[38] In describing this affair I have relied chiefly upon the affidavits from the records of Westmoreland County, reprinted by Dr. L. G. Tyler, in his admirable William and Mary College Quarterly, ii. 39-43. The affidavits were taken by Nicholas Spencer and Richard Lee, son of the Richard Lee mentioned in the preceding chapter. In Browne’s Maryland, p. 131, an attempt is made to throw the blame for killing the envoys upon the Virginians, but the affidavits seem to me trustworthy and conclusive. It is not likely that there was or is any discernible difference between human nature in Virginia and in Maryland, and public opinion in both colonies condemned Truman’s conduct.

[39] “Cittenborne Parish Grievances, reprinted from Winder Papers, Virginia State Library,” in Virginia Magazine, iii. 35.

[40] “Charles City County Grievances,” Virginia Magazine, iii. 137.

[41] The following abridged table shows the relationship (see Virginia Magazine, ii. 125):—

Robert Bacon, of Drinkstone, Suffolk. | +------------+--------------------+ | | | Thomas Sir Nicholas James Bacon, Bacon. Bacon, Lord alderman of Keeper of the London, d. 1573. Great Seal, | b. 1510, d. 1579. | | | Francis Bacon, Sir James Bacon, Viscount St. Albans of Friston Hall, and Lord Chancellor, d. 1618. b. 1561, d. 1626. | +-------+----------+ | | Nathaniel Bacon, Rev. James Bacon, b. 1593, d. 1644. Rector of Burgate, | d. 1670. | | Thomas Bacon, | m. Elizabeth Brooke. Nathaniel Bacon, | of King’s Creek, Nathaniel Bacon, b. 1620, d. 1692; the Rebel, came to Virginia b. 1648, d. 1676. cir. 1650, and settled at King’s Creek, York County.

[42] Drummond Lake, in the Dismal Swamp, was named for him.

[43] For the picturesque details of this narrative I have followed the well-known document found by Rufus King when minister to Great Britain in 1803, and published by President Jefferson in the Richmond Enquirer in 1804; since reprinted in Force’s Tracts, vol. i., Washington, 1836, and in Maxwell’s Virginia Historical Register, vol. iii., Richmond, 1850. The original manuscript was written in 1705, and addressed to Robert Harley, Queen Anne’s secretary of state, afterward Earl of Oxford. The writer signs himself “T. M.,” and speaks of himself as dwelling in Northumberland County and possessing a plantation also in Stafford County, which he represented in the House of Burgesses. From these indications it is pretty certain that he was Thomas Mathews, son of Governor Samuel Mathews heretofore mentioned. His account of the scenes of which he was an eye-witness is quite vivid.

[44] Bruce, Economic History, ii. 455.

[45] T. M. goes on to remark that “the two chief commanders ... who slew the four Indian great men” were present among the burgesses. This may seem to implicate Colonel Washington and Major Allerton in the killing of the envoys; but T. M.’s recollection, thirty years after the event, is of not much weight when contradicted by the sworn affidavits above cited. The facts that, while Truman was impeached in Maryland, no such action seems to have been undertaken in Virginia against Washington and Allerton, and that, after the governor’s strong words regarding the slaying, the friendly relations between him and these gentlemen continued, would indicate that their skirts were clean.

[46] Beverley (History and Present State of Virginia, London, 1705, bk. iv. p. 3) tells us that before 1680 the council and burgesses sat together, like the Scotch parliament, and that the separation occurred under Lord Culpeper’s administration; and his statement is generally repeated by historians without qualification. Yet here in 1676 we find the two houses sitting separately, and the discussion cited shows that it had often been so before; otherwise the sending of two councillors to sit with the burgesses could not have been customary. Beverley’s date of 1680 was evidently intended as the final date of separation; not as the date before which the two houses never sat separately, but as the date after which they never sat together.