American Historic Towns
Historic Towns of New England
Edited by LYMAN P. POWELL. With Introduction by GEORGE P. MORRIS.
Fully illustrated. Large 8^o, $3.50.
Historic Towns of the Middle States
Edited by LYMAN P. POWELL. With Introduction by ALBERT SHAW. Fully
illustrated. Large 8^o, $3.50.
Historic Towns of the Southern States
Edited by LYMAN P. POWELL. With Introduction by W. P. TRENT. Fully
illustrated. Large 8^o, $3.50.
G. P. PUTNAM’S SONS, New York and London
American Historic Towns
HISTORIC TOWNS
OF THE
SOUTHERN STATES
Edited by
LYMAN P. POWELL
Illustrated
G. P. PUTNAM’S SONS
NEW YORK & LONDON
The Knickerbocker Press
1900
COPYRIGHT, 1900
BY
G. P. PUTNAM’S SONS
The Knickerbocker Press, New York
[Illustration: _The Library of Congress, Washington, D. C._]
[Illustration]
PREFACE
The triad of volumes dealing with the older _American Historic Towns_
along or near the eastern coast is now complete. The three volumes,
like the chapters of which they are composed, have their inevitable
limitations. While neither in historical value nor in literary quality
has it proved practicable to secure a uniformity of standard, editor
and contributors have done the best they could, and they now feel
assured that the series has proved its right to exist. It is quickening
interest in our historic towns, bringing to light important facts,
picturing for the patriotic reader who may not be free to make personal
visits the places he would visit if he could, and making clear to him
many things he would not be likely to learn in the towns themselves,
however long a stay he might be free to make.
Like the preceding issues, this volume has a patriotic and educational
purpose, but it goes forth also on an irenic mission. The editor’s
father, dead almost a quarter of a century, lived in a little border
town where in war times love and hate alike were hot. An avowed and
fearless Unionist, he was also a true and faithful pacificator. As Mr.
Rule has said of Louisville, James B. R. Powell “occupied a position
similar to that of Tennyson’s sweet little heroine, Annie, who, sitting
between Enoch and Philip, with a hand of each in her own, would weep,
“‘And pray them not to quarrel for her sake.’”
In planning and in shaping this volume, the editor hopes that he is
proving himself worthy of an honored father, whose name he would
connect in this way with the work and with the series.
His special acknowledgments are due to his wife, Gertrude Wilson
Powell, for discriminating and invaluable assistance at every stage,
and to Professor W. P. Trent, who, in addition to the preparation of a
comprehensive Introduction, has ever been ready with such counsel and
suggestions as enhance in many ways the value of the volume.
LYMAN P. POWELL.
ST. JOHN’S RECTORY,
LANSDOWNE, PENNSYLVANIA.
August 10, 1900.
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
CONTENTS
PAGE
BALTIMORE St. George L. Sioussat 1
ANNAPOLIS Sara Andrew Shafer 47
FREDERICK TOWN Sara Andrew Shafer 75
WASHINGTON Frank A. Vanderlip 101
RICHMOND ON THE JAMES William Wirt Henry 151
WILLIAMSBURG Lyon G. Tyler 185
WILMINGTON Joseph Blount Cheshire 219
CHARLESTON Yates Snowden 249
SAVANNAH Pleasant Alexander Stovall 293
MOBILE Peter J. Hamilton 327
MONTGOMERY George Petrie 379
NEW ORLEANS Grace King 411
VICKSBURG H. F. Simrall 433
KNOXVILLE Joshua W. Caldwell 449
NASHVILLE Gates P. Thruston 477
LOUISVILLE Lucien V. Rule 503
LITTLE ROCK George B. Rose 537
ST. AUGUSTINE George R. Fairbanks 557
[Illustration]
ILLUSTRATIONS
PAGE
THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS, WASHINGTON, D. C. _Frontispiece_
BALTIMORE
OLD COURT-HOUSE (1768) AND POWDER MAGAZINE 5
From an old print in the possession of the Maryland
Historical Society.
EDWARD FELL, IN UNIFORM OF PROVINCIAL FORCES 9
From original painting in possession of William Fell
Johnson.
MOALE’S SKETCH OF BALTIMORE IN 1752 13
From the original in the possession of the Maryland
Historical Society.
BATTLE MONUMENT 17
MOUNT CLARE, 1760, RESIDENCE OF CHARLES CARROLL, BARRISTER 19
BOOS HOUSE, NEAR WHICH LAFAYETTE’S TROOPS ENCAMPED 23
JOHN EAGER HOWARD 27
From the painting by Rembrandt Peale, owned by R. Bayard.
ST. PAUL’S CHURCH 31
From an old copper print, owned by Rev. J. S. B. Hodges.
BELVIDERE, 1786, THE HOME OF COLONEL JOHN E. HOWARD 35
From the original in the possession of the Misses McKim,
Belvidere Terrace, Baltimore, Md.
BUST OF JOHNS HOPKINS 43
From the original in Johns Hopkins Hospital.
SEAL OF BALTIMORE 45
ANNAPOLIS
GEORGE CALVERT, FIRST LORD BALTIMORE 48
Reproduced from an old print.
CECILIUS CALVERT, SECOND LORD BALTIMORE 49
Reproduced from an old print.
ST. JOHN’S COLLEGE AND THE TREATY TREE 55
THE STATE HOUSE 57
CHARLES CARROLL OF CARROLLTON, 1737-1832 60
THE OLD HOUSE OF BURGESSES, NOW USED AS THE STATE
TREASURY 61
THE BRICE HOUSE 62
THE PEGGY STEWART HOUSE 64
THE BURNING OF THE “PEGGY STEWART” 65
From the painting by Frank B. Mayer.
THE NAVAL INSTITUTE 69
(Where the battle-flags are kept.)
THE OLD GOVERNOR’S MANSION, NOW THE NAVAL ACADEMY
LIBRARY 72
THE SEAL OF THE NAVAL ACADEMY 73
FREDERICK TOWN
PROSPECT HALL. THE DULANY MANSION 81
ROSE HILL, THE HOME OF GOVERNOR THOMAS JOHNSON 86
GOVERNOR THOMAS JOHNSON AND FAMILY 89
From the painting by Charles Wilson Peale.
FRANCIS SCOTT KEY 91
CHIEF JUSTICE ROGER B. TANEY 92
THE OLD REFORMED CHURCH 95
BARBARA FRIETCHIE 96
HOME OF BARBARA FRIETCHIE 97
THE HATED BRITISH TAX-STAMP, 1765-1766 99
WASHINGTON
PIERRE CHARLES L’ENFANT 105
STATUE OF GEN. WINFIELD SCOTT, WASHINGTON 118
THE CAPITOL 123
From the Congressional Library.
THE CITY OF WASHINGTON IN 1800 127
From an old print.
THE WHITE HOUSE 129
From the northeast.
STATE, WAR AND NAVY BUILDING 133
From the southeast.
THE “OCTAGON HOUSE” USED BY PRESIDENT AND MRS.
MADISON DURING THE REBUILDING OF THE WHITE
HOUSE IN 1814 137
GRAND STAIRCASE IN THE HALL OF THE CONGRESSIONAL LIBRARY 139
THE UNITED STATES TREASURY 143
From the southwest.
ROTUNDA OF THE CONGRESSIONAL LIBRARY, WASHINGTON 145
WASHINGTON MONUMENT 149
Looking across the “flats.”
THE SEAL OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 150
RICHMOND ON THE JAMES
GRAVE OF POWHATAN ON THE JAMES 153
COLONEL WILLIAM EVELYN BYRD 157
From a painting by Sir Godfrey Kneller.
OLD STONE HOUSE, BUILT IN 1737 160
BIRD’S-EYE VIEW OF RICHMOND 163
WASHINGTON MONUMENT AND CAPITOL, RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 167
HENRY CLAY 169
THE MARSHALL HOUSE, RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 172
RICHMOND IN FLAMES 177
MONUMENT TO GENERAL ROBERT E. LEE, RICHMOND 179
THE WHITE HOUSE OF THE CONFEDERACY, RICHMOND 180
MONUMENT OVER CONFEDERATE DEAD AT HOLLYWOOD 181
SEAL OF RICHMOND 183
WILLIAMSBURG
“OLD POWDER-HORN” 186
INTERIOR OF BRUTON PARISH CHURCH AT WILLIAMSBURG, VA. 189
COLLEGE OF WILLIAM AND MARY 193
JACOBUS BLAIR 195
The founder of William and Mary College.
BENJ. S. EWELL 197
JOHN TYLER, SR. 200
MARY CARY, WASHINGTON’S EARLY LOVE 205
CHIEF JUSTICE MARSHALL 209
GEORGE WYTHE 213
JOHN TYLER, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES 215
SEAL OF WILLIAM AND MARY COLLEGE 217
WILMINGTON
RESIDENCE OF JAMES SPRUNT 223
Formerly the residence of Governor Dudley.
ST. PAUL’S CHURCH, EDENTON, N. C., FROM THE SOUTHEAST 225
Begun in 1736.
HARNETT’S HOUSE, “HILTON,” NEAR WILMINGTON 230
“ORTON HOUSE” 232
THE WALLS OF ST. PHILIP’S CHURCH, BRUNSWICK 234
Showing part of the corner-stone broken out and rifled
by Federal soldiers in 1865.
COMMISSION OF LOUIS DE ROSSET AS CAPTAIN IN THE
FRENCH ARMY, SIGNED BY LOUIS XIV., AND COUNTERSIGNED
BY TELLIER 237
HUGH WADDELL 239
WILLIAM HOOPER OF NORTH CAROLINA, SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION
OF INDEPENDENCE 241
HEADQUARTERS OF LORD CORNWALLIS, WILMINGTON 243
COMMISSION OF LOUIS DE ROSSET AS CAPTAIN, GIVEN BY
WILLIAM AND MARY 245
SEAL OF WILMINGTON 247
CHARLESTON
PLAN OF CHARLESTON 253
From a survey by Edward Crisp in 1704.
ST. PHILIP’S CHURCH, CHARLESTON 255
A MODERN CHARLESTON RESIDENCE 259
DEFENCE OF FORT MOULTRIE 263
From a painting by J. A. Oertel.
THE ATTACK ON FORT MOULTRIE BY THE BRITISH FLEET, 1776 265
PHILADELPHIA STREET (COON ALLEY) 279
Scene in rear of St. Philip’s Church.
THE ATTACK ON CHARLESTON BY THE FEDERAL IRONCLAD FLEET,
APRIL 7, 1863 281
MAJOR-GENERAL WILLIAM MOULTRIE 285
From a painting by Col. J. Trumbull.
ST. MICHAEL’S CHURCH, CHARLESTON 289
SEAL OF CHARLESTON 292
SAVANNAH
THE POST OFFICE 295
HOUSE WHERE THE COLONIAL LEGISLATURE ASSEMBLED IN 1782 297
HEADQUARTERS OF WASHINGTON DURING A VISIT TO SAVANNAH 299
THE JASPER MONUMENT 303
THE BURIAL PLACE OF TOMOCHICHI 307
CHRIST CHURCH 309
OAKS AT BETHESDA ORPHANAGE UNDER WHICH WHITEFIELD PREACHED 310
GREAT SEAL OF GEORGIA IN COLONIAL DAYS 312
OLD FORT, WHERE POWDER MAGAZINE WAS SEIZED IN 1775 314
GENERAL OGLETHORPE 316
COUNT CASIMIR PULASKI 319
FORT PULASKI 321
R. M. CHARLTON, POET, JURIST, U. S. SENATOR 323
SEAL OF SAVANNAH 325
MOBILE
FACSIMILE PAGE OF BAPTISMAL RECORD (1704) WITH THE AUTOGRAPH
OF BIENVILLE 333
PLAN OF MOBILE AND OF FORT LOUIS IN 1711 337
THE BAY SHELL ROAD AT LOVERS’ LANE 343
MOBILE IN 1765 349
THE ELLICOTT STONE 351
PLACE WHERE AARON BURR WAS CAPTURED 354
JOHN A. CAMPBELL 362
RAPHAEL SEMMES IN 1861 364
C. S. S. “FLORIDA” ENTERING MOBILE BAY, SEPT. 4, 1862 367
From a painting by R. S. Floyd.
HOME OF AUGUSTA EVANS WILSON 373
AUGUSTA EVANS WILSON 376
SEAL OF MOBILE 378
MONTGOMERY
OLD CANNON OF BIENVILLE 380
DEXTER AVENUE DURING A STREET FAIR 387
OLD BUILDING IN WHICH LAFAYETTE BALL WAS GIVEN IN 1825 389
ALABAMA STATE CAPITOL WHERE PRESIDENT DAVIS WAS INAUGURATED 396
FIRST PAGE OF THE PERMANENT CONSTITUTION OF THE CONFEDERATE
STATES, AS REPORTED BY THE COMMITTEE 401
This is in the handwriting of Gen. Thos. R. R. Cobb,
who was a member of the committee. Taken from the
original, which is in the possession of Mr. A. L.
Hull, Athens, Ga.
THE PERMANENT CONSTITUTION OF THE CONFEDERATE STATES 403
As reported by committee and amended by Congress, is in
the possession of the daughter of Mr. Alex. B.
Clitherall, Mrs. A. C. Birch, Montgomery, Ala.
THE POLLARD RESIDENCE, BUILT BEFORE THE WAR 406
MONUMENT TO CONFEDERATE SOLDIERS ERECTED ON THE
CAPITOL GROUNDS BY THE LADIES’ MEMORIAL ASSOCIATION 407
JEFFERSON DAVIS 408
SEAL OF MONTGOMERY 410
NEW ORLEANS
TOMB OF AVAR, CITY PARK 413
THE CUSTOM-HOUSE, NEW ORLEANS 415
CHARTRES STREET AND CATHEDRAL 419
THE URSULINES CONVENT 421
THE JACKSON MONUMENT 423
CANAL STREET, NEW ORLEANS 427
THE CABILDO, OLD COURT BUILDING, JACKSON SQUARE 428
ST. FRIES CATHEDRAL 429
SEAL OF NEW ORLEANS 431
VICKSBURG
MEETING OF GENERALS GRANT AND PEMBERTON AT THE “STONE
HOUSE” INSIDE THE REBEL WORKS ON THE MORNING OF JULY 4,
1863 435
(From an actual sketch made on the spot by one of the
special artists of _Frank Leslie’s Illustrated
Newspaper_, now in the collection of Major George
Haven Putnam.)
GENERAL U. S. GRANT 442
PLAN OF THE SIEGE OF VICKSBURG 445
SEAL OF VICKSBURG 447
KNOXVILLE
JOHN SEVIER, FIRST GOVERNOR OF TENNESSEE 450
WILLIAM BLOUNT, GOVERNOR OF SOUTHWEST TERRITORY 452
UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE 459
HUGH L. WHITE 464
ADMIRAL FARRAGUT 465
WILLIAM G. BROWNLOW, THE “FIGHTING PARSON” 467
BATTLE OF FORT SAUNDERS 473
SEAL OF KNOXVILLE 475
NASHVILLE
JAMES ROBERTSON 481
THE FIRST RESIDENCE OF ANDREW JACKSON 483
FORT RIDLEY, AN OLD NASHVILLE BLOCKHOUSE 485
ANDREW JACKSON 489
THE HERMITAGE MANSION, RESIDENCE OF ANDREW JACKSON 491
JAMES K. POLK 493
TOMB OF JAMES K. POLK, NASHVILLE 495
THE STATE HOUSE 497
THE PARTHENON, NASHVILLE, TENN. 499
SEAL OF NASHVILLE 501
LOUISVILLE
GEORGE D. PRENTICE 505
From an old painting owned by the Polytechnic Society of
Kentucky.
DANIEL BOONE 508
From a painting in the possession of Col. R. T. Durrett,
Louisville, Ky.
GEORGE ROGERS CLARK 510
From a painting in the possession of Col. R. T. Durrett,
Louisville, Ky.
BLOCKHOUSE AND LOG CABINS ON CORN ISLAND, 1778, FIRST
SETTLEMENT OF LOUISVILLE, KY. 513
From an old print in the possession of Col. R. T.
Durrett, Louisville, Ky.
RESIDENCE OF GEORGE ROGERS CLARK ON THE INDIANA SHORE,
OPPOSITE LOUISVILLE 515
From an old print in the possession of Col. R. T.
Durrett, Louisville, Ky.
THE CITY HALL 519
ON THE TOBACCO BREAKS 523
THE KEATS HOUSE (THE ELKS BUILDING) 527
THE COURT-HOUSE 529
A SCENE AT THE WHARF 533
SEAL OF LOUISVILLE 535
LITTLE ROCK
THE “LITTLE ROCK,” TO WHICH THE CITY OWES ITS NAME 539
LITTLE ROCK LEVEE 540
NEW STATE HOUSE 543
OLD STATE HOUSE 545
THE HOUSE WHERE THE ARKANSAS LEGISLATURE WAS HELD IN 1835 546
ALBERT PIKE 547
ROBERT CRITTENDEN 548
THE OLD FOWLER MANSION 549
Now the residence of John M. Gracie.
THE CRITTENDEN RESIDENCE 550
The first brick house built in Little Rock. Now the home
of Governor James P. Eagle.
THE OLD PIKE MANSION 551
Now the residence of Colonel John G. Fletcher.
CUSTOM-HOUSE AND POST OFFICE 554
LITTLE ROCK UNIVERSITY 555
ST. AUGUSTINE
THE OLD CITY GATE 558
PEDRO MENENDEZ DE AVILES, FOUNDER OF ST. AUGUSTINE 560
OLD FORGE 562
OLD SPANISH FORT ON MATANZAS RIVER 565
THE OLDEST HOUSE IN ST. AUGUSTINE 569
RUINS OF THE OLD SPANISH FORT AT MATANZAS INLET 573
HOTEL PONCE DE LEON 579
SEAL OF ST. AUGUSTINE 581
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
INTRODUCTION
BY W. P. TRENT
Probably the first feeling of the reader who glances over the table
of contents of this volume will be one of surprise at the number of
Southern towns of historical importance that the editor has seen fit
and been able to include. Neither from our study of American history
nor from our study of geography have we been led to look upon the
Southern States as a region characterized by urban development. Those
of us who took the pains to examine the statistics of the census of
1890 remember that the South stood far behind the other sections
in this respect. We remember, too, to have seen in our histories
the thickly settled New England township contrasted with the large,
sparsely settled Southern county. In literature the South has figured
as a region of plantations and manor houses inhabited by cavaliers
and chatelaines and old family slaves, possessors of all the feudal
virtues, or else as the home of a curious race, presumably Caucasian,
known as “crackers,” and of equally curious mountaineers known as
“moonshiners.” An exception is made, of course, in favor of New
Orleans, the home of the Creole and the carnival; of Charleston, the
home of secession; of Richmond, the home of the Confederate government;
and of St. Augustine, the home of hotels; but on the whole it is
probable that the average American of other sections, unless he be a
drummer or a valetudinarian tourist, rarely thinks of the South from
the point of view of its towns, historic or unhistoric.
For this state of affairs no one is to blame. The great growth of
municipalities in the North, East and West--the colossal development of
New York, Chicago and Philadelphia, of Boston and Baltimore and a dozen
other great cities--has naturally cast in the shade the urban status of
a section that contains no city of three hundred thousand inhabitants.
It is true that much is heard of the New South with its commercial
future; but probably the pushing Atlanta is almost the only Southern
city that has in the last few decades impressed itself to any marked
degree upon the nation’s consciousness.
Nor is it surprising that it is only since the Civil War that the
urban development of the South has begun to be of importance even to
close students of the past and present of the section. From the time
of the earliest settlements to the present day agriculture has been
the dominant industry. Virginia tobacco, Carolina indigo and rice,
far Southern and Southwestern cotton--these staples have meant more
to the South than manufacturing or commerce. She developed seaports,
which gradually lost their relative standing among the ports of the
country and administrative and distributing centers; but there was no
crowding of operatives into manufacturing towns, no haste on the part
of country-bred youths to leave their native fields for the shops and
warehouses and offices of the city. The gentleman’s son looked forward
in most cases to being a planter; the small farmer’s son grew up in an
environment that did not stimulate ambition. Cotton was king, and his
court was bound to be a rural one.
It is not to be supposed, however, that during the period from 1820
to 1860, which witnessed the amazing growth of manufacturing and
commercial centers in the North and East and the still more wonderful
rural and urban development of the West, the South was entirely content
with the spread of her cotton-fields and oblivious to the stagnation or
the slow growth of her towns. Her country-gentleman class was doubtless
content with this state of affairs, and her politicians actually
boasted of it, being put on the defensive in all respects on account of
the attacks made upon slavery; but the leading inhabitants of the towns
regretted the backwardness of their section and devised various schemes
for remedying it, while the merchant class openly complained of the
fact that young men were taught to look down upon every pursuit other
than planting. This is but to say that the people of the South were not
so different at bottom from their hopeful, energetic fellow citizens
of other sections as has sometimes been imagined. They were Americans
tied down to one occupation and rendered unprogressive by the hampering
influences of a belated institution.
This fact does not appear on the surface; indeed it becomes apparent
only to the careful student of sources of which the Southern historian
has not yet made full use. These sources are the local newspapers
and the fairly numerous magazines--particularly the financial and
commercial De Bow’s _Review_ published at New Orleans. The Southern
historian, like his brothers of the North and East until recently, has
laid disproportionate stress upon the colonial history of his section
or else upon its political history, and thus has failed to bring out
the interesting struggle between the old and the new economic orders of
things that took place in the South down to the time of the Civil War.
Hence it is that in the present volume we find in many chapters the gap
between the surrender at Yorktown and the firing upon Sumter covered
by only a few paragraphs. Some of the towns had a most interesting
history during these years,--as we may judge from Dr. Petrie’s chapter
on Montgomery,--but it has not yet been written.
When it is, we shall get abundant evidence of a heroic if, on the
whole, unsuccessful struggle for urban development. Charleston in
particular made a most gallant fight to recover the importance as
a port which she had lost through the rivalry of Baltimore and New
Orleans. Her leading citizens, some of whom labored for the cause of
public education and of literary and scientific development with an
earnestness that should not be forgotten in spite of the paucity of
results, saw clearly that something must be done to enhance the city’s
wealth and growth if the State herself, or, indeed, the section, was
to maintain an important place in the union of rapidly developing
commonwealths. They saw, furthermore, what this something must be.
The cotton of the South and the agricultural and other products of
the great West must be drawn away from Northern ports to ships lying
in the harbor of Charleston. The distance to be traversed and the
mountain barriers made all thought of a canal similar to the one that
had brought fortune to New York out of the question, and the hopes
of enterprising citizens centered on the newly invented railway. As
early as 1831 the first steam locomotive used successfully on rails in
this country was put on its tracks at Charleston by the South Carolina
Railroad Company, and, as Mr. Snowden tells us in his chapter, the
longest railway in the world was at one time contained within the
borders of what is not familiarly known as a progressive State. It was
but a short time before ambitious plans were set on foot to connect
Charleston with Cincinnati and the West.
The full story of these plans--of the faithful labor expended upon
them, and of their ultimate failure, through no fault of the unselfish
promoters--belongs to another place; but a few words upon the subject
may be pardoned here on account of the light that will be thrown
upon the difficulties encountered by every ante-bellum Southern city
in its efforts at progress. The first steps taken by the friends
of the Louisville, Cincinnati and Charleston Railroad Company were
comparatively easy. Charters were obtained from several States,
enthusiastic conventions of promoters were held, engineers were
put into the field to decide between competing routes, and popular
subscriptions to the stock were opened in most of the towns and
villages. By November, 1836, South Carolina alone had subscribed for
nearly $2,775,000 of the $4,000,000 needed to start the enterprise.
Within a few days this latter amount was made up, and everything
looked bright. But Governor McDuffie in his annual message pointed out
unforeseen obstacles. Kentucky had subscribed only $200,000, and yet
claimed six directors out of twenty-four; Ohio had subscribed almost
nothing. Why should South Carolina cover Kentucky with railroads?
Why, again, should the promoters of the enterprise wish for banking
privileges when the whole country was crowded with banks already?
He urged the legislature to withhold the desired subscription of
$1,000,000 until the success of the road was more fully assured. His
advice was not followed, but we may learn two important facts from
his remarks: first, that the South suffered from the crude financial
methods and the fever for speculation that afflicted the rest of the
country. Second, that State jealousy was a rock upon which any great
Southern scheme was liable to split. The theory of States-rights united
the Southern commonwealths politically against the other sections, but
in internal matters it was a disintegrating agent of great potency.
The promoters of the road were not discouraged, however, by Governor
McDuffie’s pessimism. They organized their bank, purchased the
road which already connected Charleston and Augusta, known as “The
Charleston and Hamburg,” began a branch to connect the State capital,
Columbia, with this road, and commenced to realize on the popular
subscriptions to the stock. But they had not counted on the panic of
1837 and the continuing financial depression, in the midst of which
their bank was forced to suspend, nor had they expected to lose by
death their efficient president, Robert Y. Hayne, Webster’s famous
opponent. The great interstate scheme soon shrank to state proportions;
and by 1842 people were congratulating themselves that they had at
least a gratifying extent of railway mileage within the borders of
South Carolina itself. This seems a small return for a large outlay of
energy, yet after a careful study of the complicated history of the
road it can scarcely be said that General Hayne and his associates
made as bad a compromise with their magnificent dreams as the majority
of our more recent railway promoters have done. Certainly the way in
which the public responded to their efforts spoke well for the energy
and the civic intelligence of a people of planters. The effects of the
panic and of Western indifference could hardly have been foreseen; the
banking attachment was natural enough in an era of wild banking to
which the lessons of experience were wanting; and, finally, the method
of securing capital by instalments of subscription, crude as it may
seem, was almost the only available one among a people whose capital
was in the main locked up in land and negroes. We are warranted,
therefore, in concluding, from these early efforts to connect
Charleston with the West, and from later railroad enterprises of other
Southern cities that cannot be treated here, that the failure of the
_ante-bellum_ South to show a marked urban development was due not to
the backwardness and inertia of its influential citizens, but rather to
unfavorable economic conditions that could not be speedily overcome.
The student of Southern history will reach this conclusion by following
other lines of investigation. It is a well-known fact that in the
decade before the Civil War annual commercial conventions were held
in the leading Southern cities. These conventions tended also to
become political in character and furnished an opportunity for the
exploitation of some rather extreme propositions, such, for example, as
that looking to the reopening of the foreign slave-trade. They serve
to illustrate the important part played by the _ante-bellum_ towns in
developing and intensifying the movement toward secession; but it is
more to the point here to observe that they were preceded by a series
of conventions more strictly commercial in character--gatherings that
did all they could to stir up the people of the South to the need of
urban development and to open their eyes to the fact that their section
was yearly falling behind in wealth and political power.[1]
This first series seems to have begun with a gathering in Augusta,
Georgia, in October, 1837, the object of the meeting being to allow
merchants the opportunity to discuss projects for developing a direct
trade between the South and Europe. As the only speeches that caused
comment were made by two “Colonels” and a “General,” it is easy
to perceive that even in such a convention the commercial classes
were overshadowed. The delegates met twice, however, the next year,
and afterwards at Charleston and Macon, the presence of delegates
from all the Southern States being solicited and in part obtained.
These meetings did what they could to arouse the South to commercial
activity, on one occasion viewing “with deep regret the neglect of
all commercial pursuits” that had thitherto prevailed among the youth
of the section. That their efforts were no more successful than those
of the contemporary railway promoters proves only that the failure of
urban development in the South was due not to the supineness of the
entire population but to the presence of an institution during the
existence of which agriculture was bound to be the paramount industry.
It is interesting to notice that these efforts toward urban development
were contemporaneous with and in answer to the agitation of the early
abolitionists; that they practically ceased during the movement for
territorial aggrandizement in Texas and the Far West; and that they
began in full force when it became apparent that the South had gained
less of the new territory than she thought she would. So true is it
that all Southern history has a political background!
It is not, however, desirable that the present Introduction should
degenerate into a dry historical essay devoted to certain obscure
points in the economic history of the South, although it does seem
important that the reader should realize that the citizens of Southern
towns between the years 1800 and 1860 were not altogether lacking in
enterprise and foresight. Yet the period mentioned is so interesting
in many ways that it is hard to leave it. It would be pleasant to
sketch briefly the efforts made to develop literary centers--especially
at Richmond and Charleston: the establishment at the former place of
the _Southern Literary Messenger_, forever connected with the fame of
Poe; at the latter, of the earlier and the later _Southern Review_
and of Russell’s _Magazine_, connected, respectively, with the names
of Hugh S. Legaré, William Gilmore Simms and the ill-fated Henry
Timrod, whose genuine poetical genius is slowly being recognized. It
would be interesting, too, to discuss the political influence wielded
by such newspapers as the Richmond _Enquirer_ and the Charleston
_Mercury_. A topic no less important is the effect of the classical
culture undoubtedly possessed to a considerable degree by the leading
citizens of the older towns upon the problem, only now being solved by
the New South, of affording every child a free and sound education. A
discussion of this topic would naturally lead one to inquire into the
status of the lower and middle classes in the _ante-bellum_ Southern
towns, and this would necessarily carry us very far afield. Perhaps the
best way to break the train of these suggestions and reflections is to
ask the reader whether he would ever have thought it possible for a
German immigrant to become a day-laborer in a Southern town, to save
enough money in six years to build an important bridge and wharf, to
found a town of his own which soon became a flourishing cotton market
and actually, as its leading personage, to enter into quasi-diplomatic
relations with the government of Hamburg, Germany! Yet all this
actually happened in the “unprogressive” _ante-bellum_ South. The man’s
name was Henry Schultz; the town in which he made his fortune, and,
sad to relate, subsequently lost it, was Augusta, Georgia; the town he
founded was Hamburg, South Carolina, which it must be confessed has not
become a metropolis and is chiefly known in connection with certain
important riots.[2]
Next to the large number of towns worthy to be included in the volume,
perhaps the most striking feature is the fact that nearly every
town described has experienced the vicissitudes of war. No walls of
long standing or traces of them may be pointed out to the curious
visitor of to-day, but battlefields there are, and in more than one
instance stories may be told of long-sustained sieges and heroic
defences. The Sunny South ought naturally to be a land of languorous
peace, but over no other section have the clouds of war rolled so
heavily. Its oldest town, St. Augustine, was born of war. Baltimore
and Washington suffered during the War of 1812, and the latter was
seriously threatened during the War for the Union. Frederick Town lives
in our memories along with Stonewall Jackson and Barbara Fritchie.
Before Richmond Lee foiled the troops of McClellan, and the gallant
capital, after four years filled with high hopes and reckless gayety
and solemn mourning, surrendered when the same undaunted Lee had but a
few thousand starving veterans to oppose to the splendid and puissant
hosts of Grant. The ghosts of long-dead cavaliers must have shivered
when the streets of Williamsburg echoed to the tramp of soldiers
from Puritan New England. The name of Wilmington brings to mind the
daring exploits of the blockade-runners; that of Charleston recalls the
heroic defence of Fort Moultrie, the occupation by the British, the
threatened bloodshed of the Nullification crisis, the capture of Sumter
and the magnificent resistance offered the Federal arms throughout
the Civil War. Like Charleston, Savannah can tell of encounters with
Spaniards and British undergone gloriously by her sons, although she
doubtless does not yet relish having been Sherman’s Christmas gift to
the nation. Mobile and New Orleans are forever associated with the
illustrious name of Farragut, and the latter can boast of being the
scene of the most splendid victory in our annals, that won by Jackson
and his backwoodsmen over the picked troops of Wellington. As for the
great siege of Vicksburg that set the seal upon Grant’s fame, or for
the battle of Nashville that gave almost equal renown to Thomas, men
will not forget them even when Tolstoy’s dreams of universal peace have
become a blessed reality.
But peace hath her victories no less renowned than war, as these
chapters all tell us in language as convincing if not so noble as that
of Milton. The history of the brave and successful efforts made by the
South to recover from the losses of the war and from the still more
disastrous effects of the worst-devised legislation ever inflicted upon
a conquered people cannot yet be fully written, but when it is, the
part played by the Southern towns will surely be paramount. Population
and business have greatly increased in the urban centers; the cause
of truly public education has been fostered to a remarkable extent;
political prejudices have waned; respect for human life has increased;
and, finally, a true national spirit has been developed. Much remains
to be done in the way of municipal improvements,--for example in the
founding of public libraries,--but the history of the past thirty-five
years warrants us in believing that the citizens of the Southern towns
will be able to work out their own salvation. The outlook for the rural
districts, where the commission merchant has his liens and mortgages,
where ignorance and lack of thrift foster political unrest, where race
hatred is partly extenuated by its causes and wholly discredited by its
results, is less hopeful but still by no means hopeless.
The present volume, however, deals with what has been rather than with
what is or will be, and, as has been already remarked, mainly with
what took place before even our great-grandfathers were born. To some
of us the history of our fathers’ times is more interesting than the
story of what remoter ancestors did, even though the costumes and the
furniture of the former are by no means so picturesque as those of the
latter. But _tot homines, tot sententiæ_. To Colonial Dames, and Sons
and Daughters of the American Revolution, and readers of the Colonial
and Revolutionary romances that are in such vogue, many pages of this
book ought to prove both interesting and instructive. Nor are devotees
of the modern wholly unprovided for, and the special student finds
matter for reflection. He can speculate, for example, upon how far the
South’s comparative freedom from French and Indian attacks rendered
early urban development less urgent. He can notice how few great
Southern statesmen and generals were of the urban type. He can contrast
Charleston and New Orleans, in their relations with their outlying
districts, as a miniature London and a miniature Paris, respectively.
He can wonder whether any subtly psychological cause was at work to
prevent the various writers dwelling upon slavery, duelling and other
features of the past that are not especially relished by the present,
yet assuredly had much to do with making Southern towns as picturesque
and interesting as occasional travelers used to find them and as the
investigator finds them to-day. Yet, if what is omitted reminds the
student of the immense opportunity for original and important research
that lies before the rising generation of Southern historical scholars,
neither he nor the general reader should forget the gratitude due to
the editor, the various writers and the publishers of this volume for
first giving the public in an attractive form adequate proof of the
interest and charm attaching to the towns of the _ante-bellum_ South.
In more than one important series of books relating to our national
history the South is but scantily represented, but such a reproach
cannot attach to this series of American Historic Towns. For weal or
woe the South is now an integral part of the nation, and the attractive
and inspiring, no less than the warning features of its history, should
be a portion of the intellectual inheritance of every American.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] The later series of conventions is well described by Mr. Edward
Ingle in his interesting and valuable volume, based mainly upon
magazine and newspaper research, entitled _Southern Sidelights_ (pp.
220-261). Mr. Ingle pays but slight attention to the earlier series,
which seems nowhere to have been fully described.
[2] Schultz was a party for years to a very important case known as
“John W. Yarborough and others _vs._ The Bank of the State of Georgia,”
etc., for documents relating to which I am indebted to William K.
Miller, Esq., of the Augusta bar. The interesting career of the man
became known to me some years since through researches undertaken in
the early volumes of the Edgefield (S. C.) _Advertiser_.
[Illustration]
HISTORIC TOWNS OF THE SOUTHERN STATES
BALTIMORE
THE MONUMENTAL CITY
BY ST. GEORGE L. SIOUSSAT
For many a year after the weary passengers of the _Ark_ and the _Dove_
had disembarked at St. Mary’s, there to make the first settlement
under the proprietary government of the Lords Baltimore, the rivers of
Maryland ran, like Mr. George Alfred Townsend’s Rappahannock,
“All townless from the mountains to the sea.”
The Chesapeake and its almost numberless tributaries made every
plantation accessible to shipping, and so precluded that concentration
of trade and population at points of vantage which is the essential
condition of municipal growth. As Charles Calvert, third Baron
Baltimore, wrote, in 1678:
“The principall place or Towne is called St. Maryes ... other places
wee have none, that are called or cann be called Townes. The people
there not affecting to build nere each other but soe as to have their
[houses] nere the watters for conveniencye of trade and their Lands
on each side of and behynde their houses, by which it happens that
in most places there are not ffifty houses in the space of thirty
myles. And for this reason it is that they have been hitherto only
able to divide this Provynce into Countyes without being able to make
any subdivision into Parishes or Precincts which is a worke not to
be effected untill it shall please God to encrease the number of the
People and soe to alter their trade as to make it necessary to build
more close and to Lyve in Townes.”
When Lord Baltimore offered to the Lords of Trade this explanation of
the dearth of municipal life in Maryland, he emphasized precisely those
facts which have distinguished the political development of the South
from that of the North, and unwittingly explained the late appearance
upon the map of America of the city which now perpetuates his family
name.
Boston had lived and grown for nearly a century, New Amsterdam had been
New York one half that time, and a whole generation of Philadelphians
had passed away before the future metropolis of the South came into
being. A half-century passed, and the Revolution found the town
upon the Patapsco about the size of Salem or Providence; in another
half-century it had become the third city in the United States. The
pre-eminence which Baltimore thus attained was many years ago termed
“an unsolved problem in the philosophy of cities.” Now, when one views
this phenomenon in a longer perspective, it is possible, perhaps, to
discern more clearly some of the elements which combined to give rise
to it. Certainly, late years have brought to light much which one is
enabled to add to the story of historic Baltimore that the fathers have
handed down.
As Lord Baltimore’s letter to the Lords of Trade indicates, the
economic disadvantage of the absence of town life in Maryland was
appreciated by the Government of the Colony at a very early period in
its history. It was not due to the lack of desire or of effort upon
the part of the Proprietaries that in Maryland “towns there were
none.” For, first by proclamations, then by Acts of Assembly, towns
were “erected” in a great number of places situated upon the water and
selected, apparently, with little reference to any previous exhibition
of a tendency to municipal growth, and with equally little reference
to any expressions of desire upon the part of the inhabitants. That
the success of this policy was hardly proportionate to the efforts
made in its behalf is indicated by the statement made at a later time,
that “the settlers, and now the Government call town any place where
as many houses are as are individuals required to make a riot, that
is twenty, as fixed by the Riot Act.” Indeed, these “fiat” towns were
in nearly every case total failures. Harvy-town, Herrington and many
similar creations have passed into oblivion, and now only serve as
institutional fossils for the political palæontologist. As Jefferson
said of Virginia, “there are other places at which the laws have said
there shall be towns: but nature has said there shall not.”
[Illustration: OLD COURT-HOUSE (1768) AND POWDER MAGAZINE.
FROM AN OLD PRINT IN THE POSSESSION OF THE MARYLAND HISTORICAL SOCIETY.]
Among these shadow-towns of early Maryland were some of particular
interest to the history of Baltimore. The settlement upon the Patapsco
was not the first in Maryland to bear the proprietary name. The first
Baltimore seems to have been a point of land in St. Mary’s County,
spoken of only once in the early records, and never again mentioned.
A more important predecessor of the Baltimore of to-day was Baltimore
upon the Bush, a small river emptying into the head of Chesapeake
Bay, not far south of the Susquehanna. “The town-land on Bush River”
is mentioned as early as 1669, and, some years later, it was made the
seat of the court and court-house of Baltimore County. Though the
court-house was removed before long to Joppa, upon the Gunpowder,
farther to the south, many of the eighteenth-century maps of Maryland
show Baltimore as still upon the Bush. Of the history of this early
settlement no details have been preserved; only lately has its site
been determined.
Meanwhile, in the course of this general “towning,” the Patapsco had
not been neglected. In the town acts were included provisions for
towns upon Humphreys Creek, and upon Whetstone Point in that river. Of
the actual existence of any corporate life at these points there is,
however, no record; and it is probable that King George’s accession
found the Patapsco watering the same broad plantations as of yore. But
a new era in the town history of Maryland was dawning. Governmental
stimulation was being supplanted by private enterprise. Certain
progressive individuals conceived the idea of erecting a town upon
a point of land which runs out into the main stream of the Patapsco
and to-day is included within the limits of Baltimore city. At that
time, this land was the property of a Mr. John Moale, and was known as
Moale’s Point; but if it is Baltimore now, Mr. Moale was resolved that
it should not be Baltimore then, and taking his seat in the Assembly,
to which he was a delegate, he prevented the location of the town
upon his property. Tradition has censured this worthy for preferring
the excavation of iron ore to the development of a municipality, but
colonial experience in town lots had doubtless been such as to yield
him ample justification for his determination.
“The rejected of Mr. John Moale” was not, however, to wander far, for
slightly to the north lay property belonging to Charles and Daniel
Carroll, sons of the former agent of the Lord Proprietary. Here the
Patapsco formed a basin, a safe harbor for vessels of light draft; and
near by a stream, known to this day as Jones’s Falls, after the name
of an early settler, running from the hills near by, through lowland
and marsh, poured a muddy torrent into the river. In 1709, was passed
an act “for erecting a town on the north side of Patapsco in Baltimore
County and for laying out into lots sixty acres of land in and about
the place where one John Fleming now lives.”[3]
The owners of the land, the Carrolls, were more complaisant than Mr.
John Moale: they readily parted with sixty acres of land at the rate of
forty shillings per acre, payable in tobacco at one penny per pound.
The town was then surveyed and laid out into lots, after the most
approved “boomer” fashion of to-day. To secure an estate in fee simple,
“takers-up” of lots were required to erect thereon, within eighteen
months, a building covering at least four hundred square feet: failure
to comply with this condition laid the lots open for other takers-up.
Baltimore’s boom seems to have started well, for after Mr. Carroll, as
former owner, had selected the first lot, no less than fifteen other
persons invested the same year. This success was so much appreciated
that two years later _another_ town was established, consisting of two
acres laid out into twenty lots, just east of the Falls, “where Edward
Fell keeps store.” Communication between the new town, known as Jones
or Jonastown, and Baltimore was soon improved by a bridge across the
Falls, and a few years later the two towns were by Act of Assembly
formally made into one.
[Illustration: EDWARD FELL, IN UNIFORM OF PROVINCIAL FORCES.
FROM ORIGINAL PAINTING IN POSSESSION OF WILLIAM FELL JOHNSON.]
A third distinct element in the early growth of Baltimore was a
settlement somewhat farther to the east, known as Fell’s Point. In
1730, Mr. William Fell, a Lancastrian Quaker, purchased a tract of
land known as Copus’s Harbor and erected thereon a mansion. A little
to the south, a point jutting out into the Patapsco offered wharfage
facilities to vessels of large draft that were denied entrance to the
shallow basin of Baltimore town. This fact was soon appreciated, and at
a later time Edward Fell, who was the son of William, and an officer in
the Provincial army, laid out Fell’s Point into lots, thereby reaping a
fortune magnificent for those times.
During the first half of the eighteenth century little of note happened
in Baltimore. Within a few years, however, some of the most important
influences in its later development began to make themselves felt.
In Northern Maryland, particularly near the Pennsylvania border,
settlement was going on rapidly, and denser settlement meant the
extension of commercial intercourse. In 1736, communication was
established between the settlement on the Conewago--Hanover, in
Pennsylvania--and the Patapsco. Seven years later, the people of York,
also, “have opened a road to Patapsco. Some trading gentlemen there
are desirous of opening a trade to York and the country adjacent.” “In
October, 1751, no less than sixty waggons loaded with flaxseed, came
down to Baltimore from the back country.”
Baltimore, though vigorous in action, was as yet but mean in
appearance. In the rooms of the Maryland Historical Society hangs
a sketch of the town, drawn in 1752, by John Moale, the son of him
that would have none of towns or town lots. Rude in perspective as
this youthful effort is, it is treasured as one of the oldest and
most interesting of the city’s heirlooms. Twenty-five houses--four
of them built of brick--and two hundred inhabitants were then to be
found in Baltimore. Upon the hill we see perched the first of four St.
Paul’s churches successively erected upon the same lot, though not all
upon the same site. At anchor in the harbor are the brig _Philip and
Charles_ and the sloop _The Baltimore_. The merchant navy of Baltimore
was still small: the large vessels of foreign trade still waited at
Whetstone Point to receive their freight, transported in large lighters
from the plantation landings on both branches of the river.
More flattering than this early artistic attempt is Governor Sharpe’s
description of Baltimore, two years later, as having
“the appearance of the most increasing town in the Province,”
though “hardly as yet rivalling Annapolis in number of Buildings or
inhabitants: its situation as to Pleasantness, Air and Prospect is
inferior to Annapolis, but if one considers it with respect to Trade,
the extensive country beyond it leaves us room for comparison: were
a few Gentlemen of fortune to settle there and encourage the Trade,
it might soon become a flourishing place, but while few besides the
Germans (who are in general masters of small fortunes) build and
inhabit there, I apprehend it Cannot make any considerable Figure.”
The requisite “gentlemen of fortune” were not long lacking. One soon
appeared in the person of Dr. John Stevenson, who, in 1754, came from
Ireland, accompanied by his brother, Dr. Henry Stevenson, a man also
noteworthy among the founders of Baltimore. Dr. John Stevenson turned
his attention to commerce, and began the systematic development of
Baltimore’s foreign trade. He contracted for large quantities of wheat,
which he shipped to Scotland with such profitable results that general
attention was attracted to the development of a more extended commerce.
[Illustration: MOALE’S SKETCH OF BALTIMORE IN 1752.
FROM THE ORIGINAL IN THE POSSESSION OF THE MARYLAND HISTORICAL SOCIETY.]