Wythepedia: The George Wythe Encyclopedia - User contributions [en]

Wythe to Richard Henry Lee, 18 October 1777

2026-10-21T15:15:19Z

Aevrountas:

[[George Wythe]] asked [[Wikipedia:Richard Henry Lee|Richard Henry Lee]] to send his opinions on taxation, a topic that Wythe said would likely be discussed in the upcoming session of the Continental Congress. He asked Lee to send the Maryland act and said that if Lee were to look at it and provide his own observations, it would be a great help.
==Letter text==

===Page 1===
<blockquote>
:Geo: Wythe

:Hon Richard Henry Lee,
:member of the continental congress
:now at York
:Pennsylvania

:Oct 1777
:Hon Mr Whythe
</blockquote>

===Page 2===
<blockquote>
Williamsburg 10 October

Well I know, for, how much of your time is taken up in the important duties of your station, nor do I rush to interrupt you even so long as it would require to answer a teller from me, unless you think you cannot be better employed. This I write chiefly to remind you how acceptable a line ? from you will be, and further that I would very fondly be acquainted with your sentiments upon taxation, a topic which we expect at the approaching session will be expressly? discussed. When you were so obliging as to send me the Maryland act you had not considered it. Perhaps you may have since had leisure to do so; and if you have, I need not tell you what advantage may be derived from your obwervations. I am
::::::Dear Sir,
::::::::Your obedient,
::::::::::G.Wythe
</blockquote>

==See also==
*[[Wythe to Richard Henry Lee, 24 August 1777]]
*[[Richard Henry Lee to Wythe, 19 October 1777]]

[[Category:Letters from Wythe]]
[[Category:Letters and Papers]]
[[Category:Imogene E. Brown Papers]]

Wythe to Richard Henry Lee, 18 October 1777

2026-10-21T15:13:26Z

Aevrountas: /* Letter text */

Wythe to Richard Henry Lee, 10 October 1777

2026-10-21T14:10:04Z

Aevrountas: /* Letter text */

[[George Wythe]] is writing to Richard Henry Lee to hear about his opinions on taxation.

==Letter text==

===Page 1===
<blockquote>
:Geo: Wythe

:Hon Richard Henry Lee,
:member of the continental congress
:now at York
:Pennsylvania

:Oct 1777
:Hon Mr Whythe
</blockquote>

===Page 2===
<blockquote>
Williamsburg 10 October

Well I know, for, how much of your hurrie? is taken up in the important duties of your station, nor do I rush to interrupt you even so long as it would require to answer a teller from me, unless you think you cannot be better employed. This I write chiefly to remind you how acceptable a line ? from you will be, and further that I would very fondly be acquainted with your sentiments upon taxation, a topic which we expect at the approaching session will be expressly? discussed. When you were so obliging as to send me the Maryland act you had not considered it. Perhaps you may have since had leisure to do so; and if you have, I need not tell you what advantage may be derived from your obwervations. I am
::::::Dear Sir,
::::::::Your obedient,
::::::::::G.Wythe
</blockquote>

==See also==
*[[Wythe to Richard Henry Lee, 24 August 1777]]
*[[Wythe to Richard Henry Lee, 18 October 1777]]

[[Category:Imogene E. Brown Papers]]
[[Category:Letters from Wythe]]
[[Category:Letters and Papers]]

2026-09-23T14:22:24Z

Aevrountas:

Wythe explains his opinion on the 1781 case Nathan v. Virginia.

==Document text==
<blockquote>
Notwithstanding those, to whom the Bills were drawn immediately payable, could not have been intitled to more than the value received for them; I think that Mr. Nathan, the indorsee, if he were not privy to that transaction, and actually paid cash, or an equivalent, or them at bar, when he took them up, may equitably or well as legaly insist upon the assumpsit: because the Terms of the contract between the drawers and original holders not appearing in the Bills as I suppose it could bind only themselves, and such as had notice of the Terms; -- and the contract between him and the drawer was entered into without any deception which could make it unfair, on her hand.

If he were not privy to the contract between the drawers and original holders, and had not mentioned any Thing of what he paid for the Bills. he might have been irreprehensible.

But having informed the Executive that he had taken them up at bar, if he do not prove that fact, for otherwise the contrary presumable, because it is in his power to do it, and the other party probably cannot disprove it, I think equity will relieve against the assumpsit, upon this principle, that there was a suggestio falsi on his part, and an advantage gained by it.

If he knew of the contract between the drawer and original holders as he did not mention it to the Executive, altho' what he said of taking them up at bar be true, it seems a disputable question, whether there can be any relief -- it would be going too far to say, that in every bargain one party should disclose to the other whatever the former knows, and it is the interest of the latter to know -- a total silence, if the dealing in other respects be fair, may be innocent: but if one disclose part only of what he knows, and, concealing the rest, by that means, gain an unscionable advantage, this seems a culpable suppression of the truth; because the other party confided in him, and that confidence was abused by not relating the whole truth. Frivolous as this might appear in a matter of light moment; in this case where I suspect the fain to have been enormous, and suppose Mr. Nathan to have been well appraised of the difference between paper Bills the only Money which inculated in this Commonwealth, and gold and silver. I think if a good foundation for controverting his demand.

G. Wythe.

Williamsburg

9th March

1781

Mr. Wythe's opinion on Nathans Case
</blockquote>

[[Category:Imogene E. Brown Papers]]
[[Category:Letters and Papers]]

Wythe's Opinion on Nathan's Case

2026-09-23T14:15:13Z

Aevrountas:

==Document text==
<blockquote>
Notwithstanding those, to whom the Bills were drawn immediately payable, could not have been intitled to more than the value received for them; I think that Mr. Nathan, the indorsee, if he were not privy to that transaction, and actually paid cash, or an equivalent, or them at bar, when he took them up, may equitably or well as legaly insist upon the assumpsit: because the Terms of the contract between the drawers and original holders not appearing in the Bills as I suppose it could bind only themselves, and such as had notice of the Terms; -- and the contract between him and the drawer was entered into without any deception which could make it unfair, on her hand.

If he were not privy to the contract between the drawers and original holders, and had not mentioned any Thing of what he paid for the Bills. he might have been irreprehensible.

But having informed the Executive that he had taken them up at bar, if he do not prove that fact, for otherwise the contrary presumable, because it is in his power to do it, and the other party probably cannot disprove it, I think equity will relieve against the assumpsit, upon this principle, that there was a suggestio falsi on his part, and an advantage gained by it.

If he knew of the contract between the drawer and original holders as he did not mention it to the Executive, altho' what he said of taking them up at bar be true, it seems a disputable question, whether there can be any relief -- it would be going too far to say, that in every bargain one party should disclose to the other whatever the former knows, and it is the interest of the latter to know -- a total silence, if the dealing in other respects be fair, may be innocent: but if one disclose part only of what he knows, and, concealing the rest, by that means, gain an unscionable advantage, this seems a culpable suppression of the truth; because the other party confided in him, and that confidence was abused by not relating the whole truth. Frivolous as this might appear in a matter of light moment; in this case where I suspect the fain to have been enormous, and suppose Mr. Nathan to have been well appraised of the difference between paper Bills the only Money which inculated in this Commonwealth, and gold and silver. I think if a good foundation for controverting his demand.

G. Wythe.

Williamsburg

9th March

1781

Mr. Wythe's opinion on Nathans Case
</blockquote>

[[Category:Imogene E. Brown Papers]]
[[Category:Letters and Papers]]

2026-09-16T13:05:33Z

Aevrountas:

{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Journal of the Convention of Virginia, Held in the City of Richmond, on the First Monday in June, in the Year of our Lord One Thousand Seven Hundred and Eighty-Eight''}}
__NOTOC__
{{NoBookInfoBox
|shorttitle=Journal of the Convention of Virginia
|commontitle=
|vol=
|author=
|editor=
|trans=
|publoc=[[:Category:Richmond|Richmond]]
|publisher=Printed by Augustine Davis
|year=1788
|edition=
|lang=
|set=
|pages=
|desc=
}}This is a journal of Virgina's convention of the ratification of the U.S. Constitution. The Virginia ratifying convention was a heated contest between the Federalists, who supported ratification, and the anti-Federalists, who opposed. Unlike other states, Virginia was divided fairly evenly between support and opposition for the new constitution, so the convention was an arena for heated and contentious debate.<ref> “The Virginia Convention, 2–27 June 1788 [Editorial Note],” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-11-02-0057. [Original source: The Papers of James Madison, vol. 11, 7 March 1788–1 March 1789, ed. Robert A. Rutland and Charles F. Hobson. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1977, pp. 72–76.] </ref>

The chief orator for the Federalists became James Madison, while Patrick Henry led the anti-Federalist camp. Henry and Madison had opposite strengths.<ref> “Virginia Ratifying Convention Journal, June 25, 1788,” Education @ Library of Virginia, accessed September 14, 2026, https://www.lva.virginia.gov/collections/educator-resources/online-classroom/stc/entries/virginia-ratifying-convention-journal-june-25-1788 </ref> Henry was known to be a dazzling speaker that could powerfully appeal to emotion.<ref>Ibid.</ref> While Madison did not share Henry’s ability to captivate a room with hypnotic speech, he spoke with measured logic and was able to poke holes in Henry’s dramatized arguments.<ref>Ibid.</ref> He was able to “systematically [deflate] Henry’s position by exposing his faulty logic, inaccurate reading of history, and misconstruction of the language of the document.” <ref> The Virginia Convention, 2–27 June 1788 [Editorial Note],” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-11-02-0057. [Original source: The Papers of James Madison, vol. 11, 7 March 1788–1 March 1789, ed. Robert A. Rutland and Charles F. Hobson. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1977, pp. 72–76.]</ref> The Federalists eventually won the contest and the constitution was ratified, making Virginia the 10th state to do so.

The journal was compiled and published by Augustine Davis. Davis was a prominent printer in Virginia during the Revolutionary War (1775–1783) and the Early Republic period.<ref> Augustine Davis (c. 1752 or 1753–1825) (Davis, Augustine (c. 1752 or 1753–1825)) [http://www.encyclopediavirginia.org/Davis_Augustine_c_1752_or_1753-1825] </ref> The Yorktown native entered the publishing trade at the Virginia Gazette in Williamsburg, becoming co-owner in 1779. He eventually followed the state government's relocation to Richmond and in 1786 established the Virginia Independent Chronicle, which was later named the Virginia Gazette, and General Advertiser.<ref>Ibid.</ref> A supporter of a strong federal government, Davis reprinted essays from The Federalist and supported ratification of the U.S. Constitution. Davis became prosperous in the 1790s, a result of good investments and government printing contracts.<ref>Ibid.</ref>

Despite Virginia's growing population, Davis's printing volume remained unchanged, which led to complaints about the scarcity of documents in the western region of the state. The General Assembly removed him as public printer in 1798.<ref>Ibid.</ref> Eleven months after Thomas Jefferson became president, Davis lost his position as Richmond's postmaster. Although declining in political influence, he continued to publish his newspaper under various titles until 1821 before retiring comfortably.<ref>Ibid.</ref>

==Evidence for Inclusion in Wythe's Library==
[[Dean Bibliography|Dean's Memo]]<ref>[[Dean Bibliography|Memorandum from Barbara C. Dean]], Colonial Williamsburg Found., to Mrs. Stiverson, Colonial Williamsburg Found. (June 16, 1975), 15 (on file at Wolf Law Library, College of William & Mary). Dean lists the title in a section with the note, “There is evidence that Wythe had read several books not included in any of the above lists. It is possible that he borrowed one or all of these books from someone else, but it is also possible that they were in his library. At least we know that, he did indeed read them.”</ref> lists this title in a section of titles Wythe was known to have read.

==See also==
*[[Jefferson Inventory]]
*[[Wythe's Library]]

==References==
<references />

[[Category:Government]]
[[Category:Jefferson's Books]]
[[Category:Titles in Wythe's Library]]

[[Category:English]]
[[Category:Richmond]]

Journal of the Convention of Virginia

2026-09-14T14:21:26Z

Aevrountas:

2026-08-31T14:19:35Z

Aevrountas: /* United States. Continental Congress. */

{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Journals of Congress Containing the Proceedings from Sept. 5. 1774, to Jan. 1, 1776''}}
===United States. Continental Congress.===
__NOTOC__
{{NoBookInfoBox
|shorttitle=Journals of Congress
|commontitle=
|vol=
|author=
|editor=
|trans=
|publoc=[[:Category:Philadelphia|Philadelphia]]
|publisher=
|year=1777
|edition=
|lang=[[:Category:English|English]]
|set=
|pages=
|desc=
}}
The Journals of Congress are official records that are taken during daily congressional proceedings. These particular volumes owned by Wythe span 1774-1776, which was a critical time period for the country. They would have included records of congressional debates on independence. Further, Wythe was a member of the continental congress between 1775 and 1776, so this collection also contains the records taken during Wythe’s time as a member of the congress.<ref> “George Wythe,” Jefferson Library Staff, Monticello, last modified 2009, https://www.monticello.org/encyclopedia/george-wythe </ref> In addition to the political or historical significance of these books, they would have also had personal significance for Wythe.

While the whole period recorded in these volumes was pivotal for the country, it was not consistent in character or political context. There were significant changes that occurred during this stretch surrounding the congress’s perceived purpose, as well as the political context in which it operated. The First Continental Congress began in 1774, and the Second began in 1775. At the First, delegates gathered to “react to oppressive Parliamentary authority,” but they “were not yet prepared for outright revolution.” <ref> “The Continental Congresses,” Office of the Historian, Office of Art and Archives, accessed August 31, 2026, https://history.house.gov/Education/NHD/NHD-2026/NHD-ContinentalCongress/ </ref> This quickly changed, and by the time the Second congress had gathered in 1775, “colonists and British troops had already engaged in armed combat at the Battles of Lexington and Concord and at the Battle of Bunker Hill.”<ref>Ibid.</ref> These volumes therefore contain record of a period of transition.

==Evidence for Inclusion in Wythe's Library==

==See also==
*[[Richard Henry Lee to Wythe, 20 May 1777]]
*[[Wythe's Library]]

==References==
<references />

[[Category:Government]]
[[Category:Titles in Wythe's Library]]

[[Category:Philadelphia]]