Although overseeing the construction of his mansion, buying the
furniture for it, and assembling a splendid library would have been
sufficient to keep lesser men busy, Mercer was absorbed in other
activities as well. On May 10, 1748, for example, he recorded in his
journal that he went "to Raceground by James Taylor's & Wid^o
Taliaferro's,"[108] traveling 50 miles to do so. On December 13, 1748,
he went "to Stafford Court & home. Swore to the Commission of the
Peace," thus becoming a justice of the peace for Stafford County.
[Illustration: Figure 14.--ARCHEOLOGICAL SURVEY PLAN superimposed over
detail of 1691 plat, showing southwest corner of town developed by
Mercer. It can be seen that the mansion foundation was in the area near
the change of course "by the Gutt between Geo. Andrew's & the Court
house," hence in the vicinity of the courthouse site.]
In the meanwhile, years had gone by, and no action had been taken on the
suit in chancery brought in the 1730's to establish Savage's survey of
Marlborough as the official one. During this time, Mercer had continued
to build on various lots other than those he owned, "relying on the
Lease and Consent of [the feoffees], at the Expense of above Fifteen
Hundred Pounds, which Improvements would have saved forty lots."
Finally, "judging the only effectual way to secure his Title would be to
procure an Act of General Assembly for that purpose,"[109] Mercer
applied to the Stafford court to purchase the county's interest in the
town, to which the court agreed on August 11, 1747, the price to be
10,000 pounds of tobacco. Since this transaction required legislative
approval, Mercer filed with the House of Burgesses the petition which
has served so often in these pages to tell the history of Marlborough.
Mercer argued in the petition that the county had nothing to lose--that
it "had received satisfaction" for at least 30 lots, some of which he
might be obliged to buy over again; that, considering the history of the
town, no one but himself would be likely to take up any other lots, the
last having been subscribed to in 1708; and that his purchase of the
town would be not to the county's disadvantage but rather to his own
great expense. He was willing to accept an appraisal from "any one
impartial person of Credit" who would say the town was worth more, and
to pay "any Consideration this worshipful House shall think just."
He pointed out that the two acres set aside for the courthouse were
excluded and that they "must revert to the Heir of the former
Proprietor, (who is now an Infant)." He did not indicate in the petition
that he himself was the guardian of William Brent, infant heir to the
courthouse property. It is most significant, therefore, that in asking
for favorable action he added, "except the two acres thereof, which were
taken in for a Courthouse, as aforesaid and which he is willing to lay
of as this worshipful House may think most for the Benefit of Mr.
William Brent, the Infant, to whom the same belongs, _or to pay him
double or treble the worth of the said two acres, if the same is also
vested in your Petitioner_." (Italics supplied.) Plainly, Mercer had
much at stake in obtaining title to the courthouse land. This supports
the hypothesis that the Gregg survey of 1707 infringed on the courthouse
land, that Ballard's lot 19 on the Gregg survey overlapped it, and that
Mercer's first two houses, and now his mansion, were partly on land that
rightfully belonged to his ward, William Brent. Mercer apparently had so
built over all the lower part of Marlborough without regard to title of
ownership, and had so committed himself to occupancy of the courthouse
site, that he was now in the embarrassing position of having to look
after William Brent's interests when they were in conflict with his own.
Likely it is that he had depended too much on acceptance of the
still-unauthorized Savage survey to correct the previous discrepancies
by means of its extra row of lots.
Still further indication that the courthouse land was at issue is found
in the proceedings that followed the petition. In these, there are
repeated references to Mercer's having been called upon to testify "as
the Guardian of William Brent." Clearly, the legislators were concerned
with the effect the acceptance of the petition would have on Brent's
interests. If Mercer, as seems likely, was building his mansion on the
courthouse land, the burgesses had reason to question him. In any case,
the House resolved in the affirmative "That the said Petition be
rejected".[110]
This setback was only temporary, however. The wider problems of
Marlborough had at least been brought to light, so that by the time the
next fall session was held Mercer's 18-year-old suit to have Savage's
designated the official survey finally was acted upon:
"At a General Court held at the Court House in Williamsburg the 12th
October 1749" the John Savage survey of 1731 was "Decreed & Ordered" to
be "the only Survey" of Marlborough. The problem of overlapping
boundaries occasioned by the conflicts between the first two surveys was
solved neatly. Mercer agreed to accept lots 1 through 9, 22 and 25, and
33, 34, 42, and 43, "instead of the s^d 17 lots so purchased." The new
lots extended up the Potomac River shore, while the "s^d 17 lots" were
those which he had originally purchased and had built upon. Since he had
"saved" these 17 lots by building on them, according to the old laws for
the town, "it is further decreed & ordered that the said Town of
Marlborough grant & convey unto the s^d John Mercer in fee such & so
many other Lotts in the said Town as shall include the Houses &
Improvm^{ts} made by the said John Mercer according to the Rate of 400
square feet of Housing for each Lot so as the Lots to be granted for any
House of greater Dimensions be contiguous & are not separated from the
said House by any of the Streets of the said Town."[111]
Thus, Mercer's original titles to 17 lots were made secure by
substituting new lots for the disputed ones he had occupied. This device
enabled the feoffees to sell back the original lots--at £182 per
lot--with new deeds drawn on the basis of the Savage survey. The final
provision that lots be contiguous when a house larger than the minimum
400 square feet was built on them, and that the house and lots should
not be separated by streets from each other, guaranteed the integrity of
the mansion and its surrounding land. No mention was made here, or in
subsequent transfers, of the courthouse land. Presumably it was
conveniently forgotten, Mercer perhaps having duly recompensed his ward.