|
|||||||||||||
Printer-Friendly
Email this Story
Post a Comment (0)
Rappahannock County celebrates a birthday: 175 years
Many who are living in Rappahannock County may not be aware that the county is celebrating a birthday of sorts.
This Friday, February 8, marks the 175 year of Rappahannock County's formal splitting from Culpeper County. When that act was passed by the General Assembly in Richmond, Rappahannock County was created as a new county separate from Culpeper County.
It's not that Rappahannock as a county hadn't existed before. In 1656, it split from the then Lancaster County. The first Rappahannock County lost its identity again in 1692 when it was divided into Richmond County in the north, and Essex County in the south. It was from Essex County that Culpeper County was eventually created in 1749.
According to documentation at the Rappahannock Historical Society, Rappahannock lay in the Northern Neck between the Potomac and Rappahannock Rivers, and was named for a tribe of Indians who lived along the latter. The name, meaning "land of ebb and flow," or as some historians say, "land of fast-flowing water," came from the fact that the river was influenced by the tides from Chesapeake Bay.
But the formal splitting from Culpeper County in 1833 was a significant one and a change that wasn't without angst. Back in the early 1800s, Culpeper County was huge even with Madison County taken out in 1793. If you were a businessman living in Chester Gap and you had to travel to Fairfax (later Culpeper), to take care of business at the Courthouse, it was a long haul. Roads were very rough and depending on the time of year, often impassable. Transportation was difficult and time-consuming. Perhaps harking back to a legacy of community activism, several citizen groups got together and began their lobbying efforts with the Legislature asking that a separate county be formed. There were 50-60 pages of petitions. But there were also 50-60 pages of petitions from citizens who saw no need for a separate county to be formed and lobbied just as diligently with the Legislature that this not happen.
Those who wanted the new county argued that the distance to the Seat of Justice for many could be up to forty miles of hard traveling. As one petition stated, "If indeed the hackneyed idea that proximity to easy access to the seat tends to promote and increase litigation be true then the remote locality and intervening obstacles to Justice complained of should be subjects of consolation rather than regret with your Petitioners." Another argument appeared to favor domestic bliss. "The extent of territory, its shape, and boundary will render it convenient for every individual included and in attendance on court to return to his family and business every night and breakfast at home every morning. Any expenditure incurred therefrom will be voluntary and generally by such as are able to bear it. No loss or inconvenience will likely result from disarrangement of domestic concerns when instructions are issued every morning and their faithful execution attended to on each returning evening."
Those petitions favoring the status quo argued that for most the journey to the Seat of Justice would not take more than half a day, that when the rivers flooded it was a rise and fall within a 24 hour period and didn't the recently constructed bridges help? Also, a new county would require more taxes and nobody would want that. Ultimately, petitioners against the formation of a new county felt that politics were definitely in play. "Indeed, without intending to cast any imputations upon the motives of the friends of division generally, who are also our friends, and fellow country men, we must state it as our honest conviction, that the division is sought by some, more with a view to party and personal views and county politics than the public good. For these reasons we ask that the county may remain as it has for many hears without complaint, undivided..."
With hundreds of signatures on numerous petitions circulating back and forth, it was on February 2, 1833 that a final petition from Lower Culpeper signed by more than 1,500 reached the General Assembly. A meeting advertised in the Culpeper Gazette was to convene at the Court House on February 8 to plot a new course of “delaying tactics.” What this group didn't know was on that same day – February 8, 1833 – the General Assembly had authorized the formation of a new county – Rappahannock, named for that river whose headwaters drained into the region. This act – known as Chapter 73 – gave a nod to the old Rappahannock County dismembered in 1692, but whose lands once included 'new' Rappahannock.
One fellow active in the fight for a new county was Philip Thornton, a Culpeper General Assembly delegate. During that same session he took his seat as a Rappahannock delegate along with 14 former Culpeper court justices who were among 25 who swore allegiance to the new jurisdiction.
County seat
One of the first tasks for the 25 newly appointed Gentleman Justices of the new county of Rappahannock was to decide where the county seat would be located. This was a serious proposition for it wasn't just the placement of buildings. When the courts were in session, these were some of the most important days of the year. People came from miles around to buy and sell, pay debts, settle disputes, peruse the latest peddler's wares, hear political speeches and vote.
At that time, there were only two towns in the county which had been laid out with named streets: Washington and Woodville. Both of these towns were active having stores and taverns and both had about the same size population.
Having a new county didn't mean an end to squabbles and once again emotions ran high as to which area would be designated as the county seat. More written petitions or “Memorials” were considered as well as oral opinions. One influential and powerful citizen of Woodville was outraged that county buildings would be placed in pristine Woodville. He felt that the courts would “attract drunkards, lawyers, and other rowdy elements to which they did not want their children exposed,” and, “Woodville was a center of culture.” But many in the county favored having it in Washington for financial advantages – particularly those citizens of the town itself.
Ultimately, it was decided by the justices that “the Town of Washington poses the most suitable place for the erection of public buildings for the county.” To sweeten the pot, the citizens of the Town of Washington volunteered to purchase the land for those buildings. It was generally felt that “Washington was a mercantile capital and business community, and logical site for public buildings. It was located 123 miles northwest of Richmond, and 75 miles from Washington, D.C.”
Bids went out for the construction of the new buildings and the court ordered that $120 be borrowed at 6 percent interest for the purchase of a bell for the court house.
Malcum H. Crawford was awarded the bid to construct the courthouse at an amount of $4,500 and the jail for $2,600. The work was completed in 1835. There are no court records indicating when the buildings were actually occupied but it is assumed that it was before November 1835 because it was at that time that the justices authorized the purchase of a stove.
In 1833, the population of the new Rappahannock County was over 9,000 citizens. Culpeper County – through a series of divisions – lost more than half its population. By 1840, the population was 11,393. But these divisions were not uncommon in the State of Virginia when courthouses were located more than 35 miles away.
You must be logged in to post a comment.