tionally been the hero ol the piece, and Governor Sir 

 William Berkeley the oppressi\-e villain against whom 

 the freedom-lovins; Virginians were forced to rebel. 

 I have tried to dissolve this illusion in my book The 

 Governor and the Rebel: A History of Bacon's Rebellion in 

 Virginia (Univeristy of North Carolina Press, 1958), 

 and I will avoid rejseating the documentation cited 

 there. Briefly, my argument states that there is no 

 evidence to show that Bacon was a democratic re- 

 former, and no evidence to prove that Berkeley's 

 intent was to frustrate the aim of reform. 



The conflict actually arose over a difference of opin- 

 ion on Indian policy: Bacon desired to raise volimteers to 

 exterminate all Indians, while Berkeley tried to main- 

 tain a distinction between "foreign," enemy Indians 

 and dependent, friendly ones. In the course of events 

 Bacon and his followers stormed into Jamestown to 

 force from the frightened Assembly of June 1676 a 

 commission empowering the rebel to fight the Indians 

 in his own way. A civil war ensued. At first Bacon 

 had the upper hand. But Berkeley eventually suc- 

 ceeded in making the rebel leader, as the Governor 

 put it, ''acknowledge the lawes are above him." ' 

 Victory was not obtained, however, imtil after Bacon's 

 death in October 1676. 



This paper will take up the efTects of Bacon's 

 Rebellion first on the executive, then on the judicial, 

 and finally on the legislative bodies of England and 

 Virginia. The subjects will be discussed in the order 

 given, for that was the order in which the rebellion 

 affected governmental institutions on fioth sides of the 

 Atlantic. 



Effect on Executive Branches 



Bacon's Rebellion showed that the Crown's repre- 

 sentative in Virginia, 70 years after the first settlement, 

 was able to lead or restrain the colonists in ordinary 

 matters ijut could not control them when they became 

 aroused. The race issue, ]5recipitated by mutual 

 Indian-white murders on the frontier, provided the 

 "cause" that fired men who were already llred of 

 poor crops, bad weather, and low prices and who were 



looking for an esca])e from their misery. After the 

 Virginia colonists had been so roused, even Governor 

 Berkeley, who enjoyed great popularity, was unable 

 to control them. There is little doujjt that Berkeley 

 was a popular leader from 1641, when he was ap- 

 pointed Governor, until the time of the rebellion in 

 1676. -Assertions of his declining ])0]jularity after 

 1660, following his unanimous election by Virginia's 

 House of Burgesses and Council in the Parliamentary 

 period, are based on very scanty evidence indeed. 



This successful defiance of authority was made 

 ]5ossible by the improved status of the individual 

 Virginian, who, until the onset of economic depres- 

 sion and the Indian threat immediately prior to the 

 rebellion, was enjoying security and affluence un- 

 known in the shaky early years of settlement. The 

 planters were favored by their number and location. 

 There were 40,000 of them spread out from the ocean 

 to the falls of the Potoinac River and south from that 

 river to Albemarle Sound. Another element in their 

 favor was that their arms were equivalent to ariy that 

 could be brought against them by the government. 

 The situation was fully comprehended liy the Gov- 

 ernor, who wrote: ''How miseraijle that man is that 

 Governes a People wher six parts of seaven are Poore 

 Endeljtcd Discontented and Armed." - 



The Governor's role was weakened not only by the 

 growing power of the people Ijut by the creation cf 

 rival authorities in the colonies. In 1673, by an "Act 

 for the Encouragement of Trade," Parliament had 

 introduced into the colonies custoir.s collectors who 

 were not responsible to the local government at all, 

 but directly accountable to the Ctowu in England.^ 

 The customs collector for Virginia, Giles Bland, from 

 the moment of his arrival was entangled in violent 

 controversies with Governor, Council, and House of 

 Burgesses. Bland finally died in a hangman's noose 

 for helping Bacon initiate the rebellion. 



The physical requirements of a Virginia governor's 

 job were staggering. Early iit June of 1676, even 

 before the full effects of the rebellion had burst upon 

 him, the 70-year-old Governor wrote to Secretary Coy- 

 entry asserting that "I am so over wearied with riding 

 into al parts of the country to stop this violent rebellion 

 that I am not able to support my selfe at this age six 



' William Berkeley's "Derlaration and Remonstrance" of 

 May 29, 1676, in the Henry Coventry Papers (hereinafter cited 

 as Longleat), vol. 77, folios 157-158. The Longleat papers are 

 preserved at Longleat, estate of the Marquis of Bath. Microfilm 

 copies of these papers are available in the Microfilm Reading 

 Room, Library of Congress. 



' William Berkeley [to Thomas Ludwell], July 1, 1676, Long- 

 leat, vol. 77, folio 145. 



' Archibald P. Thornton, West-India Policy Unilcr l/ie Rcilnrii- 

 tion, Oxford, 1956, p. 164. 



138 



BULLETIN 22. S: CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE MUSEUM OF HISTORY .\ND TECHNOLOGY 



