Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1897-06-13
THE NORTHERN NECK.
INTERESTING QUESTION REGARD
ING TITLE TO A CHURCH.
No Records to settle If-lieavy Rain
fnIIs-iIflI-Dnm Injurcd-hnts De-
stroying the Corn-harriaSe An
uounccmcnt-PcrsO Notes.
Correspondence of the Dlspatch)

(Correspondence OF the Dispatch)
CONFORM. KING GEORGE COUNTY.
VA. June IA very interesting, and
at the same time, knotty, question has
lust been raised here in regard to the
lawful right Of Ola Lambs Creek church
and plot OF land, situated some four or
five miles above this place. on the Kappa
hammock road, leading TO fredericksburg
and as research fails 20 reveal any re-
corded title 10 the property, the question
may remain intricate for some time TO
come. About four years ago this cor
respondence contained a description ana
brief history Of Lambs Creek church.
md besides that there is not line OF
written history Of II in existence, so far
as is known here now. Bishop Meade's
history OF old churches and families Of
Virginia mentions Lambs Creek
church." I'm Stafford county, and Old
tombstones, brlckbats. &c, still mark
the spot where that Colonial church stood
near what IS now known as Muddy
Creek" some six or eight miles above the
I'D Lambs Creek church Of to-day, in
mis county. As shown in the Dispatch's
recount Of st four years aeo, it seems
Utmost certain that the church in Stafford
,poxen of by Bishop Meade as Lambs
Greek" was torn down. moved TO this
county, rebuilt. and allowed to retain the
pame of Lambs Creek" II appears
hat early in the present century Mr..
John Arnold, OF this county, bought all
HE land adjacent TO this Lambs Creek
church. and while the deed did not con-
sey the church. the plot accompanying
1t included all the church grounds.
RELINQUISHED CLAIM.
Records show that in 1885 an authorized
committee reported TO the court that the
said John Arnold relinquished all rights
and claims TO the church and grounds
included in his pot-the same ito be
used for the same purposes for which
st was used prior 10 his purchase, &c.
Just what the same purposes were Is
not now fully known, so far as any one
religious denominations rights were con-
cerned. For many years the property
has been regarded as belonging 10 the
Episcopalians. 1T has been used. when
used at all, by that denomination. 1t
has been spoken Of almost exclusively as
lambs Creek Episcopal church But
for many years the church has been al
most deserted, and unused. Episcopal
clergymen have held occasional afternoon
services there through part of the sum
mer, and for several years past the
Baptists have gone up from Potomac
church ana conducted an evening sunday
school In pleasant spring and summer
weather. This latter work by the Bap-
lists having succeeded from the first, de-
veloping an interest in religion. and the
field being an inviting one, and unoccupied
by any denomination, the BaptstS con-
ceived an idea Of building chapel at
Lambs Creek church for Sunday school
and prayor-meeting purposes, Nnd nave
succeeded so far in raising part of the
fund TO carry out the plan. Just at TINS
1uncture this idea was suggested: Here
stands old Lambs Creek church. unused
and crumbling TO decay; why not repair
this and occupy. instead OF erecting an
other house of worship just across the
road. a few feet away?' The Episcopal
rector here was asked for permission,
and he having no jurisdiction, referred
the matter to the Bishop, and this opens
up the deep question of title, when Is
now one of the most interesting topics
Of the day in all this section. II is
known that many years ago the Bapusts
held a "camp-meeting" of great proper
tions at Lambs Creek church. II Is
also known and not denied that at one
time the Baptsts had a regularly organ
ized church membership there. and regu-
lar services. There are those living to-
day who were present when Shiloh. the
mother Baptist church here granted let
fers OF transfer 10 a number OF members
who united with the membership al
lamb's Creek But as the Episcopalians
have had charge of IL many years. the
puzzling point Is this: If the Episcopalians
were the original owners, how is II that
the Baptists used it without molestatior
no long for camp-mecuns and regular
church worship? II, on the other nand
the Baptists owned the property whe1
they had full possession of II and Used
A. when and how they pleased, how Is
A. that the Episcopalians have held anc
used il as they pleased for several de-
cades past? The only scratch of per
that can be found on record concerning
the property is the report OF commit
tee. referred TO above, showing that John
Arnold In 1895 released his right and tue
10 this right growing out OF the fact
that his plot OF land included the church
grounds. The old church is now practically
IN the woods, and presents a deserted ap'
pearsnoe. II is one OF the largest coun'
try church ediices in Virginia, and bear.
marks OF having been one OF the mos
substantial structures of its day. Since
the war the yard and grounds around
have been used as a free battle-ground
the whole being now SO thickly dotted
with receptacles of the dead that "A vehi
Gle cannot approach the church without
passing over one or more OF these un
cared-for mounds. Few local questions
have awakened so deep an interest al
has tho question OF the title 10 this pro
perty the past week or two. Yet thu
most friendly and fraternag spirit char
acterizes the discussion and investiga
tion. Both denominations 0Cpiscopalian.
and Baptists) want the property. but
each wants II only on condition that Il
does not lawfully belong to the other.
HEAVY RAINS.
This section has experienced In the pas
lew days the heaviest rainfalls since tn,