SERIES xxxm No. 2 JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY STUDIES IN HISTORICAL AND POLITICAL SCIENCE Under the Direction of the Departments of History, Political Economy, and Political Science THE FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA BY PERCY SCOTT FLIPPIN, Ph.D. Professor of History and Economics in Central University of Kentucky BALTIMORE THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS 1915 THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS OF BALTIMORE. American Journal of Insanity. Quarterly. 8vo. Volume LXXI in prog- ress. $5 per volume. (Foreign postage fifty cents.) American Journal of Mathematics. FRANK MORLEY, Editor. Quarterly. 4to. Volume XXXVII in progress. $5 per volume. (Foreign postage fifty cents.) American Journal of Philology. B. L. GILDEBSLEEVE, Editor. Quarterly. 8vo. Volume XXXVI in progress. $3 per volume. (Foreign postage fifty cents.) Beitrage zur Assyrioiogie und semitischen Sprachwissenschaft. PAUL HAUPT and FRIEDRICH DELITZSCH, Editors. Volume X in progress. Elliott Monographs in the Romance Languages and Literatures. EDWARD C. ARMSTRONG, Editor. 8vo. $3 per year. Three numbers have appeared. Hesperia. HERMANN COLLITZ and JAMES W. BRIGHT, Editors. Six num- bers have appeared. Johns Hopkins Hospital Bulletin. Monthly. 4to. Volume XXVI in prog- ress. $2 per year. (Foreign postage fifty cents.) Johns Hopkins Hospital Reports. 4to. Volume XVII in progress. $5 per volume. (Foreign postage fifty cents.) Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science. 8vo. Volume XXXIII in progress. $3 per volume. Johns Hopkins University Circular, including the President's Report, Annual Register, and Medical Department Catalogue. T. R. BALL, Editor. Monthly. 8vo. Volume XXXIV in progress. $1 per year. Modern Language Notes. E. C. ARMSTRONG, J. W. BRIGHT, B. J. Vos, and C. C. MARDEN (Managing Editor). Monthly. 4to. Volume XXX in progress. $2 per volume. (Foreign postage twenty -five cents.) Report of the Maryland Geological Survey. Reprints of Economic Tracts. J. H. HOLLANDER, Editor. Third Series in progress. $2 net. Terrestrial Magnetism and Atmospheric Electricity. L. A. BATTER, Editor. Quarterly. 8vo. Volume XX in progress. $3 per volume. (Foreign postage twenty -five cents.) POEMA DE FERNAN GONQALEZ. Edited by C. Carroll Marden. 284 pp. $2.50 net. THE TAILL OF RAUF COILTEAR, Edited by William Hand Browne. 164 pp. $1 net. STUDIES IN HONOR OF PROFESSOR GILDERSLEEVE. 527 pp. $6 net. THE PHYSICAL PAPERS OF HENRY A. ROWLAND. 716 pp. $7.50 net. ECCLESIASTES : A New Metrical Translation. By Paul Haupt. 50 pp. 50 cents net. THE BOOK OF NAHUM: A New Metrical Translation. By Paul Haupt. 53 pp. 50 cents ne';. THE HAGUE PEACE CONFERENCES OF 1899 AND 1907. By James Brown Scott. Vol. I, The Conferences, 887 pp.; Vol. II, Documents, 548 pp. $5 net. DISTURBING ELEMENTS IN THE STUDY AND TEACHING OF POLITICAL ECONOMY. By James Bonar. 156 pp. $1. THE ECLOGUES OF BAPTISTA MANTUANUS. Edited by Wilfred P. Mustard. 156 pp. $1.50. THE PISCATORY ECLOGUES OF JACOPO SANNAZARO. Edited by Wilfred P. Mustard. 94 pp. $1. DIPLOMATIC NEGOTIATIONS OF AMERICAN NAVAL OFFICERS, 1778-1883. By C. O. Paullin. 380 pp. $2. FOUR PHASES OF AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT. Federalism Democracy Im- perialism Expansion. By J. B. Moore. 218 pp. $1.50. AN OUTLINE IN PSYCHOBIOLOGY. By Knight Dunlap. 121 pp., 77 cuts. $1.25. A complete list of publications sent on request THE FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA SERIES XXXIII NO. 2 JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY STUDIES IN HISTORICAL AND POLITICAL SCIENCE Under the Direction of the Departments of History, Political Economy, and Political Science JHE FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA BY PERCY SCOTT x FLIPPIN, Ph.D. Professor of History and Economics in Central University of Kentucky BALTIMORE THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS 1915 COPYRIGHT 1915 BY THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS PRESS OF THE NEW ERA PRINTING COMPANY LANCASTER. PA. HO TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Preface vii Revenues and Taxation 9 Royal Collectors 21 Naval Officers 28 Comptrollers of the Customs 32 Surveyors-General of the Customs 34 Searchers 36 Auditor 37 Receiver-General 41 Collectors of the Duty on Skins and Furs 44 Collectors of the Duty on Liquors 45 Collectors of the Duty on Slaves 45 Collectors of the Duty on Servants 47 Treasurer 47 Inspectors of Tobacco 5 Pilots 54 Postmaster 55 English Merchants 5& Governmental Expenses 68 Efficiency of the Financial System 81 Bibliography 84 PREFACE Throughout the colonial period the financial condition of Virginia was a subject of much concern to the British gov- ernment, and especially to the English merchants, with whom the government cooperated. Commercial and eco- nomic success was the object sought by the merchants, and also by the government, which was endeavoring to perpet- uate and to make more secure its control of the colony. The colonists themselves were quite naturally deeply interested in the financial system gradually worked out for them by the British government and the officials of the colony. There was a system of royal revenues, which were collected by offi- cials holding royal commissions; these men were generally paid for their services out of those revenues, but in a few cases they were paid partly out of the British exchequer. There was also a system of provincial revenues, which were collected by officials holding commissions from the governor or from other local authorities. A study of the customs duties and other royal revenues, of the provincial revenues and the system of taxation, the various officials concerned with their collection and expenditure, and of the govern- mental expenses furnishes the information necessary for determining the efficiency of the financial system of the colony. It was not until very late in the colonial period that the question of political rights was generally agitated. The colo- nists were desirous of remaining under Great Britain, and were satisfied as long as the commercial and financial policy of that government did not become oppressive. There was no objection to royal officials as such, for when the spirit of discontent did assert itself, the trouble could be usually traced to the effort of the British government to interfere with the economic and financial affairs of the colony. This study of the financial system constitutes one of the chapters of a monograph on the Royal Government in Vir- ginia, which it is my purpose to publish later. P. S. F. THE FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA Revenues and Taxation. Three methods of raising money existed in the colony, the duties on trade, the tax on land, and the poll tax. Thus the revenue system in Virginia was quite similar to that in England, where there were customs duties, land taxes, and poll taxes. When the control of the colony was changed from proprietary to royal in 1624, the customs duty on tobacco from Virginia paid in England by the importer was even then of much consequence. 1 There were really two duties on exported tobacco, the two shil- lings per hogshead paid by the shipper in the colony, and the English customs paid by the importer in England. One of the chief sources of revenue in the colony was this duty of two shillings per hogshead on exported tobacco, first im- posed in March, 1657/8, by the Assembly. 2 By 1680 the governor (Culpeper) had this duty made permanent, and instead of being accounted to the Assembly as formerly, it was to be considered a royal revenue. 3 It was appropriated for governmental expenses, being used for paying the sala- ries of the governor and other officials of the colony and for the usual contingent charges of the government, and was the 1 In 1624 the annual revenue paid by the English importers into the royal treasury from the duty on- tobacco was 90,000, while in 1674 it was 100,000. In 1624 tobacco commanded a higher price in England than in 1674, and the duty was higher also. These facts evidently account for the similarity in the amounts just mentioned, although more tobacco was raised and much more imported into England in 1674 (Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series, 1669- 1674, n o. 1159; P. A. Bruce, Institutional History of Virginia in the Seventeenth. Century, vol. ii, p. 590). 2 W. W. Hening, Statutes at Large, vol. i, pp. 491, 523; vol. ii, p. 130. 3 William Blathwayt's Journal, vol. i, p. 62. 9 10 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF [i 86 principal fund upon which the governor depended. 4 The amount realized from this revenue was 2500 in 1676, and by 1680 it was about 3000. 5 The cost of collection was twenty-seven per cent of the whole amount. There was only a very gradual increase in the net sum realized, 6 but by 1750 this revenue amounted to 5000, and by 1760 to 7000 annually. 7 The castle duty, first imposed in February, 1631/2, of one pound of powder and one pound of shot on every ton of * The Official Records of Robert Dinwiddie, vol. i, p. 353. Cited as Dinwiddie Papers. Colonial Office Papers, 5 : 15, 585. 5 William Blathwayt to Lords of Treasury, in Blathwayt's Jour- nal, vol. i, p. 62. British Museum, Additional MSS., no. 30372, p. 46. 6 Blathwayt's Journal, vol. ii, pp. 27, 29, 63, 147, 207, 291 ; vol. iii, p. 84. RECEIVER-GENERAL'S ACCOUNT OF Two SHILLINGS PER HOGSHEAD REVENUE L 926 October 25, 1714-April 25, 1715 Receipts s. 8 Disbursements s. By balance of last account due Receiver-General .... 1070 9 Salary of Governor (six months) 1000 Rent of Governor's house 75 Salary of Council 175 ' Auditor-General 50 Solicitor of Virginia Affairs 50 ' Attorney-General 20 ' Clerk of Council 50 ' Gunner at Jamestown 5 ' Armorer 6 Minister attending Assembly 10 Contingent charges 38 7 Naval Officers 10% (810. 2s. 2^d.) 81 Auditor 5% (845. 8s. 3^d.) 42 5 Receiver-General 5% " " " ) 42 5 d. 6 2/2 43/4 434 2715 926 Excess of Expenditures 1788 19 This account was signed by the receiver-general, the auditor, and the governor (W. Blathwayt, Virginia Papers, MS.). 7 C. O. 5: 216, 8; Dinwiddie Papers, vol. ii, p. 271. 1 87] THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA II cargo imported, was lowered in 1633 to one fourth of a pound of each, and in 1645 was fixed at one half a pound of each. In 1662 it was raised to three pounds, but the master of the ship had the option of paying this duty in money at the rate of one shilling three pence on every ton of cargo. Before 1680 it was paid to the captain of the fort at Point Comfort as compensation for his services, but after that date it was appropriated to the support of the government. 8 It was then known as port duty. Revenues were also derived from the fines and forfeitures imposed by act of Parliament or act of Assembly for breach of penal law, contempt of court, and conviction for felony or trespass; from a fee for the right of taking up land, which was five shillings for every fifty acres for which a grant was issued ; and from a fee of two shillings per acre for escheated land. These revenues, including the duty of two shillings per hogshead on exported tobacco, were esti- mated by Governor Gooch about 1735 at 5000, by Gover- nor Dinwiddie in 1755 at 6500, and by Governor Fauquier in 1763 at 7000 annually, 9 and were all appropriated to the support of the government. In addition to the revenues already mentioned was the quit-rent. All land in the colony was claimed by the king, and those who held it were required to pay an annual rent to him of one shilling for every fifty acres. 10 The quit-rent, which was imposed in January, 1639/40, was at first not re- quired to be paid until seven years after the grant had been obtained. As this ruling had a tendency to encourage the acquisition of more land than could be cultivated, the privi- 8 Hening, vol. i, pp. 176, 192, 218, 247, 301, 312, 423; vol. ii, pp. 9, T 34, 1 77, 466"; vol. iii, pp. 345, 491; Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, vol. iii, p. 121 ; Dinwiddie Papers, vol. i, p. 389. 9 Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, vol. iii, p. 121 ; Din- widdie Papers, vol. i, p. 389; British Museum, King's MSS., no. 205, P- 514. 10 The only exception was in the case of those holding land in the Northern Neck (between the Rappahannock and Potomac Rivers), which was granted to Culpeper and his heirs. This grant was re- voked, but the quit-rents were retained by Culpeper, by royal per- mission. 12 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF [l88 lege was revoked in the instructions to Berkeley in 1662 and also in those to later governors. 11 In the seventeenth cen- tury quit-rents were paid in tobacco, but by the beginning of the eighteenth century they were paid in either tobacco or current money. 12 Although there was some opposition to this revenue and frequent evasion of it, the collections showed a gradual increase. In 1684, for example, 574 was collected, and in 1703, 1843, tne tota ^ P a ^d in the quit-rents during this time being 22,4i8. 13 This period about the middle of the colonial era seems to be typical with refer- ence to the income from this source. In 1703 5743 was still held as a surplus, 3000 of which was, by royal order, transmitted to the British exchequer. 14 From 1704 to 1710 the collections of the quit-rents amounted to 14,719, 13,- 917 of which was paid into the exchequer. 15 In 1715 this revenue produced about 1500 a year; by 1740 the annual income was 3500, and by 1760, 6000. In 1751 the col- lections, including some arrears, amounted to 16,433. 16 11 Hening, vol. i, pp. 228, 280; Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, vol. iii, p. 15 ; Instructions to the governors. 12 Hening, vol. i, p. 316; vol. iv, pp. 41, 79; vol. vi, pp. 168, 171; vol. viii, p. 103. 13 Blathwayt's Journal, vol. ii, p. 356. 14 Ibid., p. 318. Virginia and New York were the only colonies in which the quit-rents were accounted for to the crown (Cal. St. P. Treas. Books and Papers, 1731-1734. no. 201). 15 Blathwayt's Journal, vol. iii, p. 84. 16 C. O. 5: 216, 8; Journal of the Board of Trade, vol. xxv, p. 215; Journal of the House of Burgesses, 1756-1758, p. 513. RECEIVER-GENERAL'S ACCOUNT OF THE QUIT-RENTS April 25, 1713-April 25, 1714 Receipts Collections (including 35. us. 4d. for land escheated s. d. to king) 2145 6 i Disbursements s. d. Remitted to British exchequer 880 7 5 Expense of remitting the above 4 8 Salary of Commissary (one year) 100 " " Attorney-General " 60 1 8 9 ] THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA The relation of the quit-rents to the expenses of the col- ony, and the necessity of occasional drafts upon this revenue in order to meet them, was shown in a letter of May 30, 1717, from Spotswood to the Board of Trade. Spotswood requested an appropriation, and stated that the revenue de- rived from the duty of two shillings per hogshead on tobacco lacked ^1973. ios. 4d. of the sum needed to pay the salaries Salary of Sheriffs (some 10%, some 14%) ....... 131 8 6 " Auditor, 5% (1133) ............... 56 13 6 ' Receiver-General ............... 56 13 6 1289 n o 2145 6 i 1289 ii o Net revenue ................................. 855 15 i April 25, I7i6-April 25, 1717 Receipts s. d. Surplus (April 25, 1716) .............. 2899 16 7% co,.e=,ions{ ." ." ^ };;;:;:;;;;;;; '$ 'f ** Arrears (1712-1715) ..................... _igi _ 16 _ 8)4 49QS~T6 YA. Arrears for 1715 \ ........................ 294 15 9^ money paid in 1716 I ........................ 100 2 nj^ tobacco Arrears for 1714 \ ........................ 178 7 7 money paid in 1716 ) ........................ 67 13 10^ tobacco 5546 16 354' Disbursements ....................... 1780 14 11% Net revenue ......................... 3766 I 4 Disbursements s. d. Quit-rents for 1714 carried to account of two shil- lings per hhd. revenue. Apr. 25-Oct. 25, 1716 ____ 1022 5 Negotiating bills for above ........................ 5 2 Salary of Commissary (one year) ............ 100 " " Attorney-General " " ............ 60 Solicitor of Virginia Affairs, additional salary ...... 150 Allowance to sheriffs and the people by the order of the government ................................. 198 9 Salary of Auditor, 5% ............................ 122 8 Salary of Receiver-General, 5% ................... 122 8 g l / 2 1780 14 The accounts were signed by the receiver-general, the auditor, the governor (Blathwayt, Virginia Papers, MS.). and 14 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF for the preceding year; that the usual expenses amounted to about 3500, and that there was 3766. is. 4d. to the credit of the quit-rent account. 17 Three officials were regu- larly paid by royal warrant out of the quit-rents, the com- missary, the attorney-general, and the solicitor of Virginia affairs ; and a fourth, the auditor-general, was added to the list near the close of the colonial period. While it was necessary on some occasions to appropriate a part of this revenue for the support of the government of the colony, the quit-rents were regularly sent to England. 18 The following instances are indicative of the constant prac- tice of the colony. 19 In 1714, upon royal warrant for this purpose, 855. 153. id., the balance of the quit-rents for the year, was remitted. 20 Upon a warrant under the sign man- ual of the king of July 19, 1720, the receiver-general was directed to remit by bills of exchange 6791 . 75. 7d., the balance of the quit-rents for 1719 and the surplus. 21 When this revenue reached the royal exchequer, it was not con- sidered as a surplus held there for the future needs of the colony. For example, the quit-rents were used on one occa- sion at least for the royal service in the West Indies, and on another for paying the chief engraver of seals for seals made for the colonies in America; on another, for purchasing a way through King Street to Parliament House in London, and again for the allowance of 150 a year to the auditor- general of the colonies for office expenses. 22 Some special service connected with the colony was occasionally paid for out of this revenue, such as the running of the boundary line between Virginia and North Carolina, for which 1000 was allotted. 23 A few other instances of special appropriation in 17 Official Letters of Alexander Spotswood, vol. ii, p. 247. Cited as Spotswood Letters. 18 Blathwayt's Journal, vol. ii, pp. 391, 469; vol. iii, p. 64. 19 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, pp. 94, 96; 1721-1734, p. 59; ibid., Extra Session, May 3, 1743; Dinwiddie Papers, vol. ii, pp. 575, 576, 580; Cal. St. P. Col. 1689-1692, no. 1479. 20 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, p. 226. 21 Ibid., p. 351- 22 Cal. St. P. Treas. Books and Papers, 1729-1730, no. 128, p. 235, no. 146; 1739-1741, p. 365. ig i ] THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA 15 addition to the occasional use of the quit-rents for local ex- penses were the 1000 allowed in 1710 for aiding the British expedition to Canada, 500 for helping New York against the French and Indians and also for building fortifications in Virginia in 1693, 500 for rebuilding William and Mary College in 1709, 250 for a special journey to South Carolina in the interest of Virginia, 1260 for negotiating an Indian treaty (Treaty of Lancaster, 1744), 1320 for negotiating a treaty with the Catawbas and Cherokees in 1756, and other appropriations for similar treaties and also for presents for the Indians. 24 No allotments whatever were to be made from this revenue without royal warrant. Another source of revenue was the customs duties. There was a duty of one penny a pound on tobacco exported from Virginia and Maryland to any other American colony, known as the plantation duty, which was laid by Parliament in 1672 and granted by the king in 1692 to William and Mary College; it amounted to about 200 a year. 25 The duty on exported skins and furs, paid by the exporter, which ranged from three farthings to two shillings, or five shillings for tanned hides, was first imposed in 1691 by the Assembly and appropriated for the support of William and Mary College. It amounted about 1700 to nearly 300 a year. 26 The plac- ing of this duty, together with Indian wars, however, caused the fur trade to decline so greatly that the annual income derived from this revenue was later not more than ioo. 27 The duty on imported liquors, except those from England, was from three to six pence a gallon, which was 23 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1721-1734, pp. 215, 351. 24 Cal. St. P. Col. 1693-1696, nos. 1683, 1715; Journal of the Board of Trade, vol. ii, p. 283; vol. iii, p. 274; vol. v, p. 175; Blathwayt's Journal, vol. i, p. 684; vol. ii, p. 561; vol. iii, p. 85; Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, p. 288; Cal. St. P. Treas. Papers, 1708-1714, p. 94; 1742-1745, p. 677; Dinwiddie Papers, vol. ii, p. 465. 25 H. Hartwell, J. Blair, and E. Chilton, An Account of the Present State and Government of Virginia, p. 60; Journal of the Board of Trade, vol. x, pp. 219, 220. 26 Hening, vol. iii, pp. 63, 356; vol. iv, p. 431; vol. v, p. 236; vol. vi, p. 91 ; vol. vii, p. 283 ; vol. viii, p. 142. 27 R. Beverley, The History of Virginia, p. 214; Sainsbury Papers, vol. iii, pp. 525, 530. 1 6 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF appropriated by the Assembly of 1684 for the support of the government. 28 In 1726, 200 annually was granted out of this revenue to William and Mary College, and in 1734 one penny a gallon, or one fourth of the revenue at that time, was given to the college. 29 The duty on slaves brought into the colony, which was levied by the Assembly in 1699 for the purpose of rebuild- ing the capitol, and was later appropriated for the support of the government, was twenty shillings, paid by the im- porter, and, for a brief time, six pence paid by the master of the ship, on every slave. By 1732 this duty was changed to five per cent, later increased to twenty per cent, of the purchase price of each slave, paid by the purchaser within forty days after the sale. In 1772 a special duty of 5 a head was imposed on slaves imported from the West Indies, Maryland, Carolina, or any other American colony. 30 The duties on liquors and slaves amounted in 1708 to about 2000 a year. 31 The duty on servants, which was imposed by the Assembly in 1699 for the purpose of rebuilding the capitol, and was later appropriated for the support of the govern- ment, was fifteen shillings, paid by the importer, and six pence, paid by the master of the ship, on every servant im- ported. The duty on servants is not mentioned in the acts of Assembly after I7io. 32 The duty on passengers brought into the colony, imposed by the Assembly in 1662 for the purpose of furnishing additional compensation to the captain of the fort at Point Comfort, but later (1680) ap- propriated for the support of the government, was six pence on "every person imported, not being a mariner," paid by the master of the ship. This regulation must have included 28 Hening, vol. iii, pp. 23, 229; vol. iv, pp. 144, 470; vol. v, p. 311; vol. vi, pp. 194, 354; vol. vii, pp. 133. 266, 274, 386: vol. viii, pp. 38, 335, 529. 'Ibid., vol. iv, pp. 148, 432; vol. v, p. 317; vol. viii, p. 335. Ibid., vol. iii, pp. 193, 233, 346, 492; vol. iv, p. 317; vol. v, p. 28; vol. vi, pp. 218, 419, 466 ; vol. vii, p. 81 ; vol. viii, pp. 338, 532. 31 Of the 4000 collected for the years 1706-1708, 3000 was appro- priated for building the governor's house (Calendar of Virginia State Papers, 1652-1781, vol. i, p. 124). 32 Hening, vol. iii, pp. 193, 346, 492. 193] THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA I/ servants and slaves until special duties were imposed for them. The duty on passengers is not mentioned in the acts of Assembly after I7io. 83 During the whole colonial period neglect and fraud were more or less prevalent in connection with the several reve- nues. In 1640 the secretary of the colony, Richard Kemp, petitioned the king to be allowed to go to England in order to answer the unjust charges against him of those who had been defrauding the revenues of the colony. 34 The royal quit-rents were perhaps more often evaded than any other duties. 85 In 1721, however, the auditor-general stated to the Board of Trade that they were in good condition and were increasing in value. 36 In 1753 Dinwiddie estimated that there were about a million acres of land, held by certain colonists, on which no quit-rents had been paid. This statement was no doubt made largely to justify his action in imposing the pistole fee ($3.60) for affixing the seal of the colony to land grants. 37 The governor laid this fee in order to increase his perquisites, but he could not collect it. The duty on tobacco of two shillings per hogshead was very often evaded, and the governor was instructed to en- deavor to prevent frauds and abuses in the collecting of this revenue. 38 Shipmasters would sometimes evade this and other duties by making false entries as to their lading, 39 an abuse which the Council sought to remedy by requiring 500 security of every vessel. 40 Liquors and other imports were often smuggled into the colony to avoid payment of the 33 Hening, vol. ii, pp. 135, 466 ; vol. iii, pp. 346, 492. 34 Sainsbury Papers, 1640-1691, p. 4. 35 Ibid., 1691-1697, p. 350; Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1721-1734, p. 414; Journal of the Board of Trade, vol. x, p. 266; Cal. St. P. Col. 1681-1685, no. 203. 36 Journal of the Board of Trade, vol. xxxi, p. 152. 37 Dinwiddie Papers, vol. ii, pp. 363, 370, 374, 410. 38 P. A. Bruce, Economic History of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century, vol. i, p. 452; Journal of the Board of Trade, vol. xxxvi, p. 355; Instructions to the governors from Nicholson (1702) to Dun- more (1771). 89 Journal of the Board of Trade, vol. iii, pp. 306, 338; vol. x, p. 218; vol. xliii, p. 58. 40 Cal. St. P. Col. 1689-1692, no. 1324. 2 1 8 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF [ 1 94 duty. 41 Not only the planters and masters of ships, but even the revenue officials themselves were sometimes guilty of defrauding the government by evading the duties. 42 A letter from the Council of Virginia regarding the frauds in the customs, sent to the Board of Trade in 1733, was re- ferred to the committee of the House of Commons having charge of such investigations. 43 When the matter was under discussion in the House of Commons, the commissioners of the customs stated that the total amount of such evasion was 30,000 or 40,000 a year. This estimate, however, included not only the evasion in all the colonies, but also all the frauds connected with the customs in England. 44 It would be diffi- cult to ascertain the exact amount for Virginia alone. The instructions to the governors from Nicholson (1702) to Dunmore (1771) made special mention of the frauds in the customs of the plantation trade, and insisted upon the greatest care to prevent them. It was stated that such abuses " must needs arise either from the insolvency of per- sons who are accepted for security, or from the remissness or connivance of such as have been or are governors in the several plantations." This clause had reference to Virginia as well as to the other British colonies and was therefore included in the above instructions. Though it was said that the governor was perhaps partly responsible for this condition of affairs, and that should he fail to endeavor to prevent a continuance thereof his commis- sion would be forfeited, no governor of Virginia was re- moved for this offense. In addition to the formal instruc- tions there were additional instructions and circular letters sent to the governor from time to time for the purpose of preventing illegal trading and evasion of the customs. A circular letter of June 21, 1768, sent to practically all the governors in the American colonies and in the West Indies, 41 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, p. 202. 42 Spotswood Letters, vol. i, p. 103 ; vol. ii, p. 176. 43 Journal of the Board of Trade, vol. xliii, p. 58. 44 St. G. L. Sioussat, " Virginia and the English Commercial Sys- tem," in Report of the American Historical Association, 1905, vol. i, p. 90. 195] THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA 1 9 requested suggestions as to any needed changes in the " gen- eral instructions," with special reference to revenues, and stated that " the little improvement which has been made in his majesty's revenue of quit rents, notwithstanding the rapid progress of settlement, shows that either the instruc- tions given, relative to this object, are imperfect or inade- quate or that there has not been sufficient attention given to the due execution of them." 45 Though there were evasions of the quit-rents in Virginia, this revenue amounted to more there than this circular letter would indicate. Every law enacted by the Assembly that was concerned with the revenues, both royal and provincial, carried with it a penalty for violation, and special provision was made for preventing, if possible, any irregularities on the part of the officials. The Assembly honestly endeavored to prevent the evasion of the revenues, but the laws were not strictly enforced. In addition to the revenues already considered, there was a system of taxation by poll for raising the public, county, and parish levies. A poll tax, known as a public levy, was laid every session by the House of Burgesses through the committee of claims, to which all public claims were re- ferred. This revenue was used for the expenses of the meeting of the Assembly, for paying the militia, for the erection of the capitol, the execution of criminals, the cap- ture of runaway servants and slaves, and all such public claims. 46 The public levy was, therefore, not uniform, but varied from year to year. It was usually about 15 or 20 pounds of tobacco for each tithable. 47 From 1624 to 1775 the smallest levy imposed was $% pounds, and the largest was 89 pounds. In addition to the usual public levy, extra levies were imposed for meeting such an emergency as war. 45 C. O. 5 : 241, 79. 46 Journal of the House of Burgesses 1700-1702, pp. 218-220, 229-230. G. Webb, The Office and Authority of a Justice of the Peace, p. 211; Hartwell, Blair, and Chilton, p. 54; Hening, vol. iii, P- 25. 47 Hening, vol. i, p. 143 ; vol. ii, p. 507 ; vol. iii, p. 481 ; vol. iv, p. 300; vol. v, p. 67; vol. vi, p. 247; vol. vii, p. 139; vol. viii, p. 533- 2O FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF \_ 1 9& The county levy, also a poll tax, was laid by the justices of the peace, and was used in the payment of all county debts, such ias the building and the repairing of the court- house, the prison, the bridges, and the ferry-boats ; the cost of the coroner's inquests, and especially until 1730 the largest obligation the allowance to the two burgesses for their transportation to the capital and their expenses while attending the Assembly. The total expenses of the county were annually computed by the county court, with the assist- ance of the justices of the peace, and were divided equally among the tithables of the county. 48 Another poll tax, the parish levy, was laid annually by the vestry of each parish for the payment of all parish debts, such as the erection of churches, the minister's salary, the clerk's salary, the care of the poor, and any other parish expenses. The Anglican Church was the established church of the colony, and all, regardless of religious belief, were compelled to support it. The parish levy, as well as the public and county levies, varied from year to year. The churchwardens, who supervised the collection of this levy, usually had the sheriff, who also gathered the public and county levies, collect it for them. 49 The tithables of the colony included all male persons of any color above sixteen later eighteen years of age, and all negro, mulatto, and Indian women above sixteen. By 1769, however, free negro, mulatto, and Indian women were exempted. 50 The three methods of raising funds just men- tioned were all poll taxes, and the levies amounted annually to about one hundred pounds of tobacco for each tithable. It was estimated that they aggregated at the beginning of 48 Hartwell, Blair, and Chilton, p. 54; Webb, p. 211; Hening, vol. iv, pp. 279, 370. 49 Hening, vol. vi, p. 88; Hartwell, Blair, and Chilton, pp. 53, 55 J H. Jones, The Present State of Virginia, p. 63. 50 Dinwiddie Papers, vol. ii, p. 474; Beverley, p. 204; Webb, p. 21 1; Hening, vol. viii, p. 393. Negro, Indian, and mulatto children were entered in the parish register at their birth, so that it might be ascer- tained when they became sixteen years of age (Hening, vol. ii, p. 296). 197] THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA 21 the eighteenth century about 2,000,000 pounds of tobacco a year. 51 None of these levies were paid to the receiver- general, whose duty it was to receive the royal revenues. The public levy was paid to the treasurer of the colony, the county levy into the county treasury, and the parish levy into the parish treasury. These levies, of course, increased as the number of tithables increased. 52 Royal Collectors. The British government could not carry out fully its commercial policy owing to the difficulty in enforcing the regulations regarding the colonial export trade to England, which was mainly the result of there being, especially in the earlier part of the seventeenth cen- tury, no customs officials in any of the colonies except Virginia. In 1624, in order to prevent the cultivation of tobacco in England and the illegal importation of it into English ports, a proclamation was issued that all colonial tobacco was to be brought to London. 1 In 1627 and again in 1628 the governor of Virginia was instructed by the British government to take security from the masters of ships that all tobacco would be taken to London. In order further to prevent the direct shipment of tobacco to foreign countries, there was instituted in Virginia in 1631 the system of requiring bonds that tobacco and other products would 51 Hartwell, Blair, and Chilton, p. 55. 52 Statistics for every year cannot be obtained. Population. Tithables. 1671 40,000 (British Museum, Add. MSS., no. 30372, p. 46.) 1697 70,000 20,000 (Sainsbury, 1691-1697, pp. 317, 342.) 1699 58,040 21,606 (Cal. St. P. Col. 1701, p. 636.) 1700 24,291 (Ibid., p. 640.) 1702 25,009 (Ibid., 1702, no. 767.) 1723 39,76i (Virginia Historical Register, vol. iv, p. 67.) 1726 45,266 (Ibid., p. 74.) 1756 293,472 *I03,407 (Dinwiddie Papers, vol. ii, p. 474.) * Whites 43,329, negroes 60,078. 1 G. L. Beer, The Origins of the British Colonial System, 1578- 1660, pp. 197-205. 22 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF [198 be landed at London. 2 By 1636 the governor was in- structed by the king to appoint an officer to keep a register of all exports from the colony, and to forward copies there- of to the lord treasurer. The Assembly, upon receipt of this instruction, created the office, and granted to the in- cumbent a fee of two pence on every hogshead of tobacco exported, which was paid by the masters of ships, and also certain fees on other products. Richard Kemp, secretary of the colony, was appointed to this office by the governor, but Jerome Hawley was about the same time appointed by the British government treasurer of Virginia, and in addition to collecting the quit-rents, was also authorized to keep the register of the exports of the colony. In the con- test between Kemp and Hawley for the right to keep the register and to collect the fees, the royal appointee, Hawley, was successful. On the death of Hawley, which occurred soon after, Kemp was allowed to resume his duties as register. This was the first colonial customs office for im- perial purposes. 3 Although this office was established by the Virginia Assembly, it was in obedience to an order from the king that the governor made the appointment. Jerome Hawley was the first of the large number of royal customs officials who somewhat later were concerned with the ad- ministration of the colonies. 4 The register was the direct predecessor of the collectors, the naval officers, and other customs officials of the period following the Restoration, and the report of the register forwarded to the lord treas- urer was the forerunner of the "naval office lists," which after 1700 were sent quite regularly to England. 5 During the Cromwellian period the customs officials were appointed by the Assembly and were responsible to it ; their work was to receive the customs duties, especially the duty of two shillings per hogshead on exported tobacco, laid in March, 1657/8. This act was to remain in force for one year, 2 Beer, Origins, pp. 197-205. Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, vol. vii, pp. 258, 259, 375, 385, 386. 3 Beer, Origins, p. 208. * Ibid. 5 Ibid., pp. 207, 208, note. Hartwell, Blair, and Chilton, p. 60. 199] THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA 23 and was repealed at the expiration of that time. In March, 1662, this duty was reestablished, and, as formerly, the cus- toms officials were appointed by the Assembly and were ac- countable to it. 6 Although this took place after the Restora- tion, still, as in the case of the former act, the Assembly controlled the appointment and had general supervision of the officials. There was no mention of the commissioners of the customs in this act. On August 25, 1669, however, the commissioners of the customs in England appointed Edward Diggs to have charge of the revenues in Virginia and to correct abuses in the customs. 7 He was referred to as the " collector of Virginia," and he received a salary of 250 a year, paid by the receiver-general of customs in England. 8 The collectors, who were formerly commis- sioned by the Assembly, were soon also made royal officials. They 9 were thereafter, in accordance with an act of Parlia- ment, appointed by the commissioners of the customs under the authority of the lords of the treasury. 10 The commis- sioners of the customs, with the approval of the lords of the treasury, suspended or removed a collector, trans- ferred him from one district to another, or granted him permission to go to England. 11 The surveyor-general of the customs for the southern district of America, acting under instructions from the commissioners of the customs, had general supervision of these officials, examined their ac- counts, issued instructions to them, and had authority to 6 Hening, vol. i, pp. 491, 523 ; vol. ii, p. 130. 7 Cal. St. P. Col. 1669-1674, no. 104; Cal. St. P. Treas. Books, iii, Part 2, 1669-1672, p. 1126. 8 Cal. St. P. Treas. Books, iv, 1672-1675, p. 427. 9 Not to be confused with the collectors of the duties on skins and furs, on liquors, and on servants and slaves, appointed by the gover- nor; or with the collectors of the six pence per month from seamen's wages for the royal hospital at Greenwich, appointed by commis- sioners in England for this purpose. 10 Cal. St. P. Treas. Books, iv, 1672-1675, p. 456; Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1698-1703, p. 25; Hartwell, Blair, and Chilton, p. 33; Cal. St. P. Treas. Books and Papers, I73I-I734, PP- 398, 524; Beverley, p. 198; British Museum, King's MSS. no. 205, p. 498. "Cal. St. P. Treas. Books and Papers, 1731-1734, p. 398; Cal. St. P. Col. 1675-1676, no. 698; Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, p. 60. 24 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF [_2OO suspend them, subject, of course, to the approval of the commissioners. 12 The governor administered the oath of office to the collectors and saw that they obeyed the instructions of the commissioners of the customs; in case of emergency he might make a temporary appointment. 13 He was em- powered to "immediately remove" any collector guilty of fraud or neglect, to " appoint a fit person in his stead," and to notify the king at once, through one of the principal secretaries of state and the lords of the treasury. 14 The collectors gave bond to the king, countersigned by the at- torney-general of Virginia, and took oath in the Council to execute faithfully the acts of Parliament in virtue of which they were commissioned. 15 For a few years the offices of collector and naval officer were combined, as the duties pertaining to them were very closely related, but by 1699 they were separated. There were then eight collectors, soon reduced to six, who were assigned the districts near the larger rivers and Chesa- peake Bay. These six districts were the same that were assigned the naval officers. 16 The members of the Council at first controlled these offices, and at certain times all six collectorships were held by them. 17 By 1699, however, the royal instructions to the governor specified that councillors were to be prohibited from holding the office of collector, 12 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1698-1703, p. 147; British Museum, Add. MSS. no. 8832. Collectors' accounts of the one penny a pound duty on tobacco shipped from one colony to another were inspected by officials of William and Mary College, which institution received this revenue. After their examination the accounts were sent to the commissioners of customs (Cal. St. P. Col. 1696-1697, p. 457). 13 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1698-1703, pp. 56, 100; 1705-1721, p. 90; Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, vol. i, p. 244. 14 Instructions to the governors. 15 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1698-1703, p. 60; Sainsbury, 1625-1715, p. 26. 16 Upper James River, Lower James River, York River, Rappa- hannock River, Potomac River, and the Eastern Shore (Hening, vol. iii, p. 195; Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1698-1703, p. 36; Beverley, p. 195). Cal. St. P. Col. 1689-1692, no. 2295. 2Ol] THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA 25 as their services in this capacity had not been satisfactory. 18 That there was good reason for this action of the British government is clearly demonstrated in the conniving at fraud, the accepting of bribes, and the actual complicity with pirates by collectors, both before and after the mem- bers of the Council were prohibited from holding the office. 19 After 1699 the clause in the instructions directing the governor to see that no member of the Council served in this capacity specified that "persons much concerned in trade" were also to be excluded. At first the collectors were not permitted to have deputies, but, owing to the distance which some of them lived from the ports, it was deemed advisable by 1673 to grant their request in this regard, and they were empowered to appoint them, subject to the approval of the Council. 20 The grant- ing of this privilege was not conducive to the best interests of the colony, for according to a contemporary authority ( 1698) the revenue from the duty of two shillings per hogs- head on tobacco was not so large as formerly because the regular officers lived away from the ports and entrusted the duties to "unsworn deputies," and they, in turn, to " unsworn masters of ships and exporters." 21 Because of fraud and neglect in the collection of this duty, the gov- ernors from Nott (1705) to Dunmore (1771) were in- structed to refuse to allow collectors to have deputies, except in case of absolute necessity, and in such cases to require the deputies as well as the regular officials to take a solemn oath to perform their duties. 22 The collectors received certain import and export duties, such as the two shillings per hogshead on exported tobacco, 18 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, p. 55; Hart- well, Blair, and Chilton, p. 59; Cal. St. P. Col. 1699, p. 312. 19 Cal. St. P. Col. 1680-1692, nos. 2199, 2284, 2295 ; Cal. St. P. Treas. Papers, 1689-1692, pp. 659, 660, no. 3177; 1693-1696, no. 1510; 1714- 1719, p. 481 ; Hening, vol. iii, p. 232. 20 Cal. St. P. Treas. Books, vol. iv, 1672-1675, pp. 427, 437, 456 ; Cal. St. P. Col. 1689-1692, nos. 2317, 2388; 1697-1698, no. 645; 1696- 1697, no. 1320. 21 Hartwell, Blair, and Chilton, p. 59. 22 Instructions to the governors. 26 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF [2O2 and the one penny per pound on tobacco shipped from Virginia to any other American colony. After 1680 they also received the fifteen pence per ton on ships and the six pence per poll on persons brought into the colony. They were to endeavor to prevent illegal trade, and as far as possible to aid in the capture of runaway servants and slaves. 23 In some cases the collectors were appointed by the governor and the Council as justices of the peace, in order that they might detect illegal trade and seize prohibited goods, and they also acted as notaries public in matters relating to maritime affairs. 24 The passes sent by the lords of the admiralty to protect ships from seizure were furnished to masters of ships by the collectors. Owing to several complaints, after 1728 they and other customs officers were exempted from serving on juries, in parochial offices, or in the military service, unless it was absolutely necessary, as they were hindered in the performance of their duties there- by. 25 This exemption was made in obedience to the gov- ernor's instructions. The collectors were at first paid only in fees, but later each received out of the British treasury a salary of from 40 to 100 according to the importance of his district; each had, moreover, twenty per cent on all duties collected, and also fees, fixed by the Assembly, for entering and clearing ships. 26 The income from the percentage of course varied. Their total allowance for collections for a part of the year 1706 23 Journal of the Board of Trade, vol. x, pp. 219, 220; Cal. St. P. Treas. Papers, 1720-1728, p. 07; Cal. St. P. Col. 1693-1696, no. 1700; 1696-1607, no. 290; Hartwell, Blair, and Chilton, pp. 33, 61 ; Din- widdie Papers, vol. i, p. 389. 24 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1698-1703, pp. 89, in; 1721-1734, P- 156; Cal. St. P. Col. 1699, p. 495. 25 Instructions to the governors. 28 Hening, vol. ii, pp. 387, 443; vol. iii, p. no; Dinwiddie Papers, vol. ii, p. 597 note ; Beverley, p. 198; British Museum, King's MSS.no. 205, p. 498 ; British Museum, Add. MSS. no. 8831, p. 122. For entering and clearing a ship of 50 tons or less, IDS. ; 50 to 100 tons, 155. ; ipo tons or more, i. 5s. For taking a bond from the master of a ship, 2s. 6d. ; a certificate of duties paid, 2s. 6d. Half of these fees only were charged ships owned by Virginians (Hening, vol. iii, pp. 195, 351 ; vol. vi, p. 96; Webb, p. 308). 2O3] THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA 2/ was 480. i8s. 7d. 27 A table of all fees was to be exhibited for the information of the public. For the first offense of charging excessive fees 100 fine was to be imposed, and for the second, the commission was to be forfeited. Ap- parently these penalties were not strictly enforced. The collectors swore to their accounts before the auditor, the receiver-general, and the governor in Council ; the accounts were examined by these officials, forwarded quarterly to the auditor-general of the colonies and the commissioners of the customs, and finally examined by the comptroller-general of the accounts of the royal customs. 28 It was by order of the commissioners of the customs that the collectors paid to William and Mary College the revenue arising from the duty of one penny per pound on tobacco exported to other American colonies. 29 Complaints made by London mer- chants or others that a collector was concerned in trade or was guilty of fraud were reported to the Board of Trade, and by that body referred to the commissioners of the customs. 30 It was said on several occasions that collectors failed to render correct accounts of their revenues, and they were openly charged with having misappropriated these funds. 31 In a letter to the Board of Trade of November, 1700, the surveyor-general of the customs showed how it was possible for collectors to evade the customs laws. He stated that it had formerly been the practice of some of these officials who were large planters, and who received one half of the duty on tobacco carried from Virginia and Maryland to other colonies, to take off about one third of the half due from masters of ships provided they would purchase their whole loading from them. The short entries made on the books were connived at by those concerned, 27 Blathwayt's Journal, vol. ii, p. 469. 28 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, p. 76; 1721- 1734, PP- 44, 109; Cal. St. P. Col. 1685-1688, no. 745; 1689-1692, no. 2317; 1693-1696, no. 1829; 1696-1697, no. 1320; 1701, nos. 369, 423. 29 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, p. 90; Cal. St. P. Col. 1696-1697, p. 457. 30 Journal of the Board of Trade, vol. xxvi, p. 299. 31 Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, vol. ii, pp. 166, 169, 170, 386-389; vol. iii, p. 35. 28 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF [204 as was indicated on one occasion by the books of the collectors on James River and Potomac River. 32 As late as 1766 an act was passed by the Assembly for " preventing frauds in the customs," the preamble of which was as fol- lows : " Whereas it is almost impossible to detect officers who charge greater fees than by the said act of Assembly are allowed," and so on. 33 Collectors and naval officers were therefore required under penalty of a fine of 10 to furnish receipts for all fees paid to them. The requiring of the col- lectors to furnish the commissioners of the customs with a list of all vessels owned by the colonists was done to prevent the collectors from owning trading ships, as well as to keep the commissioners informed in regard to the trade of the colony. i i Naval Officers. The Navigation Act of 1663 created the post of naval officer. The first direct mention of such an official was in 1672, in connection with Barbadoes, but it was stated at that time that there had been earlier incumbents. 1 In Virginia the governor at first appointed and removed these officers, 2 but by 1698 the nominations were approved by the commissioners of the customs and the appointees re- quired to furnish security to them. 3 By 1763 they were named under the great seal of Great Britain.* Even when the governor had the power of appointment and removal, any suspension or removal could be referred to the Board of Trade by the aggrieved officer for examination. 5 The governor was not to imprison or suspend any of the officers 32 Cal. St. P. Col. 1700, no. 906. 33 Hening, vol. viii, p. 251. 1 C. M. Andrews, Colonial Self-Government, 1652-1689, p. 33. 2 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, p. 22; 1721- I 734 > P- 159; Calendar of Virginia State Papers, vol. i, pp. 210, 233; Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, vol. i, pp. 244, 374; vol. iv, p. 52; Hartwell, Blair, and Chilton, p. 24. 3 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1698-1703, p. 25 ; Sains- bury, 1720-1730, p. 354; Cal. St. P. Col. 1700, no. 752; Instructions to governors from Nott (1705) to Dunmore (1771). 4 British Museum, King's MSS. no. 205, p. 495; Journal of the Board of Trade, vol. Ixix, pp. 135, 186, 195. 5 Journal of the Board of Trade, vol. xxiii, p. 58. 2O5] THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA 29 of the royal customs except in cases of felony, murder, or treason, but he was to report any other offenses to the commissioners of the customs. The naval officers were at first usually selected from the Council, and for a certain time only councillors held these positions, 7 but by 1699 the royal instructions specified that councillors should not be appointed. 8 As soon as the councillors were prohibited from serving in this capacity, the offices of naval officer and collector, which had been held by one person in each district, were separated. 9 The number of naval officers was, until about 1700, eight, but was then reduced to six. After 1705 they were not permitted to have deputies, except in case of absolute necessity. 10 Naval officers were assigned the same districts as the col- lectors, and .received certain fees. 11 Later, according to the importance of their districts, they were paid from 40 to 100 annually out of the British treasury; in addition, they received the fees allowed by the Assembly and collected in the colony. 12 While the perquisites were somewhat smaller than those of the collectors, the annual income, with the fees included, was in some cases rather large. 13 In 1763 6 Cal. St. P. Col. 1700, p. 638. 7 Cal. St. P. Col. 1696-1697, nos. 306, 1320; 1689-1692, no. 2295; 1697-1608, no. 913; Journal of the Board of Trade, vol. x, p. 217; Hartwell, Blair, and Chilton, p. 24. 8 Cal. St. P. Col. 1699, P- 312; Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, p. 55; Journal of the House of Burgesses, 1698- 1699, P- 185. 9 Cal. St. P. Col. 1699, P- 312; 1700, p. 311; 1701, no. 1182; Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, p. 133; Spotswood Let- ters, vol. i, p. 8; Hening, vol. iii, p. 195. 10 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, p. 37; Cal. St. P. Col. 1697-1698, no. 767; British Museum, King's MSS. no. 205, p. 495 ; Hartwell, Blair, and Chilton, p. 24. 11 Sainsbury, 1691-1697, p. 345 ; Beverley, p. 198. 12 Hening, vol. ii, pp. 387, 443; vol. iii, p. no; Dinwiddie Papers, vol. ii, p. 507, note; British Museum, Add. MSS. no. 8831, p. 122. 13 Four of the six naval officers received, about 1705, from 200 to 300 a year; the fifth, 160, and the sixth, on the Eastern Shore, very little (Sainsbury, 1705-1707, p. 133; British Museum, King's MSS. no. 205, p. 493 ; Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, P- 133). 30 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF [2O6 one naval officer received 600 in fees alone. 14 Naval officers were required to post in their offices a list of these fees. The penalty for exceeding them was a fine of 100 for the first offense, and for the second offense, removal, ineligibility to office, and a fine of 20 payable to the in- former. That irregularities occurred, notwithstanding this provision, and that naval officers evaded the enforcement of the penalties seems evident from the preamble to the law enacted in 1766 requiring them to furnish a receipt for every fee collected: "Whereas it is almost impossible to detect officers, who charge greater fees than by the said act of Assembly are allowed, unless the officer or officers demand- ing and receiving the same, be obliged to give receipts for such fees," and so on. Any naval officer refusing to give a receipt was subject to a fine of 10, payable to the informer, in any court of record in the colony. 15 The duties of the naval officers were closely related to those of the collectors, and certificates furnished by naval officers for clearing ships and bonds taken by them were not valid unless approved by the collectors. 16 In addition to entering and clearing ships, the naval officers required a bond from the master of a merchant vessel that his state- ment in regard to his cargo was true, an oath that he would pay all required fees and would observe the trade laws, and a certificate that he would guarantee to land the cargo in an English port. They granted permission to masters to have their ships loaded, seized vessels trading unlawfully or refusing to pay port duties, took charge of prize ships awaiting the decision 1 of the court, and captured runaway 14 For entering and clearing a ship of 50 tons or less, 7s. 6d. ; 50 to loo tons, los. ; loo tons or more, i. 5s. ; for taking a bond from the master of a ship, 2s. 6d. ; for a certificate to remove goods from one district to another, 2s. 6d. ; for a permit to trade, 2s. 6d. ; for a load- ing cocket, 6d. ; for a permit to load a ship for exportation, 2s. 6d. Virginia-owned ships paid only one half of the fees (Hening, vol. iii, pp. 195, 351 ; vol. vi, p. 97; British Museum, King's MSS. no. 206, P- 339J Webb, p. 309). 15 Hening, vol. iii, pp. 196, 197, 352, 353; vol. vi, pp. 97, 98; vol. viii, p. 251. 16 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1698-1703, p. 25. 2O7] THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA 31 servants and slaves and also pirates. 17 They furnished the governor and the Council with a list of all ships in their respective districts and with minute descriptions of their tonnage, cargo, guns, number of sailors, owners, and so on. 18 They also sent to the British government quarterly statements of the imports and exports, with an account of all ships trading in the colony, whence they came and whither they were bound. 18 The orders of the Council to masters of ships to attend the meetings of the Council or to perform some special duty were sent through the naval officers. 20 On one occasion the naval officers, by order of the Council, assisted the captain of a royal ship sent to guard the Virginia coast by providing a sloop to accompany him and securing a house for his sick sailors. 21 They acted as notaries public in maritime affairs. 22 It is of interest to read that the French and Spanish prisoners sent on one occasion to Virginia from Carolina were placed in charge of the naval officers to be disposed of in any way they thought best for the good of the country. 23 Naval officers reported to the attorney-general the bonds furnished by the masters of ships, in order that he might prosecute those giving them as soon as they should be forfeited. 24 Naval officers swore to their accounts before the governor and Council after they had been passed on by the receiver- general and the auditor, by whom they were sent to the auditor-general and the commissioners of the customs. 25 17 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, pp. 72, 96; Calendar of Virginia State Papers, vol. i, pp. 19, 30, 34, 92; Hening, vol. iii, p. 350; vol. iv, p. 430; vol. vi, p. 95; Spotswood Letters, vol. i, p. 3 ; Cal. St. P. Col. 1690, p. 148. 18 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, pp. 71, 95; Cal. St. P. Col. 1701, pp. 369, 423. 19 Cal. St. P. Col. 1677-1680, no. 1590. 20 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, pp. 38, 63, 65, no. 21 Ibid., p. 86. 22 Cal. St. P. Col. 1699, p. 495. 23 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, p. 65. 24 Cal. St P. Col. 1700, p. 514. Bonds of 1000, in some cases 2000, were given (C. O. 5: 188, 26; 190, 196). 25 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1698-1703, pp. 99, 103, 166-169; Cal. St. P. Col. 1700, nos. 359, 934 1057. 32 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF [208 On account of the distance of certain naval officers from the capital, and the sickness of others, at certain times they were allowed to make oath before a justice of the peace as to the truthfulness of their accounts, and to send them to the governor and the Council. Once a year they had to settle personally with the governor and the Council. 26 One of the principal objections raised by the Board of Trade to the service of members of the Council as naval officers was that they rendered their accounts to themselves, and that they were interested in trade. 27 It is not strange that some cases of fraud were detected. 28 One authority stated in 1698 that councillors serving as naval officers exacted from 3 to 4 for clearing a ship of one hundred tons or more, for which i. 53. was the maximum fee. 29 Comptrollers of the Customs. The comptrollers of the customs were, as their name indicates, revenue officials. They were instituted near the close of the colonial period, and were appointed by the commissioners of the customs for the six revenue districts of the colony. They were not to supersede the regular naval officers and collectors, nor, of course, the surveyor-general of the customs, but were to cooperate with them. Their appointment was apparently an additional effort on the part of the British government to supervise the work of the collectors and the naval officers, and to prevent fraud. Their salaries were paid by order of the commissioners of the customs, but the fees to be collected by them, as by all royal revenue officials, were determined by the Assembly. The latter fact accounts for a petition of December 18, 1764, to the governor and the Council, re- ferred by them to the House of Burgesses. Three comp- trollers requested to be allowed to charge fees on all ships 26 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, pp. 19, 118, 131- 27 Cal. St. P. Col. 1697-1698, no. 767 ; Hartwell, Blair, and Chilton, p. 33; Instructions to the governors from Nicholson (1/02) to Dun- more (1771). 28 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, p. 22; Cal. St. P. Col. 1697-1698, p. 401 ; Sainsbury, 1706-1714, p. 298. 29 Hartwell, Blair, and Chilton, p. 33. 209] THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA 33 trading in the colony. The salaries of the three in question were 30 a year for the one serving in the upper district of the James River, 50 for the one serving in the lower district of that river, and 40 for the one serving on the Eastern Shore. They complained that these salaries were too small, and requested to be allowed to charge the " same fees as are allowed by law to the collectors of his majesty's customs, or such other fees as shall be thought reasonable," but the petition was refused. 1 Among the duties performed by the comptrollers was the searching of ships with the cooperation of the collectors and the naval officers, on the authority of writs of assistance. This is shown by the following letter, in which the collector and the comptroller of Accomac wrote to the commissioners of the customs, on April 22, 1772, as follows: "Agreeable to our letter of November last, we, together with other officers, made application for writs of assistance, to the Supreme Court, 2 but were refused them, for the same reasons as were given before, viz. : that application must be made for them every time we have occasion for them, and not for general writs of assistance." 3 The collector and the comptroller of the lower district of the James River had the same experience the next year. 4 The attorney-general of Virginia, who had failed to secure writs for them, made the following explanation to the collector on April 26, 1773 : " I have moved the court for a writ of assistance, agreeable to the desire of the commissioners of the customs, and according to the form of the writ said by the attorney general of England, to be practiced there, but they have positively refused it, and declared that they can allow no other writ than such a one as was settled upon a former occasion, agreeable to our act of Assembly. I despair of ever obtaining what is wished for." 5 1 Journal of the House of Burgesses, 1761-1765, p. 301. 2 General court of Virginia, a C. O. 5 : 145, 8 C . 4 Ibid., 8 m . s Ibid., 8". 3 34 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF [2IO Surveyors-General of the Customs. The surveyors-gen- eral of the customs for America and the West Indies were first appointed about 1690. There was one for the northern district, another for the southern district, and a third for certain British island possessions. In the southern district were included Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, the Bahama Islands, and Jamaica. 1 These surveyors-general were appointed by the commis- sioners of the customs, and received instructions from them. 2 The surveyor-general of the customs for the southern dis- trict was a member of the Council in Virginia, South Caro- lina, and Jamaica, 3 and up to 1733 was granted all the privileges of a councillor ; after that date, he was considered an extraordinary councillor only, unless admitted to these privileges by the crown. 4 The Council of Virginia refused to allow Robert Dinwiddie, appointed in 1741, to act with it in a legislative or judicial capacity, and appealed to the king to have his instructions so changed. It was decided by the Privy Council, after consultation with the Board of Trade, that the royal order must be obeyed, and that Din- widdie was to sit and vote in the Upper House of the Assembly, and to serve as judge in the general court and the court of oyer and terminer. 5 The surveyor-general was a revenue officer, and was therefore under the authority of the lords of the treasury as well as of the commissioners of the customs ; he was required to get permission to go to England from one body or the other. 6 His reports were usually sent to the Board 1 Plantations General, vol. xi, M. 44, August 8, 1733 ; Cal. St. P. Treas. Books and Papers, 1731-1734, pp. 93, 204, 456; Sainsbury, 1720-1730, p. 428. 2 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1698-1703, p. 147; British Museum, King's MSS. no. 205, p. 493. 3 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, p. 219; 1721- J 734, PP- ISO, 252; Journal of the Board of Trade, vol. xxxix, pp. 29-30. * Sainsbury, 1606-1740, pp. 145-146; Acts of Privy Council, Colo- nial, 1720-1745, no. 277. 5 Journal of the Board of Trade, vol. li, p. 22; Acts of Privy Coun- cil, Col., 1720-1745, no. 537- 8 Plantations General, vol. xviii, p. 213. 2Il] THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA 35 of Trade, in addition to being forwarded to the treasury and to the custom-house. 7 Before the duty of one penny a pound on tobacco sent from one American colony to another was granted to William and Mary College, he had special charge of this revenue. 8 As the representative of the com- missioners of the customs, he had general supervision of the royal collectors and the naval officers, and issued instruc- tions to them, and his action in this regard could not be questioned by the governor or the Council. 9 In the absence of the surveyor-general, however, the governor might make a temporary assignment to a vacant collectorship. He was on some occasions consulted by the governor as to the ap- pointment of certain officers whose duties pertained to revenue or trade. 10 He was, in fact, empowered to fill any office of the customs vacated for any reason, but was re- quired to submit the name of the appointee to the commis- sioners of the customs and the lords of the treasury. Since the matters brought to the attention of the court of vice- admiralty affected trade and revenue, the names of those appointed to the admiralty courts were referred to him. 11 The surveyor-general rendered the British government valuable service in examining the books and accounts of revenue officers, and in securing debts owed to the govern- ment by the collectors or others. 12 He explained, sometimes personally, to the Board of Trade the grounds upon which certain complaints were made to it in regard to laws affect- ing trade and revenue, gave the reasons for complaints against the governor, and furnished information on general colonial conditions. 13 His most valuable service, perhaps, 7 Plantations General, vol. xix, p. 281 ; vol. xx, p. 333. 8 Journal of the Board of Trade, vol. x, p. 219. 9 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, p. 249. In- structions to Earl of Orkney, March 22, 1728, in Sainsbury, 1715- 1720, p. 442. 10 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, p. 148. 11 Plantations General, vol. iv, 5, ( v ), 7. 12 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, pp. 118, 120; 1698-1703, p. 147; Cal. St. P. Col. 1689-1692, no. 2295; 1700, no. 906. 13 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1698-1703, p. 146; Sainsbury, 1606-1740, pp. 96, 106. 36 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF [212 was in detecting and to some extent preventing piracy and illegal trade, and in forwarding to the commissioners of the customs lists of ships and an account of goods forfeited to the king for the violation of the acts of Parliament re- garding trade. 14 His salary, which was paid out of the customs, by 1763 was 600 sterling a year. 15 Searchers. According to an act of Assembly of February, 1633, searchers were appointed " to search the ships and secret places of said ships, and to seize all concealed goods." They were to notify the governor and the Council of their action. 1 It seems that this office was discontinued, but the governor, seeing the need of an officer who would devote himself to preventing illegal trade, proposed to Colonel Robert Quary, the surveyor-general of the customs, the re- establishing of such an office in the lower district of the James River. 2 The commissioners of the customs, to whom the plan was referred, evidently acted favorably on the sugges- tion, for by 1714 there were searchers in addition to col- lectors and naval officers on the James and York Rivers and on the Eastern Shore, and also one in Lynnhaven Bay. 3 In making his report to the Board of Trade in 1763, Governor Fauquier stated that there were only two searchers in the colony, one in the lower district of the James River and one on the Eastern Shore, and he emphasized the importance of increasing the number, on account of the frequency of ille- gal trading. 4 The searchers were appointed by the surveyor- general of the customs. While the surveyor-general of the customs rendered val- uable service in preventing illegal trade, still, owing to the extensive area over which he exercised jurisdiction, it was essential that such an officer as the searcher should remain 14 Plantations General, vol. iv, (*), pp. 5, 6; v, ( 2 ), November 5, 1700; February 13, 1701; November 17, 1701; vol. xxxi, p. 33. 15 Fauquier to Board of Trade, in British Museum, King's MSS. no. 205, p. 493. 1 Hening, vol. i, pp. 207, 213. 2 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, p. 148. 3 Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, vol. ii, p. 2. 4 British Museum, King's MSS. no. 205, p. 495. 213] THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA 37 in the colony and perform this important duty for him. As to the salary of the searchers, it is known that about 1740 they petitioned the lords of the treasury for a salary of 40 a year, which had been promised each of them by the sur- veyor-general of the customs. 5 Later they were paid in fees alone. 6 Auditor. The duties of the auditor were at first per- formed by the treasurer of the colony. The office was estab- lished by the Assembly in 1664, with Captain Thomas Stegg, whose commission was confirmed by the king, as the first incumbent. 1 . This office was at first provincial in the sense that it was established by the Assembly and the incumbent thereof was compensated by that body, but from the begin- ning the royal approval was necessary to confirm the appoint- ments. 2 The governor had a share in the appointive power to the extent of making recommendations for the auditor- ship, and in case of an emergency he might appoint a tem- porary incumbent. 3 Upon the death of the auditor in 1704, the governor (Nicholson) himself assumed the duties of this office, and served as auditor for nine months. He did not, however, serve in this capacity under a commission, but sim- ply performed the duties instead of making a temporary appointment. 4 The governor had the power to suspend the auditor, subject of course to royal approval, 5 but could not 5 Cal. St. P. Treas. Books and Papers, 1739-1741, p. 17. 1 Dinwiddie Papers, vol. ii, p. 507, note. 1 For a few years he was styled "auditor-general of Virginia" (Acts of Privy Council, Col. 1613-1680, no. 1309; Cal. St. P. Col. 1669-1674, nos. 104, 192, 195, 196, 696). 2 Cal. St. P. Col. 1677-1680, no. 966; Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, vol. xiv, p. 270. 3 Hartwell, Blair, and Chilton, p. 24; Cal. St. P. Col. 1677-1680, no. 1416; 1696-1697, no. 1320; Cal. St. P. Treas. Papers, 1714-1719, p. 281; Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, vol. xiv, p. 267; vol. xvii, p. 35. 4 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, pp. 3, 9; J. S. Bassett, ed., The Writings of Colonel William Byrd, introduction, p. 48. 5 Blathwayt's Journal, vol. ii, p. 57 ; Cal. St P. Treas. Papers, 1714- 1719, p. 207; Cal. St. P. Col. 1669-1674, no. 696; Spotswood Letters, vol. ii, pp. 152, 159- 38 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF [214 grant him leave of absence, as it was necessary for the audi- tor to get permission from the lords of the treasury when he desired to leave the colony. The auditor was unquestion- ably a royal appointee, and held his commission under the great seal. 6 He was, after 1680, upon the appointment of the auditor-general of the colonies, the deputy of that official. 7 When the auditorship was established, it was stated that only councillors and those who had long re- sided in the colony were eligible to this office, and it seems that this principle was generally observed. 8 For several years the auditor also performed the duties of the receiver-general, but by 1705 it was found advisable to separate these offices. 9 Nicholson told the Board of Trade that the auditor kept all the books and money of his office at his residence, which was not at the capital. He advised that these offices be separated, and both officers be required to live at the seat of government and to keep their records in the capitol. In regard to the conduct of the auditor while serving as receiver-general and the opportunities for fraud and deception, it was stated by an authority in 1698 that the auditor made up his account, and, " for fashion," laid it before the governor and the Council, "but nobody offers to say anything to it, it is by him transmitted to William Blath- 6 The auditor and the secretary were for many years the only officers besides the governor who held commissions under the great seal (Acts of Privy Council, Col. 1613-1680, no. 1309; Journal of the Board of Trade, vol. iii, p. 75; vol. vi, p. 230; British Museum, King's MSS. no. 205, p. 493; Cal. St. P. Col. 1685-1688, no. 1551; Spotswood Letters, vol. i, p. 165). 7 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, pp. 3, 265; app., p. 52; 1721-1734, pp. 16, 302; Blathwayt's Journal, vol. i, p. 472; vol. ii, p. 167; British Museum, King's MSS. no. 205, p. 493; Din- widdie Papers, vol. i, p. 390; Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, vol. iii, p. 122. 8 Cal. St. P. Col. 1669-1674, no. 195; Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, vol. xiv, p. 270; Jones, p. 77; W. G. and M. N. Stanard, The Colonial Virginia Register, pp. 22, 45, 46, 47. A strik- ing exception to this was, however, furnished in the case of Robert Ayleway, who was appointed by royal commission for life in 1677. He did not come to Virginia, but had Nathaniel Bacon, Sr., and later William Byrd, to serve for him. 9 Spotswood Letters, vol. i, p. 7; Blathwayt's Journal, vol. ii, pp. 60, 378; Beverley, p. 196; Bassett, introduction, pp. 27, 49; Stanard, pp. 22, 45-47. 215] THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA 39 wayt." 10 From 1677 to 1691 the auditor, in addition to serv- ing in the capacities just mentioned, performed the duties of the treasurer of the colony. 11 As the name of the office indicates, the auditor examined all the revenue accounts of the colony, except a few purely local ones under the supervision of the treasurer. Among these ac- counts were those of the royal collectors and naval officers, the quit-rents, the public claims, the fines and forfeitures. He swore to his accounts before the governor and the Council in April and October, and forwarded them through the auditor- general to the lords of the treasury. 12 The direct and care- ful supervising of these accounts by the lords of the treasury was shown in a letter from them to the auditor. He was instructed to send "authentic and sufficient vouchers for every particular payment" that was made by the receiver- general, by himself, or by any other person on warrants from the governor. He was to transmit " duplicates or attested copies of all original receipts, acquitances and papers " relat- ing to the revenue. 13 Previous to about 1680 he was re- quired to submit his report to the House of Burgesses before sending it to England, but Governor Culpeper discontinued this custom, thus drawing on himself the disapproval of the most influential men of the colony, who for many years ex- pressed a desire to have the practice resumed. The auditor not only examined the quit-rent accounts, but also, while serving as receiver-general, retained the money arising from this revenue, and paid it out on the order of the lords of the treasury, sent through the governor. 14 Until 1700 the quit-rents were usually paid in tobacco; after 10 Hartwell, Blair, and Chilton, p. 59. William Blathwayt was auditor-general of the colonies. 11 Blathwayt's Journal, vol. ii, p. 66. 12 Ibid., vol. i, p. 51 ; vol. ii, p. 167 ; Journal of the Council of Vir- ginia, MS., 1705-1721, pp. 19, 58, 91; Cal. St. P. Treas. Books and Papers, 1731-1734, pp. 403, 454; Cal. St. P. Treas. Papers, 1714-1719, p. 101. 13 Blathwayt's Journal, vol. i, p. 171. 14 Cal. St. P. Treas. Papers, 1714-1719, p. 109; Hartwell, Blair, and Chilton, p. 57; Cal. St. P. Col. 1681-1685, nos. 319, 1760; 1669-1692, no. 1003; 1693-1696, no. 5345 1697-1698, p. 758. 4 P- 776; Journal of the House of Burgesses, 1702^1705, pp. 21, 52, 72. 235] THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA 59 fluential London dealers, controlled a group who about 1660 and later endeavored to monopolize the trade with America and the West Indies, and exerted no small influence over colonial affairs. 1 Merchants were frequently in attendance at the meetings of the Board of Trade, and had much power, not only in regard to appointments, but also as to many matters of concern to the colony. 2 In 1752 they objected to the proposed lighthouse at Cape Henry, on account of the tax on ships which would be levied to pay for it. The act of the Virginia Assembly for this purpose was repealed by order of the king, and it was not until 1772 that the light- house was established. 3 Since certain dealers shipped liquor and slaves to the colony, it was but natural that they should petition the Board of Trade against the duties imposed in Virginia on these imports. 4 The influence of the merchants was recognized by certain men in the colony who desired endorsement by them of their petitions to the Board of Trade. 5 By means of bills of exchange on London mer- chants the governor paid the solicitor of Virginia affairs in London, and discharged other public and private obliga- tions. 8 Micajah Perry, another London merchant, is a striking example of the influence which the English traders exerted in the affairs of the colony. He was at one time solicitor of affairs for Virginia and Maryland. 7 Later, when not serving in this capacity, he was instructed by the receiver- general, upon an order of the Council, to reimburse the solicitor of Virginia affairs for expenditures in the interest of the colony, and to " advance, from time to time, what he shall hereafter have occasion for in his negotiations." 8 1 C. M. Andrews, " British Committees, Commissions, and Coun- cils of Trade and Plantations," in Johns Hopkins University Studies, ser. xxvi, nos. 1-3, pp. 49-55. 2 Journal of the Board of Trade, vol. xix, pp. 277, 394; vol. xxx, pp. 356, 468. 3 Ibid., vol. Ixvii, p. 3; vol. Ixviii, p. 190; Hening, vol. viii, p. 539. 4 Journal of the Board of Trade, vol. xxxiv, p. 2. 5 Ibid., vol. xlii, p. 73. 6 Dinwiddie Papers, vol. i, p. 252; vol. ii, pp. 50, 277. T Cal. St. P. Col. 1696-1697, no. 1157; 1701, nos. 184, 766. 8 Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, p. 117. 6O FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF [236 He recommended prospective councillors to the Board of Trade, and was frequently summoned by that body to give his opinion on laws of Virginia affecting trade. He fur- nished the colony with certain stores, presented to the com- missioners of the prize office the request of the agent of prizes in Virginia for special compensation, and for service rendered the colony was paid in bills of exchange drawn by the governor. 9 He was on the bond of William Byrd, the receiver-general, for i 10,000, and later on that of another receiver-general, John Grymes, for ;6ooo. 10 He used his influence with the auditor-general of the revenues to have Philip Ludwell appointed auditor of Virginia. 11 He and his brother Richard offered a petition in behalf of William Byrd, the receiver-general, for the renewal of his appoint- ment. 12 He kept in constant communication with William Byrd, on certain occasions paid money into the exchequer on instructions from him, 13 and once petitioned the lords of the treasury for an increase of Byrd's salary from four to five per cent. 14 In 1705 the receiver-general of Virginia, by order of Council, remitted to Mica j ah Perry and Com- pany a bill of exchange for 1669, which was the amount of the quit-rents for I7O4. 15 He had a brother who was a merchant in York County, Virginia, and a nephew who was a merchant in Charles City County. 16 His interest in colonial affairs was not confined to Virginia, and on one occasion he furnished the colony of New York with 8ooo. 17 That he had much influence with British officials, and played 9 Journal of the Council of Virginia, p. 36; Journal of the Board of Trade, vol. xii, p. 147; Cal. St. P. Col. 1699, no. 1050; Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, vol. iii, p. 232. 10 Cal. St. P. Treas. Books and Papers, 1729-1730, no. 666; Blath- wayt's Journal, vol. ii, p. 360; Journal of the Council of Virginia, MS., 1705-1721, app., p. 54. 11 Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, vol. iv, pp. IS, 16, 20. 12 Cal. St. P. Treas. Papers, 1714-1719, P- Qi- 13 Cal. St. P. Treas. Papers, 1708-1714, p. 151. 14 Blathwayt's Journal, vol. ii, p. 541. is Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, vol. xvi, p. 73. 16 William and Mary College Quarterly, vol. xvii, pp. 264, 265. 17 Cal. St. P. Treas. Papers, 1708-1714, P. 151. 237] THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA 6 1 an important part in the affairs of the colony, is thus quite apparent. Certain merchants occupied in some instances an inter- mediate position between the governor and the British authorities. Regarding supplies of various kinds furnished by Dinwiddie to the military company ordered to Virginia by the British government, Dinwiddie wrote to Messrs. J. and C. Hanbury, London merchants, as follows : " I must beg you to apply to the secretary of state and the secretary of war, to qualify me to draw for reimbursement." 18 The next year, 1755, in a letter to the secretary of state he said : "Agreeable and in obedience to his majesty's commands, I have transmitted my warrant to the paymaster general of the army, for 2000, payable to Mr. J. Hanbury, from the revenue of two shillings per hogshead on tobacco." 19 On other occasions the same merchant transacted business for Dinwiddie. The following incident will help to show the several governmental services rendered. In 1754 Dinwiddie wrote to the secretary of the Board of Admiralty: "I desire you will send me thirty passes, and Mr. John Han- bury will pay you for those you last sent me." 20 A letter to the Earl of Grenville, the proprietor of North Carolina, regarding a sum of money forwarded to him by his agent in North Carolina through Dinwiddie, makes this statement : " I enclose your lordship my own draft on Messrs. J. and C. Hanbury for 42g." 21 The British government thus recognized the important part which the merchants had in the development of the colonial trade, and also in the actual administration of affairs. A striking example of the encouragement given by it to these men is shown in the clause in the instructions to the governors of Virginia from Culpeper (1682) to Dun- more (1771) directing them to render assistance to mer- 18 Dinwiddie Papers, vol. i, pp. 252, 337; vol. ii, p. 271. He was reimbursed out of the two shillings per hogshead revenue the 1040 which he had expended. 19 Ibid., vol. ii, p. 50. 20 Ibid., vol. i, p. 105. 21 Ibid., p. 136. 62 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF [238 chants, and especially to the Royal African Company of England. This company was encouraged by the British government to furnish regularly a supply of " merchantable negroes" to Virginia, at "moderate rates." The king's dividend in this company was 322. IDS. a year. 22 The gov- ernor was ordered to prevent any trading between Virginia and the part of Africa under the jurisdiction of that com- pany, and to report annually the number of negroes brought in. The British government further endeavored to protect this and other companies by a special clause in the in- structions to the governor (Earl of Albemarle) in 1738, regarding the courts of the colony. It stated that owing to the frequent adjournment of the courts, the Royal African Company and others were prevented from recovering debts due them. The governor was to see that this irregularity was not repeated, and also to refuse to give his assent to any act of the Assembly imposing a duty on negroes imported into the colony, to the " great discouragement of merchants trading to Africa." Notwithstanding the unquestionable support of the Royal African Company by the British gov- ernment, this instruction was not strictly executed, for the British government approved certain acts for this purpose. The preamble of these acts, however, specified that the duty was for " lessening the levy by poll," for " building the capitol," for paying the debt incurred by the French and Indian War, and for " other public charges." The revenue from this duty was thus appropriated to the support of the government, which fact no doubt accounted for the approval of the British authorities. The real motive of the colonists in laying a duty on slaves was to prevent the increasing im- portation of them. In addition, as late as 1772 the bur- gesses requested the king that for the good of the colony the slave trade, long considered a " trade of great inhumanity," might be abolished. They referred to the merchants as 22 British Museum, Add. MSS. no. 10119, f. 216. This was for the period 1685-1689. The dividend was no doubt continued. 239] THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA 63 follows: "We are sensible that some of your majesty's sub- jects in Great Britain may reap emoluments from this sort of traffic, but when we consider that it greatly retards the settlement of the colonies with more useful inhabitants, and may in time have the most destructive influence, we presume to hope that the interest of the few will be disregarded when placed in competition with the security and happiness of such numbers." 23 In the seventeenth century very few ships were owned by the colonists. By the middle of the eighteenth century the number had gradually increased, but even then the British-owned vessels far exceeded those owned by the colo- nists. Robert Dinwiddie, then surveyor-general of the customs for the southern district of America, in his report on Virginia to the Duke of Newcastle, one of the principal secretaries of state, said that in 1743 there were fifty ships owned by Virginians, and one hundred and fifty British ships trading in the colony. To encourage the colonists in owning ships, the Assembly exempted them from castle duties later known as port duties 'the two shillings a hogshead on tobacco exported, the duty on liquors for a brief period, and half of the naval officers' and collectors' fees. 24 The British mer- chants maintained that this was an unjust discrimination, as they were required to pay duties and fees from which the colonists were relieved. The exemptions from the port duty and the duty of two shillings a hogshead are not mentioned in the acts of Assembly after 1710, and that from half the naval officers' and collectors' fees, after 1748. The British authorities, yielding to the desire of the traders, disallowed certain acts which contained these exemptions. 25 It is quite evident that the interests of the merchants were conserved at the expense of the colonists, who from time to time endeavored to develop the resources of the colony. The 23 Journal of the House of Burgesses, 1770-1772, p. 283. 24 Hening, vol. i, pp. 402, 536 ; vol. ii, pp. 134, 272 ; vol. iii, pp. 23, 88, 347, 352, 494; vol. vi, p. 97. 25 C. O. 5 : 5, f s. 61-62, 200-203 5 Journal of the House of Bur- gesses, 1710-1712, p. 281. 64 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF [240 merchants opposed any plan of the colonists that would ren- der them less dependent upon commercial intercourse with England. The Board of Trade, reporting to Parliament a letter from Governor Gooch of Virginia of February I, 1732/3, said that " Major Gooch in his letter of Oct. 5th last, informed us that there is, now, no act subsisting in that province, which can, in any sense, be said to affect the British trade. That since the last returns to us upon this subject, there hath been one potters' work set up in Virginia, for coarse earthenware, but that this is of so little consequence, that he believes it has occasioned little or no diminution of the earthenware that used to be imported. That they have now four iron works in that colony, employed in running pig iron only, which is afterwards sent to Great Britain to be forged and manufactured." 26 That the merchants occupied a position of much influence is quite apparent, and that they often used this influence in their own interest to so marked a degree as to provoke the colonists is clearly shown by the remonstrances against them. There was more or less complaint during the period from 1700 to 1775 ; in fact, the dissatisfaction dated back to 1660. The protest against the oppressive demands of the merchants in 1732 resulted in the petition known as "The Case of the Planters of Tobacco in Virginia," which was sent to the British government by a special agent. This was a memo- rial of the Assembly, and was approved by Governor Gooch ; 27 it complained of the British merchants, who had added to the already heavy transportation and customs duties other de- mands which made it impossible for the planters to make a profit. This petition was not answered favorably. The action of the merchants somewhat later in regard to the paper money of the colony served to antagonize the colo- nists still further. On May 19, 1763, Governor Fauquier in a speech to the Assembly referred to a special instruction recently received and communicated to that body, regarding 26 C. O. 5 : 5, f. 2. 27 Gooch in a letter to the Duke of Newcastle, July 20, 1732, com- mended Sir John Randolph, the special agent of the Assembly. 241] THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA 65 the payment in sterling coin of debts owed to British mer- chants. This instruction had not been obeyed, and upon a renewal of the complaint of the merchants to the Board of Trade, the governor had been again informed of the en- dorsement of the claim of the merchants, and copies of the resolutions of the Board regarding this matter had been sent to him. In laying these resolutions before the Assembly, the governor said : " I have never yet deceived you, and I will not now attempt it ; but in plain language inform you that all endeavors to evade their force will prove fruitless, and plunge you still deeper in his majesty's displeasure. It is absolutely necessary that something should be done to give the merchants that satisfaction for which they call upon you, and for which in case of failure of success here, they will call upon a higher power." 28 A full explanation was given in an address of the burgesses to the governor, May 28, 1763, and a declaration of the loyalty of the colony was set forth as follows: "Our dependence upon Great Britain we ac- knowledge and glory in, as our greatest happiness and only security, but this is not the dependence of a people subju- gated by the arms of a conqueror, 'but of sons sent out to explore and settle a new world for the mutual benefit of themselves and their common parent." 29 Regarding the debt incurred by the French and Indian War, the burgesses stated in this address that they would " cheerfully sustain " it " if the merchants had not raised a most unreasonable clamor against our paper bills of credit." Explaining the issue of paper money, they said : " All our neighboring colo- nies had long before adopted, and most of them repeated, the expedient of paper to supply the want of specie, in time of peace, but that we did not follow their example, before the last war, after all our treasure was anticipated, and that even then we chose at first to borrow 10,000, granted for his majesty's service, at the high interest of six per cent., and 28 Journal of the House of Burgesses, 1761-1765, p. 171. 29 Ibid., pp. 188-192. 5 66 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF [242 never until after that resource failed, went into a measure so little relished, and always, except in one instance of trifling consequence, confined the amount of the notes to the money granted." The merchants claimed that they were 'being unjustly dealt with because the instructions to the governor of January 3, 1759, were not being followed. To avoid any contention which might be later raised by the merchants, the burgesses sent at that time an address to the king in regard to the pro- posed issue of paper money. It was not until 1763 that the merchants again complained. In answer, the burgesses said : "We concluded that as they raised no objection, they were satisfied of our intention to do them justice. And we can venture to say that had we known our reasons were not sat- isfactory, it would have prevented several subsequent emis- sions, and particularly the last which gave rise to the present complaint." After declaring their purpose to pay in sterling money as far as possible, any debts owed to the merchants, and stating that the notes complained of were issued for a limited time and were secured by taxes, the burgesses said : " But, at the same time, we considered how the interest of the British merchants might be affected by this money, and at least as far as was in our power, if not effectually, secured that from injury." Commenting on the action of the mer- chants some years before in regard to the rate of exchange in the payment of sterling debts, the burgesses showed that the law of 1748 providing that sterling debts should be dis- charged by allowing twenty-five per cent addition the dif- ference at that time between current money and sterling coin was objected to by the merchants. The complaint of these traders that they would be the losers when the ex- change should be over that amount was considered by the burgesses, and the courts were empowered to settle at what rate of exchange sterling debts should be discharged. The merchants did not, however, consider this sufficient security. The decision of the burgesses in the case, as stated in the above address, was as follows: "As the present possessors 243] THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA 6/ of the treasury notes have received them under the faith of a law, making them a legal tender in all payments, except for his majesty's quit rents, to alter that essential quality of them, now, would be an act of great injustice to such pos- sessors, and that as the British merchants have constantly received, and under the present regulations of our laws, will continue to receive, such notes for their sterling debts, ac- cording to the real difference of exchange between this col- ony and Great Britain, at the time of payment, their property is so secured as to make such alteration unnecessary with respect to them." The merchants renewed their complaint to the Board of Trade in 1764, hoping to obtain their demands through that body and the governor without laying them before Parlia- ment. 30 Governor Fauquier, in presenting again the claim of the merchants, maintained that it was " reasonable on the face of it." The reply of the burgesses of November 9, 1764, stated quite clearly their position. "As we have not sterling specie to pay here, which the merchants well know, we could secure the sterling creditors from injury, in the receipt of the paper, by no other means that we can suggest, except by directing that they should be paid so much paper as would place their money in Britain without loss." 31 The position of the merchants, supported by the Board of Trade and the governor, was considered all the more unreasonable in view of the fact that the issue of paper money was made necessary by the expenses incurred by the colony in support- ing the French and Indian War. That the merchants were influential in having passed the acts of Parliament laying duties on certain articles imported into the colony may be readily inferred. A letter of June 22, 1770, from Governor Botetourt to the secretary of state regarding the association formed in the colony for a sys- tematic boycotting of British goods stated that the British merchants were largely responsible for it. 32 30 Journal of the House of Burgesses, 1761-1765, p. 227. 31 Ibid., p. 249. 32 Ibid., 1770-1772, introduction, p. 27. 68 FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION OF [244 Governmental Expenses. The colonies were considered of importance only so far as they served the interests of the British government, and especially the interests of the Eng- lish merchants, as was demonstrated by the frequent regula- tions regarding trade. That the colonies gave Great Britain material assistance seems amply demonstrated upon the au- thority of one whose position afforded him an opportunity to ascertain the actual returns from the colonies. A state- ment in 1707 to the lords of the treasury from William Blathwayt, the auditor-general of the colonies, asserted that the American colonies were the chief support of Great Britain. 1 The colony of Virginia was but one in the British colonial system, and from the British point of view was esti- mated very largely by the value of its exports to England. The opinion of the British authorities of the relative wealth and importance of Virginia is shown in the apportionment of the assistance to be given by the colonies to New York. The royal instructions of May 19, 1732, to the governor of that colony stated that the assemblies of certain colonies had been directed to appropriate specified amounts toward the erection of forts on the New York frontier. 2 Virginia was assessed far more than any other colony. It was stated that the contributions should be " in proportion to the respective abilities of each plantation." It was also provided that in case of invasion of New York, the other colonies were to furnish troops. 3 Virginia was called on to furnish forty more men for the defense of New York than that colony itself was expected to supply. When Virginia became a royal colony in 1624, the British government proposed to assume the expense of the local gov- ernmental charges, including the governor's salary and the cost of defense against the Indians, which were to be met 1 Cal. St. P. Treas. Papers, 1702-1707, p. 532. 2 Rhode Island and Providence, 150; Connecticut, 450; Penn- sylvania, 350; Maryland, 650; Virginia, 900 (C. O. 5: 195, 42). 3 Massachusetts Bay, 350; New Hampshire, 40; Rhode Island, 48; Connecticut, 120; New York, 200; East New Jersey, 60; West New Jersey, 60; Pennsylvania, 80; Maryland, 160; Virginia, 240 (C. O. 5: 195,42). 245] THE COLONY OF VIRGINIA 69 with part of the revenue on tobacco. 4 Shortly after his accession, Charles I also stated that the maintenance of all public officials in Virginia should be borne by the crown. 5 Until 1643 a part of the governor's salary was paid either directly or indirectly out of the royal exchequer, but from that date until about 1660 the whole salary was paid by the colonists directly by public tax. After that it was paid indi- rectly out of the duty on exported tobacco. Thus the as- sumption by the British government of the salary of the governor was invalid, except during the brief period indi- cated. As each of the officials of the colony is studied, it is observed that not only the provincial appointees, but also those holding royal commissions were either directly or indi- rectly paid by the colonists. The British authorities, notwithstanding the declaration of their intention to bear the cost of defense against the Indians, left this matter very largely to the colonies, for it was in fact the established policy of the British government that in times of peace in Europe the defense of a colony against a local enemy should devolve primarily on the colony itself. This policy was departed from with reluctance. 6 In 1695 the British government, deciding to leave the de- fense of the New York frontier to the colonies, directed that an appropriation of 500 be made by Virginia for this pur- pose. In an address to the governor the burgesses insisted that in view of the taxes and other expenses then borne in order to protect the frontier of Virginia, the colony should not be expected to aid New York. They maintained that Virginia had never received assistance, and added: "to which opinion they are the more induced, by this further consideration, that as this country always has in its greatest necessities, borne its own charge, without any assistance from other places, and by means thereof, is reduced to a lower ebb and degree of want, so now it must by the forces and assistance lodged within itself, be its own defense and 4 T. Rymer, Foedera, vol. xvii, p. 669; Beer, Origins, p. 318. 5 Cal. St. P. Col. 1574-1660, pp. 73-74. 6 Beer, Origins, p. 319. 7 Money answers all Things: or an essay to make money sufficiently plenti- ful amongst all ranks of people, and increase our foreign and do- mestick trade. By Jacob Vanderlint London, 1734. (Ready.) An Essay on Ways and Means for raising Money for the support of the present war, without increasing the public debts. By Francis Fau- quier London, 1756. (In press.) Each tract will be supplied by the editor with a brief introduction and with text annotations where indispensable. The general appearance of the title-page will be preserved, and the original pagination will be indicated. The edition will be limited to five hundred copies. With a view to serving the largest student usefulness, the subscription for the entire series of four tracts has been fixed at the net price of Two Dollars. Of the tracts heretofore reprinted, a limited number can yet be obtained, as follows. As the editions approach exhaustion, the prices indicated are likely to be increased without notice: Asgill, " Several Assertions Proved." London, 1696. Price, 50 cents. Barbon, "A Discourse of Trade." London, 1690. Price, 50 cents. For trey, " England's Interest Considered." Cambridge, 1663. Price, 50 eta. Longe, " A Refutation of the Wage-Fund Theory." London, 1866. Price, 75 cents. Malthus, " An Inquiry into the Nature and Progress of Rent." London, 1815. Price, 75 cents. Worth, " Discourses upon Trade." London, 1691. Price, 50 cents. Ricardo, "Three Letters on 'The Price of Gold.'" London, 1809. Price, 75 cents. West, "Essay on the Application of Capital to Land." London, 1815. Price, 75 cents. Subscriptions and orders should be sent to THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS BALTIMORE, MD.