Beaufort Barnwell Blog

My mother’s family were the Barnwells. They played a very significant role in the history of South Carolina. Stephen Barnwell, a history professor at Northern Michigan University, wrote a book entitled The Story of an American Family which was published in 1969. It is out of copyright and in great demand to genealogists and historians. I am taking on the project of scanning portions of the book that apply to my branch of the Barnwells and posting it to this blog. The American story begins with my sixth great grandfather, Colonel John Barnwell. Enjoy!

Chapter I

Colonel John Barnwell

As the 18th century opened, a young Irishman of good family, "the son of a verry good gentleman and gentlewoeman," sailed from his native Dublin for Charles Town in the colony of Carolina "out of a humor to goe to travel but for no other Reasson." Thus was John Barnwell, the progenitor of the family, described by a family friend, Alder­man John Page of Dublin. Page might have said a good deal more, but was content merely to add that John had "extriordinary friends and Relashons" in the kingdom.1

Page could have said that the Barnewalls, as the name is usually spelled in Ireland, or de Berneval as it appeared in Normandy and throughout the Middle Ages, had settled in Dublin county at Drimnagh Castle some 500 years before. Here they flourished and spread into nearby county Meath and elsewhere in Ireland and England. For centu­ries they were loyal servants of the English Crown and were duly rewarded through ennoblement in three great branches: Barons of Trimlestown in 1461, Baronets of Crickston in 1623, and Viscounts of Kingsland and Barons of Turvey in 1646. John, indeed, had "extriordinary Relashons" in the kingdom. 2

In time the Barnewalls became as "Irish as the Irish themselves," and took part in the fight for Irish independence in the 17th century. With the failure of their cause, a steady stream of Irishmen, known to history as "the wild geese," took flight for continental armies and monasteries. John, instead, came to America.

His father, Matthew Barnewall, an alderman of Dublin in 1688, was a captain in King James' Irish Army and was killed in the siege of Derry on August 12, 1690. John's mother was Margaret Carberry, a daughter of Alderman John Carberry, and his grandfather, Richard Barnewall, had been an alderman in the 1630s and briefly in 1647, the Lord Mayor. Richard was a merchant, but he also held Archerstown, an estate in county Meath which had been granted to him for his loyalty during the Rebellion of 1641. Archerstown had belonged to a cadet branch of the Barnewalls of Crickston since the reign of Henry VII, but when they joined the Rebellion, as did most of the family, their lands were declared forfeit and given to Richard. This means almost certainly that he was a member of the same branch. At any rate, Archerstown was forfeited again, by Matthew, in 1690 for his loyalty to King James. Some of his heirs attempted to regain some of their lost rights, but John was not among them. He had sailed for the new world.3

When John Barnwell landed in Charles Town, he found a colony which had survived its early problems and was entering upon what promised to be a bright future. By 1700 there were 4,200 whites, largely British but also includ­ing a sizeable number of French Huguenots; 3,200 Negro slaves, and 800 Indian slaves. The colony had been faction ridden and, to the great disappointment of the Lords Proprietors, economically unprofitable from the moment the good ship Carolina with the original settlers dropped anchor in Charles Town harbor in April 1670. But during the half-decade before John arrived, the situation had changed dramatically. The mastery of rice culture by 1695 had given the colony a staple crop which insured its prosperity. The expansion of Indian trade started the first real pene­tration into the interior by Englishmen, and the firm and wise hand of Governor Archdale had achieved a measure of political harmony hitherto unknown.

The people of Charles Town were so confident of their destiny that they had begun making their city one of the finest in all the colonies. They were "building their homes along wide and well planned streets," lined with pines, cedars, and cypress trees. By 1700 wooden houses were forbidden within the city limits. The Anglican Missionary, Dr. Francis LeJau, after travelling through the West Indies and Virginia, believed that "for Gentility, politeness and a handsome way of living," Carolina exceeded anything he had seen.4 A public library had been opened and the ear­liest contributions to science and learning already made. 

John Barnwell was fortunate in soon finding some powerful friends. By February 1703 he was Clerk of the Gover­nor's Council and in August 1704 was promoted to Deputy Secretary of the Council, in which capacity he served as liason between the council and the assembly.5 His chief patrons were the Governor, Sir Nathaniel Johnson, and Chief Justice Nicholas Trott. Johnson, appointed governor in 1702, had come to Carolina in 1689 after a distin­guished career as a colonial official in the West Indies and became a wealthy planter at Silk Hope Plantation outside Charles Town. John's friendship with him was such that in March 1705 he named his elder son Nathaniel after him. His association with Trott was even closer. John Harleston, who had preceded Barnwell from Dublin by two years, wrote to Page that Trott "respected Barnwell very much," and was "like a Father to him," and "instructed him in his Places whareof he was very incapable." Trott invited his protege and wife to Harleston's wedding in April 1707 and "set him at table with the Governor & Capt. of a men-a-ware" then lying at anchor in the harbor. 6 Finally in June 1707 John was promoted to Comptroller of the Province.7

At this point John's career takes a dramatic and important turn. Harleston put it very bluntly in a letter to Page in March 1709:

" . . . he was one that flew in the face of the Governmt & headed a Mobb against the Chief Justice Mr. Nicholas Trott, who is my Perticuler Friend in Carolina; this Barnwell was Deputy Secretary & Clark of the Council!, which was pretty Considerable in Carolina, & threw this misdemeaner he was Turned out of all; I suppose his comeing in at present would not admitt him to live in Charles towne, which has maide him settle a Plant(ation) at Port Royall near a 100 miles from towne, and thare he lives on what he has Cot by the government horn he soe Groosly abused . . . This Barnwell had this Designe in his head some before but would not vent it till the Man of warr sail'd Lest they should stop his Proceedings. Barnwell would not have had soe many Rioters to assist him but by reason of this, which was that the Judge then had the Church of England Established by act of Assembly & sent home for Ministers & Devided Parrishes & paid them out of the publick which has made the Decenters his Enemies Ever since . . Judge Trott is now on his voyage to England in Persute of this Riot & has Latters of recomindation to the Arch-Bishop of London by the Clergye of the Church of England & by the best of all the Country of his uprightness, and allsoe had record maid by Coll. Wm Rhett & Coll. Risbe Justices of the Peace concerning this riot, which I would have you see."8

Colonel William Rhett

It has been impossible so far to determine precisely the date of John's protest demonstration and act of civil diso­bedience, but to understand why he did it, it is necessary to sketch in the background to the events of these years. In September 1703 John was ordered by the Council to prepare a map of Port Royal Sound where he soon began to develop a strong interest. In February and March 1705 he received grants for 1,400 acres of land on Port Royal and neighboring islands.9 Between September 1706 and February 1709, he received five more grants for a total of 3,414 acres in the four years. Among his new neighbors was a Scotsman, Thomas Nairne, described as "probably the ablest, and certainly the most admirable politician" of his day.10

Captain Thomas Nairne had owned a plantation on St. Helena's Island since 1698 and later acquired another one on the edge of the Yemassee Indian country on the mainland across the Coosaw river. Appointed agent to regulate trade with the Indians, he became deeply interested in the urgent matter of trade reform, and, as a sincere Anglican, was interested in the conversion of the Indians to Christianity. His views on frontier policy, the Indians, and trade reform soon "attracted some of the brightest young men of the colony: . John Barnwell, George Chicken, Tobias Fitch and William Bull (who had married Nairne's step-daughter). This group of men originated every constructive development in South Carolina Indian policy for the next generation." 11

To call the commercial intercourse between the Charles Town merchants and the Indians "trade" is almost a euphemism. The Indians were gradually debauched and then enslaved by debt. South Carolina was the only colony that was able to make Indian slavery pay. The merchants profitting by the system included some of the most power­ful men in the colony: Johnson, Trott, and Colonel Rhett. They found ready allies among the so-called Goose Creek men, a group of planter-merchants who had been one of the most divisive factions in the pre-Archdale era. The more prominent among them were James Moore, Robert Gibbes, and Ralph Izard.

The planters, particularly those in the southern part of the colony, were convinced that the existing system, or lack of it, would inevitably lead to an Indian revolt, which it did, and that the leadership of the colony was too interested financially in the status quo to do anything about it. They tended to come together under the leadership of Thomas Nairne.

The situation was complicated by the proposal for the establishment of the Church of England and the exclusion of dissenters from any part in the government. From its inception Carolina had been generally free of religious con­flict. The Anglican Church was dominant, but dissenters had been freely admitted into the colony and more than one governor had been of their persuasion. Of the 4,200 white persons the largest body were Anglicans (1,800), but the dissenters altogether numbered 2,000. The 400 Huguenots, despite their theological affinity with the dissenters, tended to support the Anglicans to whose Church they were gradually being converted anyway. Taking advantage of a sparsely attended assembly in March 1704, the High Church party, with their Huguenot allies, and led by John­son, Trott, Rhett, and the Goose Creek men, secured the passage of the Church Act which not only established the Church of England but also required communion in the Anglican Church a condition to any office in the colony. The dissenters naturally objected and sent John Ash and later Joseph Boone to London to lodge a protest with the Lords Proprietors.

It is possible that the Establishment men might have gotten away with it if the Anglicans had held together, but they were divided over several issues. The dissident Anglicans in Charles Town were led by old Colonel Stephen Bull until his death in 1707. He was the last survivor of the original leadership in the colony and had helped to lay out the city in 1670. The Stanyarnes and Elliotts, for their own reasons, could also be counted upon to align themselves with the opposition to the politico-religious machinations of the High Church party. The dissident Anglicans in the coun­try were led by Thomas Nairne who had several reasons for his opposition. He generally supported the assembly and the colonists against the Governor, Council, and Lords Proprietors, but in this case he was obviously struck by the fact that those who were most opposed to trade reform were the same men who were now trying to assure their permanent political ascendancy through the imposition of religious qualifications for office holding.

Where John Barnwell stood at that time is hard to say. He was an Anglican and had his children baptized and raised in the Church, but his association with Nairne and his growing interests in the Port Royal region were draw­ing him away from his early dependence on Johnson and Trott, and he is listed by Sirmans among the dissident Anglicans. However his position in the government continued to be secure until after the repeal of the Church Act in November 1706 and through April 1707 when Trott treated him so graciously at Harleston's wedding. The religious controversy began to wane, but the bitterness of it carried over into other issues, particularly trade reform.

The opposition under Nairne won the elections to the assembly in May 1707, and soon John found himself in the center of the conflict. The assembly met in June and began to fight with Governor Johnson over trade reform and the right to appoint the chief revenue officers in the province: the public receiver and the comptroller. Nairne attacked Trott's position in the council claiming it was illegal since he held a royal commission in another capacity. The governor countered by claiming the right to appoint the public receiver and the comptroller, a right which tradition ally belonged to the assembly. In fact in their annual tax bill, the assembly had nominated George Logan for pub­lic receiver and John Barnwell for comptroller.

John Barnwell's Map of Southern North America, circa 1772

Johnson's strategy worked for the moment. The attack on Trott and the trade reform bill were postponed until the dispute over the appointments was settled. It is interesting to note that the debate centered on Logan and not Barn­well. Was Johnson trying to avoid injuring his friend, or former friend? At any rate he gave way after the assembly agreed to nominate someone else in Logan's place. The victory was assured by a new law, written by Nairne, which guaranteed this right to the assembly. The Assembly of 1707 as a whole was a victory for the opposition who finally pushed through an Indian trade bill and several other important measures. Nairne was also appointed the Indian agent for the province. John, of course, was the comptroller but not for long. In November he petitioned to be relieved of his duties and was replaced by Captain Thomas Walker.

.

This still leaves us in the dark about the riot which John led against the government. It may have occurred in connection with the consequences of the opposition victory. Johnson still smarted over his defeat at the hands of Nairne, and when Nairne, as the Indian agent, charged Johnson's son-in-law, Thomas Broughton, with illegal trade practices, Johnson had him thrown in jail on a trumped up charge of high treason. Sixty-two inhabitants of Colleton county signed a petition to gain his release on the grounds that it was false and that his presence among the Indians was essential to peace, but it was rejected. It seems most likely that it was during this period that John actively and finally threw in his lot with Nairne and the planter position and "took to the streets" by which he finally severed his relations with Trott and left Charles Town to take up permanent residence on Port Royal Island. It is worth noting that he received his last early grant of land in February 1709, and Harleston wrote to Page in March 1709. Harleston may well have exaggerated when he said that it was because of the riot that John "was turned out of all."

John was soon back in Charles Town as a member of the assembly from Colleton county in 1710-11 and from Colleton and the new Granville county in 1711-12 in all of which he was rated as a leader of the first rank in terms of committee assignments and legislation.12 Much of the ill-feeling of the previous years seems to have died down. Sirmans notes that "such stalwarts of the Church party as Thomas Broughton and William Rhett cheerfully worked in the Commons House alongside Thomas Nairne and John Barnwell, dissenting opponents." 13 In fact when the Tuscarora Indians went on the warpath in North Carolina and the local government appealed to South Carolina for help, the assembly appointed John as colonel and commander of the expeditionary force.

John's military experience must have been extensive, but the record is meagre. Since 1701 England had been at war with France and Spain in what in this country is called Queen Anne's War, and the region between Carolina and Florida became a sort of no-man's land. In August 1706 an enemy fleet was turned away from the very gates of Charles Town. When one of their ships stopped in Sewee Bay to raid the country side, a sloop was dispatched under Colonel Rhett to capture it. When they were successful, Rhett sent John Barnwell, who was among the volunteers aboard, to bring the good news to the city.14 John was more heavily involved in the various raiding parties into Flori­da. In 1708 he led a party through Timucua and up the St. John's river.15 On this as on other expeditions, he made maps of whatever he explored from which he made the great mother map of the American southeast from which all subsequent maps of that area were made.16 Now in October 1711 he was given the command of the first Indian war in the history of the Carolinas. 17

The Tuscarora Indians lived in the region between the Cape Fear and Pamlico rivers mainly along the Neuse. One of the strongest and most warlike tribes in North Carolina, their chief, King Hancock, was able to call upon 1,000 warriors from his people. Their fear of the encroaching Europeans was, in this instance, stimulated by Indian traders in Virginia afraid of competition from Carolina and also by rival Indian tribes. The Tuscaroras took advantage of divisions in the local government to make their attack in September 1711, killing or capturing for slavery over 200 settlers. The government was helpless and appealed to Virginia and South Carolina. Virginia failed to respond, but Governor Gibbes and the assembly in Charles Town pledged £4,000 and an army.

Colonel Barnwell's force consisted of 30 militiamen, two other officers: Major Alexander Mackay and Captain John Bull, and about 500 Indians. The Indians, drawn from several small tribes, were, for the most part very unreli­able. The Yemassee company had 158 men of whom only 87 were Yemassees (the only reliable group). The Essaw company had 155 men from seven different tribes, and Captain Bull's company was composed of men from eight more tribes.

References


1 Joseph Walker Barnwell, "Barnwell of South Carolina," The South Carolina Historical and Genealogical Magazine (Jan. 1901), Vol. II, pp. 47-50 has the Harleston—Page correspondence.


2 Stephen Bull Barnwell, "The Barnewall Family during the 16th and 17th Centuries," The Irish Genealogist, Vol. 3, Nos. 5-8, 10-11 (1960-63; 1965-66), and "The Family of Barnewall (De Berneval) during the Middle Ages," ibid., No. 4 (1959), pp. 124-135.


3 S. B. Barnwell, op. cit., Vol. 3, No. 6 (1961), pp. 206-209.


4 Marion Eugene Sirmans, Colonial South Carolina. A Political History, 1663-1763 (Chapel Hill, 1966), p. 58. Wooden houses continued to be built, however.


5 Alexander Samuel Salley (ed.), Commissions and Instructions from the Lords Proprietors of Carolina to Public Officials of South Carolina. 1685-1715 (Columbia, 1916), p. 159.


6 J. W. Barnwell, op. cit., p. 47n.


7 A. S. Salley (ed.), Journal of the Commons House of Assembly, /707 (Columbia, 1940), p. 42.


8 J. W. Barnwell, op. cit., p. 47n.


9 A. S. Salley (ed.), Warrants for Lands in South Carolina, 1692-1711 (Columbia, 1915), pp. 196-7.


10 Sirmans, op. cit., p. 81.


11 Loc cit.


12 Jack P. Greene, The Quest for Power: The Lower Houses of Assembly in the Southern Royal Colonies, 1689-1776 (Chapel Hill, 1963), p. 475.


13 Sirmans, op. cit., p. 104.


14 Edward McCrady, History of South Carolina under the Proprietary Government (New York, 1901), pp. 400-1.


15 Verner Winslow Crane, The Southern Frontier, 1670-1732 (Durham, N.C., 1929), p. 220.


16 William P. Cumming, The Southeast in Early Maps (chapel Hill, 1962, 2d ed.), p. 46.


17 Joseph W. Barnwell (ed.), "The Tuscarora Expedition. Letters of Colonel John Barnwell," SCHGM. Vol. IX (1908), pp. 28 54.


18 Ibid., pp. 33-34.


19 Ibid., p. 40.
20I Ibid., p. 44.


21 Ibid., pp. 45-46.


22 Ibid., p. 54.


23 Chapman James Milling, Red Carolinians (Chapel Hill, 1940), p. 128.


24 Crane, op. cit., p. 170.


25 William L. McDowell (ed.), Journals of the Commissioners of the Indian Trade 17/0-1718 (Columbia, 1955), passim.


26 Milling, op. cit. pp. 155-56.


27 Crane, op. cit., p. 228.


28 Ibid., p. 220.


29 Ella Lonn, The Colonial Agents of the Southern Colonies (Chapel Hill, 1945), pp. 280,308.


30 A. S. Salley (ed.), Journal of His Majesty's Colony for South Carolina May 29, 1721-June 10,1721 (Columbia, 1930), pp. 13-25.


31 J. W. Barnwell (ed.), "Fort King George. Journal of Col. John Barnwell (Tuscarora) in the Construction of the Fort on the Altamaha in 1721," SCHGM (1926), Vol. XXVII, No. 4, pp. 189-203.


32 Crane, op. cit., pp. 236-37.


33 Salley, op. cit.,JCHA,June 2-16,1724, p. 17.

Continued Next Post….