USA > South Carolina > Williamsburg County > History of Williamsburg; something about the people of Williamsburg County, South Carolina, from the first settlement by Europeans about 1705 until 1923. > Part 20
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
"December 31, 1825, it has pleased Almighty God, the great head of the Church, to remove from us our vener- able fathers, Captain John James, Mr. James Daniel, and Mr. George Mccutchen, Sr. While the surviving members of the Session of Indiantown Church feel the heavy affliction and deeply deplore the loss of these very respectable, much esteemed, and good, useful Church officers, they must, at the same time, express their grati- tude to a Good and Gracious God for their long spared lives, for the services they were enabled to render by their exemplary and pious conduct, but, above all, for preparing them, as we trust, for glory and honor with Himself.
"Captain John James, after filling useful stations in State, as well as Church, with honor to himself, and having through life manifested great liberality of mind and generosity of conduct, was removed by death on October 12, 1825, in the sixty-ninth year of his age.
"Mr. James Daniel was removed from life and from his services among us as a Ruling Elder, September 12, 1826, aged seventy-eight. His life was a retired one, but useful in his sphere. Sound principles appear to have possessed his mind and under the influences of these, the tenor of his life was uniform, unpretending, conscien- tious, and faithful in all his duties.
Mr. George Mccutchen was called from this scene of earthly existence on the 26th day of November and in the seventy-third year of his age. Blessed by his God with a calm and discriminating mind, a paternal temper, and a satisfied and placid disposition, his life was to us, dignified, pious, and lovely.
"It having been made known to the Session and Church by the present Pastor that he intended to resign his pas- toral charge in this congregation in the ensuing April,
261
HISTORY OF WILLIAMSBURG
this having been signified almost twelve months ago, it was deemed expedient to take another Pastor. This business was referred to the Reverend R. W. James to correspond or communicate with certain gentlemen on this subject as preparatory to this business.
"It was determined in the Session that there should be a meeting of the Congregation, called for the purpose of electing five more Ruling Elders to our Session on Jan- uary 29, 1827.
"February 10, 1827, the Congregation met according to appointment and elected Benjamin Britton, James Mc- Faddin, Hugh Mccutchen, William McFaddin, and David D. Wilson as Ruling Elders in the Church. David D. Wilson only accepted the appointment and was ordained the 13th of November, 1827.
"Our Pastor, Reverend Robert Wilson James, previous to this, made known to the Congregation his intention of giving up the charge of this Church in May, 1827.
"November, Sam, a black man, belonging to William E. James, was restored to the privileges of the Church by making public acknowledgement and confessing repen- tance for the crime of fishing on the Sabbath Day.
"October 25, at a meeting of the Session, the following members were admitted to the Ordinance of the Lord's Supper, namely : Alexander McCrea, Jane J. McKnight, Agnes K. Singletary, Sarah A. B. Singletary, Elizabeth Pressley, Sarah Gotea, Mary M. McGill, Sarah A. James, William Pressley, Elizabeth M. Pressley, John J. Clark, Jane P. Clark, Samuel E. Graham, Martha M. Graham, Margaret E. McCrea, Jane E. McFaddin, Elizabeth M. Wilson, Sarah R. J. Snowden, and Jane Barr.
"October 28, Adam Smith was suspended for intemper- ance on the 14th of March and for want of candour in not stating his reason for not communing on a former oc- casion when present.
265
INDIANTOWN CHURCH, 1819-1830
"October 28, Samuel James was suspended for intem- perance on the 14th of March. The suspension of Samuel James was continued and the next Session unanimously decided that on some day, just previous to the next Sacrament in April, the Session would receive the said Samuel James in full communion in case of his amend- ment; or if, at that time, there be not satisfactory evi- dence given of reformation, the Session will proceed to ex- communiate the said Samuel James from the sealing or- dinances of the church. And further resolved by the Ses- sion, that a copy of these minutes be handed to Samuel James within the space of a few days, signed by the Moderator, and all the Session."
CHAPTER XXII.
THE NULLIFICATION MOVEMENT, 1832.
When the Treaty of Peace between the United States and Great Britain was signed in 1783, the United States were thirteen independent republics bound together by a "rope of sand." These thirteen independent states covering a vast territory were settled by peoples of widely differing European nations, of many classes, religions, occupations, and characteristics. The means of com- munication among these thirteen states were practically impossible. A journey over land from Boston to Savan- nah by the most rapid means of travel required many weeks and could be made only by strong and daring men inured to hardships and unaccustomed to fear.
In 1789, these thirteen independent American states united into one state and adopted the Federal Consti- tution. This union was effected after many years of fasting and praying by the righteous, of scheming and dreaming by politicians, and laboring and compromis- ing by statesmen. There were two well defined schools of political thought in almost every one of these thirteen states from the time of the actualization of their inde- pendence. One school believed that the success of this new thing in nations depended on a strong central govern- ment in which the thirteen states should play but minor parts. The other faction believed just as sincerely that the central government should be largely formal and possess but nominal authority and power. The economic interests of the northern section and the southern sec- tion of the territory of these United States were widely different. The North was better suited for manufactur- ing and commerce and the South for agriculture and stock raising.
267
THE NULLIFICATION MOVEMENT, 1832
This new government of the United States required money for supporting its many agencies or functions. A tax on imported goods was adopted in the beginning to raise the required revenue. This tax on imported goods actually subsidized manufacturing and commerce, but it placed a heavy burden on agriculture and stock raising. The tariff question was from the beginning, and has con- tinued until this day, the direct or the indirect cause of nearly all the conflicts which have befallen the American people. The sections were first divided on this matter and still divide on it as interests conflict in the ever changing economic conditions in the various parts of the nation.
If some statesmen of 1789 could have written into the Constitution of the United States an article that would have, without favoring any section, produced revenue sufficient to maintain the Federal Government in all of its activities forever, in all probability the "States' Rights" question would have been the subject of nothing more than fanciful, theoretical, senatorial orations, and the slavery matter of little more than long winded ser- mons by sharp nosed Puritans, "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."
South Carolina was the one state of all the thirteen most grievously burdened by the taxes, known as the tariff, levied and collected by the Federal Government. South Carolina was, is, and will be, a state dependent largely on agriculture and animal husbandry, and there is no portion of South Carolina more entirely devoted to agri- culture and stock raising than is Williamsburg.
About 1830, the tariff then in force was especially burdensome to South Carolina; and in 1832 a State Con- vention was held in Columbia and declared the tariffs of 1828 and 1832 null and void, and that if the United States Government attempted to enforce them, South Carolina would set up a government of its own. The great leaders
268
HISTORY OF WILLIAMSBURG
of the Nullification in South Carolina were Calhoun, Hayne, McDuffie, and Hamilton; the Unionist leaders were Legare, Grimke, Pettigru, and Elliott. Practic- ally everybody in South Carolina opposed any tariff ex- cept for revenue. The division between the Nullifiers and the Unionists in South Carolina lay in the means to be used for opposing the ever increasing tariff. The Nulli- fiers claimed that the Constitution was a compact be- tween the states as equals, that this Constitution had granted certain powers to the general government and reserved all others to the states; and that when the Federal Government should exceed its granted powers, any state had the right to veto such action. The Union party held that the Constitution was for the government of the American people as a whole, and that no state had the right to nullify any act of the National Government.
In Williamsburg District, the lines between the Nulli- fiers and the Unionists were clearly drawn. In Kings- tree, Dr. James Bradley was Unionist leader; allied with him were the Scotts, Fultons, and Witherspoons. Dr. Thomas D. Singleton was the leading Nullifier and with him were the Gourdins, Nelsons, and Salters'. On the Santee, Dr. William Buford and Major Morgan Sabb were Unionists, while the Campbells, Gourdins, Keels, and Mc- Donalds were Nullifiers. Anderson Township, under the leadership of Matthew L. Martin, was almost unanimously Union; on Black Mingo, the Doziers and Captain Jack Graham were Unionists, and the Nesmiths and Brockin- tons were Nullifiers; the Johnsonville section was com- posed largely of Unionists under the leadership of the Johnsons, Haseldens, and Coxs; the Lake section, in its northern and middle portions, under the leadership of A. F. Graham, Samuel E. Graham, the Cockfields, Mc- Callisters, Matthews', and Rodgers, was largely for Nulli- fication, while its lower and eastern portions, under the leadership of James Graham, the Singletarys, and
269
THE NULLIFICATION MOVEMENT, 1832
Browns, largely espoused the Union cause. Indiantown was almost as a unit favorable to the Union cause. Many of the old families of the district were seriously divided on this question, as were the Grahams, Mouzons, McClarys, and Hannas.
The feeling between these two factions in Williams- burg grew intense. The Nullifiers denounced the Union- ists as submissionists or cowards, and the Unionists re- torted that the Nullifiers were "all smoke and no fire." The Nullifiers adopted as a badge a cockade made of white and blue ribbons representing a palmetto tree and wore these badges on the side of their hats. Great public dinners were given by each party in the several sections of the district. Sometimes, both parties held their feasts on the same day and at the some place. At these dinners, fiery orators addressed the multitudes and frequently feeling ran so high that rioting was begun.
Many were the fisticuff fights occurring between parti- sans at this time. Tradition tells of some of these. Among them, that between W. G. Gamble, Nullifier, and Colonel William Cooper, Unionist, which occurred at Kingstree; one between Robert W. Fulton, of Kingstree, and John F. Graham, at the crossroads in the vicinity of Cades. Another between Sam Graham, Unionist, and C. W. Cades, Nullifier, at the same place. Among the orators who addressed the Union gatherings in Williamsburg, were Dr. James Bradley, Colonel David D. Wilson, and Honor- able Thomas R. Mitchell, while the most important Nulli- fier speakers were Dr. Thomas D. Singleton and Peter Gourdin.
As evidence of how nearly these two factions in Wil- liamsburg were equal, Dr. Thomas D. Singleton and Colo- nel David D. Wilson were candidates for the Senate from Williamsburg, and when the vote was tabulated it was found that each of them had received the same number. Members of the Legislature from Williamsburg elected
270
HISTORY OF WILLIAMSBURG
that year were Dr. T. D. Singleton, William Cooper, and Joseph Bradley, two Unionists and one Nullifier. The Nullifiers elected all three of their delegates to the Nulli- fication Convention which was held in November, 1832. The delegates from Williamsburg to this Convention were Peter Gourdin, Dr. T. D. Singleton, and William Waites.
CHAPTER XXIII.
PURITANISM, CALVINISM, AND ARMINIANISM.
Williamsburg was wealthy in 1830. This was the first time within two hundred years these Scotch-Irish had not been enthralled by a superior force, when they were free and able to act. Calvinism had been thrust upon them in the most strategic period in their history, when they were torn and bleeding and bereft of all worldly goods, and it must have seemed that God had forgotten them. John Knox then came and preached Calvinism to them, de- claring unto them that they were God's own elect, "pre- destinated and foreordained" as His own elect. How easy was it then for the Church of Scotland to embrace Calvinism!
Economic independence is indispensable for religious progress. Circuit riders, following Bishop Asbury, had been preaching the doctrine according to St. James and the Dutch theologian, James Arminius, but until about this time few men had reached the financial condition where they felt able to fight for a faith. Besides, these Scotch-Irish had a most comforting religion in Calivnism. Did not the whole weight of responsibility for their salva- tion rest on God? Had not God "elected" them from the foundation of the world? Nobody but a fool would be- lieve that a man had to work out his own salvation when it was so plain and simple that "This effectual call is of God's free and special grace alone, not from any- thing at all foreseen in man, nor from any power or agency in the creature, coworking with His special Grace, the Creature being wholly passive therein."
The Baptists, until about 1830, had been dominated by Calvinism. They had made no inroads on the Pres- byterians in Williamsburg. The preaching of baptism by immersion only had not been sufficient to disturb these
272
HISTORY OF WILLIAMSBURG
Presbyterian Congregations. The Church of England in South Carolina had not been vitally interested in bring- ing these "poor Protestants" into communion with them in 1730, nor had its successor, the Protestant Episcopal Church, seemed to care much about these "back country" people in 1830.
In 1830, the Presbyterian Church in Williamburg be- lieved this district its very own. Ever since the War of the Revolution, it had been rightly confident that the Protestant Episcopal Church would not disturb the realm. It knew that the Baptist Church would not seriously interfere with its undisputed sway so long as it offered only immersion as an inducement. But the continual coming of the Methodist circuit riders began to weary the Presbyterian leaders. Not that these circuit riders had made many converts to their faith, especially from among the "elect," but their continual coming and fer- vent preaching disturbed them. About this time, too, many Baptist preachers were losing faith in Calvinism and proclaiming "Whatsoever a man soweth that shall he also reap."
The old breach in the Presbyterian Congregation at Williamsburg had just been healed, a new church erected, and the Indiantown Church seemed approaching the full meridian of its glory and power. These two Presbyte- rian Churches were the only religious organizations in the district that were, to all appearances, worthy of more than a name. But the Presbyterians decided it would be wise to begin preaching Calvinism in all its intensity. Then at least ninety-five per centum of the church mem- bership of the district was Presbyterian.
The Reverend John M. Ervin, who came from North Carolina as pastor of the Williamsburg and the Indian- town Churches in 1828, was the second Puritan Presby- terian preacher who came into Williamsburg, and who undertook to impress ideas of religion that had not grown
PURITANISM, CALVINISM, ARMINIANISM 273
out of the people of the community. Mr. Ervin, when he came, was in the prime vigor of manhood, tall and slender, and sharp faced, "with a long grey beard and a glitter- ing eye." He found in the reunited church at Williams- burg that "conquered Greece had captured Rome," for that the seceders of the Bethel Congregation with their Puritan tendencies, somewhat influenced by Arminianism, had become the dominant element in the ancient Williams. burg Church. In his Indiantown Congregation, his board of elders were men of strongly pronounced Puritan tendencies. Nearly everybody in both of these congre- gations believed that the Presbyterian Church should com- pletely dominate temporal as well as spiritual affairs.
Mr. Ervin found that there was in this section much not in consonance with his notions of religious conduct. Especially at Indiantown did he find many of his con- gregation given to enjoying such wordly amusements as dancing and horse racing. With the unreserved support of his Session of Elders in that Church, he preached power- ful sermons against these practices. On the 8th of Jan- uary, 1830, he and his Session of Elders published the following statement: "At a meeting of the Session of Indiantown Church, it was resolved to address the follow- ing to the communing members of this Society : Whereas, your Session has reason to believe that some of the members in full communion in this Church give encour- agement to and take active part in balls or dancing frolics; and, Whereas the encouragement thus given to this amusement is a great grievance to some, perhaps to a majority of this Society, and if we mistake not, a stumbling block to others; and, Whereas, the General Assembly of our Church has expressly disapproved of this amusement as inexpedient among professors in our Church; the Session, after deliberately viewing these things in connection with its responsibilities as officers of this Church, does hereby declare to you its approval of
274
HISTORY OF WILLIAMSBURG
the decision of this judicatory of the Church and that it will henceforth feel itself bound to view all professors of religion in this Church who encourage or take an ac- tive part in dancing as offenders against this Church and prosperity. Finally, brethren, we affectionately ex- hort you to abstain from all appearance of evil. Directed to be read by the Moderator next Sabbath." Signed, John M. Ervin, George Barr, George Mccutchen, David D. Wilson, and Samuel J. Wilson.
At the next meeting of the Session, the Reverend Mr. Ervin was directed to admonish privately all those persons whose names may have come to his knowledge as having violated the resolution on the subject of dancing. At this meeting, no satisfactory evidence of the reformation of Samuel James having been produced, the Session excom- municated him, and the clerk was instructed to notify him of its action.
These actions on the part of this Session of Elders did not terrify some of the communing members of this Church and they continued enjoying themselves as if these edicts had not been promulgated. Finally, the Session of Elders appointed a committee of two, Reverend John M. Ervin and Elder D. D. Wilson, to "converse in a pri- vate manner" with Samuel McGill and to endeavor to bring him to repentance for his dancing and permitting dancing parties to be held in his home. This committee visited Mr. McGill, who "assumed principles and used expressions," a summary of which the committee made known to the Session previous to administration of the Lord's Supper on the next occasion. After hearing this committee report, he was warned by the Session not to come to the Lord's Table for communion.
After this, the Session cited Mr. McGill to appear before it to answer the following questions. "1. Do you ac- knowledge subjection to the government and discipline of the Presbyterian Church? 2. Do you acknowledge the
PURITANISM, CALVINISM, ARMINIANISM 275
permanent authority of the pastoral letters of the Gen- eral Assembly of 1818 as far as it respects dancing? 3. Do you acknowledge that when an officer of the Church is properly authorized to converse with an offending member and the offense is confessed as a fact, that, in such a case, it is the immediate duty of the officers to endeavor to bring the offender to repentance and amend- ment by all proper means?"
May 30, 1830. "The Session at Indiantown met at twelve o'clock and continued in session until six o'clock in the afternoon, awaiting the result of Mr. Samuel Mc- Gill's deliberations on the admonitory letter addressed to him on the 16th instant, and also his decision on the pro- positions submitted to him on the 25th, and Mr. McGill did not appear nor was any communication received from him. After mature deliberation, the Session unanimously resolved to prefer the following charges against him:
"1. Samuel McGill is charged with obstinacy by avow- ing and adhering to the following as a principle in dis- cipline, viz., 'that all we do is sin,' in direct opposition to the plain import of discipline read audibly in his pres- ence. This obstinacy occurred on the 11th instant at his own house, and was persevered in during the stay of the committee, without any apparent charge of sentiment, in the presence of three members of his own family, the pastor of the Church, and D. D. Wilson, ruling elder, the two last being present on official duty with reference to a case of discipline with a member of his own family.
"2. Samuel McGill is charged with disrespect to the authorized expressions of the General Assembly of 1818, as contained in the pastoral letter on the subject of dancing. This disrespect was manifested in the day, at the place, and in the presence of all the persons above mentioned, and after it had been distinctly and audibly announced to him that these expressions were matters of permanent authority in the Presbyterian Church.
276
HISTORY OF WILLIAMSBURG
"3. Mr. Samuel McGill is charged with slandering an individual of this Session by plainly intimating that the Elder had used improper means to force an offending member of this Church to make promises of an amend- ment; and afterwards, as he asserted, the member did the same thing again, and then said Samuel McGill laid the criminality of the breach of promise on said member of Session. This slander was uttered on the day, at the place, and in the presence of all the persons mentioned in the first charge.
"The Reverened J. M. Ervin and D. D. Wilson are cited as witnesses to substantiate the above charges.
"Mr. Samuel McGill, you are hereby cited to appear before this Session on Thursday, the 9th day of June next, to answer the above charges."
Thus, the issue was clearly drawn. The moving spirit in the effort to eliminate dancing as an amusement and a recreation in Indiantown was the Reverend John M. Ervin, a minister who had lately come into the com- ยท munity and who had been trained under Puritanic con- ditions. He was a man of considerable force and ability and of a higher degree of learning than the average Pres- byterian minister of his generation. He was supported and sustained by his Session of Elders, three out of four of whom were direct lineal descendants of the great John Knox, of whom it was said, "He never feared the face of any man." Colonel Wilson, of this board of el- ders, was one of the most uncompromising, influential, and vigorous men of his day in eastern South Carolina. He was colonel of the Pee Dee Regiment of militia and State Senator, and held other places of distinction and power. The other three members of this Session of El- ders were wealthy, influential, educated, and uncompro- mising in their views. From the beginning, it was gener- ally understood that this was a fight to the finish.
PURITANISM, CALVINISM, ARMINIANISM 277
The trial of Samuel McGill before this Session of El- ders continued for nearly four years, during which time it was brought to the official notice of the Presbyterian organizations of highest rank in this country and at- tracted exceeding interest in the State of South Carolina.
This trial was conducted in strict compliance with canonical procedure, customs, and law, and the testimony recorded in full in the old Indiantown Sessional Record book. This trial and the records that were made of it indicate unmistakably the forensic abilities of the contend- ing parties. Some of the questions asked Samuel Mc- Gill and his replies thereto show that it was a case of Greek meeting Greek, and some of them, when placed within their intensely serious and penetrating religious atmosphere, are now very amusing. For instance, ques- tion 9 in the direct examination of the prosecuting wit- ness, the Reverend John M. Ervin, "Did you recommend any religious exercise in preference to dancing as an amusement?" Answer, "I did, I recommended the sing- ing of hymns." Mrs. McGill was offered as a witness to the matters and things occurring at the time Mr. Mc- Gill was first rebuked at his home by this Session for dancing. Question 8 asked her was as follows: "Did this conversation exasperate Mr. McGill and determine him to take higher grounds in favor of the practice, or did it shake his confidence and cause him to yield the justification of the amusement?" Mrs. McGill's answer was "He remained much the same."
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.