times a year, tho' it was called a quarter court. When he wrote, it was held but twice a year, as I had wrote in my book, and has not been called a quarter court these seventy-nine years. The county courts were never limited in their jurisdiction to any summons, neither was the sheriff ever a judge in them, as he would have it, but always a ministerial officer to execute their process, &c.
The account that I have given in the following sheets is plain and true, and if it be not written with so much judgment, or in so good a method and style as I could wish, yet in the truth of it I rest fully satisfied. In this edition I have also retrenched such particulars as related only to private transactions, and characters in the historical part, as being too diminutive to be transmitted to posterity, and set down the succession of the governors, with the more general incidents of their government, without reflection upon the private conduct of any person.
INTRODUCTION.
The name of Beverley has long been a familiar one in Virginia. It is said that the family may be traced among the records of the town of Beverley in England, as far back as to the time of King John. During the reign of Henry VIII, one of the Beverleys was appointed by the Crown a commissioner for enquiring into the state and condition of the northern monasteries. The family received some grants of church property, and one branch of them settled at Shelby, the other at Beverley, in Yorkshire. In the time of Charles I, John Beverley of Beverley adhered to the cause of royalty, and at the restoration his name appears in the list of those upon whom it was intended to confer the order of the Royal Oak. Robert Beverley of Beverley, the representative of the family, having sold his possessions in that town, removed with a considerable fortune to Virginia, where he purchased extensive tracts of land. He took up his residence in the county of Middlesex. Elected clerk of the House of Burgesses, he continued to hold that office until 1676, the year of Bacon's rebellion, in suppressing which he rendered important services, and by his loyal gallantry won the marked favor of the Governor, Sir William Berkley. In 1682 the discontents of Virginia arose again almost to the pitch of rebellion. Two sessions of the Assembly having been spent in angry and fruitless disputes, between Lord Culpepper, the Governor, and the House of Burgesses, in May of that year, the malcontents in the counties of Gloucester, New Kent and Middlesex, proceeded riotously to cut up the tobacco plants in the beds, especially the sweet-scented, which was produced nowhere else. Culpepper, the Governor, prevented further waste by patrols of horse. The ringleaders were arrested, and some of them hanged upon a charge of treason. A riot-act was also passed, making plant-cutting high treason, the necessity of which act evinces the illegality of the execution of these unfortunate plant-cutters. The vengeance of the government fell heavily upon Major Robert Beverley, clerk of the House of Burgesses, as the principal instigator of these disturbances. He had before incurred the displeasure of the governor and council, by refusing to deliver up to them copies of the legislative journal, without permission of the Assembly. Thus by a firm adherence to his duty, he drew down upon himself an unrelenting persecution.
In May, 1682, he was committed a prisoner on board the ship, the Duke of York, lying in the Rappahannock river. Ralph Wormley, Matthew Kemp, and Christopher Wormley, were directed to seize the records in Beverley's possession, and to break open doors if necessary. Beverley was afterwards transferred from the Duke of York to the ship Concord, and a guard was set over him. Contriving however to escape from the custody of the sheriff at York, the fugitive was retaken at his own house in Middlesex county, and transported over to the county of Northampton, on the Eastern Shore. Some months afterwards he applied by his attorney, William Fitzhugh, for a writ of habeas corpus, which however was refused. In a short time being again found at large, he was again arrested, and remanded to Northampton. In 1683 new charges were brought against him: 1st. That he had broken open letters addressed to the Secretary's office; 2d. That he had made up the journal, and inserted his Majesty's letter therein, notwithstanding it had been first presented at the time of the prorogation; 3d. That in 1682 he had refused to deliver copies of the journal to the governor and council, saying "he might not do it without leave of his masters."
In May, 1684, Major Robert Beverley was found guilty of high misdemeanors, but judgment being respited, and the prisoner asking pardon on his bended knees, was released upon giving security for his good behavior in the penalty of £2,000. The abject terms in which he now sued for pardon, form a singular contrast to the constancy of his former resistance, and the once gallant and loyal Beverley, the strenuous partizan of Berkley, thus became the victim of that tyranny which he had once so resolutely defended. He had not however lost the esteem of his countrymen, for in 1685 he was again elected clerk of the Assembly. This body strenuously resisted the negative power claimed by the governor, and passed resolutions complaining strongly of his tyranny. He negatived them, and prorogued the Assembly. James II, indignant at these democratical proceedings, ordered their dissolution, and attributing these disorders mainly to Robert Beverley, their clerk, commanded that he should be incapable of holding any office, and that he should be prosecuted, and that in future the appointment of their clerk should be made by the governor.
In the spring of 1687 Robert Beverley died, the persecuted victim of an oppressive government. Long a distinguished loyalist, he lived to become a sort of patriot martyr. It is thus that in the circle of life extremes meet. He married Catherine Hone of James City, and their children were four sons: Peter, William, Harry, and Robert, (the historian,) and three daughters, who married respectively, William Randolph, eldest son of William Randolph of Turkey Island; Sir John Randolph, his brother, of Williamsburg; and John Robinson. Peter Beverley was appointed clerk of the Assembly in 1691.
In the preface to the first edition of his History of Virginia, published at London 1705, Robert Beverley says of himself: "I am an Indian, and don't pretend to be exact in my language." This intimation may perhaps have been merely playful, but the full and minute account that he has given of the Indians, shows that he took a peculiar interest in that race.
In the preface to the second edition of his history, now republished, he remarks: "My first business in this world being among the public records of my country, the active thoughts of my youth put me upon taking notes of the general administration of the government." He was probably a deputy in his father's office, and perhaps also in that of his brother Peter Beverley. This Peter Beverley was in 1714 promoted to the place of speaker of the House of Burgesses, and he was subsequently treasurer of the colony. Robert Beverley, the historian, was born in Virginia, and educated in England. He married Ursula, daughter of William Byrd of Westover, on the James river. She lies buried at Jamestown. John Fontaine, son of a Huguenot refugee, having come over from England to Virginia, visited Robert Beverley, the author of this work, in the year 1715, at his residence, near the head of the Mattapony. Here he cultivated several varieties of the grape, native and French, in a vineyard of about three acres, situated upon the side of a hill, from which he made in that year four hundred gallons of wine. He went to very considerable expense in this enterprise, having constructed vaults of a wine press. But Fontaine comparing his method with that used in Spain, deemed it erroneous, and that his vineyard was not rightly managed. The home-made wine Fontaine drank heartily of, and found it good, but he was satisfied by the flavor of it that Beverley did not understand how to make it properly. Beverley lived comfortably, yet although wealthy, had nothing in or about his house but what was actually necessary. He had good beds, but no curtains, and instead of cane chairs used wooden stools. He lived mainly within himself upon the products of his land. He had laid a sort of wager with some of the neighboring planters, he giving them one guinea in hand, and they promising to pay him each ten guineas, if in seven years he should cultivate a vineyard that would yield at one vintage seven hundred gallons of wine. Beverley thereupon paid them down one hundred pounds, and Fontaine entertained no doubt but that in the next year he would win the thousand guineas. Beverley owned a large tract of land at the place of his residence. On Sunday Fontaine accompanied him to his parish church, seven miles distant, where they heard a good sermon from the Rev. M. De Latané, a Frenchman. A son of Beverley accompanied Fontaine in some of his excursions in that neighborhood.
