USA > Virginia > Old churches, ministers and families of Virginia, Vol. I > Part 23
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
We shall probably find an explanation of this absence of all games, not only by the presence of such pious ladies as General Nelson's mother and wife, but in the fact that old President Nelson had trained up his family otherwise, and at a time when card-play- ing and other games were but too common. We infer this from a let- ter of his to a friend in England, concerning some young man in whom they were both interested, and of whom Mr. Nelson entertains painful apprehension because he had gone to a part of the State where cards, racing, and suchlike things were freely practised. We cannot forbear mentioning one circumstance that comes to us on undoubted authority, concerning the second son of President Nelson, -Colonel Hugh Nelson, of York. He followed the example of his father's piety, and was a kind of lay preacher to the families in York, especially to those of his own name. Besides reading the service and sermon in the church every other Sunday in the absence of the minister, and every Sunday when there was no minister, as was often the case after the war, he acted as minister in preparing the candidates for the first confirmation ever held in York, soon after Bishop Madison's return from England with Episcopal consecra- tion. On the morning of the confirmation he assembled them all in the large parlour or hall at the old house in York, and addressed them on the nature of that rite. That, and the scene in church which soon followed, has been often described as most deeply affecting by one of his own children, the youngest recipient of the
213
FAMILIES OF VIRGINIA.
rite, the late Mrs. Edmund Pendleton, mother of the Rev. William N. Pendleton. We close with the expression of deep regret that many documents, from which we might have drawn other passages of interest touching President. and General Nelson, are not to be found. Of the numerous letters to correspondents in England, written during a long series of years, only those of the last six of President Nelson's life -- from 1766 to 1772-are to be had. The same loss is felt as to the letters of General Nelson. Not long before his death he caused them all to be collected and filed by his son, Mr. Philip Nelson, who had been trained to the mercantile life; and among them that son always remembered and often spoke of some most interesting ones from Washington, Lafayette, and others during and after the war. These also have disappeared. His papers and those of his father descended, together with the old York house, to one of his sons and the descendants of the same. They were doubtless objects of curiosity and desire to its numerous visitors from all parts of the State and land, especially after it became, as it was for many years, one of public entertain- ment. Too freely may the desire and curiosity of travellers and visitors have been yielded to, and too little, as in many other cases in Virginia, have such relics of our ancestors been prized.
Although no apology is needed for the more full and particular notice of the family of Nelsons which has been given, it may be well to state that my more intimate connection with it for nearly fifty years has furnished me with the means of such fulness and particularity. As to others less known to me, and worthy of spe- cial notice for their religious character and attachment to the Epis- copal Church, I invite communications. Some have been sent and gladly used.
TOMBSTONES AND INSCRIPTIONS IN THE OLD CHURCHYARD AT YORK.
But few of these remain, and some of them are broken and ille- gible. That of the first Nelson and the founder of the town is as follows :-
" Hic jacet, spe certa resurgendi in Christo, Thomas Nelson, Generosus; Filius Hugonis et Saria Nelson, de Penrith, in comitate Cumbriæe. Na- tus 20mo die Februarii, Anno Domini 1677. Vitæ bene gestæ finem im- plevit 7mo die Octobris, 1745, ætatis suæ 68."
Which is thus rendered into English :-
214
OLD CHURCHES, MINISTERS, AND
" Here lies, in the certain "hope of being raised up in Christ, Thomas Nelson, Gentleman ; the son of Hugh and Sarah Nelson, of Penrith, in the county of Cumberland. Born the 20th of February, 1677. He completed a well-spent life on the 7th of October, 1745, in his sixty- eighth year."
Adjoining this is the tomb of his son, President Nelson, whose character has been portrayed in the first article on this parish. The inscription is as follows :-
" Here lies the body of the Honourable William Nelson, Esquire, late President of his Majesty's Council in this Dominion; in whom the love of man and the love of God so restrained and enforced each other, and so invigorated the mental powers in general, as not only to defend him from the vices and follies of his age and country, but also to render it a matter of difficult decision in what part of laudable conduct he most ex- celled,-whether in the tender and endearing accomplishments of domestic life, or in the more arduous duties of a wider circuit,-whether as a neighbour, a gentleman, or a magistrate,-whether in the graces of hospi- tality or piety. Reader, if you feel the spirit of that exalted ardour which aspires to the felicity of conscious virtue, animated by those conso- lations and divine admonitions, perform the task and expect the distinc- tion of the righteous man. He died the 19th of November, Anno Domini 1772, aged 61."
The latter part of this epitaph savours much of the language of the pulpit in that day. The epitaph was probably written by President Camm.
Very near to these tombstones General Thomas Nelson was buried; but to this day not even a rough headstone marks the spot, and no hillock is to be seen ; and when one or two aged mem- bers of the family are gone, there will be none left to point out the place, when the gratitude of his country, or the filial piety of his descendants, which has been too long waiting the action of the former, desires to raise some humble monument to the most gene- rous and self-sacrificing of American patriots .*
The only other inscriptions which could be deciphered were those of Abraham Archer, who died in 1752, aged sixty-two; of
* An American writer, after describing the tombs of old Thomas Nelson and his son, President William Nelson, says that General Thomas Nelson was buried in a vault at the end of a fragment of the brick wall which surrounds the church, with nothing but a rough stone lying among the grass to mark the spot; than which nothing can be more fabulous. He was buried near to his father and grand- father. The spot has been pointed out to me by one of the family, who is well acquainted with it. Not more than two or three others survive who could now, with certainty, from personal knowledge designate the exact place.
215
FAMILIES OF VIRGINIA.
Susannah Reignolds, daughter of William Rojers, who died in 1768, aged sixty ; and of Jane Frank, the daughter of Mr. William Routh, of Kisklington, in Yorkshire. She died on her passage at sea, April 26, and was interred May 28, 1753, aged twenty- eight years. She was doubtless the wife of that pious man, Mr. Frank, of whom we have written as the friend and correspondent of the Rev. Mr. Shield and others in York and Williamsburg.
216
OLD CHURCHES, MINISTERS. AND
ARTICLE XVII.
York-Hampton Parish .- No. 2.
IN connection with York-Hampton parish and its minister, the Rev. John Camm, there is a subject which I shall now consider, deeming this the most suitable occasion, as the vestry was equally concerned in it with any other in the diocese, and the minister took a more active part than any other of the clergy. I allude to the celebrated contest between the clergy on the one hand, and the Council, Burgesses, and some of the vestries on the other, con- cerning the salaries of the former, in the year 1758. The act of Assembly which produced the contest, and convulsed both Church and State, was called the Option Law or Two-penny Act, because the people were allowed the option of paying as usual so much tobacco, or about twopence per pound instead of it. It was oc- casioned by the apprehension of a very short crop of tobacco, by the failure of plants in the spring in some parts of the State. The failure was very great, though not to the extent apprehended. It was, however, so great as, with other circumstances, to raise the price from sixteen shillings and fourpence-the supposed average price of the clergy's tobacco-to fifty and sixty shillings. In anticipation of the difficulty which many might find in dis- charging their debts to the clergy and others in tobacco, according to law or contract, the Assembly ordained that the debts due in tobacco to the clergy and to certain officers of Government,-who were but few at that time,-and from tenants to their landlords, or planters to merchants, &c., might be discharged by the pay- ment of twopence a pound in paper currency, which was only good in the Colony. In order to understand the subject aright, it is necessary to recur to some previous acts of the Assembly on the subject of salaries.
For a long time the salary of a minister had been settled at sixteen thousand-weight of tobacco per annum; and in the year 1748 the Assembly passed a new act, confirming this, and giving to the vestries certain privileges hitherto claimed by the Crown, the Governors, and clergy, but in fact exercised by the vestries, as has before been stated. Though the clergy did not like some
217
FAMILIES OF VIRGINIA.
things in it, yet, unable to help themselves, they submitted, and the royal assent was given. According to a standing law of Eng- land, no act of the Colonial Legislature could contradict a previous act which had received the royal sanction, without suspending its execution until the King's pleasure could be known. The Assem- bly, finding it desirable to have the privilege of passing some acts and carrying them into execution sooner than the distance from England .and the time then required for communication with the Government would allow, petitioned the King in the year 1751 or 1752 for leave to make some exceptions ; but the petition was posi- tively refused. Nevertheless, it began to act in a small way at first, on the principle thus refused. In the year 1753 it passed an act allowing the vestries of Frederick and Augusta to pay the salaries of their ministers in money instead of tobacco, as but little of the latter was raised in the valley,-taking care, however, to allow them handsome salaries, so that no complaint was made. In the year 1754 the same was done in Norfolk and Princess Anne parishes without much notice or complaint. But in the year 1755, when there was the threatening of a very small crop of tobacco throughout the country, the Assembly proceeded to a bolder step, and passed a law allowing all who pleased to pay either in tobacco or money as suited best. The law was carried by only one vote. A general feeling of uneasiness now seized upon the clergy, and they were preparing to make opposition. Letters and memorials were sent to England, and meetings of the clergy held ; but as the season became more propitious and the crop turned out nearly as good as usual, and the tobacco would generally be paid, no active measures were taken, though some even then threatened to resort to law. In the year 1758 a great failure was apprehended, and the Assembly now passed the obnoxious law of which we are speak- ing. Though opposed by some of the Burgesses and the Council as illegal and unjust, it was carried. The clergy who were nearest to Williamsburg assembled and asked to be admitted to the bar of the House, to be heard in opposition to the measure before it passed, but were refused. Governor Dinwiddie had been urged to veto the act of 1755, but declined, though saying it was unjust and illegal, asking, "What can I do ? If I refuse, I shall have the peo- ple on my back." Lieutenant-Governor Fauquier, now in office, when applied to for the same purpose, also refused, saying, " Whether it be just or unjust, contradictory to the King's instructions or not, is not the question. The question is, What will please the people ?" He took part with the Assembly ; and the Assembly, which had
218
OLD CHURCHES, MINISTERS, AND
voted Dinwiddie only £500, (it was the custom to make a present to every new Governor,) voted him, though a more obnoxious man than even Dinwiddie, £1000. The clergy were now convened, and made an address to the Crown, through the Lord-Commissioner of Trade for the Plantation, pleading their grievances. The Bishop of London, being called upon for his opinion by the Commissioners, was decided and strong in favour of the clergy. The Rev. Mr. Camm was sent over by the clergy to plead their cause, and per- sons were employed by the Assembly on their part. The Rev. Mr. Camm remained eighteen months in England in the prosecution of the case. To oppose the Colonies in any thing where taxation or prerogative was concerned was now becoming a critical matter. The Stamp Act had just been repealed. Notwithstanding this, the Commissioners of Trade unanimously declared the law to be not only unjust, but null and void, and recommended the King to dis- allow it and require its repeal, which he accordingly did. As to the requiring the tobacco to be paid, they told Mr. Camm that the courts in America must do this, and certainly would do it, the case being so plain ; that if it should be otherwise, and an appeal was taken to the Privy Council in England, they would certainly be righted. On this, Mr. Camm immediately wrote to his agent in America to institute a suit against his vestry for the tobacco, and carry it before the Governor and Council, which was the Supreme Court in Virginia. The vestry declined standing the suit until the Assembly passed an act to support all vestries in their defence. The trial being had, it appears that Messrs. Randolph, Corbin, Carter, and Lee were in favour of Mr. Camm's claim, and Messrs. Byrd, Taylor, Thornton, Burwell, and Blair against it. The two Mr. Nelsons, of York, the President and Secretary, declined sit- ting, as they were a party concerned, being vestrymen of Mr. Camm's parish. It was understood that they were in favour of the claim of the clergy, one of them having told the Rev. Mr. War- rington that he regarded the law as most unjust, and had Mr. Warrington's case been permitted, as was attempted afterward, to come up for trial, they would have been on the court, and have made a majority of one in favour of the clergy, whereas, in the case of Mr. Camm, a majority of one was in favour of the law. There was now no other resort for Mr. Camm but to the English Court of Appeals ; and he was not the man to give up a contest until he could contend no more, especially as he was fighting not only his own battle, but that of all the clergy of Virginia. He accordingly sent his case to the Privy Council, expecting that the promises
219
FAMILIES OF VIRGINIA.
made to him while in England would be fulfilled, but was disap- pointed. After various delays, the case was dismissed, on the pretence of some informality, the blame being chiefly laid at the door of Lord Northington. Inasmuch as the Lord-Commissioners of Trade, Privy Council, and King had all so positively and unani- mously declared the law null and void, and the Governor of Vir- ginia had proclaimed its repeal by the order of the King, we must seek the cause of this dismissal in some other difficulty than an in- formality. It was doubtless to be found in the desire to avoid at this time a collision with the Virginia Assembly ; and the clergy were deserted. The Rev. Mr. Warrington, of Hampton, who was as brave and determined in the Church as his grandson Commodore Warrington afterward in the navy, had his case before the Council of Virginia, and, if unsuccessful, was prepared to try whether the Privy Council would, when the alleged informality was avoided, enter upon the cause ; but his suit was never permitted to be tried here, the court in Virginia professing to await the decision of the court in England, and thus ended the matter. Mr. Warrington brought suit for his full salary in the Court of Elizabeth City, and the jury brought in a special verdict for some damages, But still declared the law valid in opposition to the King. The Rev. Alex- ander White, of King William, also brought suit. The court de- clined instructing the jurors as to the law, and left it entirely with them, who brought in some trivial damages. But the instance of suit which caused most interest at the time, and has continued most to sparkle on the page of history, was that of the Rev. James Maury. It was tried in Hanover county, though he was in an adjoining parish. The high character of Mr. Maury entitles any account he may have given of the transaction to great confidence. We have it in a printed letter to Mr. Camm in the year 1763. In the November Court of that year, he says, the court decided in his favour that it was no law, and at the next court a select jury was to decide upon the damages. It was indeed, he says, a select jury, three or four being what were called New Lights, who were dis- senters from and enemies to the Church, and the others picked up on the occasion, and most unfit to decide such a cause.
It was on this occasion that Patrick Henry, then young in the practice, made his first successful effort. It was truly an ad cap- tandum speech, being suited to the times and addressed to the passions and interests of the people. He praised the law as salu- tary,-said that a king, by disallowing such a law, became a tyrant instead of the father of the people. He spoke in such a manner
220
OLD CHURCHES, MINISTERS, AND
that several persons in the crowd cried out, "Treason !" The cause being pleaded on both sides, by Mr. Lyons for Mr. Maury, by Mr. Henry for the vestry or collector, and it being intimated to the jury that, though they must find for the plaintiffs, yet one penny damages would suffice, in five minutes the jury brought in that verdict. Mr. Lyons moved that the jury should be sent back again, as having found against the evidence ; but this was refused: then that certain evidence should be recorded, which also was re- fused : and, lastly, that an appeal should be allowed, which shared the same fate .* It is due to Mr. Henry to state that he apolo- gized to Mr. Maury for some improper reflection made as to him- self, and pleaded, as an excuse for his course, that he was a young lawyer, a candidate for practice and reputation, and therefore must make the best of his cause. It is probable, also, that at this time Mr. Henry may have been a little alienated from the Church of his father and relatives. f The Revs. Mr. Davies and Mr. Waddell (the old blind preacher of whom Mr. Wirt speaks) were then in their height of zeal and eminence, and Mr. Henry often attended their services and admired them much. Disaffection to the Church was also getting quite strong in that region. Mr. Henry may for a time have sympathized in their religious views, though I have no testimony to this effect. The following extract of a letter of Mr. Roger Atkinson, of Mannsfield, near Petersburg, an old vestry- man and staunch friend of the Church in that place, to his bro- ther-in-law, Mr. Samuel Pleasants, may throw some light on this point. He is drawing the portraits of the members sent to the first Congress from Virginia. Of Mr. Henry he says, "He is a real half-Quaker,-your brother's man,-moderate and mild, and in religious matters a saint ; but the very d-I in politics, -a son of thunder. He will shake the Senate. Some years ago he had
* Mr. Wirt, in his Life of Patrick Henry, while under the strongest temptation to place any thing he did or said in the most favourable light, yet hesitates not to acknowledge that the case was a bad one, and the law indefensible. Mr. Wirt, after reading all that was written on both sides of the case, says, "It seems impossible to deny at this day that the clergy had much the best of the argument." And again, that the court which had decided the principle of law in favour of the clergy, "very much to their credit, breasted the popular current." He also informs us that Mr. John Lewis, counsel for the people, was so satisfied that the case was a desperate one after the decision of the court, that he gave up the cause, saying to his clients that he could do them no service. Then it was that Mr. Henry was called in, who took care to say nothing about the law of the case.
He had an uncle in the Episcopal ministry, Patrick Henry, who lived near the place of trial, and would have been present, but at the request of his nephew stayed away.
221
FAMILIES OF VIRGINIA.
liked to have talked treason into the House."* Whatever may have been the feelings of Mr. Henry as to the Episcopal Church at that time, it is very certain that in after-life he gave full proof that he was no enemy to it, and had no desire to deprive it of any just rights. At a time when such numbers were deserting it, when politicians were raising themselves on its ruins, when the worn-out glebes, and decayed parsonages, and sacred vessels were thought to be too much to be left in the hands of the few Epis- copal families which were remaining, Mr. Henry stood up in opposi- tion to every attempt at their alienation, with the same boldness and the same success as when he denounced British oppression ; nor did the advocates of the last act by which she was prostrated in the dust succeed in their endeavour until he had left the hall of legislation .; There may be some difficulty in reconciling his oppo- sition to this measure with his advocacy of that concerning which we have been writing, but there may have seemed to be one to him, and may have been a real one. At any rate, his attachment to the Church of his fathers is clearly established. There are abundant proofs that it continued through life, and that his descendants have
* Mr. Atkinson was the grandfather of Bishop Atkinson. The remainder of this letter is so faithfully and happily descriptive of the other members of the delega- tion, that I make no apology for introducing it. Of Peyton Randolph he says, "A venerable man, whom I well know and love; an honest man ; has knowledge, temper, experience, judgment,-above all, integrity; a true Roman spirit. He, I find, is chairman. The choice will do honour to the judges, and the chairman will do honour to the choice." Of Richard Henry Lee he says, " I think I know the man, and I like him : need I say more ? He was the second choice, and he was my second choice." Of George Washington he says, " He is a soldier,-a warrior; he is a modest man; sensible; speaks little; in action cool, like a Bishop at his prayers." Of Colonel Bland he says, "A wary, old, experienced veteran at the bar and in the Senate; has something of the look of old musty parchments, which he handleth and studieth much. He formerly wrote a treatise against the Quakers on
water-baptism." Of Benjamin Harrison he says, "He is your neighbour, and brother-in-law to the speaker, (Peyton Randolph : ) I need not describe him." Of Mr. Pendleton he says, "The last and best, though all good. The last shall be first, says the Scripture. He is an humble and religious man, and must be exalted. He is a smooth-tongued speaker, and, though not so old, may be compared to old Nestor,-
""' Experienced Nestor, in persuasion skill'd, Words sweet as honey from his lips distill'd.'"
? I have often in my early days heard the delegate from Frederick county (Mr. Matthew Page) speak of the eloquence of Mr. Henry while defending the Church against this assault, and refer to the fact that his opponents could never succeed until he was out of the way. This circumstance seemed to have been well known, for Bishop White has introduced it into his Memoirs of the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States.
222
OLD CHURCHES, MINISTERS, AND
inherited it. And now, should it be asked why the clergy alone of all who were affected by this law should have made such oppo- sition, when it was professedly designed to relieve the poor, in a year of unparalleled scarcity, I will endeavour to answer the question out of the mouths of the clergy themselves at the time. Their reasons and complaints were sent in lengthy letters-memo- rials from themselves and the Commissaries Dawson and Robinson -to the Archbishop of Canterbury, and Bishop of London, and the Privy Council ; also in a letter from the Bishop of London to the Lord-Commissioners of Trade, and in an opinion of some of the first jurists in England, among them Lord Cambden. These have been preserved in the archives of Lambeth and Fulham. I have a copy of them before me, covering more than one hundred and fifty folio pages of manuscript. I have carefully examined the same, as well as whatever on the other side I could obtain, and will briefly state the substance of the clergy's plea. In the first place, it is declared to be untrue that no complaints came from other sources. In the year 1755, the same measure was carried by only one vote, such was the opposition to it. In the year 1758, some of the ablest and best men of the Assembly and the State were opposed to it. Those who were to be sufferers by it among the officers of Government were afraid to complain, as they might lose office. But the chief reason why many others did not com- plain more and longer was, that most of them were actually paid their full dues in tobacco. When the King disallowed the law at the petition of the clergy, and the Legislature was obliged to encourage the vestries to resent by promising to bear the expenses of the suit, but said nothing about any other suits, nearly all the other debtors, believing their cause to be a hopeless one, would not incur the expenses of a suit, but paid their dues as they stood before the law was passed. Thus the clergy alone were the suffer- ers, while the instruments of doing justice to others. Secondly, they maintained that theirs was a peculiar case, and might have been exempted from the operation of law, even if some such method could have been legally adopted with others. They, by their profession, were precluded from those various modes of acquiring property by which others might more easily bear a loss. Their salaries too were generally small,-so small that a great number of them could not marry,-that respectable families would not admit them into that relationship. In ordinary years most of them, it was declared, did not receive more than eighty pounds,- sometimes much less; and, when tobacco was indifferent, not more
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.