POST FR-BROPHY-MONTELEONE (DO NOT DELETE) 12/20/2016 10:08 PM LAND, SLAVES, AND BONDS: TRUST AND PROBATE IN THE PRE-CIVIL WAR SHENANDOAH VALLEY Alfred L. Brophy* and Douglas Thie** ABSTRACT .................................................................................... 346  INTRODUCTION ............................................................................. 347  I.    INHERITANCE AND SLAVERY IN LITERATURE OF THE SHENANDOAH VALLEY ........................................................................................ 348  A.  Inheritance in the Literature of the Shenandoah Valley ....... 350  B.  Inheritance in Southern Literature Beyond the Shenandoah Valley .................................................................................... 355  C.  Controversy Over Slavery in the Shenandoah Valley ........... 358  II.   VIRGINIA INHERITANCE LAW IN THE ERA OF MARKET REVOLUTION ................................................................................ 361  III.    PROBATE IN ROCKBRIDGE COUNTY ............................................. 363  A.  The Setting: Rockbridge and the Shenandoah Valley ........... 364  B.  The Methodology .................................................................. 370  C.  Who Were the Testators? ...................................................... 372  D.  What Did Testators Do With Their Wealth? ......................... 373  1.  General Testamentary Practices ...................................... 373  2.  Married Testators ............................................................ 376  IV.    TRUST INCIDENCE AND PURPOSES: THE EXPANSION OF AMERICAN TRUST LAW .................................................................................. 377  A.  Changes in Trust Incidence, 1820–1861 .............................. 377  1.  Maintenance, Care, and Education of Family Members . 377  2.  Protection of Beneficiaries from Creditors ..................... 380  3.  The Growth of the Explicit Trust .................................... 381  B.  Increasing Sophistication of Trusts, 1820–1861 .................. 384  * Judge John J. Parker Distinguished Professor, University of North Carolina. ** Associate, Clawson and Staubes, LLC, Charlotte, North Carolina. The authors would like to thank Stephen Clowney, Andrew Fede, Deborah Gordon, Susannah Loumiet, Whitney Martinko, Gregg Polsky, Dana Remus, Carla Spivack, Norman Stein, Leslie Street, Katherine Van Wie, and Caryl Yzenbaard for their help. We would like to thank the audience at Oklahoma City University’s Trusts and Estates Meets Gender and Class conference for comments, as well as the librarians of the Southern Historical Collection at the University of North Carolina, Special Collections at Washington and Lee University, especially Lisa McCown and Tom Camden, and the Library of Virginia. 345 FR-Brophy-Monteleone POST (DO NOT DELETE) 12/20/2016 10:08 PM 346 WEST VIRGINIA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 119 V.    ENSLAVED PEOPLE IN ROCKBRIDGE COUNTY WILLS .................. 387  A.  Distribution of Slaves Among Family Members ................... 387  B.  Emancipating Slaves ............................................................. 388      CONCLUSION ................................................................................ 391      APPENDIX: TABLES ...................................................................... 394  Table 1: Testators by Gender by Decade ............................. 394  Table 2: Married Testators by Gender by Decade ............... 394  Table 3: Testamentary Trusts by Gender of Testator by Decade .................................................................................. 394  Table 4: Sophistication of Testamentary Trusts by Decade . 394  Table 5: Distributions by Married Testators to Surviving Spouse by Decade ................................................................. 395  Table 6: Distributions by Testators by Decade* .................. 395  Table 7: Favored Distributions to Issue by Gender by Decade .................................................................................. 395  Table 8: Wills Devising Enslaved People by Decade ........... 396  Table 9: Trust Beneficiaries ................................................. 396  Table 10: Objects of Devise of Slaves by Testators by Decade .................................................................................. 396  ABSTRACT Land, Slaves, and Bonds samples wills probated in Rockbridge County in Virginia’s Shenandoah Valley from 1820 to 1861, to detail the changes in testamentary devises and the technology of wills and trusts during that era of market revolution. We report the gender, familial status, distributions, and incidence of trusts for the 128 testators sampled. This study also traces changes in the sophistication of wills and accompanying trusts over time. Thus, it provides a window into how Rockbridge County residents used the legal process to transmit wealth between generations and to preserve it from creditors. It also details the response of lawyers and testators to the changing market. The 40 years leading into the Civil War saw extraordinary expansion in the United States’ economy. The legal technology studied here reflects that growth in wealth and sophistication. At the same time, as the vigorous market economy was expanding—as testators’ wealth was increasingly reflected in personal property such as stocks and bonds, rather than real property—there were problems with identifying reliable agents (executors and trustees). Thus, testators continued to place a premium on family members to manage their wealth; and they also took extraordinary means, such as use of sophisticated trust documents and marriage settlements, to maintain property within their families. This study shows that testators turned frequently to legal technology to manage property and keep it within their families. They used the vehicles to keep property out of POST FR-BROPHY-MONTELEONE (DO NOT DELETE) 12/20/2016 10:08 PM 2016] LAND, SLAVES, AND BONDS 347 the hands of creditors, especially the creditors of their sons-in-law. Legal technology helped respond to the impersonal market revolution. The data have several implications. They reveal how people reacted to the expanding, impersonal economy where property owners frequently had to rely on trust, even if it was dangerous to do so because it was difficult to police the actions of agents. That era of the breakdown of “trust” was a central impetus to the turn to trust documents to protect a family’s wealth. The data show the importance of legal technology in adapting to a rapidly changing economy and a rapidly expanding world. They also demonstrate the rapid rise in sophistication of trusts and relocate the roots of modern trust law, such as the spendthrift trust, to the pre-Civil War era, even though it is frequently written about as a device of the post-War era. INTRODUCTION Recent writings on trusts and estates have asked a series of questions about who uses the probate process to transfer wealth and what do they do with their wealth.1 Investigations have ranged from the gender and family status of testators to the objects of their devises, to how the probate system functions.2 Scholars have also begun to investigate the legal technology in wills, such as the incidence of trusts and the sophistication in them,3 the language testators use,4 and the self-conceptions of testators about their role in trust administration,5 as well as legal doctrine.6 Scholars are looking anew at the history of trusts and estates, too. They are interested in gauging the gravitational pull of the economy 1 See, e.g., David Horton, In Partial Defense of Probate: Evidence from Alameda County, California, 103 GEO. L.J. 605 (2015); David Horton, Wills Law on the Ground, 62 UCLA L. REV. 1094 (2015). 2 Stephen Clowney, In Their Own Hand: An Analysis of Holographic Wills and Homemade Willmaking, 43 REAL PROP. TR. & EST. L.J. 27 (2008); Bridget J. Crawford & Anthony C. Infanti, A Critical Research Agenda for Wills, Trusts and Estates, 49 REAL PROP. TR. & EST. L.J. 317 (2014). 3 See, e.g., Jason Kirklin, Note, Measuring the Testator: An Empirical Study of Probate in Jacksonian America, 72 OHIO ST. L.J. 479 (2011). 4 See, e.g., Deborah S. Gordon, Letters Non-Testamentary, 62 U. KAN. L. REV. 585 (2014); Karen J. Sneddon, Not Your Mother’s Will: Gender, Language, and Wills, 98 MARQ. L. REV. 1535 (2015); Karen J. Sneddon, In the Name of God, Amen: Language in Last Wills and Testaments, 29 QUINNIPIAC L. REV. 665 (2011). 5 See Deborah S. Gordon, Mor[t]ality and Identity: Wills, Narratives, and Cherished Possessions, YALE J.L. & HUMAN. (forthcoming 2017); Deborah S. Gordon, Trusting Trust, 63 U. KAN. L. REV. 497 (2015). 6 See, e.g., Adam J. Hirsch, Freedom of Testation/Freedom of Contract, 95 MINN. L. REV. 2180 (2011). FR-Brophy-Monteleone POST (DO NOT DELETE) 12/20/2016 10:08 PM 348 WEST VIRGINIA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 119 on legal technology7 and the role of slavery on the evolution of legal doctrine.8 This Article turns to one county in the heart of the Shenandoah Valley in the 40 years leading into the Civil War to gauge who the testators were and what they did with their property, as well as how legal technology changed over this time. This Article contributes to the revitalization of trusts and estates scholarship by tracing the growing sophistication and incidence of trust as the market revolution swept through the Valley. As testators grew in wealth, they needed better ways of managing their wealth and keeping it within their families and away from creditors. Part I locates key issues about the problems with maintaining property within the family and protecting it from unscrupulous managers in the years before the Civil War in the fictional literature set in and near Virginia’s Shenandoah Valley. It also introduces the importance of slavery—as well as anti- slavery—to the Shenandoah Valley and to questions of preservation of wealth within families. Part II then links those concerns to Virginia’s inheritance law and the legal treatises that advised how to best use trusts to protect property from creditors. Part III turns to Rockbridge County, the focal point of this study, and reports basic data on the 128 testators from 1820 to 1861 under study here. It reports descriptive statistics on who the testators were and what they with did their property. Part IV turns to the testamentary trusts that appeared in the Rockbridge County wills under study here and the increase in the incidence and sophistication of trusts, especially the increased use of trusts to protect against creditors. Finally, Part V turns to the presence of enslaved people in the Rockbridge County wills and how the wills reflect the desire to deal with enslaved people as property as well as, on rare occasions, free them. This study reflects the growing sophistication of legal technology of wills and trusts and the increasing need for sophistication in the market economy of the pre-Civil War years. I. INHERITANCE AND SLAVERY IN LITERATURE OF THE SHENANDOAH VALLEY Sometime around the early 1840s, the Irvine family of the Shenandoah Valley lost much of their inheritance.9 The agent who managed the inheritance, Thomas Bryson, had invested it in a bank, which failed.10 Lawrence Irvine, the 7 Gregory S. Alexander, The Dead Hand and the Law of Trusts in the Nineteenth Century, 37 STAN. L. REV. 1189 (1985). 8 See, e.g., Alfred L. Brophy, The Market, Utility, and Slavery in Southern Legal Thought, in SLAVERY’S CAPITALISM: A NEW HISTORY OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 262–76 (Sven Beckert & Seth Rockman eds., 2016) (discussing legal doctrine wrought to support slavery). 9 MARGARET JUNKIN PRESTON, SILVERWOOD: BOOK OF MEMORIES 19–24 (New York, Derby & Jackson 1856). 10 Id. POST FR-BROPHY-MONTELEONE (DO NOT DELETE) 12/20/2016 10:08 PM 2016] LAND, SLAVES, AND BONDS 349 only male child in the family of a widowed mother and four sisters,11 had inquired of the agent a few months before about the financial soundness of the bank, and the agent reassured the family that their money was safe.12 Yet, that assurance proved ill-founded. A few months after the failure, the family lost their home to a fire; little was left, not even the painting illustrating a scene from Dante’s Inferno.13 The painting showed the imprisonment of Count Ugolino, who sat in jail with his family for financial crimes and later occupied the second ring in the lowest circle of inferno, the area reserved for those who betray family and friends.14 Then the agent, Thomas Bryson, stole the family’s remaining funds,15 declared bankruptcy,16 and finally fled with his family to Europe.17 The bank failure and the journey towards poverty began through the negligence of the trustee and the bank’s managers. It was made worse through outright fraud. The Irvine family suffered through no fault of their own. When there were rumors that the bank might fail, Lawrence Irvine wrote to Bryson and received assurances that the bank was fine.18 Lawrence recalled his thinking that “as a great merchant,” Bryson “ought to know what stocks were unsafe.”19 Even after Bryson’s poor investment choice in the bank was revealed, they again entrusted him with their finances.20 The Irvines made the mistake of trusting an agent, a common problem and an increasing one as the traditional personal connections were breaking down.21 Apparently Bryson “put it into his own pocket, possibly intending, when he had used it as a little help to himself in his embarrassments . . . to invest it, and then patch up some story to cover the failure of the interest.”22 But things were even worse than that; for when news came that Bryson had misappropriated the family’s remaining money, they also learned that the Bryson family’s assets were settled in his wife’s hands, so that his 11 STACEY JEAN KLEIN, MARGARET JUNKIN PRESTON, POET OF THE CONFEDERACY: A LITERARY LIFE 36 (2007). 12 PRESTON, supra note 9, at 21. 13 Id. at 11–12, 30–31. 14 Id. at 30–31 (describing destruction of family estate, including picture); id. at 9–10 (describing picture with scene of Count Ugolino from the Inferno; perhaps Preston had Joshua Reynolds’s 1773 Count Ugolino and His Children in mind). 15 Id. at 151–60. 16 Id. at 153–54. 17 Id. at 259–60. 18 Id. at 21. 19 Id. at 21. 20 Id. at 180–81. 21 CHARLES SELLERS, THE MARKET REVOLUTION: JACKSONIAN AMERICA, 1815–1846 (1992). 22 PRESTON, supra note 9, at 180–81. FR-Brophy-Monteleone POST (DO NOT DELETE) 12/20/2016 10:08 PM 350 WEST VIRGINIA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 119 creditors could not reach them.23 Edith Irvine went to plead with Bryson for help, even though she knew that she had no legal claim. When he refused, she turned to his wife, hoping that the wife would give up some of her assets to help the Irvine family.24 All to no avail. When Edith went to visit with Mrs. Bryson to ask for satisfaction, she appealed to her as a woman and mother. “Legally, I know,” Edith said, “we can compel nothing from you; but you are a woman—you have a mother’s heart—you will not see my widowed mother, with none to stand between her and the unpitying world, driven out in the afternoon of her life[.]”25 Edith did not have a claim beyond that of the other creditors; that is, there would be little satisfaction for the losses they sustained when Mr. Bryson used his power of attorney to drain the assets entrusted to him into his wife’s hands. It was fraud, but there was little recourse; Mrs. Bryson refused satisfaction and stated, “A man can’t be expected to be kinder to other people, than to his own family.”26 Or so this scene of fraud, loss of inheritance, and decline in honor was imagined by Margaret Junkin Preston of Lexington, Virginia,27 in her 1856 novel Silverwood. A. Inheritance in the Literature of the Shenandoah Valley Though the story of the Irvine family was fictional, it tapped into several important themes of the era, such as the dependence of families on the honor and trustworthiness of strangers and the inability of trust beneficiaries to protect themselves through the legal system. The moral claims that might have prevailed in an earlier generation were not effective in the impersonal market-oriented 1840s and 1850s.28 The characters in the novel—the victims of Bryon’s misappropriation—understood the settlement in his wife as grossly unfair. “You see, sir, what roguery that unjust law leads to,” pointed out Dr. DuBois, who was in love with one of the Irvine daughters.29 23 1 HENRY ST. GEORGE TUCKER, COMMENTARIES ON VIRGINIA LAW 116 (Winchester, Office of the Republican 1836) (discussing creation of trusts that keep property free from claims of husband) [hereinafter COMMENTARIES ON VIRGINIA LAW]. 24 PRESTON, supra note 9, at 219–20. 25 Id. at 219. 26 Id. at 218. 27 KLEIN, supra note 11, at 36–38. 28 See, e.g., LAWRENCE FREDERICK KOHL, THE POLITICS OF INDIVIDUALISM: PARTIES AND THE AMERICAN CHARACTER IN THE JACKSONIAN ERA (1989) (emphasizing the impersonal market of the 1840s and 1850s). 29 PRESTON, supra note 9, at 260. Dr. DuBois’s statement was not quite correct under Virginia law. A husband had to receive adequate compensation for property conveyed to the wife in trust. See, e.g., Bullock v. Gordon, 18 Va. (4 Munf.) 450 (1815). POST FR-BROPHY-MONTELEONE (DO NOT DELETE) 12/20/2016 10:08 PM 2016] LAND, SLAVES, AND BONDS 351 That [law] allows the property a man may choose to make over to his wife, to be free from all the liabilities of the husband; thus holding out a bribe to commit fraud. Now this woman, in the eye of common justice, is a swindler; yet she transgresses no law of the commonwealth.30 What saved the Irvine family was marriage of one of the daughters into another wealthy and pious family and also an inheritance from the widow’s uncle in Scotland.31 But even then, other family members threatened a lawsuit to challenge the will, and the Irvines sent a trusted cousin to Scotland to represent their interests.32 The growing commercial nature of the nineteenth century, in which a family’s wealth was increasingly held in corporate stock and notes rather than land, left many families injured by bad luck and the misdeeds of strangers. The nation was tied together with a national economy and a population in motion from their lives on farms and in rural areas to cities.33 When a bank, manufacturing company, or turnpike company, for instance, failed, the loss of capital could affect many families—sometimes those even in distant states. This was a story on the minds of people who feared for the security of their family’s inheritance and about their own place in the market economy of the rapidly changing nineteenth century.34 Testators increasingly turned to law to impose additional duties on trustees and to secure their family’s fortune, to the extent that they could.35 Trust was necessary, but it often failed because in the impersonal world people did not abide their obligations and there was little morally or legally that could be done to compel people to meet their obligations.36 As trusts were increasing in popularity—and as the law of trusts was developing—a parallel change took place in ideology about trusts. In the wake of the American 30 PRESTON, supra note 9, at 260. 31 PRESTON, supra note 9, at 379–96. 32 Id. at 389. 33 DANIEL WALKER HOWE, WHAT HATH GOD WROUGHT: THE TRANSFORMATION OF AMERICA, 1815–1848, at 211–22 (2007) (discussing increasing migration and the transportation revolution). 34 Oliver Baldwin, Address Delivered at the Dedication of the Holly-wood Cemetery: On Monday, the 25th June, in 15 THE SOUTHERN LITERARY MESSENGER, DEVOTED TO EVERY DEPARTMENT OF LITERATURE AND THE FINE ARTS 817–18 (Richmond, Macfarlane & Fergusson 1849). 35 See, e.g., Harvard Coll. v. Amory, 26 Mass. (9 Pick.) 446 (1830). 36 GREGORY S. ALEXANDER, COMMODITY AND PROPRIETY: COMPETING VISIONS OF PROPERTY IN AMERICAN LEGAL THOUGHT 1776–1970, at 127–57 (1997) (discussing commercialization in antebellum era); MORTON J. HORWITZ, THE TRANSFORMATION OF AMERICAN LAW, 1780–1860, at 211–52 (Stanley N. Kant ed., 1977) (discussing rise of commercial law in nineteenth century). FR-Brophy-Monteleone POST (DO NOT DELETE) 12/20/2016 10:08 PM 352 WEST VIRGINIA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 119 Revolution, the idea was that the rules of inheritance should be largely equal.37 That was a key legislative reform in Virginia in the 1780s. Then affluent families tried to protect their children from creditors by use of trusts that limited beneficiaries’ rights to property or kept property out of the hands of sons-in-law (and thus out of the hands of their creditors).38 Where we had been suspicious of inherited wealth at the time of the Revolution, we increasingly embraced it. It was also likely a reaction to the realities of the market, just as was the growth of proslavery sentiments despite the legacy of statements of equality during the Revolution. Trusts were part of the response to the market; they helped protect families from creditors.39 One response to impersonal credit relations was to put property in trust to keep it within the family and outside of the hands of creditors.40 Yet, even when the property was kept within the family, as Silverwood showed, the family had to rely on the services of a professional trustee to manage the property. Thus, in addition to the growth of trusts as a form of property, the common law developed extensive rules policing trustee behavior.41 The legal constraints on trustees emerged as Americans increasingly emphasized duties to oneself and to others.42 This was a particularly strong theme 37 THOMAS JEFFERSON, NOTES ON THE STATE OF VIRGINIA 140 (Boston, Lilly & Wait 1832) (discussing reform of inheritance law to give absolute right in slaves and property that had been entailed); 3 ST. GEORGE TUCKER, BLACKSTONE’S COMMENTARIES: WITH NOTES OF REFERENCE TO THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES; AND OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA 336–62 (Pennsylvania, William Young Birch & Abraham Small 1803). 38 CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL CURTIS, JEFFERSON’S FREEHOLDERS AND THE POLITICS OF OWNERSHIP IN THE OLD DOMINION 130–34 (2012) (tracing changing ideas of Republicanism to those of promotion of slavery in Virginia from the Revolution to the Civil War). 39 ALEXANDER, supra note 36, at 154–57. 40 1 REVISED STATUTES OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 724 (Albany, Packard & Van Benthuysen 1828) (1828 New York statutory provision for what we now call a spendthrift trust). The statute provided: No person beneficially interested in a trust for the receipt of the rents and profits of lands, can assign or in any manner dispose of such interest; but the rights and interest of every person whose benefit a trust for the payment of a sum in gross is created, are assignable. Id. 41 2 JAMES KENT, COMMENTARIES ON AMERICAN LAW 295–308 (New York, O. Halstead 1830) (discussing trust law); id. at 310, 315–17 (discussing powers of appointment and revocation for trusts). Regarding the martial settlement trust, Kent wrote that “it is not unusual to convey or bequeath property to a trustee in trust to pay the interest or income thereof to the wife for her separate use, free form the debts, control, or interference of her husband.” Id. at 161. 42 See, e.g., WILLIAM GASTON, ADDRESS DELIVERED BEFORE THE PHILANTHROPIC AND DIALECTIC SOCIETIES AT CHAPEL HILL: JUNE 20, 1832 (Raleigh, Jos. Gales & Sons 1832) (discussing importance of duties to oneself and to nation). The talk of duties was central to the well-functioning market economy, for such much had to rest on trust that others would abide their POST FR-BROPHY-MONTELEONE (DO NOT DELETE) 12/20/2016 10:08 PM 2016] LAND, SLAVES, AND BONDS 353 in Lexington, where students at both Washington College and the Virginia Military Institute heard a lot about duty.43 Americans needed to emphasize duties, for trust was essential to a well-functioning economy.44 Trust was an important value when one needed to rely on strangers. The theme of trust, consequently, appeared frequently in the fictional literature of the era. Two other novels published in this era and set in the Shenandoah Valley also testified to the centrality of family, economic development, and slavery to the people of the Valley. William Caruthers’s The Kentuckian in New York, published in 1834, explored the ways to resolve sectional tensions as it provided a character study of friends who had studied at Washington College and their acquaintances who moved from New York to Pennsylvania, Virginia, and South Carolina.45 Caruthers was a native of Rockbridge County, though he had married a young woman from South Carolina, and wrote the novel while living in New York.46 The novel was about the gradually increasing tensions between the North and South. It was mildly anti-slavery, for many characters looked forward to a time when slavery was as rare in tidewater Virginia as it was in western Virginia.47 Though parts of the book were proslavery, one character spoke about the economic and social reasons slavery cannot be ended48 as another spoke of the harsh nature of slavery in the deep South, where hundreds of slaves labored on plantations and did not know their owners.49 The threat of slave insurrection loomed over the narrative,50 which makes sense given that the book came out three years after the Nat Turner rebellion.51 Family and marriage, and especially inherited plantations, were central to the story.52 So was the sense that the world obligations. See HEIDI J. LEWIS, Jurisprudence at Davidson College Before the Civil War 13–15 (2014), http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2463346 (discussing the meaning and utility of references to duties). 43 See Christopher R. Lawton, The Pilgrim’s Progress: Thomas J. Jackson’s Journey Towards Civility and Citizenship, 116 VA. MAG. HIST. & BIOGRAPHY 2–41 (2008). 44 Alfred L. Brophy, The Road to the Gettysburg Address: Constitutionalism and the Antebellum Cemetery, 43 FLA. ST. U.L. REV. (forthcoming 2016). 45 WILLIAM CARUTHERS, KENTUCKIAN IN NEW YORK (New York, Harper Brothers 1834). 46 WILLIAM R. TAYLOR, CAVALIER AND YANKEE: THE OLD SOUTH AND AMERICAN NATIONAL CHARACTER 205–09 (1993) (discussing Caruthers’s background, education, marriage, and indebtedness); Elizabeth Preston Allen, Notes on William Alexander Caruthers, 9 WM. & MARY Q., 294–97 (1929). John Caruthers, William Alexander’s father, is included in our sample. See Last Will and Testament of John Caruthers, Rockbridge County Wills Book 8, at 419 (1840). 47 CARUTHERS, supra note 45, at 76–77 (abolitionist sentiments); id. at 115–16. 48 Id. at 71–73. 49 Id.; KEITH CARTWRIGHT, READING AFRICA INTO AMERICAN LITERATURE: ETHICS, FABLES, AND GOTHIC TALES (2002). 50 CARUTHERS, supra note 45, at 69–71. 51 Alfred L. Brophy, The Nat Turner Trials, 91 N.C.L. REV. 1817 (2013). 52 JOHN L. HARE, WILL THE CIRCLE BE UNBROKEN?: FAMILY AND SECTIONALISM IN THE VIRGINIA NOVELS OF KENNEDY, CARUTHERS, AND TUCKER, 1830–1845 (2002). FR-Brophy-Monteleone POST (DO NOT DELETE) 12/20/2016 10:08 PM 354 WEST VIRGINIA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 119 of New York was an impersonal one of credit relations, which was quite different from Washington College in Lexington, Virginia.53 The “progress of the age”— a phrase that recalls the constellation of economic, technological, and moral changes of the 1820s and 1830s54—was working, as one character acknowledged near the end of the volume, “a gradual revolution, which, in its onward career, will sweep away the melancholy vestiges of a former and more chivalrous and generous age.”55 This was a recognition of the shift to an impersonal market economy from the world of personal connections. There is more background to this story, though; for as Caruthers was writing about a marriage between a Washington College graduate and a woman from South Carolina in Kentuckian in New York,56 he was a Washington College graduate married to a woman from South Carolina. His wife’s family had, moreover, placed her slaves in trust for her, in an attempt to place them beyond the reach of Caruthers’s creditors. That led to a lengthy and unsuccessful lawsuit in 1838 by Rockbridge County merchants who wanted to attach some of those slaves for Caruthers’s extensive debts.57 Another novel, published nearly a decade before The Kentuckian in New York, had similarly focused on the declining fortunes of an affluent family in the Valley and the shifting attitudes towards slavery. George Tucker’s The Valley of the Shenandoah, published in three volumes, deals with the declining fortunes of the Grayson family set around the end of the eighteenth century in Virginia.58 The novel, published towards the end of the period when Virginians still clung to anti-slavery beliefs, offered a subtle critique of slavery. The transition to a market economy was well underway in the novel—one of the particularly greedy minor characters was always on the “lookout for good bargains in land, negroes, or bonds.”59 But there were other values on display there, too. Early in the novel, the Grayson family’s scion, Edward, presented a mild defense of slavery as less 53 See, e.g., CARUTHERS, supra note 45, at 151–52; id. at 192–200 (discussing characteristics of businessmen in New York); id. at 54–55 (discussing moral philosophy). 54 Alfred L. Brophy, The Republics of Liberty and Letters: Progress, Union, and Constitutionalism in Graduation Addresses at the Antebellum University of North Carolina, 89 N.C.L. REV. 1879, 1916–19 (2011) (discussing references to the “spirit of the age”). 55 CARUTHERS, supra note 45, at 194. 56 Id. at 71–72. 57 Caruthers Trust v. Jones, Rockbridge County Chancery Records, 1838-023 (1838), http://www.lva.virginia.gov/chancery/case_detail.asp?CFN=163-1838-023; Cumings v. Caruthers, Rockbridge County Chancery Court, 1838-013 (1838), http://www.lva.virginia.gov/chancery/case_detail.asp?CFN=163-1838-013 (suit by creditors of the Caruthers seeking to attach Mrs. Caruthers’ equitable interest in slaves given at the time of their marriage for payment of a debt). 58 See 1 GEORGE TUCKER, THE VALLEY OF THE SHENANDOAH; OR, MEMOIRS OF THE GRAYSONS (New York, C. Wiley 1825) [hereinafter 1 TUCKER]. 59 Id. at 21.