A meeting at Berryville

On a Saturday in September 1833, people from the eastern end of Frederick County met at Berryville to talk about leaving it. The Virginia Free Press in Charlestown reported the meeting on September 12 and said the people of the proposed county were "almost unanimous in its favour."

Their petition to the legislature ran in full in the Free Press on November 21. One of its grievances was a plan for a new courthouse in Winchester and a jail to match, which the eastern district would help pay for. "We must beg leave to enter our positive dissent to those projects," the petitioners wrote. To show the new county could stand on its own, they printed the count of tithables, the people on whom the county levies fell, that the commissioner of the revenue, Wilford G. Settle, had made in the district: 748 white men over 16, 1,654 enslaved people over 16 and 7 free Black men over 16, 2,409 in all.

The petition went to Richmond in December as a printed pamphlet, The Memorial and Petition of Sundry Inhabitants of the Eastern Part of Frederick County, praying The Formation of a New County, with sheets of signatures. The Library of Virginia still holds them. On one sheet the first eight names are bracketed together as "Magistrates," the justices of the peace who lived in the district, George H. Norris and John Hay among them. The sheets that survive from that winter carry about 1,200 signatures.

Source note: Virginia Free Press, 1833
✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

The Virginia Free Press of September 12, 1833 reported a public meeting at Berryville on the previous Saturday on dividing Frederick County, and said the people of the proposed new county were "almost unanimous in its favour."

What the source supports

That the movement for a new county out of eastern Frederick held a public meeting at Berryville in early September 1833.

Uncertainty

The paper does not name who spoke or how many came; "almost unanimous" is its report of what was said, not a count. Read on the Virginia Chronicle page image, a digital reproduction of the printed page. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

Source

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Virginia Free Press, Page 3, NEW COUNTIES.

Virginia Free Press, Charlestown, Va., September 12, 1833, page 3: news report on the petition for a new county out of eastern Frederick, 1833

Virginia Free Press · 1833-09-12 (publication)

Locator: Page 3, NEW COUNTIES

Relevant passage
We learn that a public meeting was held at Berryville, on Saturday last, on the subject of dividing the county of Frederick. It is stated that the people within the limits of the proposed new county are almost unanimous in its favour.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: virginia-free-press. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

Source note: Virginia Free Press, 1833
✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

The east Frederick petition, printed in the Virginia Free Press on November 21, 1833, cited the 1833 count by Wilford G. Settle, commissioner of the revenue, of the people taxed in the proposed county: 748 white men over 16, 1,654 enslaved people over 16 and 7 free Black men over 16, 2,409 in all.

What the source supports

The size of the proposed county as its petitioners put it to the legislature: the tithables, the people on whom county and parish levies fell.

Uncertainty

A count of tithables, not of the whole population: women, children under 16 and white men under 16 are not in it. The petitioners chose the figure to make their case. Read on the Virginia Chronicle page image, a digital reproduction of the printed page. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

Source

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Virginia Free Press, Page 1, the petition, the commissioner of the revenue's count.

Virginia Free Press, Charlestown, Va., November 21, 1833, page 1: the east Frederick petition, printed

Virginia Free Press · 1833-11-21 (publication)

Locator: Page 1, the petition, the commissioner of the revenue's count

Relevant passage
I find in the district proposed for the New County, 748 white male persons over 16 years of age, 1654 slaves over 16 years of age, and 7 free male negroes over 16 years of age, making 2409 heads subject to county and parish levies.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: virginia-free-press. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

Source note: Virginia Free Press, 1833
✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

The petition objected to paying for a new courthouse in Winchester and a jail to match it, saying the people of the eastern district would bear a large share of the cost without being consulted.

What the source supports

That the plan for new county buildings in Winchester was one of the grievances behind the petition.

Uncertainty

The petitioners' own account of their grievance; Winchester's answer to it is not in this passage. Read on the Virginia Chronicle page image, a digital reproduction of the printed page. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

Source

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Virginia Free Press, Page 1, the petition, on the new court-house and jail.

Virginia Free Press, Charlestown, Va., November 21, 1833, page 1: the east Frederick petition, printed

Virginia Free Press · 1833-11-21 (publication)

Locator: Page 1, the petition, on the new court-house and jail

Relevant passage
For ourselves, who, without being consulted, would be compelled to bear a large portion of the cost of those expensive buildings, we must beg leave to enter our positive dissent to those projects

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: virginia-free-press. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

Source note: Library of Virginia, 1833
✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

The petition of 1833 went to the legislature as a printed pamphlet, "The Memorial and Petition of Sundry Inhabitants of the Eastern Part of Frederick County, praying The Formation of a New County," printed at the Virginia Free Press office, with sheets of signatures. On one sheet the first eight names, among them George H. Norris and John Hay, are bracketed together as "Magistrates." The sheets that survive from that winter carry about 1,200 signatures.

What the source supports

How the first petition was put before the legislature, and that the district's justices of the peace led the signers.

Uncertainty

Counted by this project from the scans: a name on more than one sheet is counted each time, sheets that are lost are not counted, and some signers lived outside the proposed county. The bracket marks the names as magistrates; it does not say all of the district's magistrates signed. Read on the Library of Virginia's scan of the microfilm, a digital reproduction. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

Source

Contemporary document

Evidence role: supports. Library of Virginia, file 045_083_021, Scan page 5, the pamphlet's title page.

Library of Virginia, Legislative Petitions, Frederick County, December 11, 1833 (file 045_083_021): the printed Memorial and Petition of Sundry Inhabitants of the Eastern Part of Frederick County, with affidavits of notice and signatures

Inhabitants: Petition (catalogued by the Library of Virginia) · 1833-12-11 (filing)

Locator: Scan page 5, the pamphlet's title page

Relevant passage
THE MEMORIAL AND PETITION OF SUNDRY INHABITANTS OF THE EASTERN PART OF FREDERICK COUNTY, PRAYING The Formation of a New County. PRINTED AT THE OFFICE OF THE VIRGINIA FREE PRESS. 1833.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: lva-legislative-petitions-frederick-1831-1836. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

Contemporary document

Evidence role: supports. Library of Virginia, file 045_083_028, Scan page 4, the first signatures, bracketed "Magistrates".

Library of Virginia, Legislative Petitions, Frederick County, December 30, 1833 (file 045_083_028): petition for a new county out of eastern Frederick, with signatures and a clerk's copy of them

Inhabitants: Petition (catalogued by the Library of Virginia) · 1833-12-30 (filing)

Locator: Scan page 4, the first signatures, bracketed "Magistrates"

Relevant passage
Geo H. Norris, James Wigginton, Edwd J. Smith, Treadwell Smith, Natt. Burwell, Jno Hay, Francis B. Whiting, P. Smith. Magistrates

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: lva-legislative-petitions-frederick-1831-1836. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

The printed title page of a worn pamphlet: The Memorial and Petition of Sundry Inhabitants of the Eastern Part of Frederick County, praying The Formation of a New County, printed at the office of the Virginia Free Press, 1833. A handwritten date, Jan 9th 1834, is across the top, and the word Frederick is written beside the title.

The petition went to Richmond as a printed pamphlet. A hand at the top of this copy dates it Jan 9th 1834.

What this image does and does not showThe title page only; the pamphlet's text and tables are not shown.

Library of Virginia, Legislative Petitions Digital Collection, Frederick County, December 11, 1833 (file 045_083_021), scan page 5. Rights Changes: Rendered from page 5 of the Library of Virginia's PDF scan and cropped to the title page, leaving out most of the dark microfilm border: 553 by 792 pixels, about 46 percent of the scan's own resolution, shown at that size; re-encoded as JPEG. Nothing retouched or added.

Source: Library of Virginia, Legislative Petitions, Frederick County, December 11, 1833 (file 045_083_021): the printed Memorial and Petition of Sundry Inhabitants of the Eastern Part of Frederick County, with affidavits of notice and signatures Open the full image

Richmond says no

Against it came printed remonstrances from the rest of the county, signed by hundreds. "Your remonstrants oppose the prayer of the petitioners from Berryville and its neighborhood," they began. The House committee on propositions, which weighed petitions, found the petition "Reasonable" all the same, on January 1, 1834. On January 14 the House reversed it, 76 to 53. "So the House decided against the new county," the Political Arena of Fredericksburg reported.

The fight moved to the spring election for Frederick's three delegates. The Winchester Virginia Republican of March 29 printed letters on both sides. One closed by asking voters to choose "internal improvement and the integrity of OLD FREDERICK." Another pointed out that the three sitting delegates all lived outside the proposed county, and warned that re-electing them would "bar the door of petition" to the people inside it. The sitting delegates won. A Leesburg paper, citing the Winchester Virginian, wrote that the division had "merged every other consideration at the polls."

Source note: Political Arena, 1834
✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

On January 14, 1834 the House of Delegates reversed its committee's finding that the petition for a new county out of eastern Frederick was reasonable, by 76 votes to 53.

What the source supports

The first defeat of the petition in the House.

Uncertainty

From the Political Arena's summary of the House, not the official journal. Read on the Virginia Chronicle page image, a digital reproduction of the printed page. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

Source

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Political Arena, Page 2, House of Delegates, Tuesday, January 14.

Political Arena, Fredericksburg, Va., January 17, 1834, page 2: House of Delegates proceedings on the petition for a new county out of Frederick, session of 1833-34

Political Arena · 1834-01-17 (publication)

Locator: Page 2, House of Delegates, Tuesday, January 14

Relevant passage
The question was taken by ayes and noes, and the amendment carried, Ayes 76, Noes 53. So the House decided against the new county.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: political-arena-fredericksburg. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

Source note: Winchester Virginia Republican, 1834
✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

Before the April 1834 election, the Winchester Virginia Republican of March 29 printed letters on both sides: one closing with a call to choose "internal improvement and the integrity of OLD FREDERICK," another warning that re-electing the three sitting delegates, none of whom lived in the proposed county, would "bar the door of petition" to the people who wanted it.

What the source supports

That the division was argued in print, by both sides, in the week before the vote.

Uncertainty

Advocates' letters, not reports; the writers are not named. Read on the Virginia Chronicle page image, a digital reproduction of the printed page. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

Source

Contemporary report

Evidence role: supports. Winchester Virginia Republican, Page 2, letter against division, ending with OLD FREDERICK.

Winchester Virginia Republican, Winchester, Va., 29 March 1834, page 2

Winchester Virginia Republican · 1834-03-29 (publication)

Locator: Page 2, letter against division, ending with OLD FREDERICK

Relevant passage
Choose for your safe beacon fires, internal improvement and the integrity of OLD FREDERICK.

Checked: This passage was read on a digital reproduction of the page; no original has been handled. The source's other readings: existing OCR reviewed, original image not independently inspected.

Open source

Source family: winchester-virginia-republican. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

Contemporary report

Evidence role: supports. Winchester Virginia Republican, Page 2, letter headed TO THE VOTERS OF FREDERICK COUNTY, for division.

Winchester Virginia Republican, Winchester, Va., 29 March 1834, page 2

Winchester Virginia Republican · 1834-03-29 (publication)

Locator: Page 2, letter headed TO THE VOTERS OF FREDERICK COUNTY, for division

Relevant passage
the three former representatives are all from without the proposed limits and have shown their determination to afford no aid to the wishes of the people who reside within them; if you determine to support them, to the entire exclusion of those who reside within the district; you will effectually bar the door of petition

Checked: This passage was read on a digital reproduction of the page; no original has been handled. The source's other readings: existing OCR reviewed, original image not independently inspected.

Open source

Source family: winchester-virginia-republican. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

Source note: Genius of Liberty, 1834
✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

Frederick re-elected its three sitting delegates in the spring of 1834, all opposed to division; the Genius of Liberty, citing the Winchester Virginian, said the division "merged every other consideration at the polls."

What the source supports

That the 1834 election in Frederick turned on the division.

Uncertainty

The Leesburg paper reports the Winchester Virginian's judgment; the Virginian's own issue is not digitized. Read on the Virginia Chronicle page image, a digital reproduction of the printed page. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

Source

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Genius of Liberty, Page 2, the Frederick election.

Genius of Liberty, Leesburg, Va., April 5, 1834, page 2: news report on the division of Frederick and the election of 1834

Genius of Liberty · 1834-04-05 (publication)

Locator: Page 2, the Frederick election

Relevant passage
the local question of a division of the county merged every other consideration at the polls, and that the gentlemen elected, were chosen with little or no reference to federal politics.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: genius-of-liberty. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

Source note: Library of Virginia, 1833
✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

The House of Delegates received the 1833 petition on December 11, 1833 and referred it to its committee of propositions; on January 1, 1834 the committee found it "Reasonable."

What the source supports

That the committee approved the first petition before the House reversed it on January 14, 1834.

Uncertainty

From the clerk's docket on the petition, not the House journal. Read on the Library of Virginia's scan of the microfilm, a digital reproduction. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

Source

Contemporary document

Evidence role: supports. Library of Virginia, file 045_083_021, Scan page 19, the docket on the pamphlet's cover.

Library of Virginia, Legislative Petitions, Frederick County, December 11, 1833 (file 045_083_021): the printed Memorial and Petition of Sundry Inhabitants of the Eastern Part of Frederick County, with affidavits of notice and signatures

Inhabitants: Petition (catalogued by the Library of Virginia) · 1833-12-11 (filing)

Locator: Scan page 19, the docket on the pamphlet's cover

Relevant passage
Decr. 11th 1833 refd. to Props. Jany. 1st 1834, Reasonable. 2d Resolution reported.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: lva-legislative-petitions-frederick-1831-1836. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

Source note: Library of Virginia, 1833
✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

Printed remonstrances from the rest of Frederick, signed by hundreds, opposed "the prayer of the petitioners from Berryville and its neighborhood."

What the source supports

That the petition met an organized, printed opposition in its first session.

Uncertainty

The remonstrance is an advocates' paper. Counted by this project from the scans: a name on more than one sheet is counted each time, sheets that are lost are not counted, and some signers lived outside the proposed county. Read on the Library of Virginia's scan of the microfilm, a digital reproduction. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

Source

Contemporary document

Evidence role: supports. Library of Virginia, file 045_083_022, Scan page 1, the printed remonstrance.

Library of Virginia, Legislative Petitions, Frederick County, December 11, 1833 (file 045_083_022): printed remonstrance against both proposed counties, with signatures

Inhabitants: Remonstrance (catalogued by the Library of Virginia) · 1833-12-11 (filing)

Locator: Scan page 1, the printed remonstrance

Relevant passage
Your remonstrants oppose the prayer of the petitioners from Berryville and its neighborhood

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: lva-legislative-petitions-frederick-1831-1836. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

A second try

The eastern district petitioned again for the next session. The committee found the petition reasonable on January 21, 1835, and in February the House refused, 61 to 49, to reject it. A bill was reported on February 12, and on February 25 it was postponed indefinitely, 47 to 44. At Frederick's election that April, John B. D. Smith won votes, the Winchester Virginian said, "exclusively on account of his exertions against the division of the county."

Source note: Alexandria Gazette, 1835
✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

In February 1835 the House of Delegates refused, 61 to 49, to reject the renewed petition for a new county out of eastern Frederick, and a bill was ordered.

What the source supports

That the second petition got further than the first: the House let a bill be brought in.

Uncertainty

From the Alexandria Gazette, reprinting the Richmond Compiler's summary. Read on the Virginia Chronicle page image, a digital reproduction of the printed page. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

Source

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Alexandria Gazette, Page 3, the House of Delegates, credited to the Richmond Compiler.

Alexandria Gazette, Alexandria, D.C., February 14, 1835, page 3: House of Delegates proceedings on the petition for a new county out of Frederick, session of 1834-35

Alexandria Gazette · 1835-02-14 (publication)

Locator: Page 3, the House of Delegates, credited to the Richmond Compiler

Relevant passage
Mr. Gibson moved to amend the report, so as to reject the petition, and called for the ayes and noes

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: alexandria-gazette. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Alexandria Gazette, Page 3, the House of Delegates, credited to the Richmond Compiler.

Alexandria Gazette, Alexandria, D.C., February 14, 1835, page 3: House of Delegates proceedings on the petition for a new county out of Frederick, session of 1834-35

Alexandria Gazette · 1835-02-14 (publication)

Locator: Page 3, the House of Delegates, credited to the Richmond Compiler

Relevant passage
and rejected; ayes 49, noes 61. A bill will accordingly be reported, embracing the prayer of the Petitioners.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: alexandria-gazette. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

Source note: Genius of Liberty, 1835
✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

On February 25, 1835 the House postponed the bill forming a new county out of part of Frederick indefinitely, by 47 votes to 44.

What the source supports

The second defeat, by three votes.

Uncertainty

From the Genius of Liberty's summary of the House; the day is the one before the Thursday, February 26 heading. Read on the Virginia Chronicle page image, a digital reproduction of the printed page. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

Source

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Genius of Liberty, Page 2, House of Delegates, the day before Thursday, February 26.

Genius of Liberty, Leesburg, Va., March 7, 1835, page 2: House of Delegates proceedings on the petition for a new county out of Frederick, session of 1834-35

Genius of Liberty · 1835-03-07 (publication)

Locator: Page 2, House of Delegates, the day before Thursday, February 26

Relevant passage
A bill, forming a new county out of part of the county of Frederick, came up on its second reading

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: genius-of-liberty. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Genius of Liberty, Page 2, House of Delegates, the day before Thursday, February 26.

Genius of Liberty, Leesburg, Va., March 7, 1835, page 2: House of Delegates proceedings on the petition for a new county out of Frederick, session of 1834-35

Genius of Liberty · 1835-03-07 (publication)

Locator: Page 2, House of Delegates, the day before Thursday, February 26

Relevant passage
the bill was indefinitely postponed.—Ayes 47.---Noes 44.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: genius-of-liberty. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

Source note: Richmond Enquirer, 1835
✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

In Frederick's election of April 1835, John B. D. Smith won votes "exclusively on account of his exertions against the division of the county," the Winchester Virginian reported in an item the Richmond Enquirer reprinted.

What the source supports

That the division still decided votes in Frederick in 1835.

Uncertainty

The Virginian's judgment, reprinted; it does not say how many such votes there were. Read on the Virginia Chronicle page image, a digital reproduction of the printed page. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

Source

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Richmond Enquirer, Page 3, Frederick County returns, from the last Winchester Virginian.

Richmond Enquirer, Richmond, Va., April 21, 1835, page 3: news report on the division of Frederick and the election of 1835

Richmond Enquirer · 1835-04-21 (publication)

Locator: Page 3, Frederick County returns, from the last Winchester Virginian

Relevant passage
he was voted for by a number exclusively on account of his exertions against the division of the county.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: richmond-enquirer. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

Source note: Library of Virginia, 1834
✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

The second petition, received December 4, 1834, was found "Reasonable" by the committee on January 21, 1835, and a bill was reported on February 12, 1835.

What the source supports

That the committee approved the second petition too; the bill was then postponed on February 25, 1835.

Uncertainty

From the clerk's docket on the petition, not the House journal. Read on the Library of Virginia's scan of the microfilm, a digital reproduction. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

Source

Contemporary document

Evidence role: supports. Library of Virginia, file 045_083_035, Scan page 14, the docket.

Library of Virginia, Legislative Petitions, Frederick County, December 4, 1834 (file 045_083_035): printed petition for a new county out of north-eastern Frederick, with signatures

Inhabitants: Petition (catalogued by the Library of Virginia) · 1834-12-04 (filing)

Locator: Scan page 14, the docket

Relevant passage
Pn Frederick Cty for a New County. Decr 4th 1834 refd to Props. Jany 21st Reasonable. 22nd Resol. reported. Feby 12th Bill reported.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: lva-legislative-petitions-frederick-1831-1836. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

A tied vote

A third petition went to Richmond for the session of 1835 and 1836. The legislature had meanwhile ordered a count of the people in the proposed county. Richard M. Sydnor and Wilford G. Settle finished it on November 30, 1835: 3,125 white people, 3,508 enslaved people and 160 free Black people, 6,793 in all. More of the people of the proposed county were enslaved than free. The two men refused to count enslaved people hired out to masters outside the district, "conceiving that such slaves were not inhabitants of the district."

The opponents printed a new remonstrance, against "every division of the county, but most earnestly and emphatically against the Battletown division." The wealth of Frederick, they argued, was "in that corner of it where its population is not," and if the plan were dropped, "our friends of the Battletown vicinity will be restored to a full participation in all the honors of the county." In January the Free Press correspondent in Richmond would not guess the petition's fate, "as the most earnest opposition will again be made to it." On January 29, 1836 the committee found the petition, presented by Mr. Griggs, reasonable, and rejected a remonstrance against the division the same day. A bill was reported on February 18.

It came within one vote of failing. On March 5, 1836 the House divided 49 to 49 on whether to take up the bill, and the Speaker voted to take it up.

The blanks in the bill were then filled. The new county was named Clarke, "in honor of Gen. George R. Clarke," George Rogers Clark, and it was joined with Warren County, made the same week from parts of Frederick and Shenandoah, to elect one delegate between them. The bill passed the House 84 to 29, and on Tuesday, March 8 the Senate passed both bills almost unanimously. "The county including Berryville is to be called Clarke," the Free Press told its readers. In Fredericksburg the Political Arena wrote that the legislature had "shorn the counties of Frederick and Shenandoah of their strength."

Source note: Virginia Free Press, 1836
✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

In January 1836, with a third petition before the legislature, the Virginia Free Press's Richmond correspondent wrote that its fate could not be foreseen, as "the most earnest opposition will again be made to it."

What the source supports

That the outcome of the third petition was in doubt as the session opened.

Uncertainty

A correspondent's forecast. Read on the Virginia Chronicle page image, a digital reproduction of the printed page. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

Source

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Virginia Free Press, Page 2, Richmond correspondence.

Virginia Free Press, Charlestown, Va., January 7, 1836, page 2: Richmond correspondence on the petition for a new county out of Frederick, session of 1835-36

Virginia Free Press · 1836-01-07 (publication)

Locator: Page 2, Richmond correspondence

Relevant passage
It is impossible to say what will be the fate of this application, as the most earnest opposition will again be made to it.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: virginia-free-press. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

Source note: Richmond Enquirer, 1836
✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

On March 5, 1836 the House of Delegates took up the bill forming a new county out of Frederick on a tie vote of 49 to 49, with the Speaker voting in favor, and then passed it by 84 votes to 29.

What the source supports

How the bill forming Clarke County passed the House: the motion to take it up carried only on the Speaker's vote.

Uncertainty

From the Richmond Enquirer's report of the House; the day comes from the report's heading as read in the OCR, and the totals are the last figures of the printed lists of ayes and noes. Read on the Virginia Chronicle page image, a digital reproduction of the printed page. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

Source

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Richmond Enquirer, Page 3, NEW COUNTY, House of Delegates, Saturday, March 5.

Richmond Enquirer, Richmond, Va., March 12, 1836, page 3: House of Delegates proceedings on the passage of the act forming Clarke County, 1836

Richmond Enquirer · 1836-03-12 (publication)

Locator: Page 3, NEW COUNTY, House of Delegates, Saturday, March 5

Relevant passage
his motion was agreed to—Ayes 49, Noes 49—The Speaker voting in the affirmative.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: richmond-enquirer. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Richmond Enquirer, Page 3, NEW COUNTY, House of Delegates, Saturday, March 5.

Richmond Enquirer, Richmond, Va., March 12, 1836, page 3: House of Delegates proceedings on the passage of the act forming Clarke County, 1836

Richmond Enquirer · 1836-03-12 (publication)

Locator: Page 3, NEW COUNTY, House of Delegates, Saturday, March 5

Relevant passage
the bill passed by the following vote:

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: richmond-enquirer. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Richmond Enquirer, Page 3, the vote on the bill, totals.

Richmond Enquirer, Richmond, Va., March 12, 1836, page 3: House of Delegates proceedings on the passage of the act forming Clarke County, 1836

Richmond Enquirer · 1836-03-12 (publication)

Locator: Page 3, the vote on the bill, totals

Relevant passage
Saunders—84.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: richmond-enquirer. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Richmond Enquirer, Page 3, the vote on the bill, totals.

Richmond Enquirer, Richmond, Va., March 12, 1836, page 3: House of Delegates proceedings on the passage of the act forming Clarke County, 1836

Richmond Enquirer · 1836-03-12 (publication)

Locator: Page 3, the vote on the bill, totals

Relevant passage
Stanard—29.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: richmond-enquirer. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

Source note: Richmond Enquirer, 1836, and one more
✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

The House named the new county Clarke, "in honor of Gen. George R. Clarke," George Rogers Clark; the Virginia Free Press told its readers that "The county including Berryville is to be called Clarke."

What the source supports

Whom the county was named for, in the words of the day.

Uncertainty

The papers spell the general's name Clarke; he is usually written George Rogers Clark. Read on the Virginia Chronicle page image, a digital reproduction of the printed page. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

Source

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Richmond Enquirer, Page 3, NEW COUNTY, House of Delegates, Saturday, March 5.

Richmond Enquirer, Richmond, Va., March 12, 1836, page 3: House of Delegates proceedings on the passage of the act forming Clarke County, 1836

Richmond Enquirer · 1836-03-12 (publication)

Locator: Page 3, NEW COUNTY, House of Delegates, Saturday, March 5

Relevant passage
the name of Clarke was given to the new county, in honor of Gen. George R. Clarke

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: richmond-enquirer. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Virginia Free Press, Page 3, the two new counties.

Virginia Free Press, Charlestown, Va., March 17, 1836, page 3: news report on the passage of the act forming Clarke County, 1836

Virginia Free Press · 1836-03-17 (publication)

Locator: Page 3, the two new counties

Relevant passage
The county including Berryville is to be called Clarke, after the celebrated George Rogers Clarke

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: virginia-free-press. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

Source note: Richmond Enquirer, 1836, and one more
✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

The Senate passed the bills forming Clarke and Warren counties almost unanimously on Tuesday, March 8, 1836; Fredericksburg's Political Arena wrote that the legislature had "shorn the counties of Frederick and Shenandoah of their strength."

What the source supports

When the county was made, and how one paper outside the Valley saw it.

Uncertainty

The Senate vote is not given in figures; "almost unanimously" is the Richmond Enquirer's word. Read on the Virginia Chronicle page image, a digital reproduction of the printed page. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

Source

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Richmond Enquirer, Page 3, the Senate.

Richmond Enquirer, Richmond, Va., March 10, 1836, page 3: news report on the passage of the act forming Clarke County, 1836

Richmond Enquirer · 1836-03-10 (publication)

Locator: Page 3, the Senate

Relevant passage
On Tuesday, the bills for establishing two new counties out of parts of Frederick and Shenandoah, passed the Senate almost unanimously.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: richmond-enquirer. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Political Arena, Page 2, NEW COUNTIES.

Political Arena, Fredericksburg, Va., March 15, 1836, page 2: editorial on the passage of the act forming Clarke County, 1836

Political Arena · 1836-03-15 (publication)

Locator: Page 2, NEW COUNTIES

Relevant passage
The Legislature has shorn the counties of Frederick and Shenandoah of their strength, and reduced the former to a second rate.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: political-arena-fredericksburg. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

Source note: Library of Virginia, 1835
✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

A census of the proposed county ordered by the legislature in 1835 and finished on November 30, 1835 counted 3,125 white people, 3,508 enslaved people and 160 free Black people, 6,793 in all. Its takers, Richard M. Sydnor and Wilford G. Settle, refused to count enslaved people hired out to masters outside the district.

What the source supports

The population of the proposed county on the eve of its creation, and that more of its people were enslaved than free.

Uncertainty

The figures are Robert Page's sum in the margin of the return and Settle's corrected total; the return itself gives the white count as 3126 and its own total as 6783, and Settle had first reported 6569. Read on the Library of Virginia's scan of the microfilm, a digital reproduction. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

Source

Contemporary document

Evidence role: supports. Library of Virginia, file 045_083_053, Scan page 1, the census return, its opening.

Library of Virginia, Legislative Petitions, Frederick County, December 30, 1835 (file 045_083_053): Richard M. Sydnor and Wilford G. Settle's census of the north-eastern part of Frederick County

Settle, Wilford G. & Sydnor, Richard M.: Correspondence (catalogued by the Library of Virginia) · 1835-12-30 (filing)

Locator: Scan page 1, the census return, its opening

Relevant passage
We Richard M Sydnor and Wilford G. Settle, State, that in pursuance of an act of assembly passed February 28th 1835 we have taken the census of the North east part of Frederick County

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: lva-legislative-petitions-frederick-1831-1836. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

Contemporary document

Evidence role: supports. Library of Virginia, file 045_083_053, Scan page 1, Robert Page's sum in the margin.

Library of Virginia, Legislative Petitions, Frederick County, December 30, 1835 (file 045_083_053): Richard M. Sydnor and Wilford G. Settle's census of the north-eastern part of Frederick County

Settle, Wilford G. & Sydnor, Richard M.: Correspondence (catalogued by the Library of Virginia) · 1835-12-30 (filing)

Locator: Scan page 1, Robert Page's sum in the margin

Relevant passage
3125 white persons 3508 Slaves 160 Free Negroes 6793 the whole number according to the above

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: lva-legislative-petitions-frederick-1831-1836. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

Contemporary document

Evidence role: supports. Library of Virginia, file 045_083_053, Scan page 1, the census return.

Library of Virginia, Legislative Petitions, Frederick County, December 30, 1835 (file 045_083_053): Richard M. Sydnor and Wilford G. Settle's census of the north-eastern part of Frederick County

Settle, Wilford G. & Sydnor, Richard M.: Correspondence (catalogued by the Library of Virginia) · 1835-12-30 (filing)

Locator: Scan page 1, the census return

Relevant passage
conceiving that such slaves were not inhabitants of the district at the time of taking the census We refused to place them on the list.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: lva-legislative-petitions-frederick-1831-1836. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

Contemporary document

Evidence role: supports. Library of Virginia, file 045_083_049, Scan page 36, Wilford G. Settle to Robert Page, Winchester, November 30, 1835.

Library of Virginia, Legislative Petitions, Frederick County, December 9, 1835 (file 045_083_049): printed petition for a new county out of north-eastern Frederick, with signatures and Wilford G. Settle's letter on the census

Citizens: Petition (catalogued by the Library of Virginia) · 1835-12-09 (filing)

Locator: Scan page 36, Wilford G. Settle to Robert Page, Winchester, November 30, 1835

Relevant passage
the true amount of population is 6793

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: lva-legislative-petitions-frederick-1831-1836. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

Source note: Library of Virginia, 1835
✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

In the session of 1835 and 1836 printed remonstrances opposed "every division of the county, but most earnestly and emphatically" the Battletown division, arguing that the wealth of Frederick lay "in that corner of it where its population is not" and that if the plan were dropped, "our friends of the Battletown vicinity will be restored to a full participation in all the honors of the county."

What the source supports

What the opponents of the third petition argued.

Uncertainty

An advocates' paper; Battletown is its name for the Berryville district. Read on the Library of Virginia's scan of the microfilm, a digital reproduction. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

Source

Contemporary document

Evidence role: supports. Library of Virginia, file 045_083_051, Scan page 1, the printed remonstrance.

Library of Virginia, Legislative Petitions, Frederick County, December 22, 1835 (file 045_083_051): printed remonstrance against the Battletown division, with signatures

Citizens: Remonstrance (catalogued by the Library of Virginia) · 1835-12-22 (filing)

Locator: Scan page 1, the printed remonstrance

Relevant passage
the wealth of the county is in that corner of it where its population is not

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: lva-legislative-petitions-frederick-1831-1836. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

Contemporary document

Evidence role: supports. Library of Virginia, file 045_083_051, Scan page 1, the printed remonstrance.

Library of Virginia, Legislative Petitions, Frederick County, December 22, 1835 (file 045_083_051): printed remonstrance against the Battletown division, with signatures

Citizens: Remonstrance (catalogued by the Library of Virginia) · 1835-12-22 (filing)

Locator: Scan page 1, the printed remonstrance

Relevant passage
if this scheme of division is abandoned, our friends of the Battletown vicinity will be restored to a full participation in all the honors of the county.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: lva-legislative-petitions-frederick-1831-1836. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

Contemporary document

Evidence role: supports. Library of Virginia, file 045_083_051, Scan page 1, the printed remonstrance, its closing.

Library of Virginia, Legislative Petitions, Frederick County, December 22, 1835 (file 045_083_051): printed remonstrance against the Battletown division, with signatures

Citizens: Remonstrance (catalogued by the Library of Virginia) · 1835-12-22 (filing)

Locator: Scan page 1, the printed remonstrance, its closing

Relevant passage
the undersigned remonstrate against every division of the county, but most earnestly and emphatically against the Battletown division.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: lva-legislative-petitions-frederick-1831-1836. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

Source note: Library of Virginia, 1835, and one more
✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

The third petition, presented by Mr. Griggs and received December 9, 1835, was found "Reasonable" on January 29, 1836; the same day the committee rejected a remonstrance against the division of Frederick. A bill was reported on February 18, 1836.

What the source supports

That the committee approved the third petition and rejected the opposition's papers five weeks before the House passed the bill.

Uncertainty

From the clerks' dockets on the petition and the remonstrance, not the House journal. Read on the Library of Virginia's scan of the microfilm, a digital reproduction. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

Source

Contemporary document

Evidence role: supports. Library of Virginia, file 045_083_049, Scan page 31, the docket.

Library of Virginia, Legislative Petitions, Frederick County, December 9, 1835 (file 045_083_049): printed petition for a new county out of north-eastern Frederick, with signatures and Wilford G. Settle's letter on the census

Citizens: Petition (catalogued by the Library of Virginia) · 1835-12-09 (filing)

Locator: Scan page 31, the docket

Relevant passage
Pn Frederick for a new County to be formed from the eastern portion of said county. Decr 9th 1835 refd to Props. Jany 29th Reasonable. 30 Resoln reported. Feby 18th Bill reported. Presented by Mr Griggs

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: lva-legislative-petitions-frederick-1831-1836. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

Contemporary document

Evidence role: supports. Library of Virginia, file 045_083_058, Scan page 3, the docket.

Library of Virginia, Legislative Petitions, Frederick County, January 8, 1836 (file 045_083_058): printed remonstrance against the Battletown division, with signatures

Inhabitants: Remonstrance (catalogued by the Library of Virginia) · 1836-01-08 (filing)

Locator: Scan page 3, the docket

Relevant passage
Remonstrance against Division of Frederick Cty. Jany 8th 1836 refd to Props. Jany 29th Rejected.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: lva-legislative-petitions-frederick-1831-1836. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

A newspaper column headed NEW COUNTY. It reports that Mr. Griggs moved to take up the bill forming a new county out of parts of Frederick, that the motion was agreed to with ayes 49 and noes 49, the Speaker voting in the affirmative, and that the name of Clarke was given to the new county in honor of Gen. George R. Clarke, with one delegate allotted to Clarke and Warren.

The Richmond Enquirer of March 12, 1836 reports the House's tie of 49 to 49 on taking up the bill, broken by the Speaker, and the naming of the new county "in honor of Gen. George R. Clarke."

What this image does and does not showA crop of part of one column; the vote on the bill and the rest of the page are not shown.

Richmond Enquirer (Richmond, Va.), March 12, 1836, page 3. Virginia Chronicle, Library of Virginia. Rights Changes: A detail of a screenshot of Virginia Chronicle's page viewer (1432 by 840 pixels) with search highlighting turned off: the rectangle from x 330 to 1292 and y 232 to 650, which leaves out the viewer and the neighboring columns, not scaled, and re-encoded as JPEG. The whole page is at the source link. Nothing retouched or added.

Source: Richmond Enquirer, Richmond, Va., March 12, 1836, page 3: House of Delegates proceedings on the passage of the act forming Clarke County, 1836 Open the full image

Called and known by the name of Clarke county

The Free Press printed the act on March 24. The eastern part of Frederick "shall form one distinct and new county, and be called and known by the name of Clarke county," and the Governor was to commission nineteen justices of the peace for it.

The justices met at Berryville on Monday, March 28, 1836. George H. Norris, the oldest of them in commission, took up the duties of sheriff; John Hay was chosen clerk of the county court and John E. Page commonwealth's attorney. Four weeks later, on Monday, April 25, Clarke held its first election. At half past four that afternoon Nathaniel Burwell had 150 votes for the House of Delegates.

Source note: Virginia Free Press, 1836
✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

The act, as the Virginia Free Press printed it on March 24, 1836, made the eastern part of Frederick "one distinct and new county," to "be called and known by the name of Clarke county," and directed the Governor to commission nineteen justices of the peace for it.

What the source supports

What the act said about the county's name and its first magistrates.

Uncertainty

The newspaper's printing of the act, not the session laws. Read on the Virginia Chronicle page image, a digital reproduction of the printed page. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

Source

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Virginia Free Press, Page 2, the act forming Clarke County.

Virginia Free Press, Charlestown, Va., March 24, 1836, page 2: the act forming Clarke County, printed

Virginia Free Press · 1836-03-24 (publication)

Locator: Page 2, the act forming Clarke County

Relevant passage
shall form one distinct and new county, and be called and known by the name of Clarke county. The Governor shall commission nineteen persons as justices of the peace

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: virginia-free-press. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

Source note: Virginia Free Press, 1836
✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

The justices of the new county of Clarke first assembled in Berryville on Monday, March 28, 1836; George H. Norris, the oldest in commission, took up the duties of sheriff, John Hay was chosen clerk of the county court, and John E. Page commonwealth's attorney.

What the source supports

The first sitting of Clarke's county court and its first officers.

Uncertainty

The Free Press's report of the meeting, not the court's order book. Read on the Virginia Chronicle page image, a digital reproduction of the printed page. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

Source

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Virginia Free Press, Page 2, the first court.

Virginia Free Press, Charlestown, Va., March 31, 1836, page 2: news report on the new county of Clarke, 1836

Virginia Free Press · 1836-03-31 (publication)

Locator: Page 2, the first court

Relevant passage
The justices of the new county of Clarke assembled in Berryville, according to law, on Monday last.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: virginia-free-press. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Virginia Free Press, Page 2, the first court.

Virginia Free Press, Charlestown, Va., March 31, 1836, page 2: news report on the new county of Clarke, 1836

Virginia Free Press · 1836-03-31 (publication)

Locator: Page 2, the first court

Relevant passage
GEORGE H. NORRIS, Esq., being the oldest in commission, assumed the duties of the Sheriffalty; JOHN HAY, Esq. was chosen Clerk of the County Court; and JOHN E. PAGE, Esq. Commonwealth's Attorney.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: virginia-free-press. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

Source note: Virginia Free Press, 1836
✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

Clarke County held its first election on Monday, April 25, 1836; at half past four that afternoon Nathaniel Burwell had 150 votes for the House of Delegates and Col. William Carson 2.

What the source supports

The county's first election and its first delegate's vote.

Uncertainty

A count taken before the polls closed, as the Free Press printed it. Read on the Virginia Chronicle page image, a digital reproduction of the printed page. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

Source

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Virginia Free Press, Page 2, CLARKE ELECTION.

Virginia Free Press, Charlestown, Va., April 28, 1836, page 2: news report on the new county of Clarke, 1836

Virginia Free Press · 1836-04-28 (publication)

Locator: Page 2, CLARKE ELECTION

Relevant passage
The first election in the new county of Clarke was held on Monday last.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: virginia-free-press. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

Reporting

Evidence role: supports. Virginia Free Press, Page 2, CLARKE ELECTION.

Virginia Free Press, Charlestown, Va., April 28, 1836, page 2: news report on the new county of Clarke, 1836

Virginia Free Press · 1836-04-28 (publication)

Locator: Page 2, CLARKE ELECTION

Relevant passage
For the H. of D.—Nathaniel Burwell, Esq., 150; Col. Wm. Carson 2.

Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

Open source

Source family: virginia-free-press. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

About the sourcesWhat the evidence says
What the evidence says

Seventy-eight newspaper articles of 1833 to 1837 found on Virginia Chronicle, and the thirty Library of Virginia files of petitions and papers on the division, with the passages quoted here read on the images.

Reports of the House of Delegates are the papers' summaries, not the official journal; the letters, petitions and remonstrances are advocates' arguments; the dockets are the clerks' notes.

  • An account exists✓ Supported by a source

    On January 14, 1834 the House of Delegates reversed its committee's finding that the petition for a new county out of eastern Frederick was reasonable, by 76 votes to 53.

    See the evidence
    ✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

    On January 14, 1834 the House of Delegates reversed its committee's finding that the petition for a new county out of eastern Frederick was reasonable, by 76 votes to 53.

    What the source supports

    The first defeat of the petition in the House.

    Uncertainty

    From the Political Arena's summary of the House, not the official journal. Read on the Virginia Chronicle page image, a digital reproduction of the printed page. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

    Source

    Reporting

    Evidence role: supports. Political Arena, Page 2, House of Delegates, Tuesday, January 14.

    Political Arena, Fredericksburg, Va., January 17, 1834, page 2: House of Delegates proceedings on the petition for a new county out of Frederick, session of 1833-34

    Political Arena · 1834-01-17 (publication)

    Locator: Page 2, House of Delegates, Tuesday, January 14

    Relevant passage
    The question was taken by ayes and noes, and the amendment carried, Ayes 76, Noes 53. So the House decided against the new county.

    Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

    Open source

    Source family: political-arena-fredericksburg. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

    AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

  • An account exists✓ Supported by a source

    A census of the proposed county ordered by the legislature in 1835 and finished on November 30, 1835 counted 3,125 white people, 3,508 enslaved people and 160 free Black people, 6,793 in all. Its takers, Richard M. Sydnor and Wilford G. Settle, refused to count enslaved people hired out to masters outside the district.

    See the evidence
    ✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

    A census of the proposed county ordered by the legislature in 1835 and finished on November 30, 1835 counted 3,125 white people, 3,508 enslaved people and 160 free Black people, 6,793 in all. Its takers, Richard M. Sydnor and Wilford G. Settle, refused to count enslaved people hired out to masters outside the district.

    What the source supports

    The population of the proposed county on the eve of its creation, and that more of its people were enslaved than free.

    Uncertainty

    The figures are Robert Page's sum in the margin of the return and Settle's corrected total; the return itself gives the white count as 3126 and its own total as 6783, and Settle had first reported 6569. Read on the Library of Virginia's scan of the microfilm, a digital reproduction. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

    Source

    Contemporary document

    Evidence role: supports. Library of Virginia, file 045_083_053, Scan page 1, the census return, its opening.

    Library of Virginia, Legislative Petitions, Frederick County, December 30, 1835 (file 045_083_053): Richard M. Sydnor and Wilford G. Settle's census of the north-eastern part of Frederick County

    Settle, Wilford G. & Sydnor, Richard M.: Correspondence (catalogued by the Library of Virginia) · 1835-12-30 (filing)

    Locator: Scan page 1, the census return, its opening

    Relevant passage
    We Richard M Sydnor and Wilford G. Settle, State, that in pursuance of an act of assembly passed February 28th 1835 we have taken the census of the North east part of Frederick County

    Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

    Open source

    Source family: lva-legislative-petitions-frederick-1831-1836. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

    Contemporary document

    Evidence role: supports. Library of Virginia, file 045_083_053, Scan page 1, Robert Page's sum in the margin.

    Library of Virginia, Legislative Petitions, Frederick County, December 30, 1835 (file 045_083_053): Richard M. Sydnor and Wilford G. Settle's census of the north-eastern part of Frederick County

    Settle, Wilford G. & Sydnor, Richard M.: Correspondence (catalogued by the Library of Virginia) · 1835-12-30 (filing)

    Locator: Scan page 1, Robert Page's sum in the margin

    Relevant passage
    3125 white persons 3508 Slaves 160 Free Negroes 6793 the whole number according to the above

    Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

    Open source

    Source family: lva-legislative-petitions-frederick-1831-1836. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

    Contemporary document

    Evidence role: supports. Library of Virginia, file 045_083_053, Scan page 1, the census return.

    Library of Virginia, Legislative Petitions, Frederick County, December 30, 1835 (file 045_083_053): Richard M. Sydnor and Wilford G. Settle's census of the north-eastern part of Frederick County

    Settle, Wilford G. & Sydnor, Richard M.: Correspondence (catalogued by the Library of Virginia) · 1835-12-30 (filing)

    Locator: Scan page 1, the census return

    Relevant passage
    conceiving that such slaves were not inhabitants of the district at the time of taking the census We refused to place them on the list.

    Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

    Open source

    Source family: lva-legislative-petitions-frederick-1831-1836. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

    Contemporary document

    Evidence role: supports. Library of Virginia, file 045_083_049, Scan page 36, Wilford G. Settle to Robert Page, Winchester, November 30, 1835.

    Library of Virginia, Legislative Petitions, Frederick County, December 9, 1835 (file 045_083_049): printed petition for a new county out of north-eastern Frederick, with signatures and Wilford G. Settle's letter on the census

    Citizens: Petition (catalogued by the Library of Virginia) · 1835-12-09 (filing)

    Locator: Scan page 36, Wilford G. Settle to Robert Page, Winchester, November 30, 1835

    Relevant passage
    the true amount of population is 6793

    Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

    Open source

    Source family: lva-legislative-petitions-frederick-1831-1836. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

    AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

  • An account exists✓ Supported by a source

    On March 5, 1836 the House of Delegates took up the bill forming a new county out of Frederick on a tie vote of 49 to 49, with the Speaker voting in favor, and then passed it by 84 votes to 29.

    See the evidence
    ✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

    On March 5, 1836 the House of Delegates took up the bill forming a new county out of Frederick on a tie vote of 49 to 49, with the Speaker voting in favor, and then passed it by 84 votes to 29.

    What the source supports

    How the bill forming Clarke County passed the House: the motion to take it up carried only on the Speaker's vote.

    Uncertainty

    From the Richmond Enquirer's report of the House; the day comes from the report's heading as read in the OCR, and the totals are the last figures of the printed lists of ayes and noes. Read on the Virginia Chronicle page image, a digital reproduction of the printed page. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

    Source

    Reporting

    Evidence role: supports. Richmond Enquirer, Page 3, NEW COUNTY, House of Delegates, Saturday, March 5.

    Richmond Enquirer, Richmond, Va., March 12, 1836, page 3: House of Delegates proceedings on the passage of the act forming Clarke County, 1836

    Richmond Enquirer · 1836-03-12 (publication)

    Locator: Page 3, NEW COUNTY, House of Delegates, Saturday, March 5

    Relevant passage
    his motion was agreed to—Ayes 49, Noes 49—The Speaker voting in the affirmative.

    Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

    Open source

    Source family: richmond-enquirer. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

    Reporting

    Evidence role: supports. Richmond Enquirer, Page 3, NEW COUNTY, House of Delegates, Saturday, March 5.

    Richmond Enquirer, Richmond, Va., March 12, 1836, page 3: House of Delegates proceedings on the passage of the act forming Clarke County, 1836

    Richmond Enquirer · 1836-03-12 (publication)

    Locator: Page 3, NEW COUNTY, House of Delegates, Saturday, March 5

    Relevant passage
    the bill passed by the following vote:

    Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

    Open source

    Source family: richmond-enquirer. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

    Reporting

    Evidence role: supports. Richmond Enquirer, Page 3, the vote on the bill, totals.

    Richmond Enquirer, Richmond, Va., March 12, 1836, page 3: House of Delegates proceedings on the passage of the act forming Clarke County, 1836

    Richmond Enquirer · 1836-03-12 (publication)

    Locator: Page 3, the vote on the bill, totals

    Relevant passage
    Saunders—84.

    Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

    Open source

    Source family: richmond-enquirer. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

    Reporting

    Evidence role: supports. Richmond Enquirer, Page 3, the vote on the bill, totals.

    Richmond Enquirer, Richmond, Va., March 12, 1836, page 3: House of Delegates proceedings on the passage of the act forming Clarke County, 1836

    Richmond Enquirer · 1836-03-12 (publication)

    Locator: Page 3, the vote on the bill, totals

    Relevant passage
    Stanard—29.

    Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

    Open source

    Source family: richmond-enquirer. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

    AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

  • An account exists✓ Supported by a source

    The justices of the new county of Clarke first assembled in Berryville on Monday, March 28, 1836; George H. Norris, the oldest in commission, took up the duties of sheriff, John Hay was chosen clerk of the county court, and John E. Page commonwealth's attorney.

    See the evidence
    ✓ Supported by a sourceAn account exists

    The justices of the new county of Clarke first assembled in Berryville on Monday, March 28, 1836; George H. Norris, the oldest in commission, took up the duties of sheriff, John Hay was chosen clerk of the county court, and John E. Page commonwealth's attorney.

    What the source supports

    The first sitting of Clarke's county court and its first officers.

    Uncertainty

    The Free Press's report of the meeting, not the court's order book. Read on the Virginia Chronicle page image, a digital reproduction of the printed page. No human historian has reviewed this claim.

    Source

    Reporting

    Evidence role: supports. Virginia Free Press, Page 2, the first court.

    Virginia Free Press, Charlestown, Va., March 31, 1836, page 2: news report on the new county of Clarke, 1836

    Virginia Free Press · 1836-03-31 (publication)

    Locator: Page 2, the first court

    Relevant passage
    The justices of the new county of Clarke assembled in Berryville, according to law, on Monday last.

    Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

    Open source

    Source family: virginia-free-press. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

    Reporting

    Evidence role: supports. Virginia Free Press, Page 2, the first court.

    Virginia Free Press, Charlestown, Va., March 31, 1836, page 2: news report on the new county of Clarke, 1836

    Virginia Free Press · 1836-03-31 (publication)

    Locator: Page 2, the first court

    Relevant passage
    GEORGE H. NORRIS, Esq., being the oldest in commission, assumed the duties of the Sheriffalty; JOHN HAY, Esq. was chosen Clerk of the County Court; and JOHN E. PAGE, Esq. Commonwealth's Attorney.

    Checked: Original inspected. A digital reproduction was inspected; no original has been handled.

    Open source

    Source family: virginia-free-press. Multiple passages from one source are not independent witnesses.

    AI-assisted source check (Claude Opus 5.5) · 2026-10-17. How this project checks its sources

Each statement above is assessed on its own evidence. Nothing here is averaged, scored or voted on, and a well-attributed account can be documented while what it describes stays unconfirmed.

Closing notes
What to take awayClarke was argued into being on paper. Petitions and remonstrances went to Richmond three winters running, and the newspapers followed the fight in at least eleven papers; seventy-eight of those articles survive in the digitized record, and the petitions survive in the Library of Virginia.

Every article we found

This story rests on the newspapers of the day, found on Virginia Chronicle, the Library of Virginia's digital archive. We searched every Virginia paper there from 1831 to 1837 and read every page of the Virginia Free Press and the Winchester Virginia Republican for those years. That turned up seventy-eight articles on the founding in eleven papers, from the Berryville meeting of 1833 to the county's first courts in 1837, and every one of them is listed on this site's evidence page. The passages quoted here were read on the page images.

The record has a gap. The Winchester Virginian, the other Winchester paper, has no digitized issue between 1832 and 1848, and the Republican survives in only a few issues of these years. Reports of the House are newspaper summaries, not the official journal. Warren Hofstra's A Separate Place: The Formation of Clarke County, Virginia, first published in 1986, tells the fuller history and pointed us to many of these papers.

The petitions survive too. The Library of Virginia holds thirty files of petitions, remonstrances and papers on dividing Frederick from 1831 to 1836, among them the census of 1835 and the dockets that record what the House committee did with each. We read every page, transcribed the names on the petitions and remonstrances, and list every file on the evidence page. The names are counted as written: a man who signed twice is counted twice, and some sheets are lost. The petitions and remonstrances for and against the Front Royal county, which became Warren, are among the thirty files.

The data

Names on the petitions to divide Frederick County, 1831-1836

Every name line on the Library of Virginia’s thirty files of petitions and remonstrances for and against the new counties that became Clarke and Warren, as written on the scans, with its reading grade and the side its document took. Free to download as a spreadsheet.

Know more about this story, or see something to correct? Help fill a gap. It stays private until it is reviewed.

Remember this place or someone in this story? Share a memory, even if you do not know the date. It stays private until it is reviewed.

Go deeper: every source under this story Follow another thread

Before the county: two land offices and a line at the Opequon

How the line at the Opequon, along which the county split, was laid down a century earlier.