The Maritime War: the Revolutionary War in Princess Anne County (2024)

The Maritime War: The Revolutionary War in Princess Anne County

Christopher Pieczynski

A Research Study Submitted to the Virginia Beach Historic Preservation Commission

June 30, 2020

All rights reserved. No part of this study may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the author.

Contents

Acknowledgements 2

Introduction 3

1775 - The Land War from the Sea 4

1776 – Dunmore’s Departure 10

1776 – The Pleasure House 17

1776 – Loyalists verses Patriots 19

1777 – Cape Henry and the Blockade 26

1778 – Naval Actions 32

1779 – The Collier Raids 36

1780 – Waiting on the French 40

1780 – The Leslie Expedition 42

1781 – Benedict Arnold in Virginia 44

1781 – The Battle of Cape Henry 53

1781 – The Road to Yorktown 58

1782 – The Aftermath 69

Ships Captured by the British 71

Ships Captured by the Americans and French 75

Images 76

References 78

Acknowledgements

Many different individuals and organizations were influential in making this study possible. First and foremost, I would like to thank the Virginia Beach Historic Preservation Commission for making the research grant program available to study these little-known aspects of our area history. Jennifer Estes, Patrick Hannum, and Samuel Morrison were all critical players in an earlier study on the Skirmish at James’s Plantation. Through their efforts, we were able to identify several other parts of Princess Anne County’s role in the American Revolution – many of which found their way into this study. Dr. Edna Hendrix was a great source of information on the activities of both free and enslaved African Americans during the war. Dr. Stephen Mansfield was generous in opening up the archives at Virginia Wesleyan University and hunting down documents within the archives. The Daughters of the American Revolution, particularly Bobbie Gribble, were kind enough to have me as their guest speaker at more than one of their meetings. I also want to thank the Princess Anne County Historical Society, the Great Bridge Battlefield & Historic Waterways Foundation, the Pungo-Blackwater Branch of the Virginia Beach Public Library and the Senior Resource Center History Study Group who all gave me the opportunity to discuss new and different aspects of the Revolutionary War in Princess Anne County.

Introduction

Princess Anne County has always been defined by water. From a geographic perspective, to the east lies the Atlantic Ocean. To the north is the Chesapeake Bay. In the south, a variety of waters roughly form a large extent of the southern border – Back Bay, Currituck Bay, and the North Landing River feeding into a swampy or marshy region that formed the route of the future Albemarle and Chesapeake Canal. Only the western borders of the county are defined by land and even here we find the Little Creek and the eastern branch of the Elizabeth River reaching into the county. It stands to reason then, that being so heavily influenced by water, that the vast majority of action in and around Princess Anne County during the American Revolution was related to water.

It is unique that these actions, influenced by water, were also heavily influenced by the land as well. The purpose of this study is to examine the maritime activity of the war and its effect on the land – in terms of militia action or even its effect on the local population. Being so defined by water, activity on the water undoubtedly had some effect ashore. While there were no major land engagements of the Revolution in Princess Anne County, the maritime engagements, supported by the actions ashore, played a larger role in the American Revolution than has been previously recognized.

1775: The Land War from the Sea

For the Princess Anne County residents, the events in Virginia that helped set the eventual downfall of Royal Governor John Murray, Lord Dunmore, seemed to happen so far away in the colonial capital of Williamsburg. It was the removal of the gunpowder from the magazine to the “safekeeping” on board the HMS Magdalen in the James River on April 20, 1775 that was likely the tipping point in Dunmore’s reign. Facing significant public backlash, even a promise to return or even pay for the powder resulted in only a short reprieve in the growing unrest. While not the only contributing factor toward Dunmore’s growing unpopularity, it was the incident that banded together the movement toward independence in Virginia forcing Dunmore to take even more drastic measures to try and maintain control. By early June, Dunmore would be forced out of Williamsburg and on to the safety of the HMS Fowey. It was from this ship that Dunmore attempted to govern Virginia and would initiate events that would bring the growing conflict onto Princess Anne’s doorstep.1

On the Elizabeth River, Dunmore built an impressive flotilla of small naval vessels, merchant ships armed for Dunmore’s purposes, and others laden with supplies. On board were a growing number of Dunmore supporters and Loyalists who feared for their safety ashore. Norfolk was a key city in Virginia with a bustling port and large merchant community. Controlling Norfolk was the equivalent of controlling the economy of the Virginia. Dunmore seized cargo and vessels belonging to known patriots, quartered his troops ashore in commandeered homes, and even hid runaway slaves. Such activity was reported in the Virginia Gazette, a newspaper published by John Holt in Norfolk. Holt was not at all flattering to Dunmore and even some of his naval commanders to the point where, on September 30, Dunmore sent a contingent of 15 armed men ashore to seize Holt’s press.2 This would be the first of many raids across the region in an attempt to weaken the Patriots.

One of Dunmore’s greatest weapons was the Loyalists who would provide information on Patriot activities in the region. Not only were the Patriots arming themselves and forming militia units, but they were gathering cannon and powder to engage Dunmore’s flotilla from the banks of the Elizabeth. Dunmore initiated raids based on this information and began to seize the stockpiles of weapons. On October 15, a contingent from the HMS Otter sailed to the eastern branch of the Elizabeth River and marched to Kemp’s Landing. A marine assigned to the Otter summed the action this way: “10 Marines from our ship with a Boats Crew (consisting of 6 men well armed) with 60 men officers included of the 14 Regiment; set out for a Place called Kemps Landing, where they had inteligence there was a Quantity of Powder, and 250 'Rebels to Guard it.—they arrived

1 For the events leading to the Revolutionary War in Virginia see John Selby, The Revolutionary War in Virginia, 1775-1783 (Williamsburg, VA: Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, 2007, and Noel Ivor Hume, 1775: Another Part of the Field (London: Eyre & Spottiswoode,1966). 2 Virginia Gazette, October 7, 1775. See the varied discourse against Dunmore by Holt in Gerald Holland, “The Seizure of the Virginia Gazette, or Norfolk Intelligencer,” Journal of the American Revolution, January 16, 2016, https://allthingsliberty.com/2016/01/the-seizure-of-the-virginia-gazette-or-norfolk-intelligencer/.

4 about 5 o'clock in the evening, and Landed about 2 1/2 miles from the town, they were proceeded to a Colonel Moseley's and having examined his stores, begun their march for Kemps Landing: but what was become of the Rebel troops? nothing of them was to be seen, and our men all went out in full expectation of a smart resistance.”3 The raid found neither powder nor militia as the powder had been removed and hidden the previous night and the militia made themselves scarce in the presence of the British.

Dunmore had reason to worry about the Patriots stockpiling powder and weapons. Local shipping owner John Goodrich had contracted with Thomas Newton of Norfolk, representing the Committee of Safety, to acquire powder from St. Eustacia in the West Indies. Goodrich sent two of his ships on the supply run, one captained by his son William Goodrich. While the younger Goodrich was making his transaction, Dunmore had effectively blockaded the Elizabeth River and the route into the James River. John Goodrich was waiting along the Atlantic coast of Princess Anne County for William to get close the coast to signal him about Dunmore’s ships. Goodrich may have attempted to bring the vessel to anchorage and offload either at Rudee Inlet or Lynnhaven Inlet. William Goodrich’s vessel was captured by the British before clearing Cape Hatteras. The Virginia Gazette reported that “A large sloop from St Eustatia, mounting 16 6- pounders and a number of swivels, is said to be gone up the bay with a large quantity of gunpowder.” John Goodrich, “whose vessel Lord Dunmore suspects of having brought in a supply of that article lately, is confined in irons on board a man of war.”4 Ultimately the Goodrich family would shift their loyalties from the Patriots to the Loyalist for the remainder of the war.5

The Loyalist intelligence network was once again feeding information to Dunmore, this time about a Patriot group forming at the Great Bridge. To eliminate this group, Dunmore himself led a contingent of troops up the Elizabeth River to the Great Bridge. Arriving early in the morning of November 14, the force found the Great Bridge devoid of any Patriot militia. The intelligence network, however, reported a gathering once again at Kemp’s Landing. While the militia enjoyed a 3 to 1 superiority over the British in the October raid on Kemp’s Landing, many of the militia were untrained and untested in combat and wisely made themselves scarce. Such inexperience would show in this next encounter. Proceeding overland to Kemp’s Landing, the militia waiting in ambush of Dunmore’s force. Firing too early at the advanced guard, the British returned fire and scattered the militia, but not before killing several and taking prisoners.

Accurate casualty counts differ widely. A letter reported five killed, two drowned and 14 or 15 prisoners.6 An intercepted Loyalist letter reported the British “killed Some Say 4 or 5 others

3 Beesly Joel to Joseph Wright, October 25, 1775, in “Letters of Colonel William Woodford, Colonel Robert Howe and Major-General Charles Lee,” D.R. Anderson, ed., Richmond College Historical Papers, Vol. 1, No. 1 (June 1915), 98. (Hereafter “Woodford, Howe, Lee”) 4 Virginia Gazette, October 21, 1775. 5 George M. Curtis, “The Goodrich Family and the Revolution in Virginia, 1774-1776,” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 84, No. 1 (January 1976), 49-74. 6 Letter by W. R. W. Curle, November 16, 1775, “Woodford, Howe, Lee,” 103.

8 or 9 and took a Number of Prisoners amongst them Colo Hutchings and Antho Lawson who is now Confined on Board the Eilback.”7 The Eilback was a merchant vessel that Dunmore seized for his own use that would eventually be renamed Dunmore. John Brown, a volunteer with the British, reported “6 or 7 of the Provincials was kill'd 2 drown'd 12 wounded 8 prisoners,” but added “one of his Lordships men was wounded in the knee.”8 He changed his tally a week later “killed a few of them on the spott drove them into a a river where two of them drowned, took nineteen prisoners.”9 Still another mentioned “three of them were killed & six made Prisoners.”10 The initial report in the Virginia Gazette only identified John Ackiss as killed with nine wounded and taken prisoner.11

The Skirmish at Kemp’s Landing was significant in several regards. It showed that Dunmore was rapidly losing control of the colony, perhaps faster than he even expected. The Patriots at Kemp’s Landing likely had knowledge of Dunmore’s presence with the British at the Great Bridge and were willing to take shots at him (perhaps a little premature in the ambush) as the force approached Kemp’s Landing. This irritated Dunmore which is why he issued his Proclamation declaring martial law, freedom to slaves and indentured servants willing to fight for the King and labeling anyone not willing to take an oath of loyalty a traitor.12 Some 300 Princess Anne residents reportedly accepted Figure 1: Skirmish at Kemp's Landing the oath.13 The other aspect of this skirmish was the use Historic Marker of former slaves. Dunmore had promised them freedom in his proclamation (but only to those slaves belonging to the Patriots) and envisioned creating an Ethiopian Regiment to augment his forces. This started ongoing slave escapes to the British throughout the war. At Kemp’s Landing, Colonel Joseph Hutchings, one of the Princess Anne Militia leaders, while in hiding after the skirmish was

7 Robert Shedden to John Shedden, November 20, 1775, in H. W. R. Curle, “Intercepted Letters of Virginian Tories, 1775,” The American Historical Review, Vol. 12, No. 2 (January 1907), 345. 8 John Brown to William Brown, November 18, 1775, “Virginia Legislative Papers,” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. XIV, No. 2, (October 1906), 135. 9 John Brown to William Brown, November 25, 1775, “Virginia Legislative Papers,” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. XIV, No. 3, (January 1907), 256. 10 William Calderhead to John Shedden, November 16, 1775, “Virginia Legislative Papers,” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 14, No. 3, (January 1907), 247. 11 Virginia Gazette, November 17, 1775. 12 The text of Dunmore’s Proclamation was printed in the Virginia Gazette, November 25, 1775. 13 The Remembrancer, or Impartial Repository of Public Events, J. Almon, ed., Vol. 2 (1776), 24.

6 reportedly identified by his escaped slave when Hutchings “discharged his pistol at his slave, but missed him, and was taken by them after receiving a wound in his face with a sword.”14

The escaped slaves not only proved their value to the British but to the Patriots as well. Some of the former slaves, perhaps disaffected by British promises, either returned to the Patriot side or were sometimes re-captured. Either way, they provided a wealth of information on British strength, readiness, and even intentions. A runaway from Mr. Newton at Kemp’s Landing simply called Negro Ned was taken prisoner along with twenty other blacks (and three whites) who made their way to Norfolk. Ned reported that two additional British ships with soldiers recently arrived and that “all the Blacks who are at any time sent up to the fort at the Great Bridge are supplied with Muskets Ammunition &c, and ordered to use them against us.”15

The fort Ned was referring to was Fort Murray, constructed on the north side of the Great Bridge following his foray in November finding the area without Patriots. The fort was constructed using the growing number of Figure 2: Dunmore's Proclamation issued at former slaves in his ranks.16 Since the Kemp's Landing Skirmish at Kemp’s Landing, Patriots had seized the Great Bridge shortly after and entrenched themselves on the south side of the bridge. Dunmore’s forces attempted to regain control of the bridge on December 8 and were soundly defeated. The British abandoned Fort Murray and were pursued by the Patriots all the way back to Norfolk then back to the ships.

With Dunmore’s strength consolidated on his flotilla, the Patriots took the opportunity to consolidate their gains in Princess Anne County. The first order of business was strengthening the defenses at Kemp’s Landing. As a port it had little utility as long as Dunmore controlled the lower

14 Edmund Pendleton to Richard Henry Lee, November 27, 1775, Peter Force, ed. American Archives, Ser. 4, (Washington: 1837-1846), 201-02. 15 Examination of Negro Ned taken prisoner by Lieut Colo. Stephens's Detachment, December 5th 1775, “Woodford, Howe, Lee,” 113. 16 William Squires to Admiral Graves, December 2, 1775, American Archives, Ser. 4, 351-52.

7 reaches of the Elizabeth River. As a crossroads it had tremendous strategic value. The road system connected Kemp’s Landing to the Great Bridge to the south, Norfolk to the west, and the Pleasure House on the Chesapeake Bay. Via a circuitous route, ship movements or activity on the Chesapeake Bay could be reported to the leadership at Williamsburg from Pleasure House to Kemp’s Landing to the Great Bridge to Suffolk to Scott’s Landing, across the James River and then to Williamsburg, bypassing the British congregation in the Elizabeth River.17

Shortly after the Battle of Great Bridge, the Patriots attempted to round up as many Loyalists as possible. Lt. Colo. Stephens arrived at Kemp’s Landing on December 11th and “sent a party to secure every person in that neighbourhood that had left Norfolk since the Battle of the great Bridge.” Loyalists would gain no refuge in Princess Anne County. Colonel Woodford would assure the population that they will be protected from Dunmore “I expect a number of Men will assemble at Kemps to protect that place 'til the arrival of the Troops & make the best provision for our reception.”18

As all of these events were transpiring, a British ship, the Lord Donluce, was forced into the Chesapeake Bay by weather. The ship was headed to Cape Fear with 250 Scottish immigrants and was initially detained by the Patriots believing the ship was bringing reinforcements to Dunmore. The immigrants asked for protection and a means to get to Cape Fear, even if by land.19 While this ship was not a threat, lookouts at the Pleasure House reported the arrival of the frigate HMS Liverpool and store ship Maria. Colonel Howe welcomed the news as “This may probably give us something to do, and I hope we may execute it properly.”20

The battle for Norfolk was on with the British firing at known Patriot homes and businesses from the ships. The Patriots, meanwhile, set fire to what was left of the city.21 In the end only a few structures survived. The British were denied any use of Norfolk and even Portsmouth, directly across the Elizabeth River, was threatened by the growing number of Patriots, not just from Virginia, but from North Carolina as well.

17 Robert Howe to the President of the Virginia Convention, December 22, 1775, “Woodford, Howe, Lee,” 137-39. Howe would reiterate the need to maintain a post at Kemp’s Landing in another letter on January 2, 1775. 18 William Woodford, December 12, 1775. “Woodford, Howe, Lee,” 125. 19 Petition of Highlanders, December 11, 1775, “Woodford, Howe, Lee,” 124. 20 William Woodford to Virginia Convention, December 19, 1775, “Woodford, Howe, Lee,” 135. Robert Howe to the Virginia Committee of Safety, December 13, 1775, in William Bell Clark, ed., Naval Documents of the American Revolution, Vol. 3 (Washington, DC: Naval Historical Center, 1964), 93. (Hereafter NDAR) 21 See Patrick H. Hannum, “Norfolk, Virginia, Sacked by North Carolina and Virginia Troops,” Journal of the American Revolution, November 6, 2017, https://allthingsliberty.com/2017/11/norfolk-virginia-sacked-north- carolina-virginia-troops/.

Figure 3: Kempsville (formerly Kemp’s Landing) as shown on a 1787 map of the area (north is to the left)

1776 – Dunmore’s Departure

As Norfolk burned, Dunmore found himself in a very precarious position. His ships in the Elizabeth River were easy targets for the Patriots ashore. It was only a matter of time before cannon might make their appearance and add to the mayhem already from Patriot sharpshooters. Reinforcements were en route. Captain Andrew Snape Hamond of the HMS Roebuck was ordered to the Chesapeake, “And you are to use your utmost endeavours to prevent any Supplies getting to the Rebels, to annoy them by all means in your Power, and to protect and defend the persons and property of His Majesty's Loyal and Obedient Subjects wherever they can be distinguished.”22 Possibly a bigger problem than the Patriots were the conditions aboard the ships where food was in short supply and disease was running rampant.

The conditions and lack of supplies were well illustrated when in February 1776, Sir Henry Clinton, future commander-in-chief of all British forces in North America, arrived in the HMS Roebuck. While Clinton was heading to South Carolina, he was forced into the Chesapeake Bay due to weather. He found promise in Dunmore’s location, assuming the rebels could be controlled, and envisioned a future British base in the area.23 Clinton, however, suggested an alternative place of “refuge” until reinforcements could arrive believing that “driven from the shore, and the whole country in arms against him. On which account, I must confess, I could not see the use of his Lordship’s remaining longer there.”24

Clinton was appalled at the conditions on the ships. Expecting the proper treatment as a General, he found food, and courtesy lacking, in the fleet. Clinton even commented that he was “literally almost starved” with most of the meals depending on what fish the escaped slaves could catch.25 With the Patriots controlling all of the adjoining countryside, foraging was impossible and fewer and fewer ships that might be carrying vital supplies arrived in the ports. The captain of the merchant ship Unicorn reported, “We have suffered the greatest distress for want of provisions, the Provincials having destroyed the country on Norfolk side for many miles round by setting fire to the houses, driving back the cattle, and every thing that might be of use to us.”26 That destruction would have extended into Princess Anne County as well.

Disease was the other issue. Newspapers reported, “We have intelligence that the gaol distemper rages with great violence on board Lord Dunmore's fleet, particularly among the negro

22 Vice Admiral Samuel Graves to Captain Andrew Snape Hamond, December 25, 1775, NDAR, Vol. 3, 235. 23 Sir Henry Clinton, The American Rebellion: Sir Henry Clinton’s Narrative of his Campaigns, 1776-1782, William B. Willcox, ed., (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1954), 27-28. The 1780 Leslie Expedition and the follow-on Arnold Expedition will attempt to build that base at Portsmouth that Clinton envisioned. 24 American Rebellion, 27-28. Clinton suggested St. Augustine. Also W. Hugh Moomaw, “The British Leave Virginia,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 66, No. 2 (April 1958), 151-52. 25 “The British Leave Virginia,” 26n. 26 Captain Hutchinson to owners in Whitehaven, February 18, 1776, NDAR, Vol. 3, 1350.

10 forces; upwards of 140 of whom have died within a short time, and who, as fast as they are thrown over board to the sharks who swarm thereabouts.”27

The Patriots could have let starvation and disease defeat Dunmore and his followers by just waiting it out. However, the Patriots had other ideas. A secret scheme was presented to the Virginia Convention to coordinate naval attacks on Dunmore’s flotilla. Key to the scheme was Cape Henry. As the Naval Committee proposed:

“The Congress attentive to the safety and security of every part of the united Colonies, and observing the peculiar distresses that the Colony of Virginia is liable to form a Marine enemy, have with all possible expedition fitted out a small fleet of Armed Vessels, which they have ordered in the first place to the Bay of Chesapeak, if the winds and weather permit, there to seize and destroy as many of the Enemies ships and Vessels as they can. As the best information of the Enemies’ strength and situation is of the utmost importance to the execution of this service, the Naval Committee request of your Gentlemen to station at Cape Henry a Person of unquestioned honor, understanding, and secrecy, for the purpose of boarding, the Fleet when it appears off the Capes of Virginia, and furnish the Commander in Chief with the most accurate information of the then Strength and situation of Lord Dunmores fleet and Land forces. This Fleet will consist of Two Ships, two Brigantines, and one Sloop, with perhaps some smaller Vessel or Vessels - And for still greater certainty, as soon as the Fleet comes within proper distance and until they pass Cape Henry the largest Ship will carry at her Mizen Peak a Jack with the Union flag, and striped red and white in the field - The Person upon the Cape on his part is to fire a Musket, and hoist a white Flag on the most conspicuous part of the Cape. A Boat will then be sent on shore to get the intelligence-It is judged of the utmost consequence to the Success of this enterprise that you contrive to place 200 expert Rifle Men on such part of the Shore as that they may be taken on board the fleet before they come in sight of the Enemy, and of this, the Gentleman first at Cape Henry must be able to inform the commander. You will discern Gentlemen, that the greatest dispatch will be necessary as the Fleet will sail from this Port in [blank]

In contriving the Rifle Men as before mentioned, your judgement will point out the propriety of doing it in such a manner as not to awaken the apprehensions of the Enemy, the success of the Stroke being more sure as it [may] be most sudden and unexpected.”28

27 Remembrancer, 1776, 32. 28 Naval Committee to the Virginia Convention, January 5, 1776, NDAR, Vol 3, 640-41.

It was unknown the identity of the person of “unquestioned honor” at Cape Henry but it is possible that it was Thomas Reynolds Walker, a Colonel in the Princess Anne Militia. Walker’s activities at Cape Henry will be addressed later but he was the one individual both familiar with Cape Henry and trustworthy enough to carry our such a mission.

Charged with leading the attack fleet was Esek Hopkins, Commander in Chief of the Fleet of the United Colonies. He was to “proceed directly for Chessepeak Bay in Virginia and when nearly arrived there you will send forward a small swift sailing Vessel to gain intelligence of the Enemies Situation and- Strength - If by such intelligence you find they are not greatly superior to your own you are immediately to Enter the said bay, search out and attack, take or destroy all the Naval force of our Enemies that you may find there.”29 Hopkins, however, had different plans. He bypassed the Chesapeake Bay and proceeded to Nassau, Bahamas where he captured a supply of powder desperately needed by the Continental Army.

Ultimately, Dunmore decided to move his flotilla, already overloaded with Loyalist refugees, out of the Elizabeth River and to a safer area. On March 22, Dunmore’s flotilla, growing to some 90 ships, moved out of the Elizabeth River and into the Chesapeake Bay. Their new destination was Gwynn’s Island. With the Elizabeth River and Hampton Roads now clear of British vessels, the Patriots had the opportunity to move in and out of the bay. The HMS Otter however, was ordered to Cape Henry to both stop the movement of Patriot vessels and prevent an attack on Dunmore’s flotilla as it transited.

Despite the minimal British presence at the entrance to the bay, merchant shipping, privateers and even the vessels of the Virginia Navy freely transited the Capes. John Barry, the first commissioned officer of the Continental Navy, commanding the USS Lexington, encountered the sloop Edward off Cape Henry. His engagement report of April 7 stated: “I have the pleasure to acquaint you, that at one P. Figure 4: USS Lexington - one of the original ships of the Continental Navy M. this day, I fell in with

29 Continental Naval Committee to Commodore Esek Hopkins, January 5, 1776, NDAR, Vol. 3, 637-38.

12 the sloop Edward, belonging to the Liverpool frigate. She engaged us near two glasses. They killed two of our men, and wounded two more. We shattered her in a terrible manner, as you will see. We killed and wounded several of her crew. I shall give you a particular account of the powder and arms taken out of her, as well as my proceedings in general. I have the pleasure to acquaint you, that all our people behaved with much courage.”30 This would be the first of many captures led by Barry.

In June, the Continental Navy brig Andrew Doria captured the British transport Oxford. Oxford was carrying Highlanders destined to reinforce Dunmore. Despite being disarmed, the Highlanders overpowered the prize crew and took back their ship. On the 21st, as Oxford passed Cape Henry, she met the Virginia Navy vessels Liberty and Patriot who she took for pilot boats. Liberty and Patriot, captained by the seafaring brothers James Barron and Richard Barron, once again captured the Oxford, taking their prize to the Admiralty Court at Hampton.

Back in Princess Anne County, efforts to eliminate any Loyalist presence were in full force. On April 30, a Military Court of Enquiry convened to determine the loyalties of certain individuals. It was believed, that even though many Loyalist had already fled the county, many on board Dunmore’s Flotilla, others may remain intent on creating havoc in the region. Among those tried were a John Scott, “charged with secreting the effects of Sprowle & C. and of supplying the fleets with provisions.” Andrew Sprowle was a Norfolk merchant and Loyalist on one of Dunmore’s ships. “Two witnesses deposed that the prisoner had the sheep in his possession and that upon applying to him for pay for three hogs he offered him two geese and lambs in satisfaction for them.” In the same court William Creamar was charged with “supplying the enemy with fish.” What gave Creamar away was the quantity of fish he was acquiring: “It appears by the testimony of divers witnesses that the prisoner frequently purchased from two to three bunches of fish at a time. It also app'd that the neighbours could not purchase anything like that quantity.” In the end, Scott was sent to jail and the court recommended that Creamar “be sent to W'ms'burg to cool him.”31

Despite being a refugee at Gwynn’s Island, Dunmore still acted as if his authority as Colonial Governor still held true. Colonel William Woodford received a letter from Dunmore, dated May 22 that various Patriot prisoners, on parole, had not returned to Dunmore’s ships. Dunmore demanded that “if you do not order them to return to me on or before the 26th instant, I shall most certainly not only not grant the same indulgence to any that shall hereafter fall into my hands, but punish every man of them as they deserve, if ever they fall into my hands again.”32 Among the prisoners “missing” were Princess Anne County residents James Nimmo, John Nimmo, Jonathan Woodhouse, and John Woodhouse.

30 Remembrancer, 1776, 81. 31 Military Court of Enquiry, Princess Anne County, April 30, 1776, “Virginia Legislative Papers,” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 15, No. 4 (April 1908), 408-10. 32 William Woodford to Andrew Lewis, May 22, 1776, NDAR, Vol. 5, 210.

Figure 5: Dunmore’s encampment at Gwynn's Island The situation at Gwynn’s island soon became untenable. Patriot forces besieged Dunmore at the island and based on the scarcity of needed supplies, water, and medical care, Dunmore made the decision to quit not only Gwynn’s Island but also Virginia. This was also precipitated by the artillery attack on Dunmore’s ships on July 9 where Patriot forces inflicted serious damage on the Dunmore and Otter.33 It was just a matter of time before a full-scale attack transpired. Dunmore’s fleet initially headed further into the bay for water and other supplies. On August 4, after being mere refugees for many months, Dunmore’s flotilla anchored in the Chesapeake Bay off Princess Anne County. Final arrangements were made for an inglorious end to British occupation of Virginia. The diary of the Captain Miguel Antonio Eduardo of the Spanish packet boat, Santa Barbara, property of the Royal Agency for Negroes in America, recorded:

“August 3 - At sunrise all the convoy made sail with a fresh North wind, continuing to the capes.

August 4 - At 8 in the morning the Convoy anchored near Cape Henry. In the afternoon we continued to the Cape with some 30 Vessels bound for Florida, Bermuda and the other America. We left with them for our destination, Havana.

33 Narrative of Captain Andrew Snape Hamond, July 9, 1776 entry, NDAR, Vol. 5, 1078.

August 5 - At sunrise we made Sail with the 30 Vessels under the convoy of the Frigate of War Otter and a Schooner that were to escort those going to Florida. At 8 in the morning a Boat from the Otter came to inquire how much water we had. I told him sufficient to get to Puerto Rico, which was our nearest Port, although some distance away, but that I feared that we would perish for lack of provisions of which we were extremely short.”34

Captain Andrew Snape Hamond, Naval Commander of Virginia, in the HMS Roebuck, either reluctantly or out of sense of duty, stayed with Dunmore as his protection for many months. While Dunmore would find Hamond’s services invaluable, Hamond had a different opinion. In a letter to Han Stanley, Governor of the Isle of Wight, Hamond lamented “The history of a defensive kind of war, which has been my misfortune for some time past to have been engaged in, is painful for me to relate, and would give you no pleasure to read.”35 Hamond, nonetheless, continually executed his duties and attempted to make life for the Patriots as hard as possible. His orders to the HMS Fowey not only continued with the Dunmore mission, but set in place further naval presence at the entrance to the Virginia Capes: Figure 6: Captain Andrew Snape Hamond, Royal Navy “The Sickly and weak State of the Troops under Lord Dunmores command, as well as the bad condition of the Transports have determined His Lordship and my self to proceed with them to New York; being clearly of opinion that remaining within the Capes without power of Acting against the Rebels only tends to bring disgrace on his Majesty's Arms, and give Spirits to the enemy.

It is therefore my direction to you, that you remain with His Majesty's Ship under your command on this station, and use your utmost endeavours to prevent any of the Rebel Vessels from getting in or out of the Capes, and in every other respect to annoy the Enemy by every means in your power. I have left my Tender the Pembroke to cruize with you, but as Soon as you are joined by the Otter, or any

34 Diary of Miguel Antonio Eduardo, NDAR, Vol. 5, 1349. 35 Captain Andrew Snape Hamond to Hans Stanley, August 6, 1776, NDAR, Vol. 6, 66.

other Ship or vessel 'of War, It is my desire that you dispatch her to me imediately at New York and give me an account of every thing that may happen in my Absence from Virginia which I flatter my self will not be above 14 days at farthest.”36

Patriots across Virginia undoubtedly cheered upon reading the report of Dunmore’s departure in the Virginia Gazette:

“By advices from Hampton, we learn that last Wednesday morning the Right Hon. the Earl of Dunmore, Viscount Fincastle, and Baron Murray of Blair, Mouilli, and Tillimet, after dividing his fleet, and burning ten or a dozen vessels, took leave of the capes of Virginia, where he has, for more than a twelvemonth past, perpetrated crimes that would even have disgraced the noted pirate BLACK BEARD. One part of the fleet was seen to stand to the southward, it is imagined for South Carolina, the other to the northward, supposed for New York. Their strength, from the information of two negro deserters, who came up to Hampton in the evening, amounts to near 400, regulars, negroes, and Tories; that they were now tolerably healthy, and had lately got'a supply of provisions, which they took from a Rhode Island vessel.'- So respectable a band will, no doubt, be a most valuable acquisition to the generals Howe and Clinton!

We have just got a supply of 290 half barrels of gunpowder, and 90 stand of arms; and 436 barrels, with 18 chests of arms, arrived safe some little time ago.”37

The Patriots were receiving the arms and powder that they needed thanks to the lack of British presence in the Chesapeake Bay. The HMS Otter made an appearance off Cape Henry after completing its escort mission but that presence was short lived as she was ordered to patrol off New York.38 For the rest of 1776, the British avoided Virginia and the entrance to the Chesapeake Bay remained open to shipping. For many across Virginia, and in particular Princess Anne County, the questioned remained – how long?

36 Captain Andrew Snape Hamond to Captain George Montagu, August 6, 1776, NDAR, Vol. 6, 88-89. 37 Virginia Gazette, August 9, 1776. 38 Disposition of His Majesty’s Ships & Vessels Employed in North America, September 18, 1776, NDAR, Vol. 6, 893.

1776 - Pleasure House

As the Virginia Colony mobilized for the American Revolution and set upon the path to independence, the Virginia Committee of Safety stationed militia patrols along the coast. The patrols were to protect against British incursions, prevent supplies from reaching the British, and prevent slaves from escaping or fleeing to the British side based on the promise made through Lord Dunmore’s November 9, 1775 proclamation issued at Kemp’s Landing.39 Colonel William Woodford’s May 2, 1776 letter to Major General Charles Lee indicated he had stationed “from the Pleasure House on the Bay side to the Sea Board 100 militia.” The troops were under the command of Colonel Eppes who reported “many slaves had run off; but hope when these different partys come to be subdivided they will effectually put a stop to their escaping.”40

The Pleasure House was ideally situated to track British naval activity on the Chesapeake Bay. Overlooking Lynnhaven Bay, an observer would not only see activity in that bay, but vessels entering at Cape Henry, and those coming down the bay as well. A road connected the Pleasure House with Kemp’s Landing and New Town further connecting to Norfolk. British movement on the bay could be reported to military officials quickly and efficiently over a very secure route. Maintaining a military presence at Kemp’s Landing was critical in this juncture as well. Based on Woodford’s letter, it appears that the Pleasure House was used to both house troops and act as the headquarters for that section of patrol.

Militia force presence was managed out of Norfolk with a rotation at the Pleasure House at intervals every seven days. Typical regimental orders directed “A Detachment, consisting of one Sub., 2 Serg’ts, and 30 Privates, to get in readiness immediately to march to Kemp’s, to Relieve the Detachment there; also one to consist of a Sub., 2 Serg’ts, and 25 Privates, to Relieve that at the Pleasure-House.”41 Other orders directed “A Sergeant and Ten men to parade and march, by 11 o’Clock, to the Pleasure House, and from thence to Cape Henry, to Carry three Days’ provisions. Serg’t Carter to act as Drill Sergeant, who is to Examine well into the Arms, as, in futer, all defects in the Arms and Accoutrements will be lodged in Him.”42 Those patrolling the coasts and manning the posts at Kemp’s, the Pleasure House and Cape Henry were not exclusively Princess Anne County militia. The militia reported to the headquarters, in this case at Norfolk, and were dispersed or stationed where needed.

39 Dunmore, through his proclamation, instituted martial law, forced oaths of allegiance professing loyalty to the king, and promised freedom to slaves and indentured servants willing to fight for the king. 40 William Woodford to Charles Lee, May 2, 1776, transcript in the Jack Robertson Collection, Mansfield Archives, Virginia Wesleyan University. 41 Militia Order, June 17, 1776, in R.A. Brock, ed., Miscellaneous Papers, 1672-1865: Now First Printed From the Manuscript in the Collections of the Virginia Historical Society, (Richmond: VA: Virginia Historical Society, 1887), 183. 42 Militia Order, July 4, 1776, Miscellaneous Papers, 189.

During this time the Pleasure House was under the ownership of Major William Thorowgood. Thorowgood had a front row seat to the action on the bay. He could easily observe ships entering and leaving the bay and hear the fights in the bay between the Royal Navy, merchant vessels, privateers, and vessels of the Virginia Navy and would bear witness, along with his neighbors, to many of the events throughout the war. Having a front row seat did not always result in an enviable position. The Pleasure House was a fixture on the official navigation charts used by the Royal Navy where it was called the Watering Place. As such it was one of the first targets for British “visitation” when they entered the bay as we shall see.

Figure 7: Royal Navy navigation chart showing the "Watering Place"

1776 – Loyalists Versus Patriots

When Dunmore departed Virginia in 1776, he took with him many of the ardent Loyalists of Norfolk and Princess Anne Counties. Known Loyalists or even British supporters were identified and forced to either abandon their Loyalist ways and support the new government or face banishment. The action against Loyalists was as much retribution as it was protection of the new Continental government. Forced oaths, on both side, had a habit of disaffecting many but even voluntary oaths could appear as threatening. Take for instance the oath administered to Princess Anne Loyalists.

“We, the inhabitants of Princess Anne County, being fully sensible of the error and guilt into which this Colony hath been misled, under colour of seeking redress of grievances, by a set of factious men, styling themselves Committees and Congresses, who have violently, and under powers of Government, endeavoured to overturn our Constitution, have incurred the guilt of actual rebellion against our most gracious Sovereign. We have, therefore, taken an oath, abjuring their authority, and solemnly promising, in the presence of Almighty God, we bear faith and true allegiance to his sacred Majesty George III; that we will, to the utmost of our power and ability, support, maintain, and defend his crown and dignity, against all traitorous attempts and conspiracies whatsoever. And whereas armed bodies of men are collected in various parts of this Colony, without any legal authority, we wish them to be informed that, however unwilling we shall be to shed the blood of countrymen, we must, in discharge of our duty to God and the King, oppose their marching into this country, where their coming can answer no good end, but, on the contrary, must expose us to the ravages and horrours of a civil war. For that purpose we are determined to take advantage of our happy situation, and will defend the passes into our country and neighbourhood, to the last drop of our blood.”43

43 “Unsigned Petition of the Loyalists of Princess Anne County,” American Archives, Ser. 4, Vol. 3, 1671.

Figure 8: Oath of Loyalty to the King

The mere threat of Loyalist resistance made the forced removal of Loyalists an immediate proposition. The threat of British depredations from expeditions along the coast, combined with the Loyalist threats, fostered the relocation of the Patriot or friendly inhabitants of the area. The residents of Princess Anne County brought to the Virginia Convention a plea for action citing that they have responded to every need of the Convention and as a result:

“many of them had been reduced to the cruel necessity of abandoning their aged parents, their wives and children, and leaving them to the mercy of a lawless, plundering soldiery, and the more savage slave; that their plantations had been ravaged, their wives and children stripped almost to nakedness, their very bed- chambers invaded at the silent hour of midnight by ruffians with drawn daggers; their houses not only robbed of plate, money, and every thing valuable, but wantonly reduced by fire to ashes; their persons treated with every indignity that elated insolence and cruelty could suggest; some of their friends dragged into confinement, and now languishing under the hands of oppression; that they lamented the tardy and equivocal conduct of some of their luke-warm friends, by which Lord Dunmore had been encouraged to begin these depredations, which, with some concealed as well as open and avowed enemies, he continued to commit so long with impunity.”44

As a result, the Virginia Convention resolved: “That it be recommended to such of the Inhabitants of the counties of Norfolk and Princess Anne as may be exposed to the attacks of the enemy, to remove themselves and their effects, and that the poorer sort be assisted in their removal by the

44 Petition of Sundry Inhabitant of Norfolk and Princess Anne Country, January 13, 1776, American Archives, Ser. 4, Vol. 4, 121.

20 publick.”45 Voluntary and forced depopulation of Princess Anne County was becoming a reality. On April 12, 1776, the Committee of Safety ordered: “That all inhabitant of Norfolk and Princess Anne counties at present residing between the enemy and our posts at Great Bridge and Kemp’s Landing to the ocean, be immediately removed to some interior parts of the Colony.” The order also directed that all “livestock of the said inhabitants be immediately taken possession of by our army.”46 The Committee of Safety proclamation may not have been the result that the inhabitants of Princess Anne County were seeking. They wanted protection they received a forced removal. Once again, they appealed to the Committee of Safety articulating the impact this action would have:

“Upon a pet'on and representation from the comm'ee of the county of P. Anne in behalf of themselves and the inhabitants of said county, setting forth the distresses and ruin w'ch must attend them from the carrying into execution the resolution of this board of the tenth day of April last for their removal, and praying that the same might be revised and rescinded, or in some measure relaxed. On hearing the Gent, appointed to present the s'd pet'on, and advised with Major General Lee, and maturely considering the subject, the Comm'ee are of opinion that many inconveniences would arise from carrying the s'd resolution into execution in its full latitude, and therefore do resolve that Wm. Robinson, Thos. Reynolds Walker, Thos. Old, John Throwgood, James Henley, Erasmus Haynes, and William Wishart, Gent., or any 4 or more of them, having taken an oath before a magistrate or comm'ee men to do equal and impartial justice and keep each other's secrets, do assemble themselves together and make strict inquiry into the temper and former conduct of the inhabitants of the s'd county of Princess Anne and certifie to the Hon. Major-General Lee, or the commanding officer at Suffolk or its neighborhood, which of them have taken an active part in behalf of America, which have remained quiet at home without taking an active part on either side, and who have appeared inimical to America, on which cert'ate the General or commanding officer is desired to suffer all such as have been friends or neutrals to remain at their habitations with their families, but to remove all their live stock except such as the Comm'rs above named, shall judge necessary for their immediate subsistence; and that all the enemies of America in the said county be compelled to remove, with their families and effects, according to the former resolution, and the Comm'rs are desired to return their whole proceedings to this Comm'ee, to be laid before the General Convention.”47

45 Resolution of the Virginia Convention, January 15, 1776, American Archives, Ser. 4, Vol. 4, 124. 46 Proceedings of the Committee of Safety, April 10, 1776, in Jared Sparks, ed., Correspondence of the American Revolution; Being Letters of Eminent Men to George Washington, Vol. 2, (Boston, MA: Little, Brown, 1853), 488-89. 47 Minutes of the Virginia Committee of Safety, May, 3, 1776, in William P, Palmer, ed., Calendar of Virginia State Papers and other Manuscripts, Vol 8 (Richmond: R. F. Walker, 1875) , 166. (Hereafter CSP)

The Committee of Safety then rescinded the removal order, allowing the friendly inhabitant to remain. Loyalists nonetheless were forced to move. While the forced removal of Loyalists may appear an inhumane action, it did receive the approval of George Washington who stated, “Your Convention are acting very wisely in removing the disaffected, and stores, from the Counties of Princess Anne and Norfolk; and are much to be commended for their attention to the manufacture of salt, saltpetre, and powder. No time nor expense should be spared to accomplish these things.”48

An interesting aspect of Washington’s comment is salt. Salt was a critical component in preserving the meat needed to supply the Continental Army. Turmoil in the state and British efforts to disrupt or destroy the salt supply were causing hoarding and price gouging on the commodity. Lund Washington, tending to Mount Vernon in George’s absence even commented “the people are run’g mad about Salt—you woud hardly think it Possible there coud be such a Scarcity 5/ or 6/ pr Bushel - Conwey’s Sloop come to Alex. on Monday last with a load. he see no tenders in the Bay - several other Vessles are Expected but whether they may have Conweys luck is uncertain.”49 One salt producing facility was located in Princess Anne County near Rudee Inlet. The location appears on a 1781 French map adjacent to a “guard house.” Both entities may have been on land owned by Thomas Walker Reynolds who owned a significant amount of property in that vicinity. His standing as a militia Colonel may have influenced the protective measures in place and he was paid £58.5.7 ½ for “the Pay and Subsistence of a Serjeant and Guard stations at the Salt Work near Cape Figure 9: Salt House near Rudee inlet Henry.”50 A pension application by Thomas Bonney, who entered the militia when he was fifteen, indicates he started as a guard at the “salt house” where duty consisted of “preventing the enemy from plundering the country of cattle and other stock.”51 Princess Anne County housed a considerable amount of economic potential critical to the war effort.

48 George Washington to John Washington, May 31, 1776, American Archives, Ser. 4, Vol. 6, 632. 49 Lund Washington to George Washington, 24 November 1775,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/03-02-02-0387. 50 Journal of the Council of the State of Virginia, October 16, 1776 Session, Vol. 1 (Richmond: Division of Purchase and Printing, 1931), 200. 51 Pension Application of Thomas Bonney, S6688 in John Frederick, compiler, Virginia Revolutionary Pension Applications, Vol. 8 (Washington, DC, 1963), 44.

While Walker’s contributions to the war effort were two-fold, other Princess Anne residents contributed as well. John Rogers was paid £74.0.0 for the recruiting service he facilitated in the Princess Anne and Norfolk districts and William Hunter, was paid £11.7.11 for provisions for the Princess Anne Militia.52 Several stood up and manned militia units including James Murdaugh with his company of “minute men,” Frederick Boush for his “militia guard,” and Captain Willis Wills for the “Princess Anne Battery.”53 Others assisted in the removal of Loyalists by providing goods and services. Archibald Cary and Willis Riddick arranged for wagons used in “removing the Inhabitants of Norfolk and Princess Anne.”54

While Princess Anne County was in upheaval between Loyalist removal, the lingering British threat, and other safety measures, efforts continued to provide the highest degree of protection to those who remained along with a view of maintaining control over strategic areas. One such area was Kemp’s Landing. While the British occupied the Elizabeth River, and Patriots controlled Norfolk, maintaining a defensive position at Kemp’s Landing seemed redundant and a tax on existing resources – many of which were patrolling the vast coastal areas of Princess Anne County. A council looking into the defenses at Kemp’s Landing came to the following conclusion:

“Does it appear that Kemp' s Landing, without great risk to the body there stationed, can be supported? Is the importance of this post so great as to counterbalance the risk? But if it is thought necessary to abandon Kemp' s Landing, should not the Convention be petitioned to put in execution the former resolve of the Committee of Safety, (now rescinded,) of obliging all the slaves of a military age, as well as all the white inhabitants who are not manifest active partisans of liberty, to evacuate the Counties of Norfolk and Princess Anne, lying between the Great Bridge, ocean, and Currituck Sound; as likewise those residing in that tract between the Eastern and Southern branches, and those of the lower parts of Nansemond and the Western branch, who have taken the oaths to Lord Dunmore?

The Court are of opinion (with only one dissentient) that Kemp' s Landing cannot be supported without the greatest risk; that when it is evacuated the whole stock would consequently fall into the hands of the enemy; that therefore the male slaves, and all the inhabitants of a military age, who are not manifestly active partisans of the publick liberty, will be actively employed for her destruction; that both inclination and necessity will oblige them. In consequence of this opinion, they beg leave humbly to petition the Convention to put in execution the resolve of the Committee of Safety (now rescinded) on this subject.”55

52 CSP, Vol. 8, March 5, 1776, 108, and May 16, 1776, 180. 53 CSP, Vol. 8, Feb 17, 1776, 86, March 1, 1776, 102, and May 8, 1776, 172. 54 CSP, Vol. 8, May 15, 1776, 178, and May 16, 1776, 180. 55 Opinion of a Council of Officers, summoned by General Lee, May 8, 1776, American Archives, Ser. 4, Vol. 6, 407.

Kemp’s Landing and Princess Anne County were more important to the war effort than anyone could have imagined.

Once Dunmore left Virginia, the situation in Princess Anne more or less normalized. Militia still patrolled the coasts, Kemp’s Landing had some defenses, and for the most past, remaining Loyalists lived in relative peace. The next threat came in 1777 when Josiah Phillips, characterized as a Tory laborer from Lynnhaven Parish in Princess Anne County, began a series of terror raids across southeastern Virginia, including Princess Anne County, primarily against known Patriots. Phillips and his band of ruffians managed to escape capture by law enforcement for many months.56 A Bill of Attainder issued in 1778 stated “It shall be lawful for any person with or without orders, to pursue and slay the said Josiah Philips Philips.”57 Phillips was captured (alive) by a group led by militia Captain Amos Weeks of Princess Anne County. The Virginia Gazette reported Phillips’ execution as November 23, 1778.58

While Phillips was laying waste to the countryside, the appearance of the British off the coast often led to another round of animosity against the Loyalists.

“Whereas this Board by a resolution at the 18th of August last required the commanding officers at every Station to cause all persons who had refused to take the oath of allegiance to this Commonwealth and all others who they should have good cause to suspect had designs of doing anything unfriendly to the State, to remove themselves ten miles from any camp or garrison where any troops are stationed or from any post or place where the enemy ships lie and to apprehend and secure all persons aforesaid who might thereafter be found within such limits giving notice of their proceedings to the next Justice of the Peace, and, also, to the Governor from time to time. And, whereas the said recited resolution was entered into at a time that this State was threatened with an invasion by formidable armament in the Bay of Chesapeake, but for as much as there seems to be no reason to expect any sudden invasion as the said Fleet have sailed out of the Capes of Virginia, and the Board having been informed that it is General Washington's opinion that the enemy's attention is so fixed on other objects that this State need be under no apprehensions of danger from them this campaign. It is therefore the unanimous opinion of this Board that the above recited resolution are to be suspended For the present and the Lieutenant Governor has advised to give directions to the commanding officers at every station to permit such persons as may have been removed by virtue at the resolution aforesaid to return to their usual

56 Jesse Turner, “Four Fugitive Cases from the Realm of American Constitutional Law,” American Law Review, 49 (1915), 818-828. Also, John Alonza George, “Virginia Loyalists, 1775-1783,” Richmond College Historical Review, Vol. 1, No. 2 (June 1916): 173-221. 57 Quote from Jack Lynch, “A Patriot, a Traitor, and a Bill of Attainder,” Colonial Williamsburg Journal, (Spring 2002), http://www.history.org/foundation/journal/spring02/attainder.cfm. 58 Virginia Gazette, December 4, 1778.

places of abode upon giving their paroles respectively not to aid, abet, hold any correspondence with, or give intelligence of any matter or thing to the enemies of the United States of America, and His Honor was pleased to give directions accordingly.”59

The Loyalist population in Princess Anne County was small but was still a potentially powerful force. The belief that those Princess Anne Loyalists remaining would rush back to the royal standard was an assumption that would have potentially catastrophic ramifications as future British operations in the area would demonstrate.

59 Journal of the Congress of the State of Virginia, October 10, 1777, transcript in the Jack Robertson Collection, Mansfield Archives, Virginia Wesleyan University.

1777 - Cape Henry and the Blockade

The strategic economic importance of Cape Henry was recognized early on in our nation’s history with the recommendation that building a lighthouse at that location would be “of great Advantage to the Trade of this Bay.”60 Unfortunately, it took almost half of a century to finally bring the colonies of Virginia and Maryland into agreement on construction funding, tariff rates, and overall operation of the lighthouse. Finally, in 1773, the Maryland Assembly appropriated £3600 and the Virginia Assembly £6000 for construction.61 Despite the slow start, advertisem*nts began appearing announcing that “Notice is hereby given that a number of vessels will be wanted this summer to bring about 6,000 tons of stone from Mr. Brooke’s quarry, on Rappahannock, and land the same on Cape Henry, for the lighthouse.”62 Locally, a lighthouse board of directors was appointed to oversee construction and to provide improvements to the navigation at the entrance to the Chesapeake Bay including buoys to mark shoal areas.

In addition to the stone, the lighthouse directors also started accumulating other necessary materials for the construction. For buoys, 2,500 feet of juniper plank, 100 sheets of copper, measuring five feet by two and a half feet, and 1,200 feet of copper hoops were ordered.63 In addition, a tent was fabricated for use of the directors at Cape Henry “to view the Sands for a favorable place to build the Light House on.”64 As with any construction venture, unanticipated costs quickly diminished the available funds. While many of the materials for construction were gathered at Cape Henry, it appears that actual construction had not commenced and most of the expenditures to date were for materials and transportation to the work site. Additional materials, such as chains for anchoring the buoys and the addition of a keeper’s house were not accounted for in the original estimate. In June of 1775, another £5000 was allowed “to purchase such other Materials as are necessary, and to pay Workman’s Wages, for erecting the Light house, and other incidental charges.”65 The last allocation of funds by the Virginia House of Burgesses is remarkable considering the increasing unrest and lack of control within the Colony of Virginia. Lord Dunmore, the Governor, was already in his second week of running the colony from on board the HMS Fowey in the Elizabeth River having been driven out of Williamsburg by the rebels.

60 “Lower House Journal Entry, July 19, 1721,” Proceedings and Acts of the General Assembly of Maryland, Lower House Journal, Vol. 34, July 19, 1721 (Baltimore, MD: Maryland Historical Society, 1883), 204-05. 61 “An ACT for raising and applying money towards erecting and maintaining a lighthouse on Cape Henry,” Hanson’s Laws of Maryland, Act of 1773, Chap XXIX (Annapolis, MD: Frederick Green, Printer to the State, 1787), 94-95. 62 “Lighthouse at Cape Henry,” William and Mary Quarterly, Vol. 13, No. 4 (Apr 1905): 260. 63 “Report of the Directors and Managers for erecting a Light House on Cape Henry,” February 16, 1774, Colonial Papers Collection, Library of Virginia. 64 Colonial Papers Collection, February 17, 1774. 65 “Memorial of the Directors and Managers for Erecting a Lighthouse on Cape Henry,” June 15, 1775, H.R. McIlwaine, ed., Legislative Journals of the Council of Colonial Virginia, Vol. 3 (Richmond, VA: Virginia State Library, 1919), 1595.

Soon all consideration for constructing a lighthouse was erased by the coming of the Revolutionary War.

Several members of the lighthouse board would find themselves embroiled on both sides of the conflict. The directors’ list read like a “Who’s Who” of Hampton Roads: Thomas Nelson, Joseph Hutchings, Thomas Newton, Jr., James Holt, and Matthew Phripp, later augmented by Paul Loyall, George Kelly, William White, Lemuel Cornick, and Thomas Reynolds Walker.66 Their efforts would be stymied by the collapse of colonial rule in Virginia at the end of 1775. Nelson would find himself occupied on the Continental Congress, Joseph Hutchings, as we saw, was captured by the British at the Skirmish at Kemp’s Landing, Loyall, while Mayor of Norfolk, had his city burned, Newton was leading a militia unit, and Phripp was suspected of treason. All were focused on anything but the lighthouse.

While ships had been entering the Chesapeake Bay regularly for over 150 years, there were hazards which a navigation aid such as the lighthouse would help minimize. Common notices in local newspapers included incidents such as: “On the 16th instant was stranded on Cape Henry, the brigantine Beckey, or Lady Washington, laden with flour and bread, from Alexandria, bound to Charlestown in South Carolina, Captain's name Harper.”67 Weather, tides, currents, and even Figure 10: 1774 Minutes of the Cape Henry Lighthouse Committee inept pilots all contributed to shipping losses in Virginia.

More dangerous than navigation hazards were the British vessels patrolling the area. Although not great in number at any one time, just the presence of one ship was enough to disrupt shipping in and out of the bay. The British tactics were simple. The primary vessel, generally a 5th or 6th rate vessel, such as a frigate, but mostly smaller non-rated ships such as a sloop-of-war, brig, or schooner, would anchor in an area commanding access in and out of the bay and with a view of the Atlantic, the upper bay, and the western portions including Hampton Roads.68 The

66 “Miscellaneous Colonial Documents from the Originals in the Virginia State Archives,” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 19, No. 1 (Jan 1911): 25-26. 67 Virginia Gazette, November 22, 1776. 68 See “Rated Navy ships in the 17th to 19th centuries” and “Unrated naval vessels in the 17th to 19th centuries” from Royal Museums Greenwich, https://www.rmg.co.uk/discover/explore/rated-navy-ships-17th-19th-centuries.

27 area between Lynnhaven Bay and Cape Henry was the ideal location. From here, smaller tenders or ship’s boats, generally armed with a small canon or swivel gun would intercept any suspected shipping. The smaller vessels had the speed and maneuverability needed in the confined waters of the Chesapeake Bay.

Captain Samuel Uppleby, commanding the HMS Preston, reported one such intercept off Cape Henry in his log: “at Noon came to an Anchor Clear weather, mann'd & Armed the Barge & Pinnace & sent them to chace a sloop which the[y] boarded she proved from St Eustatia to Virginia, sent a Lieut & 25 Men in the Sloop to proceed with the Brune, after a ship which had run in Shore, which they took, she proved to be the Farmer from Maryland bound to France with Tobacco.”69 While some vessels were captured while transiting, others took to evasive measure, running close to shore to avoid the intercepts. Such was the case here when the Brune was captured at sea and the Farmer captured while aground on Cape Henry.

Faced with a growing number of vessels being captured at Cape Henry, the proposed lighthouse site, and all the materials at the site, would be far from an abandoned venture and were destined to soon play a vital role in the Revolution. Merchants and ship owners, recognizing the strategic military importance of Cape Henry, at the juncture between the Atlantic Ocean and the Chesapeake Bay, recommended a warning station and defenses at the location. Merchant James Hunter stated:

“I should think it a great Favour done the Public if you could contrive to have a few men stationed at Cape Henry, (close in with which all Vessels come), and have Two masts erected, with two large Flags, one Red, the other White-at night Two Lanthornes-should the enemy be in, hoist the Red by day, one Lanthorne at night- the Coast being clear, Vice Versa-as this cannot be attended with great Expence, and the Service it would yield our Trade, I do not see but we might be indulged, even with a Guard of Two Hundred and a little Fort to keep off Boats-The apprehension of Danger first taught us to provide against it.”70

In 1777, the Council of the State of Virginia resolved:

“that for the safety of the Trade of this Commonwealth there be immediately set upon the point of Land at Cape Henry on a staff fifty feet high at least, a white flag striped with Red to be constantly kept hoisted in the day when no enemy is within the Capes and taken down when an enemy appears; that there be also hoisted on the sd staff a proper light to be kept constantly burning in the night Time when no Enemy is within the Capes and taken down on the approach of the enemy, and that Colo: Thomas Reynolds Walker of Princess Anne be desired to have the same properly executed, and the Commander Officer of the Garrison at Portsmouth be

69 Log of HMS Preston, January 20, 1777, NDAR, Vol. 7, 1004. 70 James Hunter to Col William Aylett, February 6, 1777, in Tyler’s Quarterly, 1 (1920): 98-99.

directed to keep a subalterns or Serjeants Guard at the Cape for the purpose of hoisting the flag by day, and keeping up the light by night, and to give Intelligence of the approach of the enemy.71

While the purpose of the lighthouse was for economic purposes and protecting commerce, the new signal mast would have a similar economic purpose protecting ships from the British navy. Thomas Reynolds Walker was a member of the lighthouse board of directors and was well aware of the materials at the site which, coupled with his role as a colonel in the Princess Anne Militia, made him the ideal candidate for overseeing construction and operation of the signal mast. Walker had already been leading a company of militia at Cape Henry and a warrant issued on August 16, 1776 for payment of the troops referred to his company as the “Princess Anne Minute Men.”72

A staff 50 feet high would be visible approximately eight miles out at sea on the horizon. Depending on the height of observation - how high off the water the observer is viewing the mast (such as from the deck of a ship), that distance may be even further. Since most vessels had to approach the coast of Cape Henry to join the natural deep channel in the southern part of the bay entrance, there was ample warning from the signal mast on the British threat in the bay.

The specifications delineated by the Council were different than originally proposed Figure 11: Signal Mast at Fort Norfolk - similar to by Hunter – perhaps a simpler, singular signaling the design at Cape Henry system would be easier to see and interpret from at sea. However, instructions provided to merchant shipping show a totally different set of signals:

Signal to be observed at Cape Henry

If it’s very dangerouse to get in that is to say if the Men of War command the Capes Four Distinct Fire’s will be seen.

If they are within the Cape’s and ly in Hampton Road or pretty high up Chesepeak, three distinct will be seen.

71 Journal entry Wednesday, February 19, 1777, H. R. McIlwaine, ed., Journals of the Council of the State of Virginia, Vol. 1 (Richmond, VA: Division of Purchase and Printing, 1931), 350-51. 72 Journal entry Wednesday, August 21, 1776, 127.

If no Danger their Two distinct Fires will appear.

A Guard of 50 Men stationed their for the Protection of Vessells that may go on shore to get clear of the Enemy.73

The ability to show multiple signals simultaneously may have been unrealistic for the remote outpost considering the supply of materials at the sight although the need to display varying signals was evident. A British warship further up the bay posed little hazard for a vessel heading to the Elizabeth or James Rivers. The one common factor in all the different signal configurations was the presence of a militia unit to tend the signal and protect the coast. The post at Cape Henry was normally manned by about 50 militiamen at any given time. The militia reportedly possessed a couple of small artillery pieces. Generally, any type of artillery position at Cape Henry would have been ineffective against ships as the range of most cannon at the time would not reach ships even in the most southerly portion of the channel. Such pieces would be more effective at preventing landings of British troops or protecting any merchant vessels that may have run aground on the cape. The militia stationed at Cape Henry would find themselves well employed.

How effective the signal station was at warning ships of the British presence is debatable. On one hand, there were few documented instances of American ships evading capture because of the early warning of British activity in or at the mouth of the bay. Large scale British presence was limited to the raiding forces under Sir George Collier in 1779 and the short-lived expedition under Major General Alexander Leslie to establish a post at Portsmouth in 1780.74 It would be British warships operating independently or in small groups that would provide the biggest threat. The British vessels enforcing the blockade, however, captured numerous ships. For example, during the period between December 1777 through March 1778:

- HMS Emerald captured the Polly, Miquelon Packet, Dragon, L’Elegant, Friendship, and a sloop; - HMS Richmond captured the Alexandrine, Good Hope, and a sloop; and - HMS St. Albans captured the Arc en Ciel, Duke of Grafton, Petit Camarade, Defiance, Shore, Jean Andre and a schooner. These were all accomplished in in the lower Chesapeake Bay.75 Many of the captures were of vessels leaving the Chesapeake Bay that would not have been able to see the signal at Cape Henry.

73 “John King to the American Commissioners, 9 October 1777,” Founders Online, National Archives, last modified June 13, 2018, http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-25-02-0026. 74 Robert Fallon and Marion West Stoer, “The Old Dominion Under Fire: The Chesapeake Invasion, 1779-1781,” Ernest McNeill Eller, ed., Chesapeake Bay in the American Revolution, (Centreville, MD: Tidewater Publishers, 1981). 75 Admiralty Office, June 2, 1778, “List of Vessels seized or destroyed by His Majesty’s Ships stationed in Cheapeak Bay,” The London Gazette, June 2 to June 6, 1778.

In 1777, for example, an unnamed schooner entering the bay had run aground on Cape Henry trying to evade both the pinnace and armed cutter of the HMS Solebay on blockade duty. The crews of the pinnace and cutter went ashore to attempt to free the vessel to effect a capture or destroy it. The pinnace was “Stove to pieces in attempting to get her out of the Surf after having destroy’d the Schooner.”76 The pinnace crew of a lieutenant, three petty officers, and 15 men were stranded at Cape Henry and surrendered to the Princess Anne Militia. In an interesting twist, reported in the Virginia Gazette: “Last week the Emerald man of war took two Gentlemen as they were crossing the bay from the Eastern Shore to Princess Anne. They have been since indulged with a parole for fourteen days, to try to get exchanged for two officers of the Solebay frigate, that were lately taken by a party of the Princess Anne militia. These Gentlemen inform, that the Captain of the Emerald declared he would detain every person he took, unless they are exchanged upon the above terms.”77 The British were apparently desperate to recover their crew. In their crossing of the Chesapeake Bay the two gentlemen from the Eastern Shore would have headed for the calmer waters inside of Lynnhaven Inlet.

Figure 12: Admiralty Plans of an armed pinnace

76 Journal of HMS Solebay, Captain Thomas Symonds, August 27, 1777, William Bell Clark, ed., NDAR, Vol. 9: 844. 77 Virginia Gazette, October 3, 1777.

1778 – Naval Actions

Finding the bay very lucrative for capturing American vessels, the British instituted a more intensive blockade with the St. Albans, Phoenix, Emerald, Richmond, and Otter “placed at equal distances, to effectually stop the passage into the Chesapeak Bay.”78 This was designed, based on the latest intelligence reports, to prevent the expected arrival of the French fleet from entering the bay and the anticipated war patrol of the Continental Navy frigate Virginia and Maryland Navy ship Saratoga from leaving the bay. The tactic with the latter was successful more by happenstance than by design.

The USS Virginia was one of the ships of the small Continental Navy and was trapped at Annapolis because of the British blockade. Her commander, Captain James Nicholson, faced many challenges including lack of crew, funds, and a reliable pilot to take the ship down the bay. On top of this was mounting pressure by the Continental Congress to take some action against the British. Nicholson decided to transit the bay without a pilot, instead relying on the pilot aboard the Saratoga by following in the Saratoga’s wake. The Virginia and Saratoga sailed in company from Annapolis on March 30th. Following in the Saratoga’s wake was working until adverse winds near the entrance to the bay caused Virginia to lag with the ship running aground on the Middle Ground in the dark. Nicholson reported the incident to the Continental Marine Committee:

“This will inform you of my misfortune in losing the Virginia, at three o’clock in the morning of the 31st ult. I had weighed from Annapolis at eight the preceding morning, and had taken the advantage of going down the Bay in company with a brig which had a pilot on board, supposed to be one of the best in the Bay, to whom I had agreed to give 100 provided he carried me out clear of the ground. The wind blew hard at N.W. and in every other respect it was a most favourable time; and altho’ my tender was absent with 19 hands, I thought it most adviseable to proceed. At the above mentioned time she struck on the Middle Ground, and in about an hour and an half beat over it, with the loss of her rudder, and making as much water as we could well clear her from with four pumps; in which case, we thought it was adviseable to come to an anchor until day light, when we found one of the enemy’s ships about two gunshots off, abreast of us, and another further up the Bay; upon which I hoisted out my barge, and took such of my crew as inclined to run the risqué of getting on shore, viz. 10 including myself, and with the greatest difficulty I got on Cape Henry, where I waited until 10 o’clock, when I saw the two ships. I immediately went to Portsmouth, got a boat, and came on board the St. Alban’s with a flag, in order to procure the parole of my officers, which I expect to accomplish; after which I shall proceed to Baltimore, and from thence shall

78 Captain Benjamin Caldwell, R.N., to Captain Thomas Symonds, R.N., Captain Matthew Squire, R.N., and Commander Anthony J. P. Mollow, R.N., March 7, 1778, NDAR, Vol. 11: 541.

immediately wait on Congress. The Virginia is obliged to be towed, and is not yet got up.”79

While Captain Nicholson watched from safe ashore on Cape Henry, the bulk of his crew was still aboard Virginia, having to fend for themselves on a drifting hulk. Left onboard was Joshua Barney, the Second Lieutenant, who, “believing that it would be at least practicable to prevent her falling into the hands of the enemy, by running her on shore at Cape Henry, as the wind was fair and blowing somewhat fresh, he immediately ordered the cable to be cut.”80 Nicholson watched as the HMS Emerald closed and captured the Virginia. Emerald reported “at 9 AM fired a Six pounder at her, upon which She struck her Colours.”81

Figure 13: Continental Navy Frigate Virginia The Emerald towed Virginia into Lynnhaven Bay to effect repairs on the rudder. The prisoners were moved aboard the HMS Richmond and HMS Senegal.82 Virginia was later taken to New York City, condemned in a prize court and commissioned the HMS Virginia.

Later that year, the American privateer Rattlesnake was under pursuit by the HMS Swift. While the Rattlesnake sought safety in the Chesapeake Bay, she too ran aground near the same spot on the Middle Ground as Virginia. The Swift also managed to run aground in the same vicinity. After attempts to lighten ship by tossing over supplies, fresh water, and cannon, the 20-

79 James Nicholson to the Continental Marine Committee, April 2, 1778, NDAR, Vol. 12: 19-20. 80 Mary Barney, ed., A Biographical Memoir of the Late Commodore Joshua Barney, (Boston: Gray & Bowen, 1832), 66. 81 Journal of HMS Emerald, Captain Benjamin Caldwell, March 31, 1778, NDAR, Vol. 11: 848. 82 Journal of HMS Richmond, March 31, 1778 and Journal of HMS Senegal, March 31, 1778, NDAR, Vol. 11: 849.

33 gun British ship remained stuck. Rather than risk capture by the Americans, Captain Thomas Frederick of the Swift abandoned ship and burned his vessel. The nearest land – at Cape Henry – was occupied by the Princess Anne County Militia under Colonel Thomas Reynold Walker. Walker undoubtedly took pleasure in accepting the surrender of his 91 prisoners.83 Newspapers reported the engagement as follows”

“A few days since, as the Privateer ship RattleSnake, Captain M'Culloch, of 18 Guns; and 35 Men, was returning from Charlestown to Philadelphia, deeply laden with Salt and Rice, she fell in with and engaged the Swift British Sloop of War, of 16 Guns, and, 78 Men, off of Cape Henry-and, after maintaining a running Fight for several Hours, the former ran ashore and bilged, a little to the South of the Cape – and the latter, pursuing the devoted Snake too eagerly, shared the same Fate. - Capt. M'Culloch, (who was slightly wounded in his Leg) and his Crew, landed safely amongst their Virginia Friends; but the hapless Britons, after destroying their Vessel, were constrained to surrender themselves Prisoners of War - fully realizing that the Race is not always to the Swift. &c.”84

Rattlesnake was lost as well. Somewhere on or around the Middle Ground might still lie a couple of dozen ship’s cannon from this engagement.

Figure 14: Privateer Rattlesnake

83 “Session of Virginia Council of State, 27 November 1778,” Founders Online, National Archives, last modified June 13, 2018, http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-01-02-0089. 84 Maryland Journal, December 1, 1778.

One of the most successful officers in the Virginia Navy was Commodore James Barron of Hampton. Barron holds the distinction of capturing the greatest number of British vessels during his numerous patrols in and out of the Chesapeake Bay throughout the war. The schooner Liberty was Barron’s favorite vessel and was the only Virginia Navy ship to survive the war – the others burned, captured, or otherwise destroyed in action.

The HMS Emerald had a tender called the Fortunatus that was used in intercepting vessels while on blockade duty. In the spring of 1779, the Fortunatus was forced into the Chesapeake Bay by weather and sought protection in Hampton Roads. Captain Richard Barron, brother to James, sighted the vessel, notified James, rallied a crew and set out to capture the schooner with the Liberty. The chase proceeded out of Hampton Roads, into the Chesapeake Bay and headed for Cape Henry. Liberty was apparently a faster sailor than Fortunatus as Barron’s ship quickly came within cannon range.

The ship-on-ship battle off Cape Henry lasted about two hours and when the Liberty crew finally boarded the Fortunatus, they found only the Captain, Lieutenant Dickey, and four others of the crew of fifty able to operate any of the ten 6-pound cannons on the schooner. Liberty, due to a shortage of solid cannon shot, had been firing grape shot which resulted in the large number of casualties on Fortunatus. The Baron brothers brought Fortunatus into Hampton as a prize. Lieutenant Dickey was placed on parole in Portsmouth where he would play an ignominious role in the Collier Raids.85

85 “The Schooner Liberty,” William Maxwell, ed., Virginia Historical Review and Literary Advertiser, Vol. 1, No. 2, (Richmond, VA: McFarlane & Ferguson, 1848), 76-80.

1779 - Collier Raids

By 1779, the focus of the American Revolution shifted from the mid-Atlantic states of New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania to the southern states of Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina. The southern states had a larger Loyalist following and would submit easier to Royal Rule – or so it was believed. Additionally, a significant amount of supplies supporting the Continental Army were produced in the southern states, including Virginia. Attacking the enemy’s supply lines has always been a vital tactic in war.

While the southern campaign, led by Lord Cornwallis, was subjugating Georgia and the Carolinas, it was time to take a swipe at Virginia. Focusing again on Washington’s supply lines, Sir George Collier surmised, “these resources were principally drawn from Virginia, by her trade in tobacco, &c.; that an attack on that province, and the shutting up the navigation of the Chesapeake, would probably answer very considerable purposes; and if not of itself sufficient to end the war, would drive the rebels to infinite inconveniences and difficulties, and especially as Washington's army was constantly supplied with salted provisions sent by water through the Chesapeake.”86 Thus the concept behind the Collier Raid into Virginia.

The raids of the Chesapeake Bay region under the command of Sir George and alongside General Mathews, while designed to disrupt supplies, were in reality, nothing more than harassment of the Virginia residents. Collier’s forces, consisting of the Raisonable, Rainbow, Otter, Diligent, the sloop Harlem, the galley Cornwallis, and twenty-eight transports, arrived in the Cheaspeake on May 8. The ships entered the James and Elizabeth Rivers, attacked the Patriot fortification in Portsmouth (the old location of Dunmore’s hospital), destroyed what remained of the vessels under construction in Norfolk (the Patriots burning the unfinished vessels on Collier’s arrival), and set fire to warehouses.87 In an interesting note, Lieutenant Dickey, captain of the Fortunatus captured by the Liberty off Cape Henry earlier in the year and on parole in Portsmouth, upon hearing of Mathews’ arrival, went to the abandoned Fort Nelson, and struck the American colors whereupon Mathews and his troops took possession.88 Dickey then broke parole and departed with Collier.

While some of the stores were removed for safekeeping prior to the British arrival and were thus saved, the greater concern was the expected arrival of French merchant vessels bringing additional supplies into Virginia for the Continental Army. If these vessels arrived during the period of British presence, they would most assuredly be captured. Governor Patrick Henry

86 Sir George Collier, A Detail of Particular Services Performed in America in the Years 1776, 1777, 1778, and 1779 (New York: Printed for Ithiel Town, 1835), 74-75. 87 Collier, Detail, 77-80. 88 “The Schooner Liberty,” 78-79.

36 recommended ordering, “look-out boats on the Sea coasts to furnish proper intelligence.”89 These boats would operate in conjunction with the militia patrols ashore in Princess Anne County.

The presence of such a large British force in the region had another effect – mass escapes of slaves seeking protection from the British. This was the first large scale British presence in three years and many slaves saw it as an opportunity for freedom. Some slave owners felt the British were intentionally rounding up the slaves and forcing them into service. When Governor Henry inquired on the reported practice to Collier, Collier responded that “the business of his sovereign’s ships in Virginia, was neither to entice negro slaves on board, nor to detain them if they were found there. Nevertheless, His Majesty’s colours, in all places, afforded an asylum to the distressed, and protection upon supplication.”90 One account tallys the runaways as 256 men, 135 women and 127 children.91 It is estimated that between 500 and 1500 slaves escaped to the protection of the British during this period from the entire Hampton Roads Figure 15: Sir George Collier region.92

Even private property was not immune to the British raids. Numerous reports of plunder and even criminal acts against the local inhabitants abound. The Virginia Gazette reported one such incident:

“To show the barbarous and unmanly disposition of those invaders of our country; we submit to the publick the following facts, authenticated by the testimony of one of the parties concerned. Four boys viz. John Phripp, Thomas Walke, Thomas Lawson, and Peter Bowdoin, who were on their way from Mr. Andrews’s school near Suffolk, to their parents in Princess Anne county, were overtaken by three of their light horse, and after striking one of them with a cutlass, and the most abusive language, robbed them of their shoe and knee buckles, handkerchiefs, money, and

89 Governor Patrick Henry to the President of Congress, John Jay, May 11, 1779, in. H. R. McIlwaine, ed., Official Letters of the Governors of the State of Virginia, Volume 1: Letters of Patrick Henry, (Richmond, VA: Davis Bottom, 1926), 367. 90 Collier, Detail, 84. 91 “The Burning of Portsmouth,” The Black Loyalist, http://www.blackloyalist.info/the-burning-of-portsmouth-177/ 92 Michael A. McDonnell, The Politics of War: Race, Class & Conflict in Revolutionary Virginia, (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 2007), 343-44.

all the clothes they had, telling them at the same time, they might think themselves fortunate in not meeting with the Hessians instead of them, as they would not only have robbed them, but would have put them to death. How are the laurels of the British valour fallen, when, women and boys are now become the objects of their vengeance.”93

All told, the three-week operation captured or destroyed eight warships in various states of construction (one of 36 guns; one of 18 guns; three of 16 guns; and three of 14 guns) in addition to 137 merchant vessels of all sizes. Most telling about the economic vibrancy of the area was the destruction of 9,000 barrels of salted pork – all destined for Washington’s forces as well as other materials useful in supplying an army or navy.94 Princess Anne County was a contributor of these materials where troops of Collier’s and Mathews’ men landed near Lynnhaven Bay and captured livestock and various foodstuff and destroyed others.95

During this operation, the British captured (or kidnapped) several prominent Princess Anne County residents to be used to effect the exchange of certain Loyalists held by the Patriots. Captured were Charles Williamson and John Smith, both residents in the Eastern Branch district. When Williamson applied for parole, he was informed that “Neither of the Above Named Gentlemen [Williamson and Smith] would be Exchanged or Liberated until a Colonel Elligood in Virginia, should Either be sent into the British lines, Set at Liberty in Virginia, or some treaty Concluded Respecting him.”96 Jacob Ellegood, a wealthy Princess Anne County landowner residing at Rose Hall Plantation, was being held by the Patriots, since 1776. Ellegood crossed paths with the Patriots the previous year when he swore an oath to support Lord Dunmore and raised his own militia company, called the Queen’s Own Loyal Virginia Regiment. The regiment consisted of other Loyalists, indentured servants, escaped slaves, and even a few former Princess Anne County Militia that were captured after the Skirmish at Kemp’s Landing.97 Ellegood was appointed a Lieutenant Colonel in that regiment and was captured in the mayhem following the British defeat Figure 16: Jacob Ellegood signature at Great Bridge and the evacuation to the safety of Dunmore’s Flotilla and was imprisoned in Winchester, Virginia. Ellegood was paroled in 1781 and eventually made his way to New Brunswick after the war.98

93 Virginia Gazette, May 22, 1779. 94 Collier, Detail, 77-80. 95 The Remembrancer, Vol. 8, Part 2, 290-297. 96 Matthias Halsted to Virginia Delegates in Congress, 17 December 1780,” Founders Online, National Archives, last modified June 13, 2018, http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-02-02-0137. 97 Donald J. Gara, “Loyal Subjects of the Crown: The Queen’s Own Loyal Virginia Regiment and Dunmore’s Ethiopian Regiment, 1775-76,” Journal of the Society for Army Historical Research, Vol. 83, No. 333 (Spring 2005), 30-42 98 Jacob Ellegood, Sr., The Loyalist Collection, https://loyalist.lib.unb.ca/node/4709.

Seeing what was happening in Virginia and fearing the British moving north up the Chesapeake Bay, Maryland began bringing itself into a better defensive position. In addition to reinforcing coastal defenses, vessels of the Maryland Navy were readied. Two galleys, the Chester and Conqueror along with the tender Dolphin conducted a patrol to the Virginia Capes to protect commerce heading to and from Maryland ports. On June 28, the galleys anchored off Cape Henry. The next day they spotted a schooner and gave chase. As the wind calmed, a larger ship appeared. Commodore Thomas Gracen took the initiative: “we weighed and rowed down to her; at four we fired a shot, which she returned with a broadside; in about ten minutes the action became general, and continued without intermission till after sun-set, when the wind sprung fresh up southerly, she then made all the sail in her power, and stood to sea.”99

One significant event following the Collier Raids was the capture of the British sloop Mermaid. Merchant shipping was under constant threat, in part from raids such as Collier’s and at sea from British (or Loyalist) privateers operating from New York. In July 1779, the Continental Navy Frigates Boston and Deane were ordered to sail in company along the Atlantic for three weeks, targeting in particular the privateers.100 The pair captured the privateer brig Enterprise on the 24th and also the sloop Mermaid, which was the tender to the HMS Vigilant, bringing both prizes into the Chesapeake Bay. Mermaid found its way to Kemp’s Landing and was condemned in the Admiralty Court at Hampton.101 She was scheduled to be sold on August 13th at Kemp’s Landing. On board the Enterprise were “nine negro fellows,” all reportedly escaped slaves from various parts of the tidewater area. Among them, a Maxwell Roy, reportedly belonging to Samuel Roy at Kemp’s Landing.102 These were just some of the spoils of the Collier raids.

99 Thomas Gracen to the Governor, July 9, 1779, in David Ridgley, ed., Annals of Annapolis, (Baltimore, MD: Cushing & Brother, 1841), 189. Ernest McNeill Eller, Chesapeake Bay in the American Revolution, (Centreville, MD: Tidewater Publishers, 1981), 251. 100 Joseph Reed to Samuel Tucker, July 2, 1779, printed in John Hannibal Shepard, The Life of Samuel Tucker, (Boston, MA: Alfred Mudge & Son, 1868), 114. 101 Virginia Gazette, August 7, 1779. 102 Virginia Gazette, August 7, 1779.

1780 – Waiting for the French

Word of the French fleet’s arrival continued to circulate for many months. It was unknown when or where they would make their initial appearance, but should it be in the Chesapeake Bay, George Washington hedged for this possibility. Washington, soliciting the assistance of the Virginia governor, Thomas Jefferson, sent a special messenger, Major William Galvan, to Cape Henry to await the arrival of the fleet and coordinate operations in this area. As Washington explained:

I have the pleasure to inform Your Excellency confidentially that a French Fleet may in the course of a few Weeks be expected upon this Coast, and as it is uncertain what part of the land they may first make, Gentlemen are to be stationed at different points to give them Signals and to make them some necessary communications immediately upon their arrival. Major Galvan who will have the honor of delivering this to your Excellency is appointed to go down to Cape Henry for the purposes above mentioned, and as He will have occasion to keep one or two Boats in constant readiness to go off upon the appearance of the Fleet, I shall be much obliged by your giving an order to the person who has the superintendence of the public Vessels and Craft in Virginia to supply him with the necessary number — Should the public have none of the proper kind in their possession, you will be pleased to recommend to Major Galvan the most certain and speedy method of procuring them — One or two skilful and trusty pilots will also be necessary, that if any of the ships should have occasion to enter the Bay, they may not be at a loss.

Your Excellency will no doubt see the propriety of keeping the object of Major Galvans mission as much a secret as possible, lest the importance of the dispatches with which he is charged — might be an inducement to some of the disaffected to take him off. It would add much to his security, if your Excellency would be good enough to introduce him to some Gentleman in the neighbourhood of Cape Henry, in whom he may confide and with whom he may remain while in that quarter.103

The “Gentleman” in the Cape Henry area was likely Col. John Thorowgood Jr. who was active in the Virginia Convention and known to Jefferson. Thorowgood may have suggested that Galvan stay with the Keeling family due to the proximity of their plantation near Lynnhaven Bay to Cape Henry where the preponderance of his lookout and liaison duties would take place. In support of Galvan’s mission, an express service was established between Cape Henry and Richmond with very specific instructions to the riders:

103 From George Washington to Thomas Jefferson, 15 May 1780, Founders Online, National Archives, last modified June 13, 2018, http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/99-01-02-01749.

You are to proceed immediately to Hood’s and be there in constant readiness, never absenting yourself a moment from your quarters, nor suffering your horse to be out of your instantaneous command.

Whenever you shall receive from the express who will be placed next to you any letter or paper from me to Majr. Galvan you will proceed without a moment’s delay by night and by day and without regard to weather to carry it down to the next express stationed at ___. And when you receive a letter or paper from Majr. Galvan to me you are to proceed in like manner with it to this place; always returning to your station, after the delivery, moderately but without delay. You are to give a receipt specifying the hour and minute at which you receive any such paper, and to take a like receipt from the express to whom you shall deliver it.

You will continue in this duty till you shall be notified by Majr. Galvan or myself that you may return from your station.104

It was not known the duration of Galvan’s mission at Cape Henry. The French always held their intention close and would not even provide accurate or complete information between their own representatives. The French fleet that arrived in Newport, Rhode Island in July of 1780 brought some 5,000 French troops but did not have enough ships to make an offensive against the British. The French, it appeared, were more concerned with attacking British possessions in the West Indies than in dislodging them from their former colonies. This produced a certain amount of friction between Washington and Count Rochambeau, head of the French contingent.105

While Galvan waited, for a fleet whose arrival was questionable at best, he carried out his assigned duties. In one report to George Washington, Galvan provided this assessment: “a Ship of 20 guns, a brig of 18, two Sloops and a Schooner, are constantly at the mouth of this bay, and Some of them Come every day close to the Shore under the Cape. I have about 30 men, militia and regulars, (tho’ very irregular) with which I hope, if they will remain, that I Shall be able to keep my post.”106 The militia patrols, along with the signal station, were evidently still in place, although Galvan, a professional soldier, does express doubt as to their capabilities. Galvan was no longer on station when the French finally did arrive in February 1781, having been assigned to a light-infantry unit that month under Lafayette.

104 “Instructions to Express Riders between Richmond and Cape Henry, [ca. 31 May 1780],” Founders Online, National Archives, last modified June 13, 2018, http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/01-03-02-0471. 105 See Peter R. Mansoor and Williamson Murray, eds., Grand Strategy and Military Alliances (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016), 267-68. 106 “To George Washington from Major William Galvan, 13 June 1780,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/03-26-02-0285.

1780 - Leslie Expedition

As Lord Cornwallis was waging his campaigns in the southern states, General Henry Clinton, uncertain as to the progress or the sustainability of Cornwallis’ operations, directed Major General Alexander Leslie to support the operations via the Chesapeake Bay. Leslie was to “pursue such measures as you shall judge most likely to answer the purposes of this expedition, the principle object of which is to make a diversion in favor of Lieutenant General Earl Cornwallis.”107 Leslie was also directed to destroy any military store, particularly up the James River as well as establish a post on the Elizabeth River. You will remember that during Clinton’s visit with Lord Dunmore in 1776, he fancied Portsmouth as the ideal location for a base of operations.

Figure 17: British defenses at Portsmouth

In October of 1780, Leslie arrived in Virginia and headed immediately for the Elizabeth River for fortifying Portsmouth as a place to launch attacks into North Carolina.108 Governor Thomas Jefferson kept Major General Horatio Gates informed of the British activity as reported

107 Henry Clinton to Leslie, October 12, 1780, in William B. Willcox, ed., The American Rebellion: Sir Henry Clinton’s Narrative of his Campaigns, 1775-1782, (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1954), 467. 108 A. R. Newsome, ed., “A British Orderly Book,” North Carolina Historical Review, Vol. 9, No. 2 (April 1932): 163- 186.

“Since my first information to you of the arrival of an enemy, they have landed about 800 men near Portsmouth, some on the bay side of Princess Anne one thousand at [Hampton], and still retained considerable part on board their ships.”109 A report to the governor of North Carolina, Aber Nash stated:

“I have certain intelligence from Virginia that last Sunday evening the Enemy landed at Portsmouth to the amount of one Thousand men & upwards. They came in sixty Sail of Vessels. It seems their intention is to march through this State to form a junction with Lord Cornwallis. They sent in two hundred men into Princess Ann County, and plundered it totally and drove in the Cattle. They took Mr. Thorrowgood & Mr. Wake, [Walke?] with several other valuable citizens, and carried them on Board the Fleet, to send them, as is supposed, to some other Country to be tried.”110

It is not clear which Thorowgood or which Walke were taken prisoner but taking such prominent figures in the community may have been specific bargaining chips to gain the release or exchange of other British prisoners or even to force subservience of the local population.

Leslie seemed at odds with his orders and appeared uncertain as to his mission in Virginia. He never proceeded farther than Hampton Roads allowing the military stores up the James River to remain intact. He was directed to establish communications with Cornwallis but his messenger sent into North Carolina to inquire on Cornwallis’ desires was intercepted. The messenger was stopped in a routine search but when it appeared that he took something out of his pocket and tried putting it in his mouth, the following letter was retrieved: “I have been here near a Week Establishing a Post. I wrote to you to Charles Town, And by another Messenger by Land. I cant hear for a certainty where you are. I wait your Orders. The Bearer is to be handsomely rewarded if he brings me Any note or Mark from your Ldship.”111

Leslie’s visit was short lived being ordered south to reinforce Cornwallis in South Carolina. Leslie effected a hasty retreat from Portsmouth leaving the fortifications intact, and embarking on the ships destined for Charleston. As detailed in the Order Book: “The Fleet got under Way & Stood down the Bay for Sea, Nothing transpired during our Anchorage in the Bay except the Enemy's taking the Delight, Barge & Crewe afterwards exchanged & Shewing themselves in Small Nrs on the Princess Ann Shore.”112

109 Thomas Jefferson to Horatio Gates, October 28, 1780, in Paul Leicester Ford, ed., The Works of Thomas Jefferson, vol. 3 (New York: G. P. Putnam, 1905), 68-69. 110 Robert Smith to Abner Nash, October 24, 1780, in Walter Clark, ed., State Records of North Carolina, 15 (Goldsboro, NC: Nash Bros., Book and Job Printers, 1898), 129-130. 111 “To Samuel Huntington, enclosing an Intercepted Letter from Leslie to Cornwallis, 10 November 1780,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/01-04-02-0133. 112 “A British Orderly Book,” entry for November 22, 1780, 178.

1781 – Benedict Arnold in Virginia

The British absence would be equally short lived. On December 30, 1780, a force of British ships appeared off Cape Henry. They entered the Chesapeake Bay and paused long enough to embark a pilot. This may have been a pilot with Loyalist tendencies from Princess Anne or Norfolk County or it may have simply been a pilot forced into service. The ships proceeded up the James River – their target was Richmond. This force, under newly appointed British Brigadier General Benedict Arnold would significantly increase the war activities in Princes Anne County.

The reporting system and messenger service that was established between Cape Henry and Richmond was put into use as Virginia Governor Thomas Jefferson received word of Benedict Arnold’s arrival, literally within hours of their appearance in the Chesapeake Bay. These reports came from multiple sources both official military and private merchants concerned about the latest presence. Jefferson immediately notified Baron von Steuben “I have this moment received information that 27 sail of vessels, 18 of which were square rigged, were yesterday morning just below Willoughby’s point. No other circ*mstance being given to conjecture their force or destination,” for von Steuben to respond with the Continental Army forces at his disposal.113 Von Steuben had been appraised on the fleet’s movement from New York and was likely expecting their arrival.

Benedict Arnold’s mission was threefold: attack any of the Continental Army magazines and supply depots (“provided it may be done without much risk”), “establish a post at Portsmouth on Elizabeth River,” and “distribute the proclamations you take with you (which are to be addressed to the inhabitants of Princess Anne and Norfolk Counties).”114 Clinton’s focus on Princess Anne and Norfolk counties was to add to the defensibility of Portsmouth in securing the eastern flank and the primary approach from North Carolina (via the Great Bridge). The intent was to recruit Loyalists from those counties to secure the area and approaches from that region. The Dismal Swamp would protect the south; the navy would protect the Elizabeth River and Hampton Roads leaving Figure 18: Benedict Arnold only the western flank toward Suffolk needing any great degree of defenses. Arnold had already raided Richmond

113 From Thomas Jefferson to Steuben, 31 December 1780,” Founders Online, National Archives, last modified June 13, 2018, http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/01-04-02-0321. 114 “Extract from Sir Henry Clinton’s instructions to Brigadier General Arnold. Headquarters, New York, December 14, 1780,” in Henry Clinton, The American Rebellion: Sir Henry Clinton's Narrative of his Campaigns, 1775-1782, with an appendix of original documents, (Hamden, CT: Archon Books, 1971), 482-83.

44 and destroyed the public stores there and was now in Portsmouth continuing the fortification started by Leslie the previous year that were left nearly intact on his departure. As Arnold reported:

“No time has been lost in repairing the old and erecting new works here (in which the Negroes have been very serviceable) but none are yet compleat. Repairing Barracks, foraging and patroling with large Parties, has engrossed the time of a great part of the Troops. One hundred Men are posted at the Great Bridge. Lieut. Colonel Simcoe, with near Four hundred Men, are in Princess Anne County scouring the Country of several parties and arranging matters with the Country people.”115

At the time, the British assessed the greatest threat to Arnold’s mission as the militia units assembled near Suffolk “with Two thousand five hundred, or three thousand men.”116 To counter this threat, Arnold proposed a scheme to interdict the flow of militia from the south and west. By building dozens of landing boats and barges, and towing them around Cape Henry to the Currituck Inlet, Arnold would enter and secure the Currituck Sound of North Carolina. Controlling the southern rivers that extend into Princess Anne and Norfolk, he could support British operations in the region by limiting militia movements from the south. This would isolate the militias in Norfolk and Princess Anne Counties furthering British control of the region.117 Even if the British controlled the Chesapeake Bay, weapons and supplies frequently found their way into the region from North Carolina, with smaller vessels entering the Currituck and Albemarle sounds and moving the goods overland. Occupying these waterways would further constrict the supply line to the Patriot forces now surrounding Portsmouth. Unable to acquire enough boats, Arnold’s plan never came to fruition.

In the meantime, Patriot forces in Princess Anne County, namely a militia Captain named Amos Weeks, were active in the region and reportedly “harassing the few good loyalists.”118 Realizing such activities could severely harm recruiting efforts for his “American Legion,” Arnold sent a company of Queens Rangers under the command of Lieutenant Colonel John Graves Simcoe and Hessians under the command of Captain Johann Ewald to capture Weeks and disrupt their activity in the county.119

115 Letter from Benedict Arnold to Henry Clinton, February 13, 1781, in Walter Clark, ed., State Records of North Carolina, 17, (Goldsboro, NC: Nash Bros., Book and Job Printers, 1898), 984-986. 116 Arnold to Clinton, 985. 117 Arnold to Clinton, 985. 118 Johann Ewald, Diary of the American War: A Hessian Journal, Translated and edited by Joseph P. Tustin, (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1979), 279. 119 Arnold to Clinton, 984-986.

Simcoe and Ewald started from Portsmouth, crossed the Elizabeth River to Norfolk then proceeded overland to Kemp’s Landing arriving on February 13. From here, Simcoe would proceed to London Bridge while Ewald headed to the Great Bridge. The idea was to fix Week’s attention on Simcoe while Ewald encircled the militia from behind. To facilitate this, Ewald would have to cross through the marsh area between the Great Bridge and Princess Anne County. No sooner did the British and Hessian forces arrive at their designated locations (London Bridge and Great Bridge) than an unexpected arrival of French ships made their appearance in the Chesapeake Bay. Figure 19: Hessian Captain Johann Ewald who led the attack at James's Plantation The ships were under the command of Captain Armand Le Gardeur de Tilly and were not the French fleet expected. The Tilly Expedition of the Eveille, 64 guns, the frigates Surveillante and Gentille, and the cutter Guepe, were designed to blockade the Royal Navy ships supporting Benedict Arnold in Hampton Roads and allow for the land forces under Baron von Steuben and local militias to attack Arnold at Portsmouth. Somehow Arnold was tipped off to the ship’s departure from Newport and moved his ships further up the Elizabeth River and the James River in waters too shallow for the deeper draft French ships to sail.120 Simcoe and Ewald returned to Norfolk to help in the defense of Portsmouth, but as the French fleet was unable to carry out any action, the commanders were ordered back on their original mission.

The intelligence network in the region was such that information beneficial to both sides was regularly and promptly exchanged. Since it was virtually impossible to determine the loyalties of the locals it was easy for a resident with Loyalist sympathies to observe a Patriot movement and pass that information back to the British. Such networking played a critical role in the events of the next few days.

The first event impacted was the overall conduct of the Tilly Expedition. Arnold’s preparations in anticipation of the arrival frustrated the French as reflected in the journal of General Rochambeau aide, Louis-Alexandre Berthier who was present on the Eveille:

“They arrived in the Chesapeake only to learn that Arnold had withdrawn as far up the Elizabeth River as possible with all his transports, a frigate, and a 44-gun ship,

120 Arnold to Clinton, February 25, 1781, State Records of North Carolina, 17: 987.

which he had moored broadside and from which he had removed the guns so as to lighten her sufﬁciently to clear the shoals.

M. de Tilly took on pilots and determined to go up the river to attack and burn them, but his good intentions proved futile. After several trials he could not ﬁnd enough water for his ships to proceed up the river. This excellent officer zealously tried every trick he could think of until the Surveillante ran aground and he had to- abandon his project. After strenuous efforts he succeeded in freeing her, then anchored at the entrance to the Bay under an English ensign, ready to fall upon the ﬁrst ship that attempted to reach Arnold and by taking prizes compensate for his inability to carry out his orders.

After several prizes had been lured in by his English ensign, he sighted a warship and a corvette outside. Getting under way immediately, he soon overtook them, thanks to his superior speed, and captured them without ﬁring a shot. These were the 44-gun warship Romulus and an 18-gun corvette. He then set off for Newport, taking several other prizes en route. In all he captured 9 merchantmen and privateers, one of which was carrying 7,000 guineas to Arnold’s troops. He was warmly welcomed at Newport for having made a very useful and proﬁtable sortie, despite his failure to accomplish his mission.”121

The capture of the Romulus was a welcome addition to the French Fleet and helped tip the balance of sea power in favor of the French. Unfortunately, during the expedition, the cutter Guepe was wrecked near Cape Charles, however the entire crew was rescued. The capture was celebrated in Rhode Island upon the squadron’s return:

“After having captured the whole piratical Fleet which has for some Time infected Chesapeake Bay, under the direction of the Traitor ARNOLD; excepting for some small vessels that took Shelter in a Creek. His Most Christian Majesty’s Ships’ having brought in with them the Romulus, a British Ship of War, mounting 44 Guns, also about Five Hundred Prisoners taken in the Enemy’s Fleet. Six armed Transports, laden with Stores, one of them having a considerable Sum in Specie on board, were sent to York, in Virginia, and four others burnt.

121 Louis-Alexandre Berthier Journal, in Howard C. Rice, Jr. and Anne S. K. Brown, eds., The American Campaigns of Rochambeau's army, 1780, 1781, 1782, 1783, Vol. 1, (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1972), 240. A more abbreviated account is provided in the Clermont-Crevecoeur Journal, February 1781 entry, 23.

The above French Ships arrived with them Fifteen Hundred Stand of Arms for the Virginia Militia, who were assembled with great Alacrity; and, Arnold’s Retreat being effectively cut off, we hope, in our next Gazette, to have it in our Power to Congratulate the Public on the Capture of him and his whole Banditti, as well as to furnish a more particular Account of the above important Event, which our faithful and generous Allies have rendered such essential Service to the common Cause.”122

Figure 20: Capture of the HMS Romulus Tillys’ return from Virginia was not all good news. On board the Eveille were a number of prisoners taken from captured ships and those who might have been detained for interfering with the French operations in the area. Leadership in Virginia were worried that if these prisoners were paroled or exchanged, they might provide valuable information on the state of defenses in and around Virginia, which might influence future British operations in the state. The Virginia Delegates expressed concern that, “some of these persons, according to the persons laws of that State, fall under the description of Traitorous Citizens, and consequently are not proper subjects of exchange, and others, although they do not fall under that description, may, if exchanged or released be very prejudicial to the State during the operations against it, by giving information & counsel to the Enemy, and by their seductions among the people.” Ultimately, the delegates

122 Boston Gazette, March 5, 1781.

48 wanted to obtain, before any were released or exchanged, “a list of the names of such of his Captives as were formerly inhabitants of Virginia.”123

With the French departure from the Chesapeake Bay, the threat of a combined operation against the British between the French and the growing numbers of Virginia militia and Continental Army forces subsided and Simcoe and Ewald continued their original mission against Amos Weeks. The delay in the British operation gave Weeks time to take some defensive measures of his own. Weeks may have been aware of the particulars of Arnold’s direction based on his own intelligence network and to counter the movement of Ewald from the south, he burned Dauge’s Bridge.

What Weeks may not have anticipated was that Ewald’s forces were very adept at using the terrain to their advantage. From the Great Bridge, Ewald crossed what he called the “Devil’s Elbow Swamp” which is now the area of the Chesapeake and Albemarle Canal. He may have used portions of the existing roads as well. Arriving on the other side, near today’s Salem Road, a messenger from Kemp’s Landing provided updated intelligence on the Militia movements and location – currently believed near Dauge’s Bridge – just a few miles away. As the Hessians moved southeast to North Landing Road and headed east, they realized that Weeks had burned Dauge’s Bridge. Taking to the swamps once again, the Hessians had a difficult crossing around Dauge’s Bridge through the West Neck Swamp and West Neck Creek.124

On February 15, on the other side of West Neck swamp, they surrounded a house and forced the occupant to guide them to Week’s location, which was presumably at Jamison’s Plantation – near Brock’s Bridge, and right between Ewald’s and Simcoe’ forces. It was not long before they realized that Weeks and the militia were much closer – at James’s Plantation just a short distance away. Once Ewald realized that Weeks and his Militia were close by, he devised a plan to surprise the force. The cavalry under Captain Shank would take to the road and act as a diversion. Meanwhile, Ewald and the 180 jagers and rangers would move under cover of the woods across the road. As Ewald approached through the woods, he saw the Militia firing at Shank and the cavalry. With their attention fixed on the cavalry unit, Ewald moved out of the woods, over a fence surrounding the plantation and opened fire on the militia flank.125

123 CSP, April 2, 1781, Vol. 2, 4. 124 Tustin, Joseph P., ed., Diary of the American War: A Hessian Journal – Captain Johann Ewald, Field Jager Corps (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1979), 280. 125 Ewald, 281-84.

The Militia scattered while the cavalry and jagers under Lieutenant Bickell managed to cut down or bayonet some sixty Militia. Word was sent to Simcoe at London Bridge about the engagement and Simcoe then joined Ewald at James’s Plantation. The next day, the combined force of Hessians and Queen’s Rangers headed south toward Pungo Chapel having learned from one of the captured militia of a predesignated rendezvous point near the Northwest Landing. The force captured additional militia at Pungo Chapel and Captain Weeks narrowly avoided capture himself. After searching other parts of Pungo for more stragglers, the forces headed north, and later camped at the Cornick Plantation not far from London Bridge. They returned to Portsmouth the next day.126

Figure 21: Johann Ewald drawing of the Skirmish at James's Plantation

While Weeks may have somewhat underestimated Ewald’s ability and determination to cross through unforgiving terrain to reach an objective, Ewald, likewise, underestimated Weeks’ ability to operate in the same conditions. The scattering and retreat of the militia upon Ewald’s attack was more of a self-preservation measure than act of cowardice. Weeks had trained his militia to evade the enemy and then regroup at a predesignated rendezvous point. In this case, the point was the Northwest Landing where they would combine with the North Carolina militia under General Isaac Gregory. So impressed was Ewald by this tactic, that he wrote about it in his Treatise on Partisan Warfare published in 1785.127

126 John Graves Simcoe, Simcoe’s Military Journal: A History of the Operations of a Partisan Corps, called the Queen’s Rangers, (New York: Bartlett & Welford, 1844), 173; Ewald, 285-86. 127 Ewald, Johann. Treatise on Partisan Warfare (New York: Greenwood Press, 1991).

The veritable failure of the Simcoe-Ewald mission, or the resistance of Amos Weeks and his militia was quickly becoming an irritant to Benedict Arnold. Arnold called an assembly in Princess Anne County to “persuade the inhabitants-who pretended to be good friends-to take a new oath of allegiance to England.”128 This assembly took place at Kemp’s Landing and was reminiscent of the event hosted by Lord Dunmore in 1775 following the Skirmish at Kemp’s Landing. This may have taken place at the Singleton House and although the actual date of construction of the residence varies depending on the source, the house was definitely present in Kemp’s Landing in 1781.129

One known Princess Anne County resident in attendance was Edward Hack Moseley, Sr. who was a known Loyalist.130 Moseley reportedly received a personal invitation from Arnold to attend this particular event. It was likely that Arnold was seeking Moseley’s standing and influence in the community to help sway the loyalty of the county toward the British. By promising protection to the Loyalists of Princess Anne, Arnold could go forth and recruit its residents to be part of his “American Legion.” Arnold stated in his recruitment proclamation: “His Excellency Sir Henry CLINTON has authoriz'd me to raise a corps of cavalry and infantry, who are to be clothed, subsisted, and paid as the other troops are in the British service; and those who bring in horses, arms, or accoutrements, are to be paid their value, or have liberty to sell them.”131

At the same time, Arnold used the assembly to try and flesh out Amos Weeks and his militia. The full text of his proclamation follows:

“By Order of Brigadier Gen’l Arnold, commanding his Majesty’s Forces in Virginia

The Inhabitants of Princess Anne & Norfolk Counties are desired to meet at Kemps on Wednesday the 21st of February, to concert proper Measures with the Officers of his Majesty’s Troops in order to restore Peace and Tranquility, by freeing the County of the Banditti, who threaten and oppress the peacable Inhabitant; and to settle such Regulations and Rates, as shall be just to be allow’d for what Forage and Provision may be hereafter wanted for his Majesty’s Service. The Persons who have heretofore been in Arms, and borne Offices, under the usurp’d Authority of the Rebel Legislatures, are directed to come in and receive their Paroles from the Officer commanding at Kemps or Head Quarters in Portsmouth; or to apply for Passports, to quit the County which will be granted them. A Party of Man being in Arms under the Command of an Amos Weeks, at Kemps, has Authority to inform

128 Ewald, Diary of the American War, 286. 129 Virginia Beach Historical Register, Pleasant Hall, https://www.vbgov.com/government/departments/planning/boards-commissions- committees/Pages/VB%20Historical%20Register/Pleasant-Hall.aspx. 130 “Families of Lower Norfolk and Princess Anne Counties: Moseley Family of Lower Norfolk County,” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, 5, no. 3 (Jan 1898): 332. 131 “American Legion, Arnold’s Proclamation,” The Royal Gazette, (New York), October 25, 1780.

them, that if they submit themselves, within six days, receive their paroles, and demean themselves hereafter, as quiet Subjects, they will be receiv’d and their Property unmolested. But that if after the time committed, should they, or any other small Parties, infect the County, they will be proceeded against with the utmost Rigeur, and Reprisals made upon them and their Families for any Damages the peaceable Inhabitant may sustain from their unwarrantable Proceedings.”132

Despite obtaining oaths of loyalty from many of the residents in attendance at his gathering, Arnold likely realized that obtaining the loyalty of Princess Anne County was going to be difficult. Issuing what amounted to a death warrant against Amos Weeks did not sit well with the inhabitants of Princess Anne who saw Weeks as a better degree of safety and protection than the British. At the Kemp’s Landing assembly, Johann Ewald related a conversation he had with Thomas Reynolds Walker, the Princess Anne Militia Colonel early in the war who was not a private citizen. Walker stated that “I must first see if it is true that your people rally intend to remain with us. You have already been in the area twice. General Leslie gave me the assurances in the past autumn, and where is he now? In Carolina? Who knows where you will be this autumn? And should the French unite with the Americans, everything would certainly be lost to you here. What would we loyally disposed subjects have then? Nothing but misfortune from the Opposition Party, if you leave us again.”133

If it was not the British presence that produced such a disliking for the local residents, it was perhaps the very presence of Benedict Arnold. Arnold was likely the most despised individual in the United States. No sooner did he make his presence in Virginia than a flurry of capture attempts and schemes circulated.

132 “Proclamation of Benedict Arnold,” Jack Robertson Papers, Stephen Mansfield Archives, Virginia Wesleyan University. 133 Ewald, 286.

1781 - Battle of Cape Henry

The Tilly Expedition, successful in capturing the Romulus and several British transports but unsuccessful in attacking Benedict Arnold, nonetheless brought back a good assessment of the situation in Virginia. This enabled the French to take the opportunity to break the British hold on Virginia and possibly disrupt Cornwallis’ campaign in the Carolinas. The main target, however, was the capture of Benedict Arnold:

“After M. de Tilly’s expedition to the Chesapeake, the generals and admirals held a council of war where they decided that the whole squadron would leave for the Chesapeake Bay with 1,500 French troops. two 12-pounders, four 4-pounders, and two howitzers, all under the command of the Baron dc Vioménil. There they would take possession of the Bay. land in Virginia, and attack the traitor Arnold, who was in command of 1,200 English troops. The Marquis de LaFayette was to join Vioménil there with 1,500 American troops provided with artillery, munitions, and guns of all calibers.”134

The French were not the only one with designs on Arnold. General Clinton had certain reservations in appointing Arnold to this mission in the first place. He betrayed the United States – he could easily betray the British as well. As such, General Clinton took certain measures to guard against any such treachery. Arnold’s order specifically required consultation with his two Lieutenant Colonels – Simcoe and Dundas – “officers of great experience and much in my confidence” – “previous to your undertaking any operation of consequence.”135 Both Lieutenant Colonels also carried blank commissions in order to assume command of the forces should Arnold’s loyalty be tested.

Virginia Governor Thomas Jefferson had similar visions of capturing Arnold. His idea may have originated before Arnold even arrived in Virginia. A letter sent to Virginia Delegate Jones stated: "Some letters found on board of Prizes make known to us that the English show indications of establishing themselves at Portsmouth—Several refugees have returned to their confiscated possessions—These circ*mstances have determined M. Le Comt de Rochambeau and M. Detouches to undertake a more efficient expedition against Arnold.”136 Jefferson communicated with General Peter Muhlenberg of the Continental Army, currently operating in Virginia, and suggested using “men from the West of the mountains” to track down and “seize and

134 Clermont-Crevecoeur Journal, March 1781 entry, in Howard C. Rice, Jr. and Anne S. K. Brown, eds., The American Campaigns of Rochambeau's army, 1780, 1781, 1782, 1783, Vol. 1, (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1972), 24. 135 Clintons Instructions to Arnold, The American Rebellion, 482-483. 136 Fragment of a letter without date, "to the Hon Mr Jones Delegate of Virginia'' translated from French, CSP, Vol. 1, 408. (December 1780).

53 bring off this greatest of all traitors.”137 Muhlenberg did not appear to solicit the men Jefferson identified but he did move his forces toward Suffolk to pen Arnold’s forces in place.

The North Carolina militia under Isaac Gregory was already established in the Great Dismal Swamp following the appearance of Leslie in late 1780. Working with local militia forces to secure this southern flank, the eastern flank in Norfolk and Princess Anne Counties was all but untenable with the likes of Weeks and his militia causing trouble for the British. Even the arrival of the French Fleet in the Chesapeake Bay and Hampton Roads served to blockade the Elizabeth River and threaten a water escape.138 Attempts were made to coordinate with the Tilly Expedition via messengers from Cape Henry but without success. Baron von Steuben reported to Washington the efforts in Virginia [excerpts]:

“My last informed you that I had sent Capt. Depontiere on board the French Fleet, to know if I could under take anything against Portsmouth and was making the necessary preparations, as well for such an enterprize, as for the security of the French Vessels in case of danger.

For the first object I ordered General Gregory to assemble all the force in his power on the other side the Dismal Swamp, and hold them in readiness to second me whenever I should be ready, a line of Expresses was established between his Post and Suffolk, by means of which I could have given the necessary advice in less than 24 hours. General Muhlenberg advanced, with about 1000 Men to within 16 Miles of Portsmouth leaving the Posts of Coopers Mill & Suffolk properly guarded to cover his retreat.

General Nelson had orders to hold himself in readiness to march at the first notice— General Weedon form[ed] a corps of 800 Militia at Fredericksburg with orders to march towards Williamsburg, in case of an attack on Portsmouth this Corps was to have marched to Newport’s news, and if the french vessels had been obliged to retire to York River, they were to have covered the Battery erected at York for the Defence of the Fleet.

Six or seven armed Merchant vessels in James River were to have joined the french vessells and assisted our operations all the boats that could be found were collected at Sandy point to transport the troops—Eight 18 pounders and two Mortars were preparated such were my preparations when Mr De Tilley informed me, he was not to remain in the Bay—that his orders were to Cruize between Charles Town and New York, and that he should sail the moment the wind would permit him.

137 Thomas Jefferson to John P. G. Muhlenberg. January 31, 1781. Manuscript/Mixed Material. https://www.loc.gov/item/mtjbib000615/. 138 See the account of the ad hoc Virginia Navy efforts to augment the French and attack British shipping in “William Lewis and the Cape Henry Lighthouse,” Daybook, Vol. 20, Issue 3.

The appearance of these Vessells had much alarmed the Enemy at Portsmouth, and encouraged our Militia, in the night of the 17. General Muhlenberg advanced near Portsmouth surprized a picket, made a Serjt & 12 Men prisoners, killd 2 Yagers and Took a waggon and 8 horses—he remained within a Mile and a half all next day but the Enemy kept close in their works.

The departure of The French Vessells, has destroyed all hopes of success, in an attempt on Portsmouth.”139

With the militia and Continental Army slowing massing and surrounding the British post at Portsmouth, all that was needed was the arrival of the French fleet to inflict the decisive blow. The prospect of capture did not sit well with Arnold, who, growing more paranoid perhaps, “always carried a pair of small pistols in his pocket as a last resort to escape being hanged.”140 The French fleet in Rhode Island was locked in a maritime superiority struggle with the British fleet in New York. The capture of Romulus was enough to tip the balance in addition to a storm damaging several British vessels. While the British were making repairs in Long Island Sound, the French saw the opportunity to make their move on Virginia. The British hurried their repairs and made their departure in pursuit of the French. What began was the race to the Chesapeake Bay and the Battle of Cape Henry.

The race was influenced by copper. In the mid-eighteenth century, the Royal Navy had started experimenting with using copper sheathing on the hulls of ships. It was noticed that the copper had prevented fouling from marine growth and inhibited worms from eating away at the wooden hulls below the waterline. The initial expense and time needed to install the copper was offset by needed maintenance and hull cleanings. A clean hull also provided an increase in speed.141 The British ships were coppered. The French ships were not.

The French fleet under the command of Charles Rene Dominique Sochet des Touches departed Newport on March 8, 1781. British lookouts reported the movement to Admiral Marriot Arbuthnot who set out in pursuit from Gardiner’s Bay, New York 36 hours later. This is where the advantage of speed with copper bottomed ships came into play. The slow movement of the French due to winds enabled the British to slowly close the distance.

One witness, Jean-François Louis de Clermont Crevecoeur, an artillery officer on one of the French ships, recorded the encounter as follows:

139 “To George Washington from Friedrich Wilhelm Ludolf Gerhard Augustin, Baron [von] Steuben, 23 February 1781,” Founders Online, National Archives, last modified June 13, 2018, http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/99-01-02-04974. 140 Ewald, Diary, 295. 141 Arthur Lyon Cross, “On Coppering Ships Bottoms,” American Historical Review, Vol. 33, No. 1 (October 1927), 79-81; J. R. Harris, “Copper and Shipping in the Eighteenth Century,” The Economic History Review, New Series, Vol. 19, No. 3 (1966), 550-568.

“On 6 March [8 March] the squadron set sail, but on reaching the Capes they met an enemy squadron that, contrary to our expectations, was somewhat stronger than ours. Battle was joined [16 March] and became very hot. The Conquérant, one of our ships, was badly battered after a ﬁght with two enemy ships. while one of theirs, the Robust, was put out of action. The enemy was master of the wind. His ships entered the Bay, and our squadron, since it could not hope for victory by renewing the combat, made its way back to Newport, where it arrived on 16 April [26 March] to our great surprise, as you may imagine, for we could not believe it was ours.

The Chevalier Destouches, who after the death of the Chevalier de Ternay commanded the French Fleet, did not wish to compromise himself, since he held only a temporary command. He could not bring himself to renew the battle when prudence indicated a retreat. even though the two forces were at that time equal. He did not know then that the enemy had suffered more than we had.”142

Figure 22: Battle of Cape Henry

142 Clermont-Crevecoeur Journal, March 1781 entry, in Howard C. Rice, Jr. and Anne S. K. Brown, eds., The American Campaigns of Rochambeau's Army, 1780, 1781, 1782, 1783, vol. 1, (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1972), 24.

Admiral Arbuthnot, no doubt glad he was able to intercept the French Fleet with his speed advantage, spent considerable time maneuvering to gain the best possible fighting advantage. Upon getting into position to engage, he offered the following report:

“At two o'clock, the van of my squadron wore in the line, and in a few minutes the Robust, which led the fleet, and afterwards behaved in the most gallant manner, was warmly engaged with the van of the enemy. The ships in the van and center of the line were all engaged by half an hour past two, and by three o'clock the French line were broke; their ships began soon after to wear, and to form their line again, with their heads to the south-east into the ocean.

At twenty minutes after three, I wore and stood after them. I was sorry to observe the Robust, Prudent and Europe, which were the headmost ships, and received the whole of the enemy's fire at their rigging as they bore down, so entirely dis-abled, and the London's main top-sail-yard being carried away, (the two first unmanageable, laying with their heads from the enemy) as to be incapable of pursuit, and of rendering the advantage we had gained decisive.”143

Destouches and the French headed back to Newport. Arbuthnot and the British entered the Chesapeake Bay and anchored in Lynnhaven Bay. The damage to the British fleet was extensive and from a fleet-on-fleet engagement perspective, the French had won the Battle of Cape Henry. However, it was the British who entered the Chesapeake Bay, denying the French of the opportunity to carry out their desired action against Benedict Arnold. From a strictly naval battle perspective, naval theorist Alfred Thayer Mahan awards the victory in the battle to the French. Their positioning with the wind enabled them to bring more of their guns to bear and inflict heavier damage on the British. But not entering the Chesapeake cost them the higher victory.144

Arbuthnot met with Arnold, but it is not clear if Arbuthnot went to Portsmouth or if Arnold came to Lynnhaven Bay to meet on the HMS Royal Oak. Arbuthnot was surprised as the precarious position that Arnold faced, particularly with the lack of provisions and the increasing number of militia and Continental Army forces in Virginia. He believed, however, that “The militia, disaffected to the service, will speedily disperse; and the Count de Rochambeau must seek another opportunity of visiting Virginia. The plan of the campaign is entirely disconcerted; and I flatter myself these events will be productive of very solid advantages to his Majesty's service.”145 On March 26th, ships carrying 2,000 troops under Major General William Phillips arrived in the Chesapeake Bay and Arbuthnot’s fleet departed.

143 Arbuthnot to Stevens, March 20, 1781, The Remembrancer, 11: 313. 144 Alfred Thayer Mahan, The Influence of Sea Power upon History, 1660-1783, (New York: Dover Publications, 1987), 387. 145 Mahan, 387.

1781 – The Road to Yorktown

Following the Battle of Cape Henry, any movement against the British in the Chesapeake Bay area would have to wait until the arrival of a second French fleet under the command of Admiral de Grasse. De Grasse was busy in the Caribbean attacking the valuable British possessions in the area. While awaiting funding (which would ultimately come from Spain) to carry the fleet north to rendezvous with Rochambeau, the Americans were in a waiting game. Washington moved ahead with what appeared to be plans for a combined American and French attack on the British occupying New York City but that plan had hinged on de Grasse’s arrival.

Meanwhile, in Virginia, a number of events helped pre-stage what would be the British surrender at Yorktown. In late March 1781, Major General William Phillips arrived in Virginia to take command from Benedict Arnold. Phillips quickly drew his own impression of the situation in the region: “I come now to the Norfolk and Princess Ann counties, where we cannot much depend for assistance. They are timorous, cautious, at best, but half friends, and perhaps some, if not many, concealed enemies. Supposing them perfectly ours, we should not be able to arm more than five or six hundred men, who would become a charge to us while we remained, and being left, would be undone. At present, they act a sort of saving game, but are of no use to us.”146 Arnold would later echo a similar adding that they “are not inclined to be active in our favor.”147 The Skirmish at James’s Plantation, frequent attacks on the post at Portsmouth, and other militia activities in the surrounding area gave Phillips and Arnold cause for concern where disrupting militia activities in the region and bolstering the defenses at Portsmouth became all but impossible.

The challenge for the British now became how to protect the Loyalists who swore oaths to the king. The six hundred or so effective troops that they might be able to recruit from the county, while not insignificant in number, pressed on the resourcing required to maintain the post at Portsmouth and simultaneously protect the area Loyalists. Arnold and Phillips concluded:

“The Post of Portsmouth, which we conceive to be a bad one taken only in one View, that of the Number of Troops, necessary to defend it. There are many other Points which render the Post weak, which an order has been given by Major General Phillips to the commanding Engineer to delineate. We imagine that to protect Princess Anne County, and to have a Point for Troops to resort to, and for Expeditions in the Chesapeak to be sent from; a Post for Six hundred or one Thousand Men might be established elsewhere to more Advantage than this of Portsmouth.”

The answer was Princess Anne County. The Lynnhaven Bay provided protection to anchoring ships operating in the Chesapeake, defense from Patriot forces was possible, and supply

146 Observations of William Phillips to Henry Clinton, April 3, 1781, in Benjamin Franklin Stevens, ed., The Clinton- Cornwallis Controversy, 1, (London: Charing Cross, 1888), 379. 147 Joint Letter from Major General Phillips and Brigadier General Arnold, April 18, 1781, Clinton-Cornwallis, 412.

58 and foraging from the local area was readily available. The post in Princess Anne never materialized, but when the post at Portsmouth was finally evacuated, General Charles O’Hara, second in command to Cornwallis reported, “It is unavoidable, I am bringing you all the inhabitants of Princess Anne and Norfolk Counties. What an unfortunate scrap they are in!”148

In April, Amos Weeks and another captain named Killam were at Mores Point on the border of Princess Anne County and Currituck County. Loyalists operating in the area may not have been receiving the most accurate information on the British progress in Virginia. With scattered reports of the Arbuthnot’s fleet arriving in the Chesapeake and the arrival of General Phillips, Loyalists may have believed the British had complete control of the area. A galley approached the militiamen and the commander, named Robinson, asked Weeks how he could find the British post. General Gregory reported the incident and highlighted the quick thinking of Weeks and Killam who:

“informed him that they were British officers and that they would conduct him to Camp. Accordingly they employed one Munden to pilot them up to my Camp at North West, telling him that it was a British Post. The Pilot proceeded with the Galley as fast as possible. Weeks and Killam prevailed on Robinson to cross at a place called the Launch and go with them by land to my Camp, though he believed that it was a British Camp.

As the Galley was on her way, she unfortunately met an Oyster boat which she hailed and asked who commanded at the North West. Being informed that I did, she immediately seized the Pilot, put him in Irons, along with several of Captain Bostar’s crew, having discovered the deception they were under, rowed back with all possible expedition and went to some place in Mattamuskeet where they left her.

As soon as Weeks and Killam came to Camp with Captain Robinson they informed me how they had managed the matter. I endeavoured to intercept the boat’s retreat, but it was too late.

Robinson, the old Captain, seemed to be in high spirits to think he had so perfectly his purpose, not doubting but he was really in a British Camp until the evening. He gave all the information respecting the Rebels he could, and told me that they took the Galley by surprise in the night, and he being appointed Captain, wanted a Commission and hoped he had not done amiss in taking her before he had obtained one.

148 O’Hara to Cornwallis, August 15, 1781, in Ian Saberton, ed., Cornwallis Papers: The Campaigns of 1780 and 1781 in the Southern Theater of the American Revolutionary War, Vol. 6 (Uckfield, England: The Naval & Military Press, Ltd., 2010), 51.

You may depend that Robinson and all his crew were not only disaffected, but were as grand a set of Tories as men can be.149

1Map showing the southern waters of Princess Anne County where the galley capture occurred

In May, the private armed ship Marquis Lafayette made a daring escape from the Chesapeake Bay, right through the British fleet. Under construction in 1780 at Suffolk, the ship was purposely sunk to prevent it from falling victim of the Leslie Expedition. Completed in 1781, the ship used a moonlit night to make its escape. The idea was to wind between the anchored transport ships to avoid the larger warships. Early reconnaissance showed approximately 100 British ships of all sizes in the route out to sea. The Captain, Joseph Meredith, and the pilot, Ross Mitchell were lucky to only have been hailed once. Out to sea the Marquis Lafayette was successful in capturing three prizes.150

Not every ship was as lucky. The galley Dasher, commanded by Captain Willis Wilson, was also in the process of exiting the Chesapeake Bay when his ship was driven ashore in Lynnhaven Bay in a gale. Willis had been “making demonstrations upon the movements and

149 Isaac Gregory to Thomas Burke, March 31, 1782, Walter Clark, ed., State Records of North Carolina, Vol. 16 (Goldsboro, NC: Nash Bros., Book and Job Printers, 1898), 260-61. 150 “The Ship Marquis Lafayette,” in William Maxwell, ed., Virginia Historical Review and Literary Advertiser, Vol. 2, No. 3 (Richmond, VA: McFarlane & Ferguson, 1849), 146-55.

60 property of some tories” when the wreck occurred.151 The crew managed to get ashore but were captured by the British and imprisoned in Portsmouth. Willis, in a deposition after his release in September, described the conditions in the jail:

“That about the 23d July last, the deponent was taken a prisoner of war—was conducted to Portsmouth, (after being plundered of his cloathing, &c.,) and there lodged with about 190 other prisoners, in the Provost. This deponent, during twenty-odd days, was a spectator of the most savage cruelty with which the unhappy prisoners were treated by the English. The deponent has every reason to believe, there was a premeditated scheme to infect all the prisoners who had not been infected with the small-pox. There were upwards of one hundred of the prisoners who never had that disorder, notwithstanding which, negroes, with the infection upon them, were lodged under the same roof of the Provost. Others were sent in to attend upon the prisoners, with the scabs of that disorder upon them. Some of the prisoners soon caught the disorder, others were down with the flux. And some with fevers. From such a complication of disorders, ’twas thought expedient to petition Gen. O'Harra, who was then commanding officer, for a removal of the sick, or those who was not as yet infected with the small-pox.”152

Willis even sought redress from a Henry Burgess who Willis accused of plundering his belongings and delivering him to the British.153

British presence in Virginia continued to increase both via land and sea. In April, portions of Cornwallis’ army entered Virginia. The number of raids and skirmishes increased and when word that General Gregory and his North Carolina militia were routed near the Dismal Swamp, things started to look dim for the Patriots. Governor Nelson received a report that “we have not a man above Surry with us. Princess Anne & Norfolk, and all Nancemond below Suffolk has taken protection from the Enemy, and are very dangerous Enemies.”154

Confusion reigned over who had control of the Chesapeake Bay. Both British ad French ships entered frequently, either on official business such as logistical support to the growing British army presence, or intelligence gathering for future French operations. The large variety of warships of all shapes and sizes caught the attention of those ashore as well – sometime with disastrous results. Two residents, of either Norfolk or Princess Anne Counties, were taken prisoner by the British when they rowed too close to the HMS Diligent. The Secretary of State for the Americas, Lord George Germain, received a letter from John Montague, the Earl of Sandwich and

151 “The Virginia Navy of the Revolution,” Southern Literary Messenger, John R. Thompson, ed., Vol. 25 (February 1857), 147-48. 152 “Virginia Navy,” 281-82. 153 Entry for July 23, 1781, John Harvey Creecy, Virginia Antiquary, Vol. 1: Princess Anne County Loose Papers, 1700-1789, (Richmond: Dietz Press, 1954), 109. 154 J. Parker to Governor Nelson, June 29, 1781, CSP, Vol. 2, 189.

Commission of the Admiralty about the plight of “Mr. Charles Tomkins and Mr. William Buckner two American who were taken in Chesapeak Bay in a Boat going to a French Ship of War, & have been brought to England, having requested that they be set at Liberty, as they held in their county no Office either Civil or Military, and their visit to the French ship was a matter of curiosity only.”155 It is not known when the two finally made it home from their “Party of Pleasure”156

By August, the post at Portsmouth had demonstrated it flaws and unsuitability as a base of operations. Complicating matters were the likes of Major Alexander Dick of the Virginia Militia who continued applying the pressure on the post. Rounding up militia as he moved south from Fredericksburg, Dick commented that he “shall scour Princess Ann & Norfolk Counties & not allow them [British] to put their noses out of Portsmouth.”157 Cornwallis had chosen Yorktown as his base of operations abandoning Portsmouth and the lower counties. Following the troops to Yorktown were many of the Loyalists that remained and countless numbers of escaped slaves.

The mass exodus by the British did not equate to peace in Princess Anne County. Loyalists troublemakers, perhaps encouraged by Cornwallis, continue to create problems in the area. Governor Nelson was informed of the situation by Thomas Newton: “I this moment received the within, which will shew the necessity of some men here. A little ammunition will be wanted. Capt: Weeks will I doubt not use his best endeavors, but a few strangers will add spirit to the good men hereabonts & soon suppress those bad men who commits such ravages.”158 Newton provided the Governor with the letter from Amos Weeks describing the situation in Princess Anne County:

“I have Seek into the Situation of People and I find a Great Many Disefected in the County, Whom I think Should be Brought to Justice, And I am Getting to Gether My Men Upon that intent and Capt Butt’s Men Will Join me as Soon as Possible and then I Inten to Go Amongst them and Bring as Many as I Gett to Head Quarters, Where I hope that they Will Meett with that Punishment Due to a Tory and a Enemy to the Country. I shall be Very Glad if you will acquaint the Govener With My Proceedings as soon as Possible, Which shall not be Wanting in Any thing that Lays in My Power. I have no news to Write.”159

While all of this was transpiring, the French Fleet under Compte de Grasse arrived in late August. On the transit up from the Caribbean, the French took several British prizes and simply sailed into the Chesapeake Bay and anchored. As de Grasse reported: “On the 28th the fleet anchored three leagues from the roadstead of the Chesapeake, according to the advice of the coast

155 John Montague to George Germain, July 26, 1781, "Letter and enclosures sent to Lord Germain by Lords of the Admiralty respecting the appeal for liberty made by two Americans taken in Chesapeake Bay going to a French ship of War and taken to England" (Correspondence, The National Archives, Kew, CO 5/132 1781/07/15-1781/07/26). Accessed [May 05, 2020]. http://www.colonialamerica.amdigital.co.uk/Documents/Details/CO_5_132_046. 156 Appeal by Charles Tonkins and William Buckner, July 15, 1781, “Letters and enclosures.” 157 Major Alexander Dick to Commodore Nelson, August 8, 1781, CSP, Vol. 2, 305. 158 Thomas Newton to Governor Nelson, September 17, 1781, CSP, Vol. 2, 448. 159 Amos Weeks to Thomas Newton, September 17, 1781, CSP, Vol. 2, 448-49.

62 pilots whom we had on board. We had not yet seen any land, which here lies very low. On the 29th we anchored in three columns, in the entrance of the roadstead, after chasing a number of vessels that we could not make out. You will not perhaps be astonished to learn in what security the English live. Having anchored and displayed our flag, we were approached by a boat in which was one of the principal citizens of Virginia.”160

Also waiting for the French was Colonel Jean-Joseph Sourbader de Gimat, a French officer under Lafayette. With the certainty of the French arrival in the Chesapeake, Gimat continued the mission that Major Galvan had started earlier. “Colo. Gimat and the french officer I have mentioned are gone to Portsmouth under pretence to see the fortifications (which I have ordered to be leveled) and will proceed to Cape Henry in order to deliver My dispatches to the French Commanders, and give them every information in their power.”161

The citizens of Virginia and Maryland were glad to finally see the arrival of the French. The Maryland Gazette called upon “their patriotism, honour, and interest to exert every nerve in providing supplies for the allied forces.”162 Princess Anne County was uniquely situated as one of those supply points with the fleet right in their anchorage. The next task was to offload the French army.

The fleet under de Grasse brought with them some 3,200 troops to supplement the French forces already in the United States and were to link up with Washington’s Army moving both overland, and via the Chesapeake Bay from the Head of Elk in Maryland. The large French warships were unable to move into Hampton Roads or anywhere close to the debarkation point near Jamestown. Therefore, the fleet remained anchored in Lynnhaven and across the Chesapeake and boats moved the troops up the James River in what amounted to a grueling 120 mile round trip. The movement was taxing on the boat crews but necessary to move the troops ashore to counter Cornwallis.

As the troop movement was in progress, a British Fleet under Admiral Thomas Graves departed New York to bring needed supplies to Cornwallis at Yorktown. Graves was unaware that the French had arrived in the Chesapeake Bay. On the morning of September 5th, a French frigate patrolling the entrance to the Chesapeake Bay spotted the British fleet. The frigate signaled de Grasse, and de Grasse ordered the fleet underway. In the days of fighting sail, ships generally assumed fighting positions in predetermined formations or order. De Grasse’s signal to sortie was

160 John Dawson Gilmary Shea, ed., The Operations of the French Fleet under Count de Grasse, 1781-2, (New York: The Bradford Club, 1864), 65. 161 “To George Washington from Marie-Joseph-Paul-Yves-Roch-Gilbert du Motier, marquis de Lafayette, 24 August 1781,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/99-01-02- 06783. 162 Maryland Gazette, September 6, 1781.

63 to form in “order of speed” meaning to line up as quickly as possible rather than assemble in one of the predetermined, and normally accepted, fighting formations.163

The French were at several disadvantages. There was a flood tide that the ships would have to fight as they tried to exit the bay. The ships were already short on manning with the boats and crews still engaged in moving the army. Because of this, the ability to man every gun was questionable. Being at anchor was also a disadvantage, as it would take time to weigh anchor, set sail, and maneuver. Instead, most of the ships cut their anchor cable, marked with buoys for easier retrieval, and set sail. An eyewitness stated “This movement was executed with such precision and boldness, in spite of the absence of the best drilled part of the crew, that the enemy, doubtless taken by surprise, at once wore so as to be on the same tack as the French fleet.”164

More impressive, perhaps, than the battle itself was the race to exit the Chesapeake Bay and engage the British, which was contrary to the eyewitness report. First out of the bay was Commodore Louis Antoine de Bougainville of the Auguste. Using an impressive maneuver of tacking and spring cables, Bougainville was able to clear a shoal, avoid hitting the Hercule, and capture the wind in the sails just right to begin the charge toward the British. Other ships narrowly missed either running aground, such as Citoyen and Aigrette or running into each other like the Caton trying get between the Cesar and Destin. De Grasse in his flagship Ville de Paris had such a difficult time getting underway that he ended up in the middle of the line.165

One of the witnesses to the race out of the Chesapeake was Captain Meredith of the Marquis Lafayette. While sailing past the Eastern Shore en route to the Carolinas and Georgia, Meredith noticed “a fleet ahead, and to leeward; upon standing on, perceived it was a fleet of British ships of war, formed into a line of battle. Presently we saw a French fleet beating out of the Capes of Virginia. About 3 or 4 o'clock an action commenced.”166

The order of the French fleet and the disorder in forming a fighting line meant, initially, only those ships at the head of the line would be engaged at any one time. The scattered pockets of French ships meant that a lucky maneuver could cut them off from the main body and overwhelm them. However, the French position in the wind enabled then to utilize their lower gun ports and deliver more weight on each broadside. Therefore, the French were delivering more punch on every shot than the British could deliver. Additionally, crossed signals, or misunderstood signals from the British commander, Admiral Thomas Graves, saw some British ships not closing a target even though the opportunity was there. As in the Battle of Cape Henry, the event was

163 “A Journal of the Cruise of the Fleet of His Most Christian Majesty, under the Command of the Count de Grasse- Tilly, in 1781 and 1782 by the Chevaliér de Goussencourt,” Operations of the French Fleet under Count de Grasse as described in two Contemporary Journals, (New York: Bradford Club, 1864), 69. 164 “Journal of an Officer in the Naval Army in America in 1781 and 1782,” Operations of the French Fleet, 155. 165 The best accounts of the break out of the Chesapeake and the battle itself can be found in Harold A. Larrabee, Decision at the Chesapeake (New York: Clarkson N. Potter, 1964), and Nathanial Philbrick, In the Hurricane’s Eye (New York: Viking, 2018) 166 “The Ship Marquis Lafayette,” 154.

64 undecisive with the British, again, receiving the worst of the damage. One ship, the third-rate HMS Terrible, was scuttled after the battle due to heavy damage.167

Convinced the British were not going to re-engage or make an attempt on the Chesapeake Bay, the French gave up the chase and returned to the Chesapeake. Waiting for de Grasse in the Chesapeake was the Spanish squadron under Admiral de Barras which arrived from Newport during the engagement. Barras was carrying the heavy siege guns needed at Yorktown. It was feared that the British fleet under Graves might intercept Barras, severely derailing the combined Ameican and French efforts in Virginia. Two British frigates, the HMS Iris under Captain Dawson and the HMS Richmond under Captain Hudson were under the impression that de Barras’ ships were British and began to enter the bay when they were intercepted by de Grasse’s ships. Iris and Richmond had earlier been in a chase with the Marquis Lafayette which had witnessed the French sortie.168 Reports were that one of the frigates “fought with great bravery and perseverance against a superior force.”169

As the naval contest for the Chesapeake Bay was being decided, George Washington and his forces were still heading south from New York. Washington finally arrived in Williamsburg on September 14 having received numerous reports of the French fleet arrival in the Chesapeake, their departure in pursuit of the British (“much agitated” was how aide-de-camp Jonathan Trumbull described Washington), then their return victorious over the British.170 With the amount of miscommunication already between the French and the Americans, particularly with regard to the utilization and destination of de Grasse’ fleet, Washington saw “The necessity of seeing, & agreeing upon Figure 24: French Fleet exiting the Chesapeake Bay to engage a proper plan of cooperation with the the British Fleet. Count de Grasse induced me to make him a visit at Cape Henry where he

167 See Larrabee and Philbrick for excellent accounts of the battle. 168 See Larrabee and Philbrick for accounts of the capture. 169 Maryland Journal, September 18, 1781. 170 “Minutes of Occurrences respecting the Siege and Capture of York in Virginia, extracted from the Journal of Colonel Jonathan Trumbull, Secretary to the General, 1781.” Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society 14 (1875-76): 333.

65 lay with his fleet after a partial engagement with the British Squadron off the Capes under the Command of Admiral Graves whom he had driven back to Sandy hook.”171

On September 17, using the Queen Charlotte, a cutter captured from the British, and “In company with the Count de Rochambeau—the Chevr. Chastellux—Genls. Knox & Duportail, I set out for the Interview with the Admiral & arrived on board the Ville de Paris (off Cape Henry) the next day by Noon and having settled most points with him to my satisfaction except not obtaining an assurance of sending Ships above York and one that he could not continue his fleet on this Station longer than the first of November.”172 This was the famous Meeting of the Three Commanders, the “war council” that decided the course of the siege of Yorktown. One humorous incident from the meeting occurred as Washington stepped on board the Ville de Paris,

“On the American chiefs reaching the quarter-deck, the admiral ﬂew to embrace him, imprinting the French salute upon each cheek. Hugging him in his arms, he exclaimed, “My dear little general." De Grasse was of lofty stature; but the term petit, or small, when applied to the majestic and commanding person of Washington, produced an effect upon the risible faculties of all present not to be described. The Frenchmen, governed by the rigid etiquette of the ancien regime, controlled their mirth as best they could; but our own jolly Knox, heedless of all rules, laughed, and that aloud, till his fat sides shook again.”173

As the bustle of activity in Lynnhaven Bay and the southern Chesapeake continued with war preparations – meetings, movement of troops, and battle damage repairs to ships, the French took the time to resupply from the citizens of Princess Anne county. The location of the anchorage and the plentiful supplies in the county, particularly with the recent harvest, was an economic boon for the locals whose livelihoods and trade were always uncertain during the course of the war. Thomas Newton made his report to the Governor:

“I proceeded down immediately & appointed Commiss’rs in the Counties of Nansemond, Norfolk & Princess Anne—they are using all diligence in procuring supplies & am in hopes the fleet will fully be supply’d with beef by their own purchase & the Commissary’s—Markets are held near the Capes by which they get plenty of small meets, eggs, milk, poultry &c—The hard cash draws supplies to them from great distances, but I think they are imprudent in their management - if the Consul who acts here as agent would appoint some one to make purchases I think they wou’d have been made for 25 pr: ct: less than they now are. I have not as yet seen him, but sent your powers to him which he seem’d pleased with—I have

171 George Washington Journal, “September 1781,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/01-03-02-0007-0005. 172 George Washington Journal, Entry for September 17. 173 George Washington Parke Custis, Recollections and Private Memoirs of Washington, part 1, (New York: Derby & Jackson, 1860), 236.

made a demand of one tenth of the Cattle out of Princess Ann, which are now collecting & shall deliver up to the fleet & either take payment or bills for them, but am afraid many will be lost, as we have no guard to take care of them & the Consul will only receive them as he can have them taken off”174

Despite the new rise in economic activity, the recent British presence in and around the county still had the area in a great deal of turmoil. Newton continued:

“The County of Princess Ann has neither civil or military law in it—they are striving to collect their militia—tomorrow will determine their numbers to turn out—-Murder is committed & no notice is taken of it for want of some support up the Country—a few desperate fellows go about on the sea Coasts and large Swamps & do mischeifs in the nights. every one who appears active against them is an object of their fury—a few rifle men with an Active Officer in exchange for some militia from this, might render great service & keep up the authority of the Civil justice.”175

Still a viable presence in Princess Anne were the Loyalists. It was unlikely, based on the level of friendly military presence in the area, that the Loyalists were going to cause any trouble. Some Loyalists who evacuated the area with the British and fled to Yorktown were now fleeing Yorktown and trying to quietly assimilate back into their previous homesteads. The extended French presence in the bay, as well as the demands for fresh meat and vegetables for the armies operating around Yorktown, gave the Loyalists ample opportunity to profit from the supply needs of the military. Thomas Newton once again pointed out the new issue:

“I wrote to have the refugees taken up, those run off from York but am afraid they will be rather protected by too many who remained at Norfolk & Princess Ann, whilst the enemy were there & have never been punished for their behaviour. if some step is not taken to punish such men as have even taken up arms with the enemy, the whole of that Country will become a set of torys. Many of them now are living in aflluence & have plenty of specie at command, claiming the privilege of paroles, whilst the good men who left their homes, are starving for want of necessaries, having no hard money to buy with, & the others do every thing in their power to prevent the paper from passing—I hope your Excellency will have time soon to look into these matters & punish those who deserve it.”176

Regardless of who was marketing goods to the Continental Army and the French, Princess Anne County became the hub of economic activity. Supply commissioner George Kelly noted,

174 Thomas Newton to Governor Nelson, September 17, 1781, CSP, Vol. 2, 450. 175 Thomas Newton to Governor Nelson, September 17, 1781, CSP, Vol. 2, 450. 176 Thomas Newton to Governor Nelson, October 10, 1781, CSP, Vol. 2, 542.

“there has been very pletifull supplies of cattle & sheep from North Carolina drove down to Lin Haven Inlet for sale in such plenty that they have not been able to vend the whole.”177

As the siege of Yorktown continued, Princess Anne County continued to supply the effort with needed supplies, and their militia continued to provide protection throughout the county. On October 19, the Army of Cornwallis surrendered to George Washington’s forces. De Grasses’ concern of not being able to remain in Chesapeake Bay past November 1 was no longer an issue. Over the next several months, the flurry of activity in the bay would continue with the French re- embarking their ships, the movement of British prisoners out of the area on cartel ships, and the resumption of normal merchant and trade activities in the region. Princess Anne County played a small, but very vital role, in the success of this campaign – the last major campaign of the American Revolution.

177 George Kelly to Governor Nelson, October 12, 1781, CSP, Vol. 2, 546.

Aftermath

The British surrender at Yorktown is widely recognized as the final battle of the American Revolution. Military activities continued, however, as the Treaty of Paris, which formally ended all hostilities and recognized the independence of the United States was not signed until September 3, 1783. In Princess Anne County, life slowly started to return to normal.

Security concerns in the region remained with Princess Anne particularly threatened by “Tories & Refugees” operating from the swamps in and around the country. A local major at Portsmouth offered to “erect a Redoubt at the Cape [Henry], which will not only awe those ragamuffins, but will serve as a light-House, a protection to vessels from Privateers, and a look out to this post.”178 With the departure of the French Fleet, privateers in particular were looking for those targets of opportunity as a state of war still existed. It was clear that a lighthouse at Cape Henry was still desired.

The Marquis Lafayette once again makes an appearance off Cape Henry, under a new captain and largely a new crew, but this time portending her ultimate fate. Just south of Cape Henry the ship was being chased by a frigate when “another frigate was discovered, shaping her course to cut the Marquis off from Cape Henry. The Virginia officers that remained, assured the commander that they could round the Cape, without the danger of more than one or two broadsides at most, and perhaps without one. He was not a Meredith, but ordered the helm to be put up, and run this gallant, enterprising little ship ashore; and thus, after so many hair-breadth escapes from danger, she was lost, when the danger existed only in apprehension.”179

The need for a lighthouse was amply demonstrated with the loss of the French frigate Diligente in the vicinity of Cape Henry. Diligente was in company with the frigate Hermione heading to sea. Near Cape Henry the pilot from Hermione was transferred to Diligente and recommended anchoring near Hampton due to the approach of nightfall and deteriorating weather. Captain Chevalier Robert Sutton de Clonard of the Diligente decided instead to head to sea. De Clonard quickly found himself hard aground on the shore without a rudder. Attempts to land the crew were difficult owing to the high winds and seas. In the end, twenty-three of the crew drowned attempting to reach shore including the pilot on whom Captain de Clonard placed all blame for the wreck. The pilot upon embarking stated he “trusted more to his head than to his eyes.”180 A lighthouse as a visual marker would have aided the situational awareness and possibly prevented the Diligente from venturing so close to shore.

178 Major Alex Dick to Colonel Davies, December 26, 1781, CSP, Vol. 2, 670-71. 179 “The Ship Marquis Lafayette,” 155. The actual date of loss is unknown but it was sometime after the British surrender at Yorktown. 180 Chevalier de Clonard, Narrative of the Loss of the “Diligente,” February 5, 1782, Benson J. Lossing, ed., The American Historical Record, (Philadelphia, PA: Chase & Town, Publishers, 1872), 181-83.

Loyalists remained. Their governmental preferences were eventually forgiven if not just forgotten and they assimilated and became productive citizens. Other Loyalists were not forgiven. Jacob Ellegood, for example, wrote “I am sure there has no one given more convincing proofs of Loyalty than I have yet as a Virgia. [Virginian] I cannot but feel for the distresses of my poor unhappy native country, a country I once thought it my greatest happiness to be a native of – but now alas! that country which still contains all that is near and valuable to me in this life I durst not approach but at the peril of that verry life which I received from it.”181 Ellegood was lamenting both being abandoned by the British and banished by the Americans. Others faced prosecution even years after the conflict ended. A Grand Jury proceeding in November, 1786 presented to the Attorney General, “the following men for bearing arms in the service of the British, or for assisting the British forces: Joshua Whitehurst, John Moore, Adam Lovit, Henry Burgess, Lancaster Lovit, Jeremiah Murden, Daniel Murden, Francis Barns, Aquilla Jones, John Caton, Robert Stevens, Wm. Lovit.”182

After the war, the new nation, finally at peace, settled in and continued to develop and grow. New methods of governance were tried and when the first Congress under the new Constitution convened, they once again raised the need for a lighthouse at Cape Henry. Princess Anne was poised to continue to influence the course of the growth of the nation. As part of the eleventh Act of Congress passed in 1789, construction of a lighthouse was approved. In just a couple of years, a new lighthouse built with a foundation from the Aquia sandstone deposited on site before the Revolution and a Rappahannock sandstone tower graced the sand dunes at Cape Henry.

Figure 25: Cape Henry Lighthouse in 1797.

181 Jacob Ellegood to Charles Steuart, October 16, 1781, Charles Steuart Papers, 1762-1789, Colonial Williamsburg Foundation. 182 November 1786 entry, Princess Anne County Loose Papers, 149-50.

American Ships Captured by the British Blockade

The following list of ship captures is representative of the naval activity at the entrance to the Chesapeake Bay and in the waters in and around Princess Anne County. There were many more captures than are listed here, and the list that follows are those which have a direct connection to Princess Anne County. Reporting data at the time was very scattered and while comprehensive lists of captured vessels were printed periodically in local and national newspapers in the United States and Great Britain, the accuracy and sometimes even the details vary from issue to issue. Some vessels, like the HMS Emerald, were more active and more detailed in their capture reports and blockade activity and thus claim the preponderance of the known captures, particularly in the year 1777.

There is a trend when many vessels captured were not sent to an Admiralty Court for adjudication but instead burnt or scuttled after removing cargo or other usable and valuable items. This is due either to the low, estimated value of the vessel producing a small prize in the prize courts or the desire to minimize the number of personnel lost by the capturing vessel in making a prize crew to sail that vessel into port. Since a portion of the estimated value of the vessel and cargo, as determined by the Admiralty Court, was split among every member of the crew, it was more profitable to send the more valuables vessels to port. Some vessels were placed into British service as the size and speed of the vessel was useful in capturing enemy ships particularly in shallow and confined waters such as the Chesapeake Bay or were assigned as tenders to a larger ship. The tender would often pursue and capture the prize vessels.

Much of the data in the list was derived from the official lists published in numerous issues of the London Gazette. The majority of the lists were the results of Prize Court adjudication but were also compiled from official reports of the ship effecting the capture.

Captured in 1777 Ship Captured By Date Location Notes

Edward Emerald February 12 Cape Henry Betsey Emerald February 14 Cape Henry Two Friends Emerald February 12 Cape Henry Phoenix Emerald February 13 Lynnhaven Bay Hope Emerald February 14 Cape Henry Burnt Molly Phoenix February 17 Cape Henry Burnt Esther Emerald February 18 Cape Henry Alexander Phoenix February 18 Cape Henry Burnt Nancy Phoenix February 27 Cape Henry Scuttled Sloop Emerald June 24 Chesapeake Burnt Brig Emerald June 30 Cape Henry Burnt Friendship Emerald July 10 Cape Henry Sent to New York Betsy Emerald July 10 Cape Henry Scuttled Resolution Emerald July 10 Cape Henry Sent to New York Lee Senegal July 10 Cape Henry Sent to New York Schooner Senegal July 10 Cape Henry Sent to New York Sally Emerald July 20 Cape Henry Scuttled Alexander Emerald July 20 Chesapeake Sent to New York Success Emerald July 24 Cape Henry Sent to New York Thomas Emerald August 13 South of Cape Henry Rochister Sphynx August 15 Cape Henry Sent with the fleet Arc de Ciel St. Albans December 10 Chesapeake Destroyed Duke of Grafton St. Albans December 28 Chesapeake Sent to New York Miquelon Emerald December 28 Chesapeake Sent to New York

Captured in 1778 Ship Captured By Date Location Notes Alexandrine Richmond January 3 Chesapeake Sent to New York Sloop Richmond February 7 Cape Charles Burnt Petit Camarade St. Albans February 7 Lynnhaven Bay Burnt Good Hope Richmond March 1 Cape Henry Sent to New York Jean Andre St. Albans March 12 Chesapeake Sent to New York USS Virginia Emerald March 31 Middle Ground Renamed HMS Virginia Polly General Howe July 12 Cape Henry Marquis Enterprize July 19 Cape Henry Recapture Entragus Elizabeth George, August 30 Cape Henry Elizabeth Baltimore Hammond September 5 Cape Henry Mermaid Hammond September 25 Cape Henry Whim Lord Howe October 7 Cape Henry Salisbury Harriet October 9 Chesapeake Bay Liberty Dunmore October 25 Chesapeake Bay Success Lord Howe October 26 Cape Henry L’Amiable Daphne November 8 Cape Henry Sent to New York Genevive Experiment Betsey November 18 Cape Henry Lydia Hammond November 18 Cape Henry Favorite Hammond November 19 Cape Henry Packet Schooner St. Patrick November 21 Cape Henry Rambler Granby November 25 Cape Henry Rambler Granby November 25 Cape Henry Dove Black Prince December 5 Chesapeake Bay Polly Active December 13 Cape Henry Friendship Black Prince December 16 Cape Henry Black Prince Ardent’s tender December 23 Cape Henry Sent to New York Polly Black Prince December 29 Cape Henry

Captured in 1779 Ship Captured By Date Location Notes Crow Lane Experiment January 1 Cape Henry Prince Frederick Experiment January 1 Cape Henry Kitty Daphne January 3 Cape Henry Sent to New York St. Theresa Experiment January 14 Cape Henry Friendship Ardent’s tender January 19 Cape Henry Sent to New York Nancy Gambier January 22 Cape Henry Nancy Thornton Gambier January 22 Cape Henry Sally Revenge January 25 Cape Henry Planter’s Folly Ardent’s tender January 25 Cape Henry Sent to New York Philadelphia Nautilus January 27 Cape Henry Sent to New York Tryal Rose’s tender January 27 Chesapeake Sent to New York Bay Eagle Lord North February 3 Chesapeake Bay

Additional captures as part of the May 1779 Colliers Raids were not reported as to specific capture location.

British Ships Captured by American or French Vessels

Ship Captured By Date Location Notes

Edward Lexington April 7, 1776 Cape Henry

Oxford Andrew Doria June 1776 Off Virginia Recaptured by crew

Oxford Liberty, Patriot June 21, 1776 Cape Henry Prize Court Hampton

Pinnace Princess Anne August 27, 1777 Cape Henry Wrecked ashore Militia

HMS Fortunatus Liberty Spring 1779 Cape Henry

Mermaid Boston, Deane July 24, 1779 Off Virginia Sold at Kemp’s Landing

Enterprise Boston, Deane July 24, 1779 Off Virginia Prize Court Hampton

HMS Romulus Eveille, Gentile, February 19, Cape Henry Taken into Surveillante 1781 French Navy

Galley Amos Weeks April 1781 Mores Point, Escaped North Landing River

HMS Richmond Bourgogne, September 11, Cape Henry Taken into Aigrette 1781 French Navy as Richemont

HMS Iris Bourgogne, September 11, Cape Henry Taken into Aigrette 1781 French Navy

Images

Cover: Crublier d'Opterre, Henri. Virginie. Embouchure De La Baye De Chesapeake. [1783].

Figure 1: Skirmish at Kemp’s Landing Historic Marker: Photograph by Mark Reed.

Figure 2: Dunmore’s Proclamation: Gilder-Lehman Institute.

Figure 3: Kemp’s Landing on map: Norfolk Historical Society.

Figure 4: USS Lexington: painting by F. Mueller, Naval History and Heritage Command.

Figure 5: Gwynn’s Island Map: Thomas Jefferson drawing, Matthews Memorial Library.

Figure 6: Captain Andrew Snape Hamond: National Portrait Gallery, National Museum of Australia.

Figure 7: Pleasure House/Watering Place Map: Library of Congress.

Figure 8: Oath of allegiance tow be sworn by inhabitants of Norfolk and Princess Anne County, Virginia, 1775: National Archives, Kew.

Figure 9: Salt House on Map: Virginie. Embouchure De La Baye De Chesapeake.

Figure 10: 1774 Minutes of the Lighthouse Committee: Library of Virginia.

Figure 11: Signal Tower at Fort Norfolk: Norfolk Historical Society.

Figure 12: Armed Pinnace Drawing: National Museum of the Royal Navy, Portsmouth, UK.

Figure 13: Frigate Virginia: Howard Chappelle, History of the American Sailing Navy.

Figure 14: Privateer Rattlesnake: Howard Chappelle, History of the American Sailing Navy.

Figure 15: Sir George Collier: National Museum of the Royal Navy, Portsmouth, UK.

Figure 16: Ellegood Signature: ARCGIS.com

Figure 17: Post at Portsmouth: Library of Congress.

Figure 18: Benedict Arnold: American Battlefield Trust.

Figure 19: Johann Ewald: Diary of the American War: A Hessian Journal.

Figure 20: HMS Romulus: National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, London, Caird Collection.

Figure 21: James’s Plantation: Johan Ewald, Diary of the American War.

Figure 22: Battle of Cape Henry: La guerre incomprise ou la victoire volée Bataille de Chesapeake, by François Caron.

Figure 23: Southern Princess Anne County: Library of Congress.

Figure 24: French exiting the Chesapeake Bay: U.S. Naval Institute.

Figure 25: Cape Henry Lighthouse: U.S. Lighthouse Society.

References

Primary Source – Manuscripts:

Charles Steuart Papers, 1762-1789. Colonial Williamsburg Foundation.

Colonial Office Records. CO 5. National Archives, Kew, United Kingdom.

Jack Robertson Papers. Stephen Mansfield Archives. Virginia Wesleyan University.

Thomas Jefferson Papers, 1606-1827. Library of Congress.

Virginia Colonial Records Project. Library of Virginia.

Primary Source – Published Works:

Abercrombie, Janice L., ed. Virginia Revolutionary Publick Claims. 3 vols. Athens, GA: Iberian Pub. Co., 1992.

Almon, John, ed. The Remembrancer or Impartial Repository of Public Events. 16 Vols. London: Printed for J. Almon, 1775-1783.

Anderson, D. R., ed. “Letters of Colonel William Woodford, Colonel Robert Howe and Major- General Charles Lee.” Richmond College Historical Papers. 1 (June 1915): 96-163.

Barney, Mary, ed. A Biographical Memoir of the Late Commodore Joshua Barney. Boston: Gray & Bowen, 1832.

Beatson, Robert. Naval and Military Memoirs of Great Britain, from 1727 to 1783. 6 vols. London: Longman, Hurst, Rees and Orme, 1804.

Brock, R.A., ed. Miscellaneous Papers, 1672-1865: Now First Printed From the Manuscript in the Collections of the Virginia Historical Society. Richmond: Virginia Historical Society, 1887.

The Campaign in Virginia, 1781. 2 Vols. London: Charing Cross, 1888.

Chadwick, French Ensor, ed. The Graves Papers and Other Documents Relating to the Naval Operations of the Yorktown Campaign. New York: Naval History Society, 1916.

Clark, Walter, ed. State Records of North Carolina, 17 Vols. Goldsboro: Nash Bros., Book and Job Printers, 1898.

Clark, William Bell, ed. Naval Documents of the American Revolution. 13 Vols. Washington: Naval Historical Center, 1964-2019.

Clinton, Sir Henry. The American Rebellion: Sir Henry Clinton’s Narrative of his Campaigns, 1776-1782. William B. Willcox, ed. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1954.

Collier, Sir George, A Detail of Particular Services Performed in America in the Years 1776, 1777, 1778, and 1779. New York: Printed for Ithiel Town, 1835.

Curle, H. W. R., “Intercepted Letters of Virginian Tories, 1775,” The American Historical Review, 12 (January 1907): 341-46.

Custis, George Washington Parke, Recollections and Private Memoirs of Washington. New York: Derby & Jackson, 1860.

"Extract of a letter from the Count de Grasse to the Hon. the Chevalier de la Luzerne, Minister- Plenipotentiary of France, dated, Cape Henry, Sept. 13." 1781. The Scots Magazine, 1739-1803; Edinburgh 43 (1781): 592.

Flournoy, H. W. ed. Calendar of Virginia State Papers and Other Manuscripts Preserved in the Capitol at Richmond. 11 Vols. Richmond: James E. Goode, Printer, 1881.

Force, Peter, ed., American Archives, in Six Series. Washington: M. St. Clair Clarke and Peter Force, 1837-1853.

Ford, Paul Leicester, ed., The Works of Thomas Jefferson, 12 Vols. New York: G. P. Putnam, 1905.

Hanson, Alexander Contee. Hanson’s Laws of Maryland. Vol 203. Annapolis: Frederick Green, 1787.

Hening, William Waller, ed., Hening's Statutes at Large: Being a Collection of all the Laws of Virginia from the first session of the Legislature, in the Year 1619, 13 Vols. Richmond: George Cochran, Printer, 1822.

Lossing, Benson J. ed. The American Historical Record. Philadelphia, PA: Chase & Town, Publishers, 1872.

McIlwaine, H. R. ed. Journals of the Council of the State of Virginia. 5 Vols. Richmond: Division of Purchase and Printing, 1931.

McIlwaine, H. R., ed. Legislative Journals of the Council of Colonial Virginia, 3 Vols. Richmond: Virginia State Library, 1919.

McIlwaine, H. R., ed. Official Letters of the Governors of the State of Virginia, Volume 1: Letters of Patrick Henry. Richmond: Davis Bottom, 1926.

Rice, Howard C., Jr. and Anne S. K. Brown, eds. The American Campaigns of Rochambeau's Army, 1780, 1781, 1782, 1783. 2 Vols. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1972.

Saberton, Ian, ed. Cornwallis Papers: The Campaigns of 1780 and 1781 in the Southern Theater of the American Revolutionary War. 6 Vols. Uckfield, England: The Naval & Military Press, Ltd., 2010.

Shea, John Gilmary, ed. “A Journal of the Cruise of the Fleet of His Most Christian Majesty, under the Command of the Count de Grasse-Tilly, in 1781 and 1782 by the Chevaliér de Goussencourt.” Operations of the French Fleet under Count de Grasse as described in two Contemporary Journals. New York: Bradford Club, 1864.

Simcoe, John Graves. Simcoe’s Military Journal: A History of the Operations of a Partisan Corps, called the Queen’s Rangers. New York: Bartlett & Welford, 1844.

Sparks, Jared, ed. Correspondence of the American Revolution; Being Letters of Eminent Men to George Washington. 4 Vols. Boston: Little, Brown, 1853.

Stevens, Benjamin Franklin, ed. The Clinton-Cornwallis Controversy. 2 Vols. London: Charing Cross, 1888.

Tarter, Brent. "The Orderly Book of the Second Virginia Regiment: September 27, 1775-April 15, 1776." The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography. 85 (1977): 156-183.

Trumbull, Jonathan. “Minutes of Occurrences respecting the Siege and Capture of York in Virginia, extracted from the Journal of Colonel Jonathan Trumbull, Secretary to the General, 1781.” Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society. 14 (1875-76): 331- 38.

Turner, Jesse. “Four Fugitive Cases from the Realm of American Constitutional Law.” American Law Review. 49 (1915), 818-828.

Tustin, Joseph P., ed. Diary of the American War: A Hessian Journal – Captain Johann Ewald, Field Jager Corps. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1979.

Tyler, Lyon Gardiner, ed. Tyler's Quarterly Historical and Genealogical Magazine.

“Lower House Journal Entry, July 19, 1721.” Proceedings and Acts of the General Assembly of Maryland, Lower House Journal. Baltimore: Maryland Historical Society, 1883.

“Expedition to Portsmouth, Virginia, 1779.” The William and Mary Quarterly. 12 (July 1932): 181-186.

“Miscellaneous Colonial Documents from the Originals in the Virginia State Archives.” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography. 19 (January 1911): 12-26.

Military Court of Enquiry, Princess Anne County, April 30, 1776. “Virginia Legislative Papers.” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography. 15 (April 1908): 406-16.

Pension Application of Thomas Bonney, S6688. John Frederick, compiler. Virginia Revolutionary Pension Applications. 8, (Washington, DC, 1963): 44.

Books:

Cecere, Michael. The Invasion of Virginia 1781. Yardley: Westholme, 2017.

Eller, Ernest McNeill, ed. Chesapeake Bay in the American Revolution. Centreville: Tidewater Publishers, 1981.

Ewald, Johann. Treatise on Partisan Warfare. New York: Greenwood Press, 1991.

Fowler, William M. Jr. Rebels Under Sail: The American Navy during the Revolution. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1976.

Holton, Woody. Forced Founders: Indians, Debtors, Slaves & the Making of the American Revolution in Virginia. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1999.

Hume, Noel Ivor. 1775: Another Part of the Field. London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1966.

Larrabee, Harold A. Decision at the Chesapeake. New York: Clarkson N. Potter, 1964.

Mahan, Alfred Thayer. The Influence of Sea Power upon History, 1660-1783. New York: Dover Publications, 1987.

Mahan, Alfred Thayer. Major Operations of the Royal Navy, 1762-1783. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1898.

Mansfield, Stephen, S. Princess Anne County and Virginia Beach: A Pictorial History. Norfolk: Donning Company, 1989.

Mansoor, Peter R.and Williamson Murray, eds. Grand Strategy and Military Alliances. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016.

McDonnell, Michael A. The Politics of War: Race, Class & Conflict in Revolutionary Virginia. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2007.

Nelson, James. George Washington’s Great Gamble: And the Sea Battle That Won the American Revolution. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2010.

Philbrick, Nathanial. In the Hurricane’s Eye. New York: Viking, 2018.

Rutman, Darrett B. The Old Dominion: Essays for Thomas Perkins Abernathy. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 1964.

Selby, John. The Revolutionary War in Virginia, 1775-1783. Williamsburg: Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, 2007.

Shy, John. A People Numerous and Armed. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1990.

Shepard, John Hannibal. The Life of Samuel Tucker. Boston: Alfred Mudge & Son, 1868.

Stevens, Benjamin Franklin. The Campaign in Virginia, 1781. 2 Vols. London: 4 Trafalgar Square, Charing Cross, 1888.

Taylor, Alan. The Internal Enemy: Slavery and War in Virginia, 1772-1832. New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 2013.

Tormey, James. The Virginia Navy in the Revolution: Hampton’s Commodore James Barron and his Fleet. Charleston: History Press, 2016.

Turner, Florence Kimberly. Gateway to the New World: A History of Princess Anne County, Virginia, 1607-1824. Easley: Southern Historical Press, 1984.

Journals:

Cross, Arthur Lyon. “On Coopering Ships Bottoms.” American Historical Review. 33 (October 1927): 79-81.

Curtis, George M. “The Goodrich Family and the Revolution in Virginia, 1774-1776.” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography. 84 (January 1976): 49-74.

Delaney, Norman C. "The Outer Banks of North Carolina During the Revolutionary War." The North Carolina Historical Review. 36 (January 1959): 1-16.

Gara, Donald J. “Loyal Subjects of the Crown: The Queen’s Own Loyal Virginia Regiment and Dunmore’s Ethiopian Regiment, 1775-76.” Journal of the Society for Army Historical Research. 83 (Spring 2005): 30-42

George, John Alonza. “Virginia Loyalists, 1775-1783.” Richmond College Historical Review. 1 (June 1916): 173-221.

Harris, J. R. “Copper and Shipping in the Eighteenth Century.” The Economic History Review. New Series, 19 (1966): 550-568.

Long, C. Thomas. “Britain’s Green Water Navy in the Revolutionary Chesapeake: Long-Range Asymmetric Warfare in the Littoral.” International Journal of Naval History. 8 (August 2009): http://www.ijnhonline.org/issues/volume-8-2009/aug-2009-vol-8-issue-2/.

Moomaw, W. Hugh. “The British Leave Colonial Virginia,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography. 66 (April 1958): 147-60.

Morison, Samuel Eliot. "Prelude to Independence: The Virginia Resolutions of May 15, 1776." The William and Mary Quarterly. 8 (No. 4): 483-492.

Naisawald, Louis Van L. "Robert Howe's Operations in Virginia 1775-1776." The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography. 60 (No. 3): 437-443.

Newsome, A. R., ed. “A British Orderly Book.” North Carolina Historical Review. 9 (April 1932): 163-186.

Pieczynski, Christopher. “William Lewis and the Cape Henry Lighthouse.” Daybook. 20 (2017): 19-23.

“The Ship Marquis Lafayette.” William Maxwell, ed. Virginia Historical Review and Literary Advertiser. 2 (July 1849): 146-55.

“The Schooner Liberty.” William Maxwell, ed. Virginia Historical Review and Literary Advertiser. 1 (April 1848): 76-80.

“The Virginia Navy of the Revolution.” John R. Thompson, ed. Southern Literary Messenger. 25 (February 1857): 147-48.

“Lighthouse at Cape Henry,” William and Mary Quarterly, 13 (April 1905): 260.

“Families of Lower Norfolk and Princess Anne Counties.” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography. 5 (January 1898): 327-334.

Theses, Dissertations and Formal Studies:

Canale, Joshua P. American Dictators: Committees for Public Safety during the American Revolution, 1775-1784. PhD Dissertation, Binghamton University, 2014.

Hast, Adele. Loyalism in Virginia During the American Revolution: The Norfolk Area and Eastern Shore. PhD Dissertation, University of Iowa, 1979.

Newton, Roy M. Crossed Signals off the Chesapeake. Honors Thesis, University of Richmond, 1939.

Tilley, John Andrew. The Royal Navy in North America, 1774-1781: A Study in Command. PhD Dissertation, Ohio State University, 1980.

Newspapers:

Boston Gazette. London Gazette. Maryland Gazette. Maryland Journal. Royal Gazette. Virginia Gazette.

Maps:

Collet, John, J Bayly, and S Hooper. A compleat map of North-Carolina from an actual survey. London: S. Hooper, 1770. Map. https://www.loc.gov/item/83693769/.

Crublier d'Opterre, Henri. Virginie. Embouchure De La Baye De Chesapeake. 1783. Map. https://brbl-dl.library.yale.edu/vufind/Record/3524668.

Map of Norfolk and Princess Anne County. 1787. Norfolk Historical Society.

Part of the Province of Virginia. 1791, Map. https://www.loc.gov/item/74693199/.

Plan of Princess Ann and Norfolk counties. Virginia: 1780. Map. https://www.loc.gov/item/2012589670/.

Sayer, Robert And John Bennett. A new and accurate chart of the Bay of Chesapeake, with all the shoals, channels, islands, entrances, soundings, and sailing-marks, as far as the navigable part of the rivers Patowmack, Patapsco and north-east. London, Printed for Robert Sayer and John Bennett, 1776. Map. https://www.loc.gov/item/74691941/.

Stratton, James. A plan of Portsmouth Harbour in the province of Virginia shewing the works erected by the British forces for its defence. 1782. Map. https://www.loc.gov/item/gm71000689/.

Web Sources:

Aquia Creek Sandstone. https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/aquia-creek-sandstone.

“The Burning of Portsmouth,” The Black Loyalist, http://www.blackloyalist.info/the-burning-of- portsmouth-1777/.

Hannum, Patrick H. “Norfolk, Virginia, Sacked by North Carolina and Virginia Troops.” Journal of the American Revolution. November 6, 2017.

https://allthingsliberty.com/2017/11/norfolk-virginia-sacked-north-carolina-virginia- troops/.

Holland, Gerald. “The Seizure of the Virginia Gazette, or Norfolk Intelligencer,” Journal of the American Revolution, January 16, 2016, https://allthingsliberty.com/2016/01/the-seizure- of-the-virginia-gazette-or-norfolk-intelligencer/.

“Jacob Ellegood, Sr.” The Loyalist Collection. https://loyalist.lib.unb.ca/node/4709.

Lynch, Jack. “A Patriot, a Traitor, and a Bill of Attainder.” Colonial Williamsburg Journal. Spring 2002. http://www.history.org/foundation/journal/spring02/attainder.cfm.

National Archives. Founders Online. https://founders.archives.gov.

Rated Navy ships in the 17th to 19th centuries” and “Unrated naval vessels in the 17th to 19th centuries” from Royal Museums Greenwich, https://www.rmg.co.uk/discover/explore/rated-navy-ships-17th-19th-centuries.

Virginia Beach Historical Register. Pleasant Hall. https://www.vbgov.com/government/departments/planning/boards-commissions- committees/Pages/VB%20Historical%20Register/Pleasant-Hall.aspx.