But it was only in the spring of 1689, some months after his departure, that an uprising actually occurred. Then it was touched off by a weird story told by a stray Indian to some of the settlers on the northern frontier of a plot by Jesuits and Indians to attack Virginia and Maryland. No less than 10,000 Senecas and 9,000 Nanticocks were under arms, he said, ready to cut off all the Protestants. As the report spread from plantation to plantation, the outlying families fled in terror, while men gathered volunteers by beat of drum. We must defend ourselves in arms, they said, since no reliance can be placed on the Council or even on the county magistrates, for most of them are Catholics. The Council thought the story of the Catholic plot "only a gloss to their rebellious purposes." In October, 1688, James had sent word to Effingham that William of Orange was preparing to invade England, and had ordered him to place the colony in a posture of defence.[84] It was to seize this opportunity to rise against the government, rather than the imaginary Indian plot, that had made them take up arms, the Council thought. Preferring not to take sides in a matter which could be settled only in England, they arrested some of the ringleaders.[85] But when, apparently on the same day, a letter came to hand from the Privy Council, announcing that William and Mary had been proclaimed joint monarchs of England, order was instantly restored. On April 26, 1688, their Majesties were proclaimed before the courthouse door at Jamestown. There were two things which the colonial Virginians dreaded--despotism and the tomahawk. And it is significant that both were factors in the two uprisings of the seventeenth century. In Bacon's Rebellion the people demanded, not only protection from the savages, but an end to Berkeley's misgovernment. If the Council was right in their interpretation of the disorders of 1688, they, like the ousting of Andros in New England, were a part of the Glorious Revolution. The Council afterwards took great credit for suppressing the disorders, but one can only surmise whether the people would have remained quiet had not James been overthrown. We must not permit the Indian terror to blind us to the fact that the rebellions of 1676 and 1688 were both in defense of liberty. FOOTNOTES: [1] CO389.6, pp. 113, 137. [2] H. W. Hening, _Statutes at large_ 2: 423, 424. [3] CO389.6, p. 116. [4] CO1-40, p. 23. [5] CO1-40, p. 23. [6] CO5-1371, pp. 27, 33. [7] CO5-1371, pp. 55, 60. [8] _Ibid._, p. 152. [9] CO5-1371, p. 152. [10] CO1-40, p. 43. [11] _Bath papers_ 3: 155. [12] CO1-40, pp. 73, 106. [13] CO1-39, p. 38. [14] W. W. Hening, _Virginia statutes at large_ 2: 366, 386. [15] CO1-40, p. 88. [16] CO5-1371, p. 132. [17] CO1-40, p. 89. [18] _Virginia Magazine_ 18: 12. [19] CO5-1371, pp. 220-231. [20] CO1-40, Doc. 53. [21] _Bath papers_ 3: 187-198. [22] _Ibid._ [23] CO1-42, p. 17. [24] _Bath papers_ 3: 206.