The aegis & intelligencer. [volume] (Bel Air, Md.) 1864-1923, 1890-09-05


justifies the inference that he has himself
m eanwhile lost faith in it.
As there is a discrepancy of several years
in the dates given by Mr.. Leakin and MIR.
Chesley in the matter of the earliest record
ed baptism, I wrote to Mr.. Jay to furnish
me, among other facts, the correct date; but
in his reply he did not say a word about the
date. Under these circumstances, will
only remark that on recent examination of
the copy of the registry of the parish, ia the
library of the Maryland Historical Society,
and transcribed under the Society's direction,
/ could find no earlier record than "9th of
July, 1885," at which date birth is recorded
the baptisns beginning still later.
Let me next examine what the Rev. Free
born Garrettson-one of the most jealous
and influential preachers of the Methodists in
Maryland, who was born nearly century
and half ago in the immediate vicinity of
the old church, where he lived many years
has to say upon the subject. He tells us in
his published Journal that he was born in
1852, and that his parents were members Of
the Church of England who educated their
children in the same faith To confirm this,
if any confirmation were needed-the parish
records show that bis father was vestryman
VI Iuc CuuICu Ill 1iSl, oOou diGOI lI5 lCLuOfol
from the original site. Under circumstances
so favorable for the correct transmission of
traditions, we naturally hope to derive from
him at least, if from no one else, some trust
worthy information about this Interesting
old church, even as far back as the misty
times of its origin. But in this we are sadly
disappointed. Not only so, but this worthy
ministers statements, which he himself no
doubt thought correct, have proved disastrous
ly misleading to later writers.
An entry in Mr.. Garrettson's Journal runs
thus: July 10th, 1909: Preached in a
church in Bush River Neck, near the Chesa-
peake Bay, and not mile from the place
where I was born, and within half a mile of
where l believe the first church in Maryland
was built. From what / can learn, 1t was
built by an ancestor of mine more than two
hundred years ago."
A more preposterous statement could
scarcely have been made by an intelligent
man. This date would take us back to
quarter of century before the first colenists
landed on Maryland soil. Moreover, he else
where tells US, his earliest ancestors here, was
his grandfather. Garrett Garrettson, who
could not have been born until many years
after the date when his grandson would have
US believe he erected his church. In proof
"Garrett Garrettson (who twenty years later,
was one of the vestrymen) was married in
the parish, Dec. 5, 1902, to Elizabeth Free
born" If he really built the church, which
is not impossible-and this may be the one
golden grain OF truth 10 his sheaf of uninten-
tional errors-he could not well have done 1t
earlier than 1880, for the following reasons :
The cate of bis death on the parish registry
is Gath Oct, 1888, and even if we allow that
he reached fourscore years, he would only
have attained, in 1850, his 22d year, an early
age, TO be sure, to enter upon the work OF
church building in the wilderness, but, as
said before, not impossible.
While there is nothing by which we can
fix, or even approximate with any certainty
the date of the church's erection, the proba-
bility is that it was built between 1876 and
1880. In the first place, it is not at all likely
that in these days a church, even though OF
logs, as this was, would have been abandoned
until it was no longer safe, or, at least, no
longer comfortable. Now, we know from
evidence soon 10 be given, that in IT'S a
church was built to take the place of this
one. We know further, that this second
church, being also of wood, after in its turn
became too dilapidated for use," was itself
superseded by third, which was completed
between the building of the first and that OF
the second, which we know elapsed between
the second and the third, we get 1876 as the
date of the erection of the original church at
Gravelly. Admitting the truth of the state
ment often made-a very probable one-that
1.-The second building was more substantial
than the first" we may perhaps fairly infer
that the old Gravelly Church dates from about
1850. That is the date, too, when the first
resident minister, or, indeed, any minister,
so far as we know, came 10 these parts. 1t
was probably also about that time that the
generous devise by Jeremiah Eaton, of $50
acres on Winters Run, "to the first Protest
ant minister who should reside in Baltimore
county and his successors forever" went into
operation for although the date of his will
is 1876, the testator, for aught we know,
may not have died until several year later
On the whole then, it is exceedingly proba-
BILE that this liberal endowment, which Sc
cured ministerial support, stimulated the cree
ton of this church, as well rs the advent OF
the minister to whose benefit it enured.
Whatever doubt may surround the date OF
the church's erection, there can be no doubt
thanks to an unvarying tradition-as to it's
site, which is about half-a mile almost direct
ly south of Michaelsvile, within twenty steps
of the little bridge, (stll called Church Bridge,)
by which the main road of that section Cross
es the Red Lion branch of DELPHI Creek, and
directly by the road side. There are left no
traces whatever of the church. The site is
in the margin of a wood, and few scattered
trees, some of more than half q century 8
growth, have usurped the exact spot since
the abandonment of the building, and there
is a dense underground of bushes and bram-
bles. What is unusual in this region, there
are many stones lying far around, some of
INTELLECTUALLY not all--may once have been
made the foundation wall There is no fence
to shut it off from the highway.
1t has often been very recently said that evil
dences of grave yard are visible here, but after
a careful search, about year since, could
find no traces whatever of the kind. Every
one who has written on the subject seems
to have taken it as matter OF course that
the church was surrounded by graveyard
"a universal CUSTOM" they say, "in the old
country, brought to the new" In fact l
have never heard doubt expressed that such
was the case in this instance. To intimate
such doubt in the face of this universal be-
lief may seem presumptuous. must there
fore, as serious dOubter, give my reasons.
Although, as before said, the vestrY proceed
ipgs now extant do not begin until IT'S,
there is record of marriages, births and
deaths beginning nearly thirty years earlier,
in which the places of burial are in few in
stances stated, from 1895 until at least as
late as 1901, probably much later-my
search having ended at that date, in the
record. Such places named are as follows
"The Level" Head of Bush" "Delph,"
Swan Greek, civilian Osborns lat Bush
River,) EBAY Side, ""Mr. Halls Plantation"
Mouth of Spesutie Creek, ~ "Rumley Creek"
"Mouth OF Rumley," Head of Collects
Creek"
Here are ten places of burial mentioned,
all Enthusiastically distinct, with probably one
exception-"Rumley Creek" and mouth of
Rumley" may be one and the same. These
localities were in all directions and at
various distances from the church, from half
mile, (that at "Delph,"D to five or six miles,
Chat at Head of Bush,") and yet not sin
gle interment at the church is mentioned
The only possible answer, it seems to me, is
that, as rule, interments were made in the
churchyard, and that the record was intended
to be SO understood by everybody, unless
some other place of burial was indicated
Why is it, then, that we see so many Church
of England people-among them the most
prominent in the county, as for example, Col.
George Wells, Geo. Ute, Jr., and his wife,
(the daughter of Edward Beadle,) William
Osborn, Mrs. Elizabeth Boothby and
many others of equal standing and dear
lovers of the tablishment-choosing their