USA > South Carolina > The history of South Carolina under the proprietary government, 1670-1719, V.1 > Part 18
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29
1 Oldmixon, who was a tutor in Benjamin Blake's family, and had, therefore, excellent means of information, gives the names of the com- mittee as stated in the text. He states that this committee " drew up a new form of government differing in many articles from the former to which they gave the title of standing lunes; and temporary lars .. . But neither Lords Proprietors nor the people of Carolina accepted of them. " The address to Sothell, which contains so admirable a summary of the history of the colony to its date, gives the account in the text. i.f. that the work was abandoned amidst angry discussion. Rivers has fol- lowed this account, and we have preferred to do so likewise.
227
UNDER THE PROPRIETARY GOVERNMENT
and justice, to assent and approve any law as required by the direction of the Royal charter, but the Governor and deputies refusing to allow any to be acted upon until first passed by the Grand Council, nothing was done. Finally, in December. 1689, the Proprietors instructed Colleton to call no more parliaments without orders from them, " un- less some very extraordinary occasion should require it." As the acts usually ran but for twenty-three months only, the consequence of these instructions was that in 1690 not one statute law was in force in the colony.1
The issue was now fairly made between the people, on the one hand. contending for constitutional government under the charter and the Proprietors, on the other, claim- ing to govern by arbitrary instructions uncontrolled even by the terms of the " unalterable " Fundamental Constitu- tions which they had sent out with the colony under Sayle. In the meanwhile there was no law in the prov- ince, and Colleton proceeded to govern by his own will. He attempted vigorously to exact payment of quit-rent for every acre whether under cultivation or not; he forbade all inland trade with Indians, in his avarice, as it was charged. to monopolize the benefit for himself; and he imprisoned and fined a clergyman £100 for preaching what he considered a seditious sermon.2 To enable him to main- tain his authority. he requested the Proprietors to appoint only such deputies as he knew would support his govern- ment. This led to an outbreak. Letters from England, containing deputations of the Proprietors obnoxious to the people, were seized and suppressed. The people impris- oned Paul Grimball. the Secretary of the province, and took possession of all the public records. The little com- munity was in a state of rebellion, and every man acted as he
I Hist. Sketches of So. Ca. (Rivers), 152, 153; Appendix, 122, 423. 2 Ibul., 150.
-------
228
HISTORY OF SOUTH CAROLINA
thought proper, without regard to legal authority and in con- tempt of the Governor and other officers of the Proprietors.
In this emergency a number of the colonists were in- duced to sign a petition for the establishment of martial law. and without consulting the Commons, though his instruc- tions from the Proprietors provided for his summoning them if an extraordinary occasion should require it. acting only on the advice of the deputies of the Pro- prietors, martial law was declared by Colleton at the head of the militia, who, ignorant of his purpose, had assembled under his call made upon pretence that some danger threatened the country. The members of the Assembly thereupon met without summons, and resolved that this proceeding of the Governor was an encroachment upon their liberties and an unwarrantable exercise of power at a time when the colony was in no danger from a foreign enemy. The Governor, however. persisted and attempted to put his martial law into execution. but the disaf- fection was too great to allow him to do so. Even the signers of the petition deserted him and declaring that they had been deceived, now joined in the cry against such an "illegal tyrannical and oppressive way of government." In the face of this Colleton quailed and shrank from the exercise of the power he had assumed. The courts were allowed to sit. and he attempted to exonerate him- self on the ground that the delegates had refused to pass the militia act. and he feared an invasion by the Spaniards. The latter excuse was known to be unfounded; and to the former thirteen delegates replied, under oath, that they had proposed to pass the act. Indeed, as the people themselves constituted the only military force in the colony, this attempt to proclaim martial law was a great blunder as well as a political crime.1
1 Hist. Sketches of So. Ca. (Rivers), 154, 155 ; Appendix, 424, 425.
229
UNDER THE PROPRIETARY GOVERNMENT
The colony was verging upon anarchy when the arrival of one Seth Sothell who, as a Proprietor. claimed the government, put a new phase upon the commotions and overthrew Colleton's government, setting up one in its stead. which, in its turn, was repudiated by the Proprietors.
The course of events in England, in the meanwhile, had been rapidly tending to the great revolution of 1688, which drove James II from the throne; and on the 1st of March, 1688-89, the Proprietors forwarded to Carolina the order of council to proclaim King William and Queen Mary, and annexed the oath to be taken.1 Nor were the other American colonies much freer from commotion than Carolina. The tyranny of Andros was producing throughout New England a powerful popular reaction in favor of their charter governments. The failure of Lord Baltimore's deputies to proclaim William and Mary gave an opportunity to the disaffected Protestants to incite a revolt which resulted in the overthrow of his Lordship's charter, and the establishment of a Royal government. Pennsylvania was torn by various internal disputes, chiefly the religious schism caused by George Keith. the Quaker, and Penn was also soon to be deprived of his governorship. Delaware, Virginia, New York, and New Jersey, as well as New England, were now governed under the King's commission. Yet the Proprietors of Carolina continued an uninterrupted control over their vast prov- ince, because, enjoying "the hereditary right of com- plaining in person of their wrongs, they could interest a powerful body in their favor." 2
Sothell was a man of remarkable, if not of good, char- acter and of great ability. He had been sent in 1680
! Coll. Hist. Soc. of So. Ca .. voi, 1, 122.
2 Hist. Sketches of So. Ca., 149, 130, Rivers quoting Recolt Am. Col., 26-4.
230
HISTORY OF SOUTH CAROLINA
to regulate the distracted affairs in the colony at Albe- marle. and on his voyage out had been captured by Alge- rine pirates, three years thus elapsing before his arrival in America. He bore with him the certificate of his authority dated at Whitehall. September, 1681, which is important as declaring the views of the Proprietors to his right of government under the Fundamental Constitutions. It reads thus : ---
" Whereas Seth Sothell hath bought the Earl of Clarendon's share in Carolina and is thereby become one of the true and absolute Lords Proprietors of the Province of Carolina and whereas by virtue of the Fundamental Constitutions it is provided that the eldest proprietor that shall be in Carolina shall be governor you are to obey him as such if there be no elder proprietor than himself."
Instead of settling matters at Albemarle, his administra- tion there was so marked by selfishness and rapacity that the people rose, deposed and banished him.1 He sought refuge in South Carolina, and arrived here just in time to take part in the disturbed condition of affairs in this colony. His right to the government under the Constitu- tions. which the Proprietors were upholding, was clear by their terms, and for this he also held the certificate of the Proprietors themselves. He was received with insult by the Governor's party. but welcomed by the people as a refuge from Colleton's tyranny. Andrew Percival, who had been Governor of the attempted colony on the Edisto. Muschamp, the King's revenue officer, Berresford, who had been clerk of the peace, Ralph Izard, and John Harris with five hundred of the best people petitioned him to issue writs for a Parliament.2 This he did, as he had the
1 All the wrongs and oppressions with which Hewatt charges him as having been committed in South Carolina, were really those for which he was driven out of the colony at Albemarle. Hewatt's Hist. of So. Ca., vol. I.
2 Hist. Sketches of So. Ca. (Rivers), 155.
231
UNDER THE PROPRIETARY GOVERNMENT
right to do. if the Constitutions were of any force ; but he followed this step up with another measure which was clearly illegal. He removed the deputies of the other Proprietors who were opposed to him and appointed Mus- champ, Berresford, and Harris in their places.1 The colony at Albemarle had banished him. His Parliament at Charles Town now banished Colleton. Himself a refugee
from Albemarle, he becomes the expeller of others from Charles Town. Lieutenant Colonel Bull, Major Colleton, and Paul Grimball were disqualified for holding any civil or military office because they had acted with Colleton, and Thomas Smith because he had written the petition for the establishment of martial law.
The adherents of Colleton did not yield without a struggle. They could not, as supporters of the Constitu- tions, deny Sothell's right to supersede Colleton. - that was too plain by the letter of that instrument, which the Proprietors had been so insistent upon enforcing, -- and Sothell had, moreover, their own written word for his right to do so. But they demanded that before assuming office he should declare his approval of the Proprietors' instruc- tions as a rule of government. Placards were posted in public places charging him with treason and calling upon the people to withhold their obedience to his authority.
The Lords Proprietors, with their usual vacillation and faithlessness, abandoned Colleton. Before hearing of Sothell's assumption of the government, they had, on the 6th of October. 1690, appointed Thomas Smith Goy- ernor. But in May they had heard that Sothell was at Charles Town and had taken upon himself the administra- tion, and they write that they are well pleased that he will submit to their instructions for the government. They hope he is too wise a man to claim any power but by virtue of
1 Coll. Hist. Soc. of So. Co., vol. I, 127.
232
HISTORY OF SOUTH CAROLINA
them ; for, they go on to observe, in direct contradiction to their own declaration held by Sothell, that no single Pro- prietor by virtue of his patent had any right to the gov- ernment or to exercise any jurisdiction unless especially empowered by the rest.
Hewatt and other writers have spoken of Sothell as an usurper,1 but such he certainly was not under the Funda- mental Constitutions, which the Proprietors persisted in maintaining to be of force. By these it was expressly pro- vided that "the eldest of the Lords Proprietors who shall be personally in Carolina shall of course be the Palatine deputy," and if no Proprietor be in Carolina, nor heir apparent of any. then " the eldest man of the Landgraves." 2 Under this clause, as we have seen in the last chapter, the Proprietors. in 1684. objected to the selection by the Coun- cil of Colonel Quarry as Governor upon the death of Kyrle, because the government belonged of right to Morton as the eldest Landgrave in the province at the time, there being then no Proprietor present. So again we shall see them excusing themselves, in 1699, for not having obtained the approval of the Royal Government to Blake's appointment as Governor upon the ground that Blake did not exercise the office by virtue of appointment, but by virtue of his proprietorship. And Sothell now held their certificate or warrants that he was to be recognized and obeyed, because, by the Fundamental Constitutions, "it is provided that the eldest proprietor that shall be in Carolina shall be governor." The colonists might have objected to this com- mission, as they did not recognize the Fundamental Con- stitutions : but if they waived that point and accepted him under the letter or certificate which he held from their Lordships without regard to the reason assigned, it cer- tainly did not lay with the Proprietors to object. The
1 Hewatt's Hist., vol. 1, 103. 2 Statutes of No. Co. vol. 1, 50.
233
UNDER THE PROPRIETARY GOVERNMENT
point the Proprietors made was that no Proprietor could act as Governor without the assent of the others, but it was not so written, and until the Constitutions were for- mally altered they remained the law. at least for them. The affair presents still another instance of the instability and insincerity of all parties. Here we have the Proprietors denying the provisions of their favorite laws, and the people, who had so long been resisting. now for their immediate purpose standing upon them, because for the time they served their interest.
The Proprietors were wise enough, however, for the present not to make the issue, but summoned Sothell to return to England and answer to all the charges against him from both colonies. Sothell did not obey the sum- mons, but continued to act as Governor for eighteen months longer. Finally, in November, 1692, the Proprietors in England wrote to him that he should cease to rule and commanded him to yield obedience to Colonel Philip Ludwell, whom they had commissioned to succeed him. For reasons of his own. he having now offended the people who had sustained him, he yielded to the demand and left the colony.
Whatever may have been Sothell's private character, however avaricious and disreputable, however tyrannical and oppressive his conduct for personal gain, yet the wis- dom and liberality of the laws he enacted, the legislative activity displayed in restoring stability to the colony, and his judicious conduct in promoting the just wishes of the people, throw a doubt, observes Rivers, as to the malignant character that had been aseribed to him as a public officer. He it was who had the wisdom to see the usefulness and noble character of the French and Swiss, who were now coming into the province in considerable numbers and fill- ing up waste places in Craven County on the Cooper and
234
HISTORY OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Santee. which were soon to blossom as the rose under their skilful and laborious cultivation; and the first to constitute them citizens as free born in the colony, and of equal rights with the other settlers.
So, too, under his administration, the first act for the government of negro slaves was passed. This act fol- lowed generally the Barbadian slave code; but, in more than one respect. it was an improvement upon that law, especially in providing for the punishment of any one kill- ing a slave. It provided. also, for the slaves' comfort, and required that they should have convenient clothes.1
Sothell yielded to Ludwell, and returned to his estate in North Carolina, where he died in 1694; and it is said that much of the wealth he had accumulated there was recovered by those from whom he had unjustly taken it.
1 Statutes of So. Ca., vol. VII, 343.
CHAPTER XI
1692-94
COLONEL PHILIP LUDWELL had been secretary to Sir William Berkeley, Governor of Virginia, and had taken an active part with him in the suppression of Bacon's Rebellion. He had been the hero of Bland's capture ; and, after Sir William's death, had married Dame Frances, the widow of that fiery cavalier.1 In 1689 he had been appointed Governor of all that part of the province of Carolina that lies north and east of Cape Fear, to super- sede Sothell at Albemarle.2 Although the titles of North and South Carolina now began to be used in some official papers, there was no such division of the province at this time ; on the contrary, the Proprietors were now attempt- ing a plan of consolidating the two colonies into one gov- ernment for the whole province.3 On the 2d of November,
1 Ludwell was the third husband of Dame Frances. This lady had the singular fortune of being the wife of three Governors in succession. Her first husband was Governor Samuel Stephens of Albemarle ; her second, Sir William Berkeley, Governor of Virginia ; her third, Colonel Philip Lud- well, now Governor of Carolina. Hawkes's Hist. of Vo. Ca., vol. II, 447.
2 Colonial Records of No. Ca., vol. I, 362.
3 Commissions of Governors of North Carolina usually ran as stated in the text ; those of South Carolina ran, "of that part of the province which lies south and west of Cape Fear." So the enacting words of statutes of sonth Carolina usually were in the names of the Palatine and the rest of the Lords Proprietors " by and with the advice and consent of the rest of the members of the General Assembly now met at Charles Town for the South West part of this province." This was the usual form after 1600, but sometimes the word " province " only was used.
235
236
HISTORY OF SOUTH CAROLINA
1691, Ludwell's commission was changed from that of Governor of the territory to the north and east of Cape Fear, to that of Governor of Carolina, and he was directed to issue writs for the choice of twenty delegates for the freemen of Carolina, -five for Albemarle County, five for Colleton County, five for Berkeley County; and five for Craven County, - to meet in such place and at such time as any three or more of the deputies should appoint. The bounds of these counties were defined as follows : 1 Albe- marle County was restricted to the small but well-settled district between the Roanoke River and Virginia ; Craven County occupied all the great extent of territory from the Roanoke to Sewee Bay; Berkeley, that between Sewee Bay and the Edisto, and Colleton County between the Stono and Combahee. By additional instructions, how- ever. Governor Ludwell was directed that if he found it impracticable to have the inhabitants of Albemarle send delegates to the General Assembly held in South Carolina, he was then to issue writs for seven delegates to be chosen for Berkeley, seven for Colleton, and six for that part of Craven County that lay south and west of Cape Fear; and he was empowered to appoint a Deputy Governor for North Carolina.2 With these instructions, original and additional, there were sent also another set of private instructions with minute directions to inquire into the mismanagement of former Governors and the grounds of popular complaint. He was to inquire into the charges made by Percival, Quarry, Izard, Muschamp, Harris, and Berresford against Governor Colleton ; to make inquiry as to the alleged killing of several Indians, and, if proved, to have the guilty persons indicted and punished ; to in- quire by what authority Berresford had acted as deputy, and whether Sothell had refused to allow deputies of the
1 Colonial Records of No. Ca., vol. I, 373. 2 Ibid.
237
UNDER THE PROPRIETARY GOVERNMENT
Proprietors to act; by what authority Robert Quarry sat as judge or sheriff of Berkeley County; and to restore Bernard Shinkingh as chief judge of same.1 If he found the numbers of offenders in the late disorders to be so many that it might be inconvenient to punish them all, he was then to grant pardon to all except such as had been guilty of high treason and murder. He was to pro- ceed, however, against some few of the most notorious and obstinate offenders, against whom the proof of crimes was plainest. He was to encourage people to reside at Savannah town,2 or any other place among the Indians ; to suffer all people to trade with the Indians. He was to make strict inquiry if Mr. Sothell had granted any commission to pirates for reward or otherwise; and was informed that " Jonathan Emery " knew about such trans- actions, and had received twenty guineas for procuring a commission from Sothell. The Proprietors informed Lud- well they had given power to their trustees to sell certain lands to such persons as should first have paid the pur- chase money in pieces of eight, after the rate of five shillings the piece of eight, etc.3
But Ludwell, notwithstanding the friendship of the Proprietors and his desire to harmonize the distracted state of the colony, entered upon his administration with no increase of power or promises of reform. "Employ no Jacobite," the Proprietors wrote on the 12th of April. 1693; " beware of the Goose Creek men : reconcile yourself to our deputies : don't expect to carry on the government with all parties; convince the people that the grand
1 To what this instruction alludes we have not been able further to ascertain.
2 Afterwards the site of Fort Moore on the Savannah, near where Augusta now is. Not the site of the present city of Savannah.
3 Colonial Records of No. Ca., vol. I, 881-984.
238
HISTORY OF SOUTH CAROLINA
council has power by the constitutions to pass upon all bills before they can be submitted to parliament."1
Notwithstanding the political turmoil which had con- tinued without cessation in the colony from its commence- ment, its population was steadily, if not rapidly, increas- ing. The Huguenot immigration in Craven County and other settlers in Colleton were peopling those counties to a considerable extent; still Berkeley was by far the most thickly settled, and the inhabitants took further offence at this new and, as they regarded it, still more unjust dis- proportion of representation in the Assembly now called by Governor Ludwell under his instructions.
Colleton County with its new and smaller population had, under Governor Morton in 1683, been given equal representation with Berkeley, and now Craven with still fewer inhabitants. and those not even Englishmen, was given nearly the same. This created a new ferment. "Shall the Frenchmen," said the English colonists, " who cannot speak our language make our laws?" The flame of national animosity was kindled against those whom they had welcomed with kindness. and whom the officers of the Proprietors had been instructed to befriend. Me- 1 Hist. Sketches of So. Ca. (Rivers), 160; Coll. Hist. Soc. of So. Ca., vol. I. 131.
"Goose Creek Men," a paper purporting to be an assessment of the Parish of St. James, Goose Creek. for January, 1694, is given by Mrs. Poyas, the " Octogenarian Lady," in the Olden Time in Carolina, p. 36. This is an anachronism, inasmuch as the parish was not established until 1704. The table of assessment, however, gives a list of the taxpayers on Goose Creek, i.e. the " Goose Creek men," of whom the Proprietors were so afraid, from which we take the following: Thomas Smith. of Back River ; Edward Hyrne ; Thomas Smith, son of Landgrave ; Colonel James Moore, Captain George Chicken, Captain Arthur Middleton, Captain Ben- jamin Schenckingh, Peter St. Julien, Benjamin Godin, Mr. Mazyek, Hen- royda Inglish, and Captain John Neve. This list, however, is certainly not complete, for no mention is made of several of the most conspicuous of the planters in that settlement. i.e. Robert Gibbes, Ralph Izard, etc.
289
UNDER THE PROPRIETARY GOVERNMENT
morials were addressed to the Governor to dissuade him from permitting the French to have seats in the Assembly. The severities of the alien law of England were threat- ened against them and their children. Their marriages and their property were held equally without the respect and protection of the laws.1 Hewatt states that not a single representative was allowed from Craven in the election held under Governor Ludwell's call,2 but this is a mistake ; the journals show six members, all Huguenots, were returned and took their seats.3
The Parliament thus organized. however, was not more subservient to the Proprietors than the former had been. As soon as the new Assembly met in September, an address was sent to Ludwell requesting "an act of free and general indemnity and oblivion, and a confirmation of all judicial proceedings in the late government " as essen- tial for the prosperity of the colony and the efficiency of any law that might be made for the good of the people. The necessity for some such measure had been recognized by the Proprietors in their instructions to the Governor ; but while offering a general pardon, they had excepted not only those guilty of high treason and murder, but had also directed proceedings against " some few of the most noto- rious and obstinate offenders " as to " whom the proof was plainest." which was understood really to mean that all
1 Hist. Sketches of So. Ca. (Rivers), 176.
2 Hewatt. Hist. of So. Ca., vol. I, 113.
3 The members of the Assembly were as follows: From Berkeley County : Major Benjamin Waring, James Moore, Esq., Ralph Izard, Esq., Mr. John Ladson, Mr. John Powis, Mr. Jonathan Amory, Mr. Joseph Pendarvis. From Colleton County : Robert Gibbs, Esq., William Davis, Esq., James Williams, Esq .. Mr. Daniel Courlis, Mr. James Gilbertson, Mr. Joseph Ellicot, Mr. James Stanyame. From Craven County : Alex- ander Thette Chistaigner, Esq., John Boyd, Esq., Paul Bonneau, Esq., Mons. Rene Ravenel, Mons. John Gendron, Mons. - Lebas. Commons Journal (MISS.).
240
HISTORY OF SOUTH CAROLINA
the leaders against whom evidence could be obtained were to be indicted. Ludwell could not under these instruc- tions grant the general pardon asked for; nor does his reply, observes Rivers, indicate the mildness of disposition generally attributed to him.1 He called upon the Assem- bly, as the house of representatives now began. to be called, to look to their journals and to judge what clem- ency could be demanded. In a rambling and incoherent style he thus addressed the Speaker : --
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.