In going through Joseph Ball's Letter Book, he writes a letter to his nephew Joseph Chinn, who was his agent in Virginia. Chinn was also a Burgess at this time. Ball's letter to him from London is dated 10 Mar 1748/9, in which he heartily congratulates his nephew for his part in the 40-38 to rebuild the capitol in Williamsburg, as opposed to the nearly-successful push to have it moved further inland. Typically, Ball is quite direct in his opinion on the matter, saying it would be "the most absurd thing imaginable to remove the Seat of Government, because the Capitol was DESIGNEDLY BURNT." 

It is those last two words in caps that have me wondering. Considering the rest of the tone of this letter, it almost seems that Ball was of the opinion that the building burned as a result of arson. So my question is, were such rumors flying around at the time?

Ball also advises his nephew to remain steady in his resolve "upon a second struggle, as I am informed will be aimed at" and that he thinks it a "great presumption to remove the King's Court and seat of Government, and which would not be suffered, unless they first the Leave of the King." 

Craig Kilby

______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html