USA > Virginia > Old Virginia and her neighbours > Part 20
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
287
LEAH AND RACHEL.
son rivers and even included New England and Nova Scotia. So he entered into an arrangement with a firm of London merchants, Clobery & Com- pany, to supply them with furs and other such eligible commodities as might be obtained from the Indians, and in 1631 he obtained a royal license for trading in any and all parts of North America not already preempted by monopolies. This was done while he was in London opposing Lord Balti- more. The place most prominently mentioned in the license was Nova Scotia, and it was obtained under the seal of Scotland, from the Secretary of State for Scotland, Sir William Alexander, to whom Nova Scotia had some time before been granted. On returning to Virginia, where Sir John Harvey had lately superseded the convivial Dr. Pott as governor, Claiborne obtained a further license to trade with any of the English colonies and with the Dutch on Henry Hudson's river.
Armed with these powers, Claiborne proceeded to make a settlement upon an island which he had already, before his visit to London, selected for a trading post. It was Kent Island, far up in Chesapeake Bay, almost as far north Kent Island occupied by Claiborne. as the mouth of the Patapsco River. Here dwellings were built, and mills for grinding corn, while gardens were laid out, and orchards planted, and farms were stoeked with cattle.1 A clergyman was duly appointed, to minister to the spiritual needs of the little settlement, and in the next year, 1632, it was represented in the House
1 See Latane, " Early Relations between Maryland and Vir- ginia," Johns Hopkins University Studies, vol. xiii.
288 OLD VIRGINIA AND HER NEIGHBOURS.
of Burgesses by Captain Nicholas Martian, a patentec of the land where Yorktown now stands.
When in that same year the news of the charter granted to Lord Baltimore arrived in Virginia. it was greeted with indignation. No doubt there was plenty of elbow-room between the old colony and the land assigned to the new-comers, but the ex- ample of Claiborne shows what far-reaching plans could be cherished down on James River.
Conflicting
grants. The. Virginians had received a princely territory, and did not like to see it arbitrarily curtailed. There was no telling where that sort of thing might end. According to the charter of 1609, Virginia extended 200 miles northward from Old Point Comfort,1 or about as far north as the site of Chester in Pennsylvania ; which would have left no room for Maryland or Delaware. That charter had indeed been annulled in 1624, but both James I. and Charles I. had expressly declared that the annulling of the charter simply abolished the sovereignty that had been accorded to the Virginia Company, and did not infringe or diminish the ter- ritorial rights of the colony. Undoubtedly the grant to the Calverts was one of the numerous instances in early American history in which the Stuart kings gave away the same thing to different parties. Or perhaps we might better say that they made grants without duly heeding how one might overlap and encroach upon another. This was partly the result of carelessness, partly of igno- rance and haziness of mind ; flagrant examples of it were the grants to Robert Gorges in Massachu-
1 See above, p. 145.
289
LEAH AND RACHEL.
setts and to Samuel Gorton in Rhode Island. No serious harm has come of this recklessness, but it was the cause of much bickering in the early days, echoes of which may still be heard in silly pouts and sneers between the grown-up children of divers neighbour states. As regards the grant to Lord Baltimore, a protest from Virginia was not only natural but as inevitable as sunrise. It was dis- cussed in the Star Chamber in July, 1633, and the decision was not to disturb Lord Baltimore's char- ter ; the Virginians might, if they liked, bring suit against him in the ordinary course of law. From this decision came many heart-burnings between Leah and her younger sister Rachel, as a quaint old pamphleteer calls Virginia and Maryland.1
Viewed in the light of all the circumstances, it is difficult to avoid seeing in Claiborne's occupation of Kent Island a strategic move. Considered as such, it was bold and not ill-judged. With his far-reaching schemes the Susquehanna River was a highway which would enable him to compete with the Dutch for the northwestern fur trade. By establishing himself on Kent Island he might com- mand the approach to that highway. The maxim that actual possession is nine points in the law was in his favour. If the Star Chamber had decided to uphold Virginia's wholesale claim to the terri- tory granted her in 1609, Claiborne would have been master of the situation. Even with Claiborne's the decision as rendered, his own case resistance.
was far from hopeless.
In the autumn of 1633 he
1 Hammond. Leah and Rachel, or, The Two Fruitfull Sisters, Virginia and Maryland, 1656.
his
290 OLD VIRGINIA AND HER NEIGHBOURS.
petitioned the king to protect his interests and those of Virginia in Kent Island. Ile contended that Baltimore's charter gave jurisdiction only over territory unsettled and unimproved, --- hac- tenus in culta. - whereas Kent Island had been settled as a part of Virginia and heavy expenses incurred there before that charter had been issued. In sending this petition it was hoped that by reso- lutely keeping hold upon the strategic point it might be possible to make Lord Baltimore reeon- sider his plans and take his settlers to some other region than the shores of Chesapeake Bay. But this hope was dashed in February, 1634, when Leonard Calvert with the first party of settlers arrived in those waters. Claiborne's petition had not yet been answered, but Lord Balti-
Lord Balti- more's in- more's instructions to his brother were structions. conceived in a conciliatory spirit. Leon-
ard was to see Claiborne and offer him all the aid in his power toward building up the new settlement on Kent Island, at the same time reminding him that the place was in Baltimore's territory and not a part of Virginia. In other words, Claiborne was welcome to the property, only he must hold it as a tenant of the lord proprietor of Maryland, not as a tenant of the king in Virginia. While the Ark and the Dove were halting at anchor off Old Point Comfort, and while Leonard Calvert was ashore exchanging courtesies with Governor Harvey, he communicated this message to Claiborne.
The Virginia
council sup- ports Clai- At the next meeting of the council.
borne. Claiborne asked his fellow-councillers what he should do in the matter. In reply they
ـحة الأخـ
291
LEAH AND RACHEL.
wondered that he should ask such a question. Was not the case perfectly clear ? Was there any rea- son why they should surrender Kent Island, more than any other part of Virginia? No, they would keep it until his Majesty's pleasure should be known, and meanwhile they would treat the Mary- land company civilly and expected to be so treated by them. Behind this answer there was much bad feeling. Not only were the Virginians angry at the curtailment of their domains, not only were they alarmed as well as angry at the arrival of Papists in their neighbourhood, but they were greatly disgusted because Lord Baltimore's charter gave him far more extensive trading privileges than they possessed. Calvert's message to Claiborne had signified that before trading any further in the upper parts of Chesapeake Bay he must obtain a license from Maryland. Assured now of support from Virginia, Claiborne returned an answer in which he refused in any way to admit Lord Balti- more's sovereignty.
Leonard's instructions had been in case of such. a refusal not to molest Claiborne for at least a year. But soon complications arose. The settlers at St. Mary's observed indications of distrust or hostility on the part of a Complica- tions with the Indians. neighbouring Algonquin tribe, known as the Patuxents; so they appealed to one Cap- tain, Henry Fleete, who understood the Algonquin language, to learn what was the matter. This Cantain Fleete wished to supplant Claiborne in the fur trade and may have welcomed a chance of discrediting him with the Marylanders. At all
292 OLD VIRGINIA AND HER NEIGHBOURS.
events, he reported that the Indians had been told that the Marylanders were not Englishmen but Spaniards, and for this calumny, which might have led to the massacre of the new-comers, he under- took to throw the blame upon Claiborne. In the substance of this story there is a strong appear- ance of truth. On the Virginia coast in those days common parlance was not nice as to discriminating between Papists of any kind and Spaniards, and one ean easily see how from ordinary gossip the Indians may have got their notion. There is no reason for casting atrocious imputations upon Clai- borne, who was examined in June, 1634, by a joint commission of Virginians and Marylanders, and completely exonerated. But before the news of this verdict reached London, the charge that Clai- borne was intriguing with the Indians had been carried to Lord Baltimore and evidently alarmed him. Convinced that forbearance had ceased to be a virtue, he sent word to his brother to seize Kent Island, arrest Claiborne, and hold him pris- oner until further instructions.
This was in September, 1634. News of the message came to the ears of Claiborne's London partners, Clobery & Company, and they petitioned the king for protection in the possession of their island. Charles accordingly instructed Lord Bal- timore not to molest Claiborne and his people. and he sent a letter to the governor and council of Virginia, in which he declared that the Reprisals
and skir- true intention of the charter which he mishes. had granted to Baltimore would not ju -- tify that nobleman in any interference with Kent
293
LEAH AND RACHEL.
Island and its settlers. So the winter wore away without incident, but early in April, 1635, one of Claiborne's ships, commanded by one Thomas Smith, was seized in the Patuxent River by Cap- tain Fleete ; she was condemned for trading with- out a license, and was confiscated and sold with all lier cargo. Claiborne then sent out an armed sloop, the Cockatrice, to make reprisals upon Maryland shipping ; but Calvert was wide awake and sent Cornwallis with a stronger force of two armed pinnaces, which overtook the Cockatrice in Pocomoke River and captured her after a brisk skirmish in which half a dozen men were killed and more wounded. That was on April 23, and on May 10 there was another fight in the har- bour of Great Wigheocomoco, at the mouth of the Pocomoke, in which Thomas Smith commanded for Claiborne and defeated the Marylanders with more bloodshed.
In the midst of these unseemly quarrels the kingdom of Virginia witnessed something like a revolution. We have already had occasion to men- tion Sir John Harvey, the governor who came in March, 1630, after the brief administration of that versatile practitioner, Dr. John Pott. Har- vey was not long in getting into trouble. Complaints It was noticed at first that his manners against Governor were intolerably rude. He strutted about Harvey.
Jamestown as if he were on a quarter deck, and treated the august members of the council with as little ceremony as if they had been boot-blacks. On his own confession he once assaulted a coun- cillor and knocked out some of his teeth " with a
294 OLD VIRGINIA AND HER NEIGHBOURS.
cudgel."1 But it presently appeared that arro- gance was not his worst fault. He was too fond of money, and not particular as to how it came to him. He had a right to make grants of land to settlers for a consideration to be paid into the public treasury; it was charged against him that part of the consideration found its way into his own pockets. Nor was this all, for it happened, after the fashion of his royal master, that some of the lands which he granted were already private property. Besides this, he seems to have under- taken to draw up laws and proclaim them of his own authority without submitting them to the as- sembly ; he refused to render an account of the ways in which he spent the public money ; he had excessive fees charged, multiplied the number of fines beyond all reason, and took the proceeds or a part of them for his private use and behoof. In short, he seems to have been a second and more vulgar Argall.
Five years of this sort of thing had driven the men of Virginia to the last pitch of desperation, when the Claiborne imbroglio brought on a crisis. In obedience to the king's instructions, Harvey showed such favour as he could to the Maryland settlers, and thus made himself the more fiercely hated in Virginia. The Kent Island question was Rage of one that bred dissension in families, sep- arated bosom friends, and sowed seeds
Virginians against Maryland. of distrust and suspicion far and wide. To speak well of Maryland was accounted little less than a crime. "Sell cattle to Maryland:" 1 Neill, Virginia Carolorum, p. 126.
295
LEAH AND RACHEL.
exelaimed the wrathful planters, " better knock them on the head !" From pious people this near approach of the Scarlet Woman drew forth strong words. We are told that one day Captain Samuel Mathews, that brave gentleman and decorous Pu- ritan, on reading a letter from England, dashed his hat upon the ground and stamped in fury, shout- ing " A pox upon Maryland ! " 1
In such a state of things we can imagine what a storm was raised when Governor Harvey removed from office the able and popular secretary of state, William Claiborne, and appointed one Richard Kemp in his place. One lively gleam of vituper- ation lights up the grave pages of the colonial re- cords, when Rev. Anthony Panton called An angry parsou. Mr. Kemp a " jackanapes," and told him that he was " unfit for the place of secretary," and that " his hair-lock was tied up with ribbon as old as St. Paul's." We shall hereafter see how the outraged secretary nursed his wrath ; what he might have done in its freshness was prevented by a sudden revolution. The assembly drew up a protest against the king's attempts at monopo- lizing the tobacco trade, and Harvey refused to transmit the protest to England. About the same time the news arrived of the seizing of Claiborne's ship in Maryland waters. On the petition of many of the people, a meeting of the assembly was called for May 7, to receive complaints against Sir John Harvey.2 In the mean time, on April 27, an indignation meeting was held at the house
1 Maryland Archives - Council Proceedings, i. 29.
2 Hening's Statutes at Large, i. 223.
296 OLD VIRGINIA AND HER NEIGHBOURS.
of William Warren, in York, where the principal speakers were Nicholas Martian, for-
The meeting
at Warren's merly member of the House of Burgesses house. for Kent Island, Francis Pott, the doe- tor's brother, and William English, sheriff of York County. The house where this meeting was held in 1635 seems to have stood on or near the site of the house afterward owned by Augustine Moore, where in 1781 the surrender of Lord Corn- wallis was arranged ; and by a curious coincidence the speaker Nicholas Martian was a direct ances- tor both of George Washington, who commanded the army of the United States, and of Thomas Nelson, who commanded the forces of Virginia, on that memorable occasion.1
Next morning Martian, Pott, and English were arrested, and when they asked the reason why, .Governor Harvey politely told them that they "should know at the gallows." When the council met, the wrathful governor strode up and down the room, demanding that the prisoners be in- Scene in the stantly put to death by martial law. but council. the council insisted that no harm should come to them without a regular trial. Then Har- vey with a baleful frown put the question after the
1 " Memories of Yorktown," address by Lyon Gardiner Tyler, President of William and Mary College, Richmond Times, Nov. 25, 1894. The original letter of Captain Mathews and the decla- ration of Sir John Harvey concerning the " mutiny of 1625 " are printed in the Virginia Magazine of History and Biography. i. 416-430. In my brief account I have tried to reconcile some apparent inconsistencies in the various statements with regard
- to time. Some accounts seem to extend over three or four de: 4 the events which more probably occurred on the 27th and 2stb. The point is of no importance.
.
297
LEAH AND RACHEL.
manner of Richard III., " What do they deserve that have gone about to dissuade the people from - their obedience to his Majesty's substitute ?" A young member, George Menefie, replied with adroit sarcasm that he was too young a lawyer to be ready with "a suddain opinion " upon such a question. Turning savagely upon him, Sir John asked what all the fuss was about. "Because of the detaining of the assembly's protest," said Menefie. Then the governor struck Menefie heav- ily upon the shoulder and exclaimed, "I arrest you on suspicion of treason," whereupon Captain John Utie, roughly seizing the governor, answered, " And we the like to you, sir!" Samuel Mathews threw his arms about Harvey and forced him down into a chair, while that connoisseur in beverages, Dr. Pott, waved his hand at the window, and in the twinkling of an eye the house was surrounded by armed men. Mathews then told the helpless governor that he must go to London to answer charges that would be brought against him. In vain did Harvey argue and storm. The sequel may best be told in the words of the terse and bleak entry in the colonial records : "On Harvey the 28th of April, 1635, Sir John Har. deposed. vey thrust out of his government ; and Capt. John West acts as governor till the king's pleasure known." When the assembly met on May 7, these proceedings of the council were approved, and commissioners were appointed to go to Lon- don and lay their complaints before the king. The indignant Harvey went by the same ship, in the eustody of his quondam prisoner, Francis Pott,
298 OLD VIRGINIA AND HER NEIGHBOURS.
whom he had been so anxious to hang without ceremony.
Such were the incidents of the ever memorable "thrusting out of Sir John Harvey," the first revolutionary scene that was acted in English America. When King Charles heard the story he did not feel quite so much fondness for his trusty and well-beloved burgesses as when he had been seeking commercial favours from them. He would not receive their commissioners or hear a word on their side of the case, and he swore that
Harvey's Sir John Harvey should straightway go return. back to Virginia as governor, even were it only for one day. But when it came to act- ing, Charles was not quite so bold as his words. Harvey did not return until nearly two years had elapsed.1 Then it was the turn of the rebellious councillors - Utie, Mathews, West, Menefie, and Dr. Pott -to go to London and defend them- selves, while Harvey wreaked mean-spirited ven- get nees on his enemies. The day of reckoning had come for Anthony Panton, the minister who had called Mr. Secretary Kemp a "jackanapes." and had, moreover, as it seemed, spoken irreverently of Archbishop Laud. Panton's conduct was judged to be "mutinous, rebellious, and riotous."" his estate was confiscated, and he was banished. A shameful clause was inserted in the sentence. de- claring him outlawed if he should venture to return to Virginia, and authorizing anybody to kill him at sight; but Harvey afterward tried
1 The interval was from April 28, 1635, to January 18, 1537.
2 Neill, Virginia Carolorum, p. 143.
299
LEAH AND RACHEL.
to disown this clause, saying that it had been wickedly interpolated by the vindictive Kemp.
But Harvey's new lease of power was brief. Enemies to the throne were getting too numerous for comfort, and we may well believe that Charles, having once vindicated his royal dignity in the matter, was quite ready to yield. The statements of the councillors under examination in London no doubt had weight, for no proceedings were taken against them, but in 1639 the king Harvey's fall and death.
removed Harvey, and sent the excellent Sir Francis Wyatt once more to govern Virginia. Harvey's numerous victims forthwith overwhelmed him with law - suits, his ill - gotten wealth was quickly disgorged, his estates were sold to indem- nify Panton and others, and the fallen tyrant, bankrupt and friendless, soon sank into the grave, - such an instance of poetic justice as is seldom realized.
It was in December, 1637, during Harvey's second administration, that the Kent Island trou- bles were renewed. After Claiborne's victorious fight at Great Wigheocomoco, in May, 1635, he retained undisturbed possession of the island, but a quarrel was now brewing between himself and his London partners, Clobery & Company. They were dissatisfied because furs did not come in
Evelin sent quantities sufficient to repay their ad- to Kent Island. vances to Claiborne. The disputes with the Marylanders had sadly damaged the business, and the partners sent over George Evelin to look after their interests, and armed him with power of attorney. They requested Claiborne to turn over
-----
300
OLD VIRGINIA AND HER NEIGHBOURS.
to him the island, with everything on it, and to come to London and settle accounts. Claiborne tried to get a bond from Evelin not to surrender the island to Calvert, but that agent refused to give any assurances, except to express in strong language his belief that Calvert had no just claim to it. Nothing was left for Claiborne but to leave Evelin in possession. He did so under protest, and in May, 1637, sailed for England, where Clobery & Company immediately brought suit against him. Evelin then went to Virginia and attached all of Claiborne's property that he could find. Presently, whether from policy or from conviction, he changed his views as to the ownership of Kent Island and invited Leonard Calvert to come and take it. After some hesitation, in December, 1637, Calvert occupied the premises with forty or fifty armed men and appointed Evelin commandant of Kent Island the island. Forthwith so many people
seized by were arrested for debts owed to Clobery Calvert.
& Company that an insurrection ensued, and in February, 1638, Calvert had to come over again and enforce his authority. Among his pris- oners taken in December was Thomas Smith, the victor in the fight at Great Wighcocomoco, who was now tried for piracy and hanged, while the Maryland assembly passed a bill of attainder against Claiborne, and all his accessible property was seized for the benefit of Lord Baltimore's treasury.
Soon afterward the final and crushing blow was dealt in London. A Board of Commissioners for the Plantations had lately been created there. a
301
LEAH AND RACHEL.
germ that in later years was to develop into the well-known body commonly called the Lords of Trade. To this board the dispute over Decision is given against Claiborne. Kent Island had been referred. and the decision was rendered in April, 1638. In the decision the claims of Virginia were ignored. and the matter was treated like a personal dispute between Claiborne and Lord Baltimore. The lat- ter had a grant of sovereignty under the seal of England, the former had merely a trading license under the seal of Scotland; and this could not be pleaded in bar of the greater claim. Kent Island was thus adjudged to Lord Baltimore. Crestfallen but not yet conquered, the sturdy Claiborne re- · turned to Virginia to await the turn of Fortune's wheel.
In curious ways the march of events was tend- ing in Claiborne's favour. At first sight there is no obvious connection between questions of reli- gion and the ownership of a small wooded island, but it would be difficult to name any kind of quar- rel to which the Evil One has not contrived to give a religious colouring. By the year Puritous in 1638 the population of Virginia had come Virginia.
to contain more than 1,000 Puritans, or about seven per cent. of the whole. They had begun coming to Virginia in 1611 with Sir Thomas Dale, whose friend. the Rev. Alexander Whitaker. the famous " Apostle of Virginia," was a staunch Puritan, son of an eminent Puritan divine who was Master of St. John's College, Cambridge. The general reader, who thinks of Whitaker cor- reetly as a minister of the Church of England,
302 OLD VIRGINIA AND HER NEIGHBOURS.
must not forget that in 1611 the Puritans had not separated from the Established Church, but were striving to reform it from within. As yet there were few Separatists, save the Pilgrims who had fled to Holland three years before. The first con- siderable separation of Puritans occurred when the colony of Massachusetts Bay was founded in 1629. The great gulf between Puritans and Churchmen was dug by the Civil War, and the earliest date when it becomes strictly proper to speak of " Dis- senters" is 1662, when the first parliament of Charles II. passed the Act of Uniformity. In the earliest days of Virginia, Puritan Churchmen were common there. When in 1617 the good Whitaker was drowned in James River, he was succeeded by George Keith, who was also a Puritan.1 Under the administration of Sandys and Southampton many came. Their chief settlements were south of James River, at first in Isle of Wight County and afterwards in Nansemond. Among their prin- cipal leaders were Richard Bennett, son of a wealthy London merchant and afterwards gov- ernor of Virginia, and Daniel Gookin, noted for his bravery in the Indian massacre of 1622.
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.