#destinationdumfries

By: Lisa Timmerman, Executive Director

The Weems-Botts Museum will be opening their doors soon to safely welcome visitors as we enter Phase 3. One of our treasures, our framed and donated lace tatting, is ready to take the spotlight again! But what is tatting? Why do we sell a Lace Tatting Kit in our Gift Shop? And why are doilies so ubiquitous?

Like crochet and knitting, tatting is a type of needlework that uses thread and tools (shuttle, needle, crochet hook) to create intricate and decorative knotwork. While this type of work could have evolved from netting and ropework, we find tatting popular throughout Europe and Great Britain in the 19th century with different names: frivolite in France, knotting in England,  Schiffchenarbeit in Germany, and tatting in America. People used tatting to either accent an item (such as our 19th century petticoat with lace tatting on bottom – not on display!) or create delicate pieces, such as doilies.

 Many reading this article may already know or could easily recognize tatting thanks to the surge of popularity it experienced in the 1930s-1950s and then again in the 1970s. It was popular throughout the Victorian era with Eleonore Riego de la Branchardiere publishing numerous needlework manuals/guides, such as Golden Stars in Tatting and Crochet, 1861, currently available via Project Gutenberg. Mlle Riego de la Branchardiere started with some reassurances, “The following Designs are formed by a very simple combination of Tatting and Crochet, the more elaborate style of both Works being avoided, so that any Lady with a knowledge of the first rules of each Art will be able to accomplish the patterns without the least difficulty, the Stars and Diamonds being made in Tatting and afterwards worked round with loops of chain Crochet.” Thank goodness! Let us check in with an anonymous author who included a chapter on tatting in the 1844 publication, The Ladies’ Work-Table Book; Containing Clear and Practical Instructions in Plain and Fancy Needlework, Embroidery, Knitting, Netting, and Crocheting. This author boldly declared the purpose and high importance of needlework specifically aimed at the female population, “If it be true that “home scenes are rendered happy or miserable in proportion to the good or evil influence exercised over them by woman—as sister, wife, or mother”—it will be admitted as a fact of the utmost importance, that every thing should be done to improve the taste, cultivate the understanding, and elevate the character of those “high priestesses” of our domestic sanctuaries. The page of history informs us, that the progress of any nation in morals, civilization, and refinement, is in proportion to the elevated or degraded position in which woman is placed in society; and the same instructive volume will enable us to perceive, that the fanciful creations of the needle, have [iv]exerted a marked influence over the pursuits and destinies of man.” The instructions for tatting included open stitches, stars (a popular theme), and common tatting edges. This author concluded by reinforcing their opinion that needlework contained a Christian imperative and service, a way for women to “endeavor” and develop their “moral goodness”, “We were not sent into this world to flutter through life, like the gaudy butterfly, only to be seen and admired.”

(Source:  Project Gutenberg Ebook of Golden Stars in Tatting and Crochet by Eleonore Riego de la Branchardiere)

However, needlework and crafted items, such as doilies, should not be viewed as crafted (and useful!) curiosities only. While women’s magazines published many ideas, guides, patterns, etc. in the early 20th century, artists also used these same objects in more meaningful expressions. Horace Pippin survived but sustained an injury during WWI that limited the mobility of his arm. Using small canvasses and drawing upon his experiences, knowledge, and imagination, his work gained national attention and the Museum of Modern Art in New York exhibited his items in their “Masters of Popular Painting: Exhibitions of Modern Primitives of Europe and America”. Supporters such as Robert Carlen and Albert Barnes helped boost his popularity through solo exhibitions and purchases. According to scholar Lynda Roscoe Hartigan, “Equally crucial is valuing these diverse subjects for their autobiographical, regional, and cultural under- pinnings—underpinnings that link them irrevocably to Pippin’s more celebrated paintings of war, spiritual harmony and African-American life”. Notably, Pippin painted numerous doilies in his artwork, whether draped across seating furniture or tables. His paintings featured an impressive depth and scope – whether a reflection/recollection on the war, social injustices, slavery, or famous events such as the execution of John Brown. He remarked, “The pictures . . . come to me in my mind and if to me it is a worthwhile picture I paint it . . . I do over the picture several times in my mind and when I am ready to paint it I have all the details I need." Just studying the doilies alone show his attention and mastery to still life and detail.

So why are doilies ubiquitous? We could discuss reasons ranging from potential cost to efficiency and décor, but doilies are definitely still a “thing”. While we could joke about its function as a glorified coaster, it is hard not to be excited when opening a family chest and discovering these delightful items crafted by our families and friends.

By: Lisa Timmerman, Executive Director

Mrs. Joanne Barron (1955-2023) served as the Executive Director of Historic Dumfries Virginia, Inc. & The Weems-Botts Museum from 2011-2017. Her hospitality, commitment to education, and passion for history guided our organization as she breathed life into our mission statement by making local history accessible to everyone.

(Tea in Merchant Park with Mrs. Joanne Barron, 2013)

In 2012, Morgan, Mangold, an intern for The Weems-Botts Museum, interviewed Dumfries Town Historian & Local Legend Lee Lansing. In a draft version of her article, Ms. Mangold sat down with both Lansing and Barron, recording their interaction.

“Mrs. Joann Barron remembers fondly that, “Mister Lansing, when our Museum became a Historic Site, it was in very bad shape. And Mr. Lansing and his son [renovated it]; we’ve got pictures in the Museum of them re-doing everything.” As Lansing recalls “after we were able to buy after the county was able to buy the building at that time, uh, I was able to get in there and work and do some of the work…to bring it back up to where it should be.” Though the buildings are absolutely beautiful pieces of history now, poison ivy seemed to be a serious problem at one time and when remembering that tale, Mr. Lansing and Mrs. Barron chuckled at each other.    

In being an architect, the Weems-Botts Museum was not the only building Mr. Lansing’s name can be attributed to. The United Methodist Church of Dumfries right cross the street from the museum was built by none other than himself. “That’s all my design. The whole part of the church. All the furniture and everything is my design,” he brags lovingly. Though the furniture is beautiful and the place of worship magnificent, the suspended cross is the star. As Mrs. Barron tells, “when my husband [Vonn Barron] was a little boy he said it was like a miracle, you’d look at this cross and you couldn’t figure out how it was up there. Because you can’t see anything.” As Lansing explains, “when I first designed it. I had the cross supported from the floor. And we came up with some special types of piano wire that we can hang it from the roof. So that’s what we [did] we hung it from the roof. You cant see what holds it up there.” It is a miracle thought up by a genius.”

This interaction is truly remarkable as Mangold captured an intimate and wonderful exchange between two friends who dedicated their knowledge, experience, and passion for history to the Town of Dumfries.

Under Barron’s leadership in 2011, The Weems-Botts Museum won a nomination for the Virginia Association of Museum’s “Virginia’s Top 10 Endangered Artifacts” program for our Traveling Colonial Wood Truck on display in the exhibit room. “The fact that over 100,000 votes were cast by the public for all the nominations confirms that historic preservation matters to the citizens of the commonwealth,” Margo Carlock, Executive Director of the Virginia Association of Museums stated - “The Top Ten Winners highlight not only the unique stories found in collections across Virginia, but also the challenges that accompany preserving these artifacts.” Barron’s perseverance and commitment in this effort helped promote awareness of our small museum and showcase our treasured artifacts.

Barron’s accomplishments and achievements as Executive Director could be seen in her active advocacy for living history programs at the museum. From hosting Prince William Resolves signing events to holding Victorian teas to constantly inviting the public to engage in colonial and Civil War interpretations in Merchant Park, she provided a passionate and fascinating voice for all aspects of historical life in Dumfries. Her Ghost Walks, Charter Day celebrations, colonial camps, living history weekends (just to name a few), brought friends and families together in Merchant Park, truly making Dumfries a destination for Prince William County. It would take countless pages to review and describe the legacies and impacts we feel from her persistent aim to put us on the map. Whether you came for tea or ghosts, Barron was always there, ready to greet you with a smile and warmly welcome you to the Historic Dumfries Virginia family.

Note: Have memories you would like to share about Joanne Barron and the organization? Please send us an email ([email protected]) or call (703-221-221) so that we can continue to document the history of our organization! To see how the organization has grown and evolved from Barron’s tenure, check out our March newsletter here.

By: Lisa Timmerman, Executive Director

Leafing through a person’s business ledgers can yield surprisingly rich information regarding a person’s societal networks and obligations. In 1982, Robert Hurry gifted The Lee Lansing Research Library with an annotated copy of his research and transcriptions on the papers of Hugh Pilkington and William Leake with funding from the National Endowment for the Humanities Youth grant. Originally from St. Mary’s County working as a tobacco planter, William Leake emigrated to Dumfries hoping to engage in the thriving tobacco market driving Dumfries fortunes in the 18th century. Moving to Dumfries at such a peak time in the prosperity of the town (notably from the labor of the enslaved persons forced to work in the tobacco fields and warehouses), Leake provides an interesting perspective as he was never able to obtain the success of other wealthier families.

Reasons to change markets from Maryland to Virginia varied from soil exhaustion from tobacco farming in the mid-17th century to Maryland’s reputation of having worse tobacco as Virginia enacted and heavily regulated their crops. William Leake paid his first parish and county levy to Dettingen in 1747 after making a few trips to Dumfries. He obtained permission to travel on 08/23/1745, notable for the promise to behave himself:

St. Marys County The Bearer Willm Lake is a Marry’d Man in this County and No ways Indebt that I hear of but willing to remove into Virginia tis desired to be permitted to travail to Prince William County & back again unmolested he behaving himself well – Given und. My hand this 23d Day of Augt 1745 Gilbt Ireland       To all Christian Peoples to whom these presents Shall Come – Greetings

By 03/01/1747/8, him and his two sons worked for Philemon Waters, a local ordinary (tavern) operator and planter. Besides for beating out the barley (the grain from chaff with use of a flair or pole), plowing, helping with fodder, and digging wheat, Waters paid the Leake family for the various phases of preparing tobacco for market.

Philimon Waters Dr to Wm Lake

For my boys helpen to beat out Barley

To my Self and my two boys a day Strip:en

To my boy and Beast going with your man

To prizeing and filling up your houshed

To filling it up heading and fixing ye day that it was Rold

To Strippen of your Tobacco

And a quart of Rum

To 3 days work me an my two boys

To 1 day of mine and my two boys half a day

To 3 peck of Seed corn Lent

To 1 of my boys a day handing of Toba and plowing

To paking of 2hhh of Tobacco

To me a days work I an my two boys heaving your Cascks of Tobacco a bout an toting to the other house

To prizeing of 3 hhd of Tobacco an helping to fix them

To Roling of 1 hhd

Stripping was the process of removing tobacco leaves by hand from stalks of cured tobacco. To help maintain quality of tobacco during transportation, people prized/pressed the tobacco by packing it into a cask. Heading and fixing referred to the sealing of the cask while handling indicated the practice of gathering into small bundles cured, loose tobacco leaves, tying the ‘hand’ with a leaf. Although I omitted prices above, it is interesting to note that the amount paid for use of the two sons was equivalent to the beasts.

(Smith, Anthony. A New and Accurate Chart of the Bay of Chesapeake...1776, ink & watercolor on paper. Museum of Early Southern Decorative Arts, MESDA Collections, Ann P. and Thomas A. Gray MESDA Purchase Fund)

By 09/22/1760, Leake identified living near Cockpit Point. Based on the available records, Leake never owned land in Virginia, instead renting. Given the emphasis on the creature’s poor appearance and state of health, it is possible Leake wrote the below hoping no one would claim the animal. Virginia’s law required anyone finding and seizing stray livestock to give public notice before assuming ownership.

This is to Give Notice to all persons to whom it may Concern that I the Subscriber have taken up a middle Siz’d Grey mare Somewhat flea bitten Branded on the Near Buttock this LC She has A mark round her upper Lip which may be Supposed was cut with a line Shas Got a very Sore Back whoever owns the Said mare may have her by Applying to the Subscriber Living n Cockpit pint Neck near Dumfries

Leake also earned income for shoes, although this could be considered supplemental. Dumfries families hired him to craft and cobble shoes for the entire community, from planters to the enslaved. Other sources of income included squirrel heads. Officials and planters considered squirrels and crows to be nuisances and placed bounties on their heads and scalps. If the person did not meet a quota, they could be fined. Although not included in this blog, Leake paid and received settlements in fish and oyster transactions as well as coin and tobacco.

The 09/06/1761 record below referred presumably to William Lane’s enslaved person and a ‘young weaned pig’. ‘Coring’ can be read as ‘according’.

Mr William Leake I have Sent the Negro for that Shote and I Sent you Twenty Shillings a Coring to promise and you will much or Blige your friend

William Lane

Hurry believed Leake’s business papers were incomplete due to Leake’s possible illiteracy. He argued there should be more transactions, but Leake may have arranged them face to face without actual paperwork. Although considered a “small planter”, Leake’s papers indicate that fortunes could vastly differ in one historic label/category as Leake was unable to solely rely upon Dumfries tobacco market as his total source of income. Instead, he embraced as many opportunities as he could from seafood to scalps.

Note: This Saturday, 10/15/2022, is the Town of Dumfries Fall Festival! Starting at 11pm, you can celebrate the wonderful weather and enjoy treats and seasonal festivities in Garrison Park. From a beer garden to live music, the Town of Dumfries offers a variety of activities. Afterwards, scare yourself silly at our 9pm Ghost Walks – 5 tickets remain for this historic tradition that only comes once a year. Click here for more details!

By: Lisa Timmerman, Executive Director

Tobacco Warehouse Inspectors Matthew Harrison and John Chancellor were unhappy. Using the only platform available to them, they filed a petition with the General Assembly of Virginia sometime after 1782 to address grievances regarding their salaries. Legislative petitions were crucial tools for Virginians, as legislative petitions handled everything from maintaining a tavern to divorce (see our previous blog on the fascinating divorce case here) and included both personal and public reasons and explanations. Most importantly, the right to petition was granted to everyone regardless of race, sex, and class. Emancipated persons, free persons of color, enslaved persons and women filed petitions, although they were not allowed to vote.

While the inspection station built near Dumfries brought more people and businesses to the town, it also caused conflict as planters did not necessarily want their hogshead of tobacco inspected. A hogshead weighed nearly 1,000 pounds and it was not uncommon for planters to order enslaved persons to pack them with poor quality tobacco or even stones before exportation. Sir William Gooch passed “An Act for amending the staple of tobacco, and for preventing Frauds in his Majesty’s Customs” during the May 1730 session of the General Assembly. “And be it further enacted, That when any inspector shall bring his own tobacco to the warehouse whereof he is an inspector, the same shall not be passed or stamped, unless it be first viewed, examined, and found good, sound, and merchantable, according to the directions of this act, by the other two inspectors, attending at such warehouse…” Gooch also worked to prevent corruption. “And to the end, the said inspectors may not be induced, from any private advantage, to stamp or receive any bad or unmerchantable tobacco; and may have a sufficient encouragement and compensation for discharging the said office, with integrity and application.”

(Lee Lansing. Typical Tobacco Inspection Station - Packing & Repacking, Located at Quantico Warehouse on Dumfries Harbor, ca. 1750. This is on display along with other Dumfries miniatures he created and graciously donated to HDVI)

The petition below provides a more unique perspective as we meet two disgruntled inspectors instead of the usual frustrated planters. Mix in the Revolutionary War, and we have quite an interesting battle as these petitioners also had to keep in mind that Prince William County championed non-exportation and non-importation in the Prince William Resolves (an event that took place close to the museum!)

“That your Petitioners were duly nominated and appointed inspectors of Tobacco at Dumfries warehouse for the term of inspection from October 1781 until October 1782 when the salary allowed to them respectively by the law then in force entitled “An Act to amend an act entitled an act to amend the several acts of assembly respecting the inspection of tobacco” was five thousand five hundred weight of tobacco. That afterwards in the [text struck] 1782 they understood from a member of the honorable General Assembly that by an act passed in the October Session 1781 instead of the salary in tobacco abovementioned they were to receive each sixty pounds in specie with which your petitioners were not dissatisfied – That they were also furnished by the same Gentleman with certain extracts from the last mentioned act, on which they retired for the certain salary of sixty pounds each, copies of which extracts are hereunto subjoined to which they by leave transfer. That it was not till August 1782 when the Act of Assembly first reached this port of the commonwealth (the term of inspection being then almost expired) and came to the hands of your petitioners who on reading it were surprised to find that the funds provided for the payment of their salaries might be inadequate and of consequence that their salaries were not so certain as they had been led to believe. For they expected that the specie salary stood on the same term with regard to certainty and security with the former tobacco salaries or as they were before the war –

That in fact at the close of the inspection the funds were very considerably deficient after making the previous disbursement required by law, only five hundred [text struck] hogsheads being inspected which yielded the sum of thirty seven pounds ten shillings to each of your petitioners leaving a balance of twenty two pounds ten shillings due to them respectively, which in justice ought to be paid as otherwise your petitioners would not have accepted the office –

Your Petitioners further shew that for several years preceding the war the average number of hogsheads of tobacco inspected at their warehouse was fifteen hundred [struck: at least] and that the small number that has been inspected during the war has been a consequence of it, (trade being almost totally obstructed or its channel altered) a great deal of tobacco being carried from this part of the commonwealth uninspected to Maryland and Pennsylvania in by land. That in future on the return of the blessing of peace there is reason to believe the usual quantity of tobacco will be brought to this inspection in which case the present funds will not only be sufficient to defray the charges of the inspection but will produce nearly as much more to the public testimony – That your petitioners have in their hands a considerable sum of money collected on the duty of six shillings per hogshead on exportation out of which the balances before mentioned may conveniently be paid, and the precedent will not be attended with any bad consequence as in future such a thing will not be requested for the reasons already given –

That your petitioners offered to settle their accounts with the auditors in April last according to law, at the same time desiring to be allowed what in justice was their due, who refused to do anything in the affair until it was submitted to the consideration of the Legislature and observed that many inspectors were in the same circumstances – Wherefore it is the prayer of your petitioners that all and singular the premises may be taken into consideration and that on settlement with the auditors they may be allowed to detain as much of the money by them collected on account of the duty of six shillings per hogshead on exportation as will make up their balances of salaries or that such other relief may be given as shall be deemed just and expedient and your Petitioners as in duty bound shall ever pray &c.”

They listed their salaries at each warehouse. 30 pounds: Falls of Patawomeck; 40 pounds: Colchester, Alexandria, Aquia; 60 pounds: Dumfries, Quantico. Although the petition did not indicate whether they received their promised dues, we do have an intriguing follow-up from 1976. Mr. George H.S. King contacted Lee Lansing regarding his ancestor on 08/16/1976.

“My ancestor, John Chancellor, Esq. (1726-1815), was Inspector of Tobacco at Dumfries immediately after the Revolutionary War. Bonds for his office as such are of record and I have other material which is not of record at PrWm…I have seen a number of buildings in Dumfries now long gone. I took a few pictures of course Mrs. Morton took more and now I can’t find all of mine as I have given away the pictures and my eyes are so dim, I can’t find the negatives if indeed I have them! There was a Mrs. Brawner in Dumfries who either had a store or her husband had one and either she or he had Chancellor-Wroe-Weedon connections, who had a large batch of interesting old papers which I saw. Because there were Washingtons in them, she thought them of great value and was very cautious about them and I never returned to see them. I let a great many things drop as it appeared I was the only person in the family truly interested.”

We hope Lee Lansing informed Mr. King that Virginia may still be deficient in their promised payments.

Note: Thanks to the Potomac Shores Trails Committee, our Cherry Hill Historical Trail walks start this Saturday (09/24)! The Potomac Shores Trails Committee delightfully invites us to their community every fall and spring to discuss the history of Cherry Hill and the region as we take in breathtaking scenery and often curious animals! More info can be found here. All seasonal programs, including Ghost Walks, can be found here.

By: Lisa Timmerman, Executive Director

As summer vacations wind down, we join the local Works Progress Administration (WPA) agent Susan R. Morton in 1937 as she visited the Fleetwood Site near Nokesville, Virginia. The Historical Inventory Project asked workers to record the less well-known homes and workplaces of ordinary citizens, which differed from the Historic American Buildings Survey aim to record and document the significant architectural and historic landmarks. WPA field workers took to the streets across Virginia looking for these less significant sites and their work greatly varied. Morton usually recorded every scrap of information she could find, from local ghost stories to deed books to tombstones. Follow her down the path and imagine the site as she brings it to life with her impressive storytelling abilities.

(Virginia Historic Landmarks Commission Survey Form: Fleetwood, PWC, File no. 76-8, 1959)

“John Gibson bought of John Tayloe 724 acres in the year 1798, this being part of the Brenton tract. There is a record of “quit rents” on this property being paid by Alexander Ball, in the early part of the 18th century, but nothing else can be found concerning the ownership prior to Col. Gibson (In spite of the fact that he was not of age at the time of this transfer date, it appears the same one of Orange, Virginia). Colonel Gibson left it in trust for his wife, and she in turn left it to her trusty slave, William Chinn. At his death it was sold by E.E. Meredith, Special Commissioner, to E.S. Bear. There have been several deeds of trust in the meantime, but no transfers out of the family. The heirs of Kate S. Bear, her three children, Harry E. Bear, Clifford Bear and Carolyn Read are the present owners.

“Fleetwood” stands on a hill with Cedar Run at the foot, and it can be seen for miles around the fertile countryside. Formerly there was a terraced garden, compost almost entirely of roses, which extended from the house to the water’s edge. In those days the road led in another direction, and what now appears to be the back of the house was then the front entrance. There are some find old trees left, a few coffeeberry, locusts and oaks, but the garden is gone, and turned into a pig pen, but in spite of that there are a few old roses which persist in coming into flower each spring to tell of past glories.

There are but a few of the old outbuildings left, a smoke house and one cabin, but there are ruins of numerous other outbuildings.

The house was once plastered over and painted white. It had fine old Venetian blinds, and a lovely entrance. It still has dignity. The interior woodwork is very fine, especially in the hall and drawing room. The windows at either end of the second floor are rather unusual, in that there is half a sash on each side of the chimney.

Colonial John Gibson was a rising young lawyer of Dumfries, and with the turning tide of population towards the middle and upper end of the country, came to this spot and added the large part of the house to the small wing then composing the old place. This old wing was known as the “Office Wing”. It was in this wing that Jack Gibson was burned to death in a drunken sleep, as he lay on the hearth rug, which it is supposed was ignited by a spark. Naturally this tragic death would give rise to the story that the wing was haunted. It was in this same wing that Jack Muschett, a nephew of Mrs. Gibson met an early and tragic death. The Gibson’s had no children, and following the death of Colonel Gibson, and the nephews, Mrs. Gibson was left alone. She was a Miss Muschett, of Dumfries, one of the Muschetts of “Rose Hill,” a family of Scotch merchants who were very prominent there. She was also very proud of an ancestor who had fought at Culloden. She was a character much beloved in that section, and was known as “Aunt Fanny” to her friends. “Fleetwood” was the scene of much hospitality, and was one of the noted homes in the enviorns of Brentsville.

After the War between the States, which had caused great devastation on this place, Mrs. Gibson was very poor, and at least became entirely dependent upon the labors of a faithful servant, William Chinn, a former slave (The Gibsons were large slave owners) who had refused to leave her. He found work wherever he could, and managed to keep things going until Mrs. Gibson’s death. She willed the place to him, Rev. Mr. Towles, the rector of the Church at Brenstville., and Haymarket being a witness to the will. William Chinn never lived in the main part of the house, as he said he did not think it “fitting.”

Colonel Gibson, his wife, and the two nephews are buried about four hundred yards southwest of the house. There is only one grave in the enclosure that has an inscription. The walled enclosure is now almost completely filled with a clump of poplar trees, lilacs and other shrubs.

“Sacred to the remains of Col. John Gibson. Here rests the Remains of John Gibson, formerly of the County of Orange. Settled in the County of Prince William, in the year 1807, aged 21 years, Son of John and Ann Gibson of the County of Orange, Virginia, who departed this life September 21st, 1846, in the 62nd year of his age.”

Informants: Mrs. H.B. Hibbs, Grant Avenue, Manassas, Virginia; Mrs. Celestine Brown, Nokesville, Virginia; Miss Maud Ewell, Haymarket, Virginia.

PWC Court Records: Deed Book Y, folio 359; Deed Book 33, folio 462; Deed Book 3, folio 298.”

Architectural Building Notes: Rectangular with cellar, two stories with attic noted as ½ story, gabled roof, three chimneys, plain wooden cornices, 19 windows – 15 panes – 8x19, some slats & Venetian blinds, large semi-enclosed portico now used as front entrance with a former piazza on opposite side, Doric columns, 12 large and 12 small rooms with 10 ½ feet ceilings, winding walnut balusters and rail with Wall of Troy decoration on woodwork, papered walls with wainscoting in drawing, uneven wide floors, two very fine & beautifully carved mantels, assessment: in bad repair, but could be restored to original beauty.”

Our files on the Gibson family includes Frances B. Muschett Gibson’s will written in November 1872. She desired to be buried next to her husband at Fleetwood noting she wanted a “marble slab” for her grave cover. Some other notable and interesting object mentions include portraits of Col. John Gibson, her portrait, a piano chair stool and music, large black lace shawl, mourning ring, gold watch, thermometer, silver tumbler, and snuff box. I did not see a mention of William Chinn in our copy of her will.

As Morton noted, the Gibson’s owned enslaved persons. The 1788 will of Jonathan Gibson (died 1791), mentioned the following persons divided among the family: Joe, Charles, Eugene, Ben the son of Polly, Milly & her two children & their increase, Tom, Isaac, Will, Rose & her two children, Jacob, old Lucy, Dinah, Ala, Polly, Sarah, Judah & Polly’s Joe, Davy, the son of Sarah deceased called Ben, Milly, Bethlehem, young Lucy, Nicholas, [Larger Minny or Larger, Minny], Ned, Cate, the children of Larger, Nanny, Celia, Robbin, Sharlett, and Linna.

For possible family tracing, please contact us at [email protected] or 703-221-2218.

Note: Interested in folklore from our very own Lee Lansing Research Library? Join me virtually on Saturday, 09/10, 10:00am as I read stories and discuss our fascinating regional folklore! Free tickets here.

By: Lisa Timmerman, Executive Director

In 1976, E.R. Conner, III, compiled “A Partial List of Water-Powered Mills in Prince William County, Arranged in Upstream Order on the Respective Streams” using both John Wood’s 1820 map and William H. Brown’s 1901 map for locations. His partial list indicated 50 mills along with a brief history of each structure noting their owners, function, and current state of repair. While he noted many as dismantled, his list featured mentions of mills he was unable to locate and the various mills names – one mill could have several mill names as the property changed. Quantico Creek had three in our direct area: Deneale’s Mill, No. 1 (eastern), Deneale’s Mill, No. 2 (western), and Clifton’s Mill (Mitchell’s, Bohannon’s).

Energy production was extremely important to Dumfries as it attracted plantations, merchants, and commercial businesses. Wind-powered and water-powered gristmills were key to the survival of the early colonial era as those mills grinded grain into grist or meal, which could then be turned into flour for bread or any other consumable item. Wealthy officials or neighboring estate owners constructed “plantation gristmills” for individual or very small usage and “custom gristmills” for groups of neighboring planters. The “merchant mill” was the commercial version, exporting Virginia’s flour in the late 1700s. Millers typically operated adjacent to streams on nearby flat plots with some minor engineering to bring the water to their mill. Millers stored water in millponds, which would arrive at the mill through artificial millraces. When needing additional energy, millers would use wheels to grind grain and limestone or power saws for lumber production.

(Brown, William. Map of Prince William County, Virginia : compiled from U.S. Geological Survey and other data and corrected with the assistance of reliable residents of the county, Wash. D.C. : A. B. Graham Photo. Lith., 1901. Library of Congress Geography and Map Division Washington, D.C.)

Deneale’s Mill referred to inventor and miller James Deneale (ca.1765-1821). Besides for owning Deneale’s Mill and Clifton’s Mill, he received five federal patents for his inventions: 1800, “Kiln for drying grain”; 1804, an improved threshing machine; 1806, a “perpetual oven; 1809, a “wheat rubber” machine; and 1820, “Instrument for mapping lands, &c.” Deneale advertised his inventions and news of his mills through the Alexandria Gazette newspaper.              

While Conner’s report did not have much information on Deneale’s Mill, the agent in charge of the 1937 Works Progress Administration’s (WPA) Historical Inventory Project of Virginia did. Not only did the agent speak with residents of Dumfries and Alexandria, but they also searched through court records, and traveled south on Route 629, about ½ mile from Dumfries, to visit the actual site. Below is the report:

(First Tract)

John Graham to Burr Harrison, known as “Saw Mill Tract”

1793, Harrison to James and George Deneal

1806, Deneal to Timothy Brundidge

1876, James Davis, Special Commissioner to James Bohannon

J.R. King (Timmerman note: recorded as current owner in 1937)

(Second Tract)

1779, Hugh Devoir

1792, Luke Cannon

1815, James & George Deneal

1826, Francis Dunnington

1877, Frank Wheat et. Als

Still owned by Wheat family, locally known as Deneal’s Mill Tract

Description:

There is nothing left but the walls, a part of which have been hauled away for building purposes, and the broken wheel, and one large mill stone. The road bed has been changed in the last few years and it is quite easy to walk right past the ruins without noticing them. The creek is very shallow here now and the old dam is almost entirely taken away.

The upper mill, which is still called Deneal’s Mill, is a little less than an eighth of a mile from the lower mill which was last operated by the Wheats. There is nothing left of that but a few stones hidden by the thick undergrowth.

Historical Significance:

It is hard to realize, looking at these ruins, by the meagre stream of water, that here once centered so much of the busy life of the old town.

Old maps show the upper mill as “Graham’s Mill” and the map of 1820 show it as “Deneal’s Mill”. It has been over thirty years since the last meal was ground here, the miller at that time being a man named Mitchell who was killed there one night by his clothing catching in some of the machinery. After that time it rapidly fell into ruins. It has also been about the same length of time since the lower mill was in operation.

The water is so low that the rocks in the creek (Quantico) bottom are exposed, worn smooth as sea pebbles by the once swift water. There is a great deal of green carbonate in the rocks and it makes them look lovely.

The Bohannon who ran the mill for a number of years was quite a character and was the grandson of John Bohannon who had a mill some distance from this in the middle of the eighteenth century.

James Deneal was one of the vestryman at Pohick Church and later at Quantico Church. He was prominent in the affairs of the community. The following extract may be of interest:

“Know all men by these presents, that I, James Deneal of the town of Dumfries and state of Virginia, do make, ordain, contribute and appoint my brother, George Deneal of the town of Alexandria, my true and lawful attorney for me, and in my name to sell all my right and interest and title in the inventions of mine and for which I have received an exclusive privilege from the General Government, To wit: a machine for the threshing of grain, also a machine for baking all kinds of bread, called and known by the name of the Perpetual Oven, ratifying, conforming such sales, made by the said attorney, in testimony whereof. I have affixed this seal, the sixth day of December, eighteen hundred and six.”

Oral History Informants: Mr. Walter Keys (Dumfries, VA), Mrs. Richard Wheat (Dumfries, VA), Mr. Charles Callaham (Alexandria, VA)

PWC Court Records: Deed Book 8, folio 103, Deed Book 30, folio 132, Deed Book U, folio 38, Will Book G, folio 292, Deed Book Y, folio 87, Deed Book 31, folio 504, Deed Book 3, folio 231.”

In terms of Prince William County mills, it’s entirely possible to read the primary sources and visit the actual historic sites. What better way can local history come alive than with records and an accurate map?

Note: The Weems-Botts Bibliophiles are targeting Antiheroes for August! Learn about this confusing and contradicting trope while reading three stories featuring everything from vampires to the Witcher. Tickets here!

By: Lisa Timmerman, Executive Director

Lee Lansing’s contributions to Historic Dumfries Virginia can never be overstated as he freely donated his time, energy, and resources to restoring and developing The Weems-Botts Museum and the historical heritage of Dumfries. Recently, I came across an intriguing binder in the Lee Lansing Research Library where he had collected correspondence regarding his own family’s history in Dumfries. Jump down the rabbit hole as we read his correspondence and research to discover how the Lansing’s history “repeated itself” in 1783 and 1936.

When Lansing moved from Albany, NY to Alexandria, VA, then Dumfries, he was aware of his family’s extensive genealogical lineage as he researched family history in college. His charismatic and quirky personality shine through his writings such as in his introduction to Dumfries Short Subjects, 21A, History Repeats Itself – The Lansings in Dumfries, “Much of this data is still in my files and comes in handy many times, without having to travel to a library – saving much time and shoe leather.” He was particularly interested in Colonel Gerrit/Gerret G. Lansing, an Officer of the Fifth Company, First New York Regiment in the Continental Army.

(Lee Lansing, Official Marine Corps Photographic Section MCS, Quantico, VA. 01//21/1959)

On 11/05/1986, George Pitcher wrote to Lansing, thanking him for previous research and asking if he could help track down a book. “I was especially interested in the incident involving Gerrit G. Lansing that you describe on page M, where he was almost executed for desertion…I’m not clear why he was cleared of the charge: is it because he only pretended to desert, as it were, in order to persuade some of the genuine deserters to return to their regiments?”

Lansing replied on 11/10/1986, “The account of Gerrit G. Lansing is taken from that same publication, but the reason for his pardon came from oral history from my grandmother Lansing, an avid history buff, who left me a good measure of oral history to check-out. The author evidently had not bothered to delve into the reason Gerrit was pardoned and let the subject drop…”Gerrit evidently, with Col. Goose Van Schaick’s blessing, went to Mass. to either persuade his comrades to return or be arrested. Somehow he was discovered by a bounty hunter (which was the practice of that time), and he was brought back to a quick court martial. Col. Van Schaick had been in Albany on leave and when he returned he must have cleared Gerrit of the charges.”

When Lansing published his “Dumfries Short Stories” specifically on Col. Gerrit Lansing in 2002, he had resolved this conflict and did not mention oral history. After discussing the rampant unrest and desertion before Yorktown at West Point in 1781, he noted that troops left to reenlist in places where they could receive better wages. “Ensign Lansing found where his troops were bivouacked and proceeded to that location to try to persuade his friends to return to New York and their former company. Upon his return, on 21, July Ensign was court martialed and accused of desertion and joining the enemy; secondly he was charged with changing his name to John Johnson and re-enlisting in the Massachusetts Line.” According to Lansing, General George Washington pardoned and released Col. Gerrit Lansing due to Col. Van Schaick’s collaborating testimony.

Besides for his grandmother, Lansing recorded he had access to the original papers kept by a relative. “Unlike some officers he did not write letters home to his family but in place thereof he kept an accurate record of his exploits in the form of a journal. This journal, unlike some, “in book form”, was composed of “bits-and-pieces”, each delineating – a “campaign”, or individual task, from start to finish. He noted a few issues with the papers themselves, mainly “were on “browning paper” – torn and or in bad condition – written in what was like a lead pencil, not in order of time, bit in what seemed to be placed after being inspected and bunched together – some very hard to decipher.” Lansing went further to try to deduce if the papers were written indoors or outside, “My observation came to the conclusion that these sheets had been done when a Tavern or other comfortable structure was available. Checking on their position I found that they conformed to the Tavern, on the rise of the hill, in Stafford, near the Acquia Creek and the Tavern in Dumfries adjacent to the Town Square where they camped for the night.”

Lansing then takes the reader on a tour with Col. Lansing as he travels from Stafford to Dumfries. While the entire tour is fascinating, I’ve summarized a few of the more intriguing observations below:

“Upon inspection of the 1762 Courthouse and looking into the small deck containing the whipping post, the pillory and the dick at the waters edge – they were prone to get ot the “Tavern”, raise their tends and get some rest – no mention of cider, was with previous camping locations was made in note form on the edge of the place. They were greeted by the Sheriff and made welcome. He answered their many questions especially as to why the Town had two courthouses, referring to the Tebbs House on the hill behind the Tavern. The troops were amazed at the “all header bond” masonry, on both structures, as this method was not found in the Tri-city Area of New York.”

“At sun rise many of the men were “walking the Town” amazed at the small size, with only about fifteen structures along Main St., and twice as many vacant lots with signs of fire having destroyed the buildings thereon many years ago. Also the men commented on the few citizens in the Town. Its merchandize establishments, in general had much empty space on their shelves and seemed to do business by trading in lieu of ‘coins of the realm”, purchases.”

In the end, Lansing felt satisfied with the information he salvaged from the damaged packet of “bits and pieces”. While he did not include any sources or provide photographs, he noted that six different accounts had been found documenting the military’s use of the town for lodgings. As we continue to delve into Lansing’s research, we hope to find more sources and materials documenting his considerable knowledge and service to the Town of Dumfries.

Note: Thanks to the generosity and creativity of our volunteer Christy, we now have HDVI & The Weems-Botts Museum Apparel in our gift shop! We have a range of t-shirts, jackets, polos, and sweatshirts that nicely advertise our small historical community. Call (703-221-2218), email ([email protected]), or inquire when you make a reservation for a tour or register for a program on our website here!

By: Lisa Timmerman, Executive Director

Story time! Historian Lee Lansing contributed a wealth of historical information on the Town of Dumfries in both written, object, and art forms. He self-published numerous “Short Subject” booklets that covered different aspects of Dumfries, ranging from important people to noteworthy events. He especially took interest in the old Courthouse site and possible jail. While archaeologists located and excavated the courthouse, they lacked funding to investigate the possible jail in the vicinity. Turning to court records and newspapers, Lansing compiled a rough chronology on the structures introducing us to the people actively suing in court. Brew a cup of coffee or tea as we take you on a journey from 1759-1982 but please note – we are including many elements of folklore!

According to Lansing’s notes and transcriptions of the PWC Court Order Book, 12/1759-10/1761, “Hugh Guttray, felon, bit-off Jeremiah’s nose during a fight…” Later charged “for feloniously dismembering Jeremiah’s nose.” Not surprisingly, the Sheriff held him in custody awaiting either the trial or payment of a bond equal to one thousand pounds. Lansing noted that several local citizens stood guard at the jail overnight to prevent Guttray’s escape. Besides for noting he had escaped from jail before, Guttray was known to the Dumfries community as he operated a licensed ordinary in his home and appeared before the court only two months after receiving his license for “permitting excessive gaming in his ordinary.” Lansing stated he appeared in over 60 court cases as either a plaintiff or defendant. Unfortunately, Lansing could not locate the following court order book to see the outcome of the nose dismemberment.

Lansing identified Guttray as a bully of the Town of Dumfries citing his frequent appearance in court. While this information is included in his Short Subjects, his personal files contained more intriguing details.

“Rumor has it that this fight occurred on King’s highway across from the town dock – or in the vicinity of the town well. The well at that time was capped with a wooden structure embodying a hoist sheave with rope and bucket – at about the same grade elevation as the current paving of US #1 (1940). When, in 1998, the well cap was opened prior to demolition – there appeared at least four levels of platform i.e. the original; a 1918 level when U.S. #1 was paved; next one, probably when the structure burned in 1928; next a raise in elevation when the Lodge Hall was rebuilt and finally the concrete platform as we know it in 1998.

Mr. Cecil Garrison, purveyor of ancient knowledge, in the Town of Dumfries, claimed that the portion of Jeremiah’s nose – then removed – had been thrown into the well – since “everything people didn’t want went down the well.” Cecil could not swear to this as a fact.”

(HDVI & The Weems-Botts Museum Archives)

Ready for this to come full circle? The Potomac News reported that on Friday, 10/29/1982, “The two men were fighting in parking lot between Canal Road and U.S. 1, police said, when [name withheld] allegedly bit off a portion of [name withheld]’s nose. Fortunately for [name withheld], his nose was recovered at the scene and taken to him to Potomac Hospital, where it was surgically reattached.” While we do not know why Guttray maimed Jeremiah, the 1982 fight was reportedly over a woman.

I absolutely hate the phrase “History Repeats Itself” as every historical event has different threads running to it (I’ll gladly die on this hill). These events do have similar themes, such as biting off appendages in the Town of Dumfries on Route 1. However, this style of fighting, termed rough & tumble, was common in Southern areas during the 18th century. While white patriarchs and prominent politicians challenged each other to duels, working class white men engaged in this extreme style of fighting where eye-gouging and appendage biting was acceptable and often led to bets amongst the crowd. By participating in these fights, men supposedly restored any slighted honor and potentially gave them a reputation boost, rising their social status if they defeated a more prominent person. Of course, alcohol and gambling also played an important role.

We do not know what happened to Guttray and whether he deserved the title “bully”. Personally, I’m more interested in Lansing and Garrison’s speculations. Did they think the nose went down the well because that was the town’s repository for unsavory items? Is that why they think this happened on Route 1? Did they know any living descendants? What else did Mr. Garrison know as the “purveyor of ancient knowledge?” The last question will likely keep us awake at night imaging the stories yet to be told about Port Dumfries.  

Note: July’s Children’s Day at the Museum Sponsored by Colonial Down Group features spinning and historic clothing! Join our educator Christy as she demonstrates spinning on her spinning wheel then teaches the craft of finger knitting. RSVP your free tickets for 07/16/2022 @ 1pm here!