As for Bacon, he had been in command of the frontier forces but a few days when he sent messengers to every part of the colony to blast Berkeley"s misgovernment. The Council reported to the Board of Trade that he had traduced the governor "with many false and scandalous charges." Later, in manifesto after manifesto, Bacon a.s.sailed the corruption, the inefficiency, and the injustices of Berkeley"s regime.
"We appeal to the country itself what and of what nature their oppressions have been, and by what cabals ... carried on." By taking on himself "the sole nominating" of civil and military officers he had made himself master of the colony. He had permitted his favorites "to lay and impose what levies and impositions upon us they should or did please, which they for the most part converted to their own private lucre and gain." As for seeking relief by pet.i.tioning the Burgesses, he said: "Consider what hope there is of redress in appealing to the very persons our complaints do accuse."
Thomas Mathews tells us that it was "the received opinion in Virginia"
that the Indian war was the excuse for Bacon"s Rebellion rather than the cause. Since Mathews took part in the uprising and later wrote an account of it, he should know. He even goes so far as to say that it was Thomas Lawrence, not Bacon, who was chiefly responsible for the uprising. Bacon "was too young," he points out, "too much a stranger there, and of a disposition too precipitate to manage things to that length they were carried, had not thoughtful Mr. Lawrence been at the bottom."
This man had his personal grievance, Mathews states, for he had been cheated out of a "considerable estate on behalf of a corrupt favorite." His wife kept a tavern at Jamestown, which gave him an opportunity to meet persons from all parts of the colony. So he filled their ears with complaints of the governor. Mathews himself had heard him suggest "some expedient not only to repair his great loss, but therewith to see those abuses rectified that the country was oppressed with through ... the forwardness, avarice, and French despotic methods of the governor." As for Bacon and his adherents, they "were esteemed as but wheels agitated by the weight" of Lawrence"s resentments, after their rage had been raised to a high pitch by Berkeley"s failure to put a stop to the effusions of blood by the Indians.
Lawrence had the hearty support of William Drummond, a Scotsman who also resided in Jamestown. Like Lawrence he had a grievance against Berkeley. In fact the governor was inclined to believe that he had been "the original cause of the whole rebellion." We know that Lawrence and Drummond stood at Bacon"s elbow from the beginning to the end. The importance of the part they played may be gauged by the bitterness of Berkeley"s resentment. "I so hate Drummond and Lawrence that though they could put the country in peace in my hands, I would not accept it from such villains," he declared.
But whatever was the role of these two men, whatever the part played by Bacon, the rebellion is a landmark in the development of self-government in Virginia. Though Bacon met an untimely death, though Drummond was led to the gallows, though Lawrence disappeared in the icy forest, their efforts were not in vain. They, and the thousands who supported them, had taught future governors that there was a limit to oppression beyond which they dare not go. The roar of their cannon proclaimed to the world that Virginians would resist to the end all attempts to deprive them of their heritage of English liberty.
ESSAY ON AUTHORITIES
The opening to investigators of the Marquess of Bath Papers by the British Ma.n.u.scripts Project has thrown new light on Bacon"s Rebellion. There are several letters from Bacon to Berkeley and several from Berkeley to Bacon. They show that Berkeley went to England during the Civil War to fight for the King, that Bacon was related to Lady Berkeley, that Lady Berkeley was in England during most of the rebellion, and that she corresponded with Philip Ludwell.
The Bath Papers add to the already abundant evidence that Bacon fought partly to end misgovernment in Virginia. The evidence comes not only from Bacon"s supporters but from Berkeley himself, Ludwell, and others.
Berkeley"s letters explain why he did not hang Bacon when he had him in his power, why he dissolved the Long a.s.sembly and called for a new election based on a widened franchise, why he evacuated the almost impregnable post of Jamestown. There are several revealing letters by Philip Ludwell.
Historians have long been acquainted with the county grievances collected by the King"s commissioners. They are to be found in the British Public Record Office, CO5-1371, have now been transcribed by the Library of Congress and some have been published in the _Virginia Magazine_, Vols. II and III.
The most detailed and probably the least prejudiced account of the rebellion is the _True Narrative of the Rise, Progress and Cessation of the Late Rebellion in Virginia_, by the commissioners. The only narrative we have of the transactions of the a.s.sembly of June, 1676, by one of the members is Thomas Mathews" _The Beginning, Progress and Conclusion of Bacon"s Rebellion_, published in C.M. Andrews" _Narratives of Insurrections_ and elsewhere. Important also are _Bacon"s Proceedings_ and _Ingram"s Proceedings_, attributed to Mrs.
Ann Cotton. Bacon"s expedition to the Roanoke river, the defeat of the Susquehannocks, and the battle on Occaneechee Island are described in a doc.u.ment ent.i.tled "A Description of the Fight between the English and the Indians in May, 1676,"
published in the _William and Mary Quarterly_, Series 1, Vol.
IX, pp. 1-4. The account given by the Council is in the Bath Papers.
W.W. Hening"s _Virginia Statutes at Large_ is a storehouse of information. It includes not only the laws of the Restoration period, but many official reports, among them "The Proclamation of Pardon of October 10, 1676," "Bacon"s Submission", and the proceedings of some of the courts-martial. The details of the Susquehannock war in Maryland may be pieced together from the accounts by Thomas Mathews, the King"s commissioners, Mrs. Cotton, and others. By the aid of an old pen-and-ink diagram of the Susquehannock fort, I have been able to locate the site, and Mrs. Alice L.L.
Ferguson to uncover parts of it.
The "Dialogue between John Goode and Nathaniel Bacon," which is in the British Public Record Office, throws light on Bacon"s plans to draw North Carolina and Maryland into his rebellion, and to resist the redcoats. Important also are the "Declaration of Thomas Swan and others on August 3, 1676", (GO1-37-42); Philip Ludwell"s letters to Lady Berkeley and to Thomas Ludwell, and others (Bath Papers); the "Declaration of the People" (Bath Papers); "Grantham"s Account" (Bath Papers); Berkeley"s account of the rebellion written on board Sir John Berry"s ship, February 2, 1677 (Bath Papers).
Among the secondary sources are Mary Newton Stanard, _The Story of Bacon"s Rebellion_; Thomas J. Wertenbaker, _Virginia Under the Stuarts_; and _Torchbearer of the Revolution_; Philip Alexander Bruce, _The Economic History of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century_, and _The Inst.i.tutional History of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century_; Wesley Frank Craven, _The Southern Colonies in the Seventeenth Century_; John Fiske, _Old Virginia and her Neighbors_; John Burk, _History of Virginia_; Herbert L. Osgood, _The American Colonies in the Seventeenth Century_.
_The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography_, the _William and Mary Quarterly_, 1st and 2d Series, and _Tyler"s Magazine_ have printed much material relating to the rebellion, and Dr.
E.G. Swem"s splendid index covering these volumes has greatly increased their value.