CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME OF THE SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND GIVEN IN 1891 BY HENRY WILLIAMS SAGE Cornell University Library F 227 V81 Sepai-ation of church and state n Virgin olin 3 1924 028 784 043 DATE DUE m ^mt^ OCT-^ OD S^H^V M^iga^a:^!? Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924028784043 Virginia State Library Separation of Church and State In Virginia A Study in the Development of the Revolution Special Report OF THE JDepartment of Archives and History H. J. Eckenrode, Archivist RICHMOND: DAVIS BOTTOM, SUPBEINTENDENT OF PUBLIC PRINTING, 1910. F V6l K.tE^T ^? PREFACE. This work, begun shortly after my coming to the library, was at first outlined as a brief monograph on the religious petitions, but it grew inevita- bly to its present size and scope, as a survey of the whole subject was found requisite for a proper degree of completeness. The first three chapters are Introductory in nature. The history of the colonial church cannot be written until the county records and parish registers have been examined in detail. No need exists for a further treatment of the dissenting churches. Foote, Mcllwaine, Graham and Johnson have told the story of the Presbyterians, and Semple, Leland, Howell, Benedict, Thorn and Jaines have done the like for the Baptists. But there was room and a good deal of available material for a comprehensive study of the politico-religious question as it existed in the Revolutionary period, and the present work is an attempt to deal with this phase of Virginia history. I am indebted for corrections and suggestions to Dr. H. R. Mcllwaine, the Librarian, himself an authority in the same field, and to Mr. William 6. Stanard, of the Virginia Historical Society. H. J. BCKENRODB. INTRODUCTION. THE ESTABLISHMENT. Virginia, unlil^e New England, was a settlement of average Englishmen who had no political and religious problems to spur them to expatriation. Consequently the colonists who came to Jamestown reproduced the social conditions of England more fully in Virginia than was the case in the other colonies. Innovations were not desired. The Anglican church, as the church of the ruling majority of Englishmen, was set up in Virginia as a matter of course. A minister, Robert Hunt, went with the colonists to Jamestown In 1607 and celebrated divine service under a sail in the midst of the wilder- ness. "We had daily Common Prayer morning and evening, every Sunday two sermons, and every three moneths the holy Communion, till our minis- ter died."' The English church may be said to have been established from the first ) in Virginia. The charter of 1606 gave as one of the reasons of the settlement-" the wish to propagate the faith among the heathen. The king's instructions for the government of the colony contain a clause relating to religion: "Wee doe specially ordaine, charge and require the said president and councells, and the ministers of the said several colonies respectively, within their several limits, and precincts, that they, with all diligence, care, and respect, doe provide, that the true word, and service of God and Christian faith be preached, planted, and used, not only within every of the said several colo- nies, and plantations, but alsoe as much as they may amongst the salvage people which doe or shall adjoine unto them, or border upon them, according to the doctrine, rights, and religion now professed and established within our realme of England; and that they shall not suffer any person, or persons to withdrawe any of the subjects or people inhabiting, or which shall inhabit within any of the said several colonies and plantations from the same." ' The second charter declared in the last article that "because, the principal effect, which we can desire or expect of this action, is the con- version and reduction of the people in those parts unto the true worship of God and Christian religion, in which respect we should be loath, that any person should be permitted to pass, that we suspected to effect the super- stitions of the church of Rome: We do hereby declare, that it is our will and pleasure, that none be permitted to pass in any voyage, from time to time to be made unto the said country, but such, as first shall have taKen the oath of supremacy."" ' Anderson's History of the Church of England in the Colonies, I, 180, from John Smith's "Advertisements lor the Unexperienced Planters of New England," p. 32. "Hening's Statutes, I, 67-75 ; quo^ted in Brown's Genesis of the United States, p. 67. • Brown's Genesis of the United States, p. 236. b REPORT OF THE STATE LIBRARIAN. Hunt, the first clergyman, after a short time disappeared from view. Sir Thomas Gates and Sir George Somers carried another minister, Bucke, with them in their expedition, which sailed in May, 1609.* Bucke cele- brated service in the Bermudas when the company was ship-wrecked there, and later on in the church at Jamestown upon the arrival of the expedition in Virginia." Other clergymen accompanied the captain-general, Lord de la Warre, in 1610." The church at Jamestown was repaired and improved.' These first ministers were maintained by the company from the public store. The instructions given Gates as governor in 1609 included regulations concerning religion. The council admonished the governor to christianize the Indians and advised him to seize the medicine men in order to destroy the heathen ceremonies.* He was also ordered to maintain the worship of the established church and to require the regular attendance of the colonists. Religious observance occupied a great place in the first code of Virginia laws. Dale's Code, as it is known, went into effect with the arrival of Gates in 1610 and continued to be the law of the colony until Sir George Yeardley became governor in 1619.° This rigid and bloody code was probably not enforced to the letter, but narrative and traidition testified to Dale's stern rule." Dale's Code has been chiefly remembered because of the penalty for blasphemy, which was the thrusting of a bodkin through the blasphemer's tongue. Sabbath observance was enforced by whipping, and speaking against the Trinity or the Christian religion by death. Dale's foundation of Henrico was accompanied by the building of a church where the missionary, Alexander Whitaker, labored." He was a noble Puritan of the early period who attempted to carry into practice the conversion of the heathen so often proclaimed as a chief reason for the planting of the colony. Whitaker did not succeed in making much impres- sion upon the Indians, but he was an active and useful minister and a good influence in the colony." During Dale's last administration other clergy- men came into Virginia and new churches were built." Captain Argall, who became governor in 1617, among his decrees ordered "That every Person should go to church, Sundays and Holidays, or lyp Neck and Heels that Night, and be a Slave to the Colony the following Week : for the second Offence, he should be a Slave for a Month ; and for the third, a Year and a Day."" Representative government began in Virginia and in the Americas in 1619, with the arrival in the colony of Sir George Yeardley, the new * Anderson's History of the Church of England In th6 Colonies, I, p. 201. ' Anderson's History of the Church of England in the Colonies, I, p. 211. "Anderson's History of the Church of England in the Colonies, I, p. 215. ' Purchas His Pilgrimmes, IV, p. 1754. ' H. L. Osgood's The American Colonies in the Seventeenth Century, I, p. 63. "First Criminal Code of Virginia. In American Historical Association Report, 1899, I, p. 311. "Osgood, I, 69; Hawks's Contributions to the Ecclesiastical History of the United St!!,teB. Virginia, p. 24. Stith's History of Virginia, p. 122. Burk's History of Virginia, I, 165. " Anderson, I, 234. "Purchas, IV, 1770. "Hawks, p. 32. "Stith, p. 148. DEPARTMENT OP ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 7 governor. The church was regularly established by the instructions given him by the London Company in 1618: "And to the intent that Godly, learned and painful Ministers may be placed there for the Service of Almighty God and for the Spiritual Benefit and Comfort of the people, we further will and ordain that in every of those cities or Boroughs the several Quantity of One Hundred Acres of Land be set out in Quality of Glebe Land toward the maintainance of the several ministers of the Parishes to be there limitted. And for a further supply of their maintenance there me raised a yearly standing and certain contribution out of the profits growing or renewing within the several farms of the said Parish and so as to make the living of every minister two hundred pounds sterling per annum or more as hereafter there shall be cause.'"' It was probably within a few years that the tithe of a bushel of corn and ten pounds of tobacco was established for ministerial support. Yeardley's instructions furthermore pro- vided for the foundation of a university at Henrico for the purpose of training Indians in Christianity. Religion occupied a conspicuous place in the acts of the first Assembly in 1619. A certain number of Indian children were to be educated and trained in Christianity, "for laying a surer foundation of the conversion of the Indians to the Christian Religion."" It was enacted that "All ministers shall duely read divine service and exercise their ministerial function according to the Ecclesiastical lawes and orders of the churche of Bnglande, and every Sunday in the afternoon shall Catechize such as are not yet ripe to come to the Com. And whosoever of them shalbe found negligent or faulty in this kinde shalbe subject to the censure of the Governor and counsell of Estate." Ministers and churchwardens were required to present persons guilty of adultery and the like offenses, who were subject to suspension from church and excommunication if contumacious. Ministers were to meet four times a year at Jamestown and determine upon the persons to be excommunicated. Church going was required." When Yeardley reached Jamestown, he found that there were five ministers in Virginia, two of them without orders. "Those in orders were probably Mease, Buck and Thomas Bargrave, a nephew of Dr. Bargrave, Dean of Canterbury, who came in 1618 with Captain John Bar- grave, also his uncle, and the first in the colony to establish a private plantation. The Rev. Mr. Bargrave died in 1621, and left his library, valued at 100 marks, to the projected college at Henrico. Those not in orders were Mr. William Wickham and Mr. Samuel Macock, for whom Argall had in 1617 desired ordination."" Clergymen were sent out more frequently in the succeeding years. The Virginia Company sent out Sir Francis Wyatt's brother, the Rev. Haut Wyatt, with him." About the same time Robert Bolton and William Bennett arrived.^" Other ministers followed. 15 Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, 11, 158. " Colonial Records of Virginia, p. 21. " Colonial Records of Virginia, p. 28. " Neill's The English Colonization of America during the Seventeenth Century, p. 319. "Neill, p. 321. Records of Virginia Company, Kingsbury, I, p. 616. "Neill, p. 322. 8 EEPOET OF THE STATE LIBRARIAN. Wyatt's instructions, which were dated July 24, 1621, directed him to "keep up religion of the church of England as near as may be."" Accord- ing to the instructions, the company complained that "their Endeavours, for the Establishment of the Honour and Rights of the Church and Ministry, had not yet taken due Effect." The Virginia authorities were ordered to advance the worship of the church of England, and "to avoid all factious and needless Novelties which only tended to the Disturbance of Peace and Unity, and to see that ministers were duly respected and maintained."^" The Assembly which met in March 1624 adopted rather elaborate laws for the regulation of the church. In every plantation where the people were accustomed to meet for worship, a room was ordered to be set apart for divine service, and a lot for the burial of the dead. Persons absent from Sunday service without excuse were fined one pound of tobacco, and those absent for a month, fifty pounds. Conformity to the canons of the church of England was required. No minister should absent himself from his church for more than two months upon penalty of forfeiting half his means, and absence for four months carried with it a loss of the cure. Men were forbidden to dispose of their tobacco before the minister was satisfied, and it was directed that one man on every plantation should collect the minister's "means" out of the "first and best tobacco and corn."'" The erection of Virginia into a royal colony in 1624 did not affect the condition of the church. For some years there were few changes. The Assembly did not meet and the governor and council apparently exercised legislative power — issuing proclamations on a variety of subjects. One of these decrees, of April 30, 1628, concerned religion, "forbidding to marry without lycence or asking in church." In 1629, with the arrival of Sir John Harvey as governor, a new spirit was manifested in church affairs. Harvey represented the Laudian ecclesiastical spirit which was becoming paramount in the church of England. Laud had secured a uniformity to his self-imposed ideals in that church but at the cost of a great spiritual decline. The freedom of the Anglican eeclesia was at an end for the time; it became narrow and intolerant, and the early Puritans, who are the chief glory of the English church, were driven into dissent and into a fanaticism born, iu considerable part, of oppression. The October 1629 session of the Assembly passed a Sabbath-observance act, providing a fine of fifty pounds for a month's absence from church, and the profanation of the Sabbath by work or journeying was forbidden. This act is in the Puritan spirit which pervaded the church prior to the inauguration of the Laudian policy. Another act of the same session declared that "It is thought fitt that all those that worke in the ground of what qualitie or condition soever, shall pay tithes to the ministers."" Apparently the collection of tithes had not been rigidly enforced. The Assembly which met in March 1629-30 breathed the new note in English church government, probably as the result of Harvey's activities. »Hening, I, 114. =» Stith, 194. 2» Hening, I, 124. Ilening, I, 130. " Hening, I, 144. DEPAETMIINT OP AECHIVES AND HISTORY. 9 All ministers were required to conform to the canons of the church of England in all things, and those refusing were subject to canonical censure. All acts formerly passed concerning ministers were continued.''' The Assembly of 1631-2 again enforced uniformity and with growing emphasis. "It is ordered. That theire bee a uniformitie throughout this colony both in •substance and circumstance to the cannons and constitution of the church of England as neere as may bee and that every person yeald readie obedience unto them uppon penaltie of the paynes and forfeitures in that case appoynted.""' Ministers and church wardens were ordered to make returns of deaths, marriages, and births; and ministers to preach one sermon each Sunday, to teach children the catechism, comfort the sick, administer the sacraments thrice a year, and to abstain from drinking, dicing and card-playing. The support of ministers received careful consideration, as they had petitioned upon this point. The old allowance of ten pounds of tobacco was con- tinued, and furthermore the twentieth calf, the twentieth kid, and the twentieth pig were granted them."' Fees were also allowed for marrying, •churching, and burying. The legislature for some years added nothing further to these acts. "New parishes were formed from time to time and old ones were altered.^' "With the accession of Sir "William Berkeley as governor, another chapter •of Virginia history began. His instructions directed him to see that the form of religion of the church of England was duly observed. Every con- gregation should build a parsonage for its minister, to which 200 acres of glebe lands should be attached, and this land should be cleared by the parishioners. Berkeley was further cautioned to "Suffer no invasion in matters of religion and be careful to appoint sufficient and conformable ■ministers to each congregation."^" Berkeley carried out his instructions with ardor, especially the clause requiring uniformity in religion. Puritans had settled in Virginia to some ■extent, and there was a drift of emigration to this colony as well as to New England. In 1642 a body of dissenters, probably newly settled and -not numerous, applied to Boston for Puritan ministers. Three were sent, .and they preached for sometime to good crowds.™ They soon left the colony, ho-w«ver, probably driven from it by an act of the Assembly of March 1642-3, aimed at them. This act required that all ministers should be ^'conformable to the orders and constitutions of the church of England," and should not otherwise be allowed to preach, and furthermore "that the Governor and Counsel do take care that all nonconformists upon notice of them shall be compelled to depart the coUony with all conveniencie."" ==Hcning, I, 149. " Hcning, I, 155. « Hening, I, 159. 2' Anderson, I, 468. "Mac Donald Papers, in Virginia State Library, p. 376, and Virginia Magazine oJ History »nd Biography, II, 281. "■.Campbell, p. 202, and Hawks, p. 63. « Hening, I, 277, and Hawks, p. 53. 10 EEPORT OF THE STATE LIBEAEIAN. Trott gives another version of this act, quoted by Hawks, which reads as follows: "that for the preservation of purity and unity of doctrine and discipline in the church, and the right administration of the sacraments, nO ministers be admitted to officiate in this country, but such as shall produce to the governor a testimonial that he hath received his ordination from some' bishop in England, and shall then subscribe, to be conformable to the orders and constitutions of the church of England, and the laws there established: upon which the governor is hereby requested to induct the said minister into any parish that shall make presentation of him: and if any other person, pretending himself a minister, shall, contrary to this act, presume to teach or preach publicly or privately, the governor and council are hereby desired and empowered to suspend and silence the person so offending; and upon his obstinate persistence, to compel him to depart the country with the first convenience."^^ In the revision of the laws at this session many acts concerning religion were incorporated, and some changes were made. The former tithe of ten pounds of tobacco and one bushel of corn was continued, and the tax was laid "as well for all youths of sixteen years of age as upwards, as also for all negro women at the age of sixteen years.""" An attempt to secure a proper control of ministers inspired the passage of an act requiring a yearly meeting of the ministers and churchwardens "before the commanders and com'rs. of every county court in nature of a visitation."" Regulations for the induction and removal of ministers were provided. Vestries were granted the right of presenting ministers to the governor for induction. Likewise, upon the complaint of vestries, the governor and council were empowered to suspend ministers or inflict other punishment. Removals were left to the Assembly."'' Hawks states that: "before the passage of this act, it was a matter of dispute whether the parishes, as builders and endowers of all the churches, had not, by the law of England, the right of presentation; and after Its enactment, many parishes still con- tended for the exercise of the right, under the law of England, independent of the Btatute.""" It is probable that the parlsnes usually selected ministers before 1642, as Hawks suggests, and that the act legalized a custom. But the- question of presentation and induction was not settled and it grew to he a source of conflict between the local authorities and the governor. As a matter of fact the ecclesiastical regulations of 1642 proved inefficient. Instead of providing some practicable plan of church government, supervision of clerical matters was left, in a vague manner, to the county courts and the Assembly. "A minister of the church in Virginia was hereby placed in a position, not only essentially inferior to that retained by his brethren in England, but inferior even to that which any non-conforming minister would have claimed as his own undoubted right."" "Hawks, p. 53. "Hening, I, 242. " Hening, I, 240. '^ Hening, 1, 242, and Anderson, I, 470. '• Hawlts, p. 54. " Anderson, I, 471. DEPABTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 11 Virginia was quiet during the Civil War in England. Acts were passed from time to time for church regulation as before. Ministers were called upon to reside within their parishes. Elections of vestries were to be made by a majority of parishioners. County courts were empowered to question and fine churchwardens for neglect of duty." By an act of March 1645-6, the commissioners of the county courts, were required to fine church-, wardens for failure to make presentations to the courts of persons guilty of adultery, fornication, and drunkenness, and the governor and council were in turn empowered to fine the commissioners if they neglected ta punish churchwardens.'" Vestries were given the right to raise the tithe of ten pounds of tobacco for ministers' salaries to such a rate as they found necessary, on account of the losses occasioned by the Indian massacre of 1644.-' The Assembly of 1647 attempted to check a growing Puritanism by enacting that in the case of ministers who refused to read the prayers, the parishioners should be exempted from the payment of tithes." The establishment of the Commonwealth and the surrender of Virginia to the Parliamentary commissioners did not affect the church in the colony greatly. In the articles of surrender, the use of the prayer book was per- mitted for a year, provided that the part relating to kingship should not be read pjblicly;" ministers were continued in their places and the dues maintained." The Puritan Revolution, however, at length produced a broadening effect in Virginia. Hening states "that at no former period were the civil and religious rights of the people so well secured or justice and humanity towards our neighbors, the Indians, so sacredly regarded. In the very first act of this session (March 1657-8), for settling the church government, instead of enjoining obedience to the doctrines and discipline of the church of England, as had been invariably the case in all former acts upon this subject, no such injunction appears. On the contrary, all matters relating to the church, the ministers and other parochial affairs, are left at the entire discretion of the people."" This act, entitled "Church Government Settled," gave great power to the people of the parishes ; the vestries became quite subordinate.** Another act provided for the division into parishes of all counties not so laid out." The Restoration and the Cavalier triumph brought about a reaction. The- =" Bering, I, 290, 1044. " Hening, I, 310. "Hening, I, 328, October, 1646. " Hening, I, 341, and Anderson, II, 17. *2 "It is probable that the latter provision was observed, but there is no evidence that, otherwise, the public use of the regular form of worship of the Church of England was ever abandoned. The Assembly could not (without a conflict with the Parliamentary authorities> uphold the king's religion; but the same end was reached by leaving the parishes to manage their own affairs. This meant that the old faith would be retained." William G. Stanard, in- an article on Christ Church, Lancaster, in "Colonial Churches," p. 94. " Hening, I, 364, and Burk, II, 90. "Hening, I, 429. « Hening, I, 433. '« Hening, 1, 478. 12 REPORT OF THE STATE LIBRARIAN. Assembly which met In March, 1660, and elected Sir William Berkeley governor, passed an act for the suppression of Quakers. It Imposed a penalty of £100 upon the captain of any ship bringing Quakers Into the colony, and all of these who might enter were to be expelled; they were to be proceeded against upon a second entrance and prosecuted as felons for a third entrance." The Assembly of March, 1661, passed stringent acts for church regula- tion, sweeping away the popular legislation of 1657. Vestries were limited in number to twelve persons, who were required to take the oaths of supremacy and allegiance and subscribe to the doctrines and discipline of the church of England." They were also given the power to determine the salaries of ministers." In order to encourage clergymen to come to Virginia, all parishes were required to provide glebes, houses, and stock." Vestries were ordered to secure voluntary subscriptions in destitute parishes for the support of ministers."* Provision was also made for the appoint- ment of lay readers In vacant parishes. In this way observance of religion was secured," and the substitute system probably proved satisfactory at first, but as time went on a tendency developed to hire lay readers to the exclusion of ministers for reasons of economy. Measures were indeed necessary to instil some vitality into the church of Virginia. The chief impediment to the growth of religion in the colony was the sparseness of settlement. Virginia was a land of great plantations lying along the main tidal rivers in long narrow strips, with an uncultivated hinterland. The planters consequently tended to neglect religious service because of the distances to be travelled, and to lose, in some part, the religious instinct. Ministers were difBcult to obtain, as the work of super- vising the immense, thinly-populated parishes was great." At the time of the Restoration about a fifth of the fifty parishes were supplied with min- isters, and many parishes still lacked glebes and churches." Other reasons existed for the difficulty of obtaining ministers besides the great size of the parishes, the isolation of the life, and the small remun- eration. The spirit of self-sacrifice was lost in the church of England. The Puritan Revolution, with its excitement and moral strain, acted as a stimu- lant to the religious temper of the English people, and depression followed stimulation. There were no longer men in Oxford and Cambridge who dreamed of converting the heathen and who were willing to go out into the wilderness, as there had been in the early days of colonization. Good livings were much more desired. The church of England shared inevitably the moral decline of the Restoration. One of the world's greatest idealistic move- ments had failed and an age of materialism followed as a result. It was natural that the religious decay in England should influence the most English of the colonies. The intolerance of the Cavalier element In <■ Hening, I, 633. " Weninp-, II, 25. " Hening, II, 29. '• Hening, II, 30. "Hening, II, 37. " Hening, 11, 29. "Virginia's Cure, p. 4. Force's Tracts, III. "Ibid., p. 4. DEPARTMENT OP ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 13 England, more political than religious, was reflected in Virginia by the Assembly of 1662. All ministers were required to present evidence of ordination by an English bishop, and the governor and council were em- powered to silence all other persons teaching or preaching, publicly or privately."' The whole liturgy was required to be read in ser- vice,°° a pretty good evidence that the forms had been neglected in some parishes. No other catechism was to be taught than that of the church of England. Attendance on divine service was enforced by fines. Quaker assemblies and conventicles were forbidden on penalty of fines. The anni- versary of the execution of Charles I, "of ever blessed and glorious memory," was made a day of fasting, and the date of the Restoration a holiday. Many important acts concerning the church passed. Chapels of ease were to be built in parishes too poor to build churches." The duties of vestries were defined as the making and proportioning of levies for build- ing churches and chapels, providing for the poor, maintaining the ministers, and, in general, the management of parochial affairs. Two churchwardens were to be selected from the vestrymen, and vacancies in the vestries were to be filled by the vestries themselves. All vestrymen were required to take the oaths of allegiance and supremacy and subscribe to the doctrine and discipline of the Anglican church."' Salaries of ministers were fixed at a value of £80 in commodities of the colony — in tobacco at the rate of twelve shillings a hundred and in corn at ten shilling a barrel.™ No marriages were to be solemnized except by ministers. The legislatipn of this,_year_Jixefl- the character_of the churc h up to the Revolution. Th e vestries were given all power _m_^parqchlal__matters; and, at the same time, wer e made Irrespo nsibleT' A vestry once elected by the people or"the"liarr3h might fill its ow n vacancies, and so continue to rule for many years without being called to account. Vestries fixed the amount of the assessment for the minister's salary, church expenses, poor relief, and the individual apportionment. They transacted the parochial business and presented the minister. As a consequence a few leading gentlemen in each neighborhood administered' religious matters to suit themselves, and the great mass of parishioners could make no protest. In many cases, how- ever, the vestries doubtless acted in accordance with public sentiment, especially m^eping.ministejs'^salar^e^s as j£-w^ The ministers were generally'under the control of a local oligarchy of\ hard-fisted and ofrenTIignoxant.^. squires, jyio. were interested in keeping J expenses down. Nearly all accounts^ iigxee that the system of church gov- ernment in Virginia was inefficient. Few men oFabHity would leave Eng- land for the colony; those that came were usually inferior in ability and perhaps in character. "The Ministers and publick dispensers of the Gospel which were sent into that Plantation, are for the most part, not only far short of those qualifications required in ministers but men of opposite qualities "' Hening, II, 46. "•Hening, II, 47. " Hening, II, 44. ™ Hening, II, 45. "Heninff, II, 45. 14 EEPOET OP THE STATE LIBEAKIAN. and tempers, such as either by their loose lives, and un-Gospel-becoming conversation, or by their known weakness and unsufficiency of understand- ing and parts, do not only not gain or win upon those that are without, the Indian heathen, but cause more to go astray, and lose, many, very many of those that pretend to be within, the English Christians.'"" Again: "The Ministers of Virginia, too many of them, are very careless and negligent in dispensing Gods words and sacraments, as also indecent and slovenly in their manner of dispensing them."" And also: "There are not a few of the Ministers, whose wicked and prophane lives cause the worship of God, not only to be slighted, but to be little less than abhorred, when they officiate therein." Furthermore, "Those ministers. That are religious and laborious, • * * have scarce that single honour paid them that they deserve, from the most; and are dishonored and despised by too many." '^^ These extracts are taken from a prejudiced arraignment of Virginia and should be treated with great caution. It is to be noted that the pessi- mistic author acknowledges that there are some worthy ministers, but these, he says, are slighted by the degenerate colonists. Morgan Godwyn, another witness, wrote a few years later and in a spirit of sympathy with the Indians and negroes. He affirms that the min- isters were the slaves of the vestries, "to whom the Hiring (that is the usual word there) and Admission of Ministers is solely left." As the law did not oblige vestries to appoint ministers but allowed them the option of employing lay-readers, two-thirds of the preachers in the colony were these lay-readers."" Pluralities were allowed, parishes extended sixty or seventy miles in length, and were often without ministers for years, in order to save charges. Vestries were unfaithful in executing the laws made for the main- tenance of ministers. "Laymen were allowed to usurp the office of min- isters; and Deacons to undermine and thrust out Presbyters; in a word all things concerning the Church and Religion were left to the mercy of the people.''"' But the condition of religion in Virginia exhibited nothing abnormal under the circumstances. The people were accustomed to take their religion formally; there were few enthusiasts, fe'w deeply zealous in the colony. Furthermore, the plantation system, by isolating the colonists and depriving them of community interests, weakened their religious instincts. And, besides, the church had no healthy government. It was neither Episcopal, Presbyterian nor Congregational; it was peculiar and colonial. The union of church and state put the church under a political control, and that con- trol took its character from existing political conditions. Vestrymen were usually politicians and frequently burgesses. The church was thoroughly subordinated to the state. The advisability of a better regulation of the church was recognized early, but the English government for one cause or another did nothing. After 1675 the colony was nominally a part of the diocese of London, but the "Public Good Without Private Interest (1657), p. S. "■ Public Good Without Private Interest, p. 14. •^ Public Good Without Private Interest, p. 16. " Negro's and Indian's Advocate, p. 170, "* Anderson, 11, 352. Godwyn quoted. DEPARTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 15 "bishop in reality made little attempt to exert any authority in Virginia until near the end of the seventeenth century. As a matter of fact, a bishop should have been appointed at this time, when only a bishop's deputy was sent out Agitation for a colonial bishoprick began early. Alexander Murray was nominated about 1670 but the appointment fell through.™ Other men from time to time were mentioned for the place, among them Jonathan Swift, but the design was never carried into execution. In 1673, Charles II bestowed Virginia upon his friends Arlington and Culpeper for a term of years. The patent provided for a system of ecclesi- astical patronage upon the same plan as existed in England. The proprie- tors were to build churches and schools, and to nominate ministers and teachers." The Virginians vainly protested against this rather contemptu- ous disposition of a royal province to individuals. The church patronage scheme, however, resulted in nothing and matters remained as before. Culpeper, who came over as governor in 1680, brought with him ex- traordinary powers in church affairs, but was not able to carry into effect any changes of importance. His report on Virginia to the committee of colonies, states that "The charges of government are maintained: 1. By private levies raised in each parish, for the minister, church, courts of justice, burgesses wages, etc., which are never brought to audit, and yet are high unequal, and burdensome, to the people, as any other; being most commonly managed by sly cheating fellows, that combine to defraud the public, and ought to be supervised by the government.'"" And again: "The ecclesiastical government is under his Majesty's governor, who grants pro- bates of wills, and doth or ought to present to all livings, which ought to be worth threescore pounds a year, and are in number 76 or 7: But that poor- ness of the country, and the low price of tobacco, have made them of so much less value, scarcely the half; and the parishes, paying the ministers themselves, have used to claim the right of presentation (or rather of not paying,) whether the governor will or not, which must not be allowed, and yet must be managed with great caution.''" The unpopularity of the_self-perpetuating vestry system was shown by the act passed by Bacon's revolutionary legislature in i676, providing for an election of vestries every three years. The act, together with many other wise laws, was repealed by the succeeding Assembly. Nevertheless, in order to regulate the power of the vestries somewhat, the Assembly ■of February 1677 enacted that the voters in each parish should have the liberty of electing six persons to act with the vestry in assessing parish taxes." Lord Effingham, who became governor in 1684, apparently exerted little influence in church matters. The ecclesiastical policy of James II, how- ever, excited great apprehension in the solidly Protestant province. James Waugh, a minister of the established church, raised a commotion in Stafford county by his speeches against the king." Some of the people of Rappahan- " Anderson, II, 358. •'Anderson, II, 374. «' Chalmers' Political Annals, p. 3S5. " Ibid, p. 356. "Hening, II, 396. "Campbell, 341. 16 REPORT OF THE STATE LIBRARIAN. nock took up arms. Several persons were prosecuted and imprisoned for treasonable speeches. The uneasiness of the colonists, however, was removed by the Revolu- tion of 1688, which secured the Protestant religion in England. The new government recognized the need of some system of church regulation, and in 1691, James Blair, who had served some years in Virginia as a missionary, was made the commissary of the bishop of London in that colony. He had, as a bishop's deputy, the right to inquire into and punish ecclesiastical abuses, but his authority was limited and he lacked the power of ordaining^ to the ministry." Blair consequently did not succeed in doing all that might have been done by authority to build up the church, but he did much. His work, indeed, is a testimonial of what a man of ability and energy may accomplish in a poor and indifferent community. After a long struggle against the inertia of an unenlightened population, Blair succeeded in estab- lishing William and Mary College.'^ Governor Nicholson and the Assembly, when aroused, gave important aid. The college was founded, in large part,, for the purpose of educating a native Virginia ministry, and Beverley states that "it was a great satisfaction to the Archbishops and Bishops to see such a nursery of Religion founded in the new world." The commissary had the power of calling conventions of the clergy and this power he used to make the ministers more self-assertive. Soon after the arrival of Sir Edmund Andros as governor, the clergy petitioned him for an increase in their stipends, which were not large." The house of burgesses, to which the petition was forwarded, refused, alleging that the ministers were well provided for; "Most, if not all, the ministers of the country are in as good a condition in point of livelihood as a gentleman that is well seated, and hath twelve or fourteen servants." The clergy answered that, on the contrary, they were compelled to take tobacco in pay- ment of their salaries at a higher rate than the market price, that in many parishes there were no glebes, and that ministers were liable to ejection at the pleasure of vestries, and, in short, that the circumstances of the clergy were deplorable." The Assembly acknowledged the justice of the complaint by an act passed at the next session (September 1696) granting ministers a. salary of 16,000 pounds of tobacco, besides their perquisites. Vestries were author- ized to buy glebes and build houses, 'or were granted the option of uniting with other parishes.'" Blair's labors were in general beneficial to the colony, but his inde- pendence and activity demonstrated the fact that the office of commissary was rather out of place in Virginia, and his fate suggests a speculation as to the position a colonial bishop would have occupied. The country was a government of local powers, a land ruled by squires and rural magnates. The burgesses represented Jpcal sentiment in the whole colony and the council represented a certain locality and a small number of leading " Anderson, II, 383. " Anderson, II, 387 ; Hening, III, 122 ; Burk, II, 812-14 ; Beverley, " Anderson, II, 388. " Anderson, II, 389. " Hening, III, 151. DEPARTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 17 families. The governor, who stood for England, held a somewhat anomalous position in the political organization, and the measure of his influence depended chiefly upon his personality. The commissary now came into the colony as a new and disturbing force. He was, like the governor, an outside- oflicial, and the somewhat vague extent of his authority brought him inta conflict with the governor, who also exercised a certain supervision of church affairs. A weak commissary was only a shadow, but the vigorous and self-confident Blair passed almost his whole term of office in a struggle with a succession of governors." The rather confused policy of the British government had much to do with the controversy. The instructions given Governor Andros included the powers of an ordinary, the representative of the king and the bishop of London, and thus duplicated Blair's ofBce in fact. In such circumstances, an antagonism between governor and commissary was inevitable. In 1694, Andros suspended the commissary from his seat in the council, whereat Blair retaliated by sending home charges against Andros, as a result of v,'hich he was removed from the government." Among other things, Blair declared that Andros allowed negligent vestries to dispense with ministers, by which means they saved the amount of the salaries, and that he also forced ministers to take their allowance in tobacco at double its market valae, which reduced the amount one-half." Blair's controversy with Nicholson, the successor of Andros, was even more protracted and serious. Various reasons existed for the dispute between Blair and Nicholson, but the most important was due to the latter's attempt to i-vesfjit ministers to the parishes™ when the vestries failed or refused to make presentations. This claim was the result of a favorite colonial prac- tice. The vestries, instead of making presentations, frequently employed ministers by the year. The custom was advantageous to the extent that an unsatisfactory preacher might be ejected with little trouble, but, on the other hand, it tended to put ministers on a very precarious footing. Nicholson wished to check this habit and applied to the English attorney-general. Sir Edward Northey, for his opinion on the Virginia laws governing induction. Northey decided that the right of presentation was subject to the laws of England. Consequently when the parishioners presented a minister for induction, he became the incumbent for life and could not be displaced by them ; if the parishioners did not present a minister within six months after a vacancy, the governor as ordinary had the power to collate a minister to such a church by lapse.'" This opinion was opposed by the council, and by colonial sentiment in general. Nicholson, however, won over to his side a majority of the minis- ters, who were partly influenced by gratitude to the governor and partly by jealousy of the commissary. Nicholson held a convocation, in which eleven ministers supported him and only six were opposed. His adherents denied "Anderson, II, 393 ; Campbell, p. 368 ; Meade's Old Churches Ministers and Families of Virginia, I, 1.58 ; II, 291. "Meade, I, 157; Campbell, p. 357. " Pirrry's Historital Collections Relating to the American Colonial Church. Virginia, p. 11. " Campbell, p. 367. " Perry, p. 128. 18 EEPOET OP THE STATE LIBRARIAN. the charges which Blair had made against him." But Blair, with the faithful six, reiterated the charges, and furthermore had the support of the council, for Nicholson had made himself unpopular on various grounds. As a result the governor was recalled in 1705. The commissary extended his activities in church matters still further. He disapproved of the acts concerning the church Included in the revisal of the laws in 1705, and Governor Nott, under his influence, suspended them.'^ Blair's effort to exercise a genuine ecclesiastical control of the colonial church, however, failed. His attempt at visitations came to nothing, owing to the hostility of ministers, vestries and "the general aversion of the people to everything that looks like a spiritual court."" Ministers asserted their want of induction as a valid objection to canonical censure, and at every step technicalities were brought up to hinder procedure. Alexander Spotswood attempted to carry out Nicholson's plan of appointing ministers. Blair resolutely opposed the governor's claim to the right of collation, and the council backed him. The dispute came to a head in 1719 over the question of presentation to St. Anne's parish, Essex, which was vacant. The vestry refused the governor's nominee, one Bagge,'* and sent another min- ister, Rainsford, to be inducted. Spotswood declined to induct the latter, but the vestry admitted him to the pulpit, and Blair was said to have advised them to resist." The governor then wrote to the vestry defending his rights, in support of which he pleaded his instructions from home. "His Majesty gives his Governor full power and authority to collate any person or persons to any Churches or Chapels or other ecclesiastical benefices, as often as any of them shall become void; and in his Majesty's instructions, the Governor is particularly directed, as to the qualifications of the persons BO to be collated by him; and enjoyned to cause all persons not so qualified to be removed, and immediately to supply the vacancy, without giving notice to the vestries; which is always done in England, where there is a patron."" Furthermore Spotswood quoted the grant to Arlington and Culpeper, with the patronage of the churches. Did the king send out ministers at his expense "to depend on popular humour for their livings?'' Did the Board of Trade prepare the instructions giving the governor the power to supply vacancies if they had "any imagination that the laws of "Virginia gave the right of patronage to the vestries?"" Spotswood took high ground in this letter; he went further than his predecessors and sought to extend the power of the royal government. Consequently, Blair, in maintaining that the governor's right of presenta- tion extended only to those parishes which had lapsed," touched popular sentiment. A convention of the clergy met at Williamsburg in 1719 and considered the claims of the two officials. The convention, as a whole. " Campbell, p. 368. " Campbell, p. 378. s' Campbell, p. 402; Meado, I, 160; Manuscript account of a visitation in Virginia His- torical Sodet}'. " Perry, p. 205. " Perry, p. 204. ""Perry, p. 206. " Perrj-, p. 20Y. " Perry, p. 216. DEPARTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 19 sided with Spotswood, who would have relieved the members of local tyranny and made them dependent upon the government. They complained of the difficulty of carrying out the elaborate regulations of the Anglican church in a new country and of their uncertain tenure of position without induction." Only eight out of the twenty-five ministers present sided with Blair; the rest supported Spotswood. But the commissary had the backing of the council and the sympathy of the colony as a whole, and, in the end, he triumphed. It was largely due to the antagonism of the council that Spotswood was recalled in 1722.°° Blair had proved himself the Virginia Warwick. The controversies of the first quarter of the century were only a prelude to the more serious struggle of later years, which had far-reaching conse- quences. The establishment of the commissarial office and the increase in the number of ministers gave the clergy a new self-assertiveness. Their stand for their legal rights against the colonial government and popular sentiment culminated in a controversy which aroused the colony and influ- enced the growth of dissent, then just beginning to be an important factor In the conservative life of old Virginia. "•Present State of Virginia, p. 404. "Campbell, p. 404. CHAPTER II The Parsons' Cause The controversy which broke the strength of the establishment arose from the constitutional questions underlying the union of church and state. The civil power, in its attempt to deal with the clergy according to its pleasure, brought on a serious conflict, and the clergy, by ^pealing for pro- tection to the royal prerogative, became involved in the great dispute as to the extent of British authority in colonial affairs. The "Parsons' Cause" has been treated from several points of view, and it has always and justly received a large share of attention from the historians of Virginia. The political historians, such as Burk, Campbell, and Howison, are against the clergy, while the church annalists. Hawks and Meade, and "Wirt, the biographer of Patrick Henry, side with them as to the merits of the case. The dispute sprang from the Assembly's attempt to commute the ministers'^ salaries in money, but it is conceivable that differences might have arisen on other grounds, if normal tobacco crops had continued to be raised and if the parsons had received their 16,000 pounds of sweet-scented and other brands. The conflict was probably inevitable on account of the incongruous- ness of a church establishment dependent, in a final sense, upon a foreign and monarchical power, in a state every day growing more republican and more self-conscious. Long before Blair's death, the commissary had made for himself a lim- ited place in the governmental scheme. The position, however, was pre- carious. If the colonial government was jealous of the governor, it was more jealous of the commissary. Blair, in his conflicts with the governor, had astutely sided with and used the council, which was the most Influential part of the government. The commissary consequently was able to wield a real influence and to advance the interests of the clergy. His successors were less skilful politicians or were less fortunate. Commissary and, council fell apart, and it flnally came to pass that the governor, council,, and burgesses were arrayed on one side and the clergy on the other, with disastrous consequences to the clergy. Blair's influence built up the church and strengthened the clergy as a. class. After they began to meet in conventions, they were less helpless than when church affairs were purely local questions and when ministers were obliged to deal with vestries in their individual strength. The com- missary, as the bishop of London's representative, made reports to the bishop and appealed to hfm when the clergy were ill-treated. The ministers came to feel that they had a protector against the absolutism of the civil power. But, conversely, appeals to the bishop of London were not palatable to the civil power. Vestries were accustomed to ruling the ministers and DEPARTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 21 the Assembly to ruling the church in general, and as vestrymen were fre- quently members of the council and the burgesses, the same set of men controlled the establishment, save to the extent of the governor's inter- ference, which was not great. Consequently, any display of interest in Virginia affairs by the bishop of London was ill-received, and the commis- saries who succeeded Blair were frequently unpopular. The collective ponar of the clergy enabled them to win one im- portant victory over the vestries. The occasion was the case of William Kay, minister of Lunenburg parish, Richmond, which came up in 1748. A dispute arose between Kay and Lardon Carter, a local dignitary of great weight, who brought the vestry to act against the clergyman. The vestry closed the parish church and put other persons in possession of the glebe."' Kay preached in the church yard for two or three years without receiving any salary."^ He then sued for trespass and, in spite of Carter's efforts, received a verdict of £30 damages in the general court."' The court also decided that a minister received by a vestry and in possession of glebe land but not inducted had the right of suing for trespass. Not content with the verdict. Carter secured an appeal to the English courts. At the same time Kay sued for three years' salary in the general court." The committee of iho privy council confirmed the decision in Kay's favor,"" and in 175S the Virginia general court awarded him £200 damages In lieu of his salary.'* It wa? believed that this case decided the ministers' right to continue in possession of the glebes although not inducted," and unquestionably the arbitrary methods of the vestries in dealing with min- isters were checked. The courts now protected the clergy and the Assembly had been led to legislate in theiv favor. In 1727, an act had been passed providing a better support for ministers,"' and for the remedying of the old difficulty of collect'i:{; their pay. Salaries were fixed again at 16,000 pounds of tobacco. Vestries were directed to appoint collectors to take the tithe, were also required to provide glebes of two hundred acres in each parish, and were authorized to levy taxes for the purpose of building glebe houses. It is true that the Assembly modified this act in certain cases, as in that of the Elizabeth River parish glebe, which was declared, in 1734, to be a suffi- ■cient glebe although it contained only 172 acres."" In 1748, probably in view of the Kay incident, another act was passed for the protection of the clergy. The salary of 16,000 pounds of tobacco was continued. Furthermore, every minister received into a parish was en- titled to all its benefits and might maintain an action for trespass against anybody who molested him, but at the same time, the vestry was compen- sated at the governor's expense by a clause declaring that the sole right " Perry, 389 and 395. »= Perry, 389-90. " Perry, 390. "Perry, 391. " Perry, 401. "•Perry, 110. •' Perry, 403, 404. «Hening, IV, 204. "Hening, IV, 44a 22 REPORT OF THE STATE LIBRARIAN. of presentation existed in the vestries for the space of a year after the occurrence of a vacancy, instead of six months as before. The Assembly did not suffer the act of 1748 to stand intact long. In 1753 an act granted the ministers of Frederick and Augusta parishes a salary of £100 instead of the 16,000 pounds of tobacco, which had been com- pounded at the rate of three farthings a pound and which had proved an insufBcient support. Clerical writers professed to find a sinister motive In this exception to the act of 1748, but as a mattter of fact, there seems to be little ground for the suspicion, as the Assembly was constantly experiencing the embarrassments caused by a circulating medium subject to such violent fluctuations in value as tobacco. In the same year, 1753, the people of Halifax, Hampshire and Bedford had to pay public dues and officers' fees in money instead of tobacco."' In 1753 and 1754 the burgesses were paid out of the treasury for the purpose of lightening the public levy for the poorer people.™ The great clerical controversy began in 1755. In the preceding year, a convention of the clergy, fortified by the Kay case, protested to the governor /against an order of council prohibiting clergymen from holding the office of justice of the peace."" But worse things than this deprivation were to follow. The Assembly, at the October 1755 session, ventured to violate the statutes it had enacted for the protection of the clergy by passing an "Act to enable the inhabitants oi this colony to discharge their tobacco debts in money for this present year.'"" Tobacco due for rents, by bond, in con- tracts, and for public, county and parish levies and for officers' fees might be compounded at the rate of sixteen shillings, eight pence for every hun- dred pounds. The operation, of the act was limited to ten months. This law affected all creditors and all officers of the government, but especially the clergy, who were usually not large planters and who con- sequently received no compensating benefit by the rise in tobacco prices. The year was a hard one in Virginia. The French and Indian War was beginning and the tobacco crop was short. The act was intended as a relief to creditors and taxpayers. But the clergy determined to appeal to England against this invasion of their rights, and on November 29, 1755, John Camm and a number of other ministers drew up a petition to the bishop of London condemning the act. The paper was a skilful presentation of the clergy's case, advancing the unanswerable argument that a variable currency should not be limited in its fluctuations in only one direction. If salaries were lessened by money compositions when tobacco was high, they ought to be increased in proportion when tobacco was low, so as to provide a fixed salary for ministers. The colonial church could not expect to obtain good ministers from England if salaries were paid "in Tobacco or money or some- thing else, as any of them shall happen to be least profitable.'"" The strong- est argument of all against the act was the fact that it provided for the composition of salaries already overdue and consequently was retroactive In "' Hening, V, 88. "' Hening, VI, 372. "= Hening, VI, 373 and 440. 103 Perry, 424. "* Hening, VI, 568. 105 Perry, 434, et scq. DEPARTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 23 tendency. The petition further argued that the act was in direct opposition to that of 1748, which had obtained the king's sanction. The new law was not, as its defenders had stated, a great benefit to the poor, but rather to the rich, inasmuch as the rich had many more tithables to pay upon than the poor. Clerical salaries were small at best, imported articles were high, and a Virginia rector was no better off than an English curate with £40 a year. Another set of ministers remonstrated to the bishop in the following February. They denounced the "optional" law and asserted that the clergy received no compensation when the price of tobacco fell low, as had been the case since 1724. ' Ministers were frequently called upon to wait a year and a half for their salaries, which forced them to go into debt. The Assem- bly had been so certain that the act of 1755 was illegal and would be repealed that It had made it operative for only ten months. At the same time Thomas Dawson, the commissary succeeding "William Dawson, wrote in a milder strain to the bishop, stating that the clergy had asked him to oppose the "optional" act because their salaries for many years had been "very mean and inconsiderable," and that they were now deprived of am opportunity to gain some recompense."' The commissary did not think the act would benefit the poor, as they generally paid the levy early and in their own tobacco, while the rich endeavored to pay it in money or in poor tobacco, preferring to sell their own for a prolit. He admitted, however, that the price fixed by the act was better than that generally received, but apprehended the bad consequences of violating the act of 1748. In spite of the appeals of the clergy, nothing was done. The act of 1755 was not disallowed and the ministers had nothing to do but swallow their loss. The Assembly no doubt apprehended a disallowance, but this could only come from England after the act had served its purpose. The British government allowed the matter to pass. The composition of 1755 had excited no other protests than those of the victims. The Assembly, finding the procedure easy, passed another act in October 1758, compounding tobacco dues in money."' The state of the crop was not accurately known, but a shortage was anticipated and prices rose. Burk attributes the advance to "the arts of an extravagant speculator of the name of Dickerson.""' The war was also probably responsible to some extent for the increase. The establishment resisted again and this time with more eifect. Fauquier, the governor, had approved the act, but the clergy were now fully roused by this second trespass and by a sense of their influence with the British government. A convention denounced the "two-penny" act and sent John Camm to England as the clerical advocate. Camm, an able and insinuating man, gained his point, although the Assembly had employed agents in turn. The bishop of London wrote to the Lords Commissioners of Trade and Plantations, accusing the Assembly of overthrowing the law of 1748, and the council of disingenuous conduct in maintaining that tha "two-penny" act was not contrary to that law. The bishop said that the iM Perry, 447. "'Hening, VII, 240. "'Burk, III, 302. 24 BEPOBT OF THE STATE LIBBAKIAN. governor "boggled at" the act for his owe security, and in general he accused the Assembly of treasonable intent In setting aside a law which had received a royal assent.'™ The Board of Trade, in a dispassionate statement, recommended the king in council to disallow the acts of 1755 and 1758, which was accordingly done. The duty fell to John Camm of conveying the instructions of disallow- ance to Fauquier. The latter, who was entirely out of sympathy with the clergy in their revolt, received the papers in a violent fit of anger and ordered his negroes to refuse Camm entrance to the Virginia "palace.""" Fauquier had a reason to be angry, as it was his desire to keep the British government out of disputes with the Assembly. The veto of that government aroused great bitterness in the colony and a pamphlet and newspaper war followed. Landon Carter began by writing his "Letter to the Bishop of London," a reply to the bishop's letter to the Lords Commissioners. Carter especially resented the charges against the Assembly of disloyalty and of encouraging dissent. He handled the bishop without gloves. Richard Bland, of Prince George, wrote a far abler criti- cism of the bishop's letter in his "Letter to the Clergy of Virginia." It was an attem pt to - demon strate- that-the Assembly^had sought to ^ act from the beginning in a fair and liberal spirit towards. the^clmrch. __JHe-dejmmslxated from the trend of legislation what was undoubtedly true — ^that the Assembly intended to limit ministers to a salary of £80 or £100. The year 1757 was a year of suffering, the Assembly had been obliged to issue money from the treasury to keep people from starving, and It had passed a necessary salary act and could not wait for the royal consent under the circumstances. It had indeed dealt generously with the ministers in allowing them a com- pensation of £144, which was more than they had ever received before. Bland enlarged upon the charge of treason. He admitted that the royal instructions ought to be obeyed, but claimed that there were times when deviation was necessary. Camm answered Carter and Bland in his "Single and Distinct View of the Two-penny Act," a clever analysis of that measure. Carter responded with the "Rector Detected," a violent and abusive attack upon Camm. Still more bitter was Bland's sardonic rejoinder, "The Colonel Dismounted." This pamphlet Is in dialogue, and it assails Camm under the pretense of defend- ing him. Its most important argument is the answer to Camm's charge that the Assembly had restrained the royal prerogative in passing the act and thereby had tended to overthrow the constitution.'" Bland ably presented the Virginia view of the constitution. Virginians, he claimed, were free, either as Englishmen or as the unsubdued natives, and therefore they had the right to regulate their internal affairs. He agreed that the governor and the king had the power to disallow an act, but he declined to admit that the royal instructions to the governor were law. The "Colonel Dis- mounted," the last of the pamphlets, differs in tone from the earlier produc- tions. The Assembly is still defended against the charge of disloyalty, but jofi Perry, p. 401. ""Perry, p. 476. "' Bland's Letter, p. 12. "" Colonel Dismounted, p. 20. DEPARTMENT OF AECHIVES AND HISTOBY. 25 there Is no evidence of attachment to "the best of kings." As a matter of fact, Camm's pamphlet, able argument as it was, had wrought the clergy harm because it rested upon the basis of the royal authority. In the "Colonel Dismounted'' a distinct note of irritation against the royal government appears. The clergy immediately sought to take advantage of the king's dis- allowance. Fauquier published the document which he termed a repeal.™ It was not a repeal, however, and the clergy were right, though rather unwise, in maintaining that a disallowance was a different thing. The council seized upon the term "repeal" as a proof that the disallowance merely stayed the act in the future and had no application to the past. This position was illogical, as the act, by its own terms, was limited to a year, but nothing better illustrates the determination of the Virginians to defeat the king's will than this use of casuistry, in which Fauquier acquiesced. The clergy would not have it so. Alexander White, rector of St. David's parish. King William, brought suit for the balance of his income."* The court stated that the act of 1758 was valid in spite of the disallowance and the Jury brought in a verdict for the defendant."'' It was charged by William Robinson, the commissary, that the court had it entered on record that White had received his salary in tobacco instead of money — a manifest falsehood — in order to prevent an appeal."" Thomas Warrington, of Charles parish, York, was awarded damages by a jury,"' although the court decided the act to be valid."' The most noteworthy case of all, and one of the most celebrated law suits in American history, was that of James Maury, rector of Fredericksville parish, which came up in Hanover court in 1763. The court declared the act of 1758 to be invalid."" Maury was consequently entitled to recover damages and a jury was summoned to adjudge the amount. A number of clergymen were in attendance, as the precedent was an Important one for them. It was at this moment that Patrick Henry appeared as counsel for the vestry and delivered the speech which made him famous. He ignored the law of the case, and appealed directly to the emotions of the jury,^^" especially to the colonial jealousy of English inter- ference, boldly claiming that the king in vetoing a just and necessary law had been guilty of tyranny and so had forfeited the obedience of his sub- jects. The Jury, which was partially composed of Presbyterians,™ brought in a verdict of one penny damages and the court refused, to grant a new trial. Camm had early brought suit in the general court and, upon an adverse decision, had appealed to England, where the case remained undecided for some time. Warrington appealed to the general court,"'' but it suspended 113 Perry, p. 480. "''Perry, pp. 479, 481. 115 Perry, p. 479. Ill Perry, p. 497. "' Perry, p. 496. 113 Perry, p. 514. "" Perry, p. 497. i2« Perry, p. 497. i=» Perry, p. 498. "= Perry, p. 514. 26 REPORT OF THE STATE LIBRARIAN. judgmen^i pending the decision in England upon Camm's application. The privy council, however, did not consider the case, as Lord Northington, the president of the council, dismissed the action on the ground of technical errors,"' As the agitation excited by the Stamp Act had not subsided, it is probable that the British government did not wish to raise a new issue with a colony. The general court, in October 1767, decided against Warrington and an appeal was refused."* Camm still wished to push the matter, but James Horrocks, president of William and Mary, advised against further agitation and the "Parsons' Cause" came to an end. The controversy thus ended triumphantly for the colonial authorities. Patrick Henry's connection with it has been sometimes misunderstood, as he has been represented as the advocate of the popular feeling against the clergy. But as a matter of fact the "Parsons' Cause" was in no sense a class quarrel and should not be so considered. Henry fought the battle of the whole colony, and of the ruling powers more than of any other element. Nor did Henry's wonderful speech, in itself, defeat the clergy. It is not probable, in any case, that they would have succeeded in overcoming the opposition of the council and burgesses, who were in possession of the courts and could have used all the tactics of legal delay to obstruct their cause. But Henry did play a most important part in this crisis. Ho strongly emphasized the hatefulness of the English overlordship and aroused populaf enthusiasm against it. He could not deny that the king had acted constitutionally In vetoing the act of 1758, but he claimed that the king had acted rtot illegally but unjustly and for so doing ought to be resisted. The popular feeling excited by Henry confirmed the colonial government in its opposition to the establishment, and the excitement over the taxation ques- tion prevented the British government from proceeding in such a side issue as the clerical dispute. The "Parsons' Cause" is a proof, if one were needed, that .the colonial irritation with England involved more than the question of taxation without representation. At the bottom of it lay the feeling of Virginia nationalism; the colony was humiliated by the exercise of the royal power in opposition to its laws and will. The Virginians valued English institutions, but only as they were modified to suit the practical repub- licanism of the colony. The governor was an object of jealousy, and the attempt to adapt the Virginia establishment to its monarchical model was regarded as intolerable. The Anglican clergy, in appealing to the power of the king against the colonial will, had awakened an embittered sentiment. They were unfor- tunate, too, in invoking royal assistance at the time when the controversy over taxation was rising into importance, and they consequently incurred a double measure of odium. It was in these years, when the civil and ecclesi- astical powers were opposed, that dissent flourished all through the colony and began to be formidable. The right and wrong in the "Parsons' Cause" has been variously esti- mated. In view of the evidence, it would seem that justice was on the side of the clergy. Ministers were not extravagantly paid, for the Assembly from time to time passed acts for a better provision for them. The salary ™ Perry, p. 525. "•Perry, p. 630. DEPAKTMENT OP ARCHIVES AND HISTOEY. 27 of 16,000 pounds of tobacco had been granted the ministers long enough to become custom as well as law. The Assembly had adopted a very convenient but uncertain medium in tobacco, estimating the ministers' sal- aries at a time when the weed was at a fairly normal price. In some years the price had fallen very low and ministers received small pay. It was just, therefore, that the ministers should be entitled to the benefit of any rise, unless the circumstances were very exceptional. This they hardly were, and, in any case, the Assembly, if It contemplated an alternative medium for tobacco, should have adopted a maximum and minimum rate of exchange, in order to provide for extraordinary advances and declines in the value of tobacco. It was right to limit the salaries to a certain money value, but it was not right to have this limitation apply only to certain years; justice requires some rule. As a matter of fact, the acts of 1755 and 1758 partook somewhat of the nature of repudiation. Contracting parties were aware that tobacco might rise or fall In value, just as modern contractors know that the value of money may fluctuate 'before the obligations are discharged. The "two-penny" act deprived the creditors of a large part of their advantage, as well as the salaried ofBclals. One strong argument may be advanced in behalf of the Assembly; the "two-penny" act was passed In time of war, and war is taken to justify somewhat unusual methods. War expenses were undoubtedly high and bore . upon the people. On the other hand, only the frontiers ' of the colony were invaded by the enemy and the great advance in the price of tobacco was considered ^ an economic advantage rather outweighing the shortness of the crop. The clergy ought not to be blamed for seeking to obtain their legal rights. In fact they contended not only for the actual value taken from them, but for a principle. The precedent of constant interference with salaries which the Assembly seemed about to establish was dangerous; It tended to nlace the ministers on a precarious footing and to make them thoroughly subordinate to the Assembly. The establishment saw this and resisted. It is a valid question to ask whether the clergy were altogether justified In going to the extent of appealing to England over the heads of the colonial authorities. Acceptance of a wrong was better than the invocation of a power so unpalatable to the colonials. Certainly an appeal to the king against the Assembly after 1765 was unwise if not unjustifiable. The establishment could not expect to live in constant variance with the civil power; it could not expect to use the king as a constant threat against the government, especially in a period when the people were deeply irritated with the king for other reasons. The time was fast coming when loyalty to the king would be treason to the colony, and the establishment paid a heavy price for its attempt to make itself dependent on the crown for its protection. All classes deeply resented the clerical appeal, and the people came to dis- trust the allegiance of the whole clergy of the establishment to Virginia, a suspicion unjust to probably more than half of the ministers."^" The effect of the "Parsons' Cause" was to injure the prestige of the i ^^ A number of ministers served on committees of safety in the Revolution. Others gave- evidence of their loyalty to the American cause, as the Rev. J. B. Dunn of Suffolk has demon- strated. 28 REPORT OF THE STATE LIBRARIAN. II establishment, shake the confidence of the ministers and encourage the dis- '! senters. Accordingly, the establishment took a rather small part in the ! agitation . for the foundation of an American Episcopate engaged in by the I; Anglican clergy in the Northern colonies. Nevertheless, some of the Virginia ministers joined their Northern brethren under the leadership of the indomi- table John Camm. The occasion for the movement was an overture from the "United Con- vention of New York and New Jersey," which delegated Myles Cooper, president of King's college, and Robert McKean to visit the South and secure co-operation for the American episcopate.^^" Commissary James Horrocks, in April 1771, issued a summons for a convention to meet on May 4. The desire for a bishop may have been prompted in part by the efforts of the general court to extend its jurisdiction over ecclesiastical affairs. The commissary had never possessed sufficient authority to deprive ministers of livings and the government had been chary of interference. The notorious case of John Brunskill, minister of Hamilton parish. Prince William, which occurred in 1757, compelled some action. Brunskill persisted in an immoral life in spite of warning and the vestry complained to Commissary William Dawson, who consulted the governor. Dinwiddie advised him to proceed judicially against Brunskill, but the commissary declared he lacked the requisite powers. The governor then brought the case before the council, which removed Brunskill. This proceeding by Virginia law was, according to Dawson, opposed to canon law.- The bishop of London, however, did not Interfere."' The council had exerted an irregular kind of jurisdiction in church affairs for a long period. In 1739, upon the application of the people of St. Margaret's parish. King William and Caroline, the governor, with the advice of the council, suspended the erection of churches in the parish pend- ing a trial in the general court."' In 1741-2 the council tried James Pedin, minister of Nottoway parish, on charges of ill-conduct and recommended the commissary to turn him out of his parish."" In 1767 the case of Ramsay, a clergyman living in Albemarle, was brought before the general cqurt, which declared it had jurisdiction. Fauquier wrote to Bishop Terrick that he would keep him informed of the case, the issue of which is not known.™ In 1770 and 1771 Governor William Nelson wrote to Lord Hillsborough concerning the anomalous condi- tion of ecclesiastical authority in Virginia and suggesting that if the com- missary did not have the power of removing clergymen, the attorney and solicitor generals should prepare opinions as to the general court's jurisdic- tion in such cases."' In view of the absence of any other authority, it seemed likely that jurisdiction would fall to the general court. The convention did not assemble on May 4, according to the summons."" So few ministers appeared on the advertised date that the meeting was post- "° Hawks, p. 126 and Cross's Anglican Episcopate and the American Colonies, p. 231. >« Cross, p. 137. Ill Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, XIV, 342. '=» Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, XV, 377. "« Cross, p. 227. "' Cross, pp. 228, 229, and Perry, pp. 632, 534. 132 Cross, p. 231 ; Hawks, p. 127 ; and William and Mary College Quarterly, V, 150, Nelson's ILettet. DEPARTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 29 poned until June 4, 1771. On that day twelve of the one hundred Anglican ministers in Virginia met. After a warm discussion a resolution to petition the king for an episcopate was first voted down and then adopted. It was decided to draw up a petition and present it to the king through the bishop of London, provided a majority of the Virginia clergy concurred."^ Samuel Henley and Thomas Gwatkin, two of the professors In William and Mary College, published a protest against the resolutions in the Virginia Gazette of June 6. They gave seven reasons for dissenting, the most important of which consisted in the valid argument that an episcopate would weaken the connection between England and the colonies, tend to continue the existing disputes and awaken the fears of dissenters."* A warm news- paper controversy followed. John Camm wrote a calm and able reply to Henley and Gwatkin, maintaining that an episcopate could not affect the rights and laws of the colonies, because the latter were modelled on England, and consequently episcopal government was interwoven in their constitution."" No tribunal competent to punish unworthy ministers existed, and the clergy were averse "to Episcopal Authority in the Hands of Laymen." The letters written in reply to Camm exhibit the fear of the monarchica'l and hierarchical principle in English episcopal government held by all classes of Virginians."" Laud's episcopate was cited as a warning and an example. The controversy between Camm on one side and Gwatkin and Henley on the other- continued to fill the pages of the Virginia Gazettes until well through August."' Camm argued logically and at length, but he fought in a hopeless cause. Not only was the laity of Virginia, Episcopalians as well as dissenters, unanimously opposed to a bishop, but a great part of the established clergy as well. Richard Bland stated that the appointment of a bishop would have overturned all the acts of Assembly relative to ecclesias- tical jurisdiction.""' The Assembly considered the dispute of sufficient importance to pass a resolution of thanks to Henley and Gwatkin "for the wise and well-timed Opposition they have made to the pernicious Project of a few mistaken Clergymen, for introducing an American Bishop.''"" The controversy con- tinued for some time. The New York and New Jersey Anglican clergy criticised Gwatkin and Henley in an "Address,""" and Gwatkin replied in a pamphlet in which he showed the incompatibility of a bishop with the actual colonial constitution.'" ""Cross's Anglican Episcopate and American Colonics, p. 232; Hawlts, 127. '"Cross's Anglican Episcopate and American Colonies, p. 234. "° Dixon and Hunter's Virginia Gazette, June 13, 1771. "' Virginia Gazette, June 20, 1771. "'Attotk on Camm, June 22, 1771; Camm's Letter to Henley, July 11, 1771; Henley to Camm, July 18, 1771 ; Camm to Gwatkin, August 13 and 22, 1771. ""William and Mary College Quarterly, V, 153. "I profess myself a sincere son of the established church, but I can embrace her Doctrines without approving of her Hierarchy, which i know to be a Relick of the Papal Incroachments upon the Common Law." p. 154. ""Journal of House of Burgesses (Virginia State Librarj'), 1770-1772, 122; Hawks, ISO. Burk, III, 304. "• Cross, 238. "'Cross, 239. 30 REPORT OP TPIE STATE LIBRARIAN. Possibly this controversy stimulated the, house of burgesses to attempt to organize a church court upon the lines of a compromise. In 1772, the house directed the committee for religion to enquire into the state of religion in the colony, and Robert Carter Nicholas, on March 27, 1772, reported for the committee: "That it is the Opinion of this Committee, that for superintending the Conduct of the Clergy a Jurisdiction consisting of the Laymen and Clergymen be established."^'" Benjamin Harrison, Nicholas and Richard Bland were appointed a committee "to establish a Jurisdiction for superintending the Conduct of the Clergy, to be exercised by Clergymen, with an Appeal to a Court of Delegates.""'' Harrison introduced the bill on April 7. It was engrossed two days later and ordered to be read on the first of May, which was after the date of adjournment.'" The bill was not introduced at the following session and this mild substitute for episcopal supervision failed. Possibly in a quieter age it would have met with a better fate. In this time of suspicion the establishment of an ecclesiastical court could not be carried through. It is needless to say that the appointment of a bishop in Virginia was impossible. Church and state were united in the colony but in a simple and republican fashion, and the church was subordinate to the state. A bishop, drawing his authoritv from the king, exeriisiiig ^a -juriadiction.- over .the Virginia _fihurch, and living" upon the income of the state, would have been an anomaly. The devel- opment^ of republicanism in the colony left no place for monarchical insti- tutions. Furthermore the time was wholly inappropriate for a bishoprick, for the colonies were too irritated with the British government to see anything but Grecian gifts in its offerings, civil or ecclesiastical. Yet the upper xlassesin_ Virginia were gincerely attached to the estab- lishmefTtT^Tlnany people doubtless would have accepted such a court as was proposed in the bill of 1772 as the best solution of existing difficulties. But the policy of the clergy in seeking to draw nearer to the Anglican foundation had weakened the devotion of the colonists and had made any action difficult. So church matters remained as before while the colony drifted on to the Revolution. '"Journal of the House of Burgesses (Virginia State Library) 1770-72, 275. '"Journal, p. 300. "* Journal, p. 308. CHAPTER III The Dissenters The establishment was destined to come to ijs end from_two main causes — political revolution and the" great eyangelioal reviyal, as represented by the dissenting sects. The tendency of a part of the Virginia clergy tOi look upon the royal power as an integral element in the union of church and Btate was contributory. Dissent did not greatly trouble the establishment until the middle of the eighteenth century. Puritans lived in the colony at an early period, and the Assembly passed legislative measures against them, which were enforced by Sir William Berkeley. In an uncongenial soil and with the authorities hostile, Puritanism failed to obtain a lasting hold. Quakers came into the colony about 1656"" They settled in southern Virginia, especially in Nansemond, which was visited by George Fox and long continued to be a Quaker center."' An act of Assembly was levelled at them and they were subjected to a considerable persecution at the Restora- tion."' After a time they came to be tolerated by custom and, in 1692, they obtained legal toleration."' The Quakers, after their first period, were not aggressive and they never threatened the supremacy of the establishment. From time to time non-English elements were introduced into the Virginia population, but these were absorbed in a religious, as well as in a political and social sense. The Germans who settled at Germanna in the early years of the eighteenth century set up no really separate church of their own. The Huguenots, who came into the colony in considerable num- bers about the end of the seventeenth century, soon conformed to the estab- lishment. The Anglican church was never seriously disturbed until the rise of Presbyterianism. This sect, however, did not make headway fn the colony for niaiiy years after its first appearance. Presbyterians were living in eastern Virginia in some numbers in 1683'" Josias Mackie qualified under the Toleration Act of 1689 and became, as far as is known, the first legal dissenting minister in Virginia."" Mackie was the pastor of a congregation on Elizabeth river until about the time of his death in 1716. -Francis Mackemie, who came from Ireland to America and settled in Accomac, is "= H. E. Mcllwaine's Struggle of Protestant Dissenters for Religious Toleration in Vir- ginia, Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science, 12th series, p. 19; S. B. Weeks's Southern Quakers and Slavery, Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science,, p. 13. "« J. B. Dunn's History of Nansemond County, p. 25. "' Weeks, p. 14, et scq. "» Weeks, p. 149. "" T. C. Johnson's Virginia Preshyterianism and Religious Liberty, p. 13. >M Mcllwaine, 31. 32 EEPOET OP THE STATE LIBEAEIAN. regarded as the real founder of Preshyterianlsm in the United States. He was licensed to preach in 1699"' and after living for a time in Virginia, went North, where be fought the battle of religious freedom. The Assembly of 1699 formally acknowledged the application of the Toleration Act to Virginia. Dissenters, who qualified under the terms of the act, were allowed to be absent from church and to hold their own meetings once in two months."'' This liberty did not extend to free-.thinkers, those who denied the Trinity, the truth of Christianity, or the inspiration of the Scriptures. But advantage was not taken of this concession, and Presbyter- ianism died out in eastern Virginia after Mackemie. The creed was next introduced into western Virginia by the Ulster Irish- men who came into the Valley in large numbers after 1730. This immigra- tion was encouraged by the governor, William Gooch, who, in 1738, in reply to an overture from the synod of Philadelphia, assured such Presbyterians as might settle west of the mountains that they would not be disturbed by the Virginia government if they complied with the requirements of the Toleration Act."" Other sects were also represented by the immigrants in the west, who included Germans and English-Lutherans, Quakers, Menonists and Bunkers"' — but the Presbyterians predominated. Before 1745 there were Presbyterian congregations in the country west of the mountains and a few to the east."' It was not long before Presbyterianism developed in eastern Virginia. The first congregation, which was formed by Samuel Morris in Hanover in 1743, was the result of a spontaneous movement and not of missionary efforts."" But Presbyterian ministers soon followed the movement in midland Virginia. William Robinson, sent by New Castle Presbytery, preached in Charlotte, Prince Edward, Campbell and other counties, and John Roan and John Blair came a little later. The Hanover Presbyterians had not secured a license for a meeting house, but for some time they went unmolested by the authorities, until the fiery evangelist Roan began to attract attention by his denunciation of the Anglican ministers."' Roaln and Thomas Watkins were presented in the general court in 1745 "for reflecting upon and viliflying the established religion," a legal offense,"" and Joshua Morris for permitting an unlawful assembly in his house. Other cases followed. Isaac Winston and Samuel Morris were fined twenty shillings for allowing illegal meetings to be held in their houses. But procedure before juries proved unsatisfactory and the Presbyterians were more troubled by fines for non-attendance on church, "» Johnson, p. 16. "2 1-Iening, III, 171. In a few cases licenses were obtained under the act after Makemie's time. One occurred in Richmond county in 1729. Va. Magazine of History and BioKranhy X, 214. '™ Johnson, p. 28. '"^ Mcllwaine, p. 40. "= Johnson, 26; Mcllwaine, 42-43. The Planting of the Presbyterian Church in Northern Virginia. — J. R. Graham. ( ""Evangelical and Literary Magazine, II, 113, 186, 201, 329, 353, 474; Mcllwaine, p. 45; Johnson, p. 30 ; Campbell, p. 439. ' ' ' "' Mcllwaine, p. 46. ■ , "»F6ote, I, 137-140; Mcllwaine, p. 48. DEPARTMENT OP ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 33 inflicted by justices of the peace, than in any other way."" Among other preachers, the great Whitefield, visited Hanover, and that county became the center of dissent in the east. In 1746, Gooch issued a proclamation against "Moravians, New Lights and Methodists,'"" forbidding them to hold meetings under penalty of law. The proclamation was ineffective and the Presbyterian movement received a mighty impetus in 1747 by the arrival of a great man, Samuel Davies, who came to Hanover from Pennsylvania. He applied for a license to preach in three churches in Hanover and one in Henrico."' The council hesitated to grant the application, but the license was obtained through the governor's influence."^ The next year Davies made applica- tion for a license for a colleague, John Rodgers, but the council refused. Later on in the same year Davies asked for a license to preach in three new churches, which request was granted. But in 1750, when the New Kent county court ventured to license a meeting-house, the general court revoked the grant. The court claimed the sole right of licensing preaching- places and the council, while admitting that the English Toleration Act extended to Virginia, held the opinion that dissenting ministers should be confined to a limited number of churches. The attorney-general, Peyton Randolph, maintained that the Toleration Act was not law in Virginia, but this contention could not hold good. Davies struggled resolutely for a broad interpretation of the Toleration Act in the face of opposing church and state. The clergy of the establishment, alarmed by the inroads of dissent, appealed to the bishop of London against Davies,"' asking that he be limited to one field under the narrow interpretation of the Toleration Act. The latter wrote to Doddridge and Avery, the leading dissenting divines in England, for assistance, and they communicated with the bishop of London on the question of the number of preaching-places allowed non-conformists by law. The bishop of London wrote Doddridge that the Act of Toleration was intended to ease the consciences of non-conformists and not to serve as a dispensation for itinerant preachers."' Doddridge replied that the practice in England was to license places of worship wherever required. '" Com- missary William Dawson took the same view as the council and the bishop of London that the Toleration Act bound dissenters rigidly to particular places. Governor Dinwiddie refused Davies' application for an eighth meeting- house, and the latter met the difficulty by securing an assistant."' Undoubt- edly dissenting ministers were granted licenses wherever desired in England, but this right was secured by an act supplementing the Toleration Act, that of 10th Queen Anne."' This act had not been adopted by the Virginia '"McIIwaine, p. 60. "'Campbell, p. 442. "< Campbell, p. 446. "= Campbell, p. 446. "'Foote, I, 173. ici Perry, 372. MS Perry, 374. ""Perry, 384. 101 Perry, 398. »™ Mcllwaine, 55. 34 EEPORT OF THE STATE LIBKABIAN. Assembly, and the narrower limits of the Toleration Act legally applied. The great point in the issue was the council's wish to differentiate the colonial practice from the English, upholding the power of the general court to decide such cases according to its own interpretation. The government's objection to licensing a number of preaching-places for one minister was gradually overcome by the increase of Presbyterian minis- ters in Virginia, so that the accusation of itinerancy could no longer be urged. The growth of Presbyterianism was promoted by other causes — by the French and Indian War and the "Parsons' Cause." Davies' patriotism during the war did much to reconcile the ruling powers to his creed. When this apostle to the Virginians left the colony in 1759, he left behind him a vigorous and growing church. Numerous accessions from the upper classes gave the Presbyterians a respectable position in the east, while their place as the dominant creed in the west lent them some political influence. Before the Revolution the church had successfully weathered all storms and won a place for itself in the colony; it had gained adherents from all ranks; it had set up an ecclesiastical organization and It was prepared to found a college. The success of the Presbyterians was a portent of great changes. Church and state had been closely united in Virginia, and the upper class of planters had ruled both. That class was zealous for the supremacy of the establishment, as well as for its own social and political control. The setting-up of a rival sect in the colony, with a form of government respon- sive to popular wishes, broke in upon the autocracy of the old regime. It is true that in a few years the Presbyterians, with their natural conservatism, ceased actively to antagonize the establishment and settled down to a quiet existence, but they had paved the way for other dissenters who would demand a further extent of liberty. The crust of privilege was broken and democratic ideas in religion and politics spread and strengthened. At the same time the moral and spiritual life of the colony was deeply influenced, and the foundation was laid for the conquest of Virginia to evangelical Christianity. The sects which followed the Presbyterians into Virginia and whose task it was to widen the spread of evangelical religion were the Methodists and Baptists. The Methodists came into the colony a few years before the Revolution. Robert Williams, who settled in Norfolk in 1772, established the society in Virginia. Methodism flourished thereafter and within a few years num- bered some thousands of adherents.'™ The Methodists counted themselves as members of the Anglican communion and made no effort to oppose the establishment or to play a part in politics. Nevertheless, since their evangeli- cal tenets were very different from the spirit of the establishment, they had much to do with promoting the change in the conception of religion which was coming over Virginia. Baptists had existed In Virginia from early times, but they left no Impression in the unpropltious seventeenth century. In 1714 a colony settled in the southeast but it did not flourish. About the middle of the century Baptists began to enter Virginia In larger numbers. A party of them 103 Tjf p Bennett's Memorials of Methodism in Virginia, p. Bl. DEPARTMENT OF AKCHIVES AND HISTORY. 35 settled In the Valley in 1743.™ The earlier comers were known as "Regulars," the conservative branch of the church. The radical element, the "Separates," came into the colony between 1750 and 1760 and within a few years began an agitation which spread through its entire limits. Presbyterians, Methodists and Baptists were all animated by a new spirit, for they all, more or less, represented the great evangelical movement which had resulted from the labors of George Whitefield and John Wesley. They added this impetus to an original Puritanism. They were all at variance with the spirit and practice of the establishment, and the fact of the contrast was one of the strongest weapons wielded by the evangelicals — zeal against apathy, vigorous faith against a claimed decadence. The criticism of the establishment was keen, and of all the critics the Baptists were most trenchant. The Anglican clergy came in for a denunciation which included their lives, their sermons and the performance of their duties. What manner of men were the parsons of the establishment? The name they have gained in history prompts the question. Tradition and narrative have painted them in black colors, and the peculiar unworthiness of the Virginia clergy is a proverb. The weight of condemnation is not altogether the testimony of enemies. Writers before and after the evangelical movement, Anglicans and others, have testified against them. Jarratt mentions the lack of vital religion in the establishment."' Meade has set forth, with painstaking care, the moral deliquencies of a large number of clergymen. The records themselves attest the evil lives of some of the ministers. But, in spite of all this evidence, the fact is that the unworthiness of the established clergy has been exaggerated."^ Some of them were, with- out doubt, evil livers; others were indifferent to their duties; but the majority, from a study of the evidence, appear to have been good, everyday sort of men, and a few were pious. Why then has the whole order come In for condemnation? The earlier testimony against the worthiness of the Virginia parsons is not wholly trustworthy, as it consists for the most part of the impressions of travellers, who are always looking for flaws. Again, the clergy were more prominent, relatively speaking, in the life of the colony than in England, and their sins were consequently more advertised. It must be remembered, too, that drunkenness, the chief vice attributed to the clergy, was a universal sin In the eighteenth century. These are minor reasons. The chief cause for the general condemnation of the colonial clergy, and one of the leading causes of the overthrow of the establishment, consisted in the form of religion predominant in Virginia. The Anglican clergy did more than oppose the development of dissent in Virginia— they attempted to controvert the great religious revival which had KOA General History of the Baptist Denomination in America, by David Benedict, p. 04. "1 Life of Devereux Jarratt, 50, 84. ,,.„,.,,,, i"We cannot judge the clergy fairly as long as our knowledge of the colonial church remains defective.- I think that the full evidence will put the ministers in a better light than hrhlve yet appeared in. If their lives were as evil as has been alleged it is strange tha presentments wer not more common. Grand juries often indicted aymen carlcssly tor moral !fl^nscs Why then was a generally depraved clergy tolerated? It is possible that the parsons ga'ned a had reputation, partly for the very reason that such black sheep as were among tliem were shown up. 36 REPORT OF THE STATE LIBRARIAN. spread from England to the colonies and which had begun to influence even the English church. The evangelical movement, when it reached the colonies, first affected the dissenting churches, awaiting internal controversies, dividing them into old and new schools— "old" and "new lights" — but in the end quickening the missionary zeal of the whole bodies and sending them forth prepared to conquer in a world especially prepared for them by the great political controversy between the colonies and England. The clergy of the establishment were average clergymen of the English church, about on a par with their brethren at home before the beginning of the WesJeyan movement. The Virginia church was still under the influ- ence of that latitudinarianism which had begun to decline in England. The Virginia clergy, true to their training, still continued to preach Tillotson, Sterne and Blair to drowsy audiences. A cold rationalism claimed them. When they were denounced by itinerant evangelists for their lack of ardor, they retorted with denunciations of "enthusiasm" and "fanaticism." It is difficult to estimate the value of the established church and its influence upon the life of the community. Certainly Virginia produced a noble breed of men in this age. The lower classes, however, were not much benefited by the ministrations of the parsons. Ignorance, poverty, and immorality abounded; the records are full of bastardy.™ But the clergy should not be too greatly blamed for the condition of affairs. It was not according to the traditions of the colonial church to appeal to the emotions. Besides, the lower classes had little voice in church affairs and their Interest, therefore, was not much awakened. Furthermore, the parishes were large, sometimes comprising the extent of a modern county and containing some thousands of Inhabitants, and the preachers, who were also school teachers, were not able, if they had the will, to look after their scattered parishioners. They con- tented themselves with preaching on Sunday S,nd administering the ordi- nances of the church when required. Life was straitly ordered in the colony; duties were a matter of routine, and religious enthusiasm was unknown. It was into this dull and formal world that the evangelical missionaries came, preaching a new religion. Their sermons were not the rationalistic- homilies of Anglican divines, but the burning, moving appeals of enthusiasts. The people, with g,ll of Englishmen's susceptibility to religious feeling, responded powerfully. The awakening of popular emotion In the ordered life of old Virginia was startling In its manifestations because this was the first occasion. The poorer people, hitherto unreached by the establishment, were stirred to the core by the wandering Baptist preachers, who walked the highways and byroads, preaching in season and out and reproducing the apostolic age. The phenomena of the movement were such as mark all great revivals — hysteria, contortions, raptures, and even coma. The contrast between the overpowering sermons of the evangelists and the short prosy moral discourses of the Anglican ministers was great, and between the points of view of the two schools even greater, so that in time, as a result of the evangelical triumph, the "new light" religion came to be considered the only valid form of Christianity, and the unworthiness of the old parsons grew into- a sort of legend. The "Separate" Baptists, as a result of their disturbing Influence In '" Chiefly found, however, among the indented servants. DEPARTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 37 the community, were subjected in many places to mob violence, which is a frequent accompaniment of religious agitations. Samuel Harriss, a Baptist minister, was driven out of Culpeper county, and on another occasion he, together with one John Koones, received a beating at the hands of a mob.'" Legal prosecution followed. Penalties began to be sharply administered about 1770"= By this time, the first feeling against dissent as dissent had largely worn away among the upper classes in Virginia, but the Baptists were regarded as a disturbing social element. This they were, since all movements which agitate whole communities and tend to the betterment of large classes of men affect the order of society. The first known case of the imprisonment of Baptists occurred in Fredericksburg in 1768, when John Waller, Lewis Craig, James Childs, with several others, were arrested by the sheriff on the charge of disturbing the peace."* The court offered to release these men if they would promise not to preach in the county for a year, but they refused and suffered an imprison- ment."' They had not applied for licenses under the Toleration Act, and the judgment of the court in their case was legal. John Blair, president of the council and deputy-governor, wrote to the Spotsylvania king's attorney advising him to allow the imprisoned Baptists to apply for licenses, but they were released without any conditions. Other cases of imprisonment fol- lowed. William Webber and Joseph Anthony were jailed in Chesterfield in 1770"° and John Waller and William Webber, with two others, in Middle- sex in 1771. Cases occurred elsewhere, and as late as 1774."' According to Leland, about thirty preachers and a few laymen were Imprisoned between 1768 and 1775"' The Baptists labored chiefly in the east, the oldest and most thickly settled portion of the colony. Parishes were smaller in this region and ministers were numerous. Consequently the Baptists, in invading the stronghold of the establishment, awakened an inevitable antagonism which resulted in ill-treatment. The preachers might have avoided misuse, in large? part, by taking out licenses to preach at certain places, and by discontinuing/ the practice of wandering through the country agitating against the establish^ ment.™ The Presbyterians had been content to k eep within the law^ That the Baptists were not is significant. The defiance of law was a symptom of the pending political change. T]3g_JWn£ra£ts_considereilhe„British laws con- cerning religion .as wholly unjjjstiflahle,, aad. Jiu.t]iis_apirit,.they .disregarded ^hBm'although occasionally they applied for licenses and were refused. As a consequence, an inevitable legal prosecution followed which placed the Baptists in the light of sufferers for the cause of religious freedom. This was "*E. B. Semple's History of the Rise and Progress of the Baptists in Virginia (Beale), p. 20. "^ Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, XI, 415. "•Seniiilr, 29. "° Ai c ording to local tradition the Baptist ministers cursed the town by shaking the dust of it from their feet. "•Cambbell, 655; Semple, 20; James, 23. "' W. F. Thorn's Struggle for Religious Freedom in Virginia. The Baptists, p. 29. "• Leiand's Writings, p. 107. "»Thom, p. 27. 38 REPORT OF THE STATE LIBRARIAN. a fact, but the liberty they claimed was incompatible with the existing law. Yet the Baptists could not have done their work if they had strictly com- plied with the Toleration Act. Itinerancy was a vital feature of their agita- tion; it was only by going out into the fields and hedges that they could reach a sparse population scattered over a large territory. Their zeal and labors contrasted strongly with the apathy of the Anglican clergy, and their sufferings at the hands of authority in the end gave them a sanctity in the eyes of the populace. Other causes contributed to the marvellous success gained by the Baptists. They were democratic in politics, as well as in religion, and whole-hearted in their sympathy with the colonial cause as against England. But the chief reason for success lay in the fact that the Baptists presented the great evangelical movement in the way which appealed most strongly to the masses; and their preachers, who generally lacked the heavy classical education of the day, possibly for this very reason addressed the ignorant with more effect. The Baptist church grew by leaps and bounds after 1770, and the movement became one of the events of Virginia history. Before the actual beginning of the Revolution, the Baptists had gained thousands of converts. The spread of the Baptists and their constant conflicts with authority led to the weakening of the legal restraints of dissent. The Baptists, irritated at their ill-treatment, complained, and the Assembly awakened to the fact that some better regulation of dissenters was advisable than the law of 1699, confirming the Toleration Act. "The attempts to prevent the spread of dissent, which fell so heavily on the Baptists from the year 176S and onwards, but convinced the more thoughtful Episcopalians that some degree of restricted toleration must be granted to the citizens of Virginia, or society must be shaken to its foundation. To appease the agitated com- munity a bill was proposed granting privileges to dissenters." "° The movement for a new toleration, law began as early as 1769. The house of burgesses, on May 11, 1769, ordered the committee for religion, "to prepare and bring in a Bill for exempting his Majesty's Protestant Dis- senters from the Penalties of certain Laws,""^ but the bill was not introduced at this session. At the fall session, on November 11, 1769, the committee for religion was instructed "to prepare and bring in a Bill for granting Toleration to his Majesty's Subjects, being Protestant Dissenters," but apparently the bill for a second time was not introduced. At the opening session of 1772, a petition from Lunenburg Baptists declared that they "find themselves restricted in the Exercise of their Religion, their Teachers imprisoned under various Pretences, and the Benefit of the Toleration Act denied them, though they are willing to conform to the true Spirit of that Act, and are loyal and quiet Subjects; and therefore praying that they may be treated with the same kind Indulgence, in religious Matters, as Quakers, Presbyterians, and other Protestant Dissenters, enjoy.""" On February 22, 1772, the same petition was presented by the Mecklenburg Baptists,'" and on February 24, by the Sussex Baptists, and »" Foote, I, 320. '"Journals of the House of BurgOEses (Virginia ' State Library), 17S6-69, p. 205. "^Journals, 1766-69, p. 252. "'Journals, 1770-72, p. '161. •"Journals, 1770-72, p. 183. DEPARTMENT OF AECHIVES AND HISTORY. 39 later by the Caroline Baptists. On the same day, the Amelia Baptists declared that they were "restricted in their religious Exercises; that, if the Act of Toleration does not extend -to this colony, they are exposed to severe Persecution; and, if it does extend hither, and the Power of granting Licenses to Teachers, be lodged, as .is supposed, in the General Court alone, the Petitioners must suffer considerable Inconveniencs, not only because that court sets not oftener than twice in the Year, .and then at a Place far remote, but because the said Court will admit a single Meeting-House and no more in one County; and 'that the Petitioners are loyal and quiet Subjects, whose Tenets in no wise affect the State; and, therefore praying a Redress of their Grievances, and that Liberty of Conscience may be secured to them.'"™ The committee for religion reported that the Baptist petitions "so far as they relate to allowing the ; petitioners the same Toleration, in Matters of Religion, as is enjoyed by his Majesty's dissenting Protestant Subjects of Great-Britain, under different acts of Parliament is reasonable.""' The com- mittee was ordered to prepare a bill pursuant to the resolution, and at the same time it was ordered to "enquire into the State of the established Religion in this Colony and Report the same." Robert Carter Nicholas, on February 27, 1772, presented a "Bill 'for extending the Benefit of the several Acts of Toleration to his Majesty's Protestant Subjects, in 'this Colony, dissenting from the Church of England." The bill was re-committed to the committee, which amended it, and it was then engrossed, ordered to be printed, and 'to be read for the third time in the following July.'™ This bill did not prove satisfactory to the dissenters. It was a rather Illiberal digest of the various English acts of toleration, including the features of that of the 10th Queen Anne, and it did not go far enough to satisfy churches which had gained a pretty substantial measure of liberty. At the May 1774 1 session of the Assembly, protests against the Toleration Bill began to come in. The Baptists complained that a bill "not admitting public Worship, except in the day time, is inconsistent with the laws of England, as well as the Practice and Usage of the Primitive Churches, and even of the English Church itself; that the night season may sometimes be better spared by the Petitioners from the necessary duties of their callings; :and that they wish for no indulgences which may disturb the Peace of Government; and, therefore praying the House to take their Case into Consideration, and to grant them suitable redress."™ At the same time the committee for religion was directed to bring in a "Bill for allowing aifree Toleration to his Majesty's Protestant Subjects in this Colony, who dissent from the Church of England." A petition also i Came in from the Baptist Association, which met In Loudoun, "praying that an Act of Toleration may be made giving the Petitioners and other Protestant dissenting Ministers liberty to i preach in all proper places, and at all Seasons, without restraint.""' "= Journals, 1770-72, p. 185. "•Journals, 1770-72, p. 186. "'Journals, 1770-72, p. 188. '"Journals, 1770-72, p. 194. "'Journals, 1770-72, p. 197. "•Journals, 1770-72, p, 249. "•Journals, 1773-76, p. 92. "» Journals, 1773-76, p. 102. 40 REPOET OP THE STATE LIBRARIAN, In the fall, Hanover Presbytery took action against the Toleration Bill, drawing up a searching and able criticism of the measure. The paper was probably written by Caleb Wallace."' The Presbytery objected to the terms of the bill requiring dissenters to confine their ministry to certain designated places because Presbyterian preachers were obliged to itinerate in order to reach the numbers of people included in their' communion. The prohibition of night services was inconvenient. The clause requiring dissenters to keep church doors open in all weathers was a reflection upon their loyalty. Furthermore Presbyterians could not refuse to baptize slaves who were quali- fied to receive baptism; and they desired the liberty to hold property for their churches;™ The Presbyterian memorial was presented to the house on June 5, 1775."° On June 13, the Baptists again petitioned against the bill."" The bill was never passed. The colony was now on the verge of revolu- tion and the great controversy with England drew attention from other subjects. Besides, the time had passed for toleration. The dissenters had practically won toleration before, and, with a revolution on hand, they would be satisfied with nothing short of complete liberty. ™ W. H. Whitsitfs Life and Times of Judge Caleb Wallace, p. 34. "" Ms. in Va. State Library. Johnson prints the petition in full, 65-69. "' Journals, 1773-76, p. 189. ""Journals, 1773-76, p. 225. CHAPTER IV The Revolution The dissenters, even before the Revolution, had gained a place in Vir- ginia which made them dissatisfied -with such legal restrictions as were proposed in the Toleration Bill, a system of restraint somewhat similar to that burdening their brethren in England. "What they really desired aiTa^ hoped for was equality before the law with the establishment, although) this consummation may have seemed far away in the beginning of 1775. But/ the Revolution soon gave them the liberty which might not have been secured! in decades of peace. J It was inevitable that the evangelical sects, which were Whig in politics, should profit by the struggle with Great Brita'in. In time of war social and political advances are made in a day, especially when military service is the price paid. The nature of the quarrel with England had, too, a democratic side. The colonies were not, at least in form, contending for the liberties of states imperilled by an overbearing protectorate, as much as for the consti- tutional right of all Englishmen to tax themselves. Besides, almost all con- tests with authority lead to a strengthening of democratic forces, particularly In an age when the study of social and political rights engaged the attention of men as almost never before. The dissenters profited largely by the spread of democratic feeling in the colony. Aside from the arguments used in the controversy with England, a certain nationalist sentiment had developed in Virginia, which played a part In the colony's attitude towards the home government-. This feeling had nothing to do with class; it was general. The Revolution in Virginia was not a class or a sectional revolution; it had a political, and not a social, origin. The upper classes in Virginia were almost as strongly opposed to the ministerial policy as the backwoodsmen, although their action tended to be more conservative. Patrick Henry precipitated the Revolution in 1775, just as he had led colonial opinion in opposition to the Stamp Act in 1765, and he received the support of the midland and western elements in his agitation for immediate action, but it must not be thought that he forced the eastern and aristocratic section against its will into an undesired contest. The upper planter class had long been practically united in opposition to England. The majority in the house of burgesses and in the conventions of 1775 and 1776 was composed of this class, and consequently the conservatives, if they had been seriously opposed to revolutionary measures, were in a position to with- stand action. It is true that the council at this time was lai'gely under Dunmore's influence, but the council had lost much of Its importance in recent years. The circumstances of life of the planters formed a natural culture medium for the growth of republicanism. In the eastern counties there was substantial wealth without luxury, and a society which had been allowed 42 REPORT OF THE STATE LIBRARIAN. several generations for development. The men of the leading families were- educated largely in a legal and historical direction, and they were trained from youth in legislation and affairs. They managed large estates and con- trolled numbers of slaves, and they had the leisure and taste for political research and discussion. They ruled church and state and they laid the tax levies. The representative of central power was the royal governor, but his authority was limited. Consequently the planters viewed, with genuine- alarm, the desire of the British government to exercise control over the colonies and to curtail their rights and liberties. They recognized the danger to the semi-independent state and they instituted the colonial committee of correspondence to 'draw the colonies together for resistence. And when the time came for actual war, the upper class was united to such an extent that Toryism existed In Virginia to a smaller degree than in any colony south of New England. The committee of safety appointed in 1775 was wholly com- posed of men of rank and position. Two schools of republicanism existed In Virginia when the moment for separation came in 1776. The conservatives were English in sentiment,^ largely untouched by the political philosophy of the century, and viewing their opposition to England as a defense of the past and as resistance to a policy of innovation. These men deeply regretted the necessity of separa- tion, and they wished the Revolution to end with the actual separation. Their political ideal was the colonial state minus the governor and Parlia- mentary claims. They regarded social changes with dislike and wished to preserve the establishment intact as the state religion of the new common- wealth. Among the conservatives were Edmund Pendleton, Benjamin Harri- son, Robert Carter Nicholas, and Carter Braxton. The progressive party, led by Patrick Henry, Thomas Jefferson, Richard Henry Lee, and George Mason, fed with Locke and Montesquieu, or repre- senting democratic feeling among the people, looked beyond the English model. This party regarded the Revolution primarily as a development, and, largely because it did so, it led the way and framed the constitution. The second convention of 1775, which met in Richmond on July 17, made preparations for the war then begun and appointed a committee of safety, with executive ppwers. The Baptists declared their approval of the con- vention's measures, in a petition written on August 14, and asked that the liberty be extended four delegated ministers to preach to the colonial troops, which contained many Baptists."' The convention immediately granted the request,"* passing a resolution directing commanding officers "to permit dissenting clergymen to celebrate divine worship, and to preach to the soldiers, or exhort, from time to time * * * for the ease of such scrupulous consciences as may not choose to attend divine service as cele- brated by' the chaplain.""" The convention which met In Williamsburg on May G, 1776, was probably the most noteworthy assembly ever held in Virginia. It was largely 'com- posed of men who had sat in the burgesses and in the earlier conventions,, the rulers and picked men of the colony. Among the members 'were Edmund '" Ms. in Va. State Library, Religious Petitions. Printed in C. F. James's Documentary History of the Struggle for Religious Liberty in Virginia, p. 218. "' .Journals of Conventions of 1775, 17. '"Journals, p. 17. JJEPARTMENT OP ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 43 Pendleton, Paul Carrlngton, Archibald Gary, Meriwether Smith, George Mason, Patrick Henry, Robert Carter Nicholas, 'James Madison, Richard Bland, Richard Henry Lee, Dudley Digges, Thomas Nelson, Joseph Jones, Edmund Randolph, and George Wythe. On May 15, the convention passed the memorable resolutions instructing the Virginia delegates in the Continental Congress to propose a declaration of independence, and directing the appointment of a committee to prepare a Declaration of Rights and a constitution. This committee included ' among others, Archibald Gary, Meriwether Smith, George Mercer, Henry Lee, Robert Carter Nicholas, Patrick Henry, Edmund Randolph, 'Richard Bland, Paul Carrington, Henry Tazewell, and Thomas Ludwell Lee. Strangely enough Patrick Henry wrote, on May 20: "T-jcannot count upon one coadjutor of talents equal to the task.""°° By this statement Henry probably meant that he had no ' strong associate on the democratic side.™' James Madison and George Mason were added to the committee after the appointment, and they furnished Henry with the party support needed. The Bill of Rights was drawn' up in large part, or in its entirety, by Mason, and he also drafted the constitution. Jefferson probably wrote the preamble, and there are those who think he composed the main part of the constitution, but the evidence for this is wanting. " The Bill of Rights and constitution were not accepted without a struggle. The conservative party in the convention advocated an aristocratic model of government drawn up by Carter Braxton.''"^ The articles of the Bill of Rights were' carried one by one in the face of a stubborn opposition. The > story of the conservative resistance to the constitution has never been adequately told. Edmund Randolph, who was in a good position to do 'it, has given us a slight and unsatisfactory account. Concerning the Declara- tion of Rights, Thomas Ludwell Lee wrote on June 1, that, "A number of absurd or unmeaning alterations have been proposed. The words as they stand are approved by a very great majority, and yet, by ' a thousand masterly fetches and stratagems, the business has been so delayed that the first clause stands yet unassented to by the Convention.'""" The core of the conservative opposition, a body of about twenty men, was too small to defeat legislation but large enough to throw obstacles in the way. The first fifteen articles of the Bill of Rights were adopted without many changes. The sixteenth article, that relating to religion, provoked a dis- cussion which the sources very meagrely illuminate. Indeed, the authorship of the article is ' in doubt. Tradition credits Mason with the composition of the whole bill. Madison stated in a letter written in 1827 that he retained a perfect impression that Mason "was' the author of the 'Declaration' as originally drawn, and with very slight variations, adopted."^" The copy of the Bill of Rights in Mason's ' handwriting, which is preserved in the Virginia State Library, contains the fifteenth and sixteenth clauses. Further- 200 flr. w. Henry's Life, Correspondence and Speeches of Patrick Henry, I, 413. =" M. C. Tyler's Patrick Henry, 203. «» Campbell, 646. Tyler, 203. "" M. D. Conway's Edmund Kandolph, 34. '"* W. C. Rives' Life of James Madison, 1, 161. 44 EEPOET OF THE STATE LIBEABIAN. more. Mason, in a letter of October 2, ' 1778, enclosing a copy of the Bill, states that it was "just as it was drawn and presented by me."^" The ' only evidence opposing Mason's claim to the authorship of the Bill is a statement in Edmund Randolph's manuscript history, in which he says that "The fifteenth, recommending an adherence and frequent recurrence to fundamental principles, and the sixteenth, unfettering the exercise of religion, were proposed by Mr. Henry. The latter, coming from a gentleman who was supposed to be a dissenter,' caused an appeal to him, whether it was designed as a prelude to an attack on the established church, and he disclaimed such an object."^" The probability is that Mason wrote the draft of the sixteenth article, and with his liberal views of religion it is hardly likely 'that he heeded any urging; at the same time, if Randolph's statement is worthy of credence, it is evident that Henry gave such a special advocacy to the fifteenth ' and sixteenth articles as to be considered their originator. And indeed Henry had a peculiar interest in urging the claims of the dissenters. His sym- pathies were with them, and, besides, his chief political influence lay in the midland region, where dissent and democratic feeling were strong. ' The article on religion was not adopted without some amendment. As originally written it contained the phrase, "that all men should enjoy the fullest toleration in the exercise of religion.''"' Madison offered an amend- ment which declared "That religion, or the duty we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, being under the direction of reason and con- viction only, not' of violence or compulsion, all men are equally entitled to the full and free exercise of it, according to the dictates of consciejice, and, therefore, that no man or class of men ought, on accSount of religion, to be invested with peculiar emoluments or privileges, nor subjected to any penalties or disabilities unless, under color of' religion, the preservation of equal liberty and the existence of the state be manifestly endangered- """' The article as adopted omitted the word ' "toleration," to which Madison had specifically objected, and affirmed instead "that all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of con- science." It was certainly a broad declaration of religious liberty, even if the exact extent of Its application ' was not recognized. William Wirt , Henry, in writing of it, made the claim that "It is the high honor of Virginia that she was thus the first state in the history of the world to pronounce the decree of absolute divorce between Church and State, and to lay as the chief corner-stone of her fabric of government this precious stone ' of religious liberty, which had been rejected by the builders."""" To this statement, Charles J. Stillg, of Philadelphia, took serious exception. He denied that the sixteenth article of the Bill of Rights was a declaratioil of religious liberty."' But if it is not a declaration of religious liberty, it is a grant of toleration. This, however, the article could hardly be, since the word "toleration" was struck out in order to make' the article convey the idea of religious liberty. =»K. M. Rowland's Life of George Mason, I, 237. "" Conway's Randolph, 30. Henry's Henry, I, 430. ^' W. C. Rives' Life and Times of James Madison, I, 142. "^ W. C. Rives' Life and Times of James Madison, I, 142. '" Papers of the American Historical Association, II, 26. ^"Ibld., Ill, 206. Henry's reply, same volume, p. 213. DEPARTMENT OP ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 45 Madison himself left his commentary upon this point in a manuscript copy of the Bill of Rights. "On the printed paper, here literally copied, is a manuscript variation of this last article making it read" — (Here the amendment proposed by him is incorporated). "This variatiofi," he adds, "is in the handwriting of J. M., and is recollected to have' been brought forward by him with a view, more particularly, to substitute for the idea expressed by the term 'toleration,' an 'absolute and equal right' in all the exercise of religion according to the dictates of conscience. The proposal was moulded into the last article in the Declaration as finally established, from which the term 'toleration' is excluded.'"" Another objection is urged to W. W. Henry's 'thesis to the effect that the Bill of Rights is not a law but a mere declaration of what the law ought' to be when the statute should be subsequently enacted. This state- ment is followed by an account of the religious struggle in Virginia during the Revolution, including the bill for religious freedom and the act 'of 1799.='= As a matter of fact the Bill of Rights ' has always been considered a part of the organic law of Virginia. It had, too, an immediate effect as law. Prosecution for religious causes ceased. Disabilities on account of religion were removed.' Subscription to the declaration against transub- stantiation was no longer required of officers of the government. Anglicans, Roman Catholics, Evangelicals, Jews, and unbelievers were placed en the same civil footing. It may be said, then, that Virginia was ahead of the world at the time when the Bill 'of Rights was adopted, making the first legal statement of the principle of religious liberty. But W. W. Henry is incorrect in declaring that the sixteenth article effected an "absolute divorce of Church and State." Its action upon the relations of church and state was not clearly understood. 'Dissenters appealed to it as breaking this connection, but Anglicans, on the other hand, interpreted it as sanctioning a broad and liberal union. The Bill of Rights and the act of 1776 suspending for a year the payment of Anglican ministers' salaries did away forever with the taxation of 'dissenters for the benefit of the establishment, but the question had not been settled as to the compati- bility of a tax "for the general support of religion with the principle of reli- gious freedom. This doubt as to the interpretation of the sixteenth article 'afforded the conservatives an opportunity to rally and to attempt to secure the union of church and 'state on a broader basis. Another cause contributed to the religious struggle in Virginia after the adoption of the Bill of Rights. Grigsby has pointed out that the limitations of the constitution 'were not invariably regarded by the Assembly. The house of delegates looked upon itself as occupying much the same position as the house of commons, and consequently as wielding wide and somewhat indefinite powers. The house of delegates claimed a competency to legislate on the question of religion, although this power was felt to be hedged about in a rather undefined 'way by the Bill- of Rights. Practical considerations, too, aided in preventing 'a "' Rives, Madison, I, 145. "■ Papers of the American Historical Association, III, 205 et seq. i6 BEPOET OF THE STATE LIBRARIAN. rigid and sweeping interpretation of the sixteenth article. The establishment had always existed as a part of the state; it still continued to he so regarded after the beginning of the Revolution and the adoption of the con- stitution, even if the existence of an established 'church in a democratic republic was something of an anomaly. Some years passed before this fact was admitted by the conservative 'element In the State, but its admission could not be forever postponed. /' During the Revolution state and church continued to have a certain /connection. Anglican clergymen were still regarded, in a sense, as officers / of the state, and as such were alone capable of performing the marriage ceremony. Vestries, too, while bereft of their old power to levy tithes for the support of the establishment, managed 'the poor relief system and assessed taxes for it. The act of 1776, "for exempting the different 'societies of Dissenters from contributing to the support and maintenance of the church as by law estaClished" supplemented the sixteenth ' article of the Bill of Rights, which did not contain any specific reference, as Madison desired, to the question of clerical dues. It was passed in the recession 'of the wave of democratic feel- ing which had moved the Commonwealth in the earlier months of the year. The first Assembly of 'the independent state met on October 7, 1776. Edmund Pendleton, former chairman of the committee of safety and president of the convention, was elected speaker of the house of delegates.^" The committee for religion included Carter Braxton, Richard Lee, Richard Bland, William Fleming, Mann Page, Robert Carter Nicholas, Thomas Jefferson, and other prominent men."' On the same day the first dissenter petition came into the house. It was from the largely Presbyterian county of Prince Edward, and the subscribers pledged their allegiance to the new government.'''" Then the plea ' was made for disestablishment. "The last article of the Bill of Rights we also esteem as the rising Sun of religious Liberty, to relieve us from a long night of ecclesiastic Bondage; and we do most earnestly request and expect that you would go on to complete what is so nobly begun; raise religious as well as civil Liberty to the zenith of Glory, and make Virginia an Asylum for free enquiry, knowledge, and the virtuous of every Denomination. Justice to ourselves and 'posterity, as well as a regard to the honour of the Common-Wealth, makes it our indespensable Duty, in particular to 'intreat. That without Delay, you would pull down all Church Establishments; abolish every Tax upon Conscience and private judgment * * * and define accurately between civil and 'ecclesiastic authority; then leave our Lord Jesus Christ the Honour of being the Sole Law' giver and Governor in his Church." Jefferson, who was a member of nearly all of the important committees, had now begun to launch his great democratic programme, which included religious as well as political, legal, and educational measures. On October 14, 1776, he presented his famous bill "to enable tenants in taille to convey =•■' Journal of II. of D., 1776, p. 3. =>Mournal of the H. of D., 1770, p. 7. 2« Journal, ri-7. The paper is signed by IfiO names, many of them Presbyterian — Johnstons, Porters, Cunnirghams, Grahams, Caldwells, Morrisons, and many others. It tame at a critical iuomcnt. DEPARTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 47 their lands in fee simple,"^" and on the same 'day a bill "for the naturalization of foreigners." Other petitions from the evangelical churches emphasized the Prince Edward 'memorial. On October 16, a petition was presented asking for the ■ending of the establishment, that "this as well as every other yoke may be Broken and that the oppressed may go free that so 'every Religious Denomi- nation being on a Level animosities may cease."^" On October 22, two petitions, written in 'the same form and signed by dissenters in Albemarle, Amherst, and Buckingham, advanced the theory that the Bill of Rights had put an end to the establishment and that any laws 'passed for its maintenance would not be a continuation of an existing institution, but a revival of a' dead ■one. The establishment was not without its defenders. The Methodists, who seldom interfered as a religious ' organization in political affairs, asked, on October 28, for the retention of the state church. "We do all in our power to strengthen and support , the ' said Church — ^And as we conceive that very bad consequences would arise from the abolishment of the establishment — We therefore pray that as the Church of England ever' hath been, so it may still continue to be Established." The significant and enlightening words are added: "Signed in Behalf' of the whole Body of the people commonly called Methodists in Virginia, consisting of near, if not altogether, three thousand members. Geo. Shadford."'"' On November 8, the falling establishment spoke for itself in a moderate and well-written paper.^'"' The clergy argued that they were educated for a special profession and guarantees were given them of a livelihood and that these guarantees should be fulfilled. Besides, an establishment is conducive to the peace and happiness of a state, as the conduct of men is to some extent dependent upon their opinions, and this being so, "it therefore cannot be improper for the legislative Body of a State to consider how 'such opinions as are most consonant to Reason and of the best Efficacy in 'human affairs, may be propogated and supported." Christianity can be best preserved in its purity ' by an established church, as it supports a learned ministry, and the hardships which an establishment might impose on individuals or bodies of men ought not to be considered as weighing against it. The Virginia church had produced good fruits in the century and a half of its existence and had treated dissenters with charity. This mildness had been acknowl- edged "by 'those very dissenters, who now aim at its Ruin, many of whom emigrated from other countries, to settle in this, from motives, we may reasonably suppose, of Interest and Happiness." The petition finally urged that the 'question of continuing the establishment be deferred until the general sentiment of the people had been consulted. A large part of the people favored the establishment. A meeting of Accomac 'people instructed their delegates to oppose the attempt "to sub- vert altogether the present establishment of the Church of England." A =" Journal, p. 12. -" Journal, p. 15. Signod by 127 names, apparently o{ people of several denominations. =" Journal, p. 30. This extract and the succeeding quotations of religious petitions, in part or in full, arc taken from a manuscript collection in the Virginia State Library, known as "Religious Petitions," and arranged in order by years. =="■ Jourr.al, p. 47. MS. "Religious Petitions," 1776. 48 REPOET OF THE STATE LIBEAEIAN. petition of Charles City conservatives, not presented to the Assembly but printed in Purdie's 'Gazette, complained of the inroads of dissenters and their night meetings, which attracted large numbers of slaves, and asked "that the Church may be maintained in all its legal rights, 'and that the sectaries may be Indulged with such a regulated toleration as to this honora- ble House shall seem proper."""" But these last appeals in behalf of the lost cause were overborne by thfe demands of the dissenters. Petitioners from Augusta, on November 9, 'pro- tested against the burden of supporting an establishment while under obliga- tion "to support Gospel Ministers of their own profession." Tuscarora Congregation (Presbyterian), of Berkeley county, argued that laws incom- patible with the Bill of Rights ought to be immediately repealed. Human rights, 'and religious liberty as one of them, should have every ground of security which law could assure them. The establishment was inconsistent with the rights of humanity, civil and religious, and It ought therefore to be "suspended or laid aside." The German congregation in Culpeper asked exemption from parochial taxes on the ground that it supported its share of the expense of the war, while maintaining its own ministers, and yet declared at the same time that it was "not breaking from the established church, as do- the Common Discenders." The most 'noteworthy petition presented at the session was that of the "Dissenters from the Ecclesiastical Establishment, in the Commonwealth of Virginia." It is, like other petitions, an appeal for the overthrow of the establishment.""'' "Your Petitioners — having long groaned under the Burden of an ecclesiastical Establishment, beg leave to move your Honorable House, that this as well as every other yoke may be broken, and that the oppressed may go free." ' These petitions were the outside stimuli of a great struggle. It is almost certain that Jefferson would have attacked the establishment, even if no dissenting petitions had come in, but as they came, they were of 'us© and strengthened the democratic wing of the Assembly. The ' position of the Presbyterian church as the chief dissenting faith was, of course, of great importance. Hanover Presbytery, in its petition to the house, took . the ground that the Declaration of Rights had secured religious ' freedom, and : "Therefore we rely upon this Declaration as well as the justice of our honorable Legislature, to secure us the free exercise of religion according to the dictates of our consciences.'' Dissenters should' no longer be taxed for the benefit of the establishment. Religious liberty should accompany civil liberty. The establishment had injured Virginia by preventing Immigration into it of thousands of dissenters. Christianity needed no aid from the state, as it lived by Its spiritual power, not by external causes. Presbyterians requested no establishment for themselves; they asked that all churches ' might be left to the free exercise of their """ American Archives, 5tli series, III, 1776, Colo. 1092-1093. ""'MS. "Religious Petitions," 1776. This paper is signed by about 10,000 names. The immense manuscript is made up of segments pasted together and in many cases lists ot names are written out by the same hand. No prominent Virginians are included. Most of the names are obscure, although a good many fairly well identilied are included. Probably dissenters ol all denominations are represented, and possibly persons of no persuasions. DEPARTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 49 modes of -worship and to support themselves by voluntary contributions. The only proper objects of civil government were the happiness' and protec- tion of men in this life. The weight of opinion was against the establishment. Jefferson's activity, also,- was very great. He worked constantly in committees and presented bill after bill. Legislation on religion was included in his schedule, and indeed the situation demanded action. The Bill of Rights had made a grant of religious liberty, but the limits of the grant were unknown. Dis- senters and Anglicans gave the charter a very different interpretation, and, in the meantime, owing to the confusion of the times, clergymen were experiencing difficulties in collecting their salaries. Adam Smyth, minister of Botetourt parish, had received only one year's salary in three years and a half, and parish affairs had been entirely neglected for two years.^'" Spence Grayson, of Cameron parish, Loudoun, had received no salary for 1775, as his vestry had failed to appoint a collector, and the county court had not even assigned parties to make out a list of tithables for 1776.^^' Other ministers were in the same situation, although their complaints did not reach the Assembly at this time. The struggle over the establishment was a long and bitter one, beginning in October and lasting until December. On November 9, the religious petitions were referred from the committee for religion to the committee of the whole house,^" and the fight grew warm. Jefferson's chief opponents were Edmund Pendleton and Robert Carter Nicholas, and both were able and patriotic conservatives. Pendleton had always opposed radical action and he was arrayed against Patrick Henry in 1765. He has been charged by some with Toryism, but the accusation is untrue, since Pendleton served as chairman of the committee of safety and president of the conven- tion, the two most important and dangerous ofllces in the Revolutionary government. Nicholas was always a zealous upholder of the Anglican church, although he had acted against the clergy in the "Parsons' Cause." The committee of the whole debated the religious question on November 19, 1776, and finally adopted a set of resolutions providing for the dis- establishment of the English church. "Resolved, As the opinion of this committee, that all and every act or statute, either of the parliament of England or of Great Britain, by whatever title known or distinguished, which renders criminal the maintaining any opinions in matters of religion, forbearing to repair to church, or the exer- cising any mode of worship whatsoever, or which prescribes punishments for the same, ought to be declared henceforth of no validity or force within this Commonwealth. "Resolved, That so much of an act of Assembly made in the 4th year of the reign of Queen Anne, Intituled an act for the effectual suppression of vice, and restraint and punishment of blasphemous, wicked and dissolute persons, as inflicts certain additional penalties on any person or persons convicted a second time of any of the offenses described in the first clause of the said act, ought to be repealed. '2' Journal, p. 51. '" Journal, p. 60. "•Journal, p. 48. 50 REPORT OF THE STATE LIBRARIAN. "Resolved, That so much of the petitions of the several dissenters from the church established by law within this Commonwealth, as desires an exemption from all taxes and contributions whatever towards supporting the said church and the ministers thereof, or towards the support of their respec- tive religious societies in any other way than themselves shall voluntarily agree, is reasonable. "Resolved, That although the maintaining any opinions in matters of religion ought not to be restrained, yet that publlcli assemblies of societies for divine worship ought to be regulated, and that proper provision should be made for continuing the succession of the clergy, and superintending their conduct. "Resolved, That the several acts of Assembly, making provision for the support of the clergy, ought to be repealed, securing to the present incum- bents all arrears of salary, and to the vestries a power of levying for per- formanco of their contracts. "Resolved, That a reservation ought to be made to the use of the said church, in all time coming, of the several tracts of glebe lands, already purchased, the churches and chapels already built for the use of the several parishes, and of all plate belonging to or appropriated to the use of the said church, and all arrears of money or tobacco arising from former assessments; and that there should be reserved to such parishes as have received private donations, for the support of the said church and itfe ministers, the perpetual benefit of such donations." A committee, which included Boiling Starke, Robert Carter Nicholas, Jefferson, George Mason, Henry Tazewell, James Madison, and William Flem- ing, was appointed to draw up a bill in conformity with the resolution."^ The committee, however, was too large for business, and later five members were constituted a quorum. These instructions were more or less in the nature of a compromise. They provided for a large degree of religious liberty, while, at the same time, they would have maintained a certain connection of the state with the establishment. Jefferson has described the debates on religion as "the severest contests in which I have ever been engaged. Our great opponents ;:were Mr. Pendleton and Robert Carter Nicholas; honest men but zealous ichurchmen. The petitions were referred to the Committee of the whole House on the state of the country; and after desperate contests in that committee; almost daily from 11th October to the 5th of December, we pre- vailed so far only as to repeal the laws which rendered criminal the maintenance of any religious opinions, the forbearance of repairing to church, or the exercise of any mode of worship; and further, to exempt dissenters from contributions to the support of the Established Church; and to suspend, only until the next session, levies on the members of that church for the salaries of their own incumbents. For although the majority of our citizens were Dissenters, as has been observed, a majority of the legislature were Churchmen. Among these, however, were some reasonable and liberal men, who enabled us, on some points, to obtain feeble majorities. But our opponents carried, on the general resolutions of the Committee of November ""Journal, p. 03. DEPAETMENT OP ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 51 19, a declaration that religious assemblies ought to he regulated and that provision ought to be made for continuing the succession of the Clergy, and superintending their conduct. And in the bill now passed was inserted an express reservation of the question, whether a general assessment should not be established by law, on every one, to the support of the pastor of his Choice; or whether all should be left to voluntary contributions.'"''" The statement of Caleb Wallace, the Presbyterian deputy to the Assembly, is somewhat at variance with Jefferson's account. "Our Bill of Rights declares that all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion according to the dictates of conscience, etc. Yet in some subsequent Acts it is manifest that our Assembly designed to continue the old Church Establishment. * * * And is it not as bad for our Assembly to violate their own Declaration of Rights, as for the British Parliament to break our Charter? The Baptists circulated a Counter Petition which was signed by above 10,000, chiefly Freeholders. Our Transalpian Presbyterians were much chagrined with what was said and done in a more private way against dissenters; and indeed many Dissenters in every part of the country were unwilling any longer to bear the burden of an establishment. These circumstances induced our Presbytery to take the lead, and prepare a memorial on the subject to be presented to our House at the session last fall. * * The result was the Assembly passed an act exempting dissenters for all time to come from supporting the church of England. * * This you may suppose was very pleasing to some, and as ungrateful to others, and still there are many of a certain church, I would rather say craftsmen, who are hoping that something will yet be done in favour of the Great Goddess Diana, and others are fearing that religious liberty and the right of private judgment will be abridged by our assembly's taking upon them to interfere in a case that lies beyond the limits of civil government. Thus has the affair ended, or rather proceeded, without producing any other consequences than a day or two's debating in the House, and a little news- paper bickering.''^" Wallace's statement that the passage of the bill was effected without any great effort is supported by Edmund Randolph's narrative: "It has been seen that the friends of the Established Church were appre- hensive of the force of their own principles, to which they had assented in the bill of rights, and how they were quieted by the assurances of Mr. Henry. But they were patriots who dreaded nothing so much as a schism among the people, and thought the American principle too pure to be adulterated by religious dissension. They therefore did In truth cast the establishment at the feet of its enemies.'"'' It is possible that Jefferson made mistakes as to details, but it is not likely that he erred in his main impression of the incident, which was vivid after a lapse of many years. The controversy on some points at least was warm, even if it is true, as W. W. Henry has pointed out, that the suspensory bill was not debated in the house for any great length of time. On November 30, the conservatives were more or less successful in the =*> Henry, I, 495. Writings of Thomas Jefferson (Memorial Association), I, 58. !« Historical Magazine, I, 365, quoted by W. W. Henry, I, 493. «« Henry, I, 4flS, from Edmund Kandoiph's MS. Hist, of Va. 52 REPOBT OF THE STATE LIBEARIAN. house and passed a resolution "That the committee appointed to prepare and bring in a hill pursuant to the resolution of the whole House on the petitions of the several dissenters to be discharged therefrom, except as to so much of the third resolution as relates to exempting the several dis- senters from the established church from contributing to its support, so much of the fifth as saves all arrears of salary to incumbents, and empowers vestries to comply with their contracts, excepting also the sixth resolution; and that it be an instruction to the said Committee to receive a clause, or clauses, to make provision for the poor ot the several parishes, to regulate the provision made for the clergy, and to empower the several county courts to appoint some of their members to take lists of tithables where the same hath net been already done.''^'"' Boiling Starke, from the committee, presented the bill ordered "For exempting the different societies of dissenters from contributing to the sup- port and maintenance of the church as by law established, and its ministers, and for other purposes therein mentioned."^" On December 3, it passed the second reading and was committed to the committee of the whole house.™ It was debated on the fourth and fifth and passed.'^'' The senate returned the bill with amendments,'^' which the house accepted on December 9.=" The first article of the acf'^ declared that since "doubts have arisen, and may hereafter arise" whether the acts of Parliament concerning religion are in force or not, every act "which renders criminal the maintaining any opinions in matters of religion, forbearing to repair to church, or the exercising any mode of worship whatsoever," is null and void. This article was an amendment to the original bill, and was probably inserted by the senate. The first eight lines of the second article, the original preamble of the bill, were struck out, and the lines were inserted to read: "And whereas there are within this commonwealth great numbers of dissenters from the church established by law who have been heretofore taxed for its supportf and it is contrary to the principles of reason and justice that any should be compelled to contribute to the maintenance of a church with which their consciences will not permit them to join, and from which they can there- fore receive no benefit." The rest of this clause of the act declaring dissenters exempt from all taxes and levies for the support of the church is as In the original bill. It is probable that the first eight lines were a. substitute for a more radical declaration. The third article provided that vestries should assess all salaries and arrears of salaries upon dissenters as well as Anglicans, up to January 1, 1777; and continue making provision for the poor as in the past. The fourth article reserved the glebes, churches, and chapels and the property in them, together with arrears of money and tobacco, to thft use of the Anglican church and ministers. '-' Journal, p. 76. ==" Journal, p. 76. -'' Journal, p. 80. ™ Journal, p. S3. ™ Journal, p. 89. -^ Journal, p. 90. ■^ Hening, IX, 164. DEPARTMENT OP ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 53 The fifth article declared that the question of levying a general assess- ment for the support of all churches, or of leaving the churches to their own support should be deferred. The original article was extensively amended by suggestion of Robert Carter Nicholas.''^'' The sixth and most important article suspended the levy for support of the Anglican ministers until the end of the next session of the Assembly, that is, until the summer of 1777. This suspension was done on the ground that "by the exemptions allowed dissenters, it may be too burthensome in eome parishes to the members of the established church if they are still compelled to support the clergy by certain fixed salaries, and it is judged hest that this should be done for the present by voluntary contributions.' The seventh article directed the method of taking tithables, and the eighth fixed a penalty for the failure to make the lists. This act, in effect, destroyed the establishment. Many dates have" been given for its end, but it really came on January 1, 1777, when the act suspending the payment of tithes became effective. This was not seen at the time. The act of 1776 was intended as both a final and a temporary measure. It was final in supplementing the work of the Bill of Rights and exempting dissenters from the support of the Anglican Church; temporary in suspending the tithes paid by members of that church. But in freeing almost half of the taxpayers from the burden of the state religion, the state religion was at an end. Nobody could be forced to support it, and an attempt to levy tithes upon Anglicans alone would be to recruit the ranks of dissent In' only one way could an establishment be continued and that was by taxing all citizens for the general support of religion. The attempt to do this, in the conservative reaction at the end of the war, failed, thus prostrating the last hope. The fact remains that no taxes for religious purposes were everpaid in Virginia after January 1, 1777. The overthrow of the establishment had seemed far away in 1774, when the Baptists and Presbyterians had protested against the restrictive Toleration Bill, but two years of revolution had brought great changes. The democratic republic had replaced the royal colony. The conservative element had been forced to make important concessions to progressive feeling. These concessions seemed deplorable sacrifices to such men as Pendleton and Nicholas, who maintained English social and religious ideals. The party they represented was strong and did not suffer definite defeat until 1785, when it became apparent that the progress of democracy could not be checked. Meanwhile, during the war and after, the conservative party^' struggled hard and was able to stave off a conclusion of the religious question. Jefferson's act of 1779 settled nothing. It merely confirmed what the acts of 1776, 1777, and 1778 had practically perpetuated. The act of 1776 freed dissenters from the obligation to support the old establishment, and this much was accepted as final by all parties. The Anglican church as the exclusive religious branch of the government was no more. What remained ™ MS. in Virginia State Library. »' Party terms are not used in a very exact sense. Party organization was not known at this time, and alignments differed on different questions. But tliere was a consistency ot action on certain issues wtidi can only be expressed by the use of descriptive terms, such as "demo- cratic" or "progressive," and "conservative." 54 EEPOET OP THE STATE LIBEABIAN. unsettled was the attitude of the state towards religion in a general sense as the guardian of morality. The vestries did not escape wholesale criticism in the progress of the Revolution. Their self-perpetuating powers irritated the people, and, shorn as they were of half their authority by the act of 1776, they still administered the poor relief. Besides, in some parishes vestrymen were not in full sym- pathy with the Revolution. Consequently, on October 25, 1776, a committee was appointed to prepare a bill "for dissolving the several vestries in this country.'"^' The bill was not introduced, however, as the conservatives rallied to oppose a measure they considered so fatal to themselves as a general dissolution of the vestries and the inauguration of a new system of poor relief. The May Assembly of 1777 continued the suspensory bill. A conserva- tive reaction against the progressive feeling which had passed the Bill of Rights was now under way, and this might have seemed a good time for the revivalof the establishment, if such a thing had been possible. A petition from Cumberland protested strongly against the recent innovations in religion and called for a return to pre-revolutionary conditions. A memorial to the same effect came from Mecklenburg.'"' Nevertheless, on June 2, 1777, the bill "for further suspending the pay- ment of the salaries heretofore given to the clergy of the Church of England" passed the house without amendment.'" It was brief, merely continuing the suspension of salaries until the end of the next session of the Assembly.'" On June 3, the day following, Hanover Presbytery presented another memorial'" It stated that the Presbyterians were firmly attached to the American cause. "In our former memorial we have expressed our hearty approbation of the Declaration of Rights, which has been made and adopted as the basis of the laws and government of this State; and now we take the opportunity of testifying that nothing has inspired' us with greater confidence in our Legislature, than the late act of Assembly declaring that equal liberty, as well religious as civil, 'shall be universally extended to the good people of this country." The Presbytery was satisfied with the action of the Assembly, but feared that a general assessment might come up for discussion, a measure which It considered "contrary to our "principles and interest; and, as we think, subversive of religious liberty." The Assembly, however, did not touch upon a general assessment at this time, owing probably to the difficulties of the times. Other legislation concerning church affairs which was enacted by the Assembly was due to local changes wrought by the war and Revolution. The vestries of Newport, Isle of 'Wight, Christ Church and Stratton Major parishes were dissolved for various reasons.'" Botetourt vestry was dissolved and the new vestry ^^ Journal, p. 27. ™ Journal of House of Delegates, May, 1777, p. 36. '*" Journal, p. 17. =" Honing, IX, 312. '" Foote, I, 326. '"Hening, IX, 317. DEPARTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 55 to be elected was authorized to sell the old glebe and buy another .=" Saint Anne's and Cornwall parishes were dissolved. The fall session of the Assembly simply continued the suspensory act, although conservative petitions were presented as before in support of the establishment. Cumberland protested again at the withdrawal of state Bupport.=*° A petition from Caroline requested the enactment of a general assessment. It approved of the exemption of dissenters from supporting the Church of England, but maintained "that as public worship is a duty we owe, it ought to be enjoined and regulated by the Legislature so as to preserve Public peace, order and decency, without prescribing a Mode or Form of worship to any.'""" A Lunenburg complaint was couched in bitter terms. It indeed charged the dissenters with fraud in getting up the great petition of 1776."' "The undue means taken to overthrow the established church, by imposing upon the credulity of the vulgar, and engaging infants to sign petitions handed about dissenters, have so far succeeded as to cause a dissolution of our usual mode of support." In spite of these appeals the house, on January 6, 1778, continued the suspending act of 1776.°" The May 1778 Assembly continued the suspension,"'" and the October session still further continued it.^"" Unheeded complaints from the conservatives came to the house. Amherst people asked for a general assessment to support religion, which they had seen decline daily for some time owing to the withdrawal of the salaries. The spring session of 1779 was an important one. The Revolution had now been in progress for four years, and for more than two years the salaries of Anglican ministers had been suspended by law. The establish- ment was practically at an end, and the parochial system, continued after the church had received a vital wound, was fast going to pieces. Democratic feeling in many counties was opposed to the old vestries. In other parishes, vestrymen had died or gone away or given up the fight. Vestrymen, de- prived of half their former power, but still officers of government, continued to perform their duties with difficulty in the face of the criticism of dis- senters, who resented this relic of the union of church and state. Many petitions for the dissolution of vestries reached the house. Tillotson parish, Buckingham, complained that there was no vestry and no church in half the county. A request for the dissolution of the vestry of Wicomico parish, Northumberland, on the ground that it had not been elected by the people, showed a growth of democratic feeling in the conservative Northern Neck. Drysdale parish, Caroline, also asked for a dissolution on the same grounds."' People of Fluvanna parish, formerly a part of St. Anne's parish, Albemarle, asked that St. Anne's glebe might be sold and a share given to Fluvanna parish, "to be laid out in the purchase of a glebe or in any manner that 2" Heninff, IX, 318. ='" Journal House of Delegates, Oct. 1777, p. 14. **° Journal, p. 57. "' Journal, p. 75. ^** Journal, p. 105. =*"Hening, IX, 469. =»Hening, IX, 578. '" Journal of House of Delegates, May, 1779, p. 21. 56 REPORT OP THE STATE LIBRARIAN. shall seem just." This was the precursor of a host of like requests with spoliation as the object in view.^'^ The Assembly, under the pressure of petitions, appointed a committee composed of Jefferson, Tazewell, William Lee, John Taylor, Jerman Baker, and Anthony Winston, to bring in a bill for the dissolution of thevestries.==' Baker, on May 28, presented the bill, the terms of which are unknown, but which probably provided for a dissolution of all vestries and the election of a new order of poor officers unconnected with religion. The progressive party, on June 4, took another stride forward, when the house directed a bill "for religious freedom" should be introduced, and appointed John Harvie, George Mason, and Jerman Baker to prepare it.=" By way of compensation, the same committee was also ordered to bring in a bill "for saving the property of the church heretofore by law established."^'' Doubtless Jefferson would have headed this committee but he had ceased to be a member of the house. His great activity had won him an election as the second governor of the commonwealth, succeeding Patrick Henry. He delivered, on June 2, 1779, a short speech of acceptance, in which he uttered the appropriate sentiment: "In a virtuous and free State no rewards can be so pleasing to sensible minds as those which include the approbation of our fellow-citizens."'"" Although no longer in the house, Jefferson maintained his influence. On June 12 John Harvie presented the bill which will be forever associated with Jefferson's name, the "bill for religious freedom,"''" and which he / probably wrote. At the same time, the accompanying "bill for saving the property of the church heretofore by law established" was introduced. On June 14, the second reading of the bill for saving the church property was deferred until the first of August,''" and the third reading of the "bill tor religious freedom" was put off until the same date. With Jefferson out of the house, the fight had gone against the progressives. The next day the committee for religion was directed to prepare a bill "for further suspending the payment of salaries heretofore given to the clergy of the church of England," -''' and the house passed it on June 17."'"' The discussion of the bill "for the dissolution of vestries" was postponed until October 10."°^ The session came to an end with the religious question in exactly the same position as before. The struggle was renewed at the fall session of the Assembly, which began on October 4, 1779. On October 15, petitions from the parishes began to come in. Factions in Drysdale parish indulged in a war of manuscripts; One side asking for the division of the parish because of its size, the other opposing a division on the ground that the crops had failed, the war taxes "' Journal, p. 34. '^^ Journal, p. ' 11. =" Journal, p. 34. ^''^ Journal, p. 34. ^'"Journal, p. 31. ^'' Journal, p. 44. =" Journal, p. 46. ""Journal, p. 48. ""Journal, p. 53. ™ Journal, p. 59. DEPARTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 57 •were high and much expense had heen recently incurred in building two churches and buying a glebe. An Amherst petition called for a redivision of the divided parish; and Antrim parish requested a dissolution of the vestry and a sale of the glebe, as the parish business was neglected and the glebe land worn out.''"' The committee of courts of justice made its regular report on October 16 on suspended laws, recommending among other things that the act for suspending ministers' salaries be continued.'" On October 19, a blow was aimed at a section of the Anglican clergy, when the committee of proposi- tions and grievances, which was considering the bill "concerning non-jurors," was directed to add a clause, "to silence non-juring preachers of all denom- inations, and to deprive of their benefices non-juring clergymen of the €hurch of England. "=" This clause was intended for the benefit of those Anglican preachers who shrunk from renouncing allegiance to the king because of his position as head of the church. The "bin for religious freedom" was again brought into discussion by petitions favoring or opposing it. An Augusta memorial called for its passage.=°= A counter-petition from Culpeper protested against it and re- quested an establishment. Essex presented an ultra-conservative view; "The great confusion and disorder that hath arisen, and likely to continue in this Country on Account of Religion, since the Old Establishment has been interrupted, convinces us of the great and absolute necessity there is for the Legislative Body of this State, to take it under their most serious consideration. And we the Subscribers Freeholders and Inhabitants, of the County of Essex, being much alarmed at the appearance of a Bill en- titled Religious Freedom, consider it very injurious to the Christian Re- ligion, and will be attended with the most baneful consequences if permitted to have an existence in this State, and therefore take this method to acquaint the Honble Assembly of it, and do also direct our Representatives to Vote for the destruction of all such Diabolical Schemes. And further pray, that the Honble Assembly, wou'd adopt such regulations as are hereafter expressed to keep up the Public Worship and Teaching of the Christian Religion, and that no person, being a Protestant nor not professing the Christian Religion, and living in conformity to the same, be permitted to hold or exercise any Civil Authority within this State. A general assess- ment for the support of Religious Worship, wou'd be most agreeable to your Petitioners, that all Licentious and Itinerant Preachers be forbid collecting or Assembling of Negroes and others at unseasonable times. That every Minister of every Christian Denomination have his stated place of Worship. That no Insults, or interruptions be suffered to any Christian Congregation Assembled at proper times for Worship. That no doctrine be permitted to be preached, which may tend to subvert Government or disturb Civil Society. That there be a general Election of Vestry Men in every Parish, and that they may have power to assess or levy upon the Tythables of their respective Parishes, what they may think reasonable =«2 Journal of House ot Delegates, Oct., 1779, p. 9. =™ .Journal, p. 10. 2" Journal, p. li. ""Journal, p. 17. 58 REPORT OF THE STATE LIBRARIAN. for the Support of the Ministers of every Denomination and to be paidi to any profession that the occupiers of such Tythes may think proper." Petitions from Lunenburg,-"" presented on November 3, and from Am- herst on NovembBr 10,'" supported the assessment plan.-" The conservatives were ascendant for the time. The "bill for religious freedom" -was not brought up for its third reading, but, on the contrary, James Henry, of Accomac, on October 25, 1779, presented the conservative demands in his bill "concerning religion.""' This bill passed the first read- ing and was ordered for a second. It marks the great effort of the con- servative party to re-establish ecclesiasticism in the State by means of a general assessment and a regulation of religion. The plan was substantially the same as that brought forward in 1784. The bill reads: "For the encouragement of Religion and virtue, and for removing all restraints on the mind in its inquiries after truth, Be it enacted by the General Assembly, that all persons and Religious Societies who acknowledge that there is one God, and a future State of rewards and punishments, and that God ought to be publickly worshiped, shall be freely tolerated. "The Christian Religion shall in all times coming be deemed and held to be the established Religion of this Commonwealth; and all Denominations of Christians demeaning themselves peaceably and faithfully, shall enjoy equal privileges, civil and Religious. "To accomplish this desirable purpose without injury to the property of those So61eties of Christians already incorporated by Law for the pur- pose of Religious Worship, and to put it fully into the power of every other Society of Christians, either already formed or to be hereafter formed to obtain the like incorporation, Be it further enacted, that the respective Societies of the Church of England already formed in this Commonwealth, shall be continued Corporate, and hold the Religious property now in their possession for ever. "Whenever free male Persons not under twenty one Years of Age, professing the Christian Religion, shall agree to unite themselves in a Society for the purpose of Religious Worship, they shall be constituted a Church, and esteemed and regarded in Law as of the established Religion of this Commonwealth, and on their petition to the General Assembly shall be entitled to be incorporated and shall enjoy equal Privileges with any other Society of Christians, and all that associate with them for the purpose of Religious Worship, shall be esteemed as belonging to the Society so called. "Every Society so formed shall give themselves a name or denomina- tion by which they shall be called and known in Law. And it is further enacted, that previous to the establishment and incorporation of the re- spective Societies of every denomination as aforesaid, and in order to entitle them thereto, each Society so petitioning shall agree to and subscribe in a Book the following five Articles, without which no agreement or Union of men upon pretence of Religious Worship shall entitle them to be incor- =" .Journal, p. 37. ="■ .Journal, p. 50. ™. James, p. 94. '"•MS. Va. State Library. Ckjllection of Bills, 1779. DEPARTMENT OP AKCHIVES AND HISTORY. 59 porated and esteemed as a Church of the Established Religion of this Com- monwealth. "First, That there is one Eternal God and a future State of Rewarda and punishments. "Secondly, That God is publickly to be "Worshiped. "Thirdly, That the Christian Religion is the true Religion. "Fourthly, That the Holy Scriptures of the old and new Testament are of divine inspiration, and are the only rule of Faith. "Fifthly, That it is the duty of every Man, when thereunto called by those who Govern, to bear witness to truth. "And that the People may forever enjoy the right of electing their own Teachers, Pastors, or Clergy; and at the same time that the State may have Security for the due discharge of the Pastoral office by those who shall be admitted to be Clergymen, Teachers, or Pastors, no person shall officiate as minister of any established Church who shall not have been chosen by a majority of the Society to which he shall be minister, or by the persons appointed by the said majority to choose and procure a minister for them, nor until the Minister so chosen shall have made and subscribed the following declaration, over and above the aforesaid five articles, to b& made in some Court of Record in this Commonwealth, viz: "That he is determined by God's Grace out of the Holy Scriptures to Instruct the people committed to his charge, and to teach nothing (aa required of necessity to eternal Salvation) but that which he shall be persuaded may be concluded and proved from the Scriptures; that he will use both publick and private admonitions with prudence and discretion, as need shall require, and occasion shall be given; that he will be diligent in prayers and in reading the Holy Scriptures, and in such studies as lead to the knowledge of the same; that he will be diligent to frame and fashion himself and his Family according to the doctrines of Christ, and to make both himself and them, as much as in him lieth, wholesome examples and patterns to the flock of Christ; and that he will maintain and set forward, as much as he can, peace and love among all people, and especially among those that are or shall be committed to his charge. "No person shall disturb or molest any Religious Assembly nor shall use any reproachful, reviling or abusive language against any Church under the penalty of a second offence to be deemed a breach of good behaviour. [This clause was struck out.] "No person whatsoever shall speak anything In their Religious Assem- blies disrespectfully or Seditiously of the Government of this State. "And that permanent encouragement may be given for providing a sufficient number of ministers and teachers to be procured and continued to every part of this Commonwealth, "Be it further enacted, that the sum of pounds of Tobacco, or such rate in Money as shall be yearly settled for each County by the Court thereof, according to the Current price, shall be paid annually for each Tithable by the person enlisting the same, for and towards the Support of Religious Teachers and places of Worship in manner following: Within Months after the passing of this Act every freeholder, House- keeper, & person possessing Tithables, shall enroll his or her name with the Clerk of the County of which he or she shall be an Inhabitant, at the 60 REPORT OF THE STATE LIBRARIAN. same time expressing to the Support of wliat Society or denomination of Christian he or she would choose to contribute; which inrollment shall he "binding upon each such person, until he or she shall in like manner cause his or her name to be inroUed in any other Society. "The Clerk of each County Court shall annually before the day of deliver to the Trustees of each Religious Society, a list of the several names inrolled in his ofnce as members of such Society; with the number of Tithables belonging to each, according to the List taken and returned that Year. Whereupon such Trustees respectively shall meet and determine how the Assessment aforesaid upon such Tithables shall be laid out for the support of their teacher or places of worship, according to the true intent of this Act; and having entered such disposition in a Book to "be kept for that purpose, shall deliver a Copy thereof to the Sheriff, together with the List of Tithables so received from the Clerk, and such Sheriff shall on or before the day of then next following, Collect, Levy or Distrain for the amount of such Assessment, which he shall ac- count for and pay to the several persons to whom he shall have been directed to pay it by the Trustees of each respective Society, deducting Insolvents and Six per Centum for Collection. "If any Person shall fail to enlist his Tithables, the Sheriff shall never- theless Collect or distrain for the Assessment aforesaid in like manner as if he or she had done so, and pay the same to that Religious Society of which ho or she shall be inrolled as a member. And should any person liable to this Assessment fail to procure himself to be inrolled according to this Act, or to make his Election at the time of paying his assessment to the Sheriff, the Sheriff shall nevertheless levy in like manner the Assess- ment aforesaid for his or her Tithables, and lay an Account upon Oath of all Tobacco or Monies so Collected before his Court in the months of annually; or if no Court be then held, at the next Court which shall be Tield thereafter, who shall apportion the same between the several Religious Societies in the parish In which such person or persons shall reside, accord- ing to the amount of the Assessment for each, to be paid to the Order of such Trustees for the purposes of this Act. And every Sheriff shall annually before the day of enter into Bond, with sufficient Security to be approved by the County Court for the faithful Collection and dis- bursement of all Tobacco or Monies received in consequence of this Act; and the Trustees of any Religious Society, or any Creditor to whom money may by them be Ordered to be paid, on motion in the County Court, having given him ten days previous notice thereof, may have Judgment against any delinquent Sheriff and his Securities, his or their Executors or administrators, for what shall appear to be due from him to such Society or Creditor, or may bring suit on the Bond given him by the Sheriff; and the Bond shall not be discharged by any Judgment had thereon, but shall remain as a Security against him, and may be put in suit as often as any breach shall happen, until the whole penalty shall have been Levied. "And if any Society or Church so established, shall refuse to appoint ■some person to receive their Quota of the Assessment from the Sheriff, the money shall remain in his hands for one Year; and if then no person properly appointed shall apply for such money, the same shall by the County Court DEPARTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTOET. 61 he equally apportioned between the several Religious Societies in the parish in which such person or persons shall reside, in proportion to the amount of the Assessment for each Society. "The Clerks of the respetcive County Courts shall be entitled to the same fees for making out and delivering the Lists of Tithables required by this Act as they are entitled to for like Services in other cases. "And be it farther enacted, that so much of an Act of Assembly passed In the Year 1748, intituled "An Act for the Support of the Clergy, and for the Regular Collecting and paying the parish Levies," as respects the Levy- ing, Collecting and payment of the Salaries of the Clergy of the Church of England which has been suspended by several Acts of the General Assem- bly; and also so much of an Act intituled "ministers to be inducted," as requires Ordination by a Bishop in England, be and the same are hereby Repealed." Such a plan for a state church, founded on a basis as broad as orthodox religion, had much to commend it to a people accustomed to an establish- ment. On October 26, the bill "concerning religion" was read a second time, but failed of a third reading and was committed for a future hearing.^" On November 5, the house again debated it, but without result. The next day Samuel Goode, of Mecklenburg, presented a bill "for the dissolution of vestries." The crisis came on November 15, when the bill "concerning religion" was again debated. The progressive party was successful and further consideration of the bill was postponed until March 1.™ The demo- crats followed up their victory by ordering a bill repealing the act providing for the support of the Anglican clergy, and George Mason, French Strother and Beverley Randolph were assigned the task of preparing it.™ At the same time, doubtless as a concession to conservative feeling, a bill "for saving and securing the property of the church heretofore by law estab- lished" was also ordered, and George Mason, James Henry and Thomas Nelson were the committee appointed for drawing it up. On November 18, George Mason presented the bill "to repeal so much of the act for the support of the clergy, and for the regular collecting and paying the parish levies."^" .The bill reads: "To remove from the good People of this Commonwealth the Fear of being compelled to contribute to the Support or Maintenance of the former established Church. And that the Members of the said Church may no longer relye upon the Expectation of any re-establishment thereof, & be thereby prevented from adopting proper Measures among themselves, for the Support and Maintenance of their own Religion and Ministers, Be it enacted by the General Assembly, that so much of the Act entitled an Act for the Support of the Clergy, and for the regular collecting and paying the parish Levys and of all and every other Act or Acts providing Salaries for the Ministers and authorizing the Vestrys to levy the same, shall be and the same is hereby repealed, provided nevertheless that the Vestries of the several parishes, where the same hath not been already done, may, and they are hereby authorized and required, """Journal, p. 24. ""Journal, p. 56. -'^Journal, p. 57. 2" Journal, p. 61. MS. Va. State Library. 62 EEPORT OP THE STATE LIBRARIAN. at such time as they shall appoint, to levy and assess on all Tlthahles within their respective parishes, all such Salaries and Arrears of Salaries as were due to the Ministers or Incumbents of their parishes for Services to the first day of January in the year one thousand seven hundred and seventy seven, moreover to make such Assessments on all Tithahles as will enable the said Vestries to comply with their legal Engagements entered into before the same Day; and lastly to continue such future provision for the poor in their respective parishes, as they have hitherto by Law been accus- tomed to make, and levy the same in the Manner heretofore directed by Law; any thing in this Act to the Contrary, or seeming to the Contrary notwithstanding.''^" The bill was read the second time on November 19.=" On November 26, George Mason, introduced, according to order, the bill "lor saving the property of the church heretofore by law established to the members of thp said church for ever.""' Thus the conservatives hoped to save something from the wreck. The bill states: "Be it enacted by the General Assembly that the several Tracts of Glebe Land with the Appurte- nances, the Cliurches and Chapels, the Books, Vestments, plate and orna- ments, all ariears of money and Tobacco, and all property real and personal of private Donation, which on the seventh Day of October in the year one thousand seve.: hundred and seventy-six were vested in any persons what- ever for the use of the English Church until then established by Law, or were due or contracted for bona fide, on that Day, or which since that time have legally become so vested, due or contracted for, shall be saved in all time to come to the Members of the said English Church, by whatsoever Denomination they shall henceforth call themselves, who shall be resident within the several parishes wherein the same shall be; those of each parish to have the separate and legal property of the said Articles belonging to their respective parishes, and to apply them from year to year, or from time to time, by themselves, or by Agents to be appointed by themselves, as they shall hereafter agree, for and towards the Support of their Ministry, and the Exercise of their religious worship; and that no future change in the form of this church Government, ordination of their Ministry, or Rituals of Worship, shall take away or affect the Benefit of this saving. "And whereas it may be some considerable time before the members of the said English Church will have established the Forms of their future church Government, and in the mean time there may be among the present Incumbents of their parishes, some who are disaffected to the Common- wealth, or immoral characters, or inattentive to the Duties of their Function, who ought to be immediately removed. Be it therefore enacted, that when- ever in any parish, any twenty members thereof of the said English Church shall in writing signed by themselves exhibit any Charge or complaint against the Incumbent, and require of either church warden of the said Parish, or If there be no Church warden, then of any vestryman to call a meeting of the parishioners of the English Church, such Church warden or ■vestryman is hereby impowered and required, within ten Days after the Requisition delivered, to furnish the Incumbent with a true copy of the *T3 Preamble was struck out. ""Journal, p. 63. "»MS. Va. State Library. DEPARTMENT OP ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 63 Charge or Complaint against bim, and by advertisement to be set up at «very church within such parish to call a meeting of the said parishioners at the place where the vestrys have most usually been held; which meeting shall not be within less than three nor more than eight weeks, after the Requisition delivered: the said parishioners, or so many as will, having assembled at the time and place appointed, the warden or vestryman who called the meeting, or if he be not present, then the eldest Vestryman present, or such other person who shall be appointed for that purpose by the said meeting, shall preside in the same, and shall propose the Questions moved. In which every parishioner present of the said English Church qualified by Law to vote for Vestrymen, shall have a Right to vote ; and it shall be lawful for the said Meeting, and of all other meetings to be called in like manner, by a majority of Voices, of not less than two thirds of those present and voting, to deprive any Incumbent now holding any such Glebe; and such Vote of Deprivation, attested by the president of the meeting, being delivered to the Sherif of the County, the said Sherif shall proceed to remove the Incumbent from his possession of the said Glebe, and the same to retain and deliver to such other person as shall be authorised to the possession thereof by Vote of any meeting of the parishioners called and qualified as before directed. "The surviving Vestrymen in every parish shall have authority to carry into Execution all Contracts legally and bona fide made by themselves, or their predecessors, before the first Day of January in the Year one thousand seven hundred and seventy seven, and for that purpose may sue or be sued, as might have been heretofore when Vestries were full. "Where any parish hath been altered in its Bounds, the Inhabitants thereof shall nevertheless remain liable for their proportionable part of all money or Tobacco due, and all contracts legally made before such Division or alteration, to be apportioned to them, and levied by the Vestry of the respec- tive parish into which they are incorporated by such Division or Alteration. And whereas Vestries, although authorised by Law to levy on their parish- ioners so much only as was sufficient to answer the legal Demands on this parish actually existing, yet frequently levied more; so that there remained on their Hands a Depositumi to be applied to the future uses of their respective parishes, and it may have happened that in some Instances, such Depositums were on Hand on the said first Day of January in the year one thousand seven hundred and seventy seven, after all legal Demands satisfied which were then existing, or which by this Act are made legal, and • also Debts may have been owing to some parishes. Be it therefore enacted that such Depositums and Debts shall be applied to the maintenance of the poor of such parish, where it hath not already been done, in Ease of the poor rates to be levied for that purpose in future: and in the Case of any such parish since then divided or altered, or lying in different Counties, such Basement shall be divided and apportioned in the same way as Burthens, in a like case, are herein before directed to be apportioned: But where any parish has no Glebe, such Depositums and Debts, or the proportion thereof belonging to such parish, shall be applied towards purchasing a Glebe, the property and application of which shall be in the same persons, and the the same uses, and according to the same Rules, as wou'd have been by the 64 REPORT OF THE STATE LIBRARIAN. former part of this Act, had the said Glebe been purchased before the passing hereof." This bill was presented by Mason and is in his handwriting, so it may be taken as his composition and as his method of solving the religious ques- tion. 'The bill distinctly looked towards a complete separation of church and state, but at a distant date. In the meantime, a somewhat democratic form of government was to be foisted upon the old establishment; parishioners might dismiss their ministers at will. The property rights of the Anglican church were respected. The plan is such a one as a democrat of moderate feelings would devise for a transition from a union of church and state to a complete separation without any jar. * The bill "for saving the property of the church heretofore by law established" was read a second time the next day'"' and came up again on December 11, when it was defeated by postponement to March 3 following. At the same time the repeal bill, reported by Tazewell and amended by th& elision of the preamble, was read the third time,"' and on December 13, it passed."' Jefferson states in his autobiography that "in the bill now passed, (that of 1776) was inserted an express reservation of the question. Whether a general assessment should not be established by law, on every one, ■ to the support of the pastor of his choice; or whether all should be left to voluntary contributions; and on this question, debated at every session, from '76 to- '79, (some of our dissenting allies, having now secured their particular object, going over to the advocates of a general assessment,) we could only obtain a suspension from session to session until '79, when the question against a general assessment was finally carried, and the establishment of the Anglican church entirely put down.'""" Jefferson is rather inaccurate in this account. As a matter of fact, the- democrats gained a considerable victory in defeating James Henry's general assessment bill, but the assessment question was by no means ended with this incident. It revived, and with far more strength than ever, in the sum- mer of 1784. The importance of the repeal bill, too, has been somewhat exaggerated. The salaries of Anglican ministers had been suspended by six successive acts, and there was little likelihood of their ever being paid again. Still the act was useful in making permanent in law a policy which before had been limited to temporary legislation, however final in reality that legislation might have been. ' The condition of the former establishment was now deplorable. Not only were vestries neglecting their duties, or dying out in many parishes; the ministers, deprived of their salaries and harassed for a living, were leaving their charges. It would have been much better for the Anglican church if separation of church and state had been completed in 1776. It would then have been free to organize itself in accordance with the new con- ditions. As the case stood, the establishment was still bound to the state while deriving no benefit from that connection. Its polity was still supposed ""Journal, p. 72. "' Jourral, p. 85. "" Journal, p. 87. ""Jefferson's Writings (Memorial Asso.), I, 58. DEPARTMENT OP ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 65 to be subject to legislative supervision. This condition of semi-anarcliy, ia connection with the distractions of the war, practically broke up the old- establishment. ' Ministers grew more and more difficult to retain in the parishes. Precarious subscriptions were raised in some counties. Devereaux Jarratt said in later years: "I never had a scrip or subscription in my favour, nor did I ask for any such thing * * * j called upon him to point out, if he could, a single person, who, from the year 1776 to 1786, ever gave me a six-pence for these services * * * when a subscription was set on foot, in 1785 and 1786, I asked him, if this was done by any solicitation from me? And when about sixty or seventy people had subscribed, and the collection of the money was put into his hand, whether he did not meet with so little encouragement in the business, that, through despair, he gave up all further attempts, after having collected thirty or forty shillings for a whole year?""" Parishes indeed began to advertise for ministers. The vestry of Drys- dale parish, Caroline, promised that one would "meet with a very good glebe and a genteel subscription for his support therein.""' The vestry of North- farnham parish, Richmond, desired an "Orthodox Divine, of a good moral character, immediately, and if he , reads and preaches well, he will give the greater satisfaction. The parsonage or glebe house of brick, with four rooms below, and three above and all necessary offices have been lately put in good repair, a garden newly paled in, and the usual enclosures of cornfields, orchard and pasture under good fences, and agreeable forest situation about a mile from the church * * « and it is not doubted that a handsome subscription will be made for the support of a minister who shall be approved of."^ A minister was'wanted at St. Paul's parish, Hanover.™' The rector of Lunenburg parish, Richmond, advertised the rent of the glebe.^" The minister of St. Anne's parish, Albemarle, com- plained that in spite of the fact that he had espoused the patriot cause the vestry had never made the levy for his salary for 1774; the sale of the glebe as ordered by the Legislature would deprive him of his home. Many other parishes wanted ministers and others of the remaining ministers were in much the same sad condition as the incumbent of St. Anne's. The year 1780 was a critical one in the history of the war, and internal legislation in Virginia did not receive much attention. Dissenters were protesting at the survivals of the establishment, which were of so little use to the community and yet to which the conservatives clung obstinately. The Baptists sometime before had complained of the narrow marriage law and they continued their complaints through the latter years of the war. Protests from all sides attested the inefficiency of the vestries in the management of the poor. The Presbytery of Hanover, at its meeting in April, 1780, adopted a memorial requesting the Legislature "to abstain from interfering in the government of the church."^' M'Life of Devereaux Jarratt, 187. Mass. Historical Society Proceedings, 42, 341. 2" Dixon & Hunter's Virginia Gazette, April 10, 1779. == Virginia Gazette, June 19, 1779. MS Virginia Gazette, O'tober 30, 1779. "* Virginia Gazette, June 26, 1779. »5 Foote, I, 332 (Tliis paper has not been preserved). 66 KEPOKT OP THE STATE LIBBAEIAN. ' The marriage law and the vestries were discussed at the May, 1780, session of the Assembly. The justices of the new Rockbridge county com- plained that for want of a vestry no provision could be made for the poor and asked for authority to provide for poor relief."" This request indicates the natural tendency of civil officers to assume the duties of the obsolete vestries. Petitions from Amelia and the Baptist church attacked the exclusive marriage law. "The Memorial of the Baptists by their Ministers Elders and Delegates (at an Association held at Wallers Meeting-House in Spottsylvania County the second Saturday in May 1780) humbly sheweth; that we your Memorialist, heartily approve of the Act that passed in your last Session which partly removes the Vestige of oppression; which 'till then hung over our heads, respecting the Ministers sallary Law: and as we hope to enjoy equal, Eeligious, as well as civil Liberty: while we demean our Selves as good Citizens, and peaceable Subjects of this Commonwealth — we your Memorilists therefore desire that an Act may pass, Declareing Mariges Solemnized by Dissenting Ministers, either by License, or publication; Valid in Law, for until such an Act shall take place; the Validity of Dis- senters rights to officiate in the Same, is much disputed: as the following instances makes manifest of Ministers exacting the exhorbetant Sum of Sixty Pounds for that Service from two very poor people; and two Barrels of Corn from a Baptist, who applyed to his Minister who refused because the Licence was directed to a Minister of the Church of England — ^Your Memorialists haveing great confidence in the present Honourable Assembly's principals for equal Liberty commit our cause now under God's protection into your consideration hopeing for redress and your Memorialists as in duty bound shall ever pray. ^ Signed by Order and in behalf of the Association JOHN WALLER MODERATOR JOSEPH ANTHONY CLERK." George Carrington, chairman of the committee for religion, on June 27, presented a bill "for the dissolution of the vestries and appointing overseers of the poor."^' On June 29, the alternative and less comprehensive bill "for dissolving several vestries and electing overseers of the poor"^™ was intro- duced. This bill was read the third time and passed on July 6, 1780.™ The senate also passed it with amendments, which the house accepted. On July 4, George Carrington presented the bill "declaring what shall be a lawful marriage." '"' It was put through the house rapidly, passing on July 7,="' but the conservative senate failed to pass it, and the question as to the legality of marriages performed by non-Anglican ministers remained open. The act "for dissolving several vestries and electing overseers of the poor'' completed the separation of church and state in certain of the western counties — Rockbridge, Botetourt, Montgomery, Washington, Greenbrier, "' Journal House of Delegates, May, 1780, p. 16. 2" Journal, p. 64. -" Journal, p. 67. ='" Journal, p. 78. '"Journal, p. 73. =" Journal, p. 79. DEPARTMENT OP AKCHIVES AND HISTOEY. 67 Augusta and Frederick.'''^ Vestries had long been an anachronism in those ■counties, and the appointment of civil poor officers in their place was a matter of necessity. The act directed the sheriffs ot the counties to proceed to the election of five freeholders in each county, to serve five years; they were constituted a corporation and invested with the powers of the former vestrymen and churchwardens. Elections were to be conducted as in the case of the vestrymen. At the fall session of 1780, petitions concerning vestries came in again in large numbers, and the marriage bill, which had failed to pass in the spring, was revived. The passions engendered by the war were curiously illustrated in the McRea case, which attracted much attention in the Southside. McRea was a non-juring clergyman of Cumberland, and perhaps others of his kind were Involved with him. Petitions came in from Buckingham and Prince Edward asking that all non-juring ministers be silenced and deprived of their bene- fices and that the learned professions should be closed to men refusing to take the oat of alligiance to Virginia. A counter-petition from Cumberland accused the Presbyterians of organizing an agitation for the purpose of driv- ing Christopher McRea, a non-juror, from his glebe and breaking up the church of England in that region. The incident well illustrates the prejudice created amongst the English-hating population against the old establishment by a few ministers too scrupulous or too unwise to identify themselves with the republic. Petitions came in from St. Stephen's, Stratton Major and Drysdale parishes asking for a consolidation of the three into two parishes.-" St. Margaret's parish requested a dissolution of its vestry; the vestry of Notto- way parish, Amelia, asked for power to remove the minister, Thomas Wilkinson, from the glebe. This clergyman, since the suppression of Ms salary, had refused to perform any of his clerical offices, such as baptizing or marrying, without charging exhorbitant fees, and he had besides destroyed all the wood on the glebe. The bill "declaring what shall be a lawful marriage" was passed. The Baptist church had again asked for an adequate marriage law in a petition presented on November 8, 1780™ "The Memorial of the Baptist Association met at Sandy Creek in Charlotte * * * humbly sheweth that a due Regard to the Liberty and Rights of the People is of the highest Importance to the Welfare of the State — That this heaven born Freedom, which belongs equally to every good citizen, is the Palladium which the Legislature is par- ticularly intrusted with the Guardianship of, and on which the Safety and Happiness of the State depend. Your Memorialists therefore look upon every Law or Usage now existing among us, which does not accord with that Republican Spirit which breathes in our Constitution and Bill of Rights, to be extremely pernicious and detrimental, and that such Law or Usage should immediately be abolished. "As Religious Oppression, or the interfering with the Rights of Con- science, which God has made accountable to none but himself, is of all =MHening, X, 288. SM Journal of the House of Delegates, Oot., 1780, p. 48. =< Journal, p. 11. 68 EEPORT OP THE STATE LIBEAKIAN. Oppression the most inhuman and insupportable, and as Partiality to any Religious Denomination is its genuine Offspring, your Memorialists have with Grief observed that Religious Liberty has not made a single Advance, in this Commonwealth, without some Opposition— They have been much surprized to hear it said of Things indisputably right and necessary 'It is not now a proper Time to proceed to such Affairs, let us first think of defending ourselves &c.,' when there cannot, surely, be a more suitable Time to allow ourselves the Blessings of Liberty, which we have in our own Power, than when contending with those who endeavour to tyrannize over us. "As the Completion of Religious Liberty is what, as a Religious Com- munity, your Memorialists are particularly interested in, they would humbly call the Attention of your Honourable House to a few Particulars, viz. First the Vestry-Law which disqualifies any person to officiate who will not sub- scribe to be conformable to the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of England; by which Means Dissenters are not only precluded, but also not represented, they not having a free voice, whose Property is nevertheless subject to be taxed by the Vestry, and whose Poor are provided for at the Discretion of those who may possibly be under the Influence of Party- Motives — And what renders the said Law a Greater Grievance is, that in some Parishes, so much Time has elapsed since an Election, that there is scarcely one who was originally chosen by the People, the Vacancies having been filled up by the remaining Vestrymen — Secondly, the Solemnization of Marriage, concerning which it is insinuated by some, and taken for granted by others that to render it legal it must be performed by a Church Clergyman, according to the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England; conformably to which Sentiment Marriage-Licenses are usually worded, and directed. — Now, if this should in Reality be the Case, your Memorialists conceive that the ill Consequences resulting from thence, which are too obvious to need mentioning, render it absolutely necessary for the Legisla- ture to endeavour their Removal — ^This is an Affair of so tender a Nature, and of such Importance, that after the Restoration, one of the first Matters which the British Parliament proceeded to, vsas the Confirmation of the Marriages solemnized according to the Mode in Use during the Interregnum, and the Protectorship of Cromwell — And the Propriety of such a Measure, in Virginia, evidently appears from the vast Numbers of Dissenters, who having Objections against the Form and Manner prescribed in the Book of Common Prayer proceed to marry otherwise; and also that in many Places, especially over the Ridge there are no Church Parsons to officiate — On the other Hand if Marriages otherwise solemnized are equally valid, a Declara- tory Act to that Purport, appears to your Memorialists to be highly expedient, because they can see no Reason why any of the free Inhabitants of this State, should be terrified by a mero Mormo from their just Rights and Privileges; or censured by others on Suspicion of their acting contrary to Law — To these Considerations your Memorialists would just beg leave to add that those who claim this Province of officiating at Marriage-Solemnities as their sole Right, undertake at the same Time to be the sole Judges of what- they are to receive for the' same. "Your Memorialists humbly hope that your Honourable House will take effectual Measures to redress these Grievances, in such a Way as may mani- DEPARTMENT OP ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 69 test an equal Regard to all the good People of this Commonwealth, how- ever, diversyfied by Appellations or Religious Sentiments — and that as it is your Glory to represent a free People, you will he as forward to remove every just Cause of Offence, as your Constituents are to complain of them — and in particular that you will consign to Oblivion all the Relicks of Religious Oppression, and make a public Sacrifice of Partiality at the glorious Altar of Freedom. Signed by order SAML. HARRIS, Modr. JOHN WILLIAMS, Clk.""« The ably written request was complied with. George Carrington, on December 2, 1780, presented a bill from the committee for religion "declaring what shall be a lawful marriage.''^"" This bill, amended in several par- ticulars, was read the third time on December 15,™' and passed on December 18. The act, wrung from a reluctant Assembly by the insistence of the Baptists, should have been passed long before. The lack "of a definite legal statement of marriage was an encouragement to immorality and could in no way benefit the state. The 'act passed declared that any minister of a Christian society might perform the marriage ceremony, provided that the ceremony was accompanied by a license or a publication of banns, -except in the case of Quakers or Menonists, for whom a somewhat modified profvi- sion was -made. Judges of courts were authorized to issue licenses to four ministers of each sect in a county to perform the marriage ceremony within the bounds of that county alone. Ministers might demand a fee -of twenty- five pounds of tobacco and no more.^" The year 1781 was taken up largely with military affairs, as the State was invaded, and the religious question was not debated in the Assembly. In 1782, with peace in sight, the old problems were revived. The mar- riage act of 1780 had not entirely satisfied the Baptists, and on June 3, 1782, they petitioned the Assembly for a repeal of the clause which limited non- Anglican ministers to performing the marriage ceremony in only one county, and for a change in the poor 'relief system: "Your Memorialists firmly believe as they are taught in the Declaration of Rights 'that no Man or set of Men are entituled to exclusive or separate Emoluments of Privileges from the Community, but in Consideration of public Services.' That they cannot see that for a Person to call himself a Church-Man and to conform to the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England, is doing the State any publick Service — ^That it Is evident that Dissenters are not on an equal Footing with Churchmen as they are subject to taxation without a fair and Equal Representation by the Vestry Law, and their Ministers so ignom- iniously distinguished from Episcopal Ministers in the latter Clause of the Act declaring what shall be a lawfull Marriage. Your Memorialists there- fore hope that your wisdom and Justice will suggest to you the Expediency of removing the Ground of Animosity, which will remain while Preference ™= James. ="' Journal, p. 35. =" Journal, p. 63. »"Hening, X, 361. 70 REPORT OP THE STATE LIBRARIAN. is given, or peculiar Favours are granted in our Laws to any particular Reli- gious Denomination. ELIJAH CRAia MODERATOR REUBEN FORD, ak." On the same day some of the frontiersmen of Louisville petitioned for a legalizing of marriages performed by civil magistrates, because of the scarcity of ministers in the western country. The Assembly, however, took no action on these petitions. It dissolved the vestries of Shenandoah, Henry, Monongalia, Ohio, and Berkeley counties and ordered the election of overseers of the poor for these counties, thus practically completing the separation of church and state in the west.°°° The Vestries of Antrim and Westover parishes were dissolved and new elections ordered. They had not been held, however, when the Assembly re-assembled in the fall,''" and the fact shows how relatively unimportant the vestries had become. The glebe of Antrim parish had not been sold according to the terms of the act, as the minister declared that he regarded it as his free- hold and would return to it upon proper encouragement. The marriage law was considered at the fall session of 1782. The com- mittee for religion, which now included Richard Henry Lee and Charles Mynn Thruston, on November 22, 1782, reported upon a petition protesting agsWnst the limitations still Imposed upon non-Anglican ministers by the marriage act of 1780. It recommended the repeal of the clause limiting ministers to marry in only one county, but reported adversely to changing that which confined the grant of licenses to marry to a certain number of preachers in each county.^" No further action was taken at this session. By the summer of 1783, the country had begun to settle down from the war and to consider in earnest the many financial and political problems to be solved. The Assembly at its May session displayed a reviving interest in religion by electing a chaplain, Benjamin Blagrove, and directing him "to compose a form of prayer, to be approved by the committee for religion, fit and proper to be used in this House; and that it be a standing order, that divine service be performed every day, by using the said form or any other as the House may from time to time direct."™' Many vexatious parish questions came before the house. Lynhaven parish. Princess Anne, petitioned for a dissolution of the vestry.™ Elizabeth River parish, Norfolk, asked for authority to hold a lottery to raise money to build a church and glebe-house, which had been destroyed. The parish had suffered greatly in the war, and its number of tithables had fallen from 1800 to 500. Lower Nansemond parish asked for relief in a typical case arising from the depreciation of the currency. It had loaned out £ 600 of "'Hening, XX, 82. ""Journal of House of Delegates, Oct., 1782, p. 16. '"Journal, p. 31. ""Journal of House of Delegates, May, 1783, p. 7. Edmund Randolph convmented humor- ously on this procedure in a letter to Madison of May 15, 1783: "Religion, which has hitherto been treated with little respect by the Assembly, was yesterday incorporated into their proceed-- ings. Mr. Hay moved for a chaplain, and that a prayer should be composed adapted to all persuasions. The prayer has not been reported, though several trials, I am told, have been made." ""Journal, p. 11. DEPARTMENT OF AECHIVES AND HISTORY. 71 poor funds and the debtors tended in payment paper worth one-half the amount. Similar petitions came to the fall session. Adam Smyth, the .former minister of Botetourt parish, asked for the enforcement of the act securing him his arrears of salary. No list of tithables had heen furnished the sheriff, and besides the people considered themselves oppressed by the levy and refused to pay it. People of Botetourt parish requested a sale of the glebe, and also an apportionment of a part of Smyth's salary to Green- brier county, which had once formed a part of Botetourt parish. Fairfax parish desired a biennial election of vestrymen by freeholders, as the exist- ing vestry contained only one member who had been elected.'" The Baptists renewed their appeals for a completely liberalized mar- riage act at the May 1783 session. A petition to this effect was presented on May 30.='= On the following day a memorial was presented from the Baptists of Amelia requesting that all denominations be placed upon the same footing, without any distinctions whatever. "We do not ask this, Gentlemen, as a Favour which you have a Privilege either to grant or withhold at Pleasure, but as what we have a just Claim to as Freemen of the Commonwealth, and we trust it is your Glory to consider yourselves not as the Masters but servants of the People whom you have the Honour to represent, and that you will not fail in any Instance, to recognize the Natural Rights of all your Constituents.""' " The committee for religion reported favorably upon this petition" and William Cabell presented a bill "to amend the several acts concerning vestries,'' on June 9."™ On June 19, Cabell introduced the measure desired by Baptists, the bill "to amend the several acts concerning marriages," which was read once and then referred to the next Assembly."" The vestry bill suffered the same fate by a vote of 52 to 28."'° Most of the progressives. Including George Nicholas, Archibald Stuart, William Cabell, French Strother and Isaac Zane, voted for the bill. A modified marriage bill "to authorize and confirm marriages in certain cases," was passed.™ This act permitted the licensing of laymen in the sparsely-settled western districts to marry people according to the forms of their respective churches, at the same time requiring a marriage license or the publication of banns. It allowed fees of three shillings for certificates of publication and of six shillings for marrying. Marriages performed by magistrates prior to the act and other marriages not authorized by law were legalized.™ Notwithstanding this act, the Baptists again complained at the October, 1783, session of the Assembly of the restrictions remaining upon non- Anglican ministers in marrying, and of taxation by vestries. Besides, the penalty for failure to make returns of marriages was excessive and the '"Journal House of Delegates, Oct., 1783, p. 28. '"Journal House of Delegates, May, 1783, p. 26. ""Journal, p. 29. "" Journal, p. 30. ""Journal, p. 43. «» Journal, p. 67. "" Journal, p. 78. "I Journal, p. 81. «» Hening, XI, 281. 72 EEPORT OF THE STATE LIBEARIAN. publication of banns was undesirable. 'But requests for a complete separa- tion of church and state were countered by the inevitable conservative reaction against the liberalism of the war which now began to make itself felt. The Revolution had produced a modified religious liberty, ^but it had not settled the relations of church and state in a broad sense. The plan for a general system of taxation for the support of all Christian denomina- tions, v/hich had been temporarily defeated by the failure of James Henry's bill in 1779, now revived. On November 8, 1783, a petition was presented to the house from Lunenburg asking for a general assessment.'" "The hum- ble petition and remonstrance of all Sects and Denominations of Christians within the State: sheweth That soon after the Declaration of Indepency the General Assembly, with a view to the promotion of religious Liberty and free Toleration, thought proper, by Act to suspend ■ the collection and payment of the salaries formerly allowed by Law to Inducted ministers of the Gospel: whereby all the Citizens of the state became emancipated & free from contributions to any Church revenue. "That from that period we have with pain and regrett, seen the propo- gation of the Gospel die away in many parts of the country; and its diligent and faithful Ministers neglected; through a want of that Holy zeal In their adherents as Christians to support their respective Churches with the Dignitfy becoming their profession: and public Virtue as Citizens, to propo- gate and cherish the Sacred test of truth; as a necessary and indespensable branch of Civil Government. "That the indifference and impiety of those who are careless of their own Salvation, and equally deaf and negligent to all religions; must greatly encrease the burdens of the people of God who would wish to support the Cause of Christianity, (as they have done that of freedom) even with their last mite. "That Confined to Christianity alone; we wish for the establishment of a free and universal Toleration Subject to the Constitution; we would have no Sect or Denomination of Christians privileged to encroach upon the rights of another. For the accomplishment of these desirable purposes we wish to see the reform'd Christian religion supported and maintained by a General and equal contribution of the whole State upon the most equitable footing that is possible to place It. "We therefore pray that you our Representatives in General Assembly taking the matter into Consideration will adopt such Mode as your Wisdom shall suggest to raise Just, equitable and adequate Contribution for the sup- port of the Christian Churches, to be collected or distrained for as other Taxes, but with Liberty nevertheless reserved to each of the Contributera respectively, at the time he gives in his list, or otherwise becomes liable to the payment of such Contribution; to direct for whose benefit it is Con- tributed. The framers of this Petition and remonstrance; will not presume to decend further into particulars: Intending only by this to tell you their Complaints & wishes and to trust your wisdom and Justice for the address.""" '"Journal House of Delfgates, Oct, 1783, p. 12. "" Signed by John Ragsdale, D. A. Stokes, Joshua Ragsdale, Anthony Street, The. Buford, N. Hobson, Wm. Hardy, Edwd. Jordan, Robt. Dixon, James Hamlett, Mich'l McKie, William DEPARTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 73 George Carrington reported resolutions from the committee for religion declaring that since the Baptist petitions concerning vestries and marriages were reasonable the vestries should be dissolved and overseers of the poor appointed in each parish in the State, and the marriage law amended; also that the Lunenburg petition for a general assessment should be referred to the next Assembly."' The first two resolutions passed; the third was tabled. A petition, however, from Amherst, also asking for a general assessment, was presented on November 27, and the report of the committee on the Lunenburg petition was referred to the committee of the whole."" Carrington, on December 16, presented bills "for the election of over- seers of the poor," and "to amend the several acts concerning marriages.""' The bills were read twice, but conservative feeling then referred them to the limbo of the following March."' The Assembly of 1783, like so many others, adjourned without having taken any important action on religious questions, although those questions were even more In the public eye than formerly. A new era was left to decide whether the Revolution should be pushed to its logical conclusion and the separation of church and state completed, or whether the progress of liberalism should be checked by such a state connection with religion as yet remained possible. lysdale, Fran. DeGraffenreid, Josiah Whitlock, Benja. Estis, Thos. Edwards, Joseph Smith, Daniel McKie, Will. Glenn, Drury Murrell, Elisha "Winn, John Hix, Isaac Brigandine, Joel Far^son, Wm. Stokes, Tha. Winn, Jur., John Gooch, Gab. Fowlkes, Peter Lamkin, Rawleigh Carter, Bowler Hall, Sterling Wallington, Thos. Mitchell, Ambrose Jeter, Stith Boiling, Charles Bailey, Hthry Buford, Josiah Jackson, Asa Davis, L. Royal, John Jennings, William Gooch, John Winn, Gabl. Fowlke Sen, John L. Crutz, Robert Grutz, Ste. Cocke, Richd. Jones, Junr., Wm. Cross Craddock, Ileh. Bland, Christn. Ford, Edmd. Booker, Jnr., Jan Wills, Abram Green, Jnr., Isham Clay, Jas. Jenkins, John Jones, Edwd. Munford, Wm. Grecnhill. '"Journal, p. 19. "' Journal, p. 37. "' Journal, p. 66. "•Journal, p. 73. CHAPTER V Assessment and Incorporation Edmund Randolph, In a letter to Jefferson of May 15, 1784, stated that the following questions would occupy the debates of the spring session of the Assembly: "1. a general assessment; 2. restitution of British property; 3. payment of British debts; 4. the introduction of a stamp-act, under a less offensive name; 5. the making of Norfolk, the only port of entry and clearance.""" He added: "The first has Henry for its patron in private; but. whether he will hazard himself in public cannot be yet ascertained.'' It will be observed that Randolph put the assessment scheme first in the list of legislative topics. It was, in fact, the most important of the subjects agitating the public mind, although it had Just begun to come Into prominence in the early part of 1784. . The year was a memorable one in the annals of Virginia, but the only subject of controversy now well remembered at all is the religious struggle. The question of the payment of British debts according to the terms of the treaty of 1783 engrossed the attention of the people in general, because It is said that the Virginia planters were in debt to Englishmen to the amount of ten millions, and the country was very poor. The two chief parties in the liouse of delegates, the followings of Richard Henry Lee and Patrick Henry, opposed each other more openly and strongly in this than in any other issue; the Lee party favored the payment of the debts and Henry successfully fought off the settlement. Madison, with a thoughtful eye for the future of Virginia in commerce, succeeded in putting through a bill restricting foreign trade to a few ports. Resolutions were passed favor- ing a prompter and better method of complying with the requisitions of Congress, and in this legislation the hand of Madison is also evident.'"" Commissioners were appointed to treat with Maryland concerning a State boundary line through the Potomac river. Madison advocated a plan for the revision of the constitution and gained Richard Henry Lee's support, but Patrick Henry killed the plan. Henry was the leading advocate of a general assessment for the support of religion. He and Richard Henry Lee sunk their differences and agreed on this issue. Lee was one of the chief promoters of the assessment. "He, with Mr. Henry, wcie advocates of a proposition to make every man con- tribute something to the support of the Christian religion, as the only sure basis of public and private morality. Both these gentlemen were utterly opposed, however, to any established State religion. On the contrary, they were strenuous advocates of an entire freedom of religious belief.'"'' '" Conway'8 Edmund Randolph, p. 66. «="K8ves's Madison, I, 063. DEPARTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 75 The reasons for Henry's advocacy of assessment are not altogether- known. The sentiment which led to a demand for it grew out of the con- servative reaction from the Revolution, which began to be felt at the close- of the war. The war had brought about a great deal of license and radical changes of opinion, such as are inevitable in all revolutionary struggles, especially in those involving the principle of liberty. These effects must have .been obvious, for a variety of witnesses testified to the decline of morals and religion. "Justice and virtue are the vital principles of republican government," George Mason wrote to Henry in 1783, "but among us a depravity of manners and morals prevails, to the destruction of all confidence between man and man." =^ Presbyterians and Baptists gave evidence as to- the low state of religion. Dr. William Hill said: "The demoralizing effects of the war left religion and the church in a most deplorable condition." ^^ Semple states that "The war, though very propitious to the liberty of the Baptists, had an opposite effect upon the life of religion among them." '^ And again: "With some few exceptions, the declension was general through- out the State." ™ Richard Henry Lee said that "Refiners may weave reason Into as fine a web as they please, but the experience of all times shows religion to be the guardian of morals; and he must be a very inattentive observer in our country who does not see that avarice is accomplishing the- destruction of religion for want of legal obligation to contribute something to its support."'-" The petitions asking for a religious assessment asserted in strong terms that religion and morals had declined during the war. This opinion was most strongly held by the real conservatives, the old advocates of the establishment, who had been overborne by the weight of events, but who had never become reconciled to the separation of church and state and who welcomed the return of peace as affording an opportunity to once more place religion under governmental protection. Religion, indeed, seemed to be menaced. The Anglican church had nearly gone to wreck during the war; the few ministers who continued to serve existed precariously on the voluntary contributions of their diminished congregations. The Presbyterian ministers lived in the same way, and their congregations were poor. The Baptists and Methodists received little or no hire for preaching and eked out a living by following secular employments. An unprecedented freedom of opinion prevailed in all classes and a certain slackness of responsibility. The church appeared to lack the support of that organized social sentiment which is its strongest bulwark; men feared that religion would not be able to oppose successfully the inroads of skepticism and license of manners without some authoritative aid, and this the Legislature seemed best able to afford. The spirit of pessimism was particularly pronounced in those who had been brought up in the regulated life of colonial Virginia and who looked back upon this life, as ideal. The social progress of the Revolu- tion was distasteful to them; they had aimed merely at separation from ^ Lee's Life of Richard Henry Lee, I, 237. ^^ Rowland's Mason, II, 44. s=3 Foote, I, 412. "* Semple, p. 55. === Semple, p. 66, and Henry's Henry, II, 203. '" Lee's Richard Henry Lee, II, 51. 76 REPORT OF THE STATE LIBRARIAN. England and they had little sympathy with the democratic opinions and practices which had gained strength during the war. The conservatives had behind them the weight of wealth, intelligence, and influence, but their cause tended to decline and they knew it. Conse- quently, the accession of Patrick Henry was a great gain to them, for Henry was the most popular leader in the State; he, more than any other man, stood for the Revolution, and he was a power with the masses. Patrick Henry had begun life as an agitator, but, as a matter of fact, he was a conservative at bottom. Time and experience had cooled the revolutionary ardor of his youth, and in his maturity he fought on the defensive, laboring to preserve the State from the encroachments of the Federal constitution and society from the insidious effects of unrestrained liberalism.""' Henry took the lead of the conservative forces in the beginning of 1784, and soon made himself felt. A quorum was obtained In the house of dele- gates on May 12, 1784, and John Tyler was elected speaker."'" The com- mittee for religion, appointed the next day, was a strong one, including Wilson Miles Gary, the future governor, James Madison, William Norvell, a colleague of Jefferson's in the convention of 1776, Joseph Jones, of King George, French Strother, William White, Garland Anderson, John Ward, Nathaniel Wilkinson, Samuel Sherwin, the veteran George Wray, William Walker and Edmund Byne.'^° The committee was further strengthened by the addition of James Hubard, of Gloucester, John Berryman, of Lancaster, Patrick Henry,™ Mann Page, of Spotsylvania, Thomas Matthews, of Norfolk, John Bowyer, of Rockbridge, Joseph Prentis, of York, Thomas Towles, of Spotsylvania, Adam Craig, John Breckinridge, Archibald Stuai't, and finally Richard Henry Lee, William Grayson, the future senator, and Alexander White. The eastern and conservative element predominated in the com- mittee, but it included such leaders of the opposition as Madison, Wilson Miles Gary, French Strother, and Alexander White. The advocates of assessment presented a petition three days after the beginning of the session, on May 15, 1784. This memorial, which came from Warwick, declared "that it is essentially necessary for the good government of all free States that some legislative attention shou'd be paid to religious duties" and called for a general assessment upon tithables. No plan of distribution was given.""' At the same time the evangelical elements in the State made them- "" Henry's Henry II, 211. "^ Journal House of Delegates, May, 1784, p. 4. S2U Journal, p. 5. "'"Journal, p. 8. "' Journal," p. 8. The names are : John Dunn, Francis Lee, Thomas 0. Amory, William A'mory, John Jones, James Lewelling, Miles Wills, Richd. Mcintosh, Josiah Massenburg, Thos. Mallicote, Wm. Liveley, Mattw. Gibbs, Thos. 0. Amory, Jr., Cole Diggs, David Jons,, James Crandol, Rkhd. Cary, Mattw. Wills, John Picket, Johnson Drewry, Thos. Allen, Wra. Mallicote, Wm. Allan, Robert Brown, Jon Crandol, Aaron Barney, John Drewry, William Gibbs, Junr., Dixon Brown, Gimima V. Noblin, Matthew Noblin, Thomas Pope, Will Jones, Everard Downing, Henry Scasbrooke, Thomas Jordan, Ohr. Haynes, Humphr. Harwood, Saml. Bland, Miles Cary, Saml. Thoa., John Houghton, Morey Mallicote, John Needham, Jams. Dunn, John Bumham, James Drewry, John R. Jones, Moses Watson, Wm. Gibbs, Peter Pierce, William Harwood, Richard Noblin, Edwd. Charles, Richd. Harrison, Thos. Charles, Thorns. B. Dunn, Samuel 0. Dunn, Richd. Smith, Wm. Langhorne, Wm. Morrow. Several names are repeated. DEPARTMENT OP ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 77 selves felt. On May 26, 1784, the Baptist association presented a memorial reiterating the complaint that the Baptist appeals had received no attention from the Legislature. "And with respect to the Vestry laws," the paper con- tinues, "which confines the election to the members of one society, and subjects the property of the whole to their taxation, and even the ministers of other denominations appointed by them to possession their neighbours' lands — ^We therefore hope that as the Episcopal church, to which they belong, have equal right as a church, without your honourable house, to appoint elders, and call them by what names they please, that law will be considered as unequal and be repealed." And with respect to the marriage laws, "We hope you will regulate the Ministers of every Denomination perfectly by one law, and to have neither publication of Banns, nor returning to the Court Clerks." =» The Presbyterian clergy of Virginia introduced a memorial on the same day."' It was a clearly expressed, a vigorous and even radical document, written by John Blair Smith,'" and breathing the spirit of the Revolution. The Presbyterians declared that they expected liberty and equality in the eyes of the government. "An entire and everlasting freedom from every species of ecclesiastical domination, a full and permanent security of the Inalienable rights of conscience and private judgment, and an equal share of the protection and favor of government to all denominations of Christians were particular objects of our expectation." Members of other churches had the right to expect that distinctions, preferences and emoluments from the hand of the State should be abolished. It was consequently with dissatisfac- tion that Presbyterians viewed the failure of the Legislature to fulfill these expectations. Religious rights had been left to common law and the caprices of the Legislature instead of being inserted in the constitution, with the result that the Episcopal church had continued to style itself the established church until 1778, and the title had never been formally disclaimed. Other inequalities existed. The estate of the old established church, worth several hundred thousand pounds, was appropriated to the Episcopal church, although this property was the result of the taxation of the members of all denominations. The Episcopal church was incorporated. The Episcopal clergy enjoyed the right of performing the marriage ceremony anywhere in the State, while other ministers were restricted to their particular counties. Vestries, required by law to be composed of Episcopalians, levied taxes for poor relief upon the members of all denominations. The Presbyterian clergy, therefore, in the interests of justice' and contentment, called for the remedy of these grievances. "You will remove every real ground of contention and allay every jealous commotion on the score of religion." Neither the Baptist nor the Presbyterian petition mentioned the subject of assessment, but the agitation was just beginning in May, 1784, and it had hardly gained sufficient prominence as yet to call for an expression of opinion from those opposed to it. On May 27th Wilson Miles Cary delivered the resolution of the com- mittee for religion on the Warwick petition, that "it is the Opinion of this committee, That the petition of sundry Inhabitants of the county of Warwick '"Journal, p. 20. •» Journal, p. 21, and Fobte, I, 333. '"Foote, I, 332. 78 HEPOET OF THE STATE LIBRARIAN. whose names are thereunto subscribed praying that an act may pass for a general Assessment upon all tithables of this Commonwealth, for the support of the christian religion within the same, is reasonable." The resolution was referred to the committee of the whole.""^ The religious struggle fairly began on June 4, 1784, when the Protestant Episcopal church asked for an act of incorporation by way of adjusting its condition to the existing state of affairs. The Episcopal convention met in Richmond on June 3, 1784, with Samuel Shield as president, and drew up the memorial."^" The paper states that the Revolution had rendered altera- tions necessary in the government and liturgy of the church, as the legal requirements as to forms of worship and qualifications of ministers had become obsolete after the separation from England. The church asked for the repeal of that part of the act concerning induction which required that ■"No minister be admitted to officiate in any parish church except such as present ordination from some English bishop and shall subscribe to orders ■of the Church of England." And that "being by the late happy revolution, loosed from those obligations which bound us to our former spiritual as well as temporal rulers, we wish to be indulged also with the liberty of Introducing into our church a system of order and government suited to our xeligious principles^ — or directing a form of public worship hereafter to be used in the Episcopal Churches within this Commonwealth and of regulating all the spiritual concerns of that Church.'' An act v/as asked which would give the Episcopal clergy the power to regulate the spiritual concerns of the church, alter forms, institute canons and make rules for its government. An important feature was the clause dealing with vestries. The peti- tion requested that the direction of the poor should be taken from the vestries, and thus, in fact, that the last feature of the old establishment should be done aAvay with. The reason given for the request was that in the election of vestrymen dissenters voted in large numbers, which resulted in the choice of dissenters as vestrymen. The Episcopal church, in its re- organization, wished the vestries to be elected by and from the Episcopal body exclusively. An act was desired which should secure the perpetual title of the Episcopal church in the glebes and other property of the old establishment. As a conclusion, the memorial recommended to the assembly the "patronage and care of the Christian religion, which, from the modera,tion and gentle- ness of its principles, must merit the encouragement of all public bodies instituted for the government of mankind." This clause was not a direct request for an assessment, but It leaned that way. Perhaps the Episcopalians thought that they had asked enough in presenting their comprehensive scheme for reorganization. It will be noted that eight years after 1776 the Assembly was still sup- posed to have the power to fix church doctrines and regulations, for the petition expressly requested the grant of this power to the clergy. The ecclesiastical laws existing prior to the Revolution were still supposed to be in force, in spite of the Bill of Rights, which might reasonably be interpreted as leaving to each sect the regulation of its own doctrine and affairs. The "'"Journal, p. 23. '"Journal, p. 36. DEPARTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 79 :"act to induct ministers" must be revised before new ministers could legally officiate, altbougb they were no longer supported by the state and although no state religion existed. The force of custom prevailed over the spirit of the laws brought into existence by the Revolution. And, as a matter of fact, in the retention of the glebes, in the taxing power wielded by the vestry, and in the marriage laws survivals of the old connection between church and state certainly existed, although they hardly warranted the belief that the state still possessed the right to legislate concerning the creed and government of the church. On the same day of the presentation of the Episcopal memorial, a petition came in from Powhatan county asking for a legal contribution for the sup- port of ministers." The committee for religion proceeded to digest these various petitions and on June 8th Gary appeared before the house with the committee's recommendations.'^* These were framed in a spirit of general accommodation. The Episcopal memorial praying for a change in the laws ""which restrain the said church from the like power of self-government, as is enjoyed by all other religious societies; and which prescribe the mode ■of appointing vestries and the qualifications of vestrymen may be changed, and that the churches, glebe lands, donations and all property belonging to the said church may forever be secured to them is reasonable." Further, that such part of the Presbyterian and Baptist memorials "as prays that the laws regulating the celebration of marriage and relating to the constitution of vestries may be altered, and that in general all legal •distinctions in favor of any particular religious society may be abolished is reasonable." And lastly, that such part of the Episcopal and Presbyterian memorials "as relates to an incorporation of their societies is reasonable, and that a like incorporation ought to be extended to all other religious societies within this Commonwealth which may apply for the same." The house ordered the committee for religion to prepare bills pursuant to these resolutions. Th-e committee had outlined its report on a broad plan, but it had gone too far in coupling the Episcopal and Presbyterian churches as asking for incorporation. The spirit of the two bodies was very different, and, as a matter of fact, the Presbyterians had not asked for the right of incorpora- tion, but had complained that the right was confined solely to the Episcopal ■church. "The episcopal church is actually incorporated, and known in law as a body, so that it can receive and possess property for ecclesiatical pur- poses, without trouble or risk in securing it, while other Christian com- munities are obliged to trust to the precarious fidelity of trustees chosen for the purpose." ''' The chief question before the committee for religion was the incor- poration of the Episcopal church, and circumstances made it a momen- tous one. The Protestant Episcopal church in America, the successor of the ■church of England, had framed a liturgy and canons which dispensed with the king of England and was now about to launch out upon its new career. The Anglican branch in Virginia wished to become connected formally with ==' Journal, p. 36. '=» Journal, p. 43. ss»May 1784 Memorial. 80 REPORT OF THE STATE LIBRARIAN. the new communion. It was now time for the Legislature to abandon Its make-shift policy and recognize the position of the Episcopal church as the successor to the properties of the established church. An act was needed, or was st-pposed to be needed, to secure the property to the church and to make it independent of legislative control. Joseph Jones, of King George, presented a bill from the committee for religion, on June 16th, "for incorporating the Protestant Episcopal Church and for other purposes," drawn up along the lines of the Episcopal petition. The bill met with no opposition apparently and was read the first and second times and ordered to be committed to the committee of the whole for the following day."" It was not debated the next day, but on June 25th, shortly before adjournment, the committee of the whole considered it. After a discussion of some length, Thomas Matthews reported to the house that the committee of the whole had not had time to go through the bill and asked for another consideration."' The house, however, shelved the bill until "the second Monday in November next," and the incorporation question came up no more in the spring session. Assessment, too, was allowed to drop; the sentiment for it had not yet been worked up sufficiently. Madison wrote that "The friends of the measure did not chuse to try their strength in the House." "" According to the resolution of the committee for religion, a bill "to amend the several acts concerning marriages" was brought into the house. The bill was draughted by a special committee composed of William Ronald, William White, Isaac Zane, Thomas Towles and Madison."" It was intro- duced on June 23, 1784,°" and was read the second time the next day and passed on June 28th by a vote of 50 to 30.°" This vote was without special significance. Wilson Gary Nicholas, Archibald Stuart, French Strother, John Breckinridge were among the prominent men who voted in the affirmative. Against the bill were Garter Henry Harrison, George Wray, Spencer Roane, William Pickett, William Grayson, Isaac Zane, Henry Tazewell and Alex- ander White. Spencer Roane, William Pickett, Isaac Zane and Alexander White were afterwards strong advocates of the progressive religious policy, opposed to assessment and incorporation. The senate did not pass the bill and the regulation of marriages waited over till the next session. The incorporation bill, bo far from meeting with the approval of the Presbyterians, had awakened their fears. The bill was altered before it became a law in the fall session of 1784. In its earlier form it granted extensive powers to the clergy and perhaps justified the Presbyterian criti- cism that the Assembly aimed at making them a separate caste. "The Episcopal Clergy," Madison wrote, "introduced a notable project for re- establishing their independence of the laity. The foundation of it was that the whole body should be legally incorporated, invested with the present property of the Church, made capable of acquiring indefinitely — empowered to make canons & bye-laws not contrary to the laws of the land, and incum- "» Journal, p. 79. "' Journal, p. 79. '"Madison's Works (Hunt) II, 68. '" Journal, p. 71. '** Journal, p. 76. "•Journal, p. 81. DEPARTMENT OP ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 81 bents when once chosen by vestries, to be immovable otherwise than by sentence of the Convocation. Extraordinary as such a project was, it waS' preserved from a dishonorable death by the talents of Mr. Henry.""" John Blair Smith, the president of Hampden-Sidney college and the leader of Presbyterian thought, wrote to Madison, on June. 21, 1784, asking him to lend his influence against incorporation. He especially resented the demands made by the Episcopal clergy in their petition. "I should expect that such an Idea of spiritual domination, would be resented & opposed by every adherent to that Society (Episcopal). I should suppose that every one of them who felt the spirit of his station would regard the attempt, as an indefensible remains of Star-chamber tyranny & resist it accordingly. How- ever, if the Gentlemen of that communion are so used to Dictators, that they either have not observed the Jure divino pretension to dominion over them, or have no inclination or spirit to oppose it, perhaps it may be thought proper for one so little interested in the matter as myself to be silent. * * * But that part of the petition, which concerns me most as well as every non- Episcopalian in the State, is, where these clergymen pray for an act of the Assembly to Enable them to regulate all the spiritual concerns of that Church &c. This is an express attempt to draw the State into an illicit con- nection & commerce with them, which is already the ground of that uneasi- ness which at present prevails thro' a great part of the State. According to the spirit of that prayer, the Legislature is to consider itself as the head of that Party, & consequently they as members are to be fostered with par- ticular care. * * * i am sorry that Christian ministers should virtually declare their Church a mere political machine, which the State may regulate at present; but I shall be surprized if the Assembly shall assume the im- proper office. * * * It would be to give leave to do what every class of Citizens has a natural. Inalienable right to do without any such leave; every religious society in the State possesses full power to regulate their internal police; without depending upon the Assembly for leave to do so. Surely we are not again to be irritated & harrassed with the heavy weight of a State Church, that is to sit as sovereign over the rest, by depending in a more particular manner for direction in spirituals, upon that antiquated fountain head of inftuences, the secular power."=^' This was the chief ground of the Presbyterian objection to the incorpora- tion. Smith outlined the point clearly; he protested against the act granting the Anglican clergy the privilege of making the canons and regulations of their church as an assertion of the Assembly's right to legislate concerning religion. Madison held the same views of incorporation; it is Impossible to know whether he was influenced in this by Smith or not. In the summer of 1784, however, Madison was of the minority. The incorporation bill met with the general approval of the conservatives, and the assessment plan gained ground rapidly under the patronage of Patrick Henry. The great orator's advocacy of assessment went a long way towards reconciling to it many people of moderate opinions, who might otherwise have considered the movement somewhat reactionary. The power of the conservatives lay chiefly in their ascendency in the '"Madison's Worlis, IT, 59. Hunt. '"Letters to Sladison, Vol. XIII, MS., Library of Congress, and Madison Calendar, p. 624. 82 REPORT OF THE STATE LIBRAEIAN. Assembly, which, according to the system of equal representation of counties, contained a majority of members from the east. But prominent men from all sections sat In the house of delegates, making it probably the most talented legislative body in America. The fall session of 1784 was note- worthy both in the personnel of the members and In the importance of the questions under consideration. Few members of the house were obscure; many who are not remem- bered now were men of prominence in their own times, when the limits of a single state were considered broad enough for a generous ambition. Some of the delegates became known in both State and Federal politics, as "Wilson Gary Nicholas, a son of Robert Carter Nicholas, who represented Albemarle in the house, and sat for that county, together with his greater brother, George Nicholas, in the convention of 1788. He was elected to the United States senate In 1799 and became governor of Virginia in 1814. Nicholas was one of Jefferson's most devoted and useful lieutenants. Archibald Stuart, of Augusta, was another Jeffersonian democrat, a judge and a man of great infiuencc in the west. Andrew Moore, of Rockbridge, was likewise a demo- cra-t and an advocate of religious freedom in the broadest sense. He became a member of the house of representatives and United States senator. Isaac Vanmetcr, of Hardy, Isaac Zane, of Shenandoah, and Zachariah Johnston, of Augusta, were three westerners who strongly opposed the conservative propaganda. Alexander White, of Frederick, was the leading westerner in the house. He was a chairman of a committee and took an important part In the discussions of the house for several terms. John Breckinridge, of Montgomery, was an able lawyer and later became attorney-general of the United States. Spencer Roane was one of the leading easterners of liberal ideas. His reputation was confined to the State, but it was a great one. He became chief judge of the Virginia court of appeals and ranks as one of Virginia's greatest jurists. John Taylor, of Caroline, the doctrinaire, grew to be the leading democrat in the State politics of a decade later. He entered the United States senate and was a senator of great powers and of uncompromising republican virtue. William Grayson left a deep impression upon his State, although he died shortly after becoming a United States senator and in his prime. Amcng the conservative leaders in the church controversy, the names of John Tyler, Benjamin Harrison, Miles King, George Wray, John Marshall, John Scarsborough Wills, Joseph Jones, of King George, Richard Lee, Francis Corbin, Littleton Byre, Patrick Henry, Carter Henry Harrison, Henry Taze- well, V( illiam Norvell, and Willis Riddick are best remembered. John Tyler was the speaker of the house. Benjamin Harrison had become well known as a member of the continental congress, governor and speaker of the house of delegates — few men in the State held a higher position. Joseph Jones, of King George, served In the continental congress for several years as an influential member. Miles King and Willis Riddick were members of the house of delegates for many terms. Francis Corbin and Littleton Eyre enjoyed the reputation of men with great futures before them. The veteran Henry Tazewell had sat In the house of burgesses and the Revolutionary conventions, and he was destined to become the chief judge of the court of appeals and United States senator. Carter Henry Harrison was a typical DEPA3TMENT OF AECHIVES AND HISTORY. 83 conservative country gentleman w!io once outraged John Blair Smith hy declaring that "The greatest curse which heaven sent at any time into this Country, was sending Dissenters into it.""* John Scarsborough Wills and Richard Lee sat in the house for many sessions. Patrick Henry was the great strength of the party, for he was at once a power in the house and in the State at large. His reputation for patriotism was above question, and his character and popularity gained a respectful consideration for any measure he advocated. Comment upon John Marshall, the chief justice, is unnecessary. His conservative temper and his taste for strong government led him to espouse the policy of a state support of religion. James Madison, Henry's antagonist in the religious controversy, was destined to become the controlling figure in the Assembly. He had grown quickly into a position of influence and honor by his industrious and suc- cessful career in the continental congress. Madison was young, and his mind looked to the future. He had seasoned a thorough education with liberal ideas, and he had entered the service of the State as a democratic leader and the advocate of progressive policies. Even in 1784 he held a high place in politics. Washington and Jefferson overshadowed him with their greater personalities, but Madison yields to none in brains. He was a deep and eager student and the ablest of American political thinkers, with possibly one or two exceptions. Yet he lacked somewhat in charm and force of character — cold-blooded, clear-headed, and far-sighted, but colorless. Madison possessed the virtues of the philosophic temperament. He had no vanity; he was a Saxon without bile, content to rest in the shadow of his great and good friend Jefferson, and to serve him loyally forever. A cool debater in an age of oratory, his logic proved a match for the greatest of orators. He was a successful politician in a time when personal attractions had great weight in politics. His life is a proof that a man may be a scholar and hold his own in the field of action. The measure of his success came as the result of labor, care, and unsparing service. Madison was well pre- pared for a controversy over the relations of church and state, for, in his characteristic fashion, he had made a profound study of religion and knew more divinity than a seminary professor. The Assembly met on October 19th, but a quorum was not obtained until October 30, 1784."° The committee for religion was appointed on November 1, 1784. It consisted of William Norvell, of James City, Zachariah Johnston, of Augusta, Carter Henry Harrison, of Cumberland, James Madison, of Orange, William Watkins, of Dinwiddle, Garland Anderson, of Hanover, French Strother, of Culpeper, Wilson Cary Nicholas, of Albemarle, Edmund RufRn, of Prince George, Bernard Markham, of Chesterfield, Samuel Sher- win, of Amelia, John Ward, of Campbell, George Wray, of Elizabeth City, and Robert Clarke of Bedford.'"'" Charles Hay and Joseph Jones, of King George, were added later. Consideration of the religious question began on November 4th with the presentation of a petition from Isle of Wight, "set- ting forth, that they are much concerned to see the countenance of the civil =« Smith's Letter. Letters to Madison. Vol. XIV, ms. Library of Congress. 3" Journal, House of Delegates, Oct., 1784. ^^ Journal, p. 6. 84 EEPOET OF THE STATE LIBKAKIAN. power wholly withdrawn from religion, and the people left without the smallest coercion to contribute to its support; that they consider it as the duty of a wise Legislature to encourage its progress, and diffuse its influ- ence; that being thoroughly convinced that the prosperity and happiness of this country essentially depends on the progress of religion, they beg leave to call the attention of the Legislature to a principle, old as society itself, that whatever is to conduce equally to the advantage of all, should be borne equally by all, and praying that an act may pass to compel every one to contribute something, in proportion to his property, to the support of religion." "°' Four days later a similar memorial was presented from Amelia. It de- clared "that your Petitioners have with much concern observed a general Declension of Religion for a number of Years past, occasioned in Part, we conceive by the late War, but chiefly by its not being duly aided and patronized by the civil Power; that should it decline with nearly the same rapidity in Future, your Petitioners apprehend Consequences dangerous, if not fatal to the Strength and Stability of Civil Government." * * * "Were all Sense of Religion rooted out of the Minds of Men, scarce any thing would be left on which human Laws would take hold. * * * Your Peti- tioners therefore think that those who legislate, not only have a Right, founded upon the principle of public utility, but as they wish to promote the Virtue and Happiness of their Constituents & the good People of the State in general; as they wish well to the Strength and Stability of Gov- ernment, they ought to aid & patronize Religion." In these ponderous sentences the Amelia conservatives laid down their reasons for state support of religion. "As every Man in the State partakes of the Blessings of Peace and Order," which results no less from religion than the operation of the laws, so "every Man should be obliged to contribute as well to the Support of Religion, as that of Civil Government; ncr has he any Reason to complain of this, as an Encroachment upon his religious Liberty, if he is permitted to worship God according to the Dictates of his Conscience." The memorial further calls for the protection of the Episcopal church in its possession of the glebes and the grant to it of the right of self-govern- ment, and for a general assessment in order to encourage men of learning to enter the ministry .''°' On November 11, 1784, the Baptist petition came into the house. The general committee had met at Dover meeting-house on October 9, 1781, and had considered the religious question and- drawn up a memorial to the Legislature. "The law for the solemnization of marriage and the vestry law" were considered political grievances. They also resolved to oppose the law for a general assessment and that for the incorporation of religious societies, which were now in agitation." A memorial to the General Assembly praying for a repeal of the vestry '°> Journal, p. 11. °°^ Signed by about 176 persons, among them John Booker, Jr., Wm. Cross CrarkIo Journal, p. 75. "• Journal, p. 77. •w Madison, Works, II, 113. 102 REPORT OF THE STATE LIBRARIAN. The noes were Wilson Gary Nicholas and Edward Carter, Albemarle; Michael Bowyer and Zacharlah Johnston, Augusta; John Trigg, Bedford; Moses Hunter, Berkeley; Archibald Stuart, Botetourt; John Nicholas. Buckingham; Samuel Hawes, Caroline; Jacob Morton, Charlotte; French Strother, Culpeper; Spencer Roane and William Gatewood, Essex; Alexander Henderson, Fairfax; Thomas Underwood, Goochland; George Clendennen, Greenbrier; Ralph Humphreys and Isaac Vanmeter, Hampshire; Garland Anderson, Hanover; Nathaniel Wilkinson, Henrico; Benjamin Pope, Jeffer- son; Richard Bland Lee, Loudoun; John Glenn, Lunenburg; Robert Sayres, Montgomery; John Kearnes, Norfolk; Charles Porter, Orange; Benjamin Lankford and William Dix, Pittsylvania; Richard Bibb and John Clark, Prince Edward; John Bowyer and John Hays, Rockbridge; Gawin ! Hamilton and John Hopkins, Rockingham; Isaac Zane, Shenandoah; John Taylor, Southampton; and James Montgomery, Washington. In addition to the practically undivided western vote, the opponents of incorporation on this ballot commanded many southern and midland dele- gates, with a few easterners. The smallness of the majority may have acted as a warning to the conservatives to act quickly. It was evident that when the southern and midland delegates, now wavering between the east and the west and inclining to the latter, should array themselves with it, the game would be up. Henry's absence was greatly felt in this crisis, for he was especially influential with the delegates from the middle counties and the southside. No other man of the conservative party carried the same weight in the midland region, and the tendency to democracy naturally allied the central delegates with the mountaineers. Promptly upon the passage of the incorporation act, the conservative leaders brought the assessment bill before the house. The debate extended from December 22 to December 23, and amendments were added. "In a committee of the whole it was determined by a majority of 7 or 8 that the word "Xn" should be exchanged for the word "Religious." On the report to the house the pathetic zeal of the late Governor Harrison gained a like majority for reinstating discrimination."™ On December 23, the bill was engrossed by the close vote of 44 to 42.'°^ The engrossed bill came up for its third reading the next day, December 24. A motion was made to defer the reading "until the fourth Thursday of November next," that is, until the next session of the Assembly. The ■ motion passed 45 to 38, by almost the same vote as upon incorporation, but reversed. The counties in the affirmative were Albemarle, Amelia, Amherst, Augusta, Bedford, Berkeley, Botetourt, Buckingham, Caroline, Charlotte, Culpeper, Essex, Fauquier, Greenbrier, Hampshire, Henrico, Jefferson, Loudoun, Lunenburg, Montgomery, Norfolk, Orange, Pittsylvania, Powhatan, Rockbridge, Shenandoah, Southampton, Spotsylvania, Stafford, Sussex, Washington and Norfolk Borough. The counties in the negative were Accomao, Charles City, Chesterfield, Cumberland, Culpeper, Dinwlddie, Elizabeth City, Fairfax, Fauquier, Glouces- ter, Hanover, Isle of Wight, Jefferson, King George, Lancaster, Loudoun, Louisa, Middlesex, Nansemond, Norfolk, Northampton, Northumberland, SK MadiKon, Works, II, IH. '" Madison, Works, II, 99, DEPARTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 103 Prince Edward, Prince George, Princess Anne, Surry, Westmoreland, York and Williamsburg. This vote shows that delegates who had not voted before in the religious question voted against assessment. In a word, the antis presented their full strength, won a few conservative votes and carried the day against their wavering opponents. Following this vote, a resolution passed by a small majority "That the engrossed bill," establishing a provision for teachers of the Christian reli- gion, "together with the names of the ayes and noes, on the question of post- poning the third reading of the said bill to the fourth Thursday in November next, be published in hand-bills, and twelve copies thereof delivered to each member of the General Assembly, to be distributed to their respective counties; and that the people thereof be requested to signify their opinioil respecting the adoption of such a bill, to the next session of Assembly.'"" The postponement of the third reading of the assessment bill was a great victory for Madison. It was a victory of democratic policies over conservative, and of the progressives who wished to continue the work of the Revolution. But it was not a final triumph. Sentiment in the people at large was as yet unknown, and was supposed to rather favor assessment. The weight of petitions supported this conclusion. It was therefore necessary for the progressive leaders in the house to begia what is called a campaign of education. A majority of the delegates in the house personally favored assessment. The western delegates almost unanimously opposed it, because the west was poor, new and radical, an4 as far as religion went, chiefly Presbyterian. A large element in the State, discontented with the weight of the existing taxes, would oppose the imposi- tion of a new tax for any purpose. But there was a chance that the people might view the religious controversy apathetically, and consequently that the conservatives might be able to carry the day. But the people were only seemingly indifferent, in spite of the fact that few anti-assessment petitions had been presented. "The only proceeding of the late Session of Assembly," Madison wrote to Monroe on April 12, 1785, "which makes a noise thro' the Country is that which relates to a Genl.' Assessmt. The Episcopal people are generally for it, tho' I think the zeal' of some of them has cooled. The laity of the other sects are equally unani- mous on the other side. So are all the Clergy except the Presbyterians who seem as ready to set up an establishment which is to take them in as they' were to pull down that which shut them out."™^ On April 27, he wrote that "The Bill for a Genl. Assesst. has produced some fermentation below the' Mountains & a violent one beyond them. The contest at the next Session on this question will be a warm & precarious one."™ Madison seems to have still doubted the outcome of the struggle. But already there was a drift against assessment. The next day Madison informed Monroe that "Our' elections as far as I hear are likely to produce a great proportion of new' members. In seme counties they are influenced by the Bill tor a Genl. Assesst. In Culpeper Mr. Pendleton a worthy man, &, acceptable in: his "> MadiFon, Works, II, 113 ; Journal, p. 82. =» Madison, Works, II, 131. '"Madison, 'Works, II, 137. 104 KEPOET OF THE STATE LIBRAEIAN. general character to tlie people was laid aside in consequence of his vote for the Bill, in favor of an Adversary to it."=" And again on May 29th, "But the adversaries to the assesst. begin to think the prospect here flattering to their wishes. The printed Bill has excited great discussion and is likely to prove the sense of the Comunity to be in favor of the liberty now en- joyed. I have heard of several Counties where the late representatives have been laid aside for voting for the Bill, and not a single one where the reverse has happened. The Presbyterian Clergy too who were in general friends to the scheme, are already in another tone, either compelled by the laity of that sect, or alarmed at the probability of further interference of the Legislature, if they once begin to dictate in matters of Religion.'""' Madison's spirit rose with time, as evidences came to him of a growing spirit of hostility to the assessment. "A very warm opposition will be made to this innovation," he wrote Monroe on June 21st, "by the people of the middle and b^ck Counties, particularly the latter. They do not scruple to declare it an alarming usurpation on their fundamental rights and that tho' the Genl Assembly should give it the form, they will not give it the validity of a law." And he added on his own account, "If there be any limi- tation to the power of the Legislature, particularly if this limitation is to be sought in our Declaration of Rights or Form of Government, I own the Bill appears to me to warrant this language of the people." °°° In July, 1785, Madison was drawn into a campaign which engaged his deepest interest. The necessity of a hostile criticism of the published assess- ment bill impressed itself upon the democratic leaders. George Nicholas, brother of Wilson Gary Nicholas, was the most insistent of these, and he, together with George Mason,"" persuaded Madison to undertake the task. Nicholas wrote to Madison, on April 22, 1785, that "my brother informs me that he conversed with you on the propriety of remonstrating against certain measures of the last session of Assembly and that you seemed to think it would be best that the counties opposed to the measure should be silent. I fear this would be construed into an assent especially to the law for establishing a certain provision for the clergy, for as the Assembly only postponed the passing of it that they might know whether it was dis- agreeable to the people, I think they may justly conclude that all are for It who do not say to the contrary. A majority of the counties are in favor of the measure, but a great majority of the people against it, but if this majority should not appear by petition the fact will be denied. Another reason why all should petition is that some will certainly do it and those who support the bills will insist that those who petition are all the opposition. "Would it not add greatly to the weight of the petition if they all hold the same language? by discovering an exact uniformity of sentiment in a majority of the country it would certainly deter the majority of the assembly from pro- ceeding. I have been through a considerable part of the country and I am well assured that it would be impossible to carry such laws into execu- tion and that the attempt would bring about a revolution. If you think =" Madison, Works, II, 142. ""Madison, Works, II, 145. '"Madison, Works, II, 146. <«■ Rowland's Mason, II, 87. DEPARTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 105 with me that it will be proper to say something to the Assembly, will you commit it to paper. I risk this because I know you are most capable of doing it properly and because it will be most likely to be generally adopted. I can get it sent to Amherst Buckingham Albemarle Fluvanna Augusta Botetourt Rock Bridge and Rockingham and have no doubt that Bedford and the counties Southward of it will readily join in the measure. I will also send it to Frederick and Berkeley and if it goes from your county to Fauquier Culpeper and Loudoun it will be adopted by the most populous part of the country." "' In accordance with Nicholas's suggestion, Madison wrote his "Memorial and Remonstrance." "' This famous paper is an elaborate argument on the relation of religion to the state. It asserts in the loftiest spirit of freedom that religion is exempt from the cognizance of both society and the state. The principle of assessment was wrong; if it were lawful to establish Christianity as a state religion it would be lawful to establish a single sect, and if it were lawful to impose a small tax for religion, the admission would pave the way for oppressive levies. The assessment was not neces- sary for the support of the churches, which could stand on their own feet. The policy of ecclesiastical taxation would keep out foreigners. The inter- ference of law in religion produced evil effects only, and an attempt to enforce by legal sanction a policy obnoxious to the majority of citizens would tend to enervate the laws and create a spirit of evasion. Madison put forth in this article for the benefit of the people of Virginia the arguments he had already used effectively in the Assembly. Several editions of the Remonstrance were printed (one by the Phenix Press of Alexandria) and copies were sowed broadcast. George Nicholas sent out the Remonstrance In July through the middle and western counties,™ and it met with general approval. "One hundred and fifty of our most respectable freeholders," Nicholas wrote Madison, "signed it in a day." '"" The Remonstrance was printed in the Virginia Gazette,*" and in every way the agitation was actively furthered. Mason sent the Remonstrance to his friends, among them George Washington. "As the principles it avows," he wrote, "entirely accord with my sentiments on the subject (which is a very important one), I have been at the charge of printing several copies to disperse in the different parts of the country. ... If upon consideration, you approve the argu- ments and the principles upon which they are founded, your signature will both give the Remonstrance weight, and do it honor." "° Washington re- plied: "Although no man's sentiments are more opposed to any kind of restraint upon religious principles than mine are, yet I must confess, that I am not amongst the number of those, who are so much alarmed at the thoughts of making people pay towards the support of that which they profess. ... As the matter now stands, I wish an assessment had never been agitated, and as it has gone so far, that the bill could die an easy death; because I think it will be productive of more quiet to the State, "' Madison, Works, II, 183, note. "•Madison, Works, II, 183. '"Madison, Works, II, 184. *" Iiettera to Madison, V, xiT. MS., Library of Congreis. "•July 30, 1785. "•Rowland's Mason, II, 88. 106 KEPORT OF THE STATE LIBRARIAN. than by enacting it into a law, whicli in my opinion would be impolitic- admitting there is a decided majority for it, to the disquiet of a respectable^ minority." "' Madison informed Edmund Randolph late in July that subscriptions to the Remonstrance were on foot in various counties and would be extended to others. He wrote Jefferson, on August 20th, that the opposition to the assessment was gaining ground and that at the instance of some of its adversaries he had written the Remonstrance. "It has been sent thro' the- medium of confidential persons in a number of the upper Counties, and I am told will be pretty extensively signed." "" George Nicholas was the chief agent in the agitation which aroused' middle and western Virginia and was destined to draw forth such an ex- pression of public opinion as the state had never seen before. Nicholas was. one of the ablest politicians Virginia ever produced. He served a number of terms in the Assembly and became an influential member. He was one of the chief powers in the convention of 1788, and apparently did as much as any other man to secure the ratification of the United States Constitu- tion. "Clear as was the logic, convincing as were the ample and apt illus- trations of Madison," Grigsby declares, "their effect was equalled, probably surpassed, by the exhibitions of Nicholas." *™ After the convention, Nicholas, made the mistake of moving to Kentucky, where he was indeed prominent in local affairs, but where he was far from political centers. Yet he was made for a great career and he would no doubt have risen to a high place upon the- national triumph of the Democratic party, if an untimely death had not- taken him. /" More important probably than the efforts even of Madison and Nicholas- /and their friends was the decision of the evangelical churches to oppose fthe assessment. The Presbyterians took action early in 1785. The memo- I rial of October, 1784, had produced dissatisfaction amongst the Presbyterian, laity, and when Hanover Presbytery met at Bethel on May 29, 1785, the: Augusta congregation requested an explanation of the word "liberal," as; used in the passage relating to assessment, and also the Presbytery's- motive in sending the petition to the Assembly.*" Moses Hoge and Samuel Carrick were directed to prepare an answer to the Augusta inquiry. The question was then put whether the Presbytery approved of any kind of assessment, and the vote was unanimously in the negative. Whatever may have been the private opinions of any members of the Presbytery, Foote said,, or the influence of Patrick Henry, Presbytery declared against all assess- ments.'" A general convention of the Presbyterian church was arranged to meet at Bethel, Augusta county, on August 10, 1785. Energetic efforts were made to secure a full attendance of delegates,- and an advertisement was printed in the Virginia Gazette'" requesting every church in the State to send representatives. The convention, when it "' Rowland'r. Mason, II, 89. "■" Madison, Works, II, 163. «™ Virginia Historical Collections, X, 280. ""Footc, I, 341. '"Foote, I, 841. '"June 4, 1785, et seq. DEPARTMENT OP ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. l07 met, adopted a paper drawn up by William Graham, rector of Liberty Hall Academy. It differed considerably from the memorial of the previous autumn. All connection between church and state was strongly condemned, and the argument followed Madison's Remonstrance in part. The assertion of the divine nature of Christianity, and its primitive independence of the state and purity, soon to be repeated in a hundred petitions, was employed. An objection to assessment was found in the fact that the bill provided for no religion but Christianity, excluding Jews and Mohammedans. The asser- tion, however, that the bill "unjustly subjects men who may be good citizens, but who have not embraced our common faith, to the hardship of supporting a system they have not as yet believed the truth of, and deprives them of their property, for what they do not suppose to be of importance to them," Ts an exaggeration. The clause of the bill permitting the taxpayer to assign his tax to public education was expressly designed to meet this objection. The Bethel declaration more pertinently declared that the exclu- ■ sion of any religion from the assessment plan changed its principle, and made what should have been a state support of morality for the benefit of society a discriminating religious measure. The act incorporating the Episcopal church was condemned in such language as shows that the incor- poration had made impossible any unity of action between the Episcopal and Presbyterian churches.*" The possibility of such a union had always been remote, and it had now entirely passed away. Madison wrote in a rather cynical tone: "The Presbyterian clergy, have at length espoused the side of the oppo- sition, being moved either by a fear of their laity or a jealousy of the episcopalians. The mutual hatred of these sects has been much inflamed by the late Act incorporating the latter. I am far from being sorry for it, as a coalition between them could alone endanger our religious rights, and a tendency to such an event had been suspected." "* The Baptists took action at the same time. The general committee met at Dupuy's meeting-house, Powhatan, on August 13, 1785. Reuben Ford reported that he had presented the committee's memorial against the mar- riage and vestry laws and that the marriage act had been satisfactorily amended. Assessment was condemned by the committee,*" and those counties which had not yet prepared petitions against it were urged to do so. Reli- gion was of a divine nature and had no need of legal support. A memorial was drawn up and Reuben Ford was assigned the duty of carrying it to the Assembly."' This paper reiterated the statement that religion was a thing apart from the concerns of the state. The "Church of Christ 'is not of this world,'" from which it follows that "they cannot see en what defensible principles, the Sheriffs, County Courts and public Treasury are all to be employed in the management of money levied for the express purpose of supporting Teachers of the Christian Religion." This was a good hit at one' of the objectionable features of the tax. Furthermore, it was sinful to "com- pel men to furnish contributions of money to support that Religion which <"Foote, I, 342. <» Madison, Works, 11, 163. "" Semple, 95. «» Semple, 90, and James, 138. 108 BEPOET OP THE STATE LIBRARIAN. they disbelieve and abhor." Here again, as in the Bethel memorial, the edu- cational alternative of the assessment bill was ignored. The Baptist petition enlarged upon the argument that Christianity was most powerful in its primitive and unsupported condition. "The Proud Greeks, the Stubborn Jews and the wild Barbarians were made to bow to the Sceptre of Gospel Grace." Establishments hinder rather than help Chris- tianity. "Legislature will have sufficiently done its part in favour of Christianity when adequate provision is made for supporting those Laws of Morality, which are necessary for private and public happiness and of which it seems more properly the Guardian than of the peculiarities of the Christian Church." The Baptist General Association met at Orange on September 7, 1785, and also adopted a remonstrance: first, that the civil power had no right to establish a religious tax; second, that the fear that religion would die without state support is "founded neither in Scripture, on Reason, on Sound Policy; but is repugnant to each of them"; third, that as the Assem- bly must be the judge as to the recipients of the tax, it would determine religious principles; fourth, that the Assembly which established all sects had the power to establish one; fifth, that the incorporation of the Episcopal church was inconsistent with human freedom; sixth, that the reservation of the ecclesiastical property was a glaring distinction; seventh, that the indulgence granted Quakers and Menonites was an "open offense." The August declaration of the Baptist church had opposed assessment; the September resolutions opposed both assessment and incorporation. The Baptists were destined to become the strongest opponents of the latter measure, and it was largely due to their efforts that the Episcopal church was deprived of the glebes and churches. The Protestant Episcopal church held its first convention on May 18, 1785, at Richmond. It was a distinguished body. Among the clergymen present were Devereaux Jarratt, James Madison and David Griffith, and among the lay members, John Page, Archibald Cary, John Tyler, Wilson Miles Cary, George Wray, Spencer Roane, Willis Riddick, Carter Bassett Harrison, and Nathaniel Nelson. Twenty of the seventy lay deputies were members of the Legislature. The counties represented showed that Anglicanism survived in the east and south. Seventy parishes in fifty counties sent delegates, while only two western counties (Frederick and Berkeley) were represented. Some of the central counties and three southeastern counties were not represented. James Madison, the future bishop, was elected president. Deputies were appointed to the general convention of the church at Philadelphia.*" The convention drew up a constitution for the Episcopal church in Virginia, and issued a general address which was, in fact, a lament. "Of what is the church now possessed! Nothing but the glebes and your affections. Since the year 1776, she hath been even without regular government, and her min- isters have received but little compensation for their services. Their num- bers are diminished by death and other causes, and we have as yet no resource within ourselves for a succession of ministers. Churches stand In '" Hawks, Appendix, 5. DEPARTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 109 need of repair, and there is no fund equal to the smallest want." The whole tone of the address indicated a conviction that the times were out of joint and legislative aid uncertain. Yet the members felt hope, with the Revolu- tion in the background and with the ecclesiastical property secured to the church. The new regulations were conservative. The vestries continued to hold the right of presentation. Courts consisting of three clergymen and three laymen were established to hear complaints against ministers. Com- plaints should be received only from the vestry of the minister complained of. Decisions of the lower court were referred to the convention for approval. Edmund Randolph gave Madison his impressions of the Episcopal posi- tion in a letter of July 17, 1785: "I dedicate to you, as the patron of the Protestant Episcopal Church, the enclosed journal. Between friends, my experience in the last convention does not make me anxious to step for- ward in another. We have squeezed a little liberality from them; but at a future day they will be harder than adamant, and perhaps credulous that they possess authority." "' Madison replied with a criticism of the Episcopal constitution: "It may be of little consequence, what tribunal Is to judge of Clerical misdemeanors or how firmly the incumbent may be fastened on the parish, whilst the Vestry & people may hear & pay him or not as they like. But should a legal salary be annexed to the title, this phantom of power would be substantiated into a real monster of oppression. Indeed it appears to be so at present as far as the Glebes & donations extend." '" The Assembly met on October 24, 1785. The membership had not changed very greatly. Wilson Cary Nicholas, Zachariah Johnston, Archibald Stuart, John Taylor, of Caroline, John Tyler, Benjamin Harrison, Miles King, James Jones, Spencer Roane, Alexander White, Charles Mynn Thurs- ton, Richard Bland Lee, Littleton Eyre, James Madison, Carter Braxton, Henry Lee, Arthur Lee and Meriwether Smith were among the leading members. The committee for religion consi^ed of Zachariah Johnston, of Augusta, chairman; William Norvell, John Tyler, Carter Henry Harrison, William Watkins, French Strother, Wilson Cary Nicholas, Bernard Markham, Samuel Sherwin, Robert Clarke, Thomas Smith, Henry Fry, Lewis Burwell, Carter Bassett Harrison, James Madison, William Curtis, Richard Bibb, Benjamin Harrison and Parke Goodall. As soon as the session began petitions came into the house in such numbers as had never been known before. They were chiefly in opposition to assessment. "The steps taken throughout the Country to defeat the Genl. Assessment," said Madison, "had produced all the effect that could have been wished. The table was loaded with petitions and remonstrances from all parts against the interposition of the Legislature in matters of Religion." "" The anti-assessment petitions show, with few exceptions, the influence of Madison's Remonstrance. That paper had been circulated with a thorough- ness, amazing in consideration of the sparseness of the population, the dlf- «s Conway's Randolph, 163. "' Madison's Works, II, 152. «» Madison's Works, II, 216. 3-10 EEPORT OP THE STATE LIBEARIAN. ficulty of communication and tlie ignorance of a large part of the population. This wide range of circulation reflects great credit upon George Nicholas' talents tor political managing. Many of the petitions indeed are copies of the Remonstrance; others are paraphrases. In other petitions the changes were rung upon Madison's phrases. The Remonstrance furnished the poor people of Virginia with an able argument against a threatened restraint of liberty and an additional burden. In the strength of the sentiment worked up throughout the State against assessment, the dissenters of the conser- vative tidewater counties now broke away from the traditional influences of their section and contributed largely to the protesting petitions. The most popular argument in all these papers was the assertion, re- peated in different terms in the Remonstrance and in the Presbyterian and Baptist memorials, that Christianity had grown and prospered in spite of the opposition of the State. A score of petitions declare that "certain it is that the Blessed author of the Christian Religion, not only maintained and sup- ported his gospel in the world for several Hundred Years, without the aid of Civil Power but against all the Powers of the Earth, the Excellent Purity of its Precepts and the unblamable behaviour of its Ministers made its way thro all opposition. Nor was it the Better for the church when Constantino the great, first Established Christianity by human Laws true there was rest from Persecution, but how soon was the Church Over run with Error and Immorality." Such was the dissenters' answer to the Anglican plea that religion could not exist without State support. To the argument that the church was suf- fering because of the prevailing license and skepticism, the petition answered that these evils did not spring from the want of an establishement — min- isters should preach by their lives. "Let their Doctrine be scriptural and their Lives upright then shall Religion, if Departed, speedily return, and Deism with its Dreadful Consequences be removed." A Botetourt petition of November 29, 1785, founded its argument against assessment upon the civic virtues of -Greece and Rome, apparently in the belief that church and state were not connected in antiquity. The petition also found a grave dilemma in assessment— that is, if all Christian sects were aided by law, regardless of doctrine, the Assembly would find itself committed to the position of supporting heterodox opinions. The Montgomery petition of November 15, 17S5, asserted that religion was not absolutely essential to good morals. "Cannot it be denyed that civil laws are not sufficient? We conceive it cannot, especially where the minds of men are disposed to an Observance of what is right and an Observance of what is wrong. And we Conceive also that Ideas of right and wrong, may be derived merely from positive law, without seeking a higher original." Assessment would not tend to improve morals, unless church- going should be enforced at the same time, but this would be tyrannical. The Pittsylvania petitioners of November 7th feared that the sacrifices of the Revolution were to be disregarded and that the church of England was to be re-established "contrary to all Maxims of sound Policy." So strong was the agitation against assessment that some of its former supporters changed sides. Thus a petition from Dinwiddle declared that the subscribers "are now as decidedly opposed to a General assessment as DEPARTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. Ill sthey were formerly in favour of It. * * * rj^jgy reflect that It will be thought by this Honorable House and all Rational men much more con- sistent with a man's honour and his conscience publickly to renounce an erroneous Sentiment than by persisting in it to produce to Religion, to him- self and to his country, consequences which he will forever have cause to lament." Even the Quakers took the field against assessment. They denied that a provision was needed for educated ministers. "Christian knowledge is Immediately derived from the great author of the Christian Religion, and is no more dependent on human Literature or Pecuniary Provisions for learned Teachers, than that the Salvation of Souls depends on Human learning and ■knowledge." The petitions came from every quarter of the State and from every class — Cumberland, Rockingham, Caroline, Buckingham, Henry, Pittsylvania, Nansemcnd, Bedford, Richmond, Campbell, Charlotte, Goochland, Westmore- land, Essex, Culpeper, Prince Edward, Middlesex, Henrico, Hanover, Bruns- wick, Powhatan, Fairfax, Stafford, Lunenburg, Frederick, Dinwiddie, King and Queen, Prince George, Mecklenburg, Albemarle, Orange, Northumber- land, Louisa, James City, Amelia, Montgomery, Botetourt, Rockbridge, Ches- "terfleld. Princess Anne and other counties. Only one church presented petitions as coming from its members and that was the Presbyterian. Consequently it is impossible to estimate the ■strength of the various sects from the number of signatures. Many west- ern petitions were simple Indorsements of the Bethel memorial ; these came chiefly from Augusta, Frederick, Berkeley and Rockbridge, as far as the •counties can be determined. A special committee was appointed to consider the Presbyterian petitions. The whole number of subscribers to the anti-assessment petitions was not less than 10,000, and the number may have been even larger. About 1,500 names were signed to the Presbyterian memorials, and, doubtless, other Presbyterians signed the undenominational protests. No estimate of the number of Baptists who signed can be made, but there can be no doubt that it was very large. Some Episcopalians and probably a good many Methodists subscribed. Besides these were the signatures of the people unconnected with any church or indifferent to religion and who consequently objected to a tax for church support. While the opposition to assessment proved to be unexpectedly wide- spread, the sentiment in favor of it was also strong. A large part of the serious and cultured population of Virginia clung to the principle of state support of religion as to a familiar and beneficient policy. Innovations in religion always awaken deep alarm among conservatives, and they are almost always of concern to the state- Conservative Virginians were per- suaded that such was the case in point, but the radical spirit had grown strong in the upper classes. But for this division of opinion, assessment would doubtless have been tried. An atmosphere of philosophic inquiry Had existed in Virginia before the Revolution among the educated people. The Revolution spread this atmosphere of inquiry and unrestraint among all classes. Indeed the times were in many ways the freest and most inspir- ing in the history of the Commonwealth. Madison appealed to this spirit of 112 REPORT OF THE STATE LIBRARIAN. intellectual and political freedom in his Remonstrance, and he was met with a notable response. The liberals who rallied behind him, and the evangeli- cals, gave him the victory over the great body of conservative political and social leaders. But the petitions show that there were many supporters of assessment, and, without doubt, many more never signed petitions. The conservatives were not equal to their opponents in energy and organiza- tion and the impression was produced that an overwhelming majority of the people of the State opposed assessment. It is difficult to find out, how- ever, the strength of the opposing sides in the controversy. There were many decidedly for and against assessment, and at the same tim<3 a great part of the population had no definite views on the question at all. Further- more, it is probable that the faint-hearted, who would have supported assessment under normal conditions, opposed it because of the hard times and the difficulty of paying taxes. The main argument of the conservatives was not new — that religion is necessary to the welfare of the State and the supervision of the State necessary to religion. Holding such an opinion, many good people considered the definite separation of church and state as a blow at the existence of religion. They couched their petitions in the terms of concession. Ministers ought to have some assurance of a decent support; at present many of them lived very precariously. The assessment in no respect violated the spirit of civil and religious liberty, but tended rather to foster it. The Surry petition argued that the experience of mankind in both Christian and heathen nations testified to the benefits arising from the state support of religion. "In the most enlightened governments of Europe, the Religion of our Saviour has been countenanced and established by law." and further: "Should the great work of inculcating religious and moral truths be neglect- ed, or in great measure confined to the most illiterate of mankind, the influence of religion must daily be impaired, and infidelity, enthusiasm and superstition with all the attendant follies and vices will proportionately increase among us." The experience of the past few years had taught that the most worthy ministers could not derive a support from voluntary con- tributions. Few men would undertake a laborious preparation for a career of starvation, but the proposed law made it possible for learned men to be preachers. But the chief objection of the Surry petition to the entire separation of church and state was its novelty. "We cannot observe without concern that the United States of America exhibit to the world the singular instance of a free and enlightened government destitute of a legal provision for the sup- port of religion. It is indeed with pleasure that we look up to the wisdom of our rulers for a more perfect constitution, both civil and religious, than has hitherto been known to mankind, yet we cannot indulge the vanity of supposing that the religious system of our country will be perfected on the principle directly opposed to the wisdom of all nations." Pro-assessment petitions came in from Surry, Mecklenburg, Amelia, Pittsylvania, Lunenburg, Westmoreland, Amherst, Essex, and perhaps some other counties. Altogether about 1,200 names were signed to these memo- rials, which would make the supporters of assessment about one to eight. But this proportion is apparent only, as the conservatives made no especial DEPAETMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTOET. 113 effort to gain signatures, while their opponents labored hard. In the next year, 178G, when the repeal of the incorporation hill was threatened, petitions protesting against the repeal were signed by many more than 1,200 names. The weight of petitions settled the fate of the "Bill tor Establishing a Support for Teachers of the Christian Religion." No mention is made of it in the journal of the house of delegates for this session, although it was considered in the committee of the whole. Foote affirms that "When the bill was taken up in the committee of the whole, Mr. Smith (John Blair Smith) appeared as one of the committee of the Presbytery of Hanover, and desired to be heard on a memorial from the Presbytery against the bill. Permission was granted, and Mr. Smith addressed the committee, and took part in the discussion which was continued for three days. When the ques- tion was called the bill was lost in the committee by a majority of three votes." "' But Grigsby, in commenting upon this passage, points out that if the assessment bill had been rejected in committee as an independent bill a report would have been made to the house, the question would have been put, and the journal would contain a notice. He suggests, therefore, that the assessment bill was offered as an amendment to the bill for religious freedom and was rejected.'"' The statement is made elsewhere that Smith spoke in opposition to the assessment bill,"' so it is likely that the president of Hampden-Sidney appeared before the committee. The weight of the different influences which contributed to the defeat of assessment cannot be accurately determined. The poverty of the people had much to do with the energetic protests against the imposition of a new tax, for a bill to stay the whole tax collection for 1785 was narrowly defeated. Grigsby is right in naming the general poverty of the State as a cause of the defeat, but he lays rather too much stress upon it. After all, the separation of church and state was an ideal victory rather than a material one; it was an outcome of the spirit of the Revolution. It is easy to see why the assessment bill quietly died in committee without being brought before the house; it is not so easy to understand the reaction which carried the "bill for religious freedom" through the Assem- bly. Undoubtedly the success of the summer's campaign and Madison's unrivalled ascendency in the house at this time had much to do with the Gounterstroke. The bill for religious freedom was No. 82 in the list of bills in the Revised Code, which were to be presented to the house.™ On December 14th, the "bill for establishing religious freedom" was brought up. The next day Alexander White reported to the house that the bill had been con- sidered and amended in committee."" On December 16th the house con- sidered the amendment, which struck out the preamble of Jefferson's bill and inserted the followings words: "Whereas, it is declared by the Bill of Rights, that religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the «< Foote, I, 431. '-- Virginia Historical Collections, X, 124. ■<=' Bvan. and Lit. Mag., IX, 43. It lias been suggested that Reuben Ford may have appeared for the Baptists. (Virginia Historical Collections, IX, 125, note.) <=' Journal, p. 93. ^^ Journal, p. 04. 114 REPORT OF THE STATE LIBRARIAN. manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence; an(}, therefore, all men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience, and it is the mutual duty of all to practice christian forbearance, love and charity towards each other." "° The amendment was defeated, 38 to 66. Benjamin Harrison, John Tyler, Joseph Jones, Miles King, Alexander White, John Page, John S. Wills, Willis Riddick and Richard Lee were the most promi- nent men who voted in the affirmative. A study of the vote shows that the conservative party was now pretty well broken up. It controlled votes from Accomac, Amherst, Brunswick, Charles City, Chesterfield, Dinwiddle, Elizabeth City, Frederick, Gloucester, Hanover, Greensville, Harrison, Isle of Wight, King George, Loudoun, Mid- dlesex, Nansemond, New Kent, Norfolk, Northampton, Prince George, Princess Anne, Richmond, Southampton, Stafford, Surry, Westmoreland — most of the eastern counties with a sprinkling of central and southern. The rest of the State was lost. The bill came up for the third reading on December 17th. A motion to postpone the reading until the following October was defeated, and the bill passed the house by a vote of 74 to 20. The conservative party on the religious question had now become a mere opposition. The twenty stal- warts were Thomas Claiborne, of Brunswick; Miles King and Worlich West- wood, of Elizabeth City; John Page, of Gloucester; Garland Anderson, of Hanover; Elias Wills, of Fluvanna; William Thornton, of King George; Francis Corbin, of Middlesex; Willis Riddick, of Nansemond; Daniel Sand- ford, of Norfolk; John Gordon, of Northumberland; Edward Bland, of Prince George, Anthony Walke, of Princess Anne; George Lee Turberville, of Richmond; William Garrard, of Stafford; John Francis Mercer; Carter B. Harrison, of Surry; Richard Gary and Wilson Miles Gary, of Warwick; and Richard Lee, of Westmoreland — representatives of the eastern counties now hopelessly outvoted in the house. The senate adopted an amendment to the bill, striking out the first page and twenty-one lines of the second, and inserting the religious article in the Bill of Rights."' The house rejected the amendment, 35 to 56. The members voted in much the same way as on the former occasion."" The bill was returned to the senate, which adhered to the amendment, sending the bill back on January 9, 1786, with a request for a conference. The house agreed and appointed Madison, Zachariah Johnston and James Innes as its committee."" The . senate committee was composed of John Jones, Matthew Anderson, William Ellzey, Robert Rutherford and Walter Jones. The conference was held on January 12th. The next day the house adopted the amendment with amendments.'"'" The senate amended this amendment to the amendment."* On January 16th, the house considered the senate's last amendments, which struck out a part of the preamble and inserted instead: "Almighty God hath created the mind free, that all at- <"" Journal, p. 05. ^^^ Senate Journal, p. 61. *-"• Journal, p. 117. *^' Journal, p. 135. <" Journal, p. 139. "• Senate Journal, p. 90. DEPARTMENT OP ARCIIIVES AND HISTORY. 115 tempts to influence it lay temporal punishments or burthens, or by civil incapacitations, tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and are a departure from the plan of the Holy Author of our religion, who being Lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either, as was in his almighty power to do; that the impious presumption of Legislatures and rulers," and made two other changes."^ The house accepted these amendments and the "bill for religious free- dom," after so many delays and changes became law- Its passage came as a fitting epilogue to a drama already played out; separation of church and state in Virginia had been practically effected by the defeat of assessment. The act "for establishing religious freedom" added no new principle. In combining complete liberty of opinion and in forbidding taxation for church support,"" the act merely expressed the results of the Revolution, but it served its purpose as a landmark and as an obstacle to any reversion to the past. The senate amendments made no essential changes; they rather im- proved the preamble. Jefferson had begun the bill with the assertion: "Well aware that the opinions and belief of men depend not on their own will, but follow involuntarily the evidence proposed to their minds; that Almighty God hath created the mind free, and manifested his supreme will that free it shall remain by making it altogether insusceptible to restraint," which was elided into the memorable phrase: "Whereas Almighty God hath ■created the mind free." The senate also balked at the phrase: "That the opinions of men are not the object of civil government nor under its juris- diction." There were also some minor changes. The Assembly, in this ses- sion, furthermore made a new provision for the poor. Counties were to be divided into districts, which should be under the jurisdiction of elected over- seers of the poor, three to each district. These overseers should levy a tax upon all tithables for the poor relief. The powers of the vestries and Churchwardens were transferred to the overseers, and settlements due from the vestries should be made to the overseers."* This act destroyed the last vestige of the establishment. Vestries were henceforth simply the servants of the church; they no longer rendered a service to the church on the one hand and to the State on the other. New civil officers, under the forbidding name of "overseers of the poor," replaced them. And yet the divorce between church and state had not reached that absolute quality which Madison deemed so desirable. The incorporation act, with its regulations for the election and conduct of vestries, remained unrepealed. The Assembly, which passed the act "for establishing religious freedom," passed an act authorizing the election of vestries not elected within the time limit of the law of 1784."° There was yet something for the logical democrat to accomplish before the divorce of religion and the state wculd be complete. «3 .Journal, p. 143. «■' Hening's Statutes, XII, 84. "Pet. December 16, 1813. ""Pet. December 21, 1815. »i"Pet. December 12, 1810. »" Pet. October 21, 1814. '" Calendar of Petitions, A 1406. 154 BEPOET OF THE STATE LIBEARIAN. Methodists the right to worship in the building."'" In another case of dispute the church was put up to the highest bidder."" The case of Bruton parish church, Williamsburg, the most noted church in "Virginia, is interesting."" After the death of John Bracken, it appears that Bruton church became a union church and was so used for many years. The people of Williamsburg, without distinction of sect, repaired the ruinous building, which was shared by the various sects until 1831. In that year a Universalist minister visiting Williamsburg was refused the use of the church and it then formally went back into the hands of the Episcopal communion. A number of law suits accompanied the sale of the glebes, in spite of the decision in Turpin vs. Locket. The case of Selden vs. Overseers of the poor of Loudoun was decided in 1840 as in the former case."'* Different in principle was the case of Claughton vs. Macnaughton.™ Duncan Macnaughton, minister of St. Stephen's parish, Northumberland, applied in the chancery court for an injunction to restrain the overseers of the poor of Northumberland from selling two glebes, which he claimed to be private donations and of which he was the incumbent. The court decided that the glebes could not be sold during the life of the incumbent, and the court of appeals sustained the decision. In the case of Terrett vs. Taylor™ in 1815, the United States supreme court decided that , the Episcopal church of Alexandria had a title to the Fairfax glebe as against the overseers of the poor of Fairfax county. Justice Story delivered a very able opinion. He held that the Revolution had not destroyed the civil rights of corporations, that the guaranteeing act of 1776 was a contemporaneous interpretation of the constitution and completed the title of the Episcopal church to the glebes, and that the act of 1802 did not apply to Alexandria, since it had become a part of the District of Columbia prior to this date. In 1824 the purchasers of the glebe property, sold under this decree, brought suit to rescind the purchase upon the ground of a defective title."" The supreme court decided upon an appeal that the vestry of the Alexandria Episcopal church was the successor of the Fairfax parish vestry and thus had a right to convey the title. Justice Story's decision in these cases rested more or less upon the necessarily corporate character of religious bodies. The passing of the danger of a state church together with the Revolutionary irritations, and the many difficulties and inconveniences attending management of the property of societies which had no legal existence brought about a change In the attitude of the various denominations on the subject of incorporation. Many petitions from a number of churches, including the Baptist, came to the Legislature asking for the establishment of some system by which """Mcarto I, 25. ""Mfnile I, 26. , »" Petition of Robert Anderson, Mayor of Williamsburg, December B, 1831. "• II Leigh, 681. TiTfker's Commentaties, II, Appendix. "»2 Mimford, 013. A similar lase daidcd in the same way was that of Young v. overseers of the poor of Norfolk (ounty. 2 Muntord, 617. ""•9 Oramh, 43. "' Mason v. Muncastcr ct al. 9 Wheaton, 445. DEPAETUENT OF AECHIVES AND HISTORY. 155 property might be held by religious bodies. The difficulty was met by acts providing for the appointment of trustees to hold church property and granting members of churches the right to sue trustees for the proper execution of their trust.™ The separation of church and state, which had caused religious bodies these difficulties, did not injure the cause of religion in Virginia. Skepticism began to decline with the decline of French influence. It had probably never affected the mass of the people deeply and it largely disappeared as the evangelical churches renewed their energies. Evangelical Christianity indeed secured a notable triumph in Virginia, which became one of the most orthodox of countries and has remained so ever since. The Episcopal church, when revived by bishop Meade, was revived in an evangelical spirit. Meade, a strong man and a thorough Puritan, left an impression upon his church which still continues. With the passing of the influence of the French Revolution, the democratic age began to wane. The national triumph of the Democratic Party carried with it a modification of its early tenets. In Virginia the past began to be looked upon with different eyes. It is probable that the complete overthrow of democracy in Europe after 1815 had an influence upon America at a time when foreign politics were followed with an interest inconceivable to the people of the present. The novels of Sir Walter Scott, which were exceedingly popular in Virginia, in their glorification of the feudal age, may have had some effect upon public sentiment. At all events the French Revolution was con- demned by the generation following that which had approved it, and the colonial era was invested with the charms of imagination. The influence of slavery, although certainly not unrepublican, doubtless acted against the continuance of democratic ideals in society. The reaction found expression in politics by the rise of the Whig party, which at length divided Virginia with the Democracy. The problems of religion, however, were past. Religious questions no longer vexed politicians, and the churches, once hindered by state interference, grew in strength and influence with the passage of years. , Separation of church and state in Virginia, instead of weakening Christianity, as the conservatives of the Revolution had feared, really aided it In securing a power over men far greater than it had known in the past. •~ Pollard's Code I, 1306 et tcq. INDEX Act declaring trustees appointed to manage church property successors of former ves- tries 135 Exempting dissenters from support of established church 52 For dissolving several ves- tries and electing overseers of the poor 66 Incorporating the Protestant Episcopal Church 100 To repeal the act for incor- porating the Protestant Episcopal Church' 128 Acts of Assembly, 1619 7 1624, 1629, 1629-30 8 1631-32, 1642-43 9 1645-46, 1657-58 11 1660, 1661 12 1662 13 1676, 1677 15 1696 16 1727, 1748 21 1755 22 1758 23 Albemarle, petitions from.... 120, 137 Alexandria Episcopal Church, vestry of 154 Amelia, petitions from, 66, 84, 98, 112, 135 Amendment to bill repealing acts guaranteeing possession of glebes to Episcopal Church, 147 Amherst, petitions from, 55, 57, 58, 73, 112 Andros, Sir Edmund 16 Views of on Church affairs. . 17 Anthony, Joseph 37, 66 Anti-Federalists 134 Antrim parish, incumbent of . . . . 152 Argall, Captain 6 Arlington, Lord, made proprietor of Virginia 15 Assembly, meets in 1776 46 Assessment, not mentioned in 1777 54 Petition for from Caroline in 1777 55 Bill for in 1779 58 Question of not settled in 1779 64 Revived in 1783 72 Taken up in October, 1784. . . 83 Debate in Assembly 85 Vote on resolution favoring in 1784 86 Reported on by committee for religion 86 Bill for prepared 88 Committee appointed to pre- pare bill for 88 Presbyterian position on 89 Question of a phase of the Revolution 91 Apparently favored by people of State 95 Opposition to begins in west 95 Largely defeated by western influence 98 Bill for introduced 99 Vote on resolutions postpon- ing action on bill for.... 102 Amendments to bill for 102 Bill for ordered to be printed 103 Public opinion on 103 Presbyterian objections to. . . 107 Opposed by Baptists 107 Petitions against in 1785 .... 109 Petitions against Ill Number of subscribers to pe- titions against Ill Sentiment in favor of Ill Petitions in support of 112 Number of names signed to petitions in favor of 112 Fate of settled by weight of petitions against 113 Reasons for defeat of 113 Agitation for leaves feeling of resentment 116 Augusta, petitions from . . 57, 120, 124 Presbyterian congregation in criticizes Hanover Presby- tery 106 Augusta parish, minister of paid in money 22 Baker, Jerman 66 Baptists 75, 153 Rise of in Virginia 34 Criticize establishment 36 Imprisonment of 37 Success of 38 Petitions of 39 DEPARTMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 157 Petition of In 1775 42 Petition from 66 Petitions of against marriage law 67, 69, 71 Petition from on vestries... 77 Petition from on marriage and vestry laws 84 Petition from in 1784 85 Take action against assess- ment 107 Petition from general asso- ciation of 108 Number of opposed to assess- ment not known Ill Action of in 1787 131 Succeed Presbyterians in at- tack on church property. . 131 Opposed to Federal Constitu- tion 134 Attitude of in 1788 135 Petition for sale of glebes in 1789 135 Petition from in 1790 137 1791 138 1792 139 1794 140 1795 141 1796 142 1797 ■ 145 1798 147 Barbour, Philip 88 Bargrave, Captain John 7 Bargrave, Thomas 7 Bennett, Wm 7 Berkeley parish, petition from.. 133 Berkeley, Sir William, enforces conformity 9 Instructions of 9 Bill suspending the salaries of ministers of the established church 54, 55, 56 For the dissolution of the vestries 56 For religious freedom 57, 58 Committee appointed to draw 56 Brought forward by Madison 113 Passes house of delegates.. 114 Concerning non-jurors 57 Concerning religion 58, 61 For the "dissolution of ves- tries 61 Repealing act for the support of the clergy 61 For saving the property of the church heretofore by law established 62 Declaring what shall be a lawful marriage 67, 69 To amend the several acts concerning vestries 71 To amend the several acts concerning marriages, 71, 73, 80, 100 To authorize and confirm marriages in certain cases 71 For the election of overseers of the poor 73 For incorporating the Protes- tant Episcopal church ... 80, 100 For establishing a provision for teachers of the Chris- tian religion 99, 102, 103 Authorizing the sale of glebe lands 140 Repealing acts reserving glebes to Episcopal church, 146. 147 Directing sale of glebes passes assembly 147 Bill of Rights 78, 148, 149, 150 Authorship of 43 Considered as organic law. . 45 Supplemented by act of 1776 53 Reaction against 54 Religious article of offered as amendment to bill for relig- ious freedom 114 Claimed as prohibiting regu- lation of church affairs. . . 120 Incorporation act viewed as violation of 124 Radical interpretation of giv- en legislative sanction.... 145 Bishop of London, diocesan of Virginia 14 Denounces tworpenny act 23 Letter of on Toleration Act . . 33 Blagrove, Benjamin 70 Bland, Richard 29, 30 Attacks Camm 24 Replies to bishop of London, 24 Blair, James, appointed commis- sary 16 Disputes of with governors. . 17 Secures Nicholson's recall. . . 18 Fails in his attempts at vis- itations 18 Dispute of with Spots wood. . 18 Instrumental in securing Spotswood's recall 19 Blair, John 32, 88 President of the c6uncil 37 Board of Trade, advises king to disallow acts of 1755 and 1758 23 Bolton, Robert 7 Botetourt, petition from 110 Bra'cken, John 154 Braxton, Carter 42, 43 Breckinridge, John, notice of . . . 82 Briggs, John H 133 Brown, John 132 158 EEPOKT OF THE STATE LIBEAEIAN. Brunskill, John, case of 28 Brunswick, petition from 120 Brunswick parish 153 Bruton parish church 154 Buckingham, petitions from, 55, 120, 133 Gabell, William 71 Camm, John, petitions hishop of London 22 Sent to England as agent of the clergy 22 Answers Carter and Bland.. 24 Suit of in general court 25 Wishes to continue his case 26 Dispute of with Gwatkin and Henley 29 Caroline, petition from 55 Garrick, Samuel 106 Garrington, George 66, 69, 73 Carrington, Paul 149, 150 Carter, Landon, dispute of with Kay 21 Attacks Camm 24 Replies to hishop of London. . 24 Gary, Wilson Miles 77, 79 Chapels of ease, to be built in poor parishes 13 Charter of 1606, religious element in 5 Chesterfield, petitions from, 120, 122, 133, 141 Childs, James 37 Church Government Settled, act entitled 11 Church government, system of in Virginia inefficient 13, 14 Claughton vs. Macnaughton, case of 154 Clergy, rights of in Parson's Cause 26 Criticism of 35 Bill repealing act for support of 61 Colonel Dismounted, The, pam- phlet by Richard Bland. .. . 24 Colonial episcopate, beginning of agitation for 15 Movement for in Virginia in 1771 28 Commissary, office of established, 16 Committee appointed to draw bill repealing incorporation act, 128 Committee for religion, composi- tion of in 1784 76 Opinion of on Warwick peti- tion for general assessment 78 Members of in 1784 83 Reports resolution in favor of assessment 86 Members of in 1785 109 Limited to divorce matters.. 133 Effete in 1796 142 Committee of Courts of Justice, report of on glebe question in 1796 142 Conservative party 140, 142, 147 Struggle of during revolution, 53 Attitude of towards religion, 75 Strength of in assembly of 1784 81 Attempts to bring about re- action in 1784 91 Strength of dependent on county representation 92 Not equal to opponents in energy 112 Sinks into a mere opposition, 114 Makes poor fight in 1786 129 Wishes to try glebe case in courts 115 Cooper, Myles 28 Corbln, Francis 82, 99 Craig, Lewis 37 Culpeper, petitions from 57, 137 Culpeper, Lord, instructions and powers of 15 Made proprietor of Virginia. . 15 Report of on religion in Vir- ginia 15 Cumberland, petitions from, 54, 55, 67, 133 Court of Appeals 148 Dale's Code 6 Davies, Samuel 33, 34 Dawson, Thomas, commissary. . . 23 Dawson, Wm., commissary 23, 28 View of on Toleration act 33 De la Warre, Lord 6 Democratic Party 155 Democratic-Republican party 144 Dickson, Robert 135 Dinwiddle, Governor 33 Dinwiddle, petitions from, 99, liO, 120 Dissolution of vestries, bill for in- troduced in house of dele- gates i 54 Donnelly, Andrew 88 Ecclesiastical bill of 1772 30 Education, fund for possible from sale of glebes 139 Effingham, Lord 15 Elizabeth River parish, glebe of . . 21 End of Establishment, effected by act exempting dissenters from support of established church 53 Episcopalians, opposed to assess- ment Ill DEPARTMENT OP ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 159 Essex, petitions from, 57, 112, 120, 121, 123, 137, 153 Evangelical movement in Vir- ginia 36 Eyre, Littleton 82 Fairfax glebe Ifi4 Fauquier, Lord 28 Disapproves of clergy's oppo- sition to two-penny act ... 23 Styles king's disallowance a repeal 2^5 Fauquier, petitions from, 120, 122, 126 Federal Constitution 134 Consideration of absorbs at- tention 135 Fluvanna, petition from 137 Ford, Reuben 85, 107 Fox, George 31 Frederick parish, minister of paid in money 22 Petition from 135 Fredericksville parish, petition from 127 French Revolution, influence of on Virginia 142 Development of cause of radi- calism in Virginia 144 Passing of influence of 155 Gates, Sir Thomas, brings minis- ters to Virginia 6 Instructions of 6 Gatewood, Wm 88, 14~6 Germans 31 Glebes, 134, 137, 138, 142, 143, 145, 146, 148, 152 Not paid for by dissenters. . . 130 Real war upon begun in 1789 135 Poor policy of selling to les- sen taxes * 139 Bill authorizing sale of 140 Bill repealing acts reserving to Episcopal church 146,147 Decision in cases concerning, 150 Gloucester, glebe sales in 153 Petitions from 120, 122 Godwyn, Margan, opinion of on Virginia 14 Gooch, Wm., encourages immigra- tion of Presbyterians 32 Issues proclamation against dissenters 33 Goochland, petitions from 120, 137 Goode, Samuel 61 Graham, William 88, 90 Writes petition for Presbyte- rian church 107 Grayson, William, notice of 82 Griffith, David, elected bishop 116 , Grigsby, Hugh Blair, statement of concerning Nicholas. .. . 106 Statement of on assessment bill 113 Guaranteeing act of 1776, inter- pretation of 150 Gwatkin, Thomas 29 Halifax, overseers of poor in 152 Petitions from 141, 142 Hanover, foundation of Presbyte- rianism in 32 Petitions from 120, 123 Hanover parish, petition from.. 153 Hanover Presbytery, petition of against Toleration bill 40 Petition of in 1776 48 Petitions from 54, 65, 88 Meeting of in 1785 106 Harrison, Benjamin 30, 42, 82, 102 Harrison, Carter Henry, notice of, 82 Harriss, Samuel 37, 69 Harvey, Sir John, arrival of as governor g Harvie, John 55 Hay, Alexander 152 Henley, Samuel 29 Henley and Gwatkin's protest 29 Henrico, university at 7 Petitions from ..120, 121, 123 Henry, James 58, 64 Henry, Patrick, 42, 43, 44, 75, 76, 83, 88, 80, 136, 137 Appears in Parson's Cause.. 25 Leads the Revolution 41 Succeeded by Jefferson as governor 56 Becomes advocate of general assessment 74 Argues in favor of general as- sessment 85 In control of the house of del- egates 87 Re-elected governor 94 Absence of severely felt in house of delegates 102 Discovers a bad intention to- wards religion in Federal Constitution 134 Henry, William Wirt 44 Hill, Wm 75 Hillsborough, Lord 28 Hoge, Moses 89, 106 House of Delegates, powers of . . 45 Resolutions on church ques- tion adopted by 48 Leaders of in 1784 82 Horrocks, James, ends Parsons' Cause 26 Issues call for a convention in 1771 28 160 EEPORT OF THE STATE LIBEARIAN. Huguenots 31 Hunt, Robert 5 Incorporation, petition of Episco- pal church for 78 Question of before committee for religion 79 Resolution in favor of 92 Incorporation act, condemned by Presbyterian church 107 Threatened repeal of 116 Claimed as violation of Bill of Rights 120 Number of petitioners favor- ing repeal of 120 Number of petitioners oppos- ing repeal of 124 Viewed as violation of Bill of Rights 124 Resolutions favoring repeal of 128 Repeal of 129 Repeal of marlcs separation of church and state 129 Incorporation bill, altered 80 Presented on December 10, 1784 100 Vote on 101 Induction of Ministers, regula- tions for in 1642-3 10 Dispute over 17 Infidelity, prevalent In Virginia during French Revolution, 144 Isle of Wight, petition from 84 Jarratt, Devereaux 35, 65 Jefferson, Thomas 42, 139 Programme of 46 Activity of 49 Description by of dfebate on religion 60 Elected governor 56 Statement of concerning the religious legislation of 1779, 64 Brings French influence Into Virginia 144 Johnston, Zacharlah 82 Jones, Joseph 8o Notice of 82 Kay, William, case of In 1748. ... 21 King, Miles 82, 146 King and Queen, petitions from, 120, 137 Glebe sales in 153 King George, overseers of poor In, 152 Petitions from 120, 121,153 King William, overseers of poor of 153 King William glebe 153 King William parish, petition's from 135, 141, 142 Koones, John 37 Lancaster, petition from 120 Latitudlnarianism, prevalent in Virginia 36 Laud, Archbishop, religious policy of & Lee, Richard Henry Lee, 42, 70, 74, 75 Lee, Thomas Ludwell, letter of. . 43 Leeds parish, petition from 126 Lgland, John 134 Letter to the Bishop of London, pamphlet by Landon Carter 24 Letter to the Clergy of Virginia, pamphlet by Richard Bland 24 Liberals, repeal of Incorporation act victory of 129 Littleton parish, petition from.. 125 Louisa, petitions from, 120, 127, 141 Lunenburg, petitions from, 55, 58, 72, 98, 112 Lynhaven parish 135 Lyons, Judge 149, 150 Macock, Samuel 7 McKean, Robert '28 Mackemie, Francis 31 Mackle, Joslas, first Presbyterian minister in Virginia 31 Macnaughton, Duncan 154 McRea, Christopher 67, 133 Madison, James, 44, 74, 98, 106, 135 139 On Bill of Rights ' 43 Opinion of on incorporation, 80 Estimate of 83 Argues against general as- sessment 85 Statements of on assessment question 87 Statement of concerning Pres- byterians 90 Becomes leader in house of delegates 94 Observations of on assess- ment question 100 Explains his vote on Incor- Doration lOl Statement by of public opin- ion on general assessment, 103 Drawn into the campaign against the assessment bill, 104 Writes the Remonstrance... 105 Letter of concerning Presby- terian objections to incor- poration 107 Criticizes constitution of Epis- copal church 109 Reasons of for opposing in- corporation 128 DEPAETMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTORY. 161 Account by of repeal of in- corporation act 129 Madison, James, Rev., elected president of Episcopal con- vention 108 Bisliop of Virginia, calls con- vention 144 Manchester parish, suit of vestry of 148 Marriages, bill declaring what shall be lawful 67 Bill to authorize in certain cases 71 Bill to amend the several acts concerning, 71, 73, 80, 100 Marshall, John, notice of 83 Mason, George. .. .42, 61, 62, 75,134 Author of Bill of Rights 43 Urges Madison to write a criticism of the bill for pro- viding a support for the Teachers of the Christian Religion 104 Matthews, Thomas 80, 88 i Maury, James, suit of in Hanover. i Court 25 i Meade, Bishop Wm 35 Revives Episcopal church... 155 I Mecklenburg, petitions from, 54, 98, 112, 120 Methodists 75, 153 Rise of in Virginia 34 Petition of 47 Opposed to assessment Ill Ministers, bill suspending salaries of 54, 55,. 56 Advertised for 65 Montgomery, petition from 110 Moore, Andrew, sketch of 82 Morals, decline in occasioned by Revolution 75 Morris,' Joshua .32 Morris, Samuel 32 Murray, Alexander, nominated for bishop in colonies 15 Nansemond, petitions from 70, 120 Nansemond glebe 153 Nelson, Governor William, letter of concerning church 28 iSTelson, Nathaniel 88 New Kent, petition from 120 Nicholas, George 134 Urges Madison to write a criticism of the bill provid- ing a support for Teachers of the Christian Religion. . 104 Sends the Remonstrance through the country 105 Chief agent in anti-assess- ment agitation 106 Talents of as political man- ager 110 Opposes incorporation 128 Leader of progressives 129 Nicholas, Robert Carter, 30, 39, 42, 50, 53 Leads conservatives 49 Nicholas, Wilson Gary 82 Nicholson, Governor 16 Dispute of with Blair 17 Non-juiors, bill concerning. 57 Norfolk, petition from 70 Northey, Sir Edward, opinion of on presentation 17 Northfarnham parish, petition from 127 Northington, Lord, decides against Camm's appeal 26 Northumberland, petition from.. 55 Norvell, William 135 Nott, Governor, suspends laws of 1705 18 • Orange, petitions from. . . .120, 121, 133 Overseers of the poor, bill for... 73 Act establishing in place of vestries 115 Petition from in Norfolk... 135 Given power to sell glebes. . 148 Sell glebes 152 Of Fairfax 154 Of Northumberland 154 Of Loudoun 154 Overwharton parish 153 Pedin, James, charges against.. 28 Pendleton, Edmund 42, 50, 53 Elected speaker of house of delegates 46 Leads conservatives 49 Apparently writer of petition from Stratton Major and other parishes 127 Death of 149 Phenix Press, Madison's Remon- strance printed by 105 Pittsylvania, petitions from... 110, 112 Planter class, natural tendency of, to republicanism 41 Powhatan, petitions from, 79, 120, 141 Presbyterians 67, 75 Appearance of in Virginia. . 31 Win a place for themselves. . 34 Petition of clergy of 77 Position of on assessment... 89 Madison's opinion of 90 Attitude of towards assess- ment misunderstood 91 Views of explained by com- missioners 94 Contention of 101 162 EEPOET OP THE STATE LIBRARIAN. Madison's views of on assess- ment question 103 Take stand against assess- ment 106 Objection of to assessment.. 107 Condemn incorporation act. . 107 Petitions from against assess- ment ■ Ill First to advance theory that church property reverted to people 131 Petition from for sale of glebes 131 Resolutions reported on peti- »■ , tion of in 1787 133 Make no further efforts in glebe contest 134 Presentation, right of question of controversy 10 Prince Edward, parish church of, 153 Petitions from 67, 139 Princess Anne! petition from 70 Property of church, bill for sav- ing • 62 Dispute over '. 17 Protestant Episcopal church, 144, 146 Convention of at Richmond. . 78 Petition of for incorporation, 78 First convention of 108 Convention of in 1786 116 Petition from in 1786 116 Suffers blow in failing to ob- tain state support 116 Claimed as different from church of England 120 Petition of standing commit- tee of 125 Receives blow in repeal of in- corporation act 130 Petition from in 1796 142 Puritan Revolution, effect of in Virginia 11 Moral strain of 12 Puritans, legislation as to 9 Driven from colony 31 Quakers 130 Act for suppression of 12 Assemblies of forbidden in 1662 13 Coming of to Virginia 31 Petition of against general assessment Ill Radicals 138, 140 Wish to undo church settle- ment 130 Strength of in west 137 Case of in 1796 143 Win the day on glebe ques- tion 145 Strength of in . 1798 146 Randolph, Edmund 136 Statement of on Bill of Rights 43 Manuscript history of ...... . 44 Account by of legislation on religious question in 1776. 51 Statement as to questions to be discussed by assembly of 1784 , 74 Writes Madison concerning Episcopal convention 109 Randolph, Peyton 33 Rector Detected, The, pamphlet by Landon Carter 24 Remonstrance, The, written by James Madison 105 Sent out by George Nicholas 105 Influence of on anti-assess- ment petitions 109 An argument against re- straint of liberty 110 Repeal of incorporation act, bill for 128 Republicanism, two schools of in Virginia , 42 Resolutions, of Assembly in 1771. 29 Reported in 1787 for the par- tial sale of the glebes 133 Reported on Baptist petition of 1789 135 For sale of glebe lands in 1790 137 For sale of glebes in 1791 . . 138 Of 1792 139 For repeal of the guarantee- ing act of 1776 1411 Of 1795 141 Of 1798 145 Restoration, number of parishes at time of 12 Revolution, not a class or sec- tional movement in Vir- ginia 41 Extent of 91 Revolution of 1688, popular In Virginia 16 Rice, John Holt 90 Richmond, petition from 137 Riddick, Willis 82, 146 Roan, John 32- Roane, Spencer .82, 88,149 Robinson, Wm 32 Rockbridge, petition from 97 Rockingham, petition from 95 Rodgers, John 33 St. Anne's parish, case of presen- tation to 18 Petitions from 140, 153 St. James Northam parish, peti- tion from 133 r .■ DEf AETMENT OF ARCHIVES AND HISTOEY. 163 St. Stephen's parish 154 St. Margaret's parish.. 28 Salaries of ministers, acts as to in 1662 ■ 13 As fixed in 1727 21 Scott, Arch > 132 Scott, Sir Walter, novels of. .... . 155 Selden vs. overseers of poor of Loudoun 154 Senate, adopts amendments to bill for religious freedom, 114 Shield, Samuel 78 Single and Distinct View of the Two-penny Act, a pamphlet by John Camm 24 Skepticism, declines after French Revolution 155 Slaughter, George 88 Smith, John Blair 77, 88, 90, 94 Letter of to Madison on in- corporation 81 Speaks in committee of the whole against general as- sessment 113 Statement by of Henry's atti- tude in 1788 134 Smyth, Adam 71 Somers, Sir George 6 Southam parish, petition from... 142 Spotswood, Alexander, dispute of with Blair 18 Spotsylvania, petitions from, 120, 133 Stafford, petition from 137 Glebe sales in 153 Starke, Boning 52 Staunton Academy, fund of 153 Stille, Charles J 44 Story, Justice, decisions of in glebe cases 154 Stratton Major parish, petition from 127 Stuart, Archibald 82 Surry, petitions from 99, 112 Swift, Jonathan, mentioned for colonial bishop 15 Taylor, John, of Caroline, notice of 82 Tazewell, Henry, notice of 82 Teachers of the Christian Relig- ion, bill establishing a pro- vision for 99, 102, 103, 113 Terrett vs. Taylor, case of 154 Thruston, Charles Mynn 70 Reports resolutions for re- peal of incorporation act. . 128 Tillotson parish, petition from.. 133 Todd, John 88, 94 Toleration Act 32, 33, 37, 38 Toleration Bill 38, 39, 40 Trinity parish, petition from .... 127 *rwo-penny act of 1755 22 Of 1758 23 Tucker, Judge 149 Turpln, suit of 148 Tyler, John .76, 88 United State Supreme Court 154 Vanmeter, Isaac 82 Vestries, powers of in Iboi 12 Given full power in 1662.... 13 Self-perpetuating powers of unpopular 15 Petitions for dissolution of seat to May 1779 session of Assembly 55 Bill for dissolution of 56, 6i Done away with in west 67 Dissolution of completed in west 70 Bill to amend the several acts concerning 71 Relieved of last state duties by act of 1786. 115 Vote on resolution affirming that all churches ought to be granted right of incorpora- tion 93 On incorporation bill 101 On assessment Question 102 On resolutions of 1789 136 On resolutions of lv90 137 On resolutions of 1795 141 On resolutions of 1797 145 Wallace, Caleb, description by of debate on religious ques- tion in 1776 51 Waller, John 37,66 Warrington, Thomas, suit of for salary 25 Warwick, petition from 76 Washington, George, opinion of on assessment 105 Watkins, Thomas 32 Waugh, James, raises a riot in Stafford 15 Webber, Wm 37, 85, 120 Wesley, John 35 West, first opposition to assess- ment in 98 Small part taken by in re- peal of incorporation act. . 129 Westmoreland, petition from.... 112 Whig Party 155 Whitaker, Alexander 6 White, Alexander 113 Suit of for salary 25 Notice of 82 Whitefield, George 35 Wickham, Wm 7 Wilkinson, Thomas 67 164 ftEPORT OF THE STATE LIBRARIAN. William and Mary College, estab- lisbment of. 16 Bebates at 144 Williams, John 69 Winston, Isaac 32 Wyatt, Haut 7 Wyatt, Sir Francis ; 7 Instructions of 8 Wythe, George 148, 149 Yeardley, Sir George, arrival of as governor 6 Instructions of 7 Zane, Isaac S2