The House of Burgesses was the first legislative body in British North America. For the first decade of English settlement in Virginia, the colony and its parent organization, the Virginia Company, concentrated on the daily survival of the settlers and the establishment of a viable cash crop. By 1619 the military-style government that had been in place for nearly 10 years was replaced by a more representative system that included the House of Burgesses.
When Sir Edwin Sandys gained control of the foundering Virginia Company in 1618, he ordered the colony’s newly appointed governor, Sir George Yeardley, to establish a representative governmental body in the hope that it would make Virginia more appealing to potential
The first meeting of the House of Burgesses in Jamestown, Virginia, the first elected legislative assembly in America (Library of Congress)
Burgis, William 51
Settlers. This new legislature would meet annually with the governor and the council to address important issues. Once in session, the full assembly could adopt laws that would then be sent to England, where the Virginia Company held veto power. Although its stated powers were limited, the House of Burgesses was the first representative government in the New World and grew to a position of primary importance in Virginia by the time of the American Revolution.
The first meeting of the assembly took place in Jamestown in August 1619. There, 22 burgesses reported from their individual plantations and towns. In this first session the assembly endorsed the system of indentured servitude in which impoverished Europeans would work for a number of years as servants in exchange for their transport to Virginia. Once freed, they would normally receive some land and possibly tools or money in order to begin farming.
In its early years the House of Burgesses operated under the sometimes oppressive control of the royal governor. In 1661, after the Restoration in England, new burgesses were elected, and Sir William Berkeley was reinstated as governor. This new royalist legislature pleased Berkeley, and he refused to call a general election until Bacon’s Rebellion 15 years later. After Bacon’s Rebellion the Crown unsuccessfully attempted to rescind the House of Burgesses’ ability to initiate legislation.
By the early 18th century the House of Burgesses and the system of government in Virginia was changing. A 1699 law forbade candidates to give fOOD or drink to potential voters. Although seldom enforced, the law illustrates the fear that only wealthy men could afford to “campaign” properly and win a seat in the assembly. Most important to the rise of the House of Burgesses was the close proximity of its members to Virginia’s farmers. Through their community ties burgesses often gauged issues far more effectively and could react to them quicker than could the governor or the council.
As the colony moved through the turbulent years after the beginning of the Seven Years’ War, the House of Burgesses gained even more importance in the eyes of Virginians. With England’s abandonment of the policy of “salutary neglect,” the House of Burgesses appeared to be the sole institution standing between full English domination and colonial serfdom. As a result, eligible voters in Virginia paid close attention to the men they sent to Williamsburg to defend what they perceived as their rights as Englishmen in America. After playing an important role in the coming of the American Revolution in Virginia, the House of Burgesses faded out of existence. The final entry in the Journal of the House of Burgesses reads: “Monday, the 6th of May, 16 Geo. III. 1776. Several members met, but did neither proceed to business, nor adjourn, as a House of Burgesses. FINIS.” Not long after the outbreak of the Revolutionary War, the House of Burgesses became the Virginia House of Delegates.
Further reading: Lucille Griffith, The Virginia House of Burgesses, 1750-1774 (Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 1968); Edmund S. Morgan, American Slavery, American Freedom: The Ordeal of Colonial Virginia (New York: Norton, 1975).
—Brian McKnight and Billy G. Smith
Burgis, William (fl. 1715-1731) artist One of colonial America’s first artists, Burgis’s date and place of birth are unknown. He immigrated from London to New York City in the mid-1710s and soon began publishing illustrations by subscription. Detailed pictures of New York cityscapes, particularly the harbor, were very popular at this time, and Burgis met with great success.
In 1722 Burgis moved to Boston, where for the next eight years he published similar pictures, including the first cityscapes of Boston. The popularity of his work reflected the increasing secularism of Boston as the Puritan influence over the city slowly waned and popular art became more acceptable. Typically, these illustrations were purchased by subscription. Burgis then engraved and printed them; he occasionally sent his drawings to London to be engraved there, after which they would be delivered to his customers. Burgis is known to have drawn, or at least published, pictures of Harvard College, Boston, and several area churches. These probably were framed, glazed, and hung on the walls of people’s homes.
When his landlord died in 1728, Burgis married his wealthy widow, Mehitable Selby, thus acquiring her husband’s property. Mehitable also owned property in her own right, unusual for a married woman at this time. Clearly, this improved Burgis’s economic standing, for over the next two years he was described not only as an artist and property owner but also a “gentleman.” By 1731 Burgis placed all of his wife’s property in his name and fled town, because he was being sued in civil court. Five and a half years later, his wife petitioned for divorce on the grounds that, having taken all of her estate, he had not been seen or heard from since.
Divorce by desertion was not uncommon during this time. The law did not recognize a wife’s property as separate from her husband’s, and so Burgis’s actions were legal. It is unclear whether her divorce petition was granted, though possibly she had him declared legally dead so that she could escape the debts he had left behind.
—Victoria C. H. Resnick
Burr, Esther Edwards (1732-1758) writer Daughter of the great theologian and Congregational minister Jonathan Edwards, wife of the president of the College of New Jersey (later Princeton College), and mother of a daughter, Sally, and son, Aaron, Jr. (who subsequently became the third vice president of the United States), Esther Edwards Burr’s experience is extraordinary not only because of the men who surrounded her but also because of the journal she exchanged with confidante Sally Prince of Boston between 1754 and 1757. Burr and Prince, like many Puritan women, developed a close friendship in youth that they maintained in adulthood.
Puritan women frequently kept journals to assist in their efforts toward self-understanding and improvement, but Burr’s practice of exchanging journals with Prince was unusual. In her writing Burr expressed the challenges of marriage, homemaking, and motherhood. Burr wrote, for example, of the burden of having many children, already feeling overwhelmed with just two. Her death at an early age cut the journal short, but her observations create a rare and rich firsthand account of the daily life and values of an elite woman in colonial America.
Ing the evidence. Most counterfeiters used copper plates to achieve an image transfer, but such templates were difficult to demolish and provided evidence for prosecutors to cite in court.
By 1722 Butterworth’s prosperity attracted attention. Her husband built an elaborate house, and relatives and townspeople were caught trying to pass fraudulent bills. Officials began investigating the Butterworths’ activities and arrested several of her conspirators. Butterworth’s brother and sister-in-law, who has participated in the counterfeiting scheme, told authorities how Butterworth created her fake currency. She was subsequently exonerated when the charges against her were dismissed because of lack of proof, and none of her associates was convicted. Ceasing her counterfeiting career, Butterworth lived with her husband and seven children in their extravagant home. Butterworth died on February 7, 1775, at Rehoboth.
Further reading: Richard LeBaron Bowen, Rhode Island Colonial Money and Its Counterfeiting, 1647-1726 (Concord, N. H.: Rumford Press, 1942).
—Elizabeth D. Schafer
Further reading: Carol F. Karlsen and Laurie Crump-acker, eds., The Journal of Esther Edwards Burr, 17541757 (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1984).
—Jane P. Currie
Butterworth, Mary Peck (1 686-1 775) criminal A suspected counterfeiter, Mary Peck Butterworth was born on July 27, 1686, at Rehoboth, Plymouth Colony (Massachusetts), the daughter of Joseph and Elizabeth (Smith) Peck. She married John Butterworth, Jr., about 1710. Soon after Rhode Island distributed notes of credit valued at five pounds, Butterworth, collaborating with relatives and residents of Rehoboth, initiated a counterfeiting scheme. During the colonial era counterfeiting was a common practice when greedy individuals took advantage of both the unsophisticated printing processes used to produce money and merchants’ unfamiliarity with the diverse domestic and foreign monies circulated throughout America. Colonial counterfeiters represented a myriad of socioeconomic classes and ethnicities. Both men and women were notorious counterfeiters.
Butterworth devised a method to manufacture fake currency without leaving evidence of her crime. She placed a piece of currency underneath a piece of starched muslin and rubbed a heated iron over the surface. The currency’s pattern was imprinted on the cloth, which she used to transfer the image to pieces of paper with an iron. Butterworth improved each note by inking them with quill pens. Afterwards, she burned the cloth, thereby destroy-
Byrd, William, II (1674-1744) historian, diarist, government official
An important colonial literary figure, William Byrd II was born near Richmond, Virginia, the son and sole heir of William Byrd and Mary Horsmanden Filmer. At the age of seven he was sent to be educated in England and the Netherlands, becoming a licensed attorney in 1695. Unsuccessful as an attorney, Byrd was elected a burgess for Henrico County in 1696 and represented the Virginia colony in London in 1698. As Virginia’s representative, Byrd protested the use of the colony’s taxes to fund military operations in northern colonies. He was removed from this position when he alienated the Board of Trade by presenting an address from the king to the Virginia Council and House of Burgesses, a function of the governor. After his removal Byrd spent most of his time in England and was active in England’s scientific community. He was made a member of the Royal Society in 1697. When his father died in 1705, he claimed his inheritance and his father’s posts of receiver general and auditor of the colony, from which he received between 3 and 5 percent of Virginia’s tax receipts as a salary. In 1709 he took his father’s seat on the Virginia Council.
In addition to his political activities, Byrd was a prolific writer, publishing several books about Virginia, poetry, as well as theatricals. Byrd was also one of Virginia’s largest land speculators, acquiring over 100,000 acres along the Roanoke River. Selling little of the land, he amassed 179,400 acres by his death. Byrd engaged in many economic
World History
