Early MAGA: Rev. Richard Roach in the Cary Rebellion

 Excerpt from Defining North Carolina: a Political Sketch and Biography of Surveyor-General Edward Moseley, by Baylus C. Brooks:

p. 295-299

A somewhat ignored figure in the [Cary] rebellion is Richard Roach. Spotswood describes him as a merchant who had been sent by John Danson – Archdale’s son-in-law who recently inherited his share in the Proprietorship – from England with “a dozen or fourteen great guns and ammunition, under pretence of building a ship.”[1] A Richard Roach (1662-1730) and his wife Anne associated with “Philadelphians” for a time; Anne apparently died in 1708. “Philadelphian” was a sect begun in 1694 in Norfolk, England by Jane Leade, who died in 1704. Much in common with Quakers, they rejected the idea that they were a church, calling themselves a “society” and discouraged participation in the Anglican Church. Roach, at one time, an Anglican minister “interested in alchemy and spiritual transformation” and his wife Anne – as well as “Archdale, Mr. (fl. 1707)” – appear on “List of Philadephians and Associates Known to Have Joined or Interacted with the French Prophets in England.”[2] Camisards or “French Prophets” were Huguenots from Cévennes, France. J. Laursen, in Histories of Heresy in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries, writes that – coincident with the Cary Rebellion – “At the end of 1708, there were 400 followers of the French Prophets in the London area.”[3] Roach also believed in a “female embassy” that would usher in the last days, or the return of Christ.[4] Richard Roach explained that “it has pleased God, in this last age, to visit many persons of both sexes, but more especially the female, with his extraordinary powers; who have been, as Mary Magdalen was in her time, ambassadresses of the resurrection of Christ.”[5] Roach fell out with the French Prophets, describing them uncomfortably – similar to charismatic Pentecostals of later America – with “speaking in violent agitations of Body.”[6] Roach died while Anglican rector of St. Augustine at Hackney, Middlesex in 1730.[7]

It could be this Richard or perhaps a son who made quite an impression in Carolina in his sloop Anne & Katherine. Merchant-mariner Richard Roach in the Cary Rebellion may have been the son (b. 18 Jul 1662) of the mariner Richard Roach of Lower Shadwell, Middlesex. He may have married Anne Cocker in 1677. Roach’s connections to Christian mysticism, Quakers, and Archdale point to this association.[8]

Spotswood insinuated that Danson had been aiding the rebels and supplied them with a ship. Roach, he said, stole guns and powder from his client’s cargo to supply the rebels. Gov. Hyde told him that Cary’s men were “fortifying the house of one Roach, where is the rendezvous of his drunken crew.”[1] Spotswood also thought it necessary to add a detailed paragraph about this Richard Roach:

 

I think it necessary to acquaint your lordships that no man has appeared more active in these commotions than this Roach, — a wretched fellow, who being sent in lately with a cargo of goods, belonging to some merchants in London, no sooner came into the country but he declared himself against the government, without examining which side was in the wrong, and has been, all along, a principal incendiary ; and had it not been for his furnishing the mob with trading guns out of his store, and ammunition belonging to his employers, these commotions would never have got to the head they are now arrived at.[2]

 

Rev. John Urmstone, on 17 July 1711, wrote to the SPG a similar tale: “Danson sent hither from England one Roach with some goods, and a dozen or fourteen great guns and ammunition, under pretence of building a ship, but it is verily believed they were designed for our ruin.”[3] Urmstone insinuated that Danson had great influence over the other Proprietors and that he was the culprit. Urmstone also alleged that Von Graffenreid’s Swiss would have joined Hyde’s government, but Cary’s faction and his Indian allies prevented it. To Urmstone, Cary’s rioters, including John Porter, were working with the Tuscarora to kill English inhabitants! Historian Francis Hawks agreed with this assessment, saying that Cary and perhaps Roach were “instigating the savages to commence a war against such of the whites as were opposed to him.” He added his belief “that Carey was the chief instrument in causing the Indian war of 1711, we have but little doubt.”[4]

Few details have been learned about this merchant Roach or where on the Pamlico sat his “house.” Spotswood specifically named and identified Richard Roach as one of Cary’s men, arguing a detailed and fabricated plea with the Proprietors at Craven House – particularly Danson. They claimed that their (meaning Roach’s employer’s) supplies were commandeered by government forces, by the illicit actions of Gov. Hyde. These merchants “claim[ed] that effects seized by Gov. Hyde had caused losses as determined by Roach, and resolution that the goods seized [be] restored” as well as possible.[5] If Roach’s report had been true, then the Proprietors were partly responsible for the violence of Cary’s Rebellion and the Tuscarora War, and even encouraged it from resident Quakers. Still, the next month, the Proprietors requested that Roach return to England or to the Admiralty court in Charles Town for questioning.[6] They also granted that “the goods seized by Govr Hyde or his order should be restored as far as legally they can be.”[7] Roach most likely stole them; certainly not Hyde.

These “goods” may refer to the gunpowder that Spotswood alleged Roach had stolen and used against government forces. Furthermore, Spotswood said that Roach had been leading the Quaker faction and attempted to prevent the success of the Swiss in New Bern, a great desire of the Proprietors that symbolized John Lawson’s great success. “Roach and the Quakers,” he said, “reported that the baron had no credit in England, nor had he any money anywhere.”[8] Roach probably was not interested in helping Quakers, though. Spotswood simply took every opportunity to blame dissenters for everything that went wrong. Furthermore, the Family and their allies simply used the Quakers for their own nefarious purposes.

These rebels: Moseley, Porter, and Roach may have had a long-term relationship. About thirty years later, all of these names can all be found in the Lower Cape Fear, living in Moore’s Brunswick Settlement. Richard Roach or a possible family member named Nicholas, who had purchased lot #11 in Bath by March 1717, received land in the Lower Cape Fear amongst the oligarchic Family’s Brunswick Settlement (see figure 13 below). Most likely, he purchased this land from another because he does not appear to have been granted it by the government.[9] 

Figure 13: A portion of Moseley’s map of 1733 showing the location of “Roach” property – This strategically-placed property for a mariner – directly associated with an inlet – is just southeast of the location of the nascent “Newton,” or the current Wilmington, indicated by the notation of “[John] Watson.” This land (formerly warrant #167) had been Maurice Moore’s until it was voided by Gov. George Burrington. Note that “S[arah] Porter,” the widow of John Porter Jr., is shown just south of Wilmington as well.  

---

[1] Ibid., 423.

[2] Ibid., 423-424.

[3] Francis L. Hawks, History of North Carolina, V.II (Spartanburg, S.C.: Reprint Co., 1961), 383.

[4] Ibid., 526.

[5] National Archives of London, “Craven House, Minutes of meeting of the lords Proprietors, 24 Jan. 1711/2,” Minutes of Council (Lords Proprietors), Colonial Office, America and West Indies: Carolina (Propriety), Sessional Papers. (CO 5/292). 

[6] National Archives, “Craven House, Minutes of meeting of the lords Proprietors, 12 Feb.1711/2,” Minutes of Council (Lords Proprietors), Colonial Office, America and West Indies: Carolina (Propriety), Sessional Papers. (CO 5/292).

[7] “Minutes of a meeting of the Lords Proprietors of Carolina” (January 24, 1712), NCCR, 1: 832.

[8] Hawks, History, Vol. II, 384.

[9] Beaufort Deed Bk. 1: 250; Mar. 25, 1717; "America and West Indies: July 1722," in Calendar of State Papers Colonial, America and West Indies: Volume 33, 1722-1723, ed. Cecil Headlam (London: His Majesty's Stationery Office, 1934), 99-117; this Richard Roach may have been the same mariner who gave a deposition against Gov. Woodes Rogers in the Bahamas in 1721.

---

[1] Ibid., 383.

[2] Ariel Hessayon, Jane Lead and Her Transantional Legacy (), 232-234.

[3] J. Laursen, Histories of Heresy in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries: For, Against, and Beyond Persecution and Toleration (Springer, 2016), 40.

[4] Brian J. Gibbons, Gender in Mystical and Occult Thought: Behmenism and Its Development in England (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 143-62; Schwartz, The French Prophets in England, 210-11.

[5] Richard Roach, The Imperial Standard of Messiah Triumphant (London, 1727), 48.

[6] O.E. The shaking-prophets alarm'd, in beholding a lighted candle... (Dublin, 1711), 1;

[7] "Hackney, Middx.: lease of the rectory to the Rev. Richard Roach," Correspondence and papers on the administration of the diocese of London, Papers of Edmund Gibson, Bishop of London, Fulham Papers, ff. 4-5.

[8] "England, Middlesex Parish Registers, 1539-1988," database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3Q9M-CSF7-K2GQ?cc=3734475 : 25 March 2021), > image 1 of 1; London Metropolitan Archives, England; Boston News-Letter, Aug 24, 1713, 2; see also “Papers of the Revd. Mr. Richard Roach,” Rawlinson MSS D., Bodleian Library, Oxford.

On Jacobitism, Stuart Anti-Government Conservatism and MAGA Pirate America

 One wonders… why King James, Duke of Ormond and Windham as names for pirate vessels? Why toast the health of the “Pretender,” James III? James Butler, 2^nd duke of Ormond and Sir William Windham were both popular Jacobites of the day, adherents of James III, the “Pretender.” So does this have anything to do with the tendency of pirates to be politically conservative and anti-government? According to Snelgrave’s narrative of his capture, it did.

Snelgrave noted that all three of the pirate captains: Howell Davis in King James, Olivier LeVasseur, then taking command of Duke of Ormond, and Jeremiah Cocklyn, preparing to outfit Bird or Windham, were Jacobites. They supported the claim of the ousted Stuart dynasty over that of the foreign Hanoverian King George I. To be sure, so-called “anti-government” Jacobites were anti-government only because the current government was not Stuart! Most pirates never sought democracy. They were, however, concerned with making their government “great again” as one popular conservative trope goes.

Davis named his ship, King James, after the would-be King James III. They even claimed to be serving under his authority, supposedly possessing his personal commissions. Pirates regularly drank to the “Pretender’s health.” As Snelgrave noted, they were “doubly on the side of the gallows, both as traitors and pirates.” They even referred to King George as a “son of a whore” and a “cuckoldy dog.”[1]

LeVasseur was French; he was born in Calais, France. Catholicism defined his life and nation. It dominated his upbringing, as it had influenced the Stuarts of England, until the interruption of William of Orange, the Protestant Dutch king and husband of Mary Stuart, daughter of James II. Though Mary was a Stuart, she had been “reduced” in her family’s conservative beliefs by her marriage to William. Parliament in 1688 had used this marriage as a bandage for the perceived national wound they had caused by delegitimizing monarchial succession in England. The “Glorious Revolution” was bad for Stuarts, but the recent political insurrection surrounding the accession of the German George I was absolute liberal treason to Stuart conservatives and their allies! James Butler, 2^nd duke of Ormonde was one such conservative patriot – as viewed by Jacobites, followers of James III or the “Pretender.”[2]

Born the son of Thomas Butler, 6th Earl of Ossory and his wife Emilia, James Butler was grandson of James Butler, 1st duke of Ormonde. Raised in Ireland as a Whig, he yet schooled in France and afterwards at Christ Church, Oxford. He served with distinction in the military and attained political office. But, when Parliament attempted in January and February 1689 to declare that James II had abdicated his throne, thereby putting William of Orange and his Stuart wife Mary on the throne, he voted against both motions. Even though the conservatively-perceived horrid deed had been successful, he yet served William III with similar distinction. Butler appeared to be loyal to his nation, whatever its politics. Ormonde was appointed Commander-in-Chief of the Forces and colonel of the 1st Regiment of Foot Guards. In the Irish Parliament, Ormonde and the majority of peers supported the conservative or Tory (monarchial) interest. His position as Captain-General imbued him with great influence during the conservative crisis brought about by the death of Queen Anne in 1712. Shortly preceding her death, Ormonde began exhibiting definite Jacobite leanings. When the Jacobite Rebellion of 1715 (coincident with an uptick of British piracy in America) broke out, Ormonde was accused of supporting it. Rebels invoked his name with the cheer "High church and Ormonde." The rebellion resulted in Butler’s impeachment for high treason by Lord Stanhope on June 21, 1715. He then fled to France and joined the “Pretender,” or the would-be James III.[3]

Many wonder at Jacobite names of pirate ships: King James, Royal James, Windham (for Sir William Windham, a Jacobite whose arrest is attributed with causing the failure of the Jacobite Rebellion of 1715), and Queen Anne’s Revenge. All of them carry a stubborn Jacobite political message – similar to that of other conservative manifestos – for the early eighteenth century, that phrase might have been “Stuart rule will rise again!” Obviously, the insinuation is to illustrate the descent of conservative West Indian slaving descendants of Carolina from these same Jacobites. Many privateers and pirates in America and the West Indies, founded on Stuart traditions and Jacobite in ideology, harbored this same resentment of the new king, George I of Hanover, a foreign German Protestant who did not even speak English! This ideology translated directly to the Confederate States of America’s ailing mourners with the euphemism “The South Will Rise Again!” Jacobitism was clearly a matter of conservative political pride and America – or Johnson’s “Commonwealth of Pyrates” – still excells in such pride![4]

Illustrating this pride, wealthy South Carolina gentleman and pirate Richard Tookerman ordered his crew to fire a salute to James III (exiled in France with many of his supporters like Ormonde after 1715) on his, the “Pretender’s,” birthday. Tookerman was not afraid to dine with Jamaican elite in Port Royal, including the governor’s own son and local widow, Mrs. Pendergrass. After all, Tookerman lived in still conservative, Stuart-loving America, far from a “traitorous” foreign king! He signaled to his first mate to fire Adventure’s guns by waving a handkerchief from Mrs. Pendergrass’ window as they sat enjoying a meal at her dining table. He did this twice without hesitation and with direct instructions to the contrary from the Royal Navy in Kingston Harbour. Capt. Edward Vernon of HMS Mary learned of his misdeeds in South Carolina, Virginia, and the Leeward Islands. He arrested him and returned him to England, but Tookerman successfully sued Vernon for false arrest and won![5]

Not all Tories, conservatives, Catholics, or loyal Stuarts were prone to give up their lives and country for the cause. Historian E. T. Fox describes three levels of Jacobitism:

The first consisted of “hard-core, ideologically committed Jacobites… [who] brought up their children to follow the true [Stuart] path after them.” The second layer were those who were driven to Jacobitism by disillusionment with the Hanoverian regime and whose allegiance might therefore be temporary, while the third was comprised of “adventurers,” “desperate men” who turned to Jacobitism to repair their own misfortunes and who had “little or nothing to lose and everything to gain if the Jacobites won, which guaranteed their enthusiasm for the cause when it was in the ascendant.”[6]

Richard Tookerman’s story revealed one basic truth: radically conservative Jacobites had not lost every adherent to the cause after 1715, even in the courts of Great Britain. Author Colin Woodard even raised the possibility that pirate Charles Vane had negotiated directly with powerful Jacobite politicians and military officials – a possibility that also hinted at Vane’s higher political station. Still, pirates, especially more thoughtful gentlemanly types, were perhaps more capitalistic “adventurers” than ideologically roguish radicals. Though they certainly harbored conservative political resentments, profit stood as most important, more inticing to their finely-honed pecuniary greed, as it would for generations to come in America. This factor probably best tells the tale of pirates’ Jacobite tendencies – and, indeed, the later American rebellion for “freedom” from an arguably liberal British “tyranny.”[7]

As a Frenchman from “a bourgeous family [who] received an excellent education,” LeVasseur symbolically honored the sacrifices of James Butler, then in exile in France with his so-called “Pretender” king, James III.[8] Duke of Ormond was a name befitting this particular pirate as well as any other Jacobite name. It had special meaning to the French compatriot and brother of these conservative English rebels in the Americas.

---

[1] William Snelgrave, A New Account of Some Parts of Guinea and the Slave Trade (London, 1734), 193-288; Richard Sanders, If a Pirate I Must Be...: The True Story of Black Bart, King of the Caribbean Pirates (Skyhorse Publishing Inc., 2007), 31.

[2] A good explanation of the divisive politics reminiscent of the Trump administration in today’s America is found in Frank O’Gorman, The Long Eighteenth Century: British Political and Social History, 1688-1832 (London: Arnold, 1997), 43-51; Extreme conservatives or Tory Jacobites of 1715, at the time of the hurricane that set off massive piracy in America, were quite similar to the extreme “Neo-Confederate” Republicans of today’s America, with similar rebellious anti-government ideology. Racism, however, was the new element then and still highly significant today, owing to America’s unique economic reliance in the 17^th-19^th centuries upon chattel slavery. Still reeling from Parliament’s assertion of power over the monarchy in 1688, it was no coincidence that Jacobite conservatives again rebelled in 1715, as the Confederacy in America did in 1861 over slavery, or Trump voters did in 2016 essentially in reaction to an African-American president. Racism remains America’s most persistent illness.

[3]; "James Butler, 2nd Duke of Ormonde". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. Retrieved 11 May 2012; The hurricane on 30 July 1715 spilled a tremendous amount of Spanish silver on the east coast of Florida and essentially started the uptick in piracy. Those mariners in America who felt betrayed by Whigs in Parliament, essentially favored conservative or Jacobite politics. They greedily opposed liberal reforms against piracy, seen as a valid path to riches in Stuart-founded America.

[4] Windham information from: Lloyd Charles Sanders, The Possibility of a Stewart Restoration on the Death of Anne: The Stanhope Prize Essay for 1880 (London: T. Shrimpton, 1880), 19.

[5] Baylus C. Brooks, Quest for Blackbeard: The True Story of Edward Thache and His World (Lake City, Florida: Baylus C. Brooks, 2016), 453-468.

 

[6] E.T. Fox, "Jacobitism and the 'Golden Age' of Piracy, 1715-1725," International Journal of Maritime History, XXII, No. 2 (December 2010), 278.

[7] Colin Woodard, The Republic of Pirates: Being the True and Surprising Story of the Caribbean Pirates and the Man Who Brought Them Down (Orlando, 2007), 102-103, 196 and 230-231.

[8] Laura Nelson, The Whydah Pirates Speak (Colorado: Laura Nelson, 2015), 50.