USA > South Carolina > Marion County > A history of Marion county, South Carolina, from its earliest times to the present, 1901 > Part 7
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 | Part 56
The court house of 1823 remained intact for about ten years after the new or present court house was erected. The rooms below were rented by the Commissioners of Public Buildings to lawyers and others for offices. They were occupied as such until the year of 1861. Who the Commissioners were is not now remembered. In the winter of 1864 and 1865, one O. R. Smith, claiming to be a quartermaster, was stationed at Marion, and was there during the year 1864 and 1865, till the surrender of General Lee. During the latter part of his stay he claimed to have bought for $5,000 (Confederate money) the old court house (of 1823), upon condition that he was to
65
A HISTORY OF MARION COUNTY.
move it. He took down the building and shipped off the ick, iron and stone steps, &c., that he did not sell to individ- ils in town. What he received for it is unknown, whether lything or not. Whether he ever paid for it or not, and to hom paid, is also unknown. There has never been any ac- unting for its proceeds, or any accounting called for, by the ourt or other authority. In the minds of many it has been ›ubted whether he ever paid anything for it. There was no le authorized to sell it. No Commissioners of Public Build- gs were then in existence. If there were any, they were sorganized and had no power to sell. The old court house ›ld was built by the State and not by the county, hence it longed to the State and not to the county. The Legislature one had the power to sell or to authorize and direct its sale, hich the Legislature had not done. The pressure of the war as upon us. Civil affairs were not much looked after or at- nded to. Everything in relation to civil affairs were much isorganized, it may be said were disintegrated. Confusion id disorder prevailed everywhere. Matters more vital occu- ied our attention-our very existence was threatened. Some lere were who took advantage of the conditions then existing ; ley were on the make, and were not very scrupulous as to ow they made it. We do not say that this old court house ansaction was one of those cases, but we do say that the rcumstances surrounding and attending the transaction are lough at least to excite a reasonable suspicion. The said O. . Smith, the so-called Confederate Quartermaster, left just hen Sherman's raid passed through the upper end of the ounty, and carried two wagons loaded with corn and bacon, hich he had not gathered as an official, but took it from the arehouse at Marion, and which had been gathered and stored lere by the Post Quartermaster's Department, the writer ereof being in charge of it, and who remonstrated with said mith about it. Smith's reply to him was with an oath, "That ou, corn, bacon and all, would be in the hands of the Yankees i two weeks. D-n it all, he was going to take care of him- lf; he was going to get away and carry what he could." his prediction of Smith then seemed probable. The writer
66
A HISTORY OF MARION COUNTY.
saw Smith about four or five years afterwards, and has heard since that he was dead. He was from Warrenton, N. C.,
The first jail was built about the time the first court house was built ; it is not known by whom it was built. It is supposed the Commissioners appointed for the purpose by the Act of 1798, supra, had the jail built as early as practicable. It was located northwest of the present court house on the public square. The writer saw it while standing. Did not then observe it as he would now. It remained there and was used until about 1846, when it was replaced by the present jail, located at the lower end of Main street.
The court house and jail located according to the Act of 1798, formed or made a nucleus for the building up a county. town, at and around the court house. We do not know who resided near the county seat before the court house was erected; as we are informed by tradition, Colonel Hugh Giles, a distin- guished character during the Revolutionary War, lived just over Smith's Swamp, south of the site of Marion Court House. It was for him that the village of Marion was first called Giles- boro, and was so called till away up into the thirties, and even after that by some of the older people. The town of Marion was not incorporated until long after. At the time of which we are now writing, we suppose others were in the vicinity. These were descendants of John Godbold, who settled just be- low where Marion Court House now stands, of whom more will be said hereinafterwards; also, the descendants of Nathan Evans, who was one of the early settlers of that region, of whom more will yet be said. In connection with the name of Gilesboro, the writer will relate what his father-in-law, Philip Bethea, told him. Before Marion Court House was located and established as the county seat, there were no public roads leading to it, from the upper end of the county. The court house being located there, it became necessary to lay out and build roads to the seat of justice The road now leading from Marion up by Moody's Mill, and on up by what is now Eben- ezer Church, and on up by John Bethea's (now John C. Bethea's plantation), and on up to Harlleesville (now Little Rock), then owned by Gibson (Stephen, the writer believes), was ordered by the road authorities to be laid out, opened and
67
A HISTORY OF MARION COUNTY.
ut in condition for travel. In cutting out and opening the pad, the overseer in charge of the work had much trouble in etting those liable to perform road duty to work; the hands, le poorer white people, alleging that they did not want to ork and build a road for old Colonel Giles and John Smith, who lived where Moody's Mill now is, to go up to old John lethea's to drink cider (old John Bethea made quantities of ider and peach and apple brandy) ; that no one else wanted the bad or would use it, the white hands alleging that they did not rant the road. He said that such was the opposition that it Imost amounted to a rebellion, and that the law had to be in- oked in order to get the work done. The road is one of the lost useful roads we have in the county, and none so poor that e would not be affected by closing it up, and would not have it bandoned. The writer's informant, Philip Bethea, was a man rown at the time, and a son of old John, the cider maker, and ne of the road hands. We have a few such people among us et, and perhaps always will have them-men having no public pirit, and care for no one but themselves.
Courts of Equity, prior to the Revolution, were held by the Governor and his Majesty's Council, or a majority of them. By the Act of 1721 (VII. vol. Statutes at Large, p. 163), it was rovided that the Court of Chancery should always be open for ne transaction of business within the jurisdiction of that 'ourt, "but the days and times of full and solemn hearing shall e four times in every year, that is to say, on every Thursday ext after the Court of Common Pleas is directed to meet and it in Charleston, and shall at such times sit de die in diem ntil the business ready for said Court shall be finished." It zas further provided, "that all the officers of the said Court hould reside in Charleston." All Courts were held then only 1 Charleston. This was an ample arrangement at the time nd answered all the purposes of said Courts. Charleston was hen the State, and at that time was convenient to the settled arts of the province. Some modifications or amendments › the Act of 1721 were made in 1746, which it is not necessary > notice. In regard to the Courts of Equity, no special hanges were made until 1784, after the Revolution. In that ear the Legislature passed an Act abolishing the former
68
A HISTORY OF MARION COUNTY.
Courts or Equity and conferring all its powers and duties on three Judges or Chancellors, to be elected by the General As- sembly, and to be commissioned by the Governor. (It will be remembered that in 1784 there was no such thing at "His Majesty's Counsel.) The powers and duties of the Courts were the same as under the Act of 1721. The change was made to suit the conditions then existing. The Court estab- lished by this Act, 1784, was to be held only in Charleston. The three Chancellors provided for in this Act, and elected by the Legislature, were John Rutledge, Richard Hudson and John Matthews.
The next Act of the Legislature to establish a Court of Equity within this State is the Act of 1791. (VII. vol. Statutes at Large, p. 258.) The first section of which provides : "That all laws now of force for establishing the Court of Chancery within this State, be, and they are hereby, declared to be and continue of force in this State, until altered or repealed by the Legislature thereof," &c.
The second section of this Act, 1791, after reciting the great inconveniences to the remote inhabitants of this State resulting from the fact that the Court of Equity is held only in one place within the State, to wit: Charleston, enacts: "That all future sittings of the Court of Equity for the full and solemn hearing of cases shall be held at the times and places hereinafter di- rected, that is to say : At Columbia, for all causes wherein the defendant shall reside in Camden, Orangeburg or Cheraw Dis- tricts, on the 15th days of May and December; at Cambridge, for all causes wherein the defendant shall reside within the District of Ninety-Six, on the 5th days of May and December ; and at Charleston, for all causes wherein the defendant shall reside in either of the Districts of Charleston, Beaufort or Georgetown (our district), on the second Monday in March, the second Monday in June, and the third Monday in Septem- ber, and the same days in every succeeding year," &c. It further provided that each and every Judge should ride the Circuit, unless prevented by sickness or other unavoidable dis- ability.
The next Act in regard to the Equity Courts is the Act of 1799 (VII. vol. Statutes at Large, at page 297), which divides
69
A HISTORY OF MARION COUNTY.
the districts as then established into four Equity Circuits, to be called the Eastern, Northern, Western and Southern. Marion County was placed in the Eastern Circuit ; the Courts of Equity for this Circuit were to be held for Marion and Georgetown, at Georgetown, on the first Monday in February in each and every year.
The next Act in reference to the Courts of Equity is that of 1808 (VII. vol. Statutes at Large, p. 304). Section I of said Act divides the State into three Equity Circuits, viz : the South- ern, Northern and Western. Our county, Marion, is placed in the Northern Circuit, composed of Georgetown, Horry, Marion and Williamsburg, which shall form one other Equity District, to be called the Georgetown District, the Courts of Equity for which shall be held at Georgetown, on the first Monday in Feb- ruary and June in every year. This Act of 1808 also provides for the election of two additional Chancellors to be commis- sioned and perform the same duties as the present Chancellors. The two elected were Henry Wm. DeSaussure and Theodore Gaillard.
The Act of 1824 established an Appeal Court for both law and equity, to consist of three Judges. It also divided the State into four Equity Circuits. Marion District was assigned to the Fourth Circuit, and the Courts to be held for "George- town, at Georgetown, for the Districts of Williamsburg, Horry, Marion and Georgetown, on the first Monday after the fourth Monday in January, to sit for two weeks, should so much be necessary." (VII. vol. Statutes at Large, section IX., p. 327.) From which it appears as well by this Act of 1824 as by the Act of 1808, supra, that from and after the year 1799, the business of the Equity Courts for this section of the State was on the decrease, for by the Act of 1799, only Georgetown and Marion were united for equity purposes ; while by the Act of 1808 and 1824, Georgetown, Marion, Williamsburg and Horry were united for the same purpose.
The Act of 1825, VII. vol., p. 330, was amended so far as to allow the Court of Equity to sit twice a year for the George- town (Marion) Equity District instead of but once, one week at each term, if so much be necessary.
By the Act of 1833, it appears that Marion and Williamsburg
70
A HISTORY OF MARION COUNTY.
Districts were detached from the Georgetown Equity District, and that the Court sat in each separately, to wit: for Marion District, to commence the Thursday after the first Monday after the fourth Monday in January, and to continue in session three days, unless the business be sooner disposed of." The Act of 1833, for the first time in the judicial history of Marion District, recognized Marion as a coequal in her relations to the Courts of Equity with the other districts of the State.
The Act of 1824, entitled "An Act to revise and amend the judiciary system of this State," with some amendments thereto, continued to be the law regulating both the Courts of law and equity, together with the Court of Appeals, composed of three Judges, until 1835, when the Act of that year, 1835, entitled "An Act to reform and amend the judiciary system of this State," was passed. By this latter Act, the Appeal Court as then existing was abolished, and its powers and duties were transferred to a Court of Appeals, composed of all the law Judges and all the Chancellors in the State, sitting in banc; that no Chancellor or law Judge who had tried the cause on Circuit should sit upon hearing the appeal thereon. That the Courts of Common Pleas and General Sessions, and also the Equity Courts, should be arranged into circuits. One circuit . was called the Eastern Circuit, in which Marion was placed. Courts of Common Pleas and General Sessions were to be held at Marion Court House for Marion District, on the third Mon- day after the fourth Monday in March and October each and every year thereafter for one week at each term, unless the business of the said Courts respectively shall be sooner dis- patched. And the several Courts of Equity in the State shall hereafter be holden twice annually at the following periods, that is to say :" * * * and "at Marion Court House, for Marion District, on the Thursday next after the second Monday after the fourth Monday in January, and the Thursday next after the third Monday in June, in every year, for three days at each term, unless the business of the said Courts shall, respectively, be sooner despatched. (Act of 1835, VII. vol. Statutes, pp. 335 and 336.)
Another Act of 1836 was passed, entitled "An Act to organ- ize the Courts of this State. That the several Courts of law
71
A HISTORY OF MARION COUNTY.
and equity in this State shall hereafter be held at the times and. places as follows, that is to say: For the Eastern Circuit, at Marion Court Hause, on the fourth Monday in March and October." This was for the Court of Common Pleas and General Sessions. For the Court of Equity, "at Marion Court House, on the third Monday in January." By this Act, "all appeals from the Courts of law shall be heard and determined in a Court of Appeals, consisting of the law Judges, and that all appeals in equity shall be heard and determined in a Court of Appeals, consisting of the Chancellors. That said Courts shall meet at the same time and be held as follows, that is to say : at Charleston, on the first Monday in February, and at Columbia, on the first Monday in May, and fourth Monday in November." (Act of 1836, VII. vol. Statutes, 339 and 340.) By this Act also was created the Court of Errors, as follows : "That upon all constitutional questions arising out of the Con- stitution of this State or the United States, an appeal shall lie to the whole of the Judges assembled to hear such appeal. That an appeal shall also lie to the whole of the Judges upon all questions upon which either of the Courts of Appeal shall be divided, or when any two of the Judges of the Court shall require that a cause be further heard by all the Judges. That the Judges of law and equity, when assembled as aforesaid in one chamber, shall form a Court for the correction of all errors in law or equity in the cases that may be heard before them, and that it shall be the duty of the Judges to make all proper rules and regulations for the practice of the said Courts," &c. In this latter Court, Marion District figured in two of the cases, involving the constitutionality of the stay law, as it was called, passed in December, 1861, and continued from year to year till 1866, inclusive. The two cases were the State vs. Carew, 13 Richardson Law Reports, p. 398, represented by Mr. Lord, of Charleston, and the case of Barry vs. Iseman, 14 Richardson Law Reports, p. 161, represented by A. C. Spain for plaintiff- appellant, and W. W. Harllee and W. W. Sellers for defend- ant-respondent, from Marion. The cases were argued together in the Court of Errors before all the Judges and Chancellors "assembled in the same room," at May Term, 1866, in Colum- bia, S. C. As to the case of the State vs. Carew, opinion by the 6
72
A HISTORY OF MARION COUNTY.
venerable Chancellor Duncan, then Chief Justice, the stay law was held to be unconstitutional. Judge A. P. Aldrich dissent- ing. As to the case of Barry vs. Iseman, from Marion, opinion by Judge Monroe, the stay law was held to be constitutional. No dissent. The essential difference between the two cases was this : in the case of the State vs. Carew, the contract was made before the passage of the stay law, hence its passage was held to be an impairment of the obligation of the contract. In the case of Barry vs. Iseman, the contract was made after the passage of the stay law, and hence its passage was held not to be an impairment of the obligation of the contract, and, there- fore, constitutional. The contract was made in reference to existing law. (Constitution of the United States, article I., section 10; Constitution of the State, 1790, article IX., section 2.)
The Circuit Courts, both of law and equity, continued about the same, as provided by the Act of 1836, supra, until the war. In 1859, a separate Court of Appeals, consisting of three Judges, was again established for the hearing and decision of all cases of appeal, either at law or equity. The Court of Errors remained as before. The Judges of the Court of Ap- peals, as organized in 1859, were John Belton O'Neall, Chief Justice, Job Johnston and F. Wardlaw, Associate Justices. F. Wardlaw died in 1860 or 1861. Chief Justice O'Neall and Job Johnston died during the war, upon which Chancellor B. F. Dunkin was elected Chief Justice, and D. L. Wardlaw and John A. Inglis were elected as Associate Justices, which posi- tions they held with distinguished ability, until the upheavals of reconstruction put them out. It can be truthfully said that the judiciary of South Carolina from the earliest times as a State, have been filled, both Circuit and Appeal Courts, by men of high character, distinguished alike for integrity, dignity, learning and ability. Many of them would have done credit to any country, in any age of the world. Their names stand prominent on the rolls of fame. Such a galaxy of eminent names is scarcely to be seen anywhere. Where all are so emi- nent, it would seem to be invidious to mention any. Without disparaging others, the writer cannot forbear to mention some. From the Revolution down to the war of the States, John
73
A HISTORY OF MARION COUNTY.
Rutledge, Henry Wm. DeSaussure, Hugh Rutledge, Thomas Waties, Joseph Brevard, Samuel Wilds, Jr., Abraham Nott, Charles Jones Colcock, Langdon Cheves, William Harper, David Johnson, John S. Richardson, John Belton O'Neall, Jo- seph J. Evans, Job Johnston, B. F. Dunkin, D. L. Wardlaw, Frank Wardlaw, John A. Inglis and George W. Dargan. To this list of eminent jurists others might be added. Of such an array of legal talent as this, any people might justly be proud. Most of these Judges performed circuit as well as appeal duty. Their names are imperishable. It may be said that the judicial system of the State was perfected with and by the Act of 1836. Some slight amendments were made to it in after times, and up to "reconstruction." That unparalleled event affected great and radical changes in the judiciary system of the State. It abolished the Court of Equity as a separate Court, and with it the venerable name of Chancellor. It transferred all its powers, jurisdiction and duties to the Court of Common Pleas. The same Judge administers both law and equity-the former with a jury, the latter without a jury-the conscience of the Judge being in place of a jury. A Court of General Sessions, which has jurisdiction of all criminal matters, is also estab- lished, and is administered by the same Judge. Hence, we now have a three-sided Court; one side is called the law side, another side is called the equity side, and another side is called the criminal side. Thus centering in one man's hand jurisdic- tion of every possible right or wrong to be redressed, cogniz- able among a highly civilized people. Whether for the better or not, such is the now judicial administration of law in our State, and such it has been for more than thirty years-so since the making of the Constitution of 1868. That Constitution was made and adopted for the government of the people by a class of men who did not understand the situation or the wants of the people of the State. Those who were well qualified by education and a knowledge of the needs of the people, were shut out of the Convention of 1868, called to make an organic law for the State. It was made by a few foreigners called "carpet-baggers," a few white men, natives of the State, rene- gades, called "scalawags," and a horde of ignorant negroes- whom the carpet-baggers voted like so many cattle. It was
74
A HISTORY OF MARION COUNTY.
made really only by fifteen or twenty men, who had no sym- pathy with or for the heretofore ruling element of the State. It was made rather to humiliate and punish the better class of the people than for their future benefit. Its purpose was to perpetuate the power of themselves, to aggrandise and enrich the "carpet-bag" and "scalawag" few, out of the hard earnings of the former rulers, the former owners of the property of the people. In other words, it was to put the "bottom rail on top" and keep it there. The Constitution-makers of 1868 did make some improvement upon the Constitution of 1790 in the aboli- tion of the parish system of representation in the State Legislature, in emancipating married women as to their owner- ship of property and their right to control it independent of their husbands.
Marion County has been an essential factor in all this. Whatever affected the State for good or evil affected her. She has borne her troubles and misfortunes with marked equa- nimity-she has subordinated herself to the powers that be, and has ever been in favor of law and order. Her people are a law-abiding people-lynch law finds no place among us. Her citizenship, as a whole, are composed of honest, industrious men, who live by honest means, who are enterprising, each in his vocation trying to live and let others live. She is fast coming to the front among her sister counties in the race for distinction and preferment-a model county. If she pro- gresses through the twentieth century, as she has during the nineteenth century now closing, she will have attained a promi- nence in everything that makes a people great, prosperous and happy. Her resources are unbounded and not yet half devel- oped. These, used as they may and will be, by her people for another century, will make her a star of first magnitude among the many stars of the commonwealth, and her citizens, when they travel, will be proud to say, "I am from Marion County, S. C." The officials of the county, Senators and Representa- tives in the State Legislature, her Clerks of Court, her Sheriffs, her Ordinaries and Probate Judges, her Commissioners and Masters in Equity, will be hereinafter given, and, perhaps, the names of other county officials, since days of "reconstruction."
75
A HISTORY OF MARION COUNTY.
Political History.
Prior to the Revolutionary War, the territory now embraced in the County of Marion, including that portion of it on the west side of the Great Pee Dee, now embraced in the County of Florence, was unknown as a political or judicial division of the State, then a province of Great Britain. Bishop Gregg, in his History of the Old Cheraws (a tribe of Indians), does not mention Marion County or District as of early formation. Wherever he speaks of it, he speaks of it as what it was at the time of his writing ; for instance, as what is "now called Marion District." That eminent writer's purpose was mainly to write a history of Chesterfield, Marlborough and Darlington, and what he says about Marion County is only incidental.
The English government, from the earliest settlement of the province of Carolina, had manifested a deep interest in the colony, and was anxious to strengthen it by emigration. Great inducements were held out to the poor of European nations to emigrate to Carolina in various ways-by offering bounties in lands and in other ways. Prior to 1730, there were few, if any, settlements in what is now Marion County. It appears by well authenticated tradition that there were a few settlements within its territory, concerning which notice will be taken hereinafter- wards. Bishop Gregg, in his history, on page 42, says : "From 1696 to 1730, although its population gradually increased, no large addition was made at any one time to the inhabitants of Carolina. About the latter year (1730), a new scheme was adopted to promote the settlement of the province, which proved successful beyond the most sanguine expectations of the government. Governor Johnson was instructed 'to mark out eleven townships, in square lots, on the sides of rivers, consisting each of twenty thousand acres, and to divide the land within them into shares of fifty acres, for each man, woman and child that should come over to occupy and improve them. Each township was to form a parish, and all the inhabi- tants were to have an equal right to the river. As soon as the parish should increase to the number of one hundred families, they were to have the right to send two members of their own election to the Assembly, and to enjoy the same privileges as
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.