The Early Conventions:

Hep ar TawsorouGu,

ANNO DOMINI

1790, 1793 and 1794.

 

The First Effort to Organize the Church in
North Carolina.

 

| COLLECTED FROM ORIGINALSOURCES AND NOW FIRST PUBLISHED.

 

WitH INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF NOTES

BY

JOSEPH BLOUNT CHESHIRE, Jr.

RALEIGH:
SPIRIT OF THE AGE PRINT.

 

 

 
Diocrszt or Norra Caro.ina.

 

Tite Barly,Uonvenmons:

Herp at ‘TawsoroucH,

ANNO DOMINI

1790, 1793 and 1794.

 

The First Effort to Organize the Church in
North Carolina.

 

COLLECTED FROM ORIGINAL SOURCES AND NOW FIRST PUBLISHED.

 

Wirn INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF NOTES
BY
JOSHPH BLOUNT CHESHIRHE, Jr.

 

RALEIGH:
SPIRIT OF THE AGE PRINT.
1882,

 
 

 

INTRODUCTION.

In making some investigations, a few years, ago into the
history of the Church in Edgecombe county, my attention
was drawn to the Conventions held in Tawborough during
the last decade of the eighteenth century, in the unsuccessful
effort to organize the Church in North Carolina, and to pro-
cure the consecration of a Bishop. All the information
which I could then obtain respecting these meetings was
only such as is preserved in Bishop White’s Memoirs of the
Church in the United States, and in the Rev. Robert J.
Miller’s Letter to Dr. Hawks (since reprinted in the Church
Messenger of October 15th, 1879). So far as I could discover,
the memory of them had almost entirely died out, and no
record of their proceedings was known to exist.

It was therefore with great interest that I learned from
the Hon. Kemp P. Battle, LL. D., President of the Univer-
sity of North Carolina, that he had discovered in an old
newspaper a contemporaneous account of the Convention
of November 12th and 13th, 1790, the first Convention of
the Church ever held in this State, as was then supposed,
This account is signed by the Secretary of the Convention,
and is evidently the official publication of the minutes of
the meeting. Thinking this discovery calculated to interest
many persons in North Carolina, and possibly some in other
parts of the country, I sent copies of these minutes to the
Churchman, and to the Southerner, a paper published in Taw-
borough, in which papers they appeared ir May, 1878. An
additional motive which I had in thus making them public
through the press, was that other persons might be stimu-
lated to examine among their old papers and manuscripts
to see if something farther might not be discovered relating
to this period of our Church history. My own investiga-
tions produced nothing new, and when, in the summer of
1880, at the request of the Rev. Charles J. Curtis, editor of
the Church Messenger, I prepared for that paper an “ Histori-
cal Sketch of the Church in Edgecombe County,” I had
nothing to relate concerning those early Conventions, except
what had been derived from the sources above mentioned.

Even these imperfect memorials, however, seemed to some
persons worthy of preservation, and a few months ago, when

 
2

preparing for the press a reprint of our Diocesan Journals
of 1817, 1818, 1819, 1820 and 1821, I was requested by the
Rev. Dr. Watson to prefix to that reprint such accounts of
the Conventions of 1790, 1798 and 1794, as could be found.
It had frequently occurred to me that the Rey. Charles Pet-
tigrew, who at the last of these meetings was chosen to be
the first Bishop of North Carolina, might have left docu-
ments bearing on this interesting period; and I therefore
applied to his grandson, the Rey. William S. Peiticrew
and requested the sight of such of his grandfather's papers
relating to these meetings as might be in his possession.
With characteristic courtesy he replied by sending mea
manuscript of some sixty pages of foolscap, containing
copies of letters and papers left by Parson Charles Pettigrew.
My surprise was only equaled by my satisfaction on finding
that the manuscript contained materials for a very full his-
tory of the whole movement, which began in the latter
part of the year 1789, and culminated in Mav, 1794, in the
election of Mr. Pettigrew as Bishop; with the exception of the
proceedings of the Convention of November, 1790, which
are entirely lacking in the manuscript, but can be fully
supplied from the old newspaper belonging to Mr. Battle.
Having received with the manuscript permission to make
such use of any of its contents as I might see fit, I have
ventured to prepare for publication the following pages,
wherein is presented, for the first time in print, the docu-
mentary history of the first effort to organize the Church in
North Carolina and to secure the benefits of Episcopal over-
sight and ministrations. I cannot but believe that many
persons will be interested in these memorials of the past.

This early action of the Churchmen of North Carolina
was suggested by the venerable Bishop White, truly the
father of the American Church. In a letter to the Rey. Mr.
McDougall, of Halifax, dated November 9th, 1789, Mr. Pet-
tigrew mentions that Goy. Johnston had received a letter
from Bishop White expressing a desire that the clergy of
North Carolina should meet together to consult concerning
the interests of the Church. The Governor seems to have
turned the letter ver to Mr. Pettigrew, who immediately put
himself in communication with the few clergy remaining

in the State, proposing that they should meet at Tawborough
in May, 1790. The result of this correspondence was that

on June Sth, 1790, two clergymen and two laymen met in

Tawborough and organized the first Convention of Churchmen
ever held in North Carolina.* It appears therefore that the
meeting of November, 1790, heretofore supposed to have
been the first, was only the second, and that it met in conse-
quence of a call put out by the Convention of June 5th. The
persons composing this first Convention were the Rev. Charles
Pettigrew and James L. Wilson, of the clergy, and Dr. John
Leigh and William Clements, Esq., both of Tawborough, of
the laity; and these four men seem to have been the lead-
ing spiritsin all the subsequent meetings. Mr. Clements
is said by the Rev. 8. Halling, in a letter to Mr. Petti-
grew, to have been “of the Presbyterian Church,” but he
probably meant that he had been a Presbyterian before this
time. From the first to the last of these four Conventions
he is more prominent than any other layman in the move-
ment to procure the: consecration of a Bishop, having been
Secretary of three of them, and appointed a lay deputy to
the General Convention in 1794.

The address to the General Convention, drawn up at this
meeting, was forwarded to Bishop White, who acknowledges
its receipt in a letter dated August 8th, 1791; but it seems
not to have been presented to the General Convention.
There is no mention of it in the Journals, and the Rt. Rev.
Dr. Perry, Bishop of Iowa and Historiographer of the
Church, te whom I applied for information in regard to
this period of our Church history, wrote me that he knew
of nothing relating to these Conventions among the archives
of the General Convention in his custody.

There is another matter upon which the papers preserved

.in this Pettigrew manuscript throw much light, and which

I will venture to touch upon briefly, even at the risk of ex-
tending these introductory remarks to a greater length than
was at first intended. Injustice has sometimes been done
the zeal and earnestness of the Rev. Charles Pettigrew, in
cousequence of his not having obtained consecration to the
Episcopate, although he lived more than ten years after his
election as Bishop; as if this implied negligence on his
part. The Rev. Mr. Miller, in his oft-quoted letter to Dr.
Hawks, has given color to this, by saying that Mr. Pettigrew

*In the Address to the General Convention by this meeting, mention
is made of a letter from a Comumnittee of the General Convention, sent
through the Rev. Dr. Cutting, of Newbern, but it seems not to have
been received by the meeting, nor were even its contents known.

 
4

“was opposed in sentiment to the election at that time as
premature, and informed me then, and afterwards that his
principal object in consenting to it was to prevent the sacred
and holy office from being conferred on an improper person
and this will account for his never making any application
for consecration.” Parson Miller wrote from memory after
the lapse of thirty-six years, and it is no disparagement of
that most faithful and honored minister of Christ to Sa

that his memory of events so long past was in some aoe
inaccurate. It is not unlikely that after having failed in his
effort to be consecrated in 1795, as we shall presently see;
and feeling the declining state of his health; while at the
same time he could not shut his eyes to the distressing lack
of zeal on the part of the greater number of professed
Churchmen ; Mr. Pettigrew despaired of being able to effect
anything, and used language to Mr. Miller which led the
latter to make the statement above quoted. But that state-
ment contains an important error as to a matter of fact

concerning which Mr. Miller probably had no means of
being rightly informed ; and the whole tenor of the remarks
about Mr. Pettigrew’s opinion, af the time of his election, is

inconsistent with his letters of that period, contained in the ~

Pettigrew manuscript ; whatever may have been his feelings
later on. Asa matter of fact, Mr. Pettigrew did apply for
consecration to Bishop White, by whom the application was

laid before the General Convention at the session of 1795, -

as the Bishop himself tells us in his Memoirs of the Chute

in the United States (edition of 1820, page 216). eee ae
in his letters are to be found strong expressions of the need
he felt of a Bishop here in North Carolina : and after his
election he entered into correspondence with ‘Bishop White
and showed very plainly that he looked upon his consecra-
tion asa thing much to be desired ; although with most
commendable modesty he doubts his own fitness for such
o office, and expresses his willingness to give way in favor
pastel ee ee if such an one could be found to
_ Full of this important mission he set out for Phi ig
in good time to attend the General Convention of Tee ate
ing previously forwarded his application and the Certificate
of his election to Bishop White. Before reaching Norfolk he
met with such reports of the prevalence of yellow fever at
that place as deranged all his plans. He had reason to be-
lieve that the ordinary means of travel would be inter-

5

rupted, and that if he should succeed in finding a vessel
sailing for New York or Philadelphia, he would be kept at
quarantine so long as to endanger the purpose of his going
—all which considerations rendering the success of his

journey extremely doubtful, and the danger from exposure

to the fever being very certain, he was persuaded to post-
pone his personal application until a more favorable oppor-
tunity should present itself, and to return to North Carolina,

But although Mr. Pettigrew was thus disappointed in his
hopes of obtaining consecration, he did what he could for
the interests of the Church in the State at large. He writes
to Bishop White that he will use whatever influence his
position as Bishop-elect may give him, in endeavoring to _
rouse the Churchmen of North Carolina to take steps to or-
ganize the Parishes by the election of Wardens and Vestry-
men, and to supply the churches and chapels at least with
regular lay services, that the people might thereby be kept
together and prevented from straying off to other religious
bodies. His letters show that he faithfully kept his promise.
He seems to have extended his inquiries and oversight as
far west as Person and Lincoln counties, and to have en-
couraged and, as far as he could, assisted all efforts made
for the good of the Church. It was hardly possible for him
to make the personal visitation which was suggested to him
by some, but he was diligent in finding out the names of
men of character and influence in the different counties,
who might be induced to exert themselves in this move-
ment to revive the Church of their fathers.

In 1798 the yellow fever prevailed in Philadelphia to
such an extent that the meeting of the General Convention
had to be postponed until the following year. This Con-
vention of 1799 Mr. Pettigrew seems to have made no effort
to attend. His health had been very poor for some years,
and he probably felt physically unable to undertake the
oversight of such a diocese as this State would have been in

the year 1800.
Thus ended the first effort to obtain a Bishop for North

Carolina.

The following documents are all from the Pettigrew man-
uscript, with the exception of the minutes of the meeting
of November 12th and 18th, 1790. In the testimonial of
the election of the Rev. Charles Pettigrew (Appendix B to
Journal of the Convention of 1794, page 28), I have fol-
lowed the printed copy in Bishop White’s Memoirs, which

 
6

is more correct than the manuscript. I have ventured to
introduce, between brackets, such information, concerning
the persons or events referred to, as seemed necessary to the
proper understanding of the documents; and also to add a
few foot-notes. In some cases it has been necessary to cor-
rect a manifest error or to supply an omission in the text:
these are also enclosed between brackets.

Many of the letters preserved along with the records of
these Cohventions well deserve publication. They illus-
trate a not uninteresting period of our ecclesiastical history,
and show the characters of the men who were prominent
in this movement in a most favorable light. Doubtless
there were unworthy ministers in the Church then, as there
always have been and will be; but those who first gathered
together to consult for the interests of the Church of Christ
in North Carolina were such as we may well be proud of.

It is strange that no one has yet undertaken a biography of |

the Rev. Charles Pettigrew, the most eminent of the num-
ber. The sketch of his life and character in Sprague’s An-
uals of the American Pulpit (Vol. V, page 315), prepared
by his distinguished descendant, the late Gen. J. Johuston
Pettigrew, although excellent so far as it goes, is necessarily
inadequate. The character of the work in which it ap-
peared made it impossible to treat the subject with anything
like fullness. Is it now too late for this want to be supplied ?

Pettigrew and the men who labored with him—Wilson,
Blount, Halling and others, deserve an honored place in
the Church’s memory for their faithful devotion to her,
when hers must have seemed to them a falling cause.

It is a curious fact that the only one of that little band .

who lived to see the revival of 1817, was the Rev. Robert
Johnston Miller, who had received Lutheran ordination with
the distinct understanding that it was not to be taken as
any compromise of his position as a Churchman, and who
took part as one of the clergy in the Convention of 1794.
After having held up the hands of Pettigrew during this
short twilight of Church life in North Carolina, he lived to
be ordained. Deacon and Priest by Bishop Richard Chan-
ning Moore in 1821, and to see Bishop Ravenscroft lay
deep and strong the foundations of this Diocese in the prin-
ciples for which he and the earlier champions of the Church
had fought a losing battle.
JOS. BLOUNT CHESHIRE, Jr.
CHARLOTTE, N. C.,
All Saints, 1882.

We give Thee hearty tMawks tov the goad examples
of all those Thy servants, who, having finished Meir
course in faith, do wow vest trom theiy Ltours.

 
THE PROCEEDINGS

OF THE

First Convention of the Clergy [and Laity],

HELD AT TARBOROUGH.

Ata meeting of the Protestant Episcopal Clergy and Laity
of North Carolina, held at Tarborough, on the 5th of June,
1790, pursuant to a previous agreement entered into by the
clergy of the said State in consequence of a circular letter
addressed to them from the Committee of Correspondence at
Philadelphia, the following proceedings were entered into:

1st Resolved, That we do approve of and accede to the
Constitution adopted by a Convention of the Protestant
Episcopal Church‘held at Philadelphia in the year 1789.

2d Resolved, That the Rev. Charles Pettigrew, Rev. James
L. Wilson, and John Leigh, Esq., be, and they are hereby,
appointed a Committee to draw up and send forward an
answer to the circular letter written by the Corresponding
Committee of Philadelphia to the Episcopal Clergy of this
State, expressing the high sense we have of the proceedings
of the last Genéral Convention of the Protestant Episcopal
Church held in that city.

3d Resolved, That the Laity of the Protestant Episcopal
Church in this State are entitled to elect and send one mem-
ber from each of their respective counties to represent them
at a general convention of the Protestant Episcopal Clergy
and laity of this State.

4th Resolved, That when there is a regularly ordained
Clergyman of the Protestant Episcopal Church, he shall
represent the county in which he resides, and procure [pro-
duce?] his orders at Convention. But when there is no
such resident in a county, a layman shall be chosen by the
people as their representative.

5th Resolved, That the Clergy and Laity thus elected
shall convene on the 12th November next at Tarboiough,
to deliberate on the affairs of their Church, and to choose a
representative to the next General Convention of the Prot-

 
10

estant Episcopal Church in America, to be held at the city
of Philadelphia.

6th Resolved, That the Rev. James L. Wilson and John
Leigh, Esq., be, and [they] are hereby, appointed to make the
same known by advertisement in the public papers printed
in this State; fixing the time and mode for electing such
representatives of the people.

CHARLES PETTIGREW,

Chairman.

Wirttam Crements, Secretary.

[We learn from a letter of Mr. Pettigrew to Bishop White,
of date June 6th, 1790, that this Convention was composed
of only one clergyman, besides himself, and two laymen,
“gentlemen of distinguished merit and reputation.” The
other clergyman must have been the Rey. James L. Wilson,
and the two laymen Dr. John Leigh and William Clements,

Esq., since the names of these three persons appear in the
proceedings. |

[Address of the Convention of June, 1790, to the Gen-
eral Convention, drawn up in accordance with the
second Resolution of said Convention.]

Tarporoves, N. C., 5th June, 1790.
Right Rev. Brethren and Gentlemen of the Laity:

In answer to your zealous and friendly letter of last Fall,
addressed to the Episcopal Clergy of this State, we beg leave
to say in behalf of ourselves and absent brethren, there is
nothing we more ardently wish than strict union with our
brethren of the Clergy of the Protestant Episcopal Church
in America. But your letter reached the hand of. Dr. Cut-
ting too late to procure that representation of our Church,
which would have been highly proper, at your Convention
of last September in Philadelphia. We have seen your
journal and have the pleasure to say that we highly approve
of the business done [on that] and the preceding occasion;
particularly of your Constitution and Canons, and cheer-
fully subscribe and accede to the union. The necessity of
this our accession is to us so obvious that we reflect with

pain [on] the non-attendance of our clerical brethren who

 

11

were to meet usin Convention at this juncture—particu-
larly the Rev. Mr. Cutting, from whom we expected your
letter, and necessary information; but we charitably con-
clude that indisposition or unavoidable accident must have
prevented. This puts it out of our power to answer the
particulars in your letter with that precision we could wish,
which we hope your candor will excuse. | 5 ‘
We transmit you a copy of our imperfect proceedings, in
which you will find that we have resolved on the election
of members for a more general convention for the purpose
of choosing a delegate to represent our Church constitution-
ally at the next General Convention to be held in your city.
The state of our Church in this Commonwealth is traly
deplorable from the paucity of its clergy and the multi-
plicity of opposing sectarians who are using every possible
exertion to seduce its members to their different commun-
ions. This grievance, however, we hope will be reduced in
time by the energy of its faithful labourers ; and we esteem
ita most fortunate circumstance that Providence has ad-
vanced a gentleman of so well known integrity and zeal for
the interest of the Church and religion in general, as the
Right Rev. Dr. White, of Philadelphia, to. preside in the
Episcopal ebair. i
We have the honor to be, with sentiments of the truest
respect and esteem, Brethren and Gentlemen, your sincere

friends and Brethren.

 
 

MINUTES OF A CONVENTION

OF THE

lergy and Laity of the State of North Carolina,

HELD IN

Tarborough on the 12th and 13th of November, A. D. 1790.

[From the Worth Carolina Chronicle, or Fayetteville Gazette, of date November
22d, 1790. The paper from which the following extract is taken, is in the
possession of the Hon. Kemp P. Battle, LL. D., President of the University
of North Carolina.]

At a meeting of the Episcopal Clergy and Laity of the
State of North Carolina, held at Tarborough, on the 12th
day of November, 1790:

The Reverend Dr. Micklejohn was unanimously chosen
President.

Resolved, That the Clergy and Laity present do form them-
selves into a Committee of the Whole, for the purpose of
preparing business necessary to he proceeded on by the Con-
vention to-morrow.

Adjourned until to-morrow morning, 9 o’clock.

SaturDay, November 18th, 1790.

The Convention met according to adjournment.

The Committee appointed yesterday for the purpose of
preparing business for the Convention, reported the follow-
ing resolutions, which were agreed to:

Resolved, That the Reverend Doctor Micklejohn, the Rey.
Charles Pettigrew, the Rey. James L. Wilson, of the clergy,

 
 

 

 

14

and John Leigh, William McKenzie, and Joseph Leech,
Esquires, of the laity, be, and they are hereby, appointed
deputies to represent the Clergy and Laity of this State in
the next General Episcopal Convention, to be held in New
York, in September, 1792. Provided, That if any of the lay
deputies should fail to attend the said Convention, the said
clerical deputies shall have power to nominate and appoint
others in their stead.

Fesolped, That the Reverend Doctors Micklejohn and Out-

ting, the Rey. Messrs. Blount, Pettigrew, McDougal and -

Wiison, of the Clergy, and Jonathan Kitterell, of Granville;
James Mills, of Warren; Henry Hill, of Franklin; William
McKenzie, of Martin; Esquires; Doctors Leigh, of Tar-
borough, and Dickinson, of Edenton; and Colonels Long,
of Halifax, and Leech, of Newbern; of the Laity; be ap-
pointed a Standing Committee of the Episcopal Church in
this State. Any two of the Clergy, with two of the Laity,
aforesaid, may receive applications from, and give recom-
mendations to, all candidates for Holy Orders, which recom-
mendation shall be a sufficient voucher to said candidate to
obtain the signatures of a majority of the whole Committee,
agreeably to the sixth Canon agreed to and ratified in Gen.
eral Convention, held in Philadelphia on the 16th of Oc-
tober, 1789.

Resolved, That there be an annual meeting of the Episco-
pal Clergy and Laity of North Carolina, under the name of
the State Convention of the Hpiscopal Clergy and Laity.

Resolved, That in all General and State Conventions, the
Laity have a right to representation of their own order, and
until some future regulations take place, it is recommended
to the Laity to choose one for every county and one for every
district town* in this State.

Resolved, That the Episcopal Convention of this State do
appoint the stated time and place of their meeting and di-
rect the same to be advertised.

Resolved, That in cases of emergency, during the recess of
the Convention, a majority of the State [Standing ?] Com-
mittee be empowered to call the State Convention. That in
all such, not less than three months’ notice shall be given

in the public papers of this State, or advertised at the court
house in each county.

*See Article 4 of the Constitution of 1794, page 26 post, and note on
that Article.

15

Resolved, That the Laity hold their election for representa-
tives to the next State Convention at the court house in each
county, on the first Saturday in September next.

Convention adjourned to meet again at Tarborough on

i Jay in October next.
the fourth Wednesday in Oc one NORWOOD, See. C.

Larborough, Nov. 13th, 1790.

he Convention which by the action of the above body
aa to meet at Tawborough in October, 1791, seems
not to have been held. The most important result of the
Convention of 1790 was the ordination of the Rey. S. Hall-
ing, who was recommended for Holy Orders by the Stand-
ing Committee, and was ordained by Bishop Madison, of
Virginia. He succeeded the Rev. Dr. Cutting as Rector of
Christ Church, Newbern, in 1792 or 1793. _In Bp. Burgess’s
“List or Persons OrDAINED Deacons” Dr. Halling’s or-.
dination is put in the year 1792, and his death in 1813.
The Rey. James L. Wilson, one of the deputies appointed
to attend the General Convention of 1792, proceeded to New
York for that purpose, but was so delayed on his voyage
that he did not arrive until some days after its adjourn-
ment, as will be seen by a note appended the journal of the

General Convention of 1792.]
2

 
 

CONVENTION

HELD AT

Tarborough, November 21st, 1798,

Being the Second Attempt to Organize the Church in North Carolina.

[Heretofore the only record of the proceedings of this in-
formal meeting was the mention of itin Parson Miller’s
letter to Dr. Hawks. As Parson Miller was not present,
and spoke only from hearsay, and after the lapse of many
years, his account is not here inserted.

The following extract from a letter of the Rev. Dr. Hall-
ing, of Newbern, to the Rev. Charles Pettigrew, is the fullest
account we have of the proceedings of this Convention.
The letter is dated at Newbern, December 10th, 1793.]

“Tt will exceed the bounds of a letter to acquaint you
with all the business we went through, but I hope the fol-
lowing short abstract of our proceedings will afford you
some idea of our actions:

“Tam sorry to inform you that only six persons formed
the meeting, three of the Clergy, viz: Mr. Gurley, of Mur-
freesborough; Mr. Wilson and myself. On the part of the
Laity, Mr. Clements and Dr. Leigh, of Tarborough, the
former of the Presbyterian church, who was our secretary,
and Mr. F. Green, whom I desired the Vestry of Newbern
to appoint as deputy for Craven county.

“You may reasonably suppose that it would have been
unadvisable in us’to appoint a Bishop-elect; the smallness
of our number would have subjected him to reproach, and
our Church also.

“TI proposed we should send another advertisement, ac-
companied with a circular letter, to one or more respectable
and popular characters in every county, recommending in
the most earnest manner a convention of the people who
profess the Protestant Episcopal religion of the American
Church, to choose immediately a Vestry, to appoint Readers,
where a regularly ordained Clergyman could not be pro-
cured; and we resolved that this Vestry, the Readers, and

 
 

18.

whoever they might elect in addition as deputies, should
meet at Tarborough the last Wednesday in May, 1794, to
form a Constitution and elect one of the Clergy to be conse-
crated as Bishop of this State.

“This is the sum of our proceedings.”

[We learn from Parson Miller’s letter to Dr. Hawks, that
the Rev. James L. Wilson was President of this Convention,
and William Clements, Esq., Secretary; also that the Con-
vention appointed a Standing Committee, and published a
general notice of the meeting called for May, 1794. The
Rev. Dr. Halling, of Newbern, seems to have been the
moving spirit in this second effort at organization. There
is a long and most earnest letter from him to Mr. Pettigrew,
in which he urges the importance of the meeting to be held

in May, 1794; and probably it was his exertions which
caused so good an attendance. ]

 

CONVENTION OF 1794,

WITH THE

Constirurion Apoprep ror THE CHURCH

NORTH CAROLINA,

AND THE

Testimonial of the Rev. Charles Pettigrew as

Bishop-elect.

 
 

THE NAMES AND PLACES OF THE CLERGY.

[The following list of the Clergy of N ina i
without date, but is probably of the year Le Thies
just asit appears in the Pettigrew manuscript. The Cathie
of the Rev. Mr. Pettigrew is omitted, probably because this
was only a private memorandum of his own.]

Ist. Rev. JOHNSTON MILLER,

Lincoln Co., Whi F
2d. “ SOLM. HALLING, 0., White Haven Parish.

. Rector Chri 7
3d. “ JAMES I. WiLsoN, Church, Newbern.

f Marti
4th. “ NATHANIBL BLOUNT. e°combs

he of Pitt and E
bth. “ GEORGE MICKLEJOHN,  8°™P®

f F
6th. “ JOSEPH GURLEY, of Granville.

. of Hertford.
7th. STEPHEN JOHNSTON,

a
The Rev. Mr. DENT, of Northampton.
near the Yadkin river.

P. S.—The Rey. Robert Jol ie Mi Vhi
Parish, Lincoln Co., a Tahaan Pea erties

 

THE JOURNAL

OF THE

Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church,

HELD AT

Tarborough in May, 1794.

The Episcopal State Convention of North Carolina con-
yened in the town of Tarborough, on the last Wednesday
in May, 1794, agreeably to adjournment.

Present—
The Rev'd CHARLES PETTIGREW,

JAMES L. WILSON,
SOLOMON HALLING,

ROBERT J. MILLER,*
On the part of the Clergy.
Present on the part of the laity—
LEONARD DESSEAUX, for Beaufort county,
JOSEPH PERKINS, for Lincoln county,

ISAAC GUION, for Newbern,
JOHN LEIGH, one of the Standing Committee.
The necessary certificates were produced by the lay depu-

ties of their appointment. y
The Rev. Mr. Gurley, who was appointed by the last Con-

vention to open the business of the present by preaching a

sermon, having failed to appear, ;
The Rev. Mr. Charles Pettigrew was appointed by the

Convention to officiate in his place.
Adjourned until 7 o’clock P. M.

The Rev. Mr. Pettigrew officiated in the afternoon accord-
ing to the appointment of the Convention.

_*At this time the Rev. Mr, Miller had received only Lutheran ordina-
tion. He was ordained to the Deaconate and Priesthood by Bishop

Moore in 1821. [See Journal of that year.]

 
22

[Wepnespay, 7 O'clock, P. M.]

Mr. Robert White appeared and produced a certificate of
his election as a lay deputy to represent the town of Tar-
borough,

The Rey. Messrs. Wilson and Halling, on the part of the
Clergy, and Mr. White, on the part of the Laity, were ap-
pointed a Committee to draw up a Constitution for the gov-
ernment of the Protestant Episcopal Church in this State,
and report the same to-morrow.

Resolved, That the Convention proceed to-morrow, at the
hour of twelve, for the purpose of taking into consideration
that part of the public advertisement which relates to the
appointment of a Bishop-elect for the State.

The Convention adjourned till nine o’clock to-morrow.

Tuurspay, May 29th, 1794.

The Convention met according to adjournment, and the
morning service was read by the Rey. Mr. Miller.

On motion, Resolved, That the business of each day com-
mence with prayer.

On motion, Resolved, That Mr. William Clements be ap-
pointed Secretary of the Convention.

The Rev. Mr. Blount produced his orders and took his seat.

Mr. Wood, a member of the Standing Committee, appeared
this morning, produced his certificate, and took his seat.

The Committee appointed yesterday for drawing up a
Constitution for the government [of the Church in this
State] delivered their report. [See Appendix A].

On motion, the Convention formed itself into a Commit:
tee of the Whole, to take into consideration the Constitution
as reported by the Committee, Dr. Guion in the chair. After
some progress made the Committee rose.

Mr. James Adams, lay deputy from the county of Edge-
combe, produced his certificate and took his seat accordingly.

The Convention conceived it necessary to proceed to ap-
pointa Bishop-elect. Resolved, That this Convention do pro-
ceed, on Saturday next, to appoint by ballot a Bishop-elect.

The Convention then adjourned till 4 o’clock P. M. Thurs-
day.

23

[Tuurspay, 4 O’clock P. M.]

; ‘ : t.
The Convention met according to adjournmen
The General Constitution and Canons, as published by or-

i tion, read.
der of the General Convention, were, on motion, reat
The Convention adjourned until to-morrow at 8 o’clock.

Fripay, 80th May, 1794.

The Convention met according to adjournment, and

i er by the Rey. Mr. Blount. :
TE Gael bes of the Standing Committee from

i i i k his seat.
Pitt county, appeared this morning and took hi : :
The Ree de Massie Blount, Wilson and Halling were Oy
pointed a Committee to draw a form of recommendation for

the Bishop-elect to the General Convention. ‘
The Cenventinn resolved itself into a Committee of the

Whole, Dr. Guion in the chair. The Committee reported

rogress and asked leave to sit again.
The Convention adjourned until 4 o’clock P.M.

Fripay, 4 O’clock P. M.

The Convention met according to anger aie ie
solved itself into a Committee of the Whole, Dr. fuion a
the chair. - The Committee rose and the Faces resume :
his seat. Thechairman of the Committee reported progres

and asked leave to sit again.
The Convention adjourne
7 o'clock.

& until to-morrow morning at

——

Sarurpsy, 31st May, 1794.

The Convention met according to adjournment, prayers
being read by the Rev. Mr. Gurley.
The Committee presented a form 0

the Bishop-elect. [See Appendix B]. :
The Gonpention adjourned to meet at 12 o'clock.

f recommendation for

 
24

[Sarurpay, 12 O'clock M.]

The Convention met at 12 o’clock, according to adjourn-
ment.

The appointment of a Bishop-elect, agreeably to a resolu-
tion entered into on Thursday last, took place, when it ap-
peared that the Rey. Mr. Pettigrew was duly elected.

Resolved, That the Clergy choose lay members of the
Standing Committee, and that the laity choose the clerical
members ; and in consequence of this resolution the follow-
ing persons were chosen, viz:

The Rev. Messrs. Nara. Broun,
James L, Wirson,
Rozert J. Mrrimr,
Soromon Hatrine,
JosEPH GURLEY,
Groree MIcKLEJOnN,

Of the Clergy.
And of the laity : z
Messrs. McKenzie, Moore, Hardy Murfree, Dr. Guion,
David Turner, and Joseph Blount. ; ;
The Rev. Messrs. S. Halling and J. L. Wilson wore ap-
pointed as clerical deputies, and W. Clements, as lay deputy

to the next General Convention of the Protestant Kpiscopal
Church.

Resolwed, That the thanks of the Convention be rendered
to the President of the Convention, and the Secretary.

The Convention adjourned to meet in Tarborough on the
third Wednesday in October, 1795.

[The above is the journal of the Convention of 1794, as
given in the Pettigrew manuscript. Itis defective in one
or two points. It does not mention the election of any
President, nor does it show that any disposition was made
of the report of the Committee of the Whole on the Con-
stitution for the Church in this State. Immediately after
the journal, in the manuscript, follows a copy of the Consti-
tution, and, as it is signed by all the members of the Con-
vention, it must have been adopted by the Convention,
although no mention is made in the journal of such action.

A copy of the Constitution is given and is marked “ Appen-
dix A.”]

[APPENDIX A.]

A Copy OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL
OHUROCH IN THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA.

PREAMBLE.

in this
EREAS, There are numbers of good people in t

Heer es have been educated in the faith of the Eapientans
Episcopal Church, and many other religious and ye ue
posed persons who appear to be desirous to ore iy )
according to the forms used in said Church; W Be e ergy
and lay deputies in Convention met, have thought it a ee
able to frame a Constitution for the future Sore ae .
said Church; and humbly pray at the throne of : ceveuy
Grace that our endeavours may prove effectual to the prom

tion of virtue and true religion.

ARTICLE Ist.

That the Church be denominated the Protestant Episcopal
Church in the State of North Carolina.

2d.
That there shall be a Bishop in the said Church, who

ion; and that two-
hall be elected by ballot by the Convention; and |
thirds of the tnbeed present at the time of electing shall

be a majority for that purpose.

3d.

i t Episcopal
There shall be a Convention of the Protestant ie
Church of the State of North Carolina, on the third Nese
day in October annually, in such place as may be deter-
mined upon by every preceding Convention.

4th.

i i ler,
That the Conyention shall be, or may consist of the Clergy
regularly ordained and settled in this State, of the members

 
26

of the Standing Committee, one of the Vestry of each Parish, ~

two delegates from each county, and one from each town*
in the State, to be elected by the people.

5th.

One-third of the Clergy and an equal number of the lay
deputies shall constitute a quorum for transacting business,
but 4 smaller number may adjourn.

6th.

A Standing Committee, consisting of twelve persons, shall
be chosen or appointed by the Convention, whose office it
shall be to perform the duties laid down in the Canons and
General Constitution of the Church; and the vacancies shall
be filled up during the recess by the Bishop, which appoint-
ment shall count until the meeting of the next Convention.

7th.

That as speedily as possible after it is known in each
county what numbers are desirous of becoming members
of the Protestant Episcopal Church, they be convened and
elect a Vestry consisting of twelve persons; to form the peo-
ple into a regular society, and to procure a clergyman, who
has been regularly ordained according to the rites and cere-
monies of said Church, to officiate among them as frequently
as it is in his power to do so, and duly to administer the
Holy Ordinances. The Vestry shall be chosen annually.

8th.

That there shall be no fees or reward demanded for the
administration of the Holy Ordinance of Baptism.

9th.

All the Clergy shall be amenable to the Convention for
any immorality or misbehavior, and for countenancing and

*This refers, no doubt, to the old borough towns of Edenton, Halifax,
Newbern, Wilmington, Hillsboro and Salisbury, which, under the Con-
stitution of 1776, were entitled to one Representative each in the General
Assembly.

27

°

‘encouraging any doctrines contrary to the Holy Scriptures
comprehended in the Articles of our Church.

10th.

ny Church or Parish in this State not represented at the
a >t ordaining this Constitution, shall be entitled to the
benefit thereof,as soon as the members shall signify their
ratification in writing, or by a deputy to the State Conven-
tion.
11th.

That no person professing himself to be a Clergyman of
the Protestant Episcopal Church, shall be permitted to
preach in any of the churches or chapels in the State, until
he shall produce his Orders to the rector or minister of said
church or chapel, or to the vestry.

12th.

. The Bishop or President during the recess of the annual
Convention shall have the power of calling an especial Con-
vention on any urgent occasion, at such time as to ee may
appear most convenient, and at the place to which the pre-
ceding Convention adjourned itself.

13th.

This Constitution shall remain permanent until it may
be deemed necessary by three-fourths of any future Conven-
tion to alter or amend the same.

Done and ratified in Convention in Tarborough May 31st,

1794, and signed by

CHARLES PETTIGREW,

President of the Convention.

J. Lerten, Naruaniret Biount,
I. Guton, JosEPH GURLEY,
R. Ways, James L. Witson,
Berns. Woops, Soromon Haturna,
JosmPH PERKINS, R. Jounston MiILveEr,
L. Drsspaux,
Wo. GRIMEs,
Ropert GoDLeEY,
WitiismM CLEMENTS,

 
28

[APPENDIX B.]

TESTIMONIAL OF THE Rev. CHARLES PerrrgRew.

We, the subscribers, having met in Convention, at Tar-
borough, in North Carolina, on the 28th* day of May, 1794,
for the purpose of considering the declining situation of the
Protestant Episcopal Church in this State, and having
chosen the Rey. Charles Pettigrew as a person fit to be our
bishop, and worthy to be recommended for consecration to
that holy office—but being sensible that the great distance
at which the laity, as well as the clergy of this State live
from each other deprives us of sufficient personal acquaint-
ance with one another to subscribe a testimonial in the
words prescribed by the General Convention of the Prot-
estant Episcopal Church, have thought it necessary and
proper to make some deviation therefrom, which we pre-
sume to hope will be no obstacle to our laudable pursuit.
We therefore do hereby recommend to be consecrated to the
office of a bishop, the said Reverend Charles Pettigrew,
whom, from his morality, religious principles, piety of life,
. from his general reputation in a clerical character, from the
personal knowledge we have of him, and from his sufficiency
in good learning, and soundness in the faith, we are induced
to believe worthy of being consecrated to that important
office. We hereby promise and engage to receive him as such
when canonically consecrated and invested therewith, and
to render that canonical obedience which we believe to be
necessary to the due and proper discharge of so important
a trust in the Church of Christ. And we now address the
Right Reverend the Bishops in the several United States,

*This Testimonial could not have been actually signed before Satur-
day, May 31st, the day on which the election was made; but the old rule
of law refers every act of a legislative assembly to the first day of the

session, and so this paper is dated May 28th, Wednesday, the day on
which the Convention met.

29

i i i ing this our said
yi i ted assistance in consecrating t
Preeti ing him with the Apostolic

brother and canonically invest

office and powers.
In testimony whereof, we hereto subscribe our names,

day and year above written.

N. Brount,
J. Leien, M. D., J. L. Wuson,
I. Gurion, M. D., J. Guriery
R. Wave, \ 7 awvers S. HALLING
B. Woops, ge lites ,

R. J. Mriuier,
pean (Of the Clergy.)

W. GRIMEs, ee
R. Goprery, (Of the Laity.)

the