Skip to main content

Full text of "The North Carolina historical review"

See other formats


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2013 


http://archive.org/details/northcarolinahis1955nort 


THE 

North  Carolina 
Historical  Review 

Issued  Quarterly 

Volume  XXXII  Numbers  1-4 


JANUARY-  OCTOBER 
1955 


Published  By 

STATE  DEPARTMENT  OF  ARCHIVES  AND  HISTORY 

Corner  of  Salisbury  and  Edenton  Streets 

Raleigh,  N.  C. 


THE  NORTH  CAROLINA  HISTORICAL  REVIEW 


Published  by  the  State  Department  of  Archives  and  History 
Raleigh,  N.  C. 


Christopher  Crittenden,  Editor 
David  LeRoy  Corbitt,  Managing  Editor 


ADVISORY  EDITORIAL  BOARD 

Walter  Clinton  Jackson  Hugh  Talmadge  Lefler 

Frontis  Withers  Johnston  Douglas  LeTell  Rights 

George  Myers  Stephens 


STATE  DEPARTMENT  OF  ARCHIVES  AND   HISTORY 
EXECUTIVE  BOARD 

McDaniel  Lewis,  Chairman 

Gertrude  Sprague  Carraway  Josh  L.  Horne 

Fletcher  M.  Green  William  Thomas  Laprade 

Clarence  W.  Griffin  Mrs.  Sadie  Smathers  Patton 

Christopher  Crittenden,  Director 


This  review  was'  e^toblisked  m  January.  192 J-,,  as  a  medmm  of  publica- 
tion and  discussion  of  history :  pi{  North  Carolina.  It  is  ismed  to  other 
institutions  by  exchangej  but  to  the-  general  public  by  subscription  only. 
The  regular  price  is  $2.00  per  ytar.  Members  of  the  State  Literary  and 
Historical  Association, '  for  whic%  the  annual  dues  are  $3.00,  receive  this 
publication  without  further  payment.  Back  numbers  may  be  procured  at 
the  regular  price  of  $2.00  per  volume,  or  $.50  per  number. 


The  North  Carolina 
Historical  Review 


VOLUME  XXXI 

NUMBER  1,  JANUARY,  1955 

THE  CHURCH  ESTABLISHMENT  IN 

NORTH  CAROLINA,  1765-1776  1 

Paul  Conkin 

THE  ELECTION  OF  1836  IN 

NORTH  CAROLINA  31 

William  S.  Hoffmann 

"THE  GREAT  RECONSTRUCTOR:"  GENERAL 
E.  R.  S.  CANBY  AND  THE 

SECOND  MILITARY  DISTRICT  52 

Max  L.  Heyman 

THE  FREE  AGRICULTURE  POPULATION 
IN  SUMTER  DISTRICT, 

SOUTH  CAROLINA,  1850-1860  81 

Margaret  Burr  DesCramps 

EDITOR  HAYNE  TO  EDITOR  KINGSBURY: 
THREE  SIGNIFICANT 

UNPUBLISHED  LETTERS 92 

Francis  B.  Dedmond 

A  DESCRIPTION  OF  "CAROLANA"  BY 
A  "WELL-WILLER,"  1649  .... 102 

Hugh  Talmage  Lefler 

BOOK  REVIEWS 106 

Powell's  The  Carolina  Charter  of  1663— By  William  D. 
Overman  ;  McCain's  The  County  Court  in  North  Caro- 
lina before  1750 — By  Rex  Beach  ;  Preslar's  A  History 
of  Catawba  County — By  Henry  S.  Stroupe;  Spence's 
The  Presbyterian  Congregation  on  Rocky  River — By  E. 
Clinton  Gardner;  Draper's  King's  Mountain  and  Its 
Heroes:  History  of  the  Battle  of  King's  Mountain, — By 
William  B.  Hesseltine;  Oliphant's,  Odell's  and 

[iii] 


93133 


iv  Contents 

Eaves's  The  Letters  of  William  Gilmore  Simms:  Vol- 
ume III — By  H.  G.  Kinchloe;  Lanning's  The  St 
Augustine  Expedition  of  1740:  A  Report  to  the  South 
Carolina  General  Assembly — By  Rembert  W.  Patrick  ; 
Chitty's  Reconstruction  at  Sewannee — By  PORTER 
Williams,  Jr.;  Jahn's  Tobacco  Dictionary — By 
Nannie  M.  Tilley  ;  Lord's  The  Fremantle  Diary — By 
Herbert  W.  Hill;  Simkins's  A  History  of  the  South 
— By  Frontis  W.  Johnson;  de  Grummond's  Caracas 
Diary — By  Capus  M.  Waynick;  Beale's  Charles  A. 
Beard:  An  Appraisal — By  Fletcher  M.  Green. 

HISTORICAL  NEWS   129 


NUMBER  2,  APRIL,  1955 

NORTH  CAROLINA  TARIFF  POLICIES, 
1775-1789    151 

William  Frank  Zornow 

JOHN  CHAVIS  AS  A  PREACHER  TO  WHITES 165 

Margaret  Burr  DesChamps 

PAPERS  FROM  THE  FIFTY-FOURTH  ANNUAL 
SESSION  OF  THE  STATE  LITERARY  AND 
HISTORICAL  ASSOCIATION 
RALEIGH,  DECEMBER,  1954 

INTRODUCTION    173 

Christopher  Crittenden 

THIRTY  YEARS  OF  THE  NEW  HISTORY: 
A  STUDY  OF  THE  NORTH  CAROLINA 

HISTORICAL  REVIEW,  1924-1953 174 

Paul  Murray 

THE  JEWISH  PEOPLE  OF 

NORTH  CAROLINA  194 

Harry  L.  Golden 

NORTH  CAROLINA  FICTION,  1954 217 

Robert  Mason 

NORTH  CAROLINA  NON-FICTION 

BOOKS  1953-1954  225 

Leonard  B.  Hurley 


Contents  v 

ELIZABETHAN  POLITICS  AND 

COLONIAL  ENTERPRISE  254 

Louis  B.  Wright 

NORTH  CAROLINA  BIBLIOGRAPHY,  1953-1954  ____  271 
Mary  Lindsay  Thornton 

BOOK  REVIEWS  284 

Peckham's  The  Discovery  of  New  Britain — By  William 
S.  Powell  ;  Brooks's  Selected  Addresses  of  a  Southern 
Lawyer — By  Jason  B.  Deyton;  Noblin's  The  Grange 
in  North  Carolina,  1929-19 5 J,. — By  Haitung  King  and 
Jack  W.  Van  Derhoof;  Johnson's  and  Holloman's 
The  Story  of  Kinston  and  Lenoir  County — By  D.  J. 
Whitener;  Mathis's  The  Lost  Citadel — By  Richard 
Walser;  Mouzon's  Privateers  of  Charleston  in  the 
War  of  1812 — By  Beth  Crabtree;  Hesseltine's  Dr. 
J,  G.  M.  Ramsey:  Autobiography  and  Letters — By 
Robert  F.  Durden;  Davis's  Jeffersonian  American 
Notes  on  the  United  States  of  America — By  D.  H. 
Gilpatrick;  Todd's  Confederate  Finance — By  C.  K. 
Brown  ;  Park's  General  Kirby  Smith,  C.  S.  A. — By  Jay 
Luvaas  ;  Fishwick's  General  Lee's  Photographer — By 
J.  Walter  Coleman;  Harwell's  Stonewall  Jackson 
and  the  Old  Stonewall  Brigade — By  BURKE  DAVIS ; 
Jacobs's  Indians  of  the  Southern  Colonial  Frontier: 
The  Edmond  Atkin  Report  and  Plan  of  1775 — By 
Gaston  Litton;  Davis's  and  Hogan's  The  Barber  of 
Natchez — By  William  D.  McCain;  Freund's  Gustav 
DreseVs  Houston  Journal — By  James  A.  Tinsley; 
Kilman's  and  Wright's  Hugh  Roy  Cullen:  A  Story  of 
American  Opportunity  —  By  Nannie  M.  Tilley; 
Cowdrey's  American  Academy  of  Fine  Arts  and 
American  Art  Union — By  Ben  F.  Williams. 

HISTORICAL  NEWS  310 


NUMBER  3,  JULY,  1955 

BEDFORD  BROWN:  STATE  RIGHTS  UNIONIST  ___.  321 

Houston  G.  Jones 

LEGAL  STATUS  OF  PUBLIC  SCHOOL 
EDUCATION  FOR  NEGROES  IN 

NORTH  CAROLINA,  1877-1894  346 

Frenise  A.  Logan 


vi  Contents 

THE  UNPLEASANTNESS  AT  STECOE  258 

David  H.  Corkran 

NATHANIEL  MACON  AND  THE  SOUTHERN 
PROTEST  AGAINST  NATIONAL 

CONSOLIDATION 376 

Noble  E.  Cunningham,  Jr. 

THE  MILITARY  EXPERIENCES  OF 

JAMES  A.  PEIFER,  1861-1865 385 

George  D.  Harmon 

PAULDING'S  LETTER  TO  JOHN  C.  CALHOUN  ____  410 

Jay  B.  Hubbell 

BOOK  REVIEWS 415 

Harden's  Tar  Heel  Ghosts — By  Paul  Murray  ;  Smith's 
and  Smith's  The  History  of  Trinity  Parish,  Scotland 
Neck,  [and]  Edgecombe  Parish,  Halifax  County — By 
William  S.  Powell;  Rubin's  Thomas  Wolfe:  The 
Weather  of  His  Youth — By  George  W.  McCoy; 
Lambie's  From  Mine  to  Market:  The  History  of  Coal 
Transportation  on  the  Norfolk  and  Western  Railway — 
By  Charles  E.  Landon;  Morgan's  Justice  William 
Johnson,  the  First  Dissenter;  The  Career  and  Constitu- 
tional Philosophy  of  a  Jeffersonian  Judge— By  C.  E. 
Cauthen  ;  Easterby's  The  Colonial  Records  of  South 
Carolina.  The  Journal  of  the  Commons  House  of  Assem~ 
bly,  September  14,  17 42- January  27, 1744 — By  Henry  S. 
Stroupe  ;  Cox's  Glimpse  of  Glory,  George  Mason  of  Gun- 
ston  Hall — By  Elizabeth  W.  Wilborn  ;  Wilson's  The 
Tinkling  Spring,  Headwater  of  Freedom.  A  Study  of 
the  Church  and  Her  People — By  Thomas  H.  Spence, 
Jr.;  Wiley's  Rebel  Private,  Front  and  Rear — By 
Richard  D.  Younger  ;  Eaton's  A  History  of  the  South- 
ern Confederacy — By  Philip  M.  Rice  ;  Anderson's 
Brokenburn,  The  Journal  of  Kate  Stone,  1861-1868 — 
By  C.  H.  Hamlin  ;  Douglass's  Rebels  and  Democrats — 
By  Clara  G.  Roe;  Bower's  Making  Democracy  a  Re- 
ality. Jefferson,  Jackson  and  Polk — By  J.  G.  DE  Roulhac 
Hamilton;  Catton's  American  Heritage — By  C.  W. 
Tebeau;  Vail's  Knickerbocker  Birthday:  A  Sesqui- 
Centennial  History  of  the  New-York  Historical  Society, 
1804-1954 — By  Howard   Braverman;   Carter's   The 


Contents  vii 

Territorial  Papers  of  the  United  States.  Volume  XX. 
The  Territory  of  Arkansas,  1825-1829 — By  Paul  M. 
McCain. 

HISTORICAL  NEWS 436 

NUMBER  4,  OCTOBER,  1955 


PROPERTY  AND  TRADE:   MAIN  THEMES  OF 
EARLY  NORTH  CAROLINA  NEWSPAPER 
ADVERTISEMENTS 451 

Wesley  H.  Wallace 

BEDFORD  BROWN:  STATE  RIGHTS  UNIONIST 

PART  II:  THE  CONCILIATOR 483 

Houston  G.  Jones 

NORTH  CAROLINA  AND  THE  BRITISH 
INVESTOR,  1880-1910 512 

Alfred  P.  Tischendorf 

THE  INFLUENCE  OF  JOSEPH  RUGGLES 
WILSON  ON  HIS  SON  WOODROW  WILSON 519 

George  C.  Osborn 

THE  MILITARY  EXPERIENCES  OF  JAMES  A. 
PEIFER,  1861-1865  544 

George  D.  Harmon 

BOOK  REVIEWS 573 

Robinson's  The  North  Carolina  Guide — By  Weymouth 
T.  Jordan;  Fries's  and  Rights's  The  Records  of  the 
Moravians  in  North  Carolina,  Volume  VIII,  1823-1837 — 
By  S.  Walter  Martin  ;  Shanks's  The  Papers  of  Willie 
Person  Mangum,  Volume  IV,  1844-1846 — By  Charles 
Grier  Sellers,  Jr.;  Henley's  The  Home  Place — By 
Rosser  H.  Taylor  ;  Wellman's  Dead  and  Gone,  Classic 
Crimes  of  North  Carolina — By  Beth  G.  Crabtree; 
Masterson's  William  Blount — By  LeRoy  P.  Graf; 
Gilmer's  The  Memoirs  of  Emma  Prather  Gilmer — By 
D.  L.  Corbitt;  Stoney's  The  Dulles  Family  in  South 


viii  Contents 

Carolina — By  Elizabeth  W.  Wilborn  ;  Hubbeli/s  The 
South  in  American  Literature,  1607-1900 — By  Louise 
Greer  ;  Wiley's  Fourteen  Hundred  and  91  Days  in  the 
Confederate  Army — By  Beth  G.  Crabtree;  Davis's 
They  Called  Him  Stonewall:  A  Life  of  Lt.  General  T.  J. 
Jackson,  C.  S.  A. — By  Stuart  Noblin;  Williams's 
P.  G.  T.  Beauregard:  Napoleon  in  Gray — By  Jay 
Luvaas;  Coulter's  Wormsloe:  Two  Centuries  of  a 
Georgia  Family — By  Fletcher  M.  Green  ;  Miers's  The 
Web  of  Victory:  Grant  at  Vicksburg — By  LeRoy  H. 
Fischer;  and  Dalzell's  Benefit  of  Clergy  in  America 
and  Related  Matters — By  John  R.  Jordan,  Jr. 

HISTORICAL  NEWS  597 


The  North  Carolina 
Historical  Review 

Volume  XXXII  January,  1955  Number  1 

THE  CHURCH  ESTABLISHMENT 
IN  NORTH  CAROLINA,  1765-1776 

By  Paul  Conkin 

The  near  myth  about  religious  freedom  has  given  an  at- 
tractive halo  to  the  popular  conception  of  American  colonial 
history,  although  such  freedom,  had  it  existed,  would  have 
been  almost  inexplicable.  Most  of  the  immigrants  to  America 
brought  with  them  the  current  European  ideas  of  a  state 
church.  Puritans  in  New  England  and  Anglicans  in  North 
Carolina  alike  desired  a  privileged  legal  status  for  their  re- 
ligion. In  many  of  the  colonies,  and  particularly  in  North 
Carolina,  liberalizing  influences  tended  to  change  the  form 
of  the  established  religion  from  that  found  in  Europe.  In 
North  Carolina  religious  toleration,  which  was  initially  of- 
fered as  an  inducement  to  settlement,  and  the  almost  com- 
plete religious  freedom  found  on  the  unassimilated  and  con- 
stantly retreating  frontier  left  a  heritage  of  local  religious 
independence  which  was  hardly  reconcilable  with  a  strong 
establishment.1  In  the  period  from  1765  to  1776  many  people 
in  North  Carolina,  both  those  who  were  for  and  those  against 
the  English  political  rule,  persistently  resisted  the  efforts  of 
the  royal  authorities,  the  Anglican  clergy,  and  sometimes  the 
local  officials  to  secure  an  effective  church  establishment 
of  the  English  type.  Because  it  paralleled  a  most  important 
period  of  political  unrest  and  because  it  represents  the  climax 
of  one  of  the  several  state-wide  struggles  for  religious  free- 
dom, this  religious  discontent  reveals  a  significant  phase  in 
the  development  of  the  American  mind  and  the  institutions 
which  are  its  concrete  manifestations. 


1  Evarts   B.    Greene,   Religion   and   the   State    (New   York,    New   York 
University  Press,  1941),  47-73. 

[l] 


2  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

The  Episcopal  Church  was  always,  or  at  least  nominally, 
the  official  religion  of  colonial  North  Carolina,  although  the 
Anglican  clergy  had  no  regular  and  certain  establishment 
until  the  Vestry  and  Orthodox  Clergy  Acts  of  1765.2  Though 
the  English  Church  was  recognized  as  the  legal  or  state 
church  in  the  early  proprietary  charters,  the  proprietors 
were  given  permission  to,  and  did,  grant  freedom  of  con- 
science.3 Several  vestry  acts  were  passed  in  the  colony,  the 
first  in  1701,  but  there  is  little  evidence  that  they  were  ever 
strictly  enforced.  After  the  arrival  of  the  first  royal  governor 
in  1730  with  instructions  to  secure  an  adequate  religious 
establishment,  it  was  eleven  years  before  an  apathetic  colo- 
nial Assembly  passed  a  vestry  act.  This  law  proved  inade- 
quate to  the  purposes  of  the  clergy  and  the  Crown,  and  a 
more  effective  act  was  passed  in  1754.  When  this  act  was 
disallowed  by  the  Crown  in  1759  because  it  gave  too  much 
power  to  the  local  vestry,  a  five  year  legislative  struggle  en- 
sued before  the  Assembly  was  persuaded  to  pass  a  vestry 
law  that  met  the  demands  of  the  English  Government. 

While  in  1759  there  was  a  common  sentiment  in  North 
Carolina  that  the  Protestant  religion  should  be  legally  estab- 
lished, there  was  a  wide  difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  form 
the  Establishment  should  take.  The  source  of  the  legislative 
struggles  after  1759,  as  well  as  much  of  the  later  religious 
dissention,  was  the  Crown's  insistence  on  a  stronger  estab- 
lishment than  that  desired  by  either  the  dissenters  or  Angli- 
cans. The  Crown  wanted  a  centralized  ecclesiastical  system 
which  could  be  strictly  enforced  by  the  colonial  governor. 
The  dissenters  wanted  to  retain  almost  complete  religious 
freedom  within  an  establishment  that  would  do  little  more 
than  definitely  exclude  Catholics.  The  Anglicans  desired  the 
establishment  of  their  own  church,  yet  at  the  same  time, 
wanted  to  retain  a  firm  local  control  over  their  own  ecclesi- 
astical affairs.  The  various  vestry  acts  passed  between  1754 

2  William  L.  Saunders,  editor,  The  Colonial  Records  of  North  Carolina 
(Raleigh:  Josephus  Daniels,  1890),  VII,  490.  Hereafter  cited  as  Saunders, 
Colonial  Records. 

8  Stephen  B.  Weeks,  The  Religious  Development  in  the  Province  of  North 
Carolina  (John  Hopkins  University  Studies  in  Historical  and  Political 
Science,  Tenth  Series,  Baltimore,  1892),  14w. 


The  Church  Establishment  3 

and  1765  exhibited  both  the  latitudinarian  ideas  of  the  dis- 
senters and  the  independence  of  the  Anglicans. 

The  Vestry  Act  of  1754  left  the  right  of  presentation  of 
clergymen  in  the  hands  of  the  local  vestry.  This  situation 
was  unsatisfactory  to  Governor  Dobbs  who,  since  it  merited 
the  disapproval  of  the  Bishop  of  London,  secured  its  dis- 
allowance in  1759.4  The  problem  of  presentation,  more  than 
any  other  issue,  created  a  division  of  interests  between  the 
Crown  and  staunch  Anglicans.  According  to  English  prac- 
tice, the  Crown  had  the  authority  to  induct,  or  appoint, 
ministers  into  parishes,  although  in  practice  always  on  the 
advice  of  the  church  officials.  In  North  Carolina  the  general 
practice  had  been  for  the  local  vestry  to  hire  its  own  minister, 
if  one  were  available.  In  the  absence  of  an  American  bishop, 
the  governor  was  the  supreme  representative  of  both  the 
Crown  and  the  Church  and  was  ready  to  claim  his  preroga- 
tive and  induct  ministers  into  parishes  as  he  wished.  Until 
the  Revolution  this  problem  of  presentation  or  induction 
remained  a  source  of  friction. 

When  the  fate  of  the  Vestry  Act  of  1754  was  known  in 
North  Carolina,  Dobbs  asked  for  a  new  act,  this  time  giving 
the  Crown  its  right  of  presentation.  The  Assembly  expressed 
its  official  sorrow  that  the  last  act  had  met  with  royal  dis- 
approval, complained  of  its  lack  of  representative  in  London 
to  explain  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  the  colony,  and 
promptly  passed  twin  church  laws,  a  Vestry  and  an  Orthodox 
Clergy  Act,  which  were  even  more  obnoxious  to  the  Crown 
than  the  act  of  1754.5  Not  only  was  the  right  of  presentation 
definitely  retained  in  the  vestry,  but  also  other  unsatisfactory 
conditions  were  affixed.  In  keeping  with  the  desire  of  the 
dissenters  for  a  lax  establishment,  these  acts  required  that 
a  prospective  vestryman  take  an  oath  that  he  would  not 
oppose,  instead  of  the  usual  conform  to,  the  doctrine  and 
discipline  of  the  Church  of  England.  The  Bishop  of  London 
avowed  that  this  oath  could  be  taken  by  a  Jew  or  pagan.6 
Furthermore,  the  acts  excluded  the  minister  from  member- 

4  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VI,  15-16. 
6  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VI,  139. 
•Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VI,  714-716. 


4  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

ship  in  the  vestry,  contrary  to  English  church  practice.7  The 
men  of  North  Carolina  had  already  found  it  advantageous  to 
discuss  their  minister's  salary  and  conduct  without  his  dis- 
turbing and  embarrassing  presence.  Finally,  if  a  minister 
were  immoral  or  committed  a  crime,  he  had  to  face  trial 
in  the  local  or  secular  court  instead  of  in  an  English  ecclesi- 
astical court.8  Needless  to  say,  these  vestry  laws  of  1760  were 
disallowed.9 

In  1762  the  Assembly  passed  two  more  church  laws,  each 
retaining  the  same  objectionable  features  as  the  last  ones. 
Governor  Dobbs  immediately  vetoed  the  Vestry  Act,  but 
reluctantly  approved  the  Orthodox  Clergy  Act  in  order  that 
the  ministers  might  have  a  salary.  At  last,  in  the  legislative 
sessions  of  1764-65,  Governor  Dobbs,  ill,  tired,  and  already 
planning  to  relinquish  his  job  to  William  Tryon,  succeeded  in 
pushing  through  the  Assembly  two  church  laws  which  satis- 
fied both  him  and  the  Lord  Bishop  of  London.  These  remain- 
ed in  operation  until  the  Revolution.  Perhaps  significantly, 
the  first  of  these  laws,  the  Vestry  Act  of  1764,  was  passed  by 
an  Assembly  greatly  dwarfed  by  the  absence  of  all  but  four 
of  the  ordinarily  recalcitrant  northern  members.10 

The  Vestry  Act  of  1764  provided  for  the  support  of  the 
clergy,  for  education,  and  for  poor  relief.  On  every  third 
Easter  Monday  twelve  vestrymen  were  to  be  elected  in  each 
parish  by  the  qualified  voters.  Each  year  before  November  1 
the  sheriff  was  to  collect  a  poll  tax  of  not  more  than  ten  shil- 
lings from  each  taxable  to  support  the  Parish.  If  he  could 
not  collect  the  tax  in  a  period  of  five  days,  he  was  empowered 
to  sell  a  compensatory  amount  of  the  goods  and  chattels  of 
the  defaulting  person.  The  vestry  was  liable  for  all  damages 
to  an  underpaid  minister  in  accordance  with  the  fees  and 
salary  set  by  law.11  Most  important  in  later  controversies,  the 
act  provided  that  any  dissenter,  and  later  by  amendment  any 

7  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VI,  720-722. 

8  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VI,  714-716. 

9  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VI,  723. 

10  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VI,  1035. 

11  Walter  Clark,  editor,  The  State  Records  of  North  Carolina  (Winston, 
M.  I.  and  J.  C.  Stewart,  1895-1906),  106-107.  Hereafter  cited  as  Clark, 
State  Records. 


The  Church  Establishment  5 

one  at  all,  who  refused  to  qualify  when  elected  a  vestryman 
was  subject  to  a  fine  of  three  pounds.12 

The  Orthodox  Clergy  Act  of  1765  provided  the  parish 
minister  a  salary  of  £133.6.8  proclamation  money,  and  a 
glebe  of  300  acres  or  a  compensating  £20  extra  salary.  He 
was  to  receive  twenty  shillings  for  a  marriage  by  license, 
five  shillings  for  a  marriage  by  banns,  and  forty  shillings  for 
a  funeral.13  Although  complete  religious  jurisdiction  was 
given  to  the  Bishop  of  London,  the  governor  was  empowered 
to  suspend  an  indicted  minister  while  awaiting  the  verdict 
of  an  English  ecclesiastical  court.  The  minister  could  preach 
out  of  his  parish  only  with  the  consent  of  his  vestry.  Most 
significant,  the  right  of  presentation  was  not  mentioned.14 
As  a  result,  both  the  governor  and  the  Bishop  of  London 
interpreted  the  act  as  giving  the  right  to  the  crown  by  im- 
plication.15 With  these  two  acts,  North  Carolina  now  had  as 
strong  a  legal  establishment  as  any  other  colony. 

Unfortunately  for  the  Establishment,  Governor  Dobbs 
left  the  Church  little  more  than  two  strong  vestry  acts  in 
1765,  for  the  church  was,  if  anything,  weaker  than  it  had 
been  in  at  least  a  decade.  There  were  only  six  ministers  to 
serve  twenty-nine  county-wide  vestries  in  a  colony  with 
a  white  population  of  about  100,000;16  of  these  six  ministers 
only  four  were  doing  good  work.  The  lack  of  ministers  is 
revealed  by  the  fact  that  when  Governor  Dobbs  died  unex- 
pectedly in  1765  he  had  to  be  buried  without  benefit  of 
clergy  in  southerly  Brunswick  County.  In  the  whole  colony 
there  were  only  ten  Anglican  church  buildings,  with  a  few 
outlying  chapels.17  On  the  credit  side,  a  few  of  the  counties 
had  functioning  vestries,  which  were  helping  to  support  the 
clergy.  The  church  was  also  strengthened  by  aid  from  the 
Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gospel  in  Foreign  Parts18 
which  sponsored  most  of  the  ministers  as  missionaries. 

"Clark,  State  Records,  759-760. 

"Clark,  State  Records,  583-585. 

"Clark,  State  Records,  660-662. 

"  Arthur  Lyon  Cross,  The  Anglican  Episcopate  and  The  American 
Colonies   (New  York,  Longmans,  Green,  and  Co.,  1902),  243. 

"Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VI,  1027,  1039-1041. 

17  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VII,  102-104. 

"  Hereafter  to  be  abbreviated  as  the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the 
Gospel. 


6  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

A  more  personal  view  of  the  Established  Church  can  be 
had  from  the  letters  of  the  North  Carolina  Clergy  to  the 
Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gospel  in  the  years  just 
before  1765.  With  some  exaggeration  they  reveal  the  trials 
of  a  minister  in  the  sinful  wilds  of  a  small  but  growing  colony. 
From  Craven  County,  James  Reed,  one  of  the  most  famous 
colonial  ministers,  reported  extreme  difficulty  in  collecting 
his  salary,  deplored  the  many  dissenters  and  infidels  in  his 
parish,  and  constantly  begged  for  religious  pamphlets  to 
combat  the  "New  Lights/'  Their  "crying-out,  .  .  .  falling 
down  as  in  fits,  .  .  .  awakening  in  extacies,  .  .  .  and  impulses, 
visions,  and  revelations;"  19  their  "preaching  the  inexpediency 
of  Human  Learning  &  .  .  .  the  great  expediency  of  Dreams 
Visions  &  immediate  Revelation"20  must  have  shocked  the 
dignified  and  literate  Reed.  In  Beaufort  County,  Alex 
Steward  worked  hard  and  seldom  complained,  although  he 
was  sincerely  worried  over  the  lack  of  ministers  in  neighbor- 
ing counties.  By  1765  he  was  living  in  the  first  glebe  to  be 
furnished  a  minister  in  North  Carolina.  He  desired  pamphlets 
to  fight  the  rash  doctrines  of  the  Anabaptists  and  blushingly 
admitted  that  in  order  to  retain  for  the  church  some  of  the 
more  dupable  members  he  had  baptised  one  man  by  im- 
mersion.21 In  Chowan  County,  Daniel  Earl  performed  his 
duties,  was  influential  in  education,  but  reputedly  divided 
his  love  between  his  ministry  and  his  herring  fishery.  James 
Moir  was  preaching  occasionally  in  various  counties,  always 
deploring  his  inability  to  accumulate  a  fortune,  and  at  every 
opportunity  criticising  Governor  Dobbs  and  the  whole  ec- 
clesiastical system.23  The  most  tragic  story  of  hardship  was 
told  in  the  letters  of  James  McDowell  of  Brunswick  County. 
Though  his  parish  contained  the  largest  church  constructed 

19  G.  W.  Paschal,  "Morgan  Edwards'  Materials  Toward  a  History  of  the 
Baptists  in  the  Province  of  North  Carolina,"  North  Carolina  Historical 
Review,  VII  (1930),  383.  Hereafter  cited  as  Paschal,  "Morgan  Edwards' 
Materials." 

30  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VI,  565. 

21  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VI,  315-316,  734-735. 

23  Bennett  H.  Wall,  "Charles  Pettigrew,  First  Bishop-Elect  of  the  North; 
Carolina  Episcopal  Church,"  North  Carolina  Historical  Review,  XXVIIl 
(1951),  17. 

28  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VI,  1051. 


The  Church  Establishment  7 

in  colonial  North  Carolina24  and  also  the  leading  families, 
including  Governor  Dobbs,  McDowell  complained  of  the 
capricious  weather,  the  long,  hard  trips  to  outlying  chapels, 
his  financial  misery,  his  exclusion  from  vestry  meetings,  and 
the  fact  that  he  had  only  two  slaves  while  other  ministers 
in  the  province  had  twenty.25  When  his  wife  died  in  child- 
birth and  the  roof  of  his  big,  new  church  fell  in,  McDowell 
was  ready  to  leave  the  colony  in  despair.  In  1763  he  died 
while  still  a  minister  in  Brunswick. 

The  most  recurrent  complaint  of  the  ministers  was  about 
the  dangerous  growth  of  dissenting  denominations.  James 
Reed's  listing  and  evaluation  of  these  groups  is  a  classic  of 
brevity:  "The  Anabaptists  are  obstinate,  illiterate  &  grossly 
ignorant,  the  Methodist  [really  New  Light  Baptists],  ig- 
norant, censorious  &  uncharitable,  the  Quakers,  Rigid,  but 
the  Presbyterians  are  pretty  moderate  except  here  &  there 
a  bigot  or  rigid  Calvinist." 26  This  is  a  fairly  complete  list, 
for,  other  than  the  German  denominations,  these  four  dis- 
senting groups  were  alone  significant  in  colonial  North  Car- 
olina. The  Moravians,  by  acts  of  Parliament  and  the  North 
Carolina  Assembly,  were  given  equal  rights  with  Anglicans 
and  had  a  separate  parish.27  Beginning  about  1750  a  heavy 
German  migration  from  Pennsylvania  brought  the  Lutheran 
and  German  Reformed  churches  into  the  Piedmont  region, 
notably  along  the  Yadkin.  These  two  German  speaking  de- 
nominations received  many  special  religious  privileges  and, 
in  return,  were  always  completely  law  abiding.28  Quakers 
had  been  among  the  earliest  settlers  in  North  Carolina  and 
in  1765  were  very  numerous  in  the  Northeast,  particularly 
in  Perquimans  and  Pasquotank  counties.  They  were  exempt- 

24  The  Brunswick  church  was  seventy-six  feet  and  six  inches  long,  fifty- 
three  feet  and  three  inches  wide,  and  was  twenty-four  feet  and  four  inches 
high.  It  had  eleven  windows,  three  large  doors,  and  brick  wall  three  feet 
thick.  Marshall  D.  Haywood,  Governor  William  Tryon,  and  His  Administra- 
tion in  the  Province  of  North  Carolina,  1765-1771  (Raleigh:  E.  M.  Uzzel, 
Printer,  1903),  24.  Hereafter  cited  as  Haywood,  Governor  William  Tryon 
and  His  Administration. 

"Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VI,  236-237,  729-730. 

"Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VI,  264-266. 

^Adelaide  L.  Fries,  "The  Moravian  Contribution  to  Colonial  North 
Carolina,"  North  Carolina  Historical  Review,  VII   (1930),  14. 

28  William  K.  Boyd  and  Charles  A.  Krummel,  "German  Tracts  Concerning 
the  Lutheran  Church  in  North  Carolina  During  the  Eighteenth  Century," 
North  Carolina  Historical  Review,  VII   (1930),  81. 


8  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

ed  from  military  service  and  all  oaths,  yet  were  sometimes 
strongly  in  opposition  to  the  Establishment.29 

The  largest  dissenting  elements  were  the  principal  Baptist 
sects  and  the  Presbyterians.  After  1751  the  Particular  or 
Regular  Baptists,  strongly  Calvinistic  and  the  predecessors 
of  the  present  day  Primitive  Baptists,  absorbed  most  of  the 
earliest  Baptist  group,  the  General  or  Free  Will  Baptists,  and 
in  1765,  the  year  of  the  strong  vestry  acts,  united  their  sev- 
eral churches  in  the  Kehukee  Association.  After  1755  an  ex- 
tremely Arminian  sect,  the  New  Light  Baptists,  began  to 
gain  many  adherents  whose  extreme  emotionalism  rendered 
them  anathema  to  the  Anglicans.  They  were  most  numerous 
in  the  western  counties  of  Orange,  Guilford,  and  Rowan, 
where  they  were  organized  in  the  Sandy  Creek  Association.30 

The  Presbyterians  were  almost  as  influential  in  colonial 
North  Carolina  as  the  Anglicans.  Claiming  all  the  privileges 
of  the  Scottish  Church,  many  Presbyterians  refused  to  con- 
sider themselves  dissenters.  Except  for  a  small  colony  in 
Duplin  County  and  about  four  congregations  in  Cumberland 
County,  the  Presbyterians  were  mostly  in  the,  then,  western 
counties  of  Orange,  Mecklenburg,  Rowan,  Tryon,  Guilford, 
Bute,  Wake,  Surry,  and  Granville.  They  were  largely  Scotch- 
Irish  immigrants  who  had  filtered  down  from  Pennsylvania 
or  had  come  up  from  Charleston.  They  made  outstanding 
contributions  to  education  and  furnished  a  good  share  of 
the  political  leadership.31  Living  in  frontier  counties,  these 
Presbyterians  had  been  accustomed  to  an  almost  complete 
religious  freedom  before  1765  and  were  quick  to  devise  ways 
of  evading  the  church  laws  whenever  they  were  about  to 
be  enforced  in  their  midst. 

It  is  difficult  to  give  even  an  approximate  statistical  break- 
down of  the  religious  picture  in  North  Carolina  in  1765.  The 
colony  was  growing  rapidly;  the  total  white  and  colored 
population  rose  from  about   120,000  in   1759  to  between 

29  William  L.  Grissom,  History  of  Methodism  in  North  Carolina  (Nash- 
ville, Publishing  House  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  South,  1905), 
9-11. 

30  Paschal,  "Morgan  Edwards'  Materials,"  371. 

31  William  H.  Foote,  Sketches  of  North  Carolina  (New  York,  Robert 
Carter,  1846),  188-189.  Hereafter  cited  as  Foote,  Sketches  of  North  Carolina. 


The  Church  Establishment  9 

200,000  and  250,000  by  1771.32  With  the  growth  in  popula- 
tion, the  dissenting  denominations  were  rapidly  increasing, 
both  by  immigration  and  conversions.  The  German  Reformed 
and  Lutheran  groups  contained  only  3,000  families  in  about 
twenty  congregations  in  1771.  The  total  German  population, 
including  the  Moravians,  could  not  have  exceeded  20,000 
in  that  year;  it  was  without  doubt  less  in  1765.33  After  the 
Revolution  the  Quakers  scarcely  numbered  over  5,000.  If 
Morgan  Edwards,  a  Baptist  minister  visiting  North  Carolina 
in  1772,  is  correct,  the  Baptists  had  sixteen  churches  as  early 
as  1754  and  by  1772  had  thirty-two  churches  plus  several 
more  meeting  places.  In  the  latter  years  he  estimated  that 
39,750  people  worshipped  in  Baptist  congregations.34  There 
are  few  clues  as  to  the  number  of  Presbyterians  in  North 
Carolina  in  1765.  They  were  probably  almost  as  numerous  as 
the  Baptists  and  in  some  western  counties  were  in  a  heavy 
majority.  Always  growing  rapidly  with  the  influx  of  Scottish 
immigrants,  the  Presbyterians  had  approximately  thirty 
churches  by  the  time  of  the  Revolution  and  perhaps  a  dozen 
ministers,  some  of  whom  were  very  famous.  Despite  the  more 
rapid  growth  of  some  of  the  dissenting  groups,  the  Anglican 
Church  remained  the  largest  denomination  in  the  colony 
until  the  Revolution.  In  the  eastern  and  north-central  coun- 
ties the  Anglicans  were  well  established;  even  in  Orange 
and  Rowan  counties  there  were  substantial  congregations. 
The  small  number  of  churches  and  ministers  in  1765  belies 
the  potential  strength  of  the  established  religion,  for  there 
were  numerous  congregations,  sometimes  several  in  a  single 
county,  worshipping  in  small  chapels  or  homes  and  only 
occasionally  receiving  the  sacraments  from  a  visiting  clergy- 
man. 

Though  Governor  Dobbs  gave  the  Anglican  Church  a 
strong  legal  basis,  Governor  William  Tryon  tried  to  make 
the  Establishment  a  living  reality.  With  his  administration 

^Evarts  B.  Greene  and  Virginia  D.  Harrington,  American  Population 
Before  the  Federal  Census  of  1790  (New  York,  Columbia  University  Press, 
1932),  158-159. 

33  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VIII,  630-632. 

84  Paschal,  "Morgan  Edwards'  Materials,"  369,  394-395. 


10  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

a  new  era  in  ecclesiastical  affairs  began.35  Tryon  was  not 
a  bigot  in  any  sense;  but  he  was  very  closely  connected 
with  the  Episcopal  Church,  himself  becoming  a  member 
of  the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gospel.  Recogniz- 
ing the  great  need  for  ministers  in  the  colony,  he  used  his 
influence  to  get  young  ministers  to  come  to  North  Carolina. 
By  April,  1767,  he  could  report  in  one  of  his  many  succinct 
and  literary  communications  to  the  Society,  that  there  were 
now  thirteen  ministers  instead  of  six.36  By  1771  there  were 
eighteen  ministers,  meaning  that  fully  half  the  parishes  had 
a  full  time  parson.  But  Tryon,  in  his  determined  support 
of  the  Establishment,  inevitably  encountered  the  opposition 
of  the  dissenters  and  the  more  independent  Anglicans. 

The  fact  that  North  Carolina  had  a  decentralized  ec- 
clesiastical system  before  1765  very  much  influenced  the 
reaction  to  a  Crown-enforced  establishment  under  Tryon. 
The  vestry  laws  passed  before  1765  had,  it  is  true,  embodied 
many  of  the  restrictive  clauses  of  the  acts  of  1765,  but  they 
had  not  been  universally  enforced,  as  only  part  of  the  par- 
ishes had  been  active  or  even  organized.  In  addition,  the 
direction  of  church  affairs  had  been  in  the  hands  of  the 
local  vestry.  When  Tryon  personally  took  over  the  direction 
of  ecclesiastical  affairs  and  began  sending  ministers  into  more 
and  more  counties,  some  times  against  the  wishes  of  a  ma- 
jority of  the  inhabitants,  the  Establishment  seemed  very 
oppressive  to  many  groups.  It  should  be  kept  in  mind,  how,- 
ever,  that  despite  the  limitations  on  personal  freedom  and 
the  economic  burden  resulting  from  the  Establishment,  com- 
plete freedom  of  conscience  was  always  granted  to  all  Prot- 
estant groups  in  North  Carolina.  Anyone  could  worship  as 
he  pleased  even  though  he  were  forced  to  fulfill  certain 
obligations  to  the  state  church,  such  as  paying  his  vestry  tax. 

There  were  two  types  of  resentment  against  the  Establish- 
ment in  North  Carolina,  each  resulting  from  a  different  fea- 
ture of  the  vestry  laws.  First,  the  vestry  acts  were  passed 
by  the  North  Carolina  Assembly  and  the  Establishment  was 

85  Joseph  B.  Cheshire,  "The  Church  in  the  Province  of  North  Carolina,"  in 
Sketches  of  Church  History  in  North  Carolina,  edited  by  Joseph  B.  Cheshire 
(Wilmington:  William  L.  DeRosset,  Jr.,  Publisher,  1892),  75.  Hereafter 
cited  as  Cheshire,  "The  Church  in  the  Province  of  North  Carolina." 

"Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VII,  456-458. 


The  Church  Establishment  11 

a  North  Carolina  institution,  favored,  it  seemed,  by  at  least 
a  majority  of  the  province's  leading  citizens.  Thus,  among 
many  dissenters,  the  burden  of  an  established  clergy  could 
be  blamed  largely  on  the  predominantly  Anglican  aristoc- 
racy within  the  state,  or  the  office  holding  classes.  But  the 
Establishment  was  also  a  policy  of  the  Crown.  It  was  the 
governor,  who  as  an  agent  of  the  Crown,  pressed  for,  and 
finally  was  granted  by  a  reluctant  Assembly,  an  establish- 
ment which  gave  the  Anglican  clergy  and  the  governor  him- 
self privileged  positions.  It  was  the  British  governor  who 
enforced  the  Establishment  and  who  assumed  the  power 
of  inducting  ministers  into  vacant  parishes.  It  was  the  Brit- 
ish Crown  that  persistently  disallowed  more  liberal  religious 
laws  and  which  refused  to  recognize  the  peculiar  circum- 
stances of  the  colonial  church.  Thus  a  great  amount  of  the 
resentment  against  the  Establishment  among  the  dissenters, 
and  almost  all  the  resentment  among  the  Anglicans,  was 
directed  against  the  English  Crown,  represented  in  most 
cases  by  the  governor. 

Tryon  assumed  that  the  Orthodox  Clergy  Act  of  1765, 
by  not  mentioning  the  right  of  presentation,  gave  him  the 
authority  to  induct  ministers  into  vacant  parishes,  and  began 
to  distribute  the  newly  arrived  clergymen  into  the  most 
needy  parishes.  He  early  met  difficulties.  For  a  long  time 
there  had  been  a  growing  resentment  of  British  rule  in  the 
eastern,  predominantly  Episcopal  counties.  The  people  of 
North  Carolina  felt  that  they  had  certain  well  established 
rights  which  were  being  encroached  upon  by  the  British 
Parliament.  One  of  these  rights  was  taxing  themselves;  an- 
other was  choosing  their  own  minister.  The  governor's  usur- 
pation of  ecclesiastical  power  not  specifically  granted  him 
was  ranked  along  side  the  hated  Stamp  Act  as  another  ex- 
ample of  increasing  British  tyranny.  For  this  reason  Tryon, 
instead  of  inducting  a  certain  Cosgreve  into  Pitt  County, 
sent  him  on  a  three  months  probation,  an  action  which  he 
apologetically  explained  as  follows  to  the  Lord  Bishop  of 
London: 

This  probation  I  think  for  the  interest  of  the  cause  of  religion 
in  these  parts,  the  inhabitants  seeming  as  jealous  of  any  re- 
straint put  on  their  consciences  as  they  have  of  late  shewn  for 


12  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

that  on  their  property :  Many  persons  have  industriously  spread 
among  the  parishes  and  vestries  that  as  the  patronage  to  livings 
is  not  specified  in  the  above  Act,  the  Crown  cannot  claim  the 
patronage;  some  delicacy  therefore  your  Lordship  I  hope  sees 
is  necessary  in  the  establishment  of  the  clergy  here,  where  the 
minds  of  the  larger  body  of  inhabitants  thro'  the  want  of  the 
means  of  culture  are  incapable  of  entertaining  generous  prin- 
ciples of  public  utility.37 

In  January,  1766,  Tryon  reported  that  a  new  minister,  the 
Rev.  Barnett,  had  taken  up  duties  in  Brunswick  County.38 
There  the  vestry  promised  him  the  regulation  salary,  but 
two  years  later  Barnett  remained  in  Brunswick  only  by  the 
vestry's  wishes,  never  having  been  officially  inducted.  In 
June,  1768  he  wrote  to  the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the 
Gospel  explaining  his  plight: 

The  people  of  this  Parish  do  still  so  violently  oppose  the  pres- 
entation of  the  Crown  to  the  Living,  that  I  believe  it  will  be 
found  necessary  for  me  to  remove  to  another  part  of  the  prov- 
ince. .  .  .  Permit  me  Sir  to  assure  the  Venerable  Board  that  the 
people  are  so  desirous  of  my  stay  with  them  on  the  usual  terms, 
of  an  annual  reelection  as  I  have  been  informed,  to  be  willing 
to  make  some  addition  to  my  former  salary.  .  .  .39 

Governor  Tryon  was  prepared  to  force  induction  of  Bar- 
nett against  the  vestry's  wishes,  but  Barnett,  not  wishing 
to  stay  in  the  county  under  those  conditions,  removed  to 
Northampton.  He  was  followed  in  Brunswick  by  a  certain 
Cramp,  whom  Tryon  proposed  to  present  to  the  vestry. 
Cramp  was  fearful  that  he  would  starve  if  he  were  inducted, 
for,  as  he  reported  to  Tryon,  "none  like  the  inducted  par- 

"  40 

son. 

Tryon  had  similar  troubles  in  Duplin  and  New  Hanover 
counties.  He  reported  to  the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of 
the  Gospel  that  he  feared  the  Rev.  Briggs,  whom  he  induct- 
ed into  Duplin,  would  find  his  residence  most  disagreeable 
because  of  the  resentment  to  inducted  ministers.41  When  he 
sent  a  certain  Wills  to  New  Hanover  County,  preparatory  to 


87  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VII,  261. 

88  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VII,  158. 

39  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VII,  789-790. 

40  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VIII,  12-16. 

41  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VIII,  12-16. 


The  Church  Establishment  13 

induction,  the  vestry  sent  him  a  letter  of  protest,  praising 
Wills  as  a  "gentleman  worthy  of  his  sacred  Function"  but 
denying  the  right  of  presentation  on  the  part  of  the  governor, 
on  the  grounds  that  the  Act  of  Assembly  did  not  specifically 
grant  him  that  power.42  This  time  Tryon  proceded  to  induct 
in  spite  of  their  protests,  but  begged  the  parish  to  extend 
good  services  to  Wills  until  a  new  Clergy  Act  clearly  grant- 
ing the  right  of  presentation  could  be  passed.43  Thus,  in  four 
or  five  instances  at  least,  the  people  most  heartily  in  favor  of 
an  establishment,  the  churchmen  themselves,  refused  to  give 
up  their  cherished  right  of  choosing  and  dismissing  their 
own  minister  even  at  the  expense  of  having  no  minister  at  all. 
A  stronger  opposition  of  a  different  type  greeted  the  Estab- 
lishment in  the  western  counties  where  in  a  predominently 
Presbyterian  and  Baptist  region,  the  Vestry  Acts  were  never 
effectively  enforced.  The  Rev.  Eli  W.  Caruthers,  biographer 
of  David  Caldwell,  aptly  summarized  the  religious  situation 
in  that  area  before  the  Revolution: 

Presbyterian  ministers,  and  probably  others  too,  were  cele- 
brating marriages  without  asking  leave  of  the  parish  minister, 
and  building  churches,  holding  meetings,  and  administrating 
ordinances  without  consulting  the  Bishop  of  London,  or  ob- 
taining license  from  any  human  authority;  the  people,  without 
any  serious  apprehension  of  consequences,  were  setting  at 
naught  the  enactments  of  arbitrary  power,  by  electing  for 
vestrymen  such  men  as  they  know  would  not  serve,  or  by  staying 
away  from  the  polls  and  electing  no  vestrymen  at  all;  and  in 
some  counties  .  .  .  they  were  compelling  the  Assembly  to  rescind 
their  vestry  acts.44 

The  citizens  of  Mecklenburg  County  did  not  want  an 
established  minister.  In  1766  Andrew  Morton  arrived  in 
New  Bern,  planning  to  go  on  to  Mecklenburg  as  a  minister 
and  missionary  of  the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the 
Gospel.  Tryon  persuaded  him  against  continuing  his  journey, 
doubting  if  he  would  get  any  favorable  reception  or  any 
hearers  among  the  many  Presbyterians  in  Mecklenburg,  who 
always  managed  to  elect  vestrymen  from  their  own  number, 

42  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VIII,  119. 
^Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VIII,  219-220. 

u  Eli  W.  Carruthers,  A  Sketch  of  the  Life  and  Character  of  the  Rev. 
David  Caldwell,  D.D.   (Greensborough:   Swain  and  Sherwood,  1842),  75. 


14  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

only  to  have  them  disqualify.45  After  changing  his  plans  and 
going  to  Northampton  County,  Morton  wrote  the  Society 
for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gospel  that  the  people  in  Meck- 
lenburg 

.  .  .  had  a  solemn  league  and  covenant  teacher  settled  among 
them  That  they  were  in  general  greatly  averse  to  the  Church  of 
England — and  that  they  looked  upon  a  law  lately  enacted  in  this 
province  for  the  better  establishment  of  the  Church  as  oppres- 
sive as  the  Stamp  Act  and  were  determined  to  prevent  its  taking 
place  there,  by  opposing  the  settlement  of  any  Minister  of  the 
Church  of  England.46 

In  1769  the  citizens  of  Mecklenburg  sent  a  petition  to 
the  governor  setting  forth  their  religious  position.  According 
to  it,  1,000  loyal  freemen  in  the  county  held  to  the  Church  of 
Scotland  and  were  entitled  to  all  the  rights  and  privileges 
of  any  British  subject,  either  English  or  Scottish.  In  Scotland 
the  Presbyterian  Church  was  the  state  church  with  privileges 
similar  to  the  Church  in  England;  moreover,  they  claimed 
additional  rights  granted  by  the  original  North  Carolina 
Charter.  In  view  of  these  rights  they  felt  it  a  burden  to  be 
taxed  to  support  an  Episcopal  clergy,  especially  when  they 
had  two  Presbyterian  ministers  to  support  and  when  only 
one  twentieth  of  the  people  were  Episcopal.  They  petitioned 
that  each  group  be  allowed  to  worship  God  according  to 
conscience,  and  that  each  pay  its  own  clergy.  They  stated 
that  an  inducted  minister  would  be  useless,  that  ten  shillings 
per  taxable  was  an  enormous  sum  to  put  under  the  power 
of  the  vestry,  being  more  than  it  took  to  run  the  county 
government,  and  that  the  vestry  law,  as  a  whole,  was  curbing 
settlement  in  the  back  country  and  would  always  remain  a 
grievance.47  Many  of  the  immigrants  to  the  region  were  vir- 
tual refugees  from  the  stricter  religious  conformity  of  Vir- 
ginia, and  were  very  fearful  of  losing  the  early  freedom  they 
found  on  the  frontier.  Actually,  the  people  were  never  forced 
to  support  an  established  clergyman;  none  ever  came  to 
Mecklenburg,  and  with  reason. 


46  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VII,  241-242. 

46  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VII,  252-253. 

47  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  X,  1015-1017. 


The  Church  Establishment  15 

A  unique  petition  arrived  in  New  Bern  in  1769  from  the 
huge  frontier  county  of  Rowan,  then  stretching  an  indefinite 
distance  westward  into  the  Smokies  and  the  Cherokee  coun- 
try. A  small  number  of  Episcopalians  in  Rowan  were  ag- 
grieved because  the  vestry  acts  were  not  being  enforced  in 
their  county.  They  complained  that  Rowan  contained  people 
of  every  nation  and  creed  and  that  the  many  dissenters 
elected  as  vestrymen  such  of  their  own  number  "as  evade 
the  Acts  of  Assembly  and  refuse  the  oaths  whence  we  can 
never  expect  the  regular  enlivening  beams  of  the  Holy  Gos- 
pel to  shine  upon  us." 48  In  another  petition  they  asked  Tryon 
to  appoint  their  list  of  vestry  candidates  even  though  they 
were  defeated  in  the  election.  They  also  asked  him  to  induct 
their  newly  arrived  minister,  the  Rev.  Theodorus  Swaine 
Draige,  into  their  parish,  which  had  no  active  vestry.49 

It  can  be  wondered  why  Governor  Tryon,  who  would  not 
give  Andrew  Morton  leave  to  go  to  Mecklenburg  County, 
would  allow  Draige  to  go  to  neighboring  Rowan  as  an  estab- 
lished clergyman.  Here,  among  numerous  dissenters  and 
virtually  on  the  frontier,  poor,  gentle  Draige  became  a  self- 
styled  martyr  to  the  cause  of  his  church  and  to  the  laws  of 
his  country.  He  tried  to  allay  the  alarm  caused  among  the 
dissenters  by  his  arrival,  by  conceding  them  the  right  to  con- 
tinue performing  marriages  and  funerals  without  giving  him 
all  the  fees  as  required  by  the  Vestry  Act.  He  asked  only 
that  they  receive  his  permission  before  performing  the  cere- 
mony. Much  to  Draige's  distress,  the  dissenting  ministers 
and  the  magistrates  continued  to  marry  and  bury  as  before, 
without  permission  from  anyone.  It  finally  became  clear  to 
Draige  that  he  was  not  wanted  in  Rowan  by  more  than  a 
small  minority  of  the  inhabitants,  he  explained  his  situation 
as  follows: 

They  say  not  in  words  only  but  wishing  that  as  they  have 
opposed  England  in  endeavoring  to  intrude  on  their  civil  rights, 
they  also  shall,  and  have  a  right  to  oppose  any  intrusion  on 
their  religious  rights,  a  Maximum  I  presume  dangerous  in  itself 
not  with  respect  to  this  county  and  the  neighboring  counties,  but 
to  the  whole  Back  Frontier   of  America,   principally  settled 


48  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VIII,  219. 

49  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VIII,  154-155. 


16  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

with  Sectaries,  and  is  deserving  of  the  attention  of  Government, 
before  power  is  added  to  inclination.50 

Draige  had  no  vestry  in  Rowan  and  could  not  secure  the 
election  of  one.  At  each  vestry  election  the  dissenters  made 
use  of  a  very  common  method  of  nullifying  the  law.  Since 
they  were  a  majority,  they  elected  dissenters  as  vestrymen; 
then  the  elected  list  of  dissenting  candidates  would  refuse 
to  take  the  prescribed  oath  and  automatically  disqualify 
themselves,  leaving  no  vestry.  To  disqualify  they  had  to  pay 
a  rather  stiff  fine  of  three  pounds  each,  but  in  Rowan  the 
dissenters  did  not  mind  this.  They  had  built  up  a  permanent 
fund  from  which  to  draw  the  disqualification  penalties  by 
informing  against  law  violators  and  collecting  one  half  of 
the  fine.51  In  the  vestry  election  of  1770  the  dissenters  ef- 
fectively used  this  tactic  despite  Draige's  attempts  to  per- 
suade a  majority  to  vote  for  his  list  of  candidates.  Helpless 
to  do  anything  more  himself,  Draige  misrepresented  the  con- 
ditions in  Rowan  while  begging  Tryon  to  intervene.  He 
continued  a  short  time  in  the  county  on  voluntary  contribu- 
tions, handled  by  an  unofficial  or  rump  vestry  made  up  of 
the  defeated  list  of  candidates.52 

In  Guilford  County,  which  was  strongly  Presbyterian  and 
Baptist  the  same  method  of  evasion  was  used  as  in  Rowan. 
In  1772  the  Assembly  at  the  insistence  of  the  Presbyterian 
delegates  dissolved  a  vestry  in  Guilford  on  the  grounds  that 
it  was  illegally  elected,  probably  somewhat  like  Draige's 
rump  vestry.53  In  Wake  County,  another  strong  dissenting 
area,  the  same  situation  occurred.  When  the  Assembly  be- 
came cognizant  of  these  several  effective  evasions  of  the 
vestry  law,  it  passed  different  local  bills,  each  permitting  a 
special  vestry  election  in  a  designated  county.  In  the  special 
election  the  Anglicans  had  another  chance  to  get  a  qualified 
vestry.  At  least  the  dissenters  had  to  pay  more  fines  for  dis- 
qualifying. The  Presbyterian  members  of  the  Assembly  later 
had  these  local  bills  annulled  on  the  grounds  of  illegal  dis- 
crimination. Presbyterians  in  the  counties  specified  by  the 


60  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VIII,  180. 

51  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VIII,  179-181. 

53  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VIII,  202-204,  205-210,  502-506. 

63  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  IX,  661. 


The  Church  Establishment  17 

acts  were  put  at  a  disadvantage  as  compared  with  their 
brethren  in  such  counties  as  Rowan,  where  evasion  of  the 
vestry  act  remained  legal  and  effective.  Governor  Martin, 
who  followed  Tryon  in  1771  and  who  lacked  his  respect 
for  the  Presbyterians,  avowed  that  he  would  pass  an  act 
universally  excluding  Presbyterians  from  vestries.54 

The  Quakers  and  Baptists  joined  the  Presbyterians  in  op- 
posing the  Establishment.  Tryon  explained  the  reason  that 
the  Rev.  Fiske  could  not  collect  his  pay  in  Pasquotank 
County  in  1769  as  follows: 

I  am  told  his  parish  is  full  of  quakers  and  anabaptists,  the 
first  no  friend,  the  latter  an  avowed  enemy  to  the  mother  church. 
It  is  certain  the  preeminence  the  Church  of  England  has  ob- 
tained over  the  sectaries  by  legislative  authority  has  drawn 
upon  her  their  jealousies.55 

In  1771  the  vestry  of  Pasquotank  refused  to  serve  and 
the  Assembly  had  to  pass  a  special  act  to  provide  for  the 
poor.  The  Quakers  were  also  intransigent  in  Perquimans 
County  just  before  the  Revolution.  The  Rev.  Pettigrew  re- 
ported that  they  would  neither  hear  nor  contribute  to  the 
established  minister.  As  a  result  the  Perquimans  Vestry 
decided  to  pay  Pettigrew  by  voluntary  contributions  rather 
than  by  trying  to  extort  anything  from  the  Quakers.56  From 
1765  until  1776  there  were  almost  constant  evasions  or 
criticisms  of  either  the  vestry  acts  or  the  governor's  interpre- 
tation of  them.  When  enforced  against  the  will  of  the  people, 
these  acts  were  part  of  the  bitter  fruits  of  an  established 
church. 

The  vestry  acts  were  not  the  only  oppressive  aspects  of  a 
state  religion.  Certain  privileges  were  given  to  the  Anglican 
Church  and  denied  other  denominations.  The  two  most  im- 
portant were  the  right  of  performing  marriages  and  the  right 
to  operate  chartered  schools.  The  marriage  provision  was  in- 
corporated into  the  Marriage  Act  of  1741  and  in  later  amend- 
ments to  it.  By  this  act  only  orthodox  clergymen  or,  in  their 
absence,  magistrates  could  perform  the  marriage  ceremony. 


64  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  IX,  341. 

65  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VIII,  14. 
56  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  X,  496. 


18  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Perhaps,  as  the  Rev.  Joseph  B.  Cheshire  pointed  out,  there 
were  few  organized  dissenters  in  North  Carolina  in  1741 
and  no  dissenting  minister  who  claimed  any  authority  to 
perform  the  marriage  ceremony.57  Certainly  the  picture  had 
changed  by  1765.  Foote  believed  that  one  of  the  reasons  the 
Rev.  Alexander  Craighead,  first  Presbyterian  minister  in 
western  North  Carolina,  removed  from  Virginia  to  Mecklen- 
burg County  was  to  get  away  from  the  intolerant  church 
laws  of  Virginia  and  to  a  place  where,  remote  from  all  au- 
thority, he  could  marry  his  people  in  conformity  with  Presby- 
terian practice.58  Presbyterian  ministers  were  well  known  to 
be  performing  marriages  according  to  their  own  customs 
throughout  western  North  Carolina.  The  Governor's  Council 
proposed  a  cruel  amendment  to  the  Marriage  Act  in  1762 
because  of  this  breach  of  the  law.  It  would  have  placed  on 
any  "dissenting  minister  whatsoever"  who  performed  a  mar- 
riage, a  fine  of  fifty  pounds  proclamation  money  recoverable 
by  anyone  suing  for  same.59  This  harsh  amendment  was 
blocked  by  the  more  tolerant  Assembly,  probably  averting 
much  trouble.60 

In  1766  the  Assembly  faced  up  to  what  could  have  been 
an  embarrassing  fait  accompli.  Legally  or  not,  many  couples 
in  North  Carolina  had  been  married  by  dissenting  clergy- 
men, primarily  Presbyterians.  An  amendment  to  the  act  of 
1741  provided  that,  as  the  Presbyterians  did  not  believe 
themselves  included  in  the  marriage  act  and  had  endanger- 
ed the  validity  of  their  marriages  by  marrying  without  license 
or  banns,  all  such  marriages  performed  before  the  first  of 
1767  would  be  recognized  as  legal.  Thereafter  all  marriages 
performed  without  a  license  or  banns  were  to  incur  a  fifty 
pounds  penalty.  As  a  special  boon  to  Presbyterians  they  alone 
among  dissenters  were  granted  the  right  of  performing  mar- 
riages, but  only  with  license  and  on  the  condition  that  the 
whole  fee  be  given  to  the  orthodox  minister  if  he  demanded 
it.61 


67  Cheshire,  "The  Church  in  the  Province  of  North  Carolina,"  68-69. 
58  Foote,  Sketches  of  North  Carolina,  186-187. 
69  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VI,  881. 
60  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VI,  884. 
81  Clark,  State  Records,  XXIII,  672-674. 


The  Church  Establishment  19 

Although  the  amendment  was  passed  partly  as  a  favor 
to  them,  the  Presbyterians  were  quick  to  resent  its  wording 
and  intent.  In  a  petition  of  1769  the  citizens  in  Mecklenburg 
declared  that  the  act  scandalized  Presbyterian  clergymen 
and  tended  to  promote  immorality  by  obstructing  the  "nat- 
ural and  inalienable  right"  of  marriage.62  The  citizens  of 
Tryon  County  condemned  the  amendment  for  not  allowing 
Presbyterians  to  marry  by  banns.  They  declared  this  a  privi- 
lege never  heretofore  denied  in  America.63  But  the  strongest 
petition  came  from  Orange  and  Rowan  counties: 

And  may  it  please  you  to  grant  us  a  Repeal  of  the  Act,  pro- 
hibiting Dissenting  Ministers  from  marrying  according  to  the 
Decretals,  Rites  and  Ceremonys,  of  their  Respective  Churches: 
a  priviledge  they  were  debarred  of  in  no  other  part  of  his 
Majesty's  Dominions;  and  as  we  humbly  conceive,  a  priviledge 
they  stand  entitled  to,  by  the  Act  of  Toleration,  and  in  fine, 
a  priviledge  granted  even  to  the  very  Catholics  in  Ireland,  and 
the  Protestants  in  France.64 

For  once  the  grievances  of  the  Presbyterians  were  heard. 
In  the  Regulator  troubles  of  1769-71,  the  higher  echelons  to 
the  Assembly  remained  loyal  to  Governor  Tryon  in  his  ex- 
treme measures  to  suppress  the  revolts.  As  a  reward  for  this 
loyalty,  and  to  appease  some  of  the  Regulators,  he  approved 
two  very  lenient  acts  passed  by  the  Assembly  in  1770  and 
1771.  One  was  an  amendment  to  the  marriage  law;  another 
was  a  charter  to  Queen's  College.  The  former  act  modified 
the  marriage  law  to  allow  Presbyterians  to  perform  marriages 
in  their  own  way  and  without  any  fee  to  the  established 
clergy.65  Another  act  to  allow  Presbyterians  to  wed  without 
license  was  vetoed  by  Tryon  because  it  was  directly  against 
his  instructions  from  the  Crown.66  His  veto  was  unimportant 
anyway,  for  the  Crown  refused  to  accept  even  the  first  con- 
cession because  of  its  encouragement  to  dissenters  and  be- 
cause of  its  possible  weakening  effect  on  the  Establishment. 
The  Rev.  James  Reed  wrote  to  the  Society  for  the  Progaga- 
tion  of  the  Gospel  that,  should  the  act  receive  Royal  consent, 

63  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  X,  1015-1017. 

63  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VIII,  80b. 

64  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VIII,  82-83. 
66  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VIII,  322. 

68  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VIII,  469. 


20  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

"it  would  be  a  fatal  blow  to  the  Church  of  England." 67  On 
the  further  recommendation  of  the  Board  of  Trade,  the  law 
was  disallowed  in  1771,  leaving  a  deep  grievance  among 
Presbyterians.68  It  is  notable  that  one  of  the  first  acts  passed 
after  the  adoption  of  the  State  Constitution  of  1776  was  one 
to  permit  any  regular  minister  of  any  denomination  to  per- 
form marriages.69 

Only  a  small  bit  of  favoritism  to  the  Anglican  Church 
carried  over  into  the  field  of  education  in  North  Carolina. 
Pre-revolutionary  education  in  the  province  was  almost 
entirely  private  and  church  sponsored.  The  Presbyterians 
were  pre-eminent  in  education  and  conducted  their  schools 
without  restraints  of  any  kind.  Only  in  a  few  state-chartered 
schools  was  there  any  discrimination  in  favor  of  the  Angli- 
cans; New  Bern  Academy  is  one  example.  In  1764  a  certain 
Tomlinson  from  England  began  teaching  school  in  New 
Bern,  mainly  because  of  the  efforts  of  the  Rev.  James  Reed. 
Tomlinson  was  himself  an  Anglican  and  annually  received 
fifteen  pounds  from  the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the 
Gospel  for  his  academic  labors.70  In  1766,  by  an  act  of  as- 
sembly, the  state  virtually  adopted  New  Bern  Academy, 
giving  it  a  charter  and  providing  for  additional  revenue.  The 
act  required  the  master  of  the  school  to  be  a  member  of  the 
Church  of  England.  To  provide  extra  revenue  it  permitted 
a  tax  to  be  placed  on  all  rum  entering  the  Neuse  River,  thus, 
in  a  sense,  taxing  dissenters  as  well  as  churchmen  for  an  An- 
glican school.  It  should  be  noted  that  the  school  was  begun 
by  an  Episcopal  master  in  a  strong  Anglican  area  and  was 
well  established  before  receiving  state  help  and  continued  to 
receive  aid  from  the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gos- 
pel. After  the  Revolution  the  master  continued  to  be  an 
Episcopalian  without  any  requirement  to  that  effect.  Finally, 
as  the  school  had  a  religious  as  well  as  a  secular  purpose, 
there  was  very  little  room  for  objection  by  the  dissenters, 
or  actually,  even  by  the  rum  drinking  dissenters. 


71 


87  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  IX,  6. 

68  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  IX,  7,  284-285. 

69  Clark,  State  Records,  XXIII,  997. 

70  Charles  Lee  Raper,  The  Church  and  Private  Schools  of  North  Carolina 
(Greensboro:  N.  C,  Jos.  J.  Stone,  Book  and  Job  Printer,  1898),  25. 

71  Rev.   Robert  B.   Drane,   "Colonial   Parishes   and   Church   Schools,"  in 
Sketches  of  Church  History  in  North  Carolina,  177-178. 


The  Church  Establishment  21 

In  1770  the  North  Carolina  Assembly  passed  an  act  char- 
tering an  academy  at  Edenton.  Reluctantly,  and  only  after 
a  veto  by  Tryon  of  a  former  act,  the  members  of  the  As- 
sembly agreed  to  pass  this  act  though  it  required  the  master 
of  the  school  to  be  an  Episcopalian.  As  it  received  no  aid 
from  the  state,  Edenton  Academy  remained  a  private  school 
for  all  practical  purposes.72 

The  most  ambitious  educational  project  in  colonial  North 
Carolina  was  Queen's  College  in  Mecklenburg  County.  The 
forerunner  of  this  college  was  a  school  taught  in  1767  at 
Sugar  Creek,  a  few  miles  from  Charlotte,  by  Joseph  Alexan- 
der, a  Princeton  graduate.  When  the  citizens  of  Mecklenburg 
decided  to  enlarge  the  scope  of  Sugar  Creek  School,  Queen's 
College  became  its  successor  and  answered  a  real  need  for 
an  institution  of  higher  learning  in  central  and  western  Car- 
olina.73 In  addition  to  his  concessions  to  the  Presbyterians 
in  the  form  of  a  better  marriage  law,  Tryon  also  approved 
an  act  for  establishing  Queen's  College.  By  the  terms  of  the 
act  the  president  of  the  college  had  to  be  of  the  Established 
Church,74  but  it  was  presumed  that  all  the  other  masters 
and  the  trustees  would  be  Presbyterian,  as  it  was  in  a  Pres- 
byterian region  and  received  most  of  its  support  from  that 
denomination.75  The  college  was  to  be  financed  by  private 
endowments  and  by  a  duty  of  six  pence  per  gallon  on  all 
rum  and  spirituous  liquors  brought  into  and  disposed  of  in 
Mecklenburg  County  for  a  period  of  ten  years.76 

Governor  Tryon  urged  the  Board  of  Trade  to  accept  the 
act  in  view  of  the  Presbyterian's  assistance  in  the  Regulator 
controversy,  but  his  appeal  was  in  vain.  The  Board  of  Trade 
felt  that  the  act  should  be  disallowed  because  it  favored 
Presbyterians  and  hindered  the  Establishment  at  a  time  when 
the  King  could  not  safely  give  encouragement  to  toleration. 
The  act  was  disallowed  in  the  same  year,  1771. 77  A  later  act 


73  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VII,  591,  632-633. 

73  Charles  L.  Smith,  History  of  Education  in  North  Carolina  (Washington, 
D.  C.,  Government  Printing  Office,  1888),  32-33.  Hereafter  cited  as  Smith, 
History  of  Education  in  North  Carolina. 

7*  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VIII,  448. 

75  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VIII,  525-527. 

70  R.  D.  W.  Connor,  "The  Genesis  of  Higher  Education  in  North  Carolina," 
North  Carolina  Historical  Review,  XXVIII    (1951),   5. 

"Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  IX,  249-251,  284-285. 


22  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

for  the  same  purpose  was  also  disallowed,  leaving  a  cause 
for  bitterness  against  the  Crown  on  the  part  of  the  people 
of  Mecklenburg.78  About  1775  the  name  Queen's  College 
was  changed,  perhaps,  spitefully,  to  Liberty  Hall  Academy. 
Also  in  1775  the  citizens  of  Mecklenburg  were  leaders  in 
the  struggle  for  American  independence. 

Since  the  resistance  to  North  Carolina's  religious  estab- 
lishment paralleled  a  series  of  events  leading  to  the  Revolu- 
tion and  since  the  Establishment  ended  in  the  constitutional 
changes  accompanying  the  revolution,  the  connection  be- 
tween the  political  and  religious  discontent  might  be  as- 
sumed to  be  very  close.  The  simplest  and  most  logical  story 
would  have  the  Revolution  beginning  with  the  Regulator 
troubles  and  resulting  from  both  political  and  religious  op- 
pression.79 A  close  study  of  available  evidence  shows  the 
great  complexity  of  this  period  in  North  Carolina's  history 
and  indicates  the  following  conclusions:  first,  the  Regulator 
trouble  was  not  directly  related  to  the  Revolution  and  was 
primarily  caused  by  economic  and  not  religious  grievances. 
Secondly,  the  Revolution  was  only  slightly  influenced  by 
religious  oppression.  Thirdly,  the  ending  of  the  Establish- 
ment in  1776  was  as  much  an  accompaniment  of  the  political 
disturbances  as  the  result  of  a  long  series  of  struggles  for 
religious  freedom. 

The  Regulator  revolt,  beginning  in  1768  and  ending  with 
the  Battle  of  Alamance  in  May,  1771,  was  not  a  revolt  against 
the  form  of  government  but  against  certain  unfair  agents 
who  administered  the  constitution.  It  was  not  a  movement 
for  freedom,  but  a  popular  upheaval,  or  a  yoeman's  revolt. 
It  was  suppressed  by  North  Carolina  soldiers  under  many 
of  the  same  officers  who  later  led  the  colonial  troops  in  the 
Revolution.  Most  important  for  this  study,  the  Regulation 
was  not  a  religious  movement;  the  primary  grievances  were 
purely  economic.  Those  grievances  were  excessive  taxes  in  a 
time  of  scarce  currency,  dishonest  sheriffs  and  other  county 


78  Smith,  History  of  Education  in  North  Carolina,  33. 

79  This  general  explanation  is  implied  in  Stephen  B.  Weeks,  Church  and 
State  in  North  Carolina  (John  Hopkins  University  Studies,  Series  XI, 
1893),  46. 


The  Church  Establishment  23 

officials,  including  judges,  and  the  extortionate  fees  extract- 
ed by  unscrupulous  lawyers  and  officials.80 

Nor  can  it  be  said  conclusively  that  religious  grievances 
did  not  have  any  bearing  at  all  on  the  Regulators.  Certainly 
the  Marriage  Act  of  1766,  by  requiring  a  license  costing  ten 
shillings  for  any  marriage  performed  by  a  dissenting  minister, 
worked  an  added  economic  hardship  in  the  predominantly 
Presbyterian  and  Baptist  regions  of  Orange,  Rowan,  and 
Anson  counties.  In  his  Impartial  Relation,  one  of  the  better 
first  hand  accounts  of  the  Regulators,  Herman  Husbands 
denounced  an  establishment  or  any  other  organized  religion 
which  joined  the  magistracy  to  become  lords  over  the 
people.81  Although  the  Regulators  did  not  complain  about 
vestry  dues,  this  added  tax,  if  it  were  collected  in  any  of  the 
Regulator  areas,  must  have  seemed  an  added  burden.  Other 
than  petitioning  Tryon  to  allow  their  ministers  to  marry  ac- 
cording to  forms  prescribed  by  their  respective  churches, 
the  Regulators  were  usually  complaining  about  intolerable 
economic  conditions,  which  they  felt  to  be  directly  ascribable 
to  the  dishonesty  of  their  own  county  and  state  officials. 

All  the  organized  religious  groups  denounced  the  methods 
of  the  Regulators.  The  area  around  Orange  and  Rowan  in- 
cluded four  leading  Presbyterian  ministers— Hugh  McAden, 
James  Creswell,  Henry  Patillo,  and  David  Caldwell.  These 
ministers  addressed  a  letter  to  all  Presbyterians,  pleading 
for  obedience  to  law  and  order.82  They  also  pledged  their 
loyalty  in  a  letter  to  Tryon.83  These  ministers  knew  that  many 
Presbyterians  were  in  the  ranks  of  the  Regulators  and  were 
themselves  sympathetic  with  the  cause  of  the  Regulators, 
only  denouncing  their  use  of  force.  Dr.  Caldwell  tried  to 
negotiate  some  peacful  settlement  up  to  the  very  day  of  the 
Battle  of  Alamance.  The  German  churches  denounced  the 
Regulators  in  accordance  with  their  belief  in  subordination 


80  John  Spencer  Bassett,  "The  Regulators  of  North  Carolina,"  Annual 
Report  of  the  American  Historical  Association  for  189U,  142-150;  also  see 
Haywood,  Governor  William  Tryon  and  His  Administration,  78. 

81  Herman  Husbands,  "An  Impartial  Relation  of  the  First  Rise  and  Cause 
of  the  Recent  Differences  in  Public  Affairs,"  North  Carolina  Historical 
Review,  III   (1926),  302-303. 

82  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VII,  814-816. 

83  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  VII,  813-814. 


24  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

to  the  state.  The  Quakers  were  as  usual  pacifists.84  The  Sandy 
Creek  Baptist  Association  resolved  that:  "If  any  of  our  mem- 
bers shall  take  up  arms  against  the  legal  authority  or  aid  and 
abet  them  that  do  so  he  shall  be  excommunicated  &c."  85 
Although  the  Regulators  included  men  from  every  denomi- 
nation, the  New  Light  Baptists,  largely  representing  a  low 
economic  class,  probably  furnished  more  than  their  propor- 
tionate share.  This  is  indicated  by  the  fact  that,  according 
to  Morgan  Edwards,  all  but  eight  of  the  members  of  Great- 
Cohara  Church  moved  away  from  North  Carolina  because  of 
the  Regulator  troubles.  Sandy  Creek  Church  dropped  in 
membership  from  606  to  14  when  many  families,  despairing 
of  better  times  after  the  rout  at  Alamance,  left  the  province.86 
Another  indication  that  the  Regulators  were  not  revolting 
against  the  Establishment  is  the  fact  that  many  Regulators 
were  Anglicans.  Husbands  said  the  most  trusted  Regulators 
"were  of  the  Church  of  England  Communion."  87The  estab- 
lished ministers  naturally  opposed  the  Regulators.  When 
Tryon  first  brought  troops  westward  in  1768  to  quiet  the 
first  series  of  disturbances,  the  established  clergyman  in 
Orange  County,  old  Parson  Micklejohn,  preached  a  fiery 
sermon  to  the  assembled  troops,  using  Romans  13:  1-2  as 
a  text— a  text  obviously  aimed  at  the  Regulators: 


88 


Let  every  Soul  be  subject  unto  the  higher  powers;  for  there 
is  no  Power  but  of  God ;  the  powers  that  be  are  ordained  by  God. 

Whosoever  therefore  resisteth  the  power,  resisteth  the  ordi- 
nance of  God;  and  they  that  resist  shall  receive  to  themselves 
damnation. 

Not  to  be  outdone  in  loyalty,  the  Rev.  James  McCarty, 
newly  arrived  clergyman  in  Granville  County,  preached  a 
sermon  to  the  second  expedition  on  the  text:  "He  that  hath 
no  sword,  let  him  sell  his  garment  and  buy  one."  89 


84  Haywood,  Governor  William  Tryon  and  His  Administration,  189. 

85  Paschal,  "Morgan  Edwards'  Materials,"  396. 

89  Paschal,  "Morgan  Edwards'  Materials,"  381,  385. 

87  Haywood,  Governor  William  Tryon  and  His  Administration,  189. 

88  William  K.   Boyd,   "Some   North   Carolina   Tracts   of  the   Eighteenth 
Century,"  North  Carolina  Historical  Review,  III   (1926),  462. 

89  Haywood,  Governor  William  Tryon  and  His  Administration,  102. 


The  Church  Establishment  25 

In  the  Revolution  the  same  group  of  men,  lawyers,  sheriffs, 
and  officeholders,  who  had  been  oppressing  the  regulating 
groups  in  the  West  were  the  leaders  in  the  fight  against 
England,  while  the  name  Regulator  became  almost  synony- 
mous with  Tory.90  The  Regulation  was  primarily  a  yeoman's 
revolt;  the  Revolution  was  more  a  revolt  of  the  middle  class. 
The  Regulators  were  desperately  fighting  for  relief  from  im- 
poverishing internal  conditions.  The  leaders  of  the  Revolu- 
tion were  debating  lofty  political  principles  and  resisting  a 
restrictive  and  annoying  British  authority.  As  much  as  the 
Regulators  had  religious  grievances,  they  were  directed 
against  a  class  of  men  within  the  colony  who  enforced,  and 
sometime  profited  from,  the  vestry  and  marriage  laws.  To 
the  extent  that  the  Revolution  was  fought  because  of  reli- 
gious grievances,  the  enemy  was  always  the  British  Crown. 

The  earliest  settlers  in  North  Carolina  lent  that  province 
a  distinctively  independent  attitude— an  attitude  which  of- 
ten vented  itself  in  turbulence.  Under  the  guise  of  beautiful 
words,  the  Assembly  had  a  long  history  of  opposition  to  the 
Crown.  The  delegates  had  always  been  quick  to  drag  up 
their  old  Charter  as  a  virtual  bill  of  rights.  After  1765  this 
independence  was  further  awakened  by  a  series  of  events. 
The  Stamp  Act  was  abhorred  in  North  Carolina;  the  agent 
was  made  to  swear  he  would  not  attempt  to  execute  the  law. 
Governor  Tryon,  with  his  royal  bearing  and  pompous  dis- 
play, was  well  liked  by  the  aristocratic  elements  in  the  state, 
but  he  left  a  legacy  of  trouble  for  Governor  Martin.  His  ex- 
travagance in  building  a  £15,000  palace,  in  leading  a  costly 
expedition  to  survey  the  Cherokee  boundary,  and  in  his  os- 
tentatious expeditions  against  the  Regulators  had  left  a 
huge  debt.  When  Tryon  left  North  Carolina  the  bond  be- 
tween the  governor  and  ruling  class  was  broken,  for  Governor 
Martin  was  plain,  blunt  and  obviously  in  sympathy  with  the 
Regulator  class.  The  break  between  Martin  and  the  Assem- 
bly was  soon  complete.  Martin  tried  to  collect  several  special 
taxes,  some  to  redeem  paper  currency  issued  as  far  back 
as  1748.  He  proposed  to  carry  out,  at  the  people's  expense, 


Haywood,  Governor  William  Tryon  and  His  Administration,  166,  177. 


26  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

the  Crown's  advice  on  the  boundary  dispute  between  North 
and  South  Carolina,  which  deprived  North  Carolina  of  much 
valuable  land.  Finally,  when  he  arrogantly  refused  to  accept 
any  Court  Bill  which  included  a  foreign  attachment  clause, 
the  Crown  government  was  virtually  at  an  end.  The  lawyers, 
out  of  a  job  when  the  Assembly  refused  to  pass  any  Court 
Bill  at  all,  became  the  leaders  of  the  revolutionary  move- 
ment.91 Sympathy  for  other  colonies  bolstered  North  Caro- 
lina's determination  to  resist  British  authority.  Committees 
of  Safety  were  formed  all  over  the  state.  In  the  midst  of  all 
these  happenings,  the  religious  questions  became  secondary 
considerations.  The  governor's  insistence  on  the  right  of 
presentation  was  one  of  the  many  past  grievances  which  had 
added  to  the  growing  dissatisfaction.  In  one  location,  Meck- 
lenburg County,  the  seedbed  of  the  Revolution  in  western 
North  Carolina,  the  royal  disallowance  of  the  charter  of 
Queen's  College  and  of  the  Marriage  Act  of  1771  undoubted- 
ly had  a  great  influence  in  driving  these  Presbyterians  to 
open  rebellion.92 

The  evidence  indicates  that  the  early  dissatisfaction  with 
British  rule  did  not  grow  out  of  opposition  to  the  idea  of  an 
Anglican  establishment,  however  it  did  partly  spring  from 
what  was  believed  to  be  a  usurpation  of  ecclesiastical  power 
by  the  governor.  Many  of  the  leaders  of  the  Revolution,  if 
not  most,  were  Anglicans  and  many  of  the  vestries  went  along 
with  the  colonial  policy.  For  example,  in  June,  1776,  the 
Vestry  of  Chowan  County  subscribed  to  the  revolutionary 
oath,  swearing  support  to  the  Continental  and  Provincial 
congresses.93  In  Pitt  County  the  Committee  of  Safety  decided 
to  sell  at  public  auction  any  fire  arms  taken  from  Negroes 
and  give  the  money  to  the  parish.94  When  the  Committee 
of  Safety  of  New  Bern  ordered  a  day  of  "fasting,  humiliation 
and  prayer,"  the  Episcopal  minister,  James  Reed,  was  asked 
to  perform  divine  services.95  On  the  other  hand,  most  of  the 


81  Enoch  Walter  Sikes,  The  Transition  of  North  Carolina  from  Colony  to 
Commonwealth  (John  Hopkins  University  Studies,  Series  XVI,  1898),  7-41. 

93  Charles  Lee  Raper,  North  Carolina — A  Study  in  English  Colonial 
Government  (New  York,  The  MacMillan  Company,  1904),  227. 

83  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  X,  612. 

84  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  X,  63. 

85  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  X,  115-116. 


The  Church  Establishment  27 

Royalists  were  from  the  back  country  and  were  largely  dis- 
senters. The  newly  arrived  Scottish  Presbyterians  supported 
England  all  through  the  war.  Most  revealing  of  all,  in  1774, 
the  men  who  were  soon  to  assume  the  leadership  in  the  Revo- 
lution and  were  already  defying  Governor  Martin  on  the 
important  court  issue,  re-enacted  the  Vestry  Act  for  ten  more 
years.96  The  old  act  had  expired  two  years  before  and  Gov- 
ernor Martin  begged  that  it  be  extended.  If  the  members  of 
the  Assembly  had  desired  the  Establishment  to  end  in  1774, 
they  would  surely  have  taken  this  perfect  opportunity  to 
neglect  to  renew  the  act.  Certainly,  with  the  ill  feeling  be- 
tween Martin  and  the  Assembly,  the  act  was  continued  only 
because  the  delegates  wanted  it  continued. 

If  there  was  still  enough  sentiment  to  continue  the  Estab- 
lishment in  1774,  why  did  it  end  with  the  State  Constitution 
of  1776?  In  the  first  place,  the  Episcopal  Church  declined 
under  Martin.  The  political  controversies  hurt  the  church 
and  without  any  court  law  of  any  kind  the  minister  could 
not  force  the  payment  of  his  salary.97  The  dissenters  were 
growing  rapidly;  the  Methodists  were  beginning  to  become 
important  in  the  state.  Much  more  important  was  the  fact 
that  the  largest  share  of  the  established  ministers,  several 
still  receiving  annual  stipends  from  the  Society  for  the  Propa- 
gation of  the  Gospel,  remained  loyal  to  the  British.98  If  the 
leadership  of  the  Anglican  Church  had  firmly  supported  the 
Revolution,  the  sentiment  against  the  Establishment  at  the 
Constitutional  Convention  in  1776  might  not  have  been  suf- 
ficient to  overthrow  it.  With  the  relaxing  of  the  vestry  laws, 
and  with  the  ignominious  arrest  and  suspension  of  several  of 
its  clergymen,  the  Anglican  church,  stigmatized  alike  by 
name  and  origin,  did  not  have  the  strength  to  survive  the 
political  changes  of  1776. 

It  is  impossible  to  gauge  the  exact  amount  of  sentiment 
that  had  long  been  forming  against  the  Establishment.  The 
numerous  complaints  and  evasions  among  the  dissenters 
indicate  the  oppressive  nature  of  favoritism  to  one  church 
and  one  clergy.  It  is  clear  that  the  majority  sentiment,  per- 

96  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  IX,  861. 

97  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  IX,  1251. 

98  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  IX,  1003-1004. 


28  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

haps  even  among  Episcopalians,  was  against  a  rigid  marriage 
law  and  narrow  educational  restrictions.  Although  the 
Church  achieved  its  maximum  growth  under  Tryon,  the 
establishment  was  not  a  success.  The  Vestry  Act  gave  so 
much  power  to  the  governor  that  even  Anglicans  protested. 
The  Vestry  and  Orthodox  Clergy  Acts  remained  so  incapable 
of  enforcement  that  many  parishes  paid  their  minister  by 
voluntary  contributions.  When  the  revolt  became  a  move- 
ment for  complete  independence,  many  people  who,  while 
approving  an  establishment  of  the  Protestant  religion,  de- 
tested the  restrictive  and  unfair  aspects  of  the  current  ec- 
clesiastical system.  At  last  they  had  their  opportunity  to  over- 
throw the  English  Establishment  which  they  accomplished. 
To  their  delegates  to  the  Provincial  Congress,  which  took 
over  the  government  in  1775,  Mecklenburg  County  gave 
instructions  to  support  an  establishment  of  Protestantism, 
with  a  confession  and  profession  of  that  religion  to  be  nec- 
essary for  any  person  holding  public  office.  Other  than  this, 
the  delegates  were  advised  to  "oppose  to  the  utmost  any 
particular  church  or  set  of  Clergymen  being  invested  with 
power  to  decree  rites  and  Ceremonies."  They  were  also  to 
"oppose  the  establishment  of  any  mode  of  worship  to  be  sup- 
ported to  the  opposition  of  the  rights  of  conscience."99  In 
1776  Mecklenburg  instructed  its  delegates  to  the  Constitu- 
tional Convention  to  see  that 

In  all  times  hereafter  no  professing  Christian  of  any  denomi- 
nation whatever  shall  be  compelled  to  pay  any  tax  or  duty 
toward  the  support  of  the  clergy  or  worship  of  any  other 
denomination.100 

After  the  adoption  of  the  State  Constitution  the  Mecklen- 
burg delegates  were  to  urge  the  passing  of  two  laws,  one  to 
abolish  all  vestry  and  marriage  acts,  and  the  other  to  allow 
any  minister  to  perform  marriages  after  publication  of 
banns.101  The  only  other  set  of  instructions  came  from  Orange 
County,  and  on  religious  matters,  closely  paralleled  those  of 
Mecklenburg. 


99  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  X,  241. 
™°  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  X,  870d. 
101  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  X,  870e. 


The  Church  Establishment  29 

The  State  Constitution  of  1776  embodied  the  same  reli- 
gious principles  as  the  above  instructions.  Article  XIX  of  the 
Bill  of  Rights  read:  "That  all  men  have  a  natural  and  un- 
alienable right  to  worship  Almighty  God,  according  to  the 
dictates  of  their  own  consciences."  Articles  XXXIV  of  the 
Constitution  further  clarified  the  religious  question: 

That  there  shall  be  no  Establishment  of  any  one  religious 
Church  or  Denomination  in  this  State  in  Preferance  to  any 
other,  neither  shall  any  person,  on  any  pretense  whatsoever,  be 
compelled  to  attend  any  Place  of  worship  contrary  to  his  own 
Faith  or  judgment,  or  be  obliged  to  pay  for  the  Purchase  of  any 
Glebe,  or  the  building  of  any  House  of  Worship,  or  for  the 
maintenance  of  any  Minister  or  Ministry,  contrary  to  what 
he  believes  right,  or  has  voluntarily  or  personally  engaged  to 
perform,  but  all  persons  shall  be  at  Liberty  to  exercise  their 
own  mode  of  Worship.  Provided,  That  nothing  herein  con- 
tained shall  be  construed  to  exempt  Preachers  of  treasonable  and 
seditious  Discourses,  from  legal  trial  and  Punishment.102 

The  idea  of  a  lax  Protestant  establishment,  already  em- 
bodied in  the  Mecklenburg  instruction,  was  hotly  debated 
in  the  convention  and  finally  accepted  in  a  mild  form  in 
Article  XXXI.  The  Rev.  David  Caldwell  is  reputed  to  have 
authored  and  defended  this  clause: 

That  no  person  who  shall  deny  the  Being  of  God,  or  the  truth 
of  the  Protestant  Religion,  or  the  divine  authority  either  of  the 
Old  or  New  Testament,  or  shall  hold  religious  Principles  in- 
compatible with  the  Freedom  and  Safety  of  the  State,  shall  be 
capable  of  holding  any  office,  or  Place  of  Trust  or  Profit,  in  the 
civil  Department  within  this  State.103 

An  effective  religious  establishment  came  late  to  North 
Carolina.  In  the  strong  form  that  it  assumed  as  a  result  of 
a  consistent  but  unrealistic  Crown  policy,  the  Establishment 
met  various  types  of  opposition  from  both  Anglicans  and 
dissenters.  This  opposition  was  neither  an  important  issue 
in  the  War  of  the  Regulators  nor  a  major  cause  of  the  Revo- 
lution, though  it  did  reflect,  along  with  the  many  political 
controversies,  a  determined  insistence  by  North  Carolinians 
on  local  autonomy.  This  dislike  of  centralization  was  to  be 


wa  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  X,  1011. 
103  Saunders,  Colonial  Records,  X,  1011. 


30  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

again  reflected  in  North  Carolina's  failure  to  ratify  the  Fed- 
eral Constitution  in  1788.  The  religious  provisions  of  the 
State  Constitution  of  1776  can  be  explained  by  this  desire  for 
local  religious  autonomy,  coupled  with  the  steady  growth  of 
dissenters  and  the  unpopular  role  played  by  the  Anglican 
clergy  in  the  Revolution.  It  was  unfortunate  for  the  Anglican 
Church  that  the  Establishment  became  stronger  and  more 
fettering  at  the  very  time  the  colony  was  in  the  mood  for 
asserting  its  own  independence,  for  with  the  ending  of  polit- 
ical support  the  church  was  so  helpless  that  it  barely  sur- 
vived. It  was  another  generation  before  the  Episcopal  faith 
could  live  down  the  stigma  of  having  been  the  state  church, 
or  could,  on  the  other  hand,  become  strong  enough  to  pros- 
per without  the  state's  help. 


THE  ELECTION  OF  1836  IN  NORTH  CAROLINA 

By  William  S.  Hoffmann 

The  election  of  1836  was  one  of  the  most  significant  in 
the  history  of  the  United  States.  Though  generally  neglected 
by  historians  it  is  unique  in  American  history.  It  is  the  only 
election  in  which  a  political  party  deliberately  ran  more  than 
one  presidential  candidate.  The  Democrats  had  a  national 
candidate,  Martin  Van  Buren,  who  was  not  especially  popular 
in  any  section  of  the  country;  the  Whigs  had  three  sectional 
candidates,  Hugh  Lawson  White,  William  Henry  Harrison, 
and  Daniel  Webster.  White  ran  only  in  the  South;  Webster, 
in  parts  of  New  England,  and  Harrison,  in  the  remainder  of 
the  East  and  Northwest.  Supporters  of  each  of  the  Whig  can- 
didates could  appeal  to  the  people  of  each  region  and  tell 
them  that  the  Democratic  candidate  was  an  enemy  of  their 
section.  They  hoped  to  keep  Van  Buren  from  securing  a 
majority  of  the  electoral  vote,  so  that  the  House  of  Represen- 
tatives, voting  by  states,  could  elect  one  of  the  Whig  candi- 
dates as  president.  Had  their  plan  succeeded  such  strategy 
would  probably  have  continued,  and  presidents  would  have 
been  chosen  by  the  House  instead  of  by  the  people. 

The  presidential  contest  of  1836  was  not  a  national  election, 
but  a  series  of  state  campaigns.  As  1836  dawned  the  two 
parties  had  about  equal  strength.  In  North  Carolina,  as  in  the 
United  States,  the  people  were  about  evenly  divided  between 
the  two  parties. 

In  the  state,  as  in  the  nation,  the  great  personal  popularity 
of  Andrew  Jackson  gave  the  Democrats  an  important  ad- 
vantage.1 Since  1815  the  people  of  North  Carolina  had  dem- 
onstrated their  hero  worship  of  the  victor  of  New  Orleans, 
and  in  1823  when  a  few  leaders  of  the  state  asked  the  voters 
to  support  Jackson  they  found  a  ready  response.2  A  group 

1  Willie  P.  Mangum  to  David  L.  Swain,  December  22,  1833,  Henry  T. 
Shanks  (ed.),  The  Papers  of  Willie  Person  Mangum,  (Raleigh,  State  De- 
partment of  Archives  and  History),  II  (1952),  52.  Hereafter  cited  as 
Shanks,  Mangum  Papers. 

2  Albert  R.  Newsome,  The  Election  of  182U  in  North  Carolina,  The  James 
Sprunt  Studies  in  History  and  Political  Science  (Chapel  Hill,  XXIII, 
1939),  20-39  and  passim.  Hereafter  cited  as  Newsome,  Election  of  1824. 
Also  see  William  S.  Hoffmann,  "Origins  of  the  Jackson  Party"  (unpublish- 
ed thesis,  University  of  Wisconsin,  Madison,   1950),  17. 

[31] 


32  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

of  politicians  originally  supporting  South  Carolina's  John  C. 
Calhoun  had  formed  an  organization  called  the  People's 
party.  When  events  outside  of  North  Carolina  caused  the 
South  Carolinian  to  postpone  his  presidential  aspirations 
and  seek  the  vice-presidency,  the  leaders  of  the  People's 
party  pledged  themselves  to  support  Jackson  and  Calhoun. 
The  dominant  politicians  in  the  state  supported  William  H. 
Crawford  of  Georgia  for  the  presidency,  but  the  electoral 
ticket  of  the  People's  party  was  victorious.  It  defeated  the 
Georgian's  ticket  by  20,214  votes  to  15,621.3  Between  1824 
and  1828  most  of  Crawford's  supporters  somewhat  reluc- 
tantly shifted  to  Jackson  primarily  because  they  considered 
him  a  lesser  evil  than  John  Quincy  Adams.4  In  the  election  of 
1828,  Jackson  received  37,875  votes  while  Adams  received 
only  13,918.5  During  Jackson's  first  term  his  popularity  in- 
creased among  North  Carolinians.  The  former  supporters 
of  Crawford  enthusiastically  applauded  the  Maysville  veto 
and  Jackson's  other  state  rights  pronouncements  and  became 
loyal  members  of  the  Democratic  party.6  In  1832  Jackson 
won  his  greatest  electoral  victory  in  the  state,  receiving 
eighty-four  and  one-half  per  cent  of  the  total  vote.  An 
electoral  ticket  for  Jackson  and  Van  Buren  received  21,007 
votes,  one  for  Henry  Clay  and  John  Sergeant  received  4,563 
votes,  and  one  for  Jackson  and  Phillip  Pendleton  Barbour  of 
Virginia  received  3,855.7  Although  Jackson  lost  some  sup- 
porters during  his  second  term  the  admiration  which  the 
majority  of  people  felt  toward  him  continued.  The  Demo- 
crats realized  that  they  could  transfer  some  of  Jackson's 
popularity  to  Martin  Van  Buren,  but  their  chance  of  victory 
was  not  so  great. 

The  Whigs  had  many  factors  in  their  favor.  Many  respect- 
able leaders  of  the  state,  especially  former  Federalists,  had 


8  Newsome,  Election  of  1824,  48-89  and  passim. 

*  William  S.  Hoffmann,  "North  Carolina  Politics  in  the  Jackson  Period, 
1824-1837"  (unpublished  doctoral  dissertation,  University  of  North  Caro- 
lina, Chapel  Hill,  1953),  21-42.  Hereafter  cited  as  Hoffmann,  "North  Caro- 
lina Politics." 

6  Yadkin  and  Catawba  Journal   (Salisbury),  December  9,  1828. 

6  Hoffmann,  "North  Carolina  Politics,"  65-91;  William  S.  Hoffmann, 
"Andrew  Jackson:  State  Rightist:  The  Case  of  the  Georgia  Indians," 
Tennessee  Historical  Quarterly   (Nashville,  December,  1952),  XI,  329-334. 

7  North  Carolina  Journal   (Fayetteville),  November  7,  1832. 


The  Election  of  1836  in  North  Carolina  33 

supported  Adams  in  1828  and  were  the  nucleus  of  the  Whig 
Party.8  In  1831,  as  a  final  act  in  the  controversy  concerning 
Peggy  Eaton's  social  position,  Jackson  had  asked  for  the 
resignation  of  Secretary  of  the  Navy,  John  Branch.  The 
ousted  Secretary  returned  to  North  Carolina  and  declared 
open  warfare  on  Martin  Van  Buren.  He  found  many  fol- 
lowers who  were  secret  enemies  of  Jackson,  who  worked 
with  him  in  organizing  a  new  political  party.9  They  promised 
to  support  Jackson  for  president  and  Barbour  for  vice-presi- 
dent. Sectional  prejudice  was  aroused  against  Van  Buren, 
and  in  the  spring  and  early  summer  of  1832  this  appeared 
to  be  the  strongest  group  in  the  state.  Due  to  Barbour's 
belated  withdrawal  and  to  their  own  association  with  nul- 
lification a  very  poor  showing  was  made  in  the  election.10 
They  remained  together  as  an  effective  political  organization, 
and  their  private  hatred  for  the  President  was  increased  when 
Jackson  took  a  strong  nationalistic  stand  during  the  nullifi- 
cation controversy.11  Although  most  of  them  had  opposed  the 
national  bank  on  constitutional  grounds,  when  Jackson  trans- 
ferred federal  funds  from  the  national  bank  to  state  banks 
it  served  as  a  signal  to  join  openly  the  anti- Jackson  ranks. 
Together  the  Branch  group  and  the  original  anti-Jackson 
men  had  more  party  journals  than  their  rivals,  and  more 
important  political  leaders  supported  their  cause.  North 
Carolina  was  considered  a  doubtful  state,  and  in  many  re- 
spects the  state  campaign  was  typical  of  the  nation. 

Since  early  1834  the  North  Carolina  newspapers  had  been 
filled  with  discussions  of  partisan  issues.  The  Whig  poli- 
ticians and  editors  raised  their  voices  in  righteous  indigna- 
tion at  Jackson's  removal  of  deposits  from  the  national  bank.12 


8  Hoffmann,  "North  Carolina  Politics,"  45-50. 

9  Hoffmann,  "North  Carolina  Politics,"  92-110 ;  John  Branch  to  "A  Gentle- 
man in  this  City,"  New  Bern  Spectator  and  Literary  Journal  (New  Bern), 
May  21,  1831;  John  Branch  to  James  Iredell,  Washington,  March  31,  1832, 
James  Iredell  Papers,  Duke  University  Library,  Durham,  North  Carolina. 

"Hoffmann,  "North  Carolina  Politics,"  111-133. 

"Hoffmann,  "North  Carolina  Politics,"  134-154. 

12  Raleigh  Register,  October  1,  22,  1833,  quoting  the  Carolina  Watchman 
(Salisbury);  The  Star  (Raleigh),  September  27,  1833;  Lewis  Williams  to 
Edmund  Jones,  Washington,  December  8,  1833,  Edmund  Jones  Papers, 
Southern  Historical  Collection,  University  of  North  Carolina  Library, 
Chapel  Hill. 


34  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

When  the  Senate  censured  the  President  for  his  actions  the 
Whigs  praised  the  body  for  its  "courageous  stand  against 
executive  usurpation"  and  Democrats  denounced  the  Senate 
as  supporters  of  a  "monstrous  institution."  13  When  Jackson 
answered  the  censure  with  an  official  protest  many  Whigs 
likened  this  "additional  usurpation"  to  a  tyrant's  message 
from  the  throne,  but  Democrats  applauded  and  agreed  with 
Jackson  that  the  Senate  had  no  constitutional  right  to  pass 
the  resolution  of  censure.14  The  opponents  of  Jackson  com- 
pared his  tyranny  to  that  of  George  III  and  occasionally  took 
the  name,  Whig,  to  signify  their  opposition  to  executive  tyr- 
anny.15 Generally,  both  parties  continued  to  call  themselves 
Republicans,  and  both  insisted  that  they  were  defending 
Republican  principles. 

The  national  bank  called  in  loans  and  this  seems  to  have 
been  one  factor  in  bringing  on  a  depression.  The  Whigs  de- 
nounced Jackson  for  not  restoring  the  deposits  and  thereby 
ending  the  depression.  The  North  Carolina  Democrats 
denied  that  any  depression  existed  and  declared  that  the 
state  had  never  been  more  prosperous.16  The  Whig  voice 
was  loud,  and  Democratic  Senator  Bedford  Brown  declared: 

Every  day  the  accents  of  distress  .  .  .  sounded  .  .  .  Different  kinds 
of  distress  prevail.  .  .  .  Not  among  the  least  distressed  was  that 
class  of  politician  .  .  .  distressed  because  their  opponents  were 
in  power,  and  they  themselves  were  out  of  power.17 

Brown's  support  of  the  President's  policy  caused  the  Whigs 
to  try  to  secure  his  removal.  Mass  meetings  were  called 
which  instructed  Brown  to  support  restoration  of  the  de- 


18  Western  Carolinian  (Salisbury),  March  15,  1834;  Free  Press  (Tar- 
boro),  April  13,  1834. 

u  Western  Carolinian,  May  17,  1834;  Raleigh  Register,  April  29,  1834; 
Miners  and  Farmers  Journal  (Charlotte),  May  3,  1834;  Free  Press, 
May  4,  1834. 

""Sidney"  in  Raleigh  Register,  December  23,  1834. 

M  Western  Carolinian,  March  22,  1834;  Nathaniel  Macon  to  Martin  Van 
Buren,  May  23,  1834,  Elizabeth  McPherson,  "Letters  from  North  Caro- 
linians to  Martin  Van  Buren,"  North  Carolina  Historical  Review  (Ra- 
leigh), XV  (January,  1938),  174;  Bedford  Brown  to  Martin  Van  Buren, 
September  24,  1834,  William  K.  Boyd,  "Some  Selections  from  the  Cor- 
respondence of  Bedford  Brown,"  Trinity  College  Historical  Society,  His- 
torical Papers  (Durham),  VI  (1926),  88. 

"Brown's   speech  in  the   Senate,  Raleigh  Register,  January   21,   1835. 


The  Election  of  1836  in  North  Carolina  35 

posits  or  resign  from  the  Senate.  Whig  Senator  Willie  P. 
Mangum  presented  one  such  resolution  to  the  United  States 
Senate  and  referred  to  it  as  the  voice  of  North  Carolina. 
Brown  declared  that  he  would  obey  the  real  will  of  his 
constituents  or  resign.  He  pointed  out  that  the  meeting  had 
been  called  by  a  disappointed  aspirant  and  that  only  a  hand- 
ful of  partisans  had  been  present.  The  Whig  press  called 
Brown's  statement  a  denial  of  the  right  of  instructions  and 
declared  that  his  refusal  to  obey  made  him  unfit  to  hold 
public  office.  During  the  legislative  elections  of  1834  the 
Whigs  urged  all  men  who  believed  in  the  "Republican  prin- 
ciple of  instructions"  to  vote  only  for  legislators  who  opposed 
Brown's  re-election.18 

The  Democrats  could  also  play  the  game.  They  in  turn 
urged  the  voters  to  cast  their  ballots  only  for  candidates  who 
pledged  themselves  to  support  Brown.19  The  Democrats 
gained  a  slight  majority  and  succeeded  in  re-electing 
Brown.20  After  a  bitter  debate  the  legislature  passed  a  reso- 
lution declaring  that  a  Senator  should  support  instructions 
from  the  legislature  or  resign.  They  then  instructed  the  two 
Senators  to  support  a  resolution  expunging  the  Senate's 
censure  of  Jackson.21  Brown,  of  course,  already  favored  the 
expunging  resolution  and  needed  no  instructions.  Mangum 
refused  to  obey,  and  fearing  that  his  resignation  would  give 
the  Democrats  control  of  the  Senate  he  refused  to  retire.22 
He  declared  that  a  Senator  should  obey  instructions  from 
the  people  or  resign,  but  he  denied  that  the  legislature  was 
the  proper  body  to  speak  for  the  people.23  Until  Mangum 
finally  resigned  and  was  replaced  by  Robert  Strange—  three 
months  before  his  term  expired  the  Democrats  constantly 
attacked  the   "disobedient"   Senator  for  his   action.24   The 


M  Miners  and  Farmers  Journal,  March  1,  July  12,  1834;  Carolina  Watch- 
man, March  8,  1834;  Raleigh  Register,  February  25,  March  18,  April  15, 
1834;  Copy  of  Burke  County  Resolutions,  March  27,  1834,  Shanks,  Mangum 
Papers,  II,  54. 

18 North  Carolina,  Standard   (Raleigh),  November  7,  14,  21,  1834. 

20  Raleigh  Register,  November  25,  1834. 

21  Raleigh  Register,  January  27,  1835. 

^Willie  P.  Mangum  to  William  A.  Graham,  Washington,  December  17, 
1834,  William  Alexander  Graham  Papers,  State  Department  of  Archives 
and  History,  Raleigh  North  Carolina. 

23  Mangum's  speech  in  the  Senate,  Hillsboro  Recorder,  March  20,  1835. 

24  North  Carolina  Standard,  June  11,  1835,  and  passim. 


36  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Whigs,  forgetting  the  origin  of  the  instruction  fight,  declared 
that  the  instructions  were  part  of  the  "Jacksonian  reign  of 
terror"  to  put  down  all  who  differed  with  them.25  Neither 
side  gained  or  lost  much  support  because  of  the  instruction 
battle,  but  it  kept  partisans  on  both  sides  active  and  aroused. 

In  1835  the  Whigs  shifted  the  emphasis  in  their  attack. 
National  land  policy  had  long  been  a  minor  issue.  In  1833 
Jackson  vetoed  a  bill  calling  for  annual  distribution  of  the 
proceeds  from  federal  land  sales  to  all  the  states,  but  this 
caused  only  a  feeble  protest  from  the  anti-Jackson  men.26 
At  that  time  Mangum  had  not  openly  broken  with  Jackson 
and  had  twice  voted  against  the  measure.  Realizing  that 
distribution  would  be  popular  in  North  Carolina  and  would 
embarrass  the  Democrats,  he  wrote  Governor  David  L. 
Swain  urging  that  the  legislature  instruct  him  to  support  the 
measure.  He  could  therefore  change  his  vote  in  obedience 
to  instructions  and  not  be  condemned  for  inconsistency.27 
Although  Mangum  was  destined  to  receive  instructions  of 
another  nature,  Swain  did  his  part  well. 

In  his  inaugural  message  of  1834,  Swain  called  distri- 
bution a  panacea  for  all  of  North  Carolina's  ills,  and  the 
Whigs  became  ardent  champions  of  the  measure.28  In  Jan- 
uary, 1835,  the  lower  house  of  the  legislature  passed  a  reso- 
lution in  favor  of  distribution,  but  the  Democratic  majority 
in  the  Senate  refused  their  assent.29  The  Whigs  constantly 
denounced  the  Democrats  for  blocking  the  distribution  reso- 
lution, and  Whig  leader  William  J.  Alexander  issued  a  cir- 
cular averring  that  the  action  of  the  Democrats  had  cost 
the  people  of  the  state  five-million  dollars  annually.30  At  the 
next  session  of  the  legislature  the  house  again  assented  to  a 
Whig  resolution  favoring  distribution,  while  the  senate  pass- 

25  Samuel  Fleming's  speech  in  the  state  legislature,  Raleigh  Register, 
December  23,  1834. 

23  New  Bern  Spectator  and  Literary  Journal,  March  15,  1833;  Abraham 
Rencher's  "circular"  in  The  Star,  May  10,  1833;  Lewis  Williams,  To  the 
Citizens  of  the  Thirteenth  Congressional  District  of  North  Carolina, 
Washington,  February  12,  1833,  14.  Hereafter  cited  as  Williams,  Citizens 
of  the  Thirteenth  District. 

^Willie  P.  Mangum  to  David  L.  Swain,  December  22,  1833,  Shanks, 
Mangum  Papers,  II,  54. 

28  Swain's  inaugural  address,  Hillsboro  Recorder,  November  28,  1834. 

29  North  Carolina  Standard,  January  16,  1835. 

30  Raleigh  Register,  March  10,  1835,  quoting  extracts  from  Alexander's 
circular,  Western  Carolinian,  January  24,  1835. 


The  Election  of  1836  in  North  Carolina  37 

ed  a  resolution  which  favored  the  distribution  of  an  "un- 
avoidable surplus"  only.31  The  Whigs  again  condemned  the 
Democrats  for  refusing  to  consent  to  annual  distribution  and 
repeated  the  arguments  of  the  preceding  year.32  Distribution 
was  popular  in  North  Carolina,  especially  in  the  western 
part  of  the  state.  As  Whig  leaders  pointed  out,  it  would  give 
the  state  millions  of  dollars  annually  which  could  be  spent 
for  much  needed  roads,  schools,  and  railroads  and  would  not 
cost  the  people  one  cent  additional  taxes.  Whigs  claimed 
that  the  Democrats  were  going  to  give  the  lands  outright 
to  the  western  states  in  order  to  bribe  those  states  into  voting 
for  Van  Buren.33  The  Democrats  fervently  denied  this  and 
could  argue  that  distribution  was  unconstitutional  and  that 
the  federal  government  instead  of  distributing  surplus  funds 
should  lower  the  tariff.34  They  could  make  little  headway, 
however,  against  the  popular  Whig  advocates.  Democratic 
opposition  to  distribution  greatly  aided  the  Whigs  in  the 
national  campaign. 

The  Whigs  of  North  Carolina  considered  many  presiden- 
tial candidates.  Henry  Clay  was  the  favorite  of  the  original 
anti- Jackson  men,  but  national  party  strategy  kept  Clay  from 
entering  the  race.35  Nullifiers  led  by  Charles  Fisher  wanted  to 
nominate  John  C.  Calhoun,  but  Willie  P.  Mangum  succeeded 
in  convincing  them  that  Calhoun's  unpopularity  would  throw 
North  Carolina  into  the  Van  Buren  camp.36  In  the  fall  of 
1834,  the  Raleigh  Register,  organ  of  the  original  anti- Jackson 


81  Raleigh  Register,  December  22,  29,  1835. 

82  Raleigh  Register,  February  2,  1836,  quoting  the  Fayetteville  Observer, 
Williams,  Citizens  of  the  Thirteenth  District,  May  17,  1836. 

33  Williams,  Citizens  of  the  Thirteenth  District,  Washington,  February, 
18,  1835,  2-5;  Abraham  Rencher,  To  the  Citizens  of  the  Tenth  Congressional 
District,  Washington,  March  6,  1835,  1-2 ;  Edmund  Deberry,  To  the  Freemen 
of  the  Counties  of  Anson,  Richmond,  Cumberland,  Moore,  and  Montgomery, 
Washington,  February  28,  1835;  Edmund  Deberry  Papers,  Southern  His- 
torical Collection,  University  of  North  Carolina  Library,  Chapel  Hill; 
Swain's  annual  message,  Raleigh  Register,  November  24,  1835. 

34  North  Carolina  Standard,  February  6  and  December  15,  1835,  quoting 
Richard  Dobbs  Spaight's  inaugural  address;  Thomas  Hall,  To  the  Qualified 
Voters  of  the  Third  Congressional  District,  Washington,   March   6,  1835. 

85  Raleigh  Register,  October  22,  1833;  New  Bern  Spectator  and  Literary 
Journal,  March  15,  1833. 

38  Willie  P.  Mangum  to  John  Beard,  Philadelphia,  October  7,  1834,  Fisher 
Papers,  Southern  Historical  Collection,  University  of  North  Carolina 
Library,  Chapel  Hill. 


38  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

men,  and  the  Carolina  Watchman  (Salisbury),  both  urged 
that  a  state  convention  nominate  a  "Southern  candidate" 
for  president.  The  Western  Carolinian  ( Salisbury ) ,  organ  of 
the  milliners,  and  the  New  Bern  Spectator  and  Literary 
Journal  warned  that  such  a  nomination  might  divide  the 
party,  so  a  convention  was  not  held.37  The  Western  Carolin- 
ian seconded  the  nomination  by  a  New  York  paper  of  North 
Carolina's  own,  Willie  P.  Mangum,  and  the  Fayetteville  Ob- 
server declared  that  another  North  Carolinian,  William  Gas- 
ton of  New  Bern,  was  the  ideal  candidate.38  James  Graham, 
a  Whig  Congressman  from  Rutherford  County,  wanted  the 
state  to  support  a  Democrat,  Thomas  Ruffin,  Chief  Justice 
of  the  State  Supreme  Court.  He  believed  that  if  Ruffin  could 
secure  an  appointment  as  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  the 
North  Carolinian  would  be  able  to  defeat  Van  Buren  and 
become  President  of  the  United  States.  For  different  reasons 
the  state's  Democratic  manager,  Romulus  M.  Saunders,  was 
working  to  secure  the  appointment  for  Ruffin,  but  Jackson 
named  another  man  for  the  position.39  The  one  candidate 
who  won  general  approval  from  the  state  Whigs  was  Hugh 
Lawson  White  of  Tennessee. 

White  was  acceptable  to  all  factions  of  the  party.  In 
September,  1834,  the  Western  Carolinian  commented  favor- 
ably on  his  nomination.40  In  January,  1835,  the  Alabama 
legislature  nominated  White,  and  soon  the  Whig  press  was 
filled  with  praise  for  the  Tennessee  Senator.  On  April  3,  1835, 
citizens  of  Statesville  held  the  first  White  meeting  in  North 
Carolina.  They  declared  that  a  southerner  should  be  presi- 
dent and  recommended  White  highly.41  Similar  meetings 
followed  in  other  towns.  The  Raleigh  Register  suddenly 
dropped  its  nationalistic  tone  and  declared,  "The  cause  of 


37  Raleigh  Register,  September  2,  1834,  quoting  the  Carolina  Watchman, 
September  20,  1834. 

38  Western  Carolinian,  September  30,  December  6,  1834,  quoting  the 
Fayetteville  Observer. 

89  James  Graham  to  William  Alexander  Graham,  Washington,  January  5, 
1834,  William  Alexander  Graham  Papers,  Southern  Historical  Collection, 
University  of  North  Carolina  Library,  Chapel  Hill;  Romulus  M.  Saunders 
to  Thomas  Ruffin,  October  15,  November  4,  1833,  J.  G.  de  R.  Hamilton, 
The  Papers  of  Thomas  Ruffin,  4  volumes  (Raleigh:  North  Carolina  His- 
torical Commission,  1918,  1920),  II,  98,  105-107. 

40  Western  Carolinian,  September  27,  1834. 

41  Raleigh  Register,  February  2,  April  14,  1835. 


The  Election  of  1836  in  North  Carolina  39 

Judge  White  is  the  cause  of  the  South."42  On  December  22, 
1835,  Whig  legislators  and  others  held  a  meeting  at  Raleigh 
and  officially  nominated  White.43  As  1836  opened,  Whigs 
in  almost  every  county  were  holding  meetings  and  selecting 
delegates  to  name  electors  pledged  to  White. 

The  Democrats  also  began  the  contest  early.  In  February, 
1835,  the  North  Carolina  Standard  (Raleigh)  the  leading 
Van  Buren  organ,  called  on  all  Democrats  to  support  the 
candidate  of  the  national  convention.44  As  in  1832,  the 
enemies  of  Van  Buren  assailed  the  national  convention.  It 
was  called  a  "caucus  of  officeholders,"  and  the  phrase  became 
a  greatly  overworked  cliche.45  The  Democrats  defended  the 
convention,  and  sometimes  in  county  and  district  conven- 
tions which  met  to  select  delegates  to  the  convention,  they 
also  named  presidential  electors.46  The  venerable  Nathaniel 
Macon  was  named  to  their  electoral  ticket,  and  his  name  was 
an  advantage  to  the  party.47  The  Democrats  were  not  going 
to  lose  the  election  through  lack  of  energy. 

Most  of  the  state's  Van  Buren  men  preferred  William  C. 
Rives  of  Virginia  as  candidate  for  vice-president.  In  late 
1834  the  North  Carolina  Sentinel,  a  Democratic  paper  in 
New  Bern,  named  Rives  as  its  choice.48  Romulus  Saunders 
and  Robert  Strange,  leaders  of  the  state  delegation  at  the 
Baltimore  Convention,  both  favored  the  Virginian.  At  the 
convention  Strange  in  an  attempt  to  defeat  the  favored  can- 
didate, Richard  M.  Johnson,  proposed  that  a  two-thirds 
majority  be  required  for  a  nomination.  The  convention  as- 
sented to  Strange's  motion,  and  he  and  Saunders  persuaded 
the  minority  of  the  North  Carolina  delegation  to  vote  for 
Rives  on  the  first  ballot.  Saunders  and  Strange  promised 


42  Raleigh  Register,  December  22,  1835. 

43  Raleigh  Register,  December  29,  1835. 

44  North  Carolina  Standard,  February  13,  1835. 

45  Western  Carolinian,  May  16,  1836.  The  phrase  appears  four  times  on 
one  page  of  the  May  16  issue. 

46  North  Carolina  Standard,  May  15,  1835. 

47  Clarence  C.  Norton,  The  Democratic  Party  in  Ante-Bellum  North 
Carolina,  1835-1861,  volume  XXXI  of  The  James  Sprunt  Historical  Studies 
(Chapel  Hill,  1930),  86.  Hereafter  cited  as  Norton,  The  Democratic  Party. 

48  North  Carolina  Standard,  January  2,  1835,  quoting  the  North  Carolina 
Sentinel  (New  Bern). 


40  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

to  support  the  nominee  of  the  convention.  On  the  first  ballot 
Johnson  received  four  votes  more  than  the  necessary  two- 
thirds  and  won  the  vice-presidential  nomination.  Saunders 
made  a  speech  and  admitted  that  he,  personally,  preferred 
Rives  but  urged  all  Democrats  to  support  the  Van  Buren- 
Johnson  ticket.  Although  North  Carolina  Democrats  con- 
tinued to  say  nice  things  about  Rives  they  gave  Johnson 
wholehearted  support.49 

The  state  meeting  which  had  nominated  White  had  failed 
to  name  a  vice-presidential  candidate.  Shortly  after  North 
Carolina  Whigs  made  their  nomination,  Maryland  Whigs 
also  nominated  White  and  named  John  Tyler  as  his  running 
mate.  Tyler  accepted  the  nomination,  and  North  Carolina 
Whig  leaders  added  his  name  to  their  ticket.  Many  Whig 
meetings  passed  resolutions  praising  Tyler.  Meanwhile  Rives' 
friends  had  gotten  control  of  the  Virginia  legislature  and 
instructed  Tyler  to  support  the  expunging  resolution.  Tyler 
refused,  but,  unlike  Willie  P.  Mangum,  he  accepted  the 
doctrine  of  instructions  and  resigned.  Weston  Gales,  editor 
of  the  Raleigh  Register,  called  Tylers  resignation  "the 
strongest  rebuke  to  Whig  principles,"  and  he  called  on  those 
who  approved  Mangum's  course  to  revoke  Tyler's  nomina- 
tion.50 The  North  Carolina  Standard  stated  that  Tyler  was 
to  be  dropped  at  the  "mandate"  of  the  party  organ  and  com- 
mented that  Gales'  reasoning  proved  that  Whig  principles 
meant  ignoring  the  will  of  constituents.51  The  Star  (Raleigh), 
organ  of  the  states  rights  branch  of  the  Whig  Party,  sup- 
ported Tyler,  and  although  many  Whigs  hoped  that  the 
Virginian  would  withdraw,  few  were  willing  to  follow  the 
Registers  suggestion  and  revoke  the  nomination.  Even 
Editor  Gales,  calling  Tyler's  resignation  an  honest  error,  ac- 
quiesced in  the  Virginian's  continuance  on  the  ticket.52  The 
vice-presidency  was  not  very  important. 


49  North  Carolina  Standard,  June  5,   1835,  quoting  the  North  Carolina 
Sentinel,  June  5,  1835. 

50  Raleigh  Register,  March  8,  1836;  Weston  R.  Gales  to  Willie  P.  Mangum, 
January  22,  1836,  Shanks,  Mangum  Papers,  II,  381. 

51  North  Carolina  Standard,  March  10,  1836. 


The  Election  of  1836  in  North  Carolina  41 

The  North  Carolina  Whigs  were  more  concerned  with 
selecting  a  popular  candidate  for  governor  than  for  vice- 
president.  The  State  Constitution  had  been  amended  the 
previous  year,  and  in  1836  the  governor  for  the  first  time 
was  to  be  elected  by  the  people.  Four  Whig  candidates  were 
prominently  mentioned  for  the  position.  The  Examiner 
(Oxford)  suggested  that  Mangum  be  the  party's  candidate, 
but  he  was  vulnerable  on  several  accounts  and  did  not 
make  the  race.53  The  Carolina  Watchman  named  ex-Federal- 
ist William  B.  Meares  of  New  Hanover  County,  but  the 
Whigs  of  that  county  felt  Edward  B.  Dudley  would  be  a 
stronger  candidate.54  The  National  Republican  wing  of  the 
party  preferred  Meares,  but  realized  that  his  Federalism 
would  make  him  vulnerable  and  accepted  Dudley  as  a 
stronger  candidate.55  Thomas  Polk  of  Salisbury  was  the 
choice  of  the  Western  Whigs,  but  he  made  a  plea  for  party 
unity  and  stepped  aside  in  favor  of  Dudley.56  The  Register 
called  for  a  state  meeting  of  White  supporters  to  make  a 
nomination  for  governor,  and  the  assemblage  unanimously 
named  Edward  B.  Dudley  as  its  candidate.57 

Dudley  accepted  the  nomination  and  showed  that  he  in- 
tended to  make  sectional  opposition  to  Van  Buren  the  chief 
issue  of  the  campaign.  In  his  letter  of  acceptance  he  de- 
clared: "Mr.  Van  Buren  is  not  one  of  us.  He  is  a  Northern 
man  ...  in  soul,  in  principle,  and  in  action." 58  He  said 
that  Van  Buren  was  an  abolitionist  who  had  supported  the 
anti-slavery  provisions  of  the  Missouri  Compromise  and  had 
granted  Congress  the  power  to  abolish  slavery.  Dudley  had 
been  a  member  of  the  Branch  group  in  1832,  and  he  repeated 
the  charges  made  during  the  ill-fated  Barbour  campaign. 


52  Raleigh  Register,  March  22,  1836;  James  Simmons  to  Willie  P.  Man- 
gum,  March  9,  1836;  Robert  Gilliam  to  Willie  P.  Mangum,  April  1,  1836, 
Shanks,  Mangum  Papers,  II,  403,  417. 

53  North  Carolina  Standard,  December  15,  1835. 

54  North  Carolina  Standard,  March  10,  1836;  Raleigh  Register,  November 
3,  1835,  quoting  the  Carolina  Watchman. 

05  Weston  R.  Gales  to  Willie  P.  Mangum,  January  22,  1836,  Shanks, 
Mangum  Papers,  II,  381. 

69  Western  Carolinian,  January  16,  1836. 

57  Raleigh  Register,  January  26,  February  9,  1836. 

68  Edward  B.  Dudley  to  Weston  Gales  and  others,  February  17,  1836, 
Raleigh  Register,  February  23,  1836. 


42  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

He  was  advised  to  tour  the  state,  tell  anecdotes  concerning 
his  own  service  in  the  War  of  1812,  and  avoid  controversial 
issues.59  He  traveled  widely,  spoke  at  public  banquets,  and 
carried  on  an  active  campaign.  His  early  championship  of 
state  internal  improvements  and  his  campaign  pleas  for 
public  education  aided  his  candidacy.60 

The  Democrats  attacked  Dudley  on  several  counts.  Lauch- 
lin  Bethune,  a  former  Congressman  from  Fayetteville,  called 
a  meeting  and  denounced  Dudley's  letter  of  acceptance  as 
"illiberal,  anti-republican,  unconstitutional  in  spirit,  and  in- 
sulting to  the  pride  and  patriotism  of  the  state."61  The 
Democrats  charged  Dudley  with  deliberately  stirring  up 
sectional  hostility.62  Democratic  editors  published  a  letter 
Dudley  had  written  in  1830  opposing  forceful  removal  of 
two  thousand  Cherokees  from  North  Carolina.  They  twisted 
his  words  and  averred  that  Dudley  "thought  it  the  duty  of 
all  poor  men  in  North  Carolina  to  give  their  daughters  in 
marriage  to  the  Indian  savage."  63  Only  Democratic  partisans 
could  believe  such  an  absurd  charge,  and  Dudley  was  not 
harmed  by  his  defense  of  the  friendly  Indians. 

The  Democrats  had  little  choice  in  naming  their  candidate 
for  governor.  Their  party  in  the  legislature  had  just  selected 
Richard  Dobbs  Spaight  for  governor,  and  they  were  virtually 
forced  to  recommend  his  re-election.  In  March  the  Standard 
endorsed  his  nomination  as  "springing  spontaneously  .  .  . 
from  the  Democracy  of  the  state." 64  Spaight  was  a  poor 
campaigner.  He  refused  invitations  to  public  banquets  and 
did  not  travel  extensively  over  the  state:  he  was  trying  to 
create  the  illusion  that  he  would  neither  seek  nor  decline 
public  office.65  Most  candidates  tried  to  make  their  entrance 


59  James  Graham  to  William  A.  Graham,  Washington,  February  7,  1836, 
William  Alexander  Graham  Papers,  University  of  North  Carolina. 

60  Raleigh  Register,  June  30,  1836,  quoting  the  New  Bern  Spectator  and 
Literary  Journal. 

61  Fayetteville  Observer,  March  24,  1836. 

62  North  Carolina  Standard,  March  3,  1836. 

63  "One  of  the  People"  in  Raleigh  Register,  September  6,  1836  quoting  the 
Carolina  Gazette  (Rutherfordton)  ;  John  I.  Wright  to  David  S.  Reid, 
Rockingham  Springs,  July  30,  1836,  David  S.  Reid  Papers,  State  Depart- 
ment of  Archives  and  History,  Raleigh. 

64  North  Carolina  Standard,  March  10,  1836. 

65  North  Carolina  Standard,  March  31,  1836. 


The  Election  of  1836  in  North  Carolina  43 

into  a  campaign  appear  as  a  reluctant  willingness  to  serve, 
but  in  the  case  of  avid,  office-seeker  Richard  Dobbs  Spaight 
it  was  most  ineffective. 

Spaight  was  extremely  vulnerable  in  the  congressional 
district  which  was  composed  of  Rutherford,  Buncombe, 
Burke,  Haywood,  Macon,  and  Yancey  counties.  He  was 
linked  with  David  Newland,  the  unsuccessful  candidate  in 
the  congressional  election  of  1835.  Newland  had  lost  the 
election  by  only  fourteen  votes.66  The  state  law  required 
voters  to  cast  their  ballots  in  the  county  of  their  residence, 
and  Newland  secured  depositions  to  prove  that  many  of  the 
votes  for  the  successful  candidate,  James  Graham,  came 
from  people  voting  outside  their  county.  Newland  carried 
his  evidence  to  Washington.  He  had  once  announced  his 
support  of  White  but  intimated  that  if  the  presidential  elec- 
tion was  to  be  decided  by  the  House  of  Representatives  he 
would  vote  for  Van  Buren.  Many  people  believed  that  Web- 
ster, Harrison,  and  White  would  receive  enough  electoral 
votes  to  throw  the  election  to  the  House  and  that  Graham's 
vote  could  keep  Van  Buren  from  becoming  president.  The 
Democrats  had  a  majority  in  the  House  and  voted  to  unseat 
Graham.67  Their  action  appeared  to  Whigs  and  non  partisans 
as  an  unjust  political  decision  made  only  to  aid  Van  Buren's 
presidential  ambitions.  If  the  election  had  gone  to  the  House, 
a  pledge  to  vote  with  his  district  by  Augustine  H.  Shepperd, 
a  popular  Whig  Congressman  from  a  Democratic  consti- 
tuency, would  have  caused  North  Carolina's  vote  to  be  given 
to  Van  Buren.68Although  they  had  voted  to  unseat  Graham, 
a  majority  of  congressmen  would  not  vote  to  seat  Newland, 
and  they  requested  the  governor  to  call  a  special  election 
to  fill  the  vacancy.  Instead  of  calling  it  immediately  Spaight 
issued  a  call  to  make  the  special  congressional  election  coin- 
cide with  the  next  general  election.  The  people  of  the  district 

66  North  Carolina  Standard,  August  20,  1835. 

67  Raleigh  Register,  March  8,  1836. 

68  Free  Press,  September  3,  1836;  Ebenezer  Pettigrew  to  John  H.  Bryan, 
March  24,  1836,  John  H.  Bryan  Collections,  State  Department  of  Archives 
and  History,  Raleigh,  volume,  III. 


44  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

blamed  the  Democratic  governor  because  they  had  no  rep- 
resentative.69 

The  Democrats  had  made  a  strategic  error.  The  Whigs 
charged  that  Newland  had  persuaded  Spaight  to  delay  the 
election.  They  asserted  that  Newland  realized  he  had  no 
chance  to  win  immediately,  but  if  the  election  was  deferred 
the  aid  of  the  Democratic  party  would  give  him  a  better 
opportunity.70  Newland's  action  was  very  unpopular  in  the 
district,  and  the  Democrats  suffered  by  linking  their  cause 
with  his.  Some  Democrats  promised  Graham  their  vote  be- 
cause they  said  they  could  not  "stand  a  turncoat." 71  Newland 
realized  his  own  unpopularity  and  considered  withdrawing, 
while  Graham's  popularity  increased  with  four  months  of 
strenuous  campaigning.72  Graham  won  the  election  by  a 
majority  of  1,614  votes,  and  in  that  district  Spaight  received 
1,491  fewer  votes  than  Dudley.73  In  1835  the  district  had 
sent  a  Democratic  majority  to  the  legislature,  but  in  August, 
1836  elections  the  people  elected  ten  Whigs  and  only  four 
Democrats.74  A  part  of  the  shift  was  caused  by  the  revision 
of  the  constitution  which  increased  the  representation  in  the 
Whig  strongholds  of  Burke,  Rutherford,  and  Buncombe 
counties.  The  roles  of  Newland  and  Spaight  in  the  contested 
election  nevertheless,  had  proven  a  major  disaster  for  the 
Democrats. 

Though  his  greatest  victory  was  in  the  mountain  area, 
Edward  B.  Dudley  showed  great  strength  throughout  the 
state.  He  defeated  Spaight  by  approximately  five  thousand 
votes.  He  trailed  in  the  East  by  about  three  thousand  votes, 

69  James  Graham  to  William  A.  Graham,  Washington,  April  4,  1836, 
William  A.  Graham  Papers,  University  of  North  Carolina  Library;  North 
Carolina  Standard,  April  14,  1836. 

70  Raleigh  Register,  September  6,  1836,  quoting  the  Fayetteville  Ob- 
server. 

71  James  Graham  to  William  A.  Graham,  Rutherfordton,  May  7,  1836, 
William  A.  Graham  Papers,  University  of  North  Carolina  Library. 

72  Joseph  W.  D.  Graham  to  William  A.  Graham,  Elm  Wood  Farm,  April 
21,  1836,  James  Graham  to  William  A.  Graham,  Washington,  May  7,  1836, 
William  A.  Graham  Papers,  University  of  North  Carolina  Library. 

73  Raleigh  Register,  August  23,  November  22,  1836. 

74  James  Graham  to  William  A.  Graham,  Rutherfordton,  August  20,  1836, 
William  A.  Graham  Papers,  University  of  North  Carolina  Library. 


The  Election  of  1836  in  North  Carolina  45 

but  had  an  eight  thousand  majority  in  the  West.75  The  Whigs 
considered  Dudley's  victory  a  great  party  triumph,  but  it 
was  due  in  large  part  to  personal  popularity  and  active  cam- 
paigning.76 Edward  B.  Dudley  ran  well  ahead  of  his  party. 

In  the  contests  for  the  state  legislature  almost  every  can- 
didate campaigned  on  national  issues.  Personal  popularity 
still  played  an  important  part,  but  comparatively  few  men 
won  elections  in  counties  which  disapproved  of  their  national 
stand.  Both  parties  had  put  forth  great  efforts  to  acquire  a 
majority  in  the  legislature.  County  meetings  named  candi- 
dates as  friends  of  White  or  Van  Buren,  and  every  effort 
was  made  to  get  the  strongest  candidates  to  make  the  race.77 
The  campaign  was  arduous,  and  there  were  few  men  able 
to  sit  back  and  win  on  their  reputations.  James  Graham  even 
demanded  that  his  highly  respected  brother  cut  short  his 
honeymoon  and  "go  among  the  people."  78  If  the  old  consti- 
tution had  not  been  amended  the  Democrats  would  have 
won  by  a  sizable  majority,  and  the  provision  which  gave 
each  county  at  least  one  member  of  the  House  of  Commons 
still  left  them  a  slight  advantage.  The  Whigs  won  a  majority 
of  two  in  the  Senate,  while  the  Democrats  had  the  same 
majority  in  the  House.79  The  August  elections  indicated  that 
the  Whigs  had  a  slight  majority  in  the  state,  but  by  no  means 
gave  a  clear  indication  that  the  people  of  the  state  strongly 
opposed  Martin  Van  Buren. 

The  Whigs,  nevertheless,  claimed  that  Dudley's  victory 
was  positive  proof  that  Judge  White  would  carry  the  state. 
They  placed  more  emphasis  on  Dudley's  charge  that  Van 
Buren  was  an  abolitionist  and  consequently  lessened  their 
association  with  distribution.  The  Democrats  were  more  ac- 
curate in  their  analysis  of  the  campaign.  Bedford  Brown 

75  Raleigh  Register,  November  22,  1836.  The  Register's  figures  give  Dud- 
ley a  majority  of  5,007.  The  official  returns  give  him  a  majority  of  4,043, 
but  three  counties  were  not  counted  in  the  official  returns.  The  returns  from 
the  three  counties  would  have  resulted  in  a  majority  of  4,729,  Free  Press, 
December  17,  1836. 

79  Raleigh  Register,  September  6,  1836. 

77  Hillsboro  Recorder,  February  29,  August  16,  23,  30,  1836;  Lewis 
Williams  to  William  A.  Graham,  Washington,  April  1,  1836,  William  A. 
Graham  Papers,  University  of  North  Carolina  Library. 

78  James  Graham  to  William  A.  Graham,  Vesuvius  Furnace,  May  15,  1836, 
William  A.  Graham  Papers,  University  of  North  Carolina  Library. 

79  Free  Press,  August  27,  1836. 


46  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

wrote  Van  Buren  that  Spaight's  defeat  was  due  in  part  to 
local  causes,  in  part  to  Democratic  opposition  to  distribution, 
and  especially  due  to  "the  gross  falsehoods  spread  abroad 
as  to  the  motives  of  Democrats  who  unseated  Graham." 
Brown  had  high  hopes  for  victory  in  November  and  prom- 
ised: "our  party  .  .  .  will  go  to  the  contest,  without  that  san- 
guine expectation  of  success,  which  often  proves  fatal  .  .  . 
and  at  the  same  time  without  despondence,  which  dis- 
courages exertion."  80 

The  Whigs  tried  their  utmost  to  portray  Van  Buren  as 
an  enemy  of  the  South.  They  charged  that  the  one  principle 
upon  which  "he  has  always  acted  was  opposition  to  South- 
ern interests. " 81  They  declared  that  he  had  supported  De- 
Witt  Clinton  instead  of  James  Madison  in  1812.  They  pointed 
to  his  vote  on  the  tariff  of  1828  and  called  him  a  champion 
of  protection.  They  pointed  to  his  vote  to  extend  the  Cum- 
berland road  and  called  him  an  advocate  of  federal  internal 
improvements.  They  declared  he  had  supported  free  Negro 
suffrage  in  New  York.82  The  Democrats  answered  that  Van 
Buren  was  a  moderate  on  the  tariff  issue  and  was  an  enemy 
of  internal  improvements.  They  charged  that  Judge  White 
was  a  friend  of  the  free  Negro  and  in  1823  had  placed  his 
arms  around  one  and  led  him  to  the  ballot  box.83  The  Demo- 
cratic organ  insisted  that  Van  Buren  had  worked  to  curtail 
free  Negro  voting,  and  all  of  his  views  were  "in  accordance 
with  the  interest  of  slaveholders."84 

The  Whigs  declared  that  on  the  subject  of  slavery  a  can- 
didate "must  not  only  agree  with  us,"  but  "be  above  sus- 
pision."  85  To  prove  that  Van  Buren  was  not  above  suspicion 
they  wrote  letters  asking  the  two  candidates  to  state  their 
position  on  abolition  of  slavery  in  the  District  of  Columbia. 
White,  as  expected,  declared  that  Congress  had  no  right  to 

^Bedford  Brown  to  Martin  Van  Buren,  October  11,  1836,  McPherson, 
"Letters  to  Van  Buren,"  770. 

81  Raleigh  Register,  August  2,   1836,  quoting  the  Miners   and  Farmers 
Journal. 

82  Raleigh  Register,  February  16,  1836,  quoting  the  Miners  and  Farmers 
Journal;  Hillsboro  Recorder,  October  26,  1836. 

83  North  Carolina  Standard,  November  10,  1836. 

84  North  Carolina  Standard,  July  10,  1835. 

85  Raleigh  Register,  August  2,   1836,  quoting  the  Miners   and  Farmers 
Journal. 


The  Election  of  1836  in  North  Carolina  47 

abolish  slavery.86  Van  Buren  called  abolition  in  the  District 
inexpedient  and  declared  that  it  would  violate  the  spirit 
of  the  agreement  between  the  federal  government  and  the 
states  of  Maryland  and  Virginia.  He  wrote,  "The  slave  ques- 
tion must  be  left  to  the  slave  holding  states  themselves  with- 
out molestation  .  .  .  from  any  quarter." 87  He  would  not 
say  that  Congress  had  no  power  to  interfere.  The  Whigs 
used  the  negative  phrase  to  declare  that  Van  Buren  conceded 
the  power  to  emancipate  and  asserted  his  views  differed 
none  from  "Tappan,  Garrison,  and  Company."  88 

The  Whigs  charged  Van  Buren's  running  mate  with  a  sin 
worse  than  abolition.  It  was  well  known  that  Johnson  lived 
with  a  Negro  mistress,  but  the  Whigs  were  not  satisfied 
merely  to  charge  him  with  immorality.  They  constantly  de- 
nounced him  as  an  amalgamationist.  At  a  banquet  in  Onslow 
County  a  Whig  partisan  offered  this  toast: 

.  .  .  Martin  Van  Buren,  an  abolitionist  and  Richard  M.  Johnson, 
an  amalgamationist.  ...  It  would  be  more  congenial  to  their 
habits  and  conformable  to  their  principles — the  one  to  preside 
over  the  destinies  of  Liberia,  the  other  to  multiply  and  increase 
his  subjects.89 

Toward  the  close  of  the  campaign  Starling  Gunn  of  Caswell 
County  issued  a  circular  emphasizing  Johnson's  private  life. 
He  charged  that  Johnson's  moral  character  was 

. .  .  stained  by  the  deepest  and  blackest  vices  known  to  moral  law. 
For  while  others  merely  insist  in  theory  upon  the  equality  of 
blacks  with  the  whites  and  the  propriety  of  amalgamating  the 
two  races,  he  has  reduced  their  principles  to  practice  by  taking 
to  his  embraces  a  NEGRO  WENCH,  and  making  her  the  wife 
of  his  bosom  and  the  mother  of  his  children.90 

The  circular  made  the  rounds  of  the  press  but  did  the  Demo- 
crats little  harm.  The  Whigs  had  failed  to  learn  that  excessive 
personal  abuse  does  the  dispenser  more  harm  than  good, 
and  the  voters  of  Gvmn's  county  would  cast  1,067  votes  for 

89  Hugh   Lawson  White  to  John   Timberlake   and   others,   May   2,   1836, 
Raleigh  Register,  June  14,  1836. 

87  Martin  Van  Buren  to  Junius  Amis  and  others,  March  6,  1836,  Free 
Press,  March  26,  1836. 

88  Raleigh  Register,  July  5,  1836,  quoting  the  Halifax  Minerva. 

89  Raleigh  Register,  September  20,  1836,  quoting  the  New  Bern  Spectator 
and  Literary  Journal. 

90  Starling  Gunn,  "To  the  Voters  of  Caswell  County,"  Hillsboro  Recorder, 
October  21,  1836. 


48  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 


91 


Van  Buren  and  Johnson  and  only  116  for  White  and  Tyler 
In  North  Carolina  the  questionable  sex  life  of  the  vice-presi- 
dential candidate  cost  the  Democrats  few  votes. 

While  the  Whigs  were  doing  their  utmost  to  arouse  sec- 
tional feelings  against  the  "abolitionist  and  the  amalgama- 
tionist,"  the  Democrats  were  preaching  unionism.  They  tried 
to  associate  the  Whigs  with  the  nullifiers,  and  almost  every 
well  known  North  Carolinian  who  had  sympathized  with 
nullification  was  supporting  White.  The  Democrats  asserted 
that  White's  supporters  wanted  a  pretext  to  dissolve  the 
union.92  Bedford  Brown  urged  the  voters  to  oppose  the  sec- 
tional candidate  and  defeat  the  opposition's  scheme  of 
dividing  North  and  South.  He  declared  that  only  through 
Republican  ascendancy  had  the  "Union  been  preserved," 
and  he  pleaded  with  all  loyal  citizens  to  support  the  national 
candidate.93 

The  Democrats  had  one  important  issue  in  their  favor. 
In  1836  gold  mining  ranked  second  to  agriculture  among 
North  Carolina's  industries.94  In  1834  Democrats  secured 
passage  of  a  law  to  mint  gold  dollars,  an  act  that  was  very 
popular  in  North  Carolina.  The  Democrats  declared  that  the 
law  showed  that  the  administration  had  provided  more 
stable  currency  than  the  "rag  currency"  of  the  national 
bank.95  The  Whigs  asserted  that  gold  coinage  was  less  prac- 
tical than  United  States  bank  notes,  yet  they  admitted  that 
the  act  would  uphold  the  price  of  North  Carolina  gold.96 

In  the  winter  of  1835  Thomas  H.  Benton  introduced  a 
bill  to  establish  three  mints  in  the  South,  one  to  be  at  Char- 
lotte, the  center  of  the  state's  gold  mining  region.  This  would 
mean  much  to  the  people  of  the  area;  gold  could  be  sold 
directly  to  the  mint  with  less  danger  of  theft;  transportation 
expenses  would  be  lessened;  and  a  ready  market  would 
always  be  available.  When  the  bill  was  before  Congress  the 

91  Raleigh  Register,  November  22,  1836. 

92  North  Carolina  Standard,  November  12, 1836. 

93  Bedford  Brown  to  James  Rainey  and  others,  September  17,  1836,  Free 
Press,  September  21,  1836. 

94 Fletcher  M.  Green,  "Gold  Mining:  A  Forgotten  Industry  of  Ante- 
Bellum  North  Carolina,"  North  Carolina  Historical  Review,  (January, 
April,  1937),  XIV,  1-19,  135-155. 

06  North  Carolina  Standard,  February  11,  1836. 

98  Carolina  Watchman,  July  12,  1834. 


The  Election  of  1836  in  North  Carolina  4& 

Standard  told  readers  that  Democrats  weife'trying  to; secure 
passage  of  the  bill  but  Henry  Clay  and  the  Whigs  were 
trying  to  defeat  it.97  Both  Willie  P.  Mangum  and  Bedford 
Brown  made  speeches  defending  the  bill,  and  it  became 
law.98  The  Register  insisted  that  southern  Whigs  were  re- 
sponsible for  passage  of  the  law,  and  the  Western  Caro- 
linian gave  Calhoun  the  credit.99  The  Standard  would  not 
let  the  opposition  take  credit  for  the  measure  and  pointed 
out  that  in  the  Senate  thirteen  of  seventeen  Democrats  sup- 
ported the  bill  while  only  ten  of  the  twenty-five  Whigs  gave 
it  their  vote.100  As  the  election  drew  near  the  mint  was  almost 
ready  to  begin  operation;  the  Democrats  commented  favor- 
ably on  the  developments  of  the  institution  and  reminded 
readers  that  their  party  had  brought  it  to  North  Carolina.101 

Toward  the  close  of  the  campaign  the  Democrats  loudly 
warned  against  the  possibility  of  an  election  by  the  House 
of  Representatives.  In  early  October  they  issued  a  pamphlet 
emphasizing  that  if  the  people  of  North  Carolina  voted  for 
White  they  would  be  doing  "all  that  is  in  their  power  to  do 
towards  preventing  an  election  of  President  by  the  peo- 
ple." 102  They  pointed  out  that  148  electoral  votes  were  need- 
ed to  win  the  election,  and  even  if  White  should  carry  every 
state  where  he  was  running  he  would  receive  only  ninety-four 
votes.  They  asserted  that  the  Whigs  had  no  intention  of 
electing  White  president,  and  argued  that  if  the  new  presi- 
dent were  elected  by  the  House  he  would  owe  his  election, 
not  to  the  people,  but  to  scheming  politicians  at  Washington. 
Every  issue  of  the  Standard  denounced  the  "pie-bald  party" 
and  insisted  that  the  Whigs  had  made  a  "tool"  of  "poor 
dottering  old  Judge  White"  in  order  to  transfer  the  election 
to  the  House.103 

During  the  final  month  of  the  campaign  Democrats  "ex- 
posed" a  plan  of  North  Carolina  Whigs  to  transfer  the  vote 
of  the  state  to  William  Henry  Harrison.  Joseph  Seawell  Jones, 

97  North  Carolina  Standard,  February  20,  1835. 

98  North  Carolina  Standard,  March  6,  27,  1835. 

99  Raleigh  Register,  March  18,  1835;  Western  Carolinian,  April  25,  1835. 

100  North  Carolina  Standard,  March  27,  1836. 
ioi  North  Carolina  Standard,  January  28,  1836. 

102  William  H.  Haywood,  Jr.,  and  others,  "An  Address  to  the  Freemen  of 
North  Carolina,"  quoted  in  the  Free  Press,  October  15,  1836. 

103  North  Carolina  Standard,  October  13,  1836. 


50  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

a  young  Whig,  who  liked  to  exaggerate  his  own  importance, 
was  visiting  in  New  York  City  and  attended  a  banquet  honor- 
ing Harrison.  Jones  announced  that  North  Carolina  Whigs 
would  support  Harrison  if  White  could  not  be  elected.  An 
observer  reported  his  comment  to  a  New  York  newspaper, 
and  North  Carolina  Democrats  spotted  the  notice  and  gave 
it  wide  publicity.  The  Standard  identified  Jones  as  a  his- 
torian who  had  violently  denounced  Jefferson  and  hence  was 
good  company  for  "federalist- Whigs."  Editor  White  asked: 

Will  the  .  .  .  Whigs  and  Nullifiers  of  North  Carolina  thank  this 
.  .  .  representative  for  letting  "the  cat  out  of  the  wallet" — for 
blabbing  forth  over  his  cups  what  his  fellow  Whigs  at  home 
are  making  such  efforts  to  conceal — for  revealing  the  secret  that 
the  nullifiers  and  their  allies  .  .  .  are  ready  and  willing  to  go  for 
Harrison,  the  notorious  emancipationist,  the  tariffite  and  corrup- 
tion bank  advocate?  .  .  .  That  Mr.  Jones  while  puffed  up  with 
flattery  and  mellowed  with  wine  has  told  the  truth  about  his 
party,  every  intelligent  politician  .  .  .  knows  full  well.104 

Philo  White  concluded  that  Jones'  remarks  constituted  posi- 
tive proof  that  the  Whig  electors  intended  to  vote  for  Har- 
rison. 

The  Whig  Central  Committee  denounced  the  Standard's 
charge  as  a  "Base  Calumny,  wholly  destitute  of  truth."105 
But  the  damage  was  already  done.  Even  had  Jones  not 
"let  the  cat  out  of  the  wallet,"  it  was  still  logical  that  Harrison 
would  be  the  second  choice  of  the  Whigs,  and  many  intel- 
ligent non-partisans  realized  that  to  vote  for  White  would 
increase  the  likelihood  of  Harrison  or  Webster  becoming 
president.  The  Free  Press  (Tarboro),  declared,  "The  people 
now  see  that  White  has  no  chance  to  be  elected,  and  they 
will  not  throw  votes  away  on  him  to  help  Harrison— a  man 
who  longs  to  see  the  day  when  the  sun  will  not  shine  on  a 
negro  slave." 106  Although  Harrison  was  no  more  of  an  abo- 
litionist than  Van  Buren  he  too,  was  a  northern  man,  and 
the  political  effect  of  the  sectional  prejudice  which  the  Whigs 
had  tried  so  hard  to  arouse  was  greatly  lessened.  The  Demo- 
crats had  presented  convincing  arguments  that  White  could 

104  North  Carolina  Standard,  November  3,  1836.  Jones  was  the  author  of 
A  Defence  of  the  Revolutionary  History  of  North  Carolina  from  the  As- 
persions of  Mr.  Jefferson  (Raleigh,  1834). 

105  Raleigh  Register,  November  8,  1836. 
*»  Free  Press,  November  5,  1836. 


The  Election  of  1836  in  North  Carolina  51 

not  be  elected,  and  many  men  who  favored  him  stayed  away 
from  the  polls. 

Almost  ten  thousand  fewer  people  voted  in  November 
than  had  voted  in  August.  By  a  vote  of  29,910  to  23,626  the 
people  of  North  Carolina  voted  for  Van  Buren  electors.107 
The  Whigs  blamed  apathy  and  overconfidence  for  their  de- 
feat and  insisted  that  "party  drilling"  was  responsible  for  the 
Democratic  victory.108  The  Democrats  did  have  an  effective 
organization,  but  probably  no  better  than  the  Whigs.  One 
factor  in  determining  the  result  was  that  a  large  percentage 
of  the  voters  in  North  Carolina  were  unwilling  to  follow  a 
sectional  party;  and  Van  Buren's  victory,  in  a  sense,  was  a 
triumph  of  unionism  over  southern  sectionalism.  Yet  the 
realization  that  White  could  not  possibly  be  elected  by  the 
people  was  primarily  responsible  for  Van  Buren's  success. 
In  spite  of  Van  Buren's  victory  there  were  probably  more 
Whigs  in  the  state  than  Democrats,  and  Hugh  Lawson  White 
was  certainly  more  popular  than  Martin  Van  Buren.  In 
North  Carolina,  as  in  the  nation,  the  people  had  refused  to 
transfer  the  election  of  president  to  the  House  of  Representa- 
tives. 


*"  Niles  Register,  LI,  228.  It  stated  that  its  figures  constituted  the 
"official  returns."  See  also  Norton,  Democratic  Party,  86;  Herbert  D.  Pegg, 
"  Whig  Party  in  North  Carolina,"  (unpublished  doctoral  dissertation,  Uni- 
versity of  North  Carolina,  Chapel  Hill,  1932),  154.  J.  G.  de  R.  Hamilton, 
Party  Politics  in  North  Carolina,  1835-1860,  volume  XV  of  James  Sprunt 
Historical  Publications  (Raleigh,  1916),  41.  Hamilton  and  Pegg  give 
Van  Buren  a  majority  of  9,240.  Norton  states  that  Van  Buren's  majority 
was  15,240.  The  Raleigh  Register  gives  figures  from  each  county  and  shows 
Van  Buren  with  a  majority  of  3,660.  The  North  Carolina  Standard  pub- 
lishes less  complete  returns  and  gives  Van  Buren  a  majority  of  3,200. 

108  Raleigh  Register,  November  29,  1836. 


"THE  GREAT  RECONSTRUCTOR:" 

GENERAL  E.  R.  S.  CANBY  AND  THE 

SECOND  MILITARY  DISTRICT 

By  Max  L.  Heyman,  Jr. 

Congress,  under  Radical  leadership,  began  passing  its 
"Reconstruction"  legislation  in  March,  1867.  It  divided  the 
ex-Confederate  states  into  five  military  districts,  each  of 
which  was  to  be  commanded  by  a  general  officer  of  the 
United  States  Army.  It  set  up  a  procedure  by  which  these 
states  might  be  restored  to  the  Union,  stipulating  that  con- 
stitutional conventions  were  to  be  held  in  each  of  them. 
Colored  residents  were  to  have  a  part  in  choosing  delegates 
to  those  bodies,  but  the  whites  who  were  disqualified  under 
the  provisions  of  the  proposed  fourteenth  amendment  to  the 
Federal  Constitution  for  having  supported  the  Confederacy 
were  to  be  excluded  from  voting.  The  constitutions  framed 
by  the  conventions  were  to  provide  permanently  for  Negro 
suffrage,  at  the  same  time  disqualifying  the  leaders  of  the 
late  Confederacy.  After  the  charters  had  been  ratified  by 
a  majority  of  the  qualified  voters  in  each  state,  and  after 
the  legislatures  elected  under  those  new  constitutions  had 
ratified  the  fourteenth  amendment  (the  fifteenth  was  added 
later)  and  it  had  become  law,  the  states  might  then  "be 
entitled  to  representation  in  Congress."  The  generals  as- 
signed to  command  the  southern  districts  were  authorized 
to  initiate  the  movement  for  satisfying  these  requirements.1 

In  the  second  of  these  military  districts,  Major  General 
Daniel  E.  Sickles  commanded— but  not  for  very  long.  His 
interference  with  the  operation  of  the  United  States  Circuit 
Court  in  North  Carolina,  over  which  Chief  Justice  Salmon  P. 
Chase  presided,  incurred  the  Attorney-General's  displeasure 
and  impelled  the  President  to  remove  Sickles  and  to  appoint 

1  The  Acts  of  March  2  and  23,  1867.  See  Statutes  at  Large  .  .  .  of  the 
United  States,  XIV,  428-429,  and  XV,  2.  Hereafter  cited  as  Statutes  at 
Large.  "The  Great  Reconstructed"  is  the  title  given  General  Canby  by  the 
New  York  Tribune.  See  also  the  Daily  Richmond  Whig,  August  3,  1869. 


[52] 


"The  Great  Reconstruction"  53 

Brigadier  General  and  Brevet  Major  General  E.  R.  S.  Canby 
in  his  stead.2 

In  consequence  of  that  action,  General  Canby  was  to  be 
intimately  involved  in  the  important  work  of  reconstruction 
in  North  and  South  Carolina  for  the  ensuing  year.  The  prob- 
lems and  conditions  that  he  faced  in  helping  to  effect  the 
return  of  the  Carolinas  to  the  fold  of  the  Union  were  the 
same  as  or  similar  to  those  which  confronted  the  other  major 
generals  who  commanded  districts  in  the  South.  His  duties 
under  the  congressional  plan  of  Reconstruction  were  pri- 
marily "ministerial"  in  character,  but  the  manner  in  which 
he  approached  and  performed  them  drastically  affected  the 
states  he  was  appointed  to  govern.  These  states  were  in  no 
position  to  prevent  the  institution  of  the  radical-made  re- 
quirements for  their  readmission  and,  within  reason,  they 
were  subject  to  Canby's  every  command.  Although  the 
authorities  of  North  and  South  Carolina  complained  vigor- 
ously about  many  of  his  actions,  the  Carolinas  fared  better 
than  did  most  of  the  states  administered  by  the  other  district 
commanders. 

General  Canby's  arrival  in  Charleston,  South  Carolina, 
was  greeted  by  a  thirteen-gun  salute  and  3.12  inches  of  rain.3 
That  was  followed  by  "close  and  stifling"  weather  and  the 
welcoming  calls  of  the  mayor  and  aldermen  and  various 
other  gentlemen.4  Meanwhile,  Louisa  Canby,  the  general's 
wife,  was  receiving  "quite  a  number  of  the  first  ladies  of  the 
city."  They  created  a  "very  favorable  impression."  The  muni- 
cipal authorities  went  away  seemingly  "satisfied"  with  the 
change  in  commanders,  while  the  women  were  reported  as 

aAppleton's  American  Annual  Cyclopedia,  1867  (Washington,  1868), 
547-548.  (Hereafter  cited  as  Appleton's  Annual  Cyclopedia.)  Also  see 
J.  G.  de  R.  Hamilton,  Reconstruction  in  North  Carolina  (New  York,  1914), 
231-232.  Hereafter  cited  as  Hamilton,  Reconstruction  in  North  Carolina. 
See  J.  P.  Hollis,  Early  Period  of  Reconstruction  in  South  Carolina  (Balti- 
more, 1905),  70-71.  Cited  hereafter  as  Hollis,  Reconstruction  in  South 
Carolina.  Also  see  "Report  of  the  Secretary  of  War,"  House  Executive 
Document  No.  1,  Fortieth  Congress,  Second  Session,  23,  for  General  Order 
No.  80,  August  27,  1867,  by  which  the  President  directed  this  action. 

3  Canby  assumed  command  on  September  5,  1867.  See  General  Order 
No.  85,  Second  Military  District,  "General  Orders-Reconstruction,"  House 
Executive  Document  No.  34-2,  Fortieth  Congress,  Second  Session,  60. 
Thirteen  guns  is  a  major  general's  salute.  Charleston  Daily  News,  Sep- 
tember 6,  16,  1867.  The  rainfall  figures  are  for  September  8. 

*  Charleston  Daily  News,  September  9,  10,  1867. 


54  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

being  "highly  delighted"  with  the  reception  Mrs.  Canby 
had  accorded  them.5  Otherwise,  no  one  ventured  forth  onto 
the  "red  hot"  streets,  unless,  of  course,  it  was  absolutely 
necessary.6 

The  civic  and  society  leaders  of  Charleston  were  not  the 
only  ones  interested  in  the  new  commanding  general.  Nearly 
everybody  in  the  two  states  comprising  the  Second  Military 
District  was  curious  about  him,  and  the  newspapers  of  North 
and  South  Carolina  obligingly  printed  articles  relating  his 
history.7  These  were  accompanied  by  comments,  that  of 
the  Charleston  Mercury  being: 

In  his  opinions  he  is  said  to  be  a  moderate  Republican,  who 
takes  no  prominent  part  in  politics  and  cares  but  little  to  have 
anything  to  do  with  political  affairs.8 

It  hoped  that  this  was  so. 

Nevertheless,  the  Charleston  Courier  revealed  that  while 
he  was  not  a  politician  or  a  partisan  he  firmly  believed  in  the 
efficacy  of  the  Reconstruction  acts  and  thought  that  it  was 
the  duty  of  all  Southerners  to  accept  the  terms  which  had 
been  offered  them.  The  letter  which  the  Courier  quoted, 
supposedly  from  a  personal  friend  of  Canby,  concluded  on 
this  note:  "He  will  be  found  just  to  all,  but  corruption  or 

6  Charleston  Daily  News,  September  28,  1867.  Also  see  the  Raleigh 
Register,  September  24,  1867. 

8  Charleston  Daily  News,  September  10,  1867. 

7  In  1867  Canby  was  fifty  years  old.  After  graduating  from  West  Point 
in  1839,  he  served  in  the  Florida  War  until  1842,  on  the  Great  Lakes 
frontier,  1842-1846,  in  the  Mexican  War  (where  he  won  two  brevets  for 
gallant  and  meritorious  conduct),  in  California  during  the  gold  rush,  on 
the  Minnesota  frontier,  1855-1857,  in  the  "Mormon  War,"  and  against  the 
Navajo  Indians  in  1860-1861.  In  command  of  the  Department  of  New 
Mexico,  Canby,  by  then  a  colonel,  repulsed  the  Confederate  invasion  of  that 
territory  in  1862.  Ordered  to  Washington,  he  became  military  assistant  to 
the  Secretary  of  War,  an  office  which  he  held  until  May,  1864,  except  for 
four  months  in  1863  when  he  was  in  command  of  the  troops  that  quelled 
the  draft  riots  in  New  York  City.  Appointed  a  major  general  of  volunteers, 
Canby  was  assigned  to  command  the  Military  Division  of  West  Mississippi, 
a  capacity  in  which  he  received  the  surrender  of  the  last  two  Confederate 
armies  in  the  field.  Thereafter  his  attention  was  directed  to  the  problems  of 
reconstruction,  first  in  Louisiana  (under  the  presidential  plan  for  re- 
storing the  southern  states  to  the  Union)  and  subsequently,  after  this 
Carolina  interlude,  in  Texas  and  Virginia  (under  the  congressional  plan). 
Following  his  service  in  the  South,  Canby  was  assigned  to  command  the 
Department  of  Columbia,  where  on  April  11,  1873,  he  was  assassinated  by 
the  Modoc  Indians  during  a  peace  conference.  For  a  study  of  his  life  see 
Max  L.  Heyman,  Jr.,  "Prudent  Soldier:  A  Biography  of  Major  General 
E.  R.  S.  Canby,  1817-1873"  (doctoral  dissertation,  University  of  California, 
Los  Angeles,  1952). 

8  Charleston  Mercury,  August  30,  1867. 


"The  Great  Reconstruction"  55 

disaffection  in  any  guise  will  find  him  utterly  inapproach- 
able."9 

With  that,  the  "Old  Soldier,"  who  had  served  with  Canby 
at  Fort  Bridger  in  the  Utah  Territory  and  had  submitted  the 
sketch  of  the  general  which  the  Daily  Sentinel  published, 
agreed. 

Let  all  politicians,  red,  white,  or  green,  stay  away  from  him, 
and  he  will  do  justice  to  all.  Certainly  I  know  this;  he  is  firm, 
he  knows  no  party,  and  he  obeys  the  instructions  and  orders  of 
his  superiors.10 

This  veteran,  for  one,  was  convinced  that  North  and  South 
Carolina  were  fortunate  to  have  Canby  for  a  military  gov- 
ernor. 

The  Charleston  Daily  News  was  skeptical,  "tilt  may  be 
that  Canby  .  .  .  will  prove  less  objectionable  to  the  people  of 
the  Carolinas  than  General  Sickles.  We  say  all  this  may  be. 
There  can  be  no  certainty  on  this  point."11  Simultaneously, 
the  Charleston  Courier  was  expressing  the  hope  of  the  Caro- 
linas when  it  declared: 

He  has  no  other  option  than  to  enforce  the  Reconstruction  Acts. 
It  is  believed,  however,  that  he  will  administer  these  in  a  spirit 
of  justice  and  liberality,  without  prejudice  or  passion,  and  with 
a  desire  only  for  the  general  welfare  and  for  a  harmonious 
restoration.12 

There  can  be  no  doubt,  after  a  careful  examination  of  the 
record,  that  the  acts  were  administered  with  strict  justice, 
without  the  intense  prejudice  or  passion  which  is  usually 
associated  with  the  period,  and  for  what  Canby  conceived  to 
be  the  general  welfare.  Whether  one  thinks  that  the  justice 
meted  out  was  impartially  determined,  or  that  Canby  was 
influenced  more  by  the  "radicals"  than  by  the  "conserva- 
tives," depends  mainly  upon  which  side  of  the  fence  the 
reader  happens  to  be. 

The  New  York  Tribune  once  remarked  that  "no  one  has 
ever  called  Canby  a  Radical"; 13  but,  after  experiencing  the 

9  Charleston  Courier,  September  3,  1867;  Chronicle  (Washington,  D.  C), 
August  30,  1867. 

10 Daily  Sentinel  (Raleigh),  September  11,  1867. 

u  Charleston  Daily  News,  August  30,  1867. 

12  Charleston  Courier,  August  30,  1867. 

18  Quoted  in  the  Charleston  Mercury,  August  30,  1867. 


56  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

general's  actions  for  a  while,  Governor  Jonathan  Worth  of 
North  Carolina  did.  That  "quiet  little  old  gentleman"  of  sixty- 
five,  who  was  as  "sharp  as  a  briar," 14  was  led  to  declare  that 
"in  giving  us  Canby  for  Sickles  the  Prest.  swapped  a  devil  for 
a  witch."  15  He  regarded  Canby  as  an  "honest  man,"  but  "an 
unostentatious  and  candid  Radical"  who  cooperated  "cordial- 
ly" with  the  less  vindictive  portion  of  Congress.16 

On  another  occasion,  he  labeled  Canby  "an  extreme  Radi- 
cal," who  was  incapable  of  "magnanimous  and  statesman- 
like" views.17  He  considered  him  "a  fool,"  "more  tyrannical" 
and  possessed  of  "less  intelligence  and  consideration"  for  the 
people  of  the  "Tar  Heel"  State  than  his  predecessor.18  Indeed, 
after  an  interview  with  the  general,  Worth  advised  the  gov- 
ernor of  Georgia  that  "Our  military  comt.  is,  com  amove,  a 
Radical."  Canby  assured  him,  Worth  declared,  that  "the 
laws  he  is  appointed  to  execute,  are  not  only  constitutional, 
but  wise."  The  general,  moreover,  believed  that  these  meas- 
ures invested  him  "with  unlimited  despotic  power"  over 
the  laws  and  constitutions  of  North  and  South  Carolina. 
Furthermore,  Worth  asserted,  Canby  maintained  these 
views  "as  a  narrow  minded  conscientious  Radical."19  No 
other  person  was  so  outspoken  in  his  criticism  of  General 
Canby  as  was  Jonathan  Worth. 

Worth's  judgment  of  Canby  was,  however,  very  probably 
influenced  by  the  fact  that,  from  his  standpoint,  the  new 
district  commander  was  less  cooperative  than  General 
Sickles  had  been.  Whereas  Sickles  had  favorably  entertained 
his  suggestions,  Canby,  the  governor  felt,  all  too  frequently 
ignored  him,  and  even  when  his  views  were  solicited  by  the 

14  Charleston  Daily  News,  October  18,  1867,  quoting  the  Chronicle 
(Columbia). 

15  Jonathan  Worth  to  B.  G.  Worth,  December  26,  1867,  J.  G.  deR.  Hamil- 
ton (ed.),  The  Correspondence  of  Jonathan  Worth  (Raleigh,  1909),  II, 
1095.  Hereafter  cited  as  Hamilton,  Worth  Correspondence. 

"Jonathan  Worth  to  B.  G.  Worth,  October  25,  1867,  Hamilton,  Worth 

"Jonathan  Worth  to  John  W.  Wheeler,  October  31,  1867,  Hamilton, 
Worth  Correspondence,  II,  1071. 

18  Jonathan  Worth  to  R.  P.  Dick,  December  13,  1867,  and  Jonathan  Worth 
to  W.  A.  Graham,  January  10,  1868,  Hamilton,  Worth  Correspondence, 
II,  1085  and  1131. 

"Jonathan  Worth  to  Governor  Charles  J.  Jenkins,  January  3,  1868, 
Hamilton,  Worth  Correspondence,  II,  1105-1106. 


"The  Great  Reconstruction"  57 

general  they  seldom  seemed  to  carry  much  weight.20  Besides, 
from  Worth's  staunch  conservative  point  of  view,  Canby's 
actions  appeared  radical.  It  must  be  remembered  that  no 
matter  what  Canby  did  in  pursuance  of  orders,  the  subjected 
whites  under  his  control  (except  the  radical  elements,  of 
course)  deemed  his  actions  illegal  and  unnecessary. 

Canby's  part  in  the  process  known  as  Congressional  Re- 
construction was  governed  by  the  act  of  March  2,  1867,  and 
the  acts  of  March  23,  and  July  19,  1867,  supplementary 
thereto. 

By  the  first  of  these  measures,  he  was  enjoined 

...  to  protect  all  persons  in  their  rights  of  person  and  property, 
to  suppress  insurrection,  disorder,  and  violence,  and  to  punish,  or 
cause  to  be  punished,  all  disturbers  of  the  public  peace  and 
criminals.  .  .  . 

He  was  authorized  to  allow  the  local  courts  "to  take  jurisdic- 
tion of  and  to  try  offenders,"  but  when,  in  his  judgment,  it 
became  necessary,  he  was  empowered  "to  organize  military 
commissions  or  tribunals  for  that  purpose.  ..."  Thereupon, 
"all  interference  under  color  of  State  authority  with  the 
exercise  of  military  authority"  was  to  be  "null  and  void."  21 

In  endeavoring  to  provide  the  greatest  possible  protection 
for  the  people  of  the  Carolinas,  Canby  stationed  his  force  of 
nearly  3,000  officers  and  men  at  points  difficult  of  access, 
where  disturbances  were  most  likely  to  occur,  and  from 
which  he  might  easily  meet  any  unusual  situation.  In  South 
Carolina,  for  example,  he  concentrated  eight  companies  in 
the  seaboard  region,  six  in  the  central  section,  two  in  the 
comparatively  small  Savannah  River  District,  and  two  in  the 
western  or  mountain  country  of  the  state.  This  arrangement 
was  made  on  the  basis  of  the  ratio  of  whites  to  colored  people 

30  Hamilton,  Reconstruction  in  North  Carolina,  240 ;  see  Worth  to  Canby, 
January  23,  1868,  Jonathan  Worth  Letter  Books  (North  Carolina  State 
Department  of  Archives  and  History,  Raleigh).  Worth  compares  the  ac- 
tions of  the  two  district  commanders  in  his  letter  to  John  H.  Wheeler, 
October  31,  1867,  Hamilton,  Worth  Correspondence,  II,  1069-1072. 

91  Statutes  at  Large,  XIV,  428. 


58  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

in  each  of  those  areas,  their  attitude  toward  one  another, 
and  the  existing  means  of  communication.22 

James  L.  Orr,  governor  of  the  "Palmetto"  State,  expostu- 
lated against  this  disposition  of  the  troops.  Since  the  state 
was  not  permitted  to  organize  its  militia,  the  army  was  the 
sole  reliance  in  case  of  trouble  and  Orr  felt  that  the  presence 
of  the  troops  was  indispensable  to  the  "certain  preservation 
of  peace  and  order."  He  contended  that  a  unit  ought  to  be 
posted  at  every  one  of  the  county  seats.23 

If  that  proposal  were  carried  out,  Canby  explained  to  the 
governor,  it  would  reduce  the  military  to  a  simple  constabu- 
lary force  and  render  it  "utterly  useless"  in  event  of  any 
serious  difficulty  between  the  two  races.24  "I  believe  that 
every  district  in  this  State  wishes  to  have  troops,"  Canby 
told  General  Grant.  The  people  wanted  a  small  guard  in  each 
village  because  it  gave  them  a  greater  feeling  of  security 
and  because  it  dispersed  the  army  payroll  among  a  larger 
segment  of  the  population.  More  than  that,  it  relieved  the 
inhabitants  of  their  ordinary  police  duties.25  Yet,  when  a 
community  had  troops  stationed  in  it,  its  residents  com- 
plained constantly  about  the  soldiers'  conduct.26 

This  desire  to  have  the  troops  everywhere  was,  of  course, 
merely  a  manifestation  of  the  uneasiness  in  some,  if  not 
most,  sections  of  the  state.  Canby  was  "sorry  to  see"  it,  for 
the  excitement  tended  "naturally  and  inevitably"  to  give  a 
"coloring  or  suspicion  of  wrong"  to  perfectly  legal  and  harm- 
less acts  on  the  part  of  the  Negro.  The  general  was  satisfied 

22  Canby  to  the  Chief  of  Staff,  Headquarters  of  the  Army,  December  23, 
1867,  Second  Military  District,  Letters  Sent,  No.  1891,  1867.  Canby  had 
thiry-seven  companies  at  his  disposal.  See  Return,  February,  1868,  Second 
Military  District,  Letter  Sent,  No.  1012,  1868.  All  the  material  on  the  dis- 
trict, unless  otherwise  indicated,  may  be  found  in  the  War  Records  Divi- 
sion, National  Archives. 

23  Governor  James  L.  Orr  to  Canby,  November  29  and  December  18,  1867, 
Governor  Orr's  Letter  Books,  III,  237-239,  329.  Governor  Orr's  Letter  Books 
are  located  at  the  Historical  Commission  of  South  Carolina,  Columbia. 
Hereafter  referred  to  as  Orr  Letter  Books. 

24  Canby  to  Orr,  December  24,  1867,  Letters  of  Edward  R.  S.  Canby, 
Historical  Commission  of  South  Carolina.  Hereafter  cited  as  Canby  Letters. 

25  Canby  to  Grant,  December  18,  1867  and  Canby  to  Chief  of  Staff,  De- 
cember 23,  1867,  Second  Military  District,  Letters  Sent,  Nos.  1826  and 
1891,  1867. 

28  See  Lt.  Louis  V.  Caziarc,  Assistant  Adjutant  General,  to  Messrs.  T.  B. 
Whaley,  I.  G.  W.  Strowmann,  and  others,  Orangeburg,  S.  C,  September  17, 
1867,  Second  Military  District,  Letters  Sent,  No.  696,  1867. 


"The  Great  Reconstruction"  59 

that  the  freedmen  did  not  want  to  make  trouble.  As  a  matter 
of  fact,  he  was  persuaded  that  they  were  "quite  as  appre- 
hensive as  the  whites.  ..."  But  this  mutual  fear  and  distrust 
could  lead  to  disorders.27  The  cry  of  "negro  insurrection" 
had  been  used  so  much  for  political  effect  that  any  incident 
was  greatly  magnified  out  of  all  proportion  to  its  actual 
significance.28 

To  forestall  any  outbreaks  of  this  nature,  newspaper  re- 
ports and  complaints  registered  by  individuals  were  prompt- 
ly followed  up.  On  October  31,  for  instance,  Governor  On- 
informed  Canby  that  he  had  "reliable"  information  that  some 
300  freedmen  of  the  Abbeville  District  in  the  western  part  of 
the  state  were  meeting  regularly  every  other  week  to  drill 
and  "as  they  say  preparing  to  fight  for  land."  The  governor 
requested  the  general  to  take  steps  to  prohibit  the  Negroes 
from  assembling  and  to  punish  the  ringleaders  as  their 
crimes  deserved.29 

"Complaints  of  this  kind  are  not  at  all  new,"  Canby  re- 
plied. They  were  frequently  made  and,  upon  investigation,  it 
was  usually  found  that  the  meetings  were  not  unlawful  in 
character  or  for  any  illegal  purpose.  In  this  case,  the  special 
agent  whom  he  had  dispatched  to  the  scene  reported  that 
the  Negroes  had  been  in  the  habit  of  assembling  there  and 
elsewhere  for  some  time  past.  Nevertheless,  those  guilty  of 
violating  any  police  regulations  had  been  arrested  and 
brought  to  trial  before  a  military  commission. 

Some  of  the  freedmen  were  found  to  be  carrying  arms, 
allegedly  to  protect  themselves  against  attack  by  the  whites. 
The  fact  that  threats  had  been  made  against  them  was  be- 
yond doubt.  Whether  serious  or  not,  the  Negroes  believed 
that  they  were  made  in  earnest  and  had  prepared  to  resist 
any  attempt  to  break  up  their  meetings.  Aside  from  that, 
Canby  assured  the  governor,  there  was  no  evidence  that 
anything  was  brewing.  If  a  collision  did  occur,  Canby  in- 
sisted, it  would  be  "without  intention  on  the  part  of  the 

27  Canby  to  Chief  of  Staff,  November  30,  1867,  Second  Military  District, 
Letters  Sent,  No.  1560,  1867. 

28  Canby  to  Chief  of  Staff,  December  12,  1867,  Second  Military  District, 
Letters  Sent,  No.  1867,  1867. 

29  Orr  to  Canby,  October  31,  1867,  Orr  Letter  Books,  III,  188. 


60  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

negroes  and  from  provocation  on  the  part  of  ignorant  or 
unprincipled  whites." 

He  pointed  out  that  the  possession  of  firearms  by  the 
Negroes  was  still  a  novelty,  and  that  the  fears  excited  were 
not  unnatural.  But  it  seemed  unreasonable  to  him  to  assume 
that  they  were  to  be  used  for  hostile  purposes  and  that 
"every  assemblage  of  negroes  is  to  drill  preparatory  to 
fighting  for  land."  Dressing  in  old  army  clothes  was  not 
peculiar  to  South  Carolina  or  to  the  freedmen  and,  the  gen- 
eral chided  Governor  Orr: 

I  have  known  the  same  complaint  of  waste  of  time  in  attending 
political  meetings  to  be  made  of  white  men,  when  the  question 
involved  did  not  touch  their  interests  so  nearly  as  those  now 
involved  do  touch  the  present  and  future  interests  of  the  negroes. 

Of  course,  Canby  mollified  him  in  conclusion,  he  intended 
to  watch  the  situation  closely,  and  was  ready  to  control  and 
check  immediately  any  "wrong  tendency"  that  might  arise.30 

On  another  occasion,  Governor  Orr  sent  Canby  an  article 
from  the  Winnsboro  News,  telling  of  an  "incendiary"  speech 
delivered  by  a  colored  magistrate  in  Fairfield  County.  Again, 
Orr  requested  Canby  to  "depute  a  decent  officer"  to  inquire 
into  the  matter  and  to  remove  and  punish  this  military  ap- 
pointee if  the  report  proved  correct.31 

The  investigation  disclosed  that  the  News'  version  of  the 
speech  was,  as  Canby  had  suspected,32  "a  great  perversion" 
of  what  had  been  said.33  The  governor  thereupon  became 
very  indignant,  maintaining  that  Canby  had  prejudged  the 
affair,  and  he,  therefore,  childishly  refused  to  forward  the 
evidence  which  he  had  in  his  possession.34 

That  brings  up  an  important  point.  Much  of  the  evidence 
available  in  this  period  conflicts.  The  facts  were  subject  to 
more  than  one  interpretation  and  there  was  doubtless  some 
falsification  of  them.  There  is  no  reason  to  believe,  however, 


30  Canby  to  Orr,  November  25,  1867,  Second  Military  District,  Letters 
Sent,  No.  1499,  1867. 
81  Orr  to  Canby,  November  27,  1867,  Orr  Letter  Books,  III,  230-232. 

32  Orr  to  Canby,  December  18,  1867,  Orr  Letter  Books,  III,  331. 

33  Second  Military  District,  Letters  Received,  J59,  1867,  is  the  report.  See 
also  Canby  to  Orr,  December  24,  1867,  Canby  Letters. 

34  Orr  to  Canby,  December  18,  1867,  Orr  Letter  Books,  III,  331-332. 


"The  Great  Reconstruction"  61 

that  either  the  governor  or  General  Canby  ever  engaged  in 
this  misdeed  intentionally.  They  merely  took  the  word  of 
their  informants  or  subordinates  to  whom  they  entrusted 
the  investigation  of  these  reports.  They  could  not  be  every- 
where themselves.  Canby  could  not  avoid  making  some  mis- 
takes, but,  where  the  evidence  does  not  agree,  his  informa- 
tion has  been  given  precedence,  for  that  was  the  basis  upon 
which  he  acted. 

In  maintaining  order  throughout  the  district,  Canby  pre- 
ferred to  leave  the  enforcement  of  the  laws  to  the  local 
authorities.  These  officers  had  been  placed,  by  General 
Sickles,  under  the  supervisory  control  of  the  provost  marshal 
general  of  the  command35  and  "in  direct  relation  and  corre- 
spondence" with  the  several  post  commanders.  General  Can- 
by  continued  this  policy,  but,  while  defining  more  clearly 
and  fully  that  relationship,  he  counseled  non-interference 
with  their  activities.  Only  where  those  officials  refused  or 
failed  to  act,  or  "when  it  became  mainfest  that  from  past 
political  action  or  by  reason  of  prejudice  against  color  or 
caste,  impartial  justice  would  not  be  administered,"  did  he 
authorize  intervention  in  the  usual  mode  of  procedure.36 

Canby  was  especially  disturbed  by  the  prejudice  shown 
by  various  civil  functionaries.  He  discovered  that  some  of 
the  local  magistrates  were  unwilling  to  investigate  "well 
founded"  complaints  made  by  freedmen  against  white  men. 
They  were  governed  by  "traditions  of  the  past  .  .  .  instead 
of  the  law  as  it  exists."  The  most  effective  solution  for  this, 
in  his  opinion,  was  "the  exercise  by  the  community  of  such 
moral  coercion  as  will  constrain  the  local  authorities  to  deal 
as  impartially  and  justly  with  the  negro  as  with  the  whites" 37 
—but  that  was  wishful  thinking. 

Over  8,000  arrests  were  made  in  the  Second  Military  Dis- 
trict between  March  2,  1867,  and  July  24,  1868,  and  about 

85  Canby  to  Assistant  Adjutant  General,  Headquarters,  October  24,  1867, 
in  "Report  of  the  Secretary  of  War,"  House  Executive  Document  No.  1, 
Fortieth  Congress,  Second  Session,  300.  Hereafter  cited  as  Canby  Report, 
1867. 

38  Canby  to  Chief  of  Staff,  Headquarters,  August  31,  1868,  in  "Report  of 
the  Secretary  of  War,"  House  Executive  Document  No.  I,  Fortieth  Con- 
gress, Third  Session,  338.  Hereafter  cited  as  Canby  Report,  1868. 

37  Canby  to  Orr,  November  25  and  30,  1867,  Second  Military  District, 
Letters  Sent,  Nos.  1499  and  1560,  1867. 


62  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

one-eighth  of  them  were  made  by  the  army.38  These  arrests 
inevitably  became  the  object  of  protest  by  the  newspapers 
and  the  governors  of  both  states,  often  after  the  civil  authori- 
ties had  requested  the  army  to  take  action  in  the  matter. 
Governor  Worth  was  particularly  vexatious  in  this  regard. 
He  considered  the  power  of  military  arrest  "iniquitious"  and 
"most  oppressively  exercised"  in  the  "Old  North"  State.  He 
even  remonstrated  with  the  President  so  vehemently  about 
these  acts  of  "military  despotism"  that  he  thought  it  would 
result  in  his  removal,  or  Canby's.39 

Neither  was  removed,  but  Canby  found  it  necessary  to 
defend  himself  against  Worth's  charges.  In  refuting  the  ac- 
cusations that  had  been  made,  Canby  asserted  that  he  had 
more  than  once  in  years  past  secured  the  arrest  of  criminals 
and  held  them  in  his  guard  house  until  the  proper  authorities 
were  prepared  to  take  charge  of  them.  He  saw  no  grounds 
for  the  governor's  objection  on  that  score.  In  other  respects, 
he  conceded: 

It  is  always  to  be  regretted  that  innocent  persons  should  be 
arrested  or  subjected  to  any  restraints  or  inconvenience  from 
false  accusation  or  unfounded  suspicion,  but  this  is  an  incident 
of  civil  as  well  as  military  arrests. 

"Charges  of  military  despotism  are  easily  made,"  Canby 
observed,  but  military  arrests  were  not  made  without  pre- 
vious investigation  or  on  "strong  evidence  of  guilt." 

As  a  general  rule  [Canby  concluded]  these  complaints  are 
disin  [g]  enuous  in  the  use  that  is  made  of  them  by  being  pub- 
lished for  political  effect  with  the  knowledge  that  the  officer  ac- 
cused is  restrained  by  rules  of  military  propriety  from  making 
any  public  defense  or  counter  statement.40 


38  Canby  Report,  1868,  351-353.  Arrests  made  by  the  military  at  the  re- 
quest of  the  civil  authorities  were  not  counted  as  military  arrests  and  are 
therefore  not  included  in  this  number.  Persons  arrested  as  witnesses,  how- 
ever, are  included  in  this  number. 

39  See  the  Daily  Sentinel,  October  25,  1867 ;  the  Charleston  Mercury, 
March  4,  and  November  30,  1867,  and  January  23,  1868;  Worth  Letter 
Book,  1865-1867,  I,  578-579,  688-692,  and  Worth  Letter  Book,  1867-1868,  II, 
50-51.  Also  see  Hamilton,  Worth  Correspondence,  II,  1069-1070,  1085,  1090- 
1091,  1095,  1098-1099,  and  1101-1103. 

40  Canby  to  Chief  of  Staff,  November  14,  1867,  Andrew  Johnson  Papers, 
CXXIV,  f.  17833-17854,  Library  of  Congress. 


"The  Great  Reconstruction"  63 

As  far  as  trials  by  military  courts  were  concerned,  only 
550  cases  were  tried  before  those  tribunals  in  the  sixteen 
months  of  their  existence  in  the  Second  Military  District. 
Judge  advocates  do  not  and  did  not  take  cases  into  court 
unless  they  are  or  were  almost  positive  of  obtaining  a  con- 
viction. They  won  445,  or  eighty  per  cent,  of  the  cases  tried. 
And  that  was  a  poor  showing,  undoubtedly  due  to  the  fact 
that  they  were  dealing  with  civilians  for  the  most  part  and 
were  obliged  to  argue  some  cases  which  should  never  have 
been  brought  to  trial.  Besides  that,  129  of  the  sentences 
passed  by  these  courts  were  either  partially  or  wholly  re- 
mitted by  the  commanding  general.41 

Congress  had  authorized  the  use  of  military  courts  in  the 
South,  while  leaving  their  civil  counterparts  open.  It  was 
not  General  Canby's  fault  that  this  defied  the  opinion  of 
the  Supreme  Court  in  the  case  of  Ex  parte  Milligan.  The  only 
question  that  can  seriously  be  raised  against  him  is:  Did  he 
resort  to  military  courts  too  much,  or  was  it  expedient  for 
him  to  have  used  them  as  often  as  he  did? 

Many  persons  asked  Canby  for  military  trials,  but  it  is 
estimated  that  about  ninety-five  times  out  of  a  hundred  he 
informed  them  that  adequate  remedy  could  be  secured  in 
the  civil  courts.  So,  too,  many  individuals  emerging  the 
losers  in  cases  tried  by  the  civil  tribunals  appealed  to  him 
for  retrials  under  military  auspices,  or  at  least  military 
intercession  in  the  decisions  of  the  civil  courts.  The  records 
show  that  these  pleas  were  refused  nearly  all  the  time.42 

According  to  General  Canby's  report  on  the  subject,  inter- 
ference with  the  local  courts  was  permitted  only  "in  the  ex- 
ceptional cases  growing  out  of  the  rebellion."  How  many 
times  he  annulled,  stayed,  or  dismissed  cases  is  not  known, 
but  he  took  action  in  three  general  types  of  cases. 


41  Canby  Report,  1868, 

353. 

The  period  actually  covered  is  January  1,  1867, 

to  June  30,  1868. 

Whites                          Colored 

Tried 

368                                 182 

Guilty 

303                                 142 

Not  Guilty 

65                                   40 

Remissions : 

Partial 

63                                   20 

Whole 

17                                   29 

Conviction 

82  per  cent                    78  per  cent 

Second  Military  District,  Letters  Sent,  1867-1868,  passim. 


64  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

The  first  class  were  prosecutions  for  acts  committed  dur- 
ing the  war  under  military  orders.  Cases  of  this  sort  were 
quite  numerous  in  North  Carolina,  where  the  population  had 
been  divided  in  its  allegiance,  and  when  it  was  established, 
"by  satisfactory  evidence,"  that  the  animosity  engendered 
by  civil  strife  was  the  reason  for  the  action,  Canby  stopped 
the  proceedings. 

In  the  second  class  of  cases,  where  the  local  courts  at- 
tempted to  validate  or  give  effect  to  unexecuted  judgments 
of  the  late  Confederate  judiciary,  Canby  ordered  dismissals; 
while  in  the  third  class,  he  stayed  those  cases  involving  a 
denial  by  the  local  tribunals  of  the  right  of  appeal  or  removal 
to  the  Federal  courts  as  guaranteed  by  the  laws  of  the  United 
States.43 

Canby  continued  to  enforce  all  the  orders  and  regulations 
that  had  been  promulgated  by  his  predecessor,  but,  from 
time  to  time,  he  revoked  or  modified  some  of  them.  Of  the 
many  changes  that  were  made,  the  one  which  perhaps 
caused  the  most  indignation  was  the  order  directing  the  ad- 
mission of  freedmen  to  jury  duty.44 

In  North  Carolina,  the  qualification  for  a  juror  was  deter- 
mined by  the  possession  of  a  freehold  estate;  in  South  Caro- 
lina, it  was,  for  all  practical  purposes,  determined  by  a  per- 
son's color.  Canby  therefore  decided  to  change  the  existing 
systems  in  order  to  "secure  representation  in  the  jury  box 
to  classes  heretofore  excluded,  and  constituting  in  the  two 
States  ...  a  majority  of  the  population."  It  was 
not  only  a  question  of  abstract  justice;  but  one  that  the  interests 
of  the  community  required  should  be  so  settled  as  not  only  to 
secure  the  legal  rights  of  all  classes,  but  also  to  give  that  sense 
of  security  which  is  the  best  guarantee  of  order  and  subordina- 
tion to  law,  and  the  remedies  it  affords  for  the  redress  of  all 
wrongs. 

Canby  encountered  many  practical  difficulties  in  securing 
this  legal  right  "to  all  the  inhabitants,"  without  at  the  same 
time  introducing  the  "dangerous  elements  of  vice  and  ig- 

43  Canby  Report,  1868,  339-340. 

44  General  Order,  No.  89,  September  13,  1867,  "General  Orders — Recon- 
struction," 61.  General  Sickles  had  already  made  provisions  for  Negro 
juries,  General  Order,  No.  32,  May  30,  1867,  "General  Orders — Reconstruc- 
tion," 46.  Also  see  Hollis,  Reconstruction  in  South  Carolina,  72;  and  Hamil- 
ton, Reconstruction  in  North  Carolina,  234. 


"The  Great  Reconstruction"  65 

norance."  He  did  not  for  that  very  reason,  extend  the  jury 
lists  as  far  as  General  Grant  would  have  liked.45  As  he  finally 
established  it,  all  citizens  who  were  assessed  for  taxes  and 
who  were  qualified  to  vote  were  embraced  in  the  jury  lists, 
but  the  courts  were  permitted  to  purge  all  individuals  who 
were  mentally  or  morally  unfit.46  Color  alone,  however,  was 
not  deemed  sufficient  reason  for  disqualification.47 

For  thus  modifying  the  law,  Canby  was  vilified  by  the 
press  (especially  in  South  Carolina),  Governors  Orr  and 
Worth  objected  (it  was  the  former  who  wrote  the  President 
on  this  occasion),  a  superior  court  justice  in  North  Carolina 
resigned  in  protest,  and  Canby  was  forced  to  suspend  and 
then  remove  from  office  a  judge  in  South  Carolina  who  re- 
fused to  execute  the  order.48 

This  power  to  suspend  or  remove  from  office  any  appoint- 
ed or  elected  official,  state,  municipal,  or  otherwise,  and  the 
authority  to  appoint  some  other  person  or  detail  a  "competent 
officer  or  soldier  of  the  army"  to  fill  the  vacancies  created  by 
such  suspensions  or  removals  or  by  death  or  resignation,  was 
conferred  upon  Canby  by  the  Reconstruction  Act  of  July  19, 
1867.49 

Canby  made  a  number  of  removals,  but  the  exact  figure 
escapes  disclosure.  In  North  Carolina,  according  to  J.  G.  deR. 
Hamilton,  it  was  only  a  small  number— three  sheriffs  and 
seventeen  magistrates.50  In  South  Carolina,  besides  the  judge 
who  has  been  referred  to  above,  the  mayor  of  Charleston,  his 
military  successor,  thirteen  members  of  the  board  of  alder- 

45  Canby  to  Chief  of  Staff,  September  14,  1867,  Second  Military  District, 
Letters  Sent,  No.  676,  1867. 

46  Canby  Report,  1868,  337-338. 

47  Canby  to  Adjutant  General,  October  15,  1867,  Second  Military  District, 
Letters  Sent,  No.  953,  1867.  Also  see  Worth  to  P.  T.  Massey,  October  17, 
1867,  Hamilton,  Worth  Correspondence,  II,  1054. 

48  Charleston  Courier,  October  3,  14,  15,  16,  1867,  2;  Charleston  Mercury, 
October  3,  4,  14,  15,  1867.  The  October  15  issue  carries  Governor  Orr's 
letter  to  the  President;  Worth  to  Canby,  September  10,  11,  30,  and  Oc- 
tober 18,  1867,  Worth  Letter  Book,  I,  576-578,  578-579,  590,  and  627-628; 
Canby  Report,  1867,  304-307;  and  Canby  Report,  1868,  338.  Also  see  Canby 
to  Chief  of  Staff,  October  19,  1867,  Second  Military  District,  Letters  Sent, 
No.  1012,  1867. 

49  Statutes  at  Large,  XV,  14. 

60  Hamilton,  Reconstruction  in  North  Carolina,  238.  In  Canby  Report, 
1867,  312,  there  is  a  table  showing  the  appointments  and  removals  made  to 
September  30,  1867,  but  it  does  not  give  any  clue  as  to  how  many  were 
removed  or  appointed  by  Canby.  In  twenty-five  days,  it  could  not  have  been 
very  many. 


66  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

men,  the  mayor  of  Columbia,  and  eight  of  that  city's  alder- 
men were  removed  at  the  general's  behest;  and  there  were 
others.51 

Nearly  every  one  of  these  removals  seemed  arbitrary  and 
uncalled  for  to  the  people,  inasmuch  as  the  reasons  for  them 
were  not  usually  revealed.  But  Canby  did  not  make  removals 
unless  the  officers  in  question  were  "disloyal"  or  obstructed 
the  "due  and  proper  administration"  of  the  Reconstruction 
Acts.52  If  the  word  of  the  press  is  to  be  accepted  he  always 
acted  without  cause,  due  to  the  pressure  brought  to  bear  by 
the  "Republican  colored  committee,"  "with  no  other  motive 
than  to  punish  and  humiliate  a  proud,  brave,  manly,  wrong 
hating  people,"  or  just  to  satisfy  a  whim.53  The  Columbia 
Phoenix  made  the  typical  comment  when  it  remarked: 

Gen.  Canby  .  .  .  has  made  some  changes  in  our  municipal  gov- 
ernment, not  because  of  any  grounds  of  complaint  against  the 
duly  elected  representatives  of  the  people  of  Columbia,  but 
simply  because,  as  we  presume,  it  seems  good  to  him  thus  to  act 
in  the  plentitude  of  his  powers.  The  sword  of  the  oppressor 
thus  opens  the  way  for  the  new  regime  to  be  tried  in  South 
Carolina.54 

Canby 's  appointments  were  also  received  with  disfavor, 
particularly  when  he  appointed  Negroes  or  "carpetbaggers" 
to  office.55  As  a  general  rule,  however,  Canby  allowed  the 
governors  of  North  and  South  Carolina  to  nominate  indi- 
viduals for  office.  The  responsibility  for  making  the  appoint- 
ments rested  with  him  alone,  and  he  did  not  always  accept 
their  recommendations.86 

Canby  sincerely  desired  to  fill  the  public  offices  with  "men 
of  unblemished  character,"  and  he,  therefore,  had  the  back- 


61  John  S.  Reynolds,  Reconstruction  in  South  Carolina  (Columbia,  1905), 
70-71.  Hereafter  cited  as  Reynolds,  Reconstruction  in  South  Carolina. 
Canby  to  Chief  of  Staff,  February  21,  1868,  Second  Military  District,  Let- 
ters Sent,  No.  795,  1868.  Charleston  Courier,  May  27  and  July  7,  1868. 
See  also  Special  Order  No.  191,  section  I,  October  28,  1867,  "General  Orders- 
Reconstruction,"  94. 

52  Canby  to  W.  W.  Holden,  September  24,  1867,  Second  Military  District, 
Letters  Sent,  No.  763,  1867. 

53  Charleston  Courier,  May  27,  1868,  and  Charleston  Daily  News,  May  29, 
1868. 

64  Quoted  in  Charleston  Courier,  June  22,  1868. 

66  Canby  appointed  seven  Negroes  to  serve  as  aldermen  in  Charleston. 
Charleston  Courier,  May  29,  1868;  Charleston  Daily  News,  May  29,  1868. 
Also  see  Hamilton,  Reconstruction  in  North  Carolina,  328. 

66  Canby  to  Worth,  January  19,  1868,  Second  Military  District,  Letters 
Sent,  No.  263,  1868. 


"The  Great  Reconstruction"  67 

ground  of  every  recommended  person  investigated.57  Of 
course,  just  what  qualities  one  needed  in  order  to  have  an 
'unblemished  character"  was  subject  to  a  difference  of 
opinion.  Governor  Worth,  for  example,  professed  his  inability 
to  find  a  man  of  "respectable  pretensions  to  fitness"  whom 
he  could  nominate  to  succeed  the  judge  who  had  resigned 
over  Canby's  jury  order.58  The  general,  on  the  other  hand, 
questioned  Worth's  "standard  of  qualification."  If  devotion 
to  "our  holy  and  lost  cause"  was  the  basis  on  which  Worth 
assessed  the  worthiness  of  a  man  for  office,  then  Canby  did 
not  want  his  nominations.59 

In  several  instances,  Canby  continued  in  office  those 
officials  whose  terms  had  expired,  which  was,  in  a  way,  ap- 
pointing them  to  their  posts.60  He  did  this  because  the  pres- 
ent governments  were  provisional  only  until  the  states  were 
admitted  to  representation  in  Congress.61  When  that  happen- 
ed, his  appointments  would  lapse,  and  he  did  not  wish  to 
embarrass  the  new  administrations  by  having  them  find, 
upon  their  inauguration,  that  they  could  do  nothing  about 
the  officials  who  were  in  office  as  a  result  of  being  elected 
for  normal  terms  by  his  orders.62 

In  dealing  with  the  subjects  that  have  been  discussed  thus 
far,  Canby  was  abetted  by  a  Bureau  of  Civil  Affairs,  which 
acted  as  a  clearing  house  for  the  business  of  the  district. 
Generally,  anything  relating  to  the  operation  of  the  Recon- 
struction acts  and  to  the  legal  relations  of  the  political  com- 
munities, civil  officers,  and  individuals  in  the  Carolinas  came 
within  its  purview.  In  handling  these  matters,  the  bureau 
framed  orders  and  regulations,  which,  upon  Canby's  ap- 
proval, were  promulgated  in  the  district;  and  it  also  prepared 

57  Canby  to  'Worth,  January  4,  1868,  Second  Military  District,  Letters 
Sent,  No.  42,  1868. 

68  Worth  to  Canby,  January  11,  1868,  Worth  Letter  Book,  II,  55. 

69  Canby  to  Worth,  January  19,  1868,  Second  Military  District,  Letters 
Sent,  No.  263,  1868. 

60  For  instance,  he  ordered  the  town  council  of  Spartanburg,  South  Caro- 
lina, to  continue  in  office.  See  Charleston  Mercury,  October  2,  1867. 

61  Statutes  at  Large,  XIV,  429,  Act  of  March  2,  1867. 

62  Canby  to  Hon.  A.  G.  Mackey,  President  of  Constitutional  Convention, 
Charleston,  May  26,  1868,  Second  Military  District,  Letters  Sent,  No.  1922, 
1868.  Also  see  Caziarc  to  J.  W.  Schenck,  Jr.,  Chairman,  Republican  County 
Committee,  Wilmington,  N.  C,  December  6,  1867.  Second  Military  District, 
Letters  Sent,  No.  1636,  1867;  and  Canby  Report,  1868,  341. 


68  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

briefs  and  opinions  for  his  scrutiny,  thereby  enabling  him 
to  act  more  promptly  and  presumably  more  intelligently  on 
questions  presented  to  him  for  decision.63 

The  registration  of  voters,  as  prescribed  by  the  act  of 
March  23,  1867,  was  managed  through  the  bureau  and  had 
been  in  progress  for  over  a  month  when  Canby  arrived  in 
Charleston.  It  was  concluded  twenty-five  days  after  he  as- 
sumed command  of  the  district.64  This  registration  was  in  the 
hands  of  officials  appointed  by  General  Sickles;  consequently, 
other  than  a  few  specific  decisions  on  who  could  register  and 
the  appointment  of  a  couple  of  registrars  to  fill  vacancies  that 
occurred,  Canby 's  major  contribution  to  this  phase  of  the 
reconstruction  process  was  the  issuance  of  a  rather  "liberal" 
index  upon  which  the  revision  of  the  registration  lists  was 
based.65 

When  registration  was  completed,  Canby  ordered  an  elec- 
tion, at  which  the  qualified  voters  in  each  state  were  to  cast 
ballots  for  or  against  a  constitutional  convention.66  They 
were,  at  the  same  time,  to  select  delegates  to  constitute  the 
convention  in  case  a  majority  of  the  voters  were  in  favor  of  it 
(and  provided  a  majority  of  those  registered  exercised  their 
franchise )  .67 

The  election  was  held  on  November  19  and  20  and,  after 
a  preliminary  scare  that  the  call  for  a  convention  had  failed 
in  South  Carolina,  the  voters  of  both  states  were  found  to 
have  expressed  their  preference  in  favor  of  holding  con- 
ventions.68 Accordingly,  in  conformity  with  the  fourth  section 
of  the  March  23  Reconstruction  Act,  Canby  directed  that 

68  Canby  Report,  1867,  310-311.  A.  J.  Willard,  who  later  became  chief 
justice  of  the  State  Supreme  Court  of  South  Carolina,  who  was  in  charge 
of  this  bureau.  See  Francis  B.  Simkins  and  Robert  H.  Woody,  South  Caro- 
lina during  Reconstruction  (Chapel  Hill,  1932),  143. 

64  Canby  Report,  1867,  312.  See  General  Order  No.  65,  August  1,  1867, 
"General  Orders-Reconstruction,"  50-53. 

65  William  A.  Russ,  Jr.,  "Disfranchisement  in  North  Carolina,  1867-1868," 
North  Carolina  Historical  Review,  XI  (October,  1934),  278.  See  Circular  of 
October  31,  1867,  "General  Orders-Reconstruction,"  69-72.  Also  see  Daily 
Sentinel,  November  8,  1867. 

66  General  Orders  Nos.  99  and  101,  October  16  and  18,  1867,  "General 
Orders-Reconstruction,"  63-64,  65-66.  The  former  is  for  South  Carolina. 

67  Statutes  at  Large,  XV,  3,  Act  of  March  23,  1867. 

68  Canby  to  Grant,  November  29,  1867,  Second  Military  District,  Letters 
Sent,  No.  1543,  1867.  For  the  vote,  see  Canby  to  the  Adjutant  General, 
February  19,  1868,  "Registered  Voters  in  Rebel  States,"  Senate  Executive 
Document  No,  53,  Fortieth  Congress,  Second  Session,  3-7. 


"The  Great  Reconstruction"  69 

the  delegates  chosen  at  the  late  election  be  convened  on 
January  14,  1868,  for  the  purpose  of  framing  constitutions 
and  civil  governments  for  their  respective  states.69 

General  Canby  did  not  have  very  much  to  do  with  these 
conventions.  In  South  Carolina,  he  refused  to  act  upon  sev- 
eral resolutions  presented  to  him  by  that  body,  although  he 
did  issue  an  order,  as  requested,  temporarily  staying,  for  a 
period  of  three  months,  all  executions  and  sales  of  property 
for  debt.70  He  sanctioned  a  similar  law,  though  one  of  longer 
duration,  for  North  Carolina.71  In  both  states,  on  the  adoption 
of  ordinances  for  the  assessment  of  taxes  to  cover  the  cost  of 
the  conventions,  Canby  directed  the  treasurers  of  the  respec- 
tive states  to  advance  money  to  defray  the  current  expenses 
of  those  assemblies.72  He  did  this  because  he  believed  that 
the  members  of  the  conventions  and  their  creditors  should 
not  be  compelled  to  wait  for  the  collection  of  the  taxes  when 
sufficient  funds  were  already  in  the  state  treasuries.73  Other 
than  staying  until  the  end  of  the  convention  session  the  court 
proceedings  in  an  assault  and  battery  case  against  the  assist- 
ant doorkeeper  of  the  North  Carolina  assemblage,74  Canby 
does  not  seem  to  have  taken  any  further  part  in  the  affairs 
of  either  body. 

When  the  conventions  adjourned  sine  die,  their  handiwork 
and  candidates  for  office  in  each  state  had  to  be  submitted  to 


69  General  Orders,  Nos.  160  and  165,  December  28  and  31,  1867,  "Gen- 
eral-Orders Reconstruction,"  81-92,  84-85.  The  latter  is  for  North  Carolina. 

70  General  Order  No.  14,  January  31,  1868,  "General  Orders-Reconstruc- 
tion," 97-98.  Also  see  A.  G.  Mackey  to  Canby,  January  25,  1868,  Second 
Military  District,  Register  of  Letters  Received,  II  (LXVIII),  591;  Reynolds, 
Reconstruction  in  South  Carolina,  80;  and  Appleton's  Annual  Cyclopedia, 
1868,  693. 

71  General  Order  No.  57,  April  2,  1868,  Second  Military  District,  General 
Orders,  1868.  Also  see  Hamilton,  Reconstruction  in  North  Carolina, 
262-263;  and  Appleton's  Annual  Cyclopedia,  1868,  555. 

72  Hollis,  Reconstruction  in  South  Carolina,  88.  General  Order  No.  17, 
February  6,  1868,  "General  Orders-Reconstruction,"  98-99,  for  South  Car- 
olina. Hamilton,  Reconstruction  in  North  Carolina,  260-261.  General  Order 
No.  20,  February  12,  1868,  Second  Military  District,  General  Orders,  1868, 
for  North  Carolina. 

73  Kemp  P.  Battle,  Memoirs  of  an  Old-Time  Tar  Heel  (Chapel  Hill,  1945), 
213-214.  Edited  by  William  J.  Battle.  Kemp  P.  Battle  was  treasurer  of 
North  Carolina. 

7*  Canby  to  C  J.  Cowles,  President  of  Constitutional  Convention,  Raleigh, 
March  14,  1868,  Second  Military  District,  Letters  Sent,  No.  1052,  1868. 
On  January  17,  1868,  he  attended  a  session  of  the  South  Carolina  Con- 
vention to  hear  Governor  Orr  address  that  body.  See  Charleston  Courier, 
January  18,  1868.  On  February  12,  1868,  he  sat  in  on  the  North  Carolina 
Convention.  See  North  Carolina  Standard,  February  13,  1868. 


70  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

the  voters.  So,  while  the  nation  buzzed  about  the  impeach- 
ment move  against  President  Johnson,  Canby  proceeded  to 
authorize  a  second  election  for  the  Carolinas.75 

On  learning  that  there  might  be  attempts  by  "combina- 
tions" to  prevent,  delay,  or  hinder  persons  from  voting  by 
force,  intimidation,  or  threats  of  violence,  the  general  pro- 
mulgated another  order  warning  that  any  interference  with 
the  election  would  be  punished  as  provided  by  law.76  One 
thing  that  bothered  him  was  how  to  prevent  persons  from 
discharging  their  employees  or  tenants  for  not  voting  as  they 
were  told.  He  sought  to  forestall  this  by  letting  it  be  known 
"that  the  duty  of  the  military  authority  to  secure  a  fair  and 
free  election  will  be  fully  performed";  that  if  laborers  and 
tenants  were  displaced  and  became  public  charges,  the 
county  poor  wardens  would  be  required  to  take  care  of  them 
and  an  additional  tax  would  be  levied  for  that  purpose. 
Moreover,  advances  by  the  Freedmen's  Bureau  would  be 
withheld  from  planters  who  engaged  in  this  practice.77  How 
Canby  proposed  to  ascertain  positively  who  dismissed  his 
employees  because  of  the  way  they  voted  is  difficult  to  per- 
ceive. 

Hamilton  has  asserted  that  General  Canby  had  the  names 
of  the  candidates  for  office  in  each  state  placed  on  the  same 
ballot  with  the  question  of  ratification  of  the  constitution, 
thus,  by  a  "piece  of  entirely  unjustifiable  partisan  politics," 
preventing  all  who  had  been  disfranchised  under  the  Recon- 
struction Acts  from  exercising  their  franchise  as  provided  by 
the  newly  framed  charters.78  This  statement  is  somewhat  mis- 
leading. By  the  fourth  section  of  the  Second  Reconstruction 
Act,  the  proposed  constitutions  had  to  be  ratified  by  "the 
persons  registered  under  the  provisions  of  this  [the  March 
23]  act.  .  .  ." 79  Canby  merely  conformed  to  the  letter  of  the 

75  General  Orders  Nos.  40  and  45,  March  13  and  23,  1868,  "Elections  in 
Southern  States,"  House  Executive  Document  No.  291,  Fortieth  Congress, 
First  Session,  9-11,  4-8.  The  former  was  for  South  Carolina. 

76  General  Order  No.  61,  April  6,  1868,  Second  Military  District,  General 
Orders,  1868. 

77  General  Order  No.  80,  May  2,  1868,  Second  Military  District,  General 
Orders,  1868;  see  also  Caziarc  to  Colonel  W.  B.  Royal,  April  10,  1868, 
Second  Military  District,  Letters  Sent,  No.  1337,  1868. 

78  Hamilton,  Reconstruction  in  North  Carolina,  285-286. 

79  Statutes  at  Large,  XV,  3. 


"The  Great  Reconstruction"  71 

law,  which  he  interpreted  to  mean  that  the  constitutions  just 
drafted  remained  inoperative  until  they  were  accepted  by 
Congress.80 

It  is  true  that  if  Canby  had  permitted  the  vote  on  the 
question  of  ratification  to  be  taken  first,  waited  for  Con- 
gress to  approve  the  new  documents,  and  then  allowed  a 
second  election  for  state  and  country  officers,  most  of  those 
who  had  been  disfranchised  by  Congress  would  have  had  a 
chance  to  vote  on  the  candidates  for  office.  But  this  would 
have  been  an  involved,  costly,  and  time-consuming  process 
to  say  the  least. 

Canby  did,  however,  have  the  registration  lists  revised  be- 
fore the  poll  on  ratification  was  taken  and  whereas,  in  North 
Carolina,  the  total  registration  prior  to  the  election  on  the 
convention  question  had  been  178,665,  it  was  now  raised  to 
196,873— an  increase  of  over  18,000.  In  South  Carolina,  the 
earlier  registration  figure  was  upped  5,139  to  133, 195.81 

Canby  did  everything  possible  to  get  out  the  vote,82  even 
suspending  the  sessions  of  the  state  courts  so  that  all  might 
have  an  opportunity  to  exercise  their  franchise.83  The  elec- 
tion was  held  April  14  to  16  in  South  Carolina  and  April  21  to 
23  in  North  Carolina,  and  the  people  of  the  two  states  ac- 
cepted the  proposed  constitutions.84 

On  June  25,  1868,  Congress  approved  these  charters.85  The 
states  had  only  to  install  their  new  officers,  ratify  the  pro- 
posed fourteenth  amendment  to  the  Federal  Constitution, 
and  the  ordeal  by  Congressional  Reconstruction  would  be 
over.86  At  this  juncture,  in  order  to  "facilitate"  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  new  administrations,  Canby  removed  the  pro- 
visional officers  of  both  states  and  appointed  the  recently 
elected  officials  in  their  stead.87  This  was  done  by  General 

80  See  Canby  to  Orr,  May  1,  1868,  Second  Military  District,  Letters  Sent, 
No.  1600,  1868. 

81  Canby  Report,  1868,  340-341. 

82  See  the  provisions  of  General   Orders  Nos.  40  and  45,  March  13  or 
23,  1868,  "Elections  in  Southern  States,"  5,  9-10. 

83  General    Order    No.    65,    April    10,    1868,    Second    Military    District, 
General  Orders,  1868. 

84  Canby  Report,  1868,  340-341. 

85  The  constitutions  of  Alabama,  Florida,  Georgia,  and  Louisiana  were 
also  accepted  in  the  "Omnibus  Bill."  See  Statutes  at  Large,  XV,  73-74. 

89  Statutes  at  Large,  XIV,  429,  Act  of  March  2,  1867. 
87  General    Order    No.    120,    June    30,    1868,    Second    Military    District 
General  Orders,  1868. 


72  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Grant's  direction  and  was  in  accord  with  the  desire  of  the 
Radicals  to  be  certain  that  the  reconstructed  state  govern- 
ments came  into  existence.  There  was  the  possibility  that 
the  incumbents  would  refuse  to  yield  office,  and  that  could 
be  embarrassing,  especially  if  the  matter  was  brought  before 
the  courts. 

It  is  perhaps,  useless  to  speculate  upon  the  considerations, 
which  produced  so  sudden  a  change  in  the  mind  of  the  District 
Commander,  as  to  cause  him  to  modify  his  first  order  providing 
for  the  inauguration  of  the  civil  government.  There  is  no  ac- 
counting for  the  vagaries  of  military  caprice,  especially  when 
the  caprice  is  the  result  of  an  utter  ignorance  of  law  and  of 
usage  in  civil  affairs. 

The  Daily  Sentinel  (Raleigh)  contended  that  if  General 
Canby's  object  was  to  avoid  an  "awkward  dilemma,"  then  he 
had  "jumped  out  of  the  frying  pan  into  the  fire,"  and  by  his 
"boggling  proceedings"  had  placed  the  governor-elect  in  an 
"ungraceful"  position.88 

Canby  also  took  this  step  because  many  of  the  candidates- 
elect  in  North  and  South  Carolina  could  not  take  the  test 
oath  of  July  2,  1862.  Until  the  ninth  section  of  the  Third 
Reconstruction  Act  was  nullified  in  each  of  the  states  under- 
going reconstruction  that  oath  was  required  of  all  its  appoint- 
ed or  elected  officials.  It  was,  unfortunately,  a  technicality 
that  debarred  "many  active  and  zealous  friends  of  the  Union 
and  of  restoration"  from  holding  office  and,  Canby  main- 
tained, it  ought  to  be  dispensed  with  at  once.  Indeed,  he 
recommended  that  course  to  Congress. 

To  continue  the  disabilities  which  exclude  these  persons  is  to 
deprive  the  government  still  further  of  the  services  of  intelli- 
gent and  well-disposed  men,  whose  technical  disqualification  is 
their  only  fault,  and  whose  aid  is  essentially  important  to  the 
speedy  organization  and  successful  working  of  the  new  State 
governments.  The  removal  of  the  disabilities,  while  it  will  not 
jeopardize  any  interest  which  it  is  the  policy  of  the  government 
of  the  United  States  to  conserve  and  foster,  will,  in  my  judg- 
ment, not  only  meet  the  approval  of  a  large  majority  of  the 
people  of  the  two  States,  but  will  disarm  much  of  the  opposition 


Daily  Sentinel,  July  3,  1868. 


"The  Great  Reconstruction"  73 

which  the  new  State  governments  must  expect  to  encounter,  and 
contribute  greatly  to  the  permanent  success  of  the  work  of  re- 
construction. 

Canby  thought  it  would  be  "inexpedient"  to  dispense  with 
the  requirement  which  he  desired  to  see  relaxed  if  there 
were  any  "personal  considerations"  prejudicial  to  the  officers- 
elect,  but  he  did  not  know  of  any  such  objections.89 

Canby  considered  it  "so  important"  to  organize  the  new 
administrations  before  military  control  was  withdrawn  that 
he  went  ahead  and  adopted  the  recently  recognized  consti- 
tutions of  North  and  South  Carolina  as  the  fundamental  law 
of  each  state.90  He  held  that  the  Congressional  approval  of 
the  proposed  constitutions  made  them  a  part  of  the  Recon- 
struction acts  and,  to  the  extent  that  Congress  had  directed 
or  authorized  action  under  them  in  advance  of  the  admission 
of  the  states,  dispensed  with  the  provisions  of  any  previous 
laws  that  conflicted  with  those  charters. 

The  law  of  June  25,  1868,  approving  the  constitutions  of  [North 
and  South  Carolina] ,  and  authorizing  specific  action  under  them 
[Canby  explained],  was  regarded  by  me  as  dispensing  with  the 
oath  of  office  prescribed  by  the  law  of  July  2,  1862,  first  as  to  the 
members  of  the  general  assembly,  and,  after  the  ratification  of 
the  constitutional  amendment,  to  the  other  State  officers  duly 
elected  and  qualified  under  those  constitutions.  This  construc- 
tion, in  its  first  application,  did  not  include  the  governor  and 
lieutenant  governor,  but  as  the  organization  of  the  legislature 
would  have  been  incomplete  without  the  lieutenant  governor,  and 
as  the  legislative  action  required  by  the  law  might  have  been 
embarrassed  by  the  action  of  the  old  incumbents,  the  General 
of  the  Army  directed  that  they  should  be  removed  and  the 
governor  and  lieutenant  governor  elect  should  be  appointed 
in  their  places.91 


89  Canby  to  Chief  of  Staff,  May  4,  1868,  "Second  Military  District," 
House  Executive  Document  No.  276,  Fortieth  Congress,  Second  Session, 
2-4,  the  quote  being  on  the  latter  page. 

80  Canby  to  Chief  of  Staff,  May  7,  1868,  "Letter  on  the  South  Carolina 
Convention,"  Senate  Executive  Document  No.  55,  Fortieth  Congress,  Second 
Session,  2. 

91  Grant  approved  Canby's  first  action.  See  Canby  to  B.  W.  Gillis, 
June  26,  1869,  "Test  Oath  in  Virginia,"  House  Miscellaneous  Document 
No.  8,  Forty-first  Congress,  Second  Session,  16. 


74  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

On  July  24,  1868,  having  been  notified  that  the  legisla- 
tures of  North  and  South  Carolina  had  ratified  the  constitu- 
tional amendment  known  as  article  XIV,  Canby  remitted  to 
the  civil  authorities  of  the  two  states  all  the  power  con- 
ferred upon  and  exercised  by  him  under  the  act  of  March  2, 
1867.92  The  "dominion  of  arms"  was  over  and  the  people  of 
the  Carolinas  turned  to  face  civil  radical  rule.  Nevertheless, 
the  press  rejoiced;  the  Wilmington  Journal,  for  example, 
declaring: 

It  gives  us  pleasure  ...  to  publish  the  final  order  of  the 
Commander  of  this  Military  District.  We  may  need  the  presence 
of  the  military  to  check  the  revolutionary  schemes  of  the  Radi- 
cals, and  if  so,  we  trust  we  may  be  favored  with  an  officer  and 
not  a  partisan — a  soldier  full  of  honor  and  justice,  and  not  the 
tool  of  designing  and  bad  men.93 

Could  the  editor  have  been  referring  to  Canby? 

Before  making  a  final  analysis  of  the  general's  work  in  the 
Second  Military  District,  mention  must  be  made  of  one  other 
service  that  Canby  performed  while  he  was  in  command 
of  the  Carolinas.  Except  for  the  first  month  of  his  tour  of 
duty  there,  he  was  supervisory  assistant  commissioner  of 
the  Freedmen's  Bureau  for  the  limits  of  his  district.94 

It  was  only  natural  that  this  should  have  come  to  pass, 
for  it  was  unquestionably  desirable  to  have  under  the  same 
direction  the  bureau  officers  and  the  other  military  personnel 
who  were  entrusted  with  the  protection  of  persons  and  prop- 
erty by  the  acts  of  Congress.95  The  assistant  commissioners 
for  North  and  South  Carolina  were  therefore  ordered  to  re- 
port to  Canby  for  instructions,  although  they  continued  to 

92  General  Order  No.  145,  July  24,  1868,  Second  Military  District, 
General  Orders,  1868. 

93  Quoted  in  the  Charleston  Courier,  August  10,  1868.  Also  see  the  Charles- 
ton Courier,  July  21,  1868. 

94  Commissioner-General  0.  0.  Howard  to  Canby,  November  29,  1867, 
Freedmen's  Bureau,  Letter  Sent,  1867.  The  correct  title  of  this  War  De- 
partment agency  was  the  Bureau  of  Refugees,  Freedmen,  and  Abandoned 
Lands. 

95  Commissioner-General  0.  0.  Howard  to  Canby,  October  23,  1867,  Freed- 
men's Bureau,  Letter  Sent,  1867.  Canby  to  Howard,  November  4,  1867, 
Second  Military  District,  Letters  Sent,  II,  248-249.  Also  see  Caziarc  to  Gen- 
eral N.  A.  Miles,  October  23,  1867,  Second  Military  District,  Letters  Sent, 
II,  No.  1044.  1867. 


"The  Great  Reconstruction"  75 

communicate  directly  with  bureau  headquarters  in  Wash- 
ington. 

Canby  did  not  have  the  time  or  the  inclination  to  control 
the  administrative  details  of  the  Carolina  bureaux,  hence 
that  was  left  in  the  hands  of  the  assistant  commissioners.96 
He  could  not  relieve  or  discharge  any  bureau  agent,97  but  he 
could  and  did  appoint  the  several  post  commanders  in  the 
district  to  be  sub-assistant  commissioners  of  the  bureau 
within  the  limits  of  their  stations.98  That  action  created  some 
consternation  and  jealousy,  both  on  the  part  of  General 
Nelson  A.  Miles,  the  assistant  commissioner  for  North  Caro- 
lina, and  General  R.  K.  Scott,  his  counterpart  to  the  south. 
They  feared  that  the  commanding  general  was  usurping  their 
rightful  duties.99 

In  his  role  as  supervisory  assistant  commissioner,  Canby 
advised  the  assistant  commissioners  and  granted  or  withheld 
authority  in  matters  pertaining  to  the  freedmen.100  In  par- 
ticular, however,  all  during  this  period,  he  was  especially 
concerned  about  the  effect  on  the  Carolinas  of  the  failure  of 
the  crops  and  the  fall  in  cotton  prices. 

It  was  partially  on  this  account  that  Governor  Orr  had 
protested  Canby's  consolidation  of  the  troops.  He  was  fearful 
lest  those  thrown  out  of  work  by  this  unfortunate  turn  of 
events  would  be  forced  to  plunder  and  steal  in  order  to  keep 
alive.101  The  possibility  of  "grave  disorders"  arising  from  the 
fact  that  the  Negroes  were  unable  to  find  employment  or 
procure  food  was  undoubted,  and  Canby  assured  the  gov- 
ernor that  "serious  consideration"  had  been  given  to  the 

96  See  Canby  to  Howard,  November  4,  1867,  Second  Military  District 
Letters  Sent,  II,  248-249. 

97  The  assistant  commissioners  did  that  or  it  was  done  by  Howard.  See 
Howard  to  Canby,  December  13,  1867,  and  Howard  to  General  R.  K.  Scott, 
December  13,  1867,  Freedmen's  Bureau,  Letter  Sent,  1867. 

98  General  Order  No.  145,  December  6,  1867,  see  Caziarc  to  Commanding 
Officer,  Wilmington,  N.  C,  December  17,  1867,  Second  Military  District, 
Letters  Sent,  No.  1838,  1867.  The  replaced  officers  were  volunteers  and 
civilians  who  had  been  acting  as  agents.  For  an  account  of  a  bureau  agent 
in  Greenville,  South  Carolina,  see  John  W.  De  Forest,  A  Union  Officer  in 
Reconstruction   (New  Haven,  1948). 

99  See  Scott  to  Caziarc,  December  10,  1867 ;  Howard  to  Scott,  December  13, 
1867;  and  Howard  to  Miles,  December  11,  1867,  Freedmen's  Bureau,  Letter 
Sent,  1867.  Scott  became  Governor  of  South  Carolina  in  1868. 

100  Second  Military  District,  Letters  Sent,  1867-1868,  passim. 

101  Orr  to  Canby,  November  29  and  December  18,  1867,  Orr  Letter  Books, 
III,  238  and  328. 


76  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

subject  and  that  every  precaution  was  being  taken  to  guard 
against  that  danger.102  He  had  noticed  the  increase  in  pil- 
fering too.103 

On  December  20,  1867,  Canby  addressed  a  letter  to  the 
chief  of  staff  inviting  his  attention  to  the  destitution  and 
suffering  likely  to  occur  during  the  coming  months  unless 
special  ration  issues  were  authorized.  He  estimated  that 
30,000  Negroes  in  the  seaboard  region  of  South  Carolina 
alone  (and  that  was  the  section  hardest  hit)  were  without 
jobs  and  were  consequently  without  the  means  of  support. 

How  to  avert  the  difficulties  which  might  be  expected  to 
stem  from  "a  population  idle  from  necessity,  and  impelled 
by  hunger,"  was  a  question  of  the  "gravest  character." 

If  direct  issues  of  food  are  made  [Canby  declared],  we  incur 
the  risk  of  encouraging  idleness,  and  its  attendant  vices,  and 
of  creating  a  proletarian  population,  that  will  look  to  the 
Government  for  relief,  whenever  misfortune,  want  of  thrift,  or 
idleness  reduces  them  to  want. 

If,  on  the  other  hand,  the  government  interfered  in  the  em- 
ployment process,  Canby  contended  that  the  precedent  thus 
established  would  be  "almost  as  dangerous." 

He  believed  that  no  gratuitious  issues  should  be  made 
except  to  the  infirm  and  helpless,  that  relief  should  be  given 
to  the  poor  only  and  then  in  amounts  necessary  to  prevent 
suffering.  The  issues,  moreover,  should  be  in  the  shape  of 
advances,  or  loans,  which  were  to  be  repaid  when  the  next 
crop  was  gathered.  Furthermore,  he  felt  that  these  advances 
ought  to  be  a  lien  against  the  crop,  "not  only  to  assure  the 
Government  against  loss,  but  to  impress  upon  those  to  whom 
they  are  made,  habits  of  industry  and  thrift,  by  considera- 
tions of  interest,  as  well  as  morals." 

He  wanted  these  advances  to  be  made  to  the  colored 
people  who  were  cultivating  lands  for  themselves,  and  only 
when  this  was  impossible,  to  planters  who,  without  some 
help,  would  be  unable  to  give  employment  to  the  freedmen. 

102  Canby  to  Chief  of  Staff,  December  23,  1867,  Second  Military  District 
Letters  Sent,  No.  1891,  1867.  Also  Canby  to  Orr,  December  24,  1867,  Canby 
Letters. 

103  Canby  to  Chief  of  Staff,  December  23,  1867,  Second  Military  District 
Letters  Sent,  No.  1891,  1867. 


"The  Great  Reconstruction"  77 

The  prospect  was  gloomy  and  Canby  was  preparing  for  the 
worst.  He  was  even  thinking  of  establishing  labor  agencies 
to  disseminate  information  and  thus  diminish  the  necessity 
of  making  either  issues  or  advances.104 

This  doleful  account,  and  others  like  it,  impressed  the 
cabinet,105  and  Commissioner-General  O.  O.  Howard,  of  the 
Freedmen's  Bureau,  was  instructed  to  take  action.  Rations 
were  issued  to  refugees  and  freedmen,106  and,  after  February 
27, 1868,  the  advances  made  to  aid  the  depressed  agricultural 
interests  in  South  Carolina  were  considered  liens  upon  the 
property  of  the  persons  to  whom  they  were  granted.107  For 
those  destitute  individuals  who  were  not  included  in  the 
ministrations  of  the  Freedmen's  Bureau,  Canby  directed  the 
poor  wardens  of  the  two  states  to  apply  to  their  relief  the 
proceeds  derived  from  licenses,  forfeitures,  and  fines  ema- 
nating from  the  sale  of  spirituous  or  intoxicating  liquors.108 

On  August  5,  1868,  General  Canby  relinquished  command 
of  the  troops  in  the  late  Second  Military  District  and  return- 
ed to  Washington,  there  to  resume  command  of  the  depart- 
ment he  had  left  almost  a  year  before.109  He  had  experienced 
many  vicissitudes  during  the  months  of  constructive  and 
unconstructive  reconstruction  in  the  Carolinas.  Accused  of 
radicalism  by  some,  he  was  certainly  not  the  most  lenient 

104  Canby  to  Chief  of  Staff,  December  20,  1867,  Second  Military  District, 
Letters  Sent,  No.  1861,  1867. 

105  John  T.  Morse,  Jr.,  (ed.),  Diary  of  Gideon  Welles  (Boston,  1911),  III, 
245-246;  and  Theodore  C.  Pease  and  J.  G.  Randall,  (eds.),  The  Diary  of 
Orville  Hickman  Browning  (Springfield,  1925  and  1933),  II,  170.  The  entry 
of  December  24,  1867  in  both. 

106In  April,  1868,  7,357  rations  were  issued  in  North  Carolina.  The  average 
number  of  persons  assisted  daily  between  September  1,  1867  and  September 
1,  1868  was  1,363.  In  South  Carolina  it  was  1,944.  See  Report  of  the  Com- 
missioner of  the  Freedmen's  Bureau  for  1868  in  "Report  of  the  Secretary 
of  War,"  House  Executive  Document  No.  1,  Fortieth  Congress,  Third  Ses- 
sion, 1039  and  1027. 

107  Report  of  the  Commissioners  of  the  Freedman's  Bureau  for  1868  in 
"Report  of  the  Secretary  of  War,"  House  Executive  Document,  No.  2, 
Fortieth  Congress,  Third  Session,  1041.  That  was  not  done  in  North  Caro- 
lina, see  Miles  to  Caziarc,  May  8,  1868,  Freedmen's  Bureau,  Assistant  Com- 
missioner for  North  Carolina,  Letters  Sent,  No.  778,  1868.  Also  see  Apple- 
ton's  Annual  Cyclopedia,  1868,  693. 

108  General  Order  No.  164,  December  31,  1867,  "General  Orders-Recon- 
struction," 83.  Also  see  Canby  to  Worth,  March  26,  1868,  Second  Military 
District,  Letters  Sent,  No.  1202,  1868. 

109  General  Order  No.  150,  August  5,  1868,  Second  Military  District, 
General  Orders,  1868;  and  General  Order  No.  49,  August  14,  1868,  De- 
partment of  Washington,  General  Orders,  1868,  56. 


78  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

of  the  military  governors.  To  say,  as  did  John  S.  Reynolds, 
that  his  rule  was  "as  brutish  a  tyranny  as  ever  marked  the 
course  of  any  government  whose  agents  and  organs  claimed 
it  to  be  civilized,"  is  going  too  far.110  The  evidence  belies  it. 

There  is  no  denying  that  Canby  had  complete  control 
over  North  and  South  Carolina.111  As  Major  Birkhimer  has 
pointed  out  in  his  treatise  on  military  government  and 
martial  law,  "It  is  difficult  to  conceive  of  a  more  rigid  system 
of  martial  law"  than  that  which  Congress  established  in  the 
spring  and  summer  of  1867.  For  "completeness  of  design  and 
efficacy  of  measures  for  carrying  them  into  execution," 
nothing  could  surpass  the  Reconstruction  acts.112  Congres- 
sional Reconstruction  was,  as  Governor  Worth  maintained,  a 
"military  despotism." 

Having  to  function  as  the  legislature,  executive,  and 
judiciary,  all  in  one,  was  a  great  responsibility,  but  Canby 
did  not  shrink  from  the  task.  Acting  as  the  agent  of  Congress, 
he  was  guided  by  the  principle  that  the  power  conferred 
upon  him  by  the  Reconstruction  acts  was  "limited  and  de- 
termined by  the  clear  intent  of  those  laws  as  indicated  by 
the  duties  devolved  upon  the  District  Commanders  and  its 
exercise  must  be  incident  or  necessary  to  the  full  and  proper 
performance  of  their  duties." 113  When  they  were  not,  he 
"uniformly  declined  to  ratify  [the]  ordinances  or  declara- 
tions" made  by  the  conventions  authorized  under  the  law  of 
March  23,  1867.114  In  addition,  he  took  "particular  pains"  not 
to  know  how  the  political  parties"  stood  in  his  district.115 

It  was  only  natural  for  the  conservative  whites  of  North 
and  South  Carolina,  like  their  brethren  throughout  the  South, 
to  complain  and  to  make  out  the  best  case  possible  for  them- 
selves in  the  eyes  of  the  rest  of  the  nation.  To  that  end  they 

110  Reynolds,  Reconstruction  in  South  Carolina,  98. 

111  The  general  of  the  army  had  supervisory  control  over  his  actions,  and 
in  cases  where  the  death  penalty  was  invoked,  the  President  had  to  give 
his  consent. 

113  Major  William  E.  Birkhimer,  Military  Government  and  Martial  Law 
(Kansas  City,  1914),  482,  485. 

113  Canby  to  B.  F.  Flanders,  January  23,  1869,  Fifth  Military  District, 
Letters  Sent,  No.  289,  1869. 

114  Canby  to  William  G.  Hale,  February  11,  1869,  Fifth  Military  District, 
Letters  Sent,  No.  640,  1869. 

115  See  Canby's  interview  with  the  reporter  of  the  New  York  Sun,  quoted 
in  the  Daily  Richmond  Whig,  September  2,  1869. 


"The  Great  Reconstruction"  79 

often  perverted  and  misrepresented  the  facts,  construing 
almost  everything  that  had  to  do  with  Congressional  Recon- 
struction in  the  worst  imaginable  light.  Canby's  jury  order 
was  a  perfect  example  of  that  strategem. 

It  is  understandable  that  they  should  have  used  every 
means  at  their  command  to  try  to  throw  off  the  yoke  of  Con- 
gressional Reconstruction  as  quickly  as  possible  and  to  re- 
sume their  former  way  of  life.  Since  the  methods  of  opposi- 
tion available  to  them  were  extremely  limited,  they  adopted 
the  course  of  passive  resistance.  With  hindsight,  that  proce- 
dure can  be  seen  to  have  been  undesirable,  and  to  that  extent 
they  must  therefore  share  the  blame  for  what  happened. 

General  Canby  had  little  to  do  with  the  original  registra- 
tion in  the  Second  Military  District.  A  few  Carolinians  may 
have  been  disfranchised  on  account  of  his  interpretation  of 
the  law,  but  probably  as  many  were  enfranchised  by  the 
liberality  with  which  he  revised  the  registration  lists.  It  will 
be  recalled  that  an  increase  of  23,000  resulted  after  this 
occurred.116  Even  so,  by  the  vote  recorded  in  each  of  the 
elections,  first  on  the  convention  question  and  then  on  the 
ratification  of  the  constitutions,  it  is  evident  that  it  was  not 
he  who  kept  the  whites  away  from  the  polls.  In  South  Caro- 
lina, in  particular,  it  was  they  who  refused  to  avail  them- 
selves of  their  opportunity.  Instead,  they  preferred  to  re- 
main quiescent,  thus  fostering  the  growth  of  a  myth  about 
how  military  "satraps"  did  the  bidding  of  a  Radical  Congress 
and  foisted  off  on  them  constitutions  and  officials  they  did 
not  want,  but  about  whom  they  could  do  nothing.  It  is  a 
half-truth.  In  a  moment  of  compassion,  Jonathan  Worth  once 
referred  to  Canby  and  the  other  officers  who  were  called 
upon  to  carry  out  the  congressional  program  as  "poor 
devils/'117  How  right  he  was!  It  was  unfortunate  for  the  army 
that  its  officer  corps  had  to  be  made  the  instrument  of  radical 
designs. 

Undoubtedly,  Canby  sympathized  with  the  congressional 
policy  toward  the  South,  but  he  was  not  vindictive.  No  die- 

118  Those  who  could  have  registered  previously  and  had  failed  to  do  so 
account  for  most  of  this  number.  See  Canby  Report,  1868,  340-341. 

n7  Worth  to  John  Kerr,  January  1,  1868,  Hamilton,  Worth  Correspond- 
ence, II,  1101. 


80  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

hard  radical  of  the  Stevens-Sumner  stripe  would  have  ever 
countenanced  an  easing  of  the  reconstruction  code  such  as 
Canby  proposed.  If  anything,  Canby's  rule  was  paternalistic, 
especially  toward  the  Negro,  and  many  of  the  measures  that 
he  initiated  were  beneficial  to  the  Carolinas.  Charles  W. 
Ramsdell's  opinion  of  Canby's  administration  in  Texas  is 
applicable  also  to  his  conduct  of  Carolina  affairs.  It  was 
"vigorous  and  firm,  but  just." 118 

"Wise  statesmanship"  has  been  attributed  to  Canby; 119 
perhaps  that  is  too  high  an  evaluation.  Integrity  he  had;  con- 
ciliatory in  spirit  and  with  an  understanding  of  the  difficul- 
ties that  lay  before  him,  he  tried  to  be  a  good  military 
governor— whether  he  was  or  was  not  is  a  matter  of  personal 
opinion. 

"*  Charles  W.  Ramsdell,  Reconstruction  in  Texas  (New  York,  1910),  266. 

119  George  W.  Cullum,  Biographical  Register  of  the  Officers  and  Graduates 
of  the  United  States  Military  Academy  .  .  .  1802-1890  (Washington,  1891), 
II,  21. 


THE  FREE  AGRICULTURAL  POPULATION  IN 

SUMTER  DISTRICT,  SOUTH  CAROLINA, 

1850-1860 

By  Margaret  Burr  DesChamps 

Sumter  District,  South  Carolina,  provides  an  interesting 
case  study  in  the  social  structure  of  the  rural  South  on  the 
eve  of  the  Civil  War.  The  area  in  which  it  lay  was  frequently 
spoken  of  as  the  Middle  Country— a  name  which  applied  to 
its  geographical  position,  and  rather  aptly  described  the 
folkways  of  its  people.  Akin  to  both  Tidewater  and  Up- 
country,  its  social  life  did  not  partake  exclusively  of  the 
flavor  of  either.  The  district,  located  between  the  Fall  Line 
and  the  Tidewater,  was  comprised  of  a  variety  of  soils  which 
formed  the  basis  for  a  diversified  agricultural  life.  Although 
most  of  the  country  was  flat  and  the  soil  generally  produc- 
tive, extensive  tracts  of  sand  existed  throughout  the  area, 
especially  in  the  northwest.  There  lay  the  High  Hills  of 
Santee,  a  picturesque  range  which  were  the  refuge  of  poor 
whites  and  a  favorite  summer  retreat  for  planters  from  the 
Low  Country.1 

Whether  they  resided  in  the  sandhills,  in  Sumterville,  or 
along  the  banks  of  the  Black  River,  the  people  of  the  district 
were  predominantly  interested  in  agriculture.  Although  few 
of  the  6,857  whites  and  320  free  colored  people  left  written 
records  of  their  lives  and  endeavors,  the  head  of  each  family 
sketched  in  profile  his  worldly  accomplishments  when  he 
made  his  brief  report  to  the  census  enumerator  in  I860.2 

,    *  For    a    description    of    Sumter    District    see    William    G.    Simms,    The 
Geography  of  South  Carolina  (Charleston,  1843),  132-135. 

2  In  preparing  this  paper  microfilm  copies  of  the  Sumter  District  manu- 
script census  schedules  for  the  Seventh  Census  (1850)  and  Eighth  Census 
(1860)  were  used.  Schedules  I  (Free  Inhabitants)  and  II  (Slave  Inhabi- 
tants), owned  by  Emory  University,  were  microfilmed  by  the  Bureau  of 
Census,  Department  of  Commerce,  Washington.  Schedules  IV  (Produc- 
tions of  Agriculture),  V  (Productions  of  Industry),  and  VI  (Social  Sta- 
tistics) were  microfilmed  for  the  writer  by  the  South  Carolina  Historical 
Commission,  Columbia,  where  the  original  schedules  are  deposited.  The 
method  used  in  studying  the  census  schedules  is  essentially  that  of  Frank 
and  Harriet  Owsley  who  begin  with  Schedule  IV  and  supplement  it  with 
Schedules  I  and  II.  The  process  is  explained  in  Herbert  Weaver,  Missis- 
sippi Farmers,  1850-1860  (Nashville,  1945),  14-17.  Except  when  noted,  all 
subsequent  information  about  the  agricultural  population  is  taken  from 
these  schedules. 

[81] 


82  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

About  seventy-five  per  cent  of  the  1508  white  heads  of 
families  and  forty  per  cent  of  the  84  free  Negro  heads  of 
families  indicated  that  they  devoted  all  or  a  portion  of  their 
time  to  farming.3  An  excellent  index  to  the  lives  of  eighty-two 
per  cent  of  these  agriculturalists  is  given  in  Schedule  IV  of 
the  unpublished  census  manuscripts,  which  is  entitled  Pro- 
ductions of  Agriculture.  While  it  is  regrettable  that  a  portion 
of  the  rural  people  were  not  included  in  this  report,  it  still 
provides  a  valid  cross  section  for  study.  An  analysis  of  the 
omitted  farm  population  shows  that  this  group  included  both 
the  poor  and  the  well-to-do. 

The  southern  planter  was  well  represented  in  the  ante- 
bellum society  of  Sumter  District.  At  the  top  of  this  group 
were  the  Pinckneys,  Rutledges,  Hugers  and  friends  who  an- 
nually moved  from  their  Low  Country  residences  to  summer 
homes  in  Statesburgh,  Bradford  Springs  and  other  communi- 
ties of  the  High  Hills.4  While  they  composed  the  top  segment 
of  society  in  the  district,  about  twenty-three  per  cent  of  the 
families  reported  on  Schedule  IV  as  engaged  in  agriculture 
were  members  of  the  planter  class.  About  one-half  of  the 
16,682  slaves  in  the  district  were  in  the  hands  of  this  class. 
However,  only  eight  per  cent  were  large  planters  who  culti- 
vated as  many  as  500  acres  of  land  and  owned  fifty  or  more 
slaves. 

Although  these  large  slaveholders  were  found  throughout 
the  district,  they  were  especially  numerous  in  Statesburgh 
and  Providence.  Typical  of  the  Episcopalian  planters  in  the 
High  Hills  was  William  Richardson.  Richardson,  who  found 
little  of  interest  in  the  "dry  and  monotonous  Sand  Hills" 
other  than  horse  racing,  depended  on  overseers  to  manage 
his  crops  and  sent  his  sons  to  boarding  school  in  Winnsboro. 
His  wife,  a  devout  church  member,  spent  most  of  her  time 
making  jockey  outfits  that  would  "answer  for  Charleston," 
conferring  with  overseers,  and  writing  her  sons  of  the  evils 
of  drinking,  card  playing,  and  cursing.  Upon  the  young  boys, 

3  Ten  per  cent  of  the  white  heads  and  forty-five  per  cent  of  the  free 
Negroes  did  not  state  an  occupation,  and  fifteen  per  cent  of  both  groups 
indicated  that  they  were  engaged  in  some  non-farm  occupation. 

*  Lawrence  F.  Brewster,  Summer  Migrations  and  Resorts  of  South  Caro- 
lina Low-Country  Planters  (Durham,  1947),  46-48,  74-75. 


Population  in  Sumter  District  83 

James  and  Dick,  she  placed  the  responsibility  of  keeping 
the  family  in  a  position  of  affluence  and  leadership.  Her  let- 
ters to  them  reveal  the  anxiety  of  an  elder  generation  over 
the  continuance  of  family  prestige.5 

Among  the  Richardson's  wealthy  neighbors  was  J.  A. 
Colclough.  The  size  of  his  plantation  home  is  indicated  by 
the  inventory  of  his  estate  in  which  the  administrator  enum- 
erated and  described  more  than  fifty  chairs  and  twenty-five 
mattresses.  Among  the  furnishings  illustrative  of  the  Col- 
clough mode  of  living  were  glass  shades,  glass  candlesticks, 
brass  fire  dogs  and  fends,  a  piano  cover,  a  set  of  dining 
tables,  books,  and  one  lot  of  silverware.6  In  1860  the  personal 
property  of  Colclough's  widow  was  valued  at  $436,000. 

In  the  Black  River  section  of  the  district  lived  well-to-do 
Presbyterian  planters  like  Samuel  McBride.  In  his  will  Mc- 
Bride  left  explicit  instructions  as  to  how  he  wanted  his  plan- 
tation operated  after  his  death.  He  desired  an  overseer  "of 
good  moral  character"  to  be  hired  to  manage  his  lands.  By 
sale  of  the  "more  inferior,  the  dirty  and  immoral  ones"  and 
the  "unruly  or  Troublesome,"  he  wished  his  slaves  to  be  re- 
duced to  "not  more  than  Thirty  working  hands  .  .  .  exclus- 
ive of  House  Servants  and  Mechanicks."  These  slaves  were 
to  receive  two  suits  of  clothing  and  one  pair  of  shoes  each 
year.7 

Of  especial  concern  to  McBride  was  the  education  of  his 
son,  James,  who  would  some  day  succeed  him  as  master  of 
the  plantation.  His  friend  and  neighbor  George  Cooper 
was  entrusted  with  the  superintendance  of  James'  school- 
ing. The  boy  was  to  spend  two  or  more  years  learning 
"some  useful  Mechanical  art"  before  entering  college  and 
was  to  "be  allowed  much  exercise  in  the  country  air."  But 
"my  greatest  desire,"  stated  McBride,  "is  that  he  be  early 
taught  the  great  truths  of  the  christian  Religion  as  con- 
tained in  the  scriptures  of  the  old  and  new  Testament,  also 
the  catechisms  of  the  Presbyterian  church,  and  that  he  be 

B  James  B.  Richardson  Papers  (Duke  University). 

"Sumter  District  Wills,  1860-1867,  67-74  (Sumter  County  Courthouse). 

7  Sumter  District  Wills,  1839-1862,  330-334. 


84  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

taught  to  obey  implicitly  those  who  have  the  rule  over 
him  these  I  prize  above  all  worldly  considerations."  8 

Most  Sumter  planters,  of  course,  did  not  enjoy  the  wealth 
of  the  Richardsons,  Colcloughs,  and  McBrides.  Isaac  Lenoir, 
who  owned  forty-eight  slaves  and  farmed  300  acres  of 
improved  land  in  1850,  belonged  to  the  small  planter  group. 
At  his  death  in  1859  his  household  furniture  was  returned  as: 
one  set  of  dining  tables,  one  secretary,  one  sideboard,  one 
card  table,  one  lot  of  crockery  and  glass,  one  dozen  chairs, 
one  rocking  chair,  and  bedsteads.9  Yet,  families  like  the 
Lenoirs  lived  comfortably  and  exerted  considerable  influ- 
ence in  community  affairs. 

The  papers  of  Robert  Fraser,  small  planter  on  Black  River, 
show  how  widespread  the  interests  of  men  of  this  group 
might  be.  In  addition  to  managing  his  land  and  slaves, 
Fraser  was  at  various  times:  captain  in  the  militia,  member 
of  the  Society  of  Vigilance,  school  teacher,  magistrate,  pres- 
ident of  his  temperance  society,  member  of  the  debater's 
club,  clerk  of  the  session  of  the  Bishopville  Presbyterian 
Church,  school  trustee,  and  overseer  of  the  road  on  which 
he  lived.  An  avid  reader,  he  subscribed  to  various  periodi- 
cals including  the  Southern  Presbyterian,  True  Southron, 
Columbia  Hive,  Christian  World,  South  Carolina  Temper- 
ance Advocate,  and  Santee  Banner,  and  frequently  wrote 
letters  to  the  editors  on  matters  which  he  believed  to  be  of 
public  interest.  Indeed,  one  wonders  how  he  found  time  to 
write  so  frequently  to  newspaper  editors,  friends  and  rela- 
tives who  moved  west,  citizens  of  Charleston  who  might 
give  information  on  his  prospective  son-in-law,  associates 
in  the  Sons  of  Temperance,  and  even  President  Lincoln 
whose  aid  he  sought  in  receiving  payment  for  taking  the 
census  of  I860.10  In  spite  of  his  many  activities,  Fraser  was 
a  successful  farmer. 

A  study  of  the  manuscript  census  returns  reveals  that 
most  Sumter  District  farmers  were  yeomen  who  cultivated 
from  one  to  199  acres  of  improved  land  and  about  one-half 

8  Sumter  District  Wills,  1839-1862,  330-334. 

9  Sumter   District  Inventories   and   Sales,   1858-1867,   55-57. 

10  Robert  Fraser  Papers  (in  posession  of  Francis  J.  DesChamps,  Bishop- 
ville, South  Carolina). 


Population  in  Sumter  District  85 

of  whom  owned  slaves.11  One  of  these  plain  people  who 
desired  to  sell  his  farm  in  1850  described  it  as: 

A  highly  improved  Farm  in  the  vicinity  of  Sumterville,  con- 
taining about  two  hundred  acres  of  land,  only  fifty  of  which 
is  cleared  the  balance  being  well  wooded. — Said  Farm  has  on  it 
a  commodious  Dwelling  House,  nearly  new,  with  Stables  and 
suitable  Outbuildings  all  in  fine  order. — Also  a  Garden  in  a 
high  state  of  cultivation  and  a  fine  Fruit  Orchard.12 

While  the  main  crop  of  the  yeomen  was  cotton,  considerable 
attention  was  paid  to  sweet  potatoes  and  corn.  These  were 
cultivated  with  the  help  of  slaves  and  members  of  the  family 
who  sometimes  worked  together  in  the  fields. 

Among  the  substantial  yeomen  in  the  district  was  Elisha 
Spencer  who  combined  subsistence  farming  with  storekeep- 
ing  at  a  crossing  on  Lynch's  River.  It  was  no  great  love  of 
the  mercantile  business  that  accounted  for  Spencer's  build- 
ing a  little  store  in  his  front  yard.  Selling  a  penny's  worth  of 
candy,  a  gallon  of  sticky  molasses,  and  listening  to  the  idle 
chatter  of  the  men  who  stood  around  his  stove,  he  described 
as  loathsome  activity.  But  he  seemed  to  have  little  choice  of 
occupation.  Possessing  no  formal  education,  he  could  not 
easily  enter  a  profession,  and  since  he  believed  that  slavery 
was  morally  wrong  he  did  not  aspire  to  become  a  planter.13 
Instead,  he  became  a  subsistence  farmer  who  planted  seven 
acres  and  owned  land  and  buildings  valued  at  $700. 

Like  many  a  farmer's  wife,  Mary  Spencer  found  her  days 
full.  She  spun  cloth,  made  clothes  for  her  six  children— even 
suits  for  the  boys—,  baked  cakes  for  her  nieces,  and  kept 
an  open  house  for  relatives  and  visiting  ministers.14  Her  life 
was  further  complicated  by  the  fact  that  her  Connecticut 

11  Twenty-one  per  cent  of  slaveholders  in  Sumter  District  engaged  in 
agriculture  owned  from  one  to  four  slaves,  twenty  per  cent  owned  from 
five  to  nine,  twenty-two  per  cent  owned  from  ten  to  nineteen.  Thus  sixty- 
three  per  cent  of  the  slaveholders  were  farmers  owning  less  than  twenty 
slaves. 

13 Black  River  Watchman  (Sumterville),  September  14,  1850. 

13  "Reminiscences  of  Mattie  Spencer  MacDowell"  (typed  copy  in  pos- 
session of  the  writer).  Mrs.  MacDowell,  who  writes  from  a  remarkably 
detached  and  objective  point  of  view,  was  a  grand-daughter  of  Elisha  and 
Mary  Spencer. 

14  Mary  Spencer  to  Mary  Fraser,  undated  letters,  in  Spencer-Fraser 
Papers  (in  possession  of  Mrs.  Mattie  S.  MacDowell,  York,  South  Carolina). 


86  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

husband  constantly  irritated  a  community  whose  opinions 
on  slavery,  the  way  of  salvation,  and  the  merits  of  the  South- 
ern cause,  he  did  not  share.15  It  is  well  understood  why  Mary 
Spencer  would  exclaim  to  her  mother:  "O  I  have  so  much 
on  my  hands  and  mind  I  don't  know  which  way  to  turn."  16 

In  spite  of  her  many  household  responsibilities  Mary  Spen- 
cer showed  concern  for  the  social  life  of  her  children. 
Throughout  the  fifties  she  arranged  for  them  to  visit  their 
cousins  when  possible,  and  children  were  frequent  guests 
in  their  home.  Such  visits  were  possible  because  Mary's 
father  gave  her  two  or  three  slaves  to  help  with  the  house 
work  and  garden.  While  the  children  seem  not  to  have  had 
big  parties  at  home,  their  parents  let  them  attend  such  fes- 
tivities as  Christmas  trees  at  the  local  academy.17 

The  Spencer  household  was  marked  by  economy  and 
piety,  yet  home  life  was  not  drab  and  sombre.  By  the  sixties 
their  home  was  in  no  sense  lavishly  furnished,  but  was  color- 
ful and  comfortable.  For  example,  one  daughter  had  a  grey 
bedroom  suite  with  pink  rosebuds  painted  on  it,  and  the 
guest  who  slept  under  the  beautiful  pink  marseilles  quilt 
was  seldom  again  to  find  a  comparable  covering.18 

While  the  pleasures  of  simple  living  enjoyed  by  the  Spen- 
cers did  not  extend  throughout  the  agricultural  population, 
only  a  small  percentage  of  the  farm  operators  on  or  off 
Schedule  IV  seem  to  fall  below  the  status  of  yeomen.  Of 
the  heads  of  families  on  this  schedule,  eighteen  per  cent 
owned  no  real  estate,  but  many  of  these  people  owned  slaves 
or  cultivated  sizeable  tracts  of  land.  Among  the  eighteen 
per  cent  of  the  farm  population  not  appearing  on  Schedule 
IV,  one  would  expect  to  find  the  under-privileged  of  the 
farm  group,  as  it  might  be  assumed  that  these  people  did 
not  operate  farms  which  produced  $100  in  cash  crops.19 
Yet,  investigation  shows  that  twenty-six  per  cent  of  this 
group  owned  real  estate  and  ten  per  cent  owned  slaves. 

16  "Reminiscences  of  Mattie  Spencer  MacDowell." 

16  Mary    Spencer   to    Mary    Fraser,    undated    letter,    in    Spencer-Fraser 
Papers. 

17  Mary  Spencer  to  Mary  Fraser,  undated  letters. 

18  "Reminiscences  of  Mattie  Spencer  MacDowell." 

19  Only  those  operators  whose  farms  yielded  as  much  as  $100  in  cash 
crops  are  included  on  Schedule  IV. 


Population  in  Sumter  District 


87 


Among  the  thirty-four  men  who  composed  the  lowest  eco- 
nomic bracket,  those  who  owned  neither  real  estate  nor 
personal  property,  were  two  paupers  and  three  illiterates; 
but  they  were  not  representative  of  the  group.  As  a  whole 
these  non-propertied  people  were  young  men  just  beginning 
the  business  of  farming.  A  number  told  the  census  taker 
that  they  had  married  within  the  previous  year  and  others 
were  unmarried.  Some  of  them  bore  the  names  of  prosperous 
yeomen  and  planter  families. 

About  six  per  cent  of  the  heads  of  families  engaged  in 
agriculture  in  1860  were  overseers.  In  addition  to  these  sixty- 
five  men,  there  were  twenty-four  others  who  lived  in  the 
homes  of  the  planters  employing  them.  An  overseer  living 
in  his  employer's  home  was  doubtless  accepted  by  the  family 
and  their  friends;  sometimes  he  might  even  be  a  member 
of  the  family.  For  example,  Isaac  Richbourg  owned  200  acres 
of  improved  land  and  eleven  slaves,  but  two  of  his  sons  began 
their  careers  as  overseers  and  two  as  farm  laborers.  Nor  were 
overseers  living  in  their  own  homes  always  the  economically 
downtrodden  of  the  district.  James  Thornhill,  a  fifty-year-old 
overseer  who  owned  no  real  estate  and  only  $100  in  personal 
property  serves  as  an  illustration  of  this  point.  The  Thorn- 
hills  probably  lived  well.  A  seventeen-year-old  son  in  the 
family  who  worked  as  a  farm  laborer,  owned  $12,000  in 
real  estate  and  $22,100  in  personal  property.  Whether  this 
was  the  property  of  his  father  or  mother  which  they  chose 
to  list  in  his  name  or  a  legacy  from  some  deceased  relative 
is  unknown. 

There  were  among  the  farm  population  of  Sumter  Dis- 
trict many  farmers  who  were  poor  in  comparison  to  the 
slaveholdings  and  land  holdings  of  planters.  Some  of  these 
were  unquestionably  poor  whites,  probably  called  "po'  buck- 
ras"  by  Sumter  people  of  the  1850's,  but  to  determine  their 
number  from  the  census  schedules  seems  to  be  an  impossible 
task.  Slaveholding  and  land  holding  alone  are  not  accurate 
guides  for  setting  apart  poor  whites  from  the  rest  of  the 
population.  Although  eight  per  cent  of  the  farm  operators 
on  Schedule  IV  in  1860  did  not  own  slaves  and  did  not  state 
that  they  cultivated  any  land,   some  of  these  were  free 


88  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Negroes  and  others  were  professional  people  not  dependent 
on  their  farms  for  their  livelihood.  While  eighteen  per  cent  of 
the  operators  on  Schedule  IV  did  not  own  land,  many  of 
them  held  slaves  or  considerable  personal  property.  Even 
literacy  fails  as  a  test  for  determining  poor  whites,  for  many 
of  the  seven  per  cent  of  the  heads  of  farm  families  who  were 
illiterate  were  substantial  land  owners  and  slaveholders. 
Furthermore,  as  all  Southerners  know,  the  decisive  factor  in 
applying  this  term  is  not  always  the  absence  of  wealth  and 
education. 

By  use  of  a  master  chart  combining  information  from 
Schedules  I,  II,  and  IV,  on  occupation,  real  estate  owned, 
literacy,  slaveholding,  agricultural  productions,  and  area  of 
residence,  some  ideas  about  poor  whites  in  Sumter  District 
can  be  formed.  Small  groups  of  slaveless  families  appear 
clustered  together  in  several  areas  of  the  district.  Many  of 
them  were  small  landowners,  and  most  of  them  claimed  to 
be  literate,  but  virtually  none  of  them  were  sending  their 
children  to  school.  Today  among  the  tenant  farmers  and 
farm  laborers  of  old  Sumter  District  are  people  bearing  the 
same  family  names  as  these  underprivileged  people  of  1860. 

The  largest  group  of  these  probable  poor  whites,  some 
forty  to  fifty  families,  made  their  homes  in  the  sandy  foot 
hills  of  Bradford  Springs.  It  was  doubtless  this  area  that  the 
editor  of  the  Sumter  Banner  had  in  mind  when  he  said  that 
"in  an  area  of  three  or  four  miles  square  in  the  wealthy  and 
intelligent  District  of  Sumter,  there  can  be  found  forty-three 
children  of  the  proper  age  to  be  sent  to  school,  who  have 
never  seen  a  school-house,  who  cannot  read  or  write  their 

"   9ft 

names. 

Throughout  her  life  Mary  Boykin  Chesnut  lived  on  plan- 
tations in  or  near  the  High  Hills,  and  she  was  well  acquaint- 
ed with  the  Sandhillers.  In  the  closing  pages  of  her  Diary 
from  Dixie  she  reminisced  over  her  life-long  acquaintance 
with  a  proud,  often  arrogant,  superstitious,  and  ignorant 
people.  Milly  Trimlin  she  remembered  as  "a  perfect  specimen 
of  the  Sandhill  tackey  race."  "Her  skin,"  Mrs.  Chesnut  recall- 
ed, "was  yellow  and  leathery,  and  even  the  whites  of  her 

20  Sumter  Banner,  July  27,  1852. 


Population  in  Sumter  District  89 

eyes  were  bilious  in  color.  She  was  stumpy  and  lean,  hard- 
featured,  horny  fisted."  In  recounting  the  kindnesses  of  her 
family  to  some  of  these  people  Mrs.  Chesnut  failed  to  un- 
derstand why  they  remained  Sandhillers  from  generation  to 
generation.  "Never,"  she  wrote,  "were  people  so  aided  in 
every  way  as  these  people  are!"  Regardless  of  her  failure  to 
understand  them,  she  realized  that  they  possessed  the  same 
emotions  that  lie  deep  within  all  people.  Her  mother,  she 
stated,  offered  a  ride  to  an  old  Sandhill  acquaintance  after 
a  big  meeting  at  the  church.  The  woman  replied:  "No,  no! 
Never  mind  me.  I'm  done  in  this  world.  Take  your  namesake. 
Let  'em  all  see  my  girl  setting  by  you  in  the  carriage." 21 

As  Mrs.  Chesnut's  diary  illustrates,  contacts  of  poor  whites 
with  yeomen  and  planters  were  confined  to  such  occasions 
as  political  rallies  and  elections,  camp  meetings  and  revivals, 
and  the  visits  which  the  Sandhillers  made  to  beg  or  borrow. 
But  planters  and  yeomen  were  brought  together  through  kin- 
ship, business,  and  social  organizations.  They  worked  to- 
gether in  the  Sumter  Agricultural  Association,  sent  their 
children  to  the  local  schools,  attended  the  same  churches, 
staged  temperance  society  parades,  joined  in  debating  clubs, 
and  held  militia  picnics  and  balls  which  the  whole  country- 
side enjoyed.22  While  the  poor  whites  showed  neither  inde- 
pendence in  voting  nor  initiative  in  seeking  office,  both  yeo- 
men and  planters  manifested  keen  interest  in  seeking  office, 
and  desired  to  become  officeholders.23  Good  feeling  and 
freedom  of  association  marked  the  relationships  of  plain  folk 
and  aristocracy. 

A  considerable  number  of  free  Negroes  lived  in  Sumter 
District  in  the  1850's.24  In  1860,  five  per  cent  of  all  heads  of 
families  in  the  district  were  thus  classified.  Most  of  these 
people  lived  in  the  country,  although  only  forty  per  cent 
of  the  free  Negro  heads  of  families  were  engaged  in  agri- 

21  Mary  Boykin  Chesnut,  Diary  from  Dixie  (edited  by  Ben  Ames  Williams, 
Boston,  1949),  542-544. 

22  See  Sumter  Banner,  Sumter  Watchman,  and  Black  River  Watchman 
for  the  1850's. 

23  The  names  of  candidates  appearing  in  the  Sumter  Banner,  April  12, 
1853,  were  checked  on  Schedule  I  (unpublished),  Seventh  Census,  1850. 

24  In  this   group  were   people   of   uncertain   origin   and   race   who   were 
commonly  called  "Turks"  by  Sumter  citizens. 


90  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

culture.  The  forty-five  per  cent  of  the  free  Negro  popula- 
tion who  did  not  list  an  occupation  probably  supported 
themselves  as  domestic  servants.  For  example,  Flora,  who 
owned  no  real  estate  but  had  personal  property  valued  at 
$200,  offered  "her  services  to  the  citizens  of  Sumter  and  ad- 
joining Districts  in  the  preparation  of  bridal  feasts,  party 
suppers,  &c."  25 

Free  Negroes  engaged  in  agriculture  seem  to  have  enjoyed 
a  higher  economic  status  than  the  remainder  of  the  Negro 
population.  Two  free  Negroes,  Richard  Gayle  and  William 
Ellison,  were  slave  owners  in  1860.  As  Richard  Gayle  owned 
neither  real  estate  nor  personal  property,  his  eight  slaves 
may  have  been  members  of  his  own  family  whom  he  held 
through  legal  technicality.  William  Ellison,  however,  was 
a  large  planter  holding  sixty-four  slaves  and  cultivating  500 
acres  of  improved  land.  He  and  his  family  lived  in  the  midst 
of  the  wealthy  families  of  Statesburgh  and  occupied  a  back 
pew  in  the  local  Episcopal  church.26  A  gin  maker  by  occu- 
pation, Ellison's  advertisements  appeared  frequently  in  Sum- 
terville  newspapers.27 

Most  of  the  free  Negroes  lived  in  groups  instead  of  scat- 
tered throughout  the  population.  The  largest  community, 
consisting  of  about  twenty-three  families,  was  found  at 
Manchester.  It  appears  that  in  Manchester  and  elsewhere 
free  Negroes  and  underprivileged  white  families  associated 
with  each  other— even  to  the  extent  of  living  together.  Bill 
Tab,  a  free  Negro  farm  laborer  who  owned  no  real  estate, 
was  listed  as  the  head  of  the  house  in  which  he  resided. 
Living  with  him  was  a  white  man  forty  years  old  who  gave 
his  occupation  as  farming  and  owned  real  estate  valued  at 
$600.  An  even  more  striking  case  is  that  of  Mary  Rodgers,  a 
propertyless  black  woman,  with  whom  a  white  Baptist 
preacher,  his  wife,  and  two  children  lived.  Scattered  among 
the  census  enumerator's  listing  of  free  Negro  families  one 
finds  the  names  of  white  families  who  owned  little  or  no 
property. 

25  Sumter  Banner,  March  10,  1852. 

28  Both  the  house  and  the  pew  in  the  church  can  still  be  seen  in  States- 
burgh. 

27  For  example,  see  Black  River  Watchman,  May  11,  1850. 


Population  in  Sumter  District 


91 


With  the  exception  of  the  Negroes,  whose  lot  in  life  re- 
mained wretched,  all  groups  within  the  free  farm  population 
of  Sumter  District  prospered  in  the  1850's.  A  number  of  per- 
sons whose  names  appeared  on  Schedule  IV  of  the  Seventh 
Census  ( 1850 )  were  selected  at  random  from  scattered  sec- 
tions of  the  district  and  their  status  in  1850  and  1860  com- 
pared. They  were  classified  in  five  groups:  large  planters, 
small  planters,  slaveholding  yeomen,  non-slaveholding  yeo- 
men, and  farmers  who  owned  neither  real  estate  nor  slaves. 
In  all  groups  the  value  of  farm  implements  and  real  estate 
rose  between  1850  and  1860.  Slaveless  were  becoming  slave- 
holders and  small  slave  owners  were  increasing  their  hold- 
ings. Of  the  group  of  ten  landless  non-slaveholders  whose 
farming  operations  were  checked  in  1850  and  1860,  seven 
became  real  estate  owners  during  the  decade  and  one  be- 
came a  slave  owner.  Observing  that  the  "system  and  science 
of  agriculture  in  this  District  is  undoubtedly  in  a  state  of 
transition,"  the  editor  of  the  Sumter  Banner  stated  in  1854, 
that  with  "a  little  more  exertion  and  attention  to  stock  raising" 
Sumter  farms  would  be  as  productive  as  "the  virgin  soils  of 
the  West."28 

On  the  eve  of  the  Civil  War  Sumter  District  was,  for  the 
most  part,  composed  of  a  prospering  people  wedded  to  the 
agrarian  life.  The  advantages  and  blessings  of  this  life  were 
often  the  subject  of  local  editorials  and  were  most  idyllically 
pictured  by  the  Sumter  Banner.  After  stating  that  the  min- 
ister had  to  please  his  congregation,  the  lawyer  his  towns- 
men, and  the  merchant  and  mechanic  their  community,  the 
editor  concluded: 


The  farmer  says  just  what  he  pleases;  for  it  was  never  yet 
discovered  that  it  killed  his  cattle  or  rotted  his  potatoes.  And 
the  farmer  has  more  leisure  time  than  most  mechanics  or  pro- 
fessional men;  or  if  he  has  not,  it  is  his  own  fault.  No  farmer 
need  be  a  drudge.  His  flocks  in  the  pasture  and  his  crops  in  the 
field  are  growing  while  he  sleeps.  ...  He  relies  on  nature,  who 
labors  for  him  continually,  and  on  nature's  God,  who  never 
slumbers.29 


28  Sumter  Banner,  July  19,  1853. 
28  Sumter  Banner,  July  19,  1854. 


EDITOR  HAYNE  TO  EDITOR  KINGSBURY: 
THREE  SIGNIFICANT  UNPUBLISHED  LETTERS 

By  Francis  B.  Dedmond 

Theodore  Bryant  Kingsbury  was  one  of  the  most  dis- 
tinguished journalists  North  Carolina  has  produced.1  Noth- 
ing, however,  in  his  long  journalistic  career  seems  to  have 
so  elated  him  as  two  "notices"  he  received,  perhaps  early  in 
1858,  from  John  R.  Thompson  and  Paul  Hamilton  Hayne. 
Fifty-four  years  later,  Kingsbury  wrote: 

In  November,  1857,  I  began  the  publication  of  the  Oxford 
Leisure  Hour,2  a  literary  weekly  which  achieved  considerable 
reputation.  A  short  time  after  I  received  probably  two  of  the 
best  notices  of  any  during  my  career  from  two  distinguished 
men  of  letters,  who  were  editing  magazines  in  the  South: 
John  R.  Thompson,  editor  of  the  [Southern']  Literary  Mes- 
senger, published  in  Richmond,  Va.,  and  Paul  H.  Hayne,  who 
was  editing,  at  the  same  time,  Russell's  Magazine,  a  monthly 
containing  some  ninety  pages.  He  and  Mr.  Thompson  both  gave 


1  T.  B.  Kingsbury  was  born  in  Raleigh,  N.  C,  August  28,  1828.  He  at- 
tended the  Oxford  Male  Academy,  Love  joy  Military  Academy  at  Raleigh, 
and  the  University  of  North  Carolina.  According  to  Kingsbury,  the  first 
article  he  ever  wrote  for  a  newspaper  was  written  from  Raleigh  on  July  5, 
1845.  It  appeared  in  the  Oxford  Ledger  and  was  a  report  of  the  address 
of  Duncan  K.  MacRae  at  a  Fourth  of  July  celebration.  For  the  next  fifteen 
years,  Kingsbury  wrote  articles  for  several  papers.  Early  in  1858,  he  be- 
came editor  of  The  Leisure  Hour:  A  Literary  and  Family  News  Journal, 
which  was  published  in  Oxford,  N.  C.  Kingsbury  left  The  Leisure  Hour 
in  January  1859.  On  January  9,  1867  he  became  editor  of  a  new  weekly 
and  semi-weekly  known  as  the  Warrenton  Indicator.  He  left  The  Indicator 
on  May,  29,  1868  to  accept  a  position  with  the  Southern  Baptist  Conven- 
tion, apparently  at  Memphis,  Tennessee.  By  this  time  Kingsbury  was 
already  widely  known,  and  in  the  same  year,  1868,  Wake  Forest  College 
conferred  on  him  the  D.D.  degree.  In  March  of  1869,  he  became  associate 
editor  of  the  Raleigh  Sentinel.  On  three  occasions,  he  declined  the  editor- 
ship of  the  North  Carolina  Christian  Advocate.  He  edited  Colonel  Pool's 
Educational  Journal  in  1874-75;  and  shortly  thereafter  became  editor 
of  Colonel  Pool's  Our  Living  and  Our  Dead,  the  official  organ  of  the  North 
Carolina  branch  of  the  Southern  Historical  Society,  a  journal  published 
in  Raleigh.  In  1876,  Kingsbury  joined  the  staff  of  the  Wilmington  Morning 
Star  and  served  as  its  editor  for  twelve  years  and  eight  months.  In  1888, 
the  University  of  North  Carolina  conferred  on  him  the  LL.D.  degree.  He 
next  joined  the  staff  of  the  Wilmington  Messenger,  working  on  that  paper 
for  thirteen  years.  For  six  months,  he  edited  the  Oxford  Torchlight,  a  popu- 
lar weekly.  He  died  in  1913. 

2  Kingsbury  is  in  error  here.  The  first  issue  of  The  Leisure  Hour:  A 
Literary  and  Family  News  Journal  appeared  February  4,  1858,  with  T.  B. 
Kingsbury  listed  as  editor. 


[92] 


Hayne  to  Kingsbury  93 

me  most  cordial  notices  and  I  have  rarely  ever  had  such  pleasant 
references  to  myself  in  all  my  long  career  since  as  an  editor.3 

In  so  far  as  is  known,  the  "notice"  by  Thompson  did  not 
lead  to  a  correspondence  between  the  two  men,  but,  accord- 
ing to  Kingbury,  he  "had  the  pleasure  of  a  considerable  cor- 
respondence" with  Paul  Hamilton  Hayne,4  the  twenty-eight 
year  old  editor  of  Russell's  Magazine.  To  judge  by  Hayne's 
later  procedure,  it  may  be  assumed  that  he  carefully  pre- 
served his  correspondence  from  Kingsbury.  However,  at  the 
time  of  the  bombardment  of  Charleston  during  the  Civil 
War,  Hayne's  "beautiful  home  was  burned  to  the  ground, 
and  his  large  handsome  library  utterly  lost"  5— and,  presum- 
ably his  carefully  preserved  correspondence  also  burned.6 
Only  three  of  Hayne's  letters  to  Kingsbury  from  their  "con- 
siderable correspondence"  have  come  down  to  us,  and  they 
are  now  in  the  Southern  Historical  Collection  of  the  Uni- 
versity of  North  Carolina. 

The  first  number  of  The  Leisure  Hour:  A  Literary  and 
Family  News  Journal,  a  weekly,  was  published  at  Oxford, 
North  Carolina,  February  4,  1858.  The  paper  was  owned  by 
F.  K.  Strother  and  was  edited  by  Kingsbury.  In  the  March  4, 
1858  number,  Kingsbury  published  a  highly  laudatory  ar- 
ticle on  Hayne.  Hayne  is  declared  to  be  unsurpassed  by  no 
remembered  American  author  as  a  writer  of  sonnets,  "and 
we  have  no  doubt  but  the  reader,  if  animated  with  a  true 
poetic  taste  and  sympathy,  will  agree  with  us  that  they 
[Hayne's  sonnets]  are  among  the  best  in  the  language.  They 
remind  us  of  Wordsworth  and  Mrs.  Browning,  and  indicate 
that  his  is  that  tone  of  mind  that  Voluntarily  moves  har- 
monious numbers,' " 7 


3  "Farewell  Letter  by  Dr.  Kingsbury,"  in  "The  North  Carolina  Review, 
Literary  and  Historical  Section"  of  the  Raleigh  News  and  Observer,  Sep- 
tember 3,  1911. 

4  [T.  B.  Kingsbury],  "Review  of  Hayne's  The  Mountain  of  the  Lovers," 
Our  Living  and  Dead,  III  (July,  1875),  139. 

5  Margaret  J.  Preston,  "Biographical  Sketch,"  in  Poems  of  Paul  Hamilton 
Hayne   (complete  edition;  Boston:  D.  Lothrop  and  Company,  1882),  vii. 

9  No  letters  from  Hayne  to  Kingsbury,  for  example,  are  to  be  found 
in  the  numerous  letters  in  the  Paul  Hamilton  Hayne  Collection  of  Duke 
University. 

7  "Paul  H.  Hayne,"  The  Leisure  Hour  (Oxford,  N.  C),  March  4,  1858. 


94  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

In  the  April  1,  1858  issue,  Kingsbury  published  what  he 
described  as  a  "graceful  little  poem  .  .  .  from  the  pen  of  the 
accomplished  Editor  of  Russell's  Magazine."  It  seems  to  have 
been  written  especially  for  The  Leisure  Hour;  and,  so  far 
as  is  known,  has  not  been  republished. 

Sunset  and  Moonshine 

I 

Here,  glancing  from  this  breezy  Height, 
Whilst  the  still  Day  goes  slowly  down, 

And  sombre  Evening's  shadows  brown, 
Close  o'er  the  purple  flushing  light, 

II 

I  mark  the  softer  radiant  rest 

Of  the  calm  moon,  till  now  unseen, 
Along  the  Ocean  tides  serene, 

Scarce  heaving  toward  the  faded  West ; 

III 

At  first  there  dawns  a  ghostly  ray, 
Faint  as  a  new-born  infant's  dreams, 

But  soon  an  ampler  glory  streams, 
And  trembling  up  the  lustrous  Bay, 

IV 

Long  level  shafts  of  silvery  glow 

Lead  upward  to  the  quiet  skies, 
The  radiant  paths  to  Paradise 

Revealed  when  all  is  dark  below.8 

On  April  15,  1858,  Kingsbury  republished  in  The  Leisure 
Hour  Hayne's  short  tale  "The  Skaptar  Yokul:  A  Tale  of  Ice- 
land." Hayne  had  originally  published  the  tale  anonymously 
in  Russell's  Magazine  a  year  before,  but  here  the  tale  ap- 
peared under  Hayne's  name  and  perhaps  for  the  first  time. 
In  the  next  number  of  The  Leisure  Hour,  April  22,  1858, 
Kingsbury  began  the  republication  of  Hayne's  tale  "One  Too 
Many:  A  Tale  of  the  Equinox."  This  tale  too  had  been  pub- 
lished anonymously  by  Hayne  in  Russell's  for  June  1857. 
Kingsbury  continued  the  tale  serially  under  Hayne's  name 
in  the  next  three  issues  of  The  Leisure  Hour,  April  29,  1858, 

8  The  Leisure  Hour  (Oxford,  N.  C),  April  1,  1858. 


Hayne  to  Kingsbury 


95 


May  6,  1858  and  May  13,  1858.  While  "One  Too  Many"  was 
running  serially  in  The  Leisure  Hour,  Hayne  wrote  the  fol- 
lowing letter  to  Kingsbury: 

Charleston  May  4th,  58 
My  Dear  Sir ; 

Your  very  courteous  letter  of  the  6th  ult  was  recd  in  due 
season,  but  this  is  the  first  opportunity  I  have  had  to  reply. 

Let  me  thank  you  for  the  kind  expressions  you  employ  in  ref- 
erence to  my  vol  of  Sonnets ;  if  agreeable  to  you  I  shall  do  myself 
the  honor,  &  pleasure  of  mailing  you  another,  and  more  juvenile 
book  of  verses  which  was  published  by  Ticknor,  &  Fields  of 
Boston  in  1854.9 

The  late  nos  of  the  "Leisure  Hour"  have  all  reached  me,  &  I 
may  say  truly  that  the  better  acquainted  I  become  with  the  style 
of  your  Editorials,  &  the  general  conduct  of  the  journal,  the 
more  I  am  inclined  to  like  it.  The  literary  criticisms  are  un- 
usually thoughtful  &  just;  in  fine,  your  paper  is  an  excellent 
one,  and  I  hope  it  may  succeed.  I  d'ont  [sic]  tell  you  to  be 
sanguine  about  success  however.  Long,  &  melancholy  acquaint- 
ances with  the  temper  of  the  So.  peoples  has  [p.  2]  caused  me 
to  lose  all  confidence  in  their  grand  professions.  I  do  not  believe 
in  them,  or  in  their  promises.  For  7  years  I  have  worked  My 
Dear  Sir,  in  one  field,  or  another,  striving  to  do  all  that  one 
man  could,  to  advance  Literature,  &  the  Literary  spirit  among 
our  People.  What  has  been  my  reward?  In  no  egotistical,  &  em- 
bittered temper,  I  may  declare  that  I  have  encountered  what  to 
every  man  of  feeling,  and  courage  is  infinitely  worse  than  the 
most  savage  oppositione  [sic] — i.  e.  systematic  neglect,  &  that 
terrible  species  of  coldness  which  embodies  itself  in  quiet  sneers, 
&  the  taunts  of  the  worldling  who  despises  all  efforts  which 
bring  not  an  immediate  return  in  hard  cash ! 

Of  course  it  is  absurd  to  complain.  This  unlucky  indifference 
can  be  easily  explained  on  clear  philosophical  grounds.  At  the 
same  time  the  So.  literary  man  must  necessarily  feel  that  he 
occupies  a  wrong  position ! 

My  stories  have  been  very  correctly  published.  The  last  of 
them  "One  too  Many"  is  by  no  means  a  favorite  of  mine.  It  is 
too  extravagant,  and  melodramatic,  &  if  I  ever  republish  it  in  a 
vol.,  it  shall  be  materially  modified. 

Enclosed,  you  will  find  an  Original  Sonnet,  which  is  at  your 
disposal — ,  a  sort  of  prose-poem  or  Extravaganza  "Within  the 
Veil"  from  the  April  Russell,  which  has  proved  so  popular, 
(altho  not  pretending  to  a  spark  of  originality  in  conception, 


9  The  volume,  Poems  (Boston,  Ticknor  and  Fields),  bears  the  date  1855. 


96  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

whatever  the  execution  may  be — )  that  perhaps  you  may  like 
to  introduce  it  to  the  readers  of  the  "Leisure  Hour."  I  was  much 
annoyed  to  discover  yesterday  that  Russell's  clerk  had  neglected 
my  instructions  with  regard  to  the  Magazine;  but  after  this, 
you  may  depend  upon  receiving  it.  I  shall  mail  you  this  afternoon 
the  Jan,  Feb,  &  April  nos.,  &  when  I  can  procure  a  copy — the 
March  no.  shall  be  sent  also — Pray  let  me  have  hereafter  2 
copies  of  Every  issue  of  the  [p.  4]  Leisure  Hour;  instead  of 
directing  them  to  this  magazine  direct  them  to  me  personally. 

It  will  afford  me  pleasure  to  hear  from  you  at  any,  &  all 
times;  therefore  write  whenever  you  feel  disposed — . 

In  haste, — but  Truly  yrs. 
Paul  H.  Hayne 

P.  S.  Enclosed,  (Instead  of  enclosing  this  Editorial  which,  I 
find  increases  the  bulk  of  my  letter  unduly,  I  refer  you  to  the 
Editor's  Table  in  "Russell"  for  May),  you  will  also  find  an 
article,  extracted  from  my  Editor's  Table,  [the  analysis  I  mean 
of  Everett's  mode  of  Oratory,  &  style  as  an  author10]  which 
you  can  make  use  of,  if  it  so  pleases  you — .  This  critique — (if 
I  may  dignify  it  by  so  big  a  word)  has  attracted  considerable 
attention  in  Charleston.  Let  me  know  of  the  reception  of  this 
letter,  and  the  accompanying  periodicals,  &  thereby  oblige 

Yrs.  P.H.H.11 

Kingsbury  did  choose  to  introduce  "Within  The  Veil"  to 
the  readers  of  The  Leisure  Hour;  and  in  the  May  20,  1858 
number,  he  republished  it  under  Hayne's  name.  The  tale 
had  appeared  anonymously  in  Russell's.  Hayne  deliberately 
tried  to  keep  from  his  reading  public  the  fact  that  he  had 
published  the  tale12— at  least  until  it  had  "proved  so  popular." 

Kingsbury  did  not  review  the  "more  juvenile  book  of 
verse"  Hayne  promised  to  send  to  him;  but  in  the  May  27, 
1858  number  of  The  Leisure  Hour,  he  did  publish  a  critical 
notice  of  Hayne's  1857  volume,  Sonnets,  and  Other  Poems, 
which  was  published  in  Charleston  by  Harper  and  Calvo. 
Kingsbury  wrote:  "Among  those  who  are  struggling  with 
zeal,  ability,  and  success  in  the  cause  of  Southern  letters  is 

10  Russell's  Magazine,  III  (May,  1858),  181-183. 

11  P.  H.  Hayne  to  T.  B.  Kingsbury,  Charleston,  S.  C,  May  4,  1858.  This 
letter  and  the  other  letters  published  in  this  article  are  published  with 
the  permission  of  the  director  of  the  Southern  Historical  Collection  of 
the  University  of  North  Carolina. 

13  See  note  preceding  "Within  The  Veil,"  Russell's  Magazine,  III  (April, 
1858),  70. 


Hayne  to  Kingsbury  97 

Paul  H.  Hayne;  perhaps  the  most  successful  woer  of  the 
Muses  that  we  can  lay  claim  to."  13  Kingsbury  declared  that 
only  John  H.  Boner  among  Americans  was  a  better  writer 
of  sonnets  than  Hayne.  Hayne  "like  a  skillful  workman, 
first  found  out  what  he  was  able  to  do,  and  then  went  to 
work  to  accomplish  in  the  best  way  possible  the  duties  which 
lay  before  him."  14  Hayne  had  discussed  the  sonnet  in  the 
preface  to  Sonnets,  and  Other  Poems.  He  maintained  that 
"for  the  expression  of  a  single  cardinal  thought— its  elabora- 
tion and  'flower-like  unfolding— leaf  by  leaf,'— human  in- 
genuity could  not  have  invented  a  system  more  beautiful  and 
effective.  ...  A  successful  Sonnet  is  among  the  most  unique 
of  imaginative  creations." 15 

In  the  months  that  followed,  Kingsbury  published  several 
of  Hayne's  poems  in  The  Leisure  Hour,  and  there  is  no 
reason  to  suppose  that  their  correspondence  did  not  con- 
tinue. The  next  letter  that  has  been  preserved,  however,  is 
dated  January  25,  1859.  This  letter,  like  the  earlier  letter 
printed  above,  gives  us  an  intimate  account  of  the  trials, 
tribulations,  and  literary  heartaches  of  editor  Hayne. 

Charleston  Jan  25th  1859 
My  Dear  Sir ; 

I  have  just  reed,  the  last  number  of  the  "Leisure  Hour,"  con- 
taining your  discriminating  &  able  notice  of  the  poems  of  Mr. 
Grayson.16  I  cannot  tell  you  how  truly  grateful  I  am  at  the  ap- 
pearance of  such  an  article.  Mr.  Grayson,  besides  that  he  is  one 
of  my  dearest  personal  friends,  belongs  to  that  rare  class  of  men 
of  talent,  who,  (altho  perfectly  self-respecting),  are  so  shy  & 
modest,  that  it  takes  a  good  deal  to  bring  them  fairly  out.  His 
poems,  so  far,  have  not  reed,  the  attention  at  the  South  which 
they  deserve.  Yours,  is  one  of  the  few  comprehensive  critiques 


13  The  Leisure  Hour  (Oxford,  N.  C),  May  27,  1858. 

14  The  Leisure  Hour  (Oxford,  N.  C),  May  27,  1858. 

15  Paul  H.  Hayne,  Sonnets,  and  Other  Poems  (Charleston:  Harper  and 
Calvo,  1857),  vi. 

16 "Critical:  A  Southern  Poet,"  The  Leisure  Hour  (Oxford,  N.  C),  Janu- 
ary 20,  1859.  This  was  the  first  installment.  Kingsbury  continued  the 
article  on  Grayson  in  the  next  issue  of  The  Leisure  Hour,  January  27,  1859. 
Kingsbury  declares  that  "the  versification  of  Mr.  Grayson,  is  frequently 
vigorous  and  impressive,  and  is  almost  invariably  melliflous  and  graceful, 
whilst  the  currents  of  his  thought  run  deep  and  clear."  The  Grayson  re- 
ferred to  was  William  John  Grayson,  a  South  Carolina  planter  who  wrote 
poetry  for  a  diversion.  His  most  serious  effort  was  "Chicora"  written  in 
1856,  (Library  of  Southern  Literature),  volume  V,  2012-2013.  In  the  Janu- 
ary 20,  1859,  installment  Hayne  is  again  praised. 


98  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

upon  them  that  I  have  seen.  Really,  the  "Leisure  Hour"  is  doing 
a  good,  &  noble  work.  If  a  journal,  so  admirable  is  every  respect, 
is  not  sustained  by  the  N  Carolinians,  it  will  be  but  little  to  their 
credit.  If  I  know  myself,  this  hearty,  spontaneous  commendation 
proceeds  from  [p.  2]  no  selfish  source.  You  have  worked  gal- 
lantly for  the  South,  &  the  South,  as  Dr.  Ollapod,  hath  it,  "owes 
you  one!"  Apropos  of  Grayson,  let  me  tell  you  (in  the  strictest 
confidence),  that  the  poem  termed  "Marion"  which  is  now  in 
the  course  of  publication  in  "Russell,"  is  from  his  pen.17  I  think 
you  will  agree  with  me  that  it  is  a  most  spirited  performance, 
&  likely  to  increase  the  author's  reputation  greatly.  Indeed,  parts 
of  this  poem  are  almost  worthy  of  Sir  Walter  Scott ! 

Do  you  ever  see  among  your  Exchanges  a  paper  published  at 
N.  Orleans,  called  the  "True  Delta"?  If  so,  please  glance  at  the 
last  no.  but  one,  &  read  the  attack  upon  Simms,  Russell's  Maga- 
zine, &  one  of  the  unlucky  Editors  of  the  latter,  viz — myself.  The 
editorial  I  refer  to,  is  in  reply  to  a  few  strictures  of  mine  upon 
some  remarks  in  that  journal  a  month  or  two  ago.18  Now,  if  the 
article  meets  your  eye,  [p.  3]  pray  tell  me  if  anything  more 
provokingly  absurd  was  ever  published  in  a  newspaper !  Lest  you 
should  not  see  it,  permit  me  to  give  an  abstract  of  the  same. 
The  N.  0.  True  Delta,  referring  to  Dana's  "Household  Book  of 
Poetry,"  said  that  a  ridiculous  "clamour"  had  been  raised  on 
account  of  the  ommission  of  Simms'  name  ;19  &  went  on  to  criti- 
cise his  poetry  in  most  insulting  and  puerile  style.  To  this  I  re- 
plied by  citing  against  the  Editor  of  the  Delta,  such  authorities 


17  The  long  poem  "Marion"  appeared  in  Russell's  in  four  installment — IV 
(December  1858),  212-218;  IV  (January  1859),  313-321;  IV  (February 
1859),  406-414;  and  IV  (March  1859),  505-507.  Hayne  gives  no  hint  as  to 
why  such  secrecy  should  be  maintained.  The  poem,  it  seems,  as  a  con- 
sequence of  this  secrecy,  was  ascribed  to  Simms.  Guy  Adams  Cardwell,  Jr., 
"Charleston  Periodicals,  1795-1860:  A  Study  in  Literary  Influences,  with  a 
Descriptive  Check  List  of  Seventy-Five  Magazines"  (unpublished  Ph.D. 
dissertation,  the  University  of  North  Carolina  Library)  says  that  the 
W.  C.  Courtney  set  of  Russell's  in  the  Duke  University  Library,  John 
Russell's  personal  set  in  the  New  York  Public  Library,  and  the  F.  A. 
Porcher  set  in  the  College  of  Charleston  Library  all  ascribe  the  poem 
to  Simms. 

M  The  following  remarks  appeared  in  Hayne's  "Editor's  Table,"  Russell's 
Magazine,  IV  (January  1859),  373:  "The  New  Orlean's  True  Delta,  refer- 
ring to  what  the  editorial  critic  of  that  journal  is  pleased  to  call  the 
'clamor'  raised  at  the  south,  about  the  omission  of  Mr.  Simms'  name  in 
Dana's  'Household  Book  of  Poetry,'  says,  there  is,  really,  no  just  cause  of 
complaint,  at  least,  in  this  particular  instance,  because  to  quote  the  critics 
own  language :  'Mr.  Simms  is  not  a  poet,  for  he  lacks  the  essential  elements 
of  the  poet — imagination.  He  has  the  wish  but  not  the  wings  to  soar.  He  is 
simply  a  tolerable  verse-weaver;  but  he  weaves  with  ordinary  shuttle.  His 
is  not  the  golden-threaded  shuttle  that  flashes  to  and  fro  in  the  loom  of 
thought.' " 

18  Hayne  reviewed — if  indeed  this  be  the  right  term — Dana's  Household 
Book  of  Poetry  in  Russell's  Magazine,  IV  (January  1859),  348-353.  Hayne 
decried  the  "entire  silence  preserved  with  regard  to  most  of  the  poets  of 
the  southern  States."  As  regards  Simms,  Hayne  wrote:  "In  regard  to  Mr. 


Hayne  to  Kingsbury  99 

as  Whipple,  Poe,  Griswold,  &  Thos  Campbell.  And  how  did  the 
fellow  rebut  this  testimony ;  ?  Why,  by  saying  that  Thos.  Camp- 
bell must  have  been  idiotic  when  he  praised  Simms,  that  Poe 
must  have  been  drunk ;  &  that  as  for  Messrs  Whipple,  Griswold, 
&  Duyckink  [sic]  "their  testimony  went  for  little."20  Did  you 
ever  hear  of  such  Cockney  impudence  ? — But  eno'  of  this  matter ! 
Please  My  Dear  Sir,  let  [me]  hear  from  you  as  often  as  pos- 
sible, &  Believe  me 

Ever  Truly  P  H  Hayne21 

Two  days  after  Hayne's  letter  was  written,  Kingsbury's 
"valedictory,"  so  he  entitled  it,  appeared  in  The  Leisure 
Hour: 

With  this  number  my  editorial  connection  with  the  Leisure 
Hour  will  terminate.  The  reason  which  has  induced  this  course 
of  action  it  is  unnecessary  to  state.  .  .  .  But  the  Leisure  Hour 
has  not  become  a  popular  paper,  nor  have  I  expected  it,  owing 
to  certain  causes  which  I  refrain  from  giving.  I  here  lay  down 
my  Editorial  pen,  and  the  probability  is,  forever.  .  .  ,22 

Kingsbury's  reason  "which  .  .  .  induced  this  course  of 
action"  was  that  he  was  planning  to  study  for  the  ministry, 
and  told  Hayne  of  his  purpose.  Hayne  answered  quickly  in 
an  intimate  letter  in  which  he  laid  bare  his  own  bosom. 

Charleston  Feb  3rd  1859 
My  Dear  Mr.  Kingsbury; — I  perceive  with  sincere  regret  that 
you  have  abandoned  the  Editorship  of  the  "Leisure  Hour."  I 
cannot  say  that  the  intelligence  surprises  me,  because  I  very 
well  knew  that  the  Journal — ,  conducted  as  you  have  conducted 

Simms,  many  words  are  not  necessary.  He  is  the  first  living  writer  of  the 
south;  known  not  only  here,  but  in  the  whole  country,  and  abroad, 
wherever  American  literature  is  known  at  all.  With  high  heart,  he  has 
maintained  at  all  times,  and  in  all  places,  the  honor  of  his  native  land; 
he  has  conferred  honour  by  his  genius  on  the  whole  country.  His  fame  rests 
on  solid  foundations  of  real  and  indisputable  merit,  and  time  can  but 
make  it  more  bright." 

20  In  Russell's  Magazine,  IV  (February  1859),  474,  Hayne  wrote:  "The 
editor  of  the  True  Delta,  in  reply,  makes  a  direct  personal  attack  upon  one 
of  the  editors  of  this  Magazine;  displays  supreme  incapacity  of  compre- 
hending even  the  most  ordinary  forms  of  poetical  expression,  and  disposes 
of  the  critical  authorities  above-mentioned  after  this  manner:  'If  Campbell 
spoke  favourable  of  Simms,  it  must  have  been  in  his  dotage;  (Campbell 
was  editor  of  the  New  Monthly  at  the  time,  and  about  thirty-three  years  of 
age;  if  Poe  was  pleased  with  Simms'  poetry,  it  must  have  been  when  he 
was  overcome  with  drink;  as  to  Whipple,  Duyckinck  and  Griswold,  their 
opinions  are  of  little  importance.' " 

21  P.  H.  Hayne  to  T.  B.  Kingsbury,  Charleston,  S.  C,  January  25,  1859, 
in  The  Southern  Historical  Collection  of  the  University  of  North  Carolina. 

23  The  Leisure  Hour  (Oxford,  N.  C),  January  27,  1859. 


100  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

it — ,  could  not  be  popular ;  therefore  could  not  pay,  &  therefore 
(lastly),  must  sooner  or  later  be  given  up  by  one  not  rich 
enough  to  be  independent  of  its  pecuniary  support.  "The  Leisure 
Hour"  was  &  is  too  intellectual,  too  critical,  too  thoughtful  to 
meet  the  approbation  of  the  unintellectual,  uncritical,  unthink- 
ing people.  Perhaps  you  think  me  disposed  to  flatter.  Well,  my 
dear  Sir,  I  may  be,  I  must  by  necessity  be,  partial  to  a  paper 
which  has  during  the  14  or  15  months  of  my  acquaintance  with 
it  [  ]23  than  I  ever  expect  to  receive  again  from  any 

intelligent  source  in  the  whole  course  of  my  future  life! 

I  wish,  (let  me  frankly  say  it!)  I  wish  I  could  believe  all  you 
have  so  generously  spoke  in  my  behalf!  But  my  own  mind,  my 
self-knowledge  tells  me  that  I  have  weaknesses  (in  an  artistic,  & 
I  fear,  moral  sense) ,  which  will,  probably,  interfere  fatally  with 
my  success  as  a  poet.  With  humiliation  I  confess  to  one  whose 
great  kindness  has  opened  by  confidence,  &  really  won  my  heart, 
that  the  same  awful  infirmity  of  will,  which  I  have  commented 
upon  in  the  essay  on  Hartley  Coleridge,  is  forever  besetting  me, 
&  overturning,  or  defeating  in  some  manner,  my  cherished 
plans.24  You  call  me,  others  have  called  me,  a  successful  Sonnet- 
teer:  Why  am  I  successful  in  this  special  sort  of  versification. 
Oh!  Sir!  it  is  [p.  3]  because  I  have  not  the  persistent  strength 
of  wing,  or  of  will,  to  venture  boldly  upon  more  sustained 
flights!,  because  I  lack  as  Hartley  Coleridge  lacked,  "a  great 
central  purpose  in  art."  You  will  not  think  me  vilely  egotistical, 
because  I  write  in  this  curious  strain.  Altho  it  has  never  been 
my  fortune  to  look  upon  you  "according  to  the  flesh,"  I  feel  that 
you  are  truly  a  friend,  and  as  a  friend  I  address  you!  But  eno' 
of  this! 

"The  Leisure  Hour,"  is,  I  see,  to  be  continued.  Who 

succeeds  you  as  Editor?  No  name  is  mentioned  anywhere. 

I  hope  you  will  sometimes  continue  your  contributions.  Do 
not  devote  yourself  too  exclusively  to  theological  studies,  but 
keep  up  the  belle  lettres  tastes  you  now  possess.  They  will  do 
you  good  service  in  the  Pulpit.  Our  So.  preachers  are  wretchedly 
deficient  (generally)  in  literary  attainments,  yet  surely,  they 
should  be  scholars;  not  merely  Hebrew  scholars  and  skilled 
in  polemics,  but  thorough  English  scholars,  versed  in  our  poetry 
as  well  as  philosophy. 


23  The  letter  is  soiled  here  and  the  writing  is  not  legible. 

24  In  his  essay  entitled  "David  Hartley  Coleridge,"  Russell's  Magazine, 
IV  (February  1859),  433-442,  Hayne  wrote:  "We  have  said  that  Hartley's 
poems  were  occasional.  He  was  not  gifted  with  the  resolution,  the  consist- 
ent earnestness,  or  the  wide  grasp  of  thought  and  invention,  which  are 
the  essential  endowments  of  the  epic,  or  dramatic  poet.  He  lacked  a  great 
central  purpose  in  art,  precisely  as  he  lacked  a  great  central  purpose  in 
lifer 


Hayne  to  Kingsbury  101 

Pardon  this  letter,  which  I  feel  to  be  rather  an  eccentric,  & 
perhaps  a  too  familiar  epistle. 
Answer  quickly,  &  Believe  me, 

Ever  truly  yrs. 

Paul  H  Hayne25 

One  wonders  if  Kingsbury  answered  quickly  and,  if  so, 
how  long  this  interesting  correspondence  between  these  two 
lovers  of  literature  continued.  Kingsbury  never  ceased  to 
appreciate  Hayne's  poetry;  and  eight  years  later  when  Kings- 
bury was  once  again  editor  of  a  literary  newspaper,  the 
Warrenton,  North  Carolina,  Indicator,  Devoted  to  Literature, 
Religion,  Agriculture,  and  General  Intelligence,  he  published 
a  poem  by  Hayne.  Since  there  is  nothing  to  indicate  that  it 
was  copied  from  some  other  source,  it  may  have  been  writ- 
ten by  Hayne  for  The  Indicator.  The  poem  also  does  not  ap- 
pear in  the  Poems  of  Paul  Hamilton  Hayne  (complete  edi- 
tion; Boston:  Lothrop  and  Co.,  1882)  and  is  here,  perhaps, 
reprinted  for  the  first  time. 

Song 
I 

My  wedded  love  is  fast  asleep, 

The  white  lids  closed  o'er  marvellous  eyes, 

That  shine  a  meaning,  pure  and  deep, 

As  midnight's  far,  unf athomed  skies. 

Her  heart  upon  the  tide  of  dreams 

Is  heaving  like  a  fairy  boat, 

And  o'er  her  face  the  mystic  gleams 

Of  tender  thoughts  and  memories  float. 
II 

My  earlier  love,  I  could  not  wed, 

Is  slumbering  too,  but  far  away — 

She  sleeps  among  the  tranquil  dead, 

And  couched  upon  the  churchyard  clay ; 

Her  lids  are  closed  o'er  soulless  eyes, 

Her  pulseless  heart  is  mute  and  cold — 

But  thought  is  busy  where  she  lies, 

And  memory  wakes  beneath  the  mould.26 

No  matter  when  the  correspondence  actually  ended,  one 
may  be  sure  that  Kingsbury  cherished  the  memory  of  it  as 
long  as  he  lived. 

25  P.  H.  Hayne  to  T.  B.  Kingsbury,  Charleston,  S.  C,  February  3,  1859, 
in  the  Southern  Historical  Collection,  University  of  North  Carolina. 
20  The  Indicator  (Warrenton,  N.  C),  December  11,  1867. 


A  DESCRIPTION  OF  "CAROLANA" 
BY  A  "WELL-WILLER,"  1649 

Edited  By  Hugh  Talmage  Lefler 

The  following  unsigned  two-page  communication  to  The 
Moderate  Intelligencer,  to  which  no  reference  is  made  in 
the  Colonial  Records  of  North  Carolina,  and  which,  so  far 
as  is  known,  has  never  been  reprinted,  is  one  of  the  few  doc- 
uments relating  to  North  Carolina  between  the  grant  by 
Charles  I  to  his  Attorney-General,  Robert  Heath,  in  1629 
and  the  more  effective  grant  by  Charles  II  to  the  eight 
Lords  Proprietors  in  1663. 

The  Moderate  Intelligencer,  one  of  the  most  important 
mid-seventeenth  century  papers,  was  a  weekly  news  sheet 
published  in  London  from  June  5,  1649,  to  February  23,  1654 
—a  very  long  life  for  a  periodical  in  that  day.  Its  founder, 
owner,  and  editor,  John  Dillingham  of  Whitefriars,  was  a 
very  controversial  figure.  A  tailor  turned  publisher,  he  was 
involved  in  many  disputes  with  other  journalists  and  with 
political  and  religious  leaders.  He  gave  information  against 
Archbishop  Laud  in  1643,  and  Dr.  Brownrigg  was  committed 
to  Dillingham's  house  in  1644.  Gilbert  Mabbott,  a  rival 
journalist,  attempted  to  appropriate  the  title  of  his  paper, 
but  the  House  of  Lords  decided  that  "Dillingham  alone  was 
entitled  to  the  title  of  The  Moderate  Intelligencer."  Some 
contempories  praised  Dillingham's  writing  and  were  quite 
enthusiastic  about  his  idea  of  a  journal  in  French  for  the 
benefit  of  foreigners  in  England.  One  writer  referred  to  him 
as  "the  Countryman's  Chronicler  .  .  .  the  citizens'  harbinger 
.  .  .  and  the  epitome  of  wit .  .  .  and  though  he  tells  lies  by  the 
gross,  yet  he  would  have  the  book-turners  of  this  isle  believe 
that  he  useth  moderation."  Other  critics  were  less  compli- 
mentary; one  referred  to  Dillingham  as  "a  Prick  louse  vermin 
Taylor";  another  condemned  "that  botching  and  Moderate 
Intelligencer,"  edited  by  that  "learned  Scout." 

The  following  interesting  and  detailed  account  of  "Caro- 
lana"  may  have  been  a  bona  fide  communication  to  Dilling- 
ham's paper,  or  it  may  have  been  the  product  of  his  own 

[102] 


A  Description  of  "Carolina"  103 

fertile  imagination.  But  it  is  significant  that  in  1649,  at  the 
time  when  Oliver  Cromwell  as  Lieutenant  General  was  pre- 
paring for  his  Irish  campaign,  plans  were  under  way  to  ap- 
point a  governor  for  the  Albemarle  Sound  region,  then  con- 
sidered a  part  of  Virginia  despite  the  Heath  patent  of  1629. 
The  editor  has  been  unable  to  discover  the  identity  of  either 
the  "well-wilier"  or  the  "Gentleman  going  over  Governour 
into  Carolana." 

THE   MODERATE   INTELLIGENCER:   IMPARTIALLY 

COMMUNICATING  MARTIALL  AFFAIRS  TO  THE 

KINGDOM  OF  ENGLAND 

(From  Thursday,  April  26  to  Wednesday,  May  2,  1649.) 

At  the  intreaty  of  a  well-wilier,  the  following  lines  are  in- 
serted. 

There  is  A  Gentleman  going  over  Governour  into  Carolana  in 
America,  and  many  Gentlemen  of  quality  and  their  families  with 
him. 

This  place  is  of  a  temperate  Climate,  not  so  hot  as  Barbado's 
nor  so  cold  as  Virgina;  the  Winter  much  lake  our  March  here 
in  England.  The  Northern  latitude  begins  where  Virgina  ends,  at 
37,  neer  Cape  Henry,  and  takes  in  six  degrees  Southerly;  no 
bounds  to  the  East  and  West,  but  the  Seas.  At  Point  Comfort, 
neer  Cape  Henry,  you  enter  into  a  fair  Navigable  River,  called 
James  River,  about  two  leagues  over :  on  both  sides  that  River, 
are  the  chiefe  Plantations  in  Virginia,  and  their  chief  Town 
James  Town.  On  the  South  side  of  this  River,  are  two  Rivers, 
Elisabeth,  and  Nansamond,  which  convey  you  into  Carolana; 
so  that  this  River  is  in  a  haven  to  both  Colonies.  This  Carolana, 
besides  the  temperature  of  the  Climate,  hath  many  Native  Com- 
modities to  feed  and  cloath  the  body :  Deer  in  abundance,  bigger 
and  better  meat  then  ours  in  England,  having  two  young  ones 
at  a  time;  their  skins  good  cloathing,  being  better  dressed  by 
the  Indians  then  ours:  Elkes  of  a  large  size,  admirable  meat, 
having  three  young  at  a  time;  their  Hides  make  good  Buffe; 
besides  Hares  and  Conies,  and  many  other  that  are  good  meat: 
Beasts  of  prey,  that  are  profitable  for  their  Furres,  as  Bevers, 
Otters,  Foxes,  Martins,  Minches,  and  Musk-Cats,  their  Cods 
better  sented  then  those  of  East-India,  and  more  lasting :  Fowle 
of  all  sorts,  Partridges  and  wild  Turkies  100  in  a  flock,  some 
of  the  Turkies  weighing  40  pounds,  Fish  there  are  in  great 
abundance,  of  all  sorts.  In  the  Woods  are  sundry  kinds  of  Fruits, 
as  Strawberries,  Raspices,  Gooseberries,  Plums,  and  Cherries; 
three  several  kinds  of  Grapes,  large,  and  of  a  delicious  taste.  In 


104  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

these  woods  are  herbes  and  flowers  of  fragrant  smels,  many- 
kinds  of  singing  Birds,  which  have  varieties  of  sweet  Notes. 
Though  this  Countrey  be  for  the  most  part  woody,  but  where 
the  Indians  have  cleared,  for  their  Corne  and  Tobacco,  or  where 
fresh  marshes  and  medows  are,  yet  they  are  pleasant  and  profit- 
able; pleasant,  in  respect  of  the  stately  growth  and  distance  of 
the  Trees  one  from  the  other,  that  you  may  travail  and  see  a 
Deere  at  a  great  distance ;  profitable,  being  of  divers  kinds,  both 
for  shipping,  Pot-ashes,  Mulberry  trees  for  Silk-wormes,  Wal- 
nut trees,  and  stately  Cedars;  so  that  when  of  necessity  you 
must  cut  down  for  Building  and  other  uses,  you  are  recompenced 
for  your  labour.  You  have  also  many  pleasant  Ascents,  Hills 
and  Valleys,  Springs  of  wholesome  waters,  Rivers,  and  Rivo- 
lets.  Now  you  see  you  are  plentifully  fed  and  cloathed  with  the 
naturall  Commodities  of  the  Country,  which  fall  into  your  hands 
without  labour  or  toyle,  for  in  the  obtaining  of  them  you  have  a 
delightful  recreation.  Now  fearing  you  should  out  of  this  abund- 
ance, in  the  excesse  take  a  Surfer,  you  have  many  Physical 
herbs  and  Drugs,  Allom,  Nitrum,  Terra  Sigillata,  Tarre,  Rosin, 
Turpentine,  Oyle  of  Olives,  Oyle  of  Walnuts,  and  other  Berries ; 
Honey  from  wild  Bees,  Sugar-Canes,  Mulberries,  divers  sorts 
of  Gums  and  Dyes,  which  the  Indians  use  for  paint.  Within  the 
ground,  Mines  of  Copper,  Lead,  Tinne,  Pearle,  and  Emroydes. 
Having  the  profit  and  pleasure  of  the  natural  Commodities,  you 
shall  see  what  Art  and  Industry  may  produce.  The  Soyle  is  for 
the  most  part  of  a  black  mould  about  two  foot  deepe,  you  may 
trust  it  with  anything.  The  Indian  Corne  yeelds  200  for  one, 
they  have  two  Crops  in  six  moneths;  English  Wheat,  Barley, 
and  Pease,  yeeld  30  for  one;  Hempe,  Flax,  Rice,  and  Rape-feed 
have  a  large  encrease:  What  English  Fruits  are  planted  there, 
improve  in  quantity  and  quality.  Besides  all  this  is  said,  we 
shall  shake  hands  with  Virginia,  a  flourishing  Plantation,  which 
is  not  onely  able  to  strengthen  and  assist  us,  but  furnish  us 
with  English  Provision,  Cowes  and  Oxen,  Horse,  and  Mares, 
Sheepe  and  Hogs,  which  they  abound  in  now,  which  they  and 
other  Plantations  were  enforced  to  bring  out  of  other  Countries 
with  great  difficulty  and  charge,  these  are  ready  to  our  hands. 

//  this  that  hath  been  said  give  incouragement  to  any,  let 
them  repair  to  Mr.  Edmond  Thorowgood,  A  Virginia  Merchant, 
living  in  White-Crosse-Street,  at  the  house  that  was  Justice 
Fosters.  He  will  informe  you  of  the  Governour,  from  whom  you 
will  understand  when  and  how  to  prepare  themselves  (not  ex- 
ceed August)  and  what  conditions  shall  be  given  to  Adven- 
turers, Planters,  and  Servants;  which  shall  be  as  good,  if  not 
better,  then  have  been  given  to  other  Plantations. 

Plantations  in  America  were  first  famous  in  King  James  his 
time,  the  arguments  to  draw  people  over  were  the  bringing 


A  Description  of  "Carolana' 


105 


the  Gospel  to  the  Indians,  inriching  men  that  went  and  ad- 
ventured, and  extending  Dominion,  the  fruit  whereof  is  visible, 
in  King  Charles  his  time,  the  persecution  of  men  diffring  in 
opinion  revived  this  undertaking,  and  thousands  went  to  New 
England  whose  condition  is  also  known,  now  their  seems  to  be 
great  designes  of  this  nature  which  arise  out  of  the  discotents 
at  the  present  state  of  affairs,  alterations,  &  the  wants  which 
the  late  War  hath  brought  many  unto,  for  which  there  seems 
no  blame.  For  censent  be  advised  to  make  no  use  of  the  Merchant 
farther  than  transportation,  part  with  nothing,  if  an  adven- 
turer, but  what  you  are  willing  to  loose  to  accomodate  your 
friend,  lay  no  foundation  of  a  Plantation  for  your  perticular 
before  you  go,  when  you  begin  to  disburst,  resolve  to  go,  leave 
more  or  lesse  behind  you  in  England  that  may  supply  the  first 
necessities,  which  will  be  greatest,  and  thus  much  be  sure,  if 
the  Countrey  be  healthful  to  English,  its  seated  as  well  as  any 
upon  which  the  English  are,  if  not  better. 


BOOK  REVIEWS 

The  Carolina  Charter  of  1663.  By  William  Stevens  Powell. 
(Raleigh:  The  State  Department  of  Archives  and  History. 
1954.  Pp.  vi,  79.  Illus.  and  bibliography.  Cloth  $2.00,  paper 
$1.00.) 

The  full  title  of  this  book  is  The  Carolina  Charter  of  1663, 
How  it  came  to  North  Carolina  and  Its  Place  in  History  with 
Biographical  Sketches  of  the  Proprietors.  The  complete  text 
of  the  charter  as  reproduced  occupies  only  15  pages  but 
this  is  the  feature  of  the  volume.  To  add  to  its  value  and 
interest,  however,  the  author  has  preceded  the  actual  text 
with  two  chapters. 

One  of  these  chapters  traces  in  considerable  detail  the 
steps  taken  by  the  director  of  the  Department  of  Archives 
and  History  of  North  Carolina  to  establish  the  authenticity 
and  provenance  of  the  document  and  to  ascertain  whether 
the  London  bookseller  (who  had  discovered  the  Charter  in 
1947 )  could  offer  a  clear  title  to  it  once  the  purchase  price  of 
$6,000  was  raised.  A  number  of  scholars  and  authorities 
examined  the  charter.  Their  reports  and  correspondence 
reproduced  here  in  full  make  interesting  reading. 

The  second  chapter,  "Origin  of  the  Charter,"  is  an  in- 
formative account  of  various  grants  of  land  made  by  British 
sovereigns  prior  to  1663,  which  included  the  territory  later 
embraced  by  the  Charter.  First  of  these  was  a  grant  by 
Queen  Elizabeth,  June  1578,  to  Sir  Humphrey  Gilbert  and 
renewed  in  the  name  of  his  half  brother,  Sir  Walter  Raleigh, 
in  1584.  Raleigh  financed  several  unsuccessful  expeditions, 
among  them  the  famous  "Lost  Colony/'  In  1606  a  charter 
was  granted  to  the  Virginia  Company  of  London  which  in- 
cluded a  part  of  what  is  now  North  Carolina.  This  charter 
was  revoked  in  1624  and  the  colony  came  into  the  hands  of 
the  Crown.  In  1629  the  King  conveyed  title  to  his  attorney 
general,  Sir  Robert  Heath,  but  he  made  no  organized  at- 
tempt to  establish  a  settlement.  In  1648,  however,  several 
Virginians  purchased  from  the  Indians  large  tracts  of  land, 
covered  by  the  grant  to  Heath,  along  the  Chowan  River.  A 

[106] 


Book  Reviews 


107 


settlement  was  made  here  in  1653  and  a  steady  stream  of 
colonists  followed. 

This  activity  apparently  attracted  the  attention  of  some 
Englishmen  who  were  supporters  of  Charles  II,  and  after 
he  came  to  the  throne  he  granted  the  territory  between  31° 
and  36°  north  latitude  "from  sea  to  sea"  to  the  following 
proprietors:  Edward  Hyde,  Earl  of  Clarendon,  Lord  High 
Chancellor  of  England;  George  Monck,  Duke  of  Albemarle, 
Master  of  the  King's  Horse  and  Captain-General  of  all  his 
forces;  William  Lord  Craven,  an  old  friend  of  Charles  II's 
father  who  had  zealously  and  ably  supported  the  royal 
family;  John  Lord  Berkeley,  who  had  defended  the  Crown 
in  the  rebellion  and  joined  the  royal  family  in  exile;  Anthony 
Ashley  Cooper,  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  and  afterward 
the  Earl  of  Shaftesbury;  Sir  George  Carteret,  Vice-Chamber- 
lain of  the  King's  household;  Sir  William  Berkeley,  Governor 
of  Virginia,  who  induced  the  colony  to  be  loyal  to  Charles  II 
as  their  sovereign  even  while  he  was  in  exile;  and  Sir  John 
Colleton,  who  had  upheld  the  royal  cause  in  Barbados. 

It  did  not  take  long  for  these  royal  proprietors  to  discover 
that  the  "richest  jewel  of  their  new  domain  of  Carolina"  was 
not  in  their  domain  at  all.  Settlements  already  made  in  the 
Albemarle  region  lay  for  the  most  part  a  few  miles  north 
of  the  line  marking  the  limit  of  the  territory  granted  to  them. 
So  in  1665  they  secured  a  new  charter  extending  the  limits 
one-half  degree  to  the  north  and  two  degrees  to  the  south. 

Plan  followed  plan  for  a  scheme  of  government.  Finally, 
one  was  approved.  This  was  the  Fundamental  Consti- 
tutions drawn  up  for  Carolina  by  John  Locke  under  the 
direction  of  the  Earl  of  Shaftesbury  and  adopted  by  the 
proprietors  on  July  21,  1669 

The  Fundamental  Constitutions  were  designed  to  serve  a 
landed  aristocracy  and  set  forth  many  orders  of  rank  and 
privilege  which  were  impractical,  to  say  the  least,  and  were 
probably  responsible  for  their  eventual  failure.  But  even  with 
these  limitations  they  gave  the  Englishmen  in  Carolina  very 
broad  rights  and  freedoms.  They  provided  an  adequate  sys- 
tem of  local  courts  with  a  guarantee  of  trial  by  jury;  the  Eng- 
lish system  of  town  government  and  the  right  to  elect  repre- 


108  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

sentatives  to  meet  every  two  years.  Provision  was  made  for 
registration  of  births,  marriages,  and  deaths  and  for  recording 
land  titles.  Many  of  these  provisions  were  so  liberal  that  in 
England  they  were  considered  to  be  radical.  In  Carolina, 
however,  they  provided  nothing  more  than  was  expected  by 
the  pioneers  who  risked  their  lives  to  settle  the  wilderness. 
But  the  proprietary  rule,  set  up  under  the  Constitution,  was 
unsuccessful  and  the  colony  was  taken  back  by  the  Crown 
in  1728. 

The  other  feature  of  the  book  is  the  section  containing 
brief  biographical  sketches  of  the  proprietors  with  a  full 
page  portrait  of  all  save  one  of  whom  no  portrait  is  known. 
The  book  is  well  printed  on  good  stock.  It  is  an  interesting 
and  scholarly  work.  As  such  it  will  be  a  valuable  addition  to 
any  library. 

William  D.  Overman. 
Firestone  Tire  and  Rubber  Co., 
Akron,  Ohio. 


The  County  Court  in  North  Carolina  before  1750.  By  Paul  M. 
McCain.  (Historical  Papers  of  the  Trinity  College  Historical 
Society,  Series  XXXI.  Durham:  The  Duke  University  Press, 
1954.  Pp.  viii,  263.  $2.50.) 

The  county  court  was  the  principal  institution  of  local 
government  in  North  Carolina  for  almost  two  hundred  years 
before  the  adoption  of  the  state  constitution  of  1868.  Pro- 
vision for  a  court  in  each  precinct  of  the  colony  was  made 
in  the  Fundamental  Constitutions  of  1669.  Within  a  short 
time  courts  were  established  in  the  precincts  of  Albemarle 
County  and  later  in  those  of  Bath  County.  Following  the 
abolition  of  these  two  counties  in  1738-1739,  the  precincts 
became  counties.  The  precinct  court  was  known  thereafter 
as  the  county  court. 

In  this  scholarly  volume  Dr.  McCain  traces  the  develop- 
ment of  the  county  court  from  its  beginnings  under  the 
proprietors  as  a  precinct  court  down  to  the  middle  of  the 
eighteenth  century,  when  its  organization  and  powers  had 
become  fixed  and  stable.  Originally  the  court  was  established 
to  relieve  the  general  court,  composed  of  the  governor  and 


Book  Reviews 


109 


council,  from  trying  petty  civil  cases  and  probating  routine 
records.  As  the  colony  developed,  the  authority  of  the  court 
was  expanded  until  this  agency  became  the  chief  adminis- 
trative body  of  the  county  as  well  as  its  court  of  justice. 

Dr.  McCain  has  presented  a  clear  picture  of  the  operation 
of  the  county  court  before  1750.  Four  excellent  chapters  are 
devoted  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  court.  Specific  cases  and 
incidents  have  been  used  effectively  in  illustrating  the  au- 
thority exercised  by  the  justices  in  criminal  and  civil  actions, 
probate  proceedings,  supervision  of  orphans,  and  in  the  reg- 
ulation of  involuntary  servitude  and  slavery.  The  powers  of 
the  court  in  matters  concerning  public  buildings,  county 
finance,  supervision  of  roads,  and  the  regulation  of  business 
have  been  carefully  described  in  four  additional  chapters. 

From  the  power  and  authority  which  the  court  exercised 
in  the  affairs  of  the  people  of  North  Carolina  before  1750, 
Dr.  McCain  concludes  that  the  court  gave  to  the  inhabitants 
of  the  colony  an  institution  of  local  government  adapted  to 
their  needs. 

Serious  students  of  history  will  be  pleased  with  this  well- 
organized  and  readable  account  of  an  important  segment  of 
the  early  history  of  North  Carolina. 

Rex  Beach. 
Hall  of  Records  Commission, 
Annapolis,  Maryland. 


A  History  of  Catawba  County.  Compiled  and  published  by  Ca- 
tawba County  Historical  Association,  Inc.  Edited  by  Charles  J. 
Preslar,  Jr.  (Salisbury:  Rowan  Printing  Company.  1954.  Pp. 
526.  $5.00.) 

Eighteen  years  ago  residents  of  Catawba  County  in  the 
upper  Piedmont  section  of  North  Carolina  organized  a  his- 
torical association  and  began  collecting  materials  from  which 
a  history  of  the  county  could  be  written.  A  publication  com- 
mittee, headed  by  Dr.  J.  E.  Hodges,  president  of  the  asso- 
ciation, has  now  published  in  a  sizeable  volume  the  first 
general  history  of  the  county. 

Catawba  was  not  formed  until  1842,  when  Nathaniel  Wil- 
son captured  John  Killian's  seat  in  the  House  of  Commons 


110  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

and  put  through  a  bill  to  divide  Lincoln  County.  The  au- 
thors, however,  appropriately  began  with  the  coming  in  1749 
of  German  and  Scotch-Irish  settlers  to  the  area.  The  story 
of  the  pioneers,  the  majority  of  whom  were  Germans,  is  ade- 
quately told.  Heinrich  Weidner's  (Whitener)  experiences 
during  the  French  and  Indian  War  form  the  most  exciting 
of  the  individual  narratives. 

The  writers  attempted  to  include  every  phase  of  Catawba's 
history  and  current  state  of  development.  Accordingly,  there 
are,  in  addition  to  the  usual  political  and  military  discussions, 
sections  on  religion,  education,  transportation,  trades,  pro- 
fessions, newspapers,  post  offices,  manners,  and  health  re- 
sorts. Accounts  are  given,  for  instance,  of  the  building  in  the 
1850's  of  the  Western  North  Carolina  Railroad,  which  helped 
transform  Hickory  Tavern  into  an  industrial  center,  and  of 
social  life  at  Sparkling  Springs,  an  almost  forgotten  resort 
center.  Even  with  two  railroads  (the  Chester  and  Lenoir 
arrived  in  1881),  the  manufacture  of  furniture,  hosiery,  and 
textiles,  which  is  now  the  principal  activity  in  the  county, 
amounted  to  little  before  1900.  Predominantly  agricultural 
until  recent  years,  Catawba  now  annually  produces  manu- 
factured goods  valued  at  $100,000,000,  which  contrasts 
sharply  with  farm  products  worth  $6,000,000.  The  descrip- 
tion of  the  destructive  1916  Catawba  valley  flood  will  con- 
vince the  reader  of  the  value  of  the  present  series  of  dams 
on  the  Catawba  as  flood  control  measures,  as  well  as  for  the 
production  of  electricity  for  the  region's  industry. 

An  average  county  history  in  over-all  merit,  this  book  has, 
nevertheless,  many  shortcomings.  The  literary  style  is  un- 
impressive and  the  long  lists  of  names  make  tedious  reading. 
At  times  the  short  unrelated  paragraphs  do  not  form  con- 
nected narratives.  There  are  no  footnotes  and  little  documen- 
tation in  the  text.  The  general  tone  is  excessively  laudatory. 
Some  factual  and  typographical  errors  escaped  the  proof- 
readers. To  illustrate,  the  following  inaccurate  sentence  is 
not  explained:  "It  was  not,  in  fact,  until  1798  that  the  first 
English  school  was  opened  in  North  Carolina"  (p.  122). 
Johnston  Blakely  is  presented  as  two  persons.  John  Bell,  the 
1860  candidate,  is  referred  to  as  "Whig  John  Belle."  A  blank- 


Book  Reviews 


111 


et  statement  that  the  Confederate  soldier  "was  not  allowed 
to  return  home  after  the  cessation  of  hositilities,  as  he  was 
detained  as  a  prisoner"  (p.  283),  illustrates  the  guesswork 
in  which  the  writers  sometimes  engaged. 

The  faults  of  this  book  will  detract  from  the  pleasure  of 
reading  it,  but  will  not  prevent  the  judicious  reader  from 
tracing  through  its  pages  the  development  of  a  progressive 
North  Carolina  county.  Several  pages  of  drawings  by  Philip 
Moose  add  variety  to  the  volume.  A  short  bibliography  and 
an  acceptable  index  are  included. 

Henry  S.  S troupe. 
Wake  Forest  College, 
Wake  Forest. 


The  Presbyterian  Congregation  on  Rocky  River.  By  Thomas 
Hugh  Spence,  Jr.  (Concord,  North  Carolina:  Rocky  River 
Presbyterian  Church.  1954.  Pp.  xiv,  293.  $3.25) 

The  present  history  of  the  Presbyterian  Congregation  on 
Rocky  River  is  written  by  Thomas  Hugh  Spence,  Jr.,  and 
dedicated  to  the  memory  of  his  father,  Thomas  Hugh  Spence, 
pastor  of  the  Rocky  River  Church  from  1916  to  1931.  It 
covers  the  entire  period  from  the  time  of  the  arrival  of  John 
Rodgers,  the  first  settler,  according  to  tradition,  in  the  Rocky 
River  Community,  in  1732,  to  the  service  of  formal  recog- 
nition of  the  gift  of  the  Education  Building  on  September  6, 
1953.  Of  especial,  general  historical  interest  is  the  account 
which  Mr.  Spence  gives  of  the  beginnings  of  the  Presbyterian 
settlement  along  Rocky  River,  stemming  out  of  the  migration 
of  the  Scotch-Irish  from  the  middle  Colonies,  especially 
Pennsylvania  and  Virginia,  to  the  Rocky  River  area  where 
land  was  cheaper  than  it  was  in  Pennsylvania  and,  more  im- 
portant, where  there  was  no  intereference  by  civil  authori- 
ties in  the  Presbyterian  form  of  worship  such  as  there  had 
been  in  Virginia,  where  the  Established  Church  (Anglican) 
was  dominant  to  a  much  larger  extent  than  it  was  in  the  in- 
land regions  of  North  Carolina. 

A  large  part  of  the  more  general  appeal  of  the  story  which 
is  recounted  here  arises  from  the  extent  to  which  the  Rocky 
River  Congregation— clergy  and  laymen— have  been  caught 


112  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

up  in  the  movement  of  events  beyond  their  confines  and  the 
extent  to  which  its  members  have  participated  in  these 
events— in  war,  in  African  missions,  in  civil  affairs,  and  in 
education. 

While  those  who  are  associated  with  the  Rocky  River 
Presbyterian  Church  will  have  a  special  interest  in  this  vol- 
ume, it  will  also  appeal  to  others  who,  in  one  connection  or 
another,  have  come  to  know  the  pastors  and  lay  leaders  of 
this  congregation.  The  biographical  material  comprises  a 
large  portion  of  the  book;  it  is  full  of  accounts  of  people 
whose  lives  were  rich,  self-giving,  and  ennobling. 

A  lengthy  appendix  includes  lists  of  the  pastors,  elders, 
deacons  and  other  officials  of  Rocky  River,  together  with 
statistical  reports  and  lists  of  the  "Patriots  and  Soldiers  of 
the  Revolutionary  Period"  and  "Confederate  Casualties."  A 
detailed  bibliography  is  included. 

E.  Clinton  Gardner. 
North  Carolina  State  College, 
Raleigh. 


King's  Mountain  and  Its  Heroes:  History  of  the  Battle  of 
King's  Mountain,  October  7th,  1780,  and  the  Events  Which 
Led  to  it.  By  Lyman  C.  Draper,  LL.D.,  with  steel  portraits, 
maps,  and  plans.  (Cincinnati,  Peter  G.  Thomson.  1881.  Con- 
tinental Book  Company,  Marietta,  Georgia,  1954.  Pp.  xv, 
612.  $10.00.) 

The  republication  of  this  book  for  the  second  time  in  the 
three  quarters  of  a  century  since  its  original  publication 
should  be  a  distinct  encouragement  to  all  those  whose 
writings  are  poorly  received  but  who  firmly  believe  that  they 
are  writing  for  eternity.  It  is  perhaps  an  evidence  that  his- 
tory does  not  have  to  be  rewritten  by  each  generation.  When 
old  Dr.  Ramsey,  the  Tennessee  historian  and  the  prime  mover 
in  inducing  the  dilatory  Lyman  Draper  to  write  this— his 
only  book— saw  the  product,  he  predicted  that  it  would  be 
popular  for  a  century.  It  was  not,  to  Dr.  Draper's  great  dis- 
appointment, popular  at  the  moment.  Its  sales  fell  far  below 
his  ambitious  dreams,  and  the  immediate  reception  was  not 
good.  It  came  a  year  late  for  the  centennial  celebration  of  the 
King's   Mountain  battle   and   competed  with  the  flood  of 


Book  Reviews 


memoirs  and  battle  material  relating  to  the  Civil  War,  which 
was  then  pouring  from  the  presses.  Nevertheless,  it  has  stood 
the  test  of  time  well,  and  in  recent  years  even  the  first  reprint- 
ing some  decades  ago  has  been  selling  as  a  collectors'  item 
for  about  twenty-five  dollars.  The  re-issue  in  lithoprint  by 
the  Continental  Book  Company  is  a  real  service  to  historians, 
genealogists,  and  antiquarians. 

The  book  is  a  dramatic  account  of  the  British  in  the  Caro- 
linas,  of  the  confusion  in  the  upcountry  where  neighborhoods 
and  even  families  were  divided  between  royal  syncophants 
and  high-minded  patriots.  Finally,  as  Cornwallis,  Tarleton, 
and  Ferguson  terrorized  the  land,  a  cry  for  aid  went  over 
the  mountains  to  the  men  of  the  Watauga,  the  Nollichucky, 
and  the  fastnesses  of  the  West.  Then  under  Selby,  Camp- 
bell, Cleveland,  Chronicle,  and  John  Sevier,  the  mountain 
clans  gathered,  crossed  over  the  Yellow  Mountains,  and  on 
October  8,  1780,  stormed  the  heights  of  King's  Mountain, 
killed  Ferguson  and  many  another  leader  of  the  Redcoats, 
captured  600  foul  Tories,  saved  Carolina,  and  prepared  the 
way  for  the  final  surrender  of  the  dastard  Cornwallis  at  York- 
town.  It  is  a  dramatic  tale,  filled  with  anecdotes  of  Whig 
derring-do  and  the  bestial  deeds  of  the  Tory  hordes. 

In  addition,  the  book  is  a  veritable  encyclopedia  for  gen- 
ealogists and  antiquarians.  Names,  ancestry,  deeds,  and  de- 
scendants of  scores  are  carefully,  even  reverently,  recorded; 
and  whole  chapters  give  biographies  of  Shelby,  Sevier,  Cleve- 
land, Winston,  and  others.  Appended,  too,  is  the  diary  of 
British  Lieutenant  Allaire,  letters  of  General  Gates,  Wash- 
ington's congratulatory  order,  and  Lafayette's  comments. 
And  the  documents  in  the  virulent  controversy,  which  the 
Selbys  raised,  over  William  Campbell's  conduct  in  the  battle 
are  here  presented— and  the  conflict  resolved  by  Draper 
in  a  complete  vindication  of  Campbell.  It  is,  withal,  a  yarn 
filled  with  specific,  circumstantial  accounts.  When  the  New 
York  Times  reviewed  it  in  1881,  the  reviewer  remarked  that 
it  was  exactly  such  an  account  as  the  paper  would  wish  from 
its  correspondent  on  the  scene. 

It  might  well,  too,  serve  as  a  model  for  modern  battle  ac- 
counts—cluttered as  they  are  with  polysyllabic  incantations 


114  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

about  strategy,  logistics,  and  command  systems.  Amid  this 
mystifying  folderol,  a  clear,  balanced,  sane,  and  circumstan- 
tial account  would  be  a  blessing.  Lyman  Draper  had  no 
knowledge  of  the  high-flown  verbiage  of  modern  military 
science;  he  thought  the  patriots  won  the  battle  of  Kings 
Mountain  because  they  shot  straight.  Of  course,  as  he  im- 
plied in  every  line,  their  aim  was  true  because  their  hearts 
were  pure. 

Despite  its  nineteenth-century  style  and  a  distinct  pa- 
triotic bias  in  favor  of  the  Whig  cause,  it  is,  even  today, 
superb  reading.  Between  the  lines  is  the  very  human  story 
of  plundering,  marauding,  and  murder  on  a  disorganized 
frontier.  It  is  a  picture  which  Bancroft  and  other  of  Draper's 
contempories  failed  to  portray,  and  it  can  be  read  with  inter- 
est and  profit  by  students  of  the  Revolution  and  of  the  South, 
even  after  three  quarters  of  a  century. 

William  B.  Hesseltine. 
University  of  Wisconsin, 
Madison,  Wisconsin. 


The  Letters  of  William  Gilmore  Simms.  Volume  III— 1850-1857. 
Collected  and  edited  by  Mary  C.  Simms  Oliphant,  Alfred 
Taylor  Odell,  and  T.  C.  Duncan  Eaves.  (Columbia:  Univer- 
sity of  South  Carolina  Press.  1954.  Pp.  xxvi,  564.  $8.50.) 

The  third  volume  of  "The  Letters  of  William  Gilmore 
Simms"  reveals  anew  the  complexity  of  the  task  which  faced 
the  editors  of  Simms's  prolific  correspondence.  It  reveals  also 
the  scholarly  thoroughness  and  the  editorial  skill  of  Simms's 
granddaughter,  Mrs.  Oliphant,  and  Eaves  in  making  this  cor- 
respondence available  to  the  public.  (Odell,  who  did  much 
of  the  early  work  on  the  project,  died  shortly  before  volume 
I  of  the  letters  was  published.)  Scholars  and  students  of 
southern  literature  will  not  cease  to  be  grateful  for  their 
devoted  efforts. 

In  addition  to  printing  the  letters,  the  editors  have  includ- 
ed in  this  volume  a  list  of  the  depositories  or  owners  of  man- 
uscripts, a  chronological  list  of  the  Simms  letters  for  the  years 
1850-1857,  more  than  seventeen  hundred  footnotes,  an  ap- 
pendix containing  Simms's  sensational  lecture  entitled  "South 


Book  Reviews  115 

Carolina  in  the  Revolution,"  and  a  temporary  index  intended 
for  use  until  the  issuance  of  a  complete  index  in  the  final 
volume  of  the  five- volume  series. 

As  for  the  letters  themselves  in  this  third  volume,  they 
vary  considerably  in  interest  and  value  for  the  student  of 
southern  or  American  literature  or  even  for  specialists  in 
Simms  and  his  literary  work.  Simms  was  a  conscientious 
correspondent  who  appears  always  to  have  felt  that  when  he 
received  a  letter,  he  was  in  duty  bound  to  answer  it,  even 
if  it  called  for  no  more  than  a  brief  expression  of  thanks  for 
some  small  favor.  Though  such  notes  show  Simms  as  a  polite 
southern  gentleman,  they  do  not  provide  very  interesting 
reading;  and  one  is  inclined  after  a  while  to  skim  through 
these  or  even  to  skip  over  them  with  a  mere  glance  in  order 
to  get  to  other  letters  with  more  meat  in  them. 

The  Simms  letters  are  concerned  with  many  things;  among 
them:  family  matters,  routine  editorial  correspondence  re- 
lating to  the  Southern  Quarterly  Review,  travel  experiences, 
and  the  management  of  the  plantation  at  Woodlands,  which 
required  an  increasing  amount  of  work  from  Simms  as  his 
father-in-law  became  progressively  feeble  in  mind  and  body. 
Of  considerable  interest  to  the  present  writer  are  Simms's 
political  opinions  and  a  number  of  his  remarks  about  his 
writing. 

A  decade  before  the  storm  of  war  struck  the  South,  Wil- 
liam Gilmore  Simms  was  a  secessionist  at  heart,  and  he  an- 
ticipated the  explosion  long  before  it  came.  In  November, 
1850,  he  wrote  to  Evert  Duyckinck:  "We  are  all  absorbed  in 
politics— the  cauldron  bubbling  up  furiously,  and  about  to 
boil  over.  That  it  will  do  so,  some  day,  you  may  be  certain." 
A  few  days  later  in  the  same  month  he  was  writing  to  his 
Virginia  friend  Nathaniel  Beverley  Tucker:  "Five  years  at 
the  utmost— unless  there  be  a  great  revolution  in  public  sen- 
timent at  the  north— which  is  scarcely  possible— will  see  the 
dissolution  of  the  Union."  One  gets  the  impression  in  read- 
ing passages  like  these  which  appear  in  many  of  the  letters, 
that  Simms  did  not  bother  much  to  visualize  the  tremendous 
struggle  which  the  southern  states  would  be  involved  in  if 
their  secession  were  challenged  by  northern  arms.  He  seems 


116  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

from  his  letters  to  have  been  much  more  concerned  about 
a  grand  declaration  of  southern  freedom  than  about  the  high- 
ly intricate  and  extremely  difficult  process  by  which  the 
southerners  might  maintain  their  freedom  after  they  had 
declared  it. 

Simms  has  often  been  criticized  for  having  written  too 
much,  for  having  spread  his  talent  too  thin  through  his  ready 
flow  of  words.  The  letters  show  that  this  prolixity  was  the 
result  partly  of  Simms's  own  make-up  as  a  writer  and  partly 
of  the  circumstantial  necessity  which  forced  him  often  to 
write  like  a  mere  drudge.  In  this  latter  connection  there  is 
a  passage  in  a  letter  to  Nathaniel  Beverley  Tucker,  March  2, 
1851,  which  indicates  one  of  Simms's  many  difficulties  as 
editor  of  a  magazine  that  sadly  lacked  the  money  to  pay  the 
contributors  the  editor  wished  to  attract.  As  a  result  Simms 
had  to  depend  upon  the  scribblings  of  irresponsible  substi- 
tutes. "My  toils  [on  the  Southern  Quarterly  Review]  are 
incessant,"  writes  Simms.  "You  need  not  be  told  that  we  can 
seldom  rely  upon  the  punctuality  of  amateur  writers,  and 
at  the  last  moment  I  am  frequently  compelled  to  turn  in  & 
write  doggedly  to  fill  out  a  number." 

In  addition  to  this  enforced  writing  which  naturally  suf- 
fered from  being  uninspired  on  the  one  hand  and  hurried 
on  the  other,  there  was  much  that  Simms  put  down  on  paper 
because  he  felt  an  almost  constant  urge  toward  written 
composition.  "With  me,"  he  comments  to  Marcus  CM.  Ham- 
mond, August  7,  1850,  "it  is  habit  to  write."  Even  ill  health 
and  near  physical  exhaustion  could  not  stop  him.  Writing 
to  John  Pendleton  Kennedy,  April  5,  1852,  from  Woodlands, 
to  which  he  had  supposedly  retired  for  a  rest,  he  makes 
clear  how  difficult  this  resting  was.  "I  have  been  making  a 
most  laborious  effort  to  be  idle,"  he  says.  "But  my  habits 
of  study  and  composition  are  so  permanently  established, . .  . 
that  I  do  not  find  it  easy  to  obey  admonitions  of  abstinence, 
however  serious  may  be  the  necessity."  Like  Thomas  Wolfe 
in  our  own  century,  Simms  appears  to  have  been  unable  to 
cease  from  pouring  the  words  out.  Whether  an  increase  in 
polish  and  conciseness  through  slow,  careful  revision  would 
have  compensated  sufficiently  for  a  possible  loss  in  natural 


Book  Reviews  117 

vigor  and  warmth  of  expression  in  the  novels  of  either  Simms 
or  Wolfe  is  the  sort  of  question  that  helps  to  keep  literary 
critics  endlessly  employed  in  debate. 

H.  G.  Kincheloe. 
North  Carolina  State  College, 
Raleigh. 


The  St.  Augustine  Expedition  of  1740:  A  Report  to  the  South 
Carolina  General  Assembly.  Reprinted  from  the  Colonial  Rec- 
ords of  South  Carolina  with  an  Introduction  by  John  Tate 
Lanning.  (Columbia:  South  Carolina  Archives  Department. 
Pp.  xxviii,  182,  map,  index.  Paper,  $3.50.) 

Spanish  and  English  history  in  the  seventeenth  and  eight- 
eenth centuries  include  a  confusing  number  of  colonial  wars. 
A  resurgent  Spain  fought  to  destroy  the  English  South  Caro- 
lina settlements  while  Great  Britain  was  determined  not  only 
to  protect  them,  but  also  to  extend  her  Atlantic  colonies.  The 
clash  of  national  interests  motivated  many  expeditions,  one 
of  the  most  interesting  of  which  was  led  by  James  Ogle- 
thorpe. 

In  May,  1740,  his  army  of  Carolinians,  Georgians,  and 
Indians  occupied  Fort  George  Island  at  the  mouth  of  the  St. 
Johns  River,  marched  down  the  coast  to  capture  Fort  Diego, 
and  by  June  occupied  three  strategic  places  (Fort  Moosa, 
Point  Quartell,  and  Anastasia  Island)  north  and  east  of  St. 
Augustine.  With  gunboats  blockading  the  harbor  and  the 
Matanzas  River,  the  reduction  of  the  strong,  and  heretofore 
impregnable  Castillo  de  San  Marcos  seemed  certain.  But 
Oglethorpe  diddled,  refused  to  capture  and  destroy  St. 
Augustine,  thus  forcing  its  inhabitants  into  the  Castillo,  and 
weakened  his  force  by  dividing  it.  A  Spanish  sally  defeated 
the  companies  occupying  Moosa,  winds  enabled  Spanish 
ships  to  break  the  blockade,  and  illness  in  Oglethorpe's 
camps  spread  at  an  alarming  rate.  The  siege  was  lifted  and 
Florida  evacuated. 

Almost  immediately  a  committee  of  the  lower  house  of 
the  South  Carolina  Assembly  investigated  the  cause  of  fail- 
ure. Before  its  findings  were  published,  James  Kilpatrick 
began  a  pamphlet  war  of  Carolina  and  Oglethorpe  apolo- 
gists. Three  editions  of  the  committee  report  appeared  in 


118  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

the  1740's  and  fragments  of  the  report  were  published  in  the 
nineteenth  century,  but  only  a  few  copies  of  the  complete 
report  are  extant. 

The  St.  Augustine  Expedition  of  1740  contains  an  excel- 
lent interpretative  introduction  by  Lanning,  an  explanatory 
bibliographical  note,  the  report,  and  an  appendix  of  139 
letters,  statements,  and  accounts.  Although  the  report  and 
appendix  are  reprinted  from  the  multi-volumed  Colonial 
Records  of  South  Carolina  now  in  progress,  edited  by  J.  H. 
Easterby,  this  volume  is  of  sufficient  importance  to  stand 
alone.  Rarely  does  one  find  an  eighteenth  century  report 
with  such  a  wealth  of  detail  combined  in  a  unified  account 
and  presented  with  impartiality.  This  source  volume  is  es- 
sential for  students  of  the  British  and  Spanish  colonial 
periods. 

Rembert  W.  Patrick. 
University  of  Florida, 
Tallahassee,  Florida. 


Reconstruction  at  Sewanee.  The  Founding  of  the  University  of 
the  South  and  its  First  Administration,  1857-1872.  By  Arthur 
Benjamin  Chitty,  Jr.  (Sewanee,  Tennessee:  The  University 
Press,  1954.  Pp.  207.  $3.50.) 

This  extremely  readable  volume  traces  the  early  history 
of  the  University  of  the  South  at  Sewanee,  Tennessee,  from 
its  ambitious  founding  in  the  prosperous  years  before  the 
Civil  War  through  its  first  administration  in  the  trying  Re- 
construction period.  It  is  a  story  of  large-scale  planning, 
bitter  disappointments,  and  modest  fulfilment  under  devoted 
leaders.  The  University,  as  envisioned  by  its  founders, 
Bishops  Otey,  Polk,  and  Elliott,  was  to  be  a  great  regional 
adventure  controlled  by  the  Episcopal  Church,  though 
mainly  sponsored  by  ten  Southern  dioceses.  The  plans  called 
for  an  isolated  mountain  domain  and  a  magnificent  campus 
which  would  become  the  center  of  a  community  receiving 
its  tone  from  the  University.  The  curriculum  would  embrace 
the  major  fields  of  knowledge,  and  it  was  expected  that 
Sewanee  would  shortly  rival  the  best  universities  in  the  coun- 
try. The  war  crushed  these  plans,  but  the  ideal  was  not 
abandoned.  Church  support  was  reaffirmed  and  desperate 


Book  Reviews  119 

efforts  were  made  to  obtain  funds.  Bishop  Quintard,  later 
the  first  vice-chancellor,  even  went  to  England  for  help,  re- 
turning with  #2,500  and  grants  of  books  from  Oxford  and 
Cambridge. 

In  1868  Sewanee  opened  its  first  session  with  four  profes- 
sors and  nine  students— "the  paltriest  beginnings  and  the 
total  absence  of  any  means  at  all."  But  it  was  a  start,  and  in 
spite  of  poverty  the  early  period  was  one  of  growth  which 
set  an  enduring  pattern  that  reflected  the  traditions  of  Ox- 
ford and  Cambridge,  classical  scholarship,  the  cadet  military 
system,  the  civilization  of  the  Old  South,  and  the  Episcopal 
Church.  From  the  beginning  Sewanee  had  been  "striving 
toward  a  clearly  drawn  pattern  rather  than  moving  from 
experiment  to  experiment."  Its  goal  remained  "the  training 
of  youth  in  Christian  virtue,  in  personal  initiative,  in  self 
mastery,  in  .  .  .  intellectual  integrity." 

Mr.  Chitty  has  told  his  story  well.  It  is  thoroughly  docu- 
mented, with  copious  notes,  bibliography,  and  photographs, 
much  of  the  material  coming  from  valuable  unpublished 
diaries,  letters,  and  University  records.  The  many  quotations 
give  lively  insights  into  the  personalities  of  the  founders, 
while  references  to  southern  history  and  to  other  universities 
give  perspective  to  the  central  story.  This  book  should  be  of 
value  to  anyone  interested  in  the  growth  of  American  edu- 
cation, for  it  is  the  story  of  an  institution  now  standing 
"among  the  nation's  high  one  percent  in  scholarly  achieve- 
ment of  graduates." 

Porter  Williams,  Jr. 
North  Carolina  State  College, 
Raleigh. 


Tobacco  Dictionary.  By  Raymond  Jahn.     (New  York:  Philo- 
sophical Library,  1954.  Pp.  199.  $5.00.) 

This  little  volume  will  be  useful  indeed  to  those  who, 
knowing  little  or  nothing  about  the  tobacco  industry,  regard 
the  plant  as  romantic.  It  is  a  pioneer  work  in  so  far  as  the 
industry  of  the  United  States  is  concerned. 

Perhaps  Mr.  Jahn  has  only  followed  current  American 
convictions  in  omitting  names  of  farmers  who  have  con- 


120  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

tributed  so  notably  to  the  development  of  the  tobacco  in- 
dustry. He  includes  countless  manufacturers  and  even  names 
of  individuals  connected  with  the  redrying  and  storage  of 
leaf  tobacco.  Nor  does  he  omit  William  Fitzhugh,  "one  of 
the  prominent  members  of  the  planter-class  of  the  Chesa- 
peake Bay  region,"  who  amassed  "54,000  acres  and  over  fifty 
slaves."  But,  apparently  unconcerned  with  the  important 
work  of  various  small  farmers  in  the  less  distant  past,  he 
omits  all  reference  to  that  pioneer  breeder  of  tobacco  seed, 
Robert  L.  Ragland;  to  Dr.  Davis  G.  Tuck,  originator  of  the 
flue;  and  to  Samuel  C.  Shelton  who  devised  the  methods  and 
rationale  of  curing  single  leaves  of  tobacco.  It  is  on  the  work 
of  such  men  as  these  that  the  great  cigarette  industry  of 
today  is  based.  That  amazing  entrepreneur,  James  B.  Duke, 
grew  up  in  their  midst. 

In  general,  Tobacco  Dictionary  contains  clear  and  accu- 
rate statements,  although  exception  might  be  taken  to  the 
implication  that  Sir  Walter  Raleigh  took  Virginia  tobacco 
"back  to  Europe  with  him."  Some  few  definitions— notably 
"trash"  and  "fighting  brands"— are  perhaps  too  narrow  and 
a  number  of  varieties  of  tobacco  have  not  been  included. 
It  was  John  J.,  not  P.  Arthur  Adcock,  who  developed  the 
Adcock  variety.  Moreover,  this  volume  which  is  designed 
also  to  bring  pleasure  to  the  farmer  contains  "weeding"  but 
does  not  include  "wed"  which,  as  any  son  of  Virginia  or 
North  Carolina  recognizes,  is  the  past  tense  of  "weed." 

Nannie  M.  Tilley. 
East  Texas  State  Teachers  College, 
Commerce,  Texas. 

The  Fremantle  Diary.  Editing  and  Commentary  by  Walter  Lord. 
(Boston:  Little,  Brown  and  Company.  1954.  Pp.  xv,  304. 
$4.00.) 

Civil  War  readers  have  long  been  aware  of  young  Colonel 
Fremantle,  whether  sharing  a  fork  with  Joseph  E.  Johnston, 
peering  at  the  field  of  Gettysburg  from  high  in  a  tree  over 
Lee's  command  post,  or  making  observations  on  southern 
life  and  society.  Few  have  known  him,  however,  except  as 
quoted  by  others.  His  diary  printed  in  London  in  1863,  is 
now  reprinted,  and  made  available  for  the  pleasure  of  many. 


Book  Reviews 


121 


In  the  winter  of  1863  Lieutenant  Colonel  James  Arthur 
Lyon  Fremantle,  of  Her  Majesties  Coldstream  Guards,  took 
leave  from  his  regiment  to  see  the  great  war  in  this  country, 
and  the  southern  gallantry  and  determination  he  so  much 
admired.  Landing  in  early  April  at  the  mouth  of  the  Rio 
Grande,  he  worked  his  way  east  and  north,  seeing  everything 
and  everybody  worth  his  attention,  and  making  careful  notes 
in  his  diary.  He  was  deeply  impressed  by  the  American 
cocktail,  by  the  custom  of  personal  violence,  by  the  need  of 
shaking  hands.  He  was  friendly  with  many,  among  them 
Generals  Beauregard,  Hood,  Johnston,  Bragg,  Polk,  Lee,  and 
Longstreet  who  years  afterward  remembered  him  with 
liking.  Their  friendly  interest  explains  why  he  was  able  to 
see  so  much.  After  Gettysburg,  he  went  through  the  lines  to 
New  York,  saw  the  draft  riots  in  July,  and  went  home  con- 
vinced that  the  South  was  "destined,  sooner  or  later,  to  be- 
come a  great  and  independent  nation." 

To  Col.  Fremantle's  fascinating  story,  Mr.  Lord  has  added 
useful  and  colorful  notes.  The  total  production  is  an  ex- 
tremely interesting  addition  to  Civil  War  literature.  It  is 
unfortunate  that  the  editorial  standards  are  not  as  high.  The 
text  of  the  1863  edition  has  been  slightly  altered  in  many 
places,  without  notice  that  this  has  been  done.  The  notes 
contain  much  undocumented  material,  and  the  quotations 
are  often  inaccurately  made.  These  and  other  instances  of 
carelessness,  as  in  referring  to  ambassadors  at  so  early  a  date, 
lessen  the  value  of  the  work,  as  does  the  lack  of  an  index. 

Herbert  W.Hill. 
Dartmouth  College, 
Hanover,  N.  H. 


A  History  of  the  South.  By  Francis  Butler  Simkins.  (New  York: 
Alfred  A.  Knopf,  1953.  Pp.  xiii,  655.  Illustrations,  biblography, 
and  index.  $5.75.) 

In  1947  Simkins  published  The  South  Old  and  New:  A 
History,  1820-1947.  Now  he  offers  a  revision  of  his  earlier 
work  in  which  he  has  not  only  revised  much  of  the  first 
edition  but  has  written  several  new  chapters.  Five  of  these 
treat  of  the  period  before  1820,  where  the  1947  book  began, 


122  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

and  the  last  two  bring  the  narrative  from  World  War  II  to 
1952.  The  greatest  changes  are  therefore  at  the  beginning 
and  the  end,  though  there  is  substantial  revision  throughout 
and  one  new  chapter  on  "Social  Diversions"  which  the 
earlier  edition  did  not  have. 

Of  the  five  chapters  on  the  period  before  1820,  four  of 
them  cover  various  aspects  of  the  colonial  period,  and  the 
fifth  one  is  on  the  Revolution  in  the  South  and  its  effects  on 
the  mind,  character,  institutions,  and  attitudes  of  the  South- 
ern American.  In  none  of  these  does  Professor  Simkins  ex- 
plore beyond  accepted  presentations  nor  does  he  offer  orig- 
inal interpretations:  the  chapters  represent  largely  syntheses 
of  earlier  works.  He  examines  and  explains  the  English  pat- 
tern of  life  which  dominated  Southern  ways  and  concludes 
that  the  Revolution  did  little— though  it  did  a  little— to  change 
them.  The  military  aspects  of  the  Revolution  in  the  South 
are  largely  neglected  and,  curiously,  the  period  between 
1800  and  1820  is  completely  ignored.  Although  these  five 
chapters  have  been  added  at  the  beginning,  the  general 
division  of  the  work  remains  as  before.  About  half  the  book 
concerns  the  period  since  Reconstruction.  Here  Simkins 
seems  to  feel  more  at  home  and  here,  undoubtedly,  he  in- 
tended his  emphasis  to  be. 

In  none  of  the  work,  first  or  last,  does  Simkins  pretend 
to  survey  the  South's  contributions  to  American  history. 
Rather  he  is  interested  in  stressing  the  traits  of  mind  and 
character,  and  the  variety  of  influences,  which  made  the 
South  a  distinct  cultural  province,  conscious  of  its  distinct- 
iveness and  of  its  identity.  On  themes  such  as  these  Simkins 
is  at  his  best,  and  his  best  is  very  good.  There  are  portions 
of  fine  writing,  such  as  the  excellent  chapter  on  literature 
in  the  New  South,  and  there  are  numerous  provocative  eval- 
uations where  Simkins  speaks  his  mind  in  analyzing  the 
movements,  trends,  and  attitudes  he  is  describing.  He  makes 
many  judgments,  and  some  of  them  will  provoke  quarrels 
among  southerners,  but  his  judgments  are  characterized  by 
authority  and  understanding,  for  he  knows  how  to  be  critical 
and  sympathetic  in  the  same  process.  He  condones  without 
sentimentality  and  condemns  without  offensiveness. 


Book  Reviews  123 

The  result  is  a  book  which  is  more  than  anything  else  a 
group  of  related  essays  characterized  by  clarity  of  writing, 
richness  of  knowledge,  originality  of  presentation,  and  ma- 
turity of  judgment.  Conclusions  are  buttressed  by  pages 
of  statistics  and  catalogues  of  names,  and  both  grow  tiresome 
at  times.  The  undergraduate  student  may  enjoy  this  book,  but 
he  will  not  understand  it  unless  he  has  more  than  a  fair 
knowledge  of  general  American  history  before  he  tackles  this 
regional  review.  Because  of  these  features  it  is  not  a  very 
teachable  book,  though  this  is  not  necessarily  a  criticism. 

There  are  inevitably  a  few  errors  but  only  one  seems  im- 
portant enough  to  mention.  There  are  excellent  bibliogra- 
phies, arranged  by  chapters,  but  this  feature  is  spoiled  by  the 
fact  that  the  readings  for  chapters  xxv-xxii  have  no  rela- 
tion to  the  subject  matter  of  the  chapters  they  professedly  rep- 
resent. The  wrong  numbering  is,  of  course,  a  technical  error 
and  is  a  small  item  over  which  to  quibble  in  so  excellent  a 
book. 

Frontis  W.  Johnston. 
Davidson  College, 
Davidson. 


Caracas  Diary,  1835-1840.  By  John  G.  A.  Williamson.  Edited 
by  Jane  Lucas  de  Grummond.  (Baton  Rouge:  Camillia  Pub- 
lishing Company,  Inc.  Pp.  444.  $10.00.) 

In  1954  the  diplomatic  and  commercial  relations  between 
the  United  States  and  Venezuela  are  close  and  important. 
One-sixth  of  all  our  capital  investments  in  Latin  America  are 
in  Venezuela  and  the  two  nations  are  increasingly  inter- 
dependent. The  relations  were  neither  close  nor  important 
in  1835  when  our  neighbor  was  in  swaddling  clothes  as  a 
nation  and  more  dependent  on  England  than  on  her  youth- 
ful neighbor  republic  in  North  America. 

That  year  a  native  of  Roxboro,  North  Carolina,  John  G. 
A.  Williamson,  was  assigned  to  be  our  first  diplomatic  rep- 
resentative to  the  new  South  American  republic.  The  ap- 
pointment as  charge  d'affaires  capped  nine  years  of  service 
by  Williamson  as  our  consul  in  the  same  general  area.  Wil- 
liamson kept  a  diary  during  his  more  than  four  years  in 


124  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Caracas,  which  has  been  resurrected,  documented  and  pub- 
lished by  a  thorough  and  conscientious  editor. 

Dr.  Jane  Lucas  de  Grummond,  native  Pennsylvanian,  now 
associate  professor  of  history  at  Louisiana  State  University, 
first  encountered  the  Williamson  diary  in  the  William  T. 
Morrey  Collection  at  Louisiana  State  while  she  was  a  gradu- 
ate student  in  1942.  At  that  time  she  published  extracts  from 
it  under  the  title  of  Envoy  to  Caracas.  The  complete  work 
emerges  bearing  the  clear  impression  of  a  great  deal  of 
scholarly  labor.  The  result  is  that  a  very  personal  editorship 
throws  interestingly  colored  slides  over  the  historical  events 
of  the  birth  of  a  nation. 

The  rambling,  subjective  observations  and  reflections  of 
Williamson,  characterized  by  poor  spelling  and  increasing 
morbidity,  have  been  converted  into  a  document  of  consider- 
able historical  worth.  This  has  been  done  without  reducing 
the  pungency  of  the  candid  eye-witness  account  of  life  in 
Caracas  during  the  first  few  years  of  Venezuela's  career  as  a 
free  nation. 

Something  about  the  diarist:  Williamson  was  aided  by  a 
well-to-do  and  doting  father  in  getting  his  education.  He 
had  a  brief  business  experience  in  New  York  where  an  ad- 
mirer classified  him  as  the  "handsomest"  man  in  the  city. 
He  married  a  Philadelphia  woman  and  returned  to  North 
Carolina  to  seek  a  political  career.  He  failed  in  a  bid  for  a 
seat  in  Congress,  but  he  was  a  loyal  supporter  of  Old  Hick- 
ory, and  it  was  Jackson  who  appointed  him  to  his  posts  in 
Venezuela. 

His  diary  covers  the  years  of  his  service  in  Caracas,  but 
it  refers  frequently  to  incidents  and  people  who  had  been 
active  during  the  nine  preceding  years  in  Venezuelan  life. 
Altogether,  Williamson's  two  jobs  spanned  the  hectic  years 
of  readjustment  following  independence  from  Spain.  He  had 
brief  personal  contact  with  Simon  Bolivar,  the  George  Wash- 
ington of  South  America,  and  some  of  his  principal  satellites. 
Offended  by  the  liberator's  indifference  to  the  lusty,  but 
youthful  republic  which  he  represented,  as  well  as  by  Boli- 
var's open  adulation  of  Britain,  the  diarist  nourished  a  definite 
dislike  for  both  Bolivar  and  the  British. 


Book  Reviews  125 

His  distaste  for  his  British  colleague  in  Caracas,  Sir  Robert 
Ker  Porter,  is  aired  frequently  in  his  diary,  and  he  accused 
Bolivar  of  increasing  infidelity  to  the  democracy  he  professed. 
He  hints  that  Bolivar's  early  death  obscured  this  unfaithful- 
ness and  came  in  good  time  to  prevent  the  exposure  of  the 
liberator's  own  royalist  ambitions.  Williamson's  obvious  sen- 
sitiveness to  personal  slights,  real  or  facied,  colors  and  dis- 
colors his  report.  His  diary  remains,  nevertheless,  a  close-up 
eye-witness  account  of  men  and  their  methods  in  a  most  im- 
portant period  in  the  life  of  the  country.  History  gives  suf- 
ficient support  to  some  of  his  appraisals  of  men  to  warn 
against  a  casual  dismissal  of  all  of  them  as  badly  distorted. 
This  may  be  said  in  spite  of  his  caustic  comments  about  the 
revered  leader  of  the  forces  of  South  American  independence. 

Williamson's  comments  on  the  manners  and  morals  of 
Caracas  society  are  savage.  As  he  climbed  the  dusty  trails 
where  now  the  most  costly  roadway  in  the  world  leads  from 
the  sea  to  the  great  capital  city,  or  rode  horseback  to  the 
picnic  ground,  where  now  stands  the  most  beautiful  country 
club  in  the  Americas,  he  speculated  on  the  personalities  of 
many  who  lived  in  the  dirty  little  city  of  some  30,000  inhabi- 
tants and  groaned  in  the  weakness  of  his  own  flesh. 

He  went  pridefully  to  his  assignment,  apparently  was  dil- 
igent in  the  relatively  trivial  duties  of  his  post  but  both 
pleasure  and  pride  dwindled  and  his  diary  entries  became 
sour  and  unhappy.  His  longing  to  return  to  the  United  States, 
stayed  only  by  the  need  to  accumulate  a  little  money,  may 
have  been  caused  less  by  the  faults  in  his  environment  than 
by  the  restlessness  of  a  strangely  inconsistent  helpmate  and 
his  own  failing  health.  Though  no  word  of  criticism  of  his 
wife  appears,  there  is  tragedy  in  each  line  of  his  diary  as 
the  time  approaches  for  consummation  of  her  stubborn  re- 
solve to  return  to  Philadelphia,  regardless  of  his  course.  She 
sailed  in  May,  1840  and  less  than  three  months  later  on 
August  7,  he  died  in  Caracas,  probably  of  cancer.  Ultimate- 
ly throughout  the  diary  trickles  a  distillation  of  pain  and 
bitterness  and  it  ends  abruptly  when  his  wife  departs. 

An  ironic  twist  at  the  finish  is  that  Williamson  had  to  call 
on  his  dispised  British  colleague  to  take  over  his  office  and 


126  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

make  his  final  report  to  the  United  States  Department  of 
State. 

"I  have  the  honor,"  wrote  Sir  Robert  Ker  Porter,  "of  ad- 
dressing you  in  order  to  impart  the  melancholy  intelligence 
of  the  death  of  Mr.  J.  G.  A.  Williamson,  charge  d'affaires 
from  the  U.  States  to  this  Republic.  He  died  at  10  o'clock 
on  the  night  of  the  7th  instant  in  this  city  and  his  remains 
were  interred  this  morning  in  the  British  Cemetery  with 
every  honor,  respect  and  attention  due  to  his  public  and 
private  character."  One  may  speculate  wryly  as  to  whether 
Sir  Robert  came  upon  and  perused  the  diary. 

Capus  M.  Waynick. 
High  Point. 


Charles  A.  Beard :  An  Appraisal.  Howard  K.  Beale,  editor.  (Lex- 
ington: University  of  Kentucky  Press,  1954.  pp.  xiii,  312. 
$4.50.) 

Any  book  about  Charles  A.  Beard,  one  of  the  most  in- 
fluential, significant,  and  incidentally  one  of  the  most  con- 
troversial, historians  of  the  United  States  would  arouse  in- 
terest. The  caliber  of  the  co-authors  of  this  Appraisal  in- 
sures its  value  and  importance  in  the  field  of  history.  Eric 
F.  Goldman  leads  off  with  an  impressionistic  view  of  Beard. 
It  is  an  excellent  and  stirring  pen  picture  of  a  combination  of 
rugged  hardheadedness,  kindliness,  patriotism,  and  a  restive 
quest  for  truth,  justice,  and  freedom.  Then  follow  Harold  J. 
Laski  with  an  English  view;  Max  Lerner  on  political  theory; 
Luther  Gulic  on  muncipal  reform;  George  Soule  on  planning; 
Richard  Hofstadter  on  the  constitution;  Walton  Hamilton 
on  "the  Politics";  Howard  K.  Beale  on  the  historian;  George 
R.  Leighton  on  foreign  policy;  Merle  Curti  on  the  critic; 
Arthur  W.  MacMahon  on  the  teacher;  George  S.  Counts  on 
the  public  man;  and  Howard  K.  Beale  on  Beard's  historical 
writings.  The  book  also  contains  a  bibliography  of  Beard's 
published  writings,  and  a  who's  who  of  the  authors.  The 
limits  of  this  review  do  not  permit  each  article  to  be  dealt 
with  individually.  All  are  of  value  but  it  seems  that  the 
articles  by  Walton  Hamilton,  interesting  though  it  is,  has 
little  place  in  the  volume. 


Book  Reviews  127 

Naturally,  with  such  an  approach,  there  is  some  overlap- 
ping and  repetition  in  the  essays,  but  both  have  been  kept  to 
a  minimum  and  do  not  mar  the  value  of  the  Appraisal.  In 
fact,  they  may  be  said  to  strengthen  it.  An  interesting  repe- 
tition that  casts  light  on  one  of  Beard's  fundamental  quali- 
ties is  the  story  of  Beard's  connection  with  the  Connecticut 
dairy  farmers'  strike.  Running  through  all  the  essays  is  the 
central  theme  of  Beard's  broad  grasp  of  history  and  human 
society,  his  sincere  patriotism,  and  his  deep  desire  to  improve 
man's  condition  and  free  him  from  the  bonds  that  restrain 
him  from  the  fullest  development  of  his  opportunities.  Beard 
made  important  contributions  to  government  planning,  pub- 
lic administration,  and  municipal  government.  Broadly  train- 
ed himself,  he  believed  that  it  was  the  obligation  and  func- 
tion of  every  citizen  to  translate  his  knowledge  and  under- 
standing of  government  into  positive  action. 

But  it  was  as  a  historian  that  Beard  made  his  greatest 
contribution  and  the  essays  of  Hofstadter,  Curti,  and  Beale 
are  of  primary  value  in  the  appraisal  of  his  work  in  this 
field.  Beard  published  forty-seven  volumes  of  history  that 
had  a  total  circulation  of  nearly  thirteen  and  one  half  million 
by  1949.  These  books  embrace  both  European  and  American 
history  as  well  as  the  philosophy  of  history  and  history's 
place  in  the  social  studies.  But  the  quality  of  Beard's  work  is 
more  significant  than  the  quantity.  More  than  ony  other 
American  historian  Beard  stimulated  an  interest  in  the  eco- 
nomic interpretation  of  history.  In  this  he  was  influenced  by 
Karl  Marx  but  he  did  not  accept  the  Marxian  philosophy  of 
dialectical  materialism.  In  his  An  Economic  Interpretation 
of  the  Constitution  Beard  hit  at  the  tradition  of  individual- 
ism in  American  thinking  and  raised  up  a  veritable  storm  of 
protest.  Today,  however,  Beard's  views  on  economic  in- 
fluences on  the  Constitution  and  American  history  generally 
are  widely  accepted.  Beard's  insistence  that  "domestic  af- 
fairs and  foreign  affairs  are  intimately  associated  with  each 
other"  was  another  of  his  contributions.  In  this  area,  too, 
Beard  stirred  up  a  storm  of  protest,  particularly  with  his 
books  dealing  with  Roosevelt's  policies  and  the  coming 
of  the  second  World  War.  Professor  Beale  says  that  while 


128  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

"many  loved  him;  many  hated  him."  Whether  Beard's  views 
in  this  field  will  come  to  be  accepted  is  yet  to  be  seen. 

This  is  an  interesting  and  worthwhile  book.  It  is  to  be 
lamented  that  no  index  was  prepared. 

Fletcher  M.  Green. 
University  of  North  Carolina, 
Chapel  Hill. 


HISTORICAL  NEWS 

The  Executive  Board  of  the  Department  of  Archives  and 
History  met  in  Raleigh  on  August  20,  when  budgetary  esti- 
mates for  the  1955-1957  biennium  were  approved. 

In  Winston-Salem  on  August  26  a  marker  was  unveiled  for 
the  first  registered  Guernsey  cattle  brought  to  the  state.  The 
ceremonies  were  conducted  by  the  North  Carolina  Guernsey 
Breeders  Association,  and  those  participating  in  the  program 
included  Mayor  Marshall  C.  Kurfees,  Mr.  Alfred  M.  Brown, 
Mrs.  T.  Holt  Haywood,  Dr.  Douglas  L.  Rights,  and  Dr. 
Christopher  Crittenden. 

On  August  29  a  historical  marker  for  the  historic  landmark, 
the  Flat  Rock,  was  unveiled  at  the  Town  of  Flat  Rock, 
Henderson  County.  The  Department  of  Archives  and  History 
was  represented  by  Mrs.  Sadie  Smathers  Patton,  Board  mem- 
ber, who  was  master  of  ceremonies;  Board  member  Clarence 
W.  Griffin,  who  made  a  brief  address;  Dr.  Christopher  Crit- 
tenden, director,  who  spoke  briefly;  and  Mr.  W.  S.  Tarlton, 
researcher.  The  principal  address  was  delivered  by  Major 
General  Edward  P.  King,  United  States  Army,  retired. 

The  Historic  Sites  Commission  met  in  Greensboro,  August 
31,  considered  several  requests  for  approval  of  sites  for  state 
aid,  and  heard  an  explanation  by  Mr.  George  H.  Esser  of 
the  Institute  of  Government,  regarding  the  proposed  reor- 
ganization of  state  government  insofar  as  the  historic  sites 
are  concerned. 

The  Tryon  Palace  Commission  met  with  the  Advisory  Bud- 
get Commission  in  New  Bern  on  September  3-4,  and  met 
again  in  Greensboro  on  November  29.  At  the  latter  meeting 
the  chief  item  of  business  was  the  consideration  of  the  plans 
and  specifications  that  had  been  prepared  by  Mr.  William  G. 
Perry,  the  architect.  It  is  expected  that  the  contract  for  the 
main  building  will  be  let  within  a  few  weeks. 


[129  ] 


130  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Dr.  Christopher  Crittenden  attended  the  annual  meeting 
of  the  American  Association  for  State  and  Local  History  in 
Madison,  Wisconsin,  September  9-11.  At  that  meeting  the 
Association  announced  forty-seven  annual  awards,  of  which 
three  came  to  North  Carolina:  to  Hugh  Talmage  Lefler 
and  the  late  Albert  Ray  Newsome  for  their  work,  North 
Carolina:  The  History  of  a  Southern  State  (University  of 
North  Carolina  Press);  to  the  Raleigh  Model  Railroad  Club 
for  installing  a  railroad  exhibit  in  the  Hall  of  History;  and 
to  the  State  Department  of  Archives  and  History  for  its  first 
half  century  of  achievement  and  service. 

On  September  23  Mr.  Elbert  Cox  of  Richmond,  Va.,  re- 
gional director  of  the  National  Park  Service,  was  the  principal 
speaker  at  the  annual  celebration  at  Moore's  Creek  National 
Military  Park.  Mr.  Ashley  Murphy,  Dr.  Christopher  Critten- 
den, and  others  spoke.  Mr.  J.  V.  Whitfield,  chairman  of  the 
battleground  committee,  presided. 

On  September  25  in  Raleigh  memorial  services  were  con- 
ducted for  the  late  Dr.  George  Marion  Cooper,  who  for  many 
years  served  with  the  State  Board  of  Health,  and  a  tablet 
in  honor  of  Dr.  Cooper  was  unveiled  in  the  Cooper  Memorial 
Health  Building.  Participating  in  the  program  were  the  late 
Governor  William  B.  Umstead,  Dr.  G.  Grady  Dixon,  Dr. 
Amos  B.  Johnson,  Dr.  J.  W.  R.  Norton,  and  Dr.  J.  H.  Hamil- 
ton 

In  the  Hall  of  History,  October  1,  a  party  was  held  for  the 
purpose  of  securing  public  aid  in  identifying  a  number  of 
pictures  left  to  the  Department  by  the  late  Albert  Barden  of 
Raleigh.  These  pictures  were  numbered,  and  placed  on  the 
walls,  and  prizes  were  offered  to  the  persons  who  identified 
the  largest  number  of  photographs.  Seventy-five  or  more  per- 
sons attended.  Many  of  the  pictures  were  identified. 

On  October  13  in  Vance  County  a  marker  was  unveiled  for 
Judge  Richard  Henderson.  Dr.  Archibald  Henderson  of  the 
University  of  North  Carolina  delivered  an  address,  and  Dr. 
Christopher  Crittenden  spoke  briefly.  At  Mars  Hill  on  October 


Historical  News  131 

15  Dr.  Christopher  Crittenden  addressed  the  North  Carolina 
Baptist  college  social  studies  teachers  on  "The  Writing  and 
Preservation  of  Local  History." 

In  Gaston  County,  October  16,  a  marker  for  Revolutionary 
General  Joseph  Dickson  was  unveiled.  Mr.  Frank  B.  Rankin 
of  Mount  Holly  delivered  an  address  and  Mr.  Clarence  W. 
Griffin  and  Dr.  Christopher  Crittenden  made  short  talks.  The 
ceremonies  were  conducted  by  the  William  Gaston  Chapter, 
Daughters  of  the  American  Revolution,  with  Mrs.  Kay  Dixon 
of  Gastonia,  the  regent,  presiding. 

The  annual  church  services  and  picnic  luncheon  were  held 
on  October  17  at  restored  St.  John's  Church  in  Vance  County. 
The  services  were  conducted  by  Bishop  E.  A.  Penick  and 
Reverend  I.  Harding  Hughes,  both  of  the  Protestant  Episco- 
pal Church.  At  a  business  meeting  Dr.  Lawrence  F.  London, 
chairman  of  the  restoration  committee,  presided  and  reports 
were  made  regarding  the  restoration  project.  Dr.  Crittenden 
represented  the  Department  of  Archives  and  History. 

On  October  26  Dr.  Crittenden  spoke  at  the  unveiling  of 
a  portrait  of  Governor  James  Turner  in  the  Warrenton  Public 
Library.  The  ceremonies  were  conducted  by  the  Warren 
County  Historical  Society. 

In  Chicago,  October  28-30,  Dr.  Crittenden  attended  the 
annual  meeting  of  the  National  Trust  for  Historic  Preserva- 
tion, of  which  he  is  a  trustee.  On  November  3  he  was  present 
at  the  first  meeting  of  the  advisory  board  of  the  new  American 
Heritage  (magazine  of  history). 

North  Carolinians  participating  in  the  programs  of  the 
Southern  Historical  Association  at  the  annual  meeting  in 
Columbia,  S.  C.  November  11-13  were  as  follows:  Dr.  Chris- 
topher Crittenden  of  the  Department  of  Archives  and  His- 
tory; Dr.  Loren  C.  MacKinney  and  Dr.  J.  Carlyle  Sitterson  of 
the  University  of  North  Carolina;  Dr.  David  L.  Smiley  of 
Wake  Forest  College;  Dr.  Rosser  H.  Taylor  of  Western  Caro- 


132  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

lina  College;  Dr.  Robert  F.  Durden,  Dr.  Paul  H.  Clyde,  Dr. 
E.  Malcolm  Carroll,  Dr.  William  H.  Cartwright,  and  Dr. 
William  B.  Hamilton  of  Duke  University. 

On  November  20  in  Hollywood  Cemetery,  Richmond,  Va., 
Dr.  Crittenden  spoke  at  the  unveiling  of  a  memorial  at  the 
grave  of  Henry  Lawson  Wyatt  of  Edgecombe  County,  N.  C, 
first  soldier  in  the  Confederate  Service  to  be  killed  in  battle 
(at  Big-Bethel,  June  10,  1861).  The  ceremonies  were  con- 
ducted by  the  Lee  Chapter,  United  Daughters  of  the  Con- 
federacy, Richmond. 

On  November  30  in  Hobgood,  Halifax  County,  a  marker 
was  unveiled  for  General  James  Hogan.  Mr.  W.  S.  Tarlton, 
representing  the  Department  of  Archives  and  History,  made 
the  principal  address. 

Sir  Walter  Raleigh  Day  was  celebrated  in  the  public 
schools  of  the  state  on  December  3.  The  State  Superintendent 
of  Public  Instruction  had  been  empowered  "to  permit  volun- 
tary donations  to  be  made  by  the  school  children  of  the 
State  for  the  erection  of  a  memorial  in  the  City  of  Raleigh  in 
honor  of  Sir  Walter  Raleigh."  The  celebration  was  planned 
by  the  Sir  Walter  Raleigh  Commission,  of  which  Governor 
Luther  H.  Hodges  is  chairman;  Dr.  Clarence  Poe,  vice  chair- 
man; Dr.  Charles  F.  Carroll,  secretary;  and  Mr.  Robert  Lee 
Humber,  chairman  of  the  executive  committee. 

The  annual  meetings  of  the  various  cultural  societies  were 
held  in  Raleigh,  December  1-4.  The  first  meeting  was  the 
business  session  of  the  North  Carolina  State  Art  Society. 
Mrs.  Katherine  Pendleton  Arrington  of  Warrenton  was  re- 
elected president  of  the  Society  at  a  meeting  of  the  board  of 
directors.  Also  re-elected  by  the  board  were  Robert  Lee 
Humber  of  Greenville,  vice  president  and  chairman  of  the 
executive  committee;  Mrs.  James  H.  Cordon  of  Raleigh, 
treasurer;  Miss  Lucy  Cherry  Crisp  of  Raleigh,  executive 
secretary  and  gallery  director.  Mrs.  J.  H.  B.  Moore  of  Greens- 
ville, John  Allcott  of  Chapel  Hill,  and  Mrs.  Jacques  Busbee 


Historical  News  133 

of  Steeds  were  re-elected  vice  presidents  at  large.  Elected 
to  two-year  terms  on  the  board  of  directors  were  State 
Treasurer  Edwin  Gill,  Mrs.  Isabelle  Bowen  Henderson  and 
Dr.  Clarence  Poe  of  Raleigh,  and  Dr.  Clemmons  Sommer  of 
Chapel  Hill.  State  Auditor  Henry  L.  Bridgers  and  Jonathan 
Daniels  of  Raleigh,  Gregory  Ivey  of  Greensboro,  and  Mrs. 
Kenneth  Mountcastle,  Jr.,  of  Winston-Salem,  were  elected 
to  one-year  terms  on  the  board.  Mr.  Humber  reported  that 
it  would  probably  be  1956  before  the  state  receives  the 
$1,000,000  art  gift  from  the  Samuel  H.  Kress  Foundation. 

Dr.  Charles  F.  Carroll  of  Raleigh  presided  at  the  luncheon 
meeting  of  the  Art  Society  and  Dr.  James  Sprunt  was  the 
speaker.  A  report  on  the  museum  building  and  progress  in 
the  art  collection  was  made  by  Mr.  Robert  Lee  Humber 
who  reported  that  objects  of  art,  consisting  of  valuable  paint- 
ings, porcelains,  tapestries,  and  furniture,  valued  at  approxi- 
mately $703,900  had  been  donated  to  the  state  during  1954. 

Mr.  John  H.  Kerr,  Jr.,  of  Warrenton  received  the  Society's 
Certificate  of  Merit  and  Achievement  for  distinguished  serv- 
ice to  the  North  Carolina  State  Art  Society.  Mr.  Kerr  was 
largely  responsible  for  the  passage  in  the  General  Assembly 
of  1947,  of  the  bill  appropriating  $1,000,000  for  the  purchase 
of  objects  of  art. 

Mr.  Robert  Lee  Humber  presided  at  the  evening  meeting 
of  the  Society  and  Dr.  Marshall  Fishwick,  associate  professor 
of  American  Studies  of  Washington  and  Lee  University, 
spoke  on  "Art  in  Our  Daily  Life  and  the  Art  Museum's  Role 
in  the  Community."  Winners  of  the  1954  Purchase  Awards  in 
the  North  Carolina  Artists  Competition  were  announced.  The 
awards  were  presented  by  Miss  Lucy  Cherry  Crisp  to  Mr. 
Claude  Howell  of  Wilmington  for  his  semi-abtract  oil  paint- 
ing, "Beach  Umbrella,"  Mr.  Philip  Moose  of  Newton  for  his 
impressionistic  oil,  "The  Plaza,"  and  Mr.  Harry  Ellensweig, 
State  College  student,  for  his  ink  and  watercolor,  "City 
Maze."  After  Dr.  Fishwick's  address  a  reception  and  preview 
of  the  North  Carolina  Artists'  Exhibition  were  held  in  the 
State  Art  Gallery. 


134  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

The  Roanoke  Island  Historical  Association  held  a  luncheon 
meeting,  December  1,  at  the  Hotel  Sir  Walter. 

On  December  2  the  North  Carolina  Society  for  the  Preser- 
vation of  Antiquities  held  its  fourteenth  annual  meeting.  The 
morning  program  of  the  session  was  composed  of  reports  on 
restoration  and  preservation  projects.  Mr.  James  A.  Sten- 
house,  chairman  of  the  Historic  Sites  Commission,  reported 
on  St.  Thomas  Church  at  Bath  and  the  Alston  House  in  the 
Horseshoe.  Mrs.  John  A.  Kellenberger,  chairman  of  the  Tyron 
Palace  Commission,  stated  that  it  had  been  decided  to  enlarge 
the  grounds  at  the  Palace  and,  if  possible,  restore  the  original 
park.  Mrs.  Dorothy  R.  Phillips,  Hall  of  History,  Raleigh,  gave 
a  slide  program  on  "Historic  Buildings  in  North  Carolina." 
The  officers  of  the  Society  were  re-elected  for  another  year. 

At  the  luncheon  meeting  of  the  Antiquities  Society  Mr.. 
John  A.  Kellenberger  of  Greensboro  presided.  Mrs.  Sterling 
M.  Gary  of  Halifax  presented  Chancellor  Robert  B.  House 
of  the  University  of  North  Carolina,  who  spoke  on  the  Halifax 
Resolves  of  April  12,  1776.  Mr.  James  A.  Stenhouse  discussed 
the  restoration  and  preservation  of  historic  buildings  in  Hali- 
fax. 

Miss  Gertrude  S.  Carraway  of  New  Bern  presided  over  the 
evening  meeting.  Fourteen  new  life  members  were  presented. 
The  Cannon  Awards  were  presented  to  the  following:  Attor- 
ney General  Harry  McMullan,  Raleigh,  for  his  aid  to  the 
Society  in  the  preservation  of  historic  sites;  Mrs.  Walter  M. 
Stearns,  Raleigh,  for  the  preservation  of  her  home,  "Haywood 
Hall,"  which  was  built  in  1792;  Miss  Cora  A.  Harris,  Char- 
lotte, writer  and  landscape  gardener,  for  her  designing  and 
execution  of  period  plantings  for  restoration  projects,  and  for 
her  writings  in  history  and  horticulture;  Colonel  Jeffrey  F. 
Stanback,  Mount  Gilead,  for  his  work  in  historical  research 
and  writing,  his  setting  up  of  the  Montgomery  County  Ar- 
chives, and  his  endeavors  in  having  old  places  in  the  state 
restored;  Mr.  and  Mrs.  George  D.  Allen,  Scarsdale,  New 
York,  for  their  work  with  Duke  University  and  the  Duke 


Historical  News  135 

Endowment,  as  well  as  their  restoration  work  in  Warrenton; 
Mr.  Cecil  B.  DeMille,  formerly  of  Washington,  North  Caro- 
lina, for  his  many  fine  films.  The  program  was  presented  by 
the  Charles  B.  Aycock  Memorial  Commission  of  which  Dr. 
D.  J.  Rose,  Goldsboro,  is  chairman.  "The  Vision  of  Charles 
Brantley  Aycock,"  by  John  Ehle  and  directed  by  Clifton 
Britton,  was  presented.  A  reception  was  held  after  the  meet- 
ing. 

On  December  3  the  State  Literary  and  Historical  Associa- 
tion held  its  annual  meeting.  Mrs.  Inglis  Fletcher  presided 
at  the  morning  session  when  the  reports  of  the  secretary- 
treasurer  and  of  the  committees  were  given  and  resolutions 
were  passed.  In  the  election  of  officers  Dr.  Fletcher  M.  Green, 
head  of  the  history  department  at  the  University  of  North 
Carolina,  succeeded  Mrs.  Inglis  Fletcher  of  Edenton  as  presi- 
dent of  the  association;  Mr.  John  Harden  of  Greensboro,  Mr. 
Hugh  Morton  of  Wilmington,  and  Dr.  R.  H.  Taylor  of  Cullo- 
whee  were  elected  vice  presidents.  Dr.  Christopher  Critten- 
den, director  of  the  Department  of  Archives  and  History, 
was  re-elected  secretary-treasurer.  Dr.  Lillian  Parker  Wal- 
lace of  Meredith  College  and  Dr.  William  H.  Cartwright  of 
Duke  University  were  elected  members  of  the  executive  com- 
mittee. 

The  program  of  the  Literary  and  Historical  Association 
began  with  Dr.  Paul  Murray  of  Greenville  speaking  on  "The 
North  Carolina  Historical  Review— The  First  Thirty  Years." 
Mr.  Harry  Golden  of  Charlotte  talked  on  "The  Jewish  People 
of  North  Carolina"  and  Mr.  Robert  Mason  of  Sanford  gave 
a  review  of  North  Carolina  fiction  of  the  year.  The  R.  D.  W. 
Connor  Award  for  the  best  article  on  North  Carolina  history 
or  biography  in  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review  was 
presented  by  Dr.  Lillian  Parker  Wallace  to  Mr.  Hugh  F. 
Rankin,  graduate  student  at  the  University  of  North  Carolina, 
for  his  article,  "Cowpens:  Prelude  to  Yorktown."  Mr.  Roy 
Parker,  Sr.,  of  Ahoskie  presented  the  Roanoke-Chowan 
Poetry  Award  to  Mr.  Thad  Stem,  Jr.,  of  Oxford  for  his  volume 
of  verse  entitled  "The  Jackknife  Horse."  Mrs.  Mebane  Holo- 


136  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

man  Burgwyn  of  Jackson  was  presented  the  American  Asso- 
ciation of  University  Women's  Juvenile  Literature  Award  by 
Mrs.  Carl  A.  Plonk  of  Asheville  for  her  book,  Penny  Rose. 

Mr.  D.  L.  Corbitt  of  the  State  Department  of  Archives  and 
History  presided  at  the  luncheon  meeting  of  the  Association 
and  Dr.  Leonard  B.  Hurley  of  Greensboro  gave  a  review  of 
North  Carolina  non-fiction  for  the  year. 

The  subscription  dinner  was  presided  over  by  Mr.  Capus 
M.  Waynick  of  High  Point  and  Mrs.  Inglis  Fletcher  gave  the 
presidential  address.  Dr.  D.  J.  Whitener  of  Boone  presided 
at  the  evening  meeting.  The  address,  "The  Elizabethan  Poli- 
tics and  Colonial  Enterprise,"  was  given  by  Dr.  Louis  B. 
Wright  of  the  Folger  Shakespeare  Library  in  Washington, 
D.  C.  Mrs.  Preston  B.  Wilkes,  Jr.,  governor,  Society  of  May- 
flower Descendants  in  the  State  of  North  Carolina,  presented 
the  Mayflower  Society  Award  to  Dr.  Hugh  T.  Lefler  of 
Chapel  Hill  and  the  late  Dr.  A.  R.  Newsome  of  Chapel  Hill, 
for  their  book,  North  Carolina,  The  History  of  a  Southern 
State;  and  Miss  Clara  Booth  Byrd,  Greensboro,  president  of 
the  Historical  Book  Club,  presented  the  Sir  Walter  Raleigh 
Award  to  Mr.  Ovid  William  Pierce  of  Weldon  for  his  novel, 
The  Plantation.  A  reception  was  held  after  the  meeting. 

The  North  Carolina  Society  of  County  and  Local  His- 
torians met  on  the  afternoon  of  December  3.  The  Society  an- 
nounced the  plan  for  the  presentation  of  an  annual  award 
for  the  best  historical  feature  published  in  the  newspapers 
of  the  state.  The  perpetuation  of  the  Smithwick  Award  was 
announced  and  it  will  be  given  by  Mr.  and  Mrs.  S.  T.  Peace 
of  Henderson.  The  award  will  be  made  for  the  best  local 
historical  work  published  in  book  form.  It  will  be  given  on 
alternate  years.  Officers  re-elected  were:  Mr.  William  S. 
Powell,  Chapel  Hill,  president;  Mr.  Manly  Wade  Wellman, 
Chapel  Hill,  Colonel  Jeffrey  F.  Stanback,  Mt.  Gilead,  and 
Mrs.  S.  T.  Peace,  Henderson,  vice  presidents.  Mrs.  Musella 
W.  Wagner  of  Chapel  Hill  was  re-elected  secretary-treasurer. 
"The  Junior  Historian  Movement"  was  described  by  Dr. 


Historical  News 


137 


Jonathan  C.  McLendon  of  Durham  and  Dr.  Harry  R.  Stevens 
of  Durham  discussed  "The  Progress  and  Future  of  County 
History  Writing/' 

at  the  meeting  of  the  North  Carolina  Folklore  Society,  which 
was  held  on  the  afternoon  of  December  3,  Mr.  Manly  W. 
Wellman  spoke  on  "The  Writer's  Use  of  Folklore."  After 
his  talk  Miss  Margaret  Underwood  of  Greensboro  sang 
"Vandy,  Vandy,"  and  other  North  Carolina  folksongs.  Mr. 
James  M.  Carpenter  discussed  "Folklore  Collecting  in  Britian 
and  America." 

The  North  Carolina  Poetry  Society  also  held  its  meeting 
on  Friday  afternoon,  December  3.  Mr.  Paul  Bartlett  of 
Charlotte  presided  in  the  absence  of  Mrs.  W.  H.  Vestal  of 
Winston-Salem,  president.  Mr.  Richard  Walser  of  Raleigh 
issued  greetings,  and  Mr.  Stewart  Atkins  of  Gastonia  re- 
sponded. The  program  of  the  meeting  was  "The  History  of 
the  North  Carolina  Poetry  Society,"  by  Miss  Zoe  Kincaid 
Brockman  of  Gastonia.  Recognition  was  given  by  Mr.  Paul 
Bartlett  to  members  who  had  published  volumes  of  poetry. 
Mr.  James  Larkin  Pearson,  Poet  Laureate  of  North  Carolina, 
Guilford  College,  Mr.  Frank  Borden  Hanes,  Winston-Salem, 
1953  Poetry  Award  winner,  and  Mr.  Thad  Stem,  Jr.,  Oxford, 
winner  of  the  present  year;  spoke  briefly. 

The  members  of  the  North  Carolina  Society  of  County  and 
Local  Historians  were  guests  at  the  September  5  meeting  of 
the  Stanly  County  Historical  Society.  A  tour  included  visits 
to  several  old  homes  and  churches  as  well  as  to  the  aluminum 
plant  at  Badin  and  Morrow  Mountain  State  Park.  After  lunch 
the  group  visited  Pfeiffer  College  at  Meisenheimer. 

On  October  10  the  members  of  the  North  Carolina  Society 
of  County  and  Local  Historians  were  the  guests  at  a  tour 
arranged  by  Mr.  James  G.  W.  MacClamroch  and  Mr.  Raleigh 
C.  Taylor,  which  covered  northern  Guilford  County,  Greens- 
boro, and  the  Guilford  Courthouse  Battleground.  A  picnic 
lunch  was  enjoyed  by  the  members  who  attended. 


138  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

The  Society  of  American  Archivists  eighteenth  annual  meet- 
ing at  Williamsburg,  Virginia,  September  12-13,  was  attended 
by  Dr.  Christopher  Crittenden,  Mr.  D.  L.  Corbitt,  Mr.  W. 
Frank  Burton,  Mrs.  Doris  H.  Harris,  and  Mrs.  Frances  Whit- 
ley all  of  the  Department  staff.  Dr.  Crittenden  talked  on  the 
subject,  "The  North  Carolina  Record  Center,"  and  Mr.  Burton 
spoke  on  "Microfilming  State  Records." 

Dr.  Marvin  L.  Skaggs,  professor  and  head  of  the  depart- 
ment of  history  at  Greensboro  College,  delivered  the  principal 
address  at  the  September  17  ceremonies  at  Guilford  Battle- 
ground, when  the  Daughters  of  the  American  Revolution 
presented  a  Revolutionary  drum  to  Guilford  Courthouse  Na- 
tional Military  Park.  Dr.  Christopher  Crittenden  was  present 
and  talked  briefly  about  the  drum. 

The  Restored  Wachovia  Museum  was  opened  on  Septem- 
ber 18  by  the  late  Governor  William  B.  Umstead,  in  Old 
Salem,  Winston-Salem.  The  restoration  project  was  promoted 
and  carried  through  by  Old  Salem,  Inc.,  and  is  a  part  of  their 
long-range  program  to  recapture  as  nearly  as  possible  the 
atmosphere  and  actuality  of  the  Wachovia  settlement.  The 
museum  was  originally  begun  by  the  Young  Men's  Missionary 
Society  of  the  Moravian  Church. 

The  Wachovia  Historical  Society  at  its  annual  meeting  on 
October  19,  presented  three  North  Carolina  writers  with 
Spangenberg  Medals  commemorating  the  first  settlement  in 
Wachovia.  Those  who  were  so  honored  were  Mr.  William 
T.  Polk,  author  of  Southern  Accent;  Mr.  James  S.  Brawley, 
who  wrote  The  Rowan  Story;  and  Dr.  Hugh  T.  Lefler,  who 
co-authored  North  Carolina,  The  History  of  a  Southern  State. 
Mr.  Polk,  who  was  the  principal  speaker,  is  an  associate  edi- 
tor of  the  Greensboro  Daily  News. 

On  September  26  Dr.  Blackwell  P.  Robinson,  professor  of 
history  at  High  Point  College,  and  Mrs.  Inglis  Fletcher, 
novelist,  were  the  featured  speakers  at  the  Homecoming  Day 
program  of  the  historic  Old  Bethesda  Presbyterian  Church 


Historical  News  139 

near  Aberdeen.  The  program,  which  was  attended  by  hun- 
dreds of  the  descendants  of  the  Scottish  settlers,  lasted 
throughout  the  day  and  a  picnic  lunch  was  served.  Mr.  J. 
Talbot  Johnson,  chairman  for  27  successive  years,  presided 
and  students  from  Flora  MacDonald  College  gave  a  program 
of  religious  music.  Mrs.  Fletcher's  talk  was  on  the  topic, 
"History  and  the  Writing  of  a  Novel."  Dr.  Robinson  read 
excerpts  from  his  forthcoming  history  of  Moore  County. 

An  article  which  described  the  Robert  H.  Davis  Collection 
of  O.  Henry  ana  appeared  in  the  October  17  edition  of  the 
Greensboro  Daily  News.  It  was  written  by  Mr.  Burke  Davis, 
feature  writer  of  the  Daily  News  and  author  of  the  recent 
book,  They  Called  Him  Stonewall. 

Mrs.  Joye  E.  Jordan,  head  of  the  Division  of  Museums  of 
the  Department  of  Archives  and  History,  accompanied  by 
Mrs.  Dorothy  R.  Phillips  and  Miss  Barbara  McKeithan,  at- 
tended the  annual  meeting  of  the  Southeastern  Museums 
Conference  in  Miami,  Fla.,  October  20-23.  Mrs.  Jordan  is 
secretary- treasurer  of  this  group. 

On  November  9  Mrs.  Jordan  spoke  to  the  Dunn  Junior 
Woman's  Club  on  "North  Carolina  Pottery." 

The  thirtieth  anniversary  celebration  of  the  Greensboro 
Historical  Museum  was  held  on  October  28  with  a  luncheon 
address  by  Governor  Luther  H.  Hodges,  then  lieutenant  gov- 
ernor, and  a  visit  to  the  museum  which  featured  the  Robert 
H.  Davis  Collection  of  O.  Henry  ana.  Mr.  Karl  E.  Prickett  is 
president  of  the  Museum  and  Mr.  McDaniel  Lewis  was  chair- 
man of  the  thirtieth  anniversary  celebration.  Mr.  W.  Frank 
Burton,  Mr.  W.  S.  Tarlton,  Mrs.  Joye  E.  Jordan,  and  Mrs. 
Dorothy  R.  Phillips  of  the  Department  of  Archives  and  His- 
tory attended  the  meeting. 

The  following  papers  were  read  at  the  fall  meeting  of  the 
North  Carolina  Historical  Society  on  October  29:  Dr.  Sarah 


140  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Lemmon,  "Eugene  Talmadge  and  Dean  Cocking";  Mr.  Rich- 
ard Walser,  "The  Mysterious  Case  of  George  Higby  Throop, 
1818-1896";  and  Dr.  J.  G.  de  R.  Hamilton,  "General  Robert 
F.  Hoke  and  His  Military  Career."  Dr.  Robert  H.  Woody  of 
Duke  University  was  elected  president  and  Mrs.  Julia  Spruill, 
vice  president.  Dr.  Frontis  W.  Johnston  was  re-elected  secre- 
tary-treasurer and  the  following  members  were  elected  to  the 
council:  Dr.  Alice  B.  Kieth,  Dr.  Sam  H.  Hobbs,  Jr.,  and  Dr. 
Rosser  H.  Taylor. 

Mr.  Clarence  W.  Griffin  of  Forest  City,  a  member  of  the 
Executive  Board,  represented  the  Department  of  Archives 
and  History  at  the  unveiling  of  a  historical  marker  on  October 
31  at  the  home  place  of  Captain  William  Moore  in  Buncombe 
County.  The  marker  was  erected  in  cooperation  with  the 
Unaka  Chapter  of  the  Daughters  of  American  Colonists. 

The  Western  North  Carolina  Historical  Association  met  on 
November  6  at  Brevard  College.  The  business  session  was 
presided  over  by  Mr.  Sam  E.  Beck,  president,  of  Asheville. 
Mr.  Clarence  W.  Griffin,  vice  president,  of  Forest  City  in- 
troduced those  on  the  program.  Following  a  welcome  by  Rev. 
Robert  Stamey,  president  of  Brevard  College,  Mr.  L.  P. 
Hamlin  talked  on  "The  History  of  Transylvania  County." 

The  Executive  Committee  of  the  North  Carolina  Register 
of  Deeds  Association  met  in  Raleigh  on  November  10-11  to 
outline  a  legislative  program.  Mr.  W.  Frank  Burton,  head  of 
the  Division  of  Archives,  worked  with  the  group  in  an  ad- 
visory capacity. 

The  popular  historical  magazine,  American  Heritage,  which 
first  began  publication  five  years  ago,  was  issued  on  Decem- 
ber 6  in  its  new  book  format.  This  publication  has  been  great- 
ly expanded  into  book  form  and  contains  124  pages  of  which 
27  are  4-color  process  pictures.  It  is  jointly  sponsored  by 
the  American  Association  for  State  and  Local  History  and  the 
Society  of  American  Historians.  The  book  will  be  sold  through 
book  stores  and  not  on  magazine  or  news  stands. 


Historical  News  141 

The  Catawba  County  Historical  Association  recently  elect- 
ed Mr.  Sam  G.  Rowe,  Newton  civil  engineer,  to  succeed  Dr. 
J.  E.  Hodges  of  Maiden  as  president.  Other  officers  include 
Mrs.  J.  C.  Plonk  of  Hickory,  vice  president;  Mrs.  Pearl  Miller 
Tomlinson  of  Hickory,  secretary;  and  Mrs.  J.  M.  Ballard  of 
Newton,  treasurer.  The  society  has  decided  to  start  a  county 
museum  as  its  principal  project  for  the  coming  year. 

The  county  commissioners  of  Montgomery  County  recently 
authorized  a  depository  for  the  preservation  of  important 
manuscripts,  documents,  and  county  records.  Colonel  Jeffrey 
F.  Stanback  of  Mount  Gilead  was  appointed  county  his- 
torian. A  number  of  important  collections  have  been  promised 
as  well  as  several  old  maps  when  the  depository  is  set  up. 
January,  1955,  has  been  set  as  a  possible  date  when  the 
archives  will  be  available  to  the  public. 

Miss  Lynette  Adcock,  originally  of  Oxford,  North  Carolina, 
who  is  at  present  connected  with  Colonial  Williamsburg,  Inc., 
Williamsburg,  Virginia,  compiled  the  statistics  for  the  new 
book,  Guide  to  the  Manuscript  Collections  of  Colonial  Wil- 
liamsburg. 

Mr.  D.  L.  Corbitt,  editor  of  the  Division  of  Publications 
of  the  Department  of  Archives  and  History,  attended  a  num- 
ber of  meetings  of  county  historical  societies  and  addressed 
others  during  the  last  quarter.  On  September  25  he  assisted 
in  the  organizational  meeting  of  the  Carteret  County  County 
Historical  Society  in  Beaufort  and  spoke  on  the  various  phases 
of  achieving  a  permanent  society.  Two  weeks  later  following 
a  membership  drive  40  charter  members  elected  the  follow- 
ing officers:  Mrs.  Nat  Smith  of  Gloucester,  president,  and 
Miss  Amy  Muse  of  Beaufort,  secretary  and  curator.  On  the 
same  date  Mr.  Corbitt  assisted  an  interested  group  in  Jack- 
sonville in  organizing  the  Onslow  County  Historical  Society 
with  41  charter  members.  Mrs.  Lillian  R.  Ray  of  Hubert  was 
elected  president  and  Mrs.  John  Starling  of  Hubert  was 
elected  secretary  and  treasurer.  On  October  4  Mr.  Corbitt 
spoke  at  the  annual  meeting  of  the  Currituck  County  His- 


142  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

torical  Society  at  Shawboro.  His  subject  was  "The  Publication 
Program  of  the  State  Department  of  Archives  and  History." 
Approximately  75  persons  attended  this  meeting.  The  Blooms- 
bury  Chapter  of  the  Daughters  of  the  Revolution  held  their 
October  8  meeting  at  the  Carolina  Country  Club  with  Mr. 
Corbitt  speaking  on  "The  Publication  Program  of  the  De- 
partment of  Archives  and  History."  The  Mecklenburg  His- 
torical Association  was  organized  in  Charlotte  on  October 
18  with  Mr.  Corbitt  as  speaker  at  the  meeting.  Following  the 
program  the  association  was  formed  with  Mr.  James  A.  Sten- 
house  as  president  and  Mrs.  Georgia  Spratt  Gray  as  secretary. 
The  association  has  160  members.  On  November  5  the  Phi 
Alpha  Theta,  national  honorary  history  fraternity  of  the 
University  of  North  Carolina,  Chapel  Hill,  had  a  program 
which  featured  Mr.  Corbitt,  who  spoke  on  "The  Publishing 
of  Historical  Research  Today,"  and  Mr.  Lambert  Davis,  of 
the  University  Press,  who  spoke  on  "University  Presses  and 
the  Publishing  of  Doctor's  Dissertations." 

Mr.  W.  S.  Tarlton,  researcher  for  the  Department  of  Ar- 
chives and  History,  represented  the  Department  at  the  meet- 
ing of  the  Bertie  County  Historical  Society  at  the  Bertie 
end  of  the  Chowan  River  Bridge,  September  19.  Mr.  John 
E.  Tyler,  historian  of  the  group,  presided.  A  picnic  lunch  was 
enjoyed  by  the  guests  and  members.  A  series  of  markers  lo- 
cated at  this  historic  spot  include  the  following:  Governor 
Edward  Hyde,  Eden  House,  Pollock's  Home,  and  the  Na- 
thaniel Batts  House,  which  symbolically  marks  the  home  site 
of  the  first  known  settler  in  North  Carolina.  Mr.  Tarlton 
spoke  at  the  unveiling  of  a  marker  for  Governor  John  Branch 
at  Enfield,  September  9.  The  ceremonies  were  sponsored  by 
the  local  chapter  of  the  United  Daughters  of  the  Confed- 
eracy. On  September  17  he  talked  on  "The  Restoration  of 
Somerset  Place"  to  the  LaFayette  Chapter,  Daughters  of 
the  Revolution,  in  Raleigh.  As  a  part  of  the  Junior  Historian 
program  which  is  being  sponsored  by  the  Department  of 
Archives  and  History  he  gave  a  talk  to  an  eighth  grade  class 
at  Needham  Broughton  High  School,  Raleigh,  September  30, 
on  "The  Early  History  of  Raleigh."  On  November  10  he  was 


Historical  News  143 

the  speaker  at  the  meeting  of  the  Scotch  Gardeners  Club  in 
Laurinburg  on  the  topic,  "Restoration  Projects  in  North  Caro- 
lina," with  emphasis  on  the  Somerset  Place  project. 

Dr.  George  V.  Taylor,  assistant  professor  of  European 
History  of  the  University  of  North  Carolina,  has  returned 
from  a  year  in  France  as  a  Fulbright  Research  Scholar  where 
he  acquired  for  the  University  Library  valuable  source  ma- 
terial and  documents  on  the  French  Revolution  and  Na- 
poleonic period. 

Dr.  James  W.  Patton,  director  of  the  Southern  Historical 
Collection,  and  Dr.  Charles  G.  Sellers,  Jr.,  assistant  professor 
of  history  at  Princeton  University,  taught  in  the  1954  summer 
session  at  the  University. 

Dr.  Elisha  P.  Douglass,  assistant  professor  of  American 
History,  spent  the  summer  of  1954  at  Princeton  University 
doing  research. 

Dr.  Carl  H.  Pegg,  professor  of  modern  European  History, 
served  as  civilian  consultant  specialist  in  European  affairs, 
at  the  Air  Force  conference  held  in  Chapel  Hill  during  the 
1954  summer  session. 

Mr.  Wesley  H.  Wallace  has  been  appointed  assistant  pro- 
fessor in  radio  at  the  University. 

Dr.  Harold  A.  Bierck  has  been  appointed  to  the  faculty 
of  the  University  of  California  at  Los  Angeles  for  the  summer 
session  of  1955. 

The  department  of  history  and  political  science  at  North 
Carolina  State  College  reports  the  following  item:  Dr.  Philip 
Morrison  Rice  has  been  promoted  to  associate  professor. 

On  November  21  Dr.  L.  Walter  Seegers,  associate  profes- 
sor, gave  an  address  on  the  Mayflower  Compact  over  Station 
WPTF,  Raleigh. 


144  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Dr.  Preston  W.  Edsall,  head  of  the  department,  is  general 
chairman  of  the  third  annual  faculty  conference  on  the  state 
of  the  consolidated  University  of  North  Carolina,  which  will 
be  held  at  State  College,  March  10-11,  with  approximately 
180  members  of  the  faculties  of  the  three  units  of  the  Univer- 
sity participating.  The  theme  will  be  "Planning  a  Foreseeable 
Future/'  Dr.  Edsall  spent  several  weeks  of  the  past  summer 
in  England  and  Holland. 

Dr.  Kenneth  D.  Rabb,  assistant  professor,  conducted  a 
circle  tour  by  bus  to  the  Pacific  Coast  during  the  summer  of 
1954.  This  tour  is  taken  annually  by  a  large  number  of  public 
school  teachers. 

On  October  16  Dr.  W.  Buck  Yearns  of  Wake  Forest  Col- 
lege, read  a  paper,  "The  Peace  Movement  in  the  Confederate 
Congress,"  at  a  conference  of  the  social  studies  faculties  of 
the  Baptist  colleges  of  North  Carolina  at  Mars  Hill.  The 
meeting  was  attended  by  Dr.  Percival  Perry,  Dr.  David  L. 
Smiley,  and  Dr.  Henry  S.  Stroupe.  Dr.  Smiley  read  a  paper, 
"Cassius  M.  Clay  and  John  G.  Fee:  A  Study  in  Southern  Anti- 
Slavery  Thought."  He  is  also  the  author  of  "Cassius  M.  Clay 
and  Southern  Industrialism",  which  was  published  in  the 
Filson  Club  History  Quarterly,  October,  1954. 

Dr.  Henry  T.  Shanks,  dean  and  professor  of  history  at 
Birmingham-Southern  College,  was  awarded  an  LL.D.  de- 
gree by  Wake  Forest  College  in  June,  1954. 

Dr.  C.  Gregg  Singer,  head  of  the  department  of  history  at 
Salem  College,  recently  resigned  and  Dr.  Philip  Africa  of 
Warren,  Pa.,  has  replaced  him.  Dr.  Africa  received  his  doc- 
torate from  the  University  of  Rochester  in  1953.  Mr.  Donald 
M.  McCorkle,  who  has  joined  the  faculty  of  Salem  College  as 
assistant  professor  of  musicology,  is  spending  a  great  deal  of 
time  in  the  Moravian  Archives  cleaning  and  cataloging  the 
music  of  the  early  Moravians,  both  secular  and  sacred.  This 
research  program  is  the  largest  in  the  history  of  American 


Historical  News  145 

music  and  will  include  the  collection  of  old  musical  instru- 
ments as  well  as  music. 

The  history  department  at  Duke  University  reports  the 
following:  Dr.  Robert  F.  Durden  published  an  article,  "The 
Prostate  State  Revisited:  James  S.  Pike  and  South  Carolina 
Reconstruction,"  in  the  Journal  of  Negro  History,  April,  1954. 

Dr.  W.  T.  Laprade  authored  the  "Report  of  Committee  A 
on  Academic  Freedom  and  Tenure,"  for  the  spring  issue  of 
the  Bulletin  of  the  American  Association  of  University  Pro- 
fessors. 

Dr.  Alan  K.  Manchester  spent  the  summer  in  South  Ameri- 
ca on  special  service  for  the  United  States  Department  of 
State;  in  October  he  addressed  the  Trinity  College  Historical 
Society  on  "Brazil  in  Transition."  The  Society  had  for  its 
speaker  in  November  Dr.  Boyd  C.  Shafer,  executive  secretary 
of  the  American  Historical  Association. 

Dr.  Robert  H.  Woody  has  been  recently  appointed  director 
of  graduate  studies  in  the  history  department. 

Those  of  the  Duke  delegation  to  the  Columbia  meeting  of 
the  Southern  Historical  Association  were  Dr.  E.  Malcolm 
Carroll,  Dr.  Paul  H.  Clyde,  and  Dr.  Robert  F.  Durden,  and 
Dr.  William  H.  Cartwright,  and  Dr.  William  B.  Hamilton, 
who  also  participated  in  the  program. 

Mr.  Raymond  Esthus  and  Mr.  Robert  L.  Ganyard,  doctoral 
candidates,  have  this  year  joined  the  faculties  of  Brevard 
College  and  the  University  of  Houston  respectively. 

The  social  studies  department  of  Appalachian  State  Teach- 
ers College  sends  the  following  items:  Mr.  John  H.  Workman 
is  one  of  the  26  teachers  from  this  district  who  have  been 
invited  to  attend  a  seminar  on  money  and  banking  as  guests 
of  the  Federal  Reserve  Board,  Richmond,  December  8-11. 

Mr.  J.  C.  Yoder  attended  the  Southeast  Division  of  the 
Association  of  American  Geographers,  Chapel  Hill,  Novem- 
ber 19-20. 


146  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Dr.  D.  J.  Whitener  was  recently  re-elected  executive  vice 
president  of  the  Southern  Appalachian  Historical  Associa- 
tion, sponsor  of  "Horn  in  the  West." 

Dr.  Ina  Woestemeyer  Van  Noppen  and  Mr.  John  Mitchell 
Justice  attended  the  Southern  Historical  Association  meeting 
in  Columbia  on  November  11-13. 

Among  the  publications  of  the  faculty  of  the  University 
of  North  Carolina  are  the  following  articles  and  books  (not 
including  those  articles  or  book  reviews  that  appeared  in 
The  Review  or  were  published  by  the  Department  of  Ar- 
chives and  History):  Dr.  Harold  A.  Bierck's  "Spoils,  Soils, 
and  Skinner,"  Maryland  Historical  Magazine  (March,  June, 
1954);  Dr.  James  L.  Godfrey  s  "The  Aftermath  of  World  War 
It,"  chapter  16  in  Setton  and  Winkler's  Great  Problems  in 
European  Civilization  (New  York:  Prentice  Hall,  1954);  Dr. 
Fletcher  M.  Green's  The  Chapel  Hill  Methodist  Church:  A 
Centennial  History,  1853-1953  (Chapel  Hill:  Orange  Print- 
shop,  1954 ) ;  Dr.  Frank  W.  Klingberg's  "The  Reverend  John 
T.  Clark:  Episcopal  Unionist  in  Virginia,"  Historical  Maga- 
zine of  the  Episcopal  Church  ( September,  1954 ) . 

Mr.  William  S.  Powell  of  the  Library  of  the  University  of 
North  Carolina,  published  "First  Flight,"  in  American  Herit- 
age (winter,  1953-1954). 

Dr.  Horace  H.  Cunningham  of  Elon  College  had  an  article, 
"Organization  and  Administration  of  the  Confederate  Medi- 
cal Department,"  in  the  Journal  of  Southern  History  (July, 
1954). 

Dr.  Sarah  M.  Lemmon  of  Meredith  College  was  the  author 
of  "The  Agricultural  Policies  of  Eugene  Talmadge,"  which 
appeared  in  the  Georgia  Historical  Quarterly,  January  1954. 

The  University  of  Kentucky  Press  announces  the  establish- 
ment of  a  fellowship  which  awards  $5,000  to  the  writer  of  a 
book-length  manuscript  which  will  be  based  upon  some  signi- 


Historical  News  147 

Scant  part  of  the  cultural  and  historical  life  of  Kentucky.  The 
book  selected  will  be  published  by  the  University  of  Ken- 
tucky Press.  The  award  is  being  offered  to  attract  scholars 
who  are  interested  in  this  region  and  was  made  possible 
through  a  gift  of  Mrs.  Margaret  Voorhies  Haggin  of  New 
York  City.  Further  data  may  be  obtained  from  the  Press  at 
Lexington,  Kentucky. 

Books  received  recently  include  the  following: 

Richard  Lyle  Power,  Planting  Corn  Belt  Culture:  The  Im- 
press of  the  Upland  Southerner  and  Yankee  in  the  Old 
Northwest  (Indianapolis:  Indiana  Historical  Society,  1953); 
Frank  E.  Vandiver,  Southern  Historical  Papers  (Richmond: 
Virginia  Historical  Society,  1953);  South  Dakota  Historical 
Collections  and  Report,  Volume  XXVI  (Pierre:  South  Dakota 
Historical  Society,  1953);  Bell  Irwin  Wiley,  Fourteen  Hun- 
dred and  91  Days  in  the  Confederate  Army  (Jackson,  Tennes- 
see: McCowat-Mercer  Press  Inc.,  1954);  Stuart  Noblin,  The 
Grange  in  North  Carolina,  1929-1954,A  Story  of  Agricultural 
Progress  (Greensboro:  North  Carolina  State  Grange,  1954); 
Richard  Cecil  Todd,  Confederate  Finance  (Athens:  Univer- 
sity of  Georgia  Press,  1954);  Wilbur  R.  Jacobs,  Indians  of 
the  Southern  Frontier  (Columbia:  University  of  South  Caro- 
lina Press,  1954 ) ;  Aubrey  Lee  Brooks,  Selected  Addresses  of 
a  Southern  Lawyer  (Chapel  Hill:  University  of  North  Car- 
olina Press,  1954);  Clarence  Edwin  Carter,  The  Territorial 
Papers  of  the  United  States,  Volume  XX,  The  Territory  of 
Arkansas,  1825-1829  (Washington:  National  Archives  and 
Records  Service,  1954);  Alexander  Mathis,  The  Lost  Citadel 
(New  York:  Pageant  Press,  Inc.,  1954);  William  B.  Hessel- 
tine,  Dr.  J.  G.  M.  Ramsey  (Nashville:  Tennessee  Historical 
Commission,  1954);  Ed  Kilman  and  Theon  Wright,  Hugh 
Roy  Cullen,  A  Story  of  American  Opportunity  (New  York: 
Prentice  Hall,  Inc.,  1954);  Marion  Buckley  Cox,  Glimpse  of 
Glory,  George  Mason  of  Gunston  Hall  (Richmond,  Virginia: 
Garrett  and  Massie,  Inc.,  1954);  Claude  G.  Bowers,  Making 
Democracy  a  Reality:  Jefferson,  Jackson  and  Polk  ( Memphis, 
Tennessee:  Memphis  State  College  Press,  1954);  Richard  M. 


148  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Cameron,  The  Rise  of  Methodism:  A  Source  Book  (New 
York:  Philosophical  Library,  1954);  Charles  C.  Cole,  Jr., 
The  Social  Ideas  of  the  Northern  Evangelist,  1826-1860  ( New 
York:  Columbia  University  Press,  1954);  Jay  B.  Hubbell,  The 
South  in  American  Literature,  1607-1900  (Durham,  North 
Carolina:  Duke  University  Press,  1954);  Burke  Davis,  They 
Called  Him  Stonewall,  A  Life  of  Lientenant  General  T.  J. 
Jackson,  C.S.A.  (New  York:  Rinehart  and  Company,  Inc., 
1954);  William  H.  Masterson,  William  Blount  (Baton  Rouge: 
Louisiana  State  University  Press,  1954);  J.  H.  Easterby,  Col- 
onial Records  of  South  Carolina,  Volume  IV  (Columbia: 
South  Carolina  Archives  Department,  1954);  Richard  B. 
Harwell,  Stonewall  Jackson  and  the  Old  Stonewall  Brigade 
(Charlottesville:  University  of  Virginia  Press,  1954);  Max 
Freund,  Gustav  DreseVs  Houston  Journal:  Adventures  in 
North  America  and  Texas,  1837-1841  (Austin:  University  of 
Texas  Press,  1954);  Edwin  Adams  Davis  and  William  Ran- 
som Hogan,  The  Barber  of  Natchez  (Baton  Rouge:  Louisiana 
State  University  Press,  1954);  Allen  R.  Richards,  War  Labor 
Boards  in  the  Field  (Chapel  Hill:  University  of  North  Car- 
olina Press,  1953);  Joseph  H.  Parks,  General  Kirby  Smith 
C.S.A.  (Baton  Rouge:  Louisiana  State  University  Press, 
1954);  John  Harden,  Tar  Heel  Ghosts  (Chapel  Hill:  Univer- 
sity of  North  Carolina  Press,  1954);  and  Marshall  Fishwick, 
General  Lee's  Photographer:  The  Life  and  Work  of  Michael 
Miley  (Chapel  Hill:  University  of  North  Carolina  Press, 
1954). 


CONTRIBUTORS  TO  THIS  ISSUE 

Mr.  Paul  Conkin  is  at  present  serving  with  the  armed  forces 
in  Germany.  He  received  his  M.A.  from  Vanderbilt  and  was 
working  on  his  doctorate  when  called  into  service. 

Dr.  William  S.  Hoffman  is  chairman  of  the  division  of 
social  studies  at  Wiley  College,  Marshall,  Texas. 

Dr.  Max  L.  Heyman,  Jr.,  is  on  the  faculty  of  the  Washing- 
ton Junior  High  School,  Los  Angeles,  California. 

Dr.  Margaret  Burr  DesChamps  is  assistant  professor  of 
history  at  Agnes  Scott  College,  Decatur,  Georgia. 

Mr.  Francis  B.  Dedmond  is  professor  of  English  and  head 
of  the  Department  of  English  at  Gardner- Webb  College, 
Boiling  Springs,  North  Carolina. 

Dr.  Hugh  T.  Lefler  is  a  professor  of  history  at  the  Univer- 
sity of  North  Carolina,  Chapel  Hill,  North  Carolina. 


[149] 


J 


The  North  Carolina 
Historical  Review 

Volume  XXXII  April,  1955  Number  2 

NORTH  CAROLINA  TARIFF  POLICIES,  1775-1789 
By  William  Frank  Zornow 

The  Articles  of  Confederation  were  often  blamed  by  his- 
torians because  of  their  inability  to  provide  a  general  policy 
of  federal  finance  or  a  uniform  system  of  customs  duties. 
There  might  be  some  justification  for  criticizing  the  general 
financial  policies  of  the  central  government,  but  there  is 
really  no  justification  for  condemning  the  tariff  system  which 
was  in  operation  throughout  the  thirteen  states  during  the 
period  1775  to  1789. 

Historians  who  emphasized  the  conflicts  among  state  tariff 
policies  and  insisted  that  such  policies  presented  a  veritable 
maze  of  rates  were  guilty  of  perpetuating  a  myth  which 
probably  began  when  the  movement  was  first  launched  to 
amend  the  articles.  Historians  who  came  afterward  belabored 
this  theme  without  investigating  the  facts. 

In  1910  Albert  Giesecke  published  a  brief  study  on  the 
commercial  policies  of  the  country  prior  to  1789  in  which 
he  made  this  significant  statement  in  regard  to  state  tariff 
policies  under  the  confederation:  "We  must  not  forget  that 
such  action  [discrimination  among  the  states]  was  really 
exceptional,  for  it  was  usual  during  the  period  to  exempt 
goods  of  the  growth  or  produce  of  any  of  the  United  States 
from  import  duties  by  the  legislating  state."  1 

Though  the  myth  was  questioned  by  Giesecke  no  signifi- 
cant studies  were  made  to  explode  it  once  and  for  all.  Merrill 
Jensen  in  his  latest  study  of  American  affairs  during  this 
epoch  devoted  some  pages  to  this  important  question  in 


1  Albert  Giesecke,  American  Commercial  Legislation  before  1789   (Phila- 
delphia, 1910),  135. 

[151] 


152  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

which  he  concurred  with  Giesecke— too  much  emphasis  had 
been  placed  upon  the  differences  prevailing  among  state 
tariff  schedules  and  not  enough  attention  had  been  paid  to 
their  similarities.2  This  is  the  same  criticism  recent  historians 
have  made  of  the  traditional  treatment  of  the  whole  era.  The 
day  of  Fiske's  "Critical  Period"  has  run  its  course.  Recent 
writers  are  re-evaluating  the  Articles  of  Confederation  in 
terms  of  their  significant  achievements  rather  than  their 
failures.  Achievements,  it  might  be  added,  which  were  even 
more  significant  in  view  of  the  external  and  internal  problems 
confronting  the  weak  central  government  of  the  times. 

In  evaluating  the  state  tariff  policies  in  existence  during 
the  revolutionary  and  confederation  period  it  must  be  borne 
in  mind  that  they  were  designed  to  accomplish  four  objec- 
tives: (1)  revenue,  (2)  protection,  (3)  retaliation,  (4)  regu- 
lation. In  most  states  all  four  of  these  objectives  were  present 
in  the  tariff  legislation  enacted,  but  there  were  some  excep- 
tions. W.  C.  Fisher  in  his  study  of  tariff  policies  before  1789 
says  the  duties  levied  can  be  conveniently  grouped  under 
four  headings:  bounties  on  exports  and  imports,  and  duties 
on  exports  and  imports.  In  addition  there  were  other  charges 
such  as  tonnage  fees  and  pilotage  fees  which  are  different 
from  impost  duties,  and  drawbacks  which  are  different  from 
export  bounties.  However,  all  these  different  types  of  duties 
were  designed  to  accomplish  the  four  objectives  mentioned 
above.3 

It  is  the  purpose  of  this  paper  to  examine  briefly  the  tariff 
system  which  was  in  operation  in  North  Carolina  during  the 
period  1775  to  1789  and  to  see  to  what  extent  it  adhered  to 
or  deviated  from  what  might  be  called  a  national  norm. 

Before  the  Revolution  the  colonial  legislature  had  provided 
for  small  customs  duties  on  wine,  rum,  and  distilled  liquors 
brought  in  from  all  places  except  the  mother  country.4  It 


2  Merrill  Jensen,  The  New  Nation.  History  of  the  United  States  dur- 
ing the  Confederation,  1781-1789   (New  York,  1950),  338-341. 

3W.  C.  Fisher,  "American  Trade  Regulation  before  1789,"  Papers  of 
The  American  Historical  Association   (New  York,  1889),  III,  467-493. 

4  Walter  Clark  (ed.),  The  State  Records  of  North  Carolina  (Winston 
and  Goldsboro,  1895-1905),  XXIII,  268-273,  363-364,  371-375,  392-398;  XXV, 
331-333,  361-364.  Hereafter  referred  to  as  Clark,  State  Records. 


North  Carolina  Tariff  Policies,  1775-1789 


153 


was  not  until  1784  that  the  state  legislature  found  it  expedient 
to  adopt  a  general  tariff  schedule.  Presumably,  the  purpose 
behind  its  adoption  was  to  secure  funds  necessary  to  meet 
the  state's  quota  due  the  central  government  and  for  operat- 
ing expenses.  There  were  three  acts  adopted  in  1784  affecting 
the  tariff  system  in  North  Carolina. 

By  the  terms  of  the  legislation  of  1784  the  following 
schedule  of  rates  went  into  operation  in  the  state: 


1.  gal. 

Jamaica  rum 

4  d 

1.  gal. 

Any  other  spiritous  liquor. 

3  d 

1.  gal. 

Madeira  wine 

1 

s. 

1.  gal. 

Any  other  kind  of  wine. 

6  d 

1.  gal. 

Cider. 

2  d 

1.  gal. 

Malt  liquor 

2  d 

bottled  Madeira  wine  (dozen) 

2 

s. 

bottled  wine,  except  Madeira 

(dozen) 

1 

s. 

malt  liquor  in  bottles  (dozen) 

1 

s. 

Gin  (case) 

3 

s. 

bottled  cider,   (dozen) 

1 

s. 

1  gal. 

Molasses. 

1  d 

1  lb. 

Bohea  tea. 

6  d 

1  lb. 

All  other  kinds  of  tea. 

2 

s. 

1  lb. 

Pepper 

3  d 

1  lb. 

Brown  sugar. 

%  d 

1  lb. 

Loaf  sugar. 

2  d 

1  lb. 

All  other  kinds  of  sugar. 

1  d 

1  lb. 

Cocoa. 

1  d 

1  lb. 

Coffee. 

1  d 

There  was  also  an  ad  valorem  duty  of  2  per  cent  on  all 
other  goods  imported  into  North  Carolina.5  The  law  was  not 
clear  as  to  whether  these  duties  were  to  apply  to  goods  im- 
ported by  land  or  only  to  merchandise  coming  by  sea.  In 
colonial  times  there  had  been  some  special  duties  levied 
against  goods  imported  overland  from  neighboring  colonies, 
and  so  there  was  a  precedent  for  feeling  that  such  imports 
were  entitled  to  exemption  or  at  least  special  treatment. 

The  legislature  soon  met  this  question  by  adopting  another 
law  which  made  these  duties  collectible  on  all  goods  brought 

6  Clark,  State  Records,  XXIV,  549-553,  658-661. 


154  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

by  land  or  sea.  The  only  exemption  was  extended  to  farmers 
bringing  in  less  than  twenty  pounds  worth  of  goods  for  sale.6 
This  supplementary  act  added  a  duty  of  8  s.  on  each  pack  of 
playing  cards. 

In  1785  another  act  imposed  a  heavy  duty  of  £250  on  all 
gambling  tables  brought  into  the  state.7  While  the  following 
year  another  law  was  adopted  placing  a  duty  on  slaves.  The 
North  Carolina  act  applied  to  all  slaves  imported  into  the 
state.  In  some  southern  states  exemption  was  made  on  per- 
sons visiting  the  state  or  moving  there  to  become  permanent 
residents.  In  some  cases  the  original  domicile  of  the  slave 
affected  the  duty.  There  were  various  schedules  for  slaves 
brought  directly  from  Africa,  from  other  states,  or  from  the 
various  European  colonial  empires  in  the  western  hemisphere, 
but  in  North  Carolina  there  was  a  single  charge  for  all  slaves 
regardless  of  point  of  embarkation  or  reason  why  they  were 
brought  to  the  state.  The  only  variation  in  the  charges  de- 
pended on  the  age  of  the  slave.  Every  slave  under  the  age  of 
seven  and  over  the  age  of  forty  was  subject  to  a  50  s.  charge. 
Slaves  between  the  ages  of  seven  and  twelve,  and  between 
thirty  and  forty  were  dutiable  at  the  rate  of  five  pounds. 
Prime  field  hands  between  twelve  and  thirty  were  subject  to 
a  charge  of  ten  pounds. 

In  1786  the  anti-slavery  sentiment  was  already  evident  in 
this  act  assessing  duties  on  imported  slaves,  for  it  declared 
that  the  "importation  of  slaves  into  this  State  is  productive 
of  evil  consequences  and  highly  impolitic."  8  The  importation 
was  not  prohibited,  but  it  was  penalized  by  a  heavy  duty  on 
field  hands. 

The  final  schedule  framed  by  the  legislature  before  the  new 
government  went  into  operation  in  1789  was  adopted  in  Jan- 
uary 1787.  The  1787  schedule  was  as  follows: 


6  Clark,  State  Records,  XXIV,  655-658.  According  to  these  acts  setting  up 
the  tariff  system  in  North  Carolina  the  collector  at  each  port  was  entitled 
to  charge  the  following  fees  while  collecting  the  duties:  2  s.  for  granting 
certificates  and  for  administering  oaths,  4  s.  for  granting  permits,  and  8  s. 
for  taking  bonds. 

7  Clark,  State  Records,  XXIV,  731. 

8  Clark,  State  Records,  XXIV,  792-794. 


North  Carolina  Tariff  Policies,  1775-1789         155 

1  gal.     Jamaica  rum.  6  d. 

1  gal.     Spiritous  liquors.  5  d. 

1  gal.     Molasses.  2  d. 

1  bu.     Salt.  6  d. 

Playing  cards  (per  dozen  decks) .  12  s. 

The  other  charges  which  were  made  under  the  schedule 
of  1784  remained  the  same  as  far  as  the  enumerated  list  was 
concerned.  However,  there  were  some  changes  in  the  ad 
valorem  rate.  The  new  schedule  provided  for  an  ad  valorem 
charge  of  5  per  cent  on  all  other  articles  imported  into  the 
state,  except  on  woolens,  linens,  bar  iron,  steel,  castings,  and 
workman  tools  for  plantations.  The  ad  valorem  rate  on  these 
latter  items  was  increased  only  one-half  per  cent  to  2/2  per 
cent  in  all.9 

The  new  tariff  schedule  of  1787  marked  the  advent  of 
some  important  developments  in  this  type  of  legislation  in 
North  Carolina.  Attention  has  already  been  called  to  the 
fact  that  protectionism  was  one  of  the  elements  present  in 
the  tariff  policies  of  the  states  even  during  the  period  of 
the  Articles  of  Confederation.  This  was  particularly  true  in 
the  northern  states,  where  protection  was  frankly  acknowl- 
edged in  many  of  the  tariff  enactments,  but  in  North  Caro- 
lina it  was  almost  totally  disregarded.  The  only  modest 
attempt  to  encourage  domestic  industry  was  the  granting  of 
a  2  d.  per  gallon  drawback  on  all  molasses  distilled  within 
the  state. 

By  granting  special  duties  of  2/2  per  cent  ad  valorem  in- 
stead of  5  per  cent  on  the  most  urgently  needed  items— iron, 
tools,  and  clothes  for  slaves,  the  legislature  was  encouraging 
continued  importation  from  abroad  and  discouraging  com- 
pletely any  domestic  manufacture  of  these  goods.  The  North 
Carolinians  thought  of  their  state  primarily  as  an  exporting 
state.  They  wanted  to  sell  their  tobacco  and  other  products 
abroad  and  purchase  tools  and  needed  items  in  the  cheaper 
European  market.  This  made  the  notion  of  protection  repug- 
nant to  their  thinking.  Many  southern  states  experimented 
with  a  mild  form  of  protection  before  1789,  but  North 
Carolina  did  not. 


Clark,  State  Records,  798-802. 


156  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

One  of  the  most  noticeable  developments  before  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  constitutional  government  in  1789  was  the 
fact  that  the  states  were  cooperating  to  unify  their  tariff 
systems  and  to  admit  the  goods  produced  or  manufactured 
in  the  United  States  duty  free.  North  Carolina  fell  in  line 
with  this  general  trend  throughout  the  other  states. 

This  willingness  to  grant  concessions  to  American  pro- 
duced goods  first  made  its  appearance  in  the  tariff  legislation 
of  1785.  This  act  provided  that  no  duties  were  to  be  paid 
on  goods  which  were  manufactured  in  the  states  out  of  ma- 
terials grown  in  the  United  States,  but  it  did  insist  that 
foreign  goods  imported  in  America  bottoms  were  dutiable. 
There  had  been  a  question  raised  as  to  whether  or  not  Ameri- 
can ships  made  free  goods,  but  the  legislature  decided  this 
was  not  the  case.10 

The  act  of  1787  carried  this  principle  that  American  pro- 
duced goods  were  duty  free  even  further.  This  law  provided 
that  arms,  ammunition,  and  all  goods  grown,  produced,  or 
manufactured  in  the  United  States  were  exempt  from  all 
charges.  No  longer  was  the  qualifying  feature  of  the  1785 
act  present,  which  limited  this  exemption  only  to  goods  man- 
ufactured in  America  out  of  native  raw  materials. 

In  the  tariff  legislation  of  this  period  one  can  also  see  some 
evidence  of  discrimination  and  retaliation  aimed  particularly 
at  the  British.  This  policy  grew  out  of  the  English  attitude 
toward  American  commerce  after  the  war.  American  mer- 
chants had  long  been  dependent  upon  the  triangular  trade 
involving  their  own  ports,  and  those  of  Europe  and  the  West 
Indies.  It  was  the  only  way  Americans  could  earn  the  money 
necessary  to  purchase  products  abroad.  On  July  2,  1783,  the 
British  government  adopted  an  Order  in  Council  which  clos- 
ed the  West  Indian  ports  to  American  ships.  Naturally  this 
hurt  the  American  states  for  they  were  drained  of  specie  in 
order  to  pay  for  the  products  they  continued  to  buy  from 
England  which  formerly  had  been  paid  for  by  exports  to  the 
Indies.  The  Americans  were  quick  to  accuse  the  British  of 
trying  to  destroy  their  trade,  but  actually  the  principal  British 

10  Clark,  State  Records,  XXIV,  718-720. 


North  Carolina  Tariff  Policies,  1775-1789         157 

motive  in  adopting  this  course  was  that  under  the  mercantile 
system  they  were  compelled  to  regard  the  United  States  as 
outside  the  empire  and  to  treat  them  as  alien  states  in  matters 
of  colonial  trade. 

The  law  of  1785  which  exempted  American  goods  from  all 
duty  if  they  were  manufactured  in  the  United  States  from 
native  products  also  contained  a  provision  that  an  additional 
duty  of  20  per  cent  was  to  be  collected  on  all  goods  imported 
in  vessels  owned  in  whole  or  in  part  by  foreigners  whose 
nations  had  no  treaty  of  commerce.  The  states  were  willing 
in  most  cases  to  assist  Congress  in  this  way  in  order  to  bring 
various  European  states  to  terms  and  to  get  them  to  conclude 
commercial  conventions.  There  was  also  discrimination  in  the 
matter  of  tonnage  fees  charged  vessels  owned  by  non-treaty 
signing  states,  but  this  will  be  discussed  in  another  connec- 
tion.11 This  same  act  of  1785  declared  that  instead  of  the 
2  per  cent  ad  valorem  duty  applying  on  all  salt  it  would 
not  be  collected  on  salt  brought  into  the  state  in  American 
ships  or  foreign  ships  whose  country  had  commercial  treaties 
with  the  United  States.  In  this  case  the  duty  was  cut  to  2  d. 
per  bushel. 

The  protection  and  fostering  of  native  industry  did  not 
play  as  important  a  part  in  the  tariff  systems  of  the  southern 
states  as  it  did  in  the  North.  As  was  said  before,  North  Caro- 
lina virtually  ignored  its  domestic  industries.  Although  there 
were  hardly  any  tariff  schedules  adopted  in  North  Carolina 
during  this  period  which  could  have  been  regarded  as  pro- 
tective, there  were  other  ways  that  industry  could  be  fostered. 
An  old  colonial  device  had  been  the  granting  of  export/im- 
port bounties.  North  Carolina  provided  for  financial  grants  to 
all  persons  who  could  produce  hemp,  flax,  potash,  and  pearl 
ash.12  Throughout  the  states  this  granting  of  bounties  con- 
tinued to  the  revolutionary  period,  but  there  was  a  noticeable 
tendency  to  discontinue  this  practice  when  the  war  began. 
The  practice  was  not  revived  afterward.  The  legislators 
found  they  could  achieve  the  same  desired  ends  by  dis- 

u  Clark,  State  Records,  XXIV,  718-720. 

u  Clark,  State  Records,  XXIII,  613-614,  923-924. 


158  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

couraging  the  importation  of  European  products  by  protec- 
tive tariffs  rather  than  direct  financial  aid.  The  last  act  in 
North  Carolina  was  passed  in  1773  for  three  years.  In  1776 
it  was  allowed  to  lapse,  and  there  apparently  were  no  efforts 
to  revive  the  granting  of  bounties. 

In  addition  to  the  specified  duties  on  enumerated  goods 
and  the  charges  on  unenumerated  items,  the  importer  and 
shipper  were  also  subjected  to  a  variety  of  additional  charges 
in  each  state  which  often  became  particularly  burdensome. 
This  legislation  was  designed  to  achieve  at  least  three  of 
the  four  objectives:  revenue,  retaliation,  and  regulation. 
There  were  charges  for  wharfage,  storage,  pilotage,  light- 
houses, hospitals,  and  on  the  tonnage  of  each  vessel.  Some 
of  these  charges  were  levied  against  all  ships  (usually 
exempting  coasters)  entering  the  harbors  of  the  state,  but 
some  were  directed  primarily  against  ships  belonging  to  non- 
residents of  the  state.  This  latter  condition  caused  much  ill- 
feeling.  Shortly  before  the  calling  of  the  Annapolis  conven- 
tion, Tench  Coxe  of  Pennsylvania  wrote  that  there  were 
many  grievances  against  the  state  commercial  practices,  and 
he  listed  them  as  follows: 

1.  duty  of  tonnage  on  vessels  built  and  belonging  to  the  citizens 
of  the  other  states,  was  greater  than  that  imposed  on  vessels 
belonging  to  the  citizens  of  the  states  enacting  the  law,  and  equal 
in  some  instances  to  the  tonnage  laid  upon  most  of  the  foreign 
nations  that  have  a  commercial  intercourse  with  America. 

2.  The  duties  imposed  upon  goods  imported  in  vessels  built  in  or 
belonging  to  other  parts  of  the  Union,  were  greater  than  those 
laid  on  goods  imported  in  vessels  belonging  to  the  enacting  state. 

3.  That  goods  of  the  growth,  product,  and  manufacture  of  the 
other  states  in  the  Union,  were  charged  with  high  duties  upon 
importation  into  the  enacting  state,  as  great,  in  many  cases,  as 
those  imposed  on  foreign  articles  of  the  same  kind.13 

Some  of  Coxe's  objections  were  unwarranted.  The  third 
was  entirely  untrue.  North  Carolina,  along  with  the  other 
states,  was  admitting  American  grown,  produced,  and  manu- 
factured goods  duty  free  by  1786.  However,  there  was  some 

"Tench  Coxe  to  Edmund  Randolph,  James  Madison,  St.  George  Tucker, 
September  13,  1786,  in  Calendar  of  Virginia  State  Papers  (Richmond, 
1875-1893),  IV,  168-169. 


North  Carolina  Tariff  Policies,  1775-1789         159 

truth  in  the  first  two  objections  to  the  current  practices.  In 
some  states  there  were  higher  tonnage  fees  imposed  upon 
ships  owned  by  non-residents  of  the  enacting  state  than 
applied  on  ships  owned  by  its  own  citizens.  There  were  also 
a  few  cases  where  duties  on  goods  imported  in  ships  owned 
by  citizens  of  the  enacting  state  were  lower  than  the  duties 
on  other  goods  brought  in  ships  owned  by  foreigners  or 
residents  of  the  other  states. 

In  North  Carolina  all  incoming  vessels  were  subject  to 
pilotage  fees  which  were  based  on  a  sliding  scale  depending 
on  the  amount  of  water  drawn  by  the  ship.  An  act  of  1764 
set  up  a  basic  schedule  of  fees.  Ships  drawing  six  feet  or  less 
of  water  paid  a  pilot  fee  of  two  pounds,  and  this  rate  was 
increased  until  ships  drawing  seventeen  feet  paid  a  charge  of 
eight  pounds.  There  is  only  one  law  passed  during  the  years 
1775-1789  affecting  the  pilotage  fees,  and  this  was  enacted 
in  1784.  The  basic  charges  were  increased  because  of  the 
rising  living  costs.14  These  fees  were  collected  from  every 
ship  whether  owned  by  residents  or  by  non-residents  of  North 
Carolina. 

Every  incoming  ship  was  also  required  to  pay  a  tonnage 
duty.  Tonnage  duties  were  in  existence  from  the  earliest 
colonial  times  when  it  was  the  custom  for  each  ship  to  hand 
over  a  certain  amount  of  powder  and  shot  for  each  ton  bur- 
den. These  original  payments  in  powder  were  commuted  to 
cash  payments  later,  and  the  money  was  used  to  maintain 
the  port  facilities,  fortifications,  and  sailor  hospitals,  and  to 
pay  the  salaries  of  officials. 

In  North  Carolina  there  were  two  charges  of  this  type:  a 
regular  fee  which  depended  on  the  tonnage  of  the  ship,  and 
a  second  charge  of  a  flat  fee  which  was  levied  on  all  ships 
to  pay  the  fee  for  entering  and  clearing  the  port. 

An  early  act  of  1756  provided  for  payments  of  2  s.  per  ton 
on  all  ships  entering  the  harbors  of  the  colony,  and  this  was 
raised  to  5  s.  in  1781.15  According  to  the  latter  act  if  a  ship 
brought  arms  it  was  to  receive  an  exemption  equivalent  to 


"Clark,  State  Records,  XXIII,  650-654;  XXIV,  586-592. 
M  Clark,  State  Records,  XXIII,  467-568:  XXIV,  380-381. 


160  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

the  duty  per  ton  for  each  three  Spanish  dollars  worth  of 
such  cargo  in  its  hold.  An  increase  of  6  d.  per  ton  was  allowed 
in  1784  to  raise  funds  to  build  a  lighthouse.16 

The  inaccuracy  of  Coxe's  accusations  as  far  as  North  Caro- 
lina was  concerned  is  evident  in  the  tonnage  legislation  of 
1785  which  provided  for  a  fee  of  3  d.  per  ton  on  all  vessels 
over  sixty  tons  which  were  owned  by  Americans  or  foreigners 
whose  countries  had  commercial  treaties  with  Congress.  If 
no  treaty  existed,  the  foreign  ship  was  to  pay  5  s.  per  ton. 
Here  we  have  an  excellent  example  of  the  type  of  discrimi- 
nation which  was  so  common  in  state  tariff  legislation  of  the 
period  as  they  tried  to  cooperate  with  the  government  to  get 
recalcitrant  foreign  states  to  conclude  treaties  of  commerce.17 

The  final  act  which  was  passed  by  the  legislature  before 
the  new  constitution  went  into  effect  certainly  refuted  Coxe's 
charges.  Every  foreign  ship  over  twenty  tons  burden  was 
subject  to  a  6  d.  per  ton  duty,  while  ships  from  every  state 
(including  North  Carolina)  paid  3  d.  per  ton.18  The  proceeds 
collected  were  to  be  used  for  the  construction  of  a  lighthouse 
at  Ocracoke  Island.  The  legislature  was  making  every  effort 
to  admit  other  American  ships  into  North  Carolina  ports  on 
a  basis  of  equality  with  locally  owned  vessels,  and  to  favor 
them  over  European  ships. 

The  tonnage  fees  changed  considerably  between  the  acts 
of  1781  and  1785,  and  a  new  type  of  legislation  was  intro- 
duced by  the  assembly  in  a  law  of  1784  providing  for  a 
schedule  of  fees  payable  to  the  naval  officers  of  each  port 
for  entering  and  clearing  a  vessel.  These  fees  were  rather 
large  considering  the  tonnage  charges  already  being  levied 
in  the  state.19  Another  act  of  1789  levied  a  special  fee  of  one 
shilling  per  capita  on  every  officer  and  member  of  the  crew 
of  any  vessel  entering  a  state  port.20  The  money  collected  by 

16  Clark,  State  Records,  XXIV,  586-592. 
"Clark,  State  Records,  XXIV,  718-720. 

18  Clark,  State  Records,  XXV,  54-55.  Ships  under  twenty  tons  and  small 
vessels  engaged  in  coasting  trade  were  exempt  from  charges. 

19  Clark,  State  Records,  XXIV,  553-556.  The  schedule  was  as  follows:  8  s. 
for  entering  and  clearing  all  undecked  ships;  15  s.  for  decked  vessels  under 
20  tons;  30  s.  for  ships  from  20  to  60  tons;  and  40  s.  for  all  vessels  over 
60  tons. 

20  Clark,  State  Records,  XXV,  56-57,  81-82. 


North  Carolina  Tariff  Policies,  1775-1789         161 

this  latter  act  was  to  be  put  into  a  special  fund  for  the  care 
of  sick  and  indigent  sailors.  These  special  fees  were  payable 
by  all  ships  entering  the  state  ports. 

Various  items  imported  into  or  exported  from  each  colony 
and  state  were  subject  to  inspection  and  storage  charges. 
This  was  a  system  prevailing  in  all  the  colonies  and  it  was 
continued  during  the  state  period.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the 
inspections  were  increased,  and  the  legislation  governing  the 
inspection  and  certification  of  imports  and  exports  became 
more  numerous  during  the  1780's.  European  purchasers  often 
preferred  to  obtain  American  products.  The  supervision  of 
exports  raised  their  reputation  in  foreign  markets.  The  wide 
acceptance  of  inspection  laws  and  the  height  to  which  the 
fees  sometimes  went  constituted  these  charges  as  an  im- 
portant type  of  commercial  regulation. 

In  North  Carolina  various  items  were  subject  to  intensive 
inspection.  However,  there  were  no  inspection  fees  on  im- 
ported commodities,  but  the  fees  charged  applied  only  to 
items  for  export.  Flax,  hemp,  pork,  beef,  rice,  flour,  butter, 
tar,  pitch,  turpentine,  staves,  heading,  shingles,  lumber,  tan- 
ned leather,  deer  skin,  and  indigo  were  all  on  the  inspection 
list  as  well  as  tobacco  during  the  colonial  period.  Most  of  the 
inspection  legislation  on  the  statute  books  applied,  of  course, 
to  the  largest  export— tobacco.  After  the  revolution  the  inspec- 
tion fee  for  a  cask  of  tobacco  was  raised  to  8  s,  and  it  ap- 
parently remained  substantially  unchanged  during  the  entire 
period.21  Laws  adopted  in  1784  established  the  following 
schedule  of  fees  for  the  inspection  of  various  items: 22 

1         Cask  of  beef  or  pork.  8  d. 

1         Barrel  or  cask  of  rice,  butter, 

flour,  or  fish.  8  d. 

1         Barrel  of  tar.  2  d. 

1        Barrel  of  pitch  or  turpentine.  3  d. 

1         Barrel  of  flax  1  s. 

if  cleaning  necessary  3  s. 

100     Barrel  staves.  3  d. 

1000  Shingles.  1  s. 

1000  Feet  of  cut  lumber.  1  s. 


21  Clark,  State  Records,  XXIV,  104-109. 

22  Clark,  State  Records,  XXIV,  580-586,  658-661. 


162  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

The  granting  of  drawbacks  and  export  duties  were  other 
aspects  of  early  tariff  legislation  which  should  be  mentioned. 
There  was  a  drawback  of  2  d.  per  gallon  granted  on  all  im- 
ported molasses  distilled  in  the  state,  which  was  designed  by 
the  legislature  to  encourage  local  distilleries.  It  was  not  until 
1785  that  the  assembly  acted  on  the  matter  of  goods  landed 
in  North  Carolina  for  re-export.  Such  goods  were  subject  to 
the  customary  charges,  but  the  shipper  was  given  credit  for 
the  duties  paid  if  the  goods  were  re-exported  in  their  original 
cask  or  container  within  a  three  month  period.23  There  were 
no  export  duties  in  North  Carolina  during  this  period,  al- 
though other  southern  states  such  as  Maryland  and  Virginia 
experimented  with  this  type  of  duty  as  a  means  of  raising 
revenue.  There  had  been  a  small  export  duty  on  deerskins  in 
North  Carolina  in  the  colonial  period,  but  despite  this  pre- 
cedent the  legislature  failed  to  try  this  means  of  augmenting 
the  state's  income.  Export  duties  were  no  longer  popular  in 
most  states,  and  North  Carolina  was  merely  following  the 
national  trend  in  this  respect. 

When  examining  the  tariff  legislation  of  North  Carolina 
one  is  impressed  by  the  fact  that  there  was  so  little  of  it.  In 
many  states  the  tariff  enactments  were  quite  numerous,  but 
not  so  in  North  Carolina.  Of  all  the  southern  states  Georgia 
and  North  Carolina  had  the  least  legislation  of  this  type. 
The  schedules  were  short  and  were  confined  primarily  to 
spiritous  and  malt  liquors,  coffee,  sugar,  and  tea.  Protec- 
tionism was  virtually  non-existent.  There  was  also  very  little 
regulation  of  shipping  in  North  Carolina,  and  the  fees  were 
kept  to  a  minimum  number  when  compared  to  those  in  use 
in  other  states.  There  is  not  a  single  example  of  state  inter- 
ference to  prohibit  exports  during  this  period,  whereas  in 
other  states,  particularly  during  the  war,  the  legislatures  in- 
terfered often  to  prevent  exportation  of  badly  needed  com- 
modities or  to  proclaim  embargoes.  Yet  some  similarity  may 
be  noted  between  the  tariff  system  in  North  Carolina  and 
those  developing  in  other  states. 

23  Clark,  State  Records,  XXIV,  718-720,  798-802. 


North  Carolina  Tariff  Policies,  1775-1789  163 

By  1789  North  Carolina,  like  her  sister  states,  was  ad- 
mitting American  products  duty  free,  was  granting  special 
consideration  to  American  ships  as  far  as  tonnage  charges 
were  concerned,  and  was  treating  shippers  from  other  states 
the  same  as  her  own  merchants.  Any  discrimination  that  is 
evident  in  North  Carolina  was  directed  against  foreign  states 
which  did  not  conclude  a  treaty  with  the  United  States.  The 
spirit  of  cooperation  in  North  Carolina  was  becoming  quite 
evident,  and  it  is  apparent  not  only  in  dealings  with  other 
states  but  in  those  with  the  central  government  as  well. 

On  February  3, 1781,  Congress  proposed  to  levy  a  special  5 
per  cent  ad  valorem  duty  on  imports  and  requested  each  state 
legislature  to  act  on  this  matter.24  The  North  Carolina  legisla- 
ture responded  during  the  same  year  and  granted  Congress 
the  right  to  levy  the  5  per  cent  impost  on  all  imports  and  on 
all  prizes,  but  with  the  provision  that  it  was  not  to  go  into 
effect  until  the  other  states  had  granted  similar  powers.25 

Every  state  except  Rhode  Island  eventually  acceded  to  the 
request,  but  before  sufficient  pressure  could  be  applied  on  this 
state  to  gain  its  assent,  a  counter  movement  set  in.  On  De- 
cember 24,  1782,  Virginia  repealed  its  law  empowering  Con- 
gress to  enact  the  5  per  cent  impost  on  the  ground  that 
Rhode  Island's  failure  to  comply  invalidated  the  grant.  With- 
in a  short  time  other  states  followed  suit,  and  the  impost 
scheme  of  1781  was  lost. 

North  Carolina  repealed  her  grant  in  1783.26  On  April  18, 

1783,  Congress  made  another  attempt  to  have  the  states  ap- 
prove a  grant  of  duties  on  enumerated  articles  for  twenty-five 
years  as  well  as  a  special  ad  valorem  duty  of  five  per  cent  on 
other  items  and  on  all  prizes.  This  was  sent  to  the  states  for 
their  approval.27  The  North  Carolina  legislature  complied  in 

1784,  but  once  again  this  special  grant  to  Congress  was  lost 
because  New  York  failed  to  act.28 


24  W.  C.  Ford,  and  others,  (eds.),  The  Journal  of  the  Continental  Congress 
(Washington,  1904-1937),  XIX,  102,  112-113.  Hereafter  referred  to  as 
Ford,  Journals  of  the  Continental  Congress. 

25  Clark,  State  Records,  XXIV,  405-406. 

26  Clark,  State  Records,  XXIV,  510. 

27  Ford,  Journals  of  Continental  Congress,  XXIV,  257-261. 

28  Clark,  State  Records,  XXIV,  547-549. 


164  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

On  April  30,  1784,  Congress  resolved  that  it  should  be 
given  power  for  fifteen  years  to  prohibit  any  goods,  wares,  or 
merchandize  from  being  imported  into  or  exported  from  any 
state  in  vessels  belonging  to  or  navigated  by  the  subjects  of 
any  power  with  which  there  was  no  treaty  of  commerce.  The 
assent  of  nine  states  was  necessary  for  this  to  go  into  effect, 
but  when  the  North  Carolina  legislature  acted  on  this  request 
it  attached  the  qualification  that  its  law  would  not  become 
effective  until  all  the  states  passed  similar  legislation.  A  con- 
gressional committee  reported  on  March  3,  1786,  that  Dela- 
ware, South  Carolina,  and  Georgia  had  not  passed  any  acts 
to  grant  Congress  this  power,  and  that  New  Hampshire, 
Rhode  Island,  and  North  Carolina  had  passed  laws  which 
were  not  conformable  to  the  requests  of  Congress.  These 
states  were  urged  to  comply  at  once,  but  the  provision  never 
went  into  operation  before  the  new  government  was  es- 
tablished.29 

It  is  significant  that  all  but  one  of  the  states  were  willing 
to  cooperate  with  Congress  in  granting  it  the  special  power 
to  levy  duties  requested  in  1781  and  1783.  The  impost  resolu- 
tion of  1783  with  its  long  enumerated  list  as  well  as  ad  val- 
orem duty  stimulated  the  tendency  in  most  states  to  agree 
on  a  basic  enumerated  list,  but  the  individual  rates  on  items 
continued  to  vary  and  were  determined  by  local  considera- 
tions. Nevertheless,  there  was  a  great  deal  of  harmony  pre- 
vailing. North  Carolina  and  the  other  states  were  compelled 
long  before  1789  to  agree  on  a  general  tariff  policy  which 
was  coming  to  prevail  everywhere.  By  1789  variation  in  rates 
and  systems  was  the  exception  rather  than  the  rule. 

29  Ford,  Journals  of  Continental  Congress,  XXX,  93. 


JOHN  CHAVIS  AS  A  PREACHER  TO  WHITES 
By  Margaret  Burr  DesChamps 

John  Chavis,  accomplished  free  Negro,  has  long  been  rec- 
ognized as  a  teacher  of  children  of  prominent  white  families 
in  Raleigh.1  He  ought  also  to  be  known  as  a  preacher  to 
whites.  Prior  to  the  opening  of  his  school  about  1808,  Chavis 
was  licensed  as  a  "probationer  for  the  holy  ministry"  by  Lex- 
ington Presbytery  in  Virginia.2  Because  he  served  the  Gen- 
eral Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  from  1801  to  1807 
as  a  missionary  to  slaves  in  the  upper  South,3  it  has  been  as- 
sumed that  his  ministry  was  chiefly  to  Negroes. 

Although  sent  by  the  church  to  serve  his  own  race,  Chavis 
preached  to  far  more  whites  than  Negroes  on  his  missionary 
tours.  In  May,  1803,  the  clerk  of  the  Standing  Committee  of 
Missions  wrote  the  following  summary  of  Chavis's  travels 
during  the  past  year  for  presentation  to  the  General  As- 
sembly: 

Mr.  John  Chavis  introduces  his  narrative  by  reminding  the 
Assembly,  that  at  the  time  of  making  his  former  report  three 
months  of  the  time  for  which  he  had  been  engaged  were  un- 
expired ;  he  has  since  completed  that  tour  of  duty  by  visiting  as  a 
missionary  the  western  parts  of  Virginia,  which  appear  to  pre- 
sent natural  obstacles  that  require  no  small  share  of  zeal  and 
perserverance  to  surmount  them.  He  met  with  very  friendly 
receptions  and  great  kindness  from  the  people  in  those  parts, 
who  seem  to  have  attended  the  preaching  of  the  word  in  as  great 
numbers  as  could  reasonably  have  been  expected, — to  have  heard 
it  gladly,  and  in  some  instances  profitably. 


1The  most  scholarly  account  of  Chavis's  life  is  Edgar  W.  Knight's 
"Notes  on  John  Chavis,"  North  Carolina  Historical  Review,  VII  (July, 
1930),  326-345.  Research  for  this  paper  was  done  while  the  writer  was 
Elizabeth  Avery  Colton  fellow  of  the  American  Association  of  Univer- 
sity Women,  1951-1952. 

""Minutes  of  Lexington  Presbytery,  1800-1810,"  November  19,  1800. 
Manuscript  in  Union  Theological  Seminary,  Richmond,  Virginia.  Here- 
after referred  to  as  "Minutes  of  Lexington  Presbytery,  1800-1810." 

*  Minutes  of  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the 
United  States  of  America,  A.D.  1789  to  1820  Inclusive  (Philadelphia, 
1867),  229,  passim.  Hereafter  referred  to  as  Minutes  of  the  General  As- 
sembly. 

[166] 


166 


The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 


The  following  statement  is  made  by  the  Committee  from  Mr. 
Chavis's  Journal,  to  give  the  Assembly  a  view  of  the  numbers 
and  proportion  of  blacks  who  attended  Divine  service; 
In  Bedford  County  about  150         No  blacks  are  mentioned 
persons  attended, 

Rock  Bridge  Ditto 100 Ditto 

Lexington  Ditto 400 100,  a  revival  of  religion  here 

Falling  Spring  50 none  mentioned 

Kanawah  200 30 

Ditto  meeting  house 30 

Kanford's    30. . .  .none 

Morris's 30         (mentions  an  old  Aff  rican 

woman  as  being  much  affected 
and  weeping.) 

Johnson's    50. . . . none  mentioned 

Kanawah  Court  House  . .  .150. . .  .50 

George  Lee's 100. . .  .none  mentioned,  a  revival  of 

religion  among  the  Baptists. 
Kanawah  River  about  ....  80        person  attended 

no  blacks  mentioned 

Ditto    60 Ditto 

Coal  River 200 ....  20     Here  one  opposer  of  re- 
ligion was  made  to  fall  and 
weep.  He  never  saw  a  people 
more  desirous  to  be  instructed. 
Kanawah  Courthouse   ...100....  15 

E.Hughes's 180....   5 

Baptist  meeting  house) 

in  Green  Briar  County.  .  .200. . .  .20   (numbers  appeared  to  be 

(deeply  imprest:  he  was 
strongly  solicited  to  settle 
here. 

Lewisburgh 250 50 

Botetourt  County . .  .200 50 

Rockbridge  Ditto — 

Lebanon 200 80 

In  the  tour  he  preached  23  sermons,  and  received  $7.74. 
He  began  his  mission  under  the  appointment  of  last  year,  on 
the  18th  of  July,  and  continued  in  it  for  7  months  and  3  weeks, 
travelling  in  the  Counties  of  Mecklinburg,  Lunenburg,  and  Not- 
toway in  Virginia ;  and  in  Granville,  Person,  Wake,  Warren, 
Orange,  Chatham,  Randolph,  and  Caswell,  in  North  Carolina. 
In  this  tour  he  preached  68  times,  and  delivered  8  exhortations ; 
attended  several  religious  societies,  assisted  twice  in  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  collected  $1.86.  He  was 
several  times  prevented  from  preaching,  by  bodily  indisposition. 


John  Chavis  As  A  Preacher  To  Whites  167 

The  proportion  of  Blacks  who  attended  was  greater  than  on 
his  former  route,  as  appears  from  the  following  statement  of  the 
numbers  of  his  congregations  on  different  occasions,  Vizt, 

Mecklinburg  persons 250 . 

Person    500 

Ditto   35 

Ditto 40 

Mecklinburg    800 

Lunenburg   150 

Mecklinburg  persons 50 

Bluestone   200 

Ditto  150 

New  Bethel  300 

Person    200 

Wake    600 

Person    250 

Warren 30 

Granville    250 

Gillarns  Meeting  House 300 

Granvill    150 

Chatham     450 

Ditto   300 

Ditto   70, 

Ditto  400 

Granville    30, 

Caswell 200 

Granville    400 

Cullon's,  a  Baptist) 
Meetinghouse        )  150 

Poplar  Creek 250 

Granville    500 

So  well  did  the  white  population  attend  his  services  that 
Presbyterian  leaders  soon  came  to  regard  Chavis's  popularity 
as  a  problem.  While  their  attitude  is  more  clearly  revealed 
in  the  unpublished  records  of  the  Committee  of  Missions, 
some  indication  of  their  feeling  is  found  in  the  published 
proceedings  of  the  General  Assembly  of  1805.  At  that  meet- 
ing the  Synod  of  Virginia  reported  that  "Mr.  Chavis,  a  mis- 
sionary to  the  blacks,  itinerated  in  several  counties  in  the 

4  "Minutes  of  the  Standing  Committee  of  Missions,  1802-1807,"  May  21, 
1803.  Manuscript  in  Board  of  National  Missions  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church,  U.  S.  A.,  New  York  City.  Hereafter  referred  to  as  "Minutes  of 
the  Standing  Committee  on  Missions,  1802-1807."  The  minutes  give  only 
the  clerk's  condensation  of  Chavis's  report  rather  than  the  original. 


. . . .  Blacks  

50 

150 

15 

15 

800 

Blacks 

50 

50 

100 

10 

50 

80 

20 

10 

80 

30 

150 

50 

20 

150 

10 

20 

150 

50 

80 

1804 

168  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

south  parts  of  the  State;  but  owing  to  some  peculiar  circum- 
stances stated  in  his  journal,  his  mission  was  not  attended 
with  any  considerable  success."  No  hint  was  given  in  the 
printed  records  as  to  the  "peculiar  circumstances,5"  and  before 
the  Assembly  adjourned  Chavis  was  re-appointed  as  a  mis- 
sionary. However,  it  should  be  noted  that  the  travel  directions 
to  the  Negro  preacher  for  another  year  instructed  him  to 
"employ  himself  chiefly  among  the  blacks  and  people  of 
colour."  5 

The  manuscript  minutes  of  the  Committee  of  Missions 
show  why  these  explicit  directions  were  given  to  Chavis  and 
throw  some  light  on  the  difficulties  of  his  previous  mission. 
Apparently,  Chavis  found  that  the  slaves  preferred  the  emo- 
tional and  illiterate  exhortation  of  a  fellow  bondsman  to  the 
sermon  of  a  man  of  education  and  dignity;  hence,  he  tended 
to  preach  to  whites  rather  than  to  his  own  race.  As  he  had 
been  employed  to  minister  to  Negroes,  a  few  Presbyterians 
regarded  his  misssionary  activities  as  something  less  than 
successful.  They  "intimated  .  .  .  that  Mr.  Chavis  was  not 
properly  attentive  to  the  Instruction  of  the  Blacks,  which 
was  the  primary  object  of  his  Mission."  The  chairman  of 
the  Committee  of  Missions  promised  to  question  Chavis  about 
the  matter  so  that  he  might  "be  stimulated  to  greater  fidelity 
in  [the]  future"  or  given  "an  opportunity  for  his  own  vindi- 
cation." 6 

Before  the  General  Assembly  met  again  Chavis  replied  in 
writing  to  the  charge  of  neglecting  his  own  race  to  preach 
to  the  white  population.  Unfortunately  his  letter  was  not  pre- 
served and  no  further  mention  of  the  affair  occurs  in  the 
minutes  of  the  Committee.7  But  the  preacher  evidently  ex- 
plained his  conduct  to  the  complete  satisfaction  of  the  Com- 
mittee and  the  Assembly,  for  in  1806  he  was  appointed  as 
missionary  "among  the  blacks  and  free  people  of  colour  in 
Maryland,  if  practicable,  otherwise  at  his  discretion."  8  Thus 

5  Minutes  of  the  General  Assembly,  3234  344. 

6  "Minutes  of  the  Standing  Committee  of  Missions,  1802-1807,"  May  17, 
1806. 

'"Minutes  of  the  Standing  Committee  of  Missions,  1802-1807."  The 
minutes  state  that  the  letter  was  received,  but  it  was  not  copied  into  the 
record. 

8  Minutes  of  the  General  Assembly,  367. 


John  Chavis  As  A  Preacher  To  Whites  169 

he  won  the  privilege  of  preaching  to  whites  with  whom  he 
was  more  congenial  and  from  whom  he  doubtless  received 
more  attention. 

As  Chavis's  missionary  reports  show,  the  Great  Revival  was 
sweeping  the  South  Atlantic  states  in  the  years  that  he  was 
traveling  for  the  General  Assembly.  Since  he  rode  and  preach- 
ed in  parts  of  North  Carolina  and  Virginia  where  the  religious 
fervor  was  greatest,  he  was  in  an  excellent  position  to  ob- 
serve and  describe  it.  From  him  people  received  information 
about  the  spiritual  awakening,  which  many  seem  to  have 
regarded  as  the  beginning  of  the  millenium,  and  passed  it 
on  in  their  letters  to  friends  and  relatives.  It  is  regrettable 
that  writers  did  nothing  more  than  mention  Chavis's  name, 
but  the  casual  manner  in  which  the  observations  of  the  free 
Negro  were  introduced  into  letters  indicates  that  he  was 
a  well  known  and  acceptable  visitor  even  to  the  lady  of  the 
house. 

In  January,  1802,  Ann  Smith,  daughter  of  Samuel  Smith 
in  Granville  County,  North  Carolina,  described  "The  Great 
Revival  of  Religion  about  the  Harfields  [Hawfields]"  for 
her  relatives  in  South  Carolina.  Her  information  came  from 
"Mr.  Chavis  and  Uncle  Wm.  Webb  .  .  .  who  have  been  at 
the  Meetings  where  this  great  work  was  going  forward."9 
Later  in  the  same  year,  Moses  Hoge,  Presbyterian  minister 
in  Shepherdstown,  Virginia,  and  afterwards  president  of 
Hampden-Sydney  College,  wrote:  "By  Mr.  J.  Chavis  I  have 
had  some  account  of  the  work  going  on  in  Mr.  Wilson's  Con- 
gregations." 10  Association  with  the  Smiths  and  the  Hoges 
shows  that  Chavis's  contacts  were  with  the  most  prominent 
of  Presbyterian  families. 

8  Ann  Smith  to  Polly  Williamson,  January  16,  1802,  in  the  Williamson 
Papers,  Presbyterian  Historical  Society,  Philadelphia.  A  sketch  of  Samuel 
Smith,  Presbyterian  layman  who  migrated  from  Essex  County,  Virginia, 
to  Granville  County  in  the  early  1760's  to  occupy  land  granted  by  the 
Earl  of  Granville,  can  be  found  in  the  Samuel  Smith  Downey  Papers, 
Duke  University  library.  For  information  on  William  Webb,  Presbyterian 
layman  at  Tar  River,  see  G.  C.  Shaw,  John  Chavis,  1763-1838  (Bingham- 
ton,  1931),  19-20.  Hereafter  referred  to  as  Shaw,  John  Chavis. 

10  Moses  Hoge  to  James  Hoge,  July  20,  1802,  in  Hoge  Collection,  Histori- 
cal Foundation  of  the  Presbyterian  and  Reformed  Churches,  Montreat, 
N.  C  William  Wilson  was  pastor  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  Augusta, 
Virginia.  A  history  of  the  Hoge  family  is  found  in  Peyton  H.  Hoge,  Moses 
Drury  Hoge   (Richmond,  1899),  1-29. 


170  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Chavis'  last  preaching  mission  for  the  General  Assembly 
was  performed  in  1807.11  After  that  time  his  chief  occupation 
was  his  school  in  Raleigh.  Yet,  he  continued  to  preach  not 
only  from  the  pulpit,  but  also  in  what  he  described  as  "private 
and  public  conversations  with  my  neighbors."12  In  1824  he 
proposed  to  supply  the  pulpit  of  Old  Providence,  an  inter- 
denominational church  near  Oxford  which  had  originally 
been  sponsored  by  his  Presbyterian  friend  William  Webb. 
It  was  in  the  area  of  North  Carolina  where  Chavis  had  spent 
much  of  his  time  at  the  turn  of  the  century,  and  where,  ac- 
cording to  some  accounts,  he  had  been  born  and  raised. 
Doubtless,  he  looked  forward  to  pleasant  weekends  of  visit- 
ing and  worshipping  with  old  friends.  But  the  liberalism 
which  followed  the  Revolution  and  for  a  time  characterized 
the  Great  Revival  had  waned.  Chavis,  who  twenty  years 
earlier  had  moved  freely  among  the  most  prominent  Gran- 
ville families,  failed  to  find  "such  familiar  and  hospitable 
entertainment  as  was  desired  and  necessary"  and  "discon- 
tinued his  visits."  13 

The  experience  with  the  members  of  Old  Providence 
Church  was  a  foretaste  of  a  more  bitter  lot  which  awaited 
the  free  Negro.  In  1831  Chavis,  like  the  rest  of  his  race,  was 
forbidden  by  the  state  legislature  to  preach  at  all.  When  he 
sought  advice  from  his  friends  in  Orange  Presbytery,  who 
had  taken  him  under  their  care  when  he  moved  from  Vir- 
ginia to  North  Carolina  in  1805,  they  recommended  that  he 
abide  by  the  law.14 

A  feeble  old  man  with  no  means  of  support,  Chavis  then 
applied  to  the  presbytery  for  financial  aid.15  Among  the  mem- 
bers of  a  committee  appointed  to  assume  responsibility  in 
the  care  of  the  old  man  and  his  wife  were  Samuel  Smith 


n  Minutes  of  the  General  Assembly,  391. 

12  North  Carolina  Presbyterian,  December  27,  1882. 

18  Shaw,  John  Chavis,  21-22,  publishes  the  records  of  the  church  which 
relate  to  Chavis. 

14  "Minutes  of  Orange  Presbytery,  1831-1836,"  April  18,  1832,  manuscript 
in  Historical  Foundation  of  the  Presbyterian  and  Reformed  Churches. 
Hereafter  referred  to  as   "Minutes  of   Orange   Presbytery,   1831-1836." 

16  The  presbytery  decided  to  give  Chavis  fifty  dollars  annually  as  long 
as  he  lived,  and  apparently  paid  that  amount  to  him  until  he  died  in  1838. 
"Minutes  of  Orange  Presbytery,  1831-1836,  1836-1846,"  September  5, 
1832,  passim. 


John  Chavis  As  A  Preacher  To  Whites  171 

Downey,  Presbyterian  elder  who  was  a  grandson  of  Samuel 
Smith,  and  William  McPheeters,  minister  in  Raleigh.  Both 
men  had  probably  known  John  Chavis  for  more  than  thirty 
years,16  and  their  interest  in  his  welfare  doubtless  led  to 
their  appointment  to  the  committee.  A  letter  written  by 
McPheeters  to  Downey  in  1834  1T  shows  Chavis's  pitiful  plight 
at  that  time,  and  also  serves  as  a  commentary  on  the  change 
which  had  taken  place  in  the  whites'  attitude  toward  the 
free  Negro  preacher.  With  the  decline  of  liberalism,  paternal- 
ism replaced  the  spirit  of  equalitarianism  which  had  earlier 
characterized  the  Presbyterians'  relationships  with  Chavis. 

September  3, 1834 
Dear  Sir, 

I  have  lately  received  two  letters  from  our  Old  Friend  John 
Chavis. 

In  the  1st  he  makes  known  to  me  his  difficulties,  distresses, 
and  wants  -  Says  that  he  is  a  miserable  man  -  Old  and  infirm  - 
his  wife  a  dying  -  or  at  least  on  her  death-bed  -  in  want  of  the 
necessaries  of  life  -  and  without  money  to  procure  them. 

In  the  2nd  he  say[s]  that  he  had  applied  to  you  (lately,  I 
suppose,)  for  some  money  -  having  understood  that  you  had 
some  for  him  in  your  hands  -  and  that  the  messenger,  on  his  re- 
turn, stated  that  you  had  sent  the  money  over  to  me,  &c 

If  any  money  has  been  forwarded  to  me,  I  have  not  as  yet 
received  it  -  But  probably  the  money  referred  to,  as  sent  to  me, 
was  that  which  you  put  into  my  hands  last  year. 

At  the  last  meeting  of  Presbytery  the  following  minute  was 
adopted  -  "Resolved,  that  the  Committee  hitherto  appointed  in 
the  case  of  Mr.  Chavis,  be  directed  to  inquire  into  his  situation, 
and  make  such  provision  for  him  as  his  necessities  may  require" 

Yourself  and  Dr.  Graham  are  members  of  the  Committee  - 
who  the  others  are  I  dont  recollect  - 

In  Raleigh  I  collected  for  Mr  Chavis  in  October  or  November 
last  about  $20  -  This  sum,  with  what  you  put  into  my  hands, 
was  all  delivered  over  to  him  last  year  -  of  the  way  in  which  it 
was  expended  by  him  he  gave  account  to  Presbytery  at  the  last 


19  For  Chavis's  relations  with  Downey  see  Shaw,  John  Chavis,  30.  Chavis 
and  McPheeters  presented  themselves  as  candidates  for  the  ministry  at 
the  fall  session  of  Lexington  Presbytery  in  1799.  See  "Minutes  of  Lexing- 
ton Presbytery,  1794-1800,"  October  18,  19,  1799.  Manuscript  in  Union 
Theological  Seminary,  Richmond,  Va.  Subsequent  minutes  show  that  Chavis 
was  licensed  on  November  19,  1800,  and  McPheeters  not  until  April  18,1802. 

17  This  letter  is  in  the  Samuel  Smith  Downey  Papers,  Duke  University 
library. 


172  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

meeting  -  Presbytery  then,  with  the  view  of  providing  for  him 
during  the  present  year,  passed  the  Resolution  above  recited  - 
I  think  it  will  require  in  advance,  on  the  part  of  Presbytery, 
[the  amount]  of  5  dollars  a  month  -  or  60  dollars  a  year  to  sup- 
port the  Old  Man  and  his  Wife  -  If  this  sum  cant  be  got  with 
some  degree  of  certainty  and  punctuality,  I  see  no  other  chance 
for  him  but  the  Poor  House  -  Please  to  write  to  Mr.  Chavis  and 
give  him  any  information  you  may  possess  - 

I  am  yours  &c 
Wm  McPheeters 

Thus  unpublished  records  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  as 
well  as  letters  written  by  its  members,  show  that  while  serv- 
ing as  a  missionary  in  North  Carolina  and  Virginia,  John 
Chavis  preached  to  and  moved  freely  among  white  Presby- 
terians. Even  after  teaching  became  his  chief  occupation  he 
continued  to  minister  to  them.  In  the  last  years  of  his  life, 
when  he  was  unable  to  earn  his  livelihood,  it  was  to  these 
old  friends  that  he  turned  for  aid.  His  relationships  with 
them  illustrate  both  the  early  promise  and  the  ultimate  trag- 
edy of  his  own  career  and  that  of  other  free  Negroes  of  his 
generation. 


PAPERS  FROM  THE  FIFTY-FOURTH  ANNUAL  SES- 
SION OF  THE  STATE  LITERARY  AND  HISTORICAL 
ASSOCIATION,  RALEIGH,  DECEMBER,   1954 

Introduction 

By  Christopher  Crittenden 

The  fifty-fourth  annual  session  of  the  State  Literary  and 
Historical  Association,  one  of  the  most  successful  ever  con- 
ducted, was  held  at  the  Sir  Walter  Hotel  in  Raleigh,  Decem- 
ber 3,  1954.  Following  the  morning  business  meeting,  Dr. 
Paul  Murray  of  Greenville  spoke  on  "The  North  Carolina 
Historical  Review  -  The  First  Thirty  Years";  Mr.  Harry 
L.  Golden  of  Charlotte  talked  on  "The  Jewish  People  of  North 
Carolina";  and  Mr.  Robert  Mason  of  Sanford  reviewed  North 
Carolina  fiction  of  the  year.  The  R.  D.  W.  Connor,  Roanoke- 
Chowan,  and  American  Association  of  University  Women 
awards  were  then  announced.  At  the  luncheon  meeting  Dr. 
Leonard  Hurley  reviewed  North  Carolina  non-fiction  of  the 
year.  At  the  annual  dinner  Mrs.  Inglis  Fletcher  delivered 
an  informal  presidential  address.  In  the  evening  Dr.  Louis  B. 
Wright  spoke  on  "Elizabethan  Politics  and  Colonial  Enter- 
prise," and  the  Mayflower  and  Sir  Walter  Raleigh  awards 
were  announced.1  All  the  papers  presented  at  the  various 
meetings  are  reproduced  in  the  pages  that  follow.  The  pres- 
idential address,  which  was  not  written  is  necessarily  omitted. 

1  For  details  regarding  the  meetings  and  different  awards,  see  The  North 
Carolina  Historical  Review,  XXXII  (1955),  135-136. 


[173] 


THIRTY  YEARS  OF  THE  NEW  HISTORY:  A  STUDY  OF 

The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review, 

1924-1953 

By  Paul  Murray 

Thirty  years  are  a  short  period  in  the  life  history  of  a 
people.  In  like  manner,  the  thirty  annual  volumes  of  The 
North  Carolina  Historical  Review,  1924-1953,  are  but  a 
small  segment  of  the  total  picture  of  North  Carolina's  cul- 
tural growth.  It  is  only  when  one  attempts  to  comprehend 
such  a  segment  of  our  cultural  heritage  that  he  realizes  the 
immensity  of  the  task  of  the  serious  historian  who  is  not  satis- 
fied with  the  glittering  generalities  too  often  bandied  about 
in  standard  treatises  on  cultural  history.  To  avoid  falling 
into  such  a  pit  it  is  here  proposed  that  this  study  be  limited 
to  three  phases  of  recent  historiography:  (1)  a  characteriza- 
tion of  history  writing  concerning  North  Carolina,  1886-1929; 
( 2 )  the  founding  of  the  Review;  ( 3 )  a  summary  analysis  of 
the  content  of  the  Review,  1924-1953,  together  with  an  eval- 
uation of  its  major  effects  on  North  Carolina  history. 

The  foundations  of  the  literary  structure  of  North  Caro- 
lina history  were  laid  during  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth 
century  in  the  writings  of  Hugh  Williamson,  Francois  Xavier 
Martin,  Francis  Lister  Hawks,  and  John  Hill  Wheeler.  The 
framework  of  that  structure  was  reared  during  the  forty- 
three  years  which  elapsed  between  the  appearance  of  the 
first  volume  of  The  Colonial  Records  from  the  hand  of  Wil- 
liam Lawrence  Saunders  in  1886  to  the  publication  of  Robert 
Digges  Wimberley  Connor's  North  Carolina:  Rebuilding  an 
Ancient  Commonwealth  in  1929.  Many  and  able  were  the 
skilled  artisans  whose  trademarks  are  stamped  on  every  beam, 
joint,  and  truss  in  that  edifice.  Their  contributions  are  so  clear 
and  distinct  that  any  attempt  at  listing  by  one  person  must 

the  third  phase  of  this  study  was  presented  in  the  paper 
read  to  the  State  Literary  and  Historical  Association,  De- 
cember 3,  1954. 

[174] 


Thirty  Years  of  the  New  History  175 

surely  be  both  unnecessary  and  incomplete.1  There  are  at  least 
ten,  however,  whose  work  entitles  them  to  be  ranked  as  master 
workmen.  In  addition  to  Saunders  and  Connor,  they  are: 
Walter  Clark,  Samuel  A'Court  Ashe,  Daniel  Harvey  Hill, 
John  Spencer  Bassett,  Charles  Lee  Coon,  William  Kenneth 
Boyd,  Adelaide  Lisetta  Fries,  and  Joseph  Gregoire  de  Roulhac 
Hamilton. 

All  of  these  were  trained  in  the  classical  tradition  which 
is  our  most  valuable  heritage  in  education  from  the  nine- 
teenth century;  each  of  them,  in  addition  to  outstanding  work 
in  history,  was  a  leading  participant  in  some  phase  of  state- 
wide public  service.  In  this  respect,  a  casual  remark  by  Miss 
Fries2  to  the  effect  that  she  did  not  know  how  to  say  "No"  in 
regard  to  her  community  and  her  church  might  well  be  taken 
with  variations  to  expresss  the  sentiment  of  the  entire  group. 
They  were,  indeed,  known  as  active  and  leading  citizens  of 
the  commonwealth  of  North  Carolina  and  their  lives  as  in- 
dividuals expressed  in  a  superior  way  the  aspirations  and 
ambitions  of  North  Carolina  people. 

In  these  circumstances  is  to  be  found  the  key  to  a  concise 
statement  of  the  concept  of  North  Carolina  history  with 
which  the  Review  began  its  work  in  1924.  Clearly  these 
masters  of  the  preceding  generation  considered  the  main 
business  of  history  to  be  the  depicting  of  the  common  effort 
of  people  in  their  basic  human  organizations.3  Since  the  state 
is  primarily  a  political  entity  and  since  North  Carolina  his- 
tory is  rich  in  materials  involving  federal  relations,  they  na- 
turally highlighted  political  developments  within  the  state 
and  the  numerous  interrelationships  between  it  and  its  "co- 
states."  They  gave  some  attention  to  the  origin  and  growth 

1  Stephen  B.  Weeks,  "North  Carolina  Historians,"  Proceedings  and  Ad- 
dresses of  the  Fifteenth  Annual  Session  of  the  State  Literary  and  His- 
torical Association  of  North  Carolina  (Raleigh,  1915),  71-86.  This  is 
the  latest  effort  to  list  and  characterize  North  Carolina  historians  dis- 
covered in  this  study. 

2  Made  to  the  author  at  a  meeting  of  the  Historical  Society  of  North 
Carolina  in  Greensboro,  November  13,  1948. 

8  J.  G.  de  Roulhac  Hamilton,  "Vitality  in  State  History,"  Proceedings  of 
the  Twentieth  and  Twenty-First  Annual  Sessions  of  the  State  Literary 
and  Historical  Association  of  North  Carolina  (Raleigh,  1922),  11-19. 
In  this  presidential  address  of  1920,  Dr.  Hamilton  spoke  of  "movements" 
rather  than  "organizations." 


176  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

of  social  institutions,  especially  churches,  schools  and  col- 
leges, and  the  Masonic  Order;  but  on  the  whole  they  did  an 
indifferent  job  of  integrating  these  to  their  central  theme  of 
political  development.  Likewise,  in  an  age  that  considered  the 
personal  income  of  even  a  candidate  for  public  office  as  a 
private  matter,  they  gave  relatively  little  attention  to  what 
we  now  call  economic  history.  For  example,  they  treated 
slavery  as  a  factor  in  politics  and  a  means  of  social  control 
at  much  greater  length  than  they  did  in  its  presently  more 
basic  significance  as  the  dominant  system  of  labor  in  ante 
bellum  agriculture. 

A  three-period  chronology  is  almost  a  corollary  to  the  con- 
cept of  North  Carolina  history  as  the  development  of  insti- 
tutions within  the  state  and  their  interrelationship  with  like 
institutions  of  nationwide  character.  By  1783  the  designation 
Tar  Heel  was  probably  not  in  general  use,  but  the  individuali- 
ty of  the  state  had  been  formed  through  the  interplay  of  hu- 
man effort,  natural  resources,  and  the  transmutation  of  British 
and  German  ideals  into  American  institutions.  The  decade 
ending  in  1783  is  crowded  with  events  indicative  of  the  trans- 
ition from  the  status  of  colony  to  that  of  a  self -directing  state. 
During  these  years  the  people  of  the  state,  acting  through 
freely  chosen  leaders,  declared  their  independence  of  Great 
Britain,  established  a  government  on  the  untried  principle  of 
popular  sovereignty,  initiated  the  means  for  implementing 
the  social  ideals  of  the  Revolution,  and  entered  the  "perma- 
nent union"  of  the  American  states. 

The  second  or  federal  period  in  North  Carolina  history  was 
an  era  of  rapid  nationalization,  a  fact  that  has  been  slurred 
over  in  our  general  histories  of  the  United  States  by  over- 
absorption  in  the  details  on  which  the  basic  issue  was  fought. 
North  Carolina  historians  of  the  Old  School,  on  the  other 
hand,  presented  clearly  the  basic  factors  in  the  changing  con- 
cept of  the  Federal  Union.  Among  many  other  contributions 
they  showed  that  the  conservative  leaders  of  North  Carolina 
in  the  1850's  and  early  1860's  were  swept  against  their  better 
judgment  into  the  experiment  of  a  Southern  Confederacy.  The 
period  properly  ends  with  the  surrender  of  Johnston  to  Sher- 


Thirty  Years  of  the  New  History  177 

man4  and  the  establishment  of  military  government  as  a  sym- 
bol that,  for  good  or  ill,  national  ideals  must  triumph  over 
sectional  and  state  interests. 

The  masters  of  the  Old  School  recognized  the  period  of 
North  Carolina  history  from  the  end  of  the  Civil  War  to  1925 
as  one  of  increasing  complexity.  They  did  a  masterful  job 
of  presenting  Reconstruction  as  the  proud  reaction  of  an 
outraged  people  to  oppression  by  a  Federal  government  that 
had  thrown  off  all  constitutional  restraints  on  its  power  to  do 
evil.  They  strove  valiantly  to  fit  the  new  facts  of  race  rela- 
tions, industrial  mechanization,  and  extremes  of  economic 
and  social  status  into  the  familiar  pattern  of  a  loosely  strati- 
fied society,  an  agricultural  economy,  and  a  federal  system  of 
government.  They  gave  us  some  good  chapters  of  general 
description  on  the  twentieth  century,  but  left  the  field  of  in- 
terpretation of  recent  trends  to  be  divided  into  the  compart- 
ments occupied  by  the  political  scientists,  the  economists, 
the  sociologists,  and  the  literary  critics. 

As  has  been  indicated  before,  the  leaders  of  the  Old  School 
were  characterized  by  an  active  interest  in  public  affairs. 
Actually  the  move  for  the  publication  of  history  under  the 
auspices  of  the  state  was  given  its  first  effective  impetus  dur- 
ing the  1880's  and  1890?s  by  the  leadership  of  these  histori- 
cally minded  public  men,  especially  William  L.  Saunders, 
Walter  Clark,  and  Samuel  A.  Ashe.  The  first  active  element 
for  popularization  of  the  movement  was  the  organization  of 
patriotic  societies  during  the  nineties.  At  the  turn  of  the  cen- 
tury North  Carolina  had  state  bodies  affiliated  with  the  fol- 
lowing national  or  sectional  organizations:  The  Sons  of  the 
Revolution  ( Raleigh,  1893- ) ,  the  Colonial  Dames  of  America 
(Wilmington,  1894- ),  the  Daughters  of  the  Revolution  (Ra- 
leigh, 1896- ),  the  Society  of  the  Cincinnati   (reorganized, 

4  The  volume  division  of  the  Connor-Boyd-Hamilton,  History  of  North 
Carolina,  3  vols.  (Chicago,  1919),  brings  the  Federal  period  to  an  end  at 
1860.  The  author  of  this  essay  is  convinced  that  this  is  a  matter  of  con- 
venience, personal  interest,  and  influence  of  the  census  reports  more  than 
it  is  an  incident  of  historical  interpretation.  William  K.  Boyd  and  J.  G. 
de  Roulhac  Hamilton,  in  A  Syllabus  of  North  Carolina  History,  1584-1876 
(Durham,  1913),  suggest  a  presentation  of  the  Civil  War  as  an  integral 
phase  of  the  state's  development.  See  also  Daniel  H.  Hill,  A  History  of 
North  Carolina  in  the  War  Between  the  States,  2  vols.    (Raleigh,  1926). 


178  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Raleigh,  1896- ),  the  United  Daughters  of  the  Confederacy 
(Wilmington,  1897- ),  the  Daughters  of  the  American  Revo- 
lution (Waynesville,  1901- ),  and  the  United  Confederate 
Veterans.5  There  was  little  effort  at  correlating  the  work  of 
these  various  groups,  and  some  of  them  far  outdistanced 
others  in  the  achievement  of  their  common  endeavors.  These 
were  the  organization  of  local  chapters,  the  marking  of  his- 
toric sites,  the  erection  of  memorials,  the  collection  of  relics 
and  records,  and  the  general  awakening  of  public  opinion  to 
the  recognition  of  historic  factors  in  the  cultural  growth  of 
the  state. 

The  pioneer  organization  in  the  periodical  publication  of 
formal  historical  articles  in  North  Carolina  was  The  Daugh- 
ters of  the  Revolution.  The  members  of  this  group  on  De- 
cember 13,  1900,  resolved  to  erect  a  memorial  to  the  partici- 
pants in  the  Edenton  Tea  Party,  October  25, 1774.  As  a  means 
of  raising  funds  they  hit  upon  the  scheme  of  establishing  and 
selling  subscriptions  to  a  periodical  publication.  The  North 
Carolina  Booklet  (1901-1926)  was  the  result.6  The  editors  of 
the  Booklet  were  chosen  from  the  membership  of  The  Daugh- 
ters of  the  Revolution,  but  they  were  able  from  the  first  to 
obtain  numerous  articles  from  reputable  historians  and  lead- 
ing public  men  of  the  day. 

The  editors  of  the  Booklet  also  named  an  advisory  board 
from  the  active  historians  of  the  state;  and  as  the  venture 
grew  in  scope  and  scholarship  the  many  useful  articles  ap- 
pearing in  its  various  numbers  actually  overshadowed  in  the 
minds  of  historians  both  the  organization  and  the  cause  it 
represented.  Its  advisory  board  and  list  of  contributors 
comprised  most  of  the  able  historians  in  the  state  during 
the  first  quarter  of  the  century  and  many  amateurs  of 
better  than  average  ability.  Its  first  and  most  basic  func- 
tion was  to  furnish  the  indispensable  link  between  those 
capable  of  writing  history  and  those  interested  in  reading  it. 
That  many  of  its  contributions  were  of  a  high  order  of  scholar- 

5  Literary  and  Historical  Activities  in  North  Carolina,  1900-1905  (Raleigh, 
1907),  I,  500-537. 

6  The  North  Carolina  Booklet,  I  No.  2  (Raleigh,  May  10,  1901)  ;  Literary 
and  Historical  Activities,  I,  508-521. 


Thirty  Years  of  the  New  History  179 

ship  is  best  attested  by  a  comparison  of  the  coverage  of  events 
and  personalities  in  the  first  volume  of  Ashe,  History  of  North 
Carolina  (Greensboro,  1909)  and  that  in  Connor's  survey 
based  on  studies  available  in  1928.7 

On  October  23,  1900,  the  friends  of  history  in  North  Caro- 
lina achieved  their  first  formal  unity  when  the  North  Carolina 
Literary  and  Historical  Association  was  formed  and  three 
months  later  Walter  Clark  was  chosen  as  its  first  president. 
The  Association  elected  Henry  Groves  Connor  as  its  second 
president  and  at  its  third  annual  meeting  on  January  23,  1903, 
passed  a  resolution  requesting  the  General  Assembly  to  estab- 
lish a  historical  commission.  A  bill  establishing  such  a  com- 
mission with  the  power  to  publish  materials  on  North  Carolina 
history  was  written  by  William  Joseph  Peele  and  passed  by 
the  General. Assembly  a  few  days  later.  The  Commission  of 
five  members  did  little  more  during  the  first  four  years  of  its 
existence  than  organize  by  electing  Peele  as  Chairman  and 
R.  D.  W.  Connor  as  secretary.8  Individual  members  of  the 
Commission,  however,  continued  their  activities  in  the  pa- 
triotic societies  and  other  agencies  for  the  promotion  of  public 
interest  in  history.  At  the  meeting  of  the  Literary  and  His- 
torical Association  in  1906,  Connor,  then  an  assistant  in  the 
office  of  the  State  Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction,  made 
a  plea  for  more  vigorous  state  action  in  a  paper,  "A  State 
Library  Building  and  Department  of  Archives  and  Records."9 

A  new  day  for  the  publication  of  history  dawned  in  1907 
when  Connor  wrote  and  the  General  Assembly  passed  a  bill 
which  put  the  Commission  on  a  permanent  basis,  appropri- 
ated $5,000  annually  for  its  support,  and  authorized  the 
hiring  of  a  paid  secretary.10  At  a  salary  of  $2,000  a  year 


7  This  statement  is  not  intended  to  minimize  the  fact  that  Connor  also 
had  the  advantage  of  access  to  the  Historical  Papers  of  the  Trinity  Col- 
lege Historical  Society,  Series  I-XVI,  1897-1926;  and  the  James  Sprunt 
Historical  Monographs,  Nos.  1-8,  Vols.  9-18,  1900-1926. 

8  William  B.  Brown,  "The  State  Literary  and  Historical  Association, 
1900-1950,"  North  Carolina  Historical  Review,  XXXVIII  (April,  1951), 
157-159;  J.  G.  de  Roulhac  Hamilton,  "The  Preservation  of  North  Carolina 
History",  North  Carolina  Historical  Review,   IV    (January,   1927),   11-12. 

9  The  North  Carolina  Booklet,  VI,  No.  3,   (January,  1907,)   159-176,  206. 

10  R.  D.  W.  Connor,  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Commission  .  .  .  (Bulle- 
tin No.  1,  North  Carolina  Historical  Commission,  Raleigh,  1907),  4-8. 
There  is  a  complete  financial  report  in  The  Second  Biennial  Report  of  the 
North  Carolina  Historical  Commission,  1906-1908    (Raleigh,  1909),  15-18. 


180  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Connor  entered  upon  a  career  as  secretary  and  active  execu- 
tive head  of  the  Commission's  work  that  continued  until  1921. 
Daniel  H.  Hill,  president  of  the  Literary  and  Historical  As- 
sociation and  already  at  work  on  his  History  of  North  Caro- 
lina in  the  War  Between  the  States,  succeeded  as  secretary 
to  the  Commission;  Connor  became  Kenan  Professor  of 
History  and  Government  at  the  University  of  North  Caro- 
lina.11 

In  the  meantime,  a  representative  group  of  the  state's  in- 
terested citizens  was  keeping  up  the  activities  of  the  Literary 
and  Historical  Association.  Active  lobbying  probably  de- 
clined with  the  change  of  meetings  in  1911  from  January  to 
November,  but  there  can  be  no  doubt  of  the  influence  of 
resolutions  passed  and  of  individual  members  with  the  Gen- 
eral Assembly;  while  the  annual  meeting  with  its  papers,  re- 
ports on  publications,  public  receptions,  and  the  sponsorship 
of  other  cultural  groups  was  a  patent  demonstration  of  state- 
wide interest  that  everybody  could  see.  A  succession  of  lead- 
ers in  various  phases  of  intellectual  interests  served  as  officers 
of  the  Association.  Connor  was  president,  1911-1912,  and  be- 
came secretary  in  1912,  thus  joining  in  one  person  the  active 
direction  of  affairs  in  both  the  Commission  and  Association. 
The  first  occasion  that  two  full-time,  professional  historians 
served  successively  as  president  was  the  biennium,  1921- 
1923,  when  William  K.  Boyd,  Professor  of  History  at  Trinity 
College,  was  succeeded  by  Adelaide  L.  Fries,  Archivist  of 
the  Moravian  Church  and  a  leader  in  the  North  Carolina 
Federation  of  Women's  Clubs.12 

It  is  thus  notable  that  by  the  early  twenties  three  lines  of 
development  in  the  state  had  converged  on  the  policy  of  a 
forward  step  in  the  publishing  of  history.  These  were:  ( 1 )  the 


11  Henry  S.  Stroupe,  "The  North  Carolina  Department  of  Archives  and 
History  -  The  First  Half  Century,"  North  Carolina  Historical  Review, 
XXXI  (April,  1954),  184-193. 

13  Brown,  "The  State  Literary  and  Historical  Association,  1900-1950," 
North  Carolina  Historical  Review,  XXVIII  (April,  1951),  159-197.  A  com- 
plete list  of  at  least  650  members  in  1911  is  given  in  Proceedings  of  the 
Eleventh  and  Twelfth  Annual  Meetings  of  the  State  Literary  and  His- 
torical Association  (Raleigh,  1912),  122-137.  Hereafter  cited  as  Proceed- 
ings .  .  .  State  Literary  and  Historical  Association.  The  membership  was 
around  250  less  in  1922,  after  the  formation  of  other  groups.  Proceedings 
.  .  .  State  Literary  and  Historical  Association  (Raleigh,  1923),  97-101. 


Thirty  Years  of  the  New  History  181 

Literary  and  Historical  Association  and  related  groups;  (2) 
active  history  departments  in  colleges  and  the  University  of 
North  Carolina;13  (3)  the  North  Carolina  Historical  Com- 
mission. During  the  years,  1907-1923,  there  was  a  small  but 
steady  stream  of  publications  from  the  office  of  the  Commis- 
sion. Substantial  additions  were  made  to  public  and  private 
records.  Proceedings  of  the  Literary  and  Historical  Associa- 
tion, memorial  speeches  at  unveiling  ceremonies,  reports  on 
activities  of  the  patriotic  societies,  booklets  to  aid  teachers  of 
North  Carolina  history,  and  other  pamphlets  possessed  one 
common  characteristic:  they  were  about  North  Carolina  his- 
tory to  a  greater  extent  than  they  were  North  Carolina  his- 
tory. Some  of  the  papers  read  at  the  meeting  of  the  Associa- 
tion, on  the  other  hand,  were  on  a  high  plane  of  scholarship; 
and  events  during  the  three-year  administration  of  Secretary 
Hill  indicate  that  the  members  and  staff  of  the  Commission 
were  virtually  of  the  unanimous  opinion  that  the  emphasis 
should  be  shifted  to  this  type  of  publication. 

The  first  formal  step  in  the  direction  of  an  expanded  pro- 
gram of  scholarly  publication  came  in  February,  1922,  when 
Connor  introduced  at  a  meeting  of  the  Commission  two 
proposals:  (1)  that  a  fellow  be  appointed  at  the  University 
to  work  in  North  Carolina  history  under  the  joint  supervision 
of  the  Commission  and  the  Department  of  History;  (2)  that 
the  Commission  offer  a  prize  to  college  students  for  the  best 
play  depicting  some  phase  of  North  Carolina  history.14  At  the 
following  meeting  of  the  Commission,  "A  letter  was  read 
from  Dr.  W.  K.  Boyd,  President  of  the  State  Literary  and 
Historical  Association,  in  reference  to  the  joint  publication 
by  the  Commission  and  the  Association  of  a  historical  quar- 

13  J.  G.  de  Roulhac  Hamilton,  ''History  in  the  South  -  a  Retrospect  of 
Half  a  Century,"  North  Carolina  Historical  Review,  XXXI  (April,  1954), 
173-175;  William  B.  Hamilton,  Fifty  Years  of  The  South  Atlantic  Quart- 
erly (Durham,  1952),  6-8,  84.  The  smaller  colleges  followed  closely  the 
lead  of  Trinity  and  the  University  in  the  teaching  of  North  Carolina 
history,  though  obviously  they  could  not  match  the  publication  of  his- 
torical materials.  See  note  7  above. 

M  Minutes  of  the  North  Carolina  Historical  Commission,  February  28, 
1922.  All  the  minutes  herein  used  are  headed:  "Office  of  the  Historical 
Commission,  Raleigh."  They  are  located  in  the  Department  of  Archives 
and  History  and  were  made  available  through  the  means  of  a  microfilm 
strip.  Hereafter  cited  as  Minutes  of  Commission. 


182  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

terly.  Mr.  Noble  moved  that  the  chairman  and  three  mem- 
bers be  appointed  to  consider  the  whole  proposition,  to  for- 
mulate the  views  of  the  Commission,  and  if  possible,  have  a 
conference  with  the  officers  of  the  State  Literary  and  Histori- 
cal Association.  The  chairman  appointed  Messrs.  Pittman, 
Noble,  and  Clarkson."  15 

When  the  matter  came  before  the  Commission  for  a  deci- 
sion J.  Bryan  Grimes,  Chairman  of  the  Commission,  had  died 
and  Thomas  M.  Pittman  had  been  chosen  as  his  successor.  The 
reorganized  Commission  acted  favorably  on  Connor's  re- 
quest for  a  fellow  in  North  Carolina  history  at  the  University 
and  appropriated  $500  annually  for  his  remuneration.  "The 
question  of  the  establishment  by  the  Commission  of  a  quar- 
terly magazine  was  then  discussed  at  some  length.  It  was  de- 
cided to  start  the  quarterly  as  soon  as  arrangements  could 
be  made  and  the  Chairman  and  Secretary  were  to  get  the 
matter  under  way,  and  given  power  to  complete  all  necessary 
details."  Robert  Burton  House  was  appointed  Archivist,  but 
was  also  directed  to  arrange  for  the  publication  of  the  pro- 
posed quarterly.16  He  was  formally  appointed  editor  after  he 
had  prepared  for  publication  two  numbers  of  The  North 
Carolina  Historical  Review.  The  report  of  the  Secretary  to 
the  meeting  in  which  House  was  appointed  editor  also  for- 
mally announced  the  launching  of  the  Review  and  stated 
that  "this  publication  is  gaining  steadily  but  slowly  in  paid 
circulation."  17  This  statement  was  purely  wishful  thinking: 
six  months  after  it  was  written  the  number  of  copies  of  each 
issue  to  be  published  was  fixed  at  1,50018  and  until  very 
recently  has  remained  substantially  at  the  same  figure. 

The  launching  of  the  Review  meant  a  new  departure  in 
policy  in  that  it  expanded  the  possibilities  for  the  utilization 
of  historical  materials  on  North  Carolina  from  the  staff  at 
Raleigh  and  a  few  interested  individuals  in  the  state  to  the 
hundreds  of  students  reached  through  the  membership  of 

w  Minutes  of  Commission,  November  20,  1922. 

18  Minutes  of  Commission,  April  17,  1923;  letter,  Chapel  Hill,  June  23, 
1954,  R.  B.  House  to  author. 

17  Minutes  of  Commission,  April  18,  1924.  See  also  Tenth  Biennial  Report 
of  the  North  Carolina  Historical  Commission    (Raleigh,   1925),   8. 

™  Minutes  of  Commission,  October  17,  1924. 


Thirty  Years  of  the  New  History  183 

the  Literary  and  Historical  Association  and  libraries  and 
universities  in  every  section  of  the  country.  Yet  in  spite  of 
the  lack  of  significant  income  from  subscriptions  the  new 
policy  was  instituted  with  only  minor  adjustments  in  the 
financial  phase  of  the  Commission's  program.  The  General 
Assembly  in  1921  and  1923  appropriated  $24,000  to  maintain 
the  Commission  for  each  fiscal  year,  July  1,  1921-June  30, 
1925.19  At  this  time  printing  of  historical  materials  was  done, 
along  with  that  of  other  state  departments,  "under  the  super- 
vision of  the  Commissioner  of  Labor  and  Printing  under  a 
continuing  appropriation  of  $5,000  for  each  biennial  period." 
Actually  the  break-down  of  the  Commission's  expenditure 
for  1923-1924  revealed  that  92.6  per  cent  of  the  total  ap- 
propriation went  to  "Personal  Services."  More  than  half  of 
this  latter  total  went  into  clerical  salaries,  while  the  first  ex- 
penditure clearly  attributable  to  the  Review  alone  was  the 
payment  of  $1,500,  January,  1924-June,  1925,  to  "special 
writers  for  the  Review."  Upon  the  death  of  Secretary  Hill  in 
the  summer  of  1924  and  the  naming  of  House  as  acting  sec- 
retary there  were  some  changes  in  both  executive  and  cleri- 
cal salaries  which  reduced  these  items  by  around  $1,500.20 

In  the  first  budget  made  under  the  provisions  of  the  Budget 
Act  of  1925  the  Commission  cut  the  figure  for  special  writers 
to  $500  per  annum  and  appointed  one  of  its  members  to  com- 
ply with  the  order  of  the  Budget  Commission  that  all  depart- 
ments of  the  state  government  include  their  printing  costs 
in  their  own  budgets.  The  funds  paid  to  writers  for  the  Re- 
view were  allocated  under  the  direction  of  the  Editorial 
Board  in  fees  ranging  from  $500  to  one  writer  downward  to 
no  compensation  for  contributors  to  the  sections  on  Histori- 
cal News  and  Historical  Notes.21  In  the  budget  request  for 
1924-1925  the  item  "professional  and  technical  salaries"  was 
increased  from  $235  to  $2,325,22  presumably  to  pay  fees  to  the 

19  Report  of  state  auditor  incorporated  into  Minutes  of  Commission,  June 
27,  1922;  Minutes  of  Commission,  April  17,  1923. 

20  Minutes  of  Executive  Committee,  North  Carolina  Historical  Commis- 
sion, August  1,  1924;  Minutes  of  Commission,  October  11,  1924. 

21  Minutes  of  Commission,  October  17,  1924;  letter,  Chapel  Hill,  June  23, 
1954,  R.  B.  House  to  author. 

^Minutes  of  Commission,  October  17,  1925. 


184  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

members  of  the  Editorial  Board.  The  falling  off  of  appropria- 
tions in  the  depression  years  brought  a  temporary  curtail- 
ment of  the  size  of  the  Review  and  the  cessation  of  payments 
to  contributors  and  members  of  the  Editorial  Board.23 

The  first  issue  of  the  Review,  January,  1924,  bears  clear 
evidence  that  it  was  rather  hastily  thrown  together  from  ma- 
terials on  hand;  it  was  a  departure  from  former  publications 
of  the  Commission  in  that  twenty-two  of  its  ninety-two  pages 
were  devoted  to  reports  of  the  doings  of  historians  in  the 
state,  book  reviews,  and  a  list  of  articles  on  North  Carolina 
recently  published  in  other  periodicals.  The  April  issue  of 
1924  contained  the  first  article  written  mainly  from  published 
original  sources.  It  was  a  factual  report  by  Alexander  B.  An- 
drews, of  Raleigh,  on  the  life  of  Richard  Dobbs  Spaight,  and 
was  primarily  a  collection  of  references  from  official  records  on 
Spaight's  activities  in  the  politics  of  the  Revolution  and  the 
early  federal  period.  By  the  end  of  the  first  year  the  content 
of  the  Review  was  set  in  the  familiar  pattern  of  today,  and 
only  minor  changes  in  form  have  since  occurred.  The  practice 
of  identifying  contributors  as  to  residence  and  occupation 
was  initiated  in  January,  1927. 

The  founding  of  the  Review  was  the  mature  fruit  of  North 
Carolina's  Golden  Age  of  history  writing.  The  nature  of 
its  growth  and  the  spirit  of  its  life  have  been  heavily  influ- 
enced by  the  movement  in  American  historiography  identi- 
fied with  the  decade  of  the  twenties  and  generally  known  as 
the  New  History.  Literally  reams  of  complicated  and  some- 
times controversial  interpretations  have  emerged  from  dis- 
cussions and  investigations  of  scholars  both  before  and  after 
the  publication  of  Harry  Elmer  Barnes,  The  New  History 
and  the  Social  Studies2*  in  1925.  In  spite  of  all  this,  we  can 

23  Related  to  the  author  by  David  Leroy  Corbitt,  who  became  assistant 
editor  in  1926.  A  comparison  of  budget  reports  for  the  decade  following 
June  30,  1924,  reveals  that  the  total  annual  expenditure  of  the  Commission 
increased  gradually  to  $30,584  in  the  fiscal  year  1930-1931.  It  declined  to 
$20,380  in  1931-1932.  For  the  clearest  comparison  see  The  Budget,  1933-1935 
(Raleigh,  1933),  275. 

24  Reviewed  by  Alex  M.  Arnett,  North  Carolina  Historical  Review,  II 
(October,  1925),  528-530.  See  also  W.  W.  Pierson,  Jr.,  "Scientific  and  In- 
terpretative History,"  North  Carolina  Historical  Review,  HI  (April,  1926), 
163-183,  for  a  specific  example  of  the  influence  of  Barnes  and  the  New 
History. 


Thirty  Years  of  the  New  History  185 

now  see  that  the  New  History  was  little  more  than  an  intensi- 
fied drive  for  general  acceptance  of  three  basic  criteria  for 
the  production  of  good  history  known  and  followed  by  the 
masters  of  the  craft  since  the  days  of  Herodotus.  In  short,  the 
New  History  demanded:  (1)  that  every  event  and  circum- 
stance affecting  an  appreciable  portion  of  a  people  be  con- 
sidered as  a  legitimate  subject  for  historical  study;  (2)  that 
historical  investigators  be  broadly  familiar  with  the  culture 
in  which  they  work  and  that  they  base  their  investigations 
on  contemporary  records;  (3)  that  interpretations  and  con- 
clusions follow  closely  the  facts  derived  from  reliable  sources 
rather  than  from  preconceived  notions  in  politics,  theology, 
and  social  theory.  The  New  History  has  itself  passed  into 
history,  but  these  criteria  remain  as  the  most  generally  ac- 
cepted standards  of  excellence  in  adjudging  historical  pro- 
ductions. 

Summary  Distribution  of  Contributions  by  Subject  Matter 

South  and   National  and 
Southeast    Miscellaneous  Totals 
48  9  191 

12  3  139 

32  18  212 

92  30  542 

The  range  of  subjects  treated  in  the  542  contributions25  to 
the  Review  is  sufficient  to  satisfy  the  most  rabid  advocate  of 
the  broad  view  of  history.  A  classification  on  the  basis  of  lo- 
cation reveals  420  contributions  dealing  with  persons  and 
events  in  North  Carolina,  92  with  the  South  or  some  one  of 
North  Carolina's  Southern  neighbors,  and  30  dealing  with 
matters  of  national  import  or  affairs  of  the  mind  and  spirit 
that  have  no  geographic  limits.  Most  of  the  studies  of  neigh- 
boring states  and  South  have  a  high  degree  of  utility  for  stu- 


North 

Years 

Carolina 

1924-1933 

134 

1934-1943 

124 

1944-1953 

162 

Totals 

420 

25  The  term  "contribution"  is  used  to  designate  a  separate  item  in  a 
single  issue.  It  includes  interpretative  articles,  factual  reports,  edited 
sources,  and  installments  of  studies  extended  into  more  than  one  issue.  The 
author  is  deeply  indebted  to  a  former  student,  Miss  Bettie  Jane  Dougherty, 
who  typed  on  542  separate  cards  the  bibliographical  and  biographical  in- 
formation here  summarized. 


186  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

dents  of  North  Carolina  history  in  that  they  fill  in  connecting 
links  for  developments  in  this  state,  such  as  the  detailed  ac- 
counts of  Indian  relations  in  South  Carolina,  Virginia,  and 
Georgia,  ante  bellum  railway  developments  in  Virginia,  and 
the  origin  of  the  grandfather  clause  in  reconstruction  politics 
in  Louisiana.  These  also  serve  a  distinct  interest  by  pointing 
up  and  emphasizing  areas  of  possible  exploitation  in  North 
Carolina.  In  the  postbellum  era,  for  example,  there  are  alto- 
gether 28  studies  on  the  South  and  states  of  the  Southeast, 
most  of  which  should  be  paralleled  by  studies  in  North 
Carolina. 

In  the  much  exploited  field  of  economic  and  social  history 
the  range  is  so  wide  that  one  actually  finds  it  easier  to  note 
the  omissions  than  to  generalize  on  the  subjects  treated. 
It  is  mildly  ironic  that  the  Tar  Heel  state  has  not  produced 
a  published  historical  study  of  the  turpentine  industry. 
Though  the  entire  vegetable  kingdom  has  not  been  covered, 
there  is  a  start  in  a  treatment  of  the  gourd  in  history.  Much 
less  attention  has  been  given  to  manufacturing  than  to  agri- 
culture and  commerce,  and  no  study  of  banking  has  yet  re- 
ceived the  approval  of  the  Editorial  Board. 

From  the  earliest  days  of  the  Review  there  has  been  a 
small  trickle  of  articles  dealing  with  the  published  works 
that  have  been  written  or  enjoyed  by  North  Carolinians.  Text- 
books, novels,  newspapers  and  periodicals,  histories,  and 
plays  have  attracted  the  attention  of  investigators  most  often, 
though  the  activities  in  North  Carolina  of  that  indefatigable 
literary  hack  and  book  pedlar,  Parson  Mason  Locke  Weems, 
was  the  theme  of  a  recent  offering.  Studies  in  this  category 
are  particularly  significant,  since  prior  to  the  days  of  O. 
Henry  and  Tom  Wolfe,  North  Carolina  had  not  produced 
a  single  literary  figure  of  sufficient  importance  to  be  includ- 
ed in  the  standard  surveys  and  textbooks  in  American  litera- 
ture. The  enthusiasm  and  thoroughness  of  these  articles 
also  add  the  substance  of  hope  to  the  faith  of  the  founders 
of  the  Literary  and  Historical  Association  that  literary  and 
historical  forces  could  be  joined  in  effective  and  fruitful 
union.  Reviews  of  current  publications  in  history  have  com- 
pared favorably  with  those  in  the  regional  and  national  pro- 


Thirty  Years  of  the  New  History  187 

fessional  journals;  while  the  annual  reports  on  publications 
concerned  with  North  Carolinians  have  been  a  joy  to  libra- 
rians and  a  solace  to  that  large  company  of  readers  whose 
personal  budget  places  book  buying  in  the  realm  of  wishful 
thinking. 

Every  issue  of  the  Review  through  1953  contained  at 
least  one  contribution  in  the  field  of  edited  source  materials. 
Most  of  these  represent  no  new  materials  or  revolutionary 
viewpoints  in  history,  but  are  excellent  vehicles  for  the  stimu- 
lation of  interest  in  the  basic  stuff  of  history  in  presenting 
human  documents  in  simple  and  straightforward  fashion.  No 
particular  policy  of  including  or  excluding  materials  by  the 
Department  of  Archives  and  History  seems  to  have  been  fol- 
lowed, though  there  are  cases  of  important  documents  in 
North  Carolina  history  being  made  available  to  students 
within  the  state  through  publication  in  the  Review.  No 
doubt  some  aspirants  for  advanced  degrees  have  spent 
money  and  time  going  to  Washington  and  to  libraries  in  New 
York,  Massachusetts,  and  Pennsylvania  to  gain  access  to 
materials  they  could  have  found  in  more  convenient  form 
in  the  files  of  the  Review  in  their  hometown  libraries. 

Distribution  of  Contributors  by  Residence 


North 

Other 

Washington  & 

Years 

Carolina 

States 

British  Isles 

Totals 

1924-1933 

35 

44 

0 

79 

1934-1943 

39 

44 

10 

93 

1944-1953 

74 

50 

9 

133 

Totals 

148 

138 

19 

305 

Contributors  have  been  almost  equally  divided  between 
dwellers  in  the  state  and  those  whose  home  addresses  are 
scattered  from  California  to  the  British  Isles.  It  is  noticeable 
that  the  number  of  new  contributors  from  states  other  than 
North  Carolina  has  remained  fairly  constant  throughout  the 
three  decades.  The  increase  in  contributors  from  outside  the 
state  in  the  two  decades  since  1933  is  almost  entirely  account- 
ted  for  in  duplications,  twelve  new  contributors  from  Wash- 
ington, four  from  England,  and  one  from  Wales.  The  full 
flower  of  the  joint  movements  of  the  New  History  and  the 


188  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

new  education  is  seen  in  the  fact  that  contributors  in  North 
Carolina,  1944-1953,  were  exactly  equal  to  the  corresponding 
total  for  the  preceding  two  decades.  The  total  of  names 
appearing  one  or  more  times  for  each  of  the  three  decades 
covered  is  305,  but  the  substraction  of  duplications  reduces 
to  around  275  the  number  of  people  who  made  one  or  more 
contributions.  Truly  the  days  of  giants  in  the  land  have  been 
succeeded  by  an  age  in  which  a  multitude  of  mere  men  in- 
habit the  earth. 

The  manner  of  these  men— and  women— is  as  different  from 
that  of  the  giants  of  the  Old  School  as  educational  practices 
of  the  twentieth  century  are  at  variance  with  those  of  the 
nineteenth  century.  The  emphasis  in  our  colleges  on  general 
and  somewhat  elementary  training  in  reading  and  writing 
plus  concentration  in  vocational  subject  matter  has  produced 
a  generation  of  specialists  in  this  and  other  fields  of  scholar- 
ship. The  products  of  our  assembly  line  procedure  are  of  such 
uniform  character  that  luck  in  locating  materials,  persistence 
in  sticking  to  the  last,  physical  endurance,  and  financial  back- 
ing have  become  the  most  common  determinants  in  the  vol- 
ume of  production  by  individual  scholars.  In  all  of  these  the 
balance  is  heavily  weighted  in  favor  of  residents  within  the 
state. 

With  so  many  scholars  crowding  into  a  relatively  restricted 
area  it  had  to  happen  that  somebody  would  get  into  some- 
body else's  hair.  Just  how  many  and  whose  offering  failed  to 
make  the  grade  and  why  they  failed  are  delicate  subjects 
that  had  best  be  left  to  the  discretion  of  the  Editorial  Board. 
It  may  be  safely  pointed  out,  however,  that  sources  were 
covered  in  sufficient  detail  and  handled  with  enough  skill 
that  no  rival  scholar  has  challenged  in  the  pages  of  the  Re- 
view  an  interpretative  article  in  its  major  conclusions.  Three 
articles  have  been  subjects  of  subsequent  letters  to  the  Editor; 
two  of  these  pointed  out  probable  errors  in  the  use  of  simi- 
lar names  for  different  individuals,  and  the  third  raised  a 
question  concerning  the  validity  of  an  inference  from  a  quo- 
tation. One  of  the  Englishmen  wrote  a  short  article  taking 
another  to  task  for  an  error  of  two  years  in  timing  the  removal 
of  Joseph  Gales  from  Newark  to  Sheffield. 


Thirty  Years  of  the  New  History  189 

A  sampling  of  vocations  followed  by  contributors  indi- 
cates that  at  least  three-fourths  are  teachers  in  colleges  and 
universities.  The  second  largest  vocational  group  is  made 
up  of  professional  researchers,  archivists,  archeologists,  and 
the  like,  to  whom  history  is  considerably  more  than  an 
avocation.  A  few  newspaper  and  periodical  editors  add 
color  to  the  prevailing  academic  style  of  writing;  while  small 
groups  of  secondary  school  teachers,  lawyers,  soldiers,  minis- 
ters, state  employees,  and  housewives  keep  alive  the  illusion 
that  history  is  not  yet  monopolized  by  the  historians. 

As  the  upbringing  of  the  Review  in  the  strict  admonition 
of  the  New  History  is  reflected  in  the  range  of  subject-matter 
and  the  characteristics  of  its  contributors,  so  is  its  ancestry 
in  the  Old  School  revealed  in  the  interpretations  it  presents. 
Not  much  more  than  a  dozen  contributions  violate  the  three- 
period  chronology  by  inclusion  of  the  years  1783  and  1865. 
The  greatest  volume  of  contributions  and  the  fewest  devia- 
tions from  standard  interpretations  are  to  be  found  in  the  186 
studies  of  the  federal  period.  Detailed  studies  of  the  social 
life  and  economic  status  of  slaves  and  free  Negroes  merely 
substantiate  inferences  formerly  made  by  intuition  and  slight 
sampling  of  sources.  Pictures  of  life  in  the  towns  and  health 
resorts  reveal  the  white-collar  class  in  its  cultural  and  leisure 
activities  and  supplement  the  older  record  of  absorption  in 
politics  and  farming.  Even  the  valuable  contributions  dealing 
with  publications  repeat  again  the  familiar  refrain  that  suc- 
cess in  politics,  farming,  and  the  law  was  the  open  sesame 
in  ante  bellum  North  Carolina  to  economic  affluence  and 
social  prestige.  Excellent  treatments  of  gold  mining,  iron 
refining,  and  tobacco  manufacturing  present  these  activities 
as  adjuncts  to  the  agricultural  system.  The  score  for  origin- 
ality of  interpretation  is  a  little  better  for  the  period  of  the 
Civil  War  where  the  regulation  of  manufacturing,  the  growth 
of  defeatism,  the  problem  of  refugees,  and  the  uses  of  slave 
labor  are  treated  as  significant  phases  of  the  sectional  test  of 
strength  in  North  Carolina. 

The  98  contributions  to  the  colonial  and  Revolutionary  era 
constitute  a  mine  of  sound  findings  worthy  of  being  refined 
and  incorporated  into  the  general  narrative  of  North  Caro- 


190  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

lina  history.  More  than  a  dozen  analyses  of  political  develop- 
ments describe  the  evolution  of  law  enforcement  and  repre- 
sentation, the  transition  from  the  proprietary  system  to  the 
royal  government,  and  the  emergence  of  a  political  self-con- 
sciousness in  the  active  leaders  at  county  and  provincial  level. 
Careful  study  of  these,  most  of  which  come  in  the  first  half 
of  the  life  of  the  Review,  would  do  much  to  remove  the 
erroneous  idea  in  the  minds  of  many  students  that  the 
American  Revolution  really  began  with  the  first  permanent 
settlement  in  the  Albemarle.  Other  studies  round  out  the  pic- 
ture of  colonial  life  in  agriculture,  modes  of  travel,  com- 
merce, and  the  beginnings  of  religious  denominations;  while 
one  series  by  a  contributor26  who  unfortunately  has  "gone 
west,"  presents  a  cameo  of  the  colonial  era  in  the  settlement, 
economic  life,  and  political  development  of  Granville  County. 
Careful  evaluations  of  the  lives  of  important  leaders  in  the 
Revolution  and  the  formation  of  the  Confederation  add  to 
the  understanding  of  personalities  in  the  history  of  this  dy- 
namic period.  The  richest  set  of  edited  sources  is  the  series 
of  eighteenth  century  tracts  collected  by  William  K.  Boyd 
and  later  republished  in  book  form. 

Under  the  most  liberal  application  of  the  three-fold  test 
of  excellence  laid  down  by  the  New  History  only  58  of  the 
136  contributions  in  the  postbellum  era  can  be  accounted  as 
having  added  anything  more  than  contemporary  atmosphere 
to  North  Carolina  history.  Slightly  more  than  half  of  these 
deal  mainly  with  the  period  up  to  1900,  and  together  make 
a  fresh,  though  hardly  original  approach  to  North  Carolina 
history.  In  contrast  to  the  Old  School,  the  four  contributions 
on  Reconstruction  do  not  attack  the  Fourteenth  Amend- 
ment; rather  they  accept  it  by  inference  as  a  consequence 
of  the  Civil  War  and  work  out  political  developments  in  the 
light  of  that  revolutionary  change  in  federal  relations  and 
the  obligations  of  the  state  to  its  citizens.  William  W.  Holden 
is  objectively  presented  as  the  center  of  the  pardon  machine 
and  later  as  the  not  so  innocent  pawn  in  a  political  attack 
and  counter-attack  that  led  to  his  impeachment.  Something 

26  Nannie  Mae  Tilley,  chairman,  history  department,  East  Texas  State 
Teachers  College,  Commerce,  Texas. 


Thirty  Years  of  the  New  History  191 

of  the  Republican  effort  to  play  the  role  of  the  party  of  the 
common  man  is  reflected  in  treatments  of  radical  disfran- 
chisement and  debtor  relief.  Several  excellent  studies  por- 
traying the  growth  of  railways  and  manufacturing  during 
the  1880's  as  contrasted  to  the  plight  of  farmers  and  factory 
wage  earners  make  more  understandable  the  efforts  of  church 
people  and  liberals  to  get  child  labor  laws  passed  and  the 
phenomenal  growth  of  the  Farmers'  Alliance.  The  rising  in- 
terest in  education  is  clearly  set  forth  in  studies  dealing  with 
the  efforts  of  religious  denominations  and  the  running  fight 
in  the  General  Assembly  and  the  state  courts  for  an  adequate 
public  school  system. 

The  dependence  of  the  Review  on  the  writers  of  the 
Old  School  for  interpretative  leads  is  suggested  again  by  the 
complete  absence  of  clear  interpretations  in  the  25  or  30 
studies  dealing  primarily  with  the  twentieth  century.  Eight 
historians  deal  effectively  with  North  Carolina  phases  of  na- 
tional politics,  the  organization  and  activities  of  their  fellow 
workers,  and  the  enlightened  leadership  of  liberal  Southerners 
originating  in  North  Carolina;  about  an  equal  number  of 
state  employees  sketch  legislative  and  administrative  de- 
velopments in  various  phases  of  the  rapidly  expanding  state 
services.  The  human  bases  of  the  social  order  are  examined 
in  treatments  of  the  Farmers'  Union,  the  organization  of  the 
war  effort  in  1917-1918,  and  the  labor  movement;  and  evalu- 
ations of  general  literary  and  intellectual  development  pres- 
ent pictures  of  the  various  authors'  specialties.  But  the  unify- 
ing element  of  over-all  historical  characterization  is  absent 
and  cannot  be  supplied  by  any  reasonable  inference. 

Speculation  on  the  observable  complexities  of  the  social 
order  in  twentieth  century  North  Carolina  and  our  failure 
to  interpret  the  nature  of  that  society  could  lead  to  extreme 
pessimism.  It  is  possible  that  we  are  bewildered  by  the  over- 
whelming multiplicity  of  our  historical  resources  and  are 
stumbling  like  the  proverbial  blind  dog  in  a  meat  house. 
On  the  other  hand,  a  more  optimistic  view  is  that  our  grop- 
ings  need  not  be  in  vain  if  by  them  we  are  able  to  arrive 
at  a  basic  understanding  of  the  forces  that  are  shaping  our 


192  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

civilization.  North  Carolina  historians,  at  least,  have  not  yet 
taken  the  easy  way  out  by  accepting  the  twentieth  century 
at  its  own  Gargantuan  evaluation,  though  recently  advised 
so  to  do  by  one  of  eminent  reputation  in  the  profession.27  That 
mechanization  in  industry,  corporate  structure  in  business, 
and  authoritarianism  in  national  and  international  affairs  have 
together  created  a  new  world  in  the  past  seventy  years  is 
obvious  to  anyone  with  the  most  elementary  training  in  his- 
torical observation.  But  history  is  not  the  bondservant  of  big 
business  in  the  twentieth  century  any  more  than  it  was  the 
handmaiden  of  the  church  in  the  early  Middle  Ages  or  the 
amanuensis  of  the  schoolmen  in  the  late  Middle  Ages.  Per- 
haps it  is  but  another  expression  of  an  individual's  inherent 
conservatism  on  this  matter  to  assert  the  conviction  that  our 
preceptors  of  the  first  quarter  of  the  century  were  correct: 
in  a  democratic  society  there  is  no  excuse  for  history  except 
to  interpret  and  explain  the  successive  failures  and  successes 
of  people  as  they  strive  together  under  responsible  leadership 
to  establish  and  maintain  worthwhile  institutions.  The  plain, 
unvarnished  truth  is  that  we  need  desperately  a  host  of  sound 
monographic  studies  on  the  twentieth  century. 

It  is  increasingly  evident  that  we  of  the  New  History  do 
not  have  that  intuitive  grasp  of  historical  realities  that  was 
the  greatest  asset  of  the  Old  School.  They  opened  up  the 
colonial  period  as  a  preliminary  to  the  Revolution  and  Inde- 
pendence; we  have  added  valuable  studies  that  place  the 
era  on  a  firm  base  of  understanding  in  its  world  setting.  They 
charted  a  broad  course  through  the  maze  of  conflicting  evi- 
dence in  the  federal  period;  we  have  cleared  out  many  re- 
vealing by-paths  along  the  way.  In  their  disjointed  studies  of 
the  postbellum  era  they  contributed  a  vigorous  moral  convic- 
tion28 in  matters  of  political  and  social  justice  as  a  base  line 

27  Allan  Nevins,  "New  Lamps  for  Old  in  History,"  North  Carolina  His- 
torical Review,  XXXI   (April,  1954),  140-251. 

28  Recent  reactions  of  members  of  the  Old  School  on  this  point  are  in- 
teresting. In  1948  Connor  asserted  privately  that  historians  should  wait 
until  the  immediate  survivors  of  public  figures  had  died  before  revealing 
the  full  story  of  those  figures.  Dr.  Hamilton  in  a  series  of  articles  in  The 
News  and  Observer  (see  especially  the  issue  of  Sunday,  June  21,  1953) 
implies  strongly  that  "a  number  of  unsuspected  Democrats,"  not  including 
Zebulon  B.  Vance,  were  involved  financially  in  the  Littlefied-Swepson  frauds, 
1869-1874. 


Thirty  Years  of  the  New  History  193 

for  a  survey  of  the  field;  we  have  made  only  a  few  fragment- 
ary investigations,  too  scanty  for  a  complete  picture  and  too 
scattered  to  form  any  pattern  of  interpretation.  Of  course, 
no  one  is  naive  enough  to  believe  that  an  accumulation  of 
research  monographs  would  suffice  as  an  atonement  for  this 
signal  failure.  Rather  the  hope  of  the  New  History  is  that 
honest  research  will  lead  to  factual  knowlege  and  that  sober 
reflection  will  add  to  our  knowledge  the  understanding  on 
which  to  base  an  explanation  of  our  own  times. 


THE  JEWISH  PEOPLE  OF  NORTH  CAROLINA 

By  Harry  L.  Golden 

The  American  Jewish  community  is  celebrating  the  300th 
anniversary  of  first  Jewish  settlement  in  what  is  now  the 
United  States.  In  September,  1654,  twenty-three  Jews  landed 
on  Manhattan  Island.  They  were  travelers  in  search  of  free- 
dom who  won  for  themselves  and  for  their  descendants  the 
right  to  citizenship,  the  right  to  worship  as  Jews,  and  the  right 
to  enjoy  the  opportunities  of  freedom  in  America. 

It  is  entirely  natural  that  the  Jewish  people  should  cele- 
brate this  sixth  Jubilee  year  of  freedom  in  America.  A  people 
persecuted  in  all  the  millenniums  of  its  history,  we  could 
never  have  survived  without  the  sustaining  hope  of  a  better 
world  ahead. 

And  thus,  as  we  look  backward  and  then  forward,  two 
propositions  should  be  foremost  in  our  minds.  First,  it  is  only 
in  those  lands  where  freedom  has  endured,  and  especially  in 
the  United  States,  that  the  Jew's  contribution  to  civilization 
has  been  equalled  or  exceeded  by  the  benefits  he  has  enjoyed. 
This  is  because  the  splendid  product,  democracy,  made  avail- 
able to  all,  exceeds  the  sum  of  the  contributions  of  each. 
While  we  shall  continue  to  add  to  the  strength  of  this  country 
both  as  Americans  and  as  transmitters  of  the  Jewish  tradi- 
tion and  vitality,  we  expect  nothing  in  return  except  that  as 
Americans,  sharing  in  the  common  heritage,  participating  in 
the  common  endeavor,  we  may  continue  to  build  our  com- 
mon future. 

When  we  think  in  terms  of  a  Jewish  300th  anniversary 
celebration,  or  more  specifically  in  terms  of  the  Jewish  ex- 
perience in  one  of  our  sovereign  states— North  Carolina— the 
historian  has  one  great  advantage.  He  may  approach  the 
record  of  the  entire  history  of  human  progression  with  rich 
rewards  in  source  material.  The  Jew  is  the  one  fixture  in  the 
index  of  recorded  human  experience.  Thus  when  we  discuss 
a  fragment  of  this  experience  in  North  Carolina,  for  instance, 
we  may  begin,  if  we  wish,  with  the  Roman  historian,  Tacitus 
who  in  his  account  of  the  funeral  of  Julius  Caesar,  who  wrote 
that  "The  Jews  remained  for  three  days  to  intone  their  ancient 

[194] 


The  Jewish  People  of  North  Carolina  195 

funeral  chants."1  It  is  therefore  the  Roman  historian  who 
gives  us  the  clue  to  the  "Jewish  contribution"  to  our  society. 
The  Jew  was  considered  "ancient"  some  nineteen  centuries 
ago,  yet  he  appears  on  the  daily  scene  in  each  of  the  eras  of 
history  with  the  enthusiasm  of  a  newly-arrived  immigrant. 
Contemporaneous  with  all  of  recorded  history,  he  refuses  to 
take  the  "glorious"  past  seriously.  Neither  has  he  brooded  too 
long  over  the  horrors  of  an  Inquisitor  Torquemada,  a  Cos- 
sack Chmielnitski,  or  the  Teutonic  furioso,  Hitler.  In  essence 
the  Jew  is  now  what  he  always  was,  an  eternal  optimist  with 
a  sense  of  daily  life-affirmation  of  undiminished  vitality  be- 
traying no  slackening  of  his  energies  during  all  the  thirty 
centuries  of  his  history.  His  record  of  human  experience  may 
also  be  called  "glamorous,"  since  he  looks  into  our  modern 
world  with  the  eyes  of  former  ages  and  with  the  knowledge 
that  is  Jewish  by  race.  But  most  of  this  he  leaves  to  Cecil  B. 
De  Mille.  His  basic  "contribution"  to  America  is  that  after 
having  lived  with,  and  survived,  the  Egyptians,  Babylonians, 
Assyrians,  Hittites,  Phillistines,  Persians,  Greeks,  and  Romans, 
the  Jew  at  this  very  moment  in  his  history  considers  it  of  prime 
importance  to  become  a  member  of  the  Board  of  Directors 
of  the  Community  Chest  of  "Monroe,  N.  C,"  and  thousands 
of  "Monroes"  in  every  nook  and  corner  of  our  land  and  in- 
deed of  the  entire  Western  World.  This  zest  for  life  is  the 
true  Jewish  "contribution"  to  North  Carolina;  to  America; 
and  to  civilization  itself. 

In  approaching  his  subject,  the  Jewish  historian  must  be 
wary  of  a  pitfall— the  danger  that  racial  pride  may  cause 
him  to  blow  up  a  few  names  out  of  all  proportion  to  their 
proper  place  in  the  building  of  a  great  society.  This  would 
not  only  be  presumptuous  but  it  would  betray  a  sense  of  inse- 
curity, which  is  unwarranted  in  the  light  of  300  years  of  un- 
interrupted freedom.  North  Carolina,  of  course,  is  now,  and 
has  been  in  the  past,  a  predominantly  Gentile  society,  and 
we  must  be  careful  to  take  no  liberties  with  that  basic  fact. 

Yet  the  fact  itself  ( of  the  preponderant  Gentile  section  of 
America),  offers  the  Jewish  historian  an  unusual  opportunity 
to  study  the  "ingredients"  which  have  coalesced  into  the  com- 

1Will  Durant,  Caesar  and  Christ  (New  York:  Simon  and  Schuster,  The 
Story  of  Civilization),  III,  199. 


196  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

pletely  free  society,  and  which  in  specific  terms  of  the  Caro- 
linas may  be  called  correctly  a  300-year-old  "laboratory  of 
philo-semitism." 

What  then  are  these  "ingredients"?  One  point  in  particular 
impresses  itself  immediately.  The  new  eighteenth  century  at- 
titude toward  the  Jews  was  not  an  American  innovation,  but 
a  common  development  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  world.2  It  was 
not  geography  that  ameliorated  the  savage  prejudices  of  the 
Old  World,  but  an  idea— a  Humanism  which  had  its  roots  in 
the  Anglo-Calvinist  tradition  of  the  British  Isles  and  Holland. 
When  the  Dutch  lost  Brazil  to  Portugal  the  Jews  again  had 
to  seek  out  Dutch  or  Anglo-Saxons,  and  that  is  how  they 
came  to  establish  their  first  settlement  on  this  continent  in 
the  year  1654.  It  was  specifically  this  Atlantic-Puritan  nexus 
which  produced  a  Roger  Williams  in  New  England  and  a 
John  Locke  for  the  Carolinas,  who  gave  expression  to  this 
new  Idea,  of  which  the  philosopher,  Rabbi  Leo  Baeck,  has 
said:  ".  .  .  it  broke  all  ties  with  antiquity  ...  it  no  longer 
carried  the  Middle  Ages  on  its  back."  3 

Immediately  in  the  wake  of  the  Quakers,  French  Huguen- 
ots, Moravians,  and  Jews,  this  Anglo-Saxon  society  in  the 
Carolinas  invited  the  philosopher  John  Locke  to  establish 
its  own  tradition  in  terms  of  the  new  land.  In  the  same  year 
(1668)  that  the  Ukrainian  Bogdan  Chmielnitski  was  mas- 
sacring more  than  a  half-million  Jews  in  Eastern  Europe, 
Locke  wrote  the  Fundamental  Constitutions*  for  the  Caro- 
linas ".  .  .  in  as  ample  manner  as  they  (the  people)  might 
desire,  freedom  and  liberty  of  conscience  in  all  religious  or 
spiritual  things."  The  Constitutions  expressly  stated  that  as 
"Jews,  heathens,  and  other  dissenters"  might  be  induced  to 
settle  in  the  Colony,  "any  seven  or  more  persons  agreeing 
in  any  religion  shall  constitute  a  church  or  profession." 

These  Anglo-Saxons  who  left  their  country  and  faced  the 
dangers  of  the  ocean  to  seek  in  the  wilderness  of  North  Ameri- 

2  Cecil  Roth,  Two  Cradles  of  Jewish  Liberty,  (London:  Anglo-Jewish 
Association,  1955),  18. 

'Address  before  the  Union  of  American  Hebrew  Congregation,  quoted 
in  Time  magazine,  Aug.  18,  1952. 

*  George  Bancroft,  History  of  the  United  States  (New  York,  1886),  III, 
314. 


The  Jewish  People  of  North  Carolina  197 

ca  the  right  to  worship  God  according  to  the  dictates  of  their 
own  conscience  had  created  a  new  idea  in  human  relations. 
And  for  the  first  time  in  the  entire  history  of  the  Diaspora  the 
Jews  did  not  enter  upon  a  new  land  under  sufferance,  nor 
even  by  "negotiation."  The  Anglo-Saxons  had  eliminated  the 
"host"  and  "guest"  relationship.  Indeed,  the  immigrant  of  to- 
day was  by  right  the  "host"  of  tomorrow.  But  so  far-reaching 
an  advance  in  intellectual  Humanism  required  its  own  per- 
iod of  gestation.  The  precursors  of  this  Americanism  did  not 
quite  know  from  the  beginning  how  to  solve  the  problem  of 
the  relation  of  their  faiths  to  this  New  Freedom.  The  Ang- 
lican Church  attempted  to  establish  the  pattern  by  weight  of 
numbers.  In  North  Carolina  this  tradition  persisted,  at  least 
on  paper,  for  nearly  a  century  after  the  establishment  of  the 
Bill  of  Rights.  A  constitutional  provision  forbade  public  office 
to  anyone  who  denied  the  "being  of  God  or  the  truth  of  the 
Protestant  religion,  or  the  divine  authority  of  either  the  Old 
or  New  Testament  or  who  shall  hold  Religious  principles 
incompatible  with  the  freedom  and  safety  of  the  State."  It  is 
pertinent  to  our  study  to  note  carefully  that  during  this  en- 
tire ninety-year  debate  for  the  repeal  of  this  provision,  we 
have  been  unable  to  uncover  a  single  derogatory  reference  to 
the  Jews,  as  a  people.  The  provision,  which  involved  Catho- 
lics, Jews,  Quakers,  and  Deists,  was  clearly  in  conflict  with 
Article  19  of  the  Bill  of  Rights.  There  was  no  pride  in  this 
constitutional  provision,  and  as  a  matter  of  fact,  Catholics, 
Jews,  Quakers,  and  Deists  had  held  public  office.  An  effort  to 
expel  Jacob  Henry,  a  Jew,  had  failed  in  1809.5  The  Catholics 


5  Jacob  Henry  was  elected  to  the  state  legislature  in  1808.  A  year  later, 
upon  reflection,  an  opponent  tried  to  unseat  him  and  based  his  action 
upon  the  provision  in  the  state  constitution  which  required  "belief  in  the 
divine  authority  of  the  New  Testament."  Henry  addressed  the  legislature: 
It  is  difficult  to  conceive  how  such  a  provision  crept  into  the  Constitu- 
tion, unless  it  is  from  the  difficulty  the  human  mind  feels  in  suddenly 
emancipating  itself  from  fetters  by  which  it  has  long  been  enchained :  . . . 
If  a  man  should  hold  religious  principles  incompatible  with  the  free- 
dom and  safety  of  the  State,  I  do  not  hesitate  to  pronounce  that  he 
should  be  excluded  from  the  public  councils  of  the  same;  and  I  trust, 
if  I  know  myself,  no  one  would  be  more  ready  to  aid  and  assist  than 
myself.  But  I  should  really  be  at  a  loss  to  specify  any  known  religious 
principles  which  are  thus  dangerous.  It  is  surely  a  question  between 
a  man  and  his  maker,  and  requires  more  than  human  attributes  to 
pronounce  which  of  the  numerous  sects  prevailing  in  the  world  is 
most  acceptable  to  the  Deity.  If  a  man  fulfills  the  duties  of  that  re- 


198  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

were  admitted  to  the  British  House  of  Commons  in  1828;  the 
Jews  in  1858;  and  the  rationalists  who  refused  to  take  an 
oath  in  the  name  of  any  God,  in  1884.  It  was  no  coincidence 
that  North  Carolina  followed  the  Mother  Country  in  almost 
perfect  chronological  order. 

In  the  constitutional  process  of  the  free  society,  religious 
freedom  is  the  last  to  be  developed  and  to  become  perfect, 
as  demonstrated  by  the  example  of  England  and  America,  as 
well  as  after  the  French  Revolution.  The  memories  of  com- 
mon persecutions,  however,  were  finally  the  cause,  through 
necessary  evolution,  of  the  glorious  and  full  emancipation  of 
religion  taught  to  the  world  by  the  English-speaking  civili- 
zation. 

Thus,  when  we  discuss  the  Jewish  people  of  North  Caro- 
lina, we  are  on  solid  ground  when  we  look  at  them  as  a  con- 
tinuing culture  and  tradition.  This  is  true  not  only  of  the  Jew, 
but  of  all  our  peoples.  Certainly  the  mind  and  the  heart  of 
one  section  of  our  state  reflects  much  more  than  the  physi- 
cal presence  of  the  Moravians,  but  goes  back  to  its  roots  in  the 

ligion,  which  his  education  or  his  conscience  has  pointed  to  him  as 
the  true  one,  no  person,  I  hold,  in  this,  our  land  of  liberty,  has  a  right 
to  arraign  him  at  the  bar  of  any  inquisition;  and  the  day,  I  trust,  has 
long  passed,  when  principles  merely  speculative  were  propagated  by 
force;  when  the  sincere  and  pious  were  made  victims,  and  the  light- 
minded  bribed  into  hypocrites.  Governments  only  concern  the  actions 
and  conduct  of  man,  and  not  his  speculative  notions.  .  .  .  Shall  this 
free  country  set  an  example  of  persecution,  which  even  the  returning 
reason  of  enslaved  Europe  would  not  submit  to?  Will  you  bind  the 
conscience  in  chains?  Will  you  drive  from  your  shores  and  from  the 
shelter  of  your  Constitution  all  who  do  not  lay  their  oblations  on  the 
same  altar,  observe  the  same  ritual,  and  subscribe  to  the  same  dogmas? 
If  so,  which  among  the  various  sects  into  which  we  are  divided,  shall 
be  the  favored  one?.  .  . 
The  legislature   allowed   Henry  to   keep   his   seat   on   a   technicality.    The 
fight  went  on.  John  Branch,  James  Iredell,  W.  N.  Edwards,  William  Gaston, 
Zebulon  B.  Vance,  but  above  all,   Nathaniel   Macon,  were  the   Tar   Heel 
statesmen  who  kept  the  struggle  alive  for  the  sixty  years  it  took  for  the 
final  elimination  of  the  disability  clause.  Henry's  speech  was  reprinted  in 
a  book  called  the  American  Orator,  and  made  a  profound  impression  even 
outside  of  North  Carolina.  In  speaking  on  the  Maryland  Jew  Bill,  in  1818, 
the  Hon.  H.  M.  Brackenridge  said:  "In  the  State  of  North  Carolina  there 
is  a  memorable  instance  on  record  of  an  attempt  to  expel  Mr.  Henry,  a 
Jew,  from  the  legislative  body  of  which  he  had  been  elected  a  member. 
The  speech  he  delivered  on  that  occasion  I  hold  in  my  hand.  It  is  pub- 
lished in  a  collection  called  the  American  Orator,  a  book  given  to  your 
children  at  school  and  containing  those  republican  truths  you  wish  to  see 
earliest  implanted  in  their  minds.  Mr.  Henry  prevailed,  and  it  is  part  of 
our  education  as  Americans  to  love   and   cherish  the  sentiments   uttered 
by  him  on  that  occasion."  Leon  Huhner,  "Religious  Liberty  in  North  Car- 
olina With  Special  Reference  to  the  Jews,"  Publications  of  the  American 
Jewish  Historical  Society  (New  York,  1907)   No.  16,  37-71. 


The  Jewish  People  of  North  Carolina  199 

forests  of  Bohemia.  By  the  same  token  the  attitudes,  and 
what  we  call  the  "American  way  of  life"  within  our  North 
Carolina  society,  are  anchored  deeply  in  the  Anglo-Calvinist 
traditions  and  cultures  of  the  British  Isles;  and  so  it  is  proper 
that  we  approach  the  history  of  the  Jewish  people,  as  a  people 
—as  a  continuing  cultural  and  religious  group;  and  on  that 
basis  our  findings  dwarf  the  combined  influence  of  all  the 
individuals  within  that  group  over  these  entire  300  years. 
This  influence  is  clearly  stamped  upon  the  consciousness  of 
North  Carolina,  and  on  the  day-to-day  living  of  its  people, 
as  it  is  stamped  upon  the  whole  of  western  civilization.  You 
have  but  to  travel  a  few  miles  in  any  direction  to  come  under 
its  influence— Pisgah,  Cedars  of  Lebanon,  Mount  Olive, 
Mount  Gilead,  Mt.  Hebron,  Nebo,  Ararat,  Winston-Salem— 
and  at  every  crossroads  in  the  length  and  breadth  of  our  state 
the  inscription:  "This  way  to  Beth  El  Chapel."  And  Abraham 
called  the  place  Beth  El,  House  of  God.  And  from  the  pulpit 
of  every  church  of  every  denomination  every  Sunday,  the 
Hebraic  ideal: 

It  hath  been  told  thee,  0  Man,  what  is  good, 
And  what  the  Lord  doth  require  of  thee ; 
Only  to  do  justice,  and  to  love  mercy,  and  to  walk 
humbly  with  thy  God. 

In  this  interpretation  of  our  history  the  life  of  the  Jewish 
people  within  this  society  takes  on  its  proper  perspective 
the  substance  which  it  has  in  truth  transferred  to  the  ebb  and 
flow  of  the  daily  life  of  the  Gentile  community  in  which  it 
has  lived  in  peace  and  in  prosperity. 

It  has  a  further  historical  significance.  In  fact  it  assumes 
great  proportions  in  keeping  with  the  history  of  America  as 
a  nation;  the  story  of  the  transplanting  of  the  Nordic  and 
Mediterranean  cultures  which  compose  the  fabric  of  this 
country.  Look  at  it  once,  a  few  scattered  settlements  along 
the  Atlantic  seaboard.  Look  at  it  again,  a  mighty  nation— the 
mightiest  nation  the  world  has  ever  seen.  Where  did  they 
come  from?  Clerks  and  soldiers  from  England,  seamen  from 
Scotland,  laborers  from  Ireland,  miners  from  Wales,  peasants 
from  Italy,  woodcutters  from  Sweden,  farmers  from  Ger- 


200  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

many,  tailors  from  Russia,  Negroes  from  Africa;  Christian 
and  Jew,  the  pious  and  the  unchurched;  the  disinherited 
and  the  adventurers,  the  persecuted,  the  tired  and  the  home- 
less—and they  became  Americans— Americans  all.  Woodrow 
Wilson  was  right— America  is  nothing  except  in  terms  of  every 
one  of  them. 

North  Carolina's  participation  in  the  American  Jewish 
Tercentenary  parallels  the  300  years  of  recorded  history. 
The  earliest  Jews  undoubtedly  came  from  the  Barbadoes,  of 
Spanish-Portugese  origin.  Since  early  Jewish  settlers  estab- 
lished the  indigo  trade  in  America,  we  may  assume  that  many 
of  these  traders  and  exporters  were  established  along  the 
North  Carolina  seacoast.  But  the  earliest  name  of  record  ap- 
pears to  be  that  of  Aaron  Moses,6  who  appears  as  a  witness 
to  a  will  in  1740.  In  1750  we  run  across  a  petition  to  a  coun- 
cil by  David  David  for  a  grant  of  180  acres  of  land  at  New 
Hanover.  His  petition  was  granted,  and  in  1752  David  appears 
on  the  muster  roll  of  the  New  Hanover  County  militia  in 
Captain  Merrick's  company. 

Jewish  participation  in  the  Revolutionary  War  was  part 
of  the  natural  process  of  advancing  equality.  Most  of  the 
2,000  Jews  in  the  colonies  backed  the  independence  move- 
ment, and  names  of  Jewish  merchants  appear  on  the  Non- 
Importation  resolutions.  The  volunteers  for  Washington's 
army  from  North  Carolina  include  the  names  of  Aaron  Cohen 
of  Albemarle,  J.  Nathan  of  Charlotte,  and  Sigmund  Freuden- 
thal  of  New  Hanover.7  However,  only  the  records  of  the 
10th  regiment  of  the  North  Carolina  line  are  complete  and 
they  include  William  Solomon,  in  Sharp's  Company,  Abra- 
ham Moses,  Lazarus  Solomon,  in  Rhodes's  Company,  Isaac 
Sampson,  in  Brevard's  Company,  and  Moses  Stern  on  the  roll 
of  the  North  Carolina  Battalion.8  Aaron  Cohen's  daughter, 

e  Leon  Huhner,  "The  Jews  in  North  Carolina  Prior  to  1800,"  Publications 
of  the  American  Jewish  Historical  Society  (New  York,  1925),  No.  29,  141. 
Hereafter  cited  as  Huhner,  "Jews  in  North  Carolina." 

7  Aaron  Cohen's  gravestone  (d.  1819)  in  the  Baltimore  Hebrew  Benevo- 
lent Society  cemetery  is  inscribed,  "A  Soldier  in  Washington's  Army." 
References  to  J.  Nathan  and  Sigmund  Freudenthal  were  supplied  by  de- 
scendants; I.  L.  Lyon,  Philadelphia,  Pa.;  and  Mrs.  Walter  Rausch,  New 
York,  New  York,  respectively. 

8  Huhner,  "Jews  of  North  Carolina,"  144-145. 


The  Jewish  People  op  North  Carolina  201 

Elizabeth,  was  the  first  interment  in  the  Hebrew  Cemetery 
of  Charlotte,  which  secured  its  charter  in  1859.9 

The  name  of  Francis  Salvador,  the  most  famous  Jew  of 
South  Carolina,  also  appears  in  North  Carolina  history.  Sal- 
vador came  to  Charleston  from  England  in  1773.  He  bought 
lands  in  South  Carolina  and  lodged  with  a  Jewish  friend,  Rich- 
ard A.  Rapely  of  Coroneka,  commonly  called  Cornacre.  Sal- 
vador was  reared  in  luxury,  but  placed  his  entire  fortune  at 
the  disposal  of  his  adopted  land.  He  had  been  in  the  colony 
only  a  year  when  he  was  elected  to  the  South  Carolina  Gen- 
eral Assembly,  probably  the  first  Jew  in  history  to  be  elected  to 
public  office  by  a  Christian  community.  ( Interesting  note :  In 
1954,  Hon.  Solomon  Blatt,  a  Jew  of  Barnwell,  was  re-elected 
for  the  ninth  term  as  the  Speaker  of  the  same  General  Assem- 
bly.) In  a  rare  work  entitled  "Narrative  of  Colonel  David 
Fanning,  a  Tory  in  the  Revolutionary  War,  giving  an  Account 
of  his  Adventures  in  North  Carolina  from  1775  to  1783,"  10 
occurs  the  following  under  date  of  July,  1775: 

We  called  musters  in  various  counties,  and  captains  pre- 
sented two  papers  for  the  inhabitants  to  sign,  one  to  see  who 
were  friends  of  the  King  and  Government,  and  the  other  to 
see  who  would  join  the  rebellion. 

Fanning  relates  how  he  presented  the  two  papers,  and  that 
118  signed  in  favor  of  the  king.  His  narrative  then  continues: 

There  were  several  advertisements  set  up  in  every  part  of 
said  district  that  there  was  a  very  great  Presbyterian  minister 
to  call  at  the  different  places  to  preach  and  baptize  children. 
.  .  .  But  at  the  time  appointed,  instead  of  meeting  a  minister, 
we  all  went  to  meet  two  Jews  by  name  of  Silvedoor  and  Rapely, 
and  after  making  many  speeches  in  favor  of  the  rebellion  and 
used  all  their  endeavors  to  delude  the  people  away,  at  last  pre- 
sented rebellion  papers  to  see  who  would  sign  them.  They  were 
severely  reprimanded  by  Henry  O'Neil  and  many  others.  It 
came  so  high  that  they  had  much  adue  to  get  off  with  their  lives. 


9  The  Hebrew  Cemetery  in  Charlotte  was  organized  in  1859.  Prior  to  that 
date  it  was  the  custom  to  ship  the  remains  of  the  dead  either  to  the  earlier 
established  Hebrew  cemeteries  in  Charleston,  S.  C,  Wilmington  or  States- 
ville,  or  more  often  to  relatives  in  northern  centers. 

10  Huhner,  "Jews  of  North  Carolina,"  142. 


202  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

The  rebels  then  found  that  we  were  fully  determined  to  oppose 
them. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century,  we  begin  to 
find  records  of  political  and  commercial  activities  involving 
North  Carolina  Jews.  Jacob  Mordecai  established  the  first  pri- 
vate school  for  girls  in  the  South,  at  Warrenton,  in  1809.11 
The  school  boarded  an  average  of  eighty  girls  a  year  and  each 
pupil  was  sent  to  the  church  of  parental  choice.  The  text- 
books used  were  Brooks'  Gazetter,  Guthrie's  Grammar  of 
Geography,  Tooke's  Pantheon,  and  Blair's  Rhetoric.  In  addi- 
tion, music,  embroidery,  and  sewing  were  taught.  One  of 
Mordecai's  sons,  George  Washington  Mordecai,  also  played 
an  important  role  in  the  economic  and  cultural  development 
of  the  state.  He  was  the  first  president  of  the  state-owned 
Bank  of  North  Carolina,  and  built  the  Raleigh  and  Gaston 
Railroad,  which  ran  from  the  State  Capital  to  the  Roanoke 
River.  The  family  was  assimilated  into  Christianity  toward 
the  end  of  the  ninetenth  century;  its  most  distinguished  mem- 
ber of  this  generation  was  the  late  Samuel  Fox  Mordecai,  for 
many  years  dean  of  the  Trinity  College  (later  Duke  Univer- 
sity) Law  School.  Reared  in  the  Christian  religion12  from 

"Huhner,  "Jews  of  North  Carolina,"  146. 

12  Harry  L.  Golden,  "Jews  of  the  South,"  American  Jewish  Congress 
Weekly,  December,  1952.  Jewish  "assimilation"  into  Christianity  during 
the  nineteenth  century  was  fairly  consistent  in  the  Carolinas  and  the  South. 
The  absence  of  any  "communal"  activity;  the  greater  distances  between 
towns;  the  sparsity  of  numbers,  and  the  religious  character  of  the  section, 
all  contributed  to  this  pattern.  Oddly  enough  very  few  formal  conversions 
were  involved.  In  the  main,  the  process  was  the  result  of  a  "mixed-mar- 
riage," nearly  always  involving  a  Jewish  male  and  a  Gentile  female.  The 
head  of  the  family  maintained  at  least  a  tenuous  tie  with  Judaism,  but 
upon  his  death  the  Gentile  widow  and  the  children  integrated  into  the 
main  stream  of  the  Protestant  majority.  Most  of  the  Spanish  Jews  of 
Colonial  days  and  many  of  the  German  Jews  of  the  mid-nineteenth  cen- 
tury were  thus  absorbed  into  the  several  Christian  denominations.  (At 
the  present  time,  1955,  at  least  ninety  per  cent  of  the  Jewish  people  of 
the  Carolinas — and  the  South — are  first  and  second  generation  citizens  of 
Eastern  European  origin).  Many  leading  Christian  families  of  the  Car- 
olinas today  bear  the  same  names  as  those  on  tombstones  erected  eighty 
and  ninety  years  ago  in  the  Hebrew  cemeteries  of  Charleston  and  Camden, 
S.  C,  and  Charlotte,  N.  C  This  Jewish  assimilation  into  Christianity  in 
the  Carolinas  (and  generally  throughout  the  South)  has  been  obscured 
due  to  the  lack  of  authentic  data.  There  are  no  records,  of  course.  The 
numbers  involved  were  not  large,  but  the  percentage  was  the  highest  in 
the  country.  In  addition  to  "evidence"  gathered  from  the  old  synagogue 
membership  rolls  and  tombstones  in  the  Jewish  cemeteries,  new  sources 
of  information  on  these  conversions  are  now  available.  These  sources  are 
the  Christian  families  involved.  The  writer  has  found  that  there  is  now 


The  Jewish  People  of  North  Carolina  203 

birth,  he  had  once  been  mentioned  for  the  position  of  presi- 
dent of  Trinity  College.  Dean  Mordecai  wrote  a  humorous 
sonnet:13 

a  disposition  to  recall  Jewish  ancestors  with  both  pride  and  affection. 
This  is  particularly  true  of  those  families  who  have  acquired  the  greatest 
sense  of  "security"  through  wealth  and  prestige.  This  higher  percentage 
of  Jews  becoming  totally  integrated  into  the  Protestant  majority  was  due 
also  to  the  fact  that  there  never  was  any  "compulsion"  to  leave  the  Jewish 
faith  either  out  of  fear  or  as  a  requirement  to  thrive  and  prosper.  This 
was  true  even  during  the  periods  of  the  two  Ku  Klux  Klans.  Furthermore, 
there  was  also  an  affinity  on  religious  grounds.  It  has  raised  the  percent- 
age of  converts  through  mixed-marriage,  but  it  has  also  intensified  a  great- 
er religious  consciousness  among  the  Jews  themselves.  In  the  Carolinas 
where  the  people  have  long  since  been  divorced  from  European  influence, 
the  Gentile  has  not  completely  separated  his  Jewish  neighbor  from  the 
image  he  carries  of  Abraham  or  Jeremiah.  The  Southern  Protestant 
"understood"  the  Jew  as  a  member  of  a  religious  group — either  as  a  pious 
Jew,  or  as  a  convert  to  Christianity.  When  the  Jew  was  neither  he  be- 
came (to  the  Southerner)  an  "enigma."  But  this  has  worked  both  ways. 
The  Jews  have  always  been  alert  to  reflect  the  habits  and  the  attitudes 
of  the  Protestant  majority.  Thus  in  the  case  of  Zionism,  for  instance, 
there  would  not  have  been  the  almost  unanimous  support  for  the  movement 
if  the  "majority"  had  been  hostile  to  the  idea.  Southern  Protestantism  was 
wholly  receptive:  "Itfs  in  the  Book" 

While  "mixed-marriage"  continues  at  the  approximate  ratio  of  one  out 
of  every  eight  marriages  involving  a  Jewish  male,  we  find  a  surprising 
development  in  recent  years.  At  least  half  of  the  Gentile  brides  involved 
are  entering  the  Jewish  faith.  (Few  mixed-marriages  have  involved  a 
Jewish  female.  In  the  early  days,  the  European  immigrant  who  came  into 
the  Carolinas  and  the  south  was  unmarried,  usually  a  teen-age  boy.  He 
did  not  come  into  contact  with  Jewish  girls.  In  the  first  place  there  weren't 
many.  Secondly,  the  Jewish  families  that  were  already  established  here, 
were  well  integrated  into  the  upper  middle-class,  at  least  on  an  economic 
level,  and  often  on  a  social  level  too.  This  family,  usually  of  German  origin, 
was  not  going  to  turn  the  young  daughter  over  to  an  immigrant  from 
Russia,  or  Poland.  The  daughter  would  have  been  spoken  for  by  one  of  the 
other  Jewish  families  of  equal  status,  or  was  living  with  relatives  in 
Baltimore,  Philadelphia,  or  New  York.  There  has  been  very  little  change 
in  this  pattern.  The  Jewish  girls  have  less  opportunity  for  "outside"  con- 
tacts than  the  boys  who  are  out  selling  or  managing  as  soon  as  they  leave 
high  school  or  college.  Since  the  Jews  represent  a  single  proprietary  class, 
the  girls  are  under  no  pressure  to  start  a  career  or  earn  wages.  In  fact, 
the  girl's  "freedom"  from  any  economic  worries  is  part  of  the  growing 
"status"  of  the  family.  In  the  smaller  towns  the  family  still  sends  the 
daughter  off  to  relatives  in  the  large  cities  to  expose  her  to  larger  Jewish 
communities). 

There  is  yet  another  development  of  major  significance  in  the  life  of  the 
Jewish  people  of  the  Carolinas  and  the  south  in  general.  The  new  genera- 
tion of  native-born  Jewish  boys  and  girls  are  the  backbone  of  Jewish  re- 
ligious life  in  the  South.  The  older  generation  was  intent  upon  "getting 
ahead."  That,  together  with  a  social  segregation  that  was  partly  imposed 
and  partly  self-imposed,  gave  them  little  or  no  contact  with  the  Christian 
society  at  the  personal  level.  But  their  children  are  now  living  with  it 
from  day-to-day.  The  values  that  are  constantly  stressed  by  their  Gentile 
classmates  and  friends  are  in  terms  of  "Sunday  School,"  "church,"  "my 
preacher,"  and  "The  Bible."  This  new  generation  of  native-born  Jews  in 
the  Carolinas  and  the  South  may  very  well  be  on  its  way  to  the  establish- 
ment of  an  American-type  Jewish  orthodoxy. 

"Mordecai's  Miscellanies  (Durham,  published  privately,  1927),  35.  I  am 
indebted  to  Mr.  Thad  Stem,  Jr.,  of  Oxford,  N.  C,  for  the  loan  of  a  rare  copy. 


204  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

With  trite  constructive  platitude, 

I  now  express  my  gratitude 
To  each  and  every  person  who 

heard  my  'naug'ral  through; 
And  I'm  sure  that  my  election 

Shows  great  powers  of  selection 
In  those  who  chose  for  President 

Mr.  Mordecai,  the  Jew. 

For  the  Jewish  people,  the  American  Civil  War  was  an  im- 
portant milestone.  Its  significance  lies  not  so  much  in  the  indi- 
vidual participation  ( which  based  on  proportionate  numbers 
represented  a  mere  detail)  but  on  its  demonstration  of  the 
responsibility  of  citizenship.  The  Jews  had  not  been  long 
out  of  the  ghettos  of  Europe  where  for  nearly  1600  years 
they  lived  as  a  homogeneous  community  under  European 
law  of  group  activity  and  group  responsibility.  This  homo- 
geneity was  intensified  by  the  struggle  to  survive  in  surround- 
ings of  unrelieved  hostility.  Yet  in  freedom  Jews  of  the  South 
generally  supported  the  Confederacy  and  Jews  of  the  North 
followed  the  Union  fortunes,  in  proportion  to  their  relative 
numbers.  Thus  nearly  2,000  years  of  in-group  living  was 
shattered  in  a  single  moment  by  that  same  American  idea 
that  permits  each  citizen  to  determine  his  views  in  accordance 
with  the  dictates  of  his  private  conscience. 

Paradoxically  this  American  right  to  behave  "separately" 
unloosed  the  first  serious  attack  ( in  the  United  States )  upon 
the  Jews  as  a  people.14  The  radical  abolitionists,  using  the 
secessionism  of  Judah  P.  Benjamin  (Secretary  of  State  of 
the  Confederacy),  attempted  to  create  in  America  an  aware- 
ness for  the  European  concept  of  "group  responsibility"  as 
it  concerned  the  Jews.15  Notwithstanding  the  fact  that  Rabbi 

14Judd  L.  Teller's  excellent  work,  Scapegoat  of  Revolution  (New  York, 
Charles  Scribner's  Sons,  1955),  84-88.  Hereafter  cited  as  Teller,  Scapegoat 
of  Revolution. 

15  Of  course,  in  Gentile  folklore  "All  the  Jews  stick  together,"  which 
once  prompted  the  observation  from  that  noble  mind,  Bernard  Berenson, 
"Oh,  if  we  only  possessed  some  of  the  qualities  with  which  we  are  re- 
proached." Bernard  Berenson,  Rumor  and  Reflection  (New  York,  Simon  and 
Schuster,  1952),  145.  Winston  Churchill,  probably  the  most  "aware"  Anglo- 
Saxon  of  our  century,  has  written,  "One  Jew  is  a  Prime  Minister,  two 
Jews  are  a  Prime  Minister  and  a  Leader  of  the  Loyal  Opposition."  Winston 
Churchill,  Greek  and  Jew,  from  an  address  quoted  in  the  New  York  Times, 
Jan.  11,  1948.  Thus,  while  the  Jewish  stereotype  is  still  with  us  to  some 


The  Jewish  People  of  North  Carolina  205 

David  Einhorn  had  fled  Baltimore  before  a  pro-slavery  lynch 
mob,  most  of  the  important  abolitionist  editors,  clergymen, 
and  politicians  attempted  to  equate  the  Jews'  refusal  to  en- 
dorse en  bloc  the  abolitionist  cause  with  treason  against  the 
Republic.16 

From  North  Carolina  came  the  six  Cohen  brothers  for  the 
40th  Infantry,  and  the  first  Jew  to  fall  for  the  Confederacy 
was  Albert  Lurie  Moses  of  Charlotte,  who  died  at  the  Battle 
of  Seven  Pines.  He  had  seized  an  eight-inch  shell  with  the 
fuse  burning,  fallen  into  a  gun  pit  and  saved  many  lives.  The 
shell  has  since  been  engraved  and  stands  over  his  grave  near 
Columbus,  Ga. 

When  the  war  broke  out  Major  Alfred  Mordecai,17  an  in- 
structor in  Ordnance  at  West  Point,  was  in  charge  of  the  Wa- 

degree — the  identification  of  the  individual  with  the  group  as  a  whole 
has  never  entered  into  American  law.  In  the  entire  history  of  the  United 
States  there  have  been  only  two  isolated  instances  of  an  "official"  attempt 
to  identify  the  actions  of  one  or  a  few  with  a  group  as  a  people.  The  first 
was  the  Civil  War  "Order  No.  11"  issued  by  General  Grant  who,  irked  by 
the  activities  of  some  peddlers  "barred"  the  Jews  "as  a  race"  from  certain 
war  areas.  Official  Records  of  the  War  of  the  Rebellion,  Series  1,  Volume 
XVII,  Part  2,  424,  issued  on  December  17,  1862,  expelling  all  Jews  from 
his  (Grant's)  department.  On  January  7,  1863,  by  direction  of  General 
Halleck,  then  general-in-chief,  this  order  was  revoked.  This  order  can  be 
found  in  the  same  volume  as  above,  544.  The  second  such  attempt  was  made 
in  January,  1955,  when  the  office  of  the  Secretary  of  Agriculture  attempted 
to  identify  a  major  segment  of  American  Jewry  (of  Russion  origin)  with 
the  alleged  "un-American"  beliefs  of  a  single  individual.  In  each  case  the 
American  people  rejected  the  idea  quickly  and  decisively. 

16  Rabbi  Isaac  Mayer  Wise,  founder  of  American  Reform  Judaism,  himself 
an  ardent  Abolitionist,  answered  the  critics  of  the  southern  Jews;  ".  .  .  the 
Jew  is  as  little  responsible  for  the  politics  of  other  Jews  as  the  Catholic, 
Protestant,  Deist  or  Atheist  is  for  the  politics  of  his  co-religionists.  ...  If 
the  largest  portion  of  the  Jewish  population  of  Richmond,  Charleston,  and 
New  Orleans  give  aid  and  comfort  to  rebellion,  as  our  opponents  maintain, 
they  do  exactly  as  others  do  in  the  same  localities.  .  .  .  You  Abolitionists 
with  the  grandiloquent  and  bombastic  declamations,  of  philanthropy,  free- 
dom, and  attachment  to  the  Government,  why  do  you  not  go  down  South 
and  expound  your  doctrines  to  the  community;  and  if  you  dare  not  do  it, 
why  do  you  expect  the  Jews  there  to  stand  in  opposition  to  the  mass  of  the 
people?"  Teller,  Scapegoat  of  Revolution.  Interestingly  enough  Judah  P. 
Benjamin,  Secretary  of  War  and  later  Secretary  of  State  in  the  cabinet 
of  Jefferson  Davis,  who  raised  the  ire  of  the  Abolitionists  against  Jews  as  a 
people,  was  used  for  the  same  purpose  in  the  South.  During  Benjamin's 
hassle  with  General  "Stonewall"  Jackson  over  the  loss  of  Roanoke  Island, 
demands  were  made  upon  the  President  of  the  Confederacy  to  remove  "Mr. 
Israelite."  A  Rev.  Willicomb  of  Virginia  demanded  the  removal  of  Benjamin 
as  a  member  of  the  "tribe  which  killed  Jesus."  The  irony  of  this  situation 
on  both  sides  of  the  Mason-Dixon  line  is  that  Mr.  Benjamin,  born  a  Jew, 
was  never  known  to  have  practised  the  religion  or  to  speak  "as  a  Jew" 
at  any  time  in  his  entire  public  career.  He  was  buried  in  Paris  with  the 
rites  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church. 

17  A  son  of  Jacob  Mordecai  of  Warrenton,  N.  C,  Gratz  Mordecai,  "Notice 
of  Jacob   Mordecai,   Founder  and   Proprietor  from   1809   to   1818   of   the 


206  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

tervleit  (N.  Y.)  Arsenal,  the  largest  in  the  country.  He  re- 
signed his  commission  stating  that  he  was  unwilling  "to  forge 
arms  to  be  used  against  my  aged  mother,  brothers  and  sisters" 
(in  North  Carolina). 

In  the  Woodlawn  Cemetery  at  Elmira,  New  York,  site  of  a 
Federal  camp  for  Confederate  prisoners  of  war,  the  North 
Carolina  Jews  who  are  buried  include  Levi  Southan,  Co.  A, 
28th  N.  C.  Inf.;  Edward  Harris,  Co.  G,  26th;  I.  M.  Pinner, 
Co.  E,  2nd;  Jesse  Simons,  Co.  G,  20th;  Daniel  Jonas,  Co.  D, 
1st;  Nathan  Altman,  Co.  C,  40th;  Henry  Daniel,  Co.  F,  10th; 
J.  Israel,  Co.  E,  51st;  Moses  Simmons,  Co.  G,  20th;  David 
Lewis,  Co.  C,  22nd.  From  Charlotte  also  came  J.  Roessler, 
one  of  the  founders  of  the  first  local  Jewish  congregation, 
who  was  a  captain  in  the  40th  Infantry;  and  Lewis  Leon,  a 
prominent  Charlotte  citizen  after  the  war,  who  had  originally 
enlisted  in  South  Carolina.18 

Warrenton  (N.  C.)  Female  Seminary,"  Publications  of  the  American 
Jewish  Historical  Society  (New  York,  1897),  No.  6,  124-138.  Jacob  Mordecai 
married  Judith  Myers  of  Philadelphia.  They  lived  in  New  York,  Philadel- 
phia, Richmond,  Petersburg,  and  finally  Warrenton  (N.  C.)  where  he 
established  a  country  store  in  1791.  He  also  shipped  tobacco  and  cotton  to 
northern  markets.  Jacob's  wife  died  in  the  birth  of  their  seventh  child.  The 
eldest  son  Moses,  and  eldest  daughter  Rachel  were  born  in  Richmond.  All  the 
other  children  were  born  in  Warrenton,  and  they  included  sons  Solomon, 
who  studied  medicine  and  practiced  in  Mobile,  Alabama;  Alfred,  appointed 
to  West  Point  from  North  Carolina  in  1823;  George  Washington  Mordecai, 
practiced  law  in  Raleigh,  was  first  president  of  the  Bank  of  the  State  of 
North  Carolina,  and  president  of  the  Raleigh  and  Gaston  Railroad.  He  was 
a  member  of  the  commission  appointed  by  Governor  Charles  Manly  to  study 
plans  for  a  Hospital  for  Mental  Patients.  "Dix  Hill"  near  Raleigh  was 
chosen  by  him.  Another  son,  Samuel,  settled  in  Richmond,  Va.,  and  was  the 
author  of  Richmond  in  By-Gone  Days.  Major  Alfred  Mordecai  mentioned 
above  was  the  author  of  three  text  books  used  in  West  Point,  Reports  of 
Experiments  in  Gunpowder,  1854-59,  Artillery  for  the  United  States  Land 
Service,  and  Ordnance  Manual  for  Use  of  the  Officers  in  the  United  States 
Army,  first  edition,  1841,  second  edition,  1850.  Upon  his  resignation  from 
the  Army  he  settled  in  Philadelphia.  After  the  war  he  helped  build  the 
Mexico  and  Pacific  Railroad  from  Vera  Cruz  to  the  Pacific  Ocean.  Upon 
his  return  to  Philadephia  he  became  Secretary  and  Treasurer  of  the 
Pennsylvania  Canal  Company,  controlled  by  the  Pennsylvania  Railroad.  The 
letter  quoted  giving  his  reason  for  resignation  from  the  Army  was  included 
in  his  memoirs  privately  printed  in  Philadelphia  in  1886  on  the  occasion 
of  his  fiftieth  wedding  anniversary. 

18  "Integration,"  especially  in  time  of  trouble,  is  universal.  Pvt.  Lewis 
Leon  of  Charlotte,  marksman  in  the  53rd  North  Carolina  Infantry,  kept  a 
diary.  (Mr.  John  R.  Peacock  of  High  Point,  N.  C,  who  owns  it,  graciously 
sent  a  photostatic  copy  to  the  American  Jewish  Historical  Society  in  1952.) 
It  is  interesting  to  note  that  a  young  Jewish  immigrant  from  Poland 
on  September  19,  1862,  recorded:  "This  morning  they  read  an  order 
from  our  father  R.  E.  Lee  in  which  he  gave  furlough  to  all  Israelites  in 
honor  of  Jewish  New  Year.  Wortheim,  Oppenheim,  Norment,  Katz,  and 
myself,  as  well  as  Lieut.  E.  Cohen,  worshipped"  (italics  mine). 


The  Jewish  People  of  North  Carolina  207 

The  Jews  of  North  Carolina  followed  the  pattern  of  the 
three  major  waves  of  immigration  to  the  United  States.  First 
the  Spanish-Portugese,  then  the  German  Jews,  and  finally 
after  1880,  the  Jews  from  Eastern  Europe,  who  brought  the 
pattern  of  communal  life  which  included  an  emphasis  on 
learning,  self-help,  social  justice,  and  keen  responsibility  for 
the  Jew  overseas. 

The  Jews  who  came  to  North  Carolina  in  the  second  half 
of  the  nineteenth  century,  like  those  in  all  other  sections  of 
the  eastern  seaboard,  found  that  the  streets  were  neither 
paved  with  gold,  nor  that  dollars  grew  on  trees.  They  turned 
to  the  one  profession  open  to  them.  They  became  peddlers. 
The  Cherokees  identified  them  as  "egg-eaters."  The  basis  for 
this  may  be  in  the  fact  that  some  of  the  peddlers  adhered  to 
the  dietary  laws  of  Moses  and  avoided  meat  of  any  kind 
until  they  returned  to  their  "base  of  operations"  on  Friday 
evening  in  time  to  observe  the  Sabbath. 

For  Virginia  and  the  Carolinas,  the  main  source  of  mer- 
chandise supply  was  at  Baltimore,  Maryland,  but  within  each 
state  the  peddlers  had  "way  stations"  where  they  stored  small 
stocks  and  which  they  called  "home  for  Sabbath."  In  North 
Carolina  these  "stations"  were  at  Wilmington,  Albemarle, 
and  Yanceyville.  Often  the  peddlers  during  the  last  two  de- 
cades of  the  nineteenth  century  made  one  of  these  "way 
station- warehouses"  a  permanent  home.  In  the  August  2, 
1860,  issue  of  the  Hebrew  Leader  (N.  Y.)  there  was  included 
the  following  advertisement:  "Wanted  by  the  Israelites  of 
Wilmington,  North  Carolina,  Hazan,  Schocket,  Mohel.  Com- 
municate M.  Hirschberger,  Wilmington,  N.  C."  19  [An  indi- 
vidual who  could  combine  the  professions  of  cantor,  ritual 
butcher,  and  circumciserl 

The  peddler  was  a  walking  "department  store."  When  he 
first  came  through  North  Carolina  and  the  other  states  of 
our  country,  he  sometimes  carried  as  much  as  125  pounds 
on  his  back,  and  his  goods  included  not  only  the  minor 
accessories  such  as  suspenders,  socks,  handkerchiefs,  and 
needles,  but  also  the  finer  linens,  curtains,  taffetas  for  the 

"American  Jewish  Archives,  Hebrew  Union  College,  Jewish  Institute 
of  Religion  (Cincinnati,  Ohio),  June  1952,  109. 


208  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

farm  wife's  Sunday  dress,  ribbons  for  the  youngsters,  and 
many  gewgaws  which  helped  brighten  the  monotony  of 
isolated  living. 

The  peddler's  coming  was  a  gala  event  in  the  lives  of  the 
North  Carolina  farmers  and  pioneers.  They  all  came  out  of 
the  fields,  and  while  the  women  folk  and  children  began  to 
examine  the  wares,  the  farmer  himself  would  probably  be 
asking  the  peddler  about  news  from  the  adjoining  county, 
or  from  the  state  capital;  perhaps  even  a  word  about  Bis- 
marck or  Queen  Victoria.  The  Tar  Heel  novelist,  Bernice 
Kelly  Harris,  who  has  given  us  the  most  vivid  picture  of  rural 
life  in  eastern  North  Carolina,  writes  that  the  coming  of  the 
peddler  was  an  event  in  the  rural  day  of  not  many  events. 
"When  he  was  seen  turning  the  corner  at  Old  Uncle  Nat's,  we 
children  rushed  from  the  mulberry  orchard  houseward  to 
persuade  Mother  to  let  the  peddler  open  his  packs,  just  to 
let  him  open  his  packs,  even  if  nothing  was  to  be  bought. 
.  .  .  Mother  bought  only  needles  and  pins  to  pay  the  peddler 
for  his  trouble  in  opening  the  packs.  .  .  ."  20 

Eventually,  the  peddler  became  the  merchant  and  many 
of  them  acquired  great  wealth  and  distinction  such  as  Joseph 
Fels,  founder  of  the  Fels  Naptha  Company,  who  started  as 
a  peddler  and  whose  father  before  him  had  peddled  out  of 
Yanceyville,  N.  C.  Many  another  peddler's  son  rose  to  emi- 
nence as  a  "merchant  prince,"  and  within  a  half-century  the 
peddler  had  indeed  raised  the  entire  business  of  buying  and 

20  Bernice  Kelly  Harris,  Foreword,  Folk  Plays  of  Eastern  Carolina 
(Chapel  Hill,  University  of  North  Carolina  Press,  1940),  xxi.  At  first 
the  peddler  was  referred  to  as  a  "Dutchman."  A  death  notice  in  The 
Landmark  (Statesville),  October  11,  1884,  refers  to  the  transportation  of 
the  "remains  of  A.  Blum,  a  Dutch  peddler"  from  Wilmington  to  Baltimore. 
Both  Josephus  Daniels  in  his  Tar  Heel  Editor  and  Mrs.  Harris  in  the 
above  mentioned  book  of  plays,  speak  of  the  "Dutch"  peddler.  It  is  interest- 
ing to  note  that  Professor  Oscar  Handlin  states  that  in  early  New  England, 
too,  the  Jewish  peddler  was  "looked  upon  as  just  another  kind  of  German." 
Adventure  in  Freedom  (New  York,  McGraw-Hill,  1954),  85-88.  The  term 
"Jew-peddler"  began  to  appear  in  the  public  prints  in  the  early  part  of 
this  century,  and  later  developed  into  the  term  "Jew-store"  which  is  still 
widely  used  among  the  rural  white  and  Negro  populations.  It  was  not 
intended  as  an  insult,  since  customers  upon  entering  the  establishment 
often  asked:  "Is  this  a  Jew-store?"  The  interest  in  the  designation  was 
probably  heightened  by  a  legend  that  a  Jewish  merchant  would  make  every 
possible  concession  or  sacrifice  to  record  a  "first"  sale  of  the  day,  and  that 
he  would  accept  any  "offer"  rather  than  lose  his  first  customer.  The  farmers 
would  vie  with  one  another  to  be  the  first  one  in  the  store  to  get  a  "bargain" 
on  their  own  terms. 


The  Jewish  People  of  North  Carolina  209 

selling  into  the  realm  of  the  nobler  arts— a  profession  com- 
parable in  dignity  to  that  of  the  jurist  and  physician. 

Essentially,  however,  the  Jewish  community  of  North  Caro- 
lina, like  the  state  itself,  has  recorded  the  most  important 
part  of  its  history  during  the  past  fifty  years.  The  saga  of 
Moses  Henry  Cone  and  his  brother,  Caesar  Cone,  of  Greens- 
boro, is  the  story  of  the  industrial  development  of  North 
Carolina  into  the  greatest  textile-producing  area  in  the  world. 
The  Cones  were  the  first  to  introduce  a  variety  of  cotton 
manufactures  as  well  as  the  orderly  method  of  world-wide 
distribution.  They  were  pioneers  in  the  establishment  of 
a  welfare  program  to  afford  their  employees  every  opportunity 
for  social,  mental,  physical,   and   spiritual  advancement.21 

21  Herman  Cone  came  to  the  United  States  from  his  native  Altenstadt, 
Bavaria,  in  1854,  and  opened  a  country  store  in  Jonesboro,  Tennessee. 
During  the  Civil  War  he  added  a  small  foundry  where  he  manufactured 
bullets  for  the  Confederate  Army.  In  1870  with  his  two  oldest  boys,  Moses 
H.  and  Monroe,  he  established  a  wholesale  grocery,  leather  and  cigar 
business  in  Baltimore,  Maryland.  Later,  another  son,  Caesar,  joined  the 
business.  (Monroe  died  in  1891).  Another  son,  Bernard,  studied  law  and  in 
his  youth  was  associated  with  the  famous  New  York  law  firm,  Guggenheim, 
Untermyer  and  Marshall.  The  Cone  connection  with  North  Carolina  and  the 
textile  business  came  through  their  wholesale  establishment  in  Baltimore. 
After  one  of  the  serious  economic  depressions,  many  of  the  country  stores 
in  North  Carolina  were  in  debt  to  the  Cones  of  Baltimore.  When  things 
began  to  pick  up  these  merchants  were  still  not  able  to  discharge  their  debts, 
and  were  forced  to  make  smaller  purchases  for  cash,  or  seek  credit  else- 
where. Moses  H.  Cone  wrote  them  all  a  letter.  He  said  that  he  was  sorry 
for  their  predicament,  but  he  urged  them  to  buy  what  goods  they  needed, 
and  not  to  worry  about  the  old  accounts,  that  they  could  pay  when  they  felt 
perfectly  secure  in  their  survival.  Out  of  this  came  the  friendship  and  the 
connections  in  North  Carolina  which  led  to  the  fabulous  Cone  enterprises. 
When  the  Cones  entered  the  textile  business,  the  southern  mills  had  no 
credit  with  the  New  York  banks ;  they  were  making  only  one  product,  and 
its  distribution  was  based  on  a  chaotic  competition  among  themselves.  The 
Cones  established  the  Cone  Export  and  Commission  Company  which,  with 
several  other  commission  houses,  became  the  bankers  for  the  southern  mills. 
They  also  introduced  a  variety  of  manufactures  into  the  industry,  and  an 
orderly  method  of  world-wide  distribution.  Other  children  of  the  fabulous 
Herman  Cone  achieved  distinction  in  the  arts  and  sciences.  Dr.  Claribel 
Cone  graduated  with  honors  as  an  M.  D.  from  the  Women's  Medical  College 
at  Baltimore.  In  1903,  she  was  elected  to  the  presidency  of  the  institution. 
Dr.  Cone's  great  interest  was  the  study  of  preventive  medicine.  She  lectured 
at  Johns  Hopkins  and  did  research  at  the  Pasteur  Institute  in  Paris.  Her 
sister,  Miss  Etta  Cone,  was  a  pioneer  worker  in  favor  of  woman  suffrage. 
She  was  also  an  art  collector  who,  with  her  brother  Frederick  Cone,  began 
to  collect  original  paintings  by  French  artists  who  included  Matisse  and 
Picasso.  After  the  death  of  Miss  Etta  Cone  in  1949  the  Baltimore  Museum 
of  Art  had  the  privilege  of  making  a  selection  from  the  paintings  collected 
by  Miss  Etta  and  Frederick.  This  exhibit  is  now  on  display  at  the  Balti- 
more Museum  of  Art.  Cyrus  Adler,  Necrology  (Caesar  Cone).  Publications 
of  the  American  Jewish  Historical  Society,  (New  York,  1918),  No.  26, 
118-122. 


210  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Today  the  company  operates  600,000  spindles— nearly  three 
per  cent  of  the  entire  textile  industry  and  in  the  last  decade 
the  Cones  have  "plowed"  back  more  than  $50,000,000  for 
modernization  and  expansion  of  their  operations.22 

The  Jewish  migration  from  the  large  northern  centers  into 
North  Carolina  in  more  substantial  numbers  began  in  the  first 
decade  of  this  century  when  the  rolling  mills  and  textile 
plants  were  beginning  to  flourish.  As  the  population  grew, 
merchants  established  retail  stores  in  every  city,  town,  and 
rural  way-station  in  the  state.  Nearly  all  these  retail  estab- 
lishments sold  "soft  goods"— ready-to-wear  clothing  and  ac- 
cessories.23 The  initial  success  of  these  small  merchants  was 
due  to  the  fact  that  they  permitted  the  Negro  to  try  on  the 

22  Speech  by  Herman  Cone  quoted  in  Greensboro  Daily  News,  January  16, 
1955. 

23  The  entire  economy  of  the  Jew  in  North  Carolina  (and  the  South)  is 
based  on  self-employment.  If  a  man  loses  his  business  and  lacks  the  capital 
to  try  again,  he  will  find  it  necessary  to  go  to  one  of  the  metropolitan 
centers  in  the  North  to  find  a  job.  When  the  young  man  is  ready  to  embark 
upon  his  career  he  will  go  into  business  with  his  father  or  father-in-law, 
or  he  may  take  a  job  as  a  salesman,  traveling  the  territory  for  a  (Jewish) 
manufacturer,  wholesaler  or  mill  agent.  In  effect  the  3,180  Jewish  families 
in  North  Carolina  represent  a  single  proprietary  class  of  small  capitalists; 
retailers,  jobbers,  wholesalers,  manufacturers  or  mill  agents.  Their  activi- 
ties center  around  the  manufacture  and  distribution  of  textiles,  wholesalers 
and  mill  agents  for  the  knitting  and  hosiery  mills,  operators  of  retail  stores 
(ready-to-wear  and  credit  jewelry),  manufacture  and  distribution  of  chemi- 
cals, and  dealers  in  textile  machinery,  metals,  metal  scrap,  linen  service  and 
supply,  and  cotton  waste.  There  are  no  Jews  in  banking,  insurance,  publish- 
ing, or  in  the  food,  drug,  beverage,  tobacco  and  construction  industries.  If 
we  are  to  accept  a  yardstick  (Mark  Twain)  that  "successful  business  is 
honest  business,"  the  Jews  of  North  Carolina  (and  the  South)  have  achieved 
a  record  that  compares  favorably  with  the  general  community.  At  least 
eighty  per  cent  of  the  establishments,  plants,  and  stores  doing  business  to- 
day are  operating  under  original  certificate  of  ownership  or  articles  of 
incorporation.  During  the  past  three  or  four  years  many  traveling  sales- 
men have  established  their  homes  in  North  Carolina.  Most  of  these  men  have 
covered  the  territory  for  many  years  but  continued  to  maintain  their  homes 
in  the  metropolitan  centers  in  the  North.  A  few  years  ago,  however,  they 
began  to  move  South.  The  territory  involved  usually  includes  Virginia  and 
the  two  Carolinas,  which  makes  the  city  of  Greensboro,  N.  C,  the  most 
convenient  "base"  from  which  to  operate.  Because  of  this  influx  of  several 
hundred  traveling  men  and  their  families  during  the  past  three  years, 
Greensboro  now  has  the  largest  Jewish  population  in  the  state  with  ap- 
proximately 500  families. 

There  is  yet  another  development  which  may  eventually  change  the  char- 
acter of  Jewish  life  in  the  Carolinas  if  not  in  the  entire  South.  Dozens  of 
manufacturers  in  the  needle  trades  have  established  factories  in  the  Caro- 
linas during  the  past  five  years.  For  the  first  time,  we  now  find  a  few 
Jewish  "employees"  in  the  several  communities — factory  superintendents, 
machinists,  designers,  and  cutters. 


The  Jewish  People  of  North  Carolina  211 

merchandise  for  size  and  fit  without  the  obligation  to  make 
the  purchase.24 

In  1910  there  were  five  established  congregations,  of  which 
Temple  Israel  of  Wilmington  had  been  the  first;  and  there 
was  one  secular  organization,  the  first  state-chartered  YMHA, 
at  Asheville.  In  1955  there  are  27  established  congregations, 
a  full-time  "circuit-riding"  rabbi  to  minister  to  the  small 
towns,  and  over  40  local  and  state-wide  fraternities,  charity 
federations,  and  associations,  including  Hillel  establishments 
at  both  Duke  and  the  University  of  North  Carolina.25 

24  In  the  mercantile  establishments  of  the  South  the  rule  governing 
Negroes  for  many  years  after  the  Reconstruction  period  was: — "Don't 
touch  it  if  you're  not  going  to  buy  it."  The  Jewish  merchants  in  general 
did  not  follow  this  policy,  and  in  fact  catered  to  this  Negro  market  for 
ready-to-wear  and  other  apparel.  The  relationship  was  never  beyond  that 
of  tradesman  and  customer.  As  the  (Jewish)  merchants  prospered,  they 
identified  themselves  more  and  more  with  the  white  Protestant  middle  class 
and  eventually  assumed  the  attitudes  and  even  the  prejudices  of  the  white 
majority. 

25  According  to  the  census  records  for  1870  (State  Department  of  Archives 
and  History)  there  were  approximately  250-300  Jews  in  North  Carolina. 
Since  there  were  no  established  congregations,  the  writer  made  the  estimate 
on  the  basis  of  "name"  and  "place  of  birth,"  for  example,  "Morris  Springer, 
age  35,  born  in  Poland."  Of  these  250-300  Jews  in  the  state,  four  were 
native-born,  eleven  were  born  in  South  Carolina,  two  hundred  and  ten 
gave  Germany,  Bavaria,  or  Prussia  as  their  birthplace,  nine  were  natives 
of  Philadelphia,  two  from  New  York,  eighteen  from  Poland,  seven  from 
England,  and  one  from  Holland.  (No  census  reports  were  available  for 
hundreds  of  isolated  communities  of  the  state,  but  this  would  not  have  any 
substantial  bearing  on  our  figures.)  The  "importance"  of  the  individual 
community  followed  the  pattern  of  the  state's  industrial  development.  In 
1870  the  most  important  "Jewish"  community  was  Statesville,  N.  C.  This 
was  due  primarily  to  the  presence  of  the  Wallace  family.  Isaac  and  David 
Wallace  were  peddlers  who  started  in  the  vicinity  of  Bamberg,  South 
Carolina,  upon  their  arrival  in  this  country  in  1859.  A  few  years  later 
they  moved  to  Statesville  where  they  established  a  mercantile  business. 
They  sold  supplies  to  the  farmers,  ran  a  small  banking  business  and  a  drug 
counter.  They  encouraged  the  farmers  to  bring  their  roots  and  herbs  to  the 
Wallace  store  and  soon  the  brothers  developed  a  crude  drug  business  on  a 
national  scale  which  was  to  help  the  farmers  of  five  North  Carolina  coun- 
ties for  nearly  seventy-five  years.  Toward  the  end  of  the  nineteenth  century 
Wilmington,  the  seaport  of  North  Carolina,  became  the  largest  Jewish 
community.  It  was  here  that  the  first  formal  congregation  had  been  or- 
ganized in  1867.  The  first  synagogue  in  the  state  was  built  there  in  1875. 
The  importance  shifted  again  to  the  western  part  of  the  state  with  the  great 
industrial  development  of  the  Piedmont  section.  Since  the  1920's  the  cities 
of  Charlotte,  Greensboro,  Durham,  and  Winston-Salem  have  had  the  largest 
and  most  active  communities.  In  the  November,  1875,  issue  of  The  American 
Israelite,  published  by  Rabbi  Isaac  Myer  Wise  in  Cincinnati,  Ohio,  appeared 
this  item :  "Charlotte,  North  Carolina,  is  a  city  of  8,000  or  9,000  inhabitants 
and  we  have  about  twenty-five  Jewish  families.  The  Jewish  ladies  of  the 
city  have  established  a  Society  under  the  name  of  the  Ladies  Benevolent 
Society.  It  is  now  a  year  old.  Last  Purim  we  gave  a  ball,  and  cleared 
$100.00.  The  last  meeting  took  place  in  the  home  of  J.  Rintels  and  the 
following  were  elected  officers  for  the  year  1876:  President,  Mrs.  J.  Rintels; 
Vice-President,    Mrs.    A.    Frankenthal;    Secretary,    Mrs.    J.    Rothschild; 


212  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

The  responsibility  of  citizenship  includes,  of  course,  the 
responsibility  of  wealth,  and  the  Jewish  citizens  of  North 
Carolina,  no  less  than  their  Gentile  neighbors,  have  done 
their  part.  The  North  Carolina  community  has  one  of  the 
outstanding  records  in  the  nation  for  humanitarianism  in  com- 
ing to  the  rescue  of  stricken  brethren  overseas,  a  record  in 
which  the  Gentile  community  also  played  a  notable  part. 
The  many  benefactions  include  endowments  for  science  and 
cancer  research  from  the  James  Heineman  family  of  Char- 
lotte and  Robert  J.  Gurney  of  Gastonia;  in  education,  the 
Weil  family  of  Goldsboro  with  the  Weil  Lectures  on  Citizen- 
ship at  the  University  of  North  Carolina;  and  the  Cones  of 
Greensboro  in  the  humanities,  with  recreation  halls,  a  colored 
YMCA,  the  35,000-acre  "Moses  H.  Cone  Memorial  Park"  at 
Blowing  Rock,  deeded  to  the  government  for  public  use,  and 
the  "Moses  H.  Cone  Memorial  Hospital"  at  Greensboro. 

But  essentially  North  Carolina,  like  America  itself,  is 
PEOPLE:  of  strong  men  and  weak,  of  bold  visionaries  and 
of  frightened  newcomers,  of  men  and  women  who  may  never 
even  have  set  foot  in  the  commonwealth,  but  whose  works 
have  left  us  richer  in  mind,  in  body  and  in  spirit;  of  people 
like  the  Jewish  immigrant,  Dr.  Joseph  Goldberger,  who  found 
the  cure  for  pellagra  and  helped  thousands  of  our  southern 
children  to  grow  up  with  sturdy  legs;  of  Julius  Rosenwald 
of  Sears  Roebuck  who  contributed  millions  of  dollars  to  pro- 
vide elementary  schooling  for  the  rural  colored  population 
of  North  Carolina,  and  the  rest  of  the  south;  of  Mrs.  Connor, 
the  Roman  Catholic  mother  of  Judge  Henry  Groves  Connor, 
and  of  Mrs.  Emil  Rosenthal,  wife  of  a  Jewish  merchant  of 
Wilson,  and  Mrs.  Mary  Cleaves  Daniels,  a  Methodist  and 
mother  of  Josephus  Daniels— three  women  who  were  known 
as  the  "Three  Almoners"— who  pioneered  in  welfare  work  and 

Treasurer,  Mrs.  J.  Baumgarten;  Trustees  of  the  School  Committee,  Miss 
E.  Baruch,  Miss  L.  Goldberg,  and  Mrs.  F.  Frankenthal.  Our  town  is  small 
but  gives  promise  of  becoming  a  greater  city  than  any  of  her  sister 
cities."  Signed:  "A.  S." 

In  1880  Washington  Duke  brought  some  200  Jewish  cigarette  makers  to 
Durham,  but  they  returned  to  the  North  after  a  year  when  a  dispute  arose 
over  the  scale  of  wages.  In  1955  the  estimated  Jewish  population  based  on 
synagogue  and  fraternal  memberships  is  3,180  families  or  approximately 
10,000  souls. 


The  Jewish  People  of  North  Carolina  213 

ministrations  in  the  days  when  there  were  no  trained  nurses, 
no  hospitals,  no  Red  Cross  or  Community  Chest  organiza- 
tions; of  Zebulon  Baird  Vance,26  whose  address  The  Scattered 


26  Zebulon  B.  Vance  was  Civil  War  governor  of  North  Carolina.  Elected 
again  in  1876,  he  served  three  elective  terms  in  the  United  States  Senate. 
He  died  in  1894,  and  his  name  was  chosen  to  represent  North  Carolina  in 
the  National  Hall  of  Statuary  in  Washington.  The  address,  The  Scattered 
Nation,  was  read  from  hundreds  of  pulpits  and  reprinted  in  nearly  every 
newspaper  and  journal  published  in  the  South: 

This  curious  phenomenon  (the  Gulf  Stream)  in  the  physical  world 
has  its  counterpart  in  the  moral.  There  is  a  lonely  river  in  the 
midst  of  the  ocean  of  mankind.  The  mightiest  floods  of  human 
temptation  have  never  caused  it  to  overflow  and  the  fiercest  fires 
of  human  cruelty,  though  seven  times  heated  in  the  furnace  of 
religious  bigotry,  have  never  caused  it  to  dry  up,  although  its  waves 
for  two  thousand  years  have  rolled  crimson  with  the  blood  of 
its  martyrs.  Its  fountain  is  in  the  grey  dawn  of  the  world's  history, 
and  its  mouth  is  somewhere  in  the  shadows  of  eternity.  It  too  re- 
fuses to  mingle  with  the  surrounding  waves,  and  the  line  which 
divides  its  restless  billows  from  the  common  waters  of  humanity 
is  also  plainly  visible  to  the  eye.  It  is  the  Jewish  race.  .  .  . 
The  Jew  is  beyond  doubt  the  most  remarkable  man  of  this  world 
past  or  present.  Of  all  the  stories  of  the  sons  of  men,  there  is 
none  so  wild,  so  wonderful,  so  full  of  extreme  mutation,  so  replete 
with  suffering  and  horror,  so  abounding  in  extraordinary  provi- 
dences, so  overflowing  with  scenic  romance.  There  is  no  man  who 
approaches  him  in  the  extent  and  character  of  the  influence  which 
he  has  exercised  over  the  human  family.  His  history  is  the  history 
of  our  civilization  and  progress  in  this  world,  and  our  faith  and 
hope  in  that  which  is  to  come.  From  him  have  we  derived  the  form 
and  pattern  of  all  that  is  excellent  on  earth  or  in  heaven.  .  .  . 

Even  now,  though  the  Jews  have  long  since  ceased  to  exist  as  a 
consolidated  nation,  inhabiting  a  common  country,  and  for  eight- 
teen  hundred  years  have  been  scattered  far   and   near  over  the 
wide  earth,  their  strange  customs,  their  distinct  features,  personal 
peculiarities  and  their  scattered  unity,  make  them  still  a  wonder 
and  an  astonishment.  .  .  . 
It  is  quite  possible  that  Vance's  life-long  friendship  for  the  Jewish  people 
may  have  had  its  origin  in  an  experience  at  the  end  of  the  Civil  War.  Vance, 
the  war-time  governor  of  North  Carolina,  returned  to  his  home  in  Statesville 
under  orders  of  the  Union  General  Schofield.  On  May  13,  1865,  a  squadron 
of  General  Hugh  J.  Kilpatrick's  cavalry  surrounded  his  home,  arrested  him 
and  prepared  to  take  him  to  Washington.  As  the  railroad  and  telegraph 
lines  had  been  completely  destroyed,  Statesville  was  cut  off  from  the  outside 
world.  The  Union  officer  in  charge  wanted  the  Governor  to  ride  horseback 
thirty-five  miles  to  the  railroad  at  Salisbury.  A  Jewish  merchant,  Samuel 
Wittkowsky,  urged  the  Union  officer  to  spare  the  Governor  this  indignity. 
It  was  agreed  that  Wittkowsky  would  "deliver"  Governor  Vance  to  Salis- 
bury. And  on  that  May  day,  the  famous  war  governor  and  the  immigrant 
Jew  started  out  on  the  long  buggy  ride  surrounded  by  two  hundred  Union 
cavalry.  Clement  Dowd,  Life  of  Zebulon  B.  Vance  (Charlotte,  N.  C.  1897). 
Full   text  of   The   Scattered  Nation,   369,   399.   Vance's   experiences   with 
Wittkowsky  are  related  in  the  same  volume,  95.  Wittkowsky  became  one 
of  the  most  successful  business  men  in  the  state.  He  established  the  first 
building  and  loan  enterprise  in  the  South  and  amassed  a  huge  fortune.  At 
the  funeral  of  Senator  Vance,  Wittkowsky  was  among  state  and  national 
dignitaries  who  delivered  eulogies.  With  the  simple  faith  of  Anatole  France's 
"Juggler,"   Mr.   Wittkowsky  said:    "No   Israelite   in   North    Carolina   ever 
voted  against  Zebulon  B.  Vance."  Charlotte  Observer,  April  17,  1894. 


214  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Nation  raised  our  prestige  as  a  people;  of  Nathaniel  Macon 
who  successfully  defeated  an  early  hate  organization;  of  a 
Josephus  Daniels  who  always  held  out  the  hand  of  friendship 
and  brotherhood;  of  a  Mallissia  Haywood,  of  Montgomery 

27  Mallissia  Haywood  befriended  the  Jewish  peddlers  who  covered  the 
wide  rural  area  of  eastern  and  central  North  Carolina.  Mr.  Harry  Richter 
recalls  her  in  an  interesting  letter  to  the  writer.  Harry  Richter  and  Moses 
Richter,  Jewish  immigrants  from  Russia,  came  to  North  Carolina  as 
peddlers  in  the  closing  days  of  the  nineteenth  century.  Today  Moses  Richter 
of  Mt.  Gilead,  N.  C  is  the  largest  independent  peach  distributor  in  the  coun- 
try serving  hundreds  of  farmers  and  peach  growers  in  the  Carolinas.  He  also 
operates  several  large  mills  manufacturing  cotton  and  rayon  finished 
products.  Harry  Richter,  a  merchant  of  Norwood,  N.  C,  recalls  Mallissia 
Haywood  and  the  early  days  of  the  peddler  in  the  state: 

The  first  time  I  met  the  Haywoods  was  in  the  late  afternoon  of  a 
warm  spring  day.  They  were  both  engaged  in  chopping  cotton.  It 
was  in  the  early  part  of  the  century  and  I,  a  young  man,  newly 
arrived  from  Southern  Russia,  was  peddling  my  wares  in  the 
sparse  settlements  of  Montgomery  County,  North  Carolina.  No 
transactions  were  made,  but  the  Haywoods  displayed  a  curious 
interest  in  me.  They  offered  me  lodging  for  the  night  which  I 
gladly  accepted.  It  was  quite  evident  that  the  Haywoods  were 
very  poor,  earning  their  livelihood  from  a  none  too  impressive 
farm.  (Cotton  was  selling  at  $25.00  a  bale  and  corn  in  proportion.) 
Still,  there  was  a  serenity  and  orderliness  about  the  place  that 
made  it  quaint,  if  not  attractive. 

The  dominant  figure  in  this  idyllic  environment  was  the  mistress 
of  the  home  herself.  Her  name  was  Mallissia  Frances.  I  later 
learned  that  she  was  related,  on  her  mother's  side,  to  Flora  Mac- 
Donald.  Of  this  she  was  very  proud.  One  had  the  feeling  that  she 
was  different  from  the  other  women  that  lived  in  the  little  houses 
down  the  road.  Not  outstanding  in  any  particular  way,  she  seem- 
ingly possessed  in  proper  balance  the  many  qualities  that  are  the 
making  of  a  remarkable  personality.  She  was  kindness  itself 
and  her  face  had  an  exalted  look,  a  strange  glow  that  visibly 
came  from  inner  depths. 

The  evening  was  spent  in  difficult  conversation  (I  was  barely 
three  months  in  the  country)  and  right  there  and  then  I  received 
my  first  lesson  in  English.  Mallissia  Haywood,  a  school  teacher  in 
her  younger  days,  introduced  me  into  the  intricacies  of  the  English 
language.  This  lesson  was  followed  up  by  many  others  on  my 
subsequent  visits. 

Before  the  year  was  over  I  terminated  my  peddling  career  and 
went  to  work  in  a  gold  mine,  near  Candor,  N.  C,  known  as  the 
Montgomery  Mine.  The  Haywoods  had  by  this  time  opened  a  board- 
ing house  near  the  mine.  Instead  of  being  an  occasional  visitor,  I 
now  became  a  full-fledged  boarder.  There  were  other  boarders  also 
and  since  the  Haywoods  maintained  their  touch  with  the  soil,  still 
growing  the  white  man's  crops,  cotton  and  corn,  Mallissia  was 
busier  than  ever.  I  frequently  wondered  where  she  found  the 
strength  to  cope  with  all  her  activities. 

Though  deeply  religious,  she  was  most  tolerant  of  the  beliefs  of 
others.  This  was  clearly  demonstrated  when  on  long  winter  nights 
we'd  all  sit  and  listen  to  Mallissia's  readings  from  the  Bible.  When 
I  expressed  my  preference  for  the  Old  Testament,  she  seemed 
bewildered  at  first,  but  after  a  brief  explanation,  she  acquiesced 
most  graciously  with  all  her  natural  tact  and  charm  and,  thereafter, 
refrained  from  her  favorite  New  Testament  in  my  presence.  I 
later  realized  the  unfairness  of  my  position  and  requested  that 


The  Jewish  People  of  North  Carolina  215 

County,  who  at  the  turn  of  the  century  made  her  farmhouse 
a  haven  of  rest  for  the  Jewish  peddlers  traveling  over  the  state 
and  helped  them  with  their  English  lessons,  joined  them  in 
their  ancient  morning  prayers,  and  listened  to  their  letters 
from  Europe. 

she  alternate  between  the  Old  and  New  Testaments.  I  somehow  felt 
that  the  great  Hillel  would  have  done  likewise.  The  letters  I'd  get 
from  home  written  in  Yiddish,  had  to  be  read  aloud  in  the  original, 
just  for  the  sound  of  the  only  foreign  language  she  ever  heard. 
Then  it  had  to  be  translated  word  for  word. 

She  frequently  reminded  me  of  my  duties  towards  my  parents  on 
'the  other  side.'  It  made  her  very  happy  every  time  I  sent  money 
to  my  parents. 

The  dietary  observances  of  her  Jew  boarders  were  looked  after 
most  carefully.  The  biscuits  were  prepared  without  lard  and  the 
eggs  were  kept  at  a  safe  distance  from  the  inevitable  porker,  of 
which  there  were  always  several  varieties  on  the  table.  She  was 
an  educated  woman  according  to  the  standards  of  late  19th  and 
early  20th  century,  and  although  looked  up  to  by  her  less  endowed 
sisters,  never  made  a  display  of  her  superiority.  She  was  as  modest 
and  plain  as  the  rocky,  unyielding  fields  which  she  helped  till. 
She  was  probably  the  hardest  working  woman  I  ever  met.  She 
could  do  a  man's  full  time  job  as  well  as  any  man.  Like  the  frontier 
women  of  an  earlier  date  and  the  wives  of  the  pioneers  before 
them,  she  had  the  love  and  the  joy  of  work  in  her  heart.  It  was 
quite  natural  and  no  hardship  whatsoever,  to  work  in  the  fields 
from  early  morning  till  dark,  a  full  day  in  the  hot  sun.  This  besides 
cooking,  sewing,  laundering  (by  hand)  and  the  rearing  of  a  size- 
able family. 

But  let  it  be  remembered  that  the  case  of  Mallissia  Haywood, 
remarkable  woman  that  she  was,  was  not  an  isolated  one.  There 
were  many  Mallissias  in  those  days  throughout  the  length  and 
breadth  of  the  land.  It  was  they  who  befriended  us,  confused,  be- 
wildered immigrants  newly  arrived  from  a  different  world,  with 
the  European  milieu  still  in  our  bones.  The  adjustment  was  diffi- 
cult, sometimes  painful,  and  it  was  the  Mallissias  in  every  state 
in  the  union  who  gave  us  the  care  and  warmth  that  meant  so 
much  in  the  early  stages  of  our  becoming  Americans.  Many,  like 
myself,  were  mere  youngsters,  fresh  from  the  last  embrace  of  their 
mothers,  left  alone  with  their  fears  and  longings  for  the  sons  they 
were  never  to  see  again — our  sad-eyed  mothers  in  the  ghettos  of 
Europe  who  gave  so  much  of  themselves  and  received  so  little 
in  return — 

Our  heroic  mothers  who  never  knew  youth,  were  made  to  marry 
at  an  early  age,  reared  large  families  and,  in  many  cases,  were  also 
the  bread  earners  of  their  children  and  a  pious  impractical  husband, 
well  learned  in  the  Law — 

Our  good  mothers  who  would  leave  their  hungry  brood  to  cover 
the  town,  with  kerchief  in  hand,  collecting  pittances  for  some  un- 
fortunate widow  or  dowry  for  a  poor  bride — 

Mothers  are  the  same  all  over  the  world  and  here  we  were  to 
find  the  same  mothers  in  another  incarnation.  They  took  us  into 
their  homes,  gave  us  the  best  rooms  in  the  house,  the  choicest  bed 
and  made  us  feel  that  we  were  more  than  mere  laughable  in- 
dividuals with  a  foreign  accent.  They  raised  our  dignity  and 
gave  us  hope.  To  them  we  were  the  sons  of  the  old  proud  Hebrews 
with  the  blood  of  prophets  in  our  veins.  They  were  the  first  to 
make  us  feel  that  we  really  belonged.  From  a  letter  to  the  author 
from  Harry  Richter,  Norwood,  N.  C,  October  14,  1954. 


216  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Because  indeed,  there  would  be  no  history  to  tell  unless 
we  spoke  of  PEOPLE—the  People  of  North  Carolina  and 
the  People  of  America,  who  inspired  adherence  to  the  re- 
ligious law  of  Jeremiah:  "Pray  ye  for  the  peace  of  the  city 
in  which  ye  dwell." 


NORTH  CAROLINA  FICTION,  1953-1954 
By  Robert  Mason 

From  the  pens  of  North  Carolina  novelists,  story-tellers, 
poets,  and  rhymesters  there  came  this  year  32  books.  Spread 
before  one,  they  form  a  fascinating  exhibit  of  the  artist's,  the 
typesetter's,  and  the  bookbinder's  skills,  for  all  are  new;  their 
dustjackets  intact  and  inviting,  their  pages  crisp  and  unsoiled. 
A  few  are  of  standard  thickness,  but  most  are  thin;  volumes  of 
poetry  and  children's  works  predominate.  The  32  hardly 
would  fill  a  shelf  of  a  living  room  bookcase. 

But  what  an  investment  of  search,  of  knowledge,  of  talent 
—and  of  vanity— we  have  represented  here.  How  many  years 
of  experience,  of  reflection,  of  note-making,  and  of  the  dread- 
fully hard  work  of  writing  have  gone  into  these  gay  and  these 
somber-backed  books!  One  is  likely  to  wonder,  too,  of  the 
thrills  of  triumph  among  the  first-time  authors  mirrored  in 
the  by-lines,  and  whether  the  scattering  of  production- 
writers  who  contributed  to  the  display  did  not  experience, 
upon  the  press-room  delivery,  an  odd  mixture  of  satisfaction 
and  misgivings. 

Most  of  all,  one  lifting  this  book  and  that  of  the  32,  arrang- 
ing them  into  the  three  general  classifications,  is  likely  to 
speculate  upon  the  quality  of  this  year's  North  Carolina  fic- 
tion, poetry,  and  children's  art-stories:  is  there  permanency 
here,  or  will  these  volumes  soon  be  forgotten,  like  the  autumn 
leaves  their  jackets  suggest?  What  has  been  the  Tar  Teel 
contribution  to  the  regional,  the  national,  and  the  world  liter- 
ature in  the  year  now  ending? 

Time  will  have  the  final  say.  Already  the  popular  success 
—and  that  is  important,  although  not  conclusive— of  two  or 
three  is  evidence  that  creations  of  some  stature  are  in  the 
list;  the  majority,  meanwhile,  can  be  expected  to  survive  only 
in  narrow  spaces.  But  no  hour  devoted  to  the  reading  of 
these  books  can  be  wasted.  Even  where  quality  is  lacking 
(and  often  it  is  in  the  privately  brought-out  scraps  of  verse 
and  essays),  inspiration  is  evident,  and  as  likely  as  not  con- 
tagious. 

[  217  ] 


218  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Four  books  of  the  32  are  novels  and  another  is  a  collection 
of  short  stories;  all  these  bear  the  imprint  of  first-line  publish- 
ing houses.  A  sixth  is  drama—a  work  which  thousands  know 
as  one  of  the  great  outdoor  productions  of  which  North  Caro- 
lina peculiarly  is  the  capital,  in  both  writing  and  enactment. 
Except  for  the  fact  that  all  qualify  as  fiction,  common  ground 
is  scarce  among  them.  While  all  except  one  are  of  southern 
setting,  and  two  of  the  novels  relate  the  construction  of  per- , 
sonal  empires  through  ruthlessness  and  the  effect  of  this 
upon  several  lives,  in  no  case  is  the  similarity  remarkable. 
The  authors  are  as  heterogeneous  as  their  plots  and  tech- 
niques: some  came  into  the  state,  others  were  born  here  and 
founded  their  careers  elsewhere;  only  two,  I  think,  are  na- 
tive North  Carolinians  who  have  remained.  A  couple  of 
these  writers  are  still  in  their  youth.  Future  successes  may  be 
expected  of  all  save  one.  He  is  dead. 

One  of  the  novels  will  fit  more  easily  than  any  of  the  others 
into  the  broad  pattern  of  southern  literature  as  it  is  generally 
recognized  from  a  world  point  of  view.  That  is  The  Planta- 
tion, by  Ovid  Williams  Pierce. 

I  do  not  mean  to  imply  that  this  distinguished  book  is 
stereotyped;  nothing  could  be  further  from  the  truth.  Indeed, 
its  gentleness,  its  simplicity,  its  beauty  give  it  rareness.  But  it 
has  that  characteristic  which  the  Literary  Supplement  of  the 
London  Times  in  a  recent  and  salutary  article  on  American 
writing  found  to  be  shared  by  the  South's  best  prose  artists: 
a  passionate  feeling  for  Place.  Here  Place  is  not  treated  in 
merely  its  historical  and  prideful  meaning  ,  but  "in  its  sensory 
meaning ,  the  breathing  world  of  sight  and  smell  and  sound, 
in  its  earth  and  water  and  sky,  in  its  time  and  its  season." 

Mr.  Pierce's  story  is  dedicated  to  Place— a  plantation  in 
northeastern  North  Carolina  (it  could  have  been  in  two  or 
three  other  southern  states,  but  not  in  random  part  of  any) 
early  in  this  century,  in  a  period  critical  to  plantation  life: 
Tradition  hangs  by  a  cobweb,  mold  is  in  the  air. 

There  are,  of  course,  people  in  the  story,  and  skillfully 
done,  too,  but  they  are  subject  to  Place.  They  occupy  three 
levels,  all  according  to  the  standards  of  Place— the  owners 


North  Carolina  Fiction,  1953-1954  219 

and  the  Negroes,  both  long  established  and  each  depending 
upon  the  other,  and  white  persons  of  a  lesser  ( and,  it  being 
the  South,  fixed)  station,  brought  in  as  near-stranger  and 
stranger  out  of  need.  In  the  solemn  dignity  of  Place,  the  indi- 
viduals of  all  three  strata  have  dignity,  too;  and  Mr.  Pierce's 
presentation  of  that  points  up  a  skill  which  ranks  him,  with 
this  single  book,  near  the  top  of  the  South's  new  writers. 

But  attention  to  Place,  or  lack  of  it,  is  not  the  sole  basis 
for  judging  writing,  and  I  shall  not  explore  it  further,  ex- 
cept to  say  that  each  of  this  year's  North  Carolina  authors 
of  fiction  who  employs  familiar  setting  practices  a  funda- 
mental rule  of  story-telling  and  gives  readers  reason  to  be 
grateful  for  his  insight. 

Event  is  the  foundation  of  The  Kingpin,  by  Thomas  Wick- 
er—a novel  obviously  based  on  North  Carolina's  senatorial 
contest  of  two  summers  ago.  Any  person  who  observed  the 
progress  of  that  campaign  is  certain  to  recognize  practices 
and  persons— but  he  must  not  look  too  closely.  Mr.  Wicker 
blends  history  with  imagination,  changing  things  as  actually 
they  occurred  to  suit  the  requirements  of  story  and  thesis: 
that  is  standard  practice,  too.  The  book  makes  me  think  of 
Number  One,  which  John  Dos  Passos  wrote  a  dozen  years 
ago,  and  thereby  a  little  sad;  that  was  a  chronicle  of  Huey 
Long's  tactics,  and  it  is  not  pleasant  to  be  reminded  that 
Longism  to  any  degree  had  its  counterpart  in  our  state. 

One  dozen  stories  make  up  The  Gentle  Insurrection,  by 
Doris  Betts.  The  title  story  is  not  the  best  but  in  theme  is 
representative:  patience  and  frustration,  hope  and  discour- 
agement, realism  and  the  refusal  to  recognize  it  are  inter- 
twined in  simple  lives,  adding  up  to  tragedy— the  hallmark 
of  the  young  writer,  which  the  young  southern  writer  is  like- 
ly to  confuse  with  his  birthright.  I  liked  particularly  "Ser- 
pents and  Doves";  it  is  a  fine  character  study  worked  out 
with  mature  compassion.  Sometimes  the  people  whom  Mrs. 
Betts  uses  for  her  stories  are  superficial,  but  never  discour- 
agingly  so;  she  is  also  given  to  caricature,  but  never  cruelly. 
The  remarkable  thing  is  that  in  her  years  she  has  discovered 
and  discerned  so  much.  Her  future  is  bright. 


220  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

The  strange  and  slick  world  of  advertising  centered  in 
New  York's  skyscrapers  is  the  setting  of  The  Whip  Hand,  by 
Ian  Gordon,  who  abandoned  the  hucksters  for  the  husks  of 
a  writer's  table.  The  dustjacket  illustration  is  most  prophetic. 
It  shows  a  desk  and  chair  in  a  modernistic  office;  on  the 
desk  are  a  man's  tie  and  two  martini  glasses,  on  the  chair 
and  under  it  are  a  woman's  coat  and  her  shoes.  The  gone 
addict  of  the  light  novel  and  box  of  chocolates  no  doubt 
will  be  prepared  for  the  ending.  I  was  not. 

Those  fortunate  ones  who  have  seen  Unto  These  Hills,  Ker- 
mit  Hunter's  drama  of  the  Cherokees,  know  it  for  its  tre- 
mendous stage  qualities.  Reading  the  play,  which  has  been 
brought  out  in  illustrated  book  form  by  the  University  of 
North  Carolina  Press,  is  almost  as  rewarding  as  sitting  be- 
neath the  stars  in  the  Great  Smokies  theater  and  seeing  a 
climaxing  chapter  of  the  Red  Man's  past  unfold.  The  econ- 
omy of  dialogue,  as  contrasted  to  the  speech-writing  which 
authors  of  historical  pageants  have  not  always  been  able  to 
resist,  is  the  work  of  a  thorough  technician;  the  narrator's 
passages  are  the  product  of  a  poet  truly  humble  before  his 
subject. 

Good-bye,  My  Lady.  That  is  the  title  of  James  Street's 
last  complete  book  of  fiction.  At  about  the  time  it  was  pub- 
lished, we  said,  "Good-bye,  Jimmie."  For  Mr.  Street,  who 
was  bom  in  Mississippi  and  newspapered  in  half  a  dozen 
places,  most  successfully  (and  conspiciously )  in  New  York, 
died  in  the  home  he  had  chosen  to  be  his  last—Chapel  Hill. 

Here  is  not  Mr.  Street's  masterpiece.  But  like  the  author 
himself,  the  little  book  is  dearly  compelling— and  full  of 
fine  sentiment.  It  is  about  a  boy— a  subject  the  author  was 
as  competent  to  write  on  as  Mark  Twain  or  William  Saroyan 
—and  his  dog.  As  Mr.  Pierce  chose  a  critical  time  in  the  life 
of  a  plantation  to  forge  into  a  story,  so  Mr.  Street  selected 
an  especially  sensitive  time  in  a  boy's  life:  that  mystical 
period  when  he  passes  from  childhood  into  manhood.  To 
guide  Skeeter  through  this  stage  of  testing,  there  is  old  Uncle 
Jesse,  who  is  short  on  book  learning  but  long  on  the  ways 
of  the  swamp. 


North  Carolina  Fiction,  1953-1954  221 

But  wait,  isn't  this  the  Readers  Digest  formula  for  enter- 
taining the  person  who  likes  to  slip  his  mind  into  neutral 
when  he  reads:  boy  with  chin  up,  little  dog,  unforgettable 
character?  Of  course  it  is.  But  into  this  universal  appeal 
James  Street  wove  his  surprisingly  great  knowledge  of  the 
lower  Mississippi  country  and  its  people,  his  humor,  his 
mastery  of  the  yarn,  his  respect  for  regionalism,  his  tolerance, 
and  his  tremendous  sense  of  the  individual's  right  to  stand 
in  the  sun. 

James  Street  lived  in  North  Carolina  for  nine  years.  The 
writing  part  of  the  state  can  say,  "Thanks,  Jimmie,  for  all  of 
them." 

Exactly  half  of  all  this  year's  fiction  by  North  Carolinians 
is  for  children.  The  number  should  not  be  surprising;  the 
youth  market  is  an  ample  one  and,  I'm  told,  often  a  lucrative 
one. 

The  boundary  between  senior  and  junior  books  of  the  32 
is  as  thin  as  a  flyleaf.  Any  child  above  ten  should  appre- 
ciate Mr.  Street's  book.  And  no  adult  should  find  Penny  Rose, 
by  Mebane  Holoman  Burgwyn,  below  his  range  of  interests. 
Mrs.  Burgwyn  tells  a  first-rate  story  of  a  nearly-grown  girl 
and  her  problems,  including  (of  course!)  those  of  the  heart. 
There's  a  mystery  in  the  background,  and  when  it  is  cleared 
up,  a  lot  of  things  suddenly  assume  satisfactory  perspective; 
the  climax  comes  fairly  tumbling  upon  the  reader.  This  author 
has  a  fine  talent. 

Burgess  Leonard  contributed  two  of  the  books  for  young- 
sters, one  about  football,  the  other  about  baseball.  A  uni- 
versity varsity  star  to  whom  I  lent  One-Man  Rackfield  found 
it  authentic  and  absorbing.  As  a  baseball  fan  of  long  stand- 
ing, after  picking  up  The  Rookie  Fights  Rack  I  was  reluctant 
to  put  it  down. 

It  is  difficult  to  speak  with  conviction  about  books  for 
really  little  folks.  A  friend  of  mine  who  writes  them  once 
assured  me  that  most  are  worthless,  and  I  suppose  they  are, 
from  a  strictly  critical  view.  Pictures  receive  quite  as  much, 
and  sometimes  more,  emphasis  than  text,  inasmuch  as  sub- 
school-age  children  who  must  be  read  to,  enjoy  looking  at 


222  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

the  illustrations  and  identifying  the  words  with  them.  I  had 
the  feeling,  though,  that  the  most  skillfully  executed  of  these 
pictures  might  have  the  least  appeal  to  children.  One  set  is 
done  in  crayon,  as  best  I  can  tell,  uniform  in  blue-grey  and 
somewhat  eerie  in  quality.  Shouldn't  they  be  livelier?  My 
favorite  pictures  among  the  lot  are  in  a  tiny  book  about 
chickens  and  dogs  and  cats.  The  colors  are  brilliant  and  the 
lines  so  few  and  subtle  as  to  be  absolutely  delightful.  I  hope 
children  like  these;  I  am  sure  James  Whistler  would  have. 

I  have  come  at  last,  and  not  without  trepidation,  to  the 
books  of  poetry,  of  which  the  year  brought  ten— seven  of 
them  by  women.  I  shall  not  take  them  all  up  singly,  because 
the  pattern  of  the  majority  is  the  same. 

However,  Thad  Stem's  The  Jackknife  Horse  deserves  close 
attention,  for  it  seemed  to  me  that  here  is  an  original  Tar 
Heel  voice.  Mr.  Stem  is  producing  what  he  calls  "Ageless 
Fruit  in  solitary  blossoms."  Yet,  in  the  same  poem,  he  is 
capable  of  such  a  foolishness  as  "the  mad  suns  that  bite/ 
The  despondent  apple  trees."  He  has  energy  and  poetic 
vision: 

Not  by  a  bushelful  of  oceans,  nor  a  peck  of  April  clouds, 
Not  by  a  jugful  of  raindrops  and  rose  buds. 

There  are  moments  of  Robert  Frost,  others  when  he  brings 
a  rather  proletarian  (in  the  best  sense)  tone,  as  "This  ding- 
dong-who's-got-the-whiskey  existence."  While  I  don't  care  so 
much  for  the  allegation  that  "the  night  comes  like  a  rancid 
lover,"  he  can  strike  at  the  sordid  with  real  eloquence: 

God,  the  times  are  like  a  broken  bone 
That  will  not  knit,  or  like  a  blind  dog 
Chasing  a  cat  up  a  dead-end  alley. 

Beyond  any  doubt,  the  Maximus  Poems,  by  Charles  Olson, 
are  the  most  ambitious  work  represented  in  the  year's  col- 
lection. These  poems  seek  and  demand  comparison  with 
Ezra  Pond's  The  Cantos,  and  perhaps  also  with  William  Car- 
los Williams's  Taterson.  But  the  comparison  is  earned  only 


North  Carolina  Fiction,  1953-1954  223 

by  virture  of  prolixity  and  complexity— both  of  which,  I 
fear,  here  seem  relatively  superfluous.  The  thing  is,  Pound 
had  such  a  vast  storehouse  of  cultural  odds  and  ends  to  draw 
on  and  so  much  to  make  out  of  them,  that  his  complexity 
was  necessary.  Here,  such  is  not  the  case. 

But  Mr.  Olson  is  no  phoney.  I  am  cheered  by  his  willing- 
ness to  experiment,  for  that  is  necessary  to  the  growth  of  all 
the  arts,  and  sometimes  his  colloquialisms  and  juxtapositions 
lead  to  startling  insights. 

Julian  Mason  applied  a  superior  intellect  to  the  poems 
making  up  Search  Party,  but  with  him  poetry  is  a  less  serious 
matter,  I  think,  than  with  Mr.  Stem  and  Mr.  Olson.  He  lays 
words  like  a  good  craftsman  lays  bricks:  precisely  and  neat- 
ly, and  with  the  effect  pleasing  in  detail  and  substantial 
overall.  And  brick-laying  is  a  most  beneficial  occupation  as 
a  hobby  as  well  as  a  trade. 

In  The  Years  at  the  Spring,  by  Ruth  Vail,  there  is  a  poem 
which  I  liked  particularly,  "The  Sea  Magic."  It  contains  these 
lines: 

We  hear  the  cold  surf -notes  on  the  restless  sea 
On  moonstruck  sands, 

For  the  little  while  we  are  standing  here  together 
Clasping  each  other's  hands. 

This  and  some  of  Mrs.  Vail's  other  sea  poems  prompt  me 
to  generalize  that  our  poets  who  write  in  fulfillment  of  an 
urge  to  capture  the  life  and  the  scenes  and  the  moods  about 
them  would  be  better  off  coping  with  the  woods  and  the 
waves  and  those  other  evidences  of  our  frontiers  and  our 
trails  and  giving  less  attention  to  the  reflections  and  specula- 
tions that  could,  ever  so  often,  be  quite  adequately  expressed 
in  a  sigh,  or  perhaps  an  oath. 

Unusually  successful  in  the  many  competitions  open  to 
poets  has  been  Charlotte  Young,  here  represented  by  The 
Heart  Has  Many  Reasons.  I  found  in  "Requiem"  a  quality 
all  its  own: 


224  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Rivers  shall  hurry  down  to  the  ocean, 

Trade  winds  relentlessly  sweep, 
The  earth  shall  turn  in  two-fold  motion— 

And  I  shall  sleep  and  sleep.  .  .  . 

The  Farmer  will  rise  in  the  grey  dawn  weather, 

The  lark  will  shape  her  low  nest, 
Philosophers  piece  the  cosmos  together— 

But  I  shall  rest  and  rest.  .  .  . 

Many,  many  of  the  verses  in  these  neatly  printed  volumes 
are  parochial,  with  moralities  simplified  into  utter  unreality. 
(Where  do  people  get  the  idea  that  morals  come  easily?) 
Nearly  all  the  writers  have  a  habit  of  presenting  stock  phrases 
with  which  they  are  accustomed  to  evoking  conditioned  re- 
sponses. Sometimes  one  does  not  have  to  read;  one  merely 
drowses  and  is  lulled  into  a  kind  of  euphoria.  Listen:  "dimpl- 
ed knees,"  "smoothwhite  shoulder,"  "fragile  spires  of 
thought,"  "tear-filled  voice,"  "my  daddy's  dear  face,"  "rich 
fertile  soil."  The  poems  become  almost  interchangeable— 
and  so,  for  that  matter,  are  the  critical  plaudits  on  the  dust 
jackets.  Here  one  finds  "girlish  lips,"  "wishful  face,"  "lovely 
thoughts,"  "tender  dreams,"  "happy  heart,"  "silver  night," 
"pale  pearl  moon." 

But  there  is  the  other  side  of  the  ledger.  In  one  of  the  books 
I  found  what  seemed  to  be  pleasant,  refreshing  naivete;  sever- 
al short  items  elsewhere  recalled  the  gem-like  works  of  the 
Japanese  and  Chinese;  individual  strength  stands  out  in  scat- 
tered offerings.  The  free  verse  is,  I  think,  generally  the  most 
successful. 

Most  of  these  North  Carolina  poems  look  with  trust  and 
hope  upon  a  world  that  often  seems  cruel.  And  that  I  will 
not  have  the  hardihood  to  disavow. 


NORTH  CAROLINA  NON-FICTION  BOOKS,  1953-1954 
By  Leonard  B.  Hurley 

In  the  play  Hamlet  when  the  elderly,  extremely  talkative, 
and  somewhat  tedious  old  Polonius,  about  to  give  before  the 
Danish  court  at  Elsinore  a  long  speech  that  will  have  the 
exordium,  the  narrative  part,  and  the  peroration,  says  near 
its  beginning 

Since  brevity  is  the  soul  of  wit  [meaning  wisdom] 
and  tediousness  the  limbs  and  outward  nourishes, 
I  will  be  brief, 

Then  Queen  Gertrude,  who  on  the  whole  loves  the  old  cour- 
tier, and  knows  full  well  that  he  seldom  can  be  brief,  kindly 
admonishes: 

More  matter  and  less  art. 

As  one  who  certainly  was  never  noted  for  his  wit  (meaning 
wisdom),  nor  for  essential  brevity,  and  who  is  now  called 
upon  to  review  twenty-eight  books  of  a  most  varied  nature 
in  little  more  than  as  many  minutes,  I  am  painfully  conscious 
that  I  must  follow  the  Queen's  advice— get  in  matter  at  the 
expense  of  art  in  the  getting  in,  and  yet  that  in  so  doing  I 
can  hardly  hope  to  escape  the  tediousness  which  makes  "the 
limbs  and  outward  flourishes."  But,  I  am  somewhat  comfort- 
ed by  a  speech  that  comes  a  little  later  in  the  play,  wherein 
after  Hamlet  has  instructed  old  Polonius  to  look  well  after 
the  entertainment  of  the  players  who  have  come  by  invita- 
tion to  visit  the  court,  Polonius  replies: 

My  Lord,  I  will  use  them  according  to  their  desert, 
Hamlet  cries 

God's  bodykin's  man,  much  better !  Use  every 
man  after  his  desert  and  who  shall  'scape  whipping  ? 
Use  them  after  your  own  honor  and  dignity.  The 
less  they  deserve,  the  more  merit  is  in  your  bounty. 
Take  them  in. 

[225] 


226  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

I  feel  assured  that  this  august  assembly  will  use  me  so— not 
after  my  desert,  no  matter  how  little  that  may  be,  but  accord- 
ing to  its  own  honor  and  dignity,  with  the  merit  all  in  its 
own  bounty. 

Five  years  ago  Mr.  William  T.  Polk  pointed  out  to  this 
group  on  just  such  an  occasion  as  this,  that  North  Carolina 
could  fairly  be  termed  a  state  of  writing.  Four  years  ago  Mrs. 
Dorothy  G.  Thorne  observed  that  if  the  previous  year  had 
been  that  in  which  North  Carolina  writers  discovered  tobacco, 
1950  was  the  year  in  which  they  discovered  great  men- 
eleven  out  of  the  twenty-eight  books  in  fields  other  than  fic- 
tion and  poetry  that  year  having  been  biographical  studies. 
In  1951  Professor  Frontis  W.  Johnston  expressed  satisfaction 
in  his  inability  to  find  any  common  denominator  for  the 
eighteen  volumes  he  had  examined,  inasmuch  as  the  infi- 
nite riches  of  variety  was  only  to  be  expected  from  a  state  so 
celebrated  for  varied  resources.  In  1952  Mr.  Legette  Blythe 
was  pleased  that  he  had  not  found  it  possible  to  divide  books 
into  well-defined  categories— noting  that  each  stood  alone, 
differing  in  many  respects  from  its  fellows,  because  each 
was  the  work  of  an  individual  seeing  things  and  recording 
them  in  his  own  individual  way.  And  last  year  Mr.  Hoke 
Norris  spoke  of  his  gratification  in  having  met  forty  or  more 
North  Carolina  writers  attending  a  single  writers'  conference, 
in  Boone  in  August;  emphasized  the  amazing  and  fruitful 
revelation  that  had  come  to  him  in  reading  the  twenty-one 
books  submitted  in  the  competition  for  the  Mayflower  award; 
and  pointed  out  that  North  Carolina  had  long  before  passed 
from  Mr.  Mencken's  Sahara  of  the  Bozart  region  to  assume 
a  position  of  some  leadership  in  the  Southern  Literary 
Renaissance. 

Now,  this  year  I  can  but  follow  in  their  footsteps,  to  pro- 
claim again  the  rich  variety  of  the  year's  offerings,  to  testify 
once  more  to  the  difficulty  of  the  task  facing  those  who  would 
read  these  works  for  a  comparative  evaluation,  to  confess 
to  having  made  a  brave  initial  attempt  to  review  each  book, 
only  to  fall  back  eventually  before  the  limits  of  time  allotted 
here,  which  brings  the  necessity  for  little  more  than  bare 


North  Carolina  Non-Fiction  Books,  1953-1954      227 

mention  of  some  books,  a  very  brief  comment  on  others,  and 
a  somewhat  longer  but  still  relatively  brief  examination  of 
a  few;  and  for  convenience,  somewhat  arbitrarily  to  arrange 
them  in  groups  after  the  general  fashion  of  library  classifi- 
cation, while  realizing  that  no  such  arrangement  can  be  al- 
together satisfactory  or  feasible. 

There  are  twenty-eight  books  in  this  year's  harvest.  Six 
of  these  were  brought  out  by  a  university  press  -  one  each 
by  Cornell,  Duke,  Harvard,  Louisana  State,  the  University 
of  Chicago,  and  the  University  of  North  Carolina  Press.  A 
dozen  or  more  were  published  by  nationally  known  publish- 
ing firms  including  Dial  Press,  Doubleday,  Abingdon-Cokes- 
bury,  Samuel  French,  Harpers,  Lippincotts,  Little-Brown, 
MacMillan,  Scribners,  Broadman,  and  William  Morrow.  Oth- 
ers were  printed  by  less  well-known  firms,  were  privately 
printed,  or  were  published  by  societies  or  organized  groups 
—including  the  Philosophical  Library,  the  Exposition  Press, 
the  Divers  Press,  the  North  Carolina  Grange,  a  North  Caro- 
lina church,  and  the  State  Department  of  Archives  and  His- 
tory. 

No  specific  trends  are  to  be  noted.  Perhaps  there  were 
fewer  biographies  and  autobiographical  studies.  Only  two  of 
the  books  are  by  women,  and  both  of  these,  Mrs.  Ella  Earl 
Cotton  and  Miss  Ruby  F.  Johnston,  are  educated,  cultivated 
women  of  the  Negro  race,  who  are  now,  or  have  been,  work- 
ers in  education  and  in  social  fields.  Seven  of  the  books  are 
by  ministers,  at  least  twelve  by  teachers,  two  by  newspaper 
editors.  Nearly  half  could  be  classified  as  books  of  a  scholarly 
nature— in  a  sense  the  product  of  scholarly  research,  includ- 
ing texts.  It  might  also  be  said  that  in  comparison  with  the 
books  of  several  recent  years,  there  is  this  year  less  concen- 
tration on  North  Carolina,  although  several  of  the  best  of 
the  books  do  deal  with  the  State  in  the  past  or  the  present  or 
in  both.  For  example,  in  comparison  with  1951  when  eight 
out  of  eighteen  books  had  decided  connection  with  North 
Carolina,  this  year  only  eight  out  of  twenty-eight  do,  where- 
as twenty  have  little  connection  with  North  Carolina  other 
than  that  of  having  been  produced  by  a  North  Carolinian. 


228  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

But  enough  of  preliminaries.  Let  us  turn  to  the  books  them- 
selves. 

First,  let  us  consider  books  having  a  religious  aspect,  books, 
that  is,  that  bear  in  some  way  on  religious  themes.  At  least 
nine  such  books  are  to  be  found  in  the  offering  for  the  year 
—possibly  ten,  though  several  of  these  might  also  be  classified 
as  historical  works  or  as  social  history.  Seven  of  these  books 
are  by  North  Carolina  ministers.  Suppose  we  start  with  a 
practical,  yet  deeply  moving  book  on  the  art  and  science  of 
preaching,  pass  thence  to  four  books  of  sermons,  consider 
briefly  a  work  dealing  with  the  relation  of  religion  to  the 
treatment  of  alcoholics,  and  move  then  to  several  books  that 
combine  the  theme  of  religion  with  the  social  and  historical 
theme. 

The  True  and  Lively  Word,  A  Practical  Guide  to  Effective 
Preaching,  by  James  T.  Cleland  is  made  up  of  five  lectures 
delivered  in  February,  1953,  to  the  Episcopal  Theological 
School  in  Cambridge,  Massachusetts.  They  are  "The  Words 
of  the  Bible,"  "The  Word  of  God,"  "The  Word  of  the  World," 
"The  Word  and  the  Words  of  the  Preacher,"  and  "The  Word 
in  the  Believer."  In  these  the  writer  says  he  has  sought  to 
outline,  what,  as  he  sees  it,  preaching  is  all  about:  "its  start- 
ing point;  its  content;  its  setting;  its  exponent;  its  outcome." 
He  takes  as  its  starting  point  this  difinition  of  a  sermon:  "A 
manifestation  of  the  Incarnate  Word,  from  the  Written 
Word,  by  the  Spoken  Word."  Every  sermon,  Dr.  Cleland 
maintains,  must  explain  the  ways  of  God  and  must  at  the 
same  time  show  understanding  of  human  affairs  and  human 
interests.  It  must  be  addressed  not  to  a  theologian  but  to 
the  layman  in  language  and  terms  that  the  average  member 
of  the  congregation  can  understand.  He  emphasizes  the  need 
of  the  process  of  digging  through,  turning  up  and  testing  a 
passage  of  scripture  that  the  real  word  of  God  may  be  found 
therein.  Constantly  must  the  minister  draw  the  eternal  out 
of  the  temporal  and,  in  reverse  order,  the  temporal  out  of 
the  eternal,  and  above  all  he  must  himself  "he  the  word  re- 
incarnated." Dr.  Cleland  is  Professor  of  Preaching  in  the 
Duke  University  Divinity  School  and  Preacher  to  the  Uni- 


North  Carolina  Non-Fiction  Books,  1953-1954      229 

versity;  and  these  lectures  which,  as  the  Christian  Century 
observes,  are  "lectures  on  preaching  delivered  to  Episcopal 
students  by  a  Presbyterian  who  normally  writes  for  the 
Methodists"  seemed  a  good  work  with  which  to  begin,  since 
"with  this  ecumenical  start  one  expects  a  broadly  intelligent 
treatment,"  and  that  expectation  is  not  disappointed. 

Of  the  four  volumes  of  sermons  among  this  years'  books, 
the  first  I  would  mention  is  that  by  the  Reverend  John  A. 
Redhead,  entitled  Getting  to  Know  God— Sixteen  Sermons  to 
Make  Him  Real  to  You.  Dr.  Redhead  begins  his  simple  but 
forceful  series  with  the  sermon  that  gives  his  volume  its  title, 
"Getting  to  Know  God-What  is  God  Like,  Who  is  He?  Where 
is  He?  How  can  a  Man  Get  to  Know  Him?"— follows  this  with 
three  sermons  entitled  "A  God  Who  Grows,"  "A  Glimpse  of 
God,"  "Look  at  God  Through  Christ,"  then  comes  to  "Path- 
ways to  God,"  followed  by  six  sermons,  one  each  on  The 
Wisdom— ,The  Love—,  The  Will—,  The  Power—,  The  Provi- 
dence—, and  the  Holiness  of  God.  He  passes  thence  to  three 
sermons  on  "The  Triumphant  God,"  "The  Saving  God,"  and 
"The  Healing  God,"  and  concludes  with  two  sermons,  "The 
God  of  All  Comfort"  and  "The  God  of  All  Grace."  Choosing 
four  texts  from  the  Old  Testament  and  twelve  from  the  New, 
the  author  sets  forth  in  uncomplicated  style,  in  straightfor- 
ward language,  and  with  a  wealth  of  assurance  his  conception 
of  the  way  men  must  follow  to  come  to  know  God  through 
his  son,  Jesus  Christ. 

A  second,  and  a  most  interesting  volume  of  sermons,  is 
found  in  The  Mandate  To  Humanity,  by  the  Reverend  Ed- 
win McNeill  Poteat,  with  its  subtitle  The  Ten  Command 
ments,  Divine  Imperatives  For  Man  and  Society,  An  Inquiry 
into  the  History  and  Meaning  of  the  Ten  Commandments  and 
Their  Relation  to  Contemporary  Culture.  The  volume  recalls, 
and  I  think  compares  very  favorably  with,  Dr.  Poteat's  vol- 
ume of  1951,  The  Parables  of  Crises,  in  which  he  also  in- 
quired into  the  history  and  meaning  of  sixteen  of  the  last 
parables  of  Jesus  in  a  discussion  which  greatly  stressed  the 
times  in  which  these  parables  were  spoken  and  the  com- 
parable tensions  of  the  mid-twentieth  century.  Again  "his 


230  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

approach  is  that  of  the  scholar;  his  aim  that  of  the  pastor," 
for  Dr.  Poteat  reasons  well,  fills  his  pages  with  shrewd  ob- 
servation, proves  continually  interesting,  writes  with  clarity 
and  at  times  in  sparkling  style,  but  seldom  with  moving 
simplicity,  though  nearly  always  with  a  real,  imaginative 
choice  of  words.  For  many,  I  think,  the  book  will  not  read 
easily. 

One  notes  that  here  Dr.  Poteat  presents  his  discussion  of 
the  ten  commandments  in  sixteen  chapters.  The  first  three 
chapters:  "The  Right  to  Command,"  "Man  Meets  God,"  and 
"No  Other  God,"  deal  with  the  bases  on  which  man  recog- 
nizes the  will  and  the  right  of  God  to  give  commandments, 
and  deal  with  the  first  great  commandment— Thou  Shall  Have 
No  Other  Gods  before  me— and  this  is  seen  as  the  result  of 
monolatry  rather  than  monotheism  or  polytheism.  Chapter 
four,  "Man's  Other  Gods,"  is  presented  in  the  author's  words 
as  something  of  a  parenthesis,  a  recapitulation  for  purpose 
of  keeping  continuity  clear,  and  deals  with  man's  Other  God, 
the  ego,  the  thing  within  himself  which  tricks  him  into  false 
ideas  about  the  good.  Chapter  Five,  "The  Image  Problem," 
deals  with  the  Second  Commandment,  and  chapter  six, 
"The  Jealously  of  God"  and  seven,  "The  Name  of  God,"  deal 
with  the  third.  And  these  first  three  commandments,  says  Dr. 
Poteat,  "are  more  profitably  understoond  as  three  parts  of 
one  great  commandment."  Chapter  seven,  "The  Sabbath 
Day,"  deals  with  the  Fourth  Commandment— one  as  long  as, 
and  much  more  detailed  than,  the  first  three  taken  together, 
and  chapter  nine  deals  with  the  Fifth  Commandment  which 
sets  up  the  importance  of  the  family.  Chapter  ten,  "Our 
Moral  Bill  of  Rights,"  is  again  a  parenthetic  chapter  pointing 
forward  to  the  four  maxims  which  follow  in  the  great  Man- 
date, exposing  the  problem  of  Morality  in  its  simple  essence. 
And  chapters  eleven,  "The  Right  to  Life,"  and  twelve,  "The 
Right  to  Integrity,"  thirteen,  "The  Right  to  Property,"  and 
fourteen,  "The  Right  to  Justice"  deal  with  the  Sixth  through 
the  Ninth  Commandments,  Thou  Shalt  Not  Kill,  Commit 
Adultery,  Steal,  Bear  False  Witness.  The  Tenth  Command- 
ments which  as  our  writer  says  "falls  back  to  an  attitude  of 


North  Carolina  Non-Fiction  Books,  1953-1954      231 

mind  and  for  that  reason  does  not  belong  with  group  six 
through  nine"  is  considered  in  Chapter  Fifteen,  and  the  final 
chapter,  "Conclusion,"  sums  up  the  whole  discussion. 
Throughout  these  sixteen  chapters,  readers  will  observe,  Dr. 
Poteat  brings  into  sharp  focus  the  stern  conflict  between 
Marxist  and  Hebrew-Christian  concepts  of  man's  moral  na- 
ture. And  in  his  excellent  and  informative  fourteen-page  In- 
troduction the  writer  deals  with  what  he  says,  "Nowadays  any 
effort  to  set  forth  what  the  biblical  record  has  to  say  must  be- 
gin with:"  namely  "an  understanding  of  a  literary  problem 
that  is  involved  in  its  history."  This  solid  book  of  two  hundred 
thirty-one  pages  is  longer  and  more  complex  than  the  two  al- 
ready reviewed,  or,  I  believe,  than  the  one  to  follow.  The 
book  is  dedicated  to  Dr.  Poteat's  congregation  of  the  Pullen 
Memorial  Baptist  Church,  Raleigh. 

A  third  book  of  sermons,  I  must  treat  more  briefly:  The 
Rev.  J.  Winston  Pearce's  I  Believe:  Twelve  Studies  in  the 
Christian  Faith.  Here  is  a  small  volume  of  one  hundred  twen- 
ty pages.  Dr.  Pearce,  pastor  of  the  First  Baptist  Church  in 
Durham,  beginning  with  a  sermon  "What  a  Great  Faith  Will 
Do  For  You,"  continues  with  eleven  sermons  each  of  which 
uses  the  words  of  the  title  I  Believe:  I  believe  in  God,—  in 
Jesus  Christ,—  in  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  the  Incarnation,—  in  the 
Forgiveness  of  Sin,—  in  The  Church,—  in  Prayer,—  in  The 
Priesthood  of  All  Believers,—  in  The  Bible,— in  The  Resur- 
rection,— in  Continuing  Incarnation.  In  informal,  readable 
style,  with  apt  references  and  an  abundance  of  illustrative 
stories,  a  devout  minister,  through  giving  his  own  personal 
beliefs,  reaffirms  what  he  conceives  to  be  the  heart  of  Chris- 
tian faith. 

A  volume  almost  twice  the  length  of  I  Believe  is  found  in 
the  fourth  book  of  sermons  or  related  religious  essays,  Billy 
Graham's  Peace  With  God:  How  To  Choose  in  The  Hour 
of  Decision.  Here  the  material  is  arranged  in  three  divisions 
each  containing  six  discussions  averaging  ten  to  fifteen  pages 
in  length:  Part  One-The  Problem;  Part  Two-The  Solution; 
Part  Three— The  Result.  As  the  New  York  Times  recently 
stated:  "Mr  Graham  speaks  and  writes  for  the  average  man. 


232  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

His  is  the  'old  time  religion/  full  of  fire  and  enthusiasm,  the 
Bible-preaching  of  American  Protestantism  from  frontier  to 
TV."  This  book  of  sermons,  which  as  the  author  says  in  his 
preface  has  "literally  been  prepared  on  our  knees,"  presents 
an  analysis  of  the  teachings  of  this  well-recognized  funda- 
mentalist evangelist— teachings,  we  should  probably  remem- 
ber, which  have  a  wide  currency  because  of  the  weekly  ra- 
dio talks  "Hour  of  Decision"  and  because  of  his  evangelistic 
campaigns  in  many  cities  in  the  United  States  and  abroad. 
Believing  that  people  today  are  disorganized,  bewildered, 
and  frightened  because  they  are  sinful;  and  that  the  divine 
wisdom  of  God  as  set  forth  in  His  word  has  in  it  all  that 
man  needs  for  a  good  life,  a  peaceful  life,  and  for  salvation; 
that  man  if  he  will  but  read  the  Word  will  have  made  peace 
with  God  and  will  be  saved  from  eternal  damnation;  Graham 
here  sets  forth  his  creed  in  detail. 

A  somewhat  more  specialized  book  having  a  religious 
theme  is  found  in  Dr.  George  Aiken  Taylor's  A  Sober  Faith, 
Religion  and  Alcoholics  Anonymous.  Seeing  that  belief  in 
God  and  a  willingness  to  let  God  help  is  a  basic  belief  and 
attitude  in  those  who  work  through  Alcoholics  Anonymous; 
that  the  program  of  this  group  is  basically  a  simple  one  com- 
pletely founded  on  spiritual  principles,  a  program  consisting 
of  twelve  definitely  outlined  steps;  recognizing  that  this  pro- 
gram quite  clearly  has  a  close  kinship  with  religion  but  that 
Alcoholics  Anonymous  has  succeeded  with  cures  where  the 
church  has  failed,  Dr.  Taylor  wished  to  know  whether  those 
in  this  organization  had  found  something  in  religion,  some- 
thing whose  presence  was  hitherto  unsuspected,  and  so  he 
probes  into  this  question  and  analyzes  each  of  the  twelve 
steps  to  show  its  parallel  to  religion  and  to  suggest  how  each 
—the  church  and  Alcoholics  Anonymous— many  benefit  from 
the  other. 

We  turn  now  to  four  books  which  combine  with  the  church 
—or  the  religious  —note,  the  historical  or  sociological  theme. 
First  a  work  entitled— The  Presbyterian  Congregation  on 
Rocky  River.  This  rather  solidly  written  book  of  more  than 
two  hundred  pages,  which  the  author  Thomas  Hugh  Spence, 


North  Carolina  Non-Fiction  Books,  1953-1954      233 

Jr.  dedicates  to  his  father,  a  native  born  Scot  who  was  past- 
or of  Rocky  River  Church  1916-1931,  tells  the  story  of 
this  congregation  near  Concord  through  the  course  of  two 
centuries,  from  its  foundation  by  the  vanguard  of  the  sturdy 
Scotch-Irish  who  poured  into  the  region  in  the  eighteenth 
century,  many  of  them  to  settle  on  the  banks  of  this  river 
and  its  branches,  on  to  the  present.  The  book  is  relatively  well 
organized  and  is  written  in  a  clear,  straightforward  pleasing 
style;  it  amply  illustrates  the  development  through  the  years 
in  North  Carolina  of  a  phase  of  life  that  has  added  to  the 
stature  and  to  the  richness  of  spirit  in  this  region. 

Two  other  books  that  have  connection  with  the  religious 
theme  and  with  the  social  or  historical  are  the  Development 
of  Negro  Religion,  by  Ruby  F.  Johnston,  and  Negro  Slave 
Songs  of  the  United  States,  by  Dr.  Miles  Mark  Fisher.  The 
first  of  these,  published  by  the  Philosophical  Library,  New 
York,  is  arranged  in  two  parts.  First,  "A  Condensed  History  of 
Negro  Religion,"  presented  in  two  chapters;  and  second,  "Re- 
ligion in  Transition,"  presented  in  seven  chapters.  Miss  John- 
ston states  as  the  aim  of  her  study:  ".  .  .  to  present  functional 
aspects  of  the  Christian  religion  among  contemporary  Ameri- 
can Negroes  ...  to  demonstrate  the  origin  and  development 
of  the  concept  of  Christianity  among  Negroes,  and  to  point 
out  the  progress  of  change  in  belief  and  action  conditioned 
by  the  social  environment  in  which  this  evolution  occurred." 
She  finds  that  in  the  course  of  time  certain  features  of  re- 
ligion were  accentuated  among  the  American  Negroes,  that 
in  an  effort  to  adjust  members  to  "perplexing,  baffling,  stag- 
gering experiences  in  a  new  world,  a  distinct  flavor  in  re- 
ligious manifestation  developed  from  the  social  background 
and  habitat  of  a  transplanted  people  .  .  .  submerged  feelings 
unexperienced  in  real-life  situations  found  an  outlet  in  intense 
emotional  expression  in  the  church.  Desire  for  recognition 
.  .  .  security  unfulfilled  in  everyday  activities  received  fulfill- 
ment .  .  .  instruments  for  procurement  of  freedom  were  tor- 
mented in  the  church.  Religion  became  the  way  of  life." 
Hence  Miss  Johnston's  objective  becomes  in  her  words,  "to 
give  major  consideration  to  these  functions— emotional,  psy- 


234  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

etiological,  social— as  the  Negro  conceived  them  at  various 
periods,  with  an  account  of  the  modifications,  subordinance, 
and  displacement  of  one  form  by  another  as  the  goals  of  the 
race  were  achieved  in  the  American  cultural  setting  as  the 
American  society  itself  underwent  metamorphosis."  This 
study,  based  as  it  is  on  a  social  survey  made  of  Negro 
churches  in  Boston,  Massachusetts,  and  in  South  Carolina- 
three  rural  churches  in  or  near  Orangeburg,  S.  C,  served  by 
a  single  pastor— is  really  more  a  sociological  than  a  religious 
work.  It  presents  some  interesting  material  for  those  who 
would  understand  the  Negro  in  our  world  today. 

Negro  Slave  Songs  of  the  United  States  is  a  scholarly  study 
published  by  the  Cornell  University  Press  for  the  American 
Historical  Association,  Its  author,  Dr.  Miles  Mark  Fisher,  is 
both  teacher  and  preacher— Professor  of  Church  History  at 
Shaw  University,  Pastor  of  White  Rock  Baptist  Church  in 
Durham.  The  present  work  is  the  outgrowth  of,  and  revision 
of,  a  doctoral  dissertation  prepared  in  the  Divinity  School  of 
the  University  of  Chicago.  It  is  Dr.  Fisher's  thesis  that,  "the 
so-called  'Slave  Songs'  of  the  United  States  are  best  under- 
stood when  they  are  considered  as  expressions  of  individual 
Negroes  which  can  be  dated  and  assigned  to  a  geographical 
locale.  They  are,  in  brief,  historical  documents.  As  such  they 
reflect  Negro  behavior  which  as  Frederick  Law  Olmstead  con- 
cluded in  1860,  emphasized  African  background  patterns  ra- 
ther than  the  Christianity  of  the  nineteenth  century." 

Dr.  Fisher  has  arranged  his  study  of  Negro  slave  songs- 
spirituals— in  nine  numbered  divisions.  He  opens  with  a  twen- 
ty-six page  discussion  of  "History  in  the  Music  of  Negroes." 
He  closes  with  a  fifteen-page  summary  section  of  "Under- 
standing Spirituals."  Between  this  opening  and  this  closing 
discussion  are  seven  numbered  sections  each  approximately 
fourteen  to  twenty  pages  in  length,  each  considering  a  group 
of  spirituals  but  centered  around  an  outstanding  one,  these 
drawn  from  definite  periods  in  American  history.  For  ex- 
ample, the  first  to  be  considered,  grouped  around  "Sinner 
Please,"  are  from  the  years  1740  to  1815;  second,  those  group- 
ed around  "Deep  River"  are  from  the  years  1816  to  1831; 


North  Carolina  Non-Fiction  Books,  1953-1954      235 

third,  those  centering  about  "Steal  Away"  come  from  the  years 
1800  to  1831;  next  those  from  the  fourth,  fifth,  and  sixth  sec- 
tions and  centering  respectively  about  the  spirituals  "You'd 
Better  Min',"  "I  am  Bound  for  the  Promised  Land,"  and 
"When  I  Die"  all  come  from  the  years  1832-1867;  and  finally 
those  grouped  with  "Look  What  a  Wonder  Jedus  Done"  rep- 
resent the  years  1861  to  1867. 

In  the  course  of  this  study  Dr.  Fisher  reviews  in  a  detailed 
manner  the  history  of  various  attitudes  toward  Negro  slave 
music  or  slave  songs,  and  arrives  at  a  conclusion  that  agrees 
with  what  he  discovers  to  be  the  later  approach— the  histori- 
cal approach;  that  is  to  say  that  the  slave  "took  a  good  look 
at  this  world  and  told  what  he  saw"— that  as  John  Lowell 
said  in  1939,  a  "true  interpretation"  of  spirituals  held  that 
they  were  evidences  of  the  Negro's  obsession  with  freedom 
and  justice,  and  they  included  plans  of  strategy  with  which 
these  could  be  achieved;  and  that,  as  V.  F.  Calverton  has  it, 
"there  is  more,  far  more  than  the  ordinary  Christian  zeal 
embedded  in  Negro  spirituals.  They  are  not  mere  religious 
hymn  written  or  recited  to  sweeten  the  service  or  improve 
the  ritual."  Rather  "they  are  the  aching,  poignant  cry  of  an 
entire  people."  So,  says  Dr.  Fisher  in  the  concluding  para- 
graphs of  his  introductory  chapter,  "That  negro  spirituals 
are  historical  documents  from  the  negro  people  may  be 
postulated  in  five  statements:  The  primary  function  of  Afri- 
can Music  was  to  give  the  history  of  a  people;  African  Ne- 
groes were  transplanted  to  the  Americas  along  with  their 
gifts  of  song;  the  first  extended  collection  of  slave  songs  was 
advertised  as  historical  documents  from  the  negro  people; 
such  an  evolution  of  slave  songs  was  perceived  by  divers 
people;  Negro  spirituals  are  best  understood  in  harmony  with 
this  historical  interpretation." 

One  other  scholarly  study  in  this  category  I  would  men- 
tion as  a  most  impressive  work  among  the  year's  books,  The 
Russian  Church  and  the  Soviet  State,  by  Dr.  John  Shelton 
Curtis.  Dr.  Curtis  maintains  an  attitude  of  scrupulous  ob- 
jectivity as  he  tells  with  extraordinary  clarity  a  most  complex 
story,  that  of  the  changing  position  of  the  Russian  Orthodox 


236  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Church  in  relation  to  the  Soviet  State  from  1917  down  to  the 
end  of  the  year  1950.  This  last-named  date  was  chosen  be- 
cause, by  that  time,  the  author  declares  "the  revolutionary  as- 
pects of  the  relationship  had  ended,  and,  after  the  striking  de- 
velopments during  World  War  II,  a  modus  Vivendi  that 
promises  to  have  considerable  duration  has  been  established 
...  no  significant  changes  appear  to  be  in  prospect." 

Dr.  Curtis,  professor  of  history  at  Duke  University,  has 
indeed  produced  a  book  that  is  a  superb  piece  of  scholarship. 
The  work  is  based  on  original  sources  discovered  both  in 
America  and  in  Europe.  It  deals  with  a  problem  about  which, 
I  am  told,  specialists  in  the  Russian  field  have  long  been  lack- 
ing information,  and  hence  is  likely  to  be  regarded  as  the 
definitive  work  on  the  subject  so  long  as  Soviet  records  re- 
main closed  to  western  scholars.  I  know  that  some  of  these 
scholars  find  the  style  of  the  work,  though  not  inferior  to 
that  in  the  average  monograph,  yet  not  quite  on  the  same 
high  level  with  its  scholarship;  and  feel  that  though  the  na- 
ture of  the  material  is  admittedly  not  of  the  type  that  lends 
itself  to  vivid  and  dramatic  treatment,  some  parts  of  the 
study  seem  much  richer  than  others.  For  example,  the 
treatment  of  the  first  ten  year  period  to  1928  is  on  the  whole 
much  more  impressive  than  that  given  the  following  twenty- 
three  years,  and  that  even  if  the  official  Soviet  sources  be- 
came, as  the  author  says  'less  abundant'  after  that  year,  that 
these,  nevertheless  might  have  been  supplemented  with  profit 
by  the  contribution  which  stories  of  Soviet  emigrants  as  liv- 
ing witnesses— especially  after  1938—  would  probably  have 
made.  Despite  the  claim  on  the  book-jacket  that  the  work 
"will  interest  the  general  reader  as  well  as  the  entire  theologi- 
cal audience"  one  may  with  reason  suspect  that  only  that  por- 
tion of  the  theological  audience  which  is  directly  concerned 
with  religious  problems  behind  the  iron  curtain  will  be 
drawn  to  it,  and  that  the  average  reader  will  not  find  it  of 
great  appeal.  It  is,  as  I  have  said,  a  thorough  and  a  scholarly 
work,  carefully  documented,  well  balanced,  and  on  the  whole, 
material  interestingly  presented.  It  should  greatly  please  his- 
torians. 


North  Carolina  Non-Fiction  Books,  1953-1954      237 

Now,  having  spoken  of  six  books  with  religious  themes, 
and  four  that  combine  religion  and  the  church  with  historical 
and  social  themes,  I  turn  from  these  ten  to  ask  your  attention 
to  another  group  of  ten  whose  primary  interest  is  history,  or 
history  and  biography.  Let  us  begin  here  with  a  short  work 
on  an  early  North  Carolina  charter,  pass  to  an  excellent  his- 
tory of  North  Carolina  from  the  earliest  years  to  the  present, 
and  then  roughly  following  chronological  order,  consider  a 
work  dealing  with  the  Revolutionary  War  period,  one  con- 
cerned with  the  Civil  War  period,  one  concerned  with  more 
restricted  but  important  events  in  North  Carolina  in  the  years 
1900-1911,  one  that  covers  the  years  1912  to  the  1940's  but 
stresses  the  period  1912-1920;  one  that  considers  a  specialized 
phase  of  the  state's  progress  from  1929  to  the  present,  and 
two  that  stress  biographical  themes  outside  this  country  or 
outside  this  state. 

The  Carolina  Charter  of  1663— How  It  Came  to  North 
Carolina  and  Its  Place  in  History,  by  William  S.  Powell,  is 
an  extremely  interesting  and  a  most  attractively  arranged 
small  book  of  seventy-nine  pages  published  by  the  State  De- 
partment of  Archives  and  History.  Ownership  of  this  early 
charter  now  makes  North  Carolina  one  of  seven  states  posses- 
sing copies  of  their  original  charters.  This  book  is  primarily 
concerned  with  telling  the  story  of  how  this  original  docu- 
ment of  1663  was  acquired  by  the  state,  rather  than  with 
narrating  the  history  of  the  granting  of  this  seventeenth  cen- 
tury charter  to  the  Eight  Lord  Proprietors  by  King  Charles 
II.  But  something  of  that  phase  of  the  story  is  also  told.  The 
narrative  proper  which  runs  to  only  twenty  pages  is  in  two 
sections:  how  the  Charter  came  to  North  Carolina;  and  the 
origin  of  the  Charter.  The  full  text  of  the  four-page  charter 
follows,  comprising  some  fifteen  printed  pages  of  this  little 
volume.  The  text  is  followed  then,  by  biographical  sketches 
of  the  eight  Lords  Proprietors,  all  personal  friends  of  the 
King.  Portraits  of  seven  of  these  proprietors  are  given,  Sir 
John  Colleton  being  the  only  one  not  shown.  Also  given 
here  are  portraits  of  King  Charles  II  and  of  John  Locke,  au- 
thor of  the  Fundamental  Constitutions  drawn  up  for  the 


238  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Carolinas  under  the  direction  of  the  Earl  of  Shaftsbury  and 
adopted  by  the  proprietors  on  July  21,  1669.  Numerous  other 
interesting  illustrations  and  several  interesting  maps  are  in- 
cluded. The  work  is  furnished  with  an  excellent  bibliography. 

The  most  solid  work  in  history  among  the  books  this  year 
is,  without  doubt,  a  very  impressive  volume  running  to  more 
than  six  hundred  and  fifty  pages,  entitled  North  Carolina, 
The  History  of  a  Southern  State,  by  Hugh  Talmage  Lefler 
and  the  late  Albert  Ray  Newsome.  Except  for  school  texts  this 
is  the  first  one-volume  history  of  North  Carolina  that  has 
appeared  in  this  century.  It  is,  moreover,  the  first  single  vol- 
ume history  of  this  state  to  be  written  by  professional  histor- 
ians. Dr.  Lefler  is— as  Dr.  Newsome  was— professor  of  history 
at  the  University  of  North  Carolina.  The  work  is  published 
by  the  University  of  North  Carolina  Press. 

The  book  has  balance  and  proportion,  as  well  as  good  nar- 
rative style— an  essentially  readable  style— and  excellent  doc- 
umentation. It  is  a  most  scholarly  work.  Most  readers  will 
praise  the  book's  proportional  allotment  of  space  and  empha- 
sis to  well-defined  periods  in  the  state's  development  and  in 
national  history.  For  example,  of  its  nearly  six  hundred  pages 
of  text,  two  hundred  pages,  or  twelve  chapters,  are  accorded 
to  the  years  from  the  beginnings  up  to  the  outbreak  of  the 
American  Revolution;  two  hundred  and  twelve  pages,  or 
seventeen  chapters,  are  given  to  the  years  from  1775  up  to  the 
outbreak  of  the  Civil  War;  and  one  hundred  seventy-eight 
pages,  or  seventeen  chapters,  are  allotted  the  years  1861  up  to 
and  including  the  national  and  state  elections  of  1952.  There 
will  undoubtedly  be  some  readers,  however,  who  will  hold 
that  the  section  dealing  with  the  twentieth  century  is  on  the 
whole  somewhat  less  satisfying  than  the  first  two-thirds  of  the 
volume,  and  may  wonder  if  this  is  not  partly  to  be  accounted 
for  by  the  fact  that  the  events  of  the  past  ninety-three  years 
since  the  outbreak  of  the  Civil  War  are  accorded  slightly  less 
space  than  that  given  the  eighty-five  years  between  1775  and 
1861.  But  other  forms  of  balance  and  proportion  are  also  well 
maintained;  for  example,  between  the  history  of  the  state  in 
political  and  military  affairs  on  the  one  hand,  and  its  develop- 


North  Carolina  Non-Fiction  Books,  1953-1954      239 

ment  in  agriculture,  trade,  transportation,  industry,  education, 
social  organization,  religion  and  literature  on  the  other. 

Throughout,  the  story  of  North  Carolina  is  told  as  records 
reveal  it,  beginning  with  the  earliest  voyages  in  the  explora- 
tion in  the  sixteenth  century  and  coming  down  or  up  essen- 
tially to  the  present— and  told,  as  I  have  said,  in  first-rate 
narrative  style.  But,  whereas,  the  narrative  method  predomi- 
nates the  authors  never  hesitate  to  evaluate,  to  praise,  or  to 
criticize  wherever  they  feel  the  need  so  to  do.  The  reader 
notes  with  satisfaction,  too,  that  within  the  the  narrative  quo- 
tations are  used  with  telling  effect.  These  are  never  overdone, 
but  wherever  the  authors  sense  that  the  words  of  individuals 
living  in  a  period  or  participating  in  an  event  would  point-up 
its  depiction,  they  have  used  them  both  frequently  and  effec- 
tively. Since  the  authors  state  that  they  have  been  primarily 
interested  in  showing  how  North  Carolinians  have  through 
the  years  lived  and  made  a  living  and  our  attention  is  thus 
kept  on  the  people  in  their  state,  these  quotations,  so  aptly 
used  serve  their  purpose  well.  Perhaps  their  relative  absence 
from,  or  at  least  their  less  frequent  use  in,  the  last  quarter  of 
the  book  would  help  to  account  for  the  relative— but  only 
relative— thinness  of  that  part. 

All  in  all  this  is  a  scholarly  study  of  the  first  rank,  com- 
prehensive, well-balanced,  and  very  readable,  the  product  of 
more  than  five  years  of  carefully  planned  work.  I  believe  the 
volume  was  in  part  designed  as  a  college  text.  As  such  it  will 
be  valuable.  But  this  well-rounded  history  of  North  Carolina 
will  be  of  great  interest  and  value  also  to  the  general  reader. 

Another  brief  but  quite  good  historical  study  is  Clark  Wil- 
liam Bell's  The  First  Saratoga.  Being  The  Saga  of  John  Young 
and  His  Sloop-of-War.  This  is  Mr.  Bell's  fifth  book  dealing 
with  American  naval  history,  and  is  written  with  all  the  as- 
surance customarily  found  in  the  works  of  this  writer,  known 
for  his  easy  familiarity  with  colonial  and  revolutionary  Amer- 
ica and  especially  as  an  authority  on  our  navy  in  the  Revolu- 
tion. In  this  little  volume  of  one  hundred  and  fifty  pages 
he  brings  to  vivid  life,  a  largely  forgotten  hero  of  the  Ameri- 
can Revolution.  All  that  is  known  about  this  sloop-of-war  in 


240  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

the  continental  navy,  and  its  gallant  young  Captain,  John 
Young,  is  set  forth  with  skill  and  verve. 

Friend  of  Robert  Morris  and  Francis  Lewis,  companion  in 
naval  circles  of  John  Paul  Jones,  Seth  Harding,  and  John 
Barry,  this  inspiring  leader  of  a  devoted  young  band  of  naval 
officers  serving  the  Saratoga— the  first  of  several  ships  of  that 
name  to  win  fame  in  our  naval  history— experiences  exciting 
adventure  and  achieves  honor  and  recognition  in  a  stirring 
and  critical  period.  Captain  Young  and  his  sloop,  it  seems, 
played  an  important  role  in  raids  upon  British  ships,  especial- 
ly those  bringing  supplies  to  British  troops  in  this  country. 
After  these  cruises  filled  with  successful  engagements  and 
with  spectacular  victories  which  brought  rich  prizes,  the 
ship  and  all  its  company  disappeared  during  a  West  India 
storm  in  1781.  The  chapters  bring  exciting  events  before  us 
in  swift  succession.  This  little  book,  published  by  the  Louisi- 
ana State  University  Press,  furnishes  good  reading  matter. 

I  believe  that  the  liveliest  book  of  history— indeed  the  live- 
liest book  of  this  year's  lot— is  to  be  found  in  The  Civil  War  as 
told  by  James  Street,  in  what  he  calls  in  the  subtitle  "An  Un- 
varnished Account  of  the  Late  but  Still  Lively  Hostilities." 
And,  indeed,  unvarnished  and  still  lively  is  his  buoyant  and 
pointed  account.  The  book  is  profusely  illustrated  in  less  live- 
ly, but  telling  fashion  in  line  and  wash  drawings  by  John 
Allan  Maxwell.  The  text  book  is  arranged  in  eight  untitled 
sections.  Truly,  as  the  jacket  says,  "the  book  is  filled  with 
historical  asides  that  will  amaze"  the  reader.  It  is  literally 
crammed  with  lively  anecdote,  and  crisply  pointed  up  by 
what  one  reviewer  would  insist  is  "informed  but  opinionated 
data."  Mr.  Street  would  himself,  I  believe,  be  the  first  to 
agree  that,  of  course,  he  is  opinionated.  His  opening  sentence 
reads:  "Almost  a  hundred  years  after  the  first  shot  was  fired, 
we  Americans  cannot  even  agree  on  a  name  for  our  Civil 
War  Between  the  States,  much  less  on  what  caused  it  or 
exactly  what  happened."  Then  he  proceeds  to  tell  us  what 
caused  it— and  there,  of  course,  is  his  opinion— and  to  tell 
of  many  of  the  things  that  happened,  grim,  gallant,  foolish, 
well  or  foolishly  planned  and  executed,  and  often  amazing 


North  Carolina  Non-Fiction  Books,  1953-1954      241 

or  unbelievable,  and  to  tell  it,  as  has  been  said,  "in  prose  as 
impetuously  indecorous  as  the  Yankees'  departure  at  Bull 
Run- 
To  North  Carolinians  of  my  generation  who  began  the 
growing-up  process  in  small  North  Carolina  towns  just  be- 
fore the  turn  of  the  century,  towns  still  lying  under  the  dark 
shadow  of  this  great  conflict  ( the  bloodiest  in  human  history 
to  that  date)  the  term  The  War  could  signify  only  one  con- 
flict. It  is  an  experience  to  hear  Mr.  Street  speak  of  it  as  he 
does  here,  for  as  the  book-jacket  frankly  points  out  "Mr  Street 
has  a  way  of  stalking  into  history's  barnyards  and  staring  at 
the  sacred  cows  and  then  pinching  them:  of  pointing  to  the 
black  sheep,  the  scapegoats,  the  jackasses;  the  wise  barn 
owls  in  the  loft,  and  to  the  rats  in  the  corn  crib."  Readers  who 
had  followed  his  story  of  the  Dabney  tribe  in  his  novels  dis- 
playing strange  turns  in  our  great  civil  conflict  would  be  pre- 
pared for  this  attitude.  The  reader  turns  away  from  this  book 
enlightened,  saddened,  wryly  amused,  half  angered  at  times, 
but  with  his  faith  in  a  people  unbroken.  Swallowing  some  of 
the  facts  therein— or  even  more,  some  of  the  freely  tossed- 
off  opinions— will  leave  him  with  a  decidedly  tart,  even  puck- 
ered after-taste.  But  the  reader  who  begins  this  crisply 
written  book  will  certainly  finish  it,  or  I  miss  my  guess. 

Let  me  quote:  "Fifty  years  ago  on  the  flat  beach  land  of 
Kill  Devil  Hill  near  Kitty  Hawk,  North  Carolina,  twelve  sec- 
onds at  10:37  o'clock  on  the  morning  of  December  17,  1903, 
changed  the  course  of  the  world  events  to  come,"  so  says  Mr. 
Aycock  Brown  in  beginning  his  brief  monograph,  The 
Birth  of  Aviation.  "On  that  day,"  he  continues,  "the  world's 
first  power-driven  heavier-than-air  machine  in  which 
man  made  free,  controlled  and  sustained  flight,  took  off  into 
a  twenty-seven  mile  wind,  climbed  to  an  altitude  of  about 
ten  feet  and  remained  aloft  for  twelve  seconds.  The  actual 
distance  covered  was  only  one  hundred  and  twenty  feet; 
nevertheless  it  was  the  most  historic  of  all  flights,  because 
it  was  the  first  powered  flight  of  all  time  and  the  birth  of 
modern  aviation." 

For  the  fiftieth  anniversary  of  the  great  event  Mr.  Brown 
tells  the  story— as  his  sub-title  states  it  "Story  of  the  Wright 


242  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Brothers'  Flights  at  Kitty  Hawk  and  Kill  Devil  Hill,  North 
North  Carolina."  Mr.  Brown  makes  no  attempt  to  give  the 
life  story  of  the  two  famous  Wright  brothers.  Little  attention 
is  given  to  the  days  of  their  youth  and  early  manhood  in 
Dayton  as  they  planned  in  the  bicycle  shop  of  their  home 
town  for  glider  and  powered  flight.  Nor  does  he  attempt  to 
deal  with  their  achievements  in  later  life.  Instead,  the  author 
concentrates  on  "their  successful  experience  there  on  the 
windswept  outer  banks  of  North  Carolina,"  the  story  of 
Wilbur  and  Orville  Wright  and  its  Kitty  Hawk-Kill  Devil  Hill 
setting  from  1900  to  1911.  As  to  happenings  that  in  later  years 
became  the  subject  of  controversies,  the  writer  attempts  to 
present  both  sides  of  a  question  and  leaves  it  at  that. 

The  brief  text  of  Mr.  Brown's  story,  given  in  thirty-two 
unnumbered  pages,  is  preceded  by  fourteen  pages— followed 
by  fifteen  pages— of  excellent  photographs,  numbering  fifty- 
nine  in  all,  and  spanning  the  half -century;  the  story  is  well 
told  and  well  documented  in  words  and  pictures. 

We  come  next  to  what  I  should  think  has  been  one 
of  the  two  most  widely  read  books  of  the  year  that  came  from 
a  North  Carolina  writer,  The  End  of  Innocence,  by  Jona- 
than Daniels.  If,  as  Mr.  Marquis  Childs  has  said,  Mr. 
Daniels's  book  of  several  years  past,  The  Man  of  Indepen- 
dence is  "brilliant  political  biography,"  I  should  hazard 
the  opinion  that  The  End  of  Innocence  is  equally  good  or 
better  in  that  field,  and  as  the  portrait  of  an  era— certainly 
Arthur  M.  Schlesinger,  Jr.  has  recently  termed  it  Jona- 
than Daniel's  best  book.  Jonathan  Daniels  has  indeed  had  a 
unique  opportunity  to  know  the  inside  story  of  the  develop- 
ment of  these  United  States  from  the  beginning  of  the  Wil- 
son era  through  the  period  of  President  Truman.  His  father, 
Josephus  Daniels,  who  is  at  the  center  of  his  present  study, 
served  in  the  administrations  of  Cleveland,  of  Wilson,  and  of 
Roosevelt.  Through  the  eyes  of  one  who  as  a  young  adoles- 
cent went  to  live  in  Washington  with  that  father  in  the  eight 
years  when  Wilson  was  in  the  White  House,  and  who  was 
there  again  as  a  young  man,  and  as  a  mature  man,  as  ad- 
ministrative assistant  and  as  press  secretary  to  Roosevelt,  and 


North  Carolina  Non-Fiction  Books,  1953-1954      243 

one  who  above  all  was  close  to  his  father  through  all  these 
years,  we  here  see  the  men  and  the  age,  concentrating  mainly 
on  the  Wilson  era.  He  presents  his  father  through-out  as  an 
innocent  in  some  measure,  but  wise  with  the  innocence  of 
faith,  of  genuine  belief  in  a  type  of  democracy  whose  weak- 
nesses he  knew  but  in  whose  strength  he  firmly  believed. 

That  his  account  of  these  tumultuous  years  is  less  an  his- 
torical than  an  emotional  enterprise,  Mr.  Daniels  himself 
admits;  he  speaks  of  it  as  "memory  ridden  and  emotion  torn." 
But  if  it  be  an  emotionally  informed  story  of  the  relationships 
and  the  interrelationships  of  Wilson,  Bryan,  Daniels,  Roose- 
velt,-F.  D.  R.  and  Teddy-of  Col.  House,  and  Col.  Mc- 
Cawley  of  the  Marines,  of  Secretary  of  War  Baker,  and  Sen- 
ator Lodge,  and  Col.  Robert  Mean  Thompson  of  the  Navy 
League,  of  both  the  first  and  the  second  Mrs.  Wil- 
son, and  the  younger  Eleanor  Roosevelt,  and  of  numerous 
others,  drawn  oftentimes  in  few  but  revealing  lines— and 
always  with  emphasis  on  the  two  men  he  knew  best  and 
loved  most,  his  father  and  Franklin  Roosevelt,  nevertheless, 
the  book  is  a  warmly  human  story  and  a  most  informing  and 
moving  one.  It  is  truly  the  portrait  of  an  era,  a  beautiful  and 
sympathetic  portrait  of  an  era,  the  end  of  America's  "innocent 
parochialism"  and  its  entrance  upon  an  era  of  World  Power, 
with  the  big  ideas,  the  big  government  which  a  big  war 
brought,  a  position,  as  we  now  know,  into  which  we  moved 
to  stay,  and  moved  with  the  pain  and  the  awakened  knowl- 
edge that  always  comes  in  the  moving  from  innocence  into 
sophistication.  Moreover,  it  is  more  than  an  enthralling  story. 
Here  we  have  brilliant  memoir,  a  most  carefully  docu- 
mented presentation  of  events  and  the  men  who  moved 
through  them  shaping  them  and  being  shaped  by  them.  Here 
we  find  also,  keen  analysis  of  the  working  of  the  democratic 
system  in  America  and  an  affirmation  of  belief  in  such  democ- 
racy. One  understands  that  it  was  not  F.  D.  R.  alone  who 
learned  of  democracy  through  Josephus  Daniels. 

Certainly,  to  this  reader  for  one,  the  portrait  of  the  de- 
veloping Roosevelt  is  as  enthralling  as  that  of  the  staunch 
old  southern  democrat  who  was  his  mentor,  sometimes  his 


244  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

antagonist,  always  his  friend— the  man  who,  as  Henry  Steel 
Commager  observed,  "better  than  any  other  figure  in  public 
life  linked  up  the  Populist  Era  with  the  New  Freedom,  and 
then  with  the  New  Deal,  remaining  consistent  and  unspoiled 
through  half  a  century."  The  writer  can  and  does  view  both 
men  at  times  critically.  He  shows  that  the  two  did  not  work 
together  in  the  Navy  Department  in  those  early  years  with- 
out a  good  deal  of  stress  and  strain;  but  that  they  came  to  un- 
derstand, to  like,  and  to  trust  one  another  he  reveals  clearly— 
and  that  the  younger  man  learned  much  from  the  older.  The 
author  of  End  of  Innocence  states  his  conviction  that 
"Roosevelt's  arrival  at  appreciation  of  the  meaning  of  such 
men  as  Daniels  was  more  important  than  anything  he  [as 
Assistant  Secretary  of  the  Navy]  learned  under  Daniels  about 
dealing  with  labor,  with  steel  and  other  magnates,  with 
power  in  democracy  in  terms  of  the  back  country  as  well  as 
of  the  ward  rooms."  To  the  young  aristocrat,  he  continues, 
"there  had  been  about  Daniels  almost  the  same  deceptive  ap- 
pearance which  a  plain  strong  democratic  American  so  often 
showed  to  the  supercilious  who  suddenly  confronted  it  in 
history.  Roosevelt's  greatest  attainment  when  he  departed 
[from  the  Navy  Department]  was  that  he  was  no  longer 
self-deceived  in  democracy— and  would  not  be  so  deceived 
again." 

Although  the  book  concentrates  on  the  years  from  1912  to 
the  early  1920's,  it  does  not  end  with  the  death  of  Wilson, 
the  repudiation  of  the  League  of  Nations,  the  coming  of  the 
Harding  administration,  and  the  crippling  of  Franklin  Roose- 
velt. As  the  work  had  begun  with  Josephus  Daniels  in  1941 
at  seventy-nine,  Ambassador  in  Mexico,  and  had  gone  back 
then  to  1912,  so  it  closes  with  the  chapter  bearing  the  book's 
title,  "End  of  Innocence,"  a  chapter  opening  with  the  author 
himself  on  that  afternoon  when  as  assistant  to  Roosevelt  he 
received  in  the  White  House  the  news  of  Roosevelt's  death 
in  Georgia,  and  telephoned  to  his  father  in  Raleigh  only  to 
find  that  he  had  already  purchased  his  ticket  to  Washington. 
And  it  moves  on  to  the  speech  made  by  Daniels  at  85  in  front 
of  the  house  in  Warm  Springs  in  which  Roosevelt  died,  quo- 


North  Carolina  Non-Fiction  Books,  1953-1954      245 

ting  at  length  from  that  speech  so  clearly  affirming  the  old 
man's  faith  in  democracy: 

We  need  not  be  the  companion  of  our  fears. 
Only  the  already  lost  can  think  of  our  future  as  besieged. 
We  have  more  to  give  than  to  guard,  our  powers  are  not 
weapons  but  the  tools  with  which  to  build  the  promise  of 
democracy  into  the  purpose  of  mankind.  .  . .  Sometimes  that 
faith  is  hard  to  hold.  Even  to  an  old  man  who  has  seen  many 
years  these  times  seem  dark.  But  this  place  is  lit  with  cour- 
age and  is  illuminated  with  faith. 

The  last  chapter  is  to  me  a  most  provocative  one,  not  the 
least  because  it  so  clearly  bears  the  brand  of  the  writer's  be- 
liefs, as  well  as  those  of  his  father.  I  find  these  words  there 
and  I  like  them;  "I  set  it  down  as  my  faith  that  only  the 
Visionaries  have  helped  the  people  to  shape  their  security  and 
that  those  who  most  confidently  regard  themselves  as 
realists  have  retarded  it." 

I  find  his  book  one  of  rare  insight,  skillful  writing,  enthral- 
ling warmth,  and  keen  perception. 

Samuel  Reval  Spencer,  Jr.,  assistant  to  the  President  of 
Davidson  College,  has  given  us  a  historical  essay  or  mono- 
graph, a  slender  little  volume  of  one  hundred  nine  pages  en- 
titled Decision  for  War  1917:  The  Laconia  Sinking  and  the 
Zimmerman  Telegram  as  Key  Factors  in  the  Public  Reaction 
Against  Germany.  This  work  studies  the  facts  back  of  an  act 
which  was  probably  the  most  significant  act  of  the  United 
States  government  in  the  first  twenty-five  years  of  the  twen- 
tieth century— the  decision  to  enter  the  First  World  War 
against  Germany.  The  thesis  here  seems  to  be  that  following 
the  break  off  of  diplomatic  relations  with  Germany  on  Febru- 
ary 3,  the  sinking  of  the  ocean  liner,  Laconia,  on  February  25, 
closely  followed  by  the  publication,  on  February  27,  of  the 
Zimmerman  Telegram  revealing  the  proposal  by  the  German 
government  of  an  alliance  with  Mexico  and  Japan  against 
the  United  States,  caused  a  profound  shift  in  pubic  opinion 
in  America,  made  Americans  to  feel  that  Germany  had  at- 
tacked the  United  States,  and  hence,  became  in  their  eyes 
the  "overt  act"  on  the  part  of  Germany  which  made  war  with 


246  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

her  necessary,  so  that  by  April  6,  the  Congress,  called  into 
special  session,  in  response  to  the  Presidential  recommenda- 
tion declared  a  state  of  war  to  exist  between  the  United 
States  and  Germany. 

It  is  natural,  no  doubt,  that  some  readers  should  see  this 
study  as  an  attempt  "to  revise  the  revisionists,"  that  is,  those 
historical  thinkers  who  held  sway  in  the  1930's,  the  decade 
prior  to  our  entry  into  World  War  II.  Certainly  he  takes 
issue  with  the  interpretation  of  that  decade,  that  the  dis- 
closure of  the  Zimmerman  message  was  carefully  timed  by 
the  British;  and  he  shows  in  a  way  that  would  seem  to  be 
conclusive  that  the  British  delivered  the  message  as  soon  as 
they  could.  He  maintains  that  it  was  not  calculated  cunning 
but  the  luck  of  circumstances  that  made  the  revelation  of 
the  message  so  sensational.  He  proves  that  the  message  was 
delivered  before  the  sinking  of  the  Laconia  and  before  the 
plea  by  President  Wilson  on  the  day  following,  for  armed 
neutrality.  There  would  seem  to  be  small  doubt  that  the 
flaming  headlines  in  the  press  immediately  thereafter,  as  they 
blazoned  the  terms  of  the  Zimmerman  proposal,  caused  a 
powerful  current  in  the  stream  of  American  public  opinion. 
Of  course,  it  is  difficult  to  prove  a  shift  in  public  opinion; 
and  there  are  those  who  will  not  be  persuaded  by  Dr. 
Spencer's  argument,  no  doubt,  because  they  will  not  give 
assent  to  the  controlling  assumptions  that  give  him  his  frame 
of  reference.  I  am  not  one  of  these,  however.  I  found  the 
book  relatively  convincing.  Certainly,  the  author  presents 
an  interesting  study  of  significant  events. 

Another  work  in  the  field  of  history,  this  item  specialized 
twentieth  century  history,  I  must  mention  briefy.  An  organi- 
zation numbering  twelve  thousand  members  all  interested  in 
agricultural  pursuits,  these  coming  from  fifty-five  countries 
and  organized  in  two  hundred  local  units  "representing  the 
major  farming  interests  in  all  sections"  of  North  Carolina, 
an  organization  that  can  rightfully  boast  a  quarter  century 
of  varied  and  constructive  public  service  rounded  out  its 
twenty-fifth  anniversary  on  September  27,  1954.  To  review 
its  history  during  these  years  Dr.  Stuart  Noblin,  Associate 


North  Carolina  Non-Fiction  Books,  1953-1954      247 


Professor  of  History  and  Political  Science  at  the  North  Caro- 
lina State  College,  has  written  an  interesting  and  informative 
booklet,  The  Grange  in  North  Carolina,  1929-1954,  A  Story 
of  Agricultural  Progress.  Beginning  with  a  brief  section  called 
The  Old  Grange,  Dr.  Noblin  recounts  the  founding  in  Guil- 
ford County  in  1873— only  six  years  after  the  birth  of  the  Na- 
tional Grange— of  the  first  North  Carolina  Grange  or  Patrons 
of  Husbandry,  the  subsequent  brief  surge  of  interest  and 
power  in  the  movement  only  to  recede  before  the  mounting 
force  of  the  Farmer's  Alliance— Populist  combination  and  the 
founding  of  a  Department  of  Agriculture.  Subsequent  sections 
deal  with  "Reorganization,"  in  the  early  fall  of  1929  with 
Clarence  Poe  as  leader;  "Depression,"  the  hard  years  in  the 
early  thirties,  yet  the  steady  growth  of  the  grange  under  W. 
Kerr  Scott;  "New  Deal' -the  Grange  from  1933  to  1937  un- 
der Earl  S.  Vanatta  and  Ben  F.  Wilson;  "The  War  Years,"  the 
Grange  under  Harry  B.  Caldwell,  1937  to  1946;  and  "Since 
The  War,"  the  grange  at  work— the  longest  and  most  varied 
section  of  its  history— the  grange  under  Margaret  H.  Caldwell 
in  the  year  1946-47  and  again  her  husband's  direction,  1947 
to  the  present.  The  sketch  closes  with  the  section  "Silver  An- 
niversary"—a  summary.  An  appendix  lists  state  conventions- 
date  and  place,  national  conventions  held  in  North  Carolina, 
officers  and  divisional  leaders,  executive  committees,  Direc- 
tors of  the  Grange  Mutual  Fire  Insurance  Association  of 
North  Carolina,  and  awards  granted  during  these  years  for 
distinguished  service  to  agriculture. 

Two  works  in  this  category  remain  to  be  considered— one 
in  biographical  history,  one  in  sociological  autobiography.  The 
biographical  history,  one  that  challenges  attention,  is  the 
work  of  Charles  Richard  Sanders  of  the  Department  of  Eng- 
lish, Duke  University,  The  Strachey  Family,  1588-1932;  Their 
Writings  and  Literary  Associations,  published  by  the  Duke 
University  Press.  I  find  this  truly  an  engrossing  book  and 
have  all  too  little  time  to  speak  of  it  here.  The  author  an- 
nounces his  purpose  thus:  "To  study  humanity  as  it  has  dis- 
played itself  in  the  life  of  a  comparatively  small  but  highly 
interesting  family  over  a  period  of  about  three  hundred  years 


248  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

is  the  main  object  of  the  book."  It  presents  the  varied  history 
of  the  versatile  and  gifted  Strachey  family  through  many  gen- 
erations. Beginning  with  Elizabethan  times— 1588,  the  year  of 
the  Spanish  Armada— it  passes  quickly  to  William  Strachey, 
who  was  in  the  great  storm  in  July,  1609,  that  wrecked  the 
fleet  of  Sir  George  Somers  near  the  Bermudas,  and  who  from 
Jamestown  in  July  of  the  following  year  sent  home  a  letter  that 
is  believed  to  have  given  Shakespeare  material  for  the  first 
act  of  The  Tempest,  and  who  became  Lord  De  La  Warr's 
secretary  in  Jamestown  and  thus  the  first  secretary  to  an 
American  colony,  and  it  then  moves  through  the  centuries 
and  the  generations  of  Stracheys  to  arrive  eventually  at  the 
Honorable  John  Strachey,  who  now  in  the  days  of  the  Second 
Elizabeth  is  a  leader  in  the  British  Labor  Party.  We  follow 
the  Stracheys  not  only  through  the  centuries  but  over  the 
world,  for  their  travels,  their  exploits,  their  residences  were 
varied,  and  their  interests  and  works  wide  spread.  Dr.  San- 
ders may  be  interested  mainly  in  the  contributions  of  the 
family  to  literature— for  as  he  says,  the  Stracheys  were  a 
writing  family— a  family  with  a  genius  for  friendships  and 
their  friendships  among  men  of  the  literary  world  as  well  as 
the  world  of  public  life  were  many  and  varied:  with  John 
Donne,  with  the  Elder  Crashaw,  with  John  Locke,  with  men 
of  the  Enlightenment,  with  Robert  Southey  and  Walter  Sav- 
age Landor,  with  Carlyle  and  Kitty  Kirkpatrick,  with  Ed- 
ward Lear  of  nonsense-verse  fame— to  mention  but  a  few— 
and  always  the  author  shares  their  interests  and  exploits  in 
travel  and  exploration,  in  science,  in  government  and  parli- 
amentarianism  and  diplomacy,  in  the  Empire,  in  fine  arts, 
in  the  Church,  in  sanitation,  finance,  legal  systems  and  even 
railroads.  Always  the  Stracheys  made  their  mark  and  always 
they  left  the  imprint  of  a  strong  personality.  From  William 
Strachey  then,  author  of  The  True  Repository,  and  The  His- 
tory of  Virginia,  down  through  the  years  to  J.  St.  Loe  Strachey, 
powerful  editor  of  The  Spectator  from  1898  to  1925  and 
to  Giles  Lytton  Strachey,  author,  literary  critic,  and  emi- 
nent biographer  with  whose  death  in  1932  the  story  virtually 
closes,  the  author,  in  ingenious  though  somewhat  loosely 


North  Carolina  Non-Fiction  Books,  1953-1954      249 


coordinated  fashion,  follows  his  purpose  of  studying  human- 
ity as  it  develops  in  such  a  family  over  three  hundred  years 
—a  remarkably  interesting  and  yet  in  not  a  few  ways,  a  typi- 
cal upper  class  English  family  of  distinction.  Upon  conclud- 
ing the  volume,  the  interested  reader  may  well  understand 
why  the  Strachey  name  in  England  is  a  symbol  for  the  con- 
tinuity of  a  people  and  a  nation,  such  continuity  as  the  old 
stone  Manorhouse  at  Sutton  Court,  Somersetshire,  and  the 
wide-spread,  deeply-based,  persistent  and  continuous  ex- 
ploits of  the  family  it  housed  and  sent  forth  represent. 

An  unusual  book  in  the  field  of  history  and  autobiography 
is  found  in  Ella  Earl  Cotten's  A  Spark  for  My  People,  with  its 
sub-title  A  Sociological  Autobiography  of  a  Negro  Teacher. 
In  this  little  volume  a  dedicated  woman— child  of  a  marriage 
in  1880's  between  an  independent  young  farmer  in  the  Blue 
Ridge  Mountains  of  Virginia  and  a  young  colored  girl  who 
was  a  servant  in  his  plantation  home— tells  the  story  of  her 
childhood  in  the  care  of  an  unusual  negro  grandfather  and 
grandmother,  of  her  education  at  Knoxville  College,  of  her 
marriage  and  motherhood,  and  of  her  forty  years  with  her 
husband  as  both  taught  in  the  rural  sections  of  the  deep 
south.  Eventually  in  Alabama,  under  the  auspices  of  the 
United  Presbyterian  Church,  as  leaders  in  the  school  set-up 
they  have  their  great  opportunity  to  put  theories  into  prac- 
tice; and  there  they  achieve  a  truly  fine  school  spirit  and 
community  spirit  and  help  to  raise  the  educational  level  of 
an  entire  rural  community. 

In  her  foreword  the  author  says,  "Viewing  the  book 
in  the  same  light  as  I  would  if  someone  else  wrote  it,  the  more 
appealing  aspects  of  it,  to  me,  would  be  in  the  long,  continu- 
ous period  of  service  in  virgin  soil,  educationally.  Equally  as 
important,  perhaps  more,  was  the  fact  that  good  race  re- 
lationships were  possible  and  that  life  and  labor  could  be 
worked  out  in  a  pattern  of  happiness  for  all  around." 

She  dedicates  her  book  to  the  colored  teachers  of  the  ele- 
mentary level  in  the  thirteen  southern  states,  the  audience  for 
whom  the  book  was  prayerfully  written. 

Here  is  a  tale  told  with  relative  simplicity,  always  without 


250  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

bitterness  and  without  self-satisfaction  or  anything  border- 
ing on  conceit— told  seemingly  with  a  sense  of  deep  dedica- 
tion to  her  people  and  particularly  to  the  cause  of  education 
for  them.  Any  one  of  us,  I  believe,  could  read  the  book  with 
profit. 

Two  books,  Quintology  and  Mayan  Letters,  I  find  hard  to 
classify.  Quintology  is  a  title  coined  by  the  author,  J.  Ray 
Shute,  for  a  volume  of  five  "themes  on  the  same  subject"  as 
he  puts  it— really  addresses  in  which  liberalism  and  democ- 
racy are  equated— as  "Twin  Lamps  which  have  lighted  the 
pathway  of  freedom  down  through  the  ages."  Mayan  Letters 
by  Charles  Olsen,  contains  seventeen  letters  written  from  the 
Yucatan  by  this  historian  and  poet  in  the  months  February 
through  July  1951,  and  edited  by  Robert  Creely.  Desiring  to 
break  away  from  what  seemed  to  him  the  too  simple  West- 
ernism  stemming  from  our  Greek  culture,  to  move  back,  ever 
back,  to  a  point  of  origin  which  would  be  capable  of  extend- 
ing "history"  in  a  new  and  more  usable  sense,  to  do  more  to- 
ward repossessing  himself  of  the  Indian  past  in  the  effort  to 
find  a  civilization  anterior  to  that  which  he  has  come  from, 
the  writer  appears  to  feel  that  he  has  found  that  world  in 
the  Mayan. 

Six  books  remain  from  our  list.  Each  of  these  is  in  its  way 
an  impressive  work.  Four  of  them— in  a  sense  all  six  of  them 
—are  the  products  of  scholarly  research.  Three  of  them  are 
in  the  field  of  science  or  social  science— anthropology,  soci- 
ology, psychology;  three  of  them  in  the  field  of  literature  and 
the  social  world.  Each  of  these  books  really  deserves  detailed 
comment.  Yet  I  can  but  mention  most  of  them  briefly  and 
then  choose  one  for  slightly  longer  but  still  relatively  brief 
comment. 

In  Culture  and  Personality,  John  J.  Honigman,  anthropolo- 
gist, writes  a  text  book  for  those  who  would  study  in  this  new 
field,  Culture  and  Personality— a  synthetic  or  cross-discipline, 
not  an  insulated  department  of  social  science,  as  he  explains; 
—a  cross-discipline  in  which  present  knowledge  reflects  the 
work  of  psychologists,  psychiatrists,  sociologists,  and  an- 
thropologists; "a  young  and  rapidly  expanding  field  of  study," 


North  Carolina  Non-Fiction  Books,  1953-1954      251 

in  which  as  the  author  observes,  "the  sum  and  organization  of 
knowledge  barely  remains  unchanged  from  one  issue  of  a 
technical  journal  to  the  next."  It  would  seem  to  be  a  quite 
good  text. 

In  The  Human  Animal,  by  Winston  La  Barre,  another  an- 
thropologist, Professor  at  Duke  University,  writes  in  more 
popular  fashion— a  fashion  which  combines  sound  scholar- 
ship with  a  quite  readable  style,  clear  and  unusually  intelli- 
gible for  such  a  scientific  work,  a  style  free  of  technical  jargon 
and  lightened  with  not  infrequent  touches  of  humor.  With 
definite  purpose  in  mind  the  author  integrates  for  the  lay 
readers  the  minimum  essentials  of  human  biology,  cultural 
anthropology,  psychiatry  and  cognate  fields.  Believing  that 
to  be  a  responsible  member  of  the  human  race,  one  must  un- 
derstand human  nature,  must  have  self-knowledge;  and  that 
one  cannot  today  possess  the  necessary  self-knowledge  with- 
out a  reasonable  comprehension  of  man's  biological,  cultural 
and  psychological  inheritance,  the  author  considers  it  the 
obligation  of  the  scientist  to  "proletarianize"  his  field  in 
order  to  give  the  general  reader  this  most  essential  knowl- 
edge. And  this  Mr.  La  Barre  does  with  most  interesting 
results. 

In  an  unusual  book  The  Personality  of  Shakespeare:  A  Ven- 
ture in  Psychological  Method,  Harold  Greer  McCurdy,  As- 
sociate Professor  of  Psychology  at  the  University  of  North 
Carolina,  combines  an  experimental  study  in  psychological 
method  with  an  approach  to  literary  criticism.  In  brief,  as  a 
psychiatrist  might  use  the  day  dreams,  fancies,  imaginings 
of  his  patient  to  get  at  personality— "a  set  of  personal  rela- 
tions;" so  Mr.  McCurdy  through  a  study  of  recurrent  ele- 
ments or  themes  found  in  twenty-three  of  the  Master's  plays, 
attempts  to  measure  the  personality  projection  of  William 
Shakespeare.  I  found  this  stimulating  reading,  though  I  want- 
ed to  argue  at  times. 

In  Dramatic  Heritage  Paul  Green  brings  together  twenty- 
three  varied  essays  and  short  papers  devoted  to  life  and  the 
theatre.  Many  of  them  deal  with  phases  of  regional  theatre 
and  community  festival  and  each  will  have  its  admiring  read- 


252  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

ers.  Two,  the  critical  essay  on  Paul  Claudel,  and  the  essay 
entitled  "The  Mystical  Bernard  Shaw"  are  exceptionally 
good— the  latter,  Paul  Green  at  his  best.  As  is  usual  with  this 
writer  always  the  subject  is  treated  in  an  imaginative  way, 
in  vivid  style,  sometimes  in  poetic  terms,  always  in  language 
so  beautifully  accurate  that  it  is  a  joy  to  read. 

In  the  lively  work,  The  Gentleman  of  Renaissance  France, 
William  Leon  Wiley,  of  the  University  of  North  Carolina, 
has  produced  a  scholarly  and  very  readable  book,  one  that 
should  have  appeal  for  cultivated  readers  everywhere— not 
merely  those  interested  in  Romance  language  and  literature. 
Here  he  writes  of  the  French  Gentilhomme,  studies  the  life 
and  habits  of  the  French  gentleman,  in  the  period  1515  to 
1560,  that  is,  in  the  last  half-century  of  the  Valois  Dynasty, 
in  the  days  of,  and  at  the  courts  of  Francis  I  and  Henry  II. 
I  find  the  work  thoroughly  enjoyable  as  well  as  must  illum- 
inating. It  gives  a  very  full  and  extremely  valuable  account 
to  the  period.  It  is  vivid,  charming,  delightful.  It  distresses 
me  to  present  it  so  inadequately  to  you.  But  time  limit  for- 
bids further  comment. 

And  now  we  come  to  our  final  book,  certainly  one  of  the 
most  delightful  books  to  come  from  a  North  Carolina  pen 
this  year— delightful  alike  to  both  the  expert  and  to  the  gen- 
eral reader,  and  one  of  the  most  widely  read  books  of  the 
year:  William  T.  Polk's  Southern  Accent,  from  Uncle 
Remus  to  Oak  Ridge.  Critics  have  called  the  book  "salty, 
sympathetic  and  sagacious,"  to  quote  one;  "poetic,  sardonic, 
erudite,  and  wise,"  to  quote  another;  "provocative,  intrigu- 
ing"; "lively  and  often  informative"  to  quote  a  third.  I  have 
found  in  the  book  all  of  these  qualities  and  more.  Looking 
at  his  own  section  of  these  United  States,  a  section  that  has 
all  too  often  been  sentimentalized  on  the  one  hand,  misunder- 
stood, bitterly  criticized,  or  debunked  on  the  other,  Mr.  Polk 
himself  says  that  he  writes  "out  of  love,  shame,  admiration, 
exasperation,  perplexity  and  fascination,"  as  he  examines  its 
life  and  its  products  during  the  turbulent  and  changing  pe- 
riod of  the  past  one  hundred  years  from  1850  to  1953— 
from  Uncle  Remus  to  Oak  Ridge. 


North  Carolina  Non-Fiction  Books,  1953-1954      253 

Parts  of  the  book  are  brilliant,  it  seems  to  me;  parts  hila- 
rious. Some  readers  undoubtedly  will  feel  that  the  book  en- 
deavors to  do  too  much,  or  that  it  endeavors  to  cover  too 
much  ground.  Some  undoubtedly  will  prefer  the  first  half 
to  the  latter  part.  Mr.  Polk  arranges  his  material  in  four  parts : 
One,  What  is  the  South?— his  attempted  answer  considered 
in  four  varied  chapters;  Two,  What  is  the  South  Doing?— a 
question  answered  as  best  he  can  in  six  lively  chapters;  Third, 
What  is  the  South  Thinking?— his  answer  presented  in  three 
chapters,  one  on  race  dilemma,  one  on  Southern  statesman- 
ship from  Monticello  (Jefferson)  to  Bilbo,  and  the  last  out- 
lining seriously  Main  Currents  in  Southern  Thought,  1850- 
1953;  and  the  Fourth  Part,  What  is  the  South  Becoming?— 
in  which  some  measure  of  answer  to  the  query  is  offered 
under  headings,  "The  Almost  Irrestible  Force,"  "The  Not 
Quite  Immovable  Object,"  and  finally,  "Challenge  and  Re- 
sponse." Hilarious  indeed,  is  the  chapter  including  "A  Scythe 
for  Mother,"  Mr.  Polk's  caricature  of  a  typical  contemporary 
southern  novel  a  la  the  imitators  of  a  Faulkner,  or  a  Tobacco 
Road.  At  the  other  pole  is  the  serious  chapter  in  which  he 
analyzes  the  new  industrial  South.  This  is  a  healthy  book,  a 
delightful  and  readable  volume,  one  of  which  all  North  Car- 
olinians can  be  proud. 

There,  then,  are  the  twenty-eight  books  for  the  year  1953- 
1954.  Hurried  and  inadequate  as  my  evaluation  of  them  for 
you  has,  of  necessity,  been,  I  can  only  trust  that  I  have  made 
you  feel  in  some  measure  the  pride  and  gratification  that 
was  mine  as  I  read  them  and  as  I  came  to  realize  the  richness, 
the  variety,  and  the  value  to  be  found  in  what  our  North 
Carolina  writers  had  offered  us. 


ELIZABETHAN  POLITICS  AND  COLONIAL 
ENTERPRISE 

By  Louis  B.  Wright 

To  North  Carolinians  it  seems  only  natural  that  the  first 
effort  to  found  an  English  colony  in  the  New  World  should 
have  been  directed  to  its  shores.  Clearly  God  was  directing 
the  English  toward  the  Promised  Land.  But  to  citizens  of 
other  territories,  the  magnetic  quality  of  the  sandy  stretches  of 
beach  in  the  neighborhood  of  Cape  Hatteras  has  always 
been  a  matter  of  wonder.  Had  Raleigh's  colonists  found  safer 
harbors  and  more  fertile  territory  the  story  of  Elizabethan 
efforts  at  colonization  and  of  the  later  English  colonies  might 
have  been  different.  But  they  did  not;  three  times  they  re- 
turned to  the  same  place,  and  no  one  has  satisfactorily  ex- 
plained the  fascination  of  this  particular  spot.  It  is  true  that 
Arthur  Barlow  after  the  first  reconnaissance  in  1584  gave 
an  astonishing  account  of  grapes  growing  in  every  bush  and 
shrub  so  that,  he  wrote,  "in  all  the  world  the  like  abundance 
is  not  to  be  found."  To  one  intimately  acquainted  with  the 
juice  of  the  scuppernong  and  muscadine,  fresh  or  fermented, 
this  may  provide  a  clue  to  the  attraction  of  Roanoke  Island 
and  its  environs.  But  it  is  not  my  purpose  to  discuss  this  even- 
ing the  motives  prompting  the  expeditions  sent  out  by  Ra- 
leigh to  settle  on  the  shores  of  North  Carolina;  but  rather  it 
is  to  survey  the  reasons  why  they  were  so  long  in  coming. 

England  was  late  in  claiming  a  place  in  the  sun  of  the 
New  World.  Indeed,  she  almost  lost  her  opportunity.  For 
nearly  a  century  before  England  gained  a  foothold,  Spain 
had  been  creating  a  vast  empire  that  stretched  from  Tierra 
del  Fuego  to  Texas  and  beyond.  She  was  comfortably  settled 
in  Florida  and  was  reaching  north,  with  an  outpost  on  the 
coast  of  Georgia.  Her  explorers  had  ventured  into  Chesapeake 
Bay  and  other  inlets  of  the  North  Atlantic  seaboard.  Her 
fishermen,  along  with  those  of  France,  had  long  frequented 
the  cod  fisheries  around  Newfoundland  and  Laborador.  It 
seemed  only  a  question  of  time  before  Spain  would  envelop 

[254] 


Elizabethan  Politics  and  Colonial  Enterprise      255 

most  of  the  New  World.  However,  Jacques  Carrier,  it  must 
not  be  forgotten,  had  explored  the  St.  Lawrence  in  1536 
and  claimed  it  for  the  King  of  France,  but  France  had  been 
as  slow  as  England  in  proving  her  claim. 

A  faint  hint  of  eventual  opposition  to  Spain  lay  in  the  al- 
most forgotten  voyage  of  John  Cabot,  a  Genoese,  naturalized 
in  Venice.  He  had  entered  the  employ  of  the  first  Tudor  king, 
Henry  VII,  and  in  1497  had  explored  the  northern  coasts 
of  America,  probably  the  shores  of  Newfoundland  and  Nova 
Scotia,  and  had  reported  to  his  royal  master  that  he  had 
claimed  the  country  in  his  name.  Upon  the  slender  claims  of 
Cabot's  discovery,  England  later  based  her  right  to  territory 
in  the  North  Atlantic.  Why  had  England,  for  nearly  a  cen- 
tury, done  so  little  to  assert  these  claims  and  to  take  such  a 
rich  possession?  To  us  who  have  been  steeped  in  the  intri- 
cacies of  geopolitics  and  the  belief  in  the  necessity  of  access 
to  essential  natural  resources,  it  seems  incredible  that  a  na- 
tion as  shrewd— and  acquisitive— as  the  English  would  have 
been  so  negligent  of  its  opportunities. 

The  answer  lies  of  course  in  the  tangled  skein  of  Tudor 
politics  and  England's  slow  realization  of  her  place  in  the  in- 
ternational scene.  We  may  see  a  similar  parallel  in  the  United 
States'  own  groping  toward  political  maturity,  and  her  slow- 
ness to  grasp  the  implications  of  international  power  and 
responsibility.  For  a  long  time  England's  destinies  were  con- 
trolled by  doctrines  that  our  own  isolationists  would  under- 
stand and  approve.  But  there  were  many  complicating  fac- 
tors. 

The  first  was  the  instability  of  the  Tudor  throne.  Looking 
backward  from  our  point  of  vantage  in  time,  we  remember 
the  long  reign  of  the  first  Elizabeth  and  think  that  few  mon- 
archs  could  have  felt  more  secure  in  the  affections  of  their 
countrymen.  But  we  forget  that  Henry  VII  had  a  very  shaky 
title  to  the  crown  which  he  snatched  from  Richard  III,  and 
that  Henry  VIII  in  his  efforts  to  establish  a  male  line  of  suc- 
cession, stirred  up  a  hornet's  nest  at  home  and  abroad,  alien- 
ated Spain  and  Mother  Church,  sowed  the  seeds  of  rebel- 
lion, and  left  only  a  sickly  minor  son  and  two  uncertain 


256  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

daughters,  whose  partisans  were  ready  time  after  time  to 
plunge  the  country  into  civil  war.  Edward  VI's  brief  reign 
saw  a  Protestant  regime,  followed  by  Mary  Tudor's  reversal 
of  the  state  religion  and  marriage  with  Philip  II  of  Spain, 
chief  protagonist  of  Catholic  power  in  Europe.  Mary  in  turn 
was  followed  by  Elizabeth  in  1558,  who  cast  her  lot  with 
the  new  religion,  though  it  is  doubtful  whether  she  had  much 
enthusiasm  for  religion  of  any  kind.  But  as  the  daughter  of 
Anne  Boleyn  she  was  regarded  by  the  Catholic  Church  as 
illegitimate  and  therefore  without  claim  to  the  throne.  Her 
religious  position  was  forced  upon  her. 

On  her  accession,  Elizabeth  was  faced  with  the  internal 
rebellion  of  powerful  Catholic  subjects  like  the  Howards  in 
the  North  and  with  the  threat  of  invasion  from  the  Contin- 
ent if  she  offended  her  late  half  brother-in-law,  Philip  II. 
Few  young  girls  have  had  more  problems  to  perplex  them.  But 
few  girls  possessed  such  natural  cunning  and  shrewdness, 
and  few  have  ever  had  so  wise  and  adroit  a  counsellor  as 
William  Cecil,  later  Lord  Burghley,  whom  she  inherited 
from  her  sister  Mary.  For  most  of  her  reign— until  his  death 
in  1598— Elizabeth  kept  Burghley  by  her  side.  She  was  often 
angry  with  him,  frequently  deceived  him,  and  was  not  above 
engaging  in  political  intrigues  behind  his  back,  but  she  never 
felt  comfortable  when  she  went  against  Cecil's  advice,  and 
she  always  stood  a  bit  in  awe  of  him.  No  other  man  ever 
succeeded  in  awing  Elizabeth.  And  yet  Elizabeth  never  let 
Cecil  become  dictator  over  her  mind.  She  kept  other  poli- 
ticians in  her  service  and  she  played  them  against  each  other 
on  the  constantly  shifting  chess  board  of  national  policy.  As 
Lord  Treasurer,  Burghley  occupied  a  paramount  position. 

Her  other  great  statesman  and  counsellor  was  Francis 
Walsingham,  about  ten  years  younger  than  Burghley,  whose 
appointment  as  ambassador  to  France,  Burghley  procured 
in  1570.  Less  than  a  year  after  the  Massacre  of  St.  Bartholo- 
mew's Day,  August  24,  1572,  Walsingham  returned  to  be- 
come Principal  Secretary  to  the  Queen.  The  slaughter  of  the 
Huguenots  had  helped  to  confirm  an  ardent  Protestantism 
which  influenced  his  political  point  of  view  until  his  dying 


Elizabethan  Politics  and  Colonial  Enterprise      257 

day  in  1590.  Though  Walsingham  and  Burghley  began  as 
friends,  they  soon  found  themselves  on  opposite  sides  of  the 
political  fence,  particularly  in  matters  of  foreign  policy.  Much 
Elizabethan  history  must  be  interpreted  with  a  knowledge 
of  the  personalities  and  attitudes  of  Walsingham  and  Burgh- 
ley in  mind.  Remote  as  all  this  may  seem,  it  had  much  to  do 
with  the  planning  that  preceded  the  attempt  to  colonize 
North  Carolina. 

Walsingham  became  the  leader  of  the  Protestant  cause, 
or  more  particularly,  the  wing  of  the  Protestant  faction  that 
eventually  became  known  as  the  Puritan  group.  Burghley, 
on  the  other  hand,  became  the  architect  of  Elizabeth's  via 
media  in  religion,  a  state  church  that  would  not  be  too  hard 
for  former  Catholics  to  accept  and  yet  not  so  ritualistic  as 
to  alienate  moderate  Protestants.  The  brilliant  biographer 
of  both  of  these  men,  Professor  Conyers  Read,  thus  states 
their  differences:  "I  think  Cecil  was  a  good  Protestant,  but 
he  subordinated  religion  to  material  considerations,  and 
while  Walsingham  looked  upon  Puritans  as  crusaders,  Cecil, 
as  he  grew  older,  came  to  regard  them  as  a  nuisance.  Clap- 
ham  says  of  him  [Cecil]  that  he  disliked  Catholics  because 
of  their  superstition  and  the  Puritans  because  of  their  singu- 
larity."1 Villainous  as  Cecil  may  have  regarded  such  acts  as 
the  St.  Bartholomew's  Massacre  or  the  cruelties  perpetrated 
by  the  Spaniards  on  the  Dutch  Calvinists,  he  never  let  his 
emotions  sway  his  judgment.  He  did  not  intend  for  England 
to  lead  any  Protestant  crusade  on  the  Continent.  Though  he 
placed  no  great  trust  in  Spaniards,  he  believed  that  co-exis- 
tence of  a  sort  was  possible  with  them,  and  he  was  opposed 
to  any  policy  that  would  bring  open  conflict. 

Walsingham,  though  a  man  of  prudence,  also  became 
convinced  as  early  as  the  'seventies'  that  appeasement  of 
Spain  could  go  too  far.  In  1576,  he  was  supporting  secret 

1  The  quotation  is  from  a  personal  letter  from  Professor  Read.  His  Mr. 
Secretary  Walsingham  and  the  Policy  of  Queen  Elizabeth  (Cambridge 
1925.  3  vols.)  is  a  classic  study  of  the  man  and  his  times.  Hereafter  cited 
as  Read,  Mr.  Secretary  Walsingham.  The  first  volume  of  Professor  Read's 
biography  of  Burghley  is  now  in  press.  A  succinct  account  of  the  political 
differences  of  the  two  men  may  be  found  in  Read,  "Walsingham  and 
Burghley  in  Queen  Elizabeth's  Privy  Council,"  English  Historical  Review, 
XXVIII  (1913),  34-58.  Hereafter  cited  as  Read,  "Walsingham  and  Burgh- 
ley." 


258  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

aid  to  the  Dutch  rebels  and  Burghley  was  opposing  it.  The 
Spanish  Ambassador  in  London,  Bernardino  de  Mendoza, 
reported  in  1578,  that  Walsingham  and  the  Earl  of  Leicester 
were  pleading  the  Dutch  cause  under  the  color  of  religion 
which  made  it  hard  for  Burghley  to  oppose  them,  particularly 
since  Leicester,  "despite  his  bad  character,"  was  in  high  fa- 
vor with  the  Queen.2 

The  Queen  s  relations  with  Leicester  remain  one  of  the 
mysteries  of  history.  Whether  Leicester  was  ever  actually 
her  lover  may  be  doubted,  but  she  was  emotionally  stirred 
by  this  ambitious  man  whose  influence  was  greater  than  his 
abilities  as  a  soldier  or  statesman.  Yet  better  men  than 
Leicester  used  him  as  a  "front"  and  thereby  gained  a  favor- 
able hearing  from  the  Queen.  One  of  these  men  was  Wal- 
singham. 

Walsingham's  personal  sympathies  lay  with  the  extreme 
Protestant  or  Puritan  wing  of  the  church,  and  he  and  Leices- 
ter are  sometimes  described  as  leaders  of  the  "Puritan  party." 
That  is  an  over-simplification  of  their  activities.3  Walsing- 
ham was  too  shrewd  a  statesman  to  become  a  narrow  parti- 
san, but  both  he  and  Leicester  were  irrevocably  committed 
to  opposition  to  Spain.  After  the  Sea  Beggars  seized  Brill 
and  Flushing  in  1572,  and  the  revolt  of  the  Netherlands  ex- 
cited the  hopes  of  Protestants  throughout  Europe,  Walsing- 
ham and  Leicester  argued  earnestly  in  the  Privy  Council 
that  England  should  recognize  Philip  II  as  an  enemy  and 
go  to  the  aid  of  the  rebels.4  Henceforth,  they  were  the  recog- 
nized leaders  of  the  anti-Spanish  faction  in  the  Privy  Coun- 
cil and  of  what  Corbett  has  called  the  "war  party."5  Eliza- 
beth was  so  upset  on  one  occasion  in  1576  by  the  constant 
pressure  to  aid  the  Dutch  that  she  ran  into  her  bedroom, 
locked  the  door,  and  refused  to  come  out  until  members  of 
her  household  threatened  to  batter  down  the  door  to  re- 
trieve her.  As  one  observer  reported,  "Her  Majesty  is  troubl- 

2  Read,  "Walsingham  and  Burghley,"  38. 

3  Read,  Mr.  Secretary  Walsingham,  II,  258-339,  discusses  the  complicated 
nature  of  Walsingham's  private  and  public  relations  with  the  Puritans. 

4  Read,  Mr.  Secretary  Walsingham,  I,  316-372. 

5  Julian  S.  Corbett,  Drake  and  the  Tudor  Navy  (London,  1899),  I,  190  ff. 
Hereafter  cited  as  Corbett,  Drake  and  the  Tudor  Navy. 


Elizabethan  Politics  and  Colonial  Enterprise      259 


ed  with  these  causes,  which  maketh  her  very  melancholy 
and  [she]  seemeth  greatly  to  be  out  of  quiet."  6  Everybody 
else  was  "out  of  quiet."  Cautious,  prudent  William  Cecil, 
now  Lord  Burghley,  was  beside  himself.  He  and  the  con- 
servative members  of  the  Privy  Council  did  not  want  to  see 
Spain— or  France  either— supreme  in  the  Low  Countries,  yet 
Burghley,  like  the  Queen,  feared  open  war.  The  result,  for 
the  time  being,  was  another  effort  by  the  Queen  to  mediate 
between  Philip  and  the  Dutch.  She  ended  by  lending  the 
Dutch  money  and  allowing  English  "volunteers"  to  serve 
in  the  Low  Countries;  eventually  she  sent  her  favorite  Leices- 
ter to  command  English  troops  fighting  with  the  Dutch. 

The  decade  from  1578  to  1588  was  a  period  of  cold  war 
with  hot  intervals,  an  era  in  some  respects  like  our  own  un- 
happy age.  Throughout  these  years  Burghley  continued  to 
hope  for  a  peaceful  solution  with  Spain. 

Around  Walsingham,  however,  another  group  collected,  a 
group  intent  upon  harassing  Spain  in  every  way.  Their  stra- 
tegy was  to  unleash  as  many  commerce  raiders  as  they  could 
muster  and  let  them  prey  on  Spanish  shipping  and  Spanish 
treasure  ships.  They  even  contemplated  establishing  opera- 
tional bases  in  the  New  World,  and  of  raiding  Spain's  life 
lines  from  such  bases.  These  were  the  earliest  plans  for  Eng- 
lish settlements  overseas.  These  bold  spirits  included  John 
Hawkins,  Francis  Drake,  Humphrey  Gilbert,  Walter  Raleigh, 
and  Richard  Hakluyt,  the  dedicated  propagandist  of  English 
expansion  overseas.  It  was  not  mere  whim  that  made  Hak- 
luyt dedicate  the  1589  edition  of  the  Principal  Navigations 
to  Walsingham.  In  addition  to  the  immediate  purpose  of 
crippling  the  Spanish  capacity  to  make  war— and  of  enrich- 
ing themselves— by  capturing  Spanish  treasure  ships,  these 
men  were  coming  to  believe  that  England's  future  strength 
and  prosperity  demanded  outposts  in  the  New  World.  Seiz- 
ure of  American  bases  would  mean  a  frontal  attack  on  Span- 
ish interests  and  would  incur  the  risk  of  a  counter-attack 
on  England  and  the  loss  of  English  commerce  with  Spain  and 
the  Spanish  dominions. 

eRead,  Mr.  Secretary  Walsingham,  I,  316. 


260  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Burghley  was  opposed  to  such  bold  measures  on  several 
counts.  First,  he  did  not  believe  that  England  was  equipped 
to  wage  a  war  with  Spain,  the  colossus  of  Europe.  Spanish 
armies  were  the  mightiest  Europe  had  ever  seen.  The  Span- 
ish infantryman  had  proved  himself  invincible  on  many  a 
field  and  Spain's  reservoir  of  manpower  seemed  inexhausti- 
ble. Burghley's  natural  caution  made  him  loath  to  offend  so 
dangerous  an  enemy.  Furthermore,  he  believed  that  the  na- 
tional interest  lay  in  preserving  peace  and  encouraging  trade. 
Despite  religious  and  political  suspicion  and  hatred  of  Spain, 
England  had  a  profitable  trade  with  the  Iberian  peninsula  and 
with  Flanders.  Burghley  had  been  constantly  negotiating 
to  expand  that  trade.  War,  Burghley  believed,  would  cer- 
tainly bring  on  financial  disaster.  The  best  interests  of  Eng- 
land would  be  served  if  the  nation  should  content  itself  with 
trade,  keep  the  peace,  and  grow  prosperous.  Some  way 
would  be  found  to  circumvent  the  political  and  military 
threats  from  Spain.  In  short,  Burghley  was  a  "little  England- 
er"— at  least  for  the  time  being— and  wanted  no  part  of  over- 
seas expansion,  if  that  expansion  meant  war  with  the  great- 
est military  power  in  Europe. 

Between  Burghley  and  the  conservatives  on  one  side  and 
the  adventurers  who  looked  to  Walsingham  for  leadership, 
there  was  a  constant  struggle,  often  not  open,  but  always 
persistent.  Where  did  the  Queen  stand  in  the  midst  of  the 
great  debate?  Precisely  where  it  suited  her  at  the  moment. 
With  characteristic  Tudor  cunning,  she  played  both  sides 
against  the  middle.  She  would  not  outwardly  oppose  Burgh- 
ley and  favor  an  irreparable  affront  to  Spain;  yet  she  secret- 
ly encouraged  her  corsairs  and  sometimes  invested  in  their 
privateering  expeditions.  Always  she  demanded  and  got  a 
royal  share  of  the  booty.  But  she  took  care  that  she  could  dis- 
avow any  particularly  embarrassing  foray  by  her  seamen. 

The  political  background  of  Drake's  famous  circumnavi- 
gation of  the  world  in  1577-1580  illustrates  the  duplicity  of 
the  Queen  with  her  own  ministers.  In  the  summer  of  1576, 
Walsingham  was  in  despair  over  the  Queen's  consideration 
of  a  plan  to  make  friends  with  Philip,  and  he  was  eager  to 
take  advantage  of  any  change  of  mood  that  would  harden 


Elizabethan  Politics  and  Colonial  Enterprise      261 

her  against  the  Spanish  king.  In  the  spring  of  1577  the  Queen 
became  suspicious  that  Philip  was  nurturing  a  plot  to  aid 
Mary  Stuart  and  Walsingham  lost  no  time  in  encouraging 
that  mood.  He  advised  her  that  she  should  secretly  encourage 
some  of  her  sea  captains  to  strike  a  blow  at  Spanish  shipping 
that  would  prove  to  Philip  that  England  was  a  power  that 
he  might  not  trifle  with.  At  this  moment  Walsingham  sought 
out  Drake.  "Secretary  Walsingham  did  come  to  confer  with 
him  and  declared  unto  him  that  Her  Majesty  had  received 
divers  injuries  of  the  King  of  Spain,  for  the  which  she  de- 
sired to  have  some  revenge,"  a  contemporary  report  giving 
Drake's  account  of  the  proceeding  states. 7  Whereupon,  Wal- 
singham whipped  out  a  map  and  asked  Drake  to  write  down 
in  his  own  hand  the  places  on  the  map  where  the  King  of 
Spain  "might  be  most  annoyed."  This  Drake  refused  to  do, 
pointing  out  "that  Her  Majesty  was  mortal,  and  that  if  it 
should  please  God  to  take  Her  Majesty  away,  it  might  be 
that  some  prince  might  reign  that  might  be  in  league  with 
the  King  of  Spain,  and  then  will  my  own  hand  be  a  witness 
against  myself."  Nevertheless,  Drake  agreed  to  tell  the  Queen 
in  person  of  a  plan  to  attack  the  Spaniards  from  the  South 
Sea  and  to  raid  the  west  coast  of  Spanish  America.  This 
Drake  did,  and  he  reported  that  "Her  Majesty  did  swear  by 
her  Crown  that  if  any  within  her  realm  did  give  the  King 
of  Spain  to  understand  hereof  (as  she  suspected  too  well) 
they  should  lose  their  heads  therefor."  And  lastly  Drake 
said,  "Her  Majesty  gave  me  special  commandment  that  of 
all  men  my  Lord  Treasurer  should  not  know  it."  So  Burgh- 
ley,  the  Lord  Treasurer,  must  be  kept  in  the  dark.  Was  he 
completely  fooled  by  the  secrecy  surrounding  the  feverish 
preparations  for  the  impending  voyage?  That  is  doubtful. 
It  was  hard  to  keep  secrets  from  so  knowing  a  man  as  Burgh- 
ley.  It  was  given  out  that  this  was  to  be  a  voyage  of  discovery 
in  search  of  Terra  Australis  Incognita,  and  it  was  hinted  for 
Burghley's  benefit,  in  case  he  heard  of  the  project,  that  noth- 
ing was  farther  from  Drake's  intent  than  injury  to  the  King 
of  Spain. 

7  Corbett,  Drake  and  the  Tudor  Navy,  I,  207-208. 


262  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Clearly  Burghley  knew  something  about  the  projected 
voyage,  for  among  the  gentlemen-officers  whom  Drake  found 
it  expedient  to  take  along  was  a  mysterious  person  named 
Thomas  Doughty,  who  had  long  cultivated  Drake's  friend- 
ship. Doughty's  precise  role  has  been  a  subject  of  specula- 
tion, but  it  is  certain  that  he  was  Burghley's  agent.  Perhaps 
Burghley  placed  upon  him  responsibility  for  frustrating  any 
belligerent  move  against  Spain.  Perhaps  he  was  there  mere- 
ly to  report  to  Burghley  what  happened. 

At  any  rate,  Doughty  proved  a  troublemaker  from  the  start, 
and  when  Drake  reached  the  Straits  of  Magellan  late  in 
June  1578,  he  anchored  in  Santa  Cruz  Bay  and  brought 
Doughty  to  trial  for  mutiny  and  other  crimes.  With  charac- 
teristic English  regard  for  the  forms  of  law,  Drake  gave 
Doughty  a  jury  trial;  he  was  found  guilty  and  sentenced  by 
Drake,  who  served  as  presiding  judge,  to  death.  Again  with 
characteristic  English  regard  for  decorum,  Drake  took  com- 
munion with  the  prisoner,  sat  with  him  at  his  last  dinner, 
and  had  him  beheaded  as  a  traitor.  Whatever  the  formal 
charges  were,  Doughty's  fatal  crime  in  Drake's  eyes  was  be- 
ing the  agent  to  betray  him  to  Burghley,  the  Lord  Treasurer. 
Drake  was  realist  enough  to  know  that  he  himself  was 
caught  in  the  web  of  Elizabethan  politics,  that,  in  Corbett's 
words,  "he  was  being  used  as  an  instrument  to  upset  Burgh- 
ley's policy  of  peace."  8 

The  story  of  Drake's  epoch-making  voyage  has  been  often 
told  and  does  not  need  repeating,  but  its  political  aspects 
and  its  relation  to  other  anti-Spanish  ventures  are  frequently 
overlooked.  Drake's  raids  on  the  defenceless  towns  of  Chile 
and  Peru  were  enough  to  precipitate  war,  it  would  seem. 
But  when  Mendoza,  the  Spanish  ambassador,  complained  of 
the  "master  thief  as  he  called  Drake,  Elizabeth  blandly  re- 
torted that  she  had  no  proof  of  his  guilt.  Elizabeth,  of  course, 
was  ready  to  repudiate  a  liability,  but  Drake's  safety  lay  in 
the  extraordinary  wealth  brought  back  from  the  pillage  of 
Spanish  ships  and  towns.  To  repudiate  Drake  now  would 
mean  restitution  of  the  stolen  goods  to  Spain,  and  Elizabeth, 

8  Corbett,  Drake  and  the  Tudor  Navy,  I,  244. 


Elizabethan  Politics  and  Colonial  Enterprise      263 

once  she  had  glimpsed  the  gold  and  jewels  in  the  "Golden 
Hind's"  cargo  had  no  mind  to  send  them  to  Spain  and  hang 
Drake  merely  to  please  the  Spanish  ambassador  and  his 
royal  master.  Instead,  on  April  4,  1581,  she  went  down  to 
Deptf ord  where  the  "Golden  Hind"  lay  at  anchor  and  knight- 
ed Drake  on  his  own  deck.  Surely  this  was  an  open  affront 
to  Philip  and  proof  of  the  success  of  Walsingham's  scheme. 

Burghley  and  the  peace  party,  however,  continued  to  work 
for  a  rapprochement  with  Philip.  The  London  merchants 
trading  with  Spain  and  Portugal  were  fearful  of  the  loss  of 
their  business  and  their  ships  in  case  of  open  war  and  they 
also  exerted  all  their  influence  to  prevent  a  conflict.  Burghley 
even  counselled  the  Queen  to  restore  the  stolen  treasure  to 
Spain.  Drake  was  by  now  a  popular  hero  and  the  Queen  had 
added  to  her  treasury  too  much  of  his  gold  to  permit  resti- 
tution. The  precise  amount  of  wealth  brought  home  in  the 
"Golden  Hind"  will  never  be  known  but  it  is  estimated  at 
the  least  to  have  equalled  "nearly  twice  a  year's  normal  rev- 
enue of  the  English  crown,  and  yielding  [to  the  investors  in 
the  voyage]  a  profit  said  to  have  worked  out  at  4,700  per- 
cent." 9  Even  after  the  Queen  had  taken  her  full  share,  Drake 
was  wealthy  and  the  lowliest  cabin  boy  in  his  crew  had  a  rich 
reward.  Small  wonder  that  he  was  a  hero. 

Though  Burghley  might  stave  off  open  war  for  a  while 
longer,  Drake's  success  whetted  the  appetite  of  corsairs  and 
expansionists  who  would  continue  to  harass  Spain  until  peace 
would  be  impossible.  Drake  had  shown  that  the  Spanish  Em- 
pire was  vulnerable,  and  Walsingham's  group  became  more 
importunate  for  overseas  expansion.  By  now  they  can  be  de- 
scribed as  incipient  imperialists.  They  were  beginning  to 
think  in  terms  of  territorial  expansion  overseas. 

The  man  who  did  more  than  any  other  to  rationalize  this 
point  of  view  was  the  preacher,  Richard  Hakluyt,  who  be- 
came the  greatest  propagandist  of  his  age  for  overseas  ex- 
pansion. His  compilations  of  voyages  were  intended  for 
something  other  than  romantic  reading.  They  were  to  in- 
spire his  countrymen  to  further  explorations  and  to  provide 

9  James  A.  Williamson,  The  Tudor  Age  (London,  1953),  344. 


264  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

practical  information  which  they  might  use.  In  dedications 
and  introductions,  Hakluyt  argued  cogently  that  the  destiny 
of  England  required  her  to  settle  strategic  areas  in  the  New 
World.  Walsingham  early  recognized  the  importance  of  Hak- 
luyt's  work  and  encouraged  him  in  it.  Hakluyt  indeed  be- 
came an  influential  cosmographer  and  advocate  in  the  Wal- 
singham group  of  expansionists. 

As  early  as  1580  Hakluyt  prepared  a  paper,  probably  for 
Walsingham,  entitled  "A  Discourse  of  the  Commodity  of 
the  Taking  of  the  Straight  of  Magellanus"  in  which  he  argued 
that  without  "great  charge  and  without  open  war"  England 
might  cripple  Spain  by  fortifying  the  passage  to  the  Pacific. 
He  also  suggested  the  seizure  of  Cape  St.  Vincent  in  Brazil 
as  a  subsidiary  base  and  the  continued  search  for  a  North- 
east passage  to  Asia.  In  order  not  to  antagonize  the  King 
of  Spain  he  suggested  that  "To  the  Str.  of  Magellanus  may 
be  sent  Clerke  [Thomas  Clarke]  the  pirate  upon  promise  of 
pardon,  and  to  color  the  matter  he  may  go  as  of  himself  and 
not  with  the  countenance  of  the  English  state,  or  some  such 
man  may  be  sent."  10  He  further  suggested  that  the  fort  at 
the  Straits  might  be  garrisoned  with  slaves  and  half-breeds 
rescued  from  the  Spanish  colonies.  A  few  English  convicts, 
male  and  female,  might  also  win  their  freedom  by  going  to 
the  Straits.  Thus  the  fortification  of  this  area  would  serve  a 
Christian  and  humanitarian  purpose  and  benefit  the  nation. 
Though  there  is  no  record  that  Hakluyt's  memorandum  had 
any  immediate  effect,  it  is  evidence  of  the  growing  realiza- 
tion of  the  expansionists  that  England  must  checkmate  Spain 
in  the  New  World. 

Hakluyt's  first  compilation,  the  Divers  Voyages  of  1582, 
dedicated  to  Walsingham's  son-in-law,  Sir  Philip  Sidney, 
contained  further  arguments  of  the  value  of  English  bases 
overseas.  The  dedication  rebukes  his  countrymen  for  their 
negligence  of  duty  and  for  putting  privateering  ahead  of 
colonization  out  of  what  he  calls  "a  preposterous  desire  of 


10  E.  G.  R.  Taylor  (ed.),  The  Original  Writings  and  Correspondence  of 
the  Two  Richard  Hakluyts  (Hakluyt  Society,  2nd  Ser.,  LXXVI,  1935),  I, 
142.  Hereafter  cited  as  Taylor,  Original  Writings. 


Elizabethan  Politics  and  Colonial  Enterprise      265 

seeking  rather  gain  than  God's  glory."  "  These  beliefs  Hak- 
luyt  set  forth  in  a  long  and  closely-reasoned  state  paper,  pre- 
sented in  person  to  the  Queen  in  1584;  this  paper,  generally 
known  today  as  the  Discourse  of  Western  Planting,  shows 
the  handiwork,  not  only  of  Hakluyt  but  of  Raleigh  and  pos- 
sibly of  Walsingham. 12  It  is  a  sort  of  platform  of  the  expan- 
sionists and  makes  a  convincing  argument  for  state  support 
of  colonization. 

Adroitly  Hakluyt  wrapped  his  argument  in  a  medley  of 
religious  and  practical  reasons  which  even  a  hostile  critic 
would  find  hard  to  controvert.  The  princes  of  the  reformed 
religion,  of  whom  Queen  Elizabeth  is  the  leader,  he  asserts, 
have  a  responsibility  to  see  that  the  heathen  of  the  New 
World  are  not  allowed  to  become  a  solid  Catholic  bloc.  It 
is  not  sufficient  just  to  send  a  few  Protestant  missionaries  to 
the  heathen,  Hakluyt  points  out.  Salvation  must  be  a  con- 
comitant of  colonization.  He  then  paints  a  gorgeous  picture 
of  the  profits  to  English  merchants  and  the  enrichment  of 
the  English  crown  from  the  commodities  of  the  New  World 
which  Spain  at  present  monopolizes.  The  power  of  Spain, 
he  insists,  is  much  inflated,  and  he  prophecies  that  King 
Philip's  pride  will  be  brought  low  when  Englishmen  launch 
a  determined  attack  on  the  outposts  of  his  empire. 

All  of  this  reasoning,  all  of  this  argument  for  governmental 
support  of  colonial  enterprises  of  course  is  propaganda  for 
Raleigh's  own  projects  to  settle  the  coast  of  North  Carolina. 
In  the  political  alignment  of  the  1580's  Raleigh  held  an  in- 
teresting position.  Walsingham  undoubtedly  sympathized 
with  many  of  his  views  on  expansion  and  helped  to  promote 
them.  Yet  Walsingham  never  liked  or  trusted  Raleigh  and 
frequently  opposed  him. 13  Neither  did  Burghley  like  or 
trust  Raleigh.  "Seek  not  to  be  Essex;  shun  to  be  Raleigh," 

11  Hakluyt  as  a  propagandist  is  discussed  at  greater  length  in  Louis  B. 
Wright,  Religion  and  Empire:  The  Alliance  between  Piety  and  Commerce 
in  English  Expansion,  1558-1625  (Chapel  Hill,  N.  C,  1943),  33-56.  Here- 
after cited  as  Wright,  Religion  and  Empire. 

^Taylor,  Original  Writings,  I,  38.  See  also  David  B.  Quinn,  Raleigh 
and  the  British  Empire  (London,  1947),  59-62.  Hereafter  cited  as  Quinn, 
Raleigh  and  the  British  Empire. 

13  Read,  Mr.  Secretary  Walsingham,  III,  406,  n.  3. 


266  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

was  Burghley's  advice  to  his  own  son  Robert. 14  Yet  Raleigh 
tried  on  numerous  occasions  to  cultivate  Burghley's  good 
will  and  Burghley  was  not  above  using  Raleigh's  influence 
with  the  Queen  when  Raleigh  was  in  favor  and  it  suited 
Burghley's  purposes.  The  truth  was  that  Raleigh,  brilliant 
and  versatile,  was  also  grasping  and  arrogant  and  had  few 
friends.  Before  the  Queen  he  was  a  charming  and  gracious 
courtier  and  for  a  time  he  stood  high  in  her  favor.  It  was 
during  a  period  of  royal  favor  that  he  won  Walsingham's  ap- 
proval of  his  colonial  ventures  and  managed  to  avoid  Burgh- 
ley's veto.  From  the  Queen  he  obtained  a  favorable  charter, 
and  the  settlement  of  North  Carolina  was  theoretically  pos- 
sible. 

Raleigh  had  another  advantage:  the  experience  of  his 
half-brother,  Sir  Humphrey  Gilbert,  fifteen  years  his  senior, 
a  respected  soldier  in  Ireland  and  the  Low  Countries,  at  one 
time  an  advocate  for  explorations  in  search  of  the  Northwest 
passage,  and  the  would-be  colonizer  of  Newfoundland.  Gil- 
bert had  been  knighted  for  his  services  in  Ireland  in  the 
'sixties  and  had  the  respect  even  of  Burghley,  who,  along 
with  other  conservatives  like  the  Earl  of  Sussex,  subscribed 
to  his  project  for  the  settlement  of  Newfoundland  in  1580- 
1584. 15 

Yet  Gilbert  had  been  one  of  the  ardent  supporters  of  the 
policy  of  attacking  Spain  in  the  New  World.  Indeed,  in  Nov- 
ember 1577,  he  had  prepared  two  papers  with  similar  titles: 
"A  Discourse  How  Her  Majesty  May  Meet  with  and  Annoy 
the  King  of  Spain." 16  Just  at  the  time  when  Drake  was  pre- 
paring to  sail  on  his  expedition  around  the  world,  Gilbert 
proposed  that  he  should  lead  an  expedition  to  seize  the 
Spanish,  Portuguese,  and  French  fishing  fleets  off  Newfound- 
land and  then  combine  forces  with  other  privateers  to  take 
Cuba  and  Santo  Domingo  in  the  West  Indies.  This  action 
undoubtedly  would  have  "annoyed"  the  King  of  Spain,  not 
to  mention  the  King  of  France,  but  combined  with  Drake's 

14  William  Stebbing,  Sir  Walter  Raleigh,  A  Biography  (Oxford,  1899),  57. 

35  David  B.  Quinn,  The  Voyages  and  Colonizing  Activities  of  Sir  Hum- 
phrey Gilbert  (Hakluyt  Society,  2nd  Ser.,  LXXXIV,  1940),  II,  329.  Here- 
after cited  as  Quinn,  The  Voyages  .  .  .  of  Sir  Humphrey  Gilbert. 

16  Quinn,  The  Voyages  .  .  .  of  Sir  Humphrey  Gilbert,  I,  33-34,  170-180. 


Elizabethan  Politics  and  Colonial  Enterprise      267 

attack  on  the  west  coast,  it  might  have  broken  the  back  of 
the  Spanish  Empire.  Such  measures,  however,  were  too 
strong  for  Elizabeth,  and  she  contented  herself  with  sur- 
reptitious aid  to  Drake.  Thereafter,  Gilbert  busied  himself 
with  less  provocative  ventures  in  Newfoundland.  A  staunch 
Protestant,  he  was  convinced  that  God  had  especially  re- 
served certain  portions  of  the  New  World  for  a  Protestant 
empire,  and  Newfoundland  looked  like  the  promised  land. 
Nevertheless,  he  was  ready  to  admit  English  Catholic  refu- 
gees as  colonists,  because  that  would  drain  a  troublesome 
element  out  of  England  and  put  them  to  constructive  work 
in  a  country  where  they  could  do  no  harm. 1T  Since  Gilbert's 
Newfoundland  colony  did  not  appear  to  contravene  Spanish 
interests  sufficiently  to  arouse  violent  reactions  from  that 
quarter,  even  Burghley  smiled  upon  it.  Perhaps  he  thought 
of  the  benefits  to  the  cod  fishery,  his  own  pet  project  for  im- 
proving the  economic  state  of  England.  At  any  rate,  the  ef- 
forts to  establish  a  colony  in  Newfoundland  helped  to  get 
the  Queen  and  Burghley  used  to  the  idea  and  made  it  easier 
for  Raleigh  to  obtain  his  charter. 

The  story  of  Raleigh's  efforts  to  establish  a  colony  in 
North  Carolina  is  known  to  all.  With  the  growing  zeal  for 
colonial  enterprise,  we  may  wonder  why  these  efforts  failed. 
A  study  of  the  reasons  for  the  failures  and  mishaps  of  Ra- 
leigh's ventures— and  of  the  first  years  at  Jamestown— would 
be  a  profitable  undertaking,  but  it  would  take  more  than  the 
hour  alloted  for  this  paper.  A  few  factors,  however,  are 
worth  mentioning.  The  principal  reasons  lay  in  inexperience, 
poor  organization,  lack  of  strong  administrative  control,  in- 
sufficient capital,  and  greed  for  quick  profits. 

Some  of  the  promoters  of  colonial  enterprises  overseas, 
notably  Gilbert  and  Raleigh,  had  served  in  Ireland  and  had 
observed  the  efforts  to  found  English  colonies  there.  In  some 
respects  the  Irish  plantations  presented  problems  not  unlike 
those  encountered  in  the  New  World.  Certainly  the  wild  Irish 
were  as  fierce  as  any  Indians  on  the  coast  of  North  Carolina. 
One  would  think  that  the  Irish  experience  would  have  been 

17  Wright,  Religion  and  Empire,  23-26. 


268  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

helpful  in  the  New  World,  but  it  appears  to  have  taught  the 
promoters  very  little.  All  of  the  early  colonial  ventures  were  in- 
adequately equipped,  poorly  manned,  and  poorly  led.  Even 
when  a  capable  leader  emerged,  he  was  handicapped  by  a 
divided  command,  jealousy  among  the  "gentlemen"  in  the 
group,  and  the  lack  of  firm  authority.  Because  the  government 
in  the  initial  period  refused  to  take  any  responsibility  for 
colonies,  the  administration  of  the  ventures  was  a  private 
affair  without  any  well-tried  plan  or  procedure. 

Not  one  of  the  early  colonial  efforts  had  sufficient  financial 
backing  to  insure  its  success.  The  Elizabethans— and  the 
Jacobeans  too,  for  that  matter— were  slow  to  learn  how  ex- 
pensive colonies  can  be  in  their  first  stages  of  development. 

One  prime  reason  why  the  Elizabethans  failed  to  establish 
colonies  was  their  obsession  with  privateering— or  simple 
piracy— as  the  Spaniards  called  it.  Raleigh's  colonial  under- 
takings were  expected  to  pay  the  investors  a  profit  out  of 
Spanish  prizes  captured  by  the  prowling  ship-captains.  Both 
Gilbert  and  Raleigh  had  difficulty  keeping  their  skippers 
headed  for  Newfoundland  or  North  Carolina  when  there 
was  a  prospect  of  prizes  in  the  West  Indies.  The  lure  of  Span- 
ish galleons  to  be  taken  in  American  waters  rather  than  the 
national  preoccupation  with  defense  against  the  Spanish 
Armada  accounts  for  the  long  delay  in  attempting  to  succor 
the  colony  on  Roanoke  Island.  A  privateering  syndicate  or- 
ganized by  a  merchant  named  John  Watts  in  1591  had  as 
an  incidental  objective  the  rescue  of  the  Roanoke  colony. 
Raleigh  was  one  of  the  investors  and  John  White  went  along 
in  the  ship  "Hopewell."  The  other  vessel  was  the  "Moon- 
shine." They  coasted  along  the  shores  of  North  Carolina, 
blew  trumpets,  and  sang  English  songs,  but  could  get  no 
response,  and  finally  headed  for  home.  Nevertheless,  the 
voyage  showed  a  profit  from  prizes  taken  of  eighty-five  per 
cent  on  the  investment  of  the  shareholders.  Yet  this  hand- 
some return  was  regarded  by  Raleigh  as  so  trifling  that  he 
complained  to  Burghley  that  "we  might  have  gotten  more 
to  have  sent  them  a-fishing."  18  When  the  profits  from  piracy 

18  Quinn,  Raleigh  and  the  British  Empire,  125-126. 


Elizabethan  Politics  and  Colonial  Enterprise      269 


were  so  great,  speculators  were  not  interested  in  the  slow 
returns  on  money  invested  in  colonies. 

The  eventual  war  with  Spain  and  the  victory  over  the 
Armada  removed  the  fear  of  offending  Spain  as  a  political 
reason  against  colonial  undertakings.  Gradually,  as  English 
capital  built  up,  and  as  the  moneyed  men  in  the  City,  the 
merchants  of  London,  began  to  realize  that  sources  of  raw 
materials  and  eventual  markets  could  be  found  in  North 
America,  a  new  and  healthier  basis  for  colonization  develop- 
ed. When  King  James  made  peace  with  Spain,  the  old  zest 
for  piracy  disappeared.  No  longer  would  the  sovereign  and 
some  of  the  principal  ministers  in  the  government  take  stock 
in  piratical  voyages.  Profits  had  to  be  sought  in  another  type 
of  adventure.  The  initiative  for  colonization  passed  from  sea- 
captains  and  courtiers  to  the  directors  of  stock  companies. 
Though  colonial  ventures  were  still  subject  to  much  trial  and 
error,  a  sounder  colonial  procedure  was  in  sight. 


NORTH  CAROLINA  BIBLIOGRAPHY,  1953-19541 
By  Mary  Lindsay  Thornton 

Bibliography  and  Libraries 

POWELL,  WILLIAM  STEVENS,  compiler.  North  Carolina 
county  histories,  a  bibliography.  Raleigh,  State  Department 
of  Archives  and  History,  1954.  22  p.  Apply  The  Department. 

THOMPSON,  LAWRENCE  SIDNEY,  compiler.  The  Kentucky 
novel,  compiled  by  Lawrence  S.  Thompson  and  Algernon  D. 
Thompson.  Lexington,  University  of  Kentucky  Press,  1953. 
172  p.  $2.50. 

Philosophy  and  Religion 

ADAMS,  ELIE  MAYNARD.  The  fundamentals  of  general  logic. 

New  York,  Longmans,  Green,  1954.  361  p.  il.  $3.60. 
— Logic  problems,  a  student's  manual  to  accompany  Adams'  The 

fundamentals  of  general  logic.  144  p.  il.  $1.60. 

BARNES,  WILLIAM  WRIGHT.  The  Southern  Baptist  Con- 
vention, 1845-1953.  Nashville,  Tenn.,  Broadman  Press  [1954] 
x,  330  p.  $3.75. 

BOWMAN,  CLARICE  MARGURETTE.  Spiritual  values  in 
camping.  New  York,  Association  Press,  1954.  240  p.  $3.00. 

CLELAND,  JAMES  TOUGH.  The  true  and  lively  Word.  New 
York,  Scribner,  1954.  120  p.  $2.50. 

DICKS,  RUSSELL  LESLIE.  And  peace  at  last;  a  study  of 
death,  the  unreconciled  subject  of  our  times,  by  Russell  L. 
Dicks  and  Thomas  S.  Kepler.  Philadelphia,  Westminster  Press 
[1953]  94  p.  $1.50. 

ENSIGN,  JOHN.  Stewards  in  God's  world,  a  guide  for  junior 
high  camp  leaders,  by  John  and  Ruth  Ensign.  Richmond,  Va., 
John  Knox  Press  [c.1954]  144  p.  il.  $1.25  pa. 

GRAHAM,  WILLIAM  FRANKLIN.  Peace  with  God.  Garden 
City,  N.  Y.,  Doubleday,  1953.  222  p.  $2.50. 

HONIGMANN,  JOHN  JOSEPH.  Culture  and  personality.  New 
York,  Harper  [1954]  499  p.  il.  $5.00. 


1  Books  dealing  with  North  Carolina  or  by  North  Carolinians  published 
during  the  year  ending  August  31,  1954. 

[270] 


North  Carolina  Bibliography,  1953-1954  271 

JOHNSTON,  RUBY  F.  The  development  of  Negro  religion.  New 
York,  Philosophical  Library  [1954]  202  p.  il.  $3.00. 

KATTSOFF,  LOUIS  OSGOOD.  The  design  of  human  behavior. 
St.  Louis,  Educational  Publishers  [1953]  402  p.  $5.00. 

PEARCE,  J.  WINSTON.  I  believe.  Nashville,  Tenn.,  Broadman 
Press,  1954.  120  p.  $1.50. 

POTEAT,  EDWIN  McNEILL,  Mandate  to  humanity;  an  in- 
quiry into  the  history  and  meaning  of  the  Ten  Command- 
ments and  their  relation  to  contemporary  culture,  Nashville, 
Tenn.,  Abingdon-Cokesbury  Press  [1953]  238p.  $3.75. 

POWELL,  WILLIAM  STEVENS.  St.  Luke's  Episcopal  Church, 
1753-1953.  Salisbury,  N.  C.  St.  Luke's  Episcopal  Church, 
1953.  vii,  76p.  il.  $1.00  Order  from  The  Church. 

REDHEAD,  JOHN  A.  Getting  to  know  God,  and  other  sermons. 
Nashville,  Tenn.,  Abingdon  Press  [c.1954]  126  p.  $2.00 

SHUTE,  JOHN  RAYMOND.  The  quest.  Monroe,  N.  C,  Noca- 
lore  Press,  1951.  78  p.  $5.00. 

SPENCE,  THOMAS  HUGH,  JR.  The  Presbyterian  congrega- 
tion on  Rocky  River.  Concord,  N.  C,  Rocky  River  Presby- 
terian Church,  1954.  xiii,  238  p.  il.  Apply  The  Church. 

TAYLOR,  GEORGE  AIKEN.  A  sober  faith;  religion  and  Alco- 
holics Anonymous.  New  York,  Macmillan,  1953.  108  p.  $2.00. 

Economics  and  Sociology 

ASHMORE,  HARRY  S.  The  Negro  and  the  schools.  Chapel  Hill, 
University  of  North  Carolina  Press  [1954]  xv,  228  p.  il.  $2.75. 
Revised  edition.  239  p.  il.  $2.75. 

BRIDGES,  EARLY  WINFRED.  Chorazin  Chapter  no.  13,  Royal 
Arch  Masons,  a  historical  survey.  Staunton,  Va.,  McClure 
Printing  Company,  1953.  163  p.  il.  Apply  the  Author,  311  N. 
Edgeworth  St.,  Greensboro,  N.  C. 

BROOKS,  AUBREY  LEE.  Selected  addresses  of  a  southern  law- 
yer. Chapel  Hill,  University  of  North  Carolina  Press  [1954] 
165  p.  $2.50. 

DAVID,  PAUL  THEODORE.  Presidential  nominating  politics 
in  1952,  prepared  by  Paul  T.  David,  Malcolm  Moos  [and] 
Ralph  M.  Goldman.  Baltimore,  Johns  Hopkins  Press  [1954] 
5v.  v.3.  The  South  has  North  Carolina  material.  $3.50  for  v.3 
only. 


272  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

DOUGLAS,  ROBERT  DICK.  Forms;  a  comprehensive  and  ac- 
curate compilation  of  legal  and  business  forms  for  use  in  the 
State  of  North  Carolina,  rev.  and  enl.  by  Robert  D.  Ussery. 
Charlottesville,  Va.,  Michie  Co.,  1953.  $60. 

FISHER,  MILES  MARK.  Negro  slave  songs  in  the  United 
States.  Ithaca,  N.  Y.,  Cornell  University  Press  for  the  Ameri- 
can Historical  Association  [1953]  xv,  223  p.  $4.00. 

GILLIN,  JOHN  PHILLIP,  editor.  For  a  science  of  social  man. 
New  York,  Macmillan,  1954.  296  p.  $4.00. 

GRAY,  GORDON,  chairman.  In  the  matter  of  J.  Robert  Oppen- 
heimer;  transcript  of  hearing  before  Personnel  Security 
Board,  Washington,  D.  C,  April  12,  1954,  through  May  6, 
1954.  Washington,  U.  S.  Government  Printing  Office,  1954. 
992  p. 

HALLOWELL,  JOHN  HAMILTON.  The  moral  foundation  of 
democracy.  Chicago,  University  of  Chicago  Press,  1954.  134  p. 
$3.50. 

HAMILTON,  WILLIAM  BASKERVILLE,  editor.  Anglo- 
American  law  of  the  frontier:  Thomas  Rodney  &  his  terri- 
torial cases.  Durham,  N.  C,  Duke  University  Press,  1953.  x, 
498  p.  $12.50. 

KNIGHT,  EDGAR  WALLACE,  editor.  A  documentary  history 
of  education  in  the  South  before  1860,  vol.  5:  Educational 
theories  and  practices.  Chapel  Hill,  University  of  North  Caro- 
lina Press,  1953.  vii,  533  p.  $12.50. 

LASSITER,  WILLIAM  CARROLL.  Law  and  press;  a  North 
Carolina  guidebook  on  the  legal  aspects  of  news  reporting, 
editing  and  publishing  for  newspaper  reporters,  editors,  and 
publishers.  Raleigh,  N.  C,  The  Author,  c.1954.  215  leaves. 

McCAIN,  PAUL  M.  The  county  court  in  North  Carolina  before 
1750.  Durham,  N.  C,  Duke  University  Press,  1954.  (Histori- 
cal papers  of  the  Trinity  College  Historical  Society,  ser.  31) 
vi,  163  p.  $2.50  pa. 

NORTH  CAROLINA.  UNIVERSITY.  The  inauguration  of  Gor- 
don Gray  as  President  of  the  Consolidated  Uuiversity  of 
North  Carolina  ...  on  Tuesday,  October  the  tenth,  nineteen 
hundred  and  fifty.  [Chapel  Hill,  University  of  North  Caro- 
lina, 1954]  95  p.  il.  Apply. 

NORTH  CAROLINA.  UNIVERSITY.  The  septicentennial  cele- 
bration of  the  founding  of  the  Sorbonne  College  in  the  Uni- 


North  Carolina  Bibliography,  1953-1954  273 

versity  of  Paris,  Chapel  Hill,  February,  1953,  Proceedings 
and  papers,  Chapel  Hill  [University  of  North  Carolina]  1953. 
ix,  49  p.  Apply  Urban  T.  Holmes,  Department  of  Romance 
Languages,  Chapel  Hill,  N.  C. 

PARSONS,  BRINCKERHOFF,   HALL,  AND   MACDONALD, 

Engineers,  New  York.  Survey  and  report  on  the  inland  ports 
and  waterways  of  North  Carolina,  prepared  for  the  Depart- 
ment of  Conservation  and  Development.  New  York,  1954. 
Various  paging,  il.  Apply  The  Department. 

POWELL,  WILLIAM  STEVENS.  The  Carolina  charter  of 
1663,  how  it  came  to  North  Carolina  and  its  place  in  history, 
with  biographical  sketches  of  the  Proprietors.  Raleigh,  State 
Dept.  of  Archives  and  History,  1954.  v,  79  p.  il.  $1.00  pa, 
$2.00  cloth. 

SHUTE,  JOHN  RAYMOND,  Quintology.  Monroe,  N.  C,  Pri- 
vately printed  for  Nocalore  Press  [1954]  77  p.  il.  $5.00. 

SPENCER,  CORNELIA  (PHILLIPS)  Selected  papers;  edited 
with  an  introduction  by  Louis  R.  Wilson.  Chapel  Hill,  Uni- 
versity of  North  Carolina  Press  [1953]  vii,  753  p.  $5.00. 

TOWNSEND,  BRAXTON  B.  Farming  as  a  trust  company  ser- 
vice in  eastern  North  Carolina.  New  Brunswick,  N.  J.,  1953. 
iv,  78  p.  il.  Thesis — Rutgers  University,  1953. 

Science 

BAITY,  ELIZABETH  CHESLEY.  America  before  man.  New 
York,  Viking  Press,  1953.  224  p.  il.  $4.50.  Juvenile. 

MARKHAM,  EDWIN  CARLYLE.  General  chemistry,  by  Edwin 
C.  Markham  and  Sherman  Smith.  Boston,  Houghton-Mifflin, 
1954.  613  p.  il.  $6.00. 

RHINE,  JOSEPH  BANKS.  New  world  of  the  mind.  New  York, 
Sloane,  1953.  339  p.  $3.75. 

SPRUNT,  ALEXANDER.  Album  of  southern  birds.  Photo- 
graphs by  Samuel  A.  Grimes.  Austin,  University  of  Texas 
Press,  1954.  103  p.  $8.75. 

Applied  Science  and  Useful  Arts 

BROWN,  AYCOCK.  The  birth  of  aviation,  Kitty  Hawk,  N.  C. 
Winston-Salem,  N.  C,  Collins  Co.,  c.1953.  Unpaged,  il.  $1.00. 

CARROLL,  THOMAS  HENRY,  editor.  Business  education  for 
competence  and  responsibility.  Chapel  Hill,  University  of 
North  Carolina  Press  [1954]  x,  67  p.  $2.00. 


274  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

CHAPEL  HILL,  N.  C.  JUNIOR  SERVICE  LEAGUE.  Carolina 
cooking.  Chapel  Hill,  Junior  Service  League,  1953.  123  p. 
$1.50. 

CONCORD,  N.  C.  CABARRUS  COUNTY  MEMORIAL  HOS- 
PITAL. VOLUNTEERS.  Cook  book.  Concord,  N.  C,  1953. 
118  p.  $2.06. 

HOLLEY,  IRVING  BRINTON,  JR.  Ideas  and  weapons,  ex- 
ploitation of  the  aerial  weapon  by  the  United  States  during 
World  War  I.  New  Haven,  Yale  University  Press,  1954.  222  p. 

$3.75. 

HUDSON,  CHARLES  JOSEPH.  Southern  gardening,  a  prac- 
tical and  complete  handbook.  Atlanta,  Tupper  &  Love  [1953] 
464  p.  il.  $5.00. 

LEE,  JOHN  F.  Theory  and  design  of  steam  and  gas  turbines. 
New  York,  McGraw-Hill,  1954.  502  p.  $9.00. 

MORGAN,  NEIL.  Know  your  doctor,  by  Leo  Smollar  and  Neil 
Morgan.  Boston,  Little,  Brown,  1954.  173  p.  $3.00. 

MURRAY,  RAYMOND  LEROY.  Introduction  to  nuclear  engin- 
eering. New  York,  Prentice-Hall,  1954.  418  p.  $9.35. 

NOBLIN,  STUART.  The  Grange  in  North  Carolina,  1929- 
1954 ;  a  story  of  agricultural  progress.  Greensboro,  The  North 
Carolina  State  Grange,  1954.  ix,  59  p.  il.  $1.00. 

NORTH  CAROLINA  STATE  COLLEGE  OF  THE  UNIVER- 
SITY, RALEIGH.  WOMAN'S  CLUB.  Foods  that  rate  at  N.  C. 
State.  Raleigh,  The  Club,  1953.  159  p.  $1.00  pa.  Order  from 
Mrs.  H.  A.  Patten,  13  Furches  St.,  Raleigh,  N.  C. 

RICHARDSON,  FRANK  HOWARD.  How  to  get  along  with 
children.  Atlanta,  Tupper  &  Love,  1954.  172  p.  $2.95. 

VESTER,  KELLY  G.  Food  service,  a  master  plan.  New  York, 
Pageant  Press,   [1953]   152  p.  $3.00. 

WRIGHT,  ORVILLE.  How  we  invented  the  airplane;  edited 
and  with  commentary  by  Fred  C.  Kelly.  New  York,  McKay 
[1953]  78  p.  il.  $1.75. 

Fine  Arts 

GREEN,  PAUL.  Dramatic  heritage.  New  York,  S.  French 
iI-1953]   177  p.  $2.50. 

KAMPHOEFNER,  HENRY  L.  Churches  and  temples,  by  Paul 
Thiry,  Richard  M.  Bennett,  and  Henry  L.  Kamphoefner.  New 
York,  Reinhold  Publishing  Co.,  1954.  ii,  71  p.  il.  $18. 


North  Carolina  Bibliography,  1953-1954  275 

MEYER,  HAROLD  DIEDRICH.  Recreation :  text  and  readings, 
by  Charles  K.  Brightbill  [and]  Harold  D.  Meyer.  New  York, 
Prentice-Hall,  1953.  541  p.  $6.35. 

NEWMAN,  WILLIAM  S.  Understanding  music;  a  new  intro- 
duction to  music's  elements,  styles,  and  forms,  for  both  the 
layman  and  the  practitioner.  New  York,  Harper  [1953]  302 
p.  il.  $5.00. 

PFOHL,  BERNARD  J.  The  Salem  Band.  Winston-Salem,  Pri- 
vately Printed,  1953.  85  p.  il.  Apply  the  Author,  Winston- 
Salem,  N.  C. 

Poetry 

BAY  LEAVES  no.  2:  Prize  poems,  Poetry  Day  contests  .  .  . 
1952-1953.  [West  Asheville,  N.  C]  Poetry  Council  of  North 
Carolina,  1954.  21  p.  Order  from  C.  A.  Shull,  Box  6252,  West 
Asheville,  N.  C.  $1.00  pa. 

ERSKINE,  EDITH  DEADERICK.  From  sea  to  sky.  Emory 
University,  Ga.,  Banner  Press  [1954]  59  p.  $2.00. 

Here  they  live  and  die.  Dallas,  Texas,  The  Story 

Book  Press  [c.1953]  64  p. 

FARMER,  JAMES.  Tape  of  time.  New  York,  Vantage  Press, 
1953.  46  p.  $2.35. 

KIMREY,  GRACE  SAUNDERS.  Songs  of  Sunny  Valley.  Emory 
University,  G.,  Banner  Press  [1954]  60  p.  il.  $2.00. 

LASKEY,  LESLIE  J.  Seasons  and  hours.  Indiana  University, 
The  Art  Center,  1954.  unpaged  $3.00. 

MASON,  JULIAN.  Search  party.  New  York,  Pageant  Press 
[c.1953]  49  p.  $2.00. 

SMITH,  IVORY  HARVEY,  editor.  Life  lines,  a  collection  of 
inspiring  poetry  and  prose,  by  Ivory  Harvey  Smith  and  Isa- 
belle  Tolbert  Smith.  [Charlotte,  N.  C,  Observer  Printing 
House  for  the  Editors,  c.  1952]  xii,  144  p.  il.  $3.00. 

STEM,  THAD,  JR.  The  jack  knife  horse,  poems.2  Raleigh,  N.  C. 
Wolfs  Head  Press,  1954,  59  p.  $2.00. 

TARBOX,  LELA  PRESCOTT.  Poems  and  illustrations,  with  a 
prose  supplement.  New  Bern,  Printed  by  Owen  G.  Dunn  Com- 
pany, 1954.  63  p.  il.  $1.50  pa. 

VAIL,  RUTH.  The  year's  at  the  Spring.  Emory  University,  Ga., 
Banner  Press  [c.1954]  78  p.  il.  $2.50. 

2  Roanoke-Chowan  award  for  poetry. 


276  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Fiction3 

BELL,   THELMA  HARRINGTON.   Snow;  with  drawings  by 

Corydon  Bell.  New  York,  Viking  Press,  1954.  55  p.  il.  $2.50. 
Juvenile. 

-Take  it  easy;  illustrated  by  Corydon  Bell.  New  York, 


Viking  Press,  1953.  172  p.  $2.50.  Juvenile. 

BETTS,  DORIS.  The  gentle  insurrection,  and  other  stories.  New 
York,  Putnam  [1954]   274  p. 

BURGWYN,  MEBANE  (HOLOMON)  Moonflower.  Philadel- 
phia, Lippincott  [1954]  186  p.  $2.50.  Juvenile. 

BYRD,  MITZI.  The  loneliest  chicken  [illustrated  by]  Peggy 
Martin.  New  York,  Macmillan,  1953.  unpaged  $1.00  Juvenile. 

CARROLL,  RUTH  (ROBINSON).  Beanie,  by  Ruth  and  Latrobe 
Carroll.  New  York,  Oxford  University  Press,  1953.  unpaged, 
$2.50.  Juvenile. 

Tough  enough,  by  Ruth  and  Latrobe  Carroll.  New  York, 


Oxford  University  Press,  1954.  Unpaged,  il.  $2.75.  Juvenile. 

GORDON,  IAN.  The  whip  hand.  New  York,  Crown  Publishers 
[1954]  200  p.  $3.00. 

HARGRAVE,  CARRIE  GUERPHAN.  Jean  and  Tom  in  Casa- 
blanca. New  York,  Exposition  Press  [1953]  103  p.  il.  $2.50. 
Juvenile. 

HOSS,  MAY  DIKEMAN.  The  pike.  New  York,  Appleton-Cen- 
tury-Crofts   [1954]   303  p.  $3.50. 

JARRELL,  RANDALL.  Pictures  from  an  institution,  a  comedy 
New  York,  Knopf,  1954.  277  p.  $3.50. 

JONES,  KATHARINE  M.,  editor.  New  Confederate  stories. 
Columbia,  University  of  South  Carolina  Press,  1954.  202  p. 
$3.75. 

KARIG,  WALTER.  Don't  tread  on  me;  a  novel  of  the  historic 
exploits,  military  and  gallant,  of  Commodore  John  Paul  Jones. 
New  York,  Rhinehart  [1954]   442  p.  il.  $4.00. 

LEONARD,  BURGESS.  One-man  backfield.  Philadelphia,  Lip- 
pincott, 1953.  180  p.  $2.50.  Juvenile. 

The  Rookie  Fights  Back.  Philadelphia  Lippincott  [1954] 


192  p.  $2.50.  Juvenile. 


8By  a  North  Carolinian  or  with  the  scene  laid  in  North  Carolina. 


North  Carolina  Bibliography,  1953-1954  277 

O'NEILL,  JEAN.  Cotton  Top.  New  York,  Lothrop,  Lee  and 
Shepard  [1953]  unpaged,  il.  $2.50.  Juvenile. 

PLENN,  DORIS  TROUTMAN.  The  green  song.  New  York, 
David  McKay  Co.,  1954.  128  p.  il.  $2.50. 

ROGERS,  FRANCES  G.  The  adventures  of  Jocko  the  monkey. 
New  York,  Exposition  Press,  1954.  72  p.  $2.50.  Juvenile. 

[GLASCOCK,  HAROLD]  Plow  and  scalpel,  a  biography  of 
Clemson  MacFarland,  M.D.,  by  Robert  Winfield  [pseud.]  New 
York,  Vantage  Press,  Inc.  [c.1953]  218  p.  $3.50.  The  town 
called  Hillsdale  is  Raleigh. 

SLAUGHTER,  FRANK  GILL.  The  song  of  Ruth;  a  love  story 
from  the  Old  Testament.  Garden  City,  N.  Y.,  Doubleday,  1954. 
317  p.  $3.75. 


-Storm  Haven.  Garden  City,  N.  Y.,  Doubleday,  1953. 


282  p.  $3.50. 

SPEAS,  JAN  COX,  Bride  of  the  MacHugh,  a  novel.  Indianap- 
olis, Bobbs-Merrill  Co.  [1954]  315  p.  $3.50. 

STREET,  JAMES  HOWELL.  Good-bye,  my  Lady.  Philadelphia, 
Lippincott  [1954]  222  p.  $3.00. 

WATCHTOWERS  and  Drums,  by  Emma  Gelders  Sterne  et  al. 
New  York,  Aladdin  Books,  1953.  234  p.  il.  $2.75.  Includes 
stories  by  George  F.  Scheer  and  Manly  W.  Wellman.  Juvenile. 

WATHEN,  RICHARD.  Cliffs  of  fall.  New  Orleans,  Publications 
Press,  c.1953.  304  p.  $2.00. 

WELLMAN,  MANLY  WADE.  Gray  riders:  Jeb  Stuart  and  his 
men.  New  York,  Aladdin  Books,  1954.  192  p.  il.  $1.75. 

WICKER,  TOM.  The  kingpin.  New  York,  Sloane,  1953.  343  p. 

$3.75. 

Literature  Other  Than  Poetry,  Drama,  or  Fiction 

GILBERT,  ALLAN  H.,  translator.  Orlando  furioso:  English 
version  by  Allan  H.  Gilbert.  New  York,  Vanni,  Inc.  1954.  878 
p.  il.  $27.50. 

HOLMES,  URBAN  TIGNER.  Samuel  Pepys  in  Paris,  and  other 
essays.   Chapel  Hill,   University  of  North    Carolina    Press 
[1954]   (Studies  in  the  Romance  languages  and  literatures,  no. 
24)   57  p. 


278  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

HUBBELL,  JAY  BROADUS.  The  South  in  American  literature, 
1607-1900.    [Durham,  N.  C]    Duke  University  Press,   1954. 
xix,  987  p.  $10. 

HUSE,  HOWARD  RUSSELL,  translator.  Dante  Alighieri:  The 
Divine  comedy,  a  new  prose  translation  with  an  introduction 
and  notes  by  H.  R.  Huse.  New  York,  Rinehart  and  Co.,  Inc., 
1954.  492  p.  il.  $.95  pa. 

KELLER,  JOHN  ESTEN,  editor.  El  libro  de  los  enganos,  edited 
by  John  Esten  Keller.  Chapel  Hill  [University  of  North  Caro- 
lina Press]  1953.  (Studies  in  the  Romance  languages  and  lit- 
eratures, no.  20),  xii,  56  p.  $1.00  pa. 

McCURDY,  HAROLD  GRIER.  The  personality  of  Shakespeare, 
a  venture  in  psychological  method.  New  Haven,  Yale  Univer- 
sity Press,  1953.  xi,  243  p.  $5.00. 

SOUTH  ATLANTIC  MODERN  LANGUAGE  ASSOCIATION. 

South  Atlantic  studies  for  Sturgis  E.  Leavitt,  edited  by  Thom- 
as B.  Stroup  and  Sterling  A.  Stoudemire.  Washington,  Scare- 
crow Press,  1953.  215  p.  il.  $5.00. 

THOMPSON,  LAWRENCE  SIDNEY.  Wilhelm  Waiblinger  in 
Italy.  Chapel  Hill,  University  of  North  Carolina  Press  [1953] 
(Studies  in  the  Germanic  languages  and  literatures,  no.9) 
105  p.  $3.00. 

Genealogy 

ALBRIGHT,  WILLIAM  THOMAS.  History  of  the  Widenhouse, 
Furr,  Dry,  Stallings,  Teeter  and  Tucker  families.  [Greens- 
boro, N.  C.  1954]  145  p.  il. 

History  and  Travel 

ATKIN,  EDMOND.  Indians  of  the  southern  frontier:  The  Ed- 
mond  Atkin  report  and  plan  of  1755,  edited  by  William  R. 
Jacobs.  Columbia,  University  of  South  Carolina  Press,  1954. 
xxxviii,  108  p.  il.  $5.00. 

BLANCHARD,  FESSENDEN  S.  A  cruising  guide  to  the  inland 
waterway  and  Florida.  New  York,  Dodd,  Mead  and  Co.,  1954. 
xiv,  256  p.  $5.00. 

BRAWLEY,  JAMES  SHOBER.  The  Rowan  story,  1753-1953; 
a  narrative  history  of  Rowan  County,  North  Carolina.  Salis- 
bury, Rowan  Printing  Co.,  1953.  402  p.  il.  $5.00.  Order  from  the 
Author,  Salisbury,  N.  C. 


North  Carolina  Bibliography,  1953-1954  279 

CATAWBA  COUNTY  HISTORICAL  ASSOCIATION.  A  his- 
tory of  Catawba  County,  edited  by  Charles  J.  Preslar,  Jr. 
Salisbury,  N.  C,  Printed  by  Rowan  Printing  Co.,  1954.  526 
p.  il.  $5.16.  Order  from  the  Association,  Box  35,  Maiden,  N.  C. 

CLARK,  WILLIAM  BELL.  The  first  Saratoga;  being  the  saga 
of  John  Young  and  his  sloop-of-war.  Baton  Rouge,  Louisiana 
State  University  Press  [c.1953]  199  p.  $3.50. 

COTTERILL,  ROBERT  SPENCER.  The  southern  Indians;  the 
story  of  the  civilized  tribes  before  removal.  Norman,  Univer- 
sity of  Oklahoma  Press  [1954]  xiii,  255  p.  il.  $4.00. 

CURTISS,  JOHN  SHELTON.  The  Russian  church  and  the  So- 
viet state,  1917-1950.  Boston,  Little,  Brown  [1953]  x,  387 
p.  $6.00. 

DORRIS,  JONATHAN  TRUMAN.  Pardon  and  amnesty  under 
Lincoln  and  Johnson;  the  restoration  of  the  Confederates  to 
their  rights  and  privileges,  1861-1898.  Chapel  Hill,  Univer- 
sity of  North  Carolina  Press  [1953]  xxi,  459  p.  $7.50. 

EATON,  WILLIAM  CLEMENT.  A  history  of  the  Southern 
Confederacy.  New  York,  Macmillan,  1954.  351  p.  $5.50. 

LEFLER,  HUGH  TALMAGE.  North  Carolina;  the  history  of 
a  southern  State,  by  Hugh  Talmage  Lefler  and  Albert  Ray 
Newsome.4  Chapel  Hill,  University  of  North  Carolina  Press 
[1954]  xii,  676  p.  $7.50. 

Orange  County,  1752-1952,  edited  by  Hugh  Lefler  and 

Paul  Wager.  Chapel  Hill  [Printed  by  Orange  Printshop]  1953. 
x,  389  p.  il.  $5.00.  Order  from  Orange  Printshop,  Chapel  Hill, 

N.  C. 

LEMERT,  BENJAMIN  FRANKLIN.  North  Carolina  geo- 
graphy ;  a  study  of  how  we  live  in  North  Carolina  [by]  Ben- 
jamin Franklin  Lemert  and  Martha  Langston  Harrelson.  Ok- 
lahoma City,  Harlowe  Publishing  Corporation,  1953.  188  p. 
Preliminary  edition.  $2.25. 

LINK,  ARTHUR  STANLEY.  Woodrow  Wilson  and  the  pro- 
gressive era,  1910-1917.  New  York,  Harper  [c.1954]  xvii, 
331  p.  il.  $5.00. 

POLK,  WILLIAM  TANNAHILL.  Southern  accent:  from  Uncle 
Remus  to  Oak  Ridge.  New  York,  Morrow  [1953]  264  p.  $4.00. 

SPENCER,  SAMUEL  R.,  JR.  Decision  for  war,  1917;  the  La- 
conia  sinking  and  the  Zimmermann  telegram  as  key  factors  in 

4  Mayflower  award. 


280  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

the  public  reaction  against  Germany.  West  Rindge,  N.H.,  R.R. 
Smith,  1953.  109  p.  il.  $2.50. 

STREET,  JAMES  HOWELL.  The  Civil  War;  an  unvarnished 
account  of  the  late  but  still  lively  hostilities.  New  York,  Dial 
Press  [1953]  144  p.  $3.00. 

TUCKER,  GLENN.  Poltroons  and  patriots;  a  popular  account 
of  the  War  of  1812.  Indianapolis,  Bobbs-Merrill  [1954]  2  v. 
il.  $10. 

TURNER,  GEORGE  EDGAR.  Victory  rode  the  rails;  the  stra- 
tegic place  of  the  railroads  in  the  Civil  War.  Indianapolis, 
Bobbs-Merrill   [1953]   419  p.  il.  $4.50. 

WILEY,  WILLIAM  LEON.  The  gentleman  of  Renaissance 
France.  Cambridge,  Harvard  University  Press,  1954.  xii,  303 
p.  il.  $5.00. 

Autobiography  and  Biography 

COOK,  CHARLES  THOMAS.  The  Billy  Graham  story,  "One 
thing  I  do."  Wheaton,  111.,  Van  Kampen  [1954]  128  p.  il. 
$1.95. 

COTTON,  ELLA  EARL.  A  spark  for  my  people ;  the  socialogical 
autobiography  of  a  Negro  teacher.  New  York,  Exposition  Press 
[1954]  '288  p.  $4.00. 

DANIELS,  JONATHAN.  The  end  of  innocence.  Philadelphia, 
Lippincott  [1954]  351  p.  il.  $5.50. 

DAVIS,  BURKE.  They  called  him  Stonewall;  a  life  of  Lt.  Gen- 
eral T.  J.  Jackson,  C.S.A.  New  York,  Rhinehart  [1954]  470 
p.  il.  $5.50. 

DURHAM,  ROBERT  LEE.  Since  I  was  born;  edited  by  Mar- 
shall William  Fishwick.  Richmond,  Whittep  &  Stepherson, 
1953.  217  p.  il.  $3.50. 

EDMONDSTON,  CATHERINE  (DEVEREUX)  The  journal  of 
Catherine  Devereux  Edmondston,  1860-66,  edited  by  Margaret 
Mackay  Jones.  Mebane,  N.  C,  Privately  Printed  [1954]  111 
p.  il.  Order  from  Stephens  Press,  Asheville,  N.  C.  $3.75. 

EDWARDS,  PHILIP.  Sir  Walter  Raleigh.  London,  Longmans, 
Green  and  Co.  [1953]  xii,  184  p.  10/6 

HAYNES,  INA  (FORTUNE)  Raleigh  Rutherford  Haynes,  a 
history   of   his   life   and   achievements.   Cliffside,   Privately 


North  Carolina  Bibliography,  1953-1954  281 

Printed  [c.  1954]  xii,  99  p.  il.  Apply  Mrs.  Grover  C.  Haynes, 
Cliffside,  N.  C. 

JOHNSON,  GERALD  WHITE.  Mount  Vernon:  the  story  of  a 
shrine.  New  York,  Random  House  [1953]  122  p.  il.  $2.75. 

LAMBERT,  JOHN  R.  Arthur  Pue  Gorman.  Baton  Rouge,  La, 
Louisiana  State  University  Press,  397  p.  il.  $6.00. 

MASTERSON,  WILLIAM  HENRY.  William  Blount.  Baton 
Rouge,  Louisiana  State  University  Press  [1954]  viii,  378  p.  il. 
$6.00. 

MEADOWCROFT,  ENID  (LA  MONTE)  The  story  of  Andrew 
Jackson.  New  York,  Grosset  and  Dunlap  [1953]  182  p.  il. 
$1.50.  Juvenile. 

O'FLAHERTY,  DANIEL.  General  Jo  Shelby:  undefeated  Rebel. 
Chapel  Hill,  University  of  North  Carolina  Press,  1954.  437  p. 
$6.00. 

PARSONS,  DONALD.  Portraits  of  Keats.  Cleveland,  O.,  World 
Publishing  Co.,  1954.  189  p.  il.  $10. 

POLLOCK,  THOMAS  CLARK,  editor.  Thomas  Wolfe  at  Wash- 
ington Square,  by  Thomas  Clark  Pollock  and  Oscar  Cargill, 
New  York.  New  York  University  Press,  1954.  xiii,  163  p.  il. 
$7.50. 

SANDERS,  CHARLES  RICHARD.  The  Strachey  family,  1588- 
1932:  their  writings  and  literary  associations.  [Durham, 
N.  C]  Duke  University  Press,  1953.  x,  337  p.  il.  $6.30. 

SCHENCK,  CARL  ALWIN,  editor.  The  Biltmore  immortals, 
biographies  of  50  American  boys  graduating  from  the  Biltmore 
Forest  School.  [Darmstadt,  Germany,  L.  C.  Wittich,  pr.  1953] 
342  p.  il. 

SELDEN,  SAMUEL.  Frederick  Henry  Koch,  pioneer  playmaker, 
by  Samuel  Selden  and  Mary  Tom  Sphangos.  Chapel  Hill,  Uni- 
versity of  North  Carolina  Library,  1954.  (Library  extension 
publication,  v.  19,  no.  4)  vii,  92  p.  il.  $3.00  cloth,  $1.50  pa. 

SHANKS,  HENRY  THOMAS,  editor.  The  papers  of  Wiley  Per- 
son Mangum:  v.  3,  1839-1843.  Raleigh,  State  Department  of 
Archives  and  History,  1953.  xxi,  521  p.  il.  Mailing  fee  $1.00. 

SOUTHERN  social  register,  1952/53.  [Williamsburg,  Va.,  Sou- 
thern Social  Registrar  Foundation,  1953]  1303  p.  $12. 

STEVENSON,  AUGUSTA.  Wilbur  and  Orville  Wright,  boys 
with  wings.  Indianapolis,  Bobbs-Merrill  [1951]  192  p.  il.  $1.75. 
Juvenile. 


282  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

SYRETT,  HAROLD  COFFIN.  Andrew  Jackson:  his  contribu- 
tion to  the  American  tradition.  Indianapolis,  Bobbs-Merrill 
[1953]  298  p.  $3.00. 

TAPPAN,  GEORGE  L.  Andrew  Johnson— not  guilty.  New 
York,  Comet  Press  Books  [1954]  139  p.  $3.00. 

WOLFE,  THOMAS.  The  correspondence  of  Thomas  Wolfe  and 
Homer  Andrew  Watt;  edited  by  Oscar  Cargill  and  Thomas 
Pollock.  New  York,  New  York.  University  Press,  1954.  xi,  53 

p.  il.  $2.50. 

New  Editions  and  Reprints 

ASHBURN,  JESSE  ANDERSON.  History  of  the  Fisher's  River 
Primitive  Baptist  Association  from  its  organization  in  1832 
to  1904  .  .  .  reprinted  with  a  second  volume,  from  1905  to 
1953,  by  Francis  Preston  Stone.  [Elon  College,  N.  C,  Primi- 
tive Baptist  Publishing  House,  1953]  350  p.  il.  $2.00. 

CASH,  WILBUR  JOSEPH.  The  mind  of  the  South.  Garden  City, 
N.  Y.,  Doubleday,  1954.  444  p.  $.95,  pa. 

CROZIER,  WILLIAM  ARMSTRONG.  A  key  to  southern  pedi- 
grees. Second  ed.  Baltimore,  Southern  Book  Company,  1953. 
80  p.  $5.00. 

DRAPER,  LYMAN  COPELAND.  King's  Mountain  and  its 
heroes.  Marietta,  Ga.,  Continental  Book  Co.,  1954.  612  p.  il.  $10. 

FORSTER,  GARNET  WOLSEY.  Farm  organization  and  man- 
agement. New  York,  Prentice-Hall,  1953.  430  p.  il.  $7.00. 

GREEN,  PAUL.  The  lost  colony ;  a  symphonic  drama  of  Ameri- 
can history.  Roanoke  Island  edition.  Chapel  Hill,  University 
of  North  Carolina  Press,  1954.  70  p.  il.  $2.50. 

HAWKS,  FRANCIS  LISTER.  Narrative  of  the  expedition  of  an 
American  squadron  to  the  China  seas  and  Japan  .  .  .  abridged 
and  edited  by  Sidney  Wallach.  London,  MacDonald  [c.  1952] 
xxxv,  304  p.  il.  $3.65. 

JAMES,  POWHATAN  WRIGHT.  George  W.  Truett,  a  biog- 
raphy. Memorial  edition.  New  York,  Macmillan,  [c  1953] 
xiii,  311  p.  $3.00. 

McKNIGHT,  JOHN  P.  The  papacy,  a  new  appraisal.  London, 
McGraw-Hill  [c.  1953]  400  p.  21  s. 

NORTH  CAROLINA.  LAWS,  STATUTES,  ETC.  General  sta- 
tutes of  North  Carolina  .  .  .  1943  and  1951  supplement.  Char- 
lottesville, Va.,  Michie  Co.,  1953.  6  v.  $77.00 


North  Carolina  Bibliography,  1953-1954  283 

NORTH  CAROLINA.  LAWS,  STATUTES,  ETC.  Jerome's 
Criminal  code  and  digest  of  North  Carolina,  by  E.  C.  Jerome ; 
edited  by  Harry  B.  Skillman.  6th  edition.  Atlanta,  Ga.  Harri- 
son, 1954.  lx,  1303  p.  $27.50. 

OLDS,  FRED  A.,  compiler.  An  abstract  of  North  Carolina  wills 
from  about  1760  to  about  1800.  2nd  edition.  Baltimore,  Sou- 
thern Book  Company,  1954.  330  p.  $10. 

RANEY,  RICHARD  BEVERLY.  Handbook  of  orthopaedic  surg- 
ery, by  Albert  R.  Shands  and  Richard  B.  Raney.  4th  ed.  St. 
Louis,  V.  V.  Mosby  Co.,  1953.  644  p.  $8.00. 

SLAUGHTER,  FRANK  GILL.  Air  surgeon.  London,  Jarrolds, 

1954.  6  s. 
— The  Galileans ;  a  novel  of  Mary  Magdalene.  Garden  City,  N.  Y., 

Permabooks,  c.  1954.  $.35  pa. 
— Spencer  Brade,  M.D.  London,  Jarrolds,  1954.  240  p.  6s. 

WOLFE,  THOMAS.  Herrenhaus;  schauspiel  in  drei  akten  und 
einem  vorspiel.  Hamburg,  Rowohlt  [1953]  83  p.  $1.35. 

— Geweb  und  fels,  roman.  Hamburg,  Rowohlt  [1953]  690  p. 
$4.50. 


BOOK  REVIEWS 


The  Discovery  of  New  Britain.  London,  1651.  A  facsimile  re- 
print with  an  Introduction  by  Howard  H.  Peckham.  (Ann 
Arbor :  William  L.  Clements  Library,  University  of  Michigan. 
1954.  Pp.  28.  Folded  map  laid  in.) 

Charles  I  in  1629  granted  the  land  south  of  Virginia  be- 
tween 31°  and  36°  north  latitude  to  his  attorney-general, 
Sir  Bobert  Heath.  While  he  held  title  to  Carolina,  as  the 
region  was  called  for  the  first  time,  no  organized  attempts 
were  made  to  settle  it.  A  number  of  explorations  were  made, 
however,  and  several  very  interesting  reports  of  these  voy- 
ages appeared  in  print. 

The  Discovery  of  New  Brittaine,  published  in  London  in 
1651,  was  one  of  these.  Edward  Bland,  a  merchant  of  Vir- 
ginia, Abraham  Wood,  land  owner  and  fur  trader,  two  men 
described  simply  as  "gentlemen,"  Elias  Pennant  and  Sack- 
ford  Brewster,  two  servants,  and  two  Indian  guides,  set  out 
from  near  modern  Petersburg  to  explore  the  region  to  the 
south  with  the  hope  of  establishing  contacts  with  Indians 
which  would  lead  to  profitable  trade  and  settlement.  From 
August  27  to  September  4,  1650,  they  traveled  through  the 
Albemarle  region  which  they  called  New  Britain.  Upon 
their  return  to  Virginia  they  petitioned  and  received  from 
the  Assembly  of  the  colony  permission  to  explore,  settle,  and 
trade  in  the  territory  they  had  visited. 

To  publicize  their  venture,  Bland  and  his  associates  re- 
sorted to  the  press.  The  Discovery  of  New  Brittaine  was  in- 
tended to  present  the  advantages  of  the  area  in  such  a  light 
that  none  could  resist  the  appeal  to  join  in  a  migration  to 
the  southward.  Written  in  journal  form,  the  little  book  sings 
the  praises  of  New  Britain  in  glowing  terms.  Tobacco  and( 
sugar  cane  grew  larger  than  in  Virginia,  corn  was  harvested 
twice  a  year,  the  rivers  were  packed  with  fish,  salt  was  made 
even  with  inexperienced  help,  rivers  were  all  navigable,  and 
the  climate  was  healthier  and  more  temperate. 

The  accounts  of  Indian  life  and  customs  are  perhaps  the 
most  valuable  contribution  which  the  explorers  left  us.  The 


[284] 


Book  Reviews  285 

conceit  of  the  group  in  assigning  such  names  as  Blandina, 
Penna  Mount,  Woodford,  and  Brewster  to  the  geographical 
features  of  the  land  is  interesting. 

This  tract,  printed  in  an  edition  of  800  copies  for  the 
Clements  Library  Associates,  makes  the  text  available  again. 
It  has  been  reprinted  several  times,  once  in  a  limited  fac- 
simile edition  of  ten  copies  in  the  Photostat  Americana  Series, 
but  this  is  by  far  the  most  handsome  reproduction.  Only  half 
a  dozen  copies  of  the  original  1651  edition  have  survived  and 
of  these,  four  are  in  this  country. 

Editor  Peckham's  brief  introduction  is  entirely  adequate 
including  his  statement  that  modern  Tar  Heels  are  inclined 
to  accept  Sir  Walter  Raleigh's  inference  that  the  territory  be- 
tween 35  degrees  and  37  degrees  north  latitude  is  closely 
akin  to  the  Garden  of  Eden. 

William  S.  Powell. 

University  of  North  Carolina  Library, 

Chapel  Hill. 


Selected  Addresses  of  a  Southern  Lawyer.  By  Aubrey  Lee 
Brooks.  (Chapel  Hill:  The  University  of  North  Carolina  Press. 
1954.  Pp.  vii,  165.  $2.50.) 

This  book  contains  seven  addresses  which  were  prepared 
and  delivered  by  the  author  from  1917  to  1953.  The  sub- 
jects in  chronological  order  are  as  follows:  The  Law  and 
Twentieth  Century  Facts,  1917;  Democrats  and  Republicans, 
1928;  The  Crisis:  Causes  and  Suggested  Cures,  1931;  The 
Four  Pillars  of  Prosperity,  1936;  The  Foundations  of  Free- 
dom, 1936;  David  Caldwell  and  His  Log  College,  1949;  and 
Nathanael  Greene,  Neglected  Revolutionary  Hero,  1953. 
Each  subject  is  of  vital  interest  to  the  author  and  to  the  par- 
ticular audience  to  which  he  was  speaking.  The  addresses  are 
of  general  interest  as  commentaries  upon  the  history  of  the 
period  and  upon  the  development  of  modern  law.  The  two 
biographical  sketches  are  of  especial  interest  to  North  Caro- 
linians. 

By  profession  a  lawyer  and  always  a  student  of  history, 
the  author  is  well  equipped  to  discuss  the  subjects  which  he 


286  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

has  presented  in  these  addresses.  His  concept  of  modern  law 
developed  in  the  first  address  is  a  mature  statement  of  philos- 
ophy arrived  at  after  many  years  of  study  and  reflection. 
Steeped  in  party  history  and  in  the  philosophy  of  Jefferson, 
he  is  a  leading  spokesman  for  the  Democratic  Party.  Deeply 
rooted  in  the  South,  he  has  had  a  life-long  interest  in  the 
problems  of  agriculture.  He  is  the  author  of  two  previous 
works,  Walter  Clark:  Fighting  Judge,  and  A  Southern  Law- 
yer: Fifty  Years  at  the  Bar.  With  Hugh  Talmage  Lefler,  he 
has  edited  The  Papers  of  Walter  Clark. 

Even  though  large  concepts  are  developed  in  these  ad- 
dresses, they  make  easy  reading.  Each  subject  is  developed 
logically  and  forcefully  with  no  diversions  for  the  sake  of 
oratory.  Typically  the  style  of  the  lawyer,  the  ultimate  effect 
is  convincing.  Except  for  the  political  addresses  in  which 
some  humor  appears,  the  author  relies  entirely  upon  fact  and 
logical  development  of  his  theme  for  holding  his  audience. 

Readers  who  differ  with  the  author  politically  will  not 
like  his  discussion  of  Democrats  and  Republicans,  nor  his 
analyses  of  the  Depression  and  the  problems  of  agriculture.  A 
careful  reading  of  the  addresses,  however,  reveals  a  consis- 
tency of  purpose  in  his  devotion  to  the  philosphy  of  Jeffer- 
son that  characterizes  him  as  a  liberal  who  has  more  at  stake 
than  that  of  winning  an  election. 

Jason  B.  Deyton. 

Superintendent  of  Mitchell  County- 
Public  Schools, 
Bakersville. 


The  Grange  in  North  Carolina,  1929-1954.  By  Stuart  Noblin. 
(Greensboro,  N.  C. :  The  North  Carolina  State  Grange.  1954. 
Pp.  ix,  60.  $1.00.) 

Stuart  Noblin  has  written  a  brief  and  cursory  booklet  to 
commemorate  the  silver  anniversary  of  the  North  Carolina 
( New )  Grange.  In  documenting  the  activities  of  the  organi- 
zation, the  author  divided  the  Grange's  25-year-old  life  his- 
tory into  several  major  stages  such  as  Reorganization,  De- 
pression, New  Deal,  The  War  Years,  and  Since  the  War,  and 


Book  Reviews  287 

included  repeated  remarks  of  praiseworthy  nature  in  the  con- 
cluding section.  The  materials  used  are  taken  mainly  from  the 
official  Journal  Proceedings,  1929-1953.  Most  of  the  so-called 
"agricultural  progress"  recorded  in  the  booklet  (as  sum- 
marized on  page  48,  for  instance)  may  be  conveniently 
grouped  under  the  three-fold  category  as  advocated  by  Dr. 
C.  C.  Taylor,  namely,  prices,  markets,  and  credits.  (The 
Farmers'  Movement,  1953,  p.  2;  Rural  Life  in  the  United 
States,  1950,  p.  510.) 

It  is  certainly  encouraging  to  see  that  the  historical  pro- 
fession should  be  asked  to  take  up  such  a  task,  particularly 
considering  Prof.  Noblin's  competence  in  the  field.  However, 
the  briefness  of  the  volume  conceals  much  of  the  author's 
time-consuming  research  and  painstaking  effort.  For  instance, 
only  ten  pages  out  of  53,  excluding  Appendix  and  Index  could 
be  assigned  to  the  work  of  the  organization  during  the  critical 
years  of  the  Depression  and  the  New  Deal. 

The  import  of  the  booklet  should  not  be  minimized  by  its 
cursory  treatment,  of  course.  Future  historians  who  will 
treat  agricultural  history  of  the  twentieth  century  in  the  fash- 
ion L.  C.  Gray  did  for  the  period  up  to  the  Civil  War  ( His- 
tory of  Agriculture  in  the  United  States  to  1860,  1933)  will 
no  doubt  find  the  information  contained  in  this  volume  use- 
ful. Moreover,  a  work  like  this  should  prove  valuable  to  the 
understanding  of  the  farmers'  movement  in  North  Carolina, 
as  well  as  in  the  United  States,  since  the  farmers'  organiza- 
tions have,  in  general,  been  the  chief  mouthpiece  of  such  a 
movement,  a  consequence  which  even  the  Grange  in  the 
1870's,  despite  its  original  purpose,  had  not  been  able  to 
escape.  (The  Farmers'  Movement,  p.  115.)  This  is  particu- 
larly important  if  one  goes  along  with  Dr.  Rudolph  Heberle 
to  treat  social  movement  as  a  special  kind  of  social  group 
or  social  collective  (Social  Movements,  1951,  p.  8).  It  should 
be  made  clear,  however,  that  this  does  not  imply  that  the 
farmer's  organizations  originated  the  movement.  Rather,  as 
emphasized  by  Taylor,  the  farmers'  organizations  joined  the 
movement.  (The  Farmers'  Movement,  p.  8.)  Viewing  the 
farmers'  organizations  and  movements  within  such  a  context, 


288  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Prof.  Noblin  was  again  prevented,  due  to  the  briefness  of  the 
work,  from  closely  relating  the  local  scene  to  the  larger 
social-economic  setting,  and  accordingly,  interpreting  and 
evaluating  the  activities  of  the  Grange  within  the  larger 
cultural  framework. 

Haitung  King. 
Jack  W.  Van  Derhoof. 
Kansas  Wesleyan  University, 
Salina,  Kansas. 


The  Story  of  Kinston  and  Lenoir  County.  By  Tannage  C.  John- 
son and  Charles  R.  Holloman  (Raleigh:  Edwards  &  Broughton 
Company.  1954.  Pp.  ix.  413.  Illustrated.  $6.00.) 

This  book  is  divided  into  three  main  divisions.  The  first 
part  of  eleven  chapters,  roughly  one-half  of  the  pages,  is  a 
chronological  narrative  of  Kinston,  Kingston  at  first,  and  the 
surrounding  area  from  the  earliest  settlers  to  the  present.  In 
the  beginning,  early  land  grants  and  Richard  Caswell  and 
his  family  were  empasized. 

The  account  from  about  1800  is  less  systematic,  but  evi- 
dence is  sufficient  to  explain  the  backwardness  of  the  area 
until  the  coming  of  the  railroad  during  the  1850's.  The  war 
checked  progress.  The  invasion  by  the  Union  forces,  the 
first  and  second  battles  of  Kinston,  and  reconstruction  were 
factors  in  its  poverty. 

About  1885  Kinston  began  to  grow  and  prosper.  Its  new 
prosperity  was  founded  upon  the  growth  and  sale  of  tobacco. 
The  last  chapter,  "Fifty  Years  of  Remarkable  Achievements," 
tells,  among  other  things,  about  the  coming  to  the  area  in 
1951  of  the  $40,000,000  Dupont  plant,  which  should  mark 
the  beginning  of  a  new  era. 

The  second  part  of  the  book,  "wherein  are  presented  bio- 
graphical sketches  of  some  professional  and  business  lead- 
ers—past and  present,"  covers  138  pages  and  includes  72 
men,  no  women  (the  book  is  dedicated  to  the  memory  of 
Mrs.  Laura  Warters  McDaniel).  The  authors  explain  that 
this  space  was  not  for  sale,  although  only  those  who  made 


Book  Heviews  289 

contributions  which  made  the  publication  of  the  book  pos- 
sible, were  included. 

The  third  part  of  the  volume  is  the  61  pages  in  the  ap- 
pendix. Early  land  grants,  list  of  earliest  settlers  and  of  tax- 
ables  in  Dobbs  County  in  1766,  etc.,  are  included.  An  index 
is  added. 

The  authors  have  written  a  commendable  book,  one  which 
is  interesting.  It  is  not  a  definitive  history  of  the  area,  far 
from  it,  a  fact  fully  recognized  by  its  authors.  Unfortunate- 
ly, the  lack  of  money  for  a  more  comprehensive  book  caused 
serious  deletions  or  omissions.  Such  subjects  as  early  public 
education,  establishment  of  the  Graded  School,  control  of 
alcoholic  beverages,  race  relations,  political  parties  and  elec- 
tions were  either  omitted  or  sketchily  treated.  Errors  are 
few.  The  marriage  dates  of  Lemuel  Harvey  (p.  126)  seem  to 
be  wrong.  "William  Blount  was  the  brother  of  Thomas 
Blount,  one  of  the  signers  for  North  Carolina  of  the  Declar- 
ation of  Independence"  (p.  161).  Does  "one  of  the  signers" 
refer  to  William  or  Thomas?  In  either  case  it  is  incorrect. 
The  printing  and  general  make-up  are  good. 

D.  J.  Whitener. 
Appalachian  State  Teachers  College, 
Boone. 


The  Lost  Citadel.  By  Alexander  Mathis.  (New  York:  Pageant 
Press,  1954.  Pp.  273.  $4.00.) 

The  sixteenth-century  attempted  colonizations  at  Roanoke 
Island  have  a  fascination  for  the  novelists.  In  the  last  cen- 
tury some  eight  or  nine  fiction  writers  have  treated  the  pe- 
riod. Mr.  Mathis,  whose  home  is  Norfolk,  has  written  a 
straight  narrative  involving  the  Barlow-Amadas  expedition 
as  well  as  the  Lane  and  White  settlements.  To  provide  some 
semblance  of  fictional  movement,  the  author  has  given  Man- 
teo,  who  along  with  Wanchese  is  the  only  character  lasting 
the  length  of  the  book,  a  dominant  role  in  the  plot— if  plot 
the  novel  can  be  said  to  have.  There  is  no  compelling  love 
story,  no  leading  hero  and  heroine.  For  the  most  part,  Mathis 
depends  on  historical  accounts,  principally  Conway  Whittle 


290  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Sam's  The  Conquest  of  Virginia,  rather  than  on  his  imagina- 
tion; he  documents  his  sources  in  footnotes  when  he  thinks 
the  reader  will  judge  the  action  too  broadly  departing  from 
fact.  Thus,  as  fiction,  The  Lost  Citadel  lacks  both  rounded 
characterization  and  sustained  plot  interest. 

Much  is  made  of  the  1584  expedition,  with  Thomas  Hariot 
allowed  an  unhistorical  berth  in  order  that  he  may  begin 
tutoring  Manteo  and  Wanchese,  who  we  are  told  are  grand- 
sons of  Chief  Granganimeo.  For  the  failure  of  the  First  Col- 
ony, Mathis  blames  Grenville,  whose  loiterings  among  the 
Spanish  in  the  West  Indies  delayed  the  planting  of  crops 
at  Roanoke  and  whose  burning  of  the  Indian  village  of  Agos- 
cogoc  over  a  lost  silver  cup  irreparably  alienated  the  pre- 
viously warm-hearted  natives.  Lane  is  portrayed  as  a  just 
and  wise  governor  never  able  to  recover  from  the  errors  of 
the  arrogant  Sir  Richard.  As  reasons  for  the  departure  of 
the  Lost  Colonists  from  Roanoke,  Mathis  lists  hunger  and 
Indian  animosity.  First,  Manteo  leads  the  English  to  the 
sands  of  Croatoan,  then  later  to  friendly,  more  fertile  coun- 
try along  the  rivers,  where  they  prosper  for  a  while  until 
they  are  almost  completely  wiped  out  by  a  sudden  hostile 
Indian  attack.  Soon  Eleanor  Dare  dies  and,  as  the  story  ends 
Manteo  is  undertaking  the  education  of  eight-year-old  Vir- 
ginia. 

Richard  Walser. 

North  Carolina  State  College, 

Raleigh. 


Privateers  of  Charleston  in  the  War  of  1812.  By  Harold  A. 
Mouzon,  (Charleston,  S.  C:  Historical  Commission  of  Charle- 
ston. 1954.  Pp.  41.) 

This  small  paper-bound  publication  gives  a  brief  history 
of  privateering  from  the  port  of  Charleston  during  the  War 
of  1812.  On  June  18,  1812,  the  United  States  declared  war 
on  England  and  eight  days  later  an  act  was  passed  by  Con- 
gress authorizing  the  fitting  out  of  ships  as  privateers  to  prey 
on  British  shipping.  Early  in  July  two  ships,  the  Mary  Ann 
and  the  Nonpareil,  were  ready  to  leave  Charleston  to  begin 


Book  Reviews  291 

their  depredations.  The  Nonpareil  was  the  first  ship  out  but 
her  career  was  relatively  short— she  mistook  a  British  brig  of 
war  for  a  merchantman  and  was  captured.  The  Mary  Ann 
was  more  successful.  Commanded  by  John  P.  Chazal,  she 
took  four  prizes  in  one  month  and  on  her  second  cruise  de- 
stroyed several  small  vessels. 

A  Charleston-built  vessel,  the  Saucy  Jack,  began  privateer- 
ing with  a  great  fanfare.  Her  various  captains,  Jervey,  Sicard, 
and  Chazal,  were  successful  in  capturing  a  number  of  valu- 
able prizes.  Chazal  brought  the  ship  into  Charleston  on  De- 
cember 31,  1814,  seven  days  before  the  Treaty  of  Ghent 
had  been  signed  and  the  war  ended. 

Numerous  other  smaller  vessels  sailed  the  waters  around 
Jamaica  and  the  West  Indies  taking  prizes.  The  largest  of 
the  privateers  was  the  Decatur,  commanded  by  Dominique 
Diron.  She  met  the  British  naval  schooner,  the  Dominica,  de- 
feated her,  and  brought  her  into  Charleston. 

Mouzon  points  out  that,  for  a  port  of  her  size,  the  priva- 
teers of  Charleston  contributed  largely  to  their  owners,  crews, 
and  the  country  in  the  damage  done  to  British  shipping  dur- 
ing the  years  of  the  war.  His  chief  sources  appear  to  be  rec- 
ords in  the  National  Archives  and  contemporary  newspapers 
on  file  in  Charleston.  An  appendix  includes  a  list  of  the  ves- 
sels, giving  the  type,  date  of  commission,  tonnage,  arma- 
ment, and  the  name  of  the  captain.  Quotations  are  given  from 
newspapers,  logs  of  the  ships,  and  an  occasional  letter  writ- 
ten by  a  captain  or  member  of  the  crew. 

Beth  Crabtree. 

Department  of  Archives  and  History, 

Raleigh. 


Dr.  J.  G.  M.  Ramsey:  Autobiography  and  Letters.  Edited  by 
William  B.  Hesseltine.  (Nashville:  Tennessee  Historical  Com- 
mission. 1954.  Pp.  xvi,  367.  $5.00.) 

A  railroad-building,  agrarian  aristocrat  and  state  rights 
Democrat  from  the  heart  of  the  Parson  Brownlow  country 
is  indeed  something  of  an  anomaly.  Dr.  Ramsey,  perhaps 
best  remembered  as  the  author  of  the  Annals  of  Tennessee, 


292  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

managed  to  weave  so  many  careers  into  his  full  life— medical 
doctor,  farmer,  banker,  ferry  operator,  historian,  poet,  and 
Confederate  treasury  agent  among  them— that  there  are  many 
problems  in  understanding  him  and  his  role  in  East  Tennes- 
see's history. 

Unfortunately  Dr.  Ramsey  wrote  his  memoirs  when  he 
was  over  seventy  years  old  (he  was  born  in  1797),  apparent- 
ly in  some  haste  and  without  benefit  of  adequate  data  or  re- 
search. The  result  is  a  spotty,  occasionally  tiring  account 
which  Professor  Hesseltine  has  wisely  stiffened  by  the  inser- 
tion of  some  of  Ramsey's  letters;  these  constitute  over  a  third 
of  the  present  volume. 

An  advocate  in  the  1820's  of  rail  communication  with  the 
south  Atlantic  seaboard,  Dr.  Ramsey's  "Mecklenburg  Poli- 
tics," as  his  transportation  schemes  were  dubbed,  embroiled 
him  in  bitter  controversy  with  groups  which  favored  the  re- 
gion's concentration  upon  improvements  in  the  navigability 
of  the  Tennessee  River,  especially  at  Muscle  Shoals.  Dr.  Ram- 
sey visited  Charleston  in  1828  to  publicize  and  promote  his 
plan.  He  helped  in  assembling  railway  conventions  at  Ashe- 
ville  in  1832  and  Knoxville  in  1836.  But  the  panic  of  1837, 
followed  by  a  train  of  financial  and  political  difficulties,  de- 
layed realization  of  his  dreams  until  1858.  Only  then  did  the 
"East  Tennessee  and  Georgia  Rail  Road"  link  isolated  Knox- 
ville with  the  Atlantic  coast. 

Professor  Hesseltine  has  inserted  two  chapters  made  up 
of  Ramsey's  letters  to  fill  yawning  gaps  in  the  autobiography. 
These  deal  with  historical  work  on  the  Annals  of  Tennessee 
and  with  ante  bellum  politics.  The  former  consists  mainly 
of  Ramsey's  letters  written  from  1845  to  1853  to  his  history- 
minded  friend  and  lifelong  correspondent,  Lyman  C.  Draper, 
who  began  his  important  collecting  in  Wisconsin  in  1852. 
These  letters  reveal  a  livelier,  more  likeable  author  than  does 
the  autobiography,  and  they  amusingly  suggest  the  difficul- 
ties encountered  in  that  era  by  amateur  scholars  like  Ramsey. 
In  informing  Draper  about  the  Nashville  Historical  Society's 
"hasty  accouchement"  and  expiration,  for  example,  he  growl- 
ed that  "Commerce  chokes  the  growth  of  any  such  infants," 


Book  Reviews  293 

and  that  "Yankeedom  is  taking  a  vigorous  growth  every- 
where" (p.  63). 

Dr.  Ramsey  wrote  the  inserted  political  letters  in  April, 
1858.  Although  he  attached  them  to  his  manuscript  autobi- 
ography, he  marked  them,  sometime  around  1870,  as  "Pri- 
vate/9 and  "not  to  be  published,  but  preserved  as  speculations 
of  my  own. . . ."  (p.  83)  Such  reticence,  which  the  editor  does 
well  to  ignore,  is  understandable.  Fire-eating  secessionism, 
sectional  chauvinism,  and  an  impassioned  racial  defense  of 
slavery  and  argument  for  re-opening  the  African  slave  trade 
were  all  too  well  remembered  themes.  The  postwar  South 
stunned  and  shaken  by  war  and  defeat,  could  hardly  be  re- 
ceptive to  them. 

Dr.  Ramsey  died,  quite  unreconstructed,  in  1884  at  the 
age  of  eighty-seven.  Three  of  his  children  had  died  during 
the  war,  one  as  a  Confederate  soldier;  his  beloved  home,  sit- 
uated at  the  head  of  the  Tennessee  River  near  Knoxville,  was 
burned  by  Federal  troops;  and  he  and  the  remaining  mem- 
bers of  his  family  were  literally  storm-tossed  by  the  tides  of 
war.  He  had  served  the  Confederacy  until  the  end  both  as 
a  surgeon  and  treasury  agent. 

Approximately  the  last  hundred  pages  of  this  volume  con- 
sists of  letters,  filled  with  antiquarian  lore  about  the  "old 
border,"  which  Ramsey  wrote  Draper  after  1870.  Professor 
Hesseltine's  helpful  annotation,  along  with  the  competent 
index,  should  make  this  a  welcome  addition  to  the  published 
sources  of  Tennessee's,  and  the  South's,  history. 

Robert  F.  Durden. 

Duke  University, 

Durham. 


Jeffersonian  America:  Notes  on  the  United  States  of  America. 
Collected  in  the  Years  1805-6-7  and  11-12  by  Sir  Augustus 
John  Foster,  Bart.  Edited  with  an  introduction  by  Richard 
Beale  Davis.  (San  Marino,  California:  The  Huntington  Libra- 
ry. 1954.  Pp.  xx,  356.  $6.00.) 

The  ubiquitous  British  traveler  seems  to  be  a  constant 
force  in  American  historiography.  This  travel  book  is  slightly 


294  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

different  from  the  usual  ones  in  that  the  author-diplomat 
(secretary  of  legation  and  later  minister)  had  ample  oppor- 
tunities for  observation  while  in  America  from  1804  to  1808 
and  again  in  1811-12.  Furthermore  he  did  not  give  his  im- 
pressions to  the  world  until  he  had  laboriously  revised  them 
some  thirty  years  later. 

In  the  1830's  there  was  a  flood  of  books  on  America  by 
visiting  Britishers.  Foster  thought  that  he  could  produce  a 
better  account  so  he  set  to  work  on  his  old  notebooks  and 
journals  and  produced  in  1839  a  full  length  manuscript  which 
was  revised  in  1841-42  after  a  portion  of  it  had  been  printed 
in  the  Quarterly  Review  for  June,  1841.  These  manuscripts 
and  notebooks  now  to  be  found  in  the  Huntington  Library 
or  the  Library  of  Congress  have  been  carefully  edited  by 
Professor  Richard  Beale  Davis  of  the  English  Department 
of  the  University  of  Tennessee  and  Jeffersonian  America  is 
the  happy  result. 

Despite  Foster's  expressed  contempt  for  literary  travelers 
who  wrote  "only  for  money  or  to  gratify  their  spleen"  (p. 
110)  his  own  appraisals  are  somewhat  short  of  objective.  As  a 
British  aristocrat  and  churchman  he  was  impressed  with 
neither  American  democracy  nor  its  non-conformity.  Natural- 
ly Anglophile  Federalists  appealed  more  to  him  than  the 
Republicans  who  numbered  the  "War  Hawks"  within  their 
ranks.  Consequently,  he  always  praised  New  England  grow- 
ing quite  lyrical  over  Connecticut  in  particular,  whereas  he 
could  only  regret  that  Virginia  governed  the  union  through 
her  "gentleman  Jacobins."  For  society  in  Philadelphia  and 
Boston  he  had  only  praise  and  he  was  duly  impressed  with 
the  magnificence  of  New  York  Harbor.  With  regard  to 
the  nation  s  capital  to  which  he  devoted  more  than  one 
hundred  pages  he  was  bitterly  critical,  referring  as  he  did 
to  the  "transfer  of  the  government  to  these  marshes"  (p.  54) 
but  he  admitted  that  it  was  an  agreeable  place  to  live  since  it 
afforded  contact  with  so  many  characters,  distinguished  and 
otherwise.  For  Pennsylvania,  outside  of  Philadelphia,  he  had 
nothing  but  scorn  calling  it  "an  omnium  gatherum  for  people 
of  all  countries  and  religions" (p.  209).  He  did  not  care  for 


Book  Reviews  295 

"noisy  blustering  Germans  or  Irish  who  live  by  agitation" 
(p.  159)  and  he  did  not  fail  to  criticise  the  "camping  Metho- 
dists" and  similar  sects. 

Although  he  made  several  journeys  in  the  northern  and 
eastern  parts  of  the  United  States  Foster  did  not  go  south 
of  Virginia  except  for  the  Dismal  Swamp  in  North  Carolina 
nor  did  he  visit  the  west.  To  a  large  extent  he  relied  on  con- 
gressmen for  information  on  these  sections.  Though  he  talk- 
ed with  dozens  of  legislators  there  is  no  mention  of  Nathaniel 
Macon  and  Willis  Alston  is  the  only  North  Carolina  congress- 
man mentioned  by  name.  Foster  thought  that  North  Carolina 
was  "less  generally  known  and  less  visited  than  any  of  the 
states"  (p.  168).  South  Carolina,  in  his  estimation  figured 
mainly  as  a  breeder  of  "War  Hawks."  While  admitting  that 
the  west  might  interest  the  natural  or  speculative  philosopher 
he  felt  that  it  had  little  to  offer  the  general  traveler. 

To  the  reviewer  the  main  interest  in  this  book  is  the  atti- 
tude that  an  upper  class  Englishman  would  take  to  certain 
American  customs  and  institutions.  Connecticut's  retention 
of  state  officials  over  long  periods  seemed  good  to  him,  where- 
as the  tendency  to  move  state  capitals  to  the  interior  was  de- 
cidedly a  backward  step.  In  general  the  editing  has  been 
meticulously  and  intelligently  done  though  one  could  wish 
for  a  few  explanations  of  Foster's  historical  references  such 
as  North  Carolina's  apparent  reluctance  to  join  the  American 
Revolution  (p.  118)  and  some  few  of  the  diplomat's  histori- 
cal inaccuracies  have  remained  uncorrected  as  for  example 
his  statement  that  Britain  acquired  Acadie  as  a  result  of  the 
Seven  Years  War  (p.  335).  The  index  also  could  be  a  little 
more  complete.  However,  these  factors  do  not  appreciably 
detract  from  the  real  value  of  the  book  and  one  can  agree 
with  the  editor's  claim,  "There  is  much  to  warrant  the  publica- 
tion of  this  book  over  a  century  after  it  was  written." 

D.  H.  Gilpatrick. 

Furman  University, 

Greenville,  S.  C. 


296  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Confederate  Finance.   By  Richard  Cecil  Todd.    (Athens:   The 
University  of  Georgia  Press.  1954.  Pp.  x,  258.  $5.00.) 

This  book,  which  was  Mr.  Todd's  doctoral  dissertation  at 
Duke  University,  is  pleasingly  easy  to  read,  despite  the 
amount  of  detail  that  has  necessarily  been  included.  The 
main  features  of  each  chapter  stand  out  clearly  and  the 
reader  does  not  feel  that  he  is  dealing  with  scholarship  car- 
ried to  too  fine  a  point. 

Mr.  Todd  has  examined  and  evaluated  a  vast  mass  of  ma- 
terial ranging  from  official  manuscripts  to  contemporary 
newspapers.  The  unavailability  of  certain  documents  relating 
to  the  last  days  of  the  Confederacy  has  rendered  it  impos- 
sible to  make  the  study  absolutely  complete,  but  this  de- 
ficiency is  not  serious. 

The  opening  chapter  deals  with  the  organization  and  chief 
personnel  of  the  Confederate  Treasury,  in  which,  of  course, 
Mr.  Memminger  was  the  dominant  figure.  Each  of  the  next 
four  chapters  takes  up  a  source  of  funds— "Loans,"  "Treasury 
Notes,"  "Tariffs  and  Taxes,"  "Seizures  and  Donations"— and 
traces  the  use  of  that  source  through  the  four  years  of  the 
Confederacy.  The  final  chapter  deals  with  "Financial  Opera- 
tions Abroad."  The  separate  treatment  of  these  topics  cer- 
tainly has  merit;  but  the  interrelations  among  them  are  so 
numerous  that  the  reader  has  a  problem  of  coordination.  The 
author  helps  the  reader  over  this  difficulty  by  some  repetition 
of  material.  At  times,  however,  one  wishes  that  all  the  meth- 
ods of  finance  had  been  discussed  by  significant  periods  of 
time. 

The  Confederacy  was,  of  course,  forced  to  adopt  many 
desperate  means  of  finance.  One  is  impressed,  however,  by 
the  degree  of  success  that  these  measures  achieved  in  the 
face  of  the  extraordinarily  difficult  circumstances.  It  is  re- 
markable that  an  agrarian  region,  with  very  little  liquid  capi- 
tal and  heavily  dependent  upon  export  trade,  could,  in  spite 
of  a  strong  coastal  blockade,  have  devised  any  means  of 
finance  capable  of  sustaining  the  government  and  its  armies 
for  so  long  a  period.  Among  the  more  interesting  devices 
were  the  produce  loan,  the  tithe  levied  on  gross  production, 


Book  Reviews  297 

and  the  contracts  for  supplies  that  were  made  payable  in 
cotton. 

There  are  few  criticisms  of  style  or  diction  to  make.  An 
occasional  word  or  phrase  has  overtones  that  are  not  pleasing 
to  Southern  ears.  For  example,  on  pages  34  and  43  the  Treas- 
ury is  spoken  of  as  "playing  upon"  patriotism  in  order  to  sell 
bonds.  One  wonders,  too,  why  running  the  blockade  should 
be  called  "blockade  violations"  (p.  186).  These  are,  of  course, 
minor  points  which  in  no  way  mar  the  objectivity  of  the  work. 
The  book  is  an  excellent  study  that  should  be  useful  to  both 
historians  and  economists. 

C.  K.  Brown. 

Davidson  College, 

Davidson. 


General  Kirby  Smith,  C.  S.  A.  By  Joseph  Howard  Parks.  (Baton 
Rouge:  Louisiana  State  University  Press.  1954.  Pp.  viii,  537. 
$6.00.) 

Few  Confederate  generals  in  1862  seemingly  had  a  more 
promising  future  than  E.  Kirby  Smith.  A  hero  of  the  first 
Manassas,  where  his  brigade  made  the  decisive  outflanking 
maneuver,  Kirby  Smith  was  considered  one  of  Johnston's 
best  officers  at  the  time  of  his  transfer  to  East  Tennessee. 
Nor  did  his  reputation  suffer  as  a  consequence  of  the  fruit- 
less invasion  of  Kentucky  in  1862,  for  soon  afterward  he  was 
promoted  and  later  assigned  command  of  the  Trans-Missis- 
sippi Department,  an  unwieldy  field  of  operations  covering 
Missouri,  Arkansas,  Texas,  and  western  Louisiana. 

Here  General  Smith's  talents  as  a  field  commander  had 
little  chance  to  develop.  His  was  essentially  an  administrative 
job,  involving  him  in  knotty  problems  of  civil  affairs  and 
even  foreign  relations.  After  the  fall  of  Vicksburg  his  task 
was  virtually  hopeless.  Cut  off  from  Richmond,  confronted 
with  "a  vast  extent  of  country  to  defend"  and  having  "a 
force  utterly  inadequate  for  that  purpose,"  Kirby  Smith's 
best  hope  was  to  avoid  military  defeat  until  a  decision  was 
reached  in  the  east.  He  seems  to  have  been  capable  enough 
as  an  administrator,  and  if  his  strategy  produced  no  brilliant 


298  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

victories,  the  blame  rests  partly  with  subordinates  who  were 
either  unfit  or  antagonistic.  Frequent  clashes  with  Taylor 
and  an  inherent  distrust  of  the  value  of  militia  (which  con- 
stituted a  considerable  portion  of  his  forces )  perhaps  explain 
why  Kirby  Smith  was  often  unwilling  to  take  risks.  He  was 
an  admirer  of  Johnston,  not  Hood,  and  the  situation  called 
for  a  sound  and  prudent  strategist. 

Dr.  Parks's  most  recent  contribution  to  the  "Southern  Bio- 
graphy Series"  is  well  written  and  obviously  the  product  of 
extensive  research.  It  casts  much  light  upon  the  complex 
situation  in  the  Trans-Mississippi  Department  and  presents 
a  balanced  picture  of  Kirby  Smith,  the  soldier  and  adminis- 
trator. The  volume  lacks  adequate  maps,  which  is  particu- 
larly unfortunate  when  the  author  deals  with  the  little- 
known  campaigns  in  the  west. 

In  a  day  when  much  of  the  Civil  War  literature  is  obvious- 
ly being  written  "for  the  market,"  it  is  indeed  gratifying  to 
read  a  good  book  about  a  worthwhile— and  hitherto  neglected 
-subject. 

Jay  Luvaas. 

Duke  University, 

Durham. 


General  Lee's  Photographer.  By  Marshall  Fish  wick.  (Chapel 
Hill:  The  University  of  North  Carolina  Press.  1954.  Pp.  94. 
Illustrations.  $7.50.) 

This  is  the  story  of  a  young  Confederate  veteran  who,  re- 
turning from  the  Civil  War,  decided  to  learn  photography  as 
a  livelihood  and  who,  guided  by  his  admiration  for  Lee  and 
Jackson,  set  up  shop  in  Lexington,  Virginia.  Eventually  he 
became  significant  not  only  for  his  numerous  studies  of  Lee 
and  other  famous  figures,  but  for  his  many  worthwhile  con- 
tributions to  the  technique  of  photography. 

The  title  is  justified  by  the  fact  that  Miley  devoted  so  much 
of  his  time,  particularly  .from  1866  to  1870,  to  the  record  of 
persons,  objects  and  events  associated  with  Robert  E.  Lee. 
These  include  portraits  of  the  general  made  "as  frequently 
as  circumstances  permitted,"  copies  of  all  available  pictures 


Book  Reviews  299 

of  the  Custis,  Lee  and  Washington  families,  and  reproduc- 
tions of  many  documents  such  as  Lee's  will  and  army  com- 
mission. The  famous  study  of  Lee  on  Traveller,  probably  the 
most  popular  photograph  of  the  general,  was  made  under 
conditions  that  illustrate  the  difficulties  of  the  art  in  those 
days  of  the  slow  acting  wet  plate.  Traveller  kept  switching 
his  tail  at  the  flies! 

Aside  from  being  the  photographic  historian  of  picturesque 
and  historic  Lexington  with  its  twin  institutions,  Washing- 
ton and  Lee  University  and  The  Virginia  Military  Institute, 
its  graves  of  Jackson  and  Lee,  and  its  ghosts  of  the  Civil 
War  days,  Miley  was  a  deep  and  enthusiastic  camera  student 
of  nature.  Mr.  Fishwick  includes  in  his  book  a  remarkable 
collection  of  landscapes  to  illustrate  the  artist's  ability  in 
this  field.  He  also  brings  out  the  highly  dramatic  quality  of 
Miley's  work  with  such  scenes  as  a  mountaineer's  family  and 
the  "Tallyho  from  Lynchburg." 

Working  chiefly  in  isolation  from  professional  photograph- 
ers, Miley  developed  his  own  dry  plate  method  and  experi- 
mented successfully  with  color  work  around  the  turn  of  the 
century.  Although  he  was  relatively  unknown  outside  Rock- 
bridge County,  Virginia,  he  left  an  "enduring  record  of  him- 
self as  an  artist  and  of  his  period  of  history." 

The  author,  an  associate  professor  at  Washington  and  Lee 
University,  has  produced  a  handsome  and  readable  volume. 

J.  Walter  Coleman. 

Gettysburg  National  Military  Park, 

Gettysburg,  Pennsylvania. 


Stonewall  Jackson  and  The  Old  Stonewall  Brigade.  Edited  by 
Richard  B.  Harwell.  (Charlottesville:  University  of  Virginia 
Press.  1954.  Pp.  vi,  77.  $3.50.) 

Few  of  the  current  Civil  War  revivals  offer  so  fresh  a 
glimpse  of  war  days  as  this  slight  volume  of  sketches  by  the 
gay  young  Captain  Esten  Cooke  for  a  Richmond  newspaper. 

This  is  a  brief  account  of  the  character  and  personality  of 
General  T.  J.  Jackson  and  his  then-famed  brigade,  written 


300  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

by  Cooke  in  the  winter  of  1862-1863  shortly  before  Jackson's 
death. 

This  may  be  the  very  first  such  estimate  of  Jackson;  at 
least  its  main  lines  have  never  been  obscured,  and  anyone 
familiar  with  later  Jackson  lore  will  recognize  the  beginnings 
of  many  a  more  elaborate  incident  and  legend.  Cooke  be- 
gan with  a  disclaimer: 

"I  write  in  no  hero-worshipping  spirit  ...  I  assure  you  .  .  . 
but  I  take  my  hat  off  and  bow  low  to  a  great  and  noble  soul 
like  Jackson  ...  a  real  hero." 

The  text  itself  is  wandering,  suffers  from  hasty  organiza- 
tion, and  appears  skimpy  indeed  in  light  of  later  writings  on 
Jackson.  It  has  a  considerable  value,  however,  for  those  in- 
terested in  heroes,  the  worship  thereof,  or  the  Army  of  North- 
ern Virginia  and  Jackson  in  particular.  In  Cooke's  quick  de- 
scription of  Jackson  in  their  first  meeting,  for  instance,  are 
lines  which  sing  of  the  spirit  of  Stonewall: 

"The  appearance  of  the  famous  .  .  .  Stonewall  was  not  im- 
posing. He  wore  that  old  sun-embrowned  uniform  once  gray 
.  .  .  positively  scorched  by  sun.  .  .  .  The  cap  .  .  .  matched  the 
coat .  .  .  and  it  tilted  over  the  wearer's  forehead,  so  far  as  to 
make  it  necessary  for  him  to  raise  his  chin,  in  looking  at  you. 
He  rode  in  his  peculiar  forward-leaning  fashion,  his  old  raw- 
boned  sorrel,  gaunt  and  grim— but  like  his  master,  careless 
of  balls  and  tranquil  in  the  loudest  hurly  burly  of  battle." 

Perhaps  Jackson's  family  and  friends  did  not  approve  this, 
any  more  than  they  approved  Cooke's  announced  biography 
of  Stonewall  a  few  weeks  later,  calling  him:  a  "self-appoint- 
ed upstart ...  a  literary  and  social  impostor." 

The  family  of  Stonewall,  as  this  reviewer  has  lately  learned, 
is  still  aggressive  in  defense  of  the  Stonewall  legend. 

The  editor,  Mr.  Harwell,  lately  with  the  Flowers  Collec- 
tion of  Duke  University,  is  author  and  editor  of  several  Con- 
federate studies  of  value.  He  is  now  on  the  faculty  of  Emory 
University. 

Burke  Davis. 
Route  1, 
Guilford  College. 


Book  Reviews  301 

Indians  of  the  Southern  Colonial  Frontier :  The  Edmond  Atkin 
Report  and  Plan  of  1775.  Edited  with  an  introduction  by  Wil- 
bur R.  Jacobs.  (Columbia:  The  University  of  South  Caro- 
lina Press.  1954.  Pp.  xxxviii,  108.  $5.00.) 

The  conquest  of  vast  areas  of  the  colonial  southwest  was 
of  momentous  consequence  in  the  history  of  our  nation,  for 
it  helped  in  great  measure  to  prepare  the  way  for  the  inde- 
pendence of  British  colonies.  Essential  as  was  the  western 
colonial  movement  to  the  American  independence,  its  suc- 
cess was  threatened  by  rivalry  among  the  colonies  for  the 
Indian  market  and  other  conflicting  interests.  These  hazards 
and  perils  originating  from  a  decentralized  Indian  adminis- 
tration were  well  understood  by  Edmond  Atkin,  a  prosperous 
merchant  of  pre-revolutionary  South  Carolina  and  a  member 
of  His  Majesty's  Council  for  the  Province.  When  Atkins 
views  on  Indian  affairs  were  requested  by  the  Board  of  Trade, 
during  one  of  his  visits  to  London,  the  South  Carolinian  re- 
sponded on  May  30,  1775  with  a  lengthy  paper.  This  docu- 
ment was  not  without  merit,  for  it  contained  shrewd  analyses 
of  French  and  British  Indian  policies;  comments  on  the  long- 
established  practice  of  distributing  Indian  presents;  and  a 
critique  on  the  status  of  trade  with  the  Indians,  unregulated 
for  many  years.  Atkin  knew  the  southern  Indian  tribes,  their 
chiefs  and  headmen,  from  long  personal  contact.  His  report 
pictures  the  Red  Men  of  the  South  with  their  painted  war 
sticks  and  fluttering  trophies,  their  homes  and  hunting 
grounds.  He  tells  the  story  of  those  hardy,  rude  traders  and 
hunters  who  ranged  the  southern  wilderness  beyond  the 
frontier  of  the  colonies,  seeking  profits  among  the  remoter 
tribes  of  the  lower  Mississippi  Valley,  forming  a  commercial 
link  between  civilization  and  barbarism. 

The  Atkin  report  embodied  a  scheme,  not  wholly  new  with 
the  author  but  developed  by  him  into  a  well-reasoned  and 
overall  approach,  by  which  all  Indian  affairs  in  the  colonies 
could  be  centralized  under  two  imperial  superintendents- 
one  in  the  North  and  another  for  the  South.  Atkin's  plan  was 
nothing  less  than  a  scheme  to  extend,  stabilize  and  strengthen 
British  imperial  authority  over  an  untamed  wilderness  at  a 
time  when  the  British  sensed  that  their  situation  was  precar- 


302  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

ious.  The  report  reflects  to  a  certain  extent  the  attitudes  of 
British  bureaucracy  that  brought  the  American  colonists  to 
revolt  scarcely  two  decades  later.  The  document  also  gives 
a  glimpse  into  the  evolution  of  an  important  imperial  office 
in  the  history  of  colonial  America,  for  Atkin  was  named  to 
the  post  of  southern  superintendent  of  Indian  affairs  which 
he  advocated  in  his  report.  The  ethnological  value  of  the 
document,  two  centuries  later,  must  not  be  minimized. 

Good  work  has  already  been  done  in  chronicling  the  his- 
tory of  the  southern  frontier  by  Chapman  Milling;  Robert 
L.  Meriwether;  Philip  M.  Hamer;  Clarence  E.  Carter;  Helen 
Louise  Shaw;  Thomas  P.  Abernethy;  Clarence  W.  Alvord; 
and  John  Richard  Alden.  Now  we  must  add  the  name  of  Wil- 
bur R.  Jacobs,  who  has  lifted  the  Atkin  report  out  of  obscuri- 
ty and  by  editoriahelucidations  made  it  more  meaningful  to 
the  present-day  scholar  of  the  colonial  period,  the  general 
historian  of  the  South,  the  student  of  the  southern  Indians. 
This  recent  offering  by  the  Press  of  the  University  of  South 

Carolina  is  most  welcome.  _, 

Gaston  Litton. 

University  of  Oklahoma, 

Norman,  Oklahoma. 


The  Barber  of  Natchez.  By  Edwin  A.  Davis  and  William  Ransom 
Hogan.  (Baton  Rouge:  Louisiana  State  University  Press.  1954. 
Pp.  xi,  272.  Illustrations.  $4.00.) 

Three  years  ago  the  authors  of  The  Barber  of  Natchez  pub- 
lished William  Johnsons  Natchez:  The  Ante-Bellum  Diary 
of  a  Free  Negro,  which  was  widely  acclaimed  for  its  content 
and  the  scholarship  of  the  editors.  This  first  book  was  a  re- 
production of  a  fourteen-volume  diary  kept  from  1835  to 
1851  by  William  Johnson,  a  free  man  of  color,  who  was  a 
barber  and  respected  businessman  of  Natchez.  The  Barber 
of  Natchez  is  a  biographical  volume  based  on  the  diary,  ac- 
count books,  and  other  papers  and  sources  pertaining  to  Wil- 
liam Johnson. 

William  Johnson,  a  mulatto  slave  aged  five,  was  freed  by 
his  white  master,  William  Johnson,  in  Natchez  on  February 
10,  1820.  As  a  free  man  of  color,  he  lived  the  remainder  of 


Book  Reviews  303 

his  respectable  and  very  successful  life  in  Natchez,  where 
he  was  the  leading  barber,  a  businessman  who  loaned  money 
to  whites,  owner  of  city  real  estate  and  farm  lands, 
slaveholder,  and  friend  of  many  white  men  in  all  walks  of 
life.  He  married  a  free  woman  of  color  in  his  home  town,  and 
their  union  was  blessed  with  ten  children  before  he  was  as- 
sassinated in  1851,  presumably  by  Baylor  Winn.  Johnson's 
voluminous  diary  depicted  all  facets  of  the  life  of  Natchez, 
and  it  is  particularly  interesting  to  note  that  the  diarist  would 
not  associate  on  terms  of  equality  with  slaves  and  that  he  was 
rather  careful  of  his  association  with  free  Negroes  and  with 
white  men. 

The  book  is  divided  into  three  parts.  The  first  contains 
eight  chapters  of  biographical  material.  The  second  contains 
ten  chapters  of  the  diarist's  activities  and  observations  drawn 
from  the  diary.  The  titles  of  these  chapters  indicate  the  con- 
tents of  the  diary  and  of  the  book— "Chronicle  of  Everyday 
Natchez,"  "Barbershop  Gossip,"  "Politics  and  Politicians," 
"The  Tranquil  Streets,"  "Pistols,  Fists,  and  Bowie  Knives," 
"Fires,  Fire  Fighters— and  a  Tornado,"  "Plasters,  Pills,  and 
Purgatives,"  "Thespians  and  Clowns,"  "Sports  of  the  Turf," 
and  "Aristocrats  and  Lesser  Men."  The  third  part  is  a  four- 
chapter  appraisal  of  the  diarist. 

The  book  is  a  fascinating  and  well-written  study  of  an  un- 
usual free  Negro  in  an  unusual  Mississippi  city.  The  work  of 
the  authors  in  editing  the  diary  is  excellent  in  every  respect. 
They  have  made  another  significant  contribution  with  their 
biography  of  Johnson.  The  story  of  the  preservation  and  ac- 
quisition of  the  William  Johnson  Papers  is  almost  as  amaz- 
ing as  the  story  of  the  life  of  the  man.  The  reviewer  is  re- 
minded that  he  was  offered  these  papers  in  1939  for  the 
sum  of  $1,000.00,  which  he  was  then  unable  to  raise.  After 
seeing  the  results  of  their  acquisition  by  Louisiana  State  Uni- 
versity, he  has  no  regrets,  for  he  would  never  have  done  as 
well  with  them  as  Dr.  Davis  and  Dr.  Hogan  have  done  in 
their  two  outstanding  volumes. 

William  D.  McCain. 

Department  of  Archives  and  History, 

Jackson,  Miss. 


304  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Gustav  Dresel's  Houston  Journal.  Translated  and  edited  by  Max 
Freund.  (Austin:  University  of  Texas  Press.  1954.  Pp.  xxx, 
168.  $4.00.) 

Gustav  Dresel  was  only  nineteen  when  he  left  Geisenheim, 
Germany,  in  1837  and  came  to  North  America.  Son  of  a 
prosperous  merchant,  young  Dresel  was  seeking  to  broaden 
his  business  education  and  to  experience  the  challenge  of 
frontier  life.  He  landed  in  New  York,  spent  a  winter  with 
the  Pennsylvania  Dutch,  moved  across  to  Iowa,  came  down 
the  Mississippi  to  New  Orleans,  and  finally  made  his  way 
to  the  new  Republic  of  Texas.  For  more  than  two  years  the 
Gulf  Coast  country  between  Houston,  New  Orleans,  and 
Natchez  was  his  theater  of  operations.  He  worked  as  book- 
keeper and  commission  agent  in  the  food  and  dry  goods  busi- 
ness and  in  time  accumulated  enough  capital  to  speculate 
in  grain  and  land.  Homesickness  and  fear  of  yellow  fever 
prompted  Dresel's  return  to  Germany  in  1841.  Depreciating 
Texas  currency  had  kept  him  from  becoming  rich,  and  recur- 
ring attacks  of  fever  had  nearly  wrecked  his  health;  yet  his 
experiences  in  America  had  given  the  young  German  "an 
independent  position  in  the  world"— ample  reward,  he  felt, 
for  his  trials  and  tribulations. 

Back  in  his  homeland  Dresel  wrote  an  account  of  his  so- 
journ in  America,  in  part  to  stimulate  interest  in  German  im- 
migration to  Texas.  He  then  returned  to  Texas  in  1847  as 
agent-general  in  Galveston  for  the  "Society  for  the  Protec- 
tion of  German  Immigrants  in  Texas,"  the  most  important 
German  immigration  agency  in  Texas.  This  new  venture  had 
scarcely  begun,  however,  when  Dresel  was  struck  down  with 
yellow  fever.  He  died  in  September,  1848. 

Compared  to  the  role  played  by  some  of  his  fellow  coun- 
trymen Gustav  Dresel  was  a  minor  figure  in  the  settlement 
of  Texas.  Therefore  the  value  of  the  journal  he  wrote  about 
his  first  visit  to  the  United  States  lies  principally  in  the  excel- 
lent literary  style  with  which  Dresel  wrote  and  the  acute 
observations  he  made  of  frontier  life  and  customs.  The  ac- 
count was  written  five  to  six  years  after  the  event  (though 
apparently  from  copious  notes  taken  during  his  stay),  and 


Book  Reviews  305 

is  tinged  throughout  with  the  idealism  of  youth.  Dresel  also 
sermonized  from  time  to  time  on  the  virtues  of  the  German 
race  and  hard  work.  Nevertheless,  the  author  painted  a  good 
word  picture  of  life  in  a  raw  society. 

Gustav  Dresel's  story  lay  unpublished  until  1922.  It  has 
only  now  been  translated  by  Max  Freund,  professor  emeri- 
tus of  Germanic  languages  at  The  Rice  Institute  under  the 
somewhat  misleading  title  of  Gustav  Dresel's  Houston  Jour- 
nal. Only  a  fraction  over  one-half  of  the  book  deals  with 
Dresel's  experiences  in  Texas;  scarcely  a  quarter  on  condi- 
tions in  Houston.  This  fault  may  lead  historians  interested 
in  the  customs,  manners,  morals,  and  travel  of  people  from 
Pennsylvania  to  the  Gulf  Coast  to  overlook  this  slender  vol- 
ume. An  excellent  job  of  bookmaking  by  the  translator  and 
the  University  of  Texas  Press  could  have  been  improved  by 
including  at  least  one  map  of  Dresel's  wanderings.  The  re- 
viewer is  also  old-fashioned  enough  to  prefer  footnotes  at 
the  bottom  of  the  page  rather  than  tucked  away  at  the  back 
of  the  book.  But  these  are  relatively  minor  criticisms.  Profes- 
sor Freund  and  the  University  of  Texas  Press  are  to  be  com- 
mended for  making  this  work  available  to  a  wider  reading 
public. 

James  A.  Tinsley. 

University  of  Houston, 

Houston,  Texas. 


Hugh  Roy  Cullen:  A  Story  of  American  Opportunity.  By  Ed 
Kilman  and  Theon  Wright.  (New  York:  Prentice-Hall,  Inc. 
1954.  Pp.  viii,  369.  $4.00.) 

A  man  so  generous  to  agencies  of  social  betterment  as 
Hugh  Roy  Cullen  surely  deserves  a  better  biography.  Re- 
plete with  extravagant  and  repetitious  statements,  all  un- 
substantiated, this  volume  could  scarcely  be  considered  trust- 
worthy by  serious  students.  The  authors  do  not  even  verify 
the  efforts  of  Cullen's  grandfather  to  establish  a  school  sys- 
tem in  the  Republic  of  Texas.  Their  journalistic  abhorrence 
of  footnotes  might  well  have  permitted  a  reference  in  the 


306  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

text  to  the  House  Journal,  Regular  Session,  1839,  p.  220.  No 
doubt  this  same  grandiose  carelessness  permitted  the  mis- 
spelling of  Anadarko  on  the  end  papers  and  made  Mrs.  Car- 
ter Glass  president  of  Sweet  Briar  College. 

The  most  interesting  aspect  of  the  biography  concerns  the 
oil  business,  although  it  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  Cul- 
len's  "horse-sense  judgment"  about  finding  oil  was  usually 
accompanied  by  geological  data.  Yet  he  succeeded  in  area 
after  area  which  had  already  been  worked  by  experienced 
oil  men.  His  belief  in  deep  drilling  sent  him  to  "the  grave- 
yard of  Texas"  oil  men,  the  Washburn  Ranch,  which  had  al- 
so been  surveyed  by  the  eminent  De  Golyer  firm  of  Dallas 
and  pronounced  without  indication  of  oil.  Nevertheless,  Cul- 
len  s  "creekology"  soon  had  31  producing  wells  on  the  Wash- 
burn Ranch. 

The  philanthropic  and  political  activities  of  Cullen  re- 
ceive perhaps  more  emphasis  than  oil.  The  bulk  of  his  mag- 
nificent charitable  donations,  approximately  $175,000,000, 
has  gone  into  the  Houston  area,  but  his  political  activities 
have  often  been  on  a  national  scale.  Described  as  an  "inde- 
pendent voter"  in  1907  and  as  a  Republican  since  1928,  Cul- 
len's  aim  has  been  to  split  the  Democratic  party  in  Texas 
and  to  elect  an  isolationist  Republican  president.  The  authors 
cite  the  chief  criticism  made  by  Cullen's  political  foes,  that 
"discovering  an  oil  well  doesn't  necessarily  qualify  a  man  to 
be  political  godfather  to  an  entire  nation"  (p.  272). 

Nannie  M.  Tilley. 
East  Texas  State  Teachers  College, 
Commerce,  Texas. 


American  Academy  of  Fine  Arts  and  American  Art  Union.  By 
Mary  Bartlett  Cowdrey.  (New  York,  N.  Y. :  New- York  His- 
torical Society.  1953.  vol.  I:  Introduction,  Pp.  xiv,  311,  illus- 
trated. Vol.  II  Exhibition  Record,  Pp.  vi,  504,  index.  $7.50.) 

This  comprehensive  presentation  of  the  American  Acade- 
my of  Fine  Arts  and  the  American  Art  Union  (1816-1852) 
is  organized  in  two  volumes.  One  volume,  subtitled  Introduc- 
tion, deals  with  the  history  of  the  two  organizations;  the 


Book  Reviews  307 

other,  subtitled  Exhibition  Record,  is  a  listing  of  all  paintings 
exhibited  by  the  Art  Union. 

Miss  Cowdrey,  in  the  introductory  volume,  has  assembled 
the  following:  a  history  of  the  American  Academy  of  Fine 
Arts,  by  Professor  Theodore  Sizer  of  Yale  University;  a  his- 
tory of  the  American  Art  Union,  by  Charles  E.  Baker  of  the 
New- York  Historical  Society;  a  chronological  review  of  all 
Art  Union  publications  by  Mary  Bartlett  Cowdrey  of  Smith 
College  Museum  of  Art;  and  a  complete  record  of  the  auction 
sale  which,  in  1852,  marked  the  end  of  this  organization.  This 
record  of  sales  is  compiled  by  Malcolm  Stern,  Jr.,  of  Weslyan 
University. 

Professor  Sizer,  in  his  essay  on  the  Academy,  establishes 
in  his  introduction  the  general  character  of  this  organization, 
founded,  as  John  Trumbull  said,  "by  gentlemen  of  taste  and 
fortune."  The  genesis  of  the  organization  and  its  historical 
role  is  briefly  summarized.  Sizer  then  proceeds  with  a  year 
by  year  account  of  its  activities,  from  the  lofty  aspirations 
of  its  founders  to  its  end  under  the  rigid  and  dictatorial  di- 
rection of  the  "patriot  artist,"  John  Trumbel.  The  proceed- 
ings of  this  organization,  the  quest  for  plaster  casts  of  antique 
sculpture,  copies  of  old  master  paintings,  and  the  elevated 
intention  of  its  directors  reflect  the  survival  of  18th  century 
taste.  A  reliance  on  European  tradition,  the  denial  of  con- 
temporary artists,  and  the  overbearing  personality  of  Trum- 
bel, its  director  for  nineteen  years,  bred  opposition  and  con- 
flict. Finally  inaction,  discontent,  and  apathy  brought  the 
end  of  the  organization  in  1840. 

Remnants  of  the  American  Academy  can  be  found  in  the 
Apollo  Association  which  soon  became  the  American  Art 
Union.  It  was  against  ideals  of  the  Academy  that  these  rival 
and  successor  organizations  were  founded.  Mr.  Baker,  with 
supporting  documentation,  recounts  the  dramatic  episode  of 
this  organization,  dedicated  to  the  cause  of  living  American 
artists—democratic  in  structure  and  practice  and  coping  with 
issues  many  of  which  are  still  present  today.  The  life  of  the 
American  Art  Union  is  here  depicted  as  turbulent.  Even  in 
its  greatest  success,  scathing  criticism,  dissention,  and  unrest 
prevailed.  The  tremendous  task  which  the  Union  had  set 


308  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

for  itself,  the  patronage  of  artists  and  the  education  of  the 
public  in  matters  of  art  and  taste,  was  nevertheless  pursued 
with  vigor. 

The  Union  had  for  its  financial  support  a  subscription 
membership,  the  returns  from  which  were  applied  to  the 
purchase  of  paintings.  These  paintings  were  exhibited  in 
the  Union's  galleries  and  then  distributed  to  members 
through  annual  lotteries.  This  system,  which  gave  patronage 
to  artists  all  over  the  country,  and  which  brought  paintings 
into  the  homes  of  many  who  otherwise  could  not  afford  them, 
was  both  the  success  and  failure  of  the  Union.  After  having 
been  repeatedly  approved  by  the  New  York  State  Legisla- 
ture, in  1852  the  lottery  system  was  ruled  illegal  by  the 
courts.  The  lottery  was  an  indispensible  part  of  the  organi- 
zation and  without  it  there  was  little  hope  of  the  Union's 
survival.  All  holdings  were  sold  at  auction,  the  members  ap- 
peased, and  all  operations  ceased  in  1853. 

The  contribution  of  the  several  authors  in  the  introductory 
volume  has  been  skillfully  integrated;  even  a  marked  similar- 
ity of  style  and  technique  prevades.  In  each  of  the  three 
major  essays,  the  material  is  presented  with  strict  adherence 
to  chronology.  A  terse  commentary,  interspersed  with  a 
wealth  of  quotations  from  contemporary  documents,  excites 
a  sense  of  immediate  identity  with  the  strivings,  achieve- 
ments, and  failures  of  these  two  organizations.  Chronology, 
often  faltering,  here  achieves  a  sustained  continuum.  With 
no  sacrifice  to  scholarship,  the  historians  have  used  a  tech- 
nique which  suggests  a  fine  documentary  film  supported  by 
narration. 

The  exhibition  record  compiled  by  Miss  Cowdrey  lists 
alphabetically  by  artist  all  paintings  exhibited  by  the  Art 
Union.  This  list  includes  titles  of  the  paintings,  dates  and 
addresses  of  artists,  dates  of  exhibition,  purchasers,  lottery 
winners,  and  other  supporting  information  when  possible. 
This  volume  not  only  completes  the  record  of  this  institution, 
but  serves  as  a  biographical  dictionary  of  many  artists  not 
included  in  the  standard  reference  sources.  The  introduc- 
tory volume  is  a  requisite  for  all  scholars  of  American  art 


Book  Reviews  309 

and  history;  and,  more  than  this,  it  should  find  a  wide  public 
among  all  interested  in  American  culture. 

It  is  regrettable  that  the  notes  do  not  give  a  more  com- 
plete identification  of  many  of  the  people  referred  to  in  the 
text.  Also,  one  wonders  why  Charles  Baker  is  not  included 
on  the  title  page  along  with  Professor  Sizer.  The  foreword 
by  James  Flexner  affords  an  excellent  guide  to  the  reader, 
but  this  might  well  have  stated  explicitly  the  overall  plan  of 
the  two  volumes. 

At  a  time  when  North  Carolina  is  the  scene  of  a  growing 
interest  in  art,  with  art  groups  forming  throughout  the  State, 
the  organization,  structure,  and  experience  of  the  American 
Academy  of  Fine  Arts  and  the  American  Art  Union  have 
pertinence  to  the  art  interest  of  North  Carolina  which  can 
scarcely  be  overstated. 

Ben  F.  Williams. 

North  Carolina  State  Art  Gallery, 

Raleigh. 


HISTORICAL  NEWS 

The  Carteret  County  Historical  Society  met  in  January 
for  the  quarterly  meeting  with  almost  a  full  membership 
present.  Twenty  new  members  have  been  added  to  this 
group.  Presentation  was  made  by  Mrs.  John  S.  Jones  of  Cedar 
Point  of  a  copy  of  the  Carteret  County  Herald  which  con- 
tained a  reprint  of  an  oration  delivered  in  Beaufort  on  July  4, 
1876.  Mr.  Milton  F.  Perry  of  West  Point,  New  York,  former 
curator  at  Fort  Macon,  sent  the  society  a  well-compiled  his- 
tory of  the  Spanish  attack  on  Beaufort  in  1747.  Mr.  F.  C. 
Salisbury  displayed  a  group  of  pictures  and  cuts  which  were 
of  interest  to  the  society. 

On  January  20  the  Scotland  County  Historical  Society  was 
organized  with  approximately  35  people  present.  The  meet- 
ing was  presided  over  by  Mr.  A.  B.  Gibson  of  Laurinburg, 
who  was  elected  president.  Other  officers  elected  were:  Miss 
Margaret  John  of  Laurinburg,  vice-president;  Mr.  L.  T.  Gib- 
son, secretary;  and  Miss  Lila  Mae  Gill,  treasurer.  An  appeal 
was  made  by  the  group  to  natives  of  the  county  asking  for 
aid  in  acquiring  old  land  grants  and  other  historical  docu- 
ments, to  be  placed  on  file  in  the  county  library. 

Mr.  Bascombe  Lamar  Lunsford  of  Leicester  spoke  on  folk- 
lore in  western  North  Carolina  at  the  mid-winter  meeting  of 
the  Western  North  Carolina  Historical  Association  on  Janu- 
ary 29  in  Hendersonville.  Dr.  Rosser  H.  Taylor  was  also  a 
featured  speaker.  Three  committees  were  announced  during 
the  meeting:  A  committee  to  select  the  recipient  of  the  Asso- 
ciation's cup  which  is  presented  to  the  person  adjudged  the 
outstanding  historian  of  the  year;  a  nominating  committee; 
and  a  committee  to  work  with  other  civic  groups  and  indi- 
viduals to  secure  a  commemorative  stamp  honoring  the  Chero- 
kee chief,  Sequoyah,  who  devised  the  Cherokee  alphabet.  All 
committees  will  report  at  the  April  meeting  which  is  to  be 
held  in  Asheville.  The  Hendersonville  chapter  of  the  Daugh- 
ters of  the  American  Revolution,  the  United  Daughters  of  the 

[310] 


Historical  News  311 

Confederacy,  and  the  Literary  Department  of  the  Woman's 
Club  co-sponsored  the  meeting.  A  coffee  hour  followed  the 
meeting  which  was  attended  by  over  100  people  and  was 
one  of  the  largest  groups  assembled  at  a  meeting  of  the  asso- 
ciation. Colonel  Paul  Rockwell,  chairman  of  the  membership 
committee,  reported  on  the  drive  for  members  and  Mr.  George 
W.  McCoy  of  Asheville,  reported  on  the  Thomas  Wolfe  liter- 
ary cup  proposal.  It  was  decided  to  accept  the  cup  if  the 
Thomas  Wolfe  Memorial  Association  desires  to  give  the 
award  annually.  The  Association  began  publication  in  Jan- 
uary of  The  Western  North  Carolina  Associations  History 
Bulletin,  a  newspaper  which  is  to  be  published  quarterly  as 
the  official  news  organ  of  the  membership.  Mr.  Clarence  W. 
Griffin  of  Forest  City  is  the  editor  and  requests  material 
from  the  members  for  the  papers. 

New  officers  were  elected  at  the  quarterly  meeting  of  the 
Pasquotank  Historical  Society  held  January  22  in  Elizabeth 
City.  General  John  E.  Wood  was  re-elected  president;  Mr. 
Clarence  Morse  was  named  vice  president;  Mr.  Fred  Mark- 
ham  III,  secretary;  and  Miss  Olive  Aydlett,  treasurer.  Gen- 
eral Wood  presented  a  report  of  the  first  year's  activity  in- 
cluding not  only  the  accomplishments  of  the  society  but  also 
the  failures  and  plans  for  the  future.  Plans  were  announced 
for  a  mid-day  luncheon  for  the  April  meeting.  A  report  on  the 
search  for  houses  and  structures  which  are  100  years  old  or 
older  was  given.  The  group  has  found  that  there  are  only  36 
such  buildings  remaining  within  the  limits  of  Elizabeth  City. 
A  catalog  of  homes  constructed  during  or  prior  to  1855  is  being 
compiled  and  a  copy  sent  to  the  Literary  and  Historical  As- 
sociation headquarters  in  Raleigh. 

A  celebration  is  being  planned  for  the  centennial  of  Polk 
County  by  a  group  of  interested  people  who  met  at  the  court- 
house in  Columbus,  February  3.  The  observance  will  be  held 
in  May,  with  the  ceremonies  planned  by  an  executive  com- 
mittee composed  of  representatives  of  each  of  the  six  town- 
ships in  the  county.  Officers  elected  to  direct  the  planning  are: 
Mr.  W.  A.  McFarland,  president;  Mr.  James  Johnson,  sec- 


312  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

retary;  Mr.  Woodrow  Hague,  treasurer;  and  three  vice  presi- 
dents—Mrs. George  Taylor,  Mrs.  Seth  Vining,  Sr.,  and  Mr. 
Carroll  P.  Rogers.  Mrs.  Sadie  Patton  and  Mr.  Clarence  W. 
Griffin,  members  of  the  Executive  Board  of  the  State  Depart- 
ment of  Archives  and  History,  will  assist  in  planning  the 
time,  place,  and  program.  Dr.  Christopher  Crittenden,  Di- 
rector of  the  Department,  has  been  invited  to  attend. 

Work  on  the  restoration  of  the  Old  Bunker  Hill  bridge,  near 
Claremont,  one  of  the  three  remaining  covered  bridges  in 
North  Carolina,  was  started  in  February.  Judge  Wilson  War- 
lick  of  Newton,  chairman  of  the  committee  which  was  ap- 
pointed by  the  Catawba  County  Historical  Association,  has 
announced  that  the  bridge  is  to  be  restored  as  nearly  as 
possible  to  its  original  appearance.  To  insure  continuing  care 
of  the  project  the  association  will  pledge  in  a  25-year  lease 
with  the  R.  K.  Bolick  estate,  owner  of  the  property  on  which 
the  bridge  is  located,  to  maintain  it  over  that  period. 

A  pamphlet  has  been  received  by  the  department,  Sketches 
of  Burke  County,  which  was  prepared  by  Miss  Cordelia 
Camp,  former  superintendent  of  Burke  County  schools.  The 
material  covers  the  years  1950  through  1952  and  was  taken 
from  several  studies  made  by  the  eighth-grade  pupils  of 
their  respective  school  districts.  The  primary  intention  of  the 
booklet  is  to  acquaint  the  school  children  with  the  history, 
geography,  and  other  salient  factors  of  Burke  County. 

Mr.  C.  B.  Eller,  vice  president  of  the  Wilkes  County  His- 
torical Association,  presided  at  the  February  meeting  held 
in  the  town  hall  of  North  Wilkesboro.  Papers  were  read  by 
Mrs.  Margaret  Bloomfield,  whose  topic  dealt  with  a  private 
school  operated  by  Mrs.  Mamie  Barber  beginning  in  1879; 
and  Mrs.  L.  G.  Critcher,  whose  topic  was  the  Moravian  Falls 
Academy  which  operated  from  1876  to  1906.  Mr.  Robert 
O.  Poplin,  Jr.,  chairman  of  the  association's  committee  for  se- 
curing historical  markers  in  Wilkes  County,  reported  on  the 
work  of  his  committee  and  the  correspondence  with  the  state 
marker  advisory  committee. 


Historical  News  313 

Interest  in  the  location  of  an  "English  house"  built  for  the 
"Great  Commander"  of  the  Indians  who  inhabited  Roanoke 
Island  in  the  middle  seventeenth  century  has  been  renewed 
because  of  a  search  by  Mr.  P.  B.  Zevely,  former  resident  of 
Winston-Salem.  Mr.  Zevely's  interest  was  aroused  by  Mr.  Ben 
Shannon  of  Manteo  who  as  a  youth  uncovered  buried  "bricks" 
on  Roanoke  Island.  Electronic  search  produced  sufficient  evi- 
dence to  begin  digging  at  the  site  and  pieces  of  "bricks"  were 
found  and  specimens  were  forwarded  to  the  Smithsonian  In- 
stitution for  classification.  The  Colonial  Records  of  North 
Carolina  relate  that  in  1653  Francis  Yeardley  of  Virginia  sent 
"...  a  boat  with  six  hands,  one  being  a  carpenter,  to  build 
the  king  an  English  house  .  .  ."  and  it  is  thought  that  bricks 
may  have  been  used  on  the  structure.  Mr.  Ay  cock  Brown  of 
Manteo  has  written  a  story  which  he  sent  to  the  Department 
of  Archives  and  History  dealing  with  the  mystery  of  the 
bricks. 

Mr.  W.  Frank  Burton,  head  of  the  Division  of  Archives, 
State  Department  of  Archives  and  History,  spoke  to  the  Pitt 
County  Historical  Society  on  January  27.  His  subject  was 
"Preservation  and  Restoration  of  Historical  Manuscripts." 

Mr.  Burton  reports  that  within  the  past  two  months  Miss 
Pamela  Cocks  of  the  New  Zealand  Archives  and  Mrs.  Estela 
de  Grandi  of  the  Controller  General's  Office  in  Panama  have 
spent  several  days  in  Raleigh  studying  the  archival  and  record 
management  programs  of  the  State  Department  of  Archives 
and  History.  The  Division  of  Archives  recently  accessioned 
the  board  minutes  and  the  policy-making  correspondence 
of  the  Department  of  Conservation  and  Development,  1927- 
1950. 

In  a  meeting  held  in  the  library  in  Smithfield  on  March 
19,  Mr.  D.  L.  Corbitt,  head  of  the  Division  of  Publications, 
State  Department  of  Archives  and  History,  assisted  an  in- 
terested group  of  Johnston  County  citizens  in  the  temporary 
organization  of  a  local  historical  society.  The  group  decided 
to  meet  again  on  April  1,  at  8  P.  M.  in  the  courthouse  to 
perfect  a  permanent  organization.  Temporary  officers  elected 


314  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

were:  Mr.  H.  V.  Rose  of  Smithfield,  president;  Miss  Mildred 
Oliver  of  Pine  Level,  vice  president;  and  Mrs.  W.  B.  Beasley 
of  Smithfield,  secretary.  A  great  deal  of  interest  was  mani- 
fested in  the  Bentonville  Battlefield  as  the  first  meeting  was 
held  on  the  ninetieth  anniversary  of  the  beginning  of  the 
battle. 

On  January  14  Mr.  W.  S.  Tarlton,  researcher  for  the  De- 
partment of  Archives  and  History,  spoke  before  the  Blooms- 
bury  Chapter  of  the  Daughters  of  the  Revolution,  following 
a  luncheon  meeting  held  at  the  Woman's  Club,  Raleigh.  His 
subject  was  "The  Restoration  of  Somerset  Place  at  Pettigrew 
Park." 

At  a  meeting  held  in  Chapel  Hill  on  January  28  the  Ad- 
visory Committee  on  Historical  Markers  approved  sixteen 
new  markers  for  North  Carolina  highways:  Swannanoa  Tun- 
nel, Ridgecrest,  Buncombe  County;  Wachovia  Museum,  Win- 
ston-Salem, Forsyth  County;  Rose  Greenhow,  Wilmington, 
New  Hanover  County;  Scotch  Hall,  Bertie  County;  Wingate 
Junior  College,  Wingate,  Union  County;  William  B.  Umstead, 
Durham  County;  4-H  Club,  Hertford  County;  Clyde  R.  Hoey, 
Shelby,  Cleveland  County;  Sherman's  March,  Hoke  County; 
Willis  Smith,  Raleigh,  Wake  County;  Levi  Coffin,  Guilford 
College,  Guilford  County;  James  Iredell,  Jr.,  Edenton,  Cho- 
wan County;  Moses  A.  Curtis,  Hillsboro,  Orange  County; 
Lake  Company,  Creswell,  Washington  County;  Bethabara, 
Forsyth  County;  and  High  Point  College,  High  Point,  Guil- 
ford County. 

On  March  11  in  ceremonies  held  in  the  auditorium  of  the 
Raeford  High  School,  two  historical  markers  for  Hoke  Coun- 
ty were  unveiled.  One  of  the  markers  points  out  the  site  of  the 
Civil  War  Battle  of  Monroe's  Crossroads,  fought  on  March  10, 
1865,  between  Federal  Calvary  units  and  the  Confederate 
forces  led  by  General  Wade  Hampton.  The  other  marker  indi- 
cates the  site  of  Edenborough  Medical  College,  the  first  medi- 
cal school  chartered  by  the  state  of  North  Carolina  in  1867. 
The  Department  of  Archives  and  History  was  represented  by 


Historical  News  315 

Mr.  W.  S.  Tarlton,  who  delivered  the  main  speech  and  pre- 
sented the  two  markers.  Mr.  Paul  Dickson,  publisher  of  the 
Raeford  News- Journal,  was  master  of  ceremonies. 

The  State  Department  of  Archives  and  History's  Advisory 
Committee  on  Records  Preservation  held  its  first  meeting  at 
the  State  Archives  on  February  4.  The  group  was  welcomed 
by  Dr.  Christopher  Crittenden,  Director;  Dr.  W.  T.  Laprade, 
member  of  the  Department's  Executive  Board,  made  an  in- 
troductory statement;  Mr.  W.  Frank  Burton,  State  Archivist, 
conducted  a  tour  of  the  Archives  and  Record  Center  and 
explained  the  archives  and  records  management  program 
to  the  committee;  and  a  general  discussion  followed.  The 
members  of  the  committee  are:  Dr.  James  W.  Patton,  direc- 
tor of  the  Southern  Historical  Collection  at  the  University, 
chairman  of  the  committee;  Dr.  Laprade;  Dr.  Fletcher  M. 
Green,  chairman,  department  of  history  at  the  University  of 
North  Carolina;  Drs.  Hugh  T.  Lefler  and  J.  C.  Sitterson,  of 
the  same  department  of  history;  Drs.  William  B.  Hamilton, 
Richard  L.  Watson,  and  Robert  H.  Woody  of  the  department 
of  history,  Duke  University;  and  Dr.  Frontis  W.  Johnston, 
head,  department  of  history,  Davidson  College. 

In  Raleigh,  February  11,  the  executive  committee  of  the 
Tryon  Palace  Commission  met  with  the  architect,  Mr.  Wil- 
liam G.  Perry,  and  approved  plans  for  the  main  building  of  the 
Palace.  It  was  voted  to  call  bids  to  be  opened  in  Raleigh, 
March  16.  On  the  appointed  day  the  bids  were  opened  and 
William  Muirhead  of  Durham  got  the  general  contract  with 
a  low  bid  of  $577,000.  He  agreed  to  complete  the  job  in  600 
consecutive  days.  Other  contracts  for  plumbing,  heating,  and 
electrical  installations  totalling  $85,312  were  also  awarded  at 
the  meeting. 

The  Department  of  Archives  and  History  entertained  the 
Sir  Walter  Cabinet  on  March  15.  Slides  were  shown  of  his- 
toric houses  in  the  state,  North  Carolina  ladies,  costumes  from 
the  1780's  to  the  1930's  were  modeled,  and  a  coffee  hour  was 
held. 


316  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

North  Carolinians  who  took  part  in  the  sessions  of  the 
American  Historical  Association  in  New  York,  December 
28-30,  and  their  contributions,  were  as  follows:  Dr.  John  Gillin 
of  the  University  of  North  Carolina,  "An  Anthropologist's 
View  of  Teaching  of  Latin  American  History";  Mr.  Oliver 
H.  Orr,  Jr.,  of  the  same  institution,  a  paper  on  Charles  B. 
Aycock;  Dr.  James  L.  Godfrey,  also  of  the  University,  dis- 
cussion of  "British  Labor  Between  the  Wars";  and  Dr.  Sam- 
uel R.  Spencer  of  Davidson  College,  a  paper  on  Booker  T. 
Washington.  Dr.  Christopher  Crittenden  represented  the  De- 
partment of  Archives  and  History. 

At  the  University  at  Chapel  Hill,  Dr.  Wallace  E.  Caldwell 
has  returned  to  his  teaching  duties  after  a  leave  during  the 
fall  semester.  While  on  leave  he  lectured  at  the  University 
of  St.  Andrews  on  the  general  subject  of  the  Age  of  Pericles. 
Dr.  James  L.  Godfrey  is  acting  as  chairman  of  the  European 
section  for  the  Southern  Historical  Association  in  preparing 
the  program  for  1955.  He  is  the  recipient  of  a  research  grant 
from  the  University  and  will  continue  his  studies  on  the  Labor 
Government  in  England.  Dr.  George  V.  Taylor  is  the  recipient 
of  a  research  grant  from  the  University  and  will  continue  work 
on  the  political  activities  of  business  men  during  the  French 
Revolution.  Dr.  Harold  A.  Bierck  will  attend  a  meeting  of 
the  United  States  Committee  of  the  Pan-American  Insti- 
tute of  Geography  and  History  as  an  official  delegate.  Mr. 
William  M.  Geer  is  the  recipient  of  a  Danforth  Foundation 
Teacher  Study  Program  for  the  year  beginning  June  1,  1955. 

Mr.  Hugh  F.  Rankin,  who  spent  three  and  a  half  years  at 
the  University  of  North  Carolina  studying  under  a  Morehead 
Fellowship,  has  accepted  the  position  as  research  associate  at 
Colonial  Williamsburg.  Mr.  Rankin  was  twice  winner  of  the 
R.  D.  W.  Connor  Award  for  the  best  article  on  North  Caro- 
lina history  in  this  journal. 

The  Department  of  Social  Studies  at  Appalachian  State 
Teachers  College,  Boone,  announces  a  workshop  to  be  held 
July  5-15  with  Dr.  D.  J.  Whitener  acting  as  director.  Dr. 


Historical  News  317 

Christopher  Crittenden,  director  of  the  Department  of  Ar- 
chives and  History,  will  be  a  member  of  the  staff  and  Mrs. 
Lois  H.  Floyd  will  serve  as  co-ordinator.  The  course  will 
carry  graduate  credit. 

News  items  from  Duke  University  are:  General  Clark 
Eichelberger  of  Asheville  addressed  the  Trinity  College  His- 
torical Society  on  December  8,  and  on  February  16  Dr.  An- 
drew Whiteside  read  a  paper  on  the  various  views  of  the 
philosophical  origins  of  National  Socialism.  "American  Poli- 
tical History,"  by  Dr.  Richard  L.  Watson,  appeared  in  the 
South  Atlantic  Quarterly  for  January.  Dr.  E.  Malcolm  Carroll 
delivered  a  Blazer  Lecture  at  the  University  of  Kentucky 
recently  on  German  historians'  views  of  the  recent  past  of 
their  country. 

Dr.  Lillian  Parker  Wallace  of  Meredith  College  attended 
the  annual  meeting  of  the  American  Historical  Association  in 
New  York.  Dr.  Alice  B.  Kieth,  also  of  Meredith,  addressed  the 
Altrusa  Club  of  Raleigh  on  "The  Organization  of  American 
States  and  Peace." 

Dr.  Samuel  R.  Spencer  of  Davidson  College  has  been  pro- 
moted to  professor  of  history  and  continues  his  duties  as 
dean  of  students. 

A  151-page  mimeographed  index  of  the  Life  and  Corre- 
spondence of  James  Iredell  by  Griffith  J.  McRee  has  been 
prepared  by  Helen  Dortch  Harrison  and  issued  by  the  North 
Carolina  Collection  of  the  University  of  North  Carolina  Li- 
brary. As  long  as  the  supply  lasts,  copies  may  be  ordered  for 
fifty  cents  in  coin  or  stamps  (to  cover  the  packing  and  pos- 
tage) from  Mr.  William  S.  Powell,  Box  870,  Chapel  Hill, 
North  Carolina. 

Radcliffe  College  and  the  department  of  history  of  Harvard 
University  will  offer  for  a  second  time  an  eight-week  summer 
Institute  on  Historical  and  Archival  Management.  The  course 
is  open  to  men  and  women  college  graduates  and  will  be  held 


318  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

from  June  20  to  August  12.  Dr.  Christopher  Crittenden  will 
be  a  member  of  the  staff.  Further  information  may  be  ob- 
tained from  Mr.  Earle  W.  Newton,  Institute  on  Historical  and 
Archival  Management,  10  Garden  St.,  Cambridge  38,  Mass. 

Announcement  has  been  made  of  the  nineteenth  annual 
meeting  of  the  Society  of  American  Archivists  in  Nashville, 
Tennessee,  on  October  10-11,  1955.  The  Tennessee  State  Li- 
brary and  Archives,  headed  by  Dr.  Dan  M.  Robison,  will  be 
host,  and  co-sponsors  will  include  the  Tennessee  Historical 
Society,  Vanderbilt  University,  and  the  George  Peabody  Col- 
lege for  Teachers.  Headquarters  will  be  in  the  Andrew  Jack- 
son Hotel. 

The  American  Historical  Association  announces  the  terms 
for  the  1955  competition  for  the  Albert  J.  Beveridge  Award 
which  is  presented  yearly  by  the  Association.  The  deadline  for 
the  submission  of  applications  and  manuscripts  is  May  1, 1955. 
Further  details  may  be  obtained  from  Dr.  John  Tate  Lanning, 
chairman,  Duke  University,  Durham. 

Books  which  have  been  received  recently  include  the  follow- 
ing: Harold  E.  Dickson,  A  Hundred  Pennsylvania  Buildings 
Messages  of  the  Governors  of  Tennessee,  1835-1845,  Volume 
(State  College,  Pennsylvania:  Bald  Eagle  Press,  1954);  Tal- 
mage  C.  Johnson  and  Charles  R.  Holloman,  The  Story  of  Kin- 
ston  and  Lenoir  County  (Raleigh:  Edwards  and  Broughton 
Company,  1954);  Bell  Irvin  Wiley,  Rebel  Private:  Front  and 
Rear  (Austin:  University  of  Texas  Press,  1954);  Richard  Beale 
Davis,  Jeffersonian  America  (San  Marino,  California:  The 
Huntington  Library  Publications,  1954);  Robert  H.  White, 
Messages  of  the  Governors  of  Tennessee,  1835-1845,  Volume 
III,  ( Nashville :  The  Tennessee  Historical  Commission,  1954 ) ; 
Donald  G.  Morgan,  Justice  William  Johnson:  The  First 
Dissenter  (Columbia:  University  of  South  Carolina  Press, 
1954);  The  New  Zealand  Official  Year  Book,  1954,  (Welling- 
ton, New  Zealand:  By  Authority:  R.  E.  Owen,  Government 
Printer,  1954);  R.  G.  W.  Vail,  Knickerbocker  Birthday,  A 
Sesqui-Centennial  History  of  the  New  York  Historical  Society, 


Historical  News  319 

1804-1954  (New  York:  The  New-York  Historical  Society, 
1954);  Ernest  McNeill  Eller,  Whispering  Pines  (Winston- 
Salem,  North  Carolina:  John  F.  Blair,  Publisher,  1954);  Manly 
Wade  Wellman,  Dead  and  Gone,  Classic  Crimes  of  North 
Carolina  (Chapel  Hill:  The  University  of  North  Carolina 
Press,  1955);  Elisha  P.  Douglass,  Rebels  and  Democrats:  The 
Struggle  for  Equal  Political  Rights  and  Majority  Rule  dur- 
ing the  American  Revolution  (Chapel  Hill:  The  University 
of  North  Carolina  Press,  1955);  Howard  McKnight  Wilson, 
The  Tinkling  Spring,  Headwater  of  Freedom.  A  Study  of  the 
Church  and  Her  People,  1732-1952  (Richmond,  Virginia: 
Garrett  and  Massie,  Inc.,  1954);  American  Heritage,  The 
Magazine  of  History  ( 551  Fifth  Avenue,  New  York  17,  New 
York:  James  Parton,  Publisher,  February,  1955);  From  Mine 
to  Market,  The  History  of  Coal  Transportation  on  the  Nor- 
folk and  Western  Railway  (New  York:  New  York  University 
Press,  1954);  Stuart  Hall  Smith  and  Clairborne  T.  Smith,  Jr., 
The  History  of  Trinity  Parish,  Scotland  Neck;  Edgecombe 
Parish,  Halifax  County  (Scotland  Neck,  North  Carolina:  Pri- 
vately Published  through  the  Battle  Foundation,  1955);  and 
Louis  D.  Rubin,  Jr.,  Thomas  Wolfe:  The  Weather  of  His 
Youth  (Baton  Rouge:  The  Louisiana  State  University  Press, 
1955). 


CONTRIBUTORS  TO  THIS  ISSUE 

Dr.  William  Frank  Zornow  is  assistant  professor  of  history 
at  Kansas  State  College,  Manhattan,  Kansas. 

Dr.  Margaret  Burr  DesChamps  is  assistant  professor  of 
history  at  Agnes  Scott  College,  Decatur,  Georgia. 

Dr.  Christopher  Crittenden  is  director  of  the  State  De- 
partment of  Archives  and  History  and  secretary  of  the  Liter- 
ary and  Historical  Association,  Raleigh. 

Dr.  Paul  Murray  is  professor  of  history  at  East  Carolina 
College,  Greenville. 

Mr.  Harry  L.  Golden  is  the  editor  of  the  Carolina  Israelite, 
Charlotte. 

Mr.  Robert  Mason  is  editor  of  The  Sanford  Daily  Herald, 
Sanford. 

Dr.  Leonard  B.  Hurley  is  professor  of  English  at  the  Wo- 
man's College,  University  of  North  Carolina,  Greensboro. 

Dr.  Louis  B.  Wright  is  director  of  the  Folger  Shakespeare 
Library,  Washington,  D.  C. 

Miss  Mary  L.  Thornton  is  librarian,  North  Carolina  Col- 
lection, University  of  North  Carolina  Library,  Chapel  Hill. 


[320] 


The  North  Carolina 
Historical  Review 

Volume  XXXII  July,  1955  Number  3 

BEDFORD  BROWN:   STATE  RIGHTS  UNIONIST1 

By  Houston  G.  Jones 

Part  I:  The  Senator 

The  name  Bedford  Brown  means  little  to  a  present-day 
North  Carolinian.  Reference  to  his  name  in  a  historical  journ- 
al would  necessitate  a  footnote  to  remind  the  reader  that 
Brown  once  represented  the  state  in  the  United  States  Senate. 
An  interested  person  could,  if  he  wished,  go  to  the  standard  bi- 
ographical histories  and  find  a  brief  sketch  listing  the  various 
offices  held  by  this  almost  forgotten  man.  But  by  none  of  those 
sources  would  the  reader  be  led  to  realize  that  a  century  ago 
Bedford  Brown  was  one  of  the  best  known  leaders  of  the 
Democratic  Party  in  the  South. 

In  June,  1860,  Martin  Van  Buren  wrote  a  friend,  "I  at  least 
would  think  the  country  fortunate  to  get  such  a  man  [as 
Bedford  Brown]  for  the  office  of  President  or  Vice-Presi- 
dent." 2  This  was  not  the  only  time  that  the  former  President 
had  paid  high  tribute  to  "an  old  and  constant  friend  of  Genl. 
Jackson  and  my  own,  one  on  whom  as  much  as  any  other 
man,  we  relied  for  support  of  our  respective  administrations 
in  the  Senate  of  the  U.  States."  But  coming  as  it  did  immedi- 
ately after  the  abortive  Charleston  Convention,  the  compli- 
ment must  have  been  sweet  to  the  ears  of  the  North  Caro- 
linian who  had  fought  the  battles  of  Jacksonianism  against 
the  giants  of  that  day  and  who,  in  1860,  was  fighting  the 

1  This  article  was  being  prepared  under  the  supervision  of  Professor 
Charles  S.  Sydnor  at  the  time  of  the  tragic  death  of  that  beloved  gentleman. 
Any  merit  that  the  article  may  have  is  to  be  attributed  to  his  kind,  patient, 
and  inspiring  interest.  I  am  also  indebted  to  Professor  Fletcher  M.  Green 
for  his  many  suggestions  for  the  final  draft. 

2  Martin  Van  Buren  to  Theodore  Miller,  June  11,  1860.  Bedford  Brown 
Papers,  Duke  University. 

[321] 


322  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

greatest  battle  of  his  life  in  attempting  to  stem  the  tide  of 
disunion. 

Bedford  Brown,3  the  state  rights  Unionist  of  ante-bellum 
days,  had  lived  sixty-five  eventful  years  when  his  intimate 
friend  paid  him  the  compliment  quoted  above.  He  had  dis- 
tinguished himself  as  one  of  the  leaders  of  the  Democratic 
party  and  as  a  personal  friend  of  Andrew  Jackson,  Martin 
Van  Buren,  Franklin  Pierce,  and  James  Buchanan.  During 
his  career  he  was  elected  to  twelve  terms  in  the  General 
Assembly  (one  year  as  speaker  of  the  State  Senate),  was 
twice  elected  to  the  United  States  Senate,  was  a  strong  though 
unsuccessful  candidate  for  Congress,  was  vice-president  for 
the  North  Carolina  delegation  at  three  national  Democratic 
conventions,  was  elected  to  two  state  constitutional  conven- 
tions, and  was  twice  commissioned  to  represent  his  state  in 
conferences  with  President  Johnson  in  the  days  before  the 
ascendancy  of  the  Radicals. 

Throughout  his  many  years  of  political  life,  Brown  made 
no  unique  contribution  to  the  field  of  political  thought  or  to 
the  formulation  of  governmental  policy,  but  one  character- 
istic stood  out  above  all  else  and  marked  him  as  a  political 
leader  who  neither  asked  nor  gave  quarter.  That  charac- 
teristic was  an  unflinching  loyalty  to  what  he  conceived  to 
be  the  principles  of  republicanism  as  laid  down  by  the  early 
Jeffersonians.  "State  rights,"  to  Brown,  was  no  hollow  phrase 

"The  only  available  intimate  description  of  Brown  by  a  contemporary  is 
that  of  David  Schenck.  Judge  Schenck,  who  was  a  fellow  delegate  to  the 
convention,  described  Brown  as  a  "spare-made  man  about  six  feet  tall  and 
wore  no  beard;  his  dress  was  neat,  his  step  firm  and  his  carriage  erect.  .  .  . 
His  dignity  was  so  studied  that  it  was  a  little  pompous,  and  his  deep,  husky 
voice  did  not  seem  quite  natural.  His  under  jaw  protruded  slightly  and  his 
teeth  clenching  gave  him  a  very  resolute  appearance,  and  when  aroused  his 
countenance  was  fierce  and  defiant."  Brown  lacked  the  graces  which  persuade 
or  win  the  confidence  of  others,  Judge  Schenck  continued,  "but  he  was 
forcible  in  logic,  earnest  in  speech  and  empathic  [sic]  in  manner.  Those  who 
reflected,  and  appreciated  sound  reason  listened  to  him  with  patience  and 
attention  and  he  exerted  a  very  strong  influence.  ..."  Furthermore,  "I 
have  often  seen  him  surrounded  by  distinguished  men,  and  he  was  the 
politest  among  them  all,  and  his  manners  the  most  courtly."  He  was  a  sincere 
man,  self-confident,  fearless  and  frank,  and  "loyal  to  his  convictions  and 
using  no  art  to  enforce  his  views  and  disdaining  dissimulation  or  sophistry." 
Judge  Schenck  concluded,  "There  is  not  spot  nor  blemish  on  his  political 
character;  there  was  no  doubt  as  to  his  loyalty  and  patriotism.  He  lived 
and  acted  as  a  true  man  and  left  a  pleasant  remembrance  in  the  hearts 
of  those  who  knew  him."  David  Schenck,  Personal  Sketches  of  Distinguished 
Delegates  of  the  State  Convention  1861-2  (Greensboro,  1885),  19-21. 


Bedford  Brown 
1795-1870 


Bedford  Brown  :  State  Rights  Unionist  323 

but  rather  the  basic  ingredient  in  the  union  of  states  as  en- 
visioned in  the  Jeffersonian  tradition.  As  a  state  rights  advo- 
cate, the  nation  had  no  legislator  more  outspoken  than  Bed- 
ford Brown.  But  neither  did  it  have  a  more  ardent  Unionist. 
In  the  United  States  Senate  during  the  critical  months  of 
the  nullification  controversy,  Brown  stood  up  for  his  principle 
of  states  within  the  Union  and  at  the  same  time  rejected 
nullification  as  nothing  less  than  disunion.  It  was  this  strange 
blend  of  two  apparent  opposites  that  gave  the  Senator  from 
North  Carolina  the  chance  to  play  the  part  of  a  referee  be- 
tween the  leaders  of  sectional  controversy  during  the  hectic 
days  of  Jackson  and  Van  Buren. 

Brown,  although  an  ardent  Unionist,  attacked  the  nation- 
alistic policies  propounded  by  Webster  and  Clay  as  uncon- 
stitutional and  divisive.  A  loyal  Southerner,  he  nevertheless, 
vehemently  attacked  the  increasingly  virulent  attitude  of 
Calhoun  and  Tyler  as  threatening  to  break  up  the  most  "glo- 
rious republic"  ever  formed.  The  middle  way  is  not  always 
popular  in  politics,  and  Bedford  Brown's  opposition  to  the 
tariff  and  the  bank  was  no  more  designed  to  make  him  pop- 
ular in  the  North  and  West  than  his  opposition  to  nullifica- 
tion and  secession  was  to  gain  him  friends  in  the  South.  But 
if  a  man's  success  may  in  a  small  way  be  measured  by  what 
the  people  at  home  thought  of  him,  Bedford  Brown  must 
have  died  a  contented  man,  for  not  once  in  his  fifty-five  years 
of  political  activity  did  the  voters  of  his  native  Caswell  Coun- 
ty fail  to  give  him  a  majority  at  the  polls. 

Bedford  Brown  was  born  June  6,  1795,4  the  third  child  in 
a  family  of  eight,  at  the  Brown  homestead  between  the  upper 
branches  of  Country  Line5  and  Moon  creeks  in  what  is  now 
Locust  Hill  Township,  Caswell  County,  North  Carolina.  His 
father,  Jethro  Brown,  had  migrated  to  Caswell  during  the 

1  Brown  Family  Bible  (published  1812),  678.  Bedford  Brown  Papers,  Rose 
Hill,  Caswell  County,  N.  C.  There  are  two  family  Bibles,  one  published  in 
1812,  the  other  in  1823. 

I  am  indebted  to  Mr.  J.  W.  Brown,  great-grandson  of  Senator  Bedford 
Brown  and  present  owner  of  Rose  Hill,  for  giving  me  access  to  the  Senator's 
papers  and  library.  I  am  also  indebted  to  the  late  Miss  Mary  Wilson  Brown, 
granddaughter  of  the  Senator,  who,  as  my  fourth  grade  teacher,  first  in- 
terested me  in  her  ancestor. 

5  Sometimes  incorrectly  cited  on  maps  and  highway  markers  as  "County 
Line." 


324  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Revolution  with  his  father,  John  Edmunds  Brown.  Just  before 
the  war,  the  Browns  had  moved  from  Virginia  to  the  Pee  Dee 
country  of  South  Carolina  for  the  purpose  of  growing  indigo. 
But  when  John  Brown  and  his  family  gave  aid  to  General 
Marion  during  the  swamp  campaigns,  the  Tories  laid  waste 
to  their  property  and  the  family  moved  back  north,  settling 
in  Caswell,  near  the  Virginia  border,  because  of  the  adapta- 
bility of  the  soil  to  tobacco.6 

Brown's  mother,  the  former  Lucy  Williamson,  was  a  mem- 
ber of  a  pioneer  Caswell  family.  Both  the  Browns  and  the 
Williamsons  were  of  English  stock,  Bedford  being  named  for 
the  original  Brown  homestead  in  Bedfordshire. 

In  1813,  young  Brown  was  sent  to  the  University  of  North 
Carolina  where  he  studied  for  one  year.7  Two  years  later, 
only  twenty  years  of  age,  he  entered  politics,  being  elected, 
along  with  Romulus  M.  Saunders,  to  the  House  of  Commons.8 
As  befitted  a  twenty-year-old,  Bedford  took  no  great  part  in 
the  deliberations  of  the  House  and  was  appointed  to  the  rela- 
tively unimportant  committee  on  military  land  warrants.  On 
December  9,  1815,  however,  he  created  a  considerable  furor 
when  he  introduced  a  resolution,  "Resolved,  that  the  firm- 
ness, energy  and  wisdom  which  have  characterized  the  poli- 
tical conduct  of  the  president  of  the  United  States,  during 
the  late  arduous  contest  of  our  country,  and  his  prompt  ac- 
ceptance and  ratification  of  an  honorable  treaty,  entitle  him 
to  the  gratitude  and  thanks  of  this  legislature."9  The  resolu- 
tion provoked  long  debate  and  only  after  five  days  was  it 
finally  adopted  by  a  76  to  51  vote  in  the  House,10  indicating, 
to  some  degree,  President  Madison's  popularity  in  North 
Carolina. 

On  July  13,  1816,  Brown  married  Mary  Lumpkin  Glenn,11 
daughter  of  James  Anderson  Glenn,  an  influential  merchant 

6  The  National  Cyclopaedia  of  American  Biography  .  .  .  (New  York,  1892- 
1951,  37  vols.),  IX,  458.  See  also  Bedford  J.  Brown  [a  nephew  of  the  Sena- 
tor] to  Miss  Mary  Brown,  February  7,  1912.  Bedford  Brown  Papers,  Rose 
Hill. 

7  Kemp  P.  Battle,  Sketches  of  the  History  of  the  University  of  North 
Carolina  (Chapel  Hill,  1889),  100. 

8  Journal  of  the  House  of  Commons  .  .  .  1815,  1. 

9  Journal  of  the  House  of  Commons  .  .  .  1815,  38. 

10  Journal  of  the  House  of  Commons  .  .  .  1815,  46. 

"Brown  Family  Bible  (published  1823),  678.  Bedford  Brown  Papers, 
Rose  Hill. 


Bedford  Brown  :  State  Rights  Unionist  325 

of  Petersburg,  Virginia,  who  had  migrated  from  Scotland 
where  his  father,  Archibald  Glenn,  was  lord  provost  of  Glas- 
gow.12 The  young  couple  was  sent  off  on  a  wedding  trip  to 
England  and  Scotland  by  Jethro  Brown  who  by  1816  was  a 
moderately  prosperous  planter  and  tavern  keeper.  He  was 
also  a  man  of  some  learning  as  was  attested  by  the  fact  that 
he  maintained  in  his  tavern  the  headquarters  of  a  society 
"constituted  for  intellectual  improvement."13  Upon  the 
couple's  return  to  Caswell,  Jethro  made  them  a  gift  of  his 
attractive  home,  Rose  Hill,  built  in  1802,  and  a  considerable 
tract  of  land.  Rose  Hill  still  stands  as  one  of  the  finest  ex- 
amples of  early  Caswell  architecture  and  retains  not  only  the 
spirit  of  the  ante-bellum  planter  but  also  his  library,  some  of 
his  personal  papers,  and  his  grave.  Here,  at  Brown's  Store, 
or  Locust  Hill  as  the  community  became  known  in  the  1840's, 
a  small  amount  of  North  Carolina  history  has  been  safe- 
guarded for  a  century  and  half. 

Brown  was  again  elected  to  the  House  of  Commons  in 
1816,  and  was  re-elected  for  the  following  two  terms.14  In 
1818,  Caswell  sent  Bartlett  Yancey  to  the  State  Senate  and 
Bedford  Brown  and  Romulus  M.  Saunders  to  the  Commons, 
a  triumvirate  characterized  by  a  contemporary  as  "not  excell- 
ed in  the  legislators  of  any  county  in  the  state." 15  Within  a 
twelve-year  period,  this  trio  was  elected  to  the  speakerships 
of  the  House  and  Senate  for  a  total  of  fourteen  terms. 


12  The  National  Cyclopaedia  of  American  Biography,  V,  442. 

"Bartlett  Yancey,  "Caswell  County,"  Thomas  Henderson  Letter  Book 
1810-1811  (a  bound  volume  of  manuscripts  in  N.  C.  Department  of  Archives 
and  History).  See  also  A.  R.  Newsome,  "Twelve  North  Carolina  Counties, 
1810-1811,"  North  Carolina  Historical  Review,  V,  4  (October,  1928) ,  413-446. 

14  Because  of  the  meagerness  of  information  contained  in  the  journals  of 
ante-bellum  assemblies,  the  part  played  by  individual  representatives  is 
seldom  easy  to  ascertain,  but  sometimes  committee  assignments  give  an 
intimation  of  their  standing.  Brown  in  1816  served  on  the  committee  on 
propositions  and  grievances  and  in  the  following  session  was  on  the  com- 
mittee on  finance  and  a  committee  which  held  elections  for  councillors  of 
state.  See  Journal  of  the  House  of  Commons  .  .  .  1816,  3,  and  Journal  of  the 
House  of  Commons  .  .  .  1817,11,  48.  His  committee  assignment  is  not  listed 
in  the  Journal  for  1818,  and  his  colleague,  Saunders,  who  was  to  be  elected 
speaker  of  the  House  the  following  year,  appears  to  have  outshone  Brown 
in  the  session  of  1818.  It  is  significant  to  note  that  Bartlett  Yancey  was 
elected  speaker  of  the  Senate  in  1817  and  held  that  office  until  his  death  in 
1828. 

16  John  H.  Wheeler,  Reminiscences  and  Memoirs  of  North  Carolina  and 
Eminent  North  Carolinians  (Columbus,  Ohio,  1884),  109. 


326  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

By  1823,  Bedford  Brown  had  become  a  prosperous  young 
planter  and  held  lands  in  both  his  native  community  and 
Halifax  County,  Virginia,16  the  latter  possibly  accruing  from 
inheritance  by  his  wife.  That  year,  Brown  was  again  elected 
to  the  House  of  Commons  where  he  served  as  chairman  of 
the  committee  on  rules  and  order  and  was  a  member  of  the 
committee  on  education.17  In  this  General  Assembly,  Brown 
injected  himself  into  a  national  political  controversy  by 
strongly  opposing  the  adoption  of  the  Fisher  Resolutions.  The 
resolutions,  introduced  by  Charles  Fisher,  Calhoun's  North 
Carolina  leader,  proposed  that  the  United  States  Senators  from 
the  state  be  instructed  and  Representatives  be  requested  to 
prevent  a  caucus  nomination  for  President  of  the  United  States 
and  to  work  for  an  amendment  to  establish  a  uniform  sys- 
tem of  districts  in  the  country  for  choosing  presidential  elec- 
tors.18 Brown's  speeches  in  opposition  to  the  resolutions 
strongly  defended  the  caucus  system,  and,  although  he 
claimed  later  that  he  was  an  "original  Jackson  man,"  included 
a  defense  of  William  H.  Crawford  who  was  expected  to  re- 
ceive the  caucus  nomination  for  president. 

From  1824  to  1828,  Brown  was  content  to  oversee  his 
growing  plantations  and,  except  for  a  stroke  of  fate  in  1828, 
possibly  would  not  again  have  entered  public  life.  In  that 
year,  Bartlett  Yancey,  who  had  distinguished  himself  as  a 
congressman  and  as  speaker  of  the  State  Senate,  was  re- 
elected to  the  latter  office  from  Caswell.  Yancey  was  looked 
upon  by  many  persons  as  the  sure  choice  of  the  Assembly  to 
succeed  the  retiring  Nathaniel  Macon  in  the  United  States 
Senate.  But  his  death  intervened  and,  on  November  24,  Bed- 
ford Brown  was  elected  to  fill  the  vacancy  from  Caswell. 
Three  days  later,  Thomas  Ruffin,  a  rising  lawyer  who  was 
destined  to  become  chief  justice  of  the  State  Supreme  Court, 

16  Bedford  Brown  to  Philip  Howerton,  September  17, 1823.  Philip  Howerton 
Correspondence,  Duke  University. 

17  Journals  of  the  Senate  and  House  of  Commons  .  .  .  1823,  121,  126. 
"The  debate  was  published  in  pamphlet  form,  Debate  on  Mr.  Fisher's 

Resolutions  Against  Caucuses  in  the  House  of  Commons  of  North  Carolina 
in  Dec.  1823  (Raleigh,  1824).  See  also  A.  R.  Newsome,  "Debate  on  the 
Fisher  Resolution,"  North  Carolina  Historical  Review,  IV,  4  (October,  1927) , 
428-470;  V,  1  (January,  1928),  65-96;  V,  2  (April,  1928),  204-223;  V,  3 
(July,  1928),  310-328. 


Bedford  Brown  :  State  Rights  Unionist  327 

suggested  to  Brown  that  he  become  a  candidate  for  United 
States  Senator.  "Should  you  agree  for  your  name  to  be 
brought  forward,"  he  wrote,  "I  cannot  doubt  for  a  moment, 
the  issue  of  the  contest.  .  .  ." 1!)  Brown's  name,  however,  was 
not  pushed  and  Governor  James  Iredell  was  elected. 

After  a  lack-luster  first  session  in  the  State  Senate,  Brown 
was  re-elected  in  1829,  and,  on  the  first  day  of  the  new  term, 
was  elected  speaker  of  that  body,  defeating  Louis  D.  Wil- 
son.20 This  victory  was  an  encouragement  to  whatever  am- 
bition Brown  may  have  had,  for  the  appointment  of  United 
States  Senator  John  Branch  to  the  office  of  Secretary  of  the 
Navy  by  President  Jackson  provided  a  new  vacancy.  Thomas 
RufBn's  enthusiasm  for  the  young  man  from  Caswell,  how- 
ever, appears  not  to  have  been  universally  shared,  for  when 
nominations  for  the  vacancy  were  received  on  November 
20,  Brown's  name  was  not  included.  The  names  of  Mont- 
ford  Stokes,  Samuel  P.  Carson,  Archibald  D.  Murphey, 
William  B.  Meares,  Charles  Fisher,  Judge  John  R.  Donnell, 
and  several  others  were  placed  in  nomination,  but  no  one  re- 
ceived a  majority  of  votes.  Although,  theoretically,  there  was 
only  one  "party"  in  North  Carolina  at  the  time,  the  partisans 
of  Clay,  Adams,  Jackson,  and  Calhoun  carried  on  a  de- 
termined fight  for  their  favorite  candidates;  and  after  seven 
days  of  balloting,  the  contest  narrowed  down  to  William  B. 
Meares  of  New  Hanover  County  (later  of  Sampson),  who 
was  a  strong  supporter  of  Henry  Clay,  and  supporters  of  the 
other  national  leaders.  The  strategy  of  the  anti-Clay  forces 
was  simply  to  defeat  Meares,  but  they  could  agree  on  no 
single  candidate.  One  by  one  the  stronger  candidates  dropped 
out  —  Murphey,  Carson,  Stokes.  On  the  fourteenth  ballot,  the 
vote  was  Meares  74,  Donnell  59,  and  Fisher  48.21  On  De- 
cember 8,  after  almost  three  weeks  of  fruitless  voting,  Speak- 
er Bedford  Brown's  name  was  entered,  apparently  for  the 
purpose  of  holding  off  a  Meares  victory  until  the  anti-Clay  fac- 
tions could  come  to  some  agreement.  But,  much  to  the  sur- 

19  Thomas  Ruffin  to  Bedford  Brown,  November  27,  1828.  J.  G.  de  R.  Hamil- 
ton, editor,  The  Papers  of  Thomas  Ruffin  (Raleigh,  1920,  2  vols.),  I,  460. 
Hereafter  cited  as  Hamilton,  The  Papers  of  Thomas  Ruffin. 

20  Journals  of  the  Senate  and  House  of  Commons  .  .  .  1829-30,  1. 

21  Western  Carolinian  (Salisbury,  N.  C.),  December  15,  1829. 


328  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

prise  of  his  colleagues  and  probably  to  himself,  Brown  was 
elected  on  the  first  ballot  in  which  his  name  was  entered,  get- 
ting 95  votes  to  86  for  Meares  and  7  for  other  candidates.22 

That  Brown's  name  had  been  entered  only  as  a  stalking 
horse  instead  of  as  a  winner  may  be  indicated  in  a  statement 
attributed  to  Alfred  Stanley,  who  was  said  to  have  visited 
Brown  following  the  election  and  "stated  to  him  how  pure- 
ly accidental  was  his  election,  and  .  .  .  [that]  he  was  bound 
in  honor  to  resign.  .  .  ." 23  Another  North  Carolinian,  Joseph 
B.  Skinner,  expressed  his  dissatisfaction  to  Judge  Ruffin,  ask- 
ing if  Brown  had  "acquired  intellectual  merit  since  the  days 
in  which  I  knew  him,  so  that  the  State  is  not  dishonored,  or 
has  it  resulted  from  party  juggling?"  24  The  Western  Caro- 
linian, however,  noted  that  Brown  was  "a  gentleman  of  re- 
spectable talents,  and  will  do  justice  to  the  high  and  respon- 
sible station  he  has  been  called  to  fill." 25 

Brown  took  his  seat  in  the  United  States  Senate  on  Decem- 
ber 28, 1829,26  and  was  assigned  to  the  relatively  unimportant 
Joint  Committee  on  Engrossed  Bills.27  He  made  no  important 
speech  during  the  session,  but  his  votes  gave  indication  of 
the  direction  that  he  would  follow  during  the  next  eleven 
years  as  a  United  States  Senator.  Those  eleven  years  were 
characterized  by  opposition  to  Henry  Clay's  "American  Sys- 
tem" and  support  of  all  but  one  of  the  major  administration 
measures.  The  exception  was  the  force  bill.  At  the  same  time, 
however,  Brown  just  as  strongly  fought  nullification.  He  op- 
posed most  federal  spending  schemes,  the  distribution  of 
the  treasury  surplus  to  the  states,  the  recognition  or  annexa- 
tion of  Texas,  the  rechartering  of  the  United  States  Bank,  and 

22  Journals  of  the  Senate  and  House  of  Commons  .  .  .  1829-30,  9-46. 

23  R.  M.  Saunders,  An  Address  of  R.  M.  Saunders  to  the  People  of  North 
Carolina,  February  25,  18 US,  a  pamphlet  bound  in  North  Carolina  Politics, 
No.  1,  North  Carolina  Room,  University  of  North  Carolina.  An  acceptable 
secondary  account  of  the  election  may  be  found  in  "Bedford  Brown,"  Samuel 
A.  Ashe,  Biographical  History  of  North  Carolina  (Greensboro,  1905-1917, 
8  vols.),  I,  183. 

24  Joseph  B.  Skinner  to  Thomas  Ruffin,  December  29,  1829.  Hamilton,  The 
Papers  of  Thomas  Ruffin,  I,  537. 

25  Western  Carolinian  (Salisbury,  N.  C),  December  15,  1829. 

26  Biographical  Directory  of  the  American  Congress  177U-19J+9  (Washing- 
ton, 1950),  160;  Niles  Weekly  Register  (Baltimore,  Md.),  XXXVII  (January 
2,  1830),  291. 

27  Senate  Document  8,  Serial  192,  21st  Congress,  1st  Session. 


Bedford  Brown  :  State  Rights  Unionist  329 

he  disagreed  with  the  majority  of  southern  members  over 
the  best  way  of  handling  abolition  petitions.  By  the  time 
of  his  resignation  in  1840,  Bedford  Brown  had  marked  him- 
self as  one  of  the  most  faithful  friends  of  Jackson  and  Van 
Buren,  and,  along  with  Thomas  Hart  Benton  of  Missouri 
and  William  Rufus  King  of  Alabama,  both  natives  of  North 
Carolina,  had  become  a  leading  Democrat  in  the  Senate. 

Brown's  faith  in  General  Jackson  was  confided  to  Judge 
Ruffin  a  week  after  he  took  office.  "The  popularity  of  the  Ad- 
ministration is  so  well  established,"  he  wrote,  "and  the  con- 
fidence generally  entertained  here,  as  to  the  honesty  of  Genl. 
Jackson's  principles  is  so  great  that  I  am  inclined  to  think 
the  partizans  Isicl  of  Mr.  Clay  will  be  somewhat  discouraged 
from  making  anything  like  a  systematic  opposition."28  This 
prediction  did  not  come  true,  but  the  faith  that  the  North 
Carolinian  held  in  the  two  Presidents  under  whom  he  served 
never  wavered,  even  in  the  dark  days  of  the  late  1830's  when 
only  a  vanguard  of  original  Jackson  men  stood  in  defense  of 
the  Van  Buren  program. 

During  his  first  months  in  office,  Senator  Brown  told  Na- 
thaniel Macon,  who,  with  Thomas  Jefferson,  was  his  idol, 
of  his  intention  to  oppose  the  Clay- Adams  forces.  Brown 
wrote  the  venerable  retired  Senator, 

The  speedy  payment  of  the  national  debt .  .  .  should  be  an  object 
of  increasing  solicitude,  with  all  who  wish  to  see  the  government 
brought  back  to  its  republican  course,  for  so  long  as  it  remains 
unpaid,  it  will  form  a  pretext  for  continuing  the  present  high 
rates  of  duties ;  thus  annually  exacting  from  Agricultural  indus- 
try, a  large  sum  of  money,  which  a  wise  and  provident  govern- 
ment, should  leave  in  the  pockets  of  its  Citizens.  If  this  course 
is  persevered  in,  and  it  should  become  the  settled  policy  of  Con- 
gress, which  will  annually  bring  into  the  Treasury  a  larger  sum, 
than  the  ordinary  expenditures  of  Government  require  [,]  it 
cannot  but  be  looked  on  with  dismay  and  apprehension,  by  those 
who  are  friendly  to  preserving  the  limitations,  which  the  f ramers 
of  the  constitution  designed  to  impose  on  the  federal  government, 
but  which  have  been  almost  entirely  disregarded  by  a  combina- 
tion of  selfish  politicians,  who  have  succeeded  in  establishing, 
what  they  falsely  denominate  the  "Americal  System" ;  by  which 


28  Bedford   Brown   to   Thomas   Ruffin,   January   6,    1830.    Hamilton,    The 
Papers  of  Thomas  Ruffin,  II,  2. 


330  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

extortions  are  to  be  practiced  on  a  portion  of  the  people  of  the 
confederacy  to  be  expended  in  distant  States,  in  which  those 
who  contribute  the  largest  amount  of  money,  have  no  immediate 
interest — ,  a  system  more  false  to  the  prosperity  of  the  Southern 
portion  of  America,  better  calculated  to  annihilate  the  Sover- 
eignty of  the  States,  and  destroy  the  peace  and  harmony  of  the 
Union,  would  not,  in  my  opinion,  have  been  devised.  .  .  .29 

In  the  second  session  of  the  Twenty-first  Congress,  Brown 
received  assignment  to  two  committees— agriculture  and 
claims.80  Except  for  what  influence  he  may  have  exerted  in 
those  committees,  his  part  in  the  session  was  largely  restricted 
to  his  votes  on  the  issues.  In  his  first  major  speech  in  the  Sen- 
ate, Brown,  in  February,  1831,  defended  the  Jackson  admin- 
istration against  charges  by  Senator  John  Tyler  of  Virginia 
that  the  President  had  exceeded  his  constitutional  powers  in 
appointing  a  commission  to  draw  up  a  commercial  treaty  with 
the  Turkish  government.  In  Brown's  opinion,  the  course  of 
the  President  had  not  only  been  honest,  but  "marked  by  an 
enlightened  policy,  deserving  the  approbation  of  the  Ameri- 
can people."  Unlike  the  former  administration,  the  behavior 
of  the  Jackson  government  had  been  such  as  to  assure  that 
the  "reserved  rights  of  the  States  of  this  confederacy  [will] 
be  respected  .  .  .  and  the  action  of  the  General  Government 
restrained  within  its  appropriate  sphere." 81 

Senator  Brown  was  again  assigned  to  the  committees  on 
agriculture  and  claims  in  the  first  session  of  the  Twenty-sec- 
ond Congress  in  December,  1831.  Brown,  now  thirty-six 
years  of  age,  frequently  entered  into  discussions  on  the  floor. 
His  first  great  battle  began  in  January  when  the  forces  of 
Clay  and  Webster  opened  their  fight  against  the  confirmation 
of  Martin  Van  Buren  as  minister  to  the  United  Kingdom. 
Vice-President  John  C.  Calhoun  presided  and  took  delight 
in  every  defamation  of  the  Secretary  of  State. 

Brown  characterized  the  New  Yorker  as  having  "accomp- 
lished more  in  less  time  than  any  of  his  predecessors.  .  .  . 

"Bedford  Brown  to  Nathaniel  Macon,  April  29,  1830.  Nathaniel  Macon 
Papers,  Duke  University. 

30  Senate  Document  15,  Serial  203,  21st  Congress,  2nd  Session. 

81  Register  of  Debates  in  Congress,  21st  Congress,  2nd  Session,  274.  Here- 
after cited  as  Register  of  Debates. 


Bedford  Brown  :  State  Rights  Unionist  331 

Possessing  talents  of  a  high  order  and  rapidly  growing  in 
the  esteem  of  his  countrymen.  .  .  ." 32  He  charged  that  the 
opposition  to  Van  Buren  stemmed  from  his  success  in  nego- 
tiating a  West  Indian  trade  agreement  with  Great  Britain,  an 
accomplishment  for  which  the  Adams  administration  had 
worked  in  vain.  The  debates  continued  for  many  days  until, 
late  in  the  month,  the  Senate  cast  a  23  to  23  vote  on  the  ques- 
tion of  confirmation.  It  was  up  to  the  Vice-President  to  break 
the  tie.  Calhoun  cast  his  vote  against  the  New  Yorker,  but 
in  doing  so,  he  helped  make  Van  Buren  the  choice  of  Presi- 
dent Jackson  for  the  vice-presidency.  At  the  same  time,  the 
South  Carolinian  virtually  ended  his  own  chances  of  ever 
sitting  in  the  White  House. 

The  introduction  of  the  Tariff  bill  of  1832  was  a  signal  for 
another  North-South  battle  in  Congress.  Brown  expressed 
his  dissatisfaction  with  the  bill  because  it  re-enacted  some  of 
the  "most  obnoxious  features  of  the  tariff  of  1828."  He  had 
hoped,  he  said,  that  the  new  bill  would  remedy  the  worst 
features  of  the  Tariff  of  Abominations.  But  that  hope  had  not 
been  borne  out.  He  was  hostile  to  the  principle  of  protection, 
and  while  in  the  Senate  he  would  contribute  his  humble  ef- 
forts to  "eradicate  from  our  laws  a  principle  .  .  .  incompatible 
with  the  enlightened  spirit  of  the  age,  and  of  free  Govern- 
ment." 33  Nevertheless,  the  Senator  admitted,  considering  the 
nature  of  the  Union,  he  would  sacrifice  much  for  the  sake  of 
conciliation,  and,  in  spite  of  his  constitutional  scruples,  he 
was  willing  to  meet  on  a  half-way  ground,  "believing  that 
our  federal  system  of  Government  can  only  continue  to  exist 
by  the  exercise  of  that  spirit  of  compromise  and  conciliation 
which  gave  it  birth." 34  He  said  that  compromise  was  a  two- 
way  proposition,  and  the  proposed  reductions  were  insufficient 
to  warrant  the  support  of  the  bill  by  a  suffering  South.  The 
bill  under  debate  presented,  he  said,  the  "extraordinary  spec- 
tacle ...  in  our  country  of  continuing  a  system  of  unjust  and 
oppressive  taxation,  not  called  for  by  the  exigencies  of  the 
nation,  but  to  benefit  a  few  monopolists."  He  hoped  that  the 

32  Register  of  Debates,  21st  Congress,  2nd  Session,  1335. 

83  Register  of  Debates,  21st  Congress,  2nd  Session,  1218. 

84  Register  of  Debates,  21st  Congress,  2nd  Session,  675. 


332  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

"justice,  intelligence,  and  patriotism  of  the  people  [would] 
correct  this  evil,  and  save  the  Union  from  the  disastrous  con- 
sequences which  [are]  likely  to  result  from  perservering  in 
such  a  system."  35 

On  the  issue  of  rechartering  the  United  States  Bank,  Brown 
had  little  to  say.  He  noted  that  "in  proportion  as  the  bank 
[is]  burdened,  [will]  the  bank  burden  the  people,"  and 
voted  for  various  amendments  designed  to  restrict  operations 
of  the  bank.  His  opposition  was  clearly  indicated  by  his  votes 
on  the  amendments,  against  final  passage,  and  in  voting  to 
sustain  the  President's  veto.36 

In  November,  1832,  South  Carolina  announced  her  inten- 
tion of  treating  the  Tariffs  of  1828  and  1832  as  null  and  void 
after  February  1.  President  Jackson  replied  to  this  threat  by 
asking  Congress  for  authorization  to  use  force  to  execute  the 
laws  of  the  United  States  in  South  Carolina.  The  Senate 
thus  took  up  what  is  commonly  referred  to  as  the  "force  bill." 

Here  was  a  test  that  would  separate  the  state  rights  advo- 
cate from  the  Unionist.  Bedford  Brown  now  was  faced  with 
an  important  decision.  Would  the  man  who  would  "yield 
to  none  in  a  high  and  profound  reverence  for  the  Union  of 
the  States"  forsake  his  President  whom  he  had  invariably  de- 
fended, or  his  neighbors  in  South  Carolina?  On  January  28, 
1833,  the  North  Carolinian  gave  his  answer. 

South  Carolina,  Brown  told  the  Senate,  had  made  a  griev- 
ous error.  Her  course,  he  thought,  had  been  "rash  and  un- 
called for  by  the  exigency  of  the  times.  She  should  have  re- 
lied .  .  .  upon  a  constitutional  remedy;  upon  the  returning 
sense  of  justice  in  the  people  of  the  Northern  and  Eastern 
states;  and  upon  the  wisdom  and  patriotism  assembled  in  the 
legislative  halls  of  the  country." 37  He  expressed  complete  dis- 
approbation of  her  course. 

Having  defined  his  view  toward  South  Carolina's  actions, 
Brown  then  turned  to  the  difficult  course  of  reconciling  that 
position  with  his  opposition  to  the  force  bill.  He  would  not 
support  the  President's  request.  He  believed  that,  in  its  con- 

35  Register  of  Debates,  21st  Congress,  2nd  Session,  1219. 
se  Register  of  Debates,  22nd  Congress,  1st  Session,  1123. 
87  Register  of  Debates,  22nd  Congress,  2nd  Session,  333. 


Bedford  Brown  :  State  Rights  Unionist  333 

sequences,  it  would  be  "attended  with  violence,  and  perhaps 
lead  to  civil  war."  No  emergency,  he  believed,  justified  the 
subordination  of  the  civil  authority  to  the  military,  and  that 
would  be  the  consequence  of  the  passage  of  such  an  act. 
There  was  an  "inherent  energy  in  the  constitution  which  will 
enable  the  laws  to  triumph  without  an  appeal  to  force/'  The 
difficulties  between  South  Carolina  and  the  Union  could  be 
resolved  if  both  sides  would  take  a  position  of  reasonable 
compromise. 

When  the  Webster-Clay  forces  suggested  that  some  oppo- 
nents of  the  force  bill  were  reluctant  because  they  feared  to 
put  the  proposed  powers  into  the  hands  of  the  "present 
President,"  Brown  countered  with  a  glowing  tribute  to  Jack- 
son. He  said, 

.  .  .  the  past  course  of  the  President  [has]  been  such  as  to  entitle 
him  to  unlimited  confidence,  and  there  [is]  no  individual  to 
whom  [I]  would  more  willingly  confide  this  power  .  .  .  But 
there  [is]  no  man,  however  elevated  his  station  and  enobled  by 
virtue,  however  pure  his  integrity  and  honest  his  purposes,  to 
whom  [I]  would  give  a  power  which  [is]  unwarranted  by  the 
constitution.  ...  [I]  could  not  believe  for  a  moment,  that,  if 
this  power  were  given  to  the  President,  he  would  abuse  it.  But 
it  might,  in  worse  times  than  these,  and  in  worse  hands  than 
his,  be  abused  to  the  destruction  of  our  institutions.  .  .  .  [History 
teaches]  the  fact  of  today  becomes  a  precedent  of  tomorrow.38 

The  solution  to  the  problem  was  simple,  Brown  said.  Take 
away  the  causes  of  the  problem,  and  the  problem  itself  would 
disappear.  And  what  were  the  causes?  The  North  Carolinian 
gave  his  own  answer: 

I  take  my  stand  ...  on  the  reserved  rights  of  the  States.  I  re- 
pudiate the  doctrine  of  nullification.  I  repudiate  also  the  high- 
toned  doctrine  of  the  federal  party.  I  believe  it  is  to  that  high- 
toned  doctrine  that  we  are  to  attribute  nullification.  I  believe 
that  doctrine  produced  it ;  is  the  parent  of  it.  It  is  by  an  improper 
pressure  of  the  Federal  Government  on  the  rights  of  the  States, 
and  by  exercising  doubtful  powers,  that  the  State  of  South  Car- 
olina has  been  thrown  into  this  position.39 


Register  of  Debates,  22nd  Congress,  2nd  Session,  334. 


334  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Furthermore,  Brown  charged  that  internal  improvements  at 
federal  expense  and  the  protective  tariff  violated  the  Consti- 
tution and  state  rights.  Those  innovations  were  solely  for 
the  enrichment  of  one  section  at  the  expense  of  another,  he 
said.  South  Carolina  had  a  legitimate  complaint,  one  in  which 
the  entire  South  shared,  and  only  by  removing  the  complaint 
would  the  problem  be  removed.  The  remedy  then,  was  one 
of  conciliation,  one  aspect  of  which  would  be  the  removal 
of  the  oppression  under  which  the  Southern  people  were 
laboring  as  a  result  of  the  tariff.  He  appealed  to  the  national 
patriotism  of  all  sections: 

Thank  God,  in  the  exercise  of  my  legislative  rights  and  duties 
here,  I  can  look  beyond  the  Potomac.  Thank  God,  I  have  a  feel- 
ing which  is  not  confined  to  the  geographical  limits  of  any  por- 
tion of  the  United  States.  I  can  look  to  the  judge  of  my  country- 
men north  as  well  as  south  of  the  Potomac;  and  I  wish  it  to  be 
distinctly  understood,  that  what  I  now  say  respecting  South 
Carolina,  I  deem  applicable  to  every  member  of  this  confederacy. 
To  no  one  of  these  States  would  I  arrogantly  say,  I  will  not  do 
justice,  until  you  come  on  your  knees  before  me.  ...  I  do  hope, 
if  I  have  any  patriotism,  it  is  not  that  narrow,  contracted  patriot- 
ism which  is  confined  to  geographical  limits.  I  trust  it  is  that 
patriotism  which  looks  abroad  over  the  Union,  and  embraces 
every  portion  of  my  fellow-citizens.  And  so  help  me  God,  if  my 
constituents  were  this  day  to  demand  that  I  should  perpetrate 
an  act  of  injustice  against  any  member  of  this  confederacy  .  .  . 
which  I  believed  destructive  to  their  constitutional  rights,  so 
help  me  God  I  would  resign  my  seat,  and  retire  to  my  home, 
rather  than  jeopardize  the  peace  of  this  republic,  this  glorious  ex- 
periment of  a  free  Government,  by  taking  what  justly  belongs 
to  Maine,  and  unjustly  to  bestow  it  on  North  Carolina.  .  .  .40 

i 
All  peaceful  means,  Brown  repeated,  should  be  used  to  set- 
tle the  problem.  Then,  if  "on  a  failure  of  all  these  means,  it 
shall  be  found  necessary  to  use  force  to  execute  the  laws,  let 
it  be  used."  He  was  not  prepared  to  say  that  the  emergency 
could  not  arise,  but  before  a  law  of  such  importance  should 
be  executed,  before  the  peace  of  the  Union  should  be  dis- 
turbed, "there  ought  to  be  a  reference  to  the  justice,  to  the 

39  Register  of  Debates,  22nd  Congress,  2nd  Session,  338. 

40  Register  of  Debates,  22nd  Congress,  2nd  Session,  342. 


Bedford  Brown  :  State  Rights  Unionist  335 

wisdom  of  Congress,  to  weigh,  to  examine  the  provisions  of 
that  law,  and  solemnly  to  pause  and  reflect  upon  proceeding 
to  put  it  in  force  by  military  power/' 41 

Senator  Brown  closed  his  long  appeal  with  a  plea  that  the 
flag  which  theretofore  had  been  the  "rallying  point  of  hero- 
ism," should  not  "now  float  over  the  mangled  corpses  of  our 
bleeding  countrymen.  God  forbid  that  our  country  should 
under  go  this  sad  and  disastrous  revolution;  for  .  .  .  whenever 
that  should  take  place,  not  only  the  liberties  of  this  country, 
but  the  best  and  brightest  hope  of  the  civilized  world,  [will] 
be  destroyed  forever." 42 

But  Brown  s  opposition  to  the  force  bill  was  unavailing,  and 
the  act  went  into  effect  on  March  1.  Fortunately,  however, 
South  Carolina,  finding  little  support  for  her  action,  accepted 
the  compromise  Tariff  of  1833.  Thus,  nullification  gave  way 
to  the  conciliation  for  which  North  Carolina's  Bedford  Brown 
had  argued. 

That  Bedford  Brown's  influence  had  risen  to  command  high 
respect  in  the  Senate  by  the  time  of  the  opening  of  the 
Twenty-third  Congress  in  December,  1833,  is  indicated  in 
his  election  by  that  body  to  the  chairmanship  of  the  Com- 
mittee on  Agriculture  by  a  vote  of  43  to  3.43 

President  Jackson's  withdrawal  of  federal  deposits  from 
the  United  States  Bank  provided  the  major  issue  in  the  new 
session.  This  act  was  the  signal  for  a  full-scale  political  war 
between  the  administration  and  the  bank  forces,  the  latter 
led  by  Clay  and  Webster.  In  that  battle,  Bedford  Brown 
openly  broke  with  his  colleague  from  North  Carolina,  Sena- 
tor Willie  P.  Mangum,  and  uncompromisingly  sided  with 
the  President. 

Following  the  President's  withdrawal  of  deposits,  Congress 
was  flooded  with  petitions  claiming  financial  distress  from 
throughout  the  country.  Senator  Brown  charged  that  these 
petitions  were  inspired  by  the  "Federal  Party"  which  was 
attempting  to  arouse  the  public  into  believing  that  a  real 

41  Register  of  Debates,  22nd  Congress,  2nd  Session,  343. 

42  Register  of  Debates,  22nd  Congress,  2nd  Session,  345. 

43  At  that  time,  the  committees  were  elected  by  the  whole  membership  of 
the  Senate.  Brown  also  received  eleven  votes  for  the  chairmanship  of  the 
Committee  on  Claims.  Register  of  Debates,  23rd  Congress,  1st  Session,  42. 


336  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

crisis  had  developed  as  a  result  of  the  President's  action.  This 
campaign  to  spread  the  belief  that  there  was  real  financial 
distress  was  designed,  he  said,  to  bring  pressure  upon  Con- 
gress to  recharter  the  "monster"  bank.  Actually,  conditions 
were  good,  said  the  North  Carolinian,  citing  real  property 
prices  as  20  per  cent  higher  than  the  previous  year.  Tobacco 
was  selling  well  and  industry  was  better  recompensed  than 
at  any  time  within  his  knowledge,  he  argued.44 

The  bank,  the  Senator  charged,  had  set  out  deliberately 
to  produce  distress  and  embarrassment  in  the  country.  And, 
while  the  bank  put  the  screws  down  upon  the  people  by  cur- 
tailing its  discounts  and  its  accommodations,  "politicians, 
men  in  high  places,  newspapers,  the  whole  squadron  of  paid 
agents  and  organs,"  were  spreading  alarm  by  claiming  that 
the  country  was  being  plunged  into  ruin  by  the  removal. 
Brown  said  that  he  was  opposed,  on  general  principles,  to 
the  banking  system  in  any  form,  because  he  believed  it  to 
be  at  variance  with  the  spirit  and  character  of  American  in- 
stitutions, and  he  was  much  more  opposed  to  a  national  bank 
which  had  shown  itself  powerful  enough  "to  wield  an  almost 
irresistible  influence  over  the  affairs  of  the  country,  for  good 
or  evil  purposes,  as  it  might  choose." 45 

Brown  spoke  often  and  long  in  support  of  the  administra- 
tion's actions.  In  general,  he  took  the  line  of  argument  that 
the  administration  had  complete  authority  to  withdraw  the 
deposits,  and,  indeed,  should  be  commended  for  doing  it; 
that  the  bank  had  set  out  to  force  its  recharter  by  bringing 
about  financial  distress;  that  the  friends  of  the  bank  were  en- 
deavoring to  stir  up  a  panicky  mood  among  the  people  in 
hopes  of  winning  them  over  to  the  bank  side;  that  the  dis- 
tress was  largely  imaginary,  the  country  being  basically 
prosperous;  that  any  institution  which  possessed  such  power 
as  the  United  States  Bank  had  enjoyed  was  unconstitutional; 
that  the  bank  had  no  claim  to  the  deposits  in  the  first  place; 
that  the  "bank  party"  was  a  direct  outgrowth  of  the  old  Fed- 
eralists who  had  opposed  popular  government  and  supported 
a  "moneyed  aristocracy";  and  that  the  whole  issue  of  dis- 

44  Register  of  Debates,  23rd  Congress,  1st  Session,  229. 

45  Register  of  Debates,  23rd  Congress,  1st  Session,  550. 


Bedford  Brown  :  State  Rights  Unionist  337 

tress  was  a  false  one  promulgated  by  friends  of  the  bank. 
The  entire  issue,  he  charged,  was  "whether  the  pretensions 
set  up  by  an  arrogant  moneyed  aristocracy,  and  the  political 
party  supporting  it,  should  prevail  in  the  conflict;  or  whether 
the  cause  of  the  country,  and  the  Chief  Executive  Magistrate, 
who  is  defending  the  citadel  of  our  liberties  against  the  most 
dangerous  assaults,  should  be  sustained." 46 

Administration  forces  in  the  Senate  were  in  a  minority  on 
all  major  issues  during  the  session  of  1833-1834,  and  Brown 
found  himself  on  the  losing  side  on  practically  every  vote. 
Only  nineteen  colleagues  joined  him  in  voting  against  a  reso- 
lution condemning  Jackson's  removal  of  the  deposits  as  un- 
constitutional. When  he  left  for  North  Carolina  in  the  sum- 
mer of  1834  to  mend  his  political  fences,  Senator  Brown 
must  have  breathed  easier  in  a  friendly  atmosphere. 

Bedford  Brown,  United  States  Senator  by  accident,  was 
a  candidate  for  re-election  in  1834.  His  support  of  Jackson 
had  earned  him  the  enmity  of  a  growing  number  of  North 
Carolinians  who  looked  to  Henry  Clay  for  leadership.  At 
the  same  time,  his  frequent  clashes  with  Calhoun  had  turn- 
ed many  nominal  Democrats  against  him.  But  in  his  favor 
was  the  boomerang  of  the  Whigs'  attacks  on  the  Caswellian 
as  a  man  of  "common  manners,  a  man  of  the  lower  classes," 
a  baseless  charge.47 

Following  a  smashing  Democratic  victory  in  the  North  Car- 
olina legislative  elections  in  August,  Vice-President  Van 
Buren  wrote  Brown, 

.  .  .  you  would  not  but  have  been  gratified  to  have  witnessed  the 
deep  interest  which  has  been  taken  here  in  the  N.  Carolina  elec- 
tions on  your  account.  It  is  with  great  sincerity  that  I  say  to  you 
that  the  more  I  have  reflected  on  your  course  last  winter  the 
more  I  have  found  to  admire  it.  .  .  .  Yourself,  Forsyth,  Benton 
and  Wright  have,  I  assure  you,  laid  up  a  store  of  popularity 
which  can  not  fail  to  turn  to  account  hereafter.48 


**  Register  of  Debates,  23rd  Congress,  1st  Session,  1487. 

47  William  E.  Dodd,  The  Life  on  Nathaniel  Macon  (Raleigh,  1903),  395. 

48  Martin  Van  Buren  to  Bedford  Brown,  September  7, 1834.  Bedford  Brown 
Papers,  Duke  University.  Professor  W.  K.  Boyd  incorrectly  copied  the 
date  of  this  letter  as  "September  7,  1836"  in  his  "Selections  from  the  Cor- 
respondence of  Bedford  Brown — 1,  1832-1856,"  Trinity  College  Historical 
Papers,  VI  (1906),  75. 


338  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

On  November  20,  the  General  Assembly  formally  elected 
Brown  for  a  six-year  term  by  a  margin  of  some  thirty  votes 
over  Thomas  Settle  of  Rockingham  County.49  Soon  there- 
after, the  Assembly  displayed  its  pro-Jacksonian  fervor  by 
instructing  Senators  Brown  and  Mangum  to  vote  for  expung- 
ing the  resolutions  adopted  in  the  Senate  condemning  the 
President's  withdrawal  of  deposits  from  the  bank.  Mangum, 
now  a  confirmed  Whig,  refused  to  recognize  the  right  of  a 
legislature  to  instruct  senators,  and,  in  1836,  resigned  in  an 
unsuccessful  attempt  to  vindicate  his  position.50 

Senator  Brown  was  again  elected  chairman  of  the  Agri- 
culture Committee  in  December,  1835,  but  his  margin  of 
victory  over  Senator  Tipton  of  Indiana  was  only  25  to  14.  The 
North  Carolinian  was  also  elected  to  the  committees  on 
claims,  Indian  affairs,  and  contingent  expenses  of  the  Sen- 
ate.51 

Soon  after  the  new  session  began,  an  issue  arose  which 
was  destined  to  destroy  the  effectiveness  of  the  Democratic 
Party  for  many  years.  The  slave-owner  of  the  Upper  Country 
Line  was  faced  with  another  perplexing  decision  when  the 
issue  of  abolitionist  petitions  developed.  But,  just  as  he  had 
done  on  the  force  bill,  the  North  Carolinian  took  a  middle 
ground  and  fought  the  extremes  on  both  sides.  It  was  against 
his  fellow  southerners,  however,  that  he  aimed  his  heaviest 
attacks. 

The  basic  argument  in  the  Senate  centered  not  around 
support  of  the  abolitionists,  but  around  the  procedure  for 
handling  the  many  petitions  received  from  those  persons  ad- 
vocating interference  with  the  institution  of  slavery.  John  C. 
Calhoun  argued  that  the  Senate  should  refuse  to  receive  the 
petitions.  This  procedure,  however,  could  involve  debate. 
Brown  reasoned  that  the  petitions  should  be  received  by  the 
Senate  after  which  a  motion  would  be  made  to  lay  them  on 
the  table.  Since  parliamentary  procedure  prohibited  debate 

49  Journals  of  the  Senate  and  House  of  Commons  .  .  .  183U-S5,  10. 

50  Henry  Thomas  Shanks,  ed.,  The  Payers  of  Willie  Person  Mangum  (Ra- 
leigh, 1950,  4  vols.),  I,  xxxi-xxxiii.  See  also  Earl  R.  Franklin,  "The  Instruc- 
tion of  United  States  Senators  by  North  Carolina,"  Trinity  College  Histori- 
cal Papers,  VII  (1907),  1-15. 

51  Register  of  Debates,  24th  Congress,  1st  Session,  11. 


Bedford  Brown  :  State  Rights  Unionist  339 

on  a  motion  to  table,  the  whole  issue  could  thus  be  thrust 
aside  without  any  discussion  on  the  part  of  the  Senate.  This 
course,  said  Brown,  while  indicating  to  the  "fanatics  that 
Congress  will  yield  no  countenance  to  their  designs,  at  the 
same  time  marks  them  with  decided  reprobation  by  a  refusal 
to  print"  their  petitions.  The  preclusion  of  all  debate  "would 
thus  prevent  the  agitation  of  a  subject  in  Congress  which  all 
should  deprecate  as  fraught  with  mischief  to  every  portion 
of  this  happy  and  flourishing  confederacy/' 52 

Brown's  stand  was  not  acceptable  to  the  southern  extre- 
mists. Senators  Calhoun  and  Preston  of  South  Carolina  and 
Tyler  and  Leigh  of  Virginia  especially  argued  that  a  refusal  to 
accept  the  petitions  was  the  only  honorable  way  to  handle 
them.  They  complained  bitterly  that  the  abolitionists  were 
permitted  to  operate  legally  in  several  northern  states  and 
warned  that  the  strength  of  their  organizations  was  increas- 
ingly dangerous. 

His  southern  colleagues  were  making  exaggerated  repre- 
sentations of  the  danger  of  the  abolitionists,  Senator  Brown 
charged.  The  "fanatics,"  he  claimed,  were  countenanced  by 
no  respectable  portion  of  the  North,  and,  without  debate  in 
Congress,  the  abolitionists  would  have  no  opportunity  to  agi- 
tate the  issue.  This  was  no  time  for  sectional  differences;  it 
was  a  time  for  renewed  faith  in  the  generosity  of  all  Ameri- 
cans. To  the  extent  that  they  were  continuing  the  debates  on 
the  abolitionists,  Brown  said,  the  southerners  were  giving 
wide  circulation  to  the  abolitionist  literature.  Debates  of  Con- 
gress were  reported  by  the  newspapers  which  carried  the 
words  of  the  abolitionists  to  the  people  who  otherwise  would 
not  hear  them.  Thus,  when  Congress  debated  the  petitions, 
it  was  giving  free  publicity  to  the  anti-slavery  forces. 

When  Senator  Preston  indignantly  charged  that  the  legis- 
latures of  the  northern  states  shall  legislate  against  the  aboli- 
tionists, Brown  again  interposed  his  caution  against  driving 
northern  friends  into  the  arms  of  the  very  group  that  the  South 

52  Register  of  Debates,  24th  Congress,  1st  Session,  90.  Senator  Brown's  part 
in  this  controversy  is  discussed  in  Thomas  Hart  Benton,  Thirty  Years'  View ; 
or  a  History  of  the  Working  of  the  American  Government  for  Thirty  Years 
from  1820  to  1850  (New  York,  1856,  2  vols.),  612-613.  Hereafter  cited  as 
Benton,  Thirty  Years'  View. 


340  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

was  criticizing.  The  North  Carolinian  suggested  that  it  was 
the  part  of  "wisdom  as  well  as  of  generosity  for  us  to  cultivate 
harmonious  feelings  with  those  who  [are]  acting  in  concert 
with  us  to  the  North,  to  put  the  abolitionists  down"  by  depriv- 
ing them  of  respectability.  Only  by  maintaining  the  support 
of  the  Democratic  leaders  of  the  North,  he  believed,  could  the 
abolitionists  be  silenced.  He  suggested  that  the  abolitionist 
activity  was  partially  due  to  "the  designs  of  a  more  sagacious 
political  party,  for  the  purpose  of  operating  on  the  South  at 
an  important  crisis,"  inferring  that  the  Whigs  had  showered 
abolitionist  publications  upon  the  South  just  before  the  past 
elections.53 

Senator  Brown  was  frankly  antagonistic  toward  the  recog- 
nition of  Texas  when  that  issue  was  presented  to  the  Twenty- 
fourth  Congress.  "What  [have]  these  Texans  done  to  require 
that  we  should  embroil  ourselves  in  a  war  with  a  country  with 
whom  we  are  on  terms  of  peace?"  he  asked,  and  warned  that 
recognition  would  likely  lead  to  hostilities  with  Mexico.  And, 
when  on  May  23,  1836,  Senator  Calhoun  urged  both  recogni- 
tion and  annexation,  Brown  objected  to  any  course  that  would 
change  "the  neutral  and  pacific  character  of  our  Government, 
which  [has]  long  been  cherished  as  one  of  the  wisest  and 
best  settled  principles  of  policy.  .  .  ."  The  national  character 
of  the  United  States,  he  said,  was  "worth  infinitely  more  than 
all  the  territorial  possessions  of  Mexico,  her  wealth,  or  the 
wealth  of  all  other  nations  added  together." 54 

By  virtue  of  a  one-vote  Democratic  majority  in  the  General 
Assembly  of  North  Carolina  following  the  1836  elections, 
Robert  Strange  was  elected  to  replace  Senator  Willie  P.  Man- 
gum  who  had  resigned  after  refusing  to  accept  legislative 
instructions.  The  two  Democrats  worked  as  loyal  supporters 
of  the  administration  during  the  next  four  years,  and  Strange 
generally  followed  Brown's  lead  in  the  Senate  debates.  Fur- 
thermore, the  Democrats  now  had  a  clear  majority  in  the 
session  beginning  in  December,  1836,  as  was  evidenced  by 

53  Register  of  Debates,  24th  Congress,  1st  Session,  1118. 

54  Register  of  Debates,  24th  Congress,  1st  Session,  1533.  See  also  Benton, 
Thirty  Years'  View,  I,  667-668. 


Bedford  Brown  :  State  Rights  Unionist  341 


the  expunging  of  the  anti-Jackson  resolution  of  March,  1834, 
by  a  vote  of  24  to  19.55 

Early  in  1837,  Senator  Brown  had  another  occasion  to 
differ  with  the  majority  of  his  fellow  southerners  when  he 
supported  the  admission  of  Michigan  as  a  state.  As  he  was 
increasingly  prone  to  do,  Brown  maneuvered  his  speech  sup- 
porting the  bill  into  an  attack  on  the  Whigs,  to  whom  he  most 
frequently  referred  as  the  "Federal  Party."  That  party,  he 
said, 

.  .  .  believed,  or  affected  to  believe,  that  popular  liberty  would 
degenerate  into  licentiousness,  and  prove  incompatible  with  the 
existence  of  regular  government.  .  .  .  Sir,  ...  to  those  who  are 
in  the  habit  of  speaking  disparingly  of  the  intelligence  of  the 
great  body  of  the  people,  it  is  sufficient  to  point  them  to  the 
condition  of  the  country  to  disprove  the  change.  It  is  to  that 
public  intelligence  that  we  are  indebted  for  what  it  is.56 

A  violent  exchange  between  Brown  and  Calhoun  came  in 
debate  on  a  proposed  reduction  of  the  tariff  in  February, 
1837.  Calhoun  opposed  the  bill  on  the  grounds  that,  although 
the  Tariff  of  1833  was  "odious  and  unequal,"  he  did  not  want 
to  disturb  the  peace  that  the  compromise  had  brought.  This 
spectacle  of  the  South  Carolina  Nullificationist  working  side 
by  side  with  the  "Federals"  like  Clay  and  Webster  to  prevent 
a  reduction  in  duties  was,  to  Senator  Brown,  among  "the  most 
extraordinary  spectacles"  that  he  had  witnessed.  He  argued 
that  to  oppose  a  reduction  was,  in  effect,  to  support  the  tariff. 
He  censured  Calhoun  for  making  an  "uncalled  for  and  un- 
warrantable denunciation"  of  Jacksonian  followers  in  the 
North  who  had  come  forward  proposing  reduction,  and  ac- 
cused the  South  Carolinian  of  "subterfuge"  and  "contemptible 
vanity  and  overweening  egotism"  and  of  thinking  himself  a 
standard  of  political  infallibility.  He  would  not,  snapped 
Brown,  thereafter  "notice  the  hallucinations  and  frantic 
denunciations  of  all  the  friends  of  the  administration  who 


65  Register  of  Debates,  24th  Congress,  2nd  Session,  504.  Brown  relinquished 
his  seat  as  chairman  of  the  Agriculture  Committee  and  was  made  chairman 
of  the  Committee  on  Revolutionary  Claims.  He  was  also  chosen  to  serve  on 
the  committees  on  Commerce,  and  Post  Office  and  Post  Roads. 

58  Register  of  Debates,  24th  Congress,  2nd  Session,  280. 


342  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

might  not  happen  to  agree  with  him  [Calhoun]  in  his  opin- 
ion.  oT 

The  Panic  of  1837  failed  to  shake  the  Senator's  faith  in  the 
Jackson  and  Van  Buren  administrations.  He  supported  the 
sub-treasury  bill  and  sided  with  Calhoun  in  favor  of  an 
amendment  designed  gradually  to  require  the  payment  of 
all  government  revenues  in  specie.58  He  had  ample  opportu- 
nities to  reiterate  his  convictions  that  all  banks  were  evil  and 
that  the  founding  fathers  had  never  intended  for  the  paper 
currency  system  to  be  put  into  effect.  He  again  charged  that 
the  "bank  party"  had  succeeded  in  bringing  on  national  finan- 
cial distress  so  that  the  country  would  be  "scourged  into 
submission,  to  compel  its  obedience  to  the  mandates  of  the 
moneyed  power."59 

On  February  23,  1838,  Senator  Brown  delivered  a  speech 
which  ran  for  more  than  twenty-five  columns  in  the  Congres- 
sional Globe.  The  issue  was  the  independent  sub-treasury 
plan  which  the  North  Carolinian  supported  as  a  means  of 
getting  the  government  completely  divorced  from  the 
"moneyed  aristocracy."  Again  he  charged  that  the  bank  sup- 
porters were  to  blame  for  the  depression: 

The  present  embarrassment  of  the  Government  [is]  due  to  a 
great  moneyed  power,  acting  in  concert  with  a  certain  political 
party,  whose  only  hope  to  success  [rests]  in  destroying  the 
credit  of  the  Government,  and  drying  up  the  resources  and  com- 
merce of  the  country.  ...  It  [is]  one  of  a  series  of  actions,  put 
into  operation  for  several  years  past,  to  arrest  the  financial  oper- 
ations of  the  Government,  for  the  purpose  of  forcing  the  people 
into  the  measures  of  a  banking  corporation.  It  [was]  shame- 
lessly avowed  by  its  organ,  that  it  was  in  vain  to  reason  with 
the  people,  and  that  they  never  would  be  brought  to  their  senses 
until  they  were  brought  to  them  by  severe  distress.  .  .  .  the 
great  object  of  that  power  has  been,  and  is,  to  produce  that  dis- 
tress, for  the  purpose  of  bringing  the  people,  as  they  say,  to 
their  senses ;  or,  in  other  words,  to  bring  them  bound  hand  and 
foot  to  its  footstool.60 


57  Register  of  Debates,  24th  Congress,  2nd  Session,  916. 

58  Register  of  Debates,  25th  Congress,  1st  Session,  406, 

59 Congressional  Globe,  25th  Congress,  2nd  Session  (Appendix),  35. 
80 Congressional  Globe,  25th  Congress,  2nd  Session  (Appendix),  388. 


Bedford  Brown  :  State  Rights  Unionist  343 

The  Senator's  stand  was  applauded  by  the  noted  author, 
James  Fenimore  Cooper,  who  wrote  Brown  that  the  "present 
political  struggle  in  this  country,  appears  to  be  a  contest  be- 
tween men  and  dollars,  and  it  is  a  bad  omen  for  the  first  that 
they  are  so  easily  duped  by  the  arch  enemy;  to  their  own 

•      •  "  61 

injury. 

On  January  14,  1839,  Senator  Brown  laid  before  the  Sen- 
ate a  number  of  resolutions  which  the  North  Carolina  Gen- 
eral Assembly  had  passed  the  previous  month.  These  reso- 
lutions, usually  referred  to  as  the  Kenneth  Rayner  Resolu- 
tions, condemned  the  expunging  of  the  anti-Jackson  reso- 
lutions from  the  Senate  Journal,  opposed  the  sub-treasury 
plan,  blamed  the  administration  for  the  depression,  con- 
demned pre-emption,  and  resolved  that  the  North  Carolina 
Senators  in  Washington  should  carry  out  the  wishes  of  the 
people  in  these  regards.  The  resolutions  contained  no  instruc- 
tions. 

The  significance  of  the  controversy  which  arose  between 
Senators  Brown  and  Strange  on  the  one  hand  and  the  Whig 
General  Assembly  of  North  Carolina  on  the  other,  lay  in  the 
disagreement  between  the  two  parties  over  the  right  of  a 
legislature  to  instruct  its  federal  senators.  The  Democrats 
supported  the  right  of  instruction;  the  Whigs  refused  to  recog- 
nize it.  Senator  Mangum  had  resigned  in  1836  over  the  issue. 

Upon  presentation  of  the  resolutions,  Brown  and  Strange 
addressed  the  Senate,  supporting  the  right  of  instruction  as  a 
basic  principle  of  Jeffersonian  Republicanism.  But  these  reso- 
lutions, they  said,  did  not  instruct.  In  fact,  the  legislature 
had  had  before  it  an  amendment  specifically  to  instruct,  but 
the  Whigs  voted  against  it  unanimously,  thus  rejecting  the 
Democratic  doctrine  that  the  General  Assembly  had  the 
power  to  force  either  support  of  specific  measures  by  its 
senators  or  the  resignation  of  those  officers.62 

The  two  North  Carolinians,  faced  with  a  charge  of  party 
servility,  determined  on  a  bold  course.  They  announced  that 
they  would  resign  prior  to  the  elections  of  1840.  Through 

81  James  Fenimore  Cooper  to  Bedford  Brown,  March  24,  1838.  Bedford 
Brown  Papers,  Duke  University. 

62  Congressional  Globe,  25th  Congress,  3rd  Session,  117. 


344  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

their  choice  of  Assemblymen,  the  people  would  be  able  to 
signify  their  decision  between  the  records  of  the  two  parties 
and  between  the  conflicting  attitudes  toward  legislative  in- 
struction of  senators.  The  senators,  however,  in  view  of  the 
Whig  legislature's  rejection  of  the  right  of  instruction,  would 
not  give  their  opponents  the  pleasure  of  filling  their  seats 
until  after  the  people  had  expressed  their  decision. 

Henry  Clay,  who  had  long  objected  to  the  right  of  instruc- 
tion, arose  to  express  belief  that  Brown  and  Strange,  having 
lost  the  confidence  of  their  legislature,  should  nevertheless 
resign  immediately.  That  was  a  signal  for  Bedford  Brown  to 
get  in  one  of  his  parting  shots  at 

...  a  senator  whose  miscalled  American  system,  until  thrown 
off  by  determined  resistance,  [has],  for  a  series  of  years,  im- 
poverished and  desolated  the  South,  oppressed  her  citizens,  and 
almost  ruined  her  commerce  .  .  .  and  which  [has]  created  and 
.  .  .  established  those  dangerous  sectional  prejudices  and  feel- 
ings which  [are]  destined  to  endure  too  long  for  the  harmony 
and  safety  of  our  country.63 

Senator  Brown's  last  recorded  speech  in  Congress  was 
made  on  May  7,  1840,  when  he  defended  his  record  of  up- 
holding the  policies  of  the  Jackson  and  Van  Buren  admin- 
istrations. His  eleven  years  in  the  Senate,  he  said,  had  been 
an  uninterrupted  battle  against  the  "'federal"  doctrines  of  the 
opposition  who  had  attempted  to  set  section  against  section. 
He  said  he  had  fought  every  important  federal  spending 
scheme  and  had  been  constantly  on  the  lookout  for  extrava- 
gance. He  had  also  stood  against  those  extremists  of  his  own 
South  who  had  shown  ill-will  toward  the  "respectable"  por- 
tion of  the  northern  states  in  the  abolitionist  petition  con- 
troversy. Now,  he  was  ready  to  leave  his  fate  up  to  the 
people  of  North  Carolina  who  would  commend  or  condemn 
his  stand*. 

He  was  interrupted  by  Senator  Southard  who  suggested 
that  Brown's  position  would  be  rebuked  by  the  people. 
Brown  replied, 


Congressional  Globe,  25th  Congress,  3rd  Session,  120. 


Bedford  Brown  :  State  Rights  Unionist  345 

Sir,  should  I  meet  with  the  misfortune  of  receiving  such  a  re- 
buke, the  gentleman,  from  practical  experience,  will  know  how 
to  sympathize  with  me,  for  the  gentleman,  and  the  Administra- 
tion of  which  he  was  a  member  [Adams'] ,  [have]  received  such 
a  rebuke  from  the  popular  fiat ...  in  the  most  unequivocal  man- 
ner. That  the  gentleman  and  his  friends  should  wish  to  be  rein- 
stated in  office,  and  that  they  should  even,  in  defiance  of  proba- 
bilities, indulge  in  the  most  sanguine  anticipations,  [is]  reason- 
able enough;  but  that  the  popular  rebuke,  such  as  he  antici- 
pate [s  will]  be  bestowed  on  the  Democratic  party,  [is],  to  say 
the  least  of  it,  not  very  probable.  The  gentleman,  in  good  time, 
[will]  find  himself  greatly  mistaken  in  his  predictions.64 

It  was  the  Senator  for  North  Carolina,  however,  who  was 
mistaken  in  his  predictions. 

[To  be  concluded] 


"Congressional  Globe,  26th  Congress,  1st  Session  (Appendix),  440. 


THE  LEGAL  STATUS  OF  PUBLIC  SCHOOL 

EDUCATION  FOR  NEGROES  IN  NORTH 

CAROLINA,  1877-1894 

By  Frenise  A.  Logan 

Officials  who  are  elected  by  popular  vote  usually  reflect 
the  sentiment  and  thinking  of  the  citizens  whose  votes  placed 
them  in  office.  The  members  of  the  legislative  body  of  North 
Carolina  during  the  period  under  survey  were  no  exception 
to  this  rule.  Therefore,  with  respect  to  public  school  education 
for  the  Negro  children  of  the  state,  it  was  to  be  expected 
that  these  officeholders  would  affirm  the  large  general  views 
of  their  communities  which  held  that  education  was  a  "big 
stick"  in  the  hands  of  the  Negroes,  that  it  tended  to  spoil 
them  and  thus  ruined  good  field  hands. 

Yet  in  1876,  immediately  after  the  election  results  were 
official,  the  Democratic  press  of  the  state,  along  with  the 
newly  elected  Democratic  legislature  and  state  party  leaders, 
attempted  to  assure  the  apprehensive  Negroes  that  the  new 
regime  would  not  be  "hostile  to  their  rights  and  interests." 
On  November  8, 1876,  the  day  following  the  sweeping  Demo- 
cratic victory,  the  editor  of  the  Greensboro  Patriot,  for  ex- 
ample, wrote: 

The  negro  need  not  be  alarmed.  He  will  not  lose  a  single  right  or 
privilege  he  has  enjoyed.  Instead  of  being  reduced  to  slavery 
again  he  will  be  fully  emancipated.  .  .  .  The  day  that  Democracy 
takes  charge  of  this  government  will  be  the  brightest  the  negro 
ever  saw.  He  need  have  no  fears.  His  old  friends  will  be  his 
friends  again,  and  his  future  will  be  better  and  brighter.1 

Representative  McGehee,  a  Democrat  from  Person  Coun- 
ty, speaking  for  his  party,  promised  the  Negroes  that  the 
legislature  would  "seek  to  inspire  all  its  citizens  with  an  ab 
solute  confidence  in  its  justice,  nay  more,  in  its  good  will 
The  newly  elected  Democratic  governor,  Zebulon  B.  Vance, 
in  his  message  before  the  General  Assembly  in  January  1877, 

1  Greensboro  Patriot,  November  8,  1876. 

2  Greensboro  Patriot,  January  10,  1877. 

[346] 


»2 


Public  School  Education  For  Negroes  347 

urged  the  members  to  live  up  to  their  pledges  and  "make  no 
discrimination  in  the  matter  of  public  education";  but  to  deal 
justly  and  equitably  with  all  school  children  of  the  state 
"with  a  thorough  North  Carolina  spirit."  3 

The  record  reveals  that  for  the  first  three  years  following 
the  1876  Democratic  victory,  North  Carolina  made  serious 
effort  to  equalize  the  schools  of  the  two  races.  But  by  1880 
the  promises  and  pledges  of  1876-77  were  cast  aside.  On 
March  29  of  that  year  the  legislature  authorized  the  establish- 
ment of  graded  schools  in  the  town  of  Goldsboro  by  an  act 
which  declared  that  "the  taxes  raised  from  the  property  and 
polls  of  white  persons  shall  be  appropriated  exclusively  to 
a  graded  school  for  white  persons,  and  the  taxes  raised  from 
the  property  and  polls  of  colored  persons  shall  be  appropri- 
ated exclusively  to  a  graded  school  for  colored  persons."4 
Charles  L.  Coon  says  that  this  was  the  first  time  a  North  Caro- 
lina law  permitted  the  division  of  school  taxes  on  a  race 
basis.5  However,  this  history-making  law  got  no  further  than 
its  passage  through  the  General  Assembly;  for  when  the 
question  was  put  to  a  popular  vote  in  early  May  of  1880, 
the  poor  whites  and  "ignorant"  Negroes  of  Goldsboro  united 
to  defeat  it.6 

Refusing  to  accept  this  setback,  the  "good  white  people" 
of  Goldsboro  were  successful  on  March  5,  1881,  in  obtaining 
from  the  legislature  permission  to  hold  another  election  in 
that  city  on  May  2,  1881,  upon  the  same  question— taxation 
for  a  graded  school.  The  act  was  similar  to  the  previous  one, 
containing  also  a  provision  that  money  raised  by  taxes  paid 
by  whites  should  be  devoted  exclusively  to  the  education  of 
white  children,  and  that  money  raised  by  taxes  paid  by  Ne- 
groes should  be  devoted  exclusively  to  the  education  of 
Negro  children.7  This  time,  through  the  strenuous  efforts  of 

3  Greensboro  Patriot,  January  17,  1877. 

i  Laws  and  Resolutions  of  North  Carolina,  1880,  27,  sec.  8  Act  of  March 
29,  1880. 

5  Charles  L.  Coon,  "The  Beginnings  of  the  North  Carolina  City  Schools, 
1867-1887,"  South  Atlantic  Quarterly,  vol.  XII  (July  1913),  244.  Hereafter 
referred  to  as  Coon,  "The  Beginnings  of  .  .  .  City  Schools." 

e  Coon,  "The  Beginnings  of  .  .  .  City  Schools,"  244. 

7  Laws  and  Resolutions  of  North  Carolina,  1881,  189,  sec.  3.  Act  of  March 
5,  1881. 


348  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

Julius  A.  Bonitz,  the  editor  of  the  Goldsboro  Messenger,  the 
bill  passed.8  The  town  of  Durham,  apparently  heartened  by 
the  success  of  the  whites  in  Goldsboro,  secured  permissive 
legislation  and  also  established  graded  schools  with  money 
collected  from  the  whites  supporting  white  schools  and 
money  collected  from  the  Negroes  supporting  Negro  schools.9 

On  March  8,  1883,  the  legislature  of  North  Carolina  recog- 
nized the  division  of  local  school  taxes  and  authorized,  by 
a  general  statute,  any  school  district  in  the  state  to  vote  local 
taxes  on  that  basis.  The  procedure  was  as  follows:  A  written 
petition  signed  by  ten  white  voters  would  entitle  the  county 
commissioners  to  order  an  election  to  be  held.  Likewise,  a 
petition  signed  by  ten  colored  voters  would  bring  about  a 
similar  effect.  In  either  case,  the  taxes  collected  were  to 
support  separate  schools,  from  the  whites  in  support  of  white 
schools;  from  the  Negroes  in  support  of  Negro  schools.10 
Describing  the  law  as  a  "monstrous  enactment— a  disgrace  to 
the  State,"  a  Negro  paper  of  the  state,  the  Salisbury  Star  of 
Zion,  predicted  that  it  would  destroy  the  colored  schools.11 

The  passage  of  this  general  statute  was  due,  unquestion- 
ably, to  the  persistent  urgings  of  newspapers  like  the  Clinton 
Caucasian,  the  Goldsboro  Messenger,  and  The  News  and 
Observer  (Raleigh).  The  former  was  one  of  the  first  publi- 
cations in  the  state  to  advocate  the  doctrine  that  each  race 
should  be  held  responsible  for  the  education  of  its  children. 
It  argued  that  such  a  system  would  benefit  both  races. 

It  will  unify  the  whites  in  favor  of  a  more  liberal  system  of 
public  schools  for  their  race,  which  they  would  cheerfully  and 
willingly  sustain;  and,  as  the  blacks  are  imitative  creatures, 
they  would  be  induced  to  do  their  best  in  the  same  direction. 
Thrown  upon  their  own  resources  and  seeing  that  they  will  have 
to  depend  on  themselves,  all  of  them  would  pay  their  poll  tax; 
whereas  now,  many  thousands  of  them  evade  payments.12 


8  Coon,  "The  Beginnings  of  .  .  .  City  Schools,"  244. 

9  Laws  and  Resolutions,  231,  sec.  3.  Act  of  March  9,  1881. 

10  The  Code  of  North  Carolina,  1883,  vol.  II,  sections  2593  and  2595. 

11  See  the  New  York  Age,  March  3,  1883.  Whether  this  forecast  would 
have  been  borne  out  will  never  be  known,  for  three  years  later  the  North 
Carolina  Supreme  Court  declared  the  statute  unconstitutional. 

13  Quoted  in  the  Wilmington  Daily  Review,  March  14,  1883. 


Public  School  Education  For  Negroes  349 

The  News  and  Observer,  concurring  in  this  view,  com- 
mended the  measure  as  "doing  no  one  an  injustice,  but  as 
promising  to  aid  greatly  in  rendering  our  schools  more  effici- 
ent/' 13  This  paper,  obviously,  had  in  mind  the  white  schools, 
for  earlier  in  1883  it  had  complained  that  of  the  $172,000 
expended  in  1882  for  Negro  schools,  "under  $70,000"  was 
paid  by  that  group;  therefore,  "the  whites  contribute  $100,000 
a  year  toward  the  colored  schools  besides  paying  for  the  white 
schools." 14  The  implication,  apparently,  was  that  the  money 
the  whites  "gave"  to  the  Negro  schools  ought  to  be  retained 
for  the  advancement  of  its  own  schools.  As  we  have  seen,  the 
legislature  of  1883  so  authorized. 

Although  many  local  white  taxpayers  in  the  towns  and 
cities  of  the  state  took  advantage  of  the  general  statute  or 
specific  acts  by  the  legislature  authorizing  the  division  of 
school  taxes  along  race  lines  through  a  popular  vote,  Tar- 
boro  offers,  perhaps,  the  most  striking  illustration  of  their 
utter  failure  to  bring  this  about.  On  April  2,  1883,  the  legis- 
lature authorized  an  election  upon  the  question  of  taxation 
for  graded  schools  in  that  predominantly  Negro  city— one 
school  for  the  Negro  children  and  one  for  the  white  children. 
The  law,  as  usual,  stipulated  that  taxes  collected  from  the 
whites  would  be  applied  to  the  support  of  white  schools,  and 
taxes  collected  from  the  Negroes  would  be  applied  to  the 
support  of  Negro  schools.15  The  editor  of  The  Southerner 
(Tarboro),  obviously  pessimistic  as  to  the  outcome  of  the 
voting,  warned  the  whites  of  the  city  as  early  as  April  12, 
1883,  almost  a  month  before  the  election,  that  the  "com- 
bination of  a  few  large  taxpayers  with  the  mass  of  the  negro 
vote"  might  possibly  defeat  the  project.16  When  we  note  the 
amount  of  money  which  would  be  applied  to  the  graded 
schools  for  each  race,  as  over  against  the  number  of  Negroes 
and  whites  in  the  city's  school  population,  we  can  understand 
the  white  editor's  pessimism.  There  were  884  Negro  school 

13  The  News  and  Observer  (Raleigh),  February  2,  1883. 
u  Quoted  in  the  Greenville  Eastern  Reflector,  January  31,  1883. 
35  Laws  and  Resolutions  of  North  Carolina,  1883,  249,  sec.  3.  Act  of  April 
2    1883 
'16  The  Southerner  (Tarboro),  April  12,  1883. 


350  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

children  in  Tarboro,  but  only  374  whites;  yet  if  the  election 
results  favored  the  graded  school,  the  amount  of  money  spent 
on  the  white  schools  would  be  $5,650,  but  only  $1,942  would 
be  allocated  to  the  Negro  schools.17 

When  the  final  vote  was  counted,  and  the  results— 301 
against  and  154  for  the  graded  school  bill— were  announced, 
the  Southerner  promptly  accused  the  Negroes  of  bringing 
about  the  defeat,  saying  that  "the  whites  as  a  general  thing 
voted  for  it,  and  the  colored  people  against  it."18  In  a  de- 
cidedly bitter  and  spleeny  editorial,  the  editor  said  in  part: 

The  vote  against  it  [the  graded  school]  was  cast,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  a  few  property  owners,  by  negroes  who  had  for  their 
reason  that  not  enough  of  the  money  was  given  to  them.  On 
them  rests  the  blame  of  a  failure,  and  they  have  shown  a  degree 
of  ingratitude  that  should  instill  disgust  and  contempt  in  the 
breast  of  those  who  have  been  paying  much  to  their  support 
and  education.  Race  prejudice  defeated  the  bill,  and  the  color 
line  was  drawn  by  the  black  ingrate.  Two-thirds  of  the  money 
that  is  collected  annually  in  this  county  for  schools  is  expended 
for  the  benefit  of  the  colored  schools,  and  three-fourths  of  it  is 
paid  by  white  property  owners.19 

As  a  result  of  the  decisive  defeat  of  the  Tarboro  school 
bill  by  the  Negro  voters  of  that  city,  the  white  citizens 
of  another  heavily  Negro  populated  city,  New  Bern,  looked 
forward  to  their  graded  school  election  with  grave  misgiv- 
ings.20 On  May  6,  the  day  preceding  the  election,  these 
doubts  gave  way  to  entreaties.  The  Negroes  were  asked  to 
"remember  that  when  they  want  to  build  churches  .  .  .  they 
call  upon  their  white  friends  to  help  them/'  So  now,  the 
whites  queried,  "is  it  asking  too  much  of  our  colored  friends 
to  help  us  adopt  our  school  bill?"  21  At  least  one  segment 
of  the  city's  Negro  population,  the  Negro  public  school  teach- 
ers of  New  Bern  and  Craven  County,  heeded  these  pleas  for 
they  promised  unqualified  support  of  the  bill.  In  a  hastily 

17  The  Southerner  (Tarboro),  April  12,  1883. 

18  The  Southerner  (Tarboro),  May  10,  1883. 
10  The  Southerner  (Tarboro),  May  10,  1883. 

20  Laws  and  Resolutions  of  North  Carolina,  1883,  111.  Act  of  February  13, 
1883. 

21  New  Bern  Daily  Journal,  May  6,  1883. 


Public  School  Education  For  Negroes  351 

called  meeting  in  New  Bern  on  May  5,  they  drew  up  the 
following  resolutions  which  are  interesting  for  the  phrase- 
ology as  well  as  the  point  of  view  expressed: 

.  .  .  That  we  are  in  favor  of  the  bill  as  passed  by  the  wise  law 
makers  of  North  Carolina,  because  it  places  education  in  reach 
of  the  poor  children. 

2.  Politicians  and  enemies  of  colored  education  tell  the  colored 
voters  not  to  vote  for  the  Graded  School  Bill  because  it  is  class 
legislation;  this  is  not  true,  the  bill  simply  provides  that  each 
race  educate  their  children. 

3.  This  bill  is  the  wisest  school  bill  the  legislature  has  passed 
in  years;  it  teaches  us  one  simple  and  useful  lesson  -  a  lesson 
that  is  worth  more  to  us  as  a  race  than  thousands  of  gold  dol- 
lars ;  that  lesson  may  be  stated  thus :  To  become  a  powerful  race 
we  must  depend  on  ourselves;  this  is  the  royal  road  to  honor, 
wealth  and  virtue. 

4.  We  shall  be  greatly  surprised  if  the  colored  voters  of  New 
Bern  fail  to  vote  for  this  bill  (for  education.)  We  feel  sure  that 
every  Negro  who  possesses  pride  of  race  will  vote  for  this  mea- 
sure.22 

Apparently  the  Negro  teachers  of  Craven  County  were  "great- 
ly surprised"  following  the  May  7  election;  for  although  the 
school  bill  was  carried  376  to  296,  of  the  ballots  against  it, 
all  but  "thirty  or  forty"  were  cast  by  Negroes.23 

In  order  to  meet  the  growing  discontent  of  the  whites 
living  in  the  densely  Negro  populated  eastern  cities  and 
towns— discontent  caused  by  their  inability,  in  some  instances, 
to  enact  local  legislation  which  was  designed  to  divide  the 
school  taxes  along  racial  lines  because  the  Negro  vote  was 
sufficiently  large  enough  to  defeat  them— the  legislature  on 
March  11,  1885,  passed  an  act  which  gave  to  the  justices  of 
the  peace  and  the  county  commissioners  who,  under  a  pre- 
vious enactment  in  1877  were  appointed  by  the  legislature, 
the  right  to  elect  the  members  to  the  county  board  of  educa- 
tion. The  board  itself  was  "to  consist  of  three  residents  of 
their  county,  who  shall  be  men  of  good  moral  character,  and 
who  shall  be  qualified  by  education  and  experience  and  in- 


New  Bern  Daily  Journal,  May  6,  1883. 
New  Bern  Daily  Journal,  May  8,  1883. 


352  The  North  Carolina  Historical  Review 

terest  to  specially  further  the  public  educational  of  their 

■         »  94. 

county. 

The  above  procedure,  in  effect,  eliminated  many  Negroes 
from  the  county  board  of  education,  for  it  was  hardly  con- 
ceivable that  the  Democrats  who  controlled  the  legislature 
would  appoint  an  appreciable  number  of  Negro  Republican 
justices  of  the  peace,  or  that  the  justices  of  the  peace,  in  turn, 
would  appoint  Negro  Republicans  as  county  commissioners. 
Since  these  men  elected  the  county  school  board,  it  is  there- 
fore safe  to  assume  that  they  selected  Democrats  "of  good 
moral  character,"  sound  education,  and  the  proper  experience 
and  wisdom  "to  further  the  public  educational  interest"  of  the 
white  children  of  their  respective  counties. 

Thus,  with  the  Democrats  able  to  dominate  the  situation, 
the  county  school  board  was  authorized  to  apportion  two- 
thirds  of  the  total  school  money  to  the  school  districts  in 
proportion  to  the  number  of  children,  the  remaining  one- 
third  to  "be  apportioned  in  such  manner  as  to  equalize  school 
facilities  to  all  districts  of  the  county,  as  far  as  may  be  prac- 
ticable and  just  to  all  concerned,  without  discrimination  in 
favor  of  or  to  the  prejudice  of  either  race."25  That  the  one- 
third  invariably  found  its  way  to  the  white  school  districts 
in  the  "Negro  counties,"  thus  giving  them  a  majority  of  the 
school  monies  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  the  majority  of  the 
school  population  was  colored,  is  attested  to  by  the  vigorous 
protest  written  by  the  Negro  members  of  the  North  Carolina 
Senate  in  1885  opposing  the  measure. 

The  passage  of  this  law  marked  the  high  point  of  educa- 
tional limitations  imposed  upon  the  Negroes  of  North  Caro- 
lina between  1877  and  1894.  In  view  of  these  laws,  only 
democratic  translation  of  them  by  the  North  Carolina  Su- 
preme Court  could  encourage  the  Negroes  to  look  forward 
to  the  retention  of  some  of  the  educational  privileges  and 
rights  they  enjoyed  between  1868  and  1876. 

Between  "the  glorious"  Democratic  victory  in  1876  and  the 
defeat  of  that  party  in  1894  by  a  "mongrel"  Republican 

^Laws  and  Resolutions  of  North  Carolina,  1885,  174,  sec.  1.  Act  of  March 
11,  1885. 

25  Laws  and  Resolutions  of  North  Carolina  1885,  174,  sec.  1.  Act  of  March 
11,  1885. 


Public  School  Education  For  Negroes  353 

party,  the  Democratic  dominated  General  Assembly  en