Colonial Williamsburg Digital Library

IN SUMMARY

Benjamin Harrison seems to have been the first owner of the present Semple house which is located on Francis Street near the Capitol. Harrison's lots were assigned by Act of Assembly of 1705. These lots, apparently were kept in the Harrison family until sometime after 1753. By 1769 the property had become Dr. William Pasteur's. It is possible that Dr. Pasteur built the house now known as the "Semple house" around 1773-1777.

Sometime prior to 1782 Colonel William Finnie was owner. Finnie advertised the property for sale in 1787. John Carter Byrd, son of William Byrd III, bought it paying £500 for the house, and £195 for furniture. Byrd held the property until his death in 1796. By 1798 Richard Randolph of Curles was owner. Dying in 1799 his estate kept the property only a year. The next owner was James Semple, attorney at law. During his ownership and tenure from 1801-1834, Semple insured the house with the Mutual Assurance Society some seven times. The Semple heirs sold in 1851 to John B. Christian who sold to George P. Scarborough in 1856. Clara Southall was owner 1857-1858 and in 1859 James W. Custis (who married Clara Southall) became owner. A part of the Custis property was deeded to Rebecca M. Smith in 1891 and the remaining part which covered the house was devised to Margaret Hansford, a sister of Kate W. Custis, the same year. In 1910 Mrs. Hansford conveyed to William F. Reeve, for the use and benefit of Charles G. Reeve and Rebecca H. C. Reeve and their heirs.

In 1928 said property was conveyed to Dr. W. A. R. Goodwin, agent of Colonial Williamsburg Restoration. Further study can be seen in the body of the report.

PHOTOSTAT COPYOF THE WILLIAMSBURG PLAT IN "WILLIAMSBURG, THE OLD COLONIAL CAPITOL" BY LYON G. TYLER

LOCATION:

The house now known as the "Semple House" is situated on the south side of Francis Street in Williamsburg not far from the Capitol. On late eighteenth century maps and early nineteenth century maps of the city the lot is designated "257." (See: College Map [1796?] opposite page.)^{Not college map but Tyler copy of another map}

HISTORY:

The first known owner of property on which the present Semple House seems to stand was Benjamin Harrison.¹ An Act of Assembly continuing the Act directing the building of the Capitol and the city of Williamsburg in October 1705, sections XXIX and XXX, gives a proviso as to lots formerly laid out. Harrison's lots were designated thus: 2

And be it further enacted, by the authority aforesaid, and it is hereby enacted, That none of the lots, or half acres of land in the city of Williamsburg, whereon any houses were standing, at the laying out of the said city, shall vest in the said feoffees and trustees of the said city, to be disposed of, as the rest of the lots, and half acres may be, by virtue of the said act, made at a general assembly begun at James City, the twenty-seventh day of April, one thousand six hundred ninety nine, intitutled, An Act directing the building the Capitol, and the city of Williamsburg; but that all and every of the said lots and half acres, shall remain and continue the proper estate of the respective proprietors unaltered by the said act, and so shall be adjudged, deemed, and taken; any thing in the said Act to the contrary, or seeming to the contrary notwithstanding.

Saving to Benjamin Harrison
[Section XXX] And be it also enacted, That the four lots, or half acres, which at the first laying out of the land for the said city, were laid out and appropriated for the buildings then erected on the same, by Benjamin Harrison, jr. esq. shall remain and continue to the use of the said Benjamin Harrison, his heirs and assigns, and shall not lapse for want of other buildings thereon; any thing in this act to the contrary, notwithstanding.¹

In October, 1710 "An Act to enable Elizabeth Harrison widow and administratrix of Benjamin Harrison, late of the county of Charles City, gentleman, decd. To 3 sell certain Lands and Slaves, late the estate of the said Benjamin, for payment of the debts of the said Benjamin."¹ Diverse lands and tenements situated in Charles City, James City, Prince George and Surry Counties were noted as property owned by the deceased and now allowable for sale to pay his debts. No mention was made of any lots in Williamsburg owned by Harrison. After all debts were paid, any surplus was to be applied by said Elizabeth Harrison, administratrix, for the use and benefit of Benjamin Harrison, only son of the deceased and not yet twenty-one.²

Though no Williamsburg property was mentioned in the Act above quoted in part, the property allowed by Assembly of 1705 to Benjamin Harrison Jr. and to his heirs was kept in the family until sometime after 1753.

An Act of Assembly in 1753 described Philip Johnson's location in Williamsburg as "2 lots on Francis 4 Street between the lots of Benjamin Harrison and Benjamin Waller."¹

By 1769 the Williamsburg property--once the Harrison lots--had come into possession of Dr. William Pasteur,² an apothecary of Williamsburg. In this year Colonel Philip Johnson's property was described thus: "2 lots on Francis Street between William Pasteur and Benjamin Waller."³

In 1771 Johnson's property was noted in this way: "…between the LOTS of Mr. Waller and Doctor Pasteur …"⁴

The destruction of James City County court records for that part of Williamsburg lying in the county has deprived the future of any deeds to this property.⁵

William Pasteur was the son of Jean (John) Pasteur, peruke-maker of Williamsburg. Upon the death of his mother, Martha Harris Pasteur, in 1746, William was left under the guardianship of Commissary Dawson of the College.¹ Soon he was apprenticed to Dr. George Gilmer in his apothecary shop in the city. By 1760 Pasteur most probably had married Elizabeth Stith, daughter of the late Reverend William Stith, President of William and Mary College, and Judith Randolph Stith.² It was in 1760 that he bought a lot from Henry Wetherburn on the north side of Duke of Gloucester Street which he used as an apothecary shop. From 1760-1775 Pasteur advertised imported medicines, supplies, cordials, oils, etc. for sale. By 1775 he had entered into a partnership with Dr. John M. Galt which lasted to 1778.³

It looks as though Dr. Pasteur prior to his marriage was not a man of fortune nor did he inherit any considerable amount from either of his parents. His wife's mother, Judith Randolph, at the time of her marriage to the Reverend Stith was "a young lady of considerable fortune," according to the Virginia Gazette.¹

By 1769 (as stated before) Dr. Pasteur was living on Francis Street. By 1773 he had moved from one house on the street to another adjoining.² That year he bought a farm of 630 acres on King's Creek which had been in the Wormeley family; he owned a plantation of 800 acres in Goochland County which had been Randolph property. He had loaned Philip W. Claiborne £1500.19.4 and this year he collected that amount from Claiborne's 7 executors by order of court.¹ In fact, Dr. Pasteur, seemingly, overnight had evolved from a local doctor and apothecary to a man of landed estates and money to lend. It does not seem unreasonable to believe that Dr. Pasteur through his marriage came into money via the Randolphs.²

It is entirely possible that Dr. Pasteur could have built the house on Lot 257 now known as the "Semple House."

In January, 1773 Dr. Pasteur was advertising a part of his property for sale:

THE HOUSES and LOT adjoining me wherein I formerly lived; for which twelve Months credit will be allowed the Purchaser, on giving approved Security, to WILLIAM PASTEUR.³

We interpret Dr. Pasteur's notice above as meaning that he was willing to sell a lot with houses thereon adjoining his present house.

In May, 1773 Archibald Diddep, tailor, notified his customers that he had taken a "House contiguous to Doctor Pasteur's":

ARCHIBALD DIDDEP, TAILOR, Williamsburg TAKES this Method of informing the Publick that he has removed from his former Habitation to a House contiguous to Doctor Pasteur's, where he carries on his Business in all its different Branches. He returns his most grateful Acknowledgments to all those who have hitherto been pleased to favour him with their Custom, and hopes for a Continuance of it, as they may rely upon their Work being executed with the greatest Care and Puctuality, and the most genteel Manner.¹

According to Marcus Whiffen, architectural historian of Colonial Williamsburg (1960), "the present Semple house has the same proportions as a house on The Frenchman's Map of Williamsburg (1782) and is the same as on an insurance policy for this house in 1801." Mr. Whiffen explains "that the house [in 1801] looked just as it does today is attested by a sketch of the street 9 front upon the insurance declaration. That it and the other buildings on the property were by no means new may be inferred from the statement in the same declaration that they would have cost $4,000 to build at that date, the deduction of $2,000 being due to decay or bad repair .... And it has been confirmed by the archaeologist's spade, which by failing to reveal signs of earlier foundations upon the site has proved that the house shown on the map can be none other than the present one. The year 1782, then, is the terminus ante quem for the dating of the house; stylistic evidence makes it unlikely that it was built much before the Revolution."¹

During 1777-1779 Pasteur made repairs to the house and dependencies at the farm in York County. Harwood did the work for him.² Prior to 1779 Dr. Pasteur had removed to his farm. He advertised from King's Creek 10 as "oyster merchant able to deliver considerable quantities of open or in shell at my landing there."¹

Sometime prior to 1782 Colonel William Finnie² was owner of the Francis Street property (to follow in report). Finnie was Quartermaster-General of the Southern Department with headquarters in Williamsburg from 1776-ca. 1786. In 1782 he was listed as owner of 7 slaves. Tax records for this year give Finnie as owner of 2 lots with tax valuation of £4. In 1787 these lots were valued at £27 for tax purposes.³

Work done in 1779 by Harwood for Finnie covered such items as mending plastering, fixing porch, whitewashing 6 rooms and 2 passages. Further repairs made in 1782-1786 indicated that there was a cellar to the house, a dining room and 5 marble chimney pieces put into the house. If work done by Harwood for Finnie was at this location, it seems clear that in 1778 there was a house 11 on this lot already built and that Finnie was putting it into better repair.¹ When Finnie was having changes made to his property by Harwood, there was a note by Harwood referring to "bricks from Diddip's old House." These bricks, evidently, had been used by Harwood with Finnie's consent. In fact, Finnie expected Harwood to take these bricks as part payment for work done.²

In May, 1787 William Finnie advertised his house and lots for sale:

FOR SALE,
MY HOUSE & LOTS,
In the City of Williamsburg,
Where I now live, it is a beautiful situation, and has a lot on each side capable of improvement. Any person inclinable to purchase, may know the terms by applying to me on the premises, or in my absence to the Honourable JOSEPH PRENTIS, who I impowered to treat for the same. WM. FINNIE.³

By September, 1787 Finnie's house had been sold to John Carter Byrd,¹ son of William Byrd III. Henry Tazewell, Williamsburg lawyer and advisor to John Carter Byrd, rendered this account to Byrd:

Dr
1787 …
Sept. 28.
	To Colo Finnie for your house	£500.0.0
	To do For furniture in Edward's Bond	195.10.0
	To do for your draft in Cash	26.17.0
		£2436.19.03 ¼

…
1788
Mar	Mr Byrd. Acct as it now stands
	March 1788.
	Paid as follows
	…
	To Wm Finnie ------------------	£500.0.0
	…
	To Finnie for furniture -------	195.10.0

²

Byrd's account with Henry Tazewell 1787-1789 has one item indicating that Byrd was living in town:

1789 Sept To sowing your wheat Lot in Town & 1 Bushel Wheat	0.17.0
To 75 Loads of Wood at 10/	37.10.0
Nov To 3000 shingles 16/	2.8.0

³

In 1788 Williamsburg Land Tax records list "John Byrd of Wm Finnie & Arch Diddup ---- 4 lots --- £32."¹ Diddep held 1 lot ---- £5 in 1786 and Finnie held 2 lots --£27. Finnie's and Diddep's lot valuations added together would make £32 which is the same amount paid by Byrd. See: House History of Lot 255 or Diddep Lot, Research Department.

On June 12, 1790 Humphrey Harwood made some repairs to a house of Byrd's:

Dr	John Byrd Esq
1790 th
June 12	To 12 bushels of lime @ 9d	-. 9.-
Octo 23	To taking down the old Bricks & stones of the portch & relaying them 12/6	-.12.6
		£l. 1.6
rd		Cr
Octo 23	By Cash in full	£1. 1.6

²

In 1790 "John Byrd esqr Williamsburg" had James Anderson, Williamsburg, blacksmith, repair a smoke house 14 and chariot; and provide spikes for rafters and a ladder for a chimney.¹

Byrd held the 4 lots according to Williamsburg Land Tax records from 1788-1796.² Byrd died in 1796.³

In 1798 Richard Randolph⁴ of Curles had become the owner of 6 lots in Williamsburg with a tax valuation of $80. Randolph died in 1799. His estate held the 6 lots until 1801. (To follow in the report.)

From the will of Richard Randolph "of the City of Williamsburg" dated February 19, 1799, we know that he bought the lots from John Carter Byrd and Benjamin Bucktrout: 15

[February 19, 1799]

First I desire my just debts and funeral expences to be first paid and satisffyed. I give to my beloved wife Maria all my Houses and lots in the City of Williamsburg where I now live which I purchased of John C Byrd and Benjamin Bucktrout together with all my house hold and Kitchen furniture during her natural life .... and that my said wife be furnished with a neat serviceable carriage and a pair of horses in the discretion of my executors and also the Houses and Lots in Williamsbg in which I have given her a life estate be put in neat and good repair ….
Richard Randolph SS

[Carter Beverley and Gawin L. Corbin, executors. Witnessed by Will: Russell Mann Page junr Recorded September 9, 1799 James City County Court.]

¹

While Randolph was living in Williamsburg he held 9 slaves and 2 horses.¹

By 1801 James Semple, Attorney at Law, had become the owner of 4 lots with tax valuation of $70.²

This year Semple insured his new house with the Mutual Assurance Society, Richmond. He stated that he resided in Williamsburg in the County of James City, there were "four buildings on the Back Street South of the old Capitol at Williamsburg now occupied by myself situated between the House of Robert H: Waller and that of Benj: Bucktrout … The wooden dwelling is 24 feet by 22 two stories high with two wooden wings 22 by 20 one story high." Dependencies noted were "a wooden office 12 by 12 one story; and a wooden stable and carriage house 20 by 10 feet also one story high."³

In 1806 Semple insured his property which was a revaluation of the policy of 1801; "The four buildings on the South side of Francis Street in sd City now occupied by self are situated between the Lott of Benjamin Bucktrout W and the Lott of Burwell Bassett East in the county of James City.¹

The apparent discrepancy in the descriptions of the same property as noted in policies for 1801 and 1806 seems to be that the first refers to houses and the second to lots.

A letter dated "Williamsburg 14, 1809" [sic] from St. George Tucker to ---- Skipwith describes the Semple house at that time which was for sale:

There are two other houses in Williamsburg which I believe are for sale. The first belongs to Mr. Semple lately appointed Judge which will oblige him to move from Williamsburg. This is a neat handsome house nearly opposite the South end of the old Capitol, which you must have observed, I think, as it is the handsomest house in town. There is a large garden and I believe an acre or more of land in adjacent lots. The house is a very good one and contains about 6 rooms or 18 perhaps more. I know not what Mr. Semple would ask for it but I expect as much as Mr. Prentis's whole establishment would probably cost …¹

The Semple house was not sold. From 1809-1819 ^{X 10-14 [illegible]}Semple is shown in the Williamsburg Tax records as owner of 4 ½ lots valued from 1801-1806 at $70; 1814 at $150; 1815 at $200; 1817-1819 at $164.² In 1820 Semple is charged with 1 lot valued at $2050 including buildings, with buildings at $1800.³

In 1823 Semple's insurance policy--which was a revaluation--gave "The buildings are situated on Francis Street now occupied by self between the lot of Burwell Bassett East and South, Bucktrout Lot west, and Francis Street north in the county of James City." ⁴ The office building on the property, evidently, had been conveyed by deed to James Semple Jr. In policy #5036, in the name 19 of Semple Jr., the property described was "my buildings … on Francis Street in Williamsburg situated between the lot of James Semple on the East, South and West, and Francis street north in the county of James City…"¹

Sometime between 1806 (policy #670) and 1823 (policy #5035) a rear wing had been added to the dwelling house.² This rear wing appears on every other policy through 1850.³

An amusing story written in April, 1813 by a lad, William H. Waller who lived in the Benjamin Waller house, to his sister, Mrs. Eliza Blow of Tower Hill, Sussex County, relates the intimacy between the Waller and Semple families:

Williamsburg, April 2, 1813

… Mama has been frightened but once we heard the brittish had Landed at kings mill and were marching towards the old city she immediately snached [sic] up her silver spoons put them into her red trunk with her papers and sent them by Uncle Beuran[?] from her house to Mr. Semples who 20 lives in his old mansion house and returned with a violent pain in her back and head and went to bed, Mrs Semple soon spread the report that she went to bed to receive the Brittish…¹

In 1830 James Semple insured his property with the Mutual Assurance Society again. He stated that "My buildings on Francis Street in Williamsburg now occupied by myself situated between the lots and lands of Burwell Bassett on the East and South, the lot of Bucktrout on the west and Francis Street on the north, and partly on the East by lot of James Semple, Jr., in the county of James City…"² James Semple, Jr. insured his office in 1830 thus: "My buildings on Francis Street in Williamsburg situated between the lands and lots of James Semple on the East, South and West and the street on the north, in the county of James City…"

In 1834 Judge James Semple died.

The property was owned by his heirs until 1851 when John B. Christian³ had come into possession. A study 21 of the land tax on the property from 1820 to 1854 indicates that the lot with buildings had a valuation ranging from $2050 to $2400.¹

In 1851 Christian insured his buildings under policy #14,380 [no date given] total valuation of his property consisting of a dwelling, kitchen, laundry and office was $3900.²

In 1853 John B. Christian gave a deed to George P. Scarburgh and Clara H., his wife, to 3 ½ acres adjoining G. Durfey and Richard M. Bucktrout.³

In 1854 or 1855 George P. Scarburgh and wife deeded the 3 1/2 acres to Clara H. Southall. It was described as "the old residence of Judge James Semple."

Williamsburg Land Tax transfers for 1856 show that George P. Scarborough had come into "1 lot formerly assigned to John B. Christian."¹ Scarborough [Scarburgh] had insured the property in 1853 under policy #17,648 revaluation of #14,380 in the name of John B. Christian.² Such property was described as on Frances Street now occupied by myself situated between the lands of Goodrich Durfey on the East and Richard M. Bucktrout on the West in the county of James City … Dwelling, kitchen laundry and office --- total valuation $3900.³

In 1870 John R. Custis conveyed to Catherine W. Custis the property he had received from James W. and Clara Custis.⁴

In 1871 James W. Custis was plaintiff upon petition to set up a lost deed of trust versus Andrew Lyttle, defendant. In the petition "it appears that James W. Custis sold to Andrew Lytle in the year 1861 the following property to wit: 2/3 of a lot at the College landing half under a lease, ½ of a wharf on the College Creek, known as Galt's Wharf and also a saw mill and fixtures located on the first named lot of land and the Creek aforesaid and 2/3 of seven and three quarters acres of land near the College Creek: for the purchase of this property the said Andrew Lytle gave to James W. Custis two single bills under seal: one for six hundred and eighty dollars payable on demand and the other for one thousand and sixty dollars payable on the twenty first August 1862 with interest… "¹ (This property is not strictly the 3 ½ acres though it does show the extent of the Custis holdings in the area.)²

A part of the Custis property was deeded to Rebecca M. Smith in 1891 under a deed of trust.¹ The remaining part which covered the house was devised by will on January 21, 1891:

[Will of Kate W. Custis] … I bequeath to my sister, Margaret, Mrs. Hansford, the house and lot now owned by me in Williamsburg to be under her sole control, this though, the property I mean, must be held until all my debts are paid. The house and lot can be rented out until the debts are satisfied...²

On September 27, 1910 Margaret Custis Hansford, widow, conveyed to William F. Reeve of Moorestown, New Jersey, property naming the consideration as $2250. Such property was held in trust for the use and benefit of Charles G. Reeve and Rebecca H. C. Reeve and their heirs:

… All that certain lot or tract of land and premises situated in the City of Williamsburg in the County of James City, and the state of Virginia, known as the "Peyton Randolph House", bounded and described as follows: On the North by Francis Street; on the East by the property of Hugh S. Bird and Margaret W. S. Bird; on the South by the property of Rebecca M. Smith; and on the West by the property of 25 Eugene W. Morris. This lot fronts said Francis Street about one hundred and twelve feet (112) running South between parallel lines about two hundred and eighty-two (282) feet, being the remainder of the lot or premises devised to said Margaret C. Hansford by Catherine W. Custis by will recorded in the Clerk's Office in the County of James City and the City of Williamsburg, on the 10th day of October, 1892.¹

The said property above described, was conveyed on February 15, 1928 to Dr. W. A. R. Goodwin, agent of Colonial Williamsburg Restoration. Further title to this property can be found in the files of the Accounting Department of Colonial Williamsburg.

Illustration #1
James Semple House
Block 2

From Frenchman's Map 1782?

Illustration #2

Illustration #4

Illustration #5
James Semple House
Block 2

Mutual Assurance Society Declaration for Assurance No. 486
James Semple residing at Williamsburg in the county of James City … 1801 July 20th

"…My four buildings on the Back Street South of the old Capitol at Williamsburg now occupied by myself situated between the House of Robert H. Waller and that of Benj: Bucktrout…

The Dwelling house marked A at	$1700
The Kitchen & Smoke House B at	100
The Office D&E	100
The Stable & Carriage House C at	100
	$2000"

[Image of Original Insurance Plat]

1806, June 11th

Mutual Assurance Society Declaration for Assurance No. 670
Revaluation per Declaration No. 486
James Semple residing at Williamsburg in the county of James City…

"My four Building on the South side of Francis Street in sd City now occupied by myself and situated between the Lott of Benjamin Bucktrout W and the Lott of Burwell Bassett East in the county of James City…

The Dwelling House marked A at	$2665
The Kitchen marked B at	100
The Stable & Carriage House marked C at	200
The Office Marked B&E at	250
	$3215

[Image of Original Insurance Plat]

1823, April 28th

Mutual Assurance Society Declaration for Assurance No. 5035 Revaluation per Declaration No. 670.
James Semple residing at Williamsburg in the county of James City…

"My buildings on Francis Street between the lot of Burwell Bassett East and South, Bucktrout lot west an Francis Street north in the county of James City…

The Dwelling marked A at	$2300
The Kitchen marked B at	150
The Stable & Carriage House Marked C at	100
The Laundry markd D at	150
	$2700"

[Image of Original Insurance Plat]

Mutual Assurance Society Declaration for Assurance No. 5036 of Buildings formerly declared for Assurance by James Semple per Declaration No. 670.

1823, April 28th

James Semple Junr the declare "my buildings … on Francis Street in Williamsburg situated between the lot of James Semple on the East, South and West, and Francis street north in the county of James City…

The office marked A at	$300
	$300"

[Image of Original Insurance Plat]

1830, May 13th

Mutual Assurance Society Declaration for Assurance No. 7598 Revaluation per Declaration No. 5035
James Semple residing At Williamsburg in the county of James City…

"My buildings on Francis Street in Williamsburg now occupied by myself situated between the lots and lands of Burwell Bassett on the East and South—the lot of Bucktrout lot west an Francis Street north, and partly on the East by the lot of james Semple Jr in the county of James City…

The Dwelling marked A at	$2300
The Kitchen marked B at	150
The Stable & Carriage House Marked C at	150
The Laundry markd D at	150
	$2800"

[Image of Original Insurance Plat]

Mutual Assurance Society Declaration for Assurance No. 7588 Revaluation of Building formerly declared per Declaration No. 5036 by James Semple Junr

1830, June 2.

James Semple Junr. Residing at James City in the county of James City…
"My buildings on Francis Street in Williamsburg situated between the lands and lots of James Semple on the East, South and West and the street on the north, in the county of James City…

The Office marked A at	$300
	$300"

[Image of Original Insurance Plat]

Mutual Assurance Society Declaration for Assurance No. 10,996 Revaluation of Buildings formerly declared for Assurance by James Semple and James Semple Junr per Declarations Nos 7598 & 7599

John B. Christian the underwritten
(No date on policy)
"My buildings on my own land now occupied by myself and situated between the lands and lots of John M. Galt on the East and South, Richard E. Bucktrout on the west and Francis Street north, and partly on the East by the lot of James Semple Jr in the county of James City…

The Dwelling marked A at	$3000
The Kitchen marked B at	250
The Laundry markd C at	350
The office marked D at	350
	$3950"

[Image of Original Insurance Plat]

Mutual Assurance Society Declaration for Assurance #14,380 Revaluation of Buildings formerly declared for Assurance by John B. Christian per Declaration #10,996
No date written in [probably 1846]

I the underwritten John B. Christian residing at Williamsburg in the county of James City do hereby declare for Assurance… my Buildings on my own land in Williamsburg now occupied by myself situated between the lands of Richard M. Bucktrout on the West, Goodrich Durfey on the East and Francis Street on the North in the county of James City…

The Dwelling marked A at	$3000
The Kitchen marked B at	250
The Laundry markd C at	300
The office marked D at	350
	$3900"

[Image of Original Insurance Plat]

Mutual Assurance Society Declaration for Assurance #17,648 revaluation of Buildings formerly declared for Assurance by John B. Christian per Declaration #14,380

1853, November 29th.
I the underwritten George P. Scarburgh residing at Williamsburg in the county of James City do hereby declare for assurance… my buildings on Frances Street now occupied by myself situated between the lands of Goodrich Durfey on the East and Richard M. Bucktrout on the West in the county of James City…

The Dwelling marked A at	$3000
The Kitchen marked B at	250
The Laundry markd C at	300
The office marked D at	350
	$3900"

[Image of Original Insurance Plat]

Mutual Assurance Society Policy #21,324 Revaluation of Buildings formerly declared for Assurance by George P. Scarburgh per Declaration #17,648

1860, December 31st.
I the underwritten James W. Custis & Clara H. his wife residing at Williamsburg in the county of James City do hereby declare for assurance…
Our buildings on Frances Street now occupied by ourselves situated between the land of Goodrich Durfey, on the East and R. M. Bucktrout on the West in the county of James City…

The Dwelling marked A at	$3000
The Kitchen marked B at	250
The Laundry markd C at	300
The office marked D at	350
	$3900"

[Image of Original Insurance Plat]

Illustration #6
Burwell's Ex'ors v. Anderson, Adm'r &c
December, 1831

Upon an appeal from a decree of the superiour court of chancery of Williamsburg, in a suit between Robert Anderson, administrator of Elizabeth Pasteur and executor of Mary Stith deceased, and the executors of Nathaniel Burwell deceased, who was the executor of William Pasteur deceased, a great many questions of fact, and several points of law arose, and were discussed. The points of law, and the state of facts on which they arose, were as follows:

I. Dr. William Pasteur of Williamsburg, who died in March 1791, by his will,---after empowering his executors to sell his lands in Goochland, and all the personal property at and upon the same, excepting slaves, and directing them to apply the proceeds of sale in the first place to the payment of his debts, and after some specific bequest of particular slaves, --- devised and bequeathed as follows: "I desire that my wife Elizabeth Pasteur may have and possess, during her life, all the rest and residue of my estate, whether real or personal. And, after her death, my will and desire is, that all my estate, both real and personal, shall be turned into money, by the most advantageous sale which my executors can make of it, and the amount thereof distributed in manner following, viz: I desire my wife, by her will or otherwise as she pleases, may have the absolute disposal of £500. thereof. I give my nephew William Pasteur, to be paid him when he attains to the age of twenty-one years the sum of £200. sterling other part, thereof. And it is my will and desire, after deducting the two last mentioned sums, that two thirds of the residue be paid to my niece Anne Smith for her own use, and the remaining third to my friend Nathaniel Burwell, for the use and benefit of my sister Ann Craig, to be always at her disposal, in such manner that her husband Thomas Craig and his creditors may have no power over it. I give to my wife the absolute property in my chariot. It is my will and desire, that, if the estate hereby before directed to be sold for the payment of my debts, should not prove sufficient for that purpose, whatever sum my other estate shall be called upon to make up, shall be deducted in equal proportions according to the sums devised in money, to my wife, to my nephew, to my niece and to my sister as aforesaid." The testator's widow, Mrs. Pasteur, died in the year 1792, intestate, and without having made any disposition, by any act in her lifetime of the £500. mentioned 2 in her husband's will; and her sister, Mary Stith, was her sole distributee.

And the question was, Whether the bequest as to the £500. contained in the will, was a legacy and gift of that sum to Mrs. Pasteur, or only gave her a power of appointment of so much, and that power having been no wise executed by her, this money fell into the residuum of the estate, for the benefit of the other legatees?

II. Dr. Pasteur, as has been mentioned, died in March 1791, and Mrs. Pasteur in 1792. Nathaniel Burwell, one of the executors named in Dr. P.'s will, proved it, and qualified as executor, in the hustings court of Williamsburg, at July term 1791. Shortly after he took upon him the administration of the estate, moneys to a large amount came into his hands, and remained in his hands for several years; the greater part of the debts of his testator being british debts, as to which there was, at first, a doubt whether or no they were recoverable, and then they were to be ascertained and liquidated. In October 1810, the hustings court of Williamsburg appointed commissioners, to audit, state and settle, his accounts of administration of his testator's estate; and, in stating the accounts, the commissioners did not charge the executor with interest on the balances annually appearing to have been in his hands, and to have remained for several years applied to the debts of his testator, which debts were, however, paid in the sequel, with the interest that had accumulated upon them. The accounts so settled, shewed a balance due the executor. The commissioners reported their settlement of the accounts to the hustings court, and the court, at November 1810, ordered it to be recorded. At the time the accounts were thus audited, reported and recorded, no person had ever taken administration of Mrs. Pasteur's estate. But her sister and sole distributee, Mary Stith, was living, and living at Williamsburg. Mary Stith died in 1816, having made a will, in which Anderson was appointed her executor, who qualified as such in the same year. Anderson, as the executor of Mary Stith, exhibited his original bill in this cause, against the executors of Burwell, who was the executor of Dr. Pasteur, in the year 1818; and the case stated in that bill, shewed, that he was, in that character, entitled to demand a resettlement of Burwell's accounts of administration of Dr. Pasteur's estate, if the accounts stated and reported by the commissioners of the hustings court, were unjust; 3 and he alleged matters to falsify and surcharge them, and, in particular, objected to the omission of all charge against the executor, for interest. In 1822, Anderson took administration of Mrs. Pasteur's estate, which till then had remained wholly unrepresented; and then, in this character, he exhibited another bill against the executors of Burwell, who was the executor of Dr. Pasteur, claiming among other things, the £500. bequeathed to his intestate Mrs. Pasteur, by Dr. Pasteur's will, which he alleged had never been paid, and which, certainly, was not charged in Burwell's accounts of administration, settled and reported by the commissioners of the hustings court, as having been paid; and again surcharging and falsifying the account so settled, and objecting to the omission of all charge against the executor, for interest. It appeared, that there had been several dealings, from time to time, between Burwell, the executor, and Mary Stith, during her life: she had contracted a debt to him, and given her bond to him for it, which remained unpaid at her death. And upon this part of the case, several questions were raised.

The other judges concurred in the opinion of the president, on all the points; and a decree was entered accordingly, reversing the chancellor's decree, declaring the principles on which the interest account of the executor should be stated, correcting the accounts also as to various matters of detail, and remanding the cause &c.