University of Kentucky UKnowledge United States History History 1970 Laboratory for Liberty: The South Carolina Legislative Committee System 1719–1776 George Edward Frakes Santa Barbara City College Click here to let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Thanks to the University of Kentucky Libraries and the University Press of Kentucky, this book is freely available to current faculty, students, and staff at the University of Kentucky. Find other University of Kentucky Books at uknowledge.uky.edu/upk. For more information, please contact UKnowledge at [email protected]. Recommended Citation Frakes, George Edward, "Laboratory for Liberty: The South Carolina Legislative Committee System 1719–1776" (1970). United States History. 61. https://uknowledge.uky.edu/upk_united_states_history/61 Laboratory for Liberty This page intentionally left blank ,J,l• 4-UI f '. t(,r, • ' ' ' 'Ill) GEORGE EDW A.RD FRAKES Laboratory for Liberty fJlie South Carolina Legislative Committee System 1719-1776 THE UNIVERSITY PRESS OF KENTUCKY Lexington 1970 FRONTISPIECE: Page 213 of the Journal of the Commons House of Assembly of South Carolina for December 15, I737· From The Journal of the Commons House of Assembly, edited by ]ames Harrold Easterby. Courtesy of the South Carolina Department of Archives and History Copyright© 1970 by The University Press of Kentucky Library of Congress Catalog Card No. 74-94066 ISBN: 978-0-8131-5232-5 The University Press of Kentucky is a statewide cooperative scholarly publishing agency serving Berea College, Centre College of Kentucky, Eastern Kentucky University, Kentucky State College, Morehead State University, Murray State University, University of Kentucky, University of Louisville, and Western Kentucky University. Editorial and Sales Offices: Lexington, Kentucky 40506 TO CATHERINE DAVIES FRAKES Contents FOREWORD page ix CHAPTER I The Background of the Legislative Committee System page I CHAPTER II The Development of Legislative Committees in the Commons House of Assembly page 2I CHAPTER III The Legislative Committee System in the Early Royal Period, 1719-1725 page 38 CHAPTER IV The Legislative Committee System in a Period of Western Expansion, 1727-1737 page 53 CHAPTER V The Legislative Committee System in Peace and Frontier Conflict, 1737-1748 page 68 CHAPTER VI Committees and Legislative Supremacy in a Second Era of Frontier Conflict, 1749-1764 page 81 CHAPTER VII Legislative Committees and the Road to Revolution, 1764-1774 page IOO CHAPTER VIII Revolutionary Committee Activity, 1774-1776 page n8 APPENDIX I Committee Assignments and Memberships in the South Carolina Commons House of Assembly under the Revolutionary Government, 172o-172I page 131 APPENDIX II Committee Assignments and Memberships in the South Carolina Commons House of Assembly during Selected Segments of the Royal Period, 172I-r776 page 136 APPENDIX III Geographic Distribution of, Assignments to, and Membership of Selected Important Legislative Committees of the South Carolina Commons House of Assembly, 1736-1739 page 175 BIBLIOGRAPHY page 182 INDEX page 195 Foreword This study of the South Carolina legislative committee system is an attempt to illuminate the role of committees in the growth of colonial self­ government. Partly because of frontier developments, the legislative com­ mittee became an institution which helped to solve many governmental problems of a New-World community. In a sense, the committees provided workshops for ideas that were to bring about legislative supremacy and, finally, independence. Origins of the committee system can be traced, in part, to the parliamen­ tary committees of medieval England. In r67o Englishmen brought the committee system to South Carolina. Thereafter provincial legislative com­ mittees played a vital role in solving the problems of frontier economy and defense as well as in the emergence of self-government from 1719 to 1776. One of the first steps toward greater home rule, the South Carolina revolution of 1719 against proprietary control, was largely a product of legislative and extralegal committee activity. In the decades of royal rule that followed, important developments occurred within the committee sys­ tem. Among them was the elimination of royally appointed councilors from certain types of joint legislative committees. The dominance of joint com­ mittees by the Commons House of Assembly demonstrated that the colonists gradually increased control over their own affairs. Events on the frontier associated with Indian affairs and land development help explain this transition. Expansion of the legislative committee system resulted in Commons ix Foreword House control of important governmental functions related to expenditure of money. Often these expenditures were made during periods of inter­ colonial and frontier warfare. Other types of committees-commissions, vestries, grand juries, and other boards-were used throughout South Carolina and had an important voice in local government. Most of the leading provincial South Carolinians became acquainted with problems of self-government in this frontier colony through experience on legislative or local government committees. After 1761, when royal officials began to tighten their control over the colony, Commons House committees steadfastly opposed attempts to reduce their legislative power. The result of this struggle was a political deadlock which almost paralyzed constitutional government after 1769. Powerful extralegal organizations controlled by executive committees appeared in the 176os, both in Charles Town and on the frontier. These extralegal bodies rallied South Carolinians to their cause. Political leaders formed "general committees" that gave direction to the independence move­ ment, and Commons members used their experience in leading home-rule forces. By 1775, a province-wide network of local extralegal committees augmented the General Committee's power. The new Provincial Congress which was formed in 1775 relied upon a committee, the Council of Safety, as its executive body. South Carolina colonists had modified an Old-World parliamentary institution in a frontier environment to make it a vital part of their legislative program. Committees of the Provincial Congress helped bring about the colony's declaration of independence and first state con­ stitution. This study of South Carolina's legislative committee system thus illus­ trates the development of an institution which was vitally important in the growth of representative government in America. A number of primary materials are of particular value in studying the politics and institutions of colonial South Carolina. The journals of the Commons House and those of the Upper House and the Council are ex­ cellent sources of information. The student of South Carolina history is fortunate to have the fine collection of the South Carolina Archives as well as the materials of the South Caroliniana Library of the University of South Carolina, the Charleston Library Society collections, and the resources of the South Carolina Historical Society in Charleston to assist him. Although the number of additional public and private papers that have been published is not great, numerous materials from British archives have been copied and are now available at the South Carolina Archives Depart- X Foreword ment in Columbia, and at the Library of Congress. A number of these sources are now duplicated on microfilm. In addition, selected volumes of the journals of both houses of the South Carolina General Assembly have been published, edited by Charles Lee, James H. Easterby, Alexander S. Salley, and others. Some of the information drawn from these primary materials should be clarified. A major source of misunderstanding in colonial history is the existence of the Julian or "Old Style" calendar and the modern calendar. I have converted all Old Style dates into the modern dating system through­ out the text. However, when authorities I cite use Old Style dates in primary sources, I have retained the Old Style dates in my notes. A recently published study of South Carolina political history by the late M. Eugene Sirmans was particularly helpful to me in clarifying the political aspects of my subject. His book differs from mine in that his is a chrono­ logical investigation of politics before 1763. My study is basically an institutional treatment of the internal operations of the assembly and in­ fluential extralegal bodies with particular emphasis on the period following the French and Indian War. This study grew out of research for my doctoral dissertation. I am in­ debted to my teachers at the University of California, Santa Barbara, for their help in the preparation of this work, especially the members of my doctoral committee, Professors Henry M. Adams, A. Russell Buchanan, Rollin W. Quimby, and Robert Norris. In particular, I am grateful for the assistance of my adviser, Dr. Wilbur R. Jacobs, whose criticism and guid­ ance have been invaluable. Many other persons, too numerous to mention, have assisted me in my work. Of these, I would like to thank my classmates Professor David Kamens, Dr. Yasuhidi Kawashima, Professor Allan Rogers, Mr. Frank Bunker, Dr. Thomas Reeves, and Dr. Marvin Zahniser, who have given me excellent suggestions on this subject. I am also indebted to colleagues at Santa Barbara City College and the University of California, Santa Bar­ bara, especially Mrs. Ruth Little, Mr. Donald Sawyer, Dr. Curtis Solberg, Mr. Raymond Loynd, Mr. Robert Easton, Miss Donna