USA > South Carolina > The history of South Carolina under the proprietary government, 1670-1719, V.2 > Part 1
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.
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
Gc 975.7 M13his v.2 1707506
REYNOLDS HISTORICAL GENEALOGY COLLECTION
TTT ODLIV LIDKARY
3 1833 02294 3556
THE HISTORY
SOUTH CAROLINA
UNDER THE
PROPRIETARY GOVERNMENT
1670-1719
Vil BY
EDWARD MOCRADY
A MEMBER OF THE BAR OF CILARLESTON, S.C., AND VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF SOUTH CAROLINA
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY LONDON : MACMILGAS & CO, LTD. 1897
All rights reserved
1707506
UNDER THE PROPRIETARY GOVERNMENT 381
carry it out. It was agreed to raise 600 provincial militia, an equal number of Indians, and ten vessels for the ex- pedition. Port Royal was the place of rendezvous, and thence in September, 1702, the Governor at the head of his little army embarked.
In the plan of operation it had been agreed that Colonel Daniel, with a detached party, should go by the inland passage and make a descent upon the town from the land. while the Governor should proceed by sea and block up the harbor. The precautions to keep the matter secret had been unavailing. The inhabitants of St. Augustine heard of it and sent at once to Havana for reinforcements. Retreating to their castle with their most valuable effects, and provisions for four months, they abandoned the town to the Carolinians. Colonel Daniel. proceeding by land to the St. John's River, going down that river in small boats and landing on the east bank in the rear of St. Augustine. took the villages of St. John's and St. Mary's. and arrived first at the point of attack. He had pillaged
the town before the fleet arrived. The Governor now entered the harbor, landed his forces, made the church his quarters, and laid siege to the castle, which was sur- rounded by a deep moat ; but, unfortunately, he was unpro- vided with suitable artillery for a siege. He heid the town for a month and dispatched a sloop to Jamaica for mortars and bombs; but the commander of the vessel, either from fear or treachery, instead of going thither. came to Carolina. Remaining here for some time until shamed by the offer of others to go instead. he reluctantly proceeded again on his mission. The Governor all the while lay before the castle awaiting the return of the sloop with the guns ; hearing nothing of it, Colonel Daniel. who was the life of the expedition, set sail himself for Jamaica.
Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2016
https://archive.org/details/historyofsouthca02mccr 0
382
HISTORY OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Having with great expedition procured a supply of bombs, he sailed again for St. Augustine; but in the mean- time, during his absence, two ships had appeared in the offing, which Governor Moore took to be men-of-war, and incontinently raised the siege, abandoned his ships with all the stores, ammunition, and provisions to the enemy, while he retreated to Carolina by land. The two men-of- war that appeared to the Governor so formidable proved to be two small frigates, one of twenty-two and the other of sixteen guns. Colonel Daniel, thus abandoned on his re- turn from Jamaica, with difficulty escaped capture. He was chased, but got away. The Carolinians lost but two men ; but the expedition entailed a heavy expense upon the colony. It incurred a debt of £6000,1 probably equal to $120,000 in present currency.2
The Assembly had been under prorogation during the Governor's absence ; and when he returned it met. January, 1703. The courage and conduct of Colonel Daniel were highly praised, but the Governor was thanked reluctantly, and not without dissent, especially from Mr. Ash.
Though greatly disappointed at the result of the expe- dition, the invasion of Florida was not abandoned. A majority of the Assembly began at once to enter upon a more extensive plan for the reduction not only of St. Augustine, but of Pensacola and other Spanish strongholds as well. A brigantine was offered to Colonel Daniel to cruise on the coast of Florida. The Assembly also offered to supply with provisions a frigate if one should be sent from England to cruise on their coast. Colonel Daniel
1 British Empire in Am., vol. I, 476-178 ; Carroll's Coll., vol. II, 422- 424; Hewatt's Hist. of So. Ca., vol. I, 152-155; Hist. Sketches of So. Ca. (Rivers), 199-201. Appendix, 456.
2 This is estimating the value of the pound sterling as before ; but this value was fluctuating, and the value of money gradually lessening.
383
UNDER THE PROPRIETARY GOVERNMENT
having declined the command of the brigantine, it was offered to Captain William Rhett. But before another invasion was undertaken, it was considered best to pay for the last, against which many citizens had just claims. After considerable delay, caused by the investigation of the committees, two bills were introduced, one laying an imposition on skins, furs, liquors, and other goods and mer- chandise imported into and exported out of the province, for raising a fund towards defraying the general charges and expenses of the province and paying the debts due for the expedition against St. Augustine, and the other for raising £ 4000 in addition to the £2000 which it had at first been estimated would cover the expenses of the expedition. This sum was to be raised by a direct tax upon real and personal estates, and bills of credit were to be issued. The first of these measures, which was adopted on the 6th of May, 1703, is remarkable for a provision imposing a duty of twenty shillings a head on every negro slave (children under eight years old excepted) imported from the West Indies, or any other place but Africa, and sold in the province; and ten shillings per head on all such imported from Africa.1 This was the first tax imposed upon the importation of negroes. The bill to raise the additional sum of £4000 created great astonishment and gave opportunity to the disaffected for a renewal of their opposition. To fill up the measure of their discontent, a bill twice passed by the House for regulating elections being sent to the Governor and Council for concurrence was summarily rejected, without. as usual. inviting a con- ference. Upon this, several - Oldmixon says fifteen out of thirty members who constituted the House - entered their protest under the instructions of those who sent theni, they said, and left the House. But this they appear to
1 Statutes of So. Ca., vol. II, 201.
384
HISTORY OF SOUTH CAROLINA
have done more by way of threat than with an intention of permanent withdrawal ; for the very next day, without any invitation to return, they all came back and offered to resume their seats if the rest of the Assembly would join them in the assertion of their rights. The remaining members of the Assembly, however. had taken them at their word, and instead of welcoming them back, the pro- testing members complained that they were abused, reviled. and treated with the most scandalous reflections, very un- becoming, they observe, of an Assembly. The House, how- ever, could not make a quorum without them, and so were obliged to adjourn.
The Colleton members had. by their own showing. so far behaved in a weak, undignified, and unmanly manner. They had begun by making the most injurious charges against the honesty of the Governor and Council, imput- ing the most scandalous motives, holding back when the welfare and safety of the province demanded the most earnest support of the expedition against St. Augustine. resisting the enfranchisement of the French while making new demands for their own privileges ; then because they could not have their own way, they had withdrawn from the house, and immediately changing their minds had come back, begging to be received again. It is almost piti- ful to read their whining complaint to the Lords Proprie- tors, They wrote : -
" And we further represent to your Lordships that a day or two after such abuse was given to them in the house several of the said members viz : the said John Ash - Landgrave Thomas Smith I and others
1 Thomas Smith, the second son of Thomas Smith, the Landgrave, who died in 1692. This Thomas Smith. Mrs. Poyas says, was born in England in 1870, and was brought over when a few months old. He was called the "little Englishman." The Olden Time of Carolina, Is. But this, we have been informed. is a mistake. He was born in Madagascar, where his father lived before he came to South Carolina.
385
UNDER THE PROPRIETARY GOVERNMENT
were assaulted & set upon in the open street without any provocation or affront by them given or offered. The said Thomas Smith was set upon by Lieut Col : George Dearshy who with his drawn sword and the point held at the said Smiths belly swore he would kill him. and if he had not been prevented would have done the said Smith some considerable mischief to the endangering of his life. The said John Ash walking along the Street was assaulted by a rude drunken un- governable rabble headed encouraged & abbetted by the said Dearsby Thomas Dalton Nicholas Nary and other persons Inhabitants who set upon the said ek and used him villanously & barbarously : and that evening when he the said Ash was retired into a friends chamber for security the same armed multitude came to the House where the said .1sh was & demanded him down assuring him at the same time that they would do him no hurt, but only wanted to discourse with him; upon which assurance he came down to them who notwith- stand'g being encouraged and assisted by Captain Rhett & others drew him on board his the said Rhetts ship revilling him & threatening him as they dragged him along ; and having gotten him on board the said Rhetts ship they sometimes told him they would carry him to Jamaica at other times they threatened to hang him or leave him on some remote Island."
They complained that the Governor was cognizant of the riot, treated many persons engaged in it to drink, and gave them great encouragement, telling them "that the protesting members would bring the people on their heads for neglecting to pay the country's debts ; which if it should happen he knew not who could blame them," etc .; that while the riot continued, which it did for four or five days, Landgrave Edmund Bellinger, who was a Justice of the Peace, was the only official who attempted to do his duty ; and that for so doing Captain Rhett had beat him over the head with his cane ; that during the riot a woman, the wife of a butcher. was thrown down, miscarried and brought forth a dead child ; that when Ash, Smith, Byres. and Boone com- plained to the Governor. they received no other satisfaction than that " it was a business for a Justice of the Peace. " 1
Hist. Sketches of So. Ca. (Rivers), Appendix, 159. 20
E
380
HISTORY OF SOUTH CAROLINA
And so undoubtedly it was. There was, no doubt, a riot caused by the indignation of the people against the protesting members, who, to carry an election law they desired for the exclusion of the French, to prevent. the payment of the claims arising from the expedition to St. Augustine, and to prevent the sending another expedition to destroy that stronghold of the inveterate enemy of the community, had broken the quorum of the House. For their own political ends, they had thwarted the purposes of the people in a matter vitally affecting their safety. And yet in the terrible riot that occurred, nobody had been seri- ously hurt, unless it was the woman who had been acci- dentally thrown down in opening a door.
To sum up the casualties. Landgrave Smith had had a sword pointed at him, Landgrave Bellinger had re- ceived a whack across his head, and Thomas Ash had been tussled into a boat and frightened into believing that he was to be sent to Jamaica.
There was no court held in Charles Town after the riot, until Moore was superseded and transferred to his new office, that of Attorney General; and it was scarcely to be expected that under the circumstances he would have been vigorous in the prosecution of the rioters. Bellinger did, nevertheless, lay a record of the events before the grand jury, but no presentment was made. Neither the new Governor, the Council, nor the courts took any steps in the matter. Nor did the aggrieved party meet with support or sympathy when they sent Mr. Ash, as their agent, to the Proprietors in England with the memorial from which the above-mentioned events have been mostly taken.
CHAPTER XVII
1701-1706
JOHN, Earl of Bath, the fourth Palatine, died August 21, 1701. But so negligent were the Proprietors of the affairs of the colony that no meeting was held for five months after his death. Then, on January 10. 1701-1702. John Lord Granville succeeded the Earl his father. as the fifth Palatine of Carolina.1 The other proprietorships were represented by William Lord Craven; the Hon. Maurice Ashley, son of the second Earl of Shaftesbury: that of the minor Lord Carteret by Lord Granville. The troublesome share of Sir William Berkeley, held by Mr. Thornburgh, substituted trustee in the place of Thomas Amy, who was now dead, was in 1705 sold to John Arch- dale, who thus appears to have recognized the right of the four Proprietors under their purchase from Ludwell and his wife. notwithstanding his own previous purchase from that lady. The share of the Earl of Clarendon, then of Sothell, which the Proprietors had given to Thomas Amy, he had settled upon Nicholas Trott, Esq., of Lon- don, who had married his daughter,2 but the other Pro- prietors never recognized Trott's proprietorship, nor admitted him to its possession or profits. The Colleton share was represented by the second Sir John Colleton,
1 Coll. Hist. Soc. of So. Ca., vol. I. 150.
2 Danson v. Trott, et al .. Bd Brown's Part. Reports, 449. This Nicholas Trott was a cousin of the Nicholas Trott in Carolina. He was the same who joined with John Trott in giving a power of attorney to collect from William Rhett their share of a mercantile adventure.
387
388
HISTORY OF SOUTH CAROLINA
lately become of age. That formerly of Lord Berkeley was now owned by the minor son of Landgrave Joseph Blake.
On March 11, 1701, the Privy Council announced to the Proprietors of Carolina the death of King William and ordered the proclamation of Queen Anne. This order, on March 21. the Proprietors enclose to the Governor and Council in Carolina.1 On May 8, 1702. the Commissioners of Trade formally notify the Proprietors of the war with France and Spain. In the meanwhile the Board of Trade, urged on by Randolph, were advising the Royal authorities to reassume the government of the colonies and unite them under one administration. "An act for remitting to the crown the government of several colonies and plantations in America" was drawn, and only failed of passage in Parliament, it was said, by reason of the shortness of time and multiplicity of other business,2
In 1699 the Proprietors had been summoned to White- hall and asked how it was that his Majesty's approbation had not been obtained for appointment of Governor Blake as required by the act of Parliament for preventing frauds. etc. Mr. Thornburgh, answering for them, had stated that the then Governor ( Blake) was not so by virtue of any commission from the Proprietors, but by virtue of the Fundamental Constitutions as being a Proprietor himself ; but that the Lords Proprietors contemplated deputing one before long.3 This was not strictly true. Blake, as we have seen, had been appointed by Archdale under a power from their board, an appointment which had been ap- proved by them.+ Three years had elapsed and no ap- pointment had been made. They now at last determined to appoint Sir Nathaniel Johnson. Hewatt states that the Proprietors could not at first obtain Queen Anne's appro-
1 C'all. Hist. Soc. of So. Ca .. vol. 1. 151. This .. 510. 2 Colonial Records of No. Cu., vol 1. 535, 510, 654. & See date, pp. 287-288.
389
UNDER THE PROPRIETARY GOVERNMENT
bation of Sir Nathaniel because it was suspected that he was not a friend to the Revolution, and that her approval could only be obtained on the condition of his giving security for the observance of the laws of trade and navi- gation, and to obey such instructions as should be sent him from time to time by her Majesty ; which security the Commissioners of Trade and Plantations were ordered to take care should be sufficient.1 The historian does not give his authority for the statement. It is scarcely proba- ble that Queen Anne and her Tory administration, with Lord Godolphin at its head, would have objected to any one because he had refused to abandon the cause of the Stuarts. The requirement of security was a general regulation im- posed at the instance of the Board of Trade in 1697. and which it appears the board was zealously enforcing. Sir Nathaniel was too much in accord with the political and religious views of the now dominant party in England to fear refusal of his confirmation as Governor of Carolina.
On the 18th of June, 1702, the Lords Proprietors issued their commission to Sir Nathaniel Johnson as Gov- ernor both of South and North Carolina; and with his commission they sent their instructions of the same date. He was to follow such rules as had been given to former Governors in the Fundamental Constitutions and Tempo- rary Laws, and to be guided by them as far as in his judgment he might think fit and expedient. He was re- quired, with the advice and assistance of his Council, carefully to review the Constitutions and to lay before the Assembly, for their concurrence and assent, such of them as he should think necessary to the better establishment of government and calculated for the good of the people. He was to use his endeavors to dispose of their lands, but to take nothing less than $20 for 1000 acres and in all
1 Hewatt's Hist. of So. Ca., vol. I, 162.
390
HISTORY OF SOUTH CAROLINA
future grants to provide that the lands should escheat to the Proprietors unless a settlement was made on them within the space of four years. He was to take special care that the Indians were not abused or insulted, and to study the best methods of civilizing them and making a firm friendship with them in order to protect the colony against the Spaniards. He was to transmit to England exact copies of all laws passed, and of all annual rents paid. An act had been passed in 1701 by the Assembly in South Carolina for regulating the proceedings of the Court of Admiralty in the province. The Proprietors sent to Gov- ernor Johnson an opinion of counsel furnished them by the Board of Trade, that its provisions were not in accord- ance with the practice of the High Court of Admiralty in England, and they instructed Sir Nathaniel to have the same amended as necessary.1
On the 28th of July Mr. Robert Johnson, the Governor's son, with Mr. Hutcheson, the agent of the Proprietors, attended at Whitehall and acquainting the board that he was in possession of an estate at Keeblesworth in the County of Durham with £200 per annum, which Sir Nathaniel, his father, who was tenant for life, had made over to him, he was accepted as one of his father's sure- ties. Mr. Thomas Cary. Archdale's son-in-law, a Carolina ·merchant, was taken for the other.2
1
Though Sir Nathaniel Johnson's commission was dated in June. 1702, it did not arrive in Carolina until some time in 1703. With his commission as Governor came also a commission for Nicholas Trott as Chief Justice, for James Moore, the Governor, as Attorney General, and for Job Howes as Surveyor General. When Granville had desired the Queen's approbation of Sir Nathaniel Johnson, the fact
I Hewatt's Hist. of So. Ca., vol. I. 162 ; Colonial Records of No. Ca., vol. I, 555-557. 2 Ibid., 587.
391
UNDER THE PROPRIETARY GOVERNMENT
was known that, while Governor in the West Indies, he had refused to take the new oaths upon the revolution in England which, as we have observed, was probably a recommendation of him to Aune, and his experience and courage were urged as particularly fitting him for the critical position of the Governor of a frontier during the war against France and Spain.1
With the new administration a new Assembly was elected, and the Colleton members charged that in this election that of the members to serve from Berkeley was managed with greater injustice to the freemen of the province even than the former. "For at this last elec- tion," they said, "Jews strangers, sailors servants, ne- groes and almost every Frenchman in Craven and Berkeley counties came down to elect and their votes were taken the persons by them voted for were returned by the Sheriff," etc.2 It was the voting of the Frenchmen to which the Colleton dissenters were so opposed. This was the real ground and cause of their complaint, and the reason is obvious. There was no bitterness between the Huguenots and the High Churchmen. The Huguenots were not dissenters from the Church of England as were the Congregationalists under the lead of Morton and Boone, or as the Baptists under Screven. They were Protestants against the Church of Rome, just as were the churchmen of England. Though, in strict matter of faith. the Huguenot was a Calvinist, he had no disposition to quarrel with the establishment of the Church of England. On the contrary, he was most kindly disposed to that body, though not fully agreeing with all its tenets. When first driven from France, Canterbury offered an asylum to these persecuted Protestants, and Archbishop Parker, with the consent of Queen Elizabeth, granted the exiles the use
1 Ilist. Sketches of So. Ca. (Rivers), 206. 2 Ibid., Appendix, 159.
392
HISTORY OF SOUTH CAROLINA
of the under croft or crypt of the cathedral where "the gentle and profitable strangers," as the archbishop styled them. not only celebrated their worship, but set up their looms and carried on their several trades.1 The Hugue- nots had been protected by Cromwell, and Charles II kad assisted at his own expense in the transportation of some of them to this country. They did not object to a lit- urgy. They themselves had been accustomed to one. It was because these people would not join the dissenters to control the colony that their indignation was so aroused because aliens were allowed to vote.
The new Assembly in April, 1703, thanked their Lord- ships the Proprietors for the appointment of Governor Johnson, and requested, as their own resources were ex- hausted by the late expedition, that the Queen would send them warlike stores and forces and a frigate, for they said : " Though we are immediately under your Lordships' government, yet we are her subjects, and we hope not only to defend ourselves, but even to take St. Augustine."
Governor Johnson devoted himself immediately to the fortification of the town and preparation for the defence of the province. With limited resources he wisely stayed at home and exerted himself to render the capital of his prov- ince as defendable as possible, but Moore, restless, ener- getic, and ambitious, and burning to redeem his diminished reputation, persuaded Sir Nathaniel to allow him to make another invasion of the territory of the Apalachian, north- west of St. Augustine, which supplied that place with pro- visions and in which there were many small Spanish forts and Roman Catholic chapels. Moore set forth in Decem- ber, 1703, at the head of 50 Carolina volunteers and 1000
1 The Huguenots (Samuel Smiles), 1868, 123 ; " Historical Sketch of South Carolina," Preface to Cyclo. of Eminent Men of the Carolinas (Edward McCrady).
393
UNDER THE PROPRIETARY GOVERNMENT
Indians. The first town which he reached was one known as Ayaville, having a tolerably complete fortifica- tion with its usual appendage, a chapel. The Carolinians assaulted the fort, but were repulsed.
Balls and arrows greeted Moore's approach, from which his men first took refuge behind a mud-walled house, then. forming to the assault. they rushed forward and attempted to break down the chapel doors, but were beaten back with the loss of two men, - Francis Plowden and Thomas Dale. Two hours after they succeeded. with the aid of the Indians, in setting fire to the chapel. They captured only one white man, a friar, and about 50 Indians and over 100 women and children. and killed in the two as- saults 25 men. The next morning 23 Spaniards, with 400 Indian allies, renewed battle with the Carolinians. The Carolinians were again victorious ; the Spanish leader and eight of his men were taken prisoners, and tive or six killed, with about 200 Indians. On the part of the Carolinians. Captain John Bellinger was killed fighting bravely at the head of his men. On the same day Captain Fox died of his wounds received at the assault at Ayaville. Five fortified towns now surrendered unconditionally.
The Cacique of Ibitachtka. being strongly posted, was treated with and compounded for safety with " his church plate and ten horses laden with provisions." "I am will- ing to bring away with me," says Colonel Moore, " free, as many of the Indians as I can, this being the address of the commons to your honor to order it so. This will make my men's part of plunder (which otherwise might have been £100 to a man ) but small." He returned in March with 1300 free Apalachians and 100 slaves. By the devastation committed by Moore's own men and the depre- dations of his numerous allies, the country of the enemy was completely subdued. He received the thanks of the
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.