YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY The Great Virginia Rebellion of 1676y AN ADDRESS DELIVERED BY Prof. ROBERT M. McELROY OF PRINCETON UNIVERSITY THE GREAT VIRGINIA REBELLION OP 1676 A paper read before the Society by Professor Robert M. McBlroy of Princeton University on November 9, 1911. In the British Museum there is a document, probably written in 1605, which summarizes the reasons for the raising of money to plant a colony in Virginia. "All kingdoms," runs this document, "are maintained by rents or traficque, but especially by the latter, which in marataine places must flourish by means of navigation." It further argues that, as Eng land is an island which does not produce masts, cordage, pitch, tar, resin, and such things as are essential to the maintenance of a large fleet, care should be taken to plant colonies where these things are found in abundance. Here then is the idea which ultimately went far toward producing our Revolution, namely, that colonies exist for the purpose of increasing the commercial gains of the mother country. ^ When the Virginia Company's Charter was issued, in pursuance of this plan, in 1606, it provided that the pro jected Colonies should be under a government without a single element of popular liberty.* Their laws were to be made by the "King's Council of Virginia," which was ap pointed by the King, and administered by a council resident in the Colony, and similarly chosen. One saving clause, however, crept into that first document of American Government and stood there as the ideal toward which, not Virginia alone, but all American Colonies steadily strove during their formative period. The Colonists, it said, "Shall have and enjoy all liberties, franchises and immunities within any of our dominions ... as if they had been abiding and born within this our Realm of England. . . ."** It is true that no machinery was provided for putting "¦Text. Macdonald's Select Charters, I-II. *'* Virginia Charter of 1606, Sect. XV. the; great VIRGINIA REBELLION OF 1676 this clause into operation, nor any method for the Colonists to express their political desires, but this clause embodied the idea which took possession of each Colony as soon as it was fairly established and the essence of American Colonial history is the fight to put the ideas of that clause into operation, to give to Americans "the liberties, franchises and immunities" of Englishmen everywhere. We may even go farther and say that the story of the beginning of our War of Independence is the story of how George the Third sought to take away those hard-won "liberties, franchises and immunities." » In Virginia, thanks to the influence of strong Puritans in England, the "liberties and franchises" were soon won. The Charter of 1609* gave to the Virginia Company the choice of the lawmakers of Virginia, which the King had hitherto kept in his own hands, and the third Charter of 1612** gave the Company full power in its quarter-annual meetings in London to "ordain and make such laws and ordinances ... as to them . . . shall be thought requisite and meet, saving the laws and statutes of this our realm of England." With a Company, in which Puritan political ideals dominated, that meant, of course, that Virginia would be allowed to try the experiment of the kind of liberal govern ment which the Puritan Party was striving to realize in Eng land herself. The result was the Virginia Representative Assembly of 1619, followed in course by the Ordinance and Constitution of 1621,*** the first charter of free government in our history. This charter gave to Virginia the right to elect her own representative assembly and to make her own laws, a right which she never relinquished except for the brief period when *Text. Macdonald's Select Charters, No. 2. ** Text. Brown's Genesis of the United States, II, 540. seq. I-** Text. Hening, I, 110-113. THE GREAT VIRGINIA REBELLION OF 1676 Sir William Berkeley, after his restoration to the position of Governor of Virginia by Charles II, suppressed it by methods which I must now describe in attempting to account for Bacon's Rebellion of 1676. The restoration of 1660 found Virginia a self-governing commonwealth, her free institutions having been given her in the days when the Puritans controlled her destinies. But if Virginia had ever herself been Puritan in population that day had passed during the days of Charles Stuart's exile. The supremacy of Oliver Cromwell had made England an unpleasant place for the long-haired Cavaliers, and thousands of them had sought a refuge in Virginia, where they could safely tell again the tale of Marston Moor and Naseby and how a "good cause had gone down in blood."* The statistics of Virginia population will show the facts. In 1650 there were only 15,000 inhabitants in the Virginia Colony. In 1670 there were 40,000, an increase of almost 300 per cent, in twenty years. By this population which had largely arrived during the King's exile, it was natural that the restoration should be hailed in Virginia with delight as fervent as in England herself. When the Virginia Governor, Samuel Mathews, conveniently died, just as the news of the restoration arrived, the Virginia General Assembly showed its royalistic enthusiasm by electing the stout old royalist, Sir William Berkeley, to fill his place. Sir William had been royal Governor of Virginia in the days of Charles I and had small taste for the office at the hands of the people's representatives. When, therefore, the restored Stuart sent him a royal commission to govern Virginia, he, knowing that no man can serve two masters, chose to consider himself the representative of Royalty and not of the Virginia Assembly. He therefore set himself the '•'The Burwell manuscript (Ingram, Mass. Hist. Collections, Second Series, 1, 63) speaks of Virginia as "the onely citty of refuge left in his Majestie's dominions in those times, for distressed cavaliers." THE GREAT VIRGINIA REBELLION OF 1676 task of imitating his royal master and the cherished institu tions of Virginia began to be undermined. The process was slow and insidious, the result rather of the Governor's natural political instincts than of any deliberate intention. At first the royalistic enthusiasm which had brought him again into office sustained him in his execution of it. Being a royalist and finding that the House of Burgesses which had been chosen in 1661, under the influence of the news of the restoration, was of his own political complexion, he decided to keep it in power and accordingly, for the next fifteen years, no election of Burgesses was made.* It ' had represented the people of Virginia when chosen, but it soon ceased to represent them, and as the enthusiasm for the restored Stuart died away, many a good old cavalier began to see that such an assembly was but the shadow of self-government which Virginia had once enjoyed. When loyalty to a king is set in contraposition to rights long cherished, men are likely to dream dreams of revolu tion. The Virginians of 1676 were loyal to Charles II, but one thing they cherished even more than their loyalty — their rights. By 1676 they could see clearly that these rights were seriously threatened by a course of events which had been so gradual that few had noticed them. Among the chief of these was their suffrage. From, the arrival of Governor Yeardley in 1619 all the freemen had enjoyed a voice in public affairs; at first in matters of local interest and minor importance only, but after the first repre sentative assembly of 1619, in the important matter of choos ing representatives to the House of Burgesses.** In 1655, by act of the House of Burgesses, the suffrage was confined to householders,*** but one year later the ancient usage was * Bruce, Institutional History of Virginia, I, 67. ** Hening. Statutes at Large, I, 112. *** Ibid. I, 412. THE GREAT VIRGINIA REBELLION OF 1676 restored and "freemen" were again given a vote.* By the year 1670, however, it was claimed that the wider suffrage had operated to produce "tumults at elections,"** and, as this idea fitted well with the plans of Sir William Berkeley, the suffrage was, in that year, again confined to those in habitants who owned enough property, real or personal, to cause them to strive for the public good.*** This freeman's suffrage, which was thus destroyed for the time, was one of the rights which many Virginians valued even higher than their king and their loyalty. Another was freedom of trade, which the government of Charles II next proceeded to disturb. When Charles I had been entering upon his fatal attempt to rule England without a Parliament, he had sought to secure a monopoly of the Virginia tobacco trade by recognizing his "well-beloved Burgesses of Virginia." They had valued this recognition, but when it came to the question of paying for it by giving the Crown the desired monopoly, they raised a protest so fierce that even the Stuart was led to abandon his plan. The Commonwealth had applied to Virginia its Naviga tion Laws, designed to cripple Holland, but had been so lax in their enforcement that they amounted to little. When Charles II was restored, however, he revived the Navigation Laws and attempted a strict enforcement of them. Even intercolonial trade was burdened with heavy duties.**** These laws forced Virginia to throw her large tobacco crop into the restricted market of England, where her planters were com pelled to take such prices as were there offered. Here was a very definite application of the principle that Colonies exist for * Hening, I, 403. ** Cooke's Virginia, 223. *** Hening, II, 280. One of the acts of Bacon's Assembly, which followed the Long House of Burgesses of 1660-1676, was to restore "freeman's suffrage'' (Hening, II, 356 and 425) which remained the law late into the history of the State of Virginia. **** Cooke, 231. THE GREAT VIRGINIA REBELLION OF 1676 the benefit of the mother country, and it was deeply resented. For the other English colonies in America it was oppression thus to control their market, but for Virginia, whose chief and almost only source of revenue was her great tobacco crop, it meant financial ruin. The burgesses fiercely pro tested and the restored Stuart professed to yield to their protests, declaring that he was willing to settle matters according to their will, but before he had acted Bacon's Rebellion arrested his hand.* These, then, were three efficient causes of political dis content in Virginia in 1676: (1) A House of Burgesses of fifteen years' standing, whose members no longer repre sented their constituencies; (2) The overthrow of their ancient freemen's suffrage by the enforcement of a property qualification; (3) The enforcement of Navigation Laws which were regarded as ruinous to the chief industry of Virginia. Added to these was the restriction of the people's share in purely local government. Virginia had no town meetings such as those that managed local affairs in New England. The peculiarly scattered character of her population made that unfeasible. In New England, where farms were small, these primary assemblies of citizens for the management of local affairs were easy and natural. In Virginia, with her great planta tion life, they were impossible. In Virginia, therefore, from very early times, local laws, taxation, etc., were generally managed by the vestry, usually composed of twelve men, who, before 1664,** were elected by the people of the parishes and were therefore what we may call an "open vestry." By 1676, however, the vestries had generally begun the practice of themselves filling vacancies in their own body, '* Charles had planned to grant Virginia a new and complete charter, "but the news of Bacon's rebellion" prevented it. Bland to Berne, Jamestown, April 20, 1676. Text. John Burke's History of Virginia, II, 249. ** Hening, II, 25. THE GREAT VIRGINIA REBELLION OF 1676 thus ceasing to represent or be responsive to the will of the people.* These "closed vestries" apportioned taxes, elected church wardens (who in many instances were the tax gatherers) and attended to all local affairs except such as came under the control of the County Court of eight justices appointed by the Governor.** When they ceased to be repre sentative, local self-government in Virginia was dead. Thus, in local as well as in general government, the voice of the people of Virginia had been hushed by the year 1676. Their House of Burgesses and their local vestries had silently taken on the character of unchangeable oligarchies, and, as men began to realize what had happened, the air of the Old Dominion began to be filled with language savoring but little of political contentment. As though this were not enough, they also saw themselves used as an instru ment for squaring the King's debts. In exile Charles II had made many promises to the faithful, some of which he purposed keeping, others of which were never meant really to bind this slippery monarch. In 1673, however, he had chosen to keep one of these promises, which was no less than the granting of all Virginia to two of his friends, the Earl of Arlington and Lord Cul- peper.*** Thus, by virtue of his restored kingship, Charles II ventured to hand over his ancient and loyal province of * In 1619 the vestries were chosen by the monthly Court (see Bruce's Institutional History of Virginia, I, 65). By 1641 the parish ioners alone elected them at stated intervals (ibid. 66). This method was confirmed by an act of the Assembly in 1664, but, by 1676, each vestry had assumed the power of filling vacancies by its own vote, thus ceasing to be representative. (Bruce, Institutional History of Virginia, I, 67.) ** Full details of vestries and their duties may be found in Bruce's Institutional History of Virginia, I, 73-78. ''"'"''The grant was limited to 31 years. Campbell's Virginia, 275; Cooke, 233; Fiske's Old Virginia and Her Neighbors, I, 53; Hening, II, 519. THE GREAT VIRGINIA REBELLION OF 1676 Virginia to be the personal property of two dashing cavaliers who, of course, valued it only for what they could make out of it. They were to own Virginia, receive its revenues, appoint its officials, lay off new counties and run it as their private possession. With these accumulated evils upon her, Virginia was ripe for rebellion, needing only a leader and a new pretext for a popular gathering. Both were at hand and the insur rection which resulted is known as Bacon's Rebellion. As so often happened in Colonial times, the crisis came with an Indian war. The people of Maryland had been at war with "the Susquehanians," as the Cotton manuscript calls them,* and "it came to this pointe, yt the Marylanders were obliged ... to suplycate . . . aide of the Vergin- ians, put under the conduct of one Collonel Washing ton . . . who . . . invests the Indians in there forte. . . ." After a siege, says the Burwell manuscript,** the Indians found that "their bellies began to mind them and their stomachs too . . . which was the cause . . . that they sent out six of their Woerowances (chief men) to commence a treaty. What the articles were that they brought ... I do not know, but certainly they were so unacceptable to the English that they caused the Com missioners' brains to be knock'd out for dictating so badly ""A document entitled "Our Late Troubles," written in 1676 by Mrs. Anne Cotton to Mr. C. H , at Yardley, in Northamptonshire. Force's Historical Tracts, 1, IX. ""'= The Burwell manuscripts are much fuller in detail than the Cotton manuscript. They tell at length the story of Bacon's career and Berkeley's vengeance. They were found among the papers of Captain Nathaniel Burwell, of King William County, and sent to Josiah Quincy in the year 1812. They are printed in the Massachu setts Historical Collections, second series, vol. I, pp. 26-80, and in Force's Historical Tracts, I, XL THE GREAT VIRGINIA REBELLION OF 1676 to their tongues."* The rest of the Indians slipped away, "leaving the English to prosecute the siege as Schogin's wife brooded the eggs that the fox had suck'd."** This scene was the prelude to a succession of murders along the Virginia frontier — ^murders attended by all the fiendish tortures that savage cruelty could devise. "For some," says the Burwell manuscript, "before they would deprive them of their lives, they would take a great deal of time to deprive them first of their skins . . . knock out their teeth . . . tear off the nails of their hands and their toes.*** And now it was that the poor distressed and doubly afflicted planters began to curse and execrate that ill-managed business at the fort. Their cries were reiterated again and again, both to God and to man for releife." At last an army of 500 men was assembled near Jamestown, eager to be led against their savage tormentors. But politi cally, the times were dangerous, as the Virginians were greatly excited over the Long House of Burgesses, the restriction of the suffrage, the enforcement of the Navigation Laws, the closing of the vestries and the Arlington-Culpeper grant. Governor Berkeley was afraid to allow the regular organization of so large a force at such a time and declined to recognize them, declaring that the frontier forts were a sufficient defence against the Indians.**** *A very detailed account of the Indian War is given in the T. M. manuscript of 1705, which is a graphic account of the entire episode on the rise and fall of Bacon's rebellion by an eye witness. ** Burwell manuscript. *** Burwell manuscript. *""''* According to Berkeley's report to the Lords of Trade, written in 1670, there were then five forts in Virginia, two on the James, and one each on the York, Potomac and Rappahannock, having in all 30 cannon. "But God knows,'' he adds, "we have neither skill nor ability to make or maintain them." (Hening, II, 513.) The Burwell manuscript adds that they did little good, "For the Indians quickly found out where the mouse traps were sett, and for what purpose." Their uselessness, it adds, "excited a marvelous discontent among the people." THE GREAT VIRGINIA REBELLION OF 1676 Whether justly or not, the planters freely expressed the belief that Berkeley was preventing the punishment of the Indians in the interest of the trade in beaver skins, of which he enjoyed a monopoly.* That was, perhaps, a factor in his decision, but the real reason doubtless lay deeper. He knew the temper of his subjects and felt that His Majesty's Government would be in danger if so large an armed force were allowed to become well organized. And so the planters sullenly disbanded and returned to their homes. But in a few days they were again aroused by the news that the Indians had made another attack, this time at the falls, "where . . . they slew Mr. Bacon's overseer, whom he much loved, and one of his servants, whose bloud hee vowed to revenge. . . ." In their rage and excitement the planters "chose Colonel Bacon their General,"** and he, in accepting, made one of the fiery speeches which are given to such men upon such occasions. He did not confine himself to the Indian questions, but enlarged upon the political grievances of the time, the Long House of Burgesses, the closed vestry, the hateful Navigation Laws. He promised not only to punish the savages, but also to right these political wrongs after the Indians should be humbled. But this new Cromwell of the West did not yet know the man who was the King's Governor of Virginia. Gov ernor Berkeley saw the dangerous influence which the young planter already had over the Colonists and refused to grant him a commission. His refusal, however, only made matters * The Burwell manuscript says, in a passage which was not wholly legible in the manuscript as prepared for the press, ". . . saith something against the Govemour about the beaver trade, as being a monopoly . . ." The T. M. manuscript significantly declares that there "were popular surmizes and murmerings, vizt., that no bullets would pierce beaver skins." '•'* Burwell manuscript, 33. T. M. manuscript, 11. Anne Cotton manuscript, 4. 10 THE GREAT VIRGINIA REBELLION OF 1676 worse, for Bacon now took matters into his own hands and, without a commission, put himself at the head of his little army and marched away. He killed 150, routed the re mainder and turned homeward a hero and a rebel.* In his absence (May 29, 1676)** the old Governor had denounced him, declared him and his followers enemies of the King and, with a small body of horse, had started out to arrest them.*** But he found that not all the rebels had gone with Bacon. The country in his rear rose in indignant protest. The spirit of the young leader had permeated all Virginia and from every side planters rallied for his defence. Governor Berkeley acted with discretion under these trying conditions. He returned to his capital,**** where he very cleverly gave the impression that it was the Burgesses and not the King's Governor who ought to bear the blame for conditions in Virginia. It was time, he said, for the elec tion of a new House of Burgesses, and he accordingly issued writs for such an election.***** The result complicated matters still more, for the proscribed rebel. Bacon, was at once chosen a member of the new assembly and a few days later entered Jamestown to take his seat. There was now no choice for the King's Governor. Bacon had defied the law and must take the conse quences. He and his companions were promptly arrested and brought before the Governor.****** The scenes as "= Some historians declare that this so-called battle of Bloody Run was not fought here at this time, but the T. M. manuscript gives it on evidence said to have come from Bacon himself. Force, I, 11. Also Burwell manuscript, 35. ''"'' Anne Cotton manuscript, 4. *** Breviarie and Conclusion. Text. Burke, II, 250. **** Bur.5yeii manuscript. The Cotton manuscript gives another reason for his return: "Not knowing which way he (Bacon) was gone, he dismisseth his army . . . retireing ... to James Towne, there to be redy for the assembly, which was now upon the point of meeting." *"=""*=* Cooke, 244-245. ****** Burwell manuscript, 35. Breviarie and Conclusion. Burke, II, 250. 11 THE GREAT VIRGINIA REBELLION OF 1676 described in the T. M. manuscript are highly dramatic. The young man of twenty-eight, confronting the royal Governor of seventy, who had ruled Virginia for over a quarter of a century. "Mr. Bacon," said the Governor, "have you forgot to be a gentleman?" "No, may it please yo'r hon'r,'' answer'd Mr. Bacon. "Then," replied the Gover'r, "I'll take yo'r parol."* And so the rebel was again at liberty, though it would have suited Sir William far better to have seen him hanged. The question still remained as to what should be done with Bacon, for expediency, not law, must rule in the present excited State of Virginia. At last Berkeley hit upon what seemed a happy solution. If Bacon would acknowledge his fault he should be given his old seat on the Council and also a commission to fight the Indians.** This was a great con cession, but Bacon was now a popular idol, a duly elected member of the House of Burgesses and withal a dangerous personage, and concessions were necessary. Bacon finally agreed, but his confession must be to the Burgesses, the representatives of the people of Virginia. It was soon over; Bacon on one knee before the assembled Burgesses, with the old Governor present, presented "a sheet of paper confessing his crimes and begging pardon of God, the King and the Govern'r.*** Whereto (after a * T. M. manuscript, Force, I, VIII. The Anne Cotton manuscript, however says, "they were freed by a judgment in court upon Bacon's tryall." Ibid., IX, 4. The Burwell manuscript says, "Being brought to a day of hearing, before the Govemour and Counceil, Bacon was not only acquitted and pardoned of all misdemeanours, but restored to the Council table as before." Force, I, XI, 11. """T. M. manuscript. Force, I, VIII, 12. .+** f y[^ gayg . "Bacon . . . had a nigh relative namely Col. Nathaniel Bacon ... a very rich poletick man, and childless, design ing his kinsman for his heir, who . . . had prevailed with his un easy cousin to deliver the . . . written recantation at the bar ." Force, I, VIII, 15. THE GREAT VIRGINIA REBELLION OF 1676 short pause)," the Governor replied, "God forgive you, I forgive you, . . . yea, . . . and all that were with you."* Bacon was then "readmitted into the Counceil and promised a commission on the Monday following (this was on the Saturday). . . ."** But on Monday the commission did not appear. Tuesday and Wednesday passed likewise, and still the hero of the people waited in vain, while his friends, who knew the ways of the old Governor, began to suspect treachery. At last they prevailed upon Bacon to escape while there was yet time.*** Early the next morn ing "a bruit ran about the town : 'Bacon is fled,' " and the infatuated planters hurried after him. In three or four days he marched back toward James town at the head of a rugged, determined army of five hundred men. Berkeley heard of his approach and attempted to gather a force with which to meet him, but he could only muster about 100 and these moved so slowly that, before they were properly martialed. Bacon advanced to the green in front of the State house, "strutting betwixt his two files of men,"**** and demanded the person of the King's Gov ernor. The Governor and his Council instantly appeared. Sir William, dramatically pulling aside the lace on his bosom, cried out: "Here! Shoot me — fore God — fair mark — shoot!" Bacon replied: "No, may it please yo'r hono'r, we will not hurt a hair of yo'r head, nor of any other man's, we are *T. M. manuscript. ** Cotton manuscript, Force, I, IX, 5. T. M. says he was passing by the door of the Council room during this interval and "saw Mr. Bacon on his quondam seat with the Governor and Council, which seemed a marvelous indulgence to one whom he had so lately prose cuted as a rebel." ***Tj,g Burwell manuscript and the Cotton manuscript both say that Bacon left Jamestown upon the pretext of visiting his wife "now sick, as he pretended." Compare also Breviarie and Conclusion. Text. Burke, II, 250-253. **** Y. M. manuscript. 13 THE GREAT VIRGINIA REBELLION OF 1676 come for a commission to save our lives from th' Indians, which you have so often promised, and now we will have it before we go."* The appearance of the young rebel and his troops was so fierce that the Governor decided to have the remainder of the dangerous interview within doors. He accordingly retired, followed by Bacon and the Council, Bacon swear ing as he went, to quote the words of the T. M. manu script: "Dam my blood, l^'ll kill Govern'r, Councill, Assembly and all, and then I'll sheath my sv/ord in my own heart's blood." His soldiers stood guard outside, having been ordered "that if he (Bacon) should draw his sword they were ... to fire" on the State house. Just what happened inside we shall probably never know. T. M., who was a member of the Burgesses, says that Bacon came into their chamber an hour or more after this scene and asked the Assembly to grant him a com mission to fight the Indians. "Our Speaker," he says, "sat silent when one Mr. Blayton made answer, ' 'twas not in our province or power, nor of any other, save the King's vice-regent, our Govern'r, to grant that.' " For half an hour Bacon harangued the Assembly upon the question of public grievances, and then retired, dissatisfied. But failure was quite outside Bacon's calculations and before he left the State house he had forced his will. The next day he appeared at the head of his army proudly bear ing the commission as General and Commander-in-Chief against the Indians.** This commission had evidently been secured despite the Governor's protest, for Berkeley promptly despatched to the King a letter in which he declared: "I have above 30 years governed the most flourishing country the sun ever shone over, but am now encompassed with rebellion." *T. M. manuscript. Force, I, VIII, 17. "'* T. M. manuscript. Breviarie aiid Conclusion, Text. Burke, II, 251. 14 THE GREAT VIRGINIA REBELLION OF 1676 Bacon's victory over the Governor was, for the moment, complete. T. M. tells us that "one evening nigh sunset," just after his stormy interview with the Governor, "came Genii. Bacon with his hand full of unfolded papers'' into a group of members of the Assembly and said, "Which of these gentlem'n shall I intreat to write a few words for me . . . ?" Mr. Lawrence indicated T. M. with the words, "That gentleman writes very well." As there seemed no way of escape, T. M. offered his services and spent the whole night filling out the papers as Bacon dictated. The papers, he explains, proved to be "blank commissions sign'd by the Govern'r," which Bacon filled with such names as he chose. In that manner. Bacon, the General, prepared his army and shortly "march'd with a thousand men into the forest to seek the enemy Indians."* Before he had traversed the region at the head of the York River, however, a post overtook him with the alarm ing news "that Sir William Berkeley was raiseing the Traine- Bands in Glocester . . ."** and had again denounced him and his followers as rebels. "It vext him to the heart," says the Anne Cotton manuscript, "... to thinke that while he was hunting wolves, tigers and bears, which daly destroy'd our harm less and innossent lambs, that hee, and those with him, should be persewed in the reare with a full cry as more savage beasts."*** *T. M. ** Anne Cotton manuscript. Force, I, IX, 5. *** At this point appears a strange instance of plagiarism. The Anne Cotton manuscript, written probably in 1676, here introduces a striking paragraph which is reproduced almost without change by the Burwell manuscript, and without quotation marks or any sign of acknowledgment. This and many other touches lead me to suspect that the Burwell manuscript is a somewhat later compilation and not, as it appears on the surface, a genuine document of the rebellion written by an eye witness. — R. M. McE. THE GREAT VIRGINIA REBELLION OF 1676 Bacon accordingly abandoned his pursuit of the Indians and turned to face his white enemy, the Royal Governor of Virginia. Hastily preparing a proclamation, he marched his army to the Middle Plantations (the point where Williams burg now stands), where he issued the document to the people. It argued against the idea that men "wholy devoted to the King and countrey . . . adventuring there lives and fortunes against the savage enemies of the King; men that never ploted . . . the destruction, detryement or wrong of any of His Majestie's subjects . . . can de- surve the names of Rebells and Traters."* He then drew a clear distinction between loyalty to the Crown which protects its subjects, and the Royal Governor, Sir William Berkeley, who oppresses them, insinuating that selfish inter est had served to determine the Governor's policy upon questions which should have been decided entirely upon the basis of the common good. Having announced this startling theory of the rights of subjects, he then called upon the real friends of law and the Crown to meet on August 3** and join in public protests against the actions of the King's Governor of Virginia. At the appointed hour, one hundred years almost to the day before the signing of our Declaration of Independence, a large crowd assembled at the Middle Plantations, where they were asked to subscribe their names to a test oath of sur prisingly daring character. It bound the signers : (1) To aid their General, even to forfeiture of life and lands, against the common foe, the savages of the forest. (2) To resist the Royal Governor should he attempt to interfere with the military operations of their General. (3) To protect the General, army and all that should subscribe to this engagement against any power that should be "'Full outline of Proclamation and of subsequent oath in Cotton manuscript. ** T. M. manuscript. 16 THE GREAT VIRGINIA REBELLION OF 1676 sent out of England till the King and Parliament had heard the country's complaints against Sir William Berkeley.* This was, indeed, bold ground, the boldest ever taken on this continent until King George's troops were fired upon at Lexington, and even those hardy planters hesitated to sign. They debated "from allmost noone, 'till midnight, pro and con, whether the same might, in the last article especially, be without danger taken." While they were debating a messenger arrived with the startling news that the savages were attacking a fort on the York River, which could not resist, as the Governor "the day before had caused all arms and ammunition to be conveyed out of the fort into his owne vessel."** It is not known whether Bacon had arranged the incident, but he instantly took advantage of it, "frameing and stamping out to the people's apprehensions what commen taries or interpretations he pleased . . . insomuch that the oath became now more smooth and glib to be swallowed, even by those who had the greatest repugnancy against it. . _"*** The theory of this oath was simple, but it rested upon a conception of the people's rights which was as yet novel. Governor Berkeley was represented as making war on the people of Virginia for no reason but his own selfish advan tage. He was therefore no longer the representative of King Charles II, who was their friend. Berkeley was there- *Anne Cotton manuscript gives substance of the oath in this form. The Burwell manuscript gives Bacon's reasons for requiring the oath. Philip Ludwell's letter to Sir Henry Chicherly, dated March 28, 1678, confirms the fact that the oath bound the signers to "oppose any forces His Majesty should send in." Text. Burke's History of Virginia, II, 272. '''* Burwell manuscript. *** Anne Cotton manuscript. "Bacon even went so far,'' says this manuscript, "as to threaten to surrender up his commission to the Assembly and lett them finde other servants to do the countrey's worke." It also contains a list of the signers. Force, I, IX, 7. 17 THE GREAT VIRGINIA REBELLION OF 1676 fore the traitor and rebel, while Bacon, the defender of the people and the champion of their rights, was His Majesty's real representative in Virginia. The obvious duty, therefore, of every truly loyal soul was to sustain Bacon and, even if the King, in his ignorance of the real conditions, should send troops from England to sustain Berkeley, they must be resisted. The logical inference from such premises was that Bacon, the real representative of the King, should see that a government for Virginia be provided to take the place of the one which had been made void by Sir William Berkeley's treason to the people. Under the theory of the people's sovereignty, it was evident that such a government must come from the people. Upon a former occasion Bacon had been advised by his intimate friend and councillor, William Drummond, to depose Berkeley and put one of his own followers in his place, Drummond declaring that such an action would not be without precedent in Virginia history, as Governor Harvey had been deposed by the House of Burgesses in 1635. But Bacon had wisely declined the suggestion. Now, however, he felt that he must arrange for the people to take control and form a government, and he accordingly issued writs in His Majesty's name conven ing "an Assembly to sitt downe the 4 of September," hav ing the writs signed by four of the Governor's Council, who were with the General.* Having completed these arrangements, Bacon ordered his troops to return, each to his home, and prepare for another Indian expedition. His plans were, however, sud denly altered by the news that Governor Berkeley, with 1,000 men, was marching against Jamestown, which Bacon's lieutenant. Colonel Hansford, held with about 900 Baconians. *Anne Cotton manuscript. The names of the four as given in this manuscript are "Coll. Swan, Coll. Beale, Coll. Ballard, Esq. Bray." Compare also Burwell manuscript. 18 THE GREAT VIRGINIA REBELLION OF 1676 It was true. Immediately after Bacon's departure from Jamestown the old Governor had called for troops, but the spirit of Bacon dominated the Jamestown district and the call fell upon deaf ears. Berkeley had then hurried over to Gloucester, but when he tried to address the Colonists there his voice was drowned by the murmur, "Bacon, Bacon, Bacon,'' as his audience melted away. Having posted notices, denouncing Bacon and all his followers as rebels and traitors,* the angry old Governor had crossed over to the Peninsula of Accomac. But by this time Bacon had received news of his operations and had sent two of his lieutenants, Bland and Carver, "to block Sir William up in Accomack or other ways, to inveagle the inhabitants . . . to surrender him up into their hands. . . ."** And here occurred the first failure of the rebel cause — Carver and Bland were themselves captured by the Governor. Bland was put in irons for safe keeping, but Carver, being regarded as a more dangerous rebel, was "rewarded . . . with the gift of a halter."*** Berkeley next devoted himself to the task of raising an army large enough to overwhelm the rebellion. It was no easy task, but, by virtue of golden promises, he finally secured about 1,000 soldiers, but of the poorer sort. They were induced to serve, as the Burwell manuscript tells us, by the promise of the estates of those who had followed Bacon, "catch as catch could," the pay of twelvepence a day and exemption for 21 years from all impositions except church dues. With this motley army Berkeley advanced to Jamestown and demanded its surrender. Colonel Hansford, unwilling to engage in actual battle, evacuated during the night and. sought out Bacon with the news of the Governor's arrival. * Burwell manuscript. "'?Burwell manuscript. Massachusetts Historical Society Collec tions. Second series, I, 47. *** Burwell manuscript, 47. 19 THE GREAT VIRGINIA REBELLION OF 1676 Bacon immediately mounted his horse and, attended only by a small guard of 150 men,* hurried toward Jamestown, sending out couriers in every direction to summon his followers. By the time he reached the neighborhood of the capital he had an army of several hundred. After ordering his men to fire a volley into the town he took up his quarters in Governor Berkeley's country house at Greenspring. Knowing that the Governor's force greatly outnumbered his own, he sent out several parties of horse men "to bring into the camp some of the prime gentlewomen whose husbands were in towne." These he placed "upon the top of the smalle worke hee had cast up . . . where he caused them to tarry 'till he had finished his defence against his enemies' shott."** When the indignant Governor Berkeley saw the white aprons withdrawn he ordered his men to advance against the rebels, which they did, six or seven hundred strong, but there was little spirit in their attack, and it was quickly repulsed. "Like schoolboys," says the Burwell manuscript, "they advanced with hevie harts, but return'd hom with light heeles."*** Ashamed and disgusted, Berkeley withdrew his unheroic myrmidons from the town, "leaveing all the grate guns naled up and the howses empty for Bacon to enter at his pleasure."**** Bacon did enter promptly and burned the old town "to prevent a futer seege, as hee saide," each of his followers applying the torch to his own house. So passed the first American village, the ancient Jamestown, which had "= Anne Cotton manuscript. """Burwell manuscript and Cotton manuscript for fuller details of this discreditable story. *** So great was the Accomackian's reluctance for battle "that the Guner of Yorke Fort did proffer ... a Collonel's or a Captain's commission for a chunke of a pipe." Ibid. **** Burwell manuscript and Cotton manuscript. 20 THE GREAT VIRGINIA REBELLION OF 1676 stood for almost seventy years, not so much as the church being spared.* After a few days' delay at Greenspring, Bacon moved his little army into Gloucester, where news was brought that one Colonel Brent was advancing at the head of 1,000 men. Bacon at once moved forward to meet him, but it was needless. Brent's troops, learning "that he had beate the Govemour out of the towne and fearing . . . that he might beat them out of there lives . . . basely for sake their colours, the greater part adhering to Bacon's cause,"** and Colonel Brent exclaimed as he found him self deserted : "They have forsaken the stowtest man and ruin'd the fairest estate in Virginia." And now being free from all danger of attack ("this business of Brent's haveing like the hoggs the divil sheard, produced more noyse than wooll," as the Burwell manuscript quaintly phrases it***). Bacon turned his attention to the task of forcing the Gloucester men to subscribe to the oath of the Middle Plantation. A fever, contracted at Greenspring,**** had shattered the constitution of the young leader and he was violent and imperious to the verge of frenzy. After a stormy scene, in which Bacon ordered the arrest of a minister who had refused the oath and advised others to do the same, the Gloucester men signed and dispersed.***** This was the last great scene in the life of Bacon the Rebel, so far as we * Breviarie and Conclusion, Text. Burke, II, 252. See also Burke's History of Virginia, II, 263. ** Anne Cotton manuscript and the Burwell manuscript. *** Burwell manuscript. ""'"''* The Rev. John Clayton, writing in 1688, says : "There is a spring at my Lady Berkeleys called Green Spring, whereof I have been often told . . . that 'tis dangerous drinking thereof in Summer time, it having proved of fatal consequence to several." It was doubtless this spring which furnished the poison that removed the leader of the great Rebellion. Letter quoted, Campbell's Virginia, 280. "="=""'"'' The Burwell manuscript alone gives this scene. The Anne Cotton and the T. M. manuscripts are quite silent concerning it. THE GREAT VIRGINIA REBELLION OF 1676 know it. The fever had done its work and, on October 1, 1676, he "surrendered up that fort he was no longer able to keepe into the hands of that grim and all conquering captaine, Death."* In May he had been an unknown planter, in September he had been practical master of Virginia, and in October he was gone and with him the life of the Rebellion. The old Governor's time had come at last and he declared that he would hang the dead body of Bacon upon a gibbet, but Bacon's followers, though no longer danger ous, had lost none of their love for their gallant young leader. They hid his body amid the shades of the forests of Gloucester or buried it beneath the waters of the York River, or in some other secure resting place, but the place of its burial has never been discovered. Berkeley's vengeance was terrible. He hunted down the chief actors in the Rebellion and destroyed them without mercy.** Colonel Hansford, one of Bacon's ablest leaders, was captured and hanged as a rebel, in spite of his prayer to be shot like a soldier.*** When Drummond was brought in Gov ernor Berkeley greeted him with the words :**** "Mr. Drummond! you are very welcome. I am sure glad to see you than any man in Virginia. Mr. Drummond, you shall be hang'd in half an hour." In almost every county gibbets were erected and fully twenty-three were executed in a few days.***** He would doubtless "have hang'd half the countrey," as one Mr. Priestley told T. M., "if they had let him * Burwell manuscript. *''' The Anne Cotton manuscript says Berkeley executed "enough ... to outnumber those slane in the wholl war, on both sides." *** Burwell manuscript. Ingram's Proceedings gives the history of Berkeley's vengeance. **** 'j'_ ]y[ manuscript. *,!=*** fj-jjg Anne Cotton manuscript gives a list. Force's Tracts, I, gives a list inscribed "Those that have been executed for ye late Rebellion in Virginia," and signed by Governor Berkeley himself. 22 THE GREAT VIRGINIA REBELLION OF 1676 alone."* At last, however, he was prevailed upon to desist and to grant pardon to all except about fifty of the leaders,** who were declared "attainted of treason and their estates confiscated."*** Berkeley had crushed the rebellion, but he could not crush the hatred with which he was regarded, a hatred which was the harder to bear, as Berkeley, during his long reign, had become at heart a Virginian. This love of his adopted country he had sacrificed to his loyalty to the restored Stuart and to his political ideals and methods. The crowning blow was the discovery that his royal master would not sustain him in the bloody work which he had done in punishing the rebels. When he appeared at court the King refused to grant him an audience,**** indignantly declaring, as one of Berkeley's friends later informed the people of A'^irginia, that: "That old fool has hang'd more men in that naked country than he had done for the murder of his father."***** Berkeley's death, which occurred July 13, 1677, is said to have been due, in no small degree, to his grief at the discovery of this ingratitude of his sovereign. * T. M. manuscript. **The Burwell manuscript (Ingram) outlines the terms granted to West Point, Green Spring and certain other places still held by rebel forces. *'*=* Report of Commissioners John Berry and Francis Morrison to King Charles II, January 29, 1676-7. Text, Burke's History of Virginia, II, 253-9. Also letter of Charles II, restoring confiscated property to Mrs. Drummond. Ibid., 264-265. *+** A letter from Charles II to Berkeley, dated June 16, 1677, seems to indicate that Charles later relented and proposed to confer with Berkeley on Virginia affairs ; but there was no meeting, as Sir William was too ill to answer the summons. Public Records Office, London. C. O. 389-6, page 207. *=•""** T. M. manuscript, final paragraph. 23y