USA > Virginia > City of Norfolk > City of Norfolk > History of Norfolk County, Virginia : and representative citizens, 1637-1900 > Part 47
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 (link on the Part 1 page).
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 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97 | Part 98 | Part 99 | Part 100 | Part 101 | Part 102 | Part 103 | Part 104 | Part 105 | Part 106 | Part 107 | Part 108 | Part 109 | Part 110 | Part 111 | Part 112 | Part 113 | Part 114 | Part 115 | Part 116 | Part 117 | Part 118 | Part 119 | Part 120 | Part 121 | Part 122 | Part 123 | Part 124 | Part 125
In order that an estimate of the population of Norfolk County may be made. for the time prior to the first census, the number of tith- ables are given below as far as could be ob- tained from the court records.
Years.
Tithables.
1644
296
ยง Lynnhaven Parish.
140 }
305
1646
329
16.47
360
16.18.
334
1649
380
1650
448
1650.
46[
1653
471
1654.
454
1655. 493
1656.
49[
1657
465
1660.
402
1661
346
1662
188
166 ;.
551
1664
580
166;
585
1666.
591
1667
594
1645
Elizabeth River 165
319
AND REPRESENTATIVE CITIZENS.
1668.
597
1754
2533
1000.
659
1755.
2718
1670.
670
1756.
2784
1071.
688
1757.
2741
1672.
684
1758.
2907
1673.
695
1759
2959
1760.
3031
1075.
762
1761.
3333
1677.
860
1763.
3546
1670.
875
1764.
3757
1680.
846
1765.
3914
1681.
860
1766.
4056
1682.
850
1767
1059
1683.
922
1768.
4134
1684.
893
1769.
4140
1685.
041
1770
4179
1773.
4340
1774
4591
1775.
4739
1777
2400
1778
2604
1782.
2771
1784
3149
1785.
3267
1786.
3149
1787
3628
1788.
4,365
1789
4247
POPULATION OF NORFOLK COUNTY, V.A.
Negroes.
Chinese.
Year.
Total.
White.
Free. Slaves. Japs. & Inds.
1790
14.524
9.179
5.345
1800
19.419
11.960
7.459
1810
22.872
13.400
9.47.2
1820
23.943 13.260
13.314
1.898
9.594
1705.
722
1708.
807
1709
819
1711.
780
1712.
812
1714.
1715.
891 931 977
1717.
1038
1719.
947
1720.
1050
1721.
1094
1722.
1115
1723.
1105
1738.
1652
1739.
1751
1740.
1799
1742.
1944
1746.
2066
1747.
2190
1748.
2331
1749
2337
1750.
2506
1751.
2567
1752.
2441
1753.
2533
27.509
15.444
2.300
9.735
1850
33.036
20.329
2.307
10.400
1860
36.227
24.357
2.803
9.004 63
1870
46.702
24.380
22.320
2
1880
58.657
20),197
29.453
7
*1890
77.038
37.497
39.478
63
** 1900
50.780
19.113
31.189
Census of 1790. Borough of Norfolk, free whites, 1.604 : slaves. 1,294 ; all other free per- sons, 61. Portsmouth. free whites, 1,039; slaves. 616: all other free persons, 47. The free colored are not separately enumerated. but included in "all other free prsons.'
Census of 1800. Borough of Norfolk, in- cluding Portsmouth ( the latter not separately enumerated ), free whites. 2.312 : slaves, 2,724;
*This includes population of the cities of Norfolk and Portsmouth .- 48.139.
** The population given for 1900 for the county out- side of the cities of Norfolk and Portsmouth. The total population of the county was 114.831.
Princess Anne separated from Norfolk County.
1691.
772
1692.
775
1603.
770
1694.
764
1605.
560
1606.
614
1697.
652
1698.
652
1699.
607
1700.
606
1701.
695
1702.
692
1703.
692
1704.
709
1830
24.800
168 -.
904
1688.
982
1689.
1018
1600.
1097
1674.
702
813
1762
3417
1678.
1686.
478 1716.
1.408
9.185
1840
320
HISTORY OF NORFOLK COUNTY
all other free persons. 352. The free colored are not separately enumerated but included in "all other free persons."
Census of 1810. Borough of Norfolk. free whites, 4.776: slaves 3,825; all other free persons. 592. Portsmouth, free whites, I,19I ; slaves, 828; all other free persons, 61. The free colored are not separately enumer- ated, but included in "all other free persons."
Census of 1820. Borough of Norfolk, including Portsmouth ( the latter not sep- arately enumerated), free whites. 4.748: free colored. 599; slaves, 3,26; foreigners not naturalized, 23.
Census of 1830. Borough of Norfolk. including Portsmouth ( the latter not separate- ly enumerated ), free whites, 5,231 ; free col- ored, 928 ; slaves. 3.757.
Census of 1840. Borough of Norfolk, free whites, 6.285 : free colored. 1,026; slaves, 3.709. Portsmouth, free whites, 4,074; free colored. 423 : slaves, 1,890.
The following table gives the population of Norfolk from the date of the first census after it became a city to the date of the last census, also showing the increase in each IO years and the per cent. of increase :
Increase
Per cent.
Year
Population.
of Population. of Increase.
1850
14.320
3.300*
29.0*
1860
14.620
300
2.1
1870
19,229
4.600
31.5
1880
21.966
2.737
14.2
1890
34.871
12.905
58.7
1900
16.624
11.753
33.7
The following is the population of Nor- folk City in 1900 by wards :
Ward I 8,623
Ward 2 3.587
Ward 3
9,634
Ward 4
13,093
Ward 5 6,940
Ward 6
4.747
Total
46,624
The population of Portsmouth City in 1900 by wards was as follows :
Ward I 2,181
Ward 2 4.458
Ward 3
3,973
Ward 4
4,374
Ward 5
2.441
Total
17,427
The following statement gives the popu- lation of Norfolk County (outside of Norfolk and Portsmouth) in 1900 by districts :
Butts Road district. 1,821
Deep Creek district.
3.454
Pleasant Grove district ..
2,974
Tanner's Creek district ..
13.077
Washington district (including Berkley town. -4988 )
11.515
Western Branch district.
17.939
Total
50.780
*Compared with Norfolk's population as a borough in 1840.
CHAPTER XXI
HISTORY OF THE CITY OF NORFOLK
ITS SETTLEMENT AND HISTORY AS A BOROUGH, BY C. WHITTLE SAMS-ITS COMMERCIAL ADVANTAGES RECOGNIZED ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO-NORFOLK AS A CITY-NOR- FOLK POSTOFFICE-NORFOLK WAREHOUSE ASSOCIATION-PATRIOTISM AND PATRIOTS OF NORFOLK-SUPPRESSION OF THE SLAVE TRADE BY NORFOLK COMMITTEE OF SAFETY -- NOTABLE HISTORICAL INCIDENTS-THE ASSOCIATION FOR THE PRESERVATION OF VIRGINIA ANTIQUITIES-THE WISHING OAK-FIRE HISTORY OF NORFOLK-THE- ATRES-CHARTERS OF NORFOLK-CHANGES MADE IN THE NAMES OF STREETS SINCE 1865-MAYORS OF NORFOLK-OFFICERS OF THE CITY OF NORFOLK-LOSSES SUS- TAINED IN THE BURNING OF NORFOLK AND PORTSMOUTH BY LORD DUNMORE.
THE SETTLEMENT OF NORFOLK AND ITS HISTORY AS A BOROUGH,
1
WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE OWNER- SHIP OF ITS LAND.
Written by C. Whittle Sams for the History of Norfolk County.
Whoever it was that started that old story about the streets of Norfolk being laid out by a blind cow did not know much about the original tracts of land, and the creeks which bounded them. Col. William Byrd in his "History of the Dividing Line" is much more flattering to us, and says of Norfolk: "The streets are straight, and adorned with sev- eral good houses, which increase every day," but we cannot help wondering which streets they were which he saw, or with what very crooked place he was comparing us.
The land on which the city of Norfolk is built was so eut up by creeks that the site of the place might be simply described as am- phibious. After more than 200 years spent in filling up these creeks, there yet remain over 76 acres of water or marsh in the four old wards of the city. These creeks displayed all the irregularity which could have been ex- pected of them, and did all in their power to hinder the spreading of the settlement.
The site of the original town was a penin- sula, fronting on the Elizabeth River about three-quarters of a mile, and bounded on the north by two creeks, that on the west being known as "Town Back Creek," and that on the east as "Dun in the Mire," "Newton's Creek" or "Plume's Creek." Town Back Creek has had a sad fate, having been nearly wiped off the face of the earth, and being rep- resented in these degenerate days by the nar- row and unattractive waters of the Granby
19
322
HISTORY OF NORFOLK COUNTY
street canal. "Dun in the Mire" has fared lit- tle better, having been extensively filled up, its natural connection with the river cut off, converted into kind of a pond, and rebaptized "Mahone's Lake." the body of water near the Norfolk & Western depot.
This little peninsula was connected with the mainland by a strip about 400 feet wide, in the center of which ran the road out to the country, now called Church street, after St. Paul's Church, one of the earliest Protestant churches in America. Across this narrow neck of land, later, ran two streets, whose names bore eloquent testimony to their aquatic nature,-one was called "Marsh" and the other "Cove."
The original settlement was made at the northeastern end of this peninsula, on New- ton's Creek, around the corner, as it were, from the Elizabeth River. the little arm of the sea named in honor of the great queen who had died not many. years before. It was just at the eastern or water end of the great Bermuda street, then known under the more imposing title of "Main" street, having ef- fected an exchange with the street we now know by that name. What an important thor- oughfare it must have been, with a few strag- gling houses, the street itself only about two squares long, reaching from the creek to what is now Chapel street. But there was plenty of water, marsh and pine woods around to make up for houses.
To whom did this narrow peninsula be- long? It would seem that Capt. Thomas Will- oughby was the first to see the future im- portance of the city of Norfolk, and to set his eyes of affection on the real estate of this section, for we find that 29 years after the settlement at Jamestown, that is, in 1636, he obtained a patent, or a grant, or right to a grant, of 200 acres of land from the Colony of Virginia, in consideration of his having imported four persons into the Colony. This patent he located here.
It is interesting to think of the considera- tion demanded for these grants of land by the
straggling little Colony of Virginia,-the im- portation of persons, servants, into the Col- ony,-one servant being valued at 50 acres and entitling the importer to a deed for that much land. It may well be imagined that this requirement was not so easy to be performed. Transportation was then difficult, uncertain and expensive. The servants referred to were principally the "indented servants" of whom we have often heard,-white persons brought from England and elsewhere, who were bound to their masters for a term of years to repay the cost of their transportation. The Acts with reference to granting lands for their im- portation are found in Henning's Statutes at Large, Vol. 1, Pages 274 and 444, and date back to the year 1642. An unbroken con- tinental wilderness had to be subdued, the Colony had plenty of land, but the laborers were few. There were plenty of Indians and a few gentlemen, but a sad dearth of me- chanics and laborers,-these were what the Colony needed, and so the service performed to it of strengthening it in its infancy and weak- ness, by bringing in those who could help de- fend it against the savages, clear away the dense forests, plant tobacco, and make the Colony self supporting, became the basis of our titles to land. In other parts of the State, land was granted for a nominal rent and the actual clearing and cultivating of a small por- tion of the amount granted. The object in both instances was the same, to develop the country and increase its resources.
The description of the tract conveyed in this earliest patent is so hazy, that it becomes highly picturesque. It is described as "200 acres of land situate, lying and being upon the main of the Elizabeth River, North upon James River, South upon the first Eastern Branch of the Elizabeth River. East-North- East into the woods." The latter part, par- ticularly, is so clear. One would be nearly tempted to think that the grantee had never gone "East-North-East" into the woods to the end of his tract, to stake off his land, for fear of the Indians. Absurd as this descrip-
11
-
MA
1
1
ARMORY, CITY OFFICE AND MARKET BUILDING, NORFOLK, VA.
325
AND REPRESENTATIVE CITIZENS.
tion is, in the absence of an actual survey, which our forefathers avoided on every pos- sible occasion, we must remember that it is an attempt to describe land situated in an un- broken wilderness, in the absence of well- known names and
landmarks. "James River," what was that? Certainly not the "Noble Jeemes" that we know. It is probably Glebe or Smith's Creek. as it was later named. but it had no such name in the year 1636. If that were so, and "East-North-East into the woods" were to be allowed to stop somewhere about the corner of Bute and Church streets, it would not be such a very bad description, although it would cover somewhat more than 200 acres.
Captain Willoughby sold his patent, or had the Colony issue a new patent in its stead, on April 1, 1644. to John Watkins. Com- pared to the first description, this patent is as clear as a ray of light. The land is de- scribed in it thus: "Beginning at a marked pine standing upon a point called Four Far- thing Point ( that is, Town Point ) and run- ning up by the said Eastward Branch side East-South-East 232 poles (equal to 3,828 feet, or about three-quarters of a mile) unto a marked pine standing on a point on the West- ward side of the mouth of a creek named Dun in the Mire ( Newton's Creek), and running up the side of the said creek over certain points N. N. E. 118 poles ( equal to 1,947 feet, which would carry the line to about Wood street) unto a marked gum standing by a gut or branch side, and so W. N. W. 232 poles ( 3,828 feet) crossing the land to a marked pine ( no doubt on the margin of Glebe Creek) and so S. S. W. 148 poles (2.442 feet) cross- ing some small guts or points and butting to- wards the main river unto the first mentioned tree."
In order to come from Glebe Creek, by way of the river. back to Four Farthing Point by this water-route, as we would suppose necessary, to follow out the description of the land in this patent, we would have to stretch that last measurement a good deal. but these
old deeds, fortunately for posterity, have a good deal of elasticity about them, and we hope this one would not break if we attempted it, as we must do, in order to follow with any reasonable probability the course pursued in describing the land.
John Watkins held the land a short time, and then sold it to John Norwood, who sold it to Peter Michaelson and the rest of the owners of the ship "Luis Van Nassau," of Ulissingin. in Zealand. Holland. They ob- tained a new patent for it. dated March 4. 1649, and sold it to Lewis Vandermull, who on October 19. 1662, sold it to Nicholas Wise, Sr. On his death it descended to his son Nicholas Wise, Jr., as his heir-at-law, who, (1 August 16. 1682, sold 50 acres of the original 200 to William Robinson and An- thony Lawson. in trust for Norfolk County, for certain purposes which we will soon dis- cuss. The land was sold for an amount of to- bacco which we estimate as having been worth a few hundred dollars ; today the land is worth many millions.
The deed by which this conveyance was made is a genuine curiosity. What the strug- gling Colony of Virginia needed was persons, what Nicholas Wise, Jr., needed was tobacco, so he says in his deed :
To all Christian people to whom these presents shall come. I. Nicholas Wise, of Elizabeth River Parish. in the County of Lower Norfolk, son and heir to Nich- olas Wise, deceased. of the Parish and County afore- said, Shipwright. send greeting in our Lord God ever- lasting: Know ye. that I. the said Nicholas Wise for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Thousand Pounds of good merchantable tobacco and cask, to m . in hand paid. the receipt whereof I do hereby acknowl- edge from Capt. Wm. Robinson and Lt .- Colo. Anthony Lawson. of Lynnhaven Parish, in the County afore- said, Gent .. feoffees in trust for the said County. . 10. whereas. I hold myself well satisfied. contented and paid, and for divers other good considerations me there unto moving. have given, granted, bargained, soll, alten- ated, enfeoffed and confirmed, and by these presents, do, for myself, my heirs, ex'ors and adm'ors, glue. grant, bargain, sell, alienate, enicoff and confirm unto them. the -aid William Robinson and Lt .- Colo. Anthony Lawson, as feoffees aforesaid, for the only use and behoof of the said County forever, one piece or tract of land, containing fifty acres, for the building of a town in the said County, according to Act of Assembly.
326
HISTORY OF NORFOLK COUNTY
dated the 8th day of June. 1680, the said land being situate and lying in Elizabeth River Parish aforesaid, in the County aforesaid. on the North side of Eliza- beth River, and bounded with Elizabeth River afore- said to the South and West, to the Northward with a creek, and to the Eastward by several stacks ( stakes ?) running partly cross an old field and partly through some points of woodland, it being a small nick of cleared ground and woodland, and part of 200 acres formerly purchased by my father, deceased.
Then follows a long drawn out and tedious warranty of title, and a covenant to make any other deeds necessary to carry out the inten- tion of this deed. Then he proceeds :
In witness whereof, I have hereunto for myself, my heirs &c. set my Hand and Seal, this 16th day of August, 1682, and in the year of the reign of our sovereign lord, King Charles the Second, over England, Scotland, France and Ireland. defender of the faith, &c. his Nich. X Wise & Seal. mark
Signed, Sealed and Delivered in presence of
Plover Bray, Richard Hee, Phill. Howard, Jno. Biggs.
Acknd. in Ct. 16th Aug. 1682. Wm. Porteen.
Such was the instrument, executed in the reign of that autocrat of France and conse- crated champion of the faith, Charles II, by which land that was private property was conveyed by two military officers, as trustees, for the immediate purpose of building a town, but really for an ulterior object quite distinct therefrom as we shall presently see.
The description of the site of the town in this ancient deed is about as unsatisfactory as one could reasonably desire. The land is bounded on the south and west by the river. This is clear enough. On the north by "a creek." This is our old friend,-Town Back Creek. But the rest of the description is hard- ly sufficiently clear for us to follow, with the limited information we have on the subject now, as we also suppose that the town lands stretched to the east of Church street, to Newton's Creek, which would make the first branch of that creek a part of the boundary on the north. On the east the deed says it was bounded "by several stacks ( meaning, no
doubt, stakes), running partly cross an old field and partly through some points of wood- land." This description is unsatisfactory, of course, as we have here no natural boundary to go by. There is an embarrassment, too, in understanding this deed for this further rea- SO11 : He had only 200 acres; he sold 50 to the town, and is understood to have sold the remaining 150 to Charles Wilder, or to Will- iam Porteen, but the 200 acres went from Town Point, at the mouth of Town Back Creek, to Dun in the Mire, or Newton's Creek, and then up that creek. So, therefore, when Nicholas Wise bounds the 50 acres he sells to the town on the east by the row of stakes running across the old field and through the points of woodland, instead of by Newton's Creek, it would seem that a piece over on the eastern end had been left out unaccounted for. It is highly probable that this omitted piece was the original settlement, containing the home of Nicholas Wise, Jr., being, possibly, that also of his father. Here also was, proba- bly, a small shipyard, for we know that the place must have been on the water, and he tells us in his deed that he was a shipwright. Here may have been the homes also of other early settlers. We may be sure that it was an actual settlement from the fact stated in the deed that the stakes ran partly across " an old field,"-old even in that day. Who cleared this field? Possibly it was the Indians, al- though they did not generally relish that form of exercise. Or, it might have been cleared by Nicholas Wise, Sr., or Lewis Vandermull. This piece bore, probably, such a small pro- portion to the area of the whole 50 acres, that it was reserved by him, and not counted nor deducted from the acreage of the tract, but it seems always to have been considered a por- tion of the area of the town, or, at least, was certainly included in the original borough limits.
The Act of Assembly dated the 8th day of June, 1680, referred to in the deed from Nicholas Wise, is found in Henning's Stat- utes at Large, Vol. 2, Page 471. It is en-
327
AND REPRESENTATIVE CITIZENS.
titled : "An Act for cohabitation and encour- agement of Trade and Manufacture." It was a great .Act, and intended to work wonders. Its scheme was to build a town in each of the 20 counties of the Colony, and to equip them with storehouses and other facilities of trade, for the principal and special object of increas- ing the price of tobacco. In a nutshell then, the real object sought in the founding of Nor- folk was to raise the price of tobacco. The Act leaves us in no doubt on this point. It says: "This present General Assembly have- ing taken into their serious consideration the greate necessity, usefulnesse and advantages of cohabitation in this his majestie's country of Virginia, and observing and foreseeing the great extremities his majestie's subjects here must necessarily fall under by the present and continued loroness of the price of tobacco, the only commodity and manufacture of this coun- try (if the same be not by all prudential meanes and ways prevented )," etc., etc. So they decided that the best way to prevent that disaster was to build towns, with storehouses for tobacco, and other commodities, and grant special privileges and rights in connection with them. They therefore selected 20 sites for these towns, each to be 50 acres in area. We think we recognize among them the sites of Suffolk. Smithfield, Hampton, and other old towns in the eastern portion of the State. One was to be: "In Lower Norfolke County on Nicholas Wise his land on the Eastern Branch on the Elizabeth River at the entrance of the branch.'
The Act then proceeds in a rather dicta- torial, and as we would now say a thoroughly unconstitutional way to declare that: "The price to be paid by each county for each re- spective fifty acres of land nominated as afore- said shalbe tenn thousand pounds of tobacco and casks, which summe the owner or owners thereof shalbe and are hereby constrained to accept, take and receive as a full and value- able price and consideration for the said land forever." Then it provided that the land should be sold off into half-acre lots for 100
pounds of tobacco and "caske." the owner building a dwelling house and warehouse upon the same. As the little towns were only 50 acres in arca, it would take but 100 of these purchases to close up the transaction. It is curious to note that the city of Norfolk is still the owner of a part of its 50 acres, thus acquired 220 years ago. It sold nearly all, but at Town Point a part was reserved: it was platted. divided into streets and lots, some were sold. and some were leased, but the city still has an interest in the "Town Point Lots," as they were called. They lie principally in what was then water, on the south side of Main street, and to the West of Fayette, the region around the Norfolk & Washington Steamboat Company's wharf, and where the old tobacco warehouse was to be seen up to a few months ago, which was built as a part of this grand scheme for raising the price of the weed. This warehouse site still belongs to the city, and is leased by it to private per- sons.
It is interesting to observe the different procedure then adopted from that pursued now in founding a town. Then the county bought the land. built a tobacco warehouse, and resold the land to individuals, half-acre lots being the unit of subdivision. Now, a company buys a farm, lays it off in very small lots, builds a large hotel, and tries to get factories. The old towns were built to raise the price of tobacco, the new ones, to raise the price of lots. To supply an existing need, on the part of the world of a new town in which to live. seems never to have entered into either plan.
The date of Nicholas Wise's deed for the 50 acres, August 16. 1682. might be called the birthday of our city. It was christened Nor- folk after the county in which it was situated, then a part of what was called Lower Norfolk County, which comprised the present Norfolk County and Princess Anne. Upper Norfolk County was what we now know as Nanse- mond. This was a peculiar arrangement, making "Upper" and "Lower" stand in the
328
HISTORY OF NORFOLK COUNTY
relation of east and west to each other, instead of north and south. As Upper Norfolk Coun- ty was as low and level as Lower Norfolk, and stood to the west of it. we can see 110 reason, other than a purely arbitrary selection, for these names. The name of Norfolk was given to the county by Capt. Adam Thoro- good, in loving memory of his native county in Merry England.
It would seem that the high and mighty "Act for the cohabitation and encouragment of Trade and Manufacture" was the only law governing the settlement, as such. The legal status of the inhabitants was somewhat pe- culiar. The land was bought by the county, in the name of trustees, but to be resold in fee simple at once, but those who lived and did business within this area had certain special privileges. No separate government was provided in the Act for the inhabitants of this immense territory. It was more like a "City of Refuge," where, under certain cir- cumstances, you could escape from creditors' attachments, and enjoy peculiar facilities for handling tobacco, which the Act so pathetically declared was "the only commodity and manu- facture of this country." We do know that it was not merely the only commodity, but the regular money of the Colony, as coon skins and other precious possessions have been at other times and in other places. It was this last consideration which made the lowness of that vegetable such an affliction to the people of the Colony-their money was depreciated.
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.