Colonial Williamsburg Foundation Library Research Report Series - 1242
Colonial Williamsburg Foundation Library
Williamsburg, Virginia
1990
The Lightfoot house and its outbuildings are located on Colonial Lots #13 and 14. From what is said below it appears likely that this property had come into the possession of the Lightfoot family sometime prior to the year 1747. In that year Phillip Lightfoot, a wealthy merchant of Yorktown, made a will in which he bequeathed to his third son, John Lightfoot, all of his "Lots and Houses in the City of Williamsburg."
Phillip Lightfoot had been appointed to the governor's council fourteen years prior to that time (in 1733), and it is probable that he had acquired a home in the city of Williamsburg in which he could reside during his attendance upon the meetings of the council and the general court, and at other "public times". This supposition is supported by the fact that Lightfoot bequeathed to his son John, in addition to his houses and lots in Williamsburg, "the Furniture in the House at Williamsburg." [York County Records, Wills, Inventories, Book XX, pp. 103-105]
Phillip Lightfoot was a man of large substance and property. In addition to his mercantile activities, he acted as an attorney, and had large planting interests. He owned plantations in York, Charles City, Surry, Brunswick, Goochland, New Kent and Hanover Counties. In addition to residences in Yorktown, and Williamsburg, Phillip Lightfoot had another residence on his manor plantation at Sandy Point, in Charles City county. His residence at Yorktown was described by a British traveller in 1736 as one "equal in Magnificence to many of our superb ones at St. James."[William and Mary Quarterly, 1st series, vol. 15, p. 222]
John Lightfoot died without issue within two decades after he had inherited his father's houses and lots in Williamsburg. [Hening, Statutes vol. VII, pp. 457-460] It seems likely that his property in Williamsburg passed to his eldest brother, William, for in 1769 an orphan child of 2 William's owned certain lots on the east side of the market place, the description of which locates them as lots #13 and 14.
An Act of Assembly of that year, defining the boundary between York and James City counties within the city, stated that the line should run
... down the middle of the main street to the eastern end of the Market place, thence into the lane which divides the store-house of James Anderson merchant, from the lots of the orphan of William Lightfoot, esq. deceased as far as the middle of the palings of said lots, thence through the middle of those lots.
[Hening, Statutes, vol. VIII, pp. 405-406]
The orphan son of William Lightfoot, who had come into possession of this property was known as William Lightfoot of "Tettington". This William Lightfoot served as a member of the House of Delegates from James City County in 1799-1800, and in 1805-1806. The James City Tax Records show that he still owned two lots in Williamsburg in 1806. (The records are incomplete for the years preceding that date). This second William Lightfoot died in 1809. (Will made April 22, 1809, probated August 17, 1809). [William and Mary Quarterly, series one, Vol. 3, p. 109]
On September 30 of that year Peter Rob Deneufville insured his buildings situated "south of the main street in Williamsburg east of the Courthouse Square, north of Francis Street and west of a cross street dividing Lightfoot's lot." [Insurance Policy No. 970, p. 22]
A number of other records throw additional light on the history and ownership of lots #13 and 14 during the time it was in the possession of William Lightfoot of Tettington. The Frenchman's map of 1781 (or 1782 or 1786) indicates that a building corresponding in proportions and location to the present Lightfoot residence stood at that time on the property. A second structures with its gable end facing on the Duke of Gloucester Street is indicated on the eastern end of the property. A third small structure is indicated in the rear of the residence to the west of it.
3The unknown draftsman's map of c. 1790 and the Bucktrout map of 1803 both show these lots in the possession of a person or persons named Lightfoot.
The Lightfoot property appears to have been in litigation for some years following the death of William Lightfoot of Tettington in 1809. (See William and Mary Quarterly, series one, p. 109). The James City County Tax Records show that two lots in Williamsburg were assessed to the estate of William Lightfoot from 1810 to 1819. Although it will appear that William Lightfoot's son, Phillip John Lightfoot, apparently acquired some right to the property before his death in 1819, it appears to have been assessed as the property of the estate of William until the time of Phillip John's death. (Only one lot was assessed after 1820, but this was customary during that period when an owner had several lots that were contiguous).
It was not until 1839 that the property was sold out of the Lightfoot family. During that year, Lyon G. Tyler states, William A. Lightfoot of Buckingham County, as one of the devisees of Phillip John Lightfoot, gave a deed to a lot in the city, formerly the property of William Lightfoot, father of said Phillip John. [William and Mary Quarterly, series one, vol. 3, p. 109] The James City Tax Records for 1840 show George W. Southall in possession of a lot which had been acquired "via Lightfoot & others" and which had been "heretofore charged to Wm Lightfoot's estate." The buildings on the lot were valued at $1,500.
The Southall Papers at the College of William and Mary show that an agreement was drawn up on March 14, 1842 between Southall and Dr. John Mercer, under which Mercer, for the sum of $3,300, was to acquire title
To that lot of land & the buildings and improvements thereon now held & owned by the said Southall situated on the South side of the Main or Duke of Gloucester Street in the said City, being the same House & Lot formerly owned by William Lightfoot and purchased by the said Southall.4
Apparently Dr. Mercer never carried out his part of the agreement, for four years later, in 1846, Southall sold the property to William S. Peachy. The James City County Tax Records for 1847 (in which it is indicated that Peachey had acquired the property from Southall) show that the house was valued at that time at $3,100 and house and lot together at $3,500.
The increased valuation which was apparently put on the property while it was in the possession of Southall would seem to indicate that the buildings on it had been repaired or enlarged while he owned them. It seems likely that the wing which was attached to the east side of the residence sometime before its restoration, and which it will be seen was used by Peachey as a law office, was added at that period.
With the exception of this wing which had been added on the eastern side and some porches which had been erected, the residence had apparently been little altered during the nineteenth century. A view of the Duke of Gloucester Street in the Tucker Collection of Photographs, made late in the nineteenth century or early in the twentieth, reveals that the structure on the eastern end of the property indicated on the Frenchman's map was still standing at that time.
Speaking of the appearance of this property at the beginning of the Civil War, Mr. John S. Charles, in his Recollections, p. 42, states that "The 'Peachy' house appears now, very much as it did then the lower room on the east wing was then used as the law-office of Mr. Wm. S. Peachy. In the yard of this old home, on the site of the present "tin-shop" there was a very well preserved dutch roof house, with end to the street and door on the west side. A picket ran from the main building to a partition fence on the east side, with a gate to the back yard and also a gate to the little yard in front of the law office."
Mrs. Victoria Lee, in her Reminiscences about Williamsburg in 1861, 5 says that
The newly restored Nightingale House was the old Peachy House. The house before its restoration, except for the added east wing, looked very much as it did when I came to Williamsburg. The Peachy family owned and lived in this house.
Miss Emma Lou Barlow, who has lived since the latter part of the nineteenth century on the adjoining property to the east of the "Lightfoot"residence states that she remembers that the small "Dutch roof house" on the eastern end of the property, referred to by Mr. Charles, was long used as a kitchen by the Peachy and other families who occupied the residence. She remembers this building as a two-story one, with an enclosed stairway leading to the upper floor. The ground floor was divided by a partition into two rooms, a large one and a small one. She remembers that the large room on the southern end was used as a kitchen and that it had a brick floor. There was a very large fireplace in the southern end of this room. She recollects that there was a window on the east side of the building, at about its center, somewhat higher from the ground than the others in the building. In this window there were three vertical iron bars, through which she remembers being pushed by other children. She recalls that there was a window on the west side of this building, near the door, and somewhat lower than that on the east side. She states that there was also a door on the north side of the house, with a window with shutters on each side of this door. A very large stone step led from this door to the street. Miss Barlow recollects that her old colored mammy lived for a time in the small room on this floor. [Dictated to R. D. Farish by Miss Barlow, July, 1942].
The suggestion that this "Dutch roof house" on the eastern end of the Lightfoot property once served as a law office, and therefore should be called the "Lightfoot law office" appears to be an erroneous one. We have no 6 records that would indicate that it was ever used for this purpose. Apparently the misconception which arose with regard to its being used as a law office grew out of the statement made by Mr. Charles with regard to the modern east wing of the residence being used as a law office by Mr. Peachy. The brick floor, the very large fireplace, and the evidence given by Miss Barlow regarding its later use as a kitchen and quarters for a servant would all seem to indicate that the structure was originally used as a kitchen or for some other domestic purpose, rather than as a law office.
The Lightfoot property remained in the possession of the Peachy family until 1888, although certain portions of it seem to have been deeded away to connections of the family and others before that time. The portion facing upon the Duke of Gloucester Street, on which are the sites of the residence and the "Dutch roof house" on the eastern section, appear to have been deeded that year by Bathurst D. Peachy, as executor of the estate of William S. Peachy, to Sallie C. Spencer.
During the time the Lightfoot property remained in the possession of members of the Spencer family various parts of it were conveyed to others. At the time of its acquisition by the Restoration, the portion of the property facing on Duke of Gloucester Street had been divided into five lots that were in the hands of different owners. The portion of the lot on which the residence stood had been conveyed to J. B. C. Spencer, widower, T. P. Spencer, single, and D. B. Spencer, single, to F. P. Jackson and B. L. Jackson on March 9, 1916. On March 25, 1916 it was conveyed by F. P. and B. L. Jackson to George M. Lindsey. On the same date Lindsey conveyed it to Eugene Folliard. On June 16, 1924 Eugene Folliard and Mary L. Folliard, his wife conveyed this portion of the property to James K. Nightingale and Hilda Austin Nightingale, his wife, from whom the Restoration later acquired it. [See abstract prepared by Ashton Dovell, Esq., December 16, 1928]
Hunter D. Farish
Director,
Department of Research & Record
1940 - Obsolete
The connection of Philip Lightfoot and his son, William, with Yorktown and the estate at Sandy Point, Charles City County is much clearer than with Williamsburg. They seem to have owned lots and houses in Williamsburg, but to have lived elsewhere.
Philip Lightfoot, gentleman of Yorktown, born in 1689 and died in 1748, (William and Mary Quarterly , Vol. III (1), pp. 105-106) became one of the wealthiest merchants in York County. A partial explanation of his financial success was given by a neighbor in a letter written Sept. 25, 1739 to a London merchant, Edward Athawes. Richard Chapman wrote:
Since my being in Virginia Col. Lightfoot was Clerk of York Court and one of our most Considerable Merchants at one and the same time... near to that Gentlemans own Genius, and the Friends which that merited and procured him on your side of the water, the Business of the Office concurred to the Increase and Establishment of the other; of which he was so sensible, that he would never give it up till the King, by his Letter, called him up to the Council. (William and Mary Quarterly , Vol. XXI (1), p. 90-92)
The records shows that he was clerk of the court as early as 1707. (William and Mary Quarterly, Vol. III (1), p. 106)
He was a member of the Council from 1733 (Executive Journals of the Council of Virginia, Vol. IV, p. 307) to his death. (Legislative Journals of the Council , Vol. II) On August 23, 1734, he with John Carter was appointed to see when and where the governor would be attended with the address of the Council. (Ibid., p. 818, Vol. II) He and William Byrd were appointed to manage a conference with the House on amending a bill to regulate ordinary keepers and retailers of strong liquors on October 2, 1734; (Ibid., p. 834) and in 1739, he and Thomas Lee were appointed to examine the Treasurer's Account. (Ibid., p. 879) On May 23, 1740, as a result of an appointment by the Council, he reported that the governor would hear an address from that body in the Council Chamber (Ibid., p. 886)
In 1723, Lightfoot petitioned in court for an acre of land on the opposite side from his land on King's or Uby's Creek. He wanted to build a public grist mill on the creek. His petition was granted. The court appointed Joseph Walker and Thomas Nelson to measure the acre. (Ibid., Book XVI, p. 220)
His house at Yorktown was among those praised by a traveller as "equal in Magnificence to many of our superb ones at St. James's". (Observations in Several Voyages and Travels in America in the Year 1736 printed in William and Mary Quarterly , Vol. XV (1), p. 222)
Another way in which Lightfoot built up his wealth was by legal practice. In 1708, he was empowered as attorney by George Wray of London; (York County Records - Deeds, Orders, Wills, Book XIII, p. 168) in 1709 by Hannah Bates, (Ibid., p. 269) and by Rebecca Tyler in 1713. (Ibid., Book XIV, p. 308) In 1745-46, he was the administrator of Theophilus Pugh's estate. (Virginia Gazette, Parks, November 5, 1745 and April 3, 1746)
2In 1735, James Bray sold Philip Lightfoot 45 acres in York County for £67 10s. (York County Records - Deeds, Book IV, p. 344)
On March 1, 1737 and September 22, 1738, he advertised for a mulatto male slave which had run away. (Virginia Gazette, William Parks) The advertisement seem to apply to two different slaves.
A record of May 11, 1745 shows that William Dering, dancing Master, gave a mortgage on personal property, and slaves and lots 165 and 166 on East Palace Street to Philip Lightfoot as security for a loan of £286 15s. (York County Records - Deeds, Book V, p. 136) Failure to "life the mortgage"-- a failure of which there is some evidence since Dering after Philip Lightfoot's death, renewed the mortgage to William Lightfoot (York County Records - Deeds, Book V, p. 343) --would have caused the property to pass to the Lightfoots. There is no definite proof that this exchange took place.
Philip Lightfoot married Mrs. Mary Armistead Burwell by whom he had the following children: William, Philip (died before 1748, William and Mary Quarterly, Book III (1), p. 106), John who died without issue before 1769 (Hening, Statutes, Vol. VIII, pp. 457-60) and Armistead.
In his will made July 31, 1747, Philip Lightfoot gave his third son, John "and his Heirs forever, all my Lots and Houses in the City of Williamsburg". The estate was entailed. If John died without issue, his property went to the youngest son, Armistead. In case Armistead, too, died without issue, the property was to revert to William Lightfoot. (York County Records, Wills, Inventories, Book XX) It seems that it was through the death of the childless John (Hening, Statutes, Vol. VIII, pp. 457-60) and the failure of Armistead to have a son, (William and Mary Quarterly, Vol. III (1) p. 106) that the property passed to William Lightfoot.
One of the clauses in Philip Lightfoot's will provided that five hundred pounds current be "for a foundation for two poor Scholars forever to be brought up to the Ministry of the Church of England or such other publick employment as shall be most Suitable to their Capacity...and it's my Will and desire that my son William Lightfoot have the Nomination and preference of the first six Scholars". This gift was at the root of the statement in 1753 that William Stith and Ed. Wilcox were scholars at William and Mary on Capt. Lightfoot's foundation. (William and Mary Quarterly, Vol. I (2), pp. 39-41)
Philip Lightfoot died May 30, 1748. (William and Mary Quarterly , Vol. III (1), pp. 105-106) He was buried at Sandy Point, Charles City County. (Ibid., Vol. IV, pp. 122-123) The death of Lightfoot brought relief to one merchant, Francis Jerdone, who had found in Lightfoot, apparently, his greatest financial rival. Of the latter's removal from the earthly scene he wrote:
Col. Philip Lightfoot is now dead, so that you can never have so fair a way open'd to you for establishing a store, as at this present time; his great riches whiles he continued in health deterred everybody from settling here, none being of ability to vie with him but Mr Nelson, who always had an equal share of trade with him. (Ibid., Vol. XI (1), p. 154, Letter to Messrs. Buchanan & Hamilton, London, June 28, 1748)3 Less than two years later, his widow was attracting the attention of the President of William and Mary. An observer wrote on September 4, 1750 that "The President [Rev. Dawson] is laid out for the Widow Lightfoot". (Dawson Papers)
William Lightfoot on whom there is much less information died circ. 1767. (Virginia Magazine, Vol. VI, p. 398) Just when the Lightfoots got lot 13 and 14 in block 11 is not clear from the records, for these lots were included in the James City County Records, since destroyed, until 1769 when it was transferred to York County. At that date, the boundary between York and James City Counties was redrawn. It was to run
down the middle of the main street to the eastern end of the Market place, thence into the lane which divides the store-house of James Anderson merchant, from the lots of the orphan of William Lightfoot, esq. deceased as far as the middle of the palings of said lots, thence through the middle of those lots. (Hening, Statutes, Vol. VIII, pp. 405-6)
This statute locates the Lightfoot property, shows that there were more than one lot, that William Lightfoot was dead and that he left an orphan, presumably his son, William, in possession of the lots. Lack of information in the York County Records was due to the fact that the property stayed in the hands of the Lightfoot's until 1840. If the house (or houses) was rented, records in the court were not necessary.
William Lightfoot's son, William, possessed two lots in Williamsburg in 1806. (James City County Tax Records) There were no records of lots in 1787, 1791, nor in 1797. His name appears in 1801, but the number of lots is not given, due to an incomplete page.) From 1810 through 1819, William Lightfoot's Estate was taxed for two lots. His will was made April 27, 1809 (Munford's Reports, Vol. V, p. 42 in William and Mary Quarterly, Vol. III (1), pp. 108-09) From 1820 through 1838, William Lightfoot's Estate was taxed for only one lot.
The second William Lightfoot was a member of the House of Delegates from James City County 1799-1800; 1805-1806. (Virginia Magazine, Vol. VII, p. 398) He was designated "William Lightfoot of Tedington." (William and Mary Quarterly, Vol. III (1), p. 108) It would seem that not even the third generation lived in Williamsburg. wrong!
Additional proof that the Lightfoots did no occupy their lots in Williamsburg in the late eighteenth century, if at any time in that century, is found in two facts. No Lightfoot was a head of a family in Williamsburg in 1782. (First Census of the United States, 1790, Virginia State Library) In the list of taxable articles in Williamsburg for 1783, no Lightfoot name appears. (William and Mary Quarterly, Vol. XXIII (1), p. 137)
On the map of the unknown draftsman (circ. 1790?) a Lightfoot is shown in possession of lots 13 and 14 directly east of the Market Square on the south of the Duke of Gloucester Street. One Teagle (?) was the owner of 4 lot 15. The only change in the Bucktrout map of 1800 was the name Lee is the lot that corresponded to 15 on the former map.
On September 23, 1809, Peter Rob Deneufville insured his buildings "situated south of the main street in Williamsburg east of the Courthouse Square, north of Francis Street and west of a cross street dividing Lightfoot's lot". (Insurance Policy No. 970, p. 22)
In 1840, George W. Southall is shown in the James City County Tax Records in possession of 1 lot. The buildings on it were valued at $1500. The property had been secured "via Lightfoot & others" and had been "heretofore charged to Wm Lightfoot's estate".
An article of agreement was entered into on March 14, 1842 between Doctor John Mercer and George W. Southall. For $3300, Mercer got the right
To that lot of land & the buildings and improvements thereon now held & owned by the said Southall situated on the South side of the Main or Duke of Gloucester Street in the said City, being the same House & Lot formerly owned by William Lightfoot and purchased by the said Southall. (Southall Papers, William and Mary College)
It would seem that Dr. Mercer never carried out his part of the agreement for in 1846, William S. Peachy got the property, the house valued at $3100 and the house and lot valued at $3500 from George W. Southall. (James City Tax Records for 1847)
Mr. Charles in his Recollections, p. 42, says "The 'Peachy' house appears now, very much as it did then, the lower room on the east wing was then used as the law-office of Mr. Wm. S. Peachy. In the yard of this old home, on the site of the present "tin-shop" there was a very well preserved dutch roof house, with end to the street and door on the west side. A picket ran from the main building to a partition fence on the east side, with a gate to the back yard and also a gate to the little yard in front of the law office."
Mrs. Victoria Lee in reminiscing about the appearance of Williamsburg in 1861 writes
The newly restored Nightengale House was the Old Peachy House. The house before its restoration, except for the added east wing, looked very much as it did when I first came to Williamsburg. The Peachy family owned and lived in this house.
H. D F.
MEM
Summer, 1940
1931 - obsolete
The so-called Nightingale house was on the Colonial lot #14, separated from Maupin's Tavern (present Raleigh Hotel) by a lane.
On the "Bucktrout"map lots 13 and 14 were owned by Lightfoot. Philip Lightfoot, a wealthy and famous merchant of Yorktown, left lots and storehouses in Williamsburg (unidentified) to William Lightfoot in 1748.
When adjoining property was insured the Lightfoot buildings were mentioned. This tends to establish the date of the Nightingale property at some time prior to 1748.
Mr. Charles, in his Recollections of Williamsburg, described the Nightingale house of 1860 as being very similar to the present building and in addition he described the outbuilding shown on the Frenchman's map:
"In the yard of this old home, on the site of the present "tin-shop" there was a very well preserved dutch roof house, with end to the street and door on the west side. A picket fence ran from the main building to a partition fence on the east side, with a gate to the back yard and also a gate to the little yard in front of the law office (in the main dwelling)."
Harold R. Shurtleff, Director
Dept. of Research and Record.
Report by: Helen Bullock
cc: Dr. Tyler
Virginia Gazette, William Hunter, ed., November 21, 1755.IBID., November 28, 1755Just Imported, by the Subscriber, in the Montgomery,
Capt. Patterson, and to be Sold at his Shop, near the Market-Place, Williamsburg,A CHOICE and Large Parcel of Drugs and Medicines, faithfully prepared by the best hands in London; consisting of Sarsa and China Roots, best Rhubarb, Camphire, Opium, Aloes, Borax, Mercury, Antimony and Jesuits Bark, Ipecacuana, Sperma Ceti, Oil of Turpentine, Harthorn Shavings, French and Pearl Barley, Verdigreases, Manna, flaky ditto, Balsam Capivi, Spanish Flies, &c. &c. Also Anderson and Leckyer's Pills, Squibe's and Stougbron's Elixirs, Bateman's Drops, Godfrey's Cordial, choice Eating Oil, best Lancets, Annodne Necklaces, Eaton's Styptic, Lavender and Hangary Waters, James's Powders, Spanish Liquorice, Castile Soap, Ivory, and Pewter Syringes, Glyster Pipes, Vial and Vial Corks, Cinnamon, Cloves, Mace, Nutmegs, black Pepper, Allspice, Ginger, Turlington's Balsam, Sago, Copperass, Saltpetre, Allum and all Sorts of Garden Seeds.
Peter Hay.