History of Norfolk County, Virginia : and representative citizens, 1637-1900, Part 50

Author: Stewart, William H. (William Henry), 1838-1912
Publication date: 1902
Publisher: Chicago : Biographical Publishing Co.
Number of Pages: 1054

USA > Virginia > City of Norfolk > City of Norfolk > History of Norfolk County, Virginia : and representative citizens, 1637-1900 > Part 50

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).

with houses occupied by colored people. One of the remarkable things about it is the extent of a branch of Glebe Creek which was, in part, its northern boundary. This branch, which is in our days represented by the marsh between Granby street, extended, and James, and which is being rapidly filled up, then extended across James, Brewer, Cumberland and Hawk streets and stopped in the square between Hawk and Smith. Its course is still marked by a ditch or drain. Another thing worthy of notice was a colored cemetery at the southwest corner of Hawk and Scott streets. It included nearly the whole of Queen, a third of the north side of Bute, nearest to Church, a square and a half on Church, and parts of James, Smith, Bank and Hawk.

The chain of title to this property is be- lieved to be as follows :

The same as that of the Glebe from the patent from the Colony of Virginia to William Porteen.

William Porteen, or Daniel Porteen, or his ex- ecutors, to Adams, sale, 64 acres. being the original 200 minus the 50 of the Town Lands, minus the 86 of the Glebe land.

Adams to Samuel Smith. sale.

Samuel Smith to John Smith, descent. John Smith to Josiah Smith, sale.

Josiah Smith to John Smith and James Hutchings, executors, power of sale by his will,-Will Book I, County office, Page 53, probated January, 1761.

Josialı Smith directed his executors that : "What shall remain of a tract or parcel of land unsold at my decease lying and being on the main road (that is Church street) near the Borough of Norfolk, containing at first by a survey and plan of the same 56 acres (we think this should have been 64 acres), be laid off into lots or half-acres, and be sold at the discretion of my executors."

In pursuance of this power, the two ex- ecutors made sale of the land by a plat care- fully drawn so as to have as few right angles in it as possible. We find from the deeds the following purchasers, Richard Scott, William Aitchison, C. Calvert, J. Calvert, S. Calvert, WV. Brambles, B. Knight, P. Carberry, W. Orange, N. Wonycutt, E. Archer, S. Bacon, P. Dale, M. Calvert, P. Loyall, G. Abyvon,

341

AND REPRESENTATIVE CITIZENS.

William Bradley, J. Hutchings, A. Gordon, S. Westcott, W. Ferrall, E. Moseley, F. Ferrall, N. Bagel and M. Robertson. We wonder how many of their descendants own any part of it to-day. That there are some we do not doubt, but whether owned by their descendants or not, these are the purchasers under whom the pres- ent owners claim.

North of "Smith's Other Land" lies the property owned we know from 1775 to 1804 by Col. Thomas Newton. It was of irregular shape, fronting on the old Church street road about the distance of a square and a half, be- ginning where that other tract of Smith stopped and running about a half square north of Nicholson street. named in honor of the gov- ernor. Away out here in the country we have at last gotten out of the range of those elastic 200 acres of Nicholas Wise, and we are now on land covered by another patent,-one granted by the Colony of Virginia, acting through Sir William Berkeley, its Governor, of historic fame, to Abraham Ellet, on March 25, 1664. for 250 acres, in consideration of his having gone to the trouble and expense of im- porting five persons into the Colony, and to its presumed advantage. We will give this patent in full in connection with another tract whose title we know better. The chain of title from this first owner to Colonel Newton is unknown - to the writer. This tract embraced a large number of small squares, and takes in the whole or part of these streets: Nicholson, Scott. Liberty, Salter, Jefferson, Cumberland, Hawk and Smith. It is an unattractive por- tion of the town, and is occupied principally by colored persons.

We have now described all the land lying on the west side of the "Old Road." Let us go back to town and see about the lands which lay on the east side.

On the right hand side, going out from town, and opposite the Boush tract, we first see the magnificent Walke property. This piece of land began on Church street at the corner of Cove, and ran up Church all the way to Wood street, then down Wood to Newton's

Creek, and down that creek to its first branch, now the site of Cove street, and up that branch back to Church. It would seem that a large piece of the "Town Lands" must have been purchased and added to this tract, extending it even down to Main street, and taking in the two squares on the north side of Main to Chapel. We do not see how this could have been its original area, as we believe this little part was a portion of the original 50 acres of the "Town Lands." But, at any rate, the Walke plan, as made in 1785, ran all the way from Main to Wood.

In the earlier part of the history of the town this was a very fashionable section, some of our oldest and finest residences being here, conspicuous among them the imposing Riley residence, at the northeast corner of Riley and Holt streets, at one time known as "The Re- treat for the Sick," with its large grounds, paved walks and trees, all protected by massive brick walls. This Walke property takes in all of Fenchurch, Riley, Walke, Falkland, Mariner and Holt streets, the eastern end of Charlotte and a large part of Chapel. Like other tracts we have mentioned, its value to- day is millions of dollars.

The chain of title to this land, we are told, is the same as that of the Glebe, given above, down to the time of William Porteen, who is said to have sold it to Anthony Walke. At least, so Forrest tells us in his history of Norfolk. But right here we have difficulty in finding any room for this tract in the 200 acres of Wise, for these appear to be all taken up in the "Town Lands," the Glebe and "Smith's Other Land," but it is clearly in- cluded in the patent given above to John Wat- kins, in 1644. We are also told by Forrest that a large part of this property remained in this family for more than a century. In 1785 a plat was made of the property for the pur- pose of division among the heirs of the last owner. The old Walke house, we have been told, is still to be seen on this property,-it is a brick house (recently altered considerably, I and its ancient appearance somewhat oblit-

342

HISTORY OF NORFOLK COUNTY

erated by stucco), at the northeast corner of Holt and Chapel streets, standing about in the middle of the tract.

Pursuing our journey from town, and leav- ing the Walke tract at the corner of Church and Wood, we next notice the land on which is St. Vincent's Hospital. The writer knows very little about this tract. It stretched along the eastern side of Church street from Wood all the way up to a point opposite the corner of Nicholson. The origin of this title seems to be very obscure, and has given great trouble to title examiners. It was most likely a por- tion of the Abraham Ellet patent. In the year 1775 it was the property of Wilson Newton, and it is no doubt from this fact, and for the reason that the property north of it also be- longed to the Newtons from 1719 to 1838, that the creek, which we have so often men- tioned, took its name. This creek formed the eastern. and a branch of it the northern, boun- dary of this tract. The Newtons, it will be seen, thus owned the western side of this creek from Princess Anne avenue to Wood street. No plat was ever made of this property. It was rather low and marshy. Streets were opened through it as the needs of the com- munity required, at different times and in an irregular manner. Those now on this prop- erty are Newton, Pulaski, Master, part of Chapel, Clay, Moseley, Queen, between Church street and Brambleton avenue; Burruss, Jones and Bute street, extended.

The last tract which we will notice out here in the country is the Charles Sayer Boush property. This stretched along the east side of the old road from the Wilson Newton prop- erty, beginning at a branch of Newton's Creek which came up to Church street opposite the corner of Nicholson, all the way to Princess Anne avenue, ran out that ancient road to the head of Newton's Creek, and down that creek to the branch which runs up to Church street.

The original patent for the tract of land of 250 acres, which includes this piece, the prop- erty of Col. Thomas Newton, that of Wilson Newton, and, no doubt, other property in the

northern part of the old town, is as follows: "To all, &c., Whereas, &c., now Know ye, that the said William Berkeley, Knight, Governor, &c., give and grant unto Abraham Ellet 250 acres of land situate, lying or being in the County of Lower Norfolk-Beginning at a Spanish oak and so running for lengths north- erly upon the land of William Ship and for breadth westerly crossing a small creek butting on the Gleabe lands, and so again for lengths southerly upon a small creek and so easterly to the first mentioned marked tree bounding the said quantity of land. The said land being due unto the said Abraham Ellet by and for the transportation of five persons, &c."

The clearness of this patent should have entitled Sir William to immortality, even if he had not had it thrust upon him by Nathaniel Bacon. For impenetrable fogginess and hope- less incomprehensibility this patent should take the first prize at a conveyance show. It serves to confuse us, without illuminating us, and to bring into question some of our former con- clusions, which, but for this patent, seem pretty clear. It seems a hopeless task to at- tempt to follow its elusive descriptions. If we only knew where the Spanish oak was, or the land of William Ship, a little more defi- nitely than merely that they were in the coun- ty of Lower Norfolk, we might do something with this description. We learn from it, how- ever, that it was not the earliest patent in that portion of the suburbs, for in running "north- erly upon the land of William Ship" we see that he must have already acquired an adjoin- ing tract to the east. It serves to confuse our other deductions when the patent says: "And for breadth westerly crossing a small creek butting on the Gleabe lands." Does this mean that this 250-acre tract itself "butted on the Gleabe lands," or that it crossed a creek which "butted" on those lands? If the land itself "butted" on the Glebe lands, this tract must include the "Smith's Other Land" tract, and our early chain of title to that tract be wrong. But we think it means that it crossed a creek, which creek "butted" on the Glebe lands. The

343

AND REPRESENTATIVE CITIZENS.

crossing of any branch of Glebe or Smith's Creek would satisfy this requirement. On the whole, we think it is better to give up the at- tempt to follow these lines, and rejoice that old Sir William had all the trouble which Bacon gave him. He richly deserved it, on account of this patent if nothing else. Of course we know in a general way where these 250 acres are, because we know they included this tract of Charles Sayer Boush-his chain of title establishes that-and that they stretched toward the west. coming into con- tact with creeks near the Glebe lands. No lo- cality in Lower Norfolk County satisfies these requirements except the northern part of Church street.

This tract of land was formerly called "Boush's Pasture," and was, in large part, of a marshy nature. It was platted in 1775, the owner being apparently very proud of owning it. for he gives each of his names to streets upon it. Besides its considerable frontage on Church and Princess Anne avenue, it compre- hended the whole or parts of these streets : Charles, Sayer. Boush, Calvert, Wide and Landing. But alas for human plans! Their innocent device to render his name immortal has been cruelly defeated by the heartless City Councils. Sayer has been changed to Chapel. and Boush to Henry, leaving only the name of Charles, the least significant of the three.

It tells us a good many interesting things, among others that at that time there was a "Tann Yard" at the northeast corner of the two old roads ; that the land on the other side of Princess Anne avenue was owned by Sam- uel Farmer, and that on the other side of New- ton's Creek by John Freeman, that to the south by Wilson Newton, and on the other side of Church street that George Abyvon, John Pool and Thomas Newton held sway. But. after all. this property is not an attractive portion of the town, and is largely occupied by the colored race. We know its title, however, fairly well. It is as follows:

The Colony of Virgima to Abraham Ellet, patent, March 25. 1664.

Abraham Ellet to Sarah Ellet. will,-Book of Wills and Deeds. No. 4. Page 16.

Sarah Ellet to Alice Denise, sale. Alice Denise to William Newman, sale.

William Newman to Thomas Norris, sale,-Deed Book 4. Page 100.

Thomas Norris to Thomas Brink, sale,-Deed Book 4, Page 209. 50 acres, a part of the property.

Thomas Brink to William Porteen, sale,-Deed Book 5. Page 83. the above 50 acres.

Thomas Norris to William Porteen, sale .- the other 50 acres of a 100-acre tract cut off from the original 250. William Porteen to Lemuel Newton, sale,-Deed Book for 1719-1723. Page 171.

Lemuel Newton to Nathaniel Newion, descent.

Nathaniel Newton to Col. Samuel Boush, sale, January 20, 1738 .- Deed Book 12. Page 266.

Col. Samuel Boush to Charles Sayer Boush, will,- Will Book I. Page 37.

This last owner platted the land, and sub- divided it into lots in September, 1775. and sold it to various persons, among whom we find the names of John James. James Marsden, James Holt. William Holmes. William Row, Christopher Calvert. Nathaniel and Arthur Boush and James Theloble.

The plat of this property has a grewsome picture on it representing a poor wretch dang- ling from a gallows erected across the avenue, near the corner of the two old roads, and indi- cating that as the place of public execution. The geographical position of Princess Anne avenue is shown by this plat to be determined by. the length of Newton's Creek, this road As in the case of Town Back Creek, we owed much of our information to a dispute about ownership: here again we are indebted to a law suit for a part of this property, for the above chain of title, it having been worked out by Judge W. H. Burrows, one of the counsel in the case. being the first route to the east which could be taken without bridging this creek. This plat also tells us that at the south end of Landing street "a large loaded flat may come here. This fine landing, on such deep water, is about half a square south of the corner of Calvert and Landing, and is pretty firm land now. The three patents given in this essay ac- This plat is really a very gossiping little map. , count for 548 acres of the old town. The

344

HISTORY OF NORFOLK COUNTY

acreage of high land in the four old wards of the city is computed at 665 acres. We think that the 117 acres, the difference between these figures, would be accounted for by the filling up of the river and creeks which has taken place, and believe we have in these early trans- actions the foundation of the present owner- ship of all the land in the city.

Before we close we must say a word about the personnel of those early landowners. They were of the first dignity and importance in the community. The list of the mayors of the town contains the names of many of those whom we have had occasion to mention in this chapter. At the head stands Samuel Boush, mayor in 1736; then came George Newton, 1736; John Hutchings, 1737; Samuel Smith. 1740; Josiah Smith, 1741 : Thomas Newton, 1747; Wilson Newton, 1751; Paul Lovall, 1762; George Abyvon, 1767; Cornelius Cal- vert, 1768; and John Boush, 1791. Many of these were elected more than once, the term of office being one year. The ownership of land at an early day, and for long afterward, was a prerequisite to the right to vote, and its con- trol carried with it a good deal of consider- ation.

Whether the object sought in founding the city of Norfolk was accomplished or not ; that is, whether the price of tobacco was thereby increased, we do not know. We very much doubt it. We know that most of the 20 towns founded at that time are now no more, and are prepared to believe that long before its de- monetization the value of the weed steadily declined. But of this we are sure, that a city was thereby founded which is celebrated for its amenities, and which has a vigorous and healthy growth, and that its existence has been, and is, a blessing to thousands of our fellow beings.

C. WHITTLE SAMS.

The first Council under the charter of the borough of Norfolk organized on the 18th day of November, 1736. Sir John Randolph, Knight, qualified as recorder, George Newton,

John Hutchings, Robert Tucker, John Taylor, Samuel Smith, Jr., James Ivy and Alexander Campbell, Gents., qualified as aldermen. Sanı- uel Boush, designated by the charter as mayor, being dead, George Newton was unanimously chosen to fill the vacancy. Maj. David O'Sheal was appointed deputy recorder. Other alder- men between the above mentioned date and 1789 were: Josiah Smith, John Phripp, John Ellegood, Edward Pugh, Thomas Newton, John Tucker, Wilson Newton, Christopher Perkins, George Abyvon, Richard Kelsick, Paul Loyall, Charles Thomas, Archibald Campbell, Lewis Hansford, Maximilian Cal -. vert, William Atkinson, Cornelius Calvert, Bassett Moseley, George Kelly, Thomas Mathews and Paul Proby. Alexander Mc- Pherson was the first clerk of the market; Aldermen Samuel Smith and Alexander Camp- bell intending to remove to Europe, resigned on the 24th day of June, 1742. On the 15th day of August, William Nimmo was chosen re- corder in place of Col. David O'Sheal, de- ceased, and on the 22d of August, 1748, Pey- ton Randolph was chosen recorder in place of William Nimmo, deceased; Anthony Lawson was elected deputy recorder on July 17, 1766. Henry Tazewell, father of Governor Tazewell, was made recorder August 19, 1782.

The American Gaseteer, published in Bos- ton in 1797, and represented to contain "re- liable accounts of Richmond, Petersburg and Norfolk," as they were at that day, has the following paragraph in reference to Norfolk: "Norfolk is the most considerable commer- cial town in Virginia. It was burned on the Ist of January, 1776, by the 'Liverpool' man- of-war, by order of the British Governor,. Lord Dunmore, and the loss amounted to £300,000 sterling. The town now contains about 500 dwelling-houses, a Court House, a Gaol, an Episcopal and Methodist Church, and an academy. In 1790 it contained 2,959 inhabitants, including 1,294 slaves. The town is governed by a mayor and five aldermen. It carries on a brisk trade with the West Indies, Europe and the different States, and consti-

345

AND REPRESENTATIVE CITIZENS.

tutes with Portsmouth a port of entry. The exports for one year (1794) amounted to $1,660,752. A canal 16 miles in lengh is now cutting from the northi branch of Albe- marle Sound in North Carolina to the waters of the Southern Branch of the Elizabeth River. It will communicate with the Eliza- beth River nine miles from Norfolk. Mer- chant vessels of the largest size may go within a mile from the mouth of the canal, and here the water being fresh, the worm which does such damage to vessels in Norfolk and Ports- mouth will not affect them.'

NORFOLK AS A CITY.

On the IIth of February. 1845, Norfolk ceased to be a "borough," and by virtue of the amended charter of that date became a "city." During the year following the increase in real estate was $121,048, and the tonnage 'entered and cleared at the Custom House showed a gain of 100 per cent. In 1847 the famine in Ireland produced an extraordinary demand for corn, and the exports of this article from Norfolk were very great and profitable. In 1847, to the ever memorable year of 1855, Norfolk advanced slowly but steadily, and a revived prosperity was evident. The sum- mer of the latter year brought upon the city the most terrible visitation that ever affected an American city and in three months con- verted Norfolk and Portsmouth into charnel houses. The dread disease was imported; it was not indigenous. Since then. by means of proper precautions learned at dear cost, Nor- folk has been free from pestilence, and its health record will compare favorably with any city in the country.

From 1855 to 1861, the beginning of the Confederate War, the people engaged bravely in the work of recuperating the shattered for- tunes and enrgies, and in 1860 had again taken up the thread of the lost trade, and with splendid and commendable energy were push- ing their connections to the South and West. But the war stopped all this and brought on

another complete suspension of business and stopped all commercial operations. Four years of war drove out from their counting-rooms and warehouses, their stores and workshops, the business men of the community. They laid down their business to take up arms in behalf of their State, and those who returned after the war found their capital impaired. their trade gone, their places of business and their private residences occupied by strangers, and in many instances themselves penniless and their families homeless.

They went to work with a determination to rebuild their shattered fortunes and to make Norfolk more prominent than she had ever been before to the commerce of the country. Day and day they toiled, year and year they worked, and each day and each year the trade and building exhibit showed an increase over the previous one.

The value of imports in 1900 was $222,- 058.98. In1 1900 1,805 vessels were required to transport coal from this port. (The first car-load of Pocahontas coal arrived over the Norfolk & Western Railway,-New River di- vision,-on the 17th of March, 1883.) Over 700 steamships and 1,900 other vessels cleared from this port for foreign ports during the year 1900. For coastwise trade during the same year 2,353 vessels cleared from the Cus- tom House. The total tonnage of vessels en- tered and cleared from this port during 1900 was 11, 134,134; cargo tonnage, 19,484,734.

An idea of what the growth of the city has made necessary in the erection of new build- ings may be gathered from the following com- parative statement of buildings erected for a period of II years past :

Year.

Brick. Frame.

Total. Value (est.)

1890.

150

$ 375.000

1891

170

49.2,000

1892.

139

217

425,000

1893.

173

126

209

550,000

1894

189

252

741

951.858

1895.

1,30

170

300

649.000

1896.

108

1.40

248

4.34.400

1897.

138

760,000

1898.

136

234

1.220,000

1899

197

150

347

805.150

1000.

193

143

336

1,230.560

346

HISTORY OF NORFOLK COUNTY

The United States Census Bureau report of the manufacturing industries of Norfolk in 1900 is as follows:

Establishments 445

Capital

$6.425,099

Increase in 10 years. 88 per cent

Value of products. $9.397-355

Increase in 10 years. 84 per cent

Average number of wage earners. 4.334

Total wages $1.571,229

Miscellaneous expenses 701,597

Cost of materials used.

5.283,975

This outline unfolds the splendid destiny of Norfolk, and the recent growth is only the beginning of a great continental emporium. The predictions of the great scientist, Commo- dore Mathew F. Maury, are rapidly material- izing. He observed that "Norfolk is in a po- sition to have commanded the business of the Atlantic seaboard. It is midway the coast. It has a back country of great fertility and re- sources, and as to the approaches from the ocean, there is no harbor from the St. Johns to the Rio Grande which has the same facility for ingress and egress, at all times and in all weathers. The waters flowing by it into the sea separate the producing from the con- suming-the agricultural from the manufac- turing States of the Atlantic slope; and there unite the channels that lead from the famous regions in the country for corn, wheat and to- bacco to the marts of commerce. * : The natural advantages of the position will be ob- vious to anyone who will compare the back country in Norfolk with that of New York. The country drained by the Hudson is all the back country which naturally belongs to New York. But the back country of Norfolk is all that which is drained by the Chesapeake Bay -embraced by a line drawn along the ridge between the Delaware and Chesapeake, thence northwardly, including all of Pennsylvania that is in the valley of the Susquehanna-all of Maryland this side of the mountains-the valleys of the Potomac, Rappahannock, York and James rivers-with the valley of the Roan- oke and a great part of the State of Northi Carolina whose only outlet to the sea is by way

of Norfolk. * Virginia saw those ad- vantages and slept upon them. Nature had placed them there, and she did not dream that man could take them away. But the enterprise of New York has taken them away. The South wants to regain her direct trade. We do not wish to discourage the effort, great as the odds against Norfolk now are, for we know there are men in the South who have en- ergy, enterprise and capacity enough for any- thing that energy, enterprise and capacity can effect." If that great Virginian could see now how the energy, enterprise and capacity of Southern men are making Norfolk and her sis- ters forge ahead, he would exclaim: "Truly the people are aroused and are building on the natural advantages so as to realize my ideal in the near future." The following summary of facts are significant of the growth and im- portance of Norfolk :

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.

History of Norfolk County, Virginia : and representative citizens, 1637-1900, Part 50

Author: Stewart, William H. (William Henry), 1838-1912 Publication date: 1902 Publisher: Chicago : Biographical Publishing Co. Number of Pages: 1054

Author: Stewart, William H. (William Henry), 1838-1912
Publication date: 1902
Publisher: Chicago : Biographical Publishing Co.
Number of Pages: 1054