The royal gazette — [Charleston] S.C., 1782-02-20 00:00:00, page 4

To the Printers of the Royal Gazette.
Gentlemen,
THE inhabitants of the British Colonies in North-America
having laid claim, in a very early period of their present
Contest with the Mother Country, to the Title and Rights of an
Independent People, it was naturally expeded that they would
allo have regulated their publick condud by the laws of that
Grand Society of Nations into which they were so anxious
ly desirous of being admitted. Nor did this expectation appear
the less reasonable, when the mode of carrying on the war against
them, which Great-Britain had adopted, was examined ; that
being invariably the fame, as if her armies were invading the
territories of a foreign and universally acknowledged indepen
dent nation, not a part of her own dominions, whose inhabi
tants, though indebted to her foftering care and protection for
every advantage they poffefl'ed, now ungratefully revolted from
her lawful authority. But, have events fully juftified the pro
priety of relying thus far on the honour of Rebels ? Have they,
in every instance and situation, ftriCtly adhered to those maxims
of warfare, which have been eftablithed by the uniform prac
tice of civilized nations ? Have they, in their connections with
the British Army, which the events of the war gave rife to,
constantly regarded a military parole as binding, or a civil oath
as faered, when interest or even some trivial convenience was
to be given up by observing them? And might it not have been
forefecn, that a set of people, whom neither gratitude nor
allegiance could bind, would disregard every lesser obligation ?
An impartial history of the whole war would furnifh the
most fatisfaaory answers which can be given to these interesting
quellions. I mean not, however, to attempt it. The under
taking is too considerable for one of my slender abilities, and
sos too extensive a nature to come within the limits of a letter in
4 Inewfpaper. But I trust that some person will hereafter be
found possessing fufficient capacity and information for this ne
cessary talk, that the World, hitherto grossly deceived with
rcfpeCt to every thing that relates to America, may be made
acquainted with the true cause of Britain's being so long foiled
in her attempts to reduce her revolted colonies. Then it Will
be known, that frequent opportunities have been given up of
putting an immediate end to the rebellion, because the mea
lure that led to that desirable objeCt were thought severe ; and
that the only returns which have been made by the Americans
for such lenity, are instances without number of the most fla
grant perfidy and basest treachery.
Leaving then this ample harvest of historical glory to be ga
thered by some more fortunate person, I ihall content myfelf,
in this letter, with examining how far the actions of my coun
trymen in particular, have been agreeable to the universally
received notions of integrity and honour. In difeuffing this
fubjeCt, I shall allow them the very ground they have been
so long labouring to get possession of; I ihall suppose them for
a moment, fully inverted with the rights and privileges of a
Sovereign People; and yet, I flatter myfelf I shall be able to
demonstrate, that their conduct, if judged of by the standard
of the Law of Nations, has been bale and infamous. To do
this, I have only to exhibit a series of unadorned fads, be
ginning with the invasion of this Province, in the year 1780.
Immediately after the arrival of the British Army, a pro
clamation was iffoed, to inform the inhabitants, that if they
remained peaceably at their homes, no injury should be offered
to them, either in their persons or properties. Their assistance
was not demanded in reducing this garrison, or in forwarding
any other military operation; and this was evidently done
with the view of expoling no one to the resentment of his coun
trymen, should the siege have proved unfucctLful. By paeans
of its surrender some time after, and the success which every
where attended the exertions of the Army in the country, the
whole Province became compleatly reduced, and there was
scarcely a person in it, who was not eithera prisoner, or a
volunteer with the Britifli Troops. In this situation of affairs,
mo retrofped was ever had to the past behaviour of the firft
promoters and abettors of rebellion. No punishment was ever
inflicted, or even threatened, except against those who had been
principally concerned in depriving many persons of life, whose
only crime was an inviolable attachment to the interests oftheir
Sovereign. The Militia Prisoners were fuffered to remain at
their own homes, and to follow their usual occupations. Such
of them as were taken in the country, and who, from the cir
£umftance of not being concerned in the defence of this place,
were considered in general as less attached to the cause of
ebellion, were in a short time released from their paroles, and
most of them immediately, and with but little ceremony, re
admitted to the enjoyment of the privileges of a Britifli fub
jeCt. Others, however, of a less innocent character, and those
who were comprehended in the capitulation of Charleftown,
were forced, in order to obtain the fame end, to go through
such a variety of distressing forms to a man of spirit, as were
thought would effectually prevent any person from making ap
plication who did not sincerely desire to return to his allegi
ance. It was held to be a matter of grace and favour for one
who had been a Rebel, to be admitted to a participation of the
privileges of a constitution, long the glory of Britain, and the
envy of the World. Such therefore as were desirous of b ing
included in the number of her fubjeCts, firft presented their
humble petitions to the commanding officer of this garrison,
cxprefTing their detestation of the former measures, and their
ardent wishes again to enjoy the benefits of the Britilh Consti
tution, which they were now determined to support at the
'expence of their lives and fortunes. This was the general pur
port of the petitions, specimens of which, faithfully copied from
the originals in the registry of the Board of Police, I fliall sub
join to this letter. It did not however entirely depend on the
aft of petitioning to become a fubjeCt. The petitions, I believe,
of every one, were referred by the Commandant either to the
consideration of the Board of Police, or of a number of pri
vate gentlemen of known integrity and loyalty; and on their
determination the fate of the applications rested. Many of
them were readily granted; others with great difficulty,
after much interest being employed, and vouchers brought for
the future behaviour of those who presented them ; and, some
few were altogether rejected. In the last place, each person,
before he received a certificate of his being a fubjeCt, was
obliged to sign a declaration of allegiance, in the presence of
an Intendant of the Police. The form of the declaration com
monly used, I fliall annex to the copies of the petitions.
The whole inhabitants were in this manner divided into two
classes, the one of Prisoners on Parole, and the other of Volun
tary Subjects. Any person therefore, acquainted with the duties
which are performed in Europe by each of these descriptions
of men, would have thought, that as there was now no military
force within the Province opposed to the British Government,
Mefts. WELLS & SON,
Gentlemen,
THE Commandant has directed me to lignify to yen, his
high approbation of a Letter, which appeared in your Gazette
of the 9th instant, signed " A Carolina Loyalist," both,
as it contains a true Representation of the Conduct of many of
the Inhabitants of this Province, since the Capitulation of
Charleftown, and, as it points out the Treatment which those
deserve, who have violated their Paroles, Oaths, and Decla
rations of Allegiance to the Britifli Government; and to request
you will continue the fame in your Paper, for a Fortnight from
this Date, in Order to render the Contents thereof more ge
nerally known. lain, Gentlemen, your most obedient Servant,
February 13th, 1782. C. FRASER, Town-Major.
* The World quill scarcely believe, that the Legislature of an,
people, the leaf civilized, could make if criminal in their fubje&j
to adhere to a military parole. This, however, has been done by the
Rebel Affembl, of North-Carolina ; and Mr. Burke, their Goa s e> no ur,
who was lately brought hither a prisoner, has shewn, b, violating
bf paroles bow far he in^ndi <9 fat that law into ^cwtim.
I have been thus particular in marking the different modes of
treating prisoners, in the different Rates of society, in order
to Ihew, that what is now used, is neither commanded by the
Law of Nature, which authorizes the putting to death of 0111
enemies, by every fair means, wherever we can find them; nor
by what is generally accounted the Law of Nations, which
veils in the captor an abfbhite property in his prisoner. A pa
role therefore can never be demanded as a matter of right,
but may be given or not, agreeably to the opinion which is
entertained of the integrity of the prisoner. If this confidence
be found to have been in any instance misplaced, and what was
meant as a humane indulgence, be converted into a source of
injury, the more dangerous as unexpected and unguarded a
gainst, Reason dictates, that the offender, be treated agree
ably to the fevered rights of war, which, as I have laid
before, authorize the death of all persons taken in battle.
Custom and consent of nations support this conclusion; partly
for the fame reason, and partly with a view of deterring others
from attempting to destroy, as far as their examples can have
influence, that confidence in the honour of Mankind, on which
this most generous and benevolent custom is founded. Such
therefore is the treatment those persons in this country, who
have broken their paroles to the British Army, have aright, by
the Law of Reason and [Nations to expert.
Little need be said concerning the punishment which those
deserve, who hare violated their oaths, or declarations of alle
giance. We have only to appeal to the practice of the Ame
ricans themselves, and we will find, that transgressions of that
nature, are by them always puniffied with death. Scarcely
a newspaper is brought to us from the northern provinces,
which does not contain an account of the publick execution
of some person accused of holding correspondence with the
British army, or of being attached to its interests. Many in
deed have been deprived of life on bare suspicion, and that
too by the regular forms of their courts of law. They surely
therefore cannot deny us a right, which they exercise with
such freedom themselves, except perhaps on this plea, that as
protection and allegiance are reciprocal, the British Govern
ment could have no pretentions to the allegiance of the inha
bitants of the. country, when, by withdrawing the troops,
they ceased to give them protection. Not to mention the ab
surd consequences this doctrine would lead to, if carried to its
fulleft extent, which would even have juftified the inhabitants
of the city of London, in erecting themselves into a Rate, in
dependent of the Empire of Great-Britain, when, during the
late riots, the protection of Government was with-held from
them during the space of three days; it will be proper, on
this head, to demand, of what is the protection of Govern
ment composed ? Is it not of the united efforts of all the indi
viduals, directed by the supreme power of the date, as occa
sions may demand ? Is it not therefore agreeable to the order
of things, that the fubje&s should lend their assistance to Go
vernment, before Government is in a situation to afford this
protection ? But did the New Subjects of Britain in this country
afford that support to its government, which they solemnly
bound themselves to do? Did they even remain in a Rate of
neutrality ? Did not, on the contrary, many of them join the
Rebels, before the Troops were withdrawn from the country ?
And was not this the principal cause of that event taking
place ?—lf these questions be answered in the affirmative, and
tofning ©ill make it but a Formidable army invading it from
the other Colonies in rebellion. But conclusions drawn from
the general praflice of European nations, will seldom hold
good when applied to the Virtuous Sons of America. Their
favourite maxim has always been, that the end juftifies the
means. W hat therefore could be blame-werthy, which in any
degree contributed to the gaining of that pious and laudable'
object, the Independency of their Country? Had not Congress
already declared it to be as fixed as Fate, and wouidit not have
been impious to disregard the intentions of Providence, so
clearly communicated to this new band of prophets ? Such may
be the reasoning of an American ; and on the justice of it I leave
the World to decide. The fa# is however, that no hostile
army has ever entered this Province since its conquest, equal,
even in numbers, to the Britifli Forces in it, and yet, from
the time of Gates's appearing upon our frontiers to this period,
such numbers, both of Prisoners on Parole and New Subjects,
have gone off to the Rebels, that they now constitute by far
the greater number of the men who arc in arms in this country
against the British Government*.
What person is there, disinterested in the event of the war,
and possessing the generous feelings which do honour to hu
inanity, that will not exc'aim on reading this narrative, If
these things be true, no punishments are too severe for such
monsters of ingratitude and perfidy? If the authenticity of the
fadts related, be made the tell of the propriety of punishment in
general, I appeal to the inhabitants of this place, and demand
in what point I have erred? But with relped to the degree of
punishment, I dare not presume to give any opinion of my
own. I leave it to be determined by the Law of Reason and of
Nations. Let us therefore enquire into what Reason dictates,
and what. Nations do, refuelling these matters.—-And firft,
with regard to a breach of a military parole.
In the rudest states of society, when a whole nation compri
zes but a few individuals, wars are commonly entered into from
motives of personal revenge. The combatants fight with no
intention but that of destroying their enemies. The few pri
soners therefore that may be taken by each party, are either
immediately killed, or are reserved for death by torture. When
manners somewhat refine, and States, from conquest or other
circumstances, have become more considerable, war is fre
quently begun from views of national interest, or ambition.
The soldier has no private resentment to gratify; if the battle
is won, he rightlv conceives he has done his duty. He
obeys the voice of Humanity, which calls on him not need
lelsly to deftrey the lives of his fellow creatures; but he
at the fame time thinks himfelf fully intitled to the perpetual
services of the person whom he ha's thus saved from death.
The prisoner therefore becomes a have. This was the general
practice of those nations of antiquity, the Greeks and Romans,
whom we regard as highly polished and civilized. In modern
Europe, a prisoner was alio, for a considerable time, so far
accounted the property of the captor, that a price was set on his
liberty, and tuat not fixed by any general rule, nor in any pro
portion to his rank in the army, but as great as it was thought
he could poflibly give. As in all wars, however, each of the
contending parties rffiift fuffer, though perhaps not equally,
it at length became customary for nations to use their prisoners
with teridernefs and humanity, in expectation that their coun
trymen would receive the like treatment when in captivity, and
also to establish a general rule for the mutual exchange ofthe pri
soners each party had made. Though this practice appears ex
ceedingly natmal to us, it was either so little known to the An
cients, or so little used by them, that in all their history we read
of only one cartel. The last refinement on the treatment of
prisoners, was the invention of paroles; a circumstance that
affords the most honourable testimony that can be given, of the
fuptrior integrity and good faith of the Moderns, with whom it
has been found, that a simple promise affords greater security,
than the most rigid confinement.'
DECLARATION of ALLEGIANCE.
I do hereby acknowledge and declare mvfelf
to be a true and faithful fubjed to his Majesty, the King of
Great-Britain, and that I will at all times hereafter be obedient
to his government ; and that whenever I fliall be thereunto
required, I will be ready to maintain and defend the fame
against all persons whatever.
Subfoibed and acknowledged, at Charlfown, the da,
°j 178 before me
* This is the Mr. Smith, who was brought to town a prisoner
in the courje of last summer, on the most pojitive proofs being ob
tained that he had deviated from his allegiance. He was foot:
showed the liberty of certain flrests, and was afterwards fuffer
ed to go to fames's Ifand on bis parole.—That quilling however
to contradict, by bis own example, that well known sass in human
native, that favours heaped on a person who has injured you,
renters him your more implacable enemy, he quickly violated his
parole, and joined the "Rebel army, where, I am told, he has bee*
rewarded with a military commijion for his honourable fervic^
MASTERS of vessels, and inhabitants of the town, may
be supplied with BEER, at a reasonable price, at %>
j^wery @f Charteftewa. @,
SOUTH-CAROLINA.
To Lieut. Col. NI3BEI BALFOUR, Commandant a,
Charlffiown, &c. &c...
Tlie Humble PETII lON of James Smith.
SHEWETH,
THAT your petitioner dreading the variety of sanguinary
laws, enacted during the late feene of tyranny and ufor
pation, against those who refufed, from a sense of their duty
to their Sovereign, to take an active part therein, was con
strained, against his inclination, to acquiesce under it.
That your petitioner difeards all allegiance to any other
government than that of his most gracious Sovereign, in his
opinion the best calculated to support the fubjed in his person
and property.'
That your petitioner, when his Majesty's forces besieged
Charleftown, rather than take up arms against them, declined
coming to town, though threatened by the late rulers, with
confifeation of his whole estate, both real and personal.
That shortly after the surrender of Charleftown, your peti
tioner yielded up himfelf prisoner, and was by his parole,
confined to the limits of his plantation.
Fhat your petitioner, being in town, takes the opportunity
of manifefting his zeal for his Majesty's government, under
whose mild administration he formerly enjoyed the greatest
happiness.
Your petitioner therefore prays your Honour, to allow your
petitioner to become a fubjed to his most gracious Sovereign,
whom he solemnly promises to serve with the most inviolable
fidelity and attachment, and whose government he will be
ever ready to maintain and support, with his life and fortune.
And your petitioner will pray, &c.
November 28, 1780. JAMES SMITH*.
I think no one can be absurd enough to do otherwise, most of
the revolted fubjeCts may find, that the flale excuse, derived
from the doctrine of the reciprocality of allegiance and pro
teCtion, will no longer screen them from the vengeance of a*
injured and insulted Government. °"
The importance of the fubjeCts I have treated, will form the
best excuse I can offer for my feeble attempts to do the'
justice. The undertaking seemed to me to be highly nece/Tar'"
as many persons in this country are so ignorant of the cuftomt
and rights of nations, as to suppose, that though they have
violated their military paroles, or their oaths and declaration
of allegiance, they will still be considered as prisoners of war
should they be taken in arms against the British Government
Could I awaken but one of my countrymen to a due senses
the crimes he may have unwittingly, or from evil counfi
committed, it would be to me a source of never-ceasing Die
sure and delight. But with refpeCt to those who have th^
deluded a people, and who cannot be supposed ignorant of
what they violate by system and rule, I am bold enough to fav
That forgiveness would be a crime, and mercy but a"
other name for injustice. °
A CAROLINA LOYALIST
CbarleJlown, February 4th, 1782.
COPIES of PETITIONS.
To NISBET BALFOUR, Colonel of bis MajeJlyf Twenty
Third Regiment, and Commandant of Charlefaun.
The humble PETITION of Jonathan Lawrence.
SHE WETH,
That since the redudion of Charleftown your Petitions
has been on parole.
That your petitioner is now desirous of returning to
allegiance, and to be considered as a peaceable fubiecl and
habitant of Charleftown.
Your petitioner is therefore humbly constrained to im D lor,
your Honour will take his case into consideration, admit him
as a funjeft, and indulge him with the privileges enjoyed
such ; and your petitioner, as in duty bound, will ever prav'
o J ° Nn - LAWRENCE.
Cbarle/lown, June 25th, 1781.
SOUTH-CAROLINA?—
To the Honourable Lieut. Col. NISBET BALFOUR, of ft
Majffs Forces, and Commandant of Charleflowm "
The humble PETITION of Richard Ellis.
SHEWETH,
THAT when the inhabitants of Charleftown were fignin?
an addiefs to x the Commanders in Chief, congratulating
" ie . m 9, ti . ieir success, and manifefting a delire of returning to
their allegiance, from which they had been deluded by the
artifices and ambitious deligns of a few men, who endeavoured
to aggrandize themselves on the ruins of their country, your
petitioner took that early opportunity of shewing his attach
^ 'V s most gracious Sovereign, by likewise signing the
said address. ° 5
„ That your petitioner thought himfelf thereby entitled totfre
rights and privileges of a British fubjed, and when he called
a tew days ago to receive his protection, was much surprised
to find that his name was not inrolled among those of the
other faithful fubjefts.
Your petitioner apprehends, that this mistake was entirely
owing; to his being absent from town, at the time when an
amendment was proposed to the said address, and which your
petitioner had not an opportunity of signing, as he lived in
the country.'
Your petitioner therefore humbly pravs vour Honour will
allow him to become a fubjed to his most gracious Sovereign
whom he will ever after serve with the most inviolably fidelity
an . d . w h°fe government he will always maintain and defend
with his hie and fortune. And your petitioner will pray
, , ( si ^ ned ) RICHd. ELLIS.
12^ October, 1780.