USA > Virginia > The planting of the Presbyterian Church in Northern Virginia : prior to the organization of Winchester Presbytery, December 4, 1794 > Part 1
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org.
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17
THE PLANTING OF PRESBYTERIANISM IN THE NORTHERN NECK OF VIRGINIA
M. L.
Gc 975.5 G76p 1752356
REYNOLDS HISTORICAL GENEALOGY COLLECTION
Virginia Book Co. Berryville, Va.
ALLEN COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY 3 1833 02390 3328
Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2016
https://archive.org/details/plantingofpresby00grah_2
THE PLANTING
OF
THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
IN
NORTHERN VIRGINIA
PRIOR TO THE ORGANIZATION OF
Winchester Presbytery,
DECEMBER 4, 1794.
BY JAMES R. GRAHAM, D. D., PASTOR EMERITUS OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN WINCHESTER, VA.
WINCHESTER, VA .: THE GEO. F. NORTON PUBLISHING CO. 1904.
1
٤٠
二
1752356
TO THE MEMBERS OF WINCHESTER PRESBYTERY
-in harmonious fellowship with whom my en- tire ministry has been spent, and whose unvary- ing kindness has cheered the labors and sweet- tened the trials of a pastorate extending over a period of more than half a century-this volume is affectionately inscribed.
1
PREFACE.
It is with many misgivings that this little volume is committed to the press. Its author claims no special importance for it. It does not pretend to be a complete and connected history of our Church, either in the period of which it treats, or in the territory to which it relates. He is fully aware of its fragmentary and imperfect character, and of the very limited interest that will be taken in its pages. His excuse for offering it to the public, already surfeited with books, is the fact that its publication has been insist- ently urged by judicious friends, who have some knowledge of its charac- ter. It is, moreover, his own conviction that such facts of our Presby- terial history as he has here tried to rescue from oblivion, should be put in a form most likely to secure their preservation. Though others have ex- plored the field in which he has labored, and have made most valuable contributions to the early history of our Church, he is persuaded that some particulars are here given that will be new to most of his readers, and that will have a special interest for the people of The Northern Neck.
Notwithstanding the care taken by the proofreader, a few typograph- ical errors have somehow escaped his watchful eye. Such as have been discovered are noticed in the "Errata" at the close of the volume.
INTRODUCTION.
T is proposed, in this unpretending volume, to gather up, so far as we have been able to obtain them, the facts relating to the Planting of Presbyterianism in the territory originally covered by the Presbytery of Winchester, down to the time of the or- ganization of that Presbytery. This proposal excludes the attempt to write a history of the Presbytery itself. It lim- its our inquiries strictly to the period which precedes our Pres- byterial existence. If this limitation should prove a disap- pointment to any reader of this book, our defence is that the materials for our history, as an organized body, are carefully preserved in our Presbyte- rial Records and are readily accessible; while the facts relating to our ante- Presbyterial existence are to be sought from sources more difficult of access, many of which have already passed, and others are rapidly passing, beyond our reach.
In the prosecution of this purpose, our work will be but the enlarge- ment, in a more correct form, of statements presented in the Historical Ad- dress delivered at Shepherdstown, W. Va., September, 1894, at the cele- bration of onr Presbyterial Centennial.
The work here undertaken is not an easy one. To write the early his- tory of our churches at all is difficult; to write it with absolute complete- ness and to the entire satisfaction of the reader, is impossible. That his- tory is involved in the greatest obscurity. The most diligent and pains- taking research is not able now to dispel the darkness that broods over it. It must be remembered that Presbyterianism here is older than our Presby- tery, and that in our efforts to trace its earliest introduction, the records of Winchester Presbytery afford us no help. Our inquiries go far back of the organization of our Presbytery, and the material for this history must be gathered from sources not easily accessible, and not very satisfactory in the information furnished when access is obtained.
But while the fact is to be deplored, that our knowledge of the early history of our church is so scant and imperfect, it is gratifying to know that neither the General Assembly nor the Presbytery can be held respon- sible for the absence of this knowledge. Two years after the Assembly was organized (viz: in 1791), it enjoined upon the Presbyteries, then 17 in
2
INTRODUCTION. '
number, to gather up and forward to the Assembly all the material that could contribute to a full and accurate history of our church from the time of its first introduction into this country. Successive Assemblies, through a number of years, repeated this injunction, with which the Presbyteries very generally complied; and in 1804 Dr. Ashbel Green and Mr. Ebenezer Hazzard were appointed a committee to embody the facts that had been collected into a history of the Church. For several years this committee reported progress in their work; but the difficulties, which from the first were formidable, were found at length to be so great that, in 1813, the committee reported the work to be impracticable, and at their own re- quest were discharged. But the Assembly, unwilling to abandon the undertaking, appointed Rev. Samuel Miller D.D. to receive the material in hand, and complete the history. In 1819 he, too, asked to be relieved and Dr. Green was appointed to assist him. But in 1825 these gentlemen re- ported their inability to do the work and asked to be relieved from their appointment. While their request was granted, so important did the Assembly deem the work to be, that another and larger committee was appointed to continue and complete it. This committee reported from time to time; but at the Disruption of the church in 1838, the history was still unfinished, and from that period, so far as we have discovered, the matter disappears from the minutes of the General Assembly.
The Presbytery of Winchester displayed equal zeal for the preserva- tion of its history. One of the first things it did, after its organization in 1794, was to order its ministers to prepare a historical account of the origin and growth of its respective churches, and when these several accounts were presented to Presbytery, the Rev. Moses Hoge was appointed to com- pile from them a detailed history of Presbyterianism within our bounds, and in 1804 the manuscript volume he had prepared was forwarded to the General Assembly.
And yet when the present writer, many years ago, enquired of the proper authorities concerning Dr. Hoge's history, he was told that no defi- nite information in reference to it could be given; that while there was a mass of manuscripts nominally in possession of the General Assembly, in the absence of any provision for their care, they had been deposited in the basement of some building in Philadelphia. Some of these manuscripts, it was supposed, had already perished, and if Dr. Hoge's History of Win- chester Presbytery still existed, it would be impossible to find it, except at the expense of more time and labor than anyone could afford to give.
Since that time "The Presbyterian Historical Society" has been
3
INTRODUCTION.
formed and is engaged in a most commendable effort to rescue and pre- serve all papers bearing upon the history of the church. But the recent death of the librarian, while collating and arranging these papers, and who alone was thoroughly acquainted with the contents of his shelves, has pre- vented us from learning whether the history in question is still in existence or not.
But our own Presbytery gave further evidence of its interest in the matter. In April, 1830, it appointed Rev. Drs. Hill and Wilson a commit- tee to collect materials and prepare a history of the rise and progress of our church within its bounds. Two years later Rev. Dr. D. H. Riddle was added to this committee. As chairman, the burden of labor fell on Dr. Hill, and he engaged in the work with great enthusiasm. Considerable progress had been made when the controversy, which disturbed the church at that period, arose. The effect of this was to change materially the char- acter of his work. He decided to re-write it from the beginning, and to publish it in "Parts" at intervals. "Part I" was published in 1839, and is the only portion of his work that ever appeared; and, unfortunately for us, this part, partaking of the spirit of the time, is more controversial than historical, and sheds very little light upon the matters with which we are concerned here. The large amount of material he had collected, and which was intended for publication in the subsequent "Parts" of his history, was never published, and is not available now. This is much to be lamented, as he possessed special advantages for the work he had undertaken. His long residence of nearly fifty years in this region, his opportunities for obtaining the needed information, his personal acquaintance with many of the facts to be recorded, and his acknowledged fitness for the work, all conspire to deepen our regret that he did not finish the history he was appointed to write.
In preparing the history here presented, every accessible source of in- formation known to us has been laid under contribution. Our chief depend- encies, however, has been the Records of the Presbyteran Church, Dr. Foote's "Sketches of Virginia," and the more recent invaluable labors of the Historical Committee of our Presbytery.
THE Planting of Presbyterianism T THE Lower Shenandoah Valley
AND PARTS ADJACENT.
EFORE beginning our investigations, it is important that we have a distinct understanding of the field to which these in- vestigations are to be confined. This is the more important as the bounds originally assigned to the Presbytery have been greatly reduced. In the year 1859 the larger part of its terri- tory was set off to form the Presbytery of " Potomac," and the line of the Blue Ridge was made its eastern boundary. But previous to that year our Presbyterial bounds were sub- stantially co-terminous with what is properly known as " The Northern Neck of Virginia." This "Northern Neck " was a tract of land granted by King Charles II to Lord Culpeper when Governor of Virginia, and of which Lord Fairfax afterward became the proprietor by inheritance. It was a princely grant, extending from the shore of Chesapeake Bay to the sum- mit of the Alleghany Mountains, and embracing all that territory bounded on the northeast and north by the Potomac River throughout its entire length, and on the south by the Rappahannock to its head waters, and thence by a line extending westward to the head spring of the North Branch of the Potomac. This magnificent domain, including twenty-five of the richest counties in the State, was the territory which our Presbytery originally em- braced. Our task is to discover, so far as it is possible to do so now, the beginnings and earliest history of the Presbyterian churches in this territory, down to the time of the organization of the Presbytery, December 4, 1794.
But as soon as we enter upon our task, the discouraging conviction is forced upon us that very little is definitely known of the early history of these churches, and that the most careful search can add but little to our knowl- edge. This is due largely to two facts: First, the very scanty and imper- fect records that were made of the earliest effort to establish in this region
6
THE PLANTING OF PRESBYTERIANISM
our system of doctrine, polity, and worship; and secondly, the failure, in most instances, to preserve even such scant récords, as were made. The official proceedings of Presbyteries and Synods are often so brief and meagre as to give us now no very distinct or satisfactory idea of the events recorded. And, apart from the brevity of such documents as are now ex- tant, whole volumes of Presbyterial records are hopelessly lost, while of sessional records not a line has been produced. For these reasons the Plant- ing of Presbyterianism within our bounds is, as we have intimated, involved in much obscurity, and we are left in great uncertainty even as to the exact period of its introduction.
While there was a settlement on the James River as early as 1607, there is no documentary proof of any immigration to the Valley of the Shenandoah for more than a hundred years later. And when settlers began to enter it, they did not come, as we might have supposed, from the East, across the Blue Ridge, but from the North, across the Potomac. Nor were these hardy pioneers the English Episcopalians, who had so long held Eastern Virginia : they were Scotch-Irish Presbyterians, and Germans (Reformed) and Quakers, who, having landed at more northern ports, had pushed their way westward across the Delaware, and beyond the Susque- hannah, into the Cumberland Valley, and thence southward across Mary- land and the Potomac, till they found the home of which they were in search, on the waters of the Opecquon and the Shenandoah. But the date of this earliest immigration is not positively determined.
There is an old tradition that the first white man who took up his res- idence in this Valley was Morgan Morgan, a native of Wales, who, in 1726, settled at what is now Bunker Hill, in Berkeley County, and "built" (says Dr. Hawkes in his "History of the P. E. Church in Virginia") "the first cabin that was reared on the south side of the Potomac, between the Blue Ridge and the North Mountains." Six years later, viz: in 1732, Joist Hite, in company with sixteen families, came from Pennsylvania and set- tled at or near what is known as Bartonsville, six miles southwest of Win- chester, which, Dr. Foote says, "was the first regular settlement west of the Blue Ridge in Virginia." Vol. I., p. 101. Three years later still, a colony of much more interest and importance to us, settled in that same neighborhood. William Hoge, the ancestor of the family of that name, which through four successive generations has been so distinguished in the ministry of our church, himself " an exile for Christ's sake from Scot- land in the days of the persecution," had come to America some years be- fore, settling first in Amboy, N. J., then in Delaware, then in Dauphin
7
IN THE NORTHERN NECK OF VIRGINIA.
County, Pa., and, removing thence, settled, about the year 1735, near what is now Kernstown, three miles southwest .of Winchester. The fam- ilies of Glass, Vance, White and others, whose descendants are still among us, either accompanied him here or joined him soon after his arrival, and united with him in the organization of the Opecquon Church, "the oldest congregation (says Dr. Foote) west of the Blue Bidge." Their House of Worship was erected on land given for the purpose by Mr. Hoge.
This is the generally accepted account of the earliest settlement of our Valley, and of the introduction of Presbyterianism within our bounds. But later investigations awaken serious doubts as to its correctness. It is at least challenged by the tradition which Henry Howe preserved in his "Historical Collections of Virginia" (p. 192) and which long ago was current in Berkeley County, that "the spot where Tuscarora Church now stands, is the first place where the Gospel was publicly preached and di- vine worship performed west of the Blue Ridge." But while the claim of Tuscarora to a very early origin is doubtless well founded, tradition of it- self is not sufficient to determine a historical fact. Something more relia- ble must be advanced if we would set aside the long accepted conclusions of Dr. Foote and others. And I now propose to show that there is sub- stantial ground for believing that Presbyterianism was introduced into our Valley at a date earlier than is generally supposed, and at a point nearer to the mouth than to the head of the Opecquon.
In the records of the old Synod of Philadelphia for September 19, 1719, is this minute: "The Synod having received a letter from the peo- ple of Potomoke, in Virginia, requesting the Synod's care and diligence to provide them an able Gospel minister to settle among them; it was ap- pointed that the Rev. Mr. Daniel McGill should go and preach to that people in order to settlement upon mutual agreement," etc. The next year, September 22, 1720, we find the following minute: "Mr. McGill reported to the Synod that according to last year's appointment he went to Potomoke, in Virginia, and after some months' continuance there, put the people into church order." And then it is added, "The said congregation of Potomoke, in Virginia, have sent a letter to the Synod, manifesting their approbation of Mr. McGill's whole conduct among them, and desir- ing his settling with them as their minister." This request was consid- ered, but action upon it deferred from time to time, till finally it was re- ferred to the Committee of Bills and Overtures, whose report, if any was made, is not recorded, and the name does not appear again in the min- utes of Synod.
1
8
THE PLANTING OF PRESBYTERIANISM
The question to which these minutes have given rise is as to the loca- tion of this "Potomoke in Virginia." This question is a perplexing one, inasmuch as the most diligent search has failed to find even the name any- where else than in the minutes from which we have just quoted. Yet the dis- covery of its location is a matter of very great interest to the student of the early history of the Presbyterian Church in this country, and of special inter- est to us because of its possible bearing upon the early history of our own Presbytery, for at Potomoke-wherever that was-was organized the second Presbyterian Church planted in Virginia. Before this date we have an account of only "one small congregation on the Elizabeth River,"and "a few families favoring our way on the Rappahannock and York," while in the whole colony there was not a single resident Presbyterian minister. [See min- utes of Synod, pp. 20 and 54, "'Letters."]
No wonder, then, that the historians of the Church have sought very earnestly for some clue that would enable them to determine the locality in question. Some have tried to find it on the "Eastern Shore." Web- ster fixes upon Bladensburg, Md. Foote "supposes" it to have been in Fau- quier or Loudoun County, or somewhere east of the Blue Ridge." David- son says that "no part of Virginia at that period answered so well the de- scription as the region west of the Blue Ridge;" and he "believed the peo- ple of Potomoke to be identical with the congregations of Falling Waters and Tuscarora." Gillett positively asserts that it was "near the present town of Martinsburg, W. Va." But most confess their utter inability to discover any clue whatever to its probable location, and some, in despair over their fruitless efforts, declare that every trace of evidence as to its location is lost, and the place must now remain forever unknown.
But a matter of so much historical interest should not be summarily dismissed ; and recent investigations have brought to my knowledge cer- tain facts which suggest the possibility of still reaching a solution of this perplexing question.
One very suggestive fact is, that while "Potomoke in Virginia" dis- appears from the Records of the Synod after 1720, the expression "the people of Virginia" frequently appears in the Records for 1722, 1723 and 1724 ; and the minutes concerning these "people" come in naturally as the continuance of the minutes concerning "the people of Potomoke in Virginia," making the conclusion almost irresistible, that the two expressions refer to the same people. In 1724 the whole affair touching these people was re- ferred by the Synod to the Presbytery of New Castle. But the expecta- tion which this reference awakens-that the Records of that Presbytery
9
IN THE NORTHERN NECK OF VIRGINIA.
will give us the positive information we seek-is disappointed by the fact that those Records are lost.
In 1732 the Presbytery of Donegal was erected out of the Presbytery of New Castle ; and gradually the interests of our church in Virginia came under the oversight of the new Presbytery. And here we meet with another very suggestive fact, viz., that in the early Records of Donegal the name "Po- tomack in Virginia" occurs as an established place of divine worship. The presumption appears a reasonable one that we have here another name for "Potomoke in Virginia," or rather a different, but correct, spelling of the same name. The striking similarity of the two words, their close resemblance in sound, the fact that the one is not used in the Records till the other disappears; indeed, all the circumstances known to us, strongly force upon us the con- viction that Potomoke and Potomack are one and the same place. The slight difference in orthography is nothing against it, for first, the correct spelling of geographical names was not, at that time, fixed ; and, second- ly, even after the correct spelling had been determined, persons not famil- iar with the word, or to whom it was known only by sound, would be likely to depart from the fixed orthography. Even in these Records the word Potomoke is once written Patomoke. The word "Potomack" appears in six different forms, exclusive of the two now in question. The name of one of the oldest churches in the Shenandoah Valley, "Opecquon," is spelled in the Presbyterian Records not less than twenty-four different ways, while the pronunciation remains the same in all.
Now, as it is scarcely possible that a people, who displayed such persistent zeal in obtaining Gospel ordinances as did "the people of Poto- moke," should allow them, when once enjoyed, to pass quickly from their possession, and as we can find no trace whatever of that early church, unless we find it in that Donegal Record to which we have just re- ferred, and as all the facts in the case encourage us to look for it there, are we not warranted to conclude, not only that "the people of Potomoke, in Virginia," and "the people of Virginia" were the same people; but also that the church which was organized among them by the Rev. Daniel Mc- Gill in 1720, and which awakened so much interest and received so much attention for several years in the highest court of the Church, and was then transferred to the Presbytery of New Castle, is the same which, at a later date, reappears as the church of "Potomack in Virginia" in the Records of Donegal ?
This important question then arises-where was Potomack? That it was a place distinct from the river of that name is evident, not only
-
10
THE PLANTING OF PRESBYTERIANISM
from the fact that in the Minutes of Presbytery it is mentioned just as other churches are, but also from the fact that in early official documents, other than ecclesiastical, there is a place of that name distinctly mentioned. for example, Governor Spottswood, in a letter to the " Council of Trade," London, dated July 26, 1712, speaks of "the return of Baron De Graffenreid from Potomack," and in his letter clearly distinguishes between a place and the river of that name. Now, can we locate that place ? The Records of Donegal Presbytery enables us to do so approximately. The frequent as- sociation of Potomac with Opecquon, Bullskin and Tuscarora, as a church to be supplied at the same time with them and by the same missionary, makes it evident that it was in easy reach of these well-known churches, and therefore, somewhere, in the northern end of the Valley of Virginia. The references in the Spottswood Letters (pp. 152, 153, 168) point in the same direction. De Graffenreid had evidently set out to visit "the fforks of Potomac," where, after his disastrous experience in North Caro- lina, he had determined to settle with a colony of his Swiss countrymen. Before reaching his destination he seems to have found a settlement- called "Potomack" from which he sends back to the Governor a report of his progress; and the Governor sends to him a request that, when his des- tination is reached, he would prepare him "a draught of both those branches" which constitute "the fforks of Potomack." There is nothing in the statements of these letters that enables us to fix positively the loca- tion of "Potomack," yet the facts and circumstances that are mentioned make it difficult to resist the conclusion that the place was west of the Blue Ridge, and at some point on the river well up towards its "head springs." The testimony of these two witnesses, together with all the facts we have been able to gather, which bear upon the case at all, seem to point with singular clearness to the village of Shepherdstown-or to its im- mediate neighborhood-as the site of the place we are trying to locate; for
1. The name itself suggests its proximity to the Potomac River.
2. The Pack-Horse Ford, by which the early emigrants crossed the Potomac on entering the Valley, was at Shepherdstown, and naturally an early settlement would be made at or near the ford.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.