Rebuttal Charles/Elizabeth report Linda: Enjoyed your report! You hit all the "soft" points exactly right. However, I still believe the Moorman's were Quakers before the family set foot in VA. In support of your position favoring a later conversion, James Johnson was kicked out of the Friends in 1739 when he married "out of meeting". His wife, of course, was Lucy Clark, daughter of Andrew Moorman Sr. So Lucy was not a Quaker, and there is no evidence that Andrew Sr. was a Quaker although ALL of Andrew's children (by several wives) were active Quakers and his oldest son, Thomas, became a Quaker missionary. On the other hand, Rachel Clark and Thomas Moorman were married at the Cedar Creek Meeting on 12 Jan 1729/30. Suggests rather strongly, doesn't it, that both were Quakers! Also, based on the Henrico Meeting records, Francis Clark was a birthright Quaker. Want to debate the identity of his parents and which of them was a Quaker? (I know you suspect Francis and Christopher were not brothers.) Edward Johnson was a Quaker and his daugter, Penelope was a birthright Quaker. Any record that Penelope was dismissed from the Quakers when she married Christopher Clark? Christopher strayed away from the Quakers duing much of his adult life, but all evidence points to a conclusion that he, too, was a birthright Quaker. We know that he returned to the Quaker fold late in life. Finally, I faintly recall that Charles Moorman's name appears in the Henrico (Curles) Meeting records much earlier than 1744 -- more like 1722 or 1723. Check it out in Hinshaw. Didn't expect me to agree with EVERTHING did you? Doug Linda & Doug -- > On the other hand, Rachel Clark and Thomas Moorman were married at the > Cedar Creek Meeting on 12 Jan 1729/30. Cedar Creek monthly meeting wasn't established until 1739 and there is no mention of a marriage date for Thomas and Rachel in Cedar Creek's records or elsewhere in the Quaker records I have seen. In fact, I have never seen a source for this date although I have seen it repeated many times. > Edward Johnson was a Quaker and his > daugter, Penelope was a birthright Quaker. Any record that Penelope was > dismissed from the Quakers when she married Christopher Clark? I have never seen any records of either Edward or Penelope in the published Quaker records. Can Doug point us at any records? > >Finally, I faintly recall that Charles Moorman's name appears in the > Henrico (Curles) Meeting records much earlier than 1744 -- more like 1722 > or 1723. Check it out in Hinshaw. I did check it out, there's nothing there in the Henrico MM records. Mary Mary and Linda Come on guys, the record shows that the Cedar Creek Meeting was formed in 1714 and that it initially met in the Stanley home. The first meeting house was completed in 1721 on 800 acres of land donated by the Stanley family in 1719. The deed is recorded! Even the meeting house subscription list has survived. Perhaps it was my use of the word "monthly" that created the problem. If so, I apologize. However, Thomas and Rachel were married at the Cedar Creek Meeting on 12 January 1729/30 whether anyone wants to accept it or not. Additionally, Quaker records AND official VA records both state that the Camp Creek and Fork Creek Meetings both were in operation before 1733. (The Fork Creek Meeting was formed in 1730) That means there were enough Quakers in Green Springs by 1733 to support the formation of a "particular" or weekly meeting. That usually meant roughly a dozen families. The Cedar Creek records (not Hinshaw) show that Charles and Thomas Moorman were named "overseers" of the Camp Creek meeting in 1740/41 which implies that Camp Creek had a meeting house by that date. Most of the above dates also appear in the footnotes and appendix material in the "Friendly Virginians." However, I also picked up somewhere a note that suggested that the Camp Creek Meeting operated from 1744 to 1754. I don't know the origin of the note, but consider it to be an error. As for the 1722/23 citation for Charles Moreman in Quaker records, I will have to trace my notes back to the original record and let you know line and page. I have is cited twice in my early research notes. His name was mentioned as a delegate to a safety conference. Doug Tucker Doug - My point is that the date and place of Thomas and Rachel's wedding does not appear in any published Quaker or civil record that I can find. If you have found a record, please let us know where and what it is. I would certainly be delighted to see it. Mary Ed Marsh sent: Hi, A note or two to add. I have Hinshaw on a database so I can initiate computerized searches. I find Chales and Thomas Moorman mentioned under Curles Meeting in connection with the founding of CAMP CREEK MM in 1744: [p.283] CAMP CREEK MONTHLY MEETING Camp Creek Particular Meeting, from which the monthly meeting took its name, is first mentioned in the Cedar Creek Monthly Meeting books when it is recorded in September, 1744, that "There being a meeting lately settled in the Upper part of Louisa County, several Friends of the said meeting request this meeting to come under the care of Friends", the Cedar Creek Monthly Meeting accepted the newly formed meeting and appointed Charles Moorman and his son, Thomas, as overseers. That it is Camp Creek that is here referred to is shown by the fact that at the following monthly meeting, Camp Creek Particular Meeting reports for the first time. [p.283] CAMP CREEK MONTHLY MEETING In 1748, one year after its establishment, the new monthly meeting had a fresh incentive toward growth in the formation of one or more new particular meetings. In October of that year, "Christopher Clark, in behalf of the Friends at the mountains, requests a meeting house be built at the Mountains". This request was immediately granted and Christopher and Boling Clark were appointed overseers of "the meeting near Sugar Loaf Mountain". One of these meetings (if there was more than one) may have been what was later known as "Douglas Meeting". I find no earlier mention per se but Thomas Moorman appears as follows. I get a "kick" out of this article, "Your churches and chapels are no better than synagogues of Satan". [p.145] HENRICO MONTHLY MEETING (also called Curles, New Kent, Upper, Upland, White Oak Swamp and Weyanoke Monthly Meeting) However, we would be making a mistake to assume that Curles and its immediate neighborhood was the only locality in this section where Quakers were active and holding meetings before 1699. A scrutiny of the Register of Saint Peter's parish which begins in 1686 is revealing in that it names many men living in Henrico, New Kent and the territory that later became Hanover, Caroline and Louisa Counties whose names also appear frequently in the Quaker records. Among these are: Charles Fleming, John Realy (Raley), Thomas Moorman, James Woody, Rice Hugnes, Richmond Terrell, Sisilly Ellison, Alexander Mackeney, Thomas Stanley, Thomas Harris, William and John Johnson, Robert Ellison, Garret Robert Elleson, Robert Hughes and others. How many of these were Quakers in 1686 it is impossible to say, though some were, as a matter of fact, while others may have been "convinced" at a later date. With the opening of the 1700's this Parish was a most fertile field for the expansion of the Curles Monthly Meeting. A letter from the Episcopal rector (Mr. Nicholas Moreau) to his Bishop in 1697 shows why this was so and gives a more comprehensive picture of the state of affairs than I can ever hope to do. He recites, in part: "I don't like this Country at all, my Lord, there are so many inconveniences in it with which I cannot well agree. Your clergy in these parts are of a very ill example, no discipline or Canons of the Church are observed. This Clergy is composed for the most part of Scotchmen, people indeed so basely educated & so little acquainted with the excellency of their charge & duty that their lives and conversation are fitter to make heathens than christians. Several ministers have caused such high scandals of late & have raised such prejeduces amongst the people against the Clergy that hardly can they be persuaded to take a minister in their parish. As to me, my Lord, I have got in the very worst parish of Virginia & the most troublesome . I have brought to church again two families who had gone to the Quakers' meeting for three years past, and have baptized one of their children three years old . I have another old Quaker 70 years of age who left the church these 29 years & hope to bring him to church again within the next few weeks . If ministers were such as they ought to be, I dare say there would be no Quakers nor Dissenters". But the ministers did not behave as they ought and in 1745 we read of a Mr. Thomas Watkins of Henrico being presented in Court for reflecting on the Established Church saying, "Your churches and chapels are no better than synagogues of Satan". The fact that he was dismissed without fine or injury would imply that some agreed with him. Boy I take off an afternoon to drive to Tulsa and look what happens! I think all of you will enjoy the messages that flew between Doug Tucker and Mary Stewart while I was gone. I follow with a contribution from Ed Marsh and then my own personal comments. Others sent specific questions about other family members which I'll include in another message. Lest some of you aren't familiar with the use of ">" by most mail programs, lines that begin with this symbol is the statement the person writing the message is replying to. Mary's program uses it, and Doug's doesn't. Therefore, I'll try to make clear BEFORE each message, who is the writer -- my comments in brackets. [Mary begins, replying to Doug's:] > On the other hand, Rachel Clark and Thomas Moorman were married at the > Cedar Creek Meeting on 12 Jan 1729/30. Cedar Creek monthly meeting wasn't established until 1739 and there is no mention of a marriage date for Thomas and Rachel in Cedar Creek's records or elsewhere in the Quaker records I have seen. In fact, I have never seen a source for this date although I have seen it repeated many times. > Edward Johnson was a Quaker and his > daugter, Penelope was a birthright Quaker. Any record that Penelope was > dismissed from the Quakers when she married Christopher Clark? I have never seen any records of either Edward or Penelope in the published Quaker records. Can Doug point us at any records? > >Finally, I faintly recall that Charles Moorman's name appears in the > Henrico (Curles) Meeting records much earlier than 1744 -- more like 1722 > or 1723. Check it out in Hinshaw. I did check it out, there's nothing there in the Henrico MM records. Mary [Doug's reply to this:] Come on guys, the record shows that the Cedar Creek Meeting was formed in 1714 and that it initially met in the Stanley home. The first meeting house was completed in 1721 on 800 acres of land donated by the Stanley family in 1719. The deed is recorded! Even the meeting house subscription list has survived. Perhaps it was my use of the word "monthly" that created the problem. If so, I apologize. However, Thomas and Rachel were married at the Cedar Creek Meeting on 12 January 1729/30 whether anyone wants to accept it or not. Additionally, Quaker records AND official VA records both state that the Camp Creek and Fork Creek Meetings both were in operation before 1733. (The Fork Creek Meeting was formed in 1730) That means there were enough Quakers in Green Springs by 1733 to support the formation of a "particular" or weekly meeting. That usually meant roughly a dozen families. The Cedar Creek records (not Hinshaw) show that Charles and Thomas Moorman were named "overseers" of the Camp Creek meeting in 1740/41 which implies that Camp Creek had a meeting house by that date. Most of the above dates also appear in the footnotes and appendix material in the "Friendly Virginians." However, I also picked up somewhere a note that suggested that the Camp Creek Meeting operated from 1744 to 1754. I don't know the origin of the note, but consider it to be an error. As for the 1722/23 citation for Charles Moreman in Quaker records, I will have to trace my notes back to the original record and let you know line and page. I have is cited twice in my early research notes. His name was mentioned as a delegate to a safety conference. [Mary's response:] My point is that the date and place of Thomas and Rachel's wedding does not appear in any published Quaker or civil record that I can find. If you have found a record, please let us know where and what it is. I would certainly be delighted to see it. [Linda here: _The Friendly Virginians: America's First Quakers_ by Jay Worrall Jr., Iberian Publ Co., Athens: 1994. I recommend it highly for anyone interested in the Quaker movement. Worrall also authored an article "The Albemarle Quakers, 1742-1754" published by Magazine of VA Genealogy, vol. 22, AUG 1984, No. 3 pages 22-34. This article concentrates on the Christopher Clark family rather than the Moormans. My guess is, this is Doug's source for the marriage of Thomas Moorman/Rachel Clark at Cedar Creek. Worral's source for the entire paragraph (p.24) is Ruth H. Early, _Campbell Chronicles and Family Sketches_, Lynchburg, 1927, p. 368: "In those same years, the Quakers at Fork Creek built a meeting house and became a 'particular' or subsidiary meeting of the Cedar Creek Friends Meeting. Most of Christopher and Penelope Clark's children probably married in that primitive little building, beginning with Agnes, who married Ben Johnson there about 1728, and Rachel who married Thomas Moorman soon thereafter. Both Johnson and Moorman were Quakers, but in 1733 the Clarks' third daughter, Sarah, married Charles Lynch and Charles, though he had grown up in the Clark family, never joined the Friends. The remaining Clark children who seem to have married in Fork Creek Meeting House are Micajah who married Judith Adams about 1736; Elizabeth whose husband was Joseph Anthony; and Bowling whose wife's first name was Winifred but whose maiden name is unknown." Ed Marsh forwarded this additional information which includes some of the things the other two are dicussing. This is from vol. 6 of _Encyclopedia of American Quaker Genealogy_ by William Wade Hinshaw, GenPubCo.] A note or two to add. I have Hinshaw on a database so I can initiate computerized searches. I find Chales and Thomas Moorman mentioned under Curles Meeting in connection with the founding of CAMP CREEK MM in 1744: [p.283] CAMP CREEK MONTHLY MEETING Camp Creek Particular Meeting, from which the monthly meeting took its name, is first mentioned in the Cedar Creek Monthly Meeting books when it is recorded in September, 1744, that "There being a meeting lately settled in the Upper part of Louisa County, several Friends of the said meeting request this meeting to come under the care of Friends", the Cedar Creek Monthly Meeting accepted the newly formed meeting and appointed Charles Moorman and his son, Thomas, as overseers. That it is Camp Creek that is here referred to is shown by the fact that at the following monthly meeting, Camp Creek Particular Meeting reports for the first time. [p.283] CAMP CREEK MONTHLY MEETING In 1748, one year after its establishment, the new monthly meeting had a fresh incentive toward growth in the formation of one or more new particular meetings. In October of that year, "Christopher Clark, in behalf of the Friends at the mountains, requests a meeting house be built at the Mountains". This request was immediately granted and Christopher and Boling Clark were appointed overseers of "the meeting near Sugar Loaf Mountain". One of these meetings (if there was more than one) may have been what was later known as "Douglas Meeting". I find no earlier mention per se but Thomas Moorman appears as follows. I get a "kick" out of this article, "Your churches and chapels are no better than synagogues of Satan". [p.145] HENRICO MONTHLY MEETING (also called Curles, New Kent, Upper, Upland, White Oak Swamp and Weyanoke Monthly Meeting) However, we would be making a mistake to assume that Curles and its immediate neighborhood was the only locality in this section where Quakers were active and holding meetings before 1699. A scrutiny of the Register of Saint Peter's parish which begins in 1686 is revealing in that it names many men living in Henrico, New Kent and the territory that later became Hanover, Caroline and Louisa Counties whose names also appear frequently in the Quaker records. Among these are: Charles Fleming, John Realy (Raley), Thomas Moorman, James Woody, Rice Hugnes, Richmond Terrell, Sisilly Ellison, Alexander Mackeney, Thomas Stanley, Thomas Harris, William and John Johnson, Robert Ellison, Garret Robert Elleson, Robert Hughes and others. How many of these were Quakers in 1686 it is impossible to say, though some were, as a matter of fact, while others may have been "convinced" at a later date. With the opening of the 1700's this Parish was a most fertile field for the expansion of the Curles Monthly Meeting. A letter from the Episcopal rector (Mr. Nicholas Moreau) to his Bishop in 1697 shows why this was so and gives a more comprehensive picture of the state of affairs than I can ever hope to do. He recites, in part: "I don't like this Country at all, my Lord, there are so many inconveniences in it with which I cannot well agree. Your clergy in these parts are of a very ill example, no discipline or Canons of the Church are observed. This Clergy is composed for the most part of Scotchmen, people indeed so basely educated & so little acquainted with the excellency of their charge & duty that their lives and conversation are fitter to make heathens than christians. Several ministers have caused such high scandals of late & have raised such prejeduces amongst the people against the Clergy that hardly can they be persuaded to take a minister in their parish. As to me, my Lord, I have got in the very worst parish of Virginia & the most troublesome . I have brought to church again two families who had gone to the Quakers' meeting for three years past, and have baptized one of their children three years old . I have another old Quaker 70 years of age who left the church these 29 years & hope to bring him to church again within the next few weeks . If ministers were such as they ought to be, I dare say there would be no Quakers nor Dissenters". But the ministers did not behave as they ought and in 1745 we read of a Mr. Thomas Watkins of Henrico being presented in Court for reflecting on the Established Church saying, "Your churches and chapels are no better than synagogues of Satan". The fact that he was dismissed without fine or injury would imply that some agreed with him. [Linda here: I believe the letter he refers to is also in Bishop Meade's _Old Churches, Ministers and Families of Virginia_ in two volumes; orig. published 1857; reprint Heritage Books. Ed and Doug are correct; this introduction to the Henrico MM where Thomas Moorman's name is located is found "in" Hinshaw; however, it was written "by" Hinshaw with lots of help from Dr. Lorand Johnson. (If any one wants a citation for that statement, I'll re-type a letter in my file.) When Mary and I refer to lack of specific MOORMAN surname "in Hinshaw", we are talking about his abstracts of the Quaker MM records, and not his introduction (history) of the Monthly Meetings. One does NOT find a MOORMAN as witness to a marriage / one of the participants in a marriage, or in any of the other Quaker record categories until the 1744 one mentioned in my report. Part 3 [Hi everyone, Again, I'm omitting specific questions about Andrew Moorman and his family -- which I will send around soon; but I want to keep this interesting discussion going for now. We are fortunate to have some Quaker experts in our midst. Doug begins:] The Black Creek Quaker meeting (sometimes called the New kent Meeting) was formed in 1691 and was "formalized" with a Meeting House in 1699. That is the Meeting which almost all the folks we are interested in would have attended -- if they were Quakers. Unfortunately, the early Black Creek records have not survived and all that we have are those Black Creek records that made their way into the Monthly meeting records. In the "Friendly Virginians" is a passage about a very early Black Creek Quaker meeting that was held in an orchard and was attended by two visiting Quakers from England (one was named Edmondson) who wrote the account in their report back to England. For those that are unfamiliar with the area, Black Creek is about 6 miles long, flows from west to east and enters the Pamunkey River close to the border of New Kent Co. and Hanover Co. The Quaker Meetinghouse was built on the upper reaches of the northernmost branch of Black Creek (not including Cattail Swamp) and was almost in the backyards of Edward Johnson and Francis Clark. When Hanover Co. was formed, the Meetinghouse fell in its territory. Charles Moorman, who lived along Whiting Swamp, was about three miles from the Black Creek Meetinghouse. Until the Cedar Creek Meeting was designated as a "Monthly Meeting" in 1739, the Monthly Meeting that controlled all of the several particular weekly meetings in New Kent, Hanover, Louisa Cos was the Henrico Monthly Meeting. The weekly meeting in Henrico was known as the Curles meeting -- once a month the Curles and Henrico meetings "overlapped". Similarly, at Cedar Creek there was a weekly meeting and, after 1739, a monthly meeting as well. Quakers normally held meetings in their homes until there were enough Quaker families in the immediate area to petition the monthly meeting to allow them to establish a new particular or weekly meeting. Just background that might be helpful. [And every little bit of information does help. Now to Mary's personal knowledge about Hinshaw's introductions to the various meetings. Should any of you not recognize the names: Douglas Summers Brown is a recognized authority on the VA Quakers -- she and Sue Terrill almost single handedly started the Jones Memorial Libary in Lynchburg. She authored a book, the name of which escapes me this early a.m. Juliet Fauntleroy worked at/for the VA Library; among other things, she transcribed several Bibles in their collection.] Douglas Summers Brown signed the introductions to the records of Henrico MM and Cedar Creek MM among others and I guess she must have had a large part in writing them. I know that Juliet Fauntleroy did extensive research in the Quaker families of Campbell and Bedford counties and understand that she was a resource for the early history of these families. My aunt, Mary Winston Moorman White, was a cousin by marriage to Juliet Fauntleroy and corresponded with her frequently. In addition, Mary was herself a Quaker and she did a lot of research in the early records when she traveled to Baltimore for Yearly Meeting. I have reams of her handwritten notes. Why all this? I suspect, although I cannot prove, that my aunt was the source for saying that the Moormans were early Quakers in the introductions. She relied on the same assertions which stem from the 1880 newspaper article. In other words, I think the introductory remarks about the Moormans are flimsy at best. > Worral's source for the entire paragraph (p.24) is Ruth H. Early, > _Campbell Chronicles and Family Sketches_, Lynchburg, 1927, p. 368: Ruth Early is entertaining but not to be trusted on the facts. For instance, she is completely in error when she writes about another of my great-grands, Gerard Alexander. She made his third wife the mother of his children and sent me off on a wild goose chase. > introduction (history) of the Monthly Meetings. One does NOT find a MOORMAN > as witness to a marriage / one of the participants in a marriage, or in any > of the other Quaker record categories until the 1744 one mentioned in my > report. Thanks for that. What I find really interesting is who does and doesn't appear in the early Quaker records. Charles Fleming does and he was a known neighbor of Thomas Moorman in New Kent. He shows up in the earliest records of the Henrico MM and Worrall quotes Byrd's diaries with several references to Charles (p. 108ff). The Flemings drop out of Henrico's records in 1718. Another neighbor, Anthony Winston. doesn't appear. In fact, Nathaniel is the earliest Winston and doesn't appear until 1749. Nathaniel's son, George, was a founder of the Richmond meeting and built their meeting house. Some of George's descendants are still Quakers. Does signing on early rather than later make a stronger commitment? Just a thought. [Next we hear from Heather Olsen. She sent two messages which I am editing. Her specific questions/comments about Andrew Moorman will appear in the later message with others; I've grouped the rest of her comments into one. Remember lines beginning with ">" is a quote from a previous statement. She begins with Doug's quote:] (I know you suspect Francis and > Christopher were not brothers.) Edward Johnson was a Quaker and his > daugter, Penelope was a birthright Quaker. Any record that Penelope was > dismissed from the Quakers when she married Christopher Clark? Christopher > strayed away from the Quakers duing much of his adult life, but all > evidence points to a conclusion that he, too, was a birthright Quaker. We > know that he returned to the Quaker fold late in life. > > Finally, I faintly recall that Charles Moorman's name appears in the > Henrico (Curles) Meeting records much earlier than 1744 -- more like 1722 > or 1723. Check it out in Hinshaw. I don't have the relevant page of Hinshaw handy. I am inclined to partly agree with Doug, though. In 1744, Charles Moorman's name is mentioned in Cedar Creek records when he is made overseer of the particular meeting at Camp Creek. I would think to be overseer, he would have had to have been a Quaker for at least a few years. Perhaps there had been meetings in Louisa Co. and vicinity opperating semi-officialy for some time, and leaving no surviving records. This could account for the absence of records on many of the folks we are chasing. I'm not going to wade into whether any of there folks arrived in VA as Quakers, as I don't have enough info to make an intelligent guess. > [Mary begins, replying to Doug's:] > > On the other hand, Rachel Clark and Thomas Moorman were married at the > > Cedar Creek Meeting on 12 Jan 1729/30. > > Cedar Creek monthly meeting wasn't established until 1739 > [Doug's reply to this:] > > Come on guys, the record shows that the Cedar Creek Meeting was formed in > 1714 and that it initially met in the Stanley home. > Perhaps it was my use of the word "monthly" that > created the problem. Precisely. There was a _particular_ meeting at Cedar Creek from 1719 or thereabouts, but it belonged to Henrico MM until 1739. As far as I know there are no _records_ from Cedar Creek from this time period, there is only what was recorded at Henrico MM. If so, I apologize. However, Thomas and Rachel were > married at the Cedar Creek Meeting on 12 January 1729/30 whether anyone > wants to accept it or not. What record shows this? > Additionally, Quaker records AND official VA records both state that the > Camp Creek and Fork Creek Meetings both were in operation before 1733. (The > Fork Creek Meeting was formed in 1730) That means there were enough Quakers > in Green Springs by 1733 to support the formation of a "particular" or > weekly meeting. That usually meant roughly a dozen families. I am inclined to agree that there were meetings of sorts in Louisa Co. in that time period. The number of families that belonged is a matter of speculation, since we don't have records. The Cedar > Creek records (not Hinshaw) show that Charles and Thomas Moorman were named > "overseers" of the Camp Creek meeting in 1740/41 which implies that Camp > Creek had a meeting house by that date. Most of the above dates also appear > in the footnotes and appendix material in the "Friendly Virginians." I read "Friendly Virginians" a while ago, and don't remember that info being in there. I'll have to get ahold of a copy again. > However, I also picked up somewhere a note that suggested that the Camp > Creek Meeting operated from 1744 to 1754. I don't know the origin of the > note, but consider it to be an error. 1744 is when Camp Creek became a particular meeting of Cedar Creek. It became a monthly meeting in 1747, and was laid down in 1753, with members again coming under the jurisdiction of Cedar Creek. There probably was an informal or "indulged meeting" there before 1744, though how long before is speculation. There certainly were Quakers in Louisa in the 1730's. Ed Marsh did such a good job supplying additional information, I'll let his message stand alone. L Hi all, Some notes: 1] ...to corroborate the comment on Early's Campbell Chronicles. The CANDLER material in this book has led me astray several times. 2] ditto.. on D.S.B.-- JANE (Mrs. Douglass Summers) Brown, has led me equally astray. 3] I'm curious about this quotation in Hinshaw: "we would be making a mistake to assume that Curles [...] was the only locality in this section where Quakers were active and holding meetings before 1699. A scrutiny of the Register of Saint Peter's parish which begins in 1686 is revealing in that it names many men living in Henrico, New Kent and the territory that later became Hanover, Caroline and Louisa Counties whose names also appear frequently in the Quaker records. Among these are: Charles Fleming, John Realy (Raley), Thomas Moorman, James Woody, Rice Hugnes, Richmond Terrell, Sisilly Ellison, Alexander Mackeney, Thomas Stanley, Thomas Harris, William and John Johnson, Robert Ellison, Garret Robert Elleson, Robert Hughes and others. How many of these were Quakers in 1686 it is impossible to say..." Certainly seems to imply that the early Moormans were not Quakers. For those who want to read the Henrico articles -- Encyclopedia of American Quaker Genealogy: Virginia [p.145] HENRICO MONTHLY MEETING (also called Curles, New Kent, Upper, Upland, White Oak Swamp and Weyanoke Monthly Meeting) Counties within bounds of this Monthly Meeting: Henrico, New Kent, Hanover, Caroline, Louisa, Goochland, Prince George, Dinwiddie, Amelia, Chesterfield, York, James City, Charles City, Mecklenburg Particular meetings: Curles, Henrico Co.; Black Creek, New Kent Co.; Merchant's Hope (Binford's) Prince George Co.; Howards (Old Man's Neck), Charles City Co.; John Crew's, Charles City Co.; William Ladd's, Charles City Co.; Weyanoke, Charles City Co.; Whipanock (or Appomattox) Dinwiddie Co.; Gravelly Run, Dinwiddie Co.; Pattison's (or Amelia), Amelia Co.; Beaver Dam, Hanover Co.; Hanover (or The Swamp), Hanover Co.; Burleigh (or Hunnicutt's) Prince George Co.; Cedar Creek, Hanover Co.; "Widdow Buller's", Appomattox Co.; White Oak Swamp, Henrico Co.; Dover, Goochland Co.; Scimino, York Co.; Langley's (Burlington), Dinwiddie Co.; Picquinocque, Henrico Co.; Richmond, City of Richmond. "It is not until July, 1702, that we find positive evidence that the three particular meetings (Curles in Henrico, Black Creek in New Kent, and Howard's in Charles City County) are organized into a monthly meeting. The entry for 1702-7-4 reads: "Ordered by Friends of this meeting that there shall be a meeting held at Williams Porter's in one of his houses as he shall appoint for the business concerning friends belonging to the weekly meetings of New Kent, Curles and James Howard's - the 2nd seventh day after the first first day in every month, and two Friends are ordered to attend their monthly meeting from every one of the aforsd weekly meetings". This would make it clearness with respect to marriage that this monthly meeting had never been truly organized, though it had been calling itself a monthly meeting for two years. This new arrangement caused dissention as shown later when James Howard refused to attend the sessions. In 1703 the Virginia Yearly Meeting ordered that he and Charles Fleming appear and give an account of their proceedings. Howard refused to go, giving as his excuse his old age and that "it would raise disputes and arguments". Finally he is warned that if he does not appear at the following monthly meeting he will be disciplined; he reported that the women are not in unity with the meeting as now set up but they send a letter to the yearly meeting showing otherwise. I produce this letter as it gives in part the list of women members at this time: "We whose names are underwritten are in true unity with the monthly meeting: Signed (in) behalf of our Wom. Meeting by: Jane Pleasants, Martha Pleasants, Margt Porter, Mary Howard, Sarah Mosby, Jane Anna Gertrite, Sarah Ellyson, Elizabeth Jordan, Jane Woodson, Sarah Fleming, Dorothy Pleasants, Rachel Hughes, Judith Woodson, Elisa Atkinson. In 1706 a meeting is set up at John Crew's in Charles City County and two years later it is removed to William Lead's (Ladd) "at the request . (of) Friends in the woods about Hering Creek". In 1711 severe persecution fell upon the Virginia Quakers and in the Yearly Meeting care was taken "and Friends appointed to see that families and affairs of such who are in prison for testimony of a good conscience do not suffer . " This persecution was brought on by the refusal of some to work, hire, or in any way aid in making "any fort or defense against enemies". Rumor had swept the country that a French fleet was approaching and the colony in danger of invasion. Gov. Spottswood, in great alarm ordered the erection of fortifications and the enlistment of all able bodied men in the militia or to work on the forts. From the secret diary of William Byrd, the famed "River Barron" we gather more on this point. In September 1711 he says: [p.149] "I was a long time in discoursing with the Governor concerning what should be done with obstinate Quakers ." The next month he tells how he attended the militia court where "all Quakers were fined". He further relates, "Captain Royall neither came nor returned a list though he had two Quakers in his company. I spoke gently to the Quakers which gave them a good opinion of me and several of them seemed doubtful whether they would be arrested or not for the future. I told them they would certainly be fined five times a year if they did not do as their fellow subjects". In August John Cross refused to work on the breastworks at Jamestown and Byrd was ordered to punish him. Not only did Byrd's class persecute the Quakers but often made them objects of personal ridicule. For instance in 1712 he says, "in the afternoon we were merry and made the Quaker captain (of "The Pelican") drink the Queen's health on his knees". We can be certain that the "Quaker song" he made "on John Pleasants", was his near neighbor, was ribald**** In 1717 Benjamin Holme, a minister, came bearing letters from London and visited the meetings in this monthly meeting as well as many in North Carolina. He reported disputes "with priests" and that a new meeting house had "been built in New Kent and there are many meetings there" - showing not only the rapid growth of this sect but the direction in which it was spreading. It was this same minister who founded the Burleigh meeting in Prince George County as well as the one at "Widdo Butler's" in what is now Dinwiddie, thus carrying the western limits of this monthly meeting beyond the James River. Hereafter with members on both sides of the river the Quakers operated a ferry (run by Charles Woodson) for the convenience of those coming and going to the sessions of the monthly meeting. The primitive condition of the crossriver meetings can be gathered from the nature of the seizures for fines, for even as late as 1740 four deer skins are taken from John Simmons in lieu of tithes. In December 1721 the Quakers in upper Hanover County were numerous enough and had sufficient strength to build their own meeting house and have an established meeting settled among them known as Cedar Creek. Encyclopedia of American Quaker Genealogy: Virginia [p.145] HENRICO MONTHLY MEETING (also called Curles, New Kent, Upper, Upland, White Oak Swamp and Weyanoke Monthly Meeting) In 1722 steps were taken to begin a monthly meeting house - all previous sessions having been held in the house of William Porter, Jr., and later at Edward Mosby's. The Friends assented to have it built by Edward Mosby "the Dementions whereof to be twenty-four foot in length and seventeen foot in breth To be fraimd on Cills Covered with hart shingles naild every third course Ceald within with pine Boards . and to make three doors and a partition to be eight foot from one ende The said pertition to be raised up when accasion requires, also two windows on one Side (of) the house The other on the other Side (of the) House at the Ende oposite to which is to be erected a small gallery for ministering Friends - Together with Seats Suffishant for the Sd house, for which The sd Edward Mosby is to have 15 pounds Money half of which to be paid when the house is raised The other half if the Sd Edward can by a just account make it appear that he is a loser Thereby, the Meeting to Repearr the Sd Loss". Encyclopedia of American Quaker Genealogy: Virginia [p.145] HENRICO MONTHLY MEETING (also called Curles, New Kent, Upper, Upland, White Oak Swamp and Weyanoke Monthly Meeting) The above church was called the "White Oak Swamp Meeting House" because it stood in Henrico County near the Swamp of that name, which name was also given to this monthly meeting beginning in the year 1725. 4] On HENRICO MM: Encyclopedia of American Quaker Genealogy: Virginia [p.145] HENRICO MONTHLY MEETING (also called Curles, New Kent, Upper, Upland, White Oak Swamp and Weyanoke Monthly Meeting) Particular meetings: Curles, Henrico Co.; Black Creek, New Kent Co.; Merchant's Hope (Binford's) Prince George Co.; Howards (Old Man's Neck), Charles City Co.; John Crew's, Charles City Co.; William Ladd's, Charles City Co.; Weyanoke, Charles City Co.; Whipanock (or Appomattox) Dinwiddie Co.; Gravelly Run, Dinwiddie Co.; Pattison's (or Amelia), Amelia Co.; Beaver Dam, Hanover Co.; Hanover (or The Swamp), Hanover Co.; Burleigh (or Hunnicutt's) Prince George Co.; Cedar Creek, Hanover Co.; "Widdow Buller's", Appomattox Co.; White Oak Swamp, Henrico Co.; Dover, Goochland Co.; Scimino, York Co.; Langley's (Burlington), Dinwiddie Co.; Picquinocque, Henrico Co.; Richmond, City of Richmond 5] On Henrico/Black Water -- Encyclopedia of American Quaker Genealogy: Virginia [p.39] PAGAN CREEK MONTHLY MEETING (also called Nansemond and Levy Neck Monthly Meeting) page 43 When the one record of Pagan Creek closed in 1752, it closed abruptly, so that the endorsed of this monthly meeting under this name is even more obscrue than its beginning. The last entry is in the 4th month and no mention is made of any proposed change. Fortunately, we have a clue to what may have happened. In the rear of this book are found three certificates of dismissal signed "in and by order of Black Water Monthly Meeting". Likewise in the first known record of Black Water Monthly Meeting are found one or two items pertaining to "Pagan Creek Monthly Meeting". So if these meetings were not actually one and the same from the beginning, then Pagan Creek was absorbed (in 1752) by Black Water. In both meetings many of the family names are the same. Also in 1752 all particular meetings previously belonging to Henrico Monthly Meeting [p.43] which were located on the south side of the James River, were transferred to Black Water. 6] Cont. Encyclopedia of American Quaker Genealogy: Virginia [p.93] BLACK WATER MONTHLY MEETING (also called Surry, Burley and Gravelly Run Monthly Meeting before 1800, also also Sussex and Upper Monthly Meeting; in latter days called Seacock Monthly Meeting) At this time (1752) it is evident from a close study of various records that Black Water Monthly Meeting (or Surry) was the same or was made up of the remnants of the ancient Pagan Creek Monthly Meeting and that part of Curles (Henrico) Monthly Meeting which lay on the south side of the James River. In its limits were the counties of Surry, Sussex, Dinwiddie, Prince George, a part of Southampton, a part of the Isle of Wight, a part of Amelia and Chesterfield. Later Mecklenburg and Brunswick were included. >From 1752-1807 there were 14 or more particular meetings within these counties. In 1762 Black Water Monthly Meeting is described as being in the Black Water Quarterly Meeting (also called Western Branch or Lower quarterly meeting) and its meetings were Black Water, Surry, Black Creek, Stanton's, Burley and William Butler's.