USA > Georgia > Georgia as a proprietary province; the execution of a trust > Part 18
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24
" B. T., Ga., XII: 31-45.
" Ibid., 46 et seq.
" Ibid., 100 et seq .; Account Showing Progress, C. R. III: 412.
" Shepherd-History of Proprietary Govt. of Penn. 34.
" Mereness-Md. as a Proprietary Province 85,
252
Georgia as a Proprietary Province
the rent was much lower than that in Georgia for those going at their own expense. 48 It is to be further noted by way of comparison that the lands in most of the colonies just cited were superior to what the adventurers secured in Georgia, though this was not always the case.
As the time approached when the payments from the Trus- tees to the king and Carteret would fall due, the managers of Georgia affairs felt constrained to petition for relief in payments on lands of the poorer quality. Much of the soil around Savanah had been found very unsatisfactory for agriculture, being termed "pine barrens." If the Trustees got relief in the matter, they proposed to give to the colon- ists the benefit of the concession. On December 5, 1741, a committee was appointed to draft the petition; but nothing further seems to have been done in the matter.49
Probably the reason why the committee let the matter drop was that the subject of quit rents, along with many other questions relating to the colony, soon came up for consideration in the House of Commons on the petition of Thomas Stephens as agent for at least a portion of the inhabitants of the province. The petition of Stephens as to quit rents was that they be reduced at least as low as those that usually prevailed in the other colonies of America. During the debates in the House, it developed that a large number of the members thought that the quit rent for ad- venturers should be reduced to three shillings per hundred acres ; and a resolution to that effect was introduced. This was withdrawn, however, and no official action was taken in the House of Commons, the Trustees being left to seek such relief from the king as might enable them to make the sug- gested change in the rates.5º This was a most hopeful situa-
" Smith-S. C. as a Royal Province 30.
"C. R. V: 576.
50 Ibid., 640.
253
The Land System
tion for the independent settlers of Georgia ; for a reduction in rent from twenty shillings to three shillings on each hun- dred acres would be a material encouragement for more ad- venturers to settle in the colony.
On July 15, 1742, the Trustees drew up a petition to the king setting forth that the quit rents in Georgia which had been postponed for ten years would soon be falling due ; and that in a recent examination before the House of Com- mons it appeared that further encouragements were needed for Georgia. The petition then prayed that the quit rents might be released to the Trustees in order that they might reduce the same for the inhabitants of the colony and use the remainder for the benefit of the province.51 There was considerable hope that the petition might be favorably re- ceived and that a possible source of income might be afforded the Trust, besides their being enabled to reduce the rents. On November 22, 1742, the report of the Board of Trade was announced to the Trustees. The report approved some encouragement to the province, but it did not recommend an entire release of the quit rents to the Trustees. The suggestion made was that the rental of the king should be so reduced that the Trustees would have to pay only two shillings instead of four per hundred acres.52
An act was then prepared by' the Trustees reducing the quit rents of all classes of settlers in Georgia from four shillings to two shillings, whereof eighteen pence would go to the king and six pence to Lord Carteret.53 Instead of issuing a general order to this effect, as the Trustees had power to do, they incorporated these details in a general act changing the tenures in the province; and, as we have
51 C. R. V: 651.
52 Ibid., 670; C. R. I: 408-411.
"C. R. V: 675.
254
Georgia as a Proprietary Province
noticed, the whole act was disapproved because it provided two kinds of tenure for one colony. While the Board of Trade was willing to approve the portion of the act relative to quit rents, it failed to pass the king's approval because incorporated with objectionable clauses; and the reduction which the Trustees proposed to make was never realized. The Trustees themselves seem not to have gotten any reduc- tion from the king, the disapproval of their land act ap- parently putting a stop to all negotiations for reductions. Whether the failure to persevere in the matter and to so alter the land law as to make it acceptable to the Board of Trade was due to resentment toward the Board or to mere apathy and indifference on the part of the Trustees is not apparent; but certainly they lost an excellent opportunity to aid the colony and to silence complaints.
Since the time was actually at hand for the quit rents to be paid, the Trustees waited upon Lord Carteret to ask that he appoint a collector to receive his portion of the rents ; but he declined to do so, saying that he would not hold the Trustees responsible for more of his rents than they might actually collect.54 As a matter of fact, it was only a short time until the king purchased all Carteret's claims to land in Georgia and in the Carolinas; and his in- terest in the quit rents of the province ceased after 1744.55
On May 23, 1745, the Common Council determined to begin the collection of such rents as were then due. It was ordered that a list be prepared of all grants on which the rents had become due, and the magistrates were directed to appoint a proper person to collect the money.56 The
"C. R. V: 675-676.
56 B. T., Ga., XIII: 73 et seq .; N. C. Colonial Records IV: 655 et seq.
MC. R. II: 449.
------
255
The Land System
determining of what was due on the various grants was put into the hands of the president of the colony; but he was so old and infirm that a very unsatisfactory return was made to the Trustees, and they ordered that the work be done anew. About the same time the auditor-general of the plantations called upon the Trustees for a report as to the money that had been paid to the king in quit rents. As a matter of fact, nothing had been paid by the Trustees ; but they excused their tardiness by explaining the difficulty of getting from the colony an accurate report of the land grants that had been occupied.57
Repeated efforts were made to get a satisfactory rent roll completed; but the matter had become very compli- cated. The releases from forfeiture, which were made occa- sionally, further complicated the affair; for it was not clear whether or not these releases cancelled the rents that had become due. Nothing really effective was accomplished be- fore the Trustees felt compelled to surrender their charter. Among the recommendations that they urged in making the surrender was, "That the Arrears of Quit Rents, due at this time, be remitted, since Most of the Inhabitants have been prevented by the War, and the various Obstacles that always occur at the first Settling of a Colony, from Cul- tivating so much of their Lands as it might be expected . They would; And that the Quit Rents for the future be reduced from four to two Shillings for Each hundred Acres, this last Sum being as much as is usually reserved in any of his Majesty's Provinces in America." 58 Among other considerations that induced them to make this suggestion, was a petition from the Assembly that met in Georgia in 1751 urging that the Trustees apply for a reduction in the
57 C. R. I: 503-504.
" Ibid., 570.
256
Georgia as a Proprietary Province
rents.59 The recommendation of the Trust to the Board of Trade made no distinction in rents for those sent as charity · settlers and for those who were adventurers; but it was evi- dently intended to apply to all holders of land in the prov- ince.
No money was ever collected for quit rents in proprietary Georgia by the Trustees, by the king, or by Carteret. It was generally conceded by all concerned that the colony was not sufficiently prosperous for it to be fair that the rents be enforced. Conditions greatly improved during the last two or three years of proprietary control; and it is quite probable if the Trustees had remained in power a few years longer that the quit rents would have been regularly and successfully collected. We have noticed that the rent rolls were confused. This was not due to carelessness on the part of the Trustees, for they had arranged that ac- curate records be kept not only of original grants but also of all changes in the ownership of lots. Incompetent officials in the province were largely responsible for the confusion that occurred; but at worst the Georgia records were su- perior to most of those kept in other English provinces ; and they could have been arranged for the collection of rent, if the poverty of the colony had permitted it.
E. The Machinery of the Land System
Since the Common Council of the Trustees had exclusive power to make grants of land and to prescribe the terms of each grant, all lands were conveyed either directly or in- directly by this body. As in all other matters concerning the management of the province, the Council showed a de- cided disposition to superintend in person the details of the 5ºC. R. I: 559.
in
257
The Land System
work. Great care was exercised to perform the duty ac- curately and to avoid every suggestion of fraud.
At the outset, two methods of procedure were adopted, one for making fifty acre grants to persons going at the expense of the Trust and another for providing for those who should go at their own expense. It would be mani- festly difficult to make a large number. of small grants at a distance of three thousand miles from the land to be ceded, if each grant had to be treated separately and its land specifically described; and consequently the responsibility of making these small grants was in part delegated by the Council. When the first settlement was planned, a trust deed for several thousand acres was granted to three of the colonists who were instructed to draw deeds for fifty acres each to all the heads of families sent at the expense of the Trustees, if such persons should make application for the land. These grantees under the trust deed had no authority to locate the lands which they were to deed to their fellow settlers ; the duty of setting out and dividing the lots was at first given by special commission to Oglethorpe and later to other persons named for the purpose. It was customary that those commissioned to divide the land would survey and mark into lots all the lands covered by the trust deeds, and applicants for grants could then readily be satisfied without further surveys. Applicants were allowed some choice as to the lands they would receive, but this was re- garded as a matter of privilege not of right. Possession was given to each grantee by the surveyor or other person authorized to divide the land. The Common Council planned that each settler would receive a deed setting forth in de- tail the bounds of his lot and the terms on which it was granted ; but in practice a mere memorandum was frequently the only evidence of title a grantee would receive. The sur-
258
Georgia as a Proprietary Province
veyors were also expected to report regularly and fully to the Trustees as to the lands they had set out; but they were very negligent in performing this duty.60
This general plan of making trust deeds for large quanti- ties of land to be subdivided was regularly followed by the Common Council in establishing all the settlements of Georgia which were to be peopled by charity settlers. A dif- ferent course was pursued in conveying land to colonists who would bear their own expenses. It was customary that a man of this class who desired to secure a grant would ap- pear either in person or by proxy before the Common Coun- cil of the general board of Trustees to present his petition for land. His proposal would be examined with care, and he would be questioned as to his purpose in going to the colony. Frequently requests would be refused after this preliminary investigation; 61 but if the proposed settler seemed to be in earnest and to be of good character, his petition would be deferred to a later meeting in order that his case might be fully investigated. The good character of the applicant was always a point greatly stressed. It is not to be inferred that the characters of the charity col- onists were not also thoroughly examined; for all had to be apparently above reproach before they were regarded eli- gible to go to Georgia.
After a man's proposal had been approved, he was some- times asked to present his servants before the Trustees for their approval. Next in order would be the payment of the fees which were usually one pound one shilling. A deed would then be drawn up and presented at the next meeting of the Common Council, usually the third meeting in the process of obtaining the grant. The seal of the Trustees
" B. T., Ga., XII: 4 et seq.
"C. R. II: 31, for example.
259
The Land System
would be affixed to the deed in the open meeting of the Coun- cil, and the secretary would be instructed to countersign the grant.
When this had been done, two other steps were necessary ; one of these was to file a record of the deed with the Auditor General of Plantations, and the other to send the deed to Oglethorpe or to some other agent in the colony who would be directed to lay out the grant and to put the owner in possession. Every precaution was used to prevent fraud, and all the transactions of which we have records seem to be entirely free from any taint of it.
Though this system was cumbersome, and though it was no doubt frequently inconvenient for at least eight such busy men as composed the Common Council to get together for such trivial business, the method proved very satisfac- tory for making grants to people living in England who wished to go to Georgia. It soon developed, however, that many people in America desired to move to Georgia or to secure grants in it who could not appear personally before the Common Council. Some of these were officers in the regiment of Oglethorpe, gentlemen from South Carolina, and others similarly situated. To arrange for such petitioners, it became customary for the officials or agents in Georgia to recommend that grants be made to such persons, and these recommendations were nearly always adopted.62
By 1735 the business of making reports to the Trustees of the grants in Georgia became so large that it was de- termined to establish the office of Register. Accordingly such an officer was appointed whose duty it was to record all grants, leases, and other conveyances ; to keep an accu- rate account of the condition of the various grants that were made; and to render to the Trustees a monthly transcript
"C. R. II: 112, for instance.
260
Georgia as a Proprietary Province
of his records.63 As a general rule, the man who acted as register gave only a portion of his time to the duties of that office; and the work of nearly all who held the posi- tion was ineffective. Almost perfect records were kept of the grants that were made, for this information was incor- porated in the minutes of the President and his assistants ; but none of the registers seem to have collected information as to the improvements made on the lots granted, and none of them were careful to keep the Trustees well informed as to conditions in Georgia.
When in 1741 the government of Georgia was reorganized and a president with assistants was given the chief authority at Savannah, there was an entire change in the methods of granting lots in the colony. This change affected all settlers whether going on charity or at their own expense. From this time, most of the requests for land came from people in America ; and so it was arranged that the presi- dent and his assistants in the colony should receive directly all petitions for land from persons in Georgia. They were empowered to take such action on the petitions as seemed wise, but the decisions they reached were subject to revi- sion at the hands of the Common Council. As a matter of fact, the latter rarely investigated the decisions made by the authorities in the colony, but confirmed them almost automatically. In cases of doubt, the president and his advisers sometimes would not render any decision but would delay long enough to get a ruling from the Council. This was likely to cause serious inconvenience; for it always took a long while to send an inquiry to England and get a re- sponse; and this was particularly the case during the war period from 1739 to 1748. Since the Common Council met very seldom after 1741, it came to be customary that the @ B. T., Ga., XII: 252.
261
The Land System
general board of Trustees would approve or disapprove the actions of the Georgia authorities ; and the Council at its rare meetings would give a general endorsement to the pro- ceedings that had been held both in the colony and in Eng- land.
While few applications were made directly to the Com- mon Council for land grants, this body still retained in name at least the sole privilege of making the grants ; and occa- sionally a direct grant would be made by it as during the earlier part of the colony's existence.
Having noticed briefly the general methods of the Georgia land grants, we may consider some of the practical work- ings of these methods. For the effectiveness of the plans that were adopted, much depended upon the characters of the surveyors. Noble Jones was at first the regular sur- veyor, and others were employed by the Trust from time to time at fixed rates. Complaints were lodged against all of them at various times, but most of the complaints were on the score of tardiness in performing the duties of the office. During much of the proprietary period, there was only one surveyor for the whole province; and it is not surprising that the work progressed slowly. The Trustees themselves were perhaps stronger in their complaints than any of the settlers, for none of the surveyors were at all prompt in filing the reports that were required of them.64
Aside from the charges of delays and slowness, none of the complaints against the surveyors seem to have been well founded. Few mistakes and inaccuracies in the actual sur- veying were made. At various times disputes arose over boundaries, but in nearly every case a reference to the old
" B. T., Ga., VIII: Martyn to Jones, May 29, 1735; C. R. VI: 240-241.
262
Georgia as a Proprietary Province
surveys was sufficient to settle the difficulties. 65 It is prob- able that Georgia had as few uncertainties as to boundaries as any of the British colonies in America.
The general rule as to the compensation of surveyors was that they should be paid by the Trust for surveying the fifty acre lots, but that the grantees of the larger grants would themselves bear the expense of the surveys.66 The average annual expense to the Trust for surveying from 1732 to 1748 was about fifty pounds; after that time the work of the surveyors was evidently self-supporting. The most satisfactory arrangement with the surveyors was to pay them a fixed rate per acre instead of a stated salary per year; for they kept closer to their duties when their wages depended upon their activity. The stipend usually paid was four pence per acre for tracts between twenty and fifty acres, three pence per acre for tracts of more than fifty acres, and six pence for tracts of less than twenty acres. Besides the surveying, these officials had for their duty the task of showing lands to prospective settlers and of putting grantees in possession of their lots, for which they were paid at the rate of five shillings per day. If errors were made, all these had to be corrected at the ex- pense of the surveyor.67
Since a mere memorandum of land granted was given to the possessor, especially if the grant was for only fifty acres, many of the landholders of the colony did not have sufficient evidence to establish their claims.68 To remedy this situation, which was particularly inconvenient after the right to buy and sell lots had been granted, the Trustees
" C. R. VI: 96, 141, 143, as examples.
"Ibid., 22-23.
" Ibid., 130.
" Brief Account, etc., Ga. Hist. Collec. II: 98.
263
The Land System
on March 29, 1749, determined to prepare proper forms for all those who needed to have their grants fully estab- lished.69
Georgia had almost no trouble with squatters during the rule of the Trustees, though something approaching that trouble seemed imminent in 1748. After Oglethorpe left Frederica in 1743, there was no one in the southern part of the province deputed to recommend grants or to put ap- plicants into temporary possession of them. The officer in charge of the regiment without being authorized to do so undertook to give possession to lands in that section of the colony. This was strongly resented by both the president and his assistants and by the Trustees, for they regarded the settlers thus placed on their lands as squatters ; but there can be no doubt that it was a hardship for the inhabitants along the Altamaha to have to go to Savannah to petition for lands, and the commander was not without some excuse for his action. As a matter of fact, the grants thus illegally made were afterwards confirmed by the proper authorities; and, when the colony was surrendered to the crown, all those in the province who possessed land under any claims whatever were permitted to remain in control of it.70
F. The Size of Land Grants
It would be interesting, were it possible, to trace in de- tail how the experiences and regulations of the other Eng- lish colonies influenced the Trustees in their government of Georgia. In many details, they seem not to have been well informed as to the practices and customs of the other provinces ; and in many other particulars they deliberately
·C. R. II: 497.
1º C. R. VI: 310, as an example,
264
Georgia as a Proprietary Province
departed from the rules followed elsewhere on the ground that Georgia was unique in purpose and in physical condi- tions, so that it did not necessarily require the same policies that other colonies had found best for them. In planning the Georgia land system as a whole, they certainly pro- ceeded on that assumption to a large extent; and it dif- fered very decidedly from that of any other colony. Yet even in the land system, it is likely that the Trustees were somewhat influenced by the rules that were used in other colonies. For instance, the charter limited grants in Georgia to five hundred acres; this was the amount of land that had been fixed as a limit to South Carolina after the evils of vast grants had become apparent.71 The Trustees fixed on fifty acres as a sufficient quantity of land for charity set- tlers ; and this was the amount that each individual in South Carolina might obtain in 1731, the year before the Georgia charter was obtained. In fixing these amounts, the Trus- tees may not have been influenced by the Carolina regula- tions ; but there is a probability that the suggestions did come from the experiences of the neighbor province. The small size of even the maximum grants fitted admirably with the purposes of the Trustees to keep the people as nearly as possible on a level ; for five hundred acres were not enough on which to found an aristocracy that would overshadow the humbler classes.
One of the first problems of the Common Council was to determine the conditions on which the maximum grants would be issued, whether to all who should go at their own expense or only to those who would meet additional condi- tions. The question was not solved at once, but various experiments were made to aid in the solution of the prob- lem. The first group of grants to adventurers, as those
11 Public Records of South Carolina, Mss., IV: 128.
265
The Land System
going at their own expense were called, varied from eighty acres to five hundred. The variation was due in part to a difference in the number of servants carried; but this was not the only basis of measure, for only eighty acres were given to one man who carried one servant, while two hun- dred acres were conveyed to another who also had only one servant. A man's personal character, his financial ability, his purpose in going to Georgia, and the amount of land re- quested were all important factors in determining the size of grant that the Common Council would give to him.72
Early in 1733, the Council fixed a general rule for mak- ing maximum grants, agreeing that five hundred acres would be given to any worthy person who would go to Georgia with six able bodied men servants, paying all his expenses. No definite rule was adopted as to the conditions for giving less than five hundred acres.73
It is somewhat amusing to find that the Trustees became alarmed during the second year of the colony lest the sup- ply of land run short in Georgia; and they decided to make no more grants to adventurers until they heard from Ogle- thorpe that there was no danger of a shortage in land.7+ This is another instance illustrating how unaccustomed the Trustees really were to things colonial; for only the most inexperienced men in such matters could think seriously that a few grants of five hundred acres each would exhaust the good land in the vast territory of their grant.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.