performed
in order to make us acceptable to God," and at the close of it says
that "the best preparation for death is a virtuous temper and a good
life. When once you are furnished with these qualifications, you
may view it approaching toward you with a calm and constant mind,
free from any timorous and unmanly solicitude." Nothing is said in
the sermon about a new birth of the Spirit as a necessary qualification
for heaven, of faith in Christ and repentance toward God as
being the constant exercises of the true Christian, and from which
any good works can flow. There are many very good things said
about the vanity of earthly things and the duty of considering our
latter end, but they are such things as are common to the Christian
preacher and the pagan philosopher.

I might also speak of the Sheltons, Taliaferos, Thompsons,
Ellises, Davises, Tinsleys, Garlands, and others, as having been
fast friends of the Church in Amherst and Nelson, but refer to the
list of vestrymen for the purpose of showing who were her persevering
advocates.

There is one name on which I must dwell for a moment. Mr.
William Waller, lately deceased, was perhaps inferior to none of
the laity of Virginia in personal piety and hearty zeal for the

Church, as well as for all that was amiable and excellent in private
life. He was well known in our Conventions, which he delighted
to attend, and acted as an efficient vestryman and lay reader for a
long time. He has left a large family of children, who I trust will
follow his good example.

One word is added concerning the family of Massies, in Nelson,
not very far from Rockfish Church. It came at an early period
from England, and settled in New Kent, where several in succession
were vestrymen. Major Massie, of Nelson, after having served in
the Revolution, moved from New Kent about the close of the war,
and was a vestryman of the Church in Frederick county, with
Colonel Burwell, Meade, and others. From thence he moved to
Nelson, and lived in great seclusion the remainder of his days. He
had three sons, of whom Dr. Thomas Massie, of Nelson, was the eldest.

COUNTIES AND PARISHES OF BOTETOURT, ROCKINGHAM, ROCKBRIDGE,
GREENBRIER, AND MONTGOMERY.

When Frederick county was first divided from Augusta, the latter
was left with all of Western Virginia beyond the Alleghany Mountains,
then extending to the Pacific Ocean, or, as it was sometimes
said, to the "waters of the Mississippi."

In the year 1769, Botetourt was taken from Augusta, and also
extended westward indefinitely. At a subsequent period Montgomery
was taken from Botetourt. But in the year 1777, Rockingham,
till then part of Augusta, and Rockbridge and Greenbrier,
were cut off from Augusta, Botetourt, and Montgomery. In all
of these, parishes were also established by Act of Assembly. What
was done in them after this is unknown. In Rockingham, probably
before its separation from Augusta, there were, as may be seen in
our article on Augusta, two churches. In Rockbridge, when composed
of parts of Augusta and Botetourt, there may have been a
church or churches, but I have obtained no information of such.
Before this period the Presbyterians had made settlements in this
region, especially about Lexington. On none of our lists of clergy
or records do we find any minister belonging to Rockbridge after
its separation from Augusta and Botetourt. In Montgomery and
Greenbrier parishes and counties, we presume there were none. In
Botetourt parish, (for all the new parishes were called by the same
name with the counties,) we find that the Rev. Adam Smith was the
minister in the years 1774 and 1776. He was the father of Mr.
Alexander Smith, sometimes written Smythe, of Wythe county,
member of Congress, and General in the last war with England.

We know of no other but the Rev. Samuel Gray, who appears on
the journal of 1796, and who died in the parish poor-house, the
miserable victim of drink. In Fincastle there was an Episcopal
church on the spot where the Presbyterian church now stands.
A new church being built there, the Presbyterians worshipped in it,
and were perhaps most active in its erection. By an Act of the
Legislature, the lot of ground on which it stood was given to that
denomination. It was not until the Rev. Mr. Cobbs commenced
his labours in Bedford and extended his visits to Botetourt, that
any hopes were raised, in the breasts of the Episcopalians in that
county, of the establishment of the Church of their fathers and of
their affection.

During the ministry of Mr. Gray, some of the descendants of
Major Burwell, an old vestryman of the church in King William,
had removed to the neighbourhood of Fincastle. General Breckenridge,
and Watts, who had not forgotten the Church of their
forefathers, were also there. Woodville, son of the old minister
of Culpepper, one of the Taylors from Old Mount Airy, in the
Northern Neck, Madison, son of Bishop Madison, and others who
might be mentioned, were there to encourage the effort at establishing
a church. And yet, on my first visit to that county after
my consecration, only one solitary voice was heard in the responses
of our service.

After some years the Rev. Dabney Wharton, from the neighbouring
county, took Orders and entered on the work of resuscitating
or rather establishing the Church there, and during his residence
in the parish did much to effect it. The Rev. W. H. Pendleton
succeeded him for some years, and, though removing for a time to
another, has returned to a portion of his former field. He was
succeeded by the Rev. Mr. McElroy, in 1847. The Rev. George
Wilmer also spent some years there, first as minister to the whole
parish, and then to a portion of it, which was formed into a distinct
parish, now in the county of Roanoke. New churches have been
erected in each portion,—one at Big Lick, in Roanoke, another at
Fincastle, a third at Buchanon. The Rev. Mr. Baker has for some
years been the minister of the two congregations in Fincastle and
Buchanon. The new church at Buchanon deserves a word of
special notice. It is chiefly the result of female enterprise. A
lady well known in Virginia, who occasionally visited it in the
summer season, fleeing from the sultry heat of Richmond, determined
to effect it by collections, far and near, of only twelve and
a half cents from each contributor, and by dint of perseverance,

succeeded in the course of a few years,—at least, so far as to secure
the object. A neat, well-filled brick church is now to be seen at
Buchanon.

Although there was no church in Rockbridge county in former
times, so far as I am informed, I must not omit to mention a most
successful effort of later years. About the year 1839 or 1840, the
Rev. William Bryant, a native of Virginia, and a graduate of West
Point, who had left the army of his country to enter the army of
the Lord and become one of the great company of preachers, was
induced by his friend, and almost brother, as well as fellow-student
at West Point, Colonel Smith, of the Military Institute at Lexington,
to come and seek to establish an Episcopal church at that
place. Difficult as the work seemed to be, and most doubtful the
success of it, especially to one of so meek and quiet a spirit, and
destitute of those popular talents in the pulpit so much called for
in such positions, he nevertheless, in humble dependence on divine
assistance, undertook the task and succeeded far beyond general
expectation. With generous aids from other parts of the State,
and active exertions on the part of the few friends in Lexington,
a handsome brick church has been built and a respectable though
still a small congregation been collected. The Rev. Mr. Bryant
was succeeded by one of our present missionaries to China,—the Rev.
Robert Nelson,—who, pursuing the same judicious course and putting
forth the same efforts with his predecessor, carried on the work
with the same success, until in the providence of God he was called
to a distant field in which he had long desired to labour. The Rev.
William N. Pendleton has now for some years been labouring as his
successor.

Higher up the valley, in what was once Montgomery county and
parish, but is now not only Montgomery, but Wythe, and Washington,
and others, we cannot read or hear of any effort being
made in behalf of establishing the Episcopal Church until within
the last twenty years, when the Rev. Mr. Cofer was sent as missionary
to Abingdon, in Washington county. Some years after his
relinquishment of the station the Rev. James McCabe occupied it,
and during his stay, I believe, a neat but very small brick church
was put up. He was succeeded for two years by the Rev. Mr. Lee.
It has now for some time been without a minister, though we hope
for better times.

As emigration and natural increase of population shall follow
the railroad up this narrow though fertile valley, and whenever the
mountains on either side shall be cleared of their forests, we may

surely hope better things for our Church. Already are there many
interesting families inheriting an attachment to the Church of their
fathers to be found along the great highway leading through this
part of Virginia and the West. At Wytheville the indefatigable
efforts of a mother and daughter have raised a considerable sum of
money for the erection of a church. The tongue hath spoken, the
pen hath written, and hands have laboured, in the cause, and none
of them in vain. A most eligible sight, at great cost, has been
obtained, and perhaps great progress made in the erection of a
church. Other openings, I am told by those who have made recent
missionary visits to this upper valley of Virginia, are likely to
present themselves. The Rev. Frederick Goodwin has just settled
at Wytheville.

ARTICLE LIII.

St. George's Parish, Spottsylvania County.

I am saved all trouble in the examination of records and documents,
in order to the execution of this part of my work, by the full
and interesting history of this parish from the pen of the Rev. Mr.
Slaughter. His authorities are the old vestry-books and Henning's
Statutes.

The county of Spottsylvania was established in 1720, being
taken from the counties of Essex, King William, and King and
Queen. It extended westward to the river beyond the high mountains,—the
Shenandoah. The parish of St. George's was then
commensurate with the county. In the year 1730, the parish was
divided into St. George's and St. Mark's,—St. Mark's lying in the
upper portion, which, in the year 1734, was made the county of
Orange, and contained all that is now Orange, Madison, Culpepper,
and Rappahannock. At the first establishment of Spottsylvania,
in 1720, fifteen hundred pounds were appropriated by the House
of Burgesses to a church, court-house, prison, pillory, and stocks.
Governor Spottswood, after whom the county was named, established
the seat of justice at Germanna, and there built a church,
&c. In the year 1732, the seat of justice was, by Act of Assembly,
removed to Fredericksburg, as a more convenient place; but, seventeen
years after, the law was repealed as derogatory to his Majesty's
prerogative to take from the Governor or Commander-in-Chief of
this Colony his power and authority of removing or adjourning the
courts because it might be inconvenient in a case of smallpox or
other contagious disease. Fredericksburg was founded, by law, in
the year 1727. Colonel Byrd, in his visit in the year 1732, says
of it at this time, "Besides Colonel Willis, who is the top man
of the place, there are only one merchant, a tailor, a smith, an
ordinary-keeper, and a lady who acts both as a doctress and coffee-woman."
A church was built in that year, (1732.) There had
been a church near Fredericksburg in the year 1728, (as also one
at Mattapony,) called the Mother-Church, besides that built at
Germanna, by Governor Spottswood's order, at the first establishment
of the county. Its first minister of whom we have any knowledge

was the Rev. Theodosius Staige, whose name is found incorporated
with the Davis family, of Albemarle, and with some others,
I think. He continued until November, 1728. The Rev. Mr. De
Butts, of Westmoreland, became a candidate for the parish; but
the Rev. Rodham Kennor, having been recommended by the Governor,
was accepted. He continued the minister for eighteen
months, and then preached there once a fortnight for more than
two years,—the Rev. Mr. Pearl occasionally officiating. The Rev.
Mr. Kennor appears to have been a rolling stone,—passing from
parish to parish,—and the vestry of St. George's were well pleased
to part with him. In 1732, the Rev. Patrick Henry, uncle of the
celebrated orator, and who was afterwards, and for a long time,
minister of St. Paul's parish, Hanover, became the minister, and
continued until April, 1734. Governor Gooch sent a Rev. Mr.
Smith to the parish; but his preaching was so unacceptable that
the vestry sent a deputation to inform the Governor that they could
not accept him. They also petitioned the Governor to allow the
Rev. James Marye, who was the minister of the Huguenot settlement
at Manakintown, in King William parish, then in Goochland,
now in Powhatan, and who was willing to come, to leave his parish.
He was accordingly inducted in October, 1735. During his ministry
two chapels were built in the parish at places not now to be identified.
Roger Dixon was allowed to have any pew in the church,
except two already granted to Benjamin Grymes, provided he did
not raise the pew higher than the other pews. In the year 1767,
after a ministry of thirty-two years in this parish, Mr. Marye died,
and was succeeded by his son, James Marye, who was born in
Goochland, in 1731, was educated at William and Mary, and had
been minister in Orange county. His father was one of the Huguenots
who fled from France at the time of the persecutions of the
Protestants in that country. He married a Miss Letitia Staige, of
London, daughter of an English clergyman,—perhaps the one who
was minister in Fredericksburg. Mr. Marye, Jr. continued the
minister until 1780. He was the father of Mrs. Dunn, wife of the
Rev. John Dunn, of Leesburg, and of Mrs. Yeamans Smith, of
Fredericksburg. During his ministry a new church, near Burbridge's
Bridge, was built, and was used as an Episcopal Church
long after the Revolution, though now occupied by other denominations.
The parish also was divided during his time, and Berkeley
parish cut off from it. The parish was now vacant for seven years,
at the end of which the Rev. Thomas Thornton was chosen its
minister. Under his ministry and the voluntary system, which was
of necessity adopted after the Establishment was put down, the
congregation increased so as to require an addition to the church.
This addition made it a cruciform church. It was, however, getting
to be like an old garment with new cloth put upon its rent. During
Mr. Thornton's ministry, General Washington, coming to Fredericksburg
to visit his mother, attended, as usual, the Episcopal
Church, which drew such a crowd that something gave way in the
gallery, which produced great consternation in the attendants, who
rushed out of it through the doors and windows. It, however, still
lasted for a number of years. I was in it in the year 1811, but a
more dark and cheerless place I have seldom seen. The rite of
confirmation was first administered in this parish by Bishop Madison,
in the year 1791, during the ministry of Mr. Thornton. Soon
after this Mr. Thornton left the parish, and died at Dumfries. The
following obituary, taken from a paper of that day, shows not only
that he was a minister of that parish, but also the high esteem in
which he was held:—

A successor to Mr. Thornton was chosen in 1792, in a way most
unusual in an Episcopal congregation, and contrary to her laws,
except in the case of Christ Church, Norfolk, which is provided for
by a special act. A notice was given in the old "Virginia Herald"
inviting the subscribers to the Episcopal church to meet in the
town-hall to elect a clergyman. On that occasion ninety-six
votes were given for the Rev. Mr. Woodville, and thirty-four for
the Rev. Thomas Davis. Mr. Woodville resigned the parish in
1793,—the year after his election,—and removed to St. Mark's, Culpepper,
where he lived until his death, respected by all who knew
him.

On the 6th of January, 1794, the people assembled in the market-house,
and again, by a popular vote, unanimously elected the Rev.
James Stephenson their minister. Mr. Stephenson resigned in
1805, on account of ill health. Mr. Stephenson married a Miss

Littlepage, a lady of fine intellectual endowments. He was the
father of the Hon. Andrew Stephenson and Mr. Carter Stephenson,
also of Mrs. Woodville.

In 1806, the Rev. Abner Waugh took charge of the parish, but
was obliged to relinquish it by reason of ill health. Retiring to
Hazlewood, where he soon died, he addressed the following letter
to his friends in Fredericksburg:—

In the year 1808, the Rev. Samuel Low succeeded Mr. Waugh
Mr. Low was a man of gigantic stature, stentorian lungs, and forbidding
countenance. His powers of oratory were great. He had
been, before his coming to Fredericksburg, preaching to crowds in
Norfolk, Richmond, and elsewhere, on duelling and gambling, and
other special topics. Some of these sermons were published. He
was at that time living with a woman who was not his lawful wife,
having deserted her who was his true wife and the mother of his
children. It was some time before the news of this reached Fredericksburg,
and when it did, he solemnly denied it in the pulpit.
The fact being established beyond all doubt, he acknowledged it in
a letter to the vestry, which is on record, and going to the North,
obtained a divorce from his wife and married the other. The effect
of all this must have been most disastrous to the Church.

In the year 1811, the Rev. Mr. Strebeck was chosen to fill the
vacancy occasioned by the resignation of Mr. Low, but the Church
was little benefited by the change. Such was the unhappy condition
of the parish, that the people, in 1813, were glad to avail
themselves of the services of their present minister, as lay reader,
one year, I believe, before he was old enough to be admitted to
Deacons' Orders.

As it has been a rule observed by me in these notices to avoid all
praises or censures of the living, and in the fewest possible words refer
to the acts and successes even of my oldest friends, therefore to Mr.
Slaughter's account of the revival of the Church in this parish
during the thirty-three years of Mr. McGuire's ministry, ending
with his history of the parish, to which must now be added fourteen

more, I refer my readers for a full view of the subject. Suffice it
to say that, from that time, a succession of revivals, or rather a
continued one, under faithful evangelical preaching, has added
great numbers to the Church; that two new churches, each increasing
in size and expense, have been called for; that several
young ministers have issued from the parish,—among them the Rev.
Launcelot Minor, whose remains are on the African shore, alongside
of those of Mrs. Susan Savage, the devoted missionary, whose
spiritual birthplace was St. George's Church, as Fredericksburg
was that of her other nativity. Mr. McGuire and he who makes
this allusion entered the ministry at a short interval apart, and
cannot be long separated in leaving it behind, for another and we
trust higher ministry, in the presence of our Redeemer.

Having done with the ministers and churches of St. George's
parish, nothing remains but to present a list of the vestrymen of
the same.

BERKELEY PARISH, SPOTTSYLVANIA COUNTY.

This parish was taken from St. George's in March, 1769-70.
The first minister was the Rev. James Stephenson, who was afterward
the minister of St. George's. As he was ordained in London
in 1768, and appears on the lists of 1773-74-76 as minister of
Berkeley parish, it is more than probable that he was ordained
expressly for this parish, and became its minister in 1769. He
was, I believe, a citizen of Virginia, and an inhabitant of Fredericksburg,
before his ordination. From the time that the Rev. Mr.
Stephenson left it for Culpepper, previous to his removal to Williamsburg
in 1794, we are unable to state who, if any, was the
minister of Berkeley parish, until the year 1789, when the Rev.
Hugh Coran Boggs appears on the journal of Convention. He
was either ordained by some other English Bishop than the Bishop
of London, or else by Bishop White, or some other American
Bishop, since Bishop Madison was not consecrated until 1790.
Mr. Boggs continued to be the minister of Berkeley parish until his
death. Rev. Mr. Ward succeeded him in 1837. The Rev. Dabney
Wharton, the present minister, succeeded to Mr. Ward in 1843.
Two new churches have been built in this parish within the last
year: one of them is near the court-house, and the other near the
Louisa line.

ARTICLE LIV.

St. Mark's Parish, Culpepper County.

This parish was originally in Spottsylvania, when that was the
frontier county, and was a part of St. George's parish. The
vestry-book, from whence I derive my information concerning it,
thus begins in 1730:—"In pursuance to an Act of the General
Assembly holden at Williamsburg the 21st day of May, 1730,
entitled An Act for dividing the parish of St. George, in the county
of Spottsylvania, and that all the other parts of the said parish
be known by the name of St. Mark: according to the said Act,
the freeholders and housekeepers of the said parish of St. Mark
did meet at the church at Germanna, in the said parish, on the 1st
day of January, and there did elect and choose twelve of the most
able and discreet persons of their parish to be vestrymen,—viz.:
Goodrich Lightfoot, Henry Field, Francis Huntley, William Peyton,
James Barber, (now Barbour,) Robert Slaughter, John Finlason,
Francis Slaughter, Thomas Staunton, Benjamin Cave, Robert Green,
Samuel Ball." Robert Slaughter and Francis Slaughter were the
first churchwardens, William Peyton clerk, and William Peyton,
William Philips, and John MacMath were continued lay readers
at the several churches and chapels they formerly read at.

At the meeting of the vestry in March, 1731, the church at
Germanna is ordered to be repaired and the roof tarred; the Fork
Chapel and the Mountain Chapel ordered to be swept and kept
clean. Three houses of worship are recognised as being in use
before the division, that at Germanna being the church, the others
the chapels. The church seems to have required repairs. This
was doubtless the house built by Governor Spottswood for the
German settlers, who, like the Huguenots on James River, had
been patronized by Government and allowed certain immunities.[15]
By this time, however, they had removed higher up the river, into
what is now Madison county. Colonel Byrd, in his visit to General
Spottswood in 1732, speaking of Germanna, says, "This famous

town consists of Colonel Spottswood's enchanted castle on one side
of the street and a baker's dozen of ruinous tenements on the
other, where so many German families had dwelt some years ago,
but are now removed some ten miles higher up the Fork of Rappahannock,
to land of their own. There had also been a chapel about
a bow-shot from the Colonel's house, at the end of an avenue of
cherry-trees, but some pious people had lately burnt it down, with
intent to have one built nearer to their own homes." Mr. Byrd's
writings being full of such remarks, we may conclude that he does
not always expect us to receive them as historical verities. No
doubt the locality of the church was inconvenient, and many did
not lament its destruction, as another would be built nearer to the
body of the congregation.

Before we proceed further in the history of this parish, it may
be well to state what information we have in relation to this German
settlement which Governor Spottswood had cherished on his estate
at Germanna, which estate, it is said, was only a part of a tract
of forty-five thousand acres on which he worked a number of iron-ore
furnaces. From the letter-book of the Venerable Society in
England for Propagating the Gospel in Foreign Parts, we obtain
the following document, headed—

Whether they did succeed in their effort, and how long after this
they continued at Germanna, and what was their history after their
removal, we are not able to state. One thing we have ascertained
from one of the oldest men now living in Culpepper,—that within
his recollection, their descendants, when without a Lutheran minister,
would come a long distance to receive the sacrament from an
Episcopal minister at Buckrun Church, not many miles from Culpepper
Court-House. It is very certain that at one time they had a large
church, a flourishing congregation, a fine organ, and good music.

In passing on to our notice of the churches and ministers of
St. Mark's, we cannot but express some surprise at not finding the
name of General Spottswood among those of the vestry, although
it is mentioned in the vestry-book, as he always appeared while
Governor to be much interested in Church affairs. It may be that,
as he lived on the outskirts of the parish, and the new church
was now removed so far from him, he declined an active part in
its concerns. In a few years after this he died. His widow and
children continued to live at Germanna, and were within the pastoral
charge of its ministers. We shall see hereafter that Mrs.
Spottswood became the wife of one of them.

Previous to the year 1728, we ascertain that a Rev. Mr. Staige
had officiated at Germanna, and after him a Rev. Rodham Kennor.
Between the years 1731 and 1733 we find a Rev. Mr. De Butts and
a Rev. Mr. Pruit often preaching in St. Mark's, but neither of
them was elected. In May, 1733, the Rev. Mr. Beckett was regularly
elected and continued minister until the year 1739.

In the year 1732, the vestry built a church at the Two Springs,
on the Germanna Road, at the cost of thirty-six thousand-weight
of tobacco. In the year 1633, the choice of a pew in the new
church is offered to Colonel Spottswood. In the same year twenty-seven
thousand pounds of tobacco are voted for building a new
church in the Southwest Mountains; also, another, "twenty feet
square, near Batley's Quarter, where David Cave be lay reader."

In the year 1735, a chapel is ordered between Shaw's Mountain
and the Devil's Run. Ordered the same year "that the ministers
preach as the law directs at every church and chapel."

In the year 1739 we find the following order:—"That the churchwardens
agree with the Rev. Mr. McDaniel, if he please to serve
the parish, and if not, some other minister, except Mr. Beckett."
From something on the vestry-book a year or two before, there
would seem to have been a serious cause of complaint against Mr.
Beckett. In the year following—1740—the Rev. John Thompson
comes, recommended by Governor Gooch, and is accepted. In this
year also the parish of St. Mark, which was still in the county of
Orange, was divided, and St. Thomas formed out of it. Mr. James
Barber and William Cave being in the new parish of St. Thomas,
Mr. William Triplett and William Russell were chosen in their room.
Mr. John Catlett had been previously added to the vestry in place
of one deceased. The estimate in which Mr. Thompson was held
appears at once by the increased attention paid to the glebe-houses.
In the year 1741, Mrs. Spottswood presents a velvet pulpit cloth
and cushion to the church, and Goodrich Lightfoot is chosen vestryman
in place of Thomas Stanton, deceased. In 1742, a church
was resolved on in Tenant's old field. In the year 1743, an addition
of twenty-four feet square is ordered to the Fork Church. In
1746, Benjamin Roberts and Philip Clayton appear on the vestry.
In the year 1747, Robert Slaughter, Jr. is appointed vestryman
in place of W. Finlason, deceased, and William Green in place of
Robert Green, deceased. In the year 1750, a chapel is ordered at
the Little Fork, where an old chapel stood. In the year 1751, Abraham
Field is on the vestry, also Thomas Slaughter in place of
Robert Slaughter, Jr., who removed out of the parish, and James
Pendleton in place of Samuel Ball, deceased. In 1744, large additions
are made to the glebe-houses. In 1752, Bloomfield parish
cut off from St. Mark's, and services at the court-house instead
of at Tenant's Church. In 1752, Thomas Stubblefield and John
Hackley on the vestry. In 1752, the site of the new chapel, which
was ordered on the Little Fork, is changed to one in Freeman's old
field, and to be called a church. In the same year,—1752,—a church
ordered on Buckrun upon Colonel Spottswood's land, to cost fifty-four
thousand pounds of tobacco. Some leaves being torn out, the
next meeting of the vestry is in 1757,—Mr. Thompson still the
minister. Nathaniel Pendleton and James Pendleton are each clerk
of one of its churches. In 1758, Thomas Slaughter and Anthony
Garnet elected vestrymen. In 1760, an addition ordered to the

Little Fork Church, thirty-two by twenty-two feet. William
Williams vestryman in 1761. In the year 1763, William Ball vestryman
in place of James Pendleton, deceased. Henry Field, Jr.,
in place of Henry Field, Sen., resigned. In the year 1764, the
Rev. Mr. Thompson obtained leave to build a gallery in the church
(that nearest Germanna) for the use of his family and friends. In
the year 1766, Samuel Clayton vestryman in place of Philip Clayton,
resigned. In 1768, Buckrun Church enlarged. In the year 1770,
the old glebe sold to Samuel Henning, and Mr. Henning allowed
to build a pew in the gallery of Buckrun Church. Cadwallader
Slaughter chosen vestryman, and John Green in place of William
Green, deceased. In the same year new glebe of three hundred acres
bought of Francis Slaughter for one hundred and ninety-nine pounds
and ten thousand-weight of tobacco. In 1771, Philip Pendleton appointed
clerk of the vestry in place of William Peyton, deceased. He
was also lay reader, as two others of the name had been, and others
have been since elsewhere. In the same year French Strother and
John Gray vestrymen, in place of Goodrich Lightfoot, resigned, and
Henry Field, removed. Another addition to the Little Fork Church
of the same dimensions with the last. In 1772, a glebe-house ordered,
forty-eight feet long by thirty-two,—eight rooms,—for thirty-five
thousand nine hundred weight of tobacco. In the midst of these
preparations for the comfortable entertainment of the Rev. Mr.
Thompson, his labours were ended by death, after a ministry of thirty-two
years of uninterrupted harmony with his parishioners, and of laborious
duty in a most extensive parish. Judging from the number
of churches and chapels, and their frequent enlargement, and the
benches we read of as placed at the doors, he must have been a most
acceptable minister. His is one case added to a number which might
be adduced, from the vestry-books, in proof that where the minister
is faithful to his duty the people do not wish to exchange him.
Some few exceptions doubtless there were. Of so exemplary a
man as Mr. Thompson the reader will desire to know as much as
can be furnished. Mr. Thompson was from Scotland, and took the
degree of Master of Arts in the University of Edinburgh. On
the 28th of October, 1739, he received Deacons' Orders in Duke
Street Chapel, in the parish of Westminster, from the hands of
Nicholas, the Bishop of St. David's. On the 4th of November of
the same year, he received Priests' Orders from the same Bishop
in the Chapel of St. James, within the palace royal of St. James
of Westminster. On the following year we find him settled as
minister in St. Mark's parish, where he continued until his death,—
knowing, as a minister, one only love. On the 9th of November,
1742, he married the widow of Governor Spottswood, who was one
of his parishioners and living at Germanna. By this marriage he
had two children, Ann Thompson, who was born at Germanna, in
1744, and married Mr. Francis Thornton, of Fall Hill, near
Fredericksburg, at the early age of fifteen years, eight months.
The other is Mr. William Thompson, of whom I have as yet received
no certain information. In the year 1760, Mr. Thompson married
a second wife, Miss Elizabeth Roots, by whom he had three
children,—Mildred Thompson, John Thompson, and Philip Roots
Thompson. The last married the daughter of old Mr. R. Slaughter,
one of the vestrymen of that name in St. Mark's parish, and
moved many years since to Kanawha, where his descendants for
the last forty years have formed a little congregation of zealous
Episcopalians.

But although Mr. Thompson was so good and amiable a man,
and, as tradition informs us, one of the most imposing of men in his
person, he did not easily succeed in securing his first wife, in consequence
of the family pride of the children, which objected to the
union of the widow of Governor Spottswood with a minister of the
Gospel. Such was the opposition that, after an engagement, she
begged to be released. This caused the following letter, which all
must agree is a masterpiece of its kind. Its effect has already
been told in the fact of their marriage in a few months. An entire
reconciliation of all parties, however, was not effected until many
years after, by the intervention of the Rev. Robert Rose, the friend
and executor of Governor Spottswood, as I have said elsewhere.

While we entirely agree with all that is written above as to the
respectability of the ministry, we would caution against an ill use
that is sometimes made of the principle advocated by Mr. Thompson.
No matter how high the birth, how complete the education,
of a lady, if she be truly pious, humble, and devoted to good works,
she may be a suitable helpmate to a minister; but it is not often
that one very delicately brought up in the higher walks of life can
accommodate herself to the circumstances of many of the clergy.
As to those who are born to large fortune, let the ministers of religion
rather avoid than seek them as companions, taking warning
from the many unhappy failures which have resulted from such
experiments.

We now proceed with the history of the parish. After employing
the Rev. Charles Woodmason for a short time, the vestry elected
the Rev. Edward Jones, of Carolina, and had him inducted,—a thing
of rare occurrence. In this year Mr. John Waugh is chosen vestryman.
In the year 1773, it appearing that no convenient place,
having water, could be found on the land purchased for a glebe, the
vestry obtained one hundred more, at a cost of one hundred and
fifty pounds, from Mr. Francis Slaughter. One of the churches
being burned that year, the vestry determined to build one forty by
sixty of wood, on Mr. Robert Freeman's or Peter Bowman's land.
This order being reconsidered, it was resolved to build one eighty
feet by thirty, of brick, on the land of Peter Bowman. In this year
Captain Richard Yancey was vestryman in the place of Major John
Green, who had entered the Continental service. In the year 1778,
the vestry recommend subscriptions for paying the officers of the
church. In the same year Biskett Davenport vestryman in place
of William Williams, deceased. In February, 1780, Mr. Jones resigned
the parish, and the vestry advertised it.[16] Mr. John Gray
resigned his seat, Robert Pollard chosen vestryman. In April,
1780, the Rev. Mr. Stephenson was elected. The last meeting recorded
in the vestry-book is in 1784. On the journal of the Convention
in 1796, Mr. Stephenson appears as the minister of St.
George's Church, Fredericksburg, and Mr. Woodville as from St.
Mark's parish, they having changed places, as Mr. Woodville had
been the minister of St. George's. Mr. Woodville had married the
daughter of Mr. Stephenson, who was also the father of Mr. Andrew
Stephenson, our late minister to England, and of Mr. Carter

Stephenson, who died some years since in Fredericksburg. With
Mr. Woodville I became well acquainted soon after my entrance on
the ministry, being often at his house (the glebe) in Culpepper,
where he connected a school with the ministry, both of which he
conducted in the most conscientious manner, being himself a man
of unblemished character. His son James became a lawyer of distinction
in Botetourt county, and his son Walker has for many
years been supplying some parts of his father's old parish. With
his wife and two daughters, Fanny and Sarah, I became intimately
acquainted, and with purer spirits I do not expect to be acquainted
on this side of heaven. The former has long since gone to her rest.
The two latter—Fanny, who married Mr. Payne, and is the mother
of a numerous offspring, and Sarah, who is unmarried, and lives
with her—are residing in Mississippi. I often hear from them, and
rejoice to know that they still love Virginia and the old Church of
Virginia. I cannot take leave of old St. Mark's parish and vestry
without a brief reference to those who once composed them,—the
Spottswoods, Slaughters, Pendletons, Fields, Lightfoots, Barbers,
Greens, Peytons, Caves, Balls, Williamses, Strothers, Knoxes,
Stephenses, Watkinses, and others, who amidst all the adversities
of the Church have been faithful to her. Others have followed in
their path,—the Thompsons, Carters, Randolphs, Winstons, Mortons,
Stringfellows, Cunninghams, Thoms, and others; but death,
removals, and other circumstances, have sadly hindered her progress.
Perhaps no part of Virginia has suffered more in this way
than the county of Culpepper.

As I am writing of the past for the gratification and benefit of
the present, and not of the present for the use of the future, I can
despatch the remaining history of St. Marks in a few words. Soon
after the resuscitation of the Church of Virginia commenced, a new
church, called St. Stephen's, at Culpepper Court-House, was established
within the bounds of St. Mark's parish, and the Rev. William
Hawley appears on the journal during the years 1814 and
1815 as the minister. He laboured and preached zealously there
and in Orange, and with much effect. He was followed by Mr.
Herbert Marshall, who for some years laboured faithfully and
successfully. In the year 1827, the Rev. George A. Smith commenced
service and continued it for several years. The Rev.
Annesley Stewart performed some duty there after Mr. Smith's
removal.

The Rev. John Cole has now for a long term of years been
minister in Culpepper. Previously to his coming a new church

had been built at Culpepper Court-House, and since his settlement
in the parish two new ones have been built on opposite sides of the
county, near each branch of the Rappahannock, while the old brick
church in Forke is still remaining. A comfortable parsonage has
also been provided for the minister.

ARTICLE LV.

Orange County.—St. Thomas Parish.

[The Bishop is indebted for the following communication to the pen and
labours of its present minister, the Rev. Mr. Earnest.]

The county of Orange (embracing St. Mark's parish) was separated
from Spottsylvania in the year 1734. It was "bounden southerly
by the line of Hanover county, northerly by the grant of the
Lord Fairfax, and westerly by the utmost limits of Virginia." In
1740, "for the convenience of the minister and the people," the
parish of St. Mark's was divided. The southerly portion, including
a part of what is now Madison county, was called St. Thomas parish,
and its western limits were somewhat reduced. St. George's parish,
Spottsylvania, of which St. Thomas was a part, had for its western
boundary "the river beyond the high mountains:" the summit of
the Blue Ridge being made the western limit of St. Thomas parish.

Before the days of the Revolution St. Thomas parish had within
its limits three churches,—viz.: The Pine Stake Church, the Middle
or Brick Church, and the Orange Church. The two former have
disappeared entirely,—although both were standing and in tolerably
good keeping within time of memory. The last named, and the
oldest of the three, situated near Ruckersville, a small village about
eighteen miles from Orange Court-House, in what is now the county
of Green, is still standing, though it has long ceased to be used as
a place of worship by an Episcopal congregation. It was for a long
while in the occupancy of the Methodists. The old church, which
is of wood, has undergone so many repairs since the time it was
built, that it is thought, like the old frigate Constitution, little if
any of the original timber is to be found in it. As I passed it
some years since, for the first time, curiosity—rather I may say
veneration for the ancient house of God—led me to stop and take
a near view; but my heart was saddened to see this relic of former
times so far gone into dilapidation as to be wholly unfit for the
sacred purposes for which it was set apart. Here old Major Burton,
a staunch patriot and as staunch a Churchman, who had served his
country in the war of the Revolution, continued for a long while
in the absence of the regular ministry to serve the church as a lay
reader.

This church, though the oldest of these three Colonial churches,
was not the first in point of time that was erected within this parish.
The first church that was built in the parish was situated about ten
miles northwest of Orange Court-House, on a portion of land now
owned by Mr. Robert Brooking. The country adjacent was doubtless
sacred ground with the aborigines long anterior to the discovery
of America; for but a short distance from this "church in
the wilderness," upon the right bank of the Rapidan River, is
yet to be seen an ancient mound, or burial-place of the Indians.
Here, as the waters of this rapid stream lave its banks, there are
often exposed to view the bones of the mighty dead,—bones whose
giant size indicate that a race of men hardy, athletic, and powerful
once inhabited this fertile region.

At what period of time this first "Orange Church" was built, we
have it not in our power exactly to verify. We have been told that
it was frequented as a place of worship by some of the old settlers
as early as 1723. Certain it is, that it was used as such in 1740,—
the year in which St. Thomas was formed into a separate parish.
The winter of this year was noted in this region for its exceedingly
great severity. The degree of cold was so intense that several of
the early planters determined on seeking a more genial climate
farther south, and accordingly purchased lands in North Carolina.
At that time an old Scotch minister of the Episcopal Church,
whose name I have not been able to ascertain, but who it seems was
fond of good cheer and a game of cards, officiated regularly at
this church. He resided with Mr. Benjamin Cave, Sen., a first
settler, whose residence was but a short distance from where the
old church stood. Subsequently, as the settlements advanced westward,
the old church was removed about eight miles distant to the
place where its remains are still standing.

The Middle or Brick Church was situated about three miles southeast
of Orange Court-House, on the old road leading to Fredericksburg,
upon land owned originally by Mr. James Taylor, Sen., a
first settler, and subsequently in possession of his grandson, Mr.
Zachary Taylor, who was the grandfather of the late General
Zachary Taylor, and is now owned by Mr. Erasmus Taylor. We
have not been able to ascertain the year in which the church was
built; but from certain private records in our possession we can
assign the date of its erection somewhere between 1750 and 1758.
This church, like the old Colonial churches generally, was well built
and of durable materials. As late as 1806, time had made but
little impression upon it. But what time failed to accomplish was

reached by the unsparing hand of man. After the Church in
Virginia was divested of her glebes, her houses of worship came to
be regarded by the multitude as "common property." While her
hand was against no man, every man's hand seemed to be against
her. During or shortly before the last war with Great Britain the
work of the church's destruction was begun. Delenda est Carthago
seemed to be the watchword of the ruthless foe. They first commenced
with the roof; this soon yielded to their onset; the rafters
next gave way: the naked, massive walls resisted for a time their
further onslaught, but, nothing daunted, they redoubled their forces
and renewed the attack. The walls fell, and the triumph of the
invaders was complete, as they carried away as so many captives
the vanquished, unresisting bricks. The altar-pieces, (the gift of
Mr. Andrew Shepherd,) executed in gilt letters, and which long
adorned the venerated chancel, were torn from their ancient resting-places,
rent into fragments, and were afterward, though with
no sacrilegious intent, attached as ornamental appendages to some
articles of household furniture.

Amidst the general destruction of the property of the church,
even the ancient Communion-plate, belonging to the parish, came
to be regarded as common property. This plate, consisting of a
massive silver cup and paten, with the name of the parish engraved
thereupon, was, as we learn, the gift of a few pious communicants
about a century since, among whom were Mrs. Frances Madison,
grandmother of the President, and Mrs. James Taylor, mother of
the late Mr. Robert Taylor, and Mrs. Balmaine. It has been only
by the exercise of vigilance that this solitary remnant of the old
church's property has been rescued and handed down in a state
of perfect preservation, for the present use of St. Thomas's Church.

The time of the erection of the Pine Stake Church is, like that
of the other two, involved in obscurity. It is probable that it was
built about the same time as the Middle or Brick Church. It
was situated near Mountain Run, about fifteen miles northeast of
Orange Court-House, on lands originally taken up by Mr. Francis
Taliafero, Sen. It continued to be used as a place of worship by
an Episcopal congregation in the early part of the present century,
and was standing at least as late as the year 1813. During the
war of the Revolution a Mr. Leland, a Baptist preacher, who was
a man of considerable notoriety in these parts at that period, applied
to the vestry for the use of this church. The following letter
from the father of President Madison, who was at the time a
member of the vestry, written in a clear, bold hand, (the original of

which we have in our possession,) answers his application, and at
the same time throws no little light upon the rights and privileges
of the Church as they stood at that time:—

At a later period, ministers of other denominations had free
access to these old Colonial churches, and used and occupied them not
so much by courtesy as of common right. The Old Orange Church
was for a long while in the exclusive use of another denomination
of Christians, and the Middle Church was for some time, as was
also Walker's Church in Albemarle, alternately occupied by the
Rev. Matthew Maury and the blind Presbyterian preacher. The
latter came to this part of Virginia at a period of great depression in
the Episcopal Church, and a house of worship was erected for him
near Gordonsville, in this county, to which, however, he did not confine
his ministrations. It was here, probably on his way from
Albemarle to Orange Court, that Mr. Wirt was furnished with a
theme which has given as much notoriety to himself as to the
preacher. Before this Mr. Waddell laboured among his people in
comparative obscurity. His fame as a preacher was little known,
even in his own immediate vicinity, until after the appearance of
Mr. Wirt's celebrated letter in the British Spy. His congregations,
which previously had been very small, now became large to overflowing.

[OMITTED] from a distance far beyond the usual limit of
attendance upon divine worship in those days—some on foot, some
on horseback, some in "every kind of conveyance"—flocked to hear
the famous blind preacher. Without meaning to detract aught
from his fame as a preacher, we have no doubt, if we may form
an opinion from the representation of persons who knew him well
and heard him often, that his discourse on the occasion referred to
owes not a little of its surpassing beauty and effectiveness to the
brilliant imagination and fine descriptive powers of the author of
the British Spy.

Turning now from the old Colonial churches to the clergy who
ministered in this parish in former times, we find ourselves, in the
absence of vestry-books and other ancient records, somewhat at a
loss to reproduce in exact chronological order their names and the
period of their service. "The memory of man," and some private
records in our possession, must furnish all the data upon which we
can proceed in this regard. The old Scotch minister to whom we
have already referred, who resided near and preached at the first
Orange Church as early as 1740, is the first in the order of time
of whom we can obtain any information; and even his name is
passed into oblivion. In 1753, the name of the Rev. Mungo
Marshall appears for the first time in connection with this parish,
though it is probable he took charge of the same at an earlier
period. He continued to reside here until the time of his death,
which took place either in 1757 or 1758. We find it on record in
the clerk's office of this county, that letters of administration upon
his estate were taken out in the latter year. He was buried in
the churchyard attached to the Old Brick Church, but for a long
while no stone or other memento distinguished the place of his
interment. At length, many years after his death, a connection
of his bequeathed a certain sum, upon condition that his
legatee was not to receive it until he had first placed a tombstone
over the remains of the Rev. Mungo Marshall. In due time
thereafter this was done. But it was not long permitted to designate
the quiet resting-place of the dead. When the work of
destruction commenced upon the church, the despoilers did not
overlook the churchyard. The graves of the departed, and the
monuments sacred to their memory, were not sacred in their eyes.
The tombstones were borne off by their sacrilegious hands and appropriated
to common and unhallowed uses. That which covered
the remains of this man of God was used first to grind paints

upon, and afterward served in a tannery for the purpose of dressing
hides.

In 1760, we find the Rev. William Giberne officiating in this
parish. Whether he was removed by death or otherwise we cannot
ascertain; but his residence here was a brief one;[17] for at the close
of the year 1761, the Rev. James Marye, Jr., having just entered
into Orders, commenced his ministry in Orange. His first recorded
official act to which we are able to refer was his preaching the
funeral sermon of the paternal grandmother of President Madison.
We find in the family record of her son (James Madison, Sen.) the
following entry:—"Frances, wife of Ambrose Madison, departed
this life October 25, 1761, and was interred the Sunday following,
(at Montpelier in Orange.) Her funeral sermon was preached on
Wednesday the 30th of December following, by the Rev. Mr. James
Marye, Jr., on Revelations xiv. 13." Mr. Marye was a worthy
exception to a class of clergy that obtained in Virginia in olden
time. So far as we can learn, he was a man of evangelical views
and sincere piety. We have seen a manuscript sermon of his on
the religious training of children, which would do honour to the
head and heart of any clergyman, and whose evangelical tone and
spirit might well commend it to every pious parent and every enlightened
Christian. He remained in charge of this parish about
six years. Upon the death of his father, (the Rev. James Marye,
Sen.,) who was the minister of St. George's parish, Spottsylvania,
for thirty-one years, he was chosen to supply his place,—an unmistakable
evidence of the high regard in which both father and son
were held by the parishioners of St. George's. The Rev. Mr. Marye
is the first minister in St. Thomas parish whose residence we can
with any degree of certainty fix at the glebe. This farm, after
passing through various hands since it ceased to be the property
of the Church, is now by a singular coincidence in possession of
one of his lineal descendants, Robert B. Marye, Esq.

The Rev. Thomas Martin succeeded Mr. Marye in 1767-68. He
was a young man of merit. He came with his mother and sister
to reside at the glebe; but his residence was of short duration.
Death removed him from the scene of his labours and his usefulness
not long after he entered upon the duties of the parish. He was
followed by the Rev. John Barnett. His name occurs officially in
1771. But his connection with the parish was also of brief duration,

for in 1774 the Rev. John Wingate was the minister, and is
the last of the ante-Revolutionary clergy whose name occurs.
Whether he continued in charge of the parish during the war we
have no means to verify; but circumstances justify the conclusion
that, like some others of the old Colonial clergy, he surrendered
his charge at the commencement of hostilities between the Colonies
and the mother-country.

A period of sad depression dates from this time. For the long
interval between 1774 and 1797, (twenty-three years,) the parish
seems to be without a minister. The occasional services that were
rendered by the Rev. Matthew Maury, of Albemarle, during the
latter part of this interval, are, so far as we can see, the only ones
performed by any clergyman. Mr. William Moore, a man of note
in the parish at this time, a good old Churchman and an excellent
reader, was generally called upon on funeral occasions to read the
burial service. In the first Convention of the Church in Virginia,
held in 1785, we find St. Thomas parish, though without a minister,
not without a representative. Mr. Thomas Barbour (father
of the late Governor and of the late Judge Barbour) appeared as
the delegate. In the following year the parish is again represented
by Mr. Barbour, in connection with Mr. William Moore. In 1790,
Thomas Barbour and J. Daniel are the delegates. In 1793, the
parish is again represented by Thomas Barbour. In 1797, we find
the Rev. Charles O'Niel the clerical and William Moore the lay
delegate. The Rev. Mr. O'Niel took charge of the parish in the
latter year, and remained until 1800. He resided first near the
Pine Stake Church, and preached at that church during his residence
in Orange. He afterward removed to the upper part of the
county, where, as well as at his former residence, he taught school
in connection with his parochial duties. The late Judge Barbour
was one of his pupils. Mr. O'Niel was an Irishman, and a man
of ardent temperament and of ardent temper. We have often
heard him spoken of by elderly persons, but more as a teacher
than as a preacher. He was of that class of teachers that adopted
not only the theory, but the practice also, of the old régime, as the
best for the government of boys. Flogging was a main ingredient
in the practice of his system. He had a summary method of reducing
and gentling a refractory youth. Mounting him upon the
back of an athletic negro man, whom he seems to have kept for
the purpose, the culprit was pinioned hand and foot as in a vice,
and, with the unsparing application of the rod to his defenceless
back, was taught the lesson, if not the doctrine, of passive obedience.

However his school may have flourished under his management,
it seems his parish did not, for we look in vain for any fruits
of his parochial labours. Another long interval now occurs in the
history of the parish, without any one to take the regular oversight
of its spiritual interests. The Rev. Matthew Maury again kindly
extended his care to this neglected field, and performed occasional
services in it at least as late as 1806. In 1809-11, we find the Rev.
Hugh Coran Boggs, of Berkeley parish, Spottsylvania, devoting
a portion of his time to Orange. He preached at the Pine Stake
Church and also at the court-house. We have often heard it said,
that when he preached at the latter place he was never known to
use the Liturgy. This may have been owing to the difficulty he
met with in procuring the responses. He may have rightly judged
the lex necessitatis to be a "higher law" and of more stringent
force than any canon or rubric to the contrary. From 1811 to 1815
the parish was again without a minister. In the latter year, the
Rev. William Hawley, coming to reside at Culpepper Court-House,
took charge of St. Thomas parish in connection with St. Stephen's
Church, Culpepper. At the time he commenced his labours in
Orange, the Episcopal Church had wellnigh died out in the county.
But three or four communicants remained in all this region of
country, and some of these were far advanced in age. So entirely
had our time-honoured service gone into desuetude, that when Mr.
Hawley first commenced its use it was listened to as a striking
novelty. Under his ministry there began to appear the dawn of a
brighter day for the Church. Several communicants were added;
some of whom, in the providence of God, still remain with us. In
the autumn of 1816, Bishop Moore made his first visitation of the
parish, preached and administered the Lord's Supper, and also the
rite of Confirmation, in the court-house. This was now our usual—
nay, our only—place of worship. Referring to this visitation, the
Bishop, in his report to the following Convention, says, "My
labours commenced in the county of Orange, at which place I
preached to a large and attentive auditory, celebrated the Lord's
Supper, and administered the rite of Confirmation to a goodly
number." The visit of the good Bishop, as well from its novelty
as its effectiveness, was calculated to make, and did make, a great
impression at the time. It was an event of unusual solemnity, and
is still remembered with lively interest by some who were present.
This was the first Episcopal visitation that had ever been made,
and this the first time the rite of Confirmation had ever been administered,
in the parish. Bishop Madison, it appears, was in the
habit of visiting his relatives at Montpelier, socially, from time to
time, but we learn from undoubted authority that he never visited
the parish in his Episcopal capacity. Among the "goodly number"
confirmed by Bishop Moore on this occasion was the aged mother
of President Madison. She became a communicant at the age of
twenty, and now at the age of fourscore and four she came forward
to ratify her early baptismal vows. Until that day an opportunity
had never presented itself for the reception of this solemn and
sacred rite. The ministry of Mr. Hawley was evidently blessed
during his connection with the parish; but the growing interest in
religion and the Church which now became manifest was checked
at this auspicious period by his removal in 1817 to another field
of labour. In 1820, the Rev. Herbert Marshall came to Culpepper
and devoted some of his time to Orange. This worthy young minister
married the sister of the present Bishop of Kentucky. The
parish was very soon deprived of the benefit of his labours. Death
ended his usefulness not long after he came to this part of the
diocese. For about two years from 1823, the Rev. Frederick
Hatch, of Albemarle, had the oversight of the congregation in
Orange, officiating once a month at the court-house. In the winter
of 1826-27, the Rev. George A. Smith came to reside in Culpepper,
and took charge of St. Thomas parish in connection with St.
Mark's. He continued in charge until 1830, and devoted two
Sundays in the month to the congregation at Orange Court-House.
While it appears the attendance on divine service was good
and the congregations attentive during the time he officiated here,
yet at this period the interests of the parish were at a low ebb.
In his report to Convention in 1828, Mr. Smith says, "There is no
vestry in this parish, and the churches which existed there some
years since have been destroyed." A decided improvement, however,
in the spiritual interests of the congregation took place under
his ministry, and several communicants were added to the Church.
In the early part of August, 1832, the Rev. William G. H. Jones,
coming on a visit, was induced to take up his residence in Orange,
and to undertake the pastoral care of the parish together with
Walker's Church, in Albemarle. Here he met with the Assistant-Bishop
of the diocese, who had an appointment at Orange Court-House
at that time. This was a most auspicious period in the history
of the parish. There was found at the time of his coming a deep
awakening in the hearts of many on the subject of religion; and
this interest was kept alive for some time thereafter. The visit of
Bishop Meade at the time was also most opportune, and was attended
with the happiest effects. In his report to the following
Convention he stated, "From Albemarle I proceeded to Orange
Court-House, where I spent two days in ministering the word and
ordinances to large and deeply-impressed assemblies; on the second
day I administered the rite of Confirmation to seventeen persons,
and the Holy Communion to more than twice that number. A spirit
of earnest inquiry has been awakened among the people of that
place, which will, I trust, lead to glorious results to themselves and
their posterity." Of the communicants added on that occasion,
Mr. Jones, in his first report from St. Thomas parish, says, "Five
were added by Bishop Meade, and twelve by myself." An effort
was now made to reorganize the parish. A vestry was elected—a
body which had not existed in the parish for many years—and
steps were shortly after taken for the building of a church. In
1833, a spacious and eligible lot in the village was selected, and a
neat church-edifice of brick was commenced and completed the following
year, at the cost of three thousand five hundred dollars.
The Rev. Mr. Jones continued in Orange until the summer of
1840.

In January, 1841, the present minister took charge of the parish.
Since that time there have been alternate seasons of prosperity and
adversity in the congregation. Yet, in the face of some discouragements,
both the communion and the congregation have steadily
increased. Mr. Jones, in his last report to Convention from St.
Thomas's Church, gave thirty-four as the number of communicants:
the number now reaches ninety. In 1853, to accommodate the
increasing congregation, the church-edifice was enlarged, and at
the same time both the exterior and interior were much improved.

When we look back at the depressed state to which the parish
was reduced, and compare it with what it now is, we cannot but
exclaim, "What hath God wrought!" and to add, "Not unto us,
O Lord, not unto us, but unto thy name, give glory." If we
except the interval between 1797 and 1800, during which the Rev.
Mr. O'Niel resided in Orange, the parish was without a resident
minister from 1774 to 1832. Nowhere, during the long and dreary
night through which the Church in Virginia was made to pass, was
the darkness more distinctly visible than in Orange. With but
three or four communicants left, and they far advanced in age,—
with her substantial church-edifices, erected in Colonial times,
utterly destroyed,—with the graves of her once honoured servants,
who ministered at her altars, dismantled and insulted,—with her
time-hallowed Liturgy, so dear to every true-hearted Churchman,

gone into disuse and become a novelty in public worship,—with a
parish without an organization and existing only in name, and with
the place of litigation as the only place for the worship of Almighty
God,—the destruction of the Church in Orange seemed wellnigh
complete. But light was made to dawn upon her darkness. By
the mercy of God she has risen again, phœnix-like, from her former
ashes, and is now, in point of numbers, as it respects both her
communion and her congregation, one of the largest of the rural
parishes in Virginia.

During the darkest period of the parish, there were not wanting
a few faithful witnesses. These were identified with the Church
in the time of her prosperity and in the time of her adversity. They
forsook her not because she was down-trodden and depressed; on
the contrary, they loved her more the more she was afflicted, and
clung to her like loving children to a devoted mother. If among
God's ancient people the children were blest for their fathers' sake,
so we may believe the Church in Orange was ultimately blest for
the sake of these devoted servants of the living God. Among
these we deem it proper to notice specially the names of several
individuals, and we can do so now with the more propriety as we
speak of the dead and not of the living. The individuals to whom
we allude were the mother of President Madison, the mother of
Governor and Judge Barbour, Mrs. Frances Burnley, and Mrs.
Jane Howard,—the two last the sisters of Mrs. Lucy Balmaine, of
Winchester. These were all bright ornaments of the religion which
they professed, and the savour of their piety continues to the
present day.

In the absence of vestry-books and other records, I am unable
to furnish the names of the vestry prior to the reorganization of
the parish in 1832. Since that time we find among the vestry the
following:—

The principal families connected with the Church in Orange in
Colonial times were the Barbours, Bells, Burtons, Campbells, Caves,
Chews, Conways, Daniels, Madisons, Moores, Ruckers, Shepherds,
Taylors, Taliaferos, and Whites. Mr. Richard White, who died
some years since at the age of ninety, was the last communicant

connected with the Old Orange Church. With comparatively few
exceptions, the descendants of these respective families continued
to retain their attachment to the Church of their fathers, and some
of them are among its most worthy members.

The following letter has also been received from the same:—

ARTICLE LVI.

The Genealogy of the Madisons and Taylors—President Madison's
religious character—Churches in Madison and Rappahannock.

The following documents will give you the ancestry of President
Madison. You may be aware that he married Mrs. Dolly Todd:
her maiden name was Payne. She was, as I am informed, a Quakeress,
and was born in the county of Hanover, but at the time of
her marriage resided in Philadelphia. It was, if I mistake not,
while he was a member of Congress, sitting at the time in Philadelphia,
that he made her acquaintance. She was a lady of exceedingly
attractive manners. During the latter years of her life
she resided in Washington, and in her old age was baptized and
became a member of St. John's Church in that city. Mr. Madison
died without children. Mrs. Madison had one child, a son, by her
former marriage.

I have thought it best to furnish you with a transcript from the
record of James Madison, Sen., as it will give you some further information
respecting the family. It was transcribed in great haste,
and was intended only for my own eye.

THE TAYLOR FAMILY.

The Taylors of Orange trace their ancestry back to James Taylor,
of Carlisle, England. The time of his emigration to Virginia is
not known. It appears he settled on the Chesapeake between the
North and York Rivers, (Doc. A.) He died in 1698. He had
several children,—one of whom (Mary) was the mother of Judge
Edmund Pendleton. His son John (who married a Pendleton) is
the ancestor of Colonel John Taylor, of Caroline. His son James
took up lands in Orange, and was a first settler. He was the father
of Frances, wife of Ambrose Madison and grandmother of the
President. He had four sons,—James, George, Zachary, and Erasmus.
From James are descended the Taylors of Kentucky.
George had fourteen sons, seven of whom served in the Revolutionary
War, and thirteen of whom held offices under Government at
the same time. Some of his descendants are now residing in
Orange, and are members of the Episcopal Church. Zachary had
seven sons and three daughters. He was grandfather of General
Zachary Taylor. The latter was born at Hare Forest, about four
miles from Orange Court-House. Erasmus had two sons and five
daughters,—viz.: John and Robert, Mildred, (married Wm. Morton,)
Frances, (married — Burnley,) Elizabeth, (married — Glassel,)
Lucy, (married the Rev. A. Balmaine,) Jane, (married Charles P.
Howard.) John was father of the late Judge John Taylor, of Mississippi.
Robert married Frances Pendleton, and from them are
descended most of the Taylors now residing in Orange,—all of
whom retain their attachment to the Church of their fathers.

PRESIDENT MADISON'S RELIGIOUS OPINIONS.

In the neighbourhood of Orange Court-House, at Montpelier,
lived Mr. James Madison, once President of the United States, and
relative of Bishop Madison. Having been often asked concerning
his religious sentiments, I give the following, received from the Rev.
Dr. Balmaine, who married his near relative, and by whom Mr.
Madison himself was married. Mr. Madison was sent to Princeton
College,—perhaps through fear of the skeptical principles then so
prevalent at William and Mary. During his stay at Princeton a
great revival took place, and it was believed that he partook of its
spirit. On his return home he conducted family worship in his
father's house. He soon after offered for the Legislature, and it
was objected to him, by his opponents, that he was better suited to
the pulpit than to the legislative hall. His religious feeling, however,
seems to have been short-lived. His political associations
with those of infidel principles, of whom there were many in his
day, if they did not actually change his creed, yet subjected him
to the general suspicion of it. This was confirmed in the minds of
some by the active part he took in opposition to every thing like
the support of churches by the Legislature, in opposition to Patrick
Henry, Governor Page, Richard Henry Lee, and others. This,
however, ought not to have been sufficient to fix the charge upon
him, as George Mason and others, whose faith was not questioned,
agreed with him in this policy. A reference to a memorial against
any such act by Mr. Madison, at the request, it is affirmed, of some
non-Episcopalians, will show his character and views. It is by
far the ablest document which appears on that side of the question,
and establishes his character for good temper as well as decision.
It is drawn up on the supposition of the truth of Christianity. It
must indeed have done this in order to be acceptable to those by
whom it was solicited. Whatever may have been the private sentiments
of Mr. Madison on the subject of religion, he was never
known to declare any hostility to it. He always treated it with
respect, attended public worship in his neighbourhood, invited ministers
of religion to his house, had family prayers on such occasions,
—though he did not kneel himself at prayers. Episcopal ministers
often went there to see his aged and pious mother and administer
the Holy Communion to her. I was never at Mr. Madison's but
once, and then our conversation took such a turn—though not
designed on my part—as to call forth some expressions and arguments

which left the impression on my mind that his creed was not
strictly regulated by the Bible. At his death, some years after
this, his minister—the Rev. Mr. Jones—and some of his neighbours
openly expressed their conviction, that, from his conversation and
bearing during the latter years of his life, he must be considered as
receiving the Christian system to be divine. As to the purity of
his moral character, the amiableness of his disposition toward all,
his tender affection to his mother and wife, kindness to his neighbours,
and good treatment of his servants, there was never any
question.

Among the many orations called forth by the death of Mr.
Madison, there was one—now before me—by Mr. Philip Williams, of
Winchester, Virginia. From this I select the following passages:—

From his early training in pious principles, and from the testimony
of his minister and others as to his later years, Mr. Williams
expresses his conviction that Mr. Madison was an humble believer
in Christianity. Mr. Williams, though a zealous Episcopalian,
agrees with Madison in his opposition to the law advocated by Mr.
Henry for the support of religion, and quotes the following passages
with some others from his argument on the subject, introducing
them with this statement:—

THE CHURCHES IN MADISON AND RAPPAHANNOCK.

The following letter from the Rev. Mr. Leavell, the present
minister of these counties, contains all that I have been able to
collect concerning old Bloomfield parish:—

ARTICLE LVII.

Northern Neck of Virginia.—Fairfax and Carter Families.

We enter now on that most interesting portion of Virginia called
the Northern Neck, which, beginning on the Chesapeake Bay, lies
between the Potomac and Rappahannock Rivers, and crossing the
Blue Ridge, or passing through it, with the Potomac, at Harper's
Ferry, extends with that river to the heads thereof in the Alleghany
Mountains, and thence by a straight line crosses the North Mountain
and Blue Ridge, at the head-waters of the Rappahannock. By
common consent this is admitted to be the most fertile part of
Virginia, and to abound in many advantages, whether we consider
the rich supply of fish and oysters in the rivers and creeks of the
tide-water portion of it and the rapid growth of its forests and
improvable character of its soil, or the fertility of the lands of the
valley, so much of which is evidently alluvial.

There were settlements at an early period on the rich banks of
the Potomac and Rappahannock by families of note, who took possession
of those seats which originally belonged to warlike tribes
of Indians, which latter were forced to give way to the superior
prowess of the former. Of some of these families and their abodes
we shall have occasion to make mention in our progress along the
parishes lying upon the two rivers. It is not inconsistent with the
religious character and design of our work to begin with some
notice of that family to which the whole proprietorship of the
Northern Neck originally belonged, by a grant from the Crown,
especially as, both in England and in Virginia, so many of that
name have been attached to the Episcopal Church, and some of
whom have been bright ornaments of it.

In the corrupt and venal reign of Charles II., the whole State
of Virginia, except such parts as had been specially patented, was
made over for a time to Lord Culpepper. There was, of course, a
good pecuniary consideration given to the King for quitrents.
Lord Culpepper was not only the proprietary of the Colony, but
had the livings of all the parishes in his gift,—could bestow or
take away as he pleased. There was, however, too much of American
feeling, even at that early period, to submit to such a measure.

So heavy were the complaints, and so threatening the
opposition, that the King withdrew the grant of proprietorship for
the whole State, and restricted it with limitations to the Northern
Neck, as above described. By intermarriage between the families
of Culpepper and Fairfax, this part of the State came into possession
of Thomas Fairfax, whose mother was daughter of Lord Culpepper,
himself being the seventh Fairfax who had inherited the title of
Lord Cameron. He it was who lived and died in the forests of
old Frederick county, as we have stated in a former number, being
one of the earliest vestrymen of the parish, an active magistrate,
the patron of Washington, a friend of the poor, an eccentric but
most upright man.

The family of Fairfax is a very ancient and respectable one,
according to English history and family records. Within the last
few years, four octavo volumes of the Fairfax history and correspondence
have been published in England, a large portion of whose
contents were accidentally discovered in an old box, supposed to
contain tiles, in one of the old family seats. They had been secreted
there during Cromwell's rebellion, or soon after, for safekeeping,
and lest they should fall into the hands of those who would
make an ill use of them. Being in a box which, when opened,
presented only tiles to the eye, they were supposed to be lost for
the larger part of two centuries. Being furnished with a copy of
these volumes, and having looked over them for the purpose of
collecting any thing suitable to these pages, I present the following
brief notices.

The Fairfaxes were of true Saxon origin, going back to the times
of William the Conqueror. The name Fair-Fax meant Fair Hair.
In the early history of the family an interesting fact is stated in
old English verse,—viz.: that grandfather, son, and grandson, with
their wives and children, lived in the same house at Bradford,—a
village in England.

The above lines were written by the rector of Bradford, in 1647.

At the beginning of the Reformation, one of the Fairfaxes was
so staunch a Catholic that he disinherited his eldest son for taking
part in the sacking of Rome by the Protestants. The following

extract from his will shows the character of his creed:—"First, I
will and bequeath my soul to our Lord Jesus Christ, and to Lady
Mary, his blessed mother." He leaves money to the poor, and
also to fourteen poor persons with which to buy black gowns and
torches for attendance at his funeral. In a few generations, however,
after this, we find Romanism supplanted by as staunch a
Protestantism. Thomas Fairfax, the first who had a peerage, and
for which, besides many civil and military services, he had to pay
fifteen hundred pounds to King James I. in his pecuniary difficulties,
was a Protestant, and sympathized with Cromwell in his
contest with Charles I. His son Ferdinand distinguished himself
in Cromwell's army; and his grandson Thomas was the celebrated
Lord Fairfax, one of the leaders in the rebel army.

The first Thomas, who purchased the title, had a brother named
Edward, who signalized himself by translating "Tasso's Jerusalem
Delivered" into a smooth English, before unknown. In a work on
Demonology, he thus declares his religious belief and ecclesiastical
position:—"I am, in religion, neither a fanatic Puritan nor superstitious
Papist, but so settled in conscience, that I have the sure
ground of God's word for all I believe, and the commendable
ordinances of our English Church to approve all I practise."

The will of Ferdinando Fairfax, father of the great General in
Cromwell's army, differs much from that of his Romish ancestor.
Instead of commending his soul to Lady Mary, in conjunction with
her son, his will runs thus:—"First, I commend my soul to their
infinite Majesties, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost,—the
same God who hath with his manifold blessings been gracious to
me in this world, and whose goodness, in his great mercy, I hope
to enjoy in heaven. Next, I give my body to be buried, without
much pomp or ceremony, in what place it shall please God to call
me out of this sinful world; but, if with convenience it may be, I
desire to be interred in the parish of Bolton Percy, near the body
of my dear wife." A sensible and pious will, worthy of imitation.

This parish of Bolton Percy was one in which his brother, the
Rev. Henry Fairfax, ministered. He appears to have been a truly
pious man, and his wife to have been an helpmeet to him. Some
interesting letters, written before and after their marriage, show
them to have been well formed by nature and grace for the position
which they chose in preference to all others. While the country
was full of confusion and bloodshed, and his father, brother, and
nephew were so actively engaged in revolutionary scenes, he
quietly performed his duties as a parish minister, molesting none,

and being unmolested by any. He had two sons: one of them,
Bryan, was a scholar and author; another, Henry, was the fourth
Lord Fairfax, inheriting the title from the great General, who had
no son. His son, who was the grandson of the humble curate
of Bolton Percy, was also inheritor of the title, and married the
daughter of Lord Culpepper. Their son Thomas was the emigrant
to America. At his death, his brother Robert, in England, inherited
the title, who, dying without issue, bequeathed his estate
to the Rev. Denny Martin, a relative of the family, who assumed
the name of Fairfax. The title, however, descended to the Rev.
Bryan Fairfax, minister of the Episcopal Church of Alexandria,
who was the son of William Fairfax, of Belvoir, the friend of
Washington, and manager of the estates of Lord Fairfax after the
death of Robert Carter, alias King Carter, of Lancaster.

Before proceeding further with our brief notice of the Fairfax
family in Virginia, I must add a word as to the celebrated General
in Cromwell's army. Marrying into a Presbyterian family, and
espousing a cause much patronized by that denomination, he inclined,
for a time at least, to that persuasion. He appears to have
been an upright and conscientious man. The language of his letters
sometimes savours not a little of that which marked the communications
of Cromwell; but his sincerity was never questioned,
—which cannot be said of Cromwell, notwithstanding all the praises
heaped upon him of late years. His great General (Fairfax) could
not bring himself to pursue the ill-counselled, obstinate, and tyrannical
Charles to the scaffold, but retired into private life until the
time came to put an end to the troubles of the Commonwealth by
the restoration of monarchy, in which he took an active part. He
had an only child,—a daughter, who married the profligate Duke
of Buckingham and led a suffering life. Her relative, Bryan
Fairfax, the author, in writing of her, says, "She was an example
of virtue and piety in a vicious age and debauched court;" adding,
"David tells us, `Men of high degree are a lie, (they promise and
never perform,) and men of low degree are vanity,' (that is, have
nothing to give.)"

Before leaving the English connections of this family, it may not
be without interest to mention, that there appears to have been an
intimate friendship between the Herberts and Fairfaxes in the
mother-country, which may have laid the foundation of that which
was established between some of them in this. The same may be
said in relation to the many matrimonial connections between the
Fairfaxes and Carys of Virginia. I meet with a notice of one

occurring in England, which may have led to those in America.
Coming back to Virginia, with my notices of this family, I take
pleasure in recording the proofs of genuine piety in the Rev. Bryan
Fairfax. On going to England to receive the title, and perhaps
some property with it, he met with much trouble, delay, and mortification.
The Earl of Buchan, General Washington's friend, addressed
a letter of religious sympathy and condolence to him, to
which he thus responds:—"I have the happiness to say with the
Psalmist, in respect of God's dealings toward me, `I know that of
very faithfulness thou hast caused me to be troubled.' " I have
also seen and published a sermon of his, in which the evangelical
plan of salvation is most distinctly and happily set forth. He also
married into the Cary family,—his marriage being one of five occurring
between the families in the course of a few years. Mr.
William Fairfax, of Belvoir, near Mount Vernon, the father of the
Rev. Bryan Fairfax, had married one of the same. One of his
daughters was married to General Washington's elder brother
Lawrence, the owner of Mount Vernon, by which means it came to
pass that there was such an intimacy between the General and the
Fairfax family, and that matrimonial connections between the
Washington and Fairfax families have been so multiplied.

I have thus unavoidably been led, in tracing the history of this
family, to speak of titles and great possessions, which are now all
gone and were of little worth while had.

Let me now address a few admonitory words to those who still
bear the name, or in whose veins the blood of their ancestors continues
to flow, and many of whom are still to be found in our State
and land. I have adduced some interesting proofs of the Protestant,
evangelical piety in a number of your ancestors. Show your
estimate of a respectable ancestry, by faithfully copying their
excellencies. Say not that you have Abraham for your father, said
our Lord, for God is able to raise up children unto Abraham out
of the stones of the earth. He bids them to do the works of Abraham
in order to receive his favour. Your ancestry may, and will
be, only a shame to you, except you copy what is worthy of imitation
in their character and conduct. I especially ask your attention
to one fact in the preceding account. In a few generations,
as I have stated, three of your ancestors have chosen the sacred
ministry as their profession, in preference to the army, the navy,
or any other pursuit. Doubtless many others of their wide-spread
relations have done the same. I counsel you, as you would regain
far more than lost titles and lands, that you covet from the Lord in

behalf of your sons the highest of all honours,—the privilege of
seeking lost souls, and turning sinners to righteousness: then will
they shine, not on the page of earthly history, but as "stars in the
kingdom of God forever."

SKETCH OF THE CARTER FAMILY.

This may with propriety follow that of the Fairfaxes, as Mr.
Robert Carter—called King Carter—was for a long time the agent
and representative of the Culpepper and Fairfax families, and as his
representatives have been so numerous and respectable in the
Northern Neck.

The first of the family, so far as is known, settled in Upper
Norfolk, now Nansemond county, and was a member of the House
of Burgesses in 1649. In the year 1654, we find him a Burgess
from Lancaster county, and Commander-in-chief of the forces sent
against the Rappahannock Indians. He continued to be a member
of the House of Burgesses for some years. Both himself and his
eldest son John appear on the vestry-book as members of the
vestry in the year 1666, the father having been acting in that
capacity before,—how long not known. The father, who died in
1669, had previously built, by contract, the first church standing
on the spot where Christ Church now is, and the vestry received it
at the hands of his son John, in six months after the father's death.
The name of John Carter, 1702, is still to be seen on an old dialpost
of cedar, which was taken out of the ground, near the church-door,
some years since, and placed under the pulpit in the present
Christ Church. The first John Carter had three wives,—1st, Jane,
the daughter of Morgan Glyn, by whom he had George and Eleanor;
2d, Ann, the daughter of Cleave Carter, probably of England;
3d, Sarah, the daughter of Gabriel Ludlowe, by whom he had
Sarah. All these died before him, and he was buried with them,
near the chancel, in the church which he built, and the tombstone
from which we take the above covers them all, being still in the
same position in the present church. He had also a son named
Charles, of whom nothing is known. His son Robert was by his
last wife, Sarah Ludlowe. The eldest son, John, married,—1st,
Elizabeth Wormley, and 2d, a Miss Loyd, and had issue. Of this
branch we have no account, and must confine ourselves to that of
Robert, alias King Carter. He married twice:—first, a Miss Armistead;
next, a widow Willis, daughter of Thomas Landon, of
England. He had ten children by the two wives. Those of whom

we have information were John, Elizabeth, Judith, Ann, Robert of
Nomini, Charles, Landon of Sabine Hall, Mary, Lucy, and George.
The eldest son, John, married Miss Hill, and was Secretary of State
to the Colony, having to pay one thousand five hundred pounds
sterling for the office. His daughter Elizabeth married, first Mr.
Nathaniel Burwell, of Gloucester, and then Dr. George Nicholas,
of Williamsburg. His daughter Judith married the first Mann
Page, of Gloucester, and lived with him at Rosewell. His daughter
Ann married Benjamin Harrison, of Berkeley. His son Robert
married a Miss Bladen. His son Charles married first a Miss
Walker, then a Miss Byrd, sister of Mr. Byrd, of Westover, lastly
a Miss Taliafero. His son Landon, of Sabine Hall, married first
Elizabeth, daughter of Mr. Wormley, of Rosegill, then Maria, a
sister of Mr. Byrd, of Westover, then a Miss Beale. His youngest
child, Lucy, married Henry Fitzhugh, of King George county.
Thus we have disposed of the sons and daughters of Mr. Carter,
of Corotoman, and their marriages. To attempt to do the same
even with his grandchildren, much more with their descendants,
would not merely exceed the bounds prescribed to such genealogies
in these notices, but would require a small volume. Suffice it to
say, that, besides intermarriages one with another, the family of
Carter may be found intermingled, not only with those already
mentioned, but with those of Moore, Lee, Berkeley, Champe, Skipwith,
Braxton, Nelson, Waller, Randolph, Brown, Clayborne,
Tasker, Churchill, Chiswell, Minor, Brooke, Thornton, Baylor,
Grymes, Peck, Mitchell, Harris; and should we attempt to bring
down the list to present times, it would contain others almost without
limit. Out of the number of descendants, of whom both
Church and State might well be proud, it would be invidious to
select. So far as we have been able to judge by observation and
learn by report, we may be permitted to say that there has been
much of the amiable and the pious in the family, sometimes mixed
with a portion of eccentricity in individuals of it. In Councillor
Carter, of Nomini, the grandson of King Carter, this peculiarity
was found in a large measure. Early in life his disposition was
marked by a tendency to wit and humour. Afterward he was the
grave Councillor, and always the generous philanthropist. At a
later day he became scrupulous as to the holding of slaves, and
manumitted great numbers. The subject of religion then engrossed
his thoughts. Abandoning the religion of his fathers, he adopted
the creed of the Baptists, and patronized their young preachers,
having a chapel in his own house at Nomini. After a time he embraced
the theory of Swedenborg, and at length died an unhappy
death-dreading Papist. All the while he was a most benevolent
and amiable man. I might mention many others, of both sexes,
with whom I have had personal and intimate acquaintance, who
have been beautiful specimens of piety, without the versatility and
inconsistency of Mr. Carter, of Nomini. I was not acquainted
with Mr. Charles Carter, of Shirley, though it has been my happiness
to know many of his descendants and to love them for their
work's sake. I find his name on the list of those few devoted
friends of the Church who after the Revolution met together in
Convention at Richmond, to rescue the things that remained
and were ready to perish. I have, however, in the following letter,
a better proof of his love to the Church and its ministers than any
mere attendance on Conventions could furnish. It was addressed
to his old friend and pastor, the Rev. Mr. Currie, of Lancaster, who
was the faithful minister of Christ Church parish for fifty years.
Anticipating his own death as well as that of Mr. Currie, as
events which might occur before that of Mrs. Currie, he thus generously
provides for her support during her remaining days. She
did survive her husband a number of years, and doubtless enjoyed
the bounty of Mr. Carter.

Although Mr. Currie was a man who, judging from a sermon of
his in my possession, put his trust in God for his fatherless children
and widow when taken from them, yet it must have been truly

comforting to know that this provision was made for them by a
generous friend. The sermon is on the text, (Matthew vi. 34,)
"Take no thought for to-morrow, for the morrow shall take thought
for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof."
It is a very sensible and pious discourse on the subject treated of,
showing, among other things, the impropriety of all uneasy thoughts
about our earthly condition, and is in some respects a "conscio ad
clerum" one to poor clergymen. I find on the cover of it these
words:—

In relation to the above act of generosity, on the part of Mr.
Carter, to the widow and children of a worthy clergyman, though
there be few who can follow his example in affording them the use of
a farm of five hundred acres, yet there are many who can contribute
something to their comfort; and the thought that there are many
who will do it must be a great solace to the heart of a dying minister
when taking leave of his fatherless ones and widow. It is thus
that God fulfils his promise when he bids them leave their fatherless
ones to him, and let their widows trust in him. And let me,
in connection with this case, recommend to the pious charity of the
living and dying members of our communion the two societies now
established in our diocese,—the Society of the Widows and Orphans
of Deceased Clergymen, and that for Disabled, Superannuated
Poor Clergymen. They are both of them worthy of patronage.

Another instance of the charitable disposition of Mr. Carter is
worthy of being mentioned and imitated.

Solomon in one of his Proverbs says, "He that withholdeth corn,
the people shall curse him; but blessing shall be upon the head of
him that selleth it." Here is an allusion to some covetous and
hard-hearted persons, who, in a time of scarcity and suffering
among the poor, hold up their corn for some high price and will
not sell it. I have been told that, in a year of this kind, Mr. Carter
sent a vessel full of corn down James River, disposing of it among
the poor at a very reduced price, thus showing not only his charity,
but his judgment in the disbursement of it. Let the rich throughout
our land go and do likewise with all manner of goods which
God hath given them in abundance, and of which others stand in
need.

A few remarks concerning him who was called King Carter

seem to be called for, before we close our notice of this family.
From the fact that such a title was bestowed on him, the idea has
become prevalent in Virginia that he was not only of princely possessions,
having numerous tenants and servants, and a splendid palace
for his residence, but that, as a consequence of this, he was authoritative,
lordly, and arbitrary in his bearing and conduct, moving
as a king in the Colony. He ruled over the Colony for more than
a year, until the arrival of Governor Gooch. I have in my possession
copies of two of his letters during this period, concerning
a suspected clergyman who was desirous of getting the parish of
Wycomico, in Northumberland. They were addressed to Captain
Charles Lee and Mr. Thomas Berry, churchwardens of the parish.
They breathe a Christian spirit of moderation and yet of decision.
There is nothing of a dictatorial temper about them, but only a
desire to do his duty, in the absence of a Governor, and in reference
to one when he should arrive. It is very certain that Mr.
Carter and his family were very popular throughout the State.
His daughters were married to the first men in Virginia, and his
sons to the first ladies in Virginia. At his death a long Latin
inscription, written by some ripe scholar, was placed on his tomb,
in which the greatest virtues are assigned to him, and a sincere
piety. The epitaph will be found in our next article, on Christ
Church, Lancaster county.

ARTICLE LVIII.

Parishes in Lancaster County.

The first mention which is made of Lancaster county in Henning's
"Statutes at Large" (volume i., page 374) is in 1652, when
it is represented in the House of Burgesses by Captain Henry
Fleet and Mr. William Underwood. At that time, and for four
years after, it included all that is now Lancaster, Middlesex, Essex,
and Richmond counties. In 1656, the old county of Rappahannock
was cut off from Lancaster, and contained what, in 1692, was divided
into the two counties of Richmond and Essex,—Rappahannock
being abolished. The county of Middlesex was not cut off from
Lancaster until about 1664 or 1665, and, indeed, it is not mentioned
in Henning until the year 1675, when a levy of twenty-five
men from each of the counties of Lancaster and Middlesex is
ordered for a garrison in Stafford county, to protect the frontiers
against the Indians. We are enabled to approach very near to
certainty, as to the time of the division, by reference to an old
vestry-book of the church in Middlesex, beginning in 1664. In
1668 the vestry pass an order that a petition should be distributed
among the people, praying the Assembly to ratify a former Act
dividing Lancaster into two counties; from which it would seem
that something was wanting to complete the division, though it must
have been acted on, in some way, a year or two before. In the
county of Lancaster, when including Middlesex, there were four
parishes,—two on each side of the river. Those on the south side
of the river were called Lancaster parish and Piankatank until, at
an early period, they were merged in one and called Christ Church.
Those on the north side were St. Mary's and Christ Church until,
at a much later period, they were united in what is now Christ
Church.

The vestry-book of Christ Church, Lancaster, before the union
of the two parishes, commenced, I think, about the year 1654. I
saw it for the first time about twenty years ago, and again three
years after, I believe, and took extracts from it, some of which
were published. Soon after this it disappeared, and, though carefully
sought for since, can nowhere be found. For want of it we

lose the names of the first vestrymen, (except those of the firs
John Carter and his sons John and Robert,) and some acts of the
vestry, not remembered or written down by myself. I have recently
been furnished with the vestry-book of St. Mary's parish,
beginning in the year 1739, and continuing after its union with
Christ Church, in 1752, until the war of the Revolution. But we
still have to lament the loss of the proceedings of both parishes
until 1739, and of Christ Church until 1752, except so far as I
have retained in memory, and by print, the doings of the latter.
Something more we have as to the names and acts of the vestry of
Christ Church, by reason of the fact that, though the parishes were
separate, they always employed the same minister, and met sometimes
in what was called a general vestry,—that is, a meeting of
both,—when their names are recorded.

We will first state such information as we have retained from the
last records of Christ Church parish. About, as we believe, the
year 1654, the name of John Carter, the father of that family,
appears at the head of the vestry-lists, in a large, bold hand; then
followed the name of the minister, which I do not recollect. The
same may be said of his eldest son John, and his youngest son
Robert, alias King Carter. Their names always preceded the minister's,
and were written in a large, bold hand. This was one sign
that they took the lead in the vestry,—even going before the minister.
In all the other vestry-books I have seen, even in that of
Middlesex, where, about the same time, baronets were in the vestries,
as Chicheley and Skipwith; the minister's name was always
first. The action of the vestry, doubtless under the influence of
the Carters, seems to have been good in relation to the exercise of
discipline on offenders. One instance is recorded where a fine of
fifteen hundred-weight of tobacco is imposed on a man for swearing;
but, upon his pleading poverty, it was afterward reduced to five
hundred. Mr. Robert Carter had large possessions and numerous
servants and tenants, as we have already said. Tradition has it
that the congregation, which doubtless consisted chiefly of his dependants,
did not enter the church, on Sunday, until the arrival of
his coach, when all followed him and his family into it. Whether
this be so or not, it is certain, from the agreement on the vestrybook
when he built the church, that good provision was made for
his tenants and servants, one-fourth of the building being secured
for their use, besides a very large pew near the pulpit and chancel,
which he prepared for his immediate family.

The following extract from my report to the Convention in the

year 1838, after a visit to the parishes in the Northern Neck, will
show what were the impressions made upon me by that venerable
building,—impressions renewed and deepened by my subsequent
visit:—

To the foregoing notices of Christ Church from my report to the
Convention of 1838, I add the following from memory. Of the
two days spent in this hallowed spot, the one following the day of
humiliation was a dark and gloomy one,—the sky being overcast

with heavy clouds, from which showers were descending upon the
earth. To be in that old building, with only two-thirds of the glass
in the windows, on such a day, had a peculiar interest in it to a soul
at all inclined to the love of ancient things. The weather being
mild, there was nothing to interrupt the indulgence of such a feeling.
There was also something to encourage it, in the fact that an
aged lady, (the descendant of Mr. Carter,) whose two nieces—the
eldest daughters of Mr. Tomlin, who lived near at hand—had on
the preceding day ratified their baptismal vows, desired on this
occasion to do the same. I can never forget my feelings as I stood
in the old chancel administering the rite, while only a few individuals,
and they chiefly the descendants of the builder of the
house, were here and there to be seen in the large double pews
adjoining the pulpit and chancel. There was a circumstance
which occurred at that time not unworthy to be mentioned, as
showing that we of this day of progressive improvement are not
in all things in advance of our fathers, but in some rather the contrary.
I spent the night intervening between the two above-mentioned
days at Mr. Tomlin's house, which was a new one scarcely
finished, and, while lying in bed early in the morning and looking
toward the ceiling, suddenly saw a large portion of the plastering
giving way just above me, leaving only time to draw the covering
over my head before it fell upon my body, and not without a slight
bruise. I could not help then and often since instituting a comparison
between the fidelity and durability of ancient and modern
architecture. Here was the ceiling of a private house, not a year
old, tumbling over me, and there was the heavy plastering of an
old church, built one hundred and twenty or thirty years before,
perfectly sound and impervious to rain, except in one or two small
spots where it was a little discoloured underneath the gutter, where
the shingles had decayed. Where is the house, built in these
degenerate days of slight modern architecture, which may compare
with Old Christ Church, either within or without? When a
few years since it was repaired, as I in my report expressed the
belief that it would be, the only repairs required were a new roof,
(and but for the failure in the gutters that would have been unnecessary,)
the renewal of the cornices, supplying the broken
glass, and painting the pews, pulpit, &c. All the rest was in a most
perfect state of soundness. The shingles, except in the decayed
gutters, were so good that they were sold to the neighbours around,
and will probably now last longer than many new ones just gotten
from the woods,—having become hardened by age on the steep and
taunt roofs from which the rains of more than a century rushed
downward, not stopping for a moment to settle in the joints. That
is one reason why all of the old roofs were more durable than the
modern,—the fashionable taste for low or flat ones leading to their
speedier decay. Another is the fact that in former days worms, so
destructive now to timber, appear not to have abounded as at
present, or else some method for drying and hardening all the materials
used was adopted, which is now neglected. In taking off
the roof of Old Christ Church for the purpose of renewing it, one
secret of the durability of the plastering was discovered. Besides
having mortar of the most tenacious kind and of the purest white,
and laths much thicker and stronger than those now in use, and
old English wrought nails,—our modern factories not then being
known,—the mortar was not only pressed with a strong hand
through the openings of the laths, but clinched on the other side
by a trowel in the hand of one above, so as to be fast keyed and
kept from falling.

In all respects the house appears to have been built in the most
durable manner, but without any of the mere trinkets of architecture.
The form and proportion of the house are also most excellent,
and make a deep impression on the eye and mind of the
beholder. Though the walls are three feet thick, yet such is their
height and such the short distance between the windows and doors.
and such the effect of the figure of the cross, that there is no appearance
of heaviness about them. The roof or roofs are also very
steep and high, and take the place of tower or steeple. A steeple
or tower would indeed injure the whole aspect of the building.

For the repairing of this house we are indebted mainly to the
liberality of two brothers,—Mr. Kelleys,—descendants of old Episcopalians
of the Northern Neck. Not only did they furnish far
the larger part of the fifteen hundred dollars required for it, but
superintended most carefully the expenditure of the same. Their
bodies lie side by side within a strong iron enclosure near the
church. The eldest of the brothers has died within the last two
years, leaving, among other bequests, two thousand dollars to our
Theological Seminary and High School.

I am sure the reader will be pleased in having the following
epitaphs added to the foregoing notices of Old Christ Church.

I.

This incription is to the north of the chancel, in the east end of
the church:—

II.

This inscription is in the centre of the church, at the intersection
of the aisles:—

III.

This tombstone is at the east end of the church:—

EAST OF THE CHURCH.
IV.

EAST OF THE CHURCH, AND MUTILATED.
V.

EAST OF THE CHURCH.
VI.

Mr. Carter moved to Shirly, on James River, in 1776, and married
Ann Butler Moore,—his second wife.

The following translation of Mr. Robert Carter's epitaph may be
a help to some of our readers:—

MINISTERS OF THE PARISHES OF CHRIST CHURCH AND ST. MARY'S.

We have already stated that the same ministers served both
parishes. Who the first minister or ministers were, we are unable
to state; but upon the vestry-book, whose loss we lament, there
was one whose name and history were too striking to be forgotten.
His name was Andrew Jackson, and, for what cause we know not,
some one wrote his name, and he made his mark, beneath the name
of one of the John Carters. He was not Episcopally ordained, and
this led to a correspondence between the vestry and one of the
Governors of Virginia,—most probably Governor Nicholson,—at a
time when an order came from England that the law requiring all
holding livings in the Church to be Episcopally ordained should
be enforced in Virginia. The vestry remonstrated earnestly with
the Governor against its execution in the case of their minister,
Mr. Jackson. They plead that he had been serving the parish
faithfully for twenty-five years, that he was much esteemed and
beloved, had brought up a large family of children, and laid up
something for them from his industrious culture of the glebe, (then
and now a good farm near the church,) and the people were very
unwilling to part with him. They urged one argument very emphatically,—viz.:
that, by reason of the inferiority of the quality
of tobacco raised in the Northern Neck of Virginia, by comparison
with that in many other parts, it being worth less by twopence per
pound, the parish was not on an equal footing with a large number
elsewhere in procuring suitable ministers, and that, therefore, they
ought to be allowed to retain the one whom they had. What was
the issue of the controversy either did not appear or is not recollected.
My impression is that it took place early in the last century,
and that he was succeeded by the Rev. John Bell, who was certainly
the minister in 1713, and continued so until the year 1743,
when, at his death, the Rev. David Currie succeeded, and continued
until his death in 1792,—nearly fifty years. If such be the case,
then were the people of Lancaster served for more than one hundred
years by three ministers, who were esteemed and loved by them.
In my previous account of the Carter family I have spoken more
particularly of Mr. Currie, whose descendants are numerous and
respectable and have adhered to the Church of their worthy ancestor.
At the death of Mr. Currie, in 1791, the Rev. David Ball
appears for one year on the list of our clerical delegates to the

Convention, and for one only. Whether he was of the large family
of Balls belonging to Lancaster, or whence he came, or whither he
went, I know not. He was followed by a Rev. Mr. Leland and a
Rev. Mr. Page, each for a short time. Of each of these I shall
speak in another place. In 1794, no clerical delegate appears;
but there were two laymen,—Mr. Raleigh Downman and Mr.
William Eustace. From the year 1796 to the year 1805, the Rev.
Daniel McNaughton is on our list as minister of this parish.
James Ball, Martin Shearman, and William Montague appear as
lay delegates. In 1812, Raleigh Downman and J. M. Smith are
lay delegates. In 1813, the Rev. Samuel Low is minister. Between
him and his friends, and Mr. McNaughton, there was for
some time a contest for the parish and the use of the churches.
On one occasion Mr. Low had all the congregation in the churchyard,
and preached from the seat behind a carriage, while Mr.
McNaughton had the pulpit and the empty pews within. They
were both of them such unworthy characters, though in different
ways, that we shall not waste time and words upon them. In the
year 1824, the Rev. Ira Parker, an ignorant and incompetent
minister, took charge of the parish, but soon left it for some other.
After floating about for a few years, he adopted the system of
Swedenborg, and was dismissed from the ministry. In the year
1832, the Rev. Ephraim Adams took charge of the parish and
continued its minister for four years. He was a worthy man, but,
by reason of some peculiarities, unfitted for much usefulness. In
1838, the Rev. Francis McGuire was its minister; and, in 1839,
the Rev. Mr. Bryant, of whom we have spoken elsewhere, succeeded.
In 1844 and 1845, the Rev. Mr. Richmond was its minister. In
1850 and 1851, the Rev. Mr. Nash. In 1853, its present minister,
the Rev. Edmund Withers, took charge of it. Within the last few
years a small church has been built at Kilmarnock, about four
miles from Old Christ Church. It being more convenient to the
majority of the people in that region than the old one, services are
held there alternately. Although but few attend generally at the
old and venerable one, by reason of its inconvenient location, yet
at my recent visit to it, although there were other services near at
hand, one hundred and seventy-five persons might be counted there
on a Sabbath morning. It is somewhat remarkable that Kilmarnock
is the very spot on which the vestry determined to build a
new church nearly one hundred and fifty years ago, deeming it
the most central and convenient place, when Mr. Carter offered to
build one at his own expense, if allowed to locate it nearer to his
residence at Corotoman. Tradition says that the bricks of which
the church is built were brought from England. It is far more
probable that it is true in this case than in most of the other
houses, public or private, of which the same report has come down
to us; for Mr. Carter, having so many vessels from England assigned
to him, may, at little cost, have had English bricks put in
as ballast, and then conveyed in flatboats up the creek, within a
short distance of the place where the church stands. Piles of
stones thus coming from England may yet be seen near the riverbank
at Corotoman, there cast to prevent the waves from depredating
on the bank near his house.

In 1786, Cyrus Griffin is appointed to attend the Episcopal
Convention in Richmond, and James Ball to attend the examination
of the Rev. Edward Jones at the court-house. For what purpose
and of what character that examination was, is not certainly known,
but it is believed to have been a kind of trial under a canon of
Virginia. Thus ends the vestry-book.

WHITE CHAPEL CHURCH.

The first church was torn down. From the vestry-book it appears
that the present was built in 1740. It was contracted for with Mr.
James Jones. In that year Major James Ball and Mr. Joseph
Ball are allowed to build a gallery in the church for their families,
provided it be completed at the same time with the church, and finished
in the same style with the west gallery. Leave is also granted to two

of the Balls and two Mr. Burgesses to build an end-gallery on the
same terms. The house was originally in the form of a cross. The
two wings have been taken down, and it is now an oblong square.

In the early part of the last century the parishes must have been
in a flourishing condition, so far as numbers and attendants go.
In the year 1724, Mr. Bell, who had then been their minister for
twelve years, informs the Bishop of London that there were three
hundred families in it; that the churches were thronged; that almost
all the white persons in the parish attended; that there were a great
many negroes who neither understood his language, nor he theirs; that
the old church was opened to them, and the word preached, and the
sacraments administered with circumspection. He says at that time
the two parishes were united in one, and called Trinity: but of this
we read nothing, either in the Acts of Assembly or in the vestry-book.

Around Old White Chapel Church, under the venerable pines
which enclose it on two sides, and near an old county road, lie a
number of those strong, heavy tombstones which betoken a deep
regard of the living for the dead. Almost all of them are inscribed
with the name of Ball,—a name which so abounds in the vestrybook,
the county, and the State. Through the attention of a friend
I have a document of more ancient date than any tombstone inscription
there. It is a description of the coat of arms of the family
of Ball, brought to this country about the year 1650, by the first
of the name who came to Virginia. The coat of arms has much
that is bold about it, as a lion rampant, with a globe in his paw,
and there is helmet and shield and vizor, and coat of mail, and
other things betokening strength and courage; but none of these
suit my work. There is, however, one thing which does. On the
scroll which belongs to it are these words:—"Cœlumque tueri."
They were taken, of course, from these lines of Ovid:—

May it be a memento to all his posterity to look upward, and
"seek the things which are above." On the back of the original
copy of this armorial document are the following words, in a bold
hand, such as was common in those days:—"The coat of arms
of Colonel William Ball, who came from England with his family
about the year 1650, and settled at the mouth of Corotoman River,
in Lancaster county, Virginia, and died in 1669, leaving two sons,
William and Joseph, and one daughter, Hannah, who married
Daniel Fox. William left eight sons, (and one daughter,) five of

whom have now (Anno Domini 1779) male issue. Joseph's male
issue is extinct. General George Washington is his grandson, by
his youngest daughter, Mary. Colonel Burgess Ball is the only
child of Jeduthun, who was the third and youngest son of James,
the third son of said William." On the tombstones around the
church there is no inscription of the first William Ball or any of
his children, but only of his grandchildren and other descendants.
The first is over the grave of David Ball, seventh son of Captain
William Ball, who was born in 1686. The others are the tombstones
of Mildred Ball, Jeduthun Ball, Mary Ann Ball, daughter
of the Rev. John Bertrand, of Jesse Ball, of Mary Ball, daughter
of Edwin Conway, of James Ball, her husband, of William Ball,
"who died in a steadfast faith in Christ and full hope of a joyful
resurrection," of James Ball and Fanny, his wife, daughter of Raleigh,
and Frances Downman, of Lettuce, third wife of James Ball,
and daughter of Richard Lee, of Ditchley, of Colonel James Ball,
of James Ball, second son of James and Mary.

P.S.—Since the above was written I have received a communication
from a friend who has looked into the earliest records of
Lancaster county, when Middlesex and Lancaster were one. They
go back to 1650. A few years after this, in the absence of a vestry,
the court appointed the Rev. Samuel Cole the minister of the whole
county on both sides of the river. This is the same minister who
appears on the vestry-book of Middlesex in the year 1664. The
court also appointed churchwardens and sidesmen, as in the English
Church, on both sides of the river. They were John Taylor,
William Clapham, John Merryman, Edmund Lurin, George Kibble,
and William Leech. Other names also appear on the records, as
Thomas Powell, Cuthbert Powell, Edward Digges, W. Berkeley,
Robert Chewning, Henry Corbyn, David Fox, John Washington,
of Westmoreland. In the year 1661, a general vestry is formed,
and Mr. John Carter, Henry Corbyn, David Fox, and William
Leech, are appointed to take up subscriptions for the support of
the minister. They were chosen from each side of the river. An
instance is recorded at this early period of a man being fined five
thousand pounds of tobacco by the court for profane swearing.

In the year 1685, we find John Chilton fined, and required to
appear four times on his bended knees, and ask pardon each time,
for a misdemeanour committed in their presence.

In the year 1699, we find that none are allowed to be teachers
of youth except such as are commissioned by the Bishop of London,
and, in the same year, that inquiries were ordered as to any religious

meetings except those of the Established Church. These
things were under the mild reign of the amiable Governor Nicholson.
In the year 1727, we find presentments for being absent from
church one month and two months, for swearing, for selling crawfish
and posting accounts on Sunday.

In addition to the above, it may be stated that the county records,
as well as vestry-books, show that the family of Balls was very
active in promoting good things. At an early period of our history,
it is stated that a measure was set on foot for educating a number of
Virginia youths for the ministry, in order to a larger and better
supply. It would appear from the county records that this measure
originated, in 1729, with Mr. Joseph Ball, of Lancaster. The
following is the entry:—

This Joseph Ball married a Miss Ravenscroft, of England, and
settled in London as practitioner of law. He had only one
daughter, Fanny, who married Raleigh Downman in 1750. Her
children were Joseph Ball Downman, of Moratico, Fanny, who
married Colonel James Ball, of Bewdley, and Mr. Raleigh W.
Downman, of Belle-Isle. This Joseph Ball was the uncle of
General Washington. I have before me two letters from him, the
one addressed to his sister Mary, and the other to his nephew
George Washington, from which I take the following passages.
The first is to his sister, when her son was thinking of going to
sea. It is dated Stratford-by-Bow, 19th of May, 1747:—

To his nephew he writes thus after Braddock's defeat:—

A few words concerning a minister and church of another denomination
will close my notices of Lancaster.

The county of Lancaster was the scene of the early labours of
the Rev. Mr. Waddell, the blind Presbyterian preacher who is so
feelingly described by Mr. Wirt, in the British Spy. At a time
when disaffection toward the Established Church was spreading
through Virginia, and great numbers were leaving it, Mr. Waddell,
by his talents, zeal, and piety, gathered two congregations in this
county. One of the churches was near the court-house. The
graveyard, in its ruins, is the only relic of the establishment of
that denomination in Lancaster county. About fifty years since,
the church shared the same fate with those of the Establishment
which have now passed away. The two acres of land on which it
stood, and beneath which are the remains of numerous adherents
to that denomination, has ever been regarded as sacred. A grove
of oaks, sycamores, pines, and other trees shaded the hillocks and
some tombstones which were spread over the surface of the earth,
which was carpeted with a covering of green grass. It was, I am
told, a favourite resort to the people of the village and country
around,—to the young as a play-ground, to the old as a scene of
contemplation. I recently visited the spot, but found it no longer
a scene for the young or old, the gay or the grave. Nearly every

tree was gone, having been, within a year or two, cut down and
converted into cord-wood and sold to the steamboats. Nothing is
now to be seen but stumps and piles of dead branches, which hide
not only the hillock-graves, but the few tombstones which were
once to be seen. Young cedars are everywhere putting forth their
shoots, and in a few years it will be with this spot as with many
like it in Virginia,—it must be so hidden from the view that it will
be difficult for any ecclesiastical antiquary to discover the spot
where Mr. Waddell once proclaimed the Gospel of Christ. Rumour
says that, in the absence of any member of the Church near at
hand, application was made to some Presbyterian ministers at a distance,
and leave granted to do something to this interesting spot
which has resulted in such utter desolation.

ARTICLE LIX.

Parishes in Northumberland County.—Wycomico and St.
Stephen's.

Northumberland county, lying on the bay and the Great Potomac,
was partially settled at an early period. In the year 1646,
during the government of Sir William Berkeley, we find the following
Act of Assembly:—"Whereas, the inhabitants of Chicawane,
alias Northumberland, being members of this Colony, have not
hitherto contributed toward the charges of the war, [with the Indians,]
it is now thought fit that the said inhabitants do make payment of
the levy according to such rates as are by this present Assembly
assessed. . . . And in case the said inhabitants shall refuse or deny
payment of the said levy, as above expressed, that, upon report
thereof to the next Assembly, speedy course shall then be adopted
to call them off from the said Plantation." It had in the previous
year been allowed a Burgess, in Mr. John Matram. In the following
year Mr. William Presley was the delegate. In the year
1648, we find the following Act:—"That the ninth Act of Assembly
of 1647, for the reducing of the inhabitants of Chickcoun and
other parts of the neck of land between Rappahannock and Potomacke
Rivers be repealed, and that the said tract of land be hereafter
called and known by the name of the county of Northumberland."
In the year 1649, it is declared "that the inhabitants on
the south side of the Potomacke [Potomac] shall be included, and
are hereafter to be accounted within the county of Northumberland."
In the year 1653, the bounds of Northumberland are
reduced by the establishment of Westmoreland county, which was
made to extend "from Matchoactoke River, where Mr. Cole lives,
and so upward to the falls of the great river Potomacke above
the Necostins town;" that is, above what is now Georgetown, in the
District of Columbia. In the year 1673, the boundary-line between
Lancaster and Northumberland is settled, according to an order of
the Assembly, by Colonel John Washington, (the first settler, and
great-grandfather of General Washington,) Captain John Lee,
William Traveson, William Moseley, and R. Beverley. While we

have the above Acts of Assembly in relation to its civil divisions,
we find nothing as to its religious concerns. The establishment of
a parish or parishes within its bounds is nowhere given us, excepin
two lists of the counties in the year 1754, when it is called St.
Stephen's parish, with Mr. Thomas Smith for its minister, and in
1758, when it is called Wycomico, and has the Rev. John Leland
as its minister. In the year 1776, it is said to have two parishes,—
Wycomico and St. Stephen's,—Mr. John Leland the minister of the
former, and the Rev. Benjamin Sebastion of the other. Mr. Leland
was ordained by the Bishop of London in 1775, and Mr. Sebastion
in 1766. It is, however, confidently affirmed to this day that there
were two parishes, called Upper and Lower St. Stephen's, besides
Wycomico, and that the glebes can be pointed out.

In the year 1785, we find the two parishes represented in the
Convention,—Wycomico by the Rev. Mr. Leland, and as lay delegate
T. Gaskins, St. Stephen's by the Rev. Thomas Davis, with Mr.
Hudson Meuse as lay delegate. In the year 1786, Wycomico
alone is represented by Mr. Leland and Mr. Gaskins. In 1787,
Mr. Leland appears for the last time, with Mr. David Ball as lay
delegate. In 1789, Mr. Oneriphorus Harvey is lay delegate from
Wycomico, and in 1790, Mr. Isaac Besye. In that year the Rev.
Thomas Davis represents St. Stephen's parish, and also in 1792.
In 1795, the Rev. John Seward, with Abraham Beacham as lay
delegate, represents St. Stephen's, while three lay delegates, Messrs.
Hopkins, Hardy, and Hurst, represent Wycomico. In the year
1797, Thomas Gaskins and Thomas Hurst are lay delegates from
Wycomico, and Mr. William Claughton from St. Stephen's. In
1799, the Rev. Mr. Seward still represents St. Stephen's, while
William Davenport and Thomas Harvey are lay delegates for
Wycomico. There being no Convention, or, if one, no records of
it, until 1805, we are unable to say who ministered in Northumberland
in the interim. In that year the Rev. Duncan McNaughton
represented St. Stephen's, with John Hull as lay delegate. In the
year 1812, the Rev. Samuel Low, with Thomas Gaskins as lay
delegate, was in the Convention. Mr. Low was also there in 1813,
accompanied by Mr. Joseph Ball. From that to the present time
there has, I believe, been no regular minister belonging to either
of the parishes of this county, though services have been rendered
to them both by the ministers of Lancaster county.

Concerning the church in Wycomico parish, and which was called
Wycomico Church, we have something to say from personal knowledge.
Bishop Moore and myself both performed services in it,

though to a small number of persons. The last time that Bishop
Moore was in the desk, a piece of plastering from its high arched
ceiling fell upon his head, which was protected by only a few gray
hairs. Judging from the size of the house, there must, at the time
of its erection, have been many attendants, for it was the largest
of the old churches in Virginia of which I have any knowledge.
It was built about the beginning of the Revolutionary War, when
faithful architecture had already waned. After my last visit to it
in 1837, I made the following communication to the ensuing Convention
of 1838:—

At the end of twenty years it pains me to say that my faintest
hopes have been more than disappointed, and my worst fears more
than realized, since not only every vestige of the house is removed
and its site enclosed and cultivated with an adjoining field, but I
cannot learn that there is a single family or even individual in the
parish still connected with or attached to the Church. The whole
population is incorporated with other denominations. That worthy
friend and member of our Church, Mr. Joseph Ball, of the old seat

of Ditchley, was near enough to attend Wycomico, and in Romish
days would have been regarded and called its patron saint. Some
years after my last visit to this falling church, he placed in my
hands a rich service of Communion-plate which belonged to it,
saying, that as he was the only surviving friend of the old church,
and utterly despaired of its revival, he wished me to take charge
of it and let it be used in some other parish. This I did, on the
condition that if the parish ever revived it should receive back
again the property of its ancestry. The vessels are now used in
the congregation and church at Millwood, in Clarke county, and
the condition of their loan is recorded in the vestry-book of the
parish. The following inscription will also show that its date and
use were far anterior to the establishment of old Frederick parish,
out of which the parish about Millwood has been carved.

They are as follows:—on the tankard, "The gift of Bartholomew
Shriver, who died in 1720, and of Bartholomew his son, who died
in 1727, for the use of the parish of Great Wycomico, in the county
of Northumberland, 1728." The inscription on the plate is, "The
gift of Reynard Delafiae to Quantico Church." We know of no
Quantico Church but that which stood near Dumfries, in Prince
William county, and suppose that this plate must once have belonged
to it. There is no date to the inscription. The cup, as will be
seen hereafter, was the gift of Hancock Lee, in 1711.

I sincerely wish that it were in my power to give as good an account
of the remnant of the old church itself. The following
extract from my report to the Convention of 1841 will tell the
history of the disposal of the walls of Wycomico Church:—

I am sorry to add that to this day the remaining two hundred
and fifty dollars is unpaid. I trust that the descendants of the
purchaser, even to the latest generation, will feel bound to Wycomico,
even as the trustees of the Theological Seminary, for the part
which has been used.

NOTICES OF THE LEE FAMILY IN VIRGINIA.

In the county of Northumberland and parish of Great Wycomico,
and within sight of the Chesapeake Bay, there is an estate and
mansion called Ditchley,—an English name of note,—which has
probably from its first settlement, more than one hundred years
ago, been the favourite resort of the ministers of the Episcopal
Church. Its present owner is Mr. Flexmer Ball. His father, Mr.
Joseph Ball, was one of the truest members of our Church. Of his
ancestry we have just written in our last article. Many and pleasant
have been the hours which, in company with some of the

brethren, I have spent at Ditchley within the last thirty years
Ditchley is one of the old residences of the Lees. The mansion
called Cobbs, where Colonel Richard Lee, the first of the family,
lived for some time, was near to Ditchley, and has only very recently
been removed to make place for another, although it must
have been built two hundred years ago or more. The first settler,
of whom more will hereafter be said, had many sons, of whom the
seventh, Hancock Lee, built and lived at Ditchley. He was twice
married,—first to a Miss Kendall, then to a Miss Allerton, by each
of whom he had children, whose descendants are among us to this
day. He died in 1729, as his tombstone in the family burying-ground
at Ditchley shows to this day. Both of his wives are buried
at the same place. That he was a patron of the church is shown
by the fact that he presented a Communion-cup to the parish in
1711. In honour either of himself or father, or the whole family,
the parish was then called Lee parish, as may be seen by the inscription
on the cup. It was afterward called Wycomico. After
the downfall of the parish, Mr. Joseph Ball placed this and other
pieces into my hands for preservation, in hope that the day might
come when the old Lee and more modern Wycomico parish might
call for it again. It is now used in the church at Millwood, Clarke
county, and the source whence it came and the pledge given are
recorded in the vestry-book of the same, as has already been said.

The following account of the Lee family is copied from a manuscript
in the handwriting of William Lee, dated London, September,
177-, the last figure not known, but just before the war, as is evident
from the document itself. Its author was one of the six sons
of Thomas Lee, so many of whom were active in the Revolution.
It is somewhat doubtful whether in the early part of it Mr. Arthur
Lee and William Lee, in London, were not as effective as Richard
Henry Lee and Francis Lightfoot Lee in America. Mr. William
Lee, author of the following sketch, was sheriff and alderman in the
city of London, and subsequently commercial agent for Congress
in Europe and their Commissioner at the Courts of Berlin and
Vienna. He married a Miss Ludwell and left three children,—
William Ludwell, of Greenspring, who is buried in the old churchyard
at Jamestown, Portia, who married Mr. William Hodgson,
and Cornelia, who married Mr. John Hopkins. The high character
of Mr. Lee stamps a value on the following statement:—

Here ends the manuscript of Mr. William Lee, of London; but
we are enabled by another document to proceed further, though
not justified by the bounds prescribed to our notices to pursue it in
its details. Of the six sons of Thomas Lee, of Stratford, something
must be said, or we should be justly condemned.

Philip Ludwell, the eldest, succeeded his father at Stratford, in
Westmoreland. He married a Miss Steptoe, and left two daughters.
Matilda, the eldest, married General Henry Lee, of the Revolution;
and Flora married Mr. Ludwell Lee, of Loudoun. Thomas
Ludwell settled in Stafford, and married a Miss Aylett. Richard
Henry was educated in England, and returned in the nineteenth year
of his age, and married first a Miss Aylett, and next a Mrs.
Pinkard, who was a Miss Gaskins or Gascoigne. He took an
active part in the Revolution. His life has been written by
his grandson, Richard Henry Lee. Francis Lightfoot Lee also
participated largely in the events of the Revolution, and was
regarded as one of the ablest orators and statesmen of that period.
He married a Miss Rebecca Tayloe, daughter of Colonel John Tayloe,
of Richmond county. Of the fifth son, William, the sheriff and
alderman of London, we have already given some account. Arthur,

the sixth and youngest, as a scholar, a writer, a philosopher, a politician
and diplomatist, was surpassed by none and equalled by few
of his contemporaries. He studied physic in Edinburgh, where he
took his degrees; but, disliking the profession, he studied law, and
distinguished himself as a lawyer in England. The services rendered
by him to his country as her minister at foreign courts were
most valuable.

In the English document immediately preceding, nothing is said
of one branch of the family,—viz.: Henry Lee, one of the brothers
of Thomas Lee, of Stratford, and grandson of the first Lee.
He married a Bland, and had several children. His son Richard
was Squire Lee, of Lee Hall. His only daughter married a Fitzhugh.
Henry, the third son, married a Miss Grymes, and left five
sons and three daughters,—viz.: Henry, who was Colonel in the
Revolution, Charles, Richard Bland, Theodoric, and Edmund; also,
Mary, Lucy, and Anne. A numerous posterity has descended from
these, among whom are some bright ornaments of the Church, the
State, and the army. Mention is made in our English document
of one of the family at an early period moving to Maryland and
having numerous and influential descendants in that Province. I
have reason to believe, from recent examinations into the records
of different courts in the Northern Neck, that some of that branch
returned to Virginia, and were for a long series of years clerks in
the county of Essex. The following extract from a communication
sent me by a competent person establishes the fact. "John Lee,
clerk of Essex county, who succeeded Captain William Beverley,
came from Maryland. His nephew, John Lee, who was a member
of the House of Burgesses, succeeded him. At his death, his son
Hancock Lee succeeded to the office. At the death of Hancock
Lee, his son John Lee succeeded to it." Thus four of the name
held the office of clerk in Essex in succession.

The family of Lees, in all its branches, so far as I know and
believe, have always been Episcopal. I know of scarce an exception.
I have been intimately acquainted with some most excellent
specimens of true piety among them,—too many to be specified and
dwelt upon. If tradition and history and published documents are
to be relied on, the patriotic, laborious, self-sacrificing, and eloquent
Richard Henry Lee, of the Revolution, must have deeply sympathized
with Washington, and Peyton Randolph, and Pendleton, and
Nicholas, and Henry, in their religious character and sentiments.

In looking over the two volumes containing the life and correspondence
of Richard Henry Lee, of Chantilly, in Westmoreland,

the reader cannot fail to ask himself the question, "Was there a
man in the Union who did more in his own county and State and
country, by action at home and correspondence abroad, to prepare
the people of the United States for opposition to English usurpation,
and the assertion of American independence? Was there a
man in America who toiled and endured more than he, both in body
and mind, in the American cause? Was there a man in the Legislature
of Virginia, and in the Congress of the Union, who had the pen
of a ready writer so continually in his hand, and to which so many
public papers may be justly ascribed, and by whom so much hard
work in committee-rooms was performed?" To him most justly was
assigned the honourable but perilous duty of first moving in our
American Congress "that these United Colonies are, and of right
ought to be, free and independent States." Nor is it at all wonderful
that one who was conversant with the plans and intentions
of the English ministry should have declared that, in the event
of the reduction of the Colonies, the delivery of General Washington
and Richard Henry Lee would be demanded, in order to
their execution as rebels. Although the great principles of morality
and religion rest on infinitely higher ground than the opinion of
the greatest and best of men, yet it is most gratifying to find them
sustained in the writings and actions of such a man as Richard
Henry Lee. Mr. Lee advocated private education as being better
calculated for impressing the minds of the young "with a love of
religion and virtue." His biographer says that he had early studied
the evidences of the Christian religion, and had through life
avowed his belief in its divine origin. He was a member of the
Episcopal Church in full communion, and took a deep interest in
its welfare. He proved the sincerity of what has been quoted from
him, in favour of private education, by having a minister or candidate
for the ministry in his family as private tutor. Mr. Balmaine
was sent over to him by his brother Arthur, from London,
as both a staunch friend of America and a pious man. I have
often heard Mr. Balmaine speak in the highest terms of Mr. Lee
as a Christian and a patriotic statesman. His attachment to the
Church of his fathers was evinced by the interest he took in seeking
to obtain consecration for our Bishops, immediately after the
war, and when he was President of Congress. Twice were thanks
returned to him by our General Convention for his services. Mr.
Lee was a decided advocate of the appointment of public acts of
supplication and thanksgiving to Almighty God in times of adversity
and prosperity. When all was dark and lowering in our
political horizon, and when it was proposed that, as one means of
propitiating the favour of God, it should be recommended to the
different States to take the most effectual means for the encouraging
of religion and good morals, and for suppressing "theatrical
entertainments, horse-racing, gaming, and such other diversions as
are productive of idleness, dissipation, and a general depravity of
manners," while some voted against the measure, Mr. Lee was
found in company with the most pious men of the land in favour
of it, and it was carried by a large majority. Again, when by the
capture of Burgoyne's army the hearts of Americans were cheered,
we find Mr. Lee one of a committee drafting a preamble and resolution,
which is believed to be from his own pen, in the following pious
strain:—"Forasmuch as it is the indispensable duty of all men to
adore the superintending providence of Almighty God, to acknowledge
with gratitude their obligation to him for benefits received, and
to implore such further blessings as they stand in need of; and it
having pleased him, in his abundant mercy, not only to continue to
us the innumerable bounties of his common providence, but also to
smile upon us in the prosecution of a just and necessary war for
the independence and establishment of our unalienable rights and
liberties; particularly in that he hath been pleased in so great a
measure to prosper the means used for the support of our arms,
and crown them with the most signal success: it is therefore recommended
to the Legislature and executive powers of these States,
to set apart Thursday, the eighteenth of December next, for solemn
thanksgiving and praise; that with one heart and one voice the
people may express the feelings of their hearts, and consecrate
themselves to the service of their Divine Benefactor; and, together
with their sincere acknowledgments and offerings, they may join
the penitent confession of their manifold sins, whereby they have
forfeited every favour, and their earnest and humble supplication
that it may please God, through the merits of Jesus Christ, mercifully
to forgive and blot them out of remembrance; that it may
please God," &c.

Mr. Lee, though entirely opposed to any Church establishment,
was, together with Henry, an advocate for a proposition to make
every man contribute to the support of the Christian religion, as
the only sure basis of private and public morality. In this, however,
they failed. When the question about paying debts in depreciated
currency came on, Mr. Lee evinced his high and honourable
sense of morality in the earnest and eloquent opposition made to
it. He declared that nothing so deeply distressed him as a proposition
which he regarded as a violation of honesty and good faith

among men, and said that it "would have been better to have remained
the honest slaves of Britain, than dishonest freemen."[20]

Of the descendants of so great and good a man, I cannot refrain
from adding something. His oldest son was Thomas Lee, whose
daughter Eleanor married Girard Alexander. His second son was
Mr. Ludwell Lee, of Loudoun county, who was a worthy member
of our Church, and left children and grandchildren who have followed
his example. His daughter Mary married Colonel William
Augustin Washington, but died childless. His daughter Hannah
married Mr. Corbin Washington, many of whose descendants have
been or are zealous members of the Church. His daughter Harriet
married twice,—first Mr. George Turberville, and then the Rev. Mr.
Maffit, of the Presbyterian Church. Many of their descendants,
whether of the Episcopal or Presbyterian Church, are characterized
by exemplary piety. Sally married Edmund I. Lee, of Alexandria,
and has left a numerous posterity of children and grandchildren
and great-grandchildren, who belong to and love the Church of
their ancestors. The Rev. William F. Lee was one of her sons.

Anne, the other daughter of R. H. Lee, married Charles Lee.
Her daughter Ann married General Walter Jones, and was the
mother of a numerous family of children, who love the religion and
Church of their ancestors. Her daughter Catherine is one of our
missionaries in China.

NORTHUMBERLAND HOUSE.

On the Potomac, and within sight of the bay, are the remains
of an old graveyard, belonging to what has always gone by the
name of the "Northumberland House." The place was originally
settled and a house built on it by a Mr. Presley, one of the earliest
settlers, who was murdered in it by his own servants. It was
afterward owned by Mr. Presley Thornton, who lies buried there.
The following extract from the letter of a friend is worthy of insertion:—

To this I add that, in the absence of the vestry-books and court-records,
I find that at an early period the Lees, Presleys, Poythresses,
Kenners, Thorntons, Newtons, &c. were the leading persons
in Northumberland.

The assertion by Mr. Lee that Charles II. was proclaimed King
in Virginia before he was received as such in England is a matter
of dispute among historians. Beverley, our earliest, who published
his work in 1705,—about forty-five years after the event is said to
have occurred,—affirms it as a fact. Robertson, the historian, and
Chalmers, another writer of that day, repeat the same. Burke,
who published in 1805, agrees with the foregoing so far as to think
that something of the kind took place, though not in a regular way.
Dr. Hawks agrees with Beverley and his followers. Mr. Henning,
in his Statutes at Large, compiled by order of the Virginia Assembly,
and commenced in 1809, is of opinion that there is no foundation
for any such supposition, and appeals to the entire absence of
all notice of such proceeding in the documents of that period.
Mr. Bancroft and Mr. Charles Campbell adopt the opinion of Mr.
Henning. Of course, if it was an irregular, partial, or tumultuous
act of individuals, as Mr. Burke supposes, we could not expect to
see it among the recorded Acts of Assembly, as we do see the later
and more formal acknowledgment of Charles II. It is not, however,
a matter of sufficient importance to produce a Trojan war.
It is scarcely probable that Mr. Lee is mistaken in the tradition
that his ancestor was a zealous loyalist, and did, on his return to
England, visit Charles at Breda and hold communion with him on
the subject of his acknowledgment by Virginia, then having so
many staunch Cavaliers in it, whatever uncertainty may rest upon
the subsequent proceedings.

Since the foregoing article was written, I have received some
further information concerning the first of the Lee family and his
children, which is worthy of insertion. The will of the first Richard
Lee, dated 1663, may be seen in Mr. Charles Campbell's History
of Virginia, p. 157. From it I extract the following:—"I, Colonel
Richard Lee, of Virginia, and lately of Stratford-Langton, in the
county of Essex, Esquire, being bound out upon a voyage to Virginia
aforesaid, and not knowing how it may please God to dispose
of me in so long a voyage," &c. "First, I give and bequeath my soul
to that good and gracious God that gave it me, and to my blessed
Redeemer Jesus Christ, assuredly trusting in and by his meritorious

death and passion to receive salvation, and my body to be disposed
of, whether by sea or land, according to the opportunity of the
place, not doubting but at the last day both body and soul shall be
united and glorified." Here again we see the faith and the divinity
of that day. He then directs that his wife and children, who it
seems had not yet been to Virginia, should be sent there, except
Francis, to whose option it was left. To his wife Anna he left
Stratford-on-the-Potowmacke (to which he had removed from Cobbs)
and Mock Necke, together with servants black and white, and other
property during her life. To his son John he leaves his plantation
called Matholic, with servants, &c. This is now the Mount Pleasant
farm owned by Mr. Willowby Newton. To his son Richard he
leaves his plantation called Paradise, and the servants there. To
his son Francis he leaves his plantations called Paper-Maker's
Neck and War Captain's Neck, with servants black and white. To
his five younger children, William, Hancock, Betsy, Anne, and
Charles, he leaves a plantation, including Bishop's Neck on the
Potomac, four thousand acres on the Potomac, together with Stratford
and Mock Neck at the death of their mother. To William he
leaves his lands on the Maryland side; to Francis an interest in
his two ships. He also leaves a fund for the better education in
England of his two oldest sons, John and Richard.

Since writing the account of the marriages of Richard Henry,
as given by his brother William Lee, I have received two communications,
stating that one of his wives was a Miss Gaskins, so that,
unless he was married three times, there must have been a mistake
as to the name of one of those before mentioned.

THE CORBIN FAMILY.

The following account of the Corbin family may very properly
be added to that of the Lees, on account of their early connection
by marriage.

The vestry-books of Middlesex and King and Queen counties
doubtless speak of some of the same persons mentioned in this
genealogy.

Henry Corbin settled in the parish of Stratton Major, King and
Queen, about the year 1650. One Nicholas Jernew obtained a
patent for Peekatone, in the county of Westmoreland, dated 18th
October, 1650, which he transferred to Henry Corbin, who had
another patent issued in his own name, dated 26th of March, 1664.
Henry Corbin had three children, of whom mention is made in the
old papers in my possession. Thomas Corbin, one of his sons,

must have died without male issue, as his brother Gawin Corbin,
by his will, devises to his son Gawin Corbin "the land of my
brother, the late Mr. Thomas Corbin." His eldest daughter,
Letitia, married Richard Lee, second son of Colonel Richard Lee.
Gawin Corbin, the other son of Henry Corbin, and once President
of the Council, married a daughter of William Bassett, and left
seven children,—three sons and four daughters. Jenny, one of his
daughters, married a Mr. Bushrod; Joanna married Major Robert
Tucker; Alice married Benjamin Needler, and the other a Mr.
Allerton. His sons were—1st, Richard Corbin of Laneville, who
married Miss Betty Tayloe, daughter of Colonel John Tayloe,
(Carter Braxton married their oldest daughter;) 2d, John Corbin,
of whose history I am ignorant, (the lands devised to him were
chiefly in Maryland;) 3d, Gawin Corbin, once a member of the
Council, and who married Hannah Lee, sister of Richard Henry
Lee. Gawin Corbin, third grandson of Henry Corbin, left an
only daughter, Martha, who married George Turberville. George
Turberville left two sons,—viz.: Gawin Corbin Turberville, and
Richard Lee Turberville. Gawin Corbin Turberville married a
daughter of Colonel John Dangerfield, and left an only daughter,
Mary, who married William F. Taliafero.

A friend has sent me the following record, which shows at how
early a period that kind of dissipation which proved so destructive
to Virginia made its appearance in the Northern Neck. "John
Lee, Henry Corbin, Thomas Gerrard, and Isaac Allerton, entered
into a compact, dated 30th of March, 1670, (recorded 27th
March, 1774,) to build a banqueting-house at or near the corner
of their respective lands."

ARTICLE LX.

Cople Parish, Westmoreland County.

Westmoreland county was cut off from Northumberland county
in 1653, and extended along the Potomac as high as the Falls above
Georgetown. In the years 1661-62 the two counties were temporarily
reunited, because, by the removal of some leading persons,
there was not a suitable number of civil and military gentlemen to
constitute a proper commission in either of them alone. After some
time Stafford was taken from Westmoreland, leaving it a small,
narrow county lying on the Potomac, and only extending half-way
across the neck toward the Rappahannock River. First Lancaster,
then Rappahannock, and then Richmond counties, divided what
is now Westmoreland. In time, all the land lying between the
rivers was given to Westmoreland, and Cople parish occupied the
lower part of the county and Washington the upper. We will begin
with Cople parish.

The first minister we have on any of our lists is the Rev. Charles
Rose, brother to the Rev. Robert Rose, of Essex. He appears on
the earliest list we have,—that of 1754,—but from the diary of his
brother we know that he was its minister some years before this.
He was also minister in 1758. In the year 1773, the Rev. Thomas
Smith was its minister, as he was in 1776. Either before or after
him, we are informed that the Rev. Augustine Smith was its
minister. We presume that they were relatives of the many respectable
persons of that name in this and other counties around,
but we have received no particular account of them. In the year
1799, the Rev. James Elliott was minister. Of him we hear nothing
good from this or any other parish which he served. We hear of
no other minister in Cople parish until the Rev. Washington Nelson
took charge of it in connection with the parishes in Richmond
county. He was succeeded in 1842 by the Rev. Mr. Ward. The
Rev. Mr. Rumney succeeded him in 1849, and was succeeded by
the Rev. Edward McGuire in 1850. He was followed by the Rev.
William McGuire in 1852. The present minister, the Rev. Mr.
Dashiel, took charge of it in 1854.

There were two churches in this parish,—one at Yeocomico River

or Creek, from which it takes its name, Yeocomico; and another
about ten miles off, on Nominy River or Creek, from which it also
took the name of Nominy. The latter was destroyed by fire soon
after our last war with England, but a new brick one has taken its
place within the last few years. The plate belonging to this church
was carried off by Admiral Cockburn and his party, when they were
on a pillaging-expedition on the Potomac and its tributaries. The
plate was kept on a plantation upon the banks of Nominy River, just
opposite the church. The farm itself was called Nominy, and was
then, and still is, owned by the Griffith family, relatives of the Bishop-elect
of that name. The house was plundered and then burned.
The other—Yeocomico Church—is still in good repair, but among
the rudest and roughest of all the old brick churches. It was built
in 1706. For the first time a new roof has, within a few years,
been put upon it, and some internal changes been made in it.
Although I think it might have been better done and made more
complete, yet it would be difficult, and perhaps not desirable, to
give a more modern aspect to it. The following extract from my
report in 1838 may not be without interest to the reader:—

It deserves to be stated that I have in my possession a contract
with the vestry for the repairs of this church in 1773, at a
cost of one hundred pounds, or five hundred dollars. In the agreement,
various repairs within and without the house and in the walls
around the yard are specified, but nothing is said about a new roof,
which goes to establish the tradition that the present roof is the
original one put upon the house in 1706.

THE McGUIRE FAMILY, BY THE PRESENT MINISTER OF COPLE PARISH.

For twenty years or more, prior to the pastorate of the Rev. Washington
Nelson, this parish was without clerical services. In all that
time there was nothing except the visitations of the Bishop to remind
the people here that there was an Episcopal Church. And
depressing as was such a state of things, and calculated as it was
to break us down entirely, we were just as likely to have the same
end brought about by the life and character of the man who had
last been rector. I do not know whether this man resigned the
parish, or died whilst in charge: be that as it may, his course was
well calculated to disgust people and drive them from our services.
Looking at the consequences which must naturally flow from such
a connection, and from the long period in which there was entire
absence of Episcopal ministrations, we cannot otherwise than wonder,
whilst we thank God, as we now see our Church upon the
same spot enjoying every promise of prosperity. Whilst, during
the period referred to, there was nothing done by us, other Christian
bodies were active; and, under all the influences which operated
against us, it is not surprising that all or nearly all who had any
affection for our Church should have lost their feelings of attachment
and have sought comfort elsewhere. In truth, when Mr.
Nelson came here the Episcopal Church had nearly died out. The

only communicants he found were three old ladies in the humblest
walks of life. An account of these pious and excellent people was
published by Mr. Nelson, but I believe it must be out of print.
Even, however, if there should be any copies of it in existence,
their history is so remarkable that it will very well bear the mention
here made. The name of these sisters was McGuire,—Miss Emily,
Miss Mary, and a widow, Mrs. Davis. Two of them are still alive
and still continue warmly attached to our Church, and are exerting
a considerable influence in its favour among their acquaintances.
The eldest of them—Miss Emily—died in August, 1855. I tried to
obtain for myself a satisfactory account of how they became Episcopalians,
and how they retained their love for the Church when
every one else in the surrounding country deserted it. They said,
in substance, that they had been educated by their mother, who was
an Episcopalian, and brought up to love all our services. They
were baptized by our ministry, and attended its preaching whenever
they could. When their mother died she left them a large Prayer-Book,
with the request that they would abide by its teachings;
and, from affection for her as well as for the Church, they obeyed
her word. They told how the Church had flourished in days gone
by,—how it had been ridiculed when its clergy behaved badly,—
and how the members had been shamed away from it, and how
themselves still clung to it. I asked them how they got along
during the many years there was no minister. "Why, sir," said
Miss Emily, "whenever there was preaching at Westmoreland or
Richmond Court-House, we would walk to it,—once in a while we
would have this chance,—and when there was no preaching I would
read the Lessons on Sunday to my sister and we would go through
the morning service, and if any neighbours came in maybe I would
read a sermon." Westmoreland Court-House is four miles from
their residence and Richmond Court-House about twelve miles;
and I have it certified by others that the statement of Miss Emily
is true,—they have been known to walk to and from these places
to attend our Church services in the coldest and hottest weather.
I asked them if in that time they never attended the services of
other denominations. "Well, sir," they said, "we did sometimes;
they would be holding church all around us, and sometimes we
would go; but it wasn't like home to us. We know they're good,
but still we felt happier worshipping here in our own way."

The piety of these worthy people is even more remarkable than
their attachment to their Church. They are very poor, but their
uniform contentment and happiness is rarely to be met with. Upon

one occasion whilst Miss Emily was alive, her sister Mary remarked
that now in their old age they sometimes got right cold while walking
to church in the winter. "But what of that, sister?" says
Miss Emily; "why should we care for that?" "And I don't care
for it," was the reply.

We have mentioned that Miss Emily died in August, 1855. She
was very aged, and for some weeks previous to her decease was
imbecile. It pleased God, however, not to let her depart in this
state. The day before she died her reason returned, and she talked
solemnly and impressively to those around her. She remained thus
conscious almost up to the very moment of her death. Miss Mary
and Mrs. Davis still attend their church and see the parish which
once could number only themselves as its friends, now containing
more than twenty families, about thirty communicants now living,
and many evidences that it is still to flourish. May God help us
to remember and cherish the poor!

To this it well deserves to be added, that during the entire intermission
of services in this parish, these sisters were in the habit
of going once in a year in a sail-boat to Alexandria in order to
receive the Communion.

THE NEWTON FAMILY.

From a document of Mr. Willowby Newton, father of the present
Willowby, and grandson of a Willowby Newton, I learn that at an
early period four brothers emigrated to Virginia,—one of whom
settled in Norfolk, another in Alexandria, one in Westmoreland,
and one in Stafford; so that it is probable that all of the name in
Virginia, and many out of it, are from the same stock. Richard
Lee, of Lee Hall, in Westmoreland, not far from the ruins of the
old burnt house, which was an ancient Lee establishment, married
a Miss Poythress, of Prince George, who was a granddaughter of
Richard Bland. After the death of Mr. Lee—commonly called
Squire Lee—she married Mr. Willowby Newton, both of whom
were vestrymen, as was John Newton, father of this Willowby,
and son of the first Willowby. The name of Willowby was an
ancient one about Norfolk, and intermarried with the Newtons.

At Bushfield, in this county, there is an inscription which gives
us the origin of the name Bushrod, which is incorporated in many
other names of Virginia:—

At Wilmington, the family seat of the Newtons, we have also the
following inscription:—

In the same graveyard is the tomb of Mrs. Elizabeth Oldham,
wife of Colonel Samuel Oldham, who died in 1759, in her 72d year.

TOMBSTONES IN COPLE PARISH.

From a tombstone in the Burnt-House fields, at Mount Pleasant,
Westmoreland county, where are yet to be seen the foundations
of large buildings, are the following:—

The first is thus translated:—

The second is thus translated:—

VESTRYMEN OF COPLE PARISH.

Although no vestry-book of this parish has come down to us
from which we might give a connected list of the vestrymen, yet
we are glad to present to our readers the result of two elections
which were held in this parish,—the one in 1755, and the other in
1785. Those chosen in 1755 were John Bushrod, Daniel Tibbs,
Richard Lee, Benedict Middleton, Willowby Newton, Robert Middleton,
George Lee, John Newton, Samuel Oldham, Robert Carter,
Fleet Cox, James Steptoe. Those chosen in 1785—thirty years
after—were Vincent Marmaduke, Jeremiah G. Bailey, John A.
Washington, Samuel Rust, John Crabb, Richard Lee, George Garner,
George Turberville, Patrick Sanford, John Rochester, Samuel
Templeman.

CONTEST ABOUT YEOCOMICO CHURCH.

During the ministry of the Rev. Mr. Ward in Cople parish, a
difficulty arose as to this church, and the question was carried
before the Legislature. The following letter from Judge McComas
shows his opinion on the subject. The action of the Legislature
was in favour of the claim of the Episcopal Church:—

The following letter from Mr. W. L. Rogers, of Princeton, New
Jersey, will form an interesting supplement to what has been said
about Old Yeocomico:—

ARTICLE LXI.

Washington Parish, Westmoreland.

This name was doubtless given to it at an early period, and after
the first of the Washingtons; though we see nothing of its first
establishment in the Acts of Assembly. The Bishop of London
sends a circular to its minister in 1723. The Rev. Laurence De
Butts was its minister in that year, and had been for the three preceding
years. The parish was thirty miles long and five wide,
extending only half-way across the Neck at that time. There
were two churches in it. He administered the Communion three
times a year, and two quarts of wine had been used at one time.
Mr. De Butts preached also, during the week, at St. Stephen's
Church, Northumberland county, at Farnham Church, Richmond
county, and in Cople parish, they all being vacant at that time.
The glebe of four hundred and fifty acres was bequeathed to the
parish for the better maintenance of a minister and schoolmaster,
and the vestry gave it entirely to him on condition that he would
provide one to teach reading, writing, and arithmetic, which he had
done. What has become of this glebe we know not. We find in
the old county records the name of another minister in Westmoreland,
about this same time,—the Rev. Walter Jones. He may have
ministered in some other parish, or been a private teacher, and been
merely summoned as a witness. We have no record of any minister
in Washington parish after this until the year 1754, when the
Rev. Archibald Campbell appears on one of our lists.

Of him and his family I have something special to say. Our
lists of clergy show him to have been the minister of Washington
parish from the year 1754 to 1774,—a period of twenty years.
During most of that time Round Hill Church (afterward in Hanover
parish, King George county, by a change of the boundary-line
in the two counties) was connected with Pope's Creek Church, in
Washington parish, and Mr. Campbell was minister of those
churches. I have something to say about the former of these
churches which has a bearing on the date of Mr. Campbell's ministry
and first coming to this country.

In my report, in the year 1838, of a visit to this region in the

preceding year, I thus speak:—"In passing from Westmoreland to
King George county, where my next appointment was made, the
traveller may see, immediately on the roadside, the last vestiges of
an old church called `Round Hill Church.' A few broken bricks
and a little elevation made by the mouldered ruins are all now left
to say, Here once stood a church of the living God."

Within the last few months I spent a night at the hospitable
house of Colonel Baber, near whose outer gate the old church
stood. On learning that there was an old tombstone still to be
seen among the ruins, I determined to search for it. In the morning,
on our way to St. Paul's Church, Colonel Baber's son, Rev. Mr.
Dashiel, and myself, dismounted and made our way to the spot
through the thick pines and cedars with which it was overgrown.
After considerable search we discovered the end of a large tombstone,
the greater portion of which was covered over with the roots
of trees, moss and leaves. After clearing away the two latter, we
made out the inscription, as follows:—"Here lies Rebecca, the wife
of the Rev. Archibald Campbell, minister of Washington parish,
who died the 21st of March, 1754." "Here also lies Alexander,
their child." Now, as it is well known that he had another son
by the name of Alexander, an eminent lawyer of Virginia, the one
buried beneath or near this stone may have been born and died
some years before this, and so Mr. Campbell's ministry be carried
back a number of years before 1754, his second son Alexander
being born before that time. If this be so, and it be also true
that the Rev. Mr. Campbell kept a school in Westmoreland,—as tradition
says, and of which there is no doubt,—it may also be true,
as tradition further reports, that General Washington and Thomas
Marshall, father of the Chief-Justice, and perhaps Colonel Monroe
and Mr. Madison, all of whom were born in this region, may at one
time have been scholars of Mr. Campbell. General Washington
was born in 1732, and until his sixteenth year was much in Westmoreland.
It is only necessary that Mr. Campbell's ministry and
school should have commenced five or six years before the death
of his wife, to render this a probable thing. I introduce the report
in order to elicit either confirmation or rejection. Of the history
of this branch of the Campbells of Virginia I have obtained the
following statement. Two brothers, Archibald and Alexander,
emigrated to Virginia some time before the war. Archibald settled
as a clergyman in Westmoreland, and Alexander as a merchant in
Falmouth. At the breaking out of the war, Archibald took part
with the Americans, with the Washingtons and Lees, his parishioners,

while Alexander preferred the British side of the question,
and returned to Scotland. The youngest son of Alexander was
born in Glasgow, in 1777.[22]

The sons of Archibald were Archibald, Alexander, and John.
Archibald inherited the property of his father in Westmoreland,
consisting of two seats, the one called Pomona, the other Campbellton,
at the last of which the father lived and kept his school.
It is now the summer residence of Mr. Laurence Washington. The
other sons, Alexander and John, were eminent lawyers. Alexander
married a Miss Fitzhugh, of King George, who at his death married
the Rev. Dr. Kollock, minister of churches in Princeton, New York,
Charleston, (South Carolina,) and lastly in Savannah. An only
daughter, by her first husband, married Judge Wayne, of the Supreme
Court. The last son, John, was a lawyer in Westmoreland,
and represented the county in the Legislature, and the parish in
one of our Conventions. His daughters were Eliza, who married
Mr. Leland; Emily, who married Robert Mayo; Sarah, who married
Landon Berkeley; Louisa, who married John Mayo; and
Octavia.

After the disappearance of Mr. Campbell from any of our records,

we have no account of any minister in Washington parish
until the year 1785, when the Rev. Francis Wilson serves it for
one year. In the year 1796, the Rev. John O'Donnell appears
once in a Convention. We have none after this until the year
1822, when the Rev. Josiah Claphan appears in Convention, with
Mr. John Campbell, son of the Rev. Mr. Campbell, as lay delegate.
Mr. Clapham continued its minister for some years, performing
his duties piously and faithfully, and with as much energy as his
bodily infirmities would allow of. After a considerable interval, we
find the parish again supplied by the services of the Rev. William
McGuire, who served it in connection with Cople parish. Within a
few years past, a new parish has been taken from Washington parish,
by the name of Montross, in which a new church has been built,
while another, by the name of St. Peter's, has been built at Oak
Grove. We are much indebted to the labours of the Rev. William
McGuire for both these new churches. The Rev. Mr. Tuttle was
the minister of Washington parish for one year, since which time
the Rev. Mr. Chesley has been settled there.

THE OLD CHURCHES IN WESTMORELAND.

There were three of these,—the Round Hill Church, Pope's
Creek Church, and one at Leeds, on the Rappahannock. Pope's
Creek Church lay immediately on the road from Westmoreland
Court-House to King George. The following notice of it is taken
from my report to the Convention of 1838:—

It ought to be added that so attached were the citizens of the

county to this old building, that the excuse for its destruction by
fire was not readily admitted. Indeed, so indignant were they,
that it was brought before the grand jury and the court. The
result, however, was the acquittal of the party. It has now been
twenty years since the above-mentioned visit, and I have often
within that time passed the same spot, at each time perceiving the
disappearance of all that was old, and the rise and growth of what
was new. Trees and shrubs have been growing up over and around
the old site, rendering it more difficult each year to the passing
traveller to find out where Old Pope's Creek Church once stood.
I should not myself, in a recent visit, have been able to discover it,
but for the aid of a friend who was with me. I could not but ask
myself and that friend if it were not possible that a simple but durable
monument—say a pillar a few feet high—could be placed on the
roadside, with the name of Pope's Creek Church upon it, to inform
posterity that on that spot stood the church of the Washingtons, the
Lees, the Paynes, and others. It is said that the Legislature intends
to have an enclosure around the birthplace of Washington and the
burying-place of his ancestors, which are near at hand; and surely
some individual or individuals would take pleasure in marking the
spot where God was worshipped by so many, and where the remains
of not a few were interred, although no tombstones have preserved
their names. Among those whose bodies were deposited around
this church is to be numbered the Hon. Thomas Lee, (the father of
Richard Henry Lee and a noble band of brothers and sisters,) the
owner of Stratford, for whom it was rebuilt by the Queen, after
being consumed by fire, who held the first offices in the Colony
under several Governors, and whose commission as Governor reached
Virginia in 1756, just after his death. I take the following inscription
from his tombstone, which I saw some years since, lying
against the wall of the family vault at Stratford:—

Of Mr. Lee some account has been given in the sketch of the
Lee family in the article on Northumberland county.

LEEDS OR BRAY'S CHURCH.

This church stood on the Rappahannock, at the outskirts of the
place called Leeds. It was of brick. The ruins of it are yet to
be seen, apparently hanging on the bank of the river. It has

undergone many changes of late years since it was deserted as a
house of worship, having been used as a tavern, stable or barn, and
been altered so as to suit the different purposes to which it has been
applied. Leeds was once a place of note in this part of Virginia.
It was doubtless named, either by the Fairfaxes or Washingtons,
after the town of Leeds, in Yorkshire, near which both of their
ancestral families lived. This in Virginia was a place of much
trade in tobacco and other things. Its shipping was very considerable
at one time, and it gave the promise of being a town of no
small importance, but, like many other such places in Virginia, as
Dumfries, Colchester, Warren, Warminster, it failed to fulfil the
expectations excited. For one thing it deserves to retain a lasting
place in the history of the American Revolution. As Boston was
the Northern, so Leeds may be called the Southern cradle of American
Independence. This was the place where, with Richard
Henry Lee as their leader, the patriots of Westmoreland met,
before any and all others, to enter their protest against the incipient
steps of English usurpation. At this place did they resolve
to oppose the Stamp Act, nor allow any citizen of Westmoreland
to deal in stamps. This is a true part of the American history.

ROUND HILL CHURCH.

Of this we have said something in our mention of the Rev. Mr.
Campbell. In the following communication from my brother,
Bishop Payne, of Africa, further notice of it will be found, together
with interesting accounts of his own family. One of these at my
first visit to Pope's Creek Church promised one hundred dollars
for its repairs,—a large sum for those times.

THE WASHINGTON FAMILY.

It is agreed on all hands that, about the year 1655, two brothers,
John and Laurence Washington, came over to Virginia and settled
in Westmoreland county. In all the histories which I have seen
of the Washington family there is not another word said of Laurence
Washington, except that he and his brother came together
and settled at the same place. While the descendants of John
Washington, in all their branches, are minutely described in genealogies
and histories and biographies, doubtless in a great measure
because the great Washington was one of them, Laurence Washington
was forgotten and lost sight of as though he had never been.
I have met with persons who could not trace their connection with
General Washington or his first ancestors, yet were certain of some
connection with the family, but never thought of inquiring whether
their descent is not from the other brother. In a recent visit to
Tappahannock, the county seat of Essex county, (where are the
records of the old county of Rappahannock, which from 1653 to
1692 embraced all that lay on each side of the Rappahannock
River for some miles up to the Falls above Fredericksburg,) in
searching in an old record of wills, I found that of this same Laurence
Washington. Although he may have settled near the Potomac
with his brother John, he must have removed into Rappahannock
county, for his will is there recorded. He may have done

this without moving many miles from his brother, as Westmoreland
county and Washington parish were only about five miles wide, and
Rappahannock county and Littenburne parish were about the same
width, the one lying on the Potomac, the other on the Rappahannock
River. I have also obtained, by the help of a friend, the
will of Mr. John Washington, which was recorded at Westmoreland
Court-House, and whose original is still there in an old book of
wills, though in a somewhat mutilated form. That they were the
two brothers is evident from the fact that they mention each other
in their wills. Both of the wills are made in the same year,—that
of one on February 26, 1675; that of the other on September 27,
1675. The one is proved the 10th of January, 1677, and the other
the 6th of January of the same year, at an interval of only four
days, so that it is probable they died in a few days of each other.
There is something so pious in the language of these wills, that I
make no apology for introducing a portion of them. Without any
means of ascertaining which was the elder of the two, we begin
with the will of John Washington:—

Again he repeats the same sentiment, hoping "through the
merits of Jesus Christ's death and passion to possess and inherit
the kingdom of heaven prepared for his elect and chosen." He
directs his body to be buried on the plantation upon which he
lived, by the side of his wife and two children. He then proceeds
to distribute his property, which he says it has pleased God to give
him "far above his deserts." After dividing a number of landed
estates between his second and surviving wife and his children,—
John, Laurence, and Anne,—and also his property in England, he
directs that a funeral sermon be preached and no other funeral
kept, and that a tablet with the Ten Commandments be sent for to
England and given to the church. I think, also, that he directs
four thousand-weight of tobacco to be given to the minister, though

of this I am not certain, some words being lost. He leaves one
thousand pounds to his brother-in-law, Thomas Pope, and one
thousand pounds and four thousand-weight of tobacco to his sister,
who had come or was coming over to this country. He makes his
wife and brother Laurence his executors. From the above it would
seem that, great as were his military talents, being commander-in-chief
in the Northern Neck, high as he stood in the Government,
so that the parish was called after him, and large as was his property
in England and America, he was also a sincerely pious man, and
in his will emphatically testifies to those great Gospel principles
which are so prominent in the Church of his fathers.

In the will of his brother Laurence there is the same spirit of piety.
After the usual preamble, he says, "Imprimis: I give and bequeath
my soul unto the hands of Almighty God, hoping and trusting,
through the mercy of Jesus Christ, my one Saviour and Redeemer,
to receive full pardon and forgiveness of all my sins, and my body
to the earth, to be buried in comely and decent manner by my executor
hereafter named: and for my worldly goods, I thus dispose of
them." To his daughter Mary Washington (by a former wife in
England) he bequeathed his whole estate in England, both real
and personal, to be delivered immediately after his death, together
with a ring and other articles. To his loving son John he left all
his books and part of his plate, the other part to his daughter Ann,
when they should be of age or marry. His lands are divided between
his wife and the two children—John and Ann—by her. A
farm called West Fales, which lay on the south side of the Rappahannock,
which once belonged to Captain Alexander Fleming, and
which came to him by his wife, was to be sold for his debts. It is
probable that his second wife was a daughter of Captain Fleming.
He leaves his wife executrix of the estate, but provides that in case
of her death or neglect to be the guardian and overseer of his
children, his loving brother John Washington and loving friend
Thomas Hawkins should be. In a codicil written at the same time,
he leaves that part of the land on which he then lived, and which
came to him by marriage, to the sole disposal of his wife. It is
probable, from the above, that he lived on the north side of the
river, in what is now Westmoreland. From the foregoing particulars,
some other than myself may be able to ascertain the maiden
name of his wife, and who, if any, are the descendants of his three
children, as it is more than probable they had descendants.

THE WASHINGTON FAMILY SEAT AND VAULT.

I recently paid a visit to the old family seat of the Washingtons,
which is sometimes said to be on Pope's Creek, and sometimes on
Bridge's Creek, near the Potomac. The farm lay between the two,
which are about a mile apart, near their junction with the Potomac.
The family mansion lies near Pope's Creek, and the vault where
the dead were deposited near Bridge's Creek. The latter appears
to have been favourable to a rich growth of cedars, and may have
been chosen for this reason. Or it may be that one of the two
brothers first settled there. The estate is still in the family, or in
the possession of one intermarried with the family. Some years
since it was owned by Mr. John Gray, of Travellers' Rest, near
Fredericksburg, who either repaired one of the outhouses or a wing
of the old one, or built a small house for his overseer out of the old
materials. The brick chimney is all that remains of the Washington
mansion,—the birthplace of General Washington,—except the
broken bricks which are scattered about over the spot where it was
built. The grandson of Mrs. General Washington, Mr. Custis, of
Arlington, some years since placed a slab with a brief inscription
on the spot, but it is now in fragments. I was happy to hear that
a bill had passed one branch of our Legislature, appropriating a sum
of money for enclosing this spot, as well as the vault in a neighbouring
field nearly a mile off. I also visited that spot, which no
one can look upon without distress and even disgust. The condition
of all such vaults as were once common in some parts of Virginia,
especially in the Northern Neck, must after the lapse of time be
necessarily thus distressing and disgusting, like the sepulchres of
old when filled "with rottenness and dead men's bones." The
vault where so many of the Washington family are interred is in an
open field and unenclosed. A small space around it is covered with
grass, briers, shrubs, and a few small trees. Itself can only be
distinguished by the top of the brick arch which rises a little above
the surface. The cavity underneath has been very properly filled
up with earth by Mr. Laurence Washington, one of its late proprietors,
to prevent the bones of the dead being taken away by visitors,
who had begun thus to pillage it. Not far from the vault there was
a large slab lying on the ground, with the name of one of the family
and two of his children. There were also fragments of another.
It is to be hoped that the Legislature will resolve on putting a
permanent enclosure around this also.

THE VAULT OF THE LEES AT STRATFORD, IN WESTMORELAND.

In the preceding sketch of the Lees, by Mr. William Lee, of
London, there is mention made of a loss by fire sustained by his
father, Thomas Lee, of Stratford, and of a present to him by Queen
Caroline. This establishes the source from whence came the means
of building the present most durable building at that place, which
for the thickness of the walls and the excellency of its architecture
is not surpassed, if equalled, by any in Virginia.[23] It has sometimes
been called the Governor's House, probably because its
owner and builder, Thomas Lee, was commissioned as Governor,
though he did not live to act in that capacity. The cemetery
was not built by him, as he was buried at Pope's Creek Church.
I have been assured by Mrs. Eliza Turner, who was there at
the time, that it was built by General Harry Lee. The cemetery
is much larger than any other in the Northern Neck, consisting
of several apartments or alcoves for different branches of the
family. Instead of an arch over them there is a brick house, perhaps
twenty feet square, covered in. A floor covers the cemetery.
In the centre is a large trapdoor, through which you descend by a
ladder to the apartments below. I went down into it some years
since, when nothing was to be seen but the bones of the deceased,
which were scattered over the dirt floor. I was informed that it
had sometimes been filled with water, and that then the bones and
skulls of the deceased might be seen floating upon the surface,—at
any rate, if stirred up with a pole, as was sometimes done. The
entrance to this house has of late years been almost prevented by
a thick growth of young aspens and briers. I am happy to state
that it is the purpose of the present proprietor to fill up the vault,
take down the brick walls and convert them into a mound over the
place, and on the top of the mound to have the tombstone of old
Thomas Lee fixed in some immovable way.

Some mournful thoughts will force themselves upon us when
considering the ruins of churches, of mansions, and of cemeteries,
in Westmoreland. By reason of the worth, talents, and patriotism
which once adorned it, it was called the Athens of Virginia. But
how few of the descendants of those who once were its ornaments

STRATFORD HOUSE, WESTMORELAND

are now to be found in it! Chantilly, Mount Pleasant, Wakefield,
are now no more. Stratford alone remains. Where now are the
venerable churches? Pope's Creek, Round Hill, Nomini, Leeds,
where are they? Yeocomico only survives the general wreck. Of
the old men, mansions, churches, &c. we are tempted to say,
"Fuit Illium, et ingens gloria Dardanidum;" and yet we rejoice
to think that new ones have taken their places, in some respects
better suited to present times and circumstances. Those who, in
the general defection, have remained to the Church, are exerting
themselves to repair the waste places; and we trust there awaits for
Westmoreland a greater glory than the former.

ARTICLE LXII.

Farnham and Lunenburg Parishes, Richmond County.

To do justice to the history of this county and these parishes,
we must go back to the time when they were a part of Rappahannock
county and Littenburne parish,—which they were from the
year 1653 to 1692,—when new counties and parishes were established.
But where are the vestry-books or county records from
whence to draw our facts? Of the former there are none. Some
few of the latter are to be seen in Tappahannock, the county seat
of Essex, where the archives of old Rappahannock county are
preserved.

At my request, a worthy friend—most competent to the task—
has searched these records, and though unable to specify who were
the vestrymen of the parish, yet, in giving the following list of
magistrates from 1680 to 1695, has doubtless furnished us with
the names of far the greater part of the vestrymen, if not the whole
of them, during that period. We cannot determine to which side of
the river they belonged, as both the county and parish were on both
sides. They are as follows:—Henry Aubrey, Major Henry Smith,
Captain George Taylor, Mr. Thomas Harrison, Colonel John Stone,
Colonel Leroy Griffin, Major Robinson, Colonel William Loyd, Captain
Samuel Bloomfield, William Fauntleroy, Samuel Peachy, William
Slaughter, Cadwallader Jones, Henry Williamson. My friend
adds that "the character and habits of the early settlers, so far as can
be ascertained from their wills and the records, indicate intelligence
and a high state of morals for the times." This section appears to
have been settled chiefly by those coming from the lower counties,—
the names of the principal men being those of families in the lower
country. There are some, however, whose names are rarely met
with in other counties; and there is evidence that they originally
settled here. They are such as Latane, Waring, Upshaw, Rowsee,
Rennolds, Micou, Roy, Clements, Young.

To the labours of another friend, on the other side of the river,
we are indebted for information gotten from the records of Richmond

county after the year 1692, which can nowhere else be found,
as we have no vestry-book of that county, except that of North
Farnham parish, from the year 1787 to 1804. The first justices of
the peace were Captain George Taylor, William Underwood, Captain
William Barber, James Scott, Captain Alexander Swan. From
that time to the Revolution, the principal families in the county
were Stone, Glascock, Deane, Donaphun, Colston, Thornton, Travis,
Peachy, Tayloe, Conway, Brockenbrough, Gwin, Tarplay, Downman,
Slaughter, Parker, Sherlock, Davis, Robinson, Beale Smith,
Woodbridge, Heale, Barrow, Taverner, Barber, Griffin, Fitzhugh,
Fauntleroy, Gibson, Taliafero, Ingo, Bellfield, Tomlin, Grymes,
Metcalf, Newton, Barnes, Sydnor, Jordan, Hornby, Hamilton, Carter,
Mountjoy, Flood, Plummer, Beckwith. Of all these, my informant
says, a very few have descendants in the county at this
time who are called by these names.

According to the records of the court, he says, there were once
three parishes in the county,—North Farnham, Lunenburg, and St.
Mary's,—having separate ministers.

Of the three ministers mentioned on the records, from the year
1693 to 1742, the account is sad. The two first—John Burnet and
John Alexander—were always in court, suing or being sued. The
third—the Rev. Thomas Blewer—was presented by the grand jury
as a common swearer. A particular account is drawn from the
records of different families. From the votes on election-days, the
Woodbridges and Fauntleroys appear to have been at one time the
most popular. The Carters and Tayloes, of Sabine Hall and Mount
Airy, were active and useful men. The Chinns first appear in
1713. "From Raleigh Chinn," he says, "descended those model
males and females of that name who have served to give character
to our county in modern times." The McCartys were an ancient
family, springing from Daniel and Dennis McCarty, who are first
mentioned in 1710.

Having furnished this general account of individuals and families
from the court records, we proceed to give the information in our
possession concerning each of the parishes separately.

First, of North Farnham. This was established in 1693, when
Rappahannock county was stricken from the list of counties and
Richmond and Essex erected in its stead, and South Farnham
parish created in Essex. The first minister of this parish whom
we have on our lists—though there were doubtless many before—is
the Rev. William Mackay, who was there in 1754, and continued

until 1774.[24] From his long continuance in the parish and the
respectability of the people, we have grounds for believing that he
was a worthy man,—although in a few years after his death, or
departure from the parish, it seems to have been in the most deplorable
condition, as we shall soon see. The Rev. John Leland, a
worthy minister from Northumberland, officiated statedly in Farnham
for some time after Mr. Mackay disappears. Then the Rev.
Thomas Davis, from one of the parishes of Northumberland, gives
them a portion of his time for two years. After this a considerable
interval occurred in which there was no vestry,—several efforts at
an election having failed. At length, a partial meeting having been
had, the following address was prepared:—

Great pains were taken to circulate this; and yet on the appointed
day less than thirty persons assembled, and half of these
after two o'clock, and so there was no election.[25] Five or six of those
present agreed to appoint Whit-Monday for another meeting, and

to get a neighbouring minister to preach on that day. This was
successful, and they paid the minister four pounds ten shillings for
coming.

The vestry direct Mr. William Peachy to write to Bishop Madison
for a minister, to which the following answer was received:—

The Bishop, it seems, was as much troubled about getting a
meeting of the Convention as the friends of the Church in Farnham
had been to get an election of vestrymen. The following circular
will too surely establish that:—

In the year 1796, the vestry obtained the services of the Rev.
George Young, for one Sunday in three, (the other two being
engaged to the adjoining parish of Lunenburg,) agreeing to pay
him the sum of two hundred and fifty dollars, besides the rent
of the glebe. In the year 1799, the Rev. John Seward offers his
services one Sunday in three, and receives two hundred dollars
with the glebe. Here the vestry-book ends, except an entry of an
election of vestrymen in 1802.

The following is a list of the vestrymen from 1787 to 1802:—

If there were any other minister or ministers in this parish until
the Rev. Washington Nelson, in 1835, took charge of it in connection
with Lunenburg parish, of the same county, and Cople
parish, Westmoreland, we have not been able to ascertain the
fact. Under Mr. Nelson's charge the Old Farnham Church was

repaired at a cost of fourteen hundred dollars, and a new church
built at the court-house, by the side of whose walls his body is
interred. Mr. Nelson was succeeded in all his congregations by
the Rev. William Ward. The Rev. Mr. Coffin succeeded him in
Farnham and at the court-house, and continued about two years,
resigning them both in the summer of 1856.

CHURCHES IN NORTH FARNHAM PARISH.

Besides the one now standing, there was another about half-way
between it and the court-house, the foundation of which may yet
be seen. It was probably deserted at the time that North Farnham
Church was built; but when that was, cannot be discovered. We
have mentioned that among the families once prominent in this
parish—though now dispersed—were those of the Fauntleroys and
Colstons. To each of these, within a few miles of Farnham Church,
there were those unhappy receptacles of the dead, called vaults,
which were so common from an early period in the Northern
Neck. What the precise condition of the former is, we have not
heard, though we believe a bad one. As to the latter, the following
note, which I find among my papers, gives what I doubt not is
a true account:—

The following account of Old Farnham Church in my report to
the Convention of 1838 will complete my notices of this parish:—

LUNENBURG PARISH, RICHMOND COUNTY.

The first information we have of this parish is from communications
made to the Bishop of London by the Rev. Mr. Kay, its
minister, between the years 1740 and 1750, as well as my memory
serves me, not having the documents before me at this time. A
most painful and protracted controversy took place between him
and a portion of his vestry,—especially Colonel Landon Carter.
Though the doors of the church were closed against Mr. Kay, such
was the advocacy of him by a portion of the vestry and many of
the people that he preached in the churchyard for some time. The
dispute appears to have been about the right of Mr. Kay to the
parish in preference to another who was desired by some of the

vestry and people. The cause was carried before the Governor
and Council, and from thence to the higher court in England.
The sympathy of the Commissary and the clergy appears to have
been with Mr. Kay. How it was finally settled in the English
courts does not appear, but we find Mr. Kay in Cumberland parish,
Lunenburg county, in the year 1754.[26] In that year the Rev. Mr.
Simpson becomes minister of Lunenburg parish, Richmond county.
How long he continues, and whether any one intervenes between
him and the Rev. William Giberne, who becomes the minister in
1762, is not known. The name and memory of Mr. Giberne have
come down to our times with considerable celebrity. The first
notice I have of him is in a letter to the Bishop of London, in which
he inveighs with severity on some things in the Church of Virginia.
On the Bishop of London's writing to Commissary Robinson concerning
them, the Commissary denies the charge in its fulness, and
says that it comes with ill grace from Mr. Giberne, who himself sets
an ill example, being addicted to card-playing and other things
unbecoming the clerical character.

All the accounts I have received of him correspond with this.
He was a man of talents, of great wit and humour, and his home a
pleasant place to the like-minded,—especially attractive to the
young. He lived at the place now owned by the Brockenbrough
family, near Richmond Court-House. He married a daughter of
Moore Fauntleroy and Margaret Micou. Her father was Paul
Micou, a Huguenot who fled from Nantes in 1711.[27] In the following
communication from a friend in Richmond county there is more
particular mention of Mr. Giberne, in connection with some interesting
particulars about the two churches in Lunenburg parish.

After the Rev. Mr. Young, mentioned in the foregoing communication,
I know of no minister until the Rev. Washington Nelson,
in 1834 or 1835, who took charge of this parish in connection with
those of North Farnham and Cople. At his death the Rev. Mr.
Ward succeeded to all three of the parishes, and at his resignation,
a young man, whose name I forget, was minister of Lunenburg for
part of a year. He was succeeded by the Rev. Mr. Coffin for two
years.

The most remarkable of the old seats in this parish, known to
the writer, are those of Sabine Hall, belonging to the Carters, and
of Mount Airy, belonging to the Tayloes. Having in a preceding
article given some account of the Carter family, which has so
abounded in the Northern Neck, I subjoin a brief genealogy of the
Tayloes, who have appeared on our vestry-books in the Northern
Neck from their first settlement to the present time.

THE TAYLOE FAMILY.

From the earliest accounts of this family, they have been either
warm friends of the Church, or in full communion with it. Many
of the male members of the family have been active and liberal
vestrymen.

ARTICLE LXIII.

Parishes in King George County.

King George county was taken out of Richmond county in the
year 1720, at which time Richmond county extended as far on one
side of the Rappahannock as Essex did on the other, which was, I
believe, near the Falls of the Rappahannock or Fredericksburg.
It did not extend from the Rappahannock to the Potomac, as Westmoreland
and King George now do, for Westmoreland and Stafford[28]
extended along the Potomac, while Richmond and King George
lay on the Rappahannock. Formerly there were two parishes in
King George,—Hanover and Brunswick, lying along the Rappahannock,
the latter reaching up to the falls at Fredericksburg, for
we find Mr. W. Fitzhugh, of Chatham, opposite Fredericksburg,
representing Brunswick parish in the Conventions of 1785 and 1786.
In 1776, the boundaries of Stafford and King George were changed,
and each of them made to extend from river to river, instead of
being divided by a longitudinal line running east and west. At
this time St. Paul's parish, and part of Overwharton, formerly in
Stafford, were thrown into King George county, and that of Brunswick
parish into Stafford. There are, therefore, now in King
George, St. Paul's parish, on the Potomac side, and Hanover, chiefly
on the Rappahannock. In the parish of Brunswick there was
formerly a church some miles below Fredericksburg, whose ruins,
or the traces of whose foundation, may yet, I am told, be seen.

There was also a church in Falmouth which belonged to this parish,
and in which I have preached at an early day of my ministry.

In Hanover parish there were, from 1779 to 1796, two churches,
—viz.: Strother's, between Port Conway and Oakenbrough, and
Round Hill, under the charge of the ministers of the parish.
Until the year 1777, Round Hill Church was in Washington parish,
Westmoreland, but certain changes in the boundaries of King
George and Westmoreland in that year threw Round Hill Church
into King George county and Hanover parish. As we have but
little to say of Hanover parish, we will say it at once. We cannot
ascertain the precise time of its establishment. It was in existence
in 1720, and probably established in that year, as King George
was then cut off from Richmond county. In 1753, we find on one
of our lists the name of William Davis as its rector. In the years
1773, 1774, and 1776, we find the Rev. William Davies. But in
the mean time the Rev. Mr. Boucher was the minister of the parish
for some years.

We have nothing on any of our lists, or in the vestry-book of
this parish, concerning this distinguished man, and for the plain
reason that we have no list or vestry-book covering the period of
his ministry in Hanover parish. He was ordained for this parish
in 1762, having been resident in Virginia since he was sixteen
years of age, and probably in that part of Virginia. He was an
intimate friend of General Washington, and, as has been stated in
the article on Caroline county, dedicated a volume of sermons to
Washington. He was selected by the General as a travelling-companion
and guide to young Custis, son of Mrs. Washington, when
it was contemplated that he should make the tour of Europe. The
following extract from a letter of General Washington on the
subject will at the same time explain the causes of the relinquishment
of this plan, and show the amiableness and sound judgment
displayed by him on the occasion. Mr. Boucher was the tutor to
young Custis at Annapolis, in the year 1771, when the letter was
written of which the following is an extract:—

It seems that Mr. Custis preferred an early marriage to a European
tour, and so the matter ended.

We return from this digression to the other ministers of Hanover
parish. We have a vestry-book beginning in 1779, which shows
that in 1780 the Rev. Rodham Kennor (an old Virginia name) was
chosen its minister. In 1785, he resigned and removed to his farm
in Fauquier. The next year the Rev. John Low became its minister,
and continued until 1796, when he was allowed to preside in the
vestry till the end of the year, on condition that he would resign
at that time, which he did in a letter recorded in the vestry-book.
We know of no other minister being in this parish until its reorganization
and the election of the Rev. Mr. Friend, who has recently
left it. The following list of vestrymen from 1779 to 1796 will
show who were the leading friends of the Church in that parish.
Messrs. Piper, Woffendall, Kendall, Jett, Boon, Lovall, Marshall,
Kirk, Conway, Washington, Bernard, Johnson, Dade, Stewart,
Dishman, Flood, Oldham, Berry. Mr. Johnson was reader at
Round Hill Church, and Mr. Thornby at Strother's. Two orders
on the vestry-book serve to throw light on the manners of the
parish. One directs Mr. Ashton to try to procure four locks for
the glebe-house, evidently showing that there was difficulty and
uncertainty about it. This speaks well for the honesty of the
times, locks being so little used that they were hard to be gotten.
The other is not so creditable to the temperance of the times and
parish, as it directs that "forty pounds of tobacco be paid for two
quarts of brandy for burying a poor woman,"—that is, for use at
the funeral.

A few words will suffice for the history of the parish since the
year 1796. Some years since, a number of families in the upper

part of it—the Tayloes, Masons, Turners, &c.—united in building
a neat brick church near the court-house, for which they secured
the partial services of the Rev. Mr. Friend, by which means a very
respectable congregation has been formed. As stated above, Mr.
Friend has recently resigned his charge.

Since writing the above, we have been indebted to the kindness
and diligence of one or two friends for some further information
concerning this parish, obtained from the old records of the court.
In the years 1725, 1727, and 1737, the names of the Rev. Mr.
Skaife, Mr. Edyard, and Mr. Mackay, appear on the record, though
it is not known with what parishes they were connected. The following
were the names of vestrymen between the years 1723 and
1779:—John Grimsley, James Kay, William Strother, Rowland
Thornton, Thomas Turner,[29] John Furguson, Jos. Strother, Maximilian
Robinson, William Thornton, Joseph Murdock, Joseph Jones,
George Tankersley, George Riding, Thomas Vivian, Isaac Arnold,
Samuel Skinker, Harry Turner, Charles Carter, John Triplett,
Thomas Jett, Thomas Hodges, Richard Payne, Thomas Berry,
Horatio Dade, John Skinker, William Robinson, George Marshall,
John Washington, Townsend Dade, Robert Stith, Henry Fitzhugh,
Jr., Laurence Washington, Sen., John Pollard, William Fitzhugh,
Laurence Ashton, Thomas Hood, William Newton, William Bruce,
James Kenyon, John Taliafero, Joseph Jones, James Hunton, John
Taliafero, Jr. Whether all these belonged to Hanover parish I
think doubtful. In the year 1744, there is a suit in King George
Court in the name of Henry Downs and Zachary Taylor, (doubtless
the ancestor of our late President,) the churchwardens of St.
Thomas's Church, Orange county.

BRUNSWICK PARISH.

A short notice will suffice for Brunswick parish. This was also
in existence in 1720. In 1754 and 1758, the Rev. Daniel McDonald
was its minister. In the year 1786, we find the parish, or a
portion of it, included in Stafford county. It was no doubt taken
into it at the establishment of the new boundaries between it and
King George, in the year 1776. I have already mentioned that
there was a church a few miles from Fredericksburg, within the
parish of Brunswick. It was called Muddy Creek Church, and
about nine miles from Fredericksburg. Muddy Creek is now the
boundary-line between King George and Stafford. At a later
period, Lamb's Creek Church was the church of Brunswick parish.
The stepping-stone at the door bears the date of 1782, but the
church may have been built before that. From the records of the
court we find that a Mr. Anthony Hainy was churchwarden in this
parish as far back as 1734, and Mr. Charles Carter and John
Champe in 1739. Mr. Charles Carter was also vestryman in 1750.

ST. PAUL'S PARISH, KING GEORGE COUNTY.

Our authority for the earlier part of the history of this parish is
a vestry-book beginning in 1766, during the rectorship of the Rev.
William Stuart, who, according to the Rev. Robert Rose, was a man
of eloquence and popularity and high character.

There is also a register of the marriages, and of the births, baptisms,
and deaths of both white and black. Much of it is torn out.
Its first entry is in 1722. At that time, and long before, the Rev.
David Stuart was the minister. He continued to be so until his
death, in 1749, when he was succeeded by his son, William Stuart,
who was probably his father's assistant for some time before his
death. The son died in 1796. The earlier part of my mother's
life was spent under his ministry, and I have often heard her speak
in high praise of him. He was in bad health for some years before
his death. The following is his letter of resignation:—

It is most probable that the father's term of service was equal
to that of his son's; and if so, we should go back to near the beginning
of the century with the ministry of the two,—and that
would carry us to a period not far from that in which the first of
the Fitzhughs—Mr. William Fitzhugh—of this region wrote to
the Bishop of London urging him to send them a sober and pious
minister. Mr. Fitzhugh lived at Bedford, in what is now King
George but was then Westmoreland, and there was a church and
graveyard near his residence (Bedford) on the Potomac. A second
church was built near the present, and a few miles only from the
first. Before closing our notice of Mr. William Stuart, I must extract
from the record an entry which shows that, though he lived
some years after his resignation, his zeal for the Church did not abate:
though unable to preach, he was able and willing to give. When
a subscription was raised for his successor, Mr. Parsons, (the Establishment
being put down,) his name stands first on the list for ten
pounds,—no other exceeding three. The voluntary system was
then in its infancy, and only fifty-seven pounds were raised; but
this was as much as the most of the parishes paid their ministers
under the Establishment. Mr. Parsons was never admitted to
Priests' Orders: for what reason I am unable to say. It is not
wonderful that on this account the religious condition of the parish
should have rapidly declined, and at his death, in 1808, was in so
deplorable a state. The house of worship, which, at successive
periods from the year 1766, had been begun, completed, and repaired,
and become one of the best of the cruciform churches in
Virginia, was permitted to fall into ruins,—except its well-built
walls. In the year 1838, I gave the following account of a visit
paid to it many years before:—

The following extract from the letters of a friend and relative
in King George, (Dr. Abraham Hooe,) who has long faithfully
served as vestryman of the parish, and who has carefully examined
its records, will complete our notice of it:—

These same articles of plate are now in possession of the parish,
and I am sure are familiar to you. They had been, at some period
prior to the above date, the gift of Colonel Henry Fitzhugh, of
Stafford, in this county, as appears from the following inscription
on each piece:—"Given by Henry Fitzhugh, of Stafford county,
St. Paul's parish, Gent., for the use of your church." There are
also a large Bible and Prayer-Book belonging to the parish. The
first has the following inscription in gilt letters on the back:—
"Given for the use of the church in St. Paul's parish, by the Rev.
Wm. Stuart, rector of the same, 1762." It is a Cambridge edition,
appointed by his Majesty's special command to be read in churches,
"Cum privilegiis," and its dedication is, "To our most high and
mighty Prince James, by the grace of God King of Great Britain,
France, and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, the translators of the

Bible wish grace, mercy, and peace, through our Lord Jesus
Christ." The inscription on the Prayer-Book is, "Presented to
St. Paul's Church, King George county, by Miss Jane S. Parke,
1831." Miss Parke was great grand-daughter to the Rev. William
Stuart, the former rector.

P.S.—Since the foregoing was written, the Rev. Mr. Russell has
left the parish, and the Rev. Mr. Stuart has taken his place.

The following is the list of vestrymen of this parish from the year
1720 to the present time:—

AN ACCOUNT OF THE FITZHUGH FAMILY; ESPECIALLY OF THE
FIRST ANCESTOR, WILLIAM FITZHUGH.

The Fitzhugh family is a very ancient and honourable one in
England. Some of its members were high in office and favour
during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The name is a combination
of the two names Fitz and Hugh. Sometimes one, sometimes
the other, would precede, until at length they were united in
Fitzhugh. The first who settled in this country was William Fitzhugh.
His father was a lawyer in London, and himself of that
profession. He settled in Westmoreland county, Virginia, when a
young man, and married a Miss Tucker, of that county. He was
born in the year 1650, and died in 1701. He left five sons,—William,
Henry, Thomas, George, and John,—between whom, at his
death, he divided 54,054 acres of land in King George, Stafford,
and perhaps Essex. His sons and their descendants owned the

seats called Eagle-nest and Bedford in King George, and Bellaire
and Boscobel in Stafford. He had one daughter named Rosamond,
who married Colonel Oberton, of Westmoreland, but died without
issue. His son William married Miss Lee, of Westmoreland.
Henry married Miss Cooke, of Gloucester. Thomas and George
married daughters of Colonel George Mason, of Stafford, and John,
Miss McCarty, of Westmoreland. From these have sprung all the
families of Fitzhughs in Virginia, Maryland, and Western New
York. The Rev. Robert Rose married Ann, the daughter of Henry
Fitzhugh, of Eagle-nest, in the year 1740. She lived to the year
1789, surviving her husband thirty-five years. There are some
things in the life and character of the father of this large family
of Fitzhughs worthy to be mentioned for the benefit and satisfaction
of his posterity. I draw them from his pious and carefully-written
will, and from a large manuscript volume of his letters, a
copy of which was some years since gotten from the library of Cambridge,
Massachusetts, by one of his descendants, and which is now
in the rooms of the Historical Society of Virginia.

It appears that he was, during the period that he exercised his
profession, an eminent and most successful lawyer, and published
in England a work on the laws of Virginia. He was much engaged
in the management of land-causes for the great landholders, whether
residing in England or America. He was counsellor for the celebrated
Robert Beverley, the first of the name, and who was persecuted
and imprisoned for too much independence. He transacted
business for, and purchased lands from, Lord Culpepper, when he
held a grant from King Charles for all Virginia. In all these
transactions he appears to have acted with uprightness and without
covetousness, for in his private letters to his friends he speaks of
being neither in want nor abundance, but being content and
happy; though before he died he acquired large tracts of lands
at a cheap rate. The true cause of this was his being a sincere
Christian. This appears from his letters to his mother and sister,
to whom he remitted pecuniary assistance according to his ability,
increasing it as his ability increased. The following brief letter to
his mother in the year 1694 will exhibit his filial and pious disposition:—

He adds a postcript to the letter, saying, "My sister died a true
penitent of the Church of England."

His sister had come over to America at his instance some years
before and married here, but died without children. Other letters
to his mother, who it seems was much afflicted with some troubles,
which are not mentioned, he writes in a very consoling manner,
bidding her regard her sorrows as from Heaven, and thanks her for
pious instruction of him. His habits were strictly temperate. In
writing to a friend who was much afflicted with the gout, he tells
him the secret of his freedom from it,—viz.: that he never was addicted
to the orgies of Bacchus, or to the adoration of Ceres or
Venus, never courted unlawful pleasures, avoided feasting and the
surfeit thereof, and bids him tell the physician this.

Mr. Fitzhugh was not merely a moral man, but a sincerely religious
man, beyond the measure of that day. He is not ashamed
in one of his legal opinions to quote Scripture as the highest authority.
He was a leading member of the Episcopal Church in his
parish. Through him presents of Communion-plate and other things
from English friends were made to the parish. Referring to the
unworthiness of many of the ministers who came over from England,
he communicated with his friends and with the Bishop of
London, asking that sober, reputable, and educated men might be
sent over instead of such as did come. All this appears from passages
in his letters to England. But, were there none of these
letters extant, the following extract from his will would testify to
his sound and evangelical views of our blessed religion.

(Then follow the bequests to the various members of the family.)

It is evident that in the foregoing will there is much more than
the usual formal recognition of a God and future state. Here is
to be seen a true acknowledgment of the Holy Trinity, and an
entire reliance on the merits of the Saviour's death and the cleansing
of his blood, such as no orthodox divine could better express.

None can doubt but that the recorded sentiments and the consistent
life of this father of a numerous family must have had its
effect upon many of his posterity. I have known many, and heard
of others, who imbibed his excellent spirit, and not in Virginia only,
but in other States, to which they have emigrated. One there was,
too well known to the writer of these lines, and to whom for Christian
nurture and example he was too much indebted, ever to be
forgotten. A beloved mother was a lineal descendant of this good
man, born and nurtured on the soil which his economy and diligence
had bequeathed to a numerous posterity. To her example
and tuition, under God, am I indebted for having escaped the snares
laid for the youth of our land and for having embraced the blessed
religion of Christ. And if I may be permitted to single out one from
the numerous families of the name, it must needs be that one which
was nearest to me, and with which I have been most intimately
acquainted from my childhood up. The name of Mr. William
Fitzhugh, of Chatham, in the county of Stafford, as a perfect gentleman,
as a most hospitable entertainer, and a true son of Virginia
in her Councils, will not soon be forgotten. His name is not only
on the journals of our civil Legislature, but may be seen on the
ecclesiastical records of our Church, among those who were the last
to give up her regular assemblies and the hope of her prosperity
in her darkened days. Nor is it unlawful to proceed to some brief
notice of the two children who survived him. His son, William

Henry Fitzhugh, my associate at college, entered life with as fair
a prospect for honour and usefulness as any young man in Virginia.
Twice only, I believe, did he appear in the legislative hall of our
State, and once in a Convention of the same; but such a promise
of political distinction was there given, that it could not but be
felt that a few years would find him in the higher Councils of the
land. It pleased Providence to interfere, and by a sudden and
early death to remove him from this earthly scene. Before this
decree of Heaven was executed, as if admonished of its coming, he
had, after pleading by his pen and voice for the American Colonization
Society, directed that all his slaves—amounting, I believe, to
about two hundred—should be prepared for, and allowed to choose,
Africa as their home.

But I must not lay down my pen, though the heart bleed at its
further use, without the tribute of affection, of gratitude, and reverence
to one who was to me as sister, mother, and faithful monitor.
Mrs. Mary Custis, of Arlington, the wife of Mr. Washington Custis,
grandson of Mrs. General Washington, was the daughter of Mr.
William Fitzhugh, of Chatham. Scarcely is there a Christian lady
in our land more honoured than she was, and none more loved and
esteemed. For good sense, prudence, sincerity, benevolence, unaffected
piety, disinterested zeal in every good work, deep humility
and retiring modesty,—for all the virtues which adorn the wife, the
mother, and the friend,—I never knew her superior. A husband yet
lives to feel her loss. An only daughter, with a numerous family
of children, also survive, to imitate, I trust, her blessed example.

ARTICLE LXIV.

Overwharton Parish, Stafford County.

I come now to Overwharton parish in Stafford county. The
county and parish take their names from the corresponding ones
in England. Stafford county once extended up to the Blue Ridge
Mountain. In the year 1730, Prince William county was formed
from the "heads of King George and Stafford." Overwharton
parish was also coextensive with Stafford before Prince William
was taken off. In the same year,—1730,—Overwharton parish
was divided and Hamilton parish taken off. Overwharton covered
the narrow county of Stafford, and Hamilton the large county of
Prince William before Fauquier, Fairfax, and Loudoun were taken
away. Stafford, in its original dimensions, first appears as a
county in 1666. When it was erected into a parish is not known,—
but most probably about the same time. Its division in 1730
is the first mention of it. The Rev. Robert Rose in his account-book
mentions the Rev. Alexander Scott as a minister in it in
1727; and it is well known that he was the minister of this parish
for many years.[31] He came from Scotland,—being obliged to leave,
it is supposed, after some unsuccessful rebellion. He never married.
Having acquired considerable property, he invited his younger
brother, the Rev. James Scott, to come over and inherit it. He
had one estate in Stafford called Dipple, at which he lived. His

brother came over, and after some time became the minister of the
adjoining parish of Dettingen in Prince William, which was separated
from Hamilton when Fauquier was taken from Prince
William, and in which he ministered for thirty-seven years. Mr.
Alexander Scott had as his assistant or curate, for a short time
before his death, the Rev. Mr. Moncure, a Scotchman, but descendant
of a Huguenot refugee who fled from France at the revocation
of the Edict of Nantes. Mr. Moncure was the successor of
Mr. Scott. In what year he entered on his duties I have been
unable to ascertain, but his name is still to be seen painted on one
of the panels of the gallery in Old Aquia Church, together with
those of the vestry in 1757. The first church was burned in the
year 1751. I here give the names of the minister and vestry as
painted on the gallery in the year 1757, when it is supposed the
second church was finished. John Moncure, minister. Peter
Houseman, John Mercer, John Lee, Mott Donithan, Henry Tyler,
William Mountjoy, Benjamin Strother, Thomas Fitzhugh, Peter
Daniel, Traverse Cooke, John Fitzhugh, John Peyton, vestrymen.
It is gratifying to know that the descendants of the above are, with
probably but few exceptions, in some part of our State or land still
attached to the Episcopal Church. Their names are a guarantee
for their fidelity to the Church of their fathers. Of the minister,
the Rev. J. Moncure, the following extract from a letter of one of
his daughters, who married General—afterward Governor—Wood,
of Virginia, will give a more interesting account than any which
could possibly be collected from all other sources. It was written
in the year 1820, to a female relative, the grand-daughter of the
Rev. James Scott, who married a sister of the Rev. Mr. Moncure's
wife, and daughter of Dr. Gustavus Brown, of Port Tobacco,
Maryland:—

The time of Mr. Moncure's death is seen from the following letter
from that true patriot and statesman, Mr. George Mason, of Gunston,
Fairfax county, Virginia. As he signs himself the kinsman
of Mrs. Moncure, the relationship must have come from connection
between the Browns, of Maryland, and Masons. Dr. Brown came
to this country from Scotland in 1708, and married in Maryland.

As to the successor of Mr. Moncure in this parish, it is probable
that the Rev. Mr. Green, mentioned in the above letter, took his
place in 1764. It is certain that Mr. Scott did not. In the years
1774 and 1776 the Rev. Clement Brooke was minister. After the
Revolution, in the Convention of 1785, called for organizing the
diocese and considering the question of a general confederation of
Episcopalians throughout the Union, we find the Rev. Robert
Buchan the minister of Overwharton parish, and the Rev. Mr.
Thornton of Brunswick parish, which had been taken from King
George and given to Stafford when St. Paul's was taken from Stafford
and given to King George. The lay delegates at that Convention
were Mr. Charles Carter, representing Overwharton parish,
and Mr. William Fitzhugh, of Chatham, representing Brunswick

parish, which lay on the Rappahannock and reached to Hanover
parish in King George. In the year 1786 we find Mr. Fitzhugh
again representing Brunswick parish; and this is the last notice we
have of the Church in Stafford until some years after the revival
of Conventions. In the year 1819, the Rev. Thomas Allen, the
present devoted missionary to the poor in Philadelphia, took charge
of this parish and laboured hard for its resuscitation, preaching
alternately at Dumfries and Aquia Churches. At a subsequent
period the Rev. Mr. Prestman, afterward of New Castle, Delaware,
gave all his energies to the work of its revival. The labours of
both were of some avail to preserve it from utter extinction, but
not to raise it to any thing like prosperity. The Rev. Mr. Johnson
also made some ineffectual efforts in its behalf as a missionary. In
the year 1838, I visited Old Aquia Church as Assistant-Bishop. It
stands upon a high eminence, not very far from the main road from
Alexandria to Fredericksburg. It was a melancholy sight to behold
the vacant space around the house, which in other days had
been filled with horses and carriages and footmen, now overgrown
with trees and bushes, the limbs of the green cedars not only casting
their shadows but resting their arms on the dingy walls and
thrusting them through the broken windows, thus giving an air of
pensiveness and gloom to the whole scene. The very pathway up
the commanding eminence on which it stood was filled with young
trees, while the arms of the older ones so embraced each other over
it that it was difficult to ascend. The church had a noble exterior,
being a high two-story house, of the figure of the cross. On its top
was an observatory, which you reached by a flight of stairs leading
from the gallery, and from which the Potomac and Rappahannock
Rivers, which are not far distant from each other, and much of the
surrounding country, might be seen. Not a great way off, on another
eminence, there might be seen the high, tottering walls of the
Old Potomac Church, one of the largest in Virginia, and long before
this time a deserted one. The soldiers during the last war
with England, when English vessels were in the Potomac, had
quartered in it; and it was said to have been sometimes used as a
nursery for caterpillars, a manufactory of silk having been set up
almost at its doors. The worshippers in it had disappeared from the
country long before it ceased to be a fit place for prayer. But there
is hope even now for the once desolated region about which we have
been speaking. At my visit to Old Aquia Church in the year 1837,
to which I allude, I baptized five of the children of the present Judge
Moncure, in the venerable old building in which his first ancestor
had preached and so many of his other relatives had worshipped.
He had been saving them for that house and that day. I visited
once more, during the last spring, that interesting spot. Had I
been suddenly dropped down upon it, I should not have recognised
the place or building. The trees and brushwood and rubbish had
been cleared away. The light of heaven had been let in upon the
once gloomy sanctuary. At the expense of eighteen hundred
dollars, (almost all of it contributed by the descendants of Mr.
Moncure,) the house had been repaired within, without, and above.
The dingy walls were painted white and looked new and fresh, and
to me it appeared one of the best and most imposing temples in our
land. The congregation was a good one. The descendants of Mr.
Moncure, still bearing his name, formed a large portion. I was
told that all those whom I had baptized eighteen years ago (some of
whom, of course, were not babes at the time) were there and meant
to make it their home. The country, which seemed some time
since as if it were about to be deserted of its inhabitants by reason
of sickness and worn-out fields, is putting on a new aspect. Agriculture
is improving. A better population is establishing itself in
the county, and at the end of a century there is an encouraging
prospect that a good society and an Episcopal congregation will be
again seen around and within Old Aquia Church. The Rev. Mr.
Wall is now their minister.

The Hon. Judge Daniel, of the Supreme Court, has been kind
enough to supply me with the following letter, which, with the
accompanying extracts from the county records, will be an important
addition to my notices of this parish:—

The present clerk of Stafford county (Mr. Conway) has also been
kind enough to search through the old records, going back to the
year 1664, for such things as may answer my purpose. Among
the items furnished is the presentment, in the year 1693, by Richard
Gipson, of George and Robert Brent as being Popish recusants.

He calls upon the court to insist upon their taking the test-oath in
order to the practice of law. That oath is abjuration of transubstantiation.
The court sustains the presentment and requires
them to take the oath; but they refuse, and appeal to the General
Court in Williamsburg. What was the issue we know not, but
believe that they were leading men at the bar after that. One of
them was associated in the practice with the first William Fitzhugh,
and one of them joint sponsor with the first George Mason at the
baptism of an Indian boy whom they had taken prisoner.

We find also presentments for swearing, for pitching and playing
on the Sabbath, for not attending church. The fines were five to
ten shillings, to be paid to the churchwardens for the poor of the
parish. To the great kindness and diligence of Mr. Conway I am
indebted for a list of the justices from the year 1664 to 1857. Of
course it is a long list. I shall only select the surnames of those
most familiar to our ears:—

We must not in our minds confine all these to Stafford as it now
is, but think of its original dimensions.

ARTICLE LXV.

Dettingen Parish, Prince William County.

This was taken out of Hamilton parish, which, in 1745, covered
all of what is now Prince William and Fauquier. It is supposed
to have been named after a town in Germany, called Dettingen,
near which the English gained a victory in the year 1743,—two
years before. The parish register having been destroyed in the
Clerk's office in Fauquier, as we shall hereafter see, we have no
record of the parish of Dettingen previous to the year 1745. All
that I can learn is that the Rev. Mr. Keith, the grandfather of
Chief-Justice Marshall, was the minister of Hamilton parish previous
to the division, and continued to be the minister of that part
called Hamilton after the division. My information concerning
Dettingen parish is derived from a vestry-book in the Clerk's office
of Prince William, commenced in the year 1745 and continued to
the year 1785. It commences with the following test, signed by
the vestry:—"We do declare that we do believe there is not any
transubstantiation in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, or in
the elements of bread and wine, at or after the consecration
thereof by any person whatsoever." It would seem that the
above was the only test subscribed in this parish, showing that
there was at this time some peculiar fear and detestation of Popery,
it being about the time of the last efforts in England in behalf of
the Pretender. Although a form of the subscription of vestrymen
was prescribed by Act of the Assembly, which was generally
used, the vestries did not always conform to it, but adopted several
different ones, as we shall show hereafter. The first minister of
this parish after its separation from Hamilton was the Rev. James
Scott, of whom we have already spoken as coming over to this
country by the invitation of his elder brother, Mr. Alexander Scott,
minister of the adjoining parish of Overwharton, in Stafford. How
long Mr. James Scott had been in America is not known. The
following resolution of the vestry shows that he was living in [OMITTED]
at the time of his election, and also the probability that he

was married at that time.[33] "Ordered, that the Rev. James Scott
be received into this parish on condition of his moving into it as
soon as a glebe and house is prepared." The following letters
from Governor Gooch and Commissary Dawson speak well in his
behalf.

In the above letter, Mr. Scott is said to have been long known
to the vestry of Dettingen parish. It is supposed that he was for
some years assistant or curate to his brother Alexander Scott in

Stafford, and was succeeded in that station by the Rev. Mr. Moncure.
A glebe was purchased for Mr. Scott on Quantico Creek, which
runs up the Potomac to Dumfries. It consisted of four hundred
acres of land, and was bought of Mr. Thomas Harrison, for one
hundred and thirty-five pounds sterling. So far as I have ascertained,
but few of the glebes cost that much, and when rented out,
as they often were, seldom brought more than twenty or thirty
pounds. Mr. Scott continued the minister of that parish until his
death in 1782, being minister of the parish for thirty-seven years.
He lived most of the time at his own estate of Westwood, the gift,
it is believed, of his brother. Before we proceed to make mention
of his successors in office, there are some things worthy of notice,
in relation to the parish, which had better be disposed of in this
place. There were two churches in the parish, between which the
services of the minister were equally divided. One of them was
very near Dumfries, the other near the two streams Broad Run and
Slater Run, and sometimes called by either name. At the time of
the division of the parish, there was an old and indifferent one
near Dumfries, which, in the year 1752, was sold for fifteen hundredweight
of tobacco, and a new one costing one hundred thousand-weight
was ordered. The contractor for it was a Mr. Waite, ancestor
to the worthy member and lay reader of our Church in
Winchester, Mr. Obed Waite. The church at Broad Run was also
contracted for in 1752. Both were of brick, and very substantial
ones. It has not been many years since the roof and walls of the
latter fell to the ground. Some remnant of the ruins of the former
may perhaps be seen near Dumfries at this time. I have often
seen them, when more abundant, in my travels through that region.
Dumfries itself, once the mart of that part of Virginia, the scene
of gayety and fashion, the abode of wealthy merchants from Scotland,
who named it after a city of that name in the mother-country,
is now in ruins, almost as complete as those of the old church.
Quantico Creek, through which the trade from Europe came, is now
filled up, while the pines have covered the spot where the church
once stood near its banks. Desolation reigns around. The old
court-house was fitted up some thirty-five or forty years ago for
worship, but that has long since been abandoned for want of worshippers.
A few years since I spent a night in the neighbourhood,
in a worthy Baptist family, and, while conversing on the past, the
lady of the family mentioned that she had in her possession some
things belonging to the old church, which she would be glad to put
into my hands, as she wished to be clear of them. After hunting for
some time amid the rubbish of the top-shelf of an old cupboard
standing in the room, she brought out two small, old, well-worn
pieces of church-plate, supposed to be those once used in the Old
Quantico Church. I still have them in my possession, to bestow on
some poor parish which will not be too proud to use them. There
were galleries in the church at Broad Run, one of which was allowed
to be put up by Mr. Thomas Harrison, provided it was done so as not
to incommode any of the pews below it. The others were put up
by the vestry and sold. The pews below were all common, though
doubtless taken possession of by different families, as is usual in
England. The old English custom (beginning with the Royal
family in St. George's Church at Windsor) of appropriating the
galleries to the rich and noble was soon followed in Virginia, and,
as we shall see hereafter, the old aristocratic families could with
difficulty be brought down from their high lofts in the old churches,
even after they became uncomfortable and almost dangerous. I find
an entry on this vestry-book concerning payment to the sextons
of these churches for making fires, which is the first of the only
two instances I have met with, and I am in doubt whether the payment
was for fire in the churches or vestry-rooms in the yard; for
I have never seen where provision was made for fires in any of the
old churches, either by open chimneys or stoves, if indeed stoves
were then known in the land. It was the same case in the old
churches in England, and still is in cathedrals to this day, and it
is no wonder that the latter are so cold, damp, and comfortless.
Very few, if any, of the country churches, even in New England,
were warmed by stoves when I travelled through it in the year 1819.
In this respect I think we have certainly improved on the customs
of our fathers. I think that in some other respects we have
advanced in liberality. Nothing was done gratuitously by any
member of the church. The lay readers were always paid one
thousand or twelve hundred weight of tobacco. Clerks received
about the same. No liberal gentleman gave his wine for the Communion,
as in latter days, but always charged for it. The annual
cost at each of the churches in this parish was four pounds for
twelve bottles of wine. One thing has struck me, in all the indentures
required of those to whom orphan or illegitimate children
were bound by the vestry, as speaking well for the times. The
masters were required to teach those who were bound to them "the
art and mystery of some trade," to "instruct them in the principles
of the Christian religion." Sometimes the catechism, Lord's
prayer, creed, and Commandments are specified, as also the doctrines
of the Episcopal Church. On the part of those bound, they
must "obey their masters, keep his secrets, not leave his house
night or day without leave, not embezzle his goods or suffer others
to do it, not play at cards, dice, or any other unlawful game, or
frequent taverns or tippling-houses." Whether these promises
were faithfully complied with or not, we are unable to say. We
shall see hereafter that, by the laws of the Assembly, the very same
things were forbidden the clergy,—viz.: cards, dice, and other unlawful
games; also taverns and tippling-houses and such places: but
they were disregarded by many. It is, however, a matter of rejoicing
to see such testimonies to good morals by those in authority,
and by legislative acts, even though contradicted by the conduct
of those who bear them. In the most corrupt ages of the Christian
Church the most wholesome laws are to be found and the best
forms of religion have been used. That God who has kept the
Bible pure through so many ages of darkness and corruption has
also, by civil and ecclesiastical legislatures and rulers, preserved
and handed down many most faithful expositions of its moral code.
Some faithful ones there have been in every age who have obeyed
these laws. I doubt not but there were some ministers in the
darkest age of the Church in Virginia who obeyed her canons, and
some masters and mistresses who fulfilled pledges to orphans and
poor unfortunates.

I now return to the history of the ministers of Dettingen parish.
At the death of Mr. James Scott, his son, the Rev. John Scott, was
chosen minister. His ministry was of short duration. He resigned
the following year on account of ill health, and died soon after.
There are some painful circumstances in the history of this minister;
and, as they have been misrepresented and made worse than they
really were, it is due to himself and posterity to make a correct
statement. Even in that there is much not only to be regretted,
but utterly condemned,—the spirit of the times affording no excuse
which should for a moment be entertained. From a letter in my
possession, I think it probable he was set apart for the ministry in
early youth. At the age of eighteen, however, he was engaged in
an affair which showed that he was ill qualified for it at that time,—
being destitute of all godliness,—however changed he may have been
afterward. He conceived that his father and himself had been insulted
and injured by the misrepresentations of one who, according
to report, was a most unworthy and dangerous man, and that it
was his duty to seek reparation by a resort to arms. He accordingly
determined to challenge, and applied to Mr. Bullett, his

brother-in-law, to be with him in the contest. Mr. Bullett dissuaded
him from the challenge in a letter, which I have in my possession,
and which contains some of the many unanswerable arguments
against duelling. Failing in his effort, he attends him to the place
of combat,—the end of Old Quantico Church, where the father of
young Scott had so often read the words of Jehovah from Mount
Sinai, "Thou shalt do no murder." The result was, that the second,
who had warned against the act, and who, it was supposed, had
gone in the hope of preventing the contest, was so treated by the
challenged man on the ground as to engage in a contest with him,
in which the other was slain. He was tried and unanimously acquitted
by the court upon the ground of self-defence. Mr. Scott
was obliged to fly the country, and, with his younger brother,
Gustavus, went to Scotland. I take the following account of him
while in Scotland, and after his return, from a letter written by one
of his descendants:—

To the above notice of Mr. Scott I add a report, which is not
improbable, that, at the time he was summoned before the Council
at Annapolis to give an account of his anti-American principles,
Robert Goodloe Harper, then a young lawyer, was called in to
examine him, and ever afterward spoke of him as the most talented
man with whom he had ever engaged in controversy. After the
resignation of the Rev. John Scott in 1784, the Rev. Spence
Grayson was chosen minister. How long he continued such we
do not know; nor can we say any thing concerning him or his
ministry,—though our impression is that he was a worthy man.
The vestry-records end with the year 1785. At the last meeting
vestrymen were elected under the new organization of the Church,
a delegate appointed to the Convention, and an order made to raise
funds for the support of the minister,—as nothing now remained
but the glebe, which was of little value. Although an order was
passed that the records of the vestry should be handed over by the
old clerk to the clerk of the new vestry, it fell into the hands of
the overseers of the poor; and, some blank leaves being left in the
vestry-book, the proceedings of the latter body were for a few years
recorded on them. In this way it happened that the vestry-book
came into the possession of the court. I have petitioned the court
to have it sent for safe-keeping to our fireproof library at the

Theological Seminary of the Episcopal Church near Alexandria,
to which, I hope, many such documents will be transmitted. We
have no certain accounts of any successor to Mr. Grayson; but it is
confidently believed that the Rev. Thomas Harrison was the minister
for some years after Mr. Grayson's death, as his name appears in
the list of the overseers of the poor from 1792 to 1802, when it
disappears, and when he either probably died or resigned. I have
been unable to obtain any reliable accounts of Mr. Harrison. His
name is nowhere to be seen on any of the lists of the clergy which
I have. My old friend, Mr. Samuel Slaughter, of Culpepper, (now
eighty-eight years of age,) told me, during the last summer, that he
went to school to him in Culpepper when he was minister of Bloomfield
parish, and that he afterward moved over to Prince William.
He was the father of a numerous offspring of sons and daughters, who
became scattered over the land. The late Mr. Phil. Harrison, of
Richmond, was one of his sons, who are said to have been nine in
number. I became acquainted with one of the families many years
since near Dumfries. Its members were then preparing to move
to the South. On the first page of the vestry-book of Dettingen
parish, I find a leaf taken from the old Overwharton vestry-book
and fastened to the latter,—doubtless by Mr. Harrison,—in which
there is the following genealogy, taken from the parish record of
St. Margaret's, Westminster, and certified by Richard Gibson,
London:—

This last Thomas Harrison was, I suppose, the minister. There
was doubtless an intermarriage between the Powells, of Loudon
county, and the Harrisons, of Prince William, from which it comes
that the names Cuthbert and Burr are so often to be found in these
families. Whether all of the above were born in England, or some
of them in this country, I am unable to say. There was a Thomas
Harrison belonging to Broad Run Church, in Dettingen parish,
long before the Rev. Mr. Harrison appears in the parish, and may
have been his father. After the death of the Rev. Mr. Harrison,
the Rev. Mr. O'Neal officiated for a short time. He died after I
entered the ministry; but I never met with him. No clerical delegate,
and only one lay delegate,—Mr. Jesse Ewell,—ever appears in

the Conventions of Virginia from Dettingen parish. It only
remains that I mention, for the satisfaction of their posterity,
the lay readers and vestrymen of this old parish during the fifty
years of which the records testify. At Broad Run we find the
names of John Bryant, William Peyton, Joseph Sherman, James
Gray, George Carter. At Quantico Church, Mr. Thomas Machem
or Mitchem, John Peyton, Jeremiah Moore, lay readers. The
following are the names of the vestrymen of this parish during the
fifty years of its recorded proceedings:—Peyton, Rearser, Butler,
Deskin, Linton, Renno, Blackburn, Furguson, Ewell, Seale, Grayson,
Baxter, Whetlige, Fouchee, Rust, Roussan, Crump, Frogg, Harrison,
Wright, Bullett, Wickliffe, Bell, Copedge, Thornton, Elsey,
Betty, Eustace, Blackwell, Waggener, Nisbett, Kennor, Tibbs,
Triplett, Carr, Lee, Baylis, Buchanon, Bennett, Hoe, Alexander,
Fitzhugh, Kincheloe, Washington, Guatkin, M'Millon. The names
of Adie and Tompkins are mentioned as men of uprightness, to
whom the vestry and minister referred some important matters of
difference for decision. The Lees, Peytons, Blackburns, and Ewells
appear to have been most numerous and prominent in the vestries.

After a failure of all efforts for the resuscitation of the Church
in Dumfries, our attention was directed to the other parts of the
parish of Dettingen. The Rev. Mr. Steel, beginning in 1822, laboured
for some years with partial success, and built a small church
in the centre of the parish. The Rev. Mr. Slaughter followed him
in 1835, and preached with more success at Brentsville—the new
county seat—and at Hay-Market. The Rev. Mr. Skull succeeded
Mr. Slaughter at the same places. The Rev. Mr. Towles has now
for many years been faithfully and acceptably serving the parish.
A new and excellent stone church has been built at Brentsville;
and the old court-house at Hay-Market has been purchased and
converted into a handsome and convenient temple of religion. A
race-course once adjoined the court-house, and in preaching there
in former days I have, on a Sabbath, seen from the court-house
bench, on which I stood, the horses in training for the sport which
was at hand. Those times have, I trust, passed away forever.

ARTICLE LXVI.

Hamilton and Leeds Parishes, Fauquier County.

After the division of the former parish of Hamilton into Dettingen
and Hamilton, in the year 1745, the Rev. Mr. Keith continued
to be minister in Hamilton. How long he had been minister
of the whole parish is not known; neither have I been able to ascertain
how long he continued to be minister of Hamilton parish
after the division, only that in 1758 the Rev. Joseph Brunskill was
the minister. The vestry-book, which could have informed us, was
placed in the Clerk's office, and there torn up, page after page, by
the clerks or others, for the purpose of lighting cigars or pipes.
Of the Rev. Mr. Keith and his descendants I have not been able
to obtain all the information I desire and hope for. From all that
I can learn, he was a worthy man. He was a native of Scotland.
Being involved in the rebellion in favour of the Pretender, he was
forced to fly his country, and came to Virginia. Returning to
England for Orders, he was then settled in Hamilton parish, and
performed the duties of his office there for a long time,—probably
until 1757 or 1758. A daughter of his married Colonel Thomas
Marshall, of Oakhill, Fauquier, the seat of the Marshalls to this
day. He was the father of the late Chief-Justice. Both father
and son were in the Revolutionary Army, and fought together at
the battle of Monmouth. Another of Mr. Keith's children was
the Clerk of Frederick county, Virginia, who so long and faithfully
performed the duties of that office. The descendants of Mr.
Keith are numerous. They are also devoted members of the Episcopal
Church. After the division of the parish of Hamilton, Mr.
Keith served, until his death, all that region now embraced in
Fauquier county, as it was not until 1769 that Leeds parish was
cut off. I am unable to ascertain how many churches there were
then in that part now making the parish of Leeds. I can only
speak of the two in that which is now Hamilton,—namely, Elk Run
and Turkey Run Churches, both of which I have often seen, and
in one of which I have preached. Elk Run Church was about
fifteen miles, I think, below Fauquier Court-House, on the road to
Fredericksburg, upon a small stream from which it took its name.
It was a substantial brick church,—cruciform, I believe. I am not

certain that the roof was on it when I first saw it, in 1811. Its
walls continued for many years after this, and I saw them gradually
disappear during my annual visits to the Conventions. The
other was called the Turkey Run Church, and was situated about
a mile below Fauquier Court-House. It was an old frame church,
which, after the erection of one at the court-house, was carried
away and converted into a barn, and is still used as such. It was
here I first met with Bishop Moore, after his arrival in Virginia in
1815. His preaching was very melting. I saw an old Episcopalian
wiping the tears from his eyes during the sermon, but, on speaking
to him afterward about the Bishop's preaching, was surprised to
hear him say that the Bishop was nothing but a Methodist, so different
was his style and manner from what had hitherto been common
in Episcopal pulpits. The Bishop confirmed fifty persons at that
time, the most of whom came forward in ignorance of the proper
qualifications for this rite, or of the nature of true religion. Such
was the case with many other congregations at the Bishop's earlier
visits, some of which had no ministers, and others new ones, so that
due precautions could not be easily taken to prevent unsuitable
persons from coming forward. It injured the Church and the
Bishop not a little for some time. He once told me that he really
feared to hold a Confirmation in a new place, lest some unworthy
candidates should come forward. Of the ministers who succeeded
Mr. Keith, but little is known. In the year 1758, the Rev. Joseph
Brunskill was the minister.[35] In the year 1774, the Rev. James
Craig is minister. After Mr. Craig, I hear of the Rev. Mr. Kennor
from Hanover parish, King George, and the Rev. Mr. Iredell, from
Culpepper, as living in the parish and preaching,—neither of whom
was very creditable to the Church. In the year 1805, the Rev.
Mr. O'Neale and Mr. Charles Marshall appear as delegates in the
Convention, as minister and lay delegate. Mr. O'Neale taught
school in Warrenton for some years, and then removed to Dumfries,
and died since I entered the ministry. Most prostrate was the
condition of the parish in the year 1812 or 1813, when I first visited
it. There was no house of worship at Warrenton belonging to any
denomination, and the old Turkey Run Church was inconvenient,
so that the service was held in the court-house. Notice being given
that I would preach at three or four o'clock on a certain day during
the session of the court, a large crowd assembled from the country
around to hear a young Virginia Episcopalian. It so happened
that a very important case detained the court beyond the appointed
hour of worship. The people, however, gradually filled the house
and hemmed in the lawyers. The ladies ascended the bench on
which judges and magistrates sat, and enclosed the judge, until at
length the business of the court was obliged to stop, and neither
judge nor lawyers could escape. The house being completely filled,
I was sent for, and, being unable to pass through the crowd, was
raised up through the window and put into the sheriff's box, from
which I preached.

About this time, the Episcopalians and Presbyterians proposed
to build a church in conjunction. It was commenced, and a wall
was put up and a roof completed. Some difficulty arising between
the partners, as is generally the case, the Episcopalians determined
to build one for themselves, without relinquishing their claim on
the unfinished one. Accordingly, a frame building was put up and
consecrated as an Episcopal Church. This was used until within a
few years. A still better one of brick now receives the increasing
congregation, under its faithful and zealous minister, the Rev. Mr.
Norton, whose father and myself became candidates for the ministry
at the same time. His lot was cast in Western New York, though
by birth a Virginian. He still lives, a venerable though disabled
minister.

LEEDS PARISH, FAUQUIER.

This parish, as we have seen already, was taken out of Hamilton
in the year 1769. The first and only minister, before the Rev.
Mr. Lemmon took charge of it in 1816, was the Rev. James Thomson,

from Scotland, born near Glasgow, in the year 1739, and who
died in February, 1812. He came to this country in 1767 or 1768.
He lived at first in the family of Colonel Thomas Marshall, of
Oakhill, and instructed his sons, John Marshall, afterward Chief-Justice,
James Marshall, and others. In 1769, he went to England
for Orders. On his return, he married Miss Mary Ann Farrow,
sister of the late Nimrod Farrow, of Leeds Manor, and settled
at the glebe, near Salem, where he had a school, to which some of
the sons of Mr. Thomas Marshall were sent to him again. Mr.
Thomson, at the coming on of the Revolution, partook largely of
the spirit which animated Colonel Marshall and his son, the Chief-Justice.
In a sermon preached at the time of the first difficulties
at Boston, he thus speaks:—

Mr. Thomson, from the memoranda on a number of sermons
or fragments of sermons I have seen, seemed to have been punctual
in preaching in four churches,—Taylor's Church, not very far from
Warrenton, Goose Creek Church, near Salem, Old Bull Run
Church, whose location I cannot specify, and Piper's Church, in
Leeds Manor, not one of which are now standing. They were, I
suppose, all badly-built wooden churches, which soon came to ruin.
I never saw Mr. Thomson, though he lived in a neighbouring parish
and did not die until the year after I entered the ministry. From
an examination of some of his sermons, or parts of sermons, I
should say that they were marked by more taste and talent than
most of those which have been submitted to my perusal. But the
Episcopal Church from various causes failed, and almost disappeared,

under his ministry. Other denominations took possession
of the ground which was once entirely ours.

My nearness to Leeds parish, and its position being such that
I must pass through it on my numerous visits to other parts of
Virginia, caused me to preach more frequently there than in any
of the surrounding parishes. Mr. Thomas Marshall, eldest son of
the Chief-Justice, lived at the old homestead of the Marshalls,
Oakhill, on the road to Warrington and Fredericksburg. He was
one of my earliest and dearest Christian friends. He became a
communicant at an early period. He often begged that, in any
efforts I might make for the promotion of religion, which required
pecuniary aid, I would consider him as ready to afford it. Mr.
Thomas Ambler, a nephew of Judge Marshall, and an old schoolmate
of my early years, lived in the same neighbourhood. Cool
Spring Meeting-house lay between them. At this I often preached,
and it was the place where Mr. Lemmon officiated until perhaps the
close of his labours in that parish. The Marshalls and Amblers
continued to settle in this neighbourhood, until they have become
two small congregations, or rather important parts of two congregations.
The children of my esteemed friend, Mr. Thomas Marshall,
six in number, settled in sight of each other, on the estate
of their father, and are all living.[36] The Peytons, Turners, Beverleys,
Hendersons, and others, descendants of Episcopal families,
still adhere to the old Church, and are active in seeking its resuscitation.
In the year 1816, the Rev. George Lemmon, of Baltimore,
who graduated at Princeton College a year or two before
me, took charge of both Hamilton and Leeds parishes, and continued
to be the minister, with the exception of a few years spent
in Hagerstown, Maryland, until his death. In my report to the
Convention of 1847, I find the following notice of him:—

Never was there a minister more esteemed and beloved by his

people of all ages and characters. His preaching-talents were not
attractive, on account of the harshness of his voice, but he was faithful
to the truth, and understood how to present it experimentally
to the people. His forte was in private intercourse as a pastor
and gentleman. Though strict in his views of fashionable amusements,
in which the young are apt to delight, yet so tender, courteous,
and loving was he, that the young were ever pleased with
his company and conversation. It is delightful to hear him spoken
of to this day by his old parishioners. His health was very imperfect
for many years, and his ministrations very irregular; yet
such was the attachment of his people in both congregations, that
they bore it almost without complaining. The active friends of the
Church and Mr. Lemmon were Colonel Randolph, of Easternview,
(who was always sure to be at the minister's house on the first day
of each year with his subscription of one hundred dollars,) the
Horners, the Bells, the Withers, Smiths, Paines, Edmonds, Hendersons,
Fitzhughs, Digges, and others, in Hamilton parish, and
the Marshalls, Amblers, Scotts, Adamses, Carters, Chunns, and
others, in Leeds parish. In Hamilton parish Mr. Lemmon was succeeded
by the present rector, the Rev. Mr. Norton, in the year 1847,
under whose ministry the congregation has greatly increased, and
by whose enterprise, aided by the zeal of some untiring ladies, a
new church has been built at the cost of seven or eight thousand
dollars. I have mentioned before that Judge Marshall had no
hope of the revival of the Church in Virginia, though contributing
liberally to the efforts made for it. He lived to see himself mistaken,
and to unite with his children and grandchildren in the
services of our resuscitated Church in the very place of his nativity
and amid the scenes of his early life. In my frequent visits to
Coolspring and Oakhill, I often met with him, as I had done at my
father's house, and other places in Frederick, in more boyish days.
Though not a communicant, he was the sincere friend to religion
and the Episcopal Church. I can never forget how he would prostrate
his tall form before the rude low benches, without backs, at
Coolspring Meeting-House, in the midst of his children and grandchildren
and his old neighbours. In Richmond he always set an
example to the gentlemen of the same conformity, though many of
them did not follow it. At the building of the Monumental Church
he was much incommoded by the narrowness of the pews, which
partook too much of the modern fashion. Not finding room enough
for his whole body within the pew, he used to take his seat nearest
the door of his pew, and, throwing it open, let his legs stretch a
little into the aisle. This I have seen with my own eyes. He was
a most conscientious man in regard to some things which others
might regard as too trivial to be observed. It was my privilege
more than once to travel with him between Fauquier and Fredericksburg,
when we were both going to the lower country. On one
occasion, the roads being in their worst condition, when we came
to that most miry part called the "Black Jack," we found that
the travellers through it had taken a nearer and better road through
a plantation. The fence being down, or very low, I was proceeding
to pass over, but he said we had better go round, although each
step was a plunge, adding that it was his duty, as one in office, to be
very particular in regard to such things. As to some other matters,
however, he was not so particular. Although myself never much
given to dress or equipage, yet I was not at all ashamed to compare
with him during these travels, whether as to clothing, horse,
saddle, or bridle. Servant he had none. Federalist as he was in
politics, in his manners and habits he was truly republican. Would
that all republicans were like him in this respect! He was fond of
agriculture, and to gratify himself, and for the sake of exercise, he
purchased a small farm a few miles from Richmond, to which he
often went. On one of my visits to Richmond, being in a street
near his house, between daybreak and sunrise one morning, I met
him on horseback, with a bag of clover-seed lying before him, which
he was carrying to his farm, it being the time of sowing such seed.
But the most interesting and striking feature in the domestic character
of this truly great and good man was the tender and assiduous
attentions paid to his afflicted companion. Mrs. Marshall was
nervous in the extreme. The least noise was sometimes agony to
her whole frame, and his perpetual endeavour was to keep the house
and yard and outhouses as free as possible from the slightest cause
of distressing her; walking himself at times about the house and
yard without shoes. On one occasion, when she was in her most
distressing state, the town authorities of Richmond manifested their
great respect for him, and sympathy for her, by having either the
town-clock or town-bell muffled. I am sure that every Virginian
will excuse this digression.[37]

As to the religious opinions of Judge Marshall, the following extract from a letter
of the Rev. Mr. Norwood may be entirely relied on:—

"I have read some remarks of yours in regard to Chief-Justice Marshall, which
have suggested to me to communicate to you the following facts, which may be useful
should you again publish any thing in relation to his religious opinions. I often
visited Mrs. General Harvey during her last illness. From her I received this statement.
She was much with her father during the last months of his life, and told
me that the reason why he never communed was, that he was a Unitarian in opinion,
though he never joined their society. He told her that he believed in the truth of
the Christian revelation, but not in the divinity of Christ; therefore he could not
commune in the Episcopal Church. But during the last months of his life he read
Keith on Prophecy, where our Saviour's divinity is incidentally treated, and was
convinced by his work, and the fuller investigation to which it led, of the supreme
divinity of the Saviour. He determined to apply for admission to the Communion
of our Church,—objected to commune in private, because he thought it his duty to
make a public confession of the Saviour,—and, while waiting for improved health to
enable him to go to the church for that purpose, he grew worse and died, without
ever communing. Mrs. Harvey was a lady of the strictest probity, the most humble
piety, and of a clear discriminating mind, and her statement, the substance of which
I give you accurately, (having reduced it to writing,) may be entirely relied on.

"I remember to have heard Bishop Moore repeatedly express his surprise (when
speaking of Judge Marshall) that, though he was so punctual in his attendance at
church, and reproved Mr. —, and Mr. —, and Mr. —, when they were absent,
and knelt during the prayers and responded fervently, yet he never communed. The
reason was that which he gave to his daughter, Mrs. Harvey. She said he died an
humble, penitent believer in Christ, according to the orthodox creed of the Church.

"Very truly, your friend and brother in Christ, Wm. Norwood.

"P.S.—Another fact, illustrating the lasting influence of maternal instruction,
was mentioned by Mrs. Harvey. Her father told her that he never went to bed
without concluding his prayer with those which his mother taught him when a
child,—viz.: the Lord's Prayer and the prayer beginning, `Now I lay me down to
sleep.' "

I have nothing more to say of Leeds parish, but that during the
few years of Mr. Lemmon's stay at Hagerstown, the Rev. Mr.

Barnes took his place both in Leeds and Hamilton, and that after
Mr. Lemmon's death the Rev. Mr. Slaughter officiated in Leeds
parish in conjunction with Upperville and Middleburg. At Mr.
Slaughter's resignation of the charge, the Rev. Wm. H. Pendleton
became the minister, and so continued until the year 1854. The
present minister is the Rev. Mr. Callaway. The parish has recently
been subdivided. There are two new churches under the care of
the Rev. Mr. Shields, in the part recently cut off, and one in the
other under the care of Mr. Callaway. An excellent parsonage is
now being built.

ARTICLE LXVII.

Truro Parish, Fairfax County.

Fairfax county was separated from Prince William in the year
1742, and at first embraced Loudon county. The whole of this
was covered with Truro parish.[38] In 1749, Cameron parish was
cut off from it, and was afterward in Loudon, when that county
was separated from Fairfax in 1757. The parish of Truro was
again divided in the year 1764. In the years 1754, 1758, and
1764, I have evidence that the Rev. Chas. Green was the minister
of Truro parish, and probably lived in the neighbourhood of Gunston,
the seat of the Mason family, near which stood the old church
which was superseded by Pohick or Mount Vernon Church. Mr.
George Mason makes mention of him in a letter dated 1764. I
think it probable General Washington also mentions the same person
as visiting Mount Vernon in 1760, when Mrs. Washington was sick.
How long he may have been the minister after 1764, I cannot
ascertain. He was succeeded by the Rev. Lee Massey, either in
or before the year 1767, as that is the date of one of his sermons
preached at the Old Pohick Church. He was also in the parish as
minister in the year 1785, as I find from the date of a sermon
preached at the present Pohick Church, which was built during his
ministry, of which I possess the proof. How long he ministered after
this, I am unable to say. Mr. Massey was a lawyer previous to his
engaging in the ministry, and was ordained by the Bishop of London

for Virginia in 1766. His sermons evince talent and are sound in
doctrine, but, like most of that day, want evangelical life and
spirit, and would never rouse lost sinners to a sense of their condition.
He was a man of great wit and humour, the indulgence
of which was the fault of many of the clergy of that day. The
following account of a dispute between himself and his vestry
has been sent me, and illustrates his character. The clerk whom
Mr. Massey had selected was unacceptable to the vestry, and in order
to get rid of him they give him no salary or a very small one. Mr.
Massey complaining, the vestry met and passed two resolutions:—
1st. That the minister had a right to choose his clerk; 2d. That
the vestry had a right to fix his salary. In a letter to the vestry
Mr. Massey descanted on these resolutions with severity, and thus
concluded:—"And now, gentlemen, as to the knowing ones among
you,—and I admit there are such,—I would say, `humanum est
errare;' and, as to the rest of you, `ne sutor ultra crepidam.' "
Mr. Massey was a native of King George. His mother was an
Alexander. He lived to his eighty-sixth year, and died in 1814.
He had, however, ceased from the ministry for many years before his
death. The old families had left the neighbourhood or the Church.
General Washington, at the close of the war, had fully connected
himself with Christ Church, Alexandria, and Pohick was deserted
or only attended occasionally by some ministers of whom I shall
presently speak. Before taking leave of Mr. Massey, I will adduce
the proof that was mentioned that Mount Vernon or Pohick Church
was built during his ministry, and not at the much earlier date as
supposed by some. A friend has furnished me the following statement:—

The date is also further established by a deed recorded in the
county court, of which I have a copy. It is a deed from the vestry
of a pew in the church to Mr. Massey and his successors.

We have in this document not only a witness to the age of the
present Pohick Church, but a list of the vestrymen of that day. We
have seen a printed list of the vestry of Truro and Fairfax parishes
in the year 1765,—just after the division,—in which are some
other names belonging to the neighbourhood of Pohick,—as George
Wm. Fairfax, Edward Blackburn, William Lynton, William Gardiner,
&c. It comes from a leaf, it is said, of the old Pohick vestrybook,
which has by some means gotten into the Historical Society
of New York. Of the vestry-book itself I can hear no tidings.
In the year 1785, I find the name of George Washington, in his
own handwriting,—not as a vestryman, but as a pew-holder and
subscriber,—in the vestry-book of Christ Church, Alexandria. After
this he seldom, if ever, attended at Pohick.

It will be expected that I should say something concerning the
tradition as to the part which Washington took in the location of
Pohick Church. The following account is probably the correct one.
The Old Pohick Church was a frame building, and occupied a site
on the south side of Pohick Run, and about two miles from the
present, which is on the north side of the run. When it was no
longer fit for use, it is said the parishioners were called together
to determine on the locality of the new church, when George
Mason, the compatriot of Washington, and senior vestryman,
advocated the old site, pleading that it was the house in which their
fathers worshipped, and that the graves of many were around it,
while Washington and others advocated a more central and convenient
one. The question was left unsettled and another meeting
for its decision appointed. Meanwhile Washington surveyed the
neighbourhood, and marked the houses and distances on a well-drawn
map, and, when the day of decision arrived, met all the
arguments of his opponent by presenting this paper, and thus
carried his point. In place of any description of this house in its
past or present condition, I offer the following report of a visit made
to it in 1837:—

"It was to this church that Washington for some years regularly
repaired, at a distance of six or seven miles, never permitting any
company to prevent the regular observance of the Lord's day.
And shall it now be permitted to sink into ruin for want of a few
hundred dollars to arrest the decay already begun? The families
which once worshipped there are indeed nearly all gone, and those
who remain are not competent to its complete repair. But there
are immortal beings around it, and not far distant from it, who
might be forever blessed by the word faithfully preached therein.

"The poor shall never fail out of any land, and to them the Gospel
ought to be preached.

"For some years past one of the students in our Theological Seminary
has acted as lay reader in it, and occasionally a professor
has added his services. Within the last year the Rev. Mr. Johnson,
residing in the neighbourhood, has performed more frequent duties
there.

"On the day following the one which has given rise to the above,
I preached to a very considerable congregation in this old church,

one-third of which was made up of coloured persons. The sacrament
was then administered to twenty persons. If I should ever
be permitted to visit this house again, it must be under circumstances
far more cheering, or far more gloomy, than those which
attended my recent visit."

I am happy to say that this report led the Rev. Mr. Johnson to
its use, in a circular, by means of which he raised fifteen hundred
dollars, with which a new roof and ceiling and other repairs were
put on it, by which it has been preserved from decay and fitted for
such occasional services as are performed there. A friend, who
has recently visited it, informs me that many of the doors of the
pews are gone. Those of George Washington and George Mason
are not to be found,—perhaps borne away as relics. Those of
George William Fairfax, Martin Cockburn, Daniel McCarty,
William Payne, and the rector's, are still standing and their
names legible. Of Martin Cockburn and Mrs. Cockburn, intimate
friends of George Mason, we have heard a high character for piety
and benevolence. Mr. Cockburn was from the West Indies, and
Mrs. Cockburn was a Miss Bronaugh, a relative of the Masons, of
Gunston. They left no children to inherit and perpetuate their
virtues and graces. The family of Mason has long adhered to Old
Gunston, near which was the Old Pohick. The following account,
from one of the family, will be interesting to its members and
friends. The first of the family who came to Virginia was Colonel
George Mason, who was a member of the British Parliament in the
reign of Charles the First. In Parliament he opposed with great
eloquence the arbitrary measures of the King, but when the civil
war commenced he drew his sword on the side of the King and was
an officer in Charles the Second's army, and commanded a regiment
of horse. When the King's army was defeated at Worcester
by Oliver Cromwell in 1651, he disguised himself, and was concealed
by some peasants until he got an opportunity to embark for
America. He had considerable possessions in Staffordshire, (though
the family was of old a Warwickshire one,) where he was born and
generally lived; all of which were lost. A younger brother embarked
with him, and they arrived and landed in Norfolk, Virginia.
The younger brother, William, married and died at or near Norfolk.
He left a son, who went to Boston and settled. His female descendants
married among the Thoroughgoods, and that family was
for a long time in Princess Anne,—perhaps may be now. Colonel
George Mason went up the Potomac and settled at Accotink, near
Pasbytanzy, where he died and was buried. He called the county

Stafford, after his native county in England. Such at least is the
probable conjecture. This is the George Mason who, in another
place, we have spoken of as being, with his wife and Colonel Brent,
sponsor in baptism for a young Indian chief whom they took prisoner
in Maryland. Our notice was taken from one of the early
Tracts, republished by Peter Force, and which is ascribed to Mr.
Mason himself. The Mason family intermarried with the Brents,
Fitzhughs, and Thompsons at an early period, and afterward with
the McCartys, Bronaughs, Grahams, and many others.

Of one branch of this family, in connection with another old
family of Virginia, I have something to say. There was at Hampton,
in Elizabeth City county, an old Episcopal family by the name
of Westwood. A daughter of one member of it, Elizabeth Westwood,
married a Mr. Wallace. At his death she married John
Thompson Mason, who settled at Chappawamsic, in Stafford county.
She was the mother of Mr. Temple Mason, of Loudoun, and other
children, among whom was a daughter named Euphan, who married
Mr. Bailey Washington, of Stafford. At the death of her
husband, Mr. Washington, she married Mr. Brent, and lived and
died at Park Gate, in Prince William county. She had many children.
Among them was a daughter, who married first Mr. McCrae,
then Mr. Storke, of Fredericksburg. Her daughter Euphan married
Mr. Roy, of Matthews. This is mentioned as introductory to
some extracts from a few letters of old Mrs. Mason to her son,
Temple Mason, of Leesburg, showing the earnest desire she had
for the religious welfare of her children. From a letter of her
grand-daughter, Mrs. Storke, I learn that she was living at the time
of her death at Dumfries, in Prince William county. She was one
of those old-fashioned Virginia ladies who, like Mrs. General
Washington and Solomon's model of a lady, not only superintended
the labours of her servants, but worked with her own hands. This
she did until within a few days of her death. But her soul was
much more actively engaged with God. While it was possible, she
bent her knees daily before God, even when it was thought improper
to attempt it. Among her last words were the following:—
"Certainly, certainly, I can see no other way than that of Christ
crucified." "Christ is my all in all."

Let the following sentences, from a letter to her son Temple in
1816, sink deep into the hearts of all her descendants. After
exhorting him earnestly to attend at once to personal religion, by
reading the Scriptures, and prayer, and attendance on public worship,
she thus concludes:—

In two other letters, one of them dated in 1818, she writes in
the same earnest strain. One of them to her son Temple, whom
she addresses, "My dear child," thus concludes:—"O my blessed
God, of thy great mercy, grant, while you are reading these lines,
that you may consider and turn and seek him and find him. Oh,
what a joy it would give your aged mother to hear or see that you
were converted!"

That the prayers of this aged woman were heard in behalf of
one of her grandchildren, all who knew Mrs. Henry Magill, of
Leesburg, will be ready to believe.

Among the families which belonged to Pohick Church was that
of Mr. Lawrence Lewis, the nephew of General Washington, the
son of his sister Betty, who married Mr. Lewis. Mr. Lawrence
Lewis married Miss Custis, the grand-daughter of Mrs. Washington.
In many of the pictures of the Washington family she may be
seen, as a girl, in a groupe with the General, Mrs. Washington,
and her brother Washington Parke Custis. There were two other
full-sisters, who married Mr. Law and Mr. Peter. Mrs. Custis, the
widow of Mr. Washington's son, married again. Her second husband
was Dr. David Steuart, first of Hope Park, and then of Ossian
Hall, Fairfax county. He was the son and grandson of the two
Mr. Steuarts who were ministers in King George for so long a
period. They had a numerous offspring. The residence of Mr.
Lawrence Lewis was a few miles only from Mount Vernon, and was
called Woodlawn. After the desertion of Pohick they also attended
in Alexandria, and some time after the establishment of St. Paul's
congregation, and the settlement of Dr. Wilmer in it, they united
themselves to it, and were much esteemed by Dr. Wilmer, as he was
by them. After some years they removed to an estate near Berryville,
in what was then Frederick, now Clarke county. Mr. Lewis

was one of the most amiable of men by nature, and became a sincere
Christian, and a communicant of our Church. His person
was tall and commanding, and his face full of benignity, as was
his whole character. I wish some of our friends at a distance
could have seen him in the position I once beheld him in the church
at Berryville, when I was administering the Holy Communion.
Some of his servants were members of the church in that place,
and on that day one of them came up after the white members had
communed. It so happened that Mr. Lewis himself had not communed,
but came up and knelt by the side of his servant, feeling no
doubt that one God made them and one Saviour redeemed them.
Mrs. Lewis was also a zealous member of the Church, a lady of
fine mind and education, and very popular in her manners. Like
her grandmother, she knew the use of her hands, and few ladies in
the land did more with them for all Church and charitable purposes,
even to the last days of a long life. They had three children.
Their son, Lorenzo, married a Miss Coxe, of Philadelphia, and
settled on the estate in Clarke, but died some years since. The
two daughters married, the one Mr. Conrad, of New Orleans, and
the other Mr. Butler, of Mississippi or Louisiana. A numerous
posterity is descending from them.[39]

There were other families who belonged to this parish and church,
but I am not possessed of information to enable me to speak of
them as I could wish. The Chichesters, the Footes and Tripletts,
were, I am told, the last to leave it. The following letter from my
friend, General Henderson, of Washington, gives some notice of
his father, Alexander Henderson, who was one of the vestry of
Pohick Church who signed the deed of a pew to Rev. Mr. Massey:—

Of Mr. Richard Henderson, of Leesburg, Dr. Thomas Henderson,
and the sisters, I need not speak to the inhabitants of Leesburg
and Warrenton, where they were so well known as the props
of our Church. The author of the letter from which I have extracted
has long been a communicant and active vestryman of the
Church in Washington.

I have said that after the Revolution, when General Washington
changed his attendance from Pohick to Alexandria, and others left
the parish, regular services ceased in that part of the county. Mr.
Massey either relinquished services because none attended, or from
some other cause, although he lived many years after. The Rev.

Mr. Weems, in his books, announces himself as the rector of this
parish after this period. If some may, by comparison, be called
"nature's noblemen," he might surely have been pronounced one
of "nature's oddities." Whether in private or public, in prayers
or preaching, it was impossible that either the young or old, the
grave or the gay, could keep their risible faculties from violent
agitation. To suppose him to have been a kind of private chaplain
to such a man as Washington, as has been the impression of some,
is the greatest of incongruities. But I wish to do him ample justice.
Although his name never appears on the journals of any of our
Conventions, and cannot be found on the lists of those ordained for
Virginia or Maryland by the Bishop of London, so that a doubt
has been entertained whether he ever was ordained a minister of
our Church, yet I have ascertained that to be a fact. We presume
that he was from Maryland, as there are or were persons of
that name there, who were said to be his relatives. We will give
him credit for much benevolence, much of what Sterne called the
milk of human kindness, and of which Mr. Weems delighted
to speak in his sermons and writings. In proof of our disposition
to do him ample justice, we present the following account of his
boyhood in Maryland, which has been given us by one who knew
him:—

I acknowledge that he was in the habit of having the servant, assembled
in private houses, where he would spend the night, and would
recite a portion of Scripture, for he never read it out of the book,
and perhaps say something to them, or in the prayer about them,
but then it was in such a way as only to produce merriment. This
I have experienced in my own family and at my mother's, and have

heard others testify to the same. I do not think he could have long
even pretended to be the rector of any parish. From my earliest
knowledge of him he was a travelling bookseller for Mr. Matthew
Carey, of Philadelphia, visiting all the States south of Pennsylvania,
and perhaps some north of it, in a little wagon, with his fiddle as a
constant companion to amuse himself and others. If he would pray
with the servants at night in their owners' houses, he would play
the fiddle for them on the roadside by day. One instance of his
good-nature is well attested. At the old tavern in Caroline county,
Virginia, called the White Chimneys, Mr. Weems and some strolling
players or puppet-showmen met together one night. A notice
of some exhibition had been given, and the neighbours had assembled
to witness it. A fiddle was necessary to the full performance,
and that was wanting. Mr. Weems supplied the deficiency.

He was of a very enlarged charity in all respects. Though calling
himself an Episcopal minister, he knew no distinction of Churches.
He preached in every pulpit to which he could gain access, and
where he could recommend his books. His books were of all kinds.
Mr. Carey, his employer, was a Roman Catholic, but dealt in all
manner of books. On an election or court-day at Fairfax Court-House,
I once, in passing to or from the upper country, found Mr.
Weems, with a bookcaseful for sale, in the portico of the tavern.
On looking at them I saw Paine's "Age of Reason," and, taking it
into my hand, turned to him, and asked if it was possible that he
could sell such a book. He immediately took out the Bishop of
Llandaff's answer, and said, "Behold the antidote. The bane and
antidote are both before you." He carried this spurious charity
into his sermons. In my own pulpit at the old chapel, in my absence,
it being my Sunday in Winchester, he extolled Tom Paine
and one or more noted infidels in America, and said if their ghosts
could return to the earth they would be shocked to hear the falsehoods
which were told of them. I was present the following day,
when my mother charged him with what she had heard of his sermon,
and well remember that even he was confused and speechless.
Some of Mr. Weems's pamphlets on drunkenness and gambling would
be most admirable in their effects, but for the fact that you know
not what to believe of the narrative. There are passages of deep
pathos and great eloquence in them. His histories of Washington
and Marion are very popular, but the same must be said of them.
You know not how much of fiction there is in them. That of Washington
has probably gone through more editions than all others, and
has been read by more persons than those of Marshall, Ramsey,

Bancroft, and Irving, put together. To conclude,—all the while
that Mr. Weems was thus travelling over the land, an object of
amusement to so many, and of profit to Mr. Carey, he was transmitting
support to his interesting and pious family, at or near
Dumfries, who, if I am rightly informed, were attached to the Methodist
Church. If in this, or any thing else which I have written,
any mistake has been made, I should be glad to receive its correction.

There were three other ministers who occasionally preached at
Pohick, and visited Mount Vernon after the death of General and
Mrs. Washington, of whom a few words must be said. But, before
these few are said, it is proper to speak of the change which took
place at Mount Vernon by the death of its illustrious owners. It
is well known that Judge Bushrod Washington, the son of General
Washington's brother John, inherited Mount Vernon. He was in
full communion with the Church when I first became acquainted
with him in 1812, having no doubt united himself with it in Philadelphia
under Bishop White, while attending the Supreme Court
in that place. I know that he was intimate with Bishop White
and highly esteemed him. Judge Washington attended one or more
of our earliest Conventions in Richmond and was a punctual member
of the Standing Committee from that time until his death. He
married into the family of Blackburns, of Ripon Lodge, not many
miles from Dumfries, and perhaps twelve from Mount Vernon. The
first Richard Blackburn of whom our vestry-books speak married a
daughter of the Rev. James Scott, of Dumfries. His son was, I
believe, the father of Mrs. Bushrod Washington, Mrs. Henry
Turner, of Jefferson, Mr. Richard and Thomas Blackburn. The
family at Ripon Lodge had long been the main support of the
church at Dumfries and Centreville, and their house the resort of
the clergy. I have before me a paper drawn up in 1812 for the
support of the Rev. Charles O'Neill. The first and highest subscriber
is Mr. Thomas Blackburn, who was, I believe, the husband
of our excellent friend Mrs. Blackburn, who lived near Berryville
for many of the last years of her life. His subscription is fifty
dollars. The next highest is that of a Mr. Edmund Denny, twenty-five
dollars. The next Dr. Humphrey Peake, for twenty dollars.
All the rest much less. Old Mrs. Blackburn, with her four granddaughters,—Jane,
Polly, Christian, and Judy Blackburn,—daughters
of Mr. Richard Blackburn, were much at Mount Vernon. I became
acquainted with them during the years 1812 and 1813, while
I was ministering in Alexandria. They were the first-fruits of my

ministry in that place, and very dear to me. Two of them—Jane
and Polly—married nephews of Judge Washington, and settled in
Jefferson. One of them—Judy—married Mr. Gustavus Alexander,
of King George, and the fourth—Christian—died unmarried. By
my intimacy with these four most estimable ladies and with Mrs.
Blackburn and her sister, Mrs. Taylor, I have from time to time
become acquainted with the state of things at Ripon Lodge and
Mount Vernon as to the clergy. The Rev. Mr. Kemp and the Rev.
Mr. Moscrope occasionally officiated at Dumfries and Pohick, and
perhaps at Centreville, for the want of those who were better. But
in order to conceal the shame of the clergy from the younger ones,
and to prevent their loss of attachment to religion and the Church,
the elder ones had sometimes to hurry them away to bed or take
them away from the presence of these ministers when indulging too
freely in the intoxicating cup. The doctrine of total abstinence in
families, of banishing wine and spirits from the cellar and the table,
was not thought of then in the best of families. If the minister
chose it, he must drink. The third and last minister, and who died,
I think, in 1813, was the Rev. Charles O'Neill, who was an improvement
on the two last. The families at Mount Vernon and
Ripon Lodge were fond of him. He always spent his Christmas at
Mount Vernon, and on those occasions was dressed in a full suit
of velvet, which General Washington had left behind, and which
had been given to Mr. O'Neill. But as General Washington was
tall and well proportioned in all his parts, and Mr. O'Neill was
peculiarly formed, being of uncommon length of body and brevity
of legs, it was difficult to make the clothes of the one, even though
altered, sit well upon the other.[40]

I am happy to be able to add to this article the following extracts
from two letters of my old college friend, Colonel Stoddert, of
Wycomico House, Maryland, concerning his grandfather, the Rev.
Lee Massey:—

The following extract is from a second letter in answer to further
inquiries:—

It should be stated that the old church, called Payne's Church,
near the railroad, and a few miles from Fairfax Court-House, as
well as the new one at the court-house, are both in Truro parish.

ARTICLE LXVIII.

The Religious Character of Washington.

An interesting question in relation to Washington will now be
considered,—viz.: What are the proofs of his personal piety? This
work is already done to my hands by the Rev. E. C. McGuire, of
Fredericksburg, from whose careful and faithful volume on the
"Religious Opinions and Character of Washington" I select the
following particulars. He was the child of pious parents and
ancestors, was baptized in his second month,—Mr. Beverley Whiting
and Captain Christopher Brooks godfathers, and Mrs. Mildred
Gregory godmother,—at a time when care was taken to instruct the
children in our holy religion, according to the Scriptures as set
forth in the standards of the Episcopal Church. Until he had
passed his eleventh year he enjoyed the superintending care of
both parents, and after that of his mother and uncle. It is also
believed that, besides the instructions of the parish sexton and Mr.
Williams, he also sat under the ministry of the Rev. Archibald
Campbell, and perhaps was for a time at his school in Washington
parish, Westmoreland county. While with his mother in Fredericksburg,
there can be no doubt of his receiving pious instruction from
her and her minister, the Rev. Mr. Marye. While at school, he
was remarkable for his abhorrence of the practice of fighting among
the boys, and, if unable to prevent a contest, would inform the
teacher of the design. When about thirteen years of age he drew
up a number of resolutions, taken from books, or the result of his
own reflections. Among them is the following:—"When you speak
of God or his attributes, let it be seriously, in reverence." "Labour
to keep alive in your breast that little spark of celestial fire called
conscience." At the age of fifteen his filial piety was remarkably
displayed in relinquishing an earnest desire to enter the navy, just
when about to embark, out of a tender regard to his mother's wishes.
The religious sentiments of his mother and of himself were drawn
from the Bible and, Prayer-Book, and next to them, from the "Contemplations,
Moral and Divine, of Sir Matthew Hale," judging from
the great use which seems to have been made of this book by both
of them; and in no uninspired book do we find a purer and more

elevated Christianity.[43] Should it be said that, notwithstanding his
early religious education and some indications of youthful piety, he
may have fallen into the irreligion and skepticism of the age, and
should proofs of his sincere belief of Christianity, as a divine revelation,
be asked for, we will proceed to furnish them. At a time
when so many of the chief men in France and America, and even
some in England, were renouncing the Christian faith, and when
he was tempted to be silent at least on the subject, in his public
addresses, he seems to have taken special pains to let his sentiments
be known, and to impress them upon the nation, in opposition to
the skepticism of the age,—a skepticism which was sought by some
leading men to be propagated with great zeal among the youth of
Virginia.

In his address to the Governors of the States, dated at Head-Quarters,
June, 1783, when about to surrender up his military command,
speaking of the many blessings of the land, he says, "And,
above all, the pure and benign light of revelation." He also speaks
of "that humility and pacific temper of mind which were the characteristics
of the divine Author of our blessed religion."

In his farewell address to the people of the United States, on
leaving the Presidential chair, he again introduces the same subject:—"Of
all the dispositions and habits which lead to political
prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. A
volume could not trace all their connections with private and public
felicity." He warns against the attempt to separate them, and to
think that "national morality can prevail to the exclusion of religious
principles."

No candid man can read these and other expressions, in the public
addresses of Washington, without acknowledging that, as though
he were the great high-priest of the nation, availing himself of his
position and of the confidence reposed in him, he was raising his
warning voice against that infidelity which was desolating France
and threatening our own land. That Washington was regarded
throughout America, both among our military and political men, as
a sincere believer in Christianity, as then received among us, and
a devout man, is as clear as any fact in our history. Judge Marshall,
the personal friend, the military and political associate, of
Washington, says, "He was a sincere believer in the Christian
faith, and a truly devout man." Judge Boudinot, who knew him

well during and after the Revolution, testifies to the same. General
Henry Lee, who served under him during the war, and afterward
in the civil department, and who was chosen by Congress to
deliver his funeral oration, says, in that oration, "First in war,
first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen, he was second
to none in the endearing scenes of private life. Pious, just, humane,
temperate, and sincere,—uniform, dignified, and commanding,—his
example was edifying to all around him, as were the effects of that
example lasting." Sermons and orations by divines and statesmen
were delivered all over the land at the death of Washington.
A large volume of such was published. I have seen and read them,
and the religious character of Washington was a most prominent
feature in them; and for this there must have been some good
cause. Let the following extracts suffice. Mr. Sewell, of New
Hampshire, says:—

Thus spake New Hampshire. What says South Carolina?
David Ramsay, the historian, says:—

Mr. J. Biglow, of Boston, says:—

To the foregoing I will only add, that Major William Jackson,
aid-de-camp to Washington, in his address, speaks of the "milder
radiance of religion and morality `as shining in his character,' and
of his being beloved and admired by the holy ministers of religion;"
and that Captain Dunham of the Revolution, in his oration,
says of him, "A friend to our holy religion, he was ever guided
by its pious doctrines. He had embraced the tenets of the Episcopal
Church; yet his charity, unbounded as his immortal mind, led
him equally to respect every denomination of the followers of
Jesus." The Rev. Mr. Kirkland, of Boston, says, "The virtues
of our departed friend were crowned with piety. He is known to
have been habitually devout." We conclude with the testimony of
our own Devereux Jarratt, of Virginia, whom none will suspect of
flattery or low views of religion:—

Nor was the belief of his piety confined to America. The Rev.
Thomas Wilson, the pious son of the pious Bishop Wilson, of Sodor
and Mann, thought he could make no more suitable present to
General Washington than his father's family Bible in three volumes,
with notes, and a folio volume of his father's works. The former
was left by the will of General Washington to his friend the Rev.
Bryan Fairfax, minister of Christ Church, Alexandria; the latter
is, I presume, still in the Arlington library. From the latter I
selected, forty-six years ago, a small volume of private and family
prayers, as I have elsewhere stated.

If more certain proofs of personal piety in Washington be required
than these general impressions and declarations of his coevals
and compatriots, founded on their observation of his public
conduct, and derived from his public addresses, we proceed to
furnish them. They will be taken from the testimony of those
whose intimacy with his domestic habits enable them to judge, and
from his own diary. As to his private devotions, of course the
same kind of testimony is not to be expected as that which attests

his public observances. It may most positively be affirmed, that
the impression on the minds of his family was, that when on each
night he regularly took his candle and went to his study at nine
o'clock and remained there until ten, it was for the purpose of
reading the Scriptures and prayer. It is affirmed by more than
one that he has been seen there on his knees and also been heard
at his prayers. In like manner it is believed, that when at five
o'clock each morning, winter and summer, he went to that same
study, a portion of time was then spent in the same way. It is
also well known that it was the impression in the army that Washington,
either in his tent or in his room, practised the same thing.
One testifies to having seen him on more than one occasion thus
engaged on his bended knees. It is firmly believed that when in
crowded lodgings at Valley Forge, where every thing was unfavourable
to private devotions, his frequent visits to a neighbouring
wood were for this purpose. It is also a fact well known to the
family that, when prevented from public worship, he used to
read the Scriptures and other books with Mrs. Washington in her
chamber.

That there was a devotional spirit in Washington, a belief in the
virtue of prayer, leading to private supplication, is also rendered
most probable by his conduct as an officer in seeking to have public
prayer for his soldiers, and even conducting them himself in the
absence of a minister.

At twenty-two years of age, when heading an expedition against
the Indians, he was in the habit of having prayer in the camp at
Fort Necessity, at the Great Meadows, in the Alleghany Mountains.
His friend and neighbour, Mr. William Fairfax, of Belvoir, a few
miles from Mount Vernon, and whose daughter, Lawrence, the elder
brother of George Washington, married, thus writes to him while
at the Great Meadows, and in the letter evinces not only his own
pious disposition, but his confidence in that of the youthful Washington:—"I
will not doubt your having public prayer in the camp,
especially when the Indian families are your guests, that they, seeing
your plain manner of worship, may have their curiosity to be
informed why we do not use the ceremonies of the French, which,
being well explained to their understandings, will more and more
dispose them to receive our baptism and unite in strict bonds of
cordial friendship."

In the year 1755, Washington was the volunteer aid-de-camp to
General Braddock, and, though in danger of pursuit by the Indians,
he did, on the night after the memorable defeat, in the absence of

a chaplain, himself perform the last funeral rites over the body of
Braddock, a soldier holding the candle or lighted torch while the
solemn words were read. For several successive years Washington
was engaged in a trying contest with the Indians, and during
a considerable portion of that time—according to the testimony
of one of his aids, Colonel B. Temple, of King William county—
he frequently, on the Sabbath, performed divine service, reading
the Scriptures and praying with them when no chaplain could be
had. It was during this period that a sharp correspondence was
carried on between Washington and Dinwiddie, the latter being
offended at the persevering importunity of the former that a chaplain
might be allowed his army. At the recall of Dinwiddie, Washington
addressed the following letter to the President of the Council,
who was chief in the Colony until the arrival of Governor Fauquier,
saying, "The last Assembly, in their Supply Bill, provided for a
chaplain to our regiment. On this subject I had often, without any
success, applied to Governor Dinwiddie. I now flatter myself that
your honour will be pleased to appoint a sober, serious man for this
duty. Common decency, sir, in a camp, calls for the services of a
divine, which ought not to be dispensed with, although the world
may think us void of religion and incapable of good instructions."

In the year 1759 Colonel Washington was married, and until the
Revolution lived at Mount Vernon. That he was interested in the
affairs of the Church at this time is evident from what we have said
as to the part he acted in relation to the building of Pohick Church.
The Rev. Lee Massey was the minister during part of this time.
His testimony was, "I never knew so constant an attendant at
church as Washington. His behaviour in the house of God was
ever so reverential that it produced the happiest effects on my congregation
and greatly assisted me in my pulpit labours. No company
ever kept him from church."

In the year 1774 he was sent as a Burgess to Williamsburg. It
was at that time that a day of fasting and prayer was appointed in
view of the approaching difficulties with England. The following
entry in his diary shows his conduct on that occasion:—"June 1st,
Wednesday. Went to church and fasted all day." In September
of that year he was in Philadelphia, a member of the first Congress.
In his diary he speaks of going, during the three first Sabbaths,
three times to Episcopal churches, once to the Quaker, once to the
Presbyterian, and once to the Roman Catholic. He was a member
of Congress again the next year, and then chosen commander-in-chief
of our army. On the day after assuming its command he

issued the following order:—"The General requires and expects of
all officers and soldiers, not engaged on actual duty, a punctual
attendance on divine service, to implore the blessings of Heaven
upon the means used for our safety and defence." On the 15th of
May, 1776, Congress having appointed a day of humiliation, the
following order is given:—"The General commands all officers and
soldiers to pay strict obedience to the order of the Continental
Congress, that by their unfeigned and pious observance of their
religious duties they may incline the Lord and giver of victory to
prosper our arms." The situation of the army not admitting the
regular service every Sunday, he requires the chaplains to meet
together and agree on some method of performing it at other times,
and make it known to him. Such was Washington as head of the
army.

As President of the United States his conduct exhibited the same
faith in and reverence for religion. Not only did he regularly
attend divine service in the Church of his fathers and of his choice,
but he let it be understood that he would receive no visits on the
Sabbath. The only exception to this was an occasional visit, in
the latter part of the day, from his old friend, the Speaker of the
House of Representatives, Colonel Trumbull, who was confessedly
one of the most pious men of the age, and who would not have
sought the company of an irreligious man on the Sabbath, even
though that man were President of the United States. On the
subject of a strict observance of the Sabbath, we might have mentioned
other proofs of it, occurring before his being elevated to the
chief command of the army or first Presidency in the Republic.
His private diary shows it in various places. Let one suffice. On
a certain occasion he was informed on Saturday evening that the
smallpox was among his servants in the valley. He set out the
next morning to visit them, but notes in his diary, "Took church
on the way," thus combining duty to the poor and to his God.

His condemnation of the prevailing vices of the day deserves also
to be mentioned in proof that he understood Christianity as being
that "grace of God which hath appeared unto all men, teaching
us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live
soberly, righteously, and godly in this present evil world."

Not only was he addicted to no kind of intemperance, scarcely ever
tasting ardent spirits or exceeding two glasses of wine,—which was
equal to total abstinence in our day,—and not using tobacco in any
shape, but he used his authority in the army to the utmost to put
down swearing, games of chance, and drinking, and irregularities

of every other kind. Whilst at Fort Cumberland in 1757, we find
the following order:—"Colonel Washington has observed that the
men of his regiment are very profane and reprobate. He takes this
opportunity to inform them of his great displeasure at such practices,
and assures them that if they do not leave them off they shall be
severely punished. The officers are desired, if they hear any man
swear, or make use of an oath or execration, to order the offender
twenty-five lashes immediately, without a court-martial. For the
second offence he shall be punished more severely." The day after
General Washington took command of the American army he issued
orders to the troops, from which we take the following:—"The
General most earnestly requires and expects a due observance of
those articles of war which prohibit profane cursing, swearing, and
drunkenness," and soon after issued the following order:—

"All officers, non-commissioned officers, and soldiers are positively
forbid playing at cards and other games of chance. At this
time of public distress men may find enough to do in the service
of their God and their country, without abandoning themselves to
vice and immorality." Again, we find in August of that year an
order in these remarkable words:—"The General is sorry to be informed
that the foolish and wicked practice of profane cursing and
swearing—a vice hitherto little known in the American army—is
growing into fashion. He hopes the officers will, by example as
well as influence, endeavour to check it; and that both they and
the men will reflect that we can have little hope of the blessing of
Heaven on our arms, if we insult it by our own folly and impiety:
added to this, it is a vice so mean and low, without any temptation,
that every man of sense and character detests and despises it."
And is this the man of whom some have reported that he was
addicted to this very disgusting vice, only saying that he did it
most gracefully and swore like an angel? Credat Judæus Apella.
It has also been attempted by some to introduce greater variety into
the character of Washington, and bring him down to the common
level, by representing him as passionately fond not merely of the
chase and much addicted to it, but also of the dance, the ballroom,
and the theatre. On what ground does this rest? His fondness
for the chase is associated with that of Lord Fairfax, during the
time that he lived at Mount Vernon and his lordship at Belvoir,
the seat of his relation, William Fairfax, a few miles off. But how
long did this sporting-intimacy continue? Washington came to
Mount Vernon in his sixteenth year. Lord Fairfax came to
Virginia at that time, and young Washington for a few months

sometimes attended him in hunting, but not neglecting his mathematical
studies and surveying, which recommended him to Lord
Fairfax as a suitable agent in the valley. At the beginning of his
seventeenth year, Washington came over the Blue Ridge on duty,—
laborious duty. Lord Fairfax, after visiting England, settled at
Greenway Court. His house was only the occasional abode of
Washington during the two years in which he was surveying and
dividing the immense landed possessions of Lord Fairfax, and also
acting as public surveyor in all Western Virginia. What time was
left him to waste in the sports of the chase? From the age of
nineteen he was faithfully and painfully serving his country in the
field of battle, except when on his voyage to the West Indies with
a sick brother. During the period between his marriage and the
Revolution, he was a most diligent farmer at Mount Vernon,—
sometimes visiting his plantations in Jefferson, and acting as Burgess
in Virginia and Delegate to the earlier American Congresses.
What time, I ask, for the sports of the field? What do we find, in
his diary, of dogs and kennels and the chase? We do not say that
he may never have thus exercised himself at a time and in a country
where game and forests abounded and it was less a waste of time
than at other periods and other places: but how different must have
been the pursuit with Washington from that of the idlers of his
day?[44] And as to his admiration of the theatre and his delighting
in its ludicrous and indelicate exhibitions, does it seem probable
that the grave and dignified Washington, with all the cares of the
army and afterward of the state pressing upon him, should have
found time for such entertainments? In a letter to the President
of Congress, dated New York, April, 1776, he thus writes:—"I
give in to no kind of amusements myself, and consequently those
about me [alluding to his aids] can have none." On the 12th of
October, 1778, the following preamble and resolutions were adopted
by the American Congress:—"Whereas, true religion and good
morals are the only solid foundation of public liberty and happiness,
Therefore, resolved, that it be, and is hereby, recommended to
the several States to take the most effectual measures for the encouragement
thereof, and for suppressing theatrical entertainments,
horse-racing, gaming, and such other diversions as are productive
of idleness, dissipation, and a general depravity of manners." Is
it probable that Washington, at the head of the army, then calling
upon his officers and soldiers to abandon their oaths and drinking
and games of chance, in obedience to military laws and lest they
should offend God and lose his favour, would himself despise and
disobey this solemn call of Congress, and that too when the names of
Adams and Gerry, Sherman and Ellsworth, Morris and Dean, Lee
and Smith, of Virginia, Laurence and Mathews, of South Carolina,
were on the list of those who voted for it, and so few were against it?

As to Washington's passionate fondness for the dance, if Cicero
thought it an unbecoming exercise for any Roman citizen, as beneath
the dignity of any who were admitted to the citizenship of
that great republic, how unlikely that our great Washington—even
if feeling no religious objection to this childish amusement—
should be still a child and delight himself in such frivolous things!
May we not rather suppose him to have felt and said, with a great
man in Israel when tempted to leave the work of the Lord—the
building of his house on Mount Zion—and come down to some
meeting in one of the villages of the plain, "I am doing a great
work, so that I cannot come down"? Let not the sons and daughters
of idleness, vanity, and pleasure seek to find a sanction for their
favourite amusements in the example of Washington,—even though
in a dark age and under peculiar circumstances he may at times
have lent himself to some of them.

I come now to speak of that feature in Washington's religious
character which must most forcibly strike every reader of his public
and private communications,—his firm reliance on a special Providence,
as distinguished from that philosophic belief in Providence
which is little better than atheism. In a letter to his brother, John

A. Washington, written a few days after Braddock's defeat, he says,
"By the all-powerful dispensations of Providence, I have been protected
beyond all human probability or expectation; for I had four
bullets through my coat and two horses shot under me,—yet escaped
unhurt,—although death was levelling my companions on every side
of me." In his entrance on the contest with England, he thus
writes to General Gage:—"May that God to whom you appeal
judge between America and you! Under his providence, those who
influenced the councils of America, and all the other inhabitants
of the Colonies, at the hazard of their lives, are determined to hand
down to posterity those just and invaluable privileges which they
received from their ancestors." In a letter to his friend, Joseph
Reed, in 1776, under some great trials in relation to his supplies,
he writes, "How it will end, God in his great goodness will direct.
I am thankful for his protection to this time." In his address to
the General Assembly of Massachusetts, after the evacuation of
Boston without blood, he ascribes it "to the interposition of that
Providence which has manifestly appeared in our behalf through
the whole of this important struggle." Speaking of the expectation
of a bloody battle, he says, in a letter to his brother John, "It
is to be hoped that, if our cause be just,—as I do most religiously
believe it to be,—the same Providence which has in so many instances
appeared for us will still go on to afford its aid." In view
of an expected attack from the combined forces of the enemy he
thus calls on his soldiers:—"The fate of unborn millions will now
depend, under God, on the courage and conduct of this army. Let
us rely upon the goodness of the cause, and the aid of the Supreme
Being, in whose hand victory is, to animate and encourage us to
noble actions." After the surrender of Burgoyne's army, he writes
to his brother John, "I most devoutly congratulate my country and
every well-wisher to the cause on this signal stroke of Providence."
In the year 1778, just after the battle of Monmouth, he writes to
his brother, that all would have been lost "had not that bountiful
Providence, which has never failed us in the hour of distress, enabled
me to form a regiment or two of those who were retreating in the
face of the enemy and under their fire." To General Nelson, in
that same year, in taking a retrospect of the vicissitudes of the
war, he says, "The hand of Providence is so conspicuous in all this,
that he must be worse than an infidel that lacks faith, and more
than wicked that has not gratitude enough to acknowledge his obligations."
In a letter to Benjamin Harrison, in 1778, he writes,
"Providence has heretofore taken care of us when all other means
seemed to be departing from us." To General Armstrong, in 1781,
he writes, "Our affairs are brought to a perilous crisis, that the
hand of Providence may be more conspicuous in our deliverance.
The many remarkable interpositions of the Divine government in
the hours of our deepest distress and darkness have been too luminous
to suffer me to doubt the issue of the present contest." The
foregoing are only a few out of the many passages which pervade
all the private letters and public communications of Washington
touching a special Providence. Is it too much to say that the
communications of no king, ruler, general, or statesman in Christendom
ever so abounded in expressions of pious dependence on
God? There was an habitual reliance on God which must have
been connected with habitual prayer to God. Nor can we forbear
to institute a comparison between the language of trust in Providence,
as seen in the letters and orders of Washington, and those
of Cromwell. Who for a moment questions the sincerity and deep
feeling of Washington in all he writes? Who does not sometimes
suspect at least the hypocrisy of Cromwell and revolt at his cant?
Who does not see and feel that, while Washington was all for his
country and his God, Cromwell was sometimes seeking his own?

On one other subject in connection with the religious character
of Washington I must ask the attention of the reader. Washington
in word and deed condemned duelling. Nearly all our great men
have done it by word, but, if they have not recommended it by deed,
have been afraid to say that they might not so do, either by giving or
receiving a challenge. When a young man in Alexandria and an
officer in the army, a quarrel ensued on an election-day, in which
he used strong and offensive language to one who, with a stick,
prostrated him to the ground. On the following day he sought
an interview with his antagonist, when it was fully expected that
another rencounter or the preliminaries for one would take place.
Instead of this, Captain Washington, conscious of being in fault,
declared that the interview was sought in order to acknowledge it.
Here was true greatness of soul. Here was the true courage of
the Christian, breathed into the soul by the Spirit of God. God was
training up the spirit of Washington for all the subsequent trials
and duties of life. In the army he of course discouraged and
prevented this most foolish and wicked practice. M. Lafayette, in
a chivalrous spirit, wished to revenge some supposed insult to his
country on an Englishman who offered it, and asked leave of Washington
to send a challenge. Washington conducted the matter
with consummate skill,—and, while fully resolved not to permit it,

chose rather by a grave irony to laugh him out of it. What an
example was thus set to the gentlemen and officers and public
functionaries of America! How does Washington tower above those
who, while acknowledging that the practice is indefensible by any
laws of God or man, and utterly opposed to them, and condemned by
common sense and true honour and humanity, yet, in a most inconsistent
and cowardly manner declare that, nevertheless, such is their
apprehension of public opinion, they might be induced to engage
in this murderous act! To receive a blow, be felled to the earth
before a crowd, and then ask pardon for having provoked the blow,
must surely be considered in a young officer as an act of moral
courage which is prompted by the Spirit of God.

One question only remains to be settled:—Was Washington a
communicant of the Church? That he was, might be reasonably
inferred from the indication of youthful piety, his religious, his
ministerial offices at the head of his regiment, the active part taken
in the concerns of the parish, his habits of devotion, his regular
attendance at church, his conscientious observance of the Sabbath,
his strict fasting on appointed days. It is also believed that he was
a communicant, from the testimony of the Rev. Lee Massey, as
handed down through his family, and also of others which have come
down to us. The testimony which has often been adduced to prove
that, during the war, he did commune on a certain Sabbath in a
Presbyterian church at Morristown, New Jersey, ought to be enough
to satisfy a reasonable man of the fact. Add to these the declaration
of so many, in the sermons and orations at the time of his
death. But still it has been made a question, and it may be well
to consider on what ground. It is certainly a fact, that for a certain
period of time during his Presidential term, while the Congress was
held in Philadelphia, he did not commune. This fact rests on the
authority of Bishop White, under whose ministry the President sat,
and who was on the most intimate terms with himself and Mrs.
Washington. I will relate what the Bishop told myself and others
in relation to it. During the session or sessions of Congress held
in Philadelphia, General Washington was, with his family, a regular
attendant at one of the churches under the care of Bishop White
and his assistants. On Communion-days, when the congregation was
dismissed, (except the portion which communed,) the General left
the church, until a certain Sabbath on which Dr. Abercrombie,
in his sermon, spoke of the impropriety of turning our backs on the
Lord's table,—that is, neglecting to commune,—from which time
General Washington came no more on Communion-days. Bishop

White supposes that the General understood the "words turning our
backs on the Lord's table" in a somewhat different sense than was
designed by the preacher; that he supposed it was intended to censure
those who left the church at the time of its administration, and, in
order not to seem to be disrespectful to that ordinance, thought it
better not to be present at all on such occasions. It is needless to
attempt to conjecture what may have been the reason of this temporary
(as we hope it was) suspension of the act of communicating.
A regard for historic truth has led to the mention of this subject.
The question as to his ever having been a communicant has been
raised on this fact, as stated by Bishop White, and we have thought
it best to give the narrative as we heard it from the lips of the
Bishop himself. It has been asked why he did not, in the dying
hour, send for some minister and receive the emblems of a Saviour's
death. The same might be asked of thousands of pious communicants
who do not regard the sacrament as indispensable to a happy
death and glorious eternity, as some Romanists do. Moreover, the
short and painful illness of Washington would have forbidden it.
But his death was not without proofs of a gracious state. He told
to surrounding friends that it had no terrors for him,—that all was
well. The Bible was on his bed: he closed his own eyes, and,
folding his arms over his breast, expired in peace.

ARTICLE LXIX.

Fairfax Parish, Fairfax County.

The town of Alexandria was at first called Hunting Creek
Warehouse, sometimes Bell Haven, and consisted of a small establishment
at that place. Its growth was encouraged by successive
Acts of the Legislature, establishing semi-annual fairs and granting
certain privileges to those who attended them. In the year 1762,
it was enlarged by the laying off of numerous lots on the higher
ground, belonging to Dade, West, and the Alexanders, after which
it improved rapidly, so that at the close of the last or beginning of
the present century its population was ten thousand, and its commerce
greater than it now is. So promising was it at the close of
the war, that its claims were weighed in the balance with those of
Washington as the seat of the National Government. It is thought
that, but for the unwillingness of Washington to seem partial to
Virginia, Alexandria would have been the chosen spot, and that on
the first range of hills overlooking the town the public buildings
would have been erected. Whether there had been any public
worship or church at Alexandria previous to this enlargement of
it, and the great impulse thus given to it, does not appear from
the vestry-book, though it is believed that there was. But soon after
this, in the year 1764, Fairfax parish is established, and measures
taken for the promotion of the Church in this place. The vestrybook
commences in 1765. At that time there were two churches
in the new parish of Fairfax,—one at the Falls, called, as the present
one is, Little Falls Church; the position of the other—the
Lower Church—is not known. It may have been an old one at
Alexandria.

Among the first acts of the vestry was the repairing of the two
old churches in the parish, at a cost of more than thirty-two thousand
pounds of tobacco. In the year 1766, it is determined to
build two new churches,—one at the Little Falls, very near the old
one, and one in Alexandria, to contain twenty-four hundred square
feet, and to be high-pitched so as to admit of galleries. Mr. James
Wrenn agrees to build the former, and Mr. James Parsons the other,
for about six hundred pounds each. A most particular contract is

made for them. The mortar is to have two-thirds of lime and one of
sand,—the very reverse of the proportion at this day, and which accounts
for the greater durability of ancient walls. The shingles were
to be of the best cypress or juniper, and three-quarters of an inch thick,
instead of our present half-inch ones. Mr. Parsons was allowed to add
ten feet to the upper part of the church on his own account, and to pay
himself by their sale, on certain conditions. He commenced his
work, but was unable to finish it. It lingered for some years, until,
in 1772, Mr. John Carlisle undertakes it, and completes it in 1773.
The ten pews are now sold, and General Washington, though having
just been engaged in the erection of Mount Vernon Church, which
was finished the same year, and having a pew therein, gives the
highest price for one in Christ Church, which was occupied by him
and his family during his life, and has been by some of his name
and family ever since. The gallery was not put up until the year
1787, at which time the pews were balloted for. The steeple is of
modern construction. A gallery never was erected in the Little
Falls Church. The following notice of my visit to this church in
1827 will tell something of its history:—

Mr. Henry Fairfax was the grandson of the Rev. Bryan Fairfax,
of whom we shall soon speak as the minister of this church. He
inherited the generous and disinterested spirit of his grandfather.
It was chiefly at his expense that the church was repaired, and by
his liberality the minister supported, when another than the professors
was employed. Being a graduate of West Point, he felt
that he owed his country a debt, which could only be discharged by
engaging in the late Mexican war, and, in opposition to the wishes
and judgment of his friends and relatives, raised a company for that
purpose; but scarcely had he reached the scene of action before he
fell a victim to the climate, leaving a devoted family and congregation
to feel and mourn his loss.

While on the subject of churches, it may be as well to mention
that at a more recent date a neat frame church has been built at
Fairfax Court-House, under the auspices of the Rev. Mr. Lockwood,
who for some years officiated there as well as at the Falls
Church. The Rev. Templeman Brown had officiated at the Falls
Church and at the court-house for some time before Mr. Lockwood's
ministry, and has again been serving them for a number of years,
since Mr. Lockwood's relinquishment.

We proceed now to such notices as we possess of the ministers
of Fairfax parish. For these we are indebted to the vestry-records.
The Rev. Townshend Dade was ordained for this parish by the Bishop
of London in 1765, and entered upon his duties in the following
year or perhaps sooner. It is more than probable that he was the
son of Mr. Townshend Dade, who appears on the list of the first
vestry, or of Mr. Baldwin Dade, who was a vestryman at a later
date, and owner in part of the land on which Alexandria was built.
We are sorry to be unable to make a favourable report of the Rev.
Mr. Dade. In the year 1768, the vestry discuss the question of
examining into some alleged misconduct of his, and decide against
it, five members entering their dissent from the decision. In the
year 1777, a committee is appointed to wait upon him to know why
he neglects his congregation. Some months after, the committee is
enlarged and directed to take further steps. The result was his

resignation and relinquishment of the glebe and rectory. In the
same year the Rev. Spence Grayson is a candidate for the parish,
but the Rev. Mr. West, probably from Maryland, is preferred. He
continues until February of 1779, and resigns. The Rev. David
Griffith, then chaplain in the army, and formerly minister of Shelburne
parish, and well known to the people, is elected, though he
does not appear on the vestry-book as minister until October, 1780.
He continued to be its minister until his death in 1789. Of him
we shall speak more fully after our brief notice of the succession
of the ministers of this parish. The Rev. Bryan Fairfax succeeded
him in 1790. He was ordained deacon in 1786 by
Bishop Seabury. Mr. Bryan Fairfax had been a vestryman of
the parish and delegate to the Virginia Conventions for some
time before this. Whether it was that his health was delicate
from the first, or whatever was the cause, he wished an assistant
in the parish, and the vestry passed an order allowing him to
invite the Rev. Mason Locke Weems, or any one else whom
he might choose, to act as such. Mr. Fairfax made a very
different selection, and called the Rev. Bernard Page, giving
to him all the emoluments of the parish. Mr. Page was very decidedly
of the then rising evangelical school in the Church of England,
and a very zealous preacher of its doctrines. I doubt not but
that Mr. Fairfax sympathized with the principles of that school. In
a sermon of his which I have published, he sets forth the doctrine
of salvation by grace through faith in Christ in such a way as was
not common in that day. In the year 1792, he resigns his charge
in a letter stating his reasons, which is not entered on the record,
though the most flattering letter of the vestry, regretting their loss
of him, is. I am not aware how long he lived after this. His residence
during the latter years of his life was at a place called Mount
Eagle, a short distance beyond the Hunting Creek Bridge. He
was the father of the late Ferdinando Fairfax and Thomas Fairfax,
the latter of whom inherited his empty title of Lord Fairfax, also
of the late Mrs. Charles Catlett, by a second marriage. I am not
aware of other children, though there may have been. I have, in
another place, stated that he endeavoured to dissuade his friend
and neighbour, General Washington, from the war with England.
The General, in his letter to him, deals most gently and respectfully
with him. He was the son of his old friend and neighbour, George
William Fairfax, of Belvoir, and the brother of the wife of Lawrence
Washington, elder brother of the General. The Rev. Mr.
Fairfax acted with such prudence, if he did not see cause to change
his sentiments, as not to forfeit the friendship of Washington and
of the patriots in Fairfax parish, but was, as we have seen, chosen
to be their minister. He has left behind him many worthy adherents
to our Church, though some few have varied from it. At the
resignation of Mr. Fairfax the Rev. Thomas Davis was chosen. He
continued its minister until 1806, when he removed to Hungar's
parish, on the Eastern Shore, where he died. Mr. Davis had
ministered in various places throughout Virginia, and, though a man
of temperate habits and correct life by comparison with too many
of our clergy, was not calculated by his preaching or conversation
to promote the spiritual welfare of any people. He was succeeded
by the Rev. Mr. Gibson, of Maryland. Previous to his removal to
Alexandria, and while the church was vacant, the vestry invited
the Rev. Mr. McQuerr a Scotch minister of the Presbyterian Church,
who was then principal of the Washington Academy in Alexandria,
to officiate for them. With the character and habits of Mr. McQuerr
I became acquainted through my old teacher, Mr. Wiley, who was
educated at that school. They were nothing better than those of
many of the old Episcopal clergy. I am happy, however, to say
that more than twenty years after this, on one of my journeys to
the South, I heard of him as a most pious and exemplary minister
of that communion in the State of Georgia, a zealous advocate of
the Temperance and Colonization societies and of every good work,
and highly esteemed by all. He lived to a great age, persevering
to the last. There is something sad in the history of the Rev. Mr.
Gibson, but it must be told for the benefit of others. He began
well, preached zealously, was praised and flattered to his undoing.
He gave offence to some by a rather harsh way of saying true
things. This was complained of, and perhaps harsh things said in
return. These were communicated to him by a few of those false
friends who think to ingratiate themselves with their minister by
communicating to him what ought to be concealed. This exasperated
a temper naturally excitable. Under the influence of this, he suddenly
and unexpectedly, from the pulpit, resigned his charge.
The vestry were divided as to the acceptance of it, but the majority
were in favour of it. When too late he apologized, and wished to
retract. Parties were formed, and the result was another congregation
under his auspices. But, as will be seen when I come to
speak of that congregation, he did not continue long with it, but
returned to Maryland, where, after a short time, he was dismissed
for intemperance. There was reason to fear that the habit had
commenced in Alexandria, under the too popular pretext of using
ardent spirits privately as a medicine. He afterward united with
the Methodist Church and ministered in it. Let the clergy learn
from his fate to beware of false friends who inform them what their
enemies say of them, and to eschew alcohol, even as a medicine,
unless prescribed by a temperate physician and as a mere temporary
expedient imperiously called for.

In the following year, 1810, the Rev. Mr. Barclay, who came to
this country from the West Indies, was chosen. Bishop Clagett,
of Maryland, certified to his character for the last six years, during
which he had been ministering in Maryland; but in April of 1811
a wife, whom he had deserted, followed him from the West Indies,
and he resigned his charge in Alexandria and has been heard of no
more since.

Under these circumstances, the writer of these sad notices, having
been ordained by Bishop Madison in the spring of that year, at the
age of twenty-one, was induced to take the charge of Christ Church
in October, 1811, in conjunction with his charge in Frederick,
visiting the latter once a month. For some account of his ministry
at that time and place he refers to the second article in this series.

At the close of that brief term of service, extending only to
eighteen months, the Rev. Oliver Norris took charge of Christ
Church. Mr. Norris was of Quaker descent, but, occasionally attending
the services of St. Peter's Church, Baltimore, during the
ministry of Mr. Dashiel, first became convinced of sin, then of his
need of a Saviour, and then of the excellency of our service to
build up a convert in the true faith and practice of a Christian.
He has often detailed to me the circumstances of his conversion.
He first ministered at Elk Ridge and near Bladensburg, in Maryland,
and then came to Virginia. He was an affectionate pastor
and faithful preacher of the Gospel, very dear to his people, and
esteemed in the Church of Virginia. Being called upon to preach
his funeral sermon, and the same being published by the vestry, I
am able to present the following passage on one trait in his ministerial
character:—

After the death of Mr. Norris, in the summer of 1825, efforts
were made to obtain the services of the Rev. John Johns, then in
Fredericktown, Maryland, and of the Rev. Mr. Cobbs, of Bedford
county, Virginia, and on the failure of these applications the Rev.
Mr. Keith was induced to add the duties of a pastor and preacher
to those of professor. He continued this, with some interruption,
for the greater part of three years, when the Rev. Geo. Griswold,
son of Bishop Griswold, became pastor in 1828. On account of ill
health he resigned the following year, to the deep regret of the
congregation. The Rev. J. P. McGuire followed for one year, and,
unable through weakness of his eyes to make the necessary preparation
for the pulpit, resigned the charge. The Rev. Mr. Mann
succeeded, and, after continuing for three years, accepted an
agency for the Seminary. The Rev. Mr. Dana, its present minister,
then took charge of the church.

THE REV. DAVID GRIFFITH.

Concerning the Rev. David Griffith we have something more
particular to record. He was born in the city of New York, and
educated, partly in that place and partly in England, for the medical
profession. After taking his degree in London, he returned
to America and entered on his profession in the interior of New
York about the year 1763. Determined to enter the ministry of
the Episcopal Church, he went to London in the year 1770, and
was ordained by Bishop Terrick, August the 19th of that year, and
returned as missionary to Gloucester county, New Jersey. He
could not have continued there long; for, in the close of the next
year, he accepts the charge of Shelburne parish, Loudoun county,
Virginia. Governor Johnson, of New York, was very anxious to
obtain his services in that State, where he was regarded as a "man
of uncommon merit." The Governor of Virginia, also,—either from
personal knowledge or report,—recommends him very highly to

Shelburne parish. He continued in it until May, 1776, when—
being an American not only by birth but in heart—he entered the
service as chaplain to the 3d Virginia Regiment. In this service
he continued until some time in the year 1780. He appears as the
minister of Christ Church, Alexandria, during that year,—though
he was elected the previous year. He is represented as a man of
good size and fine appearance and pleasing manners, and as
enjoying the confidence of General Washington and the army.
Tradition says that, on the night before the battle of Monmouth,
he sought an interview with General Washington, and, in the presence
of his aids, bade him beware of General Charles Lee, though
he was not at liberty to give his reasons or authority. When Lee
unnecessarily and ingloriously retreated on the field of Monmouth,
and almost lost America the battle, there were those who believed
that he wished only to diminish the reputation of Washington and
receive the supreme command to himself. We only give this as
tradition. From the year 1780 to his death, in 1789, Mr. Griffith
was the much-esteemed pastor of Christ Church, Alexandria, and
that called Little Falls, higher up on the Potomac. During the
greater part of this time General Washington was his parishioner—
having a pew in Christ Church—and Mr. Griffith was a welcome
visitor at Mount Vernon. Mr. Griffith was not merely attentive to
his duty as a parish minister, but, in the dark and distressing days
of the Episcopal Church in Virginia and in the other States, took
a deep interest in the measures proposed for her welfare. When
a number of the clergy from the Northern States met—of their own
motion, in New York, in October, 1784—to consult about those
measures, Mr. Griffith appeared of his own accord from Virginia.
But before that time, I have letters to and from him, showing that
he was earnestly engaged in correspondence, both North and South,
with a view to promoting both State and General Conventions, as
the instruments of saving the Church from ruin. The following
letters which passed between himself and Dr. Buchanon of Richmond
will show how deplorable was the condition of things in Virginia
at this time, and also establish the fact that Dr. Griffith was
the first mover of the proposition to have a Convention in Virginia
after the war. I have also a letter in August, 1784, from the Rev.
Mr. West, dated from Baltimore, in which he delivers a message
from Dr. Smith, of Philadelphia, to Mr. Griffith, showing his estimate
of the latter in relation to this movement. It is probable that
this Mr. West was the same who preceded Mr. Griffith in Alexandria,
as he speaks of being there.

The following letter of Dr. Griffith to Dr. Buchanon, of Richmond,
must have been written in the fall of 1783, before any meeting
of Episcopalians, in any part of the land, had occurred with a
similar object. Dr. Buchanon's reply was not until the February
following, except so far as a verbal message went:—

The following is Dr. Buchanon's answer:—

Nothing could better exhibit the true condition of things in Virginia
than this correspondence. Dr. Buchanon acknowledges that
the clergy had brought this ruin upon themselves by their own misconduct.
Guilt-stricken, they were afraid and ashamed to come
forward boldly and call upon the Legislature to do something for
the cause of religion and morals, which were both declining. It never
seemed to enter into the thoughts of some, as a possibility, to do
any thing on the voluntary principle, independent of the State, so
accustomed were they to the old English system. Whether any
such meeting as that proposed by Dr. Griffith ever took place, I
have not the means of ascertaining. In the winter of 1785, the
Legislature incorporated the Episcopal Church, tendering the same
privilege to others, and in the preamble states that it was done at
the petition of the Episcopal clergy. How many united in it, and
whether it was done at a general meeting called for the purpose,
I know not. In May of that year, 1785, the first Convention of
clerical and lay deputies met in Richmond, under the Act of incorporation.
Mr. Griffith, being there, was appointed a delegate to
the General Convention in Philadelphia that fall. The second Virginia
Convention was held in May, 1786, when the Rev. Dr. Griffith
was chosen Bishop, by a vote of thirty-two members. Dr. Bracken
received ten, and Mr. Samuel Shield seven. An assessment was
made upon the parishes for funds to bear the expenses of his visit
to England for consecration; but such was the depressed condition
of the Church, that a sufficiency was not raised, either in that year
or the two succeeding ones. In May, 1789, Mr. Griffith resigned
his claim upon the office, and in the summer of that year died at
the house of Bishop White, while attending the General Convention.
At the following Convention, the Rev. James Madison was chosen
Bishop by a vote of forty-five,—the Rev. Samuel Shield having
nine. To the shame of the Church of Virginia, in that day be it

said, sufficient funds were not raised for Bishop Madison's consecration.
A part was drawn from his private resources, and that
worthy man, Graham Franks, of London, of whom we have before
spoken as the warm friend of the Church of Virginia, and whose
wife lies buried in old York graveyard, contributed five guineas
toward it.

The following names, not in the old vestry-book, have been furnished
me:—

Concerning two of the above-mentioned vestrymen I may be
permitted to say a few words. Mr. George Taylor and Edmund
I. Lee were churchwardens when I took charge of Christ Church
in 1811, and so continued until the removal of one by a change of
residence, and the other by death, after a long term of service.
They were both of them members of the Standing Committee during
the same period. I think I knew them well, and knew them to be
sincere Christians, and useful, punctual business-men. Mr. Taylor,

I think, nearly reached his century of years, his step still elastic
and form erect and countenance fine and temper unruffled,—walking
between Washington and Alexandria without weariness almost
to the last, and lifting up a distinct voice in the utterance of those
prayers in which he delighted,—dying, as he had lived, in the faith
of the Gospel. Mr. Lee generally attended on State Conventions,
and sometimes the General Convention. He was a man of great
decision and perseverance in what he deemed right,—obstinate, some
of us thought, even to a fault, when we differed from him. There
was no compromise at all in him, with any thing which he thought
wrong. He was as fearless as Julius Cæsar. On a certain Sabbath,
while I was performing service in Christ Church, a certain
person in the gallery disturbed myself and the congregation by
undue vociferation in the responses, and also at the opening of the
sermon. I paused, and requested him to desist, and was proceeding,
but Mr. Lee, who was near him, arose and asked me to suspend
the sermon. Walking toward the offender, he told him that he
must leave the house. As he approached to enforce it, the person
raised a loaded whip and struck at him. Mr. Lee, nothing moved,
took him by the arms and led him out of the house, and deposited
him in the town jail. When mayor of the town, he was a terror to
evil-doers. Ascertaining that there was much gambling going on
among the gentlemen of the place, and some of the principal ones,
he took effective measures for their discovery, brought between
thirty and forty before the court, and had them fined. The prosecuting
attorney was his particular friend, and was slightly implicated
in the evil practice; but he did not spare him. Nor did he
wish to be spared, but, coming forward and paying his fine, then
did his duty with all the rest. Mr. Lee was of course not a popular
man, nor did he seek or care to be, but did his duty entirely regardless
of all others. He kept our Conventions in good order, by
always insisting upon the observance of rules of which the clergy
are not always mindful. He was the great advocate of our Bishops'
fund, and defended it from all invasions. I not only knew Mr.
Lee from my youth up, but I saw him in his last moments, and
heard him with the truest humility speak of himself as a poor sinner,
whose only hope was in Christ. And can I speak of him
without remembering that meek and holy woman to whom he was
so long a most affectionate husband? She was the daughter of that
Christian patriot, Richard Henry Lee. For more than thirty
years she was gradually dying of consumption, and yet in such a
way as to admit of the exhibition of all her Christian graces in
the various relations of life. By universal consent, she was one of
the purest specimens of humanity sanctified by the grace of God.

P.S.—It was in this parish that the question of the right of the
Church to the glebes, which had been determined against the Church
in the Virginia courts, was reconsidered. Being brought before
the Supreme Court, the former decision was reversed, so far
as the glebe in Fairfax parish was concerned. The opinion of the
court, which was drawn up by Judge Story, of Massachusetts, may
be seen in the Appendix.

Vestry chosen for Fairfax parish, 28th March, 1765, with the
number of votes for each.

                       

John West	340
Charles Alexander	309
William Payne	304
John Dalton	281
George Washington	274
Charles Broadwater	260
George Johnston	254
Townshend Dade	252
Richard Sandford	247
William Adams	244
John Posey	222
Daniel French	221

Vestry chosen for Truro parish, 22d July, 1765, with the number
of votes for each.

                       

George Mason	282
Edward Payne	277
George Washington	259
John Posey	259
Daniel McCarty	246
George William Fairfax	235
Alexander Henderson	231
William Gardner	218
Tomison Ellzey	209
Thomas W. Coffer	189
William Lynton	172
Thomas Ford	170

ARTICLE LXX.

St. Paul's Church, Alexandria and Cameron and Shelburne
Parishes, Loudon County.

We have already said that St. Paul's Church grew out of a difference
between the Rev. Mr. Gibson and the congregation of Christ
Church, in 1809. There were worthy persons in the vestry and
congregation who thought that Mr. Gibson's apology for the manner
in which he resigned his charge ought to have been accepted, and
that he should have been allowed to withdraw his resignation and
continue his ministry. The majority of the vestry thought otherwise,
and that it would be better to let the connection be dissolved.
Some of the vestry and of the congregation thought that the harshness
of manner and language sometimes apparent in his discourses
proceeded from an honest zeal, which made him speak very differently
from the tame way and courteous strain of the old clergy,
and therefore determined to form a new congregation. They accordingly
purchased a small vacant church belonging to the Presbyterian
denomination, and commenced services in it. On the 23d of January,
1810, a vestry was organized, consisting of Daniel McLean,
Lawrence Hooff, James B. Nicholls, Mark Butts, Nathaniel C.
Hunter, John Young, Joseph Thomas, Adam Lynn, Joseph Thornton,
John Hooff, Thomas West Peyton, to whom at different times,
until the year 1832, have been added Charles Page, Thomas Moore,
Augustin Newton, Ferdinand Mastellar, John Gird, Lawrence
Lewis, Humphrey Peake, W. C. Gardiner, James Entwisle, Isaac
Cannell, Christopher Neale, George Johnson, Norman Fitzhugh,
Silas Reed, Lewis A. Cazenove, Benjamin I. Fendall, Bernard
Hooe, Charles Koones, William Fowle, Lewis Hooff, Anthony McLean,
Geo. U. Smoot, William H. Fowle, James Green, Dr. Isaac
Winston, Francis L. Smith, Stephen Shinn, David Funsten, Orlando
Fairfax, Silas Reed, George Brent, Bernard Hooe, &c.

MINISTERS OF ST. PAUL'S CHURCH.

The Rev. Mr. Gibson resigned in the month of September, 1811.
In the following February the Rev. Wm. Wilmer entered upon the
charge and continued in it until the 19th of October, 1826, when

he accepted the Presidency of William and Mary College. During
his ministry the old church was enlarged and the present church
built, and the congregation increased manifold. Of Dr. Wilmer I
have already spoken in one of the articles on Williamsburg. I will
only add that the congregation could not have been supplied with
one better calculated to build it up, whether we consider his zeal,
prudence, or ability for the work, in private or public. During his
residence in Virginia he was always sent to the General Convention,
and when there chosen to preside over its deliberations. With his
pen he defended Protestantism against Romanism, and moderate
views of the Church and Sacraments against certain extravagant
ones which were at that early period finding their way among us.
At the resignation of Mr. Wilmer, the Rev. William Jackson was
chosen, but did not enter upon his duties until February, 1827.
Most acceptably and usefully did he labour in this congregation,
until his resignation in June, 1832, when he accepted a call to St.
Stephen's Church, New York. He left St. Paul's and the diocese
of Virginia with the deep regrets of all who knew his amiable
character, heard his excellent sermons, and had opportunity to
appreciate his great worth. The Rev. James T. Johnson was then
elected, and entered upon his duties in the fall of 1833, and continues
the minister until the present time, 1857.

I find one or two things on the records of this parish which are
worthy of insertion. Bishop Madison was applied to to consecrate
the first St. Paul's Church, but declined on account of collegiate
duties, and requested Bishop Claggett to perform the office, which was
done promptly and much to the gratification of all. An instance
of liberality deserves also to be inserted. The first St. Paul's
Church was bought on credit for the sum of three thousand five
hundred dollars. In the year 1813, Mr. Daniel McLean, one of
the vestry, paid the amount and made a deed to the vestry for it.
The second church so exceeded the first in size and expense as to
cost twenty-six thousand dollars.

CAMERON AND SHELBURNE PARISHES.

Cameron parish was cut off from Truro parish in 1749, and until
1769 included Shelburne parish. A few words will suffice for all
the information I have to communicate concerning it. In the year
1758 the Rev. John Andrews was its minister; whether before or
after this, or how long, is not known. Whether he was the minister
who was subsequently the professor at Williamsburg, and after the
war discontinued the ministry and moved to Philadelphia, is not

known. He was ordained in 1749, and the Rev. Archibald Avens,
who probably succeeded him in Cameron parish, in 1767. In the
years 1773, 1774, and 1776, the Rev. Spence Grayson was the
minister; whether before or after, or how long, not known. We hear
nothing of this parish after the Revolution. There was a church
in it near the Gumspring, the traces of which are yet to be seen.
There was, I think, another not far from the junction of the roads
from Georgetown and Alexandria to Leesburg.

In addition to this brief notice of Cameron and Shelburne parishes,
we are able to furnish the following facts concerning the latter,
taken from an old vestry-book, or rather fragment of one, commencing
in 1771 and ending in 1806. On the 10th of April, in the
year 1771, the churchwardens—John Lewis and Thomas Shore—
are directed to employ some minister to perform divine service once
in every three months during pleasure, and that the preference be
given to the Rev. Mr. Scott, and that the minister employed do
preach at Leesburg and the other chapel (called the Mountain
Chapel) in the parish, as also at some convenient place near the
gap of the Short Hill, to be fixed on by the churchwardens. On
the 27th of July of that year, at the meeting of the vestry, it appears
that the Rev. Archibald Avens, who was no doubt the minister
in the parish of Cameron in the year 1769, two years before, when
Shelburne was cut off from it, and who was living in the part which
was assigned to Cameron, had moved into Shelburne and claimed
to be its minister. This the vestry resisted, and advertised for a
minister in the Virginia Gazette. In the month of August of the
same year we find the following entry:—

At a meeting in November of the same year, five thousand three
hundred and twelve pounds of tobacco were levied for the Rev.
James Scott, who had been officiating for them. He was doubtless
the minister of Prince William parish, of whom we have formerly
written, and who had been engaged to visit this parish during the
last six months.

In the next month we find the Rev. David Griffith elected and
unanimously recommended to the Governor for induction, which

was a striking proof of their confidence in him. Five thousand-weight
of tobacco were added to his salary in place of a glebe,—
there being none at that time. Mr. Griffith continued their minister
until May, 1776. During that year he engaged in the Revolutionary
struggle as chaplain. There is no record of any meeting
of the vestry after May the 22d, 1776, until April 27, 1779. In
1780 the vestry advertise for a minister. From 1776 to 1792 the
vestry was unable to obtain a minister. Indeed, it was impossible
to collect any thing for that purpose. The glebe which had been
purchased for Mr. Griffith was rented out during that time for a
very small sum. In the year 1794 the Rev. Alexander Jones is
minister for one year on a salary of fifty pounds. In 1796 the
Rev. Alexander McFarlan becomes the minister, on the written
condition that he may be removed at any time according to the
canons of the Church of Virginia. He engaged to preach two
Sundays at Leesburg, one at the Pot-House, and one at Middleburg.
In the year 1801, Mr. McFarlan, in a letter to the vestry,
resigns the parish and gives up the glebe, on the express condition
that they choose the Rev. John Dunn as his successor. The vestry
accept his resignation, adding that they have no regard to his conditions,
which he had no right to make. They, however, elect Mr.
Dunn, who was their worthy minister until his death in 1827. He
was ordained Priest by Bishop Madison. Mr. Dunn was suddenly
seized with paralysis while performing service in Middleburg, and
died in Leesburg shortly after.

I was called to witness his happy, triumphant death, and after
some time to make an improvement of both his life and death in a
funeral discourse, which was published. Had I a copy of it, I
would make use of some parts of it in order to convey to my readers
the impressions then resting on my own mind and on that of the
community concerning this excellent man. The text was, "Behold
an Israelite indeed, in whom there is no guile." And seldom
has it ever been so true of any of the frail children of men. He
was in all things a most sincere and upright man, "speaking the
truth from his heart." He was a man of a most humble and contented
mind. He lived on his glebe, and, though not much of a
farmer, and a very easy master to the few servants belonging to
himself or Mrs. Dunn, lived on its proceeds, receiving little or
nothing else, until perhaps the last few years of his life. I can
never forget his words or looks when, walking about his premises,
he told me that he had nothing to wish for more; that he had corn
enough in his granary to last until Christmas, and some hay, and

was out of debt; "and what do I want more?" he emphatically asked.
Mr. Dunn was a man of sound views of religion and an honest
preacher of them. From the time of the first efforts for the revival
of religion in Virginia until his death, he was a member of the
Standing Committee of the diocese and punctual in his attendance,
though living at some distance from the place where its meetings
were held.

He was succeeded by the Rev. Thomas Jackson, who continued
for three years to fill the place with ability and great acceptableness.
The Rev. Mr. Cutler then spent a year in the parish, and,
at the end of that time, removed to his present charge in Brooklyn,
New York.

The Rev. George Adie took charge of it in 1832, and continued
in it until his death, in 1856,—being its faithful, laborious, and
beloved minister for nearly twenty-four years,—and has been succeeded
by the Rev. Mr. Caldwell. Mr. Adie, for many years connected
with his charge at Leesburg regular though infrequent services
at Upperville, Middleburg, and Aldie. He also acted as chaplain to
the female school at Belmont, a few miles from Leesburg, kept by
Miss Margaret Mercer. For a faithful and deeply-interesting
account of this remarkable woman we must refer our readers to the
little volume by Dr. Caspar Morris, of Philadelphia, than which
there are few biographies more just, more edifying, or more pleasing.
Miss Mercer still lives in the memories and affections of her numerous
pupils, who are scattered over the land. For some years the
Sunday afternoon services of Mr. Adie were held in the large hall
at Belmont; but, as there were many poor in the neighbourhood,
Miss Mercer, at her own expense, put up a neat little chapel a
short distance from the house, for their benefit. I have spent some
interesting seasons in this house of God, preaching and administering
Confirmation. Miss Mercer was then and there to be seen in
her highest glory and happiness, in the midst of her pupils and the
poor. At her death, a tomb was erected in the churchyard by a
general contribution from her pupils, with the following inscription:—

The history of the churches in Shelburne parish, as seen on
the vestry-book, is amusing. For some years before the war, the

record states that various places were determined upon and then
abandoned, various plans agreed upon and then changed. Twice
was it ordered that a church be built at a place belonging to George
William Fairfax, once on the land of Colonel Tayloe, then at the
fork of the road leading to Noland's Ferry; sometimes it was to
be of wood, then of stone, sometimes of one size, then of another.
I am unable to designate either of the places. The war came upon
them while thus divided in sentiment, and settled the question in
favour of none. It was not until the second war with England
that an Episcopal church was begun in Leesburg, on its present
site. Services were held by Mr. Dunn in the old Presbyterian
church in Leesburg, and the free church in Middleburg.

A few words concerning the old glebe in this parish will not be
without interest to the present generation. About the year 1772,
a tract of land containing four hundred and sixty-five acres, on the
North Fork of Goose Creek, was purchased, and, soon after, a
house put upon it. When Mr. Dunn became minister, in 1801, an
effort was made by the overseers of the poor to sell it, but it was
effectually resisted at law. At the death of Mr. Dunn, in 1827,
the overseers of the poor again proceeded to sell it. The vestry
was divided in opinion as to the course to be pursued. Four of
them—Dr. W. C. Selden, Dr. Henry Claggett, Mr. Fayette Ball,
and George M. Chichester—were in favour of resisting it; the
other eight thought it best to let it share the fate of all the others.
It was accordingly sold. The purchaser lived in Maryland; and,
of course, the matter might be brought before the Supreme Court
as a last resort, should the courts of Virginia decide against the
Church's claim. The minority of four, encouraged by the decision
of the Supreme Court in the case of the Fairfax glebe, determined
to engage in a lawsuit for it. It was first brought in Winchester,
and decided against the Church. It was then carried to the Court
of Appeals, in Richmond, and, during its lingering progress there,
three out of four of the vestrymen who engaged in it died, and the
fourth was persuaded to withdraw it.

The vestry-book from the year 1806 to this present time having
been mislaid or lost, a friend has sent me from recollection the
following list of vestrymen in addition to the above:—

THE POWELL FAMILY.

I have not been able to ascertain any thing very certain concerning
the family of Powells which appears on the records of the
Church in Loudon county. The name of Powell is a very ancient
one on the civil records of Virginia. Cuthbert Powell was contemporary
in Lancaster county with the first John Carter. Indeed, the
name is found on one or more of the earliest lists of adventurers to
Virginia. Colonel Powell, of Loudon,—father of Messrs. Leven,
Burr, Cuthbert, Alfred Powell, and their sisters,—married a near
relative of the Rev. Mr. Harrison, of Dumfries, of whose ancestors
some account, taken from the record of Westminster parish, England,
was given in our sketch of Dettingen parish. Colonel Powell was
once a member of Congress from his district. With his widow I was
acquainted in the earlier years of my ministry. She was one whose
fidelity to the Church no adversity could shake. When all others
were deserting it, she continued steadfast. A minister of another
denomination was once conversing with her on the subject of his
own and her Church, and said that there was but little difference
between them,—that they were like twin-sisters. Whether she
suspected him of some design at proselyting or not, I cannot say,
but she very decidedly replied, "It might be so, but that she
greatly preferred one of the sisters to the other." She was old-fashioned
in all her ways,—in her dress, her home, her furniture,
and domestic occupations. She lived in a plain house, a little back
of the main and indeed only street in Middleburg. On one of my
journeys to Alexandria, while stopping on a summer's afternoon at
that place, I walked over to her abode, and found her busily engaged
at her wheel, spinning tow or flax, on what was called the
small wheel in those days, in contradistinction to that on which
wool and cotton were spun, and which was called the large wheel.

The march of improvement has left both sorts far behind, and with
them much honest, domestic industry and substantial clothing.

One word concerning my old friend, Mr. Lewis Berkeley, of Aldie.
We were school-boys together. He was descended from the old
family of Berkeleys in Middlesex, which lived at Barnelms, on the
Pyankatank, and which was the last to leave the county, after
having been a main prop to the Church for more than one hundred
and fifty years. Mr. Lewis Berkeley married a daughter of Mr.
William Noland, an old member of the Legislature from Loudon, in
days long since passed away. Mr. Noland signalized himself by his
zealous advocacy of the law against duelling. So just and sensible
was his speech on the subject, that it was soon introduced into the
school-books or collection of pieces for school-boys, and still holds
its place. Mr. Berkeley, his excellent wife, and Mr. and Mrs.
Noland, were for a long term of years the pious, consistent, active,
and liberal supporters of the Episcopal Church in Loudon, whether
the services were at Aldie, Middleburg, or even twelve miles off,
at Leesburg, at which latter place they often attended.

ARTICLE LXXI.

Parishes in Frederick County.

In our last communication we had reached the Blue Ridge,—the
great dividing-line between Eastern and Western Virginia. We
now ascend that beautiful range of mountains, and look down on
the wide and extensive valley which lies between it and those numerous
ones which hide the great Alleghany from our view. I believe
it is generally admitted that this valley is not only the most fertile
and desirable portion of the State, but also the most picturesque
and beautiful. But it is not our province to descant on such themes.
We may, however, be permitted to declare our assent to the hypothesis
of Mr. Jefferson and others, that it was once a great lake or
sea, which emptied itself through the channel formed by the force
of the waters at Harper's Ferry, leaving immense prairies behind
to be covered in due time with heavy forests, some of which our
eyes now behold, while most of them have been felled by the hands
of our forefathers.[47]

Such a country could not but attract the attention of hardy and
adventurous farmers. The first who entered it were from Pennsylvania.
Crossing the Potomac at what is now called Shepherdstown,
but at first and for a considerable time Mecklenburg,—doubtless
after some town or place in Germany,—they there made a settlement.
From thence emigration proceeded on toward Winchester,
Stephensburg, or Newtown, Woodstock, &c. Joist Hite, the ancestor
of all the Hites, was the first to make a settlement north of
Winchester, with sixteen families. This was in the year 1732. His

descendants of that name became active members of, or friends of,
the Episcopal Church. Soon after this, Presbyterians of Scotch
and Irish descent began to settle in the valley. In the year 1738,
a number from Pennsylvania, wishing to add themselves to those
already settled, sent, through the synod of Pennsylvania, a deputation
to Governor Gooch, of Virginia, "asking all liberty of conscience
and of worshipping God agreeably to the principles of their
education." They professed the utmost loyalty to the King, and
promised "the most dutiful submission to the government which is
placed over them." The Governor assured them of his favour, and
that no interruption should be given to their ministers, if they should
"conform themselves to the rules prescribed by the Act of Toleration
in England." It was the same principle which had been acted
on before this time in Virginia, and continued to be to the end of
the Colonial Establishment. Under that law, any number of
persons, of whatsoever name, might ask for and should receive a
license for some place of meeting where they might worship after
their own way. Even during the preceding century, the first of
our settlements in Virginia, the Germans on the Rappahannock
and the French Huguenots on James River had not only been tolerated,
but allowed special favours, such as grants of lands and
freedom from taxes, until of their own accord they applied to be
admitted into union with the Established Church under Episcopal
ministers,—finding it difficult to procure any of their own. Other
denominations also were allowed licenses for places of worship,—
whether private or public houses,—provided they sought and used
them in compliance with the true intent of the law. In the case of
President Davies, about the middle of the last century,—which we
have considered when speaking of the parish in Hanover,—seven
places of worship were licensed for him before the Governor declared
that he was exceeding the bounds prescribed by the spirit
and intent of the law.

With these general observations we proceed to the history of the
parish of Frederick. The materials are furnished by the Acts of
Assembly dating back to the year 1738, to the records of the court
beginning in 1744, and to the old vestry-book going back to the
year 1764, and some papers of an earlier date.

In the year 1738, the Assembly, in consideration of the increasing
number of settlers in the valley, determined to cut off two
new counties and parishes—West Augusta and Frederick—from
Orange county and parish, which latter then took in all Western
Virginia. The county and parish of Frederick embraced all that

is now Shenandoah, with a part of Page, Warren, Clarke, Frederick,
Jefferson, Berkeley, and Hampshire. Augusta had all the rest to
the utmost limits of Virginia, wherever they were,—the contest with
France as to the boundaries not being then settled. The execution
of the Act, however, was postponed until it should be made to
appear that there were inhabitants enough for the appointment of
justices of the peace, &c. In the year 1744, the vestry and court
of Frederick county were organized and in action. Of the vestry,
nothing more is heard after its organization, except the appointment
of processioners in 1747, until the year 1752, when an Act
of Assembly was passed dissolving it and ordering a new election,
on the ground that it had raised more than fifteen hundred pounds
for building a number of churches which were unfinished and in a
ruinous condition. As the churches of that day and in this region
were log-houses, costing only from thirty to forty or fifty pounds,
there must have been much misspending of money. Who those
vestrymen were does not appear. Those chosen in their place were
the following:—Thomas Lord Fairfax, Isaac Perkins, Gabriel Jones,
John Hite, Thomas Swearingen, Charles Buck, Robert Lemmon,
John Lindsey, John Ashby, James Cromley, Lewis Neil. Thomas
Bryan Martin, the nephew and one of the heirs of Lord Fairfax,
does not ever appear as vestryman, but seems to have been an
active magistrate, and to have taken a considerable part in completing
McCoy's Chapel, on the road from Winchester to Front
Royal, in the neighbourhood of the McCoys and Cunningham Chapel,
which stood near the spot where what has been long called the Old
Chapel—near the Burwell burial-ground—still stands. Mr. Edward
McGuire also appears as a magistrate, but not as vestryman,—he
being of the Romish Church. He was the ancestor of many worthy
ministers and members of the Protestant Episcopal Church of
Virginia.

Having mentioned Lord Fairfax as the first on the list of that
most respectable body of vestrymen given above, and who also gave
the land on which the church in Winchester stood, and under which
he was buried, it is but right that we should add a few words as to
himself and his numerous and most estimable relatives now scattered
through this and other States.

The first of the Fairfaxes who came to this country, and who
settled in Westmoreland, and then on an estate near Mount Vernon,
called Belvoir, was Mr. William Fairfax, a scholar, a soldier and
civilian. The latter character he exhibited as President of the
Council of Virginia,—the station next to that of Governor. By two

marriages he had five children,—George William, Thomas, William,
Bryan, and Hannah. George William married a Miss Cary, of
Virginia, but left the county before the Revolutionary War.
Thomas and William died, the one in the English navy and the
other in the army. Bryan took Orders in the Episcopal Church, and
was for some years minister of Christ's Church, Alexandria. Hannah
married Warner Washington, of Fairfield, a near relative of George
Washington, and was a worthy member of our Church, leaving two
sons and three daughters behind. Two of her daughters—Mrs.
Milton (who was previously Mrs. Nelson) and Mrs. Whiting—were
long and well known to me as among the best of women. Of their
mother I have often heard Mr. Balmaine speak in the highest
terms.[48] The elder William Fairfax was the manager of the estates
of his kinsman, Lord Thomas Fairfax, the owner of all the lands in
the Northern Neck of Virginia, which he inherited from his mother,
the daughter of Lord Culpepper, and which were bounded by the
Rappahannock and Potomac, extending to the head-waters of each,
the one beginning in the Blue Ridge, the other in the Alleghany
Mountains. Lord Fairfax was a man of the most perfect English
education, Oxford being his Alma Mater. He was a member of
that club of which Addison was the head, and to whose pens we are
indebted for that immortal work, the Spectator. He was early and
deeply disappointed in love, which gave a turn to his character and
habits, and prepared him for seclusion in the wilds of America.
In 1749, he visited his estates in Virginia, and was so much pleased
with the country that he determined to settle here. During that
visit he became acquainted with, and attached to, young George
Washington, then only sixteen years of age. The affection was
returned on the part of Washington, and he readily accepted the
proposition of Lord Fairfax to become surveyor of all his lands.
Lord Fairfax returned for a short time to England, while Washington
immediately repaired to his work in the valley, making his
head-quarters at Greenway Court. Washington continued for two
or three years in the service of Lord Fairfax, and as public surveyor
for Western Virginia. At the death of Lord Fairfax, in
1781, being ninety-two years of age, the title fell to his only surviving
brother, Robert, in England, and at his death, which occurred
soon after, to the Rev. Bryan Fairfax, the nearest kinsman. It
deserves to be mentioned of Lord Fairfax, that, titled as he was, and
rich, he never failed to perform his duty as a citizen and neighbour,
but, besides acting as Keeper of the Rolls for Frederick, was uniform
in his attendance at Winchester, twelve miles off, as one of the
magistrates of the county. The poor around him cultivated some
of his lands, and received all the benefits of the same.[49]

To McCoy's and Cunningham's Chapel are to be added two on
the north and south branches of Shenandoah, whose location cannot
now be ascertained, one in Winchester, one at Bunker's Hill, called
Morgan's Chapel, of which we shall speak more fully hereafter,
perhaps one called Wood's Chapel, between Winchester and Charlestown,
and one at Shepherdstown, then called Mecklenburg Chapel.
All these were probably begun, and some of them sufficiently completed
for use, between the years 1740 and 1750. In 1768, Mr.
Van Swearingen received one hundred and forty-eight pounds for
completing a new church at Mecklenburg, now Shepherdstown. In
the year 1768, Isaac Hite was directed to contract for a church at
Leith's—place not known—for forty-nine pounds. In the year 1774,
a church was ordered to be built near Cedar Creek for one hundred
pounds; whether executed or not, I cannot tell. In the year 1772,
it was resolved to build a church, costing two hundred and fifty-two
pounds, at Carney's Spring, near Berryville, on land given by Mr.
Charles Smith, which was afterward increased to four hundred and
forty-nine pounds, and a contract made with Mr. John Neville, father
of General Neville, and some of the materials collected on the spot.
In the following year it was determined to build it at Cunningham's

Chapel, two acres of ground being given by Colonel Hugh Nelson, of
York, the then owner of the Burwell tract, and the materials moved
there. Again it was resolved to build at Carney's Spring, and the
materials removed a second time. The result of the controversy was
that no such church was ever built, though the money was in hand.
The war soon came on, and at the end of it the funds were delivered
into the hands of the overseers of the poor. In the year 1762, a
new stone church was contracted for in Winchester,—the same which
was afterward sold in order to build the present church.

Having thus brought down the history of the church-buildings to
the time of the Revolution, we will now give a list of the lay readers
and vestrymen from the year 1764, when the vestry-book commences,
merely premising that the county and parish of Frederick
were in 1769 divided into the counties of Dunmore, afterward
changed to Shenandoah, Frederick, and Berkeley, and into the
parishes of Beckford, Frederick, and Norbone.

Names of the vestrymen from the year 1764 until the year 1780,
when no more meetings of the vestry take place until 1785:—Isaac
Hite, John Hite, John Greenleaf, Thomas Rutherford, James Keith,
John Neville, Charles Smith, James Wood, Jacob Hite, Thomas
Wadlington, Burr Harrison, Thomas Swearingen, Van Swearingen,
Angus McDonald, Philip Bush, Frederick Conrad, George Rice,
Alexander White, James Barnett, Marquis Calmes, John McDonald,
Edward Snickers, Warner Washington, Joseph Holmes, Benjamin
Sedwick, Edmund Taylor, John Smith, Samuel Dowdal. Of these,
Philip Bush and some others, in consequence of some unknown difficulties,
resigned in the year 1774, though all of them resumed their
seats except Mr. Bush. Lord Fairfax in the year 1775 made a deed
to Mr. Bush, Frederick Conrad, and others, for the lot on which the
Lutheran church stood, though Mr. Conrad continued as vestryman
until the year 1780, when the vestries were all dissolved by
Act of Assembly. James Wood, who was both clerk and vestryman,
resigned in 1777 and entered the army. He rose to the rank
of General, and was afterward Governor of the State, and represented
the parish two years in Convention while Governor. James
Barnett resigned in 1773 and joined the Baptists.

The lay readers during all this period, at the different chapels,
were John Ruddell, James Barnett, John Barns, Henry Nelson,
James Graham, Henry Frencham, Morgan Morgan, John James,
William Dobson. William Howard, John Lloyd.

THE MINISTERS OF FREDERICK PARISH.

The Rev. Mr. Gordon was the first; when his ministry commenced
and ended, not known. The Rev. Mr. Meldrum comes next, and
continues until 1765. Between him and the vestry a long law-suit
was carried on, which terminated in his favour. The vestry applied
to the Legislature for relief, and obtained it. Mr. Sebastian was recommended
by the vestry to the Bishop of London for Orders in 1766,
and became their minister, but after two years removed to Northumberland
county. The Rev. Mr. Thruston became the minister in
1768, binding himself to preach at seven places scattered over the
large parish of Frederick, Shepherdstown being one of them. Mr.
Thruston was a native of Gloucester, where the name still abounds,
and was captain of the militia in that county. The vestry of Petsworth
parish, in Gloucester, recommended him for Orders, and he
was their minister for some years before coming to Frederick. He
laid down the ministry and entered the army in 1777. After the
war he lived at Mount Zion, in Frederick. In his latter days he
removed to the neighbourhood of New Orleans, and, it is said, was
preparing to take some part in defending that place against the
British when they were defeated by General Jackson. He was
the father of the late Judge Thruston, of the District of Columbia,
and the ancestor of many respectable families in Virginia and elsewhere.
From the time of Colonel Thruston's resignation in 1777
to the year 1785, there was no minister, so far as we can ascertain.
In the year 1785, a vestry was elected, consisting of Colonel R. K.
Meade, George F. Norton, churchwardens, John Thruston, Edward
Smith, Raleigh Colston, Girard Briscoe, John Milton, Robert Wood,
Major Thomas Massey. By this vestry the Rev. Alexander Balmaine
was chosen minister. He had been chaplain in the army
of the Revolution, in which a number of the above-mentioned vestrymen
had served. Mr. Balmaine was born in Scotland, in the
neighbourhood of Edinburgh, in the year 1740, was educated at St.
Andrews with a view to the Presbyterian ministry, but relinquished
the design. Himself and his brother, who was a lawyer, were
warm friends of the Colonists in the Stamp Act difficulties, and
became so obnoxious on that account to the loyalists about Edinburgh,
that they thought it best to try their fortunes elsewhere,
and moved to London, where they became acquainted with Mr.
Arthur Lee, who recommended Mr. Balmaine to the family of
Richard Henry Lee, as private tutor. While there, he prepared

for the ministry of the Episcopal Church, and upon receiving Orders
became rector of Augusta parish, then extending to the Ohio River,
and including, it is believed, Pittsburg itself, for the paid several
visits to the Episcopalians in that place. When our difficulties
commenced with England, true to his principles adopted in Scotland,
he took an early and active part, was chairman of the Committee
of Safety in Augusta, and drafted the resolution adopted
by that committee. Soon after this, he entered the Virginia line
as chaplain, and continued so until the very close of the war.
Mr. Balmaine was the rector of the parish of Frederick until his
death. I was his assistant during a number of the last years of
his life.

ARTICLE LXXII.

Parishes in Frederick County.—No. 2.

After the death of Mr. Balmaine, the Rev. Mr. Bryan officiated
for a time at Winchester, Bunker's Hill, and Wickliffe, in the capacity
of assistant to myself, for a few years. He was followed by
the Rev. Mr. Robertson as assistant in Winchester alone. After a
few years he resigned and went on a mission to Greece. In the
year 1827, Christ Church, Winchester, was organized into a separate
parish, to be called the parish of Frederick, Winchester, with
the Rev. J. E. Jackson, minister. Mr. Jackson was one of three
worthy brothers of most respectable parentage in Tutbury, England,
all of whom ministered in the Church of Virginia and elsewhere in
this country. The Rev. J. E. Jackson was the father of the Rev.
William Jackson, who recently died so enviable a death in Norfolk.
He was a most diligent and faithful pastor, preaching the true
doctrines of the Gospel. Under his careful supervision the present
excellent church and parsonage were built. In 1842, he resigned
and moved to Kentucky. He was succeeded in 1842 by the Rev.
Mr. Rooker, who resigned in 1847. Its present rector, the Rev.
Cornelius Walker, succeeded Mr. Rooker. In May, 1834, another
division of Frederick parish took place, when Wickliffe, including
Berryville, was organized. The Rev. Mr. Jackson had been my
assistant in that part of the parish for two years before this. The
Rev. Mr. Rice had preceded him in that capacity. The Rev. Mr.
Shiraz followed Mr. Jackson. Its next was the Rev. Richard Wilmer,
who was succeeded by the Rev. Mr. Peterkin. Its present, the
Rev. Mr. Whittle. This parish has recently been subdivided, and
the Rev. Mr. Powell, who was disappointed during the last year in
going to China, is the minister of that part which includes Wickliffe
Church. Another offshoot was also made from Frederick parish many
years since, in the neighbourhood of Middletown, where a parish
was organized and a neat brick church built in the village, under
the auspices of the late Strother Jones, the families of Hites, and
others. It has had mainly to depend on the occasional services of
the ministers in Winchester. The Rev. Mr. Bryant and the Rev.
Mr. Irish were each for some time settled among them, and in none

of our congregations have more zeal and liberality been displayed,
according to numbers and means.

Having thus spoken of the five different divisions of Frederick
parish, after itself had been reduced by Acts of Assembly, I proceed
to mention the new churches built since the Revolution, in
addition to those at Winchester and Middletown, already alluded
to. Among the first things done by the vestry of Frederick, after its
reorganization in 1787, was the adoption of measures for the building
of a stone chapel where it was designed to erect that one which
failed, through the disagreement of the people and vestry, just before
the Revolution,—viz.: where that called Cunningham's Chapel
stood. The land having now come into possession of Colonel
Nathaniel Burwell, the same two acres for a church and burying-ground,
which were offered by Colonel Hugh Nelson before the
war, were now given by Colonel Burwell, and the present stone
chapel ordered to be built in 1790. At what time it was completed
does not appear, but probably in the same year. After the revival
of our Church in Virginia commenced, a stone church was built
at Wickliffe, Mr. Tredwell Smith and General Thomas Parker being
the most active agents. A strenuous effort was made to have it a
free church, which I earnestly opposed, and offered to insure from
elsewhere as much as was pledged by other than Episcopalians. It
was ascertained that not more than fifty dollars, out of the two or
three thousand dollars which it cost, would be subscribed by other
than Episcopalians, and the plan was dropped. This church was
badly executed, and after a time the present excellent one of brick
was built under the superintendence of Mr. Jaqueline Smith, and
in a great measure at his expense. The ground on which it stood
had been given by the family of Williams, who, with their ancestors
in the Northern Neck of Virginia, had ever been staunch friends
of the Church. After some years the church at Berryville was
built on ground given by Mr. John Taylor, who owned the farm of
which it was a part. The building of this church was delayed for
some years by the attempt to have it placed on some basis which
would make it common to all denominations. Effort after effort
was made to effect it on this plan, without success. At length, when
the friends of the scheme acknowledged its failure, I addressed the
congregation in favour of an Episcopal church, and succeeded at
once. In the year 1834, it was found that the old chapel was too
small and inconvenient for the increasing congregation, and it was
therefore determined to erect another and larger one, in a more
central and convenient place, in the vicinity of Millwood, on ground

given by Mr. George Burwell, of Carter Hall. Such, however, was
the attachment of many to the old chapel that funds for the latter
could not be obtained, except on condition of alternate services at
the chapel. From year to year these services became less frequent,
until at length they are now reduced to an annual pilgrimage, on
some summer Sabbath, to this old and much-loved spot, except
when services are held for the servants, or death summons the
neighbours to add one more to the tenants of the graveyard.[50]

My remarks on the old parish of Frederick, and some of its
branches, will be brought to a close by a brief reference to a spot
of all others most sacred to many now living as the depository of
all that was mortal of those most dear to us,—the burying-ground
which lies at the foot of the hill on which still stands the old stone
chapel. Ever since its appropriation to this purpose, it has been
the graveyard of rich and poor, bond and free, those who lived near
it, and the stranger from afar who died near it. It is called the
Burwell graveyard, not merely because the land was given by one
of that name, but because it is the resting-place of a far greater
number bearing that name than any other. It has recently been
enlarged and a portion of it divided into lots and the whole enclosed
with a strong stone wall. The vestry have also proposed the raising
and vesting in stock the sum of one thousand dollars for the perpetual
preservation of it and the old chapel which overlooks it.
Both of them stand in the immediate angle of two public and
much-frequented roads, and the passing traveller may see old and
venerable trees overshadowing many tombs, younger ones of perpetual
verdure more recently planted, green hillocks, covered with
grass and ivy, high headstones and large marble slabs, marking the
place of interment and designating the names of those whose remains
are beneath, and now and then a pillar, either for young or
old, rising above the other memorials. To this place, for more
than sixty years, have I been travelling, either borne in the arms
of others, or as a mourner, or as officiating minister. To it, at no

distant day, I expect to be carried, and from it I hope to see arise
the bodies of some of the truest saints of the Lord, unto whom, in
the adjoining temple, I was privileged to preach the blessed Gospel
of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

A brief notice of the family of Burwells, so many of whom lie
buried there, and of one other individual mentioned in the vestrybook
as the friend and defender of the Church, and whose body
was interred among his relatives, is all that I shall further say in
connection with this spot. The early genealogy of this family I
take from Henning's Statutes at Large, Campbell's History of Virginia,
and the tombstones at Carter's Creek, in the county of
Gloucester. The first of the name in this country was Major Lewis
Burwell, of Carter's Creek, in Gloucester county, Virginia, who
died in 1658. His wife was a Miss Higginson, whose father signalized
himself in the wars with the Indians. He had two sons,—
Nathaniel and Lewis. Nathaniel married a daughter of Robert
Carter, commonly called King Carter, by whom he had three sons
and one daughter. The daughter was named Elizabeth, and married
President Nelson. His sons were Lewis, Carter, and Robert
Carter. Lewis was either father or grandfather of that Lewis
Burwell who was President of the Council in 1750. Carter married
Lucy, the daughter of John Grymes, and settled at the Grove, near
Williamsburg. He was the father of Colonel Nathaniel Burwell,
who moved to Frederick and built Carter Hall. The third son,
Robert Carter, settled in Isle of Wight, and was the father of Nathaniel
Burwell, of that county, and of Fanny, the first wife of
Governor Page. His son Nathaniel was the father of Robert Carter
Burwell, who moved to Frederick, of Mrs. Philip Nelson, and of
their three sisters, Jane, Fanny, and Ariana, who died unmarried,
and lie with their brother in the Burwell graveyard. The second
son of the first of the Burwells was, as we have stated, Major
Lewis Burwell. His first wife was Abigail Smith, heiress of Nathaniel
Bacon, who was for many years President of the Council,
and near relatives of Bacon the rebel. Hence the name of Bacon,
in the Burwell family. By this marriage, he had four sons and
six daughters. His second wife was the widow of the Hon. William
Cole, and came from Nansemond county, by whom he had
two sons and three daughters. He died in the year 1710, leaving
only three sons out of the six, and six daughters out of the nine.
He lived at King's Mill, or somewhere near, either in York county
or James City. His son Lewis built a large house at King's Mill

and improved the place at great expense, also purchased other lands
around, and a tract in the Isle of Wight; on account of which, in
1736, he obtained leave of the Assembly to dock the entail of a
tract of land in King William and dispose of it. Of his numerous
descendants, and of those of the other branches, we can only say
that we find them settled in King William, Lancaster, Nansemond,
Isle of Wight, and then moving to Frederick, Berkeley, Botetourt,
Richmond City, and other places. The father of those settled in
Botetourt we read of as an active member of the vestry in King
William. Wherever they have gone, they have retained their attachment
to the Church of their fathers, and some have entered its
ministry.

I shall be excused for adding to the above a piece of family
history connected with that of a high public functionary of Old
Colonial Virginia, which may serve to cast some light on the state
of society and of the Church at the close of the first century of our
settlement. The second Lewis Burwell, as we have seen, 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 of her parents in
royal style. Neither she, her parents, or the other members of the
family, were disposed to comply. He became furious, and for years
persisted in his design and claim. All around him felt the effects
of his rage. The father, brothers, Commissary Blair, and the Rev.
Mr. Fowace, minister of some parish near Williamsburg, were the
special 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. This caused a friend of his 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 with the blood of her nearest relatives,
and yet she 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 but himself,—viz.: the bridegroom,
the officiating minister, and the justice who issued the license." The
Rev. Mr. Fowace, in a letter to the Lord-Commissioners in England,
complains, among other things, of being assaulted by Governor
Nicholson one evening on his return from a visit to the family, (the
Major being sick,) and ordered 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 even on horseback.
Such was the conduct of the Governor to him in this and
other respects that the Council and some of the clergy united in a
petition to the Crown for his removal, which was granted. All this
and much more is on record in the archives of Lambeth Palace,
copies of which are before me. What was the subsequent history
of the young lady who, like another Helen, was the innocent cause
of so much strife, is not told. Even her Christian name is not
given. 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.

I promised to conclude this article with some mention of a gentleman
whose name was on the vestry-book and whose body was
interred in the old graveyard. That person was Mr. Edmund
Randolph, a distinguished lawyer of Virginia, who was often employed
by the vestries as their counsellor. Such was the case with
the vestry of Frederick parish. Mr. Edmund Randolph was the
son of Mr. John Randolph, once Attorney-General of the State, but
who, at the breaking out of the war, preferred the royal to the republican
cause, and went to England with his family. His office
was given to his patriotic son Edmund Randolph, who figured so
largely, as the defender of his country, in the councils of the
State and of the nation, and the zealous supporter of the Church
against all which he believed to be assaults upon her rights. Young
Edmund Randolph was adopted by his uncle Peyton (who had
no children,) and espoused the same side, both as to the Church
and State, with the uncle, and was for a time the Secretary of State
under General Washington. He was educated at Williamsburg,
soon after Mr. Jefferson, Governor Page, and other distinguished
men of Virginia. It was a period of growing infidelity at that
college, and Mr. Randolph was for a time somewhat tinctured with
it, as he himself told me toward the close of his life. I can never
forget the manner in which he described the effect of a little flattery
from one of the leaders of the new school, for some doubts expressed
by him as to the truth of Christianity or of some of its doctrines.
That leader patted him on the head, calling him a promising youth
for the utterance of so independent a thought. The pressure of
that hand, he said, was felt for a long time afterward. But he
happily escaped the infidelity which soon deluged the State, and
joined Mr. Peyton Randolph, Robert C. Nicholas, Judge Pendleton,

Governor Page, and others, in defending the Church and
religion. He was not only engaged by different vestries in special
cases, as in the parish of Frederick, but was counsel for the whole
Church in that great question of the constitutionality of the law
which took away the Church property, and which was lost to the
Church by the sudden death of Judge Pendleton. Mr. Randolph
informed me that he had read that opinion and decision which was
drawn by Judge Pendleton, the President of the court, and, as I
think, that it was among his papers. Since his death I have repeatedly
inquired for it, but was informed that neither among his
papers nor those of Judge Pendleton was it to be found. It has
always been said that the document was in the pocket of Judge
Pendleton when he was suddenly struck dead on the morning of
the day on which it was to have been used. The latter days of
Mr. Randolph's life were spent chiefly at his son-in-law's, Mr.
Bennett Taylor's, of Frederick county. I saw him during this
period, and conversed with him on religious subjects, in which he
seemed to take a deep interest. McKnight's Commentary on the
Epistles came out about this time, and Mr. Randolph, who had probably
never been much conversant with such books, became passionately
fond of it, and sometimes talked of preparing and publishing
some selections from it, or an abridgment of it, that others might
enjoy the pleasure he had experienced in some of its elucidations
of Scripture, which seemed to him, to use his own language, like a
new revelation on some dark points. Mr. Randolph died at Carter
Hall, the seat of Colonel Nathaniel Burwell, of Frederick county,
and lies buried in the old graveyard by the side of Mrs. Taylor
and her husband. I close by referring in anticipation to a topic
which at some later stage of this work I purpose to notice more
fully. I have said above that the time of Mr. Randolph's residence
at William and Mary was one of growing infidelity. I was not
aware until lately that infidelity was of so recent an origin in
Virginia. In the year 1723 the Bishop of London addressed a
circular to all the clergy of Virginia, with a view of ascertaining
the state of religion in all the parishes. Among the questions
was the following:—Are there any infidels in your parish? Invariably
the reply was, none but the Indians and negroes. An
infidel among those who had been brought up in the Christian
faith was an unhappy being not then known in Virginia. The
great deep of the French Revolution had not then begun to be
broken up. Even France was not then infidel. I could scarce
believe those uniform responses of the clergy of Virginia, registered
as they are in the archives of our Mother-Church, and copies of
which are before me, until I came to another record of a somewhat
later date, which tells of the introduction of the first infidel book
which came over to Virginia. It was entitled, "A Plain Instruction."
The fact is communicated to the authorities in England, by
a letter or letters from the authorities here, as a most dreadful one.

ARTICLE LXXIII.

Norbourne Parish, Berkeley County.—No. 1.

This parish and county were, by Act of Assembly, taken from
Frederick in the year 1769,—just after the completion of the
church at Mecklenburg, or Shepherdstown, under the superintendence
of Mr. Van Swearingen. A small church had previously
stood probably on the same spot. By his will in 1776, the father
of Mr. Abraham Shepherd—Mr. Thomas Shepherd—directed his
executor to deed "a lot of two acres on which the English church
stood." A third was erected on that lot many years since, and
has been enlarged of late years to its present dimensions. A
new, larger, and more excellent one in all respects is now far
advanced. Without detracting from the praise due to many who
have contributed funds and efforts to the last two churches, we
must ascribe the first of them chiefly to the zeal, perseverance, and
liberality of that true friend of the Church in her darkest days, Mr.
Abraham Shepherd, and its enlargement to the generous donation
of eight hundred dollars by his pious widow; and the erection
of the fourth to the gift of three thousand dollars by one of his
sons, while other members of the family, and the parishioners
generally, have not been wanting in their contributions. To an
excellent parsonage for the minister they also contributed; but the
holy woman, the aged mother, excelled them and all others,—contributing
not less than one thousand dollars to it. From the year
1813 to the time of her death, in 1852, when she had reached her
ninety-second year, I knew her well. It was good to hear her speak
from the abundance of her heart on the subject which interested
her most. Out of the Bible first, and then out of the writings of
Hervey, Newton, and others of the evangelical school of the Church
of England, she drew her views of doctrinal and practical piety.
It so happened that several of those ministers under whose teachings
she sat were of that class, having for a time been followers of
Lady Huntingdon, Wesley, and Whitefield, but who drew back from
their path when they were about to turn aside from the old way of
the Church of England. She was most faithful in the use of all
the means appointed of God in his Church for "the perfecting of

his saints,"—in prayer private and public, in the participation
of the Lord's Supper, in the strict observance of the Lord's Day,
in fasting and alms, in simplicity and cheapness of apparel, in selfdenial
that she might have to give to the poor and good objects.
She was conscientious even to scrupulousness. Her sons delighted
in fine cattle, and, at great expense and with great care, became
possessed of some of the finest in the land, and sold the young
ones at high prices. She has often told me that she could not be
reconciled to their asking and receiving such enormous prices for
poor little lambs and calves; and she took care to be in no way
partakers with them. Much more might I say, but prefer directing
my reader to the excellent and just picture of her character given
in a funeral-sermon by the Rev. Mr. Andrews, her minister.

Having thus referred to the first establishment of the Church at
Shepherdstown, I proceed to notice its next settlement in the parish
of Norbourne, at Charlestown, in what is now Jefferson county. It
took its name from Mr. Charles Washington,—one of the brothers
of General Washington,—who settled on some of the fine land
taken up or purchased by the latter during the period when he was
public surveyor. His house still stands in the suburbs of the village.
Others of the family soon moved to this neighbourhood, and for the
last forty years have formed a considerable portion of the flourishing
congregation now surrounding the county-seat of Jefferson.
The venerable walls of an Episcopal church, built of stone, in the
form of a T, are still to be seen a short distance from Charlestown.
Various conjectures have been offered as to the age of this house.
I have recently made particular inquiry on the spot, of some of the
oldest inhabitants, and have no doubt that it was erected soon after
the division of the parish from Frederick, in 1769, and not many
years before the war. As Washington had large possessions in this
neighbourhood, and was often there, none can doubt but that he was
a contributor to its erection and had often worshipped within its
walls. Under the ministry of the Rev. Mr. Allen, a new brick
church was erected on the site of the present one. That becoming
too small to hold the congregation, another, much larger and more
expensive, was put up under the ministry of the Rev. Mr. Jones.
Scarcely was it consecrated and begun to be used, before it was
consumed by fire, owing to some negligence or defect about the furnace.
To the praise of the congregation be it recorded, a third was
immediately erected on the same spot, which now stands, and I
hope will long stand, a monument of what may be done by zeal
and enterprise.

As to the ministers who officiated in Norbourne parish at an
early date, we have but little information. From a list of ministers
licensed for the Plantations by the Bishops of London in 1745 and
onward, I find that the Rev. Daniel Sturges was licensed for
Norbourne parish, in 1771,—two years after its separation from
Frederick,—and tradition speaks well of him. In 1786, he was
succeeded by the Rev. Mr. Veasy, of whom a venerable old lady
in Charlestown—Mrs. Brown—speaks as a man who faithfully
performed his duty in preaching and catechizing, as she was the
subject of both. He was succeeded by the Rev. Mr. Wilson, of
whom I can learn nothing. In the year 1795, the Rev. Bernard
Page was minister. Of him I have often heard old Mrs. Shepherd
speak as one of the evangelical school,—deeply pious, zealous, and
far beyond the ministerial standard of that day. He had been
previously an assistant minister to the Rev. Bryan Fairfax, in Christ
Church, Alexandria. From Shepherdstown he went to the lower
part of Virginia, but soon died from the effects of the climate. Mr.
Page was succeeded by the Rev. Mr. Heath, who was minister in
1800, and died in the parish. Mr. Heath was a follower of Mr.
Wesley, and came over to this country under his auspices, to preside
over a female institution in Maryland, as appears by a letter to him
from Mr. Wesley, which I have seen. He, I presume, like many
others, refused to separate from the Episcopal Church when the
secession took place. The Rev. Emanuel Wilmer succeeded him,
and was in the parish about the years 1806 and 1807. The Rev.
Mr. Price had been occasionally preaching in this parish, especially
at Martinsburg and Shepherdstown, when I first visited them about
the year 1812 or 1813.

Having treated of the churches about Shepherdstown and Charlestown,
and the ministrations in Norbourne parish generally, I shall
now give an account of the churches in Martinsburg and the
vicinity, with some notice of certain laymen whose names are
worthy of a place in these sketches. The first church built at
Martinsburg, and which stood in the suburbs of the town, was erected
chiefly at the cost and under the superintendence of Mr. Philip
Pendleton,—father of the present Mr. P. Pendleton, of that place.
He was a zealous Churchman, and, so far as we know and believe, a
good Christian. He had a brother,—Mr. William Pendleton,—who
lived some miles off, and who, for a number of years during the
almost entire destitution of ministers, acted as a lay reader in
Martinsburg and at the church in Hedgesville,—the latter having
been built chiefly by himself and Mr. Raleigh Colston. Of the

latter we have already spoken as vestryman near the old chapel in
Frederick. The families of Hedges, Coxes, and Robinsons also
took part in it. As it is a part of our plan to introduce brief
notices of some of the old families of the Church, and as there is
mention of the name of Pendleton, a name belonging to so many
true friends of the Episcopal Church of Virginia and elsewhere, we
shall devote a short space to a notice of the family. That notice shall
be chiefly taken from a brief autobiography of Judge Pendleton,
President of the Court of Appeals, and from a genealogy by the same,
—both executed not long before his death. From these we learn that
about the year 1674 there came from England to Virginia two
brothers,—Nathaniel, a minister, and Philip, a teacher. The former
died without issue. The latter left three sons and four daughters.
The two younger sons married and had children, but of them there
is no certain account. The four daughters married Messrs. Clayton,
Vass, Taylor, and Thomas,—leaving numerous descendants.
The eldest son married, at the age of eighteen, Mary Taylor, who
was only thirteen. Their sons were James, Philip, Nathaniel, and
Edmund,—the latter being the President of the Court of Appeals.
Their daughters were Isabella and Mary, who married William and
James Gaines, from one of whom the late General Gaines was
descended. The sons all married and left children, except Edmund,
the Judge, who first married Miss Roy, having one child, who died,
and next Miss Pollard, who had none, and who lived to the age of
ninety. The descendants of the above-mentioned grandchildren of
the first Pendleton have intermarried with the Taylors, Pollards,
Roys, Gaineses, Lewises, Pages, Nelsons, Harts, Richards, Taliaferos,
Turners, Shepherds, Carters, Kemps, Palmers, Dandridges, Cooks,
and others unknown to me, and who now exist in thousands throughout
Virginia and elsewhere. I shall only particularize the line of
those above mentioned in the parish of Berkeley. Nathaniel Pendleton—grandson
of the first of the name and brother of Judge
Pendleton—lived in Culpepper and had four sons,—Henry, Nathaniel,
William, and Philip. Henry was put in business in Falmouth
or Fredericksburg, but, not liking it, and his father not
consenting to its relinquishment, ran away and became a great man
in South Carolina,—having the Pendleton district of that State
called by his name. Nathaniel studied law,—went first to Georgia,
then to New York, where he became the intimate friend of General
Hamilton, and was the father of the late member of Congress from
Cincinnati. William was the faithful lay reader in Berkeley, whose
son followed his example, and whose grandson is the Rev. William
H. Pendleton, of Virginia. Philip—the last of the four sons—was the
father of the present Philip Pendleton, of Martinsburg, and the late
Edmund Pendleton, of Maryland, and of Mrs. Cook and Dandridge.
The Rev. William N. Pendleton, of Virginia, belongs to a different
branch of the same family,—his mother being the daughter of Colonel
Hugh Nelson, of Yorktown. It would be inexcusable in me not to
record something more particular of one member of this large and respectable
family,—viz.: Mr. Edmund Pendleton, President of the
Court of Appeals. He was born in Caroline county, and brought up
in the clerk's office of that county. At an early age he was clerk of
the vestry, and the little which he received for that office was spent
in books, which he diligently read. At twenty years of age he was
licensed to practise law. In a few years we find him in the General
Court. He was in the House of Burgesses in the beginning of the
war,—taking a leading part in all its incipient steps. He was also
in the first Congress. After this, and until his death, he was Judge
and President of the Court of Appeals. Thus he says, (in that
brief autobiography from which I have taken the above,) "Without
any classical education, without patrimony, without what is called
the influence of family connection, and without solicitation, I have
attained the highest offices of my country." His following words
deserve to be written in letters of gold:—"I have often contemplated
it as a rare and extraordinary instance, and pathetically exclaimed,
"Not unto me, not unto me, O Lord, but unto thy name,
be the praise!' " I cannot refrain from adding the following words,
written by himself, in the year 1801, at the bottom of a genealogical
tree of the family drawn by his own hand:—"I have never had
curiosity (or, more properly, pride) enough to search the Herald's
Office or otherwise inquire into the antiquity of my family in England,
though I have always supposed the two brothers who came here
were what they call there of a good family, fallen to decay,—since
they were well educated, and came the one as a minister, the other as
a schoolmaster: however, I have had pleasure in hearing uniformly
that my grandfather and his immediate descendants were very respectable
for their piety and moral virtue,—a character preserved
in the family to a degree scarcely to be expected in one so numerous.
My mother was among the best of women, and her family highly
respectable." The elevation to which Judge Pendleton attained by
diligence and moral worth,—the latter resulting from true piety,—
without the advantages of birth, education, and fortune, affords great
encouragement to the young men of our land to imitate his noble
example. He did not despise such advantages, but he considered the
blessing of God on honest industry and the having of moral and
religious ancestors as infinitely better. He did not, in a proud
spirit, boast of his own achievements, saying,—

but humbly ascribed all merit and success to God.

Of a renowned and wealthy ancestry we have no reason to be
proud: for a pious one we ought to be thankful to God; for he has
promised his mercy to thousands descended from such. To be
descended from a Lord Nelson or a George IV., a Cromwell or a
Bonaparte, with all their honours and offices, while their characters
were stained with crimes of deepest dye, is not to be coveted; but
to be descended from such virtuous and religious patriots as were
some of those who achieved the independence of America, is a
lawful gratification, though we have no reason to be proud of or to
value ourselves on account of that. If at any time we are tempted
to think highly of ourselves at the thought of worthy ancestors, it
would be well to remember that, by going a little further back, we
may find ourselves in company with some of the most ignoble and
base of the human family. We should, indeed, ever bear in mind
that all of us must trace our origin to two most notorious transgressors
who were driven into evil from one of the richest and most beautiful
lands on earth. Such exiles are we, their descendants, to this day,
before that God with whom not only a thousand days, but a thousand
generations, are but as one.

Having said thus much of a family two of whose members—Mr.
William Pendleton and his son—contributed so much as lay readers
to the sustaining the Church at Hedgesville, I should be inexcusable
not to make some record of the character and services of
one of the most honest and upright specimens of humanity, in the
person of Colonel Edward Colston, in the same neighbourhood,
who also was a most efficient lay reader, as well as promoter of
every good work in the parish and in the diocese. Whether we view
him as a member of the parish, of the diocese, or General Convention,
or the State Legislature, or Congress, as husband, father,
master, neighbour, or friend, he was the same open, manly, consistent
person. You always knew where to find him on every
question. As was said by one of General Hamilton, "he carried
his heart in his hand, and every one might see it." Though through
life often pressed in his pecuniary affairs,—but this no fault of his
own,—he made a conscience of setting apart a due portion to the
cause of religion and charity. On one occasion, when he had lost

a most valuable mill by fire, before I could condole with him on the
event, he enclosed to me a share of bank-stock worth seventy-five
dollars, requesting me to apply it to some good object, and saying
that perhaps he had withholden something which was due to other
objects besides his family, and God had taken away from him a
portion of what was put in his hands as a steward, considering him
unworthy of the trust. I may also appeal to all his neighbours, if
in his intercourse with them he did not display the same simplicity
and friendliness which so remarkably characterized his uncle, Judge
Marshall, and his venerable mother, who was a softened image of
that uncle both in person and character. I might also speak of
other worthy persons in that interesting parish among the Robinsons,
Hedges, and Coxes, who contributed after a time to build the present
larger church at Hedgesville, and one not far off on Back
Creek; but I must hasten to the more particular mention of one in
whom they are all deeply interested, as having been even more than
an ordinary minister to their fathers and mothers.

ARTICLE LXXIV.

Norbourne Parish, Berkeley County.—No. 2.

In a previous article I spoke of Morgan's Chapel, in old
Frederick county and parish, and of Morgan Morgan as lay reader
there and elsewhere. The site of that chapel is near the dividing
line between Frederick and Berkeley, and the family of Morgans
has always been round about it. The foundation of the old chapel
may still be seen in the graveyard, though two churches have since
been built within a few paces of it. The following family sketch
is taken from a pamphlet published many years since by the Rev.
Benjamin Allen, and is so much better than any thing from my
pen, that I shall make no apology for borrowing it:—

Mr. Morgan died in the year 1797. An excellent sermon was
preached on the occasion by Dr. Balmaine, of Winchester. He
does ample justice to his personal piety, his active zeal, and his
evangelical views, as displayed in the sermons which he read. To
the latter I can testify. I have a large number of the sermons
which he used as lay reader, and have read not a few of them.
They are faithful, and deeply experimental. He has evidently

compiled some of them from various authors, and adapted them to
the occasions on which they were preached. By the notes on the
outside leaf, they appear to have been preached at funerals, in
private houses, on thanksgiving-days, on the first opening of Morgan's
Chapel, and other special subjects. Had all the sermons
preached in Virginia, from its first settlement, been like these, and
all the ministers and readers been like Morgan Morgan, the history
of the Church of Virginia would have been different from that which
truth now requires it to be. So well calculated was he for the
ministry, and so esteemed by the people whom he served, that they
united in a letter of recommendation to some Bishop, (supposed to
be Bishop Madison, not long before Mr. Morgan's death,) begging
that he might be ordained as their pastor, notwithstanding his deficiency
in human learning. The paper lies before me, and is very
strong in his praise. His age, infirmities, and the distance to be
travelled, prevented his application. The effect of his example and
ministrations has been felt to this day, where his services were
more frequent, and are to be seen especially among his own descendants,
who have been among the chief supporters of the church
at Mill Creek, or Bunker's Hill. At my last visit there, a few
months since, the congregation was called to mourn the sudden
death of one of his grandsons, William G. Morgan, who had followed
the pious example of his father, grandfather, and great-grandfather.
I mention, as one of the effects of Morgan Morgan's
example and exhortations upon his descendants and neighbours,
that when Mr. Allen first visited the neighbourhood he found no
difficulty, though twenty years after the death of this good man, in
raising a large catechetical class, among whom were full-grown
young men and women, repeating the Church catechism and hearing
it explained. This my eyes have seen, in a public tavern at
Bunker's Hill, the old church being unfit for use.

Having thus brought the history of the ministers and churches of
Norbourne parish to the time when, by God's blessing, a new order
of things commenced, I now proceed to make mention of the chief
instrument by which the revival was effected. On Christmas eve,
in the year 1814, a little after dark, there entered into my house a
gentleman who introduced himself to me as Mr. Allen, from New
York, with letters of introduction from Bishop Moore and Dr. Wilmer,
certifying that he was a candidate for Orders, and wished
employment in the valley as a lay-reader. Although the roads
were in their worst condition, much rain having fallen, he had in
two short days walked from Alexandria to my house, about sixty

miles. Carrying him with me to the Old Chapel the next day,
we met with Mr. Beverley Whiting and his sister, Miss Betsy,
from Jefferson county, who had, as they and others near them
afterward did, come about fifteen miles to church through bad
roads. Into their hands I consigned Mr. Allen, on a horse which
I had lent him. In just two weeks he returned in high spirits. He
had itinerated through the whole of Jefferson and Berkeley counties,
found out all the principal families who were still attached to the
Church, established at least twelve places for service, and received
a kind invitation from Mr. Whiting and his sister to bring his little
family to their house and make it a home for the present. To
Alexandria he immediately returned, where his wife and infant
were, and without delay, in a spell of bitter cold weather in the
month of January, brought them up in a road-wagon of Mr. Whiting's,
on its return from Alexandria, to which it had carried a load
of flour. Mr. Whiting's was his home for a considerable time,—for
years indeed; and even after a parsonage was provided his visits to
that abode of hospitality were frequent and long. From this time
until the year 1821, with feeble health, the pressure of debt upon
him, a growing family, he perhaps rode as great a distance, preached
as often, studied his Bible as much, and prepared as many things
for the press, as any man of his day. No one had a better opportunity
than myself of knowing this, for I had often to go the rounds
with him, doing more duty from necessity than I ever did before
or have done since. Sleeping in the room with him, often I have
seen him watch the morning light with his little Bible, and reading
it when others were sleeping. I have travelled with him, and seen
that Bible, or some other book, in his hand on horseback, and during
any little spare time in private hours busy with his pen in preparing
something for the press. While thus itinerating in these counties,
and also in the adjoining county in Maryland, he was conducting a
little paper called the "Layman's Magazine," and actually abridged
and published the History of the Reformation, by Burnet, in a small
volume, and compiled a history of the whole Church in two octavo
volumes. All this he did while, like an honest man, he was paying
his debts out of a small salary and the scanty profits of these publications,
if indeed there were any. For nine years he thus laboured,
contracting his sphere, though not his diligence, by the introduction
of one or two ministers into some of the numerous places he had
taken in charge, when he was called to St. Paul's Church, Philadelphia,
being the next choice to Bishop McIlvaine. His labours
in such a congregation and city were of course not diminished. He
again issued a religious magazine, and engaged in every plan for
promoting Sunday-schools, infant-schools, Bible-classes, missionary
societies, and all such things, being especially interested in Bishop
Chase's college in Ohio. His house was the Bishop's home. The
increase of Episcopal churches in Philadelphia soon attracted his
mind. At a time when a narrow and selfish policy kept ministers
and vestries in a state of fear and trembling whenever a new church
was talked of, lest its establishment might somewhat interfere with
their monopoly, his large soul, disdaining all petty considerations,
determined on at least one other church, under the patronage of
St. Paul's. Mr. Bedell was about leaving North Carolina, and wished
some situation in the North. Mr. Allen, learning this, immediately
determined to secure him for Philadelphia, and proposed it to a
few friends. Alarmed at the thought of such a great work, they
shrunk back from it; but Mr. Allen persevered and succeeded, and
St. Andrew's Church was the result. While Mr. Bedell was collecting
the congregation and the house was rising up, Mr. Allen
insisted that he should use St. Paul's during a part of each Sabbath.
Some of his people and friends were alarmed, and predicted that
the popularity of Bedell would ruin Mr. Allen's prospects, and diminish,
if not destroy, St. Paul's congregation. But nothing of
this kind moved such a man. His reply was, "Let me decrease, so
the Church increases." By God's blessing on such a Christian
course, both increased, though Mr. Allen's pulpit-talents were only
of the moderate order. At length, under the pressure of mental
and bodily labour, his health so failed that a voyage to Europe was
resorted to. But it was only used by him on his way to England,
in England, and on his return, as an occasion for greater efforts in
his Master's cause and for the souls of men. Providence found
work for him in a foreign land, and gave him favour with the most
zealous of the Christian philanthropists in England. It may be
safely affirmed that, within the same short period, no minister from
this country had ever attracted more attention, and had, and zealously
used, more opportunities of promoting the welfare of all religious
and benevolent societies, than Mr. Allen. Even the Society of
Quakers felt the influence of his zeal in behalf of Sunday-schools,
and to this day speak of him as "that wonderful man." After
these dying labours, which were like the last notes of the swan, he
returned toward America in a vessel which, by contrary winds, was
detained nearly one hundred days on the deep, the crew suffering
for provisions. Mr. Allen's grave was the great deep, as though no
narrow sepulchre was fit for one of so large a soul.

We now draw to a close these notices of what was once Berkeley
county and Norbourne parish, but which in the year 1801 became
Berkeley and Jefferson counties, and in time has been divided into
six parishes,—those around Charlestown, Harper's Ferry, Shepherdstown,
Martinsburg, Bunker's Hill, and Smithfield. The Rev.
B. B. Smith, now Bishop of Kentucky, succeeded Mr. Allen in the
congregations at Charlestown and Shepherdstown, and continued
to serve them most acceptably for nearly two years. The Rev.
Alexander Jones succeeded in 1823, and for fifteen years served
the same congregations, at the end of which time he confined his
services to the congregation at Charlestown. The Rev. Mr. Morrison
took his place at Shepherdstown and continued for two years,
and was succeeded by the present rector, the Rev. Mr. Andrews.
Dr. Jones continued in Charlestown until his removal to Richmond
a few years since. During his long ministry in that parish the
congregation steadily increased, until it became one of the largest
of our country parishes, and two noble churches were erected, the
first having been consumed by fire, as we have said before. Mr.
Jones was followed in Charlestown by the Rev. Dudley Tyng, and
he was succeeded by its present rector, the Rev. Charles Ambler.

The small number of Episcopalians at Harper's Ferry had, from
the time of Mr. Allen, been occasionally—sometimes regularly—
visited by the ministers at Charlestown and Shepherdstown, until
a few years since, when the church now standing on an imposing
eminence was built. During its erection, and with much attention
on his part, the Rev. Horace Stringfellow, Jr., was its minister.
To him succeeded for a time the Rev. Mr. Wilcoxon. The congregation
at Martinsburg, after being organized and for a time supplied
by Mr. Allen, was put in charge of the Rev. Mr. Horrell,
who continued for several years, and was succeeded in 1819 by the
Rev. Enoch Lowe. The Rev. Mr. Lippitt succeeded him. The
Rev. Dr. Brooke, now of Ohio, the Rev. James Tyng, the Rev. Mr.
Johnson, the Rev. Mr. Taliafero, the Rev. James Chisholm, the
Rev. D. F. Sprigg, and the present minister, the Rev. Richard
Davis, have successively for the last thirty years supplied the two
congregations at Martinsburg and Hedgesville. The church at
Bunker's Hill, or Morgan's Chapel, has been for the most part
supplied by the ministers from Martinsburg and Winchester, but
of late years has united with the congregations of Smithfield and
Leetown, each about five miles off. The Rev. Mr. Brown was the
first who had charge of these three in conjunction, who, after some
years, was succeeded by the Rev. Mr. Callaway. The Rev. Mr.

Grammer has just taken charge of them. In Smithfield and Leetown
two excellent churches have recently been erected, the former
by the zeal and liberality of a very few ladies and gentlemen, and
the latter at the expense of the Rev. Lewis Balch, of Baltimore,
with the aid of some of his people in the church of St. Bartholomew,
of New York, while he ministered to them. It being the
birthplace or early home of some of his ancestors, and the present
residence of his parents, Mr. Balch has sought to confer upon it an
honour far higher than the proudest and most expensive monument.
There is a circumstance peculiar to this neighbourhood which deserves
a record. Not only was the property and the residence of
General Charles Lee, of Revolutionary memory, from whom it took
its name, in sight of the church, but not far distant were the
estates of General Gates, General Stephens, and General Darke,
all of them officers in the American army. It was meet that a
Christian church should tower above the abode of such a wretched
blasphemer as General Lee. The following extract from his will
declares the character of him who once enviously sought to dethrone
Washington from the confidence of the nation, and to have
the chief command of the American army conferred on himself,
who wellnigh lost us the victory on the field of Monmouth, and
who ingloriously terminated his days, a selfish celibate, in the midst
of dogs for his most familiar friends, and an enemy to God and
man:—

Extracted from his will, recorded in the court of Berkeley
county.

ARTICLE LXXV.

Parishes in Hampshire and Shenandoah Counties.

Having disposed of Berkeley county, I come to Hampshire, which
was formed into a county and parish in the year 1753. I perceive
how the parish of Hampshire was divided and one established in
Hardy in 1785, but of the ministers and churches of the same I
have but little to say. In the year 1771 the Rev. Mr. Ogilvie, and
in the year 1772 the Rev. Mr. Manning and the Rev. Mr. Kenner,
were all ordained, in England, for Hampshire. Mr. Manning alone
ever reached there,—the others settling in parishes below the Ridge.
About the year 1812, or 1813, I remember to have seen a Rev. Mr.
Reynolds, who said that he was the minister in Hampshire and
Hardy. No churches, I expect, were ever built in these counties
until those I am about to mention. The Rev. Norman Nash, a
friend of Mr. Allen, desired to become a candidate for Orders in
Virginia, and be ordained without the knowledge of the languages.
To this Bishop Moore objected. Mr. Nash strongly declared his
conviction that he was called of God and moved by the Holy Ghost
to the work, but that he was advancing in years, and, having never
studied the ancient languages, it must be a long time before he
could be prepared for the ministry, if a knowledge of these were
requisite; that he might die before that period arrived, and that
if God should inquire of him why he had not obeyed his orders,
he could only say that Bishop Moore would not let him, until he
had studied Latin and Greek. Without entering into the merits
of the question between him and the Bishop, suffice it to say
that the latter yielded. Mr. Nash was ordained for the county of
Hampshire, where the ancient languages were but little known and
not much required. Hampshire may be truly called the hill-country
of Virginia,—not surpassed in high hills and deep valleys by
that of Judea itself. In one of its deep narrow valleys, and on its
hill-sides, a few families of plain people had settled, who retained a
strong attachment to the Church while all around had forsaken
her as the Babylon of prophecy. There was added to them one
which had emigrated from Scotland, with all the Scottish prejudices
against the Church; but the father of the family, on his way to

these Western hills, had met with some of Bishop Hobart's works,
and become a thorough convert to his views of Episcopacy and the
Church. The old man was also a great reader of Scripture, and
spent many of his latter years in writing a full paraphrase of large
portions of it,—even of the prophetical books. At his death he
bequeathed them to Dr. Balmaine and myself for publication, if
we deemed them worthy. A box of considerable size was full of
these manuscripts, in very close, small hand. We were, of course,
afraid to venture on so great an undertaking. Into this hilly region
did the Rev. Mr. Nash enter, and never did man labour more
faithfully than he did. It might have been said of him, if he could
not say it of himself,—

for he was well suited to the work and place. Having spent his
earlier days in mechanical pursuits, he diligently employed his skill
in helping to erect and complete two log churches,—working with
his own hands in various ways. When completed, he used every
proper effort to fill them with Episcopal worshippers, and, for a
time, did in a measure succeed. But there are some winds and
tides against which even the power of steam proves ineffectual, and
there are some places and societies where the excellencies of our
Church system and service cannot avail against violent and long-established
prejudices, even though the Gospel be faithfully preached
in connection with it. Such was the case in relation to this part
of Virginia, where not only Norman Nash laboured zealously and
preached faithfully, but where his nephew,—Mr. Sylvester Nash,—
who succeeded him, did the same, and where other ministers have
lent their aid, and Bishops have not failed in their peculiar offices.
Bishop Moore visited these churches several times. Mr. Sylvester
Nash not only officiated for some years at these log churches, but,
by much solicitation and perseverance, succeeded in building a neat
brick church in Romney, the county seat of Hampshire, where materials
more abounded and the prospects for a time were more
flourishing, but he was not encouraged to make a permanent abode
there. The Rev. Mr. Hedges also made a few ineffectual efforts
after the resignation of Mr. Nash, and, within a few years past,
the Rev. Mr. Irish repeated the same, with the same result. Since
this last effort, the church has been consumed by fire. In the
many changes which are continually going on in society, we will
not despair of seeing her old bare walls clothed again with garments
of praise, and a crown once more on her head.

I come now—if not in the order of time, yet of geography—to
the county of Shenandoah,—originally called after Lord Dunmore,
but changed to its present title by reason of the conduct of Dunmore,
which made his name so hateful to Virginia. The parish was
named Beckford. All this region was settled by Germans and
Swedes. Hence it was that a Swedish congregation was here collected,
and that the Rev. Peter Muhlenburg—son of the Rev. Mr.
Muhlenburg, father of the Lutheran Church in America—was sent
to take charge of it. A brief sketch of his history is necessary to
the proper understanding of his settlement at Woodstock, the county
seat of Shenandoah. He was born in the village of Trappe, in
Pennsylvania, in the year 1747, and baptized John Peter Gabriel
Muhlenburg. His father emigrated from Germany in 1742, and
became the founder of the Lutheran Church in this country,—living
at first, and for some years, in Philadelphia, then moving to Montgomery
county, Pennsylvania, and thence back again to Philadelphia.
His son was early destined in his father's mind and purpose to the
ministry, and educated with a view to the same. In the year 1763,
Peter, then sixteen years of age, and his two brothers,—Frederick
and Henry,—were sent to Halle, in Germany, for their education.
Before this time, his father had begun to fear that Peter's disposition
and habits were not suited to the ministry. In writing to a
friend, to whose care he consigned him, he says:—

I take the following account of him, until his settlement in Virginia,
from his life, written by Mr. Henry Muhlenburg, who was
either his brother or some near relative:—

His biographer informs us that his stay in London was brief,
and that he was ordained at the same time with a Mr. Braidfoot
and Mr. White, the latter being afterward Bishop of Pennsylvania.
He further adds, that the disputes between the mother-country
were just commencing to be of intense bitterness, when Mr. Muhlenburg
removed with his family from Pennsylvania to take charge
of his congregation in Virginia. Arriving among them in the fall
of 1772, sufficient time was given him, before the breaking out of
hostilities, to become extensively acquainted throughout the valley.
With Washington and Henry he was soon on terms of personal
intimacy, for in June, 1774, he was with them in the House of
Burgesses, being sent as representative by the people of his county.
This friendship had afterward much weight in determining Mr.
Muhlenburg to enter the army. Dunmore county, afterward Shenandoah,
under the controlling influence of Mr. Muhlenburg, was
one of the first to step forward in opposition to British usurpation.
At the first meeting of its citizens he was chosen moderator, and
one of the committee of correspondence. Although still a minister,
he was sent to the House of Burgesses and Convention again and
again, and with all his zeal supported Mr. Henry in the boldest
measures he proposed. His character became so well known that in
1775 he was elected Colonel of the 8th regiment, without any other
knowledge of military matters than he had acquired when a truant
youth in Germany. Washington and Henry both urged his appointment,
for they had doubtless seen in which direction his talents moved.
His was the first regiment completed on the field. His biographer
endorses the tradition of his last sermon, which concluded with the
words that there was "a time for all things; a time to fight, and
that time had now come." The sermon finished, he pronounced
the benediction. A breathless silence brooded over the congregation.
Deliberately pulling off the gown which had thus far covered
his martial figure, he stood before them a girded warrior, and, descending

from the pulpit, ordered the drums at the church-door to
beat for recruits. From all the foregoing, we must conclude that
though he was doubtless conscientious and respectable, for that day
at least, as a minister, yet he still loved his juvenile sports of hunting
and fishing too much to excel in the duties of the sacred office,
and that he had never ceased to be more of the soldier than the
divine.

Of the subsequent history of that Swedish Episcopal congregation
in Woodstock I have as yet been unable to obtain any accurate
information. Some time after the revival of the Episcopal Church
in Virginia, an effort was made by General Steenbergen, the
Arthurs, Blackfords, and Allens, to establish it in their neighbourhood,
and I paid them several visits; but the effort failed. The
same was done more than once by some friends of the Church at
Woodstock, headed by Mr. Williams, the old and much-esteemed
clerk of the county and staunch member of the Church; but with
like success.

I cannot take leave of this county and parish without a brief
notice of one remarkable locality in it. In the very centre of
Mr. Muhlenburg's parish, and only a few miles from his residence
at Woodstock, commence the mountains, almost touching each
other at first, and running parallel, so as to form a valley between.
After running some distance, they unite in one, which is
called the Massamatti Mountain. The valley between is called
Powell's Fort, and contains some thousands of acres. The mountains
on either side are called the East and West Fort Mountains.
The entrance to this valley is through a narrow defile, along which
a small but bold stream runs out into the surrounding country, with
high, steep mountains on each side, as if some convulsion of nature
had opened a passage for the waters. If the whole Valley of
Virginia was once a lake, emptying itself at Harper's Ferry, this
may be regarded as a lake within a lake, the smaller emptying
itself into the larger through this narrow passway, and both of
them sending their waters through Harper's Ferry and the Potomac
into the great Atlantic. Washington and Muhlenburg had
doubtless often been within and around this place, and the military
eye of each may have been caught by it, as one of the strongest of
nature's fortifications. In one of the darkest and gloomiest seasons
of the Revolution, when even the soul of a Washington began to fear
the stability of his fellow-citizens, they may have communed together

about this, as the last retreat of their diminished and retreating
forces. Certain it is that Washington once referred to it as the
place to which he should conduct his wasted remnant, there to call
the God of nature to its defence, and bid defiance to the British
army; thus hoping to arouse his countrymen to renewed and more
vigorous efforts for liberty and independence. I can never look
at, (for it is, on a clear day, in sight of my own residence,) pass
by, or read of this spot, and recollect that proposal of Washington,
without remembering the Edom of Scripture,—the strong city, as it
is called; for, if travellers and historians be true, there is a strong
resemblance between them, as to their entrance, their valley, and
high surrounding mountains. The loose stones almost overhanging
this narrow pass, and covering the nearly-perpendicular sides of
other parts of the mountains, would have furnished weapons of defence
to a few brave men sufficient to overwhelm thousands of
assailing foes.

ARTICLE LXXVI.

Parishes in Augusta and Rockingham Counties.

We come now to that part of the valley which was the first seen
by the white man. In the year 1714, Governor Spottswood and
his gallant band of Cavaliers, with their attendants, ascended the
Blue Ridge, at Rockfish Gap, in Albemarle county, and became the
delighted beholders of the rich and beautiful valley below.[51] Carving
the name of his King on one of the highest rocks of the mountain,
while one of his followers did the same with the Governor's on
another, they returned to Williamsburg,—the young gentry being
established into an order, and dubbed "Knights of the HorseShoe,"—each
having a small miniature golden horseshoe presented
to him by their enterprising leader. They were followed, after some
years, by hardy and daring adventurers, who settled in the valley,—
driving back the Indians still farther westward. It was not, however,
until the year 1738, that it, together with old Frederick, was
separated from Orange,—which was until then the frontier-county,
extending to the Pacific Ocean, and one hundred miles into it, according
to a charter given by King James to the London Company
for Virginia,—whose dimensions were four hundred miles wide on
the Atlantic, and of the same width from sea to sea, with all the
islands in both seas within one hundred miles from the shores
thereof. Such was old Virginia when Illinois, embracing all beyond
the Ohio River, was, in 1778, made one of her counties. Such was
old Virginia until, by various acts and charters of the Crown and
her own liberality, she was restricted to her present boundaries.
Augusta, in the year 1738, became the frontier-county, and was
therefore called West Augusta. All that I could say about the
parish of Augusta is so much better said in the following extracts,
taken from a sermon at the opening of the new church in Staunton,
a few weeks since, by the Rev. Mr. Castleman, its present minister,
that no apology is needed for using it:

In the year 1747, the vestry determined to purchase a glebe near
Leper's old plantation, and build a house; also, a church on the
plantation of Daniel Harris. Nothing of either now remains. The
glebe was sold and the proceeds vested in the academy at Staunton.
Mr. Hindman was minister for about three years. Nothing is
known of his ministry or of his death.

The foregoing documents, it is believed, have never been published
in any history or newspaper, and are therefore, as well as on
account of their intrinsic merits, here inserted. Nor are they inconsistent
with the character of these notices, since a minister and
laymen of the Episcopal Church are so prominent in them.

The present rector entered on his duties in August, 1843. For
some years past, the desirableness of a new church had been felt,
and various plans proposed and efforts made in its behalf, the
minister being very anxious for it.

The following communication from General Samuel Lewis, of
Port Republic, Rockingham county, is a suitable sequel to the
foregoing:—

Among those descendants is the author of the foregoing communication,
General Samuel Lewis, so often the delegate, not only
to our Diocesan but to our General Conventions. I knew his excellent

father, Mr. Charles Lewis, well. A truer friend to the
Church when friends were few, a more perfect gentleman, and a
worthier citizen, could not be found. I also knew that venerable
old lady, Mrs. Gabriel Jones. The first visit ever paid to that
parish was in company with her grandson, Mr. Strother Jones, of
Frederick, when we saw her in her old age, rejoicing in the prospect
of the resuscitation of the Church of her love. Her large old Prayer-Book
is still in the hands of one of her descendants. Her husband,
Mr. Gabriel Jones, was for a long time so prominent at the bar in
the valley, that he was called "The Lawyer." His name is on the
vestry-book of Frederick parish as council for the Church in one
of her suits.

THE LEWIS FAMILY.

Augusta is undoubtedly the county in which something should
be said of this name, as John Lewis, the father of the numerous
families of Lewises in Western Virginia, was the great Augusta
pioneer in 1720. Whether this family, and other families in Virginia
of the same name, are allied by reason of a common origin
in a foreign land, cannot positively be affirmed; but the sameness
of family names, and oftentimes resemblance of personal appearance
and character, are such that many have inferred a common
origin. Such was the expressed opinion of the late Benjamin
Watkins Leigh, as of others. Mr. John Lewis, of Augusta, came
from the county of Dublin, in Ireland, about the year 1720,—his
eldest son, Thomas, being born there in 1718: some ascribe a Welsh
origin, and others a Huguenot, to the family. His eldest son,
Thomas, was a vestryman of the early Church in Augusta, and one
of the first delegates to one of the first Conventions in Virginia
after our troubles began. His library was well stored with old
English theological books; and such was his attachment to the
Episcopal Church, that in his will he requested that his friend and
brother-in-law, old Peachy Gilmer, should read the burial-service
of the Prayer-Book over his remains, there being no minister in the
parish at that time. At one time he was in correspondence with
the Rev. Mr. Boucher in reference to Augusta parish. He was the
father of the Charles Lewis spoken of above, and grandfather of
the present General Lewis, of Port Republic. There were three
other sons of the first John Lewis. The second was Andrew Lewis,
the hero of Point Pleasant. The third was William, who was also
a vestryman in Augusta, and afterward settled at the Sweet

Springs. The fourth was Charles, who was killed by the Indians
in the battle of Point Pleasant. Such is the information I received
from one of the family, who speak of only four sons. Howe in
his book on Virginia, and Charles Campbell after him, speak of
two others. They say that all six of the brothers, under the command
of Samuel, the oldest, were with Washington at Braddock's
defeat.

ARTICLE LXXVII.

Churches in Western Virginia.—St. Paul's and St. John's, Brooke
County.

We introduce our notices of the churches in Western Virginia
by the following passage from a sketch of Western Virginia, by the
Rev. Dr. Doddridge, whose ministry will be duly noticed:—

Without questioning the perfect sincerity and honest zeal of Dr.
Doddridge in this severe criticism, or desiring to apologize for what
was blameworthy in the Episcopal Church in regard to the West,
we think that truth and justice require some modification of the
sentence. We cannot assent to the fact that one-half of the Western
population was originally of Episcopal parentage. We must remember
that even Maryland had a large proportion of Romanists,
as well as other Protestant denominations besides the Episcopal.
North of this there was scarce any Episcopalians from the first settlement
of the country. A short time before the war, Bishop White
was the only Episcopal minister in Pennsylvania. The emigrants
from all the Northern States, beginning with Pennsylvania, were
not of Episcopal parentage. Although Episcopalians abounded
from the first in Virginia and the Carolinas, yet it should be remembered
that, of the emigrants to the West, immense numbers—
far the larger part—had renounced the Episcopal Church before
their removal, and only carried with them bitter hatred toward it.
I am satisfied that not a tenth part of those who have left the
Eastern for the Western States were Episcopalian at their removal:
perhaps a much smaller proportion would be a correct estimate.
Soon after the issue of Dr. Doddridge's book,—perhaps forty years
ago,—I prepared something on this subject and offered it for publication.

Owing to various circumstances in her history, the Episcopal
Church may be regarded as the last of all the Churches in our
land which began the work of evangelizing. Her race only commenced
after the Revolution. All that was done before proved but
a hinderance to her. All other denominations were in active operation
long before, and were so prejudiced against her as not to be
willing to have her as a co-worker with them. Instead, therefore, of
the advantages possessed by the Episcopal Church for establishing
herself in the West being greater than those of other Churches, they
were less, whether we consider the Bishops and clergy at her command,
or the difficulty of the work to be done, by reason of existing
prejudices. Justice to the memory of our fathers requires this
statement. That of Dr. Doddridge has often been quoted without
due consideration.

We must, however, do the justice to Dr. Doddridge to say that, if
we had had many such laborious ministers as himself, the West would

have been far better supplied with Episcopal churches and ministrations
than it has been. And yet truth requires us to admit, what
will soon appear, that even his zealous labours have not been followed
by all the results which we could desire, by reason of the
numerous opposing influences with which he and the Church had
to contend. Nothing that I could draw from any documents or
record, or from living witnesses, could so interest the reader as the
following sketch of Dr. Doddridge's life and labours, from the pen
of a friend, and I therefore adopt it:—

To the foregoing we add a few things which we received from
those who knew him as the minister in Brooke county. He preached
at four places in that county, two of which are now occupied by
Presbyterians and Methodists. The other two were Wellsburg
and the neighbourhood where St. John's Church now stands.
Although he was followed by that most zealous and popular man,
the Rev. Mr. Armstrong, still it was found impracticable to sustain
congregations in all of them. Dr. Doddridge died in the year

1826, in his fifty-eight year. He was buried in a vault under his
own house, near Wellsburg, but afterward removed to a public
burying-ground.

The Rev. Mr. Armstrong, from Wheeling, preached much and
zealously to the congregations after Dr. Doddridge's death, as did
also his son at a subsequent period. The Rev. Mr. Wheat, of
Wheeling, who was the immediate successor of the elder Armstrong,
also laboured for them. After some time, the Rev. Mr. Skull was
sent as a missionary to Brooke county. He was followed by the
Rev. Mr. Harrison in the same capacity. The Revs. Mr. Goodwin,
Hyland, and Tompkins followed in succession. The Rev. Mr.
Christian is the present minister. During the intervals of ministerial
supply, which have been very considerable, the Rev. Dr.
Morse, of Steubenville, Ohio, has most kindly and laboriously
served the people of St. John's, for which he is most justly very
dear to them. Three churches have been put up in St. John's
parish on the same site,—the first of log, the second of framework,
and the last of brick,—the last being consecrated in 1850. There
has always been a considerable congregation at St. John's, and I
have ever been delighted to find myself in the midst of that plain,
unpretending, hospitable, and zealous congregation of people,
devoted to the true principles of the Gospel and worship of our
Church.

In Wellsburg, which is about seven miles from St. John's, on the
Ohio River, the congregation is small. They have a neat brick
church, which was built some years since, almost entirely at the
expense of two brothers, John and Danford Brown. The former
has gone to his rest. The latter still lives and hopes for better
times to the church of his affections.

To these notices of the Church in Brooke county, I subjoin an
extract from a pamphlet which I had occasion to publish some years
since, when the question of forming a separate diocese in Western
Virginia was considered. In discussing it I was led to consider the
real condition of that part of the State, which unfitted it for the
support of a separate organization at that time. The following is,
I believe, a true account of it:—

ARTICLE LXXVIII.

Churches in Wheeling, Fairmont, Clarksburg, Weston, Buchanon.

The Rev. Joseph Doddridge was the first Episcopal minister, it is
believed, who officiated in Wheeling. Residing in Wellsburg, he occasionally
visited the few Episcopal families then in Wheeling; but
there was no organization until the 11th of May, 1819. This is to
be ascribed to a visit of Bishop Chase, at whose instance it doubtless
took place. The organization was with the title of "St. Matthew's
Church, Wheeling." The persons composing the first association
were as follows:—John Armstrong, Jr., W. T. Good, W. Gray, T.
H. Armstrong, Joshua Morton, J. Good, W. Perrine, Richard Simms,
P. Ray, J. C. Williams, Josiah Chapline, J. Wilson, Jr., W. Chapline,
Jr., P. Bier, S. Scovill, T. M. Cowles, C. D. Knox, J. M. Smith, R.
C. Thompson, Moses Shepherd, Moses W. Chapline, H. Thornbury,
John Eoff, Samuel Chamberlain. A vestry being appointed, we find
that the Rev. John Armstrong, from Maryland, was chosen the first
minister. In the year 1821, Mr. Noah Zane presented a lot for an
Episcopal church. On the 9th of May, 1821, the corner-stone of
St. Matthew's Church was laid by the order of Masons,—the Rev.
Mr. Armstrong delivering a sermon and the Rev. Dr. Doddridge an
oration. In the fall of that year it was ready for divine service.
Mr. Armstrong's labours continued for seven years, at the end of
which time he died and was buried in the church. He was an
honest, zealous, laborious, and faithful minister. At the building
of the new church his remains were removed to it and now rest
beneath its chancel. His son—the Rev. William Armstrong—
was elected to fill the vacancy, but declined, and recommended the
Rev. Thomas Wheat, who was chosen. In 1832, the Rev. Mr.
Wheat resigned, and the Rev. Wm. Armstrong, being again elected,
became the minister of St. Matthew's Church. The congregation so
increased under his care that it became necessary to build a larger
house. The present one was consecrated by myself on the 26th of
October, 1837. In the year 1849, the question of dividing the
diocese of Virginia having been agitated in the western part of the
State, and being brought before the vestry, it was decided by a
unanimous vote to be inexpedient. In the year 1853, the Rev.

Mr. Perkins was appointed assistant to the Rev. Mr. Armstrong.
In the following year Mr. Armstrong resigned. The vestry and
congregation were so unwilling to part with one who had faithfully
served them for nearly one-quarter of a century, that earnest efforts
were made to prevent his removal from Wheeling or the vicinity;
and, had he consented, provision would have been made for his support
without the performance of the usual ministerial services; but
he felt it his duty to return and spend his remaining days in a small
parish in Maryland, which he had served during the first thirteen
years of his ministry. The Rev. Mr. Perkins was therefore chosen
as his successor, and still continues to be the pastor of St. Matthew's
Church.

Of the high respectability of the above body of vestrymen, under
whose guardianship the Episcopal Church in Wheeling has so eminently
flourished, the citizens of Wheeling, during the term of their
service, would, I doubt not, bear a strong and willing testimony.
Some of them were, and others still are, personally known to me.
Of those who were known to me on earth, and whom I hope to
know again in a higher sphere, and who are specially noticed and
honoured on the records, I may be permitted to mention the names
of Judge Caldwell and Richard Simms. The latter I knew from
the year 1820 to the time of his death,—a few years since,—and
knew him always as the same active, useful vestryman, and consistent
Christian. He helped to build the first church in Wheeling,
when it was in the midst of the woods. He loved, like David, to be
a doorkeeper in the house of the Lord, though from first to last he
was the chief churchwarden. Providence permitted him to experience
great reverses during his earthly pilgrimage, but, through
grace, he knew how to abound and how to suffer need. One thing
he did not know, and that was to be idle and dependent. When, in
extreme old age, he was deprived of all earthly property, but when
both the church and the town would have felt honoured in making

provision for him, he could not endure the thought of being unemployed,
but obtained the place of toll-keeper on the great turnpike-road
from east to west, a few miles from Wheeling, and there, with
his old and excellent companion, who yet survives him, spent the
evening of his days,—still turning the curse into a blessing, and by
the sweat of his brow making an honest livelihood. Mr. Simms
was a native of Maryland, moved to Wheeling in 1816, was married
by Dr. Doddridge, died in Triadelphia in March, 1854. His remains
were brought to Wheeling, and into the church, and from
thence to the East Wheeling Cemetery. Judge Caldwell was a
man of high character and standing in every position in society, but
above all was an humble Christian. Whenever the Holy Communion
is administered, the pastor and the people partake of the emblems
of the Saviour's body and blood from a rich service of plate, costing,
according to the vestry-book, the sum of three hundred dollars,
a present from Mr. Joseph Caldwell, the brother of Judge Caldwell.

ST. JOHN'S CHURCH, EAST WHEELING.

The following account of it has been furnished me by one who
is fully acquainted with its history. St. John's parish, Wheeling,
was organized in the year of our Lord 1849. Previous to that
time St. Matthew's parish embraced the whole of the city of Wheeling,
and was the only Episcopal church in Ohio county.

The location of the church-building was at an inconvenient
distance from the residences of a portion of the congregation.
This, together with the rapid increase of the population and business
of the city, demanded the formation of a new parish. Moved by
these considerations, and an earnest desire to extend the influence
and benefits of the Church, the Rev. William Armstrong, rector of
St. Matthew's Church, on the 31st of July, 1849, called a meeting
of his vestry for the purpose of considering the propriety and expediency
of erecting a church and forming another congregation
in the southern part of the city. The vestry, in pursuance of said
call, met on the second day of August, 1849. The following are
the proceedings of the vestry at said meeting, so far as they relate
to a division of the parish:—

Having obtained the consent of the vestry of St. Matthew's
Church, and being favoured with the hearty support and sympathy
of the respected and beloved rector, the committee promptly called
a meeting of such of the citizens of South Wheeling as were favourable
to the formation of a parish of the Church in that part of the
city. At the meeting so called, the rector of St. Matthew's Church
was present, and, in remarks appropriate and impressive, explained
the object of the meeting. After which, suitable measures were
adopted for the complete organization of the new parish, and provision
made for the erection of a building for the services of the
Church.

On the 6th of August, 1849, the Rev. Jas. D. McCabe was invited
to take charge of the parish as rector thereof, which invitation was
accepted on the 24th of the following month. The rector-elect did
not, however, enter upon the duties of his office until January, 1850.

On the 8th of February, 1850, the building erected by the congregation
was sufficiently near completion to be used, and the pulpit
was, for the first time, occupied on that day by the Rev. Mr. Armstrong.
The services were conducted by the rector, assisted by
the Rev. William L. Hyland. The organization of the parish was
sanctioned and confirmed by the Convention of the Diocese of Virginia,
in May, 1850, as "St. John's Parish, Wheeling." The churchedifice—which
had been erected and completed by the congregation—
was consecrated to the service of Almighty God, by the Rt. Rev. John
Johns, Assistant Bishop of Virginia, on the 1st of November, 1850.

The Rev. Dr. McCabe laboured profitably and acceptably to the
congregation until the 8th of January, 1856, when he removed to
Baltimore, as associate rector of St. Paul's Church, in that city.

The following is part of the proceedings of the vestry of St. John's
parish at the meeting called to act upon the resignation of the
rectorship of the parish by the Rev. Dr. McCabe. This resolution
was adopted unanimously, and heartily concurred in by every member
of the congregation:—

The Rev. George K. Warner was elected rector of the parish in
January, 1856, and took charge of the congregation on the 16th
of March following. St. John's parish was established upon the free-seat
system, which has been found to work satisfactorily. The
rector's salary is provided for by the voluntary subscription of the
members. The incidental expenses, &c. are met by weekly collections
at the Sunday morning services. The parish has a commodious
and convenient dwelling-house, erected in 1855 expressly for the
use of the rector.

St. John's parish has at this time (February, 1857) eighty-six
communicants. The Sunday-school connected with the parish is in
a flourishing condition, and, under the judicious care and management
of the rector, proves an important auxiliary to the Church.

I must add to the above, for the encouragement of others to go
and do likewise, that the rectory mentioned above, and which cost
three or four thousand dollars, was at the sole expense of a very
few zealous individuals. May they be rewarded for it by always
having a faithful minister of God to occupy it!

THE CHURCH IN CLARKSBURG.

The first missionary movement in our diocese was in behalf of
Western Virginia, by the association in the valley, composed of the
ministers in Frederick, Jefferson, and Berkeley, in the early part
of the ministry of the Rev. Benjamin Allen, Mr. Bryan, B. B. Smith,
Enoch Lowe, and the author of these pages. The first missionary
sent into Western Virginia was the Rev. Wm. F. Lee, and the first
point to which he went was Clarksburg and the next Morgantown.
In each of these places he preached repeatedly and acceptably and
did his duty faithfully as a pioneer and explorer. He was soon
followed by his relative,—the Rev. Charles Henry Page,—who imitated
his example in all things. The first effort of a more permanent
character was made by the Rev. Mr. Ward. In a letter from
a friend in Clarksburg, he thus speaks of this effort:—"Mr. Ward
came here in the fall of 1834 or 1835. At first he was the inmate
of the family of Mr. Trapnall, a firm friend of the Church. Mr.
Trapnall dying, Mr. Ward abode the remainder of his time with
Mr. Richard Despard, a devoted friend of the Church from the old
country. I have been informed that Mr. Ward succeeded in awakening

considerable interest among the friends of the Church,—that his
Sabbath-school was flourishing, and his public services well sustained."
The same friend continues:—"Mr. Ward was succeeded
by the Rev. Mr. McMechin, about the year 1840. He had previously
been in the Methodist ministry. You are well acquainted
with the course pursued by him and with the unhappy termination
of his ministry." The foregoing remark requires explanation. Other
records of the Church have already made it, but, for the benefit of
young ministers, it deserves a place here. Mr. McMechin, though
of an ancient Episcopal family, had united himself with the Methodist
communion and ministry. During the few years of his continuance
in this Society he was much esteemed. He then entered
the Episcopal Church and ministry. After a short stay in Parkersburg,
he commenced the duties of the latter under very favourable
auspices in Clarksburg. At his own cost he provided a house which
should answer the double purpose of school-room and place of worship.
In this place he preached on the Sabbath and instructed
young females during the week,—deriving his support chiefly if not
entirely from the latter. His pulpit-addresses were very acceptable.
Numbers attended his ministry. His sermons seemed about to be
blessed in the conversion of many, and there was a reasonable probability
that most if not all of them would be united to our Church.
In several successive letters he communicated to me the joyful intelligence,
and the confident expectation of a large class of candidates
for Confirmation when I should next visit Clarksburg, which
was to be after a few months. Before that time arrived, however,
I perceived a change in the tone of his letters. He was less confident
that many would be ready for Confirmation,—was afraid that
he would be disappointed in a number who had promised well. At
length my visit was made. On my arrival, he gave me the following
honest account of the whole matter. After having for some time
earnestly preached the Gospel of salvation to those who attended
his ministry, and having reason to believe that a number were prepared
to make an open profession of religion, and to do it after our
manner and in connection with our Church, he determined to make
the latter sure by a series of discourses on the ministry, the Sacraments,
the Liturgy, and the rite of Confirmation. I do not know
what particular position he took in regard to these, but the effect,
he told me, was to reduce his congregation from Sabbath to Sabbath,
so that, by the time the series was over, a mere handful were left him.
Meanwhile the pulpits of other denominations were denouncing
him and the Church, and tracts and books against Confirmation
and our peculiarities were gotten up and put in circulation through
the place, so that when I reached Clarksburg there was but one
individual who would dare to appear for Confirmation, and sickness
prevented the attendance of that one. Nor did the calamity end
here; for, not long after, Mr. McMechin himself returned, under
the influence of excited feelings, to the Methodist communion as a
lay member. It is, however, proper to state that when that excitement
passed away he resumed his place in the bosom of the Episcopal
Church, but, of course, only as a lay member,—having been
displaced from our ministry. Let young ministers in new parishes
learn a lesson from the foregoing statement, and old ones even in
old parishes not despise it.

The letter of my correspondent continues by saying that "after
Mr. McMechin abandoned the ministry, the Rev. Thomas Smith,
of Parkersburg, gave the little flock such pastoral care as his
distant residence allowed. He called the friends of the Church
together, proposed and caused to be adopted articles of confederation,
and had a regular vestry elected. Until the services of a
regular minister were secured, he paid them several visits,—riding
on horseback the distance of eighty-five miles to supply their spiritual
necessities. The Rev. Mr. Kinsolving was the next settled
minister. He officiated regularly at Clarksburg and Weston, and
occasionally at Morgantown. He remained about a year, and was
not only acceptable to his own people, but popular with all classes.
The Rev. Mr. Tompkins succeeded him at Weston, and preached occasionally
at Clarksburg,—perhaps once a month,—as well as at other
places." To this communication I add that in the year 1852, the
Rev. Robert A. Castleman went to Clarksburg, and was soon after
joined by the Rev. James Page, who, between them, supplied Clarksburg,
Weston, Fairmont, Morgantown, and Buchanon, for one year,
when the former confined his services to Clarksburg and Fairmont,
and the latter to Weston and Buchanon. During the residence of
the Rev. Mr. Tompkins in Weston, and chiefly by his exertions, an
Episcopal church has been built in that place. During the ministry
of Mr. Castleman, one has been built in Clarksburg and one purchased
and repaired at Fairmont. To his efforts in Clarksburg and
his solicitation abroad, we are indebted for the excellent house now
standing in Clarksburg. A few zealous friends in Fairmont are
entitled to praise for what they have done. Although our efforts
have thus far failed in Morgantown, I cannot pass it by without

mention of the pleasant visits made to that place, and the hospitable
reception given me by those worthy members of our Church,—Mr.
John Rogers and Mr. Guy Allen. Could the zeal and liberality of two
individuals have sufficed for the establishment of the Episcopal Church
in Morgantown, theirs would have done it. I have nothing more
to add but that Mr. Castleman is about to leave Clarksburg, and
the Rev. Mr. Smyth, a Deacon, is officiating in Weston.

ARTICLE LXXIX.

Churches in Kanawha, Ravenswood, Parkersburg and the
neighbourhood, New Martinsville, and Moundsville.

Still pursuing the order in which efforts have been made for
the establishment of the Episcopal Church in Western Virginia, we
proceed to speak of the churches in Kanawha. The Rev. Messrs.
Lee and Page, our first missionaries, extended their visits to Kanawha,
and by the way of Point Pleasant ascended the Ohio, stopping
at Parkersburg. The visit of Mr. Page led to his settlement in
Kanawha, and during the time of his residence there he officiated
in Charleston, at Coalsmouth, and Point Pleasant. A good beginning
was made by Mr. Page, and, if circumstances had not made
him feel it his duty to seek another field of labour after a few
years, it is thought that the Church in that county would have
greatly benefited by his labours. He was succeeded, after a number
of years, by the Rev. Frederick D. Goodwin, who laboured
amidst many difficulties for two years and then removed to another
field. The Rev. Mr. Martin followed Mr. Goodwin, and laboured
at Charleston and Coalsmouth. He was succeeded by the Rev.
Mr. Craik, now of Louisville, who laboured among them for some
years. Mr. Whittle and Mr. Ward were the next ministers. Mr.
Ward was followed by the Rev. R. T. Brown, who, after a few years,
was obliged, on account of his failing voice, to relinquish the charge.
The Rev. Thompson L. Smith is the present minister.

There is an excellent brick church in Charleston, whose history
deserves a special notice. When I first visited Kanawha, there
were only two communicants in our Church in Charleston,—Mrs.
Colonel Lovell and Mrs. Quarrier. There were some few other
ladies, who by birth or education were attached to the Episcopal
Church, and some few gentlemen who laughingly advocated it in
preference to others. There was no Episcopal Church, and the
idea of building one seemed preposterous. Some two or three ladies,
however, determined upon a trial,—their husbands, fathers, and
brothers making sport of it. They used their tongues, their hands,
their pens, and raised in one year about a hundred dollars, which
afforded amusement to the gentlemen. The ladies, with characteristic

good-humour, patience, and perseverance, endured it all,
putting their earnings in the bank, and proceeded in their work.
The next year doubled their collections, which were also put at
interest. How many years were thus spent, and what was the
increase of each year, I cannot say; but this I know, that after many
years of patient perseverence, and the accumulation of a very considerable
sum, the gentlemen found that the ladies could not be
laughed out of their determination, and, some of them having also
come to better thoughts on the subject of religion, it was resolved
to accept the large amount now in hand, and add to it as much as
was necessary to build a church costing four or five thousand
dollars.

OLD MRS. QUARRIER.

I mentioned that at one time there were only two communicants
in our Church at Charleston,—Mrs. Lovell and Mrs. Quarrier. The
latter died in the year 1852, full of years, and ready to depart
and be with Christ. As Mrs. Quarrier, beyond any other individual,
may be considered the mother of the Church in Western
Virginia, by reason of her age, her holy life, and numerous posterity,
who in different places have zealously promoted it, I must
give a brief genealogical sketch of the same. Mr. Alexander
Quarrier was born in Scotland in the year 1746. He removed to
America in his twenty-ninth year, and, settling in Philadelphia and
marrying, lived there twelve years, when he removed to Richmond.
His wife dying, he contracted a second marriage with Miss Sally
Burns. He left Richmond in 1811, and removed to Kanawha,
where he died at the advanced age of eighty-two. By his first
marriage he had six children,—Harriet, Eliza, Margaret, Helen,
Alexander, and Betsy. By his second wife he had seven children,
—William, James, Gustavus, Monroe, Archibald, Fanny, and Virginia.
Being unable to state the marriages and localities, &c. of
all of them, I shall mention none. The members of the Church in
different parts of Western Virginia know how much it has been
indebted to them.

THE CHURCH IN THE SALINES.

About six miles above Charleston, in the midst of the celebrated
salt-works, there is a considerable population and several churches.
One of them belongs to the Episcopalians. When I was last there,
it had been deserted for a time on account of its bad construction,
with a view either to its repair or the building of another. The

minister at Charleston gives a portion of his time and labours to
this place.

THE CHURCH AT COALSMOUTH.

About twelve miles from Charleston, and lower down, the river
Coal enters into the Kanawha. At this place a number of Episcopal
families settled themselves from thirty to sixty years ago.
They attracted the attention of our first ministers in Kanawha,
and shared their labours. Among those families was that of Mr.
Philip Thompson, of Culpepper, son of the Rev. Mr. Thompson,
of St. Mark's parish, of whom we have given so good an account
in our article on Culpepper. His family, now reduced in numbers
by death and dispersion, have contributed largely to the support
of this congregation. The venerable mother, daughter of old
Mr. Robert Slaughter, of Culpepper, was loved and esteemed by
all who knew her, as one of the humblest and most devoted members
of the Church in Virginia. I have always felt my own sense
of the divine power and excellency of religion strengthened by every
visit made to her abode. She exchanged it some years since for a
better one above.

The following communication from Mr. Francis Thompson, who
has long been a lay reader of the Church, contains every thing of
importance in relation to the congregation at Coalsmouth:—

We have no other church besides these on the Kanawha River,
though our ministers have had stations at the court-house in a
neighbouring county and at Buffalo in Kanawha county. At Point
Pleasant, besides the occasional visits of the Rev. Mr. Craik and
Mr. Henderson, the Rev. James Goodwin laboured several years in
the hope of building a church and raising up a congregation, but
was disappointed. Various circumstances have prevented the establishment
of a flourishing village on that most beautiful of all the
sites on the Ohio and Kanawha Rivers, which, by their junction
there, concur to make it as convenient for trade as it is memorable

for the bloody battle with the Indians in which the family of Lewis
so signalized itself,—some of whose descendants still live upon the
spot and adhere to the Church of their ancestors.

BRUCE CHAPEL.

About twelve miles below Point Pleasant, on Mercer's Bottom,
a large and fertile tract of land, once owned by Charles Fenton
Mercer, we have a comfortable brick building called Bruce Chapel,
erected during the ministry of the Rev. James Goodwin, and so
named because of the large contribution made to it by Mrs. Eliza
Bruce, now of Richmond, and whose liberality to so many other
objects is well known throughout Virginia. The chapel is in the
neighbourhood of the Moores, Beales, General Steenbergen, and
others whose names I cannot now recall.

THE CHURCH AT RAVENSWOOD.

Ravenswood is a small village on the Ohio River, built on land
taken up by General Washington, (who never made a mistake as to
the quality of soil,) and left to some of the Ashton family of King
George, with whom the Washington family was connected. Mr.
Henry Fitzhugh, formerly of Fauquier, marrying a descendant
of the Ashtons, became possessed of a part of this estate, and
settled on it with a large family of children. At his expense a
neat little chapel has been put up at Ravenswood, and when ministerial
services were not to be had one of his sons has officiated as
lay reader. The Rev. Mr. Tompkins has now for the last two
years been residing there, discharging the duties of a teacher and
minister at the same time. Services are also held at the court-house
of that county.

Since the above was penned, I have received a communication
which states that the ladies, by their zeal and diligence, raised one
hundred and fifty dollars for the furnishing of the chapel, and that
some contributions were made by individuals other than the family
above mentioned, in the neighbourhood, and in Wheeling and Cincinnati,
though not to a large amount. Contributions of labour were
also made by some of the neighbours. The Rev. Mr. Wheeler was
the minister for two years from the year 1842. The Rev. Messrs.
Martin and Craik and Brown, of Charleston, the Rev. Mr. Goodwin,
of Point Pleasant, the Rev. Messrs. Smith and Perkins, of Parkersburg,
the Rev. Mr. Hyland, of Moundsville, and Drs. Armstrong
and McCabe, of Wheeling, have all rendered acceptable services at

Ravenswood. The vestrymen have been Mr. Henry Fitzhugh,
Dr. John Armstrong, Thomas Atkinson, W. S. Holmes, D. M. Barr,
Burdett Fitzhugh, Henry Fitzhugh, Jr., R. H. Dickenson, James
R. Mays, George H. Fitzhugh, T. D. Noussey, J. Beckwith, Thomas
Kirk, D. Frost, I. J. C. Davenport, H. Harpold, James Beatty.

THE CHURCHES IN PARKERSBURG AND THE VICINITY.

Parkersburg was one of the places visited by our first missionaries,—the
Rev. Messrs. Lee and Page. The Rev. Mr. Goodwin,
also, either before or after his settlement in Kanawha, paid an acceptable
visit to the people of that place. The Rev. Mr. McMechin,
soon after his ordination, spent a year or more in attempting to
raise up a congregation there. In the year 1843, the Rev. Thomas
Smith was elected its minister and the church was regularly organized,
and in the following year was admitted into union with the
Convention of Virginia. Mr. Smith immediately commenced, with
his accustomed enterprise, to raise funds for building a church, and
was sufficiently successful in securing enough to provide a small
and plain church; but, as is too often the case in the progress of
such a work, the views of those engaged in it were enlarged, both as
to the size of the building and the style of its execution, so that
the completion of it was delayed for some years. It is a well-built
and handsome brick church, and stands on ground presented to the
vestry by J. F. Snodgrass, late member of Congress from that district.
For a large portion of the funds for its erection, and for much
of the superintendence of the work, the congregation is indebted
to General J. J. Jackson, of Parkersburg. Mr. Smith died in 1847,
and was buried beneath the vestibule of the church, at his own request,
the reason being assigned that, as he felt himself to be a
poor sinner, he wished to be trampled under the feet of all who
entered the house. In the same year the Rev. Mr. Perkins was
chosen, who entered on his duties in the month of October. In
the year 1853, Mr. Perkins resigned the charge, since which time
it has been vacant. During Mr. Perkins's term of service two other
churches have been built in connection with Parkersburg,—one
about fifteen or twenty miles above it, on Cow Creek, and another
about ten or twelve miles below it, at Bellville. The latter was
built almost entirely by Mr. Wells, on whose land and near whose
house it stands. Mr. Perkins used occasionally to officiate at each
of these places.

The following is the list of the vestrymen of this parish:—John
Taylor, J. G. Stringer, Dr. D. Creel, A. L. Kinnaird, J. M. Little-boy,

Sen., J. F. Snodgrass, J. R. Murdock, W. S. Gardiner, David
B. Spencer, J. J. Jackson, Beverley Smith, W. P. Rathbone, Dr.
Farmin, E. D. Safford, C. J. Meale, Isaac Morris, W. H. Morehead,
G. B. Neale, J. J. Dickenson, W. H. Laurence, W. H. Small, J. J.
Neale, J. H. Adams, E. F. De Selding.

CHURCH IN WETZEL COUNTY.

A church at New Martinsville, in this county, was partly built
some years since, under the auspices of the Rev. James McCabe
and the Rev. Mr. Hyland, and supplied for some time with services
by the same. I have no list of the vestrymen of this parish, which
was called Wetzel parish after the name of the county.

CHURCH AT MOUNDSVILLE.

Within twelve miles of Wheeling, on the Ohio River, is to be
seen one of the largest of those Indian mounds which are to be
found in our Western world. It gives the name to the place. In
the time of the elder Mr. Armstrong, there were some families belonging
to our Church in and around it, which were visited by him,
and to whom with the other people of the place he preached. The
passage of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad through it, and the
establishment of a large depôt at it, has increased the population
so much that an Episcopal church was erected here some years
since, and the Rev. Mr. Hyland has, in connection with a school,
performed the duties of a minister in it.

The following is a list of the vestrymen of the parish:—Colonel
John Thompson, Isaac Hoge, E. H. Caldwell, W. S. Lane, O. S.
Hock, G. W. Bruce, William Collins, General G. Jones.

From the foregoing notices of the Church in Western Virginia,
it will be perceived that our "beginning is small." May some
future historian, when all its resources have been developed, have
the pleasure of recording that "its latter end has greatly increased"!

ARTICLE LXXX.

Recollections of the Episcopal Church in this Country during the
last Fifty Years.

Having thus disposed of the Church of Virginia, I purpose in
the present to record some things in relation to the General Church
which have come under my observation, and in which I have taken
some part. As I introduced the notices of the Virginia Church
with some preliminary remarks on its previous history, so would I
offer a few thoughts as to the earlier history and character of the
American Church generally, before entering on the particular narrative
to which this article is devoted. And, as I was forced by a
regard to historic truth to acknowledge that at no time from its
first establishment was the moral and religious condition of the
Church in Virginia even tolerably good, so am I also, by the same
consideration, obliged to admit much that was defective in relation
to other parts of the American Episcopal Church. More especially
was this the case in regard to Maryland, which bore a strong resemblance
to Virginia in more respects than one. The character
of her early population resembled that of Virginia, in having more
of the aristocracy than was to be found in some other parts of the
English territory in this country. Slavery also was introduced at an
early period, and served to strengthen that feature in her character.
She, like Virginia, was also put under a regular establishment,—
though not at so early a period. She had her Governors and Commissaries,
who acted as substitutes for the Bishop in ecclesiastical
matters. Neither Maryland nor Virginia were under the patronage
of the Society for Propagating the Gospel in Foreign Parts, as
other portions of America were. The history of those other portions,
by comparison with those of Virginia and Maryland, establishes the
fact beyond contradiction, that the selection of missionaries by that
Society was generally better than the supply coming to Virginia
and Maryland through the Bishop of London, or some other channel.
The reader is referred to Dr. Hawks's faithful and laborious
History of the Church in Maryland for proof of this in relation to
that diocese. I adduce only one testimony besides, and that from
the well-known Dr. Chandler, of our American Church. After a

visit to the Eastern Shore of Maryland, about the year 1753, he
addressed a letter to the Bishop of London, in which, after speaking
in high terms of the laity of that part of the State, he adds, "The
general character of the clergy, I am sorry to say, is wretchedly
bad. It is readily confessed, that there are some in the Province
whose behaviour is unexceptionable and exemplary; but their
number seems to be very small in comparison,—they appearing
here and there, like lights shining in a dark place. It would really,
my lord, make the ears of a sober heathen tingle to hear the stories
that were told me by many serious persons of several clergymen in
the neighbourhood of the parish where I visited; but I still hope that
some abatement may be fairly made on account of the prejudices
of those who related them." My own recollection of statements
made by faithful witnesses forty-five years ago, as to a number of
the old clergy of Maryland, accords with the above. I have but
little knowledge from any source of the few Episcopal clergy north
of Maryland. They were not more than eighty in number when
the War of the Revolution began. As to foreign importation of
clergymen, Bishop White (who was once the only Episcopal minister
in Pennsylvania) justly remarks, "It could not be the channel
of a respectable and permanent supply." Nevertheless, as they
nearly all of them depended chiefly for their support on the aid of
the above-mentioned Society, it is to be believed that pains were
taken to select the best which could be obtained from the English
Church at that time, and to require the best recommendations in
behalf of those who were natives of America. That there were
mistakes none can doubt.[53]

The history of the missionaries of that Society in South Carolina,
as given by one of her sons, (the Rev. Mr. Dalcho,) informs us of
some who, on account of their evil character, were soon complained

of, and either recalled or dismissed from the service. The congregations,
indeed, became very cautious how they received the
missionaries. They delayed institutions, as in Virginia, until satisfied
of their good character by sufficient trial. The Society sometimes
complained that too long a trial was required. Still, I doubt
not that their general character for morals and piety was much
superior to that of the imported clergy of Maryland and Virginia.
But now a most important inquiry must be made, in order to form a
correct estimate of the religion of the Colonial Churches. It is
this:—What was the type of the theology—the substance and style
of the preaching—of the ministers of that day? What doctrines
were insisted on with emphasis from the pulpit? How did the
preaching of that day accord with the doctrines of the apostles and
the reformers on the subject of human depravity, and of Christ
as the sinner's "all in all"? How did the sermons compare with
our homilies on the misery or sinfulness of man, on justification,
on the new birth, &c.? It will surely be admitted to be a fair way
of deciding this question to ascertain what was the theology and
preaching in England during the time when our supply was greatest
from the Mother-Church. The clergy coming over to us must have
borne a strong resemblance in their theology and style of sermonizing,
and in other respects, to the great body of those left behind;
only that we are obliged to admit the probability of what was
so generally declared in all the documents and histories of the
times,—namely, that, with some honourable exceptions, they were
inferior in character. In making this inquiry, we shall not go back
to the few who came out during the reign of James I. We will
pass over those few who came to America in the days of Laud, who,
intent on establishing high Episcopal and Sacramentarian views and
on putting down all dissent, neglected (as some of his own admirers
admit) most shamefully the religious condition of the Colonies.[54]
We pass over also the times of the Commonwealth and of the two
succeeding reigns, and come down to that of William and Mary,—
the time of the greatest influx of ministers to America,—the time
of Tillotson and Burnet, and the formation of the two great societies
for extending the Church,—the Christian Knowledge Society and
the Propagation Society, which began their work within two years
of each other under the direction of kindred spirits,—the one in
1698, the other in 1700. The history of those times shows that
Romanism and Calvinism were equally eschewed. Let the sermons
and tracts of that day be compared with those of the Calvinistic
preaching in the time of Elizabeth and the semi-Romanistic ones
in the days of Laud, and a marked difference will be seen. But
there may also be seen as marked a difference between the sermons
of Tillotson and others of his stamp, and those of the earlier Reformers,
as well as those of a later period, which have been denominated
Evangelical. The age of Tillotson and Burnet may be called
the age of reasoning, of liberalism, of comprehension. Tillotson
and Burnet were great and good and pious men,—practical and
useful men. Their views of the Church, ministry, and Sacraments
were conservative. Their charity was truly Christian. And yet it
must be admitted that they stood at the beginning of a new school,
differing from any going before, and destined soon to degenerate
into something which they did not design. The sermons of Tillotson
are masterpieces of reasoning on all theological subjects,—are a
body of divinity to students; but then they are not addressed to
the hearts and consciences of sinners so as to awaken them to cry,
"What must we do to be saved?" They do not present Christ in
all his fulness to the soul with that earnest application which the
true evangelical preacher does. Burnet also admitted that he
wished to lower the doctrine of the article "On Justification by
Faith" somewhat,—though by no means to make it approach the
Sacramental view, but rather the contrary. The followers of such
men soon began to substitute reasoning, natural religion, and morality
for the Gospel. They did not deny the evangelical system,
but they did not preach it as they ought to have done, and the pulpit,
of course, lost its power. There were but few sermons published
in that day. At any rate, Tillotson's so far exceeded all others in
many respects, that they were the sermons of the Church. In the
Church of Virginia none appear to have been used by the lay readers
but Tillotson's. In many old vestry-books I have met with, a sufficient
number of his sermons were ordered to supply the lay readers;
and there were probably two lay readers to each clergyman in the
diocese. They were indeed better and longer than the brief and
most unimpressive sermons of the clergy, (judging from a number
of the latter which I have read,) but still they are not calculated to
rouse lost sinners to a sense of their condition and lead them to a
Saviour, notwithstanding all that is so excellent in them. Tillotson's
sermons, abridged into moral essays and dry reasonings on
the doctrines of religion, were, I fear, the general type of sermonizing
among the clergy who came over to America for the last
seventy or eighty years before the War of the Revolution.

I fear that many of the publications of the Christian Knowledge
Society were somewhat wanting in that pressing of evangelical
principles upon the hearts and consciences of men in the way that
has been found so effective to their conversion since the days of
Venn, Newton, Simeon, and others. Soon after entering the ministry,
I was desirous to publish a volume of sermons and tracts
for servants, and, being unable to find any such in this country, I
addressed a letter to Mr. Wilberforce, the warm friend of the negro
race, and made known to him my wishes,—not without acknowledging
my indebtedness to his book, under God, for much of that which
I considered a true view of our holy religion. In reply, he sent
me all the tracts of the Christian Knowledge Society,—perhaps all
that then had been published in England for the poor. I confess
I was disappointed in them; not that they had any of that false
doctrine which, at a later period, was surreptitiously introduced into
some of them by altering certain words, but that they did not press
with sufficient force and earnestness certain truths upon the minds
of the poor.

About this time my attention was called to some sermons of the
Rev. Mr. Bacon, a minister of our Church in Maryland, addressed
expressly to masters and servants. They were preached and published
in 1743. Their style is plain and forcible, and all that is
said is well said; but still there is the deficiency of the age in them.
They do not present Christ to men as poor lost sinners, in the way
they ought to do. They recognise the doctrine and declare it in
few words, but do not emphasize and press it. They were the best
I could get, however, and I published them. In an abridgment of

two of them afterward, I sought to supply this deficiency. Let
me add, that I think there may seem this same error in one of the
directions for the conduct and preaching of the first missionaries
of this Society when sent to South Carolina. The directions, with
this one exception, are most wise and pious. Nothing could be
better. The defective passage, as I think, is this:—"That, in instructing
heathens and infidels, they begin with the principles of
natural religion, appealing to their reason and conscience, and
thence proceed to show the necessity of revelation," &c. Now,
this is precisely the method attempted at first by the Moravian
missionaries in the North, and which they found so fruitless, and
therefore abandoned, choosing the more evangelical one with success.[55] (See Dalcho's History of the Episcopal Church in South
Carolina, p. 46.) The fault of the Tillotson school was too much
reasoning,—too much appeal to natural religion, which, though,
like Butler's Analogy, it might be very effective with some for a
certain purpose, could not answer for the multitudes. Had our
Lord preached thus, the common people would not have heard him
gladly. Nor would the wise and mighty have been converted by
the Apostles, if such had been their preaching. In what I have
said of the successors of the Tillotson school, there has been of late
a general agreement of our divines, whether called High or Low
Churchmen, all admitting that the moralizing system will not avail,
though differing much as to other things. I would not be misunderstood
on this subject. I do not deny to Tillotson most admirable
method and valuable matter in his sermons; for I have
read many of them with great pleasure, and not, I hope, without
profit. But I must regard him and his imitators as false models
of preaching, as comparatively ignoring the deep corruption of
human nature, so that God in his good providence saw fit to raise
up not only the Whitefields and Wesleys, who took an erratic course,
but the Venns, the Newtons, and the Simeons in the bosom of the
Church, to preach a simpler and fuller Gospel to the millions of
lost ones in our mother-country. This failing to set forth the
desperate wickedness of the human heart, calling for a Saviour,
a new birth, has, from my first entrance on the ministry, seemed to
me the great defect of our old clergy. I remember to have preached
before one of the oldest, most venerable and eminent of them, on
the text, "The carnal mind is enmity toward God," and in the
sermon to have quoted many of those Scriptures which represent
us as "hating God," "being his enemies in our minds," "being
children of the devil," and having quite grieved him by it. He
said that he did not like such a mode of preaching. It was in vain
that I adduced Scripture as my warrant and example. He did not
like it. And yet I was not wont to speak the doctrine harshly,
but tenderly and in pity.

Having presented this general view of the American Church,
let me proceed to mention some things which will show that I have,
from an early period, had opportunity of forming a correct estimate
of some things occurring within it during the last forty or fifty
years. At the age of seventeen I went to Princeton College. In
going from and returning to Virginia during my collegiate course,
I became a temporary inmate in the hospitable house of Dr. Abercrombie,
the associate minister with Bishop White in the churches
under his care. Several of the sisters of Mrs. Abercrombie, having
lived for a long time in the family of one of my uncles of Virginia
and received much kindness from him, became the means of my
introduction to this very kind and agreeable household. The
daughters were most interesting young women. On Good Friday,
1807, I heard Dr. Abercrombie, who was regarded as one of the
pulpit orators of the day, preach on the Passion of Christ. A
strong impression was made on my mind and memory by his action
in the pulpit, as well as by his language. After describing some
of the sufferings of Christ, he came to the crucifixion, and, erecting
his tall form to the highest point, he stretched out his arms in
a horizontal direction, and, standing motionless for a time, presented
the figure of a cross. I have never entered St. Peter's since,
without having the scene renewed. Nor has the impression made
by the kindness of himself and family ever been effaced. At the
close of my collegiate course, I formed some acquaintance with the
Rev. Dr. Beasley, associate minister with Dr. Hobart in Trinity
Church, New York; and with Dr. Montgomery, of Grace Church,
New York. That acquaintance was increased into considerable
intimacy afterward with Dr. Beasley, while he lived both in Baltimore
and Philadelphia, and with Dr. Montgomery in the latter
place, whom I often saw, for many years, at my home in the family
of old Commodore Dale, that good man and true Christian, who

married Dr. Montgomery's aunt. From these two ministers I
necessarily learned many things about the Church of that day. In
the year 1811, I was ordained, and soon after received from Bishop
Hobart, by the hand of his old college friend, Charles Fenton
Mercer, of Virginia, a large assortment of books, tracts, and pamphlets,
most of them written by himself, on points of controversy
with other denominations, and on some matters of internal trouble
in the diocese of New York, and also some Episcopal devotional
works. I read them all, and remember to have sympathized with
him in his personal difficulties. I admired the ability displayed by
him in his contest with Dr. Mason, and entirely agreed with him
in his argument for the Apostolic origin of Episcopacy, though
unable to follow when he proceeded to claim exclusive divine right
for it. By means of these publications, I became tolerably well
acquainted with the politics of the Church, and under circumstances
quite favourable to an impartial judgment. About six years after
this, (and before I attended any General Convention, though twice
elected, being prevented by unavoidable circumstances,) I went on
a painful errand to the South, bearing to its milder climate a sick
and, as the result proved, a dying wife. During my stay in Charleston,
South Carolina, myself and wife received every kind attention
which brother ministers and Christian ladies could have shown us.
It was during the last year of good Bishop Dehon's life, whose
praise was on every tongue. Dr. Gadsden was then in the laborious
discharge of his duties to bond and free. I saw him in
the place of his greatest honour,—in the Sunday-school, teaching
the coloured ones, both old and young. I preached in several of
the churches in Charleston. In one of them—either St. Philip's or
St. Michael's—I witnessed what surely would have gladdened the
heart of the most prejudiced opponent of slavery. I saw what I
was told were the last fruits of the labours of the old missionaries
of the Society for Propagating the Gospel in Foreign Parts,—old
negro men and women with some of their children sitting on benches
along the side-aisles, and around the chancel and near the pulpit,
which was advanced some distance into the middle aisle.[56] Spectacles
aided their aged vision, and, with Prayer-Books in their hands,
they read the responses aloud in the midst of their owners. The
missionaries were not prevented from teaching them to read, but
rather encouraged so to do. Nor have masters and mistresses ever
been prevented from doing it themselves, or having it done at
home; though public schools are forbidden. On the contrary,
there have, I believe, always been more well-instructed and intelligent
coloured persons, bond and free, in Charleston than in
any other city in the Union. I had occasion, two years after this,
to take the gauge and dimensions of the condition of the coloured
people in all the Atlantic States, and think that I am qualified to
judge on the subject.

It was at this time that I became acquainted with Dr. Percy, and
his excellent son-in-law, the Rev. Mr. Campbell, of South Carolina;
both of whom agreed in their views of experimental piety, and that
mode of presenting the Gospel to men for which we are pleading.
Dr. Percy was a bold, impressive, and faithful preacher of the doctrines
of grace. He was one of those who, under the auspices of
Lady Huntington, felt called on to preach an almost-forgotten
Gospel in England, though in a somewhat irregular way. He was
a graduate of Oxford, and was ordained by an English Bishop in
1767. He came over to America as one of Lady Huntington's
preachers. Here he took part with the Revolutionists, and preached
to the American troops. At the fall of Charleston, he was ordered
by Colonel Balfour to desist from preaching, on pain of confinement.
When Lady Huntington in her old age proposed to secede
from the Church of England, and wished Dr. Percy to ordain some
preachers for her, he positively and indignantly refused, and then
connected himself more closely with the Episcopal Church. In
1805, he became assistant minister in St. Philip's and St. Michael's
Churches, Charleston, South Carolina. A few years after this, St.
Paul's Church in that city was built for him. He died in the year
1817. Dr. Gadsden preached his funeral-sermon in St. Philip's
Church, at the request of the Bible Society, of which he had been

President. Although Dr. Percy was honoured by the Church in
Carolina, and was President of the Standing Committee, yet I
could perceive there was a marked difference in his views on some
points and those of the other clergy with whom I associated. His
views are presented in two pamphlets which he published while
officiating in St. Philip's and St. Michael's, and which he presented
to me. One, on the Episcopal Church, sets forth her claims in
such a manner that no sound Churchman could question his attachment
to her, and yet no reasonable Non-Episcopalian complain.
In the other we have a portrait at large of the true evangelical
preacher in life and doctrine. One or two extracts from the latter
of these will serve to confirm my views of the state of the Church
at that time. He says, in his Introduction, "That real religion at
the present period is at the lowest possible ebb, in most of our
Churches, will hardly be denied by any serious and reflecting mind,
who understands what the religion of Christ is, and what Christianity
was intended to do for mankind." He declares that all
great and general declensions of religion, whether in principle or
practice, begin at the Sanctuary or Church of God; and therefore
he calls upon all the clergy to examine themselves, both as to their
lives and preaching, and see whether they are not much in fault.
He quotes Bishop Horsley as condemning the preaching of that
day, saying to his clergy "that too many have continued so long
preaching in the smooth and fashionable strain of dry ethics and
mere moral suasion, instead of preaching the pure doctrines of the
Reformation, that they had wellnigh preached pure Christian
morality out of the world." Dr. Percy speaks very impressively
of the duty of ministers "having their own hearts savingly converted
unto God," as they hoped to be instruments of saving others.
The whole pamphlet is worthy of perusal. I cannot, however,
leave this topic without adverting to and correcting an error into
which many have fallen in tracing the evangelical movement of
the Church of England to the school of Whitefield and Wesley,
with which Dr. Percy was for a time connected. Although God
made much use for good of these zealous and fearless men, as all
acknowledge, yet the great work of evangelical reformation in the
English Church commenced in a different line, and at an earlier
period, at Cambridge and London, and elsewhere, and has ever continued
distinct. We begin our line with the Venns, Newtons, Romaines,
Legh Richmonds, and bring it down through the Simeons,
Cecils, Pratts, Gisbornes, Wilberforces, the Thorntons, Hannah
Mores, and others. These were never associated with the Huntington
school, but ever continued most true and faithful members
of the English Church. There have been those both in England
and in America who have sought to disparage the evangelical cause
by identifying it with those who left the English Church; and many
have been deceived by the misrepresentation. I remember that
Mr. John Randolph could hardly be convinced by me that Mr.
Wilberforce, Mr. Perceval, and Miss Hannah More were not regular
members of the Methodist Church in England. His prejudices were
quite strong against them on this account. In my earlier days
there were many such persons. We in this country also were
esteemed or spoken of little otherwise. By many we were considered
as in no sense Churchmen, but rather intruders into the
ministry of the Episcopal Church, having some sinister end in view.
The wish has been often expressed that such would go to their place,
—that is, to some other denomination with which they sympathized,
—just as some of us have wished that Tractarians would go to their
place, the Church of Rome. Which of us had the better right so
to speak, let history declare. Hundreds of Tractarians have gone
from the Church of England and America to Rome. Who of us
have gone to Geneva? I doubt not but many were very sincere in
their hard thoughts and hard speeches of us; but so was Paul in his
denunciation of Christians. Even Bishop White has been declared
(and it has often and recently been in print) to have denounced us
in very strong and offensive language; which I shall believe when
affirmed on sufficient authority. But if true, it only proves the
justice of our complaint as to the manner in which we have been
dealt with; for if the amiable Bishop White, with his moderate
Church views, could thus speak, what might not others have said?
Bishop Hobart issued a Pastoral entitled "The High-Churchman
Vindicated," in which he not only boasts of the name and principles
of High-Churchmen, predicting that they will one day prevail and
be honoured universally, but makes some comparisons between
them and Low-Churchmen which are not only invidious, but such
as only party feelings (of which we did not profess to be free) could
have induced him to make. I should not have adverted to this,
but that this Pastoral and another on the Principles of a Churchman
have been republished by the Protestant Episcopal Society
of New York, bound up in its volumes, and transmitted to posterity.
In one of them, those who rank the distinctive principles of the
Church, for which he pleads, among the non-essentials of religion,
are declared to be guilty of treachery to their Church and to their
Master. It is well known that Low-Churchmen do not consider
those things in which the Episcopal Church differs from orthodox
denominations as among the essentials of religion, though they do
regard them as important,—some of them very important. Of course
they are among the non-essentials, nothing being essential in religion
but what is necessary to salvation.

I now proceed to show how, in the providence of God, I was
further led into circumstances very favourable to an accurate acquaintance
with the General Church in this country, and to a just
estimate of persons and things on both sides. Having taken an
early and lively interest in the American Colonization Society, and
written something in its behalf, I was induced, in the year 1819, to
devote myself for some time to the formation of auxiliary societies
throughout the United States, the collection of funds, and the selection
of the first colonists. This led me to visit all the principal
towns, from Milledgeville, in Georgia, to Portland, in Maine. As
in duty bound, and by choice led, I invoked the aid of the ministers
of all denominations, and especially of my own, without distinction
of party. For visiting the former I was honoured with a printed
pamphlet by one "Sopater of Berea," addressed to Bishop Moore,
advising him to recall me to Virginia and to my duties at home.
While I received much kindness from ministers of all denominations,
I experienced still more from those of the Episcopal Church.
Let me mention some of them:—The clergy of Savannah, Georgia;
Bishop Bowen and the clergy of Charleston; the Rev. Mr. Lance,
of Georgetown, South Carolina; the Rev. Mr. Bedell, then living
in Fayetteville, North Carolina; Bishop Kemp, Dr. Beasley, and
Dr. Henshaw, of Baltimore; Bishop White, (at whose house I was
kindly entertained for three weeks while engaged in selecting colonists,)
and Drs. Muhlenberg, Boyd, and Montgomery, of Philadelphia;
Drs. Milnor, Lyell, and B. T. Onderdonk, of New York; Dr.
Croswell, of New Haven; Dr. Wainwright, of Hartford; Dr. Crocker,
of Providence; Drs. Eaton and Gardiner,[57] of Boston; Mr. Carlisle,
of Salem; Dr. Morse, of Newburyport; Dr. Burroughs, of Portsmouth,
New Hampshire; and Mr. Tenbroeck, of Portland, in Maine.
One of the most pleasing impressions made on my mind by that
visit, and which I have ever delighted to recall and speak of, resulted
from the uniform hospitality and kindness experienced from
one end of our land to the other. Whenever, since that time, I

have heard any thing like a comparison instituted between different
portions of our country in this respect, I have entered my protest
against it. Circumstances render hospitality more easy to the rich
in the South, by reason of their numerous servants and large estates;
but, according to the means possessed, the hospitality is the same
everywhere. It is, indeed, the most universal good feature in the
character of man. When Mr. Pickering, at Salem, (my father's old
friend and comrade in the Revolution,) cleaned my boots at daylight
in the morning, and at a later period Bishop Griswold, in Boston,
did the same, I felt that no greater hospitality could be shown me
by the richest layman or Bishop of the South. All sectional prejudices
I have ever endeavoured to discourage. Although I am
aware of the advantage of having natives of the soil to be ministers
in Virginia, yet do I always condemn any disposition to object to
worthy ministers, come from whence they may. Virginia has reaped
much advantage from ministers coming from most distant parts.
Taking warning from the unhappy dissensions of other denominations
on one painful subject, may our Church be at peace and prove
one bond of union to the land! In advocating the claims of the
Colonization Society from Northern pulpits, I always commended it
for this, that, however we might differ as to the subject of slavery,
we might all agree touching this mode of benefiting the African
race; and there has been a very general and happy agreement.

It being evident that I must have gained some considerable share
of information concerning the Church from the places thus visited
and the persons seen and conversed with, I proceed to mention a
few things which resulted from this visit.

INTRODUCTION OF MORE HYMNS INTO THE PRAYER-BOOK.

To my surprise, I found that there was a liberty taken in regard
to hymns in public worship to which I had not been accustomed.
Not only were there voluntaries before and after service, with words
chosen by the choir or minister at pleasure, but there were several
hymn-books in use not known to the Church, as, for instance, in
Savannah, Georgia, and in Trinity Church, Boston. I saw also a
few printed hymns for some special occasion at Dr. Moore's Church
in Newburyport, Massachusetts. This struck me very forcibly,
having been from a child accustomed only to those in the Prayer-Book;
nor did it strike me very favourably.[58] I was not aware at

that time that a variety of hymn-books was allowed in the English
Church, and I knew that each denomination in this country deemed
it best to have its own selection. Being conscious, however, that
we were stinted in hymns, whether for public, social, or private use,
and that many psalms were badly versified or unsuited for Christian
worship, I introduced a motion at the General Convention of 1823,
for additional hymns and a revision and selection of the metrical
psalms, and had the honour of being placed at the head of the
Committee of the Lower House. I urged the measure by stating
the diversity which I had witnessed a few years before, and plead
for such an increase of hymns and selection of psalms as would
answer all the purposes of private, social, and public worship. Dr.
Jarvis supported the resolution, and, I think, seconded it, though
maintaining that there was a perfect liberty here, as in England,
to have a variety of selections, as the hymns and psalms formed
no integral part of the Prayer-Book, but were only an appendage,
not subject to rubrics. The joint committee of both Houses, being
appointed, met during the interval between that and the next General
Convention. Dr. Muhlenberg, one of the Committee, selected,
prepared, and published a volume of hymns for the use of the Committee,
many of which were adopted. Dr. Onderdonk, afterward
Bishop of Pennsylvania, also prepared a number of paraphrases of
Scripture, some of which were also introduced into our collection.
Severe strictures having from time to time been passed upon our
work, I beg leave to offer a few remarks upon them. In the first
place, I affirm that none but those who engage in the work of selecting
hymns have any idea of the difficulty of the work. Dr.
Muhlenberg had collected hymn-books from all over England and
America, and brought a large basketful of them to the meeting.
They covered the table around which the Committee sat. I recollect
the remark with which he introduced them,—that he had no idea,
when he undertook the work, what a mass of bad poetry and false
sentiment was to be found in the hymn-books of the different denominations
of England and America, and how difficult it was to
get a good selection. The Committee found it so in the progress
of their examination. The various and strange tastes which sought
to be gratified in the selection formed another difficulty. I remember
that one of the first classical scholars of the Church, and
an excellent divine, proposed a great favourite to the Committee,
expressing a most earnest desire for its admission, and there was
every disposition to gratify him; but the hymn was so entirely unsuitable
that no one could think of adopting it. Another instance
may be mentioned. At this time the delegation from South Carolina
came around to the General Convention by sea, and it was
thought desirable, by one, at least, of their delegation, to have a
hymn suited to their case while on the ocean. Accordingly, one
had been prepared, and was put into my hands. The first line of
it read thus:—

I need not say that it found no support in the Committee, being
even more objectionable than one which may be found in some hymnbooks,
and which it was wished to have in ours, namely, "The Star
of the East." Each partook too much of the character of pagan
worship. The selection which has been made, we think, does not
deserve the criticisms which have been unsparingly passed upon it.
When we read the names of such men as White, Hobart, Professor
Turner, Dr. Muhlenberg, and Mr. Francis Key, as members
of the Committee, we might surely expect something more deserving
of praise than censure. The selection has been highly esteemed
by many good judges. When in England, at the house of Mr.
Bickersteth, who had them, I was pleased to hear him say that it
was either the very best, or among the best, he had ever seen; and
he lived in the midst of hundreds, and had himself selected one for
his own parish. Among the objections made to some of the hymns
of our selection, I have been amused to hear the following,—namely,
that we had altered the poetry of the authors of them. Now, it
happens that one of the rules adopted by the Committee was, to
give the preference to the original when it could be ascertained,
except when there was some very sufficient reason. When a hymn
was proposed, the original was called for. Certain changes complained
of were actual returns to the originals from the versions in
common use, whose compiler had altered them.

As to the desire expressed by some for an increase of hymns, I
confess I cannot feel the force of it, being convinced that a smaller
number frequently used, whether in private or public, is likely to
produce the greater effect. I do not mean to condemn selections
for Sunday-schools, and perhaps for some social meetings, but am
still decidedly in favour of one book of hymns and psalms, as in the
American Church, rather than the unbounded liberty of the English
Church, where so many hundreds, I believe, are in use.

PUBLIC BAPTISM AND PIOUS SPONSORS ADVOCATED.

In my intercourse with many ministers and churches I discovered
that there were very low notions and practices as to the administration
of baptism and the qualification of sponsors, little or no
regard being paid to the rubric, though so express as to the public
performance of it, and sponsors being admitted without any reference
to their pious qualities. My friend, Mr. Francis S. Key, and
myself had often mourned over the profanation of this sacrament
in Virginia and Maryland, where, in its private performance, even
ungodly boys and girls had been sometimes admitted as sponsors.
We were both of us on the Committee on the State of the Church,
and there introduced, after a proper preamble, the following resolution
to be acted on by the House:—"Resolved, That it is the
opinion of this General Convention that the ordinance of baptism
ought, in all possible cases, to be administered in public, and that
when necessity requires it to be administered in private, then the
office for private baptism should be used, and the infant and sponsors
should be afterward required to appear in Church and to conform
to the rubric in that respect, and that the Right Reverend
the Bishops be respectfully requested to call the attention of the
clergy to this subject, and to enjoin upon them a particular care in
requiring proper qualifications in those who are admitted as sponsors."
We were surprised to find ourselves opposed by those who
held the highest views of the efficiency of baptism, and who ought
on that account to have desired to see it most highly honoured in
the performance. After considerable discussion, the following substitute
was adopted:—"The House of Clerical and Lay Deputies,
reverting to the notices of private baptism in some of the preceding
statements, (the report from Virginia called special attention to it,)
respectfully request the House of Bishops to insert in the pastoral
letter, solicited by this House, their opinion and advice on the subject
of the existing custom of administering private baptism without
a great and reasonable cause, and of using in private the public
office; and also on the proper qualification of sponsors." The
difference between our resolution and its substitute is obvious and
great. The resolution expressed a positive and strong opinion on
the part of the clergy and laity that certain evils existed, and ought
to be corrected, requesting the Bishops to warn against them in
their pastoral letter. The substitute expressed no opinion on the
part of the House, but placed it all in the hands of the Bishops,
merely requesting their opinion and advice on the subject. It was

then (for certain reasons) more customary for those in the majority
to throw every thing into the hands of the Bishops, and those who
doubted the propriety of such a course were regarded as wanting
in respect for Bishops, and no Churchmen.[59] As some of us feared,
the opinion of the House of Bishops was not such as we desired.
It was regarded as rather apologizing for than condemning the
violation of rubrics in relation to baptism, though admitting the
duty and importance of public baptism and of pious sponsors. It
is due to Bishop White, the supposed author of the pastoral, to say,
that not very long after this he became satisfied that more decisive
measures ought to be adopted, and gave notice in all the three
churches under his care, that henceforth there should be no more
private baptisms in those churches, except for such cases as the
rubric justified. In speaking to me on the subject soon after this
order, he made this significant remark:—that if the parents had so
little respect for the ordinance that they would not bring their children
to the church, it only proved that the baptism would be of
very little service to them, thereby showing that he regarded the
chief efficacy thereof to depend on the view the parents took of it,
and the use they made of it in the education of their children. One
remark I beg leave to make as to the qualification of sponsors.
Some ministers question their right to interfere as to the qualification
of sponsors, in the absence of a positive statute. Are they
then forbidden to exclude infidels, blasphemers, and most abandoned
persons? If permitted and bound to require proper qualifications
in adults coming to baptism, in candidates desiring Confirmation
and the Communion, does not consistency require that
they avert from the Church the shame of such an abuse of the sacred
office of sponsors as sometimes occurs? The circumstance which
determined my mind more resolutely than ever against private
baptism and improper sponsors was the fact, that not long before
this effort in the General Convention I consented to baptize a child
in private, and during the ceremony discovered, to my deep concern,
that the father, who had the child in his arms, and was acting as
sponsor, was in a state of intoxication. I have during my ministry
found it a comparatively easy task to prevent any but communicants
presenting themselves as sponsors. By preaching on the subject,
and showing its great inconsistency, I have generally prevented
such applications, and when they have been made, I have never
failed to convince the persons thus applying of the impropriety of
the step proposed, by going over with them the baptismal service,
and appealing to their own consciences and judgments. Rarely,
if ever, has it happened that I was unable to receive into the visible
Church any child, where parents desired it, no matter how unsuitable
they were to become sponsors, as there could, by a short delay
and a little trouble, be found some one communicant who would
perform the part. I have on some few occasions acted as sponsor
myself, making of course some changes in the service.

PROPOSED ALTERATION IN THE THIRTY-FIFTH CANON.

Another subject came up in this Convention worthy of some
notice. It was the meaning and design of the thirty-fifth canon,
which relates to the officiating of those not ministers of our Church
in the houses of worship belonging to our communion. On my
visit to Newburyport the preceding year, I spent several days in
the hospitable family of the Rev. Dr. Morse, Episcopal minister in
that place. So far from condemning me for preaching in the pulpits
of other denominations on the subject I had in hand, as "Sopater
of Berea," and perhaps some others, had done, he informed me
that only on the preceding Sabbath he had a most respectable
minister of the Presbyterian denomination in his pulpit, and justified
the act. At the succeeding General Convention, in the year 1820,
to my surprise, he brought forward a proposition to repeal the
thirty-fifth canon, which seemed to forbid what he had done, and
which he also alleged might be construed so as to forbid lay reading
in our churches. His proposition was referred to a committee,
which reported unfavourably. It was nevertheless carried. Being
sent to the House of Bishops for concurrence, it was there negatived.
A committee of conference was proposed and agreed to,
and I was one of the committee. On a meeting of the joint committee,
it was urged, by those who were in favour of its being rescinded,
that our Bishops and ministers, in seeking to build up our
Church in many places where we had no houses of worship, were
often allowed the use of those of other denominations, and it would
be unbecoming in us to seek or accept such favours without being
willing to grant similar ones. The meeting, however, broke up
without any agreement. On that or the following day I dined with
Bishop Hobart at a Mr. Smith's, of Philadelphia, and just before
dinner the Bishop took me aside and read me something which he
thought would satisfy all parties. It is the same which may be
seen on page 58 of the Journal of the Convention of 1820. It is
as follows:—

It will be seen that in the foregoing exposition of the Bishops
there is no exclusive offensive reason assigned for their non-concurrence,
but one which all candid persons must admit to be good,
—which indeed all denominations act upon, according to circumstances.
It is not said that no other ministers but ours have a
right to preach, and that none but ours must enter Episcopal pulpits,
but that, to promote charity, to prevent collision, it is best
that they be opened only to our own, except when justifying causes
exist. That we have suffered at times in the way complained of,
in permitting the too free use of our churches, is a fact too well
known to us in Virginia, as elsewhere. I have on more than one
occasion advised the refusal of our churches, when there was no reasonable
cause for the loan of them. Against the uniting in free and
common churches I have protested from my first entrance on the
ministry, and have on various occasions been instrumental in substituting
Episcopal churches for such. Of course, it is for the
ministers and vestries to apply the reasoning and advice of the
Bishops, and decide when it is proper to open our churches to
others. There is not much cause to fear the excessive hospitality
of our own or other denominations in this respect; for all are so
multiplying houses of worship through the land that there is little
need of it. The jealousy of sects is also a sufficient safeguard
against excess. Let me add, in conclusion, that this was an old
canon of the English Church, adopted, like many others, into our
code. Its title in England, and for many years in our own land,
was, "Concerning the officiating of strangers, &c." It was designed
to prevent strolling impostors from getting into our pulpits,
and therefore their regular credentials were required to be shown
to the vestries and ministers. Had it been originally framed to
prevent all non-Episcopalian ministers from being admitted into
Episcopal pulpits, it would surely have been declared in some plain,
honest way, and the word "strangers" not have been used, for that
would have been most inapplicable to some worthy ministers of
other denominations living in the same town or parish, and well
known. For many years the same title was used in the American
Church. In the Convention of 1808, a committee was appointed
(of which Dr. Hobart was one) to revise the canons. The title of
the old canon, and nothing else, was altered, and perhaps without

discussion or observation. Bishop Hobart was a good expositor of
the design of the change, and of the construction to be put upon it.
It is to be regretted that any alteration took place in the title.
The Church has sustained injury by it in the increased prejudice
produced by the construction put upon it by some too zealous friends
and some too bitter foes,—namely, that the Episcopal Church hereby
denies the right of any other minister to preach the Gospel, which
is inconsistent with the exposition given of it by the House of
Bishops. Without any such canon, all the ministers and trustees
of other denominations guard their churches against intruders, and
lend them out when it is deemed expedient. For various reasons,
ours will always be yet more particular, even without law.

THE GENERAL THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY.

The General Theological Seminary was first established in New
York in the year 1817, then removed to New Haven, as a more
suitable place. Jacob Sherred, of New York, bequeathed a large
sum to a seminary within the State. A question arose as to the
construction of the will. Bishop Hobart maintained that the bequest
properly belonged to New York, and that he had established
a seminary there to inherit and apply it. Others thought somewhat
differently. A General Convention was called in October, 1821, to
settle the question. After much discussion, it was resolved that
the seminary should be restored to New York on certain terms, and
with a new constitution,—placing it, as many thought, too much in
the power of the Bishop and diocese of New York. In Bishop
White's Memoirs of the Episcopal Church in America, the following
account is given of this transaction. Speaking of the committee
to whom the subject was referred, he says, "All the members of
the committee concurred in giving praise to Judge Cameron, of North
Carolina, for the ability and good-temper manifested by him in the
progress of the business; and the same were again displayed by
him when it came before the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies.
However, it did not pass without opposition, which was almost
entirely confined to the clerical and lay gentlemen of Virginia, with
whom it is a favourite idea to establish a theological professorship
in the College of William and Mary." I endorse all that is here
said of Judge Cameron. I knew his venerable father,—one of the
best of our old Virginia clergymen. I think I knew the son well.
I heard him, during the time of his first love, tell what God had
done for his soul, under the ministry of Dr. Bedell, while in North
Carolina. He said, "If I have experienced a change in my soul,

I know that it was done by God's Spirit. That Spirit began the
work, not I." He had no sympathy with certain views of religion,
even then too prevalent. He did not desire the seminary to be
placed at New York. He thought the terms forced upon the Church
were hard; but they were the best that could be obtained, and
the good-temper displayed by him was in submitting to them and
counselling others to do so. I remember his speech well, and
conversed freely with him in private. The question he believed to
be between a General Seminary in New York, under the partial
influence of the whole Church besides, or a Diocesan Seminary in
New York, with Sherred's legacy and all the wealth and power
and numbers of that State,—able to overwhelm a General Seminary
elsewhere without funds. He believed, or at least hoped, that the
evil of the undue influence of New York in the General Seminary,
under the constitution as agreed upon by the committee, would be
chiefly at the beginning, and would be decreasing every year. In
glowing prophetic vision, he saw the Church extending itself over
the land; new dioceses rising up in every part and rapidly filling
themselves with ministers and churches,—sending their funds to
the treasury of the General Seminary, and, on their account, as
well as on account of the ministers, having the right to regulate
the seminary; by which means the power of the General Church
would be increasing, and that of New York proportionally decreasing.
This he said to comfort those of us who feared the overwhelming
influence of New York. I remember well how he applied
the prophetic words of the patriarch Jacob, that "the sceptre should
not depart from Judah until Shiloh come; and unto him should be
the gathering of the nations." I do not say that the scriptural application
was correct, but his meaning was plain. The dioceses
were to be the gathering together of the nations to take the sceptre
from New York in the management of the General Seminary.
Bishop White also intimates that the opposition from Virginia proceeded
from "a favourite idea with us to establish a theological
professorship in William and Mary College." We ought to have
been better acquainted with our views, motives, and reasons than any
one else. We were then struggling on with our effort at Williamsburg,
faint, yet pursuing, with Dr. Keith and one student, and scarce
any funds. We knew not but Virginia might have to depend on some
General Seminary. It was not a selfish attachment to Virginia alone
—a desire for the aggrandizement of ourselves or the destruction
of others—which prompted what we said and did. Not knowing
how soon we might have to rely on a general institution, we wished
it placed under more favourable auspices for the promotion of what
we believed to be sound views of the Gospel and the Church, than
it would be in New York. The writer of these lines recollects his
thoughts, and almost his very words, when he dared to lift up his
voice even in opposition to Judge Cameron. Whether Judge
Cameron, with all his purity of motive and strength of mind and
practical wisdom, was in this instance right, or those so greatly his
inferiors in all respects, let subsequent events and the present controlling
influence of New York in the conduct of the General Seminary
declare. The sceptre has not yet departed from Judah;
Shiloh has not yet come. The gathering together of the nations
(dioceses) has not yet been, and never will be. It was even formally
proposed, some years since, by the Bishop of Western New
York, to give it up entirely into the hands of New York, and let the
several sums contributed from other dioceses be returned to them.

PROPOSAL BY THE HOUSE OF BISHOPS, IN THE YEAR 1826, TO
MAKE SOME CHANGES IN THE SERVICE.

In my second article it was stated that Bishop Hobart acknowledged
that there were some delinquents as to the use of the ante-Communion
service in New York, as well as in Virginia, Maryland,
or elsewhere, and that the discovery of this fact had something to
do with his proposed changes.. I had a few years before—perhaps
at the General Convention, 1823—told him that some of his clergy,
chiefly in Western New York, were not more regular than some
others in the Church. This, at the time, he could not assent to;
but, at the opening of the Convention of 1826, he took me aside
and said that, on inquiry, he had found that I was correct, and
that he meant to propose something which he thought would satisfy
all parties and produce a happy uniformity throughout the Church.
His plan was soon proposed to and adopted by the other Bishops,
and, being sent down to the Lower House, was, after some discussion,
adopted by it, and spread before the Church for rejection or
ratification by the ensuing General Convention. By this proposal,
the Litany might be omitted, except on special occasions.[60] One or
more of the Psalms might be selected and read by the minister in
place of the morning or evening portions. The lesson might be

abridged by the minister, only so that not less than fourteen verses
be retained. The ante-Communion service was to be read on every
Sabbath. A change was to be made in the preface to the Confirmation
service and in one of the prayers of the same. By the latter,
the vexed question of baptismal regeneration was to be settled, and
settled at the lowest point,—namely, that of a mere change of
state or conditional title to salvation,—in opposition to certain
views which the Bishops said were imputed to the Church and injurious
to it. This proposal was unanimously adopted by all the
Bishops present. Bishop Moore, being absent, was much dissatisfied
with it, and, at the next Convention in Virginia, most earnestly
invoked a protest of the diocese against it. But for this appeal and
a tender regard for the feelings of the Bishop, I believe that the
Church in Virginia would, by its silence at least, have consented to
the action of the General Convention,—although none of us were
satisfied with some things in it. I took occasion at another Convention,
where the delegates to the General Convention were directed
to vote against the proposed changes, to declare my continued conviction
that the action of the General Convention had been, on the
whole, calculated to do good, though I meant not to oppose what had
been determined on in the Convention of Virginia. The adoption
of the changes would have effected much of what seems now so
generally desired. Had the change proposed, whereby the meaning
of baptismal regeneration was fixed at its lowest point, been adopted,
there would have been, by anticipation, a protest of the whole Church
against all that flood of error in relation to the effects of baptism
of infants which has been since brought in by the Tractarian heresy.
I would not, however, be understood as endorsing Bishop Hobart's
mode of explaining our baptismal service, as I believe another is
more consistent with the whole tenor of our services, of which the
hypothetical theory, or the judgment of charity, is the way for their
true understanding. The lead which Virginia took in opposition to the
measure was followed by some other Conventions; and, as it failed
to give general satisfaction, Bishop Hobart proposed its withdrawal,
and it was accordingly withdrawn, and the obligation to use the
ante-Communion service on every Sabbath was left to rest on its
former doubtful foundation. The Bishops had indeed expressed
their opinion that it was obligatory, but it was of course only an
opinion, wanting the force of law, as the General Convention had
never adopted it. Nor did the Bishops claim more for it.

THE EPISCOPAL SUNDAY-SCHOOL UNION.

This was established at the General Convention of 1826. Nothing
of its formation appears on the journal, for it was not even
proposed to the House. It was the wish of some to make it an
institution of the Convention, and such a proposition was talked of;
but the whole history of the action of the General Convention was
against it. On more than one occasion, individuals had applied to
the Convention or to the House of Bishops to adopt or recommend
certain Church-books, but were refused on the ground that the
General Convention was formed for other purposes, and that the
precedent would be bad. In that very year,—1826,—the Rev. Mr.
Barlow brought forward a scheme for a Church book-establishment,
and was permitted to occupy many hours in the explanation and
advocacy of it. The following resolution was adopted in regard to
it:—"Resolved, As the opinion of this House, that, without entering
at all into the merits of the plan noticed in the report of the
committee, it is inexpedient to legislate on the subject." On another
occasion an effort was made to form a General Education
Society under the patronage of the General Convention. This also,
after being considered for some time, was postponed, and never
resumed. In truth, the only institutions which have been brought
under the General Convention are the General Seminary and the
Missionary Society; and whether they give any encouragement for
the trial of others, all may judge for themselves. The Episcopal
Sunday-School Union was therefore, as has since been publicly
and formally admitted by itself, a voluntary institution. Several
attempts were made, at different General Conventions, to have it
enrolled and recognised among the general institutions of the
Church; but they failed,—the Convention being reminded that it
was only a voluntary society. The determination of the Church
not to embarrass itself and produce discord, by adopting any such
institution, was further manifested by the failure of an effort made
in 1847 by Bishop Henshaw, who proposed to have a committee
of both Houses to prepare a few catechetical books for the children
of the Church, with a view to uniformity and harmony. It was
opposed by Bishops Delancy, Whittingham, Hopkins, and myself.
After a discussion during a part of several days, the question being
taken, the mover of the resolution was the only one who voted for it.

There was, however, from the time of its formation a general
disposition to encourage the Episcopal Sunday-School Union as a

voluntary society. The American Sunday-School Union and the
American Tract Societies were noble institutions, and furnished
many excellent and suitable works for individuals, families, and
Sunday-schools; but they could not supply certain books setting
forth the peculiarities of the different denominations in connection
with the Gospel. It was therefore desirable that Episcopalians as
well as others should have some organization for supplying such.
It was distinctly understood, at the establishment of ours in 1826,
that it should assume no party character, but be conducted on liberal
comprehensive principles, setting forth only those common truths
about which Episcopalians are agreed,—which platform has been
repeatedly declared since then. Accordingly, the diocese of Virginia,
at the first Convention after its organization, earnestly recommended
it to the patronage of the Episcopalians of the State.
A few months only, however, had elapsed, when some of its publications
contained sentiments very different from what was expected,
and which were calculated to dissatisfy many of us. I immediately
wrote to the chief manager of it,—the present Bishop of Maryland,
—making complaints. In reply, I was assured that the greatest
pains should be taken in the future to avoid giving offence; that
the book most objected to should be withdrawn from circulation;
and that henceforth books favouring both parties in the Church
should be published. I did not question the sincerity of the promise
and intention, but saw the impracticability of the plan proposed.
Thus disappointed, I did not take any particular concern in the
operation of the Society after that. I only saw that from time to
time some things came out which were criticized, and which I could
not approve, though there were many good little books published
for children, chiefly from the pens of pious writers in England. At
length, when Tractarian publications began to multiply in our own
and Mother-Church, the character of the issues of this Society became
more and more tinctured with the false doctrines of that
school. Complaints became so numerous and heavy, that in the
summer of 1846, when a number of Bishops were in New York at
the annual meeting of the General Missionary Society, the Executive
Committee of the Union was convened, and the complaints
stated. An order was then passed that a set of all the books of
the Society should be sent to each Bishop for examination. On
receiving and examining those sent to myself, I found so much to
object to, that the duty was felt to spread the same before the
Church. This was done in an octavo pamphlet of more than sixty
pages. For so doing I received much severe censure from the press
and elsewhere. My charges were pronounced to be false. The
books were declared to be worthy of all praise, and to have no unsound
doctrine in them. The Church was solemnly and repeatedly
called on to sustain it just as it was. Seeing that there was no
promise or hope of amendment, a number of those who believed
that better books and tracts might be procured determined to form
another voluntary Society, in which those who agreed in sentiment
might with more harmony and efficiency benefit the Church by the
press, and resist that torrent of evil which was pouring itself over
our own and Mother-Church. Wherefore a number of Bishops,
clergy, and laity, who met together at the Convention of 1847,
in New York, united in forming what is called the Evangelical
Knowledge Society. For so doing they have been stigmatized by
many of the friends of the other Society as the promoters of division,
schism, and discord, and as slandering that Society, whose publications
were still defended as sound and useful. God has nevertheless
been pleased to bless our efforts and to extend the sphere of
our operations beyond our first hopes. Under these circumstances,
at the last General Convention, a most unexpected and extraordinary
call was made upon us to cease from our work and unite with
the elder Society under a somewhat new organization, which disavowed
all former claims by its friends of being other than a voluntary
society, and made fresh pledges of the avoidance of all which
could offend any sincere and pious Episcopalian. Had the regular
officers and members of this Society, after due consideration, formally
proposed to those of the Evangelical Knowledge Society a
conference for the purpose of inquiring whether there might not be
a union of effort on some liberal basis, and, having agreed on the
same, called upon the Church generally to sustain such a union,
there would have been something worthy the name of compromise,
though I do not believe such union practicable or likely to satisfy
long. Or had the managers of the elder Society been content to
discard such of their books as were at length found to be unworthy,
and made, even on the ground of expediency, certain changes in
others, and resolved on the most comprehensive and conciliatory
mode of action for the future, and left the other Society to do its
own work in its own way, there would have been nothing to complain
of. All must have desired to see the work of reformation go
on. But instead of this, as though it were the only Society having
a right to exist, having resolved on certain changes and certain
promises, and forgetful of past failures, it calls upon all the clergy
and congregations of the Church to rally around its banner, and it
only, under pain of being regarded as wanting in true attachment
to the Church and devoid of Christian charity. If such is not the
position which the old Society (under an altered name) has assumed
toward the Evangelical Knowledge Society, consisting of a large
number of Bishops, clergy, and laity of the Church, I have mistaken
the movement. So have I understood the language of its managers,
its committees, and its active friends, as spoken throughout the land.
As to the probability of success in making it answer all the wants
of the whole Church, it is not in place to discuss the question. It
is sufficient to say that the Evangelical Knowledge Society has seen
no cause to relinquish its work. That work is not the division of
the Church, (as has been falsely charged upon it,) either as designed
or as the natural or probable consequence. On the contrary, the
best method of preventing division is to allow a reasonable liberty
of thought and action. By attempting hermetically to seal the
minds and lips of men, there may be a swelling and an explosion.
In our Mother-Church, different societies, having the same great
object in view, but using somewhat different means, are not considered
as interfering with the unity and welfare of the Church.
Many there are, among both clergy and laity, who actively co-operate
with different societies. I sincerely hope that both of our
Societies may be worthy of such general patronage.

THE DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN MISSIONARY SOCIETY OF THE CHURCH.

Our Church was too tardy in this noble enterprise, especially as
to the foreign department. The first impulse given to us was the
tender of some pecuniary help from the Church Missionary Society
of our mother-country, if we would enter upon the work. The
missionary character and tendency of the Colonization Society did
much to excite our Church to action. The plea for Africa was a
pathetic one, addressing itself to all hearts. But it was not heard
at once by all. Even after our first efforts in behalf of that unhappy
land, I heard an old and respectable clergyman of our Church,
preaching at one of our General Conventions, designate the foreign
missionary effort as a wild crusade, and another of high standing
express the opinion that the foreign missionary work was for other
denominations, and the domestic for Episcopalians. In three years
after, however, I heard the latter plead zealously for the foreign
missionary cause. An effort for preparing coloured missionaries
for Africa was made at Hartford under the patronage of Bishop
Brownell and Dr. Wainwright, but, from various causes, it proved
of but little avail. The efforts of our Virginia Seminary commenced

with preparing Mr. and Mrs. Hill for the Greek mission, and have
ever since been successfully continued. The missionary work went
on gradually increasing on its first platform until the year 1835.
Some of its friends then thought that its labours and funds might
more rapidly increase if some changes in its organization were
effected. It was proposed to place it more entirely under the
patronage and direction of the General Convention; to constitute
the whole Church, consisting of every baptized person and child, the
Society; to declare the whole world to be but one field, forbidding
the distinction of foreign and domestic, or so arranging it that no
dissensions should arise in the management of them. I was not at
the opening of this General Convention, being detained several
days in Virginia. All things were agreed upon before my arrival
between some of those who, from their location and other circumstances,
took a more active part in the conduct of the Society. On
reaching Philadelphia, a number of those brethren whose lead I was
always ready to follow in regard to such matters, and some of whom
are yet alive, informed me that a most happy agreement had taken
place among the active friends of missions, that all party distinctions
were to be done away, and that, in proof of the liberal feeling toward
those of our way of thinking—that one Bishop should be chosen for
China and two for the domestic field—one of the latter, together
with the former, should be such as we would designate. Of course
this was very acceptable to one who had never professed to be indifferent
to the distinctions which prevailed in the Church. It
seemed to promise well. On conversing with that wise and good
man, Bishop Griswold, I found that he was not at all carried away
with the new plan; that he would rather it should assume more
than less of the voluntary system, referring to the two successful
Societies in England,—the Church Missionary Society and the Society
for Propagating the Gospel,—which had always acted on the
voluntary principle. When the proposed changes came before the
whole Society for discussion, there was, I thought, a disposition on
the part of some to underrate the character and success of the old
organization, and I took the liberty to object to such strictures,
and to refer to what it had done, and especially to the great increase
of its funds for the last year or two, at the same time declaring my
intention to act with those who understood the operation of the
Society better than myself. All things were settled on the new
platform, and some of us continued until the last night of the Convention
under the pleasing expectation of having two missionary
Bishops of our own choice; but it so happened that two of the other
side were chosen for the domestic field, and the election of one for
the foreign field was indefinitely postponed. This, among other
things, may help to account for the fact that some of us are rather
fearful of what are called compromises.

Though thus disappointed, we determined to support the new
organization. In many addresses throughout Virginia, I advocated
the peculiarities of it,—even as though it had commended itself
entirely to my own choice and judgment. The Society under the
new organization has certainly not succeeded as well as was expected
by some. An impulse was given to it by the first extraordinary
efforts made in its behalf, and its funds increased for a time; but, as
they were already on the increase, it is impossible to say whether,
with the same exertions, the increase under the old system might
not have been even greater. Certain it is, that the annual increase
soon began to decline, and that the advocates for the new arrangement
were disappointed. The friends of missions have long mourned
the want of zeal and liberality of the Church toward them. The
domestic department especially has languished. The Constantinople
mission dragged heavily for some years, then stopped altogether
for want of men, means, and success. The Greek mission,
being in a measure self-supporting, has sustained itself well. Those
of China and Africa alone seemed to draw forth missionaries and
support, and even these have done it in a degree most disproportioned
to the importance of the object and the wealth of the Church.
At the last General Convention, the causes of failure were inquired
into, especially with a view to some change in the management of
the domestic department, which was in a very languishing condition.
A night was appointed for the consideration of the subject. Through
some mistake on my part as to the place of meeting, I was not
present. I had intended, if present and opportunity offered, to
have stated my own candid convictions as to the main causes of the
deficiencies complained of. I should have referred to the notorious
fact, that the domestic department was unpopular with a large portion
of those entitled Low-Churchmen, whose funds were given reluctantly,
while many on the other side were far from being liberal to
either department. I heard it said by at least two of the Bishops,
ranging on the other side, that it would be necessary to place both
departments in the hands of Low-Churchmen, in order to draw forth
funds from the people. That confidence was wanting in the other
portion was evident from the fact, that a voluntary society had been
formed in Philadelphia for the disposal of its funds on such missionaries
as it might select. The committee of the General Society was

also changed, and some of well-known Low-Church views were put
on it, in the hope of inspiring confidence and raising funds. Some
effect has certainly been produced by this measure, though, unless
other causes of failure be removed, the effect may be only temporary.
Had a similar course been pursued in the election of Missionary
Bishops at the reorganization in 1835, according to the supposed
understanding of some, and as was most reasonable, that liberal
policy might have attached a larger number of one portion of the
Church to it, have received more funds, and have had some effect as
to the kind of missionaries employed. But, in connection with this,
there had been other causes in operation. I had never been disposed
to ascribe to the domestic committee a desire or willingness
to send unsuitable persons or men of extravagant views to the
domestic field, in preference to others. It was not their province,
indeed, to select where there were Bishops. The Bishops received
certain sums of money, and nominated the missionaries on whom it
was to be expended. The committee must, indeed, approve; but
all must see that when a Bishop makes his selection the committee
can scarce object, except in some most notorious case. Whatever
be the cause, the fact is not to be questioned, that the reputation
of the Society has suffered from the reported character of many of
her missionaries. Their very reports, in the "Spirit of Missions,"
were often very unsatisfactory on several accounts. To hearts
imbued with evangelic feeling there was nothing to interest,—
the mere externals of religion being dwelt upon, and even those
not prospering. Their evil report came back to the Eastern
States through various channels. Although there were doubtless
a considerable number of worthy men among them, yet I have
from time to time met with clergymen and laymen who were to
be relied on, who, from their own observation, have declared that, as
to very many of them, we must have different men and of different
views in the Western field, or our Church could never prosper.
From Virginia many individuals and families have gone to various
parts of the West, and from these, through their friends and relatives
at home, I have heard much that was unfavourable. The great
want of the Church, therefore, is not merely more missionaries, but
more of the best kind,—evangelists in the truest sense of the
word,—men of sense to eschew all follies and novelties, and men of
self-denial and toil and with as much experience as possible. For
such men must the Church pray and labour as she hopes for success.
Many have withheld their funds from this Society, because not
knowing unto whose support they might be given, and what false
views of the Gospel and the Church they might be made to promote.
I confess that such has been my case for many years. At first, and
for some time, I gave my annual contributions to domestic missions,
hoping the best; but such were the accounts received in various
ways, and such the most unsatisfactory reports of some of the
missionaries, that I could not continue them with a good conscience.

Still, I avoided all public declaration of my difficulties, and never
attempted to interfere with the conduct of others in regard to it.
Though hoping that the time would come when, under favourable
auspices, some voluntary society might by general consent be
formed, I have hitherto discouraged all suggestions or proposals,
either public or private, which looked toward a new society antagonistic
to that already established. In the Episcopal Missionary
Society for the West, established a few years since in Philadelphia,
I was pleased to see an organization which, while paying all due
respect to the General Society, came as near as circumstances would
allow to such an institution as will afford a channel for the conveyance
of funds to those missionaries, and those only, who are believed
by the donors to be calculated to disseminate the true doctrines
of the Gospel and the Church. While it continues to fulfil the end
and design of its formation, I shall gladly contribute to its support.
I shall also rejoice to know that, by the blessing of God in turning
the hearts of many right-minded and zealous young men to the
ministry, our General Society may have such numbers of suitable
ones at its command that no just cause for complaint may hereafter
arise.

THE MEMORIAL AND COMMISSION OF BISHOPS.

At the last General Convention, a memorial from sundry presbyters,
of all shades of opinion and from various parts of our land,
on the subject of bettering the condition and extending the operations
of the Church, was sent into the House of Bishops, which,
together with the action thereon, has excited so much attention
and called forth so much discussion that it deserves some notice in
connection with the topics referred to in this article. As some of
my brother-Bishops have, in addresses to their Conventions, declared
their sentiments in relation to it, and Conventions also have
had it under consideration, I shall be excused for a brief expression
of my own views, especially as they have been misunderstood. Most
suddenly and unexpectedly was this document introduced into the
House of Bishops. I had never heard of it until it was read to the
House. There were passages in it which seemed either unintelligible,

or most likely to be misunderstood to the injury of the cause
sought to be promoted by it. I asked for a second reading of it,
but my difficulties were not removed. I asked for an explanation
of the difficult passages, but none could be given. I suggested a
reference of the paper to its authors and signers for explanation or
modification, as I foresaw and predicted that such would be called
for, and the Bishops expected to give an account of themselves if
they accepted it and complied with its prayer. Not seeing my
way clear in favour of the motion, after speaking freely concerning
it, sometimes playfully, sometimes seriously, I united with a
few others in voting against its being submitted to a commission.
That I was not wrong in my apprehension as to the construction
which might be put on some very undefined and latitudinarian expressions
in the memorial, has been proved by the views since
presented in an exposition of the same by the chief mover of it.
Notwithstanding all the excellent things in that exposition, I have
no hesitation in saying, as to its main feature, that, had such been
the understanding of the plan, the Bishops would not have committed
themselves to the consideration of the memorial without some
modification of its language. Although voting against it, and
wondering much at some things said in its behalf, I have never
questioned the sincerity and purity of the motives of those presenting
it or of those encouraging it, and have ever taken pains to
declare my belief that no evil, and some good, would result from the
movement. In proof of my favourable disposition toward it, when
the questions of the commission, addressed to all the Bishops and
clergy, came out, I made a response and offered some suggestions.
I did not dream that the communication would ever see the light;
but, inasmuch as some of my brethren in the Episcopacy have presented
their views to the public, I here subjoin my own brief and
imperfect one. I may also add, that the favourable notice of
the memorial and commission by the last Virginia Convention met
my entire approbation,—having been previously consulted on the
subject.

It will be perceived that in the above nothing like a complete
scheme was attempted. That was not even thought of. I only
offered a few unconnected suggestions for those who were appointed
to draw up some regular plan for the consideration of the Church.
As to the substance of them, they are less in amount than the
changes proposed by the Bishops in 1826, and therefore, as an
individual, I may shelter myself behind them from any charge of
presumption or desire of change. I voted for those proposed by
the Bishops and House of Delegates in 1826, believing it to be
better to settle by law any thing which might be regarded as a serious
departure from the order of our service, rather than leave it
to individual discretion, though always maintaining that, as to
smaller matters, there must ever be room left for the exercise of a
sound discretion, and that even as to greater ones occasions must
arise justifying a departure from them, on the principle that God
loves mercy more than sacrifice, and that laws were made for men
and not men for laws. I believe that some wholesome change may
be made in the arrangements of the services, which, so far from
interfering with their original use and design, will be conformable
with the same. I trust that in a wise and conservative spirit such
arrangements will be made. It was not for the purpose of encouraging
an unlimited license in the use of the service that I opposed
the Commission, nor do I believe that it is for such a purpose that
some still contend against it, as has been sometimes intimated. I
believe that there is now a disposition on the part of many who
have hitherto been most strenuous for rubrical exactness and
lengthened services to make more changes and relaxations than I
ever practised, countenanced, or now desire. The omission of the
ante-Communion service, except on Communion-days, was in truth
almost all that distinguished some who were deemed irregular from
the most strictly rubrical according to their understanding of rubrics.
I am, however, willing for other arrangements more in accordance

with the original plan and use of our varied services. In relation
to the suggestion in my letter as to the omission of certain parts
of our baptismal service after the rite is performed, I do not know
that any others have made the same to the Committee, but I know
full well that there are many, and they not of one party only, who
feel the desirableness of it. It ought to be much less objectionable
than that of Bishop Hobart, which was agreed to by the whole
House of Bishops and by a large majority of the other House in
the year 1826. That proposed to repudiate all high views of baptismal
regeneration, as doing injustice and injury to the Church,
and to establish the lowest theory—namely, a mere change of state
and conditional title to salvation—as the doctrine of the Church.
This only proposes to omit the use of certain parts following after
the baptism, and not at all essential to its completeness, and about
whose meaning there ever have been disputes in the Church, from
the times of the fathers to the present moment, and will be perhaps
to the end of the world. It leaves every one to form his own
opinion as to the efficiency of the rite, drawing it of course from
Scripture,—the only authoritative source, if, indeed, he believes
that Scripture speaks on the subject,—or else to be content to remain
in ignorance and only perform the duties enjoined by the
ordinance. It only forbears to define and to render thanks for
something of which we can have no certain knowledge. It will
leave the service a purely devotional and scriptural one, to which
none can object, which will not perplex or distress the consciences
of either parents, sponsors, congregation, or minister, and will relieve
the Church from much misunderstanding and censure on the
part of many who hear it. I am well aware that in some of the
confessions of other Reformed Churches there may be found expressions
of the same kind, which of course are liable to a similar
objection; but there is this difference, that in their case the expressions
are locked up in books that are seldom seen. They are
not used in the public administration of baptism; not put in the
form of positive thanksgivings for a spiritual regeneration certainly
received at a given moment and through a certain act, and are
therefore not the occasion of such unhappy disputation. It is the
great shame and reproach of Christendom that so much strife and
bitterness have ever been about those things which lie beyond the
reach and above the range of the human mind, and that the clergy
especially should be the most curious and anxious to be wise above
what is written and should puzzle their poor people with such
questions. The disputes about the Divine decrees and the effects
of baptism on the condition and the souls of unconscious infants
are of this kind. How numerous and how contradictory and extravagant
the theories as to the latter! How intolerant the feelings
and speeches and conduct of some toward those who differ from
them! Is it not time that these should cease? Could there be a
better way of beginning it than by cutting off the continually-recurring
occasions of bringing it before the minds and consciences
of men? The Church has adopted this plan in relation to a clause
in the Apostles' Creed and in the service for the ordination of
priests, and has left some other things optional with the minister.
Might not the same method be adopted with happy effect in relation
to the interminable dispute about baptismal regeneration? None
of the various expositions would then be either affirmed or condemned
in the service. I am persuaded that though there always
might be differences,—great differences, requiring to be discussed,
false doctrines concerning it requiring to be exposed,—yet the
omission of any thing like defining or seeming to render thanks
for an effect certainly produced would greatly diminish controversy
and be a solemn testimony on the part of the Church against the
attempt to be wise above what is written. I confess I shall have
little confidence in the existence or strength of a spirit of compromise
in the Church for the sake of unity and peace, if there be not
a willingness merely to omit a few words, about whose meaning
there are such various opinions, and which no one can hold to be
essential to the ordinance. To be baptized with water in the name
of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost is commanded and required.
That the word should accompany it, and prayer be offered up for
God's blessing, is manifestly proper; but that we should undertake
to define the effect produced, and render thanks for it, is nowhere
enjoined. The addition is the work of man, and has been a great
unhappiness to the Church. Should any be disposed to think or
say that some of us are desirous to dispose of some words in the
service which interfere with our views of regeneration, I can most
conscientiously say that such is not my case. As I understand the
service, and believe it ought to be understood, after having examined
all that has been written on the subject, it expresses my own
convictions on the subject of baptism; but there are peculiarities
and difficulties in the mode of presenting the subject, and in the
terms used, which require continual explanations and defences, that
perplex and injure the cause. It is therefore maintained that the
omission of these words, which are the causes of almost all the controversy,
would promote the peace and welfare of the Church; which
words, it is again affirmed, are not at all necessary to the right
performance of baptism. It is complete without them.

CONCLUDING REMARKS.

If I may be allowed to express an opinion as to the present state
and prospects of our Church, I should say that some are now as
much disposed to undervalue her efficacy for good, even without the
proposed changes, as many were formerly to overrate it. Very
soon after my entrance on the ministry, I read a sermon by one of
our most distinguished Bishops on those words of the Psalmist,—
"Walk about Zion; mark well her bulwarks; consider her palaces,"
&c. They were applied to our Church in this country, and her
praises highly spoken. It was confidently affirmed that she must
greatly prevail over others by reason of her divine organization
and many excellencies. The same glorious things were continually
spoken of her by such as claimed to be her true sons; and those who
did not firmly believe that she must outstrip, or perhaps overwhelm,
all others, were considered as wanting faith in the promises of God
to his Church, and a hearty zeal in her behalf. Just at this time I
met with a sermon, on the same text and in the very same style, by
one of the oldest and most respectable Baptist ministers in Virginia,
showing that the Baptist Church was so clearly the true Apostolic
Church—of course after God's own heart—that it must carry every
thing before it; that the signs of the times could not be mistaken.
Shortly after this I went to the West, and heard of an eminent
Presbyterian minister who was preaching from place to place a sermon,
or series of sermons, if not from the same text, yet on the
same subject, in which he declared his firm conviction that his Church
was, as to her constitution, doctrine, and discipline, so scriptural
and so suited to the genius of our government that in twenty years
the whole land would embrace it. At this time also a favourite song
with many Methodists was,—

Doubtless all these were most sincere in their belief that what
they earnestly desired would surely come to pass. Forty years
have since elapsed, and no one of them has taken the place of the
other. On the contrary, all of them have, by God's blessing, done
much good on the different theatres assigned them, are still doing
good, and will do more good. Moreover, they have sustained very

much the same relation to each other as to numbers and success.
All of them have had their trials, their declensions, their reverses,
which should make them humble, and cause them to refrain from
taunts and reproaches, rather remembering the admonition that

I believe that there are very few now to be found who would venture
the prophecy that their own denomination must soon swallow up
all others. Our own Church has not been favoured with the same
abundant opportunities of preaching the Gospel to the poor, (except
on Southern plantations,) while she has enjoyed greater opportunities
of presenting it with acceptableness to the wealthy and educated.
Nor have her evangelical Liturgy and the faithful preaching of
many of her ministers been unblessed in the behalf of such. Sadly
has she been afflicted for the last fifteen years with the hankerings
of some of her ministers and people after Rome. Their apostasy
has indeed been most mortifying, and is well calculated to punish
her for much vain boasting, and to lead to a more chastened estimate
of her character and mission. She has certainly lost much in the
confidence of the community, and given to her enemies, both in
the Church and the world, occasion for increased opposition and
condemnation. It is needless to close our eyes on this most notorious
fact. It will be wisdom, honesty, and good policy to acknowledge
it freely. Sins must be confessed as well as forsaken, in
order to be fully forgiven and their evil consequences prevented.

We must also adopt the most effectual means for recovering what
has been lost. It is most encouraging to know that all of God's
favour has not been lost. On the contrary, never has the Gospel
been more faithfully and earnestly preached by greater numbers of
our ministers in England and America than during our recent fiery
trial. Though the enemy came in like a flood, the Spirit of the Lord,
speaking from thousands of pulpits, has lifted up the standard of
truth against him. The heretical movement has been arrested, and
now stands, covered with shame and confusion, seeking to find out
some object on which to lay the blame of its own mischievous proceedings.

Together with many who are guiltless of the evil sought to be
removed, some of those who have contributed to it are now proposing
certain changes in the mode of the Church's worship, in
order to regain what is lost and press forward in the duty assigned
us by God. It is believed that an abridgment of the usual worship,
[OMITTED] a partial separation of services once distinct, will remove one

stumbling-block out of the way of the Church's popularity, and I
hope that it may be found practicable to do so. But whether the
service be longer or shorter, if ministers preach the Gospel faithfully
and perform all other duties piously and zealously, great will
be the effect. Numbers will be added to the Lord of such as shall
be saved. Too many instances of a true conversion and most exalted
piety are to be found in our own and Mother-Church to allow
of a doubt on this point. The great want of the Church is more
pious and zealous ministers, who understand and preach the Gospel.
Let them be sons of the Church,—not converts, except they be
young,—not proselytes from other ministries. It is not reasonable
to expect many useful and acceptable ones from the pulpits of other
denominations. All experience is against it. If respectable, influential,
and happy in the places of their birth, training, and ministry,
it will not often happen that either conscience, choice, or
judgment will induce them to leave their old associations. Most
honourable exceptions there are. I have known such,—have laid
my hands on such, and highly esteem them. But, at the same time,
I have ever made it my boast, that if in any thing I have done good
service to the Church, it has been in dissuading from our ministry
those who would have gladly entered it, but who, like too many
others, might have done us evil instead of good,—might either have
been drones in our hive, or else have taken our ministry on the way
to Rome. When I have heard it boasted that hundreds have left
other ministries, drawn by the superior and exclusive claims of
ours, and have known who and what too many of these were, I have
mourned over the fact instead of rejoicing at it, and regarded it as
the judgment of Heaven upon us for urging, to an extreme which
neither Scripture nor our Protestant fathers nor our standards
justify, the exclusive claims of the Episcopal ordination. At the
same time, when I have heard some of other denominations declare
that none but the unworthy ever leave them, I could not forbear
the hint that there must be something most defective in the training
of their ministers, when they have so many unworthy ones to spare.

The great complaint of those who desire some change is, that
our Church does not, as at present administered, operate on the
masses,—especially that we have so few of the very poor in our
congregations, although some have laboured very faithfully to this
end. It ought certainly to be regarded as a great unhappiness and
defect to be without a due admixture of such. Ministers ought to
covet the poor for their congregations, and seek them by all proper
means. They should do it for their own sakes, and for that of the

rich of their flock, as well as for the benefit of the poor. The presence
of the poor will help them to preach the Gospel in a plainer
and more effective way,—will exercise all their ministerial graces,—
will call forth the alms of their parishioners the more abundantly.
Our services, rightly understood and used, are admirably adapted
to the poor and ignorant. It is deeply to be lamented that so much
prejudice exists in the minds of the great mass of the American
people against our Church and her peculiarities, so that thus far but
little success has attended even the most zealous efforts of some who
have devoted themselves to the work. Various circumstances connected
with our political and religious history have contributed to
this. With all the republicanism of our country, there is as much
of social and religious prejudice, caste, and division among us as
in any nation of Christendom, although it differs considerably in
some of its modes. Political and religious demagogues are continually
fostering it in order to promote their ends. Religious
associations are hard to be broken. "Can a people forsake their
gods?" may be asked now in relation to the religious sects of our
country, as formerly concerning the sects in pagan lands. Two or
three denominations among us have absorbed almost all of the
poorer classes, and claim them as their birthright. To induce even
a few of such to unite with us is attended with great difficulty, for
against no denomination of Christians are their prejudices so strong
as against our own. Still, let us endeavour to allure as many as
possible of the more neglected ones into our fold, and tend them
well. If any modifications of our system can adapt it the better
for this purpose, most assuredly let it be done. In ordaining men
for the purpose, however, let us beware of lowering our standard
too much. Our Lord and the Apostles, who preached so well to the
poor, were filled with all knowledge by the Spirit. All other denominations
are raising their standard of ministerial qualification.
Some expressions have been used among us which have excited fears
that we were about to err in this respect. I have no such fears
myself. At any rate, I am confident that a few mistakes in ordaining
ignorant and unsuitable men would soon correct the error.

I have thus in a most imperfect manner completed my recollection
of such things in the diocese of Virginia and in the General Church
as seemed most worthy of being recorded. I had thought, in view

of death, to leave behind me some such notices; but it may be
better to have been surprised into this earlier statement, so that if
I have fallen into any mistakes I may have the opportunity of correcting
them, as I should be grieved to misrepresent even in the
slightest degree the Church of my affections, or any member
of it.