DOCSLIB.ORG

The South Carolina Assembly, 1783-1800 Christopher Frank

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The South Carolina Assembly, 1783-1800 Christopher Frank ESTABLISHING A REPUBLIC: THE SOUTH CAROLINA ASSEMBLY, 1783-1800 CHRISTOPHER FRANK LEE San Antonio, Texas B.A., Rice University, 1977 M.A., University of Virginia, 1982 A Dissertation Presented to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Virginia in Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Corcoran Department of History University of Virginia May 1986 © Copyright by Christopher Frank Lee All Rights Reserved May, 1986 This study examines how South Carolina--the most aristocratic American state--created republican government in the wake of the American Revolution. In 1783, state authorities confronted enormous problems--debt, a ravaged economy, and the legacy of internecine guerilla war. In addition, long-standing conflicts between lowcountry and backcountry awaited resolution. Finally, a representative government had to supersede a monarchical one. Solving these problems was the task, and the accomplishment, of the General Assembly between 1783 and 1800. Acting mostly in response to citizen's petitions, the Assembly addressed everything from slave behavior and lawyers' qualifications to legal structure and debt. An expanded judicial system for the first time gave people throughout the state convenient access to the courts. A modified tax structure reduced disproportionate levies on the backcountry. The postwar Assemblymen improved transportation to allow the backcountry equal access to markets. They established a dozen colleges and seminaries to educate essential to a virtuous republican citizenry. The result was that, by 1800, white men throughout the state believed that they all stood on equal terms before iii iv the law, and that the laws favored no one section or interest. Over rather formidable odds, the Assembly had succeeded in establishing a republic. Yet, the republican vision was limited in South Carolina. Dominated by the elite of the slave society, the Assembly sought gradual, controlled change that would protect property rights and maintain order. Thus, fiscal measures sought to ���iQ�� the state's economy and credit. Legal changes gave all citizens equal access to courts but rarely implemented n�� rules. The Assembly showed interest in economic growth and development, but only so long as it did not interfere with ��i§iing property rights. So, too, the parsimonious legislature, while chartering schools and espousing the value of an educated citizenry, never appropriated public funds to support education. Eventually, the republicanism which the Assembly implemented would influence all of America, for in 1861, South Carolina became the state that determined the fate of the nation. For Jean ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS In the course of preparing this dissertation, I have come to appreciate more than ever that scholarship is a collective endeavor. Ira Gruber and Charles Garside, Jr. at Rice University inspired me as an undergradute and set high standards for me to attempt to emulate. Stephen Innes is a friend as well as a dissertation advisior. In the former capacity he offered much needed encouragement at critical times. In the latter, he mercilessly tried to force me to be consistent and precise <with less than complete success>. The members of my dissertation committee, Edward Ayers, D. Alan Williams, and John Sullivan, each contributed to making this a better work and offered many good suggestions for further revisions. I am especially indebted to Ron Gephart of the Library of Congress for allowing me to consult his Revolutionary America bibliography while it was still on 100,000 note cards. My stay in Columbia was a researcher 's delight. The staff of the Search Room at the South Carolina Department of History and Archive was extremely helpful in many ways. Micheal Steven was kind enough to give me a prepublication copy of his introduction to The_Journals_of_the_South vi vii Carolina_House_of_Re2resentativesi_1791. I enjoyed my years at the University of Virginia because of the many wonderful people there. The secretarial staff at the Corcoran Department of History eased my way through graduate school. In particular, Elizabeth Stovall proved an astute guide to the university. I do not think that there is anything about the university she does not know. All of my friends have supported me along the way, but Richard Hamm stands out from the rest. Despite our innumerable study breaks, racketball games, and bicycle rides, we shall both graduate. My family has been completely supportive. My parents only rarely ask me when I will get a job. Daniel and Bradford have endured many late dinners and competition for the computer with all the grace that could be expected of teenagers. Deborah, who at the age of two announced that she was writing a dissertation and that I should be quiet so she could work, has been more patient and understanding than I would have thought possible. My wife, Jean Butenhoff Lee, knows only too well that without her encouragement and support, this project could scarcely have been begun. Of all the scholarly influences upon me, hers is most pronounced. Her dedication to detail, her remorseless search for every fact, and her love of history continue to inspire me. If I have failed to live up to her example, it is scarcely her fault. Chapter Page I. Introduction . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 II. The Issues in Postwar South Carolina . • • • • 31 III. The Governor 's Messages. • • • • • • • • • • • 63 IV. The Assembly ••••••••••••••••• 112 V. The Development of a Republican Legal System . 153 VI. Debt, Taxes, and Government Expenditure •••• 201 VII. Economic Development •••.••••••••• 247 VIII. Order in a Republican Society ••••••.. • 279 IX. Petitions .•••.•••••••••••••• 316 X. South Carolina and the New Nation •. ••••• 369 Bibliography ••••••••••••••••••••• 383 viii ABREVIATIONS: House_Journal Micheal E. Stevens, �i-�!-, eds., The_Journals_of_the_ House_of ReQresentatives�_1783_ �-�-�-' The State Records of South Carolina (Columbia, S. C. , 1 979- > • Senate Journal "Journal of the Senate of South Carolina, 1783 • • , " Early State Records Series, Microfilm Ed. A.la Reels 6-9, 21. Citations are identified by year and folio number. For years in which there were more than one session, the opening month of the session is given. In 1793, the folios were not numbered so the date is given. Statutes_of_South_Carolina Thomas Cooper and David J. McCord, eds., The_Statutes_at_ Large_of_South_Carolina (Columbia, S.C., 1835-1841>. Session Laws South_Carolina_Session_Laws�_ 1783_._._. in the Readex Microprint Edition of Early American Imprints. This includes the reports and resolutions of the Assembly. Petitions General Assembly Petitions, South Carolina Department of History and Archives, Columbia, S.C. ix CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION I This study explores the ways the citizens of South Carolina, acting through their elected representatives, restructured their society in the wake of a successful revolution. In the last two decades of the eighteenth century, Americans from New England to Georgia faced the difficult task of establishing national and local govern­ ments that would be both stable and popularly based. To date, most historians of the period have studied national affairs rather than those of the states. They have done so for several reasons. The seeming permanence of the federal experiment of 1787 (as it was called); the final determina­ tion, during the Civil War, of the subordinate status of the states; and the expansion of federal power in the twentieth century all combine to suggest the comparatively limited importance of the states in the federal system. In the eighteenth century, however, all this was less apparent, and the custom of calling one's state one's country did not die until long after 1787. Some historians have recognized that the states constituted an important arena in which 1 2 Americans grappled with the implications of revolution, but to date have primarily used that insight only to explore the origins of the Federal Constitution and national political parties.1 Thus each state's experience in the post-Revolutionary world remains underexplored, especially with regard to what Americans thought their revolution meant. For nearly a century, historians have argued over whether conflict or consensus among the colonists best explains the American Revolution and its aftermath. The consensus view--which emerged in the nineteenth century, was largely supplanted in the early twentieth century, and then reappeared forcefully after World War !!--emphasizes the solidarity among the elite before and during the war and the success of the Federal Constitution. Conflict theorists, such as the Progressive historians of the early twentieth century, question the putatively high-minded motives and actions of those elites among whom the consensus existed. In recent years, scholars have drawn on both of these approaches and, in addition, have interjected the concept of ideology into the debate. A brief discussion of a few of the most important works on the period will outline the millieu of this study. John Fiske's 1888 monograph, The_Critical_Period_of American_Histor�i_1783-1789, epitomizes the consensus inter­ pretation and established the sobriquet for the 1780s.2 3 Although the volume is so one-sided that it could almost be read as a parody, it still provides a trenchant presentation of the consensus position. If one ignores the deification of Washington and the canonization of the rest of the Founders, the argument is not unreasonable. Its consensus approach emphasizes the ideas of the Revolutionaries
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Descendants of James Mathews Sr
    Descendants of James Mathews Sr. Greg Matthews Table of Contents .Descendants . .of . .James . .Mathews . .Sr. 1. .First . Generation. 1. .Source . .Citations . 2. .Second . Generation. 3. .Source . .Citations . 9. .Third . Generation. 15. .Source . .Citations . 32. .Fourth . Generation. 47. .Source . .Citations . 88. .Fifth . Generation. 115. .Source . .Citations . 147. .Sixth . Generation. 169. .Source . .Citations . 192. Produced by Legacy Descendants of James Mathews Sr. First Generation 1. James Mathews Sr. {M},1 son of James Mathews and Unknown, was born about 1680 in Surry County, VA and died before Mar 1762 in Halifax County, NC. Noted events in his life were: • First appearance: First known record for James is as a minor in the Court Order Books, 4 Jun 1688, Charles City County, Virginia.2 Record mentions James and brother Thomas Charles Matthews and that both were minors. Record also mentions their unnamed mother and her husband Richard Mane. • Militia Service: Was rank soldier on 1701/2 Charles City County militia roll, 1702, Charles City County, Virginia.3 • Tax List: Appears on 1704 Prince George County Quit Rent Roll, 1704, Prince George County, Virginia.4 • Deed: First known deed for James Mathews Sr, 28 Apr 1708, Surry County, VA.5 On 28 Apr 1708 James Mathews and wife Jeane sold 100 acres of land to Timothy Rives of Prince George County. The land was bound by Freemans Branch and John Mitchell. Witnesses to the deed were William Rives and Robert Blight. • Deed: First land transaction in North Carolina, 7 May 1742, Edgecombe County, NC.6 Was granted 400 acres in North Carolina by the British Crown in the first known deed for James in NC.
    [Show full text]
  • The Old Exchange and Provost Dungeon
    The Old Exchange and Provost Dungeon Standards Addressed: Social Studies 3-3: The student will demonstrate an understanding of the American Revolution and South Carolina’s role in the development of the new American nation. 3-3.1 Summarize the causes of the American Revolution, including Britain’s passage of the Stamp Act, the Tea Act, and the Intolerable Acts; the rebellion of the colonists; and the writing of the Declaration of Independence. 3-3.3 Summarize the course of the American Revolution in South Carolina, including the role of William Jasper and Fort Moultrie; the occupation of Charles Town by the British; the partisan warfare of Thomas Sumter, Andrew Pickens, and Francis Marion; and the battles of Cowpens, Kings Mountain, and Eutaw Springs. Visual Arts Standard 1: The student will demonstrate competence in the use of ideas, materials, techniques, and processes in the creation of works of visual art. Indicators VA3-1.1 Use his or her own ideas in creating works of visual art. VA3-1.3 Use and combine a variety of materials, techniques, and processes to create works of visual art. Objectives: 1. Students will demonstrate their understanding of four historical, South Carolina figures and how their roles during the Revolution contributed to Charleston history. 2. Students will make a connection between the four historical accounts and the history/role of the Old Exchange and Provost Dungeon. Materials: Teacher lesson: Write-up- “History of the Old Exchange and Provost Dungeon” Pictures- Labeled A, B, C, D, and E Online virtual
    [Show full text]
  • Caroliniana Columns - Fall 2016 University Libraries--University of South Carolina
    University of South Carolina Scholar Commons University South Caroliniana Society Newsletter - South Caroliniana Library Columns Fall 2016 Caroliniana Columns - Fall 2016 University Libraries--University of South Carolina Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/columns Part of the Library and Information Science Commons Recommended Citation University of South Carolina, "University of South Carolina Libraries - Caroliniana Columns, Issue 40, Fall 2016". http://scholarcommons.sc.edu/columns/40/ This Newsletter is brought to you by the South Caroliniana Library at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in University South Caroliniana Society Newsletter - Columns by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. University South Caroliniana Society newsletter Fall 2016 Cokie Roberts Season’s greetings from the South Caroliniana Library (Photograph courtesy of the University Creative Services) Summer Scholars Find Treasures in the South Caroliniana Library The South Caroliniana Library serves many constituents, sharing its unique collections with University students and faculty, local historians and genealogists, and a multitude of researchers from around the world both in person and via its online resources. Each summer the Library welcomes budding researchers to its Sumer Scholars program which includes visiting fellowships and professorships from several sources. This summer the researchers and their assistantships included: Jacob Clawson, Ph.D. candidate, Auburn University, Governor Thomas Gordon McLeod and First Lady Elizabeth Alford McLeod Research Fellow Kevin Collins, Professor of Language and Literature, Southwestern Oklahoma State University, William Gilmore Simms Visiting Research Professor Mandy L. Cooper, Ph.D. candidate, Duke University, Lewis P. Jones Research Fellow Lauren Haumesser, Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Charleston County South Carolina PHOTOGRAPHS WRITTEN
    Snee l"a.rm Ncar 'liOW1t Pleasant HiiBS !l0. Se-87 Charleston County South Carolina \"~ /\ E; ~;: L ., ..... ~',.-. • i 0' . ['i.>l(>. Ii ,\ PHOTOGRAPHS WRITTEN HISTORIC AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA • District of South Carolina Historic American Buildings Survey Prepared at Washington Office for Southeast Unit HJ..Bf No .. S::;EF~ FARi,,; Ner<.r :,~ount Pleasant, Chp<rlestC!l County I South Ca.rolina Ouic or ercctlon: c. 1750 Present co'~dition: Excellent frDJ:O construction; rectanc),lo..r plan; marble mantel, Adam de- sign .. A,lditc.onal data, One-ti:r.e horne of Colone 1 Charles Pinckney. ,'!as in Pinckney fami ly for sevent:! years • Othe~ e~~stinG !,ccords: .~ •• Cr,.arleston l:useu.T.1 Prepared by Junior Architect James L .. Burnett, Jr .. , " Approved :' Ii \,}.. J 4/! -;c. " Addendum To: SNEE FARM HABS NO. SC-87 1240 Long Point Road • Charleston Coun~y South Carolina PHOTOGRAPHS AND WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA • REDUCED COPIES OF IfEASURED DRAHINGS • Historic American Buildings Survey National Park Service Department of the Interior • Washington, D.C. 20013-7127 ~A6S 5(. , \O-(i\ouf)v HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEY j ~) - SNEE FARM • HABS NO. SC-87 Location: 1240 Long Point Road, Mt. Pleasant, Charleston County, South Carolina 4.6 miles NE of Mt. Pleasant on US Hwy 17; turn left on County Road 97 (Long Point Road); continue 0.7 mile and turn left on dirt road; house is 0.1 mile down dirt road on left. UTM: 17.609960.3634640 Present Owner: National Park Service Present Use: Vacant Significance: The Charles Pinckney Historic Site, known traditionally as "Snee Farm," is the ancestral country seat of Charles pinckney III, the American patriot and statesman.
    [Show full text]
  • Delegates to the Continental Congress from South Carolina, 177 4-1789, with Sketches of the Four Who Signed the Declaration of Independence
    Bulletins of the Historical Commission of South Carolina.-No. 9 ~-~~)~~ ~~. Delegates to the Continentaf' Congress from South Carolina, 1774-1789, With Sketches of the Four Who Signed the Declaration of Independence. By A. S. SALLEY, Jr. Secretary of the Commission Printed for the Commission by The State Company Columbia, S. C. 1927 Bulletins of the Historical Commission of South Carolina.- No. 9 Delegates to the Continental Congress from South Carolina, 177 4-1789, With Sketches of the Four Who Signed the Declaration of Independence. B y A. S. SALLEY, Jr. Secre ta ry of the Commission Printed for t he Commission by T he State Company Columbia. S. C. I 9 2 7 1774-1775. \Yhen the news of the blo c: kadino· o:f the port of Boston rea ·h ed Charles Town in June. 1774'. a convention of the people of outh Carolina wa s, on J~ un e 13, ea llcc1 2 to meet in Charles Town on th Gth of July. The co nvention met on the clay appointed and sat through the 8th. After adopting resolution · ·o t1flemn in g the British Parlia­ ment for closin g the port of Bo: ton, and ettinO' fo rth the right of Ameri ·an , the eo tll" ention adopted the foll o\\·ing resolution: 1m s oLv J ~ D , ~'hat H enry l\fid<ll cton , John J.tutl cclge, 'l' homas Lynch , C'lui - topher Gacl scl en and Etlwnrcl Hutl e <l~c , :JD ~ q r H . he and tll cy a r c hcrcb.r nominated n ncl appoiute <l :Deputies.
    [Show full text]
  • BATTLEGROUND of FREEDOM No State Made a Greater Contribution to the Winning of America
    A~ '562. 2 .· ~\l-2. C'op~ \ BATTLEGROUND OF FREEDOM No state made a greater contribution to the winning of America. Both Kosciusko and Count Pulaski, the Polish independence and the founding of the nation than South patriots, served with distinction in South Carolina. ·Carolina. Her sons served ably and well in the Con­ For nearly four years, South Carolina was spared the tinental Congress and many of her sons laid down their horrors of war, then Charleston fell in May, 1780, and lives on the altar of freedom so that liberty and in­ South Carolina became a conquered province. Except for dependence could be achieved. Her heroine daughters Marion, Sumter and Pickens and their gallant followers, are legends of the land. it seemed all was lost. After Camden, the tide began to Upon the soil of South Carolina more battles were turn with Musgrove's Mill, Hanging Rock, King's Moun­ fought than in any other state. Both Virginia and tain and Blackstock's. In October, Nathanael Greene, the Massachusetts have been referred to as "The Cradle of fighting Quaker from Rhode Island, was given command Liberty." South Carolina was "The Battleground of of the Continental troops in the South. Daniel Morgan, an Freedom." Men from many states and nations came to epic soldier of great courage, returned to active duty, In South Carolina and fought and died. Where they fought, 17'81, the British suffered a major defeat at Cowpens. The bled and died is sacred ground, consecrated by the blood Battles of Ninety Six, Hobkirk's Hill, and most promi­ of patriots.
    [Show full text]
  • Coercion, Cooperation, and Conflict Along the Charleston Waterfront, 1739-1785: Navigating the Social Waters of an Atlantic Port City
    Coercion, Cooperation, and Conflict along the Charleston Waterfront, 1739-1785: Navigating the Social Waters of an Atlantic Port City by Craig Thomas Marin BA, Carleton College, 1993 MA, University of Pittsburgh, 1998 Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Arts and Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Pittsburgh 2007 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH FACULTY OF ARTS AND SCIENCES This dissertation was presented by Craig Thomas Marin It was defended on December 4, 2007 and approved by Dr. Seymour Drescher, University Professor, Department of History Dr. Van Beck Hall, Associate Professor, Department of History Dr. John Markoff, Professor, Department of Sociology Dissertation Director: Dr. Marcus Rediker, Professor, Department of History ii Copyright © by Craig Thomas Marin 2007 iii Coercion, Cooperation, and Conflict along the Charleston Waterfront, 1739-1785: Navigating the Social Waters of an Atlantic Port City Craig Thomas Marin, PhD University of Pittsburgh, 2007 This dissertation argues that the economic demands of the eighteenth-century Atlantic world made Charleston, South Carolina, a center of significant sailor, slave, and servant resistance, allowing the working people of the city’s waterfront to permanently alter both the plantation slave system and the export economy of South Carolina. It explores the meanings and effects of resistance within the context of the waterfront, the South Carolina plantation economy, and the wider Atlantic World. Focusing on the period that began with the major slave rebellion along the Stono River in 1739 and culminated with the 1785 incorporation of Charleston, this dissertation relies on newspapers, legislative journals, court records, and the private correspondence and business papers of merchants and planters to reveal the daily activities of waterfront workers as they interacted with each other, and with their employers and masters.
    [Show full text]
  • Allston Family Papers, 1164.00
    Allston family papers, 1730-1901 SCHS# 1164.00 12/01-26 Description: 9 linear ft. (24 boxes + 2 oversized boxes) Creator: Allston family Biographical/Historical Note: Georgetown County, South Carolina family. Robert F.W. Allston (1801-1864), a plantation owner and politician, was the son of Benjamin Allston, Jr. (d. 1809) and Charlotte Anne Allston. He married Adele Petigru (sister of James Louis Petigru), and their children were: Benjamin Allston (1833-1900), Robert Allston (1834-1839), Charlotte Francis Allston, Louise Gibert Allston, William Petigru Allston, Charles Petigru Allston (1848-1922), Jane Louise Allston, who married Charles Albert Hill, Adele Allston (d. 1915), who married Arnoldus Vanderhorst (1835-1881), and Elizabeth Waties Allston (1845-1921), who married John Julius Pringle (1842-1876). John Julius Pringle was the son of John Julius Izard Pringle and Mary Izard Pringle, who later married Joel R. Poinsett (1779-1851). Elizabeth Frances Allston, a cousin of Robert F.W. Allston, married Dr. Joseph Blyth. Scope and Content: Collection contains personal and business papers of Robert F.W. Allston (1801-1864), Adele Petigru Allston, Benjamin Allston (1833-1900), Charlotte Anne Allston, Charles Petigru Allston (1848-1922), Jane Lynch Pringle, Joel R. Poinsett (1779-1851), Theodore G. Barker (b. 1832), and surveyor John Hardwick, as well as papers of the Blyth Family. Papers consist of the correspondence of Robert F.W. Allston, his wife and children, other Allston family members, members of allied families including the Lesesne, North, Petigru, Poinsett, Porcher, Pringle, Vanderhorst, and Weston families, and friends; Allston family bills and receipts, estate papers and other legal documents, land and plantation papers, plats, journals, accounts, slave records, genealogies, writings, and other items.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to the Ratification of the Constitution in South Carolina
    Introduction to the Ratification of the Constitution in South Carolina Tradition and continuity were hallmarks of South Carolina government and politics in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries and South Carolinians modeled their governmental institutions on earlier practices. Revolutionary legislator, physician, and historian David Ramsay claimed that when the state adopted a new constitution in 1776, “the policy of the rulers in departing as little as possible from ancient forms and names, made the change of sovereignty less perceptible.”1 Despite changes wrought by the Revolution, maintenance or appeals to old forms continued throughout the debate over the Constitution. In its first regular session after ratification, the state House of Representatives ordered a new gown for its speaker, “ornamented with velvet tassels, richly fringed” that was “an exact pattern of that worn by the speaker of the British house of commons.”2 Yet despite efforts to maintain “ancient forms and names,” the legacy of the Revolution, the rapid growth of the upcountry, and the economic challenges of the postwar era slowly brought change. Under the Lords Proprietors The roots of South Carolina’s institutions were planted in the West Indian islands of Barbados and Jamaica. Established as a proprietary colony in the 1620s, Barbados offered a few elite white men the opportunity to accumulate great wealth on sugar plantations worked by black slaves who, by 1652, constituted a majority of the island’s population. In 1663, when King Charles II granted a charter for a new North American colony south of Virginia to eight Lords Proprietors, some of whom were investors in the Barbadian enterprise, they had a colonial model at hand that could readily be applied to the new mainland colony that became South Carolina.
    [Show full text]
  • Baker Family Papers, 1138.00
    Baker family papers, 1683-ca. 1935 SCHS 1138.00 Containers: 11/538 - 539C, O/S Manuscript Box 1138.00, and O/S VMA Box 1138.00 (previously # 33/025) Creator: Baker family. Description: 3 linear ft. Biographical/Historical note: The Baker family became established in South Carolina in the 17th century when Richard Baker (d. 1698) emigrated from Barbados and acquired large land holdings along the Ashley River. His grandson, Richard Baker (d. 1752), married Mary Bohun (d. 1736), daughter of Nicholas Bohun (and granddaughter of Edmund Bohun, 1645-1699); their residence was at Archdale Hall Plantation in Dorchester County, S.C. Their son, Richard Bohun Baker (1736-1783), was the next owner of Archdale Hall; he married Elizabeth Elliott (d. 1771), the daughter of Barnard Elliott (d. 1758), whose other children were Amarinthea Elliott and Barnard Elliott (d. 1778). Richard Bohun Baker's children by Elizabeth Elliott were: William Bohun Baker (died young); Elizabeth Elliott Baker; Mary Bohun Baker; Charlotte Bohun Baker; and Richard Bohun Baker (1757-1837), the heir of Archdale Hall, who married Harriett Hyrne. Harriett Hyrne Baker was the daughter of Mary and Henry Hyrne of neighboring Tipseeboo Plantation. Archdale Hall was next inherited by Richard Bohun Baker (d. 1865), son of Richard Bohun Baker (1757-1837), who in turn devised it to his nephew Dr. Richard Bohun Baker (d. 1901). After his death Archdale Hall Plantation was acquired by Emma Drayton-Grimke, a great niece of Richard Bohun Baker (d. 1865). Emma Drayton-Grimke was the daughter of [Mr.] Sachtleben and Mary Bohun Baker; she married the Reverend John Drayton-Grimke, rector of St.
    [Show full text]
  • Presidential Reconstruction in South Carolina April 1865 to May 1866 Walter Bright Clemson University, [email protected]
    Clemson University TigerPrints All Theses Theses 5-2008 Radicalism and Rebellion: Presidential Reconstruction in South Carolina April 1865 to May 1866 Walter Bright Clemson University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses Part of the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Bright, Walter, "Radicalism and Rebellion: Presidential Reconstruction in South Carolina April 1865 to May 1866" (2008). All Theses. 363. https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses/363 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses at TigerPrints. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Theses by an authorized administrator of TigerPrints. For more information, please contact [email protected]. RADICALSIM AND REBELLION: PRESIDENTIAL RECONSTRUCTION IN SOUTH CAROLINA APRIL 1865 TO MAY 1866 A Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of Clemson University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts History by Walter Steven Bright May 2008 Accepted by: Dr. Rod Andrew Jr., Committee Chair Dr. H. Roger Grant Dr. Abel A. Bartley ABSTRACT The focus of this thesis deals primarily with the white elite of South Carolina during Presidential Reconstruction. Historians have noted South Carolina radicalism before the Civil War, but I propose that this radicalism did not simply fade away when the war ended. I argue that the Civil War did not destroy white South Carolinians’ will to fight; a sense of nationalism still flourished as they continued to rebel against the federal government, despite the devastating effects of the war on the Palmetto State. This work will show that these white elites continued this fight because they were enraged over the total devastation left in the wake of Sherman’s march through the state and the failure of the federal government to institute an acceptable Reconstruction plan.
    [Show full text]
  • John Drayton, 1766-1822
    John Drayton, 1766-1822 1766 Born to William Henry Drayton and Dorothy Golightly at Drayton Hall Plantation in St. Andrews Parish 1779 Attended the College of New Jersey (now Princeton University) ca. 1779-1785 Studied law at the Inner Temple in England ca. 1788 Admitted to the South Carolina Bar 1792-1798 Represented St. Philip and St. Michael parishes for three non-consecutive terms ca. 1794 Served as captain of the Charleston Cadet Infantry 1794 Married Hester Rose Tidyman, daughter of Philip Tidyman, with whom he had seven children 1794 Published Letters Written During a Tour through the Northern and Eastern States 1798 Elected lieutenant governor of South Carolina Jan. 1800 Served as interim governor of South Carolina upon the death of Edward Rutledge Dec. 1800 Elected governor of South Carolina 1801-1802 Served as president of the Board of the South Carolina College 1802 Published A View of South Carolina, as Respects Her Natural and Civil Concerns 1803-1804 Served as the 13th intendant of the City of Charleston 1805-1808 Represented St. Philip and St. Michael parishes in the South Carolina Senate 1807 Received an honorary doctorate from the South Carolina College, which he helped found during his earlier term as governor Dec. 1808 Elected to a third non-consecutive term as governor of South Carolina 1812 Appointed by President James Madison to serve as a U.S. judge for the District of South Carolina 1821 Published his father’s Memoirs of the American Revolution Nov. 1822 Death and burial at the Cathedral Church of Saint Luke and Saint Paul Sources Bailey, N.
    [Show full text]