Williamsburg and Urbanization in Antebellum Virginia: "A Place--A Process--A Parade of Change That Continues Forward"
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
W&M ScholarWorks Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 2005 Williamsburg and Urbanization in Antebellum Virginia: "A Place--a Process--a Parade of Change that Continues Forward" Elisabeth Frederick Butler College of William & Mary - Arts & Sciences Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/etd Part of the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Butler, Elisabeth Frederick, "Williamsburg and Urbanization in Antebellum Virginia: "A Place--a Process--a Parade of Change that Continues Forward"" (2005). Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects. Paper 1539626493. https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.21220/s2-kpw3-8r02 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. WILLIAMSBURG AND URBANIZATION IN ANTEBELLUM VIRGINIA: “A PLACE.. .A PROCESS—A PARADE OF CHANGE THAT CONTINUES FORWARD” A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the Department of History The College of William and Mary in Virginia In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts by Elisabeth Frederick Butler 2005 APPROVAL SHEET This thesis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Elisabeth Frederick Butler Approved by the Committee, April 2005 James P. Whittenburg, phdir Professor Carol Sheriff Professor Kris Lane TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Acknowledgements iv List of Figures V Abstract vi Introduction 2 Chapter 1. “The Spirit of Enterprise” 13 Chapter II. “The Lazies and the Crazies” 58 Chapter III. “Williamsburg Waking Up”? 91 Conclusion 133 Bibliography 137 Vita 143 iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to give special thanks to Professor James P. Whittenburg, my advisor throughout my undergraduate (1998-2002) and graduate (2002-2005) years at the College of William and Mary. He greatly broadened my knowledge of the history of colonial Virginia and of the College (the latter, by introducing me to the Spottswood Society and its director, Louise Kale; my membership in the Society from 1999 to 2004 was one of the most pleasant aspects of life at William and Mary). Professor Whittenburg also gave me a deeper understanding of the long and varied history of Williamsburg. I hope that this thesis will, in turn, add to others’ appreciation for the richness of that history. I also thank Professor Carol Sheriff, who helped me place the development of antebellum Williamsburg into a larger context; and Professor Kris Lane, who served as my third committee member at short notice. I am grateful for their generous help and guidance. LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Williamsburg’s “City Builders” ABSTRACT Williamsburg had been for almost a century the wealthy and influential capital of colonial Virginia, but the removal of the state capital to Richmond during the latter part of the Revolutionary War brought a period of decline to Williamsburg. Far from disappearing, however, Williamsburg rallied and during the first half of the nineteenth century manifested a remarkable transformation. A group of up-and- coming men, natives of the town as well as newcomers, united by their desire for personal wealth and local economic improvement, actively-pursued strategies for exploiting the agricultural and land resources of the area. Such strategies included development of internal improvements—railroads, canals, and steamboats—to link Williamsburg with the rest of the region, nearby cities like Norfolk and Petersburg, and more distant markets. Making use of its important intellectual resource, the College of William and Mary, Williamsburg also positioned itself as an educational center featuring a cadre of preparatory schools and academies, attractive to an expanding southern urban professional base that wanted good educations for its children. Further, Williamsburg responded to the state’s need for public institutions for treating the mentally ill by renovating, modernizing, and expanding its old Asylum to accommodate and draw in a greater number of patients. Until the Civil War put an end to its expansion, Williamsburg during the antebellum period increased its population, gained a measure of prosperity and influence, and played a significant part in the economy of Virginia within the “urban corridor” which developed in eastern Virginia. In the past, historians had believed that the South in the nineteenth century was almost entirely rural and played no significant urban role in antebellum America. However, in recent decades some historians have begun to test this view by taking a closer look at specific nineteenth century southern urban areas. That is the context for this study of Williamsburg between the Revolutionary and Civil Wars. WILLIAMSBURG AND URBANIZATION IN ANTEBELLUM VIRGINIA: “A PLACE.. .A PROCESS—A PARADE OF CHANGE THAT CONTINUES FORWARD” INTRODUCTION In the late 1780s, the Reverend Jedidiah Morse, a Congregationalist minister from Massachusetts, trudged through Virginia recording his impressions of its people and places for hisAmerican Universal Geography (1793), perhaps the first American travelogue. Encountering Williamsburg, once the rich and powerful capital of the largest of the British American colonies, Morse observed that everything in Williamsburgh appears dull, forsaken and melancholy-no trade-no amusements but the infamous one of gaming-no industry, and very little appearance of religion. The unprosperous state of the college, but principally the removal of the seat of government, have contributed much to the decline of the city.1 Noting that the town’s surviving two hundred houses were “going fast to decay,” Morse criticized the design of public buildings like Bruton Parish Church, the Public Hospital, the Governor’s Palace, the College of Williams and Mary, and even the statue of Lord Botetourt, a once-popular Royal Governor, which stood desultorily in front of the former Capitol. One Williamsburg citizen strongly objected to Morse’s caustic judgement. He was St. George Tucker, respected Judge of the General court, Professor of Law at the College, former Revolutionary War officer, and leading luminary of the town for the past ten years. The son of a prominent and wealthy Bermudian merchant, Tucker had twice « married into the Virginia gentry. Employing his formidable debating skills, Tucker responded to Morse with a pamphlet entitledA Letter to the Rev. Jedediah Morse, printed 2 3 in Richmond in 1795. Tucker systematically attacked Morse’s description of the town. He first drew attention to Morse’s plagiarism of Jefferson’s architectural criticisms of the College, maintaining that such an intelligent man as the honored reverend could surely find his own words. Referring to Morse’s hints of mediocrity and degeneration, Tucker protested that the town could boast a Bishop of the Episcopal Church, three distinguished ministers, a judge of the United States Supreme Court, and a Chancellor of Virginia among its residents (“Figure to yourself...this groupe employed at the infamous amusement of gaming!”)2 To Morse’s suggestion that there was no religion in Williamsburg, Tucker sarcastically retorted, “Did he expect to see a procession like the triumphal entry of St. Rosolia At Palermo; or the elevation of the host at Rome, or the celebration of an Auto de Fe at Madrid!”3 Tucker also challenged Morse’s view that the town was uniformly poor, saying it possessed a good market, a large number of skilled mechanics, and a generous outpouring of hospitality. Tucker conceded that Williamsburg had a shabby appearance and few prospects, but these things derived from the “ravages of war, the devastation of fire, the lapse of time, and the decease of population, and the increase of poverty” and not from lack of ambition in the people.4 Tucker presumably had the support of many townspeople, for a letter from Judge John Tyler to Tucker indicated widespread dislike of Morse.5 They probably found Morse’s contemptuous, superior attitude an attack on their honor. Tucker expressed as much when he prefaced his pamphlet with a quote from Shakespeare: “But he that filches from me my good name^Robes me of that which not enriches him.” Since Williamsburg, had helped to nurture the colony (not state) and the ideals of democracy and freedom, it 4 was not surprising that some felt offended. As Tucker declared, “The [inhabitants] will be content that the place of their residence be represented as dull, forsaken, melancolly...[and] acquiesce in the loss of trade and industry...” but it should not be considered “contemptible” for “Williamsburg [to] arrogate to herself the rank and honors of a metropolitan city “despite being a mere village.”6 Morse was moved later to recant some of his controversial observations, but Tucker’s defense actually revealed deep anxieties within Williamsburg. Its dwindling number of residents worried desperately about its survival—there were a large number of new western Virginia counties waiting to seize power from the eastern ones—and believed that its best days were gone. These fears also reflected larger concerns about the future of the state as a whole which was now trying to find its place in a young and growing nation. Morse’s depiction of Virginians (especially easterners) as provincial, unintellectual, dissolute, and oligarchical, seemed to reflect the prevailing attitudes of