16 September, 2014 | created using PDF Newspaper from FiveFilters.org DEATH BE NOT PROUD: A DENOUEMENT OF HOW ONE MAN AND HIS DEATH MADE ONE SMALL ISLAND BECOME MORE DETRIMENTAL TO ENGLAND Isaac Van Dam and the American Revolution ON September 19, 1774, the Sally set sail with a gift from Jonathan Upshaw, Archibald Ritchie, Jonathan Lee and Robert Beverly of Essex County, Virginia to the sufferers of the closed port of Boston.1 Part of Master James Perkins’ cargo from the Essex County Committee of Safety was one thousand and eighty-seven bushels of corn. But inclement weather and contrary winds drove the schooner south, to the Dutch island of St. Eustatius. Writing from Boston on March 14, 1775, Samuel Adams would acquaint the Essex County gentlemen with what had become of their “very valuable contribution.” Isaac Van Dam, “a reputable merchant” of St. Eustatius had sold the corn free of charge and on December 30, 1774, sent a bill of exchange drawn by Sampson Mears on Isaac Moses of New York for £171.8 New York Currency with an accompanying letter to John Hancock, Esq. or “The Overseers of the Poor of the Town of Boston.”2 In his letter to Hancock, Van Dam had praised the inhabitants of Boston “as having so virtuously dared to oppose a wicked and corrupt ministry, in their tyrannical acts of despotism,” according to Samuel Adams who had returned “due acknowledgements” to Van Dam on February 28, 1775.3 In March the Second Virginia Convention met. Several members of the Convention brought news of a “reputable merchant,” not only in agreement with their cause but in an exceptional location to be of aid to the Virginia colony. A powder transaction between Van Dam and the Convention would soon follow.4 That transaction began a network that would cause Lord Rodney to write his wife five years later, “This rock [St. Eustatius] of only six miles in length and three in breadth has done England more harm than all the arms of her most potent enemies and alone supported the infamous American rebellion.”5 By April 12, 1776 the English considered Van Dam to be “the principal agent of correspondence” between the rebels and Europe.6 This paper will be a dénouement of how this came to be. 1 Recently, much has been made of the commerce between the Dutch and the Americans during the American Revolution, especially in the Islands of the West Indies. Indeed, the popular presuppositions that if one lived on a Dutch island with a surname beginning with “Van” seem to have confounded many consequential interpretations of historical evidence.7 But Isaac Van Dam was not “Dutch.”8 The family had emigrated to the colonies in the early seventeenth century. Sixth child and fourth son of Isaac Van Dam and his wife Isabelle Pintard, he was baptized April 4, 1736 in Christ Church, Shrewsbury, New Jersey. His father had been a merchant of Manhattan. His grandfather Rip Van Dam, had also been a merchant as well as Governor of New York. His great-grandfather Claase Ripse Van Dam who died about 1693, had been a carpenter of Beverwyck, later known as Albany. Some of his cousins were members of the Continental Congress; others signed The Declaration of Independence; still others as well as in-laws were members of elite society in New York, Philadelphia as well as London. He was dead before he was forty.9 In a letter of 1781 from his wife Sarah to her brother The Reverend George Young “then in England,” Van Dam is mentioned only in relationship to Sarah, “Anthony Van Dam’s brother’s widow.”10 In spite of his small biography, Isaac Van Dam has become a well-used though misinterpreted footnote for American historians.11 Like that of so many heroes, it was Van Dam’s death that would redeem his life in historical literature. On December 16, 1773, a number of Boston men unloaded a shipload of English tea into Boston Harbor. On May 16, 1774, citizens of New Towne, now Chestertown, Maryland witnessed their compliance by doing the same with the lading of the Geddes. A few days later Virginians did the same. Eight days later the people of Virginia were called to pray and fast. The House of Burgesses had been dissolved. On June 1, it was over for the people of Boston. On October 19, the people of Annapolis set fire to a ton of tea that had arrived on the Peggy Stewart and forced Anthony Stewart to burn his brig as well. The next day, the First Continental Congress agreed to non-importation of all English goods effective December 1 and non-exportation to the British effective September 10, 1775. On December 3, 1774, HMS Scarborough arrived at Boston with an order of the Privy Council prohibiting any nation to export any munitions to the American Colonies. In the evening of April 18, 1775, Paul Revere and others alerted their neighbors of approaching doom. On the next morning Lexington and 2 Concord exploded. Maryland then took over the stored munitions of their colony when they had received the news on April 27. The Virginia Gazette would not announce the events at Lexington and Concord until April 29, but many in that colony had anticipated such news already. On March 25, The Second Virginia Convention had recommended to the various committees of safety that from every titheable funds be collected sufficient to purchase “half a pound of Gunpowder, one pound of Lead, necessary Flints and Cartridge paper, for every Titheable person in their County.”12 But even with funds, where would the munitions come from? Britain had been a major source. But by a Resolution of the Virginia Convention, as of November 1, 1774 no British Imports had been allowed into the Colony of Virginia. The Convention decided that the “most certain and speedy method” would be for Robert Carter Nicholas, Treasurer of the Colony, Thomas Nelson, Jr. and Thomas Whiting be appointed as “one General Committee” to take care of the matter.13 Virginia had been under martial law for some time. Between three and four A.M. on the Friday, April 21st, Lieutenant Henry Colins and a fifteen man landing party anchored HM schooner Magdalen at Burwell’s Ferry just four miles south of Williamsburg on the James. No one was aware of their secret mission to remove the colony’s powder from the Capital. Under orders from Governor John Murray, Earl of Dunmore, the detachment managed to load onto the Governor’s wagon fifteen half barrels of powder before they were discovered and the alarm was sounded. Colins and his men were no fools. They leapt upon the powder wagon and sped to Collins’s man of war, HMS Fowey anchored in the Elizabeth off Norfolk. They had lit the fuse that would finally cause Virginia to explode with indignation that had been fueled since June. In fear for their lives The Scottish Earl and his family would soon flee to the powder ship themselves.14 But with the raid on the Magazine, Virginians had little ammunition for retaliation. Funds were being collected to purchase munitions, but sources had to be found. At the end of the month, Richard Henry Lee and others sent a pilot boat to the West Indies for powder with which to supply their native land. But the scheme failed. Writing on May 21 from Philadelphia Lee wrote his brother Francis Lightfoot Lee that he had just received information that the Dutch merchants of Statia15 had imported a large quantity of powder but that two English men of war guarded the 3 road to prevent its exportation to the Colonies. As early as January 26, 1775 the British had been aware of such “very illicit Trade” being carried on between St. Eustatius and other Dutch settlements and His Majesty’s Colonies. The Earl of Rochford made known to Suffolk and York that it was His Majesty’s Pleasure that any ship, British or foreign, found carrying on illicit trade with the Colonies be intercepted and seized.16 Several firms offered Virginia their aid.17 The Alexandrian Virginia firm of Jenifer and Hooe would eventually send twenty-year old Richard Harrison to French Martinique and Baltimore firm of Lux & Bowley would send Abraham Van Bibber to St. Eustatius. Months later, the aggressive Willing, Morris and Company of Philadelphia would form a joint partnership with Norton and Beau of Williamsburg for importation of the gunpowder. Early in 1776 Samuel Beall would go to Europe for powder, but find it impractical to send large amounts to the colonies. In the end, Virginia’s best offer came from the firm of John Norton and Sons of Williamsburg.18 But what of the mechanics? Lee suggested to his brother that The Treasurer should be prevailed with to employ a Mr. Goodrich in in [sic] Norfolk, a famous Contraband Man, to send immediately some swift sailing Pilot Boats for 20 or 30,000 weight to supply the Counties whose money will no doubt be collected before the powder arrives.19 Luckily the son-in-law of “The Treasurer” of the Colony of Virginia, Robert Carter Nicholas was none other than John Hatley Norton.20 His father John Norton managed John Norton & Sons affairs in London and exported British goods to neutral islands in the West Indies. Lee’s suggestion to his brother was taken to heart. About June 14, Thomas Newton, Jr. a burgess of Norfolk County and himself a merchant of Norfolk,21 informed William Goodrich of Norfolk’s John Goodrich & Sons, that “the Treasurer of the Colony wished to speak with him on a matter of great importance to the Colony.” “In a day” Newton and Goodrich made their way to Williamsburg and Nicholas informed Goodrich that powder had to be gotten “at any price.” Goodrich agreed to the scheme and immediately returned to Norfolk. On July 1, 1775, John Norton & Sons advanced bills of exchange in the amount of £5,600 Sterling drawn on the firm’s London office payable to Thomas Newton, Jr.22 Newton returned to Norfolk, endorsed the bills and gave them to Goodrich with a 4 letter from Nicholas had written on Friday, the 16th, in which he wrote that he made no doubt of Goodrich’s “best endeavors” and suggested that he “communicate this scheme to your Brother for fear of any accidents happening to you to prevent your transacting the business.”23 But Nicholas must not have wanted to doubt. For the Bills of Exchange were bonded personally by Nicholas until they were cashed. Since he personally did not know the best course of action in the Islands, to further aid Goodrich Nicholas provided him with letters to merchants John Taylor and Mr. Harvey of Antigua, and letters from Matthew Phripp or Norfolk to Isaac Van Dam and Richard Downing Jennings of Statia in case there were trouble with the Bills of Exchange.24 Van Dam was soon to become the pivot. Goodrich left Portsmouth for Antigua on July 15. On their own, his brothers left for other West Indian islands for other goods.25 Profits were profits for John Goodrich & Sons. Arriving at Antigua, Goodrich found no powder. Selling £500 of Virginia’s bills “to different people” in anticipation of future purchases, he left for St. Eustacius.26 On arrival Goodrich sold another £2,000 of the bills and sought out Isaac Van Dam. If we can believe Van Dam’s bookkeeper Johan Blair, Van Dam could have been already known to Goodrich. At an inquiry following Van Dam’s death, Blair would depose that Van Dam was not interested in the munitions trafficking, “but had acted as a friend of the aforementioned Goodrich.”27 They were either good friends or Blair was lying, probably the latter, for if the truth were told, Blair would end up in prison, for it was the English Admiral’s court. All along Van Dam had told the British that “he was working for Frenchmen.”28 On September 28, Goodrich left £500 with Van Dam who felt he could get a quantity of powder from Martinique. Then Goodrich left for Martinique himself. He arrived to find its road policed by English officers from English Harbor, Antigua. Since he could not obtain what he wanted, he returned to Van Dam. But Van Dam who supposedly was not interested in such “traffick,” was ahead of him. Upon his return to St. Eustatius, Goodrich found that Van Dam had already gotten 1,800 pounds of powder “in a French bottom” from his own source, a Mr. Bartrand at St. Pierre, Martinique.29 Perhaps this was the enticement that made Goodrich leave £2,000 with Van Dam for the purchase of more powder from Bordeaux, France, before he left St. Eustatius. By luck, just before he left an 5 “English Guinea Ship” had entered the harbor from Antigua from whom Goodrich purchased another 1,600 pounds as well as another 750 from a French schooner from Martinique. Loaded with 4,150 pounds of gunpowder which had cost him £950 he left Statia on October 1.30 Most likely, this was the same munitions described in the deposition of Van Dam’s bookkeeper Johan Blair: that Shortly afterwards (leaving funds with Van Dam], when the aforesaid mentioned William Goodrich was still on this Island, eighty barrels of gunpowder arrived here which the aforementioned William Goodrich conveyed with him to North America, along with 30 barrels of gunpowder which this same Goodrich had bought here, three blunderbusses and seventy pounds of musket bullets; all of which was clearly ammunition of war, as is known to him, the witness.31 But Goodrich left a little too soon. Even more gunpowder soon arrived from Martinique. This Van Dam sold to one Mr. Knox of St. Thomas, “but with what purpose he, the witness [Blair did] not know.”32 It is most likely that this was the “New York Sloop that was laying in the rhoad” of which Goodrich wrote later.33 On the 9th Goodrich arrived at Ocracoke Inlet, North Carolina with 4,150 pounds of gunpowder. The entire adventure had taken only fifty six days. Going north through Pamlico Sound to the “Pasquotank” River he continued as far as “the plank bridge,” about ten miles northwest of what would one day be Elizabeth City. 34 Leaving his ship for others to unload, Goodrich went immediately to Norfolk, Portsmouth35 to see his family, but saw no one but his brother-in-law Robert Shedden who told him that his family as well as that of his father had moved up to a plantation of his father’s about 25 miles in the Country. Goodrich stayed with his family for two days and then proceeded to Williamsburg. On his way Goodrich met with Thomas Newton, Jr., and after alerting him to the situation finally arrived in the Capital to inform Nicholas that he had brought in “between 4 & 5000 wt of Powder.” Goodrich then produced his bill of £488.3.O for services rendered.36 The Treasurer seemed momentarily satisfied. While Goodrich was meeting with Nicholas, two wagons were rendezvousing with his ship and an escort of a “Number of Armed Men” who would convey it “up the country” just in time for Goodrich to see them on his way back to his plantation in Nansemond County.37 There he met with his wife and planned with his father the return trip to Statia to retrieve the gunpowder Van Dam had promised to procure for their return voyage. But Goodrich was not to return.38 6 The second week in October, Dunmore had positioned his ship in the mouth of the Southern Branch of the Elizabeth River to keep lookout on rebel actions. From there his ships could “see and hear all that is going forward.”39 Indeed they could, and did. Early Sunday morning, October 15, the whole powder plot had been revealed to the Governor by way of an intercepted letter from Shedden to his father-in-law John Goodrich, Sr. According to William Goodrich’s Letter of Sept. 7, 1776, by two o’clock in the morning Shedden and John Goodrich, Jr. were prisoners on board Dunmore’s Sloop of War Otter having been arrested by eight men and one officer.40 Perhaps because Shedden was also a Scot and related to the Goodriches only by marriage,41 The Governor interrogated him first. Pleading he was only trying to prevent the ruin of his friends, Shedden satisfied the Dunmore enough to get himself released with instructions to tell his father-in-law of the Governor’s frustration and that his John Goodrich, Jr. would be kept as Dunmore’s hostage. This he did. On October 31, John Goodrich, Sr. arrived at the Otter to plead his “sincere repentance of what was past and his earnest desire of returning to his duty.”42 As a sign of loyalty, John Goodrich exchanged son William for John, Jr. and a pledge that he himself would return to St. Eustatius and retrieve the £2,000 William left with Isaac Van Dam. That same day, Dunmore gave John Goodrich, Sr. a letter of passage to pursue the endeavor. Now an hostage, William remained on board and that very day deposed before Dunmore his own dealings. In a day or two, with the orders for Van Dam, John Goodrich, Sr. left for the head of the Paspotank to the ship which was waiting for William and his return voyage for the powder. But Dunmore’s officers were diligent in keeping the Governor’s orders. Almost immediately upon his departure the senior Goodrich was captured by two “croosers” who knew nothing of the plan or of any pass that was to be honored. Goodrich was again captured and returned to the Otter. Knowing that the patriots would be suspicious if he were to immediately release the elder Goodrich to continue his endeavor, Dunmore decided to dispatch William Goodrich on what would appear to most colonists his return trip to the Indies. In a letter to the Pennsylvania Council of Safety written from the Philadelphia Jail on September 7 of the following year, William swore that upon his arrival in Statia he related the whole tale to Van Dam “telling him at the same time, that we must fall upon some plan to keep Lord Dunmore from Geting [sic] of this money.”43 Van Dam made sure this would be the case by telling Goodrich that 7 the money was still in France. But Van Dam had to do something to placate not only the Governor but Goodrich also. Giving Goodrich two notes totaling £400,44 and a letter dated December 7, 1775 Van Dam explained to Goodrich that the £2,000 has been sent to France and that he then had his agent in Holland send out the money in dry goods on Van Dam’s account. Van Dam would stand accountable for the remaining £1,600, “as there is no other way to get the money here.”45 All they could do was await coming of the powder. Goodrich returned to the Governor and apparently Dunmore accepted the story. To make matters worse, sometime after the dating of this letter but before March 7, 1776, Van Dam died and he died having given Goodrich a note that neither the money nor the powder would be given to anyone but William Goodrich himself or his personal agent. By November 11, the Virginia Committee of Safety knew William Goodrich had been arrested, and by the end of the month Nicholas realized that for the most part, the scheme was over and the Convention’s money as well as his personal bond for it, lost.46 Perhaps worst of all, what even Dunmore called the “spirited, active industrious Family” and its “genius” was lost by the patriot cause. By the end of December Goodrich and his six sons were not only Tories but in command of several of the King’s ships.47 They had had no other choice. By December the Virginia Convention had named an investigation committee to “inquire into the conduct of John Goodrich, William Goodrich, and John Goodrich, Jr. relating to the importation of gunpowder, and other articles, for the use of this colony.”48 Neighbors in Isle of Wight watched as ships of the Goodrich family continued their business under the eyes of the Governor’s lookouts. And then on New Year’s Day, 1776, “The detested town of Norfolk [was] no more.” Dunmore began bombing and patriots torching the Tory city at about 4 o’clock in the afternoon. The destruction lasted about nine hours.49 The Virginia Patriots were furious and out for revenge. The Goodrich family were excellent targets, but legally there were as yet no laws to arrest, much less hang, traitors to a traitorous cause. Besides, there were no courts in which to try them. By December, the colonial appellate courts had ceased to function, and the county courts dealt only with local civil matters. It would take time. In January of 1776, Abraham Van Bibber of the Baltimore firm of Lux & Bowley had been sent by to St. Eustatius on behalf of the Maryland Convention to seek 8 out powder for that Colony. Before he left Maryland, fifty-two year old William Lux50 had taken the opportunity to furnish him with the whole state of the transactions between Isaac Van Dam and the Colony of Virginia. Lux was a principal agent for supplies from non-Virginian sources for William Aylett, Virginia Commissary of Purchases.51 Upon his arrival in Statia, Van Bibber confirmed the suspicions of the Virginia Convention on March 11.52 On the 29th the Committee of Safety began to sequester the real and a little later, the personal estate of the Goodrich family.53 Some members of the Convention still hoped that the original scheme could be completed, even without the Goodriches. In February,54 John Dixon, Jr. was sent to the West Indies with a cargo half in his own account and half for the Virginia Committee in yet another attempt to obtain the much needed gunpowder. Dixon also carried letters for Abraham Van Bibber. Before Dixon could get to St. Eustatius, he was captured at Antigua by HMS Roebuck and his ship Dolphin carried into the port as “the fair prize of by an admiralty court and offered for public sale.”55 But before the end of the month he made his way to St. Eustatius, sought out Van Bibber and informed him of what had taken place and of Van Bibber’s instructions from the Virginian Convention to act as their agent in the Van Dam affair. As noted above, Van Bibber had already looked into the Virginia matter.56 Van Bibber had now become Virginia’s, as well as Maryland’s, agent in St. Eustatius. Most likely, Dixon also carried letters or copies of letters from the Virginia Committee as well as that from Lux requesting Van Bibber’s help.57 Lux asked Van Bibber for his aid in procuring a settlement and securing from the Van Dam estate the £2,000 left with him by William Goodrich. Hence, knowing the situation and expecting that the shipment for Virginia was soon to come in, Van Bibber advanced John Dixon, Jr. £2,000 currency on the Virginia Account, that Dixon’s sloop Dolphin, with Robert Smithy Master, could return loaded for Virginia.58 Dixon had left the island March 23rd, carrying with him Van Bibber’s “Invoice of Sundry Goods” loaded on March 22, Dixon’s receipt of the sundry goods dated the following day and many letters, among which was Van Bibber’s letter of the latter date to the President of the Virginia Convention Edmund Randolph, instructing him of the whole situation.59 Van Bibber wrote Randolph that Dixon left without any powder on board, being much too frightened from his previous trip to try to return to Virginia with any “needful.”60 Nevertheless, Dixon did carry other vital 9 necessities, especially linens and ducks for uniforms and sailcloth. In his first invoice to Virginia Van Bibber carefully specified “Bought of Hendrick Pondt…Bought of Gebroedes Mendis…Bought of Demoulin & Co.…” He knew that the Virginia Committee was attempting to get their revenge on the Goodriches, and that their tool would be that the Goodrich family had broken the non-importation laws with William Goodrich’s first shipment of powder from St. Eustatius into Virginia.61 Van Bibber was determined to show that the origin of the goods he sent from this Dutch island were not British. This was basically the way things stood when Van Bibber wrote to Lux on March 28th. Two years later, account books for June 20, 1778 would show that Van Bibber had overcharged for the goods aboard the Dolphin, £178.14.10¼– “the Amo’t of Lux & Bowby [sic] protested Bill of Exchange, wrong charged the State in the former Acc’t 696.7.3.” 62 In his letter, Van Bibber reminded Lux that he had arrived in St. Eustatius with little hope of recovering the money William Goodrich had left in the hands of Isaac Van Dam, since he had arrived not only to find that Van Dam was dead, that the £2,000 Sterling had dwindled to £1,600 but that Van Dam had returned to Goodrich two notes totaling £400 and a written agreement that when the powder did arrive he would give it to Goodrich or his order and no one else. With that, Van Bibber simply did not have a legal leg to stand on for any kind of settlement with anyone. On the 7th of March he wrote the Virginia Convention that he expected that he could however “procrastinate the settlement,” until they could furnish him with the proper credentials to invalidate the legal claim of Bartlett Goodrich. Bartlett had arrived with the very note that Van Dam had given his brother William. Realizing all this on his arrival, there was little Van Bibber could do but procrastinate the settlement, make all the friends he could and try everything in his power to obtain the remaining £1600 sterling or the powder, if it had arrived, without public notice. After all, such trade was illegal.63 The Goodrich family had shown the consequences of being caught. And matters were even more complicated since Van Dam had died at the early age of thirty-nine and did so intestate, leaving his daughter Susannah without a father and his widow with his business accounts hanging in mid-air. Johannes Blair might have been an excellent book-keeper for Van Dam’s books, but his widow would have to administer the estate and do it alone. Besides that, she 10 would have to make her own deposition before the authorities concerning her husband’s doings. She would swear that Van Dam “had never violated the embargo on munitions.”64 It was with Madame [Sarah néé Young] Van Dam65 that Abraham Van Bibber would have to deal. And deal he did. He hinted at presents, offered bonds and securities to the widow and all others concerned to secure the power he needed. He searched out legal counsel who he would have to pay from his own pocket.66 In after a few weeks he was in a good way, but then the frustrations began to flow again. Bartlett Goodrich arrived from the Governor’s table to try his hand with the widow. William Goodrich had returned to Virginia, told his story to the Governor who seemed satisfied that Goodrich was telling the truth.67 Dunmore put the two retrieved bills of exchange in an envelope and forwarded them to Dartmouth.68 John Goodrich meanwhile had taken the agreement which Van Dam had made with his son William and passed it on to son Bartlett.69 Hence in a matter of weeks, Bartlett arrived at Madame Van Dam’s door with her husband’s written promise to William Goodrich to provide money or powder on demand. And Dunmore demanded it now. If he could not have it Goodrich was to apply to the Governor of Antigua for a letter to the Governor of St. Eustatius to order it paid. This just added to Van Bibber’s frustrations. But Bartlett Goodrich would have his own frustrations in his vigorous attempts to retrieve Virginia’s money. Arriving at The Rock, his zeal began to cool for he found that he was so despised and held in such contempt by everyone that all his endeavors ended in a ruff. Not even the Governor, Admiral James Young, would receive him at Antigua and so, he re-appeared at Statia, but with the wrong name to make his order legally valid to anyone. Since his brother William could never again show his face on the island, there was little chance of Dunmore’s ever seeing a farthing of the money left, much less the seven and one-half tons of powder Van Dam had on order from France. Van Bibber saw his chance. With all the interest and art he could command not only did he manage to receive an order for the Bordeaux shipment upon its momentary arrival, but 50% interest on the Virginia money still in the hand of Madame Van Dam. But he had to earn his money. The widow expected the presents of which he had hinted. So along with bowing and scraping and putting himself under obligations to many, Van Bibber presented her with £100 Sterling. 11 She in turn presented him with Virginia’s just due. But Virginia still wanted the order that Lux had asked Van Bibber to attempt to ship. Van Bibber’s gift to Madame Van Dam had to come out of his own pocket as did the Council fees he owed. Lux had given Van Bibber to expect that the account he was to collect would be £3,762.11 or £2,000 Sterling, but when all was said and done it amounted to only £2,926.18 or £1,600 Sterling,70 and so his 50 p C’t dividend, less the gift of £100 and the fees, had dwindled to only £638 Sterling, none of which he could touch for twelve months. Most probably this was because he used it as security for an Indemnification Bond to Madame Van Dam not only for the dividend itself but the expected order from France. April 10th, Van Bibber was still waiting for “the Virginia Stuff” to arrive from France. And he let Lux know that even if it did arrive there was no way to “get it home” since neither Virginia nor Lux had sent any vessels for its transport. Without instructions he intended to be cautious how he would ship anything.71 Isaac Van Dam had been the right man in the right place at the right time. He had become in a matter of months the principal agent of rebel correspondence in the islands. But the circumstances and disruptions surrounding his death caused American actions and British counteractions that would only increase the demand and supply of munitions between the colonies and the islands. Virginia’s “young man,” the twenty year-old Richard Harrison was now residing at St. Pierre, on French Martinique; Maryland agent Abraham Van Bibber on Dutch Statia. France and the Netherlands, Martinique and Statia, Harrison and Van Bibber– each needed the other for any economic venture. The Revolution in America needed them all. “In order to render (their Services more extensively useful to [their] Country & Friends,” Van Bibber and Harrison formed a “Copartnership” on June 14, proposing “to carry on under the firm of Van Bibber & Harrison.72 It made good sense. At that time the islands afforded the colonies all they could want “on tolerable good Terms.” Produce of all kinds sold high with tobacco being the most profitable article. Though goods were cheapest in the free port of Statia, the safest place to send vessels was Martinique or its neighbor St. Lucia.73 Now produce could be shipped to Harrison in Martinique, sold, and then with high profit “needful” purchased by “Van Bibber & Harrison” at Statia at the cheapest price and shipped from the Dutch island as “tea” or whatever in a seemingly legal 12 manner. Van Bibber & Harrison took “the Liberty of addressing a few lines” to the Virginia Committee of Safety, “Should this Information prove of any Advantage to you, it will produce no less Satisfaction to [them]” as to the Committee. It proved most satisfactory to both! On that very day John Martin signed a manifest that on that day was Shipp’d by the Grace of God, in good order, and well condition’d by Abraham Van Bebber in and upon the good Brigantine call’d the Friendship whereof is master under God, for this present voyage John Martin… Seven Chests & One Bale of Merchandize, the Property of Capt Robert Forsyth & his Owners, of the Town of Baltimore, Maryland, and on their own Risqué.. .or some trusty persons for them, he or they paying the freight for the said goods Ten P Ct on the Value thereof.…74 Thus “opened the earliest regular channel through which the Virginia government was enabled to exchange produce for war supplies.”75 But for a time “Van Bibber and Harrison” would have to await Virginia ships to transport the supplies which the copartnership was gathering for shipment. On 1776, July 19, “Agreeable to an order of the Hon. Privy Council, the DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE was solemnly proclaimed at the Capitol, the Courthouse, and the Palace, admidst the acclamation of the people” of Williamsburg and Virginia.76 On the 25th, Van Bibber wrote the Virginia Council acknowledging that he had before him their “favors” of April 25 and May 13, outlining the contents of vessels the Council had sent to his care,77 but that they had not yet arrived. He promised that if they should be fortunate enough to do so, the council could depend that they would have quick dispatch. He must have accepted the Council’s word that exports from Virginia were on their way. Van Bibber continued his letter that after receiving their “favor” of April 25 he had managed to gather and send with a letter “the 24th of May by Capt Isaac Caton in a Ten Gun Sloop bound to Charles Town So Carolina.. .fourteen thousand three hundred wt of Gun Powder.”78 And after their “favor” of April 13th, he had managed to do the same with a letter that on “the 13th June by Capt Martin & Shipped sixteen thousand three hundred wt of Powder this Martin is in a Ten Gun Brigantine and has a very considerable Cargo on board for the Province of Maryland.” Van Bibber ended his letter by saying that daily he hoped and expected to hear of its arrival.79 That very same day Van Bibber received notice from Harrison that “some Vessels 13 from Virginia and other Provinces are arrived..,” and so he wrote again that day to the same Council that on account and Risqué of said Colony Seven thous[and] five hundred pounds Gun Powder and Ninety Stand of Arms for which your have enclos’d Invoice & Bill of Lading We also intend to Ship on board a fine Bermuda built Boat Capt [Thomas] Davis four thous[and] pounds Gun Powder and Ninety Stand of [Arms] the whole of which sincerely wish safe to hand.80 Davis was Master of the Pluto and the goods were shipped on his boat “on Accot of the Colony of Virginia.” Pasture was Master of the Molly.81 “Van Bibber & Harrison” was doing quite well for its first month in business. In November 1776, Van Bibber’s bark The Baltimore Hero would take the English brigantine May within sight of and with no reaction from the Dutch Governor Johannes de Graaff. Though an “investigation” was made, the ship cleared port on the November 11. Van Bibber was “up to his ears in the arms traffic, and de Graaff knew it,”82 the Dutch knew it, the Americans knew it and the English knew it. As Nordholt said, “The assiduous inhabitants of the island hid behind a smokescreen of words, formulas, and false oaths.”83 In the midst of all of this, and only five days later, the American ship Andrew Doria entered Statia’s road flying a flag of thirteen red stripes and thirteen stars. The cannons of Fort Orange fired the typical salute to a ship flying the flag of a friendly nation. America had been recognized for the first time to be a sovereign nation. Van Bibber had at last “procured a settlement” for the state of affairs between Van Dam and the Convention of Virginia and in doing so had gained for the colonies a regular source and channel for munitions, until the immoral and permanent devastation of Statia by Admiral Rodney in February, 1781. In the spring of 1777 “the congress agent” Van Bibber would was found out, imprisoned for several weeks and fled to his native Maryland via St. Croix. On August 25, Richard Harrison would write The Maryland Council that his connection with Van Bibber had ceased when the latter fled Statia.84 With the fall of Statia, Madame Sarah Van Dam returned to England, but not without delay. Her ship was captured by HMS Belisarius which was in turn captured by the General Washington bound for France.85 It would appear that the only loss in the whole scheme was that of Virginia’s Treasurer. Years later, George Nicholas, acting executor of the Estate of Robert 14 Carter Nicholas, deceased, wrote the General Assembly of Virginia asking that the State of Virginia settle the account with John Norton & Sons, an account for which Robert Carter Nicholas had given his personal bond.86 The letter was forwarded to Claims as a reasonable request. We can only hope that it was taken care of. This is perhaps the last mention of the whole affair. Until Jameson’s article was published in The American Historical Review in 1903, Statia was forgotten and Isaac Van Dam, virtually unknown. Between 1903 and Barbara Tuchman’s popular history of America’s first salute, based for the most part on Jameson’s article, little original historical research seems to have been done on an island once called “the most valuable piece of real estate in the world.” Statia and Van Dam deserve a second salute. Endnotes and Bibliography 30 Dec 1774 ENDNOTES 1. Harry Alonzo Cushing, collector and editor, The Writings of Samuel Adams, III (1773−1777) (n.p.: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1907, reprinted in New York: Octagon Books, Inc., 1968, 200–202. 2. Ibid., 201. 3. Ibid., 190—191. 4. A transaction that would be posthumously settled by Abraham Van Bibber. 5. Lord Rodney to Lady Rodney. Footnoted in John Franklin Jameson, “St. Eustatius in the American Revolution,” American Historical Review, VIII, 1903, 695. Rodney must have liked these words. Four days after Statia fell he wrote about the same thing to the lords of the Admiralty in Greenwich, “I hope this Island will never be returned to the Dutch; it has been more detrimental to England than all the forces of her enemies, and alone has contributed to the continuance of the American war.” See Jan Willem Schulte Nordholt, The Dutch Republic and American Revolution, translated by Herbert H. Rowen (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1982), 46. 6. Lord Suffolk to the Dutch Ambassador, April 12, 1776, as found in Jameson, 688 n. 3. 7. For example, Barbara W. Tuchman in her The First Salute (New York: Alfred A. 15 Knopf, 1988) and Ivor Noël Hume, 1775: Another Part of the Field (New York: Knopf, 1966), 375, seem to have based their information on a mis-reading of Jameson, 688 of “The Rotterdam merchant already mentioned.…” Something else could be mentioned here. John Adams writing James Warren on October 12, 1775, remarks, I have inclosed [sic] a copy of a paper upon which I will make no Remark: But I leave you to you own Conjectures–only I must insist that it me mentioned to nobody…it may gratify and give some Relief to your Cares. The enclosure was a suggestion of exactly how the Continental Congress could steal powder from the West Indies: I would advise the continental Congress to make a general Sweep of all the Powder, at St. Eustatius, it may be first taken and then paid for afterwards as the Dutch refuse to sell it to us [emphasis mine]; I am well persuaded the whole of this Plan may be executed, and that near 3000 Blls of powder may be obtained in the Course of 3 or 4 months. (The Warren-Adams Letters, Being chiefly a correspondence among John Adams, Samuel Adams, and James Warren, vol. I [Boston: The Massachusetts Historical Society, 1917, reprinted in New York, New York: AMS Press Inc., 1972], 134—136). 8. Besides Van Dam, it should be noted that Abraham Van Bibber who will be discussed further in the present paper, was also from an old American family but indeed of Dutch descent. For further information on the Van Bibber Family, see George Johnston, History of Cecil County, Maryland, and the Early Settlements Around the Head of Chesapeake Bay and on the Delaware River With Sketches of Some of the Old Families of Cecil County (Elkton, Maryland: George Johnston, 1881, reprinted as Cecil County, A Reference Book of History, Business and General Information (Baltimore: County Directories of Maryland, Inc., 1956)) 186–189, 211, 216, 236, 247, 248, 250; and The Maryland Historical Magazine, March 1964, p. 80, from which the following is taken: His family were among the early settlers of Bohemia Manor in the Maryland Colony. Matthias was one time Justice of the County and his nephew James Van Bibber, a Sheriff. Matthias and his brothers Isaac and Henry were all natives of Holland. Matthias and Isaac were involved in merchandizing in Philadelphia before going to Maryland where they 16 were naturalized in 1702. Henry went to Cecil County in 1720. One of these three, most likely Isaac, was father of Isaac and Abra[ha]m , both commercial agents in the West Indies for the colonial government of Maryland. Agent Isaac’s grandson, Thomas E. Van Bibber was author of the popularly known, Flight into Egypt. Abraham Van Bibber was also a member of the Baltimore Committee. See William Bell Clark, Naval Documents of the American Revolution, Vols. 1–7 (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1964), 2:16. Abraham Van Bibber, generally styled “esquire” or “Gentleman” was born in Cecil County in 1741 and was of Dutch extraction. He appears to have settled in Baltimore County by 1780, in which year he completed the first of several purchases of land to make up a farm known as “Paradise.” This farm contained about 300 acres extending on both sides of Stony Run from Cold Spring Lane nearly to University Parkway in the center of the present city of Baltimore. Van Bibber married twice. First to Sarah Chew daughter of Benjamin Chew, and second, Mary Young, daughter of Samuel Young of Baltimore County. Mary Young was half sister of Robert Young Stokes who laid out the town of Harve de Grace on his own plantation. Abraham Van Bibber died at “Paradise” on August 23, 1805 at the age of 61. By his wife he had had one son Abraham, who died in Baltimore at the age of five (according to newspaper records). He left his estate to his two nephews, Andrew Van Bibber of Mathews County, Virginia and Washington Van Bibber of Maryland. 9. By the seventh day of March, 1776, he was “‘lately deceased’ of St. Eustacius,” Abraham Van Bibber to the Virginia Convention, St. Eustatia, March 7, 1776, “Virginia Legislative Papers,” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, vol. XV (October, 1907), 291. 10. Sarah Van Dam, “Letter to her Brother, The Reverend George Young,” November 4, 1784, private possession. 11. Indeed, the very transaction between Virginia and Van Dam was used by John J. McCusker, Money and Exchange in Europe and America, 1600–1775 (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, for the Institute of Early American History and Culture, Williamsburg, Virginia, 1978) Flume, Jameson, Tuchman, as well as 17 others. 12. Robert L. Scribner, ed., with the assistance of Brent Tarter, Revolutionary Virginia, The Road to Independence, I-VI (Charlottesville?: The University of Virginia Press for Virginia Independence Bicentennial Commission, 1977), 111:43 n. 4. 13. Ibid., n 7. See also II: 375–376. 14. Ibid., 111:4–5. 15. “Statia” was the affectionate name for the island. Other spellings include “Eustacius” and “Statius.” Except for quotations, this paper will use “Statia” and “St. Eustatius.” 16. “Letter of the Earl of Rochford” dated “Janry 26, 1775,” an enclosure in “Letter of Lord Suffolk to Sir Joseph York,” dated February 7, 1775, in Clark, 1:396; See also “Abstract of the most material Proceedings in this [British Admiralty] Department relative to North America,” Ibid., 393. 17. Ernest McNeill Eller, ed., The Chesapeake Bay in the American Revolution (Centreville, Maryland: Tidewater Publishers, 1981), 315–316. 18. Ibid. 19. James Curtis Ballagh, collector and ed. The Letters of Richard Henry Lee, vols. I & II. (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1911 and 1914, reprinted as a part of The Era of the American Revolution, Leonard W. Levy, ed., Da Capo Press, 1970), 1:138. 20. John Hatley Norton was not only the son of a prominent London merchant who could export British goods to neutral islands in the West Indies, but also the son-in-law of Robert Carter Nicholas, Treasurer of the Colony of Virginia. See Frances Norton Mason, ed., John Norton & Sons, Merchants of London and Virginia, The Dietz Press, second edition with Introduction by Dr[.] Samuel M. Rosenblatt, 1968. 21. Col. Thomas Newton, Jr., of Norfolk, Virginia was a son of Thomas Newton (1713−1794) and Amy Hutchings of Norfolk. Born May 15, 1742 and died September 11, 1807. He married Martha, daughter of Robert Tucker of Norfolk. Besides being one of the leading men of the Virginia of his day, he was also, at 18 many sessions, a member of the House of Burgesses for Norfolk County. He was a Patriot from the beginnings of the Revolution. Member of the Committee of Safety of the Borough of Norfolk 1775–76. He was in command of the Militia of the Borough and from 1780–81 one of the commissioners of supplies. Appointed to the commissioners of Admiralty in 1776. His son George Newton married Courtney Tucker Norton, daughter of Daniel Norton, brother of John Hatley Norton of Norfolk. For further information, see Virginius Newton, “Newton Family of Norfolk,” Genealogies of Virginia Families from The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, Baltimore:Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., 1981, 4:538–568 and Mason, 515–516. 22. George M. Curtis, III, “The Goodrich Family and the Revolution in Virginia, 1774–1776, The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, 84 (1976): 55. 23. Scribner, 111:206. 24. Ibid. 25. Curtis, 56. 26. Nordholt, 40. 27. Lord Suffolk to the Dutch Ambassador, May 31, 1776, as found in Jameson, 688 n. 3. 28. Nordholt, 39. Goodrich sailed directly (Curtis, 56) for Antigua. According to one of his depositions Goodrich “sells” £2,000 of bills or according to his deposition before Dunmore, deposits “the remainder of the cuntries money” (Van Dam says £2,000) with Van Dam. On the other hand, Goodrich says he sold £2,000 and deposited £500 with Van Dam. Someone is lying. Goodrich seems to have told his story as the audience demanded. Van Dam seems to have done the same, as did his bookkeeper and wife and numerous others. See below. Unfortunately, so many “histories” have been written using William Goodrich’s testimonies that it is all but impossible to piece together the details. 29. Goodrich in his deposition before Dunmore said that Bartram sent him the 1,BOOwt of powder “in a French bottom.” According to Jameson, Lord Suffolk wrote the British Ambassador April 12, 1776 to the Netherlands that “recently, having procured from a trader in Martinique and from a smuggling vessel belonging to Antigua more than 4,000 pounds of powder, he [Van Dam] had forwarded it to North Carolina in a Virginia vessel (Jameson, 688).” This is 19 undoubtedly the same as the 1,600, 1,800 and 750 pounds that Goodrich took on his Virginian vessel to Virginia after landing in North Carolina. 30. The order of William Goodrich’s comings and goings is different from that Curtis gives. What is so difficult about all that follows is that it is an interpretation of information provided by vow-breakers, spies, traitors, and liars. Curtis and others seem to have taken William’s sworn word for what took place, but William’s sworn word changed, depending before whom he was swearing. Add to this human memory and human error and things get even more confusing. See note 28 above. 31. Nordholt, 39. But note 29 above. 32. Ibid. 33. According to Goodrich’s letter to the Pennsylvania Council of Safety written from the Philadelphia Jail, written September 7, 1776 as found in Clark, 6:739. 34. Curtis, 57. 35. According to Goodrich’s letter to the Pennsylvania Council of Safety written from the Philadelphia Jail on September 7, 1776. See Clark 6:738. 36. Curtis, 57 37. Ibid. 38. Ibid., 58 39. Ibid. 40. Ibid. 41. Ibid., 59. 42. According to Goodrich’s letter to the Pennsylvania Council of Safety written from the Philadelphia Jail on September 7, 1776. See Clark, 6:739. 43. See Van Bibber’s letter of 28 March 1776 to William Lux, as found in “Virginia Legislative Papers,” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, XV:291, it was at this time that Goodrich got the £400 from Van Dam and told him that Dunmore was to get the rest of it. Goodrich wrote the Pennsylvania Committee in his September 7, 1776 letter that Van Dam had the powder ready which he [Van 20 Dam] sold “to a New York Sloop that was laying in the rhoad [sic].” See Clark 6:739. This was probably the ship of Mr. Knox of St. Thomas. 44. Isaac Van Dam to William Goodrich, December 6, 1775, Ibid., 2:1315. 45. “[Virginia] Committee of Safety To the Hobble [sic] The Delegates from Virginia in Congress at Philadelphia, Nov 11. 1775” in Scribner, IV:379–380. Also see Curtis, 61. Robert Carter Nicholas also sent a letter to the Virginia Delegates in the Continental Congress on November 25, regarding William Goodrich’s arrest. Some powder had been gotten by the time this letter. See Clark, 2:1137–38. Also see the letter of Edmund Pendleton to Richard H. Lee, Ibid., 2:1167. 46. Curtis, 60, 67. 47. Curtis, 60–67. One member of this committee was Thomas Newton, Jr. who had been a part of the Goodrich scheme from the beginning. 48. Clark, 3:704. See also 3:673, 661ff, 617ff. For a more comprehensive report see 3:579; 3:563ff. 49. Scribner, IV:135 n13-136. 50. Ibid., IV:67 n6—68. 51. Letter of Van Bibber to the Virginia Convention, St. Eustatius, March, 1776. A copy with the date March 11, was sent to the Virginia Committee of Safety, most likely through another channel in the event one was lost. See “Virginia Legislative Papers,” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, XV: 156–157. 52. See Curtis, 61–67. 53. Robert Walter Coakley, Virginia Commerce During the American Revolution [Charlottesville, Virginia]: Unpublished Master’s Thesis, 1949, 134. 54. Ibid., 134. 55. Scribner, V:426 n. 14. 56. Coakley, 134. 57. In his letter of March 7, 1776 to the Virginia Convention, Van Bibber says, “[I] shall not be able to render you any further [emphasis mine] service at the present.…” 21 58. Clark, 4:467. 59. “Virginia Legislative Papers,” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, XV:292. 60. Ibid. 61. Scribner, 5:398–399. 62. “Virginia Legislative Papers,” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, XVIII:64. 63. Ibid. 64. Nordholt, 39. 65. I am sure that this is “Sarah” Van Dam though no absolute proof has been found. The Sarah Van Dam who left Statia in 1784 had been married to a merchant of that island whose brother was Anthony Van Dam of New York City. No other brother could be possible except Richard Van Dam who seems o e died in Queens, New York about this time. There is no indication whatsoever that he was either a merchant not even in the West Indies. 66. Letter of Van Bibber to William Lux, from St. Eustatia, 28, 1776 as found in “Virginia Legislative Papers,” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, XV, 288—289. 67. The Earl of Dunmore to Earl of Dartmouth (No. 34), 6 December 1775-[18] February 1776, Dunmore off Norfolk, K. G. Davies, ed., Documents of the American Revolution, vol. XII (London: Irish Academic Press Ltd. 1976), 64. 68. 1776, January 9th, Letter Lord Dunmore to Dartmouth, Clark, 3:703. 69. Van Bibber to Lux Mar 28, 1776. 70. McCusker, 291–294. Interestingly enough, McCusker used the Deposition of William Goodrich, 31 October 1775 and the account of Goodrich with Isaac Van Dam 6 December 1775 to find the commercial rate of exchange in September of that year. Then it was £175. By the time Van Bibber arrived, we see that was now £188. 71. 10 Apr 1776 to Wm Lux, “Virginia Legislative Papers,” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, XV: 289—290. 22 72. Clark, 5:540. 73. Ibid. 74. Ibid. This was a printed form. Words here underlined were entered by hand. 75. Coakley, 135. 76. Mason, 394. 77. Clark, 5:1224. 78. Ibid. 79. Ibid. 80. Ibid. 81. Ibid., 1,224—25. 82. For a full account, see Nordholt, 39–41. 83. Ibid., 40–41. 84. Clark, 9:812–813. 85. According to her letter to her brother, Sarah Van Dam had been born in England. Most likely she had been raised on Montserrat as was her brother. (See note 10 above). 86. October 21, 1788. See Mason, 480–481. PRIMARY SOURCES CONSULTED Ballagh, James Curtis, collector and ed. The Letters of Richard Henry Lee, Vols. I and II. New York: The MacMillan Company, 1911 and 1914, reprinted as a part of The Era of the American Revolution, Leonard W. Levy, ed., Da Capo Press, 1970. Clark, William Bell. Naval Documents of the American Revolution, Vols. 1–9. Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1964. Cushing, Harry Alonzo, comp. and ed. The Writings of Samuel Adams, Vol. III. n.p.: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1907, reprinted, New York: Octagon Books, Inc., 1968. 23 Davies, K. G., ed. Documents of the American Revolution, Vols. X, XI, XII. London: Irish Academic Press Ltd., 1976. Mason, Prances Norton, ed. John Norton & Sons, Merchants of London and Virginia. The Dietz Press, second edition with Introduction by Dr[.] Samuel M. Rosenblatt, 1968. Scribner, Robert L., ed., with the assistance of Brent Tarter. Revolutionary Virginia, The Road to Independence, Vols. II, III, IV, V. [Charlottesville?] :The University of Virginia Press for Virginia Independence Bicentennial Commission, 1977. Warren-Adams Letters, Being chiefly a correspondence among John Adams, Samuel Adams, and James Warren Vols. I and II. Boston: The Massachusetts Historical Society, 1917, reprinted in New York, New York: AMS Press Inc., 1972. Van Dam, Sarah. “Letter to her brother [The Reverend George Young, then in England]dated Nov. 4, 1784. “Virginia Legislative Papers,” Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, Vols. XV (October, 1907), XVIII. SECONDARY SOURCES CONSULTED Coakley, Robert Walter. Virginia Commerce During the American Revolution. [Charlottesville, Virginia]: Unpublished Master’s Thesis, 1949, 130–136. Curtis, George M., ITT. “The Goodrich Family and the Revolution in Virginia, 1774–1776, The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 84, 1976, 49–74. Eller, Ernest McNeill, ed. The Chesapeake Bay in the American Revolution. 24 Centreville, Maryland: Tidewater Publishers, 1981. Fowler, William W. Rebels Under Sail. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1976. Harrison, Fairfax. “The Goodriches of Isle of Wight County, Virginia,” Tyler’s Quarterly, II (October, 1920), 130— 131. Hartog, 3. History of St. Eustatius. Aruba, Netherlands Antilles: U. S. Bicentennial Committee of the Netherlands, 1976. Hume, Ivor Noël. 1775: Another Part of the Field. New York: Knopf, 1966. Jameson, John Franklin. “St. Eustatius in the American Revolution,” American Historical Review, VIII, 1903, 683—670. Johnston, George. History of Cecil County, Maryland, and the Early Settlements Around the Head of Chesapeake Bay and on the Delaware River With Sketches of Some of the Old Families of Cecil County, Elkton, Maryland: George Johnston, 1881, reprinted as Cecil County, A Reference Book of History, Business and General Information. Baltimore: County Directories of Maryland, Inc., 1956. Mays, David John. Edmund Pendleton, 1721–1803, A Biography. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, Vol. 2, 1952. McCusker, John 3. Money arid Exchange in Europe and America, 1600–1775. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, for the Institute of Early American History and Culture, Williamsburg, Virginia, 1978. Newton, Virginius. “Newton Family of Norfolk,” Genealogies of Virginia Families from The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography. Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., Inc., 1981, Vol. 4, 538–568. 25 Nordholt, Jan Willem Schulte. The Dutch Republic and American Revolution, trans. by Herbert H. Rowen. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1982. Stephenson, 0. W. “The Supply of Gunpowder in 1776,” American Historical Review, Vol. 30, no. 2, (January, 1925). Tuchman, Barbara W. The First Salute. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1988. Wertenbaker, Thomas J. Norfolk, Historic Southern Port. Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press, 1931, Second Edition, ed. by Marvin W. Schiegel, 1962. 26 Index A Abraham, 4, 8, 9 accidents, 5 account, 8, 9, 10 accounts, 10 Adams, 1 Admiral, 5 admiralty, 9 agent, 1, 8, 9 agreement, 1, 10 aid, 1, 4, 5, 9 Alexandrian, 4 America, 6 American, 1, 2 Americans, 2 ammunition, 3, 6 Annapolis, 2 Anthony, 2 Antigua, 5, 6, 9 April, 1, 2, 3 Archibald, 1 arms, 1 Aylett, 9 i B C Baltimore, 4, 8 baptized, 2 barrels, 3, 6 Bartlett, 10 Bartrand, 5 Beall, 4 Beverly, 1 Beverwyck, 2 Bibber, 4, 8, 9, 10 Bills, 5 bills, 4, 5 Blair, 5, 6, 10 blunderbusses, 6 Bordeaux, 6 Boston, 1, 2 Bowby, 10 Bowley, 4, 8 Branch, 7 bridge, 6 Britain, 3 British, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10 bullets, 6 burgess, 4 Burgesses, 2 Burwell, 3 bushels, 1 Capital, 3, 6 cargo, 1, 9 Carolina, 6 Carter, 3, 4 Cartridge, 3 Chestertown, 2 Christ, 2 Church, 2 citizens, 2 Claase, 2 clock, 7, 8 Colins, 3 Collins, 3 Colonies, 2, 4 colonies, 2, 4 colonists, 7 Colony, 3, 4, 9 colony, 1, 3, 8 Commissary, 9 Committee, 1, 3, 8, 9, 10 Company, 4 Concord, 3 Congress, 2 Continental, 2 Contraband, 4 Convention, 1, 3, 8, 9, 10 correspondence, 1 Council, 2, 7 ii croosers, 7 D Dam, 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 daughter, 10 death, 2, 5 December, 1, 2, 8 Declaration, 2 Dixon, 9, 10 Dolphin, 9, 10 Downing, 5 Dunmore, 3, 7, 8 Dutch, 1, 2, 3, 4, 10 E Earl, 3, 4 Edmund, 9 Elizabeth, 3, 6, 7 enemies, 1 England, 1, 2 English, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 Essex, 1 Europe, 1, 4 Eustacius, 5 Eustatius, 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10 F February, 1, 9 foreign, 4 Fowey, 3 France, 6, 8 Francis, 3 French, 4, 5, 6 G Gazette, 3 Gebroedes, 10 Geddes, 2 George, 2 Goodrich, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Goodriches, 7, 9, 10 Governor, 2, 3, 7, 8 Guinea, 6 Gunpowder, 3 gunpowder, 4, 6, 8, 9 H Hancock, 1 Harrison, 4 Harvey, 5 Hatley, 4 Hendrick, 10 iii Henry, 3 Holland, 8 Hooe, 4 June, 2, 3, 4, 10 K I importation, 2, 4, 8, 10 Imports, 3 Independence, 2 Indian, 5 instructions, 7, 9 investigation, 8 Isabelle, 2 Island, 6 island, 1, 2, 9, 10 J Jail, 7 James, 1, 3 January, 4, 8 Jenifer, 4 Jennings, 5 Jersey, 2 Johan, 5, 6 Johannes, 10 John, 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 Jonathan, 1 July, 4, 5 Knox, 6 L lading, 2 laws, 2, 8, 10 Lee, 1, 3, 4 letter, 1, 2, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10 Lexington, 3 Lieutenant, 3 Lightfoot, 3 linens, 10 London, 2, 4 Lord, 1, 7 loyalty, 7 Lux, 4, 8, 9, 10 M Magazine, 3 Magdalen, 3 Manhattan, 2 March, 1, 3, 8, 9, 10 marriage, 7 iv Martinique, 4, 5, 6 Maryland, 2, 3, 9 Matthew, 5 May, 2, 3 Mears, 1 merchant, 1, 2, 4 merchants, 3, 5 Morris, 4 Moses, 1 munitions, 2, 3, 5, 6 Murray, 3 musket, 6 N Nansemond, 6 native, 3 Nelson, 3 neutral, 4 news, 1, 3 Newspaper, 1 Newton, 4, 5, 6 Nicholas, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 Norfolk, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 North, 6 Norton, 4 November, 3, 8 O Ocracoke, 6 October, 2, 6, 7 Otter, 7 Overseers, 1 P Pamlico, 6 paper, 1, 3 partnership, 4 Paspotank, 7 Pasquotank, 6 Patriots, 8 patriots, 7, 8 Paul, 2 Peggy, 2 Pennsylvania, 7 Perkins, 1 Philadelphia, 2, 3, 4, 7 Phripp, 5 Pierre, 5 pilot, 3 Pintard, 2 plantation, 6 pledge, 7 Pondt, 10 port, 1, 9 Portsmouth, 5, 6 v powder, 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10 President, 9 prison, 5 prisoners, 7 Privy, 2 prize, 9 profits, 5 purchase, 3, 5 R raid, 3 Randolph, 9 rebellion, 1 rebels, 1 Resolution, 3 Revere, 2 Reverend, 2 Revolution, 1, 2 Richard, 3, 4, 5 Rip, 2 Ripse, 2 Ritchie, 1 Robert, 1, 3, 4, 6, 9 Rochford, 4 Rodney, 1 Roebuck, 9 S Safety, 1, 7, 8, 9 sailcloth, 10 Sally, 1 Sampson, 1 Samuel, 1, 4 Sarah, 2 Scarborough, 2 schooner, 1, 3, 6 Scot, 7 Scottish, 3 Shedden, 6, 7 Ship, 6 ship, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9 shipment, 9, 10 ships, 7, 8 Shrewsbury, 2 Smithy, 9 Statia, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9 Sterling, 4, 10 sterling, 10 Stewart, 2 sufferers, 1 Suffolk, 4 Susannah, 10 T Taylor, 5 vi tea, 2 Thomas, 3, 4, 6 Tories, 8 Tory, 8 trafficking, 5 Treasurer, 3, 4, 6 tyrannical, 1 widow, 2, 10 Wight, 8 William, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Williamsburg, 3, 4, 6 Willing, 4 Y U York, 1, 2, 4, 6 Young, 2 Upshaw, 1 V Van, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Virginia, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10 Virginian, 9 Virginians, 2, 3 voyage, 6, 7 W wagons, 6 war, 3, 4, 6 weather, 1 West, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9 Whiting, 3 vii