USA > Georgia > The history of Georgia, Volume II > Part 16
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 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55
Before narrating the stirring events which immediately ante- dated the inception of the Revolution, we pause for a moment to allude to a matter which, at the time, caused some uneasiness and provoked sharp comment.
Jonathan Bryan, Esq., in concert with some of the principal gentlemen of East Florida, procured from a number of the chiefs and head men of the Creek nation a lease for ninety-nine years of a large tract of land known as the " Appalache Old Fields," bounded " on the west by the Gulph of Mexico and the Appa- lachicola river, on the north by a line drawn from the point where the Chattahoocheend Flint rivers unite, to the source of the St. Mary's river, and on the southwest by a line running thence to the Gulph of Mexico." To the grantors Mr. Bryan agreed to pay annually one hundred bushels of Indian corn, if demanded, at some convenient point within the bargained prem- ises. The professed object of the grantee was to cultivate those lands, raise cattle thereon, and open a trading post for exten- sive commerce with the natives. To this deed of conveyance fifteen of the chiefs and head men of the Creeks attached their marks.
When the business of the congress which convened at Savan- nalı on the 20th of October, 1774, was about concluded, Governor Wright produced this deed and ordered the interpreters to inform the Indians of the precise character and extent of the convey- ance. He also confessed his astonishment that they, so tenacious of their lands whenever a request was made on the part of the government for a cession of them, should, for light consideration, have parted with so large a tract in favor of an individual. When made to comprehend the genuine purport of the deed, the Indians were filled with surprise. Of what subsequently trans- pired in the congress with regard to this affair, we are informed by Messrs. John Stuart, N. Jones, James E. Powell, Clement Martin, Junior, John Graham, Lewis Johnston, James Reid, and
100
M
145
SCHEME OF MR. BRYAN.
James Hume, all of whom were present. Their account is sub- stantially as follows : 1 __
Talechee, one of those who had put their names or marks to the deed, stated that when he and some others came down to designate the lines, Mr. Bryan, bringing with him some white men and an Indian woman named Maria, who could speak Eng- lish, requested through her that there should be granted to him a spot of land where he could establish a cow-pen, cultivate corn, build a residence for himself, and open a store. He further said his understanding of the paper then presented was that it asked only for this, and contained a good talk to the Creek nation. When the deed was signed at Wood's Saw Mill, Mr. Bryan was informed that it must be carried to the Creek nation for confir- mation. This had never been done.
The other Indians present "seemed much enraged." One of them declared he would not leave the house where the congress was in session until the deed was burnt. Others called aloud to tear it up ; and one, in particular, expressed the opinion that if the paper was not destroyed the Creek nation would attach no credit to what had transpired in this convention.
At the governor's suggestion the instrument was not wholly destroyed, but the Indians were permitted to tear from it their seals and marks.
It appears that Mr. Bryan's object was to secure an extensive tract outside of the province of Georgia, and suitably located on some navigable stream, where he might engage in raising cattle on an extensive scale. IIe hoped also to attract many settlers, to build a town, and to promote the commercial prosperity of the region. He was restrained from putting forth similar exer- tions in Georgia because, in political sentiments, there existed a marked antagonism between himself and Governor Wright, who denounced his Florida scheme as one likely to beget " great con- fusion and bad consequences."
When the lease was executed, some at least of the Indian chiefs did not understand that they were conveying away, at a merely nominal consideration and for a period of ninety-nine years, a domain which, in the judgment of the superintendent of Indian affairs, embraced not less than five million acres of land. When they apprehended the magnitude and terms of the aliena- tion, they violently repudiated it, and intimated that if the effort was mado to claim and occupy the territory described in tho
1 Sce Georgia Gazette, No. 578. Wednesday, November 2, 1774. VOL. II. 10
I
-
146
THE HISTORY OF GEORGIA.
deed they would resist even to the extent of open war. Finding that the Creek nation was averse to the conveyance, Mr. Bryan dropped the matter, and thus an affair, which excited much com- ment and promised to beget a deal of trouble, lapsed into nothing- ness and forgetfulness. Had Mr. Bryan carried his intention into effect and withdrawn himself from Christ Church Parish into the wilds of Florida, Georgia would have lost one of her purest, best, and most influential citizens, and the " Liberty Boys " a strong friend, a trusted adviser, and a brave leader.
E
CHAPTER VIII.
THE BOSTON PORT BILL. - COERCIVE MEASURES RESORTED TO IN THE CASE OF MASSACHUSETTS. - PUBLIC MEETING IN SAVANNAHI. - ITS PROCEED- INGS. - MR. BRYAN RESIGNS HIS MEMBERSHIP OF COUNCIL. - GOVERNOR WRIGHIT'S PROCLAMATION DENOUNCING UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLAGES. - MEETING OF THE 10TH OF AUGUST, 1774. - RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED AND PROMULGATED. - DIVISION OF POLITICAL SENTIMENT IN THE PROVINCE. - STRICTURES UPON THE MEETING OF THE 10TH OF AUGUST. - PROTESTS FROM ADHIERENTS TO THE CROWN. - GEORGIA NOT REPRESENTED IN TIIE FIRST CONTINENTAL CONGRESS. - DECLARATION OF COLONIAL RIGHTS. - RESOLUTIONS AND ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION OF ST. ANDREW'S PARISII. - GOVERNOR WRIGHT CONVOKES THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. - ADDRESSES. - FAILURE OF THE FIRST PROVINCIAL CONGRESS. - ST. JOHN'S PARISH ACTS IN ADVANCE OF THE OTHER PARISHES. - DR. LYMAN HALL REPRESENTS THAT PARISH IN THE CONTINENTAL CONGRESS. - PECULIAR SITUATION OF THE COLONY OF GEORGIA.
THE popular current in England was setting strongly against the American colonies. The bill proposed by Lord North for closing the port of Boston and occluding the commerce of a town of perhaps the greatest consequence in the English dominions in America, was passed with astonishing unanimity. Absolute submission to Parliamentary enactment was demanded of the colonies, and until that was rendered the ministry was resolved to listen to no complaints, to adopt no measures for the redress of alleged grievances. "Obedience," cried the First Lord of the Treasury and Chancellor of the Exchequer, "obedience, not in- demnification, will be the test of the Bostonians." " The offence of the Americans is flagitious," exclaimed Van. "The town of Boston ought to be knocked about their ears and destroyed. Delenda est Carthago. You will never meet with proper obedi- ence to the laws of this Country until you have destroyed that nest of locusts." Although Burke and Dowdeswell spoke strongly against the bill, it passed without a division. In the House of Lords it underwent a fuller and fairer discussion, but even there it was unanimously adopted, and the king made haste to give it his royal approval.
This Boston Port Bill was but the first step in a system of co- ercive measures which the British ministry had now determined
4
المحمع مولة
148
THE HISTORY OF GEORGIA.
to pursue. It was quickly followed, in April, 1774, by another act which provided that the provincial council of Massachusetts, previously elected by the representative assembly in accordance with charter privileges, should thereafter be appointed by the Crown ; that the royal governor should be invested with the power of nominating and removing judges, sheriffs, and all other executive officers whose functions possessed the slightest impor- tance ; that jurymen, hitherto selected by the freeholders and citizens of the several towns, should in future be nominated and summoned by the sheriffs ; that no town-meetings of the peo- ple should be convoked without permission in writing from the royal governor; and that no business or matter should be dis- cussed at those meetings beyond the topics specified and approved in the governor's license.
Apprehending that tumults and perhaps bloodshed might en- sue upon the first attempt to carry these new measures into ex- ecution, and not fully satisfied with the control which, by the second statute, they had usurped over the administration of jus- tice and an expression of the popular will, the British ministers proceeded still further to insure impunity for their functionaries by framing a third act, which empowered the governor of the province, if he saw fit, to remit any parties indicted for murder or charged with capital offenses committed in aiding the mag- istracy of Massachusetts, for trial either to another colony or to Great Britain. In vain did Burke, Barre, and other liberal statesmen raise their warning voices against this measure of su- perfluous insult and injustice.
These three acts, sanctioned in rapid succession, were regarded in America as forming a complete system of tyranny. By the first, exclaimed the organs of popular opinion in the colonies, thousands of innocent persons are robbed of their livelihood for the act of a few individuals : by the second our chartered liber- ties are annihilated : and by the third our lives may be destroyed with impunity. The passage of the Quebec Bill also contrib- uted to enhance the general indignation.1
A knowledge of this legislation, and an appreciation of its pernicious influence, inflamed the minds of the patriots in Caro- lina and Georgia and induced them to give early and decided ex- pression to their views of condemnation and opposition. To their friends in Georgia, Henry Laurens and other gentlemen of in-
1 Sco Grahamne's History of the United States, cte., vol. iv. pp. 344-346. London. 1836.
م
1
149
PUBLIC MEETING IN SAVANNAH.
fluence and character in South Carolina, addressed letters inquir- ing whether the fertile lands between the Savannah and the Alatamaha were favorable to the growth of the Tree of Liberty, even though the Indian hatchet, sharpened by the English, was ready to strike at its roots.1
On the 20th of July, 1774, the following invitation, signed by Noble W. Jones, Archibald Bulloch, John Houstoun, and John Walton appeared in the " Georgia Gazette : " -
" The critical situation to which the British Colonies in Amer- ica are likely to be reduced from the arbitrary and alarming im- position of the late acts of the British Parliament respecting the town of Boston, as well as the acts that at present exist tending to the raising of a perpetual revenue without the consent of the people or their representatives, is considered an object extremely important at this juncture, and particularly calculated to deprive the American subjects of their constitutional rights and liberties as a part of the English Empire. It is therefore requested that all persons within the limits of this Province do attend at the Liberty Pole, at Tondee's tavern in Savannah, on Wednesday the 27th instant, in order that the said matters may be taken un- der consideration and such other constitutional measures pursued as may then appear to be most eligible."
Responding to this call, a respectable number of the freehold- ers and inhabitants of the province assembled at the Watch House in Savannah on the day appointed. The meeting was organized by the selection of John Glen as chairman. Sundry communications and resolutions from committees of correspon- dence at Boston, Philadelphia, Annapolis, Williamsburg, Charles- town, and elsewhere, were read and considered. It was moved and carried that a committee should be raised to prepare resolu- tions, similar to those adopted by the northern colonies, expres- sive of the sentiments and determination of this province. The following gentlemen were constituted members of that committee : John Glen, John Smith, Joseph Clay, John Houstoun, Noble Wimberley Jones, Lyman Hall, William Young, Edward Telfair, Samuel Farley, George Walton, Joseph Habersham, Jonathan Bryan, Jonathan Cockran, George McIntosh, Sutton Bankes, William Gibbons, Benjamin Andrew, John Winn, John Stirk, Archibald Bulloch, James Screven, David Zubly, Henry Davis Bourquin, Elisha Butler, William Baker, Parmenus Way, John Baker, John Mann, John Benefield, John Stacy, and Jolin Morel.
1 See McCall's History of Georgia, vol. ii. p. 14. Savannah. 1816.
150
THE HISTORY OF GEORGIA.
A more intelligent, responsible, and manly committee could not have been nominated from out the entire circuit of the colonial population. While the resolutions were under consideration, it was wisely suggested that inasmuch as the inhabitants of some of the more distant parishes had not been advised of the present meeting in time sufficient to allow them to attend, the adoption of the resolutions should be postponed to a future occasion. It was therefore determined that the meeting " stand adjourned " until the 10th of August. The chairman was requested to com- municate with the different parishes and districts, and to request that delegates be sent to unite with the committee in framing the contemplated resolutions. It was the sense of the meeting that those delegates should be equal in number to the represen- tatives usually elected to the General Assembly, and that the resolutions, as sanctioned by the meeting in August, should be regarded as expressing the sentiments of the inhabitants of the province.
In obedience to the will of the meeting, Mr. Glen, the chair- man, caused notices to be published and widely distributed re- questing the respective parishes to elect delegates to attend on the committee at Savannah at the time agreed upon.
Alarmed at the proceeding, Governor Wright convened his council and consulted with the members in regard to the best method of placing a check upon proceedings which he deemed unconstitutional and revolutionary. A motion was made to ex- pel Mr. Bryan from council because his name appeared among the committee men. That gentleman, says Captain McCall,1 "with patriotic indignation, informed them in a style peculiar to himself for its candour and energy, that he would 'save them the trouble,' and handed his resignation to the governor." Finding that the persuasions of himself and council were likely to prove of little avail, Governor Wright issued the following proclama- tion : -
" Georgia. By his Excellency Sir James Wright, Bart, Captain General of his Majesty's Province of Georgia, Chancellor, Vice Admiral, and Ordinary of the same.
" Whereas I have received information that on Wednesday, the 27th day of July last past, a number of persons, in conse- quence of a printed Bill or Summons issued and dispersed throughout the Province by certain Persons unknown, did un- lawfully assemble together at the Watch House in the Town of
1 Ilistory of Georgia, vol. ii. p. 20. Savannah. 1816.
.
151
PROCLAMATION OF GOVERNOR WRIGHT.
Savannah under colour or pretence of consulting together for the Redress of Grievances or imaginary Grievances, and that the Persons so assembled for the purposes aforesaid, or some of them are, from and by their own authority, by a certain other Hand- Bill issued and dispersed throughout the Province, and by other methods, endeavouring to prevail on his Majesty's liege subjects to have another meeting on Wednesday the 10th instant, similar to the former and for the purposes aforesaid, which summonses and meetings must tend to raise fears and jealousies in the minds of liis Majesty's good subjects :
" And whereas an opinion prevails, and has been industriously propagated that Summonses and Meetings of this nature are con- stitutional and legal : in order therefore that his Majesty's liege subjects may not be misled and imposed upon by artful and de- signing men I do, by this Proclamation, by and with the advice of his Majesty's honorable Council, issue this my Proclamation notifying that all such Summonses and calls by Private Persons, and all Assemblings and Meetings of the People which may tend to raise fears and jealousies with his Majesty's subjects under pretence of consulting together for redress of Public Grievances, are unconstitutional, illegal, and punishable by Law.
" And I do hereby require all his Majesty's subjects within this Province to pay due regard to this my Proclamation as they will answer the contrary.
" Given under my hand and the Great Seal of his Majesty's said Province, in the Council Chamber at Savannah, the 5th day of August in the 14th year of the Reign of our Sovereign Lord George III. in the year of our Lord 1774.
JAMES WRIGHT.
" By his Excellency's command.
THOR MOODIE, Dep : Sec : " God save the King."
In direct opposition to the will of his excellency, and in utter disregard of his proclamation, a general meeting of the inhabitants of the province was held at Tondee's tavern in Savannah on the 10th of August, 1774.
The following resolutions, reported by the committee raised for that purpose at the former convocation, were adopted and given to the public as an expression of the sentiments of Georgia with respect to the important questions which were then agitating the minds of the American colonists : -
" Resolved, nemine contradicente, That his Majesty's subjects
-
152
THE HISTORY OF GEORGIA.
in America owe the same allegiance, and are entitled to the same rights, privileges, and immunities with their fellow subjects in Great Britain.
" Resolved, nemine contradicente, That as protection and alle- giance are reciprocal, and under the British Constitution correla- tive terms, his Majesty's subjects in America have a clear and indisputable right, as well from the general laws of mankind, as from the ancient and established customs of the land so often recognized, to petition the Throne upon every emergency.
" Resolved, nemine contradicente, That an Act of Parliament lately passed for blockading the port and harbour of Boston is contrary to our idea of the British Constitution : First, for that it in effect deprives good and lawful men of the use of their prop- erty without judgment of their peers ; and secondly, for that it is in the nature of an ex post facto law, and indiscriminately blends as objects of punishment the innocent with the guilty ; neither do we conceive the same justified upon a principle of necessity, for that numerous instances evince that the laws and executive power of Boston have made sufficient provision for the punishment of all offenders against persons and property.
" Resolved, nemine contradicente, That the Act for abolishing the Charter of Massachusetts Bay tends to the subversion of American rights ; for besides those general liberties, the original settlers brought over with them as their birthright particular im- munities granted by such Charter, as an inducement and means of settling the Province : and we apprehend the said Charter cannot be dissolved but by a voluntary surrender of the people, repre- sentatively declared.
" Resolved, nemine contradicente, That we apprehend the Par- liament of Great Britain hath not, nor ever had, any right to tax his Majesty's American subjects ; for it is evident, beyond con- tradiction, the constitution admits of no taxation without repre- sentation ; that they are coeval and inseparable; and every demand for the support of government should be by requisition made to the several houses of representatives.
" Resolved, nemine contradicente, That it is contrary to natural justice and the established law of the land, to transport any person to Great Britain or elsewhere to be tried under indict- ment for a crime committed in any of the colonies, as the party prosecuted would thereby be deprived of the privilege of trial by his peers from the vicinage, the injured perhaps prevented from legal reparation, and both lose the full benefit of their witnesses.
.
ولو
شوالسنة
-
153
DIVISION OF SENTIMENT.
" Resolved, nemine contradicente, That we concur with our sister colonies in every constitutional measure to obtain redress of American grievances, and will, by every lawful means in our power, maintain those inestimable blessings for which we are indebted to God and the Constitution of our country - a Con- stitution founded upon reason and justice and the indelible rights of mankind.
" Resolved, nemine contradicente, That the Committee ap- pointed by the meeting of the inhabitants of this Province on Wednesday, the 27th of July last, together with the deputies who have appeared here on this day from the different parishes, be a general committee to act, and that any eleven or more of them shall have full power to correspond with the committees of the several Provinces upon the Continent ; and that copies of these resolutions, as well as of all other proceedings, be trans- mitted without delay to the Committees of Correspondence in the respective Provinces."
A committee, consisting of William Ewen, William Young, Joseph Clay, John Houstoun, Noble Wimberley Jones, Edward Telfair, John Smith, Samuel Farley, and Andrew Elton Wells, was appointed to solicit, receive, and forward subscriptions and supplies for the suffering poor in Boston. Within a short time five hundred and seventy-nine barrels of rice were contributed and shipped to that town.
While this meeting was most respectably constituted, and while its deliberations and conclusions were harmonious, it must not be supposed that there was no division of sentiment in Georgia upon the political questions of the day. On the contrary, the royal party was strong and active, and it required no little effort on the part of the " Liberty Boys " to acquire the mastery and place the province fairly within the lists of the Revolutionists. The line of demarkation was sometimes so sharply drawn that father was arrayed against son, and brother against brother. Thus, not to multiply instances, the Honorable James Habersham and Colonel Noble Jones maintained their allegiance to the Crown, while their sons were amongst the foremost champions of the rights of the colony. The brothers Telfair were divided in senti- ment upon the momentous issues then involved. The cruel ef- fects of such disagreements, experienced during the progress of the Revolution, were projected, not infrequently, even beyond the final establishment of the republic. No cause of quarrel can bo more dangerous than that involving a conflict of opinion touch-
154
TIIE IIISTORY OF GEORGIA.
ing the relative rights of the governing and the governed. No calamities are so appalling as those engendered in a strife be- tween peoples of the same race and claiming privileges emanating from the same fountain head. Polybius was right when he said that such dissensions were to be dreaded much more than wars waged in a foreign country or against a common enemy.
The only paper published in the colony at this time was the "Georgia Gazette." It was under the control of Governor Wright, and its official utterances were in support of the royal cause. In its issue of Wednesday, September 7, 1774,1 appeared a card signed by James Habersham, Lachlan McGillivray, Josiah Tatt- nall, James Hume, Anthony Stokes, Edward Langworthy, Henry Yonge, Robert Bolton, Noble Jones, David Montaigut and some ninety-three others, inhabitants and freeholders chiefly of the town and district of Savannah, criticising the meeting of the 10th of August and protesting that the resolutions then adopted should not be accepted as reflecting the sentiments of the people of Georgia. " The important meeting of the 10th of August in de- fence of the Constitutional rights and liberties of the American Subjects," these gentlemen affirmed, " was held at a tavern, with the doors shut for a considerable time : and it is said 26 persons answered for the whole Province and undertook to bind them by resolutions ; and when several Gentlemen attempted to go in, the Tavern-keeper, who stood at the door with a list in his hand, refused them admittance because their names were not mentioned in that list. Such was the conduct of these pretended advocates for the Liberties of America. Several of the inhabitants of St. Paul and St. George, - two of the most populous parishes of the Province, - had transmitted their written dissents to any Resolu- tions, and there were Gentlemen ready to present these dissents had not the door been shut for a considerable time and admit- tance refused. And it is conceived the shutting of the door and refusing admittance to any but resolutioners was calculated to prevent the rest of the Inhabitants from giving their dissent to measures that were intended to operate as the unanimous sense of the Province. Upon the whole, the world will judge whether the meeting of the 10th of August, held by a few persons in a Tavern, with doors shut, can, with any appearance of truth or decency, be called a General Meeting of the Inhabitants of Geor- gia." Such is the other side of the story as told by a pen dipped in the king's ink.
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.