Subject: Re: Settlement of the Back Country (Part 3) From: Wayne and Sandra Riner Date: February 25, 1998 Steven Coker wrote: > > ... Continued from part 2. > > The horse thieves, their associates, and other criminals, who, from causes > already mentioned, were numerous, made a counter common cause in supporting > themselves against these regulators. Most of the inhabitants favored one or > other of these parties. The one justified their proceedings on the score of > necessity and substantial, though irregular justice; the other alleged the > rights of British subjects to a legal trial by a court and jury. Though the > former meant well, yet justice is of so delicate a nature that form as well as > substance must be regarded. It is therefore probable, that in some cases, the > proceedings of the regulators may have so far partaken of the infirmities of > human nature, as to furnish real grounds of complaint against them. Their > adversaries made such high colored representations of their conduct, that the > civil authority interposed. Lord Charles Greville Montague, Governor of the > province, adopted measures for their suppression. With this view he conferred a > high commission on a man named Scouil, whose conduct, character and standing in > society, had rendered him in the opinion of his neighbors, and especially of the > regulators, very unfit for the office. As if the country had been in rebellion, > Scouil erected something which was intended to be a royal standard; and > afterwards called upon the regulators to answer for their transgressions of the > law. In addition to many other acts of severity, he arrested two of their > number and sent them under a guard to Charlestown, where they were imprisoned. > The regulators and the Scouilites contending for the superiority, were arranged > under their leaders and formed camps in opposition to each other. A civil war > was on the point of commencing; both were armed and prepared for the last > extremity. Each party was ready to return a fire from their adversaries, but > both dreaded the odium of beginning hostilities. Instead thereof, a flag was > sent from one to the other -- a capitulation ensued, in which both agreed to > break up their camps, go home and respectively petition the Governor for a > redress of their grievances. This was done and eventuated in the circuit court > law, passed in the year 1769. The establishment of courts of justice at > Ninety-Six, now Cambridge, at Orangeburgh, and Camden, removed that necessity > which was an apology for the proceedings of the regulators. These gloried in > having obtained their ends for bringing criminals to justice. Their exertions > henceforward took a different direction; they applied to law and ceased to > regulate. In less than two years they brought thirty-two horse thieves to > trial, condemnation and punishment, under the authority of the new and adjacent > circuit courts. The cause of justice triumphed, and a wholesome exertion of > judicial authority re-established order. The country enjoyed peace and > prosperity for the five following years. At the end of that period new scenes > of distress, connected with the revolution, opened on the inhabitants. The > animosities between these parties continued to rankle in their hearts, but were > not called into action until the year 1775. When the revolution commenced, the > actors in these late scenes of contention took opposite sides; and the names of > Scouilites and regulators were insensibly exchanged for the appellation of > tories and whigs, or the friends of the old and new order of things. Many of > the former were called Scouilites, and probably had co-operated with Scouil in > opposing the regulators; but the name was applied to others as a term of > reproach on the alleged similarity of their principles as being both abettors of > royal government, in opposition to the struggles of the people for justice and > liberty. The tories or Scouilites, for the opposers of revolutionary measures > were called by both names, insisted that the King had laid no new burdens or > taxes on the people, and that therefore their opposition to royal government was > groundless. The act, as it respected Carolina, was true; but the conclusion > drawn from it did not follow. No new burdens had been laid on the inhabitants > of the province, but the most grievous had been laid on Massachusetts, in > pursuance of principles which equally applied to Carolina, and struck at the > foundation of all her boasted rights. This train of reasoning was too refined > for selfish individuals who had not energy enough to encounter a present evil to > obtain a future good. Respectable well-informed persons were sent by the > council of safety to explain the nature of the controversy to these misjudging > people, and to induce their co-operation with their fellow-citizens in the > common cause of American liberty. Partial success followed their explanations, > and a treaty of neutrality was granted to the disaffected. But the old grudge > still subsisted, and they continued to thwart the measures of Congress. The > friends of the revolution marched in army into their settlements. Opposition > was subdued with little or no bloodshed, and a temporary calm succeeded. But > many of the disheartened royalists abandoned their plantations and went either > to the province of Florida, or among the Indians. In both cases they were tools > in the hands of the British, and ready to co-operate with them against their > countrymen who favored revolutionary measures. They lent their aid to a project > for attacking the western settlements of South Carolina, at the moment > Charlestown was to be invaded by a powerful fleet and army. They performed > their part. Under the direction of Britain, and in concert with Indians, > dressed and painted like them, they began to murder the white settlers nearly on > the same day Sullivan's Island was attacked by the British. Measures of > discrimination had been proposed among themselves to restrain the Indians from > disturbing the tories, but they were unavailing. Both classes of white people > fell by a common massacre. The repulse of the British in their attack on fort > Moultrie, disconcerted the tories and Indians, and gave the whigs leisure to > chastise them both. This was done with spirit and effect by an army commanded > by Colonel Williamson. A calm succeeded for three or four years, but guards > were kept on the frontiers and the inhabitants lived in terror; for they were > apprehensive of a renewed attack. After the fall of Charlestown in 1780, > everything was reversed. The British, the tories and Indians, had the upper > hand. Robbery, desolation and murder, became common and continued till the > revolutionary war was ended. Many were killed -- several fled -- the country > was filled with widows and orphans, and adult male population was sensibly > diminished. > > to be continued ..... > >This Scouil I`m pretty sure is either my GGGGG-grandfather or uncle do you have anymore information on him? His name is Scofield, this is how his father spelled it. I also want to thank you for all the information you send to the list it`s wonderful and has really helped me. Thank You soooooooooo much Sandra Go To: #, A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z, Main |