CHURCH AND STATE IN NORTH CAROLINA,

1711-1776.

CHAPTER I.

Introduction.

In a former paper¹ the present writer pursued studies along two lines. First, he sought to show from external and internal evidence, from contemporary and later authorities, that the first settlements in North Carolina were made not by Quakers fleeing from religious intolerance in other colonies, but by men seeking for homes under better economic conditions. In the course of a few years, especially after the failure of Bacon's rebellion, these first settlers were reinforced by others seeking political freedom, which they found flourishing finely in the little colony by the Albemarle. Before the end of the seventeenth century settlers were coming into the colony, possibly from religious motives, for Quakers were then coming from Ireland as well as from Pennsylvania, and Huguenots were making their settlement about Bath.

The second part of the paper was an effort to arrive at the true relations between Church and State as developed in theory and practice by the Lords Proprietors. We saw that provision was made for a State Church in the charter granting Carolana to Sir Robert Heath in 1629. These provisions were re-enacted in the charters to the Lords Proprietors in 1663 and 1665. No effort was made, however, to put them into practice until 1701, when a vestry act was passed providing for an establishment. The fortunes

and influence of this act were traced. The act passed late in 1704 or early in 1705 was examined and its relation to the “Cary Rebellion” considered. Dr. Hawks follows the example of the colonial leaders in disparaging the principles of Cary and his followers; with him they are rebels and indefensible. A more charitable view, that these men were struggling for political rights against the representatives of despotic power, has been recently advanced by Hon. William L. Saunders and Captain Samuel A. Ashe, and has been adopted by Hon. Kemp P. Battle; but the writer believes that the “rebellion” stands for more than a political struggle. It was the uprising of a free people against the attempt of foreign and domestic foes to saddle on them a church establishment with which they had no sympathy, and he has treated it as such. He does not believe it possible to explain the extent of the commotion on any other basis.

The purpose of this paper is to continue the line of study already begun; to trace further the relations between Church and State in North Carolina; to enquire if there was any persecution in North Carolina if so, its character, when, where, by whom, and who were the sufferers; and to discover whether the colonial or home government was responsible for the persecution. The writer will show that from 1730 to 1773 the home and colonial governments enforced in North Carolina the atrocious Schism Act; that dissenting clergymen were denied for years the privilege of performing the marriage ceremony; that this was finally granted them only under burdensome restrictions; and that they were discriminated against in the enforcement of muster laws. He will also trace the evolution of that spirit of opposition to an Establishment which was to culminate in the Declaration of Rights and in the State Constitution of 1776, in the first amendment to the Federal Constitution in 1789, and in the final triumph of absolute religious freedom by the removal in 1835 of what seemed to be a ban placed on Roman Catholics by the State Constitution in 1776.