Barons of the Potomack and Rappahannock; Wm. and Mary Qrtly., Vol. 3, No. 1 Transcribed by Kathy Merrill for the USGenWeb Archives Special Collections Project ************************************************************************ USGENWEB ARCHIVES NOTICE: These electronic pages may NOT be reproduced in any format for profit or presentation by any other organization or persons. Persons or organizations desiring to use this material, must obtain the written consent of the contributor, or the legal representative of the submitter, and contact the listed USGenWeb archivist with proof of this consent. The submitter has given permission to the USGenWeb Archives to store the file permanently for free access. http://www.usgwarchives.net *********************************************************************** Barons of the Potomack and Rappahannock Moncure Daniel Conway William and Mary College Quarterly Historical Magazine, Vol. 3, No. 1. (Jul., 1894), pp. 75-76. BOOK REVIEWS. BARONS OF THE POTOMACK AND RAPPAHANNOCK. By Moncure Daniel Conway. New York. The Grolier Club, 1892. Seldom has the press given out a work about which so many fine things can be said. There is only one word to describe the general get up of the work - it is superb. The costly hand-made paper and the clear cut antique type are perfection. Perfection cannot be as- cribed to any writer, but so many splendid elements enter into the general authorship of the work that Mr. Conway should receive unbounded praise. The tribute paid to Virginia and Virginians by Mr. Conway awakens a strain of pride for our grand old state. One hears the sky-larks of Spotswood in the melodious sentences that ring from Mr. Conway's pen. The silvery voices of the fair ladies tinkle on every page, and ever and anon the manly forms of the Washingtons, the Carters, the Lewises, and the other barons, rise like splendid dreams before our eyes. No writer in America has a greater command over the English language than Mr. Conway. Sentences, under his marvellous pen, melt into rainbows or float into music, till we seem to live in an land of dreams. All thanks to mr. W.F. Havermeyer, whose careful preservation of the manuscripts, upon which the book is based, has rendered this elegant production possible. One learns to appreciate such a man, when nearly everybody else is careless of the past, and thinks an old record fit for the moths, the dampness or fire. The careful collector of old manuscripts, which some times contain keys to a thousand mysteries, is necessarily a patriot. In there- fore noticing a few instances of error, I do not wish to be understood as modifying my admiration for the work. It is no wonder that in a work where there is a pleasure in the flickering lights of the old letters, the historic vision is sometimes lost in shadows. I think Mr. Conway lays too much stress on the political importance of the "Barons". But the error is not confined to him. The social phases of Virginia life have been often misunder- stood. Virginia was the first Colony to have a representative body - the House of Burgesses. As shown by Prof. Jameson, of Brown University, the ballot was twice as free in Virginia as in New England, at the time of the Revolution. The real authority in the Colony was the House of Burgesess, freely elected by the people. The Justices in the country held their offices during good behaviour, but the whole bench was subject to the law, and the test of the Justice was his election to the House. Spotswood, the type of the Baron, bitterly complains in his letters of the insubordination of the Burgesses, the people's representatives. In their dealings with the government, the Page 76. Council generally courted the people. And it may be said that the extreme democratic views of Jefferson - a Baron himself in family descent - were a mere expression of the popular tendency. After the Revolution it was the descendants of many of htese old Barons who were the most rabid Jacobites and friends of popular government. It is curious to read Mr. Conway's condemnation of Bacon's Rebellion. Perhaps he has not read the report in manuscript of the commissioners sent especially to investigate the trouble. They had no interest but to do justice and they laboriously did it, and they in effect thoroughly upheld the justice of Bacon's cause. When in like manner Mr. Conway say "he cannot discover an instance in which an old mansion or historic edifice in Virginia was destroyed by Northern armies", one cannot but regret his want of investigation. In York and James City counties alone there are many instances of such destruction, of which I mention the following: 1st, William and Mary College burned by Federal troops; 2d, the Brafferton building at the college, the old Indian- school house, not entirely destroyed, but gutted of every particle of woodwork; 3d. The two offices attached to the Palace in Williamsburg, considered well-built residences, torn down to make chimneys for tents of the Federal officers at Fort Magruder; 4th. the Clerk's office in Williamsburg, which was first fired, and the bricks remoed; 5th. Old "Powhatan", the residence formerly of the Whaleys, the Thorpes, and the Taliaferros, burnt; 6th. "Greenspring", the ancient residence of Gov. William Berkeley and the Ludwells, burnt with all the outhouses. The owner, who was a Northern man, then residing in New Jersey, obtained from Congress, for buildings and stock destroyed, $60,000; 7th. The old Ambler House at Jamestown; 8th. Old Chiskiak Church in York conty. I need not multiply instances. "William Lightfoot did marry Howell, who was by him beaten, so that she left him". This is denied in toto by a descendant, and the statement sounds harsh and unnecessary. On page 189, Mr. Conway says swearing was confied to "poor whites and mulattoes". He is skeptical about Washington swearing. This is hardly corret. Swearing was common throughout the United States and England. The allusion to "poor whites" is a repetition of mere negro slang. It is to be regretted that Mr. Conway indulges in it. Beverley says that in 1722 there were practically no poor people in Virginia. Smythe in his travels in 1773 syas that there were fewer poor people in Virginia than in any country in the world. That there was any caste of "poor whites" in Virginia is absurd. The negroes used the term to designate any person inferior to their masters in wealth. The abolitionists before the war seized upon the term to indicate a descent from the original servant class of emigrants. There is no proof of this, and it is folly to infer a stigma after 200 years of descent.