About Us
Society of the 1704 Virginia Quit Rents
The Society was founded April 11, 2019, at Washington, District of Columbia
The Articles of Incorporation were filed May 1, 2020, in Eufaula, Barbour County, Alabama
The Society's Constitution and Bylaws were adopted April 27, 2020
The Articles of Incorporation were filed May 1, 2020, in Eufaula, Barbour County, Alabama
The Society's Constitution and Bylaws were adopted April 27, 2020
Quitrents were small annual fees paid by a landowner in colonial Virginia to the proprietor (or granter) who had conferred the holding. The quit rent was a survival of feudalism and were more closely related to a tithe than a tax since they released the subject from any further obligation of service to the proprietor. The imposition of the quit-rents in the American colonies emphasized their relation to the mother-country as fiefs of the crown. The feudal notion of land-tenure maintained the feudal premise, that the soil belonged to the crown. In 1704 the lands of Virginia as well as the Quit Rents belonged to Queen Anne.
This was a kind of land tax that the Crown originally imposed and that was regulated by acts of Parliament. The basic English land laws under which the people of colonial Virginia gained title to their land required the owners to pay to the Crown a quitrent of two shillings for each hundred acres of land.
If a landowner failed to pay the quitrent for a specified number of years, the Crown had the right to take back the land and grant it or sell it to another person. The money raised by this tax went into the royal treasury and was used to pay the expenses of the royal government in the colony. This is the origin of the modern system of land taxes in Virginia.
In 1704 Virginia, Quitrents were collected by the Governor or Deputy Governor. Eventually, Sheriffs were given the task of collection. In the Northern Neck of Virginia, the Quit Rents were collected by the Lord Proprietors of the Fairfax and Culpeper families.
This was a kind of land tax that the Crown originally imposed and that was regulated by acts of Parliament. The basic English land laws under which the people of colonial Virginia gained title to their land required the owners to pay to the Crown a quitrent of two shillings for each hundred acres of land.
If a landowner failed to pay the quitrent for a specified number of years, the Crown had the right to take back the land and grant it or sell it to another person. The money raised by this tax went into the royal treasury and was used to pay the expenses of the royal government in the colony. This is the origin of the modern system of land taxes in Virginia.
In 1704 Virginia, Quitrents were collected by the Governor or Deputy Governor. Eventually, Sheriffs were given the task of collection. In the Northern Neck of Virginia, the Quit Rents were collected by the Lord Proprietors of the Fairfax and Culpeper families.
The Quit-Rent System in the American Colonies
Beverly Bond, Jr.
“One of the most distinctive features of the English Land-tenure in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was the quit-rent.” The quit rent was a survival of feudalism. Varied feudal dues were converted into fixed quit rents and by the beginning of the sixteenth century had become common.
The imposition of the quit rent in the American Colonies emphasized their relation to the mother country as fiefs of the Crown. The feudal notion of land tenure, that the soil belonged to the Crown, who either collected the feudal dues, chiefly in the form of quit rents, or else transferred this right to the proprietors, was carried to the New World. This feudal notion may be traced in all the early charter. In Virginia attempts to establish an effective system of collection involved a long struggle for control begin the governor and the office-holding class. In the earliest days of the colony the treasurer or his deputy collected the rents; later the sheriffs assumed this duty. Many abuses attended such a scheme of collection by officers, themselves usually landowners, who sided with the tenants rather than the Crown.
In the Royal Colonies the revenue from the quit rents was theoretically under the control of the Crown as overlord. Since the rents were frequently employed for local purposes, the assemblies tended to assert authority over them, but the policy of the home authorities was to allow expenditures from the quit rents only with royal permission. The value of such a source of income, in rendering the royal government independent of local control, is obvious.
The quit rents were also employed in Virginia to supplement the 2 shillings duty for the ordinary purpose of government. This aid, however, was granted only for the salaries of officers directly dependent upon the crown Occasionally grants were made to aid local interests, including an appropriation in 1692 of 1,982 pounds, 14 shilling to found the college of William and Mary.
Beverly Bond, Jr.
“One of the most distinctive features of the English Land-tenure in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was the quit-rent.” The quit rent was a survival of feudalism. Varied feudal dues were converted into fixed quit rents and by the beginning of the sixteenth century had become common.
The imposition of the quit rent in the American Colonies emphasized their relation to the mother country as fiefs of the Crown. The feudal notion of land tenure, that the soil belonged to the Crown, who either collected the feudal dues, chiefly in the form of quit rents, or else transferred this right to the proprietors, was carried to the New World. This feudal notion may be traced in all the early charter. In Virginia attempts to establish an effective system of collection involved a long struggle for control begin the governor and the office-holding class. In the earliest days of the colony the treasurer or his deputy collected the rents; later the sheriffs assumed this duty. Many abuses attended such a scheme of collection by officers, themselves usually landowners, who sided with the tenants rather than the Crown.
In the Royal Colonies the revenue from the quit rents was theoretically under the control of the Crown as overlord. Since the rents were frequently employed for local purposes, the assemblies tended to assert authority over them, but the policy of the home authorities was to allow expenditures from the quit rents only with royal permission. The value of such a source of income, in rendering the royal government independent of local control, is obvious.
The quit rents were also employed in Virginia to supplement the 2 shillings duty for the ordinary purpose of government. This aid, however, was granted only for the salaries of officers directly dependent upon the crown Occasionally grants were made to aid local interests, including an appropriation in 1692 of 1,982 pounds, 14 shilling to found the college of William and Mary.
Objects of the Society:
The Objects of the Society are charitable and educational and shall specifically serve to encourage the study of Colonial Virginia in the 1704 era, accomplish research; preserve manuscripts, wills, deeds, and other documents; to support the restoration of sites and landmarks having charitable, literary, educational, historical, or governing backgrounds; and to promote patriotism.
Society Purpose:
Said corporation is organized exclusively for charitable and educational purposes, including, for such purposes, the making of distributions to organizations that qualify as exempt organizations under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, or the corresponding section of any future federal tax code.
The Objects of the Society are charitable and educational and shall specifically serve to encourage the study of Colonial Virginia in the 1704 era, accomplish research; preserve manuscripts, wills, deeds, and other documents; to support the restoration of sites and landmarks having charitable, literary, educational, historical, or governing backgrounds; and to promote patriotism.
Society Purpose:
Said corporation is organized exclusively for charitable and educational purposes, including, for such purposes, the making of distributions to organizations that qualify as exempt organizations under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, or the corresponding section of any future federal tax code.
Contact Us
Web hyperlinks are not the responsibility of the society.
Please contact the web site administrator, Constance Paradiso, to report any problems or concerns with this website.